LETTER: Let's Talk Cambridge survey too vague to guide decisions

Survey questions are overly general, limit meaningful responses and miss key topics, says letter writer CambridgeToday received the following letter regarding the Let's Talk Cambridge survey: I read about the Let's Talk Cambridge initiative and survey in CambridgeToday. I went to the city website and struggled to find the page, so instead linked through the article. Is that indicative of our city administration; we can talk but no one is listening? Any survey has a purpose. A good survey will produce direct actionable results. This survey seems to serve only the purpose of being able to say, 'Look, we had a survey.' With only nine questions that are too general, merely statistical, or limited to a one-word response, even saying they had a survey is laughable. One question asks, 'Looking ahead to the future, what would make Cambridge a truly thriving city to live, play, work, and do business in?' After ignoring the grammatical error, the respondent may select up to three from a list. The list itself reflects the core purpose and raison d'être of city hall — why they exist and what they are supposed to do, though hardly exhaustive, and yet we are limited to pick three. Missing from the list are elements that relate to employment and things that would make Cambridge a thriving place to do business. There is an 'other (please specify)' option, but why aren't there three of these? So, what would a useful survey look like so that the answers actually impact choices and decisions in Cambridge? To what extent should Cambridge acquiesce to the dictates of the provincial government? Do you agree or disagree that Cambridge should become the next Mississauga or similar? Should Cambridge plan and develop for the future based on children first or profit first? Should Cambridge develop based on actual citizen demand or on the speculation that if we build it then demand will follow? The answer to the first question offers guidance to our elected representatives and city staff on how to approach their responsibilities, and even how aggressive they should be against the provincial government. All planning and development questions flow through the answer to number two; super-density or family livable, for example. Question 3 reinforces the focus with or against the province (they are profit-first motivated) and recommends the types of investments Cambridge should make and minimizes speculative behaviour by city hall. The fourth question clarifies how decisions are made by ensuring that the starting point is based on reality and that the choices and investments are taken to serve current residents. These are not perfect questions, just off the top of my head, but they highlight the kind of input the city should be seeking from its citizens. Answers must be actionable, provide direction, and even empower city hall in informing them just how ready we are to fight for our rights as a community, and for our future. Question 6 asks, 'What's one idea, investment, or opportunity that would have the biggest positive impact on Cambridge's future?' Could the answer be as simple as 'Conduct better surveys and community engagements so that Cambridge citizens can be the drivers of our own future?' For what it's worth, here's the link to the survey. Gregory Lang Preston