MINNESOTA TOWNSHIP ACREAGE REPORT. 10/28/2009 Minnesota Geospatial Information Office (MnGeo)

Transcription

1 MINNESOTA TOWNSHIP ACREAGE REPORT 10/28/2009 Minnesota Geospatial Information Office (MnGeo)

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION... 2 BACKGROUND... 2 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING BOUNDARY AND ACREAGE DATA SOURCES... 4 PROCESSES... 5 OUTCOMES ISSSUES AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E Township Acreage Project Report 1

3 DESCRIPTION The Omnibus tax bill 1 enacted in 2008 directed the Minnesota Geospatial Information Office (MnGeo) formerly the Land Management Information Center (LMIC) to prepare township acreage data. The process began in January 2009 with delivery of a table of updated city, township, and unorganized territory acreage data to the Department of Revenue in May 2009 and the completion of a comprehensive geodatabase and associated documents in June The following report describes the methodology used to gather, analyze, update, and document statewide township acreage and boundary data, and the final outcomes of the project. BACKGROUND A team of LMIC s staff consisting of Project Manager Christopher Cialek, Senior Technical Advisor John Hoshal, Senior Research Advisor Fred Logman, Documentation Specialist Nancy Rader, and Project Team Members Norm Anderson, Jim Krumrie, and Anna Brenes identified business needs, data sources, and the processes required to create and/or update existing boundary and acreage data to develop and establish a standard data source. Previous and ongoing LMIC projects to assemble and update statewide city, township, and unorganized territory data include: Boundary and acreage data preparation for the Department of Revenue and the Secretary of States Office. Government unit boundary updates based on municipal annexation data received from the Municipal Boundary Adjustments unit. Updates to boundaries related to electric utility service areas. These projects required processes to update statewide government unit boundary data. The processes used to produce data listed above served as the framework for establishing the methodology to develop an updated government unit boundary and acreage dataset. The long term goal of this project is to improve accuracy, standardize attributes and maintain statewide boundary and acreage data for ongoing use by the GIS community. 1 Sec. 7. APPROPRIATIONS. Subd. 3. Department of Administration. $60,000 is appropriated from the general fund in fiscal year 2009 to the commissioner of administration to pay the cost incurred by the Land Management Information Center to prepare township acreage data. $50,000 of this appropriation is onetime and is not added to the agency s base budget; $10,000 of this appropriation is added to the agency s budget. Township Acreage Project Report 2

4 1. Assumptions LMIC made several assumptions at the onset of the township acreage project based on perceived stakeholder business requirements and the availability and quality of statewide acreage and boundary data. These assumptions were: a. Existing statewide acreage data is not survey grade, but meets minimum map accuracy requirements based on National Map Accuracy Standards for 1:24,000 scale maps (+/- 40 feet or 12. b. There is a common demand among several state agencies and other entities for statewide city, township, and unorganized territory boundary and acreage data, which has resulted in the development of similar, non-standard data sources and redundancy in efforts to update data. A centralized coordinated effort to compile and maintain the best and most current boundary and acreage data for the state would serve to streamline efforts and provide a reliable source of geospatial information. c. Statewide boundary and acreage data should be as current as possible. These assumptions led to further investigation of end-user needs and availability of current statewide boundary and acreage data. 2. Approach: Identifying Participants and Business Requirements LMIC conducted a series of interviews to gain a better understanding of end-user needs in the State s GIS community for statewide city, township, and unorganized territory boundary and acreage data. Based on the information derived from interviews with several State and local government units, a comprehensive and regularly updated statewide city, township, and unorganized territory boundary dataset would enable them to: a. Meet their business needs more efficiently. b. Provide a greater degree of certainty regarding the geospatial relationship of the boundary data as it relates to their business needs. c. Help facilitate data processing in a more efficient manner and eliminate or reduce redundancy. A summary of the interviews with the representatives, their business requirements, and other information derived from the interviews is included in Appendix A. LMIC determined at the conclusion of the interviews that many agencies work with internal boundary and acreage data versions, and that there is a need among stakeholders for an up-to-date, standard, and comprehensive statewide city, township, and unorganized territory data source to eliminate redundant processes in compiling and maintaining boundary and acreage data. LMIC analyzed the availability, currentness, and accuracy of known government unit boundary sources and identified the best processes for updating the boundary data to address stakeholder needs identified in the interviews. The processes and final outcomes of the project are discussed in the following pages. Township Acreage Project Report 3

5 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING BOUNDARY AND ACREAGE DATA SOURCES LMIC reviewed and compared several existing data sources to determine accuracy, extent of geographic coverage, and currentness of available acreage/area data. The data selected for review included the following statewide and regional datasets: 1. Minnesota Department of Transportation s file of civil township and municipal data 2. Secretary of State s Election Division s internal file of minor civil divisions data 3. Metropolitan Council s (MetroGIS) city, township and unorganized territory data 4. Land Management Information Center s 2008 Minnesota Government Unit Boundaries (MNGUB08) The data sources were compared to determine the differences (if any) in city areas. Overall, the boundary areas of the data sources reviewed were similar with larger discrepancies observed between the more recent statewide boundary data in Mn/DOT s internal municipal boundary file. Table 1 describes the origins, extent of geographic coverage, uses, and estimated positional accuracy of the existing data sources reviewed in the comparative analysis. Appendix B provides detailed tables summarizing the results of the comparative analyses. Table 1: Existing Boundary and Acreage Data Sources Originator Data, File Name & Description Base Source Currentness Statewide Coverage Primary Use Accuracy MnDOT Municipal boundaries (muni_bdy.shp) Mn/DOT, MBA 2008 Y Created to provide statewide coverage of Mn/DOT s transportation system as it relates to municipal boundaries + or 40 feet LMIC (MnGeo) City, Township, and Unorganized Territories (MNGUB08) See Table Y Created to provide DOR acreage data based on updated City, Township, and UT boundaries + or - 40 feet Township Acreage Project Report 4

6 MetroGIS county, city, township, and unorganized territory (county_ctu.shp) County parcel data 2009 updated on a regular basis N Regionally endorsed source of city, township and unorganized territory data for the metro Varies SOS Elections Division *Minor Civil Divisions (MCD2008.shp) Census 2000, TLG, LCC GIS 2008 Y 2008 Precinct Boundaries Varies *Data used for in-house purposes only. The comparative analyses enabled LMIC to determine the degree of relative positional accuracy for statewide boundary data among several data sources. All of the data sources reviewed were within the National Map Accuracy Standards for 1:24,000 scale maps which is +/- 40 feet (12. Mn/DOT s municipal boundary file was selected to be used as the basemap to update MBA boundary changes because it provided the most comprehensive statewide boundary and acreage coverage and had more recent annexation boundary information as compared to MNGUBS08. The acreage and boundary data derived from the MNGUBS08 basemap attribute table and many of the procedures used to create MNGUBS08 were incorporated in the process of updating city, township, and unorganized territory data for the Township Acreage project. Section D, Selection of Data Sources describes the processes used to create the MNGUBS08 dataset and provides the rationale for selecting and updating basemap data to create the MNGUBS09 geospatial dataset. PROCESSES 1. Data Selection Although the MNGUBS08 boundary and acreage geodatabase provided statewide coverage of city, township, and unorganized territory information, it was determined that there were large numbers of boundary changes approved by MBA unaccounted for in the database. To resolve this and update boundary and acreage data, LMIC created the MNGUBS09 geodatabase using some of the processes and basemap data that were used to create MNGUBS08. Table 3 describes the data sources used to create the MNGUBS09 boundary and acreage geodatabase. After identifying stakeholder business needs and reviewing the best available statewide boundary and acreage data, LMIC created a new geodatabase using updated and previously established and revised in-house processes in ArcInfo. Township Acreage Project Report 5

