&
PLANNING TECHNOLOGY TODAY A PublicaƟon of the Technology Division of the American Planning AssociaƟon Issue 106 - Spring 2013 www.planningtechtoday.org
IMAGINE CENTRAL ARKANSAS PROJECT EXPERIMENTS WITH ONLINE ENGAGEMENT TOOLS Geneva Faulkner, University of Colorado Denver Building a cohesive vision for future growth can be extremely challenging. Metroplan, Central Arkansas’ Council of Local Governments and Metropolitan Planning Organization, is currently in the process of updating the region’s transportation plan and in the process introduced a variety of innovative tools to collect public opinion and ideas. Led by planning firm Gresham, Smith and Partners, the Imagine Central Arkansas project (ICA) seeks input from residents of a fourcounty region about a variety of transportation-related issues that the region will face over the next thirty years. A range of public engagement tools forms the backbone of the Imagine Central Arkansas (ICA) project. Launched in September 2012 the tools are: the State of the Region InfoGame, Treasured Places, Ideascale, and Choose Your Future. Together, these tools provided central Arkansas residents with creative, innovative ways to voice their opinions on regional priorities and learn more about their region and the challenges it faces.
IÄ T«®Ý IÝÝç Letter From The Chair 2
Social Network Analysis 5
Civic 3 Crowdsourcing
Book Review: 5 Evgeny Morozov
Planning for 3 Broadband Survey
Big Poverty 7 Questions
Events at the 4 National Conference
Upcoming 8 Conferences
The State of the Region InfoGame, developed by Urban Interactive Studio, provides a unique way for users to learn facts about transportation issues facing the region, presenting information from a rarely read, lengthy report. The demographic information that users enter on the first page generates statistics that show how their living and transportation situations fit into those of the region as a whole. Additionally, users can also test their knowledge of the region through a trivia portion of the game. InfoGames combine infographics, game elements, and personalization in a simple, fun interface. InfoGames is visually appealing, intuitive, encourages users to ponder current conditions, and gives regional context to users’ personal lifestyles. Treasured Places is an interactive map tool based on CommonSights that asks readers to submit photos of their favorite places in central Arkansas. Treasured Places is convenient and versatile, with built-in GPS functionality for smartphone users to quickly locate where their photos were taken. Because Treasured Places can be accessed and used on computers, tablets, and mobile devices, users can contribute when and wherever it is most convenient. Treasured Places allows residents of central Arkansas to articulate what makes their favorite places so special, which is vital information for planners
The Interactive tool allows the user to set their priorities for Central Arkansas
ÊÄã®Äç ÊÄ Ö ¦ 4 1
held at the conference - I will be LETTER FROM THE CHAIR being discussing mapping mashups on Monday Harsh Prakash Senior GIS Manager harsh@gisblog.org
at 2:30 pm - 3:45 pm.
I hope to meet you in Chicago. As always, you can contact me directly at harsh@ gisblog.org (@GISblog).
Chair, APA Technology Division The National Planning Conference starts this week in Chicago at the Hyatt Regency. The theme of APA 2013 is “Plan Big”, and focuses on creating a big shift in planning via big opportunities and big projects to better plan for our future (See related questions about Big Poverty on page 7). While that theme may seem at odds with the current sequestration and other economic cuts, it is a call to get bold with the planning challenges of our times. You can follow the conference on Twitter via the hashtag #apa2013. You can also follow our division’s activities at that conference via the hashtag #apa2013tech.
New Division Leaders If you want to further coordinate activities with other members, I encourage you to enter the days you are planning to attend at http://doodle.com/9fa62e5zfywcy727.
The division’s Business Meeting and Facilitated Discussion will be held on Sunday at 10.30 am - 11.45 am in the Riverside Exhibition Center. The agenda for our Business Meeting includes sharing of our last Performance Report, adoption of our Bylaws, and transition to the new leadership.
Finally, I want to congratulate those who got elected and thank others for participating in our elections held last month. Please join me in welcoming the new leadership: Katherine McMahon, incoming Chair; Nader Afzalan (@ NaderAfzalan), incoming Vice-Chair; and Karen Quinn Fung (@counti8), incoming Secretary/Treasurer. Kate has some interesting ideas on planning strategies for broadband, and I wish her success in defining the division’s focus on broadband planning activities (See the notice on p.age 3 for a related survey at http://www. surveymonkey.com/s/72GN8KZ).
