Land Parcel Data Update Naitional Geospatial Advisory Committee

1. Land Parcel Data UpdateNaitional Geospatial Advisory Committee Donald Buhler Cadastral Subcommittee, Bureau of Land Management Alexandria, VA February 4, 2009

2. October 2008 NGAC Meeting • NGAC Actions: • NGAC endorsed recommendations in NRC report, and identified a set of comments related to the recommendations • NGAC recommends that immediate action be taken on Recommendation #1 in the NRC report (designation of land parcel coordinator) • NGAC recommends that FGDC, through the Cadastral Subcommittee, convene a stakeholder group to address parcel data issues related to the mortgage crisis

3. FGDC Steering Committee ActionsOctober 17, 2008 • Begin addressing the first recommendation from NRC Study, “National Land Parcel Data: A vision for the Future” • Examine the statutory and policy authorities of BLM to coordinate Federal and national parcel activities.   • As recommended by the National Geospatial Advisory Council (NGAC) • The FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee will convene a stakeholder group to address parcel data issues related to the mortgage crisis and the economic recovery bill.

4. Task: Begin addressing NRC Recommendation #1 on Land Parcel Data • NRC recommendation #1: Examine authorities and capacities of BLM to serve as Federal and national coordinator for integration of land parcel data. • NRC vision: • Coordination of multiple sources of data • Minimal set of data attributes (in light of cost, privacy) • Presentation/delivery of data through one portal • Incentives (mandates or assistance) • OST would coordinate for Indian lands and share data with national coordinator

5. Federal Lands Parcel Coordinator Role Coordination Circular A-16 gives BLM clear lead; statutes provide basis at least for BLM, public domain lands BLM has strong institutional base; estimated 1 FTE needed Presentation Likely covered by A-16; statutory basis for BLM, public domain lands Capacity of “most visible” NILS project uncertain pending BLM and DOI reviews; resource needs probably substantial Incentives: No authority to enforce compliance absent new legislation conferring mandate on participating agencies Limited authority to transfer funds absent Economy Acts agreement; funds would need to be appropriated, possibly per joint budget initiative

6. National Lands Parcel Coordinator Role • Coordination • Circular A-16 supports BLM role; statutory basis unclear • Good institutional base; estimated 1 FTE needed • Presentation • Unclear if A-16 role covers this; no statutory basis found • NILS capacity under review by BLM, DOI; additional users may demand new functions; substantial resource need • Incentives • No basis in A-16 or statutes to require non-federal entities to share data; no clear basis to provide funding • No existing enforcement or funding resources

7. Parcel Data - Mortgage CrisisEconomic recovery • Categories of Stakeholders • Identification of Participants • Strategy and Action Steps • Timeline • Observations

8. Categories of Stakeholders • Data Sources • Authoritative Data Sources – local govt. (counties – assessors, recorders, parcel mappers) • Trusted Data Sources – publishers at State or regional levels • Consumers and Applications • Fire and Emergency • Regulatory , monitoring and oversight agencies

9. County Parcel Data • Authoritative Data Source • Most Current Source • Maintained to Support Local Business Needs • ------------------------------- • Data needs to be standardized • Mapping Needs to be completed nationwide • Support for standardization and completion • Applications • Built on top of Authoritative and Trusted Data • Serves Business needs and built by business area experts • Uses Core and Core Plus data • --------------------------- • RAVAR • HAZUS • Mortgage and Financial Analysis Project Level (site specific) request for the most current data If state or regional hosted data is not available By agreement between Authoritative and Trusted Sources • State/Regional Hosting • Trusted Data Source • Provides integrated portal or access • Technology to serve to applications • -------------------------- • Data is standardized and is integrated • with state and federal owned lands • Support for collecting public lands, • integration and publication • Consumers • Agencies that use applications to support decision making, analysis and reporting Stakeholders

10. Potential Participants • International Association of Assessment Officers (IAAO) • FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee (Cadastral Subcommittee) • Consumers - Federal Times - some of the federal agencies involved in regulation and response • Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) • Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) • Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) • Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac • Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) • Others

11. Strategy and Action Steps • Define the application needed to support the consumer needs such as including the standard processes and standardized data sets. • Develop a demonstration of solutions for the Consuming Agencies, including the departments of Treasury and Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as a point of beginning to reach an understanding among all stakeholders concerning what is needed (in terms of data content , technology, standardization, data availabilities etc.) • Facilitate work with the private sector to develop applications according to standards and consumer needs. • Document the participation and benefits to all stakeholder groups.

12. Activities to Date • Completed the approach and strategy document • Developed and established partnerships with IAAO and NSGIC • Assembled teams to do the work • Solutions and Stakeholders Meeting Team – David Cowen Lead • Completed initial review of federally available tracking data • Assessment of the role of local parcel data • Starting planning on the meeting • Valuation team – George Donatello and David Stage – co -chairs • Identify pilot areas to test valuation models • Documented the standards and approach to valuation models • Working on documentation to explain when, how and what of these models • Parcel Life Cycle and Economics Team – David Moyer and Nancy von Meyer co-chairs • Develop glossary and bibliography (in progress) • Completed comparison of parcel early warning and CDC • Define a parcel life cycle that can be used to organize and discuss stakeholders and processes

13. Timeline • Refine application needs and document – (February) • Apply demonstration application and capture scenarios and results – (February) • Identify stakeholders for meeting – (ongoing) • Meeting with Consumer Stakeholders – (April-May) • Document meeting results and publish results to data producers – (May) • Total Project – 3 to 4 months

16. Observations • Level of appropriate public intervention • Legislation to limit loss • Incentives to participate • Standardized data sets – not more data • Usability and transparency on a public/government site • Partnership with public and private • Strengthen relationship of stakeholders • Conceptualize the solutions