The headline for the 2025 community satisfaction research is clear, Port Phillip Council is rated ‘notably lower than the metropolitan average’.
‘Satisfaction with most broad areas of Council performance was somewhat to notably lower than the metropolitan average, including overall satisfaction with the customer service experience (4% lower in Port Phillip), governance and leadership (4% lower), overall performance (2% lower), aspects of planning and development (2% lower), and services and facilities (2% lower).’ Metropolis 2025, Executive Summary p 6
The Metropolis research compares Port Phillip against the 2025 metropolitan Melbourne average, which includes all municipalities located within the Melbourne Greater Capital City Statistical Area as well as the inner east region, which includes the municipalities of Bayside, Glen Eira, Stonnington, Melbourne, Port Phillip, and Yarra.
The report found the specific local services that most under-performed the metropolitan average included planning and / or building permits (9% lower in Port Phillip), services for people with disability (5% lower by 43 respondents), bike and shared paths (4% lower), Divercity (4% lower), footpaths (4% lower), enforcement of local laws (4% lower), and Council’s website (4% lower).
Port Phillip did outperform the metropolitan average for services for children from birth to five years of age (4% higher in Port Phillip).
Significant issues identified
Metropolis Research identified concerns around safety, policing, and crime issues (21%), homelessness (8%), activity centre issues (4%), and issues with drugs and alcohol (4%) as significant issues of concern to the Port Phillip community.
‘These concerns about safety, policing, and crime were reinforced by the lower than metropolitan average perception of safety in public areas at night (8% lower in Port Phillip), in and around local activity centres (3% lower), and in public areas during the day (2% lower).
‘The other significant issue identified by respondents this year related to car parking (11%), including both enforcement and availability. This result was reinforced by the lower-than-average satisfaction with parking enforcement recorded for the City of Port Phillip (4% lower).’
Service stars and shockers
There were 10 services that recorded a satisfaction score measurably higher than the average of all 40 (7.6), and four that recorded a satisfaction score measurably lower than the average, as follows:
‘Measurably HIGHER-than-average satisfaction – included the bookable hard rubbish service (11% higher), local library services (10%), the regular weekly garbage collection (10%), regular fortnightly recycling (9%), weekly food and green waste collection (9%), sports ovals / other outdoor sporting facilities (8%), services for children from birth to five years of age (6%), the Waste Recovery Centre (5%), the provision and maintenance of parks and gardens (5%), and the provision and maintenance of playgrounds (4%).’
‘Measurably LOWER-than-average satisfaction – included planning and / or building permits (13% lower), support services for people experiencing disadvantage (10%), public toilets (10%), and the maintenance and repair of major arterial roads and highways managed by VicRoads (5% lower).’
Issues that need attention
The most common issues to address in the City of Port Phillip ‘at the moment’ included traffic management (13%), car parking and enforcement (11%), road maintenance and repairs (8%), building, housing, planning, and development (8%), and the provision and maintenance of street trees (6%).
When compared to the metropolitan average:
‘MORE commonly raised in the City of Port Phillip – included safety, policing, and crime issues (21% compared to 7%), car parking (11% compared to 6%), homelessness issues (8% compared to 1%), cleaning and maintenance of the local area (5% compared to 2%), issues in and around activity centres (4% compared to <1%), and drug and alcohol related issues (4% compared to 1%).’
‘LESS commonly raised in the City of Port Phillip – included road maintenance and repairs (6% compared to 9%), traffic management (5% compared to 9%), street lighting (4% compared to 7%), and rubbish and waste issues including kerbside collections (3% compared to 7%).’
Perceptions of safety (or lack of it)
‘The perception of safety in public areas of the City of Port Phillip was measurably lower than the metropolitan and inner eastern region councils’ averages, with the perception of safety at night measurably lower than the metropolitan (8% lower in Port Phillip) and inner eastern region councils’ (10% lower in Port Phillip).
‘Respondents were asked to rate their perception of safety in the public areas of the municipality during the day (8.3 out of 10, with 3% feeling unsafe), at the beach and foreshore (7.9 with 2% feeling unsafe), in and around the local shopping district / centre (7.6 with 4% feeling unsafe), and in the public areas at night (6.5, with 14% feeling unsafe).
These results reinforce the significance of the proportion of respondents who raised safety, policing, and crime (21%), homelessness (8%), activity centre issues (4%), and issues with drugs and alcohol (4%).
‘The most common reasons why respondents felt unsafe related to concerns about drugs and alcohol (43 comments), concerns around various types of people (39 comments), concerns around crime and perceived lack of policing (32 comments), and incidents of crime and break-ins (30 comments).’
Areas of discontent
This chart maps the differing perceptions across both Port Phillip and Metro Melbourne & Inner East Councils. The depth of the green bar shows the very satisfied respondents, blue the neutral and red the dissatisfied. The areas towards the right hand side have the highest rates of dissatisfaction.
Metropolis offered this demographic analysis of the satisfaction themes:
‘Somewhat HIGHER than average satisfaction – included young adults (aged 18 to 34 years), respondents from two-parent families (with youngest child aged less than five years), respondents from group households and sole person households, rental households, and new residents (less than one year in the City of Port Phillip).’
‘Somewhat LOWER than average satisfaction – included middle-aged adults (aged 45 to 59 years) and to a lesser extent older adults (aged 60 to 74 years), respondents who had contacted Council in the last 12 months, respondents from two-parent families (with youngest child aged five to 12 years), respondents from one-parent families, respondents who owned their home outright, and long term residents (10 years or more in the City of Port Phillip).’
Read the Metropolis Report in full | Read the Council website story on the research
Flashback to the 2024 report that was concealed
Readers will remember that last year’s community satisfaction survey results were kept secret until after the Council elections. That report was damning finding that “Perceptions of the council’s overall performance declined for a second year running and are now at their lowest level in 10 years.”
It also found that “The council performs significantly lower than the Metropolitan group average for the majority of metrics.” Yikes.
This prompted Council to change research companies and methodology to produce this report.
The new researchers Metropolis says: ‘It is important to bear in mind that the survey was conducted by a different service provider in recent years, using a different methodology, using a different survey form, and employing a different scaling approach.’
