BR

1
BRE A Model for Engaging Residents in Community
Dialogue

• NACDEP Annual Conference
• April 18, 2007

Greg Davis Ohio State University Extension
2
BRE Overview

• Purpose
• Background in Ohio
• Recent Format Change
• Sectors
• Technology (Internet software)
• Membership
• Methodology

3
Study Area
4
Study Area
Cuyahoga County
City of Strongsville
Population 43,858 Households 16,209
5
Strongsville in Dialogue A Survey of Local
Residents

• Objectives
• understand the value placed on amenities and
  services
• understand satisfaction with available amenities
  and services
• understand how city officials might better meet
  resident expectations

6
Organizational Structure
Strongsville Economic Development
Committee Task Force
Mayor
Department Economic Development
City Council
Assistant
Economic Development
Chamber of Commerce Business owners/operators Soci
al services Retired Academic Clergy
7
Methodology

• Mail questionnaire with web option
• 19-item, 6-pages including cover-letter
• Census of Households (16,209)
• Data collection timeline
• awareness campaign (Nov)
• media release (radio, newspaper/newsletters)
• pre-notification postcard (early Nov)
• reminder postcard (late Dec)

8
Results

• 36 response rate
• Respondent characteristics similar to population
  characteristics

9
Findings of Interest

• 9 out of 10 respondents would recommend
  Strongsville as a place to live
• Housing quality, safe environment, and school
  system are strong draws
• Respondents willingness to pay for schools
  similar to willingness to pay for police fire
  protection

10
Overall Satisfaction
Overall, the quality of life in Strongsville is
11
What are your top three (3) reasons for living in
Strongsville?

• Family
• Friends
• Employment
• Business services
• Restaurants
• Recreation/entertainment
• Housing quality
• Safety services
• Safe environment
• Schools

55 Housing quality 53 Safe environment 38
Schools 35 Family 27 Employment 18 Safety
services 13 Friends 12 Recreation/entertainment
9 Business services 4 Available restaurants
Items as listed on questionnaire
percentage of respondents indicating item
12
Community Service Quality

• Snow and Ice Removal
• Street Repairs
• Fire Paramedic Services
• Police Safety Services
• Transportation Thoroughfares
• Water and Sewer Services

Police Safety Services Fire Paramedic
Services Snow and Ice Removal Water and Sewer
Services Transportation Thoroughfares Street
Repairs
Items as listed on questionnaire
Items ranked by quality
13
Community Service Importance

• Snow and Ice Removal
• Street Repairs
• Fire Paramedic Services
• Police Safety Services
• Transportation Thoroughfares
• Water and Sewer Services

Fire Paramedic Services Police Safety
Services Street Repairs Snow and Ice
Removal Water and Sewer Services Transportation
Thoroughfares
Items as listed on questionnaire
Items ranked by importance
14
Community Service WTP

• Snow and Ice Removal
• Street Repairs
• Fire Paramedic Services
• Police Safety Services
• Transportation Thoroughfares
• Water and Sewer Services

Police Safety Services Fire Paramedic
Services Street Repairs Snow and Ice
Removal Water and Sewer Services Transportation
Thoroughfares
Items as listed on questionnaire
Items ranked by willingness to pay
15
Comparison
Good or Excellent Quality / Very Important
Service / Yes, WTP More
16
School System
Good or Excellent Quality / Very Important
Service / Yes, WTP More
17
Comparison
Good or Excellent Quality / Very Important
Service / Yes, WTP More
18
Conclusions

• Use of BRE methodology deemed successful by
  local task force
• Listing of issues (open-ended responses)
  identified and prioritized by task force
• Anecdotal evidence suggests communications among
  leadership and between leadership and residents
  enhanced

19
Questions?

• Greg Davis
• OSU Extension
• 614-292-6356
• davis.1081_at_osu.edu
• http//localecon.osu.edu

20
The Questionnaire