City of Citizen Survey · The results for the City of Richmond are shown in blue, the Missouri and Kansas averages are shown in red, and the national averages are shown in yellow

…helping organizations make better decisions since 1982

Submitted to the City of Richmond, Missouri by: ETC Institute 725 W. Frontier Lane, Olathe, Kansas 66061 August 2020

City of Richmond

Citizen Survey

Findings Report

2020

Contents

Executive Summary ....................................................................... i

Section 1: Charts and Graphs ....................................................... 1

Section 2: Benchmarking Analysis .............................................. 30

Section 3: Importance-Satisfaction Analysis .............................. 43

Section 4: Tabular Data .............................................................. 49

Section 5: Survey Instrument ..................................................... 85

i

Executive Summ

ary Report

2020 City of Richmond Citizen Survey Executive Summary

Purpose and Methodology

ETC Institute administered a survey to residents of the City of Richmond during the summer of 2020. The purpose of the survey was to gather resident input and feedback on City programs and services. The information provided by residents will be used to improve existing programs and services and help determine long-range planning and investment decisions. This is the first survey ETC Institute has administered for the City of Richmond.

The six-page survey, cover letter and postage-paid return envelope were mailed to a random sample of households in the City of Richmond. The cover letter explained the purpose of the survey and encouraged residents to either return their survey by mail or complete the survey online. Ten days after the surveys were mailed, ETC Institute sent emails to the households that received the survey to encourage participation. The emails contained a link to the online version of the survey to make it easy for residents to complete the survey. To prevent people who were not residents of Richmond from participating, everyone who completed the survey online was required to enter their home address prior to submitting the survey. ETC Institute then matched the addresses that were entered online with the addresses that were originally selected for the random sample. If the address from a survey completed online did not match one of the addresses selected for the sample, the online survey was not counted. The goal was to obtain completed surveys from at least 300 residents. This goal was met, with a total of 310 residents completing the survey. The overall results for the sample of 310 households have a precision of at least +/-5.5 % at the 95% level of confidence.

The percentage of “don’t know” responses has been excluded from many of the graphs shown in this report to facilitate valid comparisons of the results from Richmond with the results from other communities where ETC Institute has conducted a citizen survey. Since the number of “don’t know” responses often reflects the utilization and awareness of city services, the percentage of “don’t know” responses has been provided in the tabular data section of this report. When the “don’t know” responses have been excluded, the text of this report will indicate that the responses have been excluded with the phrase “who had an opinion.” This report contains:

• An executive summary of the methodology for administering the survey and major findings, • charts showing the overall results for all questions on the survey, • benchmarking data that show how the results for Richmond compare to other

communities,

ii

Executive Summ

ary Report

• Importance-Satisfaction analysis; this analysis was done to determine priority actions for the City to address based upon the survey results,

• tables that show the results of the random sample for each question on the survey, • a copy of the survey instrument.

Overall Ratings of the City

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, rated the City of Richmond as an “excellent” or “good” place to live. Sixty-nine percent (69%) rated the City as an “excellent” or “good” place to raise children, and 66% gave the City “excellent” or “good” ratings as a place they are proud to call home. Perceptions of the City of Richmond

Seventy-two percent (72%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, rated the overall feeling of safety as “excellent” or “good.” Sixty percent (60%) rated the overall quality of life in the City as “excellent” or “good;” 52% rated the access to health care facilities as “excellent” or “good,” and 51% rated the overall reputation of the City as “excellent” or “good.” Major Categories of City Service The major categories of City service that had the highest levels of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses among residents who had an opinion, were: overall quality of fire services (79%), overall maintenance of City parks and trails (75%), overall quality of police services (65%), and overall quality of customer service from City employees (60%).

Based on the sum of their top three choices, the City services respondents indicated should receive the most emphasis from City leaders over the next five years were: 1) overall maintenance of City streets, 2) overall quality of water and sewer services, and 3) overall value received for City tax dollars and fees. Police Services

The police services that had the highest levels of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses among residents who had an opinion, were: how quickly police respond to emergencies (70%), overall attitude and behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens (66%), and overall competency of the Police Department (64%). Based on the sum of their top three choices, the police services respondents indicated should receive the most emphasis from City leaders over the next five years were: 1) the City’s efforts to prevent crime, 2) the visibility of police in neighborhoods, and 3) overall quality of animal control services.

iii

Executive Summ

ary Report

Feeling of Safety in Richmond

Nearly all (96%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, felt “very safe” or “somewhat safe” in commercial and retail areas of the City; 96% felt “very safe” or “somewhat safe” walking alone in their neighborhood during the day, and 88% felt “very safe” or “somewhat safe” in City parks, recreation areas and trails. Eleven percent (11%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, indicated they or someone in their household had been the victim of a crime in Richmond during the past 12 months. Fire Services

The fire services that had the highest levels of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses among residents who had an opinion, were: the quality of local fire protection and rescue services (70%) and the quality of fire public safety education (66%). Nearly one-third (31%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, indicated they had interacted with Fire Department personnel. Maintenance/Public Works The maintenance/public works services that had the highest levels of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses among residents who had an opinion, were: residential trash collection services (78%), ease of paying water, sewer and trash bill (71%), weekly curbside yard waste removal services (65%), maintenance of street signs (58%),and overall cleanliness of streets and other public areas (55%).

Based on the sum of their top three choices, the maintenance/public works services respondents indicated should receive the most emphasis from City leaders over the next five years were: 1) condition of street drainage/water drainage, 2) water, sewer and trash rates, and 3) condition of neighborhood streets. Communication and Engagement

The communication services that had the highest levels of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses among residents who had an opinion, were: the City’s Textcaster service (57%) and the City’s social media (43%). Nearly two-thirds (63%) of residents indicated they get City information through word of mouth or neighbors, 46% from Textcaster and 37% from the City website (multiple answers were allowed). Thirty-five percent (35%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, indicated they follow the City of Richmond on Facebook, and 53% are signed up to receive Textcaster notifications.

iv

Executive Summ

ary Report

Customer Service

Forty-four percent (44%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, indicated they had contacted the City with a question, problem, or complaint in the past year. Of those who contacted the City, 71% who had an opinion were “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with how courteously they were treated by City employees; 68% were “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with how easy the department was to contact, and 64% were “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the professionalism/knowledge of City employees who assisted them. Code Compliance

The code compliance services that had the highest levels of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses among residents who had an opinion, were: enforcing the maintenance of commercial property (41%), enforcing sign regulations (42%), and enforcing mowing/trimming of lawns on private property (36%). Parks and Recreation The parks and recreation services that had the highest levels of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses among residents who had an opinion, were: the appearance and maintenance of parks (82%), the quality of park facilities (79%), and the quality of outdoor athletic fields/courts (70%).

Additional Findings

Residents were asked what they leave Richmond to spend money on when they are not purchasing online. Seventy-three percent (73%) indicated they leave Richmond to purchase clothing, 63% leave for fine dining, 63% leave for casual dining, and 57% leave Richmond to purchase vehicles (multiple answers were allowed).

When residents were asked their level of agreement that the City should pursue various activities, 87% who had an opinion either “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the City should attract more retail stores. Eighty-one percent (81%) “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the City should attract more industrial/manufacturing, and 80% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the City should provide incentives for neighborhood restoration and upkeep.

More than one-third (37%) of residents who had an opinion indicated that the downtown area should be for development or redevelopment projects. Other areas that residents indicated should be for development/redevelopment projects include: south of 210 Highway (Walmart area) (22%), Spartan Drive/13 Highway (22%), Main Street/Old 10 Highway (17%), and other areas (2%).

v

Executive Summ

ary Report

Residents were asked the level of importance they placed on various reasons for their decision to live in the City of Richmond. Eighty-four percent (84%) of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, indicated that quality of life was either “very important” or “important” in their decision. Other reasons that were “very important” or “important” include: access to highways (81%), overall cost of living (81%), affordability of housing (80%), and quality of public education (77%).

Investment Priorities Recommended Priorities for the Next Five Years. In order to help the City identify investment priorities for the next five years, ETC Institute conducted an Importance-Satisfaction (I-S) analysis. This analysis examined the importance residents placed on each City service and the level of satisfaction with each service. By identifying services of high importance and low satisfaction, the analysis identified which services will have the most impact on overall satisfaction with City services over the next five years. If the City wants to improve its overall satisfaction rating, the City should prioritize investments in services with the highest Importance Satisfaction (I-S) ratings. Details regarding the methodology for the analysis are provided in Section 3 of this report.

Overall Priorities for City Services. This analysis reviewed the importance and ratings of the major categories of City service in Richmond. This analysis was conducted to help set the overall priorities for the City. Based on the results of this analysis, the items that are recommended as top priorities for investment over the next five years in order to raise the City’s overall satisfaction rating are listed below:

o Overall maintenance of City streets (IS Rating=0.3756) o Overall quality of water and sewer services (IS Rating=0.2342)

The table on the following page shows the Importance-Satisfaction rating for all twelve categories of City service.

vi

Executive Summ

ary Report

Section 1 Charts and Graphs

2020 City of Richmond Citizen Survey: Findings Report

ETC Institute (2020) Page 1

18%

16%

19%

15%

8%

6%

4%

3%

59%

53%

47%

46%

29%

26%

12%

12%

14%

20%

25%

27%

25%

32%

27%

25%

9%

11%

10%

13%

39%

37%

57%

60%

As a place to live

As a place to raise children

As a place you are proud to call home

As a place to retire

As a place to work

As a place to visit

As a place for recreation

As a place to shop

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Excellent (5) Good (4) Neutral (3) Below Average/Poor (2/1)

Q1. Overall Ratings of the City

Source: ETC Institute (2020)

by percentage of respondents (excluding "don't know")



17%

8%

7%

6%

6%

8%

7%

7%

5%

5%

6%

5%3%

3%

2%

2%

55%

52%

45%

45%

43%

37%

32%

30%

28%

24%

22%

21%

15%

15%

12%

10%

17%

28%

24%

30%

30%

35%

36%

36%

44%

43%

41%

33%

21%

22%

26%

26%

11%

12%

24%

20%

21%

20%

25%

27%

24%

28%

32%

42%

61%

61%

59%

62%

Overall feeling of safety in the City

Overall quality of life in the City

Access to health care facilities

Overall reputation of the City

Overall appearance of the City

Acceptance of diverse populations

Availability of affordable housing

City's environmental sustainability efforts

Transparency and accountability of City actions

Availability of diverse housing options

Quality of new commercial developments in the City

Access to restaurants and entertainment

Access to quality shopping facilities

Job availability

Availability of cultural activities and the arts

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Excellent (5) Good (4) Neutral (3) Below Average/Poor (2/1)

