Thursday, October 1, 2026
The City of Lacey’s first attempt to measure the public’s pulse through a citywide survey supplied officials with benchmarks to gauge livability, while sparking debate over the accuracy of the findings.
The Lacey City Council delved into the survey’s results during a work session on Tuesday, Sept. 23.
Communications Manager Ty Keltner disclosed the survey process and results, explaining the project stemmed from the city’s 2022–27 communications plan and its “Lacey Cares” initiative.
The city hired Polco to administer the National Community Survey (NCS), a standardized instrument developed with the International City/County Management Association and used in hundreds of jurisdictions.
The survey measured “livability,” defined as communities that are not only habitable but desirable, and organized questions into 12 categories: Quality of Life, Governance, Economy, Mobility, Community Design, Utilities, Safety, Natural Environment, Parks and Recreation, Health and Wellness, Education/Arts/Culture and Inclusivity and Engagement.
Residents were asked standardized questions. They also rated overall quality of life, sense of community, and Lacey as a place to live. Polco reported results with percentile rankings against national and peer norms.
According to the survey, 73% of residents rated overall customer service by city employees positively, while 58% gave positive marks to public information services.
Sampling, margin questioned
Between mid-May and June 30, 3,000 postcards were mailed to households inside city limits. About 292 were completed — roughly 10% — producing a 95% confidence level with a 5.7% margin of error. Polco weighted the results based on U.S. Census Bureau demographics.
Deputy Mayor Malcolm Miller asked for clarification on the confidence rating. Keltner said it meant results would fall within the same range 95% if repeated.
Council member Nicholas Dunning challenged the validity, saying “anything above a 3.2 margin of error is statistically an unreliable poll.” Keltner conceded that 5.7% “was also a little high,” but deferred to Polco’s expertise and methodology.
Assistant City Manager Shannon Kelley-Fong said the margin means each reported figure could be 5.7 points higher or lower. Council member Robin Vasquez added that such margins are typical for mailed surveys.
Dunning pressed his objections, pointing to percentile rankings revealing sidewalks in the 20th percentile, community appearance in the 24th, police services in the 11th and customer service by employees in the 27th.
“This is way too much based off feelings and not facts,” he said.
Miller said the survey should be treated as a snapshot.
“Information can be fallible,” he said.
Mobility drew favorable ratings, with a 55% rating for ease of travel by bus as excellent or good.
The natural environment also ranked high, 77% of respondents rated air quality, cleanliness and open space positively.
About 8 in 10 residents praised parks and recreation opportunities. Utilities, such as water and stormwater services, also received favorable marks, though electricity and internet are run by outside providers.
Yet, weaknesses emerged in other areas. Only 47% of the respondents rated ease of walking positively.
Travel by car scored 83% and bicycle 52%. Keltner said the results may reflect arterials, such as Martin Way, sidewalk gaps or distance from businesses.
Housing indicators were among the lowest, with just 15% rating affordable quality housing positively and 37% approving of housing variety. Downtown vibrancy lagged, though 80% still called Lacey a good place to live.
Safety results split, with 93% stating they felt safe in their neighborhoods, but only 69% in the midtown district. Overall, just over half rated their sense of safety positively, while police services drew 60% approval.
Keltner cautioned that perception should not be mistaken for actual crime data. He noted police briefings earlier in September showed offenses declining.
“Perception is not always reality,” he said.
The survey’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging (DEIB) section revealed gaps.
Overall, 73% rated city customer service as excellent or good. But white respondents rated it 79% positive, compared to 63% for people of color.
On fairness of treatment, 54% gave a positive response, with 66% among white respondents and 35% among people of color.
Council members objected to Polco’s use of the “people of color” (POC) grouping.
“It almost feels racist to me to group everybody as POC,” said Council member Carolyn Cox.
Dunning called the categorization too broad for a diverse city. Vasquez said the results reflected “a significantly different experience” for residents of color, while Kelley-Fong noted further breakdowns would raise margins of error.
Governance measures hovered in the middle. Confidence in city government stood at 51% positive, direction of the city 60%, and openness and transparency 54%. Public information services scored 58%.
