The 2016-17 Meetings Committee was Eugene Giudice (co-chair), Carolyn Hersch (co-chair), Robert Martin, Sheri Lewis, Tamara Carson, and Todd Hillmer. Clare Willis was its board liaison.

The committee planned four meetings for the 2016-17 year. Dates, locations, number of attendees and profit and loss for each meeting is shown in the table below.

Improvements Recommended by the Committee

1. Name badge creation continues to be a time consuming task. The committee recommends creation of a permanent name tag which would make check in process more efficient and is a more ecologically sustainable solution.
2. The committee notes a 4% drop in attendance from 2015-16 year. Meeting feedback suggests that topics and speakers need to be more relevant to the law firm environment. The committee recommends expanded speaker offerings to specifically address libraries that operate in the law firm environment.
3. Pricing and budgetary concerns are areas for concern. The committee notes that in the 2015-16 year, two of the four meetings broke even and showed a profit. This year, only one meeting broke even and showed a profit. The committee recommends raising meeting fee to $30.00 and implementing a schedule of periodic increases to reflect changing economic realities.
4. Audio visual services continue to be a price concern. More venues are outsourcing their AV services and simply passing the cost onto guests who require them. The committee recommends that future Meeting Committee chairs work to develop a budget specifically to cover these expenses.
5. Online registration and payment or prepayment via check to the CALL post office box should be encouraged. This will greatly speed up check in at meetings.
6. Handling of large amounts of cash and checks is a concern. The committee recommends investigation by CALL board of commercial bonding for all committee members.

Improvements Recommended Based on Survey Results

1. While the committee has worked to find venues centrally located, it is important for the committee to continue to determine how far people are willing to travel for a meeting. Responses to questions of traveling distance gave some insights, but more effective language for the post meeting survey question needs to be found.
2. Post meeting survey responses noted a marked interest in data privacy and security.
3. Post meeting surveys consistently recommended the Berghoff as a potential meeting place. The committee chairs for 2017-18 will have a proposal from the Berghoff included in the materials transitioned to them.