Q2. Perceptions of the City of Richmond



Quality of new residential developments in the City



25%

20%

18%

19%

11%

6%

8%

6%

6%

8%

5%

3%

54%

55%

47%

41%

44%

44%

33%

34%

31%

28%

31%

27%

19%

19%

24%

27%

37%

35%

30%

39%

35%

42%

34%

25%

3%

5%

12%

13%

9%

15%

30%

21%

29%

22%

31%

46%

Overall quality of fire services

Overall maintenance of City parks and trails

Overall quality of police services

Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness

Overall quality of services provided by the City

Overall quality of water and sewer services

Overall effectiveness of communication with public

Overall value received for City tax dollars & fees

Overall management of City finances

Overall enforcement of City codes and ordinances

Overall maintenance of City streets

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Satisfied (5) Satisfied (4) Neutral (3) Dissatisfied (2/1)

Q3. Satisfaction with Major Categories of City Service



Overall quality of customer service from City employees



54%

39%

24%

22%

18%

17%

16%

13%

11%

6%

6%

5%


Overall quality of water and sewer services




Overall management of City finances






0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice

Q4. Services That Should Receive the Most Emphasis from City Leaders Over the Next Five Yearsby percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices





28%

24%

20%

17%

15%

12%

12%

12%

42%

42%

44%

42%

43%

42%

32%

27%

23%

24%

28%

26%

31%

31%

46%

34%

7%

11%

8%

15%

10%

15%

10%

27%

How quickly police respond to emergencies

Overall competency of Police Department

The visibility of police in neighborhoods

The visibility of police in commercial areas

The City's efforts to prevent crime

Police Department safety education programs

Overall quality of animal control services

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Q5. Satisfaction with Police Services



Overall attitude & behavior of Police Dept. personnel toward citizens



41%

33%

25%

18%

17%

16%

16%

15%




Overall competency of Police Department




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice

by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices


Q6. Police Services That Should Receive the Most Emphasis from City Leaders Over the Next Five Years

Overall attitude & behavior of Police Dept. personnel toward citizens



63%

70%

44%

35%

33%

26%

44%

39%

4%

4%

10%

20%

1%

3%

6%

In commercial and retail areas

Walking alone in your neighborhood during the day

In City parks, recreation areas and trails

Walking alone in your neighborhood after dark

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Safe (4) Somewhat Safe (3) Somewhat Unsafe (2) Very Unsafe (1)

Q7. Feeling of Safety in Richmond





Q8. During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime in Richmond?


11%

89%

Yes No

by percentage of respondents (excluding "don’t know")



28%

24%

20%

17%

42%

42%

44%

42%

23%

24%

28%

26%

7%

11%

8%

15%

Quality of local fire protection & rescue services

Quality of fire public safety education

Attitude & behavior of Fire Dept. personnel

How quickly fire & rescue respond to emergencies

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Q9. Satisfaction with Fire Services





Q10. Have you had any interaction with Fire Department personnel?


31%

69%

Yes No




24%

24%

25%

9%

10%

10%

7%

9%

11%

8%

12%

9%

5%

9%

4%

3%

54%

47%

40%

49%

45%

42%

44%

42%

40%

39%

35%

36%

36%

26%

26%

22%

15%

18%

25%

28%

25%

32%

37%

28%

27%

28%

28%

31%

21%

24%

28%

20%

7%

12%

10%

13%

19%

17%

12%

21%

23%

25%

26%

25%

38%

40%

42%

54%

Residential trash collection services

Ease of paying water, sewer and trash bill

Weekly curbside yard waste removal services

Maintenance of street signs

Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas

Landscaping in public areas along streets

Maintenance of City‐owned buildings

Pedestrian accessibility

Overall quality of water services

Adequacy of City street lighting

Snow and ice removal

Overall quality of sewer services

Condition of streets in your neighborhood

Water, sewer and trash rates

Condition of City sidewalks

Condition of street drainage/water drainage

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Q11. Satisfaction with Maintenance/Public Works





37%

29%

29%

26%

19%

15%

14%

11%

8%

7%

6%

6%

3%

3%

3%

2%


Water, sewer and trash rates







Pedestrian accessibility




Ease of paying water, sewer and trash bill




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice

by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices


Q12. Maintenance/Public Works Services That Should Receive the Most Emphasis from City Leaders Over the Next Five Years



20%

9%

9%

7%

4%

37%

34%

35%

33%

15%

33%

44%

45%

42%

48%

10%

13%

12%

18%

33%

The City’s Textcaster service

The City's social media (e.g. Facebook)

The City website/online services

Availability of info about City programs/services

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Q13. Satisfaction with Communication and Engagement



Level of public involvement in local decision making



63%

46%

37%

36%

35%

4%

Word of mouth/neighbors

Textcaster

City website (cityofrichmondmo.org)

Local news outlets (Richmond Daily News)

City's social media (e.g. Facebook)

Other

0% 20% 40% 60%

Q14. Methods Used to Get Information About the City


by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made)



Q15. Do you follow the City of Richmond on Facebook?


35%

65%

Yes No




Q16. Are you signed up to receive City of Richmond Textcaster notifications?


53%

47%

Yes No




Q17. Have you contacted the City with a question, problem, or complaint in the past year?



44%

56%

Yes No



33%

22%

29%

27%

25%

38%

46%

35%

31%

30%

16%

13%

18%

12%

11%

13%

18%

18%

30%

34%

How courteously you were treated

How easy the department was to contact

How well your issue was handled

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Q17a. Satisfaction with Quality of Customer Service From City Employees


by percentage of respondents who contacted the City with a question, problem or complaint in the past year (excluding "don't know")

Professionalism/knowledge of City employees who assisted you

Overall responsiveness of City employees to yourrequest or concern



6%

8%

7%

6%

5%

35%

34%

29%

29%

24%

38%

45%

34%

32%

32%

21%

14%

30%

32%

40%

Enforcing the maintenance of commercial property

Enforcing sign regulations

Enforcing the maintenance of residential property

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Q18. Satisfaction with Code Compliance



Enforcing mowing/trimming of lawns on private property

Enforcing clean‐up of junk/trash/debris/other nuisances



26%

23%

21%

17%

14%

15%

12%

13%

56%

56%

49%

45%

43%

31%

26%

24%

15%

18%

23%

26%

29%

29%

43%

47%

3%

2%

7%

12%

14%

24%

20%

17%

Appearance and maintenance of parks

Quality of park facilities

Quality of outdoor athletic fields/courts

Availability of youth athletic programs

Quality of youth athletic programs

Number of walking/biking trails

Availability of adult athletic programs

Quality of adult athletic programs

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Q19. Satisfaction with Parks and Recreation





73%

63%

63%

57%

50%

43%

42%

35%

28%

11%

Clothing

Fine dining

Casual dining

Vehicles

Electronics

Furniture

Specialty groceries

General merchandise

General groceries

Other

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Q20. When you are not purchasing online, what do you leave Richmond to spend money on?


by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made)



43%

38%

36%

39%

39%

37%

37%

16%

11%

44%

43%

44%

40%

41%

38%

36%

35%

32%

11%

15%

17%

16%

18%

17%

22%

37%

43%

2%

4%

3%

5%

3%

9%

5%

13%

14%

Attract more retail stores

Attract more industrial/manufacturing

Incentives for neighborhood restoration and upkeep

Additional incentives for downtown re‐development

Attract more entertainment

Attract more fine dining

Incentives for commercial & industrial development

Adoption of design standards for downtown district

Addition of attractive elements to roadways

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Strongly Agree (5) Agree (4) Neutral (3) Disagree (2/1)

Q21. Level of Agreement That the City of Richmond Should Pursue the Following Activities






22%

22%

17%

37%

2%

South of 210 Hwy (Walmart area) Spartan Dr/13 Hwy Main St/Old 10 HwyDowntown area Other

by percentage of respondents (excluding "not provided")

Q22. Which area of the City should be for development or redevelopment projects?



33%

28%

33%

34%

40%

33%

26%

33%

22%

22%

21%

25%

14%

12%

51%

53%

48%

46%

37%

43%

47%

36%

44%

42%

39%

27%

36%

35%

15%

14%

16%

17%

16%

20%

23%

24%

26%

26%

32%

29%

37%

35%

2%

5%

3%

4%

8%

3%

4%

8%

8%

10%

8%

19%

13%

18%

Quality of life

Access to highways

Overall cost of living

Affordability of housing

Quality of public education

Quality of housing

Sense of community

Quality and access to healthcare

Close to jobs in other cities

Retirement

Access to affordable shopping

Job opportunity in Richmond

Number and quality of parks and trails

Availability of recreation programs

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Important (5) Important (4) Neutral (3) Unimportant (2/1)

Q23. Importance of Each of the Following Reasons in Respondent’s Decision to Live in Richmond





Q24. Demographics: Appriximately how many years have you lived in the City of Richmond?

13%

9%12%

8%

14%

43%

Less than 5 years 5‐10 11‐15 16‐20 21‐30 31+ years





Q25. Demographics: What is your age?

19%

21%

20%

20%

20%

Under 30 years 31‐40 41‐50 51‐60 61+





Q26. Demographics: Which of the following best describes your housing situation?


70%

30%

Own Rent




Q27. Demographics: Which of the following best describes your current employment status?


5%

61%

28%

5%

Employed in the home/have home‐based business Employed outside the home Retired Not currently employed outside the home




Section 2 Benchmarking Analysis



Executive Summ

ary Report

Benchmarking Summary Report Richmond, Missouri

Overview

ETC Institute's DirectionFinder program was originally developed in 1999 to help community leaders across the United States use statistically valid community survey data as a tool for making better decisions. Since November of 1999, the survey has been administered in more than 230 cities in 43 states. Most participating cities conduct the survey on an annual or biennial basis.

This report contains benchmarking data from two sources: (1) a national survey that was administered by ETC Institute during the summer of 2019 to a random sample of more than 4,000 residents across the United States, and (2) a regional survey administered to 368 residents living in Missouri and Kansas communities during the summer of 2019.

The charts on the following pages show how the overall results for Richmond compare to the national and regional averages based on the results of the 2019 survey that was administered by ETC institute. The results for the City of Richmond are shown in blue, the Missouri and Kansas averages are shown in red, and the national averages are shown in yellow.





76%

69%

61%

37%

31%

65%

64%

57%

58%

56%

71%

70%

56%

54%

57%

As a place to live

As a place to raise children

As a place to retire

As a place to work

As a place to visit

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Overall Ratings of the CityRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.

by percentage of respondents who rated the item 4 or 5 on a 5‐point scalewhere 5 was "very satisfied" and 1 was "very dissatisfied" (excluding don't knows)

Source: ETC Institute Survey (2020 ‐ Richmond, MO)



72%

60%

51%

49%

63%

67%

58%

53%

66%

72%

61%

64%

Overall feeling of safety in the City

Overall quality of life in the City

Overall reputation of the City

Overall appearance of the City

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Perceptions of the CityRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.





78%

76%

65%

60%

54%

50%

40%

37%

36%

30%

85%

66%

63%

53%

54%

42%

48%

41%

48%

38%

81%

61%

68%

42%

64%

48%

46%

37%

53%

42%










0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Major Categories of City ServiceRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.






70%

59%

58%

53%

45%

39%

62%

60%

60%

52%

50%

55%

62%

56%

60%

55%

52%

55%







0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Police ServicesRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.





70%

66%

59%

85%

58%

81%

81%

62%

79%

Quality of local fire protection & rescue services

Quality of fire public safety education

How quickly fire & rescue respond to emergencies

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Fire ServicesRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.





