City of Ridgefield Engagement and Priority Assessment

MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM© 2019 CobaltCommunityResearch2018015

December 2019

City of Ridgefield Engagement and Priority Assessment

Supporting Decisions | Inspiring Ideas

http://www.cobaltcommunityresearch.org/index.php?option=com_banners&task=click&bid=4

2 CobaltCommunityResearch.org Page 2

Background on Cobalt Community Research

501c3 not for profit research coalition Mission to provide research and education Developed to meet the research needs of

schools, local governments and nonprofit organizations


Measuring Where You Are: Why Research Matters

Understanding community values and priorities helps you plan and communicate more effectively about City decisions

Perception impacts behaviors you care about

Understanding community perception helps you improve and promote the City

Community engagement improves support for difficult decisions

Reliable data on community priorities aids in balancing demands of vocal groups with the reality of limited resources

Bottom line outcome measurement of service and trust: Good administration requires quality measurement and reporting


Study Goals

Support budget and strategic planning decisions Explore service assumptions to ensure baseline service

measures are understood Identify which aspects of community provide the greatest

leverage on citizens’ overall satisfaction – and how satisfaction, in turn, influences the community’s image and citizen behaviors such as volunteering, remaining in the community, recommending it to others and encouraging businesses to start up in the community

Benchmark performance against a standardized performance index regionally and nationally

Compare performance to 2015 Citizen survey


Bottom Line City is outperforming benchmarks in most areas, but scores softened from 2015 2019 ACSI Score = 65 (70 in 2015)

Washington (5,001-10,000 residents) = 65 Washington Overall = 59 West = 57 National (5,001-10,000 residents) = 58 National Overall = 61

2019 Local Government Management Score = 68 (69 in 2015) Washington (5,001-10,000 residents) = 53 Washington Overall = 51 West = 50 National (5,001-10,000 residents) = 55 National Overall = 56


Bottom Line There are several areas where improvement can have the most significant impact

on engagement (in green):

2019 Drivers 2015 Drivers

City Government Management City Government Management

Economic Health Economic Health

Community Events Community Events

Police Parks and Recreation

Ridgefield 2015

Ridgefield 2019

WA 5,001-10,000

WA Overall West Overall US 5,001-10,000

US Overall Change

Transportation Overall 63 56 60 55 53 52 56 -7Utility Services Overall 74 73 82 79 71 68 73 -1Police Department Overall 83 84 80 74 72 74 75 1Property Taxes Overall 64 60 62 54 52 53 58 -4Shopping Opportunities Overall 29 27 65 70 70 64 70 -2Local Government Overall 69 68 53 51 50 55 56 -1Community Events Overall 71 74 67 61 60 52 59 3Economic Health Overall 60 57 51 52 49 53 55 -3Parks and Recreation Overall 74 74 72 72 67 61 68 0Community Satisfaction Overall 70 65 65 59 57 58 61 -5


Bottom Line Walking and biking trails thread through many sections of the

survey and in the comments. Residents want more walking and biking trails, and they would like them integrated with downtown

Parks remain very important, but role as a driver of outcomes has diminished Themes include more walking, biking trails; more river access

Downtown is a major element in the quality of life for residents Would like more restaurants, such as quality casual, Chinese, and seafood Would like more stores/shops, including grocery, a bakery, deli, and coffee

shops Parking and curb appeal are significant concerns

Residents interested in more communication on future development, new amenities, and the City’s plan to manage growth and infrastructure (especially traffic) Email, US post, social media (Facebook), and newsletters are the most

preferred mechanisms


Schools

Transportation

Fire/Emergency

Utility

Police

Citizen Engagement Model

Citizen Experiences CitizenSatisfaction=Value

Outcome Behaviors

Where to improveWhere to invest next

Remain

Recommend

CSI

Taxes

Shopping

Local Government

Events

Overall SatisfactionCompared to expectationsCompared to ideal

Economy

Parks/Rec

Library

Volunteer

Encourage Businesses

Support Admin

Community Image


American Customer Satisfaction Index: Sample of Private Sector Companies Measured

Allstate

Albertsons

Apple, Inc.

Bank of America

Bell South (U.S.)

Best Buy (U.S.)

Blue Cross and Blue Shield

Charter Communications

Citibank

Coca-Cola (U.S.)

