There was some interesting things to come out of the city survey (mostly commentary) but you can view all of the results HERE. But a couple of quick things I found interesting.
-People will always bitch about the streets. As I have said, they are a lot better then they were 4 years ago. I will actually give the city council and the mayor credit for getting on top of this. It also doesn’t hurt that the past two winters have been mild, which saves us money in maintenance and upkeep. Could the streets be better? Yes. I agree that the traffic light time in this town is pretty bad and needs to be adjusted.
-Affordable housing is almost non-existent. When I bought my home 11 years ago I was paying $450 dollars a month for a 1-Bedroom in Pettigrew Heights. I didn’t pay heat, garbage or water. It wasn’t a dump, but it certainly wasn’t ‘nice’ I have paid the same mortgage on my home since I bought it besides tax increases, but after I re-financed a few years ago to a 15 year mortgage, my mortgage went down. Let me put it to you this way, it is almost 30% cheaper for me to be making payments on single family home then it would be for me to rent a single bedroom apartment. Rents are way overpriced in Sioux Falls, and that is evident, when you see developers continually put up apartments. They are making a racket.
-847 responses out of 3000 sent for a response rate of 28.23%. The council hours wasted on this survey is amazing. I remember sitting in the outer council room while hearing staff and councilors drone on and on about how important this was for the future of Sioux Falls? We have video for those who missed it. So for the $29.52 paid for each resident return plus the thousands of dollars spent by the council in staff time and overhead did we learn anything we did not know already? If you look at one of the last documents in this survey, you will see the comparison to other years. You will see that there wasn’t that much change from 2013-14. That tells me that we can probably hold off doing another one of these surveys for a couple of more years, instead of every year.
But the most entertaining part was the open ended question responses. Obviously, most of these comments will be negative, afterall we are asking for the opinion of the public. Very little praise was given. But what surprised me was the high number of comments about our mayor pertaining to development, building entertainment facilities and the connections to Sanford. The SFPD isn’t seen in too good of light either.
I was glad to see that most citizens, who responded to the survey, feel “safe.”
I guess I will stop worrying about the obviously rising crime rate in this city. 😉
http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/02/11/ten-u-s-cities-where-violent-crime-is-soaring/
Just a thought on polls or surveys in general. My question to all who read DaCola. This survey had about a half percent response of adults who live in this city. Do you believe these percentages, as held by half of one percent of SF residents, come close to the feelings of the whole of SF?
Poly, I suppose you are asking me if I think the survey is bogus? Yep. Just look at the survey results compared to the comments. The survey results came only from the people who mailed them in, while the commentary came from people who filled it out online. Seems they paint two different pictures. Besides the EC did the public get to approve the partnership with the hockey center, the indoor tennis center, the TIF for Sanford Sports Complex, the Indoor Pool, etc, etc, NOPE. I get the feeling from reading the comments that the citizens are getting tired of us throwing money at these facilities when our roads and public transit could be better.
The number polled and response percentage is not a good survey cross section. Many work long hours and don’t have time to answer. Most simply do not care. Still, there’s truth we know but city officials had no clue.
There’s major problems at SFPD. There’s no pride for the uniform (slobs). They’re heavy both budget and weight wise. Training, what training? To many shooting incidents. Amazing how they fire so many times but always miss. When I drive across town I never see a police car. They’re hiding in parks waiting for the end of their shift. There’s no complaint process or manner for handling unprofessional conduct, an internal affairs section. I say, replace the chief and restore the professionalism and respect for law enforcement.
No surprise that citizens have this mayor’s ego and narcisism figured out. To many sports palaces named Sanford or Huether. Doesn’t matter how fast you’re growing, there’s not funds for this many without infrastructure sacrafices.
Survey me, given the population influx, traffic is a problem. There’s still no east-west thorofare. Ask anyone their way around 41st Street between I-29 and Minnesota. They have several for different times of the day. Add lanes, time the lights, overpasses & exit ramps? Fix it.
I also believe the survey results are extremely skewed. 93% of SF residents believe SF is a great place to live? Don’t think so. First off, that’s just plain a flat out lie. Think about that statement.
93% of residents believe blah…blah…blah.
Now if they worded it 93% of the survey respondents, then it would not be a lie. Truth of the matter is, these results were based on way less than 1% of SF adults. The original sample size (3000), is still only about 3% of all registered voters in SF. Now factor in more than 7 out of 10 survey recipients rolled their eyes and threw the damn thing in the garbage. What percentage of those 7 of 10 who threw it in the recycle think SF is a great place to live?
