HomeMy WebLinkAbout20132676.tiffRESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR
TO SIGN - CENTENNIAL INSTITUTE
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to
Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of
administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Board has been presented with an Agreement for Professional Services
between the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County, and Centennial Institute, commencing September 23, 2013, and
ending December 31, 2013, with further terms and conditions being as stated in said agreement,
and
WHEREAS, after review, the Board deems it advisable to approve said agreement, a copy
of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, Colorado, that the Agreement for Professional Services between the County of Weld,
State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, and
Centennial Institute be, and hereby is, approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chair be, and hereby is, authorized to
sign said agreement.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted
by the following vote on the 23rd day of September, A.D., 2013.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD C 1TY, COLORADO
Weld County Clerk to the Board
BY:
Deputy Cl;'o the Bo
PR ED ' 1.'-M:
County Attorney
9-m4-97-7 rec'
t5i, cemenniJ/vf8
Date of signature: OCT 0 1 2013
William
a. Chair
Douglas Rade !cher, Pro-Tem
P. Conway
USED
e Freeman
aarbara Kirkmeyer /
Cc. GI autitaro
2013-2676
BC0044
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the County of Weld, State of Colorado,
whose address is 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado, 80631 ("County"), and Centennial Institute
whose address is 8787 W. Alameda Ave., Lakewood, CO 80226, ("Contractor").
WHEREAS, County desires to retain Contractor as an independent contractor to perform
services as more particularly set forth below; and
WHEREAS, Contractor has the time available to timely perform the services, and is
willing to perform the services according to the terms of this Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained
herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Engagement of Contractor. County hereby retains Contractor, and Contractor
hereby accepts engagement by County upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from September 23, 2013, through and
until December 31, 2013.
3. Services to be Performed. Contractor agrees to perform the Services listed or
referred to in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
4. Compensation.
a. County agrees to pay Contractor for services performed as set forth on
Exhibit A at the rate of $44,000.00. Charges shall be based on the time actually spent
performing the services, but shall exclude travel time.
b. Mileage may not be charged to and from any required job site. Contractor
shall not be paid any other expenses unless set forth in this Agreement.
c. Payment to Contractor will be made only upon presentation of a proper
claim by Contractor, itemizing services performed and mileage expense incurred.
d. Payment for services and all related expenses under this Agreement shall
not exceed $44,000.00.
5. Additional Work. In the event the County shall require changes in the scope,
character, or complexity of the work to be performed, and said changes cause an increase or
decrease in the time required or the costs to the Contractor for performance, an equitable
adjustment in fees and completion time shall be negotiated between the parties and this
Agreement shall be modified accordingly by a supplemental Agreement. Any claims by the
Contractor for adjustment hereunder must be made in writing prior to performance of any work
2013-2676
1
covered in the anticipated supplemental Agreement. Any change in work made without such
prior supplemental Agreement shall be deemed covered in the compensation and time provisions
of this Agreement.
6. Independent Contractor. Contractor agrees that Contractor is an independent
contractor and that neither Contractor nor Contractor's agents or employees are, or shall be
deemed to be, agents or employees of the County for any purpose. Contractor shall have no
authorization, express or implied, to bind the County to any agreement, liability, or
understanding. The parties agree that Contractor will not become an employee of County, nor is
Contractor entitled to any employee benefits from County as a result of the execution of this
Agreement.
7. Warranty. Contractor warrants that services performed under this Agreement will
be performed in a manner consistent with the professional standards governing such services and
the provisions of this Agreement.
8. Reports County Property. All reports, test results and all other tangible materials
produced in connection with the performance of this Agreement, whether or not such materials
are in completed form, shall at all times be considered the property of the County. Contractor
shall not make use of such material for purposes other than in connection with this Agreement
without prior written approval of County.
9. Acceptance of Product not a Waiver. Upon completion of the work, Contractor
shall submit to County originals of all test results, reports, etc., generated during completion of
this work. Acceptance by County of reports and incidental material furnished under this
Agreement shall not in any way relieve Contractor of responsibility for the quality and accuracy
of the work. Acceptance by the County of, or payment for, any services performed under this
Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any of the County's rights under this Agreement
or under the law generally.
10. Insurance and Indemnification. Contractor shall defend and indemnify County, its
officers and agents, from and against loss or liability arising from Contractor's acts, errors or
omissions in seeking to perform its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall provide
necessary workers' compensation insurance at Contractor's own cost and expense.
11. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time by providing
the other party with a 10 day written notice thereof. Furthermore, this Agreement may be
terminated at any time without notice upon a material breach of the terms of the Agreement. In
the event of an early termination, Contractor shall be paid for work performed up to the time of
notice and County shall be entitled the use of all material generated pursuant to this Agreement.
12. Non -Assignment. Contractor may not assign or transfer this Agreement, any
interest therein or claim thereunder, without the prior written approval of County.
2
13. Access to Records. County shall have access to Contractor's financial records as
they relate to this Agreement for purposes of audit. Such records shall be complete and available
for audit 90 days after final payment hereunder and shall be retained and available for audit
purposes for at least five years after final payment hereunder.
14. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in each and all of the provisions of this
Agreement.
15. Interruptions. Neither party to this Agreement shall be liable to the other for delays
in delivery or failure to deliver or otherwise to perform any obligation under this Agreement,
where such failure is due to any cause beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to
Acts of God, fires, strikes, war, flood, earthquakes or Governmental actions.
16. Notices. Any notice required to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing
and shall be mailed or delivered to the other party at that party's address as stated above.
17. Compliance. This Agreement and the provision of services hereunder shall be
subject to the laws of Colorado and be in accordance with the policies, procedures, and practices
of County.
18. Non -Exclusive Agreement. This Agreement is nonexclusive and County may
engage or use other contractors or persons to perform services of the same or similar nature.
19. Certification. Contractor certifies that Contractor is not an illegal immigrant, and
further, Contractor represents, warrants, and agrees that it has verified that Contractor does not
employ any illegal aliens. If it is discovered that Contractor is an illegal immigrant, employs
illegal aliens or subcontracts with illegal aliens, County can terminate this Agreement and
Contractor may be held liable for damages.
20. Entire Agreement/Modifications. This Agreement contains the entire agreement
between the parties with respect to the subject matter contained in this Agreement. This
instrument supersedes all prior negotiation, representation, and understanding or agreements with
respect to the subject matter contained in this Agreement. This Agreement may be changed or
supplemented only by a written instrument signed by both parties.
21. Funding Contingency. No portion of this Agreement shall be deemed to create an
obligation on the part of County to expend funds not otherwise appropriated or budgeted for.
22. No Conflict. No employee of Contractor nor any member of Contractor's family
shall serve on a County Board, committee or hold any such position which either by rule,
practice or action nominates, recommends, supervises Contractor's operations, or authorizes
funding to Contractor.
3
23. Severability. If any term or condition of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid,
illegal, or unenforceable, this Agreement shall be construed and enforced without such provision,
to the extent that this Agreement is then capable of execution within the original intent of the
parties.
24. Governmental Immunity. No portion of this Agreement shall be deemed to
constitute a waiver of any immunities the parties or their officers or employees may possess.
