STATE AND LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING

how-to guide

**Getting Started**

building support for mitigation planning

foreword i

introduction v

STEP ONE assess community support 1-1

task a determine the planning area 1-2

task b determine if the community is ready to begin the

planning process 1-3

task c remove roadblocks 1-5

STEP TWO build the planning team 2-1

task a create the planning team 2-2

task b obtain official recognition for the planning team 2-8

task c organize the team 2-8

STEP THREE engage the public 3-1

task a identify the public 3-2

task b organize public participation activities 3-3

task c develop a public education campaign 3-6

afterword

appendix a glossary a-1

appendix b library b-1

appendix c worksheet c-1

appendix d example questionnaire d-1

The hazard mitigation planning process

Hazard mitigation planning is the process of determining how to reduce
or eliminate the loss of life and property damage resulting from natural
and human-caused hazards. This diagram shows the four basic phases of
the hazard mitigation process.

For illustration purposes, this diagram portrays a process that appears
to proceed sequentially. However, the mitigation planning process is
rarely linear. It is not unusual that ideas developed while assessing
risks should need revision and additional information while developing
the mitigation plan, or that implementing the plan may result in new
goals or additional risk assessment.

\[DIAGRAM displaying the Hazard Mitigation Planning Process: movement
from Organize Resources to Assess Risk to Develop a Mitigation Plan to
Implement the Plan and Monitor the Progress...

Organize Resources: From the start, communities should focus on the
resources needed for a successful mitigation planning process. Essential
steps include identifying and organizing interested members of the
community as well as the technical expertise required during the
planning process.

Assess Risk: Next, communities need to identify the characteristics and
potential consequences of hazards. It is important to understand how
much of the community can be affected by specific hazards and what the
impacts would be on important community assets.

Develop a Mitigation Plan to Implement the Plan: Armed with an
understanding of the risks posed by hazards, communities need to
determine what their priorities should be and then look at possible ways
to avoid or minimize the undesired effects. The result is a hazard
mitigation plan and strategy for implementation.

Monitor the Progress: Communities can bring the plan to life in a
variety of ways ranging from implementing specific mitigation projects
to changes in the day-to-day operation of the local government. To
ensure the success of an ongoing program, it is critical that the plan
remains relevant. Thus, it is important to conduct periodic evaluations
and make revisions as needed.\]

**Foreword**

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has developed this series
of mitigation planning \"how-to\" guides to assist states, communities,
and tribes in enhancing their hazard mitigation planning capabilities.

\[GLOSSARY:

mit-i-gate\\ 1: to cause to become less harsh or hostile; 2: to make
less severe or painful.

As defined by DMA 2000- hazard mitigation: any sustained action taken to
reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from
hazards.

plan-ning\\: the act or process of making or carrying out plans; specif:
the establishment of goals, policies, and procedures for a social or
economic unit.

END GLOSSARY\]

These guides are designed to provide the type of information state and
local governments need to initiate and maintain a planning process that
will result in safer communities. These guides are applicable to states
and communities of various sizes and varying ranges of financial and
technical resources.

This how-to series is not intended to be the last word on any of the
subject matter covered; rather, it is meant to provide easy to
understand guidance for the field practitioner. In practice, these
guides may be supplemented with more extensive technical data and the
use of experts when necessary.

\[SIDE TIPS:

**The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000**

In the past, federal legislation has provided funding for disaster
relief, recovery, and some hazard mitigation planning. The Disaster
Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) is the latest legislation to improve
this planning process and was put into motion on October 10, 2000, when
the President signed the Act (Public Law 106-390). The new legislation
reinforces the importance of mitigation planning and emphasizes planning
for disasters before they occur. As such, this Act establishes a
pre-disaster hazard mitigation program and new requirements for the
national post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).

Section 322 of the Act specifically addresses mitigation planning at the
state and local levels. It identifies new requirements that allow HMGP
funds to be used for planning activities, and increases the amount of
HMGP funds available to states that have developed a comprehensive,
enhanced mitigation plan prior to a disaster. States and communities
must have an approved mitigation plan in place prior to receiving
post-disaster HMGP funds. Local and tribal mitigation plans must
demonstrate that their proposed mitigation measures are based on a sound
planning process that accounts for the risk to and the capabilities of
the individual communities.

State governments have certain responsibilities for implementing Section
322, including:

-   Preparing and submitting a standard or enhanced state mitigation
    plan;

-   Reviewing and updating the state mitigation plan every three years;

-   Providing technical assistance and training to local governments to
    assist them in applying for HMGP grants and in developing local
    mitigation plans; and

-   Reviewing and approving local plans if the state is designated a
    managing state and has an approved enhanced plan.

DMA 2000 is intended to facilitate cooperation between state and local
authorities, prompting them to work together. It encourages and rewards
local and state pre-disaster planning and promotes sustainability as a
strategy for disaster resistance. This enhanced planning network will
better enable local and state governments to articulate accurate needs
for mitigation, resulting in faster allocation of funding and more
effective risk reduction projects.

To implement the new DMA 2000 requirements, FEMA prepared an Interim
Final Rule, published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2002, at
44 CFR Parts 201 and 206, which establishes planning and funding
criteria for states and local communities.

END SIDE TIPS\]

The how-to guides cover the following topics:

-   Getting started with the mitigation planning process, including
    important considerations for how you can organize your efforts to
    develop an effective mitigation plan (FEMA 386-1);

-   Identifying hazards and assessing losses to your community or state
    (FEMA 386-2);

-   Setting mitigation priorities and goals for your community or state
    and writing the plan (FEMA 386-3);

-   Implementing the mitigation plan, including project funding and
    maintaining a dynamic plan that changes to meet new developments
    (FEMA 386-4);

-   Evaluating potential mitigation measures through the use of
    benefit-cost analysis and other techniques (FEMA 386-5);

-   Incorporating special considerations into hazard mitigation planning
    for historic structures and cultural resources (FEMA 386-6);

-   Incorporating considerations for human-caused hazards into hazard
    mitigation planning (FEMA 386-7);

-   Using multi-jurisdictional approaches to mitigation planning (FEMA
    386-8); and

-   Finding and securing technical and financial resources for
    mitigation planning (FEMA 386-9).

Why should you take the time to read these guides?

-   It simply costs too much to address the effects of disasters only
    after they happen;

-   State and federal aid is usually insufficient to cover the extent of
    physical and economic damages resulting from disasters;

-   You can prevent a surprising amount of damage from hazards if you
    take the time to anticipate where and how they occur;

-   You can lessen the impact and speed the response and recovery
    process for both natural and human-caused hazards; and

-   The most meaningful steps in avoiding the impacts of hazards are
    taken at the state and local levels by officials and community
    members who have a personal stake in the outcome and/or the ability
    to follow through on a sustained program of planning and
    implementation.

The guides focus on showing how mitigation planning:

-   Can help your community become more sustainable and
    disaster-resistant through selecting the most appropriate mitigation
    measures, based on the knowledge you gain in the hazard
    identification and loss estimation process;

-   Can be incorporated as an integral component of daily government
    business;

-   Allows you to focus your efforts on the hazard areas most important
    to you by incorporating the concept of determining and setting
    priorities for mitigation planning efforts; and

-   Can save you money by providing a forum for engaging in partnerships
    that could provide technical, financial, and/or staff resources in
    your effort to reduce the effects, and hence the costs, of natural
    and human-caused hazards.

These guides provide a range of approaches to preparing a hazard
mitigation plan. There is no one right planning process; however, there
are certain central themes to planning, such as engaging citizens,
developing goals and objectives, and monitoring progress. Select the
approach that works best in your state or community.

**Introduction**

This first guide in the State and Local Mitigation Planning How-to
series discusses the activities and issues involved in initiating a
hazard mitigation planning process. The topics covered here are
presented within the context of the beginning phase of the mitigation
planning process, although many of these activities will continue more
or less behind the scenes throughout the process. Therefore, the efforts
you put into identifying and organizing your resources early on will pay
dividends later as you progress through some of the more challenging
tasks of mitigation planning. This how-to guide thus covers not only
this first phase of the planning process, but also provides snapshots of
later phases. You will then be able to begin the planning process
knowing ahead of time what types of resources you may need to call upon
in the future. Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, elected officials,
community staff, citizens, and businesses will benefit from the
knowledge, organization, positive attitude, and energy that you and your
team demonstrate.

\[SIDBAR:

Phases of Emergency Management

To better structure the way in which communities in the United States
respond to disasters, the \"four phases of emergency management\" were
introduced in the early 1980s after the similarities between natural
disaster preparedness and civil defense became clear. This approach can
be applied to all disasters.

Mitigation is defined as any sustained action taken to reduce or
eliminate long-term risk to life and property from a hazard event.
Mitigation, also known as prevention, encourages long-term reduction of
hazard vulnerability. The goal of mitigation is to save lives and reduce
property damage. Mitigation can accomplish this, and should be
cost-effective and environmentally sound. This, in turn, can reduce the
enormous cost of disasters to property owners and all levels of
government. In addition, mitigation can protect critical community
facilities, reduce exposure to liability, and minimize community
disruption. Examples include land use planning, adoption of building
codes, and elevation of homes, or acquisition and relocation of homes
away from floodplains.

Preparedness includes plans and preparations made to save lives and
property and to facilitate response operations.

Response includes actions taken to provide emergency assistance, save
lives, minimize property damage, and speed recovery immediately
following a disaster.

Recovery includes actions taken to return to a normal or improved
operating condition following a disaster.

END SIDEBAR\]

\[SIDE TIP:

Communities that already participate in other FEMA programs such as the
Community Rating System (CRS), Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
(FMA), and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), but are interested in
updating current plans to account for additional hazards and current
regulations, should skim through this guide to verify that they have a
good framework in place for their (potentially multi-hazard) planning
effort before starting the hazard identification and risk assessment
work described in the second how-to guide, Understanding Your Risks:
Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses (FEMA 386-2). You should also
check with the State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) for any additional
planning requirements that must be met within your particular state or
region.

END SIDE TIP\]

**Using a planning approach in hazard mitigation**

Hazard mitigation is any action that reduces the effects of future
disasters. It has been demonstrated time after time that hazard
mitigation is most effective when based on an inclusive, comprehensive,
long-term plan that is developed before a disaster actually occurs.
However, in the past, many communities have undertaken mitigation
actions with good intentions but with little advance planning. In some
of these cases, decisions have been made \"on the fly\" in the wake of a
disaster. In other cases, decisions may have been made in advance but
without careful consideration of all options, effects, and/or
contributing factors. The results have been mixed at best, leading to
less than optimal use of limited resources.

Understandably, there is often pressure to do something tangible as
quickly as possible, especially in the period immediately following a
disaster. This type of response frequently occurs at the expense of
working out which projects and policies would be the best ones to pursue
through some sort of planning process.

\[SIDE TIP:

In 1996, FEMA estimated that Oregon had avoided about \$10 million a
year in flood losses because of strong land-use planning that considers
natural hazards. This was not accomplished by accident but through the
foresight of previous Oregon administrations to call for local plans to
include inventories, policies, and ordinances to guide development in
hazard-prone areas for the previous 25 years. Using a comprehensive
approach to planning has resulted in reduced losses from flooding,
landslides, and earthquakes.

END TIP\]

The primary purpose of hazard mitigation planning is to identify
community policies, actions, and tools for implementation over the long
term that will result in a reduction in risk and potential for future
losses community-wide. This is accomplished by using a systematic
process of learning about the hazards that can affect your community or
state, setting clear goals, identifying appropriate actions, following
through with an effective mitigation strategy, and keeping the plan
current.

\[SIDE TIP:

Getting Started: Building Support for Mitigation Planning is part of a
series of guides that will help you identify, plan, and evaluate
measures that can reduce the impacts of natural hazards in your
community or state through a comprehensive and orderly process known as
Hazard Mitigation Planning.

As detailed in the Foreword, the process consists of four basic phases
as shown below. This guide, Getting Started, addresses the first phase
of the planning process, which consists of creating a mitigation
planning team that has broad representation, and developing public
support for the planning process. The second phase, Assess Risks,
explains identifying hazards and assessing losses. The third and fourth
phases, Develop a Mitigation Plan and Implement the Plan and Monitor
Progress, discuss establishing goals and priorities, selecting
mitigation projects, and writing, implementing, and revisiting the
mitigation plan, respectively.

END SIDE TIP\]

\[DIAGRAM: Flowchart of 4 step process\]

Effective planning forges partnerships that will bring together the
skills, expertise, and experience of a broad range of groups to achieve
a common vision for the community or state, and can also ensure that the
most appropriate and equitable mitigation projects will be undertaken.
Hazard mitigation planning is most successful when it increases public
and political support for mitigation programs, results in actions that
also support other important community goals and objectives, and
influences the community\'s or state\'s decision making to include
hazard reduction considerations.

Communities with up-to-date mitigation plans will be better able to
identify and articulate their needs to state and federal officials,
giving them a competitive edge when grant funding becomes available.
Planning also enables communities and states to better identify sources
of technical and financial resources outside of traditional venues.

In general, the amount of effort that citizens put into planning often
reflects the significance of the problems to members of the community.
However, since many citizens are not even aware that vulnerability to
hazards may be an issue within their community, hazard mitigation
planning is often hindered by:

-   Lack of understanding of the hazards and risks and that effective
    solutions to these issues are available;

-   Lack of readiness to begin or to invest in the process due to this
    lack of understanding; and

-   Difficulty obtaining resources to undertake a planning process.

\[SIDE TIP:

**What is Planning?**

It is important to have a good understanding of what is meant by
\"planning\" in this context. As a general practice, planning is a way
that people figure out how to accomplish a goal or solve a problem. The
methods for planning are quite varied, based on what people are trying
to do. The following examples of planning in your personal life can be
used to understand the different approaches to planning, including
mitigation planning.

Sometimes people plan as they go, literally making it up along the way.
For example, if you decide to take a weekend drive in the country with
your family, the \"plan\" simply consists of deciding when to leave the
house and the general direction you will take to get out of town. As you
travel the roadways, your family makes decisions about where to stop,
where to turn, and when to head back home, i.e., the plan continues to
be developed as it occurs. This type of planning is fine when the
desired result is simply to have an experience without a lot of specific
expectations.

When there is a more specific goal in mind, a more thoughtful planning
approach is required. For example, this time your family needs to visit
relatives in a distant city. You research and evaluate your options for
traveling, weighing the cost of various transportation alternatives
(cars, trains, airplanes, etc.) versus the amount of time it requires
for each mode of transport. You decide on a method and a time to travel
that meets your needs and budget, make the necessary travel
arrangements, and undertake the journey. In so doing, the planning
process helps you realize the goal of visiting your relatives using your
resources (in this case, time and money) in the most efficient manner.
This approach only involves a few simple steps -- researching and
comparing options, and implementation -- and works well to attain a
single distinct result.

When the ultimate goal is more complex, however, the planning process
required to reach a successful result must account for more issues and
takes a little more effort. Suppose you want to plan for your eventual
retirement so that you and your spouse will have enough funds to take
care of your basic needs and to enjoy yourselves. You (perhaps with the
help of a financial advisor) take stock of your resources and earning
potential, your likely expenses over time, and options for saving and
investing your money to provide different levels of return and security.
As part of this process, you evaluate the risk that is inherent in
different types of investments, the number of years you will be working
and saving, and a host of other factors. During the planning process,
you will probably refine and revise your retirement goals as you find
out more about what you can realistically accomplish. Also, an important
difference in this type of planning process, compared with the previous
two examples, is that you will be making decisions about how to start
your investment program, but if you are wise, you will revisit your
financial plan from time to time to make sure it continues to fit your
needs and capabilities.

In doing so, you will have embarked on a long-term planning process
that:

-   Has an overarching mission (in this example, \"attaining financial
    security\") but also allows for flexibility regarding specific
    actions to be taken as the plan develops;

-   Accounts for the interactions of a number of dynamic factors that
    might influence your decision making; and

-   Does not have a finite life span, i.e., ultimate success requires
    periodic attention through the years to make sure that your mission
    is attained.

You have also expanded your decision-making framework in such a way that
all of the other decisions in your life will now have to consider your
financial goals with respect to retirement. Your retirement goals have
now become integrated into other important decisions in your life.

END SIDE TIP\]

\[SIDE TIP:

Why Follow a Planning Process?

The planning process is as important as the plan itself. A thorough
planning process can help your community or state:

-   Create a vision of what it wants to become in the future.

-   See the big picture of how the economy, environment, and people will
    change.

-   Select and agree on common goals.

-   Involve as many people, local organizations, and businesses as
    possible.

-   Find out how much time, money, and other resources are necessary to
    create positive change.

-   Regularly evaluate the success of the plan in achieving your goals,
    and update the plan as needed to account for new information,
    changes in community goals, or new laws and regulations.

-   Develop connections with organizations and institutions that will
    sustain your planning outcomes.

END SIDE TIP\]

Elected officials have to balance many competing interests. Their
efforts and resources are often consumed by what are considered more
immediate concerns; e.g., finding solutions to congested roadways,
fluctuating economic conditions, overcrowding in schools, etc. It is
difficult sometimes to dedicate the limited resources of a community
toward dealing with a problem such as hazard risk reduction, especially
when the problem may be difficult to recognize on a daily basis.

\[SIDE TIP:

Guidelines for Community-Wide Planning

-   4 Planning is not a product, but rather a process. Effective
    planning efforts result in high-quality and useful plans, but
    written plans are only one element in the process.

-   Planning must be based on a realistic assessment of hazards and of
    the likely consequences of disaster events. Hazard and vulnerability
    assessments are integral to all community-wide planning efforts.

-   Planning efforts should be based as much as possible on a
    community\'s disaster experience, information on the experiences of
    other communities, and research-based planning principles. Both
    experience and research help communities understand what to expect
    when disasters occur.

-   No agency or organization should plan for disasters in isolation
    from other organizations whose efforts are required to make plans
    work. With this goal in mind, a critical initial task in all
    planning efforts is to identify and engage planning partners at the
    very start of the planning process.

-   In addition to being multi-organizational, the planning process must
    also be inclusive -- that is, it should involve governmental
    agencies at various levels, as well as private sector and
    community-based organizations.

-   Planning efforts should seek to provide a range of benefits and
    incentives for those involved in the process -- benefits that they
    will receive even if disasters do not occur.

