Board of Trustees — Skokie, IL
Date: 2013-01-22

TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2013 – 8:00 P.M.

 1. Pledge of Allegiance led by a Combined Fire and Police Honor Guard.

 2. Call meeting to order and roll call.

 3. Approve Consent Agenda.

* 4. Approve, as submitted, minutes of regular meeting held Monday, January 7, 2013.

* 5. Approve Voucher List #17-FY13 of January 22, 2013.

 6. Proclamations and Resolutions.
 A. Proclamations:
 Morton and Shirley Paradise Day – January 30, 2013
 * National Burn Awareness Month – February 2013

 7. Recognition, Awards and Honorary Presentations.
 A. Citizen’s Life Saving Award:
 Commendation presented by Fire Chief Ralph Czerwinski to Sinan Milanovic for his
 lifesaving actions on December 17, 2012.
 B. Honorary Presentation:
 Presentation of a check to Maureen Murphy to support the Community Giving
 Program by the Skokie Firefighter’s Benevolent Fund and Schaeffer’s Food and
 Spirits.

 8. Appointments, Reappointments and Resignations.
 A. Swearing in of the following personnel by the Board of Fire and Police:
 Name Old Position New Position
 Matthew Dickinson New Hire Police Officer
 Leo Feldman New Hire Police Officer
 Patrick Howe New Hire Police Officer
 Jaclyn Roden New Hire Police Officer
 Peter Arreguin New Hire Firefighter
 Christopher Johnson New Hire Firefighter
 * B. Reappointment:
 Board of Health (Two-Year Term, One-Year Term as Chair): Dr. A. Drachler

 9. Presentations and Reports.
 A. Presentation of 2012 National Citizen Survey – Ann Tennes, Director of Marketing
 and Communications and Damema Mann, Senior Project Manager with The National
 Citizen Survey.

 10. Report of the Village Manager.
 A. No Report.

 11. Report of the Corporation Counsel.
 CONSENT:
 * A. An ordinance granting a special use permit to allow outdoor storage at 7334
 Ridgeway Avenue, Skokie, Illinois in an M3 Industry district (2012-47P). This item is
 on the consent agenda for second reading and adoption.
 * B. An ordinance vacating an unopened and unimproved residential east-west alley
 between the 4900 block of Lamon Avenue and Lavergne Avenue within an area
 bounded by Coyle Avenue, Lavergne Avenue, Morse Avenue, and Lamon Avenue,

421187
 in an R2 Single-Family Residential district (2012-48P). This item is on the consent
 agenda for second reading and adoption.

 12. Unfinished Business.

 13. New Business.

 14. Plan Commission.

 15. Citizen Comments.

 16. Adjournment.




421187
 WHEREAS, Congratulations to Shirley and Morton Paradise who will be
celebrating their 70th wedding anniversary on January 30, 2013; and

 WHEREAS, Shirley and Mort moved to Skokie in 1949, had three sons, they
have four grandchildren and one great grandchild; and

 WHEREAS, Shirley and Mort became very dedicated in helping many
organizations. Shirley was President of every PTA her children attended; Lincoln,
Madison, and East Prairie schools. She was also a den mother for her three sons in
Cub Scouts; and

 WHEREAS, both Shirley and Mort are very involved in synagogues galore:
Skokie Valley when it met at the old Skokie Valley High School, (it is no longer in
existence), B’nai Emunah, and are currently attending Judea Mizpah. They both
walked the streets collecting for the Community Chest and the Red Feather
organizations; and

 WHEREAS, Mort was a Troop Leader of Pack 215 for the Boy Scouts; he
was the VP in the Lions Club and was on the board of Orchard School and is currently
on the Board of the East Prairie Foundation; and

 WHEREAS, this year Mort will have served on the Plan Commission for
forty- years.

 NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE VAN DUSEN, Mayor of the Village
of Skokie, do hereby proclaim January 30, 2013


 “ MORTON AND SHIRLEY PARADISE DAY”

in the Village of Skokie and express our gratitude and appreciation to Shirley and
Mort Paradise for their contributions and tireless commitment to helping make the
Village Skokie, one of the best communities in the United States of America.

 Passed this 22nd January 2013


 ______________________________
 George Van Dusen, Mayor


_____________________________________
Marlene Williams, Village Clerk




VOSDOCS-#416113-v1-Proc__Shirley_&_Mort_Paradise
 WHEREAS, hot water scalds are the leading cause of burns to young
children. The vast majority of these burn injuries are preventable; and

 WHEREAS, when using tap water, turn on the COLD water first, then add
the HOT water and adjust the temperature; and

 WHEREAS, always test young children’s bath before using. When
bathing children, never leave them unattended, as they may turn on the hot water,
or slip in your absence; and

 WHEREAS, be very careful when drinking HOT liquids, especially around
children. At 140 F, it takes less than five seconds to get a third degree burn; and

 WHEREAS, playing with matches and lighters is one of the leading
causes of fire deaths to young children; and

 WHEREAS, matches and lighters are tools for grownups, and not toys to
be played with. Reinforce the concept that like power tools, lighters have specific
uses, like lighting candles, or fireplaces; and

 WHEREAS, cooling a burned area will lesson the severity of the injury, if
the procedure is performed immediately following the burn incident. A burn
should be flushed with cool water for 10 to 15 minutes. Never use ice or
ointments; and

 WHEREAS, call 911 if there is a severe burn.

 NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE VAN DUSEN, Mayor of the Village of
Skokie, do hereby proclaim the month of February 2013, as


 “NATIONAL BURN AWARENESS MONTH”

in the Village of Skokie, and do urge every resident of the Village of Skokie to
observe this month by individual attention to the cause of fires and burn injuries.

 Dated this 22nd day of January 2013

 ___________________________________
 George Van Dusen
 Mayor
Attest:

_________________________
Marlene Williams, Village Clerk
VOSDOCS-#181149-v1-proc__national_burn_awareness_week
 The National Citizen Survey™


 VILLAGE OF SKOKIE, IL
 DRAFT 2012




2955 Valmont Road, Suite 300 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500
 Boulder, CO 80301 Washington, DC 20002
www.n-r-c.com • 303-444-7863 www.icma.org • 202-289-ICMA
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Contents
 Survey Background .......................................................................................................................................... 1
 About The National Citizen Survey™ ............................................................................................................... 1
 Understanding the Results ................................................................................................................................... 3
 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 5
 Community Ratings ......................................................................................................................................... 7
 Overall Community Quality ................................................................................................................................. 7
 Community Design ................................................................................................................................................. 9
 Transportation ................................................................................................................................................... 9
 Housing............................................................................................................................................................. 12
 Land Use and Zoning................................................................................................................................... 14
 Economic Sustainability ..................................................................................................................................... 16
 Public Safety ........................................................................................................................................................... 19
 Environmental Sustainability ............................................................................................................................ 22
 Recreation and Wellness.................................................................................................................................... 25
 Parks and Recreation ................................................................................................................................... 25
 Culture, Arts and Education ...................................................................................................................... 27
 Health and Wellness .................................................................................................................................... 28
 Community Inclusiveness .................................................................................................................................. 30
 Civic Engagement ................................................................................................................................................. 32
 Civic Activity .................................................................................................................................................... 32
 Information and Awareness ...................................................................................................................... 35
 Social Engagement ....................................................................................................................................... 36
 Public Trust ............................................................................................................................................................. 37
 Village of Skokie Employees ..................................................................................................................... 39
 From Data to Action ......................................................................................................................................41




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Resident Priorities ................................................................................................................................................. 41
 Village of Skokie Action Chart™...................................................................................................................... 42
 Custom Questions ..........................................................................................................................................46
 Appendix A: Complete Survey Frequencies .........................................................................................48
 Frequencies Excluding “Don’t Know” Responses ..................................................................................... 48
 Frequencies Including “Don’t Know” Responses ...................................................................................... 61
 Appendix B: Survey Methodology ...........................................................................................................82
 Appendix C: Survey Materials ....................................................................................................................93




 The National Citizen Survey™
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Survey Background
 ABOUT THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY™
The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS) is a collaborative effort between National Research
Center, Inc. (NRC) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). The NCS
was developed by NRC to provide a statistically valid survey of resident opinions about
community and services provided by local government. The survey results may be used by staff,
elected officials and other stakeholders for community planning and resource allocation,
program improvement and policy making.

 FIGURE 1: THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY™ METHODS AND GOALS

 Survey Objectives Assessment Methods
  Identify community strengths and  Multi-contact mailed survey
 weaknesses  Representative sample of 1,200
  Identify service strengths and households
 weaknesses  352 surveys returned; 30% response rate
  5% margin of error
  Data statistically weighted to reflect
 population



 Assessment Goals

 Immediate Long-term
  Provide useful information for:  Improved services
  Planning  More civic engagement
  Resource allocation  Better community quality of
  Performance measurement life
  Program and policy  Stronger public trust
 evaluation


The NCS focuses on a series of community characteristics and local government services, as well
as issues of public trust. Resident behaviors related to civic engagement in the community also
were measured in the survey.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 1
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 FIGURE 2: THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY™ FOCUS AREAS



 COMMUNITY QUALITY
 COMMUNITY
 Quality of life INCLUSIVENESS
 Quality of neighborhood ENVIRONMENTAL
 Place to live Sense of community
 SUSTAINABILITY
 Racial and cultural
 Cleanliness acceptance
 COMMUNITY DESIGN Air quality Senior youth and low-
 Preservation of natural areas
 Transportation Garbage and recycling
 Ease of travel, transit ser ices CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
 services, street maintenance
 Civic Activity
 Housing RECREATION AND Volunteerism
 Housing options, cost, Civic attentiveness
 WELLNESS
 affordability Voting behavior
 Parks and Recreation
 Land Use and Zoning Social Engagement
 Recreation opportunities,
 New development, growth, Neighborliness, social and
 use of parks and facilities,
 code enforcement religious events
 programs and classes
 Economic Sustainability Information and
 Culture, Arts and
 Employment, shopping and Awareness
 Education
 Cultural and educational
 opportunities, libraries,
 PUBLIC SAFETY schools PUBLIC TRUST

 Safety in neighborhood and Health and Wellness Cooperation in community
 downtown Value of services
 Crime victimization Direction of community
 Police, fire, EMS services Citizen involvement
 Emergency preparedness Employees

The survey and its administration are standardized to assure high quality research methods and
directly comparable results across The National Citizen Survey™ jurisdictions. Participating
households are selected at random and the household member who responds is selected
without bias. Multiple mailings give each household more than one chance to participate with
self-addressed and postage-paid envelopes. Results are statistically weighted to reflect the
proper demographic composition of the entire community. A total of 352 completed surveys
were obtained, providing an overall response rate of 30%. Typically, response rates obtained on
citizen surveys range from 25% to 40%.

The National Citizen Survey™ customized for the Village of Skokie was developed in close
cooperation with local jurisdiction staff. Skokie staff selected items from a menu of questions
about services and community issues and provided the appropriate letterhead and signatures
for mailings. Village of Skokie staff also augmented The National Citizen Survey™ basic service
through a variety of options including crosstabulations of results and several custom questions.

 The National Citizen Survey™
 2
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 UNDERSTANDING THE RESULTS
As shown in Figure 2, this report is based around respondents’ opinions about eight larger
categories: community quality, community design, public safety, environmental sustainability,
recreation and wellness, community inclusiveness, civic engagement and public trust. Each
report section begins with residents’ ratings of community characteristics and is followed by
residents’ ratings of service quality. For all evaluative questions, the percent of residents rating
the service or community feature as “excellent” or “good” is presented. To see the full set of
responses for each question on the survey, please see Appendix A: Complete Survey
Frequencies.

 Margin of Error
The margin of error around results for the Village of Skokie Survey (352 completed surveys) is
plus or minus five percentage points. This is a measure of the precision of your results; a larger
number of completed surveys gives a smaller (more precise) margin of error, while a smaller
number of surveys yields a larger margin of error. With your margin of error, you may conclude
that when 60% of survey respondents report that a particular service is “excellent” or “good,”
somewhere between 55-65% of all residents are likely to feel that way.

 Comparing Survey Results
Certain kinds of services tend to be thought better of by residents in many communities across
the country. For example, public safety services tend to be received better than transportation
services by residents of most American communities. Where possible, the better comparison is
not from one service to another in the Village of Skokie, but from Village of Skokie services to
services like them provided by other jurisdictions.

 Interpreting Comparisons to Previous Years
This report contains comparisons with prior years’ results. In this report, we are comparing this
year’s data with existing data in the graphs. Differences between years can be considered
“statistically significant” if they are greater than seven percentage points. Trend data for your
jurisdiction represent important comparison data and should be examined for improvements or
declines. Deviations from stable trends over time, especially represent opportunities for
understanding how local policies, programs or public information may have affected residents’
opinions.

 Benchmark Comparisons
NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered
in citizen surveys from approximately 500 jurisdictions whose residents evaluated local
government services and gave their opinion about the quality of community life. The
comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each jurisdiction; most
communities conduct surveys every year or in alternating years. NRC adds the latest results
quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant.
The Village of Skokie chose to have comparisons made to the entire database. A benchmark
comparison (the average rating from all the comparison jurisdictions where a similar question

 The National Citizen Survey™
 3
 Village of Skokie | 2012


was asked) has been provided when a similar question on the Village of Skokie survey was
included in NRC’s database and there were at least five jurisdictions in which the question was
asked. For most questions compared to the entire dataset, there were more than 100
jurisdictions included in the benchmark comparison.
Where comparisons for quality ratings were available, the Village of Skokie results were
generally noted as being “above” the benchmark, “below” the benchmark or “similar” to the
benchmark. For some questions – those related to resident behavior, circumstance or to a local
problem – the comparison to the benchmark is designated as “more,” “similar” or “less” (for
example, the percent of crime victims, residents visiting a park or residents identifying code
enforcement as a problem.) In instances where ratings are considerably higher or lower than the
benchmark, these ratings have been further demarcated by the attribute of “much,” (for
example, “much less” or “much above”). These labels come from a statistical comparison of the
Village of Skokie's rating to the benchmark.

 “Don’t Know” Responses and Rounding
On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion
of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix A.
However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the
report. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had
an opinion about a specific item.

For some questions, respondents were permitted to select more than one answer. When the
total exceeds 100% in a table for a multiple response question, it is because some respondents
did select more than one response. When a table for a question that only permitted a single
response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the customary practice of percentages
being rounded to the nearest whole number.

For more information on understanding The NCS report, please see Appendix B: Survey
Methodology.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 4
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Executive Summary
This report of the Village of Skokie survey provides the opinions of a representative sample of
residents about community quality of life, service delivery, civic participation and unique issues
of local interest. A periodic sounding of resident opinion offers staff, elected officials and other
stakeholders an opportunity to identify challenges and to plan for and evaluate improvements
and to sustain services and amenities for long-term success.

Most residents experienced a good quality of life in the Village of Skokie and believed the
Village was a good place to live. The overall quality of life in the Village of Skokie was rated as
“excellent” or “good” by 81% of respondents. A majority reported they plan on staying in the
Village of Skokie for the next five years.

A variety of characteristics of the community were evaluated by those participating in the study.
Among the characteristics receiving the most favorable ratings were educational opportunities,
shopping opportunities and ease of rail or subway travel in Skokie. Among the characteristics
receiving the least positive ratings were employment opportunities, availability of affordable
quality housing and traffic flow on major streets.

Ratings of community characteristics were compared to the benchmark database. Of the 30
characteristics for which comparisons were available, 26 were above the national benchmark
comparison, four were similar to the national benchmark comparison and none were below.

Residents in the Village of Skokie were somewhat civically engaged. While only 19% had
attended a meeting of local elected public officials or other local public meeting in the previous
12 months, 77% had voted in the last general election. Less than half had volunteered their time
to some group or activity in the Village of Skokie, which was lower than the benchmark.

In general, survey respondents demonstrated trust in local government. A majority rated the
overall direction being taken by the Village of Skokie as “good” or “excellent.” This was much
higher than the benchmark. Those residents who had interacted with an employee of the Village
of Skokie in the previous 12 months gave high marks to those employees. Most rated their
overall impression of employees as “excellent” or “good.”

On average, residents gave favorable ratings to a majority of local government services. Village
services rated were able to be compared to the benchmark database. Of the 30 services for
which comparisons were available, 26 were above the benchmark comparison, four were similar
to the benchmark comparison and none were below.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 5
 Village of Skokie | 2012


A Key Driver Analysis was conducted for the Village of Skokie which examined the relationships
between ratings of each service and ratings of the Village of Skokie’s services overall. Those key
driver services that correlated most strongly with residents’ perceptions about overall Village
service quality have been identified. By targeting improvements in key services, the Village of
Skokie can focus on the services that have the greatest likelihood of influencing residents’
opinions about overall service quality. Services found to be influential in ratings of overall service
quality from the Key Driver Analysis were:

 Economic development
 Police services
 Snow removal
 Village parks


For all of these services, the Village of Skokie was much above the benchmark and should
continue to ensure high quality performance.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 6
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Community Ratings
 OVERALL COMMUNITY QUALITY
Overall quality of community life may be the single best indicator of success in providing the
natural ambience, services and amenities that make for an attractive community. The National
Citizen Survey™ contained many questions related to quality of community life in the Village of
Skokie – not only direct questions about quality of life overall and in neighborhoods, but
questions to measure residents’ commitment to the Village of Skokie. Residents were asked
whether they planned to move soon or if they would recommend the Village of Skokie to others.
Intentions to stay and willingness to make recommendations provide evidence that the Village
of Skokie offers services and amenities that work.

A majority of the Village of Skokie’s residents gave favorable ratings to their neighborhoods and
the community as a place to live. Further, most reported they would recommend the community
to others and plan to stay for the next five years. Ratings were generally stable over time.

 FIGURE 3: RATINGS OF OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE BY YEAR
 100%
 86% 87%
 81% 81%

 75%



 50%



 25%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent rating overall quality of life as "excellent" or "good"


 FIGURE 4: RATINGS OF OVERALL COMMUNITY QUALITY BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
The overall quality of life in Skokie 81% 81% 87% 86%
Your neighborhood as a place to live 78% 80% 81% 83%
Skokie as a place to live 88% 93% 92% 90%
Percent "excellent" or "good"




 The National Citizen Survey™
 7
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 FIGURE 5: LIKELIHOOD OF REMAINING IN COMMUNITY AND RECOMMENDING COMMUNITY BY YEAR

 2012
  Recommend living in 87% 2009
 Skokie to someone who
 asks 90%




 80%
 Remain in Skokie for the
 next five years
 85%



 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
 Percent "somewhat" or "very" likely




 FIGURE 6: OVERALL COMMUNITY QUALITY BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Overall quality of life in Skokie Similar
Your neighborhood as place to live Similar
Skokie as a place to live Similar
Recommend living in Skokie to someone who asks Similar
Remain in Skokie for the next five years Similar




 The National Citizen Survey™
 8
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 COMMUNITY DESIGN
 Transportation
The ability to move easily throughout a community can greatly affect the quality of life of
residents by diminishing time wasted in traffic congestion and by providing opportunities to
travel quickly and safely by modes other than the automobile. High quality options for resident
mobility not only require local government to remove barriers to flow but they require
government programs and policies that create quality opportunities for all modes of travel.

Residents responding to the survey were given a list of seven aspects of mobility to rate on a
scale of “excellent,” “good,” “fair” and “poor.” Ease of rail or subway travel was given the most
positive rating, followed by ease of car travel. These ratings tended to be much higher than the
benchmark. The rating for ease of rail or subway travel increased from 2009 to 2012.


 FIGURE 7: RATINGS OF TRANSPORTATION IN COMMUNITY BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Ease of car travel in Skokie 82% NA NA NA
Ease of bus travel in Skokie 73% 73% NA NA
Ease of rail or subway travel in Skokie 83% 68% NA 51%
Ease of bicycle travel in Skokie 62% 68% 57% NA
Ease of walking in Skokie 76% 77% 73% 73%
Availability of paths and walking trails 69% NA NA NA
Traffic flow on major streets 60% 58% NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 8: COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Ease of car travel in Skokie Much above
Ease of bus travel in Skokie Much above
Ease of rail or subway travel in Skokie Much above
Ease of bicycle travel in Skokie Much above
Ease of walking in Skokie Much above
Availability of paths and walking trails Above
Traffic flow on major streets Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 9
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Seven transportation services were rated in Skokie. As compared to most communities across
America, ratings tended to be very favorable. All were above, and most were much above the
benchmark comparison. Ratings tended to remain stable over time.

 FIGURE 9: RATINGS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING SERVICES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Street repair 55% 55% 56% 58%
Street cleaning 76% 77% 78% 80%
Street lighting 68% 70% 69% 74%
Snow removal 67% 70% 68% 73%
Sidewalk maintenance 66% 67% 67% 67%
Bus or transit services 82% 76% 70% 76%
Amount of public parking 65% 69% 67% 68%
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 10: TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING SERVICES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Street repair Above
Street cleaning Much above
Street lighting Above
Snow removal Much above
Sidewalk maintenance Much above
Bus or transit services Much above
Amount of public parking Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 10
 Village of Skokie | 2012


By measuring choice of travel mode over time, communities can monitor their success in
providing attractive alternatives to the traditional mode of travel, the single-occupied
automobile. When asked how they typically traveled to work, single-occupancy (SOV) travel was
the main mode of use. However, 10% of work commute trips were made by transit, 2% by
bicycle and 3% by foot.


 FIGURE 11: FREQUENCY OF BUS USE IN LAST 12 MONTHS BY YEAR

 2009 2012
 34%
 Ridden a local bus within
 Skokie
 42%



 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

 Percent using at least once in last 12 months


 FIGURE 12: FREQUENCY OF BUS USE BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Ridden a local bus within Skokie Much more

 FIGURE 13: MODE OF TRAVEL USED FOR WORK COMMUTE BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Motorized vehicle (e.g., car, truck, van, motorcycle, etc.) by myself 68% 72% NA NA
Motorized vehicle (e.g., car, truck, van, motorcycle, etc.) with other
children or adults 9% 10% NA NA
Bus, rail, subway or other public transportation 10% 12% NA NA
Walk 3% 3% NA NA
Bicycle 2% 2% NA NA
Work at home 7% 2% NA NA
Other 0% 0% NA NA



 FIGURE 14: DRIVE ALONE BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Average percent of work commute trips made by driving alone Less




 The National Citizen Survey™
 11
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Housing
Housing variety and affordability are not luxuries for any community. When there are too few
options for housing style and affordability, the characteristics of a community tilt toward a single
group, often of well-off residents. While this may seem attractive to a community, the absence
of affordable townhomes, condominiums, mobile homes, single family detached homes and
apartments means that in addition to losing the vibrancy of diverse thoughts and lifestyles, the
community loses the service workers that sustain all communities – police officers, school
teachers, house painters and electricians. These workers must live elsewhere and commute in at
great personal cost and to the detriment of traffic flow and air quality. Furthermore lower
income residents pay so much of their income to rent or mortgage that little remains to bolster
their own quality of life or local business.

The survey of the Village of Skokie residents asked respondents to reflect on the availability of
affordable housing as well as the variety of housing options. The availability of affordable
housing was rated as “excellent” or “good” by 59% of respondents, while the variety of housing
options was rated as “excellent” or “good” by 72% of respondents. The rating of perceived
affordable housing availability was much better in the Village of Skokie than the ratings, on
average, in comparison jurisdictions.


 FIGURE 15: RATINGS OF HOUSING IN COMMUNITY BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Availability of affordable quality housing 59% NA NA NA
Variety of housing options 72% NA NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 16: HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Availability of affordable quality housing Much above
Variety of housing options Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 12
 Village of Skokie | 2012


To augment the perceptions of affordable housing in Skokie, the cost of housing as reported in
the survey was compared to residents’ reported monthly income to create a rough estimate of
the proportion of residents of the Village of Skokie experiencing housing cost stress. About 42%
of survey participants were found to pay housing costs of more than 30% of their monthly
household income.

 FIGURE 17: PROPORTION OF RESPONDENTS EXPERIENCING HOUSING COST STRESS BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Housing costs 30% or more of income 42% 46% NA NA
Percent of respondents

 FIGURE 18: HOUSING COSTS BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Experiencing housing costs stress (housing costs 30% or MORE of income) More




 The National Citizen Survey™
 13
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Land Use and Zoning
Community development contributes to a feeling among residents and even visitors of the
attention given to the speed of growth, the location of residences and businesses, the kind of
housing that is appropriate for the community and the ease of access to commerce, green space
and residences. Even the community’s overall appearance often is attributed to the planning and
enforcement functions of the local jurisdiction. Residents will appreciate an attractive, well-
planned community. The NCS questionnaire asked residents to evaluate the quality of new
development, the appearance of the Village of Skokie and the speed of population growth.
Problems with the appearance of property were rated, and the quality of land use planning,
zoning and code enforcement services were evaluated.

The overall quality of new development in the Village of Skokie was rated as “excellent” by 19%
of respondents and as “good” by an additional 51%. The overall appearance of Skokie was rated
as “excellent” or “good” by 77% of respondents and was higher than the benchmark. The
services of land use, planning and zoning, code enforcement and animal control were rated
much above the benchmark.


 FIGURE 19: RATINGS OF THE COMMUNITY'S "BUILT ENVIRONMENT" BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Overall quality of new development in Skokie 70% NA NA NA
Overall appearance of Skokie 77% 74% 75% 75%
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 20: BUILT ENVIRONMENT BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Quality of new development in Skokie Much above
Overall appearance of Skokie Above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 14
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 FIGURE 21: RATINGS OF POPULATION GROWTH BY YEAR
 100%



 75%



 50% 41%
 38%
 35%
 32%

 25%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent rating population growth as "too fast"


 FIGURE 22: POPULATION GROWTH BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Population growth seen as too fast Much less




 FIGURE 23: RATINGS OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Land use, planning and zoning 68% 64% NA NA
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 61% 62% 69% 63%
Animal control 73% 75% 71% 72%
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 24: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Land use, planning and zoning Much above
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) Much above
Animal control Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 15
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY
The United States has been in recession since late 2007 with an accelerated downturn occurring
in the fourth quarter of 2008. Officially we emerged from recession in the third quarter of 2009,
but high unemployment lingers, keeping a lid on a strong recovery. Many readers worry that the
ill health of the economy will color how residents perceive their environment and the services
that local government delivers. NRC researchers have found that the economic downturn has
chastened Americans’ view of their own economic futures but has not colored their perspectives
about community services or quality of life.

Survey respondents were asked to rate a number of community features related to economic
opportunity and growth. The most positively rated feature was shopping opportunities.
Employment opportunities received the lowest ratings but was much above the benchmark and
ratings increased since 2003.

 FIGURE 25: RATINGS OF ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY AND OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Employment opportunities 46% 43% 44% 38%
Shopping opportunities 86% NA NA NA
Skokie as a place to work 73% 66% 72% NA
Overall quality of business and service establishments in Skokie 74% NA NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"




 FIGURE 26: ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY AND OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Employment opportunities Much above
Shopping opportunities Much above
Skokie as a place to work Much above
Overall quality of business and service establishments in Skokie Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 16
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Residents were asked to evaluate the speed of jobs growth and retail growth on a scale from
“much too slow” to “much too fast.” When asked about the rate of jobs growth in Skokie, 72%
responded that it was “too slow,” while 49% reported retail growth as “too slow.” Many more
residents in Skokie compared to other jurisdictions believed that retail growth was too slow and
fewer residents believed that jobs growth was too slow.

 FIGURE 27: RATINGS OF RETAIL AND JOBS GROWTH BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Retail growth seen as too slow 49% 58% 37% 33%
Jobs growth seen as too slow 72% 75% 62% 70%
Percent of respondents

 FIGURE 28: RETAIL AND JOB GROWTH BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Retail growth seen as too slow Much more
Jobs growth seen as too slow Less

 FIGURE 29: RATINGS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BY YEAR
 2012
 2009
 60%

  Economic development

 55%




 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

 Percent "excellent" or "good"


 FIGURE 30: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Economic development Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 17
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Residents were asked to reflect on their economic prospects in the near term. Twenty-four
percent of the Village of Skokie residents expected that the coming six months would have a
“somewhat” or “very” positive impact on their family. The percent of residents with an optimistic
outlook on their household income was more than in comparison jurisdictions.

 FIGURE 31: RATINGS OF PERSONAL ECONOMIC FUTURE BY YEAR
 100%



 75%



 50%


 22% 24%
 20%
 25% 15%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent "very" or "somewhat" positive


 FIGURE 32: PERSONAL ECONOMIC FUTURE BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Positive impact of economy on household income Above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 18
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 PUBLIC SAFETY
Safety from violent or property crimes creates the cornerstone of an attractive community. No
one wants to live in fear of crime, fire or natural hazards, and communities in which residents
feel protected or unthreatened are communities that are more likely to show growth in
population, commerce and property value.

Residents were asked to rate their feelings of safety from violent crimes, property crimes, fire
and environmental dangers and to evaluate the local agencies whose main charge is to provide
protection from these dangers. Many gave positive ratings of safety in the Village of Skokie.
About 65% of those completing the questionnaire said they felt “very” or “somewhat” safe from
violent crimes and 74% felt “very” or “somewhat” safe from environmental hazards. Daytime
sense of safety was better than nighttime safety. Ratings for safety from property crimes
decreased from 2009 to 2012.

 FIGURE 33: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY AND PERSONAL PUBLIC SAFETY BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Safety in your neighborhood during the day 87% 91% 94% 93%
Safety in your neighborhood after dark 65% 71% 75% 78%
Safety in Skokie's downtown area during the day 89% 93% 94% 93%
Safety in Skokie's downtown area after dark 66% 68% 75% 73%
Safety from violent crime (e.g., rape, assault, robbery) 65% 71% 78% 77%
Safety from property crimes (e.g, burglary, theft) 49% 57% 63% 62%
Safety from environmental hazards 74% 77% NA NA
Percent "very" or "somewhat" safe



Residents also rated seven Village public safety services; of these, six were rated above the
benchmark comparison, one was rated similar to the benchmark comparison and none were
rated below the benchmark comparison.

 FIGURE 34: RATINGS OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Police services 87% 89% 86% 87%
Fire services 97% 98% 96% 98%
Ambulance or emergency medical services 96% 96% 96% 95%
Crime prevention 66% 74% 78% 82%
Fire prevention and education 84% 88% NA 89%
Traffic enforcement 77% 72% 76% 74%
Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for
natural disasters or other emergency services) 73% 79% NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 The National Citizen Survey™
 19
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 FIGURE 35: COMMUNITY AND PERSONAL PUBLIC SAFETY BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
In your neighborhood during the day Below
In your neighborhood after dark Much below
In Skokie's downtown area during the day Similar
In Skokie's downtown area after dark Above
Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault, robbery) Much below
Property crimes (e.g., burglary, theft) Much below
Environmental hazards, including toxic waste Similar


Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 36: PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to
 benchmark
Police services Much above
Fire services Much above
Ambulance or emergency medical services Much above
Crime prevention Similar
Fire prevention and education Above
Traffic enforcement Much above
Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural
disasters or other emergency situations) Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 20
 Village of Skokie | 2012


As assessed by the survey, 16% of respondents reported that someone in the household had
been the victim of one or more crimes in the past year. Of those who had been the victim of a
crime, 71% had reported it to police. Compared to other jurisdictions more Skokie residents had
been victims of crime in the 12 months preceding the survey and far fewer of Skokie residents
had reported their most recent crime victimization to the police.

