Exhibit CC 06-06-2017 Item No. 4 Presentation of the Biennial Community SurveyCity of Cupertino2017 Community SurveyJune 6, 2017
Page 2June 6, 2017Methodology OverviewData Collection Landline, cell phone, and online interviewing from email invitationUniverse 43,657 adult (18 years or older) residents in the City of CupertinoFielding Dates April 4 through April 15, 2017Interview Length 22 minutesSample Size n=582 (landline n=145; cell n=89; online n=348)Margin of Error ± 4.04%Note: The data have been weighted to reflect the actual population characteristics of the adult residents in the City of Cupertino based on the 2015 American Community Survey (ACS) in terms of gender, age and ethnicity.
Page 3June 6, 2017Living in CupertinoThe survey results indicate that Cupertino residents continue to have very positive perceptions about living in the City.A majority of the residents are satisfied with their quality of life in the City (88.3%), with the “very satisfied” (43.6%) and the “somewhat satisfied” (44.7%) evenly split. The total is lower than in 2014 (96.9%).Sixty-six percent feel a strong sense of community in the City, while 32.7 percent feel a weak or no sense of community at all. This is slightly lower than in the 2014 data, but not statistically significant.As in previous years, the “school system” emerged as the top reason why residents choose to live in Cupertino.Thirty-five percent of the residents mentioned “school system” as the main reason for living in Cupertino, which is lower than the 39.4 percent mentions in 2014 survey. This response was more common among the residents ages 40 to 64, and Asians.Traffic was identified by 56.8 percent of the respondents as one of the two most important issues facing Cupertino. City planning / overdevelopment related issues where seen as the second most important issue (24.6%) followed by affordable housing (19.6%).
Page 4June 6, 2017Satisfaction with Quality of Life0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%2008201020122014201757%63%65.2%67.9%43.6%36%32%28.8%29.0%44.7%4%3%3.6%1.4%8.6%1%1%2%1.3%2.6%Very satisfiedSomewhat satisfiedSomewhat dissatisfiedVery dissatisfiedDK/NA88.3%96.9%94.0%95.0%93.0%
Page 5June 6, 2017Cupertino City ServicesA substantial majority of Cupertino residents continue to be satisfied with the overall job the City is doing to provide services to its residents.76.5 percent of the residents are satisfied with the job the City is doing to provide services, with 28.6 percent “very satisfied” and 47.9 percent “somewhat satisfied” ratings. This is a decrease from 2014 finding (89.1%).Only 18.5 percent were dissatisfied with the City’s overall job performance, and 4.1 percent did not have an opinion.When looking at specific services, respondents indicated they were most satisfied with the following services:Library servicesGarbage collectionQuinlan Community Center facilities and programsRecycling programBlackberry Farms programsYouth sports fieldsPolice services
Page 6June 6, 20170% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%2008201020122014201735%37%49.4%44.4%28.6%53%49%41.8%44.7%47.9%4%7%5.8%6.2%12.2%3%1%1.8%2.2%6.3%5%6%1.2%2.4%5.0%Very satisfiedSomewhat satisfiedSomewhat dissatisfiedVery dissatisfiedDK/NASatisfaction with Overall City Services76.5%91.2%89.1%86.0%88.0%
Page 7June 6, 2017Recreation and Community ServicesA large majority of the residents are satisfied with the services that the Cupertino Recreation and Community Services Department offers.Seventy-six percent of respondents were satisfied with the overall job the department is doing.Seventy-four percent of respondents indicated they visit Cupertino parks at least once a month.Twenty-two percent participate in a Recreation Department activity at least once a month and 53 percent participate at least once a year.Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satisfied” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2.The 2014 survey added a new response category “Don’t Use”, so some comparisons with previous data might not be suitable.
Page 8June 6, 2017Transportation ChoicesAn overwhelming majority of the Cupertino residents continue to rely on personal vehicles for their daily commute.87.3 percent of the residents reported they “drive alone”.13.8 percent use “carpool, vanpool, or ride with others,” to go to work, school or other places they visit frequently.At the same time, a combined total of 29.9 percent of the residents reported walking, bicycling or using public transit for these trips.Currently, 25.1 percent of the residents use alternative transportation at least once a week.Thirty-six percent of respondents indicated that inconvenient public transit routes and 28.3 percent inconvenient schedules were the reason they did not use alternative transportationThe survey indicates that Cupertino residents continue to be enthusiastic about using a network of paths and roads to walk, bike, or roller blade.Almost 8 out of 10 residents are likely to use a network of additional paths and roads, with 47.1 percent being “very likely” and 31.4 percent being “somewhat likely”.
