Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
The National Citizen Survey
- The National] C d ern uirwC'ym CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY , WA 2011 NATIONAL L RESEARCH f I L C E N T E R ixc. L 3005 30th Street 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500 Boulder, CO 80307 Washington, DC 20002 www,n-r-c.com • 303-444-7863 www.lcma.org• 202-289-ICMA City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 C DNTENTS. Survey Background 1 About The National Citizen Survey' 1 Understanding the Results 3 Executive Summary 5 Community Ratings 7 Overall Community Quality 7 Community Design 9 Transportation .9 Housing 15 Land Use and Zoning 17 Economic Sustainability 20 Public Safety 23 Environmental Sustainability 29 Recreation and Wellness 33 Parks and Recreation 33 Culture, Arts and Education 36 Health and Wellness 38 Community Inclusiveness 40 Civic Engagement 43 Civic Activity 43 Information and Awareness 46 Social Engagement 48 Public Trust 50 City of Spokane Valley Employees 53 From Data to Action 55 Resident Priorities 55 City of Spokane Valley Action Chart 56 Using Your Action Chart's 58 `' Custom Questions 60 Appendix A: Complete Survey Frequencies 61 Frequencies Excluding "Don't Know" Responses 61 Frequencies Including "Don't Know" Responses 72 Appendix B: Survey Methodology 88 0 Appendix C: Survey Materials 98 ri U o n 2 The National Citizen SurveyTM • City of Spokane Valley 2011 SURVEY BACKGROUND ABOUT THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY'' The National Citizen Survey' (The NCS) is a collaborative effort between National Research Center, Inc. (NRC) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). The NCS was developed by NRC to provide a statistically valid survey of resident opinions about community and services provided by local government. The survey results may be used by staff, elected officials and other stakeholders for community planning and resource allocation, program improvement and policy making. FIGURE 1:THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY'METHODS AND GOALS Survey Objectives Assessment Methods • Identify community strengths and O Multi-contact mailed survey weaknesses j o Representative sample of 2,000 households Identify service strengths and 459 surveys returned; 24% response rate weaknesses I • 5% margin of error • Data statistically weighted to reflect population Assessment Goals Immediate Long-term • Provide useful information for: • Improved services • Planning • More civic engagement • Resource allocation • Better community quality of life • Performance measurement • Stronger public trust • Program and policy evaluation The NCS focuses on a series of community characteristics and local government services, as well as issues of public trust. Resident behaviors related to civic engagement in the community also were measured in the survey. U C) 7 _n C, an I U 0 ' C) The National Citizen SurveyTM 1 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 FIGURE 2:THE NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY'FOCUS AREAS COMMUNITY QUALITY . COMMUNITY Quality of life INCLUSIVENESS Quality of neighborhood ENVIRONMENTAL Place to live SUSTAINABILITY Sense of community ' Racial and cultural acceptance . . . Cleanliness Senior,youth and low-income COMMUNITY DESIGN • Air quality services Preservation of natural areas Transportation Garbage and recycling Ease of travel,transit services, • services street maintenance CIVIC ENGAGEMENT Housing • Civic Activity Housing options,cost, RECREATION AND Volunteerism Civic attentiveness WELLNESS affordability Voting behavior Land Use and Zoning Parks and Recreation New development,growth, Recreation opportunities,use Social Engagement of parks and facilities, Neighborliness,social and p code enforcement I programs and classes religious events Economic Sustainability Information and Awareness Employment,shopping and Culture,Arts and Education retail,City as a place to work Cultural and educational Public information, opportunities, libraries, publications,Web site • schools Health and Wellness • PUBLIC SAFETY Availability of food,health PUBLIC TRUST services,social services Safety in neighborhood and • Cooperation in community downtown • Value of services Crime victimization Direction of community Police,fire,EMS services Citizen involvement (-- Emergency preparedness Employees (1 E The survey and its administration are standardized to assure high quality research methods and directly comparable results across The National Citizen Survey'jurisdictions. Participating 4 households are selected at random and the household member who responds is selected without Ii bias. Multiple mailings give each household more than one chance to participate with self- li `' addressed and postage-paid envelopes. Results are statistically weighted to reflect the proper } demographic composition of the entire community. A total of 459 completed surveys were obtained, providing an overall response rate of 24%. Typically, response rates obtained on citizen t surveys range from 20% to 40%. The National Citizen Survey' customized for the City of Spokane Valley was developed in close w cooperation with local jurisdiction staff. Spokane Valley staff selected items from a menu of t� questions about services and community problems and provided the appropriate letterhead and signatures for mailings. City of Spokane Valley staff also augmented The National Citizen Survey' basic service through a variety of options including an open-ended question, and several custom '2. questions. G The National Citizen SurveyTn, 2 City of Spokane Valley 2011 UNDERSTANDING THE RESULTS As shown in Figure 2, this report is based around respondents' opinions about eight larger categories: community quality, community design, public safety, environmental sustainability, recreation and wellness, community inclusiveness, civic engagement and public trust. Each report section begins with residents' ratings of community characteristics and is followed by residents' ratings of service quality. For all evaluative questions,the percent of residents rating the service or community feature as "excellent" or "good" is presented. To see the full set of responses for each question on the survey, please see Appendix A: Complete Survey Frequencies. Margin of Error The margin of error around results for the City of Spokane Valley Survey (459 completed surveys) is plus or minus five percentage points. This is a measure of the precision of your results; a larger number of completed surveys gives a smaller(more precise) margin of error, while a smaller number of surveys yields a larger margin of error. With your margin of error, you may conclude that when 60% of survey respondents report that a particular service is "excellent" or"good," somewhere between 55-65% of all residents are likely to feel that way. Comparing Survey Results Certain kinds of services tend to be thought better of by residents in many communities across the country. For example, public safety services tend to be received better than transportation services by residents of most American communities. Where possible, the better comparison is not from one service to another in the City of Spokane Valley, but from City of Spokane Valley services to services like them provided by other jurisdictions. Interpreting Comparisons to Previous Years Research is clear that a change in the method of survey data collection, by itself,will result in a change in results if the shift is from telephone administration to self-administration or vice versa. The change occurs even without change in resident perspectives and is attributed to the different environment that a survey respondent confronts when providing answers to a stranger on the telephone compared to offering private anonymous opinions. Questions by phone elicit more positive, optimistic, self—aggrandizing responses than do the same questions asked on a written self- administered questionnaire. The self-administered questionnaire brings out more candid responses which often shine less brightly. In Spokane Valley, citizen survey data were collected by phone in 2009. In 2011, data collection switched from phone to mail. As a consequence, we expected and see a decline in virtually all CI ratings. NRC has taken this into consideration and made statistical adjustments to the 2009 data to account for the more positive ratings received from phone surveys. This way the reported results for 0 2011 are not influenced by the decline that is attributable to the change in data collection mode from phone to mail. While the adjusted 2009 findings control for the expected change from phone to mail data c. collection, there remains some uncertainty in the precision of the findings due to sampling error associated not only with this administration but also with the adjustments made to the previous c. years' data. Because of this uncertainty, NRC recommends that the change in ratings or reported behaviors be viewed with caution, understanding that when data collection method changes, there will be more instability in the comparisons of years where data were collected by one mode (telephone) to the most recent year when the data collection mode changed (to mail). The National Citizen SurveyTM 3 City of Spokane Valley 2011 Consequently, we suggest that differences between 2011 results and those of 2009 of 10 percentage points or less, be considered no real change. Only when findings exceed 10 points should you explore what real events, policies or programs may be responsible for the shift. Benchmark Comparisons NRC's database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in citizen surveys from approximately 500 jurisdictions whose residents evaluated local government services and gave their opinion about the quality of community life. The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each jurisdiction; most communities conduct surveys every year or in alternating years. NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant. The City of Spokane Valley chose to have comparisons made to the entire database and a subset of similar jurisdictions from the database (populations 64,000 to 149,999). A benchmark comparison (the average rating from all the comparison jurisdictions where a similar question was asked) has been provided when a similar question on the City of Spokane Valley survey was included in NRC's database and there were at least five jurisdictions in which the question was asked. For most questions compared to the entire dataset, there were more than 100 jurisdictions included in the benchmark comparison. Where comparisons for quality ratings were available, the City of Spokane Valley results were generally noted as being "above" the benchmark, "below" the benchmark or"similar" to the benchmark. For some questions —those related to resident behavior, circumstance or to a local problem —the comparison to the benchmark is designated as "more," "similar" or"less" (for example, the percent of crime victims, residents visiting a park or residents identifying code enforcement as a problem.) In instances where ratings are considerably higher or lower than the benchmark, these ratings have been further demarcated by the attribute of"much," (for example, "much less" or"much above"). These labels come from a statistical comparison of the City of Spokane Valley's rating to the benchmark. "Don't Know" Responses and Rounding On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer "don't know." The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix A, However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the report. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. For some questions, respondents were permitted to select more than one answer. When the total exceeds 100% in a table for a multiple response question, it is because some respondents did select more than one response. When a table for a question that only permitted a single response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the customary practice of percentages being rounded to the nearest whole number. For more information on understanding The NCS report, please see Appendix B: Survey Methodology. The National Citizen SurveyT" 4 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report of the City of Spokane Valley survey provides the opinions of a representative sample of residents about community quality of life, service delivery, civic participation and unique issues of local interest. A periodic sounding of resident opinion offers staff, elected officials and other stakeholders an opportunity to identify challenges and to plan for and evaluate improvements and to sustain services and amenities for long-term success. Most residents experienced a good quality of life in the City of Spokane Valley and believed the City was a good place to live. The overall quality of life in the City of Spokane Valley was rated as "excellent" or"good" by 80% of respondents. Almost all reported they plan on staying in the City of Spokane Valley for the next five years. A variety of characteristics of the community was evaluated by those participating in the study. The three characteristics receiving the most favorable ratings were opportunities to participate in religious or spiritual events or activities, shopping opportunities, and air quality. The two characteristics receiving the least positive ratings were employment opportunities and opportunities to attend cultural activities. Ratings of community characteristics were compared to the benchmark database. Of the 31 characteristics for which comparisons were available, seven were above the national benchmark comparison, nine were similar to the national benchmark comparison and 15 were below. Residents in the City of Spokane Valley were somewhat civically engaged. While only 15% had attended a meeting of local elected public officials or other local public meeting in the previous 12 months, 95°I° had provided help to a friend or neighbor. Less than half had volunteered their time to some group or activity in the City of Spokane Valley, which was lower than the benchmark. In general, survey respondents demonstrated mild trust in local government. Close to half rated the overall direction being taken by the City of Spokane Valley as "good" or "excellent." This was lower than the benchmark. Those residents who had interacted with an employee of the City of Spokane Valley in the previous 12 months gave high marks to those employees. Most rated their overall impression of employees as "excellent" or"good." City services rated were able to be compared to the benchmark database. Of the 37 services for which comparisons were available, five were above the benchmark comparison, 15 were similar to the benchmark comparison and 17 were below. Qv 0 4 7 Y L F! O The National Citizen Survey"' 5 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 A Key Driver Analysis was conducted for the City of Spokane Valley which examined the relationships between ratings of each service and ratings of the City of Spokane Valley's services overall. Those key driver services that correlated most strongly with residents' perceptions about overall City service quality have been identified. By targeting improvements in key services, the City of Spokane Valley can focus on the services that have the greatest likelihood of influencing residents' opinions about overall service quality. Services found to be influential in ratings of overall service quality from the Key Driver Analysis were: Recreation centers or facilities Police services Public school C e ea i u � I d 0 U CS 2 17 V7 C 4 i rz F C O ii Z W The National Citizen SurveyTM 6 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 COMMUNITY RA,TINCa5 OVERALL COMMUNITY QUALITY Overall quality of community life may be the single best indicator of success in providing the natural ambience, services and amenities that make for an attractive community. The National Citizen Survey' contained many questions related to quality of community life in the City of Spokane Valley-- not only direct questions about quality of life overall and in neighborhoods, but questions to measure residents' commitment to the City of Spokane Valley. Residents were asked whether they planned to move soon or if they would recommend the City of Spokane Valley to others. Intentions to stay and willingness to make recommendations provide evidence that the City of Spokane Valley offers services and amenities that work. Most of the City of Spokane Valley's residents gave favorable ratings to their neighborhoods and the community as a place to live. Further, most reported they would recommend the community to others and plan to stay for the next five years. FIGURE 3: RATINGS OF OVERALL COMMUNITY QUALITY BY YEAR u 2011 (mail) 2009(phone) 80% The overall quality of life in Spokane Valley 76% 73°A Your neighborhood as a place to live 74% . 7r y Spokane Valley as a ^ place to live 79% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" a• 13 G 5) z 0 C7 The National Citizen SurveyTM 7 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 4: LIKELIHOOD OF REMAINING IN COMMUNITY AND RECOMMENDING COMMUNITY BY YEARt u 2011 (mail) 87% 2009 (phone) Recommend living in Spokane Valley to someone who asks 91% 1 b .%477. I o >,i+t;S el f r e h t 87% Remain in Spokane Valley for the next five r _ years 92% 1 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"somewhat"or"very"likely FIGURE 5: OVERALL COMMUNITY QUALITY BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Overall quality of fife in Spokane Valley Similar Similar Your neighborhood as place to live Much below Below Spokane Valley as a place to live Similar Similar Recommend living in Spokane Valley to someone who asks Similar Similar Remain in Spokane Valley for the next five years Similar Above c� ra l n I z , t C1 L I a ; The National Citizen Survey"' 8 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 COMMUNITY DESIGN Transportation The ability to move easily throughout a community can greatly affect the quality of life of residents by diminishing time wasted in traffic congestion and by providing opportunities to travel quickly and safely by modes other than the automobile. High quality options for resident mobility not only require local government to remove barriers to flow but they require government programs and policies that create quality opportunities for all modes of travel. Residents responding to the survey were given a list of six aspects of mobility to rate on a scale of "excellent," "good," "fair" and "poor." Ease of car travel in Spokane Valley was given the most positive rating. FIGURE 6:RATINGS OF TRANSPORTATION IN COMMUNITY BY YEAR' Ease of car travel in 68°l" n 2011 (mail) Spokane Valley 66°I. 2009 (phone) Ease of bus travel in 49% Spokane Valley 57% Ease of bicycle travel in f �x 7�1r. Jw h 470/4 Spokane Valley 40% Ease of walking in 50°/0 s. ! + Spokane Valley 42% Availability of paths and , - �{ }' `' f a Y 534/0 walking trails 50°la U u z 1w{_ • ?� j `I 53 l� Traffic flow on major 11 streets 44% > 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% C.) Percent"excellent"or"good" P{ r C.7 7 Q1 The National Citizen SurveyTM 9 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 FIGURE 7:COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION BENCHMARKS tl National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Ease of car travel in Spokane Valley Much above Much above Ease of bus travel in Spokane Valley Above Above Ease of bicycle travel in Spokane Valley Similar Similar Ease of walking in Spokane Valley Much below Below Availability of paths and walking trails Below Similar Traffic flow on major streets Much above Much above • - L7 u j 'V if t Cr I n 0 S) 7 to 1+ C N 0 �S 7 The National Citizen SurveyT11 10 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Eight transportation services were rated in Spokane Valley. As compared to most communities across America, ratings tended to be a mix of positive and negative. Two were above the benchmarks, five were below the benchmarks and one was similar to the benchmarks. FIGURE 8: RATINGS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING SERVICES BY YEARt 1:12011 (mail) 2009(phone) 111.111c. 32% Street repair 25% 145% Street cleaning 51% Street lighting 53% Snow removal 37% a n`" l 1, 41% Sidewalk maintenance 40% ;. frt? 404. v' ; 480f Traffic signal timing 490/ ti 4 - 58% Y� ��.t�.