Our Facilitated Discussion will focus on broadband infrastructure, policy and sustainability. We have also tentatively planned a social event on Monday at 5 pm. Don’t forget to check the roster on page 4 for the other technology-related events
I also want to thank Corey Proctor and Joni Graves for their contributions of time and talent as the interim Vice-Chair and Secretary/Treasurer respectively, and especially Steve Chiaramonte for a splendid job as the Newsletter Editor.
Please welcome the new Division leaders who will be taking office at the APA Conference in Chicago. Chair: Kathleen (Kate) McMahon, AICP Vice-Chair: Nader Afzalan Secretary-Treasurer: Karen Quinn Fung
CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS: PLANNING AND TECHNOLOGY TODAY The Technology Division newsletter includes feature length articles, as well as shorter “spotlights” on various technologies and tools of interest. Our regular one page spotlights will cover Public Participation, GIS, Online Tools, Visualization, and Scenario Planning. We are always accepting submissions for our feature length articles on a rolling basis. For these articles, we are looking for case studies that demonstrate how planners and/or communities have used technology in planning. What are the innovative tools and techniques applied; what worked well and what did not?
In particular we are soliciting articles and sidebars that focus on: Case studies directly from communities; Lessons learned (both positive and negative) regarding the use technology in public participation. Please submit your ideas to: Rob Goodspeed at: rob.goodspeed@gmail.com.
P½ ÄĮĦ Ä T «Äʽʦù TÊ ù - SÖٮĦ 2013
2
CIVIC CROWDFUNDING: A NEW METHOD FOR FUNDING CITY IMPROVEMENTS? Alexa Mills, MIT Colab and Rodrigo Davies, MIT Center for Civic Media Courtney Hennessey and John Stoddard dreamed of building Boston’s first rooftop farm but lacked the resources to make their idea a reality. They recently raised $23,981 on Kickstarter to begin their first growing season on top of the Boston Design Center in Fort Point Channel this spring. Increasingly, “crowdfunding” websites like Kickstarter are hosting fundraising campaigns for projects that impact cities and their communities. These sites make it possible for anyone give their own money – often in small donations of $5 or $25 – to the projects they believe in. Kickstarter is not the only platform in this game. Ioby.org (the URL stands for “In Our Back Yard) claims to “bring environmental projects to life, block by block”. Neighbor.ly is designed to support civic-minded projects. Indiegogo.com and the UK’s spacehive.com are veteran platforms in a nascent field. Additional platforms, each with their own missions and rules, emerge often. So what makes a good crowdfunding campaign? Many use a system of rewards to lure backers, offering quirky prizes for different donation amounts. Examples of these rewards include customized versions of the item being made; or visits from the campaign’s creators, which is especially valuable if they happen to be musicians or film stars. Successful campaigns create a sense of urgency: crowdfunded projects typically enjoy their biggest influx of donations around the start and end of the fundraising period, and focus their outreach around these times. They also rely heavily on recommendations within the social networks of their sponsors.
Some crowdfunding platforms are focusing specifically on this space, loosely defined as ‘civic crowdfunding’. Spacehive, based in the UK, helped the residents of Glyn Coch, a former mining town in South Wales, fund the remainder of a $1.2 million community center project that had attracted some, but not enough, government investment. Faced with the looming expiration of public grants, the local community organized a crowdfunding campaign to close the funding gap. The group met its target in less than two months, supported by local businesses, foundations, British celebrities and corporations, including the supermarket chain Tesco. Other crowdfunding sites are providing a platform for government itself to raise funds. Citizinvestor.com is hosting a campaign by the Philadelphia Parks and Recreation department to build a garden-based youth education program, and in March, San Francisco-based civic technology company CitySourced launched Zenfunder, a site whose early projects include community improvements in San Jose sponsored by a local council member. These new projects and platforms raise a lot of questions about the future of the crowdfunding model for planning projects, particularly around who should own and direct those initiatives. What does it mean when private groups take on work that has historically been the responsibility of city departments working with tax dollars? Do these sites support grassroots projects, or will they become dominated by professional planners and fundraisers? Will local people fund local projects, or will enthusiastic urbanists fundraise for projects that impact cities in states and countries other than their own? As crowdfunding projects become more common, communities need to become fluent in how to use the model, but also keep alert to the risks it carries and the wider implications of the new path it is forging.
