This report which covers the 12-month period that the Administrators have been in charge makes comparison to the 2019 survey results only. Those results were a massive drop from 2018 due to all the various goings on at the time and the “encouragement” from external “players” who had an interest in removing the Councillors from office. Listen to what the Administrators said in the Council Meeting on this matter.
Quote from Administrator Eisenbise-“We will not be resting on our laurels.”i
Council appointed an independent survey company (Key Research – Thinkfield) to conduct the 2020 Customer Satisfaction Survey (2020 Survey). Key Research was appointed by the previous Council to conduct the survey for three consecutive years starting in 2018. The Council report ignored the data from the 2018 Survey when the Councillors were “in charge” and making improvements to Council.
Instead, this report which covers the 12-month period that the Administrators have been in charge makes comparison to the 2019 survey results only. Those results were a massive drop from 2018 due to all the various goings on at the time and the “encouragement” from external “players” who had an interest in removing the Councillors from office.
These surveys focus on gathering information in four key areas on:
Council’s Overall Performance,
Reputation,
Services and Facilities and,
Value for Money.
Overall Performance evaluation is most strongly influenced by image and reputation, more so than the various services, infrastructure, and facilities, as well as value for money.
Reputation considers how competent the Council is perceived to be and the extent to which residents have developed an affinity with Council. These form the major components of its reputation.
Service and Facilities considers that perceptions are also influenced by how well residents believe Council is delivering core services such as roads, waste services and other infrastructure.
Value for Money considers how residents develop perceptions of value, based on what they receive by way of services and how this compares with what they pay in rates and other user-based fees.
This is how the Council Report describes the Survey Results.
Overall Summary of Results.
Overall satisfaction with South Gippsland Shire Council’s performance has increased from 31% of satisfied residents in 2019 (scoring six to ten out of ten) to 42% satisfied residents in 2020.
With the overall performance evaluation being most strongly influenced by image and reputation, the 5% increase from 63% in 2019 to 68% in 2020, is a positive improvement.
A significant improvement has been made in the perception of the overall direction of Council. The index score has increased by 10 points from 30 to 40. In percentage terms 33% now consider the overall direction is Good to Excellent, although 47% still consider it is poor. Further work is required to build on the positive 2020 results.
The delivery of the various services, infrastructure and facilities has a moderate impact on perceptions. It has seen a slight reduction from 26% in 2019 to 24% in 2020.
Value for money, having the least impact on perceptions of three categories,has reduced from 11% in 2019 to 7% in 2020.
General feedback from respondents was to encourage a focus on ‘Value for money’, ‘Better collaboration/communication with residents’ and ‘More transparency and accountability’.
The priorities for improving Council’s performance are for regard to be given to ‘Leadership’, ‘Faith and trust in Council’, ‘Roads, footpaths and trails’ ‘Financial management’ and ‘Regulatory services’. Improving performance in these areas will likely increase overall satisfaction.
The top 5 best performing areas scoring a percentage very satisfied of 8 to 10 are ‘Weekly rubbish collection’ (75%), ‘Libraries’ (72%), ‘Recycling collection’(72%), ‘Sports fields’ (65%) and ‘Green waste collection’ (65%).
The priorities for improving Council’s performance are for regard to be given to ‘Leadership’, ‘Faith and trust in Council’, ‘Roads, footpaths and trails’ ‘Financial management’ and ‘Regulatory services’. Improving performance in these areas will likely increase overall satisfaction.
More than two thirds of residents have contacted South Gippsland Shire Council in the past 12 months with more than half (56%) doing so via Telephone (during office hours). Satisfaction with Council’s ‘customer service performance’ is consistent with the previous year. ‘Staff friendliness and professionalism’ and the ‘Quality of services provided by customer service staff’ have been rated highly in 2020 with 81% and 77% satisfied residents, respectively.
The 2019 Results-Editorial Opinion
The 2019 survey was conducted during the disruption caused when Ex-Minister Somyurek and others were involved in the process which led to the dismissal of the elected Councillors.
Any survey conducted during that time would therefore be expected to reflect negative opinion from the community and they certainly did show that in the results with an enormous drop from the 2018 year.
