monroe city council agenda bill no. 15-204

MONROE CITY COUNCIL

Agenda Bill No. 15-204

TITLE: Discussion: Solid Waste Contract/Survey Results

DATE: DEPT: CONTACT: PRESENTER: ITEM: 11/24/2015 Finance Dianne Nelson Dianne Nelson Unfinished Business #2

Discussion: 11/24/2015

Attachments: 1. Report on Customer Satisfaction Survey

DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND This discussion is to consider whether to keep solid waste as a utility or switch to the franchise model. If the decision is made to keep it as a utility, then there is a need to consider whether to extend the current solid waste contract with Republic Services, negotiate a new contract with Republic Services, or solicit Requests for Proposals (RFP) from all solid waste vendors. When this topic was first discussed at the July 14, 2015, Council Meeting, Council requested a customer satisfaction survey to guide in the decision making process. The survey shows a positive response to current solid waste services (attachment 1).

Options Include: 1. Allow the current contract to expire, and move solid waste from a utility to a franchised

service (like cable), where rates are controlled by the WUTC. The City could request free services from provider for municipal facilities, which cannot be done when solid waste is a utility.

2. Keep Solid Waste as a utility.a. Extend the current contract for two years (no changes).b. Negotiate a new contract with Republic Services. This could contain language for

contingency service plans (labor disruptions and inclement weather). This can alsoinclude weighing the options of moving customer service and billing from the city to thesolid waste vendor.

c. Start an RFP process for solid waste services. This is a time and labor intensiveproject that should consider current staffing levels, and the impact to customers whenchanging vendors.

IMPACT – BUDGET N/A.

TIME CONSTRAINTS The current term of the solid waste contract is September 1, 2010, through August 31, 2017. Section 1 of the contract allows for two 2-year extensions, with written notice.

REQUESTED ACTION Discussion and direction regarding solid waste service options.

MCC Agenda 11/24/2015 of 68

Unfinished Business #2 AB15-204

CUSTOMERS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD REPUBLIC SERVICES IN THE CITY OF MONROE, WASHINGTON

Conducted for the City Council of Monroe, Washington

by Responsive Management

2015

ATTACHMENT 1



CUSTOMERS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD REPUBLIC SERVICES IN THE CITY OF MONROE, WASHINGTON

2015

Responsive Management National Office Mark Damian Duda, Executive Director

Martin Jones, Senior Research Associate Tom Beppler, Research Associate

Steven J. Bissell, Ph.D., Qualitative Research Associate Amanda Center, Research Associate

Andrea Criscione, Research Associate Patrick Doherty, Research Associate

Gregory L. Hughes, P.E., Research Associate Tristan Kirkman, Research Associate

Claudia Reilly, Survey Center Manager Alison Lanier, Business Manager

130 Franklin Street Harrisonburg, VA 22801

Phone: 540/432-1888 Fax: 540/432-1892 E-mail: [email protected]

www.responsivemanagement.com



Acknowledgments

Responsive Management would like to thank Dianne Nelson, Finance Director for the City of

Monroe, Washington for her input, support, and guidance on this project.



Customers’ Attitudes Toward Republic Services in the City of Monroe, Washington i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted for the City Council of Monroe, Washington to determine Monroe

citizens’ (both residential customers and business customers) attitudes toward their current solid

waste service (Republic Services) and the City of Monroe’s handling of customer service. This

information will be used by the Council to determine if they should extend their existing contract

with Republic Services or accept bids from other vendors. The study entailed a telephone survey

of Monroe residential and business customers of Republic Services, ages 18 and older.

The telephone survey questionnaire was developed cooperatively by Responsive Management

and the Monroe City Council. The survey was conducted in October 2015. Responsive

Management obtained a total of 501 completed interviews, the majority of which were residents.

For this survey, the telephone sample was provided by the Monroe City Council. The software

used for data collection was Questionnaire Programming Language. The analysis of data was

performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences as well as proprietary software

developed by Responsive Management.

USE OF REPUBLIC SERVICES BY RESPONDENTS

� Nearly all Monroe private residents receive weekly garbage collection (97%), as opposed to

monthly (2%).

� Most business customers have their garbage collected once a week (85%), though a small

portion have it collected twice a week (9%).

� Business customers most often use Republic Services (40% indicated this) for their recycling

collection. 18% of business customers indicated that they do not use any recycling service.

• Of those business customers who indicated they use Republic Services for recycling

collection, a majority (64%) indicated they set out recycling to be collected once a week

or more.



ii Responsive Management

SATISFACTION WITH AND RATINGS OF REPUBLIC SERVICES

� Most respondents (74%) indicated they are very satisfied with Republic Services, and 91% of

respondents are satisfied with Republic Services overall.

