Res21 16010 final - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

the plan. This would be clearly explained in Chapter 6 of the plan that defined the methodologies applied for the risk assessment of the plan. Public Outreach Strategy: The Public Outreach strategy for this plan update process should be framed with an equity lens, and strive to include the following elements that can be completed within the expedited timeline:  Provide information in easy to digest form and ensure the understanding of information shared by the community at large  Promote diverse community participation. This should be done through the identification of, and outreach to, trusted community-based organizations.  Utilize trusted messengers: similar to above  Translate outreach materials  Meet people where they are  Transparent process: We have included the Tt-produced graphic to show which step in the process we are in (added to website). The steering committee meetings will be open to the public, two resident surveys, and resident public meetings.  Provide the public with links to other relevant websites that the County wants to promote. Optional Elements Risk Ranking: Volume 1, Part II, Chapter 19 of the plan currently has a risk ranking protocol that defines “risk” as Probability x Impact where impacts are defined as the impact on the people, property, economy and environment of a planning area. Metrics have been defined for each component that result in each hazard getting is risk score, so that the hazards that were fully assessed can be compared. Risk ranking in this plan takes place on 2 fronts. First, the hazards are ranked for the entire planning area using aggregate data from the risk assessment. Next, each planning partner will rank the risk for their specific jurisdiction utilizing risk assessment data specific to their jurisdiction. Recommendation: As an optional element, Tetra Tech would recommend establishing 2 versions of the risk ranking protocol. One version would be the standard protocol that is currently being applied under the 2016 plan. The other, would enhance that protocol to include a social vulnerability element utilizing FEMA’s National Risk Index (NRI). So, for example:  Standard Protocol: Probability x (impacts on People + Property + Economy)  Enhanced Protocol: Probability x {impacts on (People + NRI Social Vulnerability Rating) + Property + Economy} The enhanced protocol would need to be developed by Tetra Tech looking at appropriate weighting to the metrics (the NRI social vulnerability rating). The results for both approaches would be categorized as “high, medium or low”. The objective for this duel process would be for it to seamlessly integrate into the planning process without creating any delays in the process. It is important to note that having 2 options for ranking risk would create 2 different scoring regimes for the ranking of risk. However, as long as these metrics are clearly defined and protocols established, it should not lead to any confusion within the plan or the planning partnership. Action Planning: Each planning partner is required to identify and prioritize at least 1 action that addresses each hazard that was ranked as “high” under the risk ranking protocol defined for the plan. This does not mean that the action plan is limited to only addressing high ranked hazards, it just means that it must at a minimum. For those planning partners that were covered under the 2016 plan, they must fully reconcile their actions from the