August 20, 1998

Attending Members
William Bush - Director, Arkansas Geological Commission
Susan Cromwell - Director, Office of Information Technology
Cecil Davis - DP Director and Alternate for Cathy Mathis, Director, Department of Arkansas Heritage
Shelby Johnson - Research Specialist, Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies
Ben Kittler - Ben Kittler Surveying
Robert Wallis - Acxiom Corporation
Suzanne Wiley - Tech Analyst, GIS, Spatial Analysis Lab, U of A at Monticello

Members Unable to Attend
Robert Bennett - Arkansas State University
Randy Jones - First Electric Corporation
Shirley Sandlin - Benton County Assessor
Phil Schoettlin - Chamber of Commerce, Fayetteville
Jim Wells - Wellsco Graphics Solution Center

Guests
Karen Howard, Arkansas Department of Health, GIS Working Group Liaison

Visitors
Dave Freiwald - U.S. Geological Survey
Tom Harrell - Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department
Mike Mitchell - Arkansas Game & Fish Commission
Aaron Pugh - U.S. Geological Survey
Jerry Stussy - Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department
Jelyn Thomas - Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department

--------------------

The meeting was called to order.

The minutes of the last meeting of July 16, 1998, were approved.

It was determined that the two members who were working on the LIB mission statement were not present. Mr. Bush asked that when the draft mission statement becomes available it should be distributed to all the members for review and comment.

Geodata Repository Update

Shelby Johnson was asked to open further discussion regarding the implementation of a state digital geodata repository. He began by summarizing briefly the report he compiled for the members entitled "Response to Request for Information on Implementation of a Digital Geodata Repository for Arkansas," which had been distributed prior to the meeting. He commented that it was becoming evident that there is a lot more involved that was initially thought regarding actually operating a repository and that it is going to be a lot of work, as outlined in the report. Shelby explained that CAST was not going to do anything until the Board gives instructions regarding implementation of a repository. What is envisioned is that any state agency which collects beneficial data may submit that data to the repository and it will be published through the metadata standards or other standards set by the Board. He pointed out that there are no specific standards as to each type of data and that this will be up to the agency, because the repository - under the direction of the Board - should only require the metadata, and that the data be in some format which the repository can deal. It is not felt that the repository should tell agencies what they should be collecting.

Mr. Bush commented that, in fact, some of the data would not even be in the repository but would be managed by a particular agency and linked to the repository. Shelby made the observation that not all data will be made available, based on its sensitivity. Susan Cromwell remarked that the repository should focus on supporting data that is a common denominator and that this was a big enough job to start itself. Suzanne Wiley commented that one of the Board's goals is to foster cooperation among all state agencies, because the purpose of the repository is to cut costs and share data. She continued to explain that CAST is providing a service, but that this is not CAST's data, this is state digital repository data and that agencies need to cooperate with each other, not necessarily just with CAST.

Metadata Standards
Karen Howard explained that this is what other states have done and handed out examples from the State of Minnesota, which was discussed. She pointed out that this document contained valuable guidelines for separating metadata from data. Shelby Johnson suggested that the Board consider establishing some criteria, as up to this point, CAST has just provided suggestions as to how the repository might work. He recommended that the Board now establish of technical, data, access, and standards criteria and let these objectives be documented, and that the criteria could then be provided for comment and review and later firmed up and presented as formal request for proposals. The proposals could then be reviewed by the Board. He also made the suggestion that a committee could be formed to work on the criteria. Jelyn Thomas asked whether this could be done without having some type of standards within the state and Shelby felt that this could be started based on existing standards, such as those set by the FGDC. Susan Cromwell suggested that the Board make the clearinghouse the FGDC-compliant node in the State of Arkansas in the effort to attain a status on the national infrastructure. Mike Mitchell agreed that having standards that are consistent with national standards and also the majority of the states would be conducive to allowing data sharing in between states. Susan also pointed out that standards are one thing and supported products are another, and that these are different issues. Suzanne Wiley pointed out that if the standards comply with the NSDI, there are some opportunities for federal support.