• When comparing private residents to business customers, private residents indicated they

are very satisfied slightly less often than business customers (74% and 78%, respectively)

and somewhat satisfied slightly more often than business customers (17% and 7%,

respectively).

• Of those who are not very satisfied with Republic Services, the most frequently cited

reason for not being more satisfied was cost or billing issues (32%), followed by missed

pickups (13%). Similar patterns were observed when comparing private residents and

business customers.

� All respondents were asked to rate Republic Services. Most respondents (63%) rated

Republic Services as excellent, and 94% rated Republic Services favorably overall.

• When comparing private residents to business customers, private residents rated Republic

Services as excellent more often than business customers (64% and 49% respectively)

and as good less often than business customers (30% and 44% respectively).

• Of those who did not rate Republic Services as excellent, the most common

recommendation as to how Republic Services could better meet their needs was “other or

lower pricing options” (16%), followed by “more or larger trash or recycling pickup

options” (9%). However, the most common response to the question was “none or don’t

know” (39%). There was little marked difference between private residents and business

customers.

� A series of questions asked respondents to rate Republic Services specifically with regard to

timeliness, cleanliness, safety, and helpfulness.

• Respondents most often gave Republic Services favorable ratings in timeliness (91%

rated them excellent or good in this area), followed by cleanliness (87%), safety (81%),

and helpfulness (74%).



Customers’ Attitudes Toward Republic Services in the City of Monroe, Washington iii

COMMUNITY SPRING CLEANUP

� Less than a third (29%) of respondents had ever taken items to the Community Spring Clean-

Up. Of those, a majority (57%) take items every year.

• Of private residents, 31% had ever taken any items to the Community Spring Clean-Up,

and a majority of those respondents (57%) take items every year.

• Of business customers, 11% had ever taken any items to the Community Spring Clean-

Up, and 50% of those respondents take items every year.

� A strong majority (92%) of those who had ever taken items to the Community Spring Clean-

Up were satisfied with the event; 80% were very satisfied.

• Of private residents that had ever taken any items to the Community Spring Clean-Up,

80% were very satisfied, and 92% were satisfied overall. Of business customers, 100%

were very satisfied.

• Of those who were not very satisfied with Community Spring Clean-Up (only residents),

the most frequently cited reason for not being more satisfied was that there were long

lines or that it was too busy (32%), followed by preferring home or curbside pickup

(29%) and that it was too infrequent (18%).

CITY OF MONROE CUSTOMER SERVICE

� Less than half of respondents (37%) had ever contacted the City of Monroe regarding a

question or issue with garbage, recycling, or yard waste collection services.

• Of those who had ever contacted the city, 70% were very satisfied and 84% were satisfied

overall with their customer service.

• Of private residents who were not very satisfied with their customer service, the most

commonly cited reason was that their service was delayed (22%) or it was unsatisfactory

or incomplete (20%). Of business customers, the most commonly cited reason was

rudeness or unprofessional behavior (50%).

� All respondents who had ever contacted the city with a question or issue were asked to rate

the City of Monroe’s customer service specifically in regard to knowledge about service or



iv Responsive Management

the issue, ability to answer the question or solve the issue, and timeliness of response to the

question or issue.

• Out of all respondents, 81% gave the city favorable ratings for knowledge about service

or issue, 80% gave the city favorable ratings for ability to answer question or solve the

issue, and 81% gave the city favorable ratings for timeliness of response to question or

issue. There was little difference in ratings between private residents and business

customers.

• Conversely, 16% gave the city unfavorable ratings for knowledge about service or the

issue, 19% for ability to answer question or solve the issue, and 18% for timeliness of

response to question or the issue.

� When asked whether they preferred that the city continue to be responsible for billing or that

Republic Services become responsible for billing, respondents chose the city (38%) slightly

more often than Republic Services (29%).

• Among private residents, a majority (63%) preferred the city continue to be responsible

for billing.

• Among business customers, the most common preference was “no preference” (45%),

followed by a preference that the city continue to be responsible for billing (29%).



