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?