"Notetaker:" Jim Frame (jhframe@dcn.davis.ca.us)

CPB Grant Project
GIS Development Team
Meeting Notes -- April 11, 1997

Present: Karen Beardsley, Kathy Brennan, Jim Frame, Cameron Gibbs, Paul Grant, Steve Knopf, Tess Lispi, Richard Lowenberg, Mike Martinez, Steve McNeil, Lynn Maynard, Karl Mohr, Vicki Suter, Kevin Wolf, Kevin Yarris.

1. Lynn called the meeting to order and asked for an update on the Davis Base Map portion of the project. Steve K. reported that approximately 26 hours of his time have been spent on cleanup and project-related meetings; Kevin Y. noted that the cleaned-up drawing has been imported into Genamap and is in process for topological closure, with an expected completion date of about 4/16. Kevin will report county personnel hours to Lynn on 4/14, but said he believes they are within budget for the item.

Karl will investigate efficient means of attaching APNs to the city addresses via Arcview. Vicki noted that there is a budget item for an intern; Karl will pioneer the process and turn it over to the intern. The need for the intern will arise in about 10 days; DCN will have to begin recruitment.

Kevin Y. stated that some unclosed parcels may survive the closure process; Lynn recognized this as a city maintenance issue. Incorporation of Assessor's updates was discussed briefly.

2. Lynn reported that the Steering Committee has asked for the August deliverables by July so that they can be included in the July report to CPB.

3. Lynn introduced the project evaluation issue. Vicki asked the group for guidance in developing the evaluation criteria, noting that milestones are not an adequate measure of success -- CPB wants to see citizen use of the developed tools, improved access to information and participation in decision-making. Quantitative measures are preferred but not essential; anecdotal data is acceptable in some circumstances, especially baseline evaluation.

A brainstorming session produced the following:

Qualitative:

Are better decisions being made?
Record user comments (unsolicited testimonials). User demographics and their application of the tools. Obtain baseline data from other agencies.

Quantitative:

How many places did you have to go to get data? How many now?
Web form questionnaire.
Number of hours and/or miles saved in obtaining data. How have decision processes changed?

Richard suggested proposing the evaluative process to CPB now, then report upon the ways in which that process changes in response to factors discovered during project development. Vicki will query the CPB e-mail list for input from other grant recipients.

4. Vicki noted the grant's web address:
www.dcn.davis.ca.us/dcn/grants/cpb96

5. Lynn reiterated that while the Steering Committee must select the project, they would like a recommendation from the GIS group. Richard presented the results of his research into the related activities of other groups and distributed a diagram depicting the many projects currently underway that dovetail with the CPB project. He titled the resulting conceptual framework for an overarching project the "Integrated Bio-regional Watershed Project," and presented the following web addresses for review by the group:

www.epa.gov/surf/HUCS/hucinfo/18020109
129.82.179.130:80/argis
www.ncg.nrcs.usda.gov/nsdi_node.html

6. A discussion of various project candidates slowly drifted outward from the narrow focus of the CPB grant. Vicki herded the attendees back toward the stated criteria for the grant project:

It will be located within the Davis planning area in order to make use of the City of Davis base map and avoid a large data collection effort.

It will build upon work already accomplished.

It will attract students and/or volunteers, and or integrate with work already in progress.

It will adequately test the hypothesis that the decision-making process can be improved by providing an increase in the quality of information available.

It will be useful by not to highly-charged politically.

Richard pointed out that the Davis planning area is within the larger confines of the various watersheds under discussion; in response, the group elected to reword the first criterion to stipulate only that the City of Davis be included within the project area.

7. Next Steps: the major task of the Steering Committee is to select a project. Their selection will be sent back to the GIS group to determine whether or not the project is suitable for the effective use of students/volunteers.

8. The group agreed to meet again on Friday, April 25 at a time and place to be arranged.

9. Meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m.