 FIGURE 37: CRIME VICTIMIZATION AND REPORTING BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the
victim of any crime in Skokie? 16% 13% 12% 11%
If yes, was this crime (these crimes) reported to the police? 71% 79% 70% 74%
Percent "yes"

 FIGURE 38: CRIME VICTIMIZATION AND REPORTING BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Victim of crime More
Reported crimes Much less




 The National Citizen Survey™
 21
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Residents value the aesthetic qualities of their hometowns and appreciate features such as
overall cleanliness and landscaping. In addition, the appearance and smell or taste of the air and
water do not go unnoticed. These days, increasing attention is paid to proper treatment of the
environment. At the same time that they are attending to community appearance and
cleanliness, cities, counties, states and the nation are going “Green”. These strengthening
environmental concerns extend to trash haul, recycling, sewer services, the delivery of power
and water and preservation of open spaces. Treatment of the environment affects air and water
quality and, generally, how habitable and inviting a place appears.

Residents of the Village of Skokie were asked to evaluate their local environment and the
services provided to ensure its quality. The overall quality of the natural environment was rated
as “excellent” or “good” by 75% of survey respondents. The cleanliness of Skokie received the
highest ratings and it was much above the benchmark comparison.

 FIGURE 39: RATINGS OF THE COMMUNITY'S NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 2012




 Cleanliness of Skokie 82%



 Quality of overall natural
 75%
 environment in Skokie



 Air quality 71%



 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
 Percent "exellent" or "good"




 FIGURE 40: COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Cleanliness of Skokie Much above
Quality of overall natural environment in Skokie Similar
Air quality Similar




 The National Citizen Survey™
 22
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Resident recycling was greater than recycling reported in comparison communities.

 FIGURE 41: FREQUENCY OF RECYCLING IN LAST 12 MONTHS BY YEAR
 100%
 86% 85% 87%
 79%

 75%



 50%



 25%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent using at least once in past 12 months


 FIGURE 42: FREQUENCY OF RECYCLING BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home More




 The National Citizen Survey™
 23
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Of the seven utility services rated by those completing the questionnaire, four were higher than
the benchmark comparison, three were similar and none were below the benchmark
comparison. These service ratings trends were stable when compared to past surveys.

 FIGURE 43: RATINGS OF UTILITY SERVICES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Electric utility service 81% 84% NA NA
Sewer services 71% 71% NA NA
Drinking water 82% 84% 82% 78%
Storm drainage 58% 51% 63% 52%
Yard waste pick-up 76% NA NA NA
Recycling 86% 87% 84% 84%
Garbage collection 89% 90% 85% 88%
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 44: UTILITY SERVICES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Electric utility service Similar
Sewer services Similar
Drinking water Much above
Storm drainage Similar
Yard waste pick-up Above
Recycling Much above
Garbage collection Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 24
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 RECREATION AND WELLNESS
 Parks and Recreation
Quality parks and recreation opportunities help to define a community as more than the grind
of its business, traffic and hard work. Leisure activities vastly can improve the quality of life of
residents, serving both to entertain and mobilize good health. The survey contained questions
seeking residents’ perspectives about opportunities and services related to the community’s
parks and recreation services.

Recreation opportunities in the Village of Skokie were rated positively as were services related to
parks and recreation. Village parks were rated much above the benchmark.

.

 FIGURE 45: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR
 100%
 83%
 79% 80% 80%

 75%



 50%



 25%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent "excellent" or "good"


 FIGURE 46: COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Recreation opportunities Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 25
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 FIGURE 47: PARTICIPATION IN PARKS AND RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Participated in a recreation program or activity 60% NA NA NA
Visited a neighborhood park or Village park 88% 90% 87% NA
Percent using at least once in last 12 months

 FIGURE 48: PARTICIPATION IN PARKS AND RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Participated in a recreation program or activity Much more
Visited a neighborhood park or Village park Similar



 FIGURE 49: RATINGS OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Village parks 89% NA NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 50: PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Village parks Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 26
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Culture, Arts and Education
A full service community does not address only the life and safety of its residents. Like
individuals who simply go to the office and return home, a community that pays attention only
to the life sustaining basics becomes insular, dreary and uninspiring. In the case of communities
without thriving culture, arts and education opportunities, the magnet that attracts those who
might consider relocating there is vastly weakened. Cultural, artistic, social and educational
services elevate the opportunities for personal growth among residents. In the survey, residents
were asked about the quality of opportunities to participate in cultural and educational
activities.

Opportunities to attend cultural activities were rated as “excellent” or “good” by 78% of
respondents. Educational opportunities were rated as “excellent” or “good” by 88% of
respondents. Educational opportunities and cultural activity opportunities were rated much
above the benchmark comparison.

About 89% of Skokie residents used a Village library at least once in the 12 months preceding
the survey. This participation rate for library use was much higher than in comparison
jurisdictions.

 FIGURE 51: RATINGS OF CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Opportunities to attend cultural activities 78% 81% 80% 80%
Educational opportunities 88% NA NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 52: CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Opportunities to attend cultural activities Much above
Educational opportunities Much above



 FIGURE 53: PARTICIPATION IN CULTURAL OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Used Skokie Public Library or its services 89% 83% 84% NA
Percent using at least once in last 12 months

 FIGURE 54: PARTICIPATION IN CULTURAL OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Used Skokie Public Library or its services Much more




 The National Citizen Survey™
 27
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Health and Wellness
Healthy residents have the wherewithal to contribute to the economy as volunteers or
employees and they do not present a burden in cost and time to others. Although residents
bear the primary responsibility for their good health, local government provides services that
can foster that well being and that provide care when residents are ill.

Residents of the Village of Skokie were asked to rate the community’s health services as well as
the availability of health care, high quality affordable food and preventive health care services.

Among Skokie residents, 75% rated affordable quality health care as “excellent” or “good.”
Those ratings were higher than the ratings of comparison communities.

 FIGURE 55: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY HEALTH AND WELLNESS ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Availability of affordable quality health care 75% NA NA NA
Availability of preventive health services 73% NA NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 56: COMMUNITY HEALTH AND WELLNESS ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Availability of affordable quality health care Much above
Availability of preventive health services Much above



 FIGURE 57: RATINGS OF HEALTH AND WELLNESS SERVICES BY YEAR
 100% 89%
 84%
 81% 81%

 75%



 50%



 25%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent "excellent" or "good"


 FIGURE 58: HEALTH AND WELLNESS SERVICES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Skokie Health Department services Much above

 The National Citizen Survey™
 28
 Village of Skokie | 2012




The National Citizen Survey™
 29
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 COMMUNITY INCLUSIVENESS
Diverse communities that include among their residents a mix of races, ages, wealth, ideas and
beliefs have the raw material for the most vibrant and creative society. However, the presence of
these features alone does not ensure a high quality or desirable space. Surveyed residents were
asked about the success of the mix: the sense of community, the openness of residents to
people of diverse backgrounds and the attractiveness of the Village of Skokie as a place to raise
children or to retire. They were also questioned about the quality of services delivered to various
population subgroups, including older adults, youth and residents with few resources. A
community that succeeds in creating an inclusive environment for a variety of residents is a
community that offers more to many.

A high percentage of residents rated the Village of Skokie as an “excellent” or “good” place to
raise kids and a majority rated it as an excellent or good place to retire. Most residents felt that
the local sense of community was “excellent” or “good.” About 81% of survey respondents felt
the Village of Skokie was open and accepting towards people of diverse backgrounds. The
availability of affordable quality child care was rated the lowest by residents but was much
higher than the benchmark. Ratings generally remained stable over time.

 FIGURE 59: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY QUALITY AND INCLUSIVENESS BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Sense of community 71% 67% 73% 72%
Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse
backgrounds 81% 81% 81% 76%
Availability of affordable quality child care 64% NA NA NA
Skokie as a place to raise children 83% 84% 87% 87%
Skokie as a place to retire 65% 68% 70% 68%
Percent "excellent" or "good"

 FIGURE 60: COMMUNITY QUALITY AND INCLUSIVENESS BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to
 benchmark
Sense of community Above
Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse
backgrounds Much above
Availability of affordable quality child care Much above
Skokie as a place to raise kids Above
Skokie as a place to retire Similar




 The National Citizen Survey™
 30
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Services to more vulnerable populations (e.g., seniors, youth or low-income residents) ranged
from 65% to 83% with ratings of “excellent” or “good.” All of these ratings were much above the
benchmark comparison.

 FIGURE 61: RATINGS OF QUALITY OF SERVICES PROVIDED FOR POPULATION SUBGROUPS BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Services to seniors 83% 87% 85% 87%
Services to youth 74% 75% 73% 74%
Services to low-income people 65% 62% 57% 62%
Percent "excellent" or "good"

 FIGURE 62: SERVICES PROVIDED FOR POPULATION SUBGROUPS BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Services to seniors Much above
Services to youth Much above
Services to low income people Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 31
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
Community leaders cannot run a jurisdiction alone and a jurisdiction cannot run effectively if
residents remain strangers with little to connect them. Elected officials and staff require the
assistance of local residents whether that assistance comes in tacit approval or eager help; and
commonality of purpose among the electorate facilitates policies and programs that appeal to
most and causes discord among few. Furthermore, when neighbors help neighbors, the cost to
the community to provide services to residents in need declines. When residents are civically
engaged, they have taken the opportunity to participate in making the community more livable
for all. The extent to which local government provides opportunities to become informed and
engaged and the extent to which residents take those opportunities is an indicator of the
connection between government and populace. By understanding your residents’ level of
connection to, knowledge of and participation in local government, the Village can find better
opportunities to communicate and educate citizens about its mission, services, accomplishments
and plans. This survey information is essential for public communication and for helping local
government staff to conceive strategies for reaching reluctant voters whose confidence in
government may need boosting prior to important referenda.

 Civic Activity
Respondents were asked about the perceived community volunteering opportunities and their
participation as citizens of the Village of Skokie. Survey participants rated the volunteer
opportunities in the Village of Skokie favorably. Opportunities to attend or participate in
community matters were also rated favorably.

The rating for opportunities to participate in community matters was above the benchmark
while the rating for opportunities to volunteer was similar.

 FIGURE 63: RATINGS OF CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Opportunities to volunteer 76% NA NA NA
Opportunities to participate in community matters 71% NA NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 64: CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Opportunities to participate in community matters Above
Opportunities to volunteer Similar




 The National Citizen Survey™
 32
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Most of the participants in this survey had not attended a public meeting, watched a public
meeting or volunteered time to a group in the 12 months prior to the survey. The participation
rates of these civic behaviors were compared to the rates in other jurisdictions. All showed
much lower rates of community engagement.

 FIGURE 65: PARTICIPATION IN CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR1
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public
meeting 19% 24% 12% 16%
Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other public meeting on
cable television, the Internet or other media 26% 27% 30% 25%
Volunteered your time to some group or activity in Skokie 22% 26% 27% NA
Percent participating at least once in the last 12 months

 FIGURE 66: PARTICIPATION IN CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to
 benchmark
Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting Much less
Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other public meeting on cable
television, the Internet or other media Much less
Volunteered your time to some group or activity in Skokie Much less



Village of Skokie residents showed the largest amount of civic engagement in the area of
electoral participation. Eighty-six percent reported they were registered to vote and 77%
indicated they had voted in the last general election. This rate of self-reported voting was about
the same as that of comparison communities.

 FIGURE 67: REPORTED VOTING BEHAVIOR BY YEAR2
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Registered to vote 86% 78% 85% 85%
Voted in the last general election 77% 75% NA NA
Percent "yes"



 FIGURE 68: VOTING BEHAVIOR BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Registered to vote Similar
Voted in last general election Similar

1
  Over the past few years, local governments have adopted communication strategies that embrace the Internet and new media. In
2010, the question, “Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting on cable television” was revised to
include “the Internet or other media” to better reflect this trend.
2
  Note: In addition to the removal of “don’t know” responses, those who said “ineligible to vote” also have been omitted from this
calculation. The full frequencies appear in Appendix A.

 The National Citizen Survey™
 33
 Village of Skokie | 2012




The National Citizen Survey™
 34
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Information and Awareness
Those completing the survey were asked about their use and perceptions of various information
sources and local government media services. When asked whether they had visited the Village
of Skokie Web site in the previous 12 months, 70% reported they had done so at least once.

 FIGURE 69: USE OF INFORMATION SOURCES BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Read NewSkokie newsletter 93% 90% 90% 89%
Visited the Village of Skokie Web site (at www.skokie.org) 70% 68% NA NA
Percent using at least once in last 12 months

 FIGURE 70: USE OF INFORMATION SOURCES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Read NewSkokie newsletter Much more
Visited the Village of Skokie Web site Much more



 FIGURE 71: RATINGS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEDIA SERVICES AND INFORMATION DISSEMINATION BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Cable television 66% 66% NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 72: LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEDIA SERVICES AND INFORMATION DISSEMINATION BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Cable television Above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 35
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Social Engagement
Opportunities to participate in social events and activities were rated as “excellent” or “good” by
75% of respondents.

 FIGURE 73: RATINGS OF SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES 2012

 Excellent Good


 Opportunities to
 participate in social 24% 51%
 events and activities




 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

 Percent of respondents



 FIGURE 74: SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Much above


Residents in Skokie reported a fair amount of neighborliness. Close to half indicated talking or
visiting with their neighbors at least several times a week. This amount of contact with neighbors
was about the same as the amount of contact reported in other communities.

 FIGURE 75: CONTACT WITH IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
About how often, if at all, do you talk to or visit with your immediate
neighbors (people who live in the 10 or 20 households that are closest to
you)? 48% 45% NA NA
Percent "at least several times per week"



 FIGURE 76: CONTACT WITH IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Has contact with neighbors at least several times per week Similar




 The National Citizen Survey™
 36
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 PUBLIC TRUST
When local government leaders are trusted, an environment of cooperation is more likely to
surround all decisions they make. Cooperation leads to easier communication between leaders
and residents and increases the likelihood that high value policies and programs will be
implemented to improve the quality of life of the entire community. Trust can be measured in
residents’ opinions about the overall direction the Village of Skokie is taking, their perspectives
about the service value their taxes purchase and the openness of government to citizen
participation. In addition, resident opinion about services provided by the Village of Skokie
could be compared to their opinion about services provided by the state and federal
governments. If residents find nothing to admire in the services delivered by any level of
government, their opinions about the Village of Skokie may be colored by their dislike of what
all levels of government provide.

A majority of respondents felt that the value of services for taxes paid was “excellent” or “good.”
When asked to rate the job the Village of Skokie does at welcoming citizen involvement, 64%
rated it as “excellent” or “good.” Of these four ratings, three were much above the benchmark,
one was similar to the benchmark and none were below the benchmark.

 FIGURE 77: PUBLIC TRUST RATINGS BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
The value of services for the taxes paid to Skokie* 65% 71% 69% 72%
The overall direction that Skokie is taking* 65% 68% 67% 67%
The job Skokie government does at welcoming citizen involvement* 64% 73% 74% 73%
Overall image or reputation of Skokie 71% 79% 78% NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"

* For jurisdictions that have conducted The NCS prior to 2008, a change in the wording of response options may
cause a decline in the percent of residents who offer a positive perspective on public trust. It is well to factor in the
possible change due to question wording this way: if you show an increase, you may have found even more
improvement with the same question wording; if you show no change, you may have shown a slight increase with the
same question wording; if you show a decrease, community sentiment is probably about stable.




 FIGURE 78: PUBLIC TRUST BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Value of services for the taxes paid to Skokie Much above
The overall direction that Skokie is taking Much above
Job Skokie government does at welcoming citizen involvement Much above
Overall image or reputation of Skokie Similar




 The National Citizen Survey™
 37
 Village of Skokie | 2012


On average, residents of the Village of Skokie gave the highest evaluations to their own local
government and the lowest average ratings to the State Government and Cook County
Government. The overall quality of services delivered by the Village of Skokie was rated as
“excellent” or “good” by 87% of survey participants. The Village of Skokie’s rating was much
above the benchmark when compared to other communities. Ratings of overall Village services
have remained stable over the last nine years.

 FIGURE 79: RATING OVERALL QUALITY OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE VILLAGE OF SKOKIE BY YEAR
 100% 89% 88% 88% 87%


 75%



 50%



 25%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent "excellent" or "good"



 FIGURE 80: RATINGS OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Services provided by Village of Skokie 87% 88% 88% 89%
Services provided by the Federal Government 54% 43% 47% 53%
Services provided by the State Government 41% 32% 50% 50%
Services provided by Cook County Government 41% 29% NA NA
Percent "excellent" or "good"

 FIGURE 81: SERVICES PROVIDED BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Services provided by the Village of Skokie Much above
Services provided by the Federal Government Much above
Services provided by the State Government Similar
Services provided by Cook County Government Much below




 The National Citizen Survey™
 38
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Village of Skokie Employees
The employees of the Village of Skokie who interact with the public create the first impression
that most residents have of the Village of Skokie. Front line staff who provide information, assist
with bill paying, collect trash, create service schedules, fight fires and crime and even give traffic
tickets are the collective face of the Village of Skokie. As such, it is important to know about
residents’ experience talking with that “face.” When employees appear to be knowledgeable,
responsive and courteous, residents are more likely to feel that any needs or problems may be
solved through positive and productive interactions with the Village of Skokie staff.

Those completing the survey were asked if they had been in contact with a Village employee
either in-person, over the phone or via email in the last 12 months; the 73% who reported that
they had been in contact (a percent that is much more than the benchmark comparison) were
then asked to indicate overall how satisfied they were with the employee in their most recent
contact. Village employees were rated highly; 82% of respondents rated their overall impression
as “excellent” or “good.” Employees ratings were higher than benchmark and were similar to
past survey years.

 FIGURE 82: PROPORTION OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD CONTACT WITH VILLAGE EMPLOYEES IN PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS BY
 YEAR
 100%


 73%
 70%
 75% 67% 67%



 50%



 25%



 0%
 2003 2006 2009 2012
 Percent "yes"


 FIGURE 83: CONTACT WITH VILLAGE EMPLOYEES BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Had contact with Village employee(s) in last 12 months Much more




 The National Citizen Survey™
 39
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 FIGURE 84: RATINGS OF VILLAGE EMPLOYEES (AMONG THOSE WHO HAD CONTACT) BY YEAR
 2012 2009 2006 2003
Knowledge 84% 91% 89% 85%
Responsiveness 85% 85% 85% 80%
Courtesy 80% 87% 82% 79%
Overall impression 82% 86% 82% 80%
Percent "excellent" or "good"

 FIGURE 85: RATINGS OF VILLAGE EMPLOYEES (AMONG THOSE WHO HAD CONTACT) BENCHMARKS
 Comparison to benchmark
Knowledge Above
Responsiveness Much above
Courteousness Above
Overall impression Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 40
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 From Data to Action
 RESIDENT PRIORITIES
Knowing where to focus limited resources to improve residents’ opinions of local government
requires information that targets the services that are most important to residents. However,
when residents are asked what services are most important, they rarely stray beyond core
services – those directed to save lives and improve safety.

In market research, identifying the most important characteristics of a transaction or product is
called Key Driver Analysis (KDA). The key drivers that are identified from that analysis do not
come from asking customers to self-report which service or product characteristic most
influenced their decision to buy or return, but rather from statistical analyses of the predictors of
their behavior. When customers are asked to name the most important characteristics of a good
or service, responses often are expected or misleading – just as they can be in the context of a
citizen survey. For example, air travelers often claim that safety is the primary consideration in
their choice of an airline, yet key driver analysis reveals that frequent flier perks or in-flight
entertainment predicts their buying decisions.

In local government core services – like fire protection – invariably land at the top of the list
created when residents are asked about the most important local government services. And core
services are important. But by using KDA, our approach digs deeper to identify the less obvious,
but more influential services that are most related to residents’ ratings of overall quality of local
government services. Because services focused directly on life and safety remain essential to
quality government, it is suggested that core services should remain the focus of continuous
monitoring and improvement where necessary – but monitoring core services or asking
residents to identify important services is not enough.

A KDA was conducted for the Village of Skokie by examining the relationships between ratings
of each service and ratings of the Village of Skokie’s overall services. Those Key Driver services
that correlated most highly with residents’ perceptions about overall Village service quality have
been identified. By targeting improvements in key services, the Village of Skokie can focus on
the services that have the greatest likelihood of influencing residents’ opinions about overall
service quality. Because a strong correlation is not the same as a cause, there is no guarantee
that improving ratings on key drivers necessarily will improve ratings. What is certain from these
analyses is that key drivers are good predictors of overall resident opinion and that the key
drivers presented may be useful focus areas to consider for enhancement of overall service
ratings.

Services found to be most strongly correlated with ratings of overall service quality from the
Skokie Key Driver Analysis were:

 Economic development
 Police services
 Snow removal
 Village parks


 The National Citizen Survey™
 41
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 VILLAGE OF SKOKIE ACTION CHART™
The 2012 Village of Skokie Action Chart™ on the following page combines three dimensions of
performance:

 Comparison to resident evaluations from other communities. When a comparison is
 available, the background color of each service box indicates whether the service is above
 the national benchmark (green), similar to the benchmark (yellow) or below the benchmark
 (red).
 Identification of key services. A black key icon ( ) next to a service box indicates it as a key
 driver for the Village.
 Trendline icons (up and down arrows), indicating whether the current ratings are higher or
 lower than the previous survey.

Twenty-seven services were included in the KDA for the Village of Skokie. Of these, 19 were
above the benchmark, none were below the benchmark and three were similar to the
benchmark (no comparison was available for five custom services).

Considering all performance data included in the Action Chart, a jurisdiction typically will want
to consider improvements to any key driver services that are trending down or that are not at
least similar to the benchmark. In the case of Skokie, no key drivers were below the benchmark
or trending lower in the current survey. More detail about interpreting results can be found in
the next section.

Services with a high percent of respondents answering “don’t know” were excluded from the
analysis and were considered services that would be less influential. See Appendix A: Complete
Survey Frequencies, Frequencies Including “Don’t Know” Responses for the percent “don’t
know” for each service.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 42
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 FIGURE 86: VILLAGE OF SKOKIE ACTION CHART™


 Overall Quality of Village of Skokie Services


 Recreation and Wellness
 Community Design
 Planning Animal Village
and zoning control parks
 Code Street
enforcement repair
 Economic Snow Civic Engagement
development removal
 Sidewalk Bus/transit Cable
maintenance services television
 Street
 Street cleaning
  lighting

 Public Safety
 Police Fire
 services services
 Environmental Sustainability Traffic
 EMS
 enforcement
 Drinking
 Recycling
  water
  Garbage Sewer
 collection services Other
  Electric Storm
 utility drainage Overall police Alley
 competence maintenance
 Police Sidewalk snow
 attitudes/behaviors plowing
 Public
 information



 Legend
 Above Similar to Below
 Benchmark Benchmark Benchmark

 Key Driver Rating increase Rating decrease




 The National Citizen Survey™
 43
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Using Your Action Chart™
The key drivers derived for the Village of Skokie provide a list of those services that are uniquely
related to overall service quality. Those key drivers are marked with the symbol of a key in the
action chart. Because key driver results are based on a relatively small number of responses, the
relationships or correlations that define the key drivers are subject to more variability than is
seen when key drivers are derived from a large national dataset of resident responses. To
benefit the Village of Skokie, NRC lists the key drivers derived from tens of thousands of
resident responses from across the country. This national list is updated periodically so that you
can compare your key drivers to the key drivers from the entire NRC dataset. Where your locally
derived key drivers overlap national key drivers, it makes sense to focus even more strongly on
your keys. Similarly, when your local key drivers overlap your core services, there is stronger
argument to make for attending to your key drivers that overlap with core services.

As staff review key drivers, not all drivers may resonate as likely links to residents’ perspectives
about overall service quality. For example, in Skokie, planning and zoning and police services
may be obvious links to overall service delivery (and each is a key driver from our national
database), since it could be easy for staff to see how residents’ view of overall service delivery
could be colored by how well they perceive police and land use planning to be delivered. But
animal control could be a surprise. Before rejecting a key driver that does not pass the first test
of conventional wisdom, consider whether residents’ opinions about overall service quality could
reasonably be influenced by this unexpected driver. For example, in the case of animal control,
was there a visible case of violation prior to the survey data collection? Do Skokie residents have
different expectations for animal control than what current policy provides? Are the rare
instances of violation serious enough to cause a word of mouth campaign about service
delivery?

If, after deeper review, the “suspect” driver still does not square with your understanding of the
services that could influence residents’ perspectives about overall service quality (and if that
driver is not a core service or a key driver from NRC’s national research), put action in that area
on hold and wait to see if it appears as a key driver the next time the survey is conducted.

In the following table, we have listed your key drivers, core services and the national key drivers
and we have indicated (in bold typeface and with the symbol “•”), the Village of Skokie key
drivers that overlap core services or the nationally derived keys. In general, key drivers below the
benchmark may be targeted for improvement. Additionally, we have indicated (with the symbol
“°”) those services that neither are local nor national key drivers nor are they core services. It is
these services that could be considered first for resource reductions.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 44
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 FIGURE 87: KEY DRIVERS COMPARED
 Village of Skokie National Key
 Service Key Drivers Drivers Core Services
• Police services   
Ambulance and emergency medical services 
° Traffic enforcement
Street repair 
° Street cleaning
° Street lighting
Snow removal 
° Sidewalk maintenance
° Bus or transit services
Garbage collection 
° Recycling
Drinking water 
Sewer services 
Electric utility 
Village parks 
Land use planning and zoning 
Code enforcement 
°Animal control
• Economic development  
Health services 
° Cable television
• Key driver overlaps with national and or core services
° Service may be targeted for reductions it is not a key driver or core service




 The National Citizen Survey™
 45
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Custom Questions
“Don’t know” responses have been removed from the following questions.

 Custom Question 1
  Please rate how important, if at all,
each of the following community issues Very Somewhat Not at all
or initiatives is for the Village of Skokie: Essential important important important Total
Email residents public safety and crime
alerts 31% 33% 28% 9% 100%
At-risk youth programs 24% 41% 28% 6% 100%
Downtown Skokie redevelopment 23% 31% 32% 14% 100%
Increase code enforcement for
property standards violations 22% 32% 32% 13% 100%
Elderly care services 21% 46% 30% 3% 100%
Implement licensing of landlords and
multi-family buildings 21% 32% 27% 21% 100%
Use of user fees and special taxes
instead of property taxes 20% 28% 33% 18% 100%
Construct new bike paths and bike
lanes 19% 24% 34% 23% 100%
Redevelop Dempster Street 18% 24% 39% 19% 100%
Street resurfacing 14% 35% 43% 8% 100%
Increase vehicle sticker fee to hire more
police officers 8% 21% 31% 40% 100%


 Custom Question 2
  The Village's property taxes have not
  increased since 1990. To what extent
 would you support or oppose a property
 tax increase to fund the following Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly
 programs or initiatives? support support oppose oppose Total
Continue sidewalk snow plowing 35% 37% 11% 17% 100%
Continue twice per week refuse pick-up 34% 34% 13% 19% 100%
Increase the number of police officers 23% 33% 21% 23% 100%
Increase street resurfacing 22% 43% 21% 14% 100%
Install additional traffic safety devices 18% 30% 26% 26% 100%
"Green" or other environmentally friendly
equipment and programs 17% 39% 23% 21% 100%
Revitalize Downtown Skokie 14% 36% 21% 29% 100%
Revitalize Dempster Street 13% 32% 22% 33% 100%
Increase the number of property 13% 29% 26% 32% 100%

 The National Citizen Survey™
 46
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Custom Question 2
 The Village's property taxes have not
 increased since 1990. To what extent
would you support or oppose a property
 tax increase to fund the following Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly
 programs or initiatives? support support oppose oppose Total
standards inspectors
Revitalize other shopping/commercial
areas (East Oakton Street, Main Street,
etc.) 9% 30% 27% 34% 100%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 47
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Appendix A: Complete Survey Frequencies
 FREQUENCIES EXCLUDING “DON’T KNOW” RESPONSES

 Question 1: Quality of Life
 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in
 Skokie: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Skokie as a place to live 35% 54% 9% 2% 100%
Your neighborhood as a place to live 32% 45% 16% 6% 100%
Skokie as a place to raise children 36% 47% 13% 4% 100%
Skokie as a place to work 29% 44% 21% 6% 100%
Skokie as a place to retire 20% 45% 26% 9% 100%
The overall quality of life in Skokie 26% 54% 17% 2% 100%


 Question 2: Community Characteristics
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate
 to Skokie as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Sense of community 19% 52% 26% 3% 100%
Openness and acceptance of the community toward people
of diverse backgrounds 33% 48% 17% 3% 100%
Overall appearance of Skokie 24% 53% 19% 4% 100%
Cleanliness of Skokie 33% 49% 15% 3% 100%
Overall quality of new development in Skokie 19% 51% 25% 5% 100%
Variety of housing options 22% 50% 22% 5% 100%
Overall quality of business and service establishments in
Skokie 19% 55% 22% 4% 100%
Shopping opportunities 38% 48% 11% 2% 100%
Opportunities to attend cultural activities 34% 44% 18% 4% 100%
Recreational opportunities 30% 49% 16% 4% 100%
Employment opportunities 12% 35% 39% 15% 100%
Educational opportunities 29% 59% 11% 2% 100%
Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 24% 51% 21% 4% 100%
Opportunities to volunteer 23% 53% 21% 3% 100%
Opportunities to participate in community matters 25% 46% 22% 7% 100%
Ease of car travel in Skokie 31% 51% 14% 4% 100%
Ease of bus travel in Skokie 24% 49% 22% 6% 100%
Ease of rail or subway travel in Skokie 28% 56% 15% 1% 100%
Ease of bicycle travel in Skokie 21% 41% 26% 11% 100%
Ease of walking in Skokie 27% 49% 17% 7% 100%
Availability of paths and walking trails 21% 48% 20% 12% 100%

 The National Citizen Survey™
 48
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 2: Community Characteristics
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate
 to Skokie as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Traffic flow on major streets 11% 49% 31% 9% 100%
Amount of public parking 19% 46% 29% 6% 100%
Availability of affordable quality housing 14% 45% 30% 11% 100%
Availability of affordable quality child care 14% 50% 29% 7% 100%
Availability of affordable quality health care 16% 58% 16% 9% 100%
Availability of preventive health services 19% 54% 20% 7% 100%
Air quality 18% 54% 24% 4% 100%
Quality of overall natural environment in Skokie 17% 58% 23% 2% 100%
Overall image or reputation of Skokie 22% 50% 24% 5% 100%


