Linn County Offices Report

8/14/2019 Linn County Offices Report

1/17

Five Administrative Office Building Options

Public Input Results

Linn County Board of Supervisors

November 16, 2009

I I I

s t r a t e g i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n s

DAN WIESE MARKETING RESEARCH


2/17


3/17

strategic communications

RESULTS SUMMARY

Three hundred twenty-eight (328) residents of Linn County completed online surveys regarding the five AOB options.

Two hundred and eighty three residents (283) attended the open housesmost of which fully completed a survey.

(Surveys only partially completed were not considered.).

The first thing asked of the public was to give their opinion on how much importance the Linn County Board of

Supervisors should give specific criteria in evaluating the building options. The table below displays their answers.

Customer service is the criterion they believe should be given the greatest importance, followed by environmental.

Cost and technical are given less importance, but as shown in the chart below, all the criteria have at least some

importance. Few believe any of the criteria is of little or no importance.

Importance

Sondy Daggett

909 Rosedale Road Southeast

Cedar Rapids, IA 52403

[email protected]

319.310.4359

Very High High Some Little or No No Answer

Importance Importance Importance Importance

Customer Service (accessiblelocation, good parking) 64.2% 22.3% 9% 3% 1.4%

Environmental (sustainability,energy efficiency, flood protection) 48.2% 33.1% 13.9% 2.8% 2%

Cost (purchase, renovation, lifecycle) 39.8% 35.9% 19.4% 1.8% 2.8%

Technical (size of building, meetsbuilding codes and standards) 36.7% 41.3% 16.4% 3.2% 2.1%

CustomerService

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Very High

High

Some

Little or NoImportance

No Answer

Environmental Cost

%

Technical


4/17


Next, residents were asked to rate the different choices for Linn County offices. Below are their answers

for each of the five options.

OPTION #1

Repair 2008 Flood Damage toAdministrative Office Building(Estimated net cost$0)

Option 1 is considered at least acceptable by 45% of those who rated it. It is rated unacceptable by 30%.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

Option #1 Total

Outstanding choice 14.7%

Good choice 10.8%

Acceptable choice 19.4%

Poor choice 22.9%

Unacceptable choice 29.5%

No answer 2.7%

Sample Size 564

14.7%

10.8%

19.4%

22.99%

29.5%Outstanding

Good

Acceptable

Poor

Unacceptable

No Answer

2.7%


5/17


OPTION #2

Renovate and Expand ExistingAdministrative Office Building(Estimated net cost$186,099to $8,987,446 dependent uponI-JOBS funding.)

This option, to renovate and expand the current Administrative Office Building is at least acceptable to 46% of

those who answered and considered unacceptable to 27%

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

Option #2 Total


Good choice 13.7%


Poor choice 24.2%

Unacceptable choice 27.2%No answer 3%

Sample Size 564

18.7%

13.7%

13.2%24.2%

27.2%Outstanding

Good

Acceptable

Poor

Unacceptable

No Answer

3%


6/17


OPTION #3

Purchase and RenovateFormer Steve and BarrysRetail Space at Westdale Mall(Estimated net cost of $14,563,350)

Option 3, to renovate and stay in the current Steve and Barrys location, is at least acceptable to 55% of those

answering. It is unacceptable to 19%.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

Option #3 Total


Good choice 16.5%


Poor choice 23.6%

Unacceptable choice 19.2%No answer 1.8%

Sample Size 564

19.9%

16.5%

19%

23.6%

19.2%Outstanding

Good

Acceptable

Poor

Unacceptable

No Answer

1.8%


7/17


OPTION #4

Purchase and Renovate FormerEconoFoods Grocery Space(Estimated net cost of $13,388,297)

Option #4 is considered at least acceptable by 57% and unacceptable by 19%.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

Option #4 Total


Good choice 17.6%


Poor choice 22.6%

Unacceptable choice 18.9%No answer 2%

Sample Size 564

18.9%

17.6%

20.1%

22.6%

18.9%Outstanding

Good

Acceptable

Poor

Unacceptable

No Answer

2%


8/17


OPTION #5

Co-Location with City ofCedar Rapids and/or Cedar RapidsSchool District (Estimated net costof $13,023,250)

44% of residents answering the survey said this option is at least acceptable to them. It is unacceptable to 30%.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

Option #5 Total


Good choice 11.9%


Poor choice 22.2%

Unacceptable choice 29.7%No answer 3.8%

Sample Size 564

10.7%

11.9%

21.7%

22.2%

29.7%

Outstanding

Good

Acceptable

Poor

Unacceptable

No Answer

3.8%


9/17


The table below summarizes the ratings given to the five options. The graph visualizes the findings.

