Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-15-2014 - 5ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 15, 2014 SUBJECT: Next Steps - Strategic Communications Plan DEPARTMENT: County Manager ATTACHMENT(S): Memorandum - Report on Board and Staff Interviews about a Strategic Communications Plan with Attachments Attachment A — Baseline Interview Questions Attachment B — Summary Report of Interviews Attachment C — Issues for Future Consideration Action Agenda Item No. 5 PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) No INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Talbert, 245 -2308 PURPOSE: To receive an update and provide comments on information recently gathered regarding the development of a Strategic Communications Plan for Orange County, and provide initial comments regarding the development of a proposed scope of services for the drafting of a Strategic Communications Plan. BACKGROUND: On January 31, 2014 the Board held a Retreat and discussed the need for an Orange County Strategic Communications Plan. The Board requested that the Manager provide a recommended strategy for a Communications Plan. On February 27, 2014 a Manager- appointed Communications Plan Committee met to discuss how the County could move forward with a Strategic Communications Plan. The Committee attempted to address the following questions- 1 . What is the role of the Board of County Commissioners in developing a Strategic Communications Plan? 2. What is the purpose of the plan? 3. Is there a need for a communications team approach and, if so, would the appointees to the team be staff, or staff and elected officials? 4. Will the Plan be a county -wide plan or a plan to address communications from the Board of County Commissioners? 5. Where and how does the Public Affairs office fit into the Plan? 6. How do individual County Departments fit into the plan and how would the plan govern the role of each individual department's communications and outreach programs? All of the questions identified could not be sufficiently addressed by staff and needed meaningful participation from the Board of County Commissioners. At the April 8, 2014 Board 2 work session, a Three Phase approach was recommended by the Manager to move the process of developing a Strategic Communications Plan toward to a successful conclusion. Three Phase Approach Phase One Identify and share with the Board Individual department public information strategies. Outlining the dedicated resources, communications tools, target audiences and how the department interacts with the Public Affairs Office. Status Update Staff provided these updates as part of the April 8, 2014 Board work session. Phase Two Engage Rod Visser or another School of Government professional to gather internal information by interviewing the Board and County staff to present a summary to the Board at a May, 2014 work session. The summary will outline Board of Commissioners' consensus regarding a Strategic Communications Plan, target audiences, communications tools, composition and purpose of a Communications Committee. Status Update At the Board's April 8, 2014 work session, the Board agreed that the County should engage Mr. Visser to gather internal information. Since April 8, Mr. Visser has met with County staff and held one -on -one meetings with all Board members to document the various thoughts, interests and expectations. The results of these discussions are outlined in the attachment. Also as a result of those discussions, Mr. Visser has provided a summary detailing a large number of issues for future consideration as the County moves forward on development of a Strategic Communications Plan. Phase Three With the assistance of Rod Visser or other School of Government professionals, draft a Strategic Communications Plan to be presented to the Board in September 2014. Status Update The development of a draft Strategic Communications Plan will move forward based on discussion and Board direction at this work session, with staff currently projecting that a draft Strategic Communications Plan can be presented to the Board in September 2014. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Mr. Visser was engaged to assist with moving the Strategic Communications Plan development process forward at a cost not to exceed $10,000. The scope of services approved by the Board for Phase Three will determine the total financial impact. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the update and provide comments on information recently gathered regarding the development of a Strategic Communications Plan for Orange County, and also provide initial comments regarding the development of a proposed scope of services for the drafting of a Strategic Communications Plan. K MEMORANDUM TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners Michael Talbert, Interim County Manager FROM: Rod Visser, Consultant SUBJECT: Report on Board and Staff Interviews about a Strategic Communications Plan DATE: May 8, 2014 Following discussion during the April 8, 2014 Board of Commissioners work session topic regarding a Strategic Communications Plan, the Board directed the Manager to ascertain the degree to which consensus may (or may not) exist regarding elements, purpose, responsibilities, communication tools, and target audiences that should be considered for incorporation at a future date in a possible Plan. The Manager asked me to gather this information through a series of interviews with Commissioners and staff. I conducted individual interviews with five County Commissioners, with the Director of Public Affairs, and with the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners. I