Manhattan Beach City Council
February 15, 2022

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Table of Contents
iCity of Manhattan Beach True North Research, Inc. © 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T ABLE OF C ONTENTS
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii List of Figures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Purpose of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Overview of Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Organization of Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Disclaimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 About True North . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Just the Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Quality of Life. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 City Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Spending Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Local Government & Customer Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Overall Quality of Life. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Question 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 What do You Like Most About Manhattan Beach? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Changes to Improve Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Question 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 City Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Overall Satisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Question 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Specific Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Question 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Question 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Differentiators of Opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Performance Needs & Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Question 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Code Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Question 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Question 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Homelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Question 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Question 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Spending Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Question 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Local Government & Customer Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 0 Perceptions of City Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Question 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Contact with City Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 Question 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Rating City Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Question 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Table of Contents
iiCity of Manhattan Beach True North Research, Inc. © 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Communications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Satisfaction With Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Question 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Information Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Question 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Background & Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Questionnaire Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Programming & Pre-Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Sample, Recruiting & Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Margin of Error due to Sampling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Data Processing & Weighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Rounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Questionnaire & Toplines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 List of Tables
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 iii
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

L IST OF T ABLES
Table 1 Rating City of Manhattan Beach by Years in Manhattan Beach, Home Ownership Status & Child in Hsld (Showing % Excellent) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Table 2 Rating City of Manhattan Beach by Age & Gender (Showing % Excellent) . . . . . . . . 10 Table 3 Rating City of Manhattan Beach by Ethnicity & Employment Status (Showing % Excellent) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Table 4 Satisfaction With Services by Overall Satisfacti on With City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Table 5 Needs & Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Table 6 Opinion of City Addressing Homele ss by Years in Manhattan Beach & Overall Satisfaction (Showing % Yes) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Table 7 Opinion of City Addressing Homeless by Age (Showing % Yes) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Table 8 Opinion of City Addressing Homeless by Ethnicity & Home Ownership Status (Showing % Yes) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Table 9 Opinion of City Addressing Homeless by Perceived Safety of City & Perception of Homeless in Past Year (Showing % Yes) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Table 10 Spending Priorities by Ov erall Satisfaction & Age (Showing % High Priority) . . . . . . 29 Table 11 Spending Priorities by Ethnicity, Gender, Home Ownership Status & Child in Hsld (Showing % High Priority). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Table 12 Agreement With City Statements by Years in Manhattan & Overall Satisfaction (Showing % Agreement). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Table 13 Agreement With City Statements by Age (S howing % Agreement). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Table 14 Agreement With City Statements by Ethnicity & Home Ownership Status (Showing % Agreement). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Table 15 Agreement With City Statements by Perceived Safety of City & Perception of Homeless in Past Year (Showing % Agreement) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Table 16 Demographics of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 List of Figures
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 iv
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

L IST OF F IGURES
Figure 1 Rating City of Manhattan Beach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 2 Like Most About City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 3 Changes to Improve City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Figure 4 Overall Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Figure 5 Overall Satisfaction by Ye ars in Manhattan Beach, Ethnicity & Gender . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figure 6 Overall Satisfaction by Age, Child in Hs ld & Home Ownership Status. . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figure 7 Importance of Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Figure 8 Satisfaction With Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Figure 9 Resident Service Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 10 Perceived Safety of City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 11 Perceived Safety of City by Years in Manhattan Beach, Overall Satisfaction & Age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 12 Perceived Safety of City by Ethnicity, Gender, Child in Hsld & Home Ownership Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Figure 13 Satisfaction With City’s Efforts to Enforce Code Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Figure 14 Satisfaction With City’s Efforts to Enforce Code Violations by Years in Manhattan Beach, Overall Satisfaction & Age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Figure 15 Satisfaction With City’s Efforts to Enforce Code Violations by Ethnicity, Gender, Child in Hsld & Home Ownership Status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Figure 16 Issue, Code Violation Not Mentioned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 17 Perceived Number of Homeless in Past Year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 18 Perceived Number of Homeless in Past Year by Years in Manhattan Beach, Overall Satisfaction & Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Figure 19 Perceived Number of Homeless in Pa st Year by Ethnicity, Gender, Child in Hsld, Home Ownership Status & Perceived Safety of City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Figure 20 Opinion of City Addressing Homeless . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Figure 21 Spending Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Figure 22 Agreement With City Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Figure 23 Contact City Staff in Past 12 Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Figure 24 Contact City Staff in Past 12 Mont hs by Years in Manhattan Beach, Overall Satisfaction & Age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Figure 25 Contact City Staff in Past 12 Months by Ethnicity, Gender, Child in Hsld & Home Ownership Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Figure 26 Perception of City Staff... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Figure 27 Satisfaction With Communicatio n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Figure 28 Satisfaction With Communication by Years in Manhattan Beach, Ethnicity & Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Figure 29 Satisfaction With Communication by Age, Child in Hsld & Home Ownership Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Figure 30 Information Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 31 Information Sources by Overall & Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 32 Information Sources by Overall Satisfaction, Home Ownership Status & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Figure 33 Maximum Margin of Error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Introduction
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 1
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I NTRODUCTION
Located along the coastal edge of Los Angeles County, the City of Manhattan Beach is home to an estimated 35,058 residents.1 Incorporated in 1912 as a General Law city, Manhattan Beach’s team of full- and part-time employees provides services through more than a dozen depart- ments, agencies, and programs, including the City Attorney’s office, City Clerk’s office, City Man- ager’s office, Community Development, Envi ronmental Stability, Finance, Fire, Parks & Recreation, Human Resources, Information Technology, MBtv, Police, and Public Works.

As part of its commitment to provide high qual ity services and facilities that meet the varied needs of its residents, the City of Manhattan Beach engages its residents on a daily basis and receives regular feedback regarding issue, po licy, and performance matters. Although these informal feedback mechanisms are a valuable source of information for the City in that they pro- vide timely and accurate information about the opinions of specific residents, they do not neces- sarily provide an accurate picture of the commu nity as a whole. For the most part, informal feedback mechanisms rely on the resident to initiate the feedback, which creates a self-selection bias. The City receives feedback only from thos e residents who are motivated enough to initiate the feedback process. Because these residents te nd to be those who are either very pleased or very displeased regarding a particular topic, thei r collective opinions are not necessarily repre- sentative of the City’s resident population as a whole.

PURPOSE OF STUDY The motivation for the current st udy was to design and employ a methodology that would avoid the self-selection bias noted above and thereby provide the City with a statistically reliable understanding of its residents’ satisfaction, priorities, and concerns as they relate to services, facilities, and policies provided by the City. Ultimately, the survey results and analyses presented in this report provide City Council and staff with information that can be used to make sound, strategic decisions in a variety of areas including service improve- ments and enhancements, measuring and tracking internal performance, planning, budgeting, policymaking, and community engagement.

To assist in this effort, the City selected True North Research to design the research plan and conduct the study. Broadly defined, the study was designed to:
• Identify key issues of importance for residents, as well as their perceptions of the quality of life in Manhattan Beach;
• Measure residents’ overall satisfaction with th e City’s efforts to provide municipal services; • Measure the importance of specific services to residents, as we ll as their satisfaction with the City’s efforts to provide each service;
• Gather opinions on specific topics including public safety, code enforcement, homelessness, budget priorities, and customer service;
• Determine satisfaction with the City’s communication with residents; and • Collect additional background and demographic data that are relevant to understanding res- idents’ perceptions, needs, and interests.

1. Source: California Department of Finance estimate, January 2021.

Introduction
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 2City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OVERVIEW OF METHODOLOGY A full description of the methodology used for this study is included later in this report (see Methodology o n p a g e 3 9 ) . I n b r i e f , t h e s u r v e y w a s administered to a random sample of 560 adults who reside within the City of Manhattan Beach.

The survey followed a mixed-method design that employed multiple recruiting methods (email, text, and phone) and multiple data collecti on methods (phone and online). Administered between December 6 and December 12, 2021, the average interview lasted 18 minutes.

ORGANIZATION OF REPORT This report is designed to me et the needs of readers who prefer a summary of the findings as well as those who are interested in the details of the results.

For those who seek an overview of the findings, the sections titled Just the Facts and Conclusions are for you. They provide a summary of the most important factual findings of the survey in bul- let-point format and a discussion of their implications. For the interested reader, this section is followed by a more detailed question-by-question discussion of the resu lts from the survey by topic area (see Table of Contents), as well as a description of the methodology employed for col- lecting and analyzing the data. And, for the truly ambitious re ader, the questionnaire used for the interviews is contained at the back of this report (see Questionnaire & Toplines on page 42), and a complete set of crosstabulations for the survey results is contained in Appendix A.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS True North thanks the City of Manhattan Beach for the opportu- nity to conduct the study and for contributing valuable input during the design stage of this study. The collective experience, insight, and lo cal knowledge provided by city representatives and staff improved the overall quality of the research presented here.

DISCLAIMER The statements and conclu sions in this report are those of the authors (Dr. Timothy McLarney and Richard Sarles) at True North and not necessarily those of the City of Manhattan Beach. Any errors and omissions are the responsibility of the authors.

ABOUT TRUE NORTH True North is a full-service survey research firm that is dedicated to providing public agencies with a clear understanding of the values, perceptions, priorities, and concerns of their residents and customers. Thro ugh designing and implementing scientific sur- veys, focus groups, and one-on-one interviews, as well as expert interpretation of the findings, True North helps its clients to move with confidence when making strategic decisions in a variety of areas—such as planning, policy evaluation, per formance management, establishing fiscal pri- orities, passing revenue measures, and developing effective public information campaigns.

During their careers, Dr. McLarney (President) and Mr. Sarles (Principal Researcher) have designed and conducted over 1,200 survey research studies for public agencies—including more than 400 studies for California municipalities and special districts.

Just the Facts
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 3
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

J UST THE F ACTS
The following section is an outline of the main factual findings from the survey. For the reader’s convenience, the findings are organized by the se ction titles used in the body of this report.

Thus, to learn more about a particular finding, simply turn to the appropriate report section.

QUALITY OF LIFE
• More than eight-in-ten respondents shared favorable opinions of the overall quality of life in the City (94% excellent or good) and Manhattan Beach as a place to recreate (85%), as a place raise a family (84%), and as a place to shop and dine (81%). • Ratings for Manhattan Beach as a place to re tire (60% excellent or good) and work (54%) were somewhat lower, although it should be noted that approximately one-quarter of respondents (27%) were also unsure how to rate the City as a place to work. • When asked in an open-ended ma nner to describe what they like best about the City of Man- hattan Beach, approximately 9% were unsure or unable to offer a specific aspect of Manhat- tan Beach that they would like preserved in the future. Among the specific responses that were offered, the City’s small-town feel and charming beach community vibe was mentioned most often (17%), followed closely by public safety and the low crime rate (16%), the beach and ocean (14%), cleanliness, appearance, and beauty of the City (13%), and the community and its friendly people and family atmosphere (12%).
• When asked what one change they would like city government to make to improve the qual- ity of life in Manhattan Beach, approximately 16% of respondents could not think of a desired change (10%) or stated flatly that no changes are needed (6 %). Among the specific changes suggested, improving public safety an d increasing the police presence (10%) and addressing parking issues (9%) were the most common, followed by enforcing traffic and e- bike laws (6%), limiting growth and development (5%), encouraging diversity and addressing inequity (5%), and preserving/supporting outdoor dining (5%).

CITY SERVICES
• Nearly nine-in-ten Manhattan Beach residents (88%) indicated they were either very satisfied (40%) or somewhat satisfied (48%) with the City’s efforts to provide municipal services. A very small portion of residents (9%) reported that they were dissatisfied, whereas 3% were unsure or unwilling to share their opinion.
• When asked to rate the importance of 24 s pecific services, maintaining parks and open spaces (96% extremely or very important), providing emergency medical services (92%), maintaining sewer and storm drain systems (92%), maintaining a low crime rate (91%), and providing fire protection and prevention services (90%) were viewed as the most important services.
• At the other end of the spectrum, providing a va riety of public art (33%), eastside library ser- vices (34%), cultural and arts opportunities (51%), and services and programs for seniors (53%) were viewed as less important overall.
• With respect to how satisfied they were with th e City’s efforts to provide the same list of 24 services, respondents were most satisfied with the City’s efforts to provide emergency med- ical services (99% very or somewhat satisfied) , followed by provide fi re protection and pre- vention services (97%), remove graffiti (96%), provide services and programs for seniors (95%), provide a variety of recreation progra ms for all ages (95%), provide special events (95%), and keep public buildings, parks and facilities clean and attractive (93%).

Just the Facts
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 4City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
• Respondents were somewhat less satisfied with the City’s efforts to address bike safety and e-bikes (53%), enforce animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup (67%), enforce traffic laws (69%), and address homelessness (69%).

