2016 Citizen Survey ResultsCity of College Station

Conducted by National Service Research

City Council Strategic Plan

GOOD GOVERNANCE GOALThe city is governed in a transparent, efficient, accountable and responsive manner on behalf of its citizens.

OBJECTIVES• The city delivers services in an efficient, practical manner. • The city actively pursues the aspirations, goals and expectations of its citizens. • Citizens are satisfied with city services and facilities.

ACTIONS• The city will conduct regular citizen surveys about city services and

priorities.

Methodology

• 8,000 surveys were mailed to random city addresses proportionately selected within four geographic areas.

• Households had the option to complete the survey online.

• Widely publicized through traditional media, social media, direct mail, promotional video, newsletters, website.

• Facebook ads targeted specific demographics to help ensure accurate representation.

• Survey was open from April 1-April 30.

Data Collection Summary

• A total of 2,015 responses were received, including 543 mailed surveys and 1,472 online surveys.

• Participation was up 236 percent from the 2012 survey, when 853 responses were received.

• College students completed 513 surveys, a 540 percent increase in student-participation from 2012.

• The margin of error of this sample size at a 95 percent confidence level was +/- 2.2 percent.

“This is among the best responses I’ve seen in a citizen survey.”

-Andrea Thomas, NSR President

National Service Research

About NSR• Headquartered in Fort Worth• Founded in 1989• Clients include City of Dallas, City of Fort Worth, TCU, DFW Airport, Texas

Department of Public Safety, U.S. Department of Commerce, TxDOT, Coca-Cola, and Anheuser-Busch.

Benchmark Cities

• Arlington• Austin• Baytown• Cedar Hill• Celina• El Paso• Flower Mound• Hutto• Irving• Lewisville• McKinney

• Midland• New Braunfels• North Richland Hills • Pearland• Plano• Round Rock• San Antonio• San Marcos• Sugar Land• Westlake• The Woodlands

Peer group highlighted in green

% of respondents who selected excellent or good 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

College Station as a place to live 91 93 -2 89 84

My neighborhood as a place to live 86 87 -1 79 78

College Station as a place to raise a family 89 93 -4 88 78

College Station as a place to do business 79 74 +5 -- 57

College Station as a place to work 80 77 +3 71 65

College Station as a place to retire 74 77 -3 76 68

College Station’s Image/Reputation 87 80 +7 80 79

Quality of Life

Quality of Life

% of respondents who selected very or somewhat likely 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

How likely are you to recommend College Station as a place to live?

91 92 -1 90 86

% of respondents who selected strongly or somewhat agree 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

“College Station is moving in the right direction as a community.”

85 82 +3 73 67

Public Safety

2016 2012 +/-

Crime in College Station is increasing 51 51 0Crime in College Station is decreasing 5 4 +1Crime in CS is staying the same? 27 29 -2

% of respondents who selected very or somewhat safe 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

In general, how safe do you feel in your neighborhood?

96 93 +3 88 84

What residents VALUE most

Friendly peopleFamily-oriented

Good quality of lifeEducational opportunities

College atmosphereSmall-town feel

Safety and low crime rate

1,496 responses

What residents would CHANGE

Traffic congestionStricter traffic laws

Ban texting and drivingBetter retail options

More entertainment activitiesBetter road planning/maintenance

Preserve neighborhood integrity

1,608 responses

Residents’ highest PRIORITIES

1,567 responses

Manage growth, sustainabilityMaintain small-town feel

Quality growth and developmentReduce traffic congestion

Public safetyJob creation

Maintain streets and roads

Preferred commercial development

1,405 responses

Establishments that cater to adults/familiesSpecific brand stores and restaurants

Entertainment venuesFamily-friendly activitiesUpscale grocery storesMore shopping areas

Fewer chains, more independent businesses

Quality and Value of Services

% of respondents who selected excellent or good 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

Overall quality of city services 84 85 -1 82 77

Value of services received for tax dollars 68 69 -1 62 59

Importance/Quality of Services2016 Pct. 2012 Pct. 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

1 97 1 99 Police Department services 86 93 -7 84 83

2 98 1 99 Fire Department services 93 93 0 91 89

3 98 5 99 Managing Traffic Congestion 28 50 -22 49 494 99 3 95 Maintaining Streets and roads 48 71 -23 60 56

5 87 3 89 Attracting business and jobs 67 63 +4 -- --

6 97 4 93 Managing trash and recycling 84 86 -2 89 83

7 86 8 78 Biking/walking facilities (sidewalks, trails, etc.) 56 70 -14 64 62

8 90 7 89 Retaining/supporting existing businesses 45 50 -5 -- --

9 89 6 90 Enforcing traffic laws 63 74 -11 68 68

10 80 13 89 Providing youth recreation programs 69 78 -9 65 62

<<< Importance >>> <<< Quality >>>

Ranking is based on the % of respondents who rated item among three MOST important

% of respondents who selected excellent or good

Importance/Quality of Services2016 Pct. 2012 Pct. 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

