1. CATALYSE ® Community Perceptions Survey © Executive Presentation © CATALYSE ® Pty Ltd 2012 June 2012

2. 2 Purpose  Measure overall satisfaction with the City of Fremantle  Evaluate perceptions of local services, infrastructure & facilities  Identify performance gaps  Benchmark the City against other Councils Methodology  Computer assisted telephone interviews (CATI) conducted with 401 randomly selected households  Loose quotas set by age, gender and location, then sample weighted to account for small gender and age bias.  Interviewing completed by ECU Survey Research Centre  Sampling precision is +/- 5% at the 95% confidence interval Industry Comparisons  Provided when three or more Councils have asked the same or similar question in the past two years.  For this report, the City of Fremantle has selected a subset of similar councils for benchmarking purposes: Resident sample composition % of weighted sample Gender Age Life-stage Suburb Home ownership Minority groups (18-34 years, no children) (35-64 years, no children) Introduction and research method (65+ years, no children) When responses do not add to 100% within this report this is attributed to rounding errors or ‘other’, ‘don’t know’ or ‘refused’ responses ^ small sample size (n < 30) ---- notable, but not statistically significant variance –City of Mandurah –City of Melville –Shire of Mundaring –City of Nedlands –City of South Perth –City of Belmont –Town of Cambridge –City of Cannington –City of Cockburn –City of Fremantle –City of Subiaco –City of Swan –City of Vincent –City of Wanneroo % of sample (unweighted) 43% 57% 20% 42% 38%

3. Strategic Insights  Most residents (9 in 10) are satisfied with the City of Fremantle as a place to live, and a majority (2 in 3) are satisfied with the City of Fremantle as the governing organisation.  The City’s strengths are regarded to be: –Waste services –Fremantle Arts Centre –Library and information services –Festivals, events and cultural activities  Residents also appear grateful for improved efforts to understand their needs and communicate the City’s vision –47% agree that Elected Members have a good understanding of community needs, up 8% points since 2008 –37% agree that the City has developed and communicated a clear vision, up 11% points since 2008. 3

4. Strategic Insights cont.  However, there is significant room for improvement.  While the City’s performance is on par with other Councils across many service area, there are many areas where it is below average. And, these are areas of concern in the community.  Overall, just 22% are delighted with how the City is performing as a governing organisation (17% points behind the average result for similar councils), and perceptions of value for money have fallen from 69% to 53% satisfied over past four years.  The community’s top 3 priorities are: –Parking in the City Centre (49% dissatisfied) –Safety and security – with greater concerns in the City Centre (31% dissatisfied) and Hilton (44% dissatisfied) –Economic development and job creation (37% dissatisfied) 4

5. Strategic Insights cont.  Other areas to address include: –Council’s leadership ( especially among residents from Hilton where 46% are dissatisfied) –Community consultation (30% dissatisfied) and the openness and transparency of Council processes (36% dissatisfied) –Youth services and facilities (especially among families with young children where 42% are dissatisfied) –Facilities, services and care for seniors (19% points below group average; of greater concern in White Gum Valley with 38% dissatisfied) –Footpaths and cycleways (18% points below industry average; and of greater concern for families with young children with 33% dissatisfied) –Planning and building approvals (44% dissatisfied) –Traffic (over 10% rated as a priority) –Enforcement of local laws, relating to food, health, noise and pollution (over 10% rated as a priority)  Plus, continued effort is needed to develop and communicate a clear vision for the area –45% disagree that this is happening; higher in Hilton where 59% disagree 5

6. Overall perceptions

7. All respondents 7  Satisfaction is high –Among those who could rate the service, 88% are satisfied  Renters are more satisfied than home owners.  There is greatest room to improve among older singles / couples. Overall satisfaction with the City of Fremantle as a place to live Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 399) ^ = small sample size (<30) % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 64%0% Families with younger children (0-12) 63%8% Families with older children (13+) 60%7% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 47%3% Seniors (65+) 58%9% Own 54%6% Rent 65%4% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 399) N/A

8. All respondents 8  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 67% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among younger singles / couples and those living in North Fremantle followed by Beaconsfield and Samson  There is greatest room to improve among those living in Hilton and home owners Overall satisfaction with the City of Fremantle as a governing organisation Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 394) ^ = small sample size (<30) % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 32%5% Families with younger children (0-12) 23%26% Families with older children (13+) 23%19% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 18%16% Seniors (65+) 22%24% Beaconsfield 29%17% Fremantle 21%20% Hilton 16%28% North Fremantle 33%18% O'Connor^ 19%0% Samson^ 29%10% South Fremantle 19%17% White Gum Valley 11%18% Own 20%23% Rent 32%9% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 394) N/A

