Looking forward

As voters in the district are well aware, the school district did not pass either school levy. It’s a hard pill to swallow for sure, but one that gives us all pause. Win or lose, there are always things to learn from this experience, and this post lays that out.

The first step is assessing what went right, what didn’t go as well, and what we could do in the future ( many refer to this as the start/stop/continue matrix ). Shortly after the election, the levy committee did a post-mortem survey to try and understand the execution and ways to improve with the smaller group. Here’s what we learned.

What worked well for this campaign?

Here’s what we heard…

• Positive messaging (50%)
• Thorough Communication (25%)
• Leadership (25%)
• Visibility on social media (15%)
• Public meetings (15%)
• Participation in town events (5%)
• Hard work by volunteers (5%)
• Responsiveness to questions and concerns (5%)
• Visuals and signs created (5%)

During this campaign, we tried to stay forward-thinking while simultaneously trying to be as responsive in a constructive way to the questions. In this campaign, we made it a point to have personal reach out to those who raised questions and concerns, which for many was the first time someone reached out to them about their problems. Being a small town, those personal connections build trust and respect, and it was vital for this campaign to stay true to that.

What didn’t work as well for this campaign?

Here’s what we heard…

• Short timeframe / late start for the levy campaign (25%)
• Trying to pass two levies at once (25%)
• .5 mill levy being permanent (10%)
• Not engaging enough of the district residents (15%)
• Transparency on past district decisions ( example: sports complex ) (15%)

The big message here is there was quite a hill to climb in a short period. Having two levy issues to pass at once made the messaging a bit convoluted, making the concerns on the .5 mill issue overshadow the 1% renewal issue. Additionally, relying too much on Facebook as the primary communication vehicle left many of our district residents out. For those who used Facebook, it was still quite hard to find information because of all the noise created in the comments.

What should the campaign have done that it didn’t do?

Here’s what we heard, outside the many respondents that indicated they weren’t sure (50%)…

• More outreach to the district residents and community groups through different mediums (15%)
• Talk more about the risks of not passing the levy (15%)
• Get better communication on district resident concerns (20%)

Overall the extensive feedback is with more time; more can be done. Some respondents also said that the committee needs to get more insight into district resident concerns, which aligns with the responses to the other two questions.

What feedback do you have regarding the Levy committee management, organization, and communication?

Generally, respondents were entirely complimentary of the levy committee seeing the short timetable we had. We were a new group of people getting involved for the first time, learning from the work of those who have done these campaigns before, so there were some learning curves for sure. But having that expertise and support was invaluable to the job and will help us going forward.

Raw results of the post-mortem are available here.

What comes next?

While we wait to hear about the plans for running a levy issue for the fall, there are two immediate actions we are taking.

1. Starting this website, we can speak more to the community’s concerns and questions. If you have a topic, we should cover, email it to us.
2. We are doing a community survey better to understand the district residents’ feedback and concerns.

Look for more on both these topics in the coming weeks!

---