Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Engagement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates format, timing for ‘Sustainable Sebastian’ public environmental poll
Summary
Board members reviewed a draft public-environment poll proposed to gather resident views on local environmental priorities and discussed question format, timing and distribution methods.
Natural Resources Board member Matt proposed a community poll to solicit resident views on environmental priorities and drew board feedback on question wording, format and distribution at the April 1 meeting.
Matt said the poll is modeled on similar annual surveys he administered in a previous jurisdiction and presented a first draft of 13 questions. He told the board the goal is to engage Sebastian’s approximately 25,000 residents, solicit feedback about local environmental priorities and potentially use the poll to recruit volunteers for board activities.
Board members raised format concerns. Several urged converting fill‑in‑the‑blank items to multiple‑choice so answers can be tallied; one member recommended a smaller rating scale (one to five instead of one to ten). Matt and staff agreed an electronic version with a QR code or tablet at events would speed data collection, while paper copies could be used for respondents without digital access.
Timing and distribution drew debate. Felicia said staff had previously discussed conducting an end‑of‑year poll; Matt suggested the poll could be distributed at Earth Day outreach events and through local media and partner organizations. Board members recommended preparing a finished product for review by elected officials before broad distribution.
Question content was also discussed. Members suggested removing or rewording items that were nonlocal or redundant and adding demographic questions (age brackets, resident vs. nonresident, recreational activities) to help interpret results. One board member cautioned that the term “environmentalist” can be interpreted differently and recommended clearer wording.
Why it matters: a regular, methodologically sound poll would give the board quantitative data on public priorities that could inform outreach and program priorities and help the board recruit volunteers and shape events.
Next steps: Matt will work with Felicia to revise the draft, converting many items to multiple‑choice, adding broad demographic categories, and preparing an electronic version with a QR code. The board agreed to review a revised draft at a subsequent meeting and, if appropriate, circulate it to elected officials for approval before full public distribution.
