HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-16; City Council; MinutesCITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
SPECIAL MEETING
Faraday Administration Offices
1635 Faraday Avenue
Room173A
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
10a.m.
Minutes
CALL TO ORDER: The Mayor called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.
ROLL CALL: Lewis, Kulchin, Hall, Packard, Nygaard.
1. Council discussion on Council Member reports on regional roles and assignments, as
necessary, including:
There were no reports on regional roles or assignments.
Nygaard Buena Vista Lagoon JPA
City/School Committee
LOSSAN Corridor Board of Directors
North County Dispatch Joint Powers Authority (alternate)
North County Transit District Board of Directors
North County Transit District Planning Committee
Packard Buena Vista Lagoon JPA
City/School Committee
EFJPA
Encina Joint Powers (JAC)
Encina Wastewater Authority
League of California Cities - SD Division
League of California Cities Transportation, Communication & Public Works
Committee
North County Dispatch Joint Powers Authority
Hall Chamber of Commerce Liaison
League of California Cities Revenue and Taxation Committee
SANDAG Board of Directors
SANDAG Public Safety Committee
SANDAG Executive Committee
Kulchin American Coastal Coalition Board of Directors
American Shore & Beach Preservation Association, Board of Directors
CalCoast Board of Directors
Carlsbad ConVis (alternate)
Encina Joint Powers (JAC)
Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA)
City Council Workshop January 16, 2008 2
North County Transit District (alternate)
*San Diego Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE)
SANDAG Board of Directors (2ntf alternate)
*SANDAG Shoreline Preservation Committee
Lewis Chamber of Commerce Liaison
LAFCO Cities Advisory Committee
North County Mayors and Managers
SANDAG (1st alternate)
San Diego County Water Authority Board of Directors
Requests to Speak on a listed item: A total of 15 minutes is provided. Please submit a
speaker card indicating the item you wish to address. Comments/speakers are limited to three
(3) minutes each.
Russ Kohl, 3317 Don Pablo, a member of the Rancho Carlsbad Home Owners Board asked
the Mayor about the scope of item number 4. Mr. Kohl noted that he was speaking regarding
the option agreement and relocation parcel for the recreational vehicle facilities/storage for
Rancho Carlsbad. Mr. Kohl gave a brief background of this agreement. He stated that he was
requesting a resolution or plan regarding the relocation of the facilities parcel when BJ basin is
built. He asked if Council could give him an answer.
Bill Arnold, 3432 Don Ortega Drive, noted that Rancho Carlsbad had a lack of information
regarding the funding of the parcel relocation. He asked the Mayor and Council about the
city's financial commitment to this project.
In response to Council, Mr. Arnold stated that he was looking for the funding source for the
relocation.
Kasey Cinciarelli, Lyons Court, representing Preserve Calavera, spoke in support of the
drainage master plan. She noted, however, that there are environmental concerns regarding
pollution in the flood areas. She asked that staff consider the drainage plan from the
perspective of the watershed and not the individual components of the watershed. She
offered a handout (this handout is on file in the Office of the City Clerk) with recommendations
for improvements. Speaking as a citizen of Carlsbad, Ms. Cinciarelli asked to have habitat
management brought in house at the City.
The Mayor requested that Council hear item number 1 at this time.
1. Discussion and presentation of the 2007 Public Opinion Survey. This item was
heard after item number 3.
Sr. Management Analyst Joe Garuba along with Josh Williams and Amy Barrah of [bw]
Research Partnership presented the 2007 Public Opinion Survey to Council. (The
presentation and Survey Report are on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Mr. Williams explained the new survey methodology and noted that this methodology
would improve interpretation of the data and would be useful in comparison with other
cities.
City Council Workshop January 16, 2008 3
Mayor Lewis and Council Member Hall stated that inclusion of a Time Warner Cable
evaluation in the survey would be important information.
Mr. Garuba noted that the survey information is available on the City website.
The Mayor called a recess at 11:10 a.m. and reconvened the Council at 11:15 a.m.
2. Discussion of campaign signs in City right of way and medians.
The Mayor asked Council if they were in favor of eliminating political signs in the City's
medians. In response to the Mayor, City Attorney Ron Ball stated that this can be
legislated if all other signage is restricted in the same way. He noted that Council can
legally craft policy regarding political signage.
Mayor Pro Tern Kulchin agreed to eliminate political signage from the medians.
Council Member Packard stated he did not support the elimination of political signage and
spoke in favor of fewer government rules in these matters.
Council Member Hall noted that there may be issues of fairness involved in the question;
citing the loss of signage in the medians is less than on roadsides and the need for new
candidates to have their name in front of the public.
Council Member Nygaard stated that she would like to see the 45-day political sign period
shortened.
City Attorney Ball stated that he would return this item to the agenda next month.
The Mayor asked to hear item number three at this time.
3. Discussion and update on Rancho Carlsbad flood control mitigation and
monitoring programs and improvements.
Public Works Director Glenn Pruim gave a history of the drainage and flood control work
performed in the area of Rancho Carlsbad. He pointed out that operational control of Lake
Calavera has changed the need for the BJ Basin. He stated that with the installation of the
84" storm drain, the construction of the Melrose, BJB and Faraday basins, channel
dredging and improvements along with the ability to control water levels at Lake Calavera
will assure the proper drainage and flood control for the area. He noted that hydrology
studies have confirmed that BJ basin is not needed for drainage and flood control of this
area.
In response to Council, Mr. Pruim noted that the City will monitor the Lake levels.
In response to Council, Mr. Pruim stated that if the City and the Rancho Carlsbad group do
not agree to a plan, the issue of relocation and funding would go to Council.
Mr. Pruim outlined the agreement between the McMillin Homes, Rancho Carlsbad and the
City. He noted that the City's option to have first rights to purchase the option parcel on
the McMillin property has expired.
Discussion ensued regarding the Dos Colinas property and future drainage fees.
City Council Workshop January 16, 2008 4
In response to Council, Mr. Pruim indicated that Mr. Bentley of the Cantarini/Holly Springs
development, needs to identify a suitable site for the storage of Rancho Carlsbad RV's.
Bill Arnold spoke of the need for a box culvert in the BJ area. He also stated that Rancho
Carlsbad does not agree with the methodology used by the City consultant regarding the
hydrology analysis. He noted that the City has a role in funding relocation.
City Attorney Ball stated that the proper forum for the relocation/funding discussion is at the
Council meeting that amends the Drainage Master Plan and the certification of the
Environmental Impact Report.
Jim Waltrip, 3406 Don Cota, stated that he does not agree with the data provided by staff.
Mr. Bentley, developer of Cantarini/Holly Springs, stated that he needs to know the timing
and the funding of reimbursement.
City Manager Lisa Hildabrand asked when the EIR certification and amendment to the
Drainage Master Plan would be coming to Council.
Mr. Pruim stated that these documents would come to Council in late February 2008.
Council requested that these documents be sent out earlier for review, that another
workshop be held on this topic and that staff look at other ways to come to resolution
regarding the relocation and funding issue.
4. Receipt and discussion of Planning Commission comments and concerns
regarding development processing, procedures, and other land use issues.
There was no discussion on this item.
5. Discussion of Council efficiency and effectiveness including impact of regional
assignments with regard to contact with other Council members, decision and
policymaking, serving the community and effective methods of feedback.
There was no discussion on this item.
6. City Manager review of goal and major project tracking report and update
discussion of Council goal setting process and discussion of capacity and
effectiveness in the delivery of City processes and services.
There was no discussion on this item.
7. Discussion of feedback, communications or correspondence on issues for the
good of the community, including directions to the City Manager or City Attorney,
as appropriate, for the scheduling of items for future agendas, workshops or
study sessions.
There was no discussion on this item.
City Council Workshop January 16, 2008 5
Requests to Speak: Continuation of Requests to Speak (if necessary)
None
ADJOURNMENT The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 12:05 p.m.
. WOOD, CMC
CITY CLERK
1. Specific mitigation for the identified wetlands impacts is not provided. In the absence of
such information it is impossible to determine if the requirements for no net loss have been
met. Furthermore, it is stated throughout the FEIR and staff report that mitigation for the
impacts from the emergency dredging project of 2006 have yet to be implemented- in fact a
final plan is yet to be completed. There is already a net loss of wetlands function in the
project area- a condition that will be exacerbated by the additional impacts from the proposed
project. .
2. There is no discussion of protection of wildlife movement in spite of this area having been
identified as a problem area for wildlife movement.
3. The proposed mitigation measures do not fully address all of the potential edge effects of
development- in spite of the project area being adjacent to state of CA preserve land, on the
west and city of Carlsbad HMP preserve land on the east.
Section IH LCP Amendment
The staff report indicates the intent to have the City Council approve the DMP Update and LCP
changes following review of all comments on the LCP after a 6 week public review period from
December 14 - January 24,2008. As a commentor on this project we believe we should have
received notice of such public comment period for the LCP. The mailed notice we received for
this project only mentioned the FEIR and did not provide any notice of the proposed LCP
amendment. The first public notice of the LCP amendment that we are aware of occurred with
the posting of the Planning Commission Agenda for the January 16,2008 meeting which we
believe was received via email on January 10,2008. Please verify the dates and method of
public notice for the LCP amendment and explain why we were not notified in spite of our prior
comments on this project.
In addition to concerns about public notification, we object to the proposed LCP amendment for
the following reasons:
1. The project as proposed is not consistent with the HMP as discussed in section II above.
2. The FEIR is inadequate as discussed in Section I above.
3. The LCP discusses methods to protect water quality- an item that was specifically removed
from the DMP Update.
4. The project as proposed could have significant adverse cumulative impacts on coastal
resources. The DMP Update includes proposed culverting of 19,175 linear feet or over 3.6
miles of natural and disturbed wetlands. There is essentially no discussion of avoidance or
minimization measures.
5. Discrepancies in the hardline preserve description between the HMP and the proposed
project have not been adequately explained.
We believe these comments fully support our recommendation to:
1. Make a real commitment to integrate plans for flood control with comprehensive watershed
planning - including incorporating the recommendations of the Agua Hedionda Watershed
Management Plan into the next phases of the project.
——- 2. Add a mitigation measure that requires establishing guidelines for when a creek can be
culverted or a natural creek channel can be lined with concrete.
— 3. Provide the full project level Mitigation Plan for Agua Hedionda and Calavera creeks for
public review and comment.
~~ 4. Require the city to have the habitat land manager contract signed and hi place before
allowing loss of further habitat from the project level components.
—- 5. Integrate planning for wetlands mitigation for the prior emergency dredging project, the
current project, and any others that might be anticipated in the project area.
— 6. Add a mitigation measure to address the wildlife movement corridor issues hi the project area
that will only be made worse by this project.
— 7. Provide a complete determination of HMP consistency with the EDR. as is required in the
HMP so that the public can be fully informed in order to comment on this issue.
We urge you to adopt these recommendations and assure that this project does what it is intended
to- but doesn't cause unintended damage to the watershed through piecemeal planning.
Sincerely,
Diane Nygaard
On Behalf of Preserve Calavera
Cc: David Mayer CDFG, David Zoutendyk USFWS
Mike Porter RWQCB
Att - Report by Karen Merrill.
Master Drainage Plan feir Jan 08
10
District
1
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
Presented to the City of Carlsbad
December 2007
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures.................................................................................................................... ii
List of Tables.....................................................................................................................iii
Executive Summary..........................................................................................................1
Introduction to the Study................................................................................................1
Methodology Overview ..................................................................................................1
Key Findings..................................................................................................................1
Conclusions...................................................................................................................5
Main Reason for Moving to Carlsbad................................................................................7
Satisfaction: Comparison to Other Cities.....................................................................10
Quality of Life..................................................................................................................11
Quality of life: Comparison to Other Cities...................................................................13
Number One Way to Increase Quality of Life..................................................................14
Sense of Community.......................................................................................................15
Sense of Community: Comparison to Other Cities......................................................18
Safety in Carlsbad...........................................................................................................19
Safety: Comparison to Other Cities .............................................................................21
Confidence in City Government......................................................................................23
Satisfaction with Specific City Services...........................................................................24
Ratings for Contracted City Services..............................................................................26
Household Use of City Library Facilities .........................................................................27
City’s Effectiveness Promoting Health and Wellness......................................................28
Satisfaction with City-Resident Communication..............................................................29
City-Resident Communication: Comparison to Other Cities........................................31
Rating City’s Job to Provide Information......................................................................32
Information Sources.....................................................................................................34
Frequency Visiting City’s Website ...............................................................................35
Preventing Pollution of Creeks, Lagoons, and Ocean ....................................................36
Land Use in the City of Carlsbad ....................................................................................38
Preferences for Land Near Strawberry Fields.................................................................39
Experience Visiting the Carlsbad Village ........................................................................41
Preferences for Stores and Businesses in the City.........................................................43
Methodology....................................................................................................................45
Appendix A: Toplines.................................................................................................... A-1
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
ii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Main Reason for Moving to Carlsbad..................................................................7
Figure 2 Satisfaction with City Services............................................................................8
Figure 3 Satisfaction with City Services: Comparison to Other Cities.............................10
Figure 4 Quality of Life....................................................................................................11
Figure 5 Quality of Life: Comparison to Other Cities.......................................................13
Figure 6 Number One Way to Increase Quality of Life ...................................................14
Figure 7 Level of Agreement with Items..........................................................................16
Figure 8 Sense of Community Index Levels ...................................................................16
Figure 9 Sense of Community: Comparison to Other Cities...........................................18
Figure 10 Safety in Carlsbad...........................................................................................19
Figure 11 Safety Walking Alone During the Day: Comparison to Other Cities ...............21
Figure 12 Safety Walking Alone After Dark: Comparison to Other Cities.......................22
Figure 13 Confidence in City Government to Make Decisions........................................23
Figure 14 Satisfaction with Local Issues and Services...................................................25
Figure 15 Ratings for Contracted City Services..............................................................26
Figure 16 Household Frequency Visiting City Library Facilities......................................27
Figure 17 Effectiveness Promoting Health and Wellness...............................................28
Figure 18 Satisfaction with City-Resident Communication .............................................29
Figure 19 City-Resident Communication: Comparison to Other Cities...........................31
Figure 20 Rating for the City’s Job Providing Important Information...............................32
Figure 21 Ways to Improve Satisfaction with City-Resident Communication .................33
Figure 22 Information Sources........................................................................................34
Figure 23 Times Visited City’s Website in Last 12 Months.............................................35
Figure 24 Seen or Heard Information Regarding Preventing Water Pollution ................36
Figure 25 Source of Pollution Prevention Information.....................................................36
Figure 26 Action Taken Based on Pollution Prevention Information...............................37
Figure 27 Rating for City’s Job Balancing Land Use.......................................................38
Figure 28 Familiarity with Area Along Cannon Road and Agua Hedionda Lagoon ........39
Figure 29 Support for Various Land Uses in the Area Near Strawberry Fields...............39
Figure 30 Most Preferred Option for Area Near Strawberry Fields.................................40
Figure 31 Frequency Visiting Carlsbad’s Downtown Village...........................................41
Figure 32 Experience Visiting Carlsbad Village..............................................................42
Figure 33 Preferences for Stores and Businesses in the City.........................................43
Figure 34 Frequency Visiting Similar Stores and Businesses Outside the City..............44
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Sense of Community Index................................................................................15
Table 2 Overview of Project Methodology ......................................................................45
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
In September 2007, the City of Carlsbad and its Performance Measurement Resource
Team partnered with BW Research Partnership to conduct Carlsbad’s 2007 public
opinion survey of residents.
