Dale Martin
City Manager
Fernandina Beach
September 29, 2017 1:00 a.m.
The City has received the results from the National Citizen Survey (NCS). The NCS, conducted by the National Research Center in collaboration with the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), provides a series of standard questions presented to interested communities, as well as the opportunity to pose specific questions related to each community. According to NCS documents, the survey “captures residents’ opinions within the three pillars of a community (Community Characteristics, Governance, and Participation) across eight central facets of community (Safety, Mobility, Natural Environment, Economy, Recreation and Wellness, Education and Enrichment, and Community Engagement).”
The NCS was sent to 1,500 randomly selected (by the NRC) Fernandina Beach households. The selected households received three mailings over the course of three weeks beginning July 12, 2017: a pre-notification, a letter and the actual survey, and a final reminder and another copy of the survey. 493 completed surveys were returned (7 surveys were recorded as partial, 2 surveys as refused), resulting in a response rate of 38%. The margin of error for the survey is calculated as plus/minus 4% around any given percentage included in the survey (of the 500 recorded surveys). Some rounding results may produce total percentages less than or more than one hundred.
Let me first share the demographic information of the respondents. 80% of the respondents were age 45 or older, overwhelmingly white (86%; African-American, 10%), had no children under 17 in the household (80%), and a “bell-curve” shaped distribution of income, peaking with 35% reporting incomes of $50,000-$99,999, and falling to 13% reporting less than $25,000 and 17% reporting $150,000 or more. Female respondents represented 54% and 56% of respondents indicated that they have lived in Fernandina Beach for at least eleven years (31% reporting living in Fernandina Beach for five years or less). Respondents were generally economically positive regarding the next six months, with 44% expecting a positive impact (45% neutral, 12% negative).
The survey results show Fernandina Beach to be similar in nature to most of the other benchmark communities in most responses (over 500 other communities are included in the NCS database). Several strengths were identified. The “positive” results are typically the combination of the “Excellent” and “Good” responses (the other responses were “Fair” and “Poor”). The characteristics that scored much higher when compared to the database included a place to retire (89% positive, ranking 7/345), a place to visit (97%, 5/236), stocked supplies in preparation for an emergency (68%, 5/191), attended a City-sponsored event (76%, 8/209), and volunteered to some group/activity (63%, 12/249).
Many more characteristics were scored as higher in relation to database communities: overall quality of life, image, ease of walking, public places, vibrant downtown, recreational opportunities, social events, neighborliness, volunteer opportunities, walked/biked, positive economy, use of recreation facilities/services, campaigned/advocated for an issue/candidate, contacted elected officials, club participation, and attended a public meeting.
While no characteristics scored much lower, several did score lower in the database comparisons: overall direction (42% positive), confidence in Fernandina Beach government (35% positive), generally acting in best interest of community (39% positive), bus and transit services (31% positive), and drinking water (55% positive).
The Special Topics, specific to Fernandina Beach, included questions of interest to the community. With regard to the importance of projects (a limited list was offered), 77% responded that sidewalks and bicycle paths were Essential or Very Important; 68% responded that the purchase of open space was Essential or Very Important. Less than 35% responded that new facilities (public safety, indoor recreation) were Essential or Very Important.
Respondents were asked to express their level of support for dedicated millage (taxes) to support the projects. 74% of respondents indicated Strongly or Somewhat Supportive of taxes for the purchase of open space, 60% for additional outdoor recreational facilities, 57% for a new public safety facility, and 47% for a new indoor recreational facility. I was somewhat surprised by the apparent willingness to support dedicated taxes for these projects.
Finally, respondents were queried about their preference for waterfront (Front Street from Ash Street to Alachua Street) development. The two most supported choices were the use of the waterfront for open space and recreational facilities (followed, in order, by parking, no change, and commercial development). When asked for their single preferred use, the responses matched the general support: open space (33%), recreational facilities (27%), parking (19%), no change (14%), and commercial (7%).
The survey results will be discussed at the October 3, 2017, City Commission meeting, likely as part of the City Manager’s Report. The full report will be available on the City’s web site.
The data provided will provide insight to the City Commission, especially during its next annual visioning and goal-setting session (likely in January, 2018). I look forward to studying the results in more detail over the next few months.
MUCH of the survey was POSITIVE. However, there seemed to be a HUGE clash between the citizens and the City Commissioners concerning the vision for the City. “Fernandina Beach residents evaluated the overall direction the City is taking, confidence in the City government and to the City acting in the best interest of Fernandina Beach less favorably than residents in other communities across the US.”
More detailed information concerning the survey may be found at the following links: 2017 Draft Conclusions Page, https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9h04hkbw1c3h2s/FBCommunitySurveyConclusionsDraft2017.pdf?dl=0 and 2017 Draft Reports, https://www.dropbox.com/sh/u5bnnb86up45br5/AACsRYHDaYLaoTh3kCYt52D0a?dl=0
strong response for what people want on the waterfront.
It will be interesting to see the spin that is put on these results by the various parties depending upon their perspective.
One thing I don’t understand is the lower than average rating given to the city’s drinking water as the system is consistently ranked by the state’s water regulatory agency as one of the best in the state. Is it that our water supply is so mineral rich and people, like my wife, don’t like that taste? Nothing can be done about that and it is same for all the areas that are obtaining their water source from the Florida aquifer.
Millions on a airport “welcome center” that will return zero $$ to the City vs. fix the marina which generates $1 million plus by City official reports plus down town stores? This is a no brainer. FEMA $$ from Mathew still unpaid? City Manager should manage more and play planner less.