The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 08/26/2025City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 City Council Work Session Agenda August 26, 2025 at 6:00 PM Jeni Arndt, Mayor Emily Francis, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem Susan Gutowsky, District 1 Julie Pignataro, District 2 Tricia Canonico, District 3 Melanie Potyondy, District 4 Kelly Ohlson, District 5 Council Information Center (CIC) 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 on Connexion Channel 14 and 881 on Comcast Carrie Daggett Kelly DiMartino Delynn Coldiron City Attorney City Manager City Clerk CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION 6:00 PM A) CALL MEETING TO ORDER B) ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION 1. 2025 Community Survey Results The purpose of this item is to review the 2025 Community Survey results. 2. Staff Report: PRPA Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement The purpose of this item is to provide an update on the PRPA Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement which will be presented to Council for consideration at the September 16 Electric Utility Enterprise Board meeting. 3. Visioning Our Future: Budget & Organizational System Alignment The purpose of this item is to provide an update on the work staff has been doing to improve upon the Budgeting for Outcomes process and understand feedback on proposed changes. Information will be provided on the following topics: • Budget Timeline and proposed changes • Budget Snapshot: Current sources and uses of revenue • Organizational Alignment 4. Proposed Tree Preservation and Mitigation Policies The purpose of this item is to seek Council feedback on potential tree policy updates in the Municipal and Land Use Codes. C) ANNOUNCEMENTS Page 1 City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 D) ADJOURNMENT Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Please provide advance notice. Requests for interpretation at a meeting should be made by noon the day before. A solicitud, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione aviso previo. Las solicitudes de interpretación en una reunión deben realizarse antes del mediodía del día anterior. Page 2 File Attachments for Item: 1. 2025 Community Survey Results The purpose of this item is to review the 2025 Community Survey results. Page 3 City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 August 26, 2025 WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF William Bevil, Communications & Engagement Manager Amanda King, Chief Communications & Engagement Officer Sonya Wytink, EVP of Data & Insights -Polco SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION 2025 Community Survey Results EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review the 2025 Community Survey results. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. This is an informational item in support of ongoing budget, strategic and work planning. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Since 2001, the City has contracted with Polco/National Research Center, Inc. (NRC) to administer the Community Survey with a representative sample of households to help determine attitudes and perceptions about City services and overall direction. Community Survey results and survey reports dating back to 2010 are available on the City website at www.fcgov.com/communitysurvey. The Community Survey serves as a consumer report card for the City by providing resi dents with the opportunity to rate the quality of life in the city and their satisfaction with community amenities and local government. Residents also provide feedback to the City government on what is working well and what is not and identify priorities for community planning and resource allocation. The 2025 Community Survey results and survey reports dating back to 2010 are available on the City website at www.fcgov.com/communitysurvey. NEXT STEPS 2025 Community Survey results are shared with Council and Departments to inform strategic and annual work planning. Individual department presentations will be conducted as requested, and the survey reports will be shared online with the community. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2025 Community Survey Executive Summary Page 4 Item 1. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 2. 2025 Community Survey Full Report 3. Presentation Page 5 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results -1 - The City of Fort Collins Community Survey 2025 Executive Summary July 2025 Page 6 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 5 - Executive Summary Summary of Survey Methods The 2025 City of Fort Collins Community Survey provided residents with the opportunity to rate the quality of life in Fort Collins, as well as the quality-of-service delivery and overall workings of local government. The survey also permitted residents to provide feedback on parks and recreation satisfaction and needs, and to share their priorities for community planning and resource allocation. Surveys were mailed to 4,400 randomly selected resident households in April 2025. A total of 548 surveys were completed, yielding a response rate of 13%. In addition to the scientific survey of randomly selected households, a link to an online, community-wide, open participation survey was publicized through various community channels. This open participation survey was identical to the scientific survey and open to all Fort Collins residents. A total of 373 online surveys were completed, yielding a total count of 921 survey responses. Survey results were weighted so that respondent gender, age, housing type (attached or detached), housing tenure (rent or own), race, and council district were represented in proportions reflective of the entire adult population of the city. The margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points around any given percentage point reported for all survey respondents. Because Fort Collins has administered resident surveys before, some comparisons could be made between 2025 responses and those from previous survey iterations. The body of the report presents data from 2013 to 2025. Fort Collins also elected to have its results compared to those of other jurisdictions across the nation and in the Front Range of Colorado. Comparisons are made possible through a national benchmark database created and maintained by Polco. This database contains resident perspectives gathered in resident surveys from over 400 jurisdictions over the past five years. Page 7 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 6 - Key Findings Fort Collins residents enjoy an excellent quality of life, but housing affordability continues to be a concern. • Fort Collins residents continue to rate the quality of life highly, with 87% of the respondents awarding very good or good marks in 2025. This rating, which had been slowly declining since 2013, showed an upward trend in 2025. The current 87% rating is similar to the national and Front Range benchmark comparisons. • Residents also assessed other aspects related to quality of life in the city. About 9 in 10 respondents positively rated Fort Collins as a place to live and as a place to attend college, while about 8 in 10 gave high marks to the city as a place to raise children. About 7 in 10 residents rated the quality of public schools, Fort Collins as a place to retire, and the openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds as either very good or good. • As in previous years, ratings for affordability tended to be lower. Fewer than 2 in 10 residents gave very good or good ratings to the availability of affordable quality childcare, and just 1 in 10 positively rated Fort Collins in terms of the availability of affordable quality housing. • In a question asking residents to identify in their own words the one item or focus area the city should work to improve upon in the next few years, housing issues (cost, availability, etc.) were, as in the previous surveys, the