Top 10 Sectors Using GIS in Indiana

This study was conducted to determine how mapping departments within local and state government, education, non-profits and private industry use geographic information systems map data every day. In 2008, 312 respondents told how they use GIS.

Here are the top ten use-areas among the public and private sector:

01 Transportation

For trains, planes and automobiles there are numerous government agencies, surveying and engineering firms, and community organizations who use the IndianaMap for proposed transportation routes, environmental assessments, infrastructure management, airport and roadway improvements, maintenance, accident locations, new facilities, emergency response and evacuation, state and federal reporting requirements, and system-wide transportation management

02 Utilities

Public and private utilities use the IndianaMap in their customer billing systems, routing meter-reading and inspections, load-testing, infrastructure planning and improvement, “call before you dig” locations, and emergency response

03 Natural Resources

Public, private, and non-profit organizations use the IndianaMap on a daily basis to protect endangered species and habitat, manage natural resource exploration and exploitation, protect the public from natural hazards such as flooding and earthquakes, manage wildlife for hunting and fishing, maintain parks and facilities, and manage forests, fish and wildlife for the benefit of all Hoosiers

04 Economic Development

We may not know when the next major corporation is looking at Indiana for their new home, but with the IndianaMap they can quickly see why the Hoosier state stands out; Indiana’s economic developers use the IndianaMap to locate sites for potential development, plan tax incentive zones, clear regulatory requirements, help existing businesses, and attract new business for a growing economy

05 Engineering/Surveying

Whether used for preliminary survey work, evaluating impacts to home owners, or managing construction phases, the IndianaMap saves hundreds of thousands of dollars when new developments are planned, bridges built, levees are constructed, pipelines are routed, and much, much more

06 Planning/Land Use

Communities and planning organizations use the IndianaMap to visualize land use patterns and trends, zoning, plan developments, acquire state and federal grants, and improve quality of life factors as part of “smart growth” initiatives; developers, assessors, and real estate professionals use it to look at current the landscape and changes over time

07 Infrastructure

From bridges to telecommunications, communities use the IndianaMap to assess and maintain their infrastructure, including Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) reporting requirements

08 Environmental

Government agencies entrusted with the responsibility of protecting our environment use the IndianaMap to track and manage regulated facilities and on-the-ground hazards, improve the environment through remediation, conservation, and preservation, and to communicate with citizens; private and non-profit organizations use the same consistent map information for conservation and preservation, and to assure environmental compliance within areas of new development, existing sites, and areas of concern

09 Wastewater/Stormwater

From flooding, to community growth, to modernizing outdated sewer overflows and protecting public health, utilities and communities use the IndianaMap to see where the water goes and manage the impact of that flow

10 Public Safety

The IndianaMap saves lives—it helps quickly get emergency responders to where they need to go; as an interoperable communications tool it is used for community preparedness, examining locations of shelters, warning sirens, population concentrations, critical infrastructure, and local resources; it is used by police, fire, hospital, health departments, Indiana National Guard, homeland security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Civil Air Patrol, the Red Cross, and others for all phases of disaster response and recovery; it is used daily as police patrol our streets and fight crime; it is used by corrections personnel to track geographic-restrictions and compliance of sex and violent offenders.

For more information, view the complete report (3.4MB PDF).

Indiana GIO Announcement

Press Release For Immediate Release October 29, 2007 Press Contact: Mehgan O’Connor 317.234.4589 317.979.0877

Governor Appoints State’s First Geographic Information Officer INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. – Chief Information Officer Gerry Weaver today announced Governor Mitch Daniels’ appointment of Jim Sparks as the state’s first Geographic Information Officer. Sparks, whose first day with the state is today, will oversee the coordination of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) efforts across all state agencies and work with the Indiana Geographic Information Council, Inc. (IGIC) to adopt and implement the state’s GIS data policies, standards and statewide data integration plan. GIS technology works by linking information stored in databases to a place or location on a map. Users query the data, which is presented in maps, tables and other graphic representations. Since 80% of all government information has a geographic component, the power of GIS can be widely used to support decision-making and problem-solving across all sectors – public, private and not-for-profit. Sparks, an experienced geography and mapping professional, has extensive knowledge of geographic information systems (GIS) technology and experience in administration, policy development and planning. “Having a dedicated GIS expert in Indiana government pushes our capabilities to the next level,” said Weaver. “Working with the state’s current GIS talent, Sparks will create a consistent framework of statewide public maps and data for all levels of government that will help save lives and money and improve government efficiency.” To continue the coordination of enterprise information technology solutions that save the state, and ultimately taxpayers’, time and money, Sparks will report directly to Weaver, who oversees state IT.
About the Indiana Office of Technology (IOT) – The Indiana Office of Technology is an internal service agency that was created by Governor Mitch Daniels on January 10, 2005. Its mission is to provide cost-effective, secure, consistent, reliable enterprise technology services to its partner agencies so they can better serve Hoosier taxpayers. For more information about IOT, please visit .