•� �L.yet l 'NE.ro Bus or transit services t.� 64% 66% Amount of public parking 64° 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" v; L `U U 0 0 ra 7 as The National Citizen SurveyTM 11 City of Spokane Valley 1 201 1 FIGURE 9.'TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING SERVICES BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison 1 Street repair Much below Much below Street cleaning Much below Much below Street lighting Much below Much below Snow removal Much below Much below Sidewalk maintenance Much below Much below Traffic signal timing Similar Similar Bus or transit services Above Above Amount of public parking Much above Much above V CL, N f rj •7 I c:. (,9 is The National Citizen SurveyT" 12 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 By measuring choice of travel mode over time, communities can monitor their success in providing attractive alternatives to the traditional mode of travel, the single-occupied automobile. When asked how they typically traveled to work, single-occupancy(SOV)travel was the overwhelming mode of use. However, 2% of work commute trips were made by transit, 1% by bicycle and 2% by foot. FIGURE 10: FREQUENCY OF BUS USE IN LAST 12 MONTHS BY YEAR n 2011 (mail) 2009(phone) 29% Ridden a local bus within Spokane Valley 21% l ( I 1 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent using at least once in last 12 months FIGURE 11:FREQUENCY OF Bus USE BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Ridden a local bus within Spokane Valley More More u C Q C CI ca U u VU cJ C 0 2 to dt Ni U C 0 0 2 The National Citizen SurveyT"' 13 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 FIGURE 12:MODE OF TRAVEL USED FOR WORK COMMUTE BY YEAR Motorized vehicle(e.g., car,truck,van,motorcycle, ,: , 77°l° etc.)by myself 58% Motorized vehicle(e.g., car,truck,van,motorcycle, '�.,�'`,.`1 10% etc.)with other children or adults 21% 0 2011 (mail) 1 2% 2009(phone) Bus, rail,subway or other public transportation 4% 2°fo Walk 5% 1% Bicycle ° 21° Work at home 7% 9% 0% Other 1% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent of days per week mode used FIGURE 13: DRIVE ALONE BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Average percent of work commute trips made Li by driving alone More More e ' ' C V r! { 5 a 2 V1 ra i C7 r e 4 7 C5 i The National Citizen SurveyTm 14 City of Spokane Valley J 2011 Housing Housing variety and affordability are not luxuries for any community. When there are too few options for housing style and affordability, the characteristics of a community tilt toward a single group, often of well-off residents. While this may seem attractive to a community, the absence of affordable townhomes, condominiums, mobile homes, single family detached homes and apartments means that in addition to losing the vibrancy of diverse thoughts and lifestyles, the community loses the service workers that sustain all communities —police officers, school teachers, house painters and electricians. These workers must live elsewhere and commute in at great personal cost and to the detriment of traffic flow and air quality. Furthermore lower income residents pay so much of their income to rent or mortgage that little remains to bolster their own quality of life or local business. The survey of the City of Spokane Valley residents asked respondents to reflect on the availability of affordable housing as well as the variety of housing options. The availability of affordable housing was rated as "excellent" or "good" by 55% of respondents, while the variety of housing options was rated as "excellent" or"good" by 60% of respondents. The rating of perceived affordable housing availability was much better in the City of Spokane Valley than the ratings, on average, in comparison jurisdictions. FIGURE 14: RATINGS OF HOUSING IN COMMUNITY BY YEARI El 2011 (mail) 55°/° 2009(phone) Availability of affordable quality housing ' 46% 60% Variety of housing options 630/, 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" ii u: FIGURE 1 5: HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Availability of affordable quality housing Much above Much above Variety of housing options Similar Above V1 �� F4 c 6 7 The National Citizen Sun/eyrM 15 City of Spokane Valley 1 201 1 To augment the perceptions of affordable housing in Spokane Valley, the cost of housing as reported in the survey was compared to residents' reported monthly income to create a rough estimate of the proportion of residents of the City of Spokane Valley experiencing housing cost stress. About 40% of survey participants were found to pay housing costs of more than 30% of their monthly household income. FIGURE 16: PROPORTION OF RESPONDENTS WHOSE HOUSING COSTS ARE"AFFORDABLE"BY YEAR° a 2011 (mail) f7 1 . 40% ' 2009(phone) Housing costs 30%or } more of income 39% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent of respondents FIGURE 1 7:HOUSING COSTS BENCHMARKS L National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Experiencing housing costs stress (housing costs 30% or MORE of income) More More a) �3 V FJ K 0 2 V 0 VS 0 0 C U 7_ G The National Citizen SurveyT" 16 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Land Use and Zoning Community development contributes to a feeling among residents and even visitors of the attention given to the speed of growth, the location of residences and businesses, the kind of housing that is appropriate for the community and the ease of access to commerce, green space and residences. Even the community's overall appearance often is attributed to the planning and enforcement functions of the local jurisdiction. Residents will appreciate an attractive, well-planned community. The NCS questionnaire asked residents to evaluate the quality of new development, the appearance of the City of Spokane Valley and the speed of population growth. Problems with the appearance of property were rated, and the quality of land use planning, zoning and code enforcement services were evaluated. The overall quality of new development in the City of Spokane Valley was rated as "excellent" by 10% of respondents and as "good" by an additional 38%. The overall appearance of Spokane Valley was rated as "excellent" or"good" by 52% of respondents and was much lower than the benchmarks. When rating to what extent run down buildings, weed lots or junk vehicles were a problem in the City of Spokane Valley, 15% thought they were a "major" problem. FIGURE 18: RATINGS OF THE COMMUNITY'S'BUILT ENVIRONMENT"BY YEARt [1 2011 (mail) Overall quality of new 48% 2009(phone) development in Spokane ` - Valley 47% 52% Overall appearance of N,, ., Spokane Valley 62% I I I I 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 19: BUILT ENVIRONMENT BENCHMARKS c.i National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Quality of new development in Spokane Valley Below Much below z Overall appearance of Spokane Valley Much below Much below v7 C U C z The National Citizen Survey." 17 I I City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 20: RATINGS OF POPULATION GROWTH BY YE AR' 2011 (mail) 2009 (phone) 37% Population growth seen as to fast 38% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent of respondents FIGURE 21:POPULATION GROWTH BENCHMARKS INational comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Population growth seen as too fast Much less Much less I FIGURE 22: RATINGS OF NUISANCE PROBLEMS BY YEAR n 2011 (mail) Ij 2009 (phone) To what degree,if at all, 15% are run down buildings, weed lots or junk vehicles _ a problem in Spokane Valley? 13% u 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent a"major"problem e� s FIGURE 23:NUISANCE PROBLEMS BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Run down buildings,weed lots and junk vehicles a seen as a"major" problem More Similar r� C 0 z The National Citizen SutveyTM 18 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 FIGURE 24:RATINGS OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BY YEAR{ 30% 0 2011 (mail) Land use,planning and 2009 (phone) zoning i 40% Code enforcement Le. 35°/° (weeds, abandoned - buildings, etc.) 42% 60% Animal control f 65% 1 1 l 0% 25% 50% 75% 100°%0 Percent"excellent'or"good" FIGURE 25:PLANNING AND COMMUNITY CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Land use, planning and zoning Much below Much below Code enforcement(weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) Much below Much below Animal control Similar Similar J 6t lS .0 C fJ C O .7_ 6 C U) c u CJ r C 0 The National Citizen SurveyTM 19 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 { ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY The United States has been in recession since late 2007 with an accelerated downturn occurring in the fourth quarter of 2008. Officially we emerged from recession in the third quarter of 2009, but high unemployment lingers, keeping a lid on a strong recovery. Many readers worry that the ill health of the economy will color how residents perceive their environment and the services that local government delivers. NRC researchers have found that the economic downturn has chastened Americans'view of their own economic futures but has not colored their perspectives about community services or quality of life. Survey respondents were asked to rate a number of community features related to economic opportunity and growth. The most positively rated features were shopping opportunities and the overall quality of business and service establishments in Spokane Valley. Receiving the lowest rating was employment opportunities. FIGURE 26: RATINGS OF ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY AND OPPORTUNITIES BY YEARI 32% 0 2011 (mail) Employment opportunities 31% 2009(phone) 74% Shopping opportunities 74% 590/ Spokane Valley as a place ..;,,. •5.s to work 58°l0 Overall quality of o-s�*�_ '`(y '''.' 7611'-'74"7-11'1 business and service establishments in Spokane 72% Valley 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% -- i Percent"excellent"or"good" ti V FIGURE 27:ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY AND OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 q comparison comparison Employment opportunities Similar Similar Shopping opportunities Much above Much above Spokane Valley as a place to work Above Similar LP 1 Overall quality of business and service establishments in Spokane Valley Similar Similar { 7 The National Citizen Surveyw 20 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Residents were asked to evaluate the speed of jobs growth and retail growth on a scale from "much too slow" to "much too fast."When asked about the rate of jobs growth in Spokane Valley, 79% responded that it was "too slow," while 40% reported retail growth as "too slow." When compared to jurisdictions of similar size, many more residents in Spokane Valley believed that retail growth was too slow and many more residents believed that jobs growth was too slow. FIGURE 28:RATINGS OF RETAIL AND JOB GROWTH BY YEAR} 0 2011 (mail) Jobs growth seen as too 79°I° 2009 (phone) slow 70% • Retail growth seen as QO°%° too slow 27% I-_ -- - - -- - I -0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent of respondents FIGURE 29: RETAIL AND Jon GROWTH BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Retail growth seen as too slow Similar Much more Jobs growth seen as too slow More Much more FIGURE 30:RATINGS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BY YEAR} U 2011 (mail) 30% 2009(phone) Economic development t., 38% u 0% 25% 50% 75°l° 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 31:ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Economic development Much below Much below Residents were asked to reflect on their economic prospects in the near term. Nineteen percent of the City of Spokane Valley residents expected that the coming six months would have a "somewhat" or"very" positive impact on their family. The percent of residents with an optimistic outlook on their household income was the same as in comparison jurisdictions. The National Citizen SurveyTn' 21 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 32: RATINGS OF PERSONAL ECONOMIC FUTURE BY YEAR' ° n 2011 (mail) What impact, if any,do 19 l° 2009(phone) you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? ° 19/° 1 1 1 i 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"very"or"somewhat"positive FIGURE 33: PERSONAL ECONOMIC FUTURE BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Positive impact of economy on household income Similar Similar i- t C 1 V C ! [ v C I r� I 9 1 C N C U G I n I l The National Citizen SurveyTM 22 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 PUBLIC SAFETY Safety from violent or property crimes creates the cornerstone of an attractive community. No one wants to live in fear of crime, fire or natural hazards, and communities in which residents feel protected or unthreatened are communities that are more likely to show growth in population, commerce and property value. Residents were asked to rate their feelings of safety from violent crimes, property crimes, fire and environmental dangers and to evaluate the local agencies whose main charge is to provide protection from these dangers. Many gave positive ratings of safety in the City Spokane Valley. About 69% of those completing the questionnaire said they felt "very" or"somewhat" safe from violent crimes and 73% felt "very" or "somewhat" safe from environmental hazards. Daytime sense of safety was better than nighttime safety. FIGURE 34: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY AND PERSONAL PUBLIC SAFETY BY YEARt Safety in your 92% neighborhood during ' , Er 2011 (mail) the day 88°1° 2009{phone) Safety in your ' { � . f'x' « 65 sy -4'411'9'4 ct et ' neighborhood after " dark 75% Safety in Spokane t : € ail>'' . i.: 88°/° Val ley's commercial areas during the day 88% Safety in Spokane '�' 52% Valley's commercial `3"-- areas after dark 64% Safety from violent t` ^ x Y +- ' 69% crime(e.g.,rape, — assault,robbery) 73% C pY ro Safety from property 'Y� ; ; d 4370 crimes(e.g,burglary, theft) 67% nJ Safety from 73% environmental hazards 76°10 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"very"or"somewhat"safe (i C c C The National Citizen SurveyTM 23 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 FIGURE 35:COMMUNITY AND PERSONAL PUBLIC SAFETY BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison In your neighborhood during the day Similar Similar In your neighborhood after dark Below Below In Spokane Valley's commercial areas during the day Similar Similar In Spokane Valley's commercial areas after dark Much below Similar Violent crime (e.g., rape,assault, robbery) Below Similar Property crimes(e.g.,burglary,theft) Much below Much below Environmental hazards, including toxic waste Similar Similar tJ U u ro i rt d Z G tJ N Ilfr � I The National Citizen SurveyT" 24 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 As assessed by the survey, 20% of respondents reported that someone in the household had been the victim of one or more crimes in the past year. Of those who had been the victim of a crime, 74% had reported it to police. Compared to other jurisdictions more Spokane Valley residents had been victims of crime in the 12 months preceding the survey and fewer Spokane Valley residents had reported their most recent crime victimization to the police. FIGURE 36: CRIME VICTIMIZATION AND REPORTING BY YEARt 0 2011 (mail) During the past 12 20% 2009(phone) months,were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime? 12% 74% If yes,was this crime (these crimes)reported to — — — the police? 59% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"yes" FIGURE 37: CRIME VICTIMIZATION AND REPORTING BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Victim of crime Much more Much more Reported crimes Less Less r c C 7 C' C CJ N u 0 SU !J z N The National Citizen SutveyT"1 25 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Residents rated seven City public safety services; of these, three were rated similar to the national benchmark comparison and four were rated below the national benchmark comparison. Ambulance or emergency medical services and fire prevention and education received the highest ratings, while emergency preparedness and crime prevention received the lowest ratings. FIGURE 38: RATINGS OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES BY YEAR± 64% U 2011 (mail) Police services 2009(phone) 66% t''' ` 90% Ambulance or emergency ;;.: medical services 79% 52% Crime prevention . 56% 74% Fire prevention and education 73% . k — d, 59% Traffic enforcement " "" ° "' • `T ' 61% FZ . jl C rY1 56% Municipal courts ""` , : w� 3 54% ca ci Emergency preparedness - • (services that prepare the `A.• ?:90-1',41:,44 4 e 46%• community for natural disasters or other . 57% emergency services) 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" u G_ 2 f7 The National Citizen SutveyTm 26 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 39: PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to comparison 149,999 comparison Police services Much below Much below Ambulance or emergency medical services Similar Similar Crime prevention Much below Much below Fire prevention and education Similar Similar Traffic enforcement Below Below Courts Similar Below Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) Much below Much below V O z Cr N U 0 7 The National Citizen SurveyTM 27 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 40:CONTACT WITH POLICE DEPARTMENT Have you had any in-person or phone contact with Fair an employee of the City of Spokane Valley Police Poor Department within the last 12 months? !N■■ 19% !!■■■ ■■■■■■ nom num ii■■ ` ■ 41/44.\\.\\N \\\*\\\T Ye \\\V-\\T 30,Good • No o 27�d � '0 \\ , Excellent 0 `� 34% \\\\> What was your overall impression of your most recent contact with the City of Spokane Valley Police Department? FIGURE 41:CONTACT WITH POLICE DEPARTMENT BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to comparison 149,999 comparison Had contact with the City of Spokane Valley Police Department Much less Much less Overall impression of most recent contact with the City of Spokane Valley Police Department Much below Much below L s 75 C t7 z >- E Cs a n C N U C fl The National Citizen SurveyT", 28 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY Residents value the aesthetic qualities of their hometowns and appreciate features such as overall cleanliness and landscaping. In addition, the appearance and smell or taste of the air and water do not go unnoticed. These days, increasing attention is paid to proper treatment of the environment. At the same time that they are attending to community appearance and cleanliness, cities, counties, states and the nation are going "Green". These strengthening environmental concerns extend to trash haul, recycling, sewer services, the delivery of power and water and preservation of open spaces. Treatment of the environment affects air and water quality and, generally, how habitable and inviting a place appears. Residents of the City of Spokane Valley were asked to evaluate their local environment and the services provided to ensure its quality. The overall quality of the natural environment was rated as "excellent" or"good" by 67% of survey respondents. Air quality received the highest rating, and it was similar to the national benchmark and above the benchmark for jurisdictions of similar size FIGURE 42: RATINGS OF THE COMMUNITY'S NATURAL ENVIRONMENT BY YEARt 0 2091 (mail) 55% Cleanliness of Spokane 2009(phone) Valley 63% Quality of overall natural 67% environment in Spokane Valley 66% Preservation of natural 46% areas such as open space, - - J farmlands and greenbelts 50% 72%0 \` Air quality 68% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 0 Percent"excellent"or"good" t-; ti 0 i The National Citizen SurveyTM 29 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 43:COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Cleanliness of Spokane Valley Much below Much below Quality of overall natural environment in Spokane Valley Below Similar Preservation of natural areas such as open space, farmlands and greenbelts Much below Below Air quality Similar Above CJ � I u C e i) r r t� y I t' a c Z e VY C 1 D L J Li . The National Citizen Survey", 30 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Resident recycling was greater than recycling reported in comparison communities. FIGURE 44:FREQUENCY OF RECYCLING IN LAST 12 MONTHS BY YEAR a 2011 (mail) 2009(phone) 84% Recycled used paper,cans I, _ - - or bottles from your home 86% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent using at least once in last 12 months FIGURE 45:FREQUENCY OF RECYCLING BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home More More U L u�! 