And the survey says… Queen Creek releases market research results

Town council also approves lengthy consent agenda

Queen Creek residents enjoy the community’s rural, small-town feel. They give thumbs up to its quiet environment and thumbs down to the increased traffic and road congestion that accompanies growth.

These were some of the results of the town’s 2016 citizen survey and reported to the Queen Creek Town Council during its June 15 regular meeting.

Present at the meeting were Mayor Gail Barney, Vice Mayor Dawn Oliphant and council members Craig Barnes, Robin Benning, Jeff Brown and Julia Wheatley. Councilwoman Emilena Turley was absent.

The survey has been conducted every other year since 2008, according to the town’s website. This year’s study was conducted by phone March 28-May 10 by WestGroup Research, a Phoenix-based market research firm, who also oversaw the 2014 survey.

Its purpose was to obtain residents’ perspectives on topics and issues ranging from traffic to governance, according to the survey results document in that night’s council packet.

The results for all the citizen surveys may be viewed on the town’s website.

The town paid $24,500 to WestGroup Research to conduct the citizen survey, Constance Halonen-Wilson, the town’s public information officer, said in an e-mailed response to questions. The fee, the same as in 2014, was paid from the town’s communications and marketing general services account, Ms. Halonen-Wilson said.

A total of 401 Queen Creek residents were interviewed by phone, Kathy DeBoer, Westgroup’s senior vice president and chief quality officer, told the council at the meeting.

Respondents

The respondent number accurately represents the town’s population with a 95 percent confidence level, Ms. DeBoer said.

The firm reached out to a variety of population samples, including large and small households, landline and cell phone households and a range of all ages, Ms. DeBoer said. All residents were screened to ensure they receive trash services from the town of Queen Creek and to ensure they resided in the 85142 ZIP code; 85242 was also accepted as a few residents were unaware the town’s ZIP code had been changed, Ms. DeBoer said.

The base sample interviewers dialed from was comprised of a combination of random digit dialing, cellphone and town housing data, she explained.

This year’s respondent demographics were nearly identical to 2014. Two years ago, 53 percent of the 403 respondents were male and 47 percent were female; in 2016, the genders of the respondents were split about 50 percent/50 percent, according to the survey results.

In both years, the ethnicity breakdown was the same: 62 percent Caucasian, 4 percent African-American, 19 percent Latino/Hispanic and 3 percent Asian. The remaining respondents either declined to answer or gave another ethnicity.

Regarding age, respondents were: 18-24, 7 percent in 2016 and 14 percent in 2014; 25-34, 17 percent in 2016 and 19 percent in 2014; 35-44, 28 percent in 2016 and 25 percent in 2014; 45-54, 21 percent in 2016 and 19 percent in 2014; 55-64, 14 percent in 2016 and 13 percent in 2014; 65-74, 9 percent in 2016 and 7 percent in 2014; and 75 and older, 4 percent in 2016 and 3 percent in 2014. The remaining respondents declined to answer.

A big jump in number was recorded in the number of years the respondents lived in Queen Creek, with a decrease in those living two-five years and an increase in those living here 11-20 years.

The results were: Less than two years, 1 percent in 2016 and 4 percent in 2014; two-five years, 20 percent in 2016 and 33 percent in 2014; six-10 years, 36 percent in both 2016 and 2014; 11-20 years, 35 percent in 2016 and 19 percent in 2014; and more than 20 years, 8 percent in 2016 and 6 percent in 2014. The remaining respondents declined to answer.

How they responded

Twenty-six percent and 19 percent, respectively, of this year’s respondents said the best thing about living in Queen Creek is its rural/small town feel and its quiet, peaceful atmosphere. The worst thing is traffic congestion, 17 percent; lack of proximity to places, 15 percent; and its rapid population growth/too crowded, 9 percent.

The thing they want most — 30 percent, up from 20 percent in 2014 — is more roads and highways and improvements to existing roadways.

The respondents were asked six questions about the quality of life in Queen Creek. Most of the replies mirrored those of 2014.

