City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2008 08 12

Home Browse Search

City of Louisville Citizen Survey August 2008 (55+) tended to give more favorable ratings to Louisville as a place to work than did younger respondents. In response to the 24 city characteristics listed on the survey, most respondents were pleased with the city, rating each characteristic as either "excellent" or "good." There were three exceptions. Half or fewer respondents thought that the following qualities were "good" or "excellent": shopping opportunities, availability of affordable quality housing and employment opportunities. Still, 23 of the 24 characteristics received higher ratings than were given around the nation in other jurisdictions. Sixteen of the characteristics on the survey were compared to the Front Range's ratings, and 12 were ranked above the benchmarks, with only shopping opportunities ranking below. Many characteristics' ratings had improved since 2004, although there were wording differences in some of the survey questions, which could account, in part, to differences between results. Again, there were differences by age and gender on some of the ratings. For this set of questions, there was also a difference by length of residency, with longer-term residents (10+ years) rating the availability of affordable housing lower than did shorter--term residents. Louisville residents reported feeling very safe in the community, giving higher ratings for all aspects of safety than their counterparts across the nation and in the Front Range. These ratings were consistent with those given in 2004, although. an even higher percentage of respondents reported feeling safe in parks after dark in 2008 than they had in 2004. City Services and Departments In 2008, for the first time, residents were asked to rate the overall quality of City services. The vast majority of respondents gave Louisville City services a rating of "good" or better, and no one rated it as "poor." This rating ranked Louisville above the national and the Front Range benchmarks. Residents were given the opportunity to rate 13 City services. The majority of those who had an opinion on each service rated all but. one as "excellent" or "good," with fire services, emergency services and public schools being rated by about half or more as "excellent." Services to low-income people were rated lower, with less than half of respondents rating these services as "good" or better, and one-quarter rating them as "poor." All 13 services compared favorably against the national and the Front Range benchmarks. The survey also contained questions about City employees, the Web site, cable television and the overall performance of Louisville Ciry goverrunent, along with other Ciry administration-related questions. Two-thirds or more of respondents rated these aspects of Louisville as "good" or better. The Web site, Ciry response to citizen concerns, television programming and overall City government performance could be compared to the national benchmark, and Louisville ranked above other jurisdictions in all categories. Two Front Range comparisons could be made -City Web site and overall City government performance -and Louisville rose to the top in these comparisons = as well. ~, About half of the respondents in 2008 had made contact with a City employee in the preceding 12 ~ months. As in 2004, the majority were impressed with City employees' customer service. These impressions ranked Louisville above both the national benchmarks and the Front Range benchmarks. `~ 0 Z 0 0 N O Report of Results 2