1. ESG HIA Stakeholder survey results Participants 18 people Balanced representation (2 didn’t answer) 2 elected officials 4 planning officials 1 park system rep 2 academic reps 1 concerned citizen 5 non-profit organizations 1 watershed rep Involvement in the HIA 10 spent 1-10 hours 3 spent 11-20 hours 3 spent 21-30 hours 1 spent 21-30 hours 1 spent 41+ hours

2. Key findings The HIA influence the ESG planning process -17 out of 18 agreed or strongly agreed (1 disagree) ESG planning partners and stakeholders have increased knowledge of the link between health and equity and trail planning -17 out of 18 agreed or strongly agreed (1 don’t know) ESG planning partners and stakeholders have increased knowledge about HIA -18 agreed or strongly agreed ESG will be completely ignored in the decision making process -17 out of 18 disagreed or strongly disagreed (1 don’t know)

3. How helpful were these components of the HIA?Somewh at helpful Very helpful The HIA data, maps and findings as a means to inform you about the health impacts of the trail system 610 The HIA as a tool to discuss health impacts of trails with others 79 The HIA’s evidence about how potential changes to the trail connections, alignments and trailheads can impact community health 96 The HIA’s evidence about health equity issues (such as differences among racial/ethnic groups preferences when using trails and parks) 311 The HIA’s evidence about walkability (such as walkscore)115 The HIA’s evidence about transportation related safety (such as bicycle/automobile collisions) 511 The HIAs’ evidence about crime and fear of crime (such as locations where people feel unsafe) 313

4. A look at the HIA processTrueFalse The HIA recommendations were released in time to inform the trail planning, design and construction 162 The HIA included adequate community input126 The HIA garnered meaningful stakeholder participation from the community, public agencies and decision makers 143 The HIA had access to meaningful data and resources on which to base its recommendations 170 The HIA included all pathways in which the trail network could reasonably be expected to impact health 125 The HIA pathways were informed by officials with appropriate expertise, such as the health department, academic institutions, trail plan experts, etc. 170 The HIA team explained where its scientific evidence came from to support its findings 170

5. Knowledge in HIA (8 stakeholders were not familiar at all prior to the ESG HIA-this category demonstrated the largest increase) Knowledge of equity issues within ESG communities Understanding of fear of crime within the ESG communities Understanding of social cohesion within the ESG communities Understanding of traffic safety for cyclists and pedestrians in the ESG planning area Understanding of neighborhood walkability in the ESG planning area Stakeholders of the ESG HIA increased knowledge and understanding on the following topics

6. AgreeStrongly agree The ESG TLCI Plan will be more health and equity supportive because of the HIA 98 The recommendations of the HIA will help lend credibility or political support to health supportive decisions made in this area around trail planning 88 The HIA will be useful to me in my work95 I will share information from this HIA with others96 I would like to use HIAs for other potential issues that will be brought forth by planning consultants and local officials 86 What impact will the ESG HIA have in the future?

7. Some constructive comments Some findings were extremely helpful and relevant Presentations focused too much on the process, rather than the outcomes/recommendations Community engagement is lacking The HIA brought out data that would not have been considered otherwise It’s unclear if the HIA will be reflected in the ESG plan Outreach was lacking