 Question 3: Growth
Please rate the speed of growth Much
 in the following categories in too Somewhat Right Somewhat Much
  Skokie over the past 2 years: slow too slow amount too fast too fast Total
Population growth 1% 5% 62% 22% 10% 100%
Retail growth (stores,
restaurants, etc.) 10% 39% 47% 3% 1% 100%
Jobs growth 20% 52% 26% 2% 0% 100%


 Question 4: Problems
To what degree, if at all,
 are the following Not a Minor Moderate Major
  problems in Skokie: problem problem problem problem Total
Crime 9% 33% 42% 15% 100%
Drugs 11% 30% 39% 20% 100%
Too much growth 34% 28% 24% 14% 100%
Property taxes 13% 17% 28% 42% 100%
Traffic congestion 17% 37% 40% 5% 100%
Unsupervised youth 17% 28% 31% 24% 100%
Unmaintained
properties (weeds,
peeling paint, etc.) 21% 45% 26% 9% 100%


 Question 5: Community Safety
Please rate how safe or unsafe
you feel from the following in Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very
 Skokie: safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe Total


 The National Citizen Survey™
 49
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 5: Community Safety
Please rate how safe or unsafe
you feel from the following in Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very
 Skokie: safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe Total
Violent crime (e.g., rape,
assault, robbery) 29% 37% 14% 15% 6% 100%
Property crimes (e.g., burglary,
theft) 15% 34% 15% 27% 10% 100%
Environmental hazards,
including toxic waste 40% 34% 18% 6% 2% 100%


 Question 6: Personal Safety
 Please rate how safe or Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very
 unsafe you feel: safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe Total
In your neighborhood
during the day 58% 29% 6% 6% 1% 100%
In your neighborhood
after dark 23% 42% 9% 15% 11% 100%
In Skokie's downtown
area during the day 64% 25% 6% 5% 0% 100%
In Skokie's downtown
area after dark 31% 36% 14% 14% 5% 100%


 Question 7: Crime Victim
During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of Percent of
 any crime in Skokie? respondents
No 84%
Yes 16%
Total 100%


 Question 8: Crime Reporting
 If yes, was this crime (these crimes) reported to the police? Percent of respondents
No 29%
Yes 71%
Total 100%


 Question 9: Resident Behaviors
In the last 12 months, about how many times,
 if ever, have you or other household Once 13 to More
 members participated in the following or 3 to 12 26 than 26
 activities in Skokie? Never twice times times times Total


 The National Citizen Survey™
 50
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 9: Resident Behaviors
In the last 12 months, about how many times,
 if ever, have you or other household Once 13 to More
 members participated in the following or 3 to 12 26 than 26
 activities in Skokie? Never twice times times times Total
Used Skokie Public Library or its services 11% 18% 28% 18% 25% 100%
Participated in a recreation program or
activity 40% 31% 18% 8% 4% 100%
Visited a neighborhood park or Village park 12% 21% 36% 15% 16% 100%
Ridden a local bus within Skokie 66% 14% 10% 3% 7% 100%
Attended a meeting of local elected officials
or other local public meeting 81% 14% 4% 0% 0% 100%
Watched a meeting of local elected officials
or other Village-sponsored public meeting
on cable television, the Internet or other
media 74% 18% 6% 1% 1% 100%
Read NewSkokie Newsletter 7% 18% 50% 11% 14% 100%
Visited the Village of Skokie Web site (at
www.skokie.org) 30% 27% 31% 8% 5% 100%
Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from
your home 13% 5% 13% 6% 62% 100%
Volunteered your time to some group or
activity in Skokie 78% 11% 6% 1% 3% 100%
Listened to 1660 AM Skokie radio station 85% 11% 3% 1% 0% 100%
Ridden a Senior Transportation for Area
Residents (STAR) bus 96% 2% 2% 0% 0% 100%
Ridden the Skokie Swift 41% 22% 21% 5% 11% 100%
Attended a neighborhood block party 80% 16% 3% 0% 0% 100%
Called or emailed the Village for yard waste
collection 56% 20% 19% 3% 2% 100%
Dined or shopped in Downtown Skokie 13% 19% 39% 18% 12% 100%
Visited the Skokie Farmers' Market 37% 28% 24% 6% 5% 100%


 Question 10: Neighborliness
  About how often, if at all, do you talk to or visit with your immediate neighbors Percent of
 (people who live in the 10 or 20 households that are closest to you)? respondents
Just about everyday 18%
Several times a week 29%
Several times a month 19%
Less than several times a month 33%
Total 100%


 The National Citizen Survey™
 51
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 11: Service Quality
  Please rate the quality of each of the following services in
 Skokie: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Police services 47% 40% 11% 2% 100%
Fire services 60% 37% 3% 0% 100%
Ambulance or emergency medical services 56% 39% 4% 0% 100%
Crime prevention 20% 46% 25% 9% 100%
Fire prevention and education 36% 48% 12% 4% 100%
Traffic enforcement 22% 55% 15% 8% 100%
Street repair 14% 41% 31% 14% 100%
Street cleaning 24% 52% 18% 6% 100%
Street lighting 20% 48% 21% 10% 100%
Snow removal 29% 38% 25% 7% 100%
Sidewalk maintenance 17% 49% 26% 8% 100%
Bus or transit services 23% 59% 16% 2% 100%
Garbage collection 51% 38% 10% 1% 100%
Recycling 50% 36% 10% 4% 100%
Yard waste pick-up 39% 37% 18% 6% 100%
Storm drainage 18% 40% 26% 16% 100%
Drinking water 37% 45% 13% 5% 100%
Sewer services 23% 48% 21% 8% 100%
Electric utility service 25% 56% 13% 6% 100%
Village parks 41% 48% 11% 0% 100%
Land use, planning and zoning 21% 47% 28% 4% 100%
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 15% 47% 27% 12% 100%
Animal control 26% 47% 21% 7% 100%
Economic development 16% 44% 29% 11% 100%
Skokie Health Department services 38% 43% 16% 2% 100%
Services to seniors 40% 43% 17% 1% 100%
Services to youth 25% 48% 24% 3% 100%
Services to low-income people 25% 40% 22% 13% 100%
Services to families 18% 54% 22% 6% 100%
Cable television 17% 49% 22% 11% 100%
Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the
community for natural disasters or other emergency
situations) 22% 51% 21% 6% 100%
Administrative hearings (parking and code violations) 18% 47% 25% 9% 100%
Sidewalk snow plowing 23% 34% 26% 16% 100%


 The National Citizen Survey™
 52
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 11: Service Quality
  Please rate the quality of each of the following services in
 Skokie: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Alley maintenance 18% 34% 33% 16% 100%
Obtaining a building permit 15% 50% 26% 9% 100%
Public information - 1660 AM Skokie radio station 23% 53% 24% 1% 100%
Public information - NewSkokie municipal newsletter 32% 52% 15% 1% 100%
Public information - www.skokie.org municipal Web site 24% 59% 16% 1% 100%
Public information - Village of Skokie monthly email
newsletter 31% 52% 16% 1% 100%
Overall competence of Police Department employees 30% 52% 15% 3% 100%
Police officers' attitudes and behaviors toward citizens 35% 39% 20% 6% 100%
Fire prevention - code enforcement 32% 49% 16% 2% 100%
Fire prevention - public education 33% 45% 17% 6% 100%
Senior Transportation for Area Residents (STAR) bus service 35% 43% 20% 3% 100%


 Question 12: Government Services Overall
 Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services
 provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
The Village of Skokie 35% 52% 11% 2% 100%
The Federal Government 10% 44% 34% 12% 100%
The State Government 9% 32% 36% 23% 100%
Cook County Government 8% 33% 31% 28% 100%


 Question 13: Contact with Village Employees
 Have you had any in-person, phone or email contact with an employee of the
Village of Skokie within the last 12 months (including police, receptionists, planners Percent of
 or any others)? respondents
No 27%
Yes 73%
Total 100%


 Question 14: Village Employees
 What was your impression of the employee(s) of the Village
 of Skokie in your most recent contact? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Knowledge 46% 37% 14% 2% 100%
Responsiveness 50% 34% 12% 4% 100%
Courtesy 51% 29% 17% 4% 100%
Overall impression 46% 36% 14% 4% 100%



 The National Citizen Survey™
 53
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 15: Government Performance
 Please rate the following categories of Skokie government
 performance: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
The value of services for the taxes paid to Skokie 20% 45% 25% 10% 100%
The overall direction that Skokie is taking 17% 48% 24% 11% 100%
The job Skokie government does at welcoming citizen
involvement 21% 43% 27% 9% 100%


 Question 16: Recommendation and Longevity
 Please indicate how likely or unlikely Very Somewhat Somewhat Very
 you are to do each of the following: likely likely unlikely unlikely Total
Recommend living in Skokie to
someone who asks 47% 40% 8% 6% 100%
Remain in Skokie for the next five years 55% 25% 11% 9% 100%


 Question 17: Impact of the Economy
What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in Percent of
 the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: respondents
Very positive 5%
Somewhat positive 17%
Neutral 49%
Somewhat negative 24%
Very negative 5%
Total 100%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 54
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 18a: Custom Question 1
  Please rate how important, if at all,
each of the following community issues Very Somewhat Not at all
or initiatives is for the Village of Skokie: Essential important important important Total
Increase vehicle sticker fee to hire more
police officers 8% 21% 31% 40% 100%
Street resurfacing 14% 35% 43% 8% 100%
Redevelop Dempster Street 18% 24% 39% 19% 100%
Downtown Skokie redevelopment 23% 31% 32% 14% 100%
Construct new bike paths and bike
lanes 19% 24% 34% 23% 100%
Elderly care services 21% 46% 30% 3% 100%
At-risk youth programs 24% 41% 28% 6% 100%
Implement licensing of landlords and
multi-family buildings 21% 32% 27% 21% 100%
Increase code enforcement for
property standards violations 22% 32% 32% 13% 100%
Email residents public safety and crime
alerts 31% 33% 28% 9% 100%
Use of user fees and special taxes
instead of property taxes 20% 28% 33% 18% 100%


 Question 18b: Custom Question 2
  The Village's property taxes have not
  increased since 1990. To what extent
 would you support or oppose a property
 tax increase to fund the following Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly
 programs or initiatives? support support oppose oppose Total
Revitalize Downtown Skokie 14% 36% 21% 29% 100%
Revitalize Dempster Street 13% 32% 22% 33% 100%
Revitalize other shopping/commercial
areas (East Oakton Street, Main Street,
etc.) 9% 30% 27% 34% 100%
Continue sidewalk snow plowing 35% 37% 11% 17% 100%
Increase street resurfacing 22% 43% 21% 14% 100%
Increase the number of property
standards inspectors 13% 29% 26% 32% 100%
"Green" or other environmentally friendly
equipment and programs 17% 39% 23% 21% 100%
Install additional traffic safety devices 18% 30% 26% 26% 100%
Increase the number of police officers 23% 33% 21% 23% 100%

 The National Citizen Survey™
 55
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 18b: Custom Question 2
 The Village's property taxes have not
 increased since 1990. To what extent
would you support or oppose a property
 tax increase to fund the following Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly
 programs or initiatives? support support oppose oppose Total
Continue twice per week refuse pick-up 34% 34% 13% 19% 100%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 56
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question D1: Employment Status
 Are you currently employed for pay? Percent of respondents
No 37%
Yes, full-time 49%
Yes, part-time 14%
Total 100%


 Question D2: Mode of Transportation Used for Commute
 During a typical week, how many days do you commute to work (for the longest Percent of days
 distance of your commute) in each of the ways listed below? mode used
Motorized vehicle (e.g., car, truck, van, motorcycle, etc.) by myself 68%
Motorized vehicle (e.g., car, truck, van, motorcycle, etc.) with other children or
adults 9%
Bus, rail, subway or other public transportation 10%
Walk 3%
Bicycle 2%
Work at home 7%
Other 0%


 Question D3: Length of Residency
 How many years have you lived in Skokie? Percent of respondents
Less than 2 years 6%
2 to 5 years 21%
6 to 10 years 17%
11 to 20 years 17%
More than 20 years 38%
Total 100%


 Question D4: Housing Unit Type
 Which best describes the building you live in? Percent of respondents
One family house detached from any other houses 58%
House attached to one or more houses (e.g., a duplex or townhome) 4%
Building with two or more apartments or condominiums 37%
Mobile home 0%
Other 1%
Total 100%


 Question D5: Housing Tenure (Rent/Own)


 The National Citizen Survey™
 57
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Is this house, apartment or mobile home… Percent of respondents
Rented for cash or occupied without cash payment 28%
Owned by you or someone in this house with a mortgage or free and clear 72%
Total 100%


 Question D6: Monthly Housing Cost
About how much is the monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent,
mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners" association Percent of
 (HOA) fees)? respondents
Less than $300 per month 3%
$300 to $599 per month 7%
$600 to $999 per month 28%
$1,000 to $1,499 per month 23%
$1,500 to $2,499 per month 27%
$2,500 or more per month 12%
Total 100%


 Question D7: Presence of Children in Household
 Do any children 17 or under live in your household? Percent of respondents
No 67%
Yes 33%
Total 100%


 Question D8: Presence of Older Adults in Household
 Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? Percent of respondents
No 70%
Yes 30%
Total 100%


 Question D9: Household Income
How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for
the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all Percent of
 persons living in your household.) respondents
Less than $24,999 13%
$25,000 to $49,999 30%
$50,000 to $99,999 31%
$100,000 to $149,999 17%
$150,000 or more 8%
Total 100%


 The National Citizen Survey™
 58
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question D10: Ethnicity
 Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Percent of respondents
No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 96%
Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 4%
Total 100%


 Question D11: Race
 What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race(s) you Percent of
 consider yourself to be.) respondents
American Indian or Alaskan Native 1%
Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 23%
Black or African American 4%
White 68%
Other 7%
Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option


 Question D12: Age
 In which category is your age? Percent of respondents
18 to 24 years 7%
25 to 34 years 16%
35 to 44 years 13%
45 to 54 years 21%
55 to 64 years 17%
65 to 74 years 11%
75 years or older 15%
Total 100%


 Question D13: Gender
 What is your sex? Percent of respondents
Female 53%
Male 47%
Total 100%


 Question D14: Registered to Vote
 Are you registered to vote in your jurisdiction? Percent of respondents
No 14%
Yes 83%
Ineligible to vote 3%

 The National Citizen Survey™
 59
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question D14: Registered to Vote
 Are you registered to vote in your jurisdiction? Percent of respondents
Total 100%


 Question D15: Voted in Last General Election
 Many people don't have time to vote in elections. Did you vote in the last Percent of
 general election? respondents
No 22%
Yes 74%
Ineligible to vote 4%
Total 100%


 Question D16: Has Cell Phone
 Do you have a cell phone? Percent of respondents
No 7%
Yes 93%
Total 100%


 Question D17: Has Land Line
 Do you have a land line at home? Percent of respondents
No 31%
Yes 69%
Total 100%


 Question D18: Primary Phone
 If you have both a cell phone and a land line, which do you consider your Percent of
 primary telephone number? respondents
Cell 29%
Land line 53%
Both 18%
Total 100%


 Question D19: Internet Access
 Do you have Internet access? (Please check all that apply) Percent of respondents
At home 96%
At work 50%
On a smart phone 44%
Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option



 The National Citizen Survey™
 60
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 FREQUENCIES INCLUDING “DON’T KNOW” RESPONSES
These tables contain the percentage of respondents for each response category as well as the “n” or total number of
respondents for each category, next to the percentage.

 Question 1: Quality of Life
 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in
 Skokie: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total
Skokie as a place to live 35% 122 54% 188 9% 33 2% 7 0% 1 100% 352
Your neighborhood as a place to live 32% 111 44% 156 16% 56 6% 21 2% 6 100% 350
Skokie as a place to raise children 32% 113 43% 149 12% 42 3% 12 9% 32 100% 348
Skokie as a place to work 19% 67 29% 99 14% 49 4% 13 34% 119 100% 348
Skokie as a place to retire 16% 56 36% 123 20% 70 7% 26 20% 70 100% 345
The overall quality of life in Skokie 26% 92 54% 187 17% 60 2% 7 0% 1 100% 347


 Question 2: Community Characteristics
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Don't
 Skokie as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
Sense of community 18% 62 51% 175 25% 85 3% 12 3% 11 100% 346
Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of
diverse backgrounds 32% 108 46% 157 16% 54 2% 8 4% 13 100% 341
Overall appearance of Skokie 24% 81 53% 183 19% 67 4% 12 0% 1 100% 345
Cleanliness of Skokie 33% 114 49% 172 15% 53 3% 11 0% 0 100% 350
Overall quality of new development in Skokie 17% 60 47% 164 23% 79 4% 15 8% 29 100% 347
Variety of housing options 20% 70 46% 159 21% 71 5% 16 8% 28 100% 343
Overall quality of business and service establishments in Skokie 18% 63 54% 187 22% 75 4% 13 2% 7 100% 345
Shopping opportunities 37% 131 47% 165 11% 39 2% 8 2% 6 100% 349
Opportunities to attend cultural activities 32% 110 42% 145 17% 59 3% 12 6% 22 100% 348
Recreational opportunities 28% 98 46% 158 15% 53 4% 13 7% 25 100% 346


 The National Citizen Survey™
 61
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 2: Community Characteristics
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Don't
 Skokie as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
Employment opportunities 7% 25 21% 74 24% 82 9% 33 38% 133 100% 346
Educational opportunities 26% 91 55% 188 10% 34 1% 5 8% 26 100% 343
Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 21% 74 46% 160 19% 65 4% 13 10% 35 100% 347
Opportunities to volunteer 16% 55 37% 128 15% 51 2% 7 30% 101 100% 342
Opportunities to participate in community matters 19% 66 35% 121 17% 59 5% 17 23% 80 100% 344
Ease of car travel in Skokie 30% 105 51% 175 14% 47 4% 12 2% 6 100% 346
Ease of bus travel in Skokie 17% 60 36% 125 16% 55 4% 14 27% 94 100% 349
Ease of rail or subway travel in Skokie 25% 85 49% 171 14% 47 1% 4 11% 40 100% 347
Ease of bicycle travel in Skokie 16% 55 32% 108 20% 68 9% 30 23% 80 100% 341
Ease of walking in Skokie 26% 90 49% 167 17% 59 7% 23 1% 5 100% 343
Availability of paths and walking trails 19% 64 43% 146 18% 60 11% 37 10% 34 100% 342
Traffic flow on major streets 11% 38 48% 164 31% 105 9% 31 1% 4 100% 341
Amount of public parking 18% 62 44% 150 27% 94 5% 18 6% 19 100% 344
Availability of affordable quality housing 11% 38 35% 119 23% 79 9% 30 21% 72 100% 338
Availability of affordable quality child care 6% 22 23% 79 13% 46 3% 11 54% 186 100% 344
Availability of affordable quality health care 12% 40 42% 142 12% 40 7% 22 29% 98 100% 343
Availability of preventive health services 14% 50 40% 138 15% 50 5% 18 25% 87 100% 343
Air quality 16% 56 49% 169 22% 76 4% 14 8% 28 100% 342
Quality of overall natural environment in Skokie 17% 57 57% 195 23% 77 2% 6 2% 7 100% 343
Overall image or reputation of Skokie 21% 74 49% 169 24% 81 5% 16 2% 5 100% 345


 Question 3: Growth
 Please rate the speed of growth in the
 following categories in Skokie over the Much too Somewhat Right Somewhat Much too Don't
 past 2 years: slow too slow amount too fast fast know Total


 The National Citizen Survey™
 62
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 3: Growth
 Please rate the speed of growth in the
 following categories in Skokie over the Much too Somewhat Right Somewhat Much too Don't
 past 2 years: slow too slow amount too fast fast know Total
Population growth 1% 3 3% 11 38% 130 14% 46 6% 21 39% 133 100% 343
Retail growth (stores, restaurants, etc.) 8% 29 32% 112 40% 137 2% 8 1% 3 16% 57 100% 346
Jobs growth 10% 33 25% 86 13% 42 1% 3 0% 0 51% 173 100% 338




 The National Citizen Survey™
 63
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 4: Problems
 To what degree, if at all, are the following Not a Minor Moderate Major Don't
 problems in Skokie: problem problem problem problem know Total
Crime 8% 28 29% 101 37% 130 14% 48 12% 41 100% 348
Drugs 8% 27 21% 71 27% 93 14% 49 30% 105 100% 345
Too much growth 26% 85 21% 71 18% 60 11% 35 24% 80 100% 331
Property taxes 11% 38 15% 52 25% 86 37% 126 11% 37 100% 340
Traffic congestion 16% 56 36% 123 39% 133 5% 18 4% 14 100% 343
Unsupervised youth 14% 48 23% 78 26% 88 20% 69 17% 59 100% 342
Unmaintained properties (weeds, peeling paint,
etc.) 18% 64 40% 139 23% 79 8% 27 10% 36 100% 345


 Question 5: Community Safety
Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don't
 from the following in Skokie: Very safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know Total
Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault,
robbery) 28% 96 36% 124 13% 46 14% 50 6% 20 3% 9 100% 346
Property crimes (e.g., burglary, theft) 14% 50 33% 115 14% 49 26% 90 10% 33 3% 12 100% 349
Environmental hazards, including toxic
waste 33% 114 29% 99 15% 52 5% 18 2% 6 17% 57 100% 346


 Question 6: Personal Safety
 Please rate how safe or unsafe Somewhat Neither safe nor Somewhat Very Don't
 you feel: Very safe safe unsafe unsafe unsafe know Total
In your neighborhood during the
day 58% 202 29% 102 6% 20 6% 21 1% 5 0% 1 100% 350
In your neighborhood after dark 23% 79 42% 147 9% 31 15% 54 11% 38 1% 2 100% 351
In Skokie's downtown area 59% 208 23% 80 6% 20 4% 15 0% 2 7% 25 100% 351


 The National Citizen Survey™
 64
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 6: Personal Safety
 Please rate how safe or unsafe Somewhat Neither safe nor Somewhat Very Don't
 you feel: Very safe safe unsafe unsafe unsafe know Total
during the day
In Skokie's downtown area after
dark 26% 91 31% 107 12% 42 12% 43 4% 16 15% 51 100% 349


 Question 7: Crime Victim
 During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime in Skokie? Percent of respondents Count
No 84% 281
Yes 16% 55
Don't know 0% 1
Total 100% 336


 Question 8: Crime Reporting
 If yes, was this crime (these crimes) reported to the police? Percent of respondents Count
No 28% 15
Yes 70% 38
Don't know 2% 1
Total 100% 55


 Question 9: Resident Behaviors
In the last 12 months, about how many times, if ever, have
 you or other household members participated in the Once or 3 to 12 13 to 26 More than 26
 following activities in Skokie? Never twice times times times Total
Used Skokie Public Library or its services 11% 40 18% 64 28% 98 18% 63 25% 86 100% 350
Participated in a recreation program or activity 40% 137 31% 104 18% 60 8% 28 4% 12 100% 341
Visited a neighborhood park or Village park 12% 42 21% 74 36% 125 15% 52 16% 56 100% 349


 The National Citizen Survey™
 65
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 9: Resident Behaviors
In the last 12 months, about how many times, if ever, have
 you or other household members participated in the Once or 3 to 12 13 to 26 More than 26
 following activities in Skokie? Never twice times times times Total
Ridden a local bus within Skokie 66% 225 14% 49 10% 35 3% 12 7% 23 100% 344
Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local
public meeting 81% 281 14% 50 4% 15 0% 1 0% 1 100% 348
Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other
Village-sponsored public meeting on cable television, the
Internet or other media 74% 254 18% 61 6% 19 1% 5 1% 4 100% 344
Read NewSkokie Newsletter 7% 23 18% 60 50% 170 11% 38 14% 49 100% 340
Visited the Village of Skokie Web site (at www.skokie.org) 30% 101 27% 93 31% 105 8% 27 5% 16 100% 343
Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home 13% 45 5% 17 13% 46 6% 22 62% 214 100% 344
Volunteered your time to some group or activity in Skokie 78% 270 11% 39 6% 22 1% 4 3% 11 100% 345
Listened to 1660 AM Skokie radio station 85% 292 11% 37 3% 11 1% 3 0% 1 100% 345
Ridden a Senior Transportation for Area Residents (STAR)
bus 96% 334 2% 6 2% 7 0% 2 0% 1 100% 349
Ridden the Skokie Swift 41% 144 22% 77 21% 72 5% 17 11% 40 100% 349
Attended a neighborhood block party 80% 278 16% 56 3% 11 0% 1 0% 1 100% 347
Called or emailed the Village for yard waste collection 56% 197 20% 69 19% 65 3% 11 2% 7 100% 349
Dined or shopped in Downtown Skokie 13% 45 19% 66 39% 135 18% 61 12% 40 100% 346
Visited the Skokie Farmers' Market 37% 130 28% 99 24% 82 6% 20 5% 17 100% 348


 Question 10: Neighborliness
About how often, if at all, do you talk to or visit with your immediate neighbors (people who live in the 10 or 20 Percent of
 households that are closest to you)? respondents Count
Just about everyday 18% 63
Several times a week 29% 101
Several times a month 19% 65


 The National Citizen Survey™
 66
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 10: Neighborliness
About how often, if at all, do you talk to or visit with your immediate neighbors (people who live in the 10 or 20 Percent of
 households that are closest to you)? respondents Count
Less than several times a month 33% 115
Total 100% 343


 Question 11: Service Quality
 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Don't
 Skokie: Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
Police services 44% 153 38% 129 10% 36 2% 7 5% 19 100% 344
Fire services 49% 170 30% 106 3% 9 0% 0 18% 62 100% 347
Ambulance or emergency medical services 41% 140 28% 97 3% 11 0% 0 28% 96 100% 344
Crime prevention 17% 59 39% 132 21% 71 7% 25 16% 54 100% 342
Fire prevention and education 24% 83 33% 112 8% 29 2% 8 32% 110 100% 343
Traffic enforcement 20% 67 51% 171 14% 46 7% 24 8% 27 100% 336
Street repair 14% 48 39% 136 30% 103 14% 48 3% 11 100% 345
Street cleaning 24% 82 51% 175 18% 62 6% 21 0% 1 100% 342
Street lighting 20% 69 48% 164 21% 73 10% 36 0% 0 100% 343
Snow removal 28% 96 37% 126 24% 83 7% 24 4% 15 100% 345
Sidewalk maintenance 17% 57 47% 161 24% 84 8% 27 4% 14 100% 342
Bus or transit services 17% 57 43% 143 12% 40 1% 5 27% 90 100% 334
Garbage collection 49% 169 36% 124 10% 35 1% 3 4% 13 100% 343
Recycling 47% 159 33% 113 9% 32 4% 12 7% 25 100% 341
Yard waste pick-up 30% 104 28% 97 14% 47 5% 17 23% 79 100% 342
Storm drainage 15% 50 33% 112 22% 74 13% 45 17% 58 100% 339
Drinking water 35% 121 43% 147 13% 43 5% 16 4% 15 100% 343
Sewer services 18% 62 38% 130 17% 58 6% 22 20% 66 100% 337
Electric utility service 24% 79 53% 179 12% 40 6% 19 5% 18 100% 336


 The National Citizen Survey™
 67
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 11: Service Quality
 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Don't
 Skokie: Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
Village parks 40% 137 47% 159 11% 38 0% 0 2% 6 100% 339
Land use, planning and zoning 16% 55 36% 120 22% 73 3% 10 23% 77 100% 335
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 11% 37 34% 115 19% 66 9% 29 28% 94 100% 341
Animal control 20% 69 36% 124 16% 54 5% 18 23% 77 100% 341
Economic development 12% 39 33% 111 22% 74 8% 27 25% 86 100% 336
Skokie Health Department services 25% 85 28% 95 10% 35 2% 5 35% 121 100% 342
Services to seniors 22% 74 23% 80 9% 31 0% 1 45% 154 100% 341
Services to youth 14% 47 27% 89 13% 44 2% 5 45% 152 100% 337
Services to low-income people 10% 34 16% 53 8% 29 5% 18 61% 207 100% 340
Services to families 10% 34 30% 102 12% 42 3% 11 44% 147 100% 335
Cable television 12% 41 36% 120 17% 55 8% 28 26% 87 100% 332
Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community
for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 15% 51 36% 121 14% 49 4% 14 31% 104 100% 340
Administrative hearings (parking and code violations) 10% 33 26% 86 14% 46 5% 17 45% 148 100% 329
Sidewalk snow plowing 21% 71 31% 106 24% 81 15% 50 9% 31 100% 341
Alley maintenance 14% 49 28% 95 27% 91 13% 43 17% 59 100% 337
Obtaining a building permit 6% 21 21% 70 11% 36 4% 12 58% 193 100% 332
Public information - 1660 AM Skokie radio station 7% 24 17% 56 7% 25 0% 1 68% 229 100% 335
Public information - NewSkokie municipal newsletter 26% 88 42% 141 12% 40 0% 2 20% 66 100% 336
Public information - www.skokie.org municipal Web site 16% 55 40% 132 11% 36 1% 2 32% 107 100% 331
Public information - Village of Skokie monthly email newsletter 18% 59 29% 98 9% 30 1% 2 43% 145 100% 334
Overall competence of Police Department employees 26% 89 45% 152 13% 43 3% 9 13% 45 100% 338
Police officers' attitudes and behaviors toward citizens 30% 100 34% 113 17% 59 5% 17 14% 47 100% 335
Fire prevention - code enforcement 18% 62 28% 95 9% 31 1% 5 43% 145 100% 339
Fire prevention - public education 20% 68 27% 92 10% 34 3% 12 39% 133 100% 339


 The National Citizen Survey™
 68
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question 11: Service Quality
 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Don't
 Skokie: Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
Senior Transportation for Area Residents (STAR) bus service 10% 33 12% 40 6% 19 1% 3 72% 244 100% 338


 Question 12: Government Services Overall
Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided Don't
 by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
The Village of Skokie 35% 120 51% 176 11% 37 2% 7 1% 4 100% 344
The Federal Government 9% 30 37% 126 28% 97 10% 36 15% 52 100% 341
The State Government 8% 26 28% 96 32% 107 20% 67 13% 44 100% 340
Cook County Government 7% 24 29% 98 27% 92 25% 84 12% 42 100% 339




 The National Citizen Survey™
 69
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 13: Contact with Village Employees
Have you had any in-person, phone or email contact with an employee of the Village of Skokie within the last 12 Percent of
 months (including police, receptionists, planners or any others)? respondents Count
No 27% 84
Yes 73% 225
Total 100% 309


 Question 14: Village Employees
What was your impression of the employee(s) of the Village of Skokie Don't
 in your most recent contact? Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
Knowledge 44% 100 36% 80 14% 31 2% 5 4% 9 100% 225
Responsiveness 49% 109 33% 74 12% 26 3% 8 3% 7 100% 224
Courtesy 49% 110 28% 64 16% 36 3% 8 3% 7 100% 224
Overall impression 45% 100 35% 79 14% 30 4% 8 3% 7 100% 224


