HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-12-20; City Council; Minutes (3)City of Carlsbad 2006 Public Opinion Survey Report
Conducted for:
City of Carlsbad
Conducted by:
The Social and Behavioral Research Institute
December 17, 2006
Study Team:
Allen J. Risley, M.A.; Director of Research
Lori Brown Large, M.A.; Survey Study Director
Sam Ballard; Research Assistant
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
Table of Contents
Table of Contents i
Section 1: Methodology 1
Section 2: Rating City Services 3
Overall City Services 3
Police Services 4
Fire Protection Services 5
Paramedic Services 6
Library Services 6
Recreation Programs 7
Park Conditions 8
City Services Ratings in Context 11
Section 3: Rating Contracted City Services 13
Trash Collection 13
Hazardous Waste Collection 14
Recycling Services 15
Summary 16
Section 4: Other City Services or Resources 17
Road Conditions 17
Maintenance of Street Landscaping and Medians 18
Curb and Sidewalk Conditions 19
Traffic Circulation Efficiency 20
Safety 22
Reasons for Using City Parks 23
Section 5: City Information 26
Ratings of Information Dispersal 26
Contact with City Staff 27
City Web Site 27
Accuracy of Information 29
Summary 30
Section 6: Opinions Regarding Development 31
Land Use Balance Ratings 31
Quality of Development 33
Section 7: Environmental Issues 35
Storm Water Pollution 35
Section 8: Commuting 36
Employment Status 36
Mode of Commute 36
Section 9: Spending Patterns 38
Spending in Carlsbad 38
Demographic Differences 38
Section 10: Entertainment Preferences 41
Entertainment Choices 41
Section 11: Ratings of City Government 43
Ratings of City Government 43
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey ii
Confidence in City Government 44
Summary 45
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
Section 1: Methodology
A public opinion survey of residents in
the City of Carlsbad was conducted in
the summer of 2006. The survey
addressed the attitudes of city residents
concerning city-provided services,
facilities, and issues, and included a
number of demographic questions.
The survey was conducted for the City
of Carlsbad by the Social and Behavioral
Research Institute at California State
University San Marcos. This is the
seventh year the Social and Behavioral
Research Institute has conducted this
survey for the City of Carlsbad. This
report summarizes the results of this
telephone survey; it contains a
description of the data and an
elaboration of the results of the survey.
The information in this report is based
on 1,031 telephone interviews conducted
with adult residents in the City of
Carlsbad in 2006, along with data
collected in the years 2000 through
2005. Respondent household telephone
numbers were selected for contact using
random-digit-dial methodology. Using
this methodology, all listed and unlisted
residential telephone numbers within a
geographic boundary have an equal
chance for inclusion in the sample.
The interviews were conducted with
respondent households from four regions
in the City of Carlsbad: Northwest,
Northeast, Southeast and Southwest.
The North/South region division was
based on whether residents lived north or
south of Palomar Airport Road, while
the East/West division was based on El
Camino Real. Between 219 and 297
interviews were conducted per region
(Table 1-1).
Table 1-1
Quadrant Where Respondent Lives
Northwest
Northeast
Southeast
Southwest
Total
Frequency
297
222
219
293
1031
Percent
28.8
21.5
21.2
28.4
100.0
The questionnaire used for this study is
similar to those used for the City of
Carlsbad hi the previous six years. The
questionnaire was designed by SBRI in
consultation with City of Carlsbad staff.
The interview questions can be found in
Appendix A.
All interviews were conducted by paid
SBRI staff members using the SBRI's
state-of-the-art Computer Assisted
Telephone Interviewing (CATI) system,
under the supervision of SBRI's
professional staff. Interviewers
participate in a general, three-day
training program when hired.
Additionally, a three to four hour
training session was conducted at the
outset of this project. During the
training session, the interviewers read
through the questionnaire, conducted
practice interviews, and participated in a
debriefing to resolve questions that arose
during the training session. SBRI's
supervisory staff employs a silent
monitoring system to listen to interviews
real-time for quality control purposes.
Interviewing for this study was
conducted between August 15th and
September 28th, 2006, on-site at the
SBRI Survey Lab at California State
University San Marcos. Scheduling of
the interviewing sessions was arranged
to insure that a representative sample of
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
Carlsbad households were contacted.
Up to 9 call attempts were made to
telephone numbers before retiring the
numbers. The large number of call
attempts was made in order to allow
Carlsbad residents with busy schedules
and lifestyles to have enough
opportunities to participate in the survey.
SBRI interviewers made 60,718
telephone calls during the course of the
study, with an average completed
interview length of 19.1 minutes. The
response rate for the survey was 47.6
percent. This response rate was
calculated using methodology supported
by the Council of American Survey
Research Organizations (CASRO) and
the American Association of Public
Opinion Researchers (AAPOR). The
formula used was CASRO response rate
formula RR4.
The results presented in this report are
based on a sample of Carlsbad residents,
and as such should be viewed as an
estimate of the opinions of Carlsbad
residents. The margin of error for this
sample survey is +/-3 percent. SBRI
conducted statistical analyses for this
report using standard appropriate
statistical procedures and measures,
reporting statistically significant results
at the 95%-confidence level.
Documentation of the statistical tests
employed by SBRI is archived and
available for client review.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
Section 2: Rating City
Services
A major subject area of the survey is the
rating of city services by the survey
respondents. Respondents are asked a
series of questions about different types
of services provided by the City of
Carlsbad, and are asked to rate these
services on a scale of "Excellent,"
"Good," "Fair," or "Poor."
Overall City Services
Respondents are asked to give a general
rating of all services provided by the
City of Carlsbad. Table 2-x presents the
results for this question for the 2006
survey. Roughly four out of ten
respondents (40.2%) rated Overall City
Services as being Excellent, with an
additional half of all respondents
(51.8%) rating services as Good. These
positive ratings make up over 90% of
those who answered the question, and
represent a high level of satisfaction with
City Services in general.
Table 2-1 - Overall City Services Rating1
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
404
521
66
14
1005
40.2
51.8
6.6
1.4
100.0
- "In general how would you rate the overall
services provided by the City?"
- 26 respondents either refused (1) or answered
"Don't Know" to the question (26).
Figure 2-1 puts the 2006 results into the
context of results from previous years of
the survey. Across the seven years of
the survey, the evaluation of Overall
City Services has been very positive -
over 90% of respondents have given
ratings of Excellent or Good in each
year. In 2006, the percentage of
respondents rating city services as
Excellent was the highest of any year
surveyed, and the distribution of
responses was virtually unchanged from
2005.
i
2005 \ i
2004 1 •
2003 1 •P ^^•i
•
2001 •P _
1
0%
Figure 2-1
Overall City Evaluation 2000-2006i . i i , • .- . i
5KX% 1 407% jl^H
1- . . _ L .. .. „ ..
52.5'%, 1 39.7% LtflHi .: ....j.,. . ; . •- ^^^^
60.0% 1 33.6% \A\ \ . . . " . • , .
59.8% 1 35.7% U1 1 - ,
61.1% 1 33.7% \A. \ 1 1
61.4% 1 34.2% I>^H
62.5% 1 29.0% iJ^^M
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
• Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
The rating of Overall City Services was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. No significant
differences in the 2006 ratings were
found when comparisons were made
based on: region of residence, age,
length of residence, household income,
home ownership, household size and
presence of children in the household.
Police Services
Respondents were asked to rate the
services provided by the Carlsbad
Police Department using the same scale
of Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor. The
results to this question for 2006 can be
found in Table 2-2.
The largest group of respondents
(45.9%) rated Police Services as being
Excellent, with a similar size group
(46.9%) rating these services as Good,
meaning that Police Services were rated
positively by roughly 90% of all
respondents.
Table 2-2 - Police Services Rating1
Frequency Valid Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
414
423
47
18
902
45.9
46.9
5.2
2.0
100.0
a "How would you rate police services?"
"• 129 respondents answered "Don't Know" to the question.
Across the seven years of the survey, the
evaluation of Police Services has been
very positive - over 90% of respondents
have given ratings of Excellent or Good
in each year. The 2006 ratings for
Police Services follow this overall trend,
and are statistically no different from
previous years.
The rating of Police Services was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Older Carlsbad
Police
Police
Police
Police
Police
Police
Police
Figure 2-2
Police Services Ratings
2006 • ^^^^^•rrtWIM^^^^^M
WSSHHf 44 jo/. f
mim ^HT 40 ?%
KHIISM I^Hl 4J "?"/. 1
wjioa IHi ^(i t "/,
^i'iiH |H 4^.7% f
MSt^^f JK.7"/«r
0% 20% 40%
• Poor Fair • Good •
- 2000-2006
45.9%
45.7%
42.7%
48.1%
41.3%
49.8%
1 41.6%
60% 80%
Excellent
^St
•BBS?
^Sf
mmt
^Sf
100%
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
residents (ages 61 and older) were
more likely to rate Police Services as
Excellent (55.8%) than were middle-
aged residents of Carlsbad (44.5%) or
younger residents (36.4%).
Homeowners (47.9%) were also more
likely to give Police Services an
Excellent rating than were renters
(37.6%). No other significant differences
in the 2006 ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on:
region of residence, household income,
household size and presence of children
in the household.
Fire Protection Services
Respondents were asked to rate the
services provided by the Carlsbad Fire
Department using the same scale of
Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor. The
results to this question for 2006 can be
found in Table 2-3.
Over half of respondents (56.1%) rated
Fire Protection Services as being
Excellent, with the next largest group
(41.7%) rating these services as Good,
meaning that Fire Protection Services
received nearly universal positive
ratings.
Table 2-3 - Fire Protection Services Rating
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
438 56
326 41
1
7
15 1.9
2
781 100
3
0
a How would you rate fire protection?
"• 250 respondents either refused (1) or answered
"Don't Know" to the question (249).
Across the seven years of the survey, the
evaluation of Fire Protection Services
has been very positive - over 90% of
respondents have given ratings of
Excellent or Good in each year. The
Figure 2-3
Fire Protection Services Ratings - 2000-2006
Fire Protection 2006
Fire Protection 2005
Fire Protection 2004
Fire Protection 2003
Fire Protection 2002
Fire Protection 2001
Fire Protection 2000
0%20%40%60%80%100%
i Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
2006 ratings for Fire Protection Services
follow this overall trend, and are
statistically no different from previous
years.
The rating of Fire Protection Services
was analyzed to look for differences
between demographic groups. As in
previous years, Longer-term Carlsbad
residents (lived in Carlsbad ten years or
more) were more likely to rate Fire
protection Services as Excellent
(60.6%) than were more recent residents
of Carlsbad (50.4%). No other
significant differences in the 2006
ratings were found when comparisons
were made based on: region of
residence, age, household income, home
ownership, household size and presence
of children in the household.
Paramedic Services
Respondents were asked to rate the
Paramedic Services provided by the
City of Carlsbad using the same scale of
Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor. The
results to this question for 2006 can be
found in Table 2-4.
Over half of respondents who answered
the question (58.0%) rated Paramedic
Services as being Excellent, while about
a third (39.0%) rating these services as
Table 2-4 - Paramedic Services Rating
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
348
234
12
6
600
58.0
39.0
2.0
1.0
100.0
a- How would you rate paramedic services?
"• 431 respondents either refused (3) or answered
"Don't Know" to the question (428).
Good, meaning that Paramedic Services
were rated positively by over 90% of all
respondents who gave a rating.
Interestingly, roughly 40% of all
respondents who were asked to rate
Paramedic Services answered "Don't
Know" to the question, indicating that
many citizens do not know enough about
the service to feel comfortable rating it.
