The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.council.worksession.201912091 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION December 9, 2019 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I.WORK SESSION I.A.2019 Citizen Survey Results I.B.Building IQ Project Update 1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council Members FROM: Karen Harrington, Quality Director THROUGH: Alissa Farrell, Interim Asst. City Mgr./HR Director MEMO DATE: December 4, 2019 MEETING DATE: December 9, 2019 RE: 2019 Citizen Survey Results REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This memo is to provide the Council with a brief summary of the results of the 2019 City of Aspen Citizen Survey. The survey vendor, Elevated Insights, will be presenting key findings at the December 9, 2019 work session. In addition, survey details are available at Attachment 1, the Summary Report. No formal Council action is requested. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: In 2019, staff selected Elevated Insights (EI) of Colorado Springs as the new vendor for the annual Citizen Survey. In contrast with prior iterations, the new survey:  Was administered electronically to ALL registered voters and ALL tenants/owners of APCHA and City-owned housing within the City (approximately 4500 households comprised this formal sample)  Provided an informal poll option for people outside the formal sample  Organized questions under the City’s Strategic Focus Areas  Included a more balanced blend of questions, reflective of the state of the City; policy and planning needs; and service quality ratings.  Added Key Driver Analysis, to more readily identify items with the highest potential to impact overall ratings of satisfaction or other key attributes such as quality of life  Used more refined scoring options 528 people in the formal sample responded, which is a 74% increase over the 303 who responded to the survey in 2018. The overall error rate associated with the formal sample is plus or minus 5%. The results presented here are for the formal sample. DISCUSSION: General Findings In comparison with other jurisdictions in the United States, respondents rated the quality of life, as well as the quality of City of Aspen services, very high (Figure 1). In fact, the ratings are high enough that the vendor recommends using a more refined scale in the future, one that offers a neutral response, so that the City can more effectively assess satisfaction levels. Regardless of the scales used, however, the overall ratings of Quality of Life and Satisfaction with City Services are above the national benchmark. 2 2 Figure 1. Overall Ratings of Quality of Life and Satisfaction with City Services When looking at the state of the City, respondents showed a high level of variability in their assessments (Figure 2). They were most satisfied with Ensuring a Safe Community (which was separated from Livable Community of Choice for this analysis) and least satisfied with Fostering Economic Vitality. EI conducted an additional level of analysis to help ascertain where it is most important to focus attention when it comes to the Strategic Focus Areas. This analysis, called Key Driver Analysis, looks at the correlation between satisfaction levels for each of the Strategic Focus Areas and the values of an overarching dependent variable, such as Overall Satisfaction with City Services. This can be helpful in identifying counterintuitive situations where satisfaction may be low with a service or topic, but where taking action to address that same low rating may have less impact on overall satisfaction than taking action related to a different Focus Area. Figure 3 shows the Key Driver Analysis when looking at drivers of personal quality of life ratings. Providing additional attention to two Strategic Focus Areas (Making Aspen a Livable Community of Choice and Fostering Economic Vitality) would appear to have the most potential to improve scores of personal quality of life. Being a Customer-Focused Government was close to the boundary for this quadrant, as well. The results were somewhat different when looking at drivers of satisfaction with City services. In that case, the analysis identified three areas with the greatest potential to impact ratings of satisfaction with City: Being a Customer-Focused Government, Fostering Economic Vitality, and Maintaining Financial Health. Figure 2: State of the City Ratings by Strategic Focus Area 3 3 Figure 3. Key Drivers of Personal Quality of Life Ratings Specific Findings 4 4 Within the Summary Report additional key driver matrixes, including matrixes for groups of items within each of the Strategic Focus areas, are available. (Attachment 1) Council is invited to review these matrices and staff is happy to respond to questions or provide more information. In addition to the more detailed Key Driver matrices, Council may want to be aware of the following findings: 1. 62% indicated the City provides value overall for the taxes paid 2. More than ¾ feel arts and culture are important to the community 3. About 4/5 are satisfied with Special Events and Recreation, and feel trails/open space are important 4. More than 80% support requiring composting at restaurants and City facilities 5. More than 50% agree it is important to expand infant and childcare spaces 6. Most want APCHA to focus on workforce housing, followed by community housing 7. Most are not satisfied with their ability to quickly find affordable housing 8. Less than half feel their needs for information from the City are being met 9. Less than 1/3 felt the City handles development pressures well 10. Only 15% agree that community needs are sufficiently met by local businesses 11. Less than 10% agree that young families can afford to live and work here More information behind these findings, as well as many more results, are available in the Summary Report. (Attachment 1) Potential Next Steps Based on the results of the survey, EI has provided ideas for the City to consider as potential next steps within each of the Strategic Focus Areas. (Table 1) Narrowing in specifically for the most impact, EI suggests that the City consider actions under Fostering Economic Vitality, including the ideas as part of the City’s broader planning and analysis initiatives. Table 1. Potential Next Steps for Consideration STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA % Satisfied Quadrant Actions with Greatest Impact Ensuring a safe community 88 MAINTAIN Keep it up! Consider taking more action to enforce laws/ ordinances (especially pet –related), as many specific suggestions were made in this area. Protecting the local natural environment 77 MAINTAIN Keep it up! Consider taking action with commercial waste, as most support required compost collection at commercial and City owned or operated facilities. Supporting community engagement 67 REINFORCE Communicate about major decisions early in the process and incorporate resident feedback. 5 5 STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA % Satisfied Quadrant Actions with Greatest Impact Maintaining financial health 55 EDUCATE Communicate/clarify financial policies. Livable community of choice 45 FOCUS Increase affordable housing inventory (especially rentals & larger units), don’t evict seniors (transition to new location), address 82 congestion, improve/increase parking in the core, keep a focus on mental health Being a customer- focused government 42 FOCUS Resist development pressures and ensure actions align with resident desires; help retain unique local businesses, seek to more closely match spending with resident priorities Fostering economic vitality 41 FOCUS Ensure more affordable shopping, restaurants, childcare, and infant-care. Assist/incent local service providers and stores to thrive and meet community needs. Pace development. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Informational presentation only. No funds are being requested. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: This year’s survey was administered electronically, reducing paper usage. ALTERNATIVES: Information only. No alternatives are proposed. RECOMMENDATIONS: Information only. Recommendations, based on the survey results, are provided in the Summary Report at Attachment 1. No formal recommendations are being brought forth by staff at this time. However, the survey is intended to assist the City in its continual effort to identify and respond to feedback as well as to provide data in helping determine the priorities for the community through future strategic and budget planning processes. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: None. 6 6 Attachment 1 Summary Report for 2019 City of Aspen Citizen Survey 7 City of Aspen 2019 Citizen Survey DECEMBER 2019 SUMMARY REPORT 8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & SHARING/PERMISSIONS The City of Aspen partnered with Elevated Insights to update the methodology and field the 2019 Aspen Citizen Survey. The City would like to acknowledge and thank the extra effort and assistance that went into the transition of this survey instrument and the identification of updated measures by the Core Project Team: Karen Harrington, Quality Office, Project Manager Alissa Farrell, Interim Assistant City Manager Garrett Larimer, Community Development Matt Kuhn, Parks and Recreation Trish Aragon, Engineering Mitch Osur, Parking Tracy Trulove, Communications Nathaniel Ross, Quality Office Mike Kosdrosky, Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Permission is granted to reprint from this report with citations to the City of Aspen &Elevated Insights. City of Aspen Karen Harrington, Director of Quality 130 South Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Phone: (970) 429-2856 Email: karen.harrington@CityofAspen.com Web: www.CityofAspen.com Elevated Insights Debbie Balch, President 525 N Tejon St. Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Office: (719) 590-9999 Email: debbie@elevatedinsights.com Web: www.elevatedinsights.com For further information, contact: 2 9 Aspen Citizen Survey 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 Section Page Background & Methodology 5 Conclusions, Scorecard and Potential Next Steps 9 Overall Key Driver Findings 17 Overall Ratings 21 Detailed Findings by Strategic Focus Area 31 Fiscal Health & Smart, Customer-Focused Government 33 Protected Environment 37 Economic Vitality 45 Safe & Lived-In Community 51 Community Engagement 69 Demographics 79 Comment Category Architecture 83 10 4 PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 11 Background & Methodology 5 12 Project Background The City of Aspen has conducted a citizen survey since 2006. The annual survey provides a great opportunity for the City to gather resident feedback and ensure City services are adequately meeting the needs of Aspen residents. In 2019, the City transitioned to new leadership and strategic focus areas. The City commissioned Elevated Insights, a strategic research agency company from Colorado Springs, to update the content, method, and metrics for the Aspen Citizen Survey. Safe & Lived-in Community of Choice Smart Customer Focused Government Economic Vitality & Fiscal Health Protecting the Environment Community Engagement Research Objectives •Listen to resident needs & thoughts, using a statistically valid approach to gather feedback •Understand the state of the City; satisfaction with services; and opinions overall and within key strategic focus areas •Assess trends -over time and in comparison with targets •Provide a solid foundation to guide strategic planning and action steps to best improve quality of life for Aspen residents and to best improve satisfaction with city services 6 13 What is the Aspen Citizen Survey? 7 The City of Aspen seeks input from the public annually. This enables the City to gather resident feedback and ensure City services are adequately meeting the needs of Aspen residents. Who?