Skip Maine state header navigation
Skip First Level Navigation | Skip All Navigation
|Home | Contact Us | GeoPortal||
Site Map |
Home September 14, 2005 Agenda & Transfers
MEETING: Maine Library of Geographic Information Board
1. Approval of the August 17th minutes (attached below)
4. Elect new Chair/Vice Chair
6. SPO GIS Interests / Priorities
8. Other Business
GeoLibrary Board Meeting Minutes
Jim Page, Chair (Representing Vendors)
Marilyn Lutz, Vice Chair (Representing University of Maine System) -
Dennis Boston, Representing Public Utilities
1. Approval of the August 17th minutes
Jim called for review and approval of the August 17th minutes. Sean made a motion to accept the minutes, seconded by Liz. Board members voted unanimously to accept the minutes as written.
2. Committee Reports
a. Finance: Jim reported on finance report as recorded by Dan Walters. Dan will update the report, as needed, and forward to the Board members.
b. Policy and Marketing: Marilyn reported no progress to date due to other priority GeoLibrary commitments. Will bring update to the October meeting.
Marketing the GeoLibrary would include a brochure/flyer to use in networking with the Legislature, state agencies, and private and public sector as needed. The brochure should focus on economic development as it relates to GIS and address other appropriate issues. Sean, Marilyn, and William, as the ”Marketing Team” will work to develop the brochure. It was also recommended that we contact the Real Estate community and reach out to the people we represent. Marilyn will set up a conference call with Sean and William to move forward. Another recommendation was made to contact Kathy Fuller at DOT for information on the importance of reducing state costs as a result of the Orthos completed that were needed for the Gate 1 project.
c. Technical Committee:
Orthos: Because of Dan and Larry’s absence, Liz reported information she learned as a member of the GIS Executive Council that deliveries are on schedule.
A recommendation was made to change the priority areas by moving Priority Area 7 up closer to the top of the list to accommodate statewide policy discussions. It was noted that the Board approved the current priority listing at its August meeting. However, the
Board agreed to vote to move the Priority 7 area up with the condition that it accrue no extra cost to the Board. Bob made the motion to change the priority listing, Sean seconded. Board members voted unanimously to change the priority listing (moving P7 to P4) conditional on there being no additional cost and pending negotiations between Dan and USGS.
Parcel Grants: The RFP for a second round of Parcel Grants will be advertised in the Kennebec Journal this weekend (Sept. 17). Larry will set up a Review Team and report back to the Board at the October meeting. A recommendation as made to include the Parcel Grants project on the GeoLibrary website.
Consultant Services/County Commissioners July 28 meeting: There will be a presentation in Lewiston this weekend geared toward the novice audience. Project was scheduled to wrap up in September, however there is still one more meeting to be held for registrars and emergency management folks. The goal is to produce a final report in the October/November timeframe.
GEO Portal Proposal: Marilyn reported on the GEO portal proposal process. The Review Team for the proposals consisted of Sean, Will, Dennis, Dan, and Marilyn. There were three bidders on the RFP: 1) Ionic Enterprises, Inc.; 2) iCST; and 3) Penobscot Bay Media. The recommendation for selection brought before the Board was Ionic Enterprises.
Brought to the Board’s attention was the extensive work of the Review Team in evaluating each of the three proposals. The process included telephone interviews, calling references, and extensive discussions.. Will Mitchell thanked the Review Team for many hours of hard work.
Will Mitchell made a motion to the Board, and seconded by Marilyn (?) to approve the vendor selection (Ionic Enterprises ) for the GEO portal.
Before moving forward on a vote, Barbara had some questions for the Review Team.Will Ionic be developing the software? Is the software already installed elsewhere? Ionic has already been awarded a contract with the State of Kentucky for the same type of portal. Ours will be a portal that will catalog description of data that is available for browsing and viewing. The key is getting the metadata into it. We see it as a giant card catalog to be administered by MEGIS. .
Matt Davis, ESRI Representative, brought his concerns before the Board. Did the state assess the ability of the Ionic product sitting on top of the ESRI infrastructure? ESRI has some concerns of what will be asked of them as the state’s vendor. What made the state comfortable with this selection? Matt noted that ESRI does not work well with Ionic. When asked why, his response was because they are a competitor. He noted that ESRI does have a policy on what they do or don’t do with other vendors.
A recommendation was made to have ESRI send a letter to the Board Chair (through Dan Walters) noting their concerns. If, however, they wished to protest the selection, that would have to be done in the usual way through the State. It was also noted that the State is committed to an open environment and materials from the evaluation process are available from Purchases. It was also noted that ESRI was part of the State’s infrastructure but not the whole infrastructure, and we will find a way to make it work.