The rating of Paramedic Services was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Older Carlsbad
residents (ages 61 and older) were
more likely to rate Paramedic Services
as Excellent (67.6%) than were middle-
aged residents of Carlsbad (55.7%) or
younger residents (46.9%).
Homeowners (59.6%) were also more
likely to give Paramedic Services an
Excellent rating than were renters
(50.4%). No other significant differences
in the 2006 ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on:
region of residence, household income,
household size and presence of children
in the household.
Library Services
Respondents were asked to rate the
services provided by the Carlsbad
Libraries using the same scale of
Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor. The
results to this question for 2006 can be
found in Table 2-5.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents
(66.0%) rated Library Services as being
Excellent and nearly one-third (31.3%)
rated these services as Good. Very few
respondents gave ratings of Fair or Poor.
Across the six years of survey data, the
evaluation of Library Services has also
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
Table 2-5 - Library Services Rating
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
622
295
24
1
942
66.0
31.3
2.5
.1
100.0
a- How would you rate library services?
"• 89 respondents either refused (2) or answered
"Don't Know" to the question (87).
been very positive - over 90% of
respondents have given ratings of
Excellent or Good in each year. Library
Services in Carlsbad are consistently one
of the highest-rated (if not highest-rated)
services provided by the City. The 2006
ratings for Library Services follow this
overall trend, and are statistically no
different from previous years.
The rating of Library Services was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. No significant
differences in the 2006 ratings were
found when comparisons were made
based on: region of residence, age,
length of residence, household income,
home ownership, household size and
presence of children in the household.
Recreation Programs
Respondents were asked to rate the
programs provided by the Carlsbad
Recreation Department using the same
scale of Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor.
The results to this question for 2006 can
be found in Table 2-6.
Over one-third of respondents (43.1%)
rated Recreation Programs as being
Excellent and about half (49.1%) rated
these services as Good. Less than ten
percent of respondents gave ratings of
Fair or Poor.
Across the five years of survey data, the
evaluation of Recreation Programs has
also been positive - around 90% of
Figure 2-4
Library Services Ratings - 2000-2006
-ry
Library 2006
Library 2005 I
Library 2003
Library 2002
Library 2001
Library 2000
31.3%
32.9%
32.5%
35.9%
34.1 %
36.1 %
66.0%
63.8%
64.4%
60.5%
61.8%
59.9%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
I Poor D Fair • Good • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 8
Table 2-6 - Recreational Programs Rating?
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
379
428
55
11
873
43.4
49.0
6.3
1.3
100.0
a How would you rate recreational programs?
*>• 158 respondents either refused (2) or answered
"Don't Know" to the question (156).
respondents have given ratings of
Excellent or Good in each year.
Recreation Programs continued a trend
of receiving slightly more Excellent
ratings in 2006 than in previous years - a
slightly positive trend in these ratings
that has continued since the survey
began in 2000.
Unlike previous years, no significant
differences in the 2006 ratings were
found when comparisons were made
based on: region of residence, age,
length of residence, household income,
home ownership, household size and
presence of children in the household.
Park Conditions
Respondents were asked to rate the
Condition of City Parks using the same
scale of Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor.
The results to this question for 2006 can
be found in Table 2-7.
Nearly half of respondents (48.8%) rated
Park Conditions as being Excellent,
with a similar size group (45.0%) rating
these services as Good, meaning that
Park Conditions were rated positively by
Table 2-7 - Condions of Parks Rating
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
457
422
49
9
937
48.8
45.0
5.2
1.0
100.0
' How would you rate the condition of the park/s you or
your family use?
• 94 respondents answered "Don't Know" to the question.
Figure 2-5
Recreational Programs Ratings - 2000-2006
Rec. Programs 2006
Rec. Programs 2005
Rec. Programs 2003
Rec. Programs 2002
Rec. Programs 2001
Rec. Programs 2000
0%20%40%60%80%100%
I Poor DFair BGood • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
Park
Park
Park
Po**Lr
l>Qt*lf
Figure 2-6
Park Conditions Ratings- 2001 - 2006
mmmm 45.0% i 48.8% LArmm^^m - • •
^^^^•^^^••^^••••^^^^^••••P"""" •
mAmmmT 5u% 4n% ^JH
*HiiM 44.6% 1 48.9% .^
m^m^ 43.9% 51.6% .^
J*\j\n gap
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
• Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
over 90% of all respondents.
Across the five years where survey data
has been collected on this topic, the
evaluation of Park Conditions has been
very positive - over 90% of respondents
have given ratings of Excellent or Good
in each year. The 2006 ratings for Park
Conditions confirm that there has been a
recent improvement it attitudes
regarding Park Conditions, and that
these ratings have returned to levels
recorded in 2001 and 2003.
The rating of Park Conditions was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Significant
differences were found in respondent
opinions based on their age, length of
residence in Carlsbad and the presence
of children in their household.
Younger respondents (ages 18-40)
gave Park Conditions ratings of
Excellent at a higher rate (59.0%) than
did respondents in the 41-60 or 61 and
older categories (46.1% and 46.2%),
respectively. There was no significant
difference in the distribution of Fair or
Poor scores - only differences in the
distribution of Excellent and Good
scores. More recent residents of
Carlsbad (less than ten years) were also
more likely to rate Park Conditions as
Excellent (53.3%), compared to longer-
term residents (44.3%). These two
results are related, as newer Carlsbad
residents also tend to be younger.
Park Conditions were also rated
higher by respondents with children
in their households. A majority
(54.8%) of these respondents rated Park
Conditions as "Excellent," compared to
less than half (45.5%) of those residents
without children in their households.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 10
Data from previous survey years has
shown that younger adult Carlsbad
residents, many of whom are new to the
city and have small children, use parks
more and also evaluate their condition
more positively. This trend looks to be
continuing in 2006.
No other significant differences in the
2005 ratings of Park Conditions were
found when comparisons were made
based on: region of residence, household
income, home ownership and household
size.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 11
Figure 2*9
Comparison of City Services Ratings
Library
Paramedic Services
Fire Protection
Park Conditions
Police
Recreational Programs
31.3%
39.0%
41.7%
45.0%
46.9%
49.0%
66.0%
58.0%
56.1%
48.8%
45.9%
43.4%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Poor O Fair • Good • Excellent
City Services Ratings in
Context
The chart above (Figure 2-9) arrays the
ratings received by each individual city
service area, in descending order
according to the percentage of
"Excellent" ratings. As has been the
case in past years, ratings for Library
Services and Fire Protection Services are
the highest. These services have been
joined by a service rated for the first
time in 2006 - Paramedic Services.
Once again in 2006, even for those
services that receive the lowest ratings in
this group, over 90% of all respondents
to the survey gave positive ratings to
each service listed. Carlsbad residents
continue to be extremely satisfied with
the quality of the services delivered by
the City.
Responses to these city services
questions are related to responses to
other questions in the survey.
Correlation analysis was conducted to
test these relationships. In nearly all
Citizens who rated city
services favorably also feel
more confidence and trust
in city government, and have
other favorable opinions
about life in Carlsbad.
Citizens who rate services
poorly (or less favorably)
feel less confidence and
trust in city government, and
have less favorable opinions
in other areas.
cases, respondent opinions regarding
overall and individual city services
correlated positively with ratings of
other aspects of city government,
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 12
including confidence in city government
actions, trust in city government, ratings
of quality of life in Carlsbad and ratings
of other City departments and service
areas (e.g., land development, traffic
conditions, and information dispersal).
This means that in general, respondents
who rated city services favorably also
feel more confidence and trust in city
government, and have other favorable
opinions about life in Carlsbad, and
those who rate services poorly (or less
favorably) feel less trust and confidence
in city government, and have less
favorable opinions in other areas.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 13
Section 3: Rating
Contracted City Services
Some of the services provided to
residents of the City of Carlsbad are not
offered by the City, but are instead
contracted from outside organizations.
These services include Trash Collection,
Recycling, and Hazardous Waste
Disposal. As was the case with services
provided by the City, respondents were
asked a series of questions about these
services, and were asked to rate these
services on a scale of "Excellent,"
"Good," "Fair," or "Poor."
Trash Collection
Respondents were asked to give a rating
to Trash Collection Services contracted
by the City of Carlsbad. Table 3-1
presents the results for this question for
the 2006 survey. Roughly four out of
ten respondents (41.5%) rated Trash
Collection Services as being Excellent,
with nearly half of all respondents
(45.6%) rating services as Good. These
positive ratings make up over 80% of
those who answered the question. While
these ratings do not approach those
garnered by City-run services, they do
represent a high level of satisfaction.
Table 3-1 - Trash Collection Rating1
Frequency Percent
Excellent 421
Good 463
Fair 111
Poor 20
Total 1015
a- How would you rate trash collection?
b- 16 respondents answered "Don't Know" to the question.
41.5
45.6
10.9
2.0
100.0
Figure 3-1 puts the 2006 results into the
context of results from the two previous
years where questions were asked
Figure 3-1
Trash Collection Services Ratings - 2003-2006
Trash Collection
2006
Trash Collection
2005
Trash Collection
2004
Trash Collection
2003
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 14
specifically about Trash Collection.
Across these four years, the evaluation
of Trash Collection been quite stable -
differences in the percentages displayed
are not statistically significant but do
seem to represent a small increase over
time.
The rating of Trash Collection was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Older residents
were more likely to give higher ratings
to Trash Collection Services than were
younger residents. Roughly half
(49.5%) of respondents over age sixty
rated Trash Collection Services as
"Excellent," compared to four in ten
middle-aged residents (39.9%) and one-
third of younger adult residents (34.0%).
No other significant differences in the
2006 ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on:
region of residence, presence of children
in the household, length of residence,
household income, home ownership, and
household size.
Hazardous Waste Collection
Respondents were asked to rate the
Hazardous Waste Collection services
using the same scale of Excellent, Good,
Fair and Poor. The results to this
question for 2006 can be found in Table
3-2.
Table 3-2 - Hazardous Waste Disposal Rating
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
144
343
162
74
723
19.9
47.4
22.4
10.2
100.0
a- How would you rate household hazardous waste disposal?
t>- 308 respondents answered "Don't Know" to the question.
One in five respondents (19.9%) rated
Figure 3-2
Hazardous Waste Disposal Services Ratings -
2002-2006
Haz. Waste Disposal 2006
Haz. Waste Disposal 2005
Haz, Waste Disposal 2004
Haz, Waste Disposal 2003
Haz, Waste Disposal 2002
I I
-46.6'%,19.7%
48.5%
I
19.7%
I
53.5%16.0%
52.0%13.5%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 15
Hazardous Waste Collection services
as being Excellent, with nearly half
(47.4%) rating these services as Good,
meaning that roughly two-thirds of all
respondents rated Hazardous Waste
Disposal services positively.
This particular service typically receives
some of the lowest ratings of any
contracted service. Our expectation is
that because the process of dealing with
hazardous waste is generally unpleasant
and time-consuming, this service is
destined to receive relatively low ratings.
Across the five years of collecting data
on this question, the evaluation of
Hazardous Waste Disposal has
remained stable, and the 2006 ratings are
statistically no different from previous
years.
The rating of Hazardous Waste Disposal
was analyzed to look for differences
between demographic groups. No
significant differences in the 2005
ratings were found when comparisons
were made based on: region of
residence, age, length of residence,
household income, home ownership,
household size and presence of children
in the household.
Recycling Services
Respondents were asked to rate the
Recycling services provided to the city
using the same scale of Excellent, Good,
Fair and Poor. The results to this
question for 2006 can be found in Table
3-3.
