2007 Annual Meeting Evaluation Summary
After the annual meeting, the Citizens League invited the nearly 400 guests to provide their feedback on the program and content of the event. Here's what we heard (to comment on the evaluations or add your thoughts, go to Sean's blog from October 28th):
The following questions asked participants to rank their answers on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1=poor and 5=excellent.
How could we improve the annual meeting program?
Overall, people were pleased with the program. Many especially liked the interactive keypads and that the program was kept relatively short. Some commented on technical improvements that could be made with the sound, presentation and lighting. Many would like to see the annual meeting used as an opportunity to present more background on the Citizens League for those who have not been involved previously as well as an overview of current work and where we're headed in the next year.
How could we make it easier to meet new people at the annual meeting?
For many people, the social time was the best part of the event. People said that the receptions before and after the program are a good way to meet new people and reconnect with old friends. Many people would like more time to get to know the others sitting at their table, and several people suggested having some type of activity for the table groups to do before the program starts.
How could we improve the Board of Directors election process?
Simple suggestions for improvement include making short bios on the nominees available at the event and summarizing the Board recruitment, nomination and election process before calling for a vote. Beyond that, respondents were fairly evenly divided between those who are satisfied with the process as it is and those who would like it to become more open and deliberative for all members. We will continue to consider how this process can be improved, and we welcome your input.
Do you have any other feedback on how we could improve the event?
We received a range of ideas in response to this question, including making summaries of the Citizens League reports and policy work available, and having water available throughout the event.
Was there any information that you found particularly interesting?
To this question, respondents overwhelmingly indicated that the most interesting piece of information on redistricting was discovering the "values" of the crowd on the topic. After that, they really liked the examples, particularly the Massachusetts one, and were interested in learning that drawing strange-looking districts insn't necessarily bad. A few also reported liking learning about options in redistricting.
Do you have any suggestions for presenting redistricting to the general public?
Most recommended using specific examples for implications on the audience (district, community, etc.) as the best way to garner interest in the topic, particularly the threat of losing a congressional seat. Many recommended presenting implications as a "threat" to their democracy, or by telling the "horror story" of what could come. Once the audiences' attention has been piqued, respondents believed that using illustrative examples of the implications and issues with redistricting - like Massachussets, Arizona, and/or a local example - and explaining redistricting "values" would be the best way to engage citizens. Providing background and historical information is important, as is presenting examples of options in redistricting. One respondent noted that, for many citizens, the case will have to be made that they can have an impact on this process; otherwise, they'll continue to believe that redistricting will only ever be a "closed door" deal that they won't be able to impact.