* What? When? 528 Aspen Respondents (registered voters & full-time APCHA residents) Data was weighted to represent Aspen Census Norms (Age, Gender, Income) (Sample size yielded a margin of error rate of +/-5%) Anonymous, web-based citizen survey The online survey enabled randomization and survey logic to be implemented. Residents could also request a paper survey which was mailed to them along with return postage. Formal survey links were sent to all registered voters and full-time APCHA residents About 4500 letters were distributed, directing respondents to access the survey online. The survey was also made available to a broader audience including employees and those living outside the City towards the end of the fielding window. Surveys were collected from August 12th –October 12th of 2019 How? 439 Aspen residents completed the entire survey, and an additional 89 completed at least part of the survey. In addition to the formal sample, Aspen opened the survey to others within and outside of the City for about two weeks. Those additional responses were sent to the City, but are not included in this report on the formal survey audience. When adding the informal responses, ratings largely remained the same or moved up or down one or two percentage points, providing very similar results. Please see the APPENDIX document for a detailed methodology employed for the 2019 Aspen Citizen Survey and outline of changes in method and metrics vs. prior years.14 8 PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 15 Conclusions, Scorecard and Potential Next Steps 9 16 10 High perceived quality of life •93% feel the quality of life is good or excellent in Aspen, in line with historical trends and above most cities nationally, who average between 65-70% (% positive when no neutral option is available). •Counting only the top 2 positive ratings when a neutral option is available, 69% feel the overall quality of life is very good or excellent in Aspen. Strong satisfaction with City services •83% of respondents were satisfied with City services in 2019, a 3 point rebound from 2018 levels, and above the national average of between 40 and 50% (% satisfied when no neutral option is available). •Counting only the top 2 positive ratings when a neutral option is available, 70% are genuinely satisfied with the quality of City services. Variable satisfaction between Strategic Focus Areas •Most are satisfied with the City for Ensuring Safety (88%), Protecting the Environment (77%), and Supporting Community Engagement (67%) (5-point scale). •Less than half are satisfied with making Aspen a Livable Community of Choice (45%), being Customer-Focused (42%), and Fostering Economic Vitality (41%) (5 point scale). Strong relationship between Quality of Life and Livable Community of Choice ratings •Less than half are satisfied with Aspen for being a Livable Community of Choice •Livability is linked to the perceived affordability of housing, shopping, & restaurants, lessening congestion, and improving parking. Among parents, livability is also linked to availability of affordable child care and infant care. City Service ratings are most impacted by perceived Customer Focus - how much they feel the City focuses on customers. •Less than half of residents are satisfied in this area, sharing that the City should seek feedback earlier in the process (and incorporate resident feedback) before making development decisions. •Resident age impacts some desired methods for outreach & communication: Younger residents are more likely to desire information from social media or the website; older residents are more likely to attend City meetings and read newspaper ads. Respondents have many ideas for improvements •When asked how they’d like Aspen to improve, many wish the City could be more diverse and unique. Some desired assistance in promoting/retaining local service providers while reducing development from outside entities. Additionally, many requested that Aspen address traffic/congestion and more strongly enforce a variety of laws/ordinances. •A number of residents don’t feel that Aspen is good place to retire, requesting that the City increase senior living options. Some mentioned that a lack of healthcare/specialists would make it difficult to retire in the Aspen area. Conclusions 17 11 SUMMARY METRICS This page and the two that follow feature the State of the City Scorecard. This is a collection of key satisfaction measures from throughout this report, intended to provide a snapshot of resident sentiment that can be tracked over time. How to Interpret The Scorecard: The Overall Quality of Life in Aspen, Personal Quality of Life, and Likelihood to Recommend Aspen as a Place to Live were answered on a 10 pt. scale. The percentages in the scorecard reflect the percentage of residents who rated these items as an 8, 9 or 10 (Top 3 Boxes). The rest of the measures were answered on a 5 pt. scale. The metrics are reflective of the percentage of residents who rated an item as a 4 or 5, essentially saying that they are satisfied or in agreement with the statement (Top 2 Boxes). Please note:2019 marks a seminal change in question wording and rating scales compared to prior surveys. Because of this, please understand that these ratings may be very different than prior year survey results simply due to methodological change. In short, any comparisons to prior surveys should be taken with a grain of salt. For more information, please reference the Appendix that accompanies this report. Overall Impressions 2019 2020 Overall Quality of Life in Aspen 69% Personal Quality of Life 66% Likelihood to Recommend Aspen as a Place to Live 53% Aspen is a good place to raise a family 75% Aspen is open and accepting 73% Aspen is a good place to retire 56% Satisfaction with state of the City by Strategic Focus Area 2019 2020 Satisfaction with Quality of Services provided by City of Aspen 73% Ensuring a safe community 88% Protecting the local natural environment 77% Supporting community engagement 67% Maintaining City of Aspen's financial health 55% Making Aspen a livable community of choice 45% Being a customer-focused government 42% Fostering economic vitality 41% CITY SCORECARD 18 12 Fiscal Health and Smart, Customer-focused Government 2019 2020 The City provides a welcoming environment for citizen involvement 63% The City provides value overall for the taxes paid 62% I trust the City of Aspen government 46% The City has sound financial policies and practices 42% The City matches spending with community priorities 41% The City does a good job of dealing with development pressures (commercial & residential) 29% Protected Environment 2019 2020 Water quality in local rivers and streams 90% Wildlife habitats (e.g. forests, areas along streams, open space) 87% Air quality 84% Water flows in local rivers and streams for fish and wildlife 84% Water rights and supply for residents and visitors 70% Amount of residential and commercial waste generated 24% Economic Vitality 2019 2020 Quality of public spaces 84% Preservation of historic resources 70% Overall quality of the built environment 53% Overall economic health 51% Employment opportunities 47% Current rate of commercial development in Aspen 21% Current rate of free-market residential development in Aspen 21% Current rate of affordable residential development in Aspen 20% Community needs are sufficiently met by local businesses 15% Affordable shopping opportunities 9% Young families can afford to live and work here 6% CITY SCORECARD The above measures were answered on a 5 pt. scale. The metrics are reflective of the percentage of residents who rated an item as a 4 or 5, essentially saying that they are satisfied or in agreement with the statement (Top 2 Boxes). 19 Safe and Lived in Community 2019 2020 I feel safe in Aspen as a whole 98% Ease of walking in town 89% Electric services overall 89% Ease of travel by bus 88% Water services overall 84% Special events (e.g. concerts, marathons, etc.) 81% Recreation facilities (e.g. the Aspen Recreation Center or similar facilities) 80% Ease of bicycling in town 77% Recreation programs (e.g. fitness classes, tennis, or other activities) 77% Condition of City streets (excluding Highway 82, a state highway) 67% Healthcare 55% Mental health services 48% Ease of travel by ride-share (such as Downtowner)42% APCHA: Affordability of units available for purchase 41% Ease of travel by car 35% APCHA: Affordability of units available for rent 33% APCHA: Ability to find a unit for purchase that matches my specific needs 25% APCHA: Ability to find a unit for rent that matches my specific needs 24% APCHA: Ability to purchase a unit in a reasonable amount of time 21% APCHA: Ability to rent a unit in a reasonable amount of time 21% Overall parking experience in Aspen 20% Community Engagement 2019 2020 I am as involved as I want to be in community activities and organizations 69% The City provides a variety of ways for me to stay informed 61% I find City outreach information helpful 55% I can easily access City information when I need to 53% The City responds promptly to requests for information 46% Overall, City outreach efforts meet my needs for information 43% The City communicates well about major issues 40% The City considers community feedback when making decisions 37% 13 CITY SCORECARD The above measures were answered on a 5 pt. scale. The metrics are reflective of the percentage of residents who rated an item as a 4 or 5, essentially saying that they are satisfied or in agreement with the statement (Top 2 Boxes). 20 14 Potential Next Steps STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA % Satisfied Quadrant Actions with Greatest Impact Ensuring a safe community 88 MAINTAIN Keep it up! Consider taking more action to enforce laws/ ordinances (especially pet –related), as many specific suggestions were made in this area. Protecting the local natural environment 77 MAINTAIN Keep it up! Consider taking action with commercial waste, as most support required compost collection at commercial and City owned or operated facilities. Supporting community engagement 67 REINFORCE Communicate about major decisions early in the process and incorporate resident feedback. Maintaining financial health 55 EDUCATE Communicate/clarify financial policies. Livable community of choice 45 FOCUS Increase affordable housing inventory (especially rentals & larger units), don’t evict seniors (transition to new location), address 82 congestion, improve/increase parking in the core, keep a focus on mental health Being a customer- focused government 42 FOCUS Resist development pressures and ensure actions align with resident desires; help retain unique local businesses, seek to more closely match spending with resident priorities Fostering economic vitality 41 FOCUS Ensure more affordable shopping, restaurants, childcare, and infant-care. Assist/incent local service providers and stores to thrive and meet community needs. Pace development.21 Consider focusing on Increasing Economic Vitality to most directly impact both quality of life and satisfaction with services 15 1.Increase affordable housing, especially rentals and larger units 2.Provide a transition for seniors from APCHA housing 3.Increase affordable child care / infant care spaces 4.Provide incentives/support to enable affordable local shops, restaurants and service providers to thrive 5.Increase affordability overall for workers and seniors Improve Personal Quality of Life Make Aspen More Livable Foster Economic Vitality Improve Overall Satisfaction Foster Economic Vitality Being Customer- Focused Potential Next Steps 22 16 PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 23 Overall Key Driver Findings 17 24 18 How to Interpret Key Driver Charts Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers of Desired Outcome More Impact Less Impact Less Satisfied More Satisfied All things being equal, factors in this quadrant should be considered higher priorities for new action because potential impact is higher but satisfaction is lower. They represent gaps to consider addressing. Focus: •Higher impact •Lower satisfaction Reinforce: •Higher impact •Higher satisfaction While factors in this quadrant are less important than others, the low satisfaction scores make them ones to keep an eye on. Leaders should be aware of these areas. Factors in this quadrant are often considered key strengths. These factors should be reinforced to prevent a drop in satisfaction. Be Aware: •Lower impact •Lower satisfaction Factors in this quadrant are typically lower priority for new action. These should be maintained. They may represent areas where performance is already high, and therefore concern is less. Maintain: •Lower impact •Higher satisfaction On the next two pages (and throughout this report), you will notice charts like the one below. This is a Key Driver matrix, showing “Satisfaction/Agreement” on the X-axis and “Impact on a particular satisfaction measure” on the Y-axis. Below is a description for how to interpret factors that fall into each quadrant: Impact on Desired Outcome (Shapley %) The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 25 19 How Focus Areas Impact Personal Quality of Life Among City of Aspen Strategic Focus Areas, when considering personal quality of life: •Making Aspen a livable community of choice should be prioritized –residents are less likely to be satisfied in this area, and it is the most impactful on personal quality of life by a decent margin. •Fostering economic vitality and being a customer-focused government are also noteworthy –residents are less likely to be satisfied and impact on personal quality of life is average. Protecting the local natural environment Being a customer- focused government Fostering economic vitality Maintaining City of Aspen's financial health Ensuring a safe community Making Aspen a livable community of choice Supporting community engagement 35%45%55%65%75%85%95% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for Personal Quality of Life FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Impact on Personal Quality of Life More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 26 20 How Focus Areas Impact Satisfaction with City Services Protecting the local natural environment Being a customer- focused government Fostering economic vitality Maintaining City of Aspen's financial health Ensuring a safe communityMaking Aspen a livable community of choice Supporting community engagement 35%45%55%65%75%85%95% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for Overall Satisfaction with City Services FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Among City of Aspen Strategic Focus Areas, when considering satisfaction with services: •Being a customer-focused government is an area to prioritize –residents are less likely to be satisfied in this area, and it has the highest impact on satisfaction with City services (among these 7 factors). •Fostering economic vitality and maintaining City of Aspen’s financial health are also noteworthy –residents are less likely to be satisfied and impact is slightly above average. •While making Aspen a livable community of choice is very impactful in regards to personal quality of life (prior page), it has less impact on resident satisfaction with City services. Impact on Satisfaction with City Services More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 27 Overall Ratings 21 28 94 95 95 98 95 97 96 95 95 94 95 93 93 The Overall Quality of Life -Trended Note: The Overall Quality of Life scoring and scale were refreshed with the new survey instrument: •For 2007 –2018, the QOL score represents the % citing Good or Excellent on a 4-point scale. •From 2019 forward, this trended QOL score represents the top 50% of responses after removing ‘5’ ratings. QUESTION DETAILS On a scale of 0 to 10, how would you rate the overall quality of life in Aspen? Please drag the slider to a point on the scale. 