The results of the State Auditor’s 2017 Performance Measurement Report show that Austin residents have a mixed, though generally positive, view of local government performance.

The voluntary report surveys citizens regarding 10 performance measures for cities and counties. Cities and counties that choose to participate may be eligible for a reimbursement in Local Government Aid. The Austin City Council approved Austin’s participation during their meeting on May 1.

Citizens were asked about the following performance measures:
• Overall appearance of the city – 156 responses

Excellent – 6 percent

Good – 42 percent

Fair – 40 percent

Poor – 12 percent

While several responders agreed the downtown/Main Street area is well kept, many pointed out the abundance of rundown properties in various neighborhoods.
• Overall feeling of safety in the city – 156 responses

Very safe – 16 percent

Somewhat safe – 46 percent

Somewhat unsafe – 28 percent

Very unsafe – 10 percent

Responders were complimentary of the crime fighting efforts of local police. Some expressed concerns about drug and gang activity.
• Overall quality of fire protection in the city – 156 responses

Excellent – 41 percent

Good – 40 percent

Fair – 8 percent

Poor – 1 percent

Don’t know – 10 percent

Those surveyed had an overwhelmingly positive response to the services of the Austin Fire Department. This area had the largest percentage of  “don’t know” responses as participants commented they have not been in situations requiring the services of the fire department.
•Overall condition of city streets – 154 responses

Excellent – 2 percent

Good – 32 percent

Fair – 49 percent

Poor – 17 percent

This performance measure was Austin’s worst rating, with 66 percent checking “fair” or “poor.” Potholes were a consistent complaint among participants.
• Overall quality of snowplowing on city streets – 156 responses

Excellent – 12 percent

Good – 30 percent

Fair – 29 percent

Poor – 28 percent

Don’t know – 1 percent

Like the question of street conditions, participants had many negative things to say about this one. Common complaints were quality of the job done and compacting snow at the end of driveways.
• Overall quality of city sanitary sewer services – 156 responses

Excellent – 26 percent

Good – 58 percent

Fair – 10 percent

Poor – 3 percent

Don’t know – 3 percent

This performance measure was rated the best, with 84 percent rating it “excellent” or “good.”

The only complaints were cost, upgrade needs and clearing of debris from storm drains.
•Overall fiscal management and health – 154 responses

Excellent – 11 percent

Good – 38 percent

Fair – 23 percent

Poor – 14 percent

Don’t know – 14 percent

Those that reviewed favorably cited low taxes and the city’s finance department as their reasons. Those that reviewed negatively cited non-voter approved projects and the pay for city officials as their reasons.
•Overall quality of city library programs and facilities – 155 responses

Excellent – 41 percent

Good – 40 percent

Fair – 8 percent

Poor – 3 percent

Don’t know – 8 percent

The library received overwhelmingly positive reviews. Some participants indicated they would like to see a wider variety of books.
•Overall quality of city recreational programs and facilities – 156 responses

Excellent – 20 percent

Good – 49 percent

Fair – 19 percent

Poor – 12 percent

While most participants felt positive about the city’s recreational programs and facilities, many disagreed about the condition/cleanliness of the parks.
•Overall quality of services provided by the city – 155 responses

Excellent – 8 percent

Good – 52 percent

Fair – 30 percent

Poor – 9 percent

Don’t know – 1 percent

Though generally positive, some participant’s responses showed concern about street conditions and crime.

For more information and to view the full results, visit http://www.auditor.state.mn.us/default.aspx?page=20170804.000 and click on “Austin.”