Comcast

Dell

DIRECTV

Facebook

FedEx

Ford Motor Company

General Electric

General Motors

Google

Hilton

Home Depot

Kellogg

McDonald’s

Microsoft

MillerCoors

Netflix

Nike

Sears Roebuck and Co.

Southwest Airlines

Sprint

Starbucks

Target

Verizon

Wal-Mart

Yahoo!

View more: www.theacsi.org

http://www.ge.com/index.html

http://www.google.com/

http://www.theacsi.org/


American Customer Satisfaction Index: Sample of Public Sector Agencies Measured

Department of Education, Federal Student Aid

Department of Energy

Federal Emergency Management Administration

Federal Trade Commission

General Services Administration

Health Resources and Services Administration

Internal Revenue Service

Municipal-owned Utilities

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Weather Service

National Recreation Reservation Service

Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation

Small Business Administration

Veterans Affairs

View more: www.theacsi.org

http://www.theacsi.org/


Available Tools

Detailed questions and responses broken by demographic group and “thermal mapped” so lower scores are red and higher scores are blue

Comparison scores with local governments in Washington, the West and across the nation

Comparison scores with non-local government comparables (industries, companies, federal agencies)


Preserving Voice: Looking Into Detail

Consistent Scores Regardless of Demographics

Checkered Scores that Vary by Demographics

Tran

spor

tatio

n O

vera

ll

Stre

et m

aint

enan

ce/r

epai

r

Road

sign

age

Traf

fic fr

ee o

f con

gest

ion

Publ

ic tr

ansp

orta

tion

optio

ns

Acco

mm

odat

ion

for b

icyc

le tr

affic

Ease

of f

indi

ng p

arki

ng

Acco

mm

odat

ion

for f

oot t

raffi

c

Stre

et lig

htin

g

Polic

e Dep

artm

ent O

vera

ll

Resp

ectf

ul tr

eatm

ent o

f citi

zens

Fair/

equi

tabl

e enf

orce

men

t

Com

mun

ity in

volv

emen

t/ed

ucat

ion

Resp

onse

tim

e to

emer

genc

ies

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d pa

trol

s

Com

mun

ity se

rvic

es (f

inge

rprin

ting,

vaca

tion

chec

ks)

Traf

fic en

forc

emen

t

63 64 73 69 39 40 62 50 69 83 85 83 79 85 72 79 7856 61 71 54 27 33 64 63 70 84 86 85 85 83 71 81 71

1 year or less 63 66 75 66 29 30 73 72 76 90 91 91 88 84 73 83 771-5 years 57 64 72 56 25 32 65 66 70 84 86 87 85 85 70 82 73

6-10 years 53 57 65 51 30 32 63 62 68 87 89 84 89 85 76 84 7110+ years 53 57 70 48 29 34 58 59 69 81 82 82 82 80 69 79 69

Own 56 61 71 55 28 32 64 63 70 84 86 85 85 84 70 80 72Rent/Lease 57 63 72 51 20 29 65 64 66 88 90 85 93 72 73 92 64

Yes 53 61 66 51 29 35 57 57 67 87 89 87 88 78 72 83 71No, a different community 58 64 74 56 29 32 65 64 69 85 86 85 87 84 71 80 72

I am not currently employed 64 62 76 72 9 32 77 77 69 74 73 67 78 64 78 100 87I am retired 53 57 67 51 26 32 63 63 72 83 85 87 82 86 69 82 69

City of Ridgefield Core ACSI Scores

Scale = 0 to 100

Overall Satisfaction - 2015Overall Satisfaction - 2019

Years of resience

Own/Lease

Employment


Methodology Random sample of 1500 residents drawn from utility billing

records Utilized www.random.org, a well-respected utility used

internationally by many universities and researchers to generate true random numbers

Conducted using two mailings in October-November 2019 Valid response from 393 residents (396 in 2015), providing a

solid response rate of 26 percent, and a conventional margin of error of +/- 5 percent in the raw data and an ACSI margin of error of +/- 2 percent. In addition, 106 residents participated who were not part of the sample (and who were analyzed separately). Total response 499. Note: National surveys with a margin of error +/- 5% require a sample

of 384 responses to reflect a population of 330,000,000 Respondent pattern consistent with 2015.

http://www.random.org/


Results


Outcome Behaviors to Benchmarks(High score = 100)


Community Image to Benchmarks(High score = 100)


Understanding the Charts: Community Questions – Long-term Drivers

High scoring areas that do not currently have a large impact

on engagement relative to the other areas. Action: May show

over investment or under communication.