Roughly one-third of respondents
(36.0%) rated Recycling Services as
being Excellent, with half of
respondents (48.6%) rating these
services as Good.
A separate question for Recycling
Services has been asked in the survey
for the past four years. The ratings for
these services have been virtually
identical for each year - roughly 80% of
all respondents each year have given
positive ratings to Recycling Services.
Table 3-3 - Recycling Collection Rating1
Frequency Percent
Excellent 357
Good 482
Fair 113
Poor 40
Total 992
a- How would you rate recycling collection?
"• 39 respondents either were missing (1) or
answered "Dont Know" to the question (38).
36.0
48.6
11.4
4.0
100.0
The rating of Recycling Services was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. More recent
Carlsbad residents (lived in Carlsbad
less than ten years) were less likely to
rate Recycling Services as Excellent
(34.6%) than were longer term residents
of Carlsbad (37.5%). Roughly twice as
many newer residents rated recycling
services as "Poor" than did longer-term
residents (5.7% vs. 2.6%).
Older residents were also more likely to
rate Recycling Services as "Excellent"
(42.8%) compared to middle-aged
(32.7%) and younger adult residents
(35.4%). Additionally, residents with
higher household incomes were slightly
more likely to rate Recycling Services as
"Poor".
No other significant differences in the
2006 ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on:
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 16
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Figure 3-3
Recycling Services Ratings 2003-2006
-^ , ^^^^^^^^^\^^^^^^^ETiliTil Umm 48.6% 1 36.0% ! ,4lB
M ! 1 1
Bffli iBBa" 50.0% 32.7% kJI
•Bv- . ^{^^•^^^•{^•^••^••B^^^^HII^^^HS
FTiTJYl PNM^l 48.4% 1 33.1% Jll^l
^ .^^ BgTiliia ifcMM 49.8% 32.9% ^^
P^ x"" / / / /
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
• Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
region of residence, home ownership,
household size and presence of children
in the household.
Summary
Most contracted services were rated
positively by residents. In general, the
ratings for these services were positively
and significantly correlated with other
ratings of city services, as well as
measures of confidence and trust in
government. Respondents who rate
these contracted services positively are
also positive about city government.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 17
Section 4: Other City
Services or Resources
This section of the report covers a
variety of city services not covered by
their own individual sections.
Road Conditions
Respondents were asked to give a rating
to Road Conditions in the City of
Carlsbad. As was the case with services
provided by the City, respondents were
asked to rate road conditions on a scale
of "Excellent," "Good," "Fair," or
"Poor."
Table 4-1 presents the results for this
question for the 2006 survey. A small
percentage (14.5%) rated Road
Conditions as being Excellent, with
over half of all respondents (59.6%)
rating conditions as Good. While these
ratings do not approach those garnered
by City-run services, they do represent a
generally positive level of satisfaction.
Table 4-1 - Rating of Overall Road Conditions"
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
149
611
218
48
1026
14.5
59.6
21.2
4.7
100.0
- How would you rate overall road conditions?
- 5 respondents either refused (1) or answered
"Don't Know" to the question (4).
Figure 4-1 puts the 2006 results into the
context of results from the seven years
of the survey. The 2006 evaluation of
Road Conditions demonstrates a
statistically significant increase in
satisfaction with road conditions, from
recent years of the survey. While the
proportion of "Excellent" ratings did not
change much, the proportion of "Good"
ratings increased to the point that the
2006 positive ratings are the best seen
since 2003.
Figure 4-1
Overall Road Conditions Ratings
2000-2006
Overall Roads 2006
Overall Roads 2005
Overall Roads 2004
53.0%113.4%!
Overall Roads 2003 | 13.8%
Ir- -
Overall Roads 2002 | 13.9%
Overall Roads 2001 | 13.7%
17.0%
0% 20%
25.2%
40% 60% 80%
Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
100%
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 18
The 2006 evaluation of
Road Conditions reflects
a turnaround of what had
been a recent trend of
decreasing satisfaction
with road conditions.
The proportion of positive
ratings increased to the
point that nearly three out
of four survey
respondents rated Road
Conditions favorably.
The rating of Road Conditions was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Unlike in past
years of the survey, no significant
differences in the 2006 ratings were
found when comparisons were made
based on: region, age, household
income, length or residence, home
ownership, presence of children in the
household and household size. Low
satisfaction ratings that had been given
in past years by residents from areas in
the City that were experiencing
construction-related traffic delays were
not found in the 2006 data. Figure 4-2
presents evidence that increases in the
proportion of "Good" ratings for Road
Conditions have occurred across all four
quadrants of the City.
Maintenance of Street
Landscaping and Medians
Respondents were asked to give a rating
to the Maintenance of Street
Landscaping and Medians in the City
of Carlsbad. As was the case with road
conditions, respondents were asked to
rate this maintenance on a scale of
"Excellent," "Good," "Fair," or "Poor."
Figure 4-2
Road Conditions Ratings by Quadrant
Southeast'06 ••% 25.7%
Southeast'05 wSSSf 24.4%
k
fe
L
Southwest'06 :•% 19.1%
Southwest'05 fi% 24.0%
Northeast'06 p|% 20.6%
Northeast'05 ••• 23.9%
Northwest'06
Northwest'05
0%
20.9%
27.3%
20% 40% 60% 80%
• Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
100%
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 19
Table 4-2 - Maintenance of Street^Landscaping
and Medians Rating
Frequency Percent
Excellent 268
Good 533
Fair 189
Poor 32
Total 1022
26.2
52.2
18.5
3.1
100.0
a- How would you rate maintenance of street
landscaping and medians?
b 9 respondents either refused (1) or answered
"Dont Know" to the question (8).
Table 4-2 presents the results for this
question for the 2006 survey. Roughly
one quarter of respondents (26.2%) rated
Maintenance of Street Landscaping
and Medians as being Excellent, with
over half of all respondents (52.2%)
rating conditions as Good. These ratings
represent a very positive level of
satisfaction.
The rating of Maintenance of Street
Landscaping and Medians was analyzed
to look for differences between
demographic groups. Middle-aged (41
to 60 years old) residents were less
likely to rate Maintenance of Street
Landscaping and Medians as "Excellent"
(20.4%) compared to older (28.5%) and
younger adult residents (34.1%).
Additionally, newer residents (30.3%)
were also more likely to rate
Maintenance of Street Landscaping and
Medians as "Excellent" compared to
longer-term residents (22.2%) and
renters (31.1%) handed out more
"Excellent" ratings than did home
owners (24.9%).
Curb and Sidewalk
Conditions
Respondents were asked to give a rating
to Curb and Sidewalk Maintenance
Conditions in the City of Carlsbad. As
was the case with road conditions,
respondents were asked to rate this
maintenance on a scale of "Excellent,"
"Good," "Fair," or "Poor."
Table 4-3 presents the results for this
question for the 2006 survey. Roughly
one fifth of respondents (21.8%) rated
Curb and Sidewalk Maintenance
Conditions as being Excellent, with
over half of all respondents (58.8%)
rating conditions as Good. These ratings
also represent a very positive level of
satisfaction.
Table 4-3 - Curb/Sidewalk Condition3
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
220
592
163
32
1007
21.8
58.8
16.2
3.2
100.0
How would you rate curb and sidewalk conditions?
• 24 respondents either refused (1) or answered
"Dont Know" to the question (23).
The rating of Curb and Sidewalk
Maintenance was analyzed to look for
differences between demographic
groups. Significant differences in
ratings were found among residents of
different regions of the City and based
on one's length of residence. Newer
residents of Carlsbad (less than 10
years) were more likely to rate Curb
and Sidewalk Conditions as
"Excellent" (27.4%) than were longer-
term residents (16.1%). Longer-term
residents also gave higher proportions of
"Farr" and "Poor" ratings.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 20
Figure 4-3
Curt) and Sidewalk Maintenance
Ratings by Quadrant
Northwest • 23.0%
Northeast
Southeast 114.4
Southwest 14.1
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
• Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
Residents of Northwest Carlsbad were
less satisfied with Curb and Sidewalk
Conditions, compared to residents from
other parts of the City. Figure 4-3 shows
that Northwest Carlsbad residents gave
considerable more "Fair" and "Poor"
ratings for this City feature, and that
Southwest Carlsbad residents were much
more likely to rate these conditions as
"Excellent." These regional differences
are most likely related to the length of
residence differences - residents of
Southwest Carlsbad are newer City
residents who live mostly in newer
development areas, where curbs and
sidewalks have not had time to
deteriorate.
No other significant differences in the
2006 ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on:
respondent age, household income,
home ownership, household size and
presence of children in the household.
Traffic Circulation Efficiency
Respondents were asked to give a rating
to Traffic Circulation Efficiency in the
City of Carlsbad. As was the case with
road conditions, respondents were asked
to rate this maintenance on a scale of
"Excellent," "Good," "Fair," or "Poor."
Table 4-4 presents the results for this
question for the 2006 survey. Very few
respondents (8.5%) rated Traffic
Circulation Efficiency as being
Excellent, with over one-third of all
respondents (40.0%) rating conditions as
Good and a similar one-third (38.4%)
rating Traffic Circulation as "Fair".
These ratings are some of the lowest
found throughout the 2006 survey.
Table 4-4 - Traffic Circulation Efficiency
Frequency Percent
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Total
87
409
392
134
1022
8.5
40.0
38.4
13.1
100.0
a- How would you rate: Traffic circulation efficiency,
excluding freeways?
b- 9 respondents answered 'Don't Know" to the question
Figure 4-4 puts the 2006 results into the
context of results from previous years of
the survey. The 2006 evaluation of
Traffic Circulation Efficiency reflects
a significant improvement in ratings for
this topic from previous years. The
balance between positive and negative
ratings had stayed relatively stable from
2000-2004, with negative ratings being
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 21
Figure 4-4
Traffic Circulation Ratings
2000-2006
Traffic Circulation
2006
Traffic Circulation
2004
Traffic Circulation
2003
Traffic Circulation
2002
Traffic Circulation
2001
Traffic Circulation
2000
40.0%IF3BJ5P
37.9%E32F
37.4%
38.8%
38.2%
36.2%
20% 40% 60% 80%
Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
100%
in the majority. In 2006, however, the
proportion of citizens who give the City
positive versus negative ratings on
Traffic Efficiency is virtually even.
The rating of Traffic Circulation
Efficiency was analyzed to look for
differences between demographic
groups. Significant differences in
opinion were found between respondents
of different ages. Figure 4-5 shows that
residents age 41 to 60 gave the lowest
ratings, with one in twenty (4.6%) rating
Traffic Circulation as "Excellent" and
about one in seven (15.8%) rating it as
"Poor." Renters also gave higher ratings
to Traffic Efficiency than did home
owners. Twice as many (13.5%) Renters
rated it as "Excellent," compared to
home owners (7.0%).
No other significant differences in the
2006 ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on:
region of residence, length of residence,
Figure 4-5
Traffic Circulation Efficiency by
Age of Respondent
18 to 40 El 32.7%
41 to 60
61 and
Older
0% 50% 100%
• Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 22
household income, household size and
presence of children in the household.
Additionally there were no significant
differences in the ratings given to Traffic
Circulation based on employment status,
or between those employed Carlsbad
residents that work in Carlsbad and those
who work outside the City.
Safety
The safety of the community is a
common topic of interest for city
residents, staff and city officials.
Respondents were asked two questions
related to their feelings of safety in the
City of Carlsbad. These questions had
been asked in previous years (2000-
2003, 2005). The two questions each
asked respondents to rate how safe they
felt walking alone in their own
neighborhood, with one question asking
about safety during the day, and the
second question asking about safety at
night. Each question was measured on a
zero to ten scale, with zero meaning "not
at all safe" and ten meaning "completely
safe."
