Lane County Community Survey Lane County Government

Document Sample
Lane County Community Survey Lane County Government Powered By Docstoc
					2009 Lane County Community Survey
      Demographic Breakdown
The Survey
   Random sample of 3000 Lane County
    addresses received survey by mail
   974 completed surveys – 34% response rate
   Some services always rate higher than others
   2009 is Lane County’s Baseline, plan to
    survey again in 2011
Focus Areas
        Community Quality
                                                                                         Community Inclusiveness
             Quality of life
        Quality of neighborhood                                                                 Sense of community
        County as a place to live            Environmental Sustainability                 Racial and cultural acceptance
                                                                                       Senior, youth and low-income services
                                                         Cleanliness
                                                          Air quality
        Community Design                         Preservation of natural areas
                                                Garbage and recycling services
             Transportation
  Ease of travel, transit services, street                                                    Civic Engagement
              maintenance
                                                                                                  Civic Activity
               Housing                                                                             Volunteerism
   Housing options, cost, affordability         Recreation and Wellness                         Civic attentiveness
                                                                                                 Voting behavior
       Land Use and Zoning                          Parks and Recreation
    New development, growth, code            Recreation opportunities, use of parks
                                                                                              Social Engagement
            enforcement                       and facilities, programs and classes
                                                                                        Neighborliness, social and religious
                                                                                                     events
      Economic Sustainability                    Culture, Arts and Education
    Employment, shopping and retail,         Cultural and educational opportunities,
                                                                                           Information and Awareness
      County as a place to work                         libraries, schools
                                                                                          Public information, publications,
                                                                                                      Website
                                                    Health and Wellness
                                              Availability of food, health services,
            Public Safety                                 social services                         Public Trust
  Safety in neighborhood and downtown                                                       Cooperation in community
            Crime victimization                                                                 Value of services
        Police, fire, EMS services                                                           Direction of community
        Emergency preparedness                                                                Citizen involvement
                                                                                                   Employees
Subgroup Comparisons

   Subgroup comparison report for Annual
    Household Income, Age, Race, Gender
   Statistically significant differences occur most
    between age groups, and next most frequently
    between white and non-white respondents
   Demographic characteristics of the survey were
    compared to Lane County and the survey results
    were then weighted
Gender
   Men consistently rated questions lower than
    women with the exception of the following;
       Educational opportunities
       Availability of affordable, quality housing & child care
       Growth related questions
       Environment related questions
       Feel safe in downtown after dark
       Participation in and opinion of local government
   Few of these differences were statistically
    significant except the last one regarding
    government
Overall Community Quality
   The overall quality of life in Lane County was rated as
    “excellent” or “good” by 67% of respondents
   Younger and not white respondents rated the overall quality of
    life excellent or good only 56% and 52% of the time
    respectively
   Majority of all respondents likely to remain in the County for
    next 5 years. Lowest household incomes, between 18-34 yrs
    old, or not white were less likely to stay
   Likely to retire in Lane County? Large discrepancy between
    white (61%) and not white respondents (39%)
   Non white respondents were also the least likely to
    recommend living in Lane County to someone who asks
Community Transportation
   Above benchmarks in all questions in this focus
    area.
   Availability of walking paths/trails one of the
    most favorable ratings in our survey.
   Ratings vary depending on where the
    respondents live, but overall still strong.
   Far above benchmarks for recent use of bus for
    transportation with younger, non white, and
    those with less means reporting highest levels of
    bus use.
Housing Characteristics & Cost

   Availability of affordable quality housing is one of
    lowest ratings in our survey.

                                         Housing costs 30%
                                         or MORE of income
                                               46%




              Housing costs LESS
             than 30% of income
                    54%
Land Use & Zoning
   As a whole, respondents rated the overall appearance
    of Lane County near national benchmarks – however,
    non white respondents ratings were significantly lower.
   Respondents rated the quality of new development
    low. The oldest respondents were most satisfied and
    non white respondents the least satisfied.
   The quality land use, planning and zoning are far
    below the national benchmarks with those in the 35-54
    age range least satisfied.
   Of all respondents, the oldest are least satisfied with
    code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.)
Economic Sustainability

   Overall, the most positively rated features
    were shopping opportunities and overall
    quality of business/service
    establishments – however, not white
    respondents were much less satisfied with
    either of these characteristics
   Lowest rating was employment
    opportunities and job growth with all
    subgroups in agreement
Personal Economic Prospects

                                     Very negative
                                         27%
        Somewhat negative
             43%
                                             Very positive
                                                 2%


                                           Somewhat positive
                                                5%

  What impact, if any, do you
  think the economy will have
  on your family income in the   Neutral
         next 6 months?           24%
    Sense of Safety
   About 48% of respondents said they feel very or
    somewhat safe from violent crime with the youngest
    and non white respondents feeling least secure.
   Only 25% felt the same regarding property crime with
    those lowest income group feeling least secure.
   Of all ages, 18-34 yr olds felt the most safe in their
    neighborhoods in the day – yet the least safe at night
   The greatest insecurity was experienced by the youngest,
    non whites and the lowest income at night and by non
    whites and those with the highest income during the day.
Crime Victimization

   25% of respondents reported that someone in
    the household had been a crime victim in the
    last year - 70% of them had reported that
    crime.
   35% of not white, 33% of 18-34 yr olds, and 31%
    of the lowest income group had been victimized
    with far fewer not white or low income
    respondents reporting it.
Public Safety Services
   Emergency preparedness and crime prevention
    received the lowest ratings.
   All rankings were far below benchmarks.
   The quality of Sheriff services and traffic
    enforcement responses varied depending on
    where respondents live - rural residents rate
    these services higher than urban residents.
   The oldest residents were most satisfied while
    those with the most means were the least
    satisfied.
Environmental Sustainability
   The aesthetic qualities of our community (air,
    water, storm drainage, open spaces, etc.) ranked
    similar or above benchmarks.
   74% of respondents rated the overall natural
    environment excellent or good.
   All subgroups of respondents reported recycling.
   Those subgroups that were least satisfied with
    recycling services were the youngest (18-34) and
    those with household incomes below $24,999.
Recycling

