• No results found

TASMAN DISTRICT COUNCIL

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2023

Share "TASMAN DISTRICT COUNCIL"

Copied!
188
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

The advantages and benefits are that the Council has national average and peer group average benchmarks against which to analyze perceived performance in the Tasman District, as well as results from previous Communitrak™ surveys. The survey was created on the basis of Wards, since the elected representatives are associated with a certain Ward. The white pages of the telephone directory were used as a sample source, with each.

Quota sampling was used to ensure an even balance between respondents and respondents, with the sample also stratified by Ward. Sample sizes for each department were predetermined to ensure a sufficient number of respondents within each department so that analysis could be conducted for each department separately.

COMMUNITRAK™ SPECIFICATIONS

Weights were applied to the sample data to reflect the actual ward, gender and age group proportions in the area as determined by Statistics New Zealand 2013 Census data. The margin of error numbers above refer to the accuracy of a result in a study given a 95 percent confidence level. At the 95 percent confidence level, the margin of error for a sample of 400 respondents, at a reported percentage of 50%, is plus or minus 5%.

The numbers above refer to the difference between two results required to say the difference is significant, given a 95 percent confidence level. This report summarizes the opinions and attitudes of Tasman District Council residents about the services offered to them by their council and their elected representatives.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Tasman District Council commissioned Communitrak™ to measure their effectiveness in representing the wishes and views of their residents. The percentage of not very satisfied (20%) is at the same level as the Peer Group average and slightly below the national average. The percentage saying 'yes' is on par with the Peer Group average and above the national average.

Clutha District Council Far North District Council Hauraki District Council Hurunui District Council Kaikoura District Council Kaipara District Council MacKenzie District Council Manawatu District Council Matamata-Piako District Council Opotiki District Council. South Taranaki District Council South Wairarapa District Council District Council Stratford Tararua District Council Waikato District Council Waimakariri District Council Waimate District Council Wairoa District Council Waitaki District Council Waitomo District Council.

MAIN FINDINGS

Council Services/Facilities

74% of Tasman residents are satisfied with the footpaths in their district (71% in 2016), while 21% are not very satisfied. Residents of the borough of Richmond are less likely to be dissatisfied with the roads than other residents of the borough. The main reasons why residents are not very satisfied with the water supply in Tasman District are.

The percentage not very satisfied (4%) is similar to the Peer Group and National Averages and the 2016 reading. Lakes-Murchison Ward residents are more likely to be dissatisfied with kerbside recycling than other Ward residents. Residents of Lakes-Murchison Ward are more likely to not be very satisfied with the Council's rubbish removal service than other Ward residents.

The percentage not very satisfied (15%) corresponds to the Peer Group and National Averages for renovation. The main reasons why residents are not very satisfied with the refuse/waste transport stations are. The percentage not very satisfied is on par with the Peer Group and National Averages and is similar to the 2016 result.

The percentage not very satisfied is similar to the Peer Group and National Averages and on par with the 2016 reading. 70% of Tasman residents are satisfied with environmental information, while 12% are not very satisfied and 18% cannot comment. The main reasons* residents are not very satisfied with multi-purpose public halls and community buildings.

There are no significant differences with regard to the residents† who are not particularly satisfied with the Water Centre.

Council Policy And Direction

Residents were asked if the Council had taken any action, decision or guidance recently. This was a question to gauge the level of support Tasman County residents have for Council's actions, decisions and governance. 34;Support' is a mixture of agreement with the activity or decision and/or whether the residents of the district have been adequately informed about the proposed action/decision.

Overall, 40% of Tasman residents have a recent Council action, decision or management they approve of (43% in 2016). Short-term residents, those who have lived in the district for 10 years or less, are more likely than long-term residents to have a Council action, decision or management they approve of. 1% of residents mention "bike lanes/need to make it safer" as a measure/decision/management they disapprove of.