SAFETY, CODE ENFORCEMENT & HOMELESSNESS
• Overall, 93% of respondents indicated that they feel Manhattan Beach is a safe place to live, with 48% rating it as very safe. Conversely, 6% of residents felt the City is either a very unsafe (1%) or somewhat unsafe (5%) place to live.
• When asked if, in general, they are satisfied or dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to enforce code violations, 58% of residents indicated they were very satisfied (22%) or somewhat satis- fied (36%) with the City efforts in this area, whereas 22% were dissatisfied and 21% of resi- dents did not have an opinion.
• Among those who were dissatisfied with the City’s code enforcement efforts, construction issues (24%), no-smoking regulations and violations (21%), noise ordinance violations (18%) were the types of code violations mentioned most often as their reason for being dissatis- fied.
• Approximately 43% of respondents perceived th at the amount of homeless people in the City of Manhattan Beach has stayed about the same over the past year, whereas 37% per- ceived that the number has increased, 4% thought the number has decreased, and 16% were unsure.
• When presented with four strategies the City of Manhattan Beach could pursue to address homelessness, joining with other cities and the County to create more regional homeless shelters garnered the most support (64%), followed by enhancing lighting and modifying benches in public areas to deter overnight camping (63%), providing funding for mental health facilities, street outreach, and housing placement (57%), and providing counseling and rehab for drug and alcohol addiction (56%).

SPENDING PRIORITIES
• When asked to rate nine items in terms of thei r priority for future city funding, fixing pot- holes and repairing and improving city streets and sidewalks was assigned the highest prior- ity (90% high or medium priority), followed by repairing and upgrading the City’s sewer and wastewater systems (84%), an d improving the maintenance of parks and park amenities including restrooms, sports courts, and dog runs (80%). • At the other end of the spectrum , only two-in-ten residents (20%) felt that creating a Manhat- tan Beach Historical Museum to preserve and store historical documents should be a high or medium priority for city spending.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT & CUSTOMER SERVICE
• Approximately two-thirds of resi dents agreed with the statements I trust the City of Manhat- tan Beach (67%) and The City is responsive to residents’ needs (66%). A majority (56%) agreed that The City listens to residents when making important decisions , while just under half of residents (47%) agreed that The City manages its finances well—although it should be noted that one-third of respondents (34%) were also unsure how to rate the City on the latter dimension.
• Forty-seven percent (47%) of residents indicate d they had contact with city staff during the 12 months preceding the interview.

Just the Facts
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 5City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
• When those who had interacted with city staff were given the opportunity to describe staff’s performance, 93% felt that staff members were professional, 89% said they were accessible, and 85% considered staff to be helpful.

COMMUNICATIONS
• Three-in-four respondents (75%) indicated they were satisfied with the City’s efforts to com- municate with residents through newsletters, the Internet, social media, and other means.

The remaining respondents were either dissatisf ied with the City’s efforts in this respect (16%), unsure of their opinion (9%), or unwilling to share their opinion (1%). • The most frequently-cited sour ce for City of Manhattan Beach news, events, and program- ming was The Beach Reporter (49%), followed by Nextdoor.com (25%), Nixle/Alert South Bay (22%), the City’s website (22%), and email notifications from the City (21%). Other sources mentioned by at least 10% of respondents included friends/family/associates (17%), Easy Reader (16%), social media (not the City’s sources) (15%), The Daily Breeze (14%), Manhap- penings (11%), and Patch.com (10%).

Conclusions
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 6
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C ONCLUSIONS
As noted in the Introduction, this study was designed to prov ide the City of Manhattan Beach with a statistically reliable understanding of its residents’ opinions, satisfaction, and priorities as they relate to services, facilities, and policies provided by the City. As such, the findings of this study can provide the City with information needed to make sound, strategic decisions in a vari- ety of areas including performance management, planning, establishing budget priorities, and community engagement.

Whereas subsequent sections of this report are devoted to conveying the detailed results of the survey, in this section we attempt to ‘see the forest through the trees’ and note how the survey results answer key questions that motivated th e research. The followin g conclusions are based on True North’s interpretations of the results, as well as the firm’s experience conducting similar studies for government agencies throughout the State.

How well is the City per-
forming in meeting the
needs of Manhattan
Beach residents?
The two years leading up to the 2021 Community Opinion Survey were punctuated by difficult and dramatic events in Manhattan Beach. The coronavirus pandemic that arrived in early 2020 has taken lives, threat- ened livelihoods, and forced dramatic changes in the way residents live, work, socialize, and play. Non-esse ntial businesses were shuttered for weeks or months at a time to curb the spread of COVID-19, and the City’s operations were also adjusted to protect public health and adhere to State guidelines. Services that could be effectively moved to an online format were able to continue in th at form, whereas other programs and services were modified, curtailed, or canceled to protect the safety of the public and City employees. Many city facilities were also closed periodi- cally to prevent the spread of COVI D-19, including the Manhattan Beach City Hall, Begg Pool, and recreation facilities.

Against this turbulent backdrop, residents’ opinions of their community and city government remained positive. Nearly nine-in-ten residents (88%) indicated they were satisfied wi th the City’s overall efforts to pro- vide municipal services, whereas ju st 9% were dissatisfied and the remaining 3% were unsure or did not provide a response. The high level of satisfaction expressed with the City’s performance in general was also mirrored in residents’ assessments of the City’s performance in provid- ing most specific services, with the highest satisfaction scores assigned to the City’s efforts to provide emer gency medical services, fire protec- tion and prevention services, senior programs/services, recreation pro- grams for all ages, and special events, as well as its efforts to remove graffiti and keep public buildings, parks and facilities clean and attrac- tive (see Specific Services on page 14). For all but one of the 24 service areas tested, the City is meeting or exceeding the needs and expecta- tions of at least two-thirds of its residents —and for many services the City is meeting the needs of at least 90% of residents (see Performance Needs & Priorities on page 18).

Conclusions
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 7City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City staff appear to be instrumental in keeping resident satisfaction high.

When those who had contact with the City during the 12 months prior to the survey were asked to comment on staff’s performance, staff received high marks for being accessible, professional, and helpful (see Rating City Staff on page 33).

The City’s performance in providing municipal services has also contrib- uted to a high quality of life for residents. Nearly all residents surveyed (94%) rated the quality of life in Manhattan Beach as excellent or good.

This sentiment was also widespread across a host of resident subgroups based on length of residence, home ownership status, age, employment status, and other demographics (see Overall Quality of Life on page 9).

When asked what they liked most abou t living in Manhattan Beach, the small town feel/charming beach commu nity vibe and the City’s safety/ low crime rate were the top responses, followed by its proximity to the ocean and beach and the cleanline ss/appearance/beauty of Manhattan Beach. To quote one resident: Well it’s absolutely beautiful of course. An independent city with a friendly, safe, small town feel. And to underscore this point, it must be noted that when asked about changes the city gov- ernment could make to improve Manhattan Beach, the most common r e s p o n s e w a s t h e y c o u l d n o t t h i n k o f a n y t h i n g t o c h a n g e o r t h a t n o changes were needed.

Where should the City
focus its efforts in the
future?
In addition to measuring the City’s current performance, a primary goal of this study was to look forward and identify opportunities to adjust services, improve facilities, and/or refine communications strategies to best meet the community’s evolving needs and expectations. Although residents are generally satisfied with the City’s performance (as described above), there is always ro om for improvement. Below we note some of the areas that present the best opportunities in this regard.

Considering respondents’ verbatim answers regarding what city govern- ment could do to make Manhattan Beach a better place to live (see Changes to Improve Manhattan Beach on page 11), the list of services and their respective priority status for future attention (see Performance Needs & Priorities on page 18), the manner in which residents prioritize among a variety of projects and prog rams that could receive funding in the future (see Spending Priorities on page 28), and other relevant ques- tions, the topics of addressing bike safety and e-bikes, improving public safety, addressing parking issues, code enforcement, enforcing animal control laws, street repair/maintenance, repairing/upgrading the City’s sewer and wastewater system, and improving park maintenance and amenities stood out as the key areas of opportunity and interest for resi- dents.

It is also important to keep in mind that although these areas represent opportunities to improve resident satisfaction, the City should not over- Conclusions
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 8City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
steer. Indeed, the primary takeaway from this study is that the City does many things very well, and the emphasis should be on continuing to per- form at that high level in those areas. The vast majority of residents were pleased with the City’s efforts to provide services, programs, and facili- ties and have a favorable opinion of the City’s performance in most areas. The top priority for the City should thus be to do what it takes to maintain the high quality of services that it currently provides.

Quality of Life
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 9
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q UALITY OF L IFE
The opening series of questions in the survey was designed to assess residents’ top of mind per- ceptions about the qualit y o f l i f e i n t h e C i t y o f M a n h a t t a n B e a c h , a s w e l l a s t h e i r i d e a s o n changes the city government could implement to make the community a better place to live, now and in the future.

OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE At the outset of the survey, residents were asked to rate the City of Manhattan Beach on a number of key dimensions including overall quality of life, as a place to raise a family, and as a place to work, using a five-point scale of excellent, good, fair, poor, or very poor. As shown in Figure 1 bel ow, more than eight-in-ten respondents shared favorable opinions of the overall quality of life in the City (94% excellent or good) and Manhattan Beach as a place to recreate (85%), as a place ra ise a family (84%), and as a place to shop and dine (81%). Although opinions regarding Manhattan Beach as a place to retire (60%) and work (54%) were somewhat more mixed, it should be noted that approximately one-quarter of respon- dents (27%) were also unsure how to rate the City as a place to work.

Question 2 How would you rate: _____? Would you say it is excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor?
FIGURE 1 RATING CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH
For the interested reader, tables 1-3 on the next page show how ratings of excellent for each dimension varied by years in Manhattan Beach, home ownership status, presence of a child in the home, age, gender, ethnicity, and employment status. In general, new residents (less than 5 years), those renting their home in the City, and younger resi dents (under 45) were the most likely to rate the overall quality of life in Manhattan Beach as excellent.

57.6 48.3

49.9 38.3

31.8 23.2

36.8 36.8

33.8 43.0

28.4 31.1

4.6 7.7

9.1 15.2

17.0 13.3
1 1
2 7
4 24
2 3
1 1
12 27
6 0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
The overall quality of life
in Manhattan Beach
Manhattan Beach as a place
to recreate
Manhattan Beach as a place
to raise a family
Manhattan Beach as a place
to shop and dine
Manhattan Beach as a place
to retire
Manhattan Beach as a place
to work
% Respondents
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Not sure/Prefer not to answer Quality of Life
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 10City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLE 1 RATING CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CHILD IN HSLD (SHOWING % EXCELLENT)
TABLE 2 RATING CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH BY AGE & GENDER (SHOWING % EXCELLENT) TABLE 3 RATING CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH BY ETHNICITY & EMPLOYMENT STATUS (SHOWING % EXCELLENT) WHAT DO YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT MANHATTAN BEACH? The next question in this series asked residents to identify what th ey like most about Manhattan Beach that the city government should make sure to preserve in th e future. This question was posed in an open- ended manner, thereby allowing residents to ment ion any aspect or attribute that came to mind without being prompted by—or rest ricted to—a particular list of options. True North later reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown in Figure 2 on the next page.

Approximately 9% were unsure or unable to offe r a specific aspect of Manhattan Beach that they would like preserved in the future . Among the specific responses that were offered, the City’s small-town feel and charming beach community vibe was the topic mentioned most often (17%), followed closely by public safety and the low crime rate (16%), the beach and ocean (14%), clean- liness, appearance, and beauty of the City (13%), and the community and its friendly people and family atmosphere (12%).

Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Own Rent Yes No
Overall quality of life 66.2 60.4 52.9 55.6 55.2 63.8 57.8 58.7 MB as a place to raise a family 49.1 56.4 46.2 49.3 51.7 44.5 58.0 44.5 MB as a place to recreate 52.0 50.7 38.5 49.3 49.6 46.2 49.0 47.9 MB as a place to shop and dine 43.7 38.3 30.8 38.9 37.2 42.7 35.8 39.9 MB as a place to retire 33.8 30.9 26.3 33.1 31.6 31.5 28.9 33.8 MB as a place to work 22.2 23.6 24.8 23.0 22.0 24.5 25.5 21.5 Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1)
Home Ownership
Status (QD4) Child in Hsld (QD3)
18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Male Female Overall quality of life 62.9 67.5 62.9 56.2 50.8 51.8 59.1 57.0 MB as a place to raise a family 55.6 48.6 56.6 51.0 44.2 45.7 49.3 50.9 MB as a place to recreate 41.6 47.4 47.6 51.8 44.4 51.2 46.6 50.8 MB as a place to shop and dine 33.5 49.8 32.4 39.8 37.4 36.6 37.5 39.1 MB as a place to retire 54.5 43.7 26.2 25.0 20.8 37.8 31.3 32.5 MB as a place to work 18.4 25.3 24.5 23.9 18.4 24.8 23.4 22.7 Age (QD1) Gender (QD2)
Latino/
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian
/White
Mixed or
other Full-time Part-time Student Homemaker Retired
Overall quality of life 58.9 50.2 60.3 53.7 61.2 58.6 57.1 55.3 50.5 MB as a place to raise a family 57.2 49.8 51.3 44.8 50.9 56.3 47.6 66.0 43.1 MB as a place to recreate 59.5 41.3 50.7 25.5 50.8 54.8 49.5 36.4 42.9 MB as a place to shop and dine 30.0 23.9 41.3 33.2 42.2 25.5 31.8 32.5 33.3 MB as a place to retire 35.3 28.9 31.0 33.3 30.2 42.4 48.1 23.3 35.5 MB as a place to work 36.5 19.1 22.5 20.5 26.7 21.3 20.0 16.7 18.1 Ethnicity (QD6) Employment Status (QD5)
Quality of Life
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 11City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Question 3 What do you like most about the City of Manhattan Beach that should be preserved in the future?
FIGURE 2 LIKE MOST ABOUT CITY
CHANGES TO IMPROVE MANHATTAN BEACH The next question in this series asked residents to indicate the one thing that city government could change to make Manhattan Beach a better place to live. Question 4 was presented in an open-ended manner, allowing residents to mention any change that came to mind without bei ng prompted by, or restricted to, a particular list of options. True North later reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the cat- egories shown in Figure 3 on the next page.

