Re: Two follow up items

From:hrod17@clintonemail.com To: robbymook@gmail.com CC: john.podesta@gmail.com, cheryl.mills@gmail.com, daplouffe@icloud.com Date: 2014-10-14 18:22 Subject: Re: Two follow up items

Robby, Thanks for the follow up. Could we do a call Wed or Thursday to discuss. Happy to include anyone who can participate. H Madam Secretary, I hope all is well and congratulations on a fantastic event in Pennsylvania. I was on the phone with the Wolff team for some DGA work and they couldn't have been more pleased. Obviously the press was fantastic as well! Two things I wanted to relay: First, I hope the most recent binder was helpful. I know there were A LOT of big and small issues in there, including an ambitious schedule for interviews. Understanding that everyone has incredibly busy schedules before Election Day, I think it makes sense to push the interview timeline later and spend as much time as we need in November to align on the needs and structure of the campaign architecture and a hiring process that meets those needs, as well as other key operational pieces like media and technology. Hiring should not be rushed, so if giving you and everyone else the time to discuss, reflect and and agree on a process that meets your needs slows things by a week or two, that’s perfectly fine, assuming you’re comfortable with it. Let me know if you agree (or want to try something different) and I can work with Cheryl to ensure we have time on the schedule in November. Second, I also understand that you wanted to learn more about what's happening on technology and the website, so below is a quick snapshot of the state of play. I've also attached the memo that was in the most recent binder. Feel free to call if you want to discuss this in more detail, or we can set up a conference call to discuss as a group. This is an important aspect of planning, so by all means I want your flag on any issues or questions. The big picture: We are laying the groundwork for a website that can go up if and when you decide to announce an exploratory committee. The purpose of this site is to allow visitors to donate, sign up, and invite other people to the site via social media (this would be the "new" feature). All the features of this site will be fully tested and backed up. A significantly expanded--and very different looking--website will go up if/when you officially launch your campaign, with many more features, some of them new. This is all outlined in the attached memo. Eric Schmidt's company "Groundwork" Eric has a small staff of about ten people in Brooklyn working on two key tools for the web page, which are listed below. Both tools would be great to have in the exploratory site and would help the site work better in the future; however, we are prepared to move forward without them and have tested backup alternatives from the Obama campaign that are ready to use at any time. I deliberately told Eric's team that we would need any tools he might create by mid-November so there is plenty of time to test them should you decide to use them. As of this week, they still say they will meet that deadline, but I remain cautious/skeptical until the tools are complete and tested. These tools are: 1. Sign up function: this tool will allow a committee to more dynamically optimize sign up pages in the future. For example, it would permit a committee to find out if sign up page A generates more sign ups than page B. 2. "Quick donate": this is the tool that would allow a committee to save someone's credit card information so that any future donations can be made in one click. This is obviously a huge revenue booster. Contrary to what Eric sometimes implies in his conversations with others, his team is NOT building a complete website. Speaking candidly, it's fantastic that Eric has devoted resources to creating these new tools, but we are not relying on him to have these tools available; we would consider anything his team delivers as "gravy". This is by no means meant to disparage his team’s work, but rather to help you understand where they fit into the big picture. Eric’s team may continue to build new tools well into next year and/or the campaign may choose to hire some of his staff, but this is not integral to what your tech strategy should be. The website team The team building the website itself is led by Dan Ryan, the website developer for President Obama's 2012 campaign, and Teddy Goff, President Obama's Digital Director. We are operating under the precautionary assumption that legally we cannot begin designing the visual part of the site until 4-5 weeks before you decide to announce an exploratory committee, since they are candidate specific and would require contracting with designers (there's also a risk of leaks). So, the back end architecture is being built (and can be used by any candidate should you not run), but what you can see on a screen and interact with will not be developed until a month before your exploratory is officially constituted. The features for the site will be a mix of off-the-shelf tools from major web companies, as well as tested tools used by the Obama campaign. Leadership One of the reasons I think the CTO should be slated early in the hiring schedule is that she or he should act as a guide on the technology strategy as a whole, working with you and the campaign leadership from the start to develop a true vision for the role tech will play and actual projects the campaign should invest in. It's important that the campaign not simply hire engineers and invest in technology for its own sake, but rather work with technological experts to identify specific ways that technology can make the campaign more efficient and then develop a plan and timeline to build solutions. For example, we know right now that developing the tools that will make volunteer offices “paperless” will save thousands of hours of data entry and administrative work. We also know that developing new technologies to target emails more effectively will yield millions more dollars. The question is whether these solutions can practically be built and whether they can be built in time to be useful. The CTO can be a vital early partner in answering these sorts of questions. Technical experts like Eric will come to a campaign with different and valuable points of view and a campaign should routinely consult them via some sort of tech “working group”. A CTO firmly grounded in the realities of the campaign and the end-user’s experience will be able to synthesize this input and guide a campaign’s ultimate vision. I would suggest that we discuss how to make the process of hiring the CTO as enriching as possible for all of us, from who we consult for prospects to perhaps asking the final candidates to present their ideas so you can see different perspectives. Regardless, I think this person should be seen as an early hire to bring some concrete thinking to the myriad of technological possibilities. Thinking through the process of hiring this person and who else you want to consult should be a priority action item after the election. I hope all of this is helpful and don't hesitate to call with questions. Best, Robby