Security Survey

[Jack T.]

What do you expect to see from CSD in the way of showing the responses from the security survey, or are you just assuming its another smoke and mirror exercise?

[DBCooper]

I read through the CSD survey and assumed just that. Its more data collection for a nice report and nothing will change.

[Jack T.]

Originally Posted by DBCooper

I read through the CSD survey and assumed just that. Its more data collection for a nice report and nothing will change.

The way I understand it, you’re exactly correct. It was never intended to be a mandate for change or to keep things as they are, but instead just a way for the powers to be to get an idea of what people think.

But that’s not what I was asking. I’m asking if you or anyone else would like to see the results of the survey, and perhaps what you would like to see.

FI, would you like to see which questions people thought were the most/least important, and/or would you like to see the comments that were made?

To tell the truth, I was just a teeny bit surprised at some things I saw, and not very surprised at others, but I found it interesting. As an example, with all the complaining in the paper and on the bulletin boards about barking dogs, wouldn’t you expect to see that ranking really high as far as how many people thought it was very important?

[DBCooper]

By all means show us the results. Data is good.

[Wilbur]

I'm all for healthy skepticism, but having participated in selling this effort to the CSD Board and then formulating the survey questions, I want to dispel the notion of a cynical ploy.

This idea did not originate with the CSD Board majority or its GM. It came from the grassroots. New director Bobbi Belton pushed it through, having run on it as a candidate and having been one of us vocal residents yammering for years about expanding resident input and participation. A key element of the project, and something new and alien to the status quo, was Bobbi's insistence that citizens, not CSD, define the questions to be asked. This survey did not come from "within." It came from "without."

The Board went along with the idea, with some understandable misgivings that the results might be misconstrued as a binding mandate. Of course it can't be that, because there are obligations and considerations not well understood by the electorate. The CSD Board deserves some credit for gulping and going along with the idea, because some residents no doubt will adamantly insist that one line item result or another means the BOD "must" do X. But they chose not to run from that risk of catching some flak. Good for them.

For the first time there is being amassed some rather specific information on residents' priorities and desires, the things they like and the things they don't. The next time somebody proclaims that "the residents want this or that," there actually will be a body of evidence of residents' priorities to examine. Definitive and scientific? No. But it IS the responses of hundreds of residents. I haven't studied a thorough crunch of the numbers yet, but I believe the response rate approached a quarter of households and thus perhaps an eighth of voters in the District. As surveys and polls go, that's a pretty decent sampling.

There were no definitive "action items" on the survey calling for the BOD to do any one specific thing. That was not its function. But many things informing future decisionmaking can be gleaned from the results once they're rolled out. We shouldn't expect any instantaneous changes in policy, but in future public debates at both RMA and CSD directors and residents will be able to point to things in the survey and say "Hey, the members said this particular topic was particularly important to them, we should raise the priority of that."

It's an incremental improvement in information on what residents think is important, what they think needs improving, what they think works well. I expect the information will affect directors' decisionmaking and candidates' positions. But connecting cause --> effect dots will likely be pretty elusive. That doesn't mean the information isn't useful or will be shelved away and forgotten; it will be published and known, and become a part of public discourse on the issues of the day.

[Jack T.]

Originally Posted by Wilbur

I'm all for healthy skepticism, but having participated in selling this effort to the CSD Board and then formulating the survey questions, I want to dispel the notion of a cynical ploy.

One of the really sad things about issues that really strike an important chord in people is, good things can’t happen often or fast enough, bad things happen all too often and far too fast, and there’s always that tendency to see conspiracies in every shadow, behind every tree, and around every corner. Those are the kinds of issues the survey dealt with.

For the 1st time that I can remember, those that govern us are actually asking us what we think. They may not have asked all the “right” questions or asked them in the “best” way possible, but at least they asked, and I sure would hope everyone at least wants to see the results.

[nana]

Jack, thanks for all your input on this (figuratively as well as literally); however, let's wait for CSD to publcize the results, comments, etc. Please pm me for our next step. . .

[LisaT]

Originally Posted by Jack T.

The way I understand it, you’re exactly correct. It was never intended to be a mandate for change or to keep things as they are, but instead just a way for the powers to be to get an idea of what people think.

Things won't change if the folks in charge don't want them to change. It's clear that they often aren't completely straightforward with the residents, so I'm not incredibly hopeful that there's real leadership in the security administration to deal with our growing community and the confusion that's been put out in recent years.

Originally Posted by Jack T.

....would you like to see which questions people thought were the most/least important, and/or would you like to see the comments that were made?

I think that the survey has no credibility unless that's released -- everything.

And kudos to Bobbi for getting the survey pushed through, and I suspect that she might have had something to do with pushing to get the survey redisigned to be more informative.

*And* she's the one board member asking some of the real questions -- for example, pointing out that there is no-mechanism to deal with the majority of non-resident speeding issues (another poblem routinely dismissed, and we're told some patronizing line, like it's being taken care of).

I think it does take quite a bit to effect change, but it has to start somewhere.

[Jack T.]

Originally Posted by LisaT

Things won't change if the folks in charge don't want them to change. It's clear that they often aren't completely straightforward with the residents, so I'm not incredibly hopeful that there's real leadership in the security administration to deal with our growing community and the confusion that's been put out in recent years.