The main research objectives of the study were to:
• assess residents’ perceptions regarding satisfaction with city services, quality of life,
sense of community, city government, safety, and city-resident communication;
• evaluate residents’ satisfaction with a number of specific city services;
• identify residents’ perceptions regarding land use in Carlsbad as well as open space
preferences for the land near the strawberry fields; and,
• assess residents’ experience visiting the Carlsbad Village as well as preferences for
the types of stores and businesses that could be located throughout the City
METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW
The city-wide telephone survey of residents was administered from October 1 through
November 11, 2007 (interviewing was suspended for approximately one and a half
weeks during the San Diego County fires) and averaged 20 minutes in length. In total, a
statistically representative sample of 1,001 Carlsbad residents 18 years and older
completed a telephone survey, resulting in a maximum margin of error +/- 3.08 percent
(at the 95 percent level of confidence) for questions answered by all 1,001 respondents.
KEY FINDINGS
Based on the analysis of the survey data, BW Research is pleased to present the
following key findings. Please refer to the body of the report for a more comprehensive
analysis of findings, including comparisons among resident sub-groups.
MAIN REASON FOR MOVING TO CARLSBAD (PAGE 7)
Housing was the most frequently cited reason for moving to Carlsbad, at 16.2 percent.
Responses in this category centered on residents finding a home they liked in Carlsbad
as well as the affordability of housing in Carlsbad at the time they purchased. Other
reasons cited by at least ten percent of residents included Carlsbad’s proximity to the
beach and lagoons (12.3%), proximity to work (12.0%), and the community atmosphere
and quietness (10.2%).
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
2
SATISFACTION WITH CITY SERVICES (PAGE 8)
Overwhelmingly, 91.5 percent of residents reported either being “Very” (58.0%) or
“Somewhat” satisfied (33.5%) with the job the City of Carlsbad is doing to provide city
services.
QUALITY OF LIFE (PAGE 11)
Overall, two and a half times as many residents felt the quality of life in Carlsbad was
getting better or staying the same (69.4%) as compared to getting worse. In particular,
21.5 percent of residents felt the quality of life was “Getting better,” 47.9 percent felt it
was “Staying about the same,” and 26.5 percent viewed it as “Getting worse.”
NUMBER ONE WAY TO INCREASE QUALITY OF LIFE (PAGE 14)
As a follow-up question, the 29.0 percent of residents (290 respondents) who either felt
that the quality of life in the City was getting worse or who were dissatisfied with the job
the City is doing to provide services were asked to report the number one thing that the
City could do to improve the quality of life. Overwhelmingly, the majority (51.7%) of the
290 respondents felt that the quality of life in Carlsbad would be improved if the City
stopped building and halted growth.
SENSE OF COMMUNITY (PAGE 15)
Overall, 47.9 percent of Carlsbad residents have a “High” sense of community
(assessed from a seven question series), 40.0 percent have a “Medium” sense of
community, and 12.0 percent of respondents have a “Low” sense of community.
SAFETY IN CARLSBAD (PAGE 19)
More than eight out of ten residents felt safe walking alone in their neighborhood either
during the day or after dark. Overwhelmingly, 98.3 percent of residents felt safe walking
alone in their neighborhood during the day (with 85.9 percent reporting they felt “Very
safe”) and 85.5 percent of residents indicating they felt safe walking alone after dark
(51.4% “Very safe”).
CONFIDENCE IN CITY GOVERNMENT (PAGE 23)
Approximately three out of four residents (78.5%) have confidence in Carlsbad city
government to make decisions which positively affect the lives of its community
members. Of those, 23.1 percent indicated they were “Very confident” and 55.4 percent
were “Somewhat confident.” Eighteen percent indicated that they were unconfident
(“Very unconfident”: 5.4%, “Somewhat unconfident”: 12.7%) and 3.4 percent did not
know or declined to state.
SATISFACTION WITH SPECIFIC CITY SERVICES (PAGE 24)
Over 90 percent of residents1 were satisfied with the City’s efforts to:
• Provide library services (96.3% satisfaction);
• Maintain city parks (95.0% satisfaction);
1 Responses of “Don’t know/ No answer” were filtered out of the analysis for this question.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
3
• Provide fire protection and prevention services (94.3% satisfaction);
• Provide water services (92.5% satisfaction);
• Provide law enforcement services (92.3% satisfaction);
• Provide sewer services (91.6% satisfaction);
• Provide emergency medical and paramedic services (91.5% satisfaction); and
• Maintain recreation facilities (91.3% satisfaction).
Across the 16 issues, the average satisfaction score was 84.6 percent. The three items
that fell below the average were:
• Manage traffic congestion on city streets (64.2% satisfaction);
• Manage residential growth and development (57.0% satisfaction); and
• Provide affordable housing for working families (53.2% satisfaction).
RATINGS FOR CONTRACTED CITY SERVICES (PAGE 26)
Evaluating the City’s contracted services, residents provided the most positive rating to
“Trash collection services” (88.9% “Excellent” or “Good”), followed by “Recycling
collection services (80.0% “Excellent” or “Good”), “Street sweeping services” (73.7%),
and “Hazardous waste disposal” (70.6%).
HOUSEHOLD USE OF CITY LIBRARY FACILITIES (PAGE 27)
Overall, 84.7 percent of households have visited one of the Carlsbad City Library
facilities in the past 12 months. In addition, close to the majority (49.6%) visited at least
once a month (“Once per week or more”: 17.6%, “Once or twice per month”: 32.9%).
CITY’S EFFECTIVENESS PROMOTING HEALTH AND WELLNESS (PAGE 28)
When asked to rate the City’s effectiveness in promoting health and wellness through its
recreational programs and facilities, 16.8 percent of residents did not state an opinion
(most likely because they lacked direct experience). As such, the 16.8 percent of
respondents that did not provide an opinion were filtered out of the analysis for this
question. Approximately nine out of ten residents (90.3%) who provided an opinion felt
the City was effectively promoting health and wellness through recreation. Of those, 34.1
percent felt the City was “Very effective” and 56.2 percent rated the City as “Somewhat
effective.”
SATISFACTION WITH CITY-RESIDENT COMMUNICATION (PAGE 29)
Eighty-two percent of residents were either “Very” (40.2%) or “Somewhat” satisfied
(42.2%) with the City’s efforts to communicate with residents through publications, public
notices, its website, and other means.
Rating City’s Job to Provide Information (Page 32)
When asked to rate the job the City does providing residents with the information that is
important to them, 65.7 percent of residents rated the City favorably (“Excellent”: 24.2%,
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
4
“Good”: 41.5%). An additional 23.5 percent of residents rated the City as “Fair” and 9.4
percent provided a negative rating (“Poor”: 7.2%, “Very poor”: 2.2%).
The 9.4 percent of residents (94 respondents) that provided a negative rating for the job
the City is doing to provide them with important information were next asked how the
City could improve their satisfaction. The most popular responses among this group
were better overall communication with citizens (20.4%) and more communication
through the mail (18.3%).
Information Sources (Page 34)
When asked to reveal the information sources they use to find out about City of
Carlsbad’ news, information, and programming, 37.6 percent of residents cited the City’s
website, 24.8 percent cited the “North County Times,” 17.6 percent indicated the “San
Diego Union Tribune,” and 14.6 percent indicated local television news.
Frequency Visiting City’s Website (Page 35)
Overall, 67.4 percent of residents have visited the City’s website in the past 12 months
and approximately one in five residents (21.3%) have visited the City’s website at least
ten times in the past year.
Preventing Pollution of Creeks, Lagoons, and Ocean (Page 36)
The majority of residents, 59.7 percent, have seen or heard information in the past year
about how residents can prevent the pollution of local creeks, lagoons, and the ocean.
The most frequently cited sources of the pollution prevention information were the
newspaper (29.3%) and television (27.0%). Nearly one-quarter of residents that had
been exposed to information indicated that they properly disposed of hazardous waste
(24.6%) and 21.4 percent indicated that they have not done anything to reduce water
pollution.
LAND USE IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD (PAGE 38)
The majority of residents (53.7%) rated the job the City of Carlsbad is doing in balancing
the various land uses in the City – including residential, commercial, industrial, and
recreational – as “Excellent” (15.5%) or “Good” (38.2%). Twenty-three percent rated the
City’s job as “Fair” and 20.6 percent gave the City a “Poor” (13.0%) or “Very poor”
(7.6%) rating.
PREFERENCES FOR LAND NEAR STRAWBERRY FIELDS (PAGE 39)
Residents who indicated familiarity (90.1% of residents) with the area along Cannon
Road and the Aqua Hediondo Lagoon, beginning with the strawberry fields just east of
the 5 Freeway and extending to Faraday Avenue were told that the area is largely
privately owned and used for agricultural purposes but has been designated as a
permanent open space area.
Among the four options presented, 82.0 percent of residents who were familiar with the
area would support traditional open space, which could include trails, a nature park,
viewing areas, and a picnic area, 57.8 percent would support a combination of recreation
space, traditional open space, and cultural facilities, 53.3 percent would support
recreation space (athletic fields, recreation centers, other active recreation), and 51.0
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
5
percent would support cultural and civic facilities in that area (open-air theatre, museum,
public gathering space).
After indicating their support for each of the various open space options, residents were
next asked to indicate which option would be best for the area (selecting among only
those options that they previously supported). Overall, 48.9 percent of residents who
indicated support for at least one of the options in the previous question felt that
traditional open space would be best for the area (which could include trails, a nature
park, viewing areas, and a picnic area), followed by a combination of recreation space,
traditional open space, and cultural and civic facilities (32.3%).
EXPERIENCE VISITING THE CARLSBAD VILLAGE (PAGE 41)
Overall, 96.1 percent of Carlsbad residents have visited Carlsbad’s Downtown Village.
The majority of residents regularly visited (55.5%), 24.1 percent sometimes visited (once
a month or more), and 16.5 percent seldom visited the Village (16.5%). Among residents
who have visited Carlsbad’s Downtown Village, 87.0 rated their experience positively,
with 43.4 percent rating it as “Excellent” and 43.6 percent rating it as “Good.”
PREFERENCES FOR STORES AND BUSINESSES IN THE CITY (PAGE 43)
When presented with four types of stores and businesses that could be located within
Carlsbad, movie theatres (41.8% “More”) and medical and dental offices and outpatient
services were the most popular (27.0% “More”).
Over 20 percent of residents would like to see less home furnishing stores and large-
scale retail stores in the City and a majority felt there was currently an adequate number
of each within the Carlsbad.
The majority of Carlsbad residents regularly visited large-scale retail stores such as
Target, Home Deport, or Barnes & Noble (56.5%) as well as medical and dental office
and outpatient services (52.7%) outside the City of Carlsbad.
CONCLUSIONS
BW Research Partnership offers the following conclusions from the 2007 resident survey
for the City of Carlsbad.
The City of Carlsbad is transitioning from a small to medium sized city of less than
100,000 residents to a larger city. While the City’s population has increased, so have the
diverse needs of its residents. In our experience, larger and more diverse cities,
particularly those with a population greater than 100,000, face increasing challenges
maintaining a high level of satisfaction among its residents. In the future, as the City’s
population continues to grow, Carlsbad will need to be more vigilant to maintain resident
satisfaction.
Overall, residents of Carlsbad are quite satisfied with the job the City is doing to provide
services. Ninety-two percent of respondents stated they were satisfied with the City’s
overall provision of services, and over half of those respondents were very satisfied. The
high proportion of satisfaction with the City’s overall provision of services ranks in the top
ten percent of comparable city resident satisfaction surveys and should be considered a
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
6
solid baseline of support when examining residents assessments of more specific city
services.
Results of the survey also provide some direction on where the City can focus resources
to further improve residents’ satisfaction with Carlsbad. While almost all residents were
satisfied with the overall job the City is doing to provide services, just over a quarter of
residents indicated that that the quality of life in the City was getting worse. Residents
who were more likely to indicate the quality of life in the City was getting worse had lived
in Carlsbad for 15 years or more and were over the age of 35 (and more likely to be 55
to 64 years old). When asked what could be done to improve Carlsbad, these residents
were focused on the issues of growth in the City and the related symptoms of congestion
and development. Among less satisfied residents, there appears to be a desire to keep
Carlsbad as it was - or at least what it was perceived - as a less congested and
developed community.
Residents’ land use and development priorities can be seen in the responses to what
should be done with the strawberry fields in the future. Over 80 percent of respondents
indicated they would like to see traditionally undeveloped open space in at least some
part of the land in and around the strawberry fields. Approximately half of respondents
indicated they would prefer to see the City use the land exclusively for traditionally
undeveloped open space that could be used for trails or a nature park. Another 32
percent of respondents thought the City should use the land for some combination of
open space that would combine traditionally undeveloped open space, recreational open
space that included athletic fields and recreation centers and a cultural and civic open
space that could be used for a museum or an open-air theatre.
The results of the survey also show that creating more traditional open space for trails
and a nature park, from the land that is currently in and around the strawberry fields,
engenders the least amount of opposition from residents (16 percent opposed) when
compared to other uses that were examined such as cultural and civic open space (45
percent opposed), recreational open space (43 percent opposed), or a combination of
the three types of open space (38 percent opposed).
Lastly, it should be noted that while respondents did not agree on all of the issues
related to land use and development in Carlsbad, respondents were more likely to agree
on other important local issues and assessments connected to the City’s sense of
community, communications efforts, and residents experience in the village.
• Over 80 percent of respondents strongly agreed or agreed with the statement “It is
very important for me to feel a sense of community with other residents”.