25. No Third Party Beneficiary. It is expressly understood and agreed that the
enforcement of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and all rights of action relating to
such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to the undersigned parties and nothing in this
Agreement shall give or allow any claim or right of action whatsoever by any other person not
included in this Agreement. It is the express intention of the undersigned parties that any entity
other than the undersigned parties receiving services or benefits under this Agreement shall be an
incidental beneficiary only.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date and
year written below.
CONTRACTOR:
By:
Centennial Institute
Title: John Andrews, Director
•
ATTEST:-�°"`'`Y� BOARD OF COUNTY
CLERK TO THE BOARD
Deputy Clerk i the Board 1' . lld�j� William F. Garcia, Chair
COMMISSIONERSOF WELD COUNTY
SEP 2 3 2013
4
aD/a -- 076 i'
23. Severability. If any term or condition of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid,
illegal, or unenforceable, this Agreement shall be construed and enforced without such provision,
to the extent that this Agreement is then capable of execution within the original intent of. the
parties.
24. Governmental Immunity. No portion of this Agreement shall be deemed to
constitute a waiver of any immunities the parties or their officers or employees may possess.
25. No Third Party Beneficiary. It is expressly understood and agreed that the
enforcement of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and all rights of action relating to
such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to the undersigned parties and nothing in this
Agreement shall give or allow any claim or right of action whatsoever by any other person .not
included in this Agreement. It is the express intention of the undersigned parties that any entity
other than the undersigned parties receiving services or benefits under this Agreement shall be an
incidental beneficiary only.
IN WITNESS.WHEREOF, REOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date and
year written below.
ATTEST: 1ery -... F�,.-�, - -
CLERK TO THE BOARD
Deputy Clerk ' the Board
ttet
CONTRACTOR:
q• '3o. r'S
Centennial Institute
Title: John Andrews, Director
BOARD OF COUNTY
COM1t4ISSIONE;RSOF WELL) COUNTY
By:(.1/C.--/lf� �_
Ida., William F. Garcia, Chair
4
SEP 2 3 2013
CENTENNIAL INSTITUTE
At Colorado Christian University
8787 W. Alameda Ave.
Lakewood CO 80226
AndrewsJK@aol.com
Sept. 19, 2013
SUPERSEDES LETTER OF 9/5/13
Weld County Board of Commissioners
Attn: Monica Mika // Via Email
1150 O Street
Greeley CO 80632
Dear Friends:
Thank you for inviting Centennial Institute to plan and carry out a Colorado comparative counties study
for your Board (client) this fall.
This letter, when signed by both parties, shall constitute our business agreement for services and
compensation.
Scope of work will be as generally defined in our project packet submitted on this date, responding to the
Weld County memo dated 8/2/13.
Our fee will be $44,000 complete. Payment to the research team, including opinion polling firm, will be
made by Centennial Institute, not directly by client.
Of this, $5,000 earnest money will be payable in 10 business days from signing of the agreement.
The balance will be invoiced upon satisfactory completion of the work, not later than 12/16/13.
Any change orders to the project, modifying the scope of work and/or the fee amount, shall be mutually
agreed in writing and signed by both parties.
Termination prior to project end date, if necessary, shall be mutually agreed in writing with pro rata
payment for usable work delivered.
Centennial Institute pledges confidentiality on its part regarding the project. Any media releases or public
comment, including publication of the work product itself, shall be at the discretion of Weld County,
which shall own all rights to the work product.
Sincerely,
JOHN ANDREWS
Director, Centennial Institute
AndrewsJK@aol.com
Accepted for Weld County: Date:
6d4,40.- A- No
Centennial Institute, Colorado Christian University's think tank, will contract with the Weld County
Board of Commissioners for a comparative study of its government, economy, and fiscal condition
vis-a-vis other Colorado counties similarly situated.
Counties proposed for comparison: Weld, Lorimer, Boulder, Mesa, Pueblo, El Paso.
Questions to be investigated: Is the Weld County model better than others? How and why? How could it
be better still? Could it be exported or extrapolated?
The project team will include, as highly qualified researchers: an economist, a public administration
specialist, and an opinion pollster (see names below and scope of work, attached).
Objective metrics will be devised, minimizing complexity. The approach will be both quantitative and
qualitative. All aspects of Weld County memo to CCU 8/2/13, page 3, will be addressed - with one
exception, namely: While the client may later utilize our findings to bolster its case for a hypothetical 51st
state of North Colorado, the report will NOT engage or notice that issue in any way.
Client requires the completed study by December 2013. But initial polling will be delivered by early
October (see timeline below).
Budget: 0 •complete {1 G
Project Team
Director: John Andrews, Centennial Institute
Economic & Fiscal: Barry Poulson, CU
Public Administration: Bob Brooks, CCU
Opinion Polling: Todd Vitale
Research Support: Greg Schaller, CCU
Timeline by Weeks
Aug 26 Initial team meeting
Sep 2 Team meets with client
Sep 9 Finalize plan & sign contract
Sep 16
Sep 23
Sep 30 First checkpoint (3 weeks)
Oct 7 Deliver opinion survey
Oct 14
Oct 21 Second checkpoint (6 weeks)
Oct 28
Nov 4
Nov 11 Third checkpoint (9 weeks)
Nov 18
Nov 25
Dec 2 Deliver draft report (12 weeks)
Dec 9 Revise report to client specs
Dec 16 Deliver fmal report, project completion
COMPARATIVE COUNTIES STUDY
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SECTION
By Barry W. Poulson
Emeritus Professor of Economics
University of Colorado Boulder
Overview
The focus of this study is a comparison of the economic performance of Weld County with a group of
Colorado counties with similar economic and demographic characteristics. The group of counties
includes, in addition to Weld County, Larimer, Boulder, Mesa, Pueblo, and El Paso Counties. The
comparative analysis of Weld County will help provide insight into that county's attractiveness as a place
to live, work, and invest. The comparative analysis will help to isolate policy variables from other
variables that impact Weld County's economic performance.
Over much of the post WWII period local growth has been highest in suburban counties of metropolitan
areas.' This suggests that local economic development can be defined in terms of concentric circles
around population centers; the metropolitan areas of Colorado would tend to drive economic growth
within the region. We would expect that suburban counties in the Denver metropolitan area to experience
rapid economic and population growth linked to Denver's economic growth.
However, recent research reveals a much greater diversity and nuance in local growth than is suggested
by this concentric circles model. For example, a study by Hall and Orazem finds a great diversity in
county level economic growth in Kansas.` Kansas is similar to Colorado in that economic growth is
dominated by Johnson County where Kansas City is located. Johnson County has experienced one of the
most rapid rates of economic growth of any county in the U.S. But, outside of Johnson County there is
great diversity in county rates of economic growth and demographic change. Some of the most populous
counties in Kansas, with metropolitan areas, are underachievers compared to the state average.
Metropolitan areas, such as Denver, may dominate economic growth and demographic change in
suburban counties in the region. Counties with no metropolitan area and low population density may have
disadvantages in achieving high rates of economic growth and development. But we should also expect
diversity in the economic and demographic change occurring in Colorado counties that reflects the
different policy mix pursued in these counties. A county such as Boulder with a long history of growth
controls and a ubiquitous roles for government in the local economy is likely to have different economic
and demographic outcomes compared to Weld County which has limited the size of government and the
role that government plays in the local economy. We plan to address this question using both quantitative
and qualitative evidence.