High impact areas where the City received high scores from

citizens. They have a high impact on engagement if

improved. Action: Continue investment

Low scoring areas relative to the other areas with low

impact on engagement. Action: Limit investment unless pressing

safety or regulatory consideration.

High impact on engagement and a relatively low score.

Action: Prioritize investment to drive positive changes in

outcomes. Perc

eive

d Pe

rfor

man

ce

Impact


Drivers of Satisfaction and Behavior:

Strategic PrioritiesHigher Impact,Higher Satisfaction

Lower Impact,Lower Satisfaction



Strategic Priorities Compared to 2015Higher Impact,Higher Satisfaction

Lower Impact,Lower Satisfaction



Government Management



Customer Service


Recent Contact with City Employees/ Officials

Never Fewer than 6 times a

year

6-12 times a year

More than 12 times a

year

Overall 7.8 7.6 7.8 9.1Helping you to feel valued as a citizen - 7.6 7.2 8.8

Level of knowledge - 7.8 7.4 9.8Level of professionalism - 7.9 8.0 9.7

Effectiveness in meeting your needs - 7.5 6.7 9.2Overall impression - 7.7 7.7 9.8



Economic Health



Police Department



Community Events


City Services and Programs


City Services and Programs Satisfaction Public Safety (Scale = 1 to 10)


City Services and Programs Satisfaction Other City Services (Scale = 1 to 10)


Community Planning


Community Planning

Most Important Characteristics for Growth


Community Planning

What is Liked Best


Community Planning

What to Change


Parks Planning


Parks

Importance of Parks for Quality of Life


Parks

Use of Parks


Parks

Main Reasons for Visiting


Parks

Playgrounds, lawn areas, restrooms


Parks

Walking/hiking trails


Parks

Sport fields and sport courts


Parks

Picnic areas and shelters


Parks

Children’s activities


Parks

Community events


Parks

Youth activities


Parks

Potential future park amenities


Parks

Condition of park facilities (10=excellent)


Parks


Downtown Planning


Downtown

Frequency of visits


Downtown

Why visiting


Downtown

What would encourage more visits?


Downtown

Most likely time to visit


Downtown

Most likely day to visit


Downtown

Shopping compared to benchmarks


Word Cloud:What new businesses, stores or restaurants you would like to see open downtown?Top Themes:Restaurants – Quality restaurant, Chinese, seafoodStore – Grocery store, boutiques, variety of storesBakery – Bakery/deli, coffee shop, bistro

Note: See full list of comments for context


Word Cloud:What improvements you would like to see in downtown?

Top Themes:Parking – More parking, parking for people with disabilities, traffic flowBusinesses – More local businesses, businesses that attract families, improve storefrontsWalking – More integrated walking access, more walking trails



DowntownTransportation infrastructure compared to benchmarks


Communications


How do you prefer to receive information from the City?


Preference Varies by Age

New

spap

er

Util

ity b

ill in

sert

Emai

l

City

web

site

New

slett

er

Snap

chat

Soci

al m

edia

Text

mes

sage

Mai

l to

my h

ome

Mob

ile ap

p/te

xt

Radi

o

Publ

ic m

eetin

g

25 to 34 14% 19% 46% 22% 27% 3% 54% 11% 59% 5% - -35 to 44 6% 18% 57% 37% 27% - 45% 11% 49% 17% 1% -45 to 54 13% 24% 47% 35% 39% - 35% 8% 50% 8% - 10%55 to 64 17% 17% 51% 37% 42% 1% 32% 7% 44% 4% 1% 10%

65 or over 20% 30% 40% 34% 41% - 13% 10% 46% 4% 2% 11%


Social Media Used


Local News Source Preference


TV Station Preference


Radio Station Preference


Newspaper Preference


Word Cloud:What are you most interested in hearing more about?

Top Themes:Growth – Major growth, plans for managing growth, ensuring responsible growth, adapting infrastructureDevelopment – Future development, development of port/waterfront, proposed developmentCommunity – Community activities, events, new openings, opportunities



Questions

Documents

City of Ridgefield Engagement and Priority Assessment