Overall, 49% of Tasman District residents have a recent Council action, decision or management in mind that they disapprove of. This is above the peer group average and on par with the national average and 5% above the 2016 reading. Residents who are less likely to have a recent Council action, decision or management in mind that they disapprove of are.

Lakes-Murchison and Golden Bay ward residents appear to be slightly more likely than other ward residents to have a recent action/decision they disagree with in mind. 3% of residents cite "good consultation/communication/information/listening" as a problem they approve of. 1% of residents cite "lower rates/debt reduction" as an issue they approve of.

Rates Issues

The percentage of not very satisfied is at the same level as the Peer Group average and slightly below the national average. 39% of residents have contacted the town hall by telephone in the past year (42% in 2016), 44% have personally visited a town hall and 8% have contacted the municipality in writing. Residents are listed below as residents and slightly less than rural residents to say they contacted council offices by phone.

There are no notable differences between wards and between socio-economic groups in terms of the residents who have contacted the Council offices in writing, via e-mail and/or via the online contact form. 80% of residents who have contacted Council offices (45% in 2016) by telephone within the last 12 months are satisfied, of which 41% are very satisfied, while 19% are not very satisfied. 88% of residents who have contacted a council office in person in the last 12 months are satisfied, including 57% who are very satisfied (54% in 2016).

62% of residents who wrote to municipal offices in the last 12 months are satisfied, and 38% are dissatisfied. 84% of residents who contacted the municipality's offices by e-mail in the last 12 months are satisfied, while 13% are not very satisfied (19% in 2016). The percentage of dissatisfied is similar to the average of the peer group and slightly below the national average.

86% of residents who have contacted the Council Offices via online contact form in the last 12 months are satisfied, while 11% are not very satisfied. The reasons* why residents who contact the Council offices via the online contact form are not very satisfied. There are no significant differences between socio-economic groups, in terms of those residents† who are not very satisfied.

Information

There are no significant differences between wards and between socio-economic groups, in terms of those residents who mention "Newsline - The Mag" as their main source of information. 95% of Tasman residents who are aware of information about the Council say they have seen, read or heard information that the Council publishes specifically for the community in the past 12 months (88% in 2016). There are no significant differences between wards and between socio-economic groups, in terms of those residents† who have seen, read or heard information published by the Council specifically for the community in the last 12 months.

Those residents (N=379) who saw, read or heard any information were asked to consider what types it was. Of those who saw, read or heard information produced by the Council in the last 12 months, the majority saw/read "Newsline - Die Mag and/or Council's advertisements in newspapers (67%). There are no significant differences between Wards and between socio-economic groups, in terms of those residents† who have seen or read "Nuuslyn - Die Mag" and/or Council's advertisements in newspapers.

Golden Bay Ward residents† are more likely than other Ward residents† to have seen or read the information available at the Council offices or libraries. Residents† are more likely to have seen or read Draft Annual Plan or Draft Annual Plan Summary. All residents were asked whether they considered the information provided by the Council to be sufficient.

80% of residents believe that more than/sufficient information is provided (77% in 2016), while 16% believe that information is not/sufficient. Residents of the Tasman District are more likely to feel that enough/more than enough information is being provided to the community than residents and residents across the country. There are no significant differences between departments and between socio-economic groups in terms of residents who say that there is sufficient/more than sufficient information.

Local Issues

With these in mind, they were then asked to say whether they think the Tasman District is better, about the same or worse as a place to live than it was three years ago. The percentage saying better (34%) is similar to the Peer Group average and on par with the national average. Long-term residents, those who have lived in the district more than 10 years, are more likely to feel their district is better than it was three years ago than short-term residents.

Peer Group and National Average readings and readings before 2009 refer to satisfaction with the way the Council involves the public in the decision it makes. There are no significant differences in terms of those residents who disagree with the statement.

APPENDIX

References

Related documents

Ms Hume advised that Tasman District Council and Nelson City Council have made the short list for the NZ Transport Agency cycling money.. 3 DRAFT REGIONAL LAND TRANSPORT STRATEGY –