2008 Member Survey Results
Recently the Washington Chapter of the American Planning Association conducted a survey of our members as we prepared the strategic plan and set action agendas for several of our committees. The survey consisted of questions submitted by three committees: Education, Legislative, and Climate and Sustainability Initiative. The Survey was released in the late summer of 2008 to the members of the Washington Chapter, and about 32% of Chapter members provided feedback.
This report is prepared by students in the Community, Environment and Planning program at the University of Washington. In addition to reporting the direct results of each question, we chose to look for significant differences in how certain demographic groups answered. For each question, we compared responses on the following criteria, and have included in this report the most distinct findings.
- Puget Sound Region (PSR) vs. Non-Puget Sound Region (non-PSR) – PSR includes King, Snohomish, Pierce, and Kitsap counties
- 0-10 years of professional experience vs. 10+ years of professional experience
- Government vs. non-government employed
- 'Active on CSI Issues' vs. 'Inactive on CSI Issues' (This comparison was simply based on respondents answer to the question 'Is your jurisdiction or agency addressing climate change and sustainability issues through any of the following actions?' where respondents could select all of the activities their agency was active in, or select 'We are not at this time.')
Demographics
The distribution of respondents by county (for the 387 out of 504 who indicated which county they worked in) was remarkably close to the distribution of APA Washington members; for all but four out of 39 counties, each county's percentage of membership and percentage of respondents were within one percentage point (for example, King county has 45.13% of the membership, and accounted for 45.22% of the survey respondents who indicated their county).
The proportion of employers was noticeably different for the PSR versus non-PSR. In the non-PSR more APA members are employed by government than PSR respondents.
Questions
Following is a graphical representation of the response for each question, including demographic distinctions where they occurred.
What forms of training do you prefer? (check your top three choices)
In all demographics the general preference of training is the same, Full or half day being the most preferred and evening lectures being the least. However, webcasts are increasingly preferred in the non-PSR. This may be due to the distance from sessions, which are more likely to take place in the more populated PSR. Evening lecture series are much less preferred in the non-PSR. Respondents with more experience prefer APA National Conference sessions more than respondents with less experience. On the counter, respondents with less experience prefer APA Washington Local section brown bag lunches more than respondents with more experience.
What topics would you like to have covered in continuing education? (check your top 5 choices)
If APA Washington is offering a full-day or half-day training session how far would you be willing to travel?
Respondents in the non-PSR are more willing to travel longer distances for a full or half day training session than respondents in the PSR. Although the order of preference for both PSR and non-PSR does not change, it is noticeable that PSR is more evenly distributed among the different days of travel than non-PSR. The smaller total of responses from both PSR and non-PSR on Friday and especially Saturday shows that respondents are less willing to travel on those days
If APA Washington is offering a 3 hour or shorter training session during the work week, how far would you be willing to travel?
Both PSR and non-PSR prefer morning sessions over any other time for a 3 hour or shorter training session and are more willing to travel longer distances to attend them. The least preferred time for both regions is early evenings and they are less willing to travel longer distances to attend them. PSR respondents prefer noon/lunch-time sessions more than non-PSR respondents.
Have you been involved in legislative issues in our state? (check all that apply)
The majority of respondents have not been involved in legislative issues in Washington state. When broken down by experience it becomes clear that respondents who have been involved are those who have 10+ years of experience.
How do you prefer to become informed about legislative issues in our state? (check your top 3)
Are you aware of the recently adopted chapter process for proposing legislation?
What role do you feel the chapter should play in legislative issues?
Do you feel we should have APA members from each section of the state to serve on the Legislative Committee?
Respondents from the PSR believe that eastern/western and small/large jurisdictions need to be represented. Non-PSR respondents believe that having all regions represented is just as important.
Is your jurisdiction or agency addressing climate change and sustainability issues through any of the following actions? (check all that apply)
| PSR | non-PSR | |
|---|---|---|
| Climate action plan | 25% | 21% |
| Evaluation of citywide, government, or project-level carbon footprint | 31% | 32% |
| Public outreach/education of sustainability issues | 32% | 31% |
| Green building program (LEED, Energy Star, etc.) | 43% | 28% |
| Sustainability and/or energy element included into general/comprehensive plan | 26% | 16% |
| Business and/or household incentive programs | 19% | 12%
|
| Creating non-motorized transportation options | 40% | 33% |
| Partnering with other organizations or departments (i.e. utilities, public transit, etc.) | 29% | 27% |
| Reviewing and amending land use codes and permitting process to promote renewable energy or other sustainable planning measures | 31% | 22% |
| We are not at this time. | 11% | 20% |
If your jurisdiction or agency is not active in this area, do you expect your agency to begin addressing sustainability issues in the next year or two?
For this question we chose to look at the respondents that said they were not active in any of the actions listed in the previous question 'Is your jurisdiction or agency addressing climate change and sustainability issues through any of the following actions?' As seen in the chart, most who are not active at this time are not planning on becoming active in the next year or two or are unsure/their city has other priorities.
The American Planning Association recently adopted an extensive policy statement on climate change. Do you think APA Washington should adopt a similar policy statement?
The majority of PSR and non-PSR believe that APA Washington should adopt a policy statement on climate change. The non-PSR respondents were less sure about this though because they aren't as familiar with the national APA policy statement.
APA Washington is considering a number of actions to address sustainability issues and provide education to our members, legislators and the public. How would you prioritize these actions? (check your top 5)
Open-Ended Questions:
With the open ended questions, a process was established to quantitatively analyze responses. In our first read through of all responses themes emerged. After noting the most common themes we created corresponding categories in which we could quantitatively analyze responses. The category other/miscellaneous was also created to show how many responses did not fall under a common topic. After these categories were created another read through of all responses was done and each response was tallied in one (or more if more than one topic was described in a single response) category.
What aspect of GMA and/or other statute should be among the chapter's legislative priority to monitor and/or lobby to change? (please describe)
In this open ended question respondents described many different aspects of the Growth Management Act that the APA Washington chapter should prioritize to monitor or lobby to change. As seen in the above graph, Density (especially related to Urban Growth Areas) and 'Land Use & Transportation' were frequently mentioned aspects of the GMA. Other statutes were commonly mentioned by respondents. It is evident that 'critical areas' of the environment, especially in relation to the Shoreline Management Act, is an important topic to planners.
In your opinion, how can planners make the greatest impact on Climate Change, energy and the overall sustainability of a community? Please list 1 or 2 ideas below:
In this question respondents were asked how planners could make the greatest impact on Climate Change, energy and the overall sustainability of a community. As seen in the above graph, education was the most frequently mentioned topic. Respondents expressed that it is not only important to educate the public and our elected officials, but also to educate ourselves.