Figure 4-6 displays the average response
score given by survey respondents for
the two questions for the current year, as
well as for previous years. The averages
of 9.47 (daytime safety) and 7.69 (night-
time safety) reflect an extremely high
level of safety felt by residents of
Carlsbad. These values do not differ
significantly from previous years of the
survey.
Significant differences were found in the
ratings of daytime safety based on
whether or not respondents owned then-
home. Renters gave somewhat lower
ratings for daytime safety (9.16) than did
home owners (9.54). No other
significant differences in the 2006
daytime safety ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on: age,
location of residence, length of
residence, household income, presence
of children in the household and
household size.
Figure 4-6
Residents' Feelings of Safety
~9.56~~/9.46
Average Rating
(0-10 Scale)
2000 2001 2002 2003 2005 2006
D Day • Night
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 23
Average Rating
(0-10 Scale)
Figure 4-7
Residents' Feelings of Safety
by Police Services Rating
Night
I Poor D Fair • Good • Excellent
Significant differences were also found
in the ratings of nighttime safety based
on home ownership. Renters once again
gave somewhat lower ratings for
nighttime safety (7.32) than did home
owners (7.78). Also, respondents with
higher incomes generally reported higher
ratings of nighttime safety than those
with lower incomes. Location of
residence, age, length of residence,
presence of children in the household
and household size did not affect ratings
of nighttime safety.
As might be expected, the general trend
for these safety ratings is reflected in the
evaluation of Carlsbad's Police Services.
In general (as can be seen in Figure 4-9),
residents who feel higher levels of safety
in their neighborhood rate their
satisfaction with Police Services higher.
Reasons for Using City Parks
Respondents were asked two questions
regarding their motivations for using
City parks. The first question asked
respondents to rate (using a scale of zero
to ten) the importance of rest, relaxation
and open space, as a reason for visiting
Carlsbad parks. The average rating
equaled 7.90, which could be considered
a high rating. The second question
asked respondents to rate the importance
of attending entertainment events and
social gatherings, as a reason for visiting
Carlsbad parks. This statement received
an average rating of 6.72 - still relatively
high, but considerably lower than the
previous question. Based on these
results we can say that on the average,
Carlsbad residents see parks as more
important as a venue for passive
activities like rest and relaxation, rather
than as a venue for entertainment events
and social gatherings.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 24
Figure 4-8
Ratings of Importance of Parks for
Rest and Relaxation by Age
9-1
8-
Average
Rating
(0-1Q
Scale)
7-
6-
I
I I I
18 to 40 41 to 60 61 and
over
Rating Scale: 0 =Poor 10 =
Excellent
Ratings of the importance of parks for
rest and relaxation were analyzed to look
for differences between demographic
groups. Significant differences in
opinion were found between respondents
of different ages, and whether or not the
household included children. Figure 4-6
displays that younger adults were more
likely rate the importance of open space
for rest and relaxation highly (8.25) than
were middle-aged adults (8.05) or older
adults (7.43). Respondents from
households with children also placed
more importance on using City parks for
rest and relaxation (8.13) when
compared to respondents from non-child
households (7.77).
The second statement, rating the
importance of parks for attending events
and social gatherings was also analyzed
to look for differences between
demographic groups. Significant
differences in opinion were once again
found between respondents of different
ages, but the pattern of these different
opinions was different. Middle-aged
residents (ages 41 to 60) gave the
highest importance rating to using parks
for entertainment events or social
gatherings (6.98), compared to younger
adults (6.47) and older adults (6.42).
The importance ratings given to both
statements were related to how
respondents rated the condition of City
parks. In general, respondents who rated
the condition of parks as "Excellent"
gave higher importance ratings for parks
as a place both for rest and relaxation
and parks as a place for entertainment
events and social gatherings, compared
to respondents who rated the condition
of the parks lower.
Respondents were also asked to rate an
evaluative statement about the City's
role in promoting health and welhiess.
The statement was: "how well do you
think the City of Carlsbad promotes
health and wellness through its
recreational programs and facilities?"
The average score on the zero to ten
scale was 7.37, reflecting a general
belief on the part of respondents that the
City's recreational programs do promote
health and wellness.
No significant demographic differences
were found in the ratings of Carlsbad's
promotion of health and wellness.
However, as should be expected, ratings
of how well the City promotes health
and wellness were strongly correlated
with the ratings respondents gave to both
the condition of City parks and to the
City's recreational programs (Figure 4-
7). Residents who rated Park Conditions
and Recreational Programs as either
"Good" or "Excellent" were more likely
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 25
Figure 4-9
How Well Carlsbad Promotes Health and We lines s by Ratings of
City Parks and Recreational Programs
Parks Rating Rec. Programs Rating
Poor D Fair • Good • Excellent
to give positive ratings to the City's role
in promoting health and wellness.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 26
Section 5: City
Information
This section of the report covers survey
questions on the topic of citizen
evaluation of City information dispersal,
and the types of City information
citizens want to receive.
Ratings of Information
Dispersal
Respondents were asked to give a rating
to Information Dispersal by the City of
Carlsbad. The survey question asked:
"Using a scale of zero to ten where zero
means poor and ten means excellent,
how would you rate the job the city does
in providing you with information that is
important to you?"
Figure 5-1 reports the average score on
this scale for 2006, and puts the 2006
results into the context of results from
four previous years of the survey when
this question was asked. The 2006
evaluation of information dispersal
(7.55) is a relatively high rating, located
in the upper quarter of the response
scale. The 2006 score represents a
significant improvement from 2004-
2005.
The rating of Information Dispersal was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Significant
differences were found in the ratings
given for information dispersal by
residents based on their age and the
length of time they have lived in
Carlsbad.
Residents over 60 gave higher ratings
(8.00) than did residents age 41 to 60
(7.41) or residents ages 18 to 40 (7.27).
Household income and home ownership
status were not related to ratings for
information dispersal. Additionally,
residents who have lived in Carlsbad
more then ten years gave City
Figure 5-1
Ratings of City's Information Dispersal
2001-2006
10
8
Average Rating "
(0-10 Scale) 4
2
0
I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I I
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Rating Scale: 0 = Poor 10 = Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 27
Information Dispersal higher ratings
(7.70) than did newer residents (7.40).
Contact with City Staff
Survey respondents were asked whether
or not they had had contact with a City
staff person (in the course of their work)
in the past year. Over half of all
respondents (57.3%) said that they had
been in contact with City staff (Figure 5-
2). Survey respondents with higher
household incomes and those from
larger households were slightly more
likely to have contact with City staff.
Those residents who reported that they
had contact with City staff were asked to
report they ways that they had had
contact with City staff, and these
Figure 5-2
Has Respondent had Contact
with City Staff in Past Yeai?
In the past year, did you have any contact with
employees of the City of Carlsbad as they carried
out their job?
responses are reported in Table 5-1.
Nearly three-quarters (73.5%) of
respondents who had had contact with
the City said that their contact had been
face-to-face. Over half (57.2%) also
reported that they had spoken with City
staff on the telephone.
Table 5-1 Type of Contact with City Staff
Face-to-Face
Telephone
As Part of a Group
Letter
E-mail
Other
Refused
Frequency
428
333
91
84
72
10
3
Percent
73.5%
57.2%
15.6%
14.4%
12.4%
1.7%
.5%
Respondents who had contacted City
staff were then asked to rate the level of
customer service that they experienced
in their dealings with staff. Table 5-2
shows that nearly half of these
respondents (49.5%) rated the customer
service of City staff as "Excellent," with
another large group (40.1%) rating
customer service as "Good."
Table 5-2 - Rating of Customer Service of City Staff
Based on Interactions
Frequency Percent
Excellent 284
Good 230
Fair 41
Poor 19
Total 574
49.5
40.1
7.1
3.3
100.0
a- How would you rate the level of customer service you
experienced in your interactions with City staff?
"• 8 respondents either refused (1) or answered "Don't
Know" to the question (7).
Customer service ratings were analyzed
based on the type of contact the
respondent had with the City. Figure 5-3
shows that residents who had Face-to-
Face contact with City staff gave the
largest proportion of "Excellent" ratings
(52.0%), followed by those who had
contact via Telephone (49.8%) and E-
mail (42.3%).
City Web Site
Previous surveys of Carlsbad City
residents have found that very high
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 28
Figure 5-3
Customer Service Ratings by Type of Contact
fcFace-to-Face B7.6O/1
Telephone
E-mail
Part of Group H 13.6%
Letter
42.6%49.8%
40.8%42.3%
^1
43.2%37.5%
47.0%34.9%
75.0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
• Poor Fair • Good • Excellent
12.5%
100%
percentages of households in the City
have Internet access, many with high-
speed connections. Therefore, most
Carlsbad residents should have the
ability to access the City's web site.
Survey respondents were asked if they
had accessed the City's web site in the
past year to find out information about
accessed the City's web site in the past
year. This is a significant increase from
the 2003 survey, where only 39.0% of
respondents had accessed the City's web
site.
Respondents who had used the City's
web site were asked whether they were
Table 5-3 - Visited the City's Web|ite for
Information about the City
Frequency Percent
Yes
No
Total
561
467
1028
54.6
45.4
100.0
- Have you accessed the City's website in the
past year to find information about the City?
• 3 respondents either were missing (1) or
answered "Don't Know" to the question (2).
the City. Table 5-3 shows that slightly
over half of all households (54.6%)
Figure 5-4
Did Respondent Find Wanted
Information on City Web Site?
Did yon find what you were looking for on the city's
website?
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 29
able to find the information they were
looking for. A very high proportion
(88.2%) was able to find the information
they sought (Figure 5-4). This
proportion was nearly identical to the
proportion reported in the 2003 survey
(86.2%).
Respondents reported searching for a
wide variety of City-specific
information. Table 5-4 displays the
types of information that respondents
reported searching for. Information
about Parks and Recreation was
mentioned most often, by over one third
(38.0%) of those who had searched.
Library information, building code and
zoning information, and recycling and
hazardous waste disposal information
were all mentioned by at least ten
percent of the searchers.
Table 5-4 - Information Respondent Searched For
on the City Web Site
Frequency
Parks & Recreation Information
Library Information
Building Codes, Zoning, & Permit
Information
Recycling & Hazardous Waste
Information
General Information
Road Closures & Construction
Information
Job Openings
Special Events Info
Local Business Info
City Politics & Meeting Times
Utilities
Housing Info
Public Safety
City Phone Numbers
Other
Don't Know
213
87
77
61
52
41
31
30
17
15
11
10
8
4
109
22
Percent
38.0%
15.5%
13.7%
10.9%
9.3%
7.3%
5.5%
5.3%
3.0%
2.7%
2.0%
1.8%
1.4%
.7%
19.4%
3.9%
Table 5-5 displays the types of answers
that were given. The largest group of
respondents (27.3%) said that they
would like to receive information about
upcoming and current development and
construction projects, along with road
work. About one in ten respondents
mentioned schedules for city services
(11.0%), special event information
(9.6%) and information about recreation
classes and programs. One interesting
point to consider is that the answer given
most often was "Don't Know" -
indicating that most residents are not
actively engaged in thinking about the
type of unsolicited information they
want to receive from the City.
Table 5-5 - Types of Information Respondent Would Like
to Receive from City
Frequency
Development Projects,
Roadwork, Construction
Schedules for City
Services
Special Event Info
Recreation Classes and
Programs
Recycling and Hazardous
Materials
School Information
City Calender
Other
Dont Know
281
113
99
96
61
40
22
117
342
Percent
27.3%
11.0%
9.6%
9.3%
5.9%
3.9%
2.1%
11.4%
33.3%
All survey respondents were asked to
relate the types of information that they
would like to receive from the City.