Methodology
For a survey of this literature on local economic growth see Jordan Rappaport, `Local Growth Empirics,' Center
for International Development at Harvard University, Working Paper No. 23, July 1999.
2 Arthur P. Hall and Peter Orazem, 'Long Term Economic Trends in the Regions of Kansas, 1969-2003., Research
Report, Kansas Inc., August 2005; see also Arthur P. Hall, `Economic Growth in the Regions of Kansas, 1969-
2003,' Kansas Policy Review, vol. 28, no.1, Spring 2006.
1
ackfiesi- PI 3
The comparative counties analysis will compare the economic performance of Weld County with a group
of counties in Colorado with similar economic and demographic characteristics. Some of these counties
are also similar with respect to geography, located along the front range of Colorado. These `front range'
counties have experienced rapid economic growth linked to the 'new economy' industries that emerged in
this region after WWII. They have experienced rapid population growth and in migration, in part due to
their proximity to the major metropolitan area in Colorado, Denver.
The comparative counties analysis will focus on both quantitative and qualitative evidence of economic
development and demographic change. The study will utilize county level data from national, state, and
local sources.
Topical Outline
1. Economic Growth and Structural Change
a. Measureable Variables
I. Income ( source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis)
2. Employment (source: U.S. Department of Labor)
3. Productivity
4. Industrial Structure ( source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis)
5. Assessed Value ( source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis)
6. Proprietors ( source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis)
b. Narrative
Measures of Economic growth and development in Weld County will be compared to that in the other
counties within this group. Differences in industrial structure provide a first approximation to differential
rates of economic growth and development in these counties.
2. Demographic Change and Urbanization
a. Measureable Variables
I. Population (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
2. Population Density (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
3. Population Age (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
4. Urbanization and City Growth (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
5. Migration (source: U.S. Internal Revenue Service)
6. Distance (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
2
F)(1,41,11.-- PI- ee-
b. Narrative
Weld county and the other counties selected for this study have experienced rapid growth in population
and urbanization in the post WWI period. For some front range counties these demographic changes are
linked to proximity to the major metropolitan area Denver, reflecting outmigration from Denver to
surrounding counties, and a greater share of the population in these counties commuting to work in
Denver. But the ability of these counties to grow and attract in migrants also reflects the attractiveness of
these counties as places to live, work, and invest, which in turn reflects the policy mix chosen by the
county government.
3. Standard of Living and Quality of Life
a. Measureable Variables
1. Income per Capita ( source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis)
2. Unemployment (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
3. Poverty (U.S. Department of Labor)
4. Cost of Living (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
5. Median Home Values (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau)
6. Natural Amenities (U.S. Department f Agriculture)
7. Man Made Amenities (U.S. Department f Agriculture)
8. Crime (Federal Bureau of Investigation)
b. Narrative
Population growth and migration into Weld County and other counties in the group reflect their standard
of living and quality of life. While these counties share the positive natural amenities available to citizens
living in or near the mountains of Colorado they differ considerable in other determinants of the standard
of living and quality of life.
4. Fiscal Conditions and the Size of Government
a. Measurable Variables
1. Total Revenue (source: U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau Census of Governments))
2. Sales Tax Revenue "
3. Property Tax Revenue "
4. Total Expenditures "
5. Components of Total Expenditures "
6. Debt"
7. Unfunded Liabilities "
3
b. Narrative
Much of the focus in this part of the study will be on the role of fiscal policy and the size of government
in determining the economic performance of these counties. Recent studies show a significant negative
correlation between per capita income growth and the size of government as measured by total
expenditures and the components of expenditure at the local level.' The explanation for this negative
correlation is that some local governments have become less efficient in the provision of government
services and or that the value citizens place on these government services at the local level has diminished
over time. Local officials may be slow to adjust to these changes in the marginal benefits and costs in the
provision of government services. This is especially true if local officials do not use priority budgeting,
but rather use the previous year's budget as the starting point for the current budget. Evidence suggests
that this non optimum level of local government will persist over time, resulting in levels of local
government in excess of the optimum level of government.
Recent studies also reveal a strong negative correlation between high marginal tax rates and economic
growth at both the state and local level 4 The strongest negative correlation is between income taxes and
state and local economic growth. In 1972 233 counties in 14 states imposed a personal income tax.
Fortunately counties in Colorado do not levy an income tax. The state imposed a 5 percent flat rate
income tax, replacing a graduated income tax with a top marginal rate in excess of 8 percent in 1987. That
rate has since been reduced to 4.65 percent, below the national average top state income tax rate. The
adoption of a low flat rate income tax has improved the competitiveness of Colorado counties compared
to counties in other states, especially the counties bordering on counties in other states. Wyoming has no
state income tax, and Kansas has recently reduced their top income tax rate. A ballot measure this fall will
ask Colorado citizens to return to a higher graduated income tax rate. Passage of this measure would
erode the competitive position Colorado has enjoyed in interstate tax competition.
Some studies also fmd that general and selective sales taxes also have a negative impact on local
economic growth.' Colorado counties differ in the general and selective sales taxes they impose, and such
differences are likely to be reflected in differential growth rates in these counties. The major source of
revenue at the local level is the property tax_ The TABOR Amendment imposes a constraint on the
property taxes that can be imposed at the local level, and this has resulted in lower average property tax
rates in Colorado compared to that imposed in most other states. But Colorado counties have responded
differently to the constraints imposed on property taxes by the TABOR Amendment, and these
differences in property tax rates are likely to impact growth rates in these counties.
The TABOR Amendment also imposes constraints on the ability of local governments to issue debt,
specifically requiring voter approval to issue general obligation bonds. Weld County is unique in that a
local Charter also prohibits the issuance of debt. On the other hand other counties, such as El Paso
County, have used Certificates of Participation, which do not require voter approval, to circumvent the
constraints on debt imposed by the TABOR Amendment. Finally some counties have accumulated debt
which is off the books, in the form of unfunded liabilities in their employee pension and health plans.
Across the country local governments are finding it more difficult to meet these obligations and some
3 Op. Cit. Rappaport.
4 Op. Cit. Rappaport; Barry W. Poulson and Jay Kaplan, `State Income Taxes and Economic Growth,' CATO
Journal, 2008 vol. 28 (1), 53-71.
5 Op. Cit_ Rappaport.
4
e414-1141--
county governments have entered bankruptcy.6 There is ample evidence that business investment in these
counties is deterred by the prospect of higher tax rates required to service these debt obligations. Thus
differential debt burdens in Colorado counties impact their economic performance.
The author of this study served on the Colorado Tax Commission which held hearings in counties
throughout Colorado, including Weld County. As part of the qualitative portion of this study the author
will provide observations from these hearings on the different perspectives that Colorado citizens have on
the optimum size of government and fiscal policy in different counties.