• Over 80 percent of respondents were at least somewhat satisfied, if not very
satisfied, with the City’s efforts to communicate with residents.
• Almost 90 percent of respondents who had visited Carlsbad’s downtown Village
rated their experience as either excellent or good.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
7
MAIN REASON FOR MOVING TO CARLSBAD
Early in the survey, residents were asked to reveal their main reason for moving to
Carlsbad over a neighboring City. Asked in an open-ended format, respondents were not
constrained to choose their response from a list. As is often the case with open-ended
questions, no single response was cited by a majority of residents.
Housing was the most frequently cited reason for moving to Carlsbad, at 16.2 percent.
Responses in this category centered on residents finding a home they liked in Carlsbad
as well as the affordability of housing in Carlsbad at the time they purchased. Example
comments include “I found a house that suited me,” “We found a place in Carlsbad that
we liked very much,” “There was a better availability of new homes at the time,” “The
price of housing made me want to move here,” and “At that time, the land was cheaper.”
Other reasons cited by at least ten percent of residents included Carlsbad’s proximity to
the beach and lagoons (12.3%), proximity to work (12.0%), and the community
atmosphere and quietness (10.2%).
Figure 1 Main Reason for Moving to Carlsbad
12.3%
16.2%
2.8%
10.2%
12.0%
9.3%
9.1%
7.3%
4.8%
4.5%
3.8%
2.2%
5.6%
0% 20% 40%
DK/NA
Other
Safety/ low crime
Weather/ climate/ environment
Raised in Carlsbad
Location
I liked the City
Family and friends
Schools
Community atmosphere/ quietness
Close to work
Beach/ ocean/ lagoons
Housing (affordable, liked the house)
Throughout this report, analyses of resident sub-groups are presented in text boxes.
A higher percentage of home-owners cited Carlsbad’s schools as the main reason for
moving to the City as compared to renters (10.9% vs. 3.9%). Comparatively renters
were more likely than owners to cite “Family and friends” (16.0% vs. 7.3%).
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
8
SATISFACTION WITH CITY SERVICES
Overwhelmingly, 91.5 percent of residents reported either being “Very” (58.0%) or
“Somewhat” satisfied (33.5%) with the job the City of Carlsbad is doing to provide city
services.
Figure 2 Satisfaction with City Services
Very satisfied
58.0%Very dissatisfied
3.1%
Somewhat dissatisfied
2.9%
DK/NA
2.5%
Somewhat satisfied
33.5%
In general, satisfied residents were more likely to rate other aspects of life in
Carlsbad favorably. Satisfaction was positively correlated with: residents’ views on
the direction of the community; sense of community; safety; confidence in city
government; ratings for the City’s effectiveness in promoting health and wellness
through recreation; ratings for the job the City is doing balancing land use;
satisfaction with city-resident communication; ratings for the job the city does
providing information that is important to residents; and ratings for residents’
experience visiting Carlsbad’s Downtown Village.
Specifically;
• Residents with positive views regarding the direction of the community in
Carlsbad were more likely to report satisfaction than those with negative
perceptions about the direction (“Getting better” 96.6% satisfaction; “Staying
about the same” 93.5%; “Getting worse” 84.1%).
• As residents’ sense of community increased so did their reported satisfaction,
with 96.3 percent of residents with a “High” sense of community (derived from a
series of seven items) indicating satisfaction (67.2% of which were “Very
satisfied”).
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
9
Analysis of satisfaction with the job the City is doing to provide services continued;
• The safer residents felt walking alone in their neighborhood (either during the day
or at night) the higher their reported satisfaction.
o 94.2 percent of residents who felt “Very safe” walking alone in their
neighborhood after dark reported satisfaction, with 65.7 percent indicating
they were “Very satisfied.”
o 93.6 percent of residents who felt “Very safe” walking alone in their
neighborhood during the day reported satisfaction, 62.4 percent of which
were “Very satisfied.”
• As residents’ confidence in city government to make decisions that positively
affect the lives of residents increased, so did residents’ reported satisfaction.
Ninety-eight percent of residents who reported being “Very confident” in city
government were satisfied (85.3% “Very satisfied).
• Residents who were satisfied with the City’s efforts to communicate with
residents also reported high levels of satisfaction with the job the City is doing to
provide services. Similarly, residents who provided favorable ratings for the City’s
job providing information that is important also noted the highest satisfaction.
• Residents who had visited Carlsbad Village in the past year reported higher
satisfaction than those who had not visited (92.1% vs. 73.5%). In addition,
residents who had visited the Village and rated their experience as “Excellent”
reported the highest satisfaction
• Residents’ views on how the City is doing to balance the various land uses in the
City were also highly related to their satisfaction, and in particular, their intensity
of satisfaction (i.e., the percentage “Very satisfied”) as shown in the figure below.
Demographically;
• Although overall satisfaction was comparable among men and women (89.8%
vs. 93.2%), women more much more likely to report being “Very satisfied”
(62.2% compared to 53.5%).
• One hundred percent of residents in the 18 to 24 year age category reported
satisfaction with the job the city is doing to provide services. Overall satisfaction
was comparable among residents in the remaining age groups although their
intensity of satisfaction varied. Along with residents in the 18 to 24 year group
(65.4% “Very satisfied”), the percentage of residents that were “Very satisfied”
was highest among residents 55 years and older (55 to 64 year group: 65.6%
and 65 years and older: 63.3%).
• No statistically significant differences in satisfaction were found by length of
residence, homeownership status, zip code of residence, children in the
household, or ethnicity.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
10
SATISFACTION: COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES
In our experience, the high level of satisfaction reported by City of Carlsbad residents
falls within the top ten percent among comparable resident research projects. An
average score is typically considered in the low to mid-80 percent range.
Figure 3 below shows examples of residents’ satisfaction with the job their city is doing
to provide services in cities throughout California that have conducted comparable
studies within the past five years.
Figure 3 Satisfaction with City Services: Comparison to Other Cities2
53%
92%
95%
91%
89%
85%
84%
83%
76%
75%
73%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Small City, Kern County
Large City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized CIty, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized CIty, Orange County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
2 Small cities were defined as those with a total population up to 50,000. Mid-sized cities were those with a
population between 50,001 and 150,000. Large cities were those with a population of 150,001 or more.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
11
QUALITY OF LIFE
Overall, two and a half times as many residents felt the quality of life in Carlsbad was
getting better or staying the same (69.4%) as compared to getting worse. In particular,
21.5 percent of residents felt the quality of life in Carlsbad was “Getting better,” 47.9
percent felt it was “Staying about the same,” and 26.5 percent viewed it as “Getting
worse.”
Figure 4 Quality of Life
Getting better
21.5%
DK/NA
4.0%
Getting worse
26.5%
Staying about the same
47.9%
Similar to the results for satisfaction with city services, perceptions regarding quality
of life were positively correlated with a number of attitudinal variables throughout the
survey. To follow are the highlights from the analysis;
• As residents’ sense of community increased so did their views regarding the
quality of life in Carlsbad.
• Residents who were satisfied with the job the City is doing to provide services, as
well as those satisfied with city-resident communication and those providing
positive ratings for the job the City does providing information that is important to
them were more likely to feel that the quality of life in the City was improving.
• Respondents who indicated that they were “Very confident” in city government to
make decisions that positively affect the lives of residents were the most likely to
view the quality of life as “Getting better” (44.5%) and those “Somewhat
confident” were the most likely to view it as “Staying about the same” (55.3%).
Two-thirds of residents who indicated a lack of confidence in city government
viewed the quality of life as “Getting worse” (“Somewhat unconfident”: 64.1%;
“Very unconfident”: 73.0%; Average across the two groups: 66.7%).
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
12
Highlights from the sub-group analysis of quality of life continued;
• Residents who felt “Very safe” walking alone in their neighborhood either during
the day or at night were more likely to report that the quality of life in the City was
improving. Comparatively, those who felt “Somewhat safe” or “Unsafe” were
more likely to report that the quality of life was “Getting worse.”
• Residents’ ratings for the City’s job balancing the various land uses (i.e.,
residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational) were correlated with views
on the direction of the community. Specifically, those providing an “Excellent” or
“Good” rating were the most likely to view the quality of life as “Getting better”
(40.1% and 28.1%, respectively), whereas the majority of those rating the City as
“Poor” or “Very poor” at balancing land uses felt the quality of life was “Getting
worse” (56.1% and 65.6%, respectively).
• Comparatively, residents that felt that traditional open space was the best use of
the land that begins with the strawberry fields and goes to Faraday Avenue were
more likely than those who preferred other options to view the quality of life as
“Getting worse” (31.7% vs. 20.8%).
Demographically;
• Negative perceptions regarding the direction of the community were correlated
with length of residence, such that the percentage who felt the quality of life was
“Getting worse” increased with length of residence (Less than 5 years: 13.5%
“Getting worse”; 5 to 9 years: 22.0%; 10 to 14 years: 32.6%; 15 years or more:
40.8%).
• Homeowners were more likely than renters to indicate that the quality of life in
Carlsbad was “Getting worse” (28.8% vs. 17.8%).
• Residents without children were more likely to view the quality as “Getting worse”
than residents with children.
• Residents in the 18 to 24 year age category were the most likely to view the
quality of life as “Getting better” (39.7%) and those in the 25 to 34 year category
were the most likely to view it as “Staying about the same” (58.1%).
Comparatively, residents 35 years and older were much more likely to indicate
that the quality of life was “Getting worse,” with the highest percentage cited by
those in the 55 to 64 year old age group (36.0%).
• No statistically significant differences were found by whether or not residents had
visited the Carlsbad Village, zip code of residence or gender.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
13
QUALITY OF LIFE: COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES
Figure 5 below shows examples of resident perspectives regarding the quality of life in
cities that have conducted comparable studies within the past five years. Please note
that the figure is sorted based on the combined percentage of “Getting better” and
“Staying about the same” responses.
Overall, 69.4 percent of residents felt the quality of life in Carlsbad was either “Getting
better” (21.5%) or “Staying about the same” (47.9%)
Figure 5 Quality of Life: Comparison to Other Cities3
23%
51%
27%
23%
44%
42%
55%
42%
20%
48%
33%
26%
27%
21%
24%
17%
18%
13%
12%
13%
39%
22%
51%
32%
37%
25%
41%
64%
24%
48%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Large-City, Marin County
Large City, Riverside County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Large City, San Bernardino County
Large City, Sacramento County
Large City, Clark County Nevada
Mid-Sized City, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Small City, Alameda County
Getting better Staying the same Getting worse
3 Small cities were defined as those with a total population up to 50,000. Mid-sized cities were those with a
population between 50,001 and 150,000. Large cities were those with a population of 150,001 or more.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
14
NUMBER ONE WAY TO INCREASE QUALITY OF LIFE
As a follow-up question, the 29.0 percent of residents (290 respondents) who either felt
that the quality of life in the City was getting worse or who were dissatisfied with the job
the City is doing to provide services were asked to report the number one thing that the
City could do to improve the quality of life.
Overwhelmingly, the majority (51.7%) of the 290 respondents felt that the quality of life in
Carlsbad would be improved if the City stopped building and halted growth. Examples of
responses in this category include; “They need to regulate the growth,” “There are too
many new homes,” “There is too much development. When I moved in there was lots of
open area, and it's all filled in now,” “The City of Carlsbad should improve the out-of-
control population. The traffic has gotten worse because of it,” and “Cut back on some of
the high density; I moved here for a small community,” and “They need to stop building
buildings and houses. There is not enough open area and there is too much congestion.”
Figure 6 Number One Way to Increase Quality of Life
11.3%
51.7%
1.6%
2.8%
3.5%
2.6%
2.2%
1.8%
1.7%
1.1%
0.7%
0.6%
8.2%
4.4%
5.7%
0% 20% 40% 60%
DK/NA
Other
Nothing needs improvement
Improve beach access
Build Desalination Plant
Need new Mayor and/ or City Council
More public transportation
Increase recreation opportunities
Improve schools
Remove the illegal immigrants
Preserve more open space
Increase/ improve police services
Improve the quality of the roads and other
infrastructure
Fix the traffic problems
Stop building/ stop growth
Residents who have lived in Carlsbad for five years or more (and were either
dissatisfied or felt the quality of life was getting worse) were much more likely than
newer residents to feel that the City should stop building and growth. Although the
percentage was high among all residents who have lived in Carlsbad for five years or
more, it was highest among those who have lived in the City for 15 years or more.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
15
SENSE OF COMMUNITY
To assess sense of community among Carlsbad residents, a seven-question series
known as the “Brief Sense of Community Index4” was utilized. The seven-question series
assesses the three underlying dimensions of sense of community: “Social connections,”
“Mutual concerns,” and “Community values.” The questions used to measure sense of
community among Carlsbad residents are displayed in Table 1, with the total level of
agreement with each statement shown in the last column on the right (disagreement
shown for reverse-coded items).
Carlsbad residents reported the highest level of agreement with items relating to
“Community values” (75.5% average across items) although they also believed it was
important to have strong “Mutual concerns” (74.4% average) and “Social connections”
(66.8% average) in their community.
Table 1 Sense of Community Index5
Strongly
agree Agree Neither
Dis-
agree
Strongly
disagree DK Total
Agree
Social Connections
I can recognize most of the people
who live in my neighborhood 27.6% 48.3% 3.6% 16.6% 3.1% 0.7%75.9%
Very few of my neighbors know me 7.8% 21.7% 3.2% 43.7% 23.2% 0.4% 66.9%*
I have almost no influence over what
my neighborhood is like 9.1% 25.5% 5.7% 43.3% 14.4% 2.0% 57.7%*
Mutual Concerns
My neighbors and I want the same
things from this community 24.7% 51.9% 8.2% 5.2% 1.4% 8.5%76.6%
If there is a problem in my
neighborhood, people who live here
can get it solved
20.9% 51.3% 7.7% 11.2% 3.6% 5.3% 72.2%
Community Values
It is very important for me to feel a
sense of community with other
residents
30.4% 50.4% 8.6% 8.7% 1.1% 0.8%80.8%
Very
strong
Somewhat
strong
Smwt.
weak
Very
weak
None at
all DK Total
Strong
How strongly feel sense of
community 28.7% 41.5% 17.6% 3.0% 7.2% 2.0% 70.2%
* Items reverse coded. Percentage shown is total disagreement. Disagreeing with these statements indicates a higher
sense of community.
4 Long, D.A. and Perkins, D.D (2003), “Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Sense of Community Index and
Development of a Brief SCI.” Journal of Community Psychology 33(3): Pages 279 - 296.