also conducted a group interview involving staff members of various County departments that are currently involved in departmental public outreach efforts. The County Manager participated in that group discussion. Generally, I conducted the interviews around a series of baseline questions arranged under eight topic headings. That set of topics and questions is included for reference at Attachment A. In short, my findings are that there is a substantial degree of consensus among Commissioners and staff that there is value in developing and implementing an Orange County Strategic Communications Plan. I heard little or no indication that there are diametrically opposed or mutually exclusive points of view about any element of a Plan that would prove to be an insurmountable obstacle to obtaining an approved Plan. To be sure, there were differing viewpoints on a wide range of potential Plan elements — for example, regarding the precise composition and role of a strategic communications team. However, I would characterize those differences as the types that are likely to be satisfactorily worked through by focusing on underlying interests. I was struck by the degree of Commissioner and staff open- mindedness to consider alternatives, even when they have fairly strong opinions about a particular aspect of a Plan. With approximately 10 hours of interview time, I have purposefully not attempted to report everything I heard. Rather, my summary report (Attachment B) is organized around the eight topics that grouped the baseline interview questions. Under each topic, I offer my observations about specific points of consensus and major recurring themes that arose about that topic. I have also included in each section a set of bullet points that record or paraphrase individual respondent comments. Many of these were not necessarily recurring, and in some cases at odds with each other. However, each seemed important enough to me to make sure that the thought does not get lost with the passage of time. I hope that these individual comments might be helpful to Board members in formulating your decisions at this work session about how to proceed with a Strategic Communication Plan. I also created a list titled "Issues for Future Consideration" (Attachment C) with the intent that various "kernels of wisdom" raised by Commissioners and staff during interviews be preserved for review, discussion, and perhaps action by a communications team, should the Board decide to pursue that approach. Attachment A - Baseline Interview Questions Attachment B — Strategic Communications Plan Summary Report Attachment C - Issues for Future Consideration M Attachment A Updated 042414 STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN (SCP) BASELINE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS PURPOSE: What do you see as the purpose(s) of potentially having an Orange County Strategic Communications Plan? SCOPE: What do you think about the scope of the Plan? Should the Plan be a county -wide plan or a more narrowly drawn plan to address communications to and from the Board of County Commissioners? If it would be a county -wide plan, what thoughts do you have about how to involve County departments headed by other elected or appointed officials? BOCC ROLES: What do you see as an appropriate and desirable level of BOCC involvement in the (1) development; (2) approval; (3) implementation; and (4) ongoing oversight of apossible Strategic Communications Plan? Do you support the concept raised at the January 2014 BOCC retreat about taking a communications team approach? If so, would the composition be staff only? Staff and elected officials? Anyone else? DEPARTMENTAL ROLES: Where and how do the Public Affairs Office and individual County Departments fit into the Plan? How would the Plan govern the role of each individual department's communications and outreach programs? LESSONS LEARNED: Think of an example during your tenure as Commissioner when you feel the County did a particularly good job in communication outreach. What were the outcomes, characteristics, steps, and /or considerations involved that produced good results? Alternatively (or in addition), consider a situation where the County could have done better in its communications outreach. What was missing or could have been done differently to produce better results? PLAN ELEMENTS: Are there elements (tools /audiences /others) that you see as essential for inclusion in an Orange County Strategic Communications Plan? On the other hand, are there any elements that you think should be explicitly excluded or downplayed in a Plan? The Manager provided a draft outline for a Plan as part of the January 31, 2014 retreat agenda: are there sections or elements that you would suggest adding or excising from that outline, or does that seem like a reasonable starting point for fleshing out a full Plan? SUCCESS: What conditions or outcomes would need to prevail for you to feel that the County has a successful Communications Plan in place? Given that target audiences have so many things competing for their attention, how do you think the Board should balance effort /activity level vs. effectiveness in measuring success? COMPREHENSIVENESS: Are there any issues or points that we have not talked about in this conversation that you would like to raise for consideration during the planned May 2014 work session topic, or perhaps put in "the parking lot" for later consideration during Strategic Communications Plan Phase III (if the Board decides to proceed with that)? Attachment B Prepared 050814 SUMMARY REPORT OF INTERVIEWS ORANGE COUNTY STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN PURPOSE: There was no single specific purpose for a communications plan that was identified by multiple respondents. However, a wide range of thoughts were advanced that, taken broadly, reflect the view that the County and the Board should be proactively framing the message for the public. It is inappropriate and ineffective to be in a reactive mode of trying to fix incomplete or incorrect information that may be disseminated initially by media or by people who may not have the full picture. 