The Hills Shire Council Community Research Final Report · Final Report November 2012 Prepared for:...

The Hills Shire Council

Community Research

Final Report

November 2012

Prepared for:

Prepared by:

ABN 14 003 179 440

10/1 Bounty Close Tuggerah, NSW 2259

Postal address: PO Box 5059, Chittaway Bay NSW 2261

Telephone: (02) 4352 2388 Fax: (02) 4352 2117

www.micromex.com.au

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Community Research – draft report

October 2012

The information contained herein is believed to be reliable and accurate. However, no

guarantee is given as to its accuracy and reliability, and no responsibility or liability for any

information, opinions or commentary contained herein, or for any consequences of its use, will

be accepted by Micromex Research, or by any person involved in the preparation of this report.



October 2012

Table of Contents

Introduction

Background & Methodology 1

Sample Profile 3

Key Findings 4

Summary & Recommendations 17

Results

Section A – Importance of, and Satisfaction with, Council services and facilities 18

Creating Vibrant Communities 21

Valuing Our Environment 27

Balanced Urban Growth 32

Building A Modern Local Economy 37

Proactive Leadership 41

Overall Satisfaction with Council’s Performance 46

Section B – Priority Issues 49

Things most valued about living in the Shire 49

Highest priority issues facing The Hills Shire in the next 4 years 51

Section C – Contact with Council 52

Preferred method for conducting Council related business 52

Sourcing Council information 53

Hills Focus community magazine 54

Section D – Living in The Hills Shire 55

Quality of life 55

Agreement with specific statements 56

Sustainability in the home 58

Section E – Access to Services 59

Access to services 59

Section E – Working Inside/Outside The Shire 61

Area of employment 61

Utilisation of the metro train 62

Travel time to place of employment 63

Suggested improvements for Public Transport 64

Appendices 65

A. Data and Correlation Tables 65

B. Questionnaire



October 2012 1

Background and Methodology

The Hills Shire Council sought to examine community attitudes and perceptions towards current

and future services and facilities provided by Council. Key objectives of the research included:

o To assess and establish the community’s priorities and satisfaction in relation to Council

activities, services and facilities

o To identify the community’s overall level of satisfaction with Council’s performance

o To identify the community’s level of satisfaction with regards to contact they have had with

Council staff

o To identify trends and benchmark results against the research conducted previously

To facilitate this, Micromex Research was contracted to develop a survey template that enabled

Council to effectively analyse attitudes and trends within the community.

Questionnaire

Micromex Research, together with The Hills Shire Council, developed the questionnaire.

A copy of the questionnaire is provided in Appendix B.

Data collection

The survey was conducted during the period 10th – 21st September 2012 from 4:30pm to 8:30pm,

Monday to Friday and from 10am to 4pm Saturday [if appropriate].

Survey area

The Hills Shire Council Local Government Area.

Sample selection and error

The sample consisted of a total of 1,000 residents. The selection of respondents was by means of a

computer based random selection process using the electronic White Pages.

A sample size of 1,000 residents provides a maximum sampling error of plus or minus 3.1% at 95%

confidence.

The sample was weighted by age to reflect the 2011 ABS census data.

Participants

Individuals in the household, 18 years or older, were selected using the ‘last birthday’ selection

procedure.

If the person was not at home, call-backs were scheduled for a later time. Unanswered calls were

retried to a maximum of three times throughout the period of the survey.

Interviewing

Interviewing was conducted in accordance with IQCA (Interviewer Quality Control Australia)

Standards and the Market Research Society Code of Professional Conduct.



October 2012 2

Background and Methodology

Prequalification

Participants in this survey were pre-qualified as having lived in the The Hills Shire Council area for a

minimum of six months.

Data analysis

The data within this report was analysed using SPSS. To identify the statistically significant

differences between the groups of means, ‘One-Way Anova tests’ and ‘Independent Samples T-

tests’ were used. ‘Z Tests’ were also used to determine statistically significant differences between

column percentages.

Ratings questions

The Unipolar Scale of 1 to 5, where 1 was the lowest importance or satisfaction and 5 the highest

importance or satisfaction, was used in all rating questions.

This scale allowed for a mid range position for those who had a divided or neutral opinion.

Comparisons by year

Where appropriate, comparisons have been made with the research conducted in 2010.

Mean rating explanation

Mean rating: 1.99 or less ‘Very low’ level of importance/satisfaction

2.00 – 2.49 ‘Low’ level of importance/satisfaction

2.50 – 2.99 ‘Moderately low’ level of importance/satisfaction

3.00 – 3.59 ‘Moderate’ level of importance/satisfaction

3.60 – 3.89 ‘Moderately high’ level of importance/satisfaction

3.90 – 4.19 ‘High’ level of importance/satisfaction

4.20 – 4.49 ‘Very high’ level of importance/satisfaction

4.50+ ‘Extremely high’ level of importance/satisfaction

Note: Only respondents who rated services/facilities a 4 or 5 in importance were asked to rate

their satisfaction with that service/facility.

Errors: Data in this publication is subject to sampling variability because it is based on information relating

to a sample of residents rather than the total number. This difference (sampling error) may occur

due to imperfections in reporting and errors made in processing the data. This may occur in any

enumeration, whether it is a full count or sample.

Efforts have been made to reduce the non-sampling error by careful design of the questionnaire

and detailed checking of completed questionnaires.



October 2012 3

Sample Profile

51%

49%

16%

8%

19%

23%

41%

54%

59%

40%

26%

17%

16%

1%

16%

84%

6%

10%

17%

20%

21%

14%

12%

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

Female

Male

None of these

Attended a Council focus group, workshop or Council Meeting

Been involved in crafts or hobby groups

Been involved in a local committee or local community group

Volunteered

Visited an art gallery, attended a play/concert/cultural event

Attended a community festival or event

Over 20 years

11 - 20 years

6 - 10 years

1 - 5 years

Less than 1 year

Rent

Own/buying

75 +

65 - 74

55 - 64

45 - 54

35 - 44

25 - 34

18 - 24

Age

Ratepayer status

Time lived in the area

Community involvement

Gender



October 2012 4

Key Findings

Overall, the research has found a generally positive result for The Hills Shire Council, with 46 of the

47 services/facilities/criteria rated as being of ‘moderate satisfaction’ to ‘very high satisfaction’.

At an overall level, residents expressed a ‘moderately high’ level of satisfaction with the

performance of Council, with 64% of the respondents giving a rating of ‘satisfied’-‘Very satisfied’,

which is similar to the result from 2010.

2010 2012

Mean ratings 3.56 3.64

Mean ratings: 1 = not at all satisfied, 5 = very satisfied

3%

6%

28%

54%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Not at all satisfied

Not very satisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied



October 2012 5

Things Most Valued About the Shire

‘Open spaces and a clean environment’ was the most important top of mind response from

residents, followed by ‘easy access to community facilities and services’ and a ‘friendly and

welcoming community’.

Word Frequency Tagging

Verbatim responses for this question were collated and entered into analytical software. This analysis ‘counts’ the

number of times a particular word or phrase appears and, based on the frequency of that word or phrase, a font size is

generated. The larger the font, the more frequently the word or sentiment is mentioned.

Base: n=1,911

5%

2%

2%

2%

5%

7%

9%

9%

17%

17%

25%

0% 10% 20% 30%

Other

I am able to live close to friends and family

There is a wide selection of schools

There is available housing

There is a family oriented environment

The area is surrounded by bushland and has a rural atmosphere

It is a safe area to work and live in

It is very peaceful and relaxed lifestyle

The community is friendly and welcoming

There is easy access to community facilities and services

Open spaces and a clean environment



October 2012 6

Highest Priority Issues for the Next 4 Years

‘Lack of public transport’ and ‘traffic congestion and ease of access’ were the nominated as the

highest priority issues facing The Hills Shire in the next 4 years.



number of times a particular word or phrase appears and, based on the frequency of that word or phrase, a font size is

generated. The larger the font, the more frequently the word or sentiment is mentioned.

Base: n=1,803

13%

2%

2%

2%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

11%

25%

25%

0% 10% 20% 30%

Other

Improving local facilities for elderly or disabled residents

Safey of the community

Improving communication between Council and residents

Inadequate public parking

Overdevelopment of the area

Balancing current and future infrastructure development

Protecting the local bushland and environment

Development of a local train line

Housing to accommodate the rising population

Traffic congestion and ease of access

Lack of public transport



October 2012 7

Key Findings

Comparison to LGA Benchmarks

The Hills Shire Council, residents are more satisfied than the LGA Benchmark score for 17 of the 20

comparable measures, including ‘overall satisfaction with Council’ and ‘communication with

Council and access to information’, equal to 1 and below the Benchmark for the remaining 2

comparable measures.

Service/Facility The Hills Shire Council,

Satisfaction Scores

Satisfaction

Benchmark

Above the Benchmark

Recycling collection 4.5 3.9

Town centre and village atmosphere 3.9 3.3

Youth facilities 3.5 3.1

Preservation of sensitive environmental areas 3.8 3.4

Protection of heritage values and buildings 3.8 3.5

Domestic garbage collection 4.4 4.1

Community centres and community halls 3.9 3.6

Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads 3.0 2.7

Ovals and sporting facilities 3.9 3.7

Communication with Council and access to information 3.6 3.4

Parks and gardens 3.9 3.7

Council's decision-making 3.1 3.0

Long term planning for The Hills Shire 3.2 3.1

Services and facilities for older people 3.7 3.6

Library services 4.2 4.1

Bushland regeneration and weed control 3.6 3.5

Overall satisfaction with Council’s performance 3.6 3.5

Equal to the Benchmark

Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways 3.2 3.2

Below the Benchmark

Aquatic centre 3.6 3.7

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre 3.6 3.9




October 2012 8

Key Findings

Comparisons with the research conducted in 2010 identifies that satisfaction has increased for 24

of the 41 comparable measures, decreased for 10 of the measures and remained statistically

similar for the remaining 7 measures.

2012 2010

Access to your local Councillor 3.4 3.0

Inc

rea

sed

Medium density housing developments, e.g. apartments 3.3 2.9

Town centre and village atmosphere 3.9 3.6

Support for volunteer organisations 4.0 3.8

Communication with Council and access to information 3.6 3.4

Services and facilities for older people 3.7 3.5

Youth facilities, e.g. skate parks 3.5 3.3

Emergency services, e.g. SES and Rural Fire Service 4.4 4.2

Aquatic centre 3.6 3.4

Domestic garbage collection 4.4 4.2

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre 3.6 3.4

Garden organic collection 4.4 4.2

Traffic parking enforcement 3.4 3.2

Council provision of local community events 3.9 3.7

Commercial building developments, e.g. industry, shopping centres, offices 3.8 3.6

Community centres and community halls 3.9 3.7

Pet and animal management/control 3.8 3.6

Generating local employment opportunities 3.4 3.2

Library services 4.2 4.1

Provision of public toilets 3.0 2.9

Preservation of permanent open space 3.6 3.5

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life 3.2 3.1

Protection of heritage values and buildings 3.8 3.7

Council's financial management 3.3 3.2

Image and presentation of Council information 3.6 3.6 Re

ma

ine

d sim

ilar

Council's decision-making 3.1 3.1

Range of shopping facilities 4.2 4.2

Lighting of public areas 3.5 3.5

Playgrounds/play equipment 3.8 3.8

Preservation of plants and animals in their natural habitat 3.8 3.8

Bushland regeneration and weed control 3.6 3.6

Water quality 4.0 4.1

De

cre

ase

d

Streetscape appearance 3.6 3.7

Ovals and sporting facilities 3.9 4.0

Council's conduct as a professional organisation 3.5 3.6

Parks and gardens 3.9 4.0

Low density housing developments, e.g. single houses, villas 3.4 3.5

Air quality 4.1 4.2

Management of noise pollution 3.6 3.8

Overall zoning of the Shire 3.5 3.7

Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads 3.0 3.2


= A significantly higher level of satisfaction (by group)

= A significantly lower level of satisfaction (by group)



October 2012 9

Key Findings

The specified research outcomes required us to measure both community importance and

community satisfaction with a range of specific service delivery areas. In order to identify core

priorities, we undertook a 2 step analysis process on the stated importance and rated satisfaction

data, after which we conducted a third level of analysis. This level of analysis was a Shapley

Regression on the data in order to identify which facilities and services are the actual drivers of

overall satisfaction with Council.

By examining both approaches to analysis we have been able to:

1. Identify and understand the hierarchy of community priorities

2. Inform the deployment of Council resources in line with community aspirations

Step 1. Performance Gap Analysis (PGA)

PGA establishes the gap between importance and satisfaction. This is calculated by subtracting

the mean satisfaction score from the mean importance score. In order to measure performance

gaps, respondents are asked to rate the importance of, and their satisfaction with, each of a

range of different services or facilities on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = low importance or

satisfaction and 5 = high importance or satisfaction. These scores are aggregated at a total

community level.

The higher the differential between importance and satisfaction, the greater the difference is

between the provision of that service by The Hills Shire Council and the expectation of the

community for that service/facility.

In the table on the following page, we can see the 47 services and facilities that residents rated

by importance and then by satisfaction.

When analysing performance gap data, it is important to consider both stated satisfaction and

the absolute size of the performance gap.

Performance Gap Ranking

Ranking

2012 Service/Facility

Importance

Mean

Satisfaction

Mean

Performance

Gap

1 Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads 4.68 2.97 1.71

2 Long term planning for The Hills Shire 4.52 3.19 1.33

3 Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways 4.45 3.20 1.25

4 Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life 4.38 3.21 1.17

5 Council's decision-making 4.22 3.14 1.08

6 Council's financial management 4.32 3.33 0.99

7 Generating local employment opportunities 4.32 3.36 0.96

8 Council's conduct as a professional organisation 4.40 3.47 0.93

9 Provision of public toilets 3.89 3.03 0.86

10 Lighting of public areas 4.28 3.47 0.81

11 Communication with Council and access to information 4.37 3.58 0.79

12 Management of noise pollution 4.23 3.56 0.67

Mean ratings: 1 -= not at all important/satisfied and 5 = very important, very satisfied



October 2012 10

Key Findings

Performance Gap Ranking

Ranking

2012 Service/Facility

Importance

Mean

Satisfaction

Mean

Performance

Gap

13 Low density housing developments 4.00 3.36 0.64

14 Health inspections of food premises, hairdressers, etc. 4.39 3.76 0.63

15 Bushland regeneration and weed control 4.16 3.59 0.57

16 Streetscape appearance 4.20 3.64 0.56

17 Preservation of permanent open space 4.16 3.63 0.53

18 Access to your local Councillor 3.89 3.36 0.53

19 Water quality 4.47 3.95 0.52

20 Air quality 4.57 4.06 0.51

21 Overall zoning of the Shire 3.99 3.50 0.49

22 Preservation of plants and animals in their natural habitat 4.23 3.79 0.44

23 On call kerbside service 4.40 3.98 0.42

24 Domestic garbage collection 4.73 4.36 0.37

25 Parks and gardens 4.20 3.87 0.33

26 Recycling collection 4.73 4.45 0.28

27 Pet and animal management/control 4.03 3.77 0.26

28 Preservation of sensitive environmental areas 4.01 3.75 0.26

29 Town centre and village atmosphere 4.09 3.89 0.20

30 Protection of heritage values and buildings 4.02 3.84 0.18

31 Image and presentation of Council information 3.79 3.63 0.16

32 Traffic parking enforcement 3.55 3.39 0.16

33 Ovals and sporting facilities 4.07 3.94 0.13

34 Range of shopping facilities 4.33 4.24 0.09

35 Garden organic collection 4.44 4.37 0.07

36 Emergency services 4.43 4.37 0.06

37 Playgrounds/play equipment 3.77 3.77 0.00

38 Commercial building developments 3.71 3.81 -0.10

39 Support for volunteer organisations 3.87 4.00 -0.13

40 Medium density housing developments 3.08 3.30 -0.22

41 Aquatic centre 3.38 3.61 -0.23

42 Recreation/Performing Arts Centre 3.25 3.55 -0.30

43 Council provision of local community events 3.55 3.87 -0.32

44 Services and facilities for older people 3.23 3.70 -0.47

45 Library services 3.29 4.24 -0.95

46 Youth facilities 2.53 3.48 -0.95

47 Community centres and community halls 2.90 3.89 -0.99

Mean ratings: 1 -= not at all important/satisfied and 5 = very important/very satisfied



October 2012 11

Key Findings

When analysing the performance gaps, it is important to recognise that, for the most part, a gap

of up to 1.0 is acceptable when the initial importance rating is 4.0+, as it indicates that residents

consider the attribute to be of ‘high’ to ‘very high’ importance and that the satisfaction they

have with The Hills Shire Council’s performance on that same measure, is ‘moderate’ to

‘moderately high’.