-   While planning is a long-term process, that process should involve
    tangible milestones and intermediate successes on which future
    efforts can build.

> Source: Project Impact Evaluation Team, University of Delaware
> Disaster Research Center, 2002.END SIDE TIP\]

When communities or states have not experienced significant disasters
within recent memory, the true magnitude of the problem may not be
recognized. Even if the basic threats are generally known, the
descriptions often used to characterize the magnitude of events can
mislead the public as to the inherent risk. For example, a \"100-year
flood\" can sound like something you don\'t have to worry about in the
short term, but in reality it can strike at any time.

If communities do not believe that they are at risk from potential
hazards, efforts to initiate citizen involvement and partnerships may be
for naught. Many residents assume that current building codes, zoning
regulations, subdivision review processes, and/or permitting will
adequately protect them, but this is not always the case. Education is a
key part of the planning process, and overcoming a lack of awareness
should be an integral part of the planning process.

A community self-assessment tool is provided in Step 1 of this guide to
determine what issues may need to be tackled before any significant
efforts in planning are initiated. This guide points you in the
direction of a number of resources that can be used to help convince the
right people that mitigation planning is worth the effort and is a good
investment for the future of your community or state. This is
particularly important early on to set the proper context for the
initiation of partnerships and citizen involvement throughout the
planning process. The results of your self-assessment can be folded into
your capability assessment (Phase 3 of the planning process) to help
define the appropriate mitigation actions your community will support.
Furthermore, this guide provides information on various ways mitigation
planning may be integrated into existing community or state planning
processes so that over time, hazard reduction becomes part of the fabric
of planning for community growth and change, and is not seen as an
additional or adjunct planning effort. This integration will also enable
communities to seek out resources for mitigation planning that
previously may have been overlooked as viable.

This introductory material assumes that you, the reader, have some
knowledge of hazard mitigation but do not know much about mitigation
planning. This guide also assumes you are uncertain about how much
support you may have within your community or state to undertake such an
effort. This guide provides you, and others like yourself, background
information and basic steps to help you organize and initiate your
planning effort.

**How do you use this and other how-to guides?**

Developing a plan is a first step toward an end or goal. This guide
shows how to use the planning process to reach your goal(s) and to
engage key people to buy in and create momentum toward that end.

The planning process is as individual as the jurisdiction that engages
in it. Each community or state approaches growth and change in a unique
way, and your planning process should fit your community\'s particular
\'personality.\' As a result, you should not consider the step-by-step
sequence included in this and other how-to guides to be the only way to
pursue mitigation planning. At the same time, the process illustrated
here is based on certain steps common to successful planning. Getting
Started provides detailed information on the first of four phases of the
hazard mitigation planning process as described in the how-to guides.

Organize Resources. The first phase of the mitigation planning process
includes assessing your readiness to plan, establishing a planning team,
securing political support, and engaging the community.

\[DIAGRAM: Flowchart of 4 step process with first step, Organize
Resources, highlighted and displaying 3 steps of its own\]

Assess Risks. The second phase of the mitigation planning process
involves identifying and evaluating natural hazards and preparing damage
loss estimates. Knowing where hazards can affect your built environment
and the likely outcome of damages and losses resulting from a hazard
event will help you focus on your most important assets first. This will
build the scientific and technical foundations of your mitigation
strategy. This phase of the mitigation planning process is explained in
Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses
(FEMA 386-2).

\[SIDE TIP:

If after reviewing these materials, you feel you have completed all the
steps in Phase 1 as a result of other related planning processes, then
go to Phase 2, Assess Risks -- Understanding Your Risks (FEMA 386-2).

END SIDE TIP\]

Develop a Mitigation Plan. The third phase of the mitigation planning
process builds on the risk assessment by developing the mitigation goals
and objectives and ensuring that you are focusing on the identified
risks and potential losses. This phase focuses on identifying mitigation
measures to help achieve your goals and objectives and reduce future
disaster-related losses, and then capture your efforts in a written plan
document. This phase of the mitigation planning process will be
explained in Developing a Mitigation Plan: Identifying Mitigation
Measures and Implementation Strategies (FEMA 386-3).

Implement and Monitor Progress. The fourth phase of the mitigation
planning process involves adopting, implementing, monitoring, and
reviewing the plan to ensure that the plan\'s goals and objectives are
met. Periodic review of the plan will help keep the plan current,
reflecting the changing needs of the community or state. This phase of
the mitigation planning process will be explained in Bringing the Plan
to Life: Assuring the Success of the Hazard Mitigation Plan (FEMA
386-4).

\[DMA:

FEMA developed guidance to meet planning criteria in DMA 2000 for
communities with plans created under other FEMA programs. Some states
may have criteria that meet or exceed the recommendations for planning
found in this document. Contact your state emergency management office
for additional guidance regarding the unique planning considerations
within your state.

The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 is also driving the strengthening of
many pre-existing mitigation planning requirements for
non-mitigation-related programs. For example, the Fire Management
Assistance Grant Program was authorized by Section 420 of the Stafford
Act and by DMA 2000, and provides for the amelioration, management, and
control of any fire on publicly or privately owned forest or grassland
that threatens such destruction as would constitute a major disaster.
Assistance must be requested while the fire is still burning and
constitutes the threat of a major disaster. Grants are provided through
the Grantee to state and local governments and Indian tribal governments
at a 75 percent federal cost-share provided that fire hazards are
addressed in an existing state mitigation plan. Program regulations for
the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program are located in 44 CFR Part
204.

END DMA\]

The planning process outlined in this series of how-to guides will help
you meet the basic planning requirements of FEMA\'s mitigation programs.
You must keep in mind, however, that different FEMA mitigation programs,
such as those in Table 1, sometimes have different planning requirements
that must be met to be eligible for participation in these programs.
Therefore, when submitting a plan, you can either tailor it according to
the specific criteria of the program, or submit a comprehensive,
multi-hazard plan that includes a \"crosswalk,\" i.e., identify for the
reviewer what sections of the plan address the program\'s requirements.
For example, if you are completing a Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)
program or Community Rating System (CRS) plan, it may need to be
expanded to receive credit under DMA 2000, but if you complete a DMA
plan, all other program requirements are likely to be met.

\[TABLE:

Table 1. Hazard Mitigation Planning Process Local Planning Requirements
by Program

END TABLE\]

**Types of information found in the how-to series**

The how-to series contains several types of information. Some
information is highlighted with icons. Additional information can be
found in Appendix B, Library. To illustrate how the how-to information
is used, newspaper articles of the fictional town of Hazardville are
provided.

Icons

Guidance focused solely on the role of \"states\" is identified as a
sidebar with this icon. Although much of the information will be the
same for local, tribal, and state governments, there are different
requirements for state and local mitigation plans. Furthermore, states
have additional responsibilities to assist local entities in their
planning efforts. Guidance focusing on local governments applies to
tribes as well.

\[IMAGE of STATES icon\]

The \"DMA\" icon provides information relating to the mitigation
planning requirements outlined in the Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of
2000.

\[IMAGE of DMA icon\]

The \"Caution\" icon alerts you to important information and ways to
avoid sticky situations later in the planning process.

\[IMAGE of CAUTIONicon\]

The \"Glossary\" icon identifies terms and concepts for which a detailed
explanation is provided in the Glossary included in Appendix A.

\[IMAGE of GLOSSARY icon\]

The \"Tips\" icon identifies helpful hints and useful information that
can be used in the planning process.

\[Illustration of TIPS icon\]

Library

A mitigation planning \"Library\" has been included in Appendix B. The
library has a wealth of information, including Web addresses, reference
books, and other contact information to help get you started. All of the
Web sites and references listed in the how-to guide are included in the
library.

Town of Hazardville Articles

Applications of the various steps in the mitigation planning process are
illustrated through a fictional community, the Town of Hazardville,
located in the State of Emergency. Hazardville, a small community with
limited resources and multiple hazards, is developing a multi-hazard
mitigation plan. Newspaper accounts illustrate the various steps in the
mitigation planning process.

\[SIDEBAR:

**The Hazardville Post** Vol. CXI No. 65 Thursday, January 22, 2002

**Mayor Declares a New Way of Thinking for the Town of Hazardville**

\[Hazardville, EM\] Mayor McDonald returned from the annual National
Conference of Mayors last week seemingly a new man. \"It all fits now,
like finding a giant missing piece of a jigsaw puzzle!\" Mayor McDonald
excitedly proclaimed in a press conference yesterday. The Mayor attended
several workshops focusing on communities that have incorporated
sustainable development concepts into their city, county, and town
planning. \"These communities are now safer places to live, work and do
business, and I want that for Hazardville as well,\" McDonald said.

A major component of this sustainable development is hazard mitigation,
which is any action that reduces or eliminates the loss of life or
property damage resulting from hazards such as floods, earthquakes,
hazardous material spills, and tornadoes. Mayor McDonald said,
\"Although we have a Floodplain Administrator, we really haven\'t
considered the many other types of natural and human-caused hazards,
which is surprising when you consider that we seem to be vulnerable to
many different hazards. Our community has not been using the planning
department to deal with risk reduction, and after a closer look, I feel
our planning department should play a larger role in supporting risk
reduction programs. The planning department maintains a wealth of
information on existing infrastructure, buildings, and population
demographics, and keeps up with growth issues in and around Hazardville.
It also manages the local planning process, and thus understands what is
important to citizens as Hazardville grows and changes. They are in a
pivotal position to help guide our mitigation planning process.\"

Mayor McDonald has been very busy meeting in closed-door sessions with
members of the Town Council and several members of the town government
this week. He has promised to release more information in the next few
days.

END SIDEBAR\]

Worksheet

Finally, to help track your progress, a worksheet has been developed to
correspond with Step 2 of this guide. This worksheet is included at the
end of Step 2 and also in Appendix C. Use this form to record your
progress as you undertake the process of building support for mitigation
planning.

\[Diagram of the hazard mitigation planning process and the three steps
of organizing resources\]

Step 1: Assess Community Support

Overview

\[DIAGRAM\]

Much of mitigation planning involves cycles of learning about your
community and then acting on what you have discovered. The more you
understand the issues, important concerns, and capabilities in your
community, the more you can develop a planning process that reflects
community values and thereby generates support for projects and
outcomes.

Among the first steps in the planning process is measuring the level and
source of community support for planning, and working on securing any
needed support where gaps are identified. Step 1 provides questions to
prompt you to identify and obtain appropriate sources of necessary
ingredients for successful planning. Step 1 also discusses how to
determine the appropriate geographic area in which to focus the planning
effort. Step 2 will assist you in seeking answers to the questions posed
in Step 1 so that you can begin to establish the organizational
framework for the planning effort.

The remainder of this section provides guidance on how to deal with
deficiencies in any of these particular areas. If your community is
really ready to go, that is great! If not, as is more frequently the
case, you may need to work hard to build support. This may take a couple
of meetings or many months, depending on the community\'s level of
readiness. Once you have \"primed the pump,\" you can begin enlisting
others to form the planning team, Step 2 of *Getting Started*.

\[READERS' CAUTION:

Mitigation planning is not a linear process. With the exception of the
risk assessment, most tasks can be completed in any order that works for
the community, particularly when you are working on building support in
your community. For example, what would happen if you completed Step 1
and determined that the appropriate level of government for your
mitigation planning efforts was the town, but later on, you realized the
town did not have sufficient resources or the proper authority to
develop and approve the mitigation plan? You may need to revisit this
step after contacting the county. Furthermore, if the community is not
ready to plan (i.e., there is no political support for planning or the
community has inadequate funding), it may be more appropriate in some
cases to begin instead with Step 3, *Engage the Public* to build public
pressure to support mitigation planning. This will allow the community
to build the support for planning before the planning team is
established. It is also possible that you will have to complete a
minimal type of risk assessment in order to obtain support for the
planning process. In that case, you would refer to *Understanding Your
Risks* (FEMA 386-2).

END READERS' CAUTION\]

Procedures and Techniques

Task A. Determine the planning area.

In consultation with the state, identify the areas or jurisdictions to
be included in the mitigation planning process. Local governments most
often create a mitigation plan that covers their entire political
jurisdiction, be it a county, city, township, parish, borough, or
unincorporated community that falls under a county\'s jurisdiction, but
the plan does not usually cross jurisdictional boundaries.

\[DMA NOTE:

Under DMA 2000 regulations, local governments may be defined in many
different ways. A local government may be defined by a political
boundary such as an incorporated city, county, parish, or township, or
it might not have a distinct political boundary, for example a watershed
or metropolitan region.

END DMA NOTE\]

In many instances, however, planning on a broader scale can bring
additional resources, such as staff and experience, to the effort and
can help to address hazards that may originate outside of a community\'s
jurisdictional boundaries. It may be a practical and cost-saving way to
approach hazard reduction for a large number of communities,
particularly if hazards and vulnerabilities are similar across a large
area. An example of a multi-jurisdictional planning area would be
several towns located along the same fault zone whose main hazard is
earthquakes, or communities that lie within the same watershed.

Smaller jurisdictions may also benefit from working together because of
the additional resources and expertise that collaboration can bring.
Many counties with numerous townships and incorporated municipalities
may use a county approach simply for the sake of streamlining, since
counties often provide emergency management services to their
jurisdictions, whether incorporated or not. Communities should also
consider working with an existing regional planning commission or other
regional planning organization.

\[READERS' TIP:

Reasons for Multi-Jurisdictional Planning

-   Creates partnerships.

-   Is practical for addressing issues best dealt with on a larger
    scale, such as watersheds, which do not recognize political
    boundaries.

-   Takes advantage of existing planning mechanisms, such as regional
    planning organizations.

-   Can create economies of scale and enable pooling of limited
    resources.

END READERS' TIP\]

A multi-jurisdictional approach carries with it the increased
opportunity for conflict, however, so if you have the option of choosing
a jurisdiction with which to work, care should be given to selecting
jurisdictions with similar characteristics and goals.

\[DMA NOTE:

While DMA 2000, along with CRS and FMA, allow multi-jurisdictional
plans, you should still check with the State Hazard Mitigation Officer
(SHMO) to determine if this is a viable approach.

END DMA NOTE\]

Consider including localities that you have teamed with in the past.
Your jurisdiction already may be working together with another nearby
jurisdiction, or may work closely with a regional planning district. If
so, it may be a natural fit to become part of a larger planning area.
How your planning area is defined is up to you and the state, but the
one thing that the jurisdictions must have in common is the commitment
and the shared sense that something needs to change. For more detailed
guidance, see *Multi-Jurisdictional Approaches to Mitigation Planning*
(FEMA 386-8).

\[STATE TIP:

Defining the Planning Area

States should help communities to determine the optimal planning areas
in which they will work. This determination may be based on state
planning goals, statewide planning initiatives already underway, and
resource availability.

END STATE TIP\]

\[READERS' TIP:

Consult with the State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO)

The states play an important role in determining the appropriate
planning area for local hazard mitigation planning efforts. Given the
diversity of state and local planning authorities throughout the nation,
the DMA and the Interim Final Rule define \"local government\" broadly
and provide the states with the necessary flexibility to determine how
local governments will be involved in the hazard mitigation planning
process. Some states may encourage a particular level of local
government to have the lead responsibility for \"local\" plan
development -- be it an incorporated municipality, township, county or
regional level of government. Other state mitigation planning programs
may encourage a considerable range of flexibility in how communities can
work together with adjacent jurisdictions, such as the development of
local hazard mitigation plans on a watershed basis. Communities should
contact the state emergency management office and, in particular, the
SHMO, early on to obtain guidance for determining the appropriate
planning area.

END READERS' TIP\]

Task B. Determine if the community is ready to begin the planning
process.

Below is a series of questions designed to help you assess the
availability of key elements necessary for a successful planning
process: KNOWLEDGE, SUPPORT, and RESOURCES. Seeking answers to these
questions will help you determine what you should focus on to ensure
that you have the necessary ingredients in place to begin planning:

\[STATE TIP:

States should assist local jurisdictions in assessing support for
mitigation planning. In addition, states should build their own support
for mitigation planning by educating new state officials and department
heads and seeking to build collaborative relationships.

END STATE TIP\]

Knowledge. Answering the following four questions can help you begin to
determine the level of understanding about hazard mitigation planning
and risk reduction in your community. If you determine that your public
officials are either unfamiliar with hazard mitigation or unconvinced
that investing in mitigation measures before a disaster strikes will
save more money than it would cost to recover from the disaster, you
should consider engaging in the activities related to \"Knowledge\" that
are included later in this step under Task C to help increase knowledge
of hazard mitigation in your community.

1\. How much do elected and/or appointed officials know and understand
about hazards in their area? Do they know what they and the community
can do to reduce their effects? Has there been recent disaster (or
severe weather) activity?

2\. How much do the citizens know about hazards in the community?

3\. Do officials and citizens understand that their actions, behavior,
and decisions affect their vulnerability and that steps can be taken to
reduce risks?

4\. Is there a difference between the risk perceived by the community
and the actual risk (to the extent that risk is currently known)?

Support. Answering the following questions can help you begin to
determine the level of support for hazard mitigation planning and
mitigation project implementation in your community. If you determine
that your local government elected and/or appointed officials or
citizens do not know how they and the private sector can support
mitigation, consider engaging in activities related to \"Support\"
included later in this step under Task C to help identify strategies to
increase the level of support for hazard mitigation. If you are
unfamiliar with other types of planning activities at work in your
community that can help support mitigation planning and activities,
review these examples as well in the \"Support\" section under Task C.

5\. Do elected and appointed officials understand how local, state, and
federal levels each support hazard mitigation and emergency management?

6\. Is there something (not necessarily hazard-related) that citizens
are dissatisfied with that may be located in a hazard area (i.e.,
tourism, economic development, blight, transportation issues) that could
be dealt with in context of mitigation planning? How can the mitigation
plan contribute to other planning initiatives?

7\. How likely is it that there will be an individual to serve as a
champion to provide leadership and/or support for mitigation planning
(individual, organization, or business)?

8\. What would it take to identify or recruit a planning team leader?
How will you capitalize and build on expanding enthusiasm?

9\. Is there an existing FMA or CRS flood mitigation plan or other
single hazard plan?