Conclusions
Empirical Appendix
Addendum: A recent study by Hall and Orazem compares economic growth and development in
adjacent counties along the Colorado Kansas border.' That study provides a useful comparison to
the present study for several reasons. The counties in the Hall study are located in the `Great
Plains' and share common economic and demographic characteristics. In contrast to the counties
in the present study these `Great Plains' counties have experienced slower population growth and
in some cases population declines and outmigration. This reflects slower economic growth and
job creation in these counties. These counties have been less impacted by the 'new economy'
that now dominated the front range of Colorado, and are more dependent on traditional resource
based industries such as mining, agriculture, and ranching. These counties also lack proximity to
major metropolitan areas. Outmigration from these `Great Plains' counties has impacted
population growth in the more rapidly growing counties in Colorado. Comparison of the
economic performance of these `Great Plains' counties with that of the more urbanized counties
in the present study will help to identify factors impacting growth that are unique to these
regions. The comparison of economic performance of counties along the Colorado and Kansas
border also helps identify the differences in state policy that impact local economic growth.
6 Barry W. Poulson, `Preventing Bankruptcy in the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System,' Kansas Policy
Institute, May, 2013.
Arthur p. Hall and Peter F. Orazem, `Economic Trends Along the Kansas -Colorado Border, 1969-2003,' Research
Report, Kansas Inc., August, 2005.
5
COMPARATIVE COUNTIES STUDY
' PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SECTION
By Bob Brooks
College of Adult & Graduate Studies
Colorado Christian University
1. Public Services
pt,
We will survey both mandated and non -mandated services provided by Weld County to its
citizens either directly or through other government and non -government suppliers.
We will compare the services provided to citizens of Weld County with other similar counties.
We will gauge citizen satisfaction with regard to the delivery of these services.
Methodology: Information on services provided by Weld and other counties will be obtained from
public documents, direct inquiry and statistical surveys.
2. Economic Freedom
We will assess Weld count's regulatory atmosphere with regard to the creation of new businesses
and the "business friendliness" of the County toward existing businesses.
We will review the count's land use review and other processes pertinent to business
development.
Methodology: Information on the regulatory atmosphere of Weld and other counties will be
obtained from public records, direct inquiry and statistical surveys.
3. Limited Government
In order to confirm Weld County's vision of limited government, we will compare Weld
County's non -mandated services with those of comparable counties.
Methodology: Information on non -mandated service provision by Weld and other counties will be
obtained from public records and direct inquiry.
4 Political and Civic Culture
We will attempt to confirm whether Weld County government is aligned with the public's
expectations regarding the political and civic culture of the community.
Methodology: Information on Weld and other counties will be obtained through direct inquiry
and statistical surveys.
5. Effective Government
We will review Weld County's organization for best management and business practices. How
does management ensure that front-line employees deliver needed services in the most cost
effective manner? Sub -areas to be investigated will include:
6-; ctol I if A Pe
a. Vision
How are the visions and strategies developed?
Are the counties visions and strategies in line with those of its citizens?
How are these visions and strategies shared throughout the organization?
Do front-line employees understand the visions and strategies of the County commissioners and
how their job fits within these visions and strategies?
b. Communication
How are problems, issues and desires communicated throughout the organization?
Are there systems in place to ensure that a need or problem of a citizen is communicated to the
proper place in the organization to solve the issue or problem?
Are there ways to identify recurring problems and make appropriate changes to keep these
problems from recurring?
How are needs of front-line employees communicated to the proper place within the organization
to ensure that these needs are met?
Are there mechanisms in place to ensure horizontal communication between departments?
c. Management practices
Does the County government embrace technology?
Do the various departments within the county cooperate and work as a team in order to maximize
efficiencies?
What is the chain of authority/lines of communication within the county organization?
What is the role of the budget in driving management decisions, and vice versa?
Who are the central figures in determining management philosophy? How is employee morale
gaged?
d Knowledge
Are there systems in place to ensure that employees within the organization at all levels can
access, share and create knowledge and information needed to do their job in an excellent
manner?
Are employees at all levels within the organization offered opportunities to increase their
competencies?
e. Change
Does the organization welcome and encourage change?
Are there systems in place within the Weld County organization, which are actively analyzing
when change is needed and warranted?
Are there processes for initiating such changes rapidly?
Methodology: Information on business and management practices in Weld and other counties
will be obtained through personal interviews with leadership and staff
--------------000
-6-7y144611-
TO: Centennial Institute - John Andrews
FROM: Todd Vitale
RE: Weld County — Comparative Govt. Survey Options
DATE: September 10, 2013
Introduction
Vitale & Associates sincerely appreciates the opportunity to work on this very important project.
This proposal outlines prospective cost estimates for quantitative research options associated
with the Centennial Institute's Weld County Comparative Government research project.
Below, we have outlined some options and prices based upon the group's interest in expanding
the scope of the primary research.
Proposed Research
To summarize, the current proposal is for Cl/Weld to commission an opinion study that consists
of interviews in five counties: Weld, Larimer, Boulder, Mesa and Pueblo. It is my understanding
that we have decided to NOT include El Paso County (as was originally mentioned as an
option).
First, a note about our target survey respondents: All of the below options are derived from the
most up-to-date voter figures for each county, on an "active voter" basis. Thus, we are operating
on the assumption that we want to examine attitudes among voters -- those who have recently
participated in an election -- rather than a broader sample of "adults," who as a group may be
less engaged in the civic process.
Below is a summary table with geographical segmentations for Weld, combined with voter
statistics and corresponding completed survey cell sizes at three different N sample sizes. The
table is meant to illustrate the higher quantities of completed interviews in each subset with
each level of higher sample size. The net of this table is that we could reasonably survey
N=200 active voters in Weld County, which would yield sufficient cell sizes for each of our
geographic subsets. In contrast, an N=100 Weld sample (as originally considered) would not
produce enough completes in Greeley, the unincorporated areas, or in the Denver Xurb
municipalities to be considered reliable on a sub -group basis. (NOTE: we typically look for cell
sizes above n=40 to be worthy of analytical mention).
For additional consideration, we have also included an N=300 Weld County option (which is a
customary sample size of a County -wide survey), which would bolster those cell sizes a bit
more, and enable higher confidence intervals, and perhaps some more subgroup analysis (ie.,
combinations of geography, age, gender, party registration, etc.). This sample size would bring
our total Weld County margin of error down to +/- 5.7%. We believe that this sample size would
enable Weld to more credibly report the results of the interviews from their home county.
Cl/Weld County- Research Options Page 1
< '4I& A- Pc ID
n100
4,9.8% moe
6200 n300
/- 6.9% i1 5.7%
Greeley
32%
32
64
96
Non Greeley
68%
68
136
204
Incorporated
79%
19
�•k
237
Non -incorporated
21%
MUNICIPALITY
SW Weld Xurb
Greeley
Other Muni
Non -Incorporated
27%
32%
20%
21%
Based upon our current understanding of the width and depth of subject to be covered by this
survey, our most recent draft of the survey (attached) reflects all the input to date, and includes
the additional questions that have been added since our last meeting. The current length of this
draft survey is 55 questions (— 18.5 minutes). Thus, if we were to field the current draft, with an
N=300 in Weld, and an additional n=100 in each of 4 other counties (an extra n=400, so a total
N=700), the cost would be $44,900. While this survey is on the longer side of the acceptable
range, we regularly field surveys this length. That said, if we could cut and/or split some of the
questions, it would be less cumbersome (and a bit more economical). We have a number of
specific ideas about how to accomplish this, but wanted to give our working group a
comprehensive set of questions from which to chose. We look forward to your feedback.
