Key Findings – Special Topics 2018 Nevada County, CA Key Findings – Special Topics 2018 The NCS is presented by NRC in collaboration with ICMA

Education and Enrichment Recreation and Wellness Key Focus Areas Legend Higher than national benchmark Similar to national benchmark Lower than national benchmark   Most important Safety Built Environment Education and Enrichment Natural Environment Recreation and Wellness Quick reminder of facets of livability and which ones NC residents thought were most important Mobility Economy Community Engagement

Community Characteristics A key set of questions ask residents to rate their communities on a variety of general community characteristics, overall quality of life and the overall quality of the city.

2017 Community Characteristics Highest Place to live Neighborhood as a place to live Safe neighborhood Safe downtown area Overall natural environment Place to visit Volunteer opportunities Lowest Employment opportunities Affordable quality housing Travel by public transportation Housing options Cost of living [This is the status slide. Create cut points so that anywhere from 5-10 community characteristics are identified as high and low.] High cut point: 90% or above Low cut point: 30% or below In the NCS, we ask residents to rate over 40 different community characteristics. These are areas of the jurisdiction that local government plays a strong or weaker role – but often represent amenities that residents want in their communities. We are going to present a number of different “snapshots” or your community’s results – one where we simply look at the characteristics compared to one another, one where we compare the ratings to benchmarks, and one where we compare the ratings over time. (for repeat clients). So here is our first snapshot of community characteristics.

2017 Community Characteristics: Comparison to Benchmarks Place to retire Place to visit Overall natural environment Fitness opportunities Recreational opportunities Cultural/arts/music activities Opportunities to participate in community matters Volunteer opportunities Social events and activities Travel by bicycle Travel by public transportation Affordable quality housing Housing options Employment opportunities Place to work Higher than Benchmark Lower than Benchmark For our second community characteristic “snapshot” – we look at how these same set of ratings compared to national/custom benchmarks. The reason NRC started collecting and using benchmarks decades ago is because we realized that some areas and some services will nearly always be rated higher than others – regardless of quality. Parks and fire will almost always score higher than planning and economic development. So comparing your ratings to the ratings of other communities can be very telling. Of the 47 community characteristics compared – 9 higher and 6 lower. [Use either higher/lower or much higher/much lower depending on ratings. If they don’t have any lower ratings – use similar/higher and if they don’t have higher use – lower/similar. You can also just use counts if one of the categories is huge. Find ways to abbreviate like example above when there are too many to list. Point is to find areas where they can focus. ] In the case of County – interpret.

Governance A key component of the NCS – is the question sets related to government service provision. Residents were asked to rate more than xx city government services and public trust. Now we will look at the 3 snapshots for government services performance– status, comparison to benchmarks and time trends

2017 Service Ratings Highest Lowest Sheriff Fire prevention (75%+) Overall County services Sheriff Fire prevention Garbage collection Sewer services Public libraries Customer service provided by County Lowest (<42%) Street repair Bus or transit services Land use, planning and zoning Code enforcement Economic development High cutpoint: 75% or higher Low cutpoint: 41% or lower

2017 Government Services: Comparison to Benchmarks none Street repair (25%) Higher than Benchmark Lower than Benchmark For our second community characteristic “snapshot” – we look at how these same set of ratings compared to national/custom benchmarks. The reason NRC started collecting and using benchmarks decades ago is because we realized that some areas and some services will nearly always be rated higher than others – regardless of quality. Parks and fire will almost always score higher than planning and economic development. So comparing your ratings to the ratings of other communities can be very telling. In the case of County – interpret. of the 33 – 32 were the same. [Use either higher/lower or much higher/much lower depending on ratings. If they don’t have any lower ratings – use similar/higher and if they don’t have higher use – lower/similar. You can also just use counts if one of the categories is huge. Find ways to abbreviate like example above when there are too many to list. Point is to find areas where they can focus. ]

Participation And the final pillar – or area the NCS reports on is your residents. Because we all know the old model of government as lone service provider and residents as customer is not accurate. For communities to be great – residents are more than customers they are participants. They need to take responsibility to create more livable places. We ask residents to report about their behaviors in all of the community facets studied. There are asked to report on xx behaviors in all.

2017 Participation Ratings Highest (92%+) Recommend Nevada County Remain in Nevada County Recycled at home Conserved water Purchased goods or services in the County Voted in local elections Talked/visited with neighbors Lowest (<31%) Used public transportation Economy will have positive impact Attended local public meeting Watched local public meeting Contacted County officials High cutpoint: 92% or higher Low cutpoint: 30% or lower

2017 Participation Ratings: Comparison to Benchmarks Remain in Nevada County Stocked supplies for an emergency Carpooled Recycled at home Conserved water Work in Nevada County Voted in local elections Volunteered Participated in a club Campaigned for an issue, cause or candidate Used public transportation Did not observe a code violation Higher than Benchmark Lower than Benchmark Of the 35 – 10 higher, 2 lower

Special Topics

Economy From each set of statements below, please select the one you lean toward more: Custom questions: q28a and q28b on survey Page 19 in Livability “Retired, not looking for paid work” was not included on the survey as a response option for this question. It was created using question D4 to help identify respondents who were actually unemployed versus those who were retired or not looking for paid work. Additionally, respondents who skipped the question entirely but indicated that that were “unemployed, not looking for work” or “retired” in question D4 were added to this new response category.

