2017 budget planning survey general population survey results final … · general population...

2017 Budget Planning Survey

General Population Survey Results

Final Report

August 31, 2016

City of St. Albert General Population Survey Results 2017 Budget Planning Survey Final Report

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 4

2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND 6

3.0 METHODOLOGY 7

3.1 Project Initiation and Questionnaire Design 7

3.2 Survey Population and Data Collection 7

3.3 Data Analysis and Project Documentation 8

4.0 STUDY FINDINGS 8

4.1 Top-of-Mind Priorities 9

4.2 City Spending 10

4.2.1 Summary of All Services 12 4.2.2 Direct Customer Service 13 4.2.3 Online Self-Service 14 4.2.4 Community Safety – Policing 16 4.2.5 Community Safety – Fire 17 4.2.6 Community Safety – Municipal Enforcement 18 4.2.7 Community Social Support and Development 19 4.2.8 Cultural Programs 21 4.2.9 Recreation Programs 22 4.2.10 Community Events 24 4.2.11 Ice Surfaces 25 4.2.12 Parks and Trails 26 4.2.13 Road Maintenance 27 4.2.14 Traffic Control 28 4.2.15 Environmental Programs 29 4.2.16 Environmental Protection 31 4.2.17 Business Attraction and Retention 33 4.2.18 Youth and Entrepreneurship Development 34 4.2.19 Sidewalk and Transit Stop Maintenance 35 4.2.20 Waste Management 36 4.2.21 Utilities 37 4.2.22 Other 38 4.2.23 Summary of City Spending on Programs and Services 39 4.2.24 Service Priorities 40

4.3 Capital Budget 43

4.3.1 Summary of All Services - Repair, Maintain and Replace Projects 44 4.3.2 Utilities (RMR) 45 4.3.3 Roads (RMR) 46 4.3.4 Traffic Systems (RMR) 47 4.3.5 Sidewalks and Trails (RMR) 49 4.3.6 Emergency Services (RMR) 50 4.3.7 Public Works (RMR) 52 4.3.8 Transit (RMR) 53 4.3.9 Recreation (RMR) 54 4.3.10 Culture (RMR) 56


3

4.3.11 Information Technology (RMR) 57 4.3.12 Community Capital (RMR) 58 4.3.13 Summary of RMR Programs and Services 59

4.4 Capital Projects 60

4.5 Council Priorities 63

4.6 Additional Feedback 68

4.7 Respondent Demographics 69

APPENDIX A – SURVEY INSTRUMENT 71

RECRUITMENT FORM 85


4

1.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

In 2016, Banister Research and Consulting Inc. was contracted by the City of St. Albert (“the City”; “the

Client”) to conduct the 2017 City of St. Albert General Population Budget Planning Survey. The primary

purpose of this research was to assess the views of City of St. Albert stakeholders concerning the

budgetary planning process. In total, 555 respondents completed the survey, yielding a margin of error

no greater than ±4.1% at the 95% confidence level, or 19 times out of 20.

The following summary outlines the key findings from the 2017 General Population Budget Planning

Survey.

Top-of-Mind Priorities

Stakeholders were asked what they considered to be the most important priorities facing the City

of St. Albert Council today in terms of the budget process. Most commonly, respondents

mentioned lowering taxes (35%), followed by those who mentioned a balanced budget, and/or

fiscal responsibility, and/or debt reduction (24%).

City Spending

Respondents were asked whether service levels should be increased, decreased, or maintained

for each of the twenty-two (22) program or service areas identified. For all but one, (Business

Attraction and Retention, where 46% chose to increase service levels), respondents most

commonly stated that service levels should be maintained.

Program areas for which respondents most frequently chose to increase service levels included

the following:

o Business Attraction and Retention (46% chose to increase service levels);

o Community Safety – Policing (34%); and

o Online self-service (32%).

Areas in which respondents most frequently chose to decrease service levels included:

o Cultural Programs (33% chose to decrease service levels);

o Environmental Programs (27%); and

o Community Social Support and Development (26%).

Respondents were asked what they think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate

priorities for Council to maintain, increase, and decrease service levels for:

o Respondents most commonly mentioned emergency services (33%) when asked which

services the City should maintain service levels for;

o Respondents most commonly mentioned emergency services (20%) when asked which

services the City should increase service levels for; and

o Respondents most commonly mentioned cultural programs (12%) when asked which

services the City should decrease service levels for.

City of St. Albert General Population Survey Results 2017 Budget Planning Survey Draft Report

5

Capital Budget

Respondents were asked service levels should be increase, maintained, or decreased for each of

the eleven (11) repair, maintain, and replace (RMR) project areas. For all eleven (11) project areas,

respondents most commonly reported that service levels should be maintained.

Project areas for which respondents most frequently chose to increase service levels included the

following:

o Roads (30% chose to increase service levels);

o Traffic systems (25%); and

o Sidewalks and Trails (21%).


o Culture (27% chose to decrease service levels);

o Community Capital (27%); and

o Traffic Systems (20%).

Capital Projects

Respondents were asked, thinking about new capital projects that address growth of the

community, to rate the importance of a list of categories of capital projects. Respondents most

commonly rated new emergency services facilities and equipment (46%) and new utilities

infrastructure (46%) as important (ratings of 4 or 5 out of 5).

Respondents were asked what the City can do to generate more revenue or to reduce expenses.

Most commonly, respondents mentioned increasing commercial development and/or attracting

more business (23%).

Council Priorities

Respondents were then given a list of City Council priorities, and asked to rate their importance.

Most commonly, respondents found exploring non-residential property-tax options (67%) and

exploring a joint transit system with Edmonton (66%) as most important.

Additional Feedback

When asked if they had additional feedback, respondents most commonly mentioned that taxes

are too high (6%) and to reduce frivolous spending, and/or stay within the budget, and/or be more

fiscally responsible (in general) (4%).


6

2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND

In 2016, Banister Research and Consulting Inc. was contracted by the City of St. Albert (“the City”; “the

Client”) to conduct the 2017 City of St. Albert General Population Budget Planning Survey. The primary

purpose of this research was to assess the views of City of St. Albert residents concerning the budgetary

planning process for the 2017 budget. As part of the project, Banister Research conducted the following:

General Population Web-Based Survey (n=555). Hard-copy invitations were distributed via mail-

out to 4,000 randomly-selected City of St. Albert residences on July 6th, 2016 encouraging

residents to complete the online survey by August 5th, 2016.1 A total of 555 residents completed

the survey, resulting in a response rate of 13.9%.

o Results reflect a margin of error no greater than ±4.1% at the 95% confidence level, or 19 times out of 20.2

Stakeholder Web-Based Survey (n=219). A separate link was provided to the City of St. Albert for

promotion through official City channels (e.g., City website), providing residents or other

stakeholders who had not received a letter the opportunity to complete the survey. A total of 219

responses were collected between July 6th and August 12th, 2016.

o Due to the opt-in or self-select nature of the Stakeholder, results cannot be assigned a margin of error, nor generalized to the population of the City of St. Albert.

This report outlines the results for the 2017 General Population Budget Planning Survey. The results for

the Stakeholder Web-Based Survey are available under a separate report.

1 The deadline was later extended to August 12th, 2016, in the event that letters were not delivered on time as a result of a potential Canada Post lockout. 2 Based on a population of 64,645 in 2016. Source: https://stalbert.ca/city-hall/elections-and-census/census-results/

https://stalbert.ca/city-hall/elections-and-census/census-results/



7

3.0 METHODOLOGY

All components of the project were designed and executed in close consultation with the City of St. Albert.

A detailed description of each task of the project is outlined in the remainder of this section.

3.1 Project Initiation and Questionnaire Design

At the outset of the project, all background information relevant to the study was identified and

subsequently reviewed by Banister Research. The consulting team familiarized itself with the objectives

of the Client, ensuring a full understanding of the issues and concerns to be addressed in the project. The

result of this task was an agreement on the research methodology, a detailed work plan and project

initiation.

The survey included a mixture of quantitative and qualitative questions to elicit a more in-depth

investigation of the issues and concerns regarding the assignment. Once the Client vetted the draft survey

instrument, revisions were made and the questionnaire was finalized. A copy of the final questionnaire is

provided in Appendix A.

3.2 Survey Population and Data Collection

The City of St. Albert provided Banister Research with a list of 4,000 randomly selected households in the

City, all of whom were invited to complete the web-based survey via hard copy letter. The letter included

instructions to access the survey, including the URL and a PIN unique to that household. Of the 555

residents who completed the survey, seven (n=7) were completed via telephone from the Banister

Research Call Centre, upon request. The survey was available online from July 6th to August 12th, 2016;

results provide a margin of error no greater than ±4.1% at the 95% confidence level, or 19 times out of

20.3

3 Based on a population of 64,645 in 2016. Source: https://stalbert.ca/city-hall/elections-and-census/census-results/




8

3.3 Data Analysis and Project Documentation

While data was being collected, Banister Research provided written, weekly progress reports to the Client.