How well do these techniques translate to projects in the built environment? Already we have seen that campaigns that have a strong connection to a geographic area tend to attract backers who live close to that area. Much as product-based The authors can be reached at alexam@mit.edu and rodrigo. crowdfunding campaigns tend to rely heavily on organizers’ davies@gmail.com. personal networks, there is an opportunity for community organizations to utilize their existing social capital to support planning projects.
NOTICE ON PLANNING FOR BROADBAND: INFRASTRUCTURE, POLICY, AND SUSTAINABILITY We are conducting a survey of planning professionals to assess the integration of broadband strategies in local planning documents. This on-line survey takes less than five minutes. We will present the results of the survey at the American Planning Association national conference in Chicago on April 15. We are seeking participation from all sizes and types of planning agencies. We encourage you to take the survey whether or not
your agency has engaged in any broadband planning activity. To take the survey, please click on the link below. http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/72GN8KZ
P½ ÄĮĦ Ä T «Äʽʦù TÊ ù - SÖٮĦ 2013
3
IMAGINE CENTRAL ARKANSAS (CONTINUED) CÊÄã®Äç FÙÊà P ¦ 1 in the comprehensive planning process. Ideascale is a tool that allows users to voice their opinions in a forum setting. Visitors can post ideas, write comments, and vote others’ ideas up and down. The most popular posts bubble to the top, which shows how the community prioritizes different ideas. Choose Your Future, the Imagine Central Arkansas scenario game, provided participants IdeaScale provides a forum for users to post ideas and provide with an opportunity to make tough choices and feedback on ideas posted by others. immediately grasp the impacts of their choices on Central Arkansas. Participants begin by selecting their top five For more information, visit: priorities for the future and proceed to the next step. There they Urban Interactive Studio answer several questions and see how the choices affect their priorities in real time. At the end, participants can compare http://UrbanInteractiveStudio.com your results to others’ and then share them with your friends. To date more than 1000 participants have played the game. Common Sites The Imagine Central Arkansas project represents a new way of approaching public participation. The way technology was applied was simple and intuitive yet nuanced. The variety of methods of encouraging public input ensure that a wide variety of ideas will be heard throughout the transportation planning process as Metroplan moves forward into the next stages of imagining a better future for Central Arkansas.
http://CommonSights.com IdeaScale http://IdeaScale.com Choose Your Future http://future.imaginecentralarkansas.org/.
The author can be reached at geneva.faulkner@ucdenver.edu
SELECTED EVENTS OF INTEREST AT THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE This list is a selection of sessions concerning topics of interest to Technology Division members. A full searchable listing is available online at www.planning.org/conference/program/
Customizable Community Assessment Planning for Broadband Monday, 10:30 – 11:30 AM Monday, 1 – 2:15 PM Christopher Seeger Charles Kaylor, John Shepard, Ronald Thomas, Kathleen McMahon Modeling the Impacts of Transit Oriented Development in 3D Trends in GIS for Planners: Geodesign (Workshop) Monday, 4 – 5 PM Monday, 2 – 3:30 PM Shannon McElvaney, Eric Wittner
Division Discussion & Business Meeting Other Sessions Sunday, 10:30 AM – 11:45 AM Web-Based Fiscal Impact Modeling Tech Showcase Saturday, 4 – 5:15 PM Geodesign Strategies for Urban Planning Chris Haller, Doug Walker, Della Rucker Sunday, 10 – 11 AM Trends in GIS for Planners: Citizen Shannon McElvaney, Doug Walker Engagement/Gov 2.0 (Workshop) Digitizing the Local Planning Process Monday, 8 – 9:30 AM Sunday, 2:30 – 3:30 PM Sidewalk Data in the Age of the App: Christy Langley Tools for Asset Management Rethinking Community, Rethinking GIS Monday, 12 – 2 PM Monday, 9 – 10 AM Alice Grossman, Alexandra Frackelton Francine Ramaglia, Timothy Stillings, James Barnes
Mashups for Planning Monday, April 15, 2:30 PM - 3:45 PM Harsh Prakash (CM | 1.25) Emerging Trends/The Future of Planning Tuesday, 10:30 – 11:45 AM Eugenie Birch The Future of the Planning Profession Wednesday, 9 – 10:15 AM Frank Hebbert, Bradley Barnett, Peter Park, Ray Quay, Uri Avin
P½ ÄĮĦ Ä T «Äʽʦù TÊ ù - SÖٮĦ 2013
4
SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS IN PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESSES Brittany Kubinski and Jennifer Evans-Cowley, The Ohio State University City Planners are connecting places, people, information, and events through social media. How can we make sense of the tangle of connections that form our social networks? How can city planners grow to understand who they are reaching through social media and how they are connected? Social network analysis (SNA) is an analytic method for understanding the complexity of social networks, a need that is more important now than ever as the Internet and social media are changing the dynamic of public engagement. This article examines that the idea that networks of people that engage online through social media are a unique and distinct group of people from those that engage in onsite planning. To test this hypothesis, interviews with city planners