most frequently mentioned priority. • Despite that, at least 9 in 10 residents indicated that they would be very or somewhat likely to remain in Fort Collins for the next five years and to recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asked; both ratings were higher compared to previous years. Residents feel generally safe in the city, and feelings of safety at night and while using Transfort have improved since 2024. • About 9 in 10 respondents rated the overall feeling of safety in Fort Collins as very good or good, which was above the ratings of the previous three survey iterations. Fort Collins ranked similar to the Front Range and national averages for overall safety of community members. • Survey respondents were also asked to rate how they felt in various areas in and around the community. At least 9 in 10 residents reported that they always or usually felt safe in their neighborhood during the day, in Fort Collins overall during the day, in downtown Fort Collins during the day and when visiting recreation facilities. Between 8 and 9 in 10 residents also indicated that they felt always or usually safe in parks, in natural areas/open spaces, on trails, and in their neighborhood at night. • About 7 in 10 felt safe in Fort Collins overall at night and in downtown Fort Collins at night, while about two thirds of the participants felt at least usually safe while using Transfort/MAX. • All ratings were on par or above those in 2024. The larger increases were recorded in Fort Collins overall at night (+8), Downtown Fort Collins at night (+7), and Transfort/MAX (+7). Page 8 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 7 - Ease of travel by bicycle remains highly valued, while other transportation ratings show notable improvement. • As in previous years, ease of travel by bicycle was the top-rated transportation item, with 85% rating it positively. Ease of walking, the Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service, and street maintenance were also well rated by two-thirds of respondents. About 6 in 10 residents gave positive marks to ease of travel by car, while about half praised safety from motor vehicle accidents, downtown parking availability, and accessibility for people with disabilities. Lastly, 4 in 10 residents gave positive ratings to public transportation, electric vehicle charging availability, and traffic flow. • Some items, such as street maintenance (+10), the Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service (+13), ease of traveling by public transportation (+13), and availability of electric vehicle charging stations (+17) showed strong increases when compared to 2024. Fort Collins as a place to work received its highest rating in recent years, but residents still want more job opportunities in the city. • About three-fourths of residents rated Fort Collins favorably as a place to work—an improvement over previous years. The city ranked higher than the Front Range benchmark and similar to the national benchmark in this area. • Survey participants were also asked to rate several community aspects of economic health. About two thirds of respondents positively rated the availability of quality healthcare, the quality of dining opportunities, and the quality of entertainment opportunities. About 6 in 10 praised the quality of shopping opportunities in the city while roughly one third positively rated the availability of job opportunities in Fort Collins. All ratings were mostly on par with 2023 and 2024 results. • Additionally, community members evaluated the city’s performance in supporting local businesses and promoting the economic health of Fort Collins. Just over 5 in 10 survey participants gave positive ratings for the city’s support of businesses, while a slightly lower proportion rated the city’s efforts to promote economic health as very good or good. Residents appreciate city employees and many aspects of city services. • About 8 in 10 survey respondents rated the overall quality of city services as either very good or good. This rating was similar to that in 2024 but slightly higher than in 2023. • About 7 in 10 residents positively rated the city for respecting all community members regardless of background, and for creating a welcoming, inclusive environment. Meanwhile, 6 in 10 residents praised the city’s overall direction, its efforts to encourage sustainability, the efficient operation of programs and services, and its openness to community member involvement. Lastly, about half of the residents gave positive ratings for the city’s partnership with the community to address climate change and for listening to residents, while 4 in 10 praised its approach to managing and planning for growth. All ratings were higher than in 2024. • Similar to 2024, about half of residents reported contact with a city employee in the past 12 months. Those who did were asked to rate the interaction, with nearly 9 in 10 rating employee courtesy as very good or good. About 8 in 10 gave positive ratings for promptness, knowledge, and overall impression, and roughly three-fourths felt valued during the interaction. Ratings were consistent with prior years, except for promptness, which improved by 5 points year over year. Page 9 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 8 - Survey Background The City of Fort Collins contracted with Polco to conduct a community-wide resident survey. The primary goal of the survey was to assess the attitudes and opinions of residents by: • Evaluating city programs and services. • Determining general perceptions of the quality of life in Fort Collins. • Comparing survey results to other communities across the nation. • Establishing trendlines to measure government performance over time. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey serves as a consumer report card for Fort Collins by providing residents with the opportunity to rate the quality of life in the city, as well as the community’s amenities, service delivery and their satisfaction with local government. Residents also provide feedback on what is working well and what is not and communicate their priorities for community planning and resource allocation. Focus on quality-of-service delivery helps city leaders, staff, and the public to set priorities for budget decisions and lays the groundwork for tracking community opinions about the core responsibilities of the City of Fort Collins government, helping to assure maximum service quality over time. This type of survey gets at the key services that local government controls to create a quality community. It is akin to private sector customer surveys that are used regularly by many corporations to monitor where there are weaknesses in product or service delivery before customers defect into competition or before other problems from dissatisfied customers arise. This is the 16th iteration of the City of Fort Collins Community Survey since the baseline study conducted in 2001. Survey Administration A postcard was mailed to 4,400 Fort Collins households, selected at random, notifying residents that they had been chosen to participate in the survey. A paper copy of the survey followed in the mail after one week. Both mailings included a web link so that residents could take the survey online, if desired. The survey was also available online in Spanish. All mailing contained instructions in Spanish on how to access the online survey. There were 548 respondents to the mailed questionnaire, yielding a response rate of 13%. In addition to the scientific, random sample, a link to an online “opt-in” survey was publicized through various community channels. This opt-in survey was identical to the scientific survey and open to all Fort Collins residents. A total of 373 online surveys were completed, yielding a total count of 921 survey responses. There was one completed survey in Spanish. The margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points around any given percentage for all respondents. Survey results were weighted so that respondent gender, age, housing type (attached or detached), housing tenure (rent or own), race, and council district were represented in proportions reflective of the entire adult population of the city. More information about the survey methodology can be found in Appendix G: Survey Methodology. Page 10 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 9 - How the Results are Reported For the most part, the full set of frequencies or the “percent positive” are presented in the body and narrative of the report. The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., “very good” and “good,” “very safe” and “somewhat safe,” “strongly support,” and “somewhat support,” etc.). On many of the questions in the survey, respondents could give an answer of “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies and is noted in the body of this report if it is 30% or greater. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the report, unless otherwise indicated. In other words, the majority of the tables and graphs in the body of the report display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. For some questions, respondents were permitted to select multiple responses. When the total exceeds 100% in a table for a multiple response question, it is because some respondents are counted in multiple categories. When a table for a question that only permitted, a single response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the customary practice rounding values to the nearest whole number. Precision of Estimates 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). The margin of error for this survey is generally no greater than plus or minus three percentage points around any given percentage reported for the entire sample (N=921). Comparison of Results Over Time and by Subgroups Because this survey was the 16th iteration of the Fort Collins Community Survey, the 2025 results are presented along with past ratings when available. To simplify, the body of the report presents data from 2013 to 2025, when available. The full set of trends can be found in Appendix F: Comparisons of Survey Results by Year. Differences between years can be considered “statistically significant” if they are plus or minus three points on the 100-point scale or are plus or minus five percentage points or more around any given percent. This metric can sometimes be a bit confusing, so it’s worth noting that the average rating is not the percentage of respondents who rated the item as “excellent” or “good.” Instead, it’s an average on a 100-point scale. You can think of it like a United Way fundraising thermometer—the higher the average rating, the closer it is to 100. Selected survey results were compared by respondent characteristics as well as two ways of subdividing the geographic location of respondent households: geographic area (Northeast, East Central, Southeast, Northwest, West Central, and Southwest) and Council Districts. The full set of results by demographic characteristics and geographic areas can be found in Appendix D: Responses to Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics. For each pair of subgroups that has a statistically significant difference, an upper-case letter denoting significance is shown in the category with the larger column proportion. Page 11 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 10 - Comparing Survey Results to Other Communities Polco’s database of comparative resident opinion comprises resident perspectives gathered in resident surveys from approximately 400 communities whose residents evaluated their services. National benchmark comparisons and Front Range benchmark comparisons have been provided when similar questions on the Fort Collins survey are included in Polco’s database, and there were at least five communities in which the question was asked. Where comparisons for quality ratings were available, Fort Collins’s results were generally noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark or ‘similar” to the benchmark. In instances where ratings are considerably higher or lower than the benchmark, these ratings have been further demarcated by the attribute of “much,” (for example, “much lower” or “much higher”). These labels come from a comparison of Fort Collins’ rating to the benchmark where a rating is considered ‘similar” if it is within the standard margin of error (10 points or less on the 100-point scale); “higher” or “lower” if the difference between Fort Collins’ rating and the benchmark is greater than 10 points but 20 points or less; and “much higher” or “much lower” if the difference between Fort Collins’ rating and the benchmark is more than twice the standard margin of error (greater than 20 points). Comparisons for a number of items in the survey are not available in the benchmark database. These items are excluded from the benchmark tables. Page 12 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 1 - The City of Fort Collins Community Survey 2025 Report of Results July 2025 Page 13 Item 1. FOR ASSISTANCE VIEWING OR READING ANY CITY DOCUMENTS, please call 970-221-6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance or contact the City’s ADA Coordinator via email adacoordinator@fcgov.com or phone: 970-416-4254. A Request for Reasonable Accommodation can also be completed online. For more information about the City’s Non-Discrimination policy and Accessibility efforts, visit fcgov.com/Non-Discrimination. Page 14 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 2 - Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 5 Summary of Survey Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Survey Background ............................................................................................................................ 8 Survey Administration ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 How the Results are Reported ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Precision of Estimates ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Comparison of Results Over Time and by Subgroups ................................................................................. 9 Comparing Survey Results to Other Communities ..................................................................................... 10 Neighborhood Livability and Social Health ............................................................................ 11 Promotion of Social Health .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Aspects of Quality of Life and Community ....................................................................................................... 12 Aspects of Neighborhood Livability ....................................................................................................................... 15 Community Engagement .............................................................................................................................................. 17 Safety ..................................................................................................................................................... 18 Personal Safety ................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Safety Services ................................................................................................................................................................... 20 Transportation .................................................................................................................................... 21 Environmental Health ...................................................................................................................... 22 Culture and Recreation ................................................................................................................... 24 Economic Health ................................................................................................................................ 