For example, ‘Council’s decision making’ was given an importance score of 4.22, which indicates

that it is considered an area of ‘very high’ importance by residents. At the same time it was given

a satisfaction score of 3.14, which indicates that residents are ‘moderately satisfied’ with The Hills

Shire Council’s performance and focus on that measure.

In the case of a performance gap such as for ‘library services’ (3.29 importance vs. 4.24

satisfaction), we can identify that the facility/service has only ‘moderate’ importance to the

broader community, but for residents who feel that this facility is important, it is providing a ‘very

high’ level of satisfaction.

When we examine the 11 largest performance gaps, we can identify that all the services or

facilities have been rated as ‘moderately high’ to ‘extremely high’ in importance. Resident

satisfaction for all of these areas is between 2.97 and 3.58, which indicates that resident

satisfaction for these measures is ‘moderately low’ to ‘moderate’.

Ranking Service/ Facility Importance

Mean

Satisfaction

Mean

Performance

Gap

1 Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads 4.68 2.97 1.71

2 Long term planning for The Hills Shire 4.52 3.19 1.33

3 Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways 4.45 3.20 1.25

4 Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life 4.38 3.21 1.17

5 Council's decision-making 4.22 3.14 1.08

6 Council's financial management 4.32 3.33 0.99

7 Generating local employment opportunities 4.32 3.36 0.96

8 Council's conduct as a professional organisation 4.40 3.47 0.93

9 Provision of public toilets 3.89 3.03 0.86

10 Lighting of public areas 4.28 3.47 0.81

11 Communication with Council and access to information 4.37 3.58 0.79

Mean ratings: 1 = not at all important/dissatisfied, 5 = very important/satisfied

The key outcomes of this analysis would suggest that, while there are opportunities to improve

satisfaction across a range of services/facilities, ‘maintaining the condition of residential (local)

roads’ is the area of least relative satisfaction.

Note: Performance gap is the first step in the process, we now need to identify comparative

ratings across all services and facilities to get an understanding of relative importance and

satisfaction at an LGA level. This is when we undertake step 2 of the analysis.



October 2012 12

Key Findings

Quadrant Analysis

Step 2. Quadrant Analysis

Quadrant analysis is a useful tool for planning future directions. It combines the stated needs of

the community and assesses The Hills Shire Council’s performance in relation to these needs.

This analysis is completed by plotting the variables on x and y axes, defined by stated importance

and rated satisfaction. We aggregate the mean scores for stated importance and rated

satisfaction to identify where the facility or service should be plotted. For these criteria, the

average stated importance score was 4.03 and the average rated satisfaction score was 3.69.

Therefore, any facility or service that received a mean stated importance score of ≥ 4.03 would

be plotted in the higher importance section and, conversely, any that scored < 4.03 would be

plotted into the lower importance section. The same exercise is undertaken with the satisfaction

ratings above, equal to or below 3.69. Each service or facility is then plotted in terms of

satisfaction and importance, resulting in its placement in one of four quadrants.

Library services

Community centres and community

halls

Services and facilities for older people

Emergency services

Support for volunteer organisations

Council provision of local community

events

Playgrounds/play equipment

Ovals and sporting facilities

Lighting of public areas

Provision of public toilets

Parks and gardens

Aquatic centre

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre

Preservation of sensitive environmental

areasPreservation of permanent open

space

Water quality

Air quality

Management of noise pollution

Preservation of plants & animals in their

natural habitat

Bushland regeneration and weed

control

Domestic garbage collection

Recycling collection

Garden organic collection

On call kerbside service

Maintaining residential roads

Maintaining footpaths and cycleways

Traffic parking enforcement

Overall zoning of the Shire

Range of shopping facilities

Protection of heritage values and

buildings

Low density housing

Medium density housing

Streetscape appearance

Health inspections of food premises,

hairdressers, etc.Pet and animal management/control

Town centre and village atmosphere

Commercial building developments

Generating local employment

opportunities

Council's conduct as a professional

organisation

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on

issues that affect your life

Council's decision-making

unic

Council's financial management

Long term planning for The Hills Shire

Image and presentation of Council

information

Access to your local Councillor

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

3.7

3.9

4.1

4.3

4.5

2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8

Preservation of plants & animals in their natural habitat

Youth facilities 3.48, 2.53

Communication with Council & access to info

Coles

NicheLow importance/Low satisfaction

ImproveHigh importance/Low satisfaction

MaintainHigh importance/High satisfaction

SecondaryLow importance/High satisfaction



October 2012 13

Key Findings

Explaining the 4 quadrants

Attributes in the top right quadrant, MAINTAIN, such as ‘recycling collection’, are Council’s core

strengths, and should be treated as such. Maintain, or even attempt to improve your position in

these areas, as they are influential and address clear community needs.

Attributes in the bottom right quadrant, IMPROVE, such as ‘maintaining the condition of residential

(local) roads’, are areas where Council is perceived to be currently under-performing and are key

concerns in the eyes of your residents. In the vast majority of cases you should aim to improve

your performance in these areas to better meet the community’s expectations.

Attributes in the bottom left quadrant, NICHE, such as ‘low density housing developments’, are of

a relatively lower priority (and the word ‘relatively’ should be stressed – they are still important).

These areas tend to be important to a particular segment of the community.

Finally, attributes in the top left quadrant, SECONDARY, such as ‘protection of heritage values and

buildings’, are core strengths, but in relative terms they are less important than other areas and

Council’s servicing in these areas may already be exceeding expectation. Consideration could

be given to rationalising focus in these areas as they are not community priorities for

improvement.

Recommendations based only on stated importance and satisfaction have major limitations, as

the actual questionnaire process essentially ‘silos’ facilities and services as if they are independent

variables, when they are in fact all part of the broader community perception of Council

performance.

Residents’ priorities identified in stated importance/satisfaction analysis often tend to be in areas

that are problematic. No matter how much focus a Council dedicates to road maintenance, it

will often be found in the IMPROVE quadrant. This is because, perceptually, the condition of local

roads can always be better.

Furthermore, the outputs of stated importance and satisfaction analysis address the current

dynamics of the community, they do not predict which focus areas are the most likely agents to

change the community’s perception of Council’s overall performance.

Therefore, in order to identify how The Hills Shire Council can actively drive overall community

satisfaction, we conducted further analysis.



October 2012 14

Key Findings

The Shapley Value Regression

We recently finalised the development of a Council Satisfaction Model, to identify priorities that

will drive overall satisfaction with Council.

This model was developed by conducting specialised analysis from over 30,000 LGA interviews

conducted since 2005. In essence, it proved that increasing resident satisfaction by actioning the

priorities they stated as being important does not necessarily positively impact on overall

satisfaction with the Council. This regression analysis is a statistical tool for investigating

relationships between dependent variables and explanatory variables.

What Does This Mean?

The learning is that if we only rely on the stated community priorities, we will not be allocating the

appropriate resources to the actual service attributes that will improve overall community

satisfaction. Using regression analysis we can identify the attributes that essentially build overall

satisfaction. We call the outcomes ‘derived importance’.

Correlation Between Stated Importance and

Derived Importance Is Low

If you only focus on stated importance, you are not focusing on the

key drivers of community satisfaction

Coles

89%

S

t

a

t

e

d

I

m

p

o

r

t

a

n

c

e

D e r I v e d I m p o r t a n c e

Maintaining the condition

of residential (local) roads


Council's conduct as a

professional organisationOpportunities to have a

'real say' on issues that

affect your life


Communication with

Council and access to

information

Council's financial

management

Long term planning for

The Hills Shire

Image and presentation

of Council information

Access to your local

Councillor

3.6

3.8

4.0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.8

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0

In the chart above, on the vertical axis of ‘stated importance’, all the facilities/services fall in

relatively close proximity to each other (i.e. between approximately 3.7 & 4.7). However, on the

horizontal axis the attributes are spread between 3 & 15. The further an attribute is found to the

right of the horizontal axis of ‘derived importance’, the more it contributes in driving overall

satisfaction with Council.



October 2012 15

Key Findings

Key Drivers of Satisfaction with The Hills Shire Council

The results in the chart below provide The Hills Shire Council with a complete picture of both the

extrinsic and intrinsic community priorities and motivations and identify what attributes are the key

drivers of community satisfaction.

These top 10 services/facilities account for over 60% of overall satisfaction with Council. This

indicates that the remaining 37 attributes we obtained measures on have only a limited impact

on the community’s satisfaction with The Hills Shire Council’s performance. Therefore, whilst all 47

service/facility areas are important, only a minority of them are significant drivers of the

community’s overall satisfaction with Council.

Coles

89%

These Top 10 Indicators Account for over

60% of Overall Satisfaction with Council

2.9

3.9

4.0

4.1

6.4

6.4

6.9

7.0

7.3

14.9

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00

Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads


Image and presentation of Council information


Opportunities to have a 'real say in issues that affect you



Communication with Council and access to information


Council's conduct as a professional organisation

These 10 services/facilities are the key community priorities and by addressing these, The Hills Shire

Council will improve overall community satisfaction. The score assigned to each area indicates

the percentage of influence each attribute contributes to overall satisfaction with Council.

In the above chart, ‘maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads’ contributes 2.9%

towards overall satisfaction, while ‘Council’s conduct as a professional organisation’ (14.9%) is a

far stronger driver, contributing over five times as much to overall satisfaction with Council.



October 2012 16

Key Findings

Clarifying Priorities

If The Hills Shire Council can address these core drivers, they will be able to improve resident

satisfaction with their performance. In the chart below we can see that, for many of the core

drivers, Council is already performing reasonably well. There are clear opportunities, however, to

improve satisfaction with the services/facilities that fall below the diagonal line.

Recreation/Performing

Arts Centre





professional organisation

Opportunities to have a


affect your life


Communication with


information

Council's financial

management

Long term planning for

The Hills Shire




Councillor

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

3.7

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0

Mapping Stated Satisfaction and Derived

Importance Identifies the Community Priority Areas

The key drivers of overall community satisfaction with Council are the organisation’s conduct,

decision-making and long term planning, as well as the condition of the roads

IMPROVE

CONSOLIDATE

D e r I v e d I m p o r t a n c e

S

t

a

t

e

d

s

a

t

i

s

f

a

c

t

i

o

n

The key outcomes of this analysis indicate that ‘Council’s conduct as a professional organisation’,

‘long term planning for The Hills Shire’, Council’s decision-making’, ‘opportunities to have a ‘real

say’ on issues that affect your life’ and ‘maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads’ are

priority areas from a resident perspective.



October 2012 17

Key Findings

Summary

The summary table below combines the outcomes of the regression analysis with the stated

importance and satisfaction outcomes of the performance gap and quadrant analysis.

In developing future plans and strategies, The Hills Shire Council should consider the implications

raised by each form of analysis.

Shapley’s

Analysis

Gap

Analysis

Quadrant

Analysis

Council's conduct as a professional organisation 14.85 0.93 Improve

Council's financial management 7.29 0.99 Improve

Communication with Council and access to information 6.95 0.79 Improve

Long term planning for The Hills Shire 6.92 1.33 Improve

Council's decision-making 6.45 1.08 Improve

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life 6.37 1.17 Improve

Overall zoning of the Shire 4.13 0.49 Niche

Image and presentation of Council information 4.05 0.16 Niche

Access to your local Councillor 3.89 0.53 Niche

Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads 2.89 1.71 Improve

Recommendations

The Hills Shire Council has performed strongly at an overall level; however, there are some very

clear opportunities to strengthen community perceptions, specifically:

1. Identify community expectations of Council professionalism and fiscal responsibility

2. Look to identify methods and mediums that can saliently inform the community of

Council’s activities and plans

3. Engage and actively communicate with residents as to how they can be more involved in

shaping the future plans of Council

4. Clarify and seek to address community expectations regarding all aspects of transport &

access and zoning, as they are primary issues of concern for residents

Section A

Detailed Findings Importance of, and Satisfaction with,

Council services and facilities



October 2012 18

Importance of, and Satisfaction with Council Services and Facilities

The Unipolar Scale of 1 to 5, where 1 was the lowest importance or satisfaction and 5 the highest

importance or satisfaction, was used in all rating questions.

Interpreting the Mean Scores

Within the report, the mean ratings for each of the criteria have been assigned a determined level of

‘importance’ or ‘satisfaction’. This determination is based on the following groupings:

Mean rating:

1.99 or lower ‘Very low’ level of importance/satisfaction

2.00 – 2.49 ‘Low’ level of importance/satisfaction

2.50 – 2.99 ‘Moderately low’ levels of importance/satisfaction

3.00 – 3.59 ‘Moderate’ level of importance/satisfaction

3.60 – 3.89 ‘Moderately high’ level of importance/satisfaction

3.90 – 4.19 ‘High’ level of importance/satisfaction

4.20 – 4.49 ‘Very high’ level of importance/satisfaction

4.50 + ‘Extreme’ level of importance/satisfaction

Participants were asked to indicate which best described their opinion of the importance of the following

services/facilities to them. Respondents who rated services/facilities a 4 or 5 in importance were then asked

to rate their satisfaction with that service/facility.

We Explored Resident Response to 47

Service Areas

Creating Vibrant Communities

Library services

Community centres and community halls

Youth facilities, e.g. skate parks


Emergency services


Council provision of local community events





Parks and gardens

Aquatic centre


Valuing our Environment

Preservation of sensitive environmental areas

Preservation of permanent open space

Water quality

Air quality


Preservation of plants and animals in their natural habitat

Bushlandregeneration and weed control





Balanced Urban Growth


Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways




Protection of heritage values and buildings

Low density housing developments

Medium density housing developments


Health inspections of food premises, hairdressers, etc.