Customers’ Attitudes Toward Republic Services in the City of Monroe, Washington v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction and Methodology ........................................................................................................1

Use of Telephones for the Survey ...........................................................................................1

Questionnaire Design ..............................................................................................................1

Survey Sample.........................................................................................................................1

Telephone Interviewing Facilities ...........................................................................................1

Interviewing Dates and Times.................................................................................................2

Telephone Survey Data Collection and Quality Control.........................................................2

Data Analysis...........................................................................................................................3

Sampling Error ........................................................................................................................3

Additional Information about the Presentation of Results in the Report ................................4

Use of Republic Services by Respondents.......................................................................................6

Satisfaction with and Ratings of Republic Services ......................................................................11

Community Spring Clean-Up ........................................................................................................28

City of Monroe Customer Service .................................................................................................36

Sample Information and Demographics ........................................................................................53

About Responsive Management ....................................................................................................57



Customers’ Attitudes Toward Republic Services in the City of Monroe, Washington 1

INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted for the City Council of Monroe, Washington to determine Monroe

citizens’ (both residential customers and business customers) attitudes toward their current solid

waste service (Republic Services) and the City of Monroe’s handling of customer service. This

information will be used by the Council to determine if they should extend their existing contract

with Republic Services or accept bids from other vendors. The study entailed a telephone survey

of Monroe residential and business customers of Republic Services, ages 18 and older. Specific

aspects of the research methodology are discussed below.

USE OF TELEPHONES FOR THE SURVEY

For the survey, telephones were selected as the preferred sampling medium because of the

almost universal ownership of telephones among Monroe residential and business customers

(both landlines and cell phones were called). Additionally, telephone surveys, relative to mail or

Internet surveys, allow for more scientific sampling and data collection, provide higher quality

data, obtain higher response rates, are more timely, and are more cost-effective. Telephone

surveys also have fewer negative effects on the environment than do mail surveys because of

reduced use of paper and reduced energy consumption for delivering and returning the

questionnaires.

QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN

The telephone survey questionnaire was developed cooperatively by Responsive Management

and the City Council of Monroe. Responsive Management conducted pre-tests of the

questionnaire to ensure proper wording, flow, and logic in the survey.

SURVEY SAMPLE

The sample of Monroe residential and business customers was obtained from the City Council of

Monroe.

TELEPHONE INTERVIEWING FACILITIES

A central polling site at the Responsive Management office allowed for rigorous quality control

over the interviews and data collection. Responsive Management maintains its own in-house



2 Responsive Management

telephone interviewing facilities. These facilities are staffed by interviewers with experience

conducting computer-assisted telephone interviews on the subjects of outdoor recreation and

natural resources.

To ensure the integrity of the telephone survey data, Responsive Management has interviewers

who have been trained according to the standards established by the Council of American Survey

Research Organizations. Methods of instruction included lecture and role-playing. The Survey

Center Managers and other professional staff conducted a project briefing with the interviewers

prior to the administration of this survey. Interviewers were instructed on type of study, study

goals and objectives, handling of survey questions, interview length, termination points and

qualifiers for participation, interviewer instructions within the survey questionnaire, reading of

the survey questions, skip patterns, and probing and clarifying techniques necessary for specific

questions on the survey questionnaire.

INTERVIEWING DATES AND TIMES

Telephone surveying times are Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturday

from noon to 5:00 p.m., and Sunday from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., local time. A five-callback

design was used to maintain the representativeness of the sample, to avoid bias toward people

easy to reach by telephone, and to provide an equal opportunity for all to participate. When a

respondent could not be reached on the first call, subsequent calls were placed on different days

of the week and at different times of the day. The survey was conducted in October 2015.

TELEPHONE SURVEY DATA COLLECTION AND QUALITY CONTROL

The software used for data collection was Questionnaire Programming Language (QPL). The

survey data were entered into the computer as each interview was being conducted, eliminating

manual data entry after the completion of the survey and the concomitant data entry errors that

may occur with manual data entry. The survey questionnaire was programmed so that QPL

branched, coded, and substituted phrases in the survey based on previous responses to ensure the

integrity and consistency of the data collection.




The Survey Center Managers and statisticians monitored the data collection, including

monitoring of the actual telephone interviews without the interviewers’ knowledge, to evaluate

the performance of each interviewer and ensure the integrity of the data. The survey

questionnaire itself contains error checkers and computation statements to ensure quality and

consistent data. After the surveys were obtained by the interviewers, the Survey Center

Managers and/or statisticians checked each completed survey to ensure clarity and completeness.

Responsive Management obtained a total of 501 completed interviews. The total sample size on

some questions is less than 501 because the survey asked some questions only of specific

respondents in the survey. In particular, this was done when a follow-up question did not apply

to some respondents. For instance, only those who had ever contacted the City of Monroe were

asked follow-up questions about the customer service they received.

DATA ANALYSIS

The analysis of data was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences as well as

proprietary software developed by Responsive Management.

Crosstabulations were run on many questions by whether the respondent was a residential

customer or business customer of Republic Services (hereafter referred to as private residents

and business customers). For each question, these graphs are in the body of the report following

the main (total) graph of the question.