26 Government Performance .............................................................................................................. 29 Overall Quality of City Services ............................................................................................................................... 29 City Government and Employees ........................................................................................................................... 30 Fort Collins Utilities .......................................................................................................................................................... 33 Fiscal Management and Planning ............................................................................................................................ 34 Public Information ............................................................................................................................................................. 38 Appendix A: Respondent Characteristics ................................................................................ 42 Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies ........................................................................... 48 Appendix C: Verbatim Responses to Open-Ended Questions ......................................... 84 Appendix D: Responses to Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics .................................................................................................................................. 118 Comparisons by Respondent Characteristics ................................................................................................ 119 Comparisons by Geographic Area and Council District .......................................................................... 175 Page 15 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 3 - Appendix E: Detailed Benchmark Comparisons ................................................................. 198 Comparison Data ............................................................................................................................................................. 198 Interpreting the Results .............................................................................................................................................. 198 National Benchmark Comparisons ....................................................................................................................... 199 Front Range Benchmark Comparisons .............................................................................................................. 204 Appendix F: Comparisons of Survey Results by Year ...................................................... 209 Appendix G: Survey Methodology ............................................................................................ 224 About the Survey ............................................................................................................................................................. 224 Developing the Questionnaire ................................................................................................................................. 224 Selecting Survey Recipients ..................................................................................................................................... 224 Survey Administration and Response Rate .................................................................................................... 225 Survey Processing (Data Entry) ............................................................................................................................ 226 Weighting the Data ........................................................................................................................................................ 227 Analyzing the Data ......................................................................................................................................................... 230 Appendix H: Survey Materials .................................................................................................... 231 Page 16 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 4 - Figures Figure 1: Promotion of Social Health Compared by Year ...................................................................................... 11 Figure 2: Overall Quality of Life in Fort Collins, 2025 .............................................................................................. 12 Figure 3: Overall Quality of Life Compared by Year.................................................................................................. 12 Figure 4: Aspects of Quality of Life Compared by Year .......................................................................................... 13 Figure 5: Recommend Living and Remaining in Fort Collins Compared by Year .................................. 14 Figure 6: Quality of Neighborhoods Compared by Year ......................................................................................... 15 Figure 7: Access in Neighborhood to Everyday Needs Compared by Year ............................................... 15 Figure 8: Neighborhood Services Ratings Compared by Year ............................................................................ 16 Figure 9: Respondent Relocation Frequency Compared by Year ..................................................................... 16 Figure 10: Community Engagement Compared by Year........................................................................................ 17 Figure 11: Overall Safety in City Compared by Year ................................................................................................ 18 Figure 12: Ratings of Personal Safety Compared by Year .................................................................................... 19 Figure 13: Community Safety Services Ratings Compared by Year .............................................................. 20 Figure 14: Transportation Ratings Compared by Year ............................................................................................ 21 Figure 15: Promotion of Environmental Health by Year ......................................................................................... 22 Figure 16: Overall Quality of the Environment Compared by Year ................................................................ 22 Figure 17: Aspects of the Environment Compared by Year ................................................................................. 23 Figure 18: Community Aspects of Culture and Recreation Compared by Year ...................................... 24 Figure 19: Ratings of Parks, Recreational, and Cultural Programs Compared by Year .................... 25 Figure 20: Ratings of City as a Place to Work Compared by Year .................................................................. 26 Figure 21: Community Aspects of Economic Health Compared by Year ..................................................... 26 Figure 22: Business Support and Economic Promotion Compared by Year .............................................. 27 Figure 23: Business Health Compared by Year ............................................................................................................ 28 Figure 24: Overall Quality of City Services Compared by Year ......................................................................... 29 Figure 25: City Government Ratings Compared by Year ....................................................................................... 30 Figure 26: Contact with City Employees Compared by Year............................................................................... 31 Figure 27: Users Ratings of City Employees Compared by Year ...................................................................... 31 Figure 28: Non-users Ratings of City Employees Compared by Year ........................................................... 