City of South San Francisco:2023 Community SurveyCity Council RetreatJanuary 27, 2024
Methodology Overview
Data Collection Landline (41), cell phone (95), text to online (540), and email to online (44) interviewing Universe 54,566 Adults ages 18+ in the City of South San Francisco, with a subsample of registered voters (36,769) Fielding Dates December 5 through December 18, 2023
Interview Length 25 minutes
Sample Size 720 Adults 18+ 605 Registered voters
Margin of Error ± 3.63% Adults 18+ ± 3.95% Registered voters Note: The data have been weighted by respondent age and ethnicity to reflect the actual population characteristics of the adult residents in the City of South San Francisco, based on 2021 ACS (American Community Survey).
Satisfaction With Quality of Life in South San FranciscoAdults 18+
81.3%
77.1%
Quality of Life 2017 2019 2021 2023
Satisfied 83.3% 82.5% 83.7% 81.3%
Dissatisfied 14.9% 17.1% 14.9% 18.0%
Ratio Sat/Dissat 5.6 4.8 5.63 4.51
Satisfaction With Quality of Life in South San Francisco 2023By Council District
Top 6 Most Important Issues Facing South San Francisco Compared With 2021/19/17Adults18+
Satisfaction With Provision of City ServicesAdults18+
2017 2019 2021 2023
Satisfied 81.4% 70.1% 79.5% 77.0%
Dissatisfied 12.2% 21.8% 14.7% 15.9%
Ratio Sat/Dissat 6.70 3.20 5.40 4.83
Service Importance – Satisfaction Correlation2023 Community Survey Note: The lowest satisfaction ratings are shown in red. 2023 Community Survey
Importance
Satisfaction
B. Fire protection services
2.59 1.41
A. Police services
2.53 1.10
P. Street and road maintenance
2.51 0.58
D. Parks and Recreation programs
2.38 1.07
G. Traffic on major City streets
2.37 0.07
Q. Communicating with residents
2.35 0.58
F. Library programs and services
2.32 1.37
J. Preserving open space
2.24 0.53
K. Maintaining sports fields and recreation facilities
2.24 1.15
E. Senior services
2.22 0.76
M. After-school programs
2.20 0.70
L. Environmental and sustainability programs
2.15 0.85
I. Managing building and development
2.14 0.44
R. Providing childcare services
2.10 0.66
N. Pre-kindergarten toddler programs
2.09 0.84
H. Maintaining the City's character and history
2.00 0.75
C. Code enforcement services
1.99 0.79
O. Street sweeping
1.96 1.02
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 1
Service Importance – Satisfaction Correlation2021 Community Survey Note: The lowest 2 satisfaction ratings are shown in red and the next three lowest are shown in orange. 2021 Community Survey
Importance
Satisfaction
B. Fire protection services
2.51 1.38
P. Street and road maintenance
2.43 0.35
A. Police services
2.42 1.06
Q. Communicating with residents
2.33 0.68
G. Traffic on major City streets
2.33 -0.02
D. Parks and Recreation programs
2.24 1.02
J. Preserving open space
2.18 0.52
L. Environmental and sustainability programs
2.17 0.72
F. Library programs and services
2.15 1.15
E. Senior services
2.13 0.90
M. After-school programs
2.11 0.76
I. Managing building and development
2.08 0.24
K. Maintaining sports fields and recreation facilities
2.06 0.86
N. Pre-kindergarten toddler programs
2.02 0.66
H. Maintaining the City's character and history
1.98 0.64
O. Street sweeping
1.94 0.89
C. Code enforcement services
1.90 0.77
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 1
Satisfaction With the Performance of the SSF Police DepartmentAdults18+ 2021 2023
Total Satisfied 71.0% 70.7%
Total Dissatisfied 7.1% 8.2%
Ratio Sat to Dissat 10.00 8.63
Satisfaction With Police Department Call or InteractionAdults18+ 2021 2023
Satisfied 84.9% 83.2%
Dissatisfied 12.0% 11.8%
Ratio Sat/Dissat 7.08 7.05
Feelings of Safety in the CityAdults18+
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Very Safe” = +2, “Somewhat Safe” = +1, “Neither Safe nor Unsafe” = 0, “Somewhat Unsafe” = -1, and “Very Unsafe” = -2.
SomewhatSafe
Somewhat Unsafe
Very Unsafe
VerySafe
85.7%
Tier 4
Tier 1
81.2%
60.5%
40.8%
39.9%
Neither Safe nor Unsafe
T-2
75.6%
35.8%
T-3
T-5
Key Economic Supports Community Would Like the City to Work OnAdults18+
Support for Encouraging Construction of HousingAdults18+ 2017 to 2021 Encourage Housing 2017 2019 2021
Yes 53.2% 58.2% 55.8%
No 19.3% 19.4% 20.1%
Mixed opinions 23.4% 21.4% 20.6%
Don’t know 4.1% 1.0% 3.4%
Support for Business License Tax MeasureSample A
To maintain City services, such as:
fire department emergency response;
neighborhood police patrols and services;
emergency disaster preparation and response;
public health, including pandemics, ambulance services and mental-health services; and for general government use;
shall the City of South San Francisco ordinance be adopted modernizing the business license tax, with increases in rates varying with the size of the business, as described in the ordinance, providing approximately $2,600,000 annually, until ended by voters, with annual audits and citizens' oversight? Support for a hypothetical business license tax measure exceeds to the simple majority requirement for a general purpose measure by slightly more than the margin of error (+5.81%)
Support for ½ Cent Sales Tax MeasureSample B
To maintain City services such as:
fire department emergency response;
neighborhood police patrols and services;
emergency disaster preparation and response;
public health, including pandemics, ambulance services and mental-health services; and for general government use;
shall the City of South San Francisco ordinance be adopted levying a half cent sales tax, providing approximately $15,500,000 annually, until ended by voters, with annual audits and citizens' oversight and no funds for Sacramento and all funds for South San Francisco? Support for a hypothetical sales tax measure
exceeds to the simple majority requirement for a general purpose measure by significantly more than the margin of error (+5.81%)
www.godberesearch.comCalifornia and Corporate Offices1220 Howard Avenue, Suite 250Burlingame, CA 94010 Nevada Office
59 Damonte Ranch Parkway, Suite B309
Reno, NV 89521