final report - city of coquitlam 2018 citizen survey · final report january 23, 2019 city of...

1

© 2019 Ipsos. All rights reserved. Contains Ipsos' Confidential and Proprietary information and may not be disclosed or reproduced without the prior written consent of Ipsos.

2018 Citizen SurveyFINAL REPORTJanuary 23, 2019

City of Coquitlam

2

Contents

Page

Introduction 3

Executive Summary 8

Quality of Life 15

Issue Agenda 28

Transportation 33

City Services 36

Financial Planning 48

Parks, Recreation, and Culture 53

Crime and Personal Safety 56

Communication and Community Engagement 59

Customer Service 68

Work 76

Weighted Sample Characteristics 80

Appendix: Survey Tracking 82

3

INTRODUCTION

4

This report presents the findings of the City of Coquitlam’s 2018 Citizen Survey. Ipsos has been conducting this survey for the City since 2003.

The key research objectives of the 2018 survey included:

• Identify important community issues

• Assess perceptions of the quality of life in Coquitlam

• Understand the key characteristics that residents look for in a community

• Measure the importance of and satisfaction with municipal services

• Determine the perceived value for taxes and preferred funding options

• Understand information needs and communication/engagement preferences

• Measure contact with the City and satisfaction with the City’s customer service

• Identify important transportation issues

• Identify priorities for investment in parks, recreation, and culture

• Identify important crime and personal safety issues

• Determine employment status and location

The insight gained from this research will ultimately help guide the City make important decisions around planning, budgeting, and community priorities.

Background and ObjectivesINTRODUCTION

5

Ipsos conducted a total of 500 telephone interviews with a randomly selected representative sample of Coquitlam residents aged 18 years or older.

The sample of residents was drawn by postal code. A screening question was included at the start of the survey to confirm residency in Coquitlam.

All interviews were conducted between November 21 and December 5, 2018.

Overall results are accurate to within ±4.4%, 19 times out of 20. The margin of error will be larger for sample subgroups.

A breakout of the number of interviews conducted in each neighbourhood and the associated margins of error can be found below.

The final data has been weighted to ensure that the gender/age and neighbourhood distribution reflects that of the actual population in Coquitlam according to 2016 Census data.

Neighbourhood Number of InterviewsMargin of Error

(19 times out of 20)

Northeast Coquitlam 54 ±13.3%

Westwood Plateau 80 ±11.0%

City Centre 113 ±9.2%

Central Coquitlam 133 ±8.5%

West Coquitlam 120 ±8.9%

MethodologyINTRODUCTION

6

A map of the neighbourhoods identified in the survey can be found below.

Neighbourhood MapINTRODUCTION

7

Some totals in the report may not add to 100%. Some summary statistics (e.g., total satisfied) may not match their component parts. The numbers are correct and the apparent errors are due to rounding.

Analysis of some of the statistically significant demographic results is included where applicable. While a number of significant differences may appear in the cross-tabulation output, not all differences warrant discussion.

TRACKING TO PREVIOUS SURVEYS

Where appropriate, this year’s results have been compared to similar surveys conducted by the City of Coquitlam in previous years. Comparing the year-over-year results allows the City to understand how citizens’ attitudes and priorities are changing, identify new or emerging issues facing the community, and monitor perceptions of the City’s performance in key areas.

Arrows () are used to denote differences of 5% or greater between 2018 and 2017 for results based on the full sample size.

For some questions, survey tracking dates as far back as 2003. While this report primarily focuses on trends over the past decade (e.g., 2008-2018), the complete year-over-year survey results for questions with data prior to 2008 have been included as an Appendix.

NORMATIVE COMPARISONS

Where appropriate, this year’s results have been compared to Ipsos’ database of municipal norms for British Columbia and the Lower Mainland. These norms are based on research Ipsos has conducted in other municipalities within the past five years. Normative comparisons provide additional insight, context, and benchmarks against which the City of Coquitlam can evaluate its performance.

Interpreting and Viewing the ResultsINTRODUCTION

8

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

9

QUALITY OF LIFE

Overall perceptions of quality of life remain favourable. Nearly all (98%) citizens rate Coquitlam’s quality of life as ‘very good’ or ‘good’, on par with 2017. The percentage rating the quality of life as ‘very good’ is notably higher now as compared to a decade ago (up 19 percentage points).

Citizens are optimistic about the direction that quality of life is taking. When asked how the quality of life in Coquitlam has changed over the past five years, 41% of residents say ‘stayed the same’, 34% say ‘improved’, and 23% say ‘worsened’, resulting in a net momentum score of +11 percentage points. While last year saw growing positive momentum in the direction that quality of life is taking, this year’s net score is down 7 points, marking a return to previous levels.

• Among those saying the quality of life has ‘improved’, the leading open-ended reason is “SkyTrain/Evergreen Line” (26%), followed by “improved recreational facilities/parks” (16%) and “growth/development” (12%). These were also among the top mentions last year.

• Among those saying the quality of life has ‘worsened’, the leading open-ended reason is “growth/development” (26%), followed by “traffic/traffic congestion” (18%) and “housing costs/affordable housing” (14%). These were also the main drivers of worsening impressions in 2017.

Citizens suggest a variety of actions the City could take to improve the quality of life in Coquitlam. The top open-ended suggestions are “affordable housing” (11%), “improve traffic congestion/flow” (9%), “less density/development” (9%), and “improve transit/public transportation” (9%). This year’s results are largely similar to 2017. One noteworthy change is the emphasis placed on “less density/development”, which is up 5 percentage points this year.

“Parks/green spaces” is at the top of residents’ vision for Coquitlam in the year 2040, garnering 12% of open-ended responses. Other words that residents use to describe their ideal future Coquitlam are “affordable (cost of living, housing)” (8%), “safe/secure” (7%), “community-oriented” (6%), “more inclusive/diverse” (5%), and “controlled growth/development” (5%). Year-over-year comparisons are unavailable for this question.

Executive Summary

10

ISSUE AGENDA

As a whole, transportation continues to top the public issue agenda. On an open-ended basis, more than one-third (36%) of citizens identify transportation as an important local issue, including mentions of “traffic congestion” (14%), “transportation (general)” (9%), “condition of streets/roads” (7%), “quality/level of public transit” (5%), “parking” (1%), and “road safety” (1%). Transportation has consistently been the leading top-of-mind community issue and this year’s results are on par with 2017.

Social issues – particularly housing – are a growing concern. Following transportation, the next most important local issue is social (27% open-ended mentions). The single biggest social issue by far is “housing/lack of affordable housing” (22%). In fact, “housing/lack of affordable housing” is the most frequently mentioned issue overall when responses are not categorized into the broader thematic Nets. Other social issues include “poverty/homelessness” (3%), “drugs” (2%), “seniors issues” (1%), and “affordable daycare” (1%). Social issues have been a growing concern for three consecutive years and are up 5 percentage points from 2017, representing a new all-time high.

Growth and development rounds out citizens’ top three community issues this year. Overall, 15% of citizens mention issues related to growth and development on an open-ended basis, including “growth/development (general)” (5%), “level of development” (4%), “population growth” (4%), and “monster/mega houses” (2%). Mentions of growth and development are up 5 percentage points this year, representing a new all-time high.

TRANSPORTATION

Traffic congestion and public transportation continue to be key top-of-mind transportation issues. When asked to identify what they see as the biggest transportation issue facing Coquitlam today, 33% of citizens mention “traffic/traffic congestion” and 30% mention the “quality/level of public transportation” (coded open-ends). All other transportation issues are mentioned by less than 10% of residents. While these were also the two leading transportation issues in 2017, mentions of “traffic/traffic congestion” are up 8 percentage points this year.

Executive Summary

11

CITY SERVICES

Overall satisfaction with City services remains high. Consistent with previous surveys, a strong majority (94%) of citizens say they are satisfied with the overall level and quality of services provided by the City of Coquitlam. Satisfaction with City services is on par with 2017.

Satisfaction extends to the delivery of specific services. All of the tested services receive a satisfaction score of 75% or higher (combined ‘very/somewhat satisfied’ responses), with the highest ratings going to fire services (98%), public works, including drinking water quality and sewers (98%), parks, trails, and other green space (97%), and police services (96%). In comparison, neighbourhood planning scores lower (75%), although three-quarters of citizens still say they are satisfied with this service. Satisfaction with most services is on par with 2017 – the one exception is road maintenance, which is up 9 percentage points this year.

All of the tested services are important to citizens. Importance scores (combined ‘very/somewhat important’ responses) range from a high of 99% for public works, including drinking water quality and sewers to a low of 80% for sports fields. This year’s importance ratings are consistent with 2017 for all services.

FINANCIAL PLANNING

Perceptions of the City’s value for taxes remain high. Overall, nearly nine-in-ten (88%) citizens say they receive good value for their municipal tax dollars, consistent with 2017.