1. "to make sure there is very good communication between the Board and citizens, so they know what we offer, what our priorities are, how to communicate with us, and so they have an understanding of the process by which we make our decisions, how they can best fit in, and how we can include them" 2. absolutely involves two way communication 3. for outreach efforts, there ought to be some clearinghouse and coordination and common elements 4. importance of "transparency ", so community knows when and why we're meeting, what's on agenda 5. need to develop a plan for coordinating information during a crisis 6. to enhance communication between Board members and the rest of Orange County government, including employees 7. provide more direct means for the Board to shape the County's message 8. all the objectives from the draft 1999 plan; the 4 principles in the January 31, 2014 draft outline; and the Town of Chapel Hill's Communications Strategy goal statement about "increased public awareness and participation" - taken together, these describe what a Plan should be doing 9. engage the public with how our government is here for the public good 10. "humanize the County" 11. results of staff "word association" exercise on purposes of a Plan: consistency; quality; vision; flexibility; public relations; priorities; some structure; communication about the County; transparency; apolitical; unified message (after the vote is taken) 12. having a Plan will force us to be proactive rather than reactive — how do we lead on an issue instead of getting bombarded by the same questions? SCOPE: There is consensus among Board and staff that the Plan should be county -wide in focus. A number of respondents noted that within that broad focus there should be room to specifically address communications to and from the Board of Commissioners and the public. There was also general consensus that County departments headed by elected or appointed officials should be invited to participate in the process of developing a County -wide plan, with modest variations in outlook about exactly where in the process those officials and departments should provide input. 1. primary focus should be on the broader Plan; but it would be nice to know what's on citizens' minds, and in that sense, the Plan should be between Commissioners, the Clerk, and the public 2. should invite elected /appointed department heads to participate if they want to 3. better to get broad Board agreement on some goals and come up with a "top order" Plan; we would then go through the broad outline systematically and then flesh it out 4. there should be a broad countywide plan that includes communication to and from the BOCC 5. "don't let perfect be the enemy of good "; "if it's important to do, it's important to do it well, but it doesn't have to be perfect" Attachment B Prepared 050814 6. need to get everybody at table to figure out what is best 7. do a simple format and action plan and later do something more elaborate 8. there are 2 different plans; an overriding vision of what the Board wants, but then information that different departments are sharing with citizens — "I don't want to be involved in that" 9. how departments operationalize their information should be part of the overall plan 10. "we need a plan, we really do, but maybe not as big and wide as some of the other sample plans we looked at" 11. we have not had clear discussion about the role of the Board — what communication reflects the Board as a whole vs. what represents staff communicating with the public? 12. concerned about unrealistic expectation that a Plan will solve all of our framing problems; no matter what we do, some people out there will emotionally have a different frame and will react negatively BOCC ROLES: There was clear consensus among Commissioners interviewed that the Board should have a role in the development, approval, and ongoing oversight of the Plan. There was strong sentiment broadly expressed that evaluation of what is working and not working in the Plan should be the subject of regular, formal review and that Board and staff must be willing to amend the Plan repeatedly to encompass new technologies and tools and to address demonstrated shortcomings of the Plan. There was universal agreement that there should be a communications team approach, without unanimity about the precise composition of that team. There was support among some for the concept of including 2 Commissioners on the team, but also some ambivalence among both Board members and staff about how Commissioners should best contribute to the development and oversight aspects of the Plan. Several Commissioners and staff expressed the importance of Commissioner participation not intimidating staff. There was no significant interest in having outside entities involved in developing or evaluating a Plan, except perhaps upon invitation on an occasional, ad hoc basis. 