9. 9 Overall satisfaction % of respondents who are delighted with Council performance Note: from 2011 onwards, many councils began asking overall satisfaction with the [insert council] as a ‘place to live’ and as a ‘governing organisation’. Where this has occurred, individual council results have been averaged to get an overall satisfaction measure. % of respondents who are delighted (Rating satisfaction in top 3 boxes) Source: CATALYSE ® Community Perceptions Survey, 2003-2012

10. All respondents 10  Satisfaction is moderate, and has been declining –Among home owners who could rate value for money, 53% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among seniors  There is greatest room to improve among those living in Hilton, followed by North Fremantle and South Fremantle Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 282) ^ = small sample size (<30) % of home owners (n=301) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Male 17%36% Female 17%26% Younger singles / couples (18-34) 20%15% Families with younger children (0-12) 13%38% Families with older children (13+) 10%31% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 15%37% Seniors (65+) 29%23% Beaconsfield 21%32% Fremantle 17%23% Hilton 5%40% North Fremantle 22%38% O'Connor^ 0% Samson^ 22%26% South Fremantle 20%36% White Gum Valley 12%37% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 282) N/A Value for money from Council rates

11. 11 CELEBRATE FOCUS Community Priorities Indicator TM PRIORITY (% of mentions) SATISFACTION (% Delighted) MONITOR Q. From all the areas we have been discussing in this survey, which ones would you most like the City of Fremantle to focus on improving? MULTIPLE RESPONSE ALLOWED Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Chart shows % of respondents delighted (8,9 or 10) Base: Priority – all respondents (Residents 2012 n = xxx); Satisfaction - Respondents who use / can comment on service / facility (Residents 2012 n = various)

12. Governance & Communications

13. All respondents 13  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 51% are satisfied  There appears to be more room to improve among males and those living in Hilton Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 333) ^ = small sample size (<30) Familiar 83% Priority 8% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Male 16%32% Female 15%23% Beaconsfield 14%25% Fremantle 13%22% Hilton 13%46% North Fremantle 12%32% O'Connor^ 23%0% Samson^ 31%41% South Fremantle 20%29% White Gum Valley 17%12% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 333) 2003: Leadership & advocacy in the community Council's leadership within the community

14. 14 Leadership % of respondents who are delighted with Council performance % of respondents who are delighted (Rating satisfaction in top 3 boxes) Source: CATALYSE ® Community Perceptions Survey, 2003-2012

15. 15 The City of Fremantle has developed and communicated a clear vision for the area I am fairly clear about what the area is going to look and feel like in 10 years time Q. I’m going to read out a few statements. For each one, please let me know if you strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, feel neutral, somewhat agree or strongly agree. Base: All respondents (Residents 2012 n = 401) ^ = small sample size (<30)  37% of respondents agree that the City has developed and communicated a clear vision for the area, up from 29% in the previous study  Seniors are less likely to agree than earlier lifestages (though they are not more likely to disagree)  Conversely, younger singles and couples are less likely to disagree  Those living in Hilton are more likely to disagree that there is a clear vision % of residentsTotal AgreeTotal Disagree Younger singles / couples 43%25% Families with younger children (0-12) 39%46% Families with older children (13+) 43%42% Older singles / couples 36%52% Seniors 23%50% Beaconsfield 30%54% Fremantle 37%46% Hilton 25%59% North Fremantle 44%38% O'Connor 19%^38% Samson 42%29% South Fremantle 41%45% White Gum Valley 41%29% = significant variance= notable variance INDUSTRY STANDARDS % of respondents Total agree (%) CITY OF FREMANLE Total disagree = 45% Total agree = 37% AGREE HISTORY

16. 16 Council has developed and communicated a clear vision % of respondents who agree % of respondents who agree Source: CATALYSE ® Community Perceptions Survey, 2003-2012

17. All respondents 17  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate consultation, 53% are satisfied  Views are similar across the community Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 370) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 12% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 370) How the community is consulted about local issues