Citizens continue to prefer tax increases over service cuts. When given a choice between increased taxes or service cuts, 49% choose increased taxes compared to 39% opting for service cuts. The preference for tax increases over service cuts is consistent with 2017.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND CULTURE

Citizens identify a number of investment priorities for parks, recreation, and culture. Overall, the top investment priorities are community centres, including senior and youth facilities (92% ‘very/somewhat important’) and neighbourhood parks, including playgrounds and community gardens (91%), followed by hiking, walking, and biking trails (89%), public festivals and community events (88%), swimming pools (82%), sports fields and outdoor courts (80%), performing arts and theatre (75%), and arena facilities for ice sports, curling, and lacrosse (72%). In comparison, citizens place less emphasis on indoor racquet and court facilities (59%). The importance of most priorities is consistent with 2017 – the one exception is performing arts and theatre, which is down 5 points this year.

Executive Summary

12

CRIME AND PERSONAL SAFETY

Overall, few citizens identify crime as an important community issue. On an open-ended basis, only 5% of citizens identify crime as an important local issue overall. Further, when asked to identify the biggest top-of-mind crime and personal safety issue currently facing Coquitlam, nearly three-in-ten (27%) decline to identify any specific issue (20% “none/nothing”, 7% “don’t know). The top mention overall is “theft/robbery” (29%), followed by “none/nothing” (20%) and “drugs” (13%). All other crime and personal safety issues are mentioned by less than 10% of citizens. These results are consistent with 2017.

COMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Residents are most interested in receiving City information about “community infrastructure (improvements, updates)” and “City spending/budgets”. Both of these information requests are mentioned by 18% of residents on an open-ended basis, which is more than double what is reported for any other single item.More than one-third (35%) indicate they have no immediate information needs (30% “none/nothing”, 5% “don’t know”). Requests for information about “City spending/budgets” are up 7 percentage points this year.

“Email” continues to be citizens’ preferred way of receiving City information, garnering 42% of open-ended responses. Other ways that citizens would like to receive City information are “mail” (25%), “City website” (18%), “newspaper” (17%), “newsletter/pamphlet/flyer/brochure” (17%), and “social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.)” (10%). “Email” was also the preferred method of receiving information in 2017. “Newspaper” mentions are down 5 percentage points this year.

The “telephone” and “email” remain the preferred ways of contacting the City of Coquitlam. If residents needed to contact the City, 72% say they would prefer to use the “telephone” and 52% mention “email” (coded open-ends). While the “telephone” continues to be residents’ most preferred method of contacting the City, mentions are down 6 percentage points this year as compared to 2017.

Residents are open to a variety of public consultation formats. Of the tested forms of public consultation, citizens are most interested (combined ‘very/somewhat interested’ responses) in participating in feedback forms on the City’s website (68%), surveys like this (67%), and public open houses where residents can observe and comment on information posted on display boards (64%). The next most interesting forms of public consultation are community workshops where residents take part in active discussion sessions (54%) and small community focus groups (50%). Fewer are interested in participating via mail in workbooks (44%), the City’s Facebook or Twitter page (41%), and online blogs or discussion forums (39%). Interest in both public open houses and community workshops is down 5 percentage points this year.

Executive Summary

13

CUSTOMER SERVICE

One-half (50%) of all citizens say they personally contacted or dealt with the City of Coquitlam or one of its employees in the last 12 months. Claimed contact with the City is on par with 2017. Among those saying they contacted the City:

• Two-in-ten (20%) say their contact was regarding “garbage/recycling collection” (coded open-ends). This is more than double what is mentioned for any other reason. “Garbage/recycling collection” was also the most common reason for contacting the City in 2017.

• Just over one-half (52%) say they contacted the City via the “telephone” (coded open-ends). The next most common methods of contact are “in-person” (23%) and “email” (14%). These results are consistent with 2017.

The City continues to provide good customer service overall. Among those saying they contacted the City, nearly nine-in-ten (87%) say they are satisfied with the overall service received. Satisfaction extends to the seven tested customer service elements, including the courteousness of staff (97%), staff’s helpfulness (88%), staff’s knowledge (88%), the ability of staff to understand your needs (87%), the ease of reaching staff (86%), the speed and timeliness of service (83%), and staff’s ability to resolve your issue (77%). Satisfaction with the City’s customer service is on par with 2017.

WORK

Key employment metrics hold steady. Overall, 61% of residents say they are employed either ‘full-time’ or ‘part-time’. Among those saying they are employed or attending school, one-quarter (25%) say their employment/school is ‘based in Coquitlam’. These results are consistent with 2017.

Executive Summary

14

• Overall, citizens continue to demonstrate mostly positive views of the community and City.

• Perceptions of the quality of life in Coquitlam remain strong and citizens are optimistic about the direction that quality of life is taking.

• As a whole, transportation-related issues continue to top the public issue agenda. Traffic congestion and public transportation remain the most important top-of-mind transportation issues. Mentions of traffic congestion are up this year.

• Social issues – particularly housing – are a growing concern for the third consecutive year. Mentions of growth and development are also up this year. Housing is a complex issue in Coquitlam, with residents placing a high importance on improving housing affordability but also pushing back against the types of growth and development that might improve affordability.

• Overall satisfaction with City services remains high. Satisfaction with road maintenance is up this year.

• The majority of citizens continue to say they receive good value for their municipal tax dollars. Citizens continue to prefer tax increases over service cuts.

• All of the tested parks, recreation, and culture priorities are important to citizens, with community centres and neighbourhood parks sitting at the top of this year’s list of investment priorities.

• Email continues to be citizens’ preferred way of receiving City information. If residents need to contact the City, most would opt to call or email.

• Online feedback forms, surveys, and public open houses will be the most successful at engaging residents. There is also some interest in participating via community workshops and small community focus groups. Expect lower participation levels when using mail in workbooks, social media, and online blogs or discussion forums.

• The City continues to provide good customer service overall, with staff’s courteousness standing out as a service highlight.

Key Takeaways

15

QUALITY OF LIFE

16

OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE

Overall perceptions of quality of life remain favourable, with 98% of citizens rating Coquitlam’s quality of life as ‘very good’ (48%) or ‘good’ (50%).

• Overall perceptions of quality of life (combined ‘very good/good’ responses) are high across all key demographic segments.

• Older residents are more likely to rate Coquitlam’s quality of life as ‘very good’ (55% of 55+ years vs. 40% of 18-34 years, 46% of 35-54 years).

Analysis of year-over-year tracking data shows that citizens have consistently rated the quality of life in Coquitlam highly and this year’s results are similar to 2017. However, the percentage rating the quality of life as ‘very good’ is notably higher now as compared to a decade ago (up 19 percentage points).

Perceptions of the quality of life in Coquitlam are on par with both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

CHANGE IN QUALITY OF LIFE PAST FIVE YEARS

A plurality (41%) of residents continue to say the quality of life in Coquitlam has ‘stayed the same’ in the past five years. Among those saying the quality of life has changed, more say the quality of life has ‘improved’ (34%) than ‘worsened’ (23%), resulting in a net momentum score of +11 percentage points.

• Perceptions of an ‘improved’ quality of life are higher among younger residents (43% of 18-34 years vs. 26% of 55+ years, 34% of 35-54 years) and those living in Northeast Coquitlam and City Centre (58% and 53% vs. 18% in West Coquitlam, 28% in Central Coquitlam, 37% in Westwood Plateau).

• Perceptions of a ‘worsened’ quality of life are higher among those living in West Coquitlam (34% vs. 9% in Northeast Coquitlam, 12% in City Centre, 19% in Central Coquitlam, 26% in Westwood Plateau) and those who have lived in Coquitlam for more than 15 years (26% vs. 15% of those who have lived in the area for 15 years or less).

While last year saw growing positive momentum in the direction that quality of life is taking, the net score in 2018 is down 7 percentage points, marking a return to previous levels.

Perceptions of how the quality of life has changed in Coquitlam are more positive than both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

Overall Quality of Life and Change in Quality of Life Past Five YearsQUALITY OF LIFE

17

48%

50%

2%

0%

Very good

Good

Poor

Very poor

NORMSLower

MainlandBritish

Columbia

48% 47%

97% 96%

49% 49%

2% 3%

2% 3%

<1% <1%

Q2. How would you rate the overall quality of life in the City of Coquitlam today? Base: All respondents (n=500)

TOTAL GOOD: 98%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL GOOD 95% 98% 96% 99% 96% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98%

Very good 29% 30% 41% 47% 46% 50% 51% 49% 48% 48%

Overall Quality of LifeQUALITY OF LIFE

TOTAL POOR: 2%

18

34%

41%

23%

3%

Improved

Stayed the same

Worsened

Don’t know

NORMSLower

MainlandBritish

Columbia

24% 22%

54% 55%

20% 20%

Q3. Do you feel that the quality of life in the City of Coquitlam in the past five years has improved, stayed the same, or worsened? Base: All respondents (n=500)

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

NET SCORE +2 +8 +18 +12 +12 +10 +11 +18 +11

NET SCORE

+11

NET SCORE

+4

NET SCORE

+2

Change in Quality of Life Past Five YearsQUALITY OF LIFE

19

REASONS QUALITY OF LIFE HAS IMPROVED

Among those saying the quality of life has ‘improved’, the leading open-ended reason is “SkyTrain/Evergreen Line” (26%), followed by “improved recreational facilities/parks” (16%) and “growth/development” (12%).

These were also among the top mentions last year.

REASONS QUALITY OF LIFE HAS WORSENED

Among those saying the quality of life has ‘worsened’, the leading open-ended reason is “growth/development” (26%), followed by “traffic/traffic congestion” (18%) and “housing costs/affordable housing” (14%).

