Communications Committee: Meetings & Calls

Committee Meeting Minutes
September 26, 2000, Sacramento, CA

The meeting was held in the offices of the California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA. Attending in person were Al Zemsky, Jan Miller, Kathy Van Dame, Jeannine Coward, and Carl Bowman. Attending via conference call were Barry Aarons, Karen Deike, Dan Clark, Cyra Cain, Ruth McCormick, Pauline Sampson, and Kirsten King. Karlyn Black & Scott McDonald of Enviro-Tech Communications (potential bidders to the Speakers' Bureau RFP) joined us for the morning portion. Carl Bowman took meeting notes; they are organized topically rather than chronologically.

WRAP Meeting Summary: Al Zemsky led a summary of yesterday's WRAP meeting for phone participants:

1. There was a quick discussion of the materials approved to be included on the Web site, and the timeline EPA will use to review the Annex:

A. Notice of Availability about October 15 with 30 day comment period

B. By early December the final WRAP pieces will be available. EPA will release the Proposed Rule incorporating the Annex sometime in December - February followed by a 60-day comment period

C. The goal is final publication of the rule one year from now.

2. The WRAP's Regional Modeling Center discussion was also summarized (Cyra Cain noted much of this material is on the Web page). There was discussion of a need for a liaison to the ad hoc committee developing the Center (a liaison would probably not be welcomed by that committee) and for the modeling center once it's set up. Once the Center/process is set, the Communications Committee will need to evaluate how we can support it.

3. The nominating committee for the IOC/TOC chairs is being set up to report to the next WRAP meeting (see the discussion later about expanding the Communications Committee).

4. Karen Deike reported that a press release will go out today regarding the WRAP's approval of the Annex yesterday (9/25).

5. For a review of the August - September public outreach, Carl referenced the two page report handed out at the WRAP meeting (it was determined this report is also on the Web site), and provided a brief overview of the comments received at the meetings.

Uploading Material to the Web site: The discussion about loading material on the Web site covered the following points:

1. We need to be sure liaisons are checking with Jennifer Lodder to be certain that their approved committee materials are on the Web site. Cyra can review material for clarity, style, and placement but not for factual material

2. For updates on yesterday's meeting, Ruth would normally handle it as liaison, but all WRAP-approved material from yesterday (9/25) should be on both the Market Trading Forum and Home pages. Dianne Nielson was very specific on what was and was not approved by the WRAP. Pat Cummins is working on this and Ruth can work with him to ensure it's up.

3. The identity on the Web site of chair of the Coordinating Group needs to be changed from Bill Auberle to Barry Aarons; Jan Miller will coordinate all name/position changes with Cyra Cain after today's meeting.

Web site Utilization:

1. Dan Clark pointed out there are several places to put info on the site. How can the public be alerted to new material, how do we decide what's on the front page, and how to we refer folks "inside" for more information?

A. Cyra Cain suggested a table of contents on the front page hyperlinked to forums or reports.

B. Kathy Van Dame and Karlyn Black suggested many Web pages start with a menu - ours is too big an organization to get full justice from a single front page.

C. We need to let folks get in fast to find what they're looking for. Who we are and hot items should be up front. The Web subcommittee will get together to discuss this.

2. Cyra Cain is also starting to look at archiving material after 3 months unless specifically requested/flagged by committee/forum chairs, and will send out a memo to that effect in the next couple weeks. It is important to remember that archived material is still available on the Web via a direct button. Committee chairs and liaisons need to look at housecleaning their sites of responsibility.

3. Archiving and housecleaning the Web site will free up the space we could use to add the original file formats (e.g., .ppt, .doc, .xls) in addition to the .pdf we now offer. Another option discussed is to note on Web page that all files would be available in their original file format by contacting the forum co-chair. The committee decided the limiting factor is personnel to personally send out other file formats, not the computer memory for multiple format copies of each document. The committee decided to post documents in .pdf format and whatever format they were in originally, probably using labeled buttons (similar to what EPA uses on their sites). This method will be used from now on, and the recently approved Market Trading Forum material will also be made available that way. Older documents will remain available as-is.

4. No co-chairs have responded to our request to updated membership rosters; liaisons also need to check the co-chair addresses.

