Palo Alto City Council
January 20, 2026

CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Tuesday, January 20, 2026
Council Chambers & Hybrid
5:30 PM

Palo

Alto

City

Council

meetings

will

be

held

as

“hybrid”

meetings

with

the

option

to

attend

by
teleconference

or

in

person.

Information

on

how

the

public

may

observe

and

participate

in

the
meeting

is

located

at

the

end

of

the

agenda.

The

meeting

will

be

broadcast

on

Cable

TV

Channel
26,

live

on

YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto
,

and

streamed

to

Midpen

Media
Center
https://midpenmedia.org
.

VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION

CLICK HERE TO JOIN

(
https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/362027238
)
Meeting ID: 362 027 238 Phone:1(669)900-6833

PUBLIC COMMENTS
General

Public

Comment

for

items

not

on

the

agenda

will

be

accepted

in

person

for

up

to

three
minutes

or

an

amount

of

time

determined

by

the

Chair.

General

public

comment

will

be

heard
for

30 minutes.

Additional

public

comments,

if

any,

will

be

heard

at

the

end

of

the

agenda.

Public

comments

for

agendized

items

will

be

accepted

both

in

person

and

via

Zoom

for

up

to
three

minutes

or

an

amount

of

time

determined

by

the

Chair.

Requests

to

speak

will

be

taken
until

5 minutes

after

the

staff’s

presentation

or

as

determined

by

the

Chair.

Written

public
comments

can

be

submitted

in

advance

to

[email protected]

and

will

be

provided

to
the

Council

and

available

for

inspection

on

the

City’s

website.

Please

clearly

indicate

which
agenda

item

you

are

referencing

in

your

subject

line.

Multiple

individuals

who

wish

to

speak

on
the

same

item

may

designate

a

spokesperson.

Spokespersons

must

be

representing

five

or

more
verified

individuals

who

are

present

either

in

person

or

via

zoom.

Spokespeople

will

be

allowed
up

to

10 minutes,

at

the

discretion

of

the

presiding

officer.

Speaking

time

may

be

reduced

if

the
presiding officer reduces the speaking time for individual speakers.

PowerPoints,

videos,

or

other

media

to

be

presented

during

public

comment

are

accepted

only
by

email

to

[email protected]

at

least

24 hours

prior

to

the

meeting.

Once

received,

the

Clerk

will

have

them

shared

at

public

comment

for

the

specified

item.

To

uphold

strong
cybersecurity

management

practices,

USB’s

or

other

physical

electronic

storage

devices

are

not
accepted.

Signs

and

symbolic

materials

less

than

2 feet

by

3 feet

are

permitted

provided

that:
(1)

sticks,

posts,

poles

or

similar/other

type

of

handle

objects

are

strictly

prohibited;

(2)

the
items

do

not

create

a

facility,

fire,

or

safety

hazard;

and

(3)

persons

with

such

items

remain
seated

when

displaying

them

and

must

not

raise

the

items

above

shoulder

level,

obstruct

the
view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting.

TIME ESTIMATES
Listed

times

are

estimates

only

and

are

subject

to

change

at

any

time,

including

while

the
meeting

is

in

progress.

The

Council

reserves

the

right

to

use

more

or

less

time

on

any

item,

to
change

the

order

of

items

and/or

to

continue

items

to

another

meeting.

Particular

items

may

be
heard

before

or

after

the

time

estimated

on

the

agenda.

This

may

occur

in

order

to

best

manage
the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public.

1 January 20, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas
.

CALL TO ORDER

SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (5:30 - 5:40 PM)

1. Proclamation honoring Aaron (Bunk) Miller for 34 Years of Service to the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant and its partner agencies.

AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS

PUBLIC COMMENT (5:40 - 6:10 PM)
Members of the public may speak in-person ONLY to any item NOT on the agenda. 1-3 minutes depending on number of speakers. Public Comment is limited to 30 minutes. Additional public comments, if any, will be heard at the end of the agenda.

COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS (6:10 - 6:25 PM) Members of the public may not speak to the item(s).

STUDY SESSION (6:25 - 7:25 PM)

2. Presentation of the 2025 Annual Community Survey Results. CEQA Status -- Not a project.

CONSENT CALENDAR (7:25 - 7:30 PM)
Items will be voted in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members.

3. Approval of Minutes from January 5, 2026 Meeting

4. Accept CalPERS Pension Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2024; CEQA Status – Not a project.

5. Approval of the Advisory Report: Contract Solicitation & Authority Levels and Subsequent Management Response as recommended by the Policy & Services Committee. CEQA Status – Not a Project.

6. Approval of the City of Palo Alto’s Updated 2026 Water, Gas, and Wastewater Utility Standards (Design and Construction); CEQA Status- Not a Project.

2 January 20, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas
.

7. Adopt a Resolution to Allow Consumption of Alcohol under PAMC section 9.04.010 on Certain Days and Times through May 31, 2026, on California Avenue.

8. Approve Recommended Changes that will Align Increased General Liability Insurance Costs in the General Liability Fund to be Included in the Mid-Year Budget Report as Recommended by the Finance Committee. CEQA Status—Not a project.

9. Approval of Contract Amendment Number 3 to Contract C23183770 with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. in the amount of $186,000 to Revise the Not-to-Exceed Total to $744,000 and to Extend the Term for an Additional Year of Service (the third of four one- year options to renew) for State and Federal Legislative Advocacy and Grant Consulting and Compliance Services; CEQA Status - Not a Project

10. SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing and Replacing Section 18.40.250 (Lighting) of Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) and Amending Chapters 18.10, 18.12, 18.28 and Section 18.40.230 of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Adopt New Outdoor Lighting Regulations (REINTRODUCED FIRST READING: December 8, 2025; PASSED:6-1, Lythcott-Haims, no) CITY MANAGER COMMENTS (7:30 - 7:45 PM)

BREAK (15 MINUTES)

ACTION ITEMS (Item 11: 8:00 - 9:00 PM, Item 12: 9:00 - 10:30 PM) Include: Report of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Report of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters.

11. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Adopt the 2026 State and Federal State Legislative Guidelines and 2026 Utility Policy Guidelines, and Receive an Update on State and Federal Legislative Advocacy; CEQA Status – Not a Project

12. Review the FY 2027-FY 2036 Long Range Financial Forecast (LRFF) and FY 2027 Budget Development Guidelines using the LRFF as the Baseline for Developing the FY 2027 Budget as Recommended by the Finance Committee, CEQA Status – Not a Project

ADJOURNMENT

OTHER INFORMATION

3 January 20, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas
.

Standing Committee Meetings this week

Retail Committee January 22, 2026

Public Comment Letters
Schedule of Meetings

4 January 20, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas
.

PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS
Members

of

the

Public

may

provide

public

comments

to

teleconference

meetings

via

email,
teleconference, or by phone.

1. Written public comments
may be submitted by email to
[email protected]
.

2. For

in

person

public

comments

please

complete

a

speaker

request

card

located

on

the
table

at

the

entrance

to

the

Council

Chambers

and

deliver

it

to

the

Clerk

prior

to
discussion of the item.

3. Spoken

public

comments

for

agendized

items

using

a

computer

or

smart

phone

will

be
accepted

through

the

teleconference

meeting.

To

address

the

Council,

click

on

the

link
below to access a Zoom-based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. ◦
You

may

download

the

Zoom

client

or

connect

to

the

meeting

in-

browser.

If

using
your

browser,

make

sure

you

are

using

a

current,

up-to-date

browser:

Chrome

30 ,
Firefox

27 ,

Microsoft

Edge

12 ,

Safari

7 .

Certain

functionality

may

be

disabled

in
older

browsers

including

Internet

Explorer.

Or

download

the

Zoom

application

onto
your

smart

phone

from

the

Apple

App

Store

or

Google

Play

Store

and

enter

in

the
Meeting ID below.
◦
You

may

be

asked

to

enter

an

email

address

and

name.

We

request

that

you
identify

yourself

by

name

as

this

will

be

visible

online

and

will

be

used

to

notify

you
that it is your turn to speak.
◦
When

you

wish

to

speak

on

an

Agenda

Item,

click

on

“raise

hand.”

The

Clerk

will
activate

and

unmute

speakers

in

turn.

Speakers

will

be

notified

shortly

before

they
are called to speak.
◦
When

called,

please

limit

your

remarks

to

the

time

limit

allotted.

A

timer

will

be
shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments.

4. Spoken

public

comments

for

agendized

items

using

a

phone

use

the

telephone

number
listed

below.

When

you

wish

to

speak

on

an

agenda

item

hit

*9

on

your

phone

so

we
know

that

you

wish

to

speak.

You

will

be

asked

to

provide

your

first

and

last

name

before
addressing

the

Council.

You

will

be

advised

how

long

you

have

to

speak.

When

called
please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted.

CLICK HERE TO JOIN
Meeting ID: 362-027-238 Phone: 1-669-900-6833
Americans

with

Disability

Act

(ADA)

It

is

the

policy

of

the

City

of

Palo

Alto

to

offer

its

public
programs,

services

and

meetings

in

a

manner

that

is

readily

accessible

to

all.

Persons

with
disabilities

who

require

materials

in

an

appropriate

alternative

format

or

who

require

auxiliary
aids

to

access

City

meetings,

programs,

or

services

may

contact

the

City’s

ADA

Coordinator

at
(650)

329-2550

(voice)

or

by

emailing

[email protected]
.

Requests

for

assistance

or
accommodations

must

be

submitted

at

least

24 hours

in

advance

of

the

meeting,

program,

or
service.

5 January 20, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas
.

California

Government

Code

§84308
,

commonly

referred

to

as

the

"Levine

Act,"

prohibits

an
elected

official

of

a

local

government

agency

from

participating

in

a

proceeding

involving

a
license,

permit,

or

other

entitlement

for

use

if

the

official

received

a

campaign

contribution
exceeding

$500

from

a

party

or

participant,

including

their

agents,

to

the

proceeding

within

the
last

12 months.

A

“license,

permit,

or

other

entitlement

for

use”

includes

most

land

use

and
planning

approvals

and

the

approval

of

contracts

that

are

not

subject

to

lowest

responsible

bid
procedures

and

have

a

value

over

$50,000.

A

“party”

is

a

person

who

files

an

application

for,

or
is

the

subject

of,

a

proceeding

involving

a

license,

permit,

or

other

entitlement

for

use.

A
“participant”

is

a

person

who

actively

supports

or

opposes

a

particular

decision

in

a

proceeding
involving

a

license,

permit,

or

other

entitlement

for

use,

and

has

a

financial

interest

in

the
decision.

The

Levine

Act

incorporates

the

definition

of

“financial

interest”

in

the

Political

Reform
Act,

which

encompasses

interests

in

business

entities,

real

property,

sources

of

income,

sources
of

gifts,

and

personal

finances

that

may

be

affected

by

the

Council’s

actions.

If

you

qualify

as

a
“party”

or

“participant”

to

a

proceeding,

and

you

have

made

a

campaign

contribution

to

a
Council

Member

exceeding

$500

made

within

the

last

12 months,

you

must

disclose

the
campaign contribution before making your comments.

6 January 20, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas
.

City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
Lead Department: Public Works
Meeting Date: January 20, 2026
Report #:2512-5743
Title
Proclamation honoring Aaron (Bunk) Miller for 34 Years of Service to the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant and its partner agencies.

Attachments
Attachment A: Retirement Proclamation of Appreciation for Aaron (Bunk) Miller Approved By:

Brad Eggleston, Director Public Works/City Engineer
Item 1
Item 1 Staff Report

Item 1: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 7 of 510

EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO AARON (BUNK) MILLER

UPON HIS RETIREMENT
WHEREAS, Aaron (Bunk) Miller began his career with the City of Palo Alto at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant on January 6th, 1992, as an Operator-In-Training; and
WHEREAS, Bunk has enthusiastically served the citizens of Palo Alto working entirely in the Public Works Department- Environmental Services Division for more than three decades with his final position as Assistant Plant Manager managing the Maintenance Department for the Regional Water Quality Control Plant; and
WHEREAS, Bunk received the State of California State Water Resources Control Board Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator Grade I and Grade II certificates, and the California Water Environment Association Grade I, Grade II, and Grade III certificates; and WHEREAS, Bunk was awarded Plant Mechanic of the Year in 2016 from the CWEA; and WHEREAS, Bunk with a smile worked through many storms to make sure that the streets of Palo Alto did not flood with wastewater by keeping the headworks flowing, especially during the 2022 New Year’s Eve storm, where he and his crew worked around the clock for days to make sure that the flow from the six communities could be treated at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant; and WHEREAS, Bunk improved himself with certifications above and beyond what was needed for his position in safety, equipment, process, leadership, and management and consistently had glowing reviews from his supervisors where he exceeded expectations throughout his tenure; and
WHEREAS, Bunk has mentored and trained many new operators and mechanics during his career and is known to be a true leader by showing the new team members how to fix things and where all the pipes, valves and pumps are located at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant; all staff are going to miss his wealth of knowledge of our facility; and WHEREAS, Bunk was known for being kind, helpful, friendly, honest, hardworking, having a team player mentality, and willing to work and compromise with all departments for the betterment of the Regional Water Quality Control Plant, putting the needs of the many a bove the needs of the few; and
WHEREAS, Bunk has completed 34 years of exemplary, outstanding, and dedicated service to the City of Palo Alto’s Regional Water Quality Control Plant Serving the City of Palo Alto, the City of Mountain View, the City of Los Altos, the City of East Palo Alto, the Town of Los Altos Hills, and Stanford University.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Vicki Veenker, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto, on behalf of the entire City Council, do hereby recognize Aaron (Bunk) Miller for his dedication and excellent service rendered to the City.

PRESENTED: January 20, 2026

APPROVED:

______________________
Mayor Vicki Veenker

______________________ ______________________
Vice Mayor Greer Stone Councilmember Pat Burt

______________________ ______________________
Councilmember Ed Lauing Councilmember George Lu

______________________ ______________________
Councilmember Julie Lythcott-Haims Councilmember Keith Reckdahl

ATTEST:

______________________
City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______________________ ______________________
City Manager City Attorney
Proclamation

Item 1
Attachment A - Retirement
Proclamation of Appreciation for Aaron
(Bunk) Miller

Item 1: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 8 of 510

City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: STUDY SESSION
Lead Department: City Manager
Meeting Date: January 20, 2026
Report #:2601-5805
TITLE
Presentation of the 2025 Annual Community Survey Results. CEQA Status -- Not a project.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Report of Results for the 2025 City of Palo Alto Community Survey by Polco/National Research Center, Inc (Polco).

BACKGROUND
Since 2003, the City has annually or biennially conducted a community survey to gain insights into residents’ perspectives about the community, including local amenities, services, public trust, resident participation, and other aspects of the community. Survey information is used to support budgeting, land use and strategic planning, and communication efforts with the community. This report summarizes the latest survey conducted starting August 1, 2025 through October 3, 2025.

ANALYSIS
The City takes pride in delivering outstanding programs and services to the community. An essential gauge of community satisfaction is through polling. The data obtained from these surveys serves as a valuable reference point for setting City Council priorities. City staff utilizes this information to assess programs, services and shaping performance metrics during the annual budget process.

The National Community Survey is one of several methods employed to engage the community and evaluate the perceived quality of City services. Similar to last year's response rate of 16%, this year’s total responses were 574 (585 received in 2024). While historically responses have hovered around 750, or about 23%, this year's response rate similar to last years, although lower than average history, remains statistically significant. It also aligns with the typical range observed in other jurisdictions, which falls between a 12% to 20% response rate. Responses were statistically weighed to ensure representativeness of Palo alto’s demographic makeup.

Item 2
Item 2 Staff Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 9 of 510

A few highlights in the Key Findings section based on respondent perspectives of the report are provided below, as well as a summary of notable circumstances that may have affected the results.

Palo Alto residents continue to rate their quality of life highly. Again, 88% of residents or approximately 9 of 10 residents rated Palo Alto, as well as their own neighborhood—as an excellent or good place to live. Similarly, 9 in 10 gave high marks to the overall quality of life in the city, while about 8 in 10 praised Palo Alto as a place to work and raise children. These results were consistent with previous years and in line with national benchmarks, except for Palo Alto’s rating as a place to work, which was again higher than the national average.
About 7 in 10 residents gave high marks to the city as a place to visit, and more than half rated Palo Alto as an excellent or good place to retire. Both ratings were like those from previous years and aligned with the national benchmarks. About 8 in 10 residents, indicated that they were likely to remain in Palo Alto for the next five years, slightly up from the prior year, and would recommend living in the city to someone who asked.

While residents were very satisfied with many City services, there are areas for improvement.

No service was below the national benchmark.
The City continues to maintain top-rated services, with the following seven higher than national benchmarks: City parks, open space, drinking water, utility payment options, recreation programs and classes, recreation centers and facilities, and preservation of natural areas. These ratings were generally on par or above prior year levels. Overall, 33 services received ratings consistent with 2024, while two services improved:
affordable high-speed internet access (54%, up 10 points from 2024) and electric utility services (75%, up 8 points).
Compared to national benchmarks, eight services were rated above the national average (Palo Alto open space, City parks, preservation of natural areas, drinking water, utility payment options, street cleaning, recreation centers/facilities, and recreation programs/classes), 15 services were on par, and none were below national benchmarks. Several community features received high marks from residents, including ease of walking, ease of travel by bicycle, the overall image and reputation of Palo Alto, fitness and recreational opportunities (such as exercise classes and trails), and the quality of business and service establishments. Positive ratings for these features ranged from 78% to 83%. The perceived quality of business and service establishments increased by 7 points since 2024, rising from 71% to 78%. Among the lower-rated services were building and planning application processing, land use, planning, and zoning, and code enforcement (e.g., weeds or abandoned buildings). However, these showed improvements from prior year levels.

Several process improvements have been executed or remain underway to help address the Item 2
Item 2 Staff Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 10 of 510

low ratings including enhanced customer service training for all planning, building, and support staff, aiming to improve responsiveness and efficiency in application handling, as well as providing greater clarity in approval requirements.

Housing Affordability and cost of living remain key concerns As in previous years, fewer than 1 in 10 residents gave positive ratings to the cost of living in Palo Alto, and only about 1 in 10 rated the availability of affordable quality housing favorably. Meanwhile, about 1 in 4 residents gave positive ratings to the variety of housing options. All three ratings were similar to those in 2024. Compared to national benchmarks, Palo Alto’s rating for cost of living was much lower, while ratings for affordable quality housing and variety of housing options were lower than national averages. The survey included an open-ended question inviting respondents to describe, in their own words, one change the City could make to increase resident satisfaction. The most common theme was housing and construction issues (mentioned by 21% of respondents), followed by transportation and traffic (13%), and affordability (10%).

Parks, open space, and the natural environment stand out as Palo Alto’s greatest strengths. The survey included an open-ended question inviting respondents to share, in their own words, one thing they believe the City does well and should continue to maintain. Open space and the natural environment topped the list, accounting for 28% of all mentions, followed by activities and recreation (14%), and utility and city services (11%). When asked about a list of activities they had done in the past 12 months, visiting a neighborhood or City park ranked highest, with 95% of respondents reporting they had done so. Other frequently reported activities included talking with immediate neighbors, walking or biking instead of driving, voting in the most recent local election, and using Palo Alto public libraries or their services.

Residents report limited awareness of sustainability programs. About 1 in 7 residents said they are extremely or very familiar with Palo Alto’s programs to advance community goals, such as home electrification. About 1 in 20 residents reported being extremely or very familiar with the City’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan(S/CAP) and its goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2030. When asked what would most motivate them to replace major gas appliances with electric models, the top consideration was saving money through rebates (59%), followed by improving health and safety (37%), and helping to stop climate change (35%). About 3 in 10 residents said they were not interested in upgrading to electric.

Ratings for Palo Alto government performance remain strong with some improvements. • Three-quarters of Palo Alto residents gave the local government high marks for treating residents with respect, while about 6 in 10 praised it for being honest, treating all residents Item 2
Item 2 Staff Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
3 Packet Pg. 11 of 510

fairly, acting in the best interest of the community, and being open and transparent with the public. The remaining five performance attributes also received satisfaction ratings above 50%.
• When compared to 2024, most government performance indicators were rated similarly, except for acting in the best interest of the community and being open and transparent with the public, both of which increased from 53% in 2024 to 60% in 2025. Palo Alto’s ratings were comparable to national benchmarks across all indicators.

Overall, 78% of respondents praised the quality of services provided by the City of Palo Alto, consistent with previous years. In contrast, state government services received a favorable rating of 52% (similar to last year), while federal government services received a favorable rating of just 19%, 22 points lower than in 2024.

The attached report includes information on trends over time, geographic and demographic comparisons, national benchmark comparisons, and verbatim responses to open-ended questions.

FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
Funding for the Polco contract was approved in FY 2026 budget. No additional funding is requested at this time.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The 2025 Palo Alto Community Survey process is a community engagement tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as priorities. Staff continues to implement the existing community engagement and Council priority workplans.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because Community Survey results are presented for informational purposes only with no action required by the Council.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: 2025 Community Survey Report
APPROVED BY:

Ed Shikada, City Manager
Item 2
Item 2 Staff Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
4 Packet Pg. 12 of 510

City of Palo Alto Resident Survey
June 2022

1241 John Q. Hammons Dr, Suite #203
Madison, WI 53717
info.polco.us • 608-709-8683

CITY OF PALO ALTO
COMMUNITY SURVEY 2025

Report of Results

October 2025

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
5 Packet Pg. 13 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Contents
Contents ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Survey background ........................................................................................................................... 3 Key Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Detailed Survey Methods ................................................................................................................... 6 Survey Information ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Survey Validity ............................................................................................................................................... 6 Selecting Survey Recipients ......................................................................................................................... 7 Survey Administration and Response ......................................................................................................... 9 Confidence Intervals ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Survey Processing (Data Entry) ................................................................................................................. 10 Survey Data Analysis and Reporting ......................................................................................................... 12 Trends Over Time ....................................................................................................................................... 12 Geographic and Demographic Comparisons ........................................................................................... 13 National Benchmark Comparisons ........................................................................................................... 13 Appendix A: Results Tables ............................................................................................................. 15 Appendix B: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Probability Survey ....................... 98 Appendix C: Results to Open-Participation Survey ......................................................................... 124 Appendix D: Results to Open-Participation Survey compared to Probability Survey ........................ 148 Appendix E: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Open Participation Survey .......... 157 Appendix F: Survey Materials ........................................................................................................ 174

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
6 Packet Pg. 14 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Survey background
Palo Alto contracted with Polco to implement the 2025 iteration of their community survey. For this effort, 3,600 households were randomly selected and mailed postcard invitations and paper surveys inviting participation. A total of 5 74 residents from this address -based outreach completed the survey for a response rate of 16% and a margin of error of ±4%. The results of this effort are highlighted below, with full results found in Appendix A: Results Tables.

Appendix A includes several comparisons to better understand the random sample survey results. o Comparisons to past surveys: iterations from 2012 to 2024 and the first iteration in 2003. o Comparisons to national benchmarks for questions asked in other jurisdictions. o Comparisons by geographic and demographic subgroups.

To ensure all community members would have an opportunity to participate, an additional and separate outreach effort was conducted by the City. Through many communication channels , the City invited residents to complete an open participation survey. The results from this outreach effort can be found in Appendix C: Results to Open-Participation Survey.

Please contact Lupita Alamos, Assistant to the City Manager, City of Palo Alto, at [email protected], if you have any questions about the survey.

Key Findings
Palo Alto residents continue to express strong satisfaction with quality of life. • About 9 in 10 residents rated Palo Alto —as well as their own neighborhood —as an excellent or good place to live. Similarly, 9 in 10 gave high marks to the overall quality of life in the city, while about 8 in 10 praised Palo Alto as a place to work and rai se children. These results were consistent with previous years and in line with national benchmarks, except for Palo Alto’s rating as a place to work, which was again higher than the national average. • Additionally, about 7 in 10 residents rated Palo Alto as an excellent or good place to visit, and more than half gave favorable ratings to the city as a place to retire. Both results were similar to previous years and aligned with national benchmarks.
• Nine in 10 residents praised the overall feeling of safety, the overall quality of natural environment, and the health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto. These results were similar to previous years and higher than the national benchmarks.
• About 8 in 10 residents said they were likely to remain in Palo Alto for the next five years and would recommend living in the city to others —again, consistent with prior years and national comparisons.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
7 Packet Pg. 15 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

While residents report high satisfaction with city services, some areas show room for improvement.
• About 9 in 10 residents gave excellent or good ratings to City parks, Palo Alto open space, public library services and facilities, ambulance and emergency medical services, fire emergency services, and drinking water. These ratings were consistent with previous years. Palo Alto’s open space was rated much higher than the national benchmark, while City parks and drinking water were also above national averages.
• More than 8 in 10 respondents provided positive ratings for the variety of library materials, sewer services, utility payment options, refuse collection, police services, recreation programs and classes, art programs and theater, recreation centers or faci lities, preservation of natural areas, and animal control. These results were in line with previous years. • Among the lower -rated services were building and planning application processing, land use, planning, and zoning, and code enforcement (e.g., weeds or abandoned buildings). • Overall, 33 services received ratings consistent with 2024, while two services improved:
affordable high-speed internet access (54%, up 10 points from 2024) and electric utility services (75%, up 8 points).
• Compared to national benchmarks, eight services were rated above the national average (Palo Alto open space, City parks, preservation of natural areas, drinking water, utility payment options, street cleaning, recreation centers/facilities, and recreation programs/classes), 15 services were on par, and none were below national benchmarks.

Business Quality Joins Palo Alto’s Reputation, Walkability, Bikeability, and Fitness Among Top-Rated Community Features
• Several community features received high marks from residents, including ease of walking, ease of travel by bicycle, the overall image and reputation of Palo Alto, fitness and recreational opportunities (such as exercise classes and trails), and the qualit y of business and service establishments. Positive ratings for these features ranged from 78% to 83%. The perceived quality of business and service establishments increased by 7 points since 2024, rising from 71% to 78%.

Affordable housing and cost of living continue to be key concerns. • As in previous years, fewer than 1 in 10 residents gave positive ratings to the cost of living in Palo Alto, and only about 1 in 10 rated the availability of affordable quality housing favorably.

Meanwhile, about 1 in 4 residents gave positive ratings to the variety of housing options. All three ratings were similar to those in 2024. Compared to national benchmarks, Palo Alto’s rating for cost of living was much lower, while ratings for affordable quality housing and variety of housing options were lower than national averages.
• The survey included an open-ended question inviting respondents to describe, in their own words, one change the City could make to increase resident satisfaction. The most common theme was housing and construction issues (mentioned by 21% of respondents), followed by transportation and traffic (13%), and affordability (10%).

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
8 Packet Pg. 16 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025
Report of Results

Parks, open space, and the natural environment stand out as Palo Alto’s greatest strengths.
• The survey included an open-ended question inviting respondents to share, in their own words, one thing they believe the City does well and should continue to maintain. Open space and the natural environment topped the list, accounting for 28% of all mentions, followed by activities and recreation (14%), and utility and city services (11%).
• When asked about a list of activities they had done in the past 12 months, visiting a neighborhood or City park ranked highest, with 95% of respondents reporting they had done so. Other frequently reported activities included talking with immediate neighbors, walking or biking instead of driving, voting in the most recent local election, and using Palo Alto public libraries or their services.

