Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residents Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs moving forward with resident satisfaction survey proposal; seeks timing and question review
Summary
The committee reviewed a proposed resident satisfaction survey (contracted services) and agreed to pursue a council-sponsored survey, seek input on questions and timing, and work with the law department and administration on implementation. Members discussed holding results until after the election to avoid political optics.
Cleveland Heights’ Public Safety and Health Committee on May 13 reviewed a contract proposal for a resident satisfaction survey and agreed to pursue a council-sponsored survey, subject-matter review of questions and timing for release of results.
Committee members said a repeat survey will provide timely data to inform budgeting and service priorities; they noted the last comprehensive survey in the file was done in October 2020 and that a new survey could help prioritize resources such as road funding. The proposed vendor quoted a base service fee of about $13,250 with options to complete 300 responses and mail up to 3,000 questionnaires; committee members asked for collaboration on question wording and for the results to be timed to avoid appearing politically motivated.
Jim Posch introduced the item and described the intent: to obtain representative resident input on service priorities that can inform the budget and capital planning. Members emphasized limiting questions to service and program evaluation and avoiding questions perceived as political. Council Vice Chair Alberto Larson said the survey should be framed to test citizens’ views of services and suggested codifying regular, periodic surveys in legislation so they become routine.
Members asked that the consultant (ESC/ECC or similar vendors discussed in the meeting) collaborate on question wording and demographic representation and that staff confirm whether the vendor can hold results until after the election if the committee wishes that timing. The committee also asked staff to pursue buy-in from administration but agreed the council can sponsor the survey if administration participation is not forthcoming.
No formal contract was approved at the meeting. The committee voted verbally to move toward presenting the survey plan to the law department for ordinance drafting and to the full council with the caveats above; members requested a future agenda item to review consultant methodology, the draft questions and available prior data from Burgess & Burgess and other internal studies.
