001All right, good evening everyone. It's good to be with you all on Zoom tonight for this special meeting of the Town Council. Um we are going to jump into a few procedural things and then I'll make some comments about tonight's meeting and we can get started. So, let's begin with a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. And if everybody can mute, that would be great. All right. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which we stand, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you for the flag, Bill. Ann Margaret, would you call roll, please? >> Mike Boswell. Mike Boswell. You may be muted. We'll come back to him. I saw him earlier. Mary Isaac. >> Here. >>
002Stephen Splaine. >> Here. >> Bill Mecca. >> Here. >> Ann Sather. Jennifer Winchell. >> Here. >> Guys, I'm here. Sorry about that. Mike Boswell, here. >> Very good. Thank you. Christina Laires. >> Here. >> Richard Wolfe. >> Here. >> Jason Marsh. >> Here. >> Anthony Dorsey. Ashley Gaudiano. >> Here. >> Carl Massaro. >> Here. >> John Foreman. >> Here. >> Thomas Broderick. >> Here. >> Matthew Dunn. >> Here. >> Joy Colon. >> Ryan Walsh. >> Oh, Joy is here. Very good. Kelly Melazy. >> Here. >> Ryan Walsh. >> Here. >> Kelly Melazy already said yes. Tony Senta. >> Here. >> Jared Ferrari. >> Here. >> Nicole Satin. >> Here. >> All right. I think we are all set. If anybody joins, we'll uh we'll get them accounted for at that point. All right. So, we
003are here um to get a presentation by Siena Research Institute. Oh, Rich, you're unmuted. All right. We're here for a presentation by Siena Research Institute and um Megan, who is here on their behalf, to share the results from the May 2026 survey that we conducted or that they conducted on our behalf to uh look at um kind of public opinion and public interest and um a variety of different uh kind of questions and insights around a potential senior community center. Um we are here solely to discuss the results from the survey. We will not be discussing next steps on what we do with the survey results tonight. Tonight's focus, because it's a special meeting, is on the data and the ability, while we have Megan, to ask any data-related questions we have. Um we will
004do public comment first and foremost. Um again, public comment needs to to related to the results of the survey, not on what we do or don't do with any particular project, piece of property, etc. So, if you're here for public comment, we welcome that, but please keep it related to the data from the survey, and it needs to be 2 minutes or uh roughly 2 minutes in order to keep the the evening moving. Um as a reminder, because we're on Zoom, if you have questions, please use the raise hand feature. And when you come off mute, make sure you say your name. It makes it easier for Margaret to have what she needs to have. Um and then the last thing I'll say, and we'll get started first with public comment, and then the presentation
005from Megan, is that uh you know, this was really a decision to look at and take an opportunity to get feedback from people in this town about what they want, right? The the referendum failed, and we still have a senior center that has needs, and we still have seniors in the community have who have needs, and we have a whole bunch of other people who are not uh potentially using a senior center who have needs and interests. And so, this was an opportunity to really take a step back um to take all of the work that has been done over the last 10-plus years by the senior community center uh facilities committee, and get some really statistically relevant input from people. Um recognizing that the referendum was a no vote on a certain cost and
006a certain location, and we needed some data and input and insights in order to figure out what we should do next, and what the people of this town want us to do next. And so, I hope that we can take the data from tonight, hear from Megan what that data tells us and shows, ask any questions we need, and then we'll convene probably again the public works committee and have some conversations about what's next. So, that's a little bit of why we're here for the public who's on, a reminder for the council of why we did this, and again, just a reminder that tonight's meeting is about the results, not about next steps. That will happen in a different form. So, with that, I will turn things over to public comment. If you would like
007to make a comment, again, we're going to keep it to about 2 minutes, and you can use the raise hand feature, and we'll pull you in, or Bill will pull you in one by one. So, if you'd like to make a comment, please hit raise hand. If you're unable to do that, let us know. And Bill, I'm going to let you you be in charge of this. I see iPad Milky Way has a hand up. I'm not certain who that is. Hello. If you can come off mute and state your name and address for the record, and then the floor is yours for the next 2 minutes. >> Hi. >> Hello. Nope. Almost. >> Hi. >> There we go. Now we see you. >> Sorry about that. Um my name is Sherry Boyd. I live
008at 16 Pinehurst Street. I am Milky Way tonight. Yes. Nice. Um so, I feel strongly that it's time for common sense leadership here in Trumbull and giving residents what they want. We had a referendum in the fall. The referendum didn't pass. So, the majority of the town said, "No, thank you." I completely understand why the council members and other leaders in town may be interested in getting additional information about that. I'm just not convinced that the survey that only included 2% of the population uh, was the way to go. I almost believe that soliciting input from residents via the first selectman update feature would have generated more valuable information and I'm sure a higher percentage of the population than the survey. In addition, uh, it's my understanding from friends who did fill out the survey.
