Spring 2010 SAGIC Perspective
-
Upload
wisconsin-land-information-association -
Category
Technology
-
view
245 -
download
0
Transcript of Spring 2010 SAGIC Perspective
State Government Perspective
WLIA Spring Regional Meeting
June 3, 2010
• Important land information issues
• Technological, social or political advances
• How do these issues/advances affect state government land information professionals?
• How has WLIP helped state government?
• How can WLIP be enhanced to support state government?
Land Information Issues
• No Wisconsin strategy for sustainable statewide imagery acquisition– State agencies contributed to 2010 efforts– What’s next?– Homeland Security Strategic Plan includes objective
to address this…
• Need to create or update statewide data layers aggregated from local and other sources– Parcels, PLSS
• Uncertainty about “best available” version of some statewide data layers– MCD
• Lack of consistent data exchange standards and data sharing policies
• General confusion about roles/responsibilities of groups and individuals to address issues– GIO, WIGICC, WLIA, SCO, SAGIC, LION, other
Land Information Issues
• Lack of business needs and return-on-investment (ROI) assessments to justify acquisition/creation/maintenance of centralized infrastructure, data repository and services
• Funding issues– Who should pay to support access to statewide
public domain data via centralized data repository and/or services?
– Need very high level policy to guide a strategy/plan
Land Information Issues
• Technological Advances– “Google Maps Effect”– Web Services (e.g., WMS, REST/SOAP)– ETL processes
• Social Advances– State government has always been and will continue
to be a participant in geospatial groups and initiatives
• Political Advances– Government transparency requires easier data access
Advances
Land Info Professionals
• Increase need for positions and training to develop web services and applications using web APIs
• Budget requires creative thinking about shared repository and services
• Still a lot of silos…
How Has WLIP Helped?
• Support base funding of LIOs because they create/maintain data needed by state entities
• Funded completion of statewide soil surveys
• State entities (other than DOA) have no direct input regarding WLIP– Don’t request or receive $– Don’t participate in DOA/LION/WLIA meetings– May provide testimony about legislation (e.g., flat fee)
How Can WLIP Improve?
• Do counties and DOA really support WLIP doing anything more than maintaining LIOs?
– Develop/enforce data exchange standards?– Develop/enforce consistent data sharing policies?– Fund creation/update of statewide data layers?– Fund business need and ROI assessments for
statewide initiatives (e.g., create/update statewide data layers, centralize repository/services)?
How Can WLIP Improve?
• Leave WLIP to the LIOs?• Clarify data sharing policies associated with
WLIP-funded activities?• LION do more with WLIP – WLIA do less?• WLIA address a broader set of issues?• Consider other options for addressing statewide
initiatives?