APPENDIX B: CITIZEN SURVEY

Similar documents
PUBLIC SURVEY FOR HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING

Appendix C Community Hazards Public Survey

SOUTH CENTRAL REGION MULTI-JURISDICTION HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN. Advisory Committee Meeting September 12, 2012

APPENDIX D PLANNING PROCESS DOCUMENTATION

in coordination with Peoria County, Planning and Zoning Department

Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Kankakee County, Illinois Executive Summary

Q1 Do you...(check all that apply).

Village of Blue Mounds Annex

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE MEETINGS

Dade County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

Hillsborough County Local Mitigation Strategy and the Community Rating System

PUBLIC AWARENESS SURVEY. Prepared by Cocker Fennessy, Inc.

Town of Montrose Annex

Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Data Collection Questionnaire. For Local Governments

COMMUNITY SUMMARY LINN COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN CITY OF LISBON

COMMUNITY SUMMARY LINN COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN CITY OF CENTRAL CITY

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

Stoddard County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan-Five Year Update SECTION 3

Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Data Collection Questionnaire. For School Districts and Educational Institutions

Osceola County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Part 3 - Mitigation Strategy

This survey is expected to take approximately 20 minutes and must be completed in one session.

Basic Wind & Winter Storm Emergency Preparedness

This survey is expected to take approximately 20 minutes and must be completed in one session.

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

SECTION 6 - RANGE OF ALTERNATIVE MITIGATION ACTIONS CONSIDERED

1. Do you make advanced preparations for hurricane season or severe weather? FL GA IL IA MI MN NE ND TN WI Base (n=)

Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. Executive Summary

Hazard Mitigation Planning

Section 2. Introduction and Purpose of the LMS

Mitigation Action Plan Alamance County

Planning Process---Requirement 201.6(b): An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan.

REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA

Northern Kentucky University 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan. Public Kick-Off Meeting March 20, 2018

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

9.2 ALBURTIS BOROUGH. This section presents the jurisdictional annex for Alburtis Borough. A. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT

G318 Local Mitigation Planning Workshop. Module 2: Risk Assessment. Visual 2.0

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT. MUNICIPAL PROFILE

Planning Process---Requirement 201.6(b): An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan.

Dunklin County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan-Five Year Update SECTION 3

Florida Department of Community Affairs & Regional Planning Councils of Florida STATEWIDE EVACUATION STUDY: East Central Report

On Page 4, following the Planning Process subsection, insert the following: 2012 Committee members included:

Community Disaster Preparedness Index

Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-Year Update Progress Report Chippewa County Taskforce Committee January 29, 2013

9.46 NAZARETH BOROUGH

APPENDIX H TOWN OF FARMVILLE. Hazard Rankings. Status of Mitigation Actions. Building Permit Data. Future Land Use Map. Critical Facilities Map

Implementing risk-based asset management strategies

Natural Hazards Risks in Kentucky. KAMM Regional Training

ANNEX B: TOWN OF BLUE RIVER

Truckloads (at 25 tons/truck) of building debris 90

9.8 FOUNTAIN HILL BOROUGH

9.35 VILLAGE OF TULLY

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

Disaster Preparedness Information

Role of Disaster Insurance in Improving Resilience: An Expert Meeting The Resilient America Roundtable

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

APPENDIX E: PLANNING PROCESS DOCUMENTATION

DeSoto Parish Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Kick-off Meeting. February 16, 2016 Grand Cane, LA

SECTION 6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

Somerset County Mitigation Plan Update

CHAPTER THREE Natural Hazard Mitigation Strategy

APPENDIX A: PLANNING PROCESS DOCUMENTATION

SUMMARY NOTES OF THE FEBRUARY 13, 2018 MEETING OF THE OZAUKEE COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN LOCAL PLANNING TEAM

Appendix F: Ozark special Road District Addendum

CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Delaware River Basin Commission s Role in Flood Loss Reduction Efforts

Garfield County NHMP:

