Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ Home ] [ City Council ] [ Search ] [ 05/06 Archive ] [ 07/08 Archive ] [ 09/10 Archive ] [ 2011 Archive ] [ 12/13 Archive ] [ Watch City Council Meetings ]

2019 City Satisfaction Survey -- Please work with same firm that conducted MP's 2008, 2010 and 2012 Surveys

From: domainremoved <Lynne>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 12:52:54 -0700

Dear Council,

At your last Council meeting, the City Manager said that plans are underway
for a City Satisfaction Survey.

I urge Council to have the City use the same firm (National Research
Center, Inc.) that conducted Menlo Park's surveys in 2008, 2010 and 2012.
There are several strong reasons for returning to NCS.

*Reason #1: Endorsement by the ICMA and National League of Cities --*

The *National* *Citizen* *Survey* (The *NCS*) is the only community
survey endorsed
by ICMA and National League of Cities. Its large database allows a city to
benchmark its results with other cities, and to compare results over time.
Thus, the NCS survey would allow MP to place its results in context with
other cities, to deliver objective data to Council.

While most of the questions on The NCS are fixed (to allow for benchmarking
and to keep costs low while maintaining a high-quality instrument), there
is some room on the survey for customization and there’s about ¾ of a page
allotted for optional custom questions that can be specific to that
particular jurisdiction. The firm is happy to help craft custom questions
in order to make sure they’re worded clearly and neutrally, and *to help
its clients get* *actionable data*. The firm can also help MP create
completely custom surveys.

If you would like more information, you can contact: *Damema Mann */
Senior Survey Associate


*National Research Center, Inc.*

*Reasons #2 and 3 -- Concerns with 2017 Survey Questions & Vendor Conflicts
of Interest*

The 2015 and 2017 surveys were conducted by another firm. This firm has
also conducted surveys for the business community, including Bohannon in
relation to the Menlo Gatewayballot measure
To me, this alone seems a major conflict of interest – especially with
concerns with development on the residents’ minds.

The 2017 survey generated much *negative publicity* due to what residents
described as leading questions designed to get respondents to show support
for a library-related bond measure. The 2015 survey also did not deliver
actionable data for improvement efforts in at least one area. For example,
the survey questions did not differentiate between the Main Library and the
Belle Haven branch when asking about satisfaction with library services.
Thus, the library (overall) came up favorably in the 2015 survey despite
residents serious concerns with the inadequacy of the Belle Haven Branch.

Lynne Bramlett

P.S. I made a public records request for the 2008, 2010 and 2012 surveys.
Let me know if you would like copies.
Received on Sat Aug 24 2019 - 12:46:18 PDT

[ Search ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]

Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council_at_(domainremoved)