Residents report limited awareness of sustainability programs. • About 1 in 7 residents said they are extremely or very familiar with Palo Alto’s programs to advance community goals, such as home electrification. Meanwhile, only 1 in 20 residents reported being extremely or very familiar with the City’s Sustainability an d Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2030. • When asked what would most motivate them to replace major gas appliances with electric models, the top consideration was saving money through rebates (59%), followed by improving health and safety (37%), and helping to stop climate change (35%). About 3 in 10 residents said they were not interested in upgrading to electric.

Ratings for Palo Alto government performance remain strong, with gains in key areas.
• Three-quarters of Palo Alto residents gave the local government high marks for treating residents with respect, while about 6 in 10 praised it for being honest, treating all residents fairly, acting in the best interest of the community, and being open and transparent with the public. The remaining five performance attributes also received satisfaction ratings above 50%. • When compared to 2024, most government performance indicators were rated similarly, except for acting in the best interest of the community and being open and transparent with the public, both of which increased from 53% in 2024 to 60% in 2025. Palo Alto’s ratings were comparable to national benchmarks across all indicators.
• Overall, 78% of respondents praised the quality of services provided by the City of Palo Alto, consistent with previous years. In contrast, state government services received a favorable rating of 52% (similar to last year), while federal government services received a favorable rating of just 19%, 22 points lower than in 2024.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
9 Packet Pg. 17 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Detailed Survey Methods
Survey Information
The 2025 Palo Alto Community Survey was conducted by Polco. Results offer insight into residents’ perspectives about the ir community, as well as community needs and resident participation . This information can be used to support budgeting, land use and strategic planning, and communication with residents. The demographic characteristics and geographic location of respondents were collected to permit weighting to the Census and American Community Survey estimates, and comparison of results for different subgroups of residents. The City of Palo Alto funded this research.

Survey Validity
Polco recognizes that survey validity has two key components: (1) the degree to which a community can be confident that responses accurately represent what would have been obtained if the entire population had participated, and (2) the extent to which the results reflect residents’ true beliefs and behaviors.

To answer the first question, the best survey research practices were used to ensure that the results from the survey respondents reflect the opinions of residents in the entire community. These practices include:
• Using mail-based methodology, which typically gets a higher response rate than phone for the same dollars spent. Getting a higher response rate lessens the worry that those who did not respond are different than those who did respond.
• Using a list of households or residents that is as comprehensive as possible (like a USPS list that includes all households) and s electing households at random to ensure they are representative of the larger community.
• Over-sampling multi -family housing units to improve response from respondents who generally respond in lower proportions.
• Contacting selected households multiple times to encourage response from people who may have different opinions or habits than those who would respond with only a single prompt. • Inviting response in a compelling manner (using appropriate letterhead/logos and a signature of a visible leader) to appeal to recipients’ sense of civic responsibility. • Offering the opportunity to complete the survey online or by mail, and p roviding a pre -addressed, postage-paid return envelope for ease and to spare the respondent any expense. • Weighting the results to reflect the demographic characteristics of the population.

The answer to the second question about how closely the perspectives recorded on the survey reflect what residents really believe or do is more complex. Resident responses to surveys are influenced by a variety of factors. For questions about service quali ty, residents’ expectations for service quality play a role, as well as the “objective” quality of the service provided, the way the resident perceives the entire community (that is, the context in which the service is provided), the scale on which the resident is asked to record their opinion and, of course, the opinion, itself, that a resident holds about the service. Similarly a resident’s report of certain behaviors is colored by what he or she believes is the socially desirable response (e.g., reporting tolerant behaviors toward “o ppressed groups,” likelihood of voting for a tax Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
10 Packet Pg. 18 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

increase for services to poor people, use of alternative modes of travel to work besides the single occupancy vehicle), their memory of the actual behavior (if it is not a question speculating about future actions, like a vote), their confidence that they can be honest without suffering any negative consequences (thus the need for anonymity), as well as the actual behavior itself.

How closely survey results come to recording the way a person really feels or behaves often is measured by the coincidence of reported behavior with observed current behavior (e.g., driving habits), reported intentions to behave with observed future behavi or (e.g., voting choices) , or reported opinions about current community quality with objective characteristics of the community (e.g., feelings of safety correlated with rates of crime). There is a body of scientific literature that has investigated the relationship between reported behaviors and actual behaviors. Well-conducted surveys, by and large, do capture true respondent behaviors or intentions to act with great accuracy. Predictions of voting outcomes tend to be quite accurate using survey research, as do reported behaviors that are not about highly sensitive issues (e.g., family abuse or other illegal or morally sanctioned activities). For self-reports about highly sensitive issues, statistical adjustments can be made to correct for the respondents’ tendency to report what they think the “correct” response should be.

Research on the correlation of resident opinion about service quality and “objective” ratings of service quality vary, with some showing stronger relationships than others. Polco’s own research has demonstrated that residents who report the lowest ratings of street repair live in communities with objectively worse street conditions than those who report high ratings of street repair (based on road quality, delay in repair, number of road repair employees). Similarly, the lowest rated fire services appear to be “objectively” worse than the highest rated fire services (expenditures per capita, response time, “professional” status of firefighters, breadth of services and training provided). Resident opinion commonly reflects objective performance data but is an important measure on its own. Polco principals have written, “If you collect trash three times a day but residents think that your trash haul is lousy, you still have a problem.”
Selecting Survey Recipients
“Sampling” refers to the method by which households were chosen to receive the survey. All households within the City of Palo Alto were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Palo Alto was purchased based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service.

Since some of the zip codes that serve Palo Alto households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to communi ty boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file and addresses located outside of Palo Alto boundaries were removed from consideration. Each address identified as being within City boundaries was further identified as being within one of six areas.

To choose the 3,600 survey recipients, a systematic sampling method was applied to the list of households previously screened for geographic location. Systematic sampling is a procedure whereby a complete list of all possible households is culled, selecting every Nth one, giving each eligible household a known probability of selection, until the appropriate number of households is selected. Multi -family housing units were selected at a higher rate as residents of this type of housing typically respond at lower Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
11 Packet Pg. 19 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025
Report of Results

rates to surveys than those in single-family housing units. Figure 1 displays a map with the six areas of Palo Alto used to track results.

In addition to the scientific, random selection of households, a link to an online open participation survey was publicized and posted to the City of Palo Alto website. This open participation survey was identical to the scientific survey and open to all City residents. Results from the open participation survey can be found in Appendix C: Results to Open Participation Survey.

Figure 1: Palo Alto's Areas
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
12 Packet Pg. 20 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Survey Administration and Response
Selected households received mailings beginning on August 1, 2025. All 3,600 households received three notifications in the mail. T he first mailing was a postcard announcing the upcoming survey with a link and QR code to complete the survey online. The next mailing contained a letter from the City Manager inviting the household to participate, along with a paper questionnaire and a postage -paid return envelope. The third and final mailing was a reminder postcard. The second and third mailings also asked respondents not to complete the survey a second time.

The online survey was available in English , Spanish, and Simplified Chinese . The paper survey was available in English only. All mailings included a URL through which the residents could choose to respond online, along with instructions on how to access the survey in Spanish or Simplified Chinese.

Completed surveys were collected over nine weeks. The online open participation survey was available to residents beginning August 29, 2025, and remained open through October 3, 2025.

Less than 1% of the 3,600 surveys mailed were returned because the housing unit was vacant, or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 3, 588 households that received the survey, 574 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 16%. Of the 574 completed surveys, 309 were completed online. Two surveys were completed in Simplified Chinese and another two were completed in Spanish. Additionally, responses were tracked by geographic subarea; response rates by area ranged from 1 3% to 23%. The response rates were calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 1 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons. Additionally, 216 residents completed the online open participation survey.

Confidence Intervals
It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95 percent. The 95 percent level of confidence can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions.2
The margin of error or confidence interval for the City of Palo Alto survey is no greater than plus or minus four percentage points around any given percent reported for the entire sample (574 completed surveys).

For subgroups of responses, the margin of error increases because the number of responses for the subgroup is smaller. The margins of error for the six areas within Palo Alto are shown in the following table. They range from ±8% in Area 6 to ±13% in Area 5.

1 See AAPOR’s Standard Definitions for more information: https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/standard-definitions/ 2 A 95 percent level of confidence indicates that for every 100 random samples of this many residents, 95 of the confidence intervals created will include the “true” population response. This theory is applied in practice to mean that the “true” perspective of the target population lies within the confidence interval created for a single survey. For example, if 75 percent of residents rate a service as “excellent” or “good,” then the 4 percent margin of error (for the 95 percent level of confidence) indicate s that the range of likely responses for the entire community is between 71 percent and 79 percent. This source of uncertainty is called sampling error. In addition to sampling error, other sources of error may affect any survey, including the nonresponse of residents with opinions different from survey responders. Differences in question wording, order, translation and data entry, as examples, can lead to somewhat varying results.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
13 Packet Pg. 21 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 1: Survey Response Rates

Number
mailed Undeliverable Eligible Returned
Response
rate
Margin of
error
Area 1 379 1 378 86 23% ±11%
Area 2 649 4 645 106 16% ±10%
Area 3 439 0 439 80 18% ±11%
Area 4 724 3 721 106 15% ±10%
Area 5 344 0 344 59 17% ±13%
Area 6 1,065 4 1,061 137 13% ±8%
Overall 3,600 12 3,588 574 16% ±4%

Survey Processing (Data Entry)
Upon receipt, completed paper surveys were assigned a unique identification number. Additionally, each survey was reviewed and “cleaned” as necessary. For example, a question may have asked a respondent to pick two items out of a list of five, but the respondent checked three; in this case, Polco would use protocols to randomly choose two of the three selected items for inclusion in the dataset.

All paper surveys then were entered twice into an electronic dataset; any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed.

Online surveys were conducted through the Polco platform. The Polco platform includes many features of online survey tools, but also includes elements tailored to the civic environment. For example, like Polco’s mailed surveys, surveys on Polco are presented with the City name, logo (or other image) and a description, so residents understand who is asking for input and why. Optionally, Polco can also verify respondents with local public data to ensure responden ts are residents or voters. More generally, an advantage of online programming and data gathering is that it allows for more rigid control of the data format, making extensive data cleaning unnecessary.

Survey Data Weighting
Upon completion of data collection for both the address-based and open participation surveys, the demographics of each dataset were separately compared to those found in the US Census and the American Community Survey (ACS) estimates for adults in the City of Palo Alto. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey respondents reflect the larger population of the community.

Both survey datasets were weighted independently to best match the Census and ACS . The characteristics used for weighting were housing tenure (rent or own), housing unit type (attached or detached), sex, age, and area. The highlights are based on the results from the address-based mail survey and full results for that outreach effort can be found in Appendix A: Results Tables. Results for the open participation survey can be found in Appendix C: Results from Open Participation Survey.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
14 Packet Pg. 22 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 2: Palo Alto 2025 Address-based Survey Weighting Table Characteristic Population Norm Unweighted Data Weighted Data Housing
Rent home 44% 29% 43%
Own home 56% 71% 57%
Detached unit* 59% 67% 60%
Attached unit* 41% 33% 40%
Race and Ethnicity
White 55% 64% 58%
Not white 45% 36% 42%
Not Hispanic 94% 96% 94%
Hispanic 6% 4% 6%
Sex and Age
Female 52% 53% 53%
Male 48% 47% 47%
18-34 years of age 23% 7% 21%
35-54 years of age 35% 24% 34%
55+ years of age 42% 69% 45%
Females 18-34 11% 4% 10%
Females 35-54 18% 12% 18%
Females 55+ 23% 36% 25%
Males 18-34 12% 3% 11%
Males 35-54 17% 12% 17%
Males 55+ 19% 32% 19%
Area
Area 1 13% 15% 13%
Area 2 19% 18% 19%
Area 3 13% 14% 14%
Area 4 20% 18% 19%
Area 5 9% 10% 9%
Area 6 26% 24% 26%
* U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimates

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
15 Packet Pg. 23 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Survey Data Analysis and Reporting
The survey dataset was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). When results are compared by demographic and geographic subgroups , and in the highlights section, the percentages presented represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., “excellent” and “good,” “very safe” and “somewhat safe,” “essential” and “very important,” etc.), or, i n the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month.

On many of the questions in the survey , respondents may answer “don’t know.” In Appendix A: Results Tables for each question there are two tables that show all scale points, one including and one excluding the respondents who chose “don’t know.” For ease of comparison, “don’t know” responses are excluded from the tables which show comparisons by subgroups and also from the results discussed in the highlights section. In other words, the highlights section and comparison tables only show the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.

When a table for a question that only permitted a single response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the common practice of percentages being rounded to the nearest whole number.

Trends Over Time
Trend tables display trends over time, comparing the 2025 ratings for the City of Palo Alto to the 1 2 previous iterations of survey results (going back to 20 12) and displaying 2003 data, the year when surveying started, when available.

Trend data for Palo Alto represent important comparison data and should be examined for improvement or declines. Deviations from stable trends over time represent opportunities for understanding how local policies, programs, or public information may have affected residents’ opinions.

Meaningful differences between survey years have been noted within the following tables as being “higher” or “lower” if the differences are greater than approximately six percentage points3 between the 2025 and 2024 surveys; otherwise, the comparisons between 2025 and 2024 are noted as being “similar.” When comparing results over time, small differences (those with less than a 6 percent difference) are more likely to be due to random variation (attributable to chance over real change), while larger differences (those greater than 6 percent) may be due to a real shift in resident perspective. However, it is often wise to continue to monitor results over a longer period of time to rule out random variation due to chance in the sampling process. Sometimes small changes in question wording can explain changes in results as well.

3 While the percentages are reported as rounded whole numbers, meaningful differences are identified based on unrounded percentages with decimals in place.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
16 Packet Pg. 24 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Geographic and Demographic Comparisons
The subgroup comparison tables in Appendix A display differences in opinion of survey respondents by the six geographic subareas, by race/ethnicity, and by age groups.

Chi-square or ANOVA tests of significance were applied to these breakdowns of survey questions. A “p- value” of 0.05 or less indicates that there is less than a 5% probability that differences observed between groups are due to chance; or in other words, a greater than 95% probability that the differences observed in the selected categories of the sample represent “real” differences among those populations. As subgroups vary in size and each group (and each comparison to another group) has a unique margin of error, statistical testing is used to determine whether differences between subgroups are statistically significant.

Each column in the subgroup comparison tables is labeled with a letter for each group being compared.

The “Overall” column, which shows the ratings for all respondents, also has a column designation of “(A),” but no statistical tests were done for the overall rating.

For each pair of subgroup ratings within a row (a single question item) that has a statistically significant difference, an uppercase letter denoting significance is shown in the cell with the larger column proportion. The letter denotes the subgroup with the smaller column proportion from which it is statistically different. Subgroups that have no uppercase letter denotation in their column , and that are also not referred to in any other column, were not statistically different.

National Benchmark Comparisons
Comparison Data
Polco’s database of comparative resident opinions is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in surveys from over 400 communities whose residents evaluated the same kinds of topics as the Palo Alto Community Survey. The surveys gathered for Polco’s database include data from communities that have been conducted by Polco, as well as citizen surveys unaffiliated with Polco. The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each community; most communities conduct surveys every year or in alternating years. Polco adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant, and the comparisons are to jurisdictions that have conducted a survey within the last five years. The communities in the database represent a wide geogr aphic and population range. The City of Palo Alto chose to make comparisons to the entire database.

Interpreting the Results
Ratings are compared for items in Questions 1 through 12 when there are at least five communities in which a similar question was asked. Where comparisons are available, four columns are provided on the table. The first column is Palo Alto’s average rating, converted to a 100-point scale. The second column is the rank assigned to Palo Alto’s rating among communities where a similar question was asked. The third column is the number of communities that asked a similar question. The final column shows the comparison of Palo Alto’s rating to the benchmark.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
17 Packet Pg. 25 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Although responses to many of the evaluative questions were made on a four -point scale with 1 representing the best rating and 4 the worst, the benchmarks are calculated on a common scale where 0 is the worst possible rating and 100 is the best possible rating.

In that final column, Palo Alto’s results are noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark, or “similar” to the benchmark, meaning that the average rating given by Palo Alto residents is statistically similar to or different (grea ter or lesser) than the benchmark. More extreme differences are noted as “much higher” or “much lower.” A rating is considered “similar” if it is within the standard range of 10 points; “higher” or “lower” if the difference between Palo Alto’s rating and t he benchmark is greater than the standard range but less than twice the standard range; and “much higher” or “much lower” if the difference between Palo Alto’s rating and the benchmark is higher or lower by more than twice the standard range. Where benchma rk ratings were not available, “NA” indicates that this information is not applicable (these were questions specific to Palo Alto and not asked in other communities).

The 100-point scale is not a percent. It is a conversion of responses to an average rating. Each response option is assigned a value that is used in calculating the average score. For example, “very good”= 100, “good”= 75, “neither good nor bad”= 50, “bad” = 25, and “very bad”= 0. If everyone reported “very good,” then the average rating would be 100 on the 100 -point scale. Likewise, if all respondents gave a “very bad” rating, the result would be 0 on the 100 -point scale. If half the respondents gave a scor e of “very good” and half gave a score of “very bad,” the average would be 50, in the middle of the scale or “neither good nor bad.” An example of how to convert survey frequencies into an average rating appears below.

Table 3: Example of Converting Responses to the 100-point Scale How do you rate the community as a place to live?
Response
option
Total
with
“don’t
know”
Step1: Remove
“don’t know”
responses
Total
without
“don’t
know”
Step 2:

Assign
scale
values
Step 3: Multiply
% by scale
value
Step 4: Sum
to calculate
average rating
Very good 15% =15÷(100-2)= 15.3% 100 =15.3% x 100 = 15.3 Good 53% =53÷(100-2)= 54.1% 75 =54.1% x 75 = 40.6
Neither good
nor bad
26% =26÷(100-2)= 26.5% 50 =26.5% x 50 = 13.3
Bad 3% =3÷(100-2)= 3.1% 25 =3.1% x 25 = 0.8
Very bad 0% =0÷(100-2)= 0% 0 =0% x 0 = 0
Don’t know 2% --
Total 100% 100% 70

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
18 Packet Pg. 26 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Appendix A: Results Tables
The following pages contain results for each question on the survey. The first set of results includes the “don’t know” responses, followed by results excluding the “don’t know” responses, trends over time, and geographic and demographic comparisons. For the questions in the survey where respondents could answer “don’t know,” the proportion of respondents giving this reply were not included for the comparisons over time and by geography and demographic comparisons. In other words, these tables display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.

For the basic frequencies, the percent of respondents giving a particular response is shown followed by the number of respondents (denoted with “N=”); the number of respondents is specific to each item, based on the actual number of responses received for the question or question item , and based on the weighted data (weighted responses are rounded to the nearest whole number and may not exactly add up to the total number of responses). Generally, a small portion of respondents select “don’t know” for most s urvey items and, inevitably, some items have a larger “don’t know” percentage. Comparing responses to a set of items on the same scale can be misleading when the “don’t know” responses have been included. If two items have disparate “don’t know” percentage s (2 percent versus 17 percent, for example), any apparent similarities or differences across the remaining response options may disappear once the “don’t know” responses are removed.

Tables displaying trend data appear only for the years in which the questions were asked. Meaningful differences between survey years have been noted within the following tables as being “higher” or “lower” if the differences are greater than approximately six percentage points between the 202 5 and 20 24 surveys; otherwise, the comparison between 2025 and 2024 are noted as being “similar.” Geographic and demographic comparisons have been provided for Questions 1 through 1 8 (some questions having multiple, non -scaled responses are not included). Chi -square or ANOVA tests of significance were applied to these breakdowns of survey questions. A “p-value” of 0.05 or less indicates that there is less than a 5% probability that di fferences observed between groups are due to chance; or in other words, a greater than 95% probability that the differences observed in the selected categories of the sample represent “real” differences among those populations. As subgroups vary in size and each group (and each comparison to another group) has a unique margin of error, statistical testing is used to determine whether differences between subgroups are statistically significant.

Each column in the following tables is labeled with a letter for each subgroup being compared. The “Overall” column, which shows the ratings for all respondents, also has a column designation of “(A) ,” but no statistical tests were done for the overall rating.

For each pair of subgroup ratings within a row (a single question item) that has a statistically significant difference, an upper-case letter denoting significance is shown in the cell with the larger column proportion. The letter denotes the subgroup with the smaller column proportion from which it is statistically different. Subgroups that have no upper-case letter denotation in their column, and that are also not referred to in any other column, were not statistically different.

For example, in Table 8 on page 18, respondents in areas 1, 2, 3, and 6 gave significantly higher ratings to Palo Alto as a place to live than respondents in area 4 and 5 (columns D and E), as denoted by the “D” and the “E” listed in the cell of the ratings for area 1, 2, 3, and 6.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
19 Packet Pg. 27 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 1

Table 4: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality
of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Palo Alto as a place to live 50% N=286 40% N=229 9% N=49 1% N=7 0% N=0 100% N=570 Your neighborhood as a place to live 52% N=292 40% N=227 7% N=40 1% N=6 0% N=0 100% N=565 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 40% N=224 29% N=162 11% N=59 4% N=20 17% N=96 100% N=562 Palo Alto as a place to work 34% N=190 29% N=162 14% N=77 2% N=9 22% N=126 100% N=564 Palo Alto as a place to visit 28% N=160 38% N=215 21% N=116 7% N=38 6% N=32 100% N=561 Palo Alto as a place to retire 23% N=129 22% N=124 19% N=108 18% N=102 17% N=97 100% N=560 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 41% N=230 47% N=266 11% N=63 1% N=8 0% N=0 100% N=567

Table 5: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality
of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Palo Alto as a place to live 50% N=286 40% N=229 9% N=49 1% N=7 100% N=570 Your neighborhood as a place to live 52% N=292 40% N=227 7% N=40 1% N=6 100% N=565 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 48% N=224 35% N=162 13% N=59 4% N=20 100% N=465 Palo Alto as a place to work 43% N=190 37% N=162 18% N=77 2% N=9 100% N=438 Palo Alto as a place to visit 30% N=160 41% N=215 22% N=116 7% N=38 100% N=529 Palo Alto as a place to retire 28% N=129 27% N=124 23% N=108 22% N=102 100% N=463 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 41% N=230 47% N=266 11% N=63 1% N=8 100% N=567

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
20 Packet Pg. 28 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 6: Question 1 - Historical Results
Please rate each of the
following aspects of quality of
life in Palo Alto:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Palo Alto as a place to live 95% 95% 92% 95% 92% 91% 91% 89% 88% 88% 90% 91% 90% Similar Your neighborhood as a place
to live
88% 90% 91% 92% 90% 91% 91% 90% 89% 88% 92% 93% 92% Similar Palo Alto as a place to raise
children
90% 92% 90% 93% 87% 84% 84% 82% 82% 87% 83% 84% 83% Similar Palo Alto as a place to work NA 88% 89% 86% 87% 82% 82% 80% 82% 79% 85% 84% 80% Similar Palo Alto as a place to visit NA NA NA 75% 74% 72% 71% 68% 70% 69% 73% 70% 71% Similar Palo Alto as a place to retire 62% 68% 56% 60% 52% 50% 51% 40% 52% 46% 53% 54% 55% Similar The overall quality of life in
Palo Alto
92% 92% 94% 91% 91% 88% 85% 89% 84% 88% 86% 89% 87% Similar

Table 7: Question 1 - Benchmark Comparisons
City of Palo Alto rating Rank
Number of jurisdictions
for comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Palo Alto as a place to live 80 100 355 Similar
Your neighborhood as a place to live 81 64 342 Similar
Palo Alto as a place to raise children 76 137 358 Similar Palo Alto as a place to work 74 25 354 Higher
Palo Alto as a place to visit 65 114 331 Similar
Palo Alto as a place to retire 53 253 354 Similar
The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 76 94 369 Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
21 Packet Pg. 29 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 8: Question 1 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Palo Alto as a place to live 95%
D E
93%
D E
94%
D E
84% 80% 93%
D E
90%
Your neighborhood as a place to live 92% 91% 88% 92% 88% 96% C
92%
Palo Alto as a place to raise children 92%
B
79% 85% 80% 78% 84% 83%
Palo Alto as a place to work

79% 80% 82% 84% 77% 79% 80%
Palo Alto as a place to visit 69% 61% 80%
B
69% 66% 76%
B
71%
Palo Alto as a place to retire 54% 60%
D
51% 43% 49% 63%
D
55%
The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 92%
D E
88% 90%
E
82% 78% 91%
D E
87%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
22 Packet Pg. 30 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 9: Question 1 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Palo Alto as a place to live 93%
C
90% 82% 87% 89% 93% 90%
Your neighborhood as a place to live 94% 90% 91% 93% 88% 95% B
92%
Palo Alto as a place to raise children 81% 89%
C
76% 59% 88%
A
86%
A
83%
Palo Alto as a place to work 85%
C
80%
C
64% 77% 74% 87%
B
80%
Palo Alto as a place to visit 72%
C
75%
C
53% 53% 67%
A
82%
A B
71%
Palo Alto as a place to retire 58% 52% 51% 53% 44% 62%
B
55%
The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 93%
B C
85% 79% 88% 84% 90% 87%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
23 Packet Pg. 31 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 2

Table 10: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as
they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
24% N=136 50% N=282 21% N=120 4% N=21 1% N=4 100% N=563 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 50% N=282 40% N=227 8% N=46 2% N=9 0% N=0 100% N=564 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 45% N=254 43% N=242 10% N=58 1% N=7 0% N=1 100% N=562 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 41% N=232 40% N=223 13% N=73 1% N=7 5% N=28 100% N=562 Residents' connection and engagement with their
community
16% N=91 37% N=206 26% N=147 11% N=61 10% N=53 100% N=559

Table 11: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
24% N=136 50% N=282 21% N=120 4% N=21 100% N=559
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 50% N=282 40% N=227 8% N=46 2% N=9 100% N=564 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 45% N=254 43% N=242 10% N=58 1% N=7 100% N=561 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 43% N=232 42% N=223 14% N=73 1% N=7 100% N=534 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 18% N=91 41% N=206 29% N=147 12% N=61 100% N=506

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
24 Packet Pg. 32 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 12: Question 2 - Historical Results
Please rate each of the following
characteristics as they relate to Palo
Alto as a whole:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2011 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Overall "built environment" of Palo
Alto (including overall design,
buildings, parks and transportation
systems)
NA NA 67% 63% 59% 65% 62% 76% 72% 72% 75% 75% Similar
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto NA NA 92% 91% 94% 94% 91% 87% 84% 84% 88% 90% Similar Overall quality of natural environment
in Palo Alto
84% 83% 88% 86% 84% 89% 87% 90% 88% 90% 87% 88% Similar Health and wellness opportunities in
Palo Alto
NA NA 88% 88% 85% 88% 84% 88% 90% 84% 85% 85% Similar
Residents' connection and
engagement with their community
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 62% 63% 61% 61% 59% Similar

Table 13: Question 2 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
65 33 325 Higher
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 79 57 344 Higher Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 77 59 334 Higher Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 76 26 327 Higher Residents’ connection and engagement with their community 55 128 318 Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
25 Packet Pg. 33 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 14: Question 2 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
81%
E
77%
E
81%
E
68% 59% 78%
E
75%
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto

88% 91% 88% 91% 85% 92% 90%
Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 85% 88% E
90%
E
91%
E
74% 92%
E
88%
Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto

90% 90% 84% 83% 84% 82% 85%
Residents' connection and engagement with their community 74%

B D E F
55% 77%

B D E F
52% 53% 52% 59%

Table 15: Question 2 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other
race or
Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
76% 80%
C
65% 74% 75% 76% 75%
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto

91% 89% 91% 90% 91% 90% 90%
Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 90% C
88% 81% 87% 86% 91% 88%
Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 88% 81% 83% 79% 82% 90% A B
85%
Residents' connection and engagement with their community 56% 66% A
56% 44% 59%
A
64%
A
59%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
26 Packet Pg. 34 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 3

Table 16: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do
each of the following: Very likely
Somewhat
likely
Somewhat
unlikely
Very
unlikely Don't know Total
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who
asks
40% N=229 41% N=233 12% N=66 7% N=38 1% N=4 100% N=571
Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 57% N=326 21% N=122 12% N=67 7% N=39 3% N=18 100% N=572 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 65% N=370 18% N=103 4% N=25 3% N=15 10% N=56 100% N=568

Table 17: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do
each of the following: Very likely Somewhat likely
Somewhat
unlikely Very unlikely Total
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 40% N=229 41% N=233 12% N=66 7% N=38 100% N=567 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 59% N=326 22% N=122 12% N=67 7% N=39 100% N=554 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 72% N=370 20% N=103 5% N=25 3% N=15 100% N=512

Table 18: Question 3 - Historical Results
Please indicate how likely or unlikely
you are to do each of the following:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to 2024 2011 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Recommend living in Palo Alto to
someone who asks
91% 89% 86% 80% 72% 75% 73% 74% 75% 77% 78% 82% Similar Remain in Palo Alto for the next five
years
87% 87% 83% 80% 75% 76% 78% 78% 84% 77% 79% 81% Similar Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to
friends
NA NA NA NA NA 91% 92% 91% 92% 90% 92% 92% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
27 Packet Pg. 35 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 19: Question 3 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 82 200 328 Similar Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 81 219 332 Similar

Table 20: Question 3 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 86%
D
79% 91%
B D
75% 78% 82% 82%
Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 89%
F
83% 89%
F
78% 78% 75% 81%
Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 94% 95%
D
97%
D
87% 92% 91% 92%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
28 Packet Pg. 36 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 21: Question 3 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat
likely"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone
who asks
81% 89%
A C
72% 77% 83% 82% 82%
Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 77% 91%
A C
69% 49% 86%
A
92%
A
81%
Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 94%
C
94%
C
83% 90% 92% 95% 92%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
29 Packet Pg. 37 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 4

Table 22: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community
does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Making all residents feel welcome 19% N=109 41% N=232 22% N=127 7% N=41 10% N=59 100% N=567 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 24% N=134 31% N=174 23% N=129 14% N=82 8% N=46 100% N=566 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse
backgrounds
26% N=145 40% N=228 18% N=105 5% N=31 10% N=58 100% N=566 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.)
13% N=71 24% N=137 26% N=145 12% N=68 26% N=144 100% N=565

Table 23: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Making all residents feel welcome 21% N=109 46% N=232 25% N=127 8% N=41 100% N=509 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 26% N=134 34% N=174 25% N=129 16% N=82 100% N=519 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 28% N=145 45% N=228 21% N=105 6% N=31 100% N=508 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 17% N=71 33% N=137 34% N=145 16% N=68 100% N=420

Table 24: Question 4 - Historical Results
Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following.