0 O C:� 7_ cn U. 7 4.1 The National Citizen SurveyTM 31 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Of the seven utility services rated by those completing the questionnaire, three were higher than the custom benchmark comparison, four were similar and none were below the benchmark comparison. FIGURE 46: RATINGS OF UTILITY SERVICES BY YEARS Power(electric and/or r i 7j 78% 0 2011 (mail) gas) utility 2009(phone) vi 74% Sewer services 74% ; 1 77% Drinking water ' 74% 4 sr I.. -9• r Storm drainage 58% _ f ;W e n,fe e art< 76% • Yard waste pick-up 68% :x< 7_ 76y Recycling - - 71% ° Garbage collection ' tti.,, " T`"k A` 81% I I I i 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" e1 FIGURE 47: UTILITY SERVICES BENCHMARKS is National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Power(electric and/or gas) utility Above Above Sewer services Similar Similar Drinking water Much above Much above z Storm drainage Similar Similar Yard waste pick-up Similar Above Recycling Similar Similar Garbage collection Similar Similar CJ r e � c1 ■ J i The National Citizen SurveyTn' 32 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 RECREATION AND WELLNESS Parks and Recreation Quality parks and recreation opportunities help to define a community as more than the grind of its business, traffic and hard work. Leisure activities vastly can improve the quality of life of residents, serving both to entertain and mobilize good health. The survey contained questions seeking residents' perspectives about opportunities and services related to the community's parks and recreation services. About half of the respondents rated recreation opportunities in the City of Spokane Valley positively. Resident use of Spokane Valley parks and recreation facilities tells its own story about the attractiveness and accessibility of those services. The percent of residents that used Spokane Valley recreation centers was smaller than the percent of users in comparison jurisdictions. Recreation program use in Spokane Valley was similar to the rate of use in jurisdictions of similar size. FIGURE 43: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BY YEARt ©2011 (mail) 2009 (phone) 53% Recreational opportunities 57% ■ I 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 49:COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Recreation opportunities Much below Much below 2 0 u N U c. 0 ca Z a f. The National Citizen Survey"' 33 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 50: PARTICIPATION IN PARKS AND RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR r 49% u 2011 (mail) Used Spokane Valley trr_l 2009(phone) recreation centers 34°/° Participated in a j; - 45°f° recreation program or �4 j activity 45% � r- w 81% � ,' Visited a neighborhood 5 , fs!f.V. „rtx t park or City park ° 84/a I I 1 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent using at least once in last 12 months FIGURE 51:PARTICIPATION IN PARKS AND RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Used Spokane Valley recreation centers Much less Much less Participated in a recreation program or activity Less Similar Visited a neighborhood park or City park Less Less C i V V C C? 2 a V � I C 1 ra 0 c `r3 2 at Fr^ The National Citizen SurveyTM 34 City of Spokane Valley 1 201 1 FIGURE 52: RATINGS OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES BY YEAR N.- 1 81°Ia u 2011 (mail) City parks { i °' 2009(phone) 77% �A. i 1i'. 4y t�f° , ''!t....'M�`'-, 58°10 Recreation programs or �'f�� ' ,` a s ,, ;41,2,1 classes 62% 1 Ms ` ''1 -' nif .!'1 1,h t ',I.` ' J t. 62% Recreation centers or 1"E. , a Q.,zew,A x. facilities 67% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 53:PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES BENCHMARKS I___.__ National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison City parks Similar Similar Recreation programs or classes Much below Much below Recreation centers or facilities Below Much below s n V i CA 8 m' c _h JI r_ u ,V U cc.. z 1 The National Citizen Survey", 35 I City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Culture, Arts and Education A full service community does not address only the life and safety of its residents. Like individuals who simply go to the office and return home, a community that pays attention only to the life sustaining basics becomes insular, dreary and uninspiring. In the case of communities without thriving culture, arts and education opportunities, the magnet that attracts those who might consider relocating there is vastly weakened. Cultural, artistic, social and educational services elevate the opportunities for personal growth among residents. In the survey, residents were asked about the quality of opportunities to participate in cultural and educational activities. Opportunities to attend cultural activities were rated as "excellent" or"good" by 33% of respondents. Educational opportunities were rated as "excellent" or"good" by 46% of respondents. About 64% of Spokane Valley residents used a City library at least once in the 12 months preceding the survey. This participation rate for library use was similar to comparison jurisdictions. FIGURE 54: RATINGS OF CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BY YEARt El (mail) 2009(phone) 33°/a Opportunities to attend cultural activities 3a% - I :346°10 Educational opportunities 66% r i r 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 55:CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Opportunities to attend cultural activities Much below Much below F. Educational opportunities Much below Much below � I 4 .I I to L3 ra O The National Citizen SurveyTM 36 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 56:PARTICIPATION IN CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR n 2011 (mail) Used Spokane Valley 64% public libraries or their " - 2009(phone) services 70% Participated in religious or , 57% spiritual activities in '"''". °';'`' Spokane Valley 60% 1 1 1 1 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent using at least once in the last 12 months FIGURE 57:PARTICIPATION IN CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Public schools Similar _ Similar Public library services Similar Similar FIGURE 58: PERCEPTION OF CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES BY YEAR ®2011 (mail) 65% Public schools 2009(phone) 71% 88 Public library services 81% CI 1 I 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" c1 � FIGURE 59:CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Used Spokane Valley public libraries or their services Much less Much less Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Spokane Valley More Similar The National Citizen SurveyT M 37 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Health and Wellness Healthy residents have the wherewithal to contribute to the economy as volunteers or employees and they do not present a burden in cost and time to others. Although residents bear the primary responsibility for their good health, local government provides services that can foster that well being and that provide care when residents are ill. Residents of the City of Spokane Valley were asked to rate the community's health services as well as the availability of health care, high quality affordable food and preventive health care services. The availability of affordable quality food and the availability of preventive health services were rated most positively for the City of Spokane Valley, while the availability for affordable quality health care was rated less favorably by residents. Among Spokane Valley residents, about half rated affordable quality health care as "excellent" or "good."Those ratings were similar to the ratings of comparison communities. FIGURE 60: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY HEALTH AND WELLNESS ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR IT 2011 (mail) Availability of affordable �° d.t 51 /6 quality health care 2009(phone) 49% Availability of affordable 60% quality food 72% Availability of preventive 58% health services 61% 1 1 1 1 0%0 25% 50% 75% 100% z� Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 61:COMMUNITY HEALTH AND WELLNESS ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 Q comparison comparison • Availability of affordable quality health care Similar Similar Availability of affordable quality food Similar Similar Availability of preventive health services Similar Similar The National Citizen Survey"' 38 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Health services were rated above the national benchmark, and similar to the custom benchmark. FIGURE 62: RATINGS OF HEALTH AND WELLNESS SERVICES BY YEARt El 2011 (mail} 66% 2009(phone) Health services --- -- --.-• • 70% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 63: HEALTH AND WELLNESS SERVICES BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Health services Above Similar J s e V u 0) 0) U 7 C LT1• G N N C 0 O L OJ tr The National Citizen SurveyT" 39 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 COMMUNITY INCLUSIVENESS Diverse communities that include among their residents a mix of races, ages, wealth, ideas and beliefs have the raw material for the most vibrant and creative society. However, the presence of these features alone does not ensure a high quality or desirable space. Surveyed residents were asked about the success of the mix: the sense of community, the openness of residents to people of diverse backgrounds and the attractiveness of the City of Spokane Valley as a place to raise children or to retire. They were also questioned about the quality of services delivered to various population subgroups, including older adults, youth and residents with few resources. A community that succeeds in creating an inclusive environment for a variety of residents is a community that offers more to many. About eight in ten residents rated the City of Spokane Valley as an "excellent" or "good" place to raise kids and a majority rated it as an excellent or good place to retire. About half of residents felt that the local sense of community was "excellent" or"good." Further, about half of respondents felt the City of Spokane Valley was open and accepting towards people of diverse backgrounds. The availability of affordable quality child care was rated the lowest by residents but was higher than both benchmarks. FIGURE 64: RATINGS OF COMMUNITY QUALITY AND INCLUSIVENESS BY YEAR 48% 0 2011 (mail) Sense of community 2009(phone) 52% Openness and acceptance ` of the community towards 53°I° people of diverse backgrounds 57°%° Availability of affordable '. z�� . y� 44 to quality child care ° 45 1° 0 Spokane Valley as a place I r ;',, ' :; �� 81 I°• is to raise children �79/ °° `3 Spokane Valley as a place -.4 68% n b to retire z� 65% T E 0% 25% 50 010 75°/0 100°l° a Percent"excellent"or"good" G U r_ f The National Citizen Survey"' 40 City of Spokane Valley J 2011 FIGURE 65:COMMUNITY QUALITY AND INCLUSIVENESS BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to comparison 149,999 comparison Sense of community Much below Much below Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds Below Below Availability of affordable quality child care Above Above Spokane Valley as a place to raise kids Similar Above Spokane Valley as a place to retire Similar Above U V V t U C u U' c V r W The National Citizen SurveyTM 41 1f City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Services to more vulnerable populations (e.g., seniors, youth or low-income residents) ranged from 39°/U to 65% with ratings of "excellent" or"good." Services to seniors were similar to the benchmarks, while services to youth and services to low-income people were below the benchmarks. FIGURE 66: RATINGS OF QUALITY OF SERVICES PROVIDED FOR POPULATION SUBGROUPS BY YEARt 65% 0 2011 (mail) Services to seniors a: "z ': 2009(phone) 60% r A 4 Services to youth � 50% 58% •',Itk Y� t x ;• t 39% Services to low-income .f ,r people 48% 1 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 67:SERVICES PROVIDED FOR POPULATION SUBGROUPS BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Services to seniors Similar Similar Services to youth Below Below Services to low income people Below Below Q (-J U U v rr � C O z Il c � 8 U r 0 The National Citizen Survey"' 42 City of Spokane Valley ! 2011 CIVIC ENGAGEMENT Community leaders cannot run a jurisdiction alone and a jurisdiction cannot run effectively if residents remain strangers with little to connect them. Elected officials and staff require the assistance of local residents whether that assistance conies in tacit approval or eager help; and commonality of purpose among the electorate facilitates policies and programs that appeal to most and causes discord among few. Furthermore, when neighbors help neighbors, the cost to the community to provide services to residents in need declines. When residents are civically engaged, they have taken the opportunity to participate in making the community more livable for all. The extent to which local government provides opportunities to become informed and engaged and the extent to which residents take those opportunities is an indicator of the connection between government and populace. By understanding your residents' level of connection to, knowledge of and participation in local government, the City can find better opportunities to communicate and educate citizens about its mission, services, accomplishments and plans. Communities with strong civic engagement may be more likely to see the benefits of programs intended to improve the quality of life of all residents and therefore would be more likely to support those new policies or programs. Civic Activity Respondents were asked about the perceived community volunteering opportunities and their participation as citizens of the City of Spokane Valley. Survey participants rated the volunteer opportunities in the City of Spokane Valley somewhat favorably. Opportunities to attend or participate in community matters were rated less favorably. Ratings of civic engagement opportunities were lower than ratings from comparison jurisdictions where these questions were asked. FIGURE 68: RATINGS OF Civic ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BY YEART Opportunities to l 46% 0 2011 (mail) participate in community ° 2009 (phone) matters 52 I° Opportunities to " 64% volunteer 68% C3 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% L Percent"excellent"or"good" 1 0 2 FIGURE 69:CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Opportunities to participate in community matters Much below Much below Opportunities to volunteer Much below Much below z The National Citizen Survey", 43 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Most of the participants in this survey had not attended a public meeting, volunteered time to a group or participated in a club in the 12 months prior to the survey, but the vast majority had helped a friend. The participation rates of these civic behaviors were compared to the rates in other jurisdictions. Most showed lower rates of civic engagement when compared to the benchmarks. FIGURE 70: PARTICIPATION IN CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BY YEARI1 Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other 15% u 2011 (mail) local public meeting 21% 2009(phone) Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other ?t ,=z 28% public meeting on cable television,the Internet or other media 40% Volunteered your time to some group or activity in r , s w 42 7 0 Spokane Valley 45% g c t+ t 25% Participated in a club or civic group in Spokane Valley , 29% N " �' .I m 95% Provided help to a friend or neighbor f '` 94% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent participating at least once in the last 12 months FIGURE 71: PARTICIPATION IN CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to comparison 149,999 comparison Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting Much less Much less Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other public meeting on cable television, the Internet or other media Much less Much less Volunteered your time to some group or activity in ;° Spokane Valley Less Similar Participated in a club or civic group in Spokane Valley Much less Much less Provided help to a friend or neighbor Similar Similar C. 1 Over the past few years,local governments have adopted communication strategies that embrace the Internet and new media. In ,' 2010,the question,'Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting on cable television"was revised to include"the Internet or other media"to better reflect this trend. The National Citizen Surveyrn, 44 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 City of Spokane Valley residents showed the largest amount of civic engagement in the area of electoral participation. Eight-nine percent reported they were registered to vote and 82% indicated they had voted in the last general election. This rate of self-reported voting was higher than in comparison communities. FIGURE 72:REPORTED VOTING BEHAVIOR BY YEAR+ i1 2011 (mail Q ) 89 009 (phone) Registered to vote 85% ti 4 u rAr.A'�.� >, A:""� 7 1 . 41/4,- ._ �,,,xj` t -0:Is.'s. l 82/a Voted in the last general 34%;!