These were also the main drivers of worsening impressions in 2017.

QUALITY OF LIFE

Reasons Quality of Life has Improved/Worsened(Among those saying the quality of life has improved/worsened) (Coded Open-Ends)

20

26%

16%

12%

7%

5%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

1%

Skytrain/Evergreen Line

Improved recreational facilities/parks

Growth/development

Improved transportation/roads

More events/activities

Improved/expanded infrastructure

New/improved shopping

Better accessibility to/location of businesses/facilities

New/improved services

Community planning

Improved economy (more jobs, businesses)

Community safety/policing

City Council/staff

Don't know

Q4. Why do you think the quality of life has improved? Base: Those saying the quality of life has improved (n=169)

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=172)

SkyTrain/Evergreen Line 24%

Improved recreational facilities/parks 18%

Improved transportation/roads 16%

Growth/development 10%

Mentions <2% not shown

Reasons Quality of Life has Improved(Among those saying the quality of life has improved) (Coded Open-Ends)

QUALITY OF LIFE

21

26%

18%

14%

6%

5%

5%

4%

3%

2%

2%

2%

1%

Growth/development

Traffic/traffic congestion

Housing costs/affordable housing

Crime/community safety/policing

Taxes/increased taxes

Economy/rising cost of living

Quality/level of public transportation

Quality/level of community infrastructure

Environmental issues

Impacts of construction on community

Condition of roads/streets

Don't know

Q5. Why do you think the quality of life has worsened? Base: Those saying the quality of life has worsened (n=108)

Reasons Quality of Life has Worsened(Among those saying the quality of life has worsened) (Coded Open-Ends)

QUALITY OF LIFE

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=86)

Growth/development 29%

Traffic/traffic congestion 21%

Housing costs/affordable housing 10%

Economy/rising cost of living 5%

Crime/community safety/policing 5%


Small base size, interpret with caution

22

Citizens suggest a variety of actions the City could take to improve the quality of life in Coquitlam. The top open-ended suggestion is “affordable housing” (11%), followed by “improve traffic congestion/flow” (9%), “less density/development” (9%), and “improve transit/public transportation” (9%). One-quarter (25%) decline to provide any specific suggestions for actions the City could take to improve the quality of life (includes 19% saying “none/nothing” and 6% saying “don’t know”).

This year’s results are largely similar to 2017. One noteworthy change is the emphasis placed on “less density/development”, which is up 5 percentage points this year.

QUALITY OF LIFE

Suggestions for Improving Quality of Life(Coded Open-Ends, Multiple Responses Allowed)

23

Q6. Thinking about all of the different things that contribute to the quality of life in Coquitlam, what specific actions do you think the City could take to improve the quality of life? Anything else?

Base: All respondents (n=500)

11%

9%

9%

9%

8%

7%

6%

4%

3%

3%

19%

6%

Affordable housing

Improve traffic congestion/flow

Less density/development

Improve transit/public transportation

More green space/parks

Improve transportation infrastructure/roads

Improve/expand recreation facilities/programs/services

Improve community safety

Improve/add more walkways/sidewalks/bike paths

More community events (incl. events for children)

None/nothing

Don't know

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=500)

Improve transit/public transportation 8%

Improve transportation infrastructure/roads 8%

Affordable housing 7%

Improve/expand recreation facilities/programs/ services

7%

Improve traffic congestion/flow 7%

More green space/parks 5%

Suggestions for Improving Quality of Life(Coded Open-Ends, Multiple Responses Allowed)

QUALITY OF LIFE


24

“Parks/green spaces” is at the top of residents’ vision for Coquitlam in the year 2040, garnering 12% of open-ended responses. Other words that residents use to describe their ideal future Coquitlam are “affordable (cost of living, housing)” (8%), “safe/secure” (7%), “community-oriented” (6%), “more inclusive/diverse” (5%), and “controlled growth/development” (5%). Nearly two-in-ten (19%) decline to answer (includes 1% saying “none/nothing” and 18% saying “don’t know”).

This question is new this year and thus comparisons to previous surveys are unavailable.

QUALITY OF LIFE

Description of Ideal Future Coquitlam(Coded Open-Ends, Multiple Responses Allowed)

25

Q6a. Imagine the year is 2040. What are one or two words that describe your ideal Coquitlam?Base: All respondents (n=500)

12%

8%

7%

6%

5%

5%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

1%

18%

Parks/green spaces

Affordable (cost of living, housing)

Safe/secure

Community-oriented

More inclusive/diverse

Controlled growth/development

Family-oriented

Environmentally friendly/sustainable

Modern/innovative

Clean

Less growth/development/density

Accessible

No traffic/less congestion

Calm/peaceful/quiet

Similar/same as now

None/nothing

Don't know

Description of Ideal Future Coquitlam(Coded Open-Ends, Multiple Responses Allowed)

QUALITY OF LIFE


26

Overall, citizens’ top three considerations when deciding where to live are the overall condition of the City’s existing roadways (97% ‘very/somewhat important’), the manmade features of the city including parks, green spaces, and pathways (96%), and the affordability of housing types (95%). Moreover, the percentage saying ‘very important’ is high (66% or greater) in all three instances.

Other important considerations (combined ‘very/somewhat important’ responses) are:

• Your ability to travel to and from work with minimal delay (90%)

- Importance is higher among those who are under 55 years of age (97% of 35-54 years and 95% of 18-34 years vs. 78% of 55+ years), those living in households with children under the age of 18 (94% vs. 87% of those without children at home), and those who are employed (96% vs. 80% of those who are not currently employed).

• Your proximity to outdoor recreation opportunities (90%)

- Importance is higher among those who are 35-54 years of age (94% vs. 84% of 18-34 years, 90% of 55+ years) and those living in single, detached houses (92% vs. 84% of those in some other type of housing).

• The city’s people, culture, and approach to social issues (89%)

• The design of the City’s new neighbourhoods (88%)

- Importance is higher among those living in Northeast Coquitlam and West Coquitlam (93% and 92% vs. 81% in Westwood Plateau, 86% in City Centre, 87% in Central Coquitlam).

• The jobs that are available and the overall economy (87%)

- Importance is higher among women (91% vs. 83% of men).

• The availability of different housing types (87%)

- Importance is higher among women (91% vs. 84% of men) and those not living in single, detached houses (94% vs. 84% of those in single, detached houses).

This question is new this year and thus comparisons to previous surveys are unavailable.

QUALITY OF LIFE

Important Factors in Deciding Where to Live

27

Q6b. There are a number of reasons that people choose to live in one city over another. Assuming family is not a factor, how important are each of the following to you in deciding where to live? (Scale: very important, somewhat important, not very important, not at all important)


66%

68%

77%

75%

53%

52%

48%

56%

48%

97%

96%

95%

90%

90%

89%

88%

87%

87%

The overall condition of the City’s existing roadways

The manmade features of the city including, parks, green spaces, and pathways

The affordability of housing types

Your ability to travel to and from work with minimal delay

Your proximity to outdoor recreation opportunities

The city’s people, culture, and approach to social issues

The design of the City’s new neighbourhoods

The jobs that are available and the overall economy

The availability of different housing types

Very important Somewhat important

TOTAL IMPORTANT

Important Factors in Deciding Where to LiveQUALITY OF LIFE

28

ISSUE AGENDA

29

Transportation continues to top the public issue agenda, with more than one-third (36%) of citizens identifying transportation as an important local issue on an open-ended basis. This includes mentions of “traffic congestion” (14%), “transportation (general)” (9%), “condition of streets/roads” (7%), “quality/level of public transit” (5%), “parking” (1%), and “road safety” (1%).

• Transportation mentions are statistically consistent across all key demographic segments.

• Transportation has consistently been the leading top-of-mind community issue since 2003 and this year’s results are on par with 2017.

• Transportation mentions in Coquitlam are lower than the Lower Mainland municipal norm (but on par with the BC municipal norm).

Following transportation, the next most important local issue is social (27%). The single biggest social issue by far is “housing/lack of affordable housing” (22%). In fact, “housing/lack of affordable housing” is the most frequently mentioned issue overall when responses are not categorized into the broader thematic Nets. Other social issues include “poverty/homelessness” (3%), “drugs” (2%), “seniors issues” (1%), and “affordable daycare” (1%).

• Social mentions are higher among women (32% vs. 22% of men), older residents (34% of 55+ years vs. 18% of 18-34 years, 27% of 35-54 years), those living in City Centre (40% vs. 14% in Westwood Plateau, 19% in Northeast Coquitlam, 26% in Central Coquitlam, 27% in West Coquitlam), those not living in single, detached houses (35% vs. 24% of those in single, detached houses), and those who are not currently employed (33% vs. 23% of employed residents).

• Social issues have been a growing concern for three consecutive years and are up 5 percentage points from 2017, representing a new all-time high.

• Mentions of social issues in Coquitlam are higher than both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

ISSUE AGENDA

Important Community Issues(Coded Open-Ends, Multiple Responses Allowed)

30

Rounding out citizens’ top three community issues is growth and development (15%). This includes mentions of “growth/development (general)” (5%), “level of development” (4%), “population growth” (4%), and “monster/mega houses” (2%).

