Category Archives: Empire Statewide GIS

2015 NYS GIS Legislative & GAC Summertime Blues

Posted on by
Reply

While a good chunk of the GIS community was recently at the big group hug in San Diego at the annual ESRI UC (btw – kudos to both City of Rochester and NYC Department of Sanitation for Special Achievements in GIS (SAG) Awards),  the summer government-based geospatial landscape here in the Empire State couldn’t be any different.  Government GIS –  as in municipal, county, regional and state programs – continue to creep along.    Government GIS program administrators and project leaders, and speaking here about local government GIS projects, maintaining the same ol’ same ol’ waiting patiently for a game changing statewide GIS program/project which will magically institutionalize and expand their geospatial structure.  Though in reality, local government GIS leaders continuing to endure a statewide GIS enabling program that plods along at the pace similar to an endless loop of Brian Eno’s Music for Airports.   Sure, a conference here, a webinar there, a new skin on pieces of the ancient NYS GIS Clearinghouse – all for meaningful cause on some level –  but at the end of the day, or really the end of another legislative year, a statewide program that does not produce any specific legislation action which results in earmarked funding or enabling support o help build GIS capacity in local, county, and regional governments.   Yes, those legislative appropriations which are necessary to build and sustain geospatial at the local level.

The Governor’s January 21, 2015 State of the State talking points provided an element of short term optimism identifying several priority areas including infrastructure/transportation, economic development/tourism, Regional Economic Development Councils, and public safety, some of which are at the foundation of established geospatial applications.  Unfortunately, as has been the case in years pass, there has been limited discussion or action since the January presentation among the statewide GIS leadership on how to leverage the Governor’s priorities on behalf of the geospatial community.  The one exception of course being public safety which will continue to dictate the direction of much of the so-called statewide GIS “coordination” discussion as long as the GIS Program Office is buried deep inside of the ITS Public Safety Cluster.  Of course not to question the importance of public safety applications in the broader GIS context,  so noted and recognized, but until an independent GIS office is created – and its absolutely not going to happen in the current political climate – public safety related geospatial themes will continue to take center stage in the statewide GIS coordination discussion.

Therefore, as I have done in previous years, I took a few moments to scan the legislative search engines to see if any new legislation may have been introduced by members of the NYS Legislature during the 2015 session which would include either direct or indirect funding to support statewide GIS/geospatial program development.   For those who are interested, I came up with results almost identical to the search results twelve months ago.  One can find selected pieces of legislation containing a  “mapping” component  in the areas of Alzheimer’s research, autism, and breast cancer research.  With the 2015 Legislative session now behind us, here’s a comprehensive summary.

So what’s the point?  The point is that the NYS GIS Association has grown immensely over the past decade and is now involved in many areas of the profession across the state. As noted in previous posts, one area in which the Association is still in its infancy is in building and creating a presence in the New York State legislative arena and creating its own legislative agenda.  And the lack of any geospatial-related legislation introduced by the NYS statewide legislature over the past several years  speaks to the lack of the Association’s presence in this space.  And such “legislative” support does not necessarily have to be in just the development of earmarked funding.  For example, it could also include legislative assistance – and expanding the discussion – on helping leverage existing appropriations in agencies such as the NYS Environmental Facilities Corporation (NYSEFC) which administers both the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Evolving funds.  In early July of this year, NYSEFC issued an announcement of a $50 million dollar grant program making funding available for local drinking water and wastewater improvements.  Yes, there are many earmarks and stipulations in the NYSEFC grant, but illustratively, its potential as a funding source to expand and highlight geospatial technologies at the local level as part of rebuilding the decaying public infrastructure cannot be ignored.

The Association’s legislative presence needs to be autonomous and completely independent – particularly from the Geospatial Advisory Council (GAC) which earlier in the year, as outlined in its new, wildly fascinating organizational chart, attempted to neuter the Association to the role of providing “professional development” while meanwhile taking on the role itself as to  “advising decision makers”.   Somehow determining along the way that the expertise and composition of the GAC membership was more qualified and better positioned than the entire Association membership to interact with decision makers.  If decision makers means advising their immediate supervisors, then maybe so.  But certainly not elected officials and politicians – the place where the “advice” and well scripted dialog needs to be directed.   Money here says the day GAC members who are government employees, to say the least of a politically appointed state government GIO, start independently interacting with decision makers and politicians in any meaningful and outward/visible way will also be their last day of employment.  This is work for industry-focused professional nonprofit Associations administered by real Executive Directors.  Not government employees.

To be truly independent and representative of the statewide geospatial membership, and particularly to the local government constituency, the Association needs to come out from under the shadow and footprint of state government-heavy committees/programs and engage with legislative sponsors on its own terms. (btw – GAC perfectly illustrated the Association’s need to flee the so-called new coordination framework in the new organizational chart of GIS coordination in NY State – with the dominant shaded state government rectangular box at the top of the chart.)   My guess is that the GAC leadership didn’t use a Hillary Clinton-type advance focus group test to see if anyone in the statewide GIS community really understood the chart  or for that matter what GAC is really supposed to do. Though some blame should be placed the Association leadership for even letting GAC publish the new organizational chart showing it (the Association) in some subservient capacity to the self-declared state government triumvirate and GAC, if even only in context of an advisory role.

The Association should also stop serving as a mule in providing GAC with an annual candidate list of potential members whose mere presence at the table implies endorsement of GAC’s activities.  Remove itself, along with local government individuals, from the quarterly parade to Albany to listen to state government departmental GIS applications, work plans, and projects and priorities of state government programs. While the dialog at GAC may be useful and productive in context of state government program updates and activities, its mostly for the benefit of the choir of state employees at the meeting and those making the presentations themselves.    Take a look at the minutes from the June 2015 GAC meeting and digest all of the riveting conversation concerning the needs and future activities of non-state sectors of GAC i.e., utilities, academia, nonprofits, and of course local government, and decide for yourself.  But maybe it was because it was a “state” sector designated meeting?  And other sectors will get their chance at future GAC quarterly meetings to dominate the conversation?  Yeah, probably.  Exactly why I formed the Association over a decade ago – to help lead the discussion and focus of statewide GIS development in a different direction and away from established Albany-centric GIS programs and personalities.  And the business sector?  BUSINESS.  Fugetaboutit.  Probably the most important factor which is going to shape the NYS geospatial landscape in the next decade doesn’t even really participate in the discussion.  And yes, there is a reason why business doesn’t run in the GAC circle.   And ironically, the only place the geospatial business community is going to participate and contribute is within the Association structure.

It’s time for the Association’s leadership to recognize and embrace the potential, and for that matter, its obligation, towards building an independent legislative agenda and professional appearance on the New York State political stage.  Operating and orchestrating on its own.  Working with other appropriate industry groups and committees where input and collaboration is requested and warranted as needed, but beholden to none and/or other hidden agendas.  The Association must establish itself to set the agenda of  statewide geospatial priorities. Not GAC and most definitely not state government employees or agencies.