‘`" 4 k._r.,',1,Q.,. < `A ,'''1, Al-, election 89% -._, 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Note:In addition to the removal of'don't know"responses.thpc€ried t4Sti""inelieible to vote"also have been omitted FIGURE 73:VOTING BEHAVIOR BENCHMARKS INational comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison Registered to vote More More Voted in last general election More Much more G, G 6 U vQ! C, d i ,, u' to c 1 N U r c 0 � Z 51 _r The National Citizen SurveyTM 45 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Information and Awareness Those completing the survey were asked about their use and perceptions of various information sources and local government media services. When asked whether they had visited the City of Spokane Valley Web site in the previous 12 months, 35% reported they had done so at least once. Public information services were rated similarly compared to benchmark data. FIGURE 74: UsE OF INFORMATION SOURCES BY YEARf 2011 (mail) 71% 2009(phone) Read Spokane Valley j Newsletter 23% - Visited the City of 35°/° Spokane Valley Web site (at www.spokanevalley.org) 25°/° 0% 25°1 50°1° 75% 100% Percent using at least once in last 12 months FIGURE 75: USE OF INFORMATION SOURCES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Read Spokane Valley Newsletter Much less Much less Visited the City of Spokane Valley Web site Much less Much less L U s e t1 u ct J c n I 7_ vi 4 N I U r; O CJ z 4y i -- I The National Citizen SurveyTM 46 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 76: RATINGS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEDIA SERVICES AND INFORMATION DISSEMINATION BY YEARt 9 2011 (mail) 60% 2009(phone) Cable television 69% ri� 1 61% Public information i,; services 57% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 77: LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEDIA SERVICES AND INFORMATION DISSEMINATION BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison l Cable television Above Above Public information services Similar Similar U ci Y c EL:! AJ c G 4 in z G vl C 0) C C? 2 ci The National Citizen Survey"' 47 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Social Engagement Opportunities to participate in social events and activities were rated as "excellent" or "good" by 46% of respondents, while even more rated opportunities to participate in religious or spiritual events and activities as "excellent" or "good." FIGURE 78: RATINGS OF SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BY YEAR{ 2011 (mail) Opportunities to 46% I 2009(phone) participate in social - events and activities 53% Opportunities to 751°° participate in religious or spiritual events and 78% activities 0°l0 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 79:SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Much below Much below Opportunities to participate in religious or spiritual events and activities Similar Similar L U C C C 0 n I C 1 L1 0 2 The National Citizen SurveyT" 48 tl City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Residents in Spokane Valley reported a strong amount of neighborliness. About half indicated talking or visiting with their neighbors at least several times a week. This amount of contact with neighbors was more than the amount of contact reported in other communities. FIGURE 80:CONTACT WITH IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS BY YEAR' ®2011 (mail) 2009(phone) 52% Has had contact with neighbors at least several 1'' ---- - -- times per week 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent at least several times a week" FIGURE 81:CONTACT WITH IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Has contact with neighbors at least several times per week More More v IL V' CI U S iJ L✓ r3 z R 0) CI • Cn z 0) The National Citizen SurveyTM 49 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 PUBLIC TRUST When local government leaders are trusted, an environment of cooperation is more likely to surround all decisions they make. Cooperation leads to easier communication between leaders and residents and increases the likelihood that high value policies and programs will be implemented to improve the quality of life of the entire community. Trust can be measured in residents' opinions about the overall direction the City of Spokane Valley is taking,their perspectives about the service value their taxes purchase and the openness of government to citizen participation. In addition, resident opinion about services provided by the City of Spokane Valley could be compared to their opinion about services provided by the state and federal governments. If residents find nothing to admire in the services delivered by any level of government, their opinions about the City of Spokane Valley may be colored by their dislike of what all levels of government provide. About 42% of respondents felt that the value of services for taxes paid was "excellent" or"good." When asked to rate the job the City of Spokane Valley does at welcoming citizen involvement, 37% rated it as "excellent" or"good." FIGURE 82: PUBLIC TRUST RATINGS BY YEAR' The value of services for 42% ❑2011 {mail) the taxes ane aid to Spokane - - p P � 2009(phone) Valley* 129% The overall direction that 45% Spokane Valley is taking* 43°/0 The job Spokane Valley ` �„; 37% government does at 's welcoming citizen involvement* 40°l0 Overall image or 64% reputation of Spokane Valley 65% u 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" "'for jurisdictions that have conducted The NCS prior to 2008,this change in the wording of response options may cause a decline in z the percent of residents who offer a positive perspective on public trust.It is well to factor in the possible change due to question i wording this way:if you show an increase,you may have found even more improvement with the same question wording;if you show no change,you may have shown a slight increase with the same question wording;if you show a decrease,community sentiment is probably about stable, ;_i c c The National Citizen Survey"' • 50 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 FIGURE 83: PUBLIC TRUST BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Value of services for the taxes paid to Spokane Valley Much below Much below The overall direction that Spokane Valley is taking Below Much below Job Spokane Valley government does at welcoming citizen involvement Much below Much below Overall image or reputation of Spokane Valley Below Below es ri c 5 -n } Ut C■ N c ca 7 The National Citizen SurveyT"' 51 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 On average, residents of the City of Spokane Valley gave the highest evaluations to their own local government and the lowest average rating to the Federal Government and the State Government. The overall quality of services delivered by the City of Spokane Valley was rated as "excellent" or "good" by 66% of survey participants. The City of Spokane Valley's rating was below the benchmark when compared to other communities. FIGURE 84: RATINGS OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY LOCAL,STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS BY YEAR 11 2011 (mail) 66% � Services provided by City 2009(phone) of Spokane Valley 55% Services provided by the 0 Federal Government 39% c 34% Services provided by the State Government 46% 0, _ 'i Rat 54% Services provided by Spokane County Government 55% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or''good" FIGURE 85:SERVICES PROVIDED BY LOCAL,STATE AND FEDERAL.GOVERNMENTS BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 r, comparison comparison • Services provided by the City of Spokane Valley Below Below Services provided by the Federal • Government Similar Similar • Services provided by the State Government Below Below Services provided by Spokane County Government Similar Similar - c u 0 7 The National Citizen SurveyTM 52 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 City of Spokane Valley Employees The employees of the City of Spokane Valley who interact with the public create the first impression that most residents have of the City of Spokane Valley. Front line staff who provide information, assist with bill paying, collect trash, create service schedules, fight fires and crime and even give traffic tickets are the collective face of the City of Spokane Valley. As such, it is important to know about residents' experience talking with that "face." When employees appear to be knowledgeable, responsive and courteous, residents are more likely to feel that any needs or problems may be solved through positive and productive interactions with the City of Spokane Valley staff. Those completing the survey were asked if they had been in contact with a City employee either in- person, over the phone or via email in the last 12 months; the 32% who reported that they had been in contact(a percent that much less than the benchmark comparison) were then asked to indicate overall how satisfied they were with the employee in their most recent contact. City employees were rated highly; 63% of respondents rated their overall impression as "excellent" or "good." FIGURE 86:PROPORTION OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD CONTACT WITH CITY EMPLOYEES IN PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS BY YEAR U 2011 (mail) Had in-person, phone or 32% 2009(phone) email contact with an employee of the City of - Spokane Valley within the last 12 months 35% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"yes" FIGURE 87:CONTACT WITH CITY EMPLOYEES BENCHMARKS National Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison comparison Had contact with City employee(s) in last 12 months Much less Much less 2 i U w 0 C1 The National Citizen SurveyTM 53 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 FIGURE 88: RATINGS OF CITY EMPLOYEES(AMONG THOSE WHO HAD CONTACT) BY YEAR' 73% 2011 (mail) Knowledge 2009(phone) 61% Responsiveness ` 67% 71% Courtesy .. . 68% - i 1, try`dr, s r 4` 63% Overall impression ' ``' �° 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent"excellent"or"good" FIGURE 89:RATINGS OF CITY EMPLOYEES(AMONG THOSE WHO HAD CONTACT) BENCHMARKS National comparison Populations 64,000 to 149,999 comparison I Knowledge Much below Much below Responsiveness Below Below t- Courteousness Similar Similar 4 Overall impression Much below Much below Si C'' C) , The National Citizen SurveyTM 54 City of Spokane Valley 2011 FROM DATA TO ACTION RESIDENT PRIORITIES Knowing where to focus limited resources to improve residents' opinions of local government requires information that targets the services that are most important to residents. However, when residents are asked what services are most important,they rarely stray beyond core services—those directed to save lives and improve safety. In market research, identifying the most important characteristics of a transaction or product is called Key Driver Analysis (KDA). The key drivers that are identified from that analysis do not come from asking customers to self-report which service or product characteristic most influenced their decision to buy or return, but rather from statistical analyses of the predictors of their behavior. When customers are asked to name the most important characteristics of a good or service, responses often are expected or misleading—just as they can be in the context of a citizen survey. For example, air travelers often claim that safety is the primary consideration in their choice of an airline, yet key driver analysis reveals that frequent flier perks or in-flight entertainment predicts their buying decisions. In local government core services— like fire protection — invariably land at the top of the list created when residents are asked about the most important local government services. And core services are important. But by using KDA, our approach digs deeper to identify the less obvious, but more influential services that are most related to residents' ratings of overall quality of local government services. Because services focused directly on life and safety remain essential to quality government, it is suggested that core services should remain the focus of continuous monitoring and improvement where necessary—but monitoring core services or asking residents to identify important services is not enough. A KDA was conducted for the City of Spokane Valley by examining the relationships between ratings of each service and ratings of the City of Spokane Valley's overall services. Those Key Driver services that correlated most highly with residents' perceptions about overall City service quality have been identified, By targeting improvements in key services, the City of Spokane Valley can focus on the services that have the greatest likelihood of influencing residents' opinions about overall service quality. Because a strong correlation is not the same as a cause, there is no guarantee that improving ratings on key drivers necessarily will improve ratings. What is certain from these analyses is that key drivers are good predictors of overall resident opinion and that the key drivers presented may be useful focus areas to consider for enhancement of overall service ratings. Services found to be most strongly correlated with ratings of overall service quality from the Spokane Valley Key Driver Analysis were: 7 Recreation centers or facilities Police services Public schools C 0 The National Citizen Survey.'" 55 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ACTION CHART The 2011 City of Spokane Valley Action Chart n' on the following page combines three dimensions of performance: Comparison to resident evaluations from other communities. When a comparison is available, the background color of each service box indicates whether the service is above the national benchmark (green), similar to the benchmark (yellow) or below the benchmark (red). Identification of key services. A black key icon (hT) next to a service box indicates it as a key driver for the City. Twenty-seven services were included in the KDA for the City of Spokane Valley. Of these, four were above the benchmark, 11 were below the benchmark and 12 were similar to the benchmark. Considering all performance data included in the Action Chart, ajurisdiction typically will want to consider improvements to any key driver services that are not at least similar to the benchmark. In Spokane Valley, recreation centers and facilities and police services were below the benchmark and public schools was similar to the benchmark. More detail about interpreting results can be found in the next section. Services with a high percent of respondents answering "don't know" were excluded from the analysis and were considered services that would be less influential. See Appendix A: Complete Survey Frequencies, Frequencies Including "Don't Know" Responses for the percent "don't know" for each service. I I L. ti i U � C) i V h e1 Jr3 I 7 The National Citizen SurveyTM 56 1 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 90:CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ACTION CHART' Overall Quality of City of Spokane Valley Services Public Safety ; r Community Design Police EMS services Code Animal Traffic enforcement control enforcement Economic Street , , development repair '� Sidewalk Snow maintenance removal Recreation and Wellness Street Street _ - lighting cleaning parks City Health services Traffic signal timing r Library Public . t schools , Recreation facilities , ,' t / , , t Environmental Sustainability ., j ` Drinking Rec cling Civic Engagement r � water Y g Garbage Sewer Cable ] [ Public 1 collection services television l information ) Power Storm `, ,' utility drainage Preservation of Community Inclusiveness natural areas , Senior services e N t TI C) t P . zo Legend e✓ Above Similar to Below C Benchmark Benchmark Benchmark O 7 `1 1110.17 Key Drivel t _%z -T v ✓, e]c_ N U fa 0 4 7_- N -- The National Citizen SurveyTM 57 City of Spokane Val ley I 2011 Using Your Action Chart" The key drivers derived for the City of Spokane Valley provide a list of those services that are uniquely related to overall service quality. Those key drivers are marked with the symbol of a key in the action chart. Because key driver results are based on a relatively small number of responses, the relationships or correlations that define the key drivers are subject to more variability than is seen when key drivers are derived from a large national dataset of resident responses. To benefit the City of Spokane Valley, NRC lists the key drivers derived from tens of thousands of resident responses from across the country. This national list is updated periodically so that you can compare your key drivers to the key drivers from the entire NRC dataset. Where your locally derived key drivers overlap national key drivers, it makes sense to focus even more strongly on your keys. Similarly, when your local key drivers overlap your core services, there is stronger argument to make for attending to your key drivers that overlap with core services. As staff review key drivers, not all drivers may resonate as likely links to residents' perspectives about overall service quality. For example, in Spokane Valley, planning and zoning and police services may be obvious links to overall service delivery (and each is a key driver from our national database), since it could be easy for staff to see how residents'view of overall service delivery could be colored by how well they perceive police and land use planning to be delivered. But animal control could be a surprise. Before rejecting a key driver that does not pass the first test of conventional wisdom, consider whether residents' opinions about overall service quality could reasonably be influenced by this unexpected driver. For example, in the case of animal control, was there a visible case of violation prior to the survey data collection? Do Spokane Valley residents have different expectations for animal control than what current policy provides? Are the rare instances of violation serious enough to cause a word of mouth campaign about service delivery? If, after deeper review, the "suspect" driver still does not square with your understanding of the services that could influence residents' perspectives about overall service quality (and if that driver is not a core service or a key driver from NRC's national research), put action in that area on hold and wait to see if it appears as a key driver the next time the survey is conducted. In the following table, we have listed your key drivers, core services and the national key drivers t_ and we have indicated (in bold typeface and with the symbol "•"), the City of Spokane Valley key drivers that overlap core services or the nationally derived keys. In general, key drivers below the benchmark maybe targeted for improvement. Additionally, we have indicated (with the symbol "°") those services that neither are local nor national key drivers nor are they core services. It is these services that could be considered first for resource reductions. N I 0 9 f.C 2 C m I .F 1 C 4 z n� +I The National Citizen SurveyTM 58 1 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 FIGURE 91: KEY DRIVERS COMPARED City of Spokane Valley Key National Key Service Drivers Drivers Core Services o Police services V V V Ambulance and emergency medical services ✓ °Traffic enforcement Street repair — ✓ ° Street cleaning ° Street lighting ° Snow removal • Sidewalk maintenance ° Traffic signal timing Garbage collection ✓ o Recycling Storm drainage ✓ Drinking water I ✓ Sewer services I V Power(electric and/or gas) utility V o City parks Recreation centers or facilities ✓ Code enforcement ✓ °Animal control ---------- - - ___ Economic development ✓ Health services V 0 Services to seniors o Public library Public information services V • Public schools V V ° Cable television ° Preservation of natural areas N •Key driver overlaps with national and or core services °Service may be targeted for reductions it is not a key driver or core service 7 - d7 s c U r 0 n • Z w The National Citizen Survey" 59 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 CUSTOM QUESTIONS "Don't know" responses have been removed from the following questions. Custom Question 1 How important, if at all, are each of the following services to your quality of life Very Somewhat Not at all in Spokane Valley? Essential important important important Total Street repair and cleaning 42% 48% 10% 1% 100% Police services 52% 35% 11% 1% 100% Snow removal 43% 41% 14% 2% 100% Garbage collection 41% 40% 16% 3% 100% Parks and recreation programs and facilities 35°k 44% 19% 2% 100% Business attraction, retention and 31% 41% 23% 5% 100% expansion Planning for new development 28% 42% 24% 6% 100% Bicycle/pedestrian paths &trails 26% 41% 26% 7% 100% Municipal court and jail 21% 40% 33% 7°I° 100% Animal control 20% 40% 34% 6% 100% Custom Question 2 Please indicate the extent to which you would support or oppose the investment of Percent of City time/money to attract, retain and expand the businesses in Spokane Valley: respondents Strongly support 41% Somewhat support 45% Somewhat oppose 8% Strongly oppose 6% Total - ._ _ -------------- 100% � L Custom Question 3 Spokane Valley's Vision Statement is: "A community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play and business will flourish and prosper.' How accurate or Percent of inaccurate do you think that statement is at describing Spokane Valley today? respondents Very accurate 15% Somewhat accurate 60% Somewhat inaccurate 20% Very inaccurate 6% Total �--- ----------- -- -- ---------- 100% 194 2 G The National Citizen Survey"' 60 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 APPENDIX A : COMPLETE. SURVEY FREQUENCIES FREQUENCIES EXCLUDING `DON'T KNOW" RESPONSES Question 1: Quality of Life Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Spokane Valley: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Spokane Valley as a place to live 30% 57% 11% 2% 100% Your neighborhood as a place to live 22% 51% 22% 5% 100% Spokane Valley as a place to raise children 28% 53% 18% 1°1° 100% Spokane Valley as a place to work 17% 42% 34% 7% 100% Spokane Valley as a place to retire 23% 45% 23% 9% 100% The overall quality of life in Spokane Valley 17% 62% 18% 2% 100% Question 2: Community Characteristics Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Spokane Valley as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Sense of community 9% 39% 38% 14% 100% Openness and acceptance of the community towards people of diverse backgrounds 10% 42% 39°I° 9% 100% Overall appearance of Spokane Valley 5% 47% 36% 12% 100% Cleanliness of Spokane Valley 6% 49% 37% 8% 100% Overall quality of new development in Spokane Valley 10% 38% 40% 12% 100% Variety of housing options 15% 44% 32% 8% 100% Overall quality of business and service establishments in Spokane Valley 14% 50% 29% 7% 