Technical Objectives Committee

Shelby the made the motion that the Board form a committee to establish the technical objectives for a geodata repository for the state. The motion was seconded by Ben Kittler and Suzanne Wiley.

Chairman Bush invited more discussion regarding the committee. Karen Howard recommended that the work done and processes created by the State of Kansas would be a good guideline to follow. Discussion followed regarding the "Kansas Geodata Compatibility Guidelines" document. Karen pointed out that the GIS Working Group has already recommended using the Kansas guidelines as a model for the State of Arkansas. She also talked about the GIS Users Forum and suggested that the LIB could use this statewide group as a resource to examine standards and policies, and also that after the Land Information Coordinator is hired, that this person could serve as liaison between the groups. Karen made the suggestion that the GIS Working Group and the GIS Users Forum could possibly be merged into one group, and Susan Cromwell explained that a GIS Working Group needed to remain active to feed into the overall state strategic planning effort and that this group could be a subset of the Forum.

Motion and Vote
Mr. Bush returned the discussion to the motion to form the committee and Susan Cromwell then moved to amend the motion to read "technical and content specific objectives." A short discussion followed and it was decided that the original text remain as originally proposed, with everyone agreeing that it was understood that content would be considered as part of the role of the committee. Karen Howard asked what role the GIS User Forum would play in relation to the proposed LIB committee, and Mr. Bush explained that the committee would utilize the Forum and GIS Working Group to whatever extent needed and that she could serve as a liaison additionally between the two groups and the committee.

The Board then voted on the motion to form the committee, which was unanimous.

Committee Members
Mr. Bush then suggested that the committee should consist of three Board members and a liaison between the GIS Users Forum and GIS Working Group. Susan Cromwell also recommended a representative from the DIS backbone development area, that being either Clarence Durand or Curt Norland. It was decided that the three Board members to serve on the committee would be Ben Kittler, Suzanne Wiley, and Shelby Johnson, who agreed to serve as chair. Mr. Bush asked Shelby to contact Mr. Durand regarding participation, and he further suggested that the committee feel free to include anyone as a resource who could be helpful in their objectives. Susan Cromwell reminded the members that the future Land Information Coordinator would also be a member of the committee.

Land Information Coordinator Position

The Board next reviewed a draft job description for the Land Information Coordinator position. Susan Cromwell recommended the setting of minimum qualifications and also in adding the requirement for grant writing experience. It was made clear that the Coordinator will be an employee of the Department of Information Systems and under the direct supervision of Susan Cromwell. Susan pointed out that in relation to job duties as a DIS employee, direction would be taken from the LIB. Bill Bush recommended that the basic job description be completed and details could be worked out at a later time in order to get the job posted. Susan also confirmed that the Board would have input regarding the screening of all applicants. Discussion followed as to minimum qualifications and it was agreed that a revised draft would be distributed to the members.

Duties & Status of the Board

Bill Bush passed out a list of duties and status of tasks of the LIB and asked that all the members help keep it up to date. He recommended that Karen Howard be the official liaison between the LIB and the GIS Working Group, and added that the members of the Working Group are always welcome to attend the meetings, which are open to the public. Suzanne Wiley suggested that all of the GIS Forum members should be encouraged to be on the GIS list server. Karen Howard suggested that at the upcoming Forum meeting someone from the LIB talk to the members about the Board and Suzanne Wiley volunteered to give a status report and talk to the GIS Forum members. Discussion followed regarding the need to get more involvement in statewide GIS planning and overall strategic IT planning by the higher levels within state agencies. Mr. Bush also pointed out that there is an old list of agencies who participated in the initial Land Information Board years back and that this might be a useful reference list in regards to obtaining current contacts within the state agencies. Susan Cromwell also recommended that the Governor's Technology Workgroup also be involved or kept apprised of the activities of the LIB.