32 Figure 29: Fort Collins Utilities Compared by Year .................................................................................................... 33 Figure 30: Likelihood of Using and Recommending Connexion Compared by Year ............................ 33 Figure 31: Budget Priorities Compared by Year ........................................................................................................... 35 Figure 32: Top Three Budget Priorities Compared by Year .................................................................................. 36 Figure 33: Community Member Priorities by Year ..................................................................................................... 37 Figure 34: Ratings of Informing Residents Compared by Year ......................................................................... 38 Figure 35: Providing Information and Opportunities to Participate Compared by Year ................... 39 Figure 36: Information Sources Used Compared by Year..................................................................................... 40 Figure 37: Top Three Preferred Methods of Receiving Information Compared by Year ................... 41 Page 17 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 5 - Executive Summary Summary of Survey Methods The 2025 City of Fort Collins Community Survey provided residents with the opportunity to rate the quality of life in Fort Collins, as well as the quality-of-service delivery and overall workings of local government. The survey also permitted residents to provide feedback on parks and recreation satisfaction and needs, and to share their priorities for community planning and resource allocation. Surveys were mailed to 4,400 randomly selected resident households in April 2025. A total of 548 surveys were completed, yielding a response rate of 13%. In addition to the scientific survey of randomly selected households, a link to an online, community-wide, open participation survey was publicized through various community channels. This open participation survey was identical to the scientific survey and open to all Fort Collins residents. A total of 373 online surveys were completed, yielding a total count of 921 survey responses. Survey results were weighted so that respondent gender, age, housing type (attached or detached), housing tenure (rent or own), race, and council district were represented in proportions reflective of the entire adult population of the city. The margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points around any given percentage point reported for all survey respondents. Because Fort Collins has administered resident surveys before, some comparisons could be made between 2025 responses and those from previous survey iterations. The body of the report presents data from 2013 to 2025. Fort Collins also elected to have its results compared to those of other jurisdictions across the nation and in the Front Range of Colorado. Comparisons are made possible through a national benchmark database created and maintained by Polco. This database contains resident perspectives gathered in resident surveys from over 400 jurisdictions over the past five years. Page 18 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 6 - Key Findings Fort Collins residents enjoy an excellent quality of life, but housing affordability continues to be a concern. • Fort Collins residents continue to rate the quality of life highly, with 87% of the respondents awarding very good or good marks in 2025. This rating, which had been slowly declining since 2013, showed an upward trend in 2025. The current 87% rating is similar to the national and Front Range benchmark comparisons. • Residents also assessed other aspects related to quality of life in the city. About 9 in 10 respondents positively rated Fort Collins as a place to live and as a place to attend college, while about 8 in 10 gave high marks to the city as a place to raise children. About 7 in 10 residents rated the quality of public schools, Fort Collins as a place to retire, and the openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds as either very good or good. • As in previous years, ratings for affordability tended to be lower. Fewer than 2 in 10 residents gave very good or good ratings to the availability of affordable quality childcare, and just 1 in 10 positively rated Fort Collins in terms of the availability of affordable quality housing. • In a question asking residents to identify in their own words the one item or focus area the city should work to improve upon in the next few years, housing issues (cost, availability, etc.) were, as in the previous surveys, the most frequently mentioned priority. • Despite that, at least 9 in 10 residents indicated that they would be very or somewhat likely to remain in Fort Collins for the next five years and to recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asked; both ratings were higher compared to previous years. Residents feel generally safe in the city, and feelings of safety at night and while using Transfort have improved since 2024. • About 9 in 10 respondents rated the overall feeling of safety in Fort Collins as very good or good, which was above the ratings of the previous three survey iterations. Fort Collins ranked similar to the Front Range and national averages for overall safety of community members. • Survey respondents were also asked to rate how they felt in various areas in and around the community. At least 9 in 10 residents reported that they always or usually felt safe in their neighborhood during the day, in Fort Collins overall during the day, in downtown Fort Collins during the day and when visiting recreation facilities. Between 8 and 9 in 10 residents also indicated that they felt always or usually safe in parks, in natural areas/open spaces, on trails, and in their neighborhood at night. • About 7 in 10 felt safe in Fort Collins overall at night and in downtown Fort Collins at night, while about two thirds of the participants felt at least usually safe while using Transfort/MAX. • All ratings were on par or above those in 2024. The larger increases were recorded in Fort Collins overall at night (+8), Downtown Fort Collins at night (+7), and Transfort/MAX (+7). Page 19 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 7 - Ease of travel by bicycle remains highly valued, while other transportation ratings show notable improvement. • As in previous years, ease of travel by bicycle was the top-rated transportation item, with 85% rating it positively. Ease of walking, the Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service, and street maintenance were also well rated by two-thirds of respondents. About 6 in 10 residents gave positive marks to ease of travel by car, while about half praised safety from motor vehicle accidents, downtown parking availability, and accessibility for people with disabilities. Lastly, 4 in 10 residents gave positive ratings to public transportation, electric vehicle charging availability, and traffic flow. • Some items, such as street maintenance (+10), the Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service (+13), ease of traveling by public transportation (+13), and availability of electric vehicle charging stations (+17) showed strong increases when compared to 2024. Fort Collins as a place to work received its highest rating in recent years, but residents still want more job opportunities in the city. • About three-fourths of residents rated Fort Collins favorably as a place to work—an improvement over previous years. The city ranked higher than the Front Range benchmark and similar to the national benchmark in this area. • Survey participants were also asked to rate several community aspects of economic health. About two thirds of respondents positively rated the availability of quality healthcare, the quality of dining opportunities, and the quality of entertainment opportunities. About 6 in 10 praised the quality of shopping opportunities in the city while roughly one third positively rated the availability of job