78%

65%

59%

55%

51%

51%

50%

47%

47%

44%

41%

30%

26%

72%

68%

76%

61%

56%

56%

64%

53%

62%

65%

56%

43%

46%

72%

67%

68%

59%

50%

63%

64%

48%

60%

66%

45%

43%

44%














0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Maintenance/Public WorksRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.





43%

43%

40%

19%

55%

58%

51%

34%

53%

59%

42%

31%

The City's social media (e.g. Facebook)

The City website/online services

Availability of info about City programs/services

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Communication and EngagementRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.



Level of public involvement in local decision making



71%

68%

64%

58%

55%

71%

74%

65%

55%

39%

70%

64%

58%

57%

49%

How courteously you were treated

How easy the department was to contact

Professionalism/knowledge of City employees

Overall responsiveness of City employees

How well your issue was handled

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Customer Service from City EmployeesRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.





41%

41%

36%

35%

29%

50%

45%

41%

45%

39%

51%

50%

36%

43%

42%

Enforcing the maintenance of commercial property

Enforcing sign regulations

Enforcing the maintenance of residential property

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Code ComplianceRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.



Enforcing clean‐up of junk/trash/debris/other nuisances

Enforcing mowing/trimming of lawns on private property



82%

79%

70%

57%

46%

37%

75%

64%

65%

56%

61%

50%

70%

62%

64%

62%

63%

55%

Appearance and maintenance of parks

Quality of park facilities

Quality of outdoor athletic fields/courts

Quality of youth athletic programs

Number of walking/biking trails

Quality of adult athletic programs

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Richmond MO/KS U.S.

Satisfaction With Parks and RecreationRichmond vs. MO/KS vs. U.S.





Section 3 Importance-Satisfaction Analysis



Im

portance-Satisfaction Analysis

Importance-Satisfaction Analysis Richmond, Missouri

Overview

Today, City officials have limited resources which need to be targeted to activities that are of the most benefit to their citizens. Two of the most important criteria for decision making are (1) to target resources toward services of the highest importance to citizens; and (2) to target resources toward those services where citizens are the least satisfied.

The Importance-Satisfaction (IS) rating is a unique tool that allows public officials to better understand both of these highly important decision-making criteria for each of the services they are providing. The Importance-Satisfaction rating is based on the concept that public agencies will maximize overall customer satisfaction by emphasizing improvements in those areas where the level of satisfaction is relatively low and the perceived importance of the service is relatively high.

Methodology

The rating is calculated by summing the percentage of responses for items selected as the first, second, and/or third most important services for the City to provide. The sum is then multiplied by 1 minus the percentage of respondents who indicated they were positively satisfied with the City’s performance in the related area (the sum of the ratings of 4 and 5 on a 5-point scale excluding “Don’t Know” responses). “Don’t Know” responses are excluded from the calculation to ensure the satisfaction ratings among service categories are comparable. [IS=Importance x (1-Satisfaction)].

Example of the Calculation: Respondents were asked to identify the major categories of service they thought should receive the most emphasis over the next five years. Approximately fifty-four percent (53.5%) of respondents selected overall maintenance of City streets as one of the most important items for the City to emphasize.

With regard to satisfaction, 29.8% of respondents surveyed rated overall maintenance of City streets as a “4” or “5” on a 5-point scale (where “5” means “very satisfied”), excluding “don’t know” responses. The I-S rating was calculated by multiplying the sum of the most important percentages by 1 minus the sum of the satisfaction percentages. In this example, 53.5% was multiplied by 70.2% (1-0.298). This calculation yielded an I-S rating of 0.3756, which ranked first out of 12 major categories of City service.

The maximum rating is 1.00 and would be achieved when 100% of the respondents select an item as one of their top three choices to emphasize over the next five years and 0% indicate they are positively satisfied with the delivery of the service.



Im

portance-Satisfaction Analysis

The lowest rating is 0.00 and could be achieved under either of the following two situations:

• If 100% of the respondents were positively satisfied with the delivery of the service • If none (0%) of the respondents selected the service as one for the three most important

areas for the City to emphasize over the next five years.

Interpreting the Ratings

Ratings that are greater than or equal to 0.20 identify areas that should receive significantly more emphasis over the next five years. Ratings from 0.10 to 0.20 identify service areas that should receive increased emphasis. Ratings less than 0.10 should continue to receive the current level of emphasis.

• Definitely Increase Emphasis (IS > 0.20) • Increase Current Emphasis (IS = 0.10 - 0.20) • Maintain Current Emphasis (IS < 0.10)

The results for the City of Richmond are provided on the following pages.



2020 Importance‐Satisfaction RatingRichmond, MOMajor Categories of City Service

Category of ServiceMost

Important %

Most Important

Rank Satisfaction %Satisfaction

Rank

Importance‐Satisfaction

Rating I‐S Rating Rank

Very High Priority (IS > .20)

Overall maintenance of City streets 54% 1 30% 12 0.3756 1Overall quality of water and sewer services 39% 2 40% 7 0.2342 2

High Priority (IS .10‐.20)

Overall value received for City tax dollars & fees 24% 3 37% 9 0.1537 3Overall effectiveness of communication with public 22% 4 40% 8 0.1340 4

Overall enforcement of City codes and ordinances 18% 5 36% 11 0.1167 5

Overall management of City finances 17% 6 36% 10 0.1083 6

Medium Priority (IS < .10)Overall quality of services provided by the City 13% 8 50% 6 0.0629 7

Overall quality of police services 16% 7 65% 3 0.0581 8

Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness 11% 9 54% 5 0.0511 9Overall quality of customer service from City employees 6% 10 60% 4 0.0242 10

Overall maintenance of City parks and trails 6% 11 76% 2 0.0141 11Overall quality of fire services 5% 12 78% 1 0.0113 12

Note: The I‐S Rating is calculated by multiplying the "Most Important" % by (1‐'Satisfaction' %)

Most Important %: The "Most Important" percentage represents the sum of the first, second, and thirdmost important responses for each item. Respondents were asked to identifythe items they thought should be the City's top priorities.

Satisfaction %: The "Satisfaction" percentage represents the sum of the ratings "5" and "4" excluding 'don't knows.'Respondents ranked their level of satisfaction with each of the items on a scaleof 5 to 1, with "5" being "very satisfied" and "1" being "very dissatisfied."

© 2020 ETC Institute



2020 Importance‐Satisfaction RatingRichmond, MOPolice Services


Important %

Most Important


Rank



High Priority (IS .10‐.20)The City's efforts to prevent crime 41% 1 53% 6 0.1901 1Overall quality of animal control services 25% 3 39% 8 0.1535 2The visibility of police in neighborhoods 33% 2 59% 4 0.1346 3

Medium Priority (IS <.10)Police Department safety education programs 16% 6 45% 7 0.0877 4The visibility of police in commercial areas 15% 8 58% 5 0.0632 5Overall competency of Police Department 17% 5 64% 3 0.0630 6Overall attitude & behavior of Police Dept. personnel toward citizens

18% 4 66% 2 0.0604 7

How quickly police respond to emergencies 16% 7 70% 1 0.0468 8


Most Important %: The "Most Important" percentage represents the sum of the first, second, and third

most important responses for each item. Respondents were asked to identifythe items they thought should be the City's top priorities.





2020 Importance‐Satisfaction RatingRichmond, MOMaintenance/Public Works


Important %

Most Important


Rank



Very High Priority (IS > .20)Condition of street drainage/water drainage 37% 1 26% 16 0.2786 1

High Priority (IS .10‐.20)Water, sewer and trash rates 29% 2 36% 14 0.1871 2Condition of City sidewalks 26% 4 30% 15 0.1818 3Condition of streets in your neighborhood 29% 3 41% 13 0.1691 4

Medium Priority (IS <.10)Snow and ice removal 19% 5 47% 11 0.0998 5Adequacy of City street lighting 15% 6 47% 10 0.0796 6Overall quality of water services 14% 7 50% 9 0.0694 7Overall quality of sewer services 11% 8 44% 12 0.0613 8Pedestrian accessibility 8% 9 51% 8 0.0380 9Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 7% 10 55% 5 0.0290 10Maintenance of City‐owned buildings 6% 11 51% 7 0.0284 11Maintenance of street signs 6% 12 59% 4 0.0228 12Landscaping in public areas along streets 3% 14 51% 6 0.0126 13Ease of paying water, sewer and trash bill 3% 13 70% 2 0.0095 14Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 3% 15 65% 3 0.0092 15Residential trash collection services 2% 16 78% 1 0.0035 16


Most Important %: The "Most Important" percentage represents the sum of the first, second, and thirdmost important responses for each item. Respondents were asked to identifythe items they thought should be the City's top priorities.





Section 4 Tabular Data



Q1. Perception of the City. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor," please rate the City of Richmond with regard to each of the following. (N=310) Excellent Good Neutral Below average Poor Don't know Q1-1. As a place to live 17.4% 58.7% 14.2% 8.1% 1.3% 0.3% Q1-2. As a place to raise children 14.5% 49.4% 18.7% 7.7% 2.9% 6.8% Q1-3. As a place to work 7.1% 27.1% 22.9% 22.3% 13.5% 7.1% Q1-4. As a place to retire 14.2% 43.5% 25.5% 5.5% 6.5% 4.8% Q1-5. As a place to visit 5.5% 25.5% 31.9% 19.7% 16.5% 1.0% Q1-6. As a place to shop 2.9% 12.3% 24.8% 36.1% 22.6% 1.3% Q1-7. As a place for recreation 3.5% 11.9% 26.5% 30.3% 24.2% 3.5% Q1-8. As a place you are proud to call home 18.7% 46.5% 24.2% 6.1% 3.2% 1.3%

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q1. Perception of the City. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor," please rate the City of Richmond with regard to each of the following. (without "don't know") (N=310) Excellent Good Neutral Below average Poor Q1-1. As a place to live 17.5% 58.9% 14.2% 8.1% 1.3% Q1-2. As a place to raise children 15.6% 52.9% 20.1% 8.3% 3.1% Q1-3. As a place to work 7.6% 29.2% 24.7% 24.0% 14.6% Q1-4. As a place to retire 14.9% 45.8% 26.8% 5.8% 6.8% Q1-5. As a place to visit 5.5% 25.7% 32.2% 19.9% 16.6% Q1-6. As a place to shop 2.9% 12.4% 25.2% 36.6% 22.9% Q1-7. As a place for recreation 3.7% 12.4% 27.4% 31.4% 25.1% Q1-8. As a place you are proud to call home 19.0% 47.1% 24.5% 6.2% 3.3%