Page 9June 6, 2017Daily Commuting Choices0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%DK/NAOtherLightrailTrainBusBicycleWalkCarpool/vanpool/ride with othersDrive alone (car, truck, motorcycle, scooter)<1%1%1%1%1%6%9%13%88%0.1%1.1%0.5%1.1%3.5%7.6%8.0%15.2%81.4%.4%.3%.9%1.5%4.6%6.0%5.5%12.3%83.6%0.0%1.7%1.2%2.3%6.5%6.7%13.2%13.8%87.3%2017201420122010
Page 10June 6, 2017Public WorksForty-seven percent of respondents believe the City is doing a good job preventing pollution in the creeks in the City, while only 9.5 percent disagree. However, 43.1 percent indicated they don’t know.62 percent of respondents indicated they would support a $12 increase in the annual storm water fee to $24 dollars per year.Thirty-three percent of respondents would pay at least $6 a month if it would increase recycling by 30 percent.Thirty-four percent of respondents are aware of Silicon Valley Clean Energy.
Page 11June 6, 2017Support for Storm Water Fee Increase of $12 per Year0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%2014201738.2%30.2%24.5%31.8%11.6%13.5%15.8%17.0%9.9%7.5%Strongly supportSomewhat supportSomewhat opposeStrongly opposeDK/NA62.0%62.7%2017 HomeownersSupport – 62.0%Oppose – 30.5%DK – 7.5%
Page 12June 6, 2017Economic Development and HousingFifty-three percent of the residents are satisfied with the shopping environment in Cupertino when compared to the neighboring cities in the Bay Area. Conversely, 45.6 percent indicated their dissatisfaction. Nineteen percent of respondents wanted to see more restaurants (including high end restaurants) in Cupertino, 15.3 percent want more department stores, and 14.8 percent want to see discount stores.Respondents indicated they visited Safeway (48.2%), Target Express (44.2%), and Sprouts (42.3%), among others at Crossroad, Homestead Square or Main Street in 2016.
Page 13June 6, 2017Satisfaction with Shopping Environment0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%2008201020122014201735%33%47.8%39.5%16.3%30%35%29.6%38.7%36.6%16%21%15.0%13.1%24.1%16%10%6.2%6.2%21.5%3%1%1.5%2.6%1.5%Very satisfiedSomewhat satisfiedSomewhat dissatisfiedVery dissatisfiedDK/NA78.2%52.9%77.4%68.0%65.0%
Page 14June 6, 2017Public Safety and Ethnic DiversityThe 2017 survey indicates that 38.6 percent of respondents feel that “crime has stayed about the same”, substantially less than in 2014 (57.2% stayed the same). Nine percent feel that “crime has decreased”, and 41.4 percent felt it has increased.Respondents feel most safe walking alone in their neighborhood during the day and at home. The survey results suggest that race and ethnic relations have been consistently positive (excellent and good) among Cupertino residents over the last 14 years.84.9 percent of the residents in the current survey indicated “excellent” or “good” ratings for race and ethnic relations in the City.34.9 percent of the respondents indicated that Cupertino’s ethnic diversity has made them more sympathetic and open, while 53.6 percent indicated there was no change in how they feel.Further, 63.0 percent of the residents indicated they felt that City’s efforts to ensure that members of all ethnic groups feel welcome in the City was “about right”. While, 14.6 percent feel that the City is not doing enough.