Margin of
Error
CI/Weld County - Research Options Page 2
C
Add. Counties
(4 counties)
30 questions
40 tIuestyons
55 qu
ck'e-f- P- Fir It
S0C4-:ATES
29,825
0
00
CI/Weld County - Research Options Page 3
CENTENNIAL INSTITUTE
At Colorado Christian University
8787 W. Alameda Ave.
Lakewood CO 80226
AndrewsJK@aol.com
Sept. 19, 2013
SUPERSEDES LETTER OF 9/5/13
Weld County Board of Commissioners
Attn: Monica Mika // Via Email
1150 O Street
Greeley CO 80632
Dear Friends:
Surye S
r c--1 �t� l
Yvl4.v E0 J 1` 1-'s``
1m
Thank you for inviting Centennial Institute to plan and carry out a Colorado comparative counties study
for your Board (client) this fall.
This letter, when signed by both parties, shall constitute our business agreement for services and
compensation.
Scope of work will be as generally defined in our project packet submitted on this date, responding to the
Weld County memo dated 8/2/13.
Our fee will be $44,000 complete. Payment to the research team, including opinion polling firm, will be
made by Centennial Institute, not directly by client.
Of this, $5,000 earnest money will be payable in 10 business days from signing of the agreement.
The balance will be invoiced upon satisfactory completion of the work, not later than 12/16/13.
Any change orders to the project, modifying the scope of work and/or the fee amount, shall be mutually
agreed in writing and signed by both parties.
Termination prior to project end date, if necessary, shall be mutually agreed in writing with pro rata
payment for usable work delivered.
Centennial Institute pledges confidentiality on its part regarding the project. Any media releases or public
comment, including publication of the work product itself, shall be at the discretion of Weld County,
which shall own all rights to the work product.
Sincerely,
JOHN ANDREWS
Director, Centennial Institute
AndrewsJK@aol.com
Accepted for Weld County: Date:
ATES
TO: Centennial Institute - John Andrews
FROM: Todd Vitale
RE: Weld County — Comparative Govt. Survey Options
DATE: September 10, 2013
Introduction
Vitale & Associates sincerely appreciates the opportunity to work on this very important project.
This proposal outlines prospective cost estimates for quantitative research options associated
with the Centennial Institute's Weld County Comparative Government research project.
Below, we have outlined some options and prices based upon the group's interest in expanding
the scope of the primary research.
Proposed Research
To summarize, the current proposal is for Cl/Weld to commission an opinion study that consists
of interviews in five counties: Weld, Larimer, Boulder, Mesa and Pueblo. It is my understanding
that we have decided to NOT include El Paso County (as was originally mentioned as an option).
First, a note about our target survey respondents: All of the below options are derived from the
most up-to-date voter figures for each county, on an "active voter" basis. Thus, we are operating
on the assumption that we want to examine attitudes among voters -- those who have recently
participated in an election -- rather than a broader sample of "adults," who as a group may be
less engaged in the civic process.
Below is a summary table with geographical segmentations for Weld, combined with voter
statistics and corresponding completed survey cell sizes at three different N sample sizes. The
table is meant to illustrate the higher quantities of completed interviews in each subset with each
level of higher sample size. The net of this table is that we could reasonably survey N=200
active voters in Weld County, which would yield sufficient cell sizes for each of our geographic
subsets. In contrast, an N=100 Weld sample (as originally considered) would not produce
enough completes in Greeley, the unincorporated areas, or in the Denver Xurb municipalities to
be considered reliable on a sub -group basis. (NOTE: we typically look for cell sizes above n=40
to be worthy of analytical mention).
For additional consideration, we have also included an N=300 Weld County option (which is a
customary sample size of a County -wide survey), which would bolster those cell sizes a bit more,
and enable higher confidence intervals, and perhaps some more subgroup analysis (ie.,
combinations of geography, age, gender, party registration, etc.). This sample size would bring
our total Weld County margin of error down to +/- 5.7%. We believe that this sample size would
enable Weld to more credibly report the results of the interviews from their home county.
CI/Weld County - Research Options Page 1
Greeley
Non Greeley
32%
68%
Incorporated
79%
79
.158
Non -incorporated
21%
21
42
MUNICIPALITY
SW Weld Xurb
Greeley
Other Muni
Non -Incorporated
27%
32%
20%
21%
Based upon our current understanding of the width and depth of subject to be covered by this
survey, our most recent draft of the survey (attached) reflects all the input to date, and includes
the additional questions that have been added since our last meeting. The current length of this
draft survey is 55 questions (— 18.5 minutes). Thus, if we were to field the current draft, with an
N=300 in Weld, and an additional n=100 in each of 4 other counties (an extra n=400, so a total
N=700), the cost would be $44,900. While this survey is on the longer side of the acceptable
range, we regularly field surveys this length. That said, if we could cut and/or split some of the
questions, it would be less cumbersome (and a bit more economical). We have a number of
specific ideas about how to accomplish this, but wanted to give our working group a
comprehensive set of questions from which to choose. We look forward to your feedback.
Project Completes
Weld County
Telephone Survey
Optional Additions (Up to n size)
Margin of Error
Length Total Cost
30 questions
6.90% 40 questions
55 questions
n=100
(N=300
5.7%
(
Total) Weld Only)
Add. Counties n=100 each
9.80%
30 questions
40 questions
55 questions
$9,825
$11,975
$14,900
Additional
Cost
$4,000 $13,825
$5,000 $16,700
$6,000 $20,900
30 questions $16,000 $29,825
40 questions $20,000 $36,700
Cl/Weld County - Research Options
Page 2
LLE & ASSOCIATES
55 questions $24,000 $44,900 ; I
CI/Weld County - Research Options Page 3
TALE & ASSOCIATES
CENTENNIAL INSTITUTE
COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPARATIVE STUDY
Third Draft
N=300 voters in Weld County
N=100 voters in each of Larimer, Boulder, Mesa and Pueblo
Hello, I'm of V&A Research, a national public opinion research firm. We are taking a
short survey about public policy issues here in Colorado? May I please speak with
A. Are you registered to vote in Colorado?
IF "NO". ASK: Is there someone else at home who is registered to vote in Colorado?
(IF "YES", THEN ASK: MAY I SPEAK WITH HIM/HER?)
Yes (CONTINUE)
No (THANK AND TERMINATE)
Thinking ahead to November's local and county elections -
B. What is the likelihood of your voting in November's elections? -- are you extremely likely, very likely,
somewhat likely, or not very likely at all?
(CONTINUE)
(THANK AND TERMINATE)
Extremely likely 1
Very likely 2
Somewhat likely 3
Not very likely
UNSURE (DNR)
C. Are you, or is anyone in your household an elected government official, or an employee of a
newspaper, television or radio station, or political campaign?
Yes (THANK AND TERMINATE)
No (CONTINUE)
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 1
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
TALE & t SSOCIA'
SPLIT SAMPLE
Thinking generally about things in Colorado —
1A. Do you feel things in Colorado are going in the right direction, or do you feel things have gotten
off on the wrong track?
Right direction/strongly 1
Right direction/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or Wrong track/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? Wrong track/strongly 5
And, more specifically, thinking about things in your County
1 B. Do you feel things in your area are going in the right direction, or do you feel things have gotten
off on the wrong track?