After the questionnaires were completed and verified, all survey data was compiled and into a

computerized database for analysis. A topline PowerPoint presentation of the findings for all closed-ended

results was provided to the Client.

After the surveys were completed and verified, the lead consultant reviewed the list of responses to each

open-ended or verbatim question; a code list was established. Due to the high response rate, Banister

Research coded a random sample of 400 completed questionnaires for open-ended responses; all closed-

ended responses have been provided in the report. To ensure consistency of interpretation, the same

team of coders was assigned to this project from start to finish. The coding supervisor verified at least

20% of each coder’s work. Once the questionnaires were fully coded, computer programs were written

to check the data for quality and consistency. All survey data was compiled into a computerized database

for analysis. Utilizing SPSS analysis software, the survey data was reviewed to guarantee quality and

consistency (e.g., proper range values and skip patterns).

Data analysis included cross-tabulation, whereby the frequency and percentage distribution of the results

for each question were broken down based on respondent characteristics and responses (e.g. age,

employment status, etc.). Statistical analysis included a Z-test to determine if there were significant

differences in responses between respondent subgroups. Results were reported as statistically significant

at the 95% confidence level.

The detailed data tables have been provided under a separate cover. It is important to note that any

discrepancies between charts, graphs or tables are due to rounding of the numbers.

4.0 STUDY FINDINGS

Results of the survey are presented as they relate to the specific topic areas addressed. It is important to

note that the data tables, under a separate cover, provide a detailed analysis of all survey findings.


9

4.1 Top-of-Mind Priorities

To begin, stakeholders were asked what they considered to be the most important priorities facing the City of St. Albert Council today, in terms of

the budget process on an unaided basis. Thirty-five percent (35%) of respondents mentioned lowering taxes, followed by 24% who mentioned a

balanced budget, and/or fiscal responsibility, and/or debt reduction. See Table 1, below.

Table 1

What are the three most important priorities facing the City of St. Albert Council today that need to be addressed within the 2017 budget?

Percent of Respondents*

TOTAL MENTIONS (n=400**)

FIRST MENTIONS (n=400**)

SECOND MENTIONS (n=337**)

THIRD MENTIONS (n=274**)

Lower taxes 35 24 8 5

Balanced budget/fiscal responsibility/debt reduction 24 10 8 11

Road infrastructure development/expansion 22 10 10 6

Attracting more businesses/commercial growth 15 5 8 6

Recreational facility development/expansion 13 5 5 5

Traffic/traffic control/flow/light synchronization 12 6 4 4

Road/sidewalk infrastructure maintenance 12 5 6 3

Improving/expanding public transit services 8 3 4 3

Park/green space/playground/walking path development 8 1 3 6

Lower utility fees/bills 7 1 5 3

Affordable housing development 6 2 2 4

RCMP/public safety/reducing crime 6 2 3 2

Library branch development 5 2 2 2

Maintaining existing City facilities/services (in general) 5 3 2 1

Managing City growth/expansion/services keeping up with growth 4 2 1 3

City cleanliness/upkeep/weed control (e.g., facilities, parks, river etc.) 4 1 2 2

Improved City Council governance/leadership (in general) 4 1 1 3

Other (3% or less of Total Mentions) 58 - - -

Don’t Know/Not Stated 7 7 - - *Multiple responses **A random sample of 400 responses were coded


10

4.2 City Spending

Respondents were shown the following information with regards to the City’s Net Operating Budget and

Operating Budget by Program Area, below and continued on Page 11:

The City of St. Albert budget includes the following spending categories:

Administration (28%) includes items that are necessary to govern, operate and maintain the City of St. Albert and do not vary directly with the level of service provided:

o Mayor and City Council o City Manager’s Office, Legal Services & Intergovernmental Affairs o Corporate Services

i. Human Resources ii. Innovation & Technology

iii. Strategic Services & Environment iv. Legislative Services

o Finance and Assessment Services o Debt Repayment o Capital Transfer

Programs and Services

72%

Administration28%

2016 Net Operating Budget $93 million


11

Programs and Services (72%) includes categories where spending can be increased or decreased depending on the level of service provided. Each service is provided to residents at a particular level and/or quality of services within given time period. Service levels typically focus on service experience such as access, timeliness, accuracy, consistency, frequency, etc. The City Administration is required by Council to propose the budget that supports delivery programs and services to existing service levels. If the overall Programs and Services budget for the City of St. Albert was $100, this is how the $100 was allocated in 2016. The operating budget for programs and services does not include capital projects spending. Please see the graph below:

Planning & Engineering,

$10 Transit, $12

Public Works, $23

Fire Services, $20

Policing Services, $13

Recreation & Parks, $6

Culture, $4

Family & Community Support Services, $2

Outside Agencies, $9 Environment &

Sustainability, $1

2016 Operating Budget by Program Area


12

4.2.1 Summary of All Services

Respondents were then asked whether service levels should be increased, decreased, or maintained for

each of the twenty-two (22) program areas, identified above. For all but one area (Business Attraction and

Retention, where 46% chose to increase service levels; 40% chose to maintain service levels; and 13%

chose to decrease service levels) of the twenty-two (22) program areas, respondents most commonly

reported that service levels should be maintained.

Program areas for which respondents most frequently chose to increase service levels included the

following:

Business Attraction and Retention (46% chose to increase service levels);

Community Safety – Policing (34%); and

Online self-service (32%).


Cultural Programs (33% chose to decrease service levels);

Environmental Programs (27%); and

Community Social Support and Development (26%).


13

4.2.2 Direct Customer Service

Respondents were shown the following description of direct customer service:

“Includes services where residents/clients have direct interaction with City representative, in person or

over the phone, to register for billing, pay their bills, obtain permit, pay fees, register for a program, etc.”

As shown in Figure 1, below, 2% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of direct customer

service. Seventy-two percent (72%) chose to maintain service levels, while 25% chose to decrease service

levels.

Figure 1

Selected Sub-Segment Findings

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Direct

Customer Service included:

Those aged 65 or older (81%) versus those aged 35 to 64 (68%) or 18 to 34 (63%); and

Those who were not employed (78%) versus those who were employed full or part-time (67%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels on Direct

Customer Service included:

Those aged 18 to 34 (32%) or 35 to 64 (30%) versus those aged 65 or older (15%); and

Those who were employed full or part-time (29%) versus those who were not employed (20%).

1%

25%

72%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Direct Customer Service?

n=555


14

4.2.3 Online Self-Service

Respondents were shown the description for online self-service as:

“[the] Provision of services online, including City Website and mobile application (registration for

programs, payment of bills and fines, etc.)”

Thirty-two percent (32%) of respondents chose to increase service levels of online self-service, while 64%

chose to maintain service levels, and 3% reported that service levels should be decreased. See Figure 2,

below.

Figure 2

2%

3%

64%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Online Self-Service?

n=555


15


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Online Self-

Service included:

Females (70%) versus males (59%); and

Those aged 65 or older (70%) versus those aged 35 to 64 (60%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Online Self-

Service included:

Males (36%) versus females (27%);

Those aged 35 to 64 (37%) versus those aged 18 to 34 (32%); and

Those who have lived in St. Albert for 3 to 10 years (42%) versus those who have lived in St. Albert

for more than 10 years (30%).

Those aged 65 or older (5%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for

Online Self-Service versus those aged 35 to 64 (2%).


16

4.2.4 Community Safety – Policing

Respondents were shown the description for community safety-policing as:

“Policing Services and 911 Operations.”

As shown in Figure 3, below, 34% of respondents reported that service levels of community safety –

policing should be increased. Sixty-one percent (61%) chose to maintain service levels, and 3% chose to

decrease service levels.

Figure 3


Those who have lived in St. Albert for 3 to 10 years (71%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to

maintain service levels for Community Safety – Policing versus those who have lived in St. Albert for more

than 10 years (59%).

Females (40%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Community

Safety – Policing versus males (30%).

2%

3%

61%

34%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Community Safety - Policing?

n=555


17

4.2.5 Community Safety – Fire

Respondents were shown the following description of community safety-fire:

“Fire Services and Ambulance.”

Seventeen percent (17%) of respondents chose to increase service levels of community safety - fire.

Seventy-four percent (74%) chose to maintain service levels, and 9% reported that service levels should

be decreased. See Figure 4, below.

Figure 4


Males (12%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Community Safety

– Fire versus females (4%).

1%

9%

74%

17%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Community Safety - Fire?

n=555


18

4.2.6 Community Safety – Municipal Enforcement

Respondents were shown the description of community safety-municipal enforcement as:

“City by-law enforcement.”