• Growth and development mentions are higher among those living in West Coquitlam (23% vs. 6% in City Centre, 13% in Westwood Plateau, 15% in Central Coquitlam, 17% in Northeast Coquitlam), those who have lived in Coquitlam for more than 15 years (18% vs. 10% of those who have lived in the area for 15 years or less), and those living in single, detached houses (18% vs. 9% of those in some other type of housing).

• Mentions of growth and development are up 5 percentage points this year, representing a new all-time high.

• However, mentions of growth and development in Coquitlam are consistent with both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

All other issues are mentioned by fewer than 10% of residents.

ISSUE AGENDA


31

NORMS

LowerMainland

BritishColumbia

41% 34%

14% 16%

17% 15%

9% 10%

9% 12%

7% 7%

9% 7%

10% 8%

3% 4%

4% 4%

3% 7%

8% 10%

23%

22%

10%

6%

5%

7%

36%

27%

15%

9%

7%

7%

5%

5%

4%

3%

1%

11%

11%

4%

Transportation (NET)

Social (NET)

Growth and development (NET)

Taxation and municipal government spending (NET)

Municipal government services (NET)

Parks, recreation, and culture (NET)

Education (NET)

Crime (NET)

Healthcare (NET)

Environment (NET)

Economy (NET)

Other (NET)

None/nothing

Don't know

First mention Second mention

Q1. In your view, as a resident of the City of Coquitlam, what is the most important issue facing your community, that is the one issue you feel should receive the greatest attention from your local leaders? Are there any other important local issues?


TOTAL MENTIONS


ISSUE AGENDA

32

TOTAL MENTIONS

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

Transportation (NET) 44% 41% 35% 40% 45% 37% 39% 35% 36% 36%

Social (NET) 13% 7% 7% 5% 8% 5% 8% 17% 22% 27%

Growth and development (NET) 11% 3% 5% 5% 6% 7% 10% 10% 10% 15%

Taxation and municipal government spending (NET) 6% 11% 19% 15% 14% 15% 11% 11% 6% 9%

Municipal government services (NET) 8% 10% 6% 10% 7% 7% 7% 9% 11% 7%

Parks, recreation, and culture (NET) 4% 4% 4% 9% 7% 6% 7% 6% 7% 7%

Education (NET) 6% 8% 13% 10% 8% 10% 9% 7% 6% 5%

Crime (NET) 21% 24% 14% 13% 10% 10% 11% 8% 7% 5%

Healthcare (NET) 2% 3% 2% 5% 4% 2% 2% 1% 6% 4%

Environment (NET) 5% 7% 4% 4% 5% 2% 5% 2% 4% 3%

Economy (NET) 1% 3% 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% 1% 0% 1%


ISSUE AGENDA


Base: All respondents

33

TRANSPORTATION

34

Recognizing that transportation is an important local issue, the survey asked residents to identify (on an open-ended basis) what they see as the biggest transportation issue facing Coquitlam today.

The two most frequently mentioned issues are “traffic/traffic congestion” (33%) and “quality/level of public transportation” (30%). All other transportation issues are mentioned by less than 10% of residents.

• Mentions of “traffic/traffic congestion” are higher among those who are 35-54 years of age (41% vs. 22% of 18-34 years, 32% of 55+ years). Mentions are notably lower among those living in Northeast Coquitlam (14% vs. 39% in City Centre, 35% in Central Coquitlam, 32% in West Coquitlam, 30% in Westwood Plateau).

• Mentions of the “quality/level of public transportation” are higher among younger residents (44% of 18-34 years vs. 21% of 35-54 years, 29% of 55+ years) and those living in Northeast Coquitlam (63% vs. 22% in Central Coquitlam, 27% in West Coquitlam, 28% in City Centre, 38% in Westwood Plateau).

While these were also the two leading transportation issues in 2017, mentions of “traffic/traffic congestion” are up 8 percentage points this year. Conversely, there has been a 5 point drop in mentions related to the “condition of roads”.

Important Transportation Issues(Coded Open-Ends)

TRANSPORTATION

35

33%

30%

5%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

2%

1%

1%

6%

7%

2%

Traffic/traffic congestion

Quality/level of public transportation

Capacity of roads

Condition of roads

Evergreen Line/SkyTrain

Traffic lights (too slow, number of lights)

Parking

Need ride share options

Construction

Poor cab/taxi service

Transportation planning

Other

None/nothing

Don't know

Q19. In your opinion, what is the biggest transportation issue facing the City of Coquitlam today?Base: All respondents (n=500)

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=500)

Quality/level of public transportation 34%

Traffic/traffic congestion 25%

Condition of roads 8%

Important Transportation Issues(Coded Open-Ends)

TRANSPORTATION

36

CITY SERVICES

37

Overall satisfaction with City services remains high, with 94% of citizens saying they are either ‘very satisfied’ (39%) or ‘somewhat satisfied’ (55%) with the overall level and quality of services provided by the City of Coquitlam.

• Overall satisfaction (combined ‘very/somewhat satisfied’ responses) is high across all key demographic segments.

• The percentage saying ‘very satisfied’ is higher among older residents (48% of 55+ years vs. 35% of those under the age of 55 years), those living in City Centre (51% vs. 34% in West Coquitlam, 35% in Central Coquitlam, 35% in Northeast Coquitlam, 43% in Westwood Plateau), and those not living in single, detached houses (48% vs. 35% of those in single, detached houses).

Satisfaction with City services is on par with 2017.

Satisfaction with City services in Coquitlam is consistent with the Lower Mainland municipal norm. While overall satisfaction (combined ‘very/somewhat satisfied’ responses) is also on par with the BC municipal norm, Coquitlam residents are more likely to say ‘very satisfied’.

Overall Satisfaction with City ServicesCITY SERVICES

38

39%

55%

5%

1%

Very satisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Not very satisfied

Not at all satisfied

NORMSLower

MainlandBritish

Columbia

37% 34%

94% 93%

57% 59%

5% 5%

6% 6%

1% 1%

Q8. Now, please rate how satisfied you are with the overall level and quality of services provided by the City of Coquitlam. Base: All respondents (n=500)

TOTAL SATISFIED: 94%

TOTAL NOT SATISFIED: 6%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL SATISFIED 92% 95% 95% 96% 94% 97% 96% 97% 95% 94%

Very satisfied 32% 25% 34% 34% 37% 44% 39% 37% 39% 39%

Overall Satisfaction with City ServicesCITY SERVICES

39

Satisfaction extends to the delivery of specific services. Of the tested services, citizens are most satisfied (combined ‘very/somewhat satisfied’ responses) with fire services (98%), public works, including drinking water quality and sewers (98%), parks, trails, and other green space (97%), and police services (96%). These four services also receive high ‘very satisfied’ ratings – this is particularly true for fire services and public works, with more than seven-in-ten residents saying ‘very satisfied’.

• Satisfaction with public works in Coquitlam is higher than both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

Strong satisfaction ratings (combined ‘very/somewhat satisfied’ responses) are also seen for:

• Sports fields (92%)

• Recreational and cultural opportunities (92%)

• Recycling and garbage services (86%)

- Satisfaction is higher among older residents (91% of 55+ years vs. 81% of 35-54 years, 88% of 18-34 years) and those who have lived in Coquitlam for more than 15 years (90% vs. 80% of those who have lived in the area for 15 years or less).

• Road maintenance (83%)

- Satisfaction is higher among those living in Northeast Coquitlam (92% vs. 77% in West Coquitlam, 82% in Central Coquitlam, 84% in Westwood Plateau, 89% in City Centre).

- While satisfaction with road maintenance dropped in 2017, it is up 9 percentage points this year. This is the only significant change from last year.

- Satisfaction in Coquitlam is higher than both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

In comparison, neighbourhood planning scores lower (75%), although three-quarters of citizens still say they are satisfied with this service.

• Satisfaction is higher in City Centre, Northeast Coquitlam, and Westwood Plateau (89%, 87%, and 80% vs. 61% in West Coquitlam, 73% in Central Coquitlam).

CITY SERVICES

Satisfaction with Specific City Services

40

Q8. How satisfied are you with each of the following services? (Scale: very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not very satisfied, or not at all satisfied) Base: All respondents (n=500)

73%

71%

59%

60%

45%

36%

49%

26%

19%

98%

98%

97%

96%

92%

92%

86%

83%

75%

Fire services

Public works, including drinking water quality and sewers

Parks, trails, and other green space

Police services

Sports fields

Recreational and cultural opportunities

Recycling and garbage services

Road maintenance

Neighbourhood planning

Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied

TOTAL SATISFIED

Satisfaction with Specific City ServicesCITY SERVICES

NORMSLower

MainlandBritish

Columbia

96% 94%

93% 93%

96% 94%

93% 92%

91% 92%

92% 92%

88% 88%

76% 76%

77% 78%

41

TOTAL SATISFIED

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

Fire services 95% 96% 95% 93% 96% 98% 96% 98% 98% 98%

Public works, including drinking water quality and sewers 95% 97% 97% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98%

Parks, trails, and other green space 96% 93% 95% 94% 96% 97% 97% 96% 96% 97%

Police services 90% 90% 93% 92% 92% 95% 93% 95% 96% 96%

Sports fields 91% 89% 89% 90% 92% 94% 93% 93% 95% 92%

Recreational and cultural opportunities 90% 90% 91% 91% 92% 93% 93% 94% 90% 92%

Recycling and garbage services 81% 76% 88% 84% 88% 92% 88% 91% 88% 86%

Road maintenance 75% 72% 74% 71% 76% 83% 80% 81% 74% 83%

Neighborhood planning 79% 80% 79% 68% 78% 80% 77% 79% 77% 75%

Satisfaction with Specific City ServicesCITY SERVICES

Q8. How satisfied are you with each of the following services? (Scale: very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not very satisfied, or not at all satisfied) Base: All respondents

42

All of the tested services are important to citizens, with 8 of the 9 services receiving an importance rating of 90% or higher (combined ‘very/somewhat important’ responses). Moreover, many of these services (particularly those relating to public health and safety) receive high ‘very important’ ratings.