009I was not contacted, uh, but it's my understanding that they were able to add comments at the very end of the survey. So, in the interest of total transparency and because this is a town-funded survey, uh, I believe those comments should be made available to the public for review. And that's it. Thanks for listening. >> Thanks, Sherry. Have a great night. >> You too. >> Again, if you would like to make a public comment tonight, please feel free to use the raise hand feature in order to do so. >> [snorts] >> I'm going to give it another minute because I know that technology is not always our friend. Bill, I don't see anything. Do Do see anything right this second? >> Uh, there are currently no members of the public with their hand raised. >>
010Okay. I'm going to Oh, iPad Milky Way. Sherry, uh you've already spoken, so I'm thinking you're okay. Unless you have somebody else in your house. Otherwise, okay, there we go. >> Sorry. I just wanted to tell you that I know many people were having trouble getting on to the Zoom meeting who probably wanted to do public comment, so I believe they are technology problems. Okay, that's all. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Bye. >> As a reminder to anybody watching who has friends who may want to get on to the meeting, the Zoom link is on the agenda on the town website. Um and you should just be able to click it, and I don't know, Bill, if you need to enter the webinar ID and the password or not. Um or if you'll just get
011in if you click that link. And then the last, I would just say the last reminder if people are having technology problems, you're always welcome to email the council clerk. That email address is on the website. You can always email those, and our wonderful clerk sends everybody's emails to the full council. Um so we will receive those and read those. So that is also an opportunity, um if you're having a difficult time getting on tonight. We are holding this via Zoom, recognizing the real challenges that come at this time of year for people, especially many parents who have kids graduating and wrapping up end-of-school year activities. And so, um trying to be available to everyone tonight. All right, I'm going to do one final call for any additional public comment. Any last takers? Oh, I
012saw a hand go up. Bill, I see Nate has his hand up. Hi, Nate. Hi, people. Just state your name and address, and then you are welcome to make remarks. >> Nate Gross, 4 Canterbury Lane. I think the survey uh from what I understand has uh has shown some uh some promising results for uh for uh in terms of hav- in terms of having a a senior community center, but uh but it seems like there is concern about the cost. Uh so and also where it's going to go. Uh so I think uh that is something that uh that hopefully the town could uh come together and and and decide on at some point in the future. Uh I ho- I think that uh our town needs a a new senior community center because the
013current senior center is just not uh just not viable anymore. Uh it's not a situation that uh that can go on for much longer, and I think it's an even bigger waste of money to pour more money into the current senior center than is to build a new one. >> Nate, I'm just going to have you keep your comments to the survey as I would ask anybody to do. >> Okay. >> Is there anything else you'd like to add tonight? >> Uh no, thank you. >> Thank you for coming. All right, I don't see anybody else this evening with their hand up. Feel free to send us your remarks, and anybody listening, if you have friends who can't get on, again, please remind them they can email the council clerk and those emails will get
014to all of us. All right. So, somewhere on my screen is Megan. I'm not certain where. There you are, Megan. You're on page two. Um so, Megan Crawford is with us again from Siena. She's been here before. Um Megan is going to walk us through the data at a high level and then we will do questions. Um Megan, do you have a presentation? >> I do. Yeah, I'll be sharing my screen if that's okay. >> All right. So, let's try and get through the presentation and then we can kind of toggle back if there are specific questions. >> That sounds great. >> Okay. Do you have permission to share screen? >> I think I do. Yeah. I think I do. >> I see a thumbs up from Bill. >> Yes. So, there we go. >>
015Nope. >> No, good. >> There, much better than my face. >> Yeah, sorry. >> [laughter] >> All right. The floor is yours. >> Okay, thanks so much. And thank you everyone for coming. I know, like Ashley said, this is a difficult time, so I appreciate everybody coming um to hear the results on what's sort of a pretty fairly nice um almost summer evening. So, um we'll get right into it. Um so, the goal of the survey was to understand how Trumbull residents view the idea of a new senior community facility, particularly after the November 2025 referendum. So, we conducted the survey um between May 4th and May 8th of this year. And we our original goal was to get 400 completed surveys, but we surpassed that goal. So, um the enthusiastic people of Trumbull, Connecticut,
016where we spoke with um were 654 adult residents using both cell and landline phones. And the data was weighted to reflect the town's demographics. Um what I'll focus on today is not just what residents said, but what the results tell us about why the referendum failed and what might influence future decisions. So first uh this is a highly engaged community. About 3/4 of residents say they follow local town issues closely. And awareness of the senior community center discussion is also high. Nearly eight in 10 residents say they've been following it. That tells us this vote wasn't about confusion or lack of awareness. People knew what was being discussed. Engagement increases with age. Uh younger residents are less likely to say they follow town issues closely. And white residents report higher engagement than residents of other