Q2. Please rate each of the following items that may influence your perception of the City of Richmond using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (N=310) Excellent Good Neutral Below average Poor Don't know Q2-1. Overall reputation of City 5.8% 43.5% 29.0% 13.9% 5.2% 2.6% Q2-2. Overall appearance of City 5.8% 43.2% 30.0% 15.5% 5.2% 0.3% Q2-3. Overall quality of life in City 7.4% 51.6% 28.1% 10.0% 1.9% 1.0% Q2-4. Overall feeling of safety in City 16.5% 54.5% 16.8% 7.4% 3.9% 1.0% Q2-5. Quality of new residential developments in City 6.1% 27.7% 32.9% 15.2% 9.7% 8.4% Q2-6. Quality of new commercial developments in City 4.2% 19.7% 31.0% 24.8% 14.2% 6.1% Q2-7. Acceptance of diverse populations 7.7% 34.8% 33.2% 9.7% 8.7% 5.8% Q2-8. Transparency & accountability of City actions 4.2% 22.3% 39.0% 12.6% 13.2% 8.7% Q2-9. City's environmental sustainability efforts 3.9% 23.2% 37.1% 13.2% 7.1% 15.5% Q2-10. Availability of affordable housing 6.5% 29.4% 32.9% 14.2% 8.4% 8.7% Q2-11. Availability of diverse housing options 4.8% 19.0% 35.2% 20.3% 7.1% 13.5% Q2-12. Job availability 2.3% 11.3% 24.8% 32.6% 23.2% 5.8% Q2-13. Access to health care facilities 6.8% 44.8% 23.2% 16.5% 7.7% 1.0% Q2-14. Access to quality shopping facilities 2.9% 14.5% 21.6% 36.1% 23.9% 1.0% Q2-15. Access to restaurants & entertainment 2.9% 14.8% 20.6% 32.9% 27.4% 1.3% Q2-16. Availability of cultural activities & arts 2.3% 9.7% 24.5% 28.4% 30.3% 4.8%



WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q2. Please rate each of the following items that may influence your perception of the City of Richmond using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") (N=310) Excellent Good Neutral Below average Poor Q2-1. Overall reputation of City 6.0% 44.7% 29.8% 14.2% 5.3% Q2-2. Overall appearance of City 5.8% 43.4% 30.1% 15.5% 5.2% Q2-3. Overall quality of life in City 7.5% 52.1% 28.3% 10.1% 2.0% Q2-4. Overall feeling of safety in City 16.6% 55.0% 16.9% 7.5% 3.9% Q2-5. Quality of new residential developments in City 6.7% 30.3% 35.9% 16.5% 10.6% Q2-6. Quality of new commercial developments in City 4.5% 21.0% 33.0% 26.5% 15.1% Q2-7. Acceptance of diverse populations 8.2% 37.0% 35.3% 10.3% 9.2% Q2-8. Transparency & accountability of City actions 4.6% 24.4% 42.8% 13.8% 14.5% Q2-9. City's environmental sustainability efforts 4.6% 27.5% 43.9% 15.6% 8.4% Q2-10. Availability of affordable housing 7.1% 32.2% 36.0% 15.5% 9.2% Q2-11. Availability of diverse housing options 5.6% 22.0% 40.7% 23.5% 8.2% Q2-12. Job availability 2.4% 12.0% 26.4% 34.6% 24.7% Q2-13. Access to health care facilities 6.8% 45.3% 23.5% 16.6% 7.8% Q2-14. Access to quality shopping facilities 2.9% 14.7% 21.8% 36.5% 24.1% Q2-15. Access to restaurants & entertainment 2.9% 15.0% 20.9% 33.3% 27.8% Q2-16. Availability of cultural activities & arts 2.4% 10.2% 25.8% 29.8% 31.9%



Q3. Overall Satisfaction with City Services. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the services listed below using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q3-1. Overall quality of services provided by City 5.8% 43.2% 34.5% 9.0% 5.2% 2.3% Q3-2. Overall value that you receive for your City tax & fees 5.5% 30.0% 33.9% 19.4% 8.4% 2.9% Q3-3. Overall quality of police services 16.8% 44.8% 22.6% 6.5% 4.8% 4.5% Q3-4. Overall quality of fire services 22.3% 48.7% 16.8% 1.3% 1.6% 9.4% Q3-5. Overall maintenance of City streets (not State & County roads) 2.6% 27.1% 24.5% 26.5% 19.0% 0.3% Q3-6. Overall enforcement of City codes & ordinances 4.2% 28.7% 31.3% 20.3% 8.1% 7.4% Q3-7. Overall quality of customer service you receive from City employees 18.4% 40.3% 26.5% 4.5% 7.7% 2.6% Q3-8. Overall maintenance of City parks & trails 19.4% 52.9% 18.4% 3.5% 1.3% 4.5% Q3-9. Overall effectiveness of City communication with the public 6.1% 32.6% 37.7% 13.5% 7.1% 2.9% Q3-10. Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness 9.4% 38.7% 32.6% 5.2% 2.6% 11.6% Q3-11. Overall management of City finances 7.1% 24.2% 35.8% 12.3% 6.8% 13.9% Q3-12. Overall quality of water & sewer services 7.7% 31.9% 29.4% 15.2% 14.2% 1.6%



WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q3. Overall Satisfaction with City Services. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the services listed below using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q3-1. Overall quality of services provided by City 5.9% 44.2% 35.3% 9.2% 5.3% Q3-2. Overall value that you receive for your City tax & fees 5.6% 30.9% 34.9% 19.9% 8.6% Q3-3. Overall quality of police services 17.6% 47.0% 23.6% 6.8% 5.1% Q3-4. Overall quality of fire services 24.6% 53.7% 18.5% 1.4% 1.8% Q3-5. Overall maintenance of City streets (not State & County roads) 2.6% 27.2% 24.6% 26.5% 19.1% Q3-6. Overall enforcement of City codes & ordinances 4.5% 31.0% 33.8% 22.0% 8.7% Q3-7. Overall quality of customer service you receive from City employees 18.9% 41.4% 27.2% 4.6% 7.9% Q3-8. Overall maintenance of City parks & trails 20.3% 55.4% 19.3% 3.7% 1.4% Q3-9. Overall effectiveness of City communication with the public 6.3% 33.6% 38.9% 14.0% 7.3% Q3-10. Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness 10.6% 43.8% 36.9% 5.8% 2.9% Q3-11. Overall management of City finances 8.2% 28.1% 41.6% 14.2% 7.9% Q3-12. Overall quality of water & sewer services 7.9% 32.5% 29.8% 15.4% 14.4%



Q4. Which THREE items listed in Question 3 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q4. Top choice Number Percent Overall quality of services provided by City 13 4.2 % Overall value that you receive for your City tax & fees 23 7.4 % Overall quality of police services 21 6.8 % Overall quality of fire services 4 1.3 % Overall maintenance of City streets (not State & County roads) 76 24.5 % Overall enforcement of City codes & ordinances 15 4.8 % Overall quality of customer service you receive from City employees 8 2.6 % Overall maintenance of City parks & trails 4 1.3 % Overall effectiveness of City communication with the public 8 2.6 % Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness 10 3.2 % Overall management of City finances 10 3.2 % Overall quality of water & sewer services 61 19.7 % None chosen 57 18.4 % Total 310 100.0 % Q4. Which THREE items listed in Question 3 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q4. 2nd choice Number Percent Overall quality of services provided by City 12 3.9 % Overall value that you receive for your City tax & fees 22 7.1 % Overall quality of police services 11 3.5 % Overall quality of fire services 8 2.6 % Overall maintenance of City streets (not State & County roads) 63 20.3 % Overall enforcement of City codes & ordinances 20 6.5 % Overall quality of customer service you receive from City employees 9 2.9 % Overall maintenance of City parks & trails 4 1.3 % Overall effectiveness of City communication with the public 25 8.1 % Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness 10 3.2 % Overall management of City finances 24 7.7 % Overall quality of water & sewer services 33 10.6 % None chosen 69 22.3 % Total 310 100.0 %



Q4. Which THREE items listed in Question 3 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q4. 3rd choice Number Percent Overall quality of services provided by City 14 4.5 % Overall value that you receive for your City tax & fees 30 9.7 % Overall quality of police services 19 6.1 % Overall quality of fire services 4 1.3 % Overall maintenance of City streets (not State & County roads) 27 8.7 % Overall enforcement of City codes & ordinances 21 6.8 % Overall quality of customer service you receive from City employees 2 0.6 % Overall maintenance of City parks & trails 10 3.2 % Overall effectiveness of City communication with the public 36 11.6 % Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness 15 4.8 % Overall management of City finances 19 6.1 % Overall quality of water & sewer services 28 9.0 % None chosen 85 27.4 % Total 310 100.0 %

SUM OF TOP 3 CHOICES Q4. Which THREE items listed in Question 3 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? (top 3) Q4. Sum of top 3 choices Number Percent Overall quality of services provided by City 39 12.6 % Overall value that you receive for your City tax & fees 75 24.2 % Overall quality of police services 51 16.5 % Overall quality of fire services 16 5.2 % Overall maintenance of City streets (not State & County roads) 166 53.5 % Overall enforcement of City codes & ordinances 56 18.1 % Overall quality of customer service you receive from City employees 19 6.1 % Overall maintenance of City parks & trails 18 5.8 % Overall effectiveness of City communication with the public 69 22.3 % Overall efforts of City for emergency preparedness 35 11.3 % Overall management of City finances 53 17.1 % Overall quality of water & sewer services 122 39.4 % None chosen 57 18.4 % Total 776



Q5. Police Services. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q5-1. Visibility of police in neighborhoods 16.8% 41.0% 25.2% 10.6% 4.2% 2.3% Q5-2. Visibility of police in commercial areas 13.9% 39.7% 28.7% 7.1% 2.3% 8.4% Q5-3. City's efforts to prevent crime 11.0% 38.4% 29.0% 9.7% 4.5% 7.4% Q5-4. How quickly police respond to emergencies 23.5% 35.8% 19.4% 4.8% 1.3% 15.2% Q5-5. Overall competency of Police Department 18.4% 40.0% 25.5% 3.9% 3.9% 8.4% Q5-6. Overall attitude & behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens 21.6% 38.7% 21.6% 5.5% 4.2% 8.4% Q5-7. Police Department safety education programs 9.0% 23.5% 33.5% 4.8% 2.3% 26.8% Q5-8. Overall quality of animal control services 10.0% 23.5% 29.0% 11.9% 11.3% 14.2%



WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q5. Police Services. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q5-1. Visibility of police in neighborhoods 17.2% 41.9% 25.7% 10.9% 4.3% Q5-2. Visibility of police in commercial areas 15.1% 43.3% 31.3% 7.7% 2.5% Q5-3. City's efforts to prevent crime 11.8% 41.5% 31.4% 10.5% 4.9% Q5-4. How quickly police respond to emergencies 27.8% 42.2% 22.8% 5.7% 1.5% Q5-5. Overall competency of Police Department 20.1% 43.7% 27.8% 4.2% 4.2% Q5-6. Overall attitude & behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens 23.6% 42.3% 23.6% 6.0% 4.6% Q5-7. Police Department safety education programs 12.3% 32.2% 45.8% 6.6% 3.1% Q5-8. Overall quality of animal control services 11.7% 27.4% 33.8% 13.9% 13.2%