Monthly status report deadlines: We need to set up some deadlines for liaisons to get either monthly status reports or "No Report" from co-chairs to jump-start the process. Jeannine Coward will coordinate by sending out a monthly reminder to liasions (Kirsten may be able to set this up automatically via listserve), including who the report goes to and the format to follow. The "drop dead date" is the last Friday of the month, the responsibility is the liaison's, not the co-chair's. The committee discussed motivation, that is, how we can make the forums value this process, but reached no conclusions. However, as an open, public process these reports are necessary.

Listserve Discussion:

1. Kirsten King reported that it was easy to get the listserve messages out, and most (not all) folks got it without trouble. Removing the advertising was finally worked out, and 35 people were signed up in the end. In future, we want to post Kirsten's name so that if people have trouble getting on a listserve, they can get in touch with her.

2. The Committee then discussed closing out the MTF listserve with a message on EPA's proposed timeline for the "Annex Rule." We should segue to a general WRAP listserve that goes out each week to advise to subscribers what's new on the Web site. Cyra Cain will send new material titles to Kirsten King for weekly distribution via listserve.

Speakers' Bureau:

Barry Aarons updated the Committee on the Speakers' Bureau. The Request for Proposals was approved in August; proposals are due by COB 9/29. The committee co-chairs will review them and make a recommendation, hopefully by the end of October. Our goal is to hire a professional firm to address three areas:

1. Notifying interested groups in WRAP states, who should be high-profile organizations that can promote the WRAP's programs and goals (the Communications Committee should provide the contractor with contacts).

2. Identifying more speakers within the WRAP (there are only a few now) and providing them some training. Speakers can use a variety of media from video to 3 x 5" cards depending on their preference and the facilities available. Encouragement to participate in the speakers' pool should come "from the top" among WRAP participants.

3. Connecting speakers and venues. Speakers can work with different media (depending on the individual and venue). To support the program (and outreach in general) in the future, different versions and methodologies of WRAP 201 may be developed.

We want the successful bidder to be somewhat aggressive in identifying venues and speakers. Karlyn Black noted that we must commit enough resources to recruit both speakers and venues. Barry Aarons sees developing incremental expectations as the program develops. Once the contractor has been selected, a subcommittee would be formed to establish the objectives (contacts, etc.) that committee and contractor can agree on.

Liaison update:

Barry Aarons will make one more attempt to contact those Committee liaisons who have not been able to actively participate. If they can no longer serve (or do not respond), we will send a letter thanking them for their interest and releasing them from the Committee. The liaison to the Technical Oversight Committee is vacant. Dwayne Arino is covering the Mobile Sources Forum, so we can take Terry Larson off. The Emissions Work Group is winding up their work and may not need a liaison, so Ellen Porter's departure may not be critical. Kathy Augustine (Liaison to the Public Advisory Board) and Jeannine Coward (Liaison Coordinator) may resign from the Communications Committee, as the Governor of Nevada prefers that they not participate in the WRAP; the matter is still under discussion. [Post-meeting note: As of September 29, Kathy and Jeannine have resigned.] Kirsten is willing to leave her Market Trading Forum "second liaison" position now that the workload has died down, and will consider the potential openings. Cyra Cain may be able to pinch-hit for the Emissions Forum. We need to ensure the liaisons are being copied on all committee/forum business (including RFP's).

Upcoming public involvement that may require assistance from the Communications Committee:

1. In & Near Forum: planning a workshop for Gateway communities perhaps later this year.

2. Research & Development: A dust workshop is planned for two days between December 13 and 15 at Desert Research Institute (Las Vegas), for WRAP forums and stakeholders. The Committee brainstormed other groups that might be interested:

A. ATV-use groups (they would be non-technical, is this what the forum wants?)

B. State regulators (certainly interested in the results, do they want to be part of the process for emission factors, i.e., heavy equipment on dirt roads for extractive industries),

C. Tribal governments and/or members (contact Bill Grantham),

3. Fire Emissions is not ready to go public just yet (Pete Lahm has discussed their process with us, Dennis Haddow is on top of their work). Any follow-up report(s) should be public, especially as related to management policy reviews).

4. We will have to monitor how the technical/modeling center develops.

5. Technical materials - will there be many reports "maturing" together for one big outreach, or lots of individual reports? The committee suspects lots of small reports, but the states do have a 2003 SIP deadline to meet (note that a model SIP is currently being developed by WESTAR).