017racial or ethnic backgrounds. This matters when thinking about outreach as different groups are starting from different levels of familiarity. And when we look back at the 20 November 2025 referendum, residents were almost evenly split. Slightly more residents say they were opposed than supportive. And this confirms what the election results suggested. The town is not unified on this issue. Political affiliation plays a role. Democrats were much more likely to support the referendum than Republicans or unaffiliated residents. People who have actually visited the senior center were also more supportive than those who haven't. 55% they supported it versus 39%. Direct experience with the facility appears to increase support. So we asked people which of the following they would prefer, a new senior center or a new community center. Um when asked what kind of facility they did
018prefer, a majority leaned toward a community center used by people of all ages at 52%. Only about one in five prefer a senior only facility. And even among older residents, support for a senior only center is limited. Among those who opposed the 2025 referendum, more than half, 54%, prefer neither a new senior center nor a community center. However, it does suggest that the concept of a shared multi-generational space does have broader appeal. So, about two-thirds of residents, 68%, say it's important for the town to have a facility that meets community needs. Supporters of the referendum overwhelmingly say it's important at 65%. Excuse me, 95% when you combine varying somewhat important. Opponents are much more divided. Many do not see a new facility as necessary. So, there is agreement on need, but disagreement on priority. When
019we ask about spending 27 to 30 million dollars, residents are split. But opposition slightly outweighs support with 42% opposed and 38% in favor. Four in 10 residents say they would not be willing to pay any additional taxes to fund a new facility. Among those who opposed the referendum, two-thirds say they wouldn't pay anything extra in taxes. This is the clearest and most consistent barrier we see in the data. So, renovate, build new, or wait. Residents do not coalesce around a single path forward. About a third say they prefer building a new facility. Another large share say they're unsure or don't or need more information. Opponents are especially likely to say they don't have enough information. That uncertainty is important. It suggests hesitation and maybe not necessarily firm opposition. Location is not a major driver of
020opinion. No location stands out as a clear favorite. A sizable portion of residents say they don't know or don't have a preference. Nearly half, 47%, of those in favor of the 2025 referendum, prefer the Grace Church location. Most residents also did say that their opinion wouldn't change even if certain properties were sold or developed. Compared to cost and taxes, location seems to be a secondary concern. We asked about the importance of different amenities to include in a proposed new center. There is strong support for core amenities like senior programming space, fitness areas, youth space, and flexible meeting rooms. Higher cost features like an indoor pool divide residents much more evenly. Residents who were in favor of the referendum are more apt than those opposed to express importance for each of these amenities. This points to
021a desire for functionality with sensitivity to cost. I know there's a lot on the screen. Um so messaging matters and reveals a clear divide. Residents >> Oh, Megan, I think we're losing you. Is that on your end? >> rather than towards positive new new >> I don't know. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. >> Yeah, I would say go back to the beginning of this slide. You said there's a lot on this slide and then we started losing you. >> Okay, sure. Okay, there there is strong support for core amenities like senior programming space, fitness areas, youth space, and flexible meeting rooms. Higher cost features like an indoor pool divide residents much more closely. I'm sorry. Sorry, I'm on the previous one. I'm so sorry. This is the Yeah, this I got lost. Yep. Um so
022this is these are the positive, neutral, and negative statements that have been made about the plans to build a new facility. So agreement is higher among those in favor of the referendum than those opposed on the positive statements. And conversely, negative statements elicit higher achievement among those who oppose the referendum. with those in favor. So positive with supporters, but much less affordability and long-term cost resonates strongly with opponents. So residents are interpreting the same proposal through a very different lens. Yeah, I know there's a lot of numbers on that. So I'm just kind of giving you the >> Megan, can you send this to me when we're done and I'll have the clerk send this out and we'll also get this presentation posted online so residents may see it as well. >> Sure, absolutely. So