That time for action is now, or the hopes of a meaningful 2016 geospatial legislation report reflecting the growth and expansion of the GIS profession will be a carbon copy of 2015.  And the beat will go on and on and on.   Just like Music for Airports.

The Federal Geospatial Data Act of 2015: A NYS Local Perspective

Posted on by
Reply

There has been a limited amount of fanfare and support – or even discussion for that matter – here in the Empire State on the proposed Geospatial Data Act of 2015.    Beyond one or two acknowledgements on  the state listservs, the announcement really didn’t generate any buzz or visible discussion throughout the GIS community.   Though it comes as no real surprise as few in New York statewide GIS community have had any meaningful exposure or introduction to past legislation/bills regarding federal agencies referenced in the proposed 2015 act introduced by Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah.  In absence of any real meaningful dialog here in the New York  between the GIS professional community and elected officials on federal legislation (or any geospatial legislation for that matter except perhaps the never-ending “Surveyor” Legislation), one wonders if New York’s federal delegation is even aware of the proposed act.  Or its stated benefits.

At the core of the proposed 2015 Act is a combination federal legislation and policies including (in no particular order of importance) OMB Circular A-16, the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), and the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC).   Very government-like and uber confusing, a little background includes: In 1994, Executive Order 12906 was issued by President Clinton to direct the development of the NSDI.  Unfortunately, twenty-one years later,  many of the requirements of EO 12906 have never been acted on.  Circular A-16 was originally issued in 1953, revised in 1967, revised in 1990 (establishing the FGDC), and revised again in 2002 outlining specific federal agency obligations.  A-16 Supplemental Guidance was also issued in 2010. Similar to EO 12906, federal agencies have struggled to implement many of the provisions of OMB A-16 over the same period of time.

The August 2002 revision to Circular No. A-16 was particularly significant in context of naming the stewardship of over 30 data themes to federal agencies in support of both the NSDI and FGDC programs.  Specific datasets included:

 Biological Resources, Cadastral, Cadastral Offshore, Climate, Cultural and Demographic Statistics, Cultural Resources, Orthophotography, Earth Cover, Elevation Bathymetric, Elevation Terrestrial, Buildings and Facilities, Federal Lands, Flood Hazards, Geodetic Control, Geographic Names, Governmental Units, Geologic, Housing, Hydrology, International Boundaries, Law Enforcements Statistics, Marine Boundaries, Offshore Materials, Outer Continental Shelf Submerged Lands, Public Health, Public Land Conveyance, Shoreline, Soils, Transportation, Vegetation, Watershed boundaries and Wetlands.

While all data themes are clearly important in supporting the broad national NSDI efforts, most New York State local governments  have a limited number of day-to-day business work functions directly related to NSDI spatial data themes itemized in the 2002.  (In fact many of the 2002 NSDI spatial data themes are only developed and maintained by federal resources.)  Adding to the disconnect is that many 2015 local government GIS programs, especially in urban areas, have business needs which are not supported by either the content or spatial accuracy of core 2002 NSDI spatial data themes.  For example, local government geospatial programs in the areas of  infrastructure management (drinking water, sanitary sewer, and storm water systems), utilities, vehicle routing and tracking, permitting and inspection systems, service delivery programs in the health and human services, local planning, zoning, and economic development activities are not closely aligned with many of the 2002 NSDI spatial data themes.    While many federal mapping programs and geospatial datasets continue to be consistent at 1:24,000 (2000 scale), most local urban government GIS programs are built on top of large scale (i.e., 1”=100’ or even 1”=50’) photogrammetric base maps.

Not all is lost, however, as some local data products such as parcel boundaries and planimetrics (building footprints, hydrology, transportation) actually are consistent selected 2002 NSDI spatial data themes (Cadastral, Governmental Units, Hydrology, Geodetic Control, Transportation) albeit at a higher degree of accuracy.  Unfortunately, limited capacity or systems have been established to leverage or normalize such datasets into the NSDI.

Unfortunately, even though the federal government continues to identify and list local governments as key stakeholders in most legislative proposals, it’s common belief among federal agencies that resources are not available to monitor or engage local GIS programs (i.e., 3000 counties vs. 50 states).  And there continues to be the (wild) belief state level GIS programs can serve as the ‘middle man’ or conduit between local and federal geospatial programs.  Somehow magically rolling up local government data for use by federal agencies and integrated into the NSDI.  Not really.  At least here in New York State.   And no, old school NSDI Clearinghouses nor the current rage of soon-to-be-yesterday-news “Open Data” portals being equivalent mechanisms in supporting and maintaining 2002 A-16 data themes.

Perhaps sponsors of the Geospatial Act of 2015 could model collection of local government geospatial data assets after the ongoing efforts associated with the HIFLD (Homeland Infrastructure Foundation Data) program.   Though obviously a very different end product from the NSDI, federal agencies producing the HSIP (Homeland Security Infrastructure Protection) Gold and HSIP Freedom datasets have enjoyed relatively decent success in collecting large volumes of local government data – much of which has been paid for at the local level.  And many of the same federal agencies associated with the HIFLD program including National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Defense (DOD), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have stewardship responsibilities of NSDI spatial data themes.  Different.  But similar.   And adding more bewilderment to the discussion is that it is easier to contribute crowed sourced data (structures) to the USGS than it is for local governments to push large scale photogrammetric data of the same features (structures) to federal agencies and incorporated into the NSDI.

Georeferenced 2013 US Topo White Plains quadrangle. While selected structures such as schools, fire houses and hospitals are identified on default US Topo product, this image shows all Westchester County building footprints

Georeferenced 2013 US Topo White Plains quadrangle. While selected structures such as schools, fire houses and hospitals are identified on the default US Topo product, this image shows also shows how local content such as Westchester County building footprints can be made available to the NSDI structures data theme.

Unless a methodical and accepted process – adopted by pertinent local/state/federal stakeholders – is institutionalized  by the FGDC, the Geospatial Data Act of 2015 will continue to be more about federal and state geospatial programs and less about truly integrating and taking advantage of the vast amount of local government data.   The Act needs to specify and fund building work flows which communicate directly with the source of the data as well as working towards reducing the reliance on state “middle men” GIS programs as means to acquire local geospatial data. (Local governments were not even mentioned in a February 2015 General Accounting Office report entitled “GEOSPATIAL DATA: Progress Needed on Identifying Expenditures, Building and Utilizing a Data Infrastructure, and Reducing Duplicative Effort”.  A report which appears to be eerily similar and a rebaked version of the  (ill-fated) 2013 “Map It Once, Use It Many Times”   federal geospatial legislation attempting to reposition the federal effort to coordinate National geospatial data development.

