The problem with extrapolation
I wonder if the $20,000 Estes Park taxpayers spend every two years on a citizen's survey could be better spent buying all 6500 of us a beer. 1600 households in Estes Park were contacted "randomly" (it seems strange that four surveys over the past 10 years have been sent out randomly, yet most people I know who live in Estes Park have never received one) this time around, the PIO admitted that some households have been surveyed multiple times, and still only 40% of contacted households bothered to respond. On line. Didn't even have to pay for the stamp. So a minority of a minority of homeowners in Estes Park responded to a survey, and this gets extrapolated to exact percentages, significant to two digits, like 84% or 58%, with a 4% margin of error, that help set the course for Estes Park's future.
I have no idea what this means. Well, I know what it means, I just shudder to think dumb people who respond to meaningless surveys are at the reins. These are not "yes or no/up or down" questions, like, "Are you voting for Trump? Are you voting for Clinton?" These are broad and undefinable "how satisfied are you with local government?" questions with a variety of options on how to answer. So if 6% of the respondents said local government was poor, does this mean 10% of those in the "poor" category might have actually meant "excellent"?
If I surveyed the Big Thompson River running close to my home four months out of the year, and chose those four months as November, December, January, and February, I could extrapolate my survey to the apparently "valid" conclusion that the Big Thompson River is frozen year-round. I could tack a "4% margin of error" tag onto this conclusion and have it be equally useless, horribly misleading information.
It seems like every staff person who works for the town gets some "toy" at taxpayer expense they get to play with and attach great significance to. The citizen survey is one of these toys doled out to the PIO, and half of the trustees lap up these findings like homemade ice cream. Gosh, traffic is bad, and 54% of respondents say so. Compared to what? Compared to Denver rush hour? 62% of Estes Park residents want "in-street bike paths". Really? Then why aren't any of them planning a move to the Netherlands, because most of the streets in Estes Park aren't wide enough to handle cars approaching each other, let alone cars approaching each other and a bike near the two-foot shoulder bordering on a 100-foot dropoff, and some of them cannot be widened without defying laws of nature and physics.
How many Estes Park residents want an artificial mountain nearby that when you lick it tastes like Jolly Ranchers? I don't, but unfortunately, I apparently will never be selected to fill out the "random" survey that, when extrapolated and weighted for those people in the census who eat primarily at buffets, determines whether a "majority" of Estes Park citizens do want such a thing, along with a 10-hour work week and free foot massages. Oh bother. Looks like our tax dollars will be going to provide such nonsense soon.
I have no idea what this means. Well, I know what it means, I just shudder to think dumb people who respond to meaningless surveys are at the reins. These are not "yes or no/up or down" questions, like, "Are you voting for Trump? Are you voting for Clinton?" These are broad and undefinable "how satisfied are you with local government?" questions with a variety of options on how to answer. So if 6% of the respondents said local government was poor, does this mean 10% of those in the "poor" category might have actually meant "excellent"?
It seems like every staff person who works for the town gets some "toy" at taxpayer expense they get to play with and attach great significance to. The citizen survey is one of these toys doled out to the PIO, and half of the trustees lap up these findings like homemade ice cream. Gosh, traffic is bad, and 54% of respondents say so. Compared to what? Compared to Denver rush hour? 62% of Estes Park residents want "in-street bike paths". Really? Then why aren't any of them planning a move to the Netherlands, because most of the streets in Estes Park aren't wide enough to handle cars approaching each other, let alone cars approaching each other and a bike near the two-foot shoulder bordering on a 100-foot dropoff, and some of them cannot be widened without defying laws of nature and physics.
How many Estes Park residents want an artificial mountain nearby that when you lick it tastes like Jolly Ranchers? I don't, but unfortunately, I apparently will never be selected to fill out the "random" survey that, when extrapolated and weighted for those people in the census who eat primarily at buffets, determines whether a "majority" of Estes Park citizens do want such a thing, along with a 10-hour work week and free foot massages. Oh bother. Looks like our tax dollars will be going to provide such nonsense soon.
Comments
Post a Comment