The Executive Council of the Delaware Geographic Data Committee (DGDC) will meet on Thursday, October 20, 2011, in Dover. The draft agenda (PDF) includes and update on the orthophotography project, an update on the work being done by DelDOT to create a statewide routable centerline.

The meeting will start at 10:00 a.m., in room 133 of the Haslet Armory, at 122 William Penn Street, in Dover. The Executive Council is charged with oversight of GIS Coordination in Delaware and works closely with the full membership of the DGDC.

July 21, 2010
10:00 am to 12:00 pm

The Executive Council of the Delaware Geographic Data Committee (DGDC) will meet on Thursday, July 21, 2011, in Dover. The draft agenda (PDF) discussion of a possible 2011 orthophotography project, and discussion regarding a presentation to the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues.

The meeting will start at 10:00 a.m., in room 133 of the Haslet Armory, at 122 William Penn Street, in Dover. The Executive Council is charged with oversight of GIS Coordination in Delaware and works closely with the full membership of the DGDC.

A draft agenda (PDF) is now posted for the June 9 meeting of the Delaware Geographic Data Committee (DGDC). The agenda includes subcommittee reports, discussion of a 2011 orthophotography project, and discussion on the RAMONA GIS Inventory. The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. in Room 220 of the Kent County Administration Building, at 555 Bay Road (Route 113), in Dover. All are welcome.

The publication to 2010 Census data for Delaware suggested a change to part of the attributes. The Office used that as an excuse to make several other changes. The attribute data now includes:

• The name of each municipality,
• Its Federal Information Processing System (FIPS) code, used for “uniform identification of geographic entities through all federal government agencies,”
• The Census Bureau GeoID for each, which allows linking to detailed data from the 2010 Census,
• The total population and housing unit counts for each, from the 2010 Census,
• The URL of the municipal web site (if there is one), and
• A calculation of the total area ( in acres) of the polygon that describes the municipal boundary.

Full metadata is included in the zipped shapefile collection available for download. The data set and metadata have also been posted to the Delaware Geospatial Data Exchange. They will be added to the Delaware DataMIL shortly. There is also a Google Earth (KMZ) version.

It’s in the metadata, of course, but it is also worth adding here that this data set is not intended to be used as a definitive legal boundary for any municipality. The municipal charters and other legal documents give the legal boundaries of each municipality. This data is intended to be used as a descriptive planning tool.

Matt Laick has moved from DelDOT over to the Department of Safety and Homeland Security (DSHS) to serve as GIS Coordinator for Delaware’s E911 division. DSHS Secretary Lewis Schiliro made the announcement yesterday at the E911 Emergency Services Board Meeting.

Matt, who has served as GIS and addressing administrator in Sussex County and more recently helped guide GIS use in DelDOT’s IT section, will now work with the state’s nine PSAPs (Public Safety Answering Points, the 911 centers) to make sure that they have access to the best GIS data we can provide as they handle our emergencies and send police, fire fighters and emergency medical folks to help us when we need them.

The idea for a 911 GIS Coordinator grew out of work that Matt and others, particularly the County GIS teams, have done to help the 911 centers in the past. The PSAPs are one of the places where all of our data sets meet and must work well together for the sake of people’s health and safety; from the addressing and road information maintained by the counties to the statewide aerials and other data sets.

That’s Matt’s new job and we wish him great success.

Please join the DGDC on Thursday, March 24, for an Enterprise GIS Strategy Workshop.

What do you need to help you do your job more efficiently? How can a state-level “Enterprise GIS” help you? This workshop is intended to find out from GIS users what tools and support they need. This information will help the DGDC Executive Council plan for the future.

The Delaware Geographic Data Committee has had some success over the years and has built a few tools that have helped facilitate data-sharing. But our industry is constantly changing. What was ground-breaking yesterday is normal today and will be out of date tomorrow.

As those who were at the most recent DGDC quarterly meeting will remember, the DataMIL servers and software configuration are approaching retirement age. Given that fact, and with the Geospatial Data Exchange now active, it is a good time to discuss, as a community, what might be the next steps for data-sharing tools.

So let us take a step back and do some blue-sky thinking. Forget what we have now. Forget what we’ve done for the past 13 years (yup, it’s been that long). Think instead of what we need; not in terms of vendor-specific solutions or traditional tools and approaches, but simply ask “What outcomes to we want?”

No responses are wrong. There will not be detailed discussion or debate. This workshop is only intended to collect thoughts and ideas. We’ll catalog them and group them and use them for the basis of on-going discussions and planning.

But first we have to ask a simple question: “what do we want to accomplish?”

The workshop will start at 1:00 p.m. in room 133 of the Haslet Armory, at 122 William Penn Street, in Dover. Please take a moment to register; we need to know how many folks to expect. Everyone is welcome, whether they’ve been active in the DGDC or not.

The meeting included reports on the statewide transportation data project, orthophotography updates, a report from the recent NSGIC MidYear conference, and updates from several federal agencies.

Bill Burgess, of NSGIC, gave an overview presentation on the GIS Inventory system developed by that group. Roger Barlow, of USGS, gave a presentation on the new “US Topo” product that is now available.