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to 2024 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Making all residents feel welcome 59% 62% 66% 68% 67% Similar Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 52% 51% 57% 59% 59% Similar Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 65% 65% 68% 71% 73% Similar Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 47% 45% 50% 52% 49% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
30 Packet Pg. 38 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 25: Question 4 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Making all residents feel welcome 60 176 320 Similar
Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 57 144 318 Similar Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 65 67 318 Similar Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.)
50 168 315 Similar

Table 26: Question 4 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Making all residents feel welcome 81%
D E F
78%
E F
69%
E
66%
E
45% 61%
E
67%
Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 64%
E
69%
E F
74%
D E F
59%
E
31% 54%
E
59%
Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 73% 79% E
86%
D E F
69% 62% 70% 73%
Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 65% D E F
54%
F
64%
E F
48% 36% 39% 49%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
31 Packet Pg. 39 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 27: Question 4 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Making all residents feel welcome 68%
C
76%
C
44% 70% 66% 67% 67%
Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 56% 70%
A C
49% 54% 56% 66%
A
59%
Valuing/respecting residents from diverse
backgrounds
75%
C
75%
C
58% 67% 73% 77% 73%
Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.)
45%
C
69%
A C
27% 36% 56%
A
49% 49%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
32 Packet Pg. 40 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 5

Table 28: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as
they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Overall quality of business and service
establishments in Palo Alto
25% N=138 52% N=294 17% N=97 4% N=24 2% N=10 100% N=562 Variety of business and service establishments in
Palo Alto
20% N=111 39% N=218 30% N=169 10% N=55 2% N=10 100% N=563 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 22% N=125 38% N=216 28% N=159 9% N=53 3% N=15 100% N=567 Employment opportunities 13% N=73 24% N=137 20% N=111 6% N=33 37% N=211 100% N=564 Shopping opportunities 26% N=148 40% N=225 26% N=146 7% N=39 1% N=5 100% N=563 Cost of living in Palo Alto 2% N=9 7% N=37 24% N=136 67% N=376 1% N=7 100% N=565 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 37% N=208 43% N=239 16% N=88 3% N=16 2% N=9 100% N=560 Traffic flow on major streets 10% N=58 35% N=196 37% N=211 17% N=94 1% N=7 100% N=566 Ease of public parking 19% N=107 43% N=244 26% N=149 9% N=52 3% N=17 100% N=569 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 25% N=141 44% N=251 22% N=124 7% N=41 2% N=9 100% N=566 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 6% N=35 18% N=104 23% N=132 26% N=149 26% N=145 100% N=565 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 29% N=164 39% N=219 13% N=75 3% N=19 15% N=83 100% N=561 Ease of walking in Palo Alto 35% N=198 47% N=265 11% N=65 5% N=30 1% N=8 100% N=565 Variety of housing options 5% N=28 18% N=100 31% N=176 35% N=198 11% N=60 100% N=562 Availability of affordable quality housing 3% N=15 6% N=35 15% N=85 62% N=349 14% N=77 100% N=563 Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 6% N=33 21% N=117 25% N=140 15% N=82 34% N=188 100% N=559 Availability of paths and walking trails 28% N=155 42% N=238 19% N=109 6% N=32 5% N=27 100% N=562 Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and
paths or trails, etc.)
30% N=169 42% N=238 13% N=75 6% N=33 9% N=52 100% N=566 Recreational opportunities 30% N=172 42% N=236 17% N=93 4% N=25 7% N=40 100% N=566 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 6% N=35 8% N=47 10% N=59 14% N=81 61% N=343 100% N=565 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 27% N=155 38% N=215 20% N=115 5% N=27 10% N=55 100% N=568

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
33 Packet Pg. 41 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 29: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 25% N=138 53% N=294 18% N=97 4% N=24 100% N=552 Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 20% N=111 40% N=218 31% N=169 10% N=55 100% N=552 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 23% N=125 39% N=216 29% N=159 10% N=53 100% N=552 Employment opportunities 21% N=73 39% N=137 31% N=111 9% N=33 100% N=354 Shopping opportunities 26% N=148 40% N=225 26% N=146 7% N=39 100% N=558 Cost of living in Palo Alto 2% N=9 7% N=37 24% N=136 67% N=376 100% N=558 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 38% N=208 43% N=239 16% N=88 3% N=16 100% N=551 Traffic flow on major streets 10% N=58 35% N=196 38% N=211 17% N=94 100% N=559 Ease of public parking 19% N=107 44% N=244 27% N=149 9% N=52 100% N=552 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 25% N=141 45% N=251 22% N=124 7% N=41 100% N=557 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 8% N=35 25% N=104 31% N=132 35% N=149 100% N=420 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 34% N=164 46% N=219 16% N=75 4% N=19 100% N=478 Ease of walking in Palo Alto 36% N=198 47% N=265 12% N=65 5% N=30 100% N=558 Variety of housing options 6% N=28 20% N=100 35% N=176 39% N=198 100% N=502 Availability of affordable quality housing 3% N=15 7% N=35 18% N=85 72% N=349 100% N=485 Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 9% N=33 31% N=117 38% N=140 22% N=82 100% N=371 Availability of paths and walking trails 29% N=155 45% N=238 20% N=109 6% N=32 100% N=534 Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.)
33% N=169 46% N=238 15% N=75 6% N=33 100% N=514
Recreational opportunities 33% N=172 45% N=236 18% N=93 5% N=25 100% N=526 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 16% N=35 21% N=47 27% N=59 37% N=81 100% N=222 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 30% N=155 42% N=215 22% N=115 5% N=27 100% N=513

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
34 Packet Pg. 42 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 30: Question 5 - Historical Results
Please rate each of the following
characteristics as they relate to
Palo Alto as a whole:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared
to 2024 2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Overall quality of business and
service establishments in Palo
Alto
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 85% 80% 74% 71% 78% Higher
Variety of business and service
establishments in Palo Alto
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 66% 58% 58% 54% 60% Similar
Vibrancy of downtown/
commercial areas
NA NA NA 77% 76% 73% 73% 71% 72% 62% 65% 59% 62% Similar Employment opportunities 33% 68% 68% 69% 66% 70% 74% 73% 68% 73% 62% 64% 60% Similar Shopping opportunities NA 69% 73% 82% 79% 80% 82% 79% 78% 73% 69% 66% 67% Similar Cost of living in Palo Alto NA NA NA 11% 8% 7% 8% 8% 6% 5% 8% 8% 8% Similar Overall image or reputation of Palo
Alto
NA 92% 90% 92% 88% 86% 86% 83% 78% 76% 76% 78% 81% Similar Traffic flow on major streets 36% 40% 36% 34% 35% 31% 30% 33% 49% 47% 51% 48% 45% Similar Ease of public parking NA NA NA NA 38% 36% 33% 32% 59% 67% 68% 68% 64% Similar Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 55% 62% 51% 55% 52% 44% 44% 42% 70% 72% 73% 72% 70% Similar Ease of travel by public
transportation in Palo Alto
NA 64% 71% 65% 36% 26% 28% 29% 30% 24% 32% 31% 33% Similar Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo
Alto
84% 81% 78% 78% 77% 74% 78% 74% 79% 76% 77% 81% 80% Similar Ease of walking in Palo Alto NA 82% 84% 84% 83% 80% 86% 83% 86% 85% 80% 82% 83% Similar Variety of housing options NA 29% 26% 27% 20% 17% 18% 13% 27% 21% 26% 24% 26% Similar Availability of affordable quality
housing
6% 12% 13% 11% 8% 6% 6% 5% 9% 6% 11% 11% 10% Similar
Overall quality of new
development in Palo Alto
NA 57% 56% 44% 51% 49% 42% 50% 38% 36% 40% 41% 40% Similar Availability of paths and walking
trails
NA 75% 77% 71% 74% 73% 76% 77% 76% 76% 73% 73% 74% Similar Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
35 Packet Pg. 43 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Please rate each of the following
characteristics as they relate to
Palo Alto as a whole:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared
to 2024 2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fitness opportunities (including
exercise classes and paths or
trails, etc.)
NA NA NA NA NA 78% 78% 79% 78% 79% 77% 76% 79% Similar
Recreational opportunities NA 81% 81% 81% 77% 80% 77% 81% 75% 77% 79% 77% 77% Similar Availability of affordable quality
mental health care
NA NA NA NA 63% 53% 46% 52% 38% 44% 26% 38% 37% Similar Opportunities to attend
cultural/arts/music activities
NA 73% 77% 69% 81% 79% 77% 81% 74% 71% 78% 72% 72% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
36 Packet Pg. 44 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 31: Question 5 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark

Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto
66 103 330 Similar
Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 57 130 317 Similar Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 58 104 316 Similar Employment opportunities 57 44 340 Higher
Shopping opportunities 62 62 330 Higher
Cost of living in Palo Alto 14 310 324 Much Lower
Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 72 87 348 Higher Traffic flow on major streets 46 183 342 Similar
Ease of public parking 58 126 319 Similar
Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 63 170 336 Similar
Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 35 149 320 Similar Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 70 16 333 Much Higher Ease of walking in Palo Alto 71 42 336 Higher
Variety of housing options 31 285 329 Lower
Availability of affordable quality housing 14 320 343 Lower Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 42 233 332 Similar Availability of paths and walking trails 66 164 336 Similar Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.)
68 115 321 Similar
Recreational opportunities 68 91 335 Similar
Availability of affordable quality mental health care 39 166 318 Similar Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 66 60 338 Higher

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
37 Packet Pg. 45 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 32: Question 5 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 74% 71% 82% 83% B
78% 79% 78%
Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 65% 52% 66% 67% B F
56% 55% 60%
Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area

63% 61% 68% 64% 55% 59% 62%
Employment opportunities 53% 63% 66%
D
47% 70%
D
66%
D
60%
Shopping opportunities 68% 65% 69% 69% 77%
F
61% 67%
Cost of living in Palo Alto

11% 10% 4% 9% 9% 6% 8%
Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto

86% 82% 80% 81% 73% 82% 81%
Traffic flow on major streets

45% 51% 44% 41% 52% 43% 45%
Ease of public parking

58% 62% 66% 66% 56% 68% 64%
Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 66% 77%
F
67% 78%
F
69% 65% 70%
Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 29% 38% 24% 28% 36% 40% C
33%
Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 82% 87%
D
85% 73% 78% 79% 80%
Ease of walking in Palo Alto 90%
D
93%
C D E
82%
D
67% 78% 86%
D
83%
Variety of housing options 43%
D E F
30% 29% 21% 23% 18% 26%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
38 Packet Pg. 46 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Availability of affordable quality housing 9% 15%
F
11% 9% 15% 7% 10%
Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto

45% 44% 41% 32% 39% 43% 40%
Availability of paths and walking trails

73% 79% 78% 68% 75% 71% 74%
Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) 78% 81% D
86%
D
69% 84%
D
81%
D
79%
Recreational opportunities 76% 81%
D
77% 68% 79% 82%
D
77%
Availability of affordable quality mental health care

37% 41% 46% 31% 27% 40% 37%
Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities

73% 68% 77% 70% 71% 74% 72%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
39 Packet Pg. 47 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 33: Question 5 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian,
Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto
82%
C
80%
C
65% 81% 76% 78% 78%
Variety of business and service establishments in Palo
Alto
61%
C
66%
C
43% 60% 59% 60% 60%
Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 61% 72%
A C
50% 64% 68%
C
55% 62%
Employment opportunities

64% 57% 52% 62% 55% 62% 60%
Shopping opportunities 71% 64% 64% 74%
B
62% 67% 67%
Cost of living in Palo Alto 8% 12% 4% 7% 5% 11%
B
8%
Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto

80% 86% 77% 77% 85% 81% 81%
Traffic flow on major streets 44% 52% 45% 49% 51%
C
40% 45%
Ease of public parking 64% 69% 59% 75%
C
70%
C
55% 64%
Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 68% 79%
A
71% 82%
C
77%
C
62% 70%
Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto

33% 32% 39% 37% 30% 35% 33%
Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto

79% 81% 85% 84% 79% 81% 80%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
40 Packet Pg. 48 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian,
Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Ease of walking in Palo Alto 83% 82% 82% 73% 85%
A
86%
A
83%
Variety of housing options 21% 37%
A
25% 19% 30%
A
25% 26%
Availability of affordable quality housing 6% 22%
A C
4% 8% 13% 10% 10%
Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto

38% 47% 41% 33% 46% 39% 40%
Availability of paths and walking trails

73% 75% 78% 71% 73% 75% 74%
Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and
paths or trails, etc.)
81% 78% 74% 77% 75% 83% 79%
Recreational opportunities 83%
B
73% 71% 79% 74% 80% 77%
Availability of affordable quality mental health care 35% 40% 37% 41% 29% 43% B
37%
Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 76% C
69% 62% 65% 63% 80%
A B
72%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
41 Packet Pg. 49 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 6

Table 34: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as
they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 6% N=36 11% N=62 13% N=75 16% N=89 53% N=298 100% N=560 K-12 education 37% N=205 24% N=135 7% N=38 2% N=9 31% N=172 100% N=560 Adult educational opportunities 23% N=128 34% N=189 11% N=61 2% N=12 30% N=167 100% N=557 Opportunities to participate in social events and
activities 18% N=103 38% N=213 24% N=134 4% N=25 15% N=85 100% N=560 Openness and acceptance of the community toward
people of diverse backgrounds 21% N=117 39% N=218 19% N=108 5% N=28 15% N=83 100% N=554 Opportunities to learn about City services via City
website, social media (Twitter/X, Nextdoor, Facebook,
Instagram, Medium, LinkedIn) 18% N=98 35% N=195 17% N=97 4% N=25 26% N=145 100% N=560

Table 35: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 14% N=36 24% N=62 28% N=75 34% N=89 100% N=262 K-12 education 53% N=205 35% N=135 10% N=38 2% N=9 100% N=388 Adult educational opportunities 33% N=128 48% N=189 16% N=61 3% N=12 100% N=390 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 22% N=103 45% N=213 28% N=134 5% N=25 100% N=475 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 25% N=117 46% N=218 23% N=108 6% N=28 100% N=471 Opportunities to learn about City services via City website, social media (Twitter/X, Nextdoor, Facebook, Instagram, Medium, LinkedIn) 24% N=98 47% N=195 23% N=97 6% N=25 100% N=414

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
42 Packet Pg. 50 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 36: Question 6 - Historical Results*
Please rate each of the
following characteristics as
they relate to Palo Alto as a
whole:

Percent positive
2025 rating
compared to
2024 2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Availability of affordable quality
child care/preschool
25% 27% 31% 49% 49% 39% 47% 37% 44% 34% 43% 34% 37% Similar K-12 education NA 92% 94% 95% 92% 90% 91% 91% 90% 88% 87% 89% 88% Similar Adult educational opportunities NA NA NA 89% 83% 78% 82% 77% 83% 81% 78% 83% 81% Similar Opportunities to participate in
social events and activities
NA 74% 74% 71% 74% 70% 72% 65% 62% 65% 65% 65% 67% Similar Openness and acceptance of
the community toward people
of diverse backgrounds
73% 80% 76% 76% 68% 72% 72% 72% 59% 60% 64% 71% 71% Similar Opportunities to learn about
City services through social
media such as Twitter,
Facebook, and Nextdoor
NA 63% 71% 73% 75% 68% 76% 67% 71% 58% 70% 73% 71% Similar *Prior to 2023, “Opportunities to learn about City services through social media such as Twitter, Facebook, and Nextdoor” was “Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook”.

Table 37: Question 6 - Benchmark Comparisons*

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Availability of affordable quality child care/preschool 39 188 327 Similar K-12 education 79 26 335 Much Higher
Adult educational opportunities 70 5 322 Much Higher
Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 61 104 325 Similar Opportunities to participate in community matters 62 63 323 Similar Openness and acceptance of the community towards people of diverse backgrounds
63 44 335 Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
43 Packet Pg. 51 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 38: Question 6 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 49% 36% 33% 34% 35% 39% 37% K-12 education 89% 83% 93% 86% 88% 89% 88%
Adult educational opportunities 87% 82% 81% 82% 74% 81% 81% Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 72% 63% 78% B F
66% 64% 63% 67%
Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 76% 71% 80% 71% 64% 66% 71% Opportunities to learn about City services via City website, social media (Twitter/X, Nextdoor, Facebook, Instagram, Medium, LinkedIn)
71% 77%
D
77%
D
59% 66% 73%
D
71%

Table 39: Question 6 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other
race or
Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 34% 46% C
24% 22% 41%
A
37% 37%
K-12 education 93%
B C
84% 75% 79% 84% 92%
A B
88%
Adult educational opportunities 86%
B
77% 84% 98%
B C
75% 81% 81%
Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 67% 69% 58% 55% 60% 74% A B
67%
Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds
74%
C
75%
C
52% 70% 69% 74% 71%
Opportunities to learn about City services via City website, social media (Twitter/X, Nextdoor, Facebook, Instagram, Medium, LinkedIn) 77%
B
64% 63% 61% 67% 76%
A
71%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
44 Packet Pg. 52 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 7

Table 40: Question 7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. No Yes Total Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 48% N=267 52% N=289 100% N=557 Visited a neighborhood park or City park 5% N=29 95% N=531 100% N=560 Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 26% N=147 74% N=413 100% N=560 Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 76% N=424 24% N=136 100% N=560 Attended a City-sponsored event 44% N=249 56% N=314 100% N=563 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 12% N=68 88% N=494 100% N=562 Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 43% N=238 57% N=321 100% N=559 Used the Utilities webpage to conduct business or pay bills 31% N=173 69% N=385 100% N=557 Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information 49% N=275 51% N=284 100% N=560 Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion 78% N=435 22% N=124 100% N=559 Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) 75% N=417 25% N=142 100% N=560
Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 82% N=458 18% N=102 100% N=560 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 59% N=327 41% N=229 100% N=556 Voted in your most recent local election 22% N=122 78% N=436 100% N=558 Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving 47% N=261 53% N=298 100% N=559 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 41% N=230 59% N=327 100% N=557 Walked or biked instead of driving 14% N=79 86% N=481 100% N=561 Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 57% N=318 43% N=240 100% N=557 Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 87% N=488 13% N=72 100% N=560 Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 81% N=456 19% N=104 100% N=560 This question did not have a “don’t know” response option.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
45 Packet Pg. 53 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 41: Question 7 - Historical Results*
Please indicate whether or not you have
done each of the following in the last 12
months (percent “yes”).

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2011 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their
services
60% 58% 63% 65% 63% 63% 65% 39% 47% 53% 50% 52% Similar Visited a neighborhood park or City park 91% 94% 91% 94% 93% 91% 94% 94% 94% 94% 95% 95% Similar Used Palo Alto public libraries or their
services
74% 77% 68% 76% 73% 75% 78% 62% 72% 70% 75% 74% Similar Participated in religious or spiritual
activities in Palo Alto
NA NA 30% 30% 31% 30% 30% 24% 24% 24% 24% 24% Similar
Attended a City-sponsored event NA NA 50% 57% 51% 55% 52% 30% 45% 51% 55% 56% Similar Talked to or visited with your immediate
neighbors
NA NA 91% 89% 88% 92% 90% 88% 88% 89% 84% 88% Similar
Used the City’s website to conduct
business or pay bills
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 53% 60% 63% 60% 57% Similar
Used the Utilities webpage to conduct
business or pay bills
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 69% 69% 73% 72% 69% Similar
Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person,
phone, email or web) for help or
information
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 55% 58% 54% 57% 51% Similar
Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-
person, phone, email or web) to express
your opinion
NA NA 17% 15% 17% 20% 21% 25% 21% 17% 17% 22% Similar
Attended a local public meeting (of local
elected officials like City Council or
County Commissioners, advisory boards,
town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch,
etc.)
27% 28% 22% 22% 21% 24% 25% 26% 21% 20% 17% 25% Higher
Watched (online or on television) a local
public meeting
27% 24% 16% 18% 14% 16% 12% 29% 23% 18% 16% 18% Similar Volunteered your time to some
group/activity in Palo Alto
45% 50% 40% 46% 45% 47% 47% 37% 45% 39% 40% 41% Similar Voted in your most recent local election NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 83% 77% 70% 73% 78% Similar Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
46 Packet Pg. 54 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Please indicate whether or not you have
done each of the following in the last 12
months (percent “yes”).

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2011 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Used bus, rail, subway, or other public
transportation instead of driving
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 34% 43% 44% 53% Higher
Carpooled with other adults or children
instead of driving alone
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 41% 60% 59% 59% Similar
Walked or biked instead of driving NA NA NA 85% 87% 87% 84% 88% 86% 88% 84% 86% Similar Did NOT observe a code violation or other
hazard in Palo Alto
NA NA NA 70% 67% 67% 62% 63% 60% 60% 58% 57% Similar
Household member was NOT the victim
of a crime in Palo Alto
91% 91% 94% 92% 93% 91% 90% 93% 86% 88% 87% 87% Similar Did NOT report a crime to the police in
Palo Alto
NA NA NA 87% 87% 86% 85% 87% 79% 85% 84% 81% Similar
*Some questions were re-worded in the Historical Results table to reflect the positive rating of 'yes.' Prior to 2023, “Used the Utilities webpage to conduct business or pay bills” was “Used the Utilities website to conduct business or pay bills”.