1. team could include 2 Commissioners - perhaps one who lives in town, and one who doesn't 2. importance of getting all folks who currently fulfill an outreach function in departments and get them involved 3. don't want only departments that currently have outreach resources represented on the communications team - want other departments involved to bring "fresh ideas" 4. OK to have a strategic communication plan, but be aware it's going to change so rapidly 5. should be quarterly updates to the Plan 6. consider the first year a pilot project with the intent to bring back for evaluation; after a while, oversight might be less often 7. Commissioners are out there in community so much and get hit with many different types of issues - we may have insights or sensitivity to community that staff people won't necessarily have 8. after a Plan is adopted, would keep the working group for ongoing meeting; when talking about quarterly updates, we need to know what worked and what didn't work 9. we're in charge of the messaging, and we need to be ahead of the information and get it out 10. the Board should be involved in development and approval; not in implementation, departments need to do that 11. "we need a working group that sometimes invites other experts" 12. communication team needs staff because of their knowledge of day to day operations - need their input regarding protocol and equipment 13. use staff and Commissioners on the team, then have a review process when it is almost in final form (e.g. run it by any advisory board linked to a department) 14. recommend rotating commissioners on team so same commissioner is not on year after year 7 Attachment B Prepared 050814 15. don't want staff to be intimidated by commissioners — if team includes commissioners, have effort be staff directed and not commissioner directed 16. for the communications team, "one Commissioner is not enough, two is good" DEPARTMENTAL ROLES: Most respondents seemed to settle on the view that the Public Information function should report to the County Manager. Several mentioned the importance, however, of having effective coordination between the Manager, Public Affairs, the Clerk, and the Board. There appears to be a lack of understanding about the roles and responsibilities of the Public Affairs Officer. Several observers noted that this may be attributable to having created a position before having an approved communications plan in place. If the Board decides to proceed with developing a countywide Plan, that may provide an opportunity to redefine the roles of the Public Information Officer (PIO) to fit with the Plan that is specifically adopted by the County. I believe it would be quite beneficial if the Board and all staff can develop a common understanding of the responsibilities of the PIO. The most common theme I heard regarding public outreach by individual departments is that those departments need to have considerable autonomy to carry out their public information responsibilities based on their professional competencies, while adhering to a set of overarching principles and standards established in a Board adopted Plan. 1. do not want to make a plan on how a given department gets its information out; that needs to coordinate with our overall message 2. don't want to micromanage how departments get their information out unless it's not working — that's why you would have quarterly updates 3. when it comes time to communicate with citizens, we need the help of our PIO 4. important for the new manager to be part of this process so they'll be able to feel more ownership 5. PIO should not control departments; departments must have flexibility because what they do is so dramatically different — one person cannot know all that; a standard policy will squelch innovation from some of the departments 6. would be individual department responsibility to adhere to broad standards with some flexibility on how they implement 7. need to identify the role of PIO in emergency situations 8. there should be a phone number for central information dissemination, answered either by a human or by a machine that doesn't ask a lot of questions 9. need to have chain -of- command clearly understood 10. could retool the role of the PIO to make sense with the plan we're going to implement 11. communications team should go to all departments regardless of whether they have specialists and see what they want to see in this plan LESSONS LEARNED: There was considerable concern expressed by most Commissioners that in a number of recent severe weather situations, the County has not been proactive or effective in disseminating timely, accurate, and helpful information to audiences needing that information. The existing County website is widely viewed as being severely flawed, cumbersome and not particularly intuitive, and not very "public- friendly ". Several Commissioners and staff cited the positive impacts on communication to and from the public from using Twitter and Facebook (e.g. live tweeting from Board of Health meetings) — some others acknowledged benefits while expressing some concerns about potential drawbacks as well. 1. "if you're following the Board of Health tweeting you actually feel like you're in the meeting" 2. we should always be ahead of our communications 3. we shouldn't allow the media to be introducing our topics to the public —that's our job 8 Attachment B Prepared 050814 4. over and over again we get burnt because we're allowing others to control our message 5. if we had been more proactive explaining what we were doing and the steps we were taking to reach a conclusion on financing our recycling programs, people would not have been so mad - we didn't correct the information that was being put out that was wrong 6. 