Saugatuck Public Schools Survey Presented by: EPIC ▪ MRA 4710 W . Saginaw Hwy. Suite 2C Lansing, MI 48917 District-wide Survey on a Bond Debt Tax Millage 517.886.0860 info@epicmra.com Proposal to Fund Facility Renovations www.epicmra.com
Methodology • Invitations to participate in an online survey were sent via postcard to each resident residing in the boundaries of the Saugatuck Public Schools. • A unique “access code” was included on each postcard, as well as instructions to participants that the code could be used by each adult resident in the household to participate in the survey. • Interviews averaged just over 18 minutes in duration.
Methodology • A total of 353 surveys were completed (347 Online; 2 via Telephone; 4 via Mail). • Surveys were collected from September 13, 2019 through September 29, 2019. • Ninety-seven percent of survey respondents self-identified as being registered to vote (Q. 01). • The survey results (N=353) carry an overall margin of error of ±5.2 points.
Regional Distribution of Respondents - Q. 03 At the outset of the survey, respondents were asked to indicate the City or Township in which they currently reside. The results were: 60% 40% 41% 20% 24% 23% 12% 0% Saugatuck Twp Douglas City Saugatuck City Laketown Twp
Voting Frequency (Lower Visibility Elections) - Qs. 04 & 05 Respondents were asked to consider how often they vote in November odd-year elections, “. . . when some city offices are on the ballot, and other ballot issues are sometimes presented to voters?” and given five options to best describe their frequency of voting. An identical presentation was made to respondents regarding participation in elections held in May of even-numbered years. 100% 83% 80% 80% 60% 40% 16% 20% 13% 1% 2% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% All the Most Half the Seldom Never All the Most Half the Seldom Never Time Times Time Time Times Time May Even-year November Odd-year
Likelihood of Voting in March 2019 - Q. 06 Respondents were then asked - from five presented options - to indicate their likelihood of voting in the March 2019 Presidential Primary election. 100% 90% 80% 60% 40% 20% 5% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% Very Somewhat Likely 50/50 Not Likely Refused
Likely Method of Voting - Q. 07 Respondents were next informed that, beginning in 2019, “no reason” absentee voting was available for Michigan voters, and were then asked, in light of this change, the likelihood of their voting via absentee ballot instead of going to the polling place. Total Total 60% 52% 30% 40% 32% 20% 20% 19% 15% 11% 0% Certain Very Likely Equally Very Likely Certain Absentee Ballot Polling Place
Assessment of Education Quality - Q. 08 In the first question specific to Saugatuck schools, respondents were asked to consider the quality of the K-12 education, over the past few years , and indicate whether it had “improved”, “gotten worse” or “remained about the same.” 60% 40% 49% 20% 26% 18% 7% 0% About the Same Improved Worsened Undec/Ref
Saugatuck Compared to Neighboring Districts - Q. 09 In a second test of opinions about the quality of Saugatuck Public Schools, respondents were asked to compare the district’s quality of education with the surrounding public school districts. 60% 40% 46% 36% 20% 11% 7% 0% About the Same Better Worse Undec/Ref
Grade the Saugatuck Public Schools – Q. 10 In a slightly different measurement of residents’ opinions about the quality of education provided by Saugatuck schools, respondents were asked to “grade” the schools. Total 60% Above Ave. 70% Total 40% Below Ave. 43% 3% 27% 20% 14% 3% 13% 0% 0% A (Excellent) B (Good) C (Average) D (Below Ave.) F (Fail) Und/Ref
Biggest Challenge Facing the District – Q. 11 In an open-ended question that followed, respondents were asked to offer their top-of-mind reaction to being asked to identify the single biggest challenge facing the Saugatuck Public Schools. Und/Ref, 3% Dropping enrollment, 15 "other" <= 3%, 25% 20% Lack of funding, 15% Schools of choice, 4% More community outreach, 5% Wasteful spending, 6% Aging facilities, 15% Budget priorities, 7%
Value of Education and Community Services for Taxes Paid – Q. 12 Respondents asked if the educational and community services provided by Saugatuck Public Schools in return for the state and local taxes paid to fund them were “too high”, “too low” or “about right”. Lower portion of the "Too High" bar = " MUCH "; Upper portion = " Somewhat " Total 80% 48% 60% 23% 40% 42% 20% 25% 7% 3% 0% Too High About Right Too Low Und