There definitely does seem to be a kind of paranoia that grips staff, and eventually directors, and it’s not just CSD! I certainly can’t defend anyone other than to say, its darn difficult to explain something as complex as some of the issues around here are, to people who have often made up their minds based on things are just aren’t true, and by people who may or may not understand the issue either.

Originally Posted by LisaT

I think that the survey has no credibility unless that's released -- everything.

I agree completely, but what would it take to convince people that everything had been released? Who will be believed? Apparently you won’t believe any CSD director, and I don’t get the feeling you’re a big fan of anyone on CSD’s staff. I guess those who did the tabulating could verify what was given out, but I don’t know that any of them have been privy to the entirety of the data, and if they were, who would you believe?

I honestly get the distinct impression that there will be some folks out there who will not believe the results unless they were there to collect every returned survey, then did the tabulating, and released the results too. Perhaps the next time you’ll volunteer to tabulate the surveys.

Originally Posted by LisaT

And kudos to Bobbi for getting the survey pushed through, and I suspect that she might have had something to do with pushing to get the survey redisigned to be more informative.

Redesigned from what? I wasn’t aware there was a version I of the survey.

Originally Posted by LisaT

*And* she's the from the board one asking some of the real questions -- for example, pointing out that there is no-mechanism to deal with the majority of non-resident speeding issues (another poblem routinely dismissed, and we're told some patronizing line, like it's being taken care of).

I wasn’t aware that there was no mechanism to deal with the majority of non-resident speeding issues! I didn’t even know anyone had identified the non-resident speeding issues, let alone which one’s occurred most often. Would you please explain in greater detail?

Originally Posted by LisaT

I think it does take quite a bit to effect change, but it has to start somewhere.

Absatively! But where is that starting point? Is it that those who have the power to determine policy try to change policy, or is it that folks have to start trusting those policy makers?

[LisaT]

Originally Posted by Jack T.

.....its darn difficult to explain something as complex as some of the issues around here are, to people who have often made up their minds based on things are just aren’t true, and by people who may or may not understand the issue either.

...Apparently you won’t believe any CSD director, and I don’t get the feeling you’re a big fan of anyone on CSD’s staff.....

...or is it that folks have to start trusting those policy makers?

Here's the deal.

I have a brain. And I pay attention. And I've done my homework as the years have passed.

There are ample examples where we are told things by the csd security administration that are not true, or that are deceptive. I do not know who the responsible folks are, but at the very least, there is intentional deception (take the lies about citizens' arrests, or nonresident speeding as examples). It's not clear what the board members know, what the general manager knows, or what the chief knows, so I don't know whom to hold accountable. I've read quotes from the chief that don't represent the truth. I've read things in the Pipeline that are intentional deceptions. Is Jack Cooper's confusion due to Jack Cooper, or is he being used further these ideas throughout the commuity? If they keep the RMA board confused, certainly the residents will never figure out what's going on. Will Dick Cox really try to face this issue head on? I guess we'll see about that....

I will believe them when what they say is consistent with what they do, and also consistent with what I read in the law and regulations - both their own and the state's. I trust in my ability to reason more than I trust in their word at this point. Additionally, the condescending attitude that they can't be straightforward with folks because it's too complicated bothers me too.

Redesigned from what? I wasn’t aware there was a version I of the survey.

I was just referring to the survey that they passed out in previous years. I don't remember how long it's been since the last one was sent out.

I wasn’t aware that there was no mechanism to deal with the majority of non-resident speeding issues! I didn’t even know anyone had identified the non-resident speeding issues, let alone which one’s occurred most often. Would you please explain in greater detail?

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but it is an issue. Some can take it lightly, but it's a problem. It would be nice if they would be honest and say to the community, you know, we do what we can -- we call the owners of businesses when relevant, but these other drivers, we have no authority over and we can't respond to calls regarding their driving -- that's what I expect. Not some patronizing article that says it being addressed, when there is no mechanism to address it. If you like to be patted on the head and be told to walk away, that's fine by me. I'm still a bit idealistic and expect a little more from the local government.

I don't have the numbers to back up the word "majority", so you may have caught me there, and I suspect that it also depends on the time of year -- soccer season, etc. It stands to reason that it's the majority, but I can't prove it.

Speeding by non-residents is being addressed, Security says | RanchoMurieta.com -- Rancho Murieta news, homes, golf, forums and people

Delivery truck drivers, contractors, etc. -- nothing is really done about these speeders. In theory, their employers can be contacted, and maybe it's done once in awhile, but there is no power, and I'll bet that they don't even keep track of that stuff, so I want them to prove to me that "they never have a problem at all" after that one phone call is made.

When we have events -- golf tournaments, soccer games, softball games, etc. there is absolutetly nothing that can be done when those folks speed, run stop signs, etc. Nothing. Bobbi Belton was right -- those folks get a free ride. Ask the folks that live on the route to these games, or near the parks. I see it all the time as they zoom by with a car full of kids. There are a lot of folks that come through the gates that aren't responsible to anyone (like the soccer mom's). We discriminate against residents because only residents can be cited.