combined with qualitative and quantitative analysis were undertaken. The results lead to strategies that city planners and others can adopt to further their public engagement efforts and aid in the stakeholder analysis stage of planning projects. Social network analysis views social relationships through detection of communities, defining a series of nodes and edges which represent the individuals within the social network, and traces the diffusion of information and dynamics of how opinions are formed. For this study, 20 Facebook city planning project pages were selected. NodeXL is an Excel-based software package that was used to download user activity from each Facebook page. Of these pages, three were selected for detailed case studies based on different levels of public participation. For each case study, a social network analysis was undertaken using Gephi, a graphic
visualization tool that utilizes 3D graphing to portray the connections and communities within a social network. After collecting the data, Nvivo and Ncapture, qualitative analysis tools, were used to analyze the content of what participants were communicating via the Facebook page. Using Nvivo, the comment and post activity was coded by whether or not it was engaging or sharing, and the level of activity surrounding any given post. Due to the complex nature of the social network data, interviews with the project planners were necessary to understand the degree to which those who are engaging online were or were not engaging offline in the planning project. A Facebook page can serve as a source of public engagement and outreach for an organization. Planners have found many ways to use their page for engaging the public as a method of sharing information, getting the public excited and gathering public input. This study has identified ways in which planners can use SNA software to enhance their public engagement efforts and identification of key stakeholders. Using SNA software, planners can identify key users online who are “influencers”. SNA can also help identify who the groups of users are on their Facebook page, and how these users connect to one another. The case studies show that the social network of an organizations Facebook page may differ from that of its stakeholder network. This provides organizations an opportunity to reach out to stakeholders who may have previously been left out of the planning process. While public meetings and in-person events are still important, as use of
ÊÄã®Äç ÊÄ Ö ¦ 6
BOOK REVIEW EVGENY MOROZOV. TO SAVE EVERYTHING, CLICK HERE: THE FOLLY OF TECHNOLOGICAL SOLUTIONISM. PUBLICAFFAIRS, NEW YORK, NY, 2013. 413 PAGES. $28.99. Karen Quinn Fung, Technology Division Secretary-Treasurer Evgeny Morozov’s second work sharpens the arguments he started to make in his first book, 2011’s The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. In this earlier work, he discussed how dictatorships used new technologies, arguing they do not necessarily lead to democratization. His new book crafts a comprehensive critique of how we currently talk about and consider the Internet and its impacts on our institutions and ways of relating. As the title alludes, Morozov’s subject is “solutionism” — our propensity to oversimplify and accept shallow interpretations of deeply complex problems based on the availability of technology-based ways of solving them. The chapters are structured to highlight certain propositions embedded in solutionism (such as our relationships with ourselves via self-tracking, politics and the responsibilities and rights of citizenship, open government, crime, and privacy). In these, Morozov weaves succinct critiques of the approaches,
assumptions and inevitable outcomes of various Internet-centric luminaries, as well as the technology media and journalism that ought to be questioning the breathless claims but, in practice, end up mostly repeating them. Perhaps Morozov’s most profound accomplishment with this book is to tie together a wide range of existing critical work from a number of fields into a cohesive, well-reasoned whole, drawing from, without needlessly dwelling on, the history of skepticism towards technology in the course of human development. He interrogates the purposes underpinning Internet-centric discourse, asking provocative question about the morals implied in our relationship to tools, gadgets and the complex systems being sold to us as liberating. To keep things varied, Morozov dots his arguments with occasional thought experiments describing how a tool or system might ask different things of
P½ ÄĮĦ Ä T «Äʽʦù TÊ ù - SÖٮĦ 2013
ÊÄã®Äç ÊÄ Ö ¦ 6
5
SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS (CONTINUED FROM PAGE 5) internet for connecting with others through social media rises, this will become an increasingly important part of an organizations public engagement process. SNA can also help organizations determine which of their posts have been most successful, and allow them to replicate this success by creating a strategy for their social media platform. Using SNA software, planners can identify reactions and responses to the posts they are sending out. Planners can also understand what types of information users respond most to, be it engaging posts where the organization asks for input or sharing posts where the organization shares information. The use of SNA software is also helpful for identifying key topics or emerging issues that the public finds most important.