Q6. Which THREE police services listed in Question 5 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q6. Top choice Number Percent Visibility of police in neighborhoods 52 16.8 % Visibility of police in commercial areas 8 2.6 % City's efforts to prevent crime 61 19.7 % How quickly police respond to emergencies 12 3.9 % Overall competency of Police Department 14 4.5 % Overall attitude & behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens 25 8.1 % Police Department safety education programs 8 2.6 % Overall quality of animal control services 30 9.7 % None chosen 100 32.3 % Total 310 100.0 %

Q6. Which THREE police services listed in Question 5 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q6. 2nd choice Number Percent Visibility of police in neighborhoods 28 9.0 % Visibility of police in commercial areas 21 6.8 % City's efforts to prevent crime 36 11.6 % How quickly police respond to emergencies 20 6.5 % Overall competency of Police Department 22 7.1 % Overall attitude & behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens 19 6.1 % Police Department safety education programs 17 5.5 % Overall quality of animal control services 21 6.8 % None chosen 126 40.6 % Total 310 100.0 %



Q6. Which THREE police services listed in Question 5 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q6. 3rd choice Number Percent Visibility of police in neighborhoods 22 7.1 % Visibility of police in commercial areas 18 5.8 % City's efforts to prevent crime 29 9.4 % How quickly police respond to emergencies 16 5.2 % Overall competency of Police Department 18 5.8 % Overall attitude & behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens 11 3.5 % Police Department safety education programs 24 7.7 % Overall quality of animal control services 27 8.7 % None chosen 145 46.8 % Total 310 100.0 %

SUM OF TOP 3 CHOICES Q6. Which THREE police services listed in Question 5 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? (top 3) Q6. Sum of top 3 choices Number Percent Visibility of police in neighborhoods 102 32.9 % Visibility of police in commercial areas 47 15.2 % City's efforts to prevent crime 126 40.6 % How quickly police respond to emergencies 48 15.5 % Overall competency of Police Department 54 17.4 % Overall attitude & behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens 55 17.7 % Police Department safety education programs 49 15.8 % Overall quality of animal control services 78 25.2 % None chosen 100 32.3 % Total 659



Q7. Using a scale of 1 to 4, where 4 means "Very Safe" and 1 means "Very Unsafe," please rate how safe you feel in the following situations. (N=310) Somewhat Very safe Somewhat safe unsafe Very unsafe Don't know Q7-1. In commercial & retail areas 62.6% 32.6% 3.5% 0.0% 1.3% Q7-2. Walking alone in your neighborhood after dark 33.2% 36.8% 19.0% 6.1% 4.8% Q7-3. Walking alone in your neighborhood during the day 68.7% 25.2% 3.5% 1.0% 1.6% Q7-4. In City parks, recreation areas & trails 40.3% 39.7% 8.7% 2.3% 9.0%

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q7. Using a scale of 1 to 4, where 4 means "Very Safe" and 1 means "Very Unsafe," please rate how safe you feel in the following situations. (without "don't know") (N=310) Somewhat Very safe Somewhat safe unsafe Very unsafe Q7-1. In commercial & retail areas 63.4% 33.0% 3.6% 0.0% Q7-2. Walking alone in your neighborhood after dark 34.9% 38.6% 20.0% 6.4% Q7-3. Walking alone in your neighborhood during the day 69.8% 25.6% 3.6% 1.0% Q7-4. In City parks, recreation areas & trails 44.3% 43.6% 9.6% 2.5%



Q8. During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime in Richmond? Q8. Were you the victim of any crime in Richmond during past 12 months Number Percent Yes 34 11.0 % No 267 86.1 % Don't know 9 2.9 % Total 310 100.0 % WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q8. During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime in Richmond? (without "don't know") Q8. Were you the victim of any crime in Richmond during past 12 months Number Percent Yes 34 11.3 % No 267 88.7 % Total 301 100.0 %



Q9. Fire Services. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q9-1. Overall quality of local fire protection & rescue services 32.6% 41.6% 10.6% 2.3% 0.3% 12.6% Q9-2. Overall quality of fire public safety education in the community 21.3% 33.2% 23.9% 3.2% 0.6% 17.7% Q9-3. Overall attitude & behavior of Fire Department personnel 31.0% 37.4% 14.2% 1.6% 1.3% 14.5% Q9-4. How quickly fire & rescue personnel respond to emergencies 33.9% 36.8% 10.3% 1.0% 0.3% 17.7%

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q9. Fire Services. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q9-1. Overall quality of local fire protection & rescue services 37.3% 47.6% 12.2% 2.6% 0.4% Q9-2. Overall quality of fire public safety education in the community 25.9% 40.4% 29.0% 3.9% 0.8% Q9-3. Overall attitude & behavior of Fire Department personnel 36.2% 43.8% 16.6% 1.9% 1.5% Q9-4. How quickly fire & rescue personnel respond to emergencies 41.2% 44.7% 12.5% 1.2% 0.4%



Q10. Have you had any interaction with Fire Department personnel? Q10. Have you had any interaction with Fire Department personnel Number Percent Yes 93 30.0 % No 207 66.8 % Don't know 10 3.2 % Total 310 100.0 %

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q10. Have you had any interaction with Fire Department personnel? (without "don't know") Q10. Have you had any interaction with Fire Department personnel Number Percent Yes 93 31.0 % No 207 69.0 % Total 300 100.0 %



Q11. Maintenance/Public Works. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following items using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q11-1. Condition of streets in your neighborhood 5.2% 35.5% 20.6% 25.8% 11.3% 1.6% Q11-2. Maintenance of street signs 9.0% 47.7% 27.1% 9.7% 3.2% 3.2% Q11-3. Maintenance of City owned buildings 6.8% 39.7% 33.2% 6.8% 4.5% 9.0% Q11-4. Pedestrian accessibility 8.4% 40.0% 27.1% 13.9% 6.5% 4.2% Q11-5. Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 10.0% 44.5% 24.8% 14.2% 4.8% 1.6% Q11-6. Adequacy of City street lighting 8.1% 38.4% 27.4% 17.7% 6.5% 1.9% Q11-7. Condition of City sidewalks 3.5% 25.2% 27.1% 25.8% 14.8% 3.5% Q11-8. Landscaping in public areas along streets 9.4% 40.3% 31.0% 11.6% 4.5% 3.2% Q11-9. Condition of street drainage/water drainage 3.2% 21.6% 19.7% 30.6% 22.3% 2.6% Q11-10. Snow & ice removal 11.6% 34.2% 27.1% 14.5% 10.3% 2.3% Q11-11. Overall quality of sewer services 8.4% 33.9% 29.4% 14.5% 9.4% 4.5% Q11-12. Overall quality of water services 10.3% 38.4% 25.8% 13.9% 8.7% 2.9% Q11-13. Ease of paying water, sewer & trash bill 22.9% 45.5% 17.4% 7.1% 4.2% 2.9% Q11-14. Water, sewer & trash rates 9.0% 25.2% 23.5% 21.6% 17.1% 3.5% Q11-15. Residential trash collection services 23.5% 51.9% 14.5% 4.5% 2.3% 3.2% Q11-16. Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 20.0% 32.6% 20.3% 5.5% 2.9% 18.7%



WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q11. Maintenance/Public Works. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following items using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q11-1. Condition of streets in your neighborhood 5.2% 36.1% 21.0% 26.2% 11.5% Q11-2. Maintenance of street signs 9.3% 49.3% 28.0% 10.0% 3.3% Q11-3. Maintenance of City owned buildings 7.4% 43.6% 36.5% 7.4% 5.0% Q11-4. Pedestrian accessibility 8.8% 41.8% 28.3% 14.5% 6.7% Q11-5. Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 10.2% 45.2% 25.2% 14.4% 4.9% Q11-6. Adequacy of City street lighting 8.2% 39.1% 28.0% 18.1% 6.6% Q11-7. Condition of City sidewalks 3.7% 26.1% 28.1% 26.8% 15.4% Q11-8. Landscaping in public areas along streets 9.7% 41.7% 32.0% 12.0% 4.7% Q11-9. Condition of street drainage/water drainage 3.3% 22.2% 20.2% 31.5% 22.8% Q11-10. Snow & ice removal 11.9% 35.0% 27.7% 14.9% 10.6% Q11-11. Overall quality of sewer services 8.8% 35.5% 30.7% 15.2% 9.8% Q11-12. Overall quality of water services 10.6% 39.5% 26.6% 14.3% 9.0% Q11-13. Ease of paying water, sewer & trash bill 23.6% 46.8% 17.9% 7.3% 4.3% Q11-14. Water, sewer & trash rates 9.4% 26.1% 24.4% 22.4% 17.7% Q11-15. Residential trash collection services 24.3% 53.7% 15.0% 4.7% 2.3% Q11-16. Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 24.6% 40.1% 25.0% 6.7% 3.6%



Q12. Which THREE maintenance/public works items listed in Question 11 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q12. Top choice Number Percent Condition of streets in your neighborhood 48 15.5 % Maintenance of street signs 4 1.3 % Maintenance of City owned buildings 5 1.6 % Pedestrian accessibility 10 3.2 % Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 3 1.0 % Adequacy of City street lighting 14 4.5 % Condition of City sidewalks 26 8.4 % Condition of street drainage/water drainage 46 14.8 % Snow & ice rem 16 5.2 % Overall quality of sewer services 5 1.6 % Overall quality of water services 14 4.5 % Ease of paying water, sewer & trash bill 2 0.6 % Water, sewer & trash rates 46 14.8 % Residential trash collection services 1 0.3 % Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 3 1.0 % None chosen 67 21.6 % Total 310 100.0 %

Q12. Which THREE maintenance/public works items listed in Question 11 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q12. 2nd choice Number Percent Condition of streets in your neighborhood 25 8.1 % Maintenance of street signs 8 2.6 % Maintenance of City owned buildings 3 1.0 % Pedestrian accessibility 8 2.6 % Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 7 2.3 % Adequacy of City street lighting 15 4.8 % Condition of City sidewalks 34 11.0 % Landscaping in public areas along streets 4 1.3 % Condition of street drainage/water drainage 39 12.6 % Snow & ice rem 20 6.5 % Overall quality of sewer services 17 5.5 % Overall quality of water services 16 5.2 % Ease of paying water, sewer & trash bill 4 1.3 % Water, sewer & trash rates 21 6.8 % Residential trash collection services 1 0.3 % Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 3 1.0 % None chosen 85 27.4 % Total 310 100.0 %