023what could increase future support? Um Three things stand out as potential drivers. Lower overall cost, clearer tax impacts, and energy efficient design. Even so, none of these changes alone creates majority support among those who previously opposed >> We're losing you tonight, Megan. It >> I'm done. I'm so sorry. I don't know. Is that better? >> And then it's wonky >> Is it coming in and out? >> You're just freezing kind of every now and then. The last slide we got all the way through. This one we got partway through to you saying that none of these significantly swing people who were opposed. >> Correct. >> Okay. So yeah. So >> This suggests that the incremental changes help, but they don't fully resolve any opposition. So I know the next slide I think is what a
024lot of people are interested in too, which was we concluded the survey by asking if there was anything else residents wanted to share about this topic. More than half of the respondents chose to leave a written comment, which is unusually high. The comments reflect passion, frustration, and strong feelings about taxes, priorities, about this listing. Here's just a sample of some of the responses. Um Um so, I know everybody give. Um so, among those who did give um comment, um it was equally divided whether the comments were positively um a positive towards the community center or and or senior center and those negatively um having some type of opposing comment about it. So, um you know, people the a lot of people who are opposed to it stated a lot of times that they already said
025no. This was already put to a vote. The people had already spoken. Um however, there were people who were strongly in favor of the senior center and strongly in favor of a community center and felt that it was um really something that Trumbull needed. So, I did share those um with um Ashley just this week. So, um she has all of the comments that people included. >> Yep, I got those yesterday and so I will get those out as well. >> Yeah. >> It's on my list. >> So, in some residents agree the current facility is outdated and that needs exist. Where they differ is on cost, scale, and how much they are willing or able to pay. Community sentiment is strong and residents want to feel heard. Trumbull residents broadly agree that the current
026facility is outdated and that community needs exist, but they remain unconvinced that the cost, scale, and funding approach of the 2025 proposal were right for the town. >> That conclude That that your last slide? Okay. >> That was my last slide, yeah. >> Thank you. Um I don't know if you want to pull the presentation down and then if we need to go back to it for a specific slide, we can do that. >> Sure. I stopped sharing just so if that's >> Perfect. All right, so folks have questions, again, please use the raise hand feature so that we can keep this orderly. Anything speci- Hold on, I see Um I see attendees with hands up, so just a reminder to attendees that um we had our public comment period and we're on to the
027presentation, so Oh, there we go. Thanks, Bill. Um we're on to the town council portion of this, so at this point the questions are going to come from the town council side, not the public. And if public have questions, you're welcome to send those to the council clerk or to me directly and I'll put my email Well, I don't know that I can put it in the chat, we'll see. All right, so first, I'm going to go to um Councilman Mecca and then um Councilman Alarice. >> [clears throat] >> Hi, Megan. Thank you for your presentation. Um so two things. One is if you could explain a little bit more about sample size and how it represents um the population. I think some questions from the public have come up about survey research in general,
028right? Um, and then number two, there was one slide it it was around the time that you first started fading out, but I and all the other slides were great. I I totally understood it I find it I found it very explanatory overall. Um, there was that one slide though about perceptions and messaging and I I I it was a little unclear for me how to unpack that to the fullest. So, those are my two uh, questions. >> Sure, absolutely. Thank you so much for the questions. Um, so the survey again originally we were going to do 400 and and you know, we had a you know, certain budget of uh, you know, where we were going to allot everything and we got an a really really strong response from the people of Trumbull. So,
029um, we spoke with 654 people who completed the survey um, via text or um, on the telephone or either cell phone or landline. And so what we did is the sample sample was drawn randomly for um, all those uh, people uh, who live in the town of Trumbull, Connecticut. And then what um, we did is we asked >> Megan, I wonder if you try turning your screen off if that'll help your >> of demographic questions at the end. And so, >> Really? Yeah, I wonder if you try turning that off. I don't know. >> Okay. Yeah, I'm All right. >> I'll let you know if we can't hear you. >> Okay, let me know. Um, so um, what we did then is we took the um, census data for the town of Trumbull, Connecticut and
030we um, weighted the data to make sure that it was representative of the people of uh, Trumbull, Connecticut. So, you'll see I know um, Ashley did share um, and it was on with uh, the the cross tabs for the data. So, if you look in the last page on the cross tabs of the data, you'll see the full demographics for the people, um, that we spoke with. And that is representative of, um, the census, um, data for the people for adults 18 and older in the, um, in the town of Trumbull, Connecticut. So, hopefully that answered that first question. And then I think the, um, >> Megan, can you just quickly speak to how do you know if 400 is enough people, right? I think that's part of Bill's question. Um, right? How how did
