B seems too complex, overwhelming.

site has a more simple portal, more welcoming.

The overall page looks a lot nicer; the graphic on the breefield page looks cartoonish and unprofessional

The header image on the right (breefield) makes it look unprofessional. It looks more like a children's game or something. Also, I like the layout on the left (meridian city) because it's simple and clean. The breefield website is also way too cluttered, there's too much information in one page.

B looks more cluttered. A is easier to navigate visually.

I thought A looked more professional, although both sites are slow to load

A has more drop down menus that actually work

appears more warm and inviting

the use of ".org" signifies a non-commerical website; also the website is briefer and therefore easier to remember

I prefer this one because the layout is better, there fewer links on the home page (so it doesn't look so busy), and the drawing of town hall on the top of the site I did NOT prefer makes the site and the town seem unfinished.

I like the elegant design... the other one has a cold header

looks more professional, better organized

LOOKS BETTER

it's easier to remember and read

The photo montage presented in the meridiancity.org site is far more professional than the cartoonish logo in the breefield site.

Option A is professional and is more user friendly (I prefer the dropdown options)

A looks more professional, B looks like a high school students computer class assignment.

I choose option A because I felt that there was more visual hierarchy with respect to navigational options, which makes the site easier to use. It also felt more modern and "up to date" because it included links to twitter, facebook and an rss feed. I did not see these features in option B. I expect websites to take advantage of social networking and syndication, including government websites.

I don't like the big illustration of the city hall. It looks poorly done.

If I want to search for a city website, I want to see the city name first in the address.

Option A was much more welcoming whereas B looked imposing and impersonal.

I don't like "our" for everything on the other one and It looks more professional. I like the dynamic menus

simple, easy on the eyes

much more graphically pleasing and easier to navigate and find stuff

The navigation menu bar is at the top, consistent with other sites, and the icons at the top is more professional.

Highly capable and advanced Web agency that's recognized as the leading firm for delivering custom and complex Web projects on time and on budget. Specializes in design, ecommerce, Web application development and Web strategy for mid to enterprise level clients and their representing agencies

This website is so neat and beautiful,way better than the other one.

The design is clearly laid out, it's easy to find information

B does seem to be laid out in a more professional manner

Not clutered, easy to find information

B is more thorough in its information.

This site looks like a professional government building while the other site looks like a site operated by a realtor.

it is looking more interesting

Selection B looks more professional and has more information to offer than selection A. Selection A does not look very professional at all.

looking good

While A was more attractive and less cluttered, B was more informative, with important info like traffic alerts right on the homepage.

A looks like a commercial site; a message from the mayor is not what I'd want if I needed some good info, which is what I'd want if I went to a gov't. site. Option B lines up all the kinds of info, in neat categories, that someone would want. The info would be easy to find. The artwork is also terrific.

Option A seems more like a marketing tool with the slogan and the mayor's pic. The prominence of the video and gallery links make the city seem very small in not-a-good-way. Option B seems cleaner, easier to navigate, includes options for all the users ? residents, businesses, visitors and government.

Better laid out to be able to see more text and links without as much distracting photo graphics

B looks more formal. I'd tone down the building though.

This design has more text on the front which makes it seem more informative.

Option A seems friendlier than B, but B seems more professional and informative. B gives an easier breakdown of the things available.

B seems a lot more organized.

I liked the governmental building design look. Also the links to the events were easy to follow and of course the visitors link adds a nice touch. Answer has a homey soft spoken look about it which is fine for a personal website but not for a professional business.

I like the modern-looking building drawing and the general page layout.

Option A has more of a homy feeling, Option A looks like a real-estate site

Even though Option A looked better to me, I think Option B was more professional looking and informative.

This one (B) seems more organized and efficient, and looks less cluttered to me.

Option B seemed to have categories that were easier to locate than Option A. The tabs at the top such as News and Events, Services, Employment, etc. were easy to find.

Seems more logically laid out.