10\. Is there an existing system for planning in the community? Is there
a planning department? A community plan? Are there local staff with
planning capabilities with whom you can collaborate?

11\. Is there a history of community interest and/or involvement in
environmental issues? Recreational issues? Safety issues?

12\. Is there an existing land use map, GIS system, contour map, soils
map, topographic map, or other material that can be used to better
understand the hazards context of the community?

Resources. Answering the following questions can help you begin to
determine the availability of resources and capabilities for hazard
mitigation planning and mitigation measures in your community. If you
determine that you are unfamiliar with programs that may be available in
your community or state, or need financial resources to initiate the
planning process, consider the activities related to \"Resources\" that
are included later in this step under Task C to help identify untapped
resources to support hazard mitigation.

13\. Are you aware of the range of non-FEMA or non-mitigation programs
available to assist in mitigation projects?

14\. What are the major employers, industries, and organizations that
help shape the culture of the community? Are they willing to be
involved?

It may be difficult to obtain these answers. If so, you may wish to go
ahead and begin to build your planning team knowing that you can come
back to this section for guidance on issues related to knowledge,
support, and resources for planning. The answers to these questions
should be compiled and incorporated into your plan document,
particularly in the capability analysis section that you will develop
during Phase 3 of the planning process. This information, coupled with
hazard and vulnerability information you will collect in Phase 2, will
shape the projects and policies adopted in your mitigation plan.

If your community can satisfactorily answer each of the questions above
and is clearly ready to begin a mitigation plan, go to Step 2. If not,
go to the appropriate part of Task C below.

Task C. Remove roadblocks.

Mitigation planning roadblocks related to knowledge, support, and
planning resources, such as lack of interest and limited funding, can be
overcome in several ways:

-   Educating public officials about the benefits of reducing potential
    losses through pre-disaster mitigation planning and about the costs
    of not having a mitigation plan can help convince them of the
    importance of mitigation planning. It can also give them a new
    understanding of what is at stake if they do not develop a plan for
    reducing losses from hazards.

-   Identifying leaders in other communities who were successful in
    developing and/or implementing mitigation plans can help bring peers
    together to benefit from experience.

-   Identifying a team leader in a position of authority, such as a
    community leader, elected official, or influential agency head, can
    help tremendously in convincing elected officials and others to
    support the planning effort.

-   Capitalizing on new regulations such as those implementing the DMA,
    which require states and local communities to have approved plans to
    be eligible for post-disaster mitigation funding, can serve as an
    entry point of discussion with elected officials.

-   Identifying existing processes such as comprehensive planning that
    can be expanded to include the development of a mitigation plan or
    include hazard mitigation elements.

-   Identifying self-interests in mitigation for a variety of sectors of
    the community or state to obtain broad support.

-   Identifying a variety of potential funding and technical resources
    to support the planning process and being ready to provide this
    information to others.

Following are steps you can take to overcome these roadblocks.

Knowledge

1\. Educate public officials on hazards and risks in your area.

a\. Have statistics ready about the last disaster. Many public officials
are unfamiliar with hazard mitigation planning and the mitigation
planning process. Unless your community or state has experienced a
recent disaster, local elected officials might not be very familiar with
local hazards and the associated risks. Before you or others meet with
the officials, make sure you are well prepared and have done your
homework. Know the details of recent hazard events, such as the number
of households that were damaged or destroyed, the number of businesses
that closed, or the reduction in tourism as a result of recent disaster
events. For details on estimating losses, refer to Phase 2 of the
mitigation planning process in *Understanding Your Risks* (FEMA 386-2).

\[STATE TIP:

States can often provide general information to local jurisdictions
about prior disasters within their state. In addition, they should be
speaking with local elected and appointed officials regarding new
regulatory requirements for planning under DMA, as well as assistance
the state will provide for planning. States should also be developing
hazard reduction policies and goals that will become part of local
planning considerations.

END STATE TIP\]

If it has been some time since the last disaster event, you may find it
difficult to convince officials that your community is vulnerable to
hazards. You are likely to get a negative response if you try to scare
these officials into action. Some communities have always relied on the
promise that since disasters happen so infrequently, it is better to
wait until a disaster strikes than to try to change the way the
community conducts its daily business. If this is the case, you may wish
to skip to Step 3, *Engage the Public* first.

\[READERS' TIP:

Go to www.hazardmaps.gov to find multi-hazard mapping information for
your community or state. It is a Web-based collection of natural hazards
information and supporting data.

END READERS' TIP\]

b\. Discuss general options. If you discuss potential mitigation options
that the community currently has under consideration, try to be as
inclusive as possible, without going into too many details. Only
mentioning preventive actions, such as restricting development in hazard
areas and enforcing stricter building codes, may give the officials the
wrong impression about the true range and flexibility of mitigation
options. Be sure to stress to officials that the plan\'s mitigation
goals, objectives, and strategies will be determined with the public\'s
input and support. For more details on developing an implementation
strategy, refer to Phase 3 of the mitigation planning process in
*Developing a Mitigation Plan* (FEMA 386-3).

c\. Remember the bottom line. Elected officials are concerned about the
safety and economic well-being of their constituents. To gain their
support, therefore, you should emphasize how mitigation planning helps
to achieve these goals. In particular, elected officials like to hear
about the economic benefits associated with public actions, so provide
as much information as possible on the costs of a disaster and how
mitigation actions can reduce those costs to individuals, businesses,
communities, states, and the federal government, particularly for a
disaster that recently affected your community or a nearby community.

d\. Be informative but brief. When elected officials hold meetings,
there is usually a multitude of issues before them. These officials will
appreciate and respond positively if you are organized and prepared for
the meeting. Be clear and concise about your needs and activities,
keeping your speaking time to a minimum whenever possible.

e\. Provide examples and success stories from nearby communities. Public
officials like to talk to fellow officials and counterparts, and they
will usually speak with them before contacting state or federal staff.
If you offer them positive examples from nearby communities, there is a
good chance your officials will be interested in pursuing similar
programs, which could give the planning process a big boost. Among the
many sources of information on mitigation successes are FEMA\'s Web site
(www.fema.gov) and CD-ROM, *Mitigation Resources for Success* (FEMA
372), and the Web site for the Association of State Floodplain Managers
(ASFPM) at www.floods.org.

\[READERS' TIP:

Six broad categories of mitigation measures include:

1\. Prevention. Measures such as planning and zoning, open space
preservation, land development regulations, building codes, storm water
management, fire fuel reduction, soil erosion, and sediment control.

2\. Property Protection. Measures such as acquisition, relocation, storm
shutters, rebuilding, barriers, floodproofing, insurance, and structural
retrofits for high winds and earthquake hazards.

3\. Public Education and Awareness. Measures such as outreach projects,
real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, technical
assistance, and school age and adult education programs.

4\. Natural Resource Protection. Measures such as erosion and sediment
control, stream corridor protection, vegetative management, and wetlands
preservation.

5\. Emergency Services. Measures such as hazard threat recognition,
hazard warning systems, emergency response, protection of critical
facilities, and health and safety maintenance.

6\. Structural Projects. Measures such as dams, levees, seawalls,
bulkheads, revetments, high flow diversions, spillways, buttresses,
debris basins, retaining walls, channel modifications, storm sewers, and
retrofitted buildings and elevated roadways (seismic protection).

END READERS' TIP\]

2\. Tout the benefits of hazard mitigation and mitigation planning.

Many of the benefits of hazard mitigation planning are discussed in this
guide, including identifying cost-effective and technically feasible
mitigation measures that will reduce losses from future disasters;
building partnerships with sectors not previously involved; facilitating
funding priorities, especially following a disaster; and creating more
sustainable communities. Improved disaster resistance can also be used
to attract new businesses and residents, which results in an improvement
to the overall economy.

a\. Planning leads to judicious selection of risk reduction actions.
Hazard mitigation planning is the systematic process of learning about
the hazards that can affect your community or state; setting clear
goals; and identifying and implementing policies, programs, and actions
that reduce the effects of losses from future disasters. A hallmark of
the planning approach is the careful selection of these mitigation
activities through continued community participation and technical and
cost analyses.

\[READERS' TIP:

Summary of \"Benefits of Mitigation Planning\"

-   Leads to cost-effective selection of risk reduction actions

-   Builds partnerships

-   Contributes to sustainable communities

-   Establishes funding priorities

END READERS' TIP\]

\[STATE TIP:

States can provide guidance and can assist local communities in the
development of hazard mitigation plans. The states will be working with
FEMA to develop their own mitigation plans and will know what FEMA is
looking for to approve plans under DMA 2000. In turn, states will work
with their communities to help them produce a plan that will meet DMA
2000 criteria.

END STATE TIP\]

\[READERS' TIP:

Planning Reduces Losses and Facilitates Recovery

Most of the city of Kinston, North Carolina is located in the 50-year
floodplain and is extremely vulnerable to flooding. When Hurricane Floyd
hit in 1999, the city was still recovering from Hurricane Fran that hit
three years earlier. Fran inflicted major damage to the city and
prompted Kinston to undertake a new recovery strategy guided by two
objectives: to substantially or permanently reduce flood hazards in the
county and to revitalize existing neighborhoods and business
developments in a long-term effort to empower citizens to be
self-sufficient, and in the process, improve their quality of life. As
such, the city undertook an acquisition and relocation program to reduce
potential flooding losses from storms. Using federal and state funding,
the city had acquired approximately 100 houses before Hurricane Floyd
hit in 1999. Of these houses, 95% would have flooded and more than 75%
would have been substantially damaged. Estimates for property and
displacement losses exceeded \$6 million. The city\'s investment in this
program paid off. The city spent \$2.1 million on this program.

END READERS' TIP\]

b\. Planning builds partnerships. Hazard mitigation planning is one of
the best ways to enhance collaboration and gain support among the
parties whose interests might be affected by hazard losses. Working side
by side, a broad range of stakeholders can forge partnerships that pool
skills, expertise, and experience to achieve a common vision for the
community or state, helping to ensure that the most appropriate and
equitable mitigation projects are undertaken. The increased
collaboration may also reduce duplication of efforts that results when
stakeholders work in isolation. Hazard mitigation planning is most
successful when the public and elected officials support mitigation
programs and the identified mitigation actions support other community
goals and objectives.

\[READERS' TIP:

Planning Helps Solve Multiple Needs

There were only three unaffected houses available for purchase in the
\$40,000 to \$60,000 range in Louisa County in rural Iowa after terrible
flooding occurred in 1993. As the county has limited affordable housing
opportunities, instead of demolishing 175 flood-damaged homes and
temporarily displacing nearly 5% of the county\'s population, the county
partnered with the Muscatine Center for Social Action (MCSA) to address
the shortage of affordable housing. MCSA has a history of taking on
projects no one else is willing or able to do and, working with the
county, assumed responsibility for relocating the structurally sound
homes out of the floodplain and initiated an outreach campaign to find
potential buyers. The partnership provided a valuable service to the
residents and community by keeping the tax base within the county and
providing affordable and safe housing for county residents.

END READERS' TIP\]

c\. Planning contributes to sustainable communities. There has been an
increasing awareness in the last few years of the concept of
sustainability and its intrinsic link with natural and human-caused
hazard risk reduction. Sustainability is attained when decisions made by
the present generation do not reduce the options of future generations.
The present generation passes on to the next a natural, economic, and
social environment that will provide a continuing high quality of life.
An essential characteristic of a sustainable community is its resilience
to disasters. For more information, see *Planning for a Sustainable
Future: the Link Between Hazard Mitigation and Livability* (FEMA 364)
and *Rebuilding for a More Sustainable Future: An Operational Framework*
(FEMA 365).

\[ADDITIONAL GLOSSARY INFORMATION:\]

A sustainable community considers the following issues when planning for
and with their citizens:

1\. Environmental quality and quality of life;

2\. Disaster resistance;

3\. Economic vitality and a fair legacy for future generations; and

4\. The impact of its actions and policies on adjacent jurisdictions as
well as the greater surrounding region and beyond.

END GLOSSARY INFORMATION\]

Using a planning approach to reduce hazard losses can facilitate the
incorporation of sustainable concepts in both pre- and post-disaster
timeframes. The mitigation planning process can support a more robust
and sustainable planning effort by assuring that land use planning and
development regulations guide development in directions that facilitate
many goals simultaneously.

\[READERS' TIP:

Planning Promotes Sustainability

One of the most widely recognized examples of the connection between
hazard mitigation and sustainability involves the acquisition of
flood-prone properties in low-income areas. In such areas, mitigation
projects can fail if adequate affordable housing cannot be provided for
those who are displaced. When emergency management, planning, and
affordable housing advocates coordinate their activities, the result is
newer, better, and safer housing for the affected residents. Some states
have been successful in using weatherization funds, provided by the U.S.
Department of Energy\'s Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) for
residential structures to retrofit homes against wind and flood damage,
thereby linking energy efficiency and disaster prevention. The result is
safer, more energy efficient homes.

An example of this collaboration is Valmeyer, Illinois. After the
Mississippi River flood of 1993, Valmeyer used funds from the Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy, to
incorporate sustainable technologies into the design and construction of
a new town out of the floodplain.

END READERS' TIP\]

Sustainable communities look for ways to combine policies, programs, and
design solutions to bring about multiple objectives and seek to address
and integrate social and environmental concerns. The planning process
can provide a framework within which state and local governments can
link sustainability and loss reduction to other goals.

For example, sustainable communities often emphasize open space planning
by promoting greenways, parks, and landscaping. Effective use of open
space can prevent development from encroaching into floodplains, active
fault zones, landslide areas, and other disaster-prone areas.

d\. Planning establishes funding priorities. Communities and states that
have up-to-date mitigation plans are better able to identify and
articulate their needs to state and federal officials when funding
becomes available, particularly following a disaster. Communities with
mitigation plans in place can often begin the recovery process more
quickly when a disaster occurs. Such communities can present projects as
an integral part of an overall, agreed-upon strategy, rather than as
projects that exist in isolation. Furthermore, by having established
priorities ahead of time, states and communities are better able to
identify technical and financial resources outside traditional venues.
To encourage planning, only those states and communities with approved
plans that meet the DMA 2000 criteria will be eligible to receive HMGP
funds for mitigation projects. Under the new regulations, states with
enhanced plans can receive funding under HMGP equal to 20% of the total
estimated Stafford Act disaster assistance (Individual and Public
Assistance), rather than the 15% traditionally allocated.

\[READERS' TIP:

Planning Facilitates Funding

In Texas, the Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD), a division
of the Harris County Public Infrastructure Department, implements a
progressive and efficient Acquisition/Buyout Program during and between
flooding events. Funding for the HCFCD comes primarily from a dedicated
property tax, specifically an \"ad valorem\" tax. The HCFCD uses other
federal agencies as partners to augment funding, i.e., FEMA, US Army
Corps of Engineers, and Department of Housing and Urban Development. The
HCFCD allocates county and flood control funds for the purchase of homes
in the county\'s floodplain. It sets priorities and provides a ranking
for properties throughout the county that are vulnerable to flooding.
HCFCD maintains an extensive database of every property that has
flooded, including details on property location, floodplain location,
dates of events and inspections, damage amounts, permit information,
substantial damage information, and whether it was referred to a buyout
program. For example, after Tropical Storm Allison hit, FEMA, the HCFCD,
and the State of Texas created a \"fast track\" buyout process which
allowed over 200 houses to be bought in the first ten months after the
flooding. This ongoing planning allowed the HCFCD to quickly leverage
federal funding in the immediate aftermath of Tropical Storm Allison.

END READERS' TIP\]

Support for Planning

Elected officials tend to be more receptive to understanding the
benefits of hazard mitigation planning following a disaster. Many
officials, however, may not be aware of the vulnerabilities to hazards
if disasters have rarely occurred in your area. It is the officials\'
responsibility to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their
constituents, and, in fact, most building, zoning, and subdivision codes
and ordinances begin with such a preamble. Therefore, it is important
for you to be able to explain to state and local government decision
makers, private sector entities, citizens, universities, and nonprofit
organizations why they should support mitigation planning programs.
Equally important to discuss are the benefits they would derive from
such support, and the roles they can play to ensure the success of the
planning process.

To be successful, mitigation planning, just like all community planning,
requires collaboration between, and support from, federal, state, local,
and regional governments; citizens; the private sector; universities;
and non-profit organizations. Many of these entities have specific
statutory authorities; some have funding resources available, and some
can provide technical assistance to support mitigation efforts. Most
importantly, they all contribute toward ensuring that the planning
process results in practicable actions tailored to local needs and
circumstances.

1\. Support from local government.

Local governments are responsible for enacting and/or enforcing zoning
ordinances, land use plans, building codes, and other measures to
protect life and property. They are responsible for informing citizens
of the risks hazards pose to people, property, and the environment, and
the measures they can take to reduce losses from such risks.

Communities are the first to feel the effects of disasters; therefore,
local governments should do everything possible to protect their
citizens from hazard risks and ensure that their community complies with
federal and other regulations designed to reduce disaster costs. Local
governments are responsible for addressing hazard threats within the
community and for following a sound planning process for identifying and
selecting the best solution for the community. They are responsible for
ensuring that each citizen has an opportunity to provide input into the
development of local mitigation projects and activities, in the same
tradition as comprehensive planning for communities.

\[READERS' TIP:

Local Government Powers that Apply to Hazard Reduction

Planning. Although the degree of planning authority of a local
jurisdiction is determined by state legislation, all local governments
can use a planning process to educate, encourage participation, and
reach consensus on promoting hazard mitigation.

Regulatory Power. Local jurisdictions have the authority to regulate
land use development and construction through zoning, subdivision
regulations, design standards, and floodplain regulations (note: many
states have adopted statewide model building codes wherein the local
governments are not allowed to modify or change the code).

Spending Authority. The way in which local jurisdictions use public
funds can influence development in hazard areas. One fiscal management
tool that many communities embrace is the capital improvement program,
which is generally a 5-year plan for funding improvements to public
facilities.

Taxing Power. If the private sector seeks development in hazard areas,
special taxing districts can be created to balance more equitable and
appropriate public investments. Preferential assessments can also be
used as incentives to retain agricultural and open-space uses in high
hazard areas.

Acquisition. Local governments can acquire lands in high hazard areas
through conservation easements, purchase of development rights, or
outright purchase.

END READERS' TIP\]

2\. Support from state government.