6. For next Communications Committee meeting or by Dec 1, liaisons will need to have a list of RFP's, contract completion dates, and outreach needs (before or after contract completion) from all their committees and forums. Negative responses are as important as positive ones in scoping our workload. Kathy van Dame will also check with Rich Halvey, to see if he has a master list, and with the Technical Oversight Committee. Jan Miller will check with Pat Cummins on his views for outreach needs.

Additional committee members:

The committee needs about 6 new members, Jan Miller will give Dianne Nielson (who is leading the current nominating committee) our needs. We are definitely deficient in business/industry and tribal representatives, and it would be good to get someone(s) from a public relations firm. Contacts include members of other committees/forums, corporate officials. Barry Aarons should be able to get a list of "worker bees." If the nominating committee doesn't want to deal with this, we'll do the recruiting ourselves and move the nominees forward. Jan Miller will check with Pat Cummins on any applicants from the Web site. We also need to know from the Nominating Committee if the Communications Committee will be involved in any new round of solicitation (for all committees), and if so, timeframes (numbers, dates, etc.).

WRAP Slide Show:

Dan Clark reported that the slide show updating is continuing - a population slide is being developed to include new states, and we need slides of stakeholders. The Market Trading section will be updated to reflect completion of the Annex. We'd like the slide show completed by the end of October for the start-up of the Speakers' Bureau. There is a budget item for the slide show that is enough to cover this effort (duplicating slides and CDs). We need to know how many copies we'll need for the Speakers' Bureau by mid-October (Barry Aarons can give us that). Carl Bowman edited a super-short (16 slide) version of the slide presentation for displays, pamphlets, or other uses and will get it to Dan Clark. We may add it onto the CD. We also noted that no one took pictures at yesterday's WRAP meeting. Committee members should bring cameras to these events!

Television Programs:

1. PBS Show: Dan Clark hasn't heard from Suzanne Somers with PBS for some time, he will contact her and keep working away on developing the show, but not spending any money on it yet. KUED needs $40-50 K for producer and director. Ms Somers is looking at foundations that fund this kind of work. To capture good time and audience we may need up to 1/4 million. Some of today's brainstorming ideas (below) may also fit into Pat Murdo's storyboard.

2. The committee reviewed a proposal from the Information Television Network. We decided not to contribute financially but will be happy to provide any information that they need in developing the show.

Other Outreach Possibilities:

Discussion of the slide shows and television/video opportunities led the Committee into a discussion of other ways we can use to get our messages to get to the general public.

1. Small Ancillary Project ideas brainstormed for the media to carry that message included:

A. Articles in airline magazines

B. TV shows

C. Speakers' Bureau

D. Op-ed pieces

F. Bus placards

G. Park newspaper articles

H. Library materials

I. Posters (regular and 8.5 x 11)

J. Radio spots

K. Sponsor school kid essays/posters, etc)

2. It is easier to deal with particular issues like sulfur fuel, than with a broad concept like the WRAP. To get the public's attention we need to find "hooks." Usually, this is done with "negatives," but we want to use positive ideas and issues. Ideas for attention-grabbing themes included

A. Frightening futures

B. Working for beauty

C. Equity issues

D. Empowerment (for example, in the WRAP, the tribes are an integral component with the states)

E. Length of our vision (dealing with programs on a decades-long scale, "what have you done for your grandchildren today?")

F. The WRAP provides an opportunity to "do good" or to "put your effort/money where your mouth is" in caring about environmental issues.

3. Would hiring a public relations firm help? There are two outreach methods we could use, singly or together:

A. Define and state our goals for each outreach effort and target groups that will stay with us, and/or

B Scatter shot messages to bring in new groups and individuals (perhaps ones we have not considered).

The committee chairs suggested we continue brainstorming, and each member write a paragraph on small ancillary projects to get the WRAP word out. The co-chairs will then share this information with the coordinating group to get its concurrence and ideas, perhaps streamlining the approval process for the smaller, and more general or generic projects.

Conclusion:

Al Zemsky asked if there were any "front burner issues" we are not addressing - none were brought up. There was a brief discussion about our role in the state SIP development. That role (if any) is not clear at this point, but we should be ready to provide whatever assistance is asked.

Next meetings:

We should have a conference call (at least) in December, and a face-to-face March or April in Acoma/Albuquerque with the next WRAP meeting when it is scheduled.