Pet and animal management/control

Building a Modern Local Economy



Generating local employment opportunities

Proactive Leadership


Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life









October 2012 19


Key Service Areas’ Contribution to Overall Satisfaction

By combining the outcomes of the regression data, we can identify the derived importance of the different

Nett Priority Areas.

Contribution To Overall Satisfaction With

Council’s Performance

3.0

9.6

14.6

16.1

56.8

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0

Nett - Building A Modern Local

Economy

Nett - Valuing Our Environment

Nett - Creating Vibrant Communities

Nett - Balanced Urban Growth

Nett - Proactive Leadership

‘Proactive Leadership’ (57%) is the key contributor toward overall satisfaction with Council performance.

The services and facilities grouped under this banner included:



Council's decision-making, e.g. objectivity






This is not to indicate that the other priority areas are less important, but rather that some of the services and

facilities grouped under the banner of ‘Proactive Leadership’ are core drivers of resident satisfaction.



October 2012 20


Interpreting Performance Gap

Within the report, the mean ratings for each of the criteria have been assigned a determined ‘level of

importance or satisfaction’. To identify the performance gap, we subtract the rated satisfaction mean

score from the stated importance mean scores:

Performance gap

1.50 or higher Extremely high gap between importance and satisfaction

Requires Immediate Action – Code Violet

0.90 – 1.49 Moderately high – Very high gap between importance and satisfaction

Requires Immediate Investigation – Code Red

0.20 – 0.89 Moderately low – Moderate gap between importance and satisfaction

Monitor – Code Grey

0.00 – 0.19 Minimal gap between importance and satisfaction

Monitor – Code Blue

Less than Zero Negative performance gap between importance and satisfaction

Revisit/Reconsider Resource Allocation – Code Green

Correlations – definitions

We have run analysis across 2 areas of interest:

Age

Gender



October 2012 21

Importance/Satisfaction – Creating Vibrant Communities

Services and facilities explored included:

Library services


Youth facilities


Emergency services







Parks and gardens

Aquatic centre


Contribution to Overall Satisfaction with Council (Regression Data)

Council’s performance in the areas below accounts for almost 15% of overall satisfaction, based on the

regression analysis.

Creating Vibrant Communities –

Almost 15% of Overall Satisfaction with Council

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.3

1.6

1.6

2.0

2.1

14.6

0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0

Library services




Emergency services



Aquatic centre





Parks and gardens


Nett - Creating Vibrant Communities



October 2012 22


Overview of Rating Scores

Importance – overall

Very high Emergency services


Parks and gardens

High Ovals and sporting facilities

Moderately high Provision of public toilets



Moderate Council provision of local community events

Aquatic centre

Library services



Moderately low Community centres and community halls

Youth facilities

Importance – by age

Residents aged 18-54 deemed the importance of ‘ovals and sporting facilities’ and the ‘aquatic centre’ to

be higher than did those aged 75+ (4.35, 4.24, 4.35 & 4.19 v 3.02) (3.43, 3.44, 3.76 & 3.45 v 2.70).

Residents aged 25-44 deemed the importance of ‘emergency services’ to be higher than did those aged

18-24 (4.62 & 4.52 v 4.15), and the importance of ‘playgrounds/play equipment’ to be higher than did those

aged 18-24 and 45+ (4.29 & 4.45 v 3.55, 3.56, 3.57, 3.31 & 2.72).

Residents aged 65+ rated the importance of ‘services and facilities for older people’ higher than did those

aged 25-34 (3.63 & 3.72 v 2.91).

Residents aged 35-44 deemed the importance of ‘library services’ to be higher than did those aged 25-34

and 45+ (3.79 v 3.26, 3.28, 2.92, 2.84 & 2.72), the importance of ‘community centres and community halls’ to

be higher than did those aged 55+ (3.19 v 2.62, 2.45 & 2.51), and the importance of ‘youth facilities’ to be

higher than did those aged 18-24 & 45+ (3.08 v 2.48, 2.53, 2.08, 2.01 & 1.84).

Importance – by gender

Females rated 10 of the 14 services/facilities higher in importance than did males, including:

Library services (3.52 v 3.06)

Community centres and community halls (3.05 v 2.75)

Emergency services, e.g. SES and Rural Fire Service (4.51 v 4.34)

Support for volunteer organisations (4.02 v 3.71)

Council provision of local community events (3.69 v 3.40)

Lighting of public areas (4.40 v 4.16)

Provision of public toilets (4.13 v 3.64)

Parks and gardens (4.35 v 4.03)

Aquatic centre (3.55 v 3.21)

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre (3.45 v 3.04)



October 2012 23


Satisfaction – overall

Very high Emergency services

Library services

High Support for volunteer organisations


Moderately high Community centres and community halls

Parks and gardens




Aquatic centre


Youth facilities

Moderate Lighting of public areas


Satisfaction – by age

Residents aged 35-44 were more satisfied with the provision of ‘library services’ than were those aged 18-24

(4.35 v 4.00).

Residents aged 75+ were more satisfied with the provision of the following:

Services and facilities for older people – than were 18-34 & 45-64 (4.33 v 3.56, 3.42, 3.54 & 3.59)

Emergency services – than were 18-24 & 35-54 (4.74 v 4.16, 4.31 & 4.34)

Council provision of local community events – than were 18-24 & 45-54 (4.48 v 3.81 & 3.75)

Parks and gardens – than were 18-64 (4.35 v 3.67, 3.85, 3.84, 3.74 & 3.89)

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre – than were 18-64 (4.39 v 3.00, 3.50, 3.62, 3.67 & 3.42)

Satisfaction – by gender

Males were more satisfied than were females with the provision of ‘services and facilities for older people’

(3.81 v 3.60), ‘support for volunteer organisations’ (4.13 v 3.89) and the ‘aquatic centre’ (3.76 v 3.49).



October 2012 24




Parks and gardens


Emergency services


Part 1

Performance

gap

0.86

0.81

0.33

0.13

0.06

0.00

Mean

ratings

3.89

3.03

4.28

3.47

4.20

3.87

4.07

3.94

4.43

4.37

3.77

3.77

Mean ratings: 1 = not at all important/satisfied, 5 = very important/satisfied

Performance gap

Extremely high gap Minimal gap

Moderately high – very high gap Negative gap

Moderately low – moderate gap

13%

4%

7%

4%

8%

7%

9%

5%

4%

13%

23%

6%

22%

14%

10%

7%

20%

12%

23%

15%

34%

12%

37%

22%

39%

24%

38%

22%

40%

27%

48%

32%

31%

26%

19%

24%

27%

43%

50%

65%

32%

50%

23%

47%

18%

56%

12%

42%

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

Not at all

important

Not very

important

Somewhat

important Important

Very

important

Not at all

satisfied

Not very

satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied Satisfied

Very

satisfied



October 2012 25


Support for volunteer

organisations

Aquatic centre

Recreation/

Performing Arts Centre

Council provision of local

community events

Services and facilities for older

people


Library services

Community centres and

community halls

Part 2

Performance

gap

-0.13

-0.23

-0.30

-0.32

-0.47

-0.95

-0.95

-0.99

Mean

ratings

3.87

4.00

3.38

3.61

3.25

3.55

3.55

3.87

3.23

3.70

2.53

3.48

3.29

4.24

2.90

3.89


Performance gap




22%

22%

6%

38%

21%

9%

5%

15%

8%

16%

8%

4%

15%

14%

14%

5%

11%

6%

9%

8%

12%

9%

10%

6%

22%

29%

11%

16%

25%

18%

32%

19%

20%

28%

31%

27%

23%

23%

23%

18%

44%

19%

45%

22%

36%

13%

38%

22%

47%

28%

39%

25%

35%

21%

40%

27%

27%

15%

41%

30%

19%

16%

21%

27%

25%

26%

17%

21%

25%

30%

33%

40%

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

Not at all

important

Not very

important

Somewhat

important Important

Very

important

Not at all

satisfied

Not very

satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied Satisfied

Very

satisfied



October 2012 26


Quadrant Analysis

Recommendations

Based on the stated outcomes analysis, The Hills Shire Council needs to improve:


The Hills Shire Council also needs to maintain resident satisfaction with:

Emergency services

Parks and gardens



Emergency services

Parks and gardens



Aquatic centre


Youth facilities




Library services



IMPROVE MAINTAIN

NICHE SECONDARY



October 2012 27

Importance/Satisfaction – Valuing Our Environment




Water quality

Air quality



Bushland regeneration and weed control








Coles

89%

Valuing Our Environment –Almost 10% of Overall Satisfaction with Council

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.7

1.9

9.6

0.00 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00


Garden organice collection

Air quality



Domest garbage collection


Water quality




Nett - Valuing Our Environment



October 2012 28




Extremely high Domestic garbage collection


Air quality

Very high Water quality





High Preservation of permanent open space




Residents aged 18-24 deemed the importance of the following services/facilities to be of lower importance

than did:

Preservation of permanent open space – 25+ (3.60 v 4.11, 4.26, 4.22, 4.31, 4.30 & 4.30)

Bushland regeneration and weed control – 25+ (3.65 v 4.20, 4.20, 4.20, 4.25, 4.34 & 4.39)

Domestic garbage collection – 25+ (4.50 v 4.79, 4.75, 4.73, 4.73, 4.84 & 4.88)

Recycling collection – 25-44 & 65+ (4.53 v 4.79, 4.76, 4.83 & 4.92)

Garden organic collection – 25+ (3.93 v 4.38, 4.54, 4.45, 4.48, 4.66 & 4.81)

On call kerbside services – 35+ (4.05 v 4.42, 4.50, 4.50, 4.51, 4.55)


Females deemed the importance of 9 of the 11 services/facilities to be of higher importance than did

males, including:

Preservation of sensitive environmental areas (4.15 v 3.86)

Preservation of permanent open space (4.24v 4.08)

Water quality (4.57 v 4.36)

Air quality (4.65 v 4.48)

Management of noise pollution (4.31 v 4.14)

Preservation of plants and animals in their natural habitat (4.41 v 4.04)

Bushland regeneration and weed control (4.28 v 4.04)

Garden organic collection (4.53 v 4.34)

On call kerbside service (4.46 v 4.33)



October 2012 29



Very high Recycling collection



High Air quality


Water quality

Moderately high Preservation of plants and animals in their natural habitat



Moderate Bushland regeneration and weed control



Residents aged 75+ were more satisfied with the ‘preservation of sensitive environmental areas’ than were

18-24 y/o (4.15 v 3.54), ‘preservation of permanent open spaces’ than were 18-24 & 35-64 y/o (4.23 v 3.30,

3.65, 3.51 & 3.53).


Males were more satisfied with ‘air quality’ than were females (4.15 v 3.98).



October 2012 30



Bushland regeneration and weed

control

Preservation of permanent open

space

Water quality

Air quality

Preservation of plants and

animals in their natural habitat




Preservation of sensitive

environmental areas


Performance

gap

0.67

0.57

0.53

0.52

0.51

0.44

0.42

0.37

0.28

0.26

0.07

Mean

ratings

4.23

3.56

4.16

3.59

4.16

3.63

4.47

3.95

4.57

4.06

4.23

3.79

4.40

3.98

4.73

4.36

4.73

4.45

4.01

3.75

4.44

4.37


Performance gap




4%

5%

7%

4%

4%

5%

4%

7%

4%

4%

7%

6%

4%

7%

9%

10%

4%

12%

7%

8%

25%

18%

7%

4%

9%

4%

15%

11%

28%

15%

17%

8%

22%

9%

29%

17%

30%

15%

27%

15%

25%

16%

46%

30%

27%

16%

26%

16%

22%

20%

38%

27%

39%

17%

34%

20%

37%

29%

36%

29%

33%

29%

61%

69%

20%

43%

62%

79%

59%

79%

49%

64%

25%

52%

38%

72%

36%

67%

21%

48%

20%

48%

23%

51%

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

Not at all

important

Not very

important

Somewhat

important Important

Very

important

Not at all

satisfied

Not very

satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied Satisfied

Very

satisfied



October 2012 31


Quadrant Analysis

Recommendations









Air quality

Water quality









Air quality

Water quality




Nil Preservation of sensitive environmental

areas

IMPROVE MAINTAIN

NICHE SECONDARY



October 2012 32

Importance/Satisfaction – Balanced Urban Growth








Low density housing developments, e.g. single houses, villas

Medium density housing developments, e.g. apartments





Council’s performance in the areas below accounts for over 16% of overall satisfaction, based on the


Coles

89%

Leadership and Economy –Almost 22% of Overall Satisfaction with Council

0.6

0.6

0.8

0.9

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.3

1.5

2.9

4.1

16.1

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0












Nett - Balanced Urban Growth



October 2012 33




Extremely high Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads

Very high Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways




High Pet and animal management/control




Moderate Traffic parking enforcement



Residents aged 75+ deemed the importance of ‘traffic parking enforcement’ to be higher than did those

aged 18-34 & 45-54 (4.06 v 3.38, 3.29 & 3.48), and ‘range of shopping facilities’ to be higher than did those

aged 18-24 & 45-54 (4.65 v 4.23 & 4.24).

Residents aged 45-74 deemed the importance of the ‘overall zoning of the Shire’ to be higher than did

those aged 18-24 (4.10, 4.18 & 4.23 v 3.60).

Residents aged 35-44 and 55+ rated the importance of ‘protection of heritage values and buildings’ higher

than did those aged 18-24 (4.07, 4.14, 4.26 & 4.33 v 3.65).

Residents aged 55-74 rated the importance of ‘low density housing developments’ higher than did those

aged 18-24 (4.13 & 4.21 v 3.68).

Residents aged 25-34 & 65-74 deemed the importance of ‘pet and animal management/control’ to be

higher than did those aged 18-24 (4.12 & 4.23 v 3.73).


Females rated 9 of the 11 services/facilities higher in importance than did males, these were:

Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads(4.77 v 4.58)

Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways (4.62 v 4.28)

Traffic parking enforcement (3.73 v 3.36)

Range of shopping facilities (4.44 v 4.21)

Protection of heritage values and buildings (4.17 v 3.87)

Low density housing developments, e.g. single houses, villas (4.09 v 3.90)

Streetscape appearance (4.28 v 4.11)

Health inspections of food premises, hairdressers, etc. (4.50 v 4.27)

Pet and animal management/control (4.20 v 3.85)



October 2012 34



Very high Range of shopping facilities

Moderately high Protection of heritage values and buildings




Moderate Overall zoning of the Shire





Moderately low Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads


Residents aged 18-34 were more satisfied with the ‘overall zoning of the Shire’ than were those aged 45-64

(3.89 & 3.77 v 3.32 & 3.20), and ‘streetscape appearance’ than were those aged 45-64 (3.97 & 3.89 v 3.43 &

3.46).

Residents aged 25-34 were more satisfied with ‘medium density housing developments’ than were those

aged 45-54 (3.73 v 3.04).