State governments play a significant role in supporting mitigation
planning. States administer programs that provide assistance for
mitigation initiatives and act as the liaison between federal and local
governments for all phases of emergency management. In many states, the
Emergency Management Office is assigned these responsibilities. The SHMO
serves as the point of contact and coordinates all matters relating to
hazard mitigation planning and implementation. Planning departments,
environmental agencies, and natural resource agencies may share or
assist in these responsibilities.

The states ensure that local governments uphold federal regulations
intended to reduce losses due to hazards. To do this effectively, the
state should provide technical and/or financial resources to their local
governments to achieve common mitigation goals. States continuously
evaluate their own facilities and resource capabilities and produce and
maintain statewide mitigation plans based on their own priorities, and
on local needs and priorities. The state should educate and inform local
governments, businesses, and citizens about the hazards and risks within
the state, and should assist them in developing plans to reduce the
risk. The state\'s role in coordinating hazard mitigation planning has
become even more important with the passage of DMA 2000.

3\. Support from the federal government.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the lead federal
agency responsible for providing technical and financial assistance to
state and local governments for disaster mitigation planning and the
implementation of mitigation projects. FEMA also promotes mitigation
activities and programs among federal, state, and local governments, as
well as businesses, academic institutions, and non-profit organizations.
FEMA has been given the authority to implement the Disaster Mitigation
Act of 2000 (DMA 2000); however, other federal agencies implement
programs that may also provide support for mitigation goals, such as the
Department of Housing and Urban Development\'s Community Development
Block Grant program. Examples of federal assistance available for
mitigation are included on the FEMA CD, *Mitigation Resources for
Success* (FEMA 372), available through FEMA\'s publication warehouse.

4\. Support from the private sector.

Businesses and private organizations have much to gain by reducing their
risks to hazards, in terms of their own well-being, as well as
contributing to reducing risks in the community as a whole.
Historically, more than 25% of businesses never reopen after a disaster.
Even if a business is not physically damaged during a disaster, it
cannot operate if its employees cannot get to work, if water and
electricity are unavailable, or if customers fear safety hazards.

\[READERS' TIP:

The ability of businesses to recover after a flood, fire, earthquake, or
other disaster could be the difference between community survival and
failure. When a major company that employs a large percentage of a
community\'s population remains closed following a disaster, employees
may leave town or seek jobs elsewhere.

What happened in Elkins, West Virginia is just one example. The
Kingsford Manufacturing Company\'s charcoal production plant employs
more than 100 residents in this small town. \"The Kingsford plant is an
essential member of its local community, contributing over \$8.5 million
to the economy in direct impact including payroll, taxes, and purchases
of supplies, utilities, and raw materials from local lumber mills.
Additionally, the Kingsford plant\'s total economic impact on this
community is estimated annually at \$23 million.\" (*Protecting Business
Operation*s, FEMA 331.)

In November 1985, the plant sustained \$11 million in damage and 2
months of downtime when it received more than 7 feet of floodwaters.
After it was shut down twice in 1996 due to flooding, resulting in
another \$4 million in damages, the plant developed a mitigation
strategy to reduce its risk from future flood losses. The alternative of
moving the plant to another community out of the floodplain could have
spelled economic doom for Elkins.

END READERS' TIP\]

5\. Citizen support.

Citizens are ultimately responsible for their own safety and for
protecting their assets from damage by preparing for potential disasters
that could occur within their community. It is important that they find
out about local hazards and identify measures they can take to reduce
their impact on their homes and families. For example, the purchase of
insurance that will cover their risk from these hazards is one specific
approach. The larger issue of economic viability of the community is
also very important to citizens, so it is crucial to convey to citizens
how involvement in a mitigation planning process helps protect economic
assets from disaster losses.

6\. Support from academic institutions.

Academic institutions often have their own emergency response or
operations plans to ensure the safety of their faculty, staff, and
students. Often, however these institutions are unfamiliar with the
hazards that could threaten their facilities and have not identified
measures that can be taken to reduce their impact. Just as with private
sector entities, schools stand to sustain losses in disasters and can
gain much by supporting and participating in planning. In addition, they
can often provide valuable resources to the community, such as technical
expertise, facilities in which to host meetings, post-disaster services
and facilities, and student resources to assist in data gathering.

7\. Support from a champion.

Having a prominent and well-respected community business leader, elected
official, or agency head advocate for the initiation of the planning
process will help you enlist the support of other officials and
community leaders. This also increases the \"human\" aspect of loss
reduction by associating it with a recognizable personality.

\[STATE TIP:

Under DMA 2000, states have an opportunity to create enhanced state
mitigation plans that will demonstrate their mitigation capabilities and
can obtain up to an additional 5% in HMGP funding. States should also
ensure that communities know that post-disaster funding, such as the
HMGP, will only be awarded to communities with approved local mitigation
plans (refer to Interim Final Rule at 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206 published
in the Federal Register on February 26, 2002).

States that have an approved mitigation plan in place can still use up
to 7% of the HMGP funds for mitigation planning after a major disaster
declaration.

The Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (PDM), authorized by DMA 2000, can
provide pre-disaster funding to states, communities, and tribes for
cost-effective hazard mitigation activities that are identified in a
mitigation plan, and for planning itself.

END STATE TIP\]

8\. Capitalize on new regulations.

DMA 2000 and its implementing regulations provide significant
opportunities for states and local governments to strengthen mitigation
efforts through planning. Interim Final Regulations implementing DMA
2000 were published February 26, 2002. These regulations provide
guidelines for the planning process and the content of plans. According
to these regulations, states and communities must have approved plans in
place to receive HMGP funds. States must have approved plans in place to
receive any non-emergency Stafford Act funds.

*States and communities with existing mitigation plans are urged to
revise them to comply with the new DMA 2000 regulations.* In addition,
tying mitigation planning into other ongoing planning initiatives can
significantly streamline your planning efforts and build coalitions
across units of local government, the private sector, and your
community. Integrating mitigation planning with other efforts provides
the opportunity to draw from other plans, which enables hazard reduction
goals, objectives, and actions to align with other community goals,
values, and policies.

9\. Create support by expanding current planning initiatives to include
mitigation concepts, policies, and activities.

Some opportunities to increase support for mitigation activities may
include those shown below. Note that many of these opportunities are
best used after mitigation actions are identified in Phase 3 of the
planning process. However, knowing early on that you can use these tools
to further support planning can help lend momentum to early planning
efforts. In addition, these tools are efficient as implementing
mechanisms for mitigation actions identified in Phase 3 of the planning
process.

\[READERS' TIP:

Identify an upcoming opportunity for your community or state to initiate
planning for hazards. Recently experienced disasters may provide
increased awareness and concern for developing a mitigation plan. This
interest can act as a catalyst for structuring a successful mitigation
planning effort. Such catalysts do not necessarily have to reside in the
community itself. They can involve a high profile disaster elsewhere, a
recent hazards analysis study, a book or popular movie about a disaster,
or other activities that focus attention on hazards and risks.

END READERS' TIP\]

By examining various community plan documents, you may discover public
dissatisfaction or concern with issues or physical features that have
implications for hazard reduction. For example, citizens may be
concerned about a blighted downtown business district that also happens
to lie in the floodplain. By tapping into the existing momentum for this
issue, you can channel some of the same support into reducing losses in
that area.

a\. Comprehensive and other community-oriented planning activities. Not
all communities have comprehensive plans or are required to develop them
under state-enabling legislation, but all communities need to plan for
their future. Integrating mitigation concepts and policies into existing
plans provides expanded means for implementing initiatives via
well-established mechanisms. As comprehensive plans are reviewed and
updated, and after mitigation strategies are developed, mitigation
policies and activities should be incorporated into elements of the plan
such as economic development, transportation, recreation, historic
preservation, and housing. A natural hazards element may also be
desired. Planning for future land uses by considering hazard constraints
and opportunities, addressing environmental concerns, and incorporating
hazard reduction into capital improvements and infrastructure elements
are all potential mitigation opportunities.

\[READERS' TIP:

Disasters can affect your community\'s housing, economy, transportation,
cultural resources, and natural resources, which are all usually covered
in a comprehensive plan. A comprehensive plan reflects what the
community would like to see happen in the future. The plan is carried
out through other local measures such as capital improvements, zoning,
and subdivision ordinances. The comprehensive plan can incorporate
mitigation strategies identified in the community\'s mitigation plan to
discourage new development in hazard-prone areas and encourage practices
that are consistent with the mitigation goals. Some mitigation
activities, such as the acquisition of land in high hazard areas, can
tie in with pre-existing community goals, such as preserving open space,
improving environmental quality and natural features, and enhancing
recreational opportunities.

END READERS' TIP\]

Some other special purpose community plans that can be used to help
support mitigation planning include:

-   Stormwater management plans: these plans describe actions to
    maintain system capacity to handle stormwater, which also provides
    flood mitigation benefits;

-   Open space and recreation plans: these plans target locations for
    open space and recreation areas where property acquisition or buyout
    programs in hazard areas can complement the planned improvements;

-   Redevelopment and housing plans: these plans identify areas where
    construction is occurring or will occur. Opportunities exist to
    incorporate mitigation techniques into retrofit activities and new
    construction, and to influence the location of redevelopment away
    from hazard areas; and

-   Transportation plans: these plans identify and prioritize road
    improvement projects where mitigation of transportation and utility
    systems can be incorporated.

\[READERS' TIP:

More information and resources regarding comprehensive plans, including
developing hazard elements, can be found on the American Planning
Association\'s Web site at www.planning.org. You may also contact your
local planner, regional planning agency, or state planning agency for
more information.

END READERS' TIP\]

b\. Capital improvement plans. State and local governments and private
organizations of any size have capital improvement plans for building
new facilities and replacing inadequate facilities. These plans could
incorporate mitigation principles into planned projects such as locating
new public buildings out of high hazard areas or sizing adequate
culverts to accommodate floodwaters. These plans could also include
provisions for upgrading replacement facilities using the latest
mitigation techniques; ensuring that new facilities are built to the
most current codes, standards, and specifications; and avoiding the
extension of public facilities in hazard areas.

c\. Floodplain remapping or updating. FEMA is currently in the process
of updating Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for approximately 3,300
communities. Over the next five to seven years, more than 2,700 new
digital maps of flood-prone communities that have never been mapped
before will also be included in this program. The new and updated
information that will be delineated on the maps is an important impetus
to either revise your existing mitigation and floodplain management
plans, or to create a new mitigation plan to address flood hazards.
Check with your local floodplain administrator or your state National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) coordinator to discuss the public
participation requirements of revising your FIRMs and how the flood
hazard will affect risk in your jurisdiction.

It is always important to revisit the mitigation plan every time a flood
map is revised, particularly if floodplains encompass developed areas.
For more information on FEMA\'s flood hazard mapping, or to find out if
your community is scheduled to be remapped, go to
http://www.fema.gov/mit/tsd/st_main.htm, or talk to your state NFIP
coordinator.

d\. Existing mitigation plans and other emergency management plans.
Communities and states should review existing mitigation plans and
update them to meet DMA 2000 requirements. However, planning does not
end with this update. It is important to understand that vulnerability
to hazards does change over time. Drainage patterns, shoreline erosion,
water levels, population demographics, and development patterns within
hazard areas are not constants. New research and an improved
understanding of hazards and the development of new mitigation
approaches will also require you to update your mitigation plan.
Finally, plans often have to be updated within an established timeframe
in order to be compliant with federal and state regulations. This update
provides an excellent opportunity to begin incorporating multi-hazard
mitigation principles into these plans. *Bringing the Plan to Life*
(FEMA 386-4) will address the plan maintenance and update processes.

\[READERS' CAUTION:

Do not assume that hazard elements in local, state, or other federal
plans required by state law automatically meet DMA 2000 requirements.
You should review any existing hazard elements against the Interim Final
Rule published in the Federal Register February 26, 2002 (44 CFR Parts
201 and 206) to determine compliance. Your SHMO can also help you.

END READERS' CAUTION\]

Emergency operations plans identify preparedness and response procedures
into which mitigation considerations could be incorporated to facilitate
post-disaster reconstruction and recovery. To keep plans up-to-date,
states and local governments must conduct real-life exercises based on
actual risk scenarios. Issues that emerge from post-disaster scenarios
often draw attention to pre-disaster mitigation activities that can be
undertaken now to prevent future disaster losses.

\[DMA NOTE:

After the initial approval, state mitigation plans must be reviewed,
updated, and submitted for re-approval by FEMA every three years. Local
mitigation plans must be reviewed, updated, and re-submitted to FEMA
every five years.

END DMA NOTE\]

FEMA can make available post-disaster mitigation and recovery exercises
for flood, earthquake, and hurricane disaster scenarios. Exercises
designed to assist communities in pre-disaster mitigation planning are
also being developed. Check with your FEMA regional office.

e\. Post-disaster recovery planning. Trying to organize and prioritize
projects in a post-disaster situation without a previously adopted
mitigation plan can be a disaster in its own right. Officials face
extraordinary pressure to immediately rebuild affected areas back to
pre-disaster conditions, eliminating the possibility of reducing losses
from future events. A mitigation plan that addresses post-disaster
issues before the event could help to take some of the pressure off
elected officials, and would provide a publicly supported reason for a
more sustainable redevelopment effort. See *Planning for Post-Disaster
Recovery and Reconstruction* for guidance, available from the FEMA
publications warehouse.

10\. Support from other programs.

a\. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) offers federally-backed
flood insurance to help reduce disaster losses from flooding. It
provides flood insurance to property owners for structures that
otherwise would be uninsurable because of their susceptibility to
flooding, in exchange for communities adopting and implementing
floodplain management regulations to minimize future flood losses to new
construction.

b\. The Community Rating System (CRS) is a program under NFIP that
recognizes and encourages community floodplain management activities
that exceed the minimum NFIP standards. The CRS recognizes community
efforts beyond the NFIP minimum standards by reducing flood insurance
premiums from 5% to 45% for the community\'s property owners, depending
on the amount of public information and floodplain management activities
that the community undertakes. Communities receive credit under CRS for
developing a flood mitigation plan.

c\. The Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA) is a program under the
NFIP that provides funding for states and communities for the
preparation of mitigation plans and for flood mitigation projects. Plans
required under FMA can serve as the basis of DMA 2000 plans, and can be
expanded using the criteria in the Interim Final Rule implementing DMA
2000.

d\. Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (PDM), authorized under DMA 2000,
provides for pre-disaster funding of mitigation planning and projects on
a competitive basis. An approved mitigation plan is required to receive
funding. Check with your FEMA regional office for latest information on
availability of funds.

See Table 1 (page xi) for planning requirements for the HMGP, PDM, FMA,
and CRS programs.

Planning resources

There are three primary types of resources that will facilitate your
planning efforts: technical, financial, and human.

1\. Technical resources for mitigation planning include professional
advice on matters related to economics, science, engineering, mapping,
and planning, as well as procedural information. In mitigation planning,
expertise on this wide array of topics is often needed in order to have
enough information to make determinations as to project type and
priority. Not all of this expertise is needed in the beginning stage of
planning. However, you should note when you feel you will need to obtain
such assistance and where you might obtain such assistance. Technical
resources also include data necessary to complete risk assessments or
make project decisions.

\[READERS' NOTE:

FEMA\'s *Mitigation Resources for Success* CD (FEMA 372) features a
variety of technical, case study, and federal program information that
will help build support and provide resources for undertaking hazard
mitigation activities and programs. You will find useful information,
publications, technical fact sheets, photographs, case studies, and
federal and state mitigation program information and contacts. The vast
array of documents and photographs are available for exporting to other
documents, Web sites, and publications, and for use in educational and
training presentations. To obtain a copy, call the FEMA publications
warehouse at 1-800-480-2520.

END READERS' NOTE\]

2\. Financial resources are critical for implementing most projects, as
well as for securing the technical resources discussed above. In
addition to the \"traditional\" FEMA funding programs, you should seek
out community, state, and other federal agency funding sources from
programs with missions related to the type of mitigation activity being
pursued. For example, funding for mitigation of transportation
facilities should also be sought from transportation programs. Financial
resources for planning will be summarized in this section.

3\. Human resources. In addition to private citizens, employers,
industries, and organizations can provide the staff and expertise
necessary to conduct a meaningful planning process.

1\. Technical resources.

These include existing planning, engineering, and scientific resources
on staff, GIS, local universities and colleges, and regional planning
associations. States often have staff devoted to technical matters
within the state, such as the State Geologist and State Climatologist.
Program staff such as the State Hurricane Program Manager and State
Earthquake Program Manager can also provide technical assistance.

Local and state higher education institutions can often be excellent
sources of student and faculty expertise and data. In addition, the
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) provides technical
materials to the 45 states and territories that have earthquake program
managers. Some technical assistance is provided through the National
Earthquake Technical Assistance Program (NETAP) sponsored by FEMA.

2\. Financial resources.

*Pre-Disaster Programs*

-   The Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (PDM), authorized by DMA 2000,
    can provide funding to states, communities, and tribes for
    cost-effective hazard mitigation planning activities that complement
    a comprehensive mitigation program and reduce injuries, loss of
    life, and damage and destruction of property before a disaster
    strikes. Check with your FEMA regional office on the status of
    funding.

-   The Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA) provides funding to
    assist states and communities in implementing measures to reduce or
    eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to buildings,
    manufactured homes, and other insurable structures. The three types
    of grants available through FMA are planning, project, and technical
    assistance grants. Only communities that participate in the National
    Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) can apply for project and technical
    assistance grants. Planning grants are to be used by states and
    communities to prepare flood mitigation plans, with a focus on
    repetitive loss properties. Currently, funding for FMA is provided
    through the NFIP and is funded at \$20 million annually.

*Post-Disaster Programs*

-   The Stafford Act (Public Law 100-107, as amended) authorizes funding
    for all federal disaster-related assistance in place today.

\[DMA NOTE:

How the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) Relates to the
Stafford Act

The Stafford Act authorizes federal assistance after the President
determines that a disaster has overwhelmed state and local resources.
FEMA and other agencies administer most Stafford Act assistance, which
includes such things as:

-   Provision of temporary housing assistance, including vouchers, minor
    repairs to homes, and the use of mobile homes;

-   Repair, reconstruction or replacement of public facilities;

-   Aid for individuals and families through grants for personal,
    uninsured emergency needs;

-   Clearance of debris;

-   Access to counseling and legal services; and

-   Funding for mitigation grants.