Right direction/strongly 1
Right direction/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or Wrong track/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? Wrong track/strongly 5
2. Now I would like to read you a list of issues that some people here in County have said
are important for the leaders in this area to deal with. Please listen as I read the list and tell me
which one issue you think is most important. (READ AND ROTATE ISSUES)
Keeping local taxes and spending down
Improving local roads and easing traffic congestion
Improving our local economy & jobs
Keeping our community safe from crime and drugs
Improving our local schools
• Improving parks and maintaining open space
COMBINATION/EQUALLY (DNR)
UNSURE (DNR)
MOST
IMPORTANT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 2
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ASSOCIATES
Thinking specifically about Colorado's economy, for a moment -
3. Would you say that Colorado is still in an economic recession or not? IF YES, PROMPT: And,
do you think the state economy is in a serious recession or a mild recession at this point?
Yes, serious recession 1
Yes, mild recession 2
No, not in a recession 3
OTHER (DNR) 4
UNSURE (DNR 5
SPLIT SAMPLE
And thinking ahead over the next year -
4A. From your perspective, would you say that the state economy over the next year will be getting
better or worse?
Getting better 1
Getting worse 2
About the same (DNR) 3
OTHER (DNR) 4
UNSURE (DNR 5
And more specifically, thinking about your local economy -
4B. From your perspective, would you say that your local economy over the next year will be getting
better or worse?
Getting better 1
Getting worse 2
About the same (DNR) 3
OTHER (DNR) 4
UNSURE (DNR 5
Now I would like to read you the names of several entities that have been mentioned in the news recently.
For each one, please tell me whether you have a favorable or an unfavorable impression of this
organization or entity. If you do not recognize the name, just say so. WAIT FOR RESPONSE, THEN
ASK: Would that be a strongly (favorable/unfavorable) impression or just a somewhat
(favorable/unfavorable) impression?
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE NO NEVER
(ROTATE NAMES) Strnq Smwht Smwht Strnq OPIN. HEARD
5. Colorado State Legislature
1 2 3 4 5 6
6. Your County government leadership 1 2 3 4 5 6
IF IN INCORPORATED MUNICIPALITY:
7. Your city or town government leadership 1 2 3 4 5 6
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 3
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ITALE & ASSOCIATES
As you my know, many areas of the county have special districts set up to collect taxes and provide certain
specific services for designated areas not covered by other levels of government —
8. Do you know whether there are any special districts that provide specific services to your area? IF
YES, THEN ASK: Can you tell me which services are provided to your household through a special
district?
Yes (SPECIFY)
1
NO/Not Aware 2
UNSURE (DNR) 3
9. And, can you tell me tell me whether you have a favorable or an unfavorable impression of the
special districts that provide these services? WAIT FOR RESPONSE, THEN ASK: Would that be
a strongly (favorable/unfavorable) impression or just a somewhat (favorable/unfavorable)
impression of these special districts?
Favorable/strongly 1
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: And Favorable/somewhat 2
do you strongly or somewhat UNSURE (DNR) 3
(approve/disapprove)? Unfavorable/somewhat 4
Unfavorable/strongly 5
And once again thinking specifically about only your county level government for a moment --
10. Do you generally approve or disapprove of the way that leaders in YOUR COUNTY county
government are handling their job running the your county?
Approve/strongly 1
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: And Approve/somewhat 2
do you strongly or somewhat UNSURE (DNR) 3
(approve/disapprove)? Disapprove/somewhat 4
Disapprove/strongly 5
And, still thinking just about County government -
11. When thinking about county property taxes — not federal, state, city or special district taxes --
generally speaking, would you say that here in Your County, residents receive a good value or a
bad value in terms of county taxes paid for services provided?
Good Value 1
Average Value (DNR) 2
Bad Value 3
UNSURE (DNR 4
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 4
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ITALE & ASSOCIATES
Now, thinking just about your county taxes for a moment —
12. When thinking about your county taxes — not federal, state, city or special district taxes --
generally speaking, would you say that here in Your County that your county taxes are (ROTATE)
• too high and that the your county budget needs to be cut, or • too low and more county
services are needed?
Too High (TO 13-1) 1
About Right (DNR) 2
Too Low (TO 13-2) 3
UNSURE (DNR 4
IF ANY "TOO HIGH" IN QUESTION 12, ASK:
13-1. Being as specific as you can, what are a few examples of things that should be cut from your county
budget in order to lower county taxes?
(PROBE: PLEASE TELL ME MORE ABOUT THAT)
(TO 14)
IF ANY "TOO LOW" IN QUESTION 12, ASK:
13-2. Being as specific as you can, what are a few examples county services that should be added or
improved if your county's budget was increased?
(PROBE: PLEASE TELL ME MORE ABOUT THAT)
(TO 14)
14. Compared to other counties that you're familiar with, would you say that your county taxes are
generally (ROTATE) higher or lower than most other counties?
Higher/A LOT 1
Higher/A LITTLE 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you say they are A LOT (Higher/ Lower / A LITTLE 4
Lower) or just a LITTLE BIT (Higher/Lower)? Lower/ A LOT 5
ABOUT THE SAME (DNR) 6
15. Compared to other counties that you're familiar with, would you say that your county runs
(ROTATE) more efficiently, OR less efficiently than most other counties?
More Efficiently /A LOT 1
More Efficiently /A LITTLE 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you say they are A LOT (Higher/ Less Efficiently/ A LITTLE 4
Lower) or just a LITTLE BIT (Higher/Lower)? Less Efficiently / A LOT 5
ABOUT THE SAME (DNR)
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 5
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ITALE & ASSOCIATES
16. Compared to Colorado state government, would you say that your county (ROTATE) is more
responsive and efficient, OR less responsive and efficient than state government?
More Responsive/Efficient /A LOT 1
More Responsive/Efficient /A LITTLE 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you say they are A LOT (More/Less Less Responsive/Efficient / A LITTLE 4
or just a LITTLE BIT (More/Less) Efficient? Less Responsive/Efficient / A LOT 5
ABOUT THE SAME (DNR) 6
IF INCORPORATED:
17. Compared to your local city government, would you say that your county (ROTATE) is more
responsive and efficient, OR less responsive and efficient than your city's government?
More Responsive/Efficient /A LOT 1
More Responsive/Efficient /A LITTLE 2
IF CHOICE MADE ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you say they are A LOT (More/Less Less Responsive/Efficient / A LITTLE 4
or just a LITTLE BIT (More/Less) Efficient? Less Responsive/Efficient / A LOT 5
ABOUT THE SAME (DNR) 6
18. And, do you happen to know whether your county budget is balanced each year, OR does your
county budget accumulate budget deficits like the federal government?
County runs a balanced budget 1
Runs deficits like feds 2
UNSURE (DNR) 3
19. And, do you happen to know whether your county uses bonding or other types of debt to finance
county infrastructure projects -- such public buildings, roads, schools, etc.?
County uses debt to finance things 1
Does not use debt 2
UNSURE (DNR) 3
20. Generally -speaking, do you view the use of debt financing for public projects as a SMART
financial strategy OR NOT VERY SMART financial strategy?
SMART/strongly 1
SMART/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or NOT VERY SMART/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? NOT VERY SMART/ strongly 5
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 6
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ALE & ASSOCIATES
21. Compared to other counties that you're familiar with, would you say that in terms of rules,
regulations and compliance forms that your county generally has (ROTATE) more or less rules,
regulations, and compliance forms than other counties?