0 (far left) = Very Poor; 10 (far right) = Excellent (Total: N = 438) The Overall Quality of Life in Aspen Demographic Differences: •The general quality of life is positive across all demographic groups. •3 /4 of residents earning over $150K rated quality of life in Top 3 boxes, vs. about 2/3 of total population rating quality of life in Top 3 Box. 22 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 On average, residents rated the overall quality of life in Aspen at 7.969% 0%0%2%2%2%3%5%15%27%25%17% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.89 Mean General QOL Of residents rated the quality of life in Aspen in the top 3 boxes (8-10) When using a scale from 0-10, where 0 = very poor and 10 = excellent, 0%0%2%2%2%3%5%15%27%25%17% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.9 Mean 69% When equalizing scales to allow comparison with prior years, the overall trended Quality of Life in Aspen remained stable with last year. Very Poor Excellent Trend Over Time: 29 Demographic differences: •The personal satisfaction with their quality of life is slightly lower than the general satisfaction with Aspen’s quality of life, but is still high overall and among most demographic groups. •Aspen’s youngest and oldest adult residents rated their satisfaction with life quality lower than other ages; residents earning $100 -$150K tended to be more satisfied with their quality of life. 23 Of residents rated satisfaction with their own quality of life in the Aspen community in the top 3 box (8-10) 66% 0%0%2%2%2%3%5%15%27%25%17% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.89 Mean General QOL When using a scale from 0-10 where 0 = extremely dissatisfied and 10 = extremely satisfied, 66% 1%2%1%3%3%2%5%17%27%19%19% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.7 Mean Satisfaction with Your Quality of Life represents a new, more personal gauge of quality of life. Trended data does not exist for this measure. Satisfaction with Your Quality of Life in the Aspen Community Extremely Dissatisfied QUESTION DETAILS On a scale of 0 to 10, how satisfied are you with your quality of life in the Aspen community overall? Please drag the slider to a point on the scale. 0 (far left) = Extremely Dissatisfied; 10 (far right) = Extremely Satisfied BASE: (Total: N = 439) Extremely Satisfied 30 QUESTION DETAILS How likely would you be to recommend Aspen as a place to live? Please drag the slider to a point on the scale. 0 (far left) = Not at all Likely; 10 (far right) = Extremely Likely (Total: N = 408) Likelihood of Recommending Aspen as a Place to Live 24 34.4% Promoters Promoters –Detractors = 3.9 NPS Score Aspen’s Net Promoter Score (% Promoters -% Detractors), is 3.9, with a somewhat balanced level of promoters (34%) and detractors (30.5%). 53%When using a scale from 0-10 where 0 = not at all likely and 10 = extremely likely, To note, since 69% rated the quality of life as 8-10, yet just 53% selected 8-10 for likelihood to recommend Aspen as a place to live, this lower proportion of ‘promoters’ may be due to residents hoping to stem additional population growth in Aspen. 0%0%2%2%2%3%5%15%27%25%17% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 53% 5%2%2%2%3%5%11%17%19%12%22% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Demographic differences: -Net Promoter Score is highest among those with kids age 0-5 and residents earning over $150K -Net Promoter Score is lowest among residents 45-64 years old and those earning between $100K -$150K. Not at all Likely Extremely Likely Of residents rated their likelihood of recommending Aspen as a place to live as 8, 9, or 10 31 QUESTION DETAILS Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the Aspen community. Aspen is a good place to retire: N = 381 Aspen is open and accepting: N = 425 Aspen is a good place to raise a family: N = 389 Community Perceptions Open/Accepting, Raising a Family, and Retiring 25 36% 44% 32% 39% 28% 24% 75% 73% 56% Aspen is a good place to raise a family Aspen is open and accepting Aspen is a good place to retire Agree Strongly Agree Demographic differences: •Residents with a household income of more than $150k are more likely to agree that Aspen is a good place to retire (63%) •Residents with children ages 0 –5 are more likely to agree that Aspen is a good place to retire (70%) •Residents with children ages 6 –17 are less likely to agree that Aspen is open and accepting (64%) Overall, residents have positive perceptions of the Aspen community •Most agreed that Aspen is a good place to raise a family (75%), is open and accepting (73% •A little over half agreed that Aspen is a good place to retire (56%) 32 Trend Over Time: 92 89 92 89 84 89 92 89 86 87 83 76 83 13%57%15%11%3% QUESTION DETAILS Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the quality of services provided by the City of Aspen? (Total: N = 406) Satisfaction with Quality of Services Provided by City Demographic differences: -Females are more satisfied than Males (81% vs 66% Top 2 Box) -Older residents (55+) are less likely to be satisfied than younger residents (68% vs 79% Top 2 Box) -Residents who have lived in Aspen 20 years or more are less likely to be satisfied than those who have lived in the City for less time -People who solely work in Aspen are more satisfied with quality of services than those who do not work/own a business (74% vs 57% Top 2 Box) Satisfaction with quality of services provided by the City is strong, with 70% of residents claiming to be satisfied or very satisfied. 26 Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very Satisfied Satisfaction with City Services -TrendedVery Dis-satisfiedNote: The Overall Satisfaction with City Services scale points and names were refreshed with the new survey instrument: •For 2007 –2018, the OSAT score represents the % rating Somewhat Satisfied or Satisfied on a 4-point scale •From 2019 forward, this trended Overall Satisfaction score represents % rating Satisfied or Very Satisfied from 4 scale points. 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 When equalizing scales to allow historic comparisons, the overall trended Satisfaction with City Services in Aspen rebounded in 2019. 2019 Satisfaction with Quality of City Services 70% New scale –5 points, from Very Dissatisfied to Very Satisfied 33 Poor 2% Fair 11% Good 53% Excellent 33% QUESTION DETAILS Overall, how would you rate the quality of services provided by the City of Aspen? (Total: N = 426) Quality of Services Provided Overall Demographic differences: •65+ year old residents are more likely to rate services as excellent; •Younger residents are more likely to rate services as good •Residents earning more than $150K/year are more likely to rate services as excellent; •Residents earing less than $150K are more likely to rate services as good. 27 When rating quality of services on a 4-point scale from Poor –Excellent, 86% felt services were good or excellent.86% 34 QUESTION DETAILS For each of the following City of Aspen priorities below, please rate your level of satisfaction with how the City of Aspen is doing. WEIGHTED BASE SIZE -varies by priority area due as ‘Don’t Know/NA’ responses were removed. Being a customer-focused government: N = 404 Supporting community engagement: N = 414 Fostering economic vitality: N = 402 Maintaining City of Aspen's financial health: N = 374 Ensuring a safe community: N = 437 Making Aspen a livable community of choice: N = 423 Protecting the local natural environment: N = 434 Overall Satisfaction by Strategic Focus Area Resident satisfaction varied by strategic focus area. •Most were satisfied with ensuring safety (88%), protecting the environment (77%), and supporting community engagement (67%) •Less than half were satisfied with making Aspen a livable community of choice (45%), being customer-focused (42%), and fostering economic vitality (41%). 28 49% 55% 53% 41% 35% 34% 35% 39% 22% 14% 13% 10% 8% 6% Satisfied Level of Satisfaction with the state of the City of Aspen Demographic differences: •Younger residents are more satisfied with Ensuring a safe community (98% T2B) •Satisfaction with the Livability of Aspen varies by income; 38% of residents earning less than $50K are satisfied with the livability of Aspen vs. 68% for those earning $150K or more. 88 Ensuring a safe community 77 Protecting the local natural environment 67 Supporting community engagement 55 Maintaining financial health 45 Livable community of choice 42 Being a customer-focused government 41 Fostering economic vitality 35 QUESTION DETAILS Overall, what suggestions do you have for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play? BASE: (Total: N = 272) Suggestions for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play Themes that emerged from the many open-ended comments offered by respondents included the following: •Provide more affordable housing, shopping, child care, and restaurants •Prioritize the desires of local residents over developers & tourists in decision-making •Reduce development from large/outside interests while protecting/retaining local businesses •Address traffic, congestion, and parking; reduce the number of cars within the City core overall 29 29% 18% 17% 15% 13% 13% 11% 7% 6% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% Affordable Housing - More Leadership / management / budget Affordability Development - stop/lessen Development - change/enable Law / Order Traffic / Road Changes Environmental Affordable Housing - Change Community Engagement Parking Public Transportation Parks / Open Spaces Childcare / Daycare Positive - general - love Aspen Events - less Services/resources Healthcare Workforce Opportunities Biking Events / activities - more Security / Safety Education Senior services / housing Community Connections Negative - general - don't like trends Restaurant Variety Homeless people Summary of Open-ended Suggestions for How To Improve Residents shared a wealth of information – Full comments are included in the Appendix document; An outline of comments by category is attached to this Summary Report. Example comment: “Keep Aspen local. The locals are the soul of this town and what brings people back. Building housing outside of the roundabout increases traffic and decreases community vitality. We need affordable housing options IN TOWN … I love Aspen. I accept change. But I also think we can do better. “36 QUESTION DETAILS Overall, what suggestions do you have for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play? (Total: N = 272) Suggestions for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play 30 housing affordable make/controlcity living town community people parking workers reduce need Keep development traffic stop working class improve locals manyneeds time new street vehicles place businesses work opportunities great options local family good families construction shops building APCHA units quality money commercial food allow owners support bike even afford build spaces move home end valley bus years care core helprestaurants increase cost small events public system real sidewalksservice create become around feel fix activities long market going high rid provide now number please know Enforce important big think give places retail raise expand away business issues open Some Demographic differences: •Need for more affordable housing was noted more often by younger residents and those earning under $100K •Traffic/congestion was more often mentioned by those between 35-64 years old •Increased law enforcement was suggested most often by residents 55+ years old •Addressing parking was suggested most often by those 55-64 years old •Development concerns were most often noted by residents 55+ years old 37 Detailed Findings by Strategic Focus Area 31 38 32 PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 39 33 Fiscal Health & Smart, Customer-Focused Government 40 Key Drivers for Satisfaction with “Being a Customer-focused Government’ The City does a good job of dealing with development pressures The City provides value overall for the taxes paid I trust the City of Aspen government The City matches spending with community priorities 20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for “Being a Customer-focused Government” 34 Among these “Customer-focused Government” factors: •Having trust in City government is a key driver of satisfaction for residents; however, less than 50% said they have said trust. While satisfaction is higher for this factor than two other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” quadrant), there is significant room for improvement here. •Matching spending with community priorities and dealing with government pressures are key factors to “be aware” of. FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Impact on Being a Customer- focused Government Satisfaction More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 41 Dealing with Development Pressures Only 29% of residents agreed that the City does a good job dealing with development pressures (commercial and residential) •Most agreed that the City provides a welcoming environment for citizen involvement (63%) and provides value overall for the taxes paid (62%) •Less than half agreed that the trust the City government (46%), the City has sound financial policies/practices (42%), and matches spending with community priorities (41%) 35 51% 48% 35% 35% 34% 25% 11% 14% 11% 7% 6% 4% 63% 62% 46% 42% 41% 29% The City provides a welcoming environment for citizen involvement The City provides value overall for the taxes paid I trust the City of Aspen government The City has sound financial policies and practices The City matches spending with community priorities The City does a good job of dealing with development pressures (commercial and residential) Agree Strongly Agree Top 2 Box QUESTION DETAILS Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the City of Aspen. The City does a good job of dealing with development pressures (commercial and residential): N = 430 The City provides a welcoming environment for citizen involvement: N = 431 I trust the City of Aspen government: N = 432 The City matches spending with community priorities: N = 402 The City has