5 A factor analysis was performed to confirm that the items were measuring one underlying dimension.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
16
Figure 7 below shows residents’ level of agreement across the seven-question series
(after adjusting for reverse-coded items).
Figure 7 Level of Agreement with Items
3.9%
7.0%
8.3%
13.7%
18.1%
23.0%
24.9%
1.1%
0% 20% 40%
0 of 7 items
1 of 7 items
2 of 7 items
3 of 7 items
4 of 7 items
5 of 7 items
6 of 7 items
7 of 7 items
Overall, 47.9 percent of residents agreed with at least six of the seven items and were
classified as having a “High” sense of community. Forty percent of residents agreed with
between two and five items and we labeled in the “Medium” category. Conversely, 12.0
percent of respondents agreed with zero or only one of the questions and were classified
as having a “Low” sense of community.
Figure 8 Sense of Community Index Levels
High
47.9%
Low
12.0%
Medium
40.0%
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
17
Below is an analysis of sense of community levels by residents sub-group.
• Sense of community was positively correlated with a number of factors
throughout the survey, including satisfaction with city services, satisfaction with
city-resident communication, ratings for the job the City does providing residents
with important information, confidence in city government, and perceptions
regarding the direction of the community.
• Sense of community was highest among residents who reported feeling “Very
safe” walking alone in their neighborhood (during the day or after dark).
• The proportion of residents in the high sense of community group increased as
length of residence increased.
• Homeowners were more likely to have a high sense of community, whereas
renters were more likely to have a low sense of community.
• Residents with children had a higher sense of community than those without
children in the home.
• A higher proportion of residents in zip codes 92009 and 92011 were in the low
sense of community group as compared to residents in 92008 and 92010.
• Residents who typically visited the Village once a week had a higher sense of
community than those who visited less than once a month.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
18
SENSE OF COMMUNITY: COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES
Residents feel a strong sense of community living in Carlsbad. Figure 9 below shows the
percentage of residents reporting that they feel a “Strong” sense of community living in
their City.
Although this question is not asked in as many studies as some of the other questions in
this report, the results still show that Carlsbad residents are in the top-tier with regard to
sense of community relative to cities that have conducted comparable studies within the
past five years.
Figure 9 Sense of Community: Comparison to Other Cities6
62%
67%
70%
80%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
Large City, Clark County Nevada
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, San Diego County
6 Small cities were defined as those with a total population up to 50,000. Mid-sized cities were those with a
population between 50,001 and 150,000. Large cities were those with a population of 150,001 or more.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
19
SAFETY IN CARLSBAD
More than eight out of ten residents felt safe walking alone in their neighborhood either
during the day or after dark. Overwhelmingly, 98.3 percent of residents felt safe walking
alone in their neighborhood during the day (with 85.9 percent reporting they felt “Very
safe”) and 85.5 percent of residents indicating they felt safe walking alone after dark
(51.4% “Very safe”).
Figure 10 Safety in Carlsbad
85.9%
51.4%
12.4%
34.1% 9.2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Safety walking alone
in your neighborhood
after dark
Safety walking alone
in your neighborhood
during the day
Very safe Somewhat safe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe DK/NA
Given the extremely high percentage of residents who felt safe walking alone in their
neighborhood during the day (and thereby the limited amount of differentiation that
can be found among the variables), the focus of the sub-group analysis to follow is
on safety walking alone after dark.
• Residents with a high sense of community (derived across seven variables) were
more likely to report feeling safe than those with a medium or low sense of
community.
• Residents who reported dissatisfaction with the job the City is doing to provide
services, those that were not confident in city government to make decisions that
positively affect the lives of residents, as well as those who provided low ratings
to the City’s job balancing the various land uses in the City were more likely to
report feeling unsafe than their sub-group counterparts.
• Although no statistically significant differences were found by whether or not
residents had visited the Carlsbad Village (or by frequency of visiting), residents’
experience visiting the Village was positively correlated with “Very safe” ratings.
In other words, the higher their rating for their Village experience, the higher the
percentage reporting feeling “Very safe.”
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
20
Subgroup analysis of safety walking alone in their neighborhood after dark continued;
Demographically;
• Homeowners reported a higher perception of safety walking alone in their
neighborhood after dark as compared to renters who were more than twice as
likely to report feeling unsafe (18.5% vs. 9.1%).
• Residents in the 35 to 44 year age group reported the highest feelings of safety
(92.6%), whereas those in the 18 to 24 year age category reported the highest
percentage of feeling unsafe (18.8%).
• Residents who identified as either “Caucasian or White” or “Other” reported
higher feelings of safety (86.9% and 96.6%, respectively) than Hispanic or
Latino(a) or Asian residents (76.4% and 79.4%, respectively).
• Female residents were close to three times as likely to report feeling unsafe
walking alone in their neighborhood after dark as compared to male residents
(16.4% vs. 5.8%).
• Residents of zip code 92008 reported lower safety ratings than residents in each
of the three other zip codes in the City (92008: 16.1% felt unsafe; 92009: 8.9%;
92010: 8.6%; 92011: 10.4%).
• No statistically significant differences in residents’ feelings of safety walking
alone in their neighborhood after dark were found by length of residence or
children in the household.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
21
SAFETY: COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES
As discussed in the previous section, Carlsbad residents feel safe walking alone in their
neighborhoods both during the day and at night.
Walking Alone in their Neighborhood During the Day
In our experience, the high level of safety reported by City of Carlsbad residents falls
within the top ten percent among comparable resident research projects. Figure 11
below shows examples of residents’ feelings of safety walking alone in their
neighborhood during the day in cities throughout California that have conducted
comparable studies within the past five years.
Figure 11 Safety Walking Alone During the Day: Comparison to Other Cities7
85%
86%
90%
93%
93%
95%
98%
98%
98%
83%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Large City, San Francisco County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Large City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Small City, Santa Clara County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
7 Small cities were defined as those with a total population up to 50,000. Mid-sized cities were those with a
population between 50,001 and 150,000. Large cities were those with a population of 150,001 or more.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
22
Walking Alone in their Neighborhood After Dark
As is always the case with this type of question, residents reported lower safety ratings
for walking alone in their neighborhood after dark as compared to during the day.
However, with 86 percent of residents reporting that they feel safe walking alone in their
neighborhood after dark Carlsbad falls within the top tier among comparable resident
research projects.
Figure 12 Safety Walking Alone After Dark: Comparison to Other Cities8
50%
89%
88%
86%
82%
68%
68%
61%
55%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Large City, San Francisco County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Large City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Small City, Santa Clara County
8 Small cities were defined as those with a total population up to 50,000. Mid-sized cities were those with a
population between 50,001 and 150,000. Large cities were those with a population of 150,001 or more.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
23
CONFIDENCE IN CITY GOVERNMENT
Approximately three out of four residents (78.5%) have confidence in Carlsbad city
government to make decisions which positively affect the lives of its community
members. Of those, 23.1 percent indicated they were “Very confident” and 55.4 percent
were “Somewhat confident.” Eighteen percent indicated that they were unconfident
(“Very unconfident”: 5.4%, “Somewhat unconfident”: 12.7%) and 3.4 percent did not
know or declined to state.
Figure 13 Confidence in City Government to Make Decisions
Very unconfident
5.4%
Somewhat
unconfident
12.7%
DK/NA
3.4%
Somewhat confident
55.4%
Very confident
23.1%
• Residents who were dissatisfied with the job the City is doing to provide services,
those who viewed the quality of life as “Getting worse,” those who felt less than
“Very safe” walking alone in their neighborhood (during the day or night), those
that provided a negative rating for the job the City does to balance land use,
those dissatisfied with city-resident communication, and those who provided a
negative rating for the job the City does to provide important information were
more likely to report negative ratings than their sub-group counterparts.
• Confidence in city government was highest among residents who have lived in
the City less than five years (81.4%) and lowest among those who have lived in
Carlsbad between 10 and 14 years (72.0%).
• Confidence was highest among residents in the 18 to 34 and 65 year and older
age groups and comparatively lower among residents 35 to 64 years of age.
• Residents with a “High” sense of community (derived across seven variables)
were more likely than those with a “Medium” or “Low” sense of community to
indicate confidence in city government.
• Confidence was higher among residents in zip code 92010 compared to the
other three zip codes.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
24
SATISFACTION WITH SPECIFIC CITY SERVICES
After assessing residents’ overall satisfaction with the job the City is doing to provide
services as well as gathering their perspective on a number of other big picture items,
residents were asked to indicate their satisfaction with 16 specific city services.
As shown in the figure on the following page, over 90 percent of residents9 were satisfied
with the City’s efforts to:
• Provide library services (96.3% satisfaction);
• Maintain city parks (95.0% satisfaction);
• Provide fire protection and prevention services (94.3% satisfaction);
• Provide water services (92.5% satisfaction);
• Provide law enforcement services (92.3% satisfaction);
• Provide sewer services (91.6% satisfaction);
• Provide emergency medical and paramedic services (91.5% satisfaction); and
• Maintain recreation facilities (91.3% satisfaction).
Across the 16 issues, the average satisfaction score was 84.6 percent. The three items
that fell below the average were:
• Manage traffic congestion on city streets (64.2% satisfaction);
• Manage residential growth and development (57.0% satisfaction); and
• Provide affordable housing for working families (53.2% satisfaction).
9 Due to the higher than average percentage of “Don’t know/ No answer” responses for many items, those
responses have been filtered out of the analysis for this series. The high percentage of “Don’t know/ No
answer” is likely due to residents’ lack of direct experience with those specific services.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
25
Figure 14 Satisfaction with Local Issues and Services10
63.4%
60.8%
67.4%
65.4%
76.6%
43.1%
42.8%
35.2%
41.4%
34.3%
36.8%
27.0%
31.8%
28.9%
31.7%
26.9%
29.6%
19.7%
16.5%
20.7%18.6%
22.8%
42.2%
42.7%
51.6%
46.8%
54.7%
54.5%
59.8%
64.5%
17.1%
41.4%
38.4%
36.1%
7%
11.9%
6%
6%
6%
6%
16.4%
6%
18.0%
18.5%
6%
6%
13.3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Provide affordable housing for working families
Manage residential growth and development
Manage traffic congestion on city streets
Maintain the business climate in Carlsbad
Repair and maintain local streets and roads
Provide trails and walking paths
Provide local arts and cultural opportunities
Provide recreation programs
Maintain recreation facilities
Provide emergency medical and paramedic
services
Provide sewer services
Provide law enforcement services
Provide water services
Provide fire protection and prevention services
Maintain city parks
Provide library services
Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
10 Due to space constraints, the labels for categories with less than six percent are not shown on the figure.
Due to the higher than average percentage of “Don’t know/ No answer” responses for many items, those
responses have been filtered out of the analysis for this series. The high percentage of “Don’t know/ No
answer” is likely due to residents’ lack of direct experience with those specific services.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
26
RATINGS FOR CONTRACTED CITY SERVICES
Evaluating the City’s contracted services, residents provided the most positive rating to
“Trash collection services” (88.9% “Excellent” or “Good”), followed by “Recycling
collection services (80.0% “Excellent” or “Good”), “Street sweeping services” (73.7%),
and “Hazardous waste disposal” (70.6%).
Figure 15 Ratings for Contracted City Services11
44.0%
11.7%
27.6%
39.7%
44.9%
29.1%
40.3%
46.1%
41.5% 18.5%
17.0%
7%
7%
6%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Hazardous waste
disposal
Street sweeping
services
Recycling collection
services
Trash collection
services
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor
11 Due to space constraints, the labels for categories with three percent or less are not shown on the figure.
Due to the higher than average percentage of “Don’t know/ No answer” responses for many items, those
responses have been filtered out of the analysis for this series. The high percentage of “Don’t know/ No
answer” is likely due to residents’ lack of direct experience with the specific services.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
27
HOUSEHOLD USE OF CITY LIBRARY FACILITIES
Overall, 84.7 percent of households have visited one of the Carlsbad City Library
facilities in the past 12 months. In addition, close to the majority (49.6%) visited at least
once a month (“Once per week or more”: 17.6%, “Once or twice per month”: 32.9%).
Figure 16 Household Frequency Visiting City Library Facilities
DK/NA
0.5%
Once or twice per month
32.9%
Haven't visited in past year
14.8%
Once every few months
18.4%
Once or twice in the past
year
15.8%
Once per week or more
17.6%
• Residents who have lived in Carlsbad less than five years were the less likely to
have visited one of the libraries than residents who have lived in the City longer.
• Households with children were more likely to have visited a City Library facility in
the past year, as well as be regular users, than households without children. In
addition, library use increased as the number of children in the household
increased.
• Most likely related to children in the household, residents in the 35 to 44 year age
category were the most likely to have visited a library facility (92.5%), whereas
residents in the 18 to 24 year category were the least likely (66.0%).
• Compared to residents in other zip codes, a lower proportion of residents in
92008 had visited a Carlsbad Library facility in the past year.
• A higher proportion of Asian residents (98.3%) lived in a household that had
visited a library facility in the past year compared to respondents with other
ethnic backgrounds.
• There were no statistically significant differences in library use by
homeownership status, gender, employment status, or sense of community.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
28
CITY’S EFFECTIVENESS PROMOTING HEALTH AND WELLNESS
When asked to rate the City’s effectiveness in promoting health and wellness through its
recreational programs and facilities, 16.8 percent of residents did not state an opinion
(most likely because they lacked direct experience). As such, the 16.8 percent of
respondents that did not provide an opinion were filtered out of the analysis for this
question.
Approximately nine out of ten residents (90.3%) who provided an opinion felt the City
was effectively promoting health and wellness through recreation. Of those, 34.1 percent
felt the City was “Very effective” and 56.2 percent rated the City as “Somewhat
effective.”
Figure 17 Effectiveness Promoting Health and Wellness
Somewhat effective
56.2%
Somewhat ineffective
7.6%
Very ineffective
2.1%Very effective
34.1%
• Residents who have lived in the City for 15 years or more, those 65 years and
older, those currently unemployed or retired, and residents without children were
more likely than their sub-group counterparts to rate the City as effective in
promoting health and wellness through recreation.
• Residents in zip code 92008 were the most likely to rate the City as effective,
whereas residents in 92009 were the most likely to rate the City as ineffective.
• Compared to residents in other ethnic categories, Asian residents were much
more likely to rate the City as ineffective (31.4%).