Morristown, TN Supplemental Online Survey Results

9.51 PLAINFIELD TOWNSHIP

RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the Signal Hill Safety Element was last updated in 1986; and

Appendix E: Mitigation Action Worksheet Template

1 Rare Hazard event is not likely to occur within 100 years. 2 Occasional Hazard event is likely to occur within 100 years

Emergency Preparedness and Protection of Field Equipment. DPLE 280 September 7, 2016

9.36 TOWN OF VAN BUREN

OPTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION

Hazard Mitigation Plan Planning Perspective

Community Resilience & NFIP s Community Rating system

David A. Stroud, CFM AMEC Earth & Environmental Raleigh, NC

New Braunfels, TX. Technical Appendices DRAFT 2017

9.4 VILLAGE OF CAMILLUS

Section II: Vulnerability Assessment and Mitigation

9.12 VILLAGE OF FABIUS

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

The Emerging Importance of Improving Resilience to Hazards. Presentation to: West Michigan Sustainable Business Forum November 14, 2016 Dale Sands

A Flood Mitigation Plan for the Non-Tidal N.J. Section of the Delaware River Basin. Warren County Planning Workshop (2 nd Meeting) March 7, 2007

9.10 HEIDELBERG TOWNSHIP

ANNEX F REQUIRED PLANNING DOCUMENTATION CHATHAM COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION PRE-DISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN DECEMBER 2015

SECTION VI IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT MUNICIPAL PROFILE

9.11 BUSHKILL TOWNSHIP

Marist College Institute for Public Opinion Poughkeepsie, NY Phone Fax

Sioux County, Iowa. Mitigation Plan

Authors: Terry Zien, Brian Rast and the Silver Jackets Co presenters: Brian Rast, Dave Lupardus and Frank Dolan

Bradley County Hazard Mitigation Plan

Volume 3-3. North Central Florida Region Regional Behavioral Survey Report

Skagit County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan

Name Title/ Department Address Telephone Fax

Transcription:

APPENDIX B: CITIZEN SURVEY B1

CONVERSE COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN SURVEY March 30, 2011 Prepared for: Converse County Emergency Management Agency Prepared by: Ken Markert, AICP MMI Planning Cody, WY.

Converse County Hazard Plan Survey INTRODUCTION The Converse County Hazard Mitigation Plan Survey is part of a larger effort to update the Hazard Mitigation Plan for Converse County and its four incorporated municipalities. The survey was conducted to understand opinions of citizens residing in Converse County about natural hazards and specific mitigation actions. The results of the survey will be used in updating the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Diena Bulman from the Converse County Emergency Management Office prepared and mailed all survey materials. The surveys were returned to and collected by the Emergency Management Office. The consulting team wishes to acknowledge this contribution as critical to the success of the survey. SURVEY METHODS The survey was a sample survey. A sample consisting of 221 registered voters was randomly drawn from the Converse County voter rolls. The sample constituted 4% of the total number of voters residing in the county (5,546). The survey process began on February 14, 2011. To start, the 221 voters were each sent a postcard advising of their inclusion in the survey and requesting their participation. Eight days later, the survey questionnaire was sent to the sample list. Along with the questionnaire, voters were sent a cover letter explaining the survey. Two weeks into the process, a reminder postcard was sent to every individual in the sample. The survey was then closed on March 23, 2011 and responses received after this date were not included. During the process, a number of mailings were returned by the Post Office as undeliverable. Consequently, 11 voters were eliminated from the sample and the final sample size was 210 voters. At the close of this survey, out of the total of 210 delivered surveys, 97 surveys were completed and returned. SURVEY ACCURACY The purpose of a sample survey is to make generalizations about a population based on a scientifically selected subset of that population. A sample survey allows us to understand the views of the entire county by communicating with only a sample of the people in the county. If conducted properly, sample survey results can accurately represent the views of all people in the county. This survey was designed to achieve an accuracy level of +/- 10%. This means that the results from the sample of voters have a 95% probability of being within 10% of the answers that all voters would give. For example, if 65% of the survey respondents said "yes" as the answer to a question then it is highly probable (95% chance) that between 55% and 75% (+ or - 10%) of all voters would have also answered "yes". For the Converse County Survey, achieving this level of accuracy is dependent on receiving at least 95 responses. Because 97 survey questionnaires were completed and returned, the survey has met this accuracy goal. 1