When asked to rate their neighborhood as a place to live, 60 percent of this year’s respondents rated their neighborhood as excellent and 62 percent rated it as good as opposed to 62 percent and 30 percent, respectively, in 2014.

When asked about Queen Creek as a place to raise children, 58 percent rated it as excellent and 35 percent said good as opposed to 54 percent and 38 percent, respectively, in 2014.

When asked to rate Queen Creek as a place to live, 58 percent this year rated it excellent and 35 percent said good as opposed to 50 percent and 41 percent in 2014.

When asked to rate the overall quality of life in Queen Creek, 45 percent this year rated it as excellent and 45 percent rated it as good as opposed to 45 percent and 43 percent in 2014.

When asked to rate Queen Creek as a place to retire, 41 percent of this year’s respondents rated it as excellent and 42 percent called it good as opposed to 41 percent and 43 percent in 2014.

The numbers shift more when it came to rating Queen Creek as a place to work. In 2016, 20 percent rated it as excellent, 43 percent called it good, 26 percent called it fair and 10 percent called it poor/very poor as opposed to 19 percent, 33 percent, 30 percent and 18 percent in 2014.

Councilman Benning said he was pretty excited to see an upward trend in satisfaction in regard to living in Queen Creek. However, he added he was puzzled by the low numbers regarding satisfaction in regard to working here because of the many new jobs, especially in the restaurant industry, that have been added in Queen Creek over the past year. He asked if the numbers could reflect a rebound in the construction industry in which traditionally many Queen Creek residents work,

Ms. DeBoer replied the survey has a response accuracy rate of plus/minus .5 percent. She noted respondents in the 18-35 age range gave the highest level of satisfaction with employment, which would fit with the response model.

“It’s not surprising they are feeling more confident,” Ms. DeBoer said.

Overall, respondents said they expect to live in Queen Creek for a long time. When asked if they likely would be living in Queen Creek five years from now, 83 percent of this year’s respondents said yes, while 13 percent said no and 4 percent said they don’t know. Those responses are similar to 2014, when respondents replied 78 percent yes, 19 percent no and 4 percent don’t know.

To review more of the results, visit the town’s website.