More/A LOT 1
More /A LITTLE 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you say there are A LOT (More/ Less / A LITTLE 4
Less) or just a LITTLE BIT (More/Less)? Less / A LOT 5
ABOUT THE SAME (DNR) 6
22. Generally -speaking, do you view the more local government rules, regulations and compliance as
a GOOD THING or a BAD THING?
Good thing/strongly 1
Good thing/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or Bad thing/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? Bad thing/ strongly 5
23. Generally speaking, do you view your county as a "Pro -business" county?
Yes/strongly 1
Yes/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or No/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? No/ strongly 5
24. And, generally -speaking, do you view being a "pro -business" county as a GOOD THING or a
BAD THING?
Good thing/strongly 1
Good thing/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or Bad thing/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? Bad thing/ strongly 5
Thinking specifically about economic development in this area —
25. As you may know, your county has programs to attract new businesses and to attract and retain
non -government jobs to the area. Generally -speaking, do you think these types of programs are
a GOOD use or BAD use of tax dollars?
Good use/strongly 1
Good use/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or Bad use/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? Bad use/ strongly 5
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 7
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ALE & ASSOCIATES
26. Would you generally FAVOR or OPPOSE increasing local incentives, such as tax credits for
things like job training, in order to better attract major non -government job employers, like other
cities, counties and states who offer these types of incentives?
Favor/strongly 1
Favor/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or Oppose/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? Oppose/ strongly 5
27. Would you say that your county uses technology (ROTATE) efficiently, OR not efficiently?
Efficiently/strongly 1
Efficiently/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or NOT Efficiently/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? NOT Efficiently/strongly 5
And, still thinking about your county government for a moment —
28. When thinking about your county's taxes, services, efficiency, its charter, its mission, etc,-- do
you view your county as (ROTATE) pretty similar to other county governments OR a bit unique
from other county governments?
Pretty similar 1
UNSURE (DNR) 2
A bit unique 3
29. And, still thinking about your county's taxes, services, efficiency, its charter, its mission, etc,-- do
you view your county as (ROTATE) aligned with your values OR NOT aligned with your values?
Alligned/strongly 1
Alligned/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or NOT Alligned/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? NOT Alligned /strongly 5
30. And, still thinking about your county's taxes, services, efficiency, its charter, its mission, etc,-- do
you view your county as (ROTATE) aligned with your values OR NOT aligned with your values?
Alligned/strongly 1
Alligned/somewhat 2
IF CHOICE MADE, ASK: UNSURE (DNR) 3
And do you feel strongly or NOT Alligned/somewhat 4
somewhat strongly about that? NOT Alligned /strongly 5
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 8
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ITALE & ASSOCIATES
Now I'm going to read you a list of government services. For each item, please tell me if you know which
level of government provides this service to your household, if any — COUNTY, CITY, or SPECIAL
DISTRICT, and how you would rate the current quality of the job the government is doing providing it, on
a scale from 1 to 5 — with 1 being a very poor job, and 5 being an excellent job. (RANDOMIZE) IF YOU
THINK THIS SERVICE IS NOT OFFERED BY ANY GOVT. ENTITY IN YOUR AREA AND/OR IT'S
PROVIDED BY A PRIVATE ENTITY, JUST SAY SO.
Not Gov./
Coun City Special Private Unsure SCORE
(DNR) (1-5)
31. Maintaining local roads and bridges
(PROMPT: DO YOU CONSIDER THIS
TO BE AN URGENT, HIGH, MEDIUM,
LOW, OR NOT A PRIORITY AT ALL
FOR THE CITY AT THIS TIME?) 1 2 3 4 5
32. Providing public transportation 1 2 3 4 5
33. Providing drinking water 1 2 3 4 5
34. Providing neighborhood parks 1 2 3 4 5
35. Providing recreation facilities such as
community centers, pools, gymnasiums
or other public places for kids. 1 2 3 4 5
36. Providing fire protection services 1 2 3 4 5
37. Providing emergency response services 1 2 3 4 5
38. Providing law enforcement 1 2 3 4 5
39. Providing healthcare services for the
poor and elderly 1 2 3 4 5
40. Providing driving and automobile
licensing 1 2 3 4 5
41. Providing business licensing 1 2 3 4 5
42. Providing building and land -use
permitting 1 2 3 4 5
43. Providing economic development
incentives to attract more companies
and better local jobs to this area. 1 2 3 4 5
(END ROTATION)
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 9
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
!TALE & ASSOCIATES
Finally, I'd like to read you two different viewpoints about the role and size of state government. Please
tell me which one of these two viewpoints comes closest to your own.(READ & ROTATE
ALTERNATIVES)
44. Other people say/ Colorado is a relatively low tax state, and therefore, over the years our
Some people say state budget has been cut so much, that we are now at the point where
our cuts to critical infrastructure programs such as education, healthcare
and transportation are not only hurting our citizens, but also our future
competitiveness as a state.
Some people say/
Other people say
The best thing that state government can do is to keep taxes, services
and regulations to an absolute minimum, and get state government out of
the way of private business job creation, which is the best way for our state
to compete and create the maximum amount of opportunity for our
citizens.
State budget has been cut too much 1
Keeping taxes, spending, regs to min is best way 2
UNSURE/OTHER (DNR) 3
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 10
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
Now, just a few final questions for statistical purposes only --
45. What is your age, please?
(i.e. Record 48 years old as 0 4 8 )
(Record UNSURE/REFUSED AS 9 9 9 )
(Record age)
TALE & ASSOCIATES
46. What is the highest level of education you have completed?
(DO NOT READ, JUST RECORD)
Some grade school (1-8) 1
Some high school (9-11) 2
Graduated high school(12) 3
Technical/vocational(12) 4
Some college (13-15) 5
Graduated college (16) 6
Graduate/professional school (16 or more) 7
47. What industry or area of business most affects the income or financial security of you and your
family -- tourism, ranching and agriculture, technology, the military, the federal or state
government, energy, education, small business, health care or what? If you are retired or
unemployed, just say so.
Tourism 1
Ranching & agriculture 2
Technology 3
Military 4
Federal or state govt 5
Energy 6
Education 7
Small business 8
Health care 9
Unemployed 10
Retired 11
OTHER (SPECIFY)
12
UNSURE (DNR) 13
48. And may I ask approximately what your total household income is ...... just tell me when to stop.
Less than 25,000 / year 1
25,000 to 49,000 2
50,000 to 74,000 3
75,000 to 99,000 4
100,000 to 149,000 5
150,000 to 199,000 6
More than 200,000 / year 7
UNSURE/REFUSED (DNR) 8
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 11
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
ALE & ASSOCIATES
49. How long have you been a resident of this County?
One year or less 1
1-3 years 2
4-10 years 3
11-20 years 4
20 plus years 5
UNSURE (DNR) 7
50. Do you currently own your place of residence in County, or are you renting at this time?
Own 1
Rent 2
Other 3
UNSURE/REFUSED (DNR) 4
IF "OWN' in 49, THEN ASK:
51. We want to classify property owners into broad groupings for statistical purposes only. What
would you say is the approximate market value of your primary residence here?
