But Council is not leading with that result. Instead, it is pointing to a second survey using a different method — one that produces better scores, although even those remain below average overall.
Port Phillip Council’s 2026 Community Satisfaction Report, prepared by Klein Research, benchmarks community satisfaction against other Melbourne councils and found that Port Phillip rated below average on all but one measure, where it was equal to the average.
But you won’t find that highlighted on the Council website because Council commissioned two reports using different methodologies. The Klein report, presented here, uses a method that allows benchmarking across the state.
The difference matters because the two surveys are not directly comparable. Klein’s phone-based survey is designed for state-wide benchmarking, while Metropolis relies on face-to-face interviews that generally produce slightly higher satisfaction scores.
The report methodology used by Metropolis has grown in popularity with councils because it tends to produce more positive results. Metropolis Research markets its research by noting “that the telephone methodology will tend to under-report satisfaction scores in the order of two to three percent compared to door-to-door, in-person surveys.”
But even in the Metropolis Research report, Port Phillip’s overall satisfaction score is lower than the 2026 metropolitan Melbourne council average.
Klein Research shows Council is behind peers
The independent report, coordinated by the Department of Government Services and conducted by Klein, highlights a widening gap between Port Phillip’s performance and the average scores of comparable Melbourne metropolitan councils.
Port Phillip’s overall performance index score sits at a mixed 57. While this is roughly in line with the state-wide average of 58, it falls a notable seven points short of the Metro Council benchmark of 64.
The community’s dissatisfaction is particularly evident in how the council manages public finances. Port Phillip scored just 51 on spending public funds in ways that benefit the community. Although this matches the state average, it trails the Metro benchmark by seven points, signaling that “residents are not yet seeing clear value for the rates they pay.” Furthermore, the general direction of the council scored a low 46, trailing the Metro benchmark of 50.
Even in areas where Port Phillip performed reasonably well, it struggled to match metropolitan standards. The council’s highest-scoring service was waste management at 71, yet this still sat below the Metro benchmark of 74. Similarly, customer service scored 66, trailing the Metro average of 70.
Most distressing is a Klein dedicated supplementary study across all Melbourne metropolitan council areas to create the ‘All Metro’ Benchmark. In this the shortfall in performance is across the board.
Where Port Phillip is falling short
The Klein Research says Port Phillip is underperforming against metro benchmarks across key satisfaction measures. Overall performance is seven points below the Metro group, while perceptions of Council’s direction and spending of public funds are weak — especially the sense that residents are not seeing value for rates. Customer service also trails benchmarks, with a sharp gender gap in reported experience. The report highlights uneven results across the municipality, particularly weaker ratings in Elwood, and lower scores from women on feedback opportunities and community-interest decisions.
There was some good news
The Klein Reports found Port Phillip’s strongest results are in feedback opportunities, community-interest decision-making, waste management and sealed local streets. It performs ahead of the state benchmark on the two measures most closely linked to overall satisfaction — feedback and community-interest decisions — while waste management has improved sharply since 2024 and local streets sit well above the state average.
Here’s how Council reported the surveys on Facebook
[Friday 24 July 5.16 pm]: Thank you to the 1,300 residents who participated in our annual Community Satisfaction Survey and shared their views on Council services, facilities and priorities.
We’re encouraged to see overall community satisfaction increase to 7.1 out of 10, with improvements recorded across many areas measured by the survey.
Some of the strongest improvements were in:Customer service
Community engagement
Governance and leadership
Residents also continued to rate a number of Council services highly, including:Parks and gardens
Waste and recycling services
Playgrounds
Youth services
Community and cultural services
While the results are encouraging, we know there is still more work to do. Your feedback helps us understand what’s important to our community and informs how we plan, improve and deliver services.