Page 15June 6, 2017Feelings of Safety(n=582)Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Very Safe” = +2, “Somewhat Safe” = +1, “Neither” = 0, “Somewhat Unsafe” = -1, and “Very Unsafe” = -2.012Leaving your home unattendedYour child or children walk alone to schoolWalking alone in your neighborhood at nightAt homeWalking alone in your neighborhood during the day0.440.510.661.451.562017Very SafeSomewhat SafeNeither
Page 16June 6, 2017Ethnic Relations84%82%83%72%84%85%82.9%86.8%84.9%11%14% 14%23%12% 12%13.5%10.2%9.9%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2017Excellent/GoodPoor/Very Poor
Page 17June 6, 2017Information SourcesRespondents indicated that the Cupertino Courier (27.1%) and the Cupertino Scene (18.1%) were the most used sources of City information.Sixty-one percent of respondents have visited the City’s website.Forty-four percent of respondents indicated that direct mail was the most preferred way of being informed about city projects, meetings, events and updates. Another 33.8 percent indicated email and 20 percent indicated the city website was the best source.
Page 18June 6, 2017Overview and Research ObjectivesThe City of Cupertino commissioned Godbe Research to conduct a survey of its residents with the following research objectives:Learn their overall perceptions of living in the City;Gauge resident satisfaction with the City’s performance in providing services and programs;Gather resident feedback on several local issues including: (a) recreation and community services; (b) transportation choices (c) public works; (d) economic development;(e) crime; (f) ethnic diversity; (g) information sources; and Identify any differences in attitudes and behavior due to demographic and/or behavioral characteristics.
Executive Summary
Key Findings: Living in Cupertino
Page 21June 6, 2017Q2: Reason for Living in Cupertino 34%41%46%45%47%37.7%39.4%35.3%9%6%7%10% 10%13.4%13.6%16.1%4% 4%8.1%6.4%7.7%6.6%6.6%6.3%13%15%11%8%13%14%11.4%4.5%3.6%5%3%8%5.7%3.0%9%7%6%8%7%7%6.2%9.9%0%10%20%30%40%50%2002 2004 2006 20082010 2012 2014 2017School systemFriends/family hereGrew up hereI could afford a houseClose to workSmall town atmosphereJobSafety / low crimeEnjoy/like the CityAffordable housingQuality of lifeNote: Responses with fewer than 3 percent mentions have not been charted above. For more details, refer to the topline report inAppendix C.
Page 22June 6, 2017Q3: Issues Facing CupertinoNote: Responses with fewer than 3 percent mentions have not been charted above. For more details, refer to the topline report inAppendix C.0% 20% 40% 60%Quality of lifeOver population/Over crowdingVallco mall issues - General MentionTaxesCondition of streetsEducation/School overcrowdingCrime/SafetyAffordable housingControlling growthTraffic5%3%22%29%15%3%5%11%12%10%7.6%12.0%25.3%12.8%13.4%5.6%6.0%5.2%33.3%17.3%21.5%3.8%3.9%4.6%4.7%5.3%10.9%11.6%19.6%20.7%56.8%20172014201220102008
Page 23June 6, 2017Q3: Issues Facing CupertinoContinuedNote: Responses with fewer than 3 percent mentions have not been charted above. For more details, refer to the topline report inAppendix C.0% 20% 40% 60%Not Sure/DK/NAOtherNeighborhood preservationProtection of open spaceEnvironmental healthCrimeEducationRace relationsCity’s economic health16%26%2%2%5%14%3%9%18%24%2%1%6%2%33%4%18%7.1%17.7%3.5%3.0%5.1%11.2%26.5%5.5%12.1%8.2%7.3%3.4%6.4%6.4%8.9%10.8%3.7%7.6%3.8%20.1%3.0%3.6%20172014201220102008
Page 24June 6, 2017Q4: Sense of Community0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%2008201020122014201715%15%25.2%23.2%17.4%46%40%47.8%47.0%48.7%25%28%16.4%17.5%22.4%7%8%7.3%6.2%5.7%5%7%2.6%4.6%4.5%2%2%0.7%1.6%1.2%Very strongSomewhat strongSomewhat weakVery weakNone at allDK/NA66.1%70.2%73.0%55.0%61.0%