7 The updated municipal boundary file was then overlayed and extracted from Mn/DOT s civil township file to update township and unorganized territory boundaries. Finally, the updated municipal and civil township files were merged to create a single geodatabase of city, township, and unorganized territory boundaries and acreages. Table 2 describes the data sources used to create the MNGUBS08 basemap. Name Date(s) Source Description Mn/DOT All 2/28/08 LMIC A LMIC Table (dbf) of annexations which have not been added to the municipality area by MBA and Mn/DOT docket number. It accompanies the municipality file of the same date and is based on the Mn/DOT file: 2008Corplimits.xls. Annex Adjusted Polygons Date of start LMIC A geodatabase of annexations. Each annexation is stored as a case by docket number. It contains annexations from a pilot project and work for the Department of Revenue. The annexations have been adjusted to base map layers. Annex Unadjusted Polygons Date of start LMIC A geodatabase of annexations. Each annexation is stored as a case by docket number. It contains annexations from a pilot project with some additions from a Department of Revenue project. The annexations have been added as they read from the legal property description in the docket using GIS COGO tools. Municipalities (muni_bounds) 2009 Mn/DOT Shapefile of Mn/DOT s most up-to-date municipal /corporate boundaries. Civil Townships 1991 Mn/DOT Shapefile of Mn/DOT s most up-to-date civil township boundaries digitized from USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles 2. Technical Development A potential list of unprocessed dockets from MBA was created by comparing data from MN/DOT s municipal boundary file and a docket list obtained from MBA. Through a process of comparison and elimination, a final list of unprocessed dockets was created. The docket maps and legal descriptions were then obtained from MBA and manually entered on a case-by-case manner in ArcGIS/ArcInfo Versioning either by digitizing scanned georeferenced maps or with the Traverse tool (see Figure 1). Refer to the glossary of Acronyms and Terms in Appendix D for definitions and descriptions of acronyms, processes and tools. Township Acreage Project Report 6

8 The MBA dockets were checked in ArcInfo to determine boundary closure accuracy where sufficient legal description information of the annexation was provided. Annexation data was drawn in ArcInfo using the coordinate geometry (COGO) Advanced Computations Traverse tool (see Figure 1) for ESRI s ArcGIS application and in some cases digitized using Mn/DOT s basemap layer and georeferenced maps. The Traverse tool utilizes the legal description of the annexation boundary data to draw the boundary changes in GIS while digitizing requires tracing boundary maps that have been geographically referenced (georeferenced) to landmarks on a basemap. Figure 1 Example of Traverse tool in ArcInfo (refer to Appendix D for details) Mountain Lake City MnDOT cast iron monument (point T105 R34 S3 Mountain Lake Township Acreage Project Report 7

9 Table 3: Data Sources used to create MNGUBS08 Name Date(s) Source Description DOT_MISS 2/28/08 LMIC A LMIC Table (dbf) of annexations which have not been added to the municipality area by MBA and Mn/DOT docket number. It accompanies the municipality file of the same date and is based on the Mn/DOT file: 2008Corplimits.xls. Annex Adjusted Polygons Date of start LMIC A geodatabase of annexations. Each annexation is stored as a case by docket number. It contains annexations from a pilot project and work for the Department of Revenue. The annexations have been adjusted to basemap layers. Annex Unadjusted Polygons Date of start LMIC A geodatabase of annexations. Each annexation is stored as a case by docket number. It contains annexations from a pilot project with some additions from a Department of Revenue project. The annexations have been added as they read from the legal property description in the docket using GIS COGO tools. Municipalities (muni_bounds, original) Civil Townships (original) (CivilTownship.shp) 2/28/08 Mn/DOT Shapefile of Mn/DOT s most up-to-date municipal /corporate boundaries Mn/DOT Shapefile of Mn/DOT s most up-to-date civil township boundaries digitized from USGS 7.5- quads. Using 2008 NAIP aerial photos, Mn/DOT s municipal boundary file (muni_bounds.shp), Mn/DOT s roads, and the PLS 40 quarter-quarter quads as basemap layers, LMIC adjusted city boundaries using heads-up digitizing and traverse boundary data entries from docket data received from the MBA. The updated city boundary data was then extracted from Mn/DOT s internal All_boundaries.shp file to update the boundaries and acreages for townships and unorganized territories. One geodatabase with two new feature classes was created from these processes; the Updated City Boundary feature class and the Updated Township and Unorganized Territories feature class. The steps to complete this process are summarized in Figure 2. Township Acreage Project Report 8

10 Figure 2. Summary of processes used to create MNGUBS09. Existing Boundary and Acreage Data Compared Potential Update List (PUL) Mn/DOT Boundary Data MBA Docket Data Case-by case review created Updated City Boundary Feature Class Mn/DOT All _Boundaries Data Overlay and Extract Updated Township and Unorganized Territory Feature Class Refer to Appendix D for the technical details on the processes used to create the updated city, township, and unorganized territory geodatabase. Township Acreage Project Report 9

11 OUTCOMES The process of updating city, township and unorganized territory boundaries generated the following outcomes and deliverables: i. Boundary files: Two updated GIS boundary files were created in ArcInfo; one containing city boundaries and acreage, and a second file containing township and unorganized territory boundaries and acreage. The two files are part of a GIS dataset and are stored as individual feature classes in a geodatabase. The geodatabase is the primary data storage model for ArcInfo data and is centrally located for access and management of spatial data. The 2009 geodatabase provides standard, updated statewide coverage of city, township, and boundary coverage and can be accessed by the public. ii. iii. iv. Spreadsheet of city, township, and unorganized territory acreage: A spreadsheet containing updated acreage calculations was created for the Department of Revenue. The spreadsheet contains several standardized attribute fields including the FIPS 55 code, updated acres, name, type, and other data used internally by the Department of Revenue. Metadata: A Metadata file describing the historical origins of the data, positional accuracy, and processes used to create the updated city, township, and unorganized territory data was generated to document and standardize critical information regarding the dataset. Standardized methodology: The processes used for creating the MnGUBS09 have been standardized to address future MBA annexation docket updates. ISSSUES AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT i. Basemap Sources: As previously noted, there are several state agencies and government units that process statewide boundary and acreage data for their internal business needs. Though these data may meet the requirements of the individual agencies, there are no authoritative processes in place to provide a standard, regularly maintained universal geodatabase for use by the state GIS community at large. Quality of Basemaps: The basemaps used to create the MNGUBS09 geodatabase were obtained from Mn/DOT and vary in positional accuracy and currentness. The comparative analysis completed for this project indicates that the basemaps used meet National Map Accuracy standards. Although extensive effort has been made to produce error free and complete data, all geographic information has limitations due to the scale, resolution, date and interpretation of the original source materials. The positional Township Acreage Project Report 10