Table 42: Question 7 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information
51 115 337 Similar
Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion
22 48 320 Similar
Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards,
25 66 322 Similar
Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 18 227 316 Similar Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 41 81 324 Similar Voted in your most recent local election 78 142 317 Similar Used bus, rail or other public transportation instead of driving 53 27 309 Much Higher Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 59 35 316 Higher Walked or biked instead of driving 86 14 317 Much Higher Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
47 Packet Pg. 55 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 43: Question 7 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent "yes"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 58% F
50% 55% 59%
F
57% 41% 52%
Visited a neighborhood park or City park 91% 96% 93% 97% 96% 94% 95% Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 77% 87% C D F
68% 72% 79% 65% 74%
Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 32% 23% 26% 19% 26% 24% 24% Attended a City-sponsored event 52% 50% 62% 53% 72%

A B D F
55% 56%
Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 89% 81% 92% B
90%
B
97%
B F
86% 88%
Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 60% 55% 46% 57% 75%

B C D F
58% 57%
Used the Utilities webpage to conduct business or pay bills 66% 79% C F
59% 71% 81%
C F
62% 69%
Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information
56%
F
47% 58%
F
54%
F
61%
F
41% 51%
Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion
21% 22% 26% 18% 30% 21% 22%
Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.)
27% 22% 35%
D
19% 35%
D
23% 25%
Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 15% 23% 16% 16% 32%

A C D F
14% 18%
Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 50% D
38% 49%
D
33% 48% 38% 41%
Voted in your most recent local election 83%
F
81%
F
82%
F
74% 93%
D F
68% 78%
Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving 35% 51% A
42% 57%
A C
70%
A B C
62%
A C
53%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
48 Packet Pg. 56 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent "yes"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 53% 56% 53% 63% 61% 64% 59% Walked or biked instead of driving 84% 82% 88% 85% 90% 87% 86% Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.)
42% 38% 44% 50% 53% 38% 43%
Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 16% 15% 8% 7% 23% C D
13% 13%
Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 18% 16% 12% 19% 30% B C
20% 19%

Table 44: Question 7 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent "yes"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 47% 57% A
60% 45% 56% 51% 52%
Visited a neighborhood park or City park 94% 95% 100%
A
100%
C
97%
C
91% 95%
Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 72% 81% A
68% 83%
C
78%
C
66% 74%
Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 27% B
15% 28%
B
20% 21% 29%
B
24%
Attended a City-sponsored event 54% 53% 67% 54% 62%
C
51% 56%
Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 89% 88% 81% 77% 89% A
92%
A
88%
Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 51% 64% A
73%
A
47% 67%
A C
55% 57%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
49 Packet Pg. 57 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent "yes"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Used the Utilities webpage to conduct business or pay bills 64% 77% A
86%
A
79%
C
80%
C
57% 69%
Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information
46% 51% 66%
A
32% 52%
A
57%
A
51%
Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion
22%
B
13% 35%
A B
16% 20% 27%
A
22%
Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.)
27% 19% 35%
B
10% 28%
A
30%
A
25%
Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 15% 19% 29% A
10% 21%
A
19%
A
18%
Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 44% B
32% 50%
B
28% 41%
A
46%
A
41%
Voted in your most recent local election 82%
B
68% 80%
B
70% 72% 86%
A B
78%
Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving
58%
B
43% 58% 85%
B C
47% 43% 53%
Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone
57% 60% 69% 77%
B C
57% 51% 59%
Walked or biked instead of driving 85% 87% 85% 95%
C
93%
C
76% 86%
Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.)
43% 38% 51% 34% 37% 52%
A B
43%
Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 12% 13% 23% A
8% 16%
A
13% 13%
Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 19% 12% 40% A B
13% 20% 20% 19%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
50 Packet Pg. 58 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 8

Table 45: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto
government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 13% N=74 38% N=213 24% N=135 11% N=64 13% N=74 100% N=560 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 9% N=48 37% N=205 28% N=155 12% N=68 15% N=84 100% N=559 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming
resident involvement
10% N=56 30% N=167 20% N=112 8% N=45 32% N=178 100% N=558 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 10% N=56 37% N=206 25% N=139 13% N=74 15% N=82 100% N=558 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 12% N=65 39% N=217 22% N=124 12% N=64 15% N=86 100% N=557 Being honest 12% N=67 33% N=183 18% N=102 9% N=49 28% N=158 100% N=558 Being open and transparent to the public 10% N=57 34% N=193 19% N=105 11% N=63 25% N=141 100% N=559 Informing residents about issues facing the community 11% N=63 36% N=202 24% N=135 11% N=62 17% N=94 100% N=557 Treating all residents fairly 12% N=68 31% N=174 20% N=114 6% N=33 31% N=171 100% N=560 Treating residents with respect 16% N=91 39% N=220 17% N=94 4% N=22 24% N=132 100% N=558

Table 46: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 15% N=74 44% N=213 28% N=135 13% N=64 100% N=486 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 10% N=48 43% N=205 33% N=155 14% N=68 100% N=475 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 15% N=56 44% N=167 29% N=112 12% N=45 100% N=380 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 12% N=56 43% N=206 29% N=139 16% N=74 100% N=475 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 14% N=65 46% N=217 26% N=124 14% N=64 100% N=471 Being honest 17% N=67 46% N=183 25% N=102 12% N=49 100% N=400 Being open and transparent to the public 14% N=57 46% N=193 25% N=105 15% N=63 100% N=418 Informing residents about issues facing the community 14% N=63 44% N=202 29% N=135 13% N=62 100% N=462 Treating all residents fairly 18% N=68 45% N=174 29% N=114 9% N=33 100% N=389 Treating residents with respect 21% N=91 52% N=220 22% N=94 5% N=22 100% N=426 Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
51 Packet Pg. 59 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 47: Question 8 - Historical Results
Please rate the following
categories of Palo Alto
government performance:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024
2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 The value of services for the
taxes paid to Palo Alto
NA 67% 66% 66% 65% 58% 61% 58% 53% 51% 57% 56% 59% Similar The overall direction that Palo
Alto is taking
54% 59% 54% 50% 48% 40% 45% 42% 40% 42% 54% 47% 53% Similar The job Palo Alto government
does at welcoming resident
involvement
65% 58% 55% 54% 61% 50% 56% 56% 51% 46% 55% 54% 59% Similar Overall confidence in Palo Alto
government
NA NA NA 52% 53% 44% 49% 46% 49% 47% 52% 49% 55% Similar Generally acting in the best
interest of the community
NA NA NA 54% 53% 44% 51% 45% 50% 52% 55% 53% 60% Higher Being honest

NA NA NA 58% 62% 55% 61% 56% 55% 53% 62% 61% 62% Similar Being open and transparent to
the public
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50% 53% 57% 53% 60% Higher
Informing residents about
issues facing the community
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 55% 51% 61% 58% 57% Similar
Treating all residents fairly

NA NA NA 57% 53% 47% 56% 51% 57% 50% 62% 66% 62% Similar Treating residents with respect

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 67% 68% 71% 74% 73% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
52 Packet Pg. 60 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 48: Question 8 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 54 115 361 Similar The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 50 190 342 Similar The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming citizen
involvement
54 107 341 Similar
Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 50 151 324 Similar Generally acting in the best interest of the community 53 140 327 Similar Being honest 56 117 319 Similar
Being open and transparent to the public 53 120 321 Similar Informing residents about issues facing the community 53 94 320 Similar Treating all residents fairly 57 114 326 Similar
Treating residents with respect 63 104 318 Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
53 Packet Pg. 61 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 49: Question 8 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent "excellent" or "good".

Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 53% 52% 55% 67% B
58% 66%
B
59%
The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking

55% 57% 53% 52% 47% 53% 53%
The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement

53% 58% 70% 58% 55% 59% 59%
Overall confidence in Palo Alto government

59% 55% 63% 54% 52% 50% 55%
Generally acting in the best interest of the community

61% 65% 60% 55% 58% 60% 60%
Being honest 60% 70%
D E
67% 52% 52% 70%
D E
62%
Being open and transparent to the public 53% 61% 71%
A D E
54% 50% 65% 60%
Informing residents about issues facing the community

57% 52% 64% 58% 60% 56% 57%
Treating all residents fairly 65% 65% 81%
D E F
56% 50% 59% 62%
Treating residents with respect 75% 72% 84%
D E
69% 63% 74% 73%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
54 Packet Pg. 62 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 50: Question 8 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent "excellent" or "good".

Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 70% B C
51% 48% 69%
B
48% 65%
B
59%
The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 57%
C
58%
C
39% 52% 57% 53% 53%
The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming
resident involvement
59% 66% 52% 51% 67%
A
56% 59%
Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 59%
C
63%
C
32% 60% 56% 54% 55%
Generally acting in the best interest of the community 64% C
66%
C
47% 70%
C
61% 56% 60%
Being honest 68%
C
64%
C
38% 71% 62% 61% 62%
Being open and transparent to the public 66%
C
58% 50% 78%
B C
60% 54% 60%
Informing residents about issues facing the
community
64%
B
49% 56% 73%
B C
52% 57% 57%
Treating all residents fairly 70%
C
61%
C
41% 51% 68%
A
62% 62%
Treating residents with respect 81%
B C
71%
C
51% 78% 72% 73% 73%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
55 Packet Pg. 63 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 9

Table 51: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total The City of Palo Alto 24% N=134 48% N=269 16% N=89 5% N=27 7% N=39 100% N=558 The State Government 8% N=46 38% N=211 27% N=149 15% N=85 12% N=66 100% N=557 The Federal Government 4% N=22 13% N=72 33% N=182 37% N=208 13% N=74 100% N=558

Table 52: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
The City of Palo Alto 26% N=134 52% N=269 17% N=89 5% N=27 100% N=519 The State Government 9% N=46 43% N=211 30% N=149 17% N=85 100% N=490 The Federal Government 5% N=22 15% N=72 38% N=182 43% N=208 100% N=484

Table 53: Question 9 - Historical Results
Overall, how would you rate the
quality of the services provided
by each of the following?
Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 The City of Palo Alto 87% 88% 84% 83% 85% 81% 86% 82% 73% 72% 74% 74% 78% Similar State Government 38% 41% 33% NA 47% 46% 54% 46% 52% 57% 50% 47% 52% Similar The Federal Government 32% 50% 37% 48% 46% 46% 36% 33% 27% 47% 45% 41% 19% Lower

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
56 Packet Pg. 64 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 54: Question 9 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark

The City of Palo Alto 66 104 350 Similar
The Federal Government 27 303 309 Lower

Table 55: Question 9 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
The City of Palo Alto

72% 79% 76% 79% 74% 82% 78%
The State Government

53% 53% 53% 53% 50% 51% 52%
The Federal Government 16% 32%

A C D E F
18% 16% 12% 19% 19%

Table 56: Question 9 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian Indian,
or Pacific Islander
Other race or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
The City of Palo Alto 83%
B C
75% 67% 84%
B
74% 79% 78%
The State Government 59%
B
43% 48% 63%
B
39% 57%
B
52%
The Federal Government 19% 24%
C
11% 18% 19% 20% 19%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
57 Packet Pg. 65 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 10

Table 57: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following
services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Traffic enforcement 11% N=59 41% N=223 23% N=127 12% N=63 13% N=71 100% N=543 Traffic signal timing 11% N=60 39% N=212 29% N=155 19% N=101 3% N=15 100% N=543 Street repair 16% N=85 40% N=219 29% N=159 14% N=76 2% N=9 100% N=547 Street cleaning 30% N=164 49% N=270 16% N=87 4% N=23 1% N=8 100% N=552 Street tree maintenance 27% N=146 42% N=230 19% N=103 8% N=45 5% N=26 100% N=550 Sidewalk maintenance 20% N=109 38% N=207 30% N=163 10% N=55 3% N=16 100% N=550 Land use, planning, and zoning 9% N=48 24% N=133 23% N=125 21% N=113 23% N=128 100% N=547 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 6% N=35 23% N=127 20% N=108 14% N=77 36% N=197 100% N=544 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands,
and greenbelts)
32% N=171 44% N=240 13% N=71 2% N=13 9% N=46 100% N=542 Building and planning application processing services 4% N=20 11% N=61 15% N=82 17% N=94 53% N=287 100% N=545 Affordable high-speed internet access 16% N=87 26% N=140 21% N=114 14% N=78 23% N=125 100% N=545 Electric utility 28% N=151 43% N=238 18% N=99 6% N=31 5% N=29 100% N=547 Gas utility 24% N=131 41% N=223 17% N=90 5% N=30 13% N=72 100% N=546 Utility payment options 34% N=184 43% N=233 11% N=60 2% N=10 10% N=57 100% N=544 Drinking water 49% N=269 37% N=205 9% N=48 1% N=8 4% N=21 100% N=550 Sewer services 34% N=185 43% N=236 10% N=57 1% N=6 11% N=63 100% N=547 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams,
levees, etc.)
26% N=141 38% N=207 14% N=77 4% N=21 18% N=96 100% N=542 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and
e-waste)
43% N=235 40% N=220 10% N=57 3% N=17 4% N=22 100% N=550 Police services 24% N=130 30% N=165 7% N=38 2% N=10 37% N=205 100% N=548 Crime prevention 19% N=101 35% N=191 15% N=81 4% N=25 27% N=149 100% N=546 Animal control 18% N=98 31% N=169 9% N=52 2% N=12 39% N=216 100% N=546 Ambulance or emergency medical services 22% N=122 24% N=132 4% N=20 1% N=6 49% N=264 100% N=544 Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
58 Packet Pg. 66 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Please rate the quality of each of the following
services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Fire emergency services 25% N=138 25% N=137 4% N=22 1% N=8 44% N=241 100% N=546 Fire prevention and education 17% N=90 25% N=133 9% N=49 2% N=13 47% N=255 100% N=540 Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) 54% N=293 33% N=179 6% N=32 1% N=5 7% N=38 100% N=546 City parks 54% N=297 37% N=204 6% N=32 0% N=2 2% N=11 100% N=547 Recreation programs or classes 28% N=153 31% N=172 8% N=45 2% N=8 31% N=171 100% N=550 Recreation centers or facilities 30% N=160 34% N=182 9% N=51 2% N=12 25% N=133 100% N=537 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs)
52% N=281 26% N=139 4% N=21 1% N=7 17% N=94 100% N=541
Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment,
accessibility)
54% N=295 25% N=133 5% N=25 1% N=5 16% N=85 100% N=544
Variety of library materials (books, e-books,
streaming, databases, audiobooks)
47% N=256 27% N=145 8% N=45 2% N=11 16% N=89 100% N=547 Art programs and theater 26% N=142 33% N=183 8% N=45 2% N=10 30% N=165 100% N=546 City-sponsored special events 19% N=103 35% N=189 12% N=65 2% N=9 33% N=180 100% N=546 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 18% N=96 43% N=231 17% N=92 3% N=17 19% N=102 100% N=539 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees
(police, receptionists, planners, etc.)
24% N=126 35% N=185 12% N=63 3% N=13 27% N=141 100% N=528

Table 58: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Traffic enforcement 12% N=59 47% N=223 27% N=127 13% N=63 100% N=473 Traffic signal timing 11% N=60 40% N=212 29% N=155 19% N=101 100% N=528 Street repair 16% N=85 41% N=219 29% N=159 14% N=76 100% N=538 Street cleaning 30% N=164 50% N=270 16% N=87 4% N=23 100% N=544 Street tree maintenance 28% N=146 44% N=230 20% N=103 9% N=45 100% N=525 Sidewalk maintenance 20% N=109 39% N=207 30% N=163 10% N=55 100% N=534 Land use, planning, and zoning 11% N=48 32% N=133 30% N=125 27% N=113 100% N=419 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 10% N=35 37% N=127 31% N=108 22% N=77 100% N=347 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 35% N=171 48% N=240 14% N=71 3% N=13 100% N=496 Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
59 Packet Pg. 67 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Building and planning application processing services 8% N=20 24% N=61 32% N=82 36% N=94 100% N=258 Affordable high-speed internet access 21% N=87 33% N=140 27% N=114 19% N=78 100% N=420 Electric utility 29% N=151 46% N=238 19% N=99 6% N=31 100% N=518 Gas utility 28% N=131 47% N=223 19% N=90 6% N=30 100% N=474 Utility payment options 38% N=184 48% N=233 12% N=60 2% N=10 100% N=488 Drinking water 51% N=269 39% N=205 9% N=48 2% N=8 100% N=529 Sewer services 38% N=185 49% N=236 12% N=57 1% N=6 100% N=484 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 32% N=141 46% N=207 17% N=77 5% N=21 100% N=446 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 44% N=235 42% N=220 11% N=57 3% N=17 100% N=528 Police services 38% N=130 48% N=165 11% N=38 3% N=10 100% N=343 Crime prevention 25% N=101 48% N=191 20% N=81 6% N=25 100% N=398 Animal control 30% N=98 51% N=169 16% N=52 4% N=12 100% N=331 Ambulance or emergency medical services 44% N=122 47% N=132 7% N=20 2% N=6 100% N=280 Fire emergency services 45% N=138 45% N=137 7% N=22 2% N=8 100% N=305 Fire prevention and education 32% N=90 47% N=133 17% N=49 5% N=13 100% N=286 Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) 58% N=293 35% N=179 6% N=32 1% N=5 100% N=509 City parks 55% N=297 38% N=204 6% N=32 0% N=2 100% N=536 Recreation programs or classes 40% N=153 46% N=172 12% N=45 2% N=8 100% N=378 Recreation centers or facilities 39% N=160 45% N=182 13% N=51 3% N=12 100% N=404 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs)
63% N=281 31% N=139 5% N=21 2% N=7 100% N=447
Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 64% N=295 29% N=133 6% N=25 1% N=5 100% N=459 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks)
56% N=256 32% N=145 10% N=45 2% N=11 100% N=458
Art programs and theater 37% N=142 48% N=183 12% N=45 3% N=10 100% N=381 City-sponsored special events 28% N=103 52% N=189 18% N=65 2% N=9 100% N=366 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 22% N=96 53% N=231 21% N=92 4% N=17 100% N=436 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.)
33% N=126 48% N=185 16% N=63 3% N=13 100% N=388
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
60 Packet Pg. 68 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 59: Question 10 - Historical Results*
Please rate the quality of each of
the following services in Palo
Alto:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Traffic enforcement 64% 66% 64% 62% 60% 60% 60% 53% 65% 55% 65% 56% 60% Similar Traffic signal timing NA 47% 53% 53% 47% 50% 49% 45% 59% 50% 63% 57% 51% Similar Street repair 50% 42% 47% 55% 51% 57% 55% 46% 56% 46% 42% 52% 57% Similar Street cleaning 75% 80% 76% 80% 75% 77% 78% 72% 83% 82% 79% 80% 80% Similar Street tree maintenance 62% 71% 66% 80% 73% 71% 75% 72% 75% 76% 67% 72% 72% Similar Sidewalk maintenance 50% 53% 56% 62% 62% 61% 65% 61% 63% 61% 63% 57% 59% Similar Land use, planning and zoning 41% 51% 36% 43% 40% 37% 40% 39% 40% 38% 40% 41% 43% Similar Code enforcement (weeds,
abandoned buildings, etc.)
55% 61% 57% 62% 59% 52% 56% 55% 52% 51% 53% 44% 47% Similar Preservation of natural areas
(open space, farmlands, and
greenbelts)
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 83% 83% 83% 81% 83% Similar
Building and planning application
processing services
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 44% 43% 35% 38% 29% 32% Similar
Affordable high-speed internet
access
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 39% 41% 45% 44% 54% Higher
Electric utility NA 84% 80% 72% 87% 86% 87% 83% 77% 80% 73% 67% 75% Higher Gas utility NA 86% 81% 88% 88% 87% 89% 84% 78% 81% 70% 71% 75% Similar Utility payment options NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 85% 86% 87% 85% 80% 86% Similar Drinking water 82% 83% 88% 89% 88% 87% 88% 87% 88% 91% 86% 84% 90% Similar Sewer services 84% 82% 84% 89% 88% 88% 88% 85% 87% 87% 87% 83% 87% Similar Storm water management (storm
drainage, dams, levees, etc.)
65% 75% 69% 80% 71% 75% 81% 71% 83% 78% 73% 77% 78% Similar Refuse collection (garbage,
recycling, yard waste, and e-
waste)
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 85% 87% 85% 87% 83% 86% Similar
Police services 89% 86% 86% 87% 88% 88% 93% 89% 78% 86% 84% 81% 86% Similar Crime prevention NA 74% 75% 80% 79% 80% 81% 78% 67% 64% 68% 69% 73% Similar Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
61 Packet Pg. 69 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Please rate the quality of each of
the following services in Palo
Alto:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2003 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Animal control 79% 78% 76% 80% 80% 77% 80% 75% 82% 81% 78% 82% 81% Similar Ambulance or emergency
medical services
95% 96% 93% 97% 95% 96% 96% 93% 93% 88% 90% 91% 91% Similar Fire emergency services 96% 96% 93% 95% 97% 97% 97% 94% 94% 93% 93% 92% 90% Similar Fire prevention and education NA 80% 82% 85% 85% 85% 87% 84% 82% 81% 77% 80% 78% Similar Palo Alto open space NA NA NA 82% 84% 81% 86% 83% 86% 92% 93% 89% 93% Similar City parks 90% 91% 93% 92% 93% 91% 94% 91% 91% 93% 93% 90% 94% Similar Recreation programs or classes 83% 87% 87% 87% 84% 84% 87% 81% 83% 79% 83% 80% 86% Similar Recreation centers or facilities 77% 85% 80% 84% 86% 81% 86% 82% 82% 79% 85% 81% 84% Similar Public library services (e.g., hold
requests, storytimes, teen events,
bookclubs)
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 92% 93% 93% 92% 94% Similar
Library facilities (buildings,
computer equipment,
accessibility)
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 92% 94% 95% 93% 93% 93% Similar
Variety of library materials
(books, e-books, streaming,
databases, audiobooks)
60% 88% 81% 88% 83% 82% 86% 88% 86% 92% 90% 89% 88% Similar Art programs and theater NA 82% 82% 69% 80% 78% 82% 76% 82% 89% 83% 84% 85% Similar City-sponsored special events NA NA NA 75% 75% 73% 75% 77% 72% 74% 75% 76% 80% Similar City website (cityofpaloalto.org) NA 70% 69% 88% 69% 66% 72% 65% 69% 70% 73% 72% 75% Similar Overall customer service by Palo
Alto employees (police,
receptionists, planners, etc.)
78% 81% 79% 81% 74% 77% 84% 77% 79% 80% 78% 79% 80% Similar *Prior to 2023, “Public information (Police/public safety)” was “Public information services (Police/public safety)” and “Public information (non-Police/public safety)” was “Public information services (non-Police/public safety)”.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
62 Packet Pg. 70 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 60: Question 10 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Traffic enforcement 53 177 348 Similar
Traffic signal timing 48 194 321 Similar
Street repair 53 99 362 Similar
Street cleaning 69 56 329 Higher
Sidewalk maintenance 56 110 324 Similar
Land use, planning and zoning 42 166 336 Similar
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 45 163 340 Similar Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands and greenbelts)
72 24 322 Higher
Affordable high-speed internet access 52 148 312 Similar Utility payment options 74 6 313 Higher
Drinking water 80 14 335 Higher
Sewer services 75 67 327 Similar
Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees,
etc.)
68 104 336 Similar
Police emergency services 74 103 364 Similar
Crime prevention 64 168 344 Similar
Animal control 69 60 327 Similar
Ambulance or emergency medical services 77 111 335 Similar Fire emergency services 78 193 349 Similar
Fire prevention and education 68 151 327 Similar
Palo Alto open space (e.g. Foothills, Baylands) 83 1 315 Much Higher City parks 83 14 347 Higher
Recreation programs or classes 75 16 329 Higher
Recreation centers or facilities 74 33 324 Higher

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
63 Packet Pg. 71 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 61: Question 10 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Traffic enforcement 59% 71%
D
57% 52% 55% 60% 60%
Traffic signal timing 50% 51% 58% 51% 41% 53% 51%
Street repair 41% 61%
A
62%
A
55% 53% 60%
A
57%
Street cleaning 74% 85%
D
81% 74% 73% 85%
D
80%
Street tree maintenance 58% 73%
A
76%
A
73%
A
74%
A
74%
A
72%
Sidewalk maintenance 49% 63% 70%
A E
58% 48% 61% 59%
Land use, planning, and zoning 55%
D E
45% 49%
E
37% 28% 43% 43%
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 43% 49% 48% 45% 39% 52% 47% Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 81% 90% 81% 81% 78% 83% 83% Building and planning application processing services 37% 27% 44% 28% 31% 28% 32% Affordable high-speed internet access 53% 61% 57% 46% 50% 56% 54% Electric utility 82% 76% 74% 70% 76% 74% 75%
Gas utility 75% 77% 78% 71% 74% 73% 75%
Utility payment options 88% 81% 85% 86% 85% 88% 86%
Drinking water 92% 92% 88% 86% 83% 92% 90%
Sewer services 88% 88% 86% 85% 81% 90% 87%
Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 72% 81% 82% 79% 71% 79% 78% Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 86% 91% 83% 83% 84% 87% 86% Police services 92%
D
89%
D
92%
D
71% 84% 91%
D
86%
Crime prevention 70% 73% 68% 78% 65% 79% 73%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
64 Packet Pg. 72 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Animal control 82% 86%
E
80% 76% 66% 87%
E
81%
Ambulance or emergency medical services 92%
D
99%
D
94%
D
74% 86% 95%
D
91%
Fire emergency services 95%
D
90% 91% 79% 85% 98%
D E
90%
Fire prevention and education 78% 78% 79% 74% 83% 78% 78% Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) 91% 94% 89% 94% 88% 96% 93% City parks 89% 93% 90% 99%
A C E
87% 97%
A C E
94%
Recreation programs or classes 83% 88% 87% 89% 79% 85% 86% Recreation centers or facilities 77% 86% 87% 81% 84% 89% 84% Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 91% 96% 96% 91% 94% 94% 94% Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 86% 97% A
94% 93% 93% 93% 93%
Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 82% 92% 94% A
84% 83% 89% 88%
Art programs and theater 89%
E
92%
D E
88%
E
81% 72% 85%
E
85%
City-sponsored special events 85%
E
82%
E
78% 87%
E
62% 79%
E
80%
City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 67% 81% 75% 81% 69% 74% 75% Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.)
72% 84% 71% 83% 83% 84% 80%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
65 Packet Pg. 73 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 62: Question 10 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian Indian,
or Pacific Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial 18-34
35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Traffic enforcement 59% 62% 59% 47% 61%
A
63%
A
60%
Traffic signal timing

49% 57% 55% 52% 55% 50% 51%
Street repair 60% 55% 51% 70%
B C
55% 53% 57%
Street cleaning 85%
B
74% 77% 81% 79% 80% 80%
Street tree maintenance 74% 68% 76% 84%
B C
73% 66% 72%
Sidewalk maintenance 60% 58% 68% 64%
C
64%
C
53% 59%
Land use, planning, and zoning 41% 54%
A
39% 45% 51%
C
37% 43%
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 47% 50% 45% 74% B C
51%
C
35% 47%
Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts)
84% 83% 84% 86% 83% 82% 83%
Building and planning application processing services 25% 46% A
34% 19% 43%
A C
27% 32%
Affordable high-speed internet access 60% 49% 48% 72%
B C
44% 55%
B
54%
Electric utility 80%
B
71% 69% 73% 69% 80%
B
75%
Gas utility 80%
C
71% 66% 71% 68% 81%
B
75%
Utility payment options 90%
B
80% 86% 92%
B
81% 88% 86%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
66 Packet Pg. 74 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian Indian,
or Pacific Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial 18-34
35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Drinking water 93%
B
82% 89% 95%
B
84% 91%
B
90%
Sewer services 89%
B
81% 90% 87% 82% 91%
B
87%
Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees,
etc.)
78% 80% 77% 87% 78% 76% 78%
Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e- waste)
88%
B
78% 94%
B
82% 83% 91%
A B
86%
Police services 92%
B C
82%
C
65% 77% 82% 92%
A B
86%
Crime prevention 83%
B C
63% 60% 80%
B
68% 75% 73%
Animal control 86%
B
73% 79% 95%
B C
76% 81% 81%
Ambulance or emergency medical services 96%
B C
83% 82% 77% 89%
A
94%
A
91%
Fire emergency services 97%
B C
84% 78% 90% 87% 93% 90%
Fire prevention and education 87%
B C
76%
C
59% 75% 74% 84% 78%
Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) 96%
B C
90% 87% 94% 91% 94% 93%
City parks 95% 92% 91% 100%
B C
90% 94% 94%
Recreation programs or classes 87% 87% 81% 100%
B C
84% 83% 86%
Recreation centers or facilities

87% 82% 78% 91% 81% 84% 84%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
67 Packet Pg. 75 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian Indian,
or Pacific Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial 18-34
35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs)
97%
B C
91% 85% 98%
B
91% 94% 94%
Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment,
accessibility)
96%
B C
91% 87% 95% 91% 94% 93%
Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks)
89% 89% 80% 84% 87% 90% 88%
Art programs and theater 89%
C
84% 74% 79% 82% 89% 85%
City-sponsored special events

84% 75% 81% 89% 78% 78% 80%
City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 75% 79% 82% 92%
B C
75% 70% 75%
Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.)
85% 78% 77% 89% 78% 81% 80%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
68 Packet Pg. 76 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 11

Table 63: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto
Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Reliability of utility services 52% N=284 38% N=211 8% N=42 1% N=3 1% N=8 100% N=548 Affordability of utility services 20% N=112 31% N=172 28% N=156 16% N=88 4% N=21 100% N=549 Community value received from the City owning and
operating its own municipal utility services
37% N=199 31% N=166 11% N=59 6% N=30 16% N=86 100% N=541 Utilities online customer self-service features 31% N=169 32% N=170 11% N=59 1% N=6 25% N=135 100% N=539 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business
27% N=144 33% N=178 13% N=70 4% N=19 24% N=127 100% N=538 Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 20% N=106 26% N=141 15% N=83 13% N=69 26% N=140 100% N=539 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay
23% N=126 36% N=196 20% N=110 10% N=55 10% N=54 100% N=540 Ease of obtaining information or performing a
transaction through the City’s website
20% N=107 36% N=195 16% N=86 5% N=27 23% N=126 100% N=541 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 21% N=113 32% N=174 16% N=85 4% N=21 27% N=146 100% N=540 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 21% N=114 24% N=132 12% N=65 2% N=13 40% N=216 100% N=541 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff
22% N=120 21% N=116 12% N=66 2% N=11 42% N=228 100% N=540