Approximately 16% of respondents could not think of a desired change (10%) or stated flatly that no changes are needed (6%). Among the specific changes desired to make Manhattan Beach a better place to live, improving public safety and increasing the po lice presence (10%) and addressing parking issues (9%) were the most commonly mentioned, followed by enforcing traf- fic and e-bike laws (6%), limiting growth and development (5%), encouraging diversity and addressing inequity (5%), and preserving/supporting outdoor dining (5%).

16.7 16.2

14.2 12.6

11.6 10.5

10.3 9.2

8.7 6.6

5.7 5.0

4.2 3.5

2.7 2.0

5.4 7.1
0 5 10 15 20
Small town feel, charming beach community
Public safety, low crime rate
Beach, ocean
Cleanliness, appearance, beauty of City
Community, friendly people, family atmosphere
Local businesses, downtown area
Parks, rec facilities
Schools, education
Not sure / Cannot think of anything
Low density development, single family homes
Community events, activities
Open spaces, greenbelts
Outdoor shops, dining options
Relaxed, casual lifestyle
Walkability of commercial, residential areas
The Strand, pier
Proximity to other areas
Weather, climate
% Respondents
Quality of Life
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 12City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Question 4 If the city government could change one thing to make Manhattan Beach a better place to live now and in the future, what change would you like to see? FIGURE 3 CHANGES TO IMPROVE CITY

9.8 9.6

8.5 5.6

5.5 5.1

5.0 5.0

4.7 3.8

3.7 3.6

3.6 3.5

2.7 2.6

2.6 2.3

2.0 2.0

1.8 1.8

1.6 1.7

3.8 3.7
02468 1 0
Not sure / Cannot think of anything
Improve public safety, more police presence
Address parking issues
No changes needed / Everything is fine
Enforce traffic, e-bike laws
Limit growth, development
Encourage, support diversity, address inequity
Preserve, support outdoor dining
Beautify City, cleanliness, landscaping
Improve City planning, development
Attract variety of less expensive restaurants, shops
Add, improve park, rec facilities
Provide more affordable housing
Reduce traffic congestion
Improve government leadership, communication
Address homeless issues
Enforce City codes, ordinances
Improve walkability, sidewalks
Underground utilities
Increase support for small businesses
Improve quality of education
Reduce taxes, fees
Reduce cost of living
Improve permitting process
Address Bruce’s Beach issue
Provide more activities, events for all ages
% Respondents
City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 13
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C ITY S ERVICES
After measuring respondents’ perceptions of the quality of life in Manhattan Beach, the survey next turned to assessing their opinions about the City’s performance in providing various munic- ipal services.

OVERALL SATISFACTION The first question in this seri es asked respondents to indicate if, overall, they were satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Manhattan Beach is doing to provide city services. Because this question does not reference a specific program, facility, or service and requested that the respondent consider the City’s performance in general, the find- ings of this question may be regarded as an overall performance rating for the City.

As shown in Figure 4, nearly nine-in-ten Manhattan Beach residents (88%) indicated they were either very satisfied (40%) or somewhat satisfied (48%) with the City’s efforts to provide munici- pal services. Less than one-in-ten residents reported that they were dissatisfied (9%), whereas 3% were unsure or unwilling to share their opinion.

Question 5 Next, I would like to ask a series of questions about services provided by the City of Manhattan Beach. Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Manhattan Beach is doing to provide city services?
FIGURE 4 OVERALL SATISFACTION
The next two figures display how residents’ opinions about the City’s overall performance in pro- viding municipal services varied by years in Manhattan Beach, ethnicity, gender, age, presence of a child in the household, and home ownership status. The most striking pattern in the figures is that the high levels of satisfaction exhibited by respondents as a whole (see Figure 4 above) were echoed across resident subgroups, with satisfaction ranging from a low of 80% to a high of 95% for all subgroups.

Not sure/Prefer
not to answer

2.8 Very
dissatisfied

1.9 Somewhat
dissatisfied

7.5 Very satisfied

39.5 Somewhat
satisfied

48.4 City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 14City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURE 5 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH, ETHNICITY & GENDER FIGURE 6 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY AGE, CHILD IN HSLD & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS SPECIFIC SERVICES Whereas Question 5 addressed the City’s overall performance, the next two-question series asked resp ondents to rate the importance of specific services offered by the City, as well as their level of satisfaction with efforts to provi de these services. For each service, respondents were first asked if they th ought the service was extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not at all important. Respondents were then asked about their satisfaction with these same services. The order of the items was randomized for each respondent to avoid a systematic position bias.

Figure 7 presents the services sorted in order of importance according to the percentage of respondents who rated a service as at least very important. In general, Manhattan Beach resi- dents rated parks and open space, public safety, and public works as the most important service areas. More specifically, maintaining parks and open spaces (96% extremely or very important), providing emergency medical services (92%), maintaining sewer and storm drain systems (92%), maintaining a low crime rate (91%), and providing fire protection and prevention services (90%) were viewed as the most important services among those tested.

44.6 39.1 41.7

31.1 41.1 38.2

50.7 46.9 46.4

52.3 47.6 49.4
Ver y
satisfied

52.1 43.2

33.3 36.2
Smwt
satisfied

39.5 50.551.3

48.4 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Less than
5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Latino /
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian
/ White
Mixed or
other
Male Female
Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1) Ethnicity (QD6) Gender (QD2) % Respondents

35.2 38.0 40.9 39.7 37.1

47.5 49.9

54.4 49.4 46.9 50.3

43.1 38.641.047.9
Ver y
satisfied

44.2 36.7 50.1 50.1
Smwt
satisfied

35.5 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Own Rent Age (QD1) Child in Hsld (QD3) Home Ownership
Status (QD4)
% Respondents
City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 15City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

At the other end of the spectrum, providing a variety of public art (33%), eastside library services (34%), cultural and arts opportunities (51%), and services and programs for seniors (53%) were viewed as less important overall.

Question 6 For each of the services I read, please tell me whether the service is extremely important to you, very important, somewhat important, or not at all important.

FIGURE 7 IMPORTANCE OF SERVICES
Turning to the satisfaction component, Figure 8 sorts the same list of services according to the percentage of respondents who said they were either very or so mewhat satisfied with the City’s efforts to provide the service. For comparison pu rposes between the services, only respondents who held an opinion (satisfied or dissatisfied) are included in the figure. Those who did not have an opinion were removed from this analysis. Th e percentage who held an opinion for each ser- vice is shown to the right of the service label in parentheses. Thus, for example, among the 74% of respondents who expressed an opinion about the City’s efforts to provide emergency medical services, 50% were very satisfied and 49% were somewhat satisfied.

59.3 64.9

63.5 74.8

61.6 54.8

51.2 64.3

48.4 61.1

51.4 52.5

33.0 35.9

27.4 37.9

41.1 25.3

27.2 27.8

20.1 16.3

14.2 11.7

37.1 27.2

28.1 16.6

28.4 33.6

36.7 23.3

39.2 22.4

28.6 25.8

37.7 34.7

43.1 30.4

25.1 37.3

35.3 30.0

33.3 35.0

19.4 21.7
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Maintaining parks and open spaces
Providing emergency medical services
Maintaining sewer and storm drain systems
Maintaining a low crime rate
Providing fire protection and prevention services
Preparing the City for emergencies
Maintaining and repairing local streets and roads
Preserving the City’s small, beach-town character
Keeping public buildings, parks and facilities clean and attractive Providing neighborhood police patrols
Protecting the environment
Addressing homelessness
Maintaining public athletic fields
Addressing bike safety and e-bikes
Providing a variety of recreation programs for all ages Enforcing traffic laws
Removing graffiti
Providing special events such as concerts in the park, holiday fireworks Enforcing animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup Prov iding after-school programs and div ersion programs for y outh Providing services and programs for seniors
Providing cultural and arts opportunities
Providing eastside library services
Providing a variety of public art
% Respondents
Extremely important V ery important
City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 16City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

At the top of the list, respondents were most satisfied with the City’s efforts to provide emer- gency medical services (99% very or somewhat satisfied), followed by provide fire protection and prevention services (97%), remove graffiti ( 96%), provide services and programs for seniors (95%), provide a variety of recreation programs for all ages (95%), provide special events (95%), and keep public buildings, parks and facilities clean and attractive (93%). Respondents were somewhat less satisfied with the City’s efforts to address bike safety and e-bikes (53%), enforce animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup (67%), enforce traffic laws (69%), address homelessness (69%), and provide neighborhood police patrols (70%).

Question 7 For the same list of services I just read, I'd like you to tell me how satisfied you are with the job the City is doing to provide the serv ice. Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the City's efforts to: _____, or do you not have an opinion? FIGURE 8 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICES
DIFFERENTIATORS OF OPINION For the interested reader, Table 4 on the next page displays how the level of satisfaction with ea ch specific service test ed in Question 7 varied according to residents’ overall performance ratings for the City (see Overall Satisfaction on page 13). The table divides residents who were satisfied with the City’s overall performance into one group and those dissatisfied into a second group. Also displayed is the difference between the two groups in terms of the percentage who indicated they were satisfied with the City’s efforts to provide each service tested in Qu estion 7 (far right column). For convenience, the services are sorted by that difference, with the greatest differentiators of opinion near the top of the table.

49.7 65.2

49.9 34.8

41.6 48.8

44.9 35.1

39.8 31.9

40.4 39.0

27.8 30.5

27.9 31.7

33.5 25.8

27.6 25.8

22.5 25.6

24.8 18.1

48.9 31.3

46.3 60.1

53.0 44.9

48.1 57.2

52.1 59.7

50.7 50.2

57.1 53.3

55.1 50.7

46.3 48.8

46.7 44.2

46.7 42.9

42.6 34.7

10.0 6.9

8.0 6.6
1 4
3 5.2

3.8 4.2

6.5 6.5

13.2 12.6

16.1 9.8

13.5 19.7

15.8 25.1

21.3 19.2

20.3 27.1

3.5 7.9

5.7 9.8

5.0 9.5

12.4 12.3

20.1 2
1 1
2 1

6.7 1
2 1
1 2
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Provide emergency medical services [74%]
Provide fire protection and prevention services [93%]
Remove graffiti [82%]
Provide services and programs for seniors [56%]
Provide a variety of recreation programs for all ages [82%] Provide special events such as concerts in the park, holiday fireworks [93%] Keep public buildings, parks and facilities clean and attractive [98%] Maintain public athletic fields [86%]
Maintain sewer and storm drain systems [78%]
Prepare the City for emergencies [67%]
Maintain parks and open spaces [96%]
Provide after-school programs and diversion programs for youth [60%] Provide cultural and arts opportunities [76%]
Protect the environment [76%]
Provide a variety of public art [78%]
Provide eastside library services [54%]
Maintain a low crime rate [97%]
Maintain and repair local streets and roads [97%]
Preserve the City’s small, beach-town character [96%]
Provide neighborhood police patrols [85%]
Address homelessness [91%]
Enforce traffic laws [87%]
Enforce animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup [90%] Address bike safety and e-bikes [83%]
% Respondents Who Provided Opinion
Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 17City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

When compared with their counterparts, those satisfied with the City’s overall performance in providing city services were also more likely to express satisfaction with the City’s efforts to pro- vide each of the specific services tested in Question 7. With that said, the greatest specific differ- entiators of opinion between sati sfied and dissatisfied residents we re found with respect to the City’s efforts to enforce traffic laws, enforce animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup, and protect the environment.