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
29
SATISFACTION WITH CITY-RESIDENT COMMUNICATION
Eighty-two percent of residents were either “Very” (40.2%) or “Somewhat” satisfied
(42.2%) with the City’s efforts to communicate with residents through publications, public
notices, its website, and other means.
Figure 18 Satisfaction with City-Resident Communication
Very satisfied
40.2%
Very dissatisfied
3.6%
Somewhat dissatisfied
11.0%
DK/NA
3.0%
Somewhat satisfied
42.2%
• Satisfaction with city-resident communication was positively correlated with a
number of other variables through the survey including: residents’ views on
quality of life, sense of community, satisfaction with city services, safety walking
alone in their neighborhood (either during the day or after dark), confidence in
city government, ratings for the City’s job balancing land use, ratings for the job
the City does providing important information, and ratings for the City’s
effectiveness promoting health and wellness through recreation.
• Residents who referred to the “Community Services and Recreation Guide” or
flyers in City billing statements reported the highest satisfaction.
• Residents who had visited the City’s website in the past year were more satisfied
with city-resident communication than those who had not visited the website.
• Residents who recalled being exposed to information regarding ways to prevent
the pollution of local creeks, lagoons, and the ocean reported higher satisfaction
than those that did not recall hearing or seeing anything about pollution
prevention.
• Homeowners were more satisfied with city-resident communication than renters.
• Residents with a job or business in Carlsbad reported higher dissatisfaction than
residents who worked outside the City or who were unemployed or retired.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
30
Analysis of city-resident communication by sub-group continued;
• Residents 65 years and older reported the most satisfaction with city-resident
communication, whereas residents in the 25 to 34 year group reported the
lowest.
• Hispanic or Latino(a) and Asian residents reported higher levels of dissatisfaction
than residents in other ethnic categories.
• Women were more dissatisfied with city-resident communication than men.
• No statistically significant differences in satisfaction with city-resident
communication were found by length of residence, children in the household, or
zip code of residence.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
31
CITY-RESIDENT COMMUNICATION: COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES
In our experience, the percentage of residents who are satisfied with the City’s efforts to
communicate with residents falls within the top 15 percent of comparable resident
research projects.
Figure 19 City-Resident Communication: Comparison to Other Cities12
65%
71%
72%
74%
80%
81%
81%
82%
86%
53%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Large City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Large City, Orange County
12 Small cities were defined as those with a total population up to 50,000. Mid-sized cities were those with a
population between 50,001 and 150,000. Large cities were those with a population of 150,001 or more.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
32
RATING CITY’S JOB TO PROVIDE INFORMATION
When asked to rate the job the City does providing residents with the information that is
important to them, 65.7 percent of residents rated the City favorably (“Excellent”: 24.2%,
“Good”: 41.5%). An additional 23.5 percent of residents rated the City as “Fair” and 9.4
percent provided a negative rating (“Poor”: 7.2%, “Very poor”: 2.2%).
Figure 20 Rating for the City’s Job Providing Important Information
DK/NA
1.3%Excellent
24.2%
Good
41.5%
Very poor
2.2%
Fair
23.5%
Poor
7.2%
• Residents who have lived in the City 15 years or more provided the most
favorable ratings for the job the City does providing important information.
• Residents without children reported higher ratings than residents with children.
• Homeowners provided more positive ratings than renters.
• Residents 65 years and older, followed by those 55 to 64 years of age, provided
the most favorable ratings. Comparatively, residents in the 25 to 34 year group
provide the most negative ratings.
• Hispanic or Latino(a) and Asian residents reported more negative ratings than
residents in other ethnic categories.
• Ratings were positively correlated with sense of community, such that those with
a “High” sense of community provided the most positive ratings.
• Residents who referred to the “Community Services and Recreation Guide” for
City news, information, and programming reported the most positive ratings.
• Residents who recalled being exposed to information regarding ways to prevent
the pollution of local creeks, lagoons, and the ocean reported more positive
ratings than those that did not recall hearing or seeing anything about pollution
prevention.
• No notable differences were found by gender or zip code of residence.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
33
The 9.4 percent of residents (94 respondents) that provided a negative rating for the job
the City is doing to provide them with important information were next asked how the
City could improve their satisfaction. The most popular responses among this group
were better overall communication with citizens (20.4%) and more communication
through the mail (18.3%).
The largest response category (25.5%) included comments that were not similar enough
to be coded into a separate category as well as responses that were not directly related
to the question. Instead of providing detail on ways to improve city-resident
communication, many respondents provided comments regarding general city issues or
suggested ways to improve the quality of life in Carlsbad.
Figure 21 Ways to Improve Satisfaction with City-Resident Communication
25.5%
2.8%
4.9%
5.4%
7.9%
18.3%
20.4%
14.8%
0% 20% 40% 60%
DK/NA
Other or not pertaining to question
More interaction with the community
Send email notifications
More media coverage of city issues
Be more specific on the issues that will be
discussed
More communication through the mail
Better overall communication with citizens
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
34
INFORMATION SOURCES
When asked to reveal the information sources they use to find out about City of
Carlsbad’ news, information, and programming, 37.6 percent of residents cited the City’s
website, 24.8 percent cited the “North County Times,” 17.6 percent indicated the “San
Diego Union Tribune,” and 14.6 percent indicated local television news.
Figure 22 Information Sources13
14.6%
17.6%
24.8%
37.6%
3.0%
4.3%
4.3%
4.5%
5.3%
7.5%
8.6%
6.2%
2.9%
3.0%
2.7%
2.2%
1.8%
1.7%
0.9%
0.8%
0.7%
3.5%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Don't know/ not sure
Other
Calling the City on the telephone
Flyers
Radio
Newsletter
Citizen forums
The new City desktop calendar
City Council Meetings
Word of mouth
Internet
Library/ Community Centers
Local Cable Channel
Newspaper (not specified)
Carlsbad Magazine
Information in the mail
Community Services and Recreation Guide
Flyer in City billing statement
TV-Local News
San Diego Union-Tribune
North County Times
City Web Page
13 Only responses cited by at least 0.5% of respondents are displayed in the figure.
For this question, respondents were free to mention multiple responses; therefore, the percentages in the
figure total more than 100 percent.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
35
FREQUENCY VISITING CITY’S WEBSITE
Overall, 67.4 percent of residents have visited the City’s website in the past 12 months
and approximately one in five residents (21.3%) have visited the City’s website at least
ten times in the past year.
Figure 23 Times Visited City’s Website in Last 12 Months
0.1%
32.5%
20.2%
11.6%
14.2%
11.0%
10.3%
0% 20% 40% 60%
DK/NA
15 or more times
10 to 14 times
5 to 9 times
3 to 4 times
1 to 2 times
0 times
• Residents 45 years and older were less likely to have visited the City’s website
compared to younger residents. Residents in the 65 year and older group
reported the lowest use.
• Residents who have lived in the City less than 10 years were more likely to have
visited the City’s website in the past year than those in the City 10 years or more.
• There were no statistically significant differences in whether or not residents
have visited the City’s website by gender, ethnicity, employment status, children
in the household, homeownership status, or zip code of residence.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
36
PREVENTING POLLUTION OF CREEKS, LAGOONS, AND OCEAN
The majority of residents, 59.7 percent, have seen or heard information in the past year
about how residents can prevent the pollution of local creeks, lagoons, and the ocean.
Figure 24 Seen or Heard Information Regarding Preventing Water Pollution
Yes
59.7%
No
38.0%
DK/NA
2.3%
Residents that recalled seeing or hearing pollution prevention information were asked to
recall the source of the information in an open-ended format. The most frequently cited
sources of information were the newspaper (29.3%) and television (27.0%).
Figure 25 Source of Pollution Prevention Information14
27.0%
29.3%
17.2%
6.5%
5.9%
7.0%
5.5%
5.3%
4.8%
3.5%
3.4%
2.5%
1.5%
6.8%
11.1%
13.0%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Don't know/ not sure
Other
Carlsbad Magazine
Flyer
Family/ friends/ other word of mouth
Posters
Website
Radio
Information in the mail
Public events/ booth
Water/ utility bills
Curb signs/ stormdrain stencils
Brochures
Newsletters
TV
Newspaper
14 Percentages in the figure total more than 100%. Responses cited by less than 1.5% not shown.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
37
Residents that recalled seeing or hearing information about how to prevent water
pollution were next asked to indicate what they have done, if anything, to reduce the
amount of pollution in creeks, lagoons, and the ocean.
Nearly one-quarter of residents that had been exposed to information indicated that they
properly disposed of hazardous waste (24.6%) and 21.4 percent indicated that they have
not done anything to reduce water pollution. Additional responses cited by at least ten
percent of residents included: 17.2 percent recycled, 15.2 percent used a commercial
car wash, 15.0 percent cleaned up trash at parks and beaches, and 13.1 percent used
environmentally friendly soaps and pesticides.
Figure 26 Action Taken Based on Pollution Prevention Information15
21.4%
24.6%
15.2%
15.0%
6.8%
0.5%
0.8%
2.5%
3.4%
3.9%
4.5%
4.8%
13.1%
6.6%
3.6%
17.2%
0% 20% 40% 60%
DK/NA
Other
Reduced use of hazardous materials
Wash car on the grass
Drive less
Sweep driveway instead of hosing it down
I don't litter/ pollute
Various water conservation measures
Stopped washing/ sweeping things into the
gutter
Cleaned up animal waste
Used environmentally friendly soaps,
pesticides, etc.
Cleaned up trash at parks and beaches
Used a commercial car wash
Recycle
Have not done anything
Properly disposed of hazardous waste
15 For this question, respondents were free to mention multiple responses; therefore, the percentages in the
figure total more than 100 percent.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
38
LAND USE IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD
The majority of residents (53.7%) rated the job the City is doing in balancing the various
land uses in the City – including residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational – as
“Excellent” (15.5%) or “Good” (38.2%). Twenty-three percent rated the City’s as “Fair”
and 20.6 percent gave the City a “Poor” (13.0%) or “Very poor” (7.6%) rating.
Figure 27 Rating for City’s Job Balancing Land Use
Poor
13.0%
Fair
23.4%
Very poor
7.6%
Good
38.2%
Excellent
15.5%
DK/NA
2.2%
• Residents who reported dissatisfaction with the job the City is doing to provide
services, those who viewed the quality of life as “Getting worse,” residents that
were not confident in city government to make decisions that positively affect the
lives of residents, those that felt less than “Very safe” walking alone in their
neighborhood (during the day or night), those that provided a negative rating for
the job the City does to provide important information, as well as those with a low
sense of community were more likely to report negative ratings than their sub-
group counterparts.
• Residents in the 45 to 54 year age group provided the highest “Poor” or “Very
poor” ratings (26.3%), followed by residents in the 35 to 44 year age group
(23.2%). Comparatively, residents in the 65 year and older (11.5%) and 18 to 24
year (15.3%) age groups were the least likely to provide negative ratings.
• Residents who have lived in the City between 10 and 14 years were the most
likely to provide a negative rating (27.7%), whereas residents who have lived in
the City less than five years were the least likely (17.4%).
• Residents in the 92008 and 92010 zip codes were the most likely to provide
ratings of “Excellent” or “Good,” whereas residents in 92009 were the most likely
to provide negative ratings.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
39
PREFERENCES FOR LAND NEAR STRAWBERRY FIELDS
When asked their level of familiarity with the area along Cannon Road and the Aqua
Hediondo Lagoon, beginning with the strawberry fields just east of the 5 Freeway and
extending to Faraday Avenue, 54.8 percent were “Very familiar,” 35.3 percent were
“Somewhat familiar,” and 9.4 percent were “Not at all familiar” with the area.
Figure 28 Familiarity with Area Along Cannon Road and Agua Hedionda Lagoon
Very familiar
54.8%
DK/NA
0.5%
Not at all familiar
9.4%
Somewhat familiar
35.3%
Residents who indicated familiarity with the area were next told that the area is largely
privately owned and used for agricultural purposes but has been designated as a
permanent open space area. Of the different types of open space options presented,
residents were most supportive of using the area for traditional open space purposes.
Figure 29 Support for Various Land Uses in the Area Near Strawberry Fields
15.5%
53.3%
57.8%
82.0%
51.0%
37.9%
42.9%
44.9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Cultural and civic facilities which could include
an open-air theatre, a museum and a public
gathering space
Recreation space which could include athletic
fields, recreation centers and other active
recreation
A combination of recreation space, traditional
open space, and cultural facilities
Traditional open space which could include
trails, a nature park, viewing areas and a picnic
area
Support Oppose DK/NA
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
40
After indicating their support for each of the various open space options, residents were
next asked to indicate which option would be best for the area (selecting among only
those options that they previously supported). Overall, 48.9 percent of residents who
indicated support for at least one of the options in the previous question felt that
traditional open space would be best for the area (which could include trails, a nature
park, viewing areas, and a picnic area), followed by a combination of recreation space,
traditional open space, and cultural and civic facilities (32.3%).
Figure 30 Most Preferred Option for Area Near Strawberry Fields
3.4%
6.2%
6.9%
32.3%
48.9%
2.2%
0% 20% 40% 60%
DK/NA
None of the above
Recreation space which could include athletic
fields, recreation centers and other active
recreation
Cultural and civic facilities which could
include an open-air theatre, a museum and a
public gathering space
Combination of recreation space, traditional
open space, and cultural facilities
Traditional open space which could include
trails, a nature park, viewing areas and a
picnic area
• Residents who felt the quality of life was getting worse, those that were not
confident in city government to make decisions that positively affect the lives of
residents, as well as those that provided low ratings to the City’s job balancing
the various land uses in the City were more likely to report a preference for
traditional open space than their sub-group counterparts.
• Residents of zip code 92008 were the most likely to feel that traditional open
space was the best use for the area near the strawberry fields.
• Female residents indicated a stronger preference for traditional open space than
male residents.
• A higher proportion of residents in the 18 to 24 year age category preferred the
traditional open space option as compared to residents in other age categories.
• There were no statistically significant differences in preference for traditional
open space for the area near the strawberry fields by length of residence,
homeownership status, number of children in the household, sense of
community, or satisfaction with the job the City is doing to provide services.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
41
EXPERIENCE VISITING THE CARLSBAD VILLAGE
Overall, 96.1 percent of Carlsbad residents have visited Carlsbad’s Downtown Village.
The majority of residents regularly visited (55.5%), 24.1 percent sometimes visited (once
a month or more), and 16.5 percent seldom visited the Village (16.5%).
Figure 31 Frequency Visiting Carlsbad’s Downtown Village
Regularly, once a week or
more
55.5%Never
3.5%
Seldom, less than once a
month
16.5%
DK/NA
0.4%
Sometimes, once a month
or more
24.1%
Below is a sub-group analysis of residents who regularly visited the Carlsbad Village.