100% Shopping opportunities 24% 51% 24% 2% 100% - Opportunities to attend cultural activities 7% 26% 40% 27% 100% Recreational opportunities 11% 43% 33% 14% 100% Employment opportunities 4% 29% 38% 30% 100% Educational opportunities 9% 37% 40% 14% 100% Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 10% 36% 38% 16% 100% Opportunities to participate in religious or spiritual events and activities 20% 55% 21% 4% 100% Opportunities to volunteer 15% 49% 30% 6% 100% Opportunities to participate in community matters 8°1° 38% 43% 11% 100% Ease of car travel in Spokane Valley 19% 49% 25% 7% 100% Ease of bus travel in Spokane Valley 12% 37% 30% 20% 100% Ease of bicycle travel in Spokane Valley 12% 35% 35% 19% 100% 0 Ease of walking in Spokane Valley 14% 36% 35% 15% 100% es Availability of paths and walking trails 14% 38% 32% 15% 100% • Traffic flow on major streets 9°1° 45% 35% 12% 100% The National Citizen SurveyTM 61 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Question 2: Community Characteristics Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate , to Spokane Valley as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Amount of public parking 15% 51% 27% 7% 100% Availability of affordable quality housing 13% 42% 33% 12% 100% Availability of affordable quality child care 9% 35% 43% 13% 100% Availability of affordable quality health care 17% 34% 31% 18% 100% Availability of affordable quality food 21% 39°I° 34% 6% 100% Availability of preventive health services 15% 43% 33°1° 9% 100% Air quality 18°l0 53% 24% 4°I° 100% Quality of overall natural environment in Spokane Valley 17% 50% 29% 5% 100% Overall image or reputation of Spokane Valley 13% 50% 26% 10% 100% Question 3:Growth Please rate the speed of growth in the following categories in Much Spokane Valley over the past 2 too Somewhat Right Somewhat Much years: slow too slow amount too fast too fast Total Population growth 1% 6% 56% 25% 12% 100% Retail growth (stores, restaurants, etc.) 7% 34% 49% 7% 4% 100% Jobs growth 31% 47% 20% 1% 0% 100% Question 4: Code Enforcement To what degree, if at all,are run down buildings,weed lots or junk vehicles a Percent of problem in Spokane Valley? respondents Not a problem _ 9% Minor problem 34% Moderate problem 42% 1- Major problem 15% Total 100% t, Question 5: Community Safety € Please rate how safe or unsafe G you feel from the following in Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very o Spokane Valley: safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe Total • Violent crime(e.g., rape, assault, robbery) 20% 49% 16% 13% 2% 100% Property crimes (e.g.,burglary, theft) 8% 35% 24% 24% 9% 100% Environmental hazards, including toxic waste 37% 36% 16% 9% 21° 70010° a fi The National Citizen SurveyTM 62 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Question 6: Personal Safety Please rate how safe or unsafe Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very you feel: safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe Total In your neighborhood during the day 63% 29% 4% 3% 0% 100% In your neighborhood after dark 27% 38% 16% 14% 5% 100% In Spokane Valley's commercial areas during the day 47% 42% 9% 2% 1% 100% In Spokane Valley's commercial areas after dark 9% 43% 18% 22% 8% 100% Question 7: Contact with Police Department Have you had any in-person or phone contact with an employee of the City of Spokane Valley Police Department within the last 12 months? No Yes Have you had any in-person or phone contact with an employee of the City of Spokane Valley Police Department within the last 12 months? 70% 30% Question 8: Ratings of Contact with Police Department What was your overall impression of your most recent contact with the City of Spokane Valley Police Department? Excellent Good Fair Poor What was your overall impression of your most recent contact with the City of Spokane Valley Police Department? 34% 27% 20% 19% Question 9: Crime Victim During the past 12 months,were you or anyone in your household the victim of Percent of any crime? respondents No 80% Yes 20% Total 100% Question 10: Crime Reporting If yes,was this crime (these crimes) reported to the police? Percent of respondents No 26% Yes _ 74% Total 100% 4J 7_ The National Citizen SurveyTM 63 City of Spokane Valley 2011 Question 11: Resident Behaviors In the last 12 months,about how many times, if ever, have you or other household members Once 3 to 13 to More participated in the following activities in Spokane or 12 26 than 26 Valley? Never twice times times times Total Used Spokane Valley public libraries or their services 36% 26% 22% 7% 9% 100% Used Spokane Valley recreation centers 51% 23% 14% 7% 6°l° 100°1° Participated in a recreation program or activity 55% 26% 12% 3% 5% 100% Visited a neighborhood park or City park 19% 26°l° 32% 13% 11% 100°1° Ridden a local bus within Spokane Valley 71% 12% 7% 2% 7% 100% Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting 85% 12% 3% 1% 0% 100% i Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other City-sponsored public meeting on cable television,the Internet or other media 72% 18% 8% 1% 1% 100% Read Spokane Valley Newsletter 29% 37% 25% , 5% 4% 100% Visited the City of Spokane Valley Web site (at www.spokanevalley.org) 65°l° 18°1° 10% 3% 3% 100% Recycled used paper,cans or bottles from your home 16% 8% 15% 8% 53% 100% Volunteered your time to some group or activity in Spokane Valley 58% 19% 11% 4% 7% 100% - Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Spokane Valley 43% 16% 13% 5% 23% 100% Participated in a club or civic group in Spokane Valley 75% 12% 7% 4% 3% 100% Provided help to a friend or neighbor 5% 18% 39% 19% 20% 100% Question 12: Neighborliness About how often, if at all,do you talk to or visit with your immediate neighbors Percent of (people who live in the 10 or 20 households that are closest to you)? respondents U Just about everyday 25% Several times a week 27% Several times a month 21% t3 a Less than several times a month 27% Total 100% Question 13: Service Quality Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Spokane Valley: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total u Police services 18% 46% 28% 9% 100% Ambulance or emergency medical'services 37% 53% 9% 1% 100% Crime prevention 9% 44% 35% 13% 100% The National Citizen SurveyTM 64 City of Spokane Valley I 201 1 Question 13: Service Quality Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Spokane Valley: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Fire prevention and education 23% 52% 23% 3% 100% Municipal courts 110/U 45% 38% 6% 100% Traffic enforcement 10% 49% 28% 14% 100% Street repair 4% 29% 35% 33% 100% Street cleaning 11% 34% 42% 14% 100% Street lighting 5% 41% 34% 19% 100% Snow removal 11% 36% 33% 21% 100% Sidewalk maintenance 4% 37% 32% 27% 100% Traffic signal timing 5% 44% 35% 17% 100% Bus or transit services 17% 41% 29% 14% 100% Garbage collection 29% 56% 14% 2% 100% Recycling 24% 52% 17% 7% 100% Yard waste pick-up 26% 50% 20% 4% 100% Storm drainage 14% 47% 30% 9% 100% Drinking water 35% 42% 16% 7% 100% Sewer services 23% 51% 18% 8% ' 100% Power(electric and/or gas) utility 29% 49% 17% 5% 100% City parks 26% 55% 17% 2% 100% Recreation programs or classes 15% 43% 34% 8% 100% Recreation centers or facilities 16% 46% 31% 7% 100% Land use, planning and zoning 6% 23% 46% 24% 100% Code compliance(weeds,abandoned buildings, etc.) 7% 29% 37% 28% 100% Animal control 12% 48% 27% 12% 100% Economic development 5% 25°I° 46% 24% 100% Health services 17% 50% 26% 8% 100% • Services to seniors 14% 51% 27% 8% 100% Services to youth 10% 40% 32% 18% 100% J _ Services to low-income people 9% 29% . 35% 26% 100% • Public library services 27% 61% 11% 1% 100% Public information services 13% 48% 30% 9% 100% Public schools 21% 44% 26% 90/0 100% ea Cable television 18% 42% 28% 12% 100% F Emergency preparedness(services that prepare the.community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 11% 35% 28% 26% 100% • Preservation of natural areas such as open space,farmlands and greenbelts 8% 38% 35% 19% 100% TT. U i z G The National Citizen Survey"' 65 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Question 14: Government Services Overall Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total The City of Spokane Valley _ 10% 56% 28% 6% 100% The Federal Government 6% 31% 39% 24% 100% The State Government 5% 29% 44% 22% 100% Spokane County Government 8% 46% 35% 11% 100% Question 15: Recommendation and Longevity Please indicate how likely or unlikely Very Somewhat Somewhat Very you are to do each of the following: likely likely unlikely unlikely Total Recommend living in Spokane Valley to someone who asks 42% 45% 9% 3% 100% Remain in Spokane Valley for the next five years 58% 29% 5% 8% 100% Question 16: Impact of the Economy What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in Percent of the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: respondents Very positive 3% Somewhat positive 13% Neutral 40% Somewhat negative 29% Very negative 14% Total 100% Question 1 7: Contact with City Employees Have you had any in-person, phone or email with an employee of the City of Spokane Valley within the last 12 months(including police, receptionists, planners or any Percent of others)? respondents No 68% Yes 32% Total 100% ri Question 18: City Employees What was your impression of the employee(s) of the City of Spokane Valley in your most recent contact? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Knowledge 25% 48% 21% 7% 100% Responsiveness 36% 31% 20% 14% 100% Courtesy 45% 26% 17% 12% 100% Overall impression 32% 31% 23% 14% 100% C= � 7 The National Citizen SurveyTM 66 City of Spokane Valley J 2011 Question 19: Government Performance Please rate the following categories of Spokane Valley government performance: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total The value of services for the taxes paid to Spokane Valley 4% 38% 41% 17% 100% The overall direction that Spokane Valley is taking 5% 40% 40% 15% 100% The job Spokane Valley government does at welcoming citizen involvement 7% 30% 42% 21% 100% Question 20a: Custom Question 1 How important, if at all, are each of the following services to your quality of life Very Somewhat Not at all in Spokane Valley? Essential important important important Total Animal control 20% 40% 34% 6% 100% Bicycle/pedestrian paths &trails 26% 41% 26% 7% 100% - Business attraction, retention and expansion 31% 41% 23% 5% 100% Municipal court and jail 21% 40% 33% 7% 100% Parks and recreation programs and facilities 35% 44% 19% 2% 100% Planning for new development 28% 42% 24% 6% 100% Police services 52% 35% 11% 1% 100% Snow removal 43% 41% 14% 2% 100% Garbage collection 41% 40% 16% 3% 100% Street repair and cleaning 42% 48% 10% 1% 100% Question 20b: Custom Question 2 Please indicate the extent to which you would support or oppose the investment of Percent of City time/money to attract, retain and expand the businesses in Spokane Valley: respondents o Strongly support 41% Somewhat support 45% �� Somewhat oppose 8% Strongly oppose 6% Total 100% Ti t. c o :e. Question 20c: Custom Question 3 Spokane Valley's Vision Statement is: "A community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play and business will flourish and prosper." How accurate or Percent of inaccurate do you think that statement is at describing Spokane Valley today? respondents Very accurate 15% Somewhat accurate 60% Ri Somewhat inaccurate I 20% n Very inaccurate 6% v Total 100% The National Citizen SurveyTM 67 City of Spokane Valley 2011 Question D1: Employment Status Are you currently employed for pay? Percent of respondents No 40% Yes,full-time 49% Yes, part-time 12% Total I 100% Question D2:Mode of Transportation Used for Commute During a typical week, how many days do you commute to work (for the longest Percent of days distance of your commute) in each of the ways listed below? mode used Motorized vehicle(e.g.,car,truck,van, motorcycle,etc.) by myself 77% Motorized vehicle(e.g.,car, truck,van, motorcycle, etc.)with other children or adults 10% Bus, rail, subway or other public transportation 2% Walk 2% Bicycle Work at home 7% Other 0010 Question D3: Length of Residency How many years have you lived in Spokane Valley? Percent of respondents Less than 2 years 10% 2to5years 19% 6 t 10 years 15% 11 to 20 years 19% More than 20 years 38% Total 100% Question D4: Housing Unit Type Which best describes the building you live in? Percent of respondents L.a One family house detached from any other houses _ 52% aHouse attached to one or more houses (e.g.,a duplex or townhome) 10% ��5. Building with two or more apartments or condominiums 33% Mobile home 2% D Other 2% Total 100% Question D5: Housing Tenure(Rent/Own) is this house,apartment or mobile home... Percent of respondents Rented for cash or occupied without cash payment 37% Owned by you or someone in this house with a mortgage or free and clear 63% Total 100% The National Citizen Survey"' 68 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Question D6: Monthly Housing Cost About how much is the total monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners" Percent of association (HOA) fees)? respondents Less than $300 per month 8% $300 to $599 per month 26% $600 to $999 per month 32% $1,000 to $1,499 per month 21% $1,500 to $2,499 per month 11% $2,500 or more per month 2% Total 100% Question D7: Presence of Children in Household Do any children 17 or under live in your household? Percent of respondents No 75% Yes 25% Total 100% Question D8: Presence of Older Adults in Household Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? Percent of respondents No 74% Yes 26% Total 100% Question D9: Household Income How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all Percent of persons living in your household.) respondents Less than $24,999 31% $25,000 to$49,999 29% $50,000 to$99,999 31% $100,000 to $149,000 8% $150,000 or more 1% o Total 100% C 2 Question D10: Ethnicity Y Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Percent of respondents • No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 98% • Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 2% • Total 100% 0 0 • 7 a The National Citizen SurveyTM 69 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Question D1 1: Race What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race(s) you consider Percent of yourself to he.) respondents American Indian or Alaskan Native 3% Asian,Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 3010 Black or African American 3% White 93% Other 2% Total may exceed 100%as respondents could select more than one option Question D12:Age In which category is your age? Percent of respondents 18 to 24 years 7% 25 to 34 years 20% 35 to 44 years 15% 45 to 54 years 21% 55 to 64 years 15% 65 to 74 years 10% 75 years or older 12% Total 100% Question D13: Gender What is your sex? Percent of respondents Female 53% Male 47% Total 100%Question D14: Registered to Vote Are you registered to vote in your jurisdiction? Percent of respondents No 11% rU Yes 87% Ineligible to vote 2% Total I 100% es Question D15:Voted in Last General Election l Many people don't have time to vote in elections. Did you vote in the last general Percent of election? respondents No 18% Yes 80% Ineligible to vote 2% Total 100% The National Citizen SurveyTM 70 { City of Spokane Valley I 2011 Question D16: Has Cell Phone Do you have a cell phone? Percent of respondents No 12% Yes _ 88% Total Yv 100% Question D17: Has Land Line Do you have a land line at home? Percent of respondents No 42% Yes 58°1° Total 100°1° Question D18: Primary Phone If you have both a cell phone and a land line,which do you consider your primary Percent of telephone number? respondents Cell 18% Land line ----- 61°/°-_ - --. Roth 21% Total 100% U C CJ V C3 4't • G 0 0 C_ G c 0 0 7 The National Citizen Survey"' 71 4 � 4 44 .rat .1. •1- 7. Td To 0 0 0 0 0 0 H o a o 0 0 0 e e o 0 0 ro o a 0 0 0 0 a a a a a a o a o a o > } 0 0 0 o a a 0 0 a 0 0 0 o a a a a Q) o r r r r r r r - r r r r- r r r F 1 C L , CO C1 O „� r r N frn N Lin ,�. M 'd' '- tp m Ol Q E [I1 El r O O O -- a -e o Cp ° C 0 e e o 0 o e O -9, ° e e -- e e — o 0 V O a r r r o n r-a r r 0 N r- O Y CO Cr4! V O O N M N cn O N N M h)n M N O M M in m Ln m O 6'm ° Ln ° LU . O O r C17 C O_ -6 0 0 0 e o 0 Z N Ln r LO N. N CI' o e o a° o o a 0 ----- - ,--- h. r CO r N. N N r N a-. -w 01 5 Ol N 01 — -- - (/1 Ln c9' .r, �0 r, CO CO N. O r Ln r - CO in co Lc) N �LU/ L Ln Ln ,-0 l0 LO M N O d- M M r'- 10 L r r r r- r- r r r r r r a) u' ` ro r N Li" CO Q CO L- ° ..9. -°. -9 zl° 0 -° i Ln r N r N N r o 0 0 `,'s, '1'n 0 0 o a e o i ft In M M M m M M N N M M M va i � N O Lr') N. CO 6 —_._._ Z Q o N N N N 0 N N M O N d' M in h Lc) r bA O t4 ,- N Ln CO N N h Q 0.) • 0 a1 711 r r N N r r N N r r- U v-. LI) O M M �0 v e 0 0 o a o o a o 0 0 Z CU O S ,,0 N. 03 'It r- 0 a N Ol M ---- V M M d' '�t M .tr Ln Ln N m N C CD Ci Q ,, c M o, o N co o, N 'Oe = QJ *" r c 4-, N. O N t h 01 V M o CO M N - ] C M [t N N m l0 1/40 ,r-_, N 'a` r N. F. X o o a o . . (jf -C r LF Q N "t ct 0 h. E Z U C M N N r N r O X , �. -O . - 6-,--.. a a �_ Co .0 U LL) 00 01 in i0 01 "t d- N rU M ' d O b O a a 64. o al Z � O •• C O p ID zCC w a1 ro . Z `d u 4.- 0' L C ~ L C Ur) C ° C) a >.. — Li CL a - -o To. a) Z C- o C) o 0 0 a �, ra L o o ca 01 a' _ C a C a1 L a7 1n !J-1 op OJ Q v .O eo t 3 C cn a) N b0> > U C O U) 0 C u ? a`) O Of) 3 c a1 o v; 0 .Y o ao a) a)a) > E U ro o c CU Lti —0- 00u000 o > o 0 U a1 a) m O U '@ o c u a > a) c v u c e`"i • V (a cc au co ca 4- c cn a1 o e o r w, w � O C _C. ro -o ra co co V) QS °O C) C •C V V > C A A ca C O L .n >, O } Q O. 4 u d m 0 Q7 0- c aKS) o 7 'aJ Q o 0 To -0 is CO ib o CCC `, a Un 10 -c r0 10 -, ro °,b -o C > t) > > > ` Y ° N CC a� 6 C-> an C C Cl.) • C ca Ci ', a1 a] C) > O a) _ C _ O Q) C m •- , vi 0.1 CL 0., - , - - ° to U) C L i .� L - 0 - •� O " O 0. -C 'arj 0. ° a a a -C a1 C Q CU > > a) > › a 2 a a) E H co >- cn cn rn F- a- cn O O E7 O > O cn cn O Lu '.nil 'J)IV1.:,7li)n••v,•1Nill,'U,1', i4', ,,.q\u1Qil:i/I 1I"∎ i1 0.fl I I I- CS 1n .o Lr, LO oO tr r N N ul tt w ct' N 1n O co N N a v 0 a a a a ° ° a a 0 o a o o a a a a a a a o fo a m O 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 o a 0 > O CD O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0) r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ' r r r C r LO h O t1° Q nt 1/4.0 - N CO N O1 r N O 2 1-' in tt 00 01 O1 r r r M '�#' N N r r N C o y. 0 C Q -Y a o o a o o o ° a e e a o o e o + e. �°4" cO rCO N M 10 co O r l(1 CO N co M V U r N N M N r r 1c r r in N 'It' 41 O O O N r N O in CO CO CO Lo co r m L ' in �0 r N on m kD l0 'D is) in on 'rt N iD N m r N <t' o - 0 0- a o e 1 o - o a o c a a a a a . ° o ° a ° o ° '. o a a ° T" M 11'1 O1 F. r r r r t. O 1p �f CO 1r1 M t, 1.11 N CO O O N CO It N sT 00 t\ co 111 V 111 Lc1 t\ O in O Q1 r '1- N Ln r N 07 r '1 N O N r r r r- r r r r r r r r r r r r T. r •0 1 1 i ` t e 1 i 1 i e , 0 e e 0 O O O O ° O ° O D O O O O O O a O ° O U1 sr n 4 4 d' O ,0 N 01 4 111 f\ O F. M 471 m CJ in m M r N M N N' N M N M N N N N m N N N N in M SD N m M 471 r N, 'ct' N CO M O M N N >I '� '�t' r O t\ M r O r d' Ili Cr) r 1f) M N M r r 0) -0 r r N r r N r r r r r N r r r r N N N r! 0 -- — ES ° ° o o 'C'D a a ° ° a ° a a a a a a a 7:...,,o. ° co iv U N m in 01 CO in cD on d' 4 01 V F. 01 CO F. N co CO m m d' m M 't N N CO m d• ',t' M r N M M in it' 'cp C ., _ _ N 'C ++ 117 CO M 01 r l0 00 CO t\ CO on CO 01 l0 ,- t. r m CO on = M M t\ in N CO on on N 11'1 on k.0 d• r- t.0 01 If'1 CO r- in v N E E• W e o o o e. o o o a a o 0 0 0 0 c cr,° N ° co ° ° M M ° 'd' r^ ° ir7 O M CO kD m O co �' r r r r r r r N r r r r :4+ N c 0 2 O +, 10 0) 4-, C t CD ! `121 h C.d L CJ c v a>>7 I co CJ v1 •- "0 U c C • rd a ro -0 ' rd U `° .0 , E v 0 > a o s a� o e1 E o >, t U s 4. v1 c a c -, O ro > c CU c �° . ..c O 'ca 3 > 'E E ,5 as e.) > •- . •O > o o e1 0) a7 c C o o r0 4 a a a a �' C C C b s �J i t� c 60 0' ZS' CS O' -C sll o O sd 6 a a a 0 p Y -C7 E C C.7 e} al e.) -N • g. C '-' .E a 'E to CJ) a ro L c~6 re oil so c6 c . - o. N-. 4n rd ro O co C ,c j V7 S O a -o -a - -0 7 c c�7 0 a s > 47. ' ro c .0 •'cn U 00000) t 0 0 0 o o Q7 > +'-, bU a E = b CO t std o El o o O 4.1 OJ N N `-1 >V o o a 0 0 o a o O o +�' C 4.-=''"C 4:5"C C "C sad 7 U C6 4' 4' 4" 4" 4" 4.. w E ro U s .Q 3 O o O a a N a a ,} '} v- ,1 .t0 `1 V ..q .S7 :5 .5.7 .S] b .