SAMPLING ERROR

Throughout this report, findings of the telephone survey are reported at a 95% confidence

interval (or higher). For the entire sample of 501, the sampling error is at most plus or minus

4.09 percentage points. This means that if the survey were conducted 100 times on different

samples that were selected in the same way, the findings of 95 out of the 100 surveys would fall

within plus or minus 4.09 percentage points of each other. Sampling error was calculated using

the formula described on the following page, with a sample size of 501 and a population size of

3917.




Sampling Error Equation

( )

( )96.11

25.25.

−

−

=p

s

p

N

N

N

B

Derived from formula: p. 206 in Dillman, D. A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys. John Wiley & Sons, NY.

Note: This is a simplified version of the formula that calculates the maximum sampling error using a 50:50

split (the most conservative calculation because a 50:50 split would give maximum variation).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PRESENTATION OF RESULTS IN THE REPORT

In examining the results, it is important to be aware that the questionnaire included several types

of questions:

• Open-ended questions are those in which no answer set is read to the respondents; rather,

they can respond with anything that comes to mind from the question.

• Closed-ended questions have an answer set from which to choose.

• Single or multiple response questions: Some questions allow only a single response,

while other questions allow respondents to give more than one response or choose all that

apply. Those that allow more than a single response are indicated on the graphs with the

label, “Multiple Responses Allowed.”

• Scaled questions: Many closed-ended questions (but not all) are in a scale, such as

excellent-good-fair-poor.

• Series questions: Many questions are part of a series, and the results are primarily

intended to be examined relative to the other questions in that series (although results of

the questions individually can also be valuable). Typically, results of all questions in a

series are shown together.

Where: B = maximum sampling error (as decimal)

NP = population size (i.e., total number who could be surveyed)

NS = sample size (i.e., total number of respondents surveyed)




Some graphs show an average, either the mean or median (or both). The mean is simply the sum

of all numbers divided by the number of respondents. Because outliers (extremely high or low

numbers relative to most of the other responses) may skew the mean, the median may be shown.

The median is the number at which half the sample is above and the other half is below. In other

words, a median of 5 means that half the sample gave an answer of more than 5 and the other

half gave an answer of less than 5.

Most graphs show results rounded to the nearest integer; however, all data are stored in decimal

format, and all calculations are performed on unrounded numbers. For this reason, some results

may not sum to exactly 100% because of this rounding on the graphs. Additionally, rounding

may cause apparent discrepancies of 1 percentage point between the graphs and the reported

results of combined responses (e.g., when “very satisfied” and “somewhat satisfied” are summed

to determine the total percentage of satisfaction).




USE OF REPUBLIC SERVICES BY RESPONDENTS

� Nearly all Monroe private residents receive weekly garbage collection (97%), as opposed to

monthly (2%).

� Most business customers have their garbage collected once a week (85%), though a small

portion have it collected twice a week (9%).

� Business customers most often use Republic Services (40% indicated this) for their recycling

collection. 18% of business customers indicated that they do not use any recycling service.

• Of those business customers who indicated they use Republic Services for recycling

collection, a majority (64%) indicated they set out recycling to be collected once a week

or more.




Q12. Do you have weekly or monthly service for

garbage collection? (Asked of those who receive

service to a private residence.)

0

2

97

0 20 40 60 80 100

Weekly

Monthly

Don't know

Percent (n=446)




Q13. How many times per week is your garbage

collected? (Asked of those who receive service to

a business.)

5

9

85

0 20 40 60 80 100

Once a week

Twice a week

Don't know

Percent (n=55)




Q15. Do you use Republic Services or a different

vendor for recycling? (Asked of those who receive

service to a business.)

24

18

18

40

0 20 40 60 80 100

Republic

Services

Different

recycling vendor

Neither / do not

recycle

Don't know

Percent (n=55)




Q16. How often do you typically set recycling out to

be collected? Would you say...? (Asked of those

who receive service to a business and use

Republic Services for their recycling.)

23

5

9

64

0 20 40 60 80 100

Once a week or

more

2 to 3 three

times a month

Once a month

Don't know

Percent (n=22)




SATISFACTION WITH AND RATINGS OF REPUBLIC SERVICES

� Most respondents (74%) indicated they are very satisfied with Republic Services, and 91% of

respondents are satisfied with Republic Services overall.

• When comparing private residents to business customers, private residents indicated they

are very satisfied slightly less often than business customers (74% and 78%, respectively)

and somewhat satisfied slightly more often than business customers (17% and 7%,

respectively).

• Of those who are not very satisfied with Republic Services, the most frequently cited

reason for not being more satisfied was cost or billing issues (32%), followed by missed

pickups (13%). Similar patterns were observed when comparing private residents and

business customers.