18. 18 Elected Members have a good understanding of the community’s needs Q. I’m going to read out a few statements. For each one, please let me know if you strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, feel neutral, somewhat agree or strongly agree. Base: All respondents (Residents 2012 n = 401) ^ = small sample size (<30)  47% of respondents agree that Councillors have a good understanding of the community's needs ̵ Up from 41% in the previous study  27% of respondents disagree  Those living in White Gum Valley are most likely to agree  Seniors are most likely to disagree % of residentsTotal AgreeTotal Disagree Younger singles / couples 58%13% Families with younger children (0-12) 50%25% Families with older children (13+) 51%28% Older singles / couples 48%23% Seniors 32%41% Beaconsfield 40%30% Fremantle 54%24% Hilton 37%32% North Fremantle 36%39% O'Connor 38% Samson 50%25% South Fremantle 43%32% White Gum Valley 66%7% = significant variance= notable variance INDUSTRY STANDARDS % of respondents Total agree (%) CITY OF FREMANTLE Total disagree = 27% Total agree = 47% AGREE HISTORY

19. All respondents 19  Satisfaction is low –Among those who could rate the service, 45% are satisfied  Younger singles and couples are less concerned than other lifestages Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 293) ^ = small sample size (<30) Familiar 73% Priority 6% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 13%24% Families with younger children (0-12) 20%43% Families with older children (13+) 19%37% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 7%34% Seniors (65+) 14%36% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 293) 2003: Being open in its processes How open and transparent Council processes are

20. All respondents 20  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 59% are satisfied  There is greatest room to improve among seniors and those with a disability or impairment Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 383) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 9% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 31%19% Families with younger children (0-12) 19%25% Families with older children (13+) 22%21% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 18%22% Seniors (65+) 24%32% Disability or impairment 15%33% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 383) How the community is informed about local issues

21.  56% of respondents recall seeing or reading Fremantle City News, the Council’s weekly column in the Fremantle Gazette  This is a similar result to the 2010 study with 59% recall.  Recall increases with lifestage and is also higher among home owners and those with a disability or impairment.  Recall is lowest among younger singles / couples with no children. 21 Seen or read Fremantle City News Q. Over the past 12 months, have you seen or read Fremantle City News, the Council’s weekly column in the Fremantle Gazette? Base: Respondents who gave a valid response, excludes ‘refused’ (n = 401) ^ = small sample size (<30) % of respondents Over the past 12 months, have you seen or read Fremantle City News, the Council’s weekly column in the Fremantle Gazette? = significant variance= notable variance % of respondentsYesNo Younger singles / couples (18-34) 36%64% Families with younger children (0-12) 56%42% Families with older children (13+) 55%43% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 61%39% Seniors (65+) 67%32% Own 61%37% Rent 43%57% Disability or impairment 64%43%

22. 22 Visited the City of Fremantle’s website Q. Have you visited the City of Fremantle’s website over the past 12 months? Base: Respondents who gave a valid response, excludes ‘refused’ (n = 401) ^ = small sample size (<30) Have you visited the City of Fremantle’s website over the past 12 months? = significant variance= notable variance % of respondentsYesNo Younger singles / couples (18-34) 57%43% Families with younger children (0-12) 68%32% Families with older children (13+) 49%51% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 48%52% Seniors (65+) 21%79% Disability or impairment 37%63%  48% of respondents recall visiting the City of Fremantle’s website over the past 12 months.  This is up from 35% two years ago.  Website visitation is highest among families with younger children.  Visitation is lowest among seniors and those with a disability or impairment. % of respondents

23. Society & Culture

24. All respondents 24  Satisfaction is high –Among those who could rate the service, 84% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among females and seniors Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 362) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 9% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Male 50%8% Female 60%7% Younger singles / couples (18-34) 49%8% Families with younger children (0-12) 51%9% Families with older children (13+) 52%4% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 52%7% Seniors (65+) 77%8% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 362) Library & information services

25. All respondents 25  Satisfaction is high –Among those who could rate the service, 85% are satisfied  Views are similar across the community. Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 382) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 3% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 382) N/A Festivals, events and cultural activities

26. All respondents 26  Satisfaction is relatively high –Among those who could rate the service, 75% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among younger singles / couples  There is greatest room to improve among seniors Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 381) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 4% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 49%3% Families with younger children (0-12) 37%14% Families with older children (13+) 40%10% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 35%12% Seniors (65+) 35%22% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 381) How local history and heritage is preserved and promoted 2003: Maintain & develop a sense of Fremantle history

27. All respondents 27  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 54% are satisfied  Views are similar across the community Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 380) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 16% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 380) Safety and security in the City centre 2003: Provide a safe & secure environment Safety and security