Ratings

Options 2, 3, and 4 have the highest ratings with no clear-cut concensus. Option 1, repairing the existing AOB, is

next best, with Option 5, co-location, clearly the least well rated option.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

Outstanding Good Acceptable Poor Unacceptable No Answer

OPTION 1: Repair AOB 14.7% 10.8% 19.4% 22.9% 29.5% 2.7%

OPTION 2: Expand AOB 18.7% 13.7% 13.2% 24.2% 27.2% 3%

OPTION 3: Steve and Barrys 19.6% 16.5% 19.0% 23.6% 19.2% 1.8%

OPTION 4: EconoFoods 18.9% 17.6% 20.1% 22.6% 18.9% 2%

OPTION 5: Co-locate 10.7% 11.9% 21.7% 22.2% 29.7% 3.8%

Outstanding

Good

Acceptable

Poor

Unacceptable

No Answer

Option #1Repair AOB

Option #2Expand AOB

Option #3Steve and

Barrys

Option #4EconoFoods

Option #5Co-Locate

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

%


10/17


Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

1

Next respondents were asked to

rank the five options. They were

asked to indicate their first, second

and third ranking choice. The tables

to the right show the rankings.

First Choice Total

Option 3: Steve and Barrys 25.5%

Option 2: Expand AOB 24.1%

Option 4: EconoFoods 21.5%

Option 1: Repair AOB 17%

Option 5: Co-location 10.5%

No answer 1.1%

Sample Size 564

Second Choice Total

Option 3: Steve and Barrys 22.3%



Option 1: Repair AOB 19.7%


No answer 2.8%

Sample Size 564

Third Choice Total

Option 3: Steve and Barrys 20%



Option 1: Repair AOB 11.7%


No answer 9.8%

Sample Size 564


11/17


The graph below illustrates the rankings.

Rankings

It is apparent from the graph that Options 3, 2 and 4 stand out. Option 1 is less well ranked and Option 5 is

clearly the also ran among the five.

In evaluating this data, it is apparent that while there is some differentiation between the building options, theyall have their champions and detractors. There is no clear-cut concensus.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

1

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

%

Option #1Repair AOB

Option #2Expand AOB

Option #3Steve and

Barrys

Option #4EconoFoods

Option #5Co-Locate

First Choice

Second Choice

Third Choice


12/17


Below are some representative comments from supporters of the various options in explaining why they made

their rankings.

First choice is Option 1: Repair AOB

I dont want any more debt.

No cost.

Money is tight! I feel this choice is the smartest. We are all having to conserve, cut back and government

should, too.

A no brainer minimal costs involved. Minimal flood damage. It just makes sense to move back like the

courthouse, jail and many other businesses have done.

Cost, not loosing tax base.

Already own the building. Never had any problem with parking. No additional cost. Ive found everything

there sufficient.

Cost. Central (downtown) location. Gives square feet they say they need.

Do not ask tax payers to come up with 9 million (or more depending on the option) to pay for upgrades

when flood protection for citizens has not been provided as yet.

No more dollars.

Very low cost to the taxpayerexisting building will be flood protectedno reason not to return.

Least expensive. Like locationcentralized and close to my home.

First choice is Option 2: Renovate and Expand AOB

Reuses an existing building and meets space needs.

The building is there. Used to go to that location. Cheapest.

For only 186,000.00, there is more possibilities for little money. The building should stay where its at.

Good spacefamiliar locationcosts! Good resale value if gets too small.

Gives needs for future expansion. If funding comes through an economical choice.

Costs, future of location, accessibility.

Cost. Central (downtown) location. Gives square feet they say they need.

Most cost effective and meets needs now and future.

Its the most reasonable.

No land purchased needed. Expansion of square feet should cover future needs.

If Penford doesnt want the building/land and as long as flood protection is there, might as well stay there.

Im torn between Option 2 and 3.

Overall cost and degree of satisfaction for meeting the long range needs of the county.

Because the possibility of still getting I-Jobs. So no new taxes. Dont have to bring it up to a vote.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

1


13/17


First choice is Option 3: Steve and Barrys

Location. Parking spaces. Size. May help Westdale.

Location, parking, room for future growth.

#3 is accessiblegood for handicappedlots of parking and favored by various department heads.

Theres a lot of room and parking and the second floor has room for many other departments, such as

health department and others.

Accessibility, size of building, can have many offices there, great parking.

The building spacesquare feet. Parking, accessibility.