Q12. Which THREE maintenance/public works items listed in Question 11 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? Q12. 3rd choice Number Percent Condition of streets in your neighborhood 16 5.2 % Maintenance of street signs 5 1.6 % Maintenance of City owned buildings 10 3.2 % Pedestrian accessibility 6 1.9 % Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 10 3.2 % Adequacy of City street lighting 18 5.8 % Condition of City sidewalks 20 6.5 % Landscaping in public areas along streets 4 1.3 % Condition of street drainage/water drainage 31 10.0 % Snow & ice rem 22 7.1 % Overall quality of sewer services 12 3.9 % Overall quality of water services 13 4.2 % Ease of paying water, sewer & trash bill 4 1.3 % Water, sewer & trash rates 23 7.4 % Residential trash collection services 3 1.0 % Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 2 0.6 % None chosen 111 35.8 % Total 310 100.0 % SUM OF TOP 3 CHOICES Q12. Which THREE maintenance/public works items listed in Question 11 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? (top 3) Q12. Sum of top 3 choices Number Percent Condition of streets in your neighborhood 89 28.7 % Maintenance of street signs 17 5.5 % Maintenance of City owned buildings 18 5.8 % Pedestrian accessibility 24 7.7 % Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 20 6.5 % Adequacy of City street lighting 47 15.2 % Condition of City sidewalks 80 25.8 % Landscaping in public areas along streets 8 2.6 % Condition of street drainage/water drainage 116 37.4 % Snow & ice rem 58 18.7 % Overall quality of sewer services 34 11.0 % Overall quality of water services 43 13.9 % Ease of paying water, sewer & trash bill 10 3.2 % Water, sewer & trash rates 90 29.0 % Residential trash collection services 5 1.6 % Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 8 2.6 % None chosen 67 21.6 % Total 734



Q13. Communication and Engagement. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the items below using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q13-1. Availability of information about City programs & services 6.5% 29.0% 37.4% 12.6% 2.9% 11.6% Q13-2. City's social media (e.g. Facebook) 6.8% 25.8% 33.2% 8.4% 1.0% 24.8% Q13-3. City website/online services 6.8% 27.7% 35.5% 8.7% 1.0% 20.3% Q13-4. Level of public involvement in local decision making 3.2% 12.3% 38.7% 19.4% 6.8% 19.7% Q13-5. City’s Textcaster service 14.5% 27.4% 24.5% 5.5% 1.9% 26.1%

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q13. Communication and Engagement. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the items below using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q13-1. Availability of information about City programs & services 7.3% 32.8% 42.3% 14.2% 3.3% Q13-2. City's social media (e.g. Facebook) 9.0% 34.3% 44.2% 11.2% 1.3% Q13-3. City website/online services 8.5% 34.8% 44.5% 10.9% 1.2% Q13-4. Level of public involvement in local decision making 4.0% 15.3% 48.2% 24.1% 8.4% Q13-5. City’s Textcaster service 19.7% 37.1% 33.2% 7.4% 2.6%



Q14. Which of the following methods do you use to get information about the City of Richmond? Q14. What methods do you use to get City information Number Percent City's social media (e.g. Facebook) 109 35.2 % Textcaster 142 45.8 % City website (cityofrichmondmo.org) 114 36.8 % Word of mouth/neighbors 196 63.2 % Local news outlet (Richmond Daily News) 110 35.5 % Other 11 3.5 % Total 682 Q14-6. Other Q14-6. Other Number Percent PHONE CALL TO APPROPRIATE OFFICE 2 18.2 % AT CITY HALL 1 9.1 % Talking to City employees, Councilmen, other City administration 1 9.1 % Signs 1 9.1 % ASK CITY STAFF 1 9.1 % Family 1 9.1 % Council Representative 1 9.1 % TELEPHONE 1 9.1 % Other social media 1 9.1 % TV 1 9.1 % Total 11 100.0 %



Q15. Do you follow the City of Richmond on Facebook? Q15. Do you follow City of Richmond on Facebook Number Percent Yes 105 33.9 % No 197 63.5 % Don't know 8 2.6 % Total 310 100.0 % WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q15. Do you follow the City of Richmond on Facebook? (without "don't know") Q15. Do you follow City of Richmond on Facebook Number Percent Yes 105 34.8 % No 197 65.2 % Total 302 100.0 % Q16. Are you signed up to receive City of Richmond Textcaster notifications? Q16. Are you signed up to receive City Textcaster notifications Number Percent Yes 156 50.3 % No 136 43.9 % Don't know 18 5.8 % Total 310 100.0 %

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q16. Are you signed up to receive City of Richmond Textcaster notifications? (without "don't know") Q16. Are you signed up to receive City Textcaster notifications Number Percent Yes 156 53.4 % No 136 46.6 % Total 292 100.0 % Q17. Customer Service. Have you contacted the City with a question, problem, or complaint in the past year? Q17. Have you contacted City with a question, problem, or complaint in past year Number Percent Yes 137 44.2 % No 173 55.8 % Total 310 100.0 %



Q17a. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following factors that might influence your perception of the quality of customer service you received from the City employees. Please use a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=137) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q17a-1. How easy the department was to contact 21.9% 46.0% 13.1% 13.9% 4.4% 0.7% Q17a-2. How courteously you were treated 32.8% 38.0% 16.1% 7.3% 5.1% 0.7% Q17a-3. Professionalism & knowledge of City employees who assisted you 29.2% 34.3% 18.2% 10.9% 6.6% 0.7% Q17a-4. Overall responsiveness of City employees to your request or concern 27.0% 30.7% 11.7% 12.4% 17.5% 0.7% Q17a-5. How well your issue was handled 24.1% 29.2% 10.9% 11.7% 21.2% 2.9%

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q17a. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following factors that might influence your perception of the quality of customer service you received from the City employees. Please use a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=137) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q17a-1. How easy the department was to contact 22.1% 46.3% 13.2% 14.0% 4.4% Q17a-2. How courteously you were treated 33.1% 38.2% 16.2% 7.4% 5.1% Q17a-3. Professionalism & knowledge of City employees who assisted you 29.4% 34.6% 18.4% 11.0% 6.6% Q17a-4. Overall responsiveness of City employees to your request or concern 27.2% 30.9% 11.8% 12.5% 17.6% Q17a-5. How well your issue was handled 24.8% 30.1% 11.3% 12.0% 21.8%



Q18. Code Compliance. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following items using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q18-1. Enforcing maintenance of residential property 5.2% 25.8% 28.4% 20.6% 7.7% 12.3% Q18-2. Enforcing mowing & trimming of lawns on private property 6.1% 25.8% 30.0% 19.0% 7.1% 11.9% Q18-3. Enforcing maintenance of commercial property 5.2% 29.7% 32.3% 11.3% 6.1% 15.5% Q18-4. Enforcing clean-up of junk, trash, debris & other nuisances 4.2% 21.0% 27.7% 25.5% 9.7% 11.9% Q18-5. Enforcing sign regulations 5.8% 26.1% 34.8% 7.1% 3.9% 22.3%

WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q18. Code Compliance. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following items using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q18-1. Enforcing maintenance of residential property 5.9% 29.4% 32.4% 23.5% 8.8% Q18-2. Enforcing mowing & trimming of lawns on private property 7.0% 29.3% 34.1% 21.6% 8.1% Q18-3. Enforcing maintenance of commercial property 6.1% 35.1% 38.2% 13.4% 7.3% Q18-4. Enforcing clean-up of junk, trash, debris & other nuisances 4.8% 23.8% 31.5% 28.9% 11.0% Q18-5. Enforcing sign regulations 7.5% 33.6% 44.8% 9.1% 5.0%



Q19. Parks and Recreation. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't know Q19-1. Quality of park facilities (playgrounds, shelters, etc.) 21.3% 52.3% 17.1% 1.9% 0.3% 7.1% Q19-2. Appearance & maintenance of parks 24.8% 53.5% 14.2% 2.9% 0.0% 4.5% Q19-3. Quality of outdoor athletic fields/courts 18.4% 43.2% 20.0% 5.2% 1.0% 12.3% Q19-4. Number of walking/biking trails 13.5% 27.7% 26.1% 15.5% 6.1% 11.0% Q19-5. Availability of youth athletic programs 12.9% 34.8% 19.7% 5.8% 3.5% 23.2% Q19-6. Quality of youth athletic programs 10.3% 31.9% 21.9% 6.8% 3.5% 25.5% Q19-7. Availability of adult athletic programs 8.4% 18.1% 29.7% 10.0% 3.5% 30.3% Q19-8. Quality of adult athletic programs 8.4% 15.8% 31.0% 8.1% 2.9% 33.9%



WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q19. Parks and Recreation. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know") (N=310) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q19-1. Quality of park facilities (playgrounds, shelters, etc.) 22.9% 56.3% 18.4% 2.1% 0.3% Q19-2. Appearance & maintenance of parks 26.0% 56.1% 14.9% 3.0% 0.0% Q19-3. Quality of outdoor athletic fields/ courts 21.0% 49.3% 22.8% 5.9% 1.1% Q19-4. Number of walking/biking trails 15.2% 31.2% 29.3% 17.4% 6.9% Q19-5. Availability of youth athletic programs 16.8% 45.4% 25.6% 7.6% 4.6% Q19-6. Quality of youth athletic programs 13.9% 42.9% 29.4% 9.1% 4.8% Q19-7. Availability of adult athletic programs 12.0% 25.9% 42.6% 14.4% 5.1% Q19-8. Quality of adult athletic programs 12.7% 23.9% 46.8% 12.2% 4.4%



Q20. When you are not purchasing online, what do you leave Richmond to spend money on? Q20. What do you leave Richmond to spend money on when you are not purchasing online Number Percent Fine dining 195 62.9 % Casual dining 194 62.6 % Furniture 134 43.2 % General groceries 86 27.7 % Specialty groceries 131 42.3 % Vehicles 176 56.8 % General merchandise 108 34.8 % Clothing 225 72.6 % Electronics 155 50.0 % Other 35 11.3 % Total 1439 Q20-10. Other Q20-10. Other Number Percent ENTERTAINMENT 5 14.3 % Everything 3 8.6 % Home improvement 2 5.7 % We leave Richmond to take the whole family for fun and recreation 1 2.9 % MOVIES 1 2.9 % THEATER/CONCERTS 1 2.9 % HOUSE REPAIR 1 2.9 % LUMBER AND HARDWARE 1 2.9 % HOME REPAIR MATERIALS AND MEDICAL CARE 1 2.9 % GASOLINE 1 2.9 % Pedicure 1 2.9 % DRIVE IN MOVIES 1 2.9 % HUNTING ITEMS 1 2.9 % Sporting goods 1 2.9 % HIGH PRICES 1 2.9 % Medical specialist 1 2.9 % PET FOOD AND SUPPLIES 1 2.9 % Footware 1 2.9 % Lumber and home improvement supplies 1 2.9 % Entertainment and arts 1 2.9 % Building materials 1 2.9 % Entertainment, bowling, movies and events 1 2.9 % Doctors 1 2.9 % Sports equipment 1 2.9 % Products not available on a need now basis 1 2.9 % Sams Club, Lowes, Hobby Lobby/Joann's, Pet Smart, Dick's Sporting Goods 1 2.9 % CASINO 1 2.9 % Appliances 1 2.9 % Total 35 100.0 %