TABLE 4 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICES BY OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH CITY Very or somewhat
satisfied
Very or somewhat
dissatisfied
Enforce traffic laws 71.0 36.1 34.9
Enforce animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup 70.2 38.7 31.5 Protect the environment 86.3 55.6 30.7
Provide cultural and arts opportunities 87.5 57.6 29.9
Address homelessness 72.6 42.8 29.7
Maintain sewer and storm drain systems 94.6 65.5 29.1
Provide eastside library services 84.7 56.9 27.8
Provide neighborhood police patrols 72.4 44.9 27.5
Provide special events such as concerts in the park and holiday fireworks 95.5 71.9 23.6 Preserve the City’s small, beach-town character 76.5 52.9 23.6 Maintain and repair local streets and roads 76.4 55.2 21.2 Prepare the City for emergencies 93.1 73.9 19.1
Maintain a low crime rate 81.1 64.3 16.8
Provide services and programs for seniors 96.0 79.3 16.7 Provide after-school programs and diversion programs for youth 91.0 74.8 16.2 Provide emergency medical services 99.3 91.4 7.9
Provide a variety of recreation programs for all ages 95.2 87.5 7.7 Remove graffiti 96.8 89.3 7.5
Provide a variety of public art 84.0 76.5 7.5
Provide fire protection and prevention services 97.4 91.0 6.4 Maintain parks and open spaces 91.6 86.0 5.7
Maintain public athletic fields 93.1 87.4 5.6
Keep public buildings, parks and facilities clean and attractive 93.5 89.3 4.2 Address bike safety and e-bikes 53.2 49.1 4.1
City's Overall Performance (Q5) Difference Between
Groups For Each
Service
% Respondents Satisfied With Each Service
Performance Needs & Priorities
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 18
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

P ERFORMANCE N EEDS & P RIORITIES
With a measure of the importance of a service to residents as well as a measure of satisfaction with the City’s efforts to prov ide the service, True North is able to examine the relationship between these two dimensions and identify areas where the City has the greatest opportunities to improve resident satisfaction—and identify fo r which services the City is meeting, and even exceeding, the majority of residents’ needs.

Rather than rely on averages to conduct this analysis, True North has developed an individual- ized approach to identifying priorities. This appr oach is built on the recognition that opinions will vary from resident to resident and that understanding this variation is required for assessing how well the City is meeting residents’ needs.2 Table 5 on the next page presents a grid based on the importance and satisfacti on scales. The horizontal ax is corresponds to the four impor- tance options, and the vertical sc ale corresponds to the four satisfaction options. The 16 cells within the grid are grouped into one of six categories based on how well the City is meeting, or not meeting, a resident’s needs for a particular service. The six groups are as follows:

Exceeding Needs The City is exceeding a respondent’s needs if a respondent is satisfied and the level of expressed satisfaction is higher than the importance that the respondent assigned to the service.

Meeting Needs,
Moderately
The City is moderately meeting a re spondent’s needs if the respondent is satisfied and the level of satisfaction is commensurate with the level of importance assigned to the service.

Meeting Needs,
Marginally
The City is marginally meeting a respondent’s needs if the respondent is satisfied with the City’s efforts to provide the service, but their level of satisfaction is lower than the level of importance assigned to the service.

Not Meeting Needs,
Marginally
The City is marginally not meeting a respondent’s needs if the respon- dent is somewhat dissatisfied, but the service is also viewed as just somewhat or not at all important.

Not Meeting Needs,
Moderately
The City is moderately not meeting a respondent’s needs if A) a respon- dent is very dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to provide the service, but the service is viewed somewhat or not at all important, or B) a respon- dent is somewhat dissatisfied and the service is very important.

Not Meeting Needs,
Severely
The City is severely not meeting a respondent’s needs if A) a respondent is dissatisfied and the service is view ed as extremely important, or B) a respondent is very dissatisfied and the service is viewed as very impor- tant.

2. Any tool that relies on the opinions of the average respondent will provide a limited and occasionally dis- torted picture of how well an agency is performing. The simple fact is that a city is not comprised of average residents—it is comprised of unique individuals who vary substantially in their opinions of the City’s perfor- mance in different service areas. Thus, although the arithmetic average of these individuals’ opinions is a useful statistic, it does not capture the variation in opinions that occurs among residents, and it is this varia- tion that is critical for truly assessing how well the City is meeting the needs of its residents.

Performance Needs & Priorities
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 19City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLE 5 NEEDS & PRIORITIES
Using this framework, True North categorized respondents individually for each of the 24 ser- vices tested in the study. Thus, for example, a respondent who indicated that addressing bike safety and e-bikes was somewhat important and they were very satisfied with the City’s efforts in this service area would be categorized in the exceeding needs group for this service. The same respondent may be grouped in the marginally not meeting needs group for another service (e.g., enforcing animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup) if they were somewhat dis- satisfied with the City’s efforts to provide the service, but the service was viewed as only some- what important.

Figure 9 on the next page presents the 24 servic es tested, along with the percentage of respon- dents who were grouped into each of the six possible categories. For ease of interpretation, the color-coding in Figure 9 is consistent with that presented in Table 5. Thus, for example, in the service area of addressing bike safety and e- bikes, the City is exceeding the needs of 9% of respondents, moderately meeting the needs of 21% of respondents, marginally meeting the needs of 23% of respondents, marginally not meeting the needs of 4% of respondents, moder- ately not meeting the needs of 13% of responden ts, and severely not meeting the needs of 30% of respondents.

Perhaps the most important pattern that is shown in the figure is that—for the vast majority of services tested—the City is meeting the needs of at least 80% of residents. Further, the City is meeting the needs of at least two-thirds of residents for 23 of the 24 services tested.

Operating from the management philosophy that, all other things being equal, the City should focus on improving those services that have th e highest percentage of residents for which the City is currently not meeting their needs, the services ha ve been sorted by order of priority.

Thus, addressing bike safety and e-bikes is the top priority, followed by enforcing animal control laws such as leash-laws and waste cleanup, enforcing traffic laws, and addressing homelessness.

Not at all
important
Somewhat
important Very important
Extremely
important
Very satisfied Exceeding needs Exceeding needs Meeting needs, moderately
Meeting needs,
moderately
Somewhat satisfied Exceeding needs Meeting needs,
moderately
Meeting needs,
marginally
Meeting needs,
marginally
Somewhat dissatisfied Not meeting
needs, marginally
Not meeting
needs, marginally
Not meeting
needs,
moderately
Not meeting
needs, severely
Very dissatisfied
Not meeting
needs,
moderately
Not meeting
needs,
moderately
Not meeting
needs, severely
Not meeting
needs, severely
Importance
Satisfaction
Performance Needs & Priorities
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 20City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURE 9 RESIDENT SERVICE NEEDS
2 4
15 11
5 15
4 7
2 3
1 11
14 4
23 19
3 4
3 4
3 7
12 9
51 65
50 42
52 52
47 44
40 35
42 47
40 37
38 42
34 30
30 28
31 31
30 21
45 27
32 42
37 26
41 41
49 53
49 32
31 43
22 22
43 41
42 38
35 30
25 23
0 8
6 0
1 1
4 2
5 6
4 1
1 2
2 4
2 2
1 3
4 4
6 4
1 4
7 5
5 8
6 13
1 3
4 3
5 6
8 5
7 10
4 6
19 21
17 21
24 18
21 30
0 2
1 0
3 0
4 3
1 0
1 1
2 1
2 3
2 1
0 2
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Providing emergency medical services
Providing fire protection and prevention services
Rem oving gr affiti
Providing services and programs for seniors
Providing a variety of recreation programs for all ages Providing special events, concerts in park, holiday fireworks Keeping public buildings, parks, facilities clean and attractive Maintaining public athletic fields
Maintaining sewer and storm drain systems
Preparing the City for emergencies
Maintaining parks and open spaces
Providing after-school programs and diversion programs for youth Providing cultural and arts opportunities
Protecting the environment
Providing a variety of public art
Providing eastside library services
Maintaining a low crime rate
Preserving the City’s small, beach-town character
Maintaining and repairing local streets and roads
Providing neighborhood police patrols
Addressing homelessness
Enforcing traffic laws
Enforcing animal control laws such as leash-laws, waste cleanup Addressing bike safety and e-bikes
% Respondents who Provided Opinion
Exceeding needs
Meeting needs
mo derately
Meeting needs
marginally
Not meeting needs
marginally
Not meeting needs
mo derately
Not meeting needs
severely
Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 21
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

S AFETY , C ODE E NFORCEMENT &

H OMELESSNESS
The next section of the report explores resi dents’ opinions regarding perceived safety, code enforcement, and homelessness in Manhattan Beach.

SAFETY Ensuring the personal safety of residents is the most basic functi on of local govern- ment. It is important to keep in mind, of course, that public safety is as much a matter of percep- tions as it is a matter of reality. Regardless of actual crime statistics, if residents don’t feel safe then they will not enjoy the many cultural, recreational, and shopping opportunities available in the City of Manhattan Beach that will enhance their quality of life.

Overall, 93% of respondents indicated that they feel Manhattan Beach is a safe place to live, with 48% describing it as very safe. Conversely, 6% of re sidents reported that the City is either a very unsafe (1%) or somewhat unsafe (5%) place to live (see Figure 10).

Question 8 Overall, how safe is the City of Manhattan Beach as a place to live? Would you say it is very safe, somewhat safe, somewhat unsafe, or very unsafe? FIGURE 10 PERCEIVED SAFETY OF CITY
Figures 11-12 display perceptions of safety by a
host of demographic characteristics. Across nearly
every subgroup, approxim ately nine-in-ten resi-
dents perceived Manhattan Beach to be a safe
place to live. The one no table exception to this
pattern occurs among those who were generally
dissatisfied with the City’s overall efforts to pro-
vide municipal services.

FIGURE 11 PERCEIVED SAFETY OF CITY BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH, OVERALL SATISFACTION & AGE Very safe

47.8 Somewhat safe

45.6 Prefer not to
answer

0.3 Very unsafe

0.9 Somewhat
unsafe

5.4 49.3

75.9 66.3

49.9 43.0 38.4 44.3

47.0 32.4

21.1 28.1

46.2 48.3

49.6 53.5

47.2 37.2

49.0 Ver y
safe

58.4 37.0

46.1 54.6

45.9 Smwt
safe

36.7 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Satisfied Dissatisfied 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1) Overall Satisfaction (Q5) Age (QD1) % Respondents
Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 22City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURE 12 PERCEIVED SAFETY OF CITY BY ETHNICITY, GENDER, CHILD IN HSLD & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS CODE ENFORCEMENT Respondents were next informed that the City has created codes to address and prevent a variety of issues that can negatively impact a neighborhood, such as non- permitted construction, junk storage, noise issues, and smoking in public. They were then asked if, in general, they are satisfied or dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to enforce code violations, or if they do not have an opinion on the matter.

Overall, 58% of residents indicated they were ve ry satisfied (22%) or so mewhat satisfied (36%) with the City efforts in this area, whereas 22% were dissatisfied and 21% of residents did not have an opinion. Examining only those with an opinion, nearly three-fourths (73%) indicated they were satisfied with the City’s code enforcement efforts, while the remaining one-fourth (27%) were dissatisfied.

Question 9 The City of Manhattan Beach has created codes to address and prevent a variety of issues that can negatively impact a neighborhood, such as non-permitted construction, junk storage, noise issues, and smoking in public. Over all, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the City's efforts to enforce code violations, or do you not have an opinion? FIGURE 13 SATISFACTION WITH CITY’S EFFORTS TO ENFORCE CODE VIOLATIONS

48.6 42.1

51.5 43.3

56.6 46.3 44.7 51.7

42.4 48.2

41.8 48.1
Ver y
safe

49.8 45.0 50.4

39.1 Smwt
safe

48.1 50.8

44.245.4
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Latino /
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian /
White
Mixed or
other
Male Female Yes No Own Rent
Ethnicity (QD6) Gender (QD2) Child in Hsld (QD3) Home Ownership Status (QD4)
% Respondents
Very satisfied

22.2 Somewhat
satisfied

35.5 Prefer not to
answer

1.1 Somewhat
dissatisfied

14.8 Very
dissatisfied

7.0 Not sur e

19.4 Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 23City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figures 14 and 15 demonstrate how satisfaction with the City’s code enforcement efforts varied by length of residence, overall sa tisfaction, age, ethnicity, gen der, presence of a child in the household, and home ownership status. When compared to their respective counterparts, younger residents (under 25), Asian Americans, those identifying as mixed/other ethnicities, and those who were generally dissatisfied with the Ci ty’s overall performance in providing municipal services were also among the least likely to expr ess satisfaction with the City’s code enforce- ment efforts.

FIGURE 14 SATISFACTION WITH CITY’S EFFORTS TO ENFORCE CODE VIOLATIONS BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH,

OVERALL SATISFACTION & AGE
FIGURE 15 SATISFACTION WITH CITY’S EFFORTS TO ENFORCE CODE VIOLATIONS BY ETHNICITY, GENDER, CHILD IN

HSLD & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS
Respondents who reported that they were dissati sfied with the City’s code enforcement efforts were subsequently asked if their dissatisfaction was motivated by a particular issue or violation in their neighborhood. Construction issues and concerns (24%), no-smoking regulations and vio- lations (21%), and noise ordinance violations (18%) were the topics most commonly mentioned among those dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to enforce code violations (see Figure 16 on the next page).