• Residents who have lived in the City for 15 years or more were more likely to
regularly visit the Village as compared to those who have lived in the City less
than 15 years.
• Residents with a job or business located in Carlsbad were more likely to regularly
visit the Village than those with a job outside the City or those currently
unemployed or retired.
• Residents without children were more likely than those with children to regularly
visit the Village.
• Residents living in zip codes 92008 or 92010 were more likely than those in
92009 or 92011 to regularly visit.
• Hispanic or Latino(a) residents were more likely to report regularly visiting the
Village than residents who identified themselves as another ethnic group.
• A higher proportion of residents in the 18 to 24 year age group reported regularly
visiting the Village compared to residents in other age groups.
• A higher percentage of renters reported regularly visiting the Village than
homeowners.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
42
Among residents who have visited Carlsbad’s Downtown Village, 87.0 rated their
experience positively, with 43.4 percent rating it as “Excellent” and 43.6 percent rating it
as “Good.”
Figure 32 Experience Visiting Carlsbad Village
0.5%
1.1%
10.2%
43.6%
43.4%
1.1%
0% 20% 40% 60%
DK/NA
Very poor
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent
• Female residents were more likely to rate their experience as “Excellent” or
“Good,” whereas male residents were more likely to rate it as “Good.”
• Residents in the 18 to 24 year group provided the most positive ratings for their
Village experience.
• Compared to other ethnic groups, Hispanic or Latino(a) residents rated their
Village experience the most favorably.
• Residents of zip code 92009 were more likely to provide a “Fair” rating compared
to residents in the other three zip codes that were more likely to rate their
experience as “Excellent” or “Good.”
• There were no notable differences in residents’ experience visiting the Village by
length of residence, homeownership status, children in the household, or
employment status.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
43
PREFERENCES FOR STORES AND BUSINESSES IN THE CITY
When presented with four types of stores and businesses that could be located within
Carlsbad, movie theatres (41.8% “More”) and medical and dental offices and outpatient
services were the most popular (27.0% “More”).
By far the most preferred of the four options was movie theatres, with 41.8 percent of
residents indicating they would like to see more and 49.0 percent indicating there was
currently an adequate amount.
Over 20 percent of residents would like to see less home furnishing stores and large-
scale retail stores in the City and a majority felt there was currently an adequate number
of each within the Carlsbad.
Figure 33 Preferences for Stores and Businesses in the City16
49.0%
23.2%
15.9%
41.8%
27.0%
18.0%
55.7%
54.9%
63.0% 7%
8%
27.1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Large-scale retail stores
such as Target, Home
Depot, or Barnes & Noble
Home furnishings stores
such as Ethan Allen
Medical and dental
offices and outpatient
services
Movie theatres
More Adequate Less DK/NA
16 Due to space constraints, the labels for categories with four percent or less are not shown on the figure.
As one might expect, residents who reported regularly visiting each type of store or
business outside the City were the most likely to report wanting more of each type
within Carlsbad.
2007 Public Opinion Survey Report
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
44
The majority of Carlsbad residents regularly visited large-scale retail stores such as
Target, Home Deport, or Barnes & Noble (56.5%) as well as medical and dental office
and outpatient services (52.7%) outside the City of Carlsbad.
Figure 34 Frequency Visiting Similar Stores and Businesses Outside the City17
24.1%
26.7%
18.1%
56.5%
52.7%
32.1%
21.8%
26.0%
23.6% 13.7%
13.3%
31.4% 27.8%
9.4%
6%
14.8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Home furnishings stores
such as Ethan Allen
Movie theatres
Medical and dental
offices and outpatient
services
Large-scale retail stores
such as Target, Home
Depot, or Barnes & Noble
Regularly Sometimes Seldom Never DK/NA
17 Due to space constraints, the labels for categories with one percent or less are not shown on the figure.
Below is an analysis of preferences for more movie theatres in Carlsbad by resident
sub-group.
• A higher proportion of residents who have lived in the City less than ten years
would like to see more movie theatres in the Carlsbad as compared to those who
have lived in the City for ten years or more (46.4% vs. 35.6%).
• Renters were more likely than owners to reveal a preference for more movie
theatres in the City (48.3% vs. 39.7%).
• Residents in the 25 to 34 year age group were the most likely to report wanting
to see more movie theatres in Carlsbad, whereas residents in the 65 year and
over category were the least likely.
• Residents with children were more likely than those without children to indicate a
preference for more movie theatres in Carlsbad (47.7% vs. 37.7%).
• There were no statistically significant differences in residents’ preference for
more movie theatres by zip code of residence or gender.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
45
METHODOLOGY
The table below provides an overview of the methodology utilized for the project.
Table 2 Overview of Project Methodology
Method Telephone Survey
Universe 77,856 Residents 18 years and older within the City of Carlsbad
Number of
Respondents 1,001 Residents Completed a Survey
Average Length 20 minutes
Field Dates October 1 – November 11, 2007
(Interviewing was suspended for a week and a half during the fires)
Margin of Error The maximum margin of error for questions answered by all 1,001
respondents was +/-3.08% at the 95% level of confidence.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Prior to beginning the project, BW Research Partnership met with the City of Carlsbad’s
Performance Measurement Resource Team to determine the research objectives for the
study. The main research objectives of the study were to:
• assess residents’ perceptions regarding satisfaction with city services, quality of life,
sense of community, city government, safety, and city-resident communication;
• evaluate residents’ satisfaction with a number of specific city services;
• identify residents’ perceptions regarding land use in the City as well as open space
preferences for the land near the strawberry fields, and
• assess residents’ experience visiting the Carlsbad Village as well as preferences for
the types of stores and businesses that could be located throughout the City
QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN
Through an iterative process, BW Research worked closely with the City to develop a
survey instrument that met all the research objectives of the study. In developing the
instrument, BW Research utilized techniques to overcome known biases in survey
research and minimize potential sources of measurement error within the survey.
SAMPLING METHOD
A random digit dial (RDD) methodology was utilized to interview a representative sample
of residents 18 years and older within the City of Carlsbad. The RDD methodology is
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
46
based on the concept that all residents with a telephone in their home have an equal
probability of being called and invited to participate in the survey.
The RDD method includes both the listed and unlisted phone numbers that fall into the
active telephone exchanges within a City (the exchange includes the area code and first
three digits of the phone number). Since telephone exchanges often overlap with
neighboring cities, screener questions were utilized at the beginning of the survey to
ensure that the residents who participated in the survey lived within the City boundaries.
DATA COLLECTION
Prior to beginning data collection, BW Research conducted interviewer training and also
pre-tested the survey instrument to ensure that all the words and questions were easily
understood by respondents.
Interviews were generally conducted from 5:00 pm to 9:00 pm Monday through Friday
and 10:00 am to 2:00 pm on Saturday and Sunday to ensure that residents who
commuted or were not at home during the week had an opportunity to participate.
Throughout data collection, BW Research checked the data for accurateness and
completeness and monitored the percentage of residents with language barriers to
determine whether or not the survey should be translated into a language other than
English. Since only 0.2 percent of calls were identified as having a language barrier,
translating the survey into languages other than English were not necessary to ensure
representativeness of results.
DATA PROCESSING
Prior to analysis, BW Research examined the demographic characteristics of the 1,001
respondents who completed a survey to the known universe of residents 18 years and
older using the San Diego Association of Government’s (SANDAG) 2007 demographic
estimates for the City of Carlsbad. It is estimated that among Carlsbad’s 101,337
residents, 77,856 are 18 years and older. After examining the dimensions of zip code,
gender, ethnicity, and age, the data were weighted to appropriately represent the
universe of adult residents and ensure generalizability of the results.
A NOTE ABOUT MARGIN OF ERROR AND ANALYSIS OF SUB-GROUPS
Although the overall margin of error for the study, at the 95% level of confidence, is
between +/-1.85 percent and +/- 3.08 percent (depending on the distribution of each
question) for questions answered by all 1,001 respondents, it is important to note that
questions asked of smaller groups of respondents (such as questions that were only
asked of residents who reported low satisfaction) or analysis of sub-groups (such as
examining differences by length of residence or gender) will have a margin of error
greater than +/-3.08 percent, with the exact margin of error dependant on the number of
respondents in each sub-group. BW Research has utilized statistical testing to account
for the margin of error within sub-groups and highlight statistically significant sub-group
differences throughout this report.
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-1
APPENDIX A: TOPLINES
City of Carlsbad
Resident Survey
November 2007
Toplines (n=1,001)
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Introduction:
Hello, my name is ______ and I’m calling on behalf of the City of Carlsbad. The City has
hired BW Research, an independent research agency, to conduct a survey concerning
issues in your community and we would like to get your opinions. This should just take a
few minutes of your time.
I assure you that we are an independent research agency and that all of your responses
will remain strictly confidential.
For statistical reasons, I would like to speak to the youngest adult male currently at
home that is at least 18 years of age. (Or youngest female depending on statistics of
previous completed interviews)
(IF THERE IS NO MALE/FEMALE AT LEAST 18 AVAILABLE, THEN ASK:)
Ok, then I’d like to speak to the youngest adult female currently at home that is at
least 18 years of age.
(IF THERE IS NO MALE/FEMALE AT LEAST 18 AVAILABLE, ASK FOR
CALLBACK TIME)
(If needed): This is a study about issues of importance in your community – it is a
survey only and we are not selling anything.
(If needed): This survey should only take a few minutes of your time.
(If the individual mentions the national do not call list, respond according to
American Marketing Association guidelines): “Most types of opinion and marketing
research studies are exempt under the law that congress recently passed. That law was
passed to regulate the activities of the telemarketing industry. This is a legitimate
research call. Your opinions count!”)
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
PLEASE NOTE TRADITIONAL ROUNDING RULES APPLIED
NOT ALL PERCENTAGES WILL EQUAL 100%
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-2
Screener Questions
A. Before we begin, I want to confirm that you live within our study area. Are you
currently a resident of the City of Carlsbad?
100% Yes
0% No [Thank and terminate]
B. And what is your home zip code? (If respondent gives the PO Box zip codes 92013
or 92018, prompt them to give their home zip code for survey purposes).
27.8% 92008
34.3% 92009
16.4% 92010
21.5% 92011
0% Other [Specify:_____] [Thank and terminate]
0% Don’t know/ refused [Thank and terminate]
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
1. To begin, how long have you lived in the City of Carlsbad?
5.1% Less than 1 year
26.1% 1 to 4 years
25.7% 5 to 9 years
12.6% 10 to 14 years
30.3% 15 years or more
0.2% (Don't Read) DK/NA
2. What would you say is the main reason why you moved to Carlsbad instead of a
neighboring City?
16.2% Housing (affordable, liked the house)
12.3% Beach/ ocean/ lagoons
12.0% Close to work
10.2% Community atmosphere/ quietness
9.3% Schools
9.1% Family and friends
7.3% I liked the City
4.8% Location
4.5% Raised in Carlsbad
3.8% Weather/ climate/ environment
2.2% Safety/ low crime
0.9% The Village
0.5% By chance/ luck
4.2% Other
2.8% DK/NA
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-3
3. Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Carlsbad
is doing to provide city services? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be very
(satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)?
With DK/NA Factored Out (n=976)
58.0% Very satisfied 59.5% Very satisfied
33.5% Somewhat satisfied 34.4% Somewhat satisfied
2.9% Somewhat dissatisfied 3.0% Somewhat dissatisfied
3.1% Very dissatisfied 3.1% Very dissatisfied
2.5% (Don't Read) DK/NA
4. Overall, do you feel the quality of life in Carlsbad is getting better, getting worse, or
staying about the same?
21.5% Getting better
26.5% Getting worse
47.9% Staying about the same
4.0% (Don't Read) DK/NA
[ASK IF Q3= 3 OR 4 OR Q4=2]
5. In your opinion, what is the number one thing that the City of Carlsbad could do to
improve the quality of life within the community? (ONE RESPONSE ONLY)
(n=290)
51.7% Stop building/ stop growth
11.3% Fix the traffic problems
5.7% Improve the quality of the roads and other infrastructure
4.4% Increase/ improve police services
3.5% Preserve more open space
2.8% Remove the illegal immigrants
2.6% Improve schools
2.2% Increase recreation opportunities
1.8% More public transportation
1.7% Need new Mayor and/ or City Council
1.1% Build Desalination Plant
0.7% Improve beach access
0.6% Nothing needs improvement
8.2% Other
1.6% DK/NA
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-4
6. Next, please think about the sense of community that you feel living in Carlsbad.
Would you say that you feel a strong sense of community, a weak sense of
community, or no sense of community at all?
(IF STRONG OR WEAK, THEN ASK:) Would that be very (strong/weak) or
somewhat (strong/weak)?
28.7% Very strong
41.5% Somewhat strong
17.6% Somewhat weak
3.0% Very weak
7.2% None at all
2.0% (Don't Read) DK/NA
7. Please tell me whether you agree or disagree with each of the following statements
about your neighborhood.
Here’s the (first/next) one: ____________. (READ ITEM AND ASK:) Do you strongly
agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the
statement?
RANDOMIZE Neither (DON’T)
Strongly Agree nor Strongly READ)
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree DK/NA
A. I can recognize most of the
people who live in my
neighborhood .........................27.6% 48.3% 3.6% 16.6% 3.1% 0.7%
B. Very few of my neighbors
know me..................................7.8% 21.7% 3.2% 43.7% 23.2% 0.4%
C. I have almost no influence over
what my neighborhood is like..9.1% 25.5% 5.7% 43.3% 14.4% 2.0%
D. My neighbors and I want the same
things from this community.....24.7% 51.9% 8.2% 5.2% 1.4% 8.5%
E. If there is a problem in my
neighborhood, people who live
here can get it solved ............20.9% 51.3% 7.7% 11.2% 3.6% 5.3%
F. It is very important for me to feel
a sense of community with other
residents.............................30.4% 50.4% 8.6% 8.7% 1.1% 0.8%
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-5
8. Now I’d like to ask a couple questions about safety in the City. When you are _____
would you say that you feel very safe, somewhat safe, somewhat unsafe, or very
unsafe?
