Process

According to the Holmes County Planning Commission, 608 residents chosen at random received the survey.  These respondents were selected by generating a random number that was equivalent to the sequential number assigned to each county resident.  These residents were mailed a survey, and were asked to return the completed results to the Planning Commission in the self-addressed stamped envelope.  A total of 173, or about 28% completed surveys were returned.  These surveys then became the sample size.  Several surveys that were returned were blank.  These surveys were discarded and were not included in the sample size.  According to generally accepted statistical processes (Rea & Parker, 1997) a sample size of this magnitude yields a margin of error of 10% with a 95% confidence level.

Data Reduction Process

A sequential tracking number, starting at one, was assigned to each unopened envelope.  For those surveys not in an envelope, this number was written on the first page.  This identification number was used solely for data validation and to review the open-ended questions.  Because the Commission included a self-addressed envelope, almost none of the respondents placed a return address on it, guaranteeing confidentiality.  However, several residents did include their complete address.  In a survey of this type, one of the major issues is confidentiality.  By using confidential surveys, respondents can answer without the fear of being identified with a specific answer.  For those respondents choosing to include their complete return address, it must be assumed they did not wish to remain anonymous.

Once the tracking number was assigned, the information was entered into an Excel spreadsheet.  This part of the analysis was concerned only with individual questions and is located in Appendix A.  No cross tabulation or correlation between questions was performed.  Each survey corresponds to a single row.  The comments from the open-ended questions were also entered exactly as written; no corrections for spelling or grammar were made.  Several respondents skipped some questions.  These answers which were coded as either a blank, or zero.  It must be noted that skipping questions increase the potential for error.  This increase is caused by the possibility marking answers on the wrong line.  For example, the respondent could enter the answer for question 5 on the line for question 4.  However, due to the construction of the survey the possibility of this error was considered small, and should be ignored.

In addition to omitting answers to some questions, some surveys had multiple responses for a question.  Because it was impossible to determine the desired answer, those results were coded as no answer.  This method eliminates any bias during the data entry.  Additionally, some surveys had multiple marks on a question’s answer.  These multiple marks were most likely to indicate a strong opinion on a specific question.  Because these all occurred on the same value, they were included as valid entries.  If the respondent clearly indicated an error in selection, for example, scratching out one mark, the remaining answer was coded.

Statistical Analysis

Microsoft’s Excel product was used to produce a Histogram of the various responses by category.  Here the total and percentage of each value was computed.  Additionally, several simple statistical formulas, such as Mode, Median, Average (Mean), and Standard Deviation were computed.  Because of the relatively small variance in the range of data (0-4) the standard error and confidence interval were included.  The standard error is defined by Aczel as the standard deviation divided by the square root of the sample size (1996, p.209).  This statistic is important because when dealing with a sample, the average of the sample and the population might not be identical.  The standard error provides a measure indicating the amount of the potential variance between the sample and population.  The confidence interval is defined at 1.96 times this value (Aczel, 1996 #313) and should be added and subtracted to determine potential range for the population mean.  Because of the rather large sample, it is extremely likely that over the entire population of Holmes County, the sample values are accurate within the margin of error of the survey.  Combined, these statistical computations provide key insights on the nature of and form of the data, but the relationships only become apparent by using an advanced analysis package that displays the relationships between the various questions.

To determine the correlation between questions, a statistical analysis package, JMP from the SAS Institute was used.  This package produced many of the figures contained in this report.  One of the key statistical tools is the “Contingency Table.”  This is essentially a Chi-Square analysis of the difference between the expected values and what is observed in each square.  The overall significance is contained in the probability measures located near the bottom of each figure.  The smaller the number, the more significant; conversely, the closer the number is to one, the less relationship exists between the two variables.  For example, in Figure 1, the probability is 0.0045.  This probability is small enough to indicate that there is a moderately strong relationship between these two questions.  Conversely, by looking at Figure 2, this number is .4635 indicating that there is little relationship between these questions.