Engagement levels were low: 32% said they contacted the city for help or information in the past year, 21% reported watching a public meeting, 13% contacted an elected official and 6% attended a meeting. City Manager Rick Walk said the figures point to communication gaps.
The survey cost $29,850 and was folded into the 2022–27 communications plan. The city internally reviewed the results, and the City of Lacey Commission on Equity examined the results at a meeting on Aug. 25.
Kelley-Fong said the city intends to repeat the survey in 2027. To view or examine the full survey results, the public may go to the city’s dynamic dashboard.
Editor's note: This story has been updated to reflect the correct spelling of "delved."
5 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
OlyBlues
It is rather humorous to see Lacey City Council members so concerned about the results of the survey when they should be scrutinizing how they authorized $29, 850. for this useless survey when it should have been sent out with utility bills to all Lacey customers and handled in-house by their highly paid city employees.
According to the 2020 US Census, Lacey has a population of 53,526 which is obviously much higher now. So this company sent out 30K postcards and these results are based on responses of 292 city residents or .55% of the city's population. This is not even CLOSE to an adequate sample. This is a great example of the city of Lacey council completely wasting tax dollars on a useless feel good survey that should have been handled in-house. It is a total boondoggle. Just think of all the projects that this $29K could have been spent on that would have actually made a positive difference for Lacey residents.
Friday, September 26, 2025 Report this
Carolyn Byerly
To OlyBlues: Hiring an outside research firm gives the results greater credibility than having the staff handle a survey of residents on issues essentially reflecting (to a large extent) on staff performance. In addition, a 10% response rate is similar to all large surveys of this type. The results will help the Lacey City Council in its policy making and help the staff in its planning and administrative work. I think your suggestions of sending out the survey with utility bills deserves some thought -- for myself, I rarely read material accompanying utility bills as it gets recycled when I open my mail. I suspect that issue had been considered when it was decided to mail postcards to Lacey residents.
Friday, September 26, 2025 Report this
ReasonAboveAll
So funny they don't name the names of who objected to the term POC. The Lacey City council is so non diverse that it's essentially a bunch of white people complaining about minorities getting representation in a poll.
Friday, September 26, 2025 Report this
KarenM
".....Yet, weaknesses emerged in other areas. Only 47% of the respondents rated ease of walking positively. Travel by car scored 83% and bicycle 52%. Keltner said the results may reflect arterials, such as Martin Way, sidewalk gaps or distance from businesses. "
With a sample size this low it is not appropriate to interpret WHY many people scored walking and cycling as negative. Lacey makes some attempts at supporting walking and cycling but the overall experience can be quite negative. It is not just one location of sidewalk gap. The city did a walking and cycling plan several years ago. I hope they will make more progress on the actions identified in that plan.
Saturday, September 27, 2025 Report this
RandianaJones
To ReasonAboveAll
I think they said the name of one council member who objected was Carolyn Cox. She said she felt like the concept already seemed a bit racist. She didnt elaborate i dont think.
I think they might have missed a great opportunity to be able to find snapshots into all demographics. I think it was stated in the article someone said Lacey has so much diversity integrated, that it just didnt seem relevant or important to include that particular category suggested by the survey company? I'm not really sure. I agree with you though, we need all perspectives, all voices. And while, i realize this survey was a small pool and subjective/opinion based; i think it would be interesting to compare the findings between demographics, such as race and socioeconomic classes. There can be varying perspectives of the same institutions and programs due to the varying experiences had by those of different backgrounds. Maybe its not a problem in Lacey; However, i think it would be interesting to do a survey with that scope in mind, just to have the opportunity to see where things can be improved. Although, I wish there were options to do an "in-house" project instead of outsourcing and using funds that probably could have gone to something more crucial. Im not good with bureaucracy, i dont know about budget this and budget that, where to allocate what to what blah blah etc. I just feel like we need priorities set. If figuring out if the quality of living in Lacey was that critically necessary, i dont think they picked the most efficient or effective way to do that.
Saturday, September 27, 2025 Report this