Laserfiche WebLink
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Park Survey Mei <br />May 19, 1994 <br />page 2 <br />a.)The first question in this series asks whether the current mix and number <br />of parks and recreation facilities in and around the community meet the <br />tKcds of tte residents. <br />b.)The second question asks whether Orono should offer more facilities to <br />meet residents needs versus looking to other providers to meet these <br />needs, i.e. county, private, etc. <br />c.)The third question asks the resident to generally identify the ty^ies of parks <br />or facilities needed, i.e. natural preserves, passive facilities, or active <br />facilities. <br />d.) The next questions in this series ask whether the resident is willing to pay <br />the costs related to providing additional facilities. <br />A concern was raised at the Council meeting regarding whether the introduction to the survey <br />needs to be more specific in terms of the purpose of the survey. The survey consultant has <br />indicated that a more specific introduction would cause two problems. First, if the survey is <br />framed too narrowly the number of people who refuse to participate in the surv-ey increases <br />significantly. Secondly, if the introduction becomes too specific it can become leading, in that <br />it can color the thinking and responses of the respondents. <br />The attached revised questionnaire has had several areas deleted to improve its focus. The Park <br />Commission has requested that a set of questions regarding the use of user fees to fund <br />recreation facilities be included in the survey. The survey consultant is preparing those <br />questions. <br />The Council may want to meet in a work session for further review of the survey.