How representative the survey results are is also affected by the survey response rate. The response rate is the percentage of the surveys that are completed and returned. As a general rule, when the response rate reaches 50% "self-selection bias" is not a concern. Self-selection bias is where the survey respondents are not representative of the entire population and have biased the survey results in one way or another. In mailed surveys with low response rates such as 10%, self-selection bias is almost certain. In the Converse County survey, the response rate was 46%, not quite reaching the 50% goal, and indicating that the survey sample has a small risk of not representing the whole population. SURVEY QUESTIONS The questions asked in the survey were developed by the hazard mitigation consultants with input from the Emergency Management Agency staff. The questions were multiple choice with most having "other" as an open-ended answer choice. This allowed survey respondents to write-in their own answer. The full text of the survey appears at the end of this report. SURVEY RESULTS Survey results are presented beginning on the next page. The results are mostly reported as percentages. The percentages represent the percent of 97 surveys that were returned. For example, 52% equals 50 survey responses. In questions where more than one answer could have been selected, the percentages are again based on the 97 returned surveys. In other words, if respondents could select answers "A" or "B" or both, the results will show the percent of the 97 respondents that picked "A" either alone or combined with the other answer. So if 33 respondents answered "A" and 17 more answered "A and B", the result for answer "A" is shown as 52% (33+17 97). 2

Question #1 Respondent s Location The first question asked survey respondents to indicate where they live: in Douglas, Glenrock, Lost Springs, Rolling Hills, or in Converse County outside of a town or city. Most respondents (36) indicated that they live in Douglas. The unincorporated county area was the next most common answer with 35 and Glenrock third with 17 responses. Two responses were received from Rolling Hills and none from Lost Springs. Location of Respondents Unincorporated County 35 Douglas 41 Glenrock 19 Lost Springs 0 Rolling Hills 2 0 10 20 30 40 50 Number of Returned Surveys The location of respondents is roughly comparable to the U.S. Census Bureau s 2009 population estimates. The percentage of respondents from the unincorporated county is slightly higher than the estimated percentage of residents that reside in the unincorporated county. 2009 Population Population Percent Survey Responses Douglas 6,212 40% 42% Glenrock 2,466 16% 20% Lost Springs 1 0% 0% Rolling Hills 512 3% 2% Unincorporated County 4,387 28% 36% 3

Question #2 Preparations This question asked respondents to indicate which steps their household has taken to prepare for hazard events. The most common response was "stored a flashlight and batteries" which 79% of respondents said they had done. In addition, more than half of all respondents said they had: stored medical supplies, received first aid/cpr training, stored a fire extinguisher, and identified utility shutoffs. Other preparation were employed by less than half of the respondents. Preparations for Hazard Events Flashlight Medical supplies First aid training Fire Extinquisher Utility Shut offs Food & water Fire escape plan Radio Meeting place Supply kit CERT training No Response Other Flood Insurance 6% 6% 5% 5% 14% 65% 60% 59% 56% 47% 39% 37% 33% 79% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Percent of respondents selecting each answer 4

Question #3 Confidence about Hazard Events This question asked respondents how confident they are that their household would know what to do in a natural or man-made hazard event. Most respondents (74%) indicated that they are somewhat confident in their household s ability to deal with hazard events, while only (16%) said they were "very confident". On the other hand, 7% of respondents said they were "not confident" that their household would know what to do in a hazard event. Confidence about Hazard Events Very confident 16% Somewhat confident 74% Not confident 7% No Response 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent of respondents selecting each answer 5