Ironically, just one month prior to the Geospatial Data Act of 2015 being introduced, a scathing report was released by the Consortium of Geospatial Organizations (COGO) entitled “Report Card on the U.S. National Spatial Data Infrastructure”.  In short an overall “C-“ to NSDI effort over the past two decades.  The report falls short in not holding state GIS programs more accountable and responsible as well as most have  jockeyed over the past two decades to be seen as enablers and partners of the NSDI  effort in context of framework layer stewards, recipients of FGDC grants, and establishing/maintaining NSDI Clearinghouse nodes.  States supposedly as “middle men” and conduits to valuable local government geospatial data assets.   Perhaps COGO report cards on individual State government GIS programs are forthcoming.

At the end of the day, NSDI supporters actually do have access to a wide range of local government geospatial assets as files, consumable web services, or perhaps through some other middleware provided by a software vendor.   Or a combination of all the above.  The data and the technology are here.  To the end of furthering the intent of the NSDI, legislation like the Geospatial Act of 2015 will fall on deaf ears and not advance as it should unless the federal government establishes the means to directly engage and connect to local governments.

 

 

2015 NYS Spring GIS Conference Specials

Posted on by
Reply

Spring continues to be one of my favorite times of the year for a bunch of reasons including March Madness, MLB spring training, and the opening of our local golf courses. And this year, in particular, the end of the long and brutal 2015 winter the Empire State has endured.

Spring also brings my annual summary of favorite one-day regional GIS conferences – most of which are held in locations accessible via a maximum 2-4 hour drive from all parts of the state. These one-day conferences are user-friendly, light on registration fees, provide excellent networking opportunities among colleagues and industry representatives, often provide GISP credit,  provide good presentation content, and minimize overall travel expenses. Sound too good to be true? You decide.

GIS-SIG 24rd Annual Conference, April 14th, Rochester, NY. GIS-SIG is the long standing western New York geospatial educational user group whose primary mission is to “foster the understanding of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) technology.” GIS/SIG provides a professional forum in the Rochester – Genesee Finger Lakes region for GIS education, data sharing, communication and networking with other local, state and national users, dissemination of information about trends and policies related to GIS, and technology advancement. With a loyal membership and Board of Directors, the size and content of the GIS/SIG conference is broad enough to often substitute as an annual state conference for many GIS practitioners in the western half of the state. The conference boasts a wide range of vendors and presentations involving government, industry and business, nonprofits, and contributions from the many academic institutions in the Rochester-Buffalo corridor. Corporate sponsorship keeps the price tag of an individual registration at under a $100 for the day which also includes lunch. Online registration is available and while you are at the GIS/SIG website you can also see the many resources and links GIS/SIG provides to its user community.  To the extent possible, I always try to attend and present at this event.

Northeast Arc User Group (NEARC) Meeting, May 11th, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. Though not in New York State, the Spring NEARC meeting is conveniently located in Amherst, MA which is easily accessible to the Albany Capital District and GIS professionals in eastern New York State. Once considered the smaller venue of the NEARC suite of annual conferences, Spring NEARC grew too large at its original site at Smith College in Northampton, MA and moved to a larger venue at the University of Massachusetts. Unlike the GIS/SIG conference which is software vendor independent, this show is very much ESRI centric though is packed with high quality user presentations, well attended by ESRI business partners, and has grown to be so popular that the show now competes with the larger annual three-day NEARC Conference held in the fall and other similar New England GIS shows. This is a great one-day conference, well attended, great user content, easy access, lots of opportunities to meet industry representatives and ESRI regional staff, professional networking, and includes lunch – all normally in the $50-$75 price range. If you can afford an overnight, activities the evening before downtown Amherst and a hotel room at the UMass conference center (where NEARC is held) make it even more worth your while. If your organization is an ESRI shop – this is a Spring show not to miss.

Westchester GIS User Group Meeting, May 14th, Purchase College, Purchase New York. As one of the largest geospatial meetings in New York State, the Westchester GIS User Group Meeting is a free one-day conference held at Purchase College. Made possible by financial support from exhibiting vendors and conference facilities provided by the college, the 2015 event includes a wide range of user presentations, student poster contest, and an on-campus geocaching and orienteering (aka Map Adventures) contest. The Purchase College location provides easy one-day access across the metropolitan NYC area, as well as the broader lower Hudson River Valley and southeastern Connecticut. Agenda and other meeting specifics – including registration – is available from the Westchester County GIS website.

So, if overnight travel and expenses are simply not available or significantly limited, fret not – there are regional geospatial meetings and conferences which are accessible from most areas of the state AND provide many of the same benefits of larger shows. And at the same time easy on the wallet. At the end of the day, it will be worth your while and you’ll be supporting both your colleagues and industry representatives which support our Empire State GIS programs.

Happy travels!

Building a New York State Community Mapping Framework

Posted on by
Reply

Concurrent with the growth  of user-friendly and often free online mapping programs, so have the “community” based mapping and planning projects.  While  earlier generations of geospatial programs focused, and continue to do so on many levels,  on mapping the physical world, a new generation of GIS programs and initiatives increasingly focus on the mapping and inventorying of health and human services programs which support a wide range of societal issues and needs.   Community mapping programs run the spectrum from being volunteer crowded-sourced  to those with full-time, permanent staff with many being aligned with  nonprofits, schools, youth and religious groups, and  university-based efforts.  Seen in a larger context, community mapping projects are often critical components of important global environmental and humanitarian initiatives (Haiti earthquake,  Ebola epidemic, CrisisCommons, others).

The Google Maps (New York Community Mapping Projects) Gallery provides numerous examples of statewide community mapping projects.   More specific examples include SolidaryNYC which is a program highlighting community supported agriculture (CSA) locations,  health care systems, and advocacy organizations while GrowNYC  provides community resources mapping in the areas of recycling, education, green markets, and noise pollution, and HabitatMap, a non-profit environmental health justice organization raising awareness about the impact the environment has on human health.   And of course there is the uber, long standing OasisNYC initiative which includes online access to data on community-wide food systems, environmental stewardship groups, community gardens, and subsidized housing locations.  Here in Westchester County, County GIS staff has worked closely with the Food Bank of Westchester  mapping the locations of food pantries across the County.  In nearby New Jersey, the Center for Community Mapping supports community mapping efforts for children (GIS4Kids), healthy lifestyles, and plant/wildlife habitat inventories. Continue reading →

The GIS Fork in the Road

Posted on by
Reply

New York City GISMO (Geospatial Information Systems and Mapping Organization) hosted the GIS Startup and Open Data Forum meeting at the New York Public Library on November 18th.   The agenda included a series of five-minute lightning talks featuring nine existing and emerging startups including LavaMap, Local Data, Placemeter, Sourcemap, CartoDB, Boundless, Ontodia, Interface Foundry, and Liquid Galaxy.  The second half of the meeting consisted of similar five-minute presentations by (largely) government data providers including Westchester County GIS, Colin Reilly, NYC Dept. of Information Technology and Telecommunications,  Matt Knutzen, New York Public Library Map Division, Chris Barnett, OpenGeoPortal, and Andrew Nicklin, Director,  Open New York. Continue reading →

New York State Electric and Gas (NYSEG) Starts to Change the Game

Posted on by
Reply

From a government perspective, GIS data sharing – or even information sharing – with utilities (gas, water, electric, telecommunications) in New York State has always been challenging.   Utilities have historically been wary of sharing asset data fearing the information would then be later redistributed by governments due to their obligations under the New York State Freedom of Information Law (FOIL).   Redistribution and the improper use of critical utility asset data obviously provides a myriad of potential public safety issues as well as possibly compromising the utility’s competitive position among neighboring counterparts.  While there are rare exceptions, it is most common to find thematic maps of utility service areas available for download (ex. Kentucky, Ohio, California, Wisconsin, and Michigan) in hardcopy format only.  Typically these maps are available in PDF format, designed at a small scale (1:24,000) and do not show site specific or parcel level detail.  While these examples show the utilities willingness to share geospatial information with government and public, it  falls short in context of being able to use such data in GIS programs for mapping and viewing at the street level.  A very limited number of New York State utility related GIS files are available from the NYS GIS Clearinghouse albeit these datasets are at a very small scale and several years old.  Data for other New York State regulated utilities can be found at the New York State Public Service Commission website.