Accuracy of Information
To conclude the questions regarding
City information, respondents were
asked the following question to see how
they evaluated the accuracy of
information provided by the City:
"Using a scale of zero to ten where zero
means NOT AT ALL CONFIDENT and
ten means VERY CONFIDENT, how
would you rate your level of confidence
that the information you get from the
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 30
Figure 5-5
Accuracy of Information Rating
300-x
250-
« 200§
soa.an
150-x
100-
50-x n i
23456
0-10 Rating
8 9 10
City is accurate?" The average rating
given by respondents on the zero-to-ten
scale was 8.16, a very high rating
(Figure 5-5).
The rating of Information Accuracy was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Statistically
significant differences in these ratings
were found based on respondent age and
presence of children in the household.
Younger adults had the most confidence
in the accuracy of City information
(8.46) compared to middle-aged
respondents (8.12) and older respondents
(8.10). Respondents from households
with children also gave higher ratings
(8.33) than did respondents with no
children in the household (8.08).
information they receive from the City,
and are generally pleased with the way
in which the City disseminates
information. More than half of City
residents make use of the web site to
find information, and most that use the
web site are able to successfully find
what they are looking for. City
employees also received very positive
ratings regarding their customer service
skills. Based on this data you could say
that informing its citizens is something
that the City is doing well.
Summary
In summary, City residents have a great
deal of confidence in the accuracy of the
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 31
Section 6: Opinions
Regarding Development
This section of the report covers survey
questions on the topic of land use and
development.
Land Use Balance Ratings
In each of the past five City surveys,
respondents were asked to rate how well
they thought the City of Carlsbad
balanced the different land uses within
the City. The survey question asked:
"One of the tasks of city government is
to balance various land uses in the city -
uses such as residential, commercial,
industrial and recreational. On a scale
from zero to ten, where zero means very
poor and ten means excellent, how
would you rate the job the City of
Carlsbad is doing in balancing the
various land uses in the city?"
Figure 6-1 reports the average score on
this scale for 2006, and puts the 2006
results into the context of results from
three previous years of the survey when
this question was asked. The 2006
evaluation of land use balance (6.08) is
one of the lower zero-to-ten performance
ratings measured in the survey. Survey
results from the current year and
previous years have demonstrated that
growth and overcrowding are among the
top concerns of Carlsbad residents. This
low land use rating is evidence that
survey respondents place some of the
responsibility with city government.
The average score on this question
remained virtually unchanged from 2002
to 2004, but dropped significantly in
2005. The 2006 rating constitutes a
small but significant increase in the land
use rating.
The rating of Land Use was analyzed to
look for differences between
Figure 6-1
Ratings of City's Balance of Land Uses
2001-2006
Average Rating
(0-10 Scale)
2002 2003 2004 2005
Rating Scale: ft = Very Poor 10= Excellent
2006
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 2/27/2006
r
C
r~
r*
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 32
demographic groups. Significant
differences were found in the ratings
given for Land Use based on a
respondent's age and whether they
rent or own their home.
On average, home owners (5.99) gave
the City lower ratings on Land Use than
did renters (6.45). Middle-aged
respondents (ages 41-60) gave the City
the lowest Land Use ratings (5.75),
compared to younger residents (6.53)
and older residents (6.45).
Household incomes, length of residence,
region, presence of children in the
household and household size were not
related to Land Use opinions.
Land Use ratings were strongly linked to
respondents' overall evaluation of City
services. Figure 6-2 displays the
average land use rating of respondents,
broken down by their Overall City
Services rating. Clearly, respondents
who were displeased with the City's land
Figure 6-2
Average Land Use Ratings by
Overall City Services Rating
10
8-
Average 6
Rating
(0-10
Scale) 4
I Poor O Fair • Good • Excellent
use policies or actions were also
unhappy with the services provided by
the City in general.
Figure 6-3
Quality of Development Rating
Quality of
Development 2006
Quality of
Development 2005
0%20%40%60%80% 100%
I Poor D Fair • Good • Excellent
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 2/27/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 33
Quality of Development
Respondents were asked to rate the
Quality of Development over the last
three years in the City of Carlsbad, using
the "Excellent," "Good," "Fair," and
"Poor" scale featured in other parts of
the survey. Figure 6-3 displays the
results of this question for 2006 and
2005. Approximately one out of seven
respondents (14.2%) rated the Quality
of Development as being Excellent,
with nearly half of all respondents
(45.3%) rating development quality as
Good. These positive ratings represent a
slim majority of those who answered the
question. These ratings are somewhat
improved from 2005 - the proportion of
"Excellent" ratings has increased (11.9%
to 14.2%) while the proportion of "Poor"
ratings has decreased (14.4% to 10.3%).
The opinions that respondents hold
regarding development quality are
related to their opinions about land use
policy in the City of Carlsbad. As was
the case in 2005, respondents who rated
Figure 6-4
Average Land Use Ratings by
Development Quality Rating
Average
Rating
(0-10
Scale) 4.
I Poor D Fair • Good • Excellent
the quality of development higher, on
the average, gave higher ratings to the
way the City handles land use issues
(Figure 6-4). Those who rated
development quality lower had similarly
low ratings for land use policy decisions.
Statistical analysis showed that 33% of
the variation in land use ratings could be
explained simply by using the
respondent's rating for development
quality - an extremely high percentage
for this type of analysis.
The rating of development quality was
analyzed to look for differences between
demographic groups. Longer-term
Carlsbad residents (lived in Carlsbad
more than ten years) were more likely
to rate development quality as "Poor"
(13.1%) than were more recent residents
of Carlsbad (7.3%). Younger
respondents were more likely to rate
development quality as "Excellent"
(19.4%) than were middle-aged
respondents (10.8%), and younger
respondents were also less likely to rate
development quality as "Poor" (5.6%)
than were middle-aged respondents
(11.3%) or older respondents (10.5%).
No other significant differences in the
2005 ratings were found when
comparisons were made based on:
region of residence, home ownership,
household income, household size and
presence of children in the household.
Respondents who rated development
quality as "Poor" were asked to explain
their reasons for giving the low rating.
A review of these answers found that
"Overdevelopment" and "Crowding"
were mentioned regularly by many
respondents as a reason for their low
rating. Nearly all of the reasons given
by respondents were related to issues of
growth and crowding (e.g., lack of open
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 2/27/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 34
space, traffic congestion, and insufficient
infrastructure), so it is clear that most of
the dissatisfaction with the quality of
development is related to growth and
crowding, rather than aesthetics or
craftsmanship.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 2/27/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 35
Section 7: Environmental
Issues
This section of the report covers two
survey questions related to storm water
pollution.
Storm Water Pollution
The City of Carlsbad provides a Storm
Water Quality Hotline that can be used
to report illegal discharges into the storm
water system, or to ask questions about
ways to reduce storm water pollution.
The City also regularly provides
information in City publications and
mailings regarding what citizens can do
to reduce water pollution.
Respondents were asked if they had seen
or heard any information about how
residents can prevent the pollution of
creeks, lagoons and ocean. Nearly two-
thirds (64.6%) of respondents answered
that they had either seen or heard
information about how to prevent
pollution of creeks, lagoons and the
ocean (Figure 7.1). This is an
improvement from the last time this
Figure 7-1
Has Respondent Seen or Heard Water
Pollution Prevention Information
During the past year, have you seen or heard any information
about how residentscan prevent the pollution of our creeks.
question was asked in the City survey
(2003), when the proportion of "Yes"
answers was 58.1%.
Respondents who said that they had
heard information on preventing
pollution were asked what, if anything,
they had done in the past year to help
reduce the amount of water pollution.
Table 7-1 displays the answers given
most often by respondents.
Table 7-1 - Things Respondents Report Doing to Reduce
Water Pollution
Frequency
Did Nothing
Properly Disposing of
Hazardous Waste
Cleaned Up Trash At
Beach, Roadside, Etc.
Using
Environmentally-Friendly
Soaps, Pesticides, Etc.
Used A Commercial Car
Wash
Recycling
Reduce Water Run Off/
Reduce Fertilizer and
Pesticide Use
Cleaned Up Animal Waste
Other
Don't Know
163
148
144
92
91
76
74
42
100
17
Percent
24.7%
22.4%
21.8%
13.9%
13.8%
11.5%
11.2%
6.4%
15.2%
2.6%
The answer given most often by
respondents (24.7%) was that they did
nothing to reduce water pollution.
Properly disposing of hazardous waste
(22.4%) and cleaning up outdoor trash
(21.8%) were also mentioned by more
that twenty-percent of those respondents
who had heard about how to reduce
water pollution.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 36
Section 8: Commuting
Questions were added to the 2006 survey
to look at the methods that working
Carlsbad residents commute to their
jobs. This section of the report covers
survey questions related to mode of
commute, with comparisons made
between demographic groups and
residents employed either inside or
outside of Carlsbad.
Employment Status
Early in the survey, respondents were
asked about their employment status -
whether or not they worked for pay or
owned a business. Figure 8-1 displays
Figure 8-1
Is Respondent Employed, and Is
Jo)> Located in Carlsbad
Employed
Outside
Carlsbad
275%
the responses to this question. Just
under half of all respondents said that
they were not employed (47.4%). Of
those who said they were employed,
nearly equal proportions said that they
employment was located in Carlsbad
(24.8%) and outside of Carlsbad
(27.9%). Along with looking at the
individual survey respondents, the
survey also asked whether the entire
household contained someone who was
employed, and whether any of the
household members commuted to
outside of Carlsbad. As can be seen
Figure 8-2
Is Anyone in Household Employed,
and Do Household Members Work
Outside Carlsbad
Some
Outside
Carlsbad
55.7%
from Figure 8-2, when employment
status and location is viewed from the
household perspective, significantly
more households include someone who
is employed, and significantly more
households include someone who
commutes outside of the City. In the
analysis that follows, we will focus on
differences in commuting patterns for
residents based on their status reported
in Figure 8-1, however, it should be
recognized that far more households
contain at least one household member
who commutes outside of the City.
Mode of Commute
Survey respondents who were employed
were asked to list all of the methods they
had used to commute to work during the
past year. Table 8-1 displays the
proportion of employed respondents who
used the listed commuting modes at least
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 37
once in the previous year. Driving alone
(79.1%) was the commuting mode used
by the greatest number of working
respondents in the past year. Over a
quarter of respondents said that they had
worked at home at least once during the
year (26.5%), one in seven said that they
had carpooled (15.3%) and one in ten
said that they had used public
transportation at least once.
Table 8-1 - Commute Methods Used
by Employed Respondents
Drive Alone
Work at Home
Carpool
Public Transportation
Walk
Bicycle
Other
Frequency
439
147
85
65
37
35
15
Percent
79.1%
26.5%
15.3%
11.7%
6.7%
6.3%
2.7%
(6.5%) were mentioned less often as the
commuting method used most often by
employed respondents.
As might be expected, mode of commute
did differ significantly between
respondents employed in Carlsbad and
those employed outside of Carlsbad.
Although both groups drove alone most
often (over 75% of each group),
respondents employed outside of
Carlsbad were more likely to report
carpooling and use of public
transportation, while respondents
employed in Carlsbad were more likely
to report working from home (many may
have home-based businesses).