� All respondents were asked to rate Republic Services. Most respondents (63%) rated

Republic Services as excellent, and 94% rated Republic Services favorably overall.

• When comparing private residents to business customers, private residents rated Republic

Services as excellent more often than business customers (64% and 49% respectively)

and as good less often than business customers (30% and 44% respectively).

• Of those who did not rate Republic Services as excellent, the most common

recommendation as to how Republic Services could better meet their needs was “other or

lower pricing options” (16%), followed by “more or larger trash or recycling pickup

options” (9%). However, the most common response to the question was “none or don’t

know” (39%). There was little marked difference between private residents and business

customers.

� A series of questions asked respondents to rate Republic Services specifically with regard to

timeliness, cleanliness, safety, and helpfulness.

• Respondents most often gave Republic Services favorable ratings in timeliness (91%

rated them excellent or good in this area), followed by cleanliness (87%), safety (81%),

and helpfulness (74%).




Q17. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you

with Republic Services?

0

1

2

6

16

74

0 20 40 60 80 100

Very satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied

Neither satisfied

nor dissatisfied

Somewhat

dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Don't know

Percent (n=501)

91% of

respondents

were satisfied

with Republic

Services.




Q17. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you

with Republic Services?

74

17

5

2

1

0

2

2

78

7

11

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Very satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied

Neither satisfied

nor dissatisfied

Somewhat

dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Don't know

Percent

Private Residents (n=446)

Business Customers (n=55)

91% of residents

and 85% of

business

customers were

satisfied with

Republic

Services.




Q18. Why aren't you more satisfied with the

service? (Asked of those who were not very

satisfied with Republic Services overall.)

32

13

9

8

7

5

5

5

4

4

3

10

16

0 20 40 60 80 100

Cost / billing issues

Missed pickups

Pickup schedule or locations

Lack of cleanliness

Poor customer interactions

Recycling service issues

Trash / recycling bin placement

after service

Damaged trash or recycling bin

Do not pick up enough trash

Poor comparison to a different

service

Forced renting of / charging for

trash bin

Other

No reason / Don't know

Mu

ltip

le R

esp

on

se

s A

llo

wed

Percent (n=129)





service? (Asked of those who were not very

satisfied with Republic Services overall.)

32

13

10

8

8

5

6

5

4

3

3

9

15

25

17

0

8

0

8

0

0

0

8

0

25

25

0 20 40 60 80 100

Cost / billing issues

Missed pickups

Pickup schedule or locations

Lack of cleanliness

Poor customer interactions

Recycling service issues

Trash / recycling bin placement after

service

Damaged trash or recycling bin

Do not pick up enough trash

Poor comparison to a different service

Forced renting of / charging for trash bin

Other

No reason / Don't know

Mu

ltip

le R

es

po

nse

s A

llo

wed

Percent






Q19. How would you rate Republic Services at

meeting your garbage, recycling, and yard waste

collection needs?

1

1

4

31

63

0 20 40 60 80 100

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Don't know

Percent (n=501)

94% of respondents

rated Republic

Services favorably.




Q19. How would you rate Republic Services at

meeting your garbage, recycling, and yard waste

collection needs?

1

1

4

30

64

7

44

49

0

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Don't know

Percent



94% of residents and

93% of business

customers rated

Republic Services

favorably.




Q20. Specifically, how could Republic Services

better meet your garbage, recycling, and yard

waste collection needs? (Asked of those who did

not rate Republic Services as excellent at meeting

these needs.)

16

9

9

7

6

4

4

4

2

5

39

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other or lower pricing options

More or larger trash / recycling pickup

options

Greater reliability of pickups

Greater cleanliness

Better customer service

More pickup schedule options

Larger trash / recycling bins

Better / faster repair or replacement of

trash / recycling bins

Provide trash bins

Other

None / Don't know

Mu

ltip

le R

es

po

ns

es A

llo

wed

Percent (n=184)




Q20. Specifically, how could Republic Services

better meet your garbage, recycling, and yard

waste collection needs? (Asked of those who did

not rate Republic Services as excellent at meeting

these needs.)