But here in New York State, we may be witnessing the start of a significant change in how utilities share and exchange information on their assets with governments, particularly in the aftermath of significant events such as Hurricane Sandy.  Taking a post-Sandy directive from the New York State Public Service Commission to “improve internal storm damage assessment collection and  collaboration with municipal entities to improve future restoration efforts” New York State Electric and Gas (NYSEG) has recently prototyped a basic  “damage assessment” application with two municipalities –  the Towns of Lewisboro and Pound Ridge –  in Westchester County focusing on issues associated with NYSEG utility poles and road closures.  NYSEG is currently in discussions with the Town of Bedford as well.  Data collected “from the field” immediately after a significant event is intended to improve NYSEG operation centers to better allocate and dispatch resources to areas of greatest need.  Conversely the status of NYSEG pole data can be viewed by local government administrators and emergency operations staff to help facilitate assistance at the local and neighborhood levels.

 Application Components

NYSEG built the application using the ESRI Collector app on Mini iPads.  (Note:  This was an internal NYSEG business decision as the app can be deployed on both Androids and iPhones as well).   In addition to collecting data through the mobile device, the same feature service can be accessed utilizing a standard browser on a personal computer for the entry of called-in damages. The feature service, which is being published by NYSEG, contains company X,Y utility pole location data combined with other local large scale data sets (planimetrics) to provide additional reference and context.

Version 1.0 of the NYSEG field data collection is designed to collect basic locational information on road closures, utility pole issues, and related tree conditions information. This image highlights data collection in a pilot project in southeastern New York State.

Version 1.0 of the NYSEG field data collection is designed to collect basic location information on road closures, utility pole issues, and related tree conditions information. This image highlights data collection in a pilot project in southeastern New York State.

Wireless connectivity is not an issue as the Collector app is used in disconnected mode so it can be used in wireless dead zones.  Data collected on the devices while in the disconnect mode is later synchronized with NYSEG servers by the user when wireless connectivity is available.   Access to the application – whether it is on a mobile device or on the desktop – is through a password protected login to ensure data is being collected by authorized users at the local level. For the time being NYSEG anticipates activating the program only in major outage events and is continuing its outreach with local government Emergency Operations programs to expand the user base.  Issues on local availability of mobile devices (smartphones, tablets, iPads, etc.) and required software to access the application through ArcGIS.com continue to be discussed with each municipality.  As shown below, the application interface also includes an operational dashboard based on real time updates of damages submitted from the field.   The associated graphs and easy to read maps provide important information for emergency response managers at the local level.

The application interface also includes an operational dashboard based on real time updates of damages submitted from the field. The associated graphs and easy to read maps provide important information for emergency response managers at the local level.

This NYSEG initiative presents a significant paradigm shift in the utility/government geospatial data sharing model and the benefits are already being recognized.  Notes Town of Lewisboro Supervisor Peter Parsons “I am convinced this is a real step forward. NYSEG and we believe that if it had been operational during Hurricane Sandy we could have restored power two days earlier. Even if we are being overly optimistic, one day earlier would make it a real improvement.”

Other utilities across the Empire State – gas, water, electric, and telecommunications – might take note of similar geospatial technology opportunities to support information sharing with governments and community groups in times of similar need.

For more information, contact Stephen Hope, New York State Electric and Gas, at SJHope@nyseg.com.

Results of the NYS GIS/Geospatial Business Survey

Posted on by
Reply

Survey Background

Late last spring eSpatiallyNewYork published an online survey with the intent to collect and establish baseline data on the New York State GIS/Geospatial business community.  At face value one might find this peculiar in that I am a career civil servant but I have increasingly realized over the past several years how important the geospatial business and industry sector will be in providing long term support and sustainability to statewide public GIS programs.  Fortunate as I have been over my career to have been in on the ground floor in the 1980s when government GIS programs began to lay the foundation of the geospatial technology as we know it today, these same tax-payer funded programs and systems have changed profoundly.  While geospatial is embedded – and to the point of almost expected –  in nearly all elements of daily government and managing the public good,  the equivalent funding for expanded government staffing and infrastructure has not been realized.  If anything, capacity has been reduced in context of tax caps, reduction in the government work force, and on some level, the growing belief and understanding among government decision makers that GIS solutions can be accessed and provided outside their organization (i.e., The Cloud, etc.).  And in doing so, eliminating the need to build the infrastructure and capacity with their own resources.  And there is no end in sight.    And it’s my belief, rightfully so.

Having served on the statewide GIS Coordinating Body (now dba the Geospatial Advisory Council [GAC]) for 17 years, I saw many attempts, with little coming to fruition, to bring private sector input into the statewide GIS planning and coordination efforts.   And I suspect that much will be the same with the current GAC alignment as industry representatives ultimately realize there is no real business incentive to participate in such “committees” so closely aligned with government.    And the statewide geospatial business climate has only become gloomier since 2011 when “GIS Services” were removed from the NYS Office of General Services (OGS) contract – making it much more cumbersome and difficult for governments to secure geospatial consultant services.   The good news on the landscape is that there appears to be healthy dose of private sector participation the NYS GIS Association.  A much more logical and independent place for the geospatial business community to promote its services and products to both government and industry.

Which leads to the survey.  Upon developing and finally publishing the survey, I made significant efforts to reach as broad representative sample of the geospatial business community as possible.  This included posts to the New York State and GISMO listservs as well as through geospatial Meetup groups (i.e., GeoNYC).    Contacts were also made to announce the survey through the New York State Society of Professional Engineers, New York Business Council, New York City Technology Council, and the NYS GIS Association.  I also announced the survey to a list of professional contacts I maintain and through my LinkedIn account.  The survey was short (15 total questions) consisting of a combination of multiple choice and fill-in-the-blank questions.  Respondents had the option of leaving their name and contact information – of which 32 of 52 provided.  (While I made the survey accessible via the hyperlink above I am no longer collecting data).