Question #4 Concern about Specific Hazards This question asked respondents to review a list of different hazards and rate each in terms of how concerned they are about the specific hazard. Answer choices were "not concerned", "somewhat concerned", and "very concerned." The results are shown on the next page. To evaluate the responses, the results are sorted based on how many people answered either "somewhat concerned" or "very concerned". This combined result is shown in the far right column of the table on the next page. The hazards are sorted from highest to lowest in terms of this combined result. The results indicated that "hail", "severe winter storms", "wind storms", "wildfire", and "tornados" are the top concerns each identified by 78% or more of the respondents. Lesser concerns were "drought", "earthquakes", and "hazardous material spills" were the next highest grouping with more than half of all respondents indicating concern about each of these hazards. The hazards with the lowest indication of concern were "dam failure", "flood", "landslide", and "land subsidence". It should be noted that some hazards such as landslides and dam failures may be location-specific and would not likely be a major concern of every resident. Other hazards, such as winter storms and earthquakes could affect any or all areas of the county. Some hazards with low indications of concern at the countywide scale could potentially be of much higher concern to people in specific, vulnerable locations. 6

Level of Concern about Specific Hazards Very Concerned Somewhat Concerned Not Concerned No Response Very & Somewhat Concerned Hail 26% 63% 9% 2% 89% Winter storm 37% 49% 13% 0% 87% Wind storm 29% 54% 18% 0% 82% Wildfire 31% 49% 20% 0% 80% Tornado 19% 60% 22% 0% 78% Drought 12% 55% 27% 6% 67% Earthquake 6% 47% 42% 4% 54% Haz mat spill 10% 42% 44% 3% 53% Flood 11% 33% 53% 3% 44% Landslide 5% 27% 55% 13% 32% Dam failure 5% 18% 74% 3% 23% Land Subsidence 0% 6% 89% 5% 6% 7

Question #5 Receiving Disaster Information This question asked people which means they would use to receive information during a disaster. Most people indicated that they would use television, telephone, and radio. All other methods of getting information were significantly less important. More than half of all respondents (65%) said they would get information by siren warning; directly from police or firemen (63%); and by word of mouth (51%). Regarding other means, less than half of respondents said they would get information by: off the Internet (36%); from newspapers (35%); at their workplace (31%); by email notices (24%); and by Reverse 911 (23%). Survey respondents rarely selected some newer methods of communication, such as Facebook (12%), Amateur radio (5%), and Twitter (3%). It should be noted that most respondents selected more than one answer to this question. This indicates that most people would expect to receive information during a disaster by more than one method. Several people indicated that the different siren signals need to be better explained. Means of Receiving Disaster Information Telephone Television Radio Siren Police/firemen Word of mouth Internet Newspaper Workplace Email notice Reverse 911 Facebook Amateur Radio Twitter Other No Response 5% 3% 1% 0% 12% 36% 35% 31% 24% 23% 51% 65% 63% 78% 77% 89% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Percent of respondents selecting each answer 8

Question 6 - Mitigation Actions This question asked respondents to review a range of actions that their community could undertake to reduce the risk from natural hazards. Respondents could rate each action as "very important", "somewhat important", or "not important". The results are sorted in the table below based on most important to least important. "Emergency services" and "public education" were the most preferred types of actions while "property protection" was the least popular action choice. The actions were defined in the survey as follows: Emergency Services: Examples include warning systems, evacuation planning, emergency response training, and protection of critical emergency facilities or systems. Public Education and Awareness: Actions to inform citizens about hazards and techniques they can use to protect themselves and their property. Structural Projects: Examples include dams, levees, detention/retention basins, channel modification, retaining walls, and storm sewers. Natural Resource Protection: Examples include floodplain protection, slope stabilization, and forest management. Prevention: Actions to influence land and building development. Examples include planning and zoning, building codes, and floodplain regulations. Property Protection: Actions involving existing buildings to reduce hazard risk. Examples include acquisition, relocation, elevation, and structural retrofits. Importance of Types of Mitigation Actions Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important No Response Emergency services 80% 15% 3% 1% Education 74% 22% 3% 1% Structural projects 47% 33% 15% 4% Natural resource protection 49% 36% 11% 3% Prevention 38% 41% 13% 7% Property Protection 23% 42% 26% 9% 9