As shown in Figure 5, below, 17% of the respondents reported that service levels of community safety –

municipal enforcement should be increased. Fifty-six percent (56%) chose to maintain service levels, while

25% chose to decrease service levels.

Figure 5


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Community

Safety – Municipal Enforcement included:


Those aged 65 or older (62%) versus those aged 35 to 64 (53%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Community

Safety – Municipal Enforcement included:

Males (30%) versus females (16%);

Those aged 35 to 64 (28%) versus those aged 65 or older (19%); and


1%

25%

56%

17%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Community Safety - Municipal Enforcement?

n=555


19

4.2.7 Community Social Support and Development

Respondents were shown the description for community social support and development as:

“Includ[ing] services such as neighbourhood development, providing counselling services, education and

awareness building, skill development, volunteer opportunities and mentorship.”

Seventeen percent (17%) of respondents chose to increase service levels of community social support and

development. Fifty-six percent (56%) chose to maintain service levels, while 26% reported that service

levels should be decreased. See Figure 6, below.

Figure 6


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Community

Social Support and Development included:

Those who were not employed (63%) versus those who were employed full or part- time (51%);

and

Those who have lived in St. Albert for more than 10 years (58%) versus those who have lived in St.

Albert for 3 to 10 years (42%).

1%

26%

56%

17%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Community Social Support and Development?

n=555


20

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Community


Females (29%) versus males (9%);

Those aged 18 to 34 (34%) versus those aged 35 to 64 (18%) or 65 or older (13%); and

Those who have lived in St. Albert for less than 3 years (32%) or 3 to 10 years (31%) versus those

who have lived in St. Albert for more than 10 years (14%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Community


Males (32%) versus females (14%); and

Those who have lived in St. Albert for 3 to 10 years (26%) or more than 10 years (27%) versus those

who have lived in St. Albert for less than 3 years (8%).


21

4.2.8 Cultural Programs

Respondents were shown the following description of cultural programs:

“Includes services such as cultural festivals, performing and visual arts programming, Arden Theatre,

Museum and Heritage Sites.”

As shown in Figure 7, below, 7% of the respondents reported that service levels of cultural programs

should be increased. Fifty-nine percent (59%) chose to maintain service levels, while 33% chose to


Figure 7


Females (66%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Cultural

Programs versus males (55%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Cultural

Programs included:

Those aged 18 to 34 (24%) or 35 to 64 (8%) versus those aged 65 or older (2%);

Those who have lived in St. Albert for less than 3 years (22%) versus those who have lived in St.

Albert for 3 to 10 years (8%) or more than 10 years (6%).

Males (37%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Cultural Programs

versus females (26%).

2%

33%

59%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Cultural Programs?

n=555


22

4.2.9 Recreation Programs

Respondents were shown the description for recreation programs as:

“Includ[ing] services such as recreational programing, aquatics and fitness programs.”

One quarter (25%) of respondents chose to increase service levels of recreation programs. Sixty percent

(60%) reported that service levels should be maintained, while 13% chose to decrease service levels. See

Figure 8, below.

Figure 8


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Recreation

Programs included:

Those aged 35 to 64 (60%) or 65 or older (64%) versus those aged 18 to 34 (40%); and


Albert for less than 3 years (41%).

2%

13%

60%

25%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Recreation Programs?

n=555


23

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Recreation

Programs included:


Those who were employed full or part-time (28%) versus those who were not employed (21%); and



Those aged 65 or older (15%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels

versus those aged 18 to 34 (3%).


24

4.2.10 Community Events

Respondents were shown the following description of community events:

“Provision of City organized events in the community (e.g. Arbor Day, Canada Day, Christmas Light Up,

Children’s Festival).”

As shown in Figure 9, below, 7% of respondents chose to increase service levels of community events.

Seventy percent (70%) stated that service levels should be maintained, while 21% chose to decrease

service levels.

Figure 9


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Community

Events included:




Those who have lived in St. Albert for more than 10 years (24%) were significantly more likely to have

chosen to decrease service levels for Community Events versus those who have lived in St. Albert for less

than 3 years (5%).

2%

21%

70%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Community Events?

n=555


25

4.2.11 Ice Surfaces

Respondents were shown the description of ice surfaces as:

“[the] Provision and maintenance of ice dedicated to use for recreation and sport activities (i.e. Servus

Place, Akinsdale and Kinex Arena and outdoor ice rinks).”

As shown in Figure 10, below, 13% of respondents chose to increase service levels of ice surfaces. Sixty-

nine percent (69%) reported that service levels should be maintained, while 16% of respondents chose to


Figure 10


Those aged 18 to 34 (26%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Ice

Surfaces versus those aged 35 to 64 (12%) or 65 or older (13%).

2%

16%

69%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Ice Surfaces?

n=555


26

4.2.12 Parks and Trails

Respondents were shown the following description of parks and trails:

“Includes provision and maintenance of community and neighbourhood parks and trail systems.”

As shown in Figure 11, below, 22% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of parks and trails,

while 72% chose to maintain service levels. Four percent (4%) stated that service levels should be

decreased.

Figure 11


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Parks and

Trails included:




Those aged 65 or older (83%) were significantly more likely to maintain service levels for Parks and Trails

versus those aged 35 to 64 (69%) or 18 to 34 (58%).

2%

4%

72%

22%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Parks and Trails?

n=555


27

4.2.13 Road Maintenance

Respondents were shown the description for road maintenance as:

“Includ[ing] services that maintain roads in the city; such as annual street cleaning and surface repairs and

major road resurfacing or reconstruction projects.”

Thirty percent (30%) of respondents reported that service levels of road maintenance should be increased.

Sixty-six percent (66%) of respondents chose to maintain service levels, and 3% chose to decrease service

levels. See Figure 12, below.

Figure 12


Males (4%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Road Maintenance


1%

3%

66%

30%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Road Maintenance?

n=555


28

4.2.14 Traffic Control

Respondents were shown the following description of traffic control:

“Includes services such as signage, road markings, traffic signals, parking and road safety reports and

analysis.”

As shown in Figure 13, below, 14% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of traffic control,

while 60% chose to maintain service levels and 24% stated that service levels should be decreased.

Figure 13


Those who were not employed (65%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service

levels for Traffic Control versus those who were employed full or part-time (56%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Traffic

Control included:



2%

24%

60%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Traffic Control?

n=555


29

4.2.15 Environmental Programs

Respondents were shown the description for environmental programs as:

“[the] Provision of environmental programs, initiatives and grants (i.e. Rain Barrels, Clean and Green

Riverfest, Environmental Initiatives Grants).”

Fifteen percent (15%) of respondents reported that service levels of environmental programs should be

decreased. Fifty-six percent (56%) chose to maintain service levels, while 27% chose to decrease service

levels. See Figure 14, below.


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for

Environmental Programs included:

Females (62%) versus males (53%);

Those aged 65 or older (63%) versus those aged 35 to 64 (53%);

Those who were not employed (64%) versus those who were employed full or part-time (51%); and


Albert for 3 to 10 years (44%).

2%

27%

56%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Environmental Programs?

n=555

Figure 14


30

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Environmental

Programs included:




Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for

Environmental Programs included:




31

4.2.16 Environmental Protection

Respondents were shown the following as a description for environmental protection:

“Includes services such as Air Quality monitoring, Sturgeon River Watershed Alliance and management of

City owned contaminated sites.”

As shown in Figure 15, below, 15% of respondents chose to increase service levels of environmental

protection. Seventy-one percent (71%) chose to maintain service levels, while 12% chose to decrease

service levels.

Figure 15


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for

Environmental Protection included:

Those aged 65 or older (75%) versus those aged 18 to 34 (58%); and


3%

12%

71%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Environmental Protection?

n=555


32

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Environmental

Protection included:


Those aged 18 to 34 (32%) or 35 to 64 (16%) versus those aged 65 or older (9%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for

Environmental Protection included:




33

4.2.17 Business Attraction and Retention

Respondents were shown the description for business attraction and retention as:

“Programs and services aimed at attracting new businesses to St. Albert and helping existing businesses

maintain and grow their business.”

Forty-six percent (46%) of the respondents chose to increase service levels of business attraction and

retention. Forty-percent (40%) chose to maintain service levels, while 13% stated that service levels should

be decreased. See Figure 16, below.


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Business

Attraction and Retention included:



Albert for 3 to 10 years (36%) or more than 10 years (39%).

Those who have lived in St. Albert for 3 to 10 years (55%) were significantly more likely to have chosen

to increase service levels for Business Attraction and Retention versus those who have lived in St.