Although the Stafford Act does provide some funding for mitigation
initiatives, mainly through its Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP),
it is geared towards helping communities and victims respond and recover
after a disaster has occurred.

The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) amends the existing
Stafford Act. These amendments authorize the President to provide grants
to state and local governments for pre-disaster mitigation activities,
delineate criteria to be used in awarding such grants, and define
mitigation planning requirements that state and local governments must
meet before receiving additional funding. If state and local governments
meet these criteria and get their plan approved by FEMA, they are
eligible to receive increased funding under HMGP, which is implemented
under Section 404 of the Stafford Act.

DMA 2000 shifts federal emergency management policy away from a reactive
\"response and recovery\" emphasis. Emphasis is now placed on
identifying hazards before they occur, preventing future losses, and
minimizing the impact of disasters.

END DMA NOTE\]

-   The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), authorized by Section
    404 of the Stafford Act, provides grants to state, local, and tribal
    governments (up to 15% of the FEMA disaster funds they receive) to
    implement long-term hazard mitigation measures after a major
    disaster declaration.

-   The Assistance to Individuals and Households Grant Program is
    authorized by Section 411 of the Stafford Act and authorizes grants
    to be used for mitigation measures to cover serious unmet,
    disaster-related real property losses.

-   The Public Assistance Program (PA) is authorized under Section 406
    of the Stafford Act. This program provides funding, following a
    disaster declaration, for the repair, restoration, or replacement of
    damaged facilities belonging to governments and to private nonprofit
    entities, and for other associated expenses, including emergency
    protective measures and debris removal. The program also funds
    mitigation measures related to the repair of damaged public
    facilities.

\[READERS' TIP:

Start identifying funding resources to support the planning process.
Many grants can help pay for creating the plan, while others can help
pay for the activities themselves. There are many federal agencies that
offer grants and technical assistance for general planning that may be
used towards mitigation planning. Some states and local governments hire
or task an individual to track down different grants that may be
available. A few states have automated computer systems to help local
governments locate funding for mitigation projects. Planning initiatives
almost always gain more support from local officials if there is a
potential for grant money from an outside source that can help pay for
cost-effective actions that result from the plan. Numerous resources are
available to local governments to help fund mitigation efforts. The need
for outside funding sources reinforces the need to look at
multi-objective planning. Some funding sources are not specifically
designated for hazard mitigation planning, but can be used for that if
it accomplishes the specified goal in tandem with hazard mitigation. An
example of approaching mitigation planning in a multi-objective context
is a community that wants to bury its power lines to reduce wind-related
damages. This community might be able to tap into blight-reduction
grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (as power
lines are usually seen as unsightly and can detract from the
community\'s character). Refer to the *Mitigation Resources for Success*
CD (FEMA 372) for other federal programs.

END READERS' TIP\]

3\. Human resources.

These include the community\'s citizens, businesses, and association
leaders who want to be involved in the planning process.

\[READERS' TIP:

Check with your State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) for technical
assistance and sources of funding for planning. In addition, consult
with the SHMO for planning guidance and to get the most up-to-date
requirements.

END READERS' TIP\]

In addition to the staff it brings, private sector participation can
also lead to financial and in-kind resources. Citizens with expertise in
areas such as survey techniques, fundraising, public relations, and
other technical subjects can be valuable to the planning team. For
additional guidance on planning resources, see *Securing Resources for
Mitigation Planning* (FEMA 386-9).

\[STATE TIP:

The state should assist local jurisdictions in identifying funding for
mitigation planning or to fund mitigation measures.

\[END STATE TIP\]

\[Exhibit -- Hazardville Post\]

The Hazardville Post Vol. CXI No. 100 Thursday, February 25, 2002

Mayor Challenges Town to Reduce Disaster Costs

\[Hazardville, EM\] In an attempt to follow through on his commitment to
make Hazardville a safer place to live, work, and do business, Mayor
McDonald has appointed Joe Norris, the Planning Department Director, to
head a hazard mitigation steering committee. To assist him with these
efforts, the City Council has appointed to the committee David Waters,
Hazardville\'s Floodplain Manager, Wendy Soot, Hazardville\'s Fire
Marshall, Mary Tremble, Director of Hazardville\'s Emergency Management
Agency, and Rita Booke, head of the local Citizens for Action group.

Mr. Waters, Hazardville\'s Floodplain Manager, is excited about the
opportunity to work with Mr. Norris to integrate all of the Town\'s
plans together. \"It certainly is long overdue that Hazardville begins
to take a comprehensive approach to deal with our hazards. We are a
small town that seems to be repeatedly plagued by problems brought on by
floods and landslides. In addition, I understand there is a substantial
risk for a major earthquake in the region,\" said Mr. Waters.

Mr. Waters finds that by getting many of the local business members
together, he is able enlist their help and build partnerships that will
help Hazardville become a safer place to live and work. He has asked Jim
Snow, owner of Snow\'s Snowplows and a local business leader, to
research efforts to gain outside support in the form of grants and local
monetary resources. Jim explains, \"Grants will help cover the
activities necessary to implement the plan. Getting this committee
together to develop a plan will help save more of our tax dollars in the
long run. It will help our town become more efficient at dealing with
risks, and will save things from being destroyed.\"

Disasters can affect our community's economy, housing, transportation,
cultural resources, and natural resources. These elements are all part
of the bigger picture. Ms. Tremble, Director of Hazardville\'s Emergency
Management Agency, sees that as a member of the hazard mitigation
planning team, she can help update the existing emergency management
plan by reviewing and focusing on the recent disasters and the
community\'s vulnerabilities to hazards, and by ensuring that the plan
is compliant with federal and state regulations and plans.

Mayor McDonald commented in the interview, \"We need to think on a more
regional scale. When a disaster occurs, there are no boundary lines
stating how far a flood can reach or how much damage an earthquake can
cause for a community or communities. Some flooding problems are
multi-jurisdictional, and therefore, I have asked the Hazardville
planning team to consider working closely on this mitigation planning
effort with our neighbors to the north, Soppytown, to deal with the
flooding and watershed issues in a coordinated manner.\" At the time of
press, no response was forthcoming from Soppytown\'s Mayor Smith. If you
are interested in becoming involved in the plan, please call the
Planning Department at 888-777-6666.

\[Diagram showing the movement from step1 to step 2 to step 3, with step
2 enlarged\]

2 Build the Planning Team

Overview

Once you have the support for initiating the mitigation planning
process, it is time to identify a group of dedicated and interested
individuals to be on your planning team. These individuals will be the
\"workhorses\" who will see the planning process through. Selecting
members who are a good fit will become critical to the eventual success
of your community\'s mitigation planning process. Creating a planning
team can be one of the most challenging aspects of the process.
Involving a variety of people from different segments of the community
will allow all sides of the issues to be examined and will help ensure
broad-based support for the plan. Many communities already have a Local
Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) in place to deal with hazardous
material (HAZMAT) spill contingencies and to improve the safety of all
agencies involved with HAZMAT. Some LEPCs deal with natural hazards as
well, and they would be a good base from which to build your planning
team.

\[Diagram showing the movement from step1 to step 2 to step 3, with step
2 enlarged\]

\[READERS CAUTION

In CRS, reference is made (and points are given) for involving community
*staff*, the *public*, and *stakeholders* in the flood mitigation
planning process as the planning \"committee.\" To obtain maximum points
under CRS, you may wish to organize your planning committee or team (as
referenced here) according to the CRS approach. Additionally, points are
awarded if a planner prepares the plan. Regardless of the approach used,
make sure that you take into account the unique strengths and weaknesses
of those available in your community to help create, implement, and
maintain the plan.

END READERS CAUTION\]

If your community has developed a comprehensive plan, you may want to
identify those who participated in the process and add them to your
mitigation planning team. Alternatively, you could determine that the
mitigation planning process could be integrated into the existing
comprehensive plan.

\[SIDE TIP

Consider Establishing a Steering Committee

Some communities or states may find the need to first organize a core
group of individuals into a steering committee. This group will provide
leadership and support in the early stages of creating a mitigation
plan, oversee the planning process, and be the point of contact for the
various interest groups in the community or state. This steering
committee may later be absorbed into the larger planning team.

Depending on the size of your community, you may have a wealth of
potential candidates from which to choose. Consider selecting candidates
who have the trust and respect of others and can represent different
interests within the community. Ideally, you would like to have
representation from each major interest group in the community on the
committee.

When selecting potential steering committee members, look for people
who:

-   Possess the ability to command the respect of citizens,
    businesspersons, and government elected officials.

-   Are visionary and open to new ideas.

-   Have the desire, time, and commitment to address the issues.

-   Have the ability to communicate planning and hazard concepts to
    colleagues, citizens, and others.

-   Have opposed mitigation planning, or planning in general, in the
    past (theory of inviting your \"enemies\").

-   Understand local politics and issues.

-   Have planning experience or hazard knowledge.

END SIDE TIP\]

The planning team should consist of community leaders, representatives
of local government agencies, business owners and operators, interested
citizens, and anyone else who has an interest in reducing hazards in
your community. While it can be a challenge to bring together all of the
experiences, personalities, resources, and policies in your community,
it is nonetheless a critical part of the planning process. It is
especially good to include past activists or \"squeaky wheels\" because
this will bring them into the process and hopefully educate them, as
well as other committee members, on why certain projects are or are not
feasible, including projects which are of particular concern to them.
Ensuring that your team has an equitable and diverse representation will
enhance your planning efforts and help build support for mitigation.

Procedures & Techniques

Task A. Create the planning team.

The planning team should be built on existing organizations or boards
whenever possible. Larger communities may want to consider building on
capabilities that already exist within their agencies and departments.
For example, as mentioned previously, LEPCs can provide a good base from
which to create a planning team.

\[SIDE TIP:

The American Planning Association (APA) is a professional association to
which many planners belong. Planners can be certified through the
American Institute of Certified Planners, a subsection of APA, by
passing a comprehensive exam. These individuals must meet certain
criteria for planning experience and demonstrate their knowledge of a
wide variety of planning subjects and professional ethics.

END SIDE TIP\]

The planning team can welcome anyone who is available to participate
regularly in the meetings. Smaller subgroups may have to be established
later in the process if there are numerous issues the team wants to
explore, if hazard-specific groups are desired, or if the number of
stakeholders is too large for effective discussion of issues.

\[SIDE TIP

Planning Team

members should think about organizations and people they know who might
be interested in helping with the mitigation plan. They should be asked
to provide contact information at the first meeting so that the planning
team can consider additional candidates to invite.

END SIDE TIP\]

> 1\. Select a chair of the committee. An experienced chair will
> understand how to navigate issues related to team momentum, conflict,
> team composition, and schedules for completing tasks.
>
> 2\. Determine your stakeholders. Stakeholders are individuals or
> groups that will be affected in any way by a mitigation action or
> policy and include businesses, private organizations, and citizens.
> There is no \"best\" way to identify stakeholders; indeed, the
> stakeholders you involve may change several times during the
> mitigation process as the needs or focus of the team or processes
> change. Brainstorming with the planning team is a good way to bring to
> light candidates that you may have missed earlier. Discuss the
> following questions with your team members and see what kind of
> candidates you identify:
>
> \[SIDE TIP

Help! Do You Need a Consultant?

Decide if you need or want a consultant to assist you in the planning
process. Although leading the mitigation planning process does not
require formal training in planning, engineering, or science, sometimes
it is necessary to hire someone to assist you in all or portions of the
planning process. You may need assistance if:

-   Your community does not have enough staff to devote someone to lead
    the process as part of their job duties;

-   You wish to have targeted assistance in identifying hazards, risks,
    and vulnerabilities, and in performing loss estimates;

-   You feel you need an outside facilitator to manage public meetings
    or to assist in goal setting or prioritizing; or

-   No one in the community feels comfortable leading the planning
    process, or has the time to devote to it.

Hourly rates for planning consultants vary depending on their
experience. In addition to private consultants, consider contracting
with your regional planning agency, if one exists. Issues such as
finding a consultant you are comfortable with, determining the scope of
work, guidelines for how much of a role the consultant will have during
the process, and how they will interact with the lay planners are all
important to consider before hiring a consultant.

Many communities hire outside consultants to assist them in the
coordination, facilitation, and implementation of the mitigation
planning process. If your community decides to hire a consultant to
assist with your mitigation plan, consider looking for a planner that:

-   Understands that each community has unique demographic, geographic,
    and political considerations that need to be taken into account when
    creating a fully integrated mitigation plan.

-   Understands all pertinent regulations and considerations as they
    apply to the mitigation plan (e.g., requirements of DMA 2000, state
    and local ordinances, and NFIP requirements).

-   Recognizes that community input and public participation are keys to
    any successful mitigation plan.

-   Is familiar with emergency management and multi-hazard mitigation
    concepts.

-   Will provide you with the names and phone numbers of past clients.

> For more information on hiring and working with a planning consultant,
> go to the American Planning Association Web site at www.planning.org,
> or see the additional Web sites and references that are listed in the
> Library in Appendix B.
>
> END SIDE TIP\]

-   Who are the representatives of those most likely to be affected?

-   Who might be responsible for what is intended?

-   Who is likely to mobilize in support of the mitigation planning
    process? Against it?

-   Who can make the planning process more effective through their
    participation or less effective by their nonparticipation or
    outright opposition?

-   Who are the \"voiceless\" for whom special efforts may have to be
    made?

-   Who can contribute financial or technical resources?

> \[SIDE TIP
>
> Specialized Planning Team Members
>
> You have an opportunity to include planning team members who have
> specialized areas of expertise. For example, if your mitigation plan
> will include sensitive areas, lands with endangered species, or
> historic structures, you will want to include people representing
> these issues on your planning team. In addition, if you are including
> technological hazards in your mitigation plan, such as hazardous
> materials or terrorism, invite members with the background and
> expertise to identify appropriate mitigation measures to reduce the
> risks from these hazards.
>
> As referenced in the Introduction, additional how-to guides will be
> prepared as special issues arise. These guides may suggest appropriate
> people or departments to include on your planning team to address
> these issues. Check the FEMA Web site or contact your State Hazard
> Mitigation Officer for new guides.
>
> END SIDE TIP\]
>
> 3\. Include stakeholder representation from the following groups. Even
> if these groups decline to participate early on, keep them in mind for
> later participation and advice when you are further along in the
> planning process. Also, copy them on meeting notices and meeting
> minutes. The level of participation from each of the groups that
> follows can range from advisory to active participant.

-   Neighborhood groups and other non-profit organizations and
    associations. These entities often act as advocates for citizens and
    can be essential in garnering support and local buy-in from
    citizens. These groups include neighborhood associations, housing
    organizations, watershed associations and other environmental
    groups, historical preservation groups, parent-teacher
    organizations, church organizations, and the local Red Cross.

-   State, regional, and local government representatives. State,
    regional, and local agencies can provide local expertise and
    guidance on statutes and programs that can provide grants. In
    addition, local agency representatives from departments such as
    public works, recreation, fire, or public safety can provide the
    team with valuable technical expertise. Representatives from
    neighboring communities should also be included. Key state
    representatives include the State Hazard Mitigation Officer,
    National Flood Insurance Program coordinator, State Coastal Zone
    Manager, State Geologist, State Climatologist, and other state
    agencies associated with the federal agencies mentioned below.

-   Businesses and development organizations. Local businesses are vital
    to the economic health of the community. Involving local businesses
    and the local units of national or regional chains will help ensure
    that the local economy becomes more disaster resistant, and it will
    yield a larger resource base for project implementation.

-   Elected officials. Elected officials can help validate the hazard
    mitigation program and process by providing visibility and political
    influence. These officials often can expedite legislative and budget
    considerations, proclamations and resolutions, and directives to
    local personnel and agencies.

-   Federal agency representatives. Federal agencies can provide
    technical expertise, knowledge about government processes, guidance
    on federal programs and grants, and awareness about current trends
    in the area. These federal agencies can include the regional FEMA
    office, the district Army Corps of Engineers office, Economic
    Development Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, National Weather
    Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Natural Resources
    Conservation Service (NRCS) planners. In coastal areas, the National
    Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) may be able to provide
    technical assistance on coastal issues.

-   Academic institutions. Academic institutions can provide valuable
    resources to both state and local government mitigation planning.
    State universities are often engaged in research that addresses
    state, regional, or local issues, and they can provide the latest
    data related to your community or state.

SIDE TIP

Many graduate students may be interested in undertaking a community or
statewide social, environmental, planning, hazard mapping, or geological
information initiative as their thesis or class project. A class
instructor may also be willing to coordinate a class project that could
assist a community or state in their hazard identification and risk
analysis or planning needs. Collaborating with local universities and
colleges could provide low to no-cost planning assistance and would
provide students with hands-on experience. When considering this kind of
assistance, be prepared to address the following issues:

-   Can the project be completed within one or two semesters? If not,
    can the project be broken down into smaller tasks?

-   Will there be a sufficient amount of guidance and internal
    organization to enable the instructors and students to perform the
    projects successfully?

-   Understand that the students will need guidance in understanding and
    adhering to any regulations.

END SIDE TIP\]

If possible, a community or state planner should be identified to be the
expert, guide, and facilitator of the planning process. Local, regional,
or state government agencies such as the planning, housing,
environmental, or transportation departments can also be valuable
resources when looking for professional planners. Regional economic
development and planning districts may be particularly active in your
state and could facilitate the planning process. These planners work
daily with planning processes, planning resources, and plan development.
Therefore, they are familiar with the legislative and political
framework in which the mitigation plan must operate. It is also
beneficial to have a plan leader with experience chairing other
committees, ideally other planning committees. This helps greatly in all
steps of the planning process.

Communities and states should also consider looking for candidates with
spirit, enthusiasm, and the time to dedicate to the initiative. Look
towards the leaders and advocates who are already involved with
activities to improve the quality of life in the community.

\[SIDE TIP

States may decide to identify specific state or regional planning
resources to support local plan development. The state can help local
communities to identify planning team members and should participate in
some way on the planning team.

END SIDE TIP\]

Task B. Obtain official recognition for the planning team.