Question 1: Amount of restrictions that developers should meet

Most respondents believe that developers should meet some restrictions.  By combining those that believe many restrictions should be met, the total comes to over 90%.  This would indicate that the respondents do favor some type of restrictions.  Figure 1 illustrates the results of this question are in agreement with the views expressed by question 11; that scenic beauty is important to residents.  Only 10 respondents indicated that they agreed that the rural aspect was important yet believed that there should be few or no restrictions on development.

When question 1 is compared to question 10 (see Figure 2) regarding the tourism development on SR 39, the results are inconclusive.  There is no strong relationship between these questions.  The respondents appear split on the issue, with no clear direction provided.  This also agrees with the issue dealing with the chain stores and “big city” feeling (see figure 3). 

Question 2: Subdivisions should be balanced to preserve community character

Again, the respondents have spoken clearly.  They believe that new subdivisions should preserve local flavor of the existing area with over 94% indicating they either strongly agreed or agreed that preserving the local character is important, even when building new subdivisions.  There is a very strong correlation between placing restrictions on new development and preserving the existing character of the county.  An analysis between these two questions is shown in Figure 4.  Respondents that believed in placing many restrictions on development strongly agree that community flavor should be maintained.  The respondents appear to be polarized at the extremes when the relationship between the development on SR 39 and community flavor is compared, see Figure 5.  However, when compared to the need to preserve farmland, there is a very strong interdependency between keeping farmland and the community flavor, see Figure 6.  From this interrelationship, most of the respondents are firmly convinced that the rural, or farm setting is what sets Holmes County apart, and they feel it is worth preserving (Figure 7).  An interesting figure is that about 12% of the respondents want more commerce, while holding onto the desire to preserve the rural aspects.  This information must be tempered with the fact that almost 66% of the respondents wish to preserve the existing flavor and do not wish this type of development.

Question 3: Addition of more chain stores, restaurants, and “big city” shopping in Holmes County

While results indicate that an overwhelming majority would be opposed to businesses of these types with 74% saying they do not want to see more of this type of development.  This question however, measures three different variables, which could have caused confusion.  This belief is supported by several of the open-ended questions, in which respondents indicated that they desired more theaters and places with youth entertainment.

The respondents, however, view the introduction of these types of businesses as a potential negative because they might affect their basic desire to retain that “small town feeling” (see Figure 7).  Surprisingly, there is no relationship between the creation of additional big city feelings an the need to preserve farmland (see Figure 8).  This would indicate that, while the respondents desire to have a rural environment, there is a possibility to wisely use existing farmland for more development.  However, this relationship is rather weak, which indicates that a more in-depth survey could be undertaken to determine the exact sentiment.  Perhaps it would be a better plan to use existing areas that are developed to provide these types of businesses, rather than sacrificing additional farmland.

Question 4: Wage rates are a problem in our county

Here the respondents strongly believe in this issue.  By a two-to-one margin, most respondents believe that wages are a real issue.  When related to the issue of using tax dollars to improve education and training opportunities, most respondents believe this should not be done (see Figure 9).  A potential reason for this belief is that most do not believe there is a lack of educational or training programs within the county (Figure 10).  In addition, the respondents do not wish to see additional governmental involvement to address the wage problem (see Figure 10).  However, if tax abatements are given to any industry, 58% of the respondents believe these industries should provide competitive wages as a requirement.

Question 5: Lack of training or educational opportunities within Holmes County presents county residents from obtaining high-paying jobs?

Most of the respondents, over 66%, believe that the education and job training facilities within the existing systems is sufficient to meet the requirements for high-paying jobs.  This is confirmed by relating this question to the issue of wages (see Figure 11).  While wages are an issue, many believe that additional training will not cure this problem and do not want to see additional tax dollars to be spent (see Figure 9).  When related to the issue of local tax rates being a problem, there is a relationship between the educational and training costs, 73% of the respondents both believe that the tax rates are too high and additional monies for training and education will not result in better paying jobs for the residents of the county (see Figure 12).  Clearly, the residents of Holmes County wish private industry to provide these types of jobs, not the government.  Relating wages and preserving the small-town environment, a strong relationship exists.  While the respondents would like to see improvement in wages yet preserving the small town feeling, this significantly limits the potential activities.  Clearly, meeting this desire can only be accomplished by either an increase in successful home-based businesses, or by traveling to other communities, such as Akron, Cleveland, Wooster, Ashland and Mansfield.