Like you and I both know. A total load of Bullshit.
Poly – Assuming a survey has non-biased questions and is distributed to a random sample – for a 200,000 person population for a 5% margin of error with 99% confidence you need 663 respondents.
This means that you can be 99% sure that your numbers are accurate within +/- 5% So – with 847 respondents they actually have a margin of error of +/- 4.5%
This is based off of statistical analysis and verified experimentally. You can find more at any number of websites like https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/sample-size/
Now – the better question, and the one that may or may not invalidate this (or any other) survey – Were the questions neutrally phrased (i.e. was this poll biased)? Was the sample actually a random sample?
$25,000 for this bogus survey? Yet at the same time the city cuts back on para-transit because the city needs to tighten it’s purse strings? Of course this survey thing is getting a lot of traction when you consider the city throws out this bogus survey and the argus, the ever playful lapdog it is, I mean watchdog, goes right along with it. One article yesterday, and another mention of it tomorrow when mmm’s press secretary brings it up in his satirical phone convo between his boss and Rapid City mayor Sam Kooiker.
And the argus still wonders why there subscription numbers are down? Ask anybody who does not live in SF. They’ll tell you why.
Anthony. Sounds like you’re willing to place complete trust in your survey monkey. That’s a lot of words by the monkey to sum up statistical analysis. Might I add.
Figures don’t lie, but liars figure. If what you say is true then each city election we have means 40,000 to 60,000 votes end up down a rabbit hole. Because our 99 and 99 one hundredth pure as the driven snow respondents claim 82% of them vote in city elections. Hmmmmmm
I agree with you on affordable housing – there’s a shortage everywhere, and it’s becoming a growing issue. But that’s one that’s hinged less on developer greed (sorry, I know they’re your favorite target) and more on the increasing economic divide in America. Absent subsidies, developers will build for the haves because the haves can afford to pay more. But also, rental demand has gone up as the recession has made a lot of would-be first-time homebuyers skittish about entering that market. Others just like the flexibility. But whatever the motive, it drives up prices. Developers might benefit from higher rents but they aren’t the driving factor behind why rents are high. That’s a classic supply/demand issue.
What’s not fair in this instance is to assert that rental housing is overpriced based on a comparison to single-family housing. Those are two very different markets. I completely see your point – I’m buying a condo right now in St. Paul five blocks from the one I rent because it lowers my month-to-month costs by 25%. But apples to apples, buying is almost always cheaper than renting. It’s a rare, rare circumstance in which that’s reversed.
This post reminds me that I need to cancel my landline before the next election cycle begins.
funny how demand drives up rental prices, but employers claim an employee shortage, i.e. “demand”, and yet wages don’t go up. instead, they try to bring in people willing to work for less money. and because of that, demand for affordable housing goes up, and rental prices rise again.
scott – Right?! People need apartments so we will take 50-60% of their income for rents.
Scott – if you get rid of your land line, how will you be able to fax your music columns to the Argus?
Actually Poly – I linked you to a user friendly source.
The actual formula for survey sample margin of error is
ME=z*sqrt((p(1-p)/n))
Where z is the abscissa of a standard normal
distribution and the square root of p(1-p)/n is the standard error function.
p represents the expected(desired) error level and n is the response value.
If you want to know more, look here:
http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/prc/section2/prc222.htm
There is a reason that Presidential Polls are only of a few thousand people.
There is a reason that Nate Silver and fivethirtyeight.com have correctly predicted the last four election cycles. The math doesn’t lie.
I haven’t gone through all of the questions/answers for this survey, but…
The problem with this survey is NOT the sample size. The problem is who was surveyed.
The problem is what questions were asked.
If you ask people ‘did you vote’ they will lie.
If you ask when the last time you visited your poling place you will get a more accurate measurement of the truth.
Bad questions equal bad survey results.
Bad (non-representative and/or non-random) samples equal bad survey results.
THAT is where we should be looking at.
Fancy formulas aside, if people lie about one question on a poll, why should I believe they’re being honest with any of the others? Like I said. Bogus.
Did the city attorney phrase the questions? Then, 93% don’t want something but (somehow) want an indoor ocean. I mean if you have an aquatics center you must have whales and dolphins. If there’s a swimming with mermaids area, call me some of the 93%.