Iowa League of Cities Annual Conference & Exhibit
The Engagement Party
Deb Dyar, City of AnkenyTom Brazleton, City of Ankeny
Phil Jones, City of WaverlyJeffrey Schott, Institute of Public Affairs
Handouts and presentations are available online at www.iowaleague.org
THE ENGAGEMENT PARTY – EFFECTIVELY ENGAGING CITIZENS IN MEANINGFUL WAYS IOWA LEAGUE OF CITIESSEPTEMBER 25, 2013
How can we communicate better with our constituents?
Don’t focus on “communications”Strive for “citizen engagement’’
Proactive perspective of localgovts’ role in connectingcitizens with their govt
CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
Encompasses various strategies and methods of informing, listening to, and involving a broad base of community members in the governance process.
CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
• Citizen surveys:• In General• Waverly
• Virtual Town Hall – Building Social Media as Customer Service - Ankeny
THE ENGAGEMENT PARTY
• Gauging “public opinion”• Determining the public’s
opinions on city issues and services
CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
• The squeaky wheels/chronic complainers
• Coffee klatches• Organized interest groups• Attending/speaking at public
meetings• Bloggers/letters to the editor
HOW DO WE GAUGE“PUBLIC OPINION”?
An effective means to systematically determine public opinion regarding:• City issues• City services & programs• City projects• Priorities
CITIZEN SURVEYS
• Find out what representative cross-sample of residents are thinking
• Reach out to citizens in non-confrontational environment
• Help monitor trends and changes regarding priorities, issues, and service satisfaction
BENEFITS OF CITIZEN SURVEYS
• Provide policy makers with essential planning information regarding community needs and priorities
• Help citizens understand certain decisions are difficult and complex and there are competing priorities
BENEFITS OF CITIZEN SURVEYS
• Elected officials still make the decisions/ set policies – not a “rubber stamp”
• Govt still expected to deliver services
• Local elected leadership team still ultimately responsible
WHAT DOES NOTCHANGE:
• Snap shot in time• “Recency” effect• Seasonal effects• Phrasing of questions• Limited/lack of information on
key issues
CITIZEN SURVEYS - CAUTIONS
• Sample selection• Language/diversity issues• Margin of error
CITIZEN SURVEYS - CAUTIONS
• Telephone • Internet/computer/social media• Newspaper• Mail
CITIZEN SURVEYS - METHODS
SASESample Size 800 – 900Utility CustomersResponse Rate 35 – 45%Margin of Error 4-5%
MAIL SURVEY
Public opinion questions
CITIZEN SURVEYS - FORMAT
I FEEL SAFE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD
Agree
95.3%
Disagree 2.7%
No Opinion 2.6%
CITY ENCOURAGE COMML & INDLDEV THRU FINL INCENTIVES
Agree
52.1%
Disagree 16.7%
No Opinion 31.2%
ADOPT POLICY FOR INSPECTION OF RENTAL UNITSAgree
60.3%
Disagree 15.5%
No Opinion 24.2%
PLEASED WITH OVERALL DIRECTION CITY IS TAKINGAgree
62.3%
Disagree 18.7%
No Opinion 19.0%
Quality of city services
CITIZEN SURVEYS - FORMAT
GARBAGE COLLECTIONVery Satisfied 48.1%
Satisfied 45.6%
Not Satisfied 3.2%
Very Dissatisfied 0.7%
Unsure/No Opinion 2.2%
POLICE DEPARTMENTVery Satisfied 35.9%
Satisfied 47.6%
Not Satisfied 6.2%
Very Dissatisfied 2.2%
Unsure/No Opinion 8.0%
STREET REPAIRVery Satisfied 10.5%
Satisfied 45.4%
Not Satisfied 28.7%
Very Dissatisfied 9.0%
Unsure/No Opinion 6.5%
Capital Improvement Priorities
CITIZEN SURVEYS - FORMAT
STREET IMPROVEMENTS: MAJOR STREETS
High 57.9%
Medium 38.9%
Low 7.2%
Do Not Fund 0.0%
No Opinion 4.0%
STREET IMPROVEMENTS: RESIDENTIAL STREETS
High 37.7%
Medium 48.4%
Low 9.2%
Do Not Fund 0.0%
No Opinion 4.7%
10TH AVE EXTENSION/ CEDAR RIVER PARKWAY
High 21.7%
Medium 23.4%
Low 24.7%
Do Not Fund 11.0%
No Opinion 19.2%
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - HIGH PRIORITIES
0
20
40
60
80
100
St Rep-Major
St Rep -Res
4th StImp
Dry RunCreek
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - HIGH PRIORITIES
0
20
40
60
80
100
SanSewer
RvrFront
Trails Parks -exstg
Neighborhood concerns
CITIZEN SURVEYS - FORMAT
NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS –BIG PROBLEM – TOP 5
Cars parked on st.
7.5%
Tfc/speedingAnimals at large
6.7% 5.0%
Ped. connect to trails
3.7%
Noise 3.5%
DURING PAST 12 MONTHS, QUALITY OF NEIGHBORHOOD HAS:
Stayed the same 76.6%
Improved 15.7%
Declined 5.7%
No Answer 2.0%
Open-Ended Questions
CITIZEN SURVEYS - FORMAT
LIKE MOST
Schools/ education Safety/low crime Friendly/ nice/ caring people Size/small town atm. Clean, neat
20.7% 19.7%
18.7% 18.7% 16.2%
1 2 3T 3T 5
LIKE LEASTProperty taxes too high Street conditions City spending
24.9% 8.2% 7.2%
1 2 3
Utility rates too high W – city finl contrib
5.2% 4.7%
4 5
HIGHEST PRIORITY NEEDS Street repair 24.7% 1
Flood protection
9.0% 2
Ec dev/jobs 7.0% 3
Downtown/ Main St revit
6.5% 4
Safety/ security
5.5% 5
CITY SERVICES TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE
City finl donation to W Police – reduce staffing (everything else <2%)
5.7% 5.5%
CITY SERVICES TO PROVIDE –NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Internet/ cablePublic transp. Taxi service Trans. For elderly Affordable rec prog
8.1% 2.2% 2.2% 2.2% 2.0%
Demographic Info:• Ward• Gender• Age group• Years lived in town
CITIZEN SURVEYS - FORMAT
Demographic Info:• Moved from• Where employed• Internet access
CITIZEN SURVEYS - FORMAT
INTERESTED IN NEWS ABOUT WAVERLY CITY GOVT
Yes 82.0%
No 15.0%
No Answer 3.0%
NEWS ABOUT WAVERLY
Waverly Dem. Convs w family/ friends TV news Waterloo Cour. Local access CATV
71.6% 69.6% 47.2% 44.8% 33.9%
NEWS ABOUT WAVERLY
City website Radio news City mtgs Social media
25.2% 18.2% 18.0% 7.5%
HOW OFTEN DO YOU WATCH WAVERLY COUNCIL MEETINGS?
Frequently (weekly) Regularly(1-2/mo.) Occasionally (1-2/2-3 months) Rarely (1-2/yr) Never Other
5.2% 18.7% 22.7% 22.4% 30.4% 0.5%
QUESTIONS/COMMENTS?