sound financial policies and practices: N = 389 The City provides value overall for the taxes paid: N = 428 Demographic differences: •More young residents (20 –34) agree that the City is doing a good job dealing with developmental pressures •Less residents without children in their household agree that the City is doing a good job dealing with developmental pressures 42 36 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 43 37 Protected Environment 44 Key Drivers for Satisfaction with “Protecting the Local Natural Environment” Air quality Water quality in local rivers and streams Water flows in local rivers and streams for fish and wildlife Wildlife habitats (e.g. forests, areas along streams, open space) Amount of residential and commercial waste generated Water rights and supply for residents and visitors 20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for “Protecting the Local Natural Environment” 38 Among these “Protecting the Local Environment ” factors: •Impact and satisfaction for these factors are relatively correlated. In other words, factors that residents are likely to be satisfied with are also likely to have a higher impact on satisfaction with protecting the local natural environment. This prevents factors from landing in the “Focus” or “Maintain” quadrants. •While currently lower in terms of impact, less than 25% of residents are satisfied with the amount of residential and commercial waste generated. This is an important factor to keep an eye on. •Wildlife habitants appear to be a key strength for the City of Aspen. FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Impact on Protecting the Local Natural Environment Satisfaction More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 45 QUESTION DETAILS Please rate your level of satisfaction with the following aspects of the natural environment in the Aspen community. Air quality: N = 435; Water quality in local rivers and streams: N = 438 Water flows in local rivers and streams for fish and wildlife: N = 410; Amount of residential and commercial waste generatedWildlife habitats (e.g. forests, areas along streams, open space): N = 430; Water rights and supply for residents and visitors: N = 373) Satisfaction by Aspect of Natural Environment 39 44% 48% 47% 44% 52% 16% 46% 38% 37% 39% 18% 7% 90% 87% 84% 84% 70% 24% Water quality in local rivers and streams Wildlife habitats (e.g. forests, areas along streams, open space) Water flows in local rivers and streams for fish and wildlife Air quality Water rights and supply for residents and visitors Amount of residential and commercial waste generated Satisfied Very Satisfied Demographic differences: •Less older residents (65+) are satisfied with the amount of residential and commercial waste generated •Satisfaction with waste generated varies by income; less residents earning more than $100K are satisfied with waste generated than those earning less than $100K Only 24% of residents were satisfied with the amount of residential and commercial waste generated •Most were satisfied in all other aspects of natural environment: water quality in local rivers and streams (90%), wildlife habitats (87%), water flows in local rivers and streams for fish and wildlife (84%), air quality (84%), and water rights and supply for residents and visitors (70%) 46 QUESTION DETAILS Over 1/3rd of the waste that Aspen businesses and residents send to landfills could be composted.How do you feel about the following possible action steps the City of Aspen could take to increase composting? Prohibit food and yard waste from being disposed with landfill trash: N = 432; Require compost collection at all City owned or operated properties: N = 436; Require compost collection at large food service establishments: N = 439; Require compost collection at all retail food service establishments.: N = 438 Support for Different Waste Actions 40 32% 28% 25% 23% 59% 56% 58% 38% 90% 84% 82% 61% Require compost collection at large food service establishments Require compost collection at all retail food service establishments. Require compost collection at all City owned or operated properties Prohibit food and yard waste from being disposed with landfill trash Support Strongly Support Demographic differences: •More younger residents (20 –34) support prohibiting food and yard waste from being disposed with landfill trash •More females support prohibiting food and yard waste from being disposed with landfill trash Overall, residents supported Aspen taking action steps to increase composting •Most supported required compost collection at large food service establishments (90%), retail food service establishments (84%), and City owned or operated facilities (82%) •More than half supported prohibiting food and yard wasted from being disposed with landfill trash (61%) 47 QUESTION DETAILS: How important is Aspen's air quality to you overall? (Total: N = 442) Importance of Air Quality 41 Extremely Important 61% Very Important 33%Somewhat Important -6%Of residents shared that Aspen’s air quality was important to them 94% Example comment: “Aspen is too beautiful to have noxious air floating around.” Demographic differences: •All demographic groups felt that air quality was important •Younger residents aged 20-34 were most likely to claim that air quality is extremely important. 48 QUESTION DETAILS Please select a level of concern for each contributor to air pollution in Aspen. Vehicle exhaust from traffic: N = 442;Vehicle exhaust from idling: N = 420 Wildfire smoke: N = 422; Woodburning fireplaces: N = 419 Dust Storms: N = 417 Restaurant Grill Smoke: N = 416 Secondhand smoke or vape: N = 420 Dust from construction: N = 421;Dust from streets: N = 420 Airplane emissions: N = 419 Regional oil and gas operations: N = 412 Level of Concern for Contributors to Air Quality 42 33% 32% 27% 34% 24% 26% 24% 22% 18% 14% 14% 26% 27% 30% 14% 22% 19% 18% 10% 4% 6% 6% 59% 59% 57% 49% 47% 45% 42% 32% 22% 20% 20% Vehicle exhaust from idling Vehicle exhaust from traffic Regional oil and gas operations Wildfire smoke Secondhand smoke or vape Airplane emissions Dust from construction Dust from streets Dust Storms Woodburning fireplaces Restaurant Grill Smoke Concerned Very Concerned Demographic differences: •Younger residents (20 –34) are less concerned with exhaust from idling (46%) and exhaust from traffic (34%) Most residents were concerned with vehicle smoke from idling (59%), vehicle exhaust from traffic (59%), and regional oil and gas operations (57)% contributing to air pollution •Fewer were concerned with dust storms (22%), woodburning fireplaces (20%), and restaurant grill smoke (20%) contributing to air pollution 49 For which of the following reasons, if any, is Aspen's air quality important to you? WEIGHTED BASE: (Total: N = 442) Driver of Air Quality Importance 43 4% 17% 15% 18% 36% 58% 70% None of these Other (please specify): Someone in my household has a respiratory illness or… I have young children in my household I am sensitive to air pollution I exercise at a high intensity outside I enjoy the scenic vistas Most residents think Aspen’s air quality is important because they enjoy the scenic vistas (70%) •More than half think Aspen’s air quality is important because they exercise at a high intensity outside (58%) 50 44 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 51 45 Economic Vitality 52 Key Drivers for Satisfaction with “Overall Economic Health” Employment opportunities Overall quality of the built environment Community needs are sufficiently met by local businesses Affordable shopping opportunities 5%15%25%35%45%55%65% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for "Overall Economic Health" Current rate of commercial development in Aspen Young families can afford to live and work here Current rate of affordable residential development in Aspen Current rate of free- market residential development in Aspen 46 Among these “Overall Economic Health” factors: •Employment opportunities have the highest impact on satisfaction with “overall economic health” by a wide margin. While higher than other factors in the chart, only about half of residents are satisfied, making this a factor to focus on despite landing in the “Reinforce” quadrant. •Ensuring local businesses sufficiently meet community needs is a factor to focus on. •While satisfaction is low for economic vitality measures in general, the overall quality of the built environment could be considered a key strength relative to the other factors tested. FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Impact on Overall Economic Health Satisfaction More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 53 QUESTION DETAILS How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with each of the following in Aspen? Overall economic health: N = 427 Affordable shopping opportunities: N = 440 Employment opportunities: N = 405 Satisfaction with Economic Health, Shopping, & Employment 47 40% 37% 7% 11% 11% 2% 51% 47% 9% Overall economic health Employment opportunities Affordable shopping opportunities Satisfied Very Satisfied Demographic differences: •Fewer females are satisfied with affordable shopping opportunities (6%) •Fewer residents earning less than $50k are satisfied with affordable shopping opportunities (4%) Less than 10% were satisfied with affordable shopping opportunities in Aspen •About half were satisfied with overall economic health (51%) and employment opportunities (47%) 54 QUESTION DETAILS Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements. Community needs are sufficiently met by local businesses: N = 435 Young families can afford to live and work here: N = 430 Community Needs Met by Local Businesses; Young Families can Afford to Live and Work Here. 48 12% 4% 2% 2% 15% 6% Community needs are sufficiently met by local businesses Young families can afford to live and work here Agree Strongly Agree Top 2 Box Very few agree that community needs are sufficiently met by local businesses (15%) and young families can afford to live and work here (6%) Example Quotes: Things here need to be more affordable. Yes it's Aspen but it's killing young families who are desperate to stay but cannot afford to. It is nearly impossible to afford to have a family here based on the wages paid locally. 55 QUESTION DETAILS Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following aspects of Aspen's built environment. Built environment includes homes, buildings, streets, parks, infrastructure, etc. Current rate of commercial development in Aspen: N = 420 Current rate of free-market residential development in Aspen: N = 411; Overall quality of the built environment (please see question for definition): N = 414; Preservation of historic resources: N = 426; Current rate of affordable residential development in Aspen: N = 422) Quality of public spaces: N = 425 Satisfaction with Aspects of Built Environment 49 60% 54% 47% 15% 17% 14% 24% 6% 6% 6% 4% 6% 84% 70% 53% 21% 21% 20% Quality of public spaces Preservation of historic resources Overall quality of the built environment (please see question for definition) Current rate of free-market residential development in Aspen Current rate of commercial development in Aspen Current rate of affordable residential development in Aspen Satisfied Very Satisfied Demographic differences: •Satisfaction with the rate of commercial development in Aspen varies by income; 13% of residents earning less than $50K are satisfied with the rate of commercial development in Aspen vs. 29% for those earning $150K or more •Satisfaction with the rate of commercial development in Aspen also varies by age; 13% of residents ages 20 -34 are satisfied with the rate of commercial development in Aspen vs. 25% for those ages 55 –64 and 65+ Most residents were satisfied with the quality of public spaces (84%) and preservation of historic resources (70%) •Less than 1/4 of residents were satisfied with the current rate of free-market residential development in Aspen (21%), the current rate of commercial development in Aspen (21%), and the current rate of affordable residential development in Aspen (20%) 56 QUESTION DETAILS In 2017, there were 134 births in Pitkin County, and 30 spaces were available in licensed day care facilities. Thinking about child care needs, how important is it, if at all, for the City government to take action on each of the following? Expand high-quality early education programming: N = 367 Increase the number of early childhood education spaces within the roundabout: N = 365 Increase the number of early childhood education spaces outside the roundabout: N = 357 Increase the number of infant care spaces within the roundabout: N = 362 Increase the number of infant care spaces outside the roundabout: N = 354) Importance of Increased Early Childhood/Infant Resources by Location 50 31% 34% 32% 28% 26% 31% 26% 27% 28% 28% 62% 59% 59% 57% 53% Expand high-quality early education programming Increase the number of early childhood education spaces outside the roundabout Increase the number of infant care spaces outside the roundabout Increase the number of early childhood education spaces within the roundabout Increase the number of infant care spaces within the roundabout Very Important Extremely Important Top 2 Box Demographic differences: •More residents with children 0 –5 in their household place importance on increasing the number of infant care spaces within the roundabout Residents placed importance on taking action to improve child care needs •While expanding high-quality early education programming was important to the largest proportion of residents (62%), all actions were viewed as important by more than half of residents With the long wait lists and lack of spaces, increasing childcare, particularly for infants, should be a top priority. These are barriers for many people who want to raise a family in Aspen. 