1. Andrea Shuter, Dearborn County; Tom Krohn, The Sidwell Company

2.  Dearborn County Parcel project  County specific problems  Administrative consensus building will be presented

3. This presentation will discuss the processes involved as well as the problems encountered during the project.  Dearborn County  History of Parcel Conversion Project  Workflow and Methodology  Research issues  Anticipated deliverables

4. Dearborn County Overview  Located in Southeastern Indiana (Cincinnati Tri-State region)  14 townships and 7 incorporated places.  From 1990 to 2000 population grew from 38,835 to 46,109 people.  Dearborn County is 10 th fastest growing county in Indiana  Population for 2007 has been projected at 49,000  Expected to increase to 57,719 by 2018.

5.  County Council Believed that GIS was too expensive  Paid for creation of layers from other projects.  GIS position started in January 2005 Department started 2006  Number of users increasing as is demand  Need to integrate with all departments  Desire to have data available to public

6.  Initial parcel maps derived from scanned tax maps  Not sufficient  Some area with 200 ft error  No good way to update timely  No connectivity to Assessors, Auditors, and Treasurers databases

7.  Use of GIS made the need for parcel modernization apparent  Auditor, Assessor, GIS, Planning and Zoning, Surveyor, and Highway Engineer proposed project  Inter-Departmental support but Commissioners and Council Approval necessary

8.  Data flow Mapping of Departments  Data flowing inter- departmentally  Parcel ID # key to most departments

9.  Information not readily available to all departments.  Duplication of effort in record entry  Errors in records

10.  Convoluted process  6+ months from application to tax map

11.  Application submitted to The Lawrenceburg Community Foundation for $120,000-Denied but showed good faith in funding alternate sources  Money withheld by State due to compliancy issues with parcels  Last Tax Assessment over $1 million  TIF areas needed researched  Data available via internet will translate in to staff time saved that could be applied to other tasks.  Data will be current, accurate, and readily available.

12.  Why Now?  There is current support for GIS.  Since 2005 there are more users, and more reliance on GIS data.  Looming Tax Re-assessment, and folks that are ready for a project of this scale.  Consensus built-window of opportunity

13.  Commissioners approved to go to Council May 2007 for August Budget Hearings  Auditor requested appropriation to Council-approved.  RFP submitted November 2007  Research and site visits Jan-Feb 2008  Selection made March 2008

14.  Cost  Ability to Perform Project  Methodology  QC methodology  Time frame for project completion  Integration with existing databases (CAMA and Tax)  Web solution  Training proposal  References  Relationship with ESRI

15.  Sidwell awarded contract  Kick-off meeting April 2008  Project handed over to Sidwell

16.  Cadastral Mapping is performed through a comprehensive network of computer stations Technicians perform map construction operations to create land information systems  Cadastral Mapping process begins with extensive research drawing on source documents Tax records, legal descriptions, subdivision plats, surveys, road documents, etc…

17.  Geographic information is compiled and reconciled against precision aerial photography  Township files are merged and extensive topology rules are run to ensure a “clean” final Geodatabase.

18. High Quality / High Resolution Images Color images taken with 16 megapixel camera Image Conversion & Cropping Indexing Low Impact Imaging Methods

19. Tax Roll/Legal Descriptions Cadastral Mapping involves a complete Tax Roll Inventory Detail of legal descriptions will determine other source documents use in the project

20. Subdivision Plats Essential piece of compilation puzzle Sub plats are used in every cadastral mapping project Image linked to the sub poly feature class

21. Surveys Need for surveys based on: Amount of detail in legals? Large amount of metes & bounds parcels? Availability

22. Existing Parcel Maps Need for existing maps based on: Availability May provide parcel locational information May clarify any parcel placement discrepancies from source docs

23. Subdivision Plat ties the Section Line to the SE corner of Lot 31

24. Plat of Survey ties the Section Line south of SE corner of Lot 31

25. 150’ Discrepancy

26. Refer to surveys from adjacent parcels Refer to Aerial Photos Establish adjacent Section Corners Refer to Road Source Docs Check Section Line ties from nearby plats & Surveys Refer to Tax Roll for parcel splits

27. Request “research” from the county Request form references parcel number, legal description and research question Usually a deed request May involve extensive research/investigation from the county Voided or retired parcel numbers, splits, new parcel numbers, etc… When Sidwell cannot resolve a conflict with the available source documents in-house:

28.  Problems arising from deed inaccuracies resulting in numerous hours of deed research  On average it could take 1 day to complete 1 parcel

29.  Meeting held with all department heads  Consensus that best course of action to get part-time help  Approach Council for approval.  3 additional part-time hired

30.  Finally, the anticipated project completion and resulting benefits to Dearborn County will be addressed.