At the Summit:
> Home
> Schedule

Coverage:
> See all reports
> Gallery
> Random!
> Video

 

Delegates vote on Club priorities using hand-held wireless keypads.
Photo by John Byrne Barry

by John Byrne Barry
Direction Setting

After six months of chapter and group meetings leading up to the Summit and eight hours of deliberation once there, 700 delegates chose “Building a New Energy Future” as the Club’s top priority over the next five years. Nearly two-thirds of delegates voted it the most important priority.

Also ranking high were "Building Vibrant, Healthy Communities" (52 percent), "Defending Federal Lands/Public Waters" (49 percent), and "Protecting People and the Planet from Pollution" (46 percent).

The deliberative sessions, spanning eight hours over two days, marked the first time this many Club delegates have gathered in one place to discuss and vote on priorities. Delegates, seated ten to a table, recorded their votes on wireless hand-held “option-finder” keypads that looked like oversized garage door openers.

Ken Langton, chair of the Grand Canyon Chapter (Arizona), said the direction setting was “one of the Club’s finest hours—the most impressive display of democratic, large-scale, collective decision-making I have been involved in all my adult years in this country.”

Delegates didn’t just vote on conservation priorities, but on the Club’s effectiveness in pursuing them. For example, 64 percent of delegates felt that Building a New Energy Future should be a top priority, but they rated our effectiveness in pursuing this goal at 3.2 (out of 10). By contrast, while 49 percent ranked Defending Federal Lands/Public Waters as a top priority, it garnered a 5.5 effectiveness rating. 

Delegates also voted on how the Club should best invest its resources to reach these goals. The results: (1) seeking new allies and building coalitions, (2) creating media visibility, and (3) bringing people together.

Finally, delegates chose the top three ways to impact environmental decision-makers. They were: (1) influence voters’ electoral decisions, (2) focus on state policy-makers, and (3) influence local decision-makers about specific places.

-- 09/10/2005 Sat
11am