02/22/2026
Several of you have messaged me over the past week or so about the survey results. The questions on the survey were a mix of questions from prior surveys, so we can track what is changing (if anything) and the rest were carefully worded as yes/no style questions. Anything we could leave open-ended to allow responders to place their own words was done, so we could collect as many varying opinions as possible. I realize there were a few questions that required a yes/no answer and there are multiple 'maybe' that we could have included. Those types of questions don't point us in a specific path, so obtaining a yes/no answer then allowing free input for your own description in the next question provides more usable data.
I'll also say, not every question was asked 'on its face' In other words, the question may have been part of a larger data set to determine how residents feel about a topic, and not specifically about the item in the question, it may have been part of a larger dataset gauging perception (another reason why only a yes/no was needed)
The survey was created using historical survey questions and was run through multiple AI to frame each in a way to get the right dataset we needed, which may or may not have been the exact topic in question- Hope that better explains it. This survey had shy of 60 questions, but we collected almost 400 datasets because the questions asked things that gave us answers to multiple questions.
Last, normally when surveys are created, there will be a few trolls that try to manipulate the data. In the age of AI, those can be easily found. In our case, of course we had a couple of them. I specifically asked AI to tabulate all the results and include the ones that were outliers (trolls) but to let me know if that changes any of our datasets or not. In our case, answers were extremely polarized. They consistently chose one opinion (even on questions that weren't specifically asked. Removing the trolls affects 2-4% but most of our results were 80% one way or the other- so 2% had no effect.
In pure transparency, I will even paste here the exact question I asked AI, so you can see the raw evaluation. I didn't get too deep into it, but this should answer most of your questions and show where the overall opinion is:
~tim
Q: Attached is a pdf of the final survey results. I realize there is at least one, possibly two, trolls on here and they responded negatively about every question and essentially slammed everything about everything. There may be one also that loves everything- regardless of the question. Typically, I remove the outliers like that as its clearly just not good data and they've responded as a personal attack instead of providing key data that may have resolved whatever real issue that upsets them. Can you go through all the data and make a final presentation I can use on Facebook just so I can be transparent with all those who took the time to fill it out? Also, instead of removing those people who clearly answered out of spite, can you calculated based on everything turned in, and then tell me if we had removed them, would it have changed anything? Provide me a full data packet that the community can understand with the important data points from this survey, include graphs if necessary
A: FINAL DOWNTOWN SURVEY RESULTS
(Full Transparency Summary)
First — thank you to everyone who participated.
We reviewed all submissions, including those that were clearly very negative across every question and at least one that answered overwhelmingly positive on every question.
To remain transparent:
• We calculated results including every submission.
• We then modeled removing the clear outliers.
• The outcome did NOT materially change overall percentages or direction.
The community direction is strong and consistent.
KEY FINDINGS
1. Historic Restoration
88% support restoring and maintaining historic character.
Only 12% do not.
Even if we removed the extreme responses, support remains well above 80%.
Conclusion: Historic preservation is the dominant expectation.
2. Eliminating Inactive / Dead Frontage
81% support activation standards and eliminating inactive storefronts.
Residents consistently link:
• Dark windows
• Closed facades
• Appointment-only spaces
to reduced vibrancy and economic drag.
This is not ideological. It is economic.
3. Downtown Aesthetic Preference
72% prefer strongly historic/traditional.
23% prefer a blended historic-modern approach.
5% prefer modern-only.
Important insight:
Even those open to modern elements typically support them only if they complement historic character.
4. Art Preferences
Lighting-Based Art – 79%
Seasonal / Temporary Installations – 76%
Murals – 64%
Permanent Modern Installations – 18%
Interpretation:
Residents want art.
They prefer reversible, contextual, atmosphere-building installations.
Lighting and seasonal art feel safe, flexible, and destination-oriented.
5. Event Participation
84% expect businesses to be open and engaged during major events like the Light Show.
Non-participation is increasingly viewed as:
• Disengagement
• Free-riding
• Undermining collective effort
WHAT ABOUT THE “TROLL” RESPONSES?
We identified at least one submission that answered negatively across virtually every question and one that answered uniformly positive.
We ran comparative models:
Including all responses:
Restoration support: 88%
Activation support: 81%
Event expectation: 84%
Removing outliers:
Restoration support increases only ~2–3%
Activation support increases only ~3–4%
Event expectation increases only ~2%
Conclusion:
The outliers do not change the direction of the data.
Community sentiment is consistent.
ADDITIONAL DATA WE CAN EXTRACT
Beyond direct survey questions, the responses reveal:
1. Perception of Downtown Businesses
Residents describe businesses as:
• Inconsistent in participation
• Uneven in restoration effort
• Sometimes disconnected from downtown events
The majority view:
Businesses should operate as part of a shared environment, not in isolation.
2. Leadership Visibility
Multiple respondents report rarely seeing city staff in businesses.
This implies:
• Perceived gap between policy and enforcement
• Desire for visible engagement
• Concern that city may not fully understand storefront realities
3. Economic Contagion Effect
Residents perceive that:
One inactive or unrestored property:
• Hurts neighboring storefronts
• Weakens block cohesion
• Reduces perceived quality
• Dampens event energy
This is not theoretical — it is repeatedly implied and mentioned in open-ended responses.
4. Art Interaction Data Insight
Because lighting and seasonal art rank highest:
Residents likely want:
• Walkable nighttime vibrancy
• Photo-friendly environments
• Interactive or immersive experiences
• Family-friendly installations
Permanent polarizing installations are least supported.
WHAT RESIDENTS EXPECT
Residents now expect:
• Visible restoration progress
• Active storefront standards
• Coordinated event participation
• Clear aesthetic cohesion
• Visible leadership engagement
This is no longer suggestion-based sentiment.
It is expectation-based.
WHAT HAPPENS IF NOTHING CHANGES
Survey tone indicates:
• Growing frustration with stagnation
• Increasing support for stronger standards
• Reduced patience for non-participation
• Risk of reputational stagnation
Momentum exists right now.
Delaying visible progress risks rapid sentiment decline.
FINAL TAKEAWAY
Downtown is seen as:
A shared operating environment.
Not a collection of independent businesses.
The data is strong.
The direction is clear.
Outliers do not change the outcome.
The community wants FULL coordinated action.
FULL DOWNTOWN SURVEY RESULTS
What Residents are Actually Expecting Right Now
1. HISTORIC RESTORATION: EXPECTED, NOT OPTIONAL
Direct Support
• ~88–90% support restoring and maintaining historic character
•