12 accuracy of the final dataset meets National Map Accuracy Standards for 1:24,000 scale maps (+/- 40 feet or 12. The dataset is not intended for legal land survey use, and is best suited for general reference. ii. iii. Meandered Water Bodies: The Department of Revenue (DOR) requires acreage calculations that do not include meandered water bodies. Currently, boundary and acreage data for the state does not take this into account with the exception of Mille Lacs Lake. LMIC is researching the best available statewide dataset that delineates meandered water bodies to overlay and extract meandered water bodies from the statewide boundary and acreage dataset to calculate land-only acreage for the DOR. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is nearing completion of an updated open water geospatial layer created from photographic analysis and vector digitizing using 2008, 2004, and 2003 aerial photography, and updated PLS 40 quarter-quarter section lines. It is recommended that this geospatial data layer be extracted from the boundary and acreage data submitted to DOR in fiscal year 2010 or sooner as funding to complete this task and the data become available. Annexation Dockets: Some annexation data was mapped in ArcInfo using the Traverse COGO (coordinate geometry) tool (see Figure 1) and the PLS 40 quarter-quarter section lines when the legal descriptions in the MBA dockets were complete. Dockets that could not be mapped using the Traverse tool were georeferenced and digitized using aerial photography and PLS 40 quarter-quarter section lines. The quality of the boundary data digitized from georeferenced maps varies depending on the scale and quality of the scanned raster image of the map. Some maps obtained from MBA were digitized based on intent and interpreted using area measurements and relative positions of hand drawn features on the docket maps and their approximate geospatial relationship to landmarks on aerial photos and roads. In these cases, the areas mapped may be less accurate than data entered using georeferenced maps or the Traverse tool. Township Acreage Project Report 11

13 RECOMMENDATIONS Demand for current and more accurate statewide government unit boundaries is widespread and is expected to increase over time. Presently there is no single authoritative source tasked or funded to provide a unified version of these data in a regularly maintained geodatabase. Appointing a single government unit to standardize and update statewide government unit boundary and acreage data will improve data quality and reliability. By implementing the following recommendations as funding becomes available, the accuracy and currentness of the MNGUBS09 geospatial dataset can be improved. iv. Quarterly Review of MBA Docket Data MBA docket data should be reviewed and updated in the MNGUBS geospatial dataset on a quarterly basis using the methodology established to create the MNGUBS09 dataset to provide the GIS community with the most current statewide boundary information. Maps and legal descriptions submitted to the MBA should be reviewed by a surveyor or other qualified land records person prior to submittal to ensure accuracy of annexation/de-annexation data. v. Consolidate Multi-Agency Efforts Streamlining efforts to collect data and improve data quality through a single management entity will create efficiencies in the delivery of the data and eliminate redundant efforts to compile and produce statewide boundary and acreage information. Standardizing the attribute tables of the MNGUBS data will create a more universal dataset that can be spatially joined with other similar data with minimum data manipulation. (Create model based on Federal Best Practices Standards) vi. Mobilize Counties to Provide Digital Parcel Data to Create a Parcel-Based Statewide Boundary and Acreage Database Digital parcel data in GIS from surveyed boundaries and plat maps have been created by approximately 74% of Minnesota counties. Approximately 34% of Minnesota counties publish digital parcel data online for public use. Several counties with GIS departments are in the process of compiling digital parcel data for public and internal government use. Creating incentives for counties to participate in a statewide parcel data sharing program will greatly improve the accuracy of boundary and acreage data for the GIS community since most parcel data is derived from cadastral surveys. Township Acreage Project Report 12

14 APPENDIX A ACRONYMS AND TERMS Arc: a curve that is part of a larger circle. ArcGIS: a suite of software that consists of geographic information software (GIS) products developed and published by ESRI. ArcInfo: a geographic information system that includes command-line processing and the full suite of ArcGIS tools and techniques at the highest level of licensing and functionality offered by ESRI. Attribute: data that describes features or elements of a database. Azimuth: the reference direction in degrees (or other reference direction) from north that a line runs in a clockwise measurement. Basemaps: maps which provide background on which thematic data can be overlayed and/or referenced and analyzed (spatial relationships). Cadastral survey: surveys completed to document the boundaries of land ownership. These documents are often the base element in Geographic/Land Information systems and are used to produce cadastral maps detailing structure locations, acreage, metes-and-bounds, parcel id numbers, and other elements related to land records and ownership. COGO: an abbreviation for coordinate geometry. The ArcGIS Traverse tool utilizes the coordinate geometry (COGO) method of entering data using metes-and-bounds survey data. Data input begins at a point of beginning, moves at a certain distance and/or angle in a given direction, and continues in the same manner until the geographic feature closes geometrically. Chord: a straight line segment between end points or an arc. Digitize: a process in which source materials such as georeferenced maps and their features are traced into a computer and converted to digital vector data. DOR: Minnesota Department of Revenue Township Acreage Project Report 13

15 LMIC: State of Minnesota s Administration Department s Office of Geographic & Demographic Analysis Land Management Information Center MBA: State of Minnesota s Office of Administrative Hearings Municipal Boundary Adjustments Metes-and-Bounds: a traditional system of describing the physical features of the local geography accompanied by the directions and distances from a well defined point of beginning to define and describe parcel boundaries. MetroGIS: a voluntary collaboration of local and regional governments with state and federal government partners that provide geographic information systems to serve the sevencounty Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area in Minnesota. MNGUBS: Minnesota government unit boundaries. Mn/DOT: Minnesota Department of Transportation National Map Accuracy Standards: The U.S. Geological Survey defines horizontal accuracy standards for maps at 1:24,000 scale as follows: As applied to the USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle topographic map, the horizontal accuracy standard requires that the positions of 90 percent of all points tested must be accurate within 1/50th of an inch (0.05 centi on the map. At 1:24,000 scale, 1/50th of an inch is 40 feet ( Parcel: a fundamental unit of land in a cadastral map. PLS: Public Land Survey system PLS 40 quarter-quarter: a 1:24,000 scale Public Land Survey layer consisting of line and polygon features of mathematically calculated 1/4 of 1/4 PLS sections (approximately 40 acres). Tangent Line: a line that touches a circle at one point and creates a right angle with the circles radius. Traverse: lines in a series connecting multiple points, or any line surveyed across a parcel. 2 USGS Map Accuracy Standards, Fact Sheet FS (November 1999) Township Acreage Project Report 14

16 Traverse command (ArcInfo and ArcEditor only, see Figure 1, p.5): a coordinate geometry editing tool that allows you to create a geometric sketch from a variety of traverse measurements in the form of directions and distances, angles and distances, curves, or tangent curves measured from a known point (point of beginning). Township Acreage Project Report 15

