Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-19-12 Admin. Comm of Whole minutesDUBLIN CITY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING Monday, November 19, 2012 – 6:00 p.m. Council Conference Room Vice Mayor Salay called the meeting to order. Present were: Vice Mayor Salay, Mayor Lecklider, Mr. Reiner, Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, Mrs. Boring, and Mr. Keenan. (Mr. Gerber was out of town) Staff present were: Ms. Grigsby, Ms. Puskarcik, Ms. Colley, Ms. Ott. Marty Saperstein, Saperstein Associates was present. Ms. Grigsby stated that Mr. Saperstein recently had discussion with the senior management team about the City’s community survey and how it is used. A need was identified to meet with City Council to understand what they want to learn from the community survey. Staff has invited Mr. Saperstein to meet with Council to obtain this feedback. Mr. Saperstein stated the following:  To him, surveys have two parts: first -- to establish benchmarks to track over time; second -- to provide decision makers with the information they need to make decisions in the community’s interest. In some cases, survey results may indicate that a city is not always doing what the community wants; however, that can often mean that the community needs more education about an issue – not necessarily that they don’t support it.  In reviewing past survey questionnaires, it seems there are lots of questions about “how we are doing” - - and few about whether the survey responder even wants things the way they are – they may want something different. In the 2010 survey done in Dublin, there are an infinite number of questions breaking down the community into every possible service dimension. However, the best predictor of any one question is the responder’s overall attitude about the community. The resulting percentages for the 2010 community satisfaction survey indicate a range from 80 to 99 percent, and he views that as not a significant difference.  He noted that a survey asks people to respond -- yet in many areas, data is gathered that is not entirely useful. It is not constructive when people conclude at the end of a survey that they already knew the results – nothing new is learned that would help serve the community better.  He is interested in understanding the decisions that Council as decision makers face this year, and what data will help guide those decisions. For example, they have done an attitude survey for the City of Powell where everyone is aware of the traffic concerns with particular intersections. Council thought through several alternatives for survey questions in order Administrative Committee of the Whole Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 2 to obtain citizen feedback that would be helpful. In a strategic planning session, Powell City Council identified their priorities and then asked the voters about their ideas. This is helpful data for decision making versus a satisfaction survey. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher commented that she likes that approach, especially the idea of identifying two or three key issues where Council will struggle with the final decision. It would be interesting to have that citizen input for consideration. Mr. Keenan noted that five years ago, a civic building was on the City’s “radar” screen. It would be interesting to hear what people believe makes sense to do – whether they believe that consolidating all of the employees into a facility would create synergies and would be beneficial. How would such a question be framed? This issue came up in the context of Historic Dublin development discussion. Mr. Saperstein stated that one could ask the question “straight up” by asking the voters their opinion about building a new City Hall. Mr. Keenan stated that at one time, the City Hall was listed in the capital improvements plan, but the project was postponed in order that the City could focus on economic development. Mr. Saperstein stated that if having a consolidated City building would save the City money, it may be a consideration for a survey. Mr. Keenan stated that he would also be interested in input about the City’s leaf pick-up program. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the future library would be an excellent topic. Mr. Keenan suggested that the community could be surveyed about their preferences for roundabouts in such locations as the intersection of Riverside Drive and Bridge Street. Vice Mayor Salay asked what Council would do if the survey should indicate the citizens don’t support a roundabout in that location. Mr. Saperstein stated that if a resident doesn’t prefer roundabouts as an option, the City would need to be prepared to offer an alternative. Or this input could indicate there is a need for more education about the benefits of roundabouts. Vice Mayor Salay suggested a question about whether one would be willing to contribute his/her personal treasure toward a library -- whether one would support/donate to a new facility. Administrative Committee of the Whole Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 3 Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher suggested the citizens could be surveyed about options for the future library location. Mr. Reiner suggested the question include the types of amenities desired in a future library. Mr. Keenan suggested the survey could seek input about the concept of a pedestrian bridge across the river. Mr. Saperstein commented in regard to the library survey questions. It is important to do some groundwork, find out what options are available, and then everyone can weigh in on the same things. The goal is to give people the opportunity to respond to ideas. Perhaps a group of selected individuals with