.jpg;w=960)
At the recent Downtown Sudbury annual general meeting, there was mention of a widespread public consultation process to take place this summer with respect to the Downtown Master Plan update.
What this form will take is important. Nanos Research (a national survey firm) has criticized the way in which Sudbury public opinion is collected (Sudbury.com, Feb. 20, read here) by volunteer polls and that this data “is statistically irrelevant to the municipality’s population as a whole” and that methods such as the city Over To You public consultation page are only used by those “interested in the topic at hand, which skews results in their favour.”
The problem is that this low-quality volunteer polling data has been used to supplement municipal reports to council on major decisions and, as Nanos states, “no one should look at these results and say this is what people in Sudbury think because that’s not the case.”
Most citizens would have more faith in third-party randomized surveys making sure people taking part are representative of the community. According to Laurentian University professor Dr. Parveen Nangia, a sample size of approximately 385 people would be sufficient. The cost of such professional surveys would be only a small percentage of any implemented project cost and would be invaluable in proving Insite for consideration of the city council in making important decisions.
There have been very few scientific surveys carried out with respect to important city projects in the past and currently. Of concern is that special interest groups, such as those supporting a new library and art gallery, have influenced the city council in going ahead with the Cultural Hub in Tom Davies Square despite many citizens questioning the project. The same can be said with respect to other projected endeavors such as a new or renovated arena or proposed convention centre.
While not a professional survey, our organization, the Sudbury Chapter of CARP (Canadian Association of Retired Persons) has questioned our members in attendance at our annual general meeting on items of concern.
They represent a cross-section of older citizens, and the results are of interest. One hundred per cent of those surveyed felt the city should fix and maintain present roads before building any new, which is not surprising as most of any age likely would feel the same. Eighty per cent were in favour of renovating the present arena rather than building new. Sixty per cent felt the present library on McKenzie Street should be preserved and about an equal split on retaining the present art gallery or at another location.
The value of quality public surveys cannot be underestimated. Properly asked questions can provide direction for those responsible for decision making. With respect to the Downtown Master Plan, this material can provide direction and should be undertaken before any plans are in the draft stages after which based on experience changes are often not considered or take place.
With very expensive and long-range plans being proposed or under consideration it is important that there is as close to majority opinion possible and that can only be determined through high quality survey results representing the view of the community as a whole.
We trust that Sudbury city council, being responsible, will undertake such endeavours.
John Lindsay
President, CARP Sudbury