 Question 15: Government Performance
 Please rate the following categories of Skokie government Don't
 performance: Excellent Good Fair Poor know Total
The value of services for the taxes paid to Skokie 18% 62 40% 141 23% 79 9% 30 11% 38 100% 350
The overall direction that Skokie is taking 15% 53 42% 146 21% 71 10% 33 13% 44 100% 347
The job Skokie government does at welcoming citizen
involvement 14% 49 29% 100 18% 64 6% 20 33% 113 100% 346


 Question 16: Recommendation and Longevity
 Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do Somewhat Somewhat Very Don't
 each of the following: Very likely likely unlikely unlikely know Total
Recommend living in Skokie to someone who asks 46% 161 39% 137 8% 27 6% 20 1% 4 100% 349
Remain in Skokie for the next five years 53% 184 24% 82 11% 37 9% 30 4% 13 100% 345

 The National Citizen Survey™
 70
 Village of Skokie | 2012




The National Citizen Survey™
 71
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 17: Impact of the Economy
 What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you Percent of
 think the impact will be: respondents Count
Very positive 5% 19
Somewhat positive 17% 59
Neutral 49% 168
Somewhat negative 24% 83
Very negative 5% 16
Total 100% 344


 Question 18a: Custom Question 1
 Please rate how important, if at all, each of the
 following community issues or initiatives is for the Very Somewhat Not at all Don't
 Village of Skokie Essential important important important know Total
Increase vehicle sticker fee to hire more police officers 7% 24 19% 65 28% 97 36% 124 11% 37 100% 346
Street resurfacing 13% 44 34% 114 41% 138 7% 25 5% 18 100% 339
Redevelop Dempster Street 17% 57 22% 75 35% 121 18% 61 8% 28 100% 342
Downtown Skokie redevelopment 22% 76 30% 102 30% 104 13% 46 5% 16 100% 344
Construct new bike paths and bike lanes 18% 61 21% 74 31% 108 21% 71 9% 31 100% 345
Elderly care services 17% 60 38% 131 24% 84 3% 10 17% 59 100% 345
At-risk youth programs 21% 72 36% 123 24% 83 6% 19 13% 45 100% 343
Implement licensing of landlords and multi-family
buildings 16% 56 24% 84 21% 71 16% 55 23% 78 100% 344
Implement licensing of landlords and multi-family
buildings 16% 56 24% 84 21% 71 16% 55 23% 78 100% 344
Email residents public safety and crime alerts 29% 98 31% 105 26% 88 8% 28 7% 23 100% 341
Use of user fees and special taxes instead of property
taxes 15% 52 21% 72 25% 85 14% 47 25% 86 100% 342


 The National Citizen Survey™
 72
 Village of Skokie | 2012




The National Citizen Survey™
 73
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 18b: Custom Question 2
  The Village's property taxes have not increased since
  1990. To what extent would you support or oppose a
 property tax increase to fund the following programs or Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Don't
 initiatives? support support oppose oppose know Total
Revitalize Downtown Skokie 13% 43 33% 114 19% 66 27% 92 8% 26 100% 342
Revitalize Dempster Street 12% 40 29% 97 20% 68 30% 102 9% 32 100% 340
Revitalize other shopping/commercial areas (East Oakton
Street, Main Street, etc.) 8% 28 26% 89 24% 81 30% 102 12% 40 100% 339
Continue sidewalk snow plowing 33% 112 35% 119 10% 36 16% 55 6% 19 100% 341
Increase street resurfacing 20% 68 40% 134 20% 65 13% 45 7% 23 100% 335
Increase the number of property standards inspectors 11% 37 24% 82 22% 73 27% 89 16% 54 100% 334
"Green" or other environmentally friendly equipment and
programs 15% 49 34% 113 20% 67 19% 63 12% 40 100% 331
Install additional traffic safety devices 17% 56 27% 90 23% 78 23% 79 10% 34 100% 336
Install additional traffic safety devices 17% 56 27% 90 23% 78 23% 79 10% 34 100% 336
Continue twice per week refuse pick-up 30% 103 30% 103 12% 40 17% 58 11% 36 100% 341


 Question D1: Employment Status
 Are you currently employed for pay? Percent of respondents Count
No 37% 125
Yes, full-time 49% 164
Yes, part-time 14% 48
Total 100% 337




 The National Citizen Survey™
 74
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question D2: Mode of Transportation Used for Commute
During a typical week, how many days do you commute to work (for the longest distance of your commute) in each of Percent of days mode
 the ways listed below? used
Motorized vehicle (e.g., car, truck, van, motorcycle, etc.) by myself 68%
Motorized vehicle (e.g., car, truck, van, motorcycle, etc.) with other children or adults 9%
Bus, rail, subway or other public transportation 10%
Walk 3%
Bicycle 2%
Work at home 7%
Other 0%


 Question D3: Length of Residency
 How many years have you lived in Skokie? Percent of respondents Count
Less than 2 years 6% 22
2 to 5 years 21% 74
6 to 10 years 17% 58
11 to 20 years 17% 58
More than 20 years 38% 132
Total 100% 345


 Question D4: Housing Unit Type
 Which best describes the building you live in? Percent of respondents Count
One family house detached from any other houses 58% 202
House attached to one or more houses (e.g., a duplex or townhome) 4% 14
Building with two or more apartments or condominiums 37% 128
Mobile home 0% 0
Other 1% 2


 The National Citizen Survey™
 75
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Question D4: Housing Unit Type
 Which best describes the building you live in? Percent of respondents Count
Total 100% 347


 Question D5: Housing Tenure (Rent/Own)
 Is this house, apartment or mobile home… Percent of respondents Count
Rented for cash or occupied without cash payment 28% 93
Owned by you or someone in this house with a mortgage or free and clear 72% 241
Total 100% 334


 Question D6: Monthly Housing Cost
About how much is the monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property Percent of
 tax, property insurance and homeowners" association (HOA) fees)? respondents Count
Less than $300 per month 3% 9
$300 to $599 per month 7% 24
$600 to $999 per month 28% 93
$1,000 to $1,499 per month 23% 77
$1,500 to $2,499 per month 27% 91
$2,500 or more per month 12% 39
Total 100% 332


 Question D7: Presence of Children in Household
 Do any children 17 or under live in your household? Percent of respondents Count
No 67% 232
Yes 33% 113
Total 100% 345


 Question D8: Presence of Older Adults in Household


 The National Citizen Survey™
 76
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? Percent of respondents Count
No 70% 242
Yes 30% 104
Total 100% 347




 The National Citizen Survey™
 77
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question D9: Household Income
 How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please Percent of
 include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) respondents Count
Less than $24,999 13% 42
$25,000 to $49,999 30% 98
$50,000 to $99,999 31% 102
$100,000 to $149,999 17% 56
$150,000 or more 8% 28
Total 100% 326


 Question D10: Ethnicity
 Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Percent of respondents Count
No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 96% 316
Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 4% 14
Total 100% 330


 Question D11: Race
 What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race(s) you consider yourself to be.) Percent of respondents Count
American Indian or Alaskan Native 1% 3
Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 23% 76
Black or African American 4% 15
White 68% 227
Other 7% 23
Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option




 The National Citizen Survey™
 78
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question D12: Age
 In which category is your age? Percent of respondents Count
18 to 24 years 7% 24
25 to 34 years 16% 55
35 to 44 years 13% 45
45 to 54 years 21% 71
55 to 64 years 17% 58
65 to 74 years 11% 38
75 years or older 15% 52
Total 100% 344


 Question D13: Gender
 What is your sex? Percent of respondents Count
Female 53% 182
Male 47% 159
Total 100% 341


 Question D14: Registered to Vote
 Are you registered to vote in your jurisdiction? Percent of respondents Count
No 13% 45
Yes 80% 273
Ineligible to vote 3% 11
Don't know 4% 14
Total 100% 343




 The National Citizen Survey™
 79
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question D15: Voted in Last General Election
 Many people don't have time to vote in elections. Did you vote in the last general election? Percent of respondents Count
No 22% 75
Yes 72% 247
Ineligible to vote 4% 13
Don't know 2% 8
Total 100% 343


 Question D16: Has Cell Phone
 Do you have a cell phone? Percent of respondents Count
No 7% 23
Yes 93% 321
Total 100% 344


 Question D17: Has Land Line
 Do you have a land line at home? Percent of respondents Count
No 31% 106
Yes 69% 235
Total 100% 342


 Question D18: Primary Phone
 If you have both a cell phone and a land line, which do you consider your primary telephone number? Percent of respondents Count
Cell 29% 62
Land line 53% 115
Both 18% 40
Total 100% 217



 The National Citizen Survey™
 80
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question D19: Internet Access
 Do you have Internet access? (Please check all that apply) Percent of respondents Count
At home 96% 300
At work 50% 155
On a smart phone 44% 138
Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option




 The National Citizen Survey™
 81
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Appendix B: Survey Methodology
The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS) was developed to provide local jurisdictions an
accurate, affordable and easy way to assess and interpret resident opinion about important
community issues. While standardization of question wording and survey methods provide the
rigor to assure valid results, each jurisdiction has enough flexibility to construct a customized
version of The NCS that asks residents about key local services and important local issues.

Results offer insight into residents’ perspectives about local government performance and as
such provide important benchmarks for jurisdictions working on performance measurement.
The NCS is designed to help with budget, land use and strategic planning as well as to
communicate with local residents. The NCS permits questions to test support for local policies
and answers to its questions also speak to community trust and involvement in community-
building activities as well as to resident demographic characteristics.

 SURVEY VALIDITY
The question of survey validity has two parts: 1) how can a jurisdiction be confident that the
results from those who completed the questionnaire are representative of the results that would
have been obtained had the survey been administered to the entire population? and 2) how
closely do the perspectives recorded on the survey reflect what residents really believe or do?

To answer the first question, the best survey research practices were used for the resources
spent to ensure that the results from the survey respondents reflect the opinions of residents in
the entire jurisdiction. These practices include:

 Using a mail-out/mail-back methodology, which typically gets a higher response rate than
 phone for the same dollars spent. A higher response rate lessens the worry that those who
 did not respond are different than those who did respond.
 Selecting households at random within the jurisdiction to receive the survey. A random
 selection ensures that the households selected to receive the survey are similar to the entire
 population. A non-random sample may only include households from one geographic area,
 or from households of only one type.
 Over-sampling multi-family housing units to improve response from hard-to-reach, lower
 income, or younger apartment dwellers.
 Selecting the respondent within the household using an unbiased sampling procedure; in
 this case, the “birthday method.” The cover letter included an instruction requesting that the
 respondent in the household be the adult (18 years old or older) who most recently had a
 birthday, irrespective of year of birth.
 Contacting potential respondents three times to encourage response from people who may
 have different opinions or habits than those who would respond with only a single prompt.
 Soliciting response on jurisdiction letterhead signed by the highest ranking elected official or
 staff member, thus appealing to the recipients’ sense of civic responsibility.
 Providing a self-addressed, postage-paid return envelope.
 Offering the survey in Spanish when appropriate and requested by Village officials.


 The National Citizen Survey™
 82
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 Using the most recent available information about the characteristics of jurisdiction residents
 to weight the data to reflect the demographics of the population.
The answer to the second question about how closely the perspectives recorded on the survey
reflect what residents really believe or do is more complex. Resident responses to surveys are
influenced by a variety of factors. For questions about service quality, residents’ expectations for
service quality play a role as well as the “objective” quality of the service provided, the way the
resident perceives the entire community (that is, the context in which the service is provided),
the scale on which the resident is asked to record his or her opinion and, of course, the opinion,
itself, that a resident holds about the service. Similarly a resident’s report of certain behaviors is
colored by what he or she believes is the socially desirable response (e.g., reporting tolerant
behaviors toward “oppressed groups,” likelihood of voting a tax increase for services to poor
people, use of alternative modes of travel to work besides the single occupancy vehicle), his or
her memory of the actual behavior (if it is not a question speculating about future actions, like a
vote), his or her confidence that he or she can be honest without suffering any negative
consequences (thus the need for anonymity) as well as the actual behavior itself.

How closely survey results come to recording the way a person really feels or behaves often is
measured by the coincidence of reported behavior with observed current behavior (e.g., driving
habits), reported intentions to behave with observed future behavior (e.g., voting choices) or
reported opinions about current community quality with objective characteristics of the
community (e.g., feelings of safety correlated with rates of crime). There is a body of scientific
literature that has investigated the relationship between reported behaviors and actual
behaviors. Well-conducted surveys, by and large, do capture true respondent behaviors or
intentions to act with great accuracy. Predictions of voting outcomes tend to be quite accurate
using survey research, as do reported behaviors that are not about highly sensitive issues (e.g.,
family abuse or other illegal or morally sanctioned activities). For self-reports about highly
sensitive issues, statistical adjustments can be made to correct for the respondents’ tendency to
report what they think the “correct” response should be.

Research on the correlation of resident opinion about service quality and “objective” ratings of
service quality tend to be ambiguous, some showing stronger relationships than others. NRC’s
own research has demonstrated that residents who report the lowest ratings of street repair live
in communities with objectively worse street conditions than those who report high ratings of
street repair (based on road quality, delay in street repair, number of road repair employees).
Similarly, the lowest rated fire services appear to be “objectively” worse than the highest rated
fire services (expenditures per capita, response time, “professional” status of firefighters, breadth
of services and training provided). Whether or not some research confirms the relationship
between what residents think about a community and what can be seen “objectively” in a
community, NRC has argued that resident opinion is a perspective that cannot be ignored by
government administrators. NRC principals have written, “If you collect trash three times a day
but residents think that your trash haul is lousy, you still have a problem.”




 The National Citizen Survey™
 83
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 SURVEY SAMPLING
“Sampling” refers to the method by which survey recipients were chosen. All households within
the Village of Skokie were eligible to participate in the survey; 1,200 were selected to receive the
survey. These 1,200 households were randomly selected from a comprehensive list of all housing
units within the Village of Skokie boundaries. The basis of the list of all housing units was a
United States Postal Service listing of housing units within zip codes. Since some of the zip
codes that serve the Village of Skokie households may also serve addresses that lie outside of
the jurisdiction, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to jurisdiction
boundaries, using the most current municipal boundary file (updated on a quarterly basis), and
addresses located outside of the Village of Skokie boundaries were removed from consideration.

To choose the 1,200 survey recipients, a systematic sampling method was applied to the list of
households known to be within the Village of Skokie. Systematic sampling is a procedure
whereby a complete list of all possible items is culled, selecting every Nth one until the
appropriate amount of items is selected. Multi-family housing units were over sampled as
residents of this type of housing typically respond at lower rates to surveys than do those in
single-family housing units.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 84
 Village of Skokie | 2012


 FIGURE 88: LOCATION OF SURVEY RECIPIENTS




An individual within each household was selected using the birthday method. The birthday
method selects a person within the household by asking the “person whose birthday has most
recently passed” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is
that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was
contained in the cover letter accompanying the questionnaire.

In response to the growing number of the cell-phone population (so-called “cord cutters”),
which includes a large proportion of young adults, questions about cell phones and land lines


 The National Citizen Survey™
 85
 Village of Skokie | 2012


are included on The NCS™ questionnaire. As of the middle of 2010 (the most recent estimates
available as of the end of 2010), 26.6% of U.S. households had a cell phone but no landline.3
Among younger adults (age 18-34), 53.7% of households were “cell-only.” Based on survey
results, Skokie has a “cord cutter” population greater than the nationwide 2010 estimates.

 FIGURE 89: PREVALENCE OF CELL-PHONE ONLY RESPONDENTS IN SKOKIE

 Overall 30%

 55+ 7%

 35-54 33%

 18-34 68%


 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
 Percent of respondents reporting having a "cell phone" only


 SURVEY ADMINISTRATION
Selected households received three mailings, one week apart, beginning October 1, 2012. The
first mailing was a prenotification postcard announcing the upcoming survey. The next mailing
contained a letter from the Mayor inviting the household to participate, a questionnaire and a
postage-paid return envelope. The final mailing contained a reminder letter, another survey and
a postage-paid return envelope. The second cover letter asked those who had not completed
the survey to do so and those who have already done so to refrain from turning in another
survey. Completed surveys were collected over the following six weeks.

 SURVEY RESPONSE RATE AND CONFIDENCE INTERVALS
It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of
confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of
confidence, and the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and
quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents'
opinions are relied on to estimate all residents' opinions. The confidence interval for the Village
of Skokie survey is no greater than plus or minus five percentage points around any given
percent reported for the entire sample (352 completed surveys).

A 95% confidence interval indicates that for every 100 random samples of this many residents,
95 of the confidence intervals created will include the “true” population response. This theory is
applied in practice to mean that the “true” perspective of the target population lies within the
confidence interval created for a single survey. For example, if 75% of residents rate a service as
“excellent” or “good,” then the 4% margin of error (for the 95% confidence interval) indicates
that the range of likely responses for the entire jurisdiction is between 71% and 79%. This source
of error is called sampling error. In addition to sampling error, other sources of error may affect

3
 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless201012.pdf

 The National Citizen Survey™
 86
 Village of Skokie | 2012


any survey, including the non-response of residents with opinions different from survey
responders. Though standardized on The NCS, on other surveys, differences in question
wording, order, translation and data entry, as examples, can lead to somewhat varying results.

For subgroups of responses, the margin of error increases because the sample size for the
subgroup is smaller. For subgroups of approximately 100 respondents, the margin of error is
plus or minus 10 percentage points

 SURVEY PROCESSING (DATA ENTRY)
Completed surveys received by NRC were assigned a unique identification number. Additionally,
each survey was reviewed and “cleaned” as necessary. For example, a question may have asked a
respondent to pick two items out of a list of five, but the respondent checked three; NRC staff
would choose randomly two of the three selected items to be coded in the dataset.

Once all surveys were assigned a unique identification number, they were entered into an
electronic dataset. This dataset was subject to a data entry protocol of “key and verify,” in which
survey data were entered twice into an electronic dataset and then compared. Discrepancies
were evaluated against the original survey form and corrected. Range checks as well as other
forms of quality control were also performed.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 87
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 SURVEY DATA WEIGHTING
The demographic characteristics of the survey sample were compared to those found in the
2010 Census estimates and other population norms for adults in the Village of Skokie. Sample
results were weighted using the population norms to reflect the appropriate percent of those
residents. Other discrepancies between the whole population and the sample were also aided by
the weighting due to the intercorrelation of many socioeconomic characteristics.

The variables used for weighting were housing tenure, housing unit type and gender and age.
This decision was based on:

 The disparity between the survey respondent characteristics and the population norms for
 these variables
 The saliency of these variables in detecting differences of opinion among subgroups
 The historical use of the variables and the desirability of consistently representing different
 groups over the years
The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey sample reflective of the
larger population of the community. This is done by: 1) reviewing the sample demographics and
comparing them to the population norms from the most recent Census or other sources and 2)
comparing the responses to different questions for demographic subgroups. The demographic
characteristics that are least similar to the Census and yield the most different results are the
best candidates for data weighting. A third criterion sometimes used is the importance that the
community places on a specific variable. For example, if a jurisdiction feels that accurate race
representation is key to staff and public acceptance of the study results, additional consideration
will be given in the weighting process to adjusting the race variable.

A special software program using mathematical algorithms is used to calculate the appropriate
weights. Data weighting can adjust up to 5 demographic variables. Several different weighting
“schemes” may be tested to ensure the best fit for the data.

The process actually begins at the point of sampling. Knowing that residents in single family
dwellings are more likely to respond to a mail survey, NRC oversamples residents of multi-family
dwellings to ensure their proper representation in the sample data. Rather than giving all
residents an equal chance of receiving the survey, this is systematic, stratified sampling, which
gives each resident of the jurisdiction a known chance of receiving the survey (and apartment
dwellers, for example, a greater chance than single family home dwellers). As a consequence,
results must be weighted to recapture the proper representation of apartment dwellers.

The results of the weighting scheme are presented in the table on the following page.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 88
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Skokie, IL Citizen Survey Weighting Table
 Characteristic Population Norm1 Unweighted Data Weighted Data
Housing
Rent home 28% 19% 28%
Own home 72% 81% 72%
Detached unit 58% 54% 58%
Attached unit 42% 46% 42%
Race and Ethnicity
White 63% 70% 65%
Not white 37% 30% 35%
Not Hispanic 92% 96% 96%
Hispanic 8% 4% 4%
White alone, not Hispanic 58% 67% 63%
Hispanic and/or other race 42% 33% 37%
Sex and Age
Female 54% 62% 53%
Male 46% 38% 47%
18-34 years of age 24% 8% 23%
35-54 years of age 35% 29% 34%
55+ years of age 41% 63% 43%
Females 18-34 12% 5% 12%
Females 35-54 18% 19% 18%
Females 55+ 23% 38% 23%
Males 18-34 12% 3% 12%
Males 35-54 16% 10% 16%
Males 55+ 18% 25% 19%
1
 Source: 2010 Census/2005-2009 ACS




 The National Citizen Survey™
 89
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING
The survey dataset was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
Frequency distributions were presented in the body of the report.

 Use of the “Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor” Response Scale
The scale on which respondents are asked to record their opinions about service and community
quality is “excellent,” “good,” “fair” or “poor” (EGFP). This scale has important advantages over
other scale possibilities (very good to very bad; very satisfied to very dissatisfied; strongly agree
to strongly disagree, as examples). EGFP is used by the plurality of jurisdictions conducting
citizen surveys across the U.S. The advantage of familiarity was one that NRC did not want to
dismiss when crafting The National Citizen Survey™ questionnaire, because elected officials, staff
and residents already are acquainted with opinion surveys measured this way. EGFP also has the
advantage of offering three positive options, rather than only two, over which a resident can
offer an opinion. While symmetrical scales often are the right choice in other measurement
tasks, NRC has found that ratings of almost every local government service in almost every
jurisdiction tend, on average, to be positive (that is, above the scale midpoint). Therefore, to
permit finer distinctions among positively rated services, EGFP offers three options across which
to spread those ratings. EGFP is more neutral because it requires no positive statement of
service quality to judge (as agree-disagree scales require) and, finally, EGFP intends to measure
absolute quality of service delivery or community quality (unlike satisfaction scales which ignore
residents’ perceptions of quality in favor of their report on the acceptability of the level of
service offered).

 “Don’t Know” Responses
On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion
of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix A.
However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the
report. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had
an opinion about a specific item.

 Benchmark Comparisons
NRC has been leading the strategic use of surveys for local governments since 1991, when the
principals of the company wrote the first edition of what became the classic text on citizen
surveying. In Citizen Surveys: how to do them, how to use them, what they mean, published by
ICMA, not only were the principles for quality survey methods articulated, but both the idea of
benchmark data for citizen opinion and the method for gathering benchmark data were
pioneered. The argument for benchmarks was called “In Search of Standards.” “What has been
missing from a local government’s analysis of its survey results is the context that school
administrators can supply when they tell parents how an 80 percent score on the social studies
test compares to test results from other school systems...”



 The National Citizen Survey™
 90
 Village of Skokie | 2012


NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered
in citizen surveys from approximately 500 jurisdictions whose residents evaluated local
government services. Conducted with typically no fewer than 400 residents in each jurisdiction,
opinions are intended to represent over 30 million Americans. NRC has innovated a method for
quantitatively integrating the results of surveys that are conducted by NRC with those that
others have conducted. The integration methods have been thoroughly described not only in
the Citizen Surveys book, but also in Public Administration Review, Journal of Policy Analysis and
Management. Scholars who specialize in the analysis of citizen surveys regularly have relied on
this work (e.g., Kelly, J. & Swindell, D. (2002). Service quality variation across urban space: First
steps towards a model of citizen satisfaction. Journal of Urban Affairs, 24, 271-288.; Van Ryzin, G.,
Muzzio, D., Immerwahr, S., Gulick, L. & Martinez, E. (2004). Drivers and consequences of citizen
satisfaction: An application of the American Customer Satisfaction Index Model to New York
City, Public Administration Review, 64, 331- 341). The method described in those publications is
refined regularly and statistically tested on a growing number of citizen surveys in NRC’s
proprietary databases. NRC’s work on calculating national benchmarks for resident opinions
about service delivery and quality of life won the Samuel C. May award for research excellence
from the Western Governmental Research Association.

The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each jurisdiction;
most communities conduct surveys every year or in alternating years. NRC adds the latest results
quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant.

 The Role of Comparisons
Benchmark comparisons are used for performance measurement. Jurisdictions use the
comparative information to help interpret their own citizen survey results, to create or revise
community plans, to evaluate the success of policy or budget decisions and to measure local
government performance. Taking the pulse of the community has little meaning without
knowing what pulse rate is too high and what is too low. When surveys of service satisfaction
turn up “good” citizen evaluations, jurisdictions need to know how others rate their services to
understand if “good” is good enough. Furthermore, in the absence of national or peer
community comparisons, a jurisdiction is left with comparing its fire protection rating to its
street maintenance rating. That comparison is unfair. Streets always lose to fire. More important
and harder questions need to be asked; for example, how do residents’ ratings of fire service
compare to opinions about fire service in other communities?

A police department that provides the fastest and most efficient service – one that closes most
of its cases, solves most of its crimes and keeps the crime rate low – still has a problem to fix if
the residents in the community it intends to protect believe services are not very good
compared to ratings given by residents to their own objectively “worse” departments. The
benchmark data can help that police department – or any department – to understand how well
citizens think it is doing. Without the comparative data, it would be like bowling in a tournament
without knowing what the other teams are scoring. NRC recommends that citizen opinion be
used in conjunction with other sources of data about budget, personnel and politics to help
managers know how to respond to comparative results.


 The National Citizen Survey™
 91
 Village of Skokie | 2012


Jurisdictions in the benchmark database are distributed geographically across the country and
range from small to large in population size. Most commonly, comparisons are made to the
entire database. Comparisons may also be made to subsets of jurisdictions (for example, within
a given region or population category). Despite the differences in jurisdiction characteristics, all
are in the business of providing local government services to residents. Though individual
jurisdiction circumstances, resources and practices vary, the objective in every community is to
provide services that are so timely, tailored and effective that residents conclude the services are
of the highest quality. High ratings in any jurisdiction, like SAT scores in any teen household,
bring pride and a sense of accomplishment.

 Comparison of Skokie to the Benchmark Database
The Village of Skokie chose to have comparisons made to the entire database. A benchmark
comparison (the average rating from all the comparison jurisdictions where a similar question
was asked) has been provided when a similar question on the Village of Skokie Survey was
included in NRC’s database and there were at least five jurisdictions in which the question was
asked. For most questions compared to the entire dataset, there were more than 100
jurisdictions included in the benchmark comparison.
Where comparisons for quality ratings were available, the Village of Skokie results were
generally noted as being “above” the benchmark, “below” the benchmark or “similar” to the
benchmark. For some questions – those related to resident behavior, circumstance or to a local
problem – the comparison to the benchmark is designated as “more,” “similar” or “less” (for
example, the percent of crime victims, residents visiting a park or residents identifying code
enforcement as a problem.) In instances where ratings are considerably higher or lower than the
benchmark, these ratings have been further demarcated by the attribute of “much,” (for
example, “much less” or “much above”). These labels come from a statistical comparison of the
Village of Skokie's rating to the benchmark where a rating is considered “similar” if it is within
the margin of error; “above,” “below,” “more” or “less” if the difference between your
jurisdiction’s rating and the benchmark is greater the margin of error; and “much above,” “much
below,” “much more” or “much less” if the difference between your jurisdiction’s rating and the
benchmark is more than twice the margin of error.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 92
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Appendix C: Survey Materials
The following pages contain copies of the survey materials sent to randomly selected
households within the Village of Skokie.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 93
 The National Citizen Survey™


 VILLAGE OF SKOKIE, IL
 2012

 DRAFT Benchmark Report




2955 Valmont Road, Suite 300 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500
 Boulder, CO 80301 Washington, DC 20002
www.n-r-c.com • 303-444-7863 www.icma.org • 202-289-ICMA
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Contents
 Understanding the Benchmark Comparisons ...................................................................... 1 
 Comparison Data ..................................................................................................................... 1
 Putting Evaluations onto the 100-point Scale ............................................................................ 2
 Interpreting the Results ............................................................................................................. 3
 National Benchmark Comparisons...................................................................................... 4 
 Jurisdictions Included in National Benchmark Comparisons ................................................... 12




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Understanding the Benchmark
 Comparisons
 COMPARISON DATA
 NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in
 citizen surveys from approximately 500 jurisdictions whose residents evaluated local government
 services and gave their opinion about the quality of community life. The comparison evaluations
 are from the most recent survey completed in each jurisdiction; most communities conduct surveys
 every year or in alternating years. NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion,
 keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant.
 The jurisdictions in the database represent a wide geographic and population range as shown in the
 table below.

 Jurisdiction Characteristic Percent of Jurisdictions
 Region
 West Coast1 17%
 West2 20%
 3
 North Central West 11%
 4
 North Central East 13%
 South Central5 7%
 6
 South 26%
 Northeast West7 2%
 8
 Northeast East 4%
 Population
 Less than 40,000 46%
 40,000 to 74,999 19%
 75,000 to 149,000 17%
 150,000 or more 18%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 1
 Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii
 2
 Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico
 3
 North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota
 4
 Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin
 5
 Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas
 6
 West Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Maryland,
 Delaware, Washington DC
 7
 New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey
 8
 Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine

 The National Citizen Survey™
 1
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 PUTTING EVALUATIONS ONTO THE 100-POINT SCALE
 Although responses to many of the evaluative questions were made on a four point scale with 1
 representing the best rating and 4 the worst, the benchmarks are reported on a common scale
 where 0 is the worst possible rating and 100 is the best possible rating. The 95 percent confidence
 interval around an average score on the 100-point scale is no greater than plus or minus three
 points based on all respondents.

 The 100-point scale is not a percent. It is a conversion of responses to an average rating. Each
 response option is assigned a value that is used in calculating the average score. For example,
 “excellent”=100, “good”=67, “fair”=33 and “poor”=0. If everyone reported “excellent,” then the
 average rating would be 100 on the 100-point scale. Likewise, if all respondents gave a “poor”, the
 result would be 0 on the 100-point scale. If half the respondents gave a score of “excellent” and
 half gave a score of “poor,” the average would be in the middle of the scale (like the center post of
 a teeter totter) between “fair” and “good.” An example of how to convert survey frequencies into an
 average rating appears below.

 Example of Converting Responses to the 100-point Scale
 How do you rate the community as a place to live?
 Total Step 2: Step 4: Sum
 Total with Step1: Remove the without Assign Step 3: Multiply to calculate
 Response “don’t percent of “don’t “don’t scale the percent by the average
 option know” know” responses know” values the scale value rating
 Excellent 36% =36÷(100-5)= 38% 100 =38% x 100 = 38
 Good 42% =42÷(100-5)= 44% 67 =44% x 67 = 30
 Fair 12% =12÷(100-5)= 13% 33 =13% x 33 = 4
 Poor 5% =5÷(100-5)= 5% 0 =5% x 0 = 0
 Don’t know 5% --
 Total 100% 100% 72


 How do you rate the community as a place to live?