17 APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS LMIC staff interviewed representatives from various sectors of local and state government to determine the organization s business need(s) for city, township, and unorganized territory boundary and acreage data, and the currentness and accuracy of the data they presently rely on to meet their business need(s). The following information summarizes the findings and crosscutting issues and/or business needs that emerged from the interviews. Date: February 4, 2009 Organization: Sales Tax unit, Department of Revenue, interview with Kent Treichel Township Boundary Data Uses/Business Need The Department of Revenue is required by statutory law governing taxation to determine taxing units and track local option sales taxes for the state. The department uses the township boundary data to determine the need for local option sales tax tracking, and to identify approximately 5,000 unique property taxing units in the state. Data Sources The department receives shapefile data from LMIC that reflects boundary changes based on annexation information received from the Municipal Boundary Adjustment unit. They also purchase Zip + 4 Centroids database information for Minnesota from TeleAtlas. Other data sources used include U.S. Census, Met Council/MetroGIS, TLG, Olmstead County, and MCD2003 (LMIC). The department will use 2008 Census data as soon as it is available. Data Quality The data they use is sufficient for their purposes in determining taxing units which does not require highly accurate boundary data. However, Kent stated that there are noticeable differences between the accuracy of the data sources he uses, and he believes MetCouncil s seven county GIS data is more accurate than other sources. Kent would like updated centerline data from TLG for the entire state as well as a single reliable, seamless parcel data source from one entity to ensure accuracy and consistency rather than having to obtain this information from individual counties. Township Acreage Project Report 16

18 Date: February 5, 2009 Organization: Mn/DOT, interview with Denny Brott, Bob Wolback, Thomas Martin, Jeff Seholt Township Boundary Data Uses/Business Need The boundary data is used for verifying road eligibility for Mn/DOT s State Aid program for local roads. Approximately 29% of State Trunk Highway Funds are distributed to County and Municipal road authorities as part of Minnesota s State Aid for Local Roads program. Aid is based on the linear measure of roads in a municipality, not acreage. Mn/DOT updates boundary data when they receive annexation information from the Municipal Boundary Adjustment (MBA) unit. Although they are not mandated to update municipal boundaries, they rely on accurate local government boundary data for cities with populations of 5,000 or greater to implement their State Aid program. In the past, Mn/DOT volunteered to preview the maps and legal descriptions that MBA receives from petitioners to ensure boundary accuracy before the petition was approved by MBA. The process proved to be too time consuming and Mn/DOT did not have the resources to keep up with the number of petitions received by MBA. When there are problems with the boundary data, Mn/DOT maps the boundary by intent after consulting with the petitioner. Mn/DOT provides the boundary data they create to State Aid authorities and the planning community. Mn/DOT distributes the data in the form of tables and vector files. Data Sources Mn/DOT obtains boundary data from counties, some cities, MBA, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and other Federal agencies (PLSS, MCD). Mn/DOT receives paper legal land descriptions, plat maps and drawings from the MBA and then enters them into CAD. Then the files are converted to ARC/INFO coverages, merged into statewide, seamless coverages. This is a continuous process as the boundary adjustment becomes information is received after the monthly approval meeting of the MBA. Data Quality The quality of the annexation maps and legal descriptions may vary significantly depending on the entity submitting the petition. Mn/DOT feels that the quality and accuracy of the data received would improve if a licensed surveyor reviewed the information prior to submitting the petition to the MBA. The accuracy of the Mn/DOT municipal boundary data varies across the state, but is generally +/- 40 feet. Mn/DOT stated that a uniform set of statewide maps is required. Township Acreage Project Report 17

19 Date: February 11, 2009 Organization: Municipal Boundary Adjustment (MBA) unit, interview with Christine Scotillo Township Boundary Data Uses/Business Need The MBA administers and adjudicates municipal boundary changes statewide as mandated by Minnesota Statues Chapter 414. They require township boundary data to determine whether or not the annexation request is contiguous with the existing municipal boundary. They do use township acreage information. MBA is required to provide the boundary change data to the Secretary of State, the County Auditor, and the local government unit impacted by the boundary change in the form of a certified report (paper and electronic). They also provide it to the Department of Revenue, Mn/DOT, LMIC, the State Demographer, DNR, and Met Council. Data Sources MBA receives maps and legal descriptions from petitioners. The maps vary in quality and accuracy, are checked against the legal descriptions for accuracy, and reviewed to determine if they abut the municipal boundary they are annexing to. Data Quality MBA receives a paper map and legal description and the quality and accuracy of the data varies. MBA feels that review of the data by county surveyors would improve the accuracy and consistency of the data; however, they recognize that there is no funding for this. They feel that a real-time state map of boundary data would be helpful to local units of government to improve the accuracy and quality of data submitted for boundary change petitions. Date: February 12, 2009 Organization: Chisago County Auditor, interview with Dennis Freed Township Boundary Data Uses/Business Need The County Auditor uses township boundary data to determine taxes, jurisdictional service areas, and voter precincts. He does not rely on cumulative acreage data, only the geospatial relationship of boundaries as they pertain to taxation, services, and voter precincts. The County Township Acreage Project Report 18

20 Auditor provides boundary data to the County Recorder, the GIS department, 911, and the County Assessor. Data Sources The County Assessor receives boundary change data from MBA and/or local units of government in the form of a paper report which includes a legal description. They usually do not receive a paper map. The GIS department then maps the boundary data received from the Auditor to update their digital basemap. The county currently has 99% of their parcel data mapped in GIS. Data Quality The County Auditor acknowledges that in the past the data they received was not very accurate, but feels that recent data received from the MBA is more accurate. He attributes this to improvements at the local level of government. He also feels that having a single data source for township boundary data is a good idea, but has concerns regarding the financial challenge this may pose for smaller counties. Date: February 20, 2009 Organization: Secretary of State, Elections Division, interview with Brad Neuhauser Township Boundary Data Uses/Business Need The Election Division of the office of the Secretary of State records and maintains precinct and election district boundaries. The office also uses the boundary information for redistricting and election district boundary adjustments due to annexations, and creates and publishes election data maps. Data Sources The office uses two databases, a digital map database and an address range database created from U.S Census, TIGER, TLG, Municipal Boundary Adjustment unit (MBA), Local Units of Government, with some input from Mn/DOT. The address range database (part of the Statewide Voter Registration System--SVRS) is housed by the office, but the actual address range records are updated by County Auditors/Elections officials. The Elections Division provides the information they have to the Legislative Coordinating Commission, the state demographer, LMIC, county auditor and local units of government, the Census Bureau through the VTD/BBSP program (Vote Tabulation District/Block Boundary Township Acreage Project Report 19

21 Suggestion Project--Phase 2 of the Redistricting Data Program), and the public through downloads from the LCC website. Data Quality The majority of the data they receive for boundary changes is in the form of paper maps via mail. They receive GIS shapefile data from Blue Earth and Olmstead counties, and some pdf maps from local units of government. The accuracy and quality of the information they receive varies from survey-grade data and maps to hand-drawn maps. Ideally, the Elections Division would like a standardized statewide municipal boundary map as a single source to update election related data. However, the amount of time and effort it may take to track down the information (from individual municipalities) may cause delays in updating precinct boundaries. Date: March 5, 2009 Organization: Minnesota State Demographic Center, interview with Jim Hibbs Township Boundary Data Uses/Business Need The State Demographic Center is required by statute to produce annual population and household estimates for the U.S. Census Bureau unless it s a census year. When a city, township, county or sum total of an unorganized territory boundary change occurs, the State Demographic Center sends surveys to the individual local government representative requesting the total number of households and population. They use boundary maps when they need to identify what census tracts and blocks are involved in a boundary change. Data Sources The State Demographic Center uses maps from Mn/DOT (municipal boundary maps) and/or the Municipal Boundary Adjustment unit to match and compare with the most recent decennial census maps. Data Quality The State Demographer s Office does not verify the accuracy of reported boundary changes and relies on the Census block maps to corroborate boundary changes. A statewide city, township, UT, and county base map that is regularly updated to reflect boundary changes would help facilitate the boundary checking process. Township Acreage Project Report 20

