WLIA 2013: Results of the Wisconsin Aerial Imagery Business Plan Project

Results of the 2012 Aerial Imagery Business Plan Project

Jim LacyWisconsin State Cartographer’s Office

WLIA Annual ConferenceFebruary 14, 2013

Image: aerometric.com

The Project

• Research and gather opinions on past projects

• Survey, meetings, Webinars, interviews

• Develop program “blueprint”

Status?

• First public draft in mid-March

• Multiple ways to provide feedback

orthoplan.sco.wisc.edu

Resolution and Repeat Cycle

• One-foot is the most common need

• Accuracy matters!

• Three year repeat cycle preferred

• How critical are census years??

Potential Coverage for 3-Year Cycle

Program Models

•WROC

•WROC 2.0

•Distributed

• Service Bureau

WROC

• Procurement process led by RPCs

• Bottom-up model

• Everybody negotiates their own contract, bill paid direct to vendor

• Products vary between jurisdictions

WROC

• High-res products typically not in public domain

• No statewide product unless significant partner funding acquired

• All flying in one season

• Unknown number of participants at the start

WROC 2.0• Procurement process led by RPCs

• Bottom-up model

• Establish a formal governance structure

• Identify sustainable funding that is distributed directly to counties for a base product (i.e., a grant program)

• Statewide coverage presumed, since everybody gets funding for a base product

WROC 2.0• Everybody negotiates their own contract,

bill paid direct to vendor

• High-res data are public domain, distributed via WisconsinView

• Three year repeat recommended... 1/3 state flown each year

Service Bureau

• Develop a “Service Bureau” within a single state agency, presumably the GIO

• Top-down model

• Staff supported through overhead fees and some in-kind

• Service Bureau handles all communication with vendor

Service Bureau

• QA handled primarily by Service Bureau

• Single contract

• Buy-ups optional

• Bill is paid to the Service Bureau, they pay vendor

Distributed

• Responsibility shared across multiple organizations

• Blend of top-down, bottom-up

• Governance by committee

• Product specs by committee

• Day-to-day coordination handled by a “Management Group”

Distributed

• Single contracting handled by a separate “Contracting Group” to ensure best pricing

• Bill paid to Contracting Group if you do a buy-up

• Compromise of cost savings, but retain local control

• QA by counties and cities

Funding

• Needs to be cost-neutral

• WLIP? (commence tomato-throwing)

• Police and Fire Protection Fee?

• Ad-hoc partner funds

• State agencies?

Next Steps?

• Need to reach consensus on program models

• Funding options needs more work, and significant outreach

• Target implementation for 2018

Jim LacyState Cartographer’s Office

University of Wisconsin-MadisonLacy@wisc.edu(608) 262-6850