Your individual community must decide whether this planning team will
serve only as an advisory committee or if it will be a decision-making
body. Either way, your planning efforts will be more successful if your
team is designated with the official authority to develop a mitigation
plan. Your planning team should consider obtaining official recognition
in the form of a council resolution, a proclamation, a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA), or a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This
recognition can go a long way toward demonstrating community or state
support for mitigation action, and it greatly increases the plan\'s
chances of being formally adopted.

Task C. Organize the team.

1.  Have an informal kick-off. Once potential candidates have been
    identified, it is important to convene the group to enlist their
    participation and educate them about hazard mitigation planning.
    This meeting should generate a sense of teamwork among individuals
    who may not be used to working together, or who come from different
    backgrounds or have different values and interests. The first
    meeting should focus on creating a mood for learning rather than
    jumping directly into problem solving. Participants will probably
    come to this first meeting with preconceived notions of what they
    already know about hazards and what they think can be done about
    them.

\[SIDE BAR

Memorandum of Understanding

The following provides an example Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for
a typical planning effort where the community government is being
represented by the Planning Department, which serves as the lead staff
resource for the community. Reading and signing a similar MOU should be
one of the first tasks of the planning team.

I. Purpose

As part of the Community Mitigation Planning Program, a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) must be executed between the \[insert community
name\] and the authorized citizen representative of the \[insert
planning team name\] planning area. The plan created as a result of this
MOU will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council for
adoption.

When adopted, plans provide guidance to city boards, commissions, and
departments. Adopted plans serve as a guide and do not include a
specific financial commitment by the city. All adopted plans should
address land use, community facilities, and transportation networks.
Priority projects are considered for recommendation as a part of the
Annual Improvement Project Report. This report is forwarded to the City
Council.

The intent of this MOU is to ensure that the mitigation plan is
developed in an open manner involving neighborhood stakeholders, and
that it is consistent with city policies and is an accurate reflection
of the community\'s values. Its purpose is to form a working
relationship between the citizens of \[insert community name\] and the
\[insert community name\] Planning Department.

This MOU sets out the responsibilities of all parties. The MOU
identifies the work to be performed by the planning team and Planning
Department. Planning tasks, schedules, and finished products are
identified in the Work Program.

II\. Responsibilities

A general list of responsibilities follows:

COMMUNITY PLANNING TEAM RESPONSIBILITIES

> 1\. Ensure that the planning team includes representatives from the
> neighborhood stakeholders groups, including all residents,
> neighborhood associations, community groups, property owners,
> institutions, businesses, schools, etc. The Planning Director should
> approve the final composition of the planning team.
>
> 2\. Develop the Work Program with the *Planning Department*.
>
> 3\. Organize regular meetings of the planning team in coordination
> with the *Planning Department.*
>
> 4\. Assist the *Planning Department* with organizing public meetings
> to develop the plan.
>
> 5\. Identify the community resources available to support the planning
> effort, including people to serve as meeting facilitators and
> committee chairs.
>
> 6\. Assist with recruiting participants for planning meetings,
> including the development of a mailing list, distribution of flyers,
> and placement of meeting announcements in neighborhood newsletters.
>
> 7\. Gain the support of neighborhood stakeholders for the
> recommendations found within the plan.
>
> 8\. Submit the proposed plan to the city for interdepartmental review.
>
> 9\. Work with the Planning Department to incorporate interdepartmental
> comments into the proposed plan.
>
> 10\. Submit the proposed plan to the Planning Commission and City
> Council for consideration.
>
> 11\. After adoption, develop a Coordinating Committee to monitor and
> work toward plan implementation.
>
> 12\. After adoption, publicize the plan to neighborhood interests and
> ensure new community members are aware of the plan and its contents.

PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF RESPONSIBILITIES

> 1\. Assign a planning staff member to provide technical assistance and
> necessary data to the planning effort.
>
> 2\. Coordinate and facilitate community meetings with the assistance
> of the planning team.
>
> 3\. Provide any necessary materials, handouts, etc., necessary for
> public planning meetings.
>
> 4\. Work with the planning team to collect and analyze data and
> develop goals and implementation strategies.
>
> 5\. Provide assistance with the creation of the plan, including
> review, editing, and formatting.
>
> 6\. Coordinate with other city departments, public agencies, and other
> stakeholders during plan development.
>
> 7\. Coordinate the city interdepartmental review.
>
> 8\. Prepare for plan consideration by the Planning Commission and City
> Council.

Director of Planning Planning Team Chair

Name: Signed after selection Name: Signed after selection

Signature: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Signature:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Date: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Date:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

END SIDE BAR\]

> The first gathering should be relaxed, friendly, and brief. The
> meeting should focus on an introduction of the team members, what the
> meeting is for, and what the team wants to accomplish. This first
> meeting should include a discussion of roles and responsibilities,
> decision-making processes, conflict resolution strategies,
> administrative procedures, financial management, and communication
> strategies. Consider showing a video about planning (floodplain
> planning, for example) as this could help orient the participants and
> provide background information on why planning is important. These
> issues are essential to sustaining the planning process over the long
> run. When possible, a representative from the state should provide an
> overview of mitigation planning and DMA 2000 or other applicable
> requirements. Over the course of the next few meetings, it would be
> helpful for the team to create a chart of the planning process that
> includes a timeline. The chart should describe who is responsible for
> what and when, what each member\'s roles are, and how each party\'s
> contribution is related to the overall process. The chart should not
> remain static; it should be continually updated and revised as the
> planning process progresses.
>
> \[SIDE TIP
>
> During subsequent meetings, you may want to spice up the meeting by
> watching a short video or conducting a \"what if\" exercise to find
> out what locations or assets may be vulnerable to hazards. Information
> on conducting tabletop mitigation exercises or a list of videos can be
> found on the FEMA Web site or the FEMA publications warehouse at
> 1-800-480-2520.
>
> END SIDE TIP\]
>
> 2\. Prepare for the first formal meeting. Before the first formal
> meeting is convened, the team leader should determine the local
> procedural requirements for these meetings. These laws usually concern
> whether the team can have closed meetings, whether the records and
> minutes must be available to the public, and whether there must be
> public notices of the meetings. The team leader or chair of the
> planning team should also help develop issues and points of discussion
> for the first meeting from the information it has collected. An agenda
> should be developed and sent to the members before the first meeting.
> Someone should be designated for each of the three roles that are
> vital to conducting meetings: the chair, a facilitator, and someone to
> record all of the information. These roles should have been appointed
> prior to the first formal meeting.
>
> SIDE TIP

A few simple guide rules should be posted somewhere in the room, and
should include each of the following guidelines:

-   Everyone participates fully

-   All input is honored

-   Keep your personal agendas outside of the team

-   One colleague speaks at a time

-   Be honest and speak what\'s on your mind

-   No one is ridiculed or made to feel unimportant

-   Look for connections

-   Trust the process

-   Have some fun

> END SIDE TIP\]
>
> A designated team member or two should also begin to gather data and
> information about things like the resources the community has
> available, the date of the most recent disaster, damage estimates from
> the most recent disaster, etc.
>
> 3\. Develop a mission statement. The planning team is now ready to
> develop a mission statement that will describe the overall purpose of
> developing the mitigation plan. Often the term \"mission\" is used
> interchangeably with \"vision.\" However, the mission statement is
> about the plan\'s purpose while the vision statement is about where
> your community wants to be in the future as an outcome of your
> mission. You may choose to develop both. Developing a mission
> statement is the first step toward developing goals to guide you in
> accomplishing your mission. Subsequently, you will develop objectives
> and activities to support these goals. Goals and objectives will be
> discussed in more detail in *Developing a Mitigation Plan* (FEMA
> 386-3).
>
> \[SIDE TIP

Mission and Vision Statements

Mission statements describe the overall duty and purpose of the planning
process. Vision statements describe the ultimate outcome that you strive
for through your mission.

North Carolina Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (August 2001)

-   Mission statement -- To make North Carolinians, communities, state
    agencies, local governments, and businesses less vulnerable to the
    effects of natural hazards through the effective administration of
    hazard mitigation grant programs, hazard risk assessments, wise
    floodplain management, and a coordinated approach to mitigation
    policy through state, regional, and local planning activities.

-   Vision statement -- Institutionalize a statewide hazard mitigation
    ethic through leadership, professionalism, and excellence, leading
    the way to a safe, sustainable North Carolina.

END SIDE TIP\]

Developing a mission statement will help team members to understand what
outcomes they want to achieve. This step will help build a common
understanding of the purpose of the plan. The central theme for your
mission statement should acknowledge in some way that a specific problem
exists and that there are ways to solve it. The mission statement should
answer the following questions:

-   Why is the plan being developed?

-   What does the plan do?

-   For whom or where?

-   How does the plan do this?

> 4\. Establish responsibilities. Each planning team member should have
> a clear understanding of what is expected of them as a member of the
> team, what they can expect from the team and the planning process, and
> how much time they will need to dedicate to the initiative. Team
> members should have answers to each of the following questions:

-   What do you see as your role and responsibility in this initiative?

-   To be successful, what do you need from the rest of the team?

-   To be successful, what do you need to give to the team in return?

-   How do you see the plan contributing to the betterment of the
    community?

-   What specific things will this committee do to ensure such an
    outcome?

> 5\. Assign key roles and provide job descriptions to team members.
> Assignments should be broad to accommodate future growth of the team.
> A focus that is too narrow in scope could require reorganization after
> the size of the team increases. Also, community professional staff or
> a consultant could perform some of these functions as well. Types of
> roles include:

-   Developing public information

-   Public outreach to special interest groups

> \[DMA
>
> Documentation of the planning process, including public involvement,
> is required to meet DMA 2000 (see 44CFR §201.4(c)(1) and
> §201.6(c)(1)). The plan must include a description of the planning
> process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who
> was involved in the process, and how other agencies participated. A
> description of the planning process should include how the planning
> team or committee was formed, how input was sought from individuals or
> other agencies who did not participate on a regular basis, what the
> goals and objectives of the planning process were, and how the plan
> was prepared. The description can be in the plan itself or contained
> in the cover memo or an appendix.
>
> END DMA\]

-   Technical assistance from agencies or departments that are involved

-   Meeting location planner

-   Meeting documentation -- One person should keep a record of all
    meeting minutes, voting and attendance records, resolutions of the
    team, open public meetings, and research work summaries. The
    designated member may also be in charge of posting notices for
    meetings and press releases. Keeping good records will provide
    documentation to support the team\'s decisions and provide evidence
    that the decisions were well considered. Your team might want to
    tape the meetings for easier and more complete record keeping.
    Minutes should be provided to each member of the partnership,
    including members who are not present at the meetings. Communication
    networks that provide access to the information, such as email or a
    Web page, can be established.

> 6\. Establish a regular meeting schedule. During initial meetings, the
> team should decide upon a meeting schedule that is frequent enough to
> hold the team\'s interest, but flexible enough so that team members do
> not burn out early in the process. Scheduling outside field trips and
> visits to nearby towns and communities are good ways to give team
> members first-hand knowledge of problems in the area, and they can
> also help break the monotony of meetings. Have one team member create
> a calendar of meeting dates, times, and locations and send a copy to
> all team members.
>
> Initially, the team will require frequent meetings to organize the
> process and to further define the mission and responsibilities of the
> team. Later, the structure of the workgroups, projects, grant
> applications, and disaster events will determine the frequency of the
> meetings. One of the goals of any mitigation planning team should be
> to increase coordination among its members so that it almost becomes
> second nature whether the meeting structure is formal or relaxed.
>
> 7\. Set goals for each meeting. To ensure focus, the meeting
> facilitator should set goals for each meeting and share these goals
> with the group. When setting meeting goals, be sure that the following
> questions are addressed:

-   How will I measure the success of this meeting---what specific
    things need to be seen or heard?

-   Are we making progress?

-   What will participants take away from the meeting? What will be its
    value?

-   If this meeting were a press event, what headline would I want to
    come out of this meeting?

> 8\. Set future meeting agendas; keep it action-oriented. Urge members
> to submit future agenda requests that outline what the individual
> would like the planning team to do, why he or she would like the
> planning team to do it, and what benefit it will bring to the planning
> team and project as a whole. This prevents unnecessary agenda items
> that can be handled on an individual or subgroup basis and reveals
> topics that need to be further developed before they are submitted to
> the entire planning team.
>
> When developing the agenda for team meetings, use action-oriented
> words that not only state what you are going to talk about, but
> connote activity and outcomes. This will help keep your meeting
> focused and cut down on time. Examples of a few action-oriented words
> are: *recruit, evaluate, decide, assess, monitor, appoint, select,
> determine, recommend, publicize, follow-up, write, send, design,* and
> *publish.*
>
> 9\. Set timelines for projects to be completed. Timelines are critical
> to the success of a hazard mitigation team. They keep the team focused
> on its mission and serve as a method to measure progress.
>
> 10\. Consider forming subcommittees or workgroups. One option for
> organizing members of the planning team is to create workgroups or
> subcommittees. Workgroups or subcommittees that meet independently of
> the full planning team focus on one central issue and usually provide
> the leadership, research, and plan-writing responsibilities for that
> issue. Many planning teams choose to use the workgroup/subcommittee
> option for several different reasons. Some planning teams use
> workgroups or subcommittees to concentrate participants with similar
> interests or expertise into one group. Others use them to foster more
> organized and productive meetings than an assemblage of the entire
> team would provide. Other planning teams choose workgroups or
> subcommittees simply to help prevent \"burnout\" caused by
> participating in too many meetings.
>
> \[SIDE TIP
>
> Actual terminology can vary from planning team to planning team.
> Whether your team has workgroups, subcommittees, or task forces, the
> function of these groups is the same.
>
> END SIDE TIP\]
>
> \[SIDE TIP

Example planning team committees or workgroups include:

-   Risk Assessment

-   Infrastructure

-   Critical Facilities

-   Land Use Planning and Zoning

-   Businesses

END SIDE TIP\]

\[SIDE TIP

Look out for Common Planning Pitfalls

Sometimes planning teams experience difficulty working together as a
unified group. These problems can result from a lack of commitment to
the cause, unclear missions or goals, personality conflicts, personal
agendas, or ill-defined roles for the team members. Most of these
problems will work themselves out over time, but on rare occasions, this
difficulty could threaten the very existence of the group, or the
ability to achieve the team goals. This may happen explosively through
conflict or quietly through indifference. If this occurs within your
team, consider trying different strategies to get the team back on
track.

1\. Recognize the constraints and limitations of a public-private
relationship. The concept of public-private partnerships is still a
relatively new concept for planning. The diversity of these stakeholders
will add complexity to the relationships and could cause increased
tensions among team members. The team must be alert to possible tensions
of any kind and should be prepared to take immediate action to address
the issue before it becomes a major impediment to the team\'s efforts.
Problems will arise when team members perceive an inequality of power,
have a lack of trust of other team members, are unclear about their
roles, or do not feel that their expectations for the planning process
are being met in any way.

When dealing with government agencies there are laws, regulations, and
procedures that their representatives are expected to follow. The
private sector may also have constraints and limitations on how they can
operate in a partnership relationship from issues such as serving as
boards of directors, company policies, grant restrictions, and legal
regulations. Small businesses may be limited in the amount of resources
they can contribute and the amount of time they can devote to the
partnership. Recognizing and understanding the constraints and
limitations of both sides through discussions and strategies to address
the issues will enable the team to function more effectively.

2\. Check level of understanding. Some information that will be
discussed during the team meetings will be somewhat technical, but
critical to the success of the mitigation planning process. Ask
questions of the participants to make sure they understand everything
that is discussed and why it is important before misunderstandings
become a barrier to further progress.

3\. Go back to the drawing board. The planning team or chair of the
planning team may need to determine whether the proper team members have
been invited to participate, to define more clearly the purpose and
direction of the hazard mitigation team and its roles.

4\. Check on the speed of the planning process. Too much time between
meetings or steps in the planning process may cause the team to lose
interest. The team may want to consider assigning homework for each
member before the meetings so that more work can be completed in less
time, and by tightening up deadlines to finish the planning process more
quickly.

5\. Conduct icebreaker exercises at the beginning and middle of each
meeting. Icebreakers such as mental or physical games or exercises can
enhance creative thinking and help create a relaxed, more informal
atmosphere.

6\. Appoint or hire a trained facilitator to run meetings. Facilitators
are skilled professionals who help meetings run more smoothly and
efficiently, and help keep the focus of meetings on track.

END SIDE TIP\]

\[EXHIBIT OF HAZARDVILLE POST

The Hazardville Post Vol. CXI No. 65 Thursday, March 13, 2002

Planning Committee Looks for Members

\[Hazardville, EM\] The Hazardville Mitigation Committee is seeking new
members.

Mr. Joe Norris, Planning Department Director and Chair of the newly
formed Town of Hazardville Organization for Risk Reduction (THORR),
stated; \"In forming this committee we are looking for people who want
to plan for the future and support the idea of planning before a
disaster strikes, which is the only way to truly make our community
safer, healthier, and more economically resilient.\"

Mr. Norris was tasked with organizing a committee to create a hazard
mitigation plan. The committee should include stakeholders or people
directly affected by disasters. Although there is no \"best way\" to
single these people out, Mr. Norris said he is looking for people
willing to support the mitigation planning process as well as those with
access to financial and/or technical resources. He is enlisting the help
of neighborhood associations, housing organizations, local environmental
groups, historical preservation groups, and the local American Red Cross
in order to generate a successful and well-integrated mitigation plan.

Mr. Norris said when interviewed, \"Team members should have a clear
understanding of what is expected of them and how much of his or her
time will be needed or dedicated to the initiative. I want potential
team members to walk away from any given meeting or forum feeling that
they have helped Hazardville on the road to establishing a successful
mitigation plan that will reduce losses from future disasters.\"

\"We need to develop a mission statement and a vision that will unite
the committee, and ultimately the community. We need to build a
relationship that is based on an understanding and commitment to achieve
a positive outcome for current and future generations who live and work
in Hazardville.\"

A proposed work plan and schedule, which will be reviewed and agreed
upon by the planning committee, is included at the end of this article.
This should give residents an idea of the planning process and the
actions that the committee will be responsible for. If you are
interested in participating, please call Joe Norris at (888) 222-1111.