23.9 18.8

30.1 25.6 26.9

15.8 15.3

37.5 22.7

25.1 26.9 30.9 36.4

39.1 46.4

13.1 Ver y
satisfied

26.3 31.0

21.7 18.5
Smwt
satisfied

34.0 36.737.7

31.6 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Satisfied Dissatisfied 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1) Overall Satisfaction (Q5) Age (QD1) % Respondents

20.7 26.1 19.7 20.9 27.2

40.4 31.1

38.6 34.6 38.9 30.5

21.921.821.3
Ver y
satisfied

28.7 24.1

27.7 37.5

23.2 Smwt
satisfied

47.1 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Latino /
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian /
White
Mixed or
other
Male Female Yes No Own Rent
Ethnicity (QD6) Gender (QD2) Child in Hsld (QD3) Home Ownership Status (QD4)
% Respondents
Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 24City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Question 10 Is there a particular issue or code violation in your neighborhood the City isn't addressing that leads you to be dissatisfied?
FIGURE 16 ISSUE, CODE VIOLATION NOT MENTIONED
HOMELESSNESS Most cities in Los Angeles County wi tnessed an increase in homelessness over the past few years, including a 12.7% increase between 2019 and 2020 countywide. 3 Antic- ipating that homelessness would be an importan t topic for residents, the survey addressed this issue head-on by asking respondents how they think the City should deal with homelessness.

Question 11 Over the past year, would you say the amount of homeless people in the City of Manhattan Beach has decreased, stayed about the same, or increased? FIGURE 17 PERCEIVED NUMBER OF HOMELESS IN PAST YEAR
Respondents were first asked whether they
thought the amount of homeless people in the
City of Manhattan Beach has decreased, stayed
about the same, or increased over the past year.

As shown in Figure 17, 43% of residents felt the
number of homeless has stayed about the
same, whereas 37% perceived that the number
has increased, 4% thought the number has
decreased, and 16% were unsure.

3. Source: Los Angeles County Homeless Services Authority 2020 Homeless Count.

23.5 21.4

17.8 13.3

10.1 8.5

8.3 7.6

7.2 5.4

4.4 1.9

5.8 0 5 10 15 20 25
Construction issues, concerns
No-smoking regulations, violations
Noise ordinance violations
Dog laws, violations
Lack of consistent enforcement
Cannot think of anything specific
Traffic law violations
Parking issues
Bike, e-bike issues
Building code concerns
Homelessness issues
Crime, public safety concerns
Short-term rental issues
% Respondents Dissatisfied With Code Enforcement (Q9)
Decreased

4.2 Stayed about
the same

42.9 Increased

37.0 Not sure

15.8 Prefer not to
answer

0.2 Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 25City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The two figures to follow display whether resp ondents felt homelessness in Manhattan Beach has increased or decreased over the past year by a variety of demographic characteristics. Of particular note is the strong relationship between perceived safety in the City and homelessness, with 71% of those who feel unsafe in Manhattan Beach reporting an increase in homelessness over the past year.

FIGURE 18 PERCEIVED NUMBER OF HOMELESS IN PAST YEAR BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH, OVERALL SATISFACTION & AGE
FIGURE 19 PERCEIVED NUMBER OF HOMELESS IN PAST YEAR BY ETHNICITY, GENDER, CHILD IN HSLD, HOME OWNERSHIP

STATUS & PERCEIVED SAFETY OF CITY
The next question in this series presented respondents with four strategies that could be used to address homelessness. For each of the strategies shown in Figu re 20, respondents were simply asked if the City should take this action. Of the strategies tested, joining with other cities and the County to create more regional homeless shelters garnered the most support (64%), followed by 4 4 5
10 1 2
6 4
27 40
49 36 35
53 18
23 39
55 37
29 5235
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Less than
5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Satisfied Dissatisfied 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1) Overall Satisfaction
(Q5)
Age (QD1)
% Respondents
Decreased Increased
5 4 2 5 4 5 4 2
27 43
35 44
37 36
42 33
41 31
35 71
13 33
9 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
Latino /
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian
/ White
Mixed or
other
Male Female Yes No Own Rent Safe Unsafe
Ethnicity (QD6) Gender (QD2) Child in Hsld (QD3) Home Ownership Status (QD4)
Perceived Safety of
City (Q8)
% Respondents
Decreased Increased
Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 26City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
enhancing lighting and modifying benches in public areas to deter overnight camping (63%), pro- viding funding for mental health facilities, street outreach, and housing placement (57%), and providing counseling and rehab for drug and al cohol addiction (56%). Tables 6-9 display how support for each strategy varied across resident subgroups. Interestingly, those who perceived an increase in the amount of homeless people in Manhattan Beach during the past two years were less likely than their counterparts to suppo rt regional homeless shelters, counseling, and funding for mental health facilities and hous ing placement, but were strongly supportive of actions that would deter overnight camping.

Question 12 How do you think the City should address the homeless issue? Should it: _____? FIGURE 20 OPINION OF CITY ADDRESSING HOMELESS
TABLE 6 OPINION OF CITY ADDRESSING HOMELESS BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH & OVERALL SATISFACTION (SHOWING % YES)
TABLE 7 OPINION OF CITY ADDRESSING HOMELESS BY AGE (SHOWING % YES) TABLE 8 OPINION OF CITY ADDRESSING HOMELESS BY ETHNICITY & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS (SHOWING % YES)

64.2 62.7

57.1 56.1

19.4 21.8

23.4 22.8

15.1 14.2

18.0 19.3
1 2
2 1
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Join with other cities, County to create more regional
homeless shelters
Enhance lighting and modify benches in public areas to
deter overnight camping
Provide funding for mental health facilities, street outreach, and housing placement
Provide counseling and rehab for drug and alcohol
addiction
% Respondents
Yes No Not sure Prefer not to answer
Overall Satisfaction (Q5)
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Satisfied Dissatisfied Join with other cities and the County to create more regional homeless shelters 55.6 58.1 70.6 67.1 56.2 52.2 Enhance lighting, modify benches in public areas to deter overnight camping 58.2 61.6 73.9 61.5 57.1 57.4 Provide funding for mental health facilities, street outreach, housing placement 63.7 63.8 55.5 53.7 64.1 52.6 Provide counseling, rehab for drug, alcohol addiction 56.1 54.1 54.9 57.2 65.5 51.7 Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1)
18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Join with other cities and the County to create more regional homeless shelters 81.3 59.3 55.8 63.1 65.0 75.5 E n h a n c e l i g h t i n g , m o d i f y b e n c h e s i n p u b l i c a r e a s t o d e t e r o v e r n i g h t c a m p i n g 3 1 . 43 9 . 25 6 . 87 5 . 85 8 . 77 7 . 4 P r o v i d e f u n d i n g f o r m e n t a l h e a l t h f a c i l i t i e s , s t r e e t o u t r e a c h , h o u s i n g p l a c e m e n t 8 3 . 97 6 . 05 6 . 85 8 . 44 8 . 04 7 . 3 P r o v i d e c o u n s e l i n g , r e h a b f o r d r u g , a l c o h o l a d d i c t i o n 8 0 . 66 9 . 95 0 . 65 0 . 05 0 . 16 1 . 0 Age (QD1)
Latino/
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian
/ White
Mixed or
other Own Rent
Join with other cities and the County to create more regional homeless shelters 62.2 66.5 65.4 70.8 64.3 62.9 Enhance lighting, modify benches in public areas to deter overnight camping 67.5 55.8 61.2 75.9 67.4 55.9 Provide funding for mental health facilities, street outreach, housing placement 57.5 38.6 60.7 67.4 50.2 71.7 Provide counseling, rehab for drug, alcohol addiction 52.7 40.9 59.0 60.0 50.0 67.9 Ethnicity (QD6)
Home Ownership
Status (QD4)
Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 27City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLE 9 OPINION OF CITY ADDRESSING HOMELESS BY PERCEIVED SAFETY OF CITY & PERCEPTION OF HOMELESS IN PAST YEAR (SHOWING % YES)
Safe Unsafe Decreased
Stayed about
same Increased
Join with other cities and the County to create more regional homeless shelters 64.4 61.1 70.8 70.3 55.4 Enhance lighting, modify benches in public areas to deter overnight camping 62.3 71.7 53.8 57.1 76.9 P r o v i d e f u n d i n g f o r m e n t a l h e a l t h f a c i l i t i e s , s t r e e t o u t r e a c h , h o u s i n g p l a c e m e n t 5 8 . 24 1 . 86 7 . 46 4 . 74 7 . 4 Provide counseling, rehab for drug, alcohol addiction 57.5 36.0 73.8 62.9 45.7 Perceived Safety
of City (Q8)
Perception of Homeless
in Past Year (Q11)
Spending Priorities
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 28
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

S PENDING P RIORITIES
It is often the case that residents’ desires for public facilities and programs exceed a city’s finan- cial resources. In such cases, a city must prioritize projects and programs based upon a variety of factors, including the prefer ences and needs of residents. Question 13 was designed to pro- vide Manhattan Beach with a reliable measure of how residents, as a whole, prioritize a variety of projects, programs, and improvements to which th e City could allocate re sources in the future.

The format of the question was straightforward: after informing respondents that the City does not have the financial resources to fund all of the services and projects that may be desired by residents, respondents were asked whether each project shown in Figure 21 should be a high, medium, or low priority for futu re city spending—or if the City should not spend money on the project at all.

Question 13 The City of Manhattan Beach has limited financial resources to provide the ser- vices and programs desired by residents. Because it can't fund every service, program and proj- ect, the City must set priorities . As I read each of the following items, please indicate whether you think the City should make th e item a high priority, a medium priority, or a low priority for future city spending. If you feel the City should not spend any money on this item, just say so.

Please keep in mind that not all of the items can be high priorities.

FIGURE 21 SPENDING PRIORITIES
The projects and programs are sorted in Figure 21 from high to low based on the percentage of respondents who indicated that an item was at least a medium priority for future city spending.

Among the projects tested, fixi ng potholes and repairing and improving city streets and side- walks was assigned the highest priority (90% high or medium priority), followed by repairing and upgrading the City’s sewer and wastewater sy stems (84%), and improving the maintenance of parks and park amenities including restrooms, sp orts courts, and dog runs (80%). At the other

54.6 50.5

32.0 33.1

13.4 8.4

16.6 18.3

4.0 35.0

33.8 48.2

26.7 32.3

37.3 26.1

23.6 16.1
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Fix potholes and repair and improve city streets and sidewalks Repair and upgrade the City’s sewer and wastewater systems Improve maintenance of parks and park amenities including restrooms, sports courts, dog runs
Redesign public spaces to allow for outdoor dining areas Restore and enhance nature areas throughout Sand Dune Park Renovate, improve the City’s Community Centers including the Joslyn, Manhattan Heights, Sand Dune Community Centers
Reconstruct and improve the City’s swimming pool - Begg Pool Provide low-cost, on-demand rideshare services so residents can visit restaurants, shops, and business areas in the City without having to park a vehicle
Create a Manhattan Beach Historical Museum to preserve and store historical documents
% Respondents
High priority Medium priority
Spending Priorities
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 29City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
end of the spectrum, only two-in-ten residents (20%) felt that creating a Manhattan Beach Histor- ical Museum to preserve and store historical documents should be a high or medium priority for city spending.

Tables 10-11 show how the perce ntage who rated each item a high priority varied across Man- hattan Beach subgroups, with th e top three items within each ca tegory highlighted in green to ease comparisons.