1%

13%

40%

46%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Business Attraction and Retention?

n=555

Figure 16


34

4.2.18 Youth and Entrepreneurship Development

Respondents were shown the following as a description for youth and entrepreneurship development:

“Working with youth and entrepreneurs to develop skills and experience through targeted programs.”

As shown in Figure 17, below, 19% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of youth and

entrepreneurship development. Fifty-eight percent (58%) reported that service levels should be

maintained, and 22% chose to decrease service levels.

Figure 17


Females (23%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Youth and

Entrepreneurship versus males (15%).

Males (27%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Youth and

Entrepreneurship versus females (13%).

1%

22%

58%

19%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Youth and Entrepreneurship Development?

n=555


35

4.2.19 Sidewalk and Transit Stop Maintenance

Respondents were shown the description for sidewalk and transit stop maintenance as:

“Includ[ing] maintenance and expansion of sidewalks and transit stops.”

Fourteen percent (14%) of the respondents chose to increase service levels of sidewalk and transit stop

maintenance. Seventy-five percent (75%) chose to maintain service levels, and 10% chose to decrease

service levels. See Figure 18, below.

Figure 18


Those who have lived in St. Albert for more than 10 years (77%) were significantly more likely to have

chosen to maintain service levels for Sidewalk and Transit Stop Maintenance versus those who have lived

in St. Albert for 3 to 10 years (66%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Sidewalk and

Transit Stop Maintenance included:

Those who were employed full or part-time (16%) versus those who were not employed (9%) and;



2%

10%

75%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Sidewalk and Transit Stop Maintenance?

n=555


36

4.2.20 Waste Management

Respondents were shown the following description for waste management:

“Collection, processing and disposal of landfill, organic waste and recyclable material for residents

(curbside organic, recycling and waste collection).”

As shown in Figure 19, below, 9% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of waste

management. Eighty-one percent (81%) reported that service levels should be maintained, while 9%

chose to decrease service levels.

Figure 19


Those who have lived in St. Albert for less than 3 years (22%) or 3 to 10 years (18%) were significantly more

likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Waste Management versus those who have lived in St.

Albert for more than 10 years (6%).

2%

9%

81%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Waste Management?

n=555


37

4.2.21 Utilities

Respondents were shown the following description of utilities:

“Includes services such as storm water collection and maintenance, waste water management, water

supply and distribution management, etc.).”

Seven percent (7%) of respondents chose to increase service levels of utilities. Eighty-five percent (85%)

chose to maintain service levels, while 6% chose to decrease service levels. See Figure 20, below.

Figure 20



levels for Utilities versus those who were employed full or part-time (83%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Utilities

included:

Males (8%) versus females (4%) and;

Those aged 18 to 34 (16%) versus those aged 65 or older (5%).

3%

6%

85%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Utilities?

n=555


38

4.2.22 Other

Respondents were then provided the opportunity to mention other services, and whether service levels

should be maintained, increased, or decreased. Most commonly, respondents mentioned library services

(n=16), and chose to increase service levels (n=10). See Table 2, below.

Table 2

Service Mentioned Number of Respondents*

Maintain service levels

Increase service levels

Decrease service levels

Library services (n=16) 4 10 2

Public transit services (n=6) - 4 2

Snow removal services (n=5) 2 3 -

City beautification (in general) (n=3) - 1 2

Animal Control (n=2) - 2 -

Schools/educational services (n=1) - - 1


39

4.2.23 Summary of City Spending on Programs and Services

Figure 21, below, shows a summary of responses for each program and service priority.

Figure 21

25%

6%

33%

21%

9%

16%

10%

24%

27%

12%

25%

9%

26%

22%

4%

13%

3%

3%

3%

13%

72%

85%

59%

70%

81%

69%

75%

60%

56%

71%

56%

74%

56%

58%

72%

60%

66%

64%

61%

40%

2%

7%

7%

7%

9%

13%

14%

14%

15%

15%

17%

17%

17%

19%

22%

25%

30%

32%

34%

46%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Diirect Customer Service

Utilities

Cultural Programs

Community Events

Waste Management

Ice Surfaces

Sidewalk and Transit Stop Maintenance

Traffic Control

Environmental Programs

Environmental Protection

Community Safety - Municipal Enforcement

Community Safety - Fire

Community Social Support and Development

Youth and Entrepreneurship

Parks and Trails

Recreation Programs

Road Maintenance

Online Self-Service

Community Safety - Policing

Business Attraction and Retention

Should service levels be increased , maintained, or decreased?

Increase Maintain Decreasen=555


40

4.2.24 Service Priorities

Respondents were then asked what they think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate priorities for Council to maintain, increase,

and decrease service levels for. Of all responses (n=492), 16% mentioned no immediate priorities for Council to maintain service levels for.

Of coded responses (n=400), respondents most commonly mentioned emergency services (33%), followed by road maintenance (31%). See Table

3, below.

Table 3

What do you think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate priorities for Council to maintain service levels for?






Emergency services (policing/fire/ambulance) 33 24 12 7

Road maintenance 31 15 18 13

Parks and trails 19 5 15 14

Waste management 11 2 10 7

Utilities 8 3 4 7

Traffic control 8 3 6 3

Recreation programs/facilities 7 2 5 5

Cultural programs 5 2 2 6

Snow removal services 5 3 2 1

Community social support and development 4 2 3 2

Public transit services 4 1 4 4

Community events 4 1 3 4

Business attraction and retention 4 1 3 5


Don’t know/Not stated 12 12 - - *Multiple responses **A random sample of 400 responses were coded


41

Of all responses (n=462), 22% did not mention immediate priorities for Council to increase service levels for. Of coded responses (n=400),

respondents most commonly mentioned emergency services (20%). See Table 4, below.

Table 4

What do you think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate priorities for Council to increase service levels for?






Emergency services (policing/fire/ambulance) 20 16 8 3

Road maintenance 14 6 12 11

Recreation programs/facilities 13 5 12 10

Business attraction and retention 13 7 7 11


Parks and trails 8 3 6 8

Community social support and development 6 3 3 5

Environmental programs 6 2 5 7

Waste management 5 3 3 4

Municipal bylaw enforcement 5 2 5 2




42

Of all responses (n=440), 34% did not mention immediate priorities for Council. Of coded responses (n=400), respondents most commonly

mentioned cultural programs (12%). See Table 5, below.

Table 5

What do you think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate priorities for Council to decrease service levels for?






Cultural programs 12 8 14 9


Municipal bylaw enforcement 6 4 6 4

Direct customer service 6 4 4 7

Emergency services (policing/fire/ambulance) 6 4 8 -




43

4.3 Capital Budget

Respondents were then shown the following information with regards to capital budget projects:

“As part of the budget process, Council considers a 10-year capital plan that consists of two areas of funding:

Repair, maintain and replace (RMR) existing infrastructure

Growth capital which is funding required to address growth of the community. The total approved budget for 2016-2018 RMR is $62,275,200 Municipal and $47,981,000 Utilities for a total of $110,256,200. The total approved budget for 2016-2018 for growth is $91,092,800 Municipal and $3,700,200 Utilities for a total of $94,793,000. All utility RMR and Growth projects are funded through rates and some grants, there is no impact on taxes.

For the next few questions, please think about the repair, maintenance and replacement (RMR) of the existing infrastructure in the community.”


44

4.3.1 Summary of All Services - Repair, Maintain and Replace Projects

Respondents were then asked whether service levels should be increased, decreased, or maintained for

each of the eleven (11) repair, maintain and replace (RMR) project areas. For all eleven (11) project areas,

respondents most commonly reported that service levels should be maintained. Project areas for which

respondents most frequently chose to increase service levels included the following:

Roads (30% chose to increase service levels);

Traffic systems (25%); and

Sidewalks and Trails (21%).


Culture (27% chose to decrease service levels);

Community Capital (27%); and

Traffic Systems (20%).


45

4.3.2 Utilities (RMR)

Respondents were shown the following description of utilities RMR projects:

“Includes water, wastewater, storm water and solid waste.”

As shown in Figure 22, below, 11% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of utilities RMR

projects. Eighty-three percent (83%) reported that service levels should be maintained, while 4% chose to


Figure 22


Those who were employed full or part-time (5%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease

service levels for Utilities versus those who were not employed (2%).

2%

4%

83%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Utilities projects?

n=555


46

4.3.3 Roads (RMR)

Respondents were shown the description of roads RMR projects as:

“Includ[ing] road repairs (i.e. Crack sealing/potholes), asphalt replacement and complete road re-

construction.”

Thirty percent (30%) of the respondents chose to increase service levels of roads projects. Sixty-four

percent (64%) chose to maintain service levels, while 4% reported that service levels should be decreased.

See Figure 23, below.

