Members Present

Beahan, Gary Dept. of Economic Development
Carey, Michelle City of Kansas City
Cole, Julia East West Gateway Coordinating Council
Cook, Liz USDA – NRCS
Dorge, Greg City of Jefferson
Davis, Jim Dept. of Mental Health
Duewell, Mark Dept. of Health & Senior Services
Falter, Jeff SEMA
Haithcoat, Tim MU – MSDIS
Holder, Renee Dept. of Revenue
LaScala, Jim City of Liberty
Pitts, Debbie MO State Library Census Data Center
Schloss, Jeff Dept. of Natural Resources
Shaw, Jo Ann Dept. of Natural Resources
Spicci, Tony Dept. of Conservation
Williams, Darryl USGS MCMC
Yoest, Don Dept. of Agriculture

Others Present

Beecher, Shawn (for Steve Daw) Shafer, Kline & Warren
Cain, Stephanie (for Arnold Williams) Dept. of Transportation
Johnson, Zachary Dept. of Economic Development
Peton, Ann (for Chris Barnett) MU – CARES
McIntosh, Jane Dept. of Agriculture
Smith, Jason Dept. of Health & Senior Services
Stewart, Helen SEMA
Stokes, Tom (for Gerry Wethington) Office of Information Technology
Members Not Present
Duncan, Mike St. Louis Dept. of Planning
Peterson, Jennifer (excused) City Utilities of Springfield

Tony Spicci called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.

Minutes were distributed. Minor changes were suggested, and the revised minutes were approved.

GIS Position Development

Jeff Schloss is polling other state agencies. He hopes to be able to meet with the ITAB subcommittee again.

ITAB Liaison

Jeff Falter reported that at the last ITAB meeting, Chris Wilkerson brought up GIS, and he feels that Gerry Wethington, CIO, is supportive.

Strategic Plan

Each subcommittee chair should submit a paragraph, so these can be inserted into the strategic plan and posted on the web. Jo Ann suggested that we spend some time prioritizing the goals. The group agreed that we have too much on the table to effectively deal with in the coming year. Mark emphasized that the strategic planning committee basically did some brainstorming and prepared a guideline for the committee to follow. Tim Haithcoat volunteered to send out a template for subcommittee chairpersons to fill out in order to lend some consistency to the information collected for the web site postings.

Education and Outreach

Jim said that we need a GIS picture to go in the MGISAC brochure. He clipped out a picture of the MGISAC display. We still need to work on a logo for the brochure. Tim will email Jim with what he has. Jim will email the draft of the brochure to everyone. Tim would like to have a review of the text. Jim and Debbie will have an education and outreach subcommittee meeting immediately following the MGISAC meeting. Jim asked for volunteers to serve on the Education and Outreach Subcommittee.

Federal Initiatives

According to Darryl, the National Map will eventually involve most of the people on the MGISAC. The USGS needs to increase participation by volunteers and partners. The goal is to have a seamless, national map created with a consistent set of standards, which is current within 7 days. According to Darryl, there are a number of pilots around the country. Fact sheets will be coming out soon with information about these pilots. Darryl stated that the National Map project is so huge that there are different ideas of what the end product will be.

The top priority for the USGS right now is gathering information for 120 cities for the National Imaging and Mapping Agency (NIMA). They have already provided theDOQQs, but it is difficult to obtain the vector data. NIMA has not identified what they specifically need. They want everything they can get. Some agencies have removed data from the web, and the USGS is looking at this issue. Tom asked if anyone has checked the Sunshine Law and if there are any statutes or mandates covering what information should be released. In Darryls opinion, the FOIA is being ignored right now due to FBI briefings on the subject. The FBI has stated some information should not be released at this time. Even though most of the data that the USGS serves has been out for years, they will still be reviewing it. They will also look at requests for data, which covers large areas, and they will look at where the requests are coming from. When a disaster happens, the local data will be used first. Federal data is generally at the wrong scale and out of date.

Tim feels that there is a lot of data available, but we need to make sure it has metadata, so people will know how current it is. He feels that we should continue working on getting a metadata trainer for Missouri.