Have been there. Easier access. More space. No flooding. Employees like it also. Location, location, location.

Already there.

Plenty of parking, easily accessible, did not flood and probably never will. Provides additional space to

expand into during the 20 years of the bond.

Every office of Linn Co. is in one place. Its easy to access and lots of parking. It helps the stores that are

thereit brings more customers to them.

Plenty of space for expansion. Sufficient parking. Could help Westdale Mall come back to full capacity.

First choice is Option 4: EconoFoods

Easily accessible. More centrally located to rest of county. Parking close by. Options for expansion, rent foradditional space. All services located together.

Central location for countygood 380 route. Plenty of parking. Could renovate to be efficient over others.

Accessibility to all of Linn as most of the county is north of Cedar Rapids. Tax impact is more acceptable.

Parking would not be a foreseeable problem.

Option 4good location, lots of space for added county offices. Inside of building is a blank slate, also

space for future building. Good location to I-380. Good access from other towns.

Location, parking, ability to possibly lease some space. Keeping city and county separate.

EconoFoodsno disruption of current operations during renovation. Easy access via roads. Closest

proposed site to center of county. Adequate parking. Bus access negotiable with city. Building easily

handicap accessible. Easy to incorporate renewable energy (PV, front canopy, for example). I do not have a strong preference. The co-location may be good for the long run; it is not needed now. The

grocery store seems all around solutionsize and parking.

Locating more services closer together will save more money in long run. Good parking. Its away from flood.

Customers love easy access with plenty of parking.

Good location; good size; good for public.

Good location, good parking, room for growth.

Good location. Plenty of parking. Utilizes an empty building.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

1


14/17


First choice is Option 5: Co-location

Convenient for allwill be popular.

It just makes sense. It not only improves customer service to our public, it also allows shared services that

will help with improved efficiencies.

Empty buildingable to design and configure space/offices without interruption. Ample parking planned.

Environmentally agreeable planning/energy efficiency/segregate government units/one level.

Some taxpayers money in long run. More efficient operations. More convenient services. Opportunity for

legacy. Opportunity for economic development.

Co-location maybe best if 20-40 years the county and city governments combine as well as everything in

one location now.

Centralization is always better, but it should only be city and county.

It makes sense to have these public-supported entities located together for efficiency.

Community collaboration and best interest of taxpayers.

Wise use, combined spacebecome a go to space for city/countyschoolbusiness and activity.

It has been recognized (but ignored) that Iowa has too many counties, school district, etc. Within 25 years

economics will force this to the top of the table. Des Moines is probably our largest in-state competition.

They have moved closer to a metro form of government. We too need to move in that direction. We claim

to believe in the corridor concept yet to date parochial trumps partnerships. I firmly believe that Johnson

and Linn counties will eventually merge into a metro political and economic entity.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

1


15/17


FOCUS GROUPS

Focus groups are utilized to delve deeper into participants top-of-mind thoughts about a subject. For example,

magazine publishers and editors might hold focus groups about colors, content and even a potential magazines

name, prior to launching a new publication. Retailers utilize focus groups to identify product displays that draw

shoppers. Hospitals utilize focus groups to find out what patients found unique about their services.

In this case, our goal was twofold: 1) ensure participants were fully informed about the five potential options for

the new AOB and 2) record their final preferences when they had applied the same evaluation criteria that the

Board of Supervisors will utilize in making its final decision.

Participants were randomly selected from voter registration, business and employee lists, respectively.

Notethose criteria are:

1) Customer Servicelocation (access from all areas of the county), easy access to services once there

2) EnvironmentalSilver LEED Certification, sustainability, reduced carbon footprint

3) Costpurchase price, construction/renovation, lifecycle

4) Technicalmeeting building code requirements.

Linn County Residents

While all focus groups came well-informed about the five options for the AOB, the group representing Linn

County residents (11 people) was both well-informed and well-prepared to discuss their thoughts. They camewith strong opinions and yet were very open to listening to each others opinions. Some were swayed by others

thoughts and openly admitted so. Discussion was spirited as each participant shared his/her thought processes

about the various options.

In the end, each identified his/her key criteria and made the choice based on that selection. Customer service

(location, in this case) was most important to the majority of this group after lengthy discussion. Cost remained

most important to one person in the group. All agreed that the Environmental Criteria should be a part of any

option chosen. They also agreed that Technical was well, technical, and you couldnt argue with building codes

being vital to a safe, secure building.

