Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Resident Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wayne committee finalizes resident survey structure, narrows distribution options
Summary
The Town of Wayne comprehensive‑plan committee refined a draft resident survey, agreeing to split business questions into type and size, add demographic items for respondent sorting, and to prioritize electronic distribution while limiting paper copies. Members assigned research tasks on lists and peer‑town practice.
The Town of Wayne Comprehensive Plan Committee spent most of its meeting refining a draft resident survey that the group plans to use to inform a comprehensive‑plan update. Chair (speaker S1) opened the discussion and read the minutes summarizing prior work on question structure and a previously approved $350 request to support survey distribution.
The committee agreed to split the business question into two items: one asking which types of businesses residents want to see (retail, food and beverage, service, trades, natural‑resource‑based, etc.) and a second asking about business size using full‑time‑equivalent employee ranges (recommended ranges discussed were 1–5, 6–10, and greater than 10). Presenter (S3) said she would populate the business‑type choices for the draft. On wording, members approved changing the introduction to use 'perspective' rather than 'voice' and adding a short explanation that ranking number 1 indicates highest importance.
Members spent substantial time on sampling and validity. The group agreed to include demographic screening questions so results can be parsed by full‑time resident, seasonal resident, property owner and renter. S4 offered a quick power example: "For a population of about 1,000, if you get 278 returns you have 95% confidence," which members took as an aspirational target while acknowledging typical response rates may be lower.
On distribution, the committee favored using an online platform with protections against duplicate submissions (single‑use links tied to email addresses) and agreed to limit paper surveys to a small, easily tracked set available at the town office. Chair (S1) and others tasked Shannon (town staff) to confirm which contact lists are available (town email list, registered voters, tax rolls/property owners) and asked Bob (S2) to survey how other Maine towns have distributed similar questionnaires. S1 also noted an $8,000 request in the town budget for survey work that may fund broader distribution or paid assistance if needed.
Next steps include finalizing question wording and numbering, populating business‑type choices, and reporting back on available lists and peer‑town practices at the committee's next meeting.