Proposal for a Quid Pro Quo Model for Geographic Data Exchange

Quid pro quo (Latin for “something for something” [1]) indicates a more-or-less equal exchange or substitution of goods or services.

Long time hindrances to the development of Statewide Spatial Data Infrastructures (SSDIs) and the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) have been financial, organizational, and political (most believe technical issues have already been overcome). High quality data produced by local government is often encumbered by restrictive local government licensing policies. Those same local governments are faced with the reality of large price tags for geospatial data development and maintenance and shrinking budgets. As regional, statewide, and national driving issues increasingly identify the essential need for integrated SSDIs and an NSDI, many local governments are justifiably concerned that their participation will become an unfunded mandate. In the face of these obstacles, many funding options have been proposed to help offset the high costs of data programs at the local government level and encourage their participation.

However, few programs at the state level have been successful in establishing programs where sustained funding flows among multiple jurisdictional and levels of government for geospatial data development and maintenance. In fact, most states still struggle to establish adequate funding for state-level programs, let alone funding that would flow to other entities. I believe that a Quid Pro Quo approach to developing SSDIs and the NSDI could be a successful one from the standpoint of establishing a funding mechanism for cost sharing among stakeholders and managing the real constraints of local government to participation. Under this model, those essential data sets to local, state, and federal government, i.e. Framework data (such as orthophotography, elevation, and hydrography), that can efficiently be produced over broad areas would be maintained by capable state and federal entities. Those data appropriately maintained by local (city and county*) jurisdictions would continue as such.

An equitable cost share for SSDIs and the NSDI could be realized in a required quid pro quo exchange of framework data that support the majority of stakeholders’ data requirements. The concept of data stewardship at different levels of government is not new. What is uncommon among current business models is a structuring of a quid pro quo data exchange such that all parties clearly recognize and are responsible for a shared funding model for development and maintenance of Framework data (while uncommon, there are limited examples that demonstrate this can be a successful approach, such as Ohio’s Location Based Response System). I suggest that we are well on our way to such a model as an effective means of developing SSDIs and the NSDI if the National States’ Geographic Information Council’s (NSGIC) Imagery For The Nation (IFTN) program is implemented as proposed. However, if we leave out key aspects of this model up front, namely the unequivocal recognition of a quid pro quo exchange, then we are destined to failure once again.

For example, let us assume the development and maintenance costs of parcel, address and street centerline mapping is roughly equivalent to the development and maintenance costs of orthophotography and elevation mapping (of course exact figures depends on the methods of data acquisition, accuracies, etc.). If state and federal government took on the responsibility for orthophotography and elevation layers, as is proposed by the Imagery For The Nation (IFTN) program, this would offset substantial costs to local government to build and maintain their own geospatial programs. If however, the imagery and elevation are provided in the public domain without explicit and agreed upon recognition of a quid pro quo data exchange, then we face the very real possibility that local governments will not recognize it as such and will not recognize their responsibilities to contribute to the whole. In other words, local governments remain free to use the public domain data without recognizing the cost sharing aspects to their own programs.

Many (I would argue most) will be left to continue to view the external requests for their data as unfunded mandates. Without a clear plan for recognition of a quid pro quo data exchange, thus an equitable cost share in a shared public resource, we will continue to face the same financial, organizational, and political obstacles that we do today. It is not enough to “build it and they will come.” We must be prepared to recognize and agree upon, formally, our shared roles and responsibilities. Indiana is about to embark on a social experiment that would equate to such a quid pro quo data exchange. Under a new GIS statute, Indiana’s Framework data layers are formally defined, as is a provision for “data exchange agreements” meaning an agreement concerning the exchange of any GIS data or framework data.

