The City of Hoboken's six-month pilot program with Lime electric scooters is ending and they must decide whether to keep the scooters. The program has been very contentious, so they used Involved to gather feedback from a wide audience of residents.
Problems and Purpose
The City of Hoboken began an electric scooter pilot program with Lime and OjO in May of 2019. The program has been controversial from day one, with the OjO contract being cancelled over safety reasons.
Many residents are calling for the program to end, however, the e-scooters have been incredibly popular amongst younger residents and have become an integral part of their daily routine.
City Councilman Michael Russo was unsure whether those speaking out at community meetings and on social media were representative of the entire community. He needed an easy way to hear from all of the stakeholders, including those who don't normally participate in local government decisions.
Background History and Context
Know what events led up to this initiative? Help us complete this section!
Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities
Know who organized or funded this initiative? Help us complete this section!
Participant Recruitment and Selection
The Involved open-ended question was sent out through City Councilman Michael Russo's email list of 11,000, as well as on his social media. Residents can share the question after submission, which led to responses from over 3,100 residents in under a week.
Methods and Tools Used
The city councilmember used Involved's online survey tool to get direct and immediate feedback from residents. The software platform integrated directly with existing contact databases and social media channels to maximize reach, and ensure easy use.
Specifically, the software delivers single-click surveys in email. Rather than requiring residents to create a new login to a site, this type of delivery simplifies participation while also verifying voters. The councilmember could then access all of the survey data through a custom dashboard that categorized comments and provided a heat map of respondents by demographic data.
What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation
1) Over 3,100 responses were gathered from residents over the course of a few days through email and social media. The email response rate was 28%, 10 times higher than industry average.
2) Matched respondents to public voter information in order to verify residency and provide additional demographic data, such as age and gender.
3) Provided a geographic heat map of how people were responding based on voter matched address. The map can be filtered by ward/precinct and demographics.
4) Identified top concerns and arguments for the program amongst over 1,200 submitted testimonials through keyword categorization.
5) Grew the city's database by over 300 contacts from those who responded to the survey from social media or were referred by a friend.
Influence, Outcomes, and Effects
Know what influence and effects this initiative had? Help us complete this section!
Analysis and Lessons Learned
Please see full report for analysis of results: https://hubs.ly/H0lNqZj0
This entry is missing citations. Please help us verify its content by adding footnotes.