RANDOMIZE (DON’T
Very Somewhat Somewhat Very READ)
Safe Safe Unsafe Unsafe DK/NA
A. Walking alone in your neighborhood
during the day................................. 85.9% 12.4% 1.4% 0.1% 0.3%
B. Walking alone in your neighborhood
after dark........................................ 51.4% 34.1% 9.2% 2.0% 3.3%
Question 8 with “Don’t Know/ No Answer” (DK/NA) Filtered Out
RANDOMIZE
Very Somewhat Somewhat Very
Safe Safe Unsafe Unsafe
A. Walking alone in your neighborhood
during the day (n=998)................... 86.1% 12.4% 1.4% 0.1%
B. Walking alone in your neighborhood
after dark (n=968)........................... 53.2% 35.3% 9.5% 2.1%
9. Overall, how confident are you in the Carlsbad City government to make decisions
which positively affect the lives of its community members?
23.1% Very confident
55.4% Somewhat confident
12.7% Somewhat unconfident
5.4% Very unconfident
3.4% (Don't Read) DK/NA
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-6
10. Now I’m going to read a list of services provided by the City of Carlsbad. For each
one, please tell me how satisfied you are with the job the City of Carlsbad is doing to
provide each service to residents.
Would you say you are satisfied, dissatisfied or neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with
the City’s efforts to: _____________? (GET ANSWER AND THEN ASK:) Would that
be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)?
RANDOMIZE Entire List, but Keep M-P Together and Randomly Insert
Neither (DON’T)
Very Somewhat Sat nor Somewhat Very READ)
Satisfied Satisfied Dissat Dissat Dissat DK/NA
A. Repair and maintain local
streets and roads ....................42.3% 42.4% 2.8% 6.2% 5.4% 0.9%
B. Manage traffic congestion on City
streets.....................................22.5% 41.0% 4.5% 17.8% 13.2% 1.0%
C. Provide affordable housing for
working families......................15.0% 31.7% 10.4% 16.3% 14.5% 12.1%
D. Manage residential growth
and development....................18.2% 37.6% 5.8% 16.1% 20.3% 2.1%
E. Maintain the business
climate in Carlsbad.................40.2% 41.1% 7.0% 5.7% 1.4% 4.6%
F. Provide fire protection and
prevention services ................65.0% 26.0% 2.0% 2.4% 1.2% 3.5%
G. Provide emergency medical and
paramedic services ................58.1% 24.3% 5.1% 1.2% 1.3% 10.0%
H. Provide law enforcement
services..................................62.4% 28.4% 2.4% 2.9% 2.3% 1.6%
I. Provide local arts and cultural
opportunities...........................45.2% 40.0% 5.9% 4.0% 1.6% 3.4%
J. Provide library services.............74.3% 19.1% 2.0% 1.5% 0.1% 3.0%
K. Provide water services..............59.7% 31.1% 3.1% 2.0% 2.3% 1.9%
L. Provide sewer services .............57.4% 30.5% 5.1% 1.8% 1.2% 4.0%
M. Maintain city parks ....................64.3% 29.0% 1.7% 2.2% 1.0% 1.8%
N. Maintain recreation facilities......51.9% 35.0% 3.6% 3.5% 1.2% 4.7%
O. Provide recreation programs.....51.0% 32.0% 5.8% 3.0% 1.5% 6.8%
P. Provide trails and walking
paths.......................................49.6% 33.8% 3.8% 5.4% 3.4% 4.0%
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-7
Question 10 with “Don’t Know/ No Answer” (DK/NA) Filtered Out
RANDOMIZE Entire List, but Keep M-P Together and Randomly Insert
Neither
Very Somewhat Sat nor Somewhat Very
Satisfied Satisfied Dissat Dissat Dissat
A. Repair and maintain local
streets and roads (n=992).......42.7% 42.8% 2.8% 6.3% 5.5%
B. Manage traffic congestion on City
streets (n=991).......................22.8% 41.4% 4.5% 18.0% 13.3%
C. Provide affordable housing for
working families (n=880) ........17.1% 36.1% 11.9% 18.5% 16.5%
D. Manage residential growth
and development (n=980) ......18.6% 38.4% 6.0% 16.4% 20.7%
E. Maintain the business
climate in Carlsbad (n=955) ...42.2% 43.1% 7.3% 6.0% 1.4%
F. Provide fire protection and
prevention services (n=966)...67.4% 26.9% 2.0% 2.5% 1.2%
G. Provide emergency medical and
paramedic services (n=901)...64.5% 27.0% 5.7% 1.4% 1.4%
H. Provide law enforcement
services (n=985).....................63.4% 28.9% 2.5% 2.9% 2.3%
I. Provide local arts and cultural
opportunities (n=967) .............46.8% 41.4% 6.1% 4.1% 1.6%
J. Provide library
services (n=971).....................76.6% 19.7% 2.0% 1.5% 0.1%
K. Provide water
services (n=982).....................60.8% 31.7% 3.1% 2.0% 2.3%
L. Provide sewer
services (n=961).....................59.8% 31.8% 5.3% 1.9% 1.3%
M. Maintain city parks (n=983).......65.4% 29.6% 1.7% 2.3% 1.0%
N. Maintain recreation
facilities (n=954)...................54.5% 36.8% 3.8% 3.6% 1.3%
O. Provide recreation
programs (n=933)...................54.7% 34.3% 6.3% 3.2% 1.6%
P. Provide trails and walking
paths (n=961).........................51.6% 35.2% 4.0% 5.6% 3.5%
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-8
11. The City of Carlsbad receives a number of services from outside agencies. For each
of the following, please let me know if you feel the quality of each service is
excellent, good, fair, poor, or very poor?
(DON’T
RANDOMIZE Very READ)
Excellent Good Fair Poor Poor DK/NA
A. Trash collection services...........44.7% 43.8% 7.4% 3.0% 0.8% 0.5%
B. Street sweeping services ..........26.1% 43.6% 16.1% 6.4% 2.3% 5.6%
C. Hazardous waste disposal ........23.5% 33.5% 14.9% 6.3% 2.5% 19.3%
D. Recycling collection services.....39.1% 39.7% 11.5% 6.3% 2.0% 1.5%
Question 11 with “Don’t Know/ No Answer” (DK/NA) Filtered Out
RANDOMIZE Very
Excellent Good Fair Poor Poor
A. Trash collection
services (n=996).....................44.9% 44.0% 7.4% 3.0% 0.8%
B. Street sweeping
services (n=945).....................27.6% 46.1% 17.0% 6.8% 2.4%
C. Hazardous waste
disposal (n=808).....................29.1% 41.5% 18.5% 7.8% 3.1%
D. Recycling collection
services (n=986).....................39.7% 40.3% 11.7% 6.4% 2.0%
12. On average, how often have you, or someone in your household, visited one of the
Carlsbad City Library facilities in the last 12 months?
(If needed: This includes the Dove Library in south Carlsbad near El Camino and
Alga, the Cole Library on Carlsbad Village Drive next to City Hall, the Centro de
Informacion at Pine Park, and the Adult Learning Center on Carlsbad Village Drive).
17.6% Once per week or more
32.9% Once or twice per month
18.4% Once every few months
15.8% Once or twice in the past year
14.8% Haven't visited in past year
0.5% (Don't Read) DK/NA
13. Overall, how would you rate the City’s effectiveness in promoting health and
wellness through its recreational programs and facilities?
With DK/NA Factored Out (n=833)
28.3% Very effective 34.1% Very effective
46.7% Somewhat effective 56.2% Somewhat effective
6.4% Somewhat ineffective 7.6% Somewhat ineffective
1.8% Very ineffective 2.1% Very ineffective
16.8% (Don’t Read) DK/NA
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-9
Next I’d like to ask you about the use of land in Carlsbad.
14. How would you rate the job the City of Carlsbad is doing in balancing the various
land uses in the city – including residential, commercial, industrial and recreational?
15.5% Excellent
38.2% Good
23.4% Fair
13.0% Poor
7.6% Very poor
2.2% (Don't Read) DK/NA
15. How familiar are you with the area along Cannon road and the Aqua Hediondo
Lagoon that begins with the strawberry fields just east of the 5 Freeway and goes to
Faraday Avenue? Very familiar, somewhat familiar, or not at all familiar with the
area?
54.8% Very familiar [GO TO Q16]
35.3% Somewhat familiar [GO TO Q16]
9.4% Not at all familiar [SKIP TO Q18]
0.5% (Don’t Read) DK/NA [SKIP TO Q18]
16. The area that was asked about is largely privately owned and used for agricultural
purposes but it has been designated to be a permanent open space area. At some
point in the future, would you support or oppose the following types of open space in
the area we have been discussing.
Here’s the (first/next) one: ____________. (READ ITEM AND ASK:) Would you
support or oppose this type of open space?
(n=902)
RANDOMIZE A – C (D IS ALWAYS LAST) (DON’T
READ)
Support Oppose DK/NA
A. Recreation space which could include
athletic fields, recreation centers and
other active recreation uses........... 53.3% 42.9% 3.8%
B. Traditional open space which could
include trails, a nature park, viewing
areas and a picnic area.................. 82.0% 15.5% 2.5%
C. Cultural and civic facilities which could
include an open-air theatre, a museum
and a public gathering space ......... 51.0% 44.9% 4.1%
D. A combination of recreation space,
traditional open space, and cultural
facilities........................................... 57.8% 37.9% 4.2%
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-10
17. Which of the following types of open space [REREAD THOSE THAT WERE
SUPPORTED IF NONE WERE SUPPORTED SKIP TO Q18, IF JUST ONE WAS
SUPPORTED MARK THAT IN Q17 AND GO TO Q18] would be best for the area
that is now the strawberry fields?
(n=788, Percentages are of residents who supported at least one of the options
in the previous question)
6.2% Recreation space
48.9% Traditional open space
6.9% Cultural and civic facilities
32.3% A combination of the three above
3.4% (Don’t Read) None of them
2.2% (Don't Read) DK/NA
Switching gears a bit, now I would like to get your opinions about city-resident
communication.
18. Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to communicate with residents
through publications, public notices, its website, and other means? (GET ANSWER,
THEN ASK:) Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat
(satisfied/dissatisfied)?
With DK/NA Factored Out (n=971)
40.2% Very satisfied 41.5% Very satisfied
42.2% Somewhat satisfied 43.5% Somewhat satisfied
11.0% Somewhat dissatisfied 11.3% Somewhat dissatisfied
3.6% Very dissatisfied 3.7% Very dissatisfied
3.0% (Don't Read) DK/NA
19. How would you rate the job the City does in providing you with the information that is
important to you?
With DK/NA Factored Out (n=988)
24.2% Excellent 24.5% Excellent
41.5% Good 42.1% Good
23.5% Fair 23.8% Fair
7.2% Poor 7.3% Poor
2.2% Very poor 2.2% Very poor
1.3% (Don't Read) DK/NA
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-11
If poor or very poor [ASK Q20 IF Q19=4 OR 5 OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q21]
20. Is there something specific that the City could do to improve your satisfaction?
(Probe for specifics, such as type of information or how it should be delivered)
(n=94)
20.4% Better overall communication with citizens
18.3% More communication through the mail
7.9% Be more specific on the issues that will be discussed
5.4% More media coverage of city issues
4.9% Send email notifications
2.8% More interaction with the community
25.5% Other or response not pertaining to question
14.8% DK/NA
21. Have you seen or heard anything during the past year about how residents can
prevent the pollution of our creeks, lagoons, and ocean?
With DK/NA Factored Out (n=978)
59.7% Yes [GO TO Q22] 61.1% Yes [GO TO Q22]
38.0% No [SKIP TO Q24] 38.9% No [SKIP TO Q24]
2.3% (Don’t Read) Don’t know/
Not sure [SKIP TO Q24]
22. Where do you recall seeing or hearing about ways to prevent pollution? (Don’t read
list. Multiple Response) (n=597)
29.3% Newspaper
27.0% TV
17.2% Newsletters
13.0% Brochures
11.1% Curb signs/ storm drain stencils
7.0% Water/ utility bills
5.9% Public events/ booth
5.5% Information in the mail
5.3% Radio
4.8% Website
3.5% Posters
3.4% Family/ friends/ other word of mouth
2.5% Flyer
1.5% Carlsbad Magazine
1.0% Schools
0.9% Calendar
0.7% Periodicals/ other publications
0.6% Libraries
3.6% Other (Specify: ____)
6.5% (Don't Read) Don't know/ not sure
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-12
23. Given what you have seen or heard, what have you done, if anything, to reduce the
amount of pollution in our creeks, lagoons, and oceans? [DO NOT READ – ALLOW
MULTIPLE RESPONSES] (n=597)
24.6% Properly disposed of hazardous waste
21.4% Have not done anything
17.2% Recycle
15.2% Used a commercial car wash
15.0% Cleaned up trash at parks and beaches
13.1% Used environmentally friendly soaps, pesticides, etc.
6.6% Cleaned up animal waste
4.8% Stopped washing/ sweeping things into the gutter
4.5% Various water conservation measures
3.9% I don't litter/ pollute
3.4% Sweep driveway instead of hosing it down
2.5% Drive less
0.8% Wash car on the grass
0.5% Reduced use of hazardous materials
6.8% Other (Specify: ____)
3.6% (Don't Read) DK/NA
24. What information sources do you use to find out about City of Carlsbad news,
information and programming? (DO NOT READ RECORD UP TO THREE
RESPONSES)
37.6% City Web Page (www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us)
24.8% North County Times
17.6% San Diego Union-Tribune
14.6% TV-Local News
8.6% Flyer in City billing statement
7.5% Community Services and Recreation Guide
5.3% Information in the mail
4.5% Carlsbad Magazine
4.3% Local Cable Channel
4.3% Newspaper
3.0% Internet
3.0% Library/ Community Centers
2.9% Word of mouth
2.7% City Council Meetings
2.2% The new City desktop calendar
1.8% Citizen forums
1.7% Newsletter
0.9% Radio
0.8% Flyers
0.7% Calling the City on the telephone
0.4% Carlsbad Community Update Video
0.4% Signs
2.7% Other (Specify: ____)
6.2% (Don't Read) Don't know/ not sure
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-13
25. How many times would you say you’ve visited the City’s website in the last 12
months? _____
32.5% 0 times
20.2% 1 to 2 times
11.6% 3 to 4 times
14.2% 5 to 9 times
11.0% 10 to 14 times
10.3% 15 or more times
0.1% (Don't Read) DK/NA
Next I am going to ask you a few questions about Carlsbad Village, also referred to as
downtown Carlsbad in the Northwestern part of the City.