28. All respondents 28  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 59% are satisfied  Satisfaction appears to be highest among those living in Samson  There is greatest room to improve among those living in Hilton Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 392) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 21% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Male 24%26% Female 23%24% Younger singles / couples (18-34) 25%24% Families with younger children (0-12) 21%30% Families with older children (13+) 24%21% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 21%22% Seniors (65+) 30%25% Beaconsfield 21%30% Fremantle 24%22% Hilton 8%44% North Fremantle 26%12% O'Connor^ 19%0% Samson^ 43%26% South Fremantle 29%23% White Gum Valley 19%26% Own 20%24% Rent 32%28% Disability or impairment 34%25% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 392) Safety and security in your local area 2003: Provide a safe and secure environment Safety and security

29. All respondents 29  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 52% are satisfied  Satisfaction appears to be lower among younger singles and couples. Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 378) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 7% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 19%34% Families with younger children (0-12) 20%27% Families with older children (13+) 20%21% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 14%28% Seniors (65+) 13%30% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 378) The control of graffiti, vandalism & anti-social behaviour

30. All respondents 30  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 53% are satisfied  There is greatest room to improve among families with younger children Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 274) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 8% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 13%21% Families with younger children (0-12) 13%42% Families with older children (13+) 20%21% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 6%26% Seniors (65+) 18%15% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 274) Services and facilities for youth

31. All respondents 31  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 57% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among seniors, those with a disability or impairment and those who are renting.  There appears to be more room to improve ratings among families with older children and those living in White Gum Valley. Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 244) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 7% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 17%14% Families with younger children (0-12) 11%21% Families with older children (13+) 12%30% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 18%21% Seniors (65+) 25%15% Beaconsfield 9%18% Fremantle 19%14% Hilton 20%28% North Fremantle 14%19% O'Connor^ 19%0% Samson^ 28%13% South Fremantle 17%27% White Gum Valley 17%38% Own 12%19% Rent 32%18% Disability or impairment 28%23% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 244) Facilities, services and care available for seniors

32. All respondents 32  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 59% are satisfied  Views are polarised among those who live in a household with someone who has a disability or impairment. While a greater proportion are delighted (compared to the general population), a greater proportion are also dissatisfied. Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 229) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 4% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Disability or impairment 31%27% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 229) N/A Access to services and facilities for people with disabilities

33. All respondents 33  Satisfaction is relatively high –Among those who could rate the service, 71% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among seniors and those who are renting  There is greatest room to improve among families with younger children Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 395) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 8% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 31%7% Families with younger children (0-12) 22%17% Families with older children (13+) 32%19% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 35%14% Seniors (65+) 44%9% Own 28%16% Rent 50%5% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 395) N/A Streetscapes, parks and sporting grounds

34. Environment

35. All respondents 35  Satisfaction is high –Among those who could rate the service, 80% are satisfied  Views are similar across the community Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 389) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 4% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 389) Fortnightly recycling services

36. All respondents 36  Satisfaction is relatively high –Among those who could rate the service, 79% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among seniors and those living in South Fremantle  There is greatest room to improve among older singles / couples Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 392) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 6% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 59%5% Families with younger children (0-12) 42%10% Families with older children (13+) 43%12% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 41%20% Seniors (65+) 68%6% Beaconsfield 51%4% Fremantle 42%14% Hilton 44%14% North Fremantle 47%15% O'Connor 43%38%^ Samson 57%18% South Fremantle 65%8% White Gum Valley 42%14% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 392) Verge-side bulk rubbish collections

37. All respondents 37  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 63% are satisfied  Satisfaction is highest among females and those who are renting  Dissatisfaction appears higher among earlier lifestages Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 382) ^ = small sample size (<30) Familiar 95% Priority 11% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Male 16%24% Female 28%19% Younger singles / couples (18-34) 23%29% Families with younger children (0-12) 21%23% Families with older children (13+) 23%24% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 20%17% Seniors (65+) 26%18% Own 17%24% Rent 37%16% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 382) N/A The management and control of traffic in the City centre N/A

38. All respondents 38  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 55% are satisfied  There is more room to improve among families with younger children, followed by those with older children Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 392) ^ = small sample size (<30) Familiar 98% Priority 11% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Younger singles / couples (18-34) 25%20% Families with younger children (0-12) 18%33% Families with older children (13+) 18%27% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 22% Seniors (65+) 30%23% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 392) 2003 & 2005: Average of : Provide and maintain footpaths & provide and; Maintain cycleways Footpaths and cycleways

