ordinary meeting of council to be held on tuesday, 26 april 2005 at ...

As part <strong>of</strong> the pre Management Plan consultation, a two-stage process was developed. The
first was a broad community environment survey administered in April 2003 that sought
information on residents’ values, perceptions and knowledge <strong>of</strong> the environment. To
determine willingness <strong>to</strong> pay, the survey asked respondents <strong>to</strong> indicate their level <strong>of</strong>
agreement <strong>to</strong> the statement:
“I would agree <strong>to</strong> an increase in rates if the extra money would <strong>be</strong> used <strong>to</strong> fix
environmental problems.”
From the 1143 responses, 40 % indicated a willingness <strong>to</strong> pay for environmental
improvements, a further 20% indicated a neutral stance on their willingness <strong>to</strong> pay. The main
issues for the 20 % that were neutral and 40% that disagreed identified in follow-up group
interviews and focus groups were:
1. The need <strong>to</strong> provide information on what the money would <strong>be</strong> specifically spent,
timeframes and funding limits;
2. How a levy would <strong>be</strong> accounted;
3. How transparency in decision-making and auditing would <strong>be</strong> established; and
4. How residents would <strong>be</strong> involved in the delivery <strong>of</strong> the programmes.
Interestingly however, income and stated environmental <strong>be</strong>haviours and attitudes had very
little <strong>be</strong>aring on respondents’ willingness <strong>to</strong> pay.
The second phase <strong>of</strong> consultation involved administering the same survey instrument, titled
‘Environmental Levy Survey’ (Attachment 3) through a variety <strong>of</strong> means <strong>to</strong> maximise
community reach. The survey was specifically designed <strong>to</strong> determine the level <strong>of</strong> community
support for the environmental levy and the priority <strong>of</strong> the various programmes as nominated.
The process involved:
1. 3,000 postal surveys distributed across the LGA covering each suburb proportionally. To
ensure possible variations <strong>be</strong>tween location were captured, areas selected were close <strong>to</strong>
shopping precincts or bushland, as follows:
Suburb
Population
Num<strong>be</strong>r <strong>of</strong>
surveys
Area type
Warrawee/ Wahroonga 22,008 600 shops
Turramurra 19,141 500 bush
Pymble 13,038 350 shops
St Ives 17,372 450 bush
Gordon 6,104 150 shops
Lindfield 10,723 300 bush
Killara 11,109 300 shops
Roseville 12,866 350 bush
Totals 112,361 3000
2. Posting the survey on Council’s website with links <strong>to</strong> the relevant information regarding
the levy process, administration and programmes.
3. Distributing hard copies <strong>of</strong> the survey distributed <strong>to</strong> Council facilities, such as libraries,
the Administrative Centre, and though functions including the Youth Council <strong>to</strong> obtain
484671 Page 39