2009 revaluation as an example of County being "reactive rather than proactive" 7. anytime you have something that is controversial and /or complex, maybe its just consciously thinking through how you're going to do the whole thing, including your communication piece, step by step; and how you're going to explain it; then explain it at the beginning and set the frame 8. during emergency situations, all elected officials should be made aware with reasonable (not minute to minute) updates so that if someone calls them, they can be reasonably knowledgeable for those citizens 9. with regard to getting information out to neighborhoods, we need to do better job of communicating about development in their area and about public hearings 10. would be good to have a more general exposure on how to frame issues for staff and commissioners — get a research based understanding 11. "framing is not to mislead people - framing should be in line with your philosophy" 12. what happens in meetings should not be the only perception the public has 13. the solid waste district tax got framed as an individual service provided by Orange County - but this is about a program to reduce the waste stream, not about an individual service to pick up your recycling 14. historically, a lot of information prepared for meetings is for an audience that is the Board of Commissioners — now we need to do a better job of making it public friendly, even though the issues are very complicated; professionals need to recognize an audience beyond the Board 15. some pre- conceived notions about the southern branch library were not true at all — you have to be prepared to change your mind based on the education you have received PLAN ELEMENTS: There was general consensus that the draft Plan outline provided by the Manager for consideration by the Board at the January 31, 2014 retreat is a good starting point for developing a fleshed -out Plan. Common themes I heard were that the County should use the broadest possible array of tools in its communication outreach efforts, and that tools used in any particular situation should be tailored to the needs and characteristics of primary intended audiences. There was strong emphasis among respondents of the importance during emergency or crisis situations of the Plan addressing communications to /from /between the Board, staff, public, and other partners (e.g. the Towns). There is considerable appreciation of the value of social media tools in communications between the County and the public, but some ambivalence in some quarters about the costs that may come along with the benefits of using social media. That said, I think there was enough open- mindedness expressed by those with reservations to feel confident that a communications team can develop appropriate parameters and guidelines to make social media tools a highly effective component in a Plan. There was broad sentiment among Commissioners that while press releases have an appropriate place in the toolbox, the County's current approach to using them to disseminate County- related news is not as engaging and effective as it should be. 1. there is a wealth of opportunity there with the cable TV tool 2. the County website really needs to be your first tool 3. tweeting — if you want to do it, OK, but don't rely on it, don't make it a cornerstone 4. need crossjurisdictional cooperation and collaboration 5. use different media for different audiences 6. "utilize widest possible variety of communication methods and vehicles at lowest possible cost" 9 Attachment B Prepared 050814 7. individual commissioners should not try to interject their own views — the message needs to come from the County as a vision of the majority of Commissioners 8. one aspect of a Plan is sitting down and writing out what you already do 9. media relations policy section could become either unwieldy or too brief, maybe shoot for something that is "long enough to cover the subject and short enough to be interesting" 10. input from citizens and Commissioners regarding the County website needs to be continual 11. absolutely should be a component related to measuring success 12. need employees to understand what County is doing so they can be knowledgeable and be ambassadors 13. improving relationships among emergency departments should be at forefront 14. consistent brand should be part of our communication SUCCESS: Discussion here focused on how to balance empirical information vs. visceral or anecdotal information in evaluating the relative effectiveness of a Plan. Broadly, respondents tended to note the desirability, but difficulty, of trying to judge success empirically. It is important to develop and report performance measures within the County's resources to do so. A number of respondents noted the value of less formal measures or indicators of a Plan having positive impacts, such as an increase in compliments from members of the public, evidence of greater public awareness and understanding of County programs /policies /events, and a reduction in expressed anger by the public when the Board is dealing with complex and /or controversial subjects. 