57 51 Safe and Lived-in Community 58 Key Drivers for Satisfaction with “Making Aspen a Livable Community of Choice” Overall level of satisfaction with APCHA Overall parking experience in Aspen Ease of travel by busTimeliness of street snow removal in residential areas I feel safe in Aspen as a whole Recreation programsMental health services Special events (e.g. concerts, marathons, etc.) Water services overall Healthcare 20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for “Making Aspen a Livable Community of Choice” Ease of travel by car Electrical services overall Ease of bicycling in town Condition of City streets 52 Among these “Making Aspen a Livable Community of Choice” factors: •APCHA is the most impactful by a decent margin, and only about half of residents are satisfied, which is low relative to other factors tested. •Timeliness of snow removal, overall parking, and mental health services are other factors that land in the “focus” quadrant. •While ease of travel by car is less impactful at the moment, residents are less likely to be satisfied with this factor than any other, making it a factor to “be aware of”. •Aspen’s bus system, safety and recreation programs appear to be key strengths for the City. •While less impactful, ratings are high for ease of bicycling, special events, and utilities services. FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Impact on Making Aspen a Livable Community of Choice Satisfaction More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 59 QUESTION DETAILS How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the following ways to get around Aspen? Ease of walking in town: N = 425 Ease of bicycling in town: N = 413 Ease of travel by bus: N = 419 Ease of travel by ride-share: N = 309 Ease of travel by car: N = 421 Satisfaction by Modes of Transportation 53 53% 49% 47% 26% 29% 36% 39% 30% 16% 6% 89% 88% 77% 42% 35% Ease of walking in town Ease of travel by bus Ease of bicycling in town Ease of travel by ride-share Ease of travel by car Satisfied Very Satisfied Demographic differences: •Females were more likely to be satisfied with the ease of travel by car •A higher percentage of younger residents (20 –34) are satisfied with the ease of travel by car Fewer residents were satisfied with the ease of travel by car (35%) and ease of travel by ride-share (42%) •More were satisfied with ease of walking in town (89%), ease of travel by bus (88%), and ease of bicycling in town (77%) 11% of open-ended responses requested the City address traffic and congestion, noting: •General traffic / congestion •Address 82 traffic, consider 4-lanes in/out of Aspen •Address commuter traffic -in/out of town •Get rid of S curve •Add straight shot across/ consider Marolt open space •Improve/Get rid of roundabout •Add a lane to access Airport Business Center •Other Incentivize ride share options + park & ride options •Add 4-way stop at all intersection in the core •Allow taxi, uber, shuttles to use 2nd lane of 82 •Incentives for retail workers –don’t commute past intercept lot •Lottery system for people to drive kids to school •Close City core to cars / from City hall to Paradise bakery •Less bike racks in the street •Remove RFTAs lane in town, adding a second public lane •Never allow straight shot •Use highway cone & old bridge for two ways in AM and out PM 60 QUESTION DETAILS How important, if at all, is it for the City of Aspen to take action on each of the following? Repair and replace deteriorating infrastructure (pipes, roads, etc.): N = 439 Provide all-season biking options: N = 432 Make it easier for pedestrians to find their way around town: N = 438 Make it easier for bicyclists to find their way around town: N = 424 Provide all-season walking options: N = 439 Importance for City Action to Improve Aspects of Transportation 54 41% 31% 23% 19% 18% 41% 35% 18% 18% 16% 82% 66% 41% 36% 33% Repair and replace deteriorating infrastructure (pipes, roads, etc.) Provide all-season walking options Make it easier for pedestrians to find their way around town Provide all-season biking options Make it easier for bicyclists to find their way around town Very Important Extremely Important Most residents thought it was important to take action to repair and replace deteriorating infrastructure (82%) •Less than half thought it was important to make it easier for pedestrians to find their way around town (41%), provide all-season biking options (36%), and make it easier for bicyclists to find their way around town (33%) Note: 11% still desired changes that would help address traffic / congestion within the City of Aspen. See the ‘Address Traffic / Congestion’ table in the Comment Category Architecture section on slide 88 for specific suggestions for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play. Similarly, 3% still desired changes and would address biking preferences and 2% still desired changes that would address road maintenance. See the ‘Biking Preferences’ and ‘Road Maintenance’ tables in the Comment Category Architecture section on slide 89 for specific suggestions for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play. 61 QUESTION DETAILS Please rate how satisfied you are with the following aspects of utilities, streets and parking in Aspen. Drinking water taste: N = 437 Electrical service reliability: N = 412 Electric services overall: N = 410 Overall parking experience in Aspen: N = 414 Ability to find a parking spot in my neighborhood: N = 39 Water services overall: N = 416 Timeliness of street snow removal in the commercial core: N = 424 Timeliness of street snow removal in residential areas: N = 424 Ability to find a parking spot in the commercial core: N = 413; Condition of City streets (excluding Highway 82, a state highway): N = 425 Satisfaction with Utilities, Streets, and Parking 55 64% 64% 59% 60% 46% 58% 48% 31% 19% 17% 25% 25% 25% 19% 31% 9% 15% 10% 2% 3% 89% 89% 84% 79% 77% 67% 62% 41% 22% 20% Electrical service reliability Electric services overall Water services overall Timeliness of street snow removal in the commercial core Drinking water taste Condition of City streets (excluding Highway 82, a state highway) Timeliness of street snow removal in residential areas Ability to find a parking spot in my neighborhood Ability to find a parking spot in the commercial core Overall parking experience in Aspen Satisfied Very Satisfied Top 2 Box Fewer residents were satisfied with parking: the ability to find a parking spot in my neighborhood (41%), the ability to find a parking spot in the commercial core (22%), and overall parking experience in Aspen (20%) •Most were satisfied with electrical service reliability (89%), electrical services overall (89%), and water services overall (84%) 62 QUESTION DETAILS: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? I feel safe in my neighborhood after dark: N = 441;I feel safe in my neighborhood during the day: N = 441; I feel safe in the Commercial Core after dark: N = 440;I feel safe in the Commercial Core during the day: N = 443; I feel safe in Aspen as a whole: N = 441;The Aspen Police are fair to me: N = 410; The Aspen Police provide prompt service: N = 405;The Aspen Police are helpful: N = 427) Safety & Police Performance 56 22% 20% 27% 32% 30% 31% 29% 31% 77% 79% 71% 63% 65% 60% 60% 58% 99% 99% 98% 96% 94% 90% 89% 89% I feel safe in the Commercial Core during the day I feel safe in my neighborhood during the day I feel safe in Aspen as a whole I feel safe in the Commercial Core after dark I feel safe in my neighborhood after dark The Aspen Police are helpful The Aspen Police are fair to me The Aspen Police provide prompt service Agree Strongly Agree Top 2 Box Nearly all residents reported feeling safe in Aspen –both in the Commercial Core and their neighborhood –at all times of day •Most agreed that the Aspen Police are helpful (90%), fair (89%), and provide prompt service (89%) 11% of open-ended responses requested that the City better enforce laws, including: •Enforce dog poop laws / fine residents and visitors •Enforce traffic laws -speeders, stop signs •General enforce leash laws •Ensure bicyclists obey traffic laws •Be more strict about drugs / minimize pot shops •More police presence at mall / reduce purse snatching at mall •Enforce clearing sidewalks / snow removal •Ensure pedestrians follow walk/don't walk •Other General -more enforcement of laws •Enforce idling law •Enforce loose dogs/bikes/skateboards at mall and on sidewalks •Enforce/punish littering •Enforce compliance with housing occupancy rules •Keep bikes off sidewalks •Add a youth curfew •More jail time for offenders •Close bars at midnight •More rangers watching of off leash dogs on trails •Stop wearing bullet-proof vests •Require bikes and e-bikes to have bells •Ensure drivers stop when bikes are crossing •Enforce parking regulations •Enforce speed in neighborhoods / speed bumps •Prohibit parking on land / reclaim City property •Enforce parking regulations always (not just with complaints) •More police surveillance at night 63 QUESTION DETAILS: Have you (or your Homeowners Association) taken any actions to prepare for potential wildfires? (Total: N = 397) Adoption of Wildfire Protection Measures 57 47% 22% 21% 21% 19% 15% 11% 2% None of the above Taken steps to reduce risk around homes (such as removing excess fuel loads) Identified evacuation routes Created a household evacuation plan Assessed wildfire risk Discussed how to mitigate wildfire risks Made plans to create defensible space around homes Other (please specify) About half haven’t taken any actions to prepare for potential wildfires (47%) Demographic differences: Residents with children 0 –5 years old are less likely to have have taken action, while residents with children 6 –17 are more likely to have taken some type of action 64 Key Drivers for “Overall Satisfaction with APCHA” Affordability of units available for purchase Ability to purchase a unit in a reasonable amount of time Ability to find a unit for purchase that matches my specific needs Ability to find a unit for rent that matches my specific needs 20%25%30%35%40%45% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for “Overall Satisfaction with APCHA” Affordability of units available for rent Ability to rent a unit in a reasonable amount of time 58 Among these “APCHA” factors: •Increasing the availability of units (for rent or purchase) that match specific resident needs is an important area to focus on. •The timeline to rent and purchase units are also factors to note –less than 25% of residents are satisfied with these factors. •The affordability of units available for rent appears to be a key strength of the APCHA program relative to the other factors, but satisfaction is still under 45%. FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Impact on Overall Satisfaction with APCHA More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 65 QUESTION DETAILS: Are you currently or have you ever been a deed restricted owner or renter through APCHA (Aspen- Pitkin County Housing Authority)? (Total: N = 437) Respondent Experience/Interactions with APCHA 59 Demographic differences: •Respondents without children under 18 in their household are equally as likely to rent (26%) vs. own (27%) their home through APCHA •Respondents with children ages 0 –5 in their household are more likely to own their home through APCHA (64%) •Younger respondents (20 –34) are more likely to rent their home through APCHA (54%), while 45 – 54 year old respondents were more likely to own their home through APCHA •Respondents earning less than $50k are more likely to rent their home from APCHA (48), while residents earning more than $150k are less likely to rent their home through APCHA (5%) About half of these survey respondents either own (34%) or rent (22%) their home from APCHA •Less than half of respondents have never owned or rented a home through APCHA 34% 22% 7% 3% 38% Own my home through APCHA Rent my home trhough APCHA Formerly rented home through APCHA Formerly owned home through APCHA Never owned or rented a home through APCHA 66 QUESTION DETAILS: Please rate your level of satisfaction with the following aspects of affordable housing offered through APCHA.Please note: It is okay to answer even if you have not used APCHA. However, if you feel like you do not know enough about APCHA to provide an answer for a specific row, you can simply select "Don't Know / Not Applicable". Satisfaction with Aspects of APCHA Demographic differences: •Younger residents (20 –34) are less satisfied with the ability to purchase a unit in a reasonable amount of time (6%) •Residents with a household income <$50K are less satisfied with the ability to purchase a unit in a reasonable amount of time (11%) 60 35% 32% 27% 24% 16% 19% 13% 17% 29% 14% 14% 9% 9% 5% 8% 5% 64% 46% 41% 33% 25% 24% 21% 21% Value that APCHA program provides to the community Overall level of satisfaction with APCHA Affordability of units available for purchase Affordability of units available for rent Ability to find a unit for purchase that matches my specific needs Ability to find a unit for rent that matches my specific needs Ability to purchase a unit in a reasonable amount of time Ability to rent a unit in a reasonable amount of time Satisfied Very Satisfied Affordability of units available for purchase: N = 321 Affordability of units available for rent: N = 278 Ability to rent a unit in a reasonable amount of time: N = 264 Overall level of satisfaction with APCHA: N = 375 Value that APCHA program provides to the community: N = 384 Ability to find a unit for purchase that matches my specific needs: N = 298 Ability to purchase a unit in a reasonable amount of time: N = 296 Ability to rent a unit in a reasonable amount of time: N = 264 Ability to find a unit for rent that matches my specific needs: N = 269 Fewer residents were satisfied with the ability to rent a unit in a reasonable amount of time (21%) and the ability to purchase a unit in a reasonable amount of time (21%) •Only ¼ were satisfied with the ability to find a unit for rent that matches my specific needs (24%) and the ability to find a unit for purchase that matches my specific needs (25%) •More were satisfied with the value