The September quarter showed that of the about 300 people who took part in the survey, a mere 17 % were satisfied, 10 percentage points down from the previous quarter.
It has been suggested by new mayor Sophie Barker there has traditionally been a pattern of low satisfaction before elections because "everyone is talking about the current councillors and what job they may or may not do well".
She may have a point but it is still a dismal showing.
Annual results from recent years show the satisfaction with the mayor and council has not been near the half-way mark since 2018 when it sat at 47%.
In 2022, the year Aaron Hawkins lost the mayoralty to Jules Radich, the satisfaction rate was 26%.
During Mr Radich’s term, it rose to 34% the first year, before dropping to 29% and slightly rising to 30% in his last year.
The quarterly update to councillors last week did not include comments from participants which might have helped add context to the situation.
Surveys are complex beasts and making sense of the results is not straightforward, particularly in a time when households are finding it hard to make ends meet and there is a general level of disgruntlement across the country.
Since September last year, the percentage of survey respondents who considered the council was providing value for money had dropped from 38% to 24%.
It is worth noting the margin of error was much higher for the quarterly report than for the annual one, 5.7% compared with 2.6%, and nor are the quarterly reports weighted against census demographics,
It is difficult to understand why there was a drop in the overall satisfaction with what the council provides from 47% in the June quarter to 35% in the September quarter when there does not seem to have been a corresponding change in council services.
New councillor Russell Lund drew the council’s attention to much better satisfaction rates in other parts of the country and urged returning councillors to look in the mirror.
One of those, Cr Brent Weatherall, took a different tack, describing the opinion surveys as a complete waste of time and money.
Their results changed nothing, elections did, he told last week’s city council meeting, and voters had shown their frustration at the ballot box. (Five incumbent councillors and the mayor were unseated).
Time would tell if approval ratings for councillors across the country would improve over the next three years — "I suspect not," he said.
At a time of considerable uncertainty for local government, the council may have a harder job than usual to lift the public perception of its performance.
Before Christmas there is an expectation there will be a government announcement about some form of rates cap.
While this may be welcomed by many who are struggling with the cost of living, what effect any such cap might have on the role the public expect their councils to provide in enhancing the quality of life in communities is unknown.
The spectre of local government reform, the shape of which is not yet clear, is also hanging over the heads of the recently elected.
In the meantime, the council might do well to look again at the most common comments about the council performance in the annual survey to June this year.
About a fifth of respondents raised concern about increased debt, and the council focusing on spending in the wrong areas, rather than fixing infrastructure.
Poor behaviour from councillors, with concerns around distrust and infighting and not working together, was also raised by 15% of respondents.
With some close votes already on the new council, including on the controversial Albany St Connection project and the form of any homelessness outreach programme, the new council has some way to go to prove its coherence.