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
69 Packet Pg. 77 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 64: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Reliability of utility services 53% N=284 39% N=211 8% N=42 1% N=3 100% N=540 Affordability of utility services 21% N=112 33% N=172 30% N=156 17% N=88 100% N=528 Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services
44% N=199 36% N=166 13% N=59 7% N=30 100% N=455
Utilities online customer self-service features 42% N=169 42% N=170 15% N=59 2% N=6 100% N=404 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business
35% N=144 43% N=178 17% N=70 5% N=19 100% N=411
Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 26% N=106 35% N=141 21% N=83 17% N=69 100% N=399 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay
26% N=126 40% N=196 23% N=110 11% N=55 100% N=486
Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website
26% N=107 47% N=195 21% N=86 6% N=27 100% N=414
Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 29% N=113 44% N=174 22% N=85 5% N=21 100% N=394 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 35% N=114 41% N=132 20% N=65 4% N=13 100% N=325 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 38% N=120 37% N=116 21% N=66 4% N=11 100% N=313

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
70 Packet Pg. 78 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 65: Question 11 - Historical Results
Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities' services:

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to 2024 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Reliability of utility services 96% 94% 93% 88% 91% 88% 92% Similar Affordability of utility services 64% 59% 58% 60% 51% 46% 54% Higher Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services
81% 79% 84% 86% 79% 78% 80% Similar
Utilities online customer self-service features NA 78% 86% 82% 83% 77% 84% Higher Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business
83% 75% 80% 76% 77% 70% 78% Higher
Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 63% 59% 62% 68% 56% 53% 62% Higher Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay
68% 62% 66% 68% 64% 58% 66% Higher
Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website
65% 61% 72% 75% 71% 69% 73% Similar
Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 76% 70% 80% 78% 72% 72% 73% Similar Ease of contacting Utilities department staff NA 75% 84% 81% 76% 70% 76% Similar Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff NA 76% 83% 84% 75% 73% 75% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
71 Packet Pg. 79 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 66: Question 11 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area
1 Area
2 Area
3 Area
4 Area
5 Area
6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Reliability of utility services 91% 92% 93% 88% 97%
D
92% 92%
Affordability of utility services 50% 57%
D
62%
D
43% 60%
D
54% 54%
Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services
86% 80% 79% 79% 83% 78% 80%
Utilities online customer self-service features 80% 84% 82% 82% 86% 88% 84% Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 84% 81% 77% 73% 75% 80% 78% Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 58% 64% 66% 60% 58% 63% 62% Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 62% 65% 70% 65% 63% 70% 66% Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 71% 79% D
66% 63% 71% 81%
C D
73%
Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 70% 79% E
72% 75% 61% 76% 73%
Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 73% 81% 74% 73% 70% 81% 76% Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 79% 83% 77% 68% 67% 79% 75%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
72 Packet Pg. 80 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 67: Question 11 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Reliability of utility services 95%
B
86% 90% 94% 87% 94%
B
92%
Affordability of utility services 56%
C
59%
C
35% 36% 54%
A
61%
A
54%
Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services
87%
B C
73% 72% 67% 78%
A
87%
A B
80%
Utilities online customer self-service features 88%
B
80% 82% 90%
B
80% 85% 84%
Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business
84%
B C
74% 65% 77% 71% 85%
B
78%
Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 69%
C
61%
C
42% 69%
B
54% 66%
B
62%
Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay
73%
B C
62% 52% 70% 60% 70%
B
66%
Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website
75% 71% 74% 84%
C
73% 68% 73%
Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 76% 72% 62% 92% B C
65% 75%
B
73%
Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 83%
B C
70% 67% 84% 71% 78% 76%
Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 84% B C
67% 68% 84% 69% 79% 75%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
73 Packet Pg. 81 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 12
Table 68: Question 12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Essential
Very
important
Somewhat
important
Not at all
important Total
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
46% N=242 39% N=207 13% N=66 2% N=12 100% N=529
Overall economic health of Palo Alto 47% N=256 38% N=209 13% N=72 2% N=10 100% N=548 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 53% N=295 30% N=164 14% N=75 3% N=18 100% N=552 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 43% N=239 43% N=237 13% N=69 1% N=6 100% N=551 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 25% N=135 38% N=210 31% N=172 6% N=30 100% N=548 Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 27% N=150 42% N=230 26% N=143 4% N=22 100% N=545 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 20% N=112 43% N=235 31% N=169 6% N=35 100% N=550 Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 25% N=138 32% N=175 30% N=164 13% N=73 100% N=549 Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 27% N=149 29% N=158 32% N=175 12% N=68 100% N=550 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information
18% N=95 28% N=154 40% N=218 14% N=76 100% N=543
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues
31% N=169 31% N=171 29% N=161 8% N=46 100% N=547
This question did not have a “don’t know” response option.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
74 Packet Pg. 82 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 69: Question 12 - Historical Results
Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following
in the coming two years.

Percent positive 2025 rating
compared to
2024 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
80% 82% 75% 78% 81% 84% 81% 79% 85% Similar
Overall economic health of Palo Alto 78% 82% 76% NA 85% 81% 87% 78% 85% Higher Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 82% 80% 80% 81% 83% 87% 87% 82% 83% Similar Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 81% 84% 79% 78% 85% 83% 84% 79% 86% Higher Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 61% 65% 62% NA 66% 66% 71% 61% 63% Similar Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 67% 70% 67% NA 70% 74% 72% 69% 70% Similar Residents’ connection and engagement with their
community
71% 73% 70% NA 66% 68% 61% 60% 63% Similar
Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions NA NA 58% 64% 67% 70% 68% 60% 57% Similar Increasing local solar generation capacity within city
boundaries
NA NA 57% 55% 62% 63% 67% 55% 56% Similar
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information NA NA NA 45% 46% 53% 57% 47% 46% Similar
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues
NA NA NA 63% 64% 68% 74% 61% 62% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
75 Packet Pg. 83 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 70: Question 12 - Benchmark Comparisons

City of Palo Alto
rating Rank
Number of
jurisdictions for
comparison
Comparison to
benchmark
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
76 32 317 Higher
Overall economic health of Palo Alto. 77 208 317 Similar Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 78 243 317 Similar Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 76 75 317 Similar Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 61 297 317 Lower Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 64 216 317 Similar Residents’ connection and engagement with their community 59 274 317 Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
76 Packet Pg. 84 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 71: Question 12 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
85% 91%
E F

92%
E F

84% 77% 81% 85%
Overall economic health of Palo Alto 86%
D
92%
D
91%
D
73% 84% 85%
D
85%
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 91%
D E F

87%
F

93%
D E F

80% 76% 76% 83%
Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 85% 91% 92% E
84% 79% 85% 86%
Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 60% 61% 63% 68% 56% 64% 63% Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 80% D
67% 67% 60% 70% 75%
D
70%
Residents' connection and engagement with their community 65% 54% 66% 62% 64% 67% B
63%
Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 45% 47% 60% 58% 64% A B
65%
A B
57%
Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 55% B
39% 56%
B
53%
B
70%
B D
65%
B
56%
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information
44% 51% 50% 45% 36% 45% 46%
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues
65%
E
63% 70%
E
63% 47% 61% 62%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
77 Packet Pg. 85 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 72: Question 12 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial
18-
34 35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
84% 88% 79% 81% 86% 86% 85%
Overall economic health of Palo Alto 86% 83% 84% 71% 87% A
91%
A
85%
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 79% 91%
A
82% 61% 87%
A
91%
A
83%
Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 86% 88% 83% 76% 89% A
89%
A
86%
Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 60% 73% A C
54% 50% 64%
A
69%
A
63%
Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 68% 75% 67% 59% 70% A
75%
A
70%
Residents' connection and engagement with their community 60% 63% 75% A
56% 61% 68%
A
63%
Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 60% 54% 55% 43% 54% 66% A B
57%
Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 58% 50% 65% 55% 51% 61% B
56%
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information
39% 62%
A C
40% 24% 47%
A
57%
A B
46%
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues
56% 80%
A C
47% 36% 64%
A
74%
A B
62%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
78 Packet Pg. 86 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 13

Table 73: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Including "Don't Know" Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely
Somewhat
likely
Somewhat
unlikely Very unlikely
Don't
know Total
Participate in organized group activities (such as
clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend
church/temple)
33% N=182 22% N=122 19% N=102 25% N=141 1% N=5 100% N=551 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or
neighbors
56% N=313 31% N=174 7% N=41 5% N=26 0% N=1 100% N=555

Table 74: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Without "Don't Know" Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely
Somewhat
likely
Somewhat
unlikely Very unlikely Total
Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple)
33% N=182 22% N=122 19% N=102 26% N=141 100% N=547
Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 57% N=313 31% N=174 7% N=41 5% N=26 100% N=554

Table 75: Question 13 - Historical Results
In a typical week, how likely are you to:

Percent positive (e.g., very/somewhat likely) 2025 rating compared to
2024 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams volunteer your time, attend church/temple)
52% 56% 47% 55% 53% 52% 56% Similar
Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors

85% 88% 82% 86% 86% 83% 88% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
79 Packet Pg. 87 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 76: Question 13 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely"
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple)
50% 56% 55% 56% 73%

A B C D F
52% 56%
Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 87% 86% 84% 83% 88% 95% B C D
88%

Table 77: Question 13 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely"
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial
18-
34 35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple)
55% 51% 67%
B
49% 54% 59% 56%
Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 89% C
89%
C
79% 84% 89% 89% 88%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
80 Packet Pg. 88 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 14

Table 78: Question 14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What mode of transportation do you use most for your typical daily needs for getting around town? Percent Number Driving 67% N=377
Walking 14% N=82
Biking 15% N=87
Bus 1% N=7
Train 0% N=0
Scootering 1% N=7
Palo Alto Link 0% N=0
Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 1% N=5
Carpooling 0% N=1
Total 100% N=565

Table 79: Question 14 - Historical Results
What mode of transportation do you use most
for your typical daily needs for getting around
town?
Percent selecting each response
2025 rating
compared to 2024 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Driving 77% 73% 76% 71% 67% 77% 68% 67% Similar
Walking 13% 13% 11% 14% 16% 12% 18% 14% Similar
Biking 8% 11% 10% 13% 15% 8% 12% 15% Similar
Bus 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% Similar
Train 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% Similar
Scootering NA NA NA NA NA NA 1% 1% Similar
Palo Alto Link NA NA NA NA NA NA 0% 0% Similar
Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% Similar Carpooling 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
81 Packet Pg. 89 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 15

Table 80: Question 15 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents If you did not have access to a car for your usual daily transportation around town, how convenient
(based on time and proximity) would you consider each
of the following methods of getting around?
Very
convenient
Somewhat
convenient
Somewhat
inconvenient
Very
inconvenient Total
Walking 36% N=196 35% N=190 16% N=89 12% N=66 100% N=541 Biking 47% N=249 31% N=164 8% N=43 13% N=71 100% N=526
Bus 9% N=45 26% N=136 35% N=180 30% N=153 100% N=514
Train 17% N=86 32% N=166 28% N=147 23% N=122 100% N=521 Scootering 13% N=63 26% N=121 24% N=112 37% N=175 100% N=471 Palo Alto Link 13% N=62 36% N=167 33% N=151 18% N=83 100% N=464 Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 45% N=229 34% N=172 15% N=75 7% N=34 100% N=509 Carpooling 10% N=51 27% N=134 35% N=173 27% N=134 100% N=491

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
82 Packet Pg. 90 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 81: Question 15 - Historical Results
If you did not have access to a car for
your usual daily transportation around
town, how convenient (based on time
and proximity) would you consider
each of the following methods of
getting around?
Percent positive (e.g., very/somewhat convenient)
2025 rating
compared to
2024 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Walking 92% 94% 92% 69% 76% 66% 70% 74% 71% Similar
Biking 76% 75% 75% 77% 83% 80% 78% 81% 78% Similar
Bus 53% 50% 52% 33% 33% 33% 31% 30% 35% Similar
Train 68% 66% 60% 41% 39% 43% 39% 42% 48% Similar
Scootering NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 42% 39% Similar
Palo Alto Link NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 54% 49% Similar
Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 52% 62% 66% 83% 77% 74% 78% 76% 79% Similar Carpooling 52% 45% 49% 33% 26% 41% 36% 41% 38% Similar

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
83 Packet Pg. 91 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 82: Question 15 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Walking 72%
D
74%
D
73%
D
46% 86%
D
82%
D
71%
Biking 67% 83%
A D
78% 70% 90%
A D
83%
A D
78%
Bus 21% 27% 31% 46%
A B C
46%
A B
37%
A
35%
Train 46% 35% 38% 41% 64%
B C D
65%

A B C D
48%
Scootering

45% 36% 44% 33% 46% 38% 39%
Palo Alto Link 54% 59%
D F
60%
D F
43% 49% 39% 49%
Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 84% 80% 89%
D E F
76% 69% 76% 79%
Carpooling

31% 39% 38% 41% 41% 35% 38%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
84 Packet Pg. 92 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 83: Question 15 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very" or "somewhat"
likely
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian Indian, or
Pacific Islander
Other race or Multi-
racial
18-
34 35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Walking 75%
C
67% 60% 60% 75%
A
73%
A
71%
Biking 77% 81% 87% 88%
C
89%
C
65% 78%
Bus 32% 42%
A
41% 44%
B
32% 33% 35%
Train

51% 44% 49% 43% 48% 51% 48%
Scootering 36% 45% 46% 38%
C
56%
A C
26% 39%
Palo Alto Link 51%
C
57%
C
35% 37% 54%
A
52%
A
49%
Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 76% 84% 76% 65% 87% A
79%
A
79%
Carpooling

36% 39% 44% 45% 37% 35% 38%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
85 Packet Pg. 93 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 16

Table 84: Question 16 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents

Extremely
familiar
Very
familiar
Moderately
familiar
Slightly
familiar Not familiar Total
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its goal to reduce
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2030?
1% N=8 5% N=26 18% N=101 18% N=100 58% N=324 100% N=560

Table 85: Question 16 - Historical Results
Percent familiar (e.g., extremely/very familiar) 2025 rating compared to 2024 2024 2025
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its goal to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2030? 5% 6% Similar

Table 86: Question 16 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very" or "extremely" familiar
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its goal to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2030? 10% 5% 8% 3% 11% 5% 6%

Table 87: Question 16 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very" or "extremely" familiar
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or Pacific
Islander
Other race
or Multi-
racial
18-
34 35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its goal to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2030?
6% 6% 7% 2% 5% 8%
A
6%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
86 Packet Pg. 94 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 17

Table 88: Question 17 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents

Extremely
familiar
Very
familiar
Moderately
familiar
Slightly
familiar Not familiar Total
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s programs to
advance our community goals such as home
electrification?
3% N=19 12% N=66 21% N=119 18% N=103 45% N=252 100% N=559

Table 89: Question 17 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very" or "extremely" familiar
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s programs to advance our community goals such as home electrification?
16% 20%
F
21%
F
15% 18% 8% 15%

Table 90: Question 17 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Percent rating "very" or "extremely" familiar
Race Age Overall
White
Asian,
Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other
race or
Multi-
racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s programs to advance our community goals such as home electrification?
16% 13% 18% 10% 11% 21%
A B
15%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
87 Packet Pg. 95 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 18
Table 91: Question Q18 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Which of the following considerations would most motivate you to replace your major gas appliances with an electric model? (Select up to three) Percent Number
Save time with helpful installation 30% N=154
Save money through rebates 59% N=310
Improve health and safety 37% N=193
Affect climate change 35% N=182
Support Home resale value 15% N=77
I am not going to upgrade to electric 29% N=151

Table 92: Question 18 - Geographic Subgroup Results
Which of the following considerations would most motivate you to replace your major gas appliances with an electric model? (Select up to three) Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Save time with helpful installation 36% 29% 29% 38%
F
32% 18% 30%
Save money through rebates

47% 63% 59% 67% 69% 52% 59%
Improve health and safety

33% 34% 30% 35% 50% 42% 37%
Affect climate change 33% 21% 42% 39% 35% 40%
B
35%
Support Home resale value

13% 19% 11% 15% 20% 12% 15%
I am not going to upgrade to electric

37% 37% 24% 22% 18% 31% 29%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
88 Packet Pg. 96 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 93: Question 18 - Demographic Subgroup Results
Which of the following considerations would most motivate you to replace your major gas appliances with an electric model? (Select up to three)
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or
Pacific
Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial
18-
34 35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Save time with helpful installation

28% 33% 33% 25% 33% 30% 30%
Save money through rebates

56% 64% 66% 65% 63% 54% 59%
Improve health and safety 32% 49%
A C
30% 37% 43% 32% 37%
Affect climate change

37% 34% 37% 37% 35% 34% 35%
Support Home resale value 14% 15% 16% 10% 21%
C
12% 15%
I am not going to upgrade to electric 36%
B C
21% 13% 31% 22% 33%
B
29%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
89 Packet Pg. 97 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 19
Table 94: Question 19 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier? Percent Number Housing and Construction 21% N=100
Public Safety and Policing 8% N=38
Transportation and Traffic 13% N=62
Homelessness and RVs 4% N=21
City Governance and Administration 7% N=35
Community Amenities and Services 6% N=29
Economic Development 4% N=20
Noise and Urban Environment 3% N=14
Develop Infrastructure 2% N=8
Walking and Biking trails 3% N=15
Code Enforcement 2% N=12
Make the city more affordable 10% N=45
Cleanliness of community; upkeep 4% N=21
Other 10% N=47
Don't know 1% N=6
Total 100% N=471

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
90 Packet Pg. 98 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 95: Question 19 - Geographic Subgroup Results
As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier?
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Housing and Construction 10% 18% 12% 27% 29% 26% 21%
Public Safety and Policing 7% 5% 5% 15% 6% 8% 8%
Transportation and Traffic 11% 12% 13% 16% 11% 13% 13%
Homelessness and RVs 7% 8% 12%
F
1% 2% 1% 4%
City Governance and Administration 17%
D
8% 8% 2% 7% 7% 7%
Community Amenities and Services 7% 12% 6% 6% 0% 4% 6%
Economic Development 4% 3% 2% 2% 4% 9% 4%
Noise and Urban Environment 0% 8% 4% 0% 1% 3% 3%
Develop Infrastructure 4% 1% 4% 2% 0% 0% 2%
Walking and Biking trails 4% 2% 3% 5% 0% 4% 3%
Code Enforcement 2% 3% 3% 1% 0% 5% 2%
Make the city more affordable 5% 5% 12% 13% 22% 6% 10%
Cleanliness of community; upkeep 12% 7% 0% 4% 2% 3% 4%
Other 9% 9% 15% 6% 11% 11% 10%
Don't know 2% 1% 1% 0% 5% 1% 1%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
91 Packet Pg. 99 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 96: Question 19 - Demographic Subgroup Results
As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could
the City make that would make you happier?
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or Pacific
Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial 18-34 35-54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Housing and Construction 21% 16% 30% 33%
B C
16% 20% 21%
Public Safety and Policing 5% 14%
A
12% 14%
C
9% 5% 8%
Transportation and Traffic 16% 12% 7% 14% 10% 16% 13%
Homelessness and RVs 3% 7% 7% 5% 6% 3% 4%
City Governance and Administration 7% 9% 3% 1% 7% 10%
A
7%
Community Amenities and Services 7% 6% 5% 9% 6% 5% 6%
Economic Development 5% 2% 3% 0% 7% 4% 4%
Noise and Urban Environment 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3%
Develop Infrastructure 1% 4%
A
0% 0% 3% 2% 2%
Walking and Biking trails 5% 1% 0% 2% 5% 2% 3%
Code Enforcement 3% 0% 2% 0% 2% 4% 2%
Make the city more affordable 7% 13% 16% 11% 12% 6% 10% Cleanliness of community; upkeep 6% 4% 0% 5% 5% 4% 4%
Other 10% 5% 12% 3% 10% 14%
A
10%
Don't know 1% 3% 0% 2% 0% 2% 1%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
92 Packet Pg. 100 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 20
Table 97: Question 20 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain? Percent Number Parks, open space, and natural environment 28% N=125
Utilities and city services 11% N=50
Safety services 7% N=32
Activities and Recreation (arts, libraries, museums, theaters, etc.) 14% N=64 Government/leadership; government communication 6% N=26 Schools and education, programs for the youth 7% N=33
Cleanliness of community; upkeep 9% N=39
Quality of life, reputation 4% N=17
Infrastructure, streets, transportation 1% N=3
Ease of bicycle travel/walking 3% N=14
Sustainability 2% N=8
Culture, diversity 1% N=4
Other 7% N=32
Nothing / Don’t know 1% N=6
Total 100% N=454

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
93 Packet Pg. 101 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 98: Question 20 - Geographic Subgroup Results
As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain?
Area Overall
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6
(A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Parks, open space, and natural environment

20% 28% 35% 32% 23% 26% 28%
Utilities and city services 12% 23%
F
8% 10% 12% 4% 11%
Safety services

5% 4% 8% 8% 4% 11% 7%
Activities and Recreation (arts, libraries, museums, theaters, etc.)

21% 15% 11% 14% 17% 10% 14%
Government/leadership; government communication

3% 4% 3% 8% 4% 9% 6%
Schools and education, programs for the youth 12% 5% 18% F
5% 5% 4% 7%
Cleanliness of community; upkeep

12% 6% 6% 7% 4% 13% 9%
Quality of life, reputation

2% 4% 3% 5% 5% 3% 4%
Infrastructure, streets, transportation

0% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1%
Ease of bicycle travel/walking

0% 5% 5% 4% 1% 3% 3%
Sustainability

1% 1% 0% 4% 4% 1% 2%
Culture, diversity

1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2% 1%
Other 10% 3% 4% 4% 12% 10% 7%
Nothing / Don’t know 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 3% 1%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
94 Packet Pg. 102 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 99: Question 20 - Demographic Subgroup Results
As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain?
Race Age Overall
White
Asian, Asian
Indian, or Pacific
Islander
Other race or
Multi-racial
18-
34 35-
54 55+
(A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C)
Parks, open space, and natural environment 29% 27% 25% 36% C
28% 22% 28%
Utilities and city services 14%
C
7% 1% 9% 6% 16%
B
11%
Safety services 8% 8% 3% 2% 8% 10%
A
7%
Activities and Recreation (arts, libraries, museums, theaters, etc.)

11% 18% 11% 16% 15% 11% 14%
Government/leadership; government communication 4% 4% 21% A B
8% 5% 6% 6%
Schools and education, programs for the youth 4% 10% 15% A
0% 14%
C
6% 7%
Cleanliness of community; upkeep

8% 10% 9% 14% 7% 6% 9%
Quality of life, reputation

4% 5% 1% 4% 1% 5% 4%
Infrastructure, streets, transportation

1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1%
Ease of bicycle travel/walking

4% 4% 0% 2% 5% 3% 3%
Sustainability 1% 1% 7%
A
2% 2% 2% 2%
Culture, diversity 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1%
Other 9% 4% 3% 6% 6% 9% 7%
Nothing / Don’t know 2% 1% 2% 0% 3% 1% 1%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
95 Packet Pg. 103 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Demographic Questions

Table 100: Question D1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Percent Number
Very positive 6% N=33
Somewhat positive 10% N=57
Neutral 44% N=246
Somewhat negative 34% N=190
Very negative 7% N=37
Total 100% N=563

Table 101: Question D2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your employment status? Percent Number
Working full time for pay 55% N=309
Working part time for pay 9% N=48
Unemployed, looking for paid work 3% N=17
Unemployed, not looking for paid work 2% N=12
Fully retired 30% N=169
College student, unemployed 1% N=7
Total 100% N=562

Table 102: Question D3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you work inside the boundaries of Palo Alto? Percent Number Yes, outside the home 35% N=124
Yes, from home 25% N=91
No 40% N=143
Total 100% N=357
Question asked of those reporting that they work full or part time.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
96 Packet Pg. 104 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 103: Question D4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How many years have you lived in Palo Alto? Percent Number Less than 2 years 11% N=64
2 to 5 years 22% N=123
6 to 10 years 11% N=64
11 to 20 years 16% N=89
More than 20 years 40% N=227
Total 100% N=567

Table 104: Question D5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Which best describes the building you live in? Percent Number One family house detached from any other houses 60% N=337 Building with two or more homes (duplex, townhome, apartment or condominium) 38% N=217 Mobile home 0% N=0
Other 2% N=10
Total 100% N=564

Table 105: Question D6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you rent or own your home? Percent Number
Rent 43% N=238
Own 57% N=321
Total 100% N=559

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
97 Packet Pg. 105 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 106: Question D7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Percent Number Less than $500 per month 4% N=20
$500 to $999 per month 5% N=25
$1,000 to $1,499 per month 5% N=26
$1,500 to $1,999 per month 5% N=24
$2,000 to $2,499 per month 10% N=51
$2,500 to $2,999 per month 8% N=40
$3,000 to $3,499 per month 10% N=51
$3,500 to $3,999 per month 8% N=43
$4,000 to $4,499 per month 5% N=23
$4,500 to $4,999 per month 6% N=32
$4,500 to $4,999 per month 6% N=32
$5,500 to $5,999 per month 2% N=12
$6,000 to $6,499 per month 4% N=20
$6,500 to $6,999 per month 2% N=10
$7,000 to $7,499 per month 1% N=7
$7,500 to $7,999 per month 3% N=14
$8,000 to $8,499 per month 2% N=10
$8,500 to $8,999 per month 1% N=7
$9,000 to $9,499 per month 1% N=3
$9,500 to $9,999 per month 2% N=9
$10,000 or more per month 11% N=58
Total 100% N=516

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
98 Packet Pg. 106 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 107: Question D8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do any children 17 or under live in your household? Percent Number No 74% N=411
Yes 26% N=147
Total 100% N=557

Table 108: Question D9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? Percent Number No 59% N=328
Yes 41% N=228
Total 100% N=556

Table 109: Question D10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Percent Number Less than $25,000 3% N=15
$25,000 to $49,999 4% N=20
$50,000 to $74,999 11% N=52
$75,000 to $99,999 12% N=57
$100,000 to $149,999 11% N=51
$150,000 to $199,999 11% N=51
$200,000 to $249,999 9% N=43
$250,000 to $299,999 7% N=31
$300,000 to $349,999 5% N=25
$350,000 to $399,999 5% N=24
$400,000 to $449,999 3% N=14
$450,000 to $499,999 20% N=96
$500,000 or more 0% N=0
Total 100% N=479

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
99 Packet Pg. 107 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 110: Question D11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Percent Number
No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 94% N=511
Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 6% N=34

Table 111: Question D12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race(s) you consider yourself to be.) Percent Number American Indian or Alaskan Native 1% N=6
Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 34% N=181
Black or African American 4% N=23
Middle Eastern or North African 1% N=6
White 64% N=344
Other 4% N=22
Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option.