that APCHA program provides to the community 67 QUESTION DETAILS: In your opinion, which of the following types of affordable housing should APCHA provide? (Total: N = 432) Types of Housing APCHA Should Provide 61 INSERT TEXT HERE •INSERT BULLET HERE Section Head INSERT TEXT HERE •INSERT BULLET HERE Section Head 82% 64% 46% 38% 26% 9% 3% Workforce Housing (i.e. housing for full-time permanent and seasonal employee households) - this is a current service Community Housing (i.e. housing for permanent residents regardless of employment status; e.g. qualified APCHA retirees, low/moderate income households) - this is a current service Assisted Living Housing (for people who may require assistance with the daily tasks of living) - this would be a new service Transitional Housing (temporary, i.e. for those persons leaving an abusive situation) - this would be a new service Supportive Housing (i.e. housing for those needing ongoing social services assistance) - this would be a new service Other (please specify) None of the above Most residents wanted APCHA to provide workforce housing (82%) •Many also desired community housing (64%) •Supportive housing was least desired by residents (26%) 68 QUESTION DETAILS: When it comes to housing, which of the following issues are most important for policy makers to focus on over the next 12 months? Please select up to 5. (Total: N = 428) Most Important Housing/APCHA Issues to Focus On 62 51% 47% 42% 41% 39% 33% 30% 25% 23% 20% 11% 11% 1% Increase number of rental housing opportunities Better prevent fraud, abuse and noncompliance Increase number of for-sale housing opportunities Improve affordability Provide more options for downsizing/rightsizing Provide more options for senior/retiree housing Address insufficient HOA capital reserve funds Address deferred maintenance of individual units Improve housing quality Address deferred maintenance of HOA common areas Improve customer service Other (please specify) None of the above Most residents thought it was most important to focus on increasing the number of rental housing opportunities •Residents thought it was least important to focus on improving housing quality (23%), addressing deferred maintenance of HOA common areas (20%), and improving customer service (11%) 69 QUESTION DETAILS: Please rate your level of satisfaction with the following aspects of recreation and wellness in the Aspen community overall. Mental health services: N = 317 Healthcare: N = 400 Recreation facilities (e.g. the Aspen Recreation Center or similar facilities): N = 423 Recreation programs (e.g. fitness classes, tennis, or other activities): N = 409 Special events (e.g. concerts, marathons, etc.): N = 424 Satisfaction with Aspects of Recreation and Wellness 63 44% 46% 44% 43% 39% 38% 34% 33% 12% 9% 81% 80% 77% 55% 48% Special events (e.g. concerts, marathons, etc.) Recreation facilities (e.g. the Aspen Recreation Center or similar facilities) Recreation programs (e.g. fitness classes, tennis, or other activities) Healthcare Mental health services Satisfied Very Satisfied Demographic differences: •Younger residents (20 –34) are more satisfied with mental health services (63%) Residents were least satisfied with mental health services (48%) •Most were satisfied with special events (81%), recreation facilities (80%), and recreation programs (77%) 70 37% 36% 26% 14% 14% 12% 12% 10% 9% 9% 9% 6% 5% 3% Weight/fitness room Outdoor pool Day care space Hot tubs None (none of these should be expanded or added) Gymnasium Covered tennis courts Climbing wall Pickleball courts Indoor field house Other (please specify) Meeting/reception rooms Interactive aquatics features Batting cage QUESTION DETAILS: Which of the following would you most like to see added or expanded by the City of Aspen Recreation Department?Please select up to 3 of the choices below. BASE: (Total: N = 425) Prioritized Additions to Recreation 64 Overall, residents would most like to the addition/expansion of a weight/fitness room (37%) and outdoor pool (36%) •Residents were least interested in a batting cage (3%), interactive aquatics features (5%), and meeting/reception rooms (6%) Other/write in 71 What Hinders Participation in Recreation 65 18% 17% 16% 12% 11% 8% 6% 6% 4% Don't know what programs are offered Classes are at inconvenient times Programs are too expensive Activities I'm interested in are not offerred Poor equipment or facilities Lack of child care Programs/amenities are at multiple locations instead of one consistent location Other (please specify) Lack of transportation QUESTION DETAILS: The City of Aspen Parks and Recreation Department sponsors recreational programs for Aspen residents. Thinking of the past 12 months, which of the following, if any, have impacted your participation in these programs? BASE n = 438 classesearly/late/hours needweekends Red Brick open facilityathletes pool swimming work ARC people Never indoor tennis quality adultlike betteryoga colds / flu lanelapswim joke kid free stopped lifeguards descent trail walk Crowded Small spaces want ski hike premier pass prices lower restrictive dirty active community suitable advanced level use interested show courts limited access instructors used program Ice garden supportive curling bad time games start mobility selectionstretchgoodCost center Exercise infrequently change obsolete evenings chlorinated saltwater possible available Please add morning traffic getting Season Poor behavior cliques encouraged Pickleball Group adults hockey doesn’t involve playing Other/write in Not knowing what programs are offered (18%), classes at inconvenient times (17%), and programs being too expensive (16%) were hindering residents from participating in recreational programs 72 Trend Over Time: QUESTION DETAILS: Please share your opinions regarding the following aspects of activities in City of Aspen Parks and on City of Aspen Trails. Choose whether you would like to see less, no change, or more of each of the following. Number of special events held in City Parks and on Trails: N = 385 Amount of parks and open space: N = 417 Number of Parks and Open Space rangers in the field: N = 384 Preservation of trees in town: N = 416 Enforcement of dog-related rules and codes: N = 410 Level of overall parks and trails maintenance: N = 419 Desires with Use of Parks & Open Space •Residents want more enforcement, preservation, parks & open space, and number of rangers in the field. •Among tested factors, the biggest gap vs. desired level of support is with the enforcement of dog-related rules and codes. •Altogether, they’d prefer fewer special events in City parks. 66 9% 11% 1% 8% 29% 42% 54% 69% 63% 84% 64% 49% 35% 30% 29% 16% 7% Enforcement of dog-related rules and codes Preservation of trees in town Amount of parks and open space Number of Parks and Open Space rangers in the field Level of overall parks and trails maintenance Number of special events (weddings, large events, tournaments, etc.) held in City Parks and on Trails Demographic differences: •Older residents and parents with kids 0-5 years old are more likely to desire stronger enforcement of dog-related rules Less No Change More +40 +24 +29 +21 +16 -22 % More -% Less 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Residents have consistently desired more enforcement of dog-related rules and codes over the past 8 years Less No Change More Reference: Ideal rating is for ‘no change’ to be centered with equal amounts of ‘more’ and ‘less’ responses, netting a 0. The high net scores on the right of the chart indicate that significantly more residents desire more than desire less. 73 QUESTION DETAILS: Please rate the importance of each of the following City of Aspen Parks and Open Space amenities to you. Playgrounds: N = 412 Quiet spaces: N = 426 Recreation opportunities: N = 422 Public event space: N = 421 Open space: N = 431 Trails: N = 429 Gardens: N = 426 Fitness opportunities: N = 424 Importance of Parks/Open Space Amenities More than 9 in 10 Aspen residents claimed that trails were extremely or very important to them. Open space was important to 84% of Aspen residents. 67 37% 35% 37% 36% 36% 35% 32% 27% 55% 49% 33% 33% 25% 26% 19% 17% 92% 84% 70% 69% 61% 61% 51% 44% Trails Open space Quiet spaces Recreation opportunities Gardens Fitness opportunities Playgrounds Public event space Very Important Extremely Important Demographic differences: •Quiet spaces are more important to females and younger residents•Gardens are more important to females •Open spaces and recreation opportunities are most important to younger residents 74 68 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 75 69 Community Engagement 76 Key Drivers for Satisfaction with “Supporting Community Engagement” The City responds promptly to requests for information The City provides a variety of ways for me to stay informed I can easily access City information when I need to I find City outreach information helpful The City communicates well about major issues 35%40%45%50%55%60%65% Satisfaction/Agreement (Top 2 Box) Key Drivers for “Supporting Community Engagement” The City considers community feedback when making decisions 70 Among these “Community Engagement ” factors: •Residents feel that the city could do a better job communicating well about major issues and considering community feedback when making decisions. Both factors are impactful on satisfaction with community engagement, and less than 40% of residents are satisfied. •The variety of ways that residents can stay informed appears to be a key strength relative to these other factors. FOCUS BE AWARE MAINTAIN REINFORCE Impact on Supporting Community Engagement Satisfaction More Impact Less Impact The Details: •“Impact on [FACTOR]” was calculated using Shapley Value regression, also known as incremental R-squared analysis. •“Satisfaction/Agreement” was calculated by taking the Top 2 Box of each factor (% Satisfied + Very Satisfied OR % Agree + Strongly Agree, depending on the scale of the question). •Quadrants were created using the median for both Importance and Satisfaction/Agreement respectively. It’s important to note that the levels of “Impact on [FACTOR]” and “Satisfaction/Agreement” are relative to the factors tested. For example, a factor could be higher in satisfaction than other factors (putting it in the “Reinforce” or “Maintain” quadrant) even though only 50% of residents are satisfied. Percentages on the X-axis denote the percentage of residents who are satisfied. Some factors were not included due to multicollinearity or low R-squared with the dependent variable. 77 QUESTION DETAILS: Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the City of Aspen. I am as involved as I want to be in community activities and organizations: N = 423 The City considers community feedback when making decisions: N = 401 The City responds promptly to requests for information: N = 332 The City provides a variety of ways for me to stay informed: N = 405 I can easily access City information when I need to: N = 396 I find City outreach information helpful: N = 384 The City communicates well about major issues: N = 417 Overall, City outreach efforts meet my needs for information: N = 398 Communication, Information, & Impact of Feedback •Most residents feel the City provides helpful information in a variety of ways. •Despite this, less than half agree that their need for information is being met: Less than half agree that the City responds promptly to information requests, communicates well about major issues, or considers feedback when making decisions. 71 46% 55% 49% 47% 40% 39% 36% 32% 23% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 4% 5% 69% 61% 55% 53% 46% 43% 40% 37% I am as involved as I want to be in community activities and organizations The City provides a variety of ways for me to stay informed I find City outreach information helpful I can easily access City information when I need to The City responds promptly to requests for information Overall, City outreach efforts meet my needs for information The City communicates well about major issues The City considers community feedback when making decisions Agree Demographic differences: •Male residents, older residents, and lower income residents are less likely to agree that that the City considers community feedback when making decisions 78 QUESTION DETAILS: What are your preferred ways to receive information from the City of Aspen?Please select up to 5 of the options below. (Total: N = 435) Preferred Methods for Receiving Information The outreach methods preferred by most residents, and which would likely be effective with all age groups, included articles in the newspaper and emailed newsletters. 72 Top 5 Preferred Options Total 20-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Base 435 50 65 68 87 113 Newspaper articles 70% 75%66%65%77%72% Email newsletter 51% 51%52%48%55%53% City of Aspen website 49% 57% 58% 59% 40%32% Newspaper ads 45% 25%53%41%51%59% Text alerts 33% 34%38%50% 33%24% Mailed postcard/ flyer/letters 32% 27%24%26%30%40% Facebook posts 20% 40% 23% 27% 8%5% Open houses 19% 13%21%18%22%19% City meetings 14% 3%17% 12%11%26% Radio ads 13% 18%17%10%12%14% Aspen Community Voice website 6% 5%6%7%8%6% Twitter 3% 7%0%5%2%1% Other (please specify)2% 2%1%2%1%3% Demographic differences: •Younger residents are significantly more likely to desire that the City reach out via Facebook posts, the website and Twitter. •Younger residents are less likely to attend an open house, City meeting, or view a newspaper ad. •Older residents, on the other hand, are significantly les likely to desire outreach on Facebook, through the website, or to receive text alerts. •Older residents are significantly more likely to attend City meetings and view newspaper ads than other residents. Other responses •Age of resident yielded many differences in desired forms of outreach (see green box below) •1/3 of residents desired text alerts; Instagram & Grassroots TV were noted by some as additional preferred methods of outreach 79 QUESTION DETAILS: In your opinion, how important do you feel arts and culture are to the Aspen community? (Total: N = 433) Importance of Arts & Culture Most residents feel arts and culture are important to the Aspen community, nearly half rating arts and culture extremely important to the community. 