Rather than simply providing direct access to the survey URL in the various posts and outreach efforts, I requested that any business interested in taking the survey contact me directly and I would then provide the URL.  In doing so, I could monitor who was actually filling out the survey and avoid obtaining data from non-qualified respondents.  Not the most scientific approach, but for the most part it worked.  In all, a total of 52 surveys were returned that provided useable data which could be summarized for discussion.

Broad categories which are summarized below are not necessarily unique with individual firms potentially being included in several categories.   This is a long read and certainly does not fit into the traditional “shorter” blog postings, includes a lot of statistics of which I apologize, but I wanted to provide as much detail as possible.  Here you go.

Survey Result Highlights

Quick Facts (All Respondents):

  • Nearly 65% of the respondents have been doing business in the GIS/Geospatial space for more than 10 years
  • Almost half of the survey respondents stated they have a staff of 1-5 people dedicated to GIS/Geospatial work
  • 48% indicated that GIS/Geospatial was the primary focus of their business with another 30% being part of larger engineering/photogrammetric/environmental services company.
  • Only 7% of all respondents indicated they were a Minority Women Enterprise Business (WMBE).
  • Most of the respondents (52%) indicated one-third or less of their GIS/Geospatial business was within New York State.  Just 13% (7 respondents) stated that all of their GIS/Geospatial business was in the Empire State.
  • Among all respondents, state and local government (including nonprofits, schools, and academia) business work is a limited within the State of New York
  • Over half of the respondents indicated they do not do any federal work
  • About one-third of the respondents indicated one-third or more of their work was from business and industry
  • Both the “overall” economy and removal of GIS contract services from the NYS OGS contract were both seen as major factors in negatively impacting business
  • Development of mobile/smartphone technology  and web services are seen as the primary business development space over the next 2-4 years
  • Overwhelmingly, the New York GIS Association is the professional organization respondents are aligned with and participate
  • Surprisingly, only 20% of the respondents communicate business issues/concerns/opinions with NYS elected representatives
  • Good news is nearly 90% of the respondents state their level of business has remained constant or increased in the last five years

Selected Cohort Facts:

New York State GIS/Geospatial Businesses with 10+ Years  Respondent Total = 17

  • Includes  businesses in which GIS/Geospatial is both sole focus or as part of a larger engineering firm
  • Few Minority Women Business Enterprises (MWBE)
  • Half of the respondents (17) stated that about  50% of their business in generated in New York State of which only one-third is from state and local government
  • These “older” GIS firms do minimal work in the federal space
  • Most have had stable staffing over the past five years and feel that the “overall” economy is impacting their company’s GIS business development and growth
  • One of the few cohorts which believe that some of the decline in business is because clients are building more in-house capabilities
  • Most believe the greatest potential growth is in mobile and smartphones markets including social media
  • In context of professional affiliations, a majority of the respondents listed the NYS GIS Association
  • Few firms communicate their business concerns and needs with elected representatives

Comments on “improving the business climate” include:

  1. More information/education about the integration of GIS into business operations and various financial levels that can be utilized (ArcGIS Online, dedicated desktop or server, open source, etc.)
  2. Awareness. I think we need to raise awareness that the geospatial component of what people are doing and need to be done is increasing.
  3. Increased grant funding for Local Governments, not related to shared services
  4. More open data sharing, particularly in NYC and Long Island; more widespread public awareness and usage.
  5. I believe that the GIS business climate is largely subsumed by the IT realm; its growth will primarily be a function of demonstration of value add to business processes.
  6. It would be huge if grant programs were more readily available to help complement our significant R&D investment to continually bring new geo-spatial and mobile technologies to bear for our clients.
  7. Streamlined/improved procurement procedures for State and municipal government entities; this would be achieved primarily through a more efficient NYS OGS contract approval and updating procedure.
  8. Increased Grant Funding for GIS Initiatives. Many municipal governments still see GIS as a ‘nice to have’ and will not see the benefits until they have the opportunity and funding to implement.
  9. OGS contract. Renew SARA Grants
  10. More funding for Municipal GIS related projects
  11. More positive action at the State level. The state has done very little to encourage GIS growth at the local government level. In addition, their cooperative funding for GIS has been deficient.
  12. I think that there is a need to bridge the “flat” GIS in government arena with the surging GIS in business arena. I believe that there are a lot of untapped resources and un-met needs on both sides
  13. The New York State Help Desk is an outstanding help to small organizations and Local Government.
  14. Having worked in other states, I rank NY as one of the better states in terms of geospatial infrastructure and professional communities.
  15. When you try doing work in states outside of New York, you realize how lucky we are to have such helpful GIS people and resources like the NYS GIS Clearinghouse and the various County websites

 Smaller Firms (1-5 dedicated staff) Respondent Total = 12

  •  In general,  GIS/Geospatial is primary focus of business in this cohort
  • Half have been in business only 1-5 years
  • Over half of the respondents indicate that only one-third of their business is in New York State
  • Five of 12 respondents indicate they do no local or state government work
  • Overall, contract work with state and local government (including  nonprofits, schools, and academia) is not currently a major revenue generator
  • Of all the cohorts responding, smaller firms appear to engage in more federal work (albeit this is based only on 12 respondents)
  • Business has grown over the past five years

This group provided some of the most detailed comments and suggestions:

  1.  Increased marketing
  2. General awareness. I think that a lot of clients generally didn’t realize they needed a map right away. Making businesses and government agencies aware of what maps can do would be great.
  3. Better ROI documentation- connecting the cost of geospatial programs to the cost of doing business.
  4. GIS education at executive level. Dedicated funding sources. GIS generally gets “scrap” money.
  5. I think those in the GIS/Geo industry in NYS need to partner with strong programming/IT partners or build these capabilities on their own. There are plenty of clients that have the need for geospatial tools – direct mailing companies, beverage companies, and telecom. At the same time these clients are not interested in large proprietary installations of GIS software. They certainly are not interested in paying high licensing fees. If we could find a way to bring together those in the IT sector with the traditional GIS professionals and let them build partnerships I think GIS people would find themselves in a much better position to compete in this new world of GIS/IT. At a small scale in Buffalo, we present at events like Bar Camp Buffalo, Database Meetups (we talk about PostGIS), and Open Data Meetups. The people attending these events are inherently interested in geospatial technologies and are doing some pretty cool things even though their exposure to geospatial concepts is very superficial. We are starting to build partnerships with these people/firms. The common bond with these people is the ability to develop web applications using non-proprietary programming languages and frameworks. The niche we bring is geospatial.
  6. Additional funding for the NYS Archives Grants. State mandated parcel data structure similar to MassGIS Level III.