 5% 13% 44% 38%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 0 33 67 100
 72
 Poor Fair Good Excellent




 The National Citizen Survey™
 2
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 INTERPRETING THE RESULTS
 Average ratings are compared when similar questions are included in NRC’s database, and there
 are at least five jurisdictions in which the question was asked. Where comparisons are available,
 three numbers are provided in the table. The first column is your jurisdiction’s rating on the 100-
 point scale. The second column is the rank assigned to your jurisdiction’s rating among
 jurisdictions where a similar question was asked. The third column is the number of jurisdictions
 that asked a similar question. The final column shows the comparison of your jurisdiction’s average
 rating to the benchmark.

 Where comparisons for quality ratings were available, the Village of Skokie’s results were generally
 noted as being “above” the benchmark, “below” the benchmark or “similar” to the benchmark. For
 some questions – those related to resident behavior, circumstance or to a local problem – the
 comparison to the benchmark is designated as “more,” “similar” or “less” (for example, the percent
 of crime victims, residents visiting a park or residents identifying code enforcement as a problem.)
 In instances where ratings are considerably higher or lower than the benchmark, these ratings have
 been further demarcated by the attribute of “much,” (for example, “much less” or “much above”).
 These labels come from a statistical comparison of the Village of Skokie's rating to the benchmark
 where a rating is considered “similar” if it is within the margin of error; “above,” “below,” “more”
 or “less” if the difference between your jurisdiction’s rating and the benchmark is greater the
 margin of error; and “much above,” “much below,” “much more” or “much less” if the difference
 between your jurisdiction’s rating and the benchmark is more than twice the margin of error.

 This report contains benchmarks at the national level.




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 3
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 National Benchmark Comparisons
 Overall Community Quality Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Overall quality of life in Skokie 68 210 412 Similar
 Your neighborhood as place to live 68 164 275 Similar
 Skokie as a place to live 74 165 340 Similar
 Recommend living in Skokie to
 someone who asks 76 113 210 Similar
 Remain in Skokie for the next five
 years 76 132 210 Similar


 Community Transportation Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Ease of car travel in Skokie 70 13 272 Much above
 Ease of bus travel in Skokie 64 9 197 Much above
 Ease of rail or subway travel
 in Skokie 70 12 57 Much above
 Ease of bicycle travel in
 Skokie 57 70 269 Much above
 Ease of walking in Skokie 65 70 263 Much above
 Availability of paths and
 walking trails 59 87 208 Above
 Traffic flow on major streets 54 59 264 Much above


 Frequency of Bus Use Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Ridden a local bus within
 Skokie 34 35 171 Much more




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Drive Alone Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions Comparison to
 rating Rank for Comparison benchmark
 Average percent of work commute
 trips made by driving alone 68 156 197 Less




 The National Citizen Survey™
 4
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Transportation and Parking Services Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Street repair 52 139 393 Above
 Street cleaning 65 55 266 Much above
 Street lighting 59 74 289 Above
 Snow removal 63 66 258 Much above
 Sidewalk maintenance 58 54 253 Much above
 Bus or transit services 68 9 200 Much above
 Amount of public
 parking 60 19 207 Much above


 Housing Characteristics Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Availability of affordable
 quality housing 54 44 275 Much above
 Variety of housing options 63 31 204 Much above


 Housing Costs Benchmarks
 Skokie
 average Number of Jurisdictions Comparison to
 rating Rank for Comparison benchmark
 Experiencing housing costs stress
 (housing costs 30% or MORE of income) 42 50 199 More


 Built Environment Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Quality of new development
 in Skokie 62 55 255 Much above




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Overall appearance of Skokie 66 115 312 Above


 Population Growth Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Population growth seen as
 too fast 32 150 231 Much less




 The National Citizen Survey™
 5
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Planning and Community Code Enforcement Services Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Land use, planning and zoning 62 12 274 Much above
 Code enforcement (weeds,
 abandoned buildings, etc.) 55 79 327 Much above
 Animal control 64 41 286 Much above


 Economic Sustainability and Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie Number of Jurisdictions Comparison to
 average rating Rank for Comparison benchmark
 Employment opportunities 47 43 278 Much above
 Shopping opportunities 74 18 263 Much above
 Skokie as a place to work 65 70 306 Much above
 Overall quality of business and service
 establishments in Skokie 63 55 199 Much above


 Economic Development Services Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Economic
 development 55 52 260 Much above


 Job and Retail Growth Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Retail growth seen as
 too slow 49 66 231 Much more
 Jobs growth seen as too
 slow 72 150 233 Less




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Personal Economic Future Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Positive impact of economy on
 household income 23 46 225 Above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 6
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Community and Personal Public Safety Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 In your neighborhood during the
 day 84 244 308 Below
 In your neighborhood after dark 63 255 298 Much below
 In Skokie's downtown area
 during the day 87 134 263 Similar
 In Skokie's downtown area after
 dark 68 123 269 Above
 Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault,
 robbery) 67 189 267 Much below
 Property crimes (e.g., burglary,
 theft) 54 206 268 Much below
 Environmental hazards, including
 toxic waste 76 116 204 Similar


 Crime Victimization and Reporting Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Victim of crime 16 51 238 More
 Reported
 crimes 71 194 236 Much less


 Public Safety Services Benchmarks
 Skokie Number of
 average Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Police services 77 44 382 Much above
 Fire services 85 18 310 Much above
 Ambulance or emergency medical services 84 27 295 Much above
 Crime prevention 59 164 311 Similar




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Fire prevention and education 72 57 254 Above
 Traffic enforcement 64 60 330 Much above
 Emergency preparedness (services that prepare
 the community for natural disasters or other
 emergency situations) 63 57 223 Much above


 Community Environment Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Cleanliness of Skokie 71 63 211 Much above
 Quality of overall natural
 environment in Skokie 63 100 212 Similar
 Air quality 62 113 219 Similar




 The National Citizen Survey™
 7
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Frequency of Recycling Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Recycled used paper, cans or
 bottles from your home 87 108 222 More


 Utility Services Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Electric utility
 service 67 49 110 Similar
 Sewer services 62 170 275 Similar
 Drinking water 71 43 289 Much above
 Storm drainage 53 190 326 Similar
 Yard waste pick-up 70 71 228 Above
 Recycling 77 36 309 Much above
 Garbage collection 80 21 317 Much above


 Community Recreational Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Recreation
 opportunities 69 52 274 Much above


 Participation in Parks and Recreation Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Participated in a recreation
 program or activity 60 23 223 Much more
 Visited a neighborhood park or
 Village park 88 89 231 Similar




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Parks and Recreation Services Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Village
 parks 77 63 287 Much above


 Cultural and Educational Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Opportunities to attend cultural
 activities 69 16 279 Much above
 Educational opportunities 72 31 242 Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 8
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Participation in Cultural and Educational Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Used Skokie Public Library or
 its services 89 5 204 Much more


 Community Health and Wellness Access and Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Availability of affordable quality
 health care 61 38 226 Much above
 Availability of preventive health
 services 62 37 159 Much above


 Health and Wellness Services Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Skokie Health Department
 services 73 9 174 Much above


 Community Quality and Inclusiveness Benchmarks
 Skokie
 average Number of Jurisdictions Comparison to
 rating Rank for Comparison benchmark
 Sense of community 62 88 280 Above
 Openness and acceptance of the
 community toward people of diverse
 backgrounds 70 11 256 Much above
 Availability of affordable quality child care 57 22 225 Much above
 Skokie as a place to raise kids 72 148 339 Above
 Skokie as a place to retire 59 177 325 Similar




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Services Provided for Population Subgroups Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Services to seniors 74 10 276 Much above
 Services to youth 65 43 255 Much above
 Services to low income
 people 59 10 229 Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 9
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Civic Engagement Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Opportunities to participate in
 community matters 63 50 203 Above
 Opportunities to volunteer 65 93 203 Similar


 Participation in Civic Engagement Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie Number of
 average Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Attended a meeting of local elected officials or
 other local public meeting 19 193 233 Much less
 Watched a meeting of local elected officials or
 other public meeting on cable television, the
 Internet or other media 26 157 188 Much less
 Volunteered your time to some group or activity
 in Skokie 22 225 231 Much less


 Voter Behavior Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Registered to vote 83 131 234 Similar
 Voted in last general
 election 74 117 234 Similar


 Use of Information Sources Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Read NewSkokie newsletter 93 22 168 Much more
 Visited the Village of Skokie
 Web site 70 35 196 Much more




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Local Government Media Services and Information Dissemination Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Cable
 television 57 34 170 Above


 Social Engagement Opportunities Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Opportunities to participate in social
 events and activities 65 45 196 Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 10
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Contact with Immediate Neighbors Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Has contact with neighbors at least
 several times per week 48 103 189 Similar


 Public Trust Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions Comparison to
 rating Rank for Comparison benchmark
 Value of services for the taxes paid to
 Skokie 58 60 364 Much above
 The overall direction that Skokie is
 taking 57 80 303 Much above
 Job Skokie government does at
 welcoming citizen involvement 59 34 296 Much above
 Overall image or reputation of Skokie 63 143 297 Similar


 Services Provided by Local, State and Federal Governments Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Services provided by the Village
 of Skokie 73 30 381 Much above
 Services provided by the Federal
 Government 51 4 236 Much above
 Services provided by the State
 Government 42 128 237 Similar
 Services provided by Cook
 County Government 40 156 173 Much below


 Contact with Village Employees Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Had contact with Village
 employee(s) in last 12 months 73 9 270 Much more


 Perceptions of Village Employees (Among Those Who Had Contact) Benchmarks
 Skokie average Number of Jurisdictions for Comparison to
 rating Rank Comparison benchmark
 Knowledge 76 66 303 Above
 Responsiveness 77 36 299 Much above
 Courteousness 76 79 251 Above
 Overall
 impression 75 66 344 Much above




 The National Citizen Survey™
 11
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 JURISDICTIONS INCLUDED IN NATIONAL BENCHMARK COMPARISONS
 Valdez, AK ...................................... 3,976 Livermore, CA ............................... 80,968
 Auburn, AL.................................... 53,380 Lodi, CA ....................................... 62,134
 Dothan, AL .................................... 65,496 Long Beach, CA .......................... 462,257
 Gulf Shores, AL ............................... 9,741 Marin County, CA ....................... 252,409
 Tuskegee, AL ................................... 9,865 Menlo Park, CA............................. 32,026
 Vestavia Hills, AL .......................... 34,033 Mission Viejo, CA ......................... 93,305
 Fayetteville, AR ............................. 73,580 Newport Beach, CA ...................... 85,186
 Fort Smith, AR ............................... 86,209 Palm Springs, CA .......................... 44,552
 Little Rock, AR ............................ 193,524 Palo Alto, CA ................................ 64,403
 Avondale, AZ ................................ 76,238 Pasadena, CA .............................. 137,122
 Casa Grande, AZ ........................... 48,571 Richmond, CA ............................ 103,701
 Chandler, AZ ............................... 236,123 San Carlos, CA .............................. 28,406
 Cococino County, AZ .................. 134,421 San Diego, CA ......................... 1,307,402
 Dewey-Humboldt, AZ ..................... 3,894 San Francisco, CA ....................... 805,235
 Flagstaff, AZ .................................. 65,870 San Luis Obispo County, CA ....... 269,637
 Florence, AZ ................................. 25,536 San Mateo, CA .............................. 97,207
 Gilbert, AZ .................................. 208,453 San Rafael, CA .............................. 57,713
 Goodyear, AZ ............................... 65,275 Santa Monica, CA ......................... 89,736
 Green Valley, AZ .......................... 21,391 Seaside, CA ................................... 33,025
 Kingman, AZ ................................. 28,068 South Lake Tahoe, CA ................... 21,403
 Marana, AZ ................................... 34,961 Stockton, CA ............................... 291,707
 Maricopa, AZ ................................ 43,482 Sunnyvale, CA ............................ 140,081
 Maricopa County, AZ ............... 3,817,117 Temecula, CA ............................. 100,097
 Mesa, AZ ..................................... 439,041 Thousand Oaks, CA .................... 126,683
 Nogales, AZ .................................. 20,837 Visalia, CA .................................. 124,442
 Peoria, AZ ................................... 154,065 Walnut Creek, CA ......................... 64,173
 Phoenix, AZ ............................. 1,445,632 Adams County, CO ..................... 441,603
 Pinal County, AZ ......................... 375,770 Arapahoe County, CO................. 572,003
 Prescott Valley, AZ ........................ 38,822 Archuleta County, CO................... 12,084
 Queen Creek, AZ .......................... 26,361 Arvada, CO ................................. 106,433
 Scottsdale, AZ ............................. 217,385 Aspen, CO ...................................... 6,658
 Sedona, AZ ................................... 10,031 Aurora, CO ................................. 325,078
 Surprise, AZ ................................ 117,517 Boulder, CO ................................. 97,385
 Tempe, AZ .................................. 161,719 Boulder County, CO ................... 294,567




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Yuma, AZ ...................................... 93,064 Broomfield, CO ............................ 55,889
 Yuma County, AZ ........................ 195,751 Castle Rock, CO............................ 48,231
 Apple Valley, CA ........................... 69,135 Centennial, CO ........................... 100,377
 Benicia, CA ................................... 26,997 Clear Creek County, CO ................. 9,088
 Brea, CA ........................................ 39,282 Colorado Springs, CO ................. 416,427
 Brisbane, CA ................................... 4,282 Commerce City, CO...................... 45,913
 Burlingame, CA ............................. 28,806 Craig, CO........................................ 9,464
 Concord, CA ............................... 122,067 Crested Butte, CO ........................... 1,487
 Coronado, CA ............................... 18,912 Denver, CO ................................ 600,158
 Cupertino, CA ............................... 58,302 Douglas County, CO ................... 285,465
 Davis, CA ...................................... 65,622 Eagle County, CO ......................... 52,197
 Dublin, CA .................................... 46,036 Edgewater, CO ................................ 5,170
 El Cerrito, CA ................................ 23,549 El Paso County, CO..................... 622,263
 Elk Grove, CA ............................. 153,015 Englewood, CO ............................ 30,255
 Galt, CA ........................................ 23,647 Estes Park, CO................................. 5,858
 Laguna Beach, CA ......................... 22,723 Fort Collins, CO .......................... 143,986
 Laguna Hills, CA ........................... 30,344 Frisco, CO....................................... 2,683


 The National Citizen Survey™
 12
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Fruita, CO ..................................... 12,646 Miami Beach, FL ........................... 87,779
 Georgetown, CO ............................. 1,034 North Palm Beach, FL ................... 12,015
 Gilpin County, CO .......................... 5,441 Oakland Park, FL .......................... 41,363
 Golden, CO .................................. 18,867 Ocala, FL ...................................... 56,315
 Grand County, CO ........................ 14,843 Oviedo, FL .................................... 33,342
 Greeley, CO .................................. 92,889 Palm Bay, FL ............................... 103,190
 Gunnison County, CO................... 15,324 Palm Beach County, FL ............ 1,320,134
 Highlands Ranch, CO.................... 96,713 Palm Coast, FL .............................. 75,180
 Hudson, CO .................................... 2,356 Panama City, FL ............................ 36,484
 Jackson County, CO ........................ 1,394 Pasco County, FL ........................ 464,697
 Jefferson County, CO................... 534,543 Pinellas County, FL ..................... 916,542
 Lafayette, CO ................................ 24,453 Port Orange, FL ............................. 56,048
 Lakewood, CO ............................ 142,980 Port St. Lucie, FL ......................... 164,603
 Larimer County, CO .................... 299,630 Sanford, FL .................................... 53,570
 Lone Tree, CO............................... 10,218 Sarasota, FL ................................... 51,917
 Longmont, CO .............................. 86,270 St. Cloud, FL ................................. 35,183
 Louisville, CO ............................... 18,376 Titusville, FL ................................. 43,761
 Loveland, CO ................................ 66,859 Winter Garden, FL ........................ 34,568
 Mesa County, CO ........................ 146,723 Albany, GA ................................... 77,434
 Montrose, CO ............................... 19,132 Alpharetta, GA .............................. 57,551
 Northglenn, CO ............................ 35,789 Cartersville, GA............................. 19,731
 Park County, CO ........................... 16,206 Conyers, GA ................................. 15,195
 Parker, CO .................................... 45,297 Decatur, GA.................................. 19,335
 Pueblo, CO ................................. 106,595 McDonough, GA .......................... 22,084
 Rifle, CO ......................................... 9,172 Peachtree City, GA........................ 34,364
 Salida, CO ....................................... 5,236 Roswell, GA .................................. 88,346
 Teller County, CO ......................... 23,350 Sandy Springs, GA ........................ 93,853
 Thornton, CO .............................. 118,772 Savannah, GA ............................. 136,286
 Vail, CO .......................................... 5,305 Smyrna, GA .................................. 51,271
 Westminster, CO ......................... 106,114 Snellville, GA ................................ 18,242
 Wheat Ridge, CO .......................... 30,166 Suwanee, GA ................................ 15,355
 Windsor, CO ................................. 18,644 Valdosta, GA................................. 54,518
 Coventry, CT ................................... 2,990 Honolulu, HI .............................. 953,207
 Hartford, CT ................................ 124,775 Altoona, IA.................................... 14,541
 Dover, DE ..................................... 36,047 Ames, IA ....................................... 58,965
 Rehoboth Beach, DE ....................... 1,327 Ankeny, IA .................................... 45,582




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Brevard County, FL...................... 543,376 Bettendorf, IA ................................ 33,217
 Cape Coral, FL............................. 154,305 Cedar Falls, IA............................... 39,260
 Charlotte County, FL ................... 159,978 Cedar Rapids, IA ......................... 126,326
 Clearwater, FL ............................. 107,685 Clive, IA ........................................ 15,447
 Collier County, FL ....................... 321,520 Des Moines, IA ........................... 203,433
 Cooper City, FL ............................. 28,547 Indianola, IA ................................. 14,782
 Dade City, FL .................................. 6,437 Muscatine, IA ................................ 22,886
 Dania Beach, FL ............................ 29,639 Urbandale, IA ............................... 39,463
 Daytona Beach, FL ........................ 61,005 West Des Moines, IA .................... 56,609
 Delray Beach, FL ........................... 60,522 Boise, ID ..................................... 205,671
 Destin, FL ...................................... 12,305 Hailey, ID ....................................... 7,960
 Escambia County, FL ................... 297,619 Jerome, ID .................................... 10,890
 Gainesville, FL ............................ 124,354 Meridian, ID ................................. 75,092
 Hillsborough County, FL .......... 1,229,226 Moscow, ID .................................. 23,800
 Jupiter, FL ...................................... 55,156 Pocatello, ID ................................. 54,255
 Lee County, FL ............................ 618,754 Post Falls, ID ................................. 27,574
 Martin County, FL ....................... 146,318 Twin Falls, ID................................ 44,125


 The National Citizen Survey™
 13
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Batavia, IL ..................................... 26,045 Montgomery County, MD ........... 971,777
 Bloomington, IL............................. 76,610 Prince George's County, MD ...... 863,420
 Centralia, IL ................................... 13,032 Rockville, MD ............................... 61,209
 Collinsville, IL ............................... 25,579 Takoma Park, MD ......................... 16,715
 Crystal Lake, IL .............................. 40,743 Freeport, ME ................................... 1,485
 DeKalb, IL ..................................... 43,862 Lewiston, ME ................................ 36,592
 Elmhurst, IL ................................... 44,121 Saco, ME ....................................... 18,482
 Evanston, IL ................................... 74,486 Scarborough, ME............................. 4,403
 Freeport, IL .................................... 25,638 South Portland, ME ....................... 25,002
 Highland Park, IL........................... 29,763 Ann Arbor, MI ............................. 113,934
 Lincolnwood, IL ............................ 12,590 Battle Creek, MI ............................ 52,347
 Lyons, IL........................................ 10,729 Escanaba, MI ................................. 12,616
 Naperville, IL .............................. 141,853 Farmington Hills, MI ..................... 79,740
 Normal, IL ..................................... 52,497 Flushing, MI .................................... 8,389
 Oak Park, IL .................................. 51,878 Gladstone, MI ................................. 4,973
 O'Fallon, IL ................................... 28,281 Howell, MI ..................................... 9,489
 Orland Park, IL .............................. 56,767 Hudsonville, MI .............................. 7,116
 Palatine, IL .................................... 68,557 Jackson County, MI ..................... 160,248
 Park Ridge, IL ................................ 37,480 Kalamazoo, MI .............................. 74,262
 Peoria County, IL ......................... 186,494 Kalamazoo County, MI ............... 250,331
 Riverside, IL .................................... 8,875 Midland, MI .................................. 41,863
 Sherman, IL ..................................... 4,148 Novi, MI ....................................... 55,224
 Shorewood, IL ............................... 15,615 Otsego County, MI ........................ 24,164
 Sugar Grove, IL ............................... 8,997 Petoskey, MI ................................... 5,670
 Wilmington, IL ................................ 5,724 Port Huron, MI .............................. 30,184
 Brownsburg, IN ............................. 21,285 Rochester, MI ................................ 12,711
 Fishers, IN ..................................... 76,794 South Haven, MI ............................. 4,403
 Munster, IN ................................... 23,603 Albert Lea, MN ............................. 18,016
 Noblesville, IN .............................. 51,969 Beltrami County, MN .................... 44,442
 Abilene, KS ..................................... 6,844 Blaine, MN ................................... 57,186
 Arkansas City, KS........................... 12,415 Bloomington, MN ......................... 82,893
 Fairway, KS ..................................... 3,882 Carver County, MN ....................... 91,042
 Garden City, KS............................. 26,658 Chanhassen, MN ........................... 22,952
 Gardner, KS ................................... 19,123 Coon Rapids, MN ......................... 61,476
 Johnson County, KS ..................... 544,179 Dakota County, MN .................... 398,552
 Lawrence, KS................................. 87,643 Duluth, MN .................................. 86,265




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Mission, KS ..................................... 9,323 Edina, MN..................................... 47,941
 Olathe, KS ................................... 125,872 Elk River, MN ............................... 22,974
 Roeland Park, KS ............................. 6,731 Fridley, MN .................................. 27,208
 Wichita, KS ................................. 382,368 Hutchinson, MN ........................... 14,178
 Bowling Green, KY........................ 58,067 Inver Grove Heights, MN .............. 33,880
 New Orleans, LA......................... 343,829 Mankato, MN................................ 39,309
 Andover, MA................................... 8,762 Maple Grove, MN ......................... 61,567
 Barnstable, MA .............................. 45,193 Mayer, MN ..................................... 1,749
 Burlington, MA.............................. 24,498 Minneapolis, MN ........................ 382,578
 Cambridge, MA ........................... 105,162 Olmsted County, MN .................. 144,248
 Needham, MA ............................... 28,886 Savage, MN .................................. 26,911
 Annapolis, MD .............................. 38,394 Scott County, MN ....................... 129,928
 Baltimore, MD ............................ 620,961 Shorewood, MN ............................. 7,307
 Baltimore County, MD ................ 805,029 St. Louis County, MN .................. 200,226
 Dorchester County, MD ................ 32,618 Washington County, MN ............ 238,136
 Gaithersburg, MD ......................... 59,933 Woodbury, MN ............................ 61,961
 La Plata, MD ................................... 8,753 Blue Springs, MO .......................... 52,575


 The National Citizen Survey™
 14
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Branson, MO ................................. 10,520 Washoe County, NV ................... 421,407
 Cape Girardeau, MO ..................... 37,941 Geneva, NY .................................. 13,261
 Clay County, MO ........................ 221,939 New York City, NY .................. 8,175,133
 Clayton, MO ................................. 15,939 Ogdensburg, NY ........................... 11,128
 Columbia, MO ............................ 108,500 Blue Ash, OH ............................... 12,114
 Ellisville, MO .................................. 9,133 Delaware, OH .............................. 34,753
 Harrisonville, MO ......................... 10,019 Dublin, OH .................................. 41,751
 Jefferson City, MO ......................... 43,079 Hamilton, OH ............................... 62,477
 Lee's Summit, MO......................... 91,364 Hudson, OH ................................. 22,262
 Maryland Heights, MO .................. 27,472 Kettering, OH ............................... 56,163
 Platte City, MO ............................... 4,691 Orange Village, OH ........................ 3,323
 Raymore, MO ............................... 19,206 Piqua, OH..................................... 20,522
 Richmond Heights, MO .................. 8,603 Springboro, OH ............................ 17,409
 Riverside, MO ................................. 2,937 Sylvania Township, OH ................ 18,965
 Rolla, MO ..................................... 19,559 Upper Arlington, OH .................... 33,771
 Wentzville, MO ............................ 29,070 Broken Arrow, OK ........................ 98,850
 Billings, MT ................................. 104,170 Edmond, OK ................................. 81,405
 Bozeman, MT................................ 37,280 Norman, OK ............................... 110,925
 Missoula, MT ................................ 66,788 Oklahoma City, OK .................... 579,999
 Asheville, NC ................................ 83,393 Stillwater, OK................................ 45,688
 Cabarrus County, NC .................. 178,011 Tulsa, OK .................................... 391,906
 Cary, NC ..................................... 135,234 Albany, OR ................................... 50,158
 Charlotte, NC .............................. 731,424 Ashland, OR ................................. 20,078
 Davidson, NC ............................... 10,944 Bend, OR ...................................... 76,639
 High Point, NC............................ 104,371 Corvallis, OR ................................ 54,462
 Hillsborough, NC ............................ 6,087 Forest Grove, OR .......................... 21,083
 Huntersville, NC ........................... 46,773 Hermiston, OR .............................. 16,745
 Indian Trail, NC............................. 33,518 Jackson County, OR .................... 203,206
 Mecklenburg County, NC............ 919,628 Keizer, OR .................................... 36,478
 Mooresville, NC ............................ 32,711 Lake Oswego, OR ......................... 36,619
 Stallings, NC ................................. 13,831 Lane County, OR ........................ 351,715
 Wake Forest, NC ........................... 30,117 McMinnville, OR .......................... 32,187
 Wilmington, NC .......................... 106,476 Medford, OR ................................. 74,907
 Winston-Salem, NC ..................... 229,617 Portland, OR ............................... 583,776
 Wahpeton, ND ................................ 7,766 Springfield, OR ............................. 59,403
 Grand Island, NE ........................... 48,520 Tualatin, OR ................................. 26,054




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 La Vista, NE ................................... 15,758 Umatilla, OR................................... 6,906
 Lincoln, NE ................................. 258,379 Wilsonville, OR ............................ 19,509
 Papillion, NE ................................. 18,894 Chambersburg, PA ........................ 20,268
 Dover, NH .................................... 29,987 Cumberland County, PA ............. 235,406
 Lebanon, NH ................................ 13,151 Kennett Square, PA ......................... 6,072
 Summit, NJ .................................... 21,457 Kutztown Borough, PA .................... 5,012
 Albuquerque, NM ....................... 545,852 Radnor Township, PA ................... 30,878
 Farmington, NM ............................ 45,877 State College, PA........................... 42,034
 Las Cruces, NM ............................. 97,618 West Chester, PA .......................... 18,461
 Los Alamos County, NM ............... 17,950 East Providence, RI........................ 47,037
 Rio Rancho, NM ........................... 87,521 Newport, RI .................................. 24,672
 San Juan County, NM .................. 130,044 Greer, SC ...................................... 25,515
 Carson City, NV ............................ 55,274 Rock Hill, SC ................................ 66,154
 Henderson, NV ........................... 257,729 Rapid City, SD .............................. 67,956
 North Las Vegas, NV ................... 216,961 Sioux Falls, SD ............................ 153,888
 Reno, NV .................................... 225,221 Cookeville, TN .............................. 30,435
 Sparks, NV .................................... 90,264 Germantown, TN .......................... 38,844


 The National Citizen Survey™
 15
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Morristown, TN ............................. 29,137 James City County, VA .................. 67,009
 Nashville, TN .............................. 601,222 Lexington, VA ................................. 7,042
 White House, TN .......................... 10,255 Lynchburg, VA .............................. 75,568
 Arlington, TX ............................... 365,438 Montgomery County, VA .............. 94,392
 Austin, TX ................................... 790,390 Newport News, VA ..................... 180,719
 Benbrook, TX ................................ 21,234 Norfolk, VA ................................ 242,803
 Bryan, TX ...................................... 76,201 Purcellville, VA ............................... 7,727
 College Station, TX ........................ 93,857 Radford, VA .................................. 16,408
 Colleyville, TX............................... 22,807 Roanoke, VA ................................. 97,032
 Corpus Christi, TX ....................... 305,215 Spotsylvania County, VA ............. 122,397
 Dallas, TX................................. 1,197,816 Virginia Beach, VA ...................... 437,994
 Denton, TX.................................. 113,383 Williamsburg, VA.......................... 14,068
 Duncanville, TX ............................ 38,524 York County, VA ........................... 65,464
 El Paso, TX .................................. 649,121 Montpelier, VT ................................ 7,855
 Flower Mound, TX ........................ 64,669 Airway Heights, WA ....................... 6,114
 Fort Worth, TX ............................ 741,206 Auburn, WA ................................. 70,180
 Georgetown, TX ............................ 47,400 Bellevue, WA .............................. 122,363
 Houston, TX ............................. 2,099,451 Clark County, WA ....................... 425,363
 Hurst, TX ....................................... 37,337 Edmonds, WA ............................... 39,709
 Hutto, TX ...................................... 14,698 Federal Way, WA.......................... 89,306
 La Porte, TX ................................... 33,800 Gig Harbor, WA.............................. 7,126
 League City, TX ............................. 83,560 Hoquiam, WA................................. 8,726
 McAllen, TX ................................ 129,877 Kirkland, WA ................................ 48,787
 McKinney, TX ............................. 131,117 Lynnwood, WA ............................. 35,836
 Plano, TX .................................... 259,841 Maple Valley, WA......................... 22,684
 Round Rock, TX ............................ 99,887 Mountlake Terrace, WA ................ 19,909
 Rowlett, TX ................................... 56,199 Pasco, WA .................................... 59,781
 San Marcos, TX ............................. 44,894 Redmond, WA .............................. 54,144
 Southlake, TX ................................ 26,575 Renton, WA .................................. 90,927
 Temple, TX.................................... 66,102 Sammamish, WA .......................... 45,780
 The Woodlands, TX ....................... 93,847 SeaTac, WA .................................. 26,909
 Tomball, TX .................................. 10,753 Snoqualmie, WA ........................... 10,670
 Watauga, TX.................................. 23,497 Spokane Valley, WA ..................... 89,755
 Westlake, TX ...................................... 992 Tacoma, WA ............................... 198,397
 Park City, UT ................................... 7,558 Vancouver, WA .......................... 161,791
 Provo, UT.................................... 112,488 West Richland, WA....................... 11,811




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Riverdale, UT .................................. 8,426 Woodland, WA ............................... 5,509
 Salt Lake City, UT ........................ 186,440 Yakima, WA.................................. 91,067
 Sandy, UT ..................................... 87,461 Chippewa Falls, WI ....................... 13,661
 Saratoga Springs, UT ..................... 17,781 Columbus, WI ................................. 4,991
 Springville, UT .............................. 29,466 De Pere, WI .................................. 23,800
 Washington City, UT ..................... 18,761 Eau Claire, WI ............................... 65,883
 Albemarle County, VA .................. 98,970 Madison, WI ............................... 233,209
 Arlington County, VA .................. 207,627 Merrill, WI ...................................... 9,661
 Ashland, VA .................................... 7,225 Oshkosh, WI ................................. 66,083
 Botetourt County, VA .................... 33,148 Racine, WI .................................... 78,860
 Chesapeake, VA .......................... 222,209 Wauwatosa, WI ............................ 46,396
 Chesterfield County, VA .............. 316,236 Wind Point, WI ............................... 1,723
 Fredericksburg, VA ........................ 24,286 Casper, WY ................................... 55,316
 Hampton, VA .............................. 137,436 Cheyenne, WY .............................. 59,466
 Hanover County, VA ..................... 99,863 Gillette, WY .................................. 29,087
 Herndon, VA ................................. 23,292



 The National Citizen Survey™
 16
 The National Citizen Survey™


 VILLAGE OF SKOKIE, IL
 2012

 DRAFT Report of Demographic Subgroup
 Comparisons




2955 Valmont Road, Suite 300 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500
 Boulder, CO 80301 Washington, DC 20002
www.n-r-c.com • 303-444-7863 www.icma.org • 202-289-ICMA
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Contents
 Survey Background ............................................................................................................. 1
 About The National Citizen Survey™ ........................................................................................ 1
 Understanding the Results .................................................................................................. 2 
 “Don’t Know” Responses ......................................................................................................... 2
 Understanding the Tables ......................................................................................................... 2
 Comparisons ................................................................................................................... ... 3




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Survey Background
 ABOUT THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY™
 The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS™) is a collaborative effort between National Research
 Center, Inc. (NRC) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA).

