Introductions - Randy Gockley welcomed participants to the Stakeholder Kick-Off meeting. Mr. Gockley then proceeded to give some background regarding hazard mitigation planning and previous efforts.
Project Overview – Kyle Overly reviewed the principles of hazard mitigation, the objectives of the hazard mitigation planning process, and the local requirements for participation throughout the planning process.
Review of the Planning Process – Following the project overview, Mr. Overly reviewed the six-step planning process that is used for hazard mitigation planning in Pennsylvania.
Review of Mitigation Plan Components – Jessica Cerutti discussed the components that will be inserted in the Lancaster County Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Review of the Stakeholder Participation Requirements – Next, Mr. Overly asked the meeting participants to think of hazards to their communities face. The participants came up with the following list of hazards:
Vulnerable Populations (Non- English Speaking, Amish Community)
After population of the hazards list from meeting participants, Mr. Overly asked the group to review and complete the hazard survey reviewed the surveys used to collect municipal information regarding hazards.
Review of the Planning Process Timeline – Next, Mr. Overly reviewed the timeline, pointing out important dates in the planning process, such as upcoming public meetings and review periods. He also noted that the planning website, http://hmp.lancema.us, was available for public review. He also noted that all documents and drafts will be posted online for review.
Additional Comments from FEMA – Tess Grubb from FEMA took time to address the group. She reiterated that hazard mitigation planning is a community effort. She encouraged the meeting participants to work with the planning team.
Question and Answer Session – The meeting concluded with an open discussion about the planning process. One question regarded what types of projects are considered mitigation projects. Mr. Overly explained the difference between the tactical and strategic portions of the emergency management cycle, and provided an example of structural reinforcement as a mitigation project for severe winter storms. Another question was asked regarding funding and mitigation action items and concerning ability of local government to address and implement such plans. Ms. Grubb explained that actions are ranked according to various factors, including cost, public support, etc. and that