Residents aged 18-34 and 75+ were more satisfied with the ‘protection of heritage values and buildings’

than were those aged 55-64 (4.04, 4.02 & 4.14 v 3.60).

Residents aged 75+ were more satisfied with the ‘range of shopping facilities’ than were those aged 45-54

(4.57 v 4.16).


Males were more satisfied than were females with ‘maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads’

(3.06 v 2.90) and maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways’ (3.36 v 3.06).



October 2012 35


Maintaining the condition of

residential (local) roads

Maintaining the condition of

footpaths and cycleways

Low density housing

developments

Health inspections of food

premises, hairdressers, etc.



Pet and animal

management/control

Protection of heritage values

and buildings




developments

Performance

gap

1.71

1.25

0.64

0.63

0.56

0.49

0.26

0.18

0.16

0.09

-0.22

Mean

ratings

4.68

2.97

4.45

3.20

4.00

3.36

4.39

3.76

4.20

3.64

3.99

3.50

4.03

3.77

4.02

3.84

3.55

3.39

4.33

4.24

3.08

3.30


Performance gap




9%

15%

8%

10%

4%

6%

5%

7%

4%

8%

13%

17%

14%

4%

13%

8%

5%

6%

6%

6%

13%

4%

10%

6%

15%

7%

18%

20%

28%

34%

12%

13%

29%

31%

24%

20%

22%

21%

27%

23%

30%

15%

28%

11%

31%

20%

34%

9%

35%

4%

28%

18%

40%

32%

30%

21%

42%

28%

43%

28%

34%

24%

38%

37%

41%

23%

29%

25%

27%

24%

21%

19%

18%

17%

44%

53%

19%

31%

26%

43%

25%

43%

20%

44%

20%

44%

22%

62%

18%

44%

14%

63%

11%

75%

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

Not at all

important

Not very

important

Somewhat

important Important

Very

important

Not at all

satisfied

Not very

satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied Satisfied

Very

satisfied



October 2012 36


Quadrant Analysis

Recommendations




















IMPROVE MAINTAIN

NICHE SECONDARY



October 2012 37

Importance/Satisfaction – Building A Modern Local Economy



Commercial building developments, e.g. industry, shopping centres, offices



Council’s performance in the areas below accounts for 3% of overall satisfaction, based on the regression

analysis.

Coles

89%

Building a Modern Local Economy –


0.7

1.1

1.2

3.0

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0




Nett - Building a Modern Local Economy



October 2012 38




Very high Generating local employment opportunities

High Town centre and village atmosphere

Moderately high Commercial building developments


There were no significant differences by age.


Females rated the importance of the ‘town centre and village atmosphere’ and ‘generating local

employment opportunities’ higher than did males (4.20 v 3.98) (4.45 v 4.18).


Moderately high Town centre and village atmosphere


Moderate Generating local employment opportunities


Residents aged 75+ were more satisfied with ‘generating local employment opportunities’ than were those

aged 45-54 (3.78 v 3.22).


Males were more satisfied with ‘generating local employment opportunities’ than were females

(3.44 v 3.28).



October 2012 39


Generating local

employment opportunities

Town centre and village

atmosphere

Commercial building

developments

Performance

gap

0.96

0.20

-0.10

Mean

ratings

4.32

3.36

4.09

3.89

3.71

3.81


Performance gap




5%

4%

5%

7%

6%

4%

13%

28%

27%

20%

20%

40%

12%

41%

31%

44%

31%

32%

23%

25%

29%

27%

43%

12%

59%

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

Not at all

important

Not very

important

Somewhat

important Important

Very

important

Not at all

satisfied

Not very

satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied Satisfied

Very

satisfied



October 2012 40


Quadrant Analysis

Recommendations







Nil Commercial building developments

IMPROVE MAINTAIN

NICHE SECONDARY



October 2012 41

Importance/Satisfaction – Proactive Leadership




Council's decision-making, e.g. objectivity









Coles

89%

Proactive Leadership –Almost 57% of Overall Satisfaction with Council

3.9

4.0

6.4

6.4

6.9

7.0

7.3

14.9

56.8

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0









Nett - Proactive Leadership



October 2012 42




Extremely high Long term planning for The Hills Shire

Very high Council's conduct as a professional organisation





Moderately high Access to your local Councillor



Residents aged 55-74 rated the importance of ‘Council’s financial management higher than did those

aged 18-24 (4.47 & 4.51 v 4.00).

Residents aged 35-44 and 65-74 rated the importance of ‘long term planning for The Hills Shire’ higher than

did those aged 18-24 (4.62 & 4.64 v 4.25).

Residents aged 65-74 deemed the importance of the ‘image and presentation of Council information’ to

be higher than did those aged 18-54 (4.17 v 3.60, 3.68, 3.69 & 3.69).


Females rated the importance of 6 of the 8 services/facilities higher than did males, these were:

Council's conduct as a professional organisation (4.47 v 4.33)

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life (4.52 v 4.24)

Council's decision-making, e.g. objectivity (4.29 v 4.15)

Communication with Council and access to information (4.48 v 4.26)

Long term planning for The Hills Shire (4.60 v 4.44)

Access to your local Councillor (3.99 v 3.78)



October 2012 43



Moderately high Image and presentation of Council information

Moderate Communication with Council and access to information








Residents aged 18-34 were more satisfied with ‘Council’s decision-making’ than were those aged 45-64

(3.45 & 3.44 v 2.88 & 3.01).

Residents aged 18-34 & 75+ were more satisfied with ‘Council’s financial management’ than were those

aged 45-54 (3.62, 3.53 & 3.65 v 3.07).

Residents aged 75+ were more satisfied with ‘long term planning for The Hills Shire’ than were those aged

35-64 (3.69 v 3.11, 2.92 & 3.14).

Residents aged 25-34 were more satisfied with the ‘image and presentation of Council information’ than

were those aged 45-54 (3.95 v 3.43).


Males were more satisfied with ‘opportunities to have a ‘real say’ on issues that affect your life’, ‘Council’s

financial management’ and the ‘image and presentation of Council information’ than were females (3.30

v 3.13) (3.49 v 3.17) (3.74 v 3.54).



October 2012 44


Long term planning for The

Hills Shire

Opportunities to have a 'real

say' on issues that affect your

life


Council's financial

management



Communication with Council

and access to information


Councillor

Image and presentation of

Council information

Performance

gap

1.33

1.17

1.08

0.99

0.93

0.79

0.53

0.16

Mean

ratings

4.52

3.19

4.38

3.21

4.22

3.14

4.32

3.33

4.40

3.47

4.37

3.58

3.89

3.36

3.79

3.63


Performance gap




4%

10%

5%

6%

6%

6%

7%

9%

7%

9%

8%

15%

7%

10%

11%

12%

18%

18%

15%

30%

27%

23%

22%

26%

13%

33%

12%

37%

13%

39%

18%

32%

13%

41%

7%

38%

29%

33%

24%

37%

28%

33%

25%

34%

20%

26%

25%

27%

21%

25%

19%

20%

32%

19%

41%

21%

56%

18%

60%

12%

61%

10%

52%

15%

62%

12%

70%

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

Not at all

important

Not very

important

Somewhat

important Important

Very

important

Not at all

satisfied

Not very

satisfied

Somewhat

satisfied Satisfied

Very

satisfied



October 2012 45


Quadrant Analysis

Recommendations














Nil



Nil

IMPROVE MAINTAIN

NICHE SECONDARY



October 2012 46

Overall Satisfaction with Council’s Performance

Summary

Overall, the research has found a generally positive result for The Hills Shire Council, with 46 of the 47

services/facilities/criteria rated as being of ‘moderate satisfaction’ to ‘very high satisfaction’.

At an overall level, residents expressed a ‘moderately high’ level of satisfaction with the performance of

Council, with 54% of the respondents giving a rating of ‘satisfied’.

There were no significant differences between the ages or genders.

Q. How do you rate your overall satisfaction with the performance of Council across all areas of responsibility?

18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Male Female Overall

Mean ratings 3.63 3.74 3.67 3.56 3.58 3.68 3.65 3.63 3.64 3.64


3%

6%

28%

54%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60%


Not very satisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied



October 2012 47

Overview

Using regression analysis, we identified the variables that have the greatest influence on driving positive

overall satisfaction with Council.

0.3

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.5

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.9

0.9

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.2

1.2

1.3

1.3

1.5

1.6

1.6

1.7

1.9

2.0

2.1

2.9

3.9

4.0

4.1

6.4

6.4

6.9

7.0

7.3

14.9

0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0

Library services




Air quality

Youth facilities



Emergency services





Domest garbage collection





Water quality

Aquatic centre














Preservation of plants and animals in their natural*


Parks and gardens






Opportunities to have a 'real say'*








October 2012 48

Improving Satisfaction with Council’s Performance

These 10 services/facilities are the key community priorities and by addressing these, The Hills Shire Council

will improve community satisfaction. The score assigned to each area indicates the percentage of

influence each attribute contributes to overall satisfaction with Council. For example, in the chart below

‘Council’s conduct as a professional organisation’ contributes 14.9% towards overall satisfaction.

Coles

89%

These Top 10 Indicators Account for over


2.9

3.9

4.0

4.1

6.4

6.4

6.9

7.0

7.3

14.9

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00





Opportunities to have a 'real say in issues that affect you






Based on the regression analysis, Council performance in the areas listed above accounts for over 60% of

overall satisfaction.

Outcome

If The Hills Shire Council can address these core drivers, they will be able to improve residents’ overall

satisfaction with their performance.

Section B

Priority Issues



October 2012 49

Things Most Valued About Living in The Shire

Summary

The predominant things that residents value about living in The Hills Shire are ‘open spaces and a clean

environment’, that ‘there is easy access to community facilities and services’ and ‘the community is

friendly and welcoming’.

Q. What are the things that you value most about living in The Hills Shire?



number of times a particular word or phrase appears and, based on the frequency of that word or phrase, a font size

is generated. The larger the font, the more frequently the word or sentiment is mentioned.



October 2012 50

Things Most Valued About Living in The Shire

Q. What are the things that you value most about living in The Hills Shire?

Verbatim Responses

“Being surrounded by bushland and open space, and having all the parks in The Shire”

“Rural atmosphere that our community has with peace and quiet, close to all services yet natural bushland all

around”

“The bushland and nature, the area is a safe place to live I feel safe bushwalking on my own”

“Community festivals and the Town Centre”

“Community pride in the area”

“Friendly community - attitude of neighbours, good people generally”

“Friendly neighbours make me feel like part of the community”

“Having a friendly community and social events throughout the whole Hills Shire”

“Local businesses are friendly and trustworthy and give the Shire area a good atmosphere”

“The feeling of living in a very safe community”

“The multicultural aspect, there are many different nationalities that are welcome, festivals, language schools, etc”

“Vibrant culture scene in community events”

“Great friendly area to bring up our children as we are in close proximity to all facilities such as transport, schools,

shops and entertainment”

“The family atmosphere in the area, it's peaceful, easy to access the children's schools, it's getting denser though but

we have more bushland to balance the development”

“The family atmosphere and carefree lifestyle”

“Safety of the community and a nice community atmosphere”

“The high level of safety which is due to the tight knit community who look out for each other and the neighbourhood

in general”



October 2012 51

Highest Priority Issues Facing The Hills Shire in the Next 4 Years

Summary

‘Lack of public transport’ and ‘traffic congestion and ease of access’ were nominated as the highest

priority issues facing The Hills Shire in the next 4 years.

Q. Thinking about the next 4 years, what do you think are the highest priority issues facing The Hills Shire and its

residents?



number of times a particular word or phrase appears and, based on the frequency of that word or phrase, a font size

is generated. The larger the font, the more frequently the word or sentiment is mentioned.

Verbatim Responses

“Traffic congestion needs to be addressed and resolved due to development and the population growth. With

already congested roads, it is my only concern about living out here”

“Traffic is far too congested, and the roads cannot cope with access into and out of the Hills area”

“Traffic management and the lack of space for increasing roads and developments”

“Building the Metro rail link”

“Establishing an integrated transport solution for the area”

“Get our public transport resolved, so as commuting is not so long”

“Improve the public transport facilities due growing population”

Introducing more accessible public transport options to the community

“Upgrading the roads to cater for more traffic”

“Traffic management particularly freeing the congestion of arterial roads and making easier access out of the area to

surrounding suburbs and the city”

Section C

Council Contact & Information



October 2012 52


Summary

Residents would prefer to conduct their Council related business either ‘online’ (55%) or by ‘telephone’

(53%).

Residents aged 18-44 were more likely to prefer ‘online’, whilst those aged 45-75+ preferred ‘telephone’.

Males were more likely to prefer ‘online’, whilst females were more likely to prefer telephone.

Q. How would you prefer to conduct your Council related business?

Nb: Due to a change in the terminology, comparisons could not be made to 2010.

2%

8%

12%

53%

55%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other

Library

By mail

Telephone

Online



October 2012 53


Summary

The predominant methods for sourcing information from Council were the ‘Council website’, ‘personal

enquiry’, the ‘Hills News’, with the ‘rates notice’ and in the ‘Hills Shire Times’.

Males were more likely than females to source information from the ‘Rouse Hill Times’ and ‘e-newsletters’.

Q. Where do you look to find out information from Council?

1%

2%

3%

10%

12%

14%

14%

16%

21%

31%

53%

57%

59%

62%

71%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

None of these

Other

Rouse Hills-Stanhope Gardens News

Hills Focus community magazine

E-newsletters

Social media

Radio

Rouse Hill Times

Library

Word of mouth

Hills Shire Times

Sent with rates notice

Hills News

Personal enquiry

Council website



October 2012 54


Summary

26% of residents receive Council’s ‘Hills Focus’ community magazine, 70% of whom read it.

Residents aged 25+ were more likely to acknowledge receiving the magazine.

Q. Do you receive Council’s ‘Hills Focus’ community

magazine in your letterbox?

Q. Do you read the ‘Hills Focus’?

Q. (If not read), why not?

I am not interested in the content 36

Insufficient time 28

It appears to be junk mail 5

I look online for information 2

I cannot read English 1

I was not aware of it 1

Yes

26%

No

74%

Yes

70%

No

30%

Section D

Living In The Hills Shire



October 2012 55

Quality of Life

Summary

Overall, residents rated their quality of life as ‘very high’, with 54% rating it as ‘excellent’ and 38% as ‘good’.

This was consistent across the demographics.

Q. How would you rate your overall quality of life?


Mean ratings 4.60 4.56 4.40 4.46 4.39 4.48 4.34 4.46 4.47 4.46

Mean ratings: 1 = very poor, 5 = excellent

0%

0%

7%

38%

54%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Very poor

Poor

Average

Good

Excellent



October 2012 56

Agreement with Specific Statements

Summary

Residents expressed ‘extremely high’ levels of agreement with the statements ‘I feel safe moving about in

public spaces in The Hills during the day’, ‘The Hills Shire is a good place to live’ and ‘I prefer to shop in my

local community’. The results that could be compared to 2010 were statistically similar.

‘Very high’ levels of agreement were expressed with the statements ‘in an emergency a family member or

friend is available to assist me’ and ‘my neighbourhood has a friendly atmosphere’.