Firms with GIS/Geospatial as Primary Focus of Business Respondent Total = 25

  •  In general, business is spread out over all sectors including state and local government, industry and business, and federal work
  • Includes businesses with a wide range of staff sizes
  • Small number of WMBE firms
  • Over half of the 25 respondents in this category indicate only a one-third of their business is generated in New York State of which only one-third is associated with state and local government contracts.  (Said another way 1/3 of 1/3 = state and local government work).  One of the major findings of this survey
  • A majority of this category indicate at least one-third of their business is generated by business and industry
  • Over half indicate their business has grown over the past five years
  • Like other cohorts, this business sector indicates removal of GIS services from state contract has impacted business in a negative way as well as the overall economy
  • In context of professional affiliations, a majority of the respondents listed the NYS GIS Association
  • Few firms communicate their business concerns and needs with elected representatives

Comments from this group included a mixture of comments above as well as these unique statements:

  1. Procurement at any level of government in New York State is incredibly painful. The contracting process is very unfriendly to anyone but particularly to smaller vendors.
  2. It would be great to establish contracting vehicle(s) similar to the OGS vehicle – contracting can be quite challenging at the present time.
  3. NYS is poorly represented in MAPPS, arguably the largest and most influential professional organization representing private sector firms in the geospatial industry. I would be interested in pursuing a stronger relationship between the NYS Geospatial community and MAPPS.
  4. There are no statewide conferences or other forums that “work” for private companies. The NYS Geospatial Summit and NYS GIS Conference are centered on government. Recently private industry has not been able to present and there are limited networking opportunities for private industry. The organizers want private companies to pay significant sponsor fees (our company recently paid $2,000), but won’t let us speak – crazy. We are made to feel like we are the enemy. These constraints were loosened at the recent NYS GIS conference, but it’s still not a fully inclusive environment for private industry. There are similar problems in NYC. The primary technology event every year is the Technology Forum each fall. Private industry can not officially attend unless the company has a booth, which costs at least $10,000. This keeps all the small and medium-sized firms away, but let’s Accenture, IBM and the other “gorillas” participate.
  5. Wonderful, welcoming bunch of GIS professionals in NY (having lived/worked in other states). Majority love what we do, but GIS is not seen as essential. Under appreciated. Possibly our fault as an industry. We need spokespeople.

 Firms with 100% of Business in New York State Respondent Total = 7

  •  Only one recorded that GIS/Geospatial was primary focus of business
  • Business spread out over state and local government and to a lesser extent business and industry
  • None are a MWBE
  • Very noticeable that little comes from federal business contracting
  • Company size has remained level over past five years
  • Professional affiliations were a mixture including NYS Association of Professional Land Surveyors (NYAPLS)
  • Interesting, albeit this is a small cohort, over half of the respondents indicated they communicated business concerns and issues with elected representatives

Comments from this group included a mixture of comments above as well as following unique statements:

  1.  A more knowledgeable public of what GIS is and where it can be applied.
  2. More training for end users in municipal roles
  3. Increased grant funding for Local Governments, not related to shared services
  4. Adoption of GIS delivery of any land/utility/transportation related public information by all local municipalities and state government
  5. The New York State Help Desk is an outstanding help to small organizations and Local Government.
  6. When you try doing work in states outside of New York, you realize how lucky we are to have such helpful GIS people and resources like the NYS GIS Clearinghouse.
  7. ALL counties in the State should be required to provide land parcel level vector files to the public for the cost of reproduction and delivery. The situation in Suffolk County is ridiculous!

 MWBE Firms Respondent Total = 7

  • Five of seven firms indicate GIS/Geospatial was primary focus of business
  • A majority indicate that at least one-third of their annual business is in NYS
  • Five of seven are not involved in any state and local government (including  nonprofits, schools, and academia)
  • Six of seven do not do any federal work
  • Four of seven indicate all work is with business and industry
  • Six of seven have seen their staff increase or significantly increase in the last five years
  • Similar to other cohorts, most state the greatest potential growth is in mobile and smartphones markets including social media
  • There is a mixture of  professional affiliations
  • Not one communicate their business concerns and needs with elected representatives

Summary and Conclusions

The New York State GIS/Geospatial Business Survey is not intended to be an end-all towards assessing and summarizing the geospatial business climate across the Empire State.   Results from a simple 15-question multiple choice/fill-in-the blank survey, completed by 52 statewide respondents, is hardly a mandate or implied to be definitive.  If anything it is meant to start the discussion and look deeper into how business and industry can better serve and support the statewide GIS community.

With that in mind, here is what I believe are ten relevant takeaways from the survey and the basis for further discussion:

  1. Based on data collected as part of this survey, consultant business activity in state and local government (including  nonprofits, schools, and academia) is abysmal.  While business outlook for many of the respondents can be generally considered optimistic, it is definitely is not because of government spending and procurement.  With the anticipated need for more industry and business support in government geospatial programs in the future – state and local government spending should be the opposite of this trend.
  2. Looking for a solution to change and this trend will take time and thoughtful review.  Bringing the GIS/Geospatial business community together, along with selected elected officials and representatives for a focused meeting on this issue may be a start.    With so many respondents involved with the NYS GIS Association, it seems like this would be a good place to elevate the issue to a broader audience.
  3. GIS/Geospatial firms appear to becoming smaller and with government contracting being less of priority and more of a focus on industry and business contracting.  At the foundation of this is the burgeoning grassroots startup companies focusing on the mobile/smartphone market of which all respondents state will be a priority business development environment in the next 2-4 years.    Business and industry will follow the money trail – little of which is coming out of the New York public sector right now.  Smaller firms have pros and cons, but at the end of the day, efforts to promote and use their services are important. Several smaller firms are a MWBE.
  4. Removal of GIS services via state OGS contract was echoed and viewed by many respondents as detrimental to business.  Though this is not a new issue and has been discussed in the Albany circles prior, at least these results solidify the concern among the consulting community.  This needs to change.
  5. While there is a reoccurring theme in government about the need to educate elected officials and decision makers about the benefits of GIS – industry and business respondents feel the same way.  As if we need to start anew every election cycle.  One small change is offered by the author:  The awareness and benefits of geospatial also need to be conveyed to the business community as well.  On a reoccurring basis. Systematically.
  6. A lack of “GIS education and awareness” was voiced broadly as a concern from the survey respondents.   We tend to often talk about this within government with regard to educating politicians, decision makers and even the general public about the benefits of GIS.  Interestingly the business community sees this same issue raising the question, if not the possibility, that such outreach efforts could be more fruitful if done together  (government and business).  Perhaps.
  7. With the intent of not sounding like an academic, I submit that more research and analysis is needed on the statewide GIS/Geospatial business community.  While results of this survey may only begin to understanding the evolving nature of the more recognized traditional GIS consulting market, better alignment and understanding of larger statewide firms such as IBM, Verizon, Cablevision, among others, in the GIS space also is warranted. To say the least of the escalating “start-up” technologies entering the GIS/geospatial space.  The big business companies rarely interact with the traditional GIS community and the impact of the smaller “start-up” community is relatively unknown.   Umbrellas organizations such as the New York Business Council also need further nurturing.
  8. The need for additional funding for GIS/Geospatial development was noted by several respondents.  Data from the survey suggests the GIS consultant community is looking more and more to business and industry for contracts and revenue due to the dearth of government grants and annual tax-payer spending in the GIS arena.  Options to establish traditional grant funding programs to support the statewide geospatial community currently appear to be suspect though recent programs like the New York Certified Business Incubator and Innovation Hot Spot Program through the Empire State Development Office illustrate how the geospatial business community could be expanded in a similar fashion.  With a little thought out choreography, one would have to assume there would be a positive “bump” in expanded statewide geospatial business activity associated with the Unmanned Aerial Systems (drones) research work at the Griffiss Air Force Base in Rome, N.Y.   At press time, suitors to champion this cause are still TBD.
  9. The role of MWBE firms in the statewide GIS/Geospatial business arena is limited.   The survey only recorded seven MWBEs with very little federal, state and local government work associated with this group.   Most of the focus appears now to be with business and industry though closer analysis of individual responses in this cohort indicates this may be due to the work of the newer, smaller, start-up MWBE tech companies.  With most government contracts requiring at least some level effort to reference or include MWEB firms, this is one group that should have an expanded presence in the statewide GIS/Geospatial projects.  If procurement does not improve within the public sector, expect a continue migration of their work to the greener pastures of business and industry.
  10. And finally, there remains a significant lack of interaction, communication, and defined communication between the GIS/Geospatial business community and NYS elected officials and representatives.   This generally supports previous blog posts I have made noting that until the statewide GIS community (both government and industry) evolve and find a way to sharpen their tools to effectively work – and influence – representatives in Albany, our discipline will continue to chase funding bread crumbs.  Sustained funding for a recognized and acknowledged statewide professional – the GIS/Geospatial industry – is still to be realized.