Asking about all of the methods used
can result in overestimation of the
impact of commuting methods used less
often. Therefore, those respondents who
listed more than one method of
commuting were asked which method
they used most often. Table 8-2 shows
that driving alone (76.1%) is still far and
away the method used most often to
commute. Public transportation (7.6%),
working at home (7.6%) and carpooling
Table 8-2 - How Respondent Gets to Work on Most Days
(Those Who Used More Than One Method)
Drive Alone
Public Transportation
Work at Home
Carpool
Bicycle
Walk
Total
Frequency
140
14
14
12
3
1
184
Percent
76.1
7.6
7.6
6.5
1.6
.5
100.0
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 38
Section 9: Spending
Patterns
New to the survey in 2006 were a series
of questions aimed at learning more
about the spending patterns of Carlsbad
residents. For a series of spending
categories, survey respondents were
asked to estimate the proportion of their
spending that occurred in the City of
Carlsbad. The spending categories were:
clothing, home improvement items,
groceries, dining out and entertainment.
The list of items was presented in a
random order to each respondent, in
order to reduce bias in the data.
Spending in Carlsbad
For each of the spending categories,
there were respondents who answered as
low as zero percent and as high as one
hundred percent. Table 9-1 displays the
average percentages of shopping dollars
spent in each category, ranked from high
to low.
Table 9-1 - Percentage of Types of Spending
Done in Carlsbad
Average
Percentage
Groceries
Dining Out
Clothing
Entertainment
Home Improvement Items
72.10
55.76
47.74
44.51
34.18
On the average, survey respondents said
that they made nearly three-quarters
(72.1%) of their grocery purchases in the
City of Carlsbad. Respondents averaged
over half of their dining dollars spent in
Carlsbad (55.8%) and nearly half of their
clothing purchases (47.4%). The
average spending proportion for
entertainment purchases (movies, plays,
live music, etc.) was nearly one-half
(44.5%), while respondents averaged
about a third (34.2%) of their home
improvement spending within the City
of Carlsbad.
Demographic Differences
Obviously the relative size of these
percentages is affected the most by the
presence or absence of these types of
merchants inside the City's boundaries,
but there were also significant
differences in some proportions based on
demographic factors.
Respondent Quadrant
Significant differences in spending
percentages for respondents from
different quadrants were seen for three
of the spending categories; clothing,
groceries and dining out. Interestingly,
as can be seen in Figure 9-1, the patterns
differed based on the specific spending
category - in other words, respondents
from different quadrants do not
uniformly shop hi or out of Carlsbad -
shopping patterns are based on both
respondent living location and the types
of retailers that are convenient to them.
In the case of both clothing expenditures
and dining out expenditures, respondents
from the northern quadrants reported
higher proportions of spending in
Carlsbad than did respondents from the
southern portion of the City. This is
probably the case because of the
presence of more retail and dining
opportunities for north Carlsbad
residents in the Carlsbad Village and
Plaza Camino Real commercial centers.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 39
Figure 9-1
Spending Differences by Quadrant
Clothing Groceries Dining Out
Northwest D Northeast • Southeast • Southwest
Spending proportions for groceries,
however, reflect a reversed pattern.
South Carlsbad residents report spending
more of their dollars for groceries in
Carlsbad compared to northern residents.
This reflects the difference in
development mix between the regions,
where the master-planned communities
that dominate southern Carlsbad
included grocery stores in their
development plans.
Length of Residence
Spending for clothing and for dining out
differed significantly based on how long
respondents had lived in Carlsbad. In
both instances, longer-term residents
were more likely to report spending
more on both clothing and dining out in
Carlsbad (Figure 9-2). These spending
patterns may reflect the fact that the
longer residents live in the City, the
more likely they are to become familiar
with the retail locations and restaurants
that are in the City.
Figure 9-2
Spending Differences by
Length of Residence
0%
Clothing Dining Out
I LTTen Years • More Than Ten Years
Employment Status
While the respondent's employment
status was not significantly related to
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 40
spending patterns, employment status of
the household was. In the case of
spending on clothing and on home
improvement items, households where at
least one person was employed reported
spending less in Carlsbad, and
Figure 9-3
Spending Differences by
Employment Status
60%i
0%
Clothing Home Improvement
I None Employed
I Some Jin ployed
I Some Em p. Outside Carlsbad
households with at least one person
employed outside of Carlsbad reported
even lower spending proportions in the
City (Figure 9-3).
The following demographic factors were
not related to spending patterns:
respondent employment status,
respondent job location, respondent age,
household income, home ownership,
presence of children in the household
and household size.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 41
Section 10: Entertainment
Preferences
Previous City surveys have asked
questions about the types of public
facilities that respondents would like to
see built. While these questions can be
helpful for City planners, it often begs
the question: "If we build it, what will
we do with it?" In the 2006 survey we
looked at the issue of entertainment
venues not by asking residents about the
type of facility they would like to see
built, but by asking what type of
entertainment they have had to travel
outside of Carlsbad to enjoy. This will
allow decision-makers to see the types of
entertainment that residents enjoy that is
not offered as often in the City as
residents would like.
Entertainment Choices
Respondents were presented with a
series of entertainment types and asked
whether they had ever had to travel
outside of Carlsbad to attend this type of
activity. The entertainment types were:
• Nationally-known musical acts.
• Foreign or art-house films.
• Music, dance or theater
productions in which their family
or neighbors were performers.
• Local musical groups that you
can dance to.
• Professional-quality theater or
dance.
• Art exhibits or displays.
• Stand-up comedy.
• Ethnic culture fairs
Respondents were asked to answer
whether or not they had ever traveled
outside the City of Carlsbad to
experience that type of entertainment.
Table 10-1 reports the proportions of
respondents that had gone outside of
Carlsbad for each entertainment type.
Table 10-1 - Percentage of Respondents Who Have Ever
Travelled Outside Carlsbad to See Type of Entertainment
Art Exhibits or Displays
Professional-Quality Theater
or Dance
Nationally-Known Musical
Acts
Professional-Quality Jass or
Symphonic Music
Local Musical Groups with
Dancing
Stand-Up Comedy
Ethnic Culture Fairs
Foreign or Art House Films
Music, Dance or Theater
Productions Involving Family
Cases
816
807
796
656
535
533
521
508
396
Table
Response %
83.0%
82.1%
81.0%
66.7%
54.4%
54.2%
53.0%
51.7%
40.3%
• Professional-quality
symphonic music.
jazz or
Art exhibits or displays (83.0%),
Professional-quality theater or dance
(82.1%) and Nationally-known
musical acts (81.0%) were all
mentioned by over eighty percent of
respondents. All of the remaining
entertainment types (except productions
involving family or friends) were
mentioned by over half of all
respondents. Based on these results, it
is clear that a significant proportion of
Carlsbad residents are used to
traveling outside of Carlsbad for
entertainment options.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 42
Respondents who answered "Yes" to at
least one of the entertainment choices
were asked which of the types of
entertainment they had traveled for was
their favorite. Table 10-2 shows that
professional-quality theater or dance
(30.1%) was the type of entertainment
preferred by the largest number of
people who had traveled outside of the
City for entertainment. While more
people had traveled outside the City to
see art exhibits, it was not the top choice
of out-of-town entertainment activities.
Table 10-2 - Favorite Type of Entertainment for which
Respondent has Traveled Outside of Carlsbad
Frequency
Professional-Quality
Theatre or Dance
Nationally-Known
Musical Acts
Professional-Quality
Jazz or Symphonic
Music
Art Exhibits or Displays
Music, Dance or Theatre
Productions Involving
Family
Local Musical Groups
with Dancing
Stand-up Comedy
Ethnic Culture Fairs
Foreign or Art House
Films
Total
281
194
101
101
68
56
46
44
43
934
Percent
30.1
20.8
10.8
10.8
7.3
6.0
4.9
4.7
4.6
100.0
These results demonstrate that a large
proportion of Carlsbad residents have
traveled outside of the City to enjoy
entertainment, and that the largest
proportions of residents have traveled to
see performances that require large
stages and (most likely) indoor facilities:
theater or dance, well-known music acts,
and symphonic or jazz bands. These are
also the most popular entertainment
types among those who have left the
City for entertainment. Citizen support
for the addition of a large entertainment
venue would be expected to be high.
The largest proportion of residents had
left the City to see art exhibits. While
this was not the favorite entertainment of
many of those respondents, the fact that
many had traveled outside of Carlsbad
for this activity shows that there is wide-
spread interest in this activity. Since art
exhibits do not typically require as large
a venue, this entertainment choice might
be easier to provide.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 43
Section 11: Ratings of
City Government
One of the important roles played by a
survey such as this is to provide a tool
for assessing the general level of
satisfaction that citizens have in their
local government. City officials can
benefit greatly from having an
assessment tool other than those
typically at their disposal - calls and
requests from citizens, as well as
testimony at Council and Commission
meetings, can over-estimate negative
assessments, as citizens are typically
spurred to communicate using these
methods when faced with a problem or
crisis. The other typical method for
assessing citizen opinion - the ballot box
- is an expensive and unwieldy way to
receive broad citizen feedback.
Household surveys allow city officials to
ask a representative sample of citizens to
give feedback on how well, or how
poorly, the City is doing.
For the past seven years, this survey has
included questions that ask citizens to
give the City feedback not only on how
they evaluate the City's tangible
services, but to evaluate the confidence
they have in the City's ability to make
sound decisions and carry them out.
This section looks at these issues, and
reports on the seven-year trend in
confidence in City Government.
Ratings of City Government
This year's survey included five
questions that intended to tap a variety
of dimensions of resident's evaluation of
city government performance. For each
question, respondents were asked to use
a zero to ten point scale to rate their
agreement to the statement that was
presented. The questions were presented
in random order so as to reduce bias.
The text of the statements was:
• "I receive good value for the
local taxes I pay."
• "The City of Carlsbad welcomes
citizen involvement."
• "The City of Carlsbad listens to
its citizens."
• "I am pleased with the overall
direction the City of Carlsbad is
taking."
• "In general, I think the City of
Carlsbad government is doing a
good job."
Table 11-1 displays the results for these
questions, with the number representing
the average agreement rating for the
statement on the zero-to-ten scale. Each
of the statements received average
agreement scores above the midpoint
of the scale, which indicates a general
agreement with the statements across
all respondents. Responses to these
statements correlate statistically at an
extremely high level, which reflects the
fact that all five of these statements are
Table 11-1 - Agreement With Statements About Carlsbad
City Government
Mean
The City of Carlsbad Welcomes Citizen
Involvement
In General, I Believe that the City of
Carlsbad Government is Doing A Good Job
I Recieve Good Value for the Local Taxes I
Pay
I am Pleased with the Overall Direction the
City of Carlsbad is Taking
The City of Carlsbad Listens to Citizens
7.35
7.21
7.16
6.68
6.62
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 44
related to an underlying evaluation of the
effectiveness of City government. The
highest level of agreement was with the
statement about Carlsbad welcoming
citizen involvement (7.35). This is
particularly interesting when compared
to the statement with the lowest
agreement rating - whether the City
listens to its citizens. One explanation
for this could be that there are citizens
who feel that the City provides ways for
citizens to participate in City activities,
but that the citizens' opinions or
preferences are not taken into
consideration for decision-making.
The data for these statements was
analyzed to look for demographic
differences in the ratings. Some
consistent demographic differences were
found for these statements - Older
respondents and those who did not
have someone in the household who
was employed gave higher average
scores to each of the statements about
the City. These opinion differences
were independent of household location,
length of residence, household income
and household size differences in
residents.