Of those selecting customer service/location, Option #3former Steve & Barryswas the choice of five

participants. In so choosing, they identified: easy access from anywhere in the county (grudgingly admitting to

one naysayer that the one exception might be Marion). They think there is potential growth in this area of the

county and thus, property in that region will maintain its value. While one person said she felt very safe at this

location, another vehemently disagreedespecially after the county offices close.

One person thought Option #4former EconoFoodsthe easiest to access, and another believes that the county

should continue to anchor and help rebuild downtown by selecting Option #2, with or without I-JOBS funding.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

1


16/17


As they proceeded in their discussions, individuals in this group began admitting strong interest in Option #5

Co-Location w/the CR School District and/or the City of Cedar Rapids. Each hesitated to bring it up and quickly

concluded it might be a challenge to get participating organizations to agree. (This discussion started with an

impromptu discussion about the potential merger of city/county governments in Linn County.)

Out of the discussion about Option #5, however, came an Option #6. In short, this group explored the idea of

Linn County constructing a new building based on the square footage identified in Option #2 and the industry

standards used to estimate the cost of this square footage in a co-location situation. Two people adhered to this

idea when considering both customer service and cost important.

Linn County Business Representatives

While the 8 representatives of Linn County businesses were not as thoroughly informed about the five options

as the residents, the individuals in the group had many questions they wanted to ask before beginning criteria

evaluation and selection of their preferences among the five options.

Their initial questions ranged from, How did Option #4EconoFoodsget into the mix, to is energy efficiency

and option for all? to what is the I-JOBS funding?

Again, customer service was a top priority among this group. And again, customer service was essentially limited

to where the AOB is located in the county.

Of those who believed that customer service (location) was the most important6 believed that would be

accomplished with Option #2. One person thought Option #4 was the best and one person chose Option #5.

One person insisted that fiscal responsibility should be a part of each option and adhered to that throughout

the discussion. Interestingly enough, this person thought that Option #5Co-Locationor an Option #6

identifying a completely different location for a new AOB, using the figures from Option #5 and constructing

a new AOB, would actually be the most fiscally responsible decision. He/she sighted potential county growth,

knowing what we were getting instead of tearing into old, existing buildings and thinking about the length of

time this building will be in service as reasons for preferring this option.

Similar to two other groups, many in this group agreed with this person.

Linn County Employees

AOB Employees

This group of 9 came prepared to discuss until dawn if necessary. Theyre engaged, interested and very enthusiastic

about helping their employer (to which they are very loyal) meet the needs of their customersincluding

themselves in this category.

Initially, rumors were the first topic of interest which have already been shared with Joi Bergman, Communications

Director. The rumors ranged from continued mold in the existing AOB, to moving employee parking further

from the existing AOB to parking being moved to the juvenile court space near the existing AOB.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

1


17/17


As these issues were put to restmaybethe conversation turned to the evaluation criteria used for the five

options. Many said they had never seen it, and many were concerned that the information had not been shared

with the engineers doing the feasibility studies on the various sites.

Again, once issues were put to rest, thoughtful, in-depth discussion ensued. Everyone in this group was convinced

that customer service was the most important of the evaluation criteria. They encourage the supervisors to listen

to employee needs, but especially pointed out that what Linn County residents like about the temporary location

are customer service oriented and should be considered with any option that is chosenclose-in parking, wide

hallways, and what is perceived as faster service in these more open areas.

As they were walked through the criteria and encouraged to overlay them against the five options, four thought

Option #4 provided the best customer service potential for both them and their customers; two thought thesecould be accomplished with Option #2, two favored co-location and one said, I dont think weve evaluated all

options yet.

The employee who said this was again, thoughtful and insightful. Her/his concerns were long-term in nature,

wondering who was evaluating all Linn County space needs for 25-30 years into the future, as the new or

rejuvenated AOB is planned.

Employees Who Will Not be Housed in the AOB

This group of 10 employees was interested, happy someone wanted their opinion, and fairly well-informed about

the five options.

Eventually, the group focused on the evaluation criteria and was very interested in defining each category. Again,customer service (including them as customers) was the most important criteria on the list. Each agreed that if

done correctly, environmental and fiscal responsibility should be a part of all options.

Of this group of customer-focused employees, 3 agreed that Option #4EconoFoodswould be the most

customer centric of the five; two thought Option #2 would be the best in this area, and two strongly believed that

Option #5Co-Location would provide the best customer service for the most people. Three in this group really

couldnt decide but leaned toward either Option #2 or Option #4.

Sondy Daggett



[email protected]

319.310.4359

Linn County Offices Report

Documents

Transcript of Linn County Offices Report