Training

Renee has obtained copies of successful metadata grants from other states.

Michelle wants to include what platform that all the members use and post it on the web, so people would know whether they use ESRI products,AutoCad, or whatever. Tony suggested that we post agency profiles.

Data Standards

The subcommittee met and agreed to use the Kansas address standard. Renee would like to see a master file of addresses for the state.

Tom recommended that the subcommittee should identify needs and work on standards. He stated that OIT has taken on a similar project for security standards. He said that there should be a recommendation for standards and an implementation plan.

SMAC

Liz reported that the SMAC subcommittee has determined that the main issue is the next generation ofDOQQs. They are going to send out a survey to find out what is out there now and what the needs are. This information can then be used to prioritize updates. Renee would like the survey to include a couple of questions on 911. The priority for updates ofDOQQswould be areas of rapid change and those with the oldest photography in use right now. Liz said that she and Julia attended the Missouri Association of Councils of Governments. These regional planners were eager to serve as liaisons between the subcommittee and local governments.

Liz said she would be scheduling a SMAC meeting in March. At that time, she hopes to have some alternative data platforms, formats, and costs.

Internet

No report.

Bylaws

It was difficult to reach consensus on the issue of committee composition; however, the revised bylaws passed. The goal of the bylaws committee was to retain valuable input from cooperating members while maintaining a 51% majority of state members per the directive from the CIO. Tony will send the new bylaws to the CIO for his review and approval. He pointed out to the group that amendments can be made to the bylaws. Section 9 of the bylaws states that: Amendments to these bylaws shall be offered by submission in writing to all MGISAC members at least ten days before the next scheduled meeting. The proposed amendment shall be taken up for consideration at the next scheduled meeting of the Committee at which a quorum is present. The amendment shall be adopted when it has been approved by two-thirds of the MGISAC membership.

State Architecture

There will be a meeting for county, city, and state IT people on December 3. Tim will have the opportunity to serve on a panel for this meeting. This will be an opportunity to put GIS into the minds of these people. Tim will make a draft of his presentation and send it out to the committee for input.

Tim asked the group to be thinking about which domain of the state architecture they would like to be involved in. The domains are as follows: knowledge management, security, application engineering, middleware, network, platform, and systems management. The state architecture is still a work in progress, so there may be changes to the list.

Tim handed out a budget report for the committee to review. Jo Ann asked that in the future the committee see a report of the income and expenses for the Missouri GIS conference. Renee would like to see a list of projects that MSDIS is working on.

Liz requested an update from MSDIS about what things got done and what didnt and why. This could then be tied to priorities in the strategic plan.

Tim provided the list of priorities for MSDIS that came from his survey of MGISAC members. The group assisted Tim in completing the list. Tim will send out a copy of this list via email to everyone.

Jo Ann presented a comparison of Framework Implementation Teams (I-Teams) from other states. The Indiana Geographic Information Council is serving as the I-Team for Indiana. Marylands plan recommends creating a geographic data partnership office. Maryland has established a public and private partnership to serve as the I-Team for that state. The governor of Delaware established an I-Team in that state and tasked them with report back with the status of data sets, an assessment of needs, and a plan for funding. Jo Ann made a motion that the MGISAC serve as the I-Team for Missouri. The motion was seconded and passed. Tony will draft the plan.

Tom said that we need to build the business case first for the effort. OIT would then probably be willing to support the I-Team. He indicated that he would like to see some of the MGISAC initiatives become subcommittees of ITAB. Tom agreed with Tony that it would be good to form a team and start some of the work get it in place so our state could receive some of the FGDC funding for data development. We need to do an inventory, identify the needs and where we want to go.

Tony handed out some information on the homeland security issue. The group discussed the issue at length to find ways that committee members can assist with Missouris homeland defense issues. Tony suggested that we work on a plan to make the committees GIS expertise available to SEMA in times of emergency.

Motion passed to be a benefactor at MAGIC 2001.

Motion carried to adjourn.