 The survey and its administration are standardized to assure high quality survey methods and
 comparable results across The National Citizen Survey™ jurisdictions. Participating households are
 selected at random and the household member who responds is selected without bias. Multiple
 mailings give each household more than one chance to participate with self-addressed and postage
 paid envelopes. Results are statistically weighted to reflect the proper demographic composition of
 the entire community.

 The National Citizen Survey™ customized for this jurisdiction was developed in close cooperation
 with local jurisdiction staff. The Village of Skokie staff selected items from a menu of questions
 about services and community problems; they defined the jurisdiction boundaries NRC used for
 sampling; and they provided the appropriate letterhead and signatures for mailings. Village of
 Skokie staff also determined local interest in a variety of add-on options to The National Citizen
 Survey™ Basic Service.

 One of the add-on options that Skokie chose was to have crosstabulations of evaluative questions 1-
 18 by demographic questions D3 (number of years in Skokie), D4 (housing unit type), D9 (annual
 household income), D12 (age of respondent), and D13 (gender of respondent).




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 1
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Understanding the Results
 “DON’T KNOW” RESPONSES
 On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of
 respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix A.
 However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the
 report. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an
 opinion about a specific item.

 UNDERSTANDING THE TABLES
 In this report, comparisons between demographic subgroups are shown. For most of the questions,
 we have shown only one number for each question. We have summarized responses to show only
 the proportion of respondents giving a certain answer; for example, the percent of respondents who
 rated the quality of life as “excellent” or “good”, or the percent of respondents who felt the rate of
 growth was “about right.”

 ANOVA and chi-square tests of significance were applied to these comparisons of survey questions
 by demographic subgroups. A “p-value” of 0.05 or less indicates that there is less than a 5%
 probability that differences observed between subgroups are due to chance; or in other words, a
 greater than 95% probability that the differences observed are “real.” Where differences were
 statistically significant, they are marked in grey.




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 2
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Comparisons
 Cells shaded grey indicate statistically significant differences between subgroups.

 Question 1: Quality of Life (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Please rate each of the Less More
 following aspects of quality than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 of life in Skokie: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Skokie as a place to live 83% 88% 92% 88% 94% 81% 88% 88% 85% 93% 88%
 Your neighborhood as a 60% 81% 85% 77% 92% 57% 77% 71% 75% 88% 77%
 place to live
 Skokie as a place to raise 72% 85% 88% 83% 89% 72% 83% 84% 77% 88% 83%
 children
 Skokie as a place to work 65% 71% 84% 74% 80% 66% 74% 73% 68% 86% 75%
 Skokie as a place to retire 48% 64% 76% 65% 70% 57% 65% 66% 62% 66% 65%
 The overall quality of life in 67% 82% 88% 80% 88% 69% 80% 75% 78% 91% 80%
 Skokie




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Question 1: Quality of Life (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Skokie: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Skokie as a place to live 77% 91% 93% 88% 84% 93% 88%
 Your neighborhood as a place to live 52% 77% 90% 77% 77% 77% 77%
 Skokie as a place to raise children 66% 84% 90% 83% 79% 87% 83%
 Skokie as a place to work 56% 80% 81% 74% 73% 74% 73%
 Skokie as a place to retire 49% 53% 79% 65% 69% 60% 65%
 The overall quality of life in Skokie 62% 81% 90% 80% 77% 83% 80%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 3
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 2: Community Characteristics (Percent "excellent" or "good")

 Please rate each of the Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 following characteristics as Less More
 they relate to Skokie as a than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 whole: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Sense of community 56% 72% 80% 71% 77% 62% 71% 68% 70% 74% 70%
 Openness and acceptance of 71% 82% 87% 81% 87% 72% 81% 74% 85% 86% 81%
 the community toward people
 of diverse backgrounds
 Overall appearance of Skokie 69% 77% 81% 77% 82% 69% 77% 80% 68% 82% 77%
 Cleanliness of Skokie 68% 86% 88% 82% 92% 67% 82% 77% 79% 94% 82%
 Overall quality of new
 development in Skokie 62% 73% 73% 70% 74% 65% 70% 74% 65% 75% 71%
 Variety of housing options 62% 72% 80% 72% 79% 63% 72% 71% 62% 85% 72%
 Overall quality of business and 72% 74% 75% 74% 79% 67% 74% 77% 67% 78% 74%
 service establishments in Skokie
 Shopping opportunities 81% 89% 88% 86% 89% 82% 87% 92% 79% 90% 88%
 Opportunities to attend cultural 63% 81% 84% 78% 86% 65% 78% 69% 84% 83% 78%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 activities
 Recreational opportunities 71% 81% 85% 80% 85% 71% 80% 73% 82% 87% 80%
 Employment opportunities 32% 47% 54% 46% 50% 42% 46% 48% 32% 62% 46%
 Educational opportunities 89% 86% 89% 88% 90% 85% 88% 85% 92% 89% 89%
 Opportunities to participate in 72% 75% 77% 75% 80% 68% 75% 66% 82% 79% 75%
 social events and activities
 Opportunities to volunteer 60% 81% 81% 76% 85% 61% 75% 66% 81% 85% 76%
 Opportunities to participate in 63% 75% 72% 71% 76% 63% 71% 68% 65% 85% 72%
 community matters
 Ease of car travel in Skokie 82% 78% 88% 83% 83% 82% 83% 83% 79% 88% 83%
 Ease of bus travel in Skokie 69% 71% 77% 73% 74% 71% 73% 64% 76% 91% 73%
 Ease of rail or subway travel in
 Skokie 81% 79% 88% 83% 81% 87% 83% 83% 85% 85% 84%
 Ease of bicycle travel in Skokie 53% 55% 74% 62% 61% 63% 62% 56% 70% 61% 62%
 Ease of walking in Skokie 65% 70% 89% 76% 82% 67% 76% 69% 88% 71% 75%
 Availability of paths and 70% 66% 70% 69% 70% 67% 68% 62% 76% 70% 69%


 The National Citizen Survey™
 4
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 2: Community Characteristics (Percent "excellent" or "good")

 Please rate each of the Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 following characteristics as Less More
 they relate to Skokie as a than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 whole: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 walking trails
 Traffic flow on major streets 40% 64% 69% 59% 67% 49% 60% 54% 54% 76% 60%
 Amount of public parking 51% 65% 75% 65% 74% 54% 66% 53% 70% 79% 65%
 Availability of affordable quality 48% 58% 66% 58% 69% 44% 58% 51% 55% 76% 59%
 housing
 Availability of affordable quality
 child care 50% 64% 70% 63% 67% 58% 64% 56% 68% 71% 64%
 Availability of affordable quality 57% 78% 82% 75% 84% 59% 75% 64% 77% 87% 75%
 health care
 Availability of preventive health 62% 76% 78% 73% 81% 62% 74% 62% 72% 95% 74%
 services
 Air quality 64% 69% 79% 71% 76% 65% 71% 68% 75% 73% 71%
 Quality of overall natural
 environment in Skokie 66% 77% 79% 75% 79% 70% 75% 73% 70% 83% 75%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Overall image or reputation of 62% 77% 72% 71% 77% 63% 71% 72% 62% 80% 71%
 Skokie




 The National Citizen Survey™
 5
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 2: Community Characteristics (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Skokie as a whole: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Sense of community 48% 74% 81% 71% 72% 69% 71%
 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 68% 81% 88% 81% 81% 82% 81%
 Overall appearance of Skokie 58% 81% 84% 77% 73% 80% 77%
 Cleanliness of Skokie 60% 90% 87% 82% 82% 82% 82%
 Overall quality of new development in Skokie 64% 74% 70% 70% 74% 67% 70%
 Variety of housing options 63% 71% 79% 72% 72% 72% 72%
 Overall quality of business and service establishments in Skokie 68% 76% 75% 74% 71% 76% 73%
 Shopping opportunities 84% 87% 87% 87% 81% 93% 87%
 Opportunities to attend cultural activities 61% 79% 86% 78% 84% 71% 78%
 Recreational opportunities 72% 77% 87% 80% 83% 75% 80%
 Employment opportunities 29% 48% 53% 46% 46% 45% 45%
 Educational opportunities 83% 91% 88% 88% 88% 88% 88%
 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 71% 73% 79% 75% 75% 75% 75%
 Opportunities to volunteer 55% 80% 81% 76% 80% 70% 76%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Opportunities to participate in community matters 62% 75% 72% 71% 72% 71% 71%
 Ease of car travel in Skokie 81% 77% 88% 83% 80% 86% 83%
 Ease of bus travel in Skokie 59% 73% 80% 73% 69% 78% 73%
 Ease of rail or subway travel in Skokie 83% 81% 86% 84% 82% 85% 84%
 Ease of bicycle travel in Skokie 52% 58% 71% 62% 62% 62% 62%
 Ease of walking in Skokie 55% 79% 86% 76% 77% 74% 75%
 Availability of paths and walking trails 61% 66% 75% 68% 67% 69% 68%
 Traffic flow on major streets 41% 58% 72% 60% 57% 62% 60%
 Amount of public parking 47% 66% 74% 65% 69% 62% 66%
 Availability of affordable quality housing 44% 56% 71% 58% 62% 54% 58%
 Availability of affordable quality child care 60% 62% 67% 64% 69% 59% 64%
 Availability of affordable quality health care 62% 70% 85% 75% 79% 71% 75%
 Availability of preventive health services 67% 70% 80% 74% 76% 71% 74%
 Air quality 59% 67% 82% 71% 71% 71% 71%



 The National Citizen Survey™
 6
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 2: Community Characteristics (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Skokie as a whole: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Quality of overall natural environment in Skokie 62% 74% 84% 75% 72% 79% 75%
 Overall image or reputation of Skokie 56% 73% 79% 71% 71% 71% 71%


 Question 3: Growth (Percent of respondents)

 Please rate the speed of Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 growth in the following Less More
 categories in Skokie over the than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 past 2 years: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Population growth too fast 50% 35% 21% 32% 23% 47% 32% 29% 39% 28% 32%
 Retail growth too slow 51% 54% 42% 49% 45% 55% 49% 55% 45% 46% 49%
 Job growth too slow 64% 82% 71% 73% 76% 67% 72% 81% 65% 64% 72%


 Question 3: Growth (Percent of respondents)
 Age Gender
 Please rate the speed of growth in the following categories in Skokie over the past 2 years: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Population growth too fast 59% 31% 17% 32% 37% 25% 32%
 Retail growth too slow 54% 51% 46% 49% 51% 48% 49%
 Job growth too slow 63% 70% 80% 72% 76% 69% 73%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 7
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 4: Opportunities (Percent a "major" problem)
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 To what degree, if at all, are Less More
 the following problems in than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 Skokie: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Crime 27% 11% 12% 15% 11% 22% 15% 20% 15% 8% 15%
 Drugs 24% 19% 20% 21% 15% 27% 21% 21% 25% 9% 19%
 Too much growth 14% 18% 9% 14% 11% 17% 14% 16% 9% 12% 12%
 Property taxes 41% 48% 38% 42% 39% 47% 42% 41% 47% 35% 41%
 Traffic congestion 5% 4% 7% 5% 3% 9% 5% 4% 8% 1% 5%
 Unsupervised youth 35% 17% 23% 24% 14% 38% 24% 29% 27% 12% 24%
 Unmaintained properties 9% 5% 11% 8% 6% 12% 8% 15% 5% 2% 8%
 (weeds, peeling paint, etc.)


 Question 4: Opportunities (Percent a "major" problem)
 Age Gender
 To what degree, if at all, are the following problems in Skokie: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Crime 29% 13% 9% 15% 16% 15% 15%
 Drugs 29% 17% 17% 20% 24% 17% 20%
 Too much growth 25% 11% 9% 13% 17% 9% 13%
 Property taxes 57% 40% 35% 41% 45% 37% 41%
 Traffic congestion 5% 3% 7% 5% 6% 5% 5%
 Unsupervised youth 44% 17% 18% 24% 25% 23% 24%
 Unmaintained properties (weeds, peeling paint, etc.) 13% 6% 8% 8% 9% 7% 8%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 8
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 5: Community Safety (Percent "very" or "somewhat" safe)
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Please rate how safe or Less More
 unsafe you feel from the than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 following in Skokie: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Violent crime (e.g., rape, 56% 68% 70% 65% 72% 56% 65% 67% 63% 70% 66%
 assault, robbery)
 Property crimes (e.g.,
 burglary, theft) 40% 53% 51% 48% 51% 46% 49% 56% 45% 43% 49%
 Environmental hazards, 74% 72% 75% 74% 80% 66% 74% 72% 79% 77% 75%
 including toxic waste


 Question 5: Community Safety (Percent "very" or "somewhat" safe)
 Age Gender
 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel from the following in Skokie: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault, robbery) 55% 65% 71% 65% 62% 68% 65%
 Property crimes (e.g., burglary, theft) 36% 45% 59% 48% 49% 49% 49%
 Environmental hazards, including toxic waste 75% 70% 76% 74% 67% 82% 74%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 9
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 6: Personal Safety (Percent "very" or "somewhat" safe)
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Please rate how safe or Less than 6 to 20 More than Less than $50,000 to $100,000 or
 unsafe you feel: 5 years years 20 years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 more Overall
 In your neighborhood 78% 89% 91% 87% 92% 79% 87% 83% 91% 91% 87%
 during the day
 In your neighborhood 51% 67% 71% 64% 75% 49% 64% 59% 61% 79% 65%
 after dark
 In Skokie's downtown 83% 90% 90% 88% 93% 83% 88% 89% 88% 91% 89%
 area during the day
 In Skokie's downtown 58% 72% 68% 66% 72% 60% 67% 65% 69% 71% 68%
 area after dark


 Question 6: Personal Safety (Percent "very" or "somewhat" safe)
 Age Gender
 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 In your neighborhood during the day 78% 89% 90% 87% 88% 85% 87%
 In your neighborhood after dark 43% 69% 73% 64% 61% 68% 64%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 In Skokie's downtown area during the day 83% 90% 91% 89% 86% 91% 88%
 In Skokie's downtown area after dark 56% 71% 70% 67% 62% 71% 66%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 10
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Questions 7 and 8: Crime Victimization and Reporting (Percent "yes")
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Less 6 to More
 than 5 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 During the past 12 months, 15% 21% 14% 17% 19% 12% 17% 13% 15% 26% 17%
 were you or anyone in your
 household the victim of any
 crime in Skokie?
 If yes, was this crime (these
 crimes) reported to the police? 90% 65% 66% 71% 73% 67% 71% 53% 88% 75% 71%


 Questions 7 and 8: Crime Victimization and Reporting (Percent "yes")
 Age Gender
 18- 35-
 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime in 25% 18% 11% 16% 16% 16% 16%
 Skokie?




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 If yes, was this crime (these crimes) reported to the police? 66% 76% 72% 71% 63% 83% 72%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 11
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 9: Resident Behaviors (Percent at least once in past 12 months)

 In the last 12 months, about how Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 many times, if ever, have you or More
 other household members Less 6 to than $50,000
 participated in the following than 5 20 20 Less than to $100,000
 activities in Skokie? years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Used Skokie Public Library or its
 services 83% 93% 89% 88% 88% 90% 89% 89% 90% 87% 89%
 Participated in a recreation program 49% 63% 66% 60% 71% 45% 60% 46% 61% 85% 61%
 or activity
 Visited a neighborhood park or 87% 94% 84% 88% 89% 87% 88% 82% 93% 97% 89%
 Village park
 Ridden a local bus within Skokie 34% 44% 27% 35% 32% 40% 35% 45% 35% 20% 36%
 Attended a meeting of local elected 6% 19% 29% 19% 22% 16% 19% 15% 23% 20% 19%
 officials or other local public meeting
 Watched a meeting of local elected 15% 28% 33% 26% 22% 31% 26% 33% 22% 21% 26%
 officials or other Village-sponsored
 public meeting on cable television,
 the Internet or other media




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Read NewSkokie Newsletter 88% 95% 95% 93% 94% 92% 93% 88% 96% 98% 93%
 Visited the Village of Skokie Web site 74% 75% 64% 71% 73% 66% 70% 64% 74% 84% 72%
 (at www.skokie.org)
 Recycled used paper, cans or bottles 71% 90% 95% 87% 94% 76% 87% 83% 84% 96% 86%
 from your home
 Volunteered your time to some group 12% 23% 27% 22% 25% 17% 22% 19% 24% 24% 22%
 or activity in Skokie
 Listened to 1660 AM Skokie radio 6% 18% 18% 15% 17% 13% 15% 18% 12% 14% 15%
 station
 Ridden a Senior Transportation for 0% 7% 5% 4% 3% 6% 4% 10% 0% 0% 4%
 Area Residents (STAR) bus
 Ridden the Skokie Swift 61% 66% 52% 59% 55% 65% 59% 64% 62% 51% 60%
 Attended a neighborhood block party 6% 22% 28% 20% 25% 12% 20% 15% 19% 29% 20%
 Called or emailed the Village for yard 25% 41% 59% 43% 67% 12% 44% 30% 51% 55% 43%
 waste collection




 The National Citizen Survey™
 12
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 9: Resident Behaviors (Percent at least once in past 12 months)

 In the last 12 months, about how Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 many times, if ever, have you or More
 other household members Less 6 to than $50,000
 participated in the following than 5 20 20 Less than to $100,000
 activities in Skokie? years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Dined or shopped in Downtown
 Skokie 87% 88% 86% 87% 84% 91% 87% 87% 87% 91% 88%
 Visited the Skokie Farmers' Market 58% 67% 62% 62% 62% 63% 63% 61% 59% 73% 64%


 Question 9: Resident Behaviors (Percent at least once in past 12 months)
 Age Gender
 In the last 12 months, about how many times, if ever, have you or other household members 18- 35-
 participated in the following activities in Skokie? 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Used Skokie Public Library or its services 88% 91% 86% 88% 89% 88% 88%
 Participated in a recreation program or activity 51% 69% 59% 60% 61% 58% 60%
 Visited a neighborhood park or Village park 91% 95% 82% 88% 88% 89% 88%
 Ridden a local bus within Skokie 35% 40% 30% 35% 35% 32% 34%
 Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting 7% 24% 23% 20% 20% 19% 20%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other Village-sponsored public meeting on cable
 television, the Internet or other media 23% 23% 30% 26% 26% 26% 26%
 Read NewSkokie Newsletter 87% 95% 94% 93% 94% 92% 93%
 Visited the Village of Skokie Web site (at www.skokie.org) 79% 83% 57% 71% 72% 69% 71%
 Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home 71% 90% 93% 87% 87% 86% 86%
 Volunteered your time to some group or activity in Skokie 10% 29% 22% 22% 20% 22% 21%
 Listened to 1660 AM Skokie radio station 8% 17% 16% 15% 15% 15% 15%
 Ridden a Senior Transportation for Area Residents (STAR) bus 3% 3% 6% 5% 7% 2% 5%
 Ridden the Skokie Swift 66% 71% 46% 59% 58% 60% 59%
 Attended a neighborhood block party 9% 24% 22% 20% 18% 21% 20%
 Called or emailed the Village for yard waste collection 20% 49% 52% 44% 42% 44% 43%
 Dined or shopped in Downtown Skokie 89% 88% 86% 87% 89% 85% 87%
 Visited the Skokie Farmers' Market 56% 69% 60% 62% 63% 61% 62%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 13
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 10: Neighborliness (Percent at least several times a week)
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Less than 6 to 20 More than Less than $50,000 to $100,000 or
 5 years years 20 years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 more Overall
 Visit with neighbors at 39% 45% 56% 48% 57% 35% 48% 36% 58% 52% 47%
 least several times a
 week


 Question 10: Neighborliness (Percent at least several times a week)
 Age Gender
 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Visit with neighbors at least several times a week 31% 50% 55% 47% 44% 51% 48%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 14
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 11: Service Quality (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Less 6 to More $50,000
 Please rate the quality of each of than 5 20 than 20 Less than to $100,000
 the following services in Skokie: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Police services 79% 87% 92% 87% 91% 81% 87% 83% 86% 94% 87%
 Fire services 89% 97% 100% 97% 97% 96% 97% 92% 99% 100% 96%
 Ambulance or emergency medical 89% 95% 99% 95% 95% 96% 95% 93% 100% 95% 96%
 services
 Crime prevention 47% 63% 82% 66% 75% 54% 66% 62% 65% 73% 66%
 Fire prevention and education 79% 74% 93% 84% 88% 76% 84% 78% 84% 93% 83%
 Traffic enforcement 66% 82% 79% 77% 85% 66% 77% 69% 75% 92% 77%
 Street repair 46% 62% 54% 55% 58% 51% 55% 58% 49% 55% 54%
 Street cleaning 64% 79% 81% 76% 81% 68% 76% 70% 71% 90% 76%
 Street lighting 54% 68% 77% 68% 73% 61% 68% 60% 68% 80% 67%
 Snow removal 49% 65% 80% 67% 78% 51% 67% 58% 69% 82% 67%
 Sidewalk maintenance 66% 65% 67% 66% 70% 60% 66% 64% 65% 71% 66%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Bus or transit services 72% 80% 89% 81% 87% 73% 81% 74% 84% 94% 81%
 Garbage collection 77% 90% 95% 89% 96% 78% 89% 79% 94% 99% 88%
 Recycling 68% 91% 93% 86% 95% 70% 86% 77% 90% 94% 86%
 Yard waste pick-up 66% 69% 86% 76% 79% 68% 76% 68% 82% 81% 76%
 Storm drainage 37% 59% 71% 58% 61% 52% 58% 55% 59% 57% 57%
 Drinking water 68% 79% 94% 81% 90% 69% 82% 78% 81% 87% 81%
 Sewer services 58% 72% 78% 71% 76% 61% 71% 61% 76% 78% 70%
 Electric utility service 65% 84% 90% 81% 87% 73% 81% 77% 82% 86% 81%
 Village parks 78% 93% 94% 89% 94% 81% 89% 87% 92% 89% 89%
 Land use, planning and zoning 56% 72% 71% 67% 69% 65% 68% 69% 69% 65% 68%
 Code enforcement (weeds, 43% 67% 67% 61% 68% 52% 62% 61% 57% 65% 61%
 abandoned buildings, etc.)
 Animal control 68% 73% 75% 73% 74% 71% 73% 70% 72% 79% 73%
 Economic development 54% 61% 62% 60% 61% 58% 60% 61% 59% 60% 60%
 Skokie Health Department services 55% 85% 91% 81% 91% 64% 81% 70% 90% 89% 81%



 The National Citizen Survey™
 15
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 11: Service Quality (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Less 6 to More $50,000
 Please rate the quality of each of than 5 20 than 20 Less than to $100,000
 the following services in Skokie: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Services to seniors 70% 83% 88% 83% 88% 73% 82% 77% 90% 82% 82%
 Services to youth 61% 76% 80% 74% 82% 60% 73% 66% 78% 78% 73%
 Services to low-income people 52% 56% 82% 66% 81% 47% 65% 48% 67% 95% 65%
 Services to families 74% 65% 79% 73% 81% 58% 72% 53% 81% 91% 72%
 Cable television 60% 63% 71% 65% 71% 59% 66% 67% 53% 78% 65%
 Emergency preparedness (services 52% 72% 84% 73% 83% 59% 73% 70% 70% 84% 74%
 that prepare the community for
 natural disasters or other
 emergency situations)
 Administrative hearings (parking 65% 54% 75% 65% 69% 60% 66% 66% 59% 75% 66%
 and code violations)
 Sidewalk snow plowing 36% 59% 68% 57% 66% 43% 57% 50% 56% 67% 56%
 Alley maintenance 35% 46% 70% 51% 62% 36% 51% 44% 54% 60% 51%
 Obtaining a building permit 59% 64% 68% 65% 68% 51% 65% 74% 59% 61% 64%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Public information - 1660 AM 59% 72% 81% 74% 86% 54% 75% 71% 77% 76% 74%
 Skokie radio station
 Public information - NewSkokie 77% 85% 88% 84% 88% 78% 84% 80% 86% 89% 84%
 municipal newsletter
 Public information - 69% 92% 85% 83% 86% 78% 83% 80% 77% 93% 83%
 www.skokie.org municipal Web
 site
 Public information - Village of
 Skokie monthly email newsletter 72% 88% 85% 83% 85% 79% 83% 83% 86% 78% 82%
 Overall competence of Police 67% 86% 89% 82% 90% 71% 82% 82% 79% 87% 82%
 Department employees
 Police officers' attitudes and 52% 79% 83% 73% 84% 58% 74% 67% 69% 87% 73%
 behaviors toward citizens
 Fire prevention - code 67% 78% 91% 81% 90% 68% 81% 70% 89% 94% 81%
 enforcement
 Fire prevention - public education 64% 76% 86% 77% 88% 61% 77% 66% 82% 95% 78%



 The National Citizen Survey™
 16
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 11: Service Quality (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Less 6 to More $50,000
 Please rate the quality of each of than 5 20 than 20 Less than to $100,000
 the following services in Skokie: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Senior Transportation for Area 74% 73% 84% 79% 85% 66% 78% 67% 95% 90% 79%
 Residents (STAR) bus service


 Question 11: Service Quality (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 18- 35-
 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Skokie: 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Police services 73% 91% 92% 87% 84% 91% 87%
 Fire services 94% 96% 99% 97% 96% 98% 97%
 Ambulance or emergency medical services 86% 97% 99% 96% 95% 97% 96%
 Crime prevention 37% 70% 82% 67% 65% 68% 66%
 Fire prevention and education 63% 84% 92% 84% 84% 84% 84%
 Traffic enforcement 65% 79% 83% 77% 76% 78% 77%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Street repair 41% 60% 59% 55% 56% 53% 55%
 Street cleaning 63% 76% 82% 75% 74% 76% 75%
 Street lighting 56% 63% 78% 68% 69% 65% 67%
 Snow removal 39% 67% 80% 67% 65% 69% 67%
 Sidewalk maintenance 57% 67% 70% 66% 64% 68% 66%
 Bus or transit services 75% 79% 89% 82% 81% 82% 82%
 Garbage collection 73% 91% 96% 89% 91% 86% 89%
 Recycling 68% 86% 94% 86% 88% 84% 86%
 Yard waste pick-up 62% 70% 87% 77% 79% 73% 76%
 Storm drainage 40% 49% 75% 58% 61% 56% 59%
 Drinking water 68% 82% 89% 82% 87% 77% 82%
 Sewer services 50% 69% 82% 71% 73% 70% 71%
 Electric utility service 67% 83% 88% 81% 83% 79% 81%
 Village parks 76% 90% 97% 89% 88% 90% 89%
 Land use, planning and zoning 54% 63% 80% 67% 70% 65% 68%


 The National Citizen Survey™
 17
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 11: Service Quality (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 18- 35-
 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Skokie: 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 33% 62% 75% 61% 63% 61% 62%
 Animal control 63% 72% 78% 73% 76% 70% 73%
 Economic development 49% 57% 68% 59% 63% 56% 59%
 Skokie Health Department services 53% 79% 92% 81% 82% 80% 81%
 Services to seniors 66% 81% 88% 82% 84% 80% 82%
 Services to youth 61% 72% 82% 73% 76% 71% 73%
 Services to low-income people 55% 56% 82% 66% 68% 65% 66%
 Services to families 64% 70% 81% 73% 68% 76% 72%
 Cable television 62% 58% 73% 65% 62% 70% 65%
 Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other 47% 73% 85% 73% 75% 71% 73%
 emergency situations)
 Administrative hearings (parking and code violations) 52% 62% 77% 66% 60% 72% 66%
 Sidewalk snow plowing 40% 53% 69% 57% 57% 57% 57%
 Alley maintenance 21% 58% 67% 51% 51% 50% 51%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Obtaining a building permit 44% 69% 70% 65% 58% 72% 65%
 Public information - 1660 AM Skokie radio station 42% 73% 87% 76% 76% 76% 76%
 Public information - NewSkokie municipal newsletter 82% 81% 89% 85% 83% 87% 85%
 Public information - www.skokie.org municipal Web site 75% 87% 86% 84% 84% 82% 83%
 Public information - Village of Skokie monthly email newsletter 78% 80% 89% 84% 90% 78% 84%
 Overall competence of Police Department employees 71% 82% 90% 83% 81% 85% 83%
 Police officers' attitudes and behaviors toward citizens 53% 72% 85% 74% 72% 77% 74%
 Fire prevention - code enforcement 51% 86% 93% 82% 82% 80% 82%
 Fire prevention - public education 48% 83% 86% 78% 77% 78% 78%
 Senior Transportation for Area Residents (STAR) bus service 79% 73% 83% 79% 75% 83% 79%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 18
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 12: Government Services Overall (Percent "excellent" or "good")

 Overall, how would you rate Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 the quality of the services Less More
 provided by each of the than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 following? years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 The Village of Skokie 77% 86% 94% 87% 94% 75% 87% 82% 89% 90% 86%
 The Federal Government 52% 55% 54% 54% 56% 50% 54% 67% 34% 54% 53%
 The State Government 41% 37% 43% 41% 40% 41% 41% 54% 31% 29% 40%
 Cook County Government 38% 41% 42% 41% 38% 44% 41% 54% 30% 31% 40%


 Question 12: Government Services Overall (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 The Village of Skokie 70% 88% 95% 87% 87% 87% 87%
 The Federal Government 52% 52% 56% 54% 57% 50% 54%
 The State Government 34% 39% 46% 41% 44% 37% 40%
 Cook County Government 37% 37% 47% 41% 45% 36% 41%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 19
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 13: Contact with Village Employees (Percent "yes")
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 More
 Less 6 to than $50,000
 than 5 20 20 Less than to $100,000
 years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Have you had any in-person, phone 79% 64% 77% 73% 78% 64% 72% 61% 81% 83% 73%
 or email contact with an employee of
 the Village of Skokie within the last
 12 months (including police,
 receptionists, planners or any others)?


