Browse
Search
Agenda - 04-12-2011 - 7
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 04-12-2011
>
Agenda - 04-12-2011 - 7
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/11/2011 4:43:41 PM
Creation date
4/11/2011 4:43:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/12/2011
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
7
Document Relationships
Minutes 04-12-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Items for Consideration in a Paperless Agenda Process <br />1) What goals does the Board have in mind for a paperless agenda <br />process? <br />There are many potential benefits, including: reduction of paper consumed, easier <br />access to related information, reduction in resources required to manage the agenda <br />creation process. To understand the Board's priorities will help ensure the right <br />solution. <br />2) What is the anticipated usage rate for Board members and staff for <br />paperless agendas? <br />There are significant benefits to be gained with a wholesale use of paperless agendas <br />by all meeting participants. However, partial adoption, in which staff supports both a <br />paperless process and a legacy paper-based process can significantly erode or even <br />eliminate those benefits with a net increase in staff time to support dual processes. <br />3) What screen size is deemed optimal for viewing on-line agenda <br />materials? <br />A large screen tends to be optimal for viewing detailed images (such as SAPFO <br />charts, budget spreadsheets and complex GIS maps) and multiple agenda items, while <br />smaller screens such as those on iPads and laptops may be inadequate for detailed <br />images. However, larger screens limit the portability of devices and can create a <br />visual barrier between elected officials and the public. <br />4) How would viewing hardware be handled? <br />Would Board members use their existing laptops and bring them to each meeting? <br />Would Board members prefer to use small screen touch pad devices, such as iPads? <br />How would Board members envision meetings with other deliberative bodies (Boards <br />of Health, Social Services, Planning; Quarterly Public Hearings; other local <br />governing bodies, e.g., Towns of Chapel Hill, Mebane, Hillsborough)? Would they be <br />compelled to bring laptops or would the County provide these? Providing access <br />devices beyond what is currently available could potentially cost more than the <br />system software and attendant servers. <br />5) What would the default media be? <br />There are potentially different methods for creating and displaying agenda items, <br />depending on whether paper or digital display is considered: For example, digital <br />delivery allows for direct hyperlinking to historical minutes or video footage of <br />background material. Paper does not. Due to the inherent inefficiencies of authoring <br />two parallel versions of each abstract, it would be important to determine which <br />medium would be considered the default for authoring and delivery. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.