Q21. Development. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Strongly Agree" and 1 means "Strongly Disagree," please indicate your level of agreement that the City of Richmond should pursue the following activities. (N=310) Strongly Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree disagree Don't know Q21-1. Addition of attractive elements to roadways 10.3% 29.4% 40.0% 9.4% 3.2% 7.7% Q21-2. Adoption of design standards for Downtown district 14.5% 31.6% 33.2% 8.4% 3.2% 9.0% Q21-3. Attract more fine dining 35.5% 36.8% 16.1% 6.1% 2.3% 3.2% Q21-4. Attract more industrial/ manufacturing 36.5% 41.0% 14.8% 2.6% 1.6% 3.5% Q21-5. Attract more retail stores 41.9% 43.5% 10.3% 1.6% 0.6% 1.9% Q21-6. Attract more entertainment 37.4% 39.4% 17.7% 1.6% 1.0% 2.9% Q21-7. Incentives for commercial & industrial development 34.8% 33.9% 20.6% 2.9% 1.3% 6.5% Q21-8. Additional incentives for Downtown re-development 36.8% 37.4% 14.8% 3.5% 1.3% 6.1% Q21-9. Incentives for neighborhood restoration & upkeep 34.2% 41.6% 16.5% 2.6% 0.6% 4.5%



WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q21. Development. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Strongly Agree" and 1 means "Strongly Disagree," please indicate your level of agreement that the City of Richmond should pursue the following activities. (without "don't know") (N=310) Strongly Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree disagree Q21-1. Addition of attractive elements to roadways 11.2% 31.8% 43.4% 10.1% 3.5% Q21-2. Adoption of design standards for Downtown district 16.0% 34.8% 36.5% 9.2% 3.5% Q21-3. Attract more fine dining 36.7% 38.0% 16.7% 6.3% 2.3% Q21-4. Attract more industrial/manufacturing 37.8% 42.5% 15.4% 2.7% 1.7% Q21-5. Attract more retail stores 42.8% 44.4% 10.5% 1.6% 0.7% Q21-6. Attract more entertainment 38.5% 40.5% 18.3% 1.7% 1.0% Q21-7. Incentives for commercial & industrial development 37.2% 36.2% 22.1% 3.1% 1.4% Q21-8. Additional incentives for Downtown re-development 39.2% 39.9% 15.8% 3.8% 1.4% Q21-9. Incentives for neighborhood restoration & upkeep 35.8% 43.6% 17.2% 2.7% 0.7%



Q22. Which area of the City should be for development or redevelopment projects? Q22. Which area of City should be for development or redevelopment projects Number Percent South of 210 Hwy (Walmart area) 62 20.0 % Spartan Dr/13 Hwy 63 20.3 % Main St/Old 10 Hwy 49 15.8 % Downtown area 106 34.2 % Other 7 2.3 % Not provided 23 7.4 % Total 310 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q22. Which area of the City should be for development or redevelopment projects? (without "not provided") Q22. Which area of City should be for development or redevelopment projects Number Percent South of 210 Hwy (Walmart area) 62 21.6 % Spartan Dr/13 Hwy 63 22.0 % Main St/Old 10 Hwy 49 17.1 % Downtown area 106 36.9 % Other 7 2.4 % Total 287 100.0 % Q22-5. Other Q22-5. Other Number Percent All old homes south of Main St are blighted considered slums of Richmond 1 14.3 % CLEAN UP WEST END 1 14.3 % HILL ST 1 14.3 % N OF 210 ON HWY 13 1 14.3 % SIDE STREETS 1 14.3 % Four lane Highway 210 West 1 14.3 % There is opportunity for both development in areas of McDonalds/Harps/Shell 1 14.3 % Total 7 100.0 %



Q23. Several reasons why people decide where they live are listed below. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Important" and 1 means "Very Unimportant," please indicate how important each reason was in your decision to live in Richmond. (N=310) Very Very important Important Neutral Unimportant unimportant Don't know Q23-1. Sense of community 25.2% 44.8% 22.3% 2.9% 1.3% 3.5% Q23-2. Quality of life 32.3% 49.4% 14.5% 0.6% 1.0% 2.3% Q23-3. Quality of public education 36.8% 34.5% 14.5% 4.2% 2.9% 7.1% Q23-4. Quality & access to healthcare 31.3% 34.5% 22.6% 5.2% 2.3% 4.2% Q23-5. Job opportunity in Richmond 23.9% 25.2% 27.4% 11.6% 6.5% 5.5% Q23-6. Close to jobs in other cities 20.6% 42.3% 24.5% 5.5% 2.6% 4.5% Q23-7. Access to highways 27.7% 51.6% 13.2% 3.9% 1.3% 2.3% Q23-8. Affordability of housing 32.6% 44.5% 16.1% 1.3% 2.6% 2.9% Q23-9. Quality of housing 32.3% 41.9% 19.4% 1.9% 1.3% 3.2% Q23-10. Retirement 21.3% 39.7% 24.2% 4.5% 5.2% 5.2% Q23-11. Overall cost of living 32.3% 46.1% 15.8% 1.3% 1.3% 3.2% Q23-12. Number & quality of parks & trails 13.2% 34.2% 34.5% 6.5% 5.5% 6.1% Q23-13. Access to affordable shopping 20.0% 37.7% 30.3% 3.9% 4.2% 3.9% Q23-14. Availability of recreation programs 11.0% 32.6% 31.9% 8.7% 8.1% 7.7%



WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q23. Several reasons why people decide where they live are listed below. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Important" and 1 means "Very Unimportant," please indicate how important each reason was in your decision to live in Richmond. (without "don't know") (N=310) Very important Important Neutral Unimportant Very unimportant Q23-1. Sense of community 26.1% 46.5% 23.1% 3.0% 1.3% Q23-2. Quality of life 33.0% 50.5% 14.9% 0.7% 1.0% Q23-3. Quality of public education 39.6% 37.2% 15.6% 4.5% 3.1% Q23-4. Quality & access to healthcare 32.7% 36.0% 23.6% 5.4% 2.4% Q23-5. Job opportunity in Richmond 25.3% 26.6% 29.0% 12.3% 6.8% Q23-6. Close to jobs in other cities 21.6% 44.3% 25.7% 5.7% 2.7% Q23-7. Access to highways 28.4% 52.8% 13.5% 4.0% 1.3% Q23-8. Affordability of housing 33.6% 45.8% 16.6% 1.3% 2.7% Q23-9. Quality of housing 33.3% 43.3% 20.0% 2.0% 1.3% Q23-10. Retirement 22.4% 41.8% 25.5% 4.8% 5.4% Q23-11. Overall cost of living 33.3% 47.7% 16.3% 1.3% 1.3% Q23-12. Number & quality of parks & trails 14.1% 36.4% 36.8% 6.9% 5.8% Q23-13. Access to affordable shopping 20.8% 39.3% 31.5% 4.0% 4.4% Q23-14. Availability of recreation programs 11.9% 35.3% 34.6% 9.4% 8.7%



Q24. Approximately how many years have you lived in the City of Richmond? Q24. How many years have you lived in City of Richmond Number Percent Less than 5 years 41 13.2 % 5-10 years 29 9.4 % 11-15 years 37 11.9 % 16-20 years 24 7.7 % 21-30 years 44 14.2 % 31+ years 132 42.6 % Not provided 3 1.0 % Total 310 100.0 %

WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q24. Approximately how many years have you lived in the City of Richmond? (without "not provided") Q24. How many years have you lived in City of Richmond Number Percent Less than 5 years 41 13.4 % 5-10 years 29 9.4 % 11-15 years 37 12.1 % 16-20 years 24 7.8 % 21-30 years 44 14.3 % 31+ years 132 43.0 % Total 307 100.0 %

Q25. What is your age? Q25. Your age Number Percent Under 30 years 58 18.7 % 31 to 40 years 63 20.3 % 41 to 50 years 61 19.7 % 51 to 60 years 62 20.0 % 61+ years 62 20.0 % Not provided 4 1.3 % Total 310 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q25. What is your age? (without "not provided") Q25. Your age Number Percent Under 30 years 58 19.0 % 31 to 40 years 63 20.6 % 41 to 50 years 61 19.9 % 51 to 60 years 62 20.3 % 61+ years 62 20.3 % Total 306 100.0 %



Q26. Which of the following best describes your housing situation? Q26. What best describes your housing situation Number Percent Own 211 68.1 % Rent 90 29.0 % Not provided 9 2.9 % Total 310 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q26. Which of the following best describes your housing situation? (without "not provided") Q26. What best describes your housing situation Number Percent Own 211 70.1 % Rent 90 29.9 % Total 301 100.0 %

Q27. Which of the following best describes your current employment status? Q27. What best describes your current employment status Number Percent Employed in the home/have home-based business 16 5.2 % Employed outside the home 180 58.1 % Retired 84 27.1 % Not currently employed outside the home 16 5.2 % Not provided 14 4.5 % Total 310 100.0 %

WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q27. Which of the following best describes your current employment status? (without "not provided") Q27. What best describes your current employment status Number Percent Employed in the home/have home-based business 16 5.4 % Employed outside the home 180 60.8 % Retired 84 28.4 % Not currently employed outside the home 16 5.4 % Total 296 100.0 %



Q27-2. What is the zip code where you work? Q27-2. What is the zip code where you work Number Percent 64085 60 43.2 % 64068 9 6.5 % 64067 7 5.0 % 64024 6 4.3 % 64120 6 4.3 % 64108 6 4.3 % 64116 4 2.9 % 64037 3 2.2 % 64105 3 2.2 % 64119 3 2.2 % 64188 2 1.4 % 64035 2 1.4 % 64118 2 1.4 % 64036 2 1.4 % 64129 2 1.4 % 64117 2 1.4 % 64057 2 1.4 % 64111 1 0.7 % 64133 1 0.7 % 64089 1 0.7 % 64060 1 0.7 % 64077 1 0.7 % 64055 1 0.7 % 66106 1 0.7 % 64086 1 0.7 % 66160 1 0.7 % 64153 1 0.7 % 64671 1 0.7 % 64093 1 0.7 % 66212 1 0.7 % 64114 1 0.7 % 64058 1 0.7 % 64161 1 0.7 % 64131 1 0.7 % 64051 1 0.7 % Total 139 100.0 %



Section 5 Survey Instrument



July 2020

Dear City of Richmond Resident:

During the past few months, the residents of Richmond have demonstrated their compassion and commitment to our community. This time of reflection on our past and focus on our future provides a wonderful opportunity for the City of Richmond to assess the needs of the community through a citizen survey.

As the City considers issues that affect our citizens, we want to ensure our priorities are aligned with the needs of the community. This survey will help determine priorities for the City and will assist in our assessment of current programs and services. It will also help us improve the quality of life and plan for future development in Richmond.

Your household was one of a limited number selected at random to receive this survey from our consultant, ETC Institute. It is very important that you participate. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete and each question is important. The time you invest in completing this survey will influence decisions that will enrich the future of our community. The results will also allow City of Richmond leaders to identify and address areas of needed improvement.

Please return your survey within the next week in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. Your responses will remain confidential. If you would prefer to complete the survey on-line, please do so at 2020richmondmosurvey.org.

Thank you in advance for your participation in this survey. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 816-776-5304.

Sincerely,

Tonya Willim City Administrator

http://www.2020richmondmosurvey.org/

©2020 ETC Institute for the City of Richmond, MO Page 1

2020 City of Richmond Citizen Survey Please take a few minutes to complete this survey. Your input is an important part of the City's ongoing effort to identify and respond to citizen priorities. If you have questions, please call Alicia Shaw, Economic Development Director at (816) 776-5304 ext. 108 or email her at [email protected].