This can expose planners to new stakeholders, as well as allow them to tailor their online engagement efforts. While there is crossover, those engaging online consist of users who are not attending public meetings and are choosing the online forum as their way of staying engaged. Knowing who you are connecting with online can allow planners to further their engagement efforts by taking the public meeting online to account for those who wish to engage that way. The authors can be reached at kubinski.6@buckeyemail.osu.edu and cowley.11@osu.edu
Selected References Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (n.d.). Gephi: An Currently, there is a large amount of literature on social open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. network analysis and its applications. This study has identified Available online: quantitative and qualitative results that help support SNA use https://gephi.org/publications/gephi-bastian-feb09.pdf for public engagement strategies. The use of SNA can allow an Hansen, D., Shneiderman, B., & Smith, M. A. (2011). organization to better target its engagement efforts as well as Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from identify key online stakeholders who are “influencers” of others a connected world. International Journal of Human-Computer online and can help expand the scope and exposure of a given Interaction, 27(4), 405-408. project. This research will help further the use of SNA software to practical applications in planning firms and agencies. Sederviciute, K., & Valentini, C. (2011). Towards a more While Facebook provides analytical information for page holistic stakeholder analysis approach. Mapping known and administrators, the use of SNA software allows planners to get undiscovered stakeholders from social media. International a more in-depth view of the success of their engagement and Journal of Strategic Communication, 5(4), 221-239. understand who they are reaching, rather than simply counting Wu, M. (2011). Quantifying Facebook engagement: More likes or analyzing the demographics of the users on the page. than just counting fans and likes. Lithosphere. Retrieved Many types of SNA software are open source and user friendly, from http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/science-of-socialgiving planners the ability to do high-level analysis of their blog/Quantifying-Facebook-Engagement-More-than-Justsocial network data with limited technical knowledge. SNA Counting-Fans-and/ba-p/26022 also allows planners to understand whom they are engaging and how those people relate to their offline stakeholder network.
BOOK REVIEW (CONTINUED FROM PAGE 5) and incremental change held by people with a vested interest in convincing us that the Internet and technology can cure anything that ails us, pointing to opportunities for us to exercise our sense of skepticism, curiosity and compassion. While his chapters on open government and politics are perhaps the most directly relevant to planners’ work, it is the chapter on algorithms (highlighting the perils of “information reductionism”) that points the way on how planners might come to probe the As practicing planners working with or interested in technology, proclamations of various emerging smart city methodologies. parts of this critique ought to be deeply familiar to us — in tone, if not in specific content. The communicative turn in planning Given the abundance of technology-based examples, parts of has long asked planners to interrogate how our expertise- the book will likely seem dated within a year or two. However, backed knowledge and methods are framed in light of long- its fundamental message — that human qualities like dignity term, broader desired outcomes for places and people, and to and autonomy ought not be sacrificed blindly for the whims be sensitive to the consequences of enshrining our aspirations and convenience of our technological tools — will undoubtedly and judgments in tools and code. Morozov asks us to see past remain relevant for a long while to come. claims of the Internet’s special status in history and the veiled The author can be reached at karen@countablyinfinite.ca. dismissiveness towards local action, government intervention
dots his arguments with occasional thought experiments describing how a tool or system might ask different things of us if its designers cared to incorporate broader definitions of human agency. This works at some times (like in the book’s final chapter) better than at others, but it does cast his work’s intent as being constructive, even if the book’s reputation may not indicate it as such.
P½ ÄĮĦ Ä T «Äʽʦù TÊ ù - SÖٮĦ 2013
6
BIG POVERTY QUESTIONS Rupert Douglas-Bate, Global MapAid In round numbers, there are about seven billion people in the world. The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) uses hunger as a poverty indicator and reports that an estimated 925 million of these go hungry – a full 13.1%, or almost one in seven people.
Currently, GMA, under the patronage of Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Desmond Tutu, is mapping micro-finance in Addis, Ethiopia, and vocational education by unemployment in the United Kingdom (UK) where both relative poverty and opportunity among the youth is high.