I used the meeting to announce a “Delaware Enterprise GIS Strategy Workshop” to be held on Thursday, March 24, at 1:00 p.m., in Room 133 of the Haslet Armory in Dover. This will be an opportunity for some “blue-sky” thinking about what’s next for the DGDC. We’ll post more on that event soon

For a sense of what was covered in the meeting, here is the “agenda slideshow” we used to go through the meeting.

The redistricting data, officially known as the 2010 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, includes population totals, population by race and Hispanic origin, population 18 and older (voters), and housing units (total and by occupancy status). The racial breakdowns include six single race groups and 57 multiple race groups (63 total race categories).

The 2010 edition of TIGER Shapefiles has been available for some time. We have started adding parts of the redistricting data sets to those shapefiles to create new products.

Here’s what we have so far. All of these data sets are posted on the Census State Data Center site. The shapefiles are also posted to the Delaware Geospatial Data Exchange. With metadata, of course.

• Delaware census tracts with 2010 Census population and housing counts. 
  • Google Earth (KMZ)
  • Shapefile (ZIP)
• Delaware census block groups with 2010 Census population and housing counts.
  • Google Earth (KMZ)
  • Shapefile (ZIP)

Also available are several tabular files:

• State, Counties & Towns (Google Doc) with 2000 and 2010 population counts, numerical change and percent change
• Population change, 2000 – 2010 (csv) for the state, counties and towns
• Housing unit change, 2000 – 2010 (csv) for the state, counties and towns
• Population counts, 1940 – 2010 (csv) for the state, counties and towns
• Housing unit counts, 1970 – 2010 (csv) for the state, counties and towns

And we have added the 2010 data for the state and counties to the Delaware Census Counts, 1790 to 2010 data set posted on the Census State Data Center site.

Stay tuned to the Census State Data Center site for more updates as we work our way through these data sets. And if any of you have created new data products from the 2010 Census release, please let me know so we can point to them and applaud your efforts.

A draft agenda (PDF) is now posted for the March 10 meeting of the Delaware Geographic Data Committee (DGDC). The agenda includes subcommittee reports, a report from the 2011 NSGIC Mid-Year Meeting, discussion of a 2011 orthophotography project, and presentation on the RAMONA GIS Inventory as well as the new 21st Century Quad from the USGS. There will also be discussion of a new approach to developing data standards and a call for nominations for representatives to the DGDC Executive Council.

The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. in Room 220 of the Kent County Administration Building, at 555 Bay Road (Route 113), in Dover. All are welcome.

This year, we asked pretty much the same questions of DGDC members to gain their insight before responding for the state to NSGIC.

That input led us to answer the NSGIC survey as follows:

Describe your state’s top three geospatial accomplishments during the past year.

• Strategic Plan and Business Plan Completed and approved by Executive Council
• Delaware Geospatial Data Exchange completed and deployed
• First round of data standards approved

Describe your state’s top three geospatial goals for the coming year.

• Create a GIO office (per strategic and business plans)
• Improve coordination and data cataloguing as well as technical support for users
• Next round of orthos (funding and acquisition)

Describe the three most significant geospatial challenges for your state.

• Enacting the strategic and business plans, including establishing a funding line for data maintenance
• Enacting data standards for base maps, roads, etc.
• Improving data consistency and metadata publication

The survey next asked states to select responses to gauge their status against a set of nine GIS coordination criteria (PDF) identified some years ago by the NSGIC membership as part of the 50 States Initiative. We could choose from among the following responses for each of these nine criteria:

• We previously had this function and lost it over the past year
• No plans at this time for implementing this criteria
• We currently are planning to implement this within the next 12 to 18 months
• Progress has been made and we reasonably expect this to be fully implemented within the next 12 months
• Implemented at this time

And here are the nine crietria and our responses to each:

1. A full-time, paid coordinator position is designated and has the authority to implement the state’s business and strategic plans. 
   • Progress has been made and we reasonably expect this to be fully implemented within the next 12 months
2. A clearly defined authority exists for statewide coordination of geospatial information technologies and data production.
   • Implemented at this time.
3. The statewide coordination office has a formal relationship with the state’s Chief Information Officer (or similar office).
   • Implemented at this time.
4. A champion (politician or executive decision-maker) is aware and involved in the process of coordination.
   • We are currently are planning to implement this within the next 12 to 18 months.
5. Responsibilities for developing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure and a State Clearinghouse are assigned.
   • Implemented at this time.
6. The ability exists to work and coordinate with local governments, academia, and the private sector.
   • Implemented at this time.
7. Sustainable funding sources exist to meet projected needs.
   • We are currently are planning to implement this within the next 12 to 18 months.
8. Coordinators have the authority to enter into contracts and become capable of receiving and expending funds.
   • Implemented at this time.
9. The Federal government works through the statewide coordinating authority.
   • Implemented at this time.

Our internal survey turned up a few other thoughts that will be of use, including the idea that we take our own pulse more frequently using such surveys. That can probably be arranged.