 Question 13: Contact with Village Employees (Percent "yes")
 Age Gender
 18- 35-
 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Have you had any in-person, phone or email contact with an employee of the Village of Skokie
 within the last 12 months (including police, receptionists, planners or any others)? 81% 75% 67% 73% 71% 74% 72%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 20
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 14: Village Employees (Percent "excellent" or "good")

 What was your impression of the Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 employee(s) of the Village of Less 6 to More $50,000
 Skokie in your most recent than 5 20 than 20 Less than to $100,000
 contact? years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Knowledge 76% 89% 84% 83% 92% 69% 83% 86% 81% 82% 83%
 Responsiveness 75% 94% 83% 84% 91% 74% 84% 84% 80% 89% 84%
 Courtesy 63% 86% 86% 80% 88% 65% 80% 77% 78% 84% 79%
 Overall impression 69% 92% 83% 82% 91% 68% 82% 77% 81% 88% 82%


 Question 14: Village Employees (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 What was your impression of the employee(s) of the Village of Skokie in your most recent contact? 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Knowledge 65% 87% 91% 83% 84% 83% 84%
 Responsiveness 73% 85% 91% 84% 85% 84% 85%
 Courtesy 54% 83% 95% 80% 82% 80% 81%
 Overall impression 65% 83% 92% 82% 83% 82% 82%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 21
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 15: Government Performance (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Please rate the following Less More
 categories of Skokie than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 government performance: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 The value of services for the 50% 64% 74% 65% 74% 50% 65% 61% 64% 69% 64%
 taxes paid to Skokie
 The overall direction that
 Skokie is taking 56% 68% 69% 65% 69% 59% 65% 67% 62% 68% 65%
 The job Skokie government 57% 59% 71% 64% 72% 52% 64% 65% 57% 68% 64%
 does at welcoming citizen
 involvement


 Question 15: Government Performance (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Age Gender
 Please rate the following categories of Skokie government performance: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 The value of services for the taxes paid to Skokie 34% 68% 78% 65% 59% 72% 65%
 The overall direction that Skokie is taking 48% 66% 74% 66% 62% 70% 66%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 The job Skokie government does at welcoming citizen involvement 39% 65% 74% 64% 61% 67% 64%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 22
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 16: Recommendation and Longevity (Percent "somewhat" or "very" likely)
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Please indicate how likely or Less More
 unlikely you are to do each than 5 6 to 20 than 20 Less than $50,000 to $100,000
 of the following: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Recommend living in Skokie 87% 82% 91% 87% 91% 81% 87% 89% 78% 94% 87%
 to someone who asks
 Remain in Skokie for the next 69% 81% 87% 80% 88% 69% 80% 78% 74% 88% 79%
 five years


 Question 16: Recommendation and Longevity (Percent "somewhat" or "very" likely)
 Age Gender
 Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: 18-34 35-54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Recommend living in Skokie to someone who asks 73% 90% 92% 87% 80% 95% 87%
 Remain in Skokie for the next five years 55% 87% 89% 80% 77% 84% 80%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 23
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 17: Impact of the Economy (Percent "somewhat" or "very" positive)
 Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 Less 6 to More $50,000
 than 5 20 than 20 Less than to $100,000
 years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 What impact, if any, do you think
 the economy will have on your
 family income in the next 6
 months? Do you think the impact
 will be: 28% 21% 19% 22% 21% 25% 23% 22% 23% 25% 23%


 Question 17: Impact of the Economy (Percent "somewhat" or "very" positive)
 Age Gender
 18- 35-
 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6
 months? Do you think the impact will be: 24% 20% 24% 22% 19% 26% 22%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 24
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 18a: Custom Question 2 (Percent "essential" or "very important")

 Please rate how important, if at Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 all, each of the following Less 6 to More $50,000
 community issues or initiatives is than 5 20 than 20 Less than to $100,000
 for the Village of Skokie: years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Increase vehicle sticker fee to hire
 more police officers 27% 23% 34% 28% 28% 30% 29% 23% 28% 35% 28%
 Street resurfacing 43% 41% 61% 50% 51% 46% 49% 49% 45% 56% 49%
 Redevelop Dempster Street 38% 39% 47% 42% 45% 39% 42% 43% 32% 55% 43%
 Downtown Skokie redevelopment 63% 45% 56% 54% 51% 58% 54% 57% 44% 66% 55%
 Construct new bike paths and bike 44% 45% 40% 43% 42% 45% 43% 53% 25% 53% 44%
 lanes
 Elderly care services 64% 62% 74% 67% 62% 75% 67% 72% 59% 68% 67%
 At-risk youth programs 66% 60% 70% 66% 63% 69% 65% 70% 56% 71% 66%
 Implement licensing of landlords 40% 52% 63% 53% 53% 53% 53% 49% 44% 71% 53%
 and multi-family buildings
 Increase code enforcement for 45% 50% 64% 54% 48% 64% 54% 54% 50% 58% 54%
 property standards violations




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Email residents public safety and
 crime alerts 57% 65% 65% 63% 61% 67% 63% 62% 60% 67% 62%
 Use of user fees and special taxes 35% 57% 50% 48% 50% 46% 48% 51% 44% 51% 49%
 instead of property taxes


 Question 18a: Custom Question 2 (Percent "essential" or "very important")
 Age Gender
 Please rate how important, if at all, each of the following community issues or initiatives is for the 18- 35-
 Village of Skokie: 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Increase vehicle sticker fee to hire more police officers 32% 21% 33% 29% 27% 30% 28%
 Street resurfacing 44% 40% 59% 49% 54% 44% 49%
 Redevelop Dempster Street 39% 41% 45% 42% 50% 34% 42%
 Downtown Skokie redevelopment 70% 44% 54% 54% 59% 49% 54%
 Construct new bike paths and bike lanes 49% 44% 38% 43% 45% 41% 43%
 Elderly care services 58% 66% 73% 67% 68% 65% 67%



 The National Citizen Survey™
 25
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 18a: Custom Question 2 (Percent "essential" or "very important")
 Age Gender
 Please rate how important, if at all, each of the following community issues or initiatives is for the 18- 35-
 Village of Skokie: 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 At-risk youth programs 67% 58% 71% 66% 70% 59% 65%
 Implement licensing of landlords and multi-family buildings 66% 41% 57% 53% 59% 44% 52%
 Increase code enforcement for property standards violations 60% 44% 59% 54% 62% 46% 54%
 Email residents public safety and crime alerts 58% 60% 68% 63% 67% 58% 63%
 Use of user fees and special taxes instead of property taxes 43% 43% 56% 48% 54% 41% 48%


 Question 18b: Custom Question 2 (Percent "somewhat" or "strongly" support)

 The Village's property taxes have not Number of years in Skokie Housing unit type Annual household income
 increased since 1990. To what extent More
 would you support or oppose a Less 6 to than $50,000
 property tax increase to fund the than 5 20 20 Less than to $100,000
 following programs or initiatives? years years years Overall Detached Attached Overall $49,999 $99,999 or more Overall
 Revitalize Downtown Skokie 58% 42% 50% 50% 46% 56% 50% 52% 43% 56% 50%
 Revitalize Dempster Street 45% 42% 45% 44% 42% 48% 44% 51% 30% 52% 45%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Revitalize other shopping/commercial
 areas (East Oakton Street, Main Street,
 etc.) 36% 39% 40% 39% 35% 44% 39% 40% 34% 43% 39%
 Continue sidewalk snow plowing 65% 68% 81% 72% 66% 80% 72% 76% 65% 71% 71%
 Increase street resurfacing 52% 61% 77% 65% 64% 65% 64% 63% 61% 71% 64%
 Increase the number of property 33% 39% 54% 43% 37% 50% 43% 51% 25% 49% 41%
 standards inspectors
 "Green" or other environmentally 52% 52% 62% 56% 51% 62% 56% 67% 37% 65% 56%
 friendly equipment and programs
 Install additional traffic safety devices 35% 48% 56% 48% 46% 49% 47% 51% 38% 48% 46%
 Increase the number of police officers 42% 54% 70% 56% 59% 52% 56% 54% 53% 58% 55%
 Continue twice per week refuse pick-up 55% 60% 80% 67% 63% 74% 67% 69% 62% 66% 66%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 26
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 18b: Custom Question 2 (Percent "somewhat" or "strongly" support)
 Age Gender
 The Village's property taxes have not increased since 1990. To what extent would you support or 18- 35-
 oppose a property tax increase to fund the following programs or initiatives? 34 54 55+ Overall Female Male Overall
 Revitalize Downtown Skokie 62% 46% 46% 50% 51% 49% 50%
 Revitalize Dempster Street 45% 44% 45% 44% 46% 43% 45%
 Revitalize other shopping/commercial areas (East Oakton Street, Main Street, etc.) 33% 40% 42% 39% 42% 36% 39%
 Continue sidewalk snow plowing 67% 64% 79% 71% 73% 70% 71%
 Increase street resurfacing 53% 62% 73% 65% 64% 65% 64%
 Increase the number of property standards inspectors 41% 32% 52% 42% 47% 37% 42%
 "Green" or other environmentally friendly equipment and programs 51% 56% 59% 56% 56% 55% 56%
 Install additional traffic safety devices 30% 52% 54% 48% 53% 42% 48%
 Increase the number of police officers 41% 57% 66% 56% 60% 53% 56%
 Continue twice per week refuse pick-up 54% 60% 79% 67% 67% 67% 67%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 27
 The National Citizen Survey™


 VILLAGE OF SKOKIE, IL
 2012

DRAFT Report of Geographic Subgroup Comparisons




  2955 Valmont Road, Suite 300 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500
 Boulder, CO 80301 Washington, DC 20002
  www.n-r-c.com • 303-444-7863 www.icma.org • 202-289-ICMA
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Contents
 Survey Background ............................................................................................................. 1
 About The National Citizen Survey™ ........................................................................................ 1
 Understanding the Results .................................................................................................. 2
 “Don’t Know” Responses ......................................................................................................... 2
 Understanding the Tables ......................................................................................................... 2
 Comparisons ................................................................................................................... ... 3




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Survey Background
 ABOUT THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY™
 The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS™) is a collaborative effort between National Research
 Center, Inc. (NRC) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA).

 The survey and its administration are standardized to assure high quality survey methods and
 comparable results across The National Citizen Survey™ jurisdictions. Participating households are
 selected at random and the household member who responds is selected without bias. Multiple
 mailings give each household more than one chance to participate with self-addressed and postage
 paid envelopes. Results are statistically weighted to reflect the proper demographic composition of
 the entire community.

 The National Citizen Survey™ customized for this jurisdiction was developed in close cooperation
 with local jurisdiction staff. The Village of Skokie staff selected items from a menu of questions
 about services and community problems; they defined the jurisdiction boundaries NRC used for
 sampling; and they provided the appropriate letterhead and signatures for mailings. Village of
 Skokie staff also determined local interest in a variety of add-on options to The National Citizen
 Survey™ Basic Service.




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 1
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Understanding the Results
 “DON’T KNOW” RESPONSES
 On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of
 respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix A.
 However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the
 report. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an
 opinion about a specific item.

 UNDERSTANDING THE TABLES
 In this report, comparisons between geographic subgroups are shown. For most of the questions,
 we have shown only one number for each question. We have summarized responses to show only
 the proportion of respondents giving a certain answer; for example, the percent of respondents who
 rated the quality of life as “excellent” or “good”, or the percent of respondents who felt the rate of
 growth was “about right.”

 ANOVA and chi-square tests of significance were applied to these comparisons of survey questions
 by geographic subgroups. A “p-value” of 0.05 or less indicates that there is less than a 5%
 probability that differences observed between subgroups are due to chance; or in other words, a
 greater than 95% probability that the differences observed are “real.” Where differences were
 statistically significant, they are marked in grey.

 The 95 percent confidence level for this survey is generally no greater than plus or minus five
 percentage points around any given percent reported for the entire sample (352 completed
 surveys). For each Zip Code (60076, 60077 or 60203), the margin of error rises to approximately +
 or - 16% since sample sizes were approximately 156 for 60076, 158 for 60077 and 38 for 60203.




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 2
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Comparisons
 Cells shaded grey indicate statistically significant differences between subgroups.

 Question 1: Quality of Life (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Skokie: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Skokie as a place to live 89% 86% 95% 88%
 Your neighborhood as a place to live 79% 73% 96% 78%
 Skokie as a place to raise children 84% 79% 94% 83%
 Skokie as a place to work 72% 72% 86% 73%
 Skokie as a place to retire 66% 61% 89% 65%
 The overall quality of life in Skokie 82% 76% 95% 81%


 Question 2: Community Characteristics (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Skokie as a whole: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Sense of community 73% 66% 84% 71%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 81% 79% 92% 81%
 Overall appearance of Skokie 80% 70% 96% 77%
 Cleanliness of Skokie 88% 74% 92% 82%
 Overall quality of new development in Skokie 77% 60% 87% 70%
 Variety of housing options 75% 68% 84% 72%
 Overall quality of business and service establishments in Skokie 75% 70% 87% 74%
 Shopping opportunities 88% 83% 96% 86%
 Opportunities to attend cultural activities 83% 73% 81% 78%
 Recreational opportunities 80% 78% 86% 80%
 Employment opportunities 44% 46% 55% 46%
 Educational opportunities 85% 91% 86% 88%
 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 74% 74% 83% 75%
 Opportunities to volunteer 80% 71% 76% 76%
 Opportunities to participate in community matters 76% 64% 79% 71%
 Ease of car travel in Skokie 81% 84% 83% 82%


 The National Citizen Survey™
 3
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 2: Community Characteristics (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Skokie as a whole: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Ease of bus travel in Skokie 70% 76% 72% 73%
 Ease of rail or subway travel in Skokie 80% 87% 82% 83%
 Ease of bicycle travel in Skokie 66% 60% 58% 62%
 Ease of walking in Skokie 79% 72% 79% 76%
 Availability of paths and walking trails 64% 69% 86% 69%
 Traffic flow on major streets 63% 53% 71% 60%
 Amount of public parking 68% 61% 77% 65%
 Availability of affordable quality housing 60% 56% 71% 59%
 Availability of affordable quality child care 66% 59% 75% 64%
 Availability of affordable quality health care 75% 71% 89% 75%
 Availability of preventive health services 76% 67% 88% 73%
 Air quality 70% 70% 93% 71%
 Quality of overall natural environment in Skokie 75% 73% 86% 75%
 Overall image or reputation of Skokie 70% 69% 88% 71%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Question 3: Growth (Percent of respondents)
 Zip Code
 Please rate the speed of growth in the following categories in Skokie over the past 2 years: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Population growth too fast 26% 41% 7% 32%
 Retail growth too slow 45% 55% 35% 49%
 Jobs growth too slow 75% 72% 64% 72%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 4
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 4: Opportunities (Percent a "major" problem)
 Zip Code
 To what degree, if at all, are the following problems in Skokie: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Crime 20% 14% 4% 15%
 Drugs 20% 23% 6% 20%
 Too much growth 16% 14% 0% 14%
 Property taxes 47% 40% 22% 42%
 Traffic congestion 3% 8% 0% 5%
 Unsupervised youth 23% 29% 0% 24%
 Unmaintained properties (weeds, peeling paint, etc.) 9% 9% 0% 9%


 Question 5: Community Safety (Percent "very" or "somewhat" safe)
 Zip Code
 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel from the following in Skokie: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault, robbery) 67% 62% 78% 65%
 Property crimes (e.g., burglary, theft) 43% 51% 64% 49%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Environmental hazards, including toxic waste 70% 76% 82% 74%


 Question 6: Personal Safety (Percent "very" or "somewhat" safe)
 Zip Code
 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 In your neighborhood during the day 90% 83% 94% 87%
 In your neighborhood after dark 64% 62% 83% 65%
 In Skokie's downtown area during the day 90% 86% 95% 89%
 In Skokie's downtown area after dark 66% 64% 82% 66%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 5
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Questions 7 and 8: Crime Victimization and Reporting (Percent "yes")
 Zip Code
 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime in Skokie? 20% 11% 24% 16%
 If yes, was this crime (these crimes) reported to the police? 59% 88% 85% 71%


 Question 9: Resident Behaviors (Percent at least once in past 12 months)

 In the last 12 months, about how many times, if ever, have you or other household members participated in the following Zip Code
 activities in Skokie? 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Used Skokie Public Library or its services 90% 90% 78% 89%
 Participated in a recreation program or activity 63% 54% 72% 60%
 Visited a neighborhood park or Village park 91% 85% 87% 88%
 Ridden a local bus within Skokie 33% 35% 34% 34%
 Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting 19% 19% 18% 19%
 Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other Village-sponsored public meeting on cable television, the Internet or
 other media 23% 28% 28% 26%
 Read NewSkokie Newsletter 90% 96% 94% 93%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Visited the Village of Skokie Web site (at www.skokie.org) 68% 72% 73% 70%
 Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home 93% 78% 97% 87%
 Volunteered your time to some group or activity in Skokie 24% 17% 37% 22%
 Listened to 1660 AM Skokie radio station 16% 14% 19% 15%
 Ridden a Senior Transportation for Area Residents (STAR) bus 4% 5% 4% 4%
 Ridden the Skokie Swift 56% 66% 37% 59%
 Attended a neighborhood block party 24% 12% 42% 20%
 Called or emailed the Village for yard waste collection 52% 32% 62% 44%
 Dined or shopped in Downtown Skokie 83% 91% 85% 87%
 Visited the Skokie Farmers' Market 64% 63% 50% 63%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 6
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 10: Neighborliness (Percent at least several times a week)
 Zip Code
 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Visit with neighbors at least several times a week 45% 46% 69% 48%


 Question 11: Service Quality (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Skokie: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Police services 86% 86% 91% 87%
 Fire services 94% 99% 100% 97%
 Ambulance or emergency medical services 93% 99% 97% 96%
 Crime prevention 69% 59% 88% 66%
 Fire prevention and education 87% 80% 89% 84%
 Traffic enforcement 80% 72% 91% 77%
 Street repair 53% 51% 83% 55%
 Street cleaning 80% 67% 97% 76%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Street lighting 73% 59% 94% 68%
 Snow removal 68% 62% 92% 67%
 Sidewalk maintenance 66% 62% 90% 66%
 Bus or transit services 82% 81% 82% 82%
 Garbage collection 86% 89% 100% 89%
 Recycling 86% 83% 100% 86%
 Yard waste pick-up 75% 75% 83% 76%
 Storm drainage 53% 58% 79% 58%
 Drinking water 85% 75% 100% 82%
 Sewer services 70% 68% 88% 71%
 Electric utility service 84% 76% 97% 81%
 Village parks 89% 86% 100% 89%
 Land use, planning and zoning 71% 60% 95% 68%
 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 68% 47% 91% 61%
 Animal control 76% 70% 69% 73%



 The National Citizen Survey™
 7
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Question 11: Service Quality (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Skokie: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Economic development 59% 56% 81% 60%
 Skokie Health Department services 83% 76% 98% 81%
 Services to seniors 83% 81% 87% 83%
 Services to youth 74% 71% 90% 74%
 Services to low-income people 72% 56% 85% 65%
 Services to families 71% 68% 97% 72%
 Cable television 69% 63% 67% 66%
 Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 75% 71% 70% 73%
 Administrative hearings (parking and code violations) 61% 70% 68% 66%
 Sidewalk snow plowing 60% 54% 68% 57%
 Alley maintenance 59% 45% 60% 52%
 Obtaining a building permit 66% 64% 68% 65%
 Public information - 1660 AM Skokie radio station 82% 67% 72% 75%
 Public information - NewSkokie municipal newsletter 86% 82% 90% 85%
 Public information - www.skokie.org municipal Web site 89% 77% 86% 83%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Public information - Village of Skokie monthly email newsletter 83% 80% 96% 83%
 Overall competence of Police Department employees 85% 78% 87% 82%
 Police officers' attitudes and behaviors toward citizens 79% 65% 86% 74%
 Fire prevention - code enforcement 85% 75% 91% 81%
 Fire prevention - public education 82% 71% 89% 78%
 Senior Transportation for Area Residents (STAR) bus service 70% 80% 100% 77%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 8
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 12: Government Services Overall (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 The Village of Skokie 90% 83% 94% 87%
 The Federal Government 58% 51% 50% 54%
 The State Government 40% 43% 39% 41%
 Cook County Government 37% 45% 41% 41%


 Question 13: Contact with Village Employees (Percent "yes")
 Zip Code
 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Have you had any in-person, phone or email contact with an employee of the Village of Skokie within the last 12 months
 (including police, receptionists, planners or any others)? 78% 66% 80% 73%


 Question 14: Village Employees (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 What was your impression of the employee(s) of the Village of Skokie in your most recent contact? 60076 60077 60203 Overall




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Knowledge 83% 80% 100% 84%
 Responsiveness 85% 81% 100% 85%
 Courtesy 76% 81% 96% 80%
 Overall impression 81% 80% 100% 82%


 Question 15: Government Performance (Percent "excellent" or "good")
 Zip Code
 Please rate the following categories of Skokie government performance: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 The value of services for the taxes paid to Skokie 67% 58% 85% 65%
 The overall direction that Skokie is taking 67% 59% 91% 65%
 The job Skokie government does at welcoming citizen involvement 66% 60% 71% 64%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 9
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 16: Recommendation and Longevity (Percent "somewhat" or "very" likely)
 Zip Code
 Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Recommend living in Skokie to someone who asks 85% 86% 100% 87%
 Remain in Skokie for the next five years 82% 75% 96% 80%


 Question 17: Impact of the Economy (Percent "somewhat" or "very" positive)
 Zip Code
 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the
 impact will be: 19% 23% 35% 23%


 Question 18a: Custom Question 2 (Percent "essential" or "very important")
 Zip Code
 Please rate how important, if at all, each of the following community issues or initiatives is for the Village of Skokie: 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Increase vehicle sticker fee to hire more police officers 30% 24% 42% 29%
 Street resurfacing 62% 34% 60% 49%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Redevelop Dempster Street 46% 33% 66% 42%
 Downtown Skokie redevelopment 53% 55% 56% 54%
 Construct new bike paths and bike lanes 45% 41% 44% 43%
 Elderly care services 69% 65% 67% 67%
 At-risk youth programs 70% 62% 61% 66%
 Implement licensing of landlords and multi-family buildings 55% 51% 47% 53%
 Increase code enforcement for property standards violations 57% 50% 60% 54%
 Email residents public safety and crime alerts 69% 58% 68% 64%
 Use of user fees and special taxes instead of property taxes 58% 38% 47% 48%




 The National Citizen Survey™
 10
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 18b: Custom Question 2 (Percent "somewhat" or "strongly" support)

 The Village's property taxes have not increased since 1990. To what extent would you support or oppose a property tax Zip Code
 increase to fund the following programs or initiatives? 60076 60077 60203 Overall
 Revitalize Downtown Skokie 39% 59% 60% 50%
 Revitalize Dempster Street 43% 42% 71% 45%
 Revitalize other shopping/commercial areas (East Oakton Street, Main Street, etc.) 35% 41% 49% 39%
 Continue sidewalk snow plowing 65% 77% 82% 72%
 Increase street resurfacing 68% 58% 78% 65%
 Increase the number of property standards inspectors 36% 46% 57% 42%
 "Green" or other environmentally friendly equipment and programs 51% 58% 66% 56%
 Install additional traffic safety devices 44% 49% 62% 48%
 Increase the number of police officers 56% 50% 88% 56%
 Continue twice per week refuse pick-up 60% 73% 78% 68%




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 11
 The National Citizen Survey™


 VILLAGE OF SKOKIE, IL
 2012

 DRAFT Report of Open-ended Question




2955 Valmont Road, Suite 300 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500
 Boulder, CO 80301 Washington, DC 20002
www.n-r-c.com • 303-444-7863 www.icma.org • 202-289-ICMA
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Contents
 Survey Background ............................................................................................................. 1
 About The National Citizen Survey™ ........................................................................................ 1
 Understanding the Results .................................................................................................. 2 
 About Closed-ended and Open-ended Questions ..................................................................... 2
 Verbatims ..................................................................................................................... ............ 2
 Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions .................................................................. 4 
 IS THERE A COMMUNITY ISSUE OF CONCERN TO YOU THAT IS NOT ADDRESSED IN THIS SURVEY ?
 PLEASE EXPLAIN. ................................................................................................................... 4
 Law Enforcement (crime, police services)............................................................................ 4
 Rental Properties (multifamily units, section 8 housing)....................................................... 5
 Transportation Issues (public transportation, signage) .......................................................... 5
 Governance (taxes, budget issues) ...................................................................................... 6
 Infrastructure (street repair/maintenance, snow removal, utilities) ........................................ 7
 Community, diversity, and low-income concerns................................................................ 7
 Code enforcement (appearance, abandoned buildings, animal control, city ordinances) ..... 8
 Other ......................................................................................................................... ........ 8
 Don’t know/Nothing .......................................................................................................... 9




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Survey Background
 ABOUT THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY™
 The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS™) is a collaborative effort between National Research
 Center, Inc. (NRC) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA).

 The survey and its administration are standardized to assure high quality survey methods and
 comparable results across The National Citizen Survey™ jurisdictions. Participating households are
 selected at random and the household member who responds is selected without bias. Multiple
 mailings give each household more than one chance to participate with self-addressed and postage
 paid envelopes. Results are statistically weighted to reflect the proper demographic composition of
 the entire community.

 The National Citizen Survey™ customized for this jurisdiction was developed in close cooperation
 with local jurisdiction staff. The Village of Skokie staff selected items from a menu of questions
 about services and community problems; they defined the jurisdiction boundaries NRC used for
 sampling; and they provided the appropriate letterhead and signatures for mailings. Village of
 Skokie staff also determined local interest in a variety of add-on options to The National Citizen
 Survey™ Basic Service.




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 1
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Understanding the Results
 ABOUT CLOSED-ENDED AND OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS
 Questions can either be asked in a closed-ended or open-ended manner. A closed-ended question
 is one where a set of response options is listed on the survey. Those taking the survey respond to
 each option listed. Open-ended questions have no answer choices from which respondents select
 their response. Instead, respondents must “create” their own answers and state them in their own
 words. The verbatim responses are categorized by topic area using codes. An "other" category is
 used for responses falling outside the coded categories. In general, a code is assigned when at least
 5-10% of responses will fit the code.

 Advantages of an open-ended question include:

  Responses are not prompted, allowing respondents to provide answers that are not anticipated
 or well known.
  This type of question tends to capture response options that come to mind most quickly.
  The final result can be richer, since verbatim responses are included in an appendix, giving you
 and others a chance to “hear” the voice of respondents in their own words.
  There is a smaller risk of missing important dimensions.

 VERBATIMS
 Respondents were asked to record their opinions about Skokie in the following question:

  Is there a community issue of concern to you that is not addressed in this survey? Please
 explain.

 The verbatim responses were categorized by topic area and those topics are reported in the
 following table with the percent of responses given in each category. Because some comments
 from residents covered more than a single topic, each topic mentioned by a resident was
 categorized and counted for the table below. Those verbatim responses are grouped by the first
 topic listed in each comment whenever a respondent mentioned more than a single topic. Verbatim
 comments that contain more than one topic nevertheless appear only once (in the category of the
 first topic listed), however the analysis in the table below counts each of the topic areas given by all




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 respondents regardless where those topics appeared in the comment.

 Results from the open-ended question are best understood by reviewing the table of frequencies
 that summarize responses as well as the actual verbatim responses themselves.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 2
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Question 18c: Is there a community issue of concern to you that is not addressed in this survey? Please explain.
 Percent of Respondents
 Law enforcement (crime, police services) 21%
 Rental properties (multifamily units, section 8 housing) 18%
 Transportation Issues (public transportation, signage) 15%
 Governance (taxes, budget issues) 13%
 Infrastructure (street repair/maintenance, snow removal, utilities) 10%
 Community, diversity, and low-income concerns 9%
 Code enforcement (appearance, abandoned buildings, animal control, city ordinances) 7%
 Other 11%
 Don't know/nothing 18%
 Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one category.




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 3
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Verbatim Responses to Open-ended
 Questions
 The following pages contain the respondents’ verbatim responses as written on the survey and have
 not been edited for spelling or grammar. Responses have been organized by coded topic areas.

 IS THERE A COMMUNITY ISSUE OF CONCERN TO YOU THAT IS NOT
 ADDRESSED IN THIS SURVEY? PLEASE EXPLAIN.