If the respondents were commuting to these larger metropolitan areas, it is expected that the quality of the highways and traffic becoming an important issue.  When the desire for better wages is compared to the question if traffic is a problem (see Figure 13), there appears to be some linkage.  Because these is an extremely weak relationship, this linkage should be ignored.

Question 6: Would you support tax dollars being used to create training and educational opportunities?

From the results, the respondents are sending a very clear message; they do not want tax dollars being used for additional educational and vocational training (see Figure 14).  This can be attributed to the underlying belief that high paying jobs will not be secured by additional training and education.  A second option is that the training and education currently being provided is viewed by the respondents as not likely to lead to higher paying jobs.  The first reason likely would indicate a relatively high satisfaction with the existing educational system.  Whereas, the second possible reason would indicate the respondents are dissatisfied with the educational system and would like a change.  Additional research should be undertaken to determine the underlying reason behind this question.

There were a few responses to the open-ended questions suggesting the need for a four-year college or university.  We believe that this view is not widely held within the community.

Question 7: Environmental impacts should be considered when creating new jobs.

By an overwhelming majority, almost 80% of the respondents believe the environment impacts should be considered when creating new jobs (see Figure 15).  This is in complete agreement with the desire to maintain the small town feeling (see Figure 16).  These individuals also believe that environmental impacts, while important, also influence the pay of jobs within the county (see Figure 17).  A potential solution would be to create an environment favorable for environmentally-friendly industries.

Question 8: Tax abatement incentives should be used to assist business and industry.

There is no agreement within the respondents about this issue.  This is because the results are only slightly skewed toward the agreement side (see Figure 18).  However, when relating the responses given between this question and question 9.  The results demonstrate that if any abatements are used, it should be linkage to providing competitive wages (see figure 19).

Question 10: The benefits of recent tourism developments along SR 39 in Berlin Township outweigh any disadvantages.

Many of the residents are not pleased with the tourist development; this number is about 63% (see Figure 20).  The cause appears to be the recurring theme of preserving the small town environment (see Figure 21).  The residents, however, do not view this type of development as part of the big city environment.  This could be because local individuals, who are their friends and neighbors, own these businesses.  Clearly, the respondents understand and appreciate the differences between the tourist industry and appreciate the differences between the tourist industry and other types of large-scale facilities. 

Question 13: Farmland preservation is an important issue.

Looking at this issue, almost 90% of the respondents hold to this belief (see Figure 22).  Again, there is a strong correlation between this issue and preservation of the rural environment (see Figures 6 and 23).  The respondents understand that there are conflicts between preserving the farmland and the building of subdivisions (see Figure 24).  However, the respondents are convinced that, by preserving farmland, these conflicts can be significantly reduced.

Question 14: The reason to preserve farmland

The respondents clearly believe that preserving farmland is important, as demonstrated in Question 13.  To each of the three parts of this question, over 90% either agree or strongly agree with the following reasons:  Preserve agriculture base, reduce conflicts between farms and subdivisions, and to protect the natural resources (see Figure 25).

This question also had an “other” option.  The respondents linked two other issues in addition to the ones provided.  These issues centered on the need to continue to produce food for the area, and the fact that many of the tourists visit the county to see the agricultural land.  These respondents believed that the farming communities severely reduced the number of tourists.  This reduction could cause severe financial hardships both for the local government and the business owners. 

Question 15: Subdivisions should be located in areas served by public sewer and water systems

An 81% majority agrees with this position.  These results are in complete agreement with Question 1 (see figure 26).  Approximately 74% of the respondents agreed that this would be a valid restriction.  This would be in addition to the requirement that the subdivision enhance or blend into the existing community character.

Question 16: Advertising signs and billboards should not block the view of the landscape.