While political subdivisions maintain the right to control the sale, exchange, and distribution of any GIS data or framework data provided by the political subdivision to the state through a data exchange agreement, a political subdivision may agree, through a provision in a data exchange agreement, to allow the sale, exchange, or distribution of GIS data or framework data provided to the state. As a condition in a data exchange agreement for any GIS data or framework data provided by the state to a political subdivision, the state Geographic Information Officer may require the political subdivision to follow the state GIS data standards and the statewide data integration plan when the political subdivision makes use of the GIS data or framework data as provided by the state. (Note, this does not apply to data that is otherwise required by state or federal law to be provided by a political subdivision to the state or federal government.)

As they have not yet been developed, the details of the data exchange agreements remain to be seen. I would assert that to enable a successful SSDI in Indiana, the data exchange agreements and the statewide data integration plan should explicitly define two important quid pro quo provisions: 1. Assurance that the state will maintain an ongoing high-resolution orthophotography and elevation data program, akin to Indiana’s 2005 successful orthophotography project and the proposed IFTN program (this will require a state funding commitment), that the data will reside in the public domain, and 2. That in exchange for receiving state provided framework data, political subdivisions will provide specific locally maintained framework data (e.g. parcels, addresses, and street centerlines), absent of personal/private information such as land owner names, and that the data be integrated into derivative data sets that reside either in the public domain or under a commercially restricted Creative Commons license (this is a policy issue that should be further reviewed).

I assert that equitable shared funding through a formally defined quid pro quo data exchange would enable SSDIs and the NSDI. This will require revised policies and a clear well-coordinated strategy for implementation (I do not believe it can be implemented piecemeal). There are many other issues to be tackled, including developing data where none currently exist, accessing restricted public data where they do exist (e.g., Census address coordinate data), technical issues related to data integration, etc. Still, financial, organizational, and political constraints have been the most significant obstacles to our success. If we can find ways to overcome these obstacles, the payoffs will be high. If we continue to sidestep these issues in favor of incremental progress on individual data layers, I believe the vision of SSDIs and the NSDI will be difficult, if not impossible, to truly realize.

___________ *Every state is different, and this must be recognized in Statewide Spatial Data Infrastructure business plans (e.g. some states already manage statewide addresses and parcels; some states are currently unprepared to manage statewide orthophotography).

Decision in MAPPS Lawsuit: Courts Find in Favor of US Government

MAPPS loses lawsuit… Doug Richardson (Executive Director of the Association of American Geographers) informed the FGDC that a decision has been handed down by the judge presiding over the MAPPS v. USA motion that was filed in the Eastern District of the United States District Court. The following is from that decision – “For these reasons, the affidavits do not establish that an injury in fact was suffered by the individual surveyors or their firms, and accordingly, no standing exists. Accordingly, summary judgment must be granted in favor of the government. An appropriate Order will issue.” You can read more at the AAG website.

Guidance From Above: IndianaMap Across Indiana

Over the past several months, I worked with producer Aric Hartvig of WFYI to document some of the uses and benefits of the IndianaMap for their series Across Indiana. In 2005, Indiana developed very high resolution orthophotography (aerial photography) as part of a single, consistent digital base map for geographic information systems — called the IndianaMap. The photography has made quite an impact –saving money, time, and lives by making an accurate base map available to everyone. This segment from WFYI documents some of those benefits.

Featured in the video are several Indiana Geographic Information Council members, including: Anna Radue – Indiana University UITS; Jim Binkley, Scottsburg Municipal Electric Utility; Nathan Eaton, Indiana Geological Survey; Brooke Gajownik, Hamilton County Sheriffs Office; Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Indiana Geographic Information Council.

Thanks WFYI!

Progress on Indiana’s Water GIS Map Layer

The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) high-resolution map layer is complete for Indiana. “This is a great development, but is only the first phase. We now hope to find ways to improve, maintain, and expand use of the data,” says David Nail, USGS Geospatial Liaison for Indiana. The National Hydrography Dataset is now available in a new database design that allows better web-based access and query, as well as truly seamless data that can be downloaded in various extents. The new database design provides a distribution format called NHDinGEO. Data requests in NHDinGEO can be extracted by subbasin, county, congressional district or by topographic map quad.