 Law Enforcement (crime, police services)
  Some areas of Skokie are ok-some are pretty scary. Mostly low-income housing, need a lot of
 support to keep three low income teens in good behavior to keep Skokie a family
 neighborhood.
  You have to stop letting undesirable move into Skokie I am worried where I go onto at night.
 The mayor doesn’t care who he lets in to Skokie. I live on Keating and I can’t stand whats going
 on with the housing problems.
  Drunk driving -the focus has been on traffic light and the young woman who killed the little
 child was drunk - a stop light would not have changed the outcome.
  Yes, whenever a Driver is pull over, instruct the police officer to move out of the way from
 traffic. They cause more accidents when they block a lane or the whole road.
  Crime and the effort to welcome low income residents at the expense of current resident tax
 payers.
  Village needs to have a strong anti-littering initiative with enforcement
  Need more Police presence in the neighborhoods especially at night. Side streets are too dark. I
 saw a drug buy from car to bicycle at Bronx.
  The Problem with hiring more police is that they cannot prevent crime, they can only react after
 a crime, accident or incidents occurs - it is unlikely that they are a big deterrent - therefore, are
 these dollars well spent?
  Crime, drugs / property taxes,
  I am very concerned about drugs, crimes that happen in my neighborhood I am planning to
 move out of Skokie due to these youth who are not supervise and use drugs I don’t want any




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 young children getting attached.
  Vandalism of personal and private property
  Concentrate on crimes reduction and lowering the taxes caring about the crimes victims that
 happened in Skokie
  Crime in Skokie (via Skokie patch) need more police patrols during day and night! Hire civilians
 volunteers!
  Parks are not safe for children, drugs are being sold, parents let their children take drugs &
 came nuisance to others properties police vigilance only by cars which is ineffective. A bigger
 & better webber park like facility is needed near howard/crawford. Sts.
  Based on observations, sometimes appears to be drug trafficking @ Old Orchard in parking area
  Crime has been increasing in Skokie since now had a great influx of section 8 housing




 The National Citizen Survey™
 4
 Village of Skokie | 2012




 Rental Properties (multifamily units, section 8 housing)
  The village has allowed to much section 8, area has changed.
  Low incoming housing bringing down the quality of the neighborhood and increased the
 feeling of unsafe and crime that was never a problem in Skokie but it is now.
  Stop sect 8 housing, stop bragging about diversity. Start requiring everyone in the school parade
 to play/sing patriotic music.
  That Skokie has allowed way too much. Subsidized housing which has caused more crime,
 Dirty lawns and streets and ruined the ability to feel safe here anymore. People who get
 something for nothing Do not care. Has ruined Skokie period.
  Section 8 housing. I’m not particularly impressed or proud of the negative image it gives
 Skokie, especially with the largest concentration of it happening within 1 mile
 north/south/east/west of our downtown.
  Section 8 housing and crime
  Too many condos, and apartments and section 8 (crowded living conditions) in the same area,
 and same school district instead of spread out evenly.
  Too much section 8 housing & apartments along Skokie Blvd. It make's area of town very
 undesirable.
  Section 8 renters, they need to be policed more, a lot more
  Increase of "Section-8" properties.
  Very concerned about increased subsidized housing and increased crime especially by the
 downtown area.
  Section 8 housing - youth around McDonalds are very rude and dangerous to be around. They
 assault people in the area when walking in area. Loitering at McDonald pushing Bad Situation
 Kids hanging around Skokie Swift.
  Please create a regulatory body governing low-income housing (chapter 8) applications, and
 enforcement of rules and qualifications.
  Too many low income houses, there seems to be an increase in the past years



 Transportation Issues (public transportation, signage)




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
  I would like to see more frequent, continuous, and longer hours of operation of the CTA 54a
 bus route.
  Those who live on a block needs to park on that block and those who don’t needs to park
 where they live at,
  They need to stop blowing the horn for so long as the Skokie swift goes by houses. In morning
 6:00 Am Don’t raise our property taxes!!
  Why doesn't Skokie have a (free bus) service like Niles? This would help the elderly very much
 with Dr appts and shopping etc. Thank You.
  Number of people who ignore 'left/right turn only' on stoplight at Fargo & Niles center. At rush
 hours very few people turn, but go straight across ( both west / east bound)
  Teach bicycle riding-safety for pedestrians on sidewalks remind not everyone has internet
  Place signs on the streets when the streets are swept to the cars are moved.
  The traffic control boxes that were painted are awful! I have lived in Skokie 18 1/2 yrs. Had to
 abandon going to the Skokie pool in the water park about 10 yrs. ago due to filth and
 overcrowding. Pretty Bad when you can’t enjoy your neighborhood pool! Used to enjoy it what
 a shame!

 The National Citizen Survey™
 5
 Village of Skokie | 2012



  Absence of day long parking at Skokie Swift Station Oakton St.
  We would like to know when street & leaf cleaning will occur so we can move our car. (for
 better clean up)
  The wait time for the Skokie swift train is for too long now that there is a stop down town, these
 need to be adjusted
  Cars blocking intersections you wind up waiting for 2 lights Skokie Blvd. & Howard. People on
 bikes not following the rules. Going thru red lights
  East west bicycle routes - such as Main, Church
  New zone parking south of Oakton near swift stop is too restrictive and hurts downtown
 business
  (1)Skokie needs more stop signs instead of yield signs, in our neighborhoods. (2)More
 entertainment for our kids and social events & activities. (Free)



 Governance (taxes, budget issues)
  Keep in mind that a large portion of retirees are on fixed incomes. Even if they own their homes
 the increasing property taxes are becoming a very difficult situation. On it medicines food or
 taxes?
  Excessive amounts of money spent on consultant fees.
  I'm very much against taxing landlords.
  High real estate taxes relative to value of home
  Property tax should be reduced
  Increased taxes with nothing in return. Village inspectors grant occupancy to new building with
 major defects from irresponsible border allowed to build in Skokie new owners stock with
 building defects and liens and Skokie does not take any no one can sell because of residual
 liens responsibility can’t wait to get out of Skokie would rather die than go to Skokie
  Taxes are too high and I’ve experienced extreme increases! This is a major problem for us and
 makes us want to leave.
  Yes why is Skokie wasting taxpayer money on hanging plants on street lights, plants and trees
 on streets and to maintain those items? This is a complete waste and looks awful later in the
 fall!
  I will use this section to comment on property tax statement above, to support or not is




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 contingent on the % increase.
  Does this survey take into account the different taxes paid for those of us in 60203?
  Taxes on my home are forcing me out. Started at $2400 of are amt $900 on a home that is only
 worth $225 - less than paid. I have appealed to no avail.
  Assessments have decreased and yet the property taxes have increased. There should be cuts to
 the property taxes even if it means that the schools should more effectively use the money they
 receive.
  Village's property taxes have gone up and not down as mention here




 The National Citizen Survey™
 6
 Village of Skokie | 2012



 Infrastructure (street repair/maintenance, snow removal,
 utilities)
  Gross Point Road needs curbs and gutters/storm drains. Has anything come of this? I attended a
 meeting last year and have heard nothing more.
  Crawford Street should be under village of Skokie & not under Cook County. On Crawford
 between Golf & Howard & -There is very very poor road condition, poor street light, very poor
 snow remove
  Street rights and maintenance
  I appreciate having the alley exits cleared after the snow plows clear the streets excellent
  My consern about Alleys in my neiborhood. You souposed to make level, the water stay’s in
 back yards, the water comes to our yards very anhealthy very anhealthy!!
  There are not enough streets lamps near my home. I cannot see in the dark. I Live at 4923
  Need to fix your sensor's at traffic light's many of them don't work "please"
  I live in Timber Ridge and our street s are not resurfaced, we don’t get sidewalk plowing. And
 our child can’t use the park so when schools are out if not like not Skokie schools.
  I asked to have my "falling apart and broken" curb repaired. They made it look 3x s as bad as it
 was; even had a child working on it. I feel I was punished for asking to have it made safer.
  Electrical outages are a disgrace.
  Speed bumps needed on woods drive
  The new garbage collecting company is the very worst ever.
  Streets in neighborhood need re surfacing
  Very poor road condition, street lighting, snow removal on Crawford ave
  Why does the street cleaning truck partially clean the street (block). Why does he leave some
 areas unclean?



 Community, diversity, and low-income concerns
  Skokie puts too much emphasis on diverse ethnicity; whites no longer fit in. If you want to
 revitalize parts of Skokie, appeal to middle age & younger citizens - old, elderly people don't
 spend money. Problem with traffic is the drivers they're stupid & slow or unconscious at the
 wheel.




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
  The experience of immigrants is not addressed - specifically childrens education language
 barriers cultural issues. Skokie has enormous diversity in new populations. Feedback from these
 residents would be helpful to support their comfort/success in our community.
  Lot of Indian & Pakistani community reside in Skokie, we need space (building) for Muslims &
 Hindu for worship (mosque & temple). Please assign or provide Zoning as Christians and Jews
 have space.
  Yes, we need to stop accepting low income disbursement. It has raised our crime rate,
 diminished and crowded our schools! Skokie has taken a turn for the worst!
  We welcome to many low income families. We have over 50% free lunches give out in our
 school district. Why do you think crime is up.
  Jewish families walking in the street as they go to & from temple. Why don't they use
 sidewalks? We need bike lanes on major streets - Dempster /Crawford/Main Church St.
  The needs to physically handicapped elderly who lives alone - getting groceries, doctors visit,
 cleaning, pleasure, time etc. Pick up mails (Mail PO Box) Those who can’t afford standard
 payment for services.



 The National Citizen Survey™
 7
 Village of Skokie | 2012



  People are embattled in their homes and neighborhoods. Walking my dog in old neighborhood
 met and enjoyed neighborhoods. Here they run out yelling be sure my dog doesn’t do her
 business...I prominently carry bright bags. Cost to me. Don’t Like walking around. Cost to
 community Ex I met elderly couple who are isolated and ran out excited my dog looked like
 their old one. Say to myself come this way often just to be available, social etc. Then near
 neighbor got upset I come too often. Old neighborhood, elderly Holocaust survivor sits on his
 porch we all phone chair to conf on street
  Food pantry staff (Niles township)- they should be more friendly, accommodating and not rude
 to the public


 Code enforcement (appearance, abandoned buildings, animal
 control, city ordinances)
  People who let their dogs do their business at schools, parks, etc. and not remove it or put it in
 someone elses garbage can.
  Allowing home with 3 large dogs making their yard as garbage you should enforce the code i
 believe is 2 per household
  In my many daily walks, I notice there are unoccupied foreclosed homes where grass is not
 moved and a general state of disrepair, these turning into quite eyesore. Who is responsible for
 maintaining/cleaning these properties?
  Garbage in front yards is ugly-absentee landlords with section - 8 tenants allow properties to
 become trashy.
  Can public works contest people about huge trees growing in their blocking neighbor view of
 the street? Also it is dangerous when backing out of your driveway and can’t see if a car is
 coming down the street
  Dogs feces. I have not notified the village. My house is by the corner and people with dogs pass
 by. They throw dog feces in brown bin (garbage bin) and the garbage man does not pick it up
 and leaves it there inside to stink.
  Perhaps have pet ownership workshops put on by ac(health) dept. to teach irresponsible dog
 (&cat) owners how to be better owners such as training as training classes provided by village.
 (funded)




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.
 Other
  The appearance board should set higher standards for business and housing. Don't let
 opportunities for improvements slip away!
  Rats are everywhere Even on the village green. Cell phone taxes too high.
  Yes I do: it is a crime against Americans, committed by the 200 richest Americans by denying
 us Americans to have free health care.
  The hazards of breathing smoke from wood burning stoves fireplace and fire pits!!
  The old desire building it has been empty for years it needs to be redeveloped soon. It does not
 good to have a building empty for years. I am embarrassed as a Skokie resident Poor decision
 years ago to build the store on bottom, apt on top building in downtown area.
  I did not fill out the last question of 18a because I don’t know what would come under the term
 "uses fees and specialties".
  Yard flooding due to other homes too big for lots causing others water on?
  Education needs to continue to be the top priority. Keeping teachers salarie competitive to keep
 and recruit excellent teachers. Cap out-of-control administrator wages.


 The National Citizen Survey™
 8
 Village of Skokie | 2012



  Fitness First - recreation center: group exercise programs the quality of instructors is
 deteriorating. Most instructors are average, at best. Several are Lackluster; one is near
 incompetent. Improvement in quality is necessary.
  Pest control in high density alleys - at times rats are a big concern. Glad to say that a call to the
 village is followed up nearly immediately, but my alley is filthy due to apartment dwellers not
 putting garbage in cans.


 Don’t know/Nothing
  Not a problem
  No
  No
  No
  No. This survey is quite comprehensive
  I have truly enjoyed Skokie. I retired and am moving to Ohio Nov 1st. I will miss the services.
  The library is excellent number 1 in state
  None
  Not yet
  Because is not important.
  No concern.
  No.
  None
  No
  None
  None
  Think you got it all!
  None
  None
  None
  No




The National Citizen Survey™ by National Research Center, Inc.




 The National Citizen Survey™
 9
 MML: *1/22/13
 A
 PC: 2012-47P
 SUP: 440.01
 THIS ORDINANCE MAY BE CITED AS
 VILLAGE ORDINANCE NUMBER

 13-1-Z-


 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO
 ALLOW OUTDOOR STORAGE AT 7334 RIDGEWAY AVENUE,
 SKOKIE, ILLINOIS IN AN M3 INDUSTRY DISTRICT

1 WHEREAS, the owner of the following described real property:

2 LOT 117 IN KRENN & DATO’S WEST ROGERS PARK “L” SUBDIVISION OF THE
3 NORTH ½ OF THE SOUTHEAST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 26,
4 TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 13, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN
5 COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS.
6
7 PIN: 10-26-308-042-0000

8 more commonly described as 7334 Ridgeway Avenue, Skokie, Illinois (the “Subject
9 Property”), petitioned the Village of Skokie for a special use permit to allow outdoor storage
10 at the Subject Property in an M3 Industry district; and

11 WHEREAS, located on the Subject Property is Masters Kitchen and Bath Corporation
12 (hereinafter “Masters”). Masters shapes granite stone slabs into counter tops and flooring and
13 provides general contracting services for the installation of its products; and

14 WHEREAS, the petitioner intends to construct a chain link fenced and screened
15 storage area behind the building because there is insufficient space within the building to store
16 the slabs of granite; and

17 WHEREAS, the granite would be brought by a forklift from the storage area into the
18 building through an existing rear overhead door. A sliding gate would be installed to provide
19 access to the storage area from the alley; and

20 WHEREAS, the Skokie Plan Commission, at a public hearing duly held on November
21 15, 2012, for which proper legal notice had been achieved and no interested parties appeared
22 and after hearing all discussion, (a) made the appropriate findings of fact as required under
23 Section 118-32 of the Skokie Village Code and (b) voted to recommend to the Mayor and
24 Board of Trustees that the requested special use permit be granted subject to the conditions
25 contained in the Plan Commission Report dated December 17, 2012; and

26 WHEREAS, subsequent to the hearing, a letter from the owner of the property at 7335
27 Hamlin Avenue was reviewed by Village staff, which expressed concerns regarding trucks that
28 potentially could block the alley behind their building. The property owner expressed the
29 opinion that he would no longer be able to unload materials within the area behind their
30 building due to the presence of the proposed fence behind 7334 Ridgeway Avenue. It is the


 Page 1 of 3
 VOSDOCS-#421089, Ordinance_2012-47P_SUP_Outdoor Storage_7334 Ridgeway
1 opinion of Village staff that the proposed fence is to be built along the rear lot line of the
2 Subject Property, but will not block access to the 7335 Hamlin property; and

3 WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees, at a public meeting duly held on
4 December 17, 2012, concurred in the aforesaid recommendations and findings of fact of the
5 Skokie Plan Commission;

6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the
7 Village of Skokie, Cook County, Illinois:

8 Section 1: That the special use permit requested by the petitioner to allow outdoor
9 storage at the Subject Property, described above and commonly known as 7334 Ridgeway
10 Avenue, Skokie, Illinois, in an M3 Industry district be and the same, is hereby granted and
11 approved subject to each of the conditions set forth below:

12 1. The petitioner shall operate and maintain the outdoor storage area in
13 substantial conformance with the Site Plan, dated November 1, 2012;
14 2. The screening surrounding the storage area must be constructed in
15 compliance with Section 118-171(2) of the Skokie Village Code;
16 3. All fencing, walls, sidewalks, driveways, curbs, wheel stops, parking areas,
17 signage, landscaping, structures, and any other facilities or infrastructure on
18 the Subject Property must be maintained in a good state of repair, and when
19 needed, be repaired or replaced in a timely manner;
20 4. Parking lot and exterior lighting must meet IES standards, be full cut-off design
21 and be directed away from adjacent properties, subject to the approval of the
22 Engineering Division;
23 5. All off-street parking spaces must be legibly striped and maintained;
24 6. Vehicles must always be parked between, and not overlap, the striped lines of
25 designated parking spaces and must not block driveways, sidewalks, aisles, or
26 other points of access;
27 7. All private and public sidewalks must be maintained free of snow, ice, sleet, or
28 other objects that may impede travel;
29 8. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the petitioners must submit to the
30 Planning Division of the Community Development Department the name,
31 address, and telephone number of the company and contact person
32 responsible for site maintenance in compliance with the special use permit;
33 9. If work is to be performed on public property or if public property is utilized or
34 impacted during construction and/or development, the owner shall provide, or
35 shall cause the developer and/or contractor to provide, the Village of Skokie
36 with a certificate of insurance naming the Village of Skokie as additionally
37 insured for any and all claims related to any and all work. The owner shall
38 hold, and shall cause the developer and/or contractor to hold, the Village of
39 Skokie harmless and indemnify the Village for any and all claims for property
40 damage or personal injury related to work on or use of public property;
41 10. The petitioners shall comply with all Federal and State statutes, laws, rules


 Page 2 of 3
 VOSDOCS-#421089, Ordinance_2012-47P_SUP_Outdoor Storage_7334 Ridgeway
1 and regulations and all Village codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations;
2 11. Failure to abide by any and all terms of this Ordinance shall be cause for the
3 Village to initiate hearings to determine whether the subject Ordinance, as well
4 as any applicable business licenses, should be revised or revoked; and
5 12. The petitioners shall pay all costs related to any hearings conducted as a
6 result of non-compliance with any of the provisions of the enabling ordinance.
7 The costs shall include but not be limited to court reporter fees, attorney fees,
8 and staff time required researching and conducting said hearing.
9
10 Section 2: That a notice of the approval of this Ordinance incorporating the
11 conditions contained herein shall be executed by the owner of the property in writing and
12 duly recorded with the Cook County Recorder of Deeds Office at the owner’s expense.

13 Section 3: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
14 passage, approval and recordation as provided by law.
15 ADOPTED this day of January 2013.
16
17 Village Clerk
18 Ayes:
19 Nays:
20 Absent:
21 Approved by me this day of
22 Attested and filed in my January 2013.
23 office this day of
24 January 2013.
25
26 Mayor, Village of Skokie
27
28 Village Clerk




 Page 3 of 3
 VOSDOCS-#421089, Ordinance_2012-47P_SUP_Outdoor Storage_7334 Ridgeway
 MML: *1/22/13
 B
 PC: 2012-48P

 THIS ORDINANCE MAY BE CITED AS
 VILLAGE ORDINANCE NUMBER
 13-1-Z-

 AN ORDINANCE VACATING AN UNOPENED AND UNIMPROVED
 RESIDENTIAL EAST-WEST ALLEY BETWEEN THE 4900 BLOCK
 OF LAMON AVENUE AND LAVERGNE AVENUE WITHIN
 AN AREA BOUNDED BY COYLE AVENUE, LAVERGNE
 AVENUE, MORSE AVENUE, AND LAMON AVENUE, IN
 AN R2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT

1 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department is continuing the alley vacation
2 program that was initiated in 2002, in which the Village vacates unopened and unimproved
3 residential alleys that are unnecessary for Village transportation and access needs; and

4 WHEREAS, the alleys to be vacated were dedicated along with the original subdivisions,
5 however, they were never improved when the homes were constructed, and the Village does
6 not have any intent to open or improve them; and

7 WHEREAS, the alley vacation program benefits both property owners, by receiving
8 increased land area that will potentially increase the value and development potential of their
9 property, and the Village by reducing maintenance costs; and

10 WHEREAS, the alley to be vacated is the east-west alley in the 4900 block between
11 Lamon Avenue and Lavergne Avenue measuring approximately 594.33 feet in length and 16
12 feet in width (the “Subject Property”); and

13 WHEREAS, the Subject Property is depicted on the Plat of Vacation, dated October 22,
14 2012, and subsequently revised November 6, 2012, a copy of which is attached hereto as
15 Exhibit “A”; and

16 WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located in an R2 Single-Family Residential district
17 within an area bounded by Coyle Avenue, Lavergne Avenue, Morse Avenue, and Lamon
18 Avenue and is described in Exhibit “B” attached hereto; and

19 WHEREAS, the nature and extent of the public use or public interest to be subserved in
20 the Subject Property shall warrant the vacation of the same; and

21 WHEREAS, the title and ownership of the portion of the Subject Property to be vacated
22 shall, pursuant to 65 ILCS 5/11-91-2, vest in equal proportions to the abutting property owners
23 as identified by the Permanent Index Numbers (hereinafter “PIN”) and are listed by PIN block
24 numbers in Exhibit “B” attached hereto; and

25 WHEREAS, the only structure that may be built on the vacated alley is a fence, and that
26 any and all structures built or maintained by the property owners are done so at the property
27 owner’s risk. The Village shall have the right to enter upon vacated alleys and may damage or
28 remove the structure, should the Village need to access the area covered by the easement; and


 Page 1 of 3
 VOSDOCS-#421208-v1-Ordinance__2012-48P__Alley_Vacation__4900_Block__Bounded_by_Coyle-Lavergne-Morse-
 Lamon_4900 Block_Bounded by Coyle-Lavergne-Morse-Lamon
1 WHEREAS, the Village will remove any existing alley aprons and restore parkways,
2 sidewalks and any curbs, if necessary; and

3 WHEREAS, a permanent public easement for drainage purposes shall be maintained by
4 the Village, as well as easements for Village and Village-franchised public utilities will remain
5 over the entire area to be vacated; and

6 WHEREAS, there are several existing sheds located within the Subject Property which
7 will be allowed to remain. However, once these sheds are removed, they may not be rebuilt on
8 the Subject Property; and

9 WHEREAS, no compensation shall be paid by the owners of the abutting properties for
10 the value of the real estate which may accrue to them by reason of the enactment of this
11 Ordinance, since it has been determined that the vacation of alleys and the vacated portion will
12 benefit both residents and the Village; and

13 WHEREAS, the abutting property owners of the Subject Property were duly notified of
14 the Skokie Plan Commission proceedings; and

15 WHEREAS, the Skokie Plan Commission, at a public hearing duly held on November
16 15, 2012, heard testimony from an interested party who inquired about potential damage to his
17 fence located on the Subject Property by a utility company. Staff replied the utility companies,
18 as well as the Village, have the right of entry onto the Subject Property to repair their equipment;
19 and

20 WHEREAS, after hearing all discussion, the Skokie Plan Commission (a) determined
21 proper legal notice was achieved, and (b) voted to recommend to the Mayor and Board of
22 Trustees that the Subject Property be vacated, subject to the conditions set forth in the Plan
23 Commission Report dated December 17, 2012; and

24 WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Skokie, at a public
25 meeting duly held December 17, 2012, concurred in the recommendation of the Skokie Plan
26 Commission;

27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the
28 Village of Skokie, Cook County, Illinois:
29 Section 1: That the following portion of the alley commonly described below, and
30 legally described in Exhibit “B” attached hereto, and depicted on the Plat of Vacation, dated
31 October 22, 2012, and subsequently revised November 6, 2012, a copy of which is attached
32 hereto as Exhibit “A”, located in the Village of Skokie, be and the same is hereby vacated:
33 the rectangular-shaped 594.33 feet of the unimproved 16-foot wide east-west residential
34 alley in the 4900 block between Lamon Avenue and Lavergne Avenue,
35 and the title to the vacated alley shall vest to the abutting property owners pursuant to 65 ILCS
36 5/11-91-2, as identified by their Permanent Index Numbers set out in Exhibit “B” attached
37 hereto.

38 Section 2: The aforesaid vacation is subject to the conditions set forth below:
39 1. Easements shall be and are hereby reserved on, in and over the Subject
40 Property for all Village and Village-franchised public utilities over the Subject Property. A


 Page 2 of 3
 VOSDOCS-#421208-v1-Ordinance__2012-48P__Alley_Vacation__4900_Block__Bounded_by_Coyle-Lavergne-Morse-
 Lamon_4900 Block_Bounded by Coyle-Lavergne-Morse-Lamon
1 permanent public drainage easement for the benefit of the Village shall be, and is hereby,
2 reserved on, in and over the Subject Property.
3 2. Property owners shall not alter the grade or change the drainage pattern in the
4 Subject Property without a permit from the Engineering Division.
5 3. Other than a fence, no structures shall be constructed or trees planted in the
6 Subject Property.

7 Section 3: The Village, on its own behalf and on behalf of Village-franchised public
8 utilities, shall retain the right of entry upon the Subject Property in order to install, repair, replace
9 or remove, or engage in the maintenance of, any equipment or facility of any such utility or the
10 drainage conditions in the Subject Property. In the course of repair, replacement or removal, or
11 maintenance of equipment or facilities of a Village-franchised public utility, or drainage
12 conditions in, on or over the Subject Property, the Village or the Village-franchised public utility
13 shall not be held liable by any owner of the Subject Property for any damage to structures,
14 landscaping, or fences in, on or over the Subject Property. Any and all structures, including a
15 fence, built or maintained on the Subject Property are done so at the owner of the Subject
16 Property’s own risk.

17 Section 4: That the aforesaid vacation, incorporating the conditions contained
18 herein, shall be effective upon the recording of a Plat of Vacation by the Village of Skokie in the
19 Office of the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County.

20 Section 5: That no compensation shall be paid by the owners of the abutting
21 properties for the value of the real estate which may accrue to them by reason of the enactment
22 of this ordinance and that the public interest and benefit will be subserved by the vacation of the
23 properties referenced herein.

24 Section 6: It is the intention of the Village that ownership and title to the vacated
25 alley shall pass to and vest in the adjacent property owners, as listed by the Permanent Index
26 Numbers in Exhibit “B”, in equal proportions of the vacated alley.

27 Section 7: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
28 passage, approval, and recordation as provided by law.
29 ADOPTED this day of January 2013.
30
31 Village Clerk
32 Ayes:
33 Nays:
34 Absent:
35 Approved by me this day of
36 Attested and filed in my January 2013.
37 office this day of
38 January 2013.
39
40 Mayor, Village of Skokie
41
42 Village Clerk




 Page 3 of 3
 VOSDOCS-#421208-v1-Ordinance__2012-48P__Alley_Vacation__4900_Block__Bounded_by_Coyle-Lavergne-Morse-
 Lamon_4900 Block_Bounded by Coyle-Lavergne-Morse-Lamon
Exhibit A
 Exhibit B




 LEGAL DESCRIPTION


 ALL OF THE EAST WEST 16 FOOT ALLEY LYING SOUTH OF LOTS 1 TO
 18, BOTH INCLUSIVE, AND NORTH OF LOTS 19 TO 36, BOTH
 INCLUSIVE, LYING WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF LAMON AVENUE,
 EXTENDED NORTH AND SOUTH, AND EAST OF THE EAST LINE OF
 LAVERGNE AVENUE, EXTENDED NORTH AND SOUTH, IN KRENN AND
 DATO’S PRATT-MORSE SUBDIVISION, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 3
 IN COUNTY CLERK’S DIVISION OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 33,
 TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 13 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL
 MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS.


 AFFECTED INDEX NUMBERS (PINS)


10-33-222-001-0000 10-33-222-058-0000 10-33-222-054-0000
10-33-222-002-0000 10-33-222-059-0000 10-33-222-029-0000
10-33-222-051-0000 10-33-222-019-0000 10-33-222-030-0000
10-33-222-066-0000 10-33-222-020-0000 10-33-222-031-0000
10-33-222-046-0000 10-33-222-055-0000 10-33-222-032-0000
10-33-222-047-0000 10-33-222-056-0000 10-33-222-063-0000
10-33-222-043-0000 10-33-222-024-0000 10-33-222-035-0000
10-33-222-060-0000 10-33-222-025-0000 10-33-222-036-0000
10-33-222-061-0000 10-33-222-026-0000 10-33-222-067-0000
10-33-222-062-0000 10-33-222-053-0000

12685
MINUTES of a regular meeting of the Mayor and the Board of Trustees of the Village of
Skokie, Cook County, Illinois held in the Council Chambers at 5127 Oakton Street at 8
p.m. on Tuesday, January 22, 2013

The Combined Fire and Police Honor Guard presented the Colors and Mayor Van Dusen led
the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Mayor called the meeting to order.
The Clerk called the Roll. Those present were Trustee Roberts, Sutker, Bromberg Shah, Gray-
Keeler and Mayor Van Dusen. Trustee Perille was not present.
Motion to approve the Consent Agenda.
Moved: Trustee Shah Seconded: Trustee Bromberg
Ayes: Roberts, Sutker, Bromberg, Shah, Gray-Keeler and Mayor Van Dusen
Nays: None.
Absent: Perille.
MOTION CARRIED

* Approve, as submitted, minutes of regular meeting held Monday, January 7, 2013.
Omnibus vote.

* Approve Voucher List #17-FY13 of January 22, 2013.
Omnibus vote.

Proclamations and Resolutions.
A. Proclamations:
Morton and Shirley Paradise Day – January 30, 2013
Mayor Van Dusen read a Proclamation expressing gratitude and appreciation to Shirley
and Mort Paradise for their contributions and tireless commitment to helping make the
Village of Skokie one of the best communities in the United States of America.

*National Burn Awareness Month – February 2013
Omnibus vote.

Recognition, Awards and Honorary Presentations.
A. Citizen’s Life Saving Award
Fire Chief Ralph Czerwinski presented a Citizen’s Life Saving Award to Sinan
Milanovic for his lifesaving actions on December 17, 2012 at the Armond King
Apartments.
The Chief noted that thru the efforts of former Corporation Counsel Hanley, Deputy
Chief Fire Chief James Walters and the cooperation of the Cook County Housing
Authority, this building received a lifesaving sprinkler system.

B. Honorary Presentation:
Skokie Firefighter’s Benevolent Fund and Schaeffer’s Food and Spirits presented a
check for $2,900 to Maureen Murphy to support the Community Giving Program.

Appointments, Reappointments and Resignations.
A. Swearing in of the following personnel by the Board of Fire and Police Commissioner
Beryl Rabinowitz:
 Name Old Position New Position
 Matthew Dickinson New Hire Police Officer
 Leo Feldman New Hire Police Officer
 Patrick Howe New Hire Police Officer
 Jaclyn Roden New Hire Police Officer
 Peter Arreguin New Hire Firefighter
 Christopher Johnson New Hire Firefighter
Mayor Van Dusen congratulated the new Police Officers and new Firefighters who introduced
their family and friends.

* B. Reappointment:
Board of Health (Two-Year Term, One-Year Term as Chair): Dr. A. Drachler
Omnibus vote.

 1
12686
Meeting of the Mayor and Board of Trustees
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 Page Two

Presentations and Reports.
A. Presentation of 2012 National Citizen Survey – Ann Tennes, Director of Marketing and
Communications and Damema Man, Senior Project Manager with The National Citizen
Survey.
Senior Project Manager Damema Mann, with the National Citizen Survey gave a detailed
presentation providing significant details on resident responses to the Village’s citizen survey
administered in October 2012.

Report of the Village Manager.
A. No Report.

Report of the Corporation Counsel.
*A. Ordinance 13-1-Z-3963
Motion to adopt an ordinance granting a special use permit to allow outdoor storage at 7334
Ridgeway Avenue, Skokie, Illinois in an M3 Industry district (2012-47P). This item is on the
consent agenda for second reading and adoption.
Omnibus vote.

*B. Ordinance 13-1-Z-3964
Motion to adopt an ordinance vacating an unopened and unimproved residential east-west alley
between the 4900 block of Lamon Avenue and Lavergne Avenue within an area bounded by
Coyle Avenue, Lavergne Avenue, Morse Avenue, and Lamon Avenue, in an R2 Single-Family
Residential district (2012-48P). This item is on the consent agenda for second reading and
adoption.
Omnibus vote.




Citizen Comments. None


Adjournment
Motion to adjourn at 9:05 p.m.
Moved: Trustee Roberts Seconded: Trustee Sutker
Ayes: Roberts, Sutker, Bromberg , Shah, Gray-Keeler and Mayor Van Dusen
Nays: None.
Absent: Perille.
MOTION CARRIED




 __________________________

 Marlene Williams, Village Clerk



.
Approved:
______________________
George Van Dusen, Mayor




 2
3