Question 7 - More Information Wanted This question was the last question on the survey form. It asked respondents to identify hazards about which the respondent would like to receive more information. Respondents could pick more than one answer and usually did. These results may indicate the most productive topics for public education efforts. More than half (52%) indicated they would like more information about "severe winter storms". More than one-third want more information about "wind storms", "tornados", and "wildfire". Less than a third of respondents want additional information about the other hazards. A significant number of respondents (21%) did not select any answer, indicating they do not want any additional information. More Information Wanted Winter storm 52% Wind storm Tornado Wildfire 39% 42% 46% Earthquake Hazardous materials Hail Flood Drought No Response Land Subsidence 31% 30% 30% 26% 25% 21% 18% Dam failure 10% Landslide Other 0% 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Percent of respondents selecting each answer 10

SURVEY QUESTIONS Below is the exact wording of the seven questions asked in the survey. 1. Where do you live? (Please check one answer only.) In Douglas In Rolling Hills In Glenrock In Lost Springs In Converse County not in a town or city 2. Which of the following steps has your household taken to prepare for a natural hazard event? (Please check all that apply.) Received first aid/cpr training Made a fire escape plan Designated a meeting place Identified utility shutoffs Received Community Emergency Response Training Prepared a disaster supply kit Purchased flood insurance Stored food and water Stored flashlights and batteries Stored a battery-powered radio Stored a fire extinguisher Stored medical supplies (first aid kit, medications) Other: 3. How confident are you that your household would know what to do in a natural or manmade hazard event? (Please check one answer only.) Not at all confident Somewhat confident Very confident 11

4. How concerned are you about the following hazards to your home, business, and neighborhood? Please indicate whether you are NOT concerned, SOMEWHAT concerned, or VERY concerned. (Please circle one answer for each hazard or leave it blank if you don't know.) Dam failure.................... Not Somewhat Very Drought...................... Not Somewhat Very Earthquake................... Not Somewhat Very Flood........................ Not Somewhat Very Hail......................... Not Somewhat Very Hazardous materials spill......... Not Somewhat Very Land subsidence............... Not Somewhat Very Landslide.................... Not Somewhat Very Severe winter storm............ Not Somewhat Very Tornado..................... Not Somewhat Very Wind storm................... Not Somewhat Very Wildfire...................... Not Somewhat Very Other: Not Somewhat Very 5. Which of the following methods would help you receive information during a disaster? (Check all that apply.) Television Radio Amateur radio Telephone or cell phone Siren system At your workplace Internet Reverse 911 (Code Red) Facebook posting Twitter feeds Newspaper Email notice Directly from police/fire personnel By word of mouth Other: 12

6. A number of activities can reduce our risk from natural hazards. In general, these activities fall into one of the following six broad categories. Please tell us how important you think each one is for your community or the county to consider pursuing. (Please check one answer for each or leave it blank if you don't know.) Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important Prevention: Actions to influence land and building development. Examples include planning and zoning, building codes, and floodplain regulations. Property Protection: Actions involving existing buildings to reduce hazard risk. Examples include acquisition, relocation, elevation, and structural retrofits. Natural Resource Protection: Examples include floodplain protection, slope stabilization, and forest management. Structural Projects: Examples include dams, levees, detention/retention basins, channel modification, retaining walls, and storm sewers. Emergency Services: Examples include warning systems, evacuation planning, emergency response training, and protection of critical emergency facilities or systems. Public Education and Awareness: Actions to inform citizens about hazards and techniques they can use to protect themselves and their property. 7. Which of the following types of hazards would you like to have more information about? (Please check all that apply.) Dam failure Drought Earthquake Flood Hail Hazardous materials spill Landslide Severe winter storm Tornado Wind storm Wildfire Other: Land subsidence 13