opportunities in Fort Collins. All ratings were mostly on par with 2023 and 2024 results. • Additionally, community members evaluated the city’s performance in supporting local businesses and promoting the economic health of Fort Collins. Just over 5 in 10 survey participants gave positive ratings for the city’s support of businesses, while a slightly lower proportion rated the city’s efforts to promote economic health as very good or good. Residents appreciate city employees and many aspects of city services. • About 8 in 10 survey respondents rated the overall quality of city services as either very good or good. This rating was similar to that in 2024 but slightly higher than in 2023. • About 7 in 10 residents positively rated the city for respecting all community members regardless of background, and for creating a welcoming, inclusive environment. Meanwhile, 6 in 10 residents praised the city’s overall direction, its efforts to encourage sustainability, the efficient operation of programs and services, and its openness to community member involvement. Lastly, about half of the residents gave positive ratings for the city’s partnership with the community to address climate change and for listening to residents, while 4 in 10 praised its approach to managing and planning for growth. All ratings were higher than in 2024. • Similar to 2024, about half of residents reported contact with a city employee in the past 12 months. Those who did were asked to rate the interaction, with nearly 9 in 10 rating employee courtesy as very good or good. About 8 in 10 gave positive ratings for promptness, knowledge, and overall impression, and roughly three-fourths felt valued during the interaction. Ratings were consistent with prior years, except for promptness, which improved by 5 points year over year. Page 20 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 8 - Survey Background The City of Fort Collins contracted with Polco to conduct a community-wide resident survey. The primary goal of the survey was to assess the attitudes and opinions of residents by: • Evaluating city programs and services. • Determining general perceptions of the quality of life in Fort Collins. • Comparing survey results to other communities across the nation. • Establishing trendlines to measure government performance over time. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey serves as a consumer report card for Fort Collins by providing residents with the opportunity to rate the quality of life in the city, as well as the community’s amenities, service delivery and their satisfaction with local government. Residents also provide feedback on what is working well and what is not and communicate their priorities for community planning and resource allocation. Focus on quality-of-service delivery helps city leaders, staff, and the public to set priorities for budget decisions and lays the groundwork for tracking community opinions about the core responsibilities of the City of Fort Collins government, helping to assure maximum service quality over time. This type of survey gets at the key services that local government controls to create a quality community. It is akin to private sector customer surveys that are used regularly by many corporations to monitor where there are weaknesses in product or service delivery before customers defect into competition or before other problems from dissatisfied customers arise. This is the 16th iteration of the City of Fort Collins Community Survey since the baseline study conducted in 2001. Survey Administration A postcard was mailed to 4,400 Fort Collins households, selected at random, notifying residents that they had been chosen to participate in the survey. A paper copy of the survey followed in the mail after one week. Both mailings included a web link so that residents could take the survey online, if desired. The survey was also available online in Spanish. All mailing contained instructions in Spanish on how to access the online survey. There were 548 respondents to the mailed questionnaire, yielding a response rate of 13%. In addition to the scientific, random sample, a link to an online “opt-in” survey was publicized through various community channels. This opt-in survey was identical to the scientific survey and open to all Fort Collins residents. A total of 373 online surveys were completed, yielding a total count of 921 survey responses. There was one completed survey in Spanish. The margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points around any given percentage for all respondents. Survey results were weighted so that respondent gender, age, housing type (attached or detached), housing tenure (rent or own), race, and council district were represented in proportions reflective of the entire adult population of the city. More information about the survey methodology can be found in Appendix G: Survey Methodology. Page 21 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 9 - How the Results are Reported For the most part, the full set of frequencies or the “percent positive” are presented in the body and narrative of the report. The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., “very good” and “good,” “very safe” and “somewhat safe,” “strongly support,” and “somewhat support,” etc.). On many of the questions in the survey, respondents could give an answer of “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies and is noted in the body of this report if it is 30% or greater. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the report, unless otherwise indicated. In other words, the majority of the tables and graphs in the body of the report display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. For some questions, respondents were permitted to select multiple responses. When the total exceeds 100% in a table for a multiple response question, it is because some respondents are counted in multiple categories. When a table for a question that only permitted, a single response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the customary practice rounding values to the nearest whole number. Precision of Estimates 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). The margin of error for this survey is generally no greater than plus or minus three percentage points around any given percentage reported for the entire sample (N=921). Comparison of Results Over Time and by Subgroups Because this survey was the 16th iteration of the Fort Collins Community Survey, the 2025 results are presented along with past ratings when available. To simplify, the body of the report presents data from 2013 to 2025, when available. The full set of trends can be found in Appendix F: Comparisons of Survey Results by Year. Differences between years can be considered “statistically significant” if they are plus or minus three points on the 100-point scale or are plus or minus five percentage points or more around any given percent. This metric can sometimes be a bit confusing, so it’s worth noting that the average rating is not the percentage of respondents who rated the item as “excellent” or “good.” Instead, it’s an average on a 100-point scale. You can think of it like a United Way fundraising thermometer—the higher the average rating, the closer it is to 100. Selected survey results were compared by respondent characteristics as well as two ways of subdividing the geographic location of respondent households: geographic area (Northeast, East Central, Southeast, Northwest, West Central, and Southwest) and Council Districts. The full set of results by demographic characteristics and geographic areas can be found in Appendix D: Responses to Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics. For each pair of subgroups that has a statistically significant difference, an upper-case letter denoting significance is shown in the category with the larger column proportion. Page 22 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 10 - Comparing Survey Results to Other Communities