CC_Minutes_2010_1122 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Meeting Monday, November 22, 2010 Page 17 Councilmember Roe confirmed with staff that the questions presented in the packet represented the latest version; and how respondents were to gauge service level questions; and the value of that information, speaking in support of a statis- tical evaluation for valuation criteria. Mr. Pratt noted that those questions were repeated in the budget portion of the survey (page 4) with another set of questions for rating satisfaction and funding priorities. In general, Mayor Klausing opined that the community survey served as a great tool; but recognized that it was only one tool, with limitations; and didn't allow elected officials to focus only on the feedback from this one tool. In reviewing funding priorities, Mayor Klausing anticipated that the survey may uncover some surprises on values; but could serve as a benchmark over time to determine if ranking and values were being reflected in citizen satisfaction or whether they perceived that they were getting a return on their taxpayer investment. Councilmember Ihlan concurred with Councilmember Roe's comments related to rankings; and opined that even with repeating the categories throughout the sur- vey, they would not provide a useful sense of what was important to residents and their basis for living in Roseville. Councilmember Ihlan expressed her interest in using care to ensure that the questions provide useful information or can answer specific questions, such as Item #16 (last item). Councilmember Ihlan questioned whether support for current City government or administration was helpful for measurement. Councilmember Ihlan further questioned how respondents could rank budget priorities without having general descriptions of those categories to understand, using "housing programs" or "community facilities" as examples of not having enough specificity. Councilmember Ihlan noted that items that aren't optional, such as elections, didn't seem an important survey question, since even though respondents could rate current services or ease of voting, their ranking as a priority or to be eliminated was not relevant, since it was a mandated service. Councilmember Ihlan opined that the most problematic portion of the survey was the budgetary actions supported portion; further opining that people probably wouldn't support raising taxes of fees; and questioned the accuracy of the infor- mation. Mayor Klausing cautioned pre judging responses to the survey. Councilmember Ihlan questioned what such questions provided in the context, whether they were meaningful results, and may simply provide interesting, but unreliable information for policy making purposes; however, she opined that the first portion of the survey would provide useful information.