Table 112: Question D13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents In which category is your age? Percent Number
18 to 24 years 4% N=21
25 to 34 years 18% N=99
35 to 44 years 13% N=71
45 to 54 years 21% N=120
55 to 64 years 10% N=54
65 to 74 years 15% N=86
75 years or older 20% N=110
Total 100% N=561

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
100

Packet Pg. 108 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 113: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your gender? Percent Number
Female 53% N=293
Male 47% N=261
Identify in another way 0% N=0
Total 100% N=554

Table 114: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your sexual orientation? Percent Number
Heterosexual 93% N=474
Lesbian 1% N=6
Gay 2% N=9
Bisexual 2% N=11
Identify another way 2% N=12
Total 100% N=512
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
101

Packet Pg. 109 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Appendix B: Verbatim Responses to Open -ended
Questions from Probability Survey
The following are responses to questions 19 and 20. Responses are presented here in verbatim form, including any typographical, grammatical or other mistakes. Responses are in alphabetical order within the category in which the response was categorized.

Question 19: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier?
Housing and Construction
• 1) MAKE "AFFORDABLE HOUSING" TRULY AFFORDABLE FOR MINIMUM WAGE WORKERS 2) MAKE SENIOR SERVICES & HOUSING VERY LOW COST.
• A much greater emphasis on housing, to the point of restricting current and future commercial development until housing resources are better aligned. • Accelerate the building of all types of housing.
• Actually get apartment buildings built. I don't need that myself but we should let more people live here.

Overall, the City does get.
• ADDRESS "HOUSING ELEMENT ISSUES" (OVER NO-BLDG)
• AFFORDABLE HOUSING - FAIRNESS OF RESOURCES FOR ALL NEIGHBORS • AFFORDABLE HOUSING & CHILD CARE
• Affordable housing, we rent but we'd love to own where we live • ALLOW FASTER BUILDING APPROVALS, ESPECIALLY CALTRAIN GRADE SEPARATION • Allow for more building of residences of all kinds. I cannot recommend Palo Alto if no one can afford to move here. More homes, more apartments, and yes towers are OK. More bike lanes would also be wonderful.
• ALLOW REZONING THAT HELPS BUILD MULTIPURPOSE COMMERCIAL/HOUSING ON MIDDLEFIELD RD. • APARTMENTS FOR LOWER INCOME AND CITY EMPLOYEES
• Approve the building of more affordable housing and allow more 6+ apartment building stories in downtown.
• As a resident of Barron Park, I love it here - am concerned (but not overly) about all the new (needed) housing construction on El Camino, and new traffic signs (e.g., no turn on red) near Barron Park - the combition of all of these factors is going to significantly increase travel time for residents here getting in and out of Barron Park. Not sure what can be done - if the no right turn on red signs significantly help safety for (possibly increasing?) number of cyclists on El Camino - then I understand signs. And we need more affordable housing - but it will hit Barron Park hard from a traffic perspective. • Bajar el costo de viviendas, para que ms gente pueda venir a traer a sus hijos, a las escuelas de Palo Alto • BETTER HOUSING PRICES (JUST AFFORDABLE)
• BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING; PROVIDE HOUSING FOR HOMELESS • Build cheaper homes. Do not allow huge very expensive homes to replace smaller cheaper homes. A large pelty tax on vacant homes.
• Build more affordable AND market rate housing
• Build more affordable housing.
• BUILD MORE AFFORTABLE APARTMENTS FOR MIDDLE INCOME ELDERLY • Build more housing
• Build more housing and clean up the streets. Why are we letting unsheltered residents sleep outside? • Building higher density housing around transportation hubs like Caltrain stations. • BUILDING HUGE UGLY HOMES ON SMALL LOTS
• Calm traffic by installing bike lanes with barriers so that children can bike safely to school.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
102

Packet Pg. 110 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• CLARITY ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING
• COST OF BUYING A HOME OR ROUTING HERE NEEDS TO DECREASE • denser housing
• DO NOT ALLOW BUILDERS TO BUILD HIGHER THAN 6-8 FLOORS MAX. MAKE BUILDERS PLAN FOR

IMPACTS TO PARKING CARS ON THE ROAD, IMPACTS TO INFRASTRUCTURE ROADS, BIKE LANES, TRAFFIC LIGHTS, TUNNELS SAFETY.
• Encourage more affordable housing to be built. Require large % of new builds have affordable units.

Require new permitted ADUs to be rented at below market rates or to house vulnerable populations like the elderly or disabled.
• encourage more housing construction through more flexible zoning • FEWER HIGH RISE DEVELOPMENT WITH LESS TRAFFIC
• Find a way to put an immediate end to the State-mandated. forced housing requirements that increase density.
• GET OUT OF HOUSING SOLUTIONS
• Housing affordability and diversity (which are related) • HOUSING DIVERSITY
• I AM RESIDENT OF LYTTON GARDENS SENIOR HOME MORE SENIOR HOUSING • I wish our NIMBYS and our YIMBYS would work together on solving housing. • INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
• INCREASE CONSTRUCTION RATE OF BUILDINGS IN THE MIDDLEFIELD PLAZA • Increase in affordable housing for all, especially those who are homeless or in danger of becoming homeless.
• Increase reliability and availability of buses. The nearest bust stop is a mile away, and it takes about an hour to get anywhere, even only a few miles
• It's a NIMBY perspective, but I'm not in favor of government-mandated affordable housing. It will reduce property values (bad for the haves and will allocate a scarce below market resource somewhat arbitrarily to the have-nots). So nobody will be happy. I understand this is a state mandate, but it could greatly affect quality of life for some of us.
• KEEP HOME STYLE THE SAME
• KEEP OUR BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT TO 50 FEET!
• LESS DENSITY, BETTER ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, TRAFFIC CALMING • LESS LOW QUALITY HOUSING UNITS, LESS CROWDING LESS OVER POPULATION. • LIMIT NUMBER OF APPOINTMENT BUILDINGS
• LIVE UP TO ITS OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE MORE HOUSING (ALL KINDS). • Lower cost of building permits and ease the process.
• Lower cost of housing, may it be a price to buy or a price to rent. • LOWER HOUSING COSTS
• Lower the cost of housing!
• Lower the cost of housing.
• MAKE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AVAILABLE AND FOR THAT I THINK REZONING WILL BE NECESSARY • Make housing affordable for my children to live here. • make housing more affordable
• More affordable homes. Will be moving soon bc I can't afford to buy here. I wish I could. • MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
• MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
• MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
• More affordable housing
• More affordable housing
• MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND AVAILABLE PUBLIC REST ROOMS • More affordable housing for others that are middle class vs. wealthy, especially local service providers such as teachers, fire, and police personnel
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
103

Packet Pg. 111 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SERVICE WORKERS
• More affordable housing, less NIMBYism
• More affordable housing.. Housing closer to business and shopping and transportation. • MORE AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING
• MORE HOUSING BETTER ZONING ON CAL AVE & UNIVERSITY MORE BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE • MORE LOW COST HOUSING
• More mixed-use development to increase convenience of walking and to increase housing options and affordability
• Offer more housing options.
• Overall cost of housing is the major concern
• Planning Department does not have a clear plan of how city should implement additiol housing. a 17 story building does not fit in with neighborhood, parking is a big problem, which is made worse when new buildings are under parked.
• provide more affordable housing options especially for essential workers - teachers, caretakers, city employees
• PUSH BACK ON CA STATE HIGH DENSITY HOUSING LAWS
• Reduce effect of construction on neighbors: Putting dirt into water system, enforce hours, and encourage quick completion
• Speed up approval process for projects
• STOP BUILDING - FIX SIDEWALKS - TRIM TREES
• STOP BUILDING HOUSING
• STOP BUILDING MULTI LEVEL APARTMENTS THE CITY IS LOOKING UGLY AND TRAFFIC CONGESTION • STOP HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, IE, LESS POPULATION
• STOP INCREASING HOUSING DENSITY
• STOP PERMITTING LARGE, TALL BUILDINGS IN SOUTH PA, STOP GIVING DEVELOPERS ZONING EXEMPTIONS, FIGHT THE STATE MANDATE TO ADD 6000+ HOUSING UNITS TO PA BY 2030, OPPOSE SB79 BECAUSE OF ITS IMPACTS TO NEIGHBORHOODS, IT SEEMS LIKE THE PEOPLE MAKING THE DECISIONS HAVE NEVER USED THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM (BUS, CAL TRAIN); THESE NEED TO BE IMPROVED BEFORE INCREASING THE POPULATION.
• STREAMLINE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSTRUCTION
• The city needs more housing options. My family (2 adults, 3 children) would definitely like to upgrade from a 3-br 1350 sq ft unit, but there are not many options without moving to another city. I understand that long-time residents don't want 20 story apartment buildings, but there needs to be a balance between that and aging ranch homes in sprawling neighborhoods.
• The cost of house should be lower or stayed.
• The high density housing is unsightly and tightly packed into single story neighborhoods. The new monstrosity is are ugly and not well thought out. There's also a great number of RV homeless people everywhere. They create trash and their oversized vehicles are a traffic Hazard.

Public Safety and Policing
• BETTER TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT
• Do more about residential crimes, both actively and in terms of getting the message out that Palo Alto will crack down on all crimil activity
• FOCUS ON BURGLARIES - SEEM THIS PROBLEM IS CONTINUING AND ADD MORE PICKTOBALL WORKS! • Focus on safety and do something about the e-bike riders! • Further reduction in house break-ins, bike thefts.
• Hire more public safety officers to reduce crime and speeding/aggressive driving. • ID LIKE THE CITY TO FOCUS MORE IN PUBLIC SAFETY (IF FIRE, POLICE, EMS) • Make our city safe / reduce crime.
• more attention to safe routes to school and less attention to converting every single street into a neighborhood bike path - we are an aging community and drive cars Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
104

Packet Pg. 112 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• More frequent traffic law enforcement on El Camino Real, sometimes I saw cars running through red lights, creating risks to others
• MORE SAFETY IN PUBLIC PLACES
• Patrol city parks after sunset
• POLICE (NON-URGENT) SPEND LESS TIME VERIFYING REPORT INCIDENT MORE TIME ON QUICK

RESPONSE TO STOP FIREWORKS (FIRE DANGER)
• POLICE ENFORCEMENT AGAINST BIKE RIDING, WHEN OTHER PRESENT, CALIF AVE UNDERPASS • POLICE RESPONSEVENESS USABILITY
• REDUCE THE BURGLAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
• REDUCING THEFT AND BURGLARY
• SAFETY
• SAFETY
• SAFETY CONTROLS.
• Safety improvements, no crime especially in residential stress • SAFETY, CONNECT BETWEEN RESIDENTS, CITIZEN EVENTS.
• Separate roads from train crossings to reduce suicides and improve traffic flow • Speed bumps to slow cars on Grant and Ash
• SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON BUSY STREETS LIKE EMBARCADRO RD
• STREETER TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT SAFETY
• Tener mas luz en el barrio por la noche
• Traffic law compliance enforcement for safety of seniors...both cars and bikes.vc Transportation and Traffic
• 1. Small buses to provide public transportation from residential areas to city landmarks (Cubberley, Uiveristy ave, Cal Ave, public libraries) 2. Figure out Caltrain crossings ASAP and ACT! 3. Spend less money on police station
• Accelerate plans for Caltrain grade separate at the three crossings (Charleston, Meadow, and Churchill) • Better and more accessible public transportation system • Better around town transportation such as LIFT, bus.
• BETTER DESIGN OF CAL AVENUE PEDESTRIAN AREA
• BETTER PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
• better public transportationn
• Better ride share: longer hours, better availability
• BETTER ROADS - TO RUDY
• better traffic flow; i.e better (dedicated) bike lanes, better sigl timing, roundabouts, etc • Better transit in the neighborhoods
• BRING BACK THE FREE SHUTTLE, CONTROL RENT/MAKE SURE NO BUILDINGS START EMPTY • Connectivity to Caltrain
• CONVERT THAT SMALL PARK NEAR STANFORD SHOP CENTER INTO A ROAD • DEAL WITH TRAFFIC, HAVING NARROWED ROADS AND NO RIGHTS TURNS ON RED ON EL CAMINO REAL IT TAKES FOREVER TO DRIVE ANYWHERE IN PALO ALTO VERY FRUSTRATING. • ENFORCE TRAFFIC LAWS, DISTRACTED BIKER & PEDESTRIANS
• Enforce traffic speed limits on the major thru-fares, on all streets, really • Figure out how to get to El Camino Laundromat with the no parking for the bicycle lane. • FIX SIGNAL TIMINGS - SPECIALLY AT TRACKS (RAILROAD CROSSINGS) • Fix the intersection(s) on Embarcadero near the high school and Town & Country Village. They are a mece. Only one crossing is needed.
• Fix the traffic light at Oregon Expressway and El Camino Real so that it doesn't go out so frequently.

Maybe 10 x / year it malfunctions with no light and dangerous traffic with compounding major delays in traffic at that intersection. Breaks down way too frequently. This should be fixable. • FREE BUS SAVE; MORE HOUSE FOR ELDERLY
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
105

Packet Pg. 113 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Getting rid of the neighborhood parking programs
• GRADE SEPARATIONS GET THEM DONE. PRIORITIZE SPEED PEOPLE ARE DYING • HAVE MORE PUBLIC PARKING FOR RESIDENTS IN DOWNTOWN AREA (ALMA STREET AND HOMER) • Have our neighborhood be able to participate in City services for the elderlylike help in transportation, which we are not included in now.
• here are some: traffic control on major thoroughfares: Alma, East Meadow, Charleston; near schools ( there are many more speeders on East Meadow and Bryant bikeway); improve RR crossings - Churchill&Alma/need dedicated left turn lane/light at North Alma at RR parking lot; improve lights or traffic control at Alma&El Camino interchange (people go through red lights - camera to capture license?); replace those trees removed from city sites (no liquid amber trees = they are hazardous and cause sewer problem); improve web vigation and bill paying (garden plots) • I'm near California Ave. shopping area. We will have more residents and more traffic (congestion, noise, pollution, danger). We need to encourage other ways of getting around than cars. I loved the closing of California Ave to car traffic.
• Improve connections to CalTrain
• Improve public transport or Palo Alto link
• IMPROVE RAIL ROAD CROSSINGS FOR PEDESTRIANS & BIKES
• Improve shuttle service -- Btw Cal Ave and Univ Ave, for example. • Improve the conditions of the road surfaces
• Improve the timing of traffic lights. Eg. Streets that cross Caltrain tracks should have green while train is crossing. Eg. It's never possible to have green lights all the way down El Camino Real - I always seem to hit every red.
• Improve traffic flow (Embarcadero/Alma, and Page Mill - Oregon/Alma) and then close Churchill crossing. • IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW; FEWER LIGHTS MORE ROUNDABOUTS!
• IMPROVE TRAFFIC LIGHT INTELLIGENCE ON EL CAMINO REAL
• Improve traffic on streets like Sand Hill Blvd
• IMPROVE TRAFFIC SYSTEM CROSSING THE RAILROAD
• Install real-time traffic sigl control technology on major streets to keep traffic moving, thus reducing waiting at sigls while also reducing GHG emissions from idling vehicles. • less traffic
• Make Palo Alto Link more reliable and frequent. Make El Camino traffic sigls synchronize • more parking
• MORE RIDE SERVICES FOR ELDERLY
• MORE SENSORS FOR AUTO TRAFFIC SO SIGLS MAY RESPOND QUICKER TO ANOTHER VEHICLE DURING SLOW TIMES LIKE EVENINGS AND NIGHT.
• NO MORE UNDERGROUND BIKE PATHS (UNDER RAILROAD) REDUCE SPEEDING CARS. TRAFFIC & SPEEDING NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. SPEND MONEY IN THAT AREA. WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER UNDERPASS BIKE / PEDPATH.
• People from neighboring cities, park their car in our neighborhood and leave garbage in the street. I would love to see the city improve the situation.
• PEOPLE NOT STOPPING AT STOP SIGNS-PLOWING THRU ON THEIR SCOOTERS/E BIKES/ADULTS & CHILDREN! TREES-CITY TREES ON RESIDENTS PROPERTY-THEY REED TO TRIM THEM MORE OFTEN ONLY LINE THEY DO IS ONLY. IF YOU CALL THEM NOW.
• Please write traffic tickets. People speed. People run stop signs. People run traffic lights. We really need traffic to slow down.
• PROTECTED LEFT TURN AT MIDDLEFIELD & COLORADO
• PROUD IMPROVED & CONVENIENT PUBLIC TRANSPORT
• REDUCING TRAFFIC
• Revamp Midtown including the old Philz space and also the Safeway which is poorly stocked and maged. • RR/Alma crossings at Charleston & at E.Meadow should be exactly same as Embarcadero. Especially regarding the simple+easy bike routing on Embarcadero, ie: keep bike lanes physically separated from cars, with very minimal elevation up/down (3% max grade for bikes, preferably flat), and provide 2 bike Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
106

Packet Pg. 114 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

lanes (one eastbound, one westbound, each positioned to right of car lanes (this is vs idiotic proposals that expect cyclists to inconveniently cross multiple car lanes to join a single/combined 2 -way bike lane and then inconveniently cross back again afterwards).
• SIDEWALKS IN BARRON PARK
• STOP PARKING ON UNIVERSITY AVE DB IT IS A THROUGH SHEET & MAKE PERMUTING FOR NEW

QUALIFIED HOMES FASTER
• Street lights for pedestrians to make it safer to walk in the evening, increase safe and clean public transportation options (buses), availability of app-paid electric scooters and bikes, longer opening hours of cafes/bars, more community events like concerts (there are free concerts in Redwood city and MV) • TRAFFIC
• TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT - ESPECIALLY RED LIGHT RUNNERS/STOP SIGN RUNNERS • Traffic enforcement - stop signs, speed, bikes following rules. And addressing homes without residents which is destabilizing to sense of community - the Mark Zuckerberg articles in New York Times were so disappointing. This should be a place for family engagement.And downtown is sooooo boring. One aversge restaurant after another. The shops are mostly gone. And it's all Asian related stores and restaurants now. Little diversity. Such a disappointment. In fact PAlo is becoming less and less diverse not more.
• TRAFFIC IS TERRIBLE WHEN TRYING TO CROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS - UNDER CROSSING /OVER

CROSSING SIGNAL TIMING
• TRAFFIC RULES ENFORCEMENT - CARS AND BIKES. TOO MANY RED-LIGHT RUNNERS • TRAIN UNDER/OVER PASSES MORE SENIORS BIKE SAFETY MEASURES • TRANSPORTATION - LIGHTS TIMES TO KEEP TRAFFIC FLOWING! • UNDERGROUND ROLES/STREET PAVEMENT
• VENDER TO PARK AT EXTREME CARRIERS A RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY THAT WIDER RESIDENTIAL

STREETS FOR VEHICLE PARKING AND NOT ALLOWING
• WE NEED ALTERNATIVES TO CARS WITH MORE PEOPLE WE WILL HAVE CAR CONGESTION • We need new pavement after sewer line fix several years ago on Whitclem Drive.

Homelessness and RVs
• Address the number of RV residents living in our neighborhoods. This is especially bad now that El Camino has been blocked off for bikers.
• Deal with the apparently abandoned homes or homes that start construction but don't finish in a timely manner. Also enforce the Keep Clear area of streets, particularly the one at Oregon and Greer. • DECREASE HOMELESS LIVING ON STREET
• ELIMINATE RV CAMPING ON STREETS
• ESTABLISH SAFE RV PARKING & SERVICES FOR HOMELESS AND/OR FOLKS WORKING HERE BUT LIVING IN CENTRAL VALLEY.
• Find a workable and sustaible solution for the unhoused who live and park their RVs on city streets that aren't able to support their needs
• find apartments fpr all the homeless people
• Get rid of the RVs all over Palo Alto. It is not a good image for Palo Alto and hurts homeowners and businesses.
• GET THE RVs OUT OF FABIAN WAY AND E MEADOW CIRCLE
• INCREASE SPACE AND RESOURCES FOR VAN DWELLERS
• Long term rv parking on street
• Outlawing parking of trailers in Mitchell Park parking lot and on residential streets. This would make me feel safer for my kids.
• REDUCE HOMELESS / RVS
• Reduce homelessness and homeless campers in the city
• REDUCE HOMELESSNESS AROUND TOWN, IT'S EVERYWHERE
• REDUCE THE HOMELESS PEOPLE AROUND THE DOWNTOWN AREA
• Reducing homelessness
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
107

Packet Pg. 115 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• remove trailer living on local streets (which blocks bike lanes, harms overall visibility, is unsightly, and degrades the overall appearance and neighborhood feel in Palo Alto) • The RVs that are now encroaching in our neighborhoods because of the bike lanes on ECR is a big problem. Their spillover of junk onto the sidewalks is not just hazardous, but ugly .

City Governance and Administration
• A LESS LIBERAL "WOKE" AGENDA & LESS SOCIAL ENGINEERING • ACCESS TO 250 HAMILTON CITY OFFICES
• AN EASY TO USE, HELPFUL WEB SITE GOOD SEARCH ENGINE
• BE MORE TRANSPARENT, DO NOT LIKE WHEN SOME PEOPLE ARE ABOVE THE LAW, LIKE MARK ZUCKERBERG WHO WAS ABLE TO GET AROUND P.A. BUILDING LAWS • better leadership, listen more to and act on citizen concerns, better planning and code enforcement • Better utilities department transparency and alignment with residents beliefs such as supporting the Bay Delta Plan
• BRIGHTER CITY COUNCIL, COORDINATE THE STOPLIGHTS AT EL CAMINO & OXFORD • CITY COUNCIL TO BE MORE RESPONSIVE TO RENTERS CONCERNS • City government more transparent to the residents.
• Do away with the Palo Alto Process. Does it take 20 plus years to put 3 underpasses on a railroad? • Equitable property tax, or if that's not possible, protected bike lanes. • Fire 50% of city employees. Palo Alto needs its DOGE moment. • FIRE ALTA HOUSING
• Fully reopen City Hall
• Getting building and remodeling permits
• HOW / WHERE TO FIND OUT DIFFERENT ELECTRICITY PRICES DURING A DAY • I WISH THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD MAKE DECISIONS & NOT HIRE EXPERTS • I would like the city workers to be more helpful and knowledgeable about their fields, be helpful to the residents regardless of their race. Because they have these huge salaries they should work harder, it is disheartening to see them on their phones or distracted while they're at work • IMPROVE CUSTOMER SERVICE
• Leaner and more efficient city administration, more like Mountain View • LESS CITY STAFF
• less regulations
• Less restrictive permitting and planners being more flexible • LESS ROAD WORK DURING MORNING & AFTERNOON COMMUTE HOURS • Let residents choose, instead of mandates
• Make decisions based on facts and information and not on political whims. Too much time and $ is wasted on staff and consultant time that the council in the end ignores and makes decisions or non decisions to avoid making the hard decisions. The Palo Alto way!!! • More efficient governce to deal with changing times.
• MORE REBATE FOR ELECTRIFICATION/BIG ITEM PICKUP MORE OFTEN • My stove is electric, and I don't use the gas heating, so my gas usage is zero. Still, the city charges me $15 monthly for gas, which feels like a pelty for not using gas and goes against your policy. Please stop this charge.
• Quit trying to place all the low income and rental properties along the San Antonio corridor. Traffic sucks there right now and the City is only going to make it worse by not devoting enough resources to the area.

Where are they going to park ? City is allowing less than two parking spaces per residence. Can't afford to make it in this area on one "low" income.
• Reduce Bureaucracy for permits
• Resist efforts by the State to control local zoning.
• Resist the pressure to in-fill by developers looking to make a bundle and move on. Our neighborhood is being transformed by uffordable mega-houses crammed onto newly split lots. The city definitely doesn't Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
108

Packet Pg. 116 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

have our backs on this one: Our magnificent tree canopy is being destroyed, displacing tive wildlife and leaving us instead with traffic and car-lined streets.
• SHORTEN CITY MEETINGS - LESS STOP & GO
• SPEND SMARTER & SAVE COST ON SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION/IMPROVEMENT • staff city offices; no off-site workno
• Stop charging residents for using Foothill Park
• Stop trying to force us to do things - lpg is essential for cooking - it does not harm the environment like gasoline does - stop forcing rent control on owners. Fix our traffic lights - make then synchronous • STOP WASTING VALUABLE TIME ON CITY COUNCIL VIRTUE SIGNALING & DO YOUR JOB RUNNING THE CITY!
• Streamline permitting processes for home improvement
• THE CITY COUNCIL SPENDS HOURS DISCUSSING, THEN KICKS THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD -STOP! • The city's bureaucracy sucks. Transparency is minimal. And it seems more programs are geared toward the wealthy. If you can afford to own a home in Palo Alto, for example, you can pay for your own damn solar panels. Also the city's leaders suffer from an acute frankly embarrassing lack of vision and imagition. Look at how dumb the Cal Ave makeover has been, and how the upcoming plans will make it dumber. We somehow have "two downtowns" - Cal Ave and University Ave - yet both are nowhere near as vibrant, fun or pleasant as other downtowns including but not limited to RWC, Mountain View, Los Altos, etc. further away, Los Gatos, Saratoga, etc are all better destitions than either one of our "two downtowns"
• When I lived in Santa Clara, we can upload a ticket in publicstuff, and some staff will reply to me in 1 -2 weeks, actions will be taken soon. In Palo alto, I asked about a street tree question twice via email, and only get an automatic email reply which mentioned someone will answer my questions in 10 days, 1) but no questions were ever answered in email. 2) There is an ticket created in publicstuff, but no one is replying in it.Palo Alto has too many departments and programs, it is already hard to know whi ch service is under which department, and hard to connect easily.

Community Amenities and Services
• 1.MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT / 2.BETTER INTERNET ACCESS • 1.PUBLIC REC CENTER AT CUBBERLY. 2.BUILDING DEPT. PERMITTING PROCESS IS A NIGHTMARE. • Add a community center
• Attract younger and diverse people ramping up cultural entertainment • DEVELOP ACTIVE SENIOR PROGRAMMING
• Excellent Open Air Theatre for movies and music
• Facilitate neighborhood socials, keep pedestrian streets like California Avenue, attract more small business and restaurants to downtown
• GET CUBBEKLEY DONE!
• Greater emphasis on recreatiol activities.
• I don't know about ways to get involved in the community • I WISE WE HAD AN ACTUAL SENIOR CENTER LIKE OTHER CITIES DO • I'd like to see more community engagement around Midtown that isn't religious affiliated. • Improve Rincoda pool maintence.
• MORE ACTIVITIES AVAILABLE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE IN 20'S
• MORE COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES, MORE PLACES TO SOCIALIZE
• MORE COMMUNITY GATHERINGS & PUBLIC MUSICAL EVENTS; BAND CONCERTS ETC. • More dog parks/off leash dog areas
• More events that can help residents connect
• More fitness options - commercial gyms and exercise equipment at parks. • MORE FREQUENT RESURFACING OF TENNIS & PUCKLEBALL COINS. • MORE PICKLEBALL COURTS
• More summer camp programs within walking distance, cheaper utilities, better time control for sigls at Middlefield Rd
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
109

Packet Pg. 117 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• official welcome wagon for new residence. Get people to in local neighbourhoods to meet each other more regularlyfor the above question : replacing appliances to gas, I felt the city has not supported me well through this process of electrification. I get the permit yet the city makes things difficult. It started with changing my electrical panel -- all was done as per the requirements, but I was thinking ahead so I increased my electrical panel to accommodate future upgrades to the house like electric c ar, water heater, heat pump. But the city required and additiol post inspection -- why? The city official said they were concerned I was putting too big of a panel ( a big panel is required to upgrade all things you are promoting to upgrade) The city needs to make electrification easy. The city also needs to upgrade its electrical grid to support all the electrical cars. City support not there to help me as a resident migrate to electricity. Permitting difficult and the inspectors are not easy to work with. Way easier to stay with gas.Please enforce Gardners to use electrical equipment. I hate the smell of hydrocarbons from the neighbour's gardeners who use gas equipment (it is not just 1 it is many many) • STAGE SOME COMMUNITY CELEBRATIVE ONE IN WHILE.

