October 25, 1999
Minnesota Planning
304 Centennial Office Building
St. Paul, MN 55155
Attendees:
David Arbeit, Land Management Information Center
Dean Barkley, Minnesota Planning
Luci Botzek, Minnesota Association of County Officers
Will Craig, University of Minnesota, Center for Urban & Regional Affairs
Richard Johnson, Metropolitan Council
Fred Logman, Minnesota Counties Computer Cooperative
Les Maki, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Eileen McCormack, Minnesota Office of Technology
Jeff Grosso, City of St. Paul
Phil Sailer, Pro-West & Associates Inc.
Rory Vose, Resource Studies Center, St. Mary's University
Jay Wittstock, Dakota County
Nicole Brown, Land Management Information Center, Minnesota Planning
Sally Wakefield, Land Management Information Center, Minnesota Planning
WELCOME
Welcome the members of the fiscal year 2000 Land Records Modernization
Committee
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Luci Botzek, committee chair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. The
meeting agenda was accepted as presented.
DISCUSSION OF AGGREGATED RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS
In preparation for the meeting, Chairperson Botzek distributed a set of 5
questions relating to individual perceptions of land records modernization and
committee tasks. During the meeting, Botzek distributed a handout listing
responses. Discussion centered on those responses and comments are indicated
below.
1. What is land records modernization in your opinion? The committee
member's responses to this question revealed many different aspects to LRM,
ranging from computerized property transactions to multi-department system
integration.
2. What would the first step be in such an effort from your perspective?
(Handout - June 1999: Land Records Modernization Committee Report)
Members discussed reviewing the previous LRM committee's report to compare
and contrast previous efforts in regards to initiatives the committee would like
to accomplish. Logman addressed the importance of public relations and a vision
or mission statement to act as an identifier with foundational element and
mentioned that the implementation of land records modernization should be
described as a series of processes and procedures. This way people can see that
there are many aspects to the project and where they might fit in. Members
discussed the need to be very clear that this is not a "one size fits
all" program because of the current varying levels of technology in
counties today. Members discussed the Wisconsin system as a potential model.
Botzek distributed an informal survey conducted by a recorder from Minnesota
asking questions of recorders in Wisconsin regarding their experience with land
records modernization. Five responses were attached and varied widely regarding
stage of GIS implementation satisfaction with the system. Members discussed the
importance of learning what they can from Wisconsin, yet realizing that the
Wisconsin model is not the only model to research. Members also discussed a need
to further understand the roles of county officers in relation to land records
management. Many voiced concerns over the need to work closely with groups most
affected by the processes, perhaps that this committee might serve an advisory
role to a larger group, or vice-versa. Botzek informed members of a recently
formed GIS committee within the Minnesota Association of County Officers and the
possibility of working with that group. Arbeit spoke of current discussion at
the Secretary of State's office related to attaching descriptive information to
a parcel's ID number (PIN).
3. Who else needs to be at the table?
Members generally agreed that the land records committee needs to include
all levels of government and private industry from the get go, and make a point
not to exclude anyone. Some industries and local governments may turn the
opposite direction if they feel this is spearheaded by state government. Members
also reiterated the need to illustrate for folks their role and benefit for
participation. Education must be an important part of this initiative, to
clearly articulate the project and what it means to folks, how it will affect
their work.
4. If you were involved what would you do differently from the last effort in
this area?
The council members openly discussed the various difficulties of the
previous land records modernization committee. The reoccurring point of
discussion is that "key players" need to be established early in the
process. The group committee must be careful to foster the role of working with
the communities rather than advising communities.
5. What barriers do you perceive to exist in the development of a modern land
record system in Minnesota?
Members discussed the amount, or lack of GIS knowledge and technology
available to communities. Not all communities will be equipped with an adequate
GIS and even if they are they may not have the staff to use the systems.
Political or turf issues within government were also mentioned.
YEARLY PLANNING
(Handout – Potential Initiative for Land Records Modernization Committee)
The committee will continue to discuss the initiatives to define committee
priorities for the year to come. The committee is currently focused on defining
land records modernization and what it would like to accomplish. Rory Vose
reported on proposed LRM related legislation that St. Mary's University and the
City of Winona were collaborating on last year.
OTHER BUSINESS
No other business was discussed
NEXT MEETING
November 30, 1999 from 1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. at Dakota County Western Service
Center, room 334.
ADJOURN
N. Brown – 11/99