By an overwhelming majority, just slightly under 90%, the respondents firmly believe that this type of advertising should be controlled.  This issue appears to be a rather emotional one because 50% of the respondents indicated they strongly agreed, with the remaining 40% agreeing.  The respondents appear to view the landscape as part of the natural resources of the county as demonstrated by the strong correlation between this question and Protecting Natural Resources (Question 18C).  This relationship is illustrated in Figure 28.  Many respondents, just over 81%, linked protecting natural resources and that controlling signs to prevent obstruction of the landscape. 

Question 17: More recreational opportunities are needed in my Township/Village

Here, just under one third of the respondents believe there should be additional facilities (see Figure 29).  However, many of those agreeing left the types of additional facilities blank, so it is impossible to determine the exact nature of any additional recreational activities desired.  Those that did answer either indicated more outdoor-related activities, such as camping, canoeing or to provide activities for the young people.  There were a few references to theater but it was not clear whether cinema or state productions.

Question 18: Road conditions

Most of the respondents have no complaints about the condition of the roadways.  By far, the largest complaints (either Somewhat Dissatisfied or Satisfied) appear to be on the township roads.  Here, over 41% of the respondents indicated their dissatisfaction.  This was the first category in which the dissatisfaction level exceeded 25% (see Figure 30).

There is a remarkable consistency with those respondents that selected traffic as a problem and how they perceive the conditions of the roads (see Figure 34), but there is not a sufficient correlation to derive any valid meaning. 

Question 19:  Property owners should have absolute and final say about what happens with their property.   

This has some interesting relationships; 84% of the people indicated that they agreed that property owners should have absolute and final say (see Figure 31), but when related to other questions, this is within limits.  They believe that the rights of the property owner exist within the context of the needs of the community.  For example, those that agreed with this position also believe that certain activities such as adult entertainment establishments should have increased regulations (see Figure 32).  This does not hold true when the business is large-scale animal farming such as hogs (see Figure 33).  This indicates and reinforces the underlying current that preserving the rustic farm environment is the key issue within this county.

This question is also contained in an open-ended response; the most frequent concern entered here was to regulate and monitor the conditions of “large scale” chicken farms.  Many of the respondents expressed a concern that these types of farms could become more common and wished to ensure that this did not happen.

Question 20: We need to balance property rights and public interest

The respondents appear to be divided on this issue.  As seen in Figure 34, there is a strong correlation between this question and the small town feeling.  This tends to indicate that the balance should be in the direction of preserving the small town feeling.  Clearly, the residents do not want to see the commercialization indicative of that along SR 39 in Berlin to spread throughout the county.

Question 21: Farmland is becoming unaffordable.

A total of 88% of the respondents are firmly convinced that farmland is becoming unaffordable for the majority.  These individuals also strongly believe that it is important for Holmes County to preserve the existing farms as shown in figure 36.  Even those individuals disagreeing that preserving farmland is important still tend to believe that land prices are becoming unaffordable.

Question 23: Issues within the community.

The four most important issues are (see Figure 37):

Each of these issues has a more than 60% of the respondents indicating that this is a significant issue.  These issues all relate to the livability of the community.  Without a living wage, the respondent cannot remain within the community that is important to him or her.  Additionally, if the taxation becomes oppressive, which many residents believe it already has, this, too, will force individuals to leave their traditional family homes.  The last two, litter and farmland, center on the overall visual environment.  Residents just do not want to see a sprawling shopping center outside their windows with the corresponding increase in roadside litter.

Conclusions

Looking at the results, there is a central theme—that retaining the unique rural beauty that is Holmes County.  These respondents firmly believe that action needs to be taken to keep the rural and picturesque county setting that has become one of the central parts of the community.  They understand that, once this uniqueness is lost, it is gone forever.  While they understand the requirement to continue to increase the economic diversity of the area, they are not willing to sacrifice this heritage.

Without additional research, it would appear that the residents also are satisfied with the educational opportunities provided by public education and the existing job training opportunities.  They do not see any linkage between the educational opportunities and the creation of better paying jobs, as such are not willing to pay increased taxes.  In fact, many already feel that the tax rates are a problem.  They see the major source of jobs being the private sector, and while against the use of tax abatements to encourage private businesses, if they are used, they want assurances that the jobs will provide good wages to the residents of the county.

Home