|
Public participation is a key component to strategic planning processes. Citizen participation offers citizens the chance to voice their ideas, interests, and opinions. The Federal Emergency Management Agency also requires public input during the development of mitigation plans.
The City of Glendale Local Hazards Mitigation Plan integrates a cross-section of citizen input throughout the planning process. To accomplish this goal, the Glendale Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee developed a public participation process that consisted of four main components: (1) development of a project Steering Committee comprised of knowledgeable individuals from City agencies that are already tasked with natural hazard reduction programs and that are representative of the community; (2) stakeholder interviews to obtain input from specific individuals with expertise in or knowledgeable about natural hazards and their impact on populations at risk; (3) public workshops and meetings to identify common concerns and ideas regarding hazard mitigation and to discuss specific goals and actions of the mitigation plan, and (4) publication of the Draft Plan in the City's Web site with links that allow for public comment and input regarding the document. Furthermore, integrating public participation during the development of the City of Glendale Local Hazards Mitigation Plan and the City's Long Range Planning efforts has ultimately resulted in increased public awareness. Through citizen involvement, the Mitigation Plan reflects community issues, concerns, and new ideas and perspectives on mitigation opportunities and plan action items.
Steering and Advisory Committees:
Hazard mitigation in the city of Glendale is overseen by the Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee. This committee includes representatives from various City departments, and other public agencies. A smaller group of members from the Advisory Committee form the Steering Committee. These committee members have an understanding of how the community is structured and how residents, businesses, and the environment may be affected by natural hazard events. The Advisory Committee guided the development of the Plan, and assisted in developing plan goals and action items, identifying stakeholders, and sharing local expertise to create a more comprehensive Plan. The Steering Committee has provided the resources necessary to prepare the Plan, and is tasked with the implementation and review of the Plan's effectiveness.
Table B.1 below lists the various organizations represented in the City of Glendale Natural Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee:
Process Followed:
Disaster mitigation planning in the city of Glendale has been an ongoing process since at least April 2001, when the City put out a Request for Proposals to update their Safety Element of the General Plan. Earth Consultants International, Inc. responded to and won the bid to prepare this document for the City. The contract was signed on March 12, 2002, and work on the Safety Element began immediately thereafter. A kick-off meeting was conducted on April 24, 2002 at the offices of the City's Planning Department to introduce the consultant and City staff that would work on the project. This meeting was also designed to identify and address key issues of concern to City staff regarding disaster planning and response, with an emphasis on areas in the city particularly vulnerable to natural hazards. Based on this meeting, the initial draft of the Technical Background Report to the Safety Element was prepared and submitted in August 2002 for review by City staff. An internal meeting with personnel from the Planning Department was held on August 26, 2002, and another meeting to receive input from the rest of the Safety Element review committee was held on September 23, 2002. Based on discussions with the review committee, the report was expanded to more thoroughly describe the wildfire hazard in the city, and the City's existing programs to deal with this hazard. Less substantial modifications were made to other sections of the report, typically in the form of additional information provided by various City departments in response to the first draft.
Once the second draft of the Technical Background Report was completed and reviewed, a Community Open House meeting was held on April 14, 2003. Oversized printouts of all of the hazard maps prepared for the Safety Element (the same hazard maps included with this document) were placed around the conference room at the Planning Department (633 E. Broadway), either on easels or pinned to the wall, to allow for easy viewing by the participants. The consultant was present to answer any questions. Unfortunately, approximately only about eight individuals attended this event. Therefore, the Planning Department took the presentation "on the road," addressing various homeowners association and real estate groups, and members of the local Chamber of Commerce. Concurrent with these activities, the Safety Element Review Committee took on the task of prioritizing the action items (policies and programs) that the consultant submitted as part of the Draft Safety Element. The City of Glendale opted to be very proactive - each policy statement is the Safety Element identifies the agency responsible for implementation and the timeline for implementation, similar to the requirements of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, but not typical of most California Safety Elements of the General Plan. Televised presentations (broadcast on Glendale's community television channel - GTV6) were given to the Glendale's Planning Commission on September 8, 2003. Then, on October 7, 2003, Glendale's updated Safety Element was adopted by City Council, following a televised presentation by personnel of the City's Planning Department and the consultant to City Council members.
Work on the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan began in 2005, following presentation of a proposal by Earth Consultants International, Inc. to the City in 2004. The consultant and the Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee started preparation of the Plan by holding a kick-off meeting on May 2, 2005. The following paragraphs summarize the results of this meeting, and subsequent meetings held between the consultant and the Advisory Committee.
Meeting #1: May 2, 2005, 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.
The purpose of this kick-off meeting was to set in motion the process to create the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan for the City of Glendale, as required by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The attendees are listed in Table B.2, below. The consultant presented a PowerPoint presentation that described the requirements of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, and the work already accomplished with preparation of the 2003 Safety Element. The function of the City in regards to the Plan and public input and process was discussed. Members of the committee were interviewed, via a written questionnaire, regarding information on existing hazard mitigation efforts within their own divisions and organizations, and ideas on how to best conduct the public outreach requirements of this project. The information obtained from these individuals was reviewed and compiled as part of this effort, and is included herein as an attachment to this appendix. Ways to gather public input, an important part of the process, were suggested, such as the use of the City's cable television channel, City's website, and flyers for distribution to citizen groups.
Meeting No. 2: December 15, 2005
This meeting of the Glendale Hazard Advisory Committee was held in the workroom of the Emergency Operations Center. Individuals who attended this meeting are listed in Table B.4 below.