END EXHIBIT\]

\[DRAFT WORK PLAN

Hazard Identification, Analysis and Risk Assessment (June \'02 --
October \'02)

-   Project Initiation Meeting

-   Public Meeting #1

-   Hazard Identification

-   Hazard Events Profile

-   Community Asset Inventory

-   Risk Assessment/Loss Estimation

-   Progress and Coordination Meetings

Capability Assessment (June \'02 -- October \'02)

-   Plans, Policies, and Programs Examination

-   Assessment of Previous Mitigation Activities

-   Identification of Resources

-   Public Meeting #2

-   Progress and Coordination Meetings

Assessment of Alternative Hazard Mitigation Measures and Needs (November
\'02 -- January \'03)

-   Develop Goals and Objectives

-   Research of Mitigation Alternatives

-   Progress and Coordination Meeting

-   Evaluate the Mitigation Measures

-   Mitigation Recommendations

-   Public Meeting #3

Development of Implementation Strategy (February \'03 -- May \'03)

-   Progress and Coordination Meetings

-   Mitigation Action Plan

-   Public Meeting #4

-   Public Hearing: present the draft Hazard Mitigation Plan

-   Final Presentation: elected and appointed officials or other
    designated forum

Production of Final Plan (March \'03 -- May \'03)

-   Draft Plan

-   Final Plan

-   Adoption of plan by Planning Committee and City Council

Ongoing Activities (ongoing from June \'03)

-   Plan Evaluation

-   Plan Updates

-   Incorporate changes into plan

> END DRAFT WORK PLAN\]
>
> \[WORK SCHEDULE DIAGRAM\]
>
> \[WORKSHEET 1 BUILD THE PLANNING TEAM
>
> In establishing a planning team, you want to ensure that you have a
> broad range of backgrounds and experiences represented. Below are some
> suggestions for agencies to include in a planning team. There are many
> organizations, both governmental and community-based, that should be
> included when creating a local team. In addition, state organizations
> can be included on local teams, when appropriate, to serve as a source
> of information and to provide guidance and coordination.
>
> Use the checklist as a starting point for forming your team. Check the
> boxes beside any individuals or organizations that you have in your
> community/state that you believe should be included on your planning
> team so you can follow up with them.
>
> Task A. Create the planning team -- Suggestions for team members.
> Date:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Local/Tribal
>
>  Administrator/Manager's Office
>
>  Budget/Finance Office
>
>  Building Code Enforcement Office
>
>  City/County Attorney's Office
>
>  Economic Development Office
>
>  Emergency Preparedness Office
>
>  Fire and Rescue Department
>
>  Hospital Management
>
>  Local Emergency Planning Committee
>
>  Planning and Zoning Office
>
>  Police/Sheriff's Department
>
>  Public Works Department
>
>  Sanitation Department
>
>  School Board
>
>  Transportation Department
>
>  Tribal Leaders
>
> Special Districts and Authorities
>
>  Airport and Seaport Authorities
>
>  Business Improvement District(s)
>
>  Fire Control District
>
>  Flood Control District
>
>  Redevelopment Agencies
>
>  Regional/Metropolitan Planning Organization(s)
>
>  School District(s)
>
>  Transit/Transportation Agencies
>
> Others
>
>  Architectural/Engineering/Planning Firms
>
>  Citizen Corps
>
>  Colleges/Universities
>
>  Land Developers
>
>  Major Employers/Businesses
>
>  Professional Associations
>
>  Retired Professionals
>
> State
>
>  Adjutant General's Office (National Guard)
>
>  Board of Education
>
>  Building Code Office
>
>  Climatologist
>
>  Earthquake Program Manager
>
>  Economic Development Office
>
>  Emergency Management Office/State Hazard Mitigation Officer
>
>  Environmental Protection Office
>
>  Fire Marshal's Office
>
>  Geologist
>
>  Homeland Security Coordinator's Office
>
>  Housing Office
>
>  Hurricane Program Manager
>
>  Insurance Commissioner's Office
>
>  National Flood Insurance Program Coordinator
>
>  Natural Resources Office
>
>  Planning Agencies
>
>  Police
>
>  Public Health Office
>
>  Public Information Office
>
>  Tourism Department
>
> Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
>
>  American Red Cross
>
>  Chamber of Commerce
>
>  Community/Faith-Based Organizations
>
>  Environmental Organizations
>
>  Homeowners Associations
>
>  Neighborhood Organizations
>
>  Private Development Agencies
>
>  Utility Companies
>
>  Other Appropriate NGOs

\[Diagram showing the movement from step1 to step 2 to step 3, with step
3 enlarged\]

3 Engage the Public

Overview

Although the planning team represents a cross-section of the community,
it is important to include broad public participation in the planning
process as well. Involving stakeholders who are not part of the core
team in all stages of the process will introduce the planning team to
different points of view about the needs of the community. It will also
provide opportunities to educate the public about hazard mitigation, the
planning process, any findings, and could be used to generate support
for the mitigation plan.

\[Diagram showing the movement from step1 to step 2 to step 3, with step
3 enlarged\]

The stakeholders to involve include those individuals who do not
regularly participate in the planning process, but may be affected or
have an interest in the plan and its implications. Such stakeholders
include public officials, agency heads, neighborhood and other civic
organizations, business associations, institutions, and individual
citizens.

Involving these stakeholders in a public participation process will aid
in developing support for the plan and its implementation. Getting these
stakeholders\' support, however, may be a challenge. Two obstacles are
commonly encountered. First, most people may not be aware of risks in
their community; secondly, they may not know what mitigation is or how
it can compliment an array of existing goals. Therefore, it is important
to find ways to engage these stakeholders and educate them about the
planning process and the benefits of mitigation to them personally and
at the community level.

This step will show you how to identify the stakeholders, organize your
public participation activities, and incorporate public feedback into
your decision-making process.

\[SIDE TIP

Public Participation Methods

Groups make decisions in many ways. In a partnership, the level of
enthusiasm or involvement of individual members is tied directly to the
feeling of ownership in the project. Using a consensus-based approach to
decision making helps promote an attitude of respect for other opinions
while ensuring a process that allows everyone to participate and be
heard. This differs from the majority-rule concept, in which members of
the group may leave the decision-making process feeling unhappy with the
outcome. Majority rule is a legitimate way to make decisions when the
situation does not warrant the time consuming process of consensus. The
group should be able to decide whether the seriousness and significance
of the situation requires consensus or majority rule.

Consensus is a way of working together as a group to reach a decision or
solution. The consensus-based approach is an important part of working
and acting as a team because it forces the individual members to move
beyond their own self-interests and take into consideration the
positions of other stakeholders. It is an informal discussion involving
talking issues through, understanding what other people are saying and
feeling, and then trying to work out decisions acceptable to everyone.
All of the members should be a part of the decision and should feel the
decision that was reached was the best possible one for the team. The
decision may not be their personal preference, but it is one they should
be able to support.

For additional information, including techniques you can use to reach
consensus, see Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In,
and Breaking the Impasse: Consensus Approaches to Resolving Public
Disputes (see Appendix B).

END SIDE TIP\]

Procedures & Techniques

Task A. Identify the public.

Identifying the people to involve will be similar to what you did in
Step 2, Task A, when you created the planning team. In this step,
however, you will be looking more toward educating and informing the
public about what is happening and how proposed measures may affect
them, providing opportunities for them to voice their concerns, and
integrating their feedback as you make decisions.

As a start, you may have developed a list of stakeholders when you
identified members for the planning team. Revisit this list to see who
declined to join the planning team and put them on your contact list.
Also, as you learned more about your community, you may have encountered
other stakeholders you may not have originally considered. Revisit the
questions in Step 2, Task A.2 to help you identify these people. You may
also have lists of participants from previous planning efforts. Review
these lists and select those who should be contacted.

\[SIDE TIP

An effective way to identify leaders in the community (this would
include people who may not necessarily be heads of organizations or
elected officials, but who command the respect of community members,
e.g., a lawyer, neighborhood activist, or philanthropist) is to ask team
members and those who attend public participation activities to name
individuals they think should be contacted. You will notice that the
same names keep coming up. You may want to personally invite these
people or follow-up a mailing to them with a phone call to ensure that
they are aware of the next planning team meeting.

END SIDE TIP\]

Task B. Organize public participation activities.

1\. Schedule public participation activities.

During your organization of the team (Step 2), you set up a regular
meeting schedule (Task C) and a timeline for completing certain phases
of your plan. Revisit this schedule and identify points where it is
important to inform the public of what is happening and to seek their
input to assist you in making a decision. For example, you may want to
hold a public meeting at the beginning of the planning process to let
stakeholders know the purpose of your planning effort and how you are
approaching it. You may have one or more people join the team after such
a meeting. Once they understand what is involved, they may decide it is
worth their time. Another good time to invite public involvement is
after you have completed your risk assessment and damage loss estimation
\[see Understanding Your Risks (FEMA 386-2)\]. This will give the public
a chance to learn specific information about the community\'s
vulnerabilities, which can be a revelation as to why mitigation planning
is important. You may also want to get feedback and input on setting
goals, and identifying and selecting mitigation alternatives.
Stakeholders should review and agree with your selection and evaluation
criteria. Once you have a draft plan that the public can review, invite
them to provide comments before the plan is presented formally for
adoption \[see Bringing the Plan to Life (FEMA 386-4)\]. Note that
Hazardville held four public meetings during the one-year planning
process.

Determine the appropriate public participation method for different
types of stakeholders.

Not everyone likes to participate or voice opinions in a large meeting
setting. Others may prefer to learn about community initiatives during
their regularly scheduled association meetings. It is important to
assess how best to reach your stakeholders. Ask others on the team what
they have done in the past to inform or get input from stakeholders. The
public participation methods that will work for your community or state
depends on the size of your community, the extent of citizen
involvement, governmental policies, and the capabilities of the
officials to support the planning initiative. Review how you have
handled this in the past and what produced good results. You may have
found that elected officials prefer a one-on-one briefing. Businesses,
non-profits, and institutions may have welcomed you at their business
association meetings or invited you to speak at their regularly
scheduled breakfasts. The team can also ask to be added to the agendas
of scheduled community group meetings, including neighborhood
associations, community service groups (Lions, Jaycees, etc), business
alliances, and the local Chamber of Commerce, to explain and talk about
the planning process. Take advantage of the meeting infrastructure
already in place.

Some other participation methods you may want to consider for your
community or state include: hosting a public workshop, establishing a
hotline, conducting interviews, and distributing a questionnaire.
Workshops can be held during different milestones in the planning
process for large or small groups of community or state representatives,
business representatives, and citizens. These meetings can bring
problems and issues to the table and provide new ideas for solutions.

Holding regular community meetings can create a public forum in which
questions can be asked, issues can be raised, answers can be given, and
concerns can be addressed. These public meetings will also help you sell
mitigation beyond the planning team to the community at large. As part
of this, you need to agree on the public participation rules. You may
decide to use the same ones that apply to the planning team or modify
this list. Also, agree on how you will handle conflict beforehand.

A hotline can be established so that anyone with a concern, question, or
comment can reach a person who will be able to speak knowledgeably about
the planning process. This number should be well publicized in
newsletters, news releases, meeting announcements, etc. The key to an
effective hotline is ensuring that callers feel that the person at the
other end of the hotline is interested in what they have to say, and not
whether or not they have all the answers. A cost-effective alternative
to a telephone hotline would be to post an e-mail address or use an
interactive Web site.

Interviews allow you to gather information from key people, including
community representatives or leaders, heads of civic groups, and people
who will be most affected by the plan and might be more comfortable
talking one-on-one. Obviously, you cannot interview everyone, but by
interviewing key community members, you can gather specific qualitative
information that you probably cannot obtain in any other way.

Questionnaires can also be used to gather valuable information that
people might not feel comfortable disclosing face-to-face. The
questionnaire can be as simple or detailed as you want and is a good way
to collect a lot of information on citizens' knowledge of hazards as
well as what mitigation activities they\'d like to see implemented. An
excellent example is the questionnaire used by the Partners for Disaster
Resistance: Oregon Showcase State Program, which is included as Appendix
D.

Once you determine how to best approach public stakeholders, assign
responsibilities for:

-   Organizing mailings;

-   Logistical coordination;

-   Meeting facilitation;

-   Establishing a hotline;

-   Contacting interviewees; and

-   Developing presentation materials.

Again, select the method, or methods, most appropriate for your
community and assign responsibilities accordingly.

Analyze, evaluate, and incorporate comments.

As a team, decide how to analyze, evaluate, respond, and incorporate
comments into your decision-making process. Stakeholders should know
that you will listen to their opinions and suggestions, and that you
will decide how to best incorporate these into the plan. They should be
warned, however, that while suggestions are welcome, they will not
always be acted upon. However, stakeholders deserve an explanation of
your decision. Someone should be assigned the responsibility for
organizing the feedback you receive, including summarizing meeting
points, identifying and tracking key issues, and responding to feedback.

Keeping track of and analyzing public comments can get complicated if
you have a large amount of information coming in. Develop a process for
organizing and storing the comments you receive. This can be based on
such things as the topic addressed in the comment, the geographic area
of the person making the comment, or whether it is a positive or
negative comment. It doesn\'t matter how the feedback is organized, as
long as you ensure that the comments are incorporated into the various
stages of the planning process. The Library in Appendix B contains
references that include more specific information on how to analyze and
evaluate public feedback.

2\. Document results.

Documenting results is a crucial part of analyzing, evaluating, and
incorporating public feedback. As mentioned previously, all public
comments, regardless of the source of the comment, should be recorded
and organized. After each public participation activity, results should
be documented so that they can be referred to later. Decision makers
will use the public comments to ensure that all issues are addressed
during the formation of the mitigation plan. The documentation of the
feedback serves as a permanent record that shows you included public
input during the planning process. A specific person or persons from the
planning team should be designated the central contact for public
feedback. This person will be responsible for maintaining and organizing
the comments.

Task C. Develop a public education campaign.

\[SIDE TIP

Obtain Letters of Support or Endorsement

During public outreach activities, you may come to realize that certain
groups or organizations strongly support your mitigation plan and
planning process. Try to get these organizations to provide you with
letters of support or endorsement. To ease this process, provide them
with a template letter that they can tailor and send back to you. These
letters will let you know who is interested and can possibly help you,
and will also be of assistance during the formal plan adoption process.
They may also help in continuing to attract new participants.

END SIDE TIP\]

You will need a specific way to present information to each type of
stakeholder. When meeting with elected and public officials, for
example, you may want to present a brief PowerPoint presentation that
can be expanded for use in a larger public meeting setting. You may
leave brochures with them that can also be distributed at fairs or
libraries. Look at the activities and map out what information would be
useful to leave with stakeholders and what information you need to
prepare for presentation purposes. The following are information
materials you can prepare as part of your education campaign, as well as
venues for distributing them.

1\. News media.

One of the easiest and most effective ways to inform and involve the
public is through the media. Print, radio, and television media have the
ability to affect and shape our opinions and behavior, and influence our
preferences and choices. Your team might want to include a special
insert in the local paper, broadcast public meetings on the local access
channel or through public service announcements, or even produce a video
highlighting recent disasters and damages in your community or state.

You can contact local reporters and give them a press kit, which is a
folder summarizing the key information that includes your goals and
actions, to pique their interest and provide them with accurate
information. You can also do a news release, which you write and provide
to local news media. If your story generates enough interest, a feature
story may be done. This is a full news story written by a reporter. A
news conference is another way to get information out, but to generate
enough interest and ensure that the media will show up, these are
usually only done for major announcements by well known people.

\[READERS CAUTION

While the media is a good source for getting information to the public,
you do have to be careful. Sometimes the media can distort the
information you give them or give it a different spin. The media likes
attention-grabbing headlines so they may try to make your plan
controversial in some way. You should work on establishing an honest,
working relationship with a local reporter so that each of you has
someone to turn to when you need to gather or provide information to the
community.

END READERS CAUTION\]

You can also contact local publications and newsletters and ask them to
include information about the plan and the planning process. Examples of
local organizations that might have publications include: watershed
organizations, historic societies, volunteer organizations, technical
associations, garden clubs, and churches.

2\. Brochures, fliers, and newsletters.

Brochures, fliers, and newsletters are relatively inexpensive to produce
and can be useful in reaching audiences that might not otherwise have
the opportunity to learn more about hazards that affect your community.
Someone on the planning team can create the brochure or newsletter, or
perhaps you can find a volunteer willing to produce it. Make sure these
publications are reviewed and approved by key members of the planning
team before they are distributed. The brochures should be clear and easy
to read and understand. The brochures, fliers, and newsletters should
include information about the planning committee and what the mitigation
plan is expected to accomplish in your community or state. Make sure
that the documents include a designated department or contact name and
phone number in case anyone wants to learn more about the initiative.
These documents can be distributed through utility bills, grocery or
department stores, government buildings, and libraries throughout the
community or state.

\[SIDE TIP

FEMA\'s Mitigation Resources for

Success CD

(FEMA 372) is full of materials and practical ideas for building
community awareness. The success stories from other communities or
states may ignite a wealth of new ideas in your planning team. The
Mitigation Library contains brochures, fact sheets, and step-by-step
instructions on disaster preparedness, mitigation, response, and
recovery. To order, call the FEMA publications warehouse at
1-800-480-2520.

END SIDE TIP\]

3\. Outreach activities at festivals, fairs, and bazaars.

Public events provide unique opportunities for planning team members to
interact with the public in a relaxed and informal atmosphere. The
planning team may want to ask the event coordinators if they would
consider donating a booth or a table to display hazard and
mitigation-related brochures, fliers, and newsletters. During the event,
team members can talk to citizens about their experience with hazards
and try to get feedback on any mitigation activities the team is
considering. This also provides people with an opportunity to ask
questions face to face. Someone on the planning team should be in charge
of keeping track of the dates of local fairs, festivals, etc. and should
be responsible for contacting the organizers of the events.

\[SIDE TIP

When creating a mitigation plan in response to the Cerro Grande Fire,
the town of Los Alamos, NM created a Web page to announce public
meetings, gain public input into the process and development of the
plan, and to inform the public about the potential mitigation measures
and the progress of the mitigation plan.

END SIDE TIP\]

4\. Get your planning team connected to the Internet.

