Laserfiche WebLink
N— Needs Improvement: The plan addresses the criteria, Out needs significant improvement. Reviewer's comments must <br /> be provided. <br /> S—Satisfactory: the plan meets the minimum criteria. Reviewer's comments are encouraged, but not required. <br /> O—Outstanding: The plan exceeds the minimum criteria. Reviewer's comments are encouraged, but not required. <br /> Corresponding NOT <br /> 3.1 Prerequisites Plan sections) MET MET Reviewer Comments <br /> 3.1.1 Adoption by the Local Planning <br /> Governing Body: Process II F, <br /> The local hazard mitigation plan shall page 4 <br /> include documentation that the plan has ❑ ❑ <br /> been formally adopted by the governing <br /> body of the ju6s'diction requesting <br /> approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, <br /> County Commissioners, Tribal Council). <br /> 3.1.2 Multi jurisdictional Plan Planning <br /> Adoption: For multijurisdictioRal pla s, Process II F, <br /> each jurisdiction requesting approval of page 4 ❑ ❑ <br /> the plan must document that it Ilas been <br /> formally adopted. <br /> 3.1.3 Multi jurisdictional Planning <br /> Participation: Multi jurisdictional plans Process II B, <br /> (e.g., watershed plans) may be Accepted, page 1 <br /> as appropriate, as long as each. ❑ ❑ <br /> jurisdiction has participated in toe <br /> process. State-wide plans will riot be <br /> accepted as multi jurisdictional plans. <br /> 3.2 Planning Process Corresponding <br /> Plan.$ection(s) U N S O Reviewer Comments <br /> 3.2.1 An open public involvement. Planning <br /> process is essential to the development Process II C ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ <br /> of an effective plan. In orderto'develop a & G <br /> more comprehensive approach to <br /> Local Mitigation Plan Review Sheets—FEMA-R5,4/03 Page 2 of 8 <br />