031we get the number 400? >> Well, right. So, yeah, so what we, you know, what the people that we speak to what what what we do is then we calculate a margin of error. So, the margin of error for, um, 654 respondents, um, is, um, plus or minus 4 and 1/2% So, what that means is that if we were to do the survey 100 times, um, 95 times out of 100, the results would be the same plus or minus 4 and 1/2% So, um, you know, we do surveys like this all the time. So, for example, we do a survey of New York State, um, registered voters. Um, we do it on a monthly basis. Um, for New York State registered voters, we speak to 800 people. So, the the margin of error on that
032is usually somewhere in the neighborhood of about 3 and 1/2% Um, so, you don't need to talk to everyone in order to get a statistically valid result as long as the way in which they were drawn was random. So, >> That was helpful and we had you the whole time until just now. >> with people who comments on It's I I know why it's saying I'd say that I have a really good signal, but it's telling me unstable network connection. Let me All right, I don't understand. Okay. I thought All right, it seems like I'm back. So, um does that did it answer the question or as far as understanding how speaking with 600 people is is is a valid um number of responses for the town? >> Bill, does that answer the question you
033asked? >> Yeah, yeah, and I I you know, I I I haven't conducted a lot of research, but I certainly took a lot of courses in statistics and survey research. I just know that, you know, you always have to explain things to those folks who either don't have much confidence in polling, and I know we're not talking apples to apples, but you know, out there in the world, it seems like there's been a lot of disputing of data and statistics for a lot of reasons, right? That we can't really get into, just speculation. So, I just wanted to make sure that those with not a background or understanding of data and statistics and and survey research kind of has confidence that all right, um and I like what you said about if you repeated it
034so many times, you said there's just a margin of error of plus or minus 4%. >> Mhm. Yeah, correct. >> Yeah, I think that's super helpful. Hopefully people can um wrap their their their arms around that. And then the perceptions and messaging slide. >> Yeah. I mean >> I don't know if we could put that up again, that one slide, but it's just that in particular, I I thought there was a lot to unpack there, and it wasn't just because we were we were losing you at times. I just think I didn't fully understand it myself. >> Okay. >> So, what what story was that telling? Cuz it seemed like it had a lot to it. >> Mhm. I don't I feel like I can't share it now. It's telling me I can't share my
035video again. >> Okay. Okay. >> So but let's I'll try again. >> Maybe maybe that's just my question. If it's not a question for >> Oh no no, there's a lot on that screen. There we go. Let me share it again. So I think it was this one. That right? This is the right one, right? >> I think it was the one labeled perceptions and messaging. Wasn't there one that I thought at the top? >> This one. Okay, yeah, this one. >> Um [snorts] >> There we go. >> Yep. There we go. Yep. >> Yeah, so what I what I tried to do here, I know it is a lot. I probably should have maybe divided it up into a few slides. But what I tried to do is this. So the top three were
036more positive statements about the center. You know, a new bene- a new facility would not only benefit seniors, but the whole community. We need a new facility. And the town of Trumbull needs a safe place for youth. Then the two in the middle are just kind of like neutral statements just about you know, the current senior center is outdated and a new facility um should have an indoor pool. And then three more um you know, more negative um response >> I know she cut out again. >> I was saying, you know, I was saying, you know, I don't want to board it and construction >> I see now that >> construction would negatively impact >> Yes, I understand it now. So right, the top three were evaluating or measuring positive statements. The two were the
037neutral you said, and the bottom three were digging a little deeper into the negative. >> Right, exactly. >> Yeah. Thank you very much. That helps. >> Okay, that Yeah, that I mean I mean overall, you know, people were overall in agreement with these statements, even the positive ones and the negative ones. There was more support for where um those who were in favor of the referendum. Their agreement was higher, and conversely, then those who were opposed were more in disagreement partic- in agreement of, you know, the negative statements as well. So, it kind of followed that >> pattern. Yeah, thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> And those are all related to question 13 A, B, etc. in the survey. So, if you pull up the survey, that's what all of that's what this
038slide is related to. All right, Christine and then John. >> Okay, thank you so much. Um so, I do appreciate you're taking the time to walk us through all of this, and I also appreciate what you indicated at the top of our of the presentation, right, that it was easier for you to reach and even exceed the sample size because of the engaged the level of engagement in our community. One other thing that I just was curious about because you talked about how there were more free-form comments than you typically receive when you're doing these surveys. I was wondering if you could benchmark that. Like, what when you're doing surveys and there's an opportunity for a free-form comment, what's the typical percentage of response rate you get, and then what did our engaged community hit?