Economic Development
• 1. Introduce more business in town, I feel Palo Alto is behind the city like Cupertino or even Redwood City, Los Altos. For example, there is State Street Market in Los Altos, I cannot find something even close in Palo Alto.2. Increase bike lane and reduce the traffic3. Increase housing • Allow more stores on el Camino where residents can walk to buy groceries. Allow greater variety of restaurants, cafes, retail stores, grocery stores to open in Palo Alto. Make Palo Alto more walkable and rebuild the very old stores that no one goes to on el Camino and other areas. • ATTRACT & RETAIN MORE RESTAURANTS & BARS. REDUCE ONEROUS PERMITS • attract more affordable restaurants and stores
• Attract young entrepreneurs and starups (via e.g. home & office rent incentives, or by opening a city - sponsored co-working and community space) - that may re-vitalize both the economy and the community.

Palo Alto, that used to be the epicenter of growth and innovaton, today is safe and polished, but also mostly uffordable, predomintly white, old, oftenly boring, and stagnt. We still love it, and wish it the very best.
• Be more pro business and stop virtue sigling by elected officials. • BRING MORE VARIETY OF BUSINESS TO CALIFORNIA AVENUE. THERE ARE A LOT OF STREETS THAT NEED ASPHALT REPAIRS. REDUCE UTILITY CHARGES
• Change tax structure to strongly discourage downtown prop ownwers from having empty storefronts! Downtown, where I Live has tons of empty stores. Also we need more housing! Faster permitting! I am a YIMBY, not the norm of NIMBY in Palo Alto. Make Palo Alto available to younger families again, build! • Diversify the kinds of stores/restaurants in the downtown spaces, especially. University. Seems impossible for small, unique stores or restaurants to make it anymore, increasingly just outposts of larger chains, which is less interesting. (A second thing would be to extend Fiber service into College Terrace!) • ENABLE MORE MIXED UP AND ECONOMIC COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT VACANCY • Encourage movie theaters
• Find a way to make Palo Alto more attractive to a wide range o household income levels. • IMPROVE DOWNTOWN RETAIL
• Improve downtown vibrancy. Too many empty properties. Feels blighted. Too many restaurants and lack of shopping diversity. Also, homelessness is off putting with too many frightening interactions, particularly near the train and 7-11 on Lytton
• Improved retail mix on U. Ave, Cal Ave
• Maintain stores and services that make life in Palo Alto easy. Stop building multi -use projects that never get commercial partners in them. Mandate that developers of multi -use developments subside retail so that retail can exist.
• MORE GOOD RESTAURANTS TO EAT AT
• More grocery stores and less vacant buildings
• Prevent future flooding
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
110

Packet Pg. 118 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Revitalize Downtown Palo Alto. It used to be great. This is no longer the case. The city is too difficult to work with. This causes businesses to go elsewhere.
• Wider variety of businesses and more creative, inviting architecture on University Avenue .

Noise and Urban Environment
• A levee to protect from Bay flooding.
• Do more to encourage all residents to switch to climate-friendly appliances and especially replace _all_ gas usage in the home! We were early adopters and it was frustrating that we could never get the rebates that were given to residents 3 months or years AFTER we switched out gas stove, heater and more. • Environment
• FIGHT TO REDUCE THE OVERWHELMING AIRPLANE NOTICE
• Get rid of train noise from Caltrain
• Increase tive tree canopy and protect ture and biodiversity in parks and open space. Buy properties to increase the availability of parkland and recreation opportunities. Promote use of tive plants in private property.
• more trees
• MY STREET TREE WAS RUN OVER. PLEASE REPLACE IT
• PROMISE TO MAINTAIN OR INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE FORESTS • QUALITY AT NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
• REDUCE NOISE; DISALLOW LOUD CAR EXHAUSTS, AIRPLANE, HELICOPTERS, TRAIN, SIRENS • Relaying in tural body of water
• Silence the Caltrain horns
• TOO MUCH NOISE FROM PLANTS ALSO LOUD CARS & MOTORCYCLES AT NIGHT .

Develop Infrastructure
• Accelerate Palo Alto Fiber installation - I've been hearing about it for so long but nothing has happened in my area and the website provides no status updates that make any sense. • ADDING BATHROOM TO ELEANOR PARDEE PARK
• ALLOW MORE SOLAR BATTERY INSTALLATION; IMPROVE CELL PHONE SIGNALS. • Bathrooms at Eleanor park
• Don't do the repair everyday on Charleston Avenue and Arastradero Road. The repair seems occur every working day in a year.
• Fast Internet
• Have their fiber optic up and running
• maintain roads
• Put a restroom in Padee park, have more access to adult ed classes.

Walking and Biking trails
• Bike path crossings over/under train
• Bike safety lanes on major roads
• Elimite bike lanes on el Camino so we can park at my dentist office • improve bike infrastructure/safety
• KEEP RAMONCE STREET PEDESTRIAN ONLY
• LESS FOCUS ON MAKING ROADS BICYCLE FRIENDLY BUT DANGEROUS FOR DRIVERS • MORE & SAFER BIKE LANES - I FEEL MORE UNSAFE THAN EVER • MORE BIKE LANES
• MORE BIKING ROUTES & ENFORCE NO PARKING IN LANES
• MOST BIKE LANES ARE NOT USED OFTEN & TIE UP TRAFFIC
• pedestrian-friendly environment
• Safer biking streets- make a planned concerted effort of routes through the town that have separate bike lanes
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
111

Packet Pg. 119 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• SOFA BIKING INFRASTRUCTURE DOWNTOWN
• Stop the building of bike lanes and assuming people are willing or able to bike to do daily tasks or just life.

Code Enforcement
• A) ENFORCE SPEED LIMITS B) FIX STREETS
• ALLOW DOGS OFF LEASH IN PARKS AT LOW-USE TIMES
• ATTENTION TO CODE VIOLATIONS FOR SAFETY AT/ON STREETS • BE MORE AGGRESSIVE IN INSURING RESIDENTS MAINTAIN HOME & YARD • CODE ENFORCEMENT IS TERRIBLE-NEW BUILDINGS ARE TOO DENSE & UGLY • CODE ENFORCEMENT WAS REAPPOINTED AGAINST ME BY NEIGHBOR - WASTE OF TIME • CONTROL ALL DOGS ON CUBBERLEY FIELD - MAKE OWNERS LEASH THEIR DOGS • Enforce code, especially gas powered blowers.
• Enforce existing bike laws! Before adding any more bike routes, enforce the existing. Putting signs up does not work. I walk and bikes make my life as pedestrian terrible. I've tried working with the city but they seem to care more about cars and bikes rather than pedestrians. You have bike lanes and bikes continue to ride on the sidewalks. When sign ask bike riders to dismount, they just speed up. Try walking and see how terrible it is to be a walker!
• Enforce parking laws, get rid of campers/large vehicles parked on streets with people living in them. • Enforce sidewalk safety through better bicycle regulation and education.As a Palo Alto resident, I'd prioritize creating safer sidewalks through stricter enforcement of bicycle regulations and comprehensive rider education. Despite our city's excellent bike lane infrastructure, cyclists regularly ride on sidewalks, creating dangerous conditions for pedestrians.This isn't just an inconvenienceit's a genuine safety crisis affecting everyone involved. I've been almost struck by cyclists multiple times, watched my dog nearly get run over, and feared for my elderly father's safety during his visits. When I lived in Sunnyvale, riders would announce when they were getting close to you, showing this courtesy is possible. Here in Palo Alto, cyclists rarely announce their presence or slow down around pedestrians, showing a concerning lack of basic courtesy and awareness. I've also witnessed cyclists fall or lose control when trying to vigate around pedestrians and pets on crowded sidewalksputting both riders and walker s at risk.The solution requires both enforcement and education. We need consistent citation of sidewalk cycling violations, coupled with public awareness campaigns about proper cycling etiquettelike audibly warning pedestrians before passing and using desigted bike lanes that taxpayers have funded.Our sidewalks should be safe spaces for all pedestrians, including children, seniors, and people with disabilities. When cyclists ignore desigted infrastructure and endanger pedestrians, it undermines both our tra nsportation goals and community safety. If current infrastructure isn't working, the city should consider reallocating funds to redesign problematic intersections and create clearer physical separation between bike lanes and sidewalks. Better sigge, barriers, or redesigned pathways could elimite confusion about where cyclists belong while protecting pedestrians.Better regulation and targeted infrastructure improvements would immediately improve quality of life
• ENFORCE SPEED LAWS (WITHIN REASON)
• Enforce speed limit and stop signs
• INCREASE CCW TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT
• Sonic Internet utility install crews should not be cutting concrete at 10:45 PM .

Make the city more affordable
• A GREATER FOCUS ON WHO IS BUYING HOMES. THERE SHOULDN'T BE THIS MANY INVESTMENT

COMPANIES DRIVING UP PRICES IN OUR ALREADY HIGH-PRICED NEIGHBORHOOD • AFFORDABILITY
• Affordability
• Better affordability to support living here long term. It's hard to imagine affording children here. • COST OF LIVING FOR FAMILIES W/55 & PARENTS FACING RETIREMENT & JOB DISCRIM - IN AT LOST • Cut taxes, even at the expense of city services
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
112

Packet Pg. 120 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Don't keep increasing the utility bill
• EASIER /CHEEPER TO TRANSITION FROM WORKING TO RETRIEMENT. • Focus on what people actually need. Utilities are horrendous, Sewer rate for renters. $70 of $110 bill.

Each apartment in duplex on site (with no pool, dishwasher, little garden) pays same as houses flanking, Utilites has been unresponsive to both separate renters inquiries. Completely unhelpful, • GREATER RENT AFFORDABILITY, LOWER HOUSING PRICES.
• I DON'T SUPPOSE YOU CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE COST OF RENT… • I JUST GRAD. COLLEGE, MAKE 50K/YEAR - THE CITY IS SO EXPENSIVE!!! • I WISH UTILITY PRICES WOULD BE MORE AFFORDABLE; I ALSO AVAILABILITY OF MORE AFFORDABLE • If cost of living was more affordable for the "middle class" • IF HOUSING WERE MORE AFFORDABLE FOR OTHERS, IF THE LIBRARY HAD MORE BOOKS! • IF UTILITY BILL KEEPS CLIMBING AT RATE CITY SAY BIT WILL, WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO

RETIRE HERE
• KEEP THE UTILITIES BILL LOW
• Less expensive.
• Life costs are not getting higher every year.
• Lower cost of living
• lower cost of living
• LOWER RENT/RENT STABILIZATION
• Lower the utility rate
• Lower utilities cost
• Lower utilities cost
• Lower utility costs
• Make it easier for people who work here to live here, too. This would be especially nice for our city employees.
• PROVIDE MORE REASONABLE RENT RATE FOR DONE STUDIOS, RECREATION ACTIVITY TOWN • Reduce outrageous water fees
• reduce property tax
• REDUCE PROPERTY TAXES, REMOVE RESIDENCIES KING TAX, PRIVATE WEEKLY MAYORAL REPORT TO

NEWSPAPER
• REDUCE SALES TAX
• Reduce the cost of gas
• REDUCING THE COST OF LIVING
• Reduction of utility bills
• RENT CONTROL
• Rent control for downtown businesses , so they can afford to stay in business • Rent control/cost lowering
• Stop siphoning money from utilities
• TRY TO KEEP UTILITY PRICES DOWN WATER, GAS, ELECTRIC
• UTILITY DISCOUNTS FOR SENIORS.

Cleanliness of community; upkeep
• Beautify and adapt downtown streets that are already closed to cars, and close more downtown streets to cars.
• BETTER MAINTENANCE OF STREETS
• Better maintence of landscaping at City facilities
• clean sidewalk street
• Crackdown on neglected/vacant residential properties. Whole neighborhoods have become ghost streets with out of area buyers leaving their property vacant & unkept creating theft vulnerability, fire & rodent infestation dangers for the whole neighborhood.
• FIX ROADS & SIDEWALKS
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
113

Packet Pg. 121 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Good maintence and availability of the local parks
• Have better architecture for new buildings, especially apartment buildings. • IMPROVE THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED & MODERNIZE • KEEP STREETS CLEANER, MAKE UNIVERSITY AVE MORE COLESIDE, ATTRACTIVE • Keep the city clean! I hate to see the trash on the streets, in medians and in yards and dirty sidewalks and roads.
• Keep the city safe and clean, and keep property taxes as low as possible • Maintain the character of Palo Alto, which has already dramatically changed for the worse. It has gotten too dense, too crowded, too many people here only for the city services and not to truly be a part of the community. Wish there could be a limit on the number of second home purchases that are only for investment.
• NEIGHBORS KEEPING CURB AREA CLEANER AND MORE WELL-TENDED • OCCATIONAL STREET SWEEPING ON OUR STREET (EL CAMINO WAY) IF POSSIBLE • Street and curb repair. Our curb was damaged when underground work was done on our street. The curb is still left damaged.
• TEST CONTROL FOR RATS, AFFORDABLE HOUSING
• Trim city trees to reduce branch/leaf falls and potential hurt. Build restrooms in parks.

Other
• Address 311 tickets.
• Change utilities sewer rates to be based on number of residents or home size. Other rates are based on usage, but a single resident in a studio apartment should not have to pay the same amount as an entire family.
• CITY SOULED LINES!
• Covered heated outdoor eating on California avenue
• Diversity
• Divest from genocide and pass resolutions to divest from companies and services complicit in Palestinian genocide.
• DO NOT SUPPORT (TWITTER ORX)
• Enforce the CUP rules for pod schools as you do for private and public schools. • ethnic diversity
• FOCUS EDUCATION ON ACADEMIC OUTCOMES VERY UNHAPPY WITH PAUSD • Free afterschool until 4:30 pm
• GET RIDE OF LIQUIDAMBARS!!!!
• Help neighboring communities by doing things regiolly vs just our city • IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LIBERAL, DEMOCRATIC VIEW YOU ARE SHUNNED. NOT OPEN TO OTHER VIEWS.
• Integrate more with East Palo Alto. The divide is so stark. Also, their kid section of the library is fantastic, and I often take my kids there. Palo Alto has a whole children's library, and it doesn't come close in terms of coziness. Their library has a much more commul feel, which I love. • KEEP PARKING & BRING BACK WIDE VARIETY OF RETAIL
• Kick out snobby people
• Less antisemitism in the town and country protests
• LESS EMPHASIS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING & GROWTH AND MORE ON MAINTAINING QUALITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. FIGHT BACK ON STATE MANDATES.
• Less of a feeling of "us versus them" when it comes to different parts of the city (north vs. south, Barron Park vs. everywhere else, etc.)
• LESS PALO ALTO PROCESS!!! KEEP DONATION CLEAN!!
• LESS SNOOTY
• LESS VACANCIES / LESS POP UP STORES
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
114

Packet Pg. 122 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• LET APARTMENT DWELLERS WITH THEIR OWN ADDRESS TO BE PART OF NEIGHBORHOOD CLEANUP. • Low cost Event space for Live Music
• MAINTAIN ABILITY TO SUPPLY GAS TO RESIDENCES THROUGH MY GAS PAYMENT WITH OUT UPPING

MY COSTS THROUGH TRANFEING MUNCY TO THE GENERAL FUND
• Making education more persolized for their need and level instead of making them the same bar which can be either too high for some kids and too low for some others. At a result, school trends to keep the challenges low in middle and elementary schools for most kids and it does not challenges them and prepare them well for high school.
• More focus on preservation of our heritage of older buildings • More positive focus on the neighborhood things that make a big difference in how happy snd safe residents feel. For example, the removal of the fire engine from Middlefield Rd. Not remedying the stagnt water on Ames Avenue for months and months while blaming residents instead of fixing the street that has lifted over time, not moving with light speed to help rebuild the burned down comercial center at Middlefield and Loma Verde that housed a cafe and outdoor garden seating area, not fixing the facade of the Mitchell Park Library for years, not taking care of the plantings in the street along Ross Road or the landscaping at Mitchell Park Library.
• MORE PUBLIC EVCATE IN DOWNTOWN AREA
• Not require electrification of water heaters and gas furces for those of us with 100amp service. It would cost upwards of $30k for me. Since any new electricity needs in CA will most likely be filled by new gas plants, and using gas to make electricity is less efficient than using gas directly, you are not reducing greenhouse gases. Just because PA pays extra for green energy does not change these calculations for the state of CA as a whole.
• PALO ALTO IS GETTING VERY CROWDED, COMPARED IS WHEN I MOVED HERE, I DON'T THAT FIXABLE. • PUBLIC SCHOOL PATHWAYS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO MAXIMIZE THEIR OWN ACADEMIC POTENTIAL • publish school days and hours and holidays
• Relax the tree removal ordince; put bathrooms in Eleanor park • REMOVE THE FEMA RESTRICTIONS IN SOUTH PALO ALTO DUE TO NON -EXISTENT BAY FLOODS • REPLACE LIQUID - AMBAR TREES IN COLLEGE TERRACE WITH TREES THAT DON'T DROP SEED PODS • REPLACE THE ROADS IN RESIDENTIAL AREA
• Return Foothills to PA residents only
• ROADS ARE FOR WORK THAN MUCH LESS AFFLUENT CITIES
• Send the survey to an email or use an app versus paper. • SOME SORT OF OUTREACH TO NEW CHINESE IMMIGRANTS THEY DON'T KNOW ABOUT VALUE OF COMMUNITY EFFORT. 1) HEY RARELY SAY HELLOW, OR SMILE AS WALK BY 2) LOOK AWARNESS THAT

OUT OPEN SPACES ARE
• stop connect library to open internet, so students won't be coming and play video games for long long time in library and waste their study time!!!
• Stop the blackouts
• Stop using the social media platform X. Many residents are troubled by this. The City should move to Bluesky and stop supporting that platform for hate speech and propaganda. • STOP WASTING TIME 1/3 $ ON STUDIES THAT THE COUNCIL THE IGNORES PURSING POLITICAL

SOLUTIONS
• SUPPORT LA COMIDA MORE
• TAKE STRONG STAND ON NATIONAL (POLITICAL) ISSUES
• There was a time when city staff hadn't returned from Covid, or were working remotely - long after most people had returned to work - and I found the city very unreliable. I didn't understand why they were not coming back to work like the rest of us. I lost trust in the city over this. • TO REPLACE OUR MAJOR GAS APPLIANCES WITH ELECTRICITY
• TO TRIM TREES MORE NEAR ELECTRICAL AREAS US HAVING TO PAY FOR IT • Treat Stanford University employees with respect and appreciation rather than as an annoyance. I have lived at Stanford West apartments on Sand Hill Rd for 25 years and we have never felt welcome as a community or neighborhood in Palo Alto. We are residents of Palo Alto, but do not feel Palo Alto as a city Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
115

Packet Pg. 123 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

government or as a community overall welcome us at all. The resistance of Palo Alto elected officials and voters to the concept of building this apartment complex still stings after more than 25 years. I walk to work everyday, and drive only 2,500 miles per year, and still we are resented. It's painful. • Work to end the tensions between long time residents and newer residents; The school board bruhaha is a symptom of a failure to listen, communicate, understand.

Nothing/Don't know
• FINE WEATHER FOR WALKING - IN OTHER WORDS, NOTHING
• I am very happy now! Keep working hard to make Palo Alto wonderful! • I don't know
• NO CHANGE IS NECESSARY
• NONE
• None
• NOTHING.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
116

Packet Pg. 124 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Question 20: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain?
Parks, open space, and natural environment
• ABUNDANT GREENERY (MAINTAIN & EXPAND)
• ACCESS TO PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
• ACCESS TO PARKS, NATURE, PAY LANDS, ETC.
• Amount of green area
• BAYLANDS & OTHER PARKS, KEEP THE WILD WILD, DON'T BUILD ON IT OR EXPAND THE AIRPORT • Baylands. No more wetlands loss like for the airport. • BEAUTIFUL PARKS, TREES, CITY PLANNING, LOW CRIME RATE, EXCELLENT POLICE AND FIRE

DEPARTMENTS
• BEAUTIFUL TREES AND PARKS.
• Care for our trees and tural environment
• CARE OF THE TREES AROUND THE CITY, PARKS AND THE HERITAGE HOME PRESERVATION. • CITY PARKS
• CITY PARKS AND RECREATION ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES. ALSO LIBRARY ACCESS • CITY PARKS! OPEN SPACES; STREET CLEANING
• Green and Open spaces.
• Green space
• Green spaces
• Green spaces and trees
• Love foothill park.
• MAINTAIN GREAT PARKS
• maintain it's green spaces
• Maintain its own utilities.
• Maintain its parks
• Maintain the excellent parks
• Maintaining green spaces. The parks are fantastic.
• Maintaining parks and libraries
• PARKS
• PARKS
• Parks
• Parks
• Parks
• Parks
• Parks
• PARKS & RECREATION
• PARKS AND EMERGENCY SERVICES
• Parks and libraries
• PARKS AND LIBRARIES ARE (FIRE EMOJI)
• PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
• Parks and open space!!!
• PARKS AND OPEN SPACES AND LIBRARIES
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
117

Packet Pg. 125 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• parks and outdoor spaces are very good
• Parks are abundant and well maintained
• Parks!! - keep up maintence please.
• Parks, Libraries, Art Center, and Children's Theatre
• PARKS, LIBRARIES, PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES
• PARKS, NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, BAYLANDS
• Parks, Open spaces and access to them. The pedestrian / bike bridge to the Baylands over Hwy -101 between San Antonio and Oregon Expressway is a great example. Tons of people use that overpass to access the open space. The city should know how many people were up there on July 4th with kids, bikes, dogs, grandparents, etc. to go watch the fireworks displays. • PARKS, SHOPS
• provider of park space
• Public areas are great.
• Public open space.
• Public parks and libraries are great amenities for residents • Public parks/spaces like foothills, Mitchell, etc
• QUALITY AT NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
• The open spaces are nice. Utilities was reasobly easy. • The open spaces, including Foothills Open Space Preserve and the baylands. • THE PARKS
• the parks & libraries
• THE PARKS & THE LIBRARY
• The trees
• there are many: Parks/libraries/community gardens/free compost/tree lined streets/info from utilities/zero waste website/engaging in planning (e.g. Cubberley, bike routes)/support for VA Palo Alto • TREES & GREENERY & PARKS & LIBRARIES
• TREES ENVIRONMENT, PARKS, GARBAGE COLLECTION LIBRARIES • Trees, libraries, teachers
• tural environment and trails such as the Baylands
• turaleza y seguridad
• ture preserves are good (we should stop developing anything within ture preserves). Small town atmosphere.
• VALUES ITS NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - ENGLANDS, FOOTBALL, ITS TREES ETC • WE LOVE THE PARKS AND PRESERVES. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO TO MAINTAIN THEM • CONTINUE TO INVEST IN PUBLIC SPACES LIKE PARKS. MOST HOUSES ARE FIRE BUT SOME HOMES LOOK

ABANDONED)
• ENVIRONMENT AND LANDSCAPE
• ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
• Great outdoor space and clean city
• GREAT PARKS AND RECREATION. LOTS OPEN SPACE
• I love our parks and libraries.
• I LOVE THE GREEN CANOPY - KEEP IT UP
• I LOVE THE PARKS AND DOG PARKS. STREET SWEEPING. THE PARKING PERMIT SYSTEM HAS REALLY

HELPED THE SPILL-OVER BUSINESS PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS • LUSH GREEN, BIG TREES TROUGHOUT
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
118

Packet Pg. 126 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• MAINTAINING PARKS AND PUBLIC SPACES
• Maintaining parks and public spaces
• Maintaining the excellent public spaces like libraries, parks, and tural spaces. • Maintaining the overall environment of the city
• MAINTAINS OUR GREEN CANOPY
• MAINTENANCE OF PARKS
• MAINTENANCE OF STREETS AND PARKS
• Maintence of city parks and common spaces
• Maintence of parks and recreation areas
• OPEN SPACE
• open space
• Open Space Preserve is fantastic.
• Our parks and libraries are pretty nice
• Our parks are awesome.
• Palo Alto Baylands
• Quantity and size of parks & green spaces (including keeping school fields available after school hours) • So many parks
• SPACE GIVEN TO PARKS. CONCERTS IN THE PARK
• The environment with all the trees and plants
• The environmentalism
• The investment in maintain and improving parks and libraries and cultural events • I WOULD WANT TO CITY TO MAINTAIN ITS PARTS AND OPEN SPACES • IT'S NATURAL BEAUTY - TREES/PARKS
• Love the parks and outdoor spaces.
• MANY WELL MAINTAINED PARKS SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE AREA • NATURE, PARKS, LIBRARIES
• OVERALL ENVIRONMENT. KEEPING THE CITY VERY GREEN
• Park and open space maintence
• PARK MAINTENANCE
• Street trees
• Street trees. Library.