‘High’ levels of agreement were expressed with the statements ‘I feel part of my local community’ and ‘I

feel safe moving about in public spaces in The Hills at night’.

Residents aged 18-24, 25-34 and 65-74 were more likely to agree with the statement ‘The Hills Shire is a good

place to live’ than were those aged 35-44 (4.75, 4.71 & 4.77 v 4.50).

Residents aged 65+ were more likely to agree with the statement ‘I feel part of my local community’ than

were those aged 18-24 (4.20 & 4.27 v 3.75).

Residents aged 18-24 were more likely to agree with the statement ‘I feel safe moving about in public

spaces in The Hills during the day’ than were those aged 55-64 (4.80 v 4.58) and more likely than those

aged 45-54 to agree with the statement ‘in an emergency a family member or friend is available to assist

me’ (4.65 v 4.26).

Residents aged 18-34 were more likely to agree with the statement ‘I feel safe moving about in public

spaces in The Hills at night’ than were those aged 65+ (3.93 & 3.92 v 3.43 & 3.18).

Females were more likely to agree with the statements ‘I feel part of my local community’ and ‘I prefer to

shop in my local community’ than were males (4.06 v 3.87) (4.62 v 4.41), whilst males were more likely to

agree that ‘I feel safe moving about in public spaces in The Hills at night’ than were females (3.87 v 3.48).



October 2012 57


Q. How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements:

Mean ratings

2012

4.67

4.63

4.52

4.40

4.21

3.97

3.67

2010

4.51

N/A

N/A

4.34

4.29

N/A

3.58

Mean ratings: 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly disagree

8%

4%

28%

25%

13%

8%

7%

4%

3%

36%

34%

36%

24%

26%

26%

26%

24%

35%

46%

62%

65%

69%

71%

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

I feel safe moving about in public

spaces in The Hills at night

I feel part of my local community

My neighbourhood has a friendly

atmosphere

In an emergency a family

member or friend is available to

assist me

I prefer to shop in my local

community

The Hills Shire is a good place to

live

I feel safe moving about in public

spaces in The Hills during the day

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree



October 2012 58

Sustainability in the Home

Summary

Over a third of residents were likely to ‘bulk buy to reduce packaging waste’, have ‘compost or a worm

farm’ and ‘recycle water’. Whilst one in five have a ‘water tank’ or ‘solar power’.

21% of residents did not do or have any of the sustainable criteria.

These results were similar to 2010.

Residents aged 25-54 were more likely to partake of ‘bulk buying to reduce packaging waste’ than were

those aged 55+ (55% 62% & 57% v 37%, 29% & 22%).

Residents aged 18-24 were more likely to state they don’t do or have any of the sustainable criteria than

were those aged 45-54 (30% v 14%).

Males were more likely to have a ‘water tank’ than were females.

Q. Which of the following, if any, do you have, or do, at home in relation to being more sustainable?

2010

50%

34%

31%

22%

17%

1%

21%

22%

24%

35%

40%

47%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

None of the above

Solar power

Water tank

Recycle water

Compost or worm farm

Bulk buying to reduce package waste

Section E

Access to Services



October 2012 59

Access to Services

Summary

There were ‘very high’ levels of agreement that there is ease of access to ‘local shops’, ‘schools’, ‘major

shopping centres’, ‘health and medical services’ and ‘parks, open spaces and bushland’, whilst there were

‘high’ levels of agreement that there is ease of access to ‘childcare’ and ‘sporting facilities’. The remaining

facilities received ‘moderate’ to ‘moderately high’ levels of agreement for being easy to access.

With the exception of ‘childcare’, which remained statistically similar, agreement with all criteria had

significantly improved since 2010.

Residents aged 45-54 were least likely to agree that it was easy to access facilities in the area, particularly

for the following:

Major shopping centres – than were 65-54 y/o (4.22 v 4.53)

Health and medical services – than were 65-74 & 75+ y/o (4.15 v4.54 & 4.59)

Childcare – than were 25-34 & 35-44 y/o (3.69 v.4.14 & 4.10)

Schools – than were 18-24 y/o (4.23 v 4.60)

Residents aged 18 – 55 y/o were less likely to agree that there is ease of access to ‘public transport’ than

were those aged 65+ (3.00, 2.91, 2.99, 2.70 & 2.95 v 3.58 & 3.57).

Residents aged 18-34 & 45-54 were less likely to agree that there is ease of access to ‘entertainment or

cultural facilities than were those aged 65-74 (3.25 & 3.21 v 3.70).

Residents aged 18-24 were less likely to agree that there is ease of access to ‘community facilities’ than

were those aged 65-74 (3.62 v 4.01).

Females were more likely to agree that there is ease of access to ‘my place of work’, ‘local shops’ and

‘childcare’ than were males (3.82 v 3.48) (4.53 v 4.42) (4.03 v 3.84), whilst males were more likely to agree

that there is ease of access to ‘public transport’ than were females (3.09 v 2.91).



October 2012 60

Access to Services

Q. In The Hills Shire I find it easy to access:

Mean ratings

2012

4.48

4.39

4.38

4.29

4.20

3.94

3.90

3.77

3.65

3.40

3.25

3.00

2010

4.18

4.23

3.95

3.89

4.16

3.90

3.69

N/A

3.04

3.19

2.86

2.76

Mean ratings: 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree

19%

11%

5%

13%

5%

19%

14%

11%

9%

6%

5%

6%

25%

33%

40%

18%

29%

23%

22%

12%

13%

12%

11%

8%

20%

22%

30%

20%

40%

41%

26%

40%

30%

27%

28%

26%

18%

20%

15%

40%

24%

29%

41%

43%

52%

57%

58%

63%

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

Public transport

Tertiary institutions (TAFE or university)

Entertainment or cultural facilities

My place of work

Community facilities

Sporting facilities

Childcare

Parks, open spaces and bushland

Health and medical services

Major shopping centres

Schools

Local shops

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree

Section F

Working Inside/Outside The Shire



October 2012 61

Working Inside/Outside The Hills Shire

Summary

30% of residents work in The Hills Shire, whilst 44% do not, the remainder of surveyed residents did not work,

this result is similar to 2010.

Female residents were significantly more likely than were males to work locally.

Of those residents who do work, but do not work locally, 38% stated their reason for not doing so as the

‘company is based outside of the local area’. A further 27% stated that there were ‘no jobs available

locally’ and 26% that ‘jobs in my industry/specialisation were not available locally’.

Q. Do you work in The Hills Shire?

Q. What is the main reason that you do not work locally?

Yes

30%

No

43%

I don't

work

27%

1%

2%

6%

26%

27%

38%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Other

Prefer to work outside of The Hills Shire

Retained old job when moved into The Hills Shire

Job in my industry/specialisation not available locally

No jobs available locally

Company based outside of local area



October 2012 62


Summary

41% of residents thought it likely that they would use the metro train to travel to work and a further 10%

thought they may, whilst 48% thought it unlikely. This result is similar to 2010.

Residents aged 18-24 were significantly more likely to affirm their future use of the metro train than were

those aged 25-64 (60% v 44%, 39%, 44% and 23%).

Residents aged 18-24 were likely to spend significantly more time travelling to work than were their older

counterparts.

Q. As you may be aware, the NSW State Government is planning to construct an underground metro rail system

that will link Rouse Hill to the Sydney CBD. Do you think that you will utilise this metro train to travel to work?

Yes

41%

No

48%

Maybe

10%

Can't say

1%



October 2012 63


Summary

On average, residents in The Hills travel just over an hour a day for their employment.

Young people aged 18-24 travel significantly longer to and from their workplace.

Q. On average, how many minutes does it take you in total, to travel to and from your usual workplace?


Mean travel time

in minutes 91.7 69.2 67.8 62.3 63.5 N/A N/A 79.8 58.3 69.0

12%

29%

28%

32%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

More than 2 hours

1 to 2 hours

31 minutes to 1 hour

Up to 30 minutes



October 2012 64


Q. How do you think Public Transport can be improved and in what time frame?

Improvement Time frame N=622

Increased bus services

As soon as possible 24%

Within a year 14%

Within the next 2 - 4 years 4%

Within the next 5 years 2%


Development of a train line


Within a year 2%




Improved traffic management


Within a year 1%




Increased access to public transport


Within a year 1%


Integration of transport facilities


Within a year 0%


Reduced cost of public transport




Introduce a shuttle bus service As soon as possible 0%

Easier access to timetables Within a year 0%

Increase in available taxis Within the next 5 years 0%

Nb: As the percentages have been rounded to the nearest percentage, the criteria with counts of 3 or

less are shown as 0%.

Appendix A

Data and Correlation Tables



October 2012 65


Importance 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Library services 3.68 3.26 3.79 3.28 2.92 2.84 2.72

Community centres and community halls 3.10 2.92 3.19 3.03 2.62 2.45 2.51

Youth facilities, e.g. skate parks 2.48 2.95 3.08 2.53 2.08 2.01 1.84

Services and facilities for older people 3.30 2.91 3.09 3.14 3.32 3.63 3.72

Emergency services, e.g. SES and Rural Fire

Service 4.15 4.62 4.52 4.39 4.38 4.43 4.48

Support for volunteer organisations 3.68 3.86 3.97 3.79 3.87 4.01 3.92

Council provision of local community events 3.35 3.74 3.74 3.59 3.42 3.44 3.25

Playgrounds/play equipment 3.55 4.29 4.45 3.56 3.57 3.31 2.72

Ovals and sporting facilities 4.35 4.24 4.35 4.19 3.82 3.63 3.02

Lighting of public areas 4.25 4.53 4.28 4.26 4.26 4.19 4.08

Provision of public toilets 3.65 4.06 4.03 3.97 3.82 3.87 3.49

Parks and gardens 3.98 4.24 4.23 4.20 4.25 4.13 4.38

Aquatic centre 3.43 3.44 3.76 3.45 3.16 3.11 2.70

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre 3.43 2.94 3.34 3.26 3.34 3.17 3.12

Importance Male Female Overall

Library services 3.06 3.52 3.29

Community centres and community halls 2.75 3.05 2.90

Youth facilities, e.g. skate parks 2.45 2.61 2.53

Services and facilities for older people 3.22 3.24 3.23

Emergency services, e.g. SES and Rural Fire Service 4.34 4.51 4.43

Support for volunteer organisations 3.71 4.02 3.87

Council provision of local community events 3.40 3.69 3.55

Playgrounds/play equipment 3.69 3.85 3.77

Ovals and sporting facilities 4.05 4.08 4.07

Lighting of public areas 4.16 4.40 4.28

Provision of public toilets 3.64 4.13 3.89

Parks and gardens 4.03 4.35 4.20

Aquatic centre 3.21 3.55 3.38

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre 3.04 3.45 3.25

Mean ratings: 1 = not at all important, 5 = very important

= A significantly higher level of importance (by group)

= A significantly lower level of importance (by group)



October 2012 66


Satisfaction 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Library services 4.00 4.06 4.35 4.25 4.35 4.41 4.41

Community centres and community halls 4.07 3.71 3.81 3.96 3.76 4.18 4.09

Youth facilities, e.g. skate parks 3.55 3.21 3.62 3.43 3.24 3.73 4.11

Services and facilities for older people 3.56 3.42 3.79 3.54 3.59 3.98 4.33

Emergency services, e.g. SES and Rural Fire

Service 4.16 4.35 4.31 4.34 4.40 4.57 4.74

Support for volunteer organisations 3.70 3.97 3.95 3.91 3.97 4.39 4.44

Council provision of local community events 3.81 3.87 3.80 3.75 3.83 4.09 4.48

Playgrounds/play equipment 3.62 3.70 3.75 3.66 3.80 4.12 4.45

Ovals and sporting facilities 4.00 3.82 3.87 3.83 3.94 4.30 4.50

Lighting of public areas 3.53 3.40 3.43 3.23 3.56 3.70 3.88

Provision of public toilets 3.20 2.91 2.94 2.86 3.09 3.41 3.41

Parks and gardens 3.67 3.85 3.84 3.74 3.89 4.09 4.35

Aquatic centre 4.19 3.26 3.49 3.46 3.70 3.93 4.11

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre 3.00 3.50 3.62 3.67 3.42 3.76 4.39

Satisfaction Male Female Overall

Library services 4.18 4.29 4.24

Community centres and community halls 3.88 3.90 3.89

Youth facilities, e.g. skate parks 3.61 3.37 3.48

Services and facilities for older people 3.81 3.60 3.70

Emergency services, e.g. SES and Rural Fire Service 4.32 4.41 4.37

Support for volunteer organisations 4.13 3.89 4.00

Council provision of local community events 3.94 3.81 3.87

Playgrounds/play equipment 3.82 3.73 3.77

Ovals and sporting facilities 3.97 3.90 3.94

Lighting of public areas 3.53 3.41 3.47

Provision of public toilets 3.08 3.00 3.03

Parks and gardens 3.88 3.86 3.87

Aquatic centre 3.76 3.49 3.61

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre 3.52 3.58 3.55






October 2012 67


216 22% 103 10% 157 16% 220 22% 304 30% 1000 100%

218 22% 149 15% 294 29% 193 19% 147 15% 1000 100%

385 38% 143 14% 185 18% 132 13% 156 16% 1000 100%

208 21% 112 11% 192 19% 221 22% 268 27% 1000 100%

40 4% 18 2% 70 7% 219 22% 653 65% 1000 100%

75 8% 65 6% 183 18% 272 27% 405 40% 1000 100%

85 9% 90 9% 278 28% 284 28% 263 26% 1000 100%

128 13% 64 6% 141 14% 241 24% 426 43% 1000 100%

74 7% 47 5% 115 12% 268 27% 496 50% 1000 100%

35 3% 29 3% 116 12% 260 26% 561 56% 1000 100%

66 7% 56 6% 217 22% 242 24% 419 42% 1000 100%

21 2% 30 3% 153 15% 324 32% 472 47% 1000 100%

162 16% 99 10% 230 23% 212 21% 298 30% 1000 100%

151 15% 117 12% 273 27% 251 25% 207 21% 1000 100%

Library services


community halls

Youth facilities, e.g. skate

parks

Services and facilities for

older people

Emergency services, e.g.

SES and Rural Fire Service


organisations


community events

Playgrounds/play

equipment

Ovals and sporting

facilities



Parks and gardens

Aquatic centre

Recreation/Performing Arts

Centre

N Row %

Not at all

important

N Row %

Not very

important

N Row %

Somewhat

important

N Row %

Important

N Row %

Very important

N Row %

Total

3 1% 12 2% 55 11% 232 45% 212 41% 513 100%

8 2% 14 4% 71 22% 142 44% 88 27% 322 100%

18 6% 37 14% 69 25% 97 36% 53 19% 274 100%

13 3% 23 5% 134 32% 162 38% 90 21% 422 100%

4 0% 9 1% 76 10% 299 38% 391 50% 779 100%

8 1% 19 3% 144 23% 248 40% 205 33% 623 100%

11 2% 32 6% 106 20% 252 47% 132 25% 534 100%

22 3% 59 9% 142 22% 254 39% 177 27% 653 100%

20 3% 39 5% 150 20% 303 40% 241 32% 754 100%

29 4% 107 13% 280 34% 256 31% 145 18% 817 100%

54 8% 150 23% 237 37% 122 19% 79 12% 641 100%

14 2% 34 4% 179 23% 385 48% 183 23% 794 100%

38 8% 43 9% 112 23% 170 35% 122 25% 484 100%

23 5% 33 8% 132 31% 168 39% 74 17% 429 100%

Library services


community halls

Youth facilities, e.g. skate

parks

Services and facilities for

older people

Emergency services, e.g.