039I'm just curious. Thanks. >> Sure. I mean, generally on something like, you know, an open-ended response where we kind of ask for comment, you know, it's in the like 30 to 40%, and it was over half. It was um 56% I believe um that um gave a >> Okay, thank you. >> Welcome. It was there was definitely You're welcome. >> John. >> Uh thank you, Megan. Um in looking at reviewing some of the uh the comments from the public in the uh in the raw data file, there were quite a number of call-outs regarding the overall quality of the questionnaire uh and some suggesting there's some bias in the language and in the phraseology of some of these questions. What do you make of all of that? >> Um >> [clears throat] >> I don't
040think I think that the people um everyone likes to just believe that they can, you know, >> [sighs and gasps] >> I take the criticism. I know I I I I think that the survey was as as fair and balanced as is possible. Um some people don't necessarily um agree with, you know, the particular phraseology of certain things and, you know, feel that maybe it should have been worded differently or and/or more information should have been provided or that people people like to give their feedback and/or um felt strongly enough that that that was necessary to be said. So, they took the survey, so they gave their opinions and I also Yeah. >> You know, the I I ask because in our as in the reviewing some of the public works uh prior meetings, reviewing
041the survey questions and the like, uh some of that was called out in the phraseology. Um I don't see that two main edits have been made. Uh, but I recall in your presentation to the town in February, uh, you'd called out, you know, ensuring best practices uh, and making sure to to ensure removing any type of biases to those questions. And so, like in reviewing a question seven that goes on to say, "A new facility meets the needs of all, you know, agreeing the new facility meets the needs of all town residents and is important." You know, it reads as basically saying something good is good to have is something good. Um, I I think that then when you follow that on, lots of people respond positively to that phrase. But then in subsequent questions,
042uh, question eight and question nine, you know, the the the favoritism for that drops off considerably, you know, only 80 80 38% favoring spending the money. Um, only 30 39% favoring, you know, actually building a new building versus uh, some of the others. And so, there seems like a large gap there. Um, and I just wonder if you had some explanation of that. >> Yeah, I mean, reading question seven, question seven doesn't read as biased to me. I don't think that any of those words are, um, it you know, people can feel that something is important and not feel like they want to also pay for it. You know, it's it they can they felt that yes, it's important to have a new a facility in the town. However, if it's going to cost 27
043to 30 million dollars, I I don't agree I don't agree with that. Um, you know, and to me that's public opinion. That's how people feel. Um, people can feel, um, what may sound like conflicting views. To me it it's not. To me that makes perfect sense. >> Thank you. I just want to one other follow-on question, just kind of connecting the dots between all of these things. Um Is there Do you have any answer to the ranking of the >> Oh, sorry. I thought you were done. You cut out. >> No, I'm I'm good. I'm good. Go ahead. That's okay. Yep. >> Okay, I'm not sure if you cut out or if you stopped talking. I apologize. Um Regarding some of the primary Is there a ranking Do you have ever like a ranking of
044importance? You know, whether you know, people who were opposed, you know, what ranking their ranking their issues that they were most opposed to or for those that were in favor, you know, the things that they were, you know, whether it's the amenities, the location, the cost. Is there an actual ranking or scoring of each of those items? >> Yes, in in the report that I gave, um it it does kind of detail some of those out. Definitely the opponents um were what what really was very that stood out particularly among opponents was anything that had to do with cost, um any implications to taxes and things like that. As far as the ones in favor, uh the people you know, they liked the different um and didn't They were not as opposed to paying um
045additional taxes. They thought it was um but I think any mention of increasing of taxes was seen both by um supporters and opponents of the original referendum as not something that was uh You know, if given the opportunity, no one wants to pay additional taxes. So, um you know, I think [clears throat] uh anything related to cost was major driver for the opponents, um whereas the supporters, they supported it. They want a new facility, um whether it was a community center that was helpful versus just a senior center, and they liked different, you know, the different aspects of it. I know one of the big discussions was this was the addition of a public pool. That didn't really seem to be a major contributing factor. It was somewhat important, but it did not bubble up