Figure 23

2%

4%

64%

30%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Roads projects?

n=555


47

4.3.4 Traffic Systems (RMR)

Respondents were shown the following description of traffic systems RMR projects:

“Includes transportation management systems such as traffic signals and sensors.”

One quarter of respondents (25%) chose to increase service levels of traffic systems projects. Fifty-three

percent (53%) chose to maintain service levels, and 20% chose to decrease service levels. See Figure 24,

below.

Figure 24


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Traffic

Systems included:

Those aged 65 or older (60%) versus those aged 18 to 34 (42%); and


2%

20%

53%

25%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Traffic Systems projects?

n=555


48

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Traffic

Systems included:



for less than 3 years (11%).

Those aged 35 to 64 (23%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for

Traffic Systems versus those aged 65 or older (14%).


49

4.3.5 Sidewalks and Trails (RMR)

Respondents were shown the following description of sidewalks and trails RMR projects:

“Includes repair or replacement of sidewalks and trails.”

As shown in Figure 25, below, 21% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of sidewalks and

trails projects. Sixty-nine percent (69%) chose to maintain service levels, while 7% reported that service

levels should be decreased.

Figure 25


Those aged 35 to 64 (69%) or 65 or older (75%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain

service levels for Sidewalks and Trails versus those aged 18 to 34 (50%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Sidewalks and

Trails included:

Those aged 18 to 34 (40%) versus those aged 35 to 64 (22%) or 65 or older (17%) and;



3%

7%

69%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Sidewalks and Trails projects?

n=555


50

4.3.6 Emergency Services (RMR)

Respondents were shown the following description of emergency services RMR projects:

“Includes equipment replacement (i.e. vehicles, radios, safety equipment) and repair of existing buildings.”

As shown in Figure 26, below, 15% of the respondents reported that service levels of sidewalks and trails

projects should be increased. Seventy-seven percent (77%) chose to maintain service levels, while 5%

chose to decrease service levels.

Figure 26


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Emergency

Services included:

Those aged 65 or older (83%) versus those aged 18 to 34 (66%) and;


4%

5%

77%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Emergency Services projects?

n=555


51

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Emergency

Services included:

Those aged 18 to 34 (26%) versus those aged 65 or older (10%) and;


Males (7%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Emergency Services



52

4.3.7 Public Works (RMR)

Respondents were shown the description for public works RMR projects as:

“Includ[ing] equipment replacement (i.e. vehicles and snow clearing/road repair/parks maintenance) and

City buildings.”

Thirteen percent (13%) of the respondents chose to increase service levels of public works projects.

Seventy-five percent (75%) chose to maintain service levels, while 9% chose to decrease service levels.

See Figure 27, below.

Figure 27



levels for Public Works versus those who were employed full or part-time (72%).

Those who were employed full or part-time (16%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to increase

service levels for Public Works versus those who were not employed (9%).

3%

9%

75%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Public Works projects?

n=555


53

4.3.8 Transit (RMR)

Respondents were shown this description of transit RMR projects:

“Includes regular replacement of buses.”

As shown in Figure 28, below, 9% of respondents reported that service levels of transit projects should be

increased. Sixty-nine percent (69%) chose to maintain service levels, and 19% chose to decrease service

levels.

Figure 28



levels for Transit versus those who were employed full or part-time (64%).

Those who have lived in St. Albert for 3 to 10 years (14%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to

increase service levels for Transit versus those who have lived in St. Albert for more than 10 years (7%).

Males (23%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Transit versus

females (13%).

3%

19%

69%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Transit projects?

n=555


54

4.3.9 Recreation (RMR)

Respondents were shown the description of recreation RMR projects as:

“Includ[ing] maintenance of recreational facilities such as pools, sportfields, playgrounds and outdoor

rinks.”

One in five respondents (20%) chose to increase service levels of recreation projects. Sixty-nine percent

(69%) stated that service levels should be maintained, while 8% chose to decrease service levels. See

Figure 29, below.

Figure 29


Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Recreation

included:

Those who were not employed (75%) versus those who were employed or part-time (66%); and



3%

8%

69%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Recreation projects?

n=555


55

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Recreation

included:






56

4.3.10 Culture (RMR)

Respondents were shown the following description of culture RMR projects:

“Includes maintenance of cultural facilities (i.e. Arden Theatre, Visual Art Studio).”

As shown in Figure 30, below, 6% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of culture projects.

Sixty-three percent (63%) chose to maintain service levels, and 27% chose to decrease service levels.

Figure 30


Females (72%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Culture versus

males (60%).

Respondent subgroups significantly more likely to have chosen to increase service levels for Culture

included:



Albert for more than 10 years (4%).

Males (33%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Culture versus

females (18%).

3%

27%

63%

6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Culture projects?

n=555


57

4.3.11 Information Technology (RMR)

Respondents were shown the following description of information technology RMR projects:

“Includes replacement of information technology related equipment (i.e. networks, security and data

systems).”

As shown in Figure 31, below, 13% of the respondents chose to increase service levels of information

technology project, while 74% reported that service levels should be maintained and 10% chose to


Figure 31

4%

10%

74%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Information Technology projects?

n=555


58

4.3.12 Community Capital (RMR)

Respondents were shown the description of community capital RMR projects as:

“Includ[ing] funds that not-for-profit community groups can access to improve facilities they own and/or

operate (indoor and outdoor facilities used for sport, recreation, culture and social services).”

Twelve percent (12%) of the respondents chose to increase service levels of community capital projects.

Fifty-eight percent (58%) reported that service levels should be maintained, and 27% chose to decrease

service levels. See Figure 32, below.

Figure 32


Females (66%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to maintain service levels for Community

Capital versus males (54%).

Males (34%) were significantly more likely to have chosen to decrease service levels for Community Capital


3%

27%

58%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don't Know

Decrease

Maintain

Increase

Should service levels be increased, maintained, or decreased for Community Capital projects?

n=555


59

Figure 33

4.3.13 Summary of RMR Programs and Services

Figure 33, below, shows a summary of responses for each RMR project area.

27%

19%

4%

27%

9%

10%

5%

8%

7%

20%

4%

63%

69%

83%

58%

75%

74%

77%

69%

69%

53%

64%

6%

9%

11%

12%

13%

13%

15%

20%

21%

25%

30%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Culture

Transit

Utilities

Community Capital

Public Works

Information Technology

Emergency Services

Recreation

Sidewalks and Trails

Traffic Systems

Roads

For each RMR project area, should service levels be increased , maintained, or decreased?

Increase Remain the Same Decrease

n=555


60

4.4 Capital Projects

Respondents were then asked, thinking about new capital projects that address growth of the Community,

to rate the importance of a list of categories of capital projects. Most commonly, respondents ranked new

emergency services facilities and equipment (46%) and new utilities infrastructure (46%) as important

(ratings of 4 or 5 out of 5). Results are shown in Figure 34, below, and Table 6 on the following page.

Figure 34

12%

16%

17%

25%

33%

34%

35%

46%

46%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

New Public Works Facilities and Equipment

New Transit Buses and Facilities

Re-development of Downtown

Community Improvement Projects

New Transportation Initiatives

New Recreation and Culture Facilities

City Facility Energy Conservation Improvements

New Utilities Infrastructure

New Emergency Services Facilities and Equipment

Importance of Capital Projects

n=555*Percent of respondents who found each important (ratings of 4 or 5 out of 5)


61

Table 6

How would you rate the level of importance of each of the following categories of capital projects?

Percent of Respondents (n=555)

Very

Important (5)

(4) (3) (2) Not at all

Important (1)

Don’t Know Mean

(Out of 5)

New Utilities Infrastructure (water, wastewater, storm water, solid waste)

22 24 40 10 4 1 3.51

New Emergency Services Facilities and Equipment (Fire Aerial Truck, Police Facility expansion, Fire Pumps)

20 26 33 12 7 3 3.42

City Facility Energy Conservation Improvements (heat recovery, co-generation and solar energy)

13 22 31 20 12 2 3.04

New Recreation and Culture Facilities (Branch Library, Ice Arena Surface, Parks)

16 18 28 22 15 1 2.97

New Transportation Initiatives (Safe Journey to School, intersection enhancements, St. Albert Trail revitalization)

12 20 30 21 14 1 2.96

Community Improvement Projects (Land planning for new City facilities, expansion of urban forest canopy, accessibility requirements for City facilities)

7 18 37 23 14 1 2.80

New Transit Buses and Facilities 6 11 36 24 20 5 2.56

New Public Works Facilities and Equipment (salt/sand covered storage, satellite shop )

3 9 41 28 16 3 2.53

Re-development of Downtown (Development of Millennium Park and Perron Street pedestrian improvements)

7 11 27 25 30 2 2.39


62

Respondents were then asked what the City can do to generate more revenue or to reduce expenses. Of

all respondents (n=555), 36% provided no suggestions. Of coded responses (n=400), respondents most

commonly mentioned increasing commercial development and/or attracting more businesses (23%). See

Table 7, below.