Among the individual statements, only
the statement about receiving good value
for local taxes was consistently rated
differently between some demographic
groups. Respondents who were
employed, younger, were newer
residents, lived in south Carlsbad and
had children in the household all gave
slightly lower agreement ratings to that
statement than did their counterparts.
Confidence in City
Government
A question that has been included in the
survey for seven years and that has been
used as a yardstick of Carlsbad city
government performance is the
following:
"On a scale of zero to ten, where zero
means NOT AT ALL CONFIDENT and
ten means VERY CONFIDENT, how
Figure 11-1
Confidence in City Government Ratings
2000-2006
10
8
Average Rating "
(0-10 Scale) 4
2^
0
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Rating Scale: 0 = Not at All Confident 10 = Very Confident
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cal State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 45
confident are you in the Carlsbad City
government to make decisions which
positively affect the lives of its
community members? "
Figure 11-1 reports the results for 2006,
as well as for previous years of the
survey. The average rating of 6.97
given by respondents in 2006 is a very
high rating for this measure, and
reflects continued confidence in the
actions of Carlsbad's city government.
While this rating does not differ
statistically from the previous years'
ratings, it is the highest rating that the
City has received in seven years of
survey administration.
The data for city government confidence
was analyzed to look for demographic
differences in the ratings. Significant
differences were found between some
groups that reflect some of the
differences just seen in City government
ratings, and in some of the City service
ratings reported earlier. Older Carlsbad
residents (7.31) gave higher confidence
ratings than did younger (ages 18-40)
residents (7.12) or middle-aged residents
(6.77).
Employment status was also related to
confidence in government. Respondents
who were employed gave lower average
confidence ratings (6.80) than did
respondents who were not employed
(7.18). This trend was also true when
respondents were divided based on
employment status of the household.
Respondents from households where no
one was employed had the highest
confidence in City government (7.30),
compared to households with only
people employed in Carlsbad (6.81) and
households with at least one person
employed outside of Carlsbad (6.86).
No other demographic groupings
displayed statistically significant
differences in confidence in City
government.
As in previous years, this measure did
correlate significantly with all other
ratings of city government services and
policy performance, indicating that
confidence in government is a product of
citizen's evaluations of the actions taken
by the City.
Summary
This survey and report have been the
seventh in an annual series of citizen
evaluation surveys conducted for the
City of Carlsbad by the Social and
Behavioral Research Institute at
California State University San Marcos.
Throughout this report, data has been
presented that reflect the actions and
opinions reported by a representative
sample of households hi the City of
Carlsbad, California.
According to the responses given by
residents, they are generally pleased with
life hi their city, with the services
provided by the city, and with the way in
which city government is carried out.
Survey respondents answered
consistently throughout the survey that
they were satisfied with the services
provided by the city, and that they
positively evaluate the City's
government.
As has been the case in previous years,
the topics that consistently receive a
higher than average proportion of
negative comments and ratings are the
topics of growth, development and
traffic. This year, as in years past, when
open-ended follow-up questions were
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey 46
asked of respondents who replied
negatively to ratings questions, the
reasons given for the negative ratings
were overwhelmingly related to growth
and overcrowding.
One positive note in this area is that
opinions regarding both road conditions
and traffic circulations posted
significantly higher ratings than in recent
years. Steps that the City has taken to
open connector streets, the completion of
some major road construction projects
and continued communication about the
reason for traffic delays have contributed
to these higher ratings.
Another area that continues to receive
positive ratings from citizens is the way
the City communicates with its residents.
Communication by the City is
consistently rated high and this year
respondents positively evaluated their
use of the City's web site to find needed
information. The City's employees also
received high marks for the level of
customer service that they display when
working with citizens. The City should
continue to exploit these tools that are
working well, as increased
communication (especially on difficult
subjects) continues to be on of the City's
most effective tools.
Prepared by Social and Behavioral Research Institute, Cat State San Marcos 12/17/2006
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A1
City of Carlsbad
2006 Public Opinion Survey
SQHELLO Hello, my name is and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Carlsbad
from the SBRI survey lab at Cal State University San Marcos. We're talking to
Carlsbad residents to get their opinions on City services and we'd like to include your
opinions.
1. TO CONTINUE WITH INTERVIEW
QINTRO1 Are you one of the primary decision makers in your home, and at least 18 years of age?
{IF NOT, ASK FOR THE MALE/FEMALE HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD}
1. TO CONTINUE WITH INTERVIEW
SHELLO2 The interview will take about fifteen to twenty minutes and your participation is
voluntary. The answers you give will be kept strictly confidential and you may stop the
interview at any time. I am also required to let you know that this call may be monitored
for quality control purposes. May we continue?
1. TO CONTINUE WITH INTERVIEW
QAREA1 Are you currently a resident of Carlsbad?
QAREA2
O.No
l.Yes
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
[SKIPTO CLOSE]
[SKIPTO CLOSE]
[SKIPTO CLOSE]
First, to be sure that you live in our study area, what is your zip code?
[DO NOT READ]
1. 92008
2.92009
3.92010
4.92011
5. OTHER [Specify: ] [SKIPTO NOTQUAL3]
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
[SKIPTO CLOSE]
[SKIPTO CLOSE]
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A2
QAREA3 To be sure we talk to people from all areas of Carlsbad, do you live east or west of El
Camino Real?
LEAST
2. WEST
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QAREA4 Do you live north or south of Palomar Airport Road?
1. NORTH
2. SOUTH
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QWORK2 Do you currently work for pay or own a business?
0. NO [SKIPTO TCHAD]
LYES
8. DON'T KNOW [SKIPTO TCBAD]
9. REFUSED [SKIPTO TCBAD]
Q WORKS Is your job or business located in the City of Carlsbad?
O.NO
LYES
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
TCBAD My first few questions ask about your general impressions of Carlsbad.
[PRESS C TO CONTINUE]
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A3
QCB AD 1 What do you like most about living in the City of Carlsbad?
TOO NOT READ ANSWER CHOICES]
[CHOOSE ALL THAT APPLY]
1. THE BEACH/OCEAN
2. QUIET SMALL TOWN/VILLAGE FEEL
3. WEATHER/CLIMATE
4. LIKE THE COMMUNITY/PEOPLE
5. CITY GOVERNEMENT/PLANNING/SERVICES
6. BEAUTIFUL/CLEAN
7. LOCATION
8. CONVENIENCE OF STORES/ENTERTAINMENT
9. TRAILS/PARKS/RECREATION
10. SCHOOLS
11. OTHER
12. DON'T KNOW
13. REFUSED
14. NO MORE ANSWERS
QCBAD2 What is your biggest concern regarding the City of Carlsbad?
TOO NOT READ ANSWER CHOICES]
[CHOOSE ALL THAT APPLY]
1. GROWTH/OVERCROWDING
2. TRAFFIC
3. GOVERNMENT PLANNING & RESPONSIVENESS/POOR CITY SERVICES
4. COST OF LIVING/HOUSING
5. QUALITY & CROWDING OF SCHOOLS
6. OTHER
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QGENSRV In general how would you rate the overall services provided by the City?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey
QSERV1 How would you rate: Recreational programs?
A4
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
skip to QSERV2
skip to QSERV2
skip to QSERV2
skip to QSERV2
skip to QSERV2
QSERV1P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated recreational programs as poor?
QSERV2 How would you rate: Library services?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
skip to QSERV3
skip to QSERV3
skip to QSERV3
skip to QSERV3
skip to QSERV3
QSERV2P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated library services as poor?
QSERV3 [HOW WOULD YOU RATE] fire protection?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
skip to QSERV4
skip to QSERV4
skip to QSERV4
skip to QSERV4
skip to QSERV4
QSERV3P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated FIRE PROTECTION as poor?
QSERV4 [HOW WOULD YOU RATE] police services?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
skip to QSERV6
skip to QSERV6
skip to QSERV6
skip to QSERV6
skip to QSERV6
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A5
QSERV4P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated POLICE SERVICES as poor?
QPRKRATE How would you rate the condition of the park/s you or your family use?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QPRKRTP [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated parks as poor?
QSERV9 How would you rate: Paramedic services?
4. Excellent -> skip to TSERVICE
3. Good -»skip to TSERVICE
2. Fair -» skip to TSERVICE
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW -> skip to TSERVICE
9. REFUSED -* skip to TSERVICE
QSERV9P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated Paramedic services as poor?
[RANDOMLYADMINISTER THE FOLLOWING TRANSITION STATEMENT TO HALF THE
RESPONDENTS]
TSERVICE The City of Carlsbad receives a number of services from outside agencies.
Please rate each of the following services as excellent, good, fair, or poor.
[PRESS C TO CONTINUE]
QOUTSRV1 How would you rate trash collection?
4. Excellent -» skip to QOUTSRV3
3. Good -» skip to QOUTSRV3
2. Fair -» skip to QOUTSRV3
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW -> skip to QOUTSRV3
9. REFUSED -> skip to QOUTSRV3
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A6
QOUTSV1P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated TRASH COLLECTION as poor?
QOUTSRV3 [HOW WOULD YOU RATE] household hazardous waste disposal?
[IF RESPONDENT DOES NOT USE THIS SERVICE, PLEASE ENTER "8" FOR DON'T KNOW]
4. Excellent -»• skip to QOUTSRV5
3. Good -». skip to QOUTSRV5
2. Fair -» skip to QOUTSRV5
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW -» skip to QOUTSRV5
9. REFUSED -»• skip to QOUTSRV5
QOUTSV3P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS
WASTE DISPOSAL as poor?
QOUTSRV5 [HOW WOULD YOU RATE] recycling collection?
4. Excellent -» skip to TSTREET
3. Good -» skip to TSTREET
2. Fair -> skip to TSTREET
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW -> skip to TSTREET
9. REFUSED -». skip to TSTREET
QOUTSV5P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated RECYCLING COLLECTION
SERVICES as poor?
TSTREET The next few questions have to do with traffic and road maintenance in Carlsbad.
Please rate the condition of each of the following items as excellent, good, fair, or poor.
QSTREET1 How would you rate: Overall road conditions?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QSTRT1P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated OVERALL ROAD CONDITIONS
as poor?
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A7
QMAIN1 How would you rate: Maintenance of street landscaping and medians?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QMAIN1P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated MAINTENANCE OF STREET
LANDSCAPING AND MEDIANS as poor?
QMAIN5 How would you rate: Curb and sidewalk conditions?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QMAIN5P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated CURB AND SIDEWALK
CONDITIONS as poor?
QSTREET5 How would you rate: Traffic circulation efficiency, excluding freeways?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QSTRT5P [If "poor"] is there a specific reason why you rated TRAFFIC CIRCULATION
EFFICIENCY as poor?
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A8
TCOMUT [ASK IF QWORK1 = YES] Now I have a few questions about your commute.
QCOMUT1 During the past year, which of the following ways have you used to get to work from
home? Did you... [SELECT ALL THAT APPLY]
1. Drive alone,
2. Carpool,
3. Use public transportation [BUS, TRAIN, TROLLEY],
4. Bicycle,
5. Walk or
6. Work at home
7. OTHER [SPECIFY]
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QCOMUT2 How do you get to work from home, on most days?
1. DRIVE ALONE,
2. CARPOOL,
3. USE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION [BUS, TRAIN, TROLLEY]
4. BICYCLE,
5. WALK
6. WORK AT HOME
7. OTHER [SPECIFY]
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
TWHYP Next I would like to ask you to rate some reasons for using Carlsbad parks, according to
their importance to you. As I tell you each reason, please rate each reason on a scale of
zero to ten, where zero means it is NOT IMPORTANT and ten means it is VERY
IMPORTANT to you.