Upcoming Meetings

Mr. Bush mentioned that three important GIS meetings are scheduled for the near future - the GIS Users Forum, the USGS meeting in Rolla, Missouri, and the Kansas GIS Standards Forum. It was noted that the LIB would have someone attending each of these meetings. It was also noted that Mr. Jim Wells was attending the County Association Meeting on August 20-22.

State Geodetic Advisor

Mr. Bush informed the Board that he had been doing some research on state geodetic advisor positions. He was surprised to discover that some states are discontinuing their geodetic advisor positions. He commented that this seemed due to the fact that the federal government controls some of the money for these positions and there apparently had been some conflicts arising as to what goes on between the states and the feds. He also explained that he has heard comments from various people that a geodetic advisor is not needed in Arkansas, but he questions the validity of this information. Mr. Bush did feel that this type of information needs to be checked out prior to asking the Arkansas Legislature for money for a position. He referenced the information from last month's meeting that Tom Webb distributed (job descriptions for similar positions), and said that this information made the position of a geodetic advisor sound very good.  Mr. Bush said that apparently the federal government will pay for part of the salary, and that they have paid for a vehicles and equipment in some states.

Ben Kittler pointed out that the Arkansas Society of Professional Land Surveyors--approximately 3,600 members - would fully support a state geodetic advisor position. Mr. Bush pointed out that some of the negative comments he had received had come from the surveyors and that it seemed to be based on the fact that some states were against this type of position. Mr. Kittler commented that many state monuments have been lost or damaged and have not been recovered simply because there is no state geodetic advisor, whose job duties include taking care of state monuments. He explained that he very much supports a state geodetic advisor because there can be no base mapping set in the state without good monumentation. He further explained that the reason that Alabama and other states have gone away from a geodetic advisor is that they have set enough monumentation and have reached a level where they can pretty well just depend on the professional societies to carry on the monumentation tasks, but that Arkansas has not reached that level yet because there has been no one to manage the program for 25 years.

Shelby Johnson inquired as to the next meeting of the ASPLS and Mr. Kittler said the next meeting is the second Thursday of September in Hot Springs. Shelby suggested that a Board member could talk to that professional group as to the activities of the Board and also talk about the possible geodetic advisor position to try and build some support. Suzanne Wiley suggested that a job description could be compiled from job information presented to the Board by Tom Webb at an earlier meeting. Mr. Bush said that at the next meeting of the Land Survey Division Advisory Board he would present this information for discussion. He explained that this Board was made up surveyors, appraisers, real estate people, and other groups who are all very familiar with these issues.

Next Meeting - Planning Session

Shelby Johnson pointed out that time is getting short for planning for the next legislative session and suggested that the LIB meet for an extended session to approach some important issues. He commented that the strategic planning process takes a lot of time, so a full day to prioritize needs and make a strategic plan would be helpful. Susan Cromwell suggested that the LIB start with a mission statement, create the goals that support the mission, and then follow with the objectives and the strategy. The topic was discussed and it was agreed by the members present that an all-day meeting to focus on strategic planning will be scheduled for September 22 from 9:00 to 5:00 at the Little Rock Main Library, and that the LIB members should be encouraged to set the time aside to attend this important meeting.

Final Business

The visitors then introduced themselves. Mr. Bush addressed a question to Mr. Freiwald regarding the status of the 14-digit watershed maps, and Mr. Freiwald explained that the project is progressing but it will be quite a while before it will be completed. Karen Howard inquired as to whether the LIB would make it a goal to write the costs to complete the DOQs and DEMs into legislation. The Board members replied in the affirmative, and Mr. Bush explained that he will be meeting with the USGS in Rolla, Missouri, and see if there are other funding sources for this project. He also mentioned that this will be an item on the agenda of the next meeting in relation to requesting legislative funding. Karen Howard said she would tell the GIS Users Forum that this project is going to be supported by the LIB.

It was agreed that as documentation becomes available from the various meetings and members, this information would be posted to the LIB internet web page.

The meeting was then adjourned.