Atherton survey: residents report high satisfaction; public safety and street maintenance top concerns

A consultant presented the results of a Town of Atherton resident satisfaction survey and council members discussed next steps for outreach and possible follow-ups.

Adam Prabolsky, a research consultant with the Prabolsky team, told the joint Audit & Finance Committee and City Council that the survey produced 424 completed responses and “a very robust” dataset for a town the size of Atherton. He said households were contacted by postcard, email, text and phone and that respondents spent an average of about 13 minutes completing the survey.

The survey found very high overall satisfaction and trust: 90.8% rated overall quality of life good or excellent and 91% said they were satisfied with services the town provides. Prabolsky said 93% of respondents reported satisfaction with police services and 76% reported a high level of trust in town government.

Why this matters: the survey is intended to give the council an evidence base for outreach and capital-planning choices and to indicate where residents see gaps between what they value and what they feel the town delivers.

Prabolsky said the top open‑ended concerns were public safety and housing affordability; maintenance of streets and traffic operations also ranked highly when respondents were asked what was personally important. He described a “delta” analysis showing where importance exceeded satisfaction — with street maintenance and drainage among the larger gaps.

Council members and staff pressed for clarification on several items. Council member Rick DeGoya asked about willingness to pay for undergrounding utilities and noted costs can be large: “when we looked at undergrounding … it was more than a million dollars” for some short segments. Prabolsky cautioned the survey did not specify a price point, and explained that among respondents who identified undergrounding as a priority about 65% said they would vote yes on a funding measure for it; roughly half of respondents had identified undergrounding as a goal in the earlier question.

On flood mitigation, Prabolsky said two‑thirds of respondents rated it important and that 53% of respondents who indicated flood mitigation as important said they would be willing to pay for flood‑mitigation projects. He noted many respondents were “unsure” because the survey did not attach a cost to the proposals.

Councilors and staff discussed communications implications. Prabolsky said residents still rely heavily on print and direct mail and that word‑of‑mouth remained a significant source of local information, advising the town to prioritize mail and local channels for some outreach. Council members asked staff to post or make available more of the detailed reporting and to consider a press release summarizing the study.

The consultant emphasized that the full dataset contains demographic cross‑tabs and verbatim open‑ended responses that the council and staff can use for targeted outreach and that Prabolsky’s team is available to provide follow‑up or specialized analyses.

Coming next: councilors asked staff to make the detailed (non‑identifying) data more accessible to the council and public and to consider additional, targeted polls if the town contemplates a ballot measure for undergrounding or other capital projects.