22 APPENDIX C COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS DETAILS Table 1 summarizes the results of the comparison of LMIC s MNGUBS08 dataset and MetroGIS s counties, cities, and townships dataset. Cities were randomly selected from all seven counties. Some known factors affecting the percent differences between areas are updates to annexations that may not have been included in the MNGUBS08 dataset and known inaccuracies where positional accuracy of the town decreases as distance increases from section corners, or where the county has not tested positional accuracy. Table 1: Comparative Study between MNGUBS08 and MetroGIS county_ctu.shp City, Township County Name LMIC/MNGUBS08 (sq. MET COUNCIL (sq. (sq. Percent Prior Lake Scott 46,322,653 47,453,734 1,131,081 2% Elko New Market Scott 8,471,998 8,457,102 14, % Jordan Scott 8,272,321 8,246,307 26, % Empire Twp. Dakota 81,647,169 81,724,675 77, % Apple Valley Dakota 45,586,948 45,247, , % Eagan Dakota 86,681,784 86,705,519 23, % Vermillion Dakota 2,566,571 2,572,896 6, % Hassan Twp. Hennepin 51,572,993 51,035, ,425 1% Corcoran Hennepin 93,371,324 93,396,435 25, % Dayton Hennepin 65,345,089 64,860, , % Township Acreage Project Report 21

23 Long Lake Hennepin 2,428,747 2,476,987 48,240 2% Stillwater Washington 19,925,516 19,967,818 42, % Bayport Washington 4,688,857 4,514, ,900 4% Woodbury Washington 92,204,619 92,594, , % Oak Grove Park Washington 8,604,322 8,759, ,044 2% St. Paul Ramsey 145,148, ,984, , % Vadnais Heights Ramsey 21,333,920 21,263,801 70, % Roseville Ramsey 35,881,402 35,828,646 52, % Mayer Carver 2,922,787 3,558, ,354 18% San Francisco Twp. Carver 62,422,478 62,390,261 32, % Bethel Anoka 2,531,002 2,697, ,622 6% Fridley Anoka 27,986,683 28,216, , % Total 915,917, ,952,580 4,826, % Overall, the results show only a small difference in area (0.5%) between LMIC s MNGUBS08 dataset and MetroGIS counties, cities, and townships dataset. Areas where differences were greater than 0.5% are attributed to more recent annexation data found in the MetroGIS dataset. MetroGIS boundary data is regionally endorsed by the participating counties. The basemap was created from individual submittals by each county, and the line work is updated quarterly. The horizontal positional accuracy of the boundary data varies; however, based on the methodology used by each county to digitize parcel data and verify accuracy, it is estimated that the metro area data has a higher level of accuracy as compared to all known regional boundary data sources available for the state. Table 2 illustrates the comparative analysis completed between MNGUBS08 dataset and the Secretary of State s Office, Elections Division s most current precinct boundary dataset, MCD2008. The MCD2008 shapefile is based on 2000 US Census data and adjusted 2008 line data for twenty two counties in Minnesota from the Lawrence Group (TLG). MCD2008 is used internally by the Elections Division, and is not intended for public use. Township Acreage Project Report 22

24 Table 2: Comparative Study between MNGUBS08 and MCD2008 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data McGregor Twp Aitkin 88,198,572 88,197,311 1, % County has digital parcel maps Aitkin Twp Aitkin 88,978,283 88,935,514 42, % Logan Twp Aitkin 92,622,792 92,433, , % Anoka Anoka 18,732,323 18,418, , % Purchase digital parcel data Andover Anoka 90,240,975 90,279,642 38, % Oak Grove Anoka 91,169,376 90,672, , % Gilmanton Twp* Benton 86,869,812 87,584, , % PDF parcel maps Sauk Rapids Twp Benton 19,937,372 20,589, , % Rice Benton 15,872,476 15,782,807 89, % Round Lake Twp Becker 187,838, ,969, , % County has digital parcel maps Wolf Lake Twp Becker 92,622,236 92,700,625 78, % Wolf Lake Becker* 790, , , % Port Hope Twp Beltrami 84,177,558 84,142,657 34, % County has interactive GIS Township Acreage Project Report 23

25 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Blackduck Beltrami 4,145,232 4,135,894 9, % Bemidji* Beltrami 46,016,780 36,875,522 9,141, % Boundary needs to be reviewed and updated. MNGUBS includes water body, MCD does not. Battle Township Beltrami 35,619,251 35,604,724 14, % Graceville Big Stone 1,441,976 1,556, , % Foster Township Big Stone 86,034,521 86,061,330 26, % Mankato Twp* Blue Earth* 59,441,211 70,536,765 11,095, % MCD includes a large area of South Bend Twp Mapleton* Blue Earth* 4,585,835 3,882, , % Sleepy Eye Brown 5,133,799 5,072,875 60, % Eden Twp Brown 107,180, ,540, , % North Star Twp Brown 91,690,552 91,598,879 91, % Cloquet Carlton 93,322,362 93,000, , % Twin Lakes Twp* Carlton 117,537, ,975,277 1,561, % Barnum Carlton 2,608,692 2,614,172 5, % Township Acreage Project Report 24

26 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Moose Lake Carlton* 7,917,138 9,092,856 1,175, % Waconia* Carver 10,297,027 11,528,401 1,231, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Young America Twp Carver 87,568,240 86,552,933 1,015, % Ottertail Peninsula Twp* Cass 166,385, ,378,658 27,993, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Barclay Twp Cass 38,667,463 38,895, , % Remer* Cass 3,377,746 3,747, , % Kego Twp Cass 93,591,150 93,615,615 24, % Hackensack Cass 2,628,007 2,709,343 81, % Montevideo* Chippewa 12,143,765 12,060,188 83, % Kragero Twp Chippewa 115,623, ,844, , % Wyoming Twp* Chisago* 109,955,441 58,432,442 51,522, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Lindstrom* Chisago* 9,080,518 6,338,439 2,742, % Township Acreage Project Report 25

27 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Taylors Falls Chisago 10,687,824 10,436, , % Moorhead* Clay 50,406,090 51,276, , % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Hawley Twp Clay 81,090,361 80,968, , % Georgetown Township Clay 95,520,643 95,569,399 48, % Hitterdal* Clay 2,435,272 2,278, , % Pine Lake Township Clearwater 88,601,939 88,794, , % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Gonvick Clearwater 3,509,784 3,401, , % Copley Twp Clearwater 87,993,687 87,487, , % Windom* Cottonwood 9,941,546 11,201,222 1,259, % PDF parcel maps Westbrook Twp Cottonwood 92,066,040 91,804, , % Brainerd* Crow Wing 30,003,313 32,794,515 2,791, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Irondale Twp* Crow Wing 76,914,758 80,457,344 3,542, % Township Acreage Project Report 26