• Public works, including drinking water quality and sewers (99% important, 89% ‘very important’)

• Fire services (98% important, 83% ‘very important’)

• Road maintenance (98% important, 68% ‘very important’)

• Police services (97% important, 79% ‘very important’)

• Parks, trails, and other green space (96% important, 60% ‘very important’)

• Recycling and garbage services (93% important, 69% ‘very important’)

- Importance is higher among women (98% vs. 89% of men) and those who have lived in Coquitlam for more than 15 years (96% vs. 89% of those who have lived in the area for 15 years or less).

• Neighbourhood planning (93% important, 54% ‘very important’)

- Importance is higher among those who are 35-54 years of age (97% vs. 87% of 18-34 years, 92% of 55+ years) and homeowners (94% vs. 85% of renters).

• Recreational and cultural opportunities (90% important, 45% ‘very important’)

- Importance is higher among those living in Northeast Coquitlam and City Centre (both 95% vs. 85% in Central Coquitlam, 90% in West Coquitlam, 91% in Westwood Plateau).

In comparison, relatively fewer (but still a strong majority) say sports fields are important (80%, including 30% ‘very important’).

• Importance is higher those who are 35-54 years of age (86% vs. 74% of 18-34 years, 80% of 55+ years).

This year’s importance ratings are consistent with both 2017 and the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm for all services.

CITY SERVICES

Importance of Specific City Services

43

89%

83%

68%

79%

60%

69%

54%

45%

30%

99%

98%

98%

97%

96%

93%

93%

90%

80%

Public works, including drinking water quality and sewers

Fire services

Road maintenance

Police services


Recycling and garbage services

Neighbourhood planning


Sports fields


Q7. I am going to read a list of City of Coquitlam services provided to you. Please rate how important each one is to you on a scale of very important, somewhat important, not very important, or not at all important.


Importance of Specific City ServicesCITY SERVICES

TOTAL IMPORTANT

NORMSLower

MainlandBritish

Columbia

99% 99%

97% 98%

99% 99%

99% 98%

96% 97%

97% 97%

94% 93%

92% 93%

84% 82%

44

TOTAL IMPORTANT

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

Public works, including drinking water quality and sewers 100% 99% 98% 95% 99% 99% 99% 98% 99% 99%

Fire services 99% 98% 99% 97% 98% 98% 98% 98% 99% 98%

Road maintenance 97% 99% 96% 96% 97% 97% 98% 98% 99% 98%

Police services 98% 98% 97% 97% 96% 98% 99% 99% 99% 97%

Parks, trails, and other green space 97% 95% 94% 93% 96% 95% 96% 97% 97% 96%

Recycling and garbage services 98% 98% 98% 98% 95% 96% 96% 98% 97% 93%

Neighborhood planning 92% 91% 88% 86% 90% 93% 92% 93% 94% 93%

Recreational and cultural opportunities 90% 92% 89% 90% 90% 91% 91% 92% 94% 90%

Sports fields 82% 83% 83% 82% 84% 84% 86% 84% 81% 80%

Importance of Specific City ServicesCITY SERVICES



45

An Importance versus Satisfaction Action Grid was plotted to better understand the City of Coquitlam’s perceived strengths and areas for improvement. This analysis simultaneously displays the perceived value (e.g., importance) of the City’s services and how well the City is seen to be performing (e.g., satisfaction) in each area.

Action Grids are a relative type of analysis, meaning that services are scored relative to one another. As such, there will always be areas of strength and areas for improvement.

Individual services would fall into one of four categories:

• Primary Strengths represent services where the City is performing well and are of value to citizens. Efforts should be made to maintain high levels of satisfaction with these key services.

• Primary Areas for Improvement represent services where the City is performing relatively less well but are still of value to citizens. Delivery of these key services could be improved. They also represent the best opportunities for improving overall satisfaction with City services.

• Secondary Strengths represent services where the City is performing well but are of lesser value to citizens. These services can be considered as ‘low maintenance’; while maintaining positive perceptions would be beneficial, they are of lower priority than other areas.

• Secondary Areas for Improvement represent services where the City is performing relatively less well and are also of lesser value to citizens. Depending on available resources and priorities, the City may or may not decide to make a targeted effort to improve performance in these lower priority areas. These could also be considered longer-term action items to be addressed when resources permit.

Action GridCITY SERVICES

46

STRENGTHS

The City of Coquitlam has four PRIMARY STRENGTHS including public works, fire services, police services, and parks, trails, and other green space.

The City’s two SECONDARY STRENGTHS are recreational and cultural opportunities and sports fields.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

The City of Coquitlam’s one PRIMARY AREA FOR IMPROVEMENT is road maintenance.

The City has two SECONDARY AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT including recycling and garbage services and neighbourhood planning.


47

75%

94%

IMP

OR

TAN

CE

SATISFACTION

Primary Areas for Improvement

Secondary StrengthsSecondary Areas for Improvement

Primary Strengths

Sports fields


Neighborhood planning Recycling and garbage services

Road maintenance


Police services

Public worksFire services


70% 91%

48

FINANCIAL PLANNING

49

The majority (88%) of citizens continue to say they receive good value for their municipal tax dollars. Most of these residents describe the value for taxes as ‘fairly good’ (64%) rather than ‘very good’ (24%).

• Overall perceptions (combined ‘very/fairly good value’ responses) of value for taxes are consistent across all key demographic segments.

• Older residents are more likely to rate their value for taxes as ‘very good’ (32% of 55+ years vs. 18% of 35-54 years, 21% of 18-34 years).

This year’s results are consistent with 2017.

The perceived value for taxes in Coquitlam is consistent with the Lower Mainland municipal norm. However, it is higher than the BC municipal norm, particularly when considering the combined ‘very/fairly good value’ responses.

Value for TaxesFINANCIAL PLANNING

50

Q9. Thinking about all the programs and services you receive from the City of Coquitlam, would you say that overall you get good value or poor value for your tax dollars? (Is that very or fairly good/poor value?)


24%

64%

8%

3%

1%

Very good value

Fairly good value

Fairly poor value

Very poor value

Don't know

TOTAL GOOD VALUE:88%

TOTAL POOR VALUE:11%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL GOOD VALUE 85% 86% 81% 81% 83% 88% 88% 86% 86% 88%

Very good value 22% 20% 17% 18% 23% 23% 22% 20% 21% 24%

Value for TaxesFINANCIAL PLANNING

NORMS

LowerMainland

BritishColumbia

23% 21%

86% 83%

63% 62%

9% 11%

12% 15%

3% 4%

51

Overall, citizens continue to prefer tax increases (49%) over service cuts (39%). Specifically, 33% of citizens say ‘increase taxes to maintain services at current levels’ and 16% say ‘increase taxes to enhance or expand services’. Conversely, 26% say ‘cut services to maintain current tax level’ and 13% say ‘cut services to reduce taxes’. Another 11% decline to identify a preferred approach to balancing taxation and service delivery levels (includes 9% saying ‘none’ and 2% saying ‘don’t know’).

• A preference for tax increases is notably lower among those living in Westwood Plateau and Northeast Coquitlam (36% and 45% vs. 54% in Central Coquitlam, 52% in City Centre, 51% in West Coquitlam).

• Conversely, those living in Northeast Coquitlam and Westwood Plateau are more likely to opt for service cuts (49% and 48% vs. 33% in Central Coquitlam, 37% in City Centre, 39% in West Coquitlam).

The preference for tax increases over service cuts is consistent with 2017.

Coquitlam residents’ tolerance for tax increases is on par with both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

FINANCIAL PLANNING

Balancing Taxation and Service Delivery Levels

52

16%

33%

26%

13%

9%

2%

Increase taxes - to enhance or expand services

Increase taxes - to maintain services at current levels

Cut services - to maintain current tax level

Cut services - to reduce taxes

None

Don't know

Q10. Municipal property taxes are the primary way to pay for services provided by the City of Coquitlam. Due to the increased cost of maintaining current service levels and infrastructure, the City of Coquitlam must balance taxation and service delivery levels. To deal with this situation, which one of the following four options would you most like the City of Coquitlam to pursue?