1. get out positive, proactive messages on various themes (e.g. education, environment, solid waste) 2. first of all, there needs to be a Plan! 3. if you don't have negative publicity and people aren't yelling at you 4. if we get more people telling us we did a good job on something or an employee explained something really well 5. Plan must have goals and objectives, a vision, and mission statement 6. citizens coming to meetings to give us input as opposed to them coming and yelling at you because you're doing something wrong is a kind of barometer 7. "when topics are non - controversial, then you could say we did a good job" 8. anecdotal evidence can be useful; the challenge is that no matter what you say factually, some people will still believe what they want to believe; communication success is very hard to measure 9. "sometimes even a data driven person like me has to accept that you can't have all the empirical measures" 10. results of staff "word association" with "what feels like success" — public engagement; inclusion; informed; fluid; limited backlash; democratic; proactive vs. reactive COMPREHENSIVENESS: This heading was intended to get at points important to Commissioners or staff that were not elicited by the questions set out under the other topic headings. Any issues raised that did not seem to me to fall clearly under a different heading are captured on the "Issues for Future Considerations" list at Appendix C. My thought process in setting up this section was to ensure that any comments or observations that do not need to be addressed in the immediate present (i.e. at the May 15 work session) should be preserved for consideration by a strategic communications team one or three or six months down the road. Various" kernels of wisdom" raised during the interviews are thus recorded and may be evaluated further down the road for incorporation into a draft Plan. Attachment C 10 Prepared 050814 ORANGE COUNTY STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN ISSUES FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION 1. role of Twitter — OK for some to use it and others not - how to encourage more use of this while respecting individual right not to do so 2. concerned with two way communication 3. help people understand what Orange County government does not do (e.g. roads, courts, schools) 4. concerns about not having a plan that is so long that it doesn't get used — preference for a shorter plan 5. develop a protocol for hierarchy of responsibility for shaping the Orange County message — when is it a departmental responsibility, when the Manager's responsibility, when the Board of Commissioners' responsibility, when shared 6. need to consider certain departmental protocols 7. if people know there's a place to call, a website to look at, a radio station to listen to, the burden is also on them somewhat to use those 8. importance of two way communication in emergency situations so people know who to call, especially low income folks who can't afford a generator or to stay at a hotel 9. don't plan what to put in, plan what to keep out — since you don't know what may be coming down the pipeline 10. community listening sessions — if something is going to happen in an area, we can go out there, for example to a community center, as a way to exchange ideas without limiting folks to 3 minutes; this reinforces the two way street notion 11. not how many press releases you put out, but how many satisfied customers do you have? 12. how many complaints do you get, how many do you resolve? how many phone calls are you getting? 13. could do a survey — did you hear? how did you hear? 14. if you don't know where you're going, how will you get there? 15. need to build on brand — it says who we are, and represents who we are; the Board has approved a logo, we just need to build on it 16. the Public Affairs Office and budget can be an asset that supplements departmental budgets for public outreach 17. make sure the public knows that a particular function is a County function 18. employees don't have a great idea of what goes on; maybe get them David Hunt's meeting summaries 19. press releases are OK, but they need to tell a story to humanize the County 20. Rants and Raves" button on a county website to let manager know what residents liked or didn't like 21. PIO should report to the County Manager but with some check so the Board has some review capacity - perhaps through the Manager's annual review process or some semi - annual meeting with the Board 22. periodic roundtable of departmental public outreach people on what they're up to, how they can help each other; should include PIO 23. other departments should meet w /PIO for help 24. show meeting agenda at bottom of cable TV screen 25. during recent severe weather situations, OC did nothing to be a "community bulletin board" -was incredibly frustrating to not help people with information — would be great community service to do so Attachment C 11 Prepared 050814 26. Town of Chapel Hill's periodic "Citizen Satisfaction Study" — interesting idea and one way to measure market penetration 27. examine how University sports departments are creating their own media portals 28. Orange County has no live content except press releases — what if somebody was tweeting everyday and it appeared on the webpage and folks could get the Twitter feed and you felt like there was some consciousness reaching out to you if you got on the website 29. need to target what your media outlets are to see what impact you have made on their coverage — do you intrigue them enough so they are interested? 30. create "an introduction protocol" - have some strategy for introducing new manager to the County; maybe also for key new department heads and new Commissioners 31. use gender neutral language in all communications 32. careful framing of an issue, e.g. "tax assistance" vs. "tax relief' 33. careful use of abbreviations and acronyms 34. if you solicit public input, you should make clear how you're going to use it 35. sometimes people say or act like "you didn't listen to me if you don't do what I said" 36. you should definitely be willing and able to change your behavior depending on what was said by the public 37. how do you get out "important information" to folks in more rural parts of Orange County (e.g. about changes in county line) vs. getting out "urgent" information (e.g. in case of emergencies); may be a role for volunteer fire departments? 