73 Demographic differences: •Females are more likely to place an importance on arts and culture in the Aspen community Extremely Important, 44%Very Important, 34%Somewhat Important 17%Not Very Important, 4%Not at all Important, 1%80 QUESTION DETAILS: Have you been to the following places in the past 12 months? Red Brick Building: N = 427 Wheeler Opera House: N = 434 Resident Use of Red Brick Building & Wheeler Opera House Residents frequently take advantage of City cultural resources. More than 65% of respondents had visited the Red Brick Building and nearly 90% had visited the Wheeler Opera House. 74 67% 87% 33% 13% Red Brick Building Wheeler Opera House Yes No Demographic differences: •Those earning more than $150k were more likely to have been to the Wheeler Opera House (93%) •Those without children under 18 were more likely to have been to the Wheeler Opera House (90%) •Females were more likely to have been to the Red Brick Building (74%) •Those with children 0 –17 years old were more likely to have been to Red Brick Building (81%) 81 QUESTION DETAILS: For which of the following reasons have you visited the Red Brick Building over the past 12 months? (Total: N = 287) Destination Drivers to Red Brick Building 75 gymnastics art birthday partyThrift sale Community event Dept shop Joshua Johnson lawneventspicnicparties Race packet pickup Theater Perfomance watch repair meet friends Buddy Program adult classes outreach cookout Attend parks open house tot lot feedback Check-in Backcountry Marathon attended school child pass reflect telling girlfriend parents divorced sitting big tree next sidewalk Family works Kid's Drop activities Donated books bookcase Other/write in •Aspen residents utilized the Red Brick Building for a broad range of reasons in the past 12 months. More than half of residents noted that they’ve visited the Red Brick Building to view an art gallery exhibition. 82 QUESTION DETAILS: What visual arts programming should the City of Aspen expand, if any? WEIGHTED BASE: (Total: N = 313) Visual Arts Programming Desires 76 art kids programstrades trainingceramics/pottery trained red brick current studios town locals cater richvisitors support Photography Studio Coop Generation staybusy information overloadIdeasfest displays CORE Snowmass Andersen RanchValley Indoor outdoor meeting space Museum needs welcoming expanding youth options school collaboration’ tours wheelerstronger tie schools teachers love logic attend ISIS HealthclassPaint party Interactive Breckreate promote existing matter •8 out of 10 Aspen residents are interested in additional arts programs; Art classes for adults and youth were the most frequently requested programming Other/write in Other/write in 83 QUESTION DETAILS: Which of the following are true about your visit(s) to Wheeler Opera House over the past 12 months? (Total: N = 371) What types of performances or events at the Wheeler Opera House did you attend over the past 12 months? (Total: N = 340) Destination Drivers for Wheeler Opera House •About 9 out of 10 residents visited the Wheeler Opera House in the past year for a performance or event •More than half of residents who visited Wheeler Opera House bought tickets through Aspen Show Tix 77 operalectures PhysicsEnvironmentalCrossroads Church Bauahaus ball Aspen Ideas Fest Historical society master classes Ballet lecture Poetry plays talk Sunset Sessions gatherings mezzanine films Theater supportingCMC Types of Events Attended Other / Write in responses Visits to the Wheeler Opera House Past 12 Months 84 78 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 85 DEMOGRAPHICS 79 86 What is your gender? 42 who said «prefer not to answer» removed have been removed (N=401) Demographics 80 52%48% Gender 20-34 26% 35-44 18% 45-54 20% 55-64 14% 65+ 22% Age What is your current age? 60 who said «prefer not to answer» removed have been removed (N=401) 40%25%18%18% Household Income Less than $50k $50k - $100k $100k - $150k More than $150k Which of the following best describes your household income level? (this would include the total income from all sources for your household). 92 who said «prefer not to answer» have been removed (N=351) In which of the following age ranges (if any) do you have children? 11 who said «prefer not to answer have been removed (N=383) 22% 12% 12% 50% Age/Presence of Children 18 or older 6 to 17 0 to 5 No children 4%7% 89% Months of the Year Living in Aspen 6 months or less 7-11 monhts 12 months About how many months out of the year, if any, do you live in Aspen?19 who said «prefer not to answer have been removed (N=424) 3%17%16%10%9% 45% 1st year 2 - 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 - 15 years 16 - 20 years 20+ years Longevity of Residing in Aspen For how long have you been living [pipe: D4] out of the year in Aspen? 22 who said «prefer not to answer» have been removed (N=421) 2% 74% 15% 19% I own a 2nd home in Aspen (vacation home, rental property, etc.) I work in Aspen I own a business in Aspen None of these apply to me % Survey Takers Who Work, Own a Businesses, and Own Vacation Homes Finally, please check each of the following that apply to you: (N=431) Please note: percentages represent the weighted population of survey responses. Aspen Census norms were applied to age, gender and income. Note: Data was weighted to Aspen Census norms for gender, age and income to ensure responses reflect population at large. These norms were derived from the American Community Survey 2017 5-year estimates. See Appendix for full comparison of responses vs. weighted values and method utilized. 87 QUESTION DETAILS: Would you like to be kept informed and participate in discussions about key community topics? If so, please select the first option below (the next screen will prompt you for your name, phone number and email address).Please note: your name and contact information will be provided to the City. HOWEVER, they will not see your survey results, simply that you are interested in participating in specific discussions so that they can reach out. (Total: N = 431) Below are 7 key areas where you can be kept informed and participate in discussions about key community topics. Which areas would you be most interested in?Please select up to 3. WEIGHTED BASE: (Total: N = 267) Community Engagement 81 62% 38% Interested in Staying Informed in Community Topics I would like to stay informed and participate in discussions about key community topics I would NOT like to stay informed and participate in discussions about key community topics 3% 29% 70% 19% 14% 24% 28% 58% None of these interest me (I would not like to be kept informed or participate in discussions about these… Supporting community engagement Making Aspen a livable community of choice Ensuring a safe community Maintaining City of Aspen's financial health Fostering economic vitality Making the government customer-focused Protecting the local natural environment Among residents who wanted to stay informed - proportion interested in key community topics: 88 82 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 89 Note: See APPENDIX for full/verbatim suggestions. COMMENT CATEGORY ARCHITECTURE 83 90 Suggestions for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play 84 More Affordable Housing –30% •Need more affordable housing •Need larger units/ family-sized •Need more employee housing •Don't evict seniors when retire from City housing •Raise taxes on prop owners that don't live in Aspen •Reduce HOA charges •Transition seniors to retirement community (create this) •Provide option of waving property taxes for 2 years to encourage senior transition •Provide seniors incentives to move to acceptable area Stop/Lessen/Pace Development –16% •General stop/lessen/pace development •Stop/lessen projects like sky hotel and Lift One •Other limit residential construction •Don't allow tearing down buildings with character / historic buildings •Watch out for money laundering operations •Monitor/limit construction decibel levels •Cut construction vehicles •Reduce high end retail/penthouses •City shouldn't be housing developers •Require more housing mitigation for commercial developments •Don't allow large homes to be converted to lodging for non-residents •No residential development outside roundabout •Don't become owned by the ski company •Don't allow developers to bring spec houses •Minimize pop up shops that compete with existing Responses in each category are sorted by frequency cited Other / General Affordability –19% •Need more affordable shopping options •Need more affordable restaurants •Make Aspen affordable for working & middle class •Higher wages/keep pace with Cost of living •Make Aspen affordable for retired people •Need more affordable gas Leadership / Management / Budget –18% •Cater to locals (vs. visitors or wealthy) •Cater to those earning under 50K •Listen to residents before acting •Reduce budget / spend less / less taxes •Like City manager idea / new leadership •More budget experience, business experience •Have a clear vision for future •Need a watchdog / oversight •Play by the rules you enforce •Change specific leaders •Consider history/cultures/values with decisions •Ensure City can afford the actions it takes •Need new people on City boards •Tax weed, use revenue for local needs •Pay more attention to visitors and second homeowners vs. locals •Don't disdain tourists and second homeowners •Cater to families •Adapt to new ideas/trends •Collaborate with entire valley •Less bias with feedback / survey •Stop advertising and encouraging growth •Spend efficiently, provide value •Adjust voting system so AH residents don't control vote •Less employees •Be friendly •Keep improving / don't settle Change Development –14% •Commercial rent control/ more affordable for locals, mom/pops •Don't lose independent businesses/local services for profit -help them stay •Faster/less complex planning and zoning •Build second bridge over Castle Creek •Need faster building permits •Facilitate natural growth •Allow residents to VRBO homes if they're on vacation •General encourage free-market commercial development •Need consistent interpretation of codes •Ensure use setbacks downtown so sun can reach street •Create vacancy tax for year-round store fronts & residents •Ensure opportunities for locals to invest in City •Less zoning restrictions •More planning/zoning throughout •Shift development to outside the roundabout •Consider tiny homes for deed restricted housing •Manage VRBOs better •Develop neighborhooding approach / kid-centric, pet-centric •Stricter remodeling permits •Subsidize hostel-like accommodations •Expand the core –more family-fun areas in the core QUESTION DETAILS: Overall, what suggestions do you have for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play? (Total: N = 272) 91 QUESTION DETAILS: Overall, what suggestions do you have for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play? (Total: N = 272) Suggestions for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play 85 Address Traffic / Congestion –11% •General traffic / congestion •Address 82 traffic, consider 4-lanes into / out of Aspen •Address commuter traffic -in/out of town •Get rid of S curve •Add straight shot across/ consider Marolt open space •Improve/Get rid of roundabout •Add a lane to access Airport Business Center •Other Incentivize ride share options + park & ride options •Add 4-way stop at all intersection in the core •Allow taxi, uber, shuttles to use 2nd lane of 82 •Incentives for retail workers –don’t commute past intercept lot •Lottery system for people to drive kids to school •Close City core to cars / from City hall to paradise bakery •Less bike racks in the street •Remove RFTAs lane in town, adding a second public lane •Never allow straight shot •Use highway cone & old bridge for two ways in AM and out PM Enforce Laws / Maintain Order –11% •Enforce dog poop laws / fine residents and visitors •Enforce traffic laws -speeders, stop signs •General enforce leash laws •Ensure bicyclists obey traffic laws •Be more strict about drugs / minimize pot shops •More police presence at mall / reduce purse snatching at mall •Enforce clearing sidewalks / snow removal •Ensure pedestrians follow walk/don't walk •Other General -more enforcement of laws •Enforce idling law •Enforce loose dogs/bikes/skateboards at mall and on sidewalks •Enforce/punish littering •General -less enforcement/regulations •Enforce compliance with housing occupancy rules •Keep bikes off sidewalks •Add a youth curfew •More jail time for offenders •Close bars at midnight •More rangers watching of off leash dogs on trails •Stop wearing bullet-proof vests •Require bikes and e-bikes to have bells •Ensure drivers stop when bikes are crossing •Enforce parking regulations •Enforce speed in neighborhoods / speed bumps •Prohibit parking on land / reclaim City property •Enforce parking regulations always (not just with complaints) •More police surveillance at night Change APCHA / Affordable Housing –7% •Address fraud / ensure those living deserve to be there •Improve quality of housing for purchase •Reduce the scope of affordable housing program •More accountability to developers for affordable housing •Reduce FAR limits on single-family residences •Help with transition to free market or RO housing •Be more accommodating / less tyrannical within APCHA •Change messaging -not us vs. them, not a handout •Ensure HOAs are adequately funded •Clean up the affordable housing •Refocus on policies that matter vs. minimum income goal •Update lottery approach for those who never win - increase likelihood •No discrimination •Make GMQS compliant / not favor residents Parking Desires –6% •Add parking garage in town / underground garage in town •Add parking in the core •Provide free parking in spring