TABLE 10 SPENDING PRIORITIES BY OVERALL SATISFACTION & AGE (SHOWING % HIGH PRIORITY) TABLE 11 SPENDING PRIORITIES BY ETHNICITY, GENDER, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CHILD IN HSLD (SHOWING %

HIGH PRIORITY)
Satisfied Dissatisfied 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Fix potholes and repair and improve city streets and sidewalks 56.5 38.4 44.1 37.6 46.5 50.5 58.9 70.7 Repair and upgrade the City’s sewer and wastewater systems 52.6 32.5 43.1 33.9 45.6 49.5 53.6 62.4 Redesign public spaces to allow for outdoor dining areas 33.4 29.4 35.7 44.1 44.2 36.7 24.5 19.8 Improve maintenance of parks and park amenities including restrooms, sports courts, dog runs 32.3 32.8 24.7 29.7 42.9 33.0 28.0 27.3 Provide low-cost, on-demand rideshare services so residents can visit restaurants, shops, and business areas in the City without having to park a vehicle

18.1 20.0 35.1 33.9 17.5 4.8 10.4 28.4
Reconstruct and improve the City’s swimming pool - Begg Pool 16.3 21.0 10.1 11.0 17.0 17.6 22.9 16.8 Restore and enhance nature areas throughout Sand Dune Park 13.7 13.7 17.7 19.6 15.3 13.3 10.7 10.8 Renovate, improve the City’s Community Centers including the Joslyn, Manhattan Heights, Sand Dune Community Centers 8.3 6.0 5.4 8.6 9.2 3.4 11.7 11.6 Create a Manhattan Beach Historical Museum to preserve
and store historical documents 4.1 3.8 7.0 12.8 0.7 2.2 2.9 3.8 Age (QD1)Overall Satisfaction (Q5)
Latino/
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian
/ White
Mixed or
other Male Female Own Rent Yes No
Fix potholes and repair and improve city streets and sidewalks 55.5 63.4 52.5 58.6 53.0 56.9 57.4 50.4 47.3 60.2 Repair and upgrade the City’s sewer and wastewater systems 39.6 60.0 51.2 44.0 48.3 53.0 52.5 47.2 45.8 53.8 Redesign public spaces to allow for outdoor dining areas 38.8 21.8 35.7 35.1 29.6 37.4 30.9 39.6 37.1 30.6 Improve maintenance of parks and park amenities including restrooms, sports courts, dog runs 50.1 22.7 30.8 37.2 31.7 32.2 32.7 29.0 44.3 24.4 Provide low-cost, on-demand rideshare services so residents can visit restaurants, shops, and business areas in the City without having to park a vehicle

34.9 12.7 18.0 23.8 16.5 20.8 16.9 19.3 11.2 22.6
Reconstruct and improve the City’s swimming pool - Begg Pool 16.5 13.0 19.0 9.4 16.0 17.4 19.0 12.7 24.2 12.7 Restore and enhance nature areas throughout Sand Dune Park 32.0 13.1 12.6 11.5 14.7 12.7 11.3 18.0 16.4 11.3 Renovate, improve the City’s Community Centers including the Joslyn, Manhattan Heights, Sand Dune Community Centers 21.2 6.8 7.4 7.7 8.6 8.2 9.9 5.0 9.2 7.8 Create a Manhattan Beach Historical Museum to preserve
and store historical documents 14.6 0.0 3.5 0.0 4.3 3.8 2.7 5.1 2.7 4.5 Child in Hsld (QD3)Ethnicity (QD6) Gender (QD2)
Home Ownership
Status (QD4)
Local Government & Customer Service
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 30
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

L OCAL G OVERNMENT & C USTOMER

S ERVICE
Although much of the survey focused on residents’ satisfaction with the City’s efforts to provide specific services, the City of Manhattan Beach also recognizes there is more to good governance than simply providing satisfactory services. Do re sidents perceive that the City is responsive to their needs and listens to them when making important decisions? Do residents feel that staff serves their needs in a professional and helpful manner? Do residents trust the City of Manhattan Beach? Answers to questions like these are as important as service or policy-related questions in measuring the City’s performance in meeting residents’ needs. Accordingly, they were the focus of the next section of the survey.

PERCEPTIONS OF CITY GOVERNMENT The first question in this series was designed to measure how residents perceive the City re garding its responsiveness to residents’ needs, management of funds, and tendency to listen to residents when making important decisions, as well as their trust of the City in general. For each of the statements shown on the left of Figure 22, respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed with the statement.

Approximately two-thirds of residen ts agreed with the statements I trust the City of Manhattan Beach (67%) and The City is responsive to residents’ needs (66%). A majority (56%) agreed that The City listens to residents when making important decisions , whereas just under half of resi- dents (47%) agreed that The City manages its finances well —although it should be noted that just one-third of respondents (34%) were also unsure how to rate the City on the latter dimen- sion.

Question 14 Next, I'm going to read you a series of statements about the City of Manhattan Beach. For each, I'd like you to tell me whether you agree or disagree with the statement.

FIGURE 22 AGREEMENT WITH CITY STATEMENTS

18.5 14.3

12.7 12.9

48.4 51.3

43.2 34.3

13.1 13.4

16.9 13.1

5.6 7.6

5.4 14.3

15.5 19.6

34.3 5.7
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
I trust the City of
Manhattan Beach
City is responsive to
residents’ needs
City listens to residents
when making important
decisions
City manages its finances
well
% Respondents
Strongly agree Sm wt agree Sm wt disagree Strongly disagree DK/NA Local Government & Customer Service
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 31City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tables 12-15 on the following page show how agreement with each statement varied by years in Manhattan Beach, overall satisfac tion, respondent age, ethnicity, home ownership status, per- ceived safety in the City of Manhattan Beach, and perceptions regarding the number of homeless in the City over the past year. In general, re sidents who have lived in Manhattan Beach between five and nine years, Latino/Hispanic respondents, residents satisfied with the City’s overall per- formance, and those who feel safe in Manhattan Beach reported higher levels of agreement with the statements when compared to their respective counterparts.

TABLE 12 AGREEMENT WITH CITY STATEMENTS BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN & OVERALL SATISFACTION (SHOWING %

AGREEMENT)
TABLE 13 AGREEMENT WITH CITY STATEMENTS BY AGE (SHOWING % AGREEMENT) TABLE 14 AGREEMENT WITH CITY STATEMENTS BY ETHNICITY & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS (SHOWING % AGREEMENT) TABLE 15 AGREEMENT WITH CITY STATEMENTS BY PERCEIVED SAFETY OF CITY & PERCEPTION OF HOMELESS IN PAST YEAR (SHOWING % AGREEMENT)
CONTACT WITH CITY STAFF Residents were next asked if they had been in contact with City of Manhattan Beach staff in the past 12 mo nths. Figure 23 on the next page presents the findings of this question and shows that 47% of residents indicated they had contact with city staff during the 12 months prec eding the interview, which based on True North’s experience is high for the pandemic period. Respondents 35 to 64 years of age, Asian Americans, those with a child in the household, and homeowners were the most likely to report having been in contact with city staff in the year prior to the interview (see figures 24 & 25).

Overall Satisfaction (Q5)
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Satisfied Dissatisfied I trust the City of Manhattan Beach 69.6 74.9 60.3 65.7 70.9 35.2 City is responsive to residents’ needs 69.0 71.6 58.8 64.6 70.1 32.2 City listens to residents when making important decisions 52.1 60.1 53.7 56.6 60.5 25.3 City manages its finances well 41.3 46.6 44.0 50.2 50.5 25.7 Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1)
18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older I trust the City of Manhattan Beach 58.8 51.6 74.2 75.2 58.2 71.0 City is responsive to residents’ needs 64.6 65.7 66.4 69.8 58.9 69.1 City listens to residents when making important decisions 59.2 49.5 59.0 58.2 51.7 59.4 City manages its finances well 53.2 32.0 46.1 48.4 40.5 61.3 Age (QD1)
Latino/
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian
/ White
Mixed or
other Own Rent
I trust the City of Manhattan Beach 90.7 66.7 65.9 67.2 67.4 67.5 City is responsive to residents’ needs 74.6 67.3 65.2 71.5 63.9 70.8 City listens to residents when making important decisions 65.0 62.5 56.3 42.5 56.5 55.5 City manages its finances well 55.1 53.8 48.9 24.4 48.0 45.5 Ethnicity (QD6)
Home Ownership
Status (QD4)
Safe Unsafe Decreased
Stayed about
same Increased
I trust the City of Manhattan Beach 68.5 47.1 47.3 69.6 65.6 City is responsive to residents’ needs 67.1 45.2 76.6 64.3 68.6 City listens to residents when making important decisions 56.5 49.4 60.6 59.9 53.9 City manages its finances well 48.0 37.0 62.7 49.6 49.7 Perceived Safety
of City (Q8)
Perception of Homeless
in Past Year (Q11)
Local Government & Customer Service
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 32City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Question 15 In the past 12 months, have you been in contact with staff from the City of Man- hattan Beach?
FIGURE 23 CONTACT CITY STAFF IN PAST 12 MONTHS
FIGURE 24 CONTACT CITY STAFF IN PAST 12 MONTHS BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH, OVERALL SATISFACTION & AGE
FIGURE 25 CONTACT CITY STAFF IN PAST 12 MONTHS BY ETHNICITY, GENDER, CHILD IN HSLD & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS
Prefer not to
answer

1.4 Not sure

3.5 Yes, contact
with City staff

46.5 No contact
with City staff

48.6 46.3

51.8 13.5

35.9 53.2 53.3

57.4 41.1

46.3 49.9 49.8

44.8 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
Less than
5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Satisfied Dissatisfied 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1) Overall Satisfaction
(Q5)
Age (QD1)
% Respondents With Staff
Contact in Past 12 Months

44.8 47.9 51.3

42.6 49.9

41.2 49.4

43.5 55.2

43.3 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
Latino /
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian /
White
Mixed or
other
Male Female Yes No Own Rent
Ethnicity (QD6) Gender (QD2) Child in Hsld (QD3) Home Ownership Status (QD4)
% Respondents With Staff
Contact in Past 12 Months
Local Government & Customer Service
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 33City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RATING CITY STAFF Presented only to residents who had been in contact with city staff in the past 12 months, Question 16 asked responden ts to rate staff on three dimensions: helpful- ness, professionalism, and accessibility. The find ings of this question are presented below in Figure 26. As shown in the figure, Manhattan Beach city staff received high marks on each dimension of customer service tested. Ninety-thr ee percent (93%) felt that city staff members were professional, 89% said they were accessible, and 85% considered staff to be helpful.

Question 16 In your opinion, was the staff at the City very _____, somewhat ______, or not at all _____.

FIGURE 26 PERCEPTION OF CITY STAFF...

59.8 42.9 43.3

32.8 45.6 41.6

12.1 2.8 3.3 2.94.6 8.2
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Professionalism Accessibility Helpfulness
Q16 Perception of city staff . . .
% Respondents With Staff
Contact in Past 12 Months
Not sure
Not at all
Somewhat
Very
Communications
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 34
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C OMMUNICATIONS
The importance of a city’s communication with its residents cannot be overstated. Much of a city’s success is shaped by the quality of information that is exchanged in both directions, from the city to the community and from the community to the city. This study is just one example of Manhattan Beach’s efforts to enhance the information flow to the City to better understand the community’s concerns, perceptions, and needs. Some of Manhattan Beach’s many efforts to communicate with its residents include its newsletters, timely press releases, social media posts, and its website. The following se ction presents the results of two communication-related ques- tions.

SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION Question 17 asked Manhattan Beach resi- dents to report their satisfaction with city-resident communication. Overall, 75% of respondents indicated they were satisfied with the City’s efforts to communicate with residents through news- letters, the Internet, social media, and other me ans. The remaining respondents were either dis- satisfied with the City’s efforts in this respect (16%), unsure of their opinion (9%), or unwilling to share their opinion (1%).

Question 17 Overall, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the City's efforts to communicate with residents through newsletters, the Internet, social media, and other means? FIGURE 27 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION
The next two figures display how satisfaction with the City’s efforts to communicate with resi- dents varied across a number of demographic subgroups. Satisfaction with the City’s communi- cation efforts varied somewhat across demographic subgroups, ranging between 68% and 81% at the extremes. It is also noteworthy that seni ors and Asian-American respondents were among the most satisfied subgroups with respect to the City’s communication efforts.

Prefer not to
answer

1.2 Not sure

8.5 Very
dissatisfied

4.2 Somewhat
dissatisfied

11.3 Very satisfied

24.4 Somewhat
satisfied

50.4 Communications
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 35City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURE 28 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION BY YEARS IN MANHATTAN BEACH, ETHNICITY & GENDER FIGURE 29 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION BY AGE, CHILD IN HSLD & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS INFORMATION SOURCES To help the City identify the most effective means of communi- cating with residents, it is helpful to understand what information sources they currently rely on for this type of information. In an open-ended manner, residents were asked to list the sources they typically use to find out about City of Manhattan Beach news, events, and programming.

Because respondents were allowed to describe up to three sources, the percentages shown in Figure 30 on the next page represent the percentage of residents who mentioned a source.

As shown in the figure, the most frequently-cited source for City of Manhattan Beach news, events, and programming was The Beach Reporter (49%), followed by Nextdoor.com (25%), Nixle/Alert South Bay (22%), the City’s website (22%), and email notifications from the City (21%).

Other sources mentioned by at least 10% of respondents included friends/family/associates (17%), Easy Reader (16%), social media (not the City’s sources) (15%), The Daily Breeze (14%), Manhappenings (11%), and Patch.com (10%).

32.7 25.1 24.3 27.0 22.0 27.4

43.2 56.0 51.0 52.4 56.3 44.2

22.124.318.3
Ver y
satisfied

37.5 56.0 47.0 52.5
Smwt
satisfied

41.7 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Less than
5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Latino /
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian
/ White
Mixed or
other
Male Female
Years in Manhattan Beach (Q1) Ethnicity (QD6) Gender (QD2) % Respondents

22.3 19.8 26.8 22.6 23.2 28.1

45.8 61.3 47.9 53.0 53.2 45.8
Ver y
satisfied

24.1 22.1 22.9

32.5 Smwt
satisfied

53.6 45.7

50.648.2
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Own Rent Age (QD1) Child in Hsld (QD3) Home Ownership
Status (QD4)
% Respondents
Communications
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 36City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Question 18 What information sources do you use to find out about City of Manhattan Beach news, events, and programs?
FIGURE 30 INFORMATION SOURCES
For the interested reader, figure s 31 and 32 consolidate the information sources into general categories and show how their use varied by ag e, overall satisfaction, home ownership status, and ethnicity. Reliance on City sources and ne wspapers generally increased with age, whereas younger residents were most apt to consult the Internet and social media for information about news, events, and programs in Manhattan Beach.