Indiana Governor Signs GIS into Law

I’m back! I had a two month hiatus spent largely on the Indiana legislative session, and boy am I glad it’s over. I have a new-found respect for our law makers who do that year after year – and I was following only one bill!

I am very pleased to report that Governor Daniels signed the first Indiana GIS bill into law last Wednesday. Much thanks go to senate sponsor Sen. David Ford and house sponsor Rep. Scott Reske for their support, leadership, and faith in what we do. The law defines GIS framework data, institutes a governor appointed Geographic Information Officer, and establishes a framework for a statewide GIS Data Integration Plan and GIS framework data standards. Finally, it establishes a fund for GIS (though does not add dollars to the pot yet – we hope this is the first step in an incremental process!).

Loss of Free Data Services

Access to free web mapping services has many of us hooked – but what does the future have in store? Here is a recent experience with free going to fee. It leaves me wondering where the industry is heading over the long haul regarding web mapping services, and at what cost. Shortly after September 11th I assisted the (former) Indiana State Emergency Management Agency to set up GIS in their Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The EOC also coordinates mapping efforts with the Indiana National Guard. The programs were set up on limited staff and budgets. For storms, floods, tornadoes and the like, weather data is essential but wasn’t being provided in the needed format (a web map service – WMS) from the National Weather Service.

Luckily we found and pulled the data from their WMS. Over the course of a couple years, I have pointed many professional GIS’ers to this source of free data. I recently learned from my friends at the National Guard that AccuWeather has stopped providing their service for free and now is subscription-based. Don’t get me wrong, I understand and appreciate that this is an industry and businesses are here to make money. I certainly don’t fault AccuWeather for going to a subscription service. However, it leaves us at a loss for an important data source.

With the obvious homeland security implications, and the infrastructure in place, I am left wondering why the National Weather Service isn’t making a free weather WMS a priority. It also leaves me wondering what is in store for us all as we become increasingly reliant on web map services provided by others. WMS is a powerful way for us to leverage geospatial technologies. I’m one among many who are enthusiastic about their potential. However, we need to approach the future with our open eyes. What is the long-term availability, reliability, and cost of this technology? Will we all get hooked and the then the rules change? What will that mean to our projects, and our budgets? I’d love to hear your thoughts (and if you know of another free weather WMS, please pass it on!)

****The following is a message from AccuWeather, Inc: In order to access, you’ll need to be a Professional subscriber. You can find more information at Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, AccuWeather Solution Center

Quote of the day: “Maps can endanger freedom.”

In a story in the 3/13/07 edition of the Cape Gazette “Positive Growth Alliance: NEMO lacks balance

Mr. Rich Collins, executive director of the Positive Growth Alliance (PGA), is quoted as saying “Maps can endanger freedom.” This is in reference to the Delaware Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) program which educates municipal officials about the correlation in the percentage of impervious surface, stormwater management and the quality of watersheds that are nearby. Not surprisingly, Mr. Collins runs a pro-property rights group called the Positive Growth Alliance which is a property rights organization, “The PGA stands for effective solutions and gives people the freedom to do what they want.” Here, here.

Ironically, my second favorite quote today compliments this story: “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance,” which is the tag line of the Cape Gazette newspaper.

Indiana’s GIS Law

Years in the making, Indiana passes first comprehensive GIS law. It defines data exchange agreements, identifies framework data as essential elements of a statewide base map, emphasizes open access, establishes the first Geographic Information Officer as an appointee of the governor, establishes (but does not fund) a GIS fund, and recognizes the role of state universities and the not-for-profit Indiana Geographic Information Council.

Sponsored by Sen David Ford and Rep. Scott Reske.


 Chapter 7.3. Indiana GIS Mapping Standards

Sec. 1. As used in this chapter, “data exchange agreement” means an agreement concerning the exchange of any GIS data or framework data.

Sec. 2. As used in this chapter, “electronic map” has the meaning set forth in IC 5-14-3-2(d).

Sec. 3. (a) As used in this chapter, “framework data” means common electronic map information for a geographic area.
(b) The term includes the following:

(1) Digital orthophotography.
(2) Digital cadastre.
(3) Public land survey system.
(4) Elevation.
(5) Geodetic control.
(6) Governmental boundary units.
(7) Water features.
(8) Addresses.
(9) Streets.