-. -' 0 to 0 O ..E O O 0 0 0 0 rd U a rd rd rd rd rd C Vd sd (6/ O 0. > 2 a 0) v (1) J ' E 0 ' `R1 • '- O td e),a$ w w d Lu- O O O O w w Q i- Q Q Q < Q d - O' O <Li :WI 1.),1,-)■1lic-,i�;_;: I,' ,I,.j :YS., i;r.,I' -. 1:.1ri11.111 : €';, oii! r o c CO 4 p to in in Lin v ∎ `° N d. b I.• o o a --- ----- 0 o a 0 > 0 00 0 4 0 00 O a) r r r c r I r r c a) c h 'ct c O M M O 61 c1 6� O r r cl c a i. o 0 o a o O 0 0 O ❑ a 0 0 00 N O Ln in 0 ❑ Y o o o 4. N O N N N } M d r N M 'U - -- c O N m 0 C) O O • Tl a) d) d _c vi C) U 7 y' a 1+° m 0 0 o i, • 0 M O N C) N r rv. - O N M co Ln O M N > -C cu v C atn ra E O ° Y OC 0 0 '0 0 Y a VI L.0 CO r a r' N V) M • L -C O O N © (1)tc- �q '.� 7 cn 2 O O O D Q 1_. ACA,, '- '� C !� ..ate W 0 y a) E �' en i r' !'' I U Z r` M �+ r 't M O O �"� O _c N r- U > U M co CO 'al a) �i e t {v — r C I - O O O . C 0' O O _° o o i- •a ]L Z el en , 1 oo m M a, 0, " r N O i., w -cs __. �- I O N N O r I fir in s p -- a cQ M u „' ` . o D T ° `° N -o > O M - -- •3 N t0 rn I c s - 3 G > a) U .. as _Q x 6 > u c a a o ro �; CD `?° T , L-- oa a I c o •-1-- V) V O c N rti L ,E 'CI L] Ji ,- L L Q 'O 'O a) a1 C ' pip N ca to-.5 O 2 E 3 3 bA c1 N v 2 - of E E 3 E �' 1 ,,�_, V O bA .� 'p7 N N o Y o �. ro CO c c ra .n -- 'b c a) "- O iO $ -c o 2 *; o C , C U U E a) .- --- 04 O rd O aJ ±- ;' EE N m o N I 0. O d ,N en I- a.+ c 'O . c ate+ 2 - v, v- ,.o O O of p 17- '+ O O co d ti © Z ❑ F-- > Q w S . 1 1 I )u1'Jdlrri::)L1))t•aic) (I I..r.o•,.l Aq,.tatru5 uarrli 1 Irutulr(.I)'31.11 II I Y O N. aD M r r- e-NI d' ,- 0-, co M °o d' H -a a o o H o H a o 0 O O O O — — a r r Y r Y C6 C CU p a o g o 0 '15 0 .L a ....9. a a ❑ .SC'. a ❑ 1 0 t]. �∎ e a 0 o N r i a o c d U -- N d �} h --- _• O N. O P O r tf +, N M M `" N v iti r� 3 o e e e e co Q lh r co M L tri +d �D N '-- N d L N RS r LO r Q1 M s w ' p a-, lL a el VVI Z e N O ,• E C c N aJ in M r N N a) [a Li 'L E a) CO U 2 to a,l 4) a (a o co N N. iD e�i rCa U N o C ,- N. M i� o c O _ __ N E E 0 ca v v +b t GO• 9.1 > C v C d ° v 3 -- v N +�C e ° e e -C 4' o t u e . CL, a3 co U 4 u GJ M j V n a '' C U C M C C O C O C O C C O ..0 a 3 r r r r ^ O N y C 'U-' d = Z a a) a C r - ca as t O a1 t- in 00 CO d d a? coj 8 ' G .- N M M r v C a) C O a) a ra ,- ,„1-; OC -, (u U C 1+ lh C O N. ,aL_ C C cn t U N Nr O M .L-, = ` r0 N 3 .� O o ❑ v n. O q} e a -6 ° C G V, E E O y O N a0 O as }, r �- - E N A C as u 4 T o., p (Vo (a) v� (a O a) a] p a A O. JO cG 2 Q a) o _, C �J O p vi ❑ a 7' _c _a L a3 -C 4- O - C N c N O U L2 C 'vi O C • L ..0 a) ay �^ •u o 0 ra C pA ca ,� •L `O C i cz L Q. E C as v V2 C3- 3 .Y as O O •- a0 £2, v w — ca v O U V ?, v a i > C. u) C =p�. fO ° 7 v , Z ] C . L a.) a) v U °0 o p ❑ a 0 C 0 s cl i > s _C C> CO >' .s h an 'C ,u 'l >- ill a d v , 0 roO m C C to ca a1 O C 1... - X _X (a a 0O >, A a y (1] 0 0 p., 0. rd 0 a, C C C C b I > Z ❑ H •nil"J.i),i,..)L JJi'..sax P t, ,!:r. .q r..4aasi(S uam 1 I,,■eTlt r;o,1I r N 'D N N 1,1 I\ CO Ol N VI O N N O ul ul ',4' t t t Li") 'cr u l '4' In ''t e l ul — C V V �i d �1 rt tl �i �Y f 7 M in a, N M N o N .D C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o e p p 0 0 0 h-- 0 0 0 o e o o a o a o o° e o co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r C) - r r r r r r r r r r r r r r-• co _v ko N ,_. 0 N M Ln M N 0 Ol N M N 0 o. C 'd' N N 'd' M O r r N M Co Cr- O O O O O b O b p •C 0-, lD Lr .. 0 r •c4 M N on O Q. p �J ,.D °� e O d' N r n O m M M LO 0 'd' �1 N 1r r Q M CO ru'! N M N N CO O CU -^ o E - U M '*'' 0 0 o M e o 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 61 1� 1� M N r r° t17 M CO c4 art C r• ti. a. O M - M M M �D M 0 N N t9 N tiD li 1 M r m `D V) in M ,- r ay O , 'ic a o 0 a �° o a o v o p o M N S1' N N N M CO 1r1 Q 1n r M n of 2 N r r M N r- r r M I-. C •O w. 0o N '1' �.0 M N ,�0 r N N f A D aU r r r in Lr'1 CO r, CO M CO NN. lrt 00 Q1 U O.L ,a) U . N C) OD C 7 a p p o 0 o p a b b a o a C fl' �,., *' o o a o a o p a o e a o 0 C) C �0 M tiD '.0 N N CO h CO ° 01 '.D N CO N E e) N N N N r M r 0 r r r r V Q1 _ 0 N tY '0 N MV '`t CO CO N 01 � rj N O O 1- r N N c° M M CO N N M N C G C C) ems) 2 O -C C Z 0 a o o a a o 0 o a o 0 0 , i ' • - O O 'O VI Ol ul N Ol rn �D co M ir7 C a-., V' M in Lc) r N Co h N uJ rn 'c4- n Z • `-o di - , G) aa) a N u c s ° .0 a' c a- > ° CO aCO o i a C v1 1 _orb E a) E , -o ,,,. '� - v .0 .0 ,a ) A `i o ° . . r•/) e) 1 .� o o O > .- c ,/,a1 E .0 > v 5 H in O >, ,r _ • re o. C � N U U N O _O I I O � 41 Q l x E ro i ' ,,, +C O Q- O p i 0 a s E a ° E -D C) 0.0..) CL o e o a A o f _ o , ro i o bn n .� c L O 0 U U c4 Q 0 'C 1:43 5 E m °' c � > L E a= u u "' ° � sp. ( o _ ° o 'o _ i' cc} • '? O C C) U 100 5 C 0 O "O O CaJ bo 'O vi Q •,F, d� O U d ° 1 > >• p O e u .o E O 9._ __a_3 Ae) ) I_ 3 2 c O c a U _c W C ba E w Q. - -C c' c E C U CC' C o � 'U > ° o V. o E e i O > > ro -Q o y o ro ro ' o E E C n-0 aC} U ca "C 0 o Q -° ) a) -C O • O -0 ° C} o E X aQ i z3 I= . no E o ) a Q. 0 a u c CL) � -C U u ,a Z 7U- 0 H c D D a%. > Q ©. o ce > > a. > a.. o_ s,, '1.r ) II,i ., I:• ,r, , iq 4.1l.ti111ci n.)/111 )I'1 "" , 1 II i r O O N c0 R r'1 •••D O 7 7 al c0 7 N 7 01 c O r P r d U --- - 0 ° ...9, ° ...47. ° O° ..$2. O° O ...j..7 ° ...L.:, o° ° -.9. ° o oOO oar0 O O O O O 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q r r r r r r r r r ,- r r r r r r r C 4 co 46 a T Q k Q C ° e e ° ' S CU d , r M 0 r--.. c0 R � ,3) c 11 R , R O u r N r dr ,..0 ,r co d' r 00 rfj 2 a N N N N O O C C•io irI o o 111 .o_ N'" o N � N o o o ell_m O J M r d N fi. 6l °'-- '- 'd' m o0 O • FP, cry cTl N u7 R r O ` M d' r L(] c0 00 R en N 7 M C Q N O Cl- c o r ° M al O M 9 „.9 o o e o 00 7 N N N CO N lD cri r•-, + O al 0 C Lo M1 C R M ,f} O m r 0 N N r r N M dt N CO m r Y r T M co R D c 0 co � N o R r >1.y c c l D R N x 00 M cO O N 0 d' cr CD Q .. -Q r r r r co r r r N N ' r O Q 0 ° ° ° ° ° ° ° o .6., ° o e 0' r r VD o� O O CO Cr) r N M d' r 1/40 N s d d• M M N d- N M d' M st N cn M r CD C O u i1iF11Fi °° a o a a C 0 CO ,-,3 Y C O ° o O ,°.,c, N R O O . 0 r N rn In r N N r 'a e, -E Q z F u C C m O C .0 o as 0 • t N N .3 0 0 0 un Q -c �,- u Y Y = c) al U —ca E Q a E s (A 6j V C cq C M :� -C 0 c3 U yr E. C E �4 C N CL o L' co ro N o to C ,G V L _ ��al 0 cc.Y r r 9.9 m 5 ' C u - .- .0 .0 O `° rd 0 O E. G 7 _a G_ G_ i �y '.` E c c V a 0 '� ro a Q a a Cv 0.0 m w •c� v u o a 0a iH ! a. Q U u; 1- va vo f, cn yr ca (3 ce )- v, n -,'.II ,J0111,1;)IIIJ'ce'i:i I ,,:fl':; rif:_..(.1n I_,<,'iI •(Ill]I'I I i 'iI{11 1 1 i O Co O O Ol m O O .D Ol m r Ol .D N, N CO Ol m N re) er et' er m m .t m M et et m m m d' m N m 1' '1 tl' '�i' " d. '1 d. 'V '1' d. d. d. q' d' 'd '4. ' 0) 0o 0 0 0 o a 0 0 0 0 o a a o 0 o 0 a a b o o a O Cr- 0 o O O 6 O p o 0 0 o O o TO O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O > O O O O O O O o O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O V r r r r- r r-° r r r r r r r r r r r r r O. _ It -` iO CO .i. 't .O N M Ol .O O O r 1\ N W O , r In I\ N r N ,- N Ol Ol O Ol CO m to N r r r r r r r C O w O e a a o ,°-.1 o a o a,- Ca 0 6.) o a ,- a NN o �y `t � V m NN r •c 'S r r'1 N "I m O r li CO CO m Ol LO CO N 1/40 m .O O N N N� M N r r ,o c o N N N tt' N m �i' .D Lrl O O" o o e o 0 e a o a e a 0 0 0 0 0 o ‘,.5.... o o o c o ."52-3 0 N In N 'c 4 te O O co '\D Lt-5 O ,It. .0 I� Ol 'I r, __ ■ N .D M CO d' r 'd' Ol 6l Lo CO N O ra l CO .D N CO 6l T Ol CO co m co N Ol .0 LI-. OO O O h g O Ln N N O Q CrisD 1 co N" rn 0 N co •cr 21 q al co fl p N rn Ts o m I\ a a a o a o a a VD a Q \7 O N N m r m .D , m N N C u N m tf1 '.O .0 • CO N Alm N m ' CO CO Or m r N � r m i N .D N N V co M co C a ° o o a a o a o 0 w ▪ on co o ° O N I i .0 in v — CO a) Z c -o H v cr, LI u c d -r. c co'a) o , > c '. .-' ra —o o ( Q. o c 1-",4',; ru .0 a o a - �'' o I V)ii ° u w u' 'Q to'_ c c 0 ur D v— O ei a�� i U cri N .70 R U L CIO 4 m +J . O CO O C U L L cn EV v E e, �, o a ` C V O Ca s C a O ra ) 0 1 OD +� C +� 'T a7 U O C C r0 O > 4] 'C C 3 `n .CI vI O a) ra O 1 I"' U C]. V +L1 N U > O a' E O 'In a,0.r3 e� a x o o v E d u o 0 0 o ro . O _ c C e-j ai Q. of as O aUi ro D _u v u ,u ,u ,U c s c E.T. ai 0 4- a) aui o .G o v E 5 2 as .A z _ aJ � 6, as ` in a., U Ce Cu —I U < u I vs can' crn CL CL CL U w Ci ao i,, 'J,r“')y Iwo,I?t II'I I.,,I p;Atl ,{awns 1I)•l I)Irivilik 4 atJ i P O 'I D 121 o ,..0 N c,4 ko N M M rn M M M co ^ CO M d d O eh aai o Y U o° b° p° e° o° o° ----- - ---- ta 0 0 0 0 O O > O o 0 a O O as r r- r c 4 ca 4E) Oa a, M \O lfl U-S y-, N C `, ` z e e e ° C C U O M M O O7 'd' O w c 0 O C t.. r-. d- (v r O o a o 0 y.' — ` 4 Q. r r- r U . . ' --�..... _• • Ct O et N rel N O> CO a r M o _ O X o.. e 0 0 0 > -. r O1 O C o o 0 Li) N r r M OD a 0 N r. ,..n 0 D r kt lCl rr'l r.,• r r- ,— r O N .0 a a 0 0 iCs �f co t7 y N E N M M M +- E G co to m to >� cn rn Ln >-• G �+ > N r O f� Q -D N r r r 0 O aJ a) O - -J C O ,. U V a e o o _C tr CO U C r kD tn. O ra CO +i O� v--• W in N N d• C r r as a7 a) o L a E C •••-• C O N Ol al N O O C!1 E, Q9 CD a1 7I. N N N "C EO e e �J C ++ h E Q7 .. 0 v] h ca 7' V E X o a ._.e o E N O- • W Cr) VI Let N. E — E t0 = o 0 •• U V a M a .;p ,o -.o O Ce r- N r O = CO 4 Y C r Q1 Cr; - O_ •? C 6 I-' e e SR O t 0 O O C aJ N vl w ,u co .c c a > V' N D b-n 0 CY ,,_CJ 0 0 — v a 3 un o 41 a C a' o CC o _c n• >_ ,o RS • c E >- o 4o 0• ? Y E {'' Q co c0 0) tom, c' d' r r r r V' 1' V C F— Q Q O O ~ O O O > O O O O O O O a1 i— r-. rtS 0 - -0 tr..C -.-Q 0_ C) C O] N O a--1 c0 CO vT 12 O M 0 T O C 0 d x Q. @ Q . o o a -- { .} y 0 0 O O i O e in 1 13 _ r N M L r en en en O L LPI LO i O N 0_ -? a a a Od T N d- 0_ a a a T r r N 't ar-. l—• r Crl f', en N - - -- --- N N N m b0 Le) N Y L 1- N r r LL a o a a - O N. en eo •'5 N N N LL a a o T -_----- re) N N '.0I en 'cf' a1 2 1 o> (b O ..� a M lD F- o > n. O o o a o i9 m I- CO �+ ¢, a1 ` i (� 0 0 o a f ,' C CI 00 r lD T , O 1 LE Q O ..._ d' M N M `� V a - o =to . N r N e, • > o. I.rl o t- er o m m T = s} 0 w a) + w 1r--i- ' N O . '' U o a 6-9. .1;9. E N r r O 1' L x li, l0 In N C __ U aJ �1 � a1 U � N M � M C1 a1 C C 631,___ } x a a e CO C s.'' N T O W 't 11) C. w V o fl. C c — - 2 d L71 . ' R. �'� N O Z OCO fl.. O a tf O c C d 'O n L. N .' O Q } a ro 2 V T C e1 r,. a1 > 0 O c > C •bP1V (C Q d Q1 Y �e d E a0 u C O ,ro 3 ; O C U C n d O U 22 O O C C 4- V - 7 - -C es 0 O g p. > C a1 a1 O d . = `C x ._ c Q1 C N O. a1 a 0 > O. O C ' ice-, ++ t ■•- ,� C O C v C fl- iC O N C Tv i E u ° > t co L .� . •� C 3 O co ul al a1 L CO O }' C ❑. +' O - O C +- CO bi] > E ' a1 _ a Q7 rt To -c Q o, C co z >- H cu0 1- � I- ,c 1 >U1'1 alI(,)) 71r'.e- '>I 1,. .Si, 4:',r., ,J.Ir r, 11 ' = L'!I i H. O s.D N CO r 14 r1 N 'C1 al N M In Lr1 Ir) Lr1 tr) Lr) if) to tst E. Ol c9 r re-} 'C _ d th �7 cI e7 d t d d d O cQ M N 't >. rs - U H O O 8 O O G a° p o O To O O O O O O O O O O O O C D O S Q Q Q Q C) r r- r r r r- r C v- Yom'+ CO O C tD O N O eh N O ^ , O r N d r- N C `� o c o a N. co o a O C C ` O 7. h Lr1 Cr) O T _ O O 0 -V i- e a o o o o a `n D_ L 4" b M •z!- Oi 1 N r r- ✓ IC O N C O O ro c N M N N r N co C Q O. L Z ,E o a o 0 o a o 0 0 0 - Lr1 N. Ln N N ,.D N co r co , O rri , aD O N0 O M O t r T CO 1-11 V) N cr >• [LS G O o -_ • E o 0 -.2 o__„.., o __9. o 'a3 ,-. (!7 'C N Ql 06 en r 'SO O N E N N N r- N x-' r C C •{,,, O r O 4" y N r r N N CO C's N al N ate) U) C N O c 'lfl Ql N L11 cO N 7 `+- d o N [} O !r E a) o E N O > Q o a s o a a o p o a O M E e° 2 4 0 0 0 Cr-. a a 9 ' E ro *- ,_ 0 0 a, �D N c to O Q1 N. V co V en m m v M m m •d' U O 0 ili O ,C CC O O r ai �D r M O O a) O q CO N Ol M co tf1 r M 00 C �+ r r l' r N r r r C ++ 9 �_—. O 01 C co N o p p p p 8 O a •.• C' - l�r! 0 0 o O r o o a O-9- as a1 C W O V) q) Q1 M U) N O r = Q r-�r-----. N N N r c+-1 N in - t7' ti' a O Q@ I- lJ O .0 D CO >- O CL V N. C1 O ,.6 "O O O C 41 o O./ o a • •- ;} 3 C) S v) a X •C >> CC •C G -a u CO i ,V :c L — ° ro ro * C c o { o 0 i C Ti: E — O O C ac) C e CO 'D C U 't aG Q a 'L i= ro ` L a o a)av W p 0. o D n - c ix o 7 w a F V V > i U a = p d E C 7� v O O O 0. v 0 7 O. 5i u ,r Z ,� '� rJc ° — o ro o v o E E o o +° c Q C4 co d B. Q.. cr1 C7 D" i_15 v s cn ci 0 H ._1ul')olua:-.)it in.,-sum II litiom q i.{UAaIK, ei.sr!U t I.IInhii t.1 Oki! i o 4- N p L9 `co tri a),/,"4 oQ N ,,t' 14 0 + NQl c-.71 E 7 T! r- m r!'1 j - - ----- - - U r-• N >n 3' > _ -1 zil C11 O c O O Q n O C o c -r . cr) r N N r r". O ca Y O ,-X c -c r t o e e p C Cl)a V 0. r r�l1 �r Ln 01 O L Q I,. , 0_ U -C a -c T c 4-'- co ! C] o c � -o so. a 0 C in -0 a c C c a.c o rj o 0 0 ° l b u L o CA N C c v fl d' ° E ! C }.71 u c U a ,. ro U j_ I m -a = ,2 o A G c ti co Y -n a d IA VYi . In C ▪ Tv Y V' D ra Ili V -s c c .- +c' Cf) • E c -c o t cabs O N ! D °L' c E °- o eci U °N° t >. w C -0 76 u 0 Y y.. • .. C c r, C 0 0 - J ,„ o v Cd 0 a a } . CEI Z-0 `o . j O ▪ Q cC Y al _ a) E O EL) , m O y3 N Y — _0 I- 0... CS Y • o E a a .0 ,- , 8 •. E a) a.)" a o �., w Cr D 6. c ?�0 0 0 8 8 o 1 u o Ti O O p cn a: A j, C C d' ,� a C 73 ; � L a p i C O V U ac co C ; 0 3 0 C c - 4 00 an Y �' a Q O ro a °S o r a c a a L..1 ` u m u u ro a 3 w u c a a s `U �C �a 3 a jz, a c• a rtl C u 0 . . '0 'C) !1 4. Y = MI 7 3 .0 a rd bA .c. .c •'El a1 rG .� C) a *" v- Q_ C L 4-j. v.) c • flfr o 5 0 !- I . • 1 T s, ,J J': i, )q)! .,. 1, • •_:, ..,,,,.),1-',.1 ∎.10i `.1 ; l,'I u.', 1 pd N - . j \ $ CO CO \ CO \ / $ j \ \ \ U ® © / ._ _ / o cr) . { / 4-0 .4c ° 7 U \ / R 4 ® & G G / \ \ m \ / o r m J a % y tn ...9. / \ \ � k a ) o e m y 2 m § 2 F- $ >-. c . ' \ ( (0 c ( k -c \ ¥ . cc I E § E Co ± \ s 1 E / 0 0 > o = E G _ m o $ n - ) k a -co a O . \ 0 k E & E / § ( 3 7 • t t , / \ a E w o k / \ \ w u ) J 8 / § ° ƒ 7 k - , m -c \ § § ƒ o c ; _ » § . n e $ 0 m \ 5 E -c t / » 3 ? E t \ E E ) k \ I d c 1r \ E = 0 0 o 0 \ a 2 ° . / \ u) \ o / \ u / S m § . u * \ \ >" o / .- f k £ / ^ v- $ E a / t m / ¥ 3 \. 2 . / § \ \ ƒ 5 { 7 / m z H 4 H O 13 7 0 / } O H e '°»vz©« E «I « aw> wmuI 1 II r _ T 1 0 4_, C N a r r r�-� al .1- co -1- V._, CO O [A f\ N 1 O U M r U M T CJ ca 0 0 - o 0 0 0 c a a t!1 i O co N M N r N O C 9 0_ v 1 CJ C O a) o. . -a o L o 0 ' • D. °c v ti) i\ N p O r • C) C„ " irl if) U C O a O O (\ hi CJ 0_ C4-- d a C E a >- a ca 0. "a a °a 0 i9 O a to -- -- O N cvl o• E• ri o I 7+ a 'C • C • 7 bo• o a -} n,• CD a c V. ,. y, c c _c a1 'O N • C '.=-•co o 0 o O U v-. LP1 .> O U N. O al " tO a N C 71 O u N a C �7 vs al I c • a)0 a C 0.. 3 i U Z I ,-1, ri O Ln Q' _E E o 0 0 . 4... b A O s ai C Q I- oa a a o > >,0 V U' ` or O co C Cr) L I C 0 "'C 4J y LA = C -0 O C 'O E s • >• N. E 1 r. L 4-, a C a ■ C -C O `O V p E Q +7,5,, g U Cry 1 a O LO C Y O O C ro 3 O C C E E O O O E o 0 v u E 0 >. E E o. Q. 'if) I u al-) ' b tj rn co a Q n Q al al a E O d d' •- O 6r. a, • • O 3 m co a, 6a e» E €n Cr) - C 69 69 O O O s-, cc - O O 00 0 0 O O O u'1 u'1 To cd v.b O `� .-J 69 69 <fl 69 6 i° Z 7- --- • Z - FO- i€11 .) ' :-1 11) r'4 Fir ,iq !gip I1 S sl.:/Ii)ir'r€nit`N i I O _ N / N in m ® = ,- N N rn § U ) g w / U r & e % - -- - U ® . > / 0 C �- I * / 3 \ 9 g R a e / % \ %. 2 % . - - ƒ C o .E E ) / f \ / ....9. 2 k { / § ƒ aOJ al l 0 »/ - ) . . . ,_ 2 ( ) c u _c $ m / U) 2 / ,c u N 2 ƒ 2 7 % / § k / � C \ 0 - S $ § 2 a 0 B . CO O « 0.0 f \ w 0 § f g \ a - % / } r„,. a 2 0 2 E§ 1111 G E ' G » \01 -C ° 7 ° c 2 o s - > U Ord \ , / \ \ \ a n Z u E .\ < U J k \ C 0 .g 2 •a 0 % co Li E rd 0 ? ) 0 / \ 1 r m o e / ® 2 ƒ E i. & 2 § \ a * $ e e ® ° E ® ) 5 c $ ¥ 3 % 5 ° ® § , 7 2 5 \ \ k C C \ / / 7 c / / § / ) 2 / m { Q- a . t I \ \ Z / \ \ \ ƒ • / j I 'I get# @©r. 6 »v : masi ; n N . . ± r 0 \ \ m < N. 7 / / 2 $ $ $ 7 / \ y $ n % U C.) / m C # \ --- -- - 0 ( ± ------ U « / k _ 1 / . '.--• \ \ \ \ / / a § in \ ,- \ \ \ \ \ ± / C . ( E \ q I- a. § & G > I © % .0 0 — - U 0 U © `0.1 7 \ $ N / _w . . :41 $ a . . 0 e ' g § ¥ c \ _ 0 0 . _ $ . O 0' ƒ \ J 2 ) 2 U \ w . 2 12.0 >' n — u 1 \ \ 3 D 7 ) /u r u � 7 ,1 . i G - � \ i ,c < I -o o cti /n �A Q » I A m . m . w P ' 3 5 2 3 3 2 ° \ k o § x _ 0 o t r E ]c m m « m m U ( r m m # m z w e > e Z » _ 0 e am'will g g• 2 P©mw 9 «xsn m 9 e . , : ( w ES / k ' �` § ® \ 2 G c , r w \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ? �.� • -1‘ \ 0 cri CA 0 -- - a E c / 0 a e \ » 6. \ \ \ 0 0 / 3 G / O 0 . ® y•\ c1.1 . \ c / . / 0 - o " \ \ o a % # n ° E 7 § \ \ C C c 0 % .- 03 { 2 g 5 2 m 0 \ f G ~ \ >t II ¥ 2 cƒ s b / a b % 2 Q 2 / / 2 { k CC O / ƒ ' $ q / % .E - , I ~ 7 _OD .2 5 \ \ / > / - - - -- § c ( 0 \ _ \ Li. . \ \ c \ C) c 6 0' 0' a \ I- c . ƒ O 2 ( $ s _c & C { \ 0 . 0 C / 3 ^ I MI [ au ra c c/ 2 o .o \/ n _c ; \ 7 +0' . G \ \ E 3 ° 2 a - » a - £ \ - 7 2 e 2 k §o o t o G y o m t t f 7 » E e Z w e Z w e U u CO E I . - . e wee v, « 2 ©m,+ t :semi1. 9n City of Spokane Val ley I 201 1 APPENDIX B : SURVEY METHODOLOGY The National Citizen Survey' (The NCS) was developed to provide local jurisdictions an accurate, affordable and easy way to assess and interpret resident opinion about important community issues. While standardization of question wording and survey methods provide the rigor to assure valid results, each jurisdiction has enough flexibility to construct a customized version of The NCS that asks residents about key local services and important local issues. Results offer insight into residents' perspectives about local government performance and as such provide important benchmarks for jurisdictions working on performance measurement. The NCS is designed to help with budget, land use and strategic planning as well as to communicate with local residents. The NCS permits questions to test support for local policies and answers to its questions also speak to community trust and involvement in community-building activities as well as to resident demographic characteristics. SURVEY VALIDITY The question of survey validity has two parts: 1) how can a jurisdiction be confident that the results from those who completed the questionnaire are representative of the results that would have been obtained had the survey been administered to the entire population? and 2) how closely do the perspectives recorded on the survey reflect what residents really believe or do? To answer the first question, the best survey research practices were used for the resources spent to ensure that the results from the survey respondents reflect the opinions of residents in the entire jurisdiction. These practices include: Using a mail-out/mail-back methodology, which typically gets a higher response rate than phone for the same dollars spent. A higher response rate lessens the worry that those who did not respond are different than those who did respond. Selecting households at random within the jurisdiction to receive the survey. A random selection ensures that the households selected to receive the survey are similar to the entire population. A non-random sample may only include households from one geographic area, or from households of only one type. Over-sampling multi-family housing units to improve response from hard-to-reach, lower income, or younger apartment dwellers. Selecting the respondent within the household using an unbiased sampling procedure; in this case, the "birthday method."The cover letter included an instruction requesting that the respondent in the household be the adult (18 years old or older)who most recently had a birthday, irrespective of year of birth. Contacting potential respondents three times to encourage response from people who may = have different opinions or habits than those who would respond with only a single prompt, Soliciting response on jurisdiction letterhead signed by the highest ranking elected official or Fs staff member, thus appealing to the recipients' sense of civic responsibility. Providing a self-addressed, postage-paid return envelope. Offering the survey in Spanish when appropriate and requested by City officials, Using the most recent available information about the characteristics of jurisdiction residents to weight the data to reflect the demographics of the population. The answer to the second question about how closely the perspectives recorded on the survey reflect what residents really believe or do is more complex. Resident responses to surveys are influenced by a variety of factors. For questions about service quality, residents' expectations for The National Citizen Survey 88 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 service quality play a role as well as the "objective" quality of the service provided,the way the resident perceives the entire community (that is, the context in which the service is provided), the scale on which the resident is asked to record his or her opinion and, of course,the opinion, itself, that a resident holds about the service. Similarly a resident's