   Resident recycling was greater than in comparison communities
    with 70% or respondents recycling more than 26 times in the last
    year.
                                           Never
                                            3%
                                                       Once or twice
                                                           3%

          More than 26 times
                 70%
                                                        3 to 12 times
                                                             9%




                                              13 to 26 times
                                                   14%
Parks & Recreation,
Culture, Arts & Education
   The quality of our community’s recreational
    opportunities and the residents’ participation in these
    opportunities are some of the highest scores in our
    survey.
   While opportunities to participate in cultural activities
    were rated well and above benchmarks, not whites
    responses were much lower than other subgroups for
    cultural, social, and recreational opportunities. Those
    over 55 yrs old indicated the greatest opportunities for
    these activities.
Health & Wellness
   One of the least positive ratings in our survey was the availability
    of quality affordable health care.
   Ratings of health and wellness services were also low and below
    benchmark.                                     Excellent Good



                    Health services    6%         36%




             Mental health services    5%   22%




          Drug and alcohol services    5%     30%




            Adult protective services 4%    27%



                                      0%          25%            50%             75%   100%
                                                        Percent of respondents
Community Inclusiveness
                                                                                     Excellent   Good


                              Sense of community 8%                46%                                Moderate results in
                                                                                                       most areas.
Openness and acceptance of the community towards
         people of diverse backgrounds
                                                       11%          43%                               Availability of
                                                                                                       affordable quality
           Availability of affordable quality child care 5% 20%                                        child care one of
                                                                                                       least positive ratings
           Lane County as a place to raise children        16%            51%                          in survey.

                   Lane County as a place to retire        18%          41%



                                                      0%          25%         50%        75%         100%
                                                                    Percent of respondents
Civic Engagement
   Lane County residents perceive they have many
    opportunities to volunteer and participate in
    community matters,
       though non whites and 18-34 yr olds indicated fewer
        opportunities.
   A modest number had attended (25%) or watched (45%)
    a local elected officials meeting
       with 18-34 yr olds least likely to have attended or watched and
        those who make less than $24,999 least likely to have watched.
   59% reported volunteering
       with those in the highest income subgroup and between 34-54
        yrs old volunteering the most
Civic Engagement

   Consistent across all subgroups, an
    overwhelming majority (97%) report
    providing help to friends an neighbors.
   81% of them having contact with
    neighbors at least one per month.
   With those 18-34 yrs old and not white a
    bit less likely to have as frequent neighbor
    contact.
Public Information

   46% of respondents reported visiting the
    County’s website in the last year.
       Those with the smallest household income or are
        over 55 were least likely to visit the website.
       Non white visitors to the website were most critical
        of the current site’s appearance, navigation,
        search function, and content.
   41% rated our public information services
    good or excellent, below the benchmark.
Public Trust
                                                                             Excellent   Good


  The value of s ervices for
   the taxes paid to Lane 3%       22%                                Less than half of
           County
                                                                       respondents felt the
                                                                       value of services for
  The overall direction that
                             3%    23%
                                                                       taxes paid were
   Lane County is taking
                                                                       excellent or good.
     The job Lane County
                                                                      Though residents gave
     governm ent does at                                               higher ratings to their
                              3%     32%
      welcom ing citizen                                               Lane County compared
         involvem ent
                                                                       to the state and federal
     The job Lane County
                                                                       governments.
     governm ent does at 3%        21%
      lis tening to citizens



     Overall im age or
                              8%                 51%
 reputation of Lane County



                             0%            25%              50%                 75%             100%
                                                   Percent of res pondents
Lane County Employees

   51% of respondents reported having an in-
    person contact with an employee in the
    last year.
       More likely to have contact if higher household
        income or under 55.
   County employees were rated positively;
    67% of respondents rated their overall
    impression excellent or good.
       Consistent across all subgroups.
Which three services does Lane County government do
the best job providing?”
                   Question #18F: Which three services does Lane County government do the best job of providing?

                                                                                              Percent of Respondents

             Parks and recreation, events, fairgrounds                                                  32%

  Health and Human Services (services to youth, judicial services)                                      21%

     Public Safety/Law Enforcement, crime, traffic enforcement                                          19%

                Fire and ambulance/EMS services                                                         18%

    Waste Management, trash removal, recycling, bulk pick up                                            14%

               None/Did not apply to question asked                                                     12%

                   Public transportation services                                                       12%

                Infrastructure, public works, utilities                                                 11%

         Education/Cultural and Community opportunities                                                 10%

       Code enforcement and land use issues, appearance                                                  9%

   Governance issues (public meeting, elections, taxation, public
                              information)                                                               7%

         Environmental- clean air, water, land preservation                                              5%

                     Don’t Know/No Comment                                                              13%

                                Other                                                                   12%

                                  Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one category.
Survey Steering Committee

   Sascha Cosio, Diversity Action Cmt Chair
   Bill Fleenor, West Lane Commissioner
   Amber Fossen, Public Information Officer
   Jennifer Inman, Sr. Management Analyst
   Liane Richardson, County Counsel
   Lisa Smith, Youth Services Director
   Jeff Spartz, County Administrator

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:4
posted:10/13/2012
language:English
pages:26