SES and Rural Fire Service


organisations


community events

Playgrounds/play

equipment

Ovals and sporting

facilities



Parks and gardens

Aquatic centre

Recreation/Performing Arts

Centre

N Row %

Not at all

satisfied

N Row %

Not very

satisfied

N Row %

Somewhat

satisfied

N Row %

Satisfied

N Row %

Very satisfied

N Row %

Total



October 2012 68


Importance 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Preservation of sensitive environmental areas 3.90 3.92 4.00 4.08 4.05 4.05 4.09

Preservation of permanent open space 3.60 4.11 4.26 4.22 4.31 4.30 4.30

Water quality 4.33 4.62 4.60 4.37 4.45 4.41 4.41

Air quality 4.43 4.65 4.63 4.52 4.62 4.52 4.54

Management of noise pollution 4.13 4.26 4.26 4.18 4.26 4.21 4.34

Preservation of plants and animals in their

natural habitat 4.13 4.15 4.30 4.22 4.25 4.26 4.31

Bushland regeneration and weed control 3.65 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.25 4.34 4.39

Domestic garbage collection 4.50 4.79 4.75 4.73 4.73 4.84 4.88

Recycling collection 4.53 4.79 4.76 4.70 4.73 4.83 4.92

Garden organic collection 3.93 4.38 4.54 4.45 4.48 4.66 4.81

On call kerbside service 4.05 4.26 4.42 4.50 4.50 4.51 4.55


Preservation of sensitive environmental areas 3.86 4.15 4.01

Preservation of permanent open space 4.08 4.24 4.16

Water quality 4.36 4.57 4.47

Air quality 4.48 4.65 4.57

Management of noise pollution 4.14 4.31 4.23

Preservation of plants and animals in their natural habitat 4.04 4.41 4.23

Bushland regeneration and weed control 4.04 4.28 4.16

Domestic garbage collection 4.71 4.75 4.73

Recycling collection 4.70 4.76 4.73

Garden organic collection 4.34 4.53 4.44

On call kerbside service 4.33 4.46 4.40






October 2012 69


Satisfaction 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Preservation of sensitive environmental areas 3.54 3.84 3.74 3.66 3.67 3.94 4.15

Preservation of permanent open space 3.30 3.68 3.65 3.51 3.53 3.84 4.23

Water quality 4.00 4.18 3.92 3.72 3.79 4.12 4.31

Air quality 4.28 4.21 3.93 3.91 3.97 4.26 4.20

Management of noise pollution 3.65 3.63 3.75 3.24 3.49 3.63 3.75


natural habitat 3.93 3.92 3.75 3.52 3.72 3.95 4.23

Bushland regeneration and weed control 3.90 3.55 3.55 3.31 3.54 3.74 4.10

Domestic garbage collection 4.23 4.10 4.28 4.28 4.48 4.73 4.85

Recycling collection 4.57 4.29 4.32 4.28 4.55 4.69 4.88

Garden organic collection 4.60 4.33 4.19 4.11 4.54 4.58 4.80

On call kerbside service 4.04 4.00 4.14 3.73 3.80 4.22 4.33


Preservation of sensitive environmental areas 3.79 3.71 3.75

Preservation of permanent open space 3.70 3.56 3.63

Water quality 3.96 3.94 3.95

Air quality 4.15 3.98 4.06

Management of noise pollution 3.57 3.56 3.56

Preservation of plants and animals in their natural habitat 3.85 3.74 3.79

Bushland regeneration and weed control 3.58 3.59 3.59

Domestic garbage collection 4.42 4.31 4.36

Recycling collection 4.46 4.43 4.45

Garden organic collection 4.39 4.35 4.37

On call kerbside service 4.04 3.93 3.98






October 2012 70


49 5% 45 4% 178 18% 301 30% 426 43% 1000 100%

31 3% 30 3% 167 17% 289 29% 483 48% 1000 100%

24 2% 16 2% 95 9% 196 20% 669 67% 1000 100%

18 2% 8 1% 81 8% 175 17% 718 72% 1000 100%

26 3% 28 3% 148 15% 292 29% 506 51% 1000 100%

28 3% 27 3% 153 15% 270 27% 522 52% 1000 100%

28 3% 40 4% 155 15% 292 29% 485 48% 1000 100%

5 1% 3 0% 40 4% 161 16% 792 79% 1000 100%

5 1% 4 0% 36 4% 165 16% 791 79% 1000 100%

38 4% 28 3% 83 8% 159 16% 692 69% 1000 100%

26 3% 25 3% 111 11% 202 20% 636 64% 1000 100%


environmental areas

Preservation of

permanent open space

Water quality

Air quality

Management of noise

pollution

Preservation of plants

and animals in their

natural habitat

Bushland regeneration

and weed control

Domest garbage

collection


Garden organice

collection


N Row %

Not at all

important

N Row %

Not very

important

N Row %

Somewhat

important

N Row %

Important

N Row %

Very important

N Row %

Total

13 2% 49 7% 178 25% 323 46% 139 20% 703 100%

27 4% 68 9% 223 29% 283 37% 159 21% 760 100%

11 1% 62 7% 189 22% 287 34% 303 36% 852 100%

15 2% 38 4% 154 17% 347 39% 334 38% 889 100%

38 5% 97 12% 215 27% 262 33% 179 23% 791 100%

14 2% 49 6% 219 28% 298 38% 196 25% 775 100%

30 4% 75 10% 223 30% 274 36% 152 20% 754 100%

16 2% 41 4% 86 9% 247 26% 558 59% 947 100%

17 2% 27 3% 62 7% 255 27% 592 62% 954 100%

26 3% 32 4% 59 7% 214 25% 514 61% 845 100%

60 7% 54 7% 122 15% 183 22% 400 49% 820 100%


environmental areas

Preservation of

permanent open space

Water quality

Air quality

Management of noise

pollution

Preservation of plants

and animals in their

natural habitat

Bushland regeneration

and weed control

Domest garbage

collection


Garden organice

collection


N Row %

Not at all

satisfied

N Row %

Not very

satisfied

N Row %

Somewhat

satisfied

N Row %

Satisfied

N Row %

Very satisfied

N Row %

Total



October 2012 71


Importance 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Maintaining the condition of residential (local)

roads 4.63 4.74 4.70 4.70 4.65 4.63 4.56

Maintaining the condition of footpaths and

cycleways 4.33 4.58 4.54 4.38 4.39 4.45 4.53

Traffic parking enforcement 3.38 3.29 3.55 3.48 3.60 3.90 4.06

Overall zoning of the Shire 3.60 3.95 3.89 4.10 4.18 4.23 3.85

Range of shopping facilities 4.23 4.39 4.27 4.24 4.36 4.41 4.65

Protection of heritage values and buildings 3.65 3.89 4.07 3.99 4.14 4.26 4.33

Low density housing developments, e.g. single

houses, villas 3.68 4.08 3.99 3.92 4.13 4.21 4.13

Medium density housing developments, e.g.

apartments 3.03 3.06 2.90 3.07 3.24 3.13 3.34

Streetscape appearance 4.10 4.15 4.22 4.12 4.31 4.23 4.32


hairdressers, etc. 4.38 4.42 4.37 4.37 4.50 4.37 4.13

Pet and animal management/control 3.73 4.12 4.03 4.02 4.09 4.23 3.95


Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads 4.58 4.77 4.68

Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways 4.28 4.62 4.45

Traffic parking enforcement 3.36 3.73 3.55

Overall zoning of the Shire 3.92 4.05 3.99

Range of shopping facilities 4.21 4.44 4.33

Protection of heritage values and buildings 3.87 4.17 4.02

Low density housing developments, e.g. single houses, villas 3.90 4.09 4.00

Medium density housing developments, e.g. apartments 3.06 3.10 3.08

Streetscape appearance 4.11 4.28 4.20

Health inspections of food premises, hairdressers, etc. 4.27 4.50 4.39

Pet and animal management/control 3.85 4.20 4.03






October 2012 72


Satisfaction 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Maintaining the condition of residential (local)

roads 2.95 2.97 3.05 2.79 2.89 3.19 3.30

Maintaining the condition of footpaths and

cycleways 3.22 3.13 3.28 3.04 3.19 3.36 3.30

Traffic parking enforcement 3.79 3.57 3.31 3.25 3.37 3.41 3.28

Overall zoning of the Shire 3.89 3.77 3.48 3.32 3.20 3.63 3.83

Range of shopping facilities 4.21 4.23 4.19 4.16 4.19 4.37 4.57

Protection of heritage values and buildings 4.04 4.02 3.80 3.66 3.60 3.99 4.14


houses, villas 3.45 3.54 3.31 3.27 3.19 3.45 3.54

Medium density housing developments, e.g.

apartments 3.40 3.73 3.08 3.04 3.19 3.38 3.68

Streetscape appearance 3.97 3.89 3.60 3.43 3.46 3.57 3.87


hairdressers, etc. 3.91 3.84 3.77 3.63 3.68 3.79 3.83

Pet and animal management/control 3.65 3.87 3.75 3.65 3.86 3.79 3.96


Maintaining the condition of residential (local) roads 3.06 2.90 2.97

Maintaining the condition of footpaths and cycleways 3.36 3.06 3.20

Traffic parking enforcement 3.49 3.31 3.39

Overall zoning of the Shire 3.53 3.47 3.50

Range of shopping facilities 4.20 4.27 4.24

Protection of heritage values and buildings 3.90 3.79 3.84

Low density housing developments, e.g. single houses, villas 3.43 3.29 3.36

Medium density housing developments, e.g. apartments 3.34 3.25 3.30

Streetscape appearance 3.70 3.58 3.64

Health inspections of food premises, hairdressers, etc. 3.82 3.70 3.76

Pet and animal management/control 3.79 3.76 3.77






October 2012 73


5 0% 12 1% 38 4% 193 19% 752 75% 1000 100%

13 1% 21 2% 94 9% 244 24% 627 63% 1000 100%

96 10% 82 8% 307 31% 208 21% 307 31% 1000 100%

46 5% 43 4% 229 23% 244 24% 438 44% 1000 100%

11 1% 16 2% 132 13% 316 32% 525 53% 1000 100%

30 3% 59 6% 201 20% 281 28% 429 43% 1000 100%

37 4% 68 7% 196 20% 254 25% 445 44% 1000 100%

154 15% 144 14% 344 34% 183 18% 175 17% 1000 100%

14 1% 24 2% 149 15% 372 37% 440 44% 1000 100%

20 2% 30 3% 108 11% 227 23% 615 62% 1000 100%

25 2% 59 6% 210 21% 276 28% 431 43% 1000 100%




of footpaths and

cycleways

Traffic parking

enforcement

Overall zoning of the Sh ire

Range of shopping

facilities

Protection of heritage

values and buildings

Low density housing

developments, e.g. single

houses, vil las


developments, e.g.

apartments




Pet and animal

management/control

N Row %

Not at all

important

N Row %

Not very

important

N Row %

Somewhat

important

N Row %

Important

N Row %

Very important

N Row %

Total

120 13% 192 20% 331 35% 198 21% 105 11% 945 100%

72 8% 152 18% 293 34% 232 27% 118 14% 867 100%

42 8% 66 13% 147 29% 153 30% 99 19% 508 100%

40 6% 85 13% 179 27% 229 34% 136 20% 670 100%

3 0% 32 4% 96 12% 337 40% 366 44% 834 100%

21 3% 33 5% 165 24% 295 42% 181 26% 695 100%

49 7% 103 15% 216 31% 203 29% 123 18% 694 100%

31 9% 59 17% 100 28% 100 28% 62 18% 351 100%

18 2% 79 10% 240 30% 308 38% 161 20% 805 100%

14 2% 49 6% 214 28% 315 41% 169 22% 761 100%

30 4% 44 6% 147 22% 291 43% 168 25% 680 100%




of footpaths and

cycleways

Traffic parking

enforcement

Overall zoning of the Sh ire

Range of shopping

facilities

Protection of heritage

values and buildings

Low density housing

developments, e.g. single

houses, vil las


developments, e.g.

apartments




Pet and animal

management/control

N Row %

Not at all

satisfied

N Row %

Not very

satisfied

N Row %

Somewhat

satisfied

N Row %

Satisfied

N Row %

Very satisfied

N Row %

Total



October 2012 74


Importance 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Town centre and village atmosphere 3.95 4.18 4.06 4.06 4.09 4.16 4.31

Commercial building developments, e.g.

industry, shopping centres, offices 3.55 3.79 3.66 3.63 3.90 3.69 3.75

Generating local employment opportunities 4.30 4.41 4.32 4.40 4.35 4.22 3.95


Town centre and village atmosphere 3.98 4.20 4.09

Commercial building developments, e.g. industry, shopping centres, offices 3.66 3.75 3.71

Generating local employment opportunities 4.18 4.45 4.32

Satisfaction 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Town centre and village atmosphere 3.96 4.00 3.90 3.74 3.78 4.02 4.08

Commercial building developments, e.g.

industry, shopping centres, offices 4.05 3.78 3.83 3.72 3.67 3.94 3.96

Generating local employment opportunities 3.56 3.38 3.28 3.22 3.26 3.51 3.78


Town centre and village atmosphere 3.87 3.90 3.89

Commercial building developments, e.g. industry, shopping centres, offices 3.83 3.80 3.81

Generating local employment opportunities 3.44 3.28 3.36


= A significantly higher level of importance/satisfaction (by group)

= A significantly lower level of importance/satisfaction (by group)



October 2012 75


19 2% 41 4% 196 20% 314 31% 429 43% 1000 100%

53 5% 75 7% 275 27% 306 31% 292 29% 1000 100%

32 3% 27 3% 121 12% 229 23% 591 59% 1000 100%


atmosphere

Commercial building

developments, e.g.

industry, shopping centres,

offices

Generating local


N Row %

Not at all

important

N Row %

Not very

important

N Row %

Somewhat

important

N Row %

Important

N Row %

Very important

N Row %

Total

15 2% 46 6% 146 20% 326 44% 201 27% 734 100%

11 2% 29 5% 163 28% 240 41% 144 25% 587 100%

28 4% 101 13% 313 40% 247 32% 96 12% 784 100%


atmosphere

Commercial building

developments, e.g.