report of certain behaviors is colored by what he or she believes is the socially desirable response (e.g., reporting tolerant behaviors toward "oppressed groups," likelihood of voting a tax increase for services to poor people, use of alternative modes of travel to work besides the single occupancy vehicle), his or her memory of the actual behavior(if it is not a question speculating about future actions, like a vote), his or her confidence that he or she can be honest without suffering any negative consequences (thus the need for anonymity) as well as the actual behavior itself. How closely survey results come to recording the way a person really feels or behaves often is measured by the coincidence of reported behavior with observed current behavior(e.g., driving habits), reported intentions to behave with observed future behavior(e.g., voting choices) or reported opinions about current community quality with objective characteristics of the community (e.g., feelings of safety correlated with rates of crime). There is a body of scientific literature that has investigated the relationship between reported behaviors and actual behaviors. Well-conducted surveys, by and large, do capture true respondent behaviors or intentions to act with great accuracy. Predictions of voting outcomes tend to be quite accurate using survey research, as do reported behaviors that are not about highly sensitive issues (e.g., family abuse or other illegal or morally sanctioned activities). For self-reports about highly sensitive issues, statistical adjustments can be made to correct for the respondents' tendency to report what they think the "correct" response should be. Research on the correlation of resident opinion about service quality and "objective" ratings of service quality tend to be ambiguous, some showing stronger relationships than others. NRC's own research has demonstrated that residents who report the lowest ratings of street repair live in communities with objectively worse street conditions than those who report high ratings of street repair (based on road quality, delay in street repair, number of road repair employees). Similarly, the lowest rated fire services appear to be "objectively" worse than the highest rated fire services (expenditures per capita, response time, "professional" status of firefighters, breadth of services and training provided). Whether or not some research confirms the relationship between what residents think about a community and what can be seen "objectively" in a community, NRC has argued that resident opinion is a perspective that cannot be ignored by government administrators. NRC principals have written, If you collect trash three times a day but residents think that your trash haul is lousy, you still have a problem." SURVEY SAMPLING "Sampling" refers to the method by which survey recipients were chosen. All households within the City of Spokane Valley were eligible to participate in the survey; 2,000 were selected to receive the } survey. These 2,000 households were randomly selected from a comprehensive list of all housing units within the City of Spokane Valley boundaries. The basis of the list of all housing units was a United States Postal Service listing of housing units within zip codes. Since some of the zip codes that serve the City of Spokane Valley households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the jurisdiction, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to jurisdiction boundaries, using the most current municipal boundary file (updated on a quarterly basis), and addresses located outside of the City of Spokane Valley boundaries were removed from consideration. 7 kr The National Citizen SurveyTm 89 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 To choose the 2,000 survey recipients, a systematic sampling method was applied to the list of households known to be within the City of Spokane Valley. Systematic sampling is a procedure whereby a complete list of all possible items is culled, selecting every Nth one until the appropriate amount of items is selected. Multi-family housing units were over sampled as residents of this type of housing typically respond at lower rates to surveys than do those in single-family housing units. FIGURE 92:LocATION OF SURVEY RECIPIENTS The National Citizen Survey' Spokane Valley, WA 2011 .. • . • • + . t r • •• 4• • ° • • 1• • a • e • 45 • • •ill • go I� •• • �i ♦,`` #••y'i �• • • • •• • •••• w •• •; • 4_ •: •• •• . ♦i . • ; • i •• .• • •i• • • • •• S• r ♦•. • • e• •• ••• •• ei f • •• • • •`• •• •• •• •. •i. __, • l• w i � • • ••. � • • •` i.• • • • ••• i i • •• •. V ••• • M ••• •• • • • +••• ••• • ••••••••:s 110 i 4••� • „• • ••• • .• • . •• + •♦ • •e u i•w. r •114 % • • • • U • • • • Survey Recipient c C W U i u pc An individual within each household was selected using the birthday method. The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the "person whose birthday has most recently passed" to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the cover letter accompanying the questionnaire. 4 l c 0 7 ti I The National Citizen SurveyT" 90 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 In response to the growing number of the cell-phone population (so-called "cord cutters"), which includes a large proportion of young adults, questions about cell phones and land lines are included on The NCS"a questionnaire. As of the middle of 2010 (the most recent estimates available as of the end of 2010), 26.6% of U.S. households had a cell phone but no landline.z Among younger adults (age 18-34), 53.7% of households were "cell-only." Based on survey results, Spokane Valley has a "cord cutter" population greater than the nationwide 2010 estimates. FIGURE 93:PREVALENCE OF CELL-PHONE ONLY RESPONDENTS IN SPOKANE VALLEY Overall 41% 55+ 13% 35-54 36% 18-34 84% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percent of respondents reporting having a"cell phone"only SURVEY ADMINISTRATION Selected households received three mailings, one week apart, beginning April 11, 2011. The first mailing was a prenotification postcard announcing the upcoming survey. The next mailing contained a letter from the mayor inviting the household to participate, a questionnaire and a postage-paid return envelope. The final mailing contained a reminder letter, another survey and a postage-paid return envelope. The second cover letter asked those who had not completed the survey to do so and those who have already done so to refrain from turning in another survey. Completed surveys were collected over the following 21 weeks. SURVEY RESPONSE RATE AND CONFIDENCE INTERVALS It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a "level of confidence" and accompanying "confidence interval" (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and ▪ the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents' opinions are relied on • to estimate all residents' opinions. The confidence interval for the City of Spokane Valley survey is no greater than plus or minus five percentage points around any given percent reported for the entire sample (459 completed surveys). A 95% confidence interval indicates that for every 100 random samples of this many residents, 95 of the confidence intervals created will include the "true" population response. This theory is } applied in practice to mean that the "true" perspective of the target population lies within the • confidence interval created for a single survey. For example, if 75% of residents rate a service as "excellent" or "good," then the 4% margin of error (for the 95% confidence interval) indicates that the range of likely responses for the entire jurisdiction is between 71% and 79%. This source of error is called sampling error. In addition to sampling error, other sources of error may affect any http://tiv modc,gov/nchs/datalnhls/earlyreleaseAvlreless201012.pdf The National Citizen SurveyT"' 91 • City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 survey, including the non-response of residents with opinions different from survey responders. Though standardized on The NCS, on other surveys, differences in question wording, order, translation and data entry, as examples, can lead to somewhat varying results. For subgroups of responses, the margin of error increases because the sample size for the subgroup is smaller. For subgroups of approximately 100 respondents,the margin of error is plus or minus 10 percentage points SURVEY PROCESSING (DATA ENTRY) Completed surveys received by NRC were assigned a unique identification number. Additionally, each survey was reviewed and "cleaned" as necessary. For example, a question may have asked a respondent to pick two items out of a list of five, but the respondent checked three; NRC staff would choose randomly two of the three selected items to be coded in the dataset. Once all surveys were assigned a unique identification number, they were entered into an electronic dataset. This dataset was subject to a data entry protocol of"key and verify," in which survey data were entered twice into an electronic dataset and then compared. Discrepancies were evaluated against the original survey form and corrected. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. e r e � a c. U 2 }. I C CJ r_ C: z A The National Citizen Surveyno 92 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 SURVEY DATA WEIGHTING The demographic characteristics of the survey sample were compared to those found in the 2005-- 2009 American Community Survey Census estimates for adults in the City of Spokane Valley. Sample results were weighted using the population norms to reflect the appropriate percent of those residents. Other discrepancies between the whole population and the sample were also aided by the weighting due to the intercorrelation of many socioeconomic characteristics. The variables used for weighting were housing tenure, housing unit type, race and ethnicity, and sex and age. This decision was based on: The disparity between the survey respondent characteristics and the population norms for these variables The saliency of these variables in detecting differences of opinion among subgroups The importance to the community of correct racial or ethnic representation The historical use of the variables and the desirability of consistently representing different groups over the years The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey sample reflective of the larger population of the community. This is done by: 1) reviewing the sample demographics and comparing them to the population norms from the most recent Census or other sources and 2) comparing the responses to different questions for demographic subgroups. The demographic characteristics that are least similar to the Census and yield the most different results are the best candidates for data weighting. A third criterion sometimes used is the importance that the community places on a specific variable. For example, if a jurisdiction feels that accurate race representation is key to staff and public acceptance of the study results, additional consideration will be given in the weighting process to adjusting the race variable. A special software program using mathematical algorithms is used to calculate the appropriate weights. Data weighting can adjust up to 5 demographic variables. Several different weighting "schemes" may be tested to ensure the best fit for the data. The process actually begins at the point of sampling. Knowing that residents in single family dwellings are more likely to respond to a mail survey, NRC oversamples residents of multi-family dwellings to ensure their proper representation in the sample data. Rather than giving all residents an equal chance of receiving the survey, this is systematic, stratified sampling, which gives each resident of the jurisdiction a known chance of receiving the survey (and apartment dwellers, for example, a greater chance than single family home dwellers). As a consequence, results must be weighted to recapture the proper representation of apartment dwellers. The results of the weighting scheme are presented in the table on the following page. _!7 ci rs The National Citizen SUrVeYTM 93 City of Spokane Valley 201 1 Y ! YI Spokane Valley Citizen Survey Weighting Table Characteristic Population Norma Unweighted Data Weighted Data Housing Rent home 36% 40% 37% Own home 64% 60% 63% Detached unit 56% 57% 54% Attached unit 44% -- 43% 46% Race and Ethnicity White 93% 90% 91% Not white 7% 10% 9% Not Hispanic 97% 98% 98% Hispanic 3% 2% 2% White alone, not Hispanic 91% 88% 89% Hispanic and/or other race 9°I° I 12% 11% Sex and Age Female 52% 58% 52% Male 48% 42% 48% 18-34 years of age 30% 14% 28% 35-54 years of age 37% 27% 36% 55+ years of age 34% 59% Wv 36% Females 18-34 14% 10% 13% Females 35-54 19% 16% 19% Females 55+ 19% 32% 21% Males 18-34 15% 4% 15% Males 35-54 18% - -. 12% 18% Males 55+ 14% 27% 15% C 0 vC c 4 e 6 D 9 3 Source:2005-2009 American Community Survey The National Citizen Survey.'" 94 City of Spokane Valley I 2011 SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING The survey dataset was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Frequency distributions were presented in the body of the report. Use of the "Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor" Response Scale The scale on which respondents are asked to record their opinions about service and community quality is "excellent," "good," "fair" or "poor" (EGFP). This scale has important advantages over other scale possibilities (very good to very bad; very satisfied to very dissatisfied; strongly agree to strongly disagree, as examples). EGFP is used by the plurality of jurisdictions conducting citizen surveys across the U.S. The advantage of familiarity was one that NRC did not want to dismiss when crafting The National Citizen Survey' questionnaire, because elected officials, staff and residents already are acquainted with opinion surveys measured this way. EGFP also has the advantage of offering three positive options, rather than only two, over which a resident can offer an opinion. While symmetrical scales often are the right choice in other measurement tasks, NRC has found that ratings of almost every local government service in almost every jurisdiction tend, on average, to be positive (that is, above the scale midpoint). Therefore, to permit finer distinctions among positively rated services, EGFP offers three options across which to spread those ratings. EGFP is more neutral because it requires no positive statement of service quality to judge (as agree- disagree scales require) and, finally, EGFP intends to measure absolute quality of service delivery or community quality (unlike satisfaction scales which ignore residents' perceptions of quality in favor of their report on the acceptability of the level of service offered). "Don't Know" Responses On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer"don't know." The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix A. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the report. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. Benchmark Comparisons NRC has been leading the strategic use of surveys for local governments since 1991, when the principals of the company wrote the first edition of what became the classic text on citizen surveying. In Citizen Surveys: how to do them, how to use them, what they mean, published by ICMA, not only were the principles for quality survey methods articulated, but both the idea of benchmark data for citizen opinion and the method for gathering benchmark data were pioneered. rj The argument for benchmarks was called "In Search of Standards." "What has been missing from a local government's analysis of its survey results is the context that school administrators can supply • when they tell parents how an 80 percent score on the social studies test compares to test results • from other school systems..." t - NRC's database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in • citizen surveys from approximately 500 jurisdictions whose residents evaluated local government services. Conducted with typically no fewer than 400 residents in each jurisdiction, opinions are • intended to represent over 30 million Americans. NRC has innovated a method for quantitatively integrating the results of surveys that are conducted by NRC with those that others have conducted. The integration methods have been thoroughly described not only in the Citizen Surveys book, but • also in Public Administration Review,Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. Scholars who specialize in the analysis of citizen surveys regularly have relied on this work (e.g., Kelly,J. & The National Citizen SurveyT" 95 City of Spokane Valley 1 2011 Swindell, D. (2002), Service quality variation across urban space: First steps towards a model of citizen satisfaction.Journal of Urban Affairs, 24, 271-288.; Van Ryzin, G., Muzzio, D., Immerwahr, S., Gulick, L, & Martinez, F. (2004). Drivers and consequences of citizen satisfaction: An application of the American Customer Satisfaction index Model to New York City, Public Administration Review, 64, 331- 341). The method described in those publications is refined regularly and statistically tested on a growing number of citizen surveys in NRC's proprietary databases. NRC's work on calculating national benchmarks for resident opinions about service delivery and quality of life won the Samuel C. May award for research excellence from the Western Governmental Research Association. The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each jurisdiction; most communities conduct surveys every year or in alternating years. NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant. The Role of Comparisons Benchmark comparisons are used for performance measurement.Jurisdictions use the comparative information to help interpret their own citizen survey results, to create or revise community plans, to evaluate the success of policy or budget decisions and to measure local government performance. Taking the pulse of the community has little meaning without knowing what pulse rate is too high and what is too low. When surveys of service satisfaction turn up "good" citizen evaluations,jurisdictions need to know how others rate their services to understand if"good" is good enough. Furthermore, in the absence of national or peer community comparisons, a jurisdiction is left with comparing its fire protection rating to its street maintenance rating. That comparison is unfair. Streets always lose to fire. More important and harder questions need to be asked; for example, how do residents' ratings of fire service compare to opinions about fire service in other communities? A police department that provides the fastest and most efficient service —one that closes most of its cases, solves most of its crimes and keeps the crime rate low® still has a problem to fix if the residents in the community it intends to protect believe services are not very good compared to ratings given by residents to their own objectively "worse" departments. The benchmark data can help that police department—or any department—to understand how well citizens think it is doing. Without the comparative data, it would be like bowling in a tournament without knowing what the other teams are scoring. NRC recommends that citizen opinion be used in conjunction with other sources of data about budget, personnel and politics to help managers know how to respond to comparative results. Jurisdictions in the benchmark database are distributed geographically across the country and range from small to large in population size. Most commonly, comparisons are made to the entire t database. Comparisons may also be made to subsets of jurisdictions (for example, within a given region or population category). Despite the differences in jurisdiction characteristics, all are in the business of providing local government services to residents. Though individual jurisdiction circumstances, resources and practices vary, the objective in every community is to provide te services that are so timely, tailored and effective that residents conclude the services are of the highest quality. High ratings in any jurisdiction, like SAT scores in any teen household, bring pride and a sense of accomplishment. oc Comparison of Spokane Valley to the Benchmark Database The City of Spokane Valley chose to have comparisons made to the entire database and a subset of similar jurisdictions from the database (populations from 64,000 to 149,999), A benchmark The National Citizen Survey,'" 96 City of Spokane Valley 2011 comparison (the average rating from all the comparison jurisdictions where a similar question was asked) has been provided when a similar question on the City of Spokane Valley Survey was included in NRC's database and there were at least five jurisdictions in which the question was asked. For most questions compared to the entire dataset, there were more than 100 jurisdictions included in the benchmark comparison. Where comparisons for quality ratings were available, the City of Spokane Valley results were generally noted as being "above" the benchmark, "below" the benchmark or"similar"to the benchmark. For some questions--those related to resident behavior, circumstance or to a local problem —the comparison to the benchmark is designated as "more," "similar" or "less" (for example, the percent of crime victims, residents visiting a park or residents identifying code enforcement as a problem.) In instances where ratings are considerably higher or lower than the benchmark, these ratings have been further demarcated by the attribute of"much," (for example, "much less" or "much above"). These labels come from a statistical comparison of the City of Spokane Valley's rating to the benchmark where a rating is considered "similar" if it is within the margin of error; "above," "below," "more" or"less" if the difference between your jurisdiction's rating and the benchmark is greater the margin of error; and "much above," "much below," "much more" or "much less" if the difference between your jurisdiction's rating and the benchmark is more than twice the margin of error. - ci U f3 Vi Ci tt `} 0 ci r The National Citizen SurveyTM 97 ) & 00 ) & GG 1 2 0 2 0 o)/\ o *z Qo0-�2\ ee���� CL - 30 O. ] § U & 0 • • o co \ B \ R / @ /g I \\ \\ // \/ 1 e§ 2# la> _> / 2 w2 CU m § k /k / TCO 1-C I _\ & §g .0\ & 0 oak§\\ { 2ao �o . mO�� E 7777§{ EL L 2ƒ �ƒ2 3I • • 0 0 \ R \ g , / 5 $ 2 . 