My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
090115
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2015 3:02:45 PM
Creation date
8/26/2015 3:02:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/1/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Tri-Valley Water Roundtable Discussion Notes Page 4 <br /> relations with the media, routinely responded to questions, and was proactive in <br /> making sure the media had the correct information. <br /> Group Discussion on Public Outreach <br /> In order to facilitate workshop discussion, participants were asked to answer the following four <br /> questions in small groups: <br /> 1. Should the agencies agree to jointly participate in an active public outreach effort, and <br /> how might this effort be structured? <br /> 2. If the need for IPR is confirmed by the Zone 7 water supply evaluation, should public <br /> outreach begin in the fall, or wait until a further study is completed and why? <br /> 3. List the key political,business and community leaders or organizations that should be <br /> the focus of early outreach efforts. <br /> 4. How should elected officials support the public outreach effort? <br /> A summary of the overall discussion that occurred in relation to each individual question is <br /> presented below. <br /> Discussion of Question 1: Should the agencies agree to jointly participate in an active public outreach <br /> effort, and how might this effort be structured? <br /> Responses from participants were as follow: <br /> • We should use the communication strategy we utilized for the drought as our model <br /> for organizing public outreach efforts for these projects. <br /> • We should move together,but have a lead agency who contracts for services and is <br /> committed to steering the effort;joint funding is important to keep us all committed. <br /> • We should move as a group and have an administrative lead agency (similar to the <br /> reciprocal service agreement) to help coordinate messaging and delivery. <br /> • We should have joint outreach and a unified message (but the solution can be tailored <br /> to our distinct communities). <br /> Discussion of Question 2: If the need for IPR is confirmed by the water supply evaluation, should <br /> public outreach begin in the fall, or wait until a further study is completed and why? <br /> Responses from participants were as follow: <br /> • There seems to be support for this already, given the nature of media articles. <br /> • Yes;public outreach should begin in the fall and we should start with a survey. <br /> • We should start now, rather than waiting for the water supply evaluation to be <br /> complete; there are some basic elements we could start and we need to take advantage <br /> of current community awareness of these issues. <br /> • Outreach is practically starting already with last two roundtables;existing use of <br /> recycled water is a potential springboard (e.g., fill stations). <br /> Discussion of Question 3: List the key political, business and community leaders or organizations that <br /> should be the focus of early outreach efforts? <br /> Responses from participants were as follow: <br /> • Veterans of Foreign Wars • "No growth" groups • Senior centers <br /> (VFW) • Friends of Livermore • Large home owner's <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.