FIGURE 31 INFORMATION SOURCES BY OVERALL & AGE

49.3 24.9

22.2 22.0

21.0 17.3

15.8 15.4

13.7 10.3

9.5 8.4

8.0 2.6

2.3 2.0

1.1 1.0

1.0 0.7

9.0 10.9
0 1 02 03 04 05 0
The Beach Reporter
Nextdoor.com
Nixle/Alert South Bay notification system
City website
Email notifications from City
Friends/Family/Associates/word of mouth
Easy Reader
Non-City Social Media, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube The Daily Breeze
Manhappenings brochure
Patch.com
Internet (not City’s site)
Letters, postcards, flyers or brochures mailed from City to your home Los Angeles Times
City’s social media posts on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube Television (general)
Other
City Council Meetings
HOA or neighborhood association
Not sure
Do Not Receive Information about City
Radio
% Respondents
66 54
40 52
60 78
91 70
29 80
51 59
69 61
58 45
29 23
16 24
18 22
27 28
2 7
2 2
0 1
1 48
74 74
77 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Overall Age (QD1)
% Respondents
Newspapers
City Sources
Internet & Social Media
Other
Not sure / No sources
Communications
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 37City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURE 32 INFORMATION SOURCES BY OVERALL SATISFACTION, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & ETHNICITY 64 77
71 55
54 52
69 68
70 67
74 51
46 46
63 42
52 52
52 23
27 23
24 14
30 23
22 2
0 1
3 4
0 1
0 71
84 68
64 74
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Satisfied Dis-satisfied Own Rent Latino /
Hispanic
Asian
American
Caucasian /
White
Mixed or
other
Overall Satisfaction (Q5) Home Ownership Status
(QD4)
Ethnicity (QD6)
% Respondents
Newspapers
City Sources
Internet & Social Media
Other
Not sure / No sources
Background & Demographics
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 38
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B ACKGROUND & D EMOGRAPHICS
TABLE 16 DEMOGRAPHICS OF SAMPLE
Table 16 presents the key demographic information
collected during the surve y. Although the primary
motivation for collecting the background and demo-
graphic information was to provide a better insight
into how the results of the substantive questions of
the survey vary by demographic characteristics, it was
also a means to ensure that the resulting sample
matched the profile of Manhattan Beach’s adult resi-
dent population on key ch aracteristics according to
the latest Census estimates.

Total Respondents 560
Q2 Years in Manhattan Beach %
Less than 5 16.6
5 to 9 15.9
10 to 14 14.5
15 or more 52.9
Prefer not to answer 0.1
Age (QD1)
18 to 24 5.6
25 to 34 11.4
35 to 44 18.8
45 to 54 23.5
55 to 64 17.6
65 or older 20.2
Prefer not to answer 2.9
Gender (QD2)
Male 51.7
Female 46.0
Prefer not to answer 2.3
Child in Hsld (QD3)
Yes 37.9
No 58.3
Prefer not to answer 3.8
Home Ownership Status (QD4)
Own 66.8
Rent 29.2
Prefer not to answer 4.0
Employment Status (QD5)
Full-time 55.9
Part-time 6.1
Student 3.3
Homemaker 6.1
Retired 21.2
Prefer not to answer 7.2
Ethnicity (QD6)
Latino / Hispanic 6.6
Asian American 11.0
Caucasian / White 69.1
Mixed or other 5.3
Prefer not to answer 7.9
Methodology
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 39
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M ETHODOLOGY
The following sections outline the methodology used in the study, as well as the motivation for using certain techniques.

QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT Dr. McLarney of True North Research worked closely with the City of Manhattan Beach to develop a qu estionnaire that covered the topics of interest and avoided many possible source s of systematic measurement e rror, including position-order effects, wording effects, response-category effect s, scaling effects, and priming. Several ques- tions included multiple individual items. Because asking items in a set order can lead to a sys- tematic position bias in responses, the items were asked in a random order for each respondent.

Some questions asked in this study were presen ted only to a subset of respondents. For exam- ple, only respondents who indicated they were dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to enforce code violations (Question 9) were asked to detail the particular issue or code violation leading to their dissatisfaction (Question 10). The questi onnaire included with this report (see Questionnaire & Toplines on page 42) identifies the skip patterns us ed during the interview to ensure that each respondent received the appropriate questions.

PROGRAMMING & PRE-TEST Prior to fielding the survey, the questionnaire was CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone In terviewing) programmed to assist interviewers when conduct- ing the telephone interviews. The CATI program automatically navigates the skip patterns, ran- domizes the appropriate question items, and alerts interviewers to certain types of keypunching mistakes should they happen during the interview. The survey was also programmed into a pass- code-protected online survey application to allow online participation for sampled residents. The integrity of the questionnaire was pre-tested internally by True North and by dialing into random homes in the City prior to formally beginning the survey.

SAMPLE, RECRUITING & DATA COLLECTION A comprehensive database of Manhat- tan Beach households was utilized for this study, ensuring that all households in Manhattan Beach had the opportunity to be selected to part icipate in the survey. Once selected at random, contact information was appended to each record including email addresses and telephone num- bers for adult residents. Indivi duals were subsequently recruit ed to participate in the survey through multiple recruiting methods. Using a combination of email and text invitations, sampled residents were initially invited to participate in the survey online at a secure, passcode-protected website designed and hosted by True North. Each individual was assigned a unique passcode to ensure that only Manhattan Beach residents who received an invitation could access the online survey site, and that the surve y could be completed only one time per passcode. An email reminder notice was also sent to encourage participation among those who had yet to take the survey. Following a period of online data coll ection, True North placed telephone calls to land lines and cell phone numbers of sampled residents that had yet to partic ipate in the online sur- vey or for whom only telephone contact information was available.

Telephone interviews averaged 18 minutes in length and were conducted during weekday eve- nings (5:30PM to 9PM) and on weekends (10AM to 5PM). It is standard practice not to call during the day on weekdays because most working adults are unavailable and thus calling during those Methodology
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 40City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
hours would bias the sample. A total of 560 completed surveys were gathered online and by tele- phone between December 6 and December 12, 2021.

MARGIN OF ERROR DUE TO SAMPLING The results of the survey can be used to esti- mate the opinions of all adult residents in the City. Because not every adult resident of the City participated in the survey, however, the results have what is known as a statistical margin of error due to sampling. The margin of error refers to the difference between what was found in the survey of 560 adult residents for a particular question and what would have been found if all of the estimated 26,026 adult residents4 had been interviewed.

Figure 33 provides a plot of the maximum margin of error in this study. The maximum margin of error for a dichotomous percentage result occurs when the answers are evenly split such that 50% provide one response and 50% provide the al ternative response. For this survey, the maxi- mum margin of error is ± 4.1% for questions answered by all 560 respondents.

FIGURE 33 MAXIMUM MARGIN OF ERROR
Within this report, figures and tables show how responses to ce rtain questions varied by demo- graphic characteristics such as length of residence and age of th e respondent. Figure 33 is thus useful for understanding how the maximum margin of error for a percentage estimate will grow as the number of individuals asked a question (or in a particular subgroup) shrinks. Because the margin of error grows exponentially as the sample size decreases, the reader should use caution when generalizing and interpreting the results for small subgroups.

4. Source: U.S. Census Bureau estimate for Manhattan Beach, April 2020. 560 Respondents
± 4.1%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 Sample Size (Number of Respondents)
Margin of Error
Methodology
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 41City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DATA PROCESSING & WEIGHTING Data processing consisted of checking the data for errors or inconsistencies, coding and recoding responses, categorizing verbatim responses, and preparing frequency analyses and cross-tabulations. The final data were weighted to balance the sample by age and home ownership status according to Census estimates.

ROUNDING Numbers that end in 0.5 or higher are rounded up to the nearest whole num- ber, whereas numbers that end in 0.4 or lower are rounded down to the nearest whole number.

These same rounding rules are also applied, when needed, to arrive at numbers that include a decimal place in constructing figures and charts. Occasionally, these rounding rules lead to small discrepancies in the first decimal place when comparing tables and figures for a given question.

Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 42
City of Manhattan Beach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q UESTIONNAIRE & T OPLINES

True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 1
City of Manhattan Beach
Community Opinion Survey
Final Toplines (n=560)
December 2021
Section 1: Introduction to Study
Hi, may I please speak to: _____. Hi, my name is _____ and I’m calling from TNR on behalf of the City of Manhattan Beach. The City is conducting a survey of residents about important issues in Manhattan Beach and would like to get your opinions.

If needed: This is a survey about important issues in your community. I’m NOT trying to sell anything and I won’t ask for a donation.

If needed: Your answers to the survey will be confidential.

If needed: The survey should take about 12 minutes to complete.

If needed: If now is not a convenient time, can you let me know a better time so I can call back?
If needed: TNR is an independent public opinion research firm. TNR was hired by the City to design and conduct the survey.

Section 2: Quality of Life
I’d like to begin by asking you a few questions about what it is like to live in the City of Manhattan Beach.

Q1 How long have you lived in the City of Manhattan Beach? 1 Less than 1 year 3%
2 1 to 4 years 14%
3 5 to 9 years 16%
4 10 to 14 years 14%
5 15 years or longer 53%
99 Not Sure/Prefer not to answer 0%
Q2 How would you rate: _____? Would you say it is excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor? Always ask A first, then randomize
remaining items
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Not sure
Prefer not to
answer
A The overall quality of life in Manhattan
Beach 58% 37% 5% 0% 1% 0% 0%
B Manhattan Beach as a place to raise a
family 50% 34% 9% 1% 1% 4% 1%
C Manhattan Beach as a place to work 23% 31% 13% 4% 2% 23% 4% D Manhattan Beach as a place to retire 32% 28% 17% 7% 3% 11% 1% E Manhattan Beach as a place to shop and
dine 38% 43% 15% 2% 1% 0% 0%
F Manhattan Beach as a place to recreate 48% 37% 8% 1% 2% 3% 1% Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 43City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 2

Q3
What do you like most about the City of Manhattan Beach that should be preserved in the future? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below. Categories mentioned by at least 2% of respondents shown here.

Small town feel, charming beach
community 17%
Public safety, low crime rate 16%
Beach, ocean 14%
Cleanliness, appearance, beauty of City 13%
Community, friendly people, family
atmosphere 12%
Local businesses, downtown area 11%
Parks, rec facilities 10%
Schools, education 9%
Not sure / Cannot think of anything 9%
Community events, activities 7%
Low density development, single family
homes 7%
Open spaces, greenbelts 6%
Outdoor shops, dining options 5%
Relaxed, casual lifestyle 5%
The Strand, pier 4%
Walkability of commercial, residential areas 4%
Proximity to other areas 3%
Weather, climate 2%
Q4
If the city government could change one thing to make Manhattan Beach a better place to live now and in the future, what change would you like to see? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below. Categories mentioned by at least 2% of respondents shown here.

Improve public safety, more police presence 10%
Not sure / Cannot think of anything 10%
Address parking issues 9%
No changes needed / Everything is fine 6%
Limit growth, development 5%
Encourage, support diversity, address
inequity 5%
Preserve, support outdoor dining 5%
Enforce traffic, e-bike laws 5%
Beautify City, cleanliness, landscaping 5%
Provide more affordable housing 4%
Reduce traffic congestion 4%
Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 44City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 3
Attract variety of less expensive
restaurants, shops 4%
Improve City planning, development 4%
Improve government leadership,
communication 4%
Add, improve park, rec facilities 4%
Enforce City codes, ordinances 3%
Underground utilities 3%
Address homeless issues 3%
Improve walkability, sidewalks 3%
Reduce taxes, fees 2%
Reduce cost of living 2%
Increase support for small businesses 2%
Improve permitting process 2%
Improve quality of education 2%
Provide more activities, events for all ages 2%
Address Bruce’s Beach issue 2%

Section 3: City Services
Next, I would like to ask a series of questions about services provided by the City of Manhattan Beach.

Q5
Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Manhattan Beach is doing to provide city services? Get answer, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? 1 Very satisfied 39%
2 Somewhat satisfied 48%
3 Somewhat dissatisfied 7%
4 Very dissatisfied 2%
98 Not sure 2%
99 Prefer not to answer 0%
Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 45City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 4

Split Sample for Q6.

Sample A receives items A-L, Sample B receives items M-X.

Q6 For each of the services I read, please tell me whether the service is extremely important to you, very important, somewhat important, or not at all important.