16

10

8

7

6

5

4

4

3

5

37

14

7

11

4

7

0

4

0

0

4

50

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other or lower pricing options

More or larger trash / recycling pickup

options

Greater reliability of pickups

Greater cleanliness

Better customer service

More pickup schedule options

Larger trash / recycling bins

Better / faster repair or replacement of

trash / recycling bins

Provide trash bins

Other

None / Don't know

Mu

ltip

le R

esp

on

ses

Allo

we

d

Percent






Q23-Q26. Percent of respondents who rated

Republic Services as excellent in each of the

following areas:

69

59

56

49

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or

on-time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent (n=501)





Republic Services as excellent in each of the

following areas:

70

60

57

50

60

49

47

44

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or

on-time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent







Republic Services as excellent or good in each of

the following areas:

91

87

81

74

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or

on-time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent (n=501)





Republic Services as excellent or good in each of

the following areas:

91

88

83

75

87

82

69

65

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or on-

time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent







Republic Services as fair or poor in each of the

following areas:

6

10

3

7

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or

on-time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent (n=501)





Republic Services as fair or poor in each of the

following areas:

6

10

3

7

5

13

7

11

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or on-

time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent







Republic Services as poor in each of the following

areas:

1

1

0

2

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or

on-time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent (n=501)





Republic Services as poor in each of the following

areas:

1

1

0

2

4

4

4

5

0 20 40 60 80 100

Timeliness or on-

time pick-up

Cleanliness

Safety

Helpfulness

Percent






COMMUNITY SPRING CLEANUP

� Less than a third (29%) of respondents had ever taken items to the Community Spring Clean-

Up. Of those, a majority (57%) take items every year.

• Of private residents, 31% had ever taken any items to the Community Spring Clean-Up,

and a majority of those respondents (57%) take items every year.

• Of business customers, 11% had ever taken any items to the Community Spring Clean-

Up, and 50% of those respondents take items every year.

� A strong majority (92%) of those who had ever taken items to the Community Spring Clean-

Up were satisfied with the event; 80% were very satisfied.

• Of private residents that had ever taken any items to the Community Spring Clean-Up,

80% were very satisfied, and 92% were satisfied overall. Of business customers, 100%

were very satisfied.

• Of those who were not very satisfied with Community Spring Clean-Up (only residents),

the most frequently cited reason for not being more satisfied was that there were long

lines or that it was too busy (32%), followed by preferring home or curbside pickup

(29%) and that it was too infrequent (18%).




Q28. Have you ever taken any items to the

Community Spring Clean-Up for disposal?

71

29

0 20 40 60 80 100

Yes

No

Percent (n=501)




Q28. Have you ever taken any items to the

Community Spring Clean-Up for disposal?

69

31

89

11

0 20 40 60 80 100

Yes

No

Percent






Q29. How often do you take items to the

Community Spring Clean-Up? Would you say...?

(Asked of those who have ever taken items to the

Community Spring Clean-Up.)

3

9

32

57

0 20 40 60 80 100

Nearly every

year

Every 2 to 3

years

Every 4 to 5

years or less

Don't know

Percent (n=145)




Q29. How often do you take items to the

Community Spring Clean-Up? Would you say...?

(Asked of those who have ever taken items to the

Community Spring Clean-Up.)

2

9

32

57

0

33

50

17

0 20 40 60 80 100

Nearly every year

Every 2 to 3

years

Every 4 to 5

years or less

Don't know

Percent






Q30. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the

Community Spring Clean-Up? (Asked of those who

have ever taken items to the Community Spring

Clean-Up.)

1

3

1

3

12

80

0 20 40 60 80 100

Very satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied

Neither satisfied

nor dissatisfied

Somewhat

dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Don't know

Percent (n=145)

92% of

respondents

were satisfied




Q30. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the

Community Spring Clean-Up? (Asked of those who

have ever taken items to the Community Spring

Clean-Up.)

1

3

1

4

12

79

0

0

0

100

0

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Very satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied

Neither satisfied

nor dissatisfied

Somewhat

dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Don't know

Percent



91% of

residents

were

satisfied.





Community Spring Clean-Up? (Asked of those

who have ever taken items to the Community

Spring Clean-Up and were not 'very satisfied' with

it.)

32

29

18

7

14

14

0 20 40 60 80 100

Long lines / too

busy

Prefer home /

curbside pickup

Too infrequent

Poor

advertising /

awareness

Other

No reason /

don't know

Mu

ltip

le R

es

po

nse

s A

llo

wed

Percent (n=28)

Note: includes

only residents




CITY OF MONROE CUSTOMER SERVICE

� Less than half of respondents (37%) had ever contacted the City of Monroe regarding a

question or issue with garbage, recycling, or yard waste collection services.

• Of those who had ever contacted the city, 70% were very satisfied and 84% were satisfied

overall with their customer service.

• Of private residents who were not very satisfied with their customer service, the most

commonly cited reason was that their service was delayed (22%) or it was unsatisfactory

or incomplete (20%). Of business customers, the most commonly cited reason was

rudeness or unprofessional behavior (50%).