Polco’s database of comparative resident opinion comprises resident perspectives gathered in resident surveys from approximately 400 communities whose residents evaluated their services. National benchmark comparisons and Front Range benchmark comparisons have been provided when similar questions on the Fort Collins survey are included in Polco’s database, and there were at least five communities in which the question was asked. Where comparisons for quality ratings were available, Fort Collins’s results were generally noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark or ‘similar” to the benchmark. In instances where ratings are considerably higher or lower than the benchmark, these ratings have been further demarcated by the attribute of “much,” (for example, “much lower” or “much higher”). These labels come from a comparison of Fort Collins’ rating to the benchmark where a rating is considered ‘similar” if it is within the standard margin of error (10 points or less on the 100-point scale); “higher” or “lower” if the difference between Fort Collins’ rating and the benchmark is greater than 10 points but 20 points or less; and “much higher” or “much lower” if the difference between Fort Collins’ rating and the benchmark is more than twice the standard margin of error (greater than 20 points). Comparisons for a number of items in the survey are not available in the benchmark database. These items are excluded from the benchmark tables. Page 23 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 11 - Neighborhood Livability and Social Health A number of questions on the 2025 survey address measures of neighborhood livability and social health including quality of life and community, characteristics of neighborhoods, and resident engagement with the community. Promotion of Social Health As in previous years, Fort Collins residents were asked to assess the city’s performance in promoting the social health of Fort Collins. About 4 in 10 residents rated the city positively for its promotion of social health through human services, affordable housing, homelessness, equity and inclusion. This rating represents a significant improvement over those from 2024 and 2023. Figure 1: Promotion of Social Health Compared by Year Please rate the City’s performance in each of the following areas: Promotion of social health of Fort Collins (human services, affordable housing, homelessness, equity & inclusion, etc.) Percent very good or good 32% 37% 36% 30% 29% 41% Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (human services, affordable housing, homelessness, equity & inclusion, etc.) 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 Page 24 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 12 - Aspects of Quality of Life and Community Fort Collins residents continue to rate the quality of life highly, with 87% awarding very good or good marks in 2025. The rating, which had been slowly declining since 2013, showed an upward trend in 2025. The current 87% rating is similar to the national and Front Range benchmark comparisons (see Appendix E: Detailed Benchmark Comparisons for detailed information on benchmark comparisons). Figure 2: Overall Quality of Life in Fort Collins, 2025 Figure 3: Overall Quality of Life Compared by Year Percent very good or good Very good 44% Good 43% Average 10% Bad 3% Very bad 1% 92%89%91%87%88%85%85%85%83%87% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 25 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 13 - Residents also assessed other aspects related to quality of life in the city. About 9 in 10 respondents positively rated Fort Collins as a place to live and as a place to attend college, while about 8 in 10 gave high marks to the city as a place to raise children. About 7 in 10 rated the quality of public schools, Fort Collins as a place to retire, and the openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds as either very good or good. Ratings for affordability in the community tended to be lower. Fewer than 2 in 10 residents gave very good or good ratings to the availability of affordable quality childcare, and just 1 in 10 positively rated Fort Collins in terms of the availability of affordable quality housing. Most community ratings tended to be higher compared to reviews given in previous years. When comparisons were possible, Fort Collins generally ranked similarly to the national and Front Range benchmarks—except in the areas of public-school quality and community openness to diversity, where it exceeded the Front Range average. Figure 4: Aspects of Quality of Life Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. (Percent very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 21 20 1 9 20 18 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Overall, as a place to live 91% 87% 89% 89% 91% 92% 92% 95% 93% 97% As a place to attend college 86% 84% 83% 84% 86% 84% 85% 86% 89% 88% As a place to raise children 85% 80% 84% 82% 86% 91% 85% 89% 90% 92% Quality of public schools* 72% 66% 70% 71% 76% 78% 80% 83% 84% 82% As a place to retire 71% 65% 65% 63% 69% 71% 71% 69% 81% 79% Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 68% 61% 59% 58% 54% 55% 58% 66% 68% 75% Availability of affordable quality childcare* 19% 16% 17% 21% 22% 15% . . . . Availability of affordable quality housing 10% 9% 7% 7% 8% 12% 10% 11% 17% 31% * More than 30% of respondents had “no opinion” when rating the asterisked items. The full set of responses, including “no opinion”, can be found in Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies. Page 26 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 14 - At least 9 in 10 residents indicated that they would be very or somewhat likely to remain in Fort Collins for the next five years and to recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asked; both ratings were higher than in recent years. Ratings for both aspects were similar to peer communities across the nation and the Front Range. Figure 5: Recommend Living and Remaining in Fort Collins Compared by Year Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Percent very or somewhat likely 88% 85% 86% 82% 88% 83% 87% 80% 82% 82% 83% 82% 81% 82% 88% 87% Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 2018 2017 Page 27 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 15 - Aspects of Neighborhood Livability About 9 in 10 residents positively rated their neighborhood as a place to live and about 8 in 10 gave high marks to their neighborhood as a place to raise children. These ratings were above those given in 2024. Benchmark comparisons were available for “your neighborhood as a place to live”: Fort Collins ranked similar to the national and Front Range averages. Figure 6: Quality of Neighborhoods Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Percent very good or good As in 2024, about 7 in 10 survey respondents rated their access to everyday needs—such as grocery shopping— in their neighborhoods as very good or good Figure 7: Access in Neighborhood to Everyday Needs Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below: Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) Percent very good or good 86%86%85%85%84%84%82%82%81%86% 73%76%75%75%75%77%74%72%74%78% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 20212 2022 2023 2024 2025 Your neighborhood as a place to live Your neighborhood as a place to raise children 79%79%78%79%79%74%68%68%70% 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 28 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 16 - Survey respondents were also asked to rate neighborhood-related services. About two-thirds of the residents positively rated residential property maintenance, while about 5 in 10 gave very good or good ratings to code enforcement. Also 4 in 10 praised the noise enforcement in Fort Collins. All three ratings were above those given in 2024. Fort Collins ranked similarly to the national benchmark and outperformed the Front Range benchmarks in code enforcement. Figure 8: Neighborhood Services Ratings