Randomize
Extremely
Important
Very
Important
Somewhat
Important
Not at all
Important
Not sure
Prefer not to
answer
A Enforcing traffic laws 38% 30% 24% 7% 1% 0%
B Providing neighborhood police patrols 61% 22% 12% 4% 1% 0% C Providing emergency medical services 65% 27% 7% 1% 0% 0% D Preparing the City for emergencies 55% 34% 11% 1% 0% 0% E Maintaining sewer and storm drain systems 63% 28% 7% 1% 1% 0% F Maintaining parks and open spaces 59% 37% 4% 0% 0% 0% G Providing special events such as concerts in the
park and holiday fireworks 25% 37% 29% 7% 1% 0%
H Providing a variety of recreation programs for
all ages 27% 43% 27% 3% 0% 0%
I Providing services and programs for seniors 20% 33% 35% 8% 3% 0% J Protecting the environment 51% 29% 17% 2% 0% 0%
K Providing cultural and arts opportunities 16% 35% 38% 9% 1% 0% L Providing eastside library services 14% 19% 34% 25% 6% 1% M Maintaining a low crime rate 75% 17% 7% 1% 0% 1%
N Providing fire protection and prevention
services 62% 28% 8% 1% 0% 0%
O Enforcing animal control laws such as leash-
laws and waste cleanup 27% 35% 26% 10% 1% 0%
P Maintaining and repairing local streets and
roads 51% 37% 11% 0% 0% 0%
Q Removing graffiti 41% 25% 24% 9% 1% 0%
R Maintaining public athletic fields 33% 38% 27% 2% 1% 0% S Addressing homelessness 52% 26% 19% 2% 0% 1%
T Keeping public buildings, parks and facilities
clean and attractive 48% 39% 12% 0% 0% 0%
U Preserving the City’s small, beach-town
character 64% 23% 8% 3% 1% 0%
V Providing a variety of public art 12% 22% 44% 21% 1% 0% W Providing after-school programs and diversion
programs for youth 28% 30% 28% 10% 4% 1%
X Addressing bike safety and e-bikes 36% 35% 20% 8% 1% 0% Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 46City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 5
Split Sample for Q7.

Sample A receives items A-L, Sample B receives items M-X.

Q7
For the same list of services I just read, I’d like you to tell me how satisfied you are with the job the City is doing to provide the service.

Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to: _____, or do you not have an opinion? Get answer. If ‘satisfied’ or ‘dissatisfied’, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? Randomize
Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
Not sure
Prefer not to
answer
A Enforce traffic laws 22% 37% 17% 11% 13% 0%
B Provide neighborhood police patrols 22% 38% 21% 4% 14% 1% C Provide emergency medical services 37% 36% 1% 0% 26% 0% D Prepare the City for emergencies 21% 40% 5% 0% 33% 0% E Maintain sewer and storm drain systems 31% 41% 5% 1% 21% 1% F Maintain parks and open spaces 39% 49% 7% 2% 4% 0%
G Provide special events such as concerts in the
park and holiday fireworks 45% 42% 4% 2% 5% 2%
H Provide a variety of recreation programs for all
ages 34% 44% 3% 1% 17% 1%
I Provide services and programs for seniors 19% 34% 3% 0% 42% 2% J Protecting the environment 23% 41% 10% 3% 22% 2%
K Provide cultural and arts opportunities 21% 43% 10% 1% 23% 2% L Provide eastside library services 17% 27% 5% 4% 43% 3% M Maintain a low crime rate 32% 45% 13% 7% 2% 1%
N Provide fire protection and prevention services 61% 29% 3% 0% 7% 0% O Enforce animal control laws such as leash-laws
and waste cleanup 22% 38% 18% 11% 8% 1%
P Maintain and repair local streets and roads 25% 47% 19% 5% 3% 0% Q Remove graffiti 41% 38% 3% 1% 17% 1%
R Maintain public athletic fields 30% 49% 6% 1% 12% 2%
S Address homelessness 21% 43% 19% 9% 8% 1%
T Keep public buildings, parks and facilities clean
and attractive 44% 47% 6% 1% 2% 0%
U Preserve the City’s small, beach-town character 27% 45% 15% 9% 2% 1% V Provide a variety of public art 22% 43% 13% 1% 19% 3% W Provide after-school programs and diversion
programs for youth 23% 30% 6% 1% 36% 4%
X Address bike safety and e-bikes 15% 29% 23% 17% 15% 2%

Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 47City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 6
Section 4: Safety, Code Enforcement & Homelessness
Q8 Overall, how safe is the City of Manhattan Beach as a place to live? Would you say it is very safe, somewhat safe, somewhat unsafe, or very unsafe? 1 Very safe 48%
2 Somewhat safe 46%
3 Somewhat unsafe 5%
4 Very unsafe 1%
99 Prefer not to answer 0%
Q9
The City of Manhattan Beach has created codes to address and prevent a variety of issues that can negatively impact a neighborhood, such as non-permitted construction, junk storage, noise issues, and smoking in public.

Overall, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to enforce code violations, or do you not have an opinion? Get answer. If ‘satisfied’ or ‘dissatisfied’, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? 1 Very satisfied 22% Skip to Q11
2 Somewhat satisfied 36% Skip to Q11
3 Somewhat dissatisfied 15% Ask Q10
4 Very dissatisfied 7% Ask Q10
98 Not sure 19% Skip to Q11
99 Prefer not to answer 1% Skip to Q11
Q10
Is there a particular issue or code violation in your neighborhood the City isn’t addressing that leads you to be dissatisfied? If yes, ask: Please briefly describe it to me.

Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below.

Construction issues, concerns 24%
No-smoking regulations, violations 21%
Noise ordinance violations 18%
Dog laws, violations 13%
Lack of consistent enforcement 10%
Cannot think of anything specific 9%
Traffic law violations 8%
Parking issues 8%
Bike, e-bike issues 7%
Building code concerns 6%
Homelessness issues 5%
Crime, public safety concerns 4%
Short-term rental issues 2%

Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 48City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 7

Q11 Over the past year, would you say the amount of homeless people in the City of Manhattan Beach has decreased, stayed about the same, or increased? 1 Decreased 4%
2 Stayed about the same 43%
3 Increased 37%
98 Not sure 16%
99 Prefer not to answer 0%
Q12 How do you think the City should address the homeless issue? Should it: _____? Randomize
Yes
No
Not sure
Prefer not
to answer
A Provide funding for mental health facilities,
street outreach, and housing placement 57% 23% 18% 2%
B Provide counseling and rehab for drug and
alcohol addiction 56% 23% 19% 2%
C Join with other cities and the County to
create more regional homeless shelters 64% 19% 15% 1%
D Enhance lighting and modify benches in
public areas to deter overnight camping 63% 22% 14% 1%

Section 5: Spending Priorities
The City of Manhattan Beach has limited financial resources to provide the services and programs desired by residents. Because it can’t fund every service, program and project, the City must set priorities.

Q13
As I read each of the following items, please indicate whether you think the City should make the item a high priority, a medium priority, or a low priority for future city spending. If you feel the City should not spend any money on this item, just say so.

Please keep in mind that not all of the items can be high priorities.

Here is the (first/next) one: _____. Should this item be a high, medium or low priority for the City – or should the City not spend any money on this item? Randomize
High Priority
Medium
Priority
Low Priority
Should not
spend money
Not sue
Prefer not to
answer
A Reconstruct and improve the City’s
swimming pool – Begg Pool 17% 26% 38% 12% 7% 0%
B Fix potholes and repair and improve city
streets and sidewalks 55% 35% 8% 1% 1% 0%
C
Renovate and improve the City’s
Community Centers including the Joslyn,
Manhattan Heights, and Sand Dune
Community Centers
8% 37% 40% 11% 4% 0%
Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 49City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 8

D Restore and enhance nature areas
throughout Sand Dune Park 13% 32% 41% 10% 3% 0%
E
Improve the maintenance of parks and park
amenities including restrooms, sports
courts, and dog runs
32% 48% 16% 2% 1% 0%
F Redesign public spaces to allow for outdoor
dining areas 33% 27% 27% 12% 1% 0%
G
Create a Manhattan Beach Historical
Museum to preserve and store historical
documents
4% 16% 51% 27% 2% 0%
H Repair and upgrade the City’s sewer and
wastewater systems 51% 34% 8% 1% 6% 0%
I
Provide low-cost, on-demand rideshare
services so residents can visit restaurants,
shops, and business areas in the City
without having to park a vehicle
18% 24% 30% 26% 2% 0%

Section 6: Local Governance & Customer Service
Q14
Next, I’m going to read you a series of statements about the City of Manhattan Beach.

For each, I’d like you to tell me whether you agree or disagree with the statement.

Here is the (first/next) one: _____ Do you agree or disagree, or do you not have an opinion? If agree or disagree, ask: Would that be strongly (agree/disagree) or somewhat (agree/disagree)?
Randomize
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Not sure
Prefer not to
answer
A The City is responsive to residents’ needs 14% 51% 13% 6% 15% 1% B The City manages its finances well 13% 34% 13% 5% 34% 1% C The City listens to residents when making
important decisions 13% 43% 17% 8% 19% 1%
D I trust the City of Manhattan Beach 19% 48% 13% 6% 13% 2% Q15 In the past 12 months, have you been in contact with staff from the City of Manhattan Beach?
1 Yes 47% Ask Q16
2 No 49% Skip to Q17
98 Not sure 3% Skip to Q17
99 Prefer not to answer 1% Skip to Q17

Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 50City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 9

Q16 In your opinion, was the staff at the City very _____, somewhat ______, or not at all _____.

Read one item at a time, continue until all items are read.

Randomize
Very
Somewhat
Not at all
Not sure
Prefer not
to answer
A Helpful 43% 42% 12% 2% 1%
B Professional 60% 33% 5% 2% 1%
C Accessible 43% 46% 8% 2% 1%

Section 7: Communications
Q17
Overall, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the City’s efforts to communicate with residents through newsletters, the Internet, social media, and other means? Get answer, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? 1 Very satisfied 24%
2 Somewhat satisfied 50%
3 Somewhat dissatisfied 11%
4 Very dissatisfied 4%
98 Not sure 9%
99 Prefer not to answer 1%
Q18 What information sources do you use to find out about City of Manhattan Beach news, events, and programs? Don’t read list. Record up to first 3 responses.

Newspapers
1 Los Angeles Times 8%
2 The Beach Reporter 49%
3 The Daily Breeze 14%
4 Easy Reader 16%
6 Other newspaper 1%
City Sources
7 City website 22%
8 Email notifications from City 21%
9 Letters, postcards, flyers or brochures
mailed from City to your home 9%
10 Manhappenings brochure 11%
11 City’s social media posts on
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and
YouTube
8%
12 Reach MB mobile app 0%
13 Nixle/Alert South Bay notification
system 22%
Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 51City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 10
14 MBtv, the City’s local government
channel on Spectrum Channel 8,
Frontier Channel 35, or webstream
0%
15 City Council Meetings 2%
Internet & Social Media
16 Internet (not City’s site) 9%
17 Social Media (not City’s) including
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
YouTube
15%
18 Nextdoor.com 25%
5 Patch.com 10%
19 Blogs 0%
Other
20 Television (general) 3%
21 Radio 1%
22 HOA or neighborhood association 1%
23 Friends/Family/Associates/word of
mouth 17%
24 Other 2%
25 Do Not Receive Information about City 1%
98 Not sure 1%
99 Prefer not to answer 1%

Section 8: Background & Demographics
Thank you so much for your participation. I have just a few background questions for statistical purposes.

D1 In what year were you born? Year recoded into age groups shown below. 18 to 24 6%
25 to 34 12%
35 to 44 19%
45 to 54 24%
55 to 64 18%
65 or older 21%
Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 52City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 11

D2 What is your gender?
1 Male 52%
2 Female 46%
3 Non-binary <1%
99 Prefer not to answer 2%
D3 Do you have one or more children under the age of 18 living in your household? 1 Yes 38%
2 No 58%
99 Prefer not to answer 4%
D4 Do you own or rent your residence in Manhattan Beach? 1 Own 67%
2 Rent 29%
99 Prefer not to answer 4%
D5
Which of the following best describes your employment status? Would you say you are employed full-time, part-time, a student, a homemaker, retired, or are you in-between jobs right now?
1 Employed full-time 56%
2 Employed part-time 6%
3 Student 3%
4 Homemaker 6%
5 Retired 21%
6 In-between jobs 2%
99 Prefer not to answer 5%
Questionnaire & Toplines
True North Research, Inc. © 2021 53City of Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City of Manhattan Beach Community Opinion Survey December 2021 True North Research, Inc. © 2021 Page 12

D6 What ethnic group do you consider yourself a part of or feel closest to? Read list if respondent hesitates
1 Latino/Hispanic 7%
2 Asian American -- Korean, Japanese,
Chinese, Vietnamese, Filipino or other
Asian
11%
3 Caucasian/White 69%
4 African-American/Black <1%
5 American Indian or Alaskan Native <1%
6 Pacific Islander <1%
7 Middle Eastern 2%
8 Mixed Heritage 2%
98 Other ethnic group 1%
99 Prefer not to answer 8%
Those are all of the questions that I have for you! Thanks so much for participating in this important survey! This survey was conducted for the City of Manhattan Beach