� All respondents who had ever contacted the city with a question or issue were asked to rate

the City of Monroe’s customer service specifically in regard to knowledge about service or

the issue, ability to answer the question or solve the issue, and timeliness of response to the

question or issue.

• Out of all respondents, 81% gave the city favorable ratings for knowledge about service

or issue, 80% gave the city favorable ratings for ability to answer question or solve the

issue, and 81% gave the city favorable ratings for timeliness of response to question or

issue. There was little difference in ratings between private residents and business

customers.

• Conversely, 16% gave the city unfavorable ratings for knowledge about service or the

issue, 19% for ability to answer question or solve the issue, and 18% for timeliness of

response to question or the issue.

� When asked whether they preferred that the city continue to be responsible for billing or that

Republic Services become responsible for billing, respondents chose the city (38%) slightly

more often than Republic Services (29%).

• Among private residents, a majority (63%) preferred the city continue to be responsible

for billing.

• Among business customers, the most common preference was “no preference” (45%),

followed by a preference that the city continue to be responsible for billing (29%).




Q33. Have you ever contacted the City of Monroe

regarding a question or issue with the garbage,

recycling, and yard waste collection services?

0

63

37

0 20 40 60 80 100

Yes

No

Don't know

Percent (n=501)




Q33. Have you ever contacted the City of Monroe

regarding a question or issue with the garbage,

recycling, and yard waste collection services?

0

63

37

2

64

35

0 20 40 60 80 100

Yes

No

Don't know

Percent






Q34. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied were you

with the customer service you received when you

contacted the city? (Asked of those who have ever

contacted the City of Monroe regarding the

garbage, recycling, and yard waste collection

services.)

1

4

8

3

14

70

0 20 40 60 80 100

Very satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied

Neither satisfied

nor dissatisfied

Somewhat

dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Don't know

Percent (n=183)

84% of

respondents

were satisfied




Q34. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied were you

with the customer service you received when you

contacted the city? (Asked of those who have ever

contacted the City of Monroe regarding the

garbage, recycling, and yard waste collection

services.)

1

4

8

2

15

70

0

11

5

79

5

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Very satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied

Neither satisfied

nor dissatisfied

Somewhat

dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Don't know

Percent



84% of residents

and 84% of

business

customers were

satisfied.





customer service you received? (Asked of those

who have ever contacted the City of Monroe

regarding the garbage, recycling, and yard waste

collection services and were not very satisfied with

their service.)

20

19

17

17

11

9

7

13

6

0 20 40 60 80 100

Service received was delayed

Service received was

unsatisfactory or incomplete

Rudeness / unprofessional

behavior

Service call took too much time

/ did not receive a response

Service requested was refused

or against policy

Service call was referred /

transferred to another service

Lack of service provider

knowledge

Other

No reason / don't know

Mu

ltip

le R

esp

on

se

s A

llo

wed

Percent (n=54)





customer service you received? (Asked of those

who have ever contacted the City of Monroe

regarding the garbage, recycling, and yard waste

collection services and were not very satisfied with

their service.)

22

20

14

16

12

10

8

12

6

0

0

50

25

0

0

0

25

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Service received was delayed

Service received was unsatisfactory or

incomplete

Rudeness / unprofessional behavior

Service call took too much time / did not

receive a response

Service requested was refused or

against policy

Service call was referred / transferred to

another service

Lack of service provider knowledge

Other

No reason / don't know

Mu

ltip

le R

esp

on

se

s A

llo

wed

Percent






Q38-40. Percent of respondents who rated the City

of Monroe's customer service in regard to garbage,

recycling, and yard waste collection services as

excellent in each of the following areas: (Asked of

those who have ever contacted the city.)

51

50

62

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service

or issue

Ability to

answer

question or

solve issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or

issue

Percent (n=183)







excellent in each of the following areas: (Asked of


52

51

63

47

42

53

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service or

issue

Ability to answer

question or solve

issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or issue

Percent









excellent or good in each of the following areas:

(Asked of those who have ever contacted the city.)

81

80

81

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service

or issue

Ability to

answer

question or

solve issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or

issue

Percent (n=183)







excellent or good in each of the following areas:

(Asked of those who have ever contacted the city.)

81

80

82

79

84

79

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service or

issue

Ability to answer

question or solve

issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or issue

Percent









fair or poor in each of the following areas: (Asked

of those who have ever contacted the city.)

16

19

18

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service

or issue

Ability to

answer

question or

solve issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or

issue

Percent (n=183)







fair or poor in each of the following areas: (Asked

of those who have ever contacted the city.)