Satisfaction with City Services
Page 26June 6, 2017Q6: Satisfaction with Specific City ServicesNote: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satisfied” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2.-2 -1 0 1 2Median strip landscape maintenanceSports Center programsSenior Center programsStreet sweeping servicesPolice servicesYouth sports fieldsBlackberry Farm programsRecycling programQuinlan community center facilities and programsGarbage collectionLibrary services1.21.21.31.31.51.51.61.31.21.31.21.51.71.71.371.371.441.271.481.651.521.321.311.450.971.011.031.091.121.121.211.281.331.361.5620172014201220102008Very SatisfiedSomewhat SatisfiedVery DissatisfiedSomewhat Dissatisfied
Page 27June 6, 2017Q6: Satisfaction with Specific City ServicesContinuedNote: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satisfied” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2.-2 -1 0 1 2Green living and sustainable energy programsTraffic safetyQuinlan community center facilitiesSenior citizen programsQuinlan Community Center programsManaging land useEconomic development effortsStreet pavement maintenanceSidewalk maintenanceNeighborhood programsEnvironmental and sustainability programsStreet tree maintenance0.91.51.40.10.61111.10.711.51.50.40.50.910.810.991.031.41.430.870.991.141.261.061.331.35-0.100.360.620.740.760.810.9020172014201220102008Very SatisfiedSomewhat SatisfiedVery DissatisfiedSomewhat Dissatisfied
Page 28June 6, 2017Q7: Satisfaction with Recreation and Community Services DepartmentNote: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satisfied” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2.012Overall job Recreation and CommunityServices Department is doing1.51.511.411.172017201420122010Somewhat SatisfiedVery Satisfied
Page 29June 6, 2017Q8: Frequency of Visiting City Parks(n=582)More than once a week19.9%Once a week23.5%A few times a month19.7%Once a month11.2%A few times a year14.8%Once a year3.4%Less than once a year3.1%Never3.9%DK/NA0.6%
Page 30June 6, 2017Q9: Frequency of Participating in Recreation Department Activities(n=582)More than once a week4.0%Once a week5.7%A few times a month4.5%Once a month8.0%A few times a year25.0%Once a year5.7%Less than once a year13.1%Never29.6%DK/NA4.4%
Transportation Choices
Page 32June 6, 2017Q11: Use of Alternative Transportation0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%DK/NANeverFew times a year or lessOnce a monthFew times a monthOnce a weekFew times a weekDaily<1%31%11%6%12%9%20%11%0.3%30.4%14.4%6.4%14.1%9.1%14.0%11.3%.1%43.4%10.9%5.1%12.9%8.3%13.9%5.4%0.5%38.7%16.8%6.7%12.1%7.3%12.0%5.8%2017201420122010
Page 33June 6, 2017Q12: Reasons for Not Using Alternative Transportation0% 20% 40% 60%DK/NAOtherFeel unsafe using public transitWeatherPoorly maintained sidewalks/lanes/pathsElderly, disabled, or health reasonsNot enough sidewalks/lanes/pathsFeel unsafe due to traffic/automobilesInconvenient public transit schedulesInconvenient public transit routesPrefer driving3.9%6.8%4.2%1.8%2.0%10.1%2.9%4.9%11.4%17.3%51.5%1.8%4.9%4.1%5.5%5.6%6.8%9.1%18.5%28.3%35.8%42.0%20172014
Page 34June 6, 2017Q13: Likely Use of Additional Paths and Roads0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%201020122014201746%51.1%43.7%47.1%25%27.2%34.3%31.4%8%8.7%7.9%7.4%19%11.0%12.8%11.5%3%2.0%1.4%2.5%Very likelySomewhat likelySomewhat unlikelyVery unlikelyDK/NA78.0%78.5%78.3%71.0%
Public Works
Page 36June 6, 2017Q14: City Doing a Good Job Preventing Pollution in Creeks0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%2014201755.3%47.4%11.8%9.5%32.9%43.1%YesNoDK/NA