38. important to push information out because people are retweeting 39. use of checklists when performing outreach activities 40. part of plan is to have ways to let people know they aren't being forgotten in emergency situations 41. during emergencies, should be a central location where all info is gathered and that person should have all the information 42. let's share information between jurisdictions and assume we all need to take care of the emergency together 43. must build community by getting people connected 44. Town of Chapel Hill surveyed people about how they wanted to be communicated to 45. PIO would be central figure for departments to go to make sure information gets to Commissioners 46. it's important for Commissioners to at least be aware that Twitter is out there — should have some way of knowing what people are saying about him or her 47. contrast between" information item" and "press release" 48. if message didn't get out despite our efforts, need to discuss where it broke down; what did we learn? what do we change? if we did A, B, and C, do we need a D? 49. get ahead on the conversation about the need to build a new jail 50. telling individual stories of how someone was helped by a particular program causes people to attribute that to the person's motivation; you don't engage them on the need for the program nor engage them on policy; research shows the individual story does not engage people 51. some people who are doing the framing may not have an understanding from psychological point of view of the public about how to frame 52. "people don't make decisions on facts — they play some role but people make decisions on their emotional reactions - how do you reach people in their hearts ?" 53. press releases are needed but there's a much bigger issue we're not dealing with head on — the emotional part of how to reach people; trying to paint the global picture rather than the focus on the individual 54. working group should partly be a continuing education group Attachment C 12 Prepared 050814 55. "if we have too many expectations on one person, we're doomed regarding our communications strategy" 56. website and access to advisory board minutes is poor - there should be some standards that a work group develops 57. we should have minutes up on the website promptly, even if as draft — such inconsistency between departments on how fast they post minutes 58. there is no contact information for advisory board members 59. Plan should recognize that County staff need to have training on how to better communicate with the public through the Commissioners 60. are there any parameters that need to be set regarding an Orange County policy on staff use of social media so it doesn't interfere with their roles as public officials? 61. are there ways to better let public know we have listened, but don't agree? 62. use of "dashboards" so we can show through performance indicators that we are making our county better 63. Town of Chapel Hill has won a lot of awards for the way they communicate 64. how are you going to communicate when you have no electrical power, no Internet service? 65. concern that if this plan is too encompassing and too homogeneous it will be detrimental to us providing quality service to the public - one aspect of that is the administrative processes that get superimposed on the basic work processes that in turn take more time and effort and introduce delays into the work we're already doing 66. piggybacking social media from one department to another department may lead followers of one department to "defriend" because they don't want to be bothered with the piggybacked department - there may be powerful unintended consequences 67. one of the great things about social media is it gives people a lot of freedom about what they choose to connect with or not connect with 68. there are differences between a "spokesperson" and a "public affairs officer" 69. corporations have their own brand promotions, actively advertising a wide range of product lines at the same time they're promoting their brands, but trying to do it in a mutually complimentary way 70. other entities all adhere to a certain standard; can help raise the level and sophistication of communications; can help departments to raise their games to fit into the standard that has been set 71. balance coordination with autonomy 72. funding for communication people to have the resources without having to use their own equipment all the time; people aren't just on Facebook and Twitter from 8 to 5 — 7 to l Opm is when people use those most 73. mental checklists; idea of using a flow chart 74. may be a journey more than a destination — Plan development will be an educational journey 75. what are the implications of one commissioner live tweeting — is it perceived as representative of the whole board? 76. don't create a new plan for every major issue that arises — "the Plan is the Plan" 77. BOCC needs their own way to communicate with the public about those critical issues of governance, but there are ways to do that that are not at the expense of organizational capacities to do communications about government and our different product lines and services 78. BOCC questions and challenges about library services plan made the plan better 79. for the message to come out from "the Board ", you can't have seven individual commissioners all sending out messages saying "do this, do this" - all Board decisions have to be made in open session, so it's really complicated to come up with a "Board message" working under the legal requirements of open meetings