industry, shopping centres,

offices

Generating local


N Row %

Not at all

satisfied

N Row %

Not very

satisfied

N Row %

Somewhat

satisfied

N Row %

Satisfied

N Row %

Very satisfied

N Row %

Total



October 2012 76


Importance 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+


organisation 4.30 4.47 4.37 4.35 4.52 4.49 4.22

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues

that affect your life 4.43 4.41 4.32 4.41 4.41 4.44 4.20

Council's decision-making, e.g. objectivity 4.10 4.27 4.18 4.23 4.31 4.32 4.08

Communication with Council and access to

information 4.20 4.45 4.40 4.33 4.42 4.44 4.33

Council's financial management 4.00 4.36 4.30 4.26 4.47 4.51 4.39

Long term planning for The Hills Shire 4.25 4.53 4.62 4.51 4.55 4.64 4.46


information 3.60 3.68 3.69 3.69 3.90 4.17 4.13

Access to your local Councillor 4.03 3.73 3.77 3.74 4.04 4.05 4.22


Council's conduct as a professional organisation 4.33 4.47 4.40

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life 4.24 4.52 4.38

Council's decision-making, e.g. objectivity 4.15 4.29 4.22

Communication with Council and access to information 4.26 4.48 4.37

Council's financial management 4.30 4.34 4.32

Long term planning for The Hills Shire 4.44 4.60 4.52

Image and presentation of Council information 3.72 3.85 3.79

Access to your local Councillor 3.78 3.99 3.89






October 2012 77


Satisfaction 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+


organisation 3.56 3.65 3.51 3.38 3.28 3.42 3.72

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues

that affect your life 3.13 3.39 3.15 3.11 3.10 3.32 3.64

Council's decision-making, e.g. objectivity 3.45 3.44 3.05 2.88 3.01 3.22 3.36


information 3.43 3.64 3.64 3.50 3.52 3.74 3.65

Council's financial management 3.62 3.53 3.26 3.07 3.18 3.47 3.65

Long term planning for The Hills Shire 3.23 3.47 3.11 2.92 3.14 3.29 3.69


information 3.71 3.95 3.57 3.43 3.57 3.63 3.77

Access to your local Councillor 3.39 3.41 3.47 3.14 3.23 3.50 3.66


Council's conduct as a professional organisation 3.51 3.43 3.47

Opportunities to have a 'real say' on issues that affect your life 3.30 3.13 3.21

Council's decision-making, e.g. objectivity 3.18 3.11 3.14

Communication with Council and access to information 3.58 3.57 3.58

Council's financial management 3.49 3.17 3.33

Long term planning for The Hills Shire 3.26 3.13 3.19

Image and presentation of Council information 3.74 3.54 3.63

Access to your local Councillor 3.40 3.32 3.36






October 2012 78


14 1% 18 2% 119 12% 250 25% 598 60% 1000 100%

15 2% 25 2% 135 13% 209 21% 616 62% 1000 100%

23 2% 24 2% 180 18% 251 25% 522 52% 1000 100%

7 1% 19 2% 132 13% 279 28% 563 56% 1000 100%

23 2% 41 4% 133 13% 197 20% 605 61% 1000 100%

18 2% 24 2% 74 7% 189 19% 695 70% 1000 100%

37 4% 79 8% 268 27% 294 29% 323 32% 1000 100%

53 5% 73 7% 217 22% 245 24% 412 41% 1000 100%



Opportun ities to have a


affect your l ife

Council's decision-making,

e.g. objectivity

Communication with


information

Council's financial

management


Hills Shire




Councillor

N Row %

Not at all

important

N Row %

Not very

important

N Row %

Somewhat

important

N Row %

Important

N Row %

Very important

N Row %

Total

46 6% 89 11% 278 33% 274 33% 150 18% 838 100%

72 9% 142 18% 257 32% 218 27% 118 15% 807 100%

56 7% 132 18% 289 39% 195 26% 78 10% 750 100%

49 6% 82 10% 214 26% 309 37% 174 21% 828 100%

46 6% 84 12% 269 37% 247 34% 85 12% 730 100%

61 7% 126 15% 346 41% 207 25% 101 12% 841 100%

18 3% 52 9% 185 30% 230 38% 121 20% 607 100%

63 10% 90 15% 138 23% 200 33% 116 19% 608 100%



Opportun ities to have a


affect your life

Council's decision-making,

e.g. objectivity

Communication with


information

Council's financial

management


Hills Shire




Councillor

N Row %

Not at all

satisfied

N Row %

Not very

satisfied

N Row %

Somewhat

satisfied

N Row %

Satisfied

N Row %

Very satisfied

N Row %

Total



October 2012 79

Overall Satisfaction with Council’s Performance

Q. How do you rate your overall satisfaction with the performance of Council across all areas of responsibility?


Mean ratings 3.63 3.74 3.67 3.56 3.58 3.68 3.65 3.63 3.64 3.64


9 8% 19 14% 21 10% 12 6% 21 12% 12 12% 6 11%

69 55% 82 58% 116 56% 109 54% 82 48% 54 53% 31 55%

41 33% 30 21% 54 26% 64 32% 46 27% 28 28% 14 25%

3 3% 6 5% 11 5% 10 5% 17 10% 5 5% 4 6%

3 3% 4 3% 4 2% 6 3% 4 2% 2 2% 1 3%

125 100% 143 100% 206 100% 200 100% 170 100% 100 100% 56 100%

Very satisfied

Satisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Not very satisfied


Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

54 11% 47 9% 101 10%

260 53% 282 55% 541 54%

132 27% 145 28% 277 28%

35 7% 22 4% 57 6%

11 2% 14 3% 25 2%

491 100% 509 100% 1000 100%

Very satisfied

Satisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Not very satisfied


Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall



October 2012 80


Q. How would you prefer to conduct your Council related business?

78 69% 84 64% 122 62% 99 55% 64 44% 31 38% 9 21%

37 33% 52 39% 96 49% 116 64% 86 59% 53 65% 30 66%

16 14% 22 16% 18 9% 20 11% 17 11% 10 12% 7 15%

12 11% 9 7% 18 9% 9 5% 6 4% 6 8% 7 15%

0 0% 0 0% 4 2% 6 3% 5 4% 2 2% 0 0%

112 100% 132 100% 197 100% 180 100% 146 100% 81 100% 45 100%

Online

Telephone

By mail

Library

Other

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

256 60% 231 50% 487 55%

201 47% 268 58% 470 53%

58 13% 51 11% 109 12%

38 9% 30 6% 67 8%

10 2% 8 2% 17 2%

430 100% 463 100% 893 100%

Online

Telephone

By mail

Library

Other

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall



October 2012 81


Q. Where do you look to find out information from Council?

97 78% 121 85% 174 85% 152 76% 113 66% 41 41% 13 23%

53 43% 93 65% 141 69% 129 64% 114 67% 62 62% 28 49%

66 53% 71 50% 117 57% 112 56% 107 63% 71 70% 45 80%

37 30% 76 53% 119 58% 123 61% 107 63% 70 70% 37 66%

62 50% 67 47% 99 48% 106 53% 96 57% 58 58% 37 66%

53 43% 48 33% 54 26% 52 26% 47 28% 27 27% 24 44%

41 33% 39 27% 52 25% 34 17% 20 12% 19 19% 10 18%

25 20% 28 20% 39 19% 21 11% 23 13% 11 11% 10 18%

28 23% 22 15% 28 13% 23 11% 13 8% 17 17% 10 18%

53 43% 26 18% 22 10% 15 7% 12 7% 5 5% 3 5%

16 13% 13 9% 37 18% 22 11% 20 12% 14 14% 4 6%

9 8% 17 12% 21 10% 20 10% 17 10% 11 11% 9 17%

3 3% 6 5% 10 5% 4 2% 5 3% 3 3% 1 3%

3 3% 2 2% 3 1% 6 3% 2 1% 5 5% 3 5%

0 0% 4 3% 0 0% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

125 100% 143 100% 206 100% 200 100% 170 100% 100 100% 56 100%

Council website

Personal enquiry

Hills News


Hills Shire Times

Word of mouth

Library

Rouse Hill Times

Radio

Social media

E-newsletters

Hills Focus community

magazine

Rouse Hills-Stanhope

Gardens News

Other

None of these

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

358 73% 352 69% 710 71%

290 59% 330 65% 620 62%

276 56% 313 61% 589 59%

289 59% 279 55% 568 57%

244 50% 282 55% 526 53%

136 28% 169 33% 306 31%

103 21% 111 22% 214 21%

88 18% 68 13% 157 16%

71 14% 69 14% 140 14%

65 13% 70 14% 135 14%

80 16% 45 9% 125 12%

45 9% 59 12% 104 10%

14 3% 19 4% 33 3%

15 3% 10 2% 25 2%

2 0% 3 1% 5 1%

491 100% 509 100% 1000 100%

Council website

Personal enquiry

Hills News


Hills Shire Times

Word of mouth

Library

Rouse Hill Times

Radio

Social media

E-newsletters

Hills Focus community magazine

Rouse Hills-Stanhope Gardens News

Other

None of these

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall



October 2012 82


Q. Do you receive Council’s ‘Hills Focus’ community magazine in your letterbox?

Q. Do you read the ‘Hills Focus’?

12 10% 43 30% 55 27% 57 28% 47 28% 34 34% 14 25%

112 90% 99 70% 151 73% 144 72% 122 72% 66 66% 42 75%

125 100% 143 100% 206 100% 200 100% 170 100% 100 100% 56 100%

Yes

No

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

126 26% 137 27% 263 26%

365 74% 371 73% 737 74%

491 100% 509 100% 1000 100%

Yes

No

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall

9 75% 24 55% 33 59% 40 70% 37 78% 30 86% 13 95%

3 25% 19 45% 23 41% 17 30% 11 22% 5 14% 1 5%

12 100% 43 100% 55 100% 57 100% 47 100% 34 100% 14 100%

Yes

No

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

85 68% 100 73% 185 70%

41 32% 37 27% 78 30%

126 100% 137 100% 263 100%

Yes

No

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall



October 2012 83

Quality of Life

Q. How would you rate your overall quality of life?


Mean ratings 4.60 4.56 4.40 4.46 4.39 4.48 4.34 4.46 4.47 4.46

Mean ratings: 1 = very poor, 5 = excellent

81 65% 89 62% 104 50% 102 51% 80 47% 57 57% 29 51%

37 30% 45 32% 82 40% 89 44% 76 45% 35 35% 19 34%

6 5% 9 6% 19 9% 10 5% 14 8% 8 8% 8 14%

0 0% 0 0% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1% 1 1%

0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

125 100% 143 100% 206 100% 200 100% 170 100% 100 100% 56 100%

Excellent

Good

Average

Poor

Very poor

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

262 53% 278 55% 541 54%

192 39% 192 38% 384 38%

37 7% 36 7% 73 7%

0 0% 2 0% 2 0%

0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

491 100% 509 100% 1000 100%

Excellent

Good

Average

Poor

Very poor

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall



October 2012 84


Q. How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements:

Agreement 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

The Hills Shire is a good place to live 4.75 4.71 4.50 4.57 4.60 4.77 4.76

I feel part of my local community 3.75 3.95 3.98 4.00 3.88 4.20 4.27

My neighbourhood has a friendly atmosphere 4.28 4.32 4.25 4.13 4.00 4.32 4.29

I prefer to shop in my local community 4.40 4.53 4.53 4.41 4.56 4.63 4.72

I feel safe moving about in public spaces in

The Hills during the day 4.80 4.76 4.67 4.61 4.58 4.63 4.65

I feel safe moving about in public spaces in

The Hills at night 3.93 3.92 3.74 3.61 3.56 3.43 3.18

In an emergency a family member or friend is

available to assist me 4.65 4.39 4.34 4.26 4.35 4.59 4.40

Agreement Male Female Overall

The Hills Shire is a good place to live 4.63 4.63 4.63

I feel part of my local community 3.87 4.06 3.97

My neighbourhood has a friendly atmosphere 4.24 4.18 4.21

I prefer to shop in my local community 4.41 4.62 4.52

I feel safe moving about in public spaces in The Hills during the day 4.65 4.69 4.67

I feel safe moving about in public spaces in The Hills at night 3.87 3.48 3.67

In an emergency a family member or friend is available to assist me 4.36 4.44 4.40


= A significantly higher level of agreement (by group)

= A significantly lower level of agreement (by group)

3 0% 6 1% 38 4% 261 26% 692 69% 1000 100%

16 2% 45 4% 246 25% 340 34% 353 35% 1000 100%

18 2% 31 3% 135 13% 357 36% 459 46% 1000 100%

9 1% 18 2% 67 7% 259 26% 647 65% 1000 100%

3 0% 2 0% 25 3% 262 26% 707 71% 1000 100%

42 4% 80 8% 283 28% 355 36% 239 24% 1000 100%

28 3% 25 3% 85 8% 243 24% 619 62% 1000 100%

The Hills Shire is a good

place to live

I feel part of my local

community

My neighbourhood has

a friendly atmosphere

I prefer to shop in my

local community

I feel safe moving about

in public spaces in The

Hills during the day

I feel safe moving about

in public spaces in The

Hills at night

In an emergency a

family member or friend

is available to assist me

N Row %

Strongly

disagree

N Row %

Disagree

N Row %

Neither

N Row %

Agree

N Row %

Strongly agree

N Row %

Total



October 2012 85

Sustainability in the Home

Q. Which of the following, if any, do you have, or do, at home in relation to being more sustainable?

50 40% 78 55% 128 62% 114 57% 63 37% 29 29% 12 22%

53 43% 52 36% 81 39% 74 37% 72 42% 44 44% 20 35%

47 38% 56 39% 82 40% 64 32% 61 36% 23 23% 14 24%

28 23% 37 26% 41 20% 49 25% 43 25% 23 23% 17 30%

25 20% 30 21% 50 24% 47 23% 35 21% 22 22% 15 27%

37 30% 28 20% 30 14% 36 18% 37 22% 29 28% 15 27%

125 100% 143 100% 206 100% 200 100% 170 100% 100 100% 56 100%

Bulk buying to reduce

package waste


Recycle water

Water tank

Solar power

None of the above

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

220 45% 254 50% 474 47%

203 41% 194 38% 396 40%

177 36% 170 33% 347 35%

131 27% 107 21% 238 24%

123 25% 102 20% 225 22%

101 21% 111 22% 212 21%

491 100% 509 100% 1000 100%

Bulk buying to reduce package waste


Recycle water

Water tank

Solar power

None of the above

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall



October 2012 86

Access to Services


Agreement 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

My place of work 3.51 3.68 3.72 3.67 3.64 3.52 3.75

Local shops 4.53 4.59 4.47 4.38 4.40 4.54 4.57

Major shopping centres 4.50 4.42 4.38 4.22 4.37 4.53 4.37

Health and medical services 4.28 4.22 4.23 4.15 4.34 4.54 4.59

Childcare 3.90 4.14 4.10 3.69 3.75 3.96 3.86

Schools 4.60 4.48 4.39 4.23 4.31 4.48 4.38

Tertiary institutions (TAFE or university) 3.03 3.40 3.31 3.02 3.38 3.53 3.71

Public transport 3.00 2.91 2.99 2.70 2.95 3.58 3.57

Sporting facilities 3.98 4.06 3.91 3.75 3.81 4.04 3.81

Entertainment or cultural facilities 3.25 3.53 3.37 3.21 3.42 3.70 3.66

Parks, open spaces and bushland 4.33 4.20 4.22 4.11 4.16 4.26 4.21

Community facilities 3.62 3.82 3.72 3.69 3.80 4.01 4.03

Agreement Male Female Overall

My place of work 3.48 3.82 3.65

Local shops 4.42 4.53 4.48

Major shopping centres 4.34 4.42 4.38

Health and medical services 4.25 4.32 4.29

Childcare 3.84 4.03 3.94

Schools 4.35 4.43 4.39

Tertiary institutions (TAFE or university) 3.24 3.27 3.25

Public transport 3.09 2.91 3.00

Sporting facilities 3.88 3.93 3.90

Entertainment or cultural facilities 3.42 3.38 3.40

Parks, open spaces and bushland 4.20 4.20 4.20

Community facilities 3.74 3.80 3.77






October 2012 87

Access to Services


99 13% 73 9% 142 18% 160 20% 311 40% 786 100%

9 1% 22 2% 82 8% 257 26% 630 63% 1000 100%

8 1% 22 2% 121 12% 274 27% 573 57% 999 100%

9 1% 36 4% 133 13% 302 30% 515 52% 995 100%

31 5% 41 6% 143 22% 176 26% 275 41% 666 100%

14 2% 12 1% 87 11% 226 28% 470 58% 810 100%

91 11% 109 14% 263 33% 174 22% 160 20% 797 100%

181 19% 181 19% 242 25% 192 20% 175 18% 970 100%

20 2% 42 5% 216 23% 379 41% 271 29% 929 100%

46 5% 104 11% 387 40% 294 30% 147 15% 977 100%

11 1% 36 4% 121 12% 399 40% 427 43% 994 100%

19 2% 59 6% 279 29% 386 40% 232 24% 975 100%

My place of work

Local shops

Major shopping centres

Health and medical

services

Childcare

Schools

Tertiary institutions (TAFE

or un iversity)