On the other hand, the World Bank (WB) looks at poverty using different indicators, often income-based. A frequently used indicator by them is the United States (US) $1.25 poverty gap, being the mean shortfall from the poverty line (counting the non-poor as having zero shortfall), and expressed as a percentage of the poverty line. This indicator reflects the depth of poverty as well as its incidence. Their data tends to be from three or four years ago, as it is collected from many self-reporting national statistical agencies - and that is a long time. The WB report - Global Economic Prospects (2010), published that about 1.4 billion people in the developing world, or one in four, were living on less than US $1.25 a day in 2005, down from about 1.9 billion, or one in two, in 1981.
But such Big Poverty reduction projects have yielded questions for the technology professionals: How can organizations use opensource GIS or wikis so that data can be collected by nonspecialist staff who often have a higher interest in its collection? Or, how can agencies like the WB use technology to publish topical data in about a year rather than publish it after three or four years? Or, how can organizations best use GIS to report poverty in terms of solutions, such as micro-finance or vocational training, rather than report it in terms of problems, such as low-income or hunger? Or, how can cartography be best used to present poverty?
Questions: ‘’Where there is no Vision, the people perish’’ Using Big Data, organizations like Global MapAid (GMA) are applying Geographic Information System (GIS) to a very narrow domain – fighting Big Poverty by pursuing sustainable job-creation. Such an approach is also consistent with the United Nations (UN) Millennium Development Goals. E.g.
A technology planner interested in equitable international planning needs to help answer these questions because that in turn could quicken the turn-around of map dashboards to the critical networks of private and public leaders who fight Big Poverty every day. If you have an answer, please email us. The author can be reached at info@globalmapaid.org.
Source: http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm
P½ ÄĮĦ Ä T «Äʽʦù TÊ ù - SÖٮĦ 2013
7
The Technology Division is charting the use of new technologies for the American Planning Association. Planners everywhere need to understand the use and planning implications of new systems: computer simulation, GIS, telecommunications, and computer-based information resources. Planning & Technology Today is the Division’s newsletter, bringing you current information that is useful for making decisions on how to use the new technologies. If you are presently a member of APA, it costs only $25 to join the Division; students $10; non-members $40. To Join: Send your name, address, and payment to: AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION LOCK BOX 97774 CHICAGO IL , 60678 You may also join at www.planning.org/joinapa
UPCOMING CONFERENCES American Planning Association National Conference April 13-17 Chicago, Illinois www.planning.org/conference/ APA Intelligent Cities Unconference April 17 Chicago, Illinois http://unconference.planning.org/ Building Leaders 2013 American Institute of Architects Convention June 20-22 Denver, CO convention.aia.org
INCOMING SECRETARY/TREASURER Karen Quinn Fung VANCOUVER PUBLIC SPACE NETWORK cproctor@co.forrest.ms.us
OUTGOING CHAIR Harsh Prakash SENIOR GIS MANAGER harsh@gisblog.org
NEWSLETTER BLOG CHAIR Rob Goodspeed MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY rob.goodspeed@gmail.com
INCOMING VICE CHAIR Nader Afzalan UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO BOULDER nader.afzalan@colorado.edu
NEWSLETTER EDITOR Stephen Chiaramonte, AICP PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF chiaramonte@pbworld.com
ESRI User Conference July 8-12 San Diego, California www.esri.com/events/user-conference/ Land Trust Alliance Rally Sept. 17-19 New Orleans, LA www.landtrustalliance.org/learning/rally Strata Conference Oct. 28-30, 2013 New York, NY http://strataconf.com/stratany2013 SOCIAL NETWORKING & NEW TECHNOLOGY CHAIR Ayanthi Gunawardana FORDHAM UNIVERSITY argunaw@gmail.com GIS CHAIR Corey Proctor FOREST COUNTY (MS) cproctor@co.forrest.ms.us CONFERENCE CHAIR VACANT
DIVISION LEADERSHIP
INCOMING CHAIR Kate McMahon APPLIED COMMUNICATIONS kate@appcom,net
Real CORP 2013: Planning Times May 20-23 Rome, Italy www.corp.at
MEMBERSHIP CHAIR VACANT
P½ ÄĮĦ Ä T «Äʽʦù TÊ ù - SÖٮĦ 2013
8