and fall (off seasons) •Require construction employees to carpool, bus, or shuttle •Make construction companies pay for resident parking during projects •Improve parking lots; paint lines •Change to 24-hour parking on vine street •Move to parallel parking in core for wider sidewalks •Address parking in B zoned area •Store City-owned vehicles off the street •Improve City market parking / 30-minute parking •More parking at trailheads / Smuggler trailhead Community Engagement –5% •Respond faster •Keep open discourse between leaders & residents •Be transparent / begin community outreach earlier with developments •Help us contribute to the community •Don't allow vocal few to represent all •Share accurate info so less reliant on biased newspapers •Develop innovative ways to encourage communication •Provide affordable/accessible arts & rec options •P&Z members should be honest about decisions, share with plenty of time •Ice cream socials with police at skate park •Continue asking/surveys •Engage Latino community •Improve OTA TV Broadcast to inform citizens/public Responses in each category are sorted by frequency cited 92 Suggestions for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play 86 Childcare / Daycare –4% •Need affordable childcare within City limits •Newborn childcare •Encourage leading employers to create a childcare complex •Need childcare for off hours, holidays, night shifts Public Transportation –5% •Less busses -drop empty routes •Improve bus stops -covers, bike racks •Add energy efficient microbuses instead of large RFTA buses •Express shuttles to /from large lots outside roundabout •Maintain good/free bus service •Avoid electric scooters -too crowded •Support mass transit all the way into town Desired Services / Resources –3% •Need bigger airport with more long-term parking •Say no to 5G •Need DMV •Help refurbish district theater •More weightlifting at rec center •Extended hunting seasons for predator species •Support library more •Add RV dump station Events / Hosting -Less –3% •Less events -general •Drop food/wine event in Wagner Park •Share the event profits with residents •More police/control Parks / Open Spaces –4% •Keep parks/spaces very clean, fix water fountains •More porta potties for visitors •Continue to expand green spaces/trails •Fix parks / playground (Ruby Park, basketball, skate park) •Use more native/natural elements •Upgrade park -lose asphalt, trim trees •More park benches •Limit private use of public parks •Consider City owned campground like Telluride Town Park •Keep vehicles off land •Don't close so long for private events •Add trees to Rio Grande; don't cut down trees •Encourage use of Ice Garden •Need dog park Road Maintenance –2% •Snow/ice off streets/sidewalks •Better road sign visibility •Address black ice •Fix potholes •Wash/clean the streets -use dry street cleaner or water •Fix handicap curbs •Repair fences •Bicycle lanes are confusing/clarify Biking Preferences –3% •Better path from town to Aspen Rec center •Less focus on biking •Add fatbikes and e-bikes to Wecycle program; more docking stations •Has helped commute •Desire more biking paths •Add secure parking for bicycles •Education and etiquette for biking Security / Safety –2% •Protect residents from mold •More/better street number visibility on residences and businesses •Add lights to public walkways at night to enable walking home from work •Develop detailed evacuation plan •Need safety/security at Stillwater bridge -jumping & recreation Responses in each category are sorted by frequency cited QUESTION DETAILS: Overall, what suggestions do you have for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play? (Total: N = 272) 93 THANK YOU Office (719) 590 –9999 info@elevatedinsights.com Elevated Insights is a full-service market research agency headquartered in Colorado Springs that provides qualitative and quantitative research, evaluation, and data mining for both the private and public sectors. EI prepared this report under contract to and in collaboration with the City of Aspen. Over the past five years, Elevated Insights has focused on utilizing impactful research solutions to make a difference in the state of Colorado, partnering with multiple government, non-profit, and educational organizations. Note: Elevated Insights is a dba for Balch Consulting, a 100% female-owned S-Corp registered in the state of Colorado since 2000. 94 88 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 95 Page | 1 • • 96 Page | 2 • • • • 97 Page | 3 • • • 98 Page | 4 • 99 1 Attachment A: Examples of Benchmarking “Report Cards” from Other Cities Denver, CO......................................................................................................................................2 Philadelphia, PA..............................................................................................................................3 Seattle, WA.......................................................................................................................................5 100 2 Denver, CO 101 3 Philadelphia, PA 102 4 Philadelphia, PA (continued) 103 5 Seattle, WA 104 6 Seattle, WA (continued) 105 7 106 Engagement Goal Progress A key component of Building IQ is to hear from the community and integrate input into the design of the ordinance. This document is a midway report to show how the project's public engagement is tracking against initial goals, what the community has contributed thus far, and how the project team will continue to engage for deeper input. PROGRESS: One-on-one in-person meetings with 65% of program participants. PROGRESS: 2 committee meetings; 55% of program participants in attendance. All 4 topics covered. GOAL: Digital and in- person outreach campaign. PROGRESS: Direct communications to 100% of program participants, conversation with 85%. GOAL: Build and maintain a digital resource for the public. For fall 2019 engagement, the program participants refer to representatives of commercial buildings 20,000 square feet and above. GOAL: Meet with 75% of program participants. PROGRESS: Aspen Community Voice has 233 unique visitors and 37 engaged visitors. Program Participants Stakeholders As this project is still in its early stages, many stakeholders will begin to participate in 2020. This is a summary of currently engaged stakeholders and those who will be involved before an ordinance is presented to Council. Utilities & City Currently Engaged Will be Invited to Engage in 2020 Building owners/managers of: -The Gant -Aspen Meadows -Aspen Art Museum -Mill Street Plaza -Puppy Smith -SkiCo Properties (4) -Alpine Bank -Maroon Creek Club -Hotel Jerome -St. Regis -City Council -City Staff -All Utilities -Asset Management Dept One-on-One Meetings Stakeholder Steering Committee Outreach Campaign Online Engagement -Aspen Chamber Resort Association(ACRA) -Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) -Historical Preservation Commission (HPC) Community Organizations Public Engagement UpdateKnow Your Building. Know Your Power. Community Organizations -US Green Building Council (USGBC) -Aspen Institute -Setterfield & Bright Program Participants -Multifamily building owners & managers -Homeowners associations boards & management -Commercial tenants -Multifamily tenants -Large commercial building owners & managers of under 20,000 sq.ft. -Business owners -Large commercial building owners & managers of 20,000 sq. ft. and over who have not yet participated GOAL: 3 committee meetings covering 4 initial input topics. 107 Initial Impressions Community Organizations Currently Engaged Invited to Engage in 2020 -Pitkin County -Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) -Aspen Skiing Company -Aspen Valley Hospital -Aspen School District -Town of Basalt -Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) -Alpine Bank -Aspen Global Change Institute (AGCI) -Aspen Center for Environmental Studies (ACES) -Pyramid Advisors -Commercial Core & Lodging Association(CCLC) Stakeholder Steering Committee Interest All program participants who met with staff in person expressed interest in steering committee participation. Current Efficiency Improvement Motivators Stakeholders confirmed that efficiency upgrades are generally driven by profitability and an established replacement schedule. Factors like durability, decreased maintenance, and environmental leadership are also compelling drivers to some. Energy & Water Tracking as a Best Practice Tracking energy and water consumption is standard and does not present a significant obstacle. The majority of the steering committee would be ready to benchmark in 2021. Most voted for a spring reporting deadline. April is the favored month. Stakeholders encouraged test cases on municipal and commercial buildings so that early insights can be shared. Lead by Example Incentives for Improvements Creating motivating incentives is crucial in designing any form of required energy efficiency improvements or upgrades. Incentives supported include grants and rebates. Public Engagement UpdateKnow Your Building. Know Your Power. Barriers to Benchmark The most common barriers sited were data privacy, time (to benchmark), complex or unusual meter configurations and understanding how to request information from utilities. Building Sector Workforce -Environmentalists -Business community -Interested public Community Organizations -Colorado Mountain College (CMC) -Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) -Pitkin County Airport -Aspen Lodging Association (ALA) Aspen Public -General contractors -Electricians -Energy performance experts -HVAC contractors -Building engineers -Energy Auditors 108 Stay Engaged What Comes Next? 2 Community Info Sessions Get in touch with Laura Armstrong, Sustainability Programs Administrator at 970-920-5104 or laura.armstrong@cityofaspen.com Visit AspenCommunityVoice.com to give input and sign up for project updates Attend an upcoming engagement opportunity 1. 2. 3. In the first few months of 2020, the Building IQ team will focus on continuing the relationships and feedback channels established with key stakeholders and expanding reach to the building workforce, more community organizations, and the Aspen public. The stars on this timeline indicate opportunities for engagement when Aspen City Council is welcome to attend and hear firsthand community insights on the project. The engagement in 2020 will also include conversations on beyond benchmarking energy efficiency improvements, introducing a new and important element of the policy into discussion with the community. ASPEN COMMUNITY Program Participant 1:1 Meetings 2 Stakeholder Steering Meetings Community Org Meetings Public Engagement Update 1 Public Engagement Update 2 Final Public Engagement Report Council Work Session Council Work Session Council Ordinance Readings 2-3 Stakeholder Steering Meetings ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES CITY OF ASPEN 1-3 Workforce Meetings WE ARE HERE Public Engagement UpdateKnow Your Building. Know Your Power. Data Disclosure to the Public Significant concern was expressed regarding detailed energy and water usage becoming public. Some concerns included not seeing the community value of publicizing the information and the potential for competitors to use it against one another. There were many initial questions raised about how to ensure buildings are compared to other buildings fairly. Over time, managers understood that Portfolio Manager normalizes for weather, occupancy, use-type, and operational specifics. Building Comparisons Preferred Support Stakeholders largely preferred online how-to documents and videos, coupled with email and chat benchmarking support. Phone assistance leading up to a reporting deadline was also mentioned as helpful, specifically to assist in setting up an account and understanding Portfolio Manager. FALL 2019 DECEMBER 9, 2019 2020 Refers to opportunities for Aspen City Council to participate in engagement. 109 ASPEN COMMUNITY 2 Community Info Sessions 2 Stakeholder Steering Mtgs WE ARE HERE Program Participant 1:1 Mtgs 2 Stakeholder Steering Mtgs Community Org Mtgs Public Engagement Update 1 Public Engagement Update 2 Final Public Engagement Report Council Work Session Council Work Session Council Ordinance Readings ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES CITY OF ASPEN 1-3 Workforce Meetings December 9, 2019 2020fall 2019 Refers to opportunities for Aspen City Council to participate in engagement. 110 Program Participant 1:1 Meetings Stakeholder Steering Committee Community Organization Meetings Workforce Meetings Community Information Sessions Final Public Engagement Report One-on-one meetings with large commercial and multi-family building representatives to explain Building IQ, understand their concerns and values, and invite them to continue to participate in the public engagement process. The stakeholders approached for one on one meetings are also invited to participate in an ongoing stakeholder steering committee formed to advise the project team on elements of the ordinance. The Building IQ team has contacted community organizations across Aspen and throughout the Roaring Fork Valley who would be interested in or impacted by the policy and program. All the input, techniques used, metrics, and insights gained during this public engagement process will be analyzed and synthesized into a comprehensive report for Council. This report will be delivered prior to the Council Ordinance Readings in 2020. Community members working in the building sector will be invited to attend a series of meetings to explain Building IQ and receive input on specific elements. These will be publicly noticed, all Council members welcome to attend. These meetings will take place in 2020. Community Information Sessions are for anyone who is interested in learning more about Building IQ. We will explain Building IQ, collect input, and answer questions.These will be publicly noticed, all Council members welcome to attend. The sessions will take place in 2020. 111