'SA ) \ ,' II 1 $�&/® e 0o 2 =_m , I sijok7ane .000Fualey. 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000• Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhatl@spokanevalley.org April 2011 Dear City of Spokane Valley Resident: The City of Spokane Valley wants to know what you think about our community and municipal government. You have been randomly selected to participate in Spokane Valley's 2011 Citizen Survey. Please take a few minutes to fill out the enclosed Citizen Survey. Your feedback will help the City set benchmarks for tracking the quality of services provided to residents. Your answers will help the City Council make decisions that affect our community. You should find the questions interesting and we will definitely find your answers useful. Please participate! To get a representative sample of Spokane Valley residents, the adult (anyone 18 years or older) in your household who most recently had a birthday should complete this survey. Year of birth of the adult does not matter. Please have the appropriate member of the household spend a few minutes to answer all the questions and return the survey in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. Your responses will remain completely anonymous. Your participation in this survey is very important — especially since your household is one of only a small number of households being surveyed. If you have any questions about the Citizen Survey please call 509-720-5411. Please help us shape the future of Spokane Valley. Thank you for your time and participation. Sincerely, Thomas E. Towey Mayor --�-.. • CM sp okane ile11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 t Spokane Valley Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org April 2011 Dear City of Spokane Valley Resident: About one week ago, you should have received a copy of the enclosed survey. If you completed it and sent it back, we thank you for your time and ask you to discard this survey. Please do not respond twice. If you have not had a chance to complete the survey, we would appreciate your response. The City of Spokane Valley wants to know what you think about our community and municipal government, You have been randomly selected to participate in the City of Spokane Valley's Citizen Survey. Please take a few minutes to fill out the enclosed Citizen Survey. Your feedback will help the City set benchmarks for tracking the quality of services provided to residents. Your answers will help the City Council make decisions that affect our community. You should find the questions interesting and we will definitely find your answers useful. Please participate! To get a representative sample of Spokane Valley residents, the adult (anyone 18 years or older) in your household who most recently had a birthday should complete this survey. Year of birth of the adult does not matter. Please have the appropriate member of the household spend a few minutes to answer all the questions and return the survey in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. Your responses will remain completely anonymous. Your participation in this survey is very important – especially since your household is one of only a small number of households being surveyed. If you have any questions about the Citizen Survey please call 509-720-5411. Please help us shape the future of Spokane Valley. Thank you for your time and participation, Sincerely, (--7 ___ ....„ ,. ... , cr.,.....„ .,,, ,,,,,. —7. Thomas E. Towey Mayor The City of Spokane Valley 2011 Citizen Survey Please complete this questionnaire if you are the adult(age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had a birthday. The adult's year of birth does not matter. Please select the response (by circling the number or checking the box)that most closely represents your opinion for each question. Your responses are anonymous and will be reported in group form only. 1. Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Spokane Valley: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Spokane Valley as a place to live 1 2 3 4 5 Your neighborhood as a place to live 1 2 3 4 5 Spokane Valley as a place to raise children 1 2 3 4 5 Spokane Valley as a place to work 1 2 3 4 5 Spokane Valley as a place to retire 1 2 3 4 5 The overall quality of life in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Spokane Valley as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Sense of community 1 2 3 4 5 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 1 2 3 4 5 Overall appearance of Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Cleanliness of Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of new development in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of housing options 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of business and service establishments in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Shopping opportunities 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to attend cultural activities 1 2 3 4 5 Recreational opportunities 1 2 3 4 5 Employment opportunities 1 2 3 4 5 Educational opportunities 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in religious or spiritual events and activities 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to volunteer 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in community matters 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of car travel in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of bus travel in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of bicycle travel in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of walking in Spokane Valley . 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of paths and walking trails 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic flow on major streets 1 2 3 4 5 Amount of public parking 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality housing 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality child care 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality health care 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality food 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of preventive health services 1 2 3 4 5 Air quality 1 2 3 4 5 Quality of overall natural environment in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 Overall image or reputation of Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 3. Please rate the speed of growth in the following categories in Spokane Valley over the past 2 years: Much Somewhat Right Somewhat Much Don't too slow _too slow amount too fast too fast know Population growth 1 2 3 4 5 6 Retail growth (stores, restaurants, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Jobs growth 1 2 3 4 5 6 Page 1 of 5 The National Citizen Survey's 4. To what degree,if at all,are run down buildings,weed lots or junk vehicles a problem in Spokane Valley? O Not a problem 0 Minor problem 0 Moderate problem 0 Major problem 0 Don't know 5. Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel from the following in Spokane Valley: Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don't f safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault, robbery) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Property crimes (e.g., burglary,theft) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Environmental hazards, including toxic waste 1 2 3 4 5 6 6. Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don't safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know In your neighborhood during the day 1 2 3 4 5 6 In your neighborhood after dark 1 2 3 4 5 6 In Spokane Valley's commercial areas during the day 1 2 3 4 5 6 In Spokane Valley's commercial areas after dark 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. Have you had any in.person or phone contact with an employee of the City of Spokane Valley Police Department within the last 12 months? O No 4 Go to Question 9 0 Yes 4 Go to Question 8 0 Don't know 4 Go to Question 9 8. What was your overall impression of your most recent contact with the City of Spokane Valley Police Department? O Excellent 0 Good 0 Fair 0 Poor 0 Don't know 9. During the past 12 months,were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime? O No 4 Go to Question 11 0 Yes 4 Go to Question 10 0 Don't know 4 Go to Question 11 10. If yes,was this crime(these crimes) reported to the police? 0 No 0 Yes 0 Don't know 11. In the last 12 months,about how many times, if ever,have you or other household members participated in the following activities in Spokane Valley? Once or 3 to 12 13 to 26 More than Never twice times times 26 times Used Spokane Valley public libraries or their services 1 2 3 4 5 Used Spokane Valley recreation centers 1 2 3 4 5 Participated in a recreation program or activity 1 2 3 4 5 Visited a neighborhood park or City park 1 2 3 4 5 Ridden a local bus within Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 , Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other . local public meeting 1 2 3 4 5 Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other City-sponsored public meeting on cable television, the Internet or other media 1 2 3 4 5 P. Read Spokane Valley Newsletter 1 2 3 4 5 Visited the City of Spokane Valley Web site ce (at www.spokanevalley.org) 1 2 3 4 5 Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your borne 1 2 3 4 5 Volunteered your time to some group or activity in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 z Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 8 Participated in a club or civic group in Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 n Provided help to a friend or neighbor 1 2 3 4 5 ° O 12. About how often, if at all,do you talk to or visit with your immediate neighbors(people who live in the 10 or 20 • households that are closest to you)? 0 just about every day O Several times a week O Several times a month 0 Less than several times a month 0 z t= Page 2 of 5 1 The City of Spokane Valley 2011 Citizen Survey 13. Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Spokane Valley: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Police services 1 2 3 4 5 Ambulance or emergency medical services 1 2 3 4 5 Crime prevention 1 2 3 4 5 Fire prevention and education 1 2 3 4 5 Municipal courts 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 Street repair 1 2 3 4 5 Street cleaning 1 2 3 4 5 Street lighting 1 2 3 4 5 Snow removal 1 2 3 4 5 Sidewalk maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic signal tinting 1 2 3 4 5 Bus or transit services 1 2 3 4 5 Garbage collection 1 2 3 4 5 Recycling 1 2 3 4 5 Yard waste pick-up 1 2 3 4 5 Storm drainage 1 2 3 4 5 Drinking water 1 2 3 4 5 Sewer services 1 2 3 4 5 Power(electric and/or gas) utility 1 2 3 4 5 City parks 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation programs or classes 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation centers or facilities 1 2 3 4 5 Land use, planning and zoning 1 2 3 4 5 Code compliance (weeds, abandoned buildings,etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 Animal control 1 2 3 4 5 Economic development 1 2 3 4 5 Health services 1 2 3 4 5 Services to seniors 1 2 3 4 5 Services to youth 1 2 3 4 5 Services to low-income people 1 2 3 4 5 Public library services 1 2 3 4 5 Public information services 1 2 3 4 5 Public schools 1 2 3 4 5 Cable television 1 2 3 4 5 Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 1 2 3 4 5 Preservation of natural areas such as open space,farmlands and greenbelts 1 2 3 4 5 14, Overall,how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know The City of Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 The Federal Government 1 2 3 4 5 The State Government 1 2 3 4 5 Spokane County Government 1 2 3 4 5 15. Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don't likely likely unlikely unlikely know Recommend living in Spokane Valley to someone who asks 1 2 3 4 5 Remain in Spokane Valley for the next five years 1 2 3 4 5 16. What impact, if any,do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: 0 Very positive 0 Somewhat positive Q Neutral 0 Somewhat negative 0 Very negative Page 3 of 5 i The National Citizen Survey' • 17. Have you had any in-person or phone contact with an employee of the City of Spokane Valley within the last 12 months(including police, receptionists, planners or any others)? 0 No 4 Go to Question 19 0 Yes 4 Go to Question 18 18,. What was your impression of the employee(s)of the City of Spokane Valley in your most recent contact? (Rate each characteristic below.) Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know I Knowledge 1 2 3 4 5 Responsiveness 1 2 3 4 5 Courtesy 1 2 3 4 5 Overall impression 1 2 3 4 5 19. Please rate the following categories of Spokane Valley government performance: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know The value of services for the taxes paid to Spokane Valley 1 2 3 4 5 The overall direction that Spokane Valley is taking 1 2 3 4 5 The job Spokane Valley government does at welcoming citizen involvement 1 2 3 4 5 20. Please check the response that comes closest to your opinion for each of the following questions: a. How important, if at all,are each of the following services to your quality of life in Spokane Valley? Very Somewhat Not at all Don't Essential important important important know Animal control 1 2 3 4 5 Bicycle/pedestrian paths &trails 1 2 3 4 5 Business attraction, retention and expansion 1 2 3 4 5 Municipal court and jail 1 2 3 4 5 Parks and recreation programs and facilities 1 2 3 4 5 Planning for new development 1 2 3 4 5 Police services 1 2 3 4 5 Snow removal 1 2 3 4 5 Garbage collection 1 2 3 4 5 Street repair and cleaning 1 2 3 4 5 b. Please indicate the extent to which you would support or oppose the investment of City time/money to attract, retain and expand businesses in Spokane Valley: O Strongly support O Somewhat support U O Somewhat oppose 0 Strongly oppose 0 O Don't know �, s e. Spokane Valley's Vision Statement is: "A community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play and businesses will flourish and prosper." How accurate or inaccurate do you think that statement is at describing Spokane Valley today? 0 Very accurate 0 O Somewhat accurate z O Somewhat inaccurate 5 ■ Very inaccurate Y 0 Don't know o N a d. What one thing do you believe the City can do to make Spokane Valley a better community? v z N gi V To c 0 Z 4 Page 4 of 5 The City of Spokane Valley 2011 Citizen Survey Our last questions are about you and your household.Again, all of your responses to this survey are completely anonymous and will be reported in group form only. Dl.Are you currently employed for pay? D8.Are you or any other members of your household aged O No -B Go to Question D3 65 or older? O Yes,full time 4 Go to Question D2 0 No 0 Yes O Yes, part time 4 Go to Question D2 09, How much do you anticipate your household's total D2. During a typical week, how many days do you income before taxes will be for the current year? commute to work(for the longest distance of (Please include in your total income money from all your commute) in each of the ways listed below? sources for all persons living in your household.) (Enter the total number of days,using whole 0 Less than $24,999 numbers.) 0 $25,000 to $49,999 Motorized vehicle (e.g., car,truck,van, 0 $50,000 to $99,999 motorcycle, etc.) by myself days 0 $100,000 to $149,999 Motorized vehicle(e.g., car, truck, van, 0 $150,000 or more motorcycle, etc.)with other children or adults days Please respond to both questions D10 and D11: Bus or other public transportation days D10. Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Walk days 0 No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino Bicycle days 0 Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic Work at home days or Latino Other days D11. What is your race?(Mark one or more races to D3. How many years have you lived in Spokane Valley? indicate what race you consider yourself to be.) O Less than 2 years 0 11-20 years 0 American Indian or Alaskan Native 0 2-5 years 0 More than 20 years 0 Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 0 6-10 years O Black or African American 0 White D4.Which best describes the building you live in? 0 Other O One family house detached from any other houses O House attached to one or more houses (e.g.,a D12. In which category is your age? duplex or townhome) 0 18-24 years 0 55-64 years 0 25-34 years 0 65-74 years 0 Building with two or more apartments or 0 35-44 years 0 75 years or older condominiums O 45-54 years O Mobile home O Other D13. What is your sex? D5. Is this house,apartment or mobile home... O Female 0 Male O Rented for cash or occupied without cash payment? 1314. Are you registered to vote in your jurisdiction? O Owned by you or someone in this house with a 0 No 0 Ineligible to vote moi#gage or free and clear? 0 Yes 0 Don't know D6.About how much is your monthly housing cost for D15. Many people don't have time to vote in elections. the place you live(including rent, mortgage payment, Did you vote in the last general election? property tax, property insurance and homeowners' 0 No 0 Ineligible to vote association (HOA)fees)? 0 Yes 0 Don't know O Less than $300 per month 016. Do you have a cell phone? O $300 to $599 per month O No O Yes O $600 to $999 per month O $1,000 to $1,499 per month D17. Do you have a land line at home? O $1,500 to $2,499 per month 0 No 0 Yes O $2,500 or more per month D18, If you have both a cell phone and a land line,which D7. Do any children 17 or under live in your household? do you consider your primary telephone number? O No 0 Yes 0 Cell 0 Land line 0 Both Thank you for completing this survey. Please return the completed survey in the postage-paid envelope to: National Research Center, Inc., PO Box 549, Belle Mead, NJ 08502 Page 5 of 5 ,- | flp<§§§ D f & } § . � g /) k$ � § /u# \f / �(7 A2 < g k*\ \\ � )w\ -a-ƒ - (.0 //3 %/ 2/\ 22 @ ± 0 H)Q \ 2 � � 0 = co 0 ƒ»\ / z 02 § § _ —.% E ) = U « 5 sCi§� � � co - \\ . Cn } _I 3 J \ j/ a ) > 0 > C m 13 ` m = m m ® % L §2 co K = 2 ± 2 o $F_/ j § - ¥ { !_ / © / \ _ D D % §2E ƒ / \ Cl) % / -0E § O Rt D E x CF. W2 CO w c 2y E ° ® § UJ\\ \\ ea » me 222 0 0. R)\ - › /�k S§ « 0� ) $2 ett m� o ee . E \k zm n- {o + (