As more communities learn about the Internet and obtain the resources to
set up Web sites, more people come to expect information at their
fingertips. Almost all state, regional, and local governmental entities
now have Web sites. Linking to a Web page on these sites can be an
excellent way to publicize and highlight your planning efforts. The Web
page can be as simple as a description of the planning initiative with
upcoming meeting dates, times, and minutes from the last meeting, or it
can be highly developed with links to mitigation and hazard resources
and sites. The Web site could also be used to post questionnaires for
citizens to determine their perceptions of hazards and risks in the
community or state, as well as provide an additional outlet to generate
feedback on issues.

\[EXHIBIT OF HAZARDVILLE POST

The Hazardville Post Vol. CXI No. 65 Thursday, May 3, 2002

THORR to Hold Public Workshop

\[Hazardville, EM\] The Town of Hazardville Organization for Risk
Reduction (THORR) is organizing a facilitated workshop to educate the
community on the mitigation planning process and to outline
opportunities for public input in the planning process. This meeting
will also serve as a forum for the public to voice their opinions and
concerns about the mitigation plan. Ms. Rita Booke, head of the local
Citizen\'s for Action group, has agreed to record all public comments
and will post them and their responses on the THORR Web page. Ms. Booke
stated, \"Public input into this process is so important, I really hope
people come to the meeting and voice their opinions and ask questions.
Without public comments this process will not be nearly as effective; in
fact, we\'re counting on public input to help us shape the plan.\"

Mr. Joe Norris, Planning Department Director and Chair of THORR, said he
would be available to answer questions on the day of the workshop. \"I
have details about the last flood and how it affected the community as a
whole,\" said Mr. Norris. \"These details are not easily forgotten since
I, as well as many others, lost crops and ended up doing major repairs
on our homes after the flooding of May 2000.\"

Mary Tremble, Director of Hazardville\'s Emergency Management Agency,
will discuss the disasters that have occurred in the past in and around
Hazardville, and state representatives from the Office of Emergency
Preparedness (OEP), Office of the Environment, and Office of Planning
will be on hand to demonstrate their sup-port for the planning process.
Hazardville received a \$20,000 grant from the State Emergency
Management Agency\'s Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program to complement
local funding to develop Hazardville\'s All-Hazard Risk Reduction Plan.

Starting May 5, 2002, local radio station WHAM will begin announcing the
date, time, and location of the workshop to ensure that as many people
as possible are aware of what is happening and, therefore, better
informed. Jim Snow, owner of Snow\'s Snowplows and the business leader
of THORR, and Mr. Norris will also distribute posters and fliers
announcing the workshop.

Afterword

Afterword

You have organized your resources, established your planning team, and
engaged the public. The work you have done in this first phase will
continue to pay dividends throughout the planning process. You are now
ready to move to the next phase of the hazard mitigation planning
process, Assess Risks.

The next how-to guide in this series, Understanding Your Risks (FEMA
386-2), will walk you through a four-step process of identifying your
hazards and estimating the potential losses from future hazard events.
The loss estimation is important to help you identify the hazards or
assets you should address first in your mitigation plan.

\[Hazard mitigation planning process diagram

As detailed in the Foreword, the Hazard Mitigation Planning process
consists of four basic phases.

The next how-to in the series, Understanding Your Risks, will provide
the factual basis for your plan.

Appendicies

Appendix A Glossary

Acquisition: Local governments can acquire lands in high hazard areas
through conservation easements, purchase of development rights, or
outright purchase of property.

Asset: Any manmade or natural feature that has value, including, but not
limited to people; buildings; infrastructure like bridges, roads, and
sewer and water systems; lifelines like electricity and communication
resources; or environmental, cultural, or recreational features like
parks, dunes, wetlands, or landmarks.

Building: A structure that is walled and roofed, principally above
ground and permanently affixed to a site. The term includes a
manufactured home on a permanent foundation on which the wheels and
axles carry no weight.

Coastal Zone: The area along the shore where the ocean meets the land as
the surface of the land rises above the ocean. This land/water interface
includes barrier islands, estuaries, beaches, coastal wetlands, and land
areas having direct drainage to the ocean.

Community Rating System (CRS): CRS is a program that provides incentives
for National Flood Insurance Program communities to complete activities
that reduce flood hazard risk. When the community completes specified
activities, the insurance premiums of the policyholders in those
communities are reduced.

Contour: A line of equal ground elevation on a topographic (contour)
map.

Debris: The scattered remains of assets broken or destroyed in a hazard
event. Debris caused by a wind or water hazard event can cause
additional damage to other assets.

Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000): DMA 2000 (Public Law
106-390) is the latest legislation to improve the planning process. It
was signed into law on October 10, 2000. This new legislation reinforces
the importance of mitigation planning and emphasizes planning for
disasters before they occur.

Earthquake: A sudden motion or trembling that is caused by a release of
strain accumulated within or along the edge of earth\'s tectonic plates.

Erosion: Wearing away of the land surface by detachment and movement of
soil and rock fragments, during a flood or storm or over a period of
years, through the action of wind, water, or other geologic processes.

Extent: The size of an area affected by a hazard or hazard event.

Fault: A fracture in the continuity of a rock formation caused by a
shifting or dislodging of the earth\'s crust, in which adjacent surfaces
are differentially displaced parallel to the plane of fracture.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Independent agency created
in 1979 to provide a single point of accountability for all federal
activities related to disaster mitigation and emergency preparedness,
response, and recovery.

Flood Depth: Height of the flood water surface above the ground surface.

Flood Hazard Area: The area shown to be inundated by a flood of a given
magnitude on a map.

Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM): Map of a community, prepared by FEMA,
shows both the special flood hazard areas and the risk premium zones
applicable to the community under the National Flood Insurance Program.

Flood Zone: A geographical area shown on a FIRM that reflects the
severity or type of flooding in the area.

Floodplain: Any land area, including watercourse, susceptible to partial
or complete inundation by water from any source.

Hazard: A source of potential danger or adverse condition.

Hazard Event: A specific occurrence of a particular type of hazard.

Hazard Identification: The process of identifying hazards that threaten
an area.

Hazard Mitigation: Sustained actions taken to reduce or eliminate
long-term risk from hazards and their effects.

HAZUS (Hazards U.S.): A GIS-based, nationally standardized, loss
estimation tool developed by FEMA.

Hurricane: An intense tropical cyclone, formed in the atmosphere over
warm ocean areas, in which wind speeds reach 74 miles per hour or more
and blow in a large spiral around a relatively calm center or \"eye.\"
Hurricanes develop over the north Atlantic Ocean, northeast Pacific
Ocean, or the south Pacific Ocean east of 1600E longitude. Hurricane
circulation is counter-clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere and
clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere.

Infrastructure: Refers to the public services of a community that have a
direct impact on the quality of life. Infrastructure includes
communication technology such as phone lines or Internet access, vital
services such as public water supplies and sewer treatment facilities,
and includes an area\'s transportation system such as airports,
heliports, highways, bridges, tunnels, roadbeds, overpasses, railways,
bridges, rail yards, depots; and waterways, canals, locks, seaports,
ferries, harbors, drydocks, piers, and regional dams.

Landslide: Downward movement of a slope and materials under the force of
gravity.

Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC): LEPCs consist of community
representatives and are appointed by the State Emergency Response
Commissions (SERCs), as required by Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA), Title III. They develop an emergency plan to
prepare for and respond to chemical emergencies. They are also
responsible for coordinating with local facilities to find out what they
are doing to reduce hazards, prepare for accidents, and reduce hazardous
inventories and releases. The LEPC serves as a focal point in the
community for information and discussions about hazardous substances,
emergency planning, and health and environmental risks.

Magnitude: A measure of the strength of a hazard event. The magnitude
(also referred to as severity) of a given hazard event is usually
determined using technical measures specific to the hazard.

Mitigate: To cause something to become less harsh or hostile, to make
less severe or painful.

Mitigation Plan: Systematically evaluating community policies, actions,
and tools, and setting goals for implementation over the long term that
will result in a reduction in risk and minimize future losses
community-wide.

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP): Federal program created by
Congress in 1968 that makes flood insurance available in communities
that enact minimum floodplain management regulations as indicated in 44
CFR §60.3.

National Weather Service (NWS): Prepares and issues flood, severe
weather, and coastal storm warnings and can provide technical assistance
to federal and state entities in preparing weather and flood warning
plans.

Planning: The act or process of making or carrying out plans; the
establishment of goals, policies, and procedures for a social or
economic unit.

Preparedness: Actions that strengthen the capability of government,
citizens, and communities to respond to disasters.

Probability: A statistical measure of the likelihood that a hazard event
will occur.

Recovery: The actions taken by an individual or community after a
catastrophic event to restore order and lifelines in a community.

Regulatory Power: Local jurisdictions have the authority to regulate
certain activities in their jurisdiction. With respect to mitigation
planning, the focus is on such things as regulating land use development
and construction through zoning, subdivision regulations, design
standards, and floodplain regulations.

Response: The actions taken during an event to address immediate life
and safety needs and to minimize further damage to properties.

Risk: The estimated impact that a hazard would have on people, services,
facilities, and structures in a community; the likelihood of a hazard
event resulting in an adverse condition that causes injury or damage.
Risk is often expressed in relative terms such as a high, moderate, or
low likelihood of sustaining damage above a particular threshold due to
a specific type of hazard event. It also can be expressed in terms of
potential monetary losses associated with the intensity of the hazard.

Scale: A proportion used in determining a dimensional relationship; the
ratio of the distance between two points on a map and the actual
distance between the two points on the earth\'s surface.

Stafford Act: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, PL 100-107 was signed into law November 23, 1988 and
amended the Disaster Relief Act of 1974, PL 93-288. The Stafford Act is
the statutory authority for most federal disaster response activities,
especially as they pertain to FEMA and its programs.

Stakeholder: Individual or group that will be affected in any way by an
action or policy. They include businesses, private organizations, and
citizens.

State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO): The representative of state
government who is the primary point of contact with FEMA, other state
and federal agencies, and local units of government in the planning and
implementation of pre- and post-disaster mitigation activities.

Substantial Damage: Damage of any origin sustained by a structure in a
Special Flood Hazard Area whereby the cost of restoring the structure to
its before-damaged condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of the
market value of the structure before the damage.

Tectonic Plate: Torsionally rigid, thin segments of the earth\'s
lithosphere that may be assumed to move horizontally and adjoin other
plates. It is the friction between plate boundaries that cause seismic
activity.

Topographic: Characterizes maps that show manmade features and indicate
the physical shape of the land using contour lines.

Tornado: A violently rotating column of air extending from a
thunderstorm to the ground.

Tropical Cyclone: A generic term for a cyclonic, low-pressure system
over tropical or sub-tropical waters.

Tropical Storm: A tropical cyclone with maximum sustained winds greater
than 39 mph and less than 74 mph.

Tsunami: Great sea wave produced by submarine earth movement or volcanic
eruption.

Vulnerability: Describes how exposed or susceptible to damage an asset
is. Vulnerability depends on an asset\'s construction, contents, and the
economic value of its functions. Like indirect damages, the
vulnerability of one element of the community is often related to the
vulnerability of another. For example, since many businesses depend on
uninterrupted electrical power, if an electric substation is flooded it
will affect not only the substation itself, but a number of businesses
as well. Often, indirect effects can be much more widespread and
damaging than direct ones.

Vulnerability Assessment: The extent of injury and damage that may
result from a hazard event of a given intensity in a given area. The
vulnerability assessment should address impacts of hazard events on the
existing and future built environment.

Wildfire: An uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels,
exposing and possibly consuming structures.

Appendix B Library

Web Sites

American Planning Association:

http://www.planning.org

Association of State Floodplain Managers:

http://www.floods.org

Developing the Implementation Strategy:
http://www.pro.gov.uk/recordsmanagement/eros/framework.pdf

> http://www.allhandsconsulting.com/ERI_books.htm
>
> http://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0100/firetools.html
>
> http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/\~bernard/hazard3.pdf
>
> http://www.uli.org/Pub/Pages/d_search/allbooks.cfm

Federal Emergency Management Agency Mitigation Planning:
http://www.fema.gov/fima/planning.shtm

Community Rating System:

http://www.fema.gov/nfip/crs.htm

Flood Hazard Mapping:

http://www.fema.gov/mit/tsd/st_main.htm

Flood Mitigation Assistance Program:

http://www.fema.gov/fima/planfma.shtm

Hazard Mitigation Grant Program:

http://www.fema.gov/fima/hmgp

Individual Assistance Programs:

http://www.fema.gov/rrr/inassist.shtm

Interim Final Rule:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a020226c.html

Multi-Hazard Mapping:

http://www.hazardmaps.gov

National Flood Insurance Program:

http://www.fema.gov/nfip

Public Assistance Program:

http://www.fema.gov/rrr/pa

Oregon Natural Hazards Workgroup:

http://www.uoregon.edu/\~onhw/index2.htm

Working with Consultants:

http://ntweb03.asiandevbank.org/oes0019p.nsf/pages/209ATP

http://www.mapnp.org/library/staffing/outsrcng/consult/consult.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/WorkingWounded/workingwounded001020.html

Publications

Creighton, James L., 1992

> The Program for Community Problem Solving. Involving Citizens in
> Community Decision Making: A Guidebook.

FEMA

> Publications Warehouse 1-800-480-2520.
>
> Mitigation Resources for Success CD (FEMA 372).
>
> Planning for a Sustainable Future: the Link Between Hazard Mitigation
> and Livability (FEMA 364).
>
> Protecting Business Operations (FEMA 331).
>
> Rebuilding for a More Sustainable Future: An Operational Framework
> (FEMA 365).

Fisher, Roger and William Ury, 1981

> Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In. Penguin
> Books: New York.

Schwab, Jim et al., 1998

> Planning for Post-Disaster Recovery and Reconstruction. American
> Planning Association: Chicago.

Susskind, Lawrence and Jeffry Cruikshank, 1987

> Breaking the Impasse: Consensual Approaches to Resolving Public
> Disputes. Basic Books: New York

Appendix C

Worksheet

Worksheet 1 Build the Planning Team

In establishing a planning team, you want to ensure that you have a
broad range of backgrounds and experiences represented. Below are some
suggestions for agencies to include in a planning team. There are many
organizations, both governmental and community-based, that should be
included when creating a local team. In addition, state organizations
can be included on local teams, when appropriate, to serve as a source
of information and to provide guidance and coordination.

Use the checklist as a starting point for forming your team. Check the
boxes beside any individuals or organizations that you have in your
community/state that you believe should be included on your planning
team so you can follow up with them.

Task A. Create the planning team -- Suggestions for team members.
Date:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Local/Tribal

 Administrator/Manager's Office

 Budget/Finance Office

 Building Code Enforcement Office

 City/County Attorney's Office

 Economic Development Office

 Emergency Preparedness Office

 Fire and Rescue Department

 Hospital Management

 Local Emergency Planning Committee

 Planning and Zoning Office

 Police/Sheriff's Department

 Public Works Department

 Sanitation Department

 School Board

 Transportation Department

 Tribal Leaders

Special Districts and Authorities

 Airport and Seaport Authorities

 Business Improvement District(s)

 Fire Control District

 Flood Control District

 Redevelopment Agencies

 Regional/Metropolitan Planning Organization(s)

 School District(s)

 Transit/Transportation Agencies

Others

 Architectural/Engineering/Planning Firms

 Citizen Corps

 Colleges/Universities

 Land Developers

 Major Employers/Businesses

 Professional Associations

 Retired Professionals

State

 Adjutant General's Office (National Guard)

 Board of Education

 Building Code Office

 Climatologist

 Earthquake Program Manager

 Economic Development Office

 Emergency Management Office/State Hazard Mitigation Officer

 Environmental Protection Office

 Fire Marshal's Office

 Geologist

 Homeland Security Coordinator's Office

 Housing Office

 Hurricane Program Manager

 Insurance Commissioner's Office

 National Flood Insurance Program Coordinator

 Natural Resources Office

 Planning Agencies

 Police

 Public Health Office

 Public Information Office

 Tourism Department

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

 American Red Cross

 Chamber of Commerce

 Community/Faith-Based Organizations

 Environmental Organizations

 Homeowners Associations

 Neighborhood Organizations

 Private Development Agencies

 Utility Companies

 Other Appropriate NGOs

Appendix D Example Questionnaire

\[Image of Disaster Resistant Design logo\]

\[letter from Oregon Showcase Program\]

March 2002

Dear Oregon Citizen,

We need your help! Oregon is embarking on an initiative to assist
communities in reducing risk from natural hazards: the Partners for
Disaster Resistance: Oregon Showcase State Program. In December 2000,
Governor John Kitzhaber signed an Executive Order designating Oregon a
\"Showcase State for Natural Disaster Resistance And Resilience.\"
Partners for Disaster Resistance is now providing citizens and
organizations statewide with an opportunity to prepare for and minimize
the impact of natural hazards.

This questionnaire is designed to help us understand household
preparedness for disasters. We are developing a strategic plan to
prioritize activities to assist Oregon communities reduce their risk
from natural disasters. The information you provide about your needs for
disaster preparedness will help improve coordination of preparedness and
risk reduction activities within the state.

Your returned survey indicates your willingness to take part in the
study. Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you have
questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please
contact the Office of Human Subjects Compliance, University of Oregon,
5219, Eugene, OR 97403, or call (541) 346-2510. All individual survey
responses are strictly confidential, and are for research purposes only.

Your opinions are important to us. Please return your completed survey
no later than Monday, April 1st, 2002.

If you have questions regarding the survey, feel free to contact the
Oregon Natural Hazards Workgroup at (541) 346-3588.

Thank you for your participation!

Sincerely,

André LeDuc

State Coordinator,

Partners for Disaster Resistance: Oregon Showcase Program
www.OregonShowcase.org

Suzanne Hildick

Executive Director, American Red Cross,

Oregon Trail Chapter

www.PrepareForLife.org

Beverlee Venell

Director, Oregon Emergency Management

www.osp.state.or.us/oem/

\[Household Natural Hazards Preparedness Questionnaire\]

The following is a questionnaire for citizens used to determine the
disaster history of their area, how much the public knows about
disasters, how much citizens are willing to spend on disaster
preparedness, and to gather general demographic information.

This questionnaire was created by the Oregon Natural Hazards Workgroup
at the University of Oregon's Community Service Center.