11 93 9 78 Maintaining appearance of parks 75 79 -4 86 83

12 95 10 69 Managing stormwater drainage 68 79 -11 71 66

13 83 12 80 Code enforcement services 53 65 -12 60 5514 74 16 56 Special events (Starlight, Christmas at the Park, etc.) 74 77 -3 73 73

15 77 11 75 Library services 73 77 -4 87 84

16 62 15 69 Attracting tourism 62 57 +5 -- --

17 75 14 65 Senior citizen services 56 67 -11 64 64

18 82 18 75 Educating public on crime prevention 50 58 -8 -- --

19 81 17 78 Animal Control Services 66 70 -4 68 65

20 67 13 68 Providing adult recreation programs 56 78 -22 61 57

Ranking is based on the % of respondents who rated item Among three MOST important

<<< Importance >>> <<< Quality >>>

% of respondents who selected excellent or good

Biggest Gaps – Quality/Importance

Rank Quality Importance Gap

1 Managing traffic congestion 28 98 -60

2 Maintaining streets and roads 48 99 -51

3 Supporting and retaining existing businesses 45 90 -454 Educating public on crime prevention 50 82 -32

5 Biking/walking facilities (sidewalks, trails, etc.) 56 86 -30

Code Enforcement 53 83 -30

7 Managing stormwater drainage 68 95 -27

8 Enforcing traffic laws 63 89 -26

Service Prioritization

Increase Efforts

Managing traffic congestion Maintaining streets Attracting business/jobs Biking/walking facilities Retain/support businessesEnforcing traffic laws Maintaining appearance of parks Managing stormwater drainage Code enforcement services Crime prevention education 2

(high importance, lower quality)This is where the city is NOT performing as well as residents expect. These items

have an impact on citizen satisfaction and the city should increase emphasis.

Service Prioritization

Maintain Efforts

Police servicesFire servicesManaging trash/recycling

(high importance, high quality)This is where the city is meeting residents’ expectations. These items have an impact

on citizen satisfaction and the city should maintain or slightly increase emphasis.

Service Prioritization

Less Important

Youth recreation programsSpecial eventsLibrary servicesAttracting tourismSenior citizen servicesAnimal controlAdult recreation programs

(less importance, lower quality)This is where the city is not performing well relative to other areas, but these items may be considered less important.

These items do not significantly impact overall satisfaction and the city should maintain current levels of emphasis.

Comments about city services

702 responses

Enforce traffic lawsImprove traffic flow and congestion

Ban texting and drivingMore bike/trail connections

More dog parksMore family-friendly options

Keep up the good work (17%)

% of respondents who selected excellent or good 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

Water services 80 92 -12 82 78

Wastewater services 81 92 -11 81 77

Quality of Utility Services

% of respondents who selected excellent or good 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

Electric utility services 77 89 -12 81 76

Customer Service

% of respondents who selected excellent or good 2016 2012 +/- Peers TX

What was your impression of the city employee regarding their courtesy, knowledge and responsiveness?

85 89 -4 77 77

Yes No

Have you had contact with a city employee in the last 12 months?

52 48

How could service be improved?

368 responses

Better communicationQuicker response to inquiriesQuicker follow-up to inquiriesBetter training of employees

More staff neededBetter website

Positive comments (29%)

Rank % of respondents who selected very or somewhat important 2016 2012 +/-

1 Ease of car travel around town 96 91 +5

2 Availability of medical/health care facilities 99 98 +1

3 Job opportunities 94 91 +34 Availability of quality affordable housing 86 77 +9

5 Overall appearance of College Station 98 97 +16 Educational opportunities 96 92 +4

7 Quality shopping opportunities 87 85 +2

8 Sense of community 92 87 +5

9 Appearance of neighborhoods 97 95 +2

10 Support of sustainability/green issues 78 67 +11

Ranking is based on the % of respondents who rated item among three MOST important

Community Characteristics

Rank % of respondents who selected very important/important 2016 2012 +/-

11 Quality of business/service establishments 95 94 +1

12 Recreational opportunities 92 84 +8

13 Entertainment opportunities 91 83 +814 Business opportunities 90 87 +3

15 Availability of open space 89 85 +416 Quality of new development 92 91 +1

17 Ease of bicycle travel around town 68 61 +7

18 Cultural activities 82 73 +9

19 Opportunities to participate in local gov’t 74 69 +5

20 Volunteer opportunities 73 62 +9

Ranking is based on the % of respondents who rated item among three MOST important

Community Characteristics

Municipal FacilitiesHow would you rate the quality of these municipal facilities?

Excellent/Good

Municipal Court 80

Southwood Community Center 69

College Station City Hall 59Lincoln Recreation Center 53

How important is it for the city to provide additional facilities for: Very/Somewhat important

Youth activities and programs 87

City offices and services 79

Community meeting and activity space 79Senior activities and program 74

Comments about city facilities

235 responses

Need new city hallCentralize departments

Existing facilities old/outdated/smallNeed more meeting spaceNeed community center

Existing facilities are adequate (8%)

2016 Citizen Survey ResultsCity of College Station

Conducted by National Service Research