Other council actions

Also at the meeting the council voted 6-0 to approve the consent agenda. The items were.
A. Consideration and possible approval of expenditures $25,000 and over:
•Fiscal year 2015-16 expenditure. $83,143 to Southwest Waterworks for the Sossaman Well vertical turbine pump.
•Fiscal year 2016-17 expenditures.
1. $1,122,186, Dana Kepner for meters, meter fittings and services.
2. $200,000, Weber Water Resources, well repair services.
3. $110,000, AllChem, water treatment chemicals.
4. $144,000, Infosend, utility bill printing and mailing.
5. $30,000, HD Supply, water distribution parts.
6. $25,000, Kemira, wastewater treatment chemicals.
7. $75,000, Vertech, SCADA services.
8. $75,000, Makinen Professional Services, public outreach services.
9. $300,000, Swain Electric, as-needed electrical services.
10. $300,000, Foster Electric, as-needed electrical services.
11. $42,000, In-Pipe Technology, odor and corrosion control services.
12. $25,000, Valleywide Generator Service, generator maintenance service/repairs.
13. $65,000, Accela, annual support for Accela Civic Platform.
14. $73,500, AOT, annual printer fleet lease/support.
15. $128,200, SHI, annual software support for Cartegraph, VDI and Office 365.
16. $50,000, Dimension Data, annual Cisco equipment maintenance.
17. $27,000, DITO, annual Google licensing subscription.
18. $130,130, Tyler Technologies, annual support for MUNIS financial system.
19. $35,000, Citrix, annual support/maintenance for virtual desktop.
20. $36,000, Visit Mesa, tourism partnership contract renewal.
21. $125,000, Arizona Labor Force, temporary labor services.
22. $80,000, Winner’s Circle Soil Products, arena stall bedding.
23. $48,000, Albert Holler & Associates, sales tax auditing services.
24. $2,805,000, Valley Schools Management Group, health care services for town employees.
25. $86,000, MCI Communications/Verizon, cellular services.
26. $266,000, Queen Creek Unified School District, town-wide fuel purchases.
27. $204,000, Dickinson-Wright, legal services.
28. $35,000, NAPA, fleet maintenance supplies.
B. $50,000 for community recreation services and the use of two rooms in the Queen Creek Community Center and Fire Training Center as part of an agreement between Boys and Girls Club of the East Valley and town of Queen Creek. This is included in the fiscal year 2016-17 budget.
C. $15,000 for an agreement between the Greater Phoenix Economic Council and the town of Queen Creek. This is included in the fiscal year 2016-17 budget.
D. Renewal of the annual intergovernmental agreement with the town of Gilbert for fire support services.
E. Flood irrigation services contract with Romo Irrigation in an amount not to exceed $140,000 annually for irrigation services.
F. A professional services contract with Plan*Et Communities PLLC in an amount not to exceed $200,000 for General Plan update. This was budgeted in the fiscal year 2015-16.
G. A cooperative purchase agreement with Starwest Tech International in an amount not to exceed $38,000 for electronic patient care reporting services.
H. A professional services contract with CookDZ LLC, utilizing a cooperative purchasing agreement with Mohave County, in an amount not to exceed $130,000 to provide owner’s representative services in the design/build of the Queen Creek Municipal Center project. This was budgeted in the fiscal year 2015-16.
I. A contract amendment No. 1 with PLAN*Et Communities in an amount not to exceed $52,230 to provide conceptual design for the West Park Site. This is included in the fiscal year 2016-17 budget.
J. A design services contract with Salt River Agricultural Improvement and Power District in an amount not to exceed $38,656 for street light facilities design, Salt River Project Work Order T2111647, for Capital Improvement Project No. I0010 Ellsworth Road and Queen Creek Road intersection improvements Phase 2. This was budgeted in the fiscal year 2015-16.
K. A design services contract with Salt River Agricultural Improvement and Power District in an amount not to exceed $128,300 for overhead electrical facilities relocation, SRP Work Order T2101676, for CIP No. I0010 Ellsworth Road and Queen Creek Road Intersection Improvements Phase 2. This was budgeted in the fiscal year 2015-16.
L. $75,000 for a service and license agreement between the Queen Creek Chamber of Commerce and the town of Queen Creek for fiscal year 2016-17.
M. A design services contract with Salt River Agricultural Improvement and Power District in an amount not to exceed $301,500 for underground electrical facilities relocation and conversion, SRP Work Order T2111645, for CIP No. I0010 Ellsworth Road and Queen Creek Road Intersection Improvements Phase 2. This is included in the fiscal year 2016-17 budget.
N. $135,000 for an agreement between the Queen Creek Cultural Foundation and the town of Queen Creek for fiscal year 2016-17.
O. A contract with Sentry Builders in an amount not to exceed $44,160 for the fabrication and installation of metal siding panels and shade covers for the covered arena at Horseshoe Park and Equestrian Center. This was budgeted in the fiscal year 2015-16.
P. $20,000 for an agreement with the Friends of Horseshoe Park to produce the 2017 Roots N’ Boots Queen Creek event.
Q. A professional services contract amendment No. 2 with Stanley Consultants Inc., in an amount not to exceed $95,000 for engineering project management services. This was budgeted in the fiscal year 2015-16.
R. The first amendment to the professional services agreement with Rich Hendricks, Command Solutions Inc. for public safety law enforcement consulting services.
S. The 2016-21 Corporate Strategic Plan.
T. The appointment of Councilwoman Wheatley to the East Valley Partnership Board of Directors.

 

News Editor Wendy Miller can be contacted at 480-982-7799 and via e-mail at qcnews@newszap.com, or follow her on Twitter @WendyNewszap123.

You are encouraged to leave relevant comments but engaging in personal attacks, threats, online bullying or commercial spam will not be allowed. All comments should remain within the bounds of fair play and civility. (You can disagree with others courteously, without being disagreeable.) Feel free to express yourself but keep an open mind toward finding value in what others say. To report abuse or spam, click the X in the upper right corner of the comment box.