Listening to All: How Community Surveys Strengthen Local Decision-Making

I took students from my upper-level Policy Analysis class to visit the city manager of a mid-sized city to discuss public budgeting decisions. He was excited to tell us about a new pickleball facility the city was about to open in one of the city parks. When I asked what kind of data and analysis they used to make that decision, he laughed and said, “None, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” 

As a political scientist, I know that many elected officials and staff have a skewed sense of what their constituents want based on the oversize role that lobbyists play in congressional policymaking (Hertel-Fernandez, Mildenberger, & Stokes 2018). What I found surprising was that even at the local level, and in a city with a very professional staff, decisions could be made based on limited public input and little analysis. (This doesn’t necessarily mean that building pickleball courts is a bad decision, the sport continues to grow quickly, and getting people more active is a great goal).

But, as anyone who has regularly attended a city council meeting knows, there are some regular attenders in every community. Moreover, these people tend to be older men who own homes and their high level of participation can bias decision making (Einstein, Palmer, & Glick 2018). Women with childcare obligations, working parents, and residents with less free time in general can be left out of the conversation and thus underrepresented in the decisions made by their elected officials.

If decision-making rests only on those who show up, the result is a distorted picture of community needs. That’s where broad-based community surveys come in. By systematically reaching out to residents where they are—through mail, phone, or online—local governments can gather a more representative picture that better reflects the views of the entire community.

Beyond the “Squeaky Wheels”

Public meetings capture only a small portion of community voices. In fact, one study found that 80 to 85 percent of survey respondents had not attended a council meeting or watched one on television in the previous year (Miller 2013). That means governments relying solely on public meetings miss the perspectives of the vast majority of residents.

Harry Hatry of the Urban Institute put it well: “Resident opinions are as necessary to the actions of local government officials as customer service surveys are to business decision-makers.” Surveys provide the equivalent of a performance dashboard—offering leaders a direct line into how residents experience city services and what they want prioritized.

Research has repeatedly shown the value of this approach. For instance, one study found that budget transparency, through participatory budgeting, is actually associated with better financial stability, and a positive cycle of higher levels of citizen trust and participation (Caudrado-Ballesteros & Bisogno 2022).

Furthermore, in The Ethics Primer for Public Administrators Svara (2021) argues that public administrators have an ethical obligation to seek out diverse perspectives to ensure equitable decision-making. Broad-based surveys are a powerful tool for fulfilling this duty by giving a voice to those who might not otherwise be heard—the working parent who can't attend evening meetings, the senior citizen with mobility issues, or the young professional new to town.

From Feedback to Strategy

Quality, scientific community surveys are strategic planning tools. Kansas City, Missouri, is a widely cited example (see this report by the Harvard Kennedy Center). The city conducts annual surveys to determine budget priorities. They recently used this data to determine infrastructure upgrades and voters approved an $800 million dollar bond measure. When leaders can point to robust survey data, it strengthens the legitimacy of funding proposals and helps align spending with resident priorities.

This approach represents a growing movement: According to the International City/County Managers Association (ICMA) the number of jurisdictions conducting broad citizen surveys has grown from only 3% two decades ago to roughly 30% today. The trend reflects recognition that survey data is not “nice to have”—it’s essential for budgeting, performance tracking, and accountability.

Building Satisfaction Through Transparency

This matters because the connection between voice, transparency, and satisfaction is well-documented. A Pew Research Center study found that when residents perceive their government as open and inclusive, they report higher satisfaction with civic life, greater trust in local institutions, and stronger belief that “average citizens can have an impact on government.”

By publishing survey results and showing how decisions are shaped by community input, local governments reinforce trust. This transparency not only improves satisfaction but also builds public support for difficult decisions.

A note on methodology

The numbers that come out at the end are only as good as the process used to generate them. Data alone is not sufficient information for community leaders to base their decisions on, it needs to be high quality data that is analyzed correctly to determine actionable insights. This comes down to three main factors

1. Survey design: 

   1. respondents are very sensitive to seemingly minor things like question wording and even the order in which the questions asked.

   2. Questions need to be straightforward and use clear language so they can be understood the same way by everyone answering the questionnaire. 

   3. Sparks Lab surveys are based on best practices in political science research.

2. Sampling and weighting: 

   1. As any honest pollster will tell you, achieving a representative sample is very difficult to achieve. 

   2. People who are willing to fill out a survey are likely to be different from people who are not, but less difference than that between people who show up to public meetings vs. those who do not.

   3. Being able to generalize from the sample can be achieved in a number of ways

      1. Post cards and phone calls to targeted groups who are less likely to complete the survey.

      2. Real-time monitoring of results to benchmark against the known population and adjusting recruitment techniques as necessary.

      3. Data can be weighted to known population parameters in the analysis.

3. Data analysis: 

   1. Helpful insights can be drawn from simple statistical techniques such as averages.

   2. Additional insight can be obtained by using more advanced statistical modeling common in the social sciences. Statistical controls can be used to determine relationships between factors of interest for decision makers.