TOTAL INCREASE TAXES: 49%

TOTAL CUT SERVICES: 39%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL INCREASE TAXES 55% 46% 46% 45% 43% 48% 53% 54% 51% 49%

TOTAL CUT SERVICES 26% 41% 44% 46% 43% 41% 34% 34% 38% 39%

Balancing Taxation and Service Delivery LevelsFINANCIAL PLANNING

NORMSLower

MainlandBritish

Columbia

20% 21%

51% 52%

31% 31%

26% 25%

36% 35%

10% 10%

10% 10%

53

PARKS, RECREATION, AND CULTURE

54

When it comes to investing in parks, recreation, and culture over the next five years, citizens attach the greatest importance (combined ‘very/somewhat important’ responses) to community centres, including senior and youth facilities (92%) and neighbourhood parks, including playgrounds and community gardens (91%).

Other important priorities include:

• Hiking, walking, and biking trails (89%)

• Public festivals and community events (88%)

- Importance is higher among women (91% vs. 84% of men) and those living in City Centre (94% vs. 83% in Central Coquitlam, 86% in Westwood Plateau, 87% in West Coquitlam, 92% in Northeast Coquitlam).

• Swimming pools (82%)

- Importance is higher among those who are 35-54 years of age (88% vs. 78% of 55+ years, 79% of 18-34 years).

• Sports fields and outdoor courts (80%)

- Importance is higher among men (85% vs. 76% of women), those who are younger than 55 years of age (85% of 35-54 years and 83% of 18-34 years vs. 73% of 55+ years), and those living in households with children under the age of 18 (88% vs. 77% of those without children at home).

• Performing arts and theatre (75%)

- Importance is higher among women (81% vs. 68% of men) and those who are not currently employed (82% vs. 70% of employed residents).

- Importance is down 5 percentage points this year. This is the only change from 2017.

• Arena facilities for ice sports, curling, and lacrosse (72%)

In comparison, citizens place less emphasis on indoor racquet and court facilities (59%).

• Importance is higher among those who are 35-54 years of age (66% vs. 54% of 55+ years, 57% of 18-34 years).

Parks, Recreation, and Culture PrioritiesPARKS, RECREATION, AND CULTURE

55

Q21. When it comes to parks, recreation, and culture, the City of Coquitlam has many different investment options over the next five years. Please tell me how important each of the following is to you personally using a scale of very important, somewhat important, not very important, or not at all important.


56%

58%

56%

41%

47%

42%

29%

39%

18%

92%

91%

89%

88%

82%

80%

75%

72%

59%

Community centres, including senior and youth facilities

Neighbourhood parks, including playgrounds and community gardens

Hiking, walking, and biking trails

Public festivals and community events

Swimming pools

Sports fields and outdoor courts

Performing arts and theatre

Arena facilities for ice sports, curling, and lacrosse

Indoor racquet and court facilities


2017 2016 2015(n=500) (n=500) (n=501)

93% 93% 95%

95% 94% 91%

91% 89% 88%

87% 83% 81%

86% 85% 84%

80% 81% 82%

80% 75% 77%

69% 71% 74%

59% 59% 60%

Parks, Recreation, and Culture PrioritiesPARKS, RECREATION, AND CULTURE

TOTAL IMPORTANT

56


57

On an unprompted basis, only 5% of citizens identify crime as an important local issue overall (see Important Community Issues). Moreover, crime-related mentions in Coquitlam are lower than the Lower Mainland municipal norm.

Further, when asked to identify the biggest top-of-mind crime and personal safety issue currently facing Coquitlam, nearly three-in-ten (27%) citizens decline to identify any specific issue (includes 20% saying “none/nothing” and 7% saying “don’t know”).

The top mention overall is “theft/robbery” (29%), followed by “none/nothing” (20%) and “drugs” (13%). All other crime and personal safety issues are mentioned by less than 10% of citizens.

• Mentions of “drugs” are higher among older residents (18% of 55+ years vs. 9% of 18-34 years, 11% of 35-54 years), those living in West Coquitlam (20% vs. 7% in City Centre, 9% in Northeast Coquitlam, 10% in Central Coquitlam, 11% in Westwood Plateau), and those who have lived in Coquitlam for more than 15 years (15% vs. 7% of those who have lived in the area for 15 years or less).

These results are consistent with 2017.

Important Crime and Personal Safety Issues(Coded Open Ends)


58

29%

13%

6%

5%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

4%

20%

7%

Theft/robbery

Drugs

Unsafe driving

Homelessness

Gangs

Level of crime/crime rate

Property crime

Vandalism/graffiti

SkyTrain/Evergreen Line bringing in crime

Level of policing

Community safety

Bears/wildlife

Gun violence

Insufficient lighting/street lighting

Other

None/nothing

Don't know

Q22. In your opinion, what is the biggest crime and personal safety issue currently facing the City of Coquitlam today? Base: All respondents (n=500)

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=500)

Theft/robbery 28%

Drugs 15%

Homelessness 5%

Important Crime and Personal Safety Issues(Coded Open Ends)


59


60

Residents are most interested in receiving City information about “community infrastructure (improvements, updates)” (18%) and “City spending/budgets” (18%) (coded open-ends). All other information requests are mentioned by less than 10% of respondents. More than one-third (35%) indicate they have no immediate information needs, with 30% saying “none/nothing” and 5% saying “don’t know”.

• Mentions of “community infrastructure (improvements, updates)” are higher among those who are 35-54 years of age (24% vs. 12% of 55+ years, 18% of 18-34 years).

Requests for information about “City spending/budgets” are up 7 percentage points this year. Conversely, mentions of “transparency/accountability” are down 6 points.

Information Needs(Coded Open Ends, Multiple Mentions Allowed)


61

18%

18%

7%

6%

6%

5%

4%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

30%

5%

Community infrastructure (improvements, updates)

City spending/budgets

Housing/development

Community events/activities

General city news/updates

City services (unspecified)

Community safety/emergency services

Recreational events/activities

Garbage/recycling

Continue to provide information on the website

Parks/greenspaces

Newspaper/print

Frequent/updated information on City Council

Transparency/accountability

Health information/improvements

Zoning

None/nothing

Don't know

Q11. Thinking about your information needs, what kinds of information do you want the City of Coquitlam to provide you with? Any others? Base: All respondents (n=500)

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=500)

Community infrastructure (improvements, updates)

17%

City spending/budgets 11%

Transparency/accountability 8%

Recreational events/activities 5%

General city news/updates 5%

Housing/development 5%

Community events/activities 5%

Information Needs(Coded Open Ends, Multiple Mentions Allowed)



62

When it comes to communicating City information to citizens, “email” tops the list of preferred communication channels, garnering 42% of open-ended responses. Other ways that citizens would like to receive City information are “mail” (25%), “City website” (18%), “newspaper” (17%), “newsletter/pamphlet/flyer/brochure” (17%), and “social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.)” (10%).

• Mentions of “City website” are higher among men (23% vs. 13% of women) and homeowners (20% vs. 7% of renters).

• Mentions of “newspaper” are higher among those living in Westwood Plateau and City Centre (26% and 22% vs. 10% in Central Coquitlam, 12% in Northeast Coquitlam, 18% in West Coquitlam), those who have lived in Coquitlam for more than 15 years (20% vs. 12% of those who have lived in the area for 15 years or less), and those living in households without children under the age of 18 (20% vs. 11% of those with children at home).

• Mentions of “newsletter/pamphlet/flyer/brochure” are higher among those who are 55+ years of age (20% vs. 13% of 35-54 years, 19% of 18-34 years).

• Mentions of “social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.)” are higher among those who are 35-54 years of age (16% vs. 5% of 55+ years, 9% of 18-34 years).

“Email” was also residents’ preferred method of receiving City information in 2017. “Newspaper” mentions are down 5 percentage points this year.

The preference for “email” communications in Coquitlam is higher than both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.


Preferred Methods of Receiving City Information(Coded Open Ends, Multiple Mentions Allowed)

63

42%

25%

18%

17%

17%

10%

7%

6%

2%

2%

2%

1%

1%

1%

1%

2%

2%

1%

Email

Mail

City website

Newspaper

Newsletter/pamphlet/flyer/brochure

Social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.)

Internet (unspecified)

Telephone

Radio

TV

Text message/texting

City meetings

Mobile apps

Signage/billboards/posters

Open houses/public consultations

Other

None/nothing

Don't know

Q12. And what methods would be best for the City of Coquitlam to communicate information to you? Any others? Base: All respondents (n=500)

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=500)

Email 38%

Mail 24%

Newspaper 22%

City website 19%

Newsletter/pamphlet/flyer/brochure 15%

Internet (unspecified) 10%

NORM TOP MENTIONS

LM BC

Email 33% 27%

Mail 27% 23%

Newspaper 24% 28%

Newsletter/pamphlet/flyer/ brochure 17% 16%

City website 16% 13%

Preferred Methods of Receiving City Information(Coded Open Ends, Multiple Mentions Allowed)


64

If residents needed to contact the City of Coquitlam, 72% say they would prefer to use the “telephone” and 52% mention “email”. These are by far the two most frequently mentioned contact methods. Another 14% mention “in-person”.

• Mentions of “telephone” are higher among women (77% vs. 68% of men), those who have lived in Coquitlam for more than 15 years (76% vs. 64% of those who have lived in the area for 15 years or less), and those who are not currently employed (80% vs. 67% of employed residents).

• Mentions of “email” are higher among those under 55 years of age (58% vs. 41% of those 55+ years), those living in Westwood Plateau (65% vs. 42% in Northeast Coquitlam, 46% in Central Coquitlam, 52% in West Coquitlam, 54% in City Centre), and those who are employed (56% vs. 46% of those who are not currently employed).