26. How often do you visit Carlsbad’s downtown village?
55.5% Regularly, once a week or more
24.1% Sometimes, once a month or more
16.5% Seldom, less than once a month
3.5% Never [SKIP TO Q28]
0.4% (Don't Read) DK/NA
27. How would you rate your experience while visiting Carlsbad’s downtown village?
(n=966)
With DK/NA Factored Out (n=955)
43.4% Excellent 43.9% Excellent
43.6% Good 44.1% Good
10.2% Fair 10.3% Fair
1.1% Poor 1.1% Poor
0.5% Very poor 0.5% Very poor
1.1% (Don't Read) DK/NA
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-14
Finally I would like to ask you about the type of stores and businesses that are offered in
the entire City of Carlsbad.
28. Now I am going to read a list of stores and businesses that could be located in the
City of Carlsbad?
For each one, please tell me if you would like to see more or less of this type of
business in the city of Carlsbad, or do you feel there is currently an adequate
amount? (REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH ITEM)
RANDOMIZE (DON’T
READ)
More Less Adequate DK/NA
A. Large scale retail stores such as
Target, Home Depot, or
Barnes & Noble.............................. 15.9% 27.1% 55.7% 1.3%
B. Medical and dental offices and outpatient
services.......................................... 27.0% 6.7% 63.0% 3.2%
C. Home furnishings stores such as Ethan
Allen ............................................... 18.0% 23.2% 54.9% 3.8%
D. Movie theatres................................... 41.8% 7.7% 49.0% 1.5%
29. For this same list of stores and services, please tell me how often you use these
stores or services OUTSIDE the City of Carlsbad.?
How often do you go to a_____ outside the City of Carlsbad, regularly, sometimes,
seldom, or never? (REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH ITEM)
RANDOMIZE (DON’T
READ)
Regularly Sometimes Seldom Never DK/NA
A. Large scale retail store such as
Target, Home Depot, or
Barnes & Noble.............................. 56.5% 24.1% 13.3% 5.9% 0.3%
B. Medical and dental office or related outpatient
services.......................................... 52.7% 23.6% 13.7% 9.4% 0.6%
C. Home furnishings store such as Ethan
Allen ............................................... 18.1% 21.8% 31.4% 27.8% 0.9%
D. Movie theatre .................................... 32.1% 26.0% 26.7% 14.8% 0.4%
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-15
To wrap things up, I just have a few background
questions for comparison purposes only.
A. Do you own or rent the unit in which you live?
21.8% Rent
77.0% Own
1.2% (Don't Read) Refused
B. If you are currently employed, is your job or business located in the City of
Carlsbad?
32.2% Yes, located in Carlsbad
42.3% Not located in Carlsbad
25.0% Not currently employed
0.5% (Don't Read) Refused
C. Please tell me how many children under 18 live in your household. _____
59.6% No children
16.2% 1 child
18.1% 2 children
6.1% 3 or more children
D. In what year were you born? 19_ _
7.6% 18 to 24 years
14.4% 25 to 34 years
18.5% 35 to 44 years
20.6% 45 to 54 years
17.3% 55 to 64 years
17.4% 65 years or older
4.2% (Don't Read) Refused
E. What ethnic group do you consider yourself a part of or feel closest to? (IF
HESITATE, READ):
76.6% White or Caucasian
11.6% Hispanic or Latino
4.3% Asian
1.6% African American or Black
1.7% Other (Specify: ____)
4.3% (Don't Read) Refused
2007 Public Opinion Survey – Report
City of Carlsbad
A-16
F. 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?
A. Street? __________
B. Is that a street, road, avenue, or something else?
C. And what is the nearest cross street? __________
D. Is that a street, road, avenue, or something else?
G. Lastly, would you be interested in participating in future research sponsored by the
City of Carlsbad (GET ANSWER IF YES). So the City of Carlsbad can contact you
in the future, may I get you name, the phone number you would prefer to be
contacted at and your email address?
Interested in future research:
56.9% Yes
43.1% No
A. Name __________
B. Preferred phone number
C. Email __________
Those are all of the questions I have for you.
Thank you very much for participating!
H. Gender (Recorded from voice, not asked):
48.9% Male
51.1% Female
Page
City of Carlsbad
2007 Public Opinion Survey
January 16, 2008
Page
Research Objectives
•Assess residents’ perceptions regarding satisfaction with
city services, quality of life, sense of community, city
government, safety, and city-resident communication;
•Evaluate residents’ satisfaction with specific city services;
•Identify residents’ perceptions regarding land use in
Carlsbad as well as open space preferences for the land
near the strawberry fields, and
•Assess residents’ experience visiting the Carlsbad Village
as well as preferences for the types of stores and
businesses that could be located throughout the City
2
Page
Methodology
•Telephone Survey of 1,001 Residents
¾Fielded: October 1 – November 11, 2007
(Suspended for a week and a half during the fires)
¾Average length: 20 minutes
¾Statistically representative sample by age, gender,
ethnicity and geographic distribution (zip code)
based on SANDAG’s 2007 estimates for Carlsbad
¾Margin of error +/- 3.08% (95% confidence level)
3
Page
Methodological Changes from Past Surveys
•New questions were added in 2007. Among comparable
questions, many response scales were changed to provide a
simpler interpretation and enhance comparisons to other survey
research
•Specific response categories were used instead of the zero to ten
scales used in past surveys (for example: are you satisfied or
dissatisfied, would that be very or somewhat)
•Survey data were weighted using SANDAG’s 2007 population
estimates for the City by gender, age, ethnicity, and zip code to
ensure representativeness of results
•Although changes make it difficult to directly compare with past
years, the 2007 survey will serve as the basis for future
comparisons while also allowing comparisons with other research
4
Page
Satisfaction with City Services
92% of residents are either Very (58%) or Somewhat Satisfied
(34%) with the job the City is doing to provide services
Very satisfied
58.0%
Very dissatisfied
3.1%
Somewhat
dissatisfied
2.9%
DK/NA
2.5%
Somewhat
satisfied
33.5%
5
Page
City Satisfaction: Example Comparisons
73%
75%
76%
83%
84%
85%
89%
91%
95%
92%
53%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Small City, Kern County
Large City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Orange County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
Small City
Total population up to
50,000
Mid-Sized City
Population between
50,001 and 150,000
Large City
150,001 or more
6
Page
Satisfaction with City’s Efforts to …. (Top 8)
Analysis Excludes Responses of Don’t Know/ No Answer
28.9%
31.7%
26.9%
29.6%
19.7%
54.5%
76.6%
65.4%
67.4%
60.8%
63.4%
59.8%
64.5%
36.8%
27.0%
31.8%5%
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Maintain recreation facilities
Provide emergency medical and paramedic
services
Provide sewer services
Provide law enforcement services
Provide water services
Provide fire protection & prevention services
Maintain city parks
Provide library services
Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Neither Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
7
Page
Satisfaction with City’s Efforts to …. (cont.)
Analysis Excludes Responses of Don’t Know/ No Answer
43.1%
42.8%
35.2%
41.4%
34.3%
17.1%
54.7%
46.8%
51.6%
42.7%
42.2%
22.8%
18.6%
36.1%
38.4%
41.4%
6%
6%
6%
12%
7%
6%
6%
18.5%
18.0%
6%
16.4% 20.7%
16.5%
13.3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Provide affordable housing for working
families
Manage residential growth and development
Manage traffic congestion on city streets
Maintain the business climate in Carlsbad
Repair and maintain local streets and roads
Provide trails and walking paths
Provide local arts and cultural opportunities
Provide recreation programs
Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Neither Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
8
Page
Ratings for Contracted City Services
44.0%
11.7%
29.1%
44.9%
39.7%
27.6%
41.5%
46.1%
40.3%
7%
17.0%
18.5% 8%
6%
7%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Hazardous waste
disposal
Street sweeping
services
Recycling collection
services
Trash collection
services
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor
9
Analysis Excludes Responses of Don’t Know/ No Answer
Page
Sense of Community Index: Comprised of a
Series of Seven Items
Strongly
agree Agree Neither
Dis-
agree
Strongly
disagree DK Total
Agree
Social Connections
I can recognize most of the people who
live in my neighborhood 27.6% 48.3% 3.6% 16.6% 3.1% 0.7%75.9%
Very few of my neighbors know me 7.8% 21.7% 3.2% 43.7% 23.2% 0.4% 66.9%*
I have almost no influence over what my
neighborhood is like 9.1% 25.5% 5.7% 43.3% 14.4% 2.0% 57.7%*
Mutual Concerns
My neighbors and I want the same things
from this community 24.7% 51.9% 8.2% 5.2% 1.4% 8.5%76.6%
If there is a problem in my neighborhood,
people who live here can get it solved 20.9% 51.3% 7.7% 11.2% 3.6% 5.3% 72.2%
Community Values
It is very important for me to feel a sense
of community with other residents 30.4% 50.4% 8.6% 8.7% 1.1% 0.8%80.8%
Very
strong
Somewhat
strong
Smwt.
weak
Very
weak None at all DK
Total
Strong
How strongly feel sense of community 28.7% 41.5% 17.6% 3.0% 7.2% 2.0% 70.2%
* Items reverse coded. Percentage is total disagreement. Disagreeing with these statements indicates a higher sense of community.
10
Page
Sense of Community Index: Levels
48% of residents are classified as having a strong
sense of community
Medium
40.0%
Low
12.0%High
47.9%
High
Agreement with 6 or 7 items (of 7)
Medium
Agreement with 2 to 5 items (of 7)
Low
Agreement with 0 or 1 items (of 7)
11
Page
Safety in Carlsbad Neighborhoods
98% of residents feel safe walking alone in their neighborhood
during the day; 86% feel safe after dark
51.4%
85.9%
34.1%
12.4%
9.2%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Safety walking alone
in your neighborhood
after dark
Safety walking alone
in your neighborhood
during the day
Very safe Somewhat safe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe DK/NA
12
Page
Safety Walking Alone in Neighborhood
During the Day: Example Comparisons
83%
98%
98%
98%
95%
93%
93%
90%
86%
85%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Large City, San Francisco County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Large City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Small City, Santa Clara County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
13
Page
Safety Walking Alone in Neighborhood
After Dark: Example Comparisons
52%
55%
61%
68%
68%
82%
86%
88%
89%
50%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Large City, San Francisco County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Large City, Santa Clara County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, Santa Clara County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Small City, Santa Clara County
14
Page
Satisfaction: City-Resident Communication
82% of residents are either Very (40%) or Somewhat Satisfied
(42%) with the City’s efforts to communicate with residents
Very satisfied
40.2%
Somewhat satisfied
42.2%
DK/NA
3.0%
Somewhat
dissatisfied
11.0%
Very dissatisfied
3.6%
15
Page
Satisfaction with City-Resident Communication:
Example Comparisons
53%
86%
82%
81%
81%
80%
74%
72%
71%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Large City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, San Diego County
Mid-Sized City, Riverside County
Mid-Sized City, Sacramento County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
Mid-Sized City, Los Angeles County
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Large City, Orange County
16
Page
54% of residents rate the job the City is doing balancing the
various land uses – residential, commercial, industrial, &
recreational – as “Excellent” (16%) or “Good” (38%)
Rating for the Job the City Does Balancing
Land Uses
DK/NA
2.2%Excellent
15.5%
Good
38.2%Very poor
7.6%
Fair
23.4%
Poor
13.0%
17
Page
Among the 90% of residents familiar with the land near
the strawberry fields, 82% support traditional open space
in that area
Preferences for Land Near Strawberry Fields
15.5%
51.0%
82.0%
57.8%
53.3%
44.9%
42.9%
37.9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Cultural and civic facilities (open-air theatre, a
museum and a public gathering space)
Recreation space (athletic fields, recreation
centers and other active recreation)
A combination of recreation space, traditional
open space, and cultural facilities
Traditional open space (trails, a nature park,
viewing areas and a picnic area)
Support Oppose DK/NA
18
Page
Most Preferred Option for Land Near
Strawberry Fields
3.4%
6.2%
6.9%
32.3%
48.9%
2.2%
0%20%40%60%
DK/NA
None of the above
Recreation space (athletic fields, recreation
centers and other active recreation)
Cultural and civic facilities (open-air theatre, a
museum and a public gathering space)
Combination of recreation space, traditional
open space, and cultural facilities
Traditional open space (trails, a nature park,
viewing areas and a picnic area)
Data reflects residents
who supported at least
one of the options
presented in the
previous question
19
Page
87% of residents who have visited Carlsbad Village rate their
experience as “Excellent” (43%) or “Good” (44%)
Experience Visiting Carlsbad Village
80% of residents visit
Carlsbad’s Downtown
Village at least once a
month
55% of residents visit
the Village at least
once a week
1.1%
43.4%
43.6%
10.2%
1.1%
0.5%
0%20%40%60%
DK/NA
Very poor
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent
20
Page
42% of residents would like to see more movie theatres
in Carlsbad
Preferences for Businesses in the City
49.0%
23.2%18.0%
27.0%
41.8%
15.9%
63.0%
54.9%
55.7% 27.1%
8%
7%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Large-scale retail stores such as Target,
Home Depot, or Barnes & Noble
Home furnishings stores such as Ethan
Allen
Medical and dental offices and outpatient
services
Movie theatres
More Adequate Less DK/NA
21
Page
Quality of Life
69% of residents feel the quality of life in Carlsbad is “Getting
Better” (22%) or “Staying about the Same” (48%)
Getting better
21.5%
DK/NA
4.0%
Getting worse
26.5%
Staying about the
same
47.9%
22
Page
Follow-Up Question: Number One Way to
Increase the Quality of Life in Carlsbad
Asked of the 29% who feel the quality of life is getting worse
or are dissatisfied with the City’s job providing services
1.6%
51.7%
11.3%
5.7%
4.4%
3.5%
2.8%
2.6%
2.2%
14.1%
0%20%40%60%
DK/NA
Other
Increase recreation opportunities
Improve schools
Remove illegal immigrants
Preserve more open space
Increase/ improve police services
Improve roads and infrastructure
Fix the traffic problems
Stop building/ growth
Items with 2% or less
combined into “Other”
n=290
23
Page
Confidence in City Government
79% of residents are confident in Carlsbad city government
to make decisions that positively affect the lives of
community members
Very unconfident
5.4%
Somewhat
unconfident
12.7%
DK/NA
3.4%
Somewhat
confident
55.4%
Very confident
23.1%
24
Page
Conclusions
•The City is transitioning from a small to medium sized city
(less than 100,000 residents) to a larger city with more
diverse needs
•Overall satisfaction with City’s provision of services remains
high and is in the top 10% of comparable resident
satisfaction studies
•Among residents who perceive the quality of life as
declining, increased growth and development in the City
appears to be the driving factor - particularly among
residents who have lived in the City for more than 15 years
25