046to the top. >> Regarding the cost factor, were you able to draw draw parallels or conclusions between age, tenure in town, things of that nature? Like those who opposed due to cost technically fell in this >> across the board >> age group or tenure of town and things of that nature. >> It It was across the board whether people wanted, you know, to, you know, people were not willing to pay necessarily, you know, 40% across the board were not willing to pay additional taxes as far as um Let's see if there was anything um there really I mean it it it was pretty consistent among all of the subgroups, you know, those with slightly higher incomes were a little bit more willing to pay, but not significantly, and you know, those who Yeah, it there
047when you look at it by um the only ones who were a little bit more willing were Democrats. >> Okay, thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Thanks, Megan. Matt. >> Hi. Thank you for presenting. Continuing on question 14 about the tax implications and and stuff. So, clearly the plurality at least from how the data is displayed, shows 40% wanting no increase in taxes, but um I I just want to uh double-check that I'm understanding this correctly that at least for the remainder of the options besides don't know {slash} refused, it is suggesting some form of an increase that people would be okay with. I'm just double-checking if that's >> Yeah, that's right. >> like 50 o- it's over 50% >> Yes, there is >> So, can can that inform us uh about there being some
048amount of people who responded who maybe they voted no because there were some other factors like certain features that weren't included. Um cuz I I know a lot of the people who are opposed don't want the costs associated with it. Um but um I'm trying to make sense of how we still have a majority that are still open to some increase in in payment for the the facility while um uh while potentially maybe like voting no on the referendum for the specific circumstances of the proposed plan. >> Yeah, among those who were opposed to the referendum, um 67% did say um nothing, that they would not be willing to pay any taxes. So, it was a smaller group among those opposed who did say that they would be willing to pay some taxes, but there
049you know, it was 2/3 who said um they would not um be willing to pay any. Um yeah, I mean, it's it's a plurality that said nothing, Um you know, but but there was a majority overall who said they would be willing to pay something. But among those who were opposed, it was an over uh it was, you know, a clear um majority that said that they would not be willing to pay any. >> Okay. >> Thanks, Matt. >> Um >> Additional questions >> questions? John, you're back. >> Sorry. Can I ask one more question here? Regarding like just for example in uh question eight notable labor question eight, but um the the subgroup where it shows November 2025 referendum in favor 20 78 eight opposed >> looking, real quick, just so we're all on
050the same page, you're looking at the question, are you in favor of or opposed to spending? Is that correct? >> Correct. That's correct. And then there's the you've got your totals, your in favor and opposed, 38 42. But then the subgroup there to the to the right that so shows November 2025 referendum in favor 78, opposed eight. And then the next line I'm in favor five, opposed 79. >> Mhm. >> I'm just trying to more importantly just trying to understand how I interpret that so relative to everything else. >> Sure. So, among those who were in favor of referendum, 78% [clears throat] are in favor of a facility who spending 27 to 30 million dollars for a new facility, and 5% of those people are opposed. Among those who were opposed to the referendum in
0512025 79% are opposed to spending 27 to 30 million dollars for a new facility. Does that make sense? >> Okay. So, that's I I guess if I were to look at that relative to other questions about cost, >> Right. >> would I expect to see something similar given that cost is a seems to be one of our most significant drivers of this? >> Correct. Yes. So, and I and I did look um too at um I did I crossed question eight with support and opposed uh the you know, in like those Yeah, so if you're looking at um the support or oppose the referendum, it's um you know, majority of the people who are opposed to question eight as well. >> Okay. >> And I think John, if you look at question um 13c, right?