While the “telephone” continues to be residents’ most preferred method of contacting the City, mentions are down 6 percentage points this year as compared to 2017.


Preferred Methods of Contacting the City(Coded Open Ends, Multiple Mentions Allowed)

65

Q13. If you needed to contact the City of Coquitlam, what contact method would you most prefer to use? Any others? Base: All respondents (n=500)

72%

52%

14%

9%

3%

2%

2%

2%

Telephone

Email

In-person

City website

Social media (City Facebook or Twitter page)

In writing such as by mail or fax

Online/Internet

Other

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=500)

Telephone 78%

Email 50%

In-person 17%

City website 10%

Preferred Methods of Contacting the City(Coded Open Ends, Multiple Mentions Allowed)


66

Of the tested forms of public consultation, citizens are most interested (combined ‘very/somewhat interested’ responses) in participating in feedback forms on the City’s website (68%), surveys like this (67%), and public open houses where residents can observe and comment on information posted on display boards (64%).

• Interest in feedback forms on the City’s website is higher among those living in Central Coquitlam (79% vs. 58% in West Coquitlam, 66% in Northeast Coquitlam, 69% in Westwood Plateau, 69% in City Centre).

• Interest in public open houses is down 5 percentage points this year.

Following this, the next most interesting forms of public consultation are community workshops where residents take part in active discussion sessions (54%) and small community focus groups (50%).

• Interest in community workshops is higher among women (59% vs. 48% of men).

• Interest in community workshops is down 5 percentage points this year.

Fewer are interested in participating via mail in workbooks (44%), the City’s Facebook or Twitter page (41%), and online blogs or discussion forums (39%).

• Interest in mail in workbooks is higher among those living in West Coquitlam (52% vs. 32% in Westwood Plateau, 43% in City Centre, 43% in Central Coquitlam, 46% in Northeast Coquitlam).

• Interest in the City’s Facebook or Twitter page is higher among younger residents (61% of 18-34 years vs. 29% of 55+ years, 38% of 35-54 years) and renters (54% vs. 38% of homeowners).

• Interest in online blogs or discussion forums is higher among younger residents (53% of 18-34 years vs. 30% of 55+ years, 36% of 35-54 years) and those who have lived in Coquitlam for 15 years or less (48% vs. 34% of those who have lived in the area for more than 15 years).

For all methods of public consultation, most of those interested describe themselves as ‘somewhat’ rather than ‘very’ interested.

Interest in Participating in Various Forms of Public ConsultationCOMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

67

2017 2016 2015

(n=500) (n=500) (n=501)

66% 67% 68%

68% 67% 65%

69% 64% 66%

59% 52% 59%

53% 48% 52%

40% 42% 38%

39% 40% 36%

38% 37% 36%

23%

15%

19%

16%

14%

13%

14%

10%

68%

67%

64%

54%

50%

44%

41%

39%

Feedback forms on the City's website

Surveys like this

Public open houses where residents can observe and comment on information posted on display boards

Community workshops where residents take part in active discussion sessions

Small community focus groups

Mail in workbooks

The City's Facebook or Twitter page

Online blogs or discussion forums

Very interested Somewhat interested

Interest in Participating in Various Forms of Public Consultation

Q14. How interested are you in participating in each of the following forms of public consultation on a topic that is of interest to you personally? Would you say very interested, somewhat interested, not very interested, or not at all interested?



TOTAL INTERESTED

68

CUSTOMER SERVICE

69

CLAIMED CONTACT

One-half (50%) of all citizens say they personally contacted or dealt with the City of Coquitlam or one of its employees in the last 12 months.

• Claimed contact is higher among those who are 35+ years of age (58% of 35-54 years and 57% of 55+ years vs. 30% of 18-34 years), those living in West Coquitlam and Central Coquitlam (62% and 55% vs. 35% in City Centre, 38% in Westwood Plateau, 49% in Northeast Coquitlam), homeowners (53% vs. 28% of renters), and those living in single, detached houses (58% vs. 28% of those in some other type of housing).

Claimed contact with the City is consistent with 2017 as well as both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

REASON FOR CONTACTING THE CITY (among those saying they contacted the City)

Among those saying they contacted the City, two-in-ten (20%) say their contact was regarding “garbage/recycling collection” (coded open-ends). This is more than double what is mentioned for any other reason.

“Garbage/recycling collection” was also the most common reason for contacting the City in 2017.

CONTACT METHOD (among those saying they contacted the City)

Just over one-half (52%) of those contacting the City say they did so via the “telephone” (coded open-ends). The next most common methods of contact are “in-person” (23%) and “email” (14%).

These results are consistent with 2017.

CUSTOMER SERVICE

Contact with City Last 12 Months

70

NORMSLower

MainlandBritish

Columbia

49% 47%

50% 53%

Q15. In the last 12 months, have you personally contacted or dealt with the City of Coquitlam or one of its employees?Base: All respondents (n=500)

50%

50%

Yes

No

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

Yes 41% 44% 47% 46% 47% 52% 51% 44% 50% 50%

Claimed ContactCUSTOMER SERVICE

71

20%

8%

7%

5%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

Garbage/recycling collection

Parks/recreational facilities

Pay my taxes/utilities

Bylaws

License/permit

Housing/real estate

Roads (maintenance)

Specific property information

Animals/animal control

Traffic signs

Neighborhood planning

Trees on property

Landscaping/gardening

City services/programs

Policing/community safety

Street lighting

Developments/overdevelopment

Zoning

Noise complaint

Water/drain concerns

Don't know

Q16. What was the main reason why you contacted the City?Base: Those saying they contacted the City (n=264)

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=269)

Garbage/recycling collection 17%

Parks/recreational facilities 10%

Pay my taxes/utilities 8%

Roads (maintenance) 6%

License/permit 6%

Reason for Contacting the City(Among those saying they contacted the City) (Coded Open-Ends)

CUSTOMER SERVICE


72

52%

23%

14%

4%

2%

2%

2%

Telephone

In-person

Email

Website

Public gathering/community event

Other

Don't know

Q17. How did you come into contact with the City?Base: Those saying they contacted the City (n=264)

TOP MENTIONS 2017

(n=269)

Telephone 51%

In-person 24%

Email 13%

Contact Method(Among those saying they contacted the City) (Coded Open-Ends)

CUSTOMER SERVICE

73

Contact experiences continue to be satisfactory, with 87% of those who contacted the City in the last 12 months saying they are satisfied (including 50% saying ‘very satisfied’) with the overall service received.

• Overall satisfaction with the City’s customer service is statistically consistent across all key demographic segments.

Satisfaction (combined ‘very/somewhat satisfied’ responses) extends to specific elements of the City’s customer service. Specifically, among those who contacted the City in the last 12 months:

• 97% say they are satisfied with the courteousness of the staff – this includes nearly three-quarters (74%) saying ‘very satisfied’

• 88% say they are satisfied with staff’s helpfulness

• 88% say they are satisfied with staff’s knowledge

• 87% say they are satisfied with the ability of staff to understand your needs

• 86% say they are satisfied with the ease of reaching staff

• 83% say they are satisfied with the speed and timeliness of service

• 77% say they are satisfied with staff’s ability to resolve your issue

While ratings in all areas are up slightly this year, satisfaction with the City’s customer service is not significantly different from 2017 and remains on par with both the Lower Mainland and BC municipal norm.

Satisfaction with Customer Service(Among those saying they contacted the City)

CUSTOMER SERVICE

74

Q18. Thinking about your personal experience with the City, how satisfied are you with each of the following? (Scale: very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not very satisfied, not at all satisfied)

Base: Those saying they contacted the City (n=264)

50%

74%

60%

54%

57%

46%

47%

46%

87%

97%

88%

88%

87%

86%

83%

77%

Overall service you received

The courteousness of the staff

Staff's helpfulness

Staff's knowledge

The ability of staff to understand your needs

The ease of reaching staff

The speed and timeliness of service

Staff's ability to resolve your issue

Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied


CUSTOMER SERVICE

TOTAL SATISFIED

NORMS

LowerMainland

BritishColumbia

84% 81%

93% 93%

88% 86%

88% 85%

87% 87%

87% 86%

83% 83%

77% 76%

75

TOTAL SATISFIED

2008 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=180) (n=207) (n=274) (n=247) (n=269) (n=264)

Overall service you received 75% 89% 87% 88% 82% 87%

The courteousness of the staff 89% 92% 93% 92% 93% 97%

Staff's helpfulness 82% 93% 89% 89% 84% 88%

Staff's knowledge 80% 92% 86% 87% 85% 88%

The ability of staff to understand your needs 84% 87% 89% 87% 83% 87%

The ease of reaching staff 82% 91% 85% 86% 82% 86%

The speed and timeliness of service 74% 85% 88% 85% 77% 83%

Staff's ability to resolve your issue 71% 80% 79% 79% 75% 77%


CUSTOMER SERVICE

Q18. Thinking about your personal experience with the City, how satisfied are you with each of the following?Base: Those saying they contacted the City

76

WORK

77

EMPLOYMENT STATUS

Overall, 61% of residents say they are employed either ‘full-time’ (49%) or ‘part-time’ (12%) – this includes those who are self-employed. Another 24% say they are ‘retired’, 7% say they are ‘a student’, 5% say they are ‘not currently employed’, and 2% identify themselves as ‘a homemaker’.