This meeting was held after the Draft Plan had been submitted to the Advisory Committee for review, although not all members had had the opportunity to read the document. The main topics of meeting included: 1) review of the contents of the Plan, 2) format used, 3) preparation and prioritization of the action items, and 4) steps necessary to complete the Plan and get approval from FEMA. The consultant gave a PowerPoint presentation describing each of these main topics. It was discussed that the format of the document followed closely the format previously used by other communities that had already submitted their Plans to FEMA and had received approval from FEMA, and as a result, it appeared prudent to follow the same. Committee members were tasked with reviewing the draft action items proposed by the consultant and to develop new action items as they saw fit, and prioritize the action items based on a perceived need for implementation and the resources available to do so.
Over the course of the next few months, the various City departments represented in the Advisory Committee did just that. Captain Eric Indermill from the Glendale Fire Department was tasked to direct and facilitate this effort. Captain Indermill met with the consultant on April 13, 2006 to discuss the public participation process and action item needs. Following this meeting, Captain Indermill contacted all the City departments involved in the process to obtain their input and feedback. He then forwarded the information received to the consultant, who incorporated it into the second draft of Section 4, Goals and Action Items. Captain Indermill also obtained and forwarded a copy of Glendale Memorial Hospital's Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan to the consultant for review and use as appropriate.
Public Meetings:
As shown above, Glendale's Local Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan is the result of a collaborative effort between various City Departments and their consultant, and public agencies and non-profit organizations in the Glendale area. This section discusses how the voices of the private sector and local citizens have also been considered in the process. Essentially, public participation played a key role in the development of goals and action items. Information regarding the various natural hazards that can impact the city of Glendale has been made available to the public in a variety of forums since 2003, when the City's Safety Element of the General Plan was updated. This Plan builds on the work begun in 2003; the chapters on natural hazards are similar to those in the Technical Report to the Safety Element, but additional information on each of these hazards, formatted in accordance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) requirements for these documents, is included herein.
Presentations to various stakeholders have been made across the city, both as part of the original Safety Element work, and for this project. The Draft version of the Plan was posted on the City's website to allow for, and provide ongoing citizen/stakeholder information and participation. A link to post comments and questions regarding the Draft document was provided on the City's website. Finally, and most importantly, the City of Glendale held 13 meetings as part of its Long Range Planning process (see Table B.5). These meetings, although not originally designed to address the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, were used as a springboard to present specific aspects of the Plan to the public, and to receive public input.
The meetings were announced through several media, including local newspapers, the City's website, and flyers. The flyers were printed in English, Armenian and Spanish; translation services were provided at the meetings to involve all attending the event. To increase participation, the City offered door prices, refreshments and child care. The meetings were also broadcast on Charter Cable (GTV6), and two call-in shows were also held, the first on January 19, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. and the second on February 2, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Combined, a total of more than 600 people attended these meetings.
Results:
Specific comments - transcribed directly from the hand-written notes - received from the public regarding the City's efforts to prepare its Local Hazard Mitigation Plan are provided below. In most cases, the comments refer to the question posed to the local residents in attendance at these meetings regarding how much value they placed on safety and where they want the City to invest future resources. The common thread to these comments is that Glendale's residents want the City to invest more on disaster preparedness.
- Disaster preparedness.
- This is the core function of any municipality. Should be #1 priority.
- Educate about disaster preparedness. Community safety for children (ie. Walking to school).
- The City needs to be able to respond to residents in a more timely manner during a disaster.
- Disaster awareness/drill for residents.
- Help neighborhoods establish disaster preparation schemes.
- Does the city have a disaster plan? Money from federal government.
- There is an urgent need to expand disaster preparedness. i.e. The ability to respond in a major earthquake. Volunteer resources (C.E.R.T.) needs to be pushed with a major city campaign.
- Living in earthquake country, the city must be prepared for major disasters. If the city is looking 7 years ahead, terrorism must be considered.
- More disaster training for local residents.
- Glendale is doing a pretty good job with community safety, but I think that we have to communicate and improve more about disaster preparedness.
- Disaster preparedness is very important.
- Support police/fire - new paramedic and disaster preparedness.
- What disaster plan??
- (Translated from Spanish) I think It's important to prepare for disasters.
- City should encourage neighborhoods to become organized and self-reliant for disaster preparedness.
- In relations with emergency funds, disaster funds and building safety and code compliance is important to protect our city from having to come up with large amounts of money when a building falls or a disaster occurs. By preparing funds set for disasters, we're protecting our city and our citizens and as far as building safety and code compliance, we'd be saving money by putting attention towards quality of the buildings instead of spending money to fix buildings that aren't built correctly and safely.
- With all concerns on natural disasters and collapsing buildings, we need to make stronger walls to protect and it should be made stronger.
- CPR and 1st for disaster preparedness classes.
- Disaster preparedness should be a focus.
- One never knows what can happen. Ever since 9/11 unknown weather disasters, floods and earthquakes.
- City of Glendale needs more places for training nurses or other medical fields.
- Be prepared financially for emergencies and disasters.
- Is Glendale prepared in case of a disaster like Katrina?
- Emergency prep. Business retention.
- Support the decision to increase police presence especially in traffic enforcement. Get the full additional 100 cops. Execute the decision already in place fund it. Make sure Glendale gets every available state and federal $ to spend on police, fire & disaster preparedness.
- Disaster preparedness.
- Educate about disaster preparedness.
- There is an urgent need to expand disaster preparedness. ie. The ability to respond in a major earthquake. Volunteer resources (C.E.R.T.) needs to be pushed with a major city campaign.
|
