HomeMy WebLinkAbout040825 email - RE_ JAC survey credibilityALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
I provided you with the transcript.
Were they lying then, or now?
From: Greg Brotherton <GBrotherton@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, April 8, 2025 11:22 AM
To: Tom Thiersch <tprosys@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: JAC survey credibility
Thanks Tom,
I had already asked JAC for clarification when I received your public records requests. I think you are interpretating their words, and perhaps hearing what you wanted to hear. I haven’t
looked through the transcript for where they said they didn’t remove any responses. I guess we’ll both know for sure when we can give full responses to your two requests,
Greg Brotherton
From: Tom Thiersch <tprosys@gmail.com <mailto:tprosys@gmail.com> >
Sent: Monday, April 7, 2025 4:33 PM
To: Greg Brotherton <GBrotherton@co.jefferson.wa.us <mailto:GBrotherton@co.jefferson.wa.us> >
Cc: jeffbocc <jeffbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us <mailto:jeffbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us> >
Subject: RE: JAC survey credibility
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Commissioner.
Please listen to the recording, or simply believe the transcript that Zoom prepared in realtime.
[Chambers] 10:37:48
Where the submissions were coming from by geographic area compared to the 2020 census data. And that allowed us to look at the areas that we were underrepresented or overrepresented
and adjust our outreach strategy to make sure that we're targeting all the areas that were needed more attention. We did some QAQC, so cleaning of the data overall, the way that the
survey was designed allowed us to have very clean data having masks on what types of information could be entered into the different fields. But there was a little bit of cleaning that
had to be done.
You may have heard only what you wanted to hear, but that’s why we record meetings instead of relying on memory or minutes.
Tom Thiersch
From: Greg Brotherton <GBrotherton@co.jefferson.wa.us <mailto:GBrotherton@co.jefferson.wa.us> >
Sent: Monday, April 7, 2025 4:16 PM
To: Tom Thiersch <tprosys@gmail.com <mailto:tprosys@gmail.com> >
Subject: RE: JAC survey credibility
They said very clearly that they did not remove any responses.
Greg
From: Tom Thiersch <tprosys@gmail.com <mailto:tprosys@gmail.com> >
Sent: Monday, April 7, 2025 2:16 PM
To: jeffbocc <jeffbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us <mailto:jeffbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us> >
Subject: JAC survey credibility
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Commissioners,
https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/survey-data-cleaning-7-things-to-check-before-you-start-your-analysis/
“Survey data cleaning involves identifying and removing responses from individuals who either don’t match your target audience criteria or didn’t answer your questions thoughtfully.”
In their presentation, JAC stated that they did, in fact, conduct “survey data cleaning” before preparing and presenting their report.
Not stated:
* What criteria were used to exclude survey reponses from the results?
* How many survey responses were excluded?
Given their lack of disclosure, JAC’s conclusions can only be viewed as highly suspect.
I have submitted Public Records Requests to get to the bottom of this. One can only hope that the PRR responses are produced timely, before you make a hasty decision to proceed with
formation of a PFD which will, I believe, be a further waste of increasingly scare county funds.
Tom Thiersch