Table 7

In your opinion, what can the City do to generate more revenue or to reduce expenses?


(n=400**)

Yes, specify 56

Increase commercial development/attract more businesses 23

Reduce frivolous spending/be more fiscally responsible (in general) 8

Cut/review under-utilized/non-essential services (in general) 5

Review/reduce number of City employees/hiring freeze 4

Review/lower City employee wages 3

Other (2% or less) 28

Don’t Know/Not Stated 6

*Multiple responses **A random sample of 400 responses were coded


63

4.5 Council Priorities

Respondents were given the following information:

“The City of St. Albert Strategic Plan identifies:

1) A Community Strategy that includes five (5) ‘Pillars of Sustainability’; 2) A Governance Strategy; and 3) A Service Delivery Strategy.

Collectively, these provide direction to the City, in the pursuit of the Community Vision:

‘a vibrant, innovative and thriving City that we all call home, that sustains and cherishes its unique identity and small town values.’

Council has identified a number of priorities for each area of the Strategic Plan that they would like Administration to complete during their term on Council. The following table shows the Council priorities identified for the 2017 budget.”

Respondents were then asked to rate each priority using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 meant “not at all

important” and 5 meant “very important.” Most commonly, respondents found exploring non-residential

property tax options (67%) and exploring a joint transit system with the City of Edmonton (66%) as

important. Results are shown in Figures 35 and 36, below and on the following page, and Tables 8 and 9

on pages 66 and 67, respectively.


64

Figure 35

38%

40%

42%

48%

48%

52%

61%

62%

66%

67%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Review of Municipal Development Plan

Direct community growth

Creation of Neighbourhood CommunityDevelopment policy

Affordable Housing Strategy

Development of land strategy

Funding strategy for future off-site developerinfrastructure projects

Boundary adjustment and joint fire services withSturgeon County

Strategy for build out of Ray Gibbon Drive

Joint transit system with City of Edmonton

Explore non-residential property tax options

Importance of Council Priorities



65

Figure 36

18%

20%

21%

21%

21%

24%

27%

29%

34%

34%

36%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Negotiate expiring agreements with Arts andHeritage Foundation and St. Albert Guild

Assess St. Albert indoor soccer fieldopportunity

Completion of train whistle cessation project

Support of Smart City Master Plan

Focus on green space within Kingswood AreaStructure Plan

Urban sustainability strategy

Negotiation of expiring lease agreement forChamber of Commerce

Establishment of Youth Council

Review strategies to enhance communicationwith residents

Encourage growth of downtown

Review and assess numerous bylaws

Importance of Council Priorities



66

Table 8

How would you rate the level of importance of each of the following council projects?


Very

Important (5)

(4) (3) (2) Not at all

Important (1)

Don’t Know Mean

(Out of 5)

Social – We are a friendly and inclusive community of passionate equals, where everyone feels a sense of belonging. We believe that community starts with the person next door.

Develop an Affordable Housing Strategy to support the development of entry-level and affordable housing.

30 19 19 16 16 1 3.30

Create a Neighborhood Community Development policy that promotes our small town values.

19 23 26 15 13 5 3.22

Establish a Youth Council. 11 18 27 22 18 4 2.81 Economic – We prosper and excel through a strong and diverse economy that is supported by forward-thinking commerce, outstanding local businesses and a dynamic downtown core.

Work with the St. Albert Chamber of Commerce to negotiate expiring lease agreement for their building.

7 20 36 16 12 9 2.94

Encourage the growth of downtown through maintaining character, monitoring densification, assessing parking, developing Millennium Park place-making strategies, improving access for pedestrians on Perron Street and identifying a significant asset for the new downtown roundabout.

14 21 25 19 18 4 2.93

Natural Environment – We protect, embrace and treasure our deeply-rooted connections with the natural environment through championing environmental action.

Focus on green space within the Kingswood Area Structure Plan (ASP).

8 14 28 21 21 9 2.63

Develop an urban sustainability strategy that incorporates backyard chickens, green roofs and green building policy.

13 11 16 14 43 3 2.34

Culture – We are proud of our storied history that has fed and nurtured our festive and culturally-rich community. Assess the St. Albert indoor soccer field opportunity. 6 14 30 23 24 3 2.54 Work with the Arts and Heritage Foundation and St. Albert Guild to negotiate expiring agreements.

5 13 30 26 21 5 2.53

Service Delivery Strategy - Council is committed to ensuring that the City of St. Albert is engaging residents to identify opportunities to improve delivery of services to the community.

Review strategies to enhance communication with residents (e.g. Social media).

13 22 32 18 13 3 3.04


67

Table 9

How would you rate the level of importance of each of the following council projects?


Very

Important (5)

(4) (3) (2) Not at all

Important (1)

Don’t Know Mean

(Out of 5)

Built Environment – We build our community towards the future to sustain balanced development, with a reverent eye to the past, honouring our unique settlement history and distinct identity. Explore the build out of Ray Gibbon Drive and develop a strategy and timeline to move forward.

41 21 18 7 4 9 3.96

Develop a strategy to address funding for future off-site developer infrastructure projects, such as project #9 (wastewater utilities needed to service new development), and provide rigorous costing estimates for both operating and capital (budgets).

21 31 29 9 3 8 3.63

Develop a land strategy to assist in identifying available land for future community assets such as the library, arena and Chateau Mission Court (seniors housing).

21 27 31 12 6 3 3.46

Direct community growth through the completion of the Badger lands area structure plan (ASP), expansion of the Red Willow Trail and identifying improvements to local transit routes.

12 28 33 14 7 6 3.27

Complete a review of the Municipal Development Plan and Land Use Bylaw to permit new innovative residential built forms.

16 21 31 13 10 9 3.23

Support the Smart City Master Plan recommendations and focus on completing the municipal broadband network.

7 15 34 15 13 17 2.85

Complete the whistle cessation project to ensure the required safety mechanisms are in place in order to eliminate train whistles from operating within the community.

12 9 16 16 42 4 2.29

Governance Strategy - Council is committed to ensuring that the City of St. Albert is a responsive, accountable government that delivers value to the community. Explore non-residential property tax options that may assist in accelerating the change in property tax split away from the residential class.

40 27 20 5 3 6 4.04

Explore a joint transit system with the City of Edmonton. 42 25 18 6 9 2 3.87 Continue to work with Sturgeon County to discuss boundary adjustment and joint fire services.

27 34 27 8 2 2 3.77

Review and assess numerous bylaws including ridesharing (i.e. Uber), smoking and fire.

13 23 29 19 12 5 3.06


68

4.6 Additional Feedback

When asked if there was any additional feedback they wished to provide regarding their choices for

variable spending, 66% of all respondents (n=555) provided no additional feedback. Of coded responses

(n=400), 25% provided additional comments, most frequently mentioning that taxes are too high (6%) and

to reduce frivolous spending, and/or stay within the budget, and/or be more fiscally responsible (in

general) (4%). See Table 10, below.

Table 10

Do you have any additional comments or feedback with regards to the 2017 budget?

Percent of

Respondents* (n=400**)

Yes, specify 25

Taxes are too high/need to lower taxes 6

Reduce frivolous spending/stay within budget/be more fiscally responsible (in general)

4

Improve City Council governance/leadership (in general) 2

Listen to feedback/consultation from residents 2

Other (1% or less) 22

Don’t Know/Not Stated 10

*Multiple responses **A random sample of 400 responses were coded


69

4.7 Respondent Demographics

Tables 11 and 12, below and on the following page, demonstrate the demographic breakdown of

stakeholders surveyed for the City of St. Albert 2017 Budget Planning General Population Survey.

Table 11

Percent of Respondents

(n=555)

Gender

Male 56

Female 38

Decline to answer 6

Age

18 to 24 years of age <1

25 to 34 years of age 7




65 years of age and older 27

Mean 56.3 years

Employment Status

Working Full-Time (including self-employment; >30 hours/week) 50

Working Part-Time (including self-employment; ≤30 hours/week) 11

Homemaker 2

Not Employed 1

Retired 34

No Response 1


70

Table 12

Percent of Respondents

(n=555)

Neighbourhood

Akinsdale 7

Braeside 5

Deer Ridge 10

Downtown 1

Erin Ridge 6

Erin Ridge North 2

Forest Lawn 6

Grandin 11

Heritage Lakes 5

Inglewood <1

Kingswood 4

Lacombe Park 14

Mission 2

North Ridge 6

Oakmont 5

Pineview 4

Riverside <1

Sturgeon Heights 3

Woodlands 4

No Response 3

How long have you lived in the City of St. Albert?