28 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Garrison Township* Crow WIng 87,059,094 91,850,229 4,791, % Empire Twp Dakota 81,647,170 81,770, , % MCD2008 includes part of lake/mngubs excludes it County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Farmington Dakota 38,435,436 38,850, , % Coates Dakota 3,568,572 3,608,916 40, % Dodge Center Dodge 6,028,637 5,515, , % Hayfield Twp Dodge 94,687,062 94,671,841 15, % Alexandria Douglas 35,202,312 36,920,855 1,718, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Evansville Twp Douglas 91,288,829 91,404, , % Blue Earth Faribault 8,362,095 8,678, , % Winnebago Twp Faribault 89,324,627 89,289,204 35, % Preston Fillmore 6,153,259 6,341, , % Holt Twp Fillmore 84,592,759 85,339, , % Rushford Village Fillmore 87,356,795 87,112, , % Township Acreage Project Report 27

29 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Albert Lea Freeborn 36,801,329 33,733,261 3,068, % Shell Rock Twp* Freeborn 89,772,798 87,236,682 2,536, % Cannon Falls Goodhue 10,587,310 10,658,072 70, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Zumbrota Twp Goodhue 90,160,475 90,204,327 43, % Red Wing Goodhue 106,886, ,046, , % Logan Twp Grant 90,496,218 90,468,984 27, % Barrett Grant 5,458,919 5,449,162 9, % Crystal Hennepin 15,147,193 15,197,141 49, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Rogers* Hennepin 16,417,806 18,445,197 2,027, % Plymouth Hennepin 91,880,241 91,328, , % Hokah Houston 1,976,244 1,885,015 91, % Brownsville Twp Houston 76,847,302 76,545, , % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Park Rapids* Hubbard 16,822,624 17,098, , % Township Acreage Project Report 28

30 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Lakeport Twp Hubbard 91,609,069 91,577,396 31, % Nevis Hubbard 2,618,391 2,637,574 19, % Cambridge Isanti 19,441,689 19,888, , % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Athens Twp* Isanti 101,725,089 81,440,040 20,285, % Stanchfield Twp Isanti 88,666,709 88,457, , % Colerain Itasca 15,419,776 16,507,782 1,088, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Taconite* Itasca 13,624,389 35,027,829 21,403, % Nashwauk Twp* Itasca 143,873,647 87,358,815 56,514, % Feeley Twp Itasca 84,389,296 84,569, , % Max Twp Itasca 88,547,734 88,573,808 26, % Jackson Jackson 10,092,268 10,556, , % Lakefield* Jackson 3,261,736 2,766, , % West Heron Lake Twp* Jackson 92,566,556 71,208,096 21,358, % City of Mora Kanabec 11,198,576 11,119,759 78, % Township Acreage Project Report 29

31 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Peace Twp Kanabec 98,128,051 98,261, , % Willmar* Kandiyohi 38,585,605 41,055,591 2,469, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps St. Johns Twp Kandiyohi 87,513,096 87,580,251 67, % Genessee Twp Kandiyohi 90,498,524 90,393, , % Hallock* Kittson 3,395,089 5,410,601 2,015, % Lancaster Kittson 6,049,835 5,824, , % Percy Twp Kittson 91,783,768 91,588, , % Lake Bronson Kittson 1,416,003 1,554, , % Arveson Twp Kittson 89,900,283 89,687, , % Northome Koochiching 4,558,067 4,888, , % Legal descriptions only Mizpah Koochiching 7,820,478 7,842,456 21, % International Falls Koochiching 16,618,505 16,577,148 41, % Dawson Lac Qui Parle 3,686,535 3,839, , % Madison Twp Lac Qui Parle 90,662,876 90,598,038 64, % Township Acreage Project Report 30

32 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Silver Bay* Lake 20,871,849 16,959,335 3,912, % Legal descriptions only Stony River Twp Lake 1,496,392,894 1,498,475,335 2,082, % Two Harbors Lake 8,375,882 8,444,238 68, % Baudette* Lake of the Woods 8,757,796 9,639, , % Link to county GIS broken Montgomery* Le Sueur 6,563,054 5,702, , % Ottawa Twp Le Sueur 39,614,966 39,441, , % Waterville Le Sueur 6,096,577 5,956, , % Tyler City* Lincoln 4,065,044 4,988, , % Link to county GIS broken Royal Twp Lincoln 88,033,352 87,897, , % Hendricks City Lincoln 2,795,047 2,523, , % Marshall* Lyon 25,411,502 24,202,613 1,208, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Lyons Twp Lyon 91,889,671 91,936,759 47, % Cottonwood* Lyon 3,939,885 2,523,442 1,416, % Township Acreage Project Report 31

33 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Mahnomen Mahnomen 2,657,508 2,649,871 7, % Text parcel data available Bejou Twp Mahnomen 96,963,753 96,802, , % East Valley Twp Marshall 90,315,321 90,417, , % Text parcel data available online through CPU Viking Marshall 1,333,581 1,322,545 11, % Oak Park Twp Marshall 101,845, ,982, , % Grygla* Marshall 870,194 1,623, , % Fairmont Martin 43,305,728 42,905, , % Lake Belt Twp Martin 91,999,173 91,846, , % Hutchison McCleod 21,786,495 20,774,062 1,012, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps available online. Glencoe Twp McCleod 87,799,850 87,560, , % Litchfield Meeker 12,940,307 12,764, , % Darwin* Meeker 5,463,206 2,140,161 3,323, % Kingston Twp Meeker 138,376, ,781, , % Township Acreage Project Report 32

34 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Cosmos Meeker 2,844,045 2,948, , % Text Parcel Info online Isle Mille Lacs 6,513,942 6,781, , % Isle Harbor Twp Mille Lacs 70,370,160 83,011,577 12,641, % Milaca* Mille Lacs 7,847,462 8,261, , % Pierz* Morrison 2,715,006 3,504, , % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps Genola* Morrison 760, ,914 69, % Little Falls Twp Morrison 93,641,085 93,711,579 70, % Austin* Mower 28,875,686 29,925,645 1,049, % pdf maps online Lyle Twp Mower 91,744,016 91,787,080 43, % Slayton City* Murray 4,580,160 4,799, , % Moulton Twp Murray 90,667,945 91,105, , % St. Peter Nicollet 14,823,387 14,669, , % Belgrade Twp Nicollet 89,773,305 89,411, , % Township Acreage Project Report 33

35 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Courtland Nicollet 6,798,433 6,876,383 77, % Worthington Nobles 22,870,231 22,723, , % Indian Lake Twp Nobles 90,582,820 90,471, , % Ada Norman 3,428,507 3,509,553 81, % Text parcel data available online through CPU Wild Rice Township Norman 91,327,697 91,418,762 91, % Shelly Norman 539, ,014 3, % Rochester* Olmstead 130,871, ,497,188 6,625, % Elmira Twp Olmstead 90,365,199 90,579, , % Ottertail* Ottertail 15,428,223 13,315,535 2,112, % Interactive map - property taxes Everts Twp Ottertail 89,591,237 89,088, , % Perham* Ottertail 7,251,012 8,064, , % Thief River Falls Pennington 13,050,381 13,483, , % Goodridge Twp Pennington 69,595,406 69,448, , % Township Acreage Project Report 34