1. Perception of the City. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor," please rate the City of Richmond with regard to each of the following.

How would you rate your City... Excellent Good Neutral Below Average Poor Don't Know

1. As a place to live 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. As a place to raise children 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. As a place to work 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. As a place to retire 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. As a place to visit 5 4 3 2 1 9 6. As a place to shop 5 4 3 2 1 9 7. As a place for recreation 5 4 3 2 1 9 8. As a place you are proud to call home 5 4 3 2 1 9

2. Please rate each of the following items that may influence your perception of the City of Richmond using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor."

How would you rate the... Excellent Good Neutral Below Average Poor Don't Know

01. Overall reputation of the City 5 4 3 2 1 9 02. Overall appearance of the City 5 4 3 2 1 9 03. Overall quality of life in the City 5 4 3 2 1 9 04. Overall feeling of safety in the City 5 4 3 2 1 9 05. Quality of new residential developments in the City 5 4 3 2 1 9 06. Quality of new commercial developments in the City 5 4 3 2 1 9 07. Acceptance of diverse populations 5 4 3 2 1 9 08. Transparency and accountability of City actions 5 4 3 2 1 9 09. City's environmental sustainability efforts 5 4 3 2 1 9 10. Availability of affordable housing 5 4 3 2 1 9 11. Availability of diverse housing options 5 4 3 2 1 9 12. Job availability 5 4 3 2 1 9 13. Access to health care facilities 5 4 3 2 1 9 14. Access to quality shopping facilities 5 4 3 2 1 9 15. Access to restaurants and entertainment 5 4 3 2 1 9 16. Availability of cultural activities and the arts 5 4 3 2 1 9


3. Overall Satisfaction with City Services. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the services listed below using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."

Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very

Dissatisfied Don't Know

01. Overall quality of services provided by the City 5 4 3 2 1 9 02. Overall value that you receive for your City tax dollars and fees 5 4 3 2 1 9 03. Overall quality of police services 5 4 3 2 1 9 04. Overall quality of fire services 5 4 3 2 1 9 05. Overall maintenance of City streets (NOT State and County roads) 5 4 3 2 1 9 06. Overall enforcement of City codes and ordinances 5 4 3 2 1 9 07. Overall quality of customer service you receive from City employees 5 4 3 2 1 9 08. Overall maintenance of City parks and trails 5 4 3 2 1 9 09. Overall effectiveness of City communication with the public 5 4 3 2 1 9 10. Overall efforts of the City for emergency preparedness 5 4 3 2 1 9 11. Overall management of City finances 5 4 3 2 1 9 12. Overall quality of water and sewer services 5 4 3 2 1 9

4. Which THREE items listed in Question 3 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 3, or circle "NONE."]

1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE

5. Police Services. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."



1. The visibility of police in neighborhoods 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. The visibility of police in commercial areas 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. The City's efforts to prevent crime 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. How quickly police respond to emergencies 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. Overall competency of Police Department 5 4 3 2 1 9

6. Overall attitude and behavior of Police Department personnel toward citizens 5 4 3 2 1 9

7. Police Department safety education programs 5 4 3 2 1 9 8. Overall quality of animal control services 5 4 3 2 1 9

6. Which THREE police services listed in Question 5 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 5, or circle "NONE."]

1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE

7. Using a scale of 1 to 4, where 4 means "Very Safe" and 1 means "Very Unsafe," please rate how safe you feel in the following situations.

How safe do you feel... Very Safe Somewhat Safe Somewhat Unsafe Very Unsafe Don't Know

1. In commercial and retail areas 4 3 2 1 9 2. Walking alone in your neighborhood after dark 4 3 2 1 9 3. Walking alone in your neighborhood during the day 4 3 2 1 9 4. In City parks, recreation areas and trails 4 3 2 1 9


8. During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime in Richmond? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No ____(9) Don't Know

9. Fire Services. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."



1. Overall quality of local fire protection and rescue services 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. Overall quality of fire public safety education in the community 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. Overall attitude and behavior of Fire Department personnel 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. How quickly fire and rescue personnel respond to emergencies 5 4 3 2 1 9

10. Have you had any interaction with Fire Department personnel? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No ____(9) Don't Know

11. Maintenance/Public Works. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following items using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."



01. Condition of streets in your neighborhood 5 4 3 2 1 9 02. Maintenance of street signs 5 4 3 2 1 9 03. Maintenance of City-owned buildings 5 4 3 2 1 9 04. Pedestrian accessibility 5 4 3 2 1 9 05. Overall cleanliness of streets/other public areas 5 4 3 2 1 9 06. Adequacy of City street lighting 5 4 3 2 1 9 07. Condition of City sidewalks 5 4 3 2 1 9 08. Landscaping in public areas along streets 5 4 3 2 1 9 09. Condition of street drainage/water drainage 5 4 3 2 1 9 10. Snow and ice removal 5 4 3 2 1 9 11. Overall quality of sewer services 5 4 3 2 1 9 12. Overall quality of water services 5 4 3 2 1 9 13. Ease of paying water, sewer and trash bill 5 4 3 2 1 9 14. Water, sewer and trash rates 5 4 3 2 1 9 15. Residential trash collection services 5 4 3 2 1 9 16. Weekly curbside yard waste removal services 5 4 3 2 1 9

12. Which THREE maintenance/public works items listed in Question 11 should receive the MOST EMPHASIS from City leaders over the next FIVE years? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 11, or circle "NONE."]

1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE

13. Communication and Engagement. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the items below using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."



1. The availability of information about City programs and services 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. The City's social media (e.g. Facebook) 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. The City website/online services 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. Level of public involvement in local decision making 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. The City’s Textcaster service 5 4 3 2 1 9


14. Which of the following methods do you use to get information about the City of Richmond? [Check all that apply.] ____(1) City's social media (e.g. Facebook) ____(2) Textcaster ____(3) City website (cityofrichmondmo.org)

____(4) Word of mouth/neighbors ____(5) Local news outlet (Richmond Daily News) ____(6) Other: ___________________________________________

15. Do you follow the City of Richmond on Facebook?

____(1) Yes ____(2) No ____(9) Don’t Know

16. Are you signed up to receive City of Richmond Textcaster notifications? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No ____(9) Don’t Know

17. Customer Service. Have you contacted the City with a question, problem, or complaint in the past year? ____(1) Yes [Answer Q17a.] ____(2) No [Skip to Q18.]

17a. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following factors that might influence your perception of the quality of customer service you received from the City employees. Please use a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means “Very Satisfied” and 1 means “Very Dissatisfied.”



1. How easy the department was to contact 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. How courteously you were treated 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. Professionalism and knowledge of City employees who assisted you 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. Overall responsiveness of City employees to your request or concern 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. How well your issue was handled 5 4 3 2 1 9

18. Code Compliance. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following items using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."



1. Enforcing the maintenance of residential property 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. Enforcing the mowing and trimming of lawns on private property 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. Enforcing the maintenance of commercial property 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. Enforcing the clean-up of junk, trash, debris and other nuisances 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. Enforcing sign regulations 5 4 3 2 1 9

19. Parks and Recreation. Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."

Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Don't Know

1. Quality of park facilities (playgrounds, shelters, etc.) 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. Appearance and maintenance of parks 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. Quality of outdoor athletic fields/courts 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. Number of walking/biking trails 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. Availability of youth athletic programs 5 4 3 2 1 9 6. Quality of youth athletic programs 5 4 3 2 1 9 7. Availability of adult athletic programs 5 4 3 2 1 9 8. Quality of adult athletic programs 5 4 3 2 1 9


20. When you are not purchasing online, what do you leave Richmond to spend money on? [Check all that apply.] ____(01) Fine dining ____(02) Casual dining ____(03) Furniture ____(04) General groceries

____(05) Specialty groceries ____(06) Vehicles ____(07) General merchandise ____(08) Clothing

____(09) Electronics ____(10) Other: ______________________

21. Development. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means “Strongly Agree” and 1 means “Strongly Disagree,” please indicate your level of agreement that the City of Richmond should pursue the following activities.

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree Don't Know

1. Addition of attractive elements to roadways 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. Adoption of design standards for the downtown district 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. Attract more fine dining 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. Attract more industrial/manufacturing 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. Attract more retail stores 5 4 3 2 1 9 6. Attract more entertainment 5 4 3 2 1 9 7. Incentives for commercial and industrial development 5 4 3 2 1 9 8. Additional incentives for downtown re-development 5 4 3 2 1 9 9. Incentives for neighborhood restoration and upkeep 5 4 3 2 1 9

22. Which area of the City should be for development or redevelopment projects? [Check only one.] ____(1) South of 210 Hwy (Walmart area) ____(2) Spartan Dr/13 Hwy

____(3) Main St/Old 10 Hwy ____(4) Downtown Area

____(5) Other: __________________

23. Several reasons why people decide where they live are listed below. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means “Very Important” and 1 means “Very Unimportant,” please indicate how important each reason was in your decision to live in Richmond.

Very Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very Unimportant Don't Know

01. Sense of community 5 4 3 2 1 9 02. Quality of life 5 4 3 2 1 9 03. Quality of public education 5 4 3 2 1 9 04. Quality and access to healthcare 5 4 3 2 1 9 05. Job opportunity in Richmond 5 4 3 2 1 9 06. Close to jobs in other cities 5 4 3 2 1 9 07. Access to highways 5 4 3 2 1 9 08. Affordability of housing 5 4 3 2 1 9 09. Quality of housing 5 4 3 2 1 9 10. Retirement 5 4 3 2 1 9 11. Overall cost of living 5 4 3 2 1 9 12. Number and quality of parks and trails 5 4 3 2 1 9 13. Access to affordable shopping 5 4 3 2 1 9 14. Availability of recreation programs 5 4 3 2 1 9


Demographics

24. Approximately how many years have you lived in the City of Richmond? ____(1) Less than 5 years ____(2) 5-10 years

____(3) 11-15 years ____(4) 16-20 years

____(5) 21-30 years ____(6) More than 30 years

25. What is your age? ____(1) Under 30 years ____(2) 31 to 40 years

____(3) 41 to 50 years ____(4) 51 to 60 years

____(5) 61 to 70 years ____(6) 71+ years

26. Which of the following best describes your housing situation? ____(1) Own ____(2) Rent

27. Which of the following best describes your current employment status? ____(1) Employed in the home/have home-based business ____(2) Employed outside the home (What is the zip code

where you work? _________________________)

____(3) Student ____(4) Retired ____(5) Not currently employed outside the home

28. If you have suggestions for improving the quality of city programs, facilities, or services, please write your suggestions in the space below.

This concludes the survey. Thank you for your time! Please return your completed survey in the enclosed postage-paid envelope addressed to:

ETC Institute, 725 W. Frontier Circle, Olathe, KS 66061

Your responses will remain completely confidential. The information printed to the right will ONLY be used to help identify which areas of the City are having problems with City services. If your address is not correct, please provide the correct information. Thank you.

Documents

City of Citizen Survey · The results for the City of Richmond are shown in blue, the Missouri and Kansas averages are shown in red, and the national averages are shown in yellow