What Erie’s $70K Survey Gets Right—and So, So Wrong

This piece is part of Yellow Scene Magazine’s Opinion section. The views expressed here are those of the author in their role as Associate Editor, and do not represent a reported news position. At Yellow Scene, opinion pieces speak freely, challenge assumptions, and say the quiet parts out loud.

Earlier this week, Yellow Scene reached out to the Town of Erie to request a copy of the full community survey. In response, the town informed us that. to protect the integrity of the fielding process, they would not be releasing the questions publicly until after the survey closes.

Let’s be clear: while we have serious criticisms of how this survey was constructed and deployed, we have no desire to undermine the people involved (however flawed the execution) or invalidate a process that, for better or worse, cost the town $70,000. We decided we would respect the process and avoid publishing the questions today. However, we are going to share our initial impressions. All images of questions will come from the publicly available survey draft, and may have minor differences from the presentation of the final questions. What follows is a breakdown of the types of questions that make up the survey, based on known phrasing, public discussions, and our reporting. We’re sharing this to shed light on broader patterns in the survey design, not to necessarily dive into the political topics it covers or comprehensively cover the questions.

When the survey was first introduced, residents and council members raised concerns about the questions. There were fears that the survey would ask residents to weigh in on technical issues they weren’t equipped to evaluate, or present false choices in overly simplistic ways. At the root of it all is a deeper concern: that this survey, marketed as a way to reflect the “will of the people,” is being used to manufacture consent for decisions that may not actually serve Erie’s long-term interests and provide cover for city officials seeking to avoid accountability.

Now that we’ve seen the questions, the verdict is mixed. Some of those fears have come to fruition. Others haven’t. Overall, I’d break the survey questions down into four categories: Solid, Serviceable, Ill-Fitting, and Loaded.

Solid Questions

First, some praise.

There are questions in this survey that are thoughtful, well-constructed, and likely to yield valuable insight. One example: a question that asks residents to describe what a “small-town feel” means to them. This question stands out because it doesn’t force a numerical answer or push residents into a false binary. It invites reflection, and in doing so, it taps into a real, emotional tension as Erie grows. What makes Erie feel like home? What elements of that tight-knit identity might be at risk as development accelerates?

That’s the kind of question a survey should ask.

My only critique is that the framing presumes Erie does have a small-town feel, and that this is inherently good. It’s a subtle slant, but worth noting. Still, I’d estimate fewer than a dozen of the survey’s questions strike this kind of thoughtful, balanced tone.

Serviceable Questions

Next up: the middle-of-the-road questions. These aren’t great, but they aren’t harmful either. Some are simply boring. Others are vague or imprecise. But they don’t mislead or cause real damage. Think basic demographic questions (race, income) or broad approval ratings.

Take Question 6, for example:
“Do you approve or disapprove of the job the Town of Erie is doing to provide public services, projects, and programs for Town residents?”

It’s a reasonable pulse check. But it’s incredibly broad. What counts as a “public service” or “town project”? Does that include festivals? Parks? Affordable housing? And what does “approve” mean? Is “mostly fine” enough to click “approve”? The question tries to measure overall satisfaction, but it’s so fuzzy that the results may not tell the town anything useful. And because the answers are multiple choice rather than open-ended, there’s no room to clarify.

Ill-Fitting Questions

Now we enter problematic territory.

These are questions that simply shouldn’t be in a public opinion survey because they require expert analysis or have empirically measurable answers that shouldn’t be swayed by gut feelings or individual bias.

For example:
Should Erie prioritize building a water park or investing in sustainable infrastructure?

This is not a question of public opinion—it’s a policy decision that should be based on data, long-term impacts, and expert input. Pretending otherwise is irresponsible at best—and at worst, a thinly veiled attempt to justify bad decisions with cherry-picked public sentiment.

These types of questions create a false equivalence. Celebratory fireworks and water conservation efforts don’t belong in the same ranking list.

Another example:
“How much of a problem is rental availability?”

That’s something we can measure. Vacancy rates, average time on market, income-to-rent ratios, all of that data exists. Asking residents to weigh in without that context will generate results based on anecdote, bias, and personal circumstance, rather than fact.

And here’s the deeper issue:
Let’s say the majority of residents rank building a “water park” as their top priority. What then? Will the town scrap housing and sustainability initiatives to fund more splash pads?

If yes, that’s a governance failure. If not, why ask the question in the first place?

This is a $70,000 survey. That breaks down to roughly $1,400 per question. And some of these questions simply aren’t worth that price tag. Yes, part of the cost covers distribution and vendor fees, but that’s all the more reason to treat each question like it matters.

Loaded Questions

Finally, the worst offenders: loaded, leading, or misleading questions.

Despite public concerns, the final survey still includes several questions asking residents to weigh in on specific, highly technical complex issues, without enough context to make an informed decision. Two sentences of background isn’t enough for a resident to decide whether Erie should invest in high-density versus low-density housing, or use a particular tax structure to fund infrastructure.

Many of these questions boil complex tradeoffs down to a single, misleading frame:
Raise taxes or don’t?

Predictably, most people will choose “don’t” especially when the question doesn’t provide critical information like project timelines, interest rates, or long-term community benefits. But that’s exactly the problem: surveys aren’t built for this kind of nuance. What we’re left with is a set of questions that pretend to ask for guidance, when really, they’re just looking for permission.

Final Verdict: 5/10

There are worse surveys out there. But given the time, money, and political weight placed behind this one, it leaves a lot to be desired There’s nothing wrong with wanting to involve residents in decisions that affect their lives. In fact, that’s admirable. But there are far better tools than this: Hold real town halls. Share accessible, informative materials. Engage directly with community groups. Host public votes when appropriate.

This survey? It feels more like a cover story than a real conversation.

And for $70,000, Erie deserves more than that.

What the survey postcard looks like (don’t discard it!)

It hit hard when, after 31 years, a beloved local publication closed its doors. Independent journalism in Colorado just got a little smaller. And a lot more vulnerable.

In Boulder County, only one locally-owned, independent news platform remains: Yellow Scene Magazine. We don’t answer to a corporate board. We’re not backed by a hedge fund. We answer and report to our readers..

The future isn’t found in selling out or corporate donors. It’s in community.

Help us keep unbought, unbossed journalism alive and delivered to your mailbox.

Become a sustaining supporter for just $8/month