Sec. 4. As used in this chapter, “fund” refers to the Indiana mapping data and standards fund established by section 19 of this chapter.

Sec. 5. As used in this chapter, “GIS” refers to geographic information systems.

Sec. 6. As used in this chapter, “IGIC” refers to the nonprofit entity known as the Indiana Geographic Information Council, or its successor organization.

Sec. 7. As used in this chapter, “political subdivision” has the meaning set forth in IC 36-1-2-13.

Sec. 8. As used in this chapter, “state agency” has the meaning set forth in IC 4-13-1-1.

Sec. 9. As used in this chapter, “state data center” refers to the state data center established under IC 4-23-7.1.

Sec. 10. As used in this chapter, “state GIS officer” refers to the individual appointed under section 13 of this chapter.

Sec. 11. As used in this chapter, “statewide base map” means an electronic map of Indiana consisting of framework data for Indiana.

Sec. 12. As used in this chapter, “statewide data integration plan” means a plan:

(1) to integrate GIS data and framework data developed and maintained by different units of the federal, state, and local government into statewide coverage of framework data; and
(2) that includes details for:

(A) an inventory of existing data;
(B) stakeholder data requirements;
(C) identification of data stewards;
(D) data standards and schema, costs, work flow, data transfer mechanisms, update frequency, and maintenance; and
(E) identification of appropriate data sharing policies and mechanisms to facilitate intergovernmental data exchange, such as data exchange agreements.

Sec. 13. (a) The governor shall appoint an individual as the state GIS officer.
(b) The individual appointed by the governor must be an experienced geography and mapping professional who has:

(1) extensive knowledge of the principles, practices, terminology, and trends in GIS, spatial data, analysis, and related technology; and
(2) experience in administration, project management, policy development, coordination of services, and planning.

Sec. 14. The state GIS officer shall do the following:

(1) Function as the chief officer for GIS matters for state agencies.
(2) Review and either veto or adopt both the:

(A) state’s GIS data standards; and
(B) statewide data integration plan; as recommended by the IGIC. If either of the recommendations is vetoed, the state GIS officer shall return the recommendation to the IGIC with a message announcing the veto and stating the reasons for the veto. If the IGIC ceases to exist or refuses to make the recommendations listed in this subsection, the state GIS officer may develop and adopt state GIS data standards and a statewide data integration plan. The standards and the plan adopted under this subsection must promote interoperability and open use of data with various GIS software, applications, computer hardware, and computer operating systems.

(3) Act as the administrator of:

(A) the state standards and policies concerning GIS data and framework data; and
(B) the statewide data integration plan.

(4) Enforce the state GIS data standards and execute the statewide data integration plan adopted under subdivision (2) through the use of:

(A) GIS policies developed for state agencies; and
(B) data exchange agreements involving an entity other than a state agency.

(5) Coordinate the state data center’s duties under this chapter.
(6) Act as the state’s representative for:

(A) requesting grants available for the acquisition or enhancement of GIS resources; and
(B) preparing funding proposals for grants to enhance coordination and implementation of GIS.

(7) Review and approve, in accordance with the statewide data integration plan, the procurement of GIS goods and services involving the state data center or a state agency.
(8) Cooperate with the United States Board on Geographic Names established by P.L.80-242 by serving as the chair of a committee formed with the IGIC as the state names authority for Indiana.
(9) Publish a biennial report. The report must include the status and metrics on the progress of the statewide data integration plan.
(10) Represent the state’s interest to federal agencies regarding the National Spatial Data Infrastructure.
(11) Serve as the state’s primary point of contact for communications and discussions with federal agencies regarding framework data, spatial data exchanges, cost leveraging opportunities, spatial data standards, and other GIS related issues.
(12) Facilitate GIS data cooperation between units of the federal, state, and local governments.
(13) Promote the development and maintenance of statewide GIS data and framework data layers associated with a statewide base map.
(14) Approve and maintain data exchange agreements to which the state data center or a state agency is a party to increase the amount and quality of GIS data and framework data available to the state.
(15) Use personnel made available from state educational institutions to provide technical support to the:

(A) state GIS officer in carrying out the officer’s duties under this chapter; and

Sec. 15. The publication and access requirements of this chapter do not apply to data that would otherwise be exempt from public disclosure under IC 5-14-3-4(b)(19).