Under 3 years 7

3 to 10 years 15

Over 10 years 78

Don’t know 1

Home Ownership

Own 95

Rent 5

Other <1

Don’t know 1

Do you work for the City of St. Albert?

Yes 4

No 95

Not Stated 1

APPENDIX A – SURVEY INSTRUMENT

City of St. Albert 2017 Budget Survey

Final Questionnaire Banister Research & Consulting Inc.

City of St. Albert Budget Survey

2017 Budget Survey

City Council would like to hear from St. Albert residents about their priorities and opinions of services, programs and projects, to assist Council during the 2017-2019 budget process. The results of the survey will be used as one of the sources of information provided to Council to assist them in their budget deliberations.

This survey contains questions designed to gather your perceptions and opinions of how funding should be allocated in the City of St. Albert. The length of the survey should take 10 to 12 minutes to complete.

Banister Research & Consulting Inc. has been retained to assist with the administration of this survey and the analysis of the findings. All information you provide will be kept anonymous and be used only for the purposes of this study. Results will be provided in aggregate, and will not be used to identify individual respondents.

Information is provided to you as background to some of the questions. Should you have any questions about this information, please feel free to contact Darija Slokar, Lead, Corporate Business Planning and Special Projects, City of St. Albert at 780-418-6608 or [email protected], Monday to Friday between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm.

If you have any technical issues while accessing the survey, you may contact Christine Mendonca, Associate with, Banister Research & Consulting, at 780-451-4444 or [email protected].

The deadline to complete the survey is Friday, August 12th, 2016.

Please try to answer all of the questions, reading each question or statement carefully and selecting the response that best represents your point of view. However, if you do not have enough information or you feel that you cannot respond to a question, please skip it and go on to the next one. Unless otherwise indicated, please fill in only one response per question.

A. Please confirm you are over the age of 18:

Yes No [TERMINATE]

B. Please confirm you are a resident of the City of St. Albert:

Yes No [TERMINATE]

mailto:[email protected]





Top-of-Mind Priorities

1) What would you say are one (1) to three (3) of the most important priorities facing the City of St. Albert Council today that need to be addressed within the 2017 budget?

__________________________ __________________________ __________________________

City Spending

The next section provides an overview of the City’s budget as approved by Council for 2016. This budget was developed to maintain current services and service levels, as per Council’s policy.

The City of St. Albert budget includes the following spending categories:

Administration (28%) includes items that are necessary to govern, operate and maintain the City of St. Albert and do not vary directly with the level of service provided:

o Mayor and City Council o City Manager’s Office, Legal Services & Intergovernmental Affairs o Corporate Services

i. Human Resources ii. Innovation & Technology

iii. Strategic Services & Environment iv. Legislative Services

o Finance and Assessment Services o Debt Repayment o Capital Transfer

Programs and Services

72%

Administration28%

2016 Net Operating Budget $93 million




Programs and Services (72%) includes categories where spending can be increased or decreased depending on the level of service provided. Each service is provided to residents at a particular level and/or quality of services within given time period. Service levels typically focus on service experience such as access, timeliness, accuracy, consistency, frequency, etc. The City Administration is required by Council to propose the budget that supports delivery programs and services to existing service levels. If the overall Programs and Services budget for the City of St. Albert was $100, this is how the $100 was allocated in 2016. The operating budget for programs and services doesn’t include capital projects spending. Please see the graph below:

Planning & Engineering,

$10 Transit, $12

Public Works, $23

Fire Services, $20

Policing Services, $13

Recreation & Parks, $6

Culture, $4

Family & Community Support Services, $2

Outside Agencies, $9 Environment &

Sustainability, $1

2016 Operating Budget by Program Area




Program and Service Priorities

2) Below is a list of a select programs and services. For each listed below, please indicate whether you want the City to maintain service levels (i.e., you are satisfied with the current service offering), increase service levels (you would like more of this service), or decrease service levels (you would like less of this service).

Service Description of Services Should service levels be increased or decreased?

1. Direct customer service (paying bills, registering for program, obtaining permit, etc.)

Includes services where residents/clients have direct interaction with City representative, in person or over the phone, to register for billing, pay their bills, obtain permit, pay fees, register for a program, etc.

□ Maintain service levels

□ Increase service levels

□ Decrease service levels

2. Online self-service Provision of services online, including City Website and mobile application (registration for programs, payment of bills and fines, etc.)




3. Community Safety - Policing Policing Services and 911 Operations.




4. Community Safety - Fire Fire Services and Ambulance




5. Community Safety - Municipal Enforcement

City by-law enforcement.




6. Community Social Support and Development

Includes services such as neighbourhood development, providing counselling services, education and awareness building, skill development, volunteer opportunities and mentorship.




7. Cultural Programs Includes services such as cultural festivals, performing and visual arts programming, Arden Theatre, Museum and Heritage Sites.




8. Recreation Programs Includes services such as recreational programing, aquatics and fitness programs.







9. Community Events Provision of City organized events in the community (e.g. Arbor Day, Canada Day, Christmas Light Up, Children’s Festival)




10. Ice Surfaces

Provision and maintenance of ice dedicated to use for recreation and sport activities (i.e. Servus Place, Akinsdale and Kinex Arena and outdoor ice rinks).




11. Parks and Trails Includes provision and maintenance of community and neighbourhood parks and trail systems.




12. Road Maintenance

Includes services that maintain roads in the city; such as annual street cleaning and surface repairs and major road resurfacing or reconstruction projects.




13. Traffic Control Includes services such as signage, road markings, traffic signals, parking and road safety reports and analysis.




14. Environmental Programs Provision of environmental programs, initiatives and grants (i.e. Rain Barrels, Clean and Green Riverfest, Environmental Initiatives Grants).




15. Environmental Protection Includes services such as Air Quality monitoring, Sturgeon River Watershed Alliance and management of City owned contaminated sites.




16. Business Attraction and Retention

Programs and services aimed at attracting new businesses to St. Albert and helping existing businesses maintain and grow their business.




17. Youth and Entrepreneurship Development

Working with youth and entrepreneurs to develop skills and experience through targeted programs.




18. Sidewalk and Transit Stop Maintenance

Includes maintenance and expansion of sidewalks and transit stops.







19. Waste Management Collection, processing and disposal of landfill, organic waste and recyclable material for residents (curbside organic, recycling and waste collection)




20. Utilities Includes services such as storm water collection and maintenance, waste water management, water supply and distribution management, etc.)




21. Other service; specify; __________________________________________




22. Other service; specify; __________________________________________




3) What do you think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate priorities for Council to

maintain service levels for? [LIST UP TO 3]

__________________________ __________________________ __________________________ None/no immediate priorities for Council

4) What do you think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate priorities for Council to increase service levels for? [LIST UP TO 3]

__________________________ __________________________ __________________________ None/no immediate priorities for Council

5) What do you think are the top three (3) services that should be immediate priorities for Council to reduce service levels for? [LIST UP TO 3]

1. __________________________ 2. __________________________ 3. __________________________ 4. None/no immediate priorities for Council

Capital Budget




As part of the budget process, Council considers a 10-year capital plan that consists of two areas of funding:

Repair, maintain and replace (RMR) existing infrastructure

Growth capital which is funding required to address growth of the community. The total approved budget for 2016-2018 RMR is $62,275,200 Municipal and $47,981,000 Utilities for a total of $110,256,200. The total approved budget for 2016-2018 for growth is $91,092,800 Municipal and $3,700,200 Utilities for a total of $94,793,000. All utility RMR and Growth projects are funded through rates and some grants, there is no impact on taxes.




For the next few questions, please think about the repair, maintenance and replacement (RMR) of the existing infrastructure in the community. 6) Below is a list of a select capital RMR projects areas planned for 2016-2018. For each listed below,

please indicate whether you want the City to maintain service levels (i.e., you are satisfied with how City currently repairs, maintains and replaces existing infrastructure), increase service levels (you would like City to do more work in this area, or work more frequently), or decrease service levels (you would like the City to do less work in this area or work less frequently).

Project Categories Project Description Should service levels be increased or decreased?

1. Utilities Includes water, wastewater, storm water and solid waste.




2. Roads Includes road repairs (i.e. Crack sealing/potholes), asphalt replacement and complete road re-construction.




3. Traffic Systems Includes transportation management systems such as traffic signals and sensors.




4. Sidewalks and trails Includes repair or replacement of sidewalks and trails.




5. Emergency Services Includes equipment replacement (i.e. vehicles, radios, safety equipment) and repair of existing buildings.




6. Public Works Includes equipment replacement (i.e. vehicles and snow clearing/road repair/parks maintenance) and City buildings.