Will Mitchell commented that the Review Team is proposing an independent process that will not replace or crowd out ESRI infrastructure running in the state now. The portal is to harvest metadata and render it available and work with the current ESRI infrastructure already in place.
With all concerns noted, the Board voted unanimously on the motion to accept the Review Team’s recommendation on selecting Ionic Enterprises.
3. Appointments to the Board
With receipt of a signed letter, from Commissioner Wyke, appointing Judy Mathiau as the Designee this fills the vacancy representing the Dept. of Administrative & Financial Services.
With Jon Giles leaving the Board, Jim will follow up with MMA on nominations to fill the vacancy representing Municipalities. Sean will pass along this information for nominations at NEARC.
Will Mitchell has submitted his re-appointment but has not heard anything to date.
Bob Faunce (not seeking re-appointment) is waiting to hear from the Association for a nomination to replace him as a representative for the Counties. Let it be known that the Maine GeoLibrary Board acknowledges their deep appreciation to Bob Faunce for all his hard work in support of the GeoLibrary.
4. Election of a new Chair and Vice Chair
Bob Faunce nominated Jim Page to continue as Chair to the Board and Marilyn Lutz was asked to remain as Vice Chair. Both Marilyn and Jim accepted their nominations. Having three members conferencing in, and with the Board wishing to vote by secret ballot, the voting process was adapted to meet those needs. Members present were asked to fill in their ballot and give to Carmen and leave the room. Once all members present had voted and left the room, Carmen worked with each member on the phone to get their vote, asking two members to move away from the telephone while she took one member’s vote. Having completed the voting process, members present were asked to come back into the conf room. Carmen counted the ballots which resulted in 100% Yes votes to re-elect Jim as Chair and Marilyn as Vice Chair to the Maine GeoLibrary Board for September 2005 to September 2006.
5. Update on the GIS Executive Council and 6. SPO GIS Interests / Priorities
Liz reported the GIS Executive Council is moving to finalize its 2002-2007 Strategic Plan which is still in draft form. The plan was reviewed by the ISPB but never finalized or approved. The Council will revamp the plan, finalize it, and use it as a jumping off point to work on their next 5 year plan. We also need to work to mesh the Executive Council plans and efforts with those of the GeoLibrary Board. The GIS EC will be looking to the GeoLibrary Board for input. Liz noted two points particular to the current and new plan. The current plan focused on “selling” GIS to its constituencies, the next plan needs to focus on GIS as part of the state’s tool box to get its work done. Marketing the GeoLibrary could work very well with the GIS Executive plan. .
We will be looking to promote the use of geospatial information as a part of everyday business. If you use the word “WHERE”, GIS can help solve the problem. The goal of the GIS EC is to have a 3-year work plan, an implementation plan to include tasks and both plans will be revised during the 5-year period.
Liz talked about the GIS activities with the State Planning Office, noting that their GIS person was very busy. Liz also mentioned the Public Land Conservation data layers and the need to bring these layers up to speed and create a process to keep them current. SPO is trying to maintain that layer (a critical layer this is lacking for planning processes). Liz asked the Committee whethersome of the GeoLibrary’s “free money” could be sent over to SPO to help with this specific task. Liz was asked to put together a report on the current status and what the needs are. Also, this request will be passed to the GeoLibrary’s Technical Committee. Will Mitchell noted this was a good project for the Board to participate in.
7. Bond Planning
Jim noted the GeoLibrary Board, in its efforts to secure bond funding would be working with the State Planning Office and within the SPO timeframe. He also noted that Rep. Koffman’s bill was carried over to the next session. The Board needs to prepare items for the bond and get this information to SPO in a timely manner. The Board proceeded to review funding priorities from the list put together by Dan Walters.
The Board will work with Tim and Tony of the State Planning to complete all Board requirements to request bond funding. It was agreed the Board does need more support to move forward. One recommendation was to possibly partner in with the Department of Economic and Community Development. In outlining a successful political effort the Board will start with SPO and move to the Legislature. The Board needs to come to a common agreement of what is needed/wanted.
update statewide land cover
Zoning, conservation lands, roads
Upgrades & validation / conformity tools
The Regional Service Center concept was brought up as a possible bond funding item. TRHere are long term policy issues that the Board needs to address here, first answering to its satisfaction what a Regional Service Center may be and what is its role.
What can the Board do to push the programs/projects of the GeoLibrary as they relates to economic development?
A vote was requested on the Board to accept Dan’s bond funding list, subject to the above revisions, as the working document for developing bond funding. Bob made the motion, Liz seconded and the Board voted unanimously to accept the motion.
|Copyright © 2011 All rights reserved.|