 

GIS Summertime Blues

Posted on by
Reply

My optimism for 2014-2015 State level GIS program development went south as early as January of this year as part of Governor Cuomo’s State of the State Address  on January 9th.  I’ve reread the 10-page speech several times looking for something to feel good about while wearing my GIS hat.  Each time though, a big zero.  Nada.  Based on the content of the 2014 Address, as well the previous three years of this administration, even the most optimistic GIS professional would need a wild imagination to think geospatial is on the Governor’s radar screen or that he has given the State Chief Technology Officer (Kishor Bagul) –   who has oversight of the State’s Geographic Information Officer –  the green light in moving forward towards building state level GIS capacity.  And that’s not just State government programs – but statewide – including county, regional, and local governments (cities, towns, and villages).

It would seem all that remains in the hollow geospatial speak of the Office for Information Technology Serivces  (ITS) public relations machine – IT Transformation, Clusters/Governance/consolidations, and an organizational chart that is mind-numbing -are just fragments of a State level geospatial program that was probably better off ten years ago.  One can dig a little deeper and find a copy of the 2014-2017 NYS IT Strategic Plan published last month in which under Goal 2: Strengthening Our Service to Agencies is an initiative itemized as Next Generation Geographic Information Systems (GIS).    The project narrative reads  “ITS is developing a bold new strategy to build on existing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) capabilities within the NYS GIS Clearinghouse (www.gis.ny.gov) to create a centralized, state -of-the-art suite of shared resources that can be used by all agencies and members of the public. The enterprise strategy for GIS will create a new tier of technology to harness the network of currently isolated GIS resources using web services that can be widely shared and reused by a whole host of stakeholders”.  Unfortunately the reference to a very out-of-date www.gis.ny.us website as a jumping off point for this proposed initiative makes one wonder how deep the NextGen GIS discussion actually went.  But maybe that’s just me.

So, with little to get excited about in the Governor’s January 2014 speech,  I took a step back over the next several months  to monitor any legislation that might be introduced  by members of the NYS Legislature that would include either direct or indirect funding to support statewide GIS/geospatial program development.  An initial summary and analysis of current NYS legislation which contains a geospatial component was the focus of my February 2014 blog post.   Little has changed since then and beyond current pieces of legislation which contain a “mapping” component  in the areas of Alzheimer’s, autism, and breast cancer research among others,  there is no legislation which will specifically help build and expand geospatial capacity across the state.  With last Legislative session now behind us, here’s an exhaustive summary of what went down.

Of course had any pro-GIS/geospatial legislation been introduced or passed during the 2014 Legislative session it would be more by accident than by design as the NYS geospatial community has no formalized advocacy in the political and legislative arena.  Which goes to show you that GIS legislation/funding in New York is still a game of chance versus a well-choreographed legislative agenda by the statewide GIS constituency.  Maybe outreach and work within the legislative arena might ultimately evolve from the NYS GIS Association?  Maybe.

So what does all this lack of State level government and legislative support mean for GIS programs across the state?   It means that beyond providing the staples of orthophotos and addresses, it’s doubtful that any additional geospatial infrastructure is going to be created at the State level in the foreseeable future.   Which actually may not be all that bad.  One could argue that future statewide funding and legislative support is probably better spent at the local level anyway.   Beyond the old school GIS commodities noted above, most State governments have limited involvement with the primary day-to-day geospatial business needs of county, city, town, and village GIS programs – particularly in the areas of infrastructure management (drinking water, storm and sanitary systems, utilities), permitting, code enforcement, and inspection activities, planning and zoning, land records/tax mapping, and supporting local public safety programs (fire and police).  Yes, there is some overlap in functions and business needs, but not a lot.

Geospatial architecture and infrastructure which supports local programs is much different today.  The Cloud, mobile apps, GIS functionality in COTS business software, a significantly reduced government workforce, mash-ups, content everywhere on the internet, crowdsourcing for everything, and so forth have changed the landscape.  All these factors, both collectively and individually, have significantly changed how local governments use and apply the technology.   And in doing so, it seems to further suggest that the conventional thinking of investing at the State level to support local government GIS programs needs to be revisited?   Or abandoned?  If the State really wants to make a difference in the local geospatial arena, invest in the public health and social services  systems – both of which are State mandated and two of the costliest budgets items in county government.   Across the state.  Any integrated (state-local) geospatial solutions in these program areas will have widespread applicability and impact.

I certainly don’t know what the future looks like for State government GIS program areas, but I do know for the near future most local GIS programs will continue to fend for themselves and require to be self-funded.  Or at least until the day we – as a community and network of statewide GIS programs – are successful in establishing sustaining legislative and financial support for our programs.

It’s said that the Geospatial Summit is a conference designed for out-of-the-box thinkers. Might I suggest that if there is no progress on funding any statewide geospatial initiatives by the next Summit, a spokesperson from Kickstarter be invited as part of 2016 agenda?   Why not?

Hey, you never know.

Survey of New York State GIS/Geospatial Industry

Posted on by
Reply

I am in the process of gathering data via an online survey (SurveyMonkey) focusing on the GIS/Geospatial industry in New York State. Information and data collected will be summarized and presented in a future post of this blog, as well as hopefully starting the discussion in a broader context within the statewide GIS community on the 2014 GIS/Geospatial business landscape. Government sponsored GIS programs are struggling with funding often being reduced or even eliminated, the mobile/smartphone and Cloud environments appear to present great promise (really?), and the broad GIS/Geospatial business community seems to be working longer and harder for less money. Where is it all heading? What does the GIS/Geospatial business community have to say? What needs to be changed, if at all?