Rate the Buildings and Grounds – Q. 13 Respondents were asked to issue either a Positive rating of “Excellent” or “Pretty good” or a Negative rating of “Just fair” or “Poor” for the condition of Saugatuck Public Schools’ schools, other facilities, and grounds. Total Total 80% 47% 45% 60% 40% 35% 36% 20% 12% 9% 8% 0% Postive Negative Undecided Pretty good/Just fair Excellent/Poor
Adequacy of Funding – Q. 14 Respondents were next asked to assess whether they believe the Saugatuck Public Schools has “too much”, “too little” or “about the right amount” of funding from state and local sources to provide a quality education. Lower portion of the bars = " MUCH "; Upper portion = " Somewhat " 80% Total 43% 60% Total 19% 40% 26% 34% 20% 12% 3% 17% 7% 0% Too Much About Right Too Little Und
Opinion Regarding Financial Stewardship – Q. 15 As with the assessment of the condition of facilities, respondents were asked to offer a Positive or Negative rating of Saugatuck Public Schools’ management of district finances; again using a gradation of “Excellent” and “Pretty good” for the positive rating and “Poor” and “Just fair” for the negative rating. Total 52% Total 80% 40% 60% 27% 40% 32% 20% 25% 8% 8% 0% Postive Negative Undecided Pretty good/Just fair Excellent/Poor
Perception of Enrollment Trajectory – Q. 16 Respondents were asked to report whether they believed student enrollment in SPS had “increased”, “decreased” or “remained about the same” and gradations of “a lot” and “some” were offered for the increased and decreased categories. Lower portion of the bars = " A lot "; Upper portion = " Some " 80% Total 60% Total 29% 25% 40% 39% 23% 20% 23% 7% 6% 2% 0% Increased Same Decreased Und
Opinion of Schools of Choice Participation – Q. 17 Respondents were reminded that Saugatuck Public Schools participates in the schools of choice program and asked if they Support or Oppose the Districts’ participation in the program. Gradations of “strongly” and “somewhat” were also provided to measure the intensity of sentiment. Total 74% 80% Total 29% 60% 23% 40% 45% 3% 12% 20% 11% 0% Approve Disapprove Undecided Somewhat Strongly
May 7, 2019 Vote History/Behavior – Qs. 18 & 19 • Nearly all respondents (94 percent) reported having voted in the recent May 7 th school bond election. • In the follow-up question, respondents were asked how they voted in the May bond election. The raw data produced a 53 percent “Yes” to 40 percent “No” result; an outcome at odds with the actual May 2019 returns. • For purposes of providing some measure of predictive value, the survey data were re-weighted to produce a 48 percent “Yes” to 49 percent “No”, to more closely align with the May outcome.
Initial “Cold Vote” on the Ballot Proposal – Q. 20 In the first presentation of a question asking for reaction to a request which would once again ask for approval of a 1.67 mill increase to fund $40 million in capital improvement bonds, the “vote” result was: Total Total 80% 51% 46% 60% 1% 40% 50% 46% 3% 20% 0% Yes No Und Solid Lean
Support/Opposition to Components of Proposal – Qs. 21-36 The related improvements and expansions to be funded by the bond revenue were segregated into 16 separate descriptive statements. For each, respondents were asked to indicate if they supported or opposed that aspect of the plan; irrespective of how they would vote on the overall proposal. Gradations of “strongly” and “somewhat” were once again provided to measure the intensity of sentiment. Top Three Supported Improvements Strong TOTAL TOTAL Strong DK/ of Sixteen Tested SUP SUP OPP OPP UND Security improvements would be made to the elementary school, including secured entryways to control visitor access to the 56% 78% 20% 10% 2% buildings and video monitoring, fire suppression and fire alarm at a cost of just over $1 million. Security improvements would be made to the middle school and high school, including secured entryways to control visitor access 55% 77% 21% 9% 2% to the buildings and video monitoring, fire suppression and fire alarm at a cost of just under $2 million Five new buses would be purchased for the district to replace the 41% 75% 23% 11% 2% buses that have surpassed their useable life at a cost of $500,000.
Recommend
More recommend