36 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Pine City Twp Pine 94,697,044 94,456, , % Hinckley* Pine 8,787,236 8,988, , % Kettle River Twp Pine 79,879,103 79,839,484 39, % Sturgeon Lake* Pine 9,264,500 9,904, , % Pipestone Pipestone 10,245,693 10,582, , % Burke Twp Pipestone 89,597,045 89,589,861 7, % Fisher Twp Polk 92,527,316 92,213, , % Under construction Huntsville Twp Polk 90,683,014 90,660,671 22, % Climax* Polk 2,428,392 2,969, , % Knute Twp Polk 90,320,180 90,307,063 13, % Crookston Polk 13,419,644 12,789, , % Glenwood Twp Pope 107,431, ,449,150 17, % Text Parcel Info online New Prairie Twp Pope 92,819,113 92,845,604 26, % Township Acreage Project Report 35

37 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Maplewood Ramsey 46,519,296 46,501,698 17, % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps available online. White Bear Twp Ramsey 28,136,144 28,106,836 29, % North St. Paul Ramsey 7,749,918 7,749, % Red Lake Falls Red Lake 5,604,261 5,738, , % Plummer Red Lake 6,938,298 7,340, , % Poplar River Township Red Lake 90,608,152 90,519,772 88, % Redwood Falls* Redwood 13,031,129 13,690, , % Vesta Twp Redwood 90,863,745 90,385, , % Sanborn Redwood 5,489,332 5,515,413 26, % Hector* Renville 4,589,770 3,994, , % Bird Island Twp Renville 85,040,745 85,357, , % Faribault* Rice 35,268,603 38,381,326 3,112, % Bridgewater Twp Rice 93,440,423 92,814, , % Township Acreage Project Report 36

38 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Lonsdale City Rice 6,278,913 6,819, , % Luverne* Rock 9,198,814 8,865, , % Martin Twp Rock 124,515, ,432,310 83, % Roseau Roseau 6,740,727 6,194, , % County has interactive GIS digital parcel maps available online. Hereim Township Roseau 85,686,262 85,985, , % Lake Township Roseau 150,439, ,609, , % Warroad Roseau 7,323,626 7,104, , % Orr St. Louis 3,646,480 3,498, , % County Auditor's searchable database/text. Owens Twp St. Louis 71,913,364 72,214, , % White Twp* St. Louis 279,897, ,414,536 7,482, % Ely St. Louis 7,031,771 7,056,629 24, % Eveleth St. Louis 16,772,510 16,786,634 14, % County has interactive GIS Prior Lake* Scott 46,322,653 47,058, , % Township Acreage Project Report 37

39 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Belle Plain* Scott 15,506,481 13,669,904 1,836, % New Market Twp* Scott 84,423,154 84,278, , % Becker Sherburne 27,946,146 28,639, , % Available for purchase Big Lake Twp Sherburne 105,010, ,881, , % Zimmerman Sherburne 8,922,244 8,807, , % Haven Twp Sherburne 88,733,428 88,762,692 29, % Gaylord Sibley 4,156,677 4,110,075 46, % Alfsborg Twp Sibley 91,026,859 90,873, , % Arlington Sibley 3,739,064 3,799,729 60, % Waite Park Stearns 21,936,014 21,946,029 10, % Avon Twp Stearns 89,835,901 89,978, , % Brockway Twp Stearns 125,336, ,709, , % Sauk Center Stearns 10,607,158 10,567,252 39, % Owatonna Steele 37,170,718 37,496, , % Blooming Prairie Twp Steele 89,751,320 90,360, , % Township Acreage Project Report 38

40 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Morris* Stevens 11,440,050 12,747,419 1,307, % Rendsville Twp Stevens 90,806,483 90,577, , % City of Benson* Swift 6,444,513 7,929,915 1,485, % Kildare Twp Swift 90,820,196 91,088, , % Tintah Traverse 1,954,080 1,956,741 2, % Lake Valley Twp Traverse 160,845, ,581, , % Long Prairie Todd 6,452,110 6,300, , % Partial digital parcel data available Birchdale Twp Todd 92,975,632 93,093, , % Zumbro Twp Wabasha 83,372,011 83,462,050 90, % County has parcel maps available online Elgin City Wabasha 2,179,024 1,811, , % Sebeka Wadena 6,375,278 6,390,769 15, % Bullard Twp Wadena 80,010,378 80,320, , % Wadena Wadena 13,817,743 13,548, , % Township Acreage Project Report 39

41 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Waseca Waseca 13,149,228 13,405, , % Janesville Twp Waseca 90,058,888 89,242, , % Mahtomedi* Washington 14,738,986 13,113,851 1,625, % Baytown Twp* Washington 21,767,129 24,464,593 2,697, % County has parcel maps available online Oakdale Washington 29,282,009 29,304,661 22, % St. James* Watonwan 6,057,972 6,105,463 47, % Butterfield Twp Watonwan 92,093,766 92,105,020 47, % Connelly Twp Wilkin 63,324,278 63,715, , % Text Parcel Info online Breckenridge Wilkin 6,338,198 6,085, , % Goodview Winona 5,491,835 5,591,522 99, % Wilson Twp Winona 89,166,446 89,020, , % Buffalo* Wright 22,516,481 24,630,990 2,114, % County has parcel maps available online Rockford Twp Wright 92,093,473 92,598, , % Township Acreage Project Report 40

42 City, Township County MNGUBS08 (sq. MCD2008 (sq. (sq. Percent Comments/Parcel Data Waverly* Wright 6,485,661 4,281,048 2,204, % Clearwater Twp Wright 61,752,429 60,802, , % Stony Run Twp Norman Twp Yellow Medicine 106,595, ,489, , % Yellow Medicine 90,462,554 90,590, , % TOTAL 13,669,268,320 13,596,966,541 72,301, % *MNGUBS08 and/or MCD2008 potentially missing annexation/boundary change data - boundaries need verification Cities and townships were randomly selected from each dataset, and their total areas were compared in Table 2. The total percent difference between the MNGUBS08 boundary data and the MCD2008 boundary data indicates only a slight variation (0.5%) in size between townships and cities. Unorganized territories were not compared in the analysis due to the great amount of variation in size, division, and the names of the unorganized territories between the two datasets. Township Acreage Project Report 41