(DNR - WAIT FOR ANSWER AND FIT RESIDENCE VALUE INTO CORRECT CATEGORY)
Under $75,000 1
$75,000-$99,000 2
$100,000-$249,999 3
$250,000-$499,999 4
$500,000-$749,999 5
$750,000-$999,999 6
$1,000,000 or over 7
UNSURE (DNR) 8
REFUSED (DNR) 9
52. In which political party do state records show that you are registered to vote?
-- (ROTATE) --
• the Republican,
• the Democrat OR
• Unaffiliated
Republican 1
Democrat 2
Unaffiliated 3
OTHER (DNR) 4
UNSURE (DNR) 5
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 12
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
1TALE & ASSOCIATES
53. When thinking about politics and government, do you consider yourself to be...
(READ LIST, ROTATE TOP TO BOTTOM, BOTTOM TO TOP)
Very conservative 1
Somewhat conservative 2
MODERATE (DNR) 3
Somewhat liberal 4
Very liberal 5
54. What do you consider to be your race? Are you white, African -American, Hispanic, Asian or
some other race?
White 1
Black/African-American 2
Hispanic 3
Asian 4
Other 5
UNSURE/REFUSED (DNR) 6
55. Sex (BY OBSERVATION)
ASK OF EVERYONE: Are you employed outside the house, are you a homemaker, or are you
retired?
Male/employed 1
Male/homemaker 2
Male/retired 3
Male/not in labor force 4
Female/employed 5
Female/homemaker 6
Female/retired 7
Female/not in labor force 8
MALE/REFUSED (DNR) 9
FEMALE/REFUSED (DNR) 10
PLEASE ENTER VOTE HISTORY FLAGS FROM SAMPLE SHEET
PLEASE ENTER REGION CODE FROM SAMPLE SHEET
Centennial Institute - Colorado County Governance Survey (September 2013) Page 13
Vitale & Associates - CONFIDENTIAL
Esther Gesick
Subject: FW: sending again=expanded survey options memo and latest survey draft
Attachments: image001.jpg; ATT00001.htm; ATT00002.htm; Centennial Institute - Comparative County
Survey-O3.docx; ATT00003.htm; CI -Weld research options 9-10-13.docx; ATT00004.htm
From: John Andrews [mailto:andrewsjk@aaol.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 6:11 PM
To: Monica Mika
Subject: sending again=expanded survey options memo and latest survey draft
Monica, after you called I am resending this. Please confirm you got it.
Notice where he says "put us under 30k," that is for the polling ONLY. It means $29,000 and change, rather
than $9,000 and change - our initial polling component.
So the revised total bid from Centennial Institute would then be $43,000 flat.
Thank you,
JOHN ANDREWS
Director, Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University
www.centennialccu.org
720.489.7700
@JohnAndrewsJr
From: Todd Vitale <todd@vitaleassociates.com>
Subject: FW: expanded survey options memo and latest survey draft
Date: September 12, 2013 8:42:38 PM MDT
To: "mmika@co.weld.co.us" <mmika@co.weld.co.us>
Cc: John Andrews <andrewsjk(a)aol.com>
Hi Monika — I know you all are working overtime right now to deal with impacts of rain, so I wish you and your
community a speedy recovery.
John Andrews asked me to forward the email below and the attachments, for the consideration of your team. John also
wanted me to note that he spoke with Commissioner Conway today and Sean thought the group would be open and
interested in seeing all the options with an expanded scope. To underscore a point from the attached memo, the
current questionnaire draft captures all of the items that we have discussed to date. But, we understand that the $45k
may be too much, and thus we can work with your team to trim the questionnaire down closer to 30 questions, which,
even with the recommended full sample (N=300 Weld plus n=100 in each of the other four counties), would put us
under $30k.
I welcome feedback and any questions you all may have.
Best,
1
Esther Gesick
From: Monica Mika
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 2:47 PM
To: Esther Gesick
Subject: FW: expanded survey options memo and latest survey draft
Attachments: Centennial Institute - Comparative County Survey-Q3.docx; CI -Weld research options
9-10-13.docx
This is the attachment. Hum, seems a document might be missing??? Let me look.
Monica Daniels -Mika
Director of Finance and Administration
1150 0 Street
Greeley. Co 80632
(970) 336 7205 ext. 4210
mmikaPco.weld.co.us
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents
of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited.
From: Todd Vitale [mailto:todd@ vitaleassociates.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 8:43 PM
To: Monica Mika
Cc: John Andrews
Subject: FW: expanded survey options memo and latest survey draft
Hi Monika — I know you all are working overtime right now to deal with impacts of rain, so I wish you and your
community a speedy recovery.
John Andrews asked me to forward the email below and the attachments, for the consideration of your team. John also
wanted me to note that he spoke with Commissioner Conway today and Sean thought the group would be open and
interested in seeing all the options with an expanded scope. To underscore a point from the attached memo, the
current questionnaire draft captures all of the items that we have discussed to date. But, we understand that the $45k
may be too much, and thus we can work with your team to trim the questionnaire down closer to 30 questions, which,
even with the recommended full sample (N=300 Weld plus n=100 in each of the other four counties), would put us
under $30k.
I welcome feedback and any questions you all may have.
Best,
Todd
1
CA LE & ASSOCIATES
Todd Vitale
303-748-1140
todd@vitaleassociates.com
www.vitaleassociates.com
From: Todd Vitale
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 9:53 PM
To: 'John Andrews'
Subject: expanded survey options memo and latest survey draft
John — please find the attached two documents: an expanded survey options memo and the latest survey draft.
Please note that the latest draft reflects all of the changes and additions that I have gathered to date. Specifically, we
have added a bunch of things that speak to the values, mission, and the comparative (state, other county, city and
special district) dynamics. In addition, I have totally reworked the specific services section to maximize our information
gather.
As for the memo, I have also worked hard to lay out all options -- both in terms of sampling sizes and survey length -- the
trade-offs and impact on price. As the memo acknowledges, it's a long survey, but fully reflects the expanded scope of
what they are trying to capture. I think the survey is shaping up to be very interesting and informative. Look forward to
your feedback.
Thanks again for including me on this,
Todd
ALE & ASSOCIATES
Todd Vitale
303-748-1140
todd@vitaleassociates.com
www.vitaleassociates.com
2
Donna Bechler
From: John Andrews [andrewsjk@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 2:38 PM
To: Donna Bechler
Subject: signed=Agreement for Professional Services - Centennial Institute
Attachments: weld centennial agreement 30sep2013.pdf; ATT00001.htm
Donna, here is the signed agreement. As it did not reach us with Exhibit A (scope of work) attached, I have
added that.
The hard copy follows by postal mail.
t
Donna Bechler
From: Donna Bechler
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 2:18 PM
To: 'AndrewsJK@aol.com'
Subject: Agreement for Professional Services - Centennial Institute
Attachments: Agreement for Professional Services - Centennial Institute.pdf
Mr. Andrews,
This agreement was approved by the Board of Weld County Commissioners on 9/23/2013. I am e -mailing you a pdf of
the signed agreement, and ask that you sign it, scan it, and e-mail it to me at your earliest convenience. If possible, we
would appreciate it if you could also put the signed agreement in the mail, and return it to me at the address written
below. Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
Donna Bechler
Deputy Clerk to the Board
1150 O Street
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80632
970-336-7215 Ext 4227
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for
the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise
protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return
e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the
contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited.
1
Hello