Sec. 16. With money from the fund, the state GIS officer, through the data center, the IGIC, and the other organizations, shall do the following:

(1) Ensure that there are adequate depositories of all GIS data and framework data obtained by a state agency.
(2) Acquire, publish, store, and distribute GIS data and framework data through the computer gateway administered under IC 4-13.1-2-2(a)(5) by the office of technology and through the state data center. The state GIS officer may also provide access through the IGIC and other entities as directed by the state GIS officer.
(3) Integrate GIS data and framework data developed and maintained by state agencies and political subdivisions into the statewide base map.
(4) Maintain a state historical archive of GIS data, framework data, and electronic maps.
(5) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, provide public access to GIS data and framework data in locations throughout Indiana.
(6) Provide assistance to state agencies and political subdivisions regarding public access to GIS data and framework data so that information is available to the public while confidentiality is protected for certain data from electronic maps.
(7) Develop and maintain statewide framework data layers associated with a statewide base map or electronic map.
(8) Publish and distribute the state GIS data standards and the statewide data integration plan adopted under section 14(2) of this chapter.
(9) Subject to section 20 of this chapter, make GIS data, framework data, and electronic maps available for use by the Indiana Business Research Center.


Sec. 17. The state GIS officer shall coordinate with state educational institutions to do the following:

(1) Promote formal GIS education opportunities for full-time and part-time students.
(2) Provide informal GIS learning opportunities through a series of seminars and noncredit concentrated classes provided throughout Indiana.
(3) Coordinate research assets for the benefit of Indiana by maintaining inventories of the universities’ academic and technical GIS experts, data and technology resources as provided by the universities, and research interests for collaboration to pursue research grant opportunities.
(4) Implement an outreach network to Indiana political subdivisions to enhance communication and data sharing among state government, political subdivisions, and the business community.

Sec. 18. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a state educational institution may not bid on contracts to provide photogrametry services or framework layer data conversion services for the benefit of a state agency or political subdivision. This section shall not be construed to prohibit the purchase of any of the following by a state agency or political subdivision from a state educational institution:

(1) GIS data or framework data.
(2) Data previously created by the state educational institution as part of the educational, research, or service mission of the state educational institution.

(b) If there is a lack of qualified bids on contracts referred to in subsection (a) by entities other than state educational institutions, the state agency or political subdivision may, with the advice of the state GIS officer, solicit bids from state educational institutions.

Sec. 19. (a) The Indiana mapping data and standards fund is established for the following purposes:

(1) Funding GIS grants.
(2) Administering this chapter.

(b) The fund consists of the following:

(1) Appropriations made to the fund by the general assembly.
(2) Gifts, grants, or other money received by the state for GIS purposes.

(c) The state GIS officer shall administer the fund.     (d) The expenses of administering the fund shall be paid from money in the fund.     (e) The treasurer of state shall invest the money in the fund not currently needed to meet the obligations of the fund in the same manner as other public money may be invested. Interest that accrues from these investments shall be deposited in the fund.     (f) Money in the fund at the end of a state fiscal year does not revert to the state general fund.

Sec. 20. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b), (c), and (d), a political subdivision maintains the right to control the sale, exchange, and distribution of any GIS data or framework data provided by the political subdivision to the state through a data exchange agreement entered into under this chapter.
(b) A political subdivision may agree, through a provision in a data exchange agreement, to allow the sale, exchange, or distribution of GIS data or framework data provided to the state.
(c) Subsection (a) does not apply to data that is otherwise required by state or federal law to be provided by a political subdivision to the state or federal government.
(d) As a condition in a data exchange agreement for providing state GIS data or framework data to a political subdivision, the state GIS officer may require the political subdivision to follow the state GIS data standards and the statewide data integration plan when the political subdivision makes use of the GIS data or framework data as provided by the state.

Sec. 21. (a) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to permit the IGIC, the state GIS officer, or the state data center to recommend or restrict standards for GIS hardware or software that a proprietary vendor provides to any political subdivision.
(b) It is the intent of the general assembly in enacting this chapter to promote high technology enterprise and employment within Indiana. To the extent practicable, the “Buy Indiana Presumption” required by Executive Order 05-05, shall be observed with respect to all procurement decisions related to this chapter, so long as Executive Order 05-05 is in effect.

Sec. 22. The publication and access requirements of this chapter do not supersede IC 5-14-3.