Placerville Recreation Commission debates sharper, shorter community survey to guide parks priorities

The Placerville Recreation and Parks Commission spent the bulk of its October meeting refining a proposed community survey intended to guide a future parks and recreation master plan.

Commissioners and staff said they want the survey to be short, focused and easier for residents to complete so the city can collect usable data about what people want and why. Commission members repeatedly urged simplified phrasing, clearer distinctions between “wants” and “needs,” and measures to ensure responses come from city residents.

Staff outlined five draft questions that ask what community services respondents are most interested in, to rank potential improvements, to explain why those improvements matter, to identify preferred notification methods, and to rate the importance of specific program types. The presenter said the goal is to design questions that produce “quality data” that can be used to set strategic priorities.

Commissioners recommended several revisions. Suggestions included reducing the number of choices respondents must consider, changing phrasing from “community services” to “recreation and park services” for clarity, adding an “other” write‑in option, asking respondents whether they are city residents (or capturing address data in electronic responses), and providing Spanish and English versions of the survey.

Several commissioners proposed distinguishing program preferences by age groups (for example, children, teens, adults, seniors). Youth Commissioner Leah Zimmerman, a student at El Dorado High School, told the panel middle and high school students should be singled out because they can give meaningful input, while parents are more likely to answer on behalf of elementary school children.

Commission discussion also addressed outreach methods. Commissioners agreed that water/sewer billing mailers would reach a large proportion of city households and that the high school’s ASB and school communications could connect the survey to students. Commissioners were split on whether to use broad social media distribution; some warned public social links would attract many nonresident responses unless residency could be confirmed.

Commissioners also stressed the importance of setting realistic public expectations about what the city can deliver. Staff reminded members that most parks and program funding comes from the general fund and that large projects may require new revenue or assessments. The presenter said the survey will be refined and returned to the commission before public distribution.

The commission did not approve a final version this evening; the presenter said staff will tighten question wording, reduce options, add bilingual presentation, and return the draft at a later meeting.