39. All respondents 39  Satisfaction is low –Among those who could rate the service, just 38% are satisfied  Those who are renting express less concern Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 288) ^ = small sample size (<30) Familiar 72% Priority 6% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Own 11%49% Rent 25%18% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 288) N/A Planning and building approvals

40. Economy

41. All respondents 41  Satisfaction is low –Among those who could rate the service, only 39% are satisfied  There is greatest room to improve among families with older children, home owners and those living in White Gum Valley, followed by Beaconsfield Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 262) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 12% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Male 8%38% Female 8%35% Younger singles / couples (18-34) 12%22% Families with younger children (0-12) 7%38% Families with older children (13+) 10%47% Older singles / couples, no kids (35-64) 7%38% Seniors (65+) 7%39% Beaconsfield 9%45% Fremantle 5%35% Hilton 8%34% North Fremantle 3%19% O'Connor^ -% Samson^ 20%30% South Fremantle 12%37% White Gum Valley 8%58% Own 4%45% Rent 19%17% Disability or impairment 14%47% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 262) Encourage economic & industrial development Economic development and job creation

42. All respondents 42  Satisfaction is moderate –Among those who could rate the service, 63% are satisfied  There appears to be more room to improve among males, those with a disability or impairment, home owners, and those living in South Fremantle. Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 372) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 10% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance % of respondents who rated serviceDelightedDissatisfied Male 21%31% Female 26%17% Beaconsfield 20%28% Fremantle 25%22% Hilton 14%26% North Fremantle 23%18% O'Connor^ 19% Samson^ 38%^33% South Fremantle 21%35% White Gum Valley 36%13% Own 20%27% Rent 39%12% Disability or impairment 35%36% Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 372) Efforts to attract tourists and visitors to the area N/A

43. All respondents 43  Satisfaction is low –Among those who could rate the service, just 38% are satisfied –49% are dissatisfied  Views are similar across the community  Dissatisfied respondents are mostly concerned with access issues followed by the cost of parking. Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Base: Respondents who feel familiar enough with service / facility to comment (n = 386) ^ = small sample size (<30) Priority 21% % of all respondents (n=401) Delighted (8-10) RESIDENT SATISFACTION INDUSTRY STANDARDS SATISFACTION HISTORY = significant variance Respondents familiar with service (excludes don’t know and refused) % of respondents who rated service excludes don’t know and no response (n= 386) N/A Parking in the City Centre *The control of parking

44. Revitalising the CBD

45. % of respondents Community support for revitalising the area Q. To revitalise the Fremantle CBD area, do you think it would be helpful to have more: Base: All respondents, excluding ‘no response’ (Residents 2010 n = 201; 2012 n = 401) Historical analysis 73%77%= 57%70%  68%57%  52%51%= 20112012Trend  To revitalise the Fremantle CBD, a majority of respondents think it would be helpful to have more apartments in the area.  Support for larger 3 bedroom apartments has increased significantly over the past 12 months, up from 50% to 70%.  At the same time support for more shops and retail space has declined from 68% to 57%.  Support for more commercial space has remained steady around 51%.

46.  There is growing community support for increasing the vibrancy and intensity of development at selected sites across the Fremantle CBD.  There is greatest support for developing Adelaide Street and the Kings Square Precinct, followed by Victoria Quay.  The jury is still out for the cappuccino strip on South Terrace, with polarised views in the community. % of respondents Community support for increasing the vibrancy and intensity of development Historical analysis 62%73%  48%53% = 72%80%  72%80%  20112012Trend Q. Do you feel the local community would benefit by increasing the vibrancy and intensity of development in the following areas: Base: All respondents, excluding ‘no response’ (Residents 2010 n = 201; 2012 n = 400)

47. 47 CELEBRATE FOCUS Community Priorities Indicator TM PRIORITY (% of mentions) SATISFACTION (% Delighted) MONITOR Q. From all the areas we have been discussing in this survey, which ones would you most like the City of Fremantle to focus on improving? MULTIPLE RESPONSE ALLOWED Q. How satisfied are you with [READ OUT AREA]? 10 = totally satisfied; 0 = totally dissatisfied. Chart shows % of respondents delighted (8,9 or 10) Base: Priority – all respondents (Residents 2012 n = xxx); Satisfaction - Respondents who use / can comment on service / facility (Residents 2012 n = various)

48. Lisa Lough Managing Director CATALYSE Pty Ltd t: +61 8 9226 5674 e: lisa@catalyse.com.au www.catalyse.com.au We’d love to discuss these insights with you further! If you have any questions, please ask: