Web 2.0 Working Group Charter

For those of you that read my last post on our new Social Media Policy, here’s the companion document that describes the duties and responsibilities expected from the peer oversight group, obliquely named the “Web 2.0 Working Group.”

We’re hoping a more creative name for the group will emerge in time, but for now maybe the group’s name will repel “casual joiners” that tend to creep into some meetings. We also hope that the title will remind group members that they should actively work on implementing some of the strategies and tools we’re teaching each other at these meetings.

Right now the group’s membership are primarily public facing departments, including the PIO, Parks and Rec, Libraries, Community Development/Planning, Fire and Rescue, and Police. We also have plans to bring in Human Resources later so they can start looking at ways to apply social media to recruitment and retention programs.

In any case, this Charter is still a draft document, so please excuse any redundancies or typos you stumble across. Lastly, my thanks to my Virginia peers in Fairfax County, whose CIO graciously sent our CIO some valuable resources and ideas earlier in the year that helped inspire the “who does what” in this Charter.

* * * * * * * * * *

ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Web 2.0 Working Group Committee Charter

I. PURPOSE
This document outlines the role of the Web 2.0 Working group and the roles of the Public Information Office and other County Departments directly involved in evaluating, creating, monitoring and revising Roanoke County’s Web 2.0 programs and initiatives.

Web 2.0 programs and initiatives are broadly defined as a class of web-based services or applications that facilitate communication, information sharing, interoperability and collaboration. Web 2.0 may include forms of instant or mobile messaging, web-based communities, social networking outlets, blog sites, interactive services, video and photograph sharing sites, shared content editing sites (wikis), social bookmarking, folksonomies, and virtual worlds.

II. RESPONSIBILITIES
A. The County Administrator delegates authority to the Web 2.0 Working Group for the management of all aspects of public information disseminated through Web 2.0 initiatives, social media and emerging technologies.

B. The Web 2.0 Working Group shall evaluate, create, monitor and revise Web 2.0 programs and initiatives in accordance with existing Roanoke County goals and policies regarding Electronic Media and Internet Usage policy in the Roanoke County Handbook.

C. The Web 2.0 Working Group will be Chaired by the Public Information Director.

D. The Information Technology Director is responsible for providing the technology architecture, technical standards, technical infrastructure and security review to support the County’s Web 2.0 programs and initiatives.

E. The Web 2.0 Working Group will work as a collaborative team to ensure the overall effectiveness of the presentation and packaging of the County’s Web 2.0 programs and initiatives.

In addition the Web 2.0 Working Group is responsible for:

• Evaluation of various Web 2.0 technologies and the appropriateness of using these media to promote established County goals and policies, including a risk/benefit analysis of identified Web 2.0 technologies and media.
• Forwarding recommendations to the Technology Governance Committee about which Web 2.0 technologies and media are appropriate to use in support of County goals.
• Advocacy of Web 2.0 technologies at the department level and assisting County departments to apply appropriate Web 2.0 technology to further the departments’ service goals.
• Establish best practices to maximize one-way and/or one-to-one communication through Web 2.0 technologies and media.
• Work with the County Attorney’s office to educate departments on the legal aspects of using Web 2.0 technology (including but not limited to issues concerning copyright, trademark, First Amendment, FOIA, and Terms of Service), best practices, potential uses, and suggested content development.
• Issuing naming standards and visual branding elements consistent with the overall goals of the County.
• Establishing goals for publishing, updating, and ensuring adherence to County’s overall policies regarding Web 2.0 content.
• The Web 2.0 Working Group has the authority to direct county agencies in all Web 2.0 content related matters.
• Monitoring compliance with the Web content policy including review and determination of internal and external links.
• Measure effectiveness of Web 2.0 programs and drive revision as needed to maximize the usefulness of these new media while remaining in compliance with existing County web policies.

As always, your comments are welcome!