Please choose the statement that best describes you: Economy Please choose the statement that best describes you: Custom question – q29 on survey p. 19 in Livability Residents were also asked about the number of jobs they worked. The largest proportion (45%) worked one job, about one-third did not work and about 2 in 10 worked more than one job.

Fire Danger Regarding issues related to fire danger in your neighborhood, please rate how concerned, if at all, you are with each of the following: Custom question – q18 on survey p. 15 in Livability Report When thinking about issues related to fire danger in their neighborhood, at least 6 in 10 residents were very or somewhat concerned with all the items listed. Residents were most likely to feel very concerned about illegal campfires (75%). About two-thirds were very concerned with illegal encampments and forest health and about half were very concerned with obtaining or renewing homeowner insurance with wildfire protection.

Wildfire Safety To what degree, if at all, do the following barriers exist for wildfire safety on your property? Custom question – q19 on survey p. 15 in Livability Report When residents were asked about barriers to wildfire safety on their property, about one-quarter felt that fiscal barriers to making their property wildfire safety were definitely a barrier and another 4 in 10 felt they were sort of a barrier. Respondents were less likely to indicate that physical barriers or regulations with local and state agencies were obstacles for wildfire safety.

Emergencies How much of a source, if any, do you consider each of the following for obtaining information during an emergency? Custom question – q20 on survey p. 16 in Livability Report Residents considered three County information sources and were asked to indicate how much of a source they felt each one was during emergencies. Nearly half of residents considered the Nevada County CodeRED notification system to be a major source of information during emergencies, and another one-quarter considered it a minor source. About 7 in 10 residents considered the County Office of Emergency Services website to be a major or minor source while about two-thirds used County communications on social media as an information source during emergencies.

Homelessness To what extent, if at all, are you concerned about each of the following aspects of homelessness in Nevada County? Custom question – q21 on survey p. 16 in Livability Report When thinking about their level of concern related to aspects of homelessness in Nevada County, at least 6 in 10 residents felt very concerned about illegal camping, loitering/nuisance in business areas and public safety. Less than half of respondents were very concerned about the impact on economic development, accessibility or availability of community and government support services, although roughly 4 in 10 residents indicated that they were somewhat concerned with these aspects.

Internet Connectivity How do you connect to the Internet at home? (Mark all that apply.) Please rate the quality of your current broadband availability: Custom question – q22 + q24 on survey p. 17 in Livability Report Residents were also asked about Internet service and broadband. About half of residents had a home Internet connection via cable, about one-third connected via cellular and another 2 in 10 had a DSL connection. Roughly 1 in 10 connected to the Internet using satellite or fixed wireless, and only 1% reported using a dial-up connection. Slightly more than half of residents rated their current broadband availability as excellent or good, about 3 in 10 felt it was fair and about 2 in 10 rated it as poor

Level of Support for Retail Sales of Cannabis To what extent do you support or oppose each of the following types of retail sales of cannabis in Nevada County? *MJ questions are discussed in the Livability conclusions as part of Economy Livability Report: Fig. 11, page 12 Question 14 on survey Residents of Nevada County are largely supportive of having retail sales of medical cannabis which was made legal in 1996, 74% support it with 54% showing strong support Retail sales of recreational does not hold as strong support in the county. Our survey shows 54% support for recreational cannabis in the county, which is similar to the actual vote in 2016, where 53% of the county voted yes on proposition 64. While most do support recreational cannabis, it should be noted that 39% expressed strong opposition.

Level of Concern with Aspects of Cannabis To what extent, if at all, are you concerned about each of the following aspects of cannabis in Nevada County? Livability Report: Fig. 14, page 14 Question 17 on survey Residents were also asked how concerned, if at all, they were with 11 aspects of cannabis in the county. This slide shows results from the six aspects deemed most important by County staff.

Moving Forward Citizen-centric Decision making Data-driven Decision making TheNCS Call to action --- remind them how important and useful these data can be. Encourage them to do something! The NCS provide a great foundation Action Planning. The NCS simplifies traditional planning because: It is based on resident opinions – their perceptions of quality and priorities they place on community issues (they are your customer and their opinion is your bottom line) It is data. In an age where the most progressive companies use “data driven decision making” – it is an easy way for governments to ID the right areas in which to move and provide the data to support the strategies. The NCS provides a great tool when you have strong local advocates of strategies that might not always reflect the desires of the greater population. Envision, Engage, Educate, Earmark, Enact, Evaluate

Questions?

Thank you! National Research Center, Inc. 2955 Valmont Road Suite 300 Boulder, CO 80301 303-444-7863 • nrc@n-r-c.com www.n-r-c.com