Page 37June 6, 2017Q16: Amount Willing to Pay Per Month for Garbage Collection if Recycling Increases 30%(n=582)$16-$207.0%$11-$155.4%$6-$1020.5%$1-$524.9%I would not be willing to pay more34.0%DK/NA8.2%32.9% Willing to Pay $6<
Page 38June 6, 2017Q17: Seen, Heard or Read About Silicon Valley Clean Energy(n=582)Yes33.5%No58.1%DK/NA8.5%
Economic Development
Page 40June 6, 2017Q19: Businesses Would Like to See in Cupertino(n=582)0% 10% 20%Not Sure/DK/NANothingOther MentionEntertainment venues/Night lifeMall/Outdoor mallFast foodVallco - General mentionSports / Sports facilitiesBook storesElectronics / Software / High techEthnic grocery store / Ranch 99Have a good mix / Good as is / SatisfiedHigh end retail / Nordstrom's / Dillard'sLocal retail stores/Small/Mom and PopTraditional grocery store / Lucky's / SafewayShopping / RetailDiscount stores / Walmart / CostcoDepartment storesRestaurants / High end4.7%8.1%9.9%2.6%4.0%4.8%5.3%5.9%6.2%6.3%6.7%8.6%11.1%12.5%14.6%14.7%14.8%15.3%19.4%2017
Page 41June 6, 2017Q20: Businesses Visited at Crossroads, Homestead Square, or Main Street(n=582)0% 20% 40% 60%DK/NANothingOtherPanino GuistoMeet FreshUltaSteinmartEurekaLazy DogHomeGoods/TJ MaxxSproutsTarget ExpressSafeway2.2%7.9%14.5%7.2%9.6%10.8%11.9%14.1%28.3%37.5%42.3%44.2%48.2%2017
Public Safety
Page 43June 6, 2017Q21: Increase or Decrease of Crime15%21%17%27%21%29%28.5%26.6%41.4%15%11%8%5%3%4%10.2%8.2%9.2%54%52%61%52%67%60%54.4%57.2%38.6%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2017IncreasedDecreasedStayed about same
Ethnic Diversity
Page 45June 6, 2017Q24: Attitude Towards Ethnic Minorities11%10%11%15%8%9%11.0%7.1%6.8%36%26%31%27%38%33%38.6%30.6%34.9%49%60%51%52%51%54%45.8%58.8%53.6%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2017More resentful/closedMore sympathetic/openNo change in how I feel
Page 46June 6, 2017Q25: City Efforts for Ethnic Minorities9% 9%9.6%6.6%5.9%59%60%63.5%67.4%63.0%16% 16%17.1%13.3%14.6%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%2008 2010 2012 2014 2017Too muchAbout the right amountNot enough
Information Sources
Page 48June 6, 2017Q26: Preferred Information SourcesNote: Responses in the 2017 survey with fewer than 3 percent mentions have not been charted above. For more details, refer to the topline report in Appendix C.0% 20% 40% 60%Flyers or posters around townFacebookMailers / PostcardsSan Jose Mercury NewsEmailInternet (No specific site)Word of mouthNextDoorCity WebsiteLocal TV news channelsBrochures or flyersCupertino SceneCupertino Courier11%6%2%21%13%11%41%6%13%1%23%16%13%42%3.9%5.7%4.0%24.0%12.9%7.8%35.4%4.6%5.3%5.9%5.9%6.2%10.1%11.6%12.6%13.0%15.4%18.0%18.1%27.1%2017201220102008
Page 49June 6, 2017Q26: Preferred Information SourcesContinuedNote: Responses in the 2017 survey with fewer than 3 percent mentions have not been charted above. For more details, refer to the topline report in Appendix C.0% 20% 40% 60%DK/NAOtherNone/NothingLos Gatos Daily NewsKICUKTVULocal cable station (No specific station)Cupertino PatchThe C -- Cupertino newsTelevision3%21%4%1%4%9%9.4%9.4%7%<1%0<1%1%1%5%0.6%13.8%0.2%3.0%3.5%3.6%4.0%4.2%5.6%14.3%1.2%8.0%2.5%2017201220102008
Page 50June 6, 2017Q27: City Website Visits0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%200820102012201766%71%61.2%61.3%33%28%37.2%34.8%1%1%1.6%4.0%YesNoDK/NA
Page 51June 6, 2017Q28: Preferred Information Medium(n=582)0% 20% 40% 60%DK/NAOtherNoneTwitterWeChatText messageFacebookFlyers or posters around townNextDoorCity WebsiteEmailBrochures or flyers in the mail4.1%1.7%1.3%1.2%1.8%2.7%6.7%11.4%12.7%20.0%33.8%44.0%2017