43 APPENDIX D ACREAGE CALCULATION PROCESSES Township Acreage Calculation Process Setup Created TownshipAcreage file geodb in C:\Work\Township Acreage\Data\FileGeodb and Townships_local.mxd in C:\Work\Township Acreage\Data\Mapfiles. Imported Database Connections\aquarius.jimk.sde\JIMK.TownshipAcreage dataset from ArcSDE because of connection problems. Received all_boundaries.shp from Bob at MnDOT 5/6/09 via o File contains all CTUs of MN (3493 records) Created dough feature class State_quad for cutting by cutter feature classes by manually creating generalized outline of MN outside of its border. These were to be used to check for holes (i.e. areas outside any city, township or unorganized territory). Create Township Acreage File Active Townships and Unorganized Territories were culled by writing out file using SQL: "STATUS_COD" = 'A' AND "MCD_TYPE" IN ('2','3') (1852 records) to Townships_Unorganized_Territories from All_boundaries. Records with duplicate [MCD_Codes] are either of different townships (not overlying), typos or duplicate townships (overlying). The following edits were made to fix typos and overlaying townships: o o o o South Bend code changed from to per Civil Townships file. Deleted duplicate Alexandria township Deleted duplicate Lucas township (with [DATE_ACTIV]=1/1/2006) Deleted duplicate Maine Prairie township (with [DATE_ACTIV]=1/1/2006) Township Acreage Project Report 42

44 o Deleted duplicate Marysville township (with [DATE_ACTIV]= 11/18/2000) o 1848 records remained (not overlying townships with the same MCD_Code could not be fixed as it is uncertain what that field means) Analysis > Overlay > Erase Townships_Unorganized_Territories with JIMK_Muni_Bnds to produce TUs_Erase (file from which Township Acreages will be calc d). Created and calculated [Acreage] field for all features in both JIMK_Muni_Bnds and TUs_Erase. Find areas not Cities, Townships or Unorganized Areas (i.e. holes ) Data Management > General > Merge TUs_Erase and JIMK_Muni_Bnds into Munis_and_TUs_Erase (2756 records). Erase JIMK_State_quad with Munis_and_TUs_Erase to produce State_quad_Erase_by_Munis_and_TUs_Erase. Advanced Edit Tools > Explode single State_quad_Erase_by_Munis_and_TUs_Erase record into 857. Deleted polygon outside of MN border (now 856 records). Added *Acreage+ field and calc d values for all records. Fixed 55 records > 1 acre by merging holes with appropriate feature class (TUs_Erase or JIMK_Muni_Bnds) according to the attributes of the overlying All_boundaries feature class. Also fixed 7 blank records in JIMK_Muni_Bnds using the same method as above. Deleted extra muni in 3 pairs of identical twins (that do not reside in more than one county). A couple other miscellaneous fixes to JIMK_Muni_Bnds and TUs_Erase. Final data preparation The data fields required by Mn Dept. of Revenue (MDOR) were very dissimilar from those in the Muni and Township files received from Mn Dept. of Transportation (MnDOT). For example, they needed townships and cities with their own revenue and county codes as well as FIPS codes. The original MnDOT files contained none of this information and therefore had to be joined spatially to data received from MDOR. Township Acreage Project Report 43

45 Received two zipped shapefiles from MDOR on 5/08/09 that contained their current city and township boundaries: CoCT08 MN PTX_region.shp, MCD 1008 MN MOD_region.shp. Since the boundaries in the edited MnDOT muni and township feature classes differed significantly from MnDORs boundaries it was decided that the edited MnDOT files (JIMK_Muni_Bnds and TUs_Erase) be converted to centroid point files first to better facilitate a spatial join. Hawths Tools > Vector Editing Tools > Generate Polygon Centroid Points o o Inputs: JIMK_Muni_Bnds and TUs_Erase Outputs: Muni_Bnds_pts.shp and TU_pts.shp Spatially joined both output point files back with their parents (JIMK_Muni_Bnds and TUs_Erase respectively) to retrieve their attributes because this Hawth s tool does not retain attributes. Outputs: Muni_Bnds_pts2.shp and TU_pts_w_atts.shp. (Handed off Muni_Bnds_pts2.shp to Anna.) Spatially joined TU_pts_w_atts.shp with its associated MnDOR file: MCD 1008 MN MOD_region.shp. Output: Join_TU_pts_MCDs.shp. Selected all records where the name fields from the two source files did not match: TU_pts_w_atts.[MCD_Name] and MCD 1008 MN MOD_region.[MCDName] (89 selected). Looked at each selected record to determine if the [MCD_Name] field was misspelled, the centroid point location (from TU_pts_w_atts.shp) was in the wrong polygon (from MCD 1008 MN MOD_region.shp) or the MCD in the TU_pts_w_atts.shp file was different from its overlying MCD in MCD 1008 MN MOD_region.shp. Fixed each accordingly. Exported attribute info from Join_TU_pts_MCDs.shp to Townships_Unorg_Territories.dbf and then imported into MS Excel as Townships_Unorg_Territories.xls. Removed unnecessary columns and finished preparing spreadsheet for MnDOR. A similar process was used to create the Cities.xls from Muni_Bnds_pts2.shp. The data from this process was combined with Townships_Unorg_Territories.xls to create a single spreadsheet of city, township, and unorganized territory data called MNGUBS09_Acreage_ xls. Township Acreage Project Report 44

46 Copied the edited MnDOT files (JIMK_Muni_Bnds and TUs_Erase) to JIMK.Munis and JIMK.Townships_Unorg_Terr feature classes respectively in Database Connections\aquarius.jimk.sde\JIMK.MnGUBS09\. Note: In response to information received from the city of Duluth, the Unorganized Territory of Herman was deleted from JIMK.Townships_Unorg_Terr and its area was added to the city of Hermantown in JIMK.Munis (both in Database Connections\aquarius.jimk.sde\JIMK.MnGUBS09\). This was also done in Townships_Unorg_Territories.xls, Cities.xls and MNGUBS09_Acreage_ xls. The exact area is still a discrepancy between the city of Duluth and the county of St. Louis. Township Acreage Project Report 45

47 TRAVERSE TOOL EXAMPLE: After identifying records requiring updates, docket files were obtained from MBA and were digitized in ArcMap using geo-referenced MBA maps, aerial photos, and county street maps or by using the Traverse tool (Figure 1, Appendix D) and coordinate geometry data from legal descriptions where legal descriptions provided sufficient information. Figure 1, Appendix D, illustrates an example of Traverse tool in ArcInfo using the following partial metes-and-bounds annexation description from MBA docket OA (see p.39) : Part of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of section 3, township 105 north, range 34 west in Mountain Lake Township, Cottonwood County, Minnesota, lying north of Minnesota Trunk Highway No. 60, described as follows: (1) Beginning at an existing MnDOT cast iron monument at the northwest corner of the northwest quarter of said section 3; thence south 89 degrees 13 minutes 32 seconds east, assumed bearing along the north line of said northwest quarter a distance of feet, to a point on the northwesterly right of way line of Minnesota Trunk Highway No. 60, as per right of way plat no. 17-6; (2) thence south 14 degrees 09 minutes 34 seconds west, along said northwesterly right of way line, a distance of feet; (3) thence southwesterly along a non-tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a central angle of 23 degrees 56 minutes 17 seconds, a radius of feet, an arc distance of feet, a chord bearing of south 56 degrees 33 minutes 31 seconds west, a chord distance of feet. Note: the distance measurements are entered in U.S. feet and automatically converted to meters in the Traverse tool description. Township Acreage Project Report 46

48 Figure 1, Appendix D: Example of Traverse Tool Mountain Lake City Mn/DOT cast iron monument (point of beginning) Mountain Lake Township Township Acreage Project Report 47

49 Full Legal Description and accompanying map of OA Township Acreage Project Report 48