• Claimed employment is higher among men (67% vs. 55% of women), those who are 35-54 years of age (89% vs. 29% of 55+ years, 63% of 18-34 years), those living in Westwood Plateau (77% vs. 50% of in Central Coquitlam, 54% in Northeast Coquitlam, 61% in City Centre, 63% in West Coquitlam), those who have lived in Coquitlam for 15 years or less (70% vs. 56% of those who have lived in the area for more than 15 years), and those living in households with children under the age of 18 (80% vs. 52% of those without children at home).

This year’s results are on par with 2017.

LOCATION OF WORK OR SCHOOL (among those saying they are employed or attending school)

Among those saying they are employed or attending school, one-quarter (25%) say their employment/school is ‘based in Coquitlam’. Another 34% say ‘based in a neighbouring municipality’, 24% say ‘based in Vancouver’, and 14% say ‘based elsewhere in the Lower Mainland’.

• Older residents are more likely to work or attend school in Coquitlam (40% vs. 21% of 18-34 years, 24% of 35-54 years).

The percentage saying their employment/school is ‘based in Coquitlam’ is consistent with 2017.

Employment Status and Location of Work or SchoolWORK

78

2009 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=665) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL EMPLOYED 67% 61% 63% 60% 57% 57% 61%

Q23. Which ONE of the following categories best describes your current employment status? Base: All respondents (n=500)

49%

12%

24%

7%

5%

2%

Employed full-time, including self employed

Employed part-time, including self employed

Retired

A student

Not currently employed

A homemaker

TOTAL EMPLOYED:61%

Employment StatusWORK

79

Q24. And, is your employment/school…?Base: Those saying they are employed or attending school (n=308)

25%

34%

24%

14%

2%

1%

Based in Coquitlam

Based in a neighbouring municipality

Based in Vancouver

Based elsewhere in the Lower Mainland

Other

Don't know

2009 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=450) (n=363) (n=265) (n=325) (n=330) (n=318) (n=308)

Based in Coquitlam 28% 30% 23% 31% 22% 28% 25%

Location of Work or School(Among those saying they are employed or attending school)

WORK

80

WEIGHTED SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS

81

1%

18%

34%

24%

11%

13%

Less than a year

1 to 10

11 to 20

21 to 30

31 to 40

Over 40

Age

48% 52%

Neighbourhood

Own or Rent Type of Housing

72%

11%

10%

3%

3%

1%

1%

Single, detached house

Apartment

Townhouse or rowhouse

Duplex, triplex, or semi-detached

Secondary suite

Condominium

Other

Children Under 18 in Household

32%

67%

Yes

No

Years Living in Coquitlam

Weighted Sample Characteristics

Mean: 23.5 Years

Gender

82%

14%

4%

Own

Rent

Refused

7%

21%

16%

25%

31%

Northeast

City Centre

Westwood Plateau

Central Coquitlam

West Coquitlam

28%

37%

35%

18 to 34

35 to 54

55+Male Female

82

Appendix: Survey Tracking

83

Q2. How would you rate the overall quality of life in the City of Coquitlam today? Base: All respondents

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=1200) (n=400) (n=400) (n=1201) (n=400) (n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL GOOD 98% 97% 97% 97% 98% 95% 98% 96% 99% 96% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98%

Very good 37% 38% 35% 25% 28% 29% 30% 41% 47% 46% 50% 51% 49% 48% 48%

Q3. Do you feel that the quality of life in the City of Coquitlam in the past five years has improved, stayed the same, or worsened? Base: All respondents

2003 2006 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=1200) (n=800) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

NET SCORE +11 +2 +2 +8 +18 +12 +12 +10 +11 +18 +11

Quality of LifeSURVEY TRACKING

84



TOTAL MENTIONS

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018


Transportation (NET) 47% 36% 41% 51% 35% 44% 41% 35% 40% 45% 37% 39% 35% 36% 36%

Social (NET) 6% 1% 7% 6% 11% 13% 7% 7% 5% 8% 5% 8% 17% 22% 27%

Growth and development (NET) 8% 7% 6% 7% 8% 11% 3% 5% 5% 6% 7% 10% 10% 10% 15%

Taxation and municipal government spending (NET)

12% 14% 7% 9% 9% 6% 11% 19% 15% 14% 15% 11% 11% 6% 9%

Municipal government services (NET) 3% 9% 4% 8% 4% 8% 10% 6% 10% 7% 7% 7% 9% 11% 7%

Parks, recreation, and culture (NET) 8% 8% 8% 14% 6% 4% 4% 4% 9% 7% 6% 7% 6% 7% 7%

Education (NET) 22% 9% 11% 8% 10% 6% 8% 13% 10% 8% 10% 9% 7% 6% 5%

Crime (NET) 21% 20% 22% 34% 24% 21% 24% 14% 13% 10% 10% 11% 8% 7% 5%

Healthcare (NET) 5% 5% 8% 6% 3% 2% 3% 2% 5% 4% 2% 2% 1% 6% 4%

Environment (NET) 8% 5% 4% 7% 5% 5% 7% 4% 4% 5% 2% 5% 2% 4% 3%

Economy (NET) 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% 1% 0% 1%


SURVEY TRACKING

85

Q8. Now, please rate how satisfied you are with the overall level and quality of services provided by the City of Coquitlam. Base: All respondents

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=400) (n=1201) (n=400) (n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL SATISFIED 96% 93% 93% 96% 92% 95% 95% 96% 94% 97% 96% 97% 95% 94%

Very satisfied 37% 36% 25% 37% 32% 25% 34% 34% 37% 44% 39% 37% 39% 39%

Satisfaction with City ServicesSURVEY TRACKING

TOTAL SATISFIED

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

Public works, including drinking water quality and sewers 96% 95% 97% 97% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98%

Fire services 97% 95% 96% 95% 93% 96% 98% 96% 98% 98% 98%

Parks, trails, and other green space 94% 96% 93% 95% 94% 96% 97% 97% 96% 96% 97%

Police services 92% 90% 90% 93% 92% 92% 95% 93% 95% 96% 96%

Sports fields 89% 91% 89% 89% 90% 92% 94% 93% 93% 95% 92%

Recreational and cultural opportunities 90% 90% 90% 91% 91% 92% 93% 93% 94% 90% 92%

Recycling and garbage services 86% 81% 76% 88% 84% 88% 92% 88% 91% 88% 86%

Road maintenance 66% 75% 72% 74% 71% 76% 83% 80% 81% 74% 83%

Neighborhood planning 82% 79% 80% 79% 68% 78% 80% 77% 79% 77% 75%

Q8. How satisfied are you with each of the following services? (Scale: very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not very satisfied, or not at all satisfied) Base: All respondents

86



TOTAL IMPORTANT

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

Public works, including drinking water quality and sewers 100% 100% 99% 98% 95% 99% 99% 99% 98% 99% 99%

Fire services 100% 99% 98% 99% 97% 98% 98% 98% 98% 99% 98%

Road maintenance 97% 97% 99% 96% 96% 97% 97% 98% 98% 99% 98%

Police services 99% 98% 98% 97% 97% 96% 98% 99% 99% 99% 97%

Parks, trails, and other green space 96% 97% 95% 94% 93% 96% 95% 96% 97% 97% 96%

Recycling and garbage services 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 95% 96% 96% 98% 97% 93%

Neighborhood planning 92% 92% 91% 88% 86% 90% 93% 92% 93% 94% 93%

Recreational and cultural opportunities 93% 90% 92% 89% 90% 90% 91% 91% 92% 94% 90%

Sports fields 83% 82% 83% 83% 82% 84% 84% 86% 84% 81% 80%

Importance of City ServicesSURVEY TRACKING

87

Q9. Thinking about all the programs and services you receive from the City of Coquitlam, would you say that overall you get good value or poor value for your tax dollars? (Is that very or fairly good/poor value?)


2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018

(n=400) (n=400) (n=1201) (n=400) (n=400) (n=665) (n=400) (n=400) (n=602) (n=400) (n=501) (n=500) (n=500) (n=500)

TOTAL GOOD VALUE 86% 85% 83% 86% 85% 86% 81% 81% 83% 88% 88% 86% 86% 88%

Very good value 25% 27% 22% 21% 22% 20% 17% 18% 23% 23% 22% 20% 21% 24%

Financial PlanningSURVEY TRACKING

Q10. Municipal property taxes are the primary way to pay for services provided by the City of Coquitlam. Due to the increased cost of maintaining current service levels and infrastructure, the City of Coquitlam must balance taxation and service delivery levels. To deal with this situation, which one of the following four options would you most like the City of Coquitlam to pursue?


2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018


TOTAL INCREASE TAXES 58% 48% 47% 55% 58% 55% 46% 46% 45% 43% 48% 53% 54% 51% 49%

TOTAL CUT SERVICES 32% 37% 30% 35% 31% 26% 41% 44% 46% 43% 41% 34% 34% 38% 39%

final report - city of coquitlam 2018 citizen survey · final report january 23, 2019 city of...

Documents