various expertise could be invited to brainstorm about what they want to see – and a list of ten items could then be taken to a survey of the community. The results will give percentages of interest in the various options. Mr. Reiner commented that another survey area could be the Police department and traffic control – whether the City should increase the number of officers doing traffic patrol, or provide more speed trailers to make people aware of their speeds. There are varying opinions on the level of traffic control desired. Vice Mayor Salay responded that Dublin has never done heavy traffic enforcement as is done in some communities in Ohio. Mr. Reiner stated that such traffic enforcement can give the impression of being revenue generating. Mr. Saperstein asked if Dublin has traffic light cameras. Council responded that the City does not have traffic light cameras and does not desire to implement them. Mrs. Boring asked if the survey could identify what improvements can be made in services that are already excellent, such as the Rec Center. What new programs could be offered? Mr. Saperstein responded that the City should not ask in a survey what it will require to make the facility better – but instead suggest specific things to determine if there is support. However, there is a tradeoff in terms of opportunity costs – if one option is added, perhaps another program will not be done due to funding. Mr. Keenan stated in regard to a parking structure in Historic Dublin that if residents knew of the cost per space to build such a structure, their views may change. Administrative Committee of the Whole Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 4 Mr. Reiner suggested that park amenities be part of a survey – what people expect in their parks and what interests them. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she supports a list of prioritization of amenities. For example, in the development of the river area, what kind of amenities are residents interested in having? Kayaks, restaurants, or other amenities? Vice Mayor Salay stated that the question relates to the balance of nature versus developed land. This is a natural river corridor and attraction, and there must be a balance. Mr. Keenan stated that it would be interesting to learn what the community believes are the worst traffic signals in the City in terms of timing and resulting delays. Mr. Reiner stated that three roundabouts are planned in the Avery Road corridor where the heaviest commercial use will be in the future. Perhaps Council should reconsider the Avery Road plans. This could be an area where Council could seek input. He recalls that in the late 70s or early 80s, other alternatives were discussed, including viaducts to manage and move traffic. Mr. Saperstein asked if there is anything Council wants to know from the community that would impact Council’s decision about future roundabouts or future viaducts, if that is an option. Mayor Lecklider expressed caution with this approach. He noted that most of Council has indicated support for the concept of a pedestrian bridge across the river. But does Council want to consult the public about engineering-based decisions for items like roundabouts? Maybe some citizens do not support roundabouts and maybe some citizens want the traffic lights timed so there are no stops. Vice Mayor Salay agreed that there are some subjective opinions and there are engineering decisions that are appropriately made by engineers. Mr. Saperstein noted that the example of input regarding the library location would be a good one – especially if it were tied to a levy issue. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the Dublin branch library is tied to the Columbus Metropolitan Library system and they currently have bonds issued that will fund facilities for the entire system. Mr. Saperstein stated that for purposes of the survey questions, he needs to know what decisions Council is facing versus input that is “nice to know.” The Administrative Committee of the Whole Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 5 question is: What issues will Dublin be facing for which the community data will be helpful? Mayor Lecklider stated that, for him, the issues would include the library, the development of the Bridge Street District, a future City Hall, and park amenities. Mr. Keenan stated that a number of other roundabouts are planned for other locations and input on them may be useful. Mr. Reiner stated that he is not certain that there are many questions regarding the Bridge Street District, given the extensive public process that has already taken place. Ms. Grigsby stated that there are not many negative items to address, but generally positive things – which options are preferred, are citizens willing to pay more to address an issue, options for amenities, and site locations for future facilities. Mr. Saperstein stated that the need is to then identify what those options might be. In this process, he reviewed the past year of newspaper articles provided by Ms. Puskarcik. He noticed some articles about shared services, and wondered if that is a possible topic. Mr. Keenan stated that the City is exploring radio system shared services. Ms. Grigsby stated that negotiations for shared services for dispatching are underway. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that perhaps consolidation of some services provided by the township could be considered, given the other cities that are studying this issue. Mr. Keenan stated that there was past discussion about this matter. Mr. Saperstein stated that in Powell, there was a question of sharing services with the township. However, some were not supportive of pursuing such consolidation for police and fire. Mr. Keenan stated that part of the consolidation issue relates to continuation of the millage in place for fire services and whether it could be continued if the services are consolidated. There is a mechanism available to do so, and such a consolidation would eliminate a layer of government involved in providing services. Administrative Committee of the Whole Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 6 Ms. Grigsby stated that, based on previous discussion, there were other issues identified with consolidating fire services. Mr. Keenan noted that the size of the township has some bearing on the union issues involved. Ms. Grigsby stated that the City is pursuing fleet maintenance shared services with several other local governments. Efficiency is prompting this consideration of sharing of services. Mr. Keenan noted that Washington Township already shares fueling and dispatching services with the City. He is aware that the township has identified problems with the ongoing maintenance for their park system. Mrs. Boring indicated she would not be interested in seeking public opinion about bringing the fire department into the City. She would prefer to keep the levies for the township fire and the City-related levies separate. Mr. Reiner asked if a survey is ever used as an informational tool, such as for the CNG or electric fueling stations that are now available to the City. Mr. Saperstein stated that the survey could ask whether anyone is planning to purchase an electric or CNG-fueled car. However, it is an inefficient use of the survey to educate. One should use the survey for things such as how citizens want to communicate with the City, i.e. whether the community would object to abandoning paper communication. Once the citizens know the costs of the paper, they may not be opposed. It could be useful to ask how many are aware of what the City offers in terms of CNG fueling, and if 90 percent respond they have no information, the City would be aware of the need for this education. The education effort would be directed to a much broader audience than the survey group. Mr. Keenan stated that many believe that the Schools and the City are one entity. It would be interesting to see how many understand they are separate entities. Vice Mayor Salay pointed out that Mr. Saperstein has indicated the survey is not best used for educating people about issues. Mr. Saperstein commented that in polling done for New Albany, responders were asked if people who live in Columbus pay the same taxes as those in New Albany. The results reflected there is much confusion about taxes in general -- but it is apparently very inconvenient to understand the truth. Ms. Grigsby stated that in terms of timing of the survey, perhaps the results could be incorporated into Council’s goal setting. Administrative Committee of the Whole Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 7 Ms. Puskarcik noted that staff also considered the timing of the National Citizen Survey, which is underway at this time. Staff hopes to have those results at the end of December/early January and can distribute it to Council at that time. There are some customized questions included in that survey related to the I- 270/33 interchange and internet access. Mr. Saperstein stated that it will likely not be necessary to ask the same questions again in the survey conducted by the City. Ms. Puskarcik stated that if the City survey can be done in the January/February timeframe, the results would be available for goal setting. Mr. Saperstein stated that the Dublin survey will be a telephone survey. It will be interesting to learn how the responders obtain information from the City. The phone numbers come from registered voter lists. He noted that when a telephone survey is done, the survey is somewhat biased toward non technologically savvy people. Vice Mayor Salay recalled a past City survey where anyone was invited to complete the online survey. Ms. Puskarcik stated that did occur and the results were consistent with the mailed survey. The National Citizen Survey provides another tool for the City and complements what is already in place. Mr. Saperstein commented that the data received is only as good as the method used. There are no known population parameters; one relies upon the survey tool. There is never a time when one would compromise the method. If one did only phone surveys and let the person answering phone complete the survey, it would involve women for the most part as women generally answer the phone. It would also involve an older group who uses the phone versus other communication methods. But one has to replicate the community as best one can. Mr. Keenan commented that many younger people have only cell phones and do not have a land line. Mr. Saperstein agreed that many people 35 and younger have only cell phones. He added that in ten years, there will have to be more electronic surveys unless Congress approves legislation that provides access to cell phone directories. Polling becomes very difficult if one can’t contact people and everyone does rely upon polling. Currently, people voluntarily include their cell phone on voter registration lists. But as time goes by, and more people use cell phones, it will be difficult to have random samples. Congress will likely have to require the directories be published. Administrative Committee of the Whole Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 8 Ms. Grigsby stated that the next step in this process will be to consider potential questions for the survey. Based on Council’s input, staff will work with Mr. Saperstein to review the issues identified for preparation of the survey questions. The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. __Anne Clarke_________________ Clerk of Council