QWHYP1 How important are rest, relaxation and open space to you, as a reason for visiting
Carlsbad parks?
[0= NOT IMPORTANT 10= VERY IMPORTANT]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A9
QWHYP3 [HOW IMPORTANT ARE] attending entertainment events and social gatherings [TO
YOU, AS A REASON FOR VISITING CARLSBAD PARKS]?
[0= NOT IMPORTANT 10= VERY IMPORTANT]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QWELL Thinking overall about recreational programs and facilities in Carlsbad, using a scale of
0 to 10 where zero means not at all well and ten means very well, how well do you
think the City of Carlsbad promotes health and wellness through its recreational
programs and facilities?
[0= NOT WELL AT ALL 10= VERY WELL]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
TSPND The next few questions have to do with how you purchase goods and services -
specifically whether you make these purchases in Carlsbad or someplace else. I'm
going to list several spending categories. For these questions, please tell me what
percentage of your spending would be in Carlsbad. The first item is... [RANDOMIZE]
QSPND1 Clothing
[WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU NORMALLY SPEND IN CARLSBAD?]
[ENTER 0-100]
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
QSPND2 Home improvement items
[WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU NORMALLY SPEND IN CARLSBAD?]
[ENTER 0-100]
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
QSPND3 Groceries
[WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU NORMALLY SPEND IN CARLSBAD?]
[ENTER 0-100]
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A10
QSPND4 Dining out
[WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU NORMALLY SPEND IN CARLSBAD?]
[ENTER 0-100]
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
QSPND6 Entertainment [MOVIES, PLAYS, LIVE MUSIC, ETC.]
[WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU NORMALLY SPEND IN CARLSBAD?]
[ENTER 0-100]
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
TENT Next I have a few questions about entertainment - namely some of the types of
entertainment that you might enjoy. I'm going to read a list of types of entertainment.
For each item that I read, please tell me if you have ever traveled outside of Carlsbad to
experience this type of entertainment. The first one is... [RANDOMIZE]
QENT1 Nationally-known musical acts.
O.NO
LYES
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
[REPEAT ANSWER CHOICES FOR ALL QENT QUESTIONS]
QENT2 Foreign or art house films.
QENT3 Music, dance or theater productions in which your family or neighbors were performers.
QENT4 Local musical groups that you can dance to.
QENT5 Professional-quality theater or dance.
QENT6 Professional-quality j azz or symphonic music.
QENT7 Art exhibits or displays.
QENT8 Stand-up comedy.
QENT9 Ethnic culture fairs.
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A11
QENTX [SHOW ALL ITEMS THAT RESPONDENT ANSWERED YES FROM QENT1 TO
QENT9] Here is a list of all the types of entertainment you said you visited outside of
Carlsbad. Please tell me your favorite out of all of these.
TLAND Now I have a few questions for you about development and land use.
QLAND One of the tasks of city government is to balance various land uses in the city - uses
such as residential, commercial, industrial and recreational. On a scale from zero to ten,
where zero means very poor and ten means excellent, how would you rate the job the
City of Carlsbad is doing in balancing the various land uses in the city?
[RANDOMLY INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE "industrial" and TRACK CONDITION IN SEPARATE
FIELD]
[0= POOR 10= EXCELLENT]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QLAND2
TDEV
QDEV1
QDEV1E
QDEV1P
TVILL2
[IF QLAND < 4] What could the City do to improve your rating on this issue?
We are interested in your opinions about development in the City of Carlsbad in terms
of architecture, traffic patterns, site layout, landscaping, and recreational and open
spaces.
How would you rate the overall quality of the development in Carlsbad in the last three
years?
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
[SKIP TO QDEV1E]
[SKIP TO QDEVIMP]
[SKIP TO QDEVIMP]
[SKIP TO QDEV1P]
[SKIP TO QDEVIMP]
[SKIP TO QDEVIMP]
What is it about the development that leads you to rate the quality of the development as
Excellent? (open end) [SKIP TO QDEVIMP]
What is it about the development that leads you to rate the quality of the development as
Poor? (open end)
The next several questions cover a variety of additional topics about the City of
Carlsbad.
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A12
QVIL1
QPOLL1
QPOLL3
TSAFE
QSAFE1
QSAFE2
How often do you visit the Downtown Village Area of Carlsbad?
1. Every day
2. Once a week or more
3. Once a month or more
4. A few times each year
5. Once a year
6. Never
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
During the past year, have you seen or heard any information about how residents can
prevent the pollution of our creeks, lagoons and ocean?
0. No
1. Yes
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
[SKIP TO TSAFE]
[SKIP TO TSAFE]
[SKIP TO TSAFE]
Have you personally done anything in the past year to reduce the amount of pollution of
our creeks, lagoons and ocean? [IF SO...] What have you done?
[SELECT ALL THAT APPLY]
1. DID NOTHING
2. PROPERLY DISPOSED OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
3. USED ENVIRONMENTALLY-FRIENDLY SOAPS, PESTICIDES, ETC.
4. CLEANED UP ANIMAL WASTE
5. USED A COMMERCIAL CAR WASH
6. CLEANED UP TRASH AT BEACH, ROADSIDE, ETC.
7. OTHER
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
10. NO MORE ANSWERS
The next few questions have to do with neighborhood safety and police services. For
each question, please use a scale of 0 to 10 where zero means not at all safe and ten
means very safe.
How safe do you feel walking alone in your neighborhood during the day?
Rating
How safe do you feel walking alone hi your neighborhood after dark?
Rating
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A13
TRAT Now I have a few statements about Carlsbad City Government. Please rate each
statement on a scale of zero to ten, where zero means you totally disagree and ten
means you totally agree with the statement. [These items would be randomized] [Last
asked in 2004]
QRAT1 I receive good value for the local taxes I pay.
[0 = TO ALL Y DISAGREE 10= TO ALL Y AGREE]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QRAT2 The City of Carlsbad welcomes citizen involvement.
[0 = TO ALLY DISAGREE 10- TOALLY AGREE]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QRAT3 The City of Carlsbad listens to citizens.
[0 = TOALLY DISAGREE 10= TOALLY AGREE]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QRAT4 I am pleased with the overall direction the City of Carlsbad is taking.
[0 = TOALLY DISAGREE 10= TOALLY AGREE]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QRAT5 In general, I believe that the City of Carlsbad government is doing a good job.
[0 = TOALLY DISAGREE 10= TOALLY AGREE]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QRATF [Ask if any of QRAT1 - QRAT5 are less than 4] Why did you disagree with the
statement(s) about [show summary of statement (s)]?
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A14
QCONTCT3 In the past year, did you have any contact with employees of the City of Carlsbad as
they carried out their job?
0. NO [SKIPTO QCITINF2]
LYES
8. DON'T KNOW [SKIPTO QCITINF2]
9. REFUSED [SKIPTO QCITINF2]
QCONTCT2 We would like to find out more about the contact you have had with City staff. Which
of the following ways did you have contact with the City or City staff? Was it...
[SELECT ALL THAT APPLY]
1. By telephone,
2. By letter or other written correspondence,
3. By e-mail,
4. Face-to-face, individually,
5. As part of a group, or
6. Some other way? [SPECIFY]
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QCONTCT4 How would you rate the level of customer service you experienced in your interactions
with City staff? Would you rate it as...
4. Excellent
3. Good
2. Fair
l.Poor
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QCCONT4P [If QCONTCT4 = 1 ] is there a specific reason why you rated the City's customer
service as poor?
QCITINF2 Using a scale of zero to ten where zero means POOR and ten means EXCELLENT,
how would you rate the job the city does in providing you with information that is
important to you?
[0= POOR 10- EXCELLENT]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QCITIN2P [If QCITINF2 < 4] is there a specific reason why you rated the City's information
delivery as poor?
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A15
QCWEB1 Have you accessed the City's website in the past year to find information about the
City?
O.No
l.Yes
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
[SKIPTO QCITINF4]
[SKIPTO QCITINF4]
[SKIPTO QCITINF4]
QCWEB2 Did you find what you were looking for on the city's website?
O.No
l.Yes
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
QCWEB3 What type of information were you looking for?
(open end)
QCITINF4 What types or topics of information
would you like to receive from the City?
(open end)
QCITINF3 Using a scale of zero to ten where zero means NOT AT ALL CONFIDENT and ten
means VERY CONFIDENT, how would you rate your level of confidence that the
information you get from the City is accurate?
[0= NOT AT ALL CONFIDENT 10= VERY CONFIDENT]
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QCITIN3P [If QCITINF3 < 4] is there a specific reason why your confidence in the City's
information is so low?
QCONFID3 On a scale of zero to ten, where zero means NOT AT ALL CONFIDENT and ten
means VERY CONFIDENT, how confident are you in the Carlsbad City government to
make decisions which positively affect the lives of its community members?
Rating
IF ((QCONFID3 > 8) & (QCONFID3 < 98)) SKP QCONHIGH
IF ((QCONFID3 < 9) & (QCONFID3 > 3)) SKP TDEMO
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A16
QCONLOW Is there a specific reason why your rating for confidence in city government was so
low? (open end)
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QCONHIGH Is there a specific reason why your rating for confidence in city government was so
high? (open end)
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
TDEMO And now a few final questions, for classification purposes only.
DEMO1 How many years have you lived in Carlsbad? (open end)
DEMO2 Do you own or rent your home?
0. RENT
1. OWN
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
DEMOS How many people currently reside in your household, including yourself? (open end)
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
DEMO4
DEMO7
DEMOS
[IF 1 SKIPTO QDEMO7]
How many children under the age of 18 do you have in your household? (open end)
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
[IF QWORK2 IS "YES"] Earlier you said that you worked for pay or owned a business.
On average, how many miles do you travel, one way, to get to where you work?
MILES
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
Including yourself, how many adults in your household work outside of the home?
(open end)
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
[IF 0 SKIPTO QAGE]
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A17
DEMO6 How many of those who work outside the home work outside of the City of Carlsbad?
(open end)
98. DON'T KNOW
99. REFUSED
QAGE In what year were you born?
QRACE What race do you consider yourself to be?
1. White/Caucasian
2. African American or Black
3. Asian
4. American Indian, Aleut, Eskimo
5. Hispanic or Latino
6. Other [Specify]
8. DON'T KNOW
9. REFUSED
Q STREET One of the ways that we will present the results of this study is to compare the answers
given by people in different neighborhoods. So that we can do this, could you tell me the name of the
street that you live on?
QSTREETA Is that a street, road, avenue, or something else?
QXSTREET And what is the nearest cross street?
QXSTRET2 Is that a street, road, avenue, or something else?
2006 City of Carlsbad Public Opinion Survey A18
QINCOME Please stop me when I reach the category that best describes your household's total
income last year before taxes?
1. Under $25,000
2. $25,000 to under $35,000
3. $35,000 to under $50,000
4. $50,000 to under $75,000
5. $75,000 to under $100,000
6. $100,000 to under $125,000
7. $125,000 to under $150,000
8. $150,000 to under $200,000
9. $200,000 and above
X. DON'T KNOW
Y. REFUSED
QCOMMENT Do you have any additional comments you would like to make about any of the topics
that we covered?
QBYE Those are all the questions I have for you today. Thank you for your time and
cooperation. Goodbye.
GENDER RESPONDENT'S GENDER
I.MALE
2. FEMALE
QCOM [INTERVIEWER: PLEASE ADD ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS YOU HAVE
ABOUT THE INTERVIEW]
QCOOPER How cooperative was the respondent?
QUNDR In general, how well did the respondent understand the questions?
QATTEND How well was the respondent able to pay attention during the interview?