052Our town cannot afford a new multi-million dollar facility, right? That's one of the perceptions of messaging question. You see similar trends when you look at that November 25 referendum in favor or opposed, you see people who are opposed strongly agreeing that we can't afford it. And those who are in favor more evenly being split among all of those things. Right? Any of those money questions seem to track similarly. >> I'm good. >> All right. Other questions? Okay, Megan, anything else to add on your end? >> No, I don't I mean I don't think I'm, you know, um I know there was, um there was a question [clears throat] posed with >> Oh, there it is. Okay. >> Do you Do I believe Ashley just about, um I'm going to turn my video off again. I'll
053try that. >> Okay, there was a question >> Yep. >> Okay. Yeah, there was a question a question about, um um people who didn't complete the survey who started it but didn't. >> Mhm. >> Um so, I just wanted to address that. Um so, I did look that up to give, um specific and it did fall kind of in line with similar surveys, um that we've done. Um there were 834 people who passed through the screening questions. Um and then how many people dropped off. It it it kind of was even among um most of them. We You do see the most drop-off after the first question. So, we lost 29 people um the first substantive question, question three to question four. And then it's single digits of people who we lost along the way.
054And then the next biggest drop was from Q9 to Q10, um where there were 20 drop-offs at that point. But, I looked to just historically just for quality control. base. So, um but I know that that was a question, so I wanted to make sure that that was addressed. >> That was that came in, I think, from the public. >> Yep. Correct. >> John, another question? No, this is what we're here for, right? So, I'm >> geek out with the numbers. I'm sorry. So, when we come to, we think when we think of, uh margin of error, right? Um there's a lot of these numbers that are are relatively close. Um am I correct in when I interpret this more more or less my perception here is that you need a spread of greater than
055nine if not more than not 10 points um to draw us draw a conclusion that is, you know, of statistical significance, right? Cuz if you have >> That is correct. >> Is that correct? Okay. >> correct. The ones that are really close, that's within the margin of error. >> Right. So it could go the other way, right? >> Right, because an oppose at 45% and a four at 50% are you got put 4 and 1/2% on either side of those numbers, and if they cross over, then they're kind of Yeah, they're it's not statistically significant enough. >> Yeah, I mean it's Yeah, I Correct. Yeah, when it's that you we I don't know, I like lost my bandwidth again. Generally how we report it is we say it's close. Those two, you know, you know,
056like if it's candidates, for example, where it's, you know, John versus Mary, you would say it was that was a close race, you know, if it was 45 to 50. >> Depending on your base size and your margin of error. Okay. >> Correct. >> Um Okay. All right, I think that's it. >> Okay. And I would just say, right, um I will send the open-ended questions that I got, I will send um Megan, if you send me this presentation, I'll send that out. Um and then if, you know, if any other questions come to the service, obviously our contract with Sienna is over, but um if any other questions come up and, you know, we need a little bit of input from Megan, Megan, hopefully we can >> Absolutely. >> send those over and and
057get them answered. So, you know, take a look at the presentation when you get it. We will post these things on the town website. Um, there will be ample opportunity to speak to what's next. Um, I don't think that this is the last time we'll talk about this subject. It's just the opportunity to have this data presented at this point in time. All right, I don't see anything else. I don't want to rush the meeting, but I don't see anyone else with their hand up. So, I'm going to do one more pause. Okay. Megan, thank you very, very much. We appreciate your insights and uh work on this. And I'll wait for that presentation from you. And for the rest of the council, um, the meeting dates for July are going to be committee meetings
058on July 8th and council meeting on July 13th. So, just make sure Margaret sent those out. Just make sure you have those on your calendar. Um, and with that, I will take a motion to adjourn. Somebody's got to make a motion. >> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> Kelly and Bill, thank you. I think it was Kelly and Bill. Um, all in favor, can we pass that by unanimous consent? Thumbs up. All right. Thank you, everyone. Have a great evening. Um, happy graduation to all those who have graduating kiddos, and we'll see you in July. >> Thank you. >> Bye.