Utilities and city services
• AFFORDABLE UTILITY SERVICE/COST
• MAINTAIN INFRASTRUCTURE TO CITY SERVICES
• Their utility in one bill
• UTILITIES
• UTILITIES
• UTILITIES
• Utilities
• Utilities
• Utilities
• Utilities
• Utilities
• Utilities
• UTILITIES & POLICE SERVICES
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
119

Packet Pg. 127 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• utilities communication and billing
• UTILITIES PUBLIC SAFETY
• Utilities response time
• UTILITIES SERVICE
• Utilities Services
• Utility
• Utility department
• Utility services
• Utility services in general.
• City employees polite. Lots of services for children. • CITY OWNED UTILITIES!
• City owned utility.
• CITY PROVIDED SERVICE
• CITY RUN UTILITIES - EXCELLENT!
• CPAU electric has really good rates.
• effective utilities and services
• ELECTRIC SERVICE
• Electricity and water supply.
• ELECTRIFICATION PROGRAM - IMPORTANT TO PROMOTE RESIDENTIAL SOLAR AND BATTERY

STORAGE
• GOOD VALUES IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENT CARE OF RESIDENTS • KEEPING PALO ALTO UTILITIES NOT PGE
• Keeping utilities costs down and a great recycling program • Maging its own utility district
• MAINTAIN P A UTILITIES INVESTMENTS
• OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF UTILITIES
• OWNING & OPERATING ITS OWN MUNICIPAL UTILITY SERVICES • Owning our public utilities.
• OWNING OWN UTILITIES
• Pa owned utilities
• Public Utilities
• The utility services as a whole. It is a very important service as well as police and emergency services are excellent.
• Gas utility services
• GENERAL GENE OF BASIC SERVICES
• Good service for utility and street cleaning
• HELPING SENIORS WITH COMFORT. TAKING GARBAGE CAME OUT/HELPING WITH UTILITIES. • I AM VERY PLEASED WITH THE RESPONSE TIME OF THE UTILITES DEPARTMENT WHEN CONTACTING

THEM REGARDING ROAD ISSUES - PARTICULARRLY PETER RUANO - LEAD ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND

INSPECTOR
• KEEP UTILITIES COSTS LOW
• Palo Alto has a lot of public facilities, eg the community center, and the downtown area is quite vibrant for a small town.
• Palo Alto provided electric utility
• REBATE FOR ELECTRIFICATION
• reliability of our utilities
• Tenemos buenos hospitalesY bues escuelas pblicas
• The city does really well in utility magement, being transparent about decisions and taking actions to provide good service.
• The city should continue providing its own utilities, including its initiative for high speed internet. • The city-owned electric is very affordable compared to surrounding communities. It's like an oasis.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
120

Packet Pg. 128 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Safety services
• EXTRA POINTS FOR PA FIRE DEPT. THEYR'E BEEN VERY HELPFUL ON SVERAL TECHNICAL AND

MEDICAL ISSUES
• Keep the city safe.
• KEEPING THE CRIME RATE DOWN
• Keeping the neighborhood safe
• KEEPING US SAFE / FEELING SAFE
• LOCAL POLICE, FILE, EMT
• POLICE & FIRE
• Police and Fire Department services
• POLICE CHIEF & DEPARTMENT ARE REALLY CONNECTING W/RESIDENTS/KEEP THAT UP AND OFFER MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CITIZENS AND CUPS TO INTERACT! LET'S BUILD BRIDGES! • Police Fire Education Parks Library Emergency services although I'm very worried about the switch to contracted EMT,s to staff ambulances. I am alive because PA Firefighters revived me after a cardiac arrest and transported me to Stanford fast enough that I was able to make a full recovery. I don't know if I would have survived with less experienced contracted EMTs. I do support fiber to the home. • POLICE FORCE
• POLICE SERVICE UTILITIES SERVICES - PARKS - CHILDREN ACTIVITIES • prevent crime
• Provides safe community living
• Public safety
• public safety
• Public safety.
• Public safey
• PUBLIC SCHOOLS
• SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL
• SAFETY
• Safety
• safety
• SAFETY & ENVIRONMENT
• Safety and walk ability
• Safety of residents
• Safety of residents
• Safety, and community.
• Safety, beautiful and clean environment
• CRIME CONTROL
• Things are much better, but continuing to remove homeless and broken down RVs/vehicles from our streets
• Fire and police services and that we own our utilities • I DO FEEL SAFE & I LIKE THAT CAMERAS THAT CAN HELP IN CRIME RESOLUTION • I really appreciate that it feels safe here, that our utilities feel reliable, and that it is a beautiful and vibrant place.
• KEEP PA A SAFE PLACE FOR FAMILIES
• keep resident safe from crimes
• OVERALL FEELING OF SAFETY IN PALO ALTO.

Activities and Recreation (arts, libraries, museums, theaters, etc.) • ALL OF THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EVENTS & OPPORTUNITIES WE ESPECIALLY LOVE THE

TWILIGHT CONCERTS
• Amazing library services in person and online (important during pandemic and for those with limited mobility) for young families and elderly
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
121

Packet Pg. 129 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• I love the libraries
• I LOVE THE LIBRARIES & BEING ABLE TO WALK ANYWHERE I NEED TO MAKE CITY BETTER FOR POOR

PEOPLE TO LIVE HERE
• I love the Palo Alto libraries!
• LIBRARIES
• LIBRARIES
• LIBRARIES
• LIBRARIES
• LIBRARIES
• Libraries
• Libraries
• Libraries
• LIBRARIES & REC FACILITIES
• LIBRARIES AND ARTS EVENTS
• Libraries and parks and cleaniness of streets
• Libraries and parks and community events
• Libraries are excellent for kids and adults. Online assets that libraries provide like Morningstar subscription is above and beyond what other cities provide. • Libraries are well run and a valuable asset to the city. • Libraries are wonderful
• libraries, pool, parks
• LIBRARY
• Library and park
• LIBRARY FACILITIES
• Library services
• LIBRARY SYSTEM IS THE BEST
• Library, Park, Recreation Centers are well run, and kids really enjoyed them. • LOVE CAL AVE BANDS/MUSIC & GATHERINGS - WISH THERE WERE MORE • Public library and utilities
• The libraries are amazing! Keep funding them please!
• The libraries are excellent and they nurture my family's persol growth! • City library
• community entertainment (the movie nights in the park), events at the library, and speed limit control • COMMUNITY EVENTS LIKE SUMMER CONCERT SERIES AT PARKS
• CULTURAL RESOURCES: LIBRARIES, MUSEUMS, EVENTS
• CULTURAL-ART/THEATER
• events; however they are not well publcized in a timely fashion • Excellent libraries and recreation centers
• EXCELLENT RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES (DANCE CLASSES AT HOCTE STERNS) POOLS, ETC, FOOTHILLS PARK. FUN COMMUNITY EVENTS ON HOLIDAYS, ETC.
• MAINTENANCE OF OUR LIBRARIES, PARKS
• plentiful recreatiol access
• SENIOR ACTIVITIES
• THEY DO EVENTS WELL BUT DON'T SEND THAT NOTICES AHEAD OF TIME • Funding library, open space, and parks
• GOOD LIBRARIES AND ARTS CENTERS
• MOST OF THEIR ACTIVITIES
• NICE LIBRARIES / PARKS / DOWNTOWN
• Oh gosh, too many things to say! I would say city programming for families and youth - the libraries, the children's theater
• Opportunities to engage in different types of activities. Social, recreation, arts, classes, etc.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
122

Packet Pg. 130 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• ORGANIZING COMMUNITY EVENTS SUCH AS THE CONCERT SERIES TO FOSTER ENGAGEMENT AND

BELONGING
• outdoor wellness opps -- nice parks, trails, tennis courts, concerts • Overall our libraries and parks are wonderful.
• RECREATION CLASSES
• RINCONADZ POOL AND THE PARKS ARE STELLAR. LOVE THE LIBRARIES. I WISH DOWNTOWN

SHOPPING WHO AS CHARMING, UNPRETENTIOUS & USEFUL IS NEWLO PARK • The Enjoy Catalog of opportunities. Supporting the children's theatre .

Government/leadership; government communication
• A continuous stream of leaders willing to serve on Council and commissions • A POLITICAL VOICE NATIONALLY
• City council engagement with the community
• Great talents and great leaders make the difference
• Communicate with residents
• COMMUNICATE WITH RESIDENTS - OUTREACH
• Communications to residents via website, flyers, etc
• Communications.
• community and technology adoption
• Community efforts
• CONTACT & RESIDENTS THROUGH UTILITY MAILINGS
• CONTACT ME @ WHAT'S GOING ON IN PA THERE WEEKLY EMAILS. • Continue keeping the website updated with current information and emergency notifications. • CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVING THE CITY. WHEN I MOVED LANE IN 2022, #1 CAMINO REAL WAS HORRIBLE BUT SINCE 2024, THE ROADS LANE DRAMATICALLY IMPROVED. THE CITY PROVIDE,

AFFORDABLE AVENUES FOR ITS RESIDENTS TO ENGAGE IN LEVELNESS EXERCISES, EDUCATION, ARTS & COMMUNITY GATHERING.
• Good policing.
• STAFF
• TRANSPARENCY W/ COMMUNITY
• I think the City of Palo Alto is very thorough in how it approaches things, which is something I appreciate very much.
• Keeping citizens informed
• Keeps residents informed and maintains a very inclusive environment • LISTEN TO RESIDENCE
• palo alto is well maged and i hope it continues.
• Palo Alto runs very effectively and efficiently. It takes many people working together to make that happen. Keep working!!!
• Planning and building. The quality of building in PA is second to none. You do need to make getting a building permit easier.
• Seeks cooperation and consensus in decisions that affect all residents.

Schools and education, programs for youth
• EXTRA DIN PECULIAR SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS & ADULTS (EDUCATION ARTS) (CONT.) ENCOURAGE

STANFORD TO PROVIDE MORE PARKING FOR EMPLOYS/STUDENTS/ASSOCIATES/VISITORS • Great schools
• Have a good public school system
• K12 schools
• Prioritizes schools
• PUBLIC EDUCATION QUALITY
• Public schools
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
123

Packet Pg. 131 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Public schools
• Public services
• School District has been amazing for us
• SCHOOLS
• SCHOOLS
• SCHOOLS
• SCHOOLS
• Schools
• SCHOOLS.
• The schools are amazing, and kid activities and job opportunities are good • VERY GOOD SCHOOLS; KEEP OF THE STANDARD
• Educate children.
• Education
• Education - the public schools are outstanding
• EDUCATION QUALITY
• EXCELLENT SCHOOLS, EXCELLENT PARKS
• Excellent. Schools
• EXCREMENT SCHOOLS
• Our schools
• Palo Alto Adult School
• HIGH QUALITY OF PUBLIC EDUCATION AND ITS COMMITMENT TO SAFETY FOR EVERYONE IN THE

COMMUNITY
• It maintains schools educatiol quality,,, but this mostly due to the constituency' value on higher education.

Recurring efforts to "dumb-down" curriculum standards are misguided and counterproductive. • Maintain our exceptiol commitment to public education and community resources.As a Palo Alto resident, I'm consistently impressed by the city's dedication to fostering an educated, well -informed community. Having five libraries throughout our city demonstrates that we genuinely value education and knowledge access for all residentsfrom young families to seniors.I also appreciate thoughtful community outreach like the welcoming mailer with important contact numbers and city information. I really appreciated receiving that when I moved in, especially since the cost of real estate in the Bay Area means so many people have to rent. As a renter, it made me feel valued and seen since I don't contribute taxes through being a homeowner. This kind of proactive communication shows the city cares about keeping all residentsregardless of housing statusinformed and connected to essential services.These efforts reflect Palo Alto's core values: prioritizing education, ensuring equitable access to resources, and maintaining strong communication with residents. Our library system isn't just about booksit's about creating community spaces where people can learn, work, and connect. Combined with clear, helpful communication from city staff, these initiatives show a city government that truly serves its entire community.I hope Palo Alto continues investing in these educatiol and communication resources, as they're what make our city not just a place to live, but a place where all residents can thrive and stay engaged in civic life.
• Palo Alto engages in helping our community thrive through its planning and implementation of running our schools, health and community services and commitment to combating climate change. • THE EDUCATION SYSTEM - PAUSED
• THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, DESPITE RECENT ETHANOL RACE-STADNES DISPUTES IS GOOD, BUT VARIOUS HNOMS/AP CLASSES SHOULD BE RESTORAL! AVE FEE RACE ETHNIC CIRCULAR SHOULD BE ESITY, AND FULLY AVAILABLE FOR EXAMINATION.

Cleanliness of community; upkeep
• Clean and safe public spaces.
• Clean and Tidy Streets
• CLEAN STREETS, TREE CORE
• CLEAN/SAFE
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
124

Packet Pg. 132 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• CLEANLINESS
• CLEANLINESS
• Cleanliness
• CLEANLINESS OF ENVIRONMENT
• Cleanliness of the city and hoping to extend further to remote corners of the city. • Clean-up of El Camino has impressed me
• KEEP STREET CLEAN, REPAIR THE POT HOLE OF THE ROAD. (EL CAMINO REAL) • LANDSCAPING, BEAUTIFICATION
• Maintain a clean and safe enviornment.
• Maintain city street sweeping once every one or two weeks. • TRASH PICKUP & RECYCLING
• WASTE COLLECTION
• WEEKLY GARBAGE CLEAN-UP
• Commitment to a clean and green environment
• CURBSIDE REFUSE COLLECTION IS GREAT
• PA LINK CLEANLINESS
• Street Sweeping
• Garbage pickup is excellent -- reliable, neat and professiol • GOOD MAINTENANCE
• I ABSOLUTELY LOVE HOW VISIBLE? FREQUENT PLAYGROUND CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE IS • Maintence of the streets and trees
• Overall, the cleanliness and safety of the city are very high. • Park cleaning and maintence.
• regular street sweeping. Rich options in library.
• STREET CLEANING MORE SECURITY AND SAFETY
• STREET TREE MAINTENANCE.

Quality of life, reputation
• An overall forward-thinking vision and willingness to deploy resources to make quality of life a high priority
• Nurture its reputation
• QUALITY OF LIFE GREAT - CLEAR STREETS / TREE TRIMMING • BRINGING THE COMMUNITY TOGETHER.
• CITY OF PA IS PRETTY.
• Create a welcoming and attractive city environment.
• EMPHASIS ON PHYSICAL BEAUTY AND MAINTENANCE; TREE TRIMMING, STREET SWEEPING • ENGAGES RESIDENTS
• Engaging with residents
• family friendly
• Focus on the community, not the typical political bs
• Good quality of life issues, environment such as fixiing the creek flooding threat after some twenty years, maintaining control of zoning issues, street parking hazards. • KEEPING A SMALL TOWN SPIRIT RATHER THAN JUST BEING A "SUBURB" OF SAN FRANCISCO. • My Greenmeadow neighborhood - and others like it.
• NEIGHBORS FRIENDLINESS: THIS IS RAPIDLY NOT GOVERNMENT PROVIDED: EG. WE ALL RAISED CHANGING = VERY SAD SITUATION MONEY FOR OPEN SPACE AS VOLUNTEERS. • Overall high quality of life.
• ROAD MAINTENANCE
• Roads/bike lanes
• STREETS ARE WELL-KEPT
• The City needs to continue to be at the forefront of innovations to improve our quality of life .

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
125

Packet Pg. 133 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Infrastructure, streets, transportation
• Downtown - overall feel, public parking options
• IMPROVEMENT AND WIDENING OF MAIN STREETS FOR EASE A TRAFFIC Ease of bicycle travel/walking
• As someone who gets out on foot and bike a lot - it is so much better to travel on foot/bike/scooter here than other Peninsula Cities. If I'm allowed a quick second - I'm in love with trees and I love how Palo Alto prtoects the trees everywhere. It means a world of diffference! • Attractive walkable neighborhoods
• BEAUTIFUL WALKABLE TREE LINED STREETS THAT ARE SAFE
• BICYCLE BOULEVARDS, SUMMER ART CAMPS
• BIKE & PEDESTRIAN TRANSPORTATION
• Bike path maintence and improvement
• Bike routes are very useful and appreciated.
• BIKE ROUTES, OPEN SPACE, CULTURAL ACTIVITIES
• BIKE-FRIENDLY
• CHILDREN LIBRARY, KIDS FRIENDLY EVENTS, PARK CLEANESS • Children's Zoo and Museum is Great!! Not as important as public safety but very special. • I think Palo Alto does a great job maintain bike paths and lanes. • Walk ability
• Closed California avenue to vehicular traffic.

Sustainability
• Protecting the tural environment
• Provide high quality water from the Hetch-Hetchy system. • Recycling
• Delivering Hetch Hetchy water AND maintaining lower, more reliable electricity than PG&E -- we are very grateful!
• Ecological programs
• Focuses on the environment
• GOES OUT OF YOUR WAY TO PROTECT TREES AND GREEN SPACE APPRECIATE IT AND WANT IT TO

CONTINUE
• RECYCLE & REFUSE COLLECTION
• SUPPORT CLIMATE CHANGE MEASURES - MAKE IT EASIER, FASTER, CHEAPER.

Culture, diversity
• ATTRACTIVE & WELCOMING DIVERSE COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE. MAINTENANCE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH STANFORD BECAUSE THEY OFFER THE BEST RESOURCES & EVENTS. • DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION
• downtown is vibrant and fun
• Public Partner partnerships with the Art Center, The Children's Theatre and the Children's Museum and Zoo.
• Generally progressive and open attitudes.
• It is a very nice place to live but must maintain cultural and economic diversity • The diversity is excellent of the people. The downtown areas are fun to visit. The city parks are beautiful.

Other
• appeal to young families to keep them wanting to purchase homes in Palo Alto • BETTER MAINTENANCE OF STREETS AND SEWERS
• City does most things well.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
126

Packet Pg. 134 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Use technology to improve productivity and reduce costs • Very prompt responses for any questions.
• WAS VERY ACTIVE IN PALO ALTO 2000-2010. FEEL VERY DETECTED FROM COMMUNITY SINCE 2019. • Community involvement
• CONTROLLER SALARIES AND FUTURE OBLIGATIONS LIKE PENSIONS • EVERYTHING
• Everything - great place to raise kids
• EVERYTHING. EXCEED. ALTA HOUSING DISTRICT
• TO OT OWN HORN
• Economic opportunities are high here
• I am extremely dissatisfied with the inclusion of my special needs child (non -speaking autism). There is barely any opportunity for him to participate. Also there is simply no training among city programs to support him. The area is so uffordable that I cant find care either. It forced me to give up a career and provide for my son. The school district is even worse- they wont acknowledge his method of communication. There is lack or training, unwillingness to learn or be open to needs that require consistent learning/committment. All help is sporadic, unreliable and meant to be an eye wash • I like that we are not dependent on PG&E
• I think the city takes a lot of criticism for the city owned utilities, but over the history of the city it has been a significant good, and should be maintained.
• KEEPS PROPERTY VALUES HIGH
• LOW DENSITY HOUSING MAINTENANCE
• MIXED HOUSING OPTIONS & POLICE SAFETY ACTION
• No homeless
• Open minded community
• OPENERS
• PA SHOULD DO MORE TO PRESERVE OLD HOUSES, LIMIT HUGE MANSIONS KEEP THE RESIDENT CAL "FLAVOURED" OLD PA.
• PALO ALTO DRAWS INTERESTING & MOTIVATED PEOPLE
• PARKING GARAGES
• PARKING IS PUTTY GOOD
• PAUC
• RELATIONSHIP WITH STARFOOD
• SEAFOOD BALANCE OF ALL SERVICES SHOULD BE BETTER, BUT WORKS WELL • Strict building codes that are fairly enforced
• STRIKES A GOOD BALANCE SERVING LOCAL NEEDS & REGIONAL / GLOBAL GOALS (WATER) (CLIMATE) • Support of non-profit agencies
• THE CITY DOES VERY WELL AS IT IS
Nothing/don’t know/something negative
• N/A
• N/a
• NONE
• not sure
• I am not familiar enough to comment
• I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CITY DOES.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
127

Packet Pg. 135 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Appendix C: Results to Open -Participation Survey
After data collection for the probability -based, address-sampled survey was underway, the City launched an open survey to gather additional input from residents. The survey was accessible through a link on the City’s website and shared via social media. Between August 29 and October 3, 2025, a total of 216 responses were received. This section presents the results from that open participation survey. Because these responses were not collected through a random sample, it is not possible to determine who in t he community was aware of or chose to participate in the survey; therefore, no statistical level of confidence can be assigned to the representativeness of the results. To help reduce potential bias, the data were weighted to align with key demographic characteristics of adults in the City of Palo Alto based on the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey estimates. The resulting weighting scheme is summarized in the table.

Table 115: Palo Alto, CA 2025 Weighting Table
Characteristic Population Norm Unweighted Data Weighted Data Housing
Rent home 44% 21% 39%
Own home 56% 79% 61%
Detached unit* 59% 76% 58%
Attached unit* 41% 24% 42%
Race and Ethnicity
White 55% 78% 66%
Not white 45% 22% 34%
Not Hispanic 94% 95% 93%
Hispanic 6% 5% 7%
Sex and Age
Female 52% 55% 53%
Male 48% 45% 47%
18-34 years of age 23% 3% 13%
35-54 years of age 35% 22% 38%
55+ years of age 42% 74% 50%
Females 18-34 11% 2% 5%
Females 35-54 18% 12% 18%
Females 55+ 23% 42% 30%
Males 18-34 12% 2% 7%
Males 35-54 17% 9% 18%
Males 55+ 19% 34% 21%
Area
Area 1 13% 14% 15%
Area 2 19% 18% 17%
Area 3 13% 23% 14%
Area 4 20% 12% 20%
Area 5 9% 13% 10%
Area 6 26% 21% 23%
* U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-year estimates
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
128

Packet Pg. 136 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Results Tables

Table 116: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Palo Alto as a place to live 39% N=84 47% N=100 12% N=26 2% N=4 0% N=0 100% N=214 Your neighborhood as a place to live 39% N=82 52% N=111 6% N=13 3% N=6 0% N=0 100% N=212 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 37% N=79 41% N=85 11% N=23 2% N=4 9% N=20 100% N=211 Palo Alto as a place to work 33% N=69 36% N=75 14% N=29 1% N=3 16% N=34 100% N=210 Palo Alto as a place to visit 27% N=56 43% N=90 21% N=45 4% N=8 6% N=12 100% N=212 Palo Alto as a place to retire 18% N=37 27% N=58 20% N=43 29% N=61 6% N=12 100% N=211 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 30% N=63 52% N=110 17% N=35 1% N=3 0% N=0 100% N=211

Table 117: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Palo Alto as a place to live 39% N=84 47% N=100 12% N=26 2% N=4 100% N=214 Your neighborhood as a place to live 39% N=82 52% N=111 6% N=13 3% N=6 100% N=212 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 41% N=79 45% N=85 12% N=23 2% N=4 100% N=191 Palo Alto as a place to work 39% N=69 43% N=75 17% N=29 2% N=3 100% N=176 Palo Alto as a place to visit 28% N=56 45% N=90 23% N=45 4% N=8 100% N=200 Palo Alto as a place to retire 19% N=37 29% N=58 22% N=43 30% N=61 100% N=199 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 30% N=63 52% N=110 17% N=35 1% N=3 100% N=211

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
129

Packet Pg. 137 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 118: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't
know Total
Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 13% N=28 53% N=113 27% N=57 6% N=13 0% N=0 100% N=212 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 46% N=99 44% N=94 7% N=15 3% N=6 0% N=0 100% N=214 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 46% N=97 44% N=94 8% N=18 1% N=3 0% N=0 100% N=213 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 45% N=97 38% N=82 11% N=24 4% N=9 1% N=2 100% N=214 Residents' connection and engagement with their
community 14% N=30 44% N=94 27% N=58 11% N=24 3% N=6 100% N=213

Table 119: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 13% N=28 53% N=113 27% N=57 6% N=13 100% N=212 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 46% N=99 44% N=94 7% N=15 3% N=6 100% N=214 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 46% N=97 44% N=94 8% N=18 1% N=3 100% N=213 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 46% N=97 39% N=82 11% N=24 4% N=9 100% N=212 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 15% N=30 45% N=94 28% N=58 12% N=24 100% N=207

Table 120: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do
each of the following: Very likely
Somewhat
likely
Somewhat
unlikely
Very
unlikely
Don't
know Total
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who
asks 34% N=73 42% N=91 14% N=30 8% N=18 1% N=2 100% N=215 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 50% N=108 33% N=70 8% N=18 4% N=9 5% N=10 100% N=215 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 71% N=151 21% N=46 3% N=5 1% N=3 4% N=8 100% N=214

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
130

Packet Pg. 138 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 121: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very likely
Somewhat
likely
Somewhat
unlikely
Very
unlikely Total
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 34% N=73 43% N=91 14% N=30 9% N=18 100% N=213 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 53% N=108 34% N=70 9% N=18 4% N=9 100% N=205 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 74% N=151 22% N=46 3% N=5 1% N=3 100% N=205

Table 122: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor
Don't
know Total
Making all residents feel welcome 12% N=25 39% N=83 27% N=58 19% N=42 3% N=7 100% N=214 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 15% N=32 26% N=55 23% N=50 30% N=65 6% N=12 100% N=214 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 17% N=36 33% N=69 21% N=45 21% N=45 8% N=16 100% N=212 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 5% N=12 26% N=56 33% N=72 28% N=60 7% N=15 100% N=215

Table 123: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Making all residents feel welcome 12% N=25 40% N=83 28% N=58 20% N=42 100% N=207 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 16% N=32 27% N=55 25% N=50 32% N=65 100% N=202 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 18% N=36 35% N=69 23% N=45 23% N=45 100% N=196 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 6% N=12 28% N=56 36% N=72 30% N=60 100% N=200

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
131

Packet Pg. 139 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 124: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as
they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 20% N=44 51% N=109 23% N=50 4% N=9 1% N=2 100% N=215 Variety of business and service establishments in Palo
Alto 11% N=22 48% N=102 28% N=59 14% N=29 0% N=0 100% N=212 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 14% N=31 41% N=88 31% N=66 11% N=23 3% N=7 100% N=215 Employment opportunities 14% N=31 32% N=69 20% N=44 5% N=10 28% N=60 100% N=214 Shopping opportunities 22% N=46 51% N=108 21% N=44 6% N=12 0% N=0 100% N=210 Cost of living in Palo Alto 1% N=3 4% N=9 16% N=35 77% N=166 1% N=2 100% N=215 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 29% N=62 39% N=82 21% N=44 10% N=22 1% N=2 100% N=213 Traffic flow on major streets 9% N=19 41% N=86 29% N=61 21% N=44 1% N=2 100% N=211 Ease of public parking 25% N=54 44% N=94 22% N=46 8% N=16 1% N=3 100% N=214 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 19% N=40 56% N=120 18% N=39 7% N=15 0% N=1 100% N=214 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 5% N=11 18% N=38 19% N=42 38% N=82 19% N=41 100% N=213 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 22% N=47 38% N=80 21% N=45 5% N=11 14% N=30 100% N=212 Ease of walking in Palo Alto 34% N=72 39% N=84 18% N=38 8% N=17 1% N=2 100% N=213 Variety of housing options 5% N=11 13% N=27 28% N=58 49% N=104 6% N=12 100% N=212 Availability of affordable quality housing 5% N=10 6% N=13 11% N=22 72% N=150 7% N=14 100% N=208 Recreational opportunities 29% N=62 49% N=104 14% N=31 2% N=4 6% N=14 100% N=215 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 5% N=11 10% N=22 14% N=31 21% N=46 49% N=104 100% N=215 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 31% N=67 43% N=91 15% N=31 5% N=10 6% N=13 100% N=212

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
132

Packet Pg. 140 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 125: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 21% N=44 51% N=109 24% N=50 4% N=9 100% N=213 Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 11% N=22 48% N=102 28% N=59 14% N=29 100% N=212 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 15% N=31 43% N=88 32% N=66 11% N=23 100% N=208 Employment opportunities 20% N=31 45% N=69 28% N=44 7% N=10 100% N=154 Shopping opportunities 22% N=46 51% N=108 21% N=44 6% N=12 100% N=210 Cost of living in Palo Alto 1% N=3 4% N=9 16% N=35 78% N=166 100% N=213 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 30% N=62 39% N=82 21% N=44 10% N=22 100% N=211 Traffic flow on major streets 9% N=19 41% N=86 29% N=61 21% N=44 100% N=209 Ease of public parking 26% N=54 45% N=94 22% N=46 8% N=16 100% N=211 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 19% N=40 56% N=120 18% N=39 7% N=15 100% N=213 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 6% N=11 22% N=38 24% N=42 47% N=82 100% N=172 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 26% N=47 44% N=80 24% N=45 6% N=11 100% N=183 Ease of walking in Palo Alto 34% N=72 40% N=84 18% N=38 8% N=17 100% N=211 Variety of housing options 5% N=11 13% N=27 29% N=58 52% N=104 100% N=200 Availability of affordable quality housing 5% N=10 7% N=13 12% N=22 77% N=150 100% N=194 Recreational opportunities 31% N=62 52% N=104 15% N=31 2% N=4 100% N=201 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 10% N=11 20% N=22 28% N=31 42% N=46 100% N=111 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 34% N=67 46% N=91 16% N=31 5% N=10 100% N=199

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
133

Packet Pg. 141 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results