16

19

18

21

16

21

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service or

issue

Ability to answer

question or solve

issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or issue

Percent









poor in each of the following areas: (Asked of


7

7

7

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service

or issue

Ability to

answer

question or

solve issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or

issue

Percent (n=183)







poor in each of the following areas: (Asked of


7

8

7

0

0

5

0 20 40 60 80 100

Knowledge

about service or

issue

Ability to answer

question or solve

issue

Timeliness of

response to

question or issue

Percent






Q43 / Q44. Would you prefer that the city continue

to be responsible for billing or for Republic

Services to become responsible for billing?

5

29

29

38

0 20 40 60 80 100

The city

continue to be

responsible for

billing

Republic

Services

become

responsible for

billing

No preference

Don't know

Percent (n=501)




Q43 / Q44. Would you prefer that the city continue

to be responsible for billing or for Republic

Services to become responsible for billing?

4

27

6

63

45

15

29

11

0 20 40 60 80 100

The city continue

to be responsible

for billing

Republic

Services become

responsible for

billing

No preference

Don't know

Percent






SAMPLE INFORMATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS

� A majority of respondents were classified as private residents (89%). This compares

favorably to the portion of residents in the sample given by the City Council of Monroe

(91%).

� A mostly uniform spread of age categories was observed in respondents, with all categories

(except ages 18-24) occurring within a 10% range. The most common age category was 35-

44, with a mean age among respondents of 47.8 years old and a median age of 46 years old.

� There was a slightly higher portion of female respondents (53%) than male respondents

(47%).




Q9. First, just to confirm, is the property at which

you receive garbage and recycling service in the

city of Monroe a private residence or a business?

11

89

0 20 40 60 80 100

Residence

Business

Percent (n=501)




Q45. May I ask your age?

2

20

24

21

15

15

3

0 20 40 60 80 100

65 or older

55-64

45-54

35-44

25-34

18-24

Refused

Percent (n=501)

Mean Age: 47.8

Median Age: 46




Q51. Respondent's gender (Observed by

interviewer; not asked)

47

53

0 20 40 60 80 100

Male

Female

Percent (n=501)




ABOUT RESPONSIVE MANAGEMENT

Responsive Management is an internationally recognized public opinion and attitude survey research

firm specializing in natural resource and outdoor recreation issues. Our mission is to help natural

resource and outdoor recreation agencies and organizations better understand and work with their

constituents, customers, and the public.

Utilizing our in-house, full-service telephone, mail, and web-based survey center with 50

professional interviewers, we have conducted more than 1,000 telephone surveys, mail surveys,

personal interviews, and focus groups, as well as numerous marketing and communication plans,

needs assessments, and program evaluations.

Clients include the federal natural resource and land management agencies, most state fish and

wildlife agencies, state departments of natural resources, environmental protection agencies, state

park agencies, tourism boards, most of the major conservation and sportsmen’s organizations, and

numerous private businesses. Responsive Management also collects attitude and opinion data for

many of the nation’s top universities.

Specializing in research on public attitudes toward natural resource and outdoor recreation issues,

Responsive Management has completed a wide range of projects during the past 22 years, including

dozens of studies of hunters, anglers, wildlife viewers, boaters, park visitors, historic site visitors,

hikers, birdwatchers, campers, and rock climbers. Responsive Management has conducted studies

on endangered species; waterfowl and wetlands; and the reintroduction of large predators such as

wolves, grizzly bears, and the Florida panther.

Responsive Management has assisted with research on numerous natural resource ballot initiatives

and referenda and has helped agencies and organizations find alternative funding and increase their

membership and donations. Additionally, Responsive Management has conducted major

organizational and programmatic needs assessments to assist natural resource agencies and

organizations in developing more effective programs based on a solid foundation of fact.




Responsive Management has conducted research on public attitudes toward natural resources and

outdoor recreation in almost every state in the United States, as well as in Canada, Australia, the

United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan. Responsive Management has also conducted focus

groups and personal interviews with residents of the African countries of Algeria, Cameroon,

Mauritius, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

Responsive Management routinely conducts surveys in Spanish and has conducted surveys in

Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese and has completed numerous studies with specific target

audiences, including Hispanics; African-Americans; Asians; women; children; senior citizens; urban,

suburban, and rural residents; large landowners; and farmers.

Responsive Management’s research has been upheld in U.S. District Courts; used in peer-reviewed

journals; and presented at major natural resource, fish and wildlife, and outdoor recreation

conferences across the world. Company research has been featured in most of the nation’s major

media, including CNN, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and on the front pages of USA

Today and The Washington Post. Responsive Management’s research has also been highlighted in

Newsweek magazine.

Visit the Responsive Management website at:

www.responsivemanagement.com



monroe city council agenda bill no. 15-204

Documents