However, the Administrators have had a full 12 months in control of council and with their mandate from Ex-Minister Somyurek for good governance and their notable credentials, one would expect significant improvements.
The Report claims compared the Administrators 12 month period with the low point of 2019 and not the previous year when Council was functioning without external forces attempting to have the Council removed. Lets look at those comparisons.
6 min and 19 seconds.
Comments from Adminstrator Zahra (Yes he really said this)
1. Generally a positive report.
2. The role of Councillor/Administrator “requires significant public trust“
Comments from Administrator Eisenbise (Yes she really said this)
1. This is the exciting part
2. Like to thank staff for seeing us into an upward trend
3. We will not be resting on our laurels.
See the report date below to “appreciate” their comments.
What the Council Report Left out from the Findings
The lowest possible grade given by the respondents to a question was Very Dissatisfied.
These ratings were increased by the Administrators.
The figures for the major areas in 2018 and 2020 were as follows.
Criteria Councillors 2018 Administrators 2020
Overall Dissatisfaction with Council Performance 37% 49%
Overall Dissatisfaction with Value for Money 45% 52%
Overall Dissatisfaction with Reputation 44% 59%
Overall Dissatisfaction with Rates being Reasonable 51% 59%
Overall Dissatisfaction with Financial Management 52% 59%
Overall Dissatisfaction with Trust and Faith 46% 58%
Overall Dissatisfaction with Leadership 46% 59%
Editorial Comment-This data is saying that with the main significant questions, that just shy of 60% of the respondents picked the worst rating possible for the Administrators. These numbers are a massive increase in dissatisfaction. No wonder no comment was made to these results in the Council Report.
The following charts are data from the report, the comments are Editor Analysis of the graphs.
Overall performance under the Councillors from the 2016 election was consistent around 46.
The administrators performance is a marginal 10% better than the 2019 low but a long way short of the result obtained by the Councillor Group..
The previous Councillors results were 25% higher than achieved by the Administrators.
Community Consultation under the Councillors from the 2016 election was consistent around 47 and slightly increasing.
The administrators performance is a single 1 point better than the 2019 low and a long way short of the result obtained by the Councillor Group..
The previous Councillors results were again 25% higher than achieved by the Administrators.
Advocacy under the Councillors from the 2016 election was consistent around 46 and slightly decreasing.
The administrators performance is a only 2 points better than the 2019 low and a long way short of the result obtained by the Councillor Group..
The previous Councillors results were 10% higher than achieved by the Administrators.
Making Community Decisions under the Councillors from the 2016 election the result decreased from 47% to 42%.
The administrators performance is a only 2 points better than the 2019 low and a long way short of the result obtained by the Councillor Group..
The previous Councillors results were 15% higher than achieved by the Administrators.
Sealed Local Roads under the Councillors from the 2016 election the result had increased from 30% to 48%.
The administrators performance has not changed this level.
Guess roads don’t deteriorate in 12 months once constructed.
Customer Service Fairly consistent all the way through here and one of councils better performing areas.
Overall Council Direction No data was recorded for 2018 but Councillors had made significant change to this measure at 51%.
Administrators at 40% have clearly indicated a better direction that ratepayers must have felt during 2019 but still, Councillors achieved over 25% better in 2017.
Overall Image and Reputation No data was recorded for 2019 but Council had a reasonable measure at 42%.
Administrators at 32% appear to have a poorer reputation and image than the Councillors.
The Council Report summarizes the Survey findings as follows.
Ongoing below average levels of community satisfaction with Council’s performance or understanding of Council’s improvement initiatives, may hamper Council and community efforts to work effectively together to achieve common objectives.
The stability Administrators have brought to Council, has been reflected in the increased levels of satisfaction indicated in the 2020 Survey results. This positive result can now be built upon to further to improve Council’s efforts in working with the community.
Editorial Comment.
Will leave this to the readers to wonder over.
PS. Council was asked if they could point out a year prior to 2018 where the results were worse than achieved by the Administrators this year and no response so far-they are still looking.