Public transport

Sporting facilities

Entertainment or

cultu ral facilities

Parks, open spaces

and bushland

Community facilities

N Row %

Strongly

disagree

N Row %

Disagree

N Row %

Neither

N Row %

Agree

N Row %

Strongly agree

N Row %

Total



October 2012 88

Community Involvement

Q. In the last 12 months, have you done any of the following:

56 45% 86 61% 147 71% 140 70% 92 54% 51 51% 17 31%

72 58% 60 42% 115 56% 116 58% 93 55% 54 53% 26 46%

50 40% 45 32% 104 50% 95 48% 56 33% 39 39% 19 33%

9 8% 39 27% 45 22% 61 30% 32 19% 25 25% 18 33%

16 13% 28 20% 38 18% 22 11% 40 23% 26 26% 17 29%

22 18% 32 23% 23 11% 26 13% 26 15% 20 20% 16 28%

6 5% 11 8% 15 7% 15 7% 14 8% 12 12% 5 9%

125 100% 143 100% 206 100% 200 100% 170 100% 100 100% 56 100%

Attended a community

festival or event

Visited an art gallery,

attended a play, concert

or other cultural event

Volunteered

Been involved in a local

committee or local

community group, such as

355 committees

Been involved in crafts or

hobby groups

None of these

Attended a Council focus

group, workshop or

Council Meeting

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

274 56% 316 62% 589 59%

239 49% 296 58% 535 54%

167 34% 242 47% 408 41%

107 22% 123 24% 229 23%

66 13% 120 23% 186 19%

96 20% 68 13% 165 16%

47 10% 31 6% 78 8%

491 100% 509 100% 1000 100%

Attended a community festival or event

Visited an art gallery, attended a play, concert or other cultural event

Volunteered

Been involved in a local committee or local community group, such as 355 committees

Been involved in crafts or hobby groups

None of these

Attended a Council focus group, workshop or Council Meeting

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall



October 2012 89


Q. Do you work in The Hills Shire?

Q. As you may be aware, the NSW State Government is planning to construct an underground metro rail system

that will link Rouse Hill to the Sydney CBD. Do you think that you will utilise this metro train to travel to work?



41 33% 48 33% 70 34% 84 42% 45 27% 9 9% 1 1%

62 50% 78 55% 107 52% 99 49% 74 44% 8 8% 1 1%

22 18% 17 12% 30 14% 18 9% 50 30% 84 83% 55 97%

125 100% 143 100% 206 100% 200 100% 170 100% 100 100% 56 100%

Yes

No

I don't work

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

115 23% 182 36% 297 30%

245 50% 183 36% 428 43%

131 27% 144 28% 275 27%

491 100% 509 100% 1000 100%

Yes

No

I don't work

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall

37 60% 35 44% 42 39% 43 44% 17 23% 2 23% 0 0%

12 20% 37 47% 55 52% 45 46% 49 66% 5 62% 1 100%

12 20% 6 8% 8 8% 9 9% 8 10% 1 15% 0 0%

0 0% 0 0% 1 1% 2 2% 1 1% 0 0% 0 0%

62 100% 78 100% 107 100% 99 100% 74 100% 8 100% 1 100%

Yes

No

Maybe

Can't say

Total

N Col %

18 - 24

N Col %

25 - 34

N Col %

35 - 44

N Col %

45 - 54

N Col %

55 - 64

N Col %

65 - 74

N Col %

75 +

104 42% 72 40% 176 41%

107 44% 97 53% 204 48%

31 13% 13 7% 45 10%

3 1% 1 0% 4 1%

245 100% 183 100% 428 100%

Yes

No

Maybe

Can't say

Total

N Col %

Male

N Col %

Female

N Col %

Overall

Appendix B

Questionnaire


Community Survey

August 2012 1

The Hills Shire Council – Community Satisfaction

Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening

My name is __________ and I am calling on behalf of The Hills Shire Council from a research company called

Micromex. We are conducting a survey about the services provided by Council and what Council's priorities

should be in the future.

The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete and we would like to interview the person in your

household over 18 who had the most recent birthday. Would you please be able to assist?

Before we start, I just have to make sure you qualify for an interview. Firstly, is this household in The Hills Shire

Council area? [IF NOT TERMINATE] And have you lived in this Council area for more than 6 months? [IF NOT

TERMINATE] Are you or anyone in your household a Councillor of employed by any local Council? (IF YES,

TERMINATE INTERVIEW)

Great, you qualify. The information you provide will only be used for research purposes and is completely

confidential. I also have to inform you that my supervisor may monitor this call for quality control purposes.

Firstly thinking the ways you can make contact with Council

Q1. How would you prefer to conduct your Council related business? Prompt

O In person at the Administration Centre (Showground Rd Castle Hill)

O Library (Castle Hill, Rouse Hill, Dural, Baulkham Hills, Carlingford)

O Online

O Telephone

O By mail

O Other (please specify)...............................

Q2a. Where do you look to find out information from Council? Prompt

O Word of mouth

O Sent with rates notice

O Hills News

O Rouse Hill Times

O Hills Shire Times

O Rouse Hills-Stanhope Gardens News

O Radio

O Hills Focus community magazine

O Library

O Council website

O Personal enquiry

O E-newsletters

O Social media

O Other (please specify)...............................

Q2b. Do you receive Council’s ‘Hills Focus’ community magazine in your letterbox?

O Yes O No (Go to Q3)

Q2c. Do you read the ‘Hills Focus’?

O Yes O No


Community Survey

August 2012 2

Q2d. Why not?

...........................................................................................................................................................

Q3. SPECIFIC SERVICES

I would like to ask you some questions about Council provided services. In this first part could you please

indicate which best describes your opinion of the importance of the following services/facilities to you, and

in the second part, your level of satisfaction with the performance of that service.

The scale is from 1 to 5 where 1 = low importance and low satisfaction and 5 = high importance and high

satisfaction.

Creating Vibrant Communities

Importance Satisfaction

Low High Low High

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Library services O O O O O O O O O O

Community centres and community halls O O O O O O O O O O

Youth facilities, e.g. skate parks O O O O O O O O O O

Services and facilities for older people O O O O O O O O O O

Emergency services, e.g. SES and Rural Fire ServiceO O O O O O O O O O

Support for volunteer organisations O O O O O O O O O O

Council provision of local community events O O O O O O O O O O

Playgrounds/play equipment O O O O O O O O O O

Ovals and sporting facilities O O O O O O O O O O

Lighting of public areas O O O O O O O O O O

Provision of public toilets O O O O O O O O O O

Parks and gardens O O O O O O O O O O

Aquatic centre O O O O O O O O O O

Recreation/Performing Arts Centre O O O O O O O O O O

Valuing Our Environment


Low High Low High

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5


(i.e Broadwater wetlands and bushland reserves) O O O O O O O O O O

Preservation of permanent open space O O O O O O O O O O

Water quality O O O O O O O O O O

Air quality O O O O O O O O O O

Management of noise pollution O O O O O O O O O O


natural habitat O O O O O O O O O O

Bushland regeneration and weed control O O O O O O O O O O

Domestic garbage collection (red bin) O O O O O O O O O O

Recycling collection (yellow bin) O O O O O O O O O O

Garden organic collection (green bin) O O O O O O O O O O

On call kerbside service O O O O O O O O O O


Community Survey

August 2012 3

Balanced Urban Growth


Low High Low High

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Maintaining condition of residential (local) roads O O O O O O O O O O

Maintaining condition of footpaths and

cycleways O O O O O O O O O O

Traffic parking enforcement O O O O O O O O O O

Overall zoning of the Shire O O O O O O O O O O

Range of shopping facilities O O O O O O O O O O

Protection of heritage values and buildings O O O O O O O O O O


houses, villas O O O O O O O O O O

Medium density housing developments,

e.g. apartments O O O O O O O O O O

Streetscape appearance O O O O O O O O O O

Health inspections of food premises, hairdressers, etc. O O O O O O O O O O

Pet and animal management/control O O O O O O O O O O

Building A Modern Local Economy


Low High Low High

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Town centre and village atmosphere O O O O O O O O O O

Commercial building developments,

e.g. industry, shopping centres, offices O O O O O O O O O O

Generating local employment opportunities O O O O O O O O O O

Proactive Leadership


Low High Low High

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Council’s conduct as a professional organisation O O O O O O O O O O

Opportunities to have a ‘real say’ on issues that

affect your life O O O O O O O O O O

Council’s decision-making e.g. objectivity O O O O O O O O O O


information O O O O O O O O O O

Council’s financial management O O O O O O O O O O

Long term planning for The Hills Shire O O O O O O O O O O

Image and presentation of Council information O O O O O O O O O O

Access to your local Councillor O O O O O O O O O O


Community Survey

August 2012 4

Q4. How do you rate your overall satisfaction with the performance of Council across all areas of

responsibility. Prompt

O Very satisfied

O Satisfied

O Somewhat satisfied

O Not very satisfied

O Not at all satisfied

Q5. How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements: Prompt

Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree

The Hills Shire is a good place to live O O O O O

I feel part of my local community O O O O O

My neighbourhood has a friendly atmosphere O O O O O

I prefer to shop in my local community O O O O O

I feel safe moving about in public spaces in The Hills

during the day O O O O O

I feel safe moving about in public spaces in The Hills

at night O O O O O

In an emergency a family member or friend is

available to assist me O O O O O

Q6. How would you rate your overall quality of life? Prompt

O Excellent

O Good

O Neither

O Poor

O Very poor


Community Survey

August 2012 5

Access to services

On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 means ‘strongly agree’, to what extent do you

agree or disagree with the following statements?

Q7. In The Hills Shire I find it easy to access:

Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree

Place of work O O O O O

Local shops O O O O O

Major shopping centres O O O O O

Health and medical services O O O O O

Child care O O O O O

Schools O O O O O

Tertiary institutions (TAFE or university) O O O O O

Public transport O O O O O

Sporting facilities O O O O O

Entertainment or cultural facilities O O O O O

Parks, open spaces and bushland O O O O O

Community facilities O O O O O

Q8. In the last 12 months have you done any of the following: Prompt

O Attended a community festival or event

O Visited an art gallery, attended a play, concert of other cultural event

O Been involved in crafts or hobby groups

O Volunteered

O Been involved in a local committee or local community group, such as 355 committees

O Attended a Council focus group, workshop or Council Meeting

Q9. Which of the following, if any, do you have, or do at home in relation to being more sustainable?

Prompt

O Compost or worm farm.

O Water tank

O Recycle water

O Solar power

O Bulk buying to reduce package waste

O None of the above

Q10a. Do you work in The Hills Shire?

O Yes (Go to Q10d) O No O Not working (Go to Q11)

Q10b. What is the main reason why you do not work locally? Do not prompt

O Company based outside of local area.

O No jobs available locally.

O Job in my industry/specialisation not available locally

O Retained old job when moved into The Hills Shire.

O Prefer to work outside of The Hills Shire.

O Other (please specify).........................................................


Community Survey

August 2012 6

Q10c. As you may be aware, the NSW State Government is planning to construct an underground metro

rail system that will link Rouse Hill to the Sydney CBD. Do you think that you will utilise this metro train

to travel to work?

O Yes O No O Maybe O Can’t Say

Q10d. On average, how many minutes does it take you in total, to travel to and from your usual work

place?

...........................................................................................................................................................

Q10e. How do you think Public Transport can be improved and in what time frame?

...........................................................................................................................................................

Priority Issues

Q11. What are the things that you value most about living in The Hills Shire? (PROBE FULLY)

...........................................................................................................................................................

Q12. Thinking about the next 4 years, what do you think are the highest priority issues facing The Hills Shire

and its residents? (PROBE FULLY)

...........................................................................................................................................................

Demographics

Could you please now just assist with the following demographic information?

Q13. Age Group:

O 18 – 24 O 55 - 64

O 25 - 34 O 65 - 74

O 35 - 44 O 75 - 84

O 45 – 54 O 85 and over

Q14. Which of the following best describes your home?

O Free standing house

O Villa

O Townhouse

O Flat/unit

O Self care retirement complex

O Rural dwelling

O Other

Q15. Do you own or rent your home?

O Own/buying

O Rent


Community Survey

August 2012 7

Q16. In which suburb do you live?

O Annangrove O Leets Vale

O Baulkham Hill O Lower Portland

O Beaumont Hills O Maraylya

O Bella Vista O Maroota

O Box Hill O Middle Dural

O Carlingford O North Rocks

O Castle Hill O Northmead

O Cattai O Oatlands

O Dural O Rouse Hill

O Glenhaven O Sackville North

O Glenmore O South Maroota

O Kellyville O West Pennant Hills

O Kenthurst O Wisemans Ferry

Q17. How long have you been a resident of The Hills Shire?

O Less than 1 year

O 1 – 5 years

O 6 – 10 years

O 11 – 20 years

O Over 20 years

Q18. Gender (determine by voice):

O Male O Female

That completes the survey and I thank you for your assistance. This information will assist Council in

providing better services for residents.

I confirm again that my name is …………….. from Micromex Research. If you have any questions with

regards to this survey you may contact Council or discuss this survey with my supervisor on 02 43522388.

Contact Kerrie Walshaw – 0421 348 864

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE

The Hills Shire Council Community Research Final Report · Final Report November 2012 Prepared for:...

Documents

Transcript of The Hills Shire Council Community Research Final Report · Final Report November 2012 Prepared for:...