In addition to gathering data from traditional GIS/geospatial service providers, new start-up companies in the mobile/smartphone and social media environment supporting GIS/geospatial applications are also encouraged to participate. I am also interested in hearing from GIS/geospatial companies supporting the health and human services, public safety, retail and banking, and communication industries. I am casting a broad net in attempting to reach and make contact with GIS/Geospatial business community (listservs, user groups, business contacts, etc.) – if you know of a firm doing GIS/Geospatial business in New York State – please feel to pass along information about the survey.

If your firm is interested in participating in the survey, please respond to espatiallynewyork@gmail.com and a link to the online survey will be emailed back to you. It is a short survey which should take about 15-minutes to complete.

sam

Still Working in the Shadows

Posted on by
Reply

A few weeks ago, Linda Rockwell (Mohawk Valley GIS) posted to the GISNY listserv making reference to a short conversation she recently had with an elected federal representative. As it turns out, the representative she was talking with did not know what “GIS” or Geographic Information Systems stood for even though he was active on committees in Washington dealing with Transportation and STEM issues.  For those of us who have been working in GIS in New York State for many years, Linda’s encounter does not come as a surprise.  By no means was it the first time, nor will it be the last, a GIS practitioner in New York State came away from a conversation scratching his or her head thinking “How can that politician possibly not know what GIS is about or the value of what we do?!”  Reason:  one of our most significant limitations as a statewide community of GIS professionals is that we have been incredibly slow in terms of delivering an effective and lasting “message” to elected officials concerning the role of geospatial technology in government and business.  While there are pockets of successful GIS projects across the state, due largely on local and sustaining political support, widespread legislative awareness of the technology has never been truly realized.

So What’s Missing?

In context of advancing as a professional discipline, look no further than similar organizations across the state as part of their efforts in representing membership and professional interests to elected officials.    And really, no Madison Avenue magic is involved – just very specific outreach and polished marketing to the Legislature as part of creating legislative agendas.   For example, current efforts by NYS professional organizations which benefit from the development of geospatial technology include:

  • New York State Society of Professional Engineers:  Always at the top of my list here in Westchester County.   Their influence is broad and at the end of the day their involvement and use of geospatial data is endless.  And they always host great golf tournaments.
  • New York State Association of Chiefs of Police:  Many years ago as a rookie GIS Manager I was told by a superior that when justifying or pitching a GIS budget I should always have the Police and Fire Chief standing next me.  Some of the best guidance I ever received which still resonates today.    We’ve spent many years carefully nurturing our relationships with these disciplines which have proven to be incredibly fruitful.
  • New York State County Highway Superintendents Association:  What a winter for roads across the region.  One of the few places where grant funding is still to be found, transportation networks are a staple for GIS programs statewide supporting many emerging geospatial applications in vehicle tracking, mobile mapping, inspections and work order/permit processing.  Transportation and public works departments make great GIS allies.  Take note of their annual legislative approach:  membership showing up in mass in Albany and then head to the chambers to see their representatives.  If there is some kind of YouTube video of this annual event, it would make a great training video for the NY GIS Association.
  • New York State School Board Association:  I’m still at a loss as to why after so many of GIS development across state the GIS/geospatial community has not aligned itself closer to our public school systems. Particularly at the local level where we are competing for the same tax dollar and there are so many areas of mutual interest including demographic analysis, demographic analysis, facilities management and public safety programs, and student transportation applications among others.  And this has nothing to do with GIS in the classroom which is still a work in progress at best.  You can be assured the Legislature will hear the NYSSBA 2014 legislative agenda loud and clear.
  • New York Farm Bureau:  I’ve recently written on the growing number of areas in the agricultural space where the traditional GIS community can expand collaborative efforts.  The NYFB legislative priorities augment the recently passed federal farm bill (The Agriculture Act of 2014) which authorizes agricultural, environmental and community assistance programs through the end of fiscal year 2018 and contains provisions that support infrastructure and the environment.   I bet the NYS GIS community can find a way to get involved.
  • New York State Association of Professional Land Surveyors:  While their website is a bit out of date in context of 2013/2014 information, NYAPLS is no stranger to the NYS GIS community based on the many years of debate over the “Surveyor Legislation” which as of January 2014 is in Legislative committee review.    With an organization of comparable membership numbers to the NY GIS Association, NYAPLS seems to a decent job in getting its message heard and represented.

Noted, most of these organizations have been established much longer, are vastly better funded, and are represented by legal counsel and supported by lobbyists.  Though the Legislative Committee of the NYS GIS Association has been closely monitoring evolution the “Surveyor Legislation”  over the past couple years, the NYS GIS professional community can learn much from the inner-workings of these organizations on how to build effective legislative agenda programs.

Is There Any Relevant NYS 2014 GIS Legislation?

Kinda.  Maybe a little by accident and a little by design.   Ironically in stark contrast to Linda’s concern that elected officials don’t really know about GIS and its still “our secret”, there actually is legislation currently under review in the NYS Legislature which has either specific mapping language or relies to some degree on geospatial technology.  Speaking as one who was a member of the New York State GIS Coordinating Body for 17 years (now dba as the GIS Advisory Council) and having routinely attended state conferences and hosted local user group meetings, I can say there has been very little dialog, communication, and/or review of NYS legislative bills by the GIS community – except for the “Surveyor Legislation”.   I doubt much of the NYS GIS community knows little of how these pieces of legislation were submitted, by whom, when, or why.    In showing what is currently on the table, I simply used the online NYS Open Senate legislative search engine using key words such as  “mapping, geographic information systems, and surveying” to generate a list. Some of the proposed bills are more relevant than others and/or have been around a while, but at least the search result can and should be part of the discussion.   Illustrative pieces of legislation aligned with the NYS geospatial disciplines include:

  • Surveyor Legislation:   As noted above – this one is still around.   The NYGIS Association has been tracking and reviewing this piece of legislation for several years primarily with regard to its potential impact on field data collection/mapping with GPS units and the mapping of physical features.
  • Open Data Law:   One of my favorites in context of all discussions and efforts we’ve been hearing relative to “open government” here in NYS.  Not clear how this does/does not augment the Governor’s Executive Order of last year or relates to Open New York – which was actually launched through the efforts of NYS Dept. of Health.  And there are a bunch of new geospatial open data portals to choose from as well.

Conclusions

While I can relate to the conversation Ms. Rockwell had with her representative,  I’d rather propose that our underappreciated “little secret” of GIS is still not a priority in context of the many critical issues elected officials are faced with today,  particularly  in an era of declining staff and financial resources.  Come budget time, the “must-have” case just hasn’t been made in many circles.   We haven’t elevated the collective body of geospatial work to a high enough level of sustained and ongoing political awareness.  And it’s not going to change until the GIS community transforms the manner in which it presents the geospatial message on a much larger stage and can build capacity to conduct business within the legislative framework.