7. Transit Includes regular replacement of buses.




8. Recreation Includes maintenance of recreational facilities such as pools, sportfields, playgrounds and outdoor rinks.







9. Culture Includes maintenance of cultural facilities (i.e. Arden Theatre, Visual Art Studio)




10. Information Technology Includes replacement of information technology related equipment (i.e. networks, security and data systems)




11. Community Capital

Includes funds that not-for-profit community groups can access to improve facilities they own and/or operate (indoor and outdoor facilities used for sport, recreation, culture and social services).




For the next few questions, please think about the new capital projects that address growth of the Community. 7) Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means “not at all important” and 5 means “very important,”

please rate the importance of each of the following categories of capital projects.

Not at all Important … … … Very Important

a) New Utilities infrastructure (water, wastewater, storm water, solid waste) b) New Recreation and Culture Facilities (Branch Library, Ice Arena Surface, Parks) c) New Transit buses and facilities d) Re-development of Downtown (development of Millennium Park and Perron Street pedestrian

improvements) e) New Transportation Initiatives (Safe Journey to School, Intersection enhancements, St. Albert

Trail revitalization). f) City facility energy conservation improvements (heat recovery, co-generation and solar energy) g) New Public Works Facilities and Equipment (salt/sand covered storage, satellite shop) h) New Emergency Services Facilities and Equipment (Fire Aerial Truck, Police Facility expansion,

Fire Pumps) i) Community Improvement Projects (Land planning for new City facilities, expansion of urban

forest canopy, accessibility requirements for City facilities.

8) In your opinion, what can the City do to generate more revenue or to reduce expenses?

__________________________ Nothing/no suggestions




Council Priorities

9) The City of St. Albert Strategic Plan identifies: 1) A Community Strategy that includes five (5) ‘Pillars of Sustainability’; 2) A Governance Strategy; and 3) A Service Delivery Strategy. Collectively, these provide direction to the City, in the pursuit of the Community Vision: ‘a vibrant, innovative and thriving City that we all call home, that sustains and cherishes its unique identity and small town values.’ Council has identified a number of priorities for each area of the Strategic Plan that they would like Administration to complete during their term on Council. The following table shows the Council priorities identified for the 2017 budget. For each of the following priorities, please rate each in terms of importance, using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means “not at all important” and 5 means “very important”:

How important are each of the following?

Council Priorities (1) Not at all

Important (2) (3) (4)

(5) Very Important

Don’t Know

1) Social – We are a friendly and inclusive community of passionate equals, where everyone feels a sense of belonging. We

believe that community starts with the person next door.

1. Develop an Affordable Housing Strategy to support the development of entry-level and affordable housing. □ □ □ □ □ □

2. Create a Neighborhood Community Development policy that promotes our small town values. □ □ □ □ □ □

3. Establish a Youth Council. □ □ □ □ □ □

Economic – We prosper and excel through a strong and diverse economy that is supported by forward-thinking commerce, outstanding local businesses and a dynamic downtown core.

4. Work with the St. Albert Chamber of Commerce to negotiate expiring lease agreement for their building. □ □ □ □ □ □

5. Encourage the growth of downtown through maintaining character, monitoring densification, assessing parking, developing Millennium Park place-making strategies, improving access for pedestrians on Perron Street and identifying a significant asset for the new downtown roundabout.

□ □ □ □ □ □

Built Environment – We build our community towards the future to sustain balanced development, with a reverent eye to the past, honouring our unique settlement history and distinct identity.

6. Develop a land strategy to assist in identifying available land for future community assets such as the library, arena and Chateau Mission Court (seniors housing).

□ □ □ □ □ □

7. Develop a strategy to address funding for future off-site developer infrastructure projects, such as project #9 (wastewater utilities needed to service new development), and provide rigorous costing estimates for both operating and capital (budgets).

□ □ □ □ □ □




8. Direct community growth through the completion of the Badger lands area structure plan (ASP), expansion of the Red Willow Trail and identifying improvements to local transit routes.

□ □ □ □ □ □

9. Support the Smart City Master Plan recommendations and focus on completing the municipal broadband network. □ □ □ □ □ □

10. Explore the build out of Ray Gibbon Drive and develop a strategy and timeline to move forward. □ □ □ □ □ □

11. Complete a review of the Municipal Development Plan and Land Use Bylaw to permit new innovative residential built forms. □ □ □ □ □ □

12. Complete the whistle cessation project to ensure the required safety mechanisms are in place in order to eliminate train whistles from operating within the community.

□ □ □ □ □ □

Natural Environment – We protect, embrace and treasure our deeply-rooted connections with the natural environment through championing environmental action.

13. Focus on green space within the Kingswood Area Structure Plan (ASP). □ □ □ □ □ □

14. Develop an urban sustainability strategy that incorporates backyard chickens, green roofs and green building policy. □ □ □ □ □ □

Culture – We are proud of our storied history that has fed and nurtured our festive and culturally-rich community.

15. Work with the Arts and Heritage Foundation and St. Albert Guild to negotiate expiring agreements. □ □ □ □ □ □

16. Assess the St. Albert indoor soccer field opportunity. □ □ □ □ □ □

Governance Strategy - Council is committed to ensuring that the City of St. Albert is a responsive, accountable government that delivers value to the community.

17. Continue to work with Sturgeon County to discuss boundary adjustment and joint fire services. □ □ □ □ □ □

18. Explore a joint transit system with the City of Edmonton. □ □ □ □ □ □

19. Review and assess numerous bylaws including ridesharing (i.e. Uber), smoking and fire. □ □ □ □ □ □

20. Explore non-residential property tax options that may assist in accelerating the change in property tax split away from the residential class.

□ □ □ □ □ □

Service Delivery Strategy - Council is committed to ensuring that the City of St. Albert is engaging residents to identify opportunities to improve delivery of services to the community.

21. Review strategies to enhance communication with residents (e.g. Social media). □ □ □ □ □ □




Final Comments

10) Do you have any additional comments or feedback with regards to the 2017 budget?

_________________________ None/no additional comments

Respondent Characteristics

In order for the City of St. Albert to better understand the different views and needs of residents, the next few questions allow us to analyze the data into sub-groups. Please be assured that nothing will be recorded to link your answers with you or your household.

11) Gender

Male Female LGBTQ – please specify; ________________ Decline to answer

12) In what year were you born?

______________

13) What is your current employment status?

Working full time, including self-employment (more than 30 hours per week) Working part time, including self-employment (30 hours per week or less) Homemaker Student Not employed Retired




14) Which neighbourhood do you live in?

Akinsdale Braeside Deer Ridge Downtown Erin Ridge Erin Ridge North Forest Lawn Grandin Heritage Lakes Inglewood Jensen Lakes Kingswood Lacombe Park Mission North Ridge Oakmont Pineview Riverside Sturgeon Heights Woodlands Other; specify: ____________________________________________

15) How long have you lived in the City of St. Albert?

Under 3 years 3 to 10 years Over 10 years

16) Do you own or rent your home in the City of St. Albert?

Own Rent Other (e.g., lives with parents or other person who owns the home)

17) And finally, do you work for the City of St. Albert?

Yes No




Public Consultation Opportunity

As part of its public consultation activities, the City of St. Albert will also be conducting public engagement “World Café” group discussions with City residents on Tuesday, September 13th and on Wednesday, November 2nd, 2016. The discussions will be approximate 1.5 to 2 hours in length and held at a facility in the city from 6:30-8:30pm. Those who participate will be eligible to enter a draw to win one (1) of five (5) $100 gift cards to a local business (one draw per session).

18) Would you be interested in attending a World Café style discussion in September or November, 2016 to provide additional input to Council into proposed budget?

Yes GO TO RECRUITMENT FORM No GO TO END OF SURVEY

Recruitment Form

19) Please provide the following information, so that we can contact you when we have more details:

Full name: _______________________________ [MANDATORY]

E-mail address: _______________________________ [MANDATORY]

Best phone number to reach you at: _______________________________ [MANDATORY]

Best time of day/preferred day to reach you (you may leave this blank if you don’t have any preferences): _______________________________

20) Do you agree to provide your contact information to Banister Research for the purposes of participating in a World Café discussion? Please note that your information will not be released to any third party without your consent, and you will not be required to participate if you change your mind. You may remove yourself from this list at any time by contacting Banister Research at [email protected], or by calling (780) 451-4444. [MANDATORY]

I agree to provide my personal information to Banister Research for follow-up I do not agree to provide my personal information (your information will not be recorded)

Thank you very much for your participation in this research. Your time and feedback are greatly appreciated by the City of St. Albert.

Please note that the results of this survey will be shared with City Council during the budget process for 2017. Should you have any additional questions, please contact: Darija Slokar, Lead, Corporate Business Planning and Special Projects, City of St. Albert at 780-418-6608 or [email protected].


2017 budget planning survey general population survey results final … · general population...

Documents