Compared by Year Please rate the quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Percent very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Residential property maintenance 66% 59% 58% 56% 60% 61% 63% 65% 65% 67% Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 51% 45% 45% 48% 51% 56% 56% 49% 54% 57% Noise enforcement 41% 37% 40% 41% 48% 48% 54% 50% 49% 57% As in previous years, the city asked residents how often they tend to relocate within Fort Collins. Residents were most likely to indicate that they relocate every 2 to 4 years, or they have not relocated within the city; about one-quarter of respondents selected this option. The proportions of residents selecting each option in 2025 were similar to previous years. Figure 9: Respondent Relocation Frequency Compared by Year In the last 20 years, how often have you moved to a different place of residence in Fort Collins? Percent of respondents 24% 12% 5% 6% 8% 12% 25% 8% 25% 16% 6% 5% 7% 9% 22% 10% 24% 15% 5% 6% 8% 13% 23% 6% I have not relocated within the City I have not relocated in the last 20 years 16-20 years Every 11-15 years Every 8-10 years Every 5-7 years Every 2-4 years About once a year or more 2025 2024 2023 Page 29 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 17 - Community Engagement Virtually all residents visited a locally owned business operating within the city or went to a neighborhood park or city park at least once in the 12 months prior to the survey. Similarly to 2024, about 9 in 10 indicated that they had talked to or visited with their immediate neighbors. About 8 in 10 respondents indicated that they had done a favor for a neighbor at least once in the past year. About 6 in 10 respondents indicated that they had either carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone or had volunteered their time in Fort Collins at least once. About 4 in 10 residents attended a neighborhood-sponsored event at least once in the last 12 months, and over a third attended a government-organized event. Fort Collins ranked much higher than the national and Front Range benchmarks for volunteering time, and higher than the national and Front Range benchmarks for carpooling with other adults or children instead of driving alone. It also ranked higher than the national benchmark for talking to or visiting immediate neighbors and visiting a neighborhood park or city park. Figure 10: Community Engagement Compared by Year In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? (Percent at least once in the last 12 months) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 Visited a locally owned business operating within the city 99% 98% . . . . . . Visited a neighborhood park or City park 96% 96% 95% 94% 94% 93% 95% 92% Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 90% 86% 88% 94% 89% 89% 93% 91% Done a favor for a neighbor 79% 74% 76% 78% 77% 76% 80% 79% Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 63% 57% 57% 52% 37% 58% 55% 57% Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 59% 51% 54% 47% 45% 60% 60% 58% Attended a neighborhood-sponsored event 43% 44% 42% 36% 25% 48% 47% 44% Attended a government-organized event (open house, City Council session, forum, etc.) 36% 33% 34% 25% 17% 27% 29% 30% Page 30 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 18 - Safety In order to participate in and contribute to their community, residents must have a sense of personal safety in their environment, as well as confidence in the quality of government services provided to keep the community safe. Personal Safety About 9 in 10 respondents rated the overall feeling of safety in Fort Collins as very good or good, which is above the rating given in the last years. Fort Collins ranked similar to the Front Range and national averages for overall safety of community members. Figure 11: Overall Safety in City Compared by Year Percent very good or good Survey respondents were also asked to rate how they felt in various areas in and around the community (see Figure 12 on the following page). At least 9 in 10 residents reported that they usually or always felt safe in their neighborhood during the day, in Fort Collins overall during the day, in downtown Fort Collins during the day and when visiting recreation facilities. About 9 in 10 respondents also indicated that they felt usually or always safe in parks, in natural areas/open spaces, on trails, and in their neighborhood at night. About 7 in 10 felt safe in Fort Collins overall at night and in downtown Fort Collins at night, while about two thirds of the participants felt at least usually safe on the Transfort/MAX. All ratings were on par or above those in 2024. When comparisons were possible, Fort Collins generally ranked similar to the national and Front Range benchmarks. 91%88%90%86%86%85%82%80%82%87% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 31 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 19 - Figure 12: Ratings of Personal Safety Compared by Year Please tell us how safe you feel in each of the following areas. (Percent reporting always safe or usually safe) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Your neighborhood during the day 97% 95% 96% 96% 98% 97% 98% 96% 97% 98% Fort Collins overall during the day 93% 93% 93% 94% 96% 95% 94% 95% 96% 98% Downtown Fort Collins during the day 92% 91% 92% 94% 96% 94% 93% 93% 95% 99% Recreation facilities 92% 92% 86% 91% 95% 92% 90% 92% 93% 95% Parks 88% 84% 81% 86% 90% 85% 82% 82% 83% 87% Your neighborhood at night 88% 83% 83% 83% 84% 83% 82% 85% 85% 88% Natural areas/open spaces 86% 83% 82% 85% 87% 86% 81% 84% 87% 88% Trails 85% 81% 82% 82% 87% 82% 80% 83% 83% 82% Fort Collins overall at night 73% 65% 66% 66% 75% 70% 72% 71% 73% 77% Downtown Fort Collins at night 70% 63% 60% 60% 66% 62% 65% 59% 67% 71% Transfort/MAX* 66% 59% 59% 67% 68% 70% . . . . * About 50% of respondents said “no opinion” when evaluating perceptions of safety in the Transfort/MAX system (See Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies for all responses including “no opinion”). Page 32 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 20 - Safety Services About 9 in 10 respondents positively rated natural areas and park ranger services, EMS/fire services overall, and EMS/fire response time. About three fourths of respondents gave very good or good marks toward disaster response and emergency preparedness, and at least two thirds praised fire prevention/education/outreach and business property maintenance. About 6 in 10 residents positively rated police response time, police services overall, animal control, and crime prevention. About half of residents gave very good or good ratings to police visibility and police patrol while 4 in 10 positively rated traffic enforcement. Positive ratings for traffic enforcement (+8), crime prevention (+5), emergency preparedness (+4), and EMS/Fire services overall (+4) increased in 2025 when compared to 2024, while ratings for the remaining services remained stable. Although Fort Collins safety services tended to rank on par with peer communities across the nation and in the Front Range, it scored higher than the Front Range average for emergency preparedness. Figure 13: Community Safety Services Ratings Compared by Year Please rate the quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 21 20 1 9 20 18 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 88% 88% 88% 87% 86% 88% 84% 85% 83% 81% EMS/Fire services overall* 88% 84% 87% 79% 87% 85% 83% 89% 87% 89% EMS/Fire response time* 86% 83% 85% 81% 86% 85% 83% 91% 87% 89% Disaster response and restoration of services* 74% 71% 73% 67% 78% 72% 75% 82% 77% 84% Emergency preparedness 73% 69% 70% 66% 80% 75% 76% 79% 76% 80% Fire prevention /education/ outreach 70% 68% 67% 62% 75% 72% 73% 74% 78% 74% Business property maintenance 68% 67% 58% 61% 68% 70% 73% 72% 68% 74% Police response time* 60% 58% 55% 58% 69% 73% 71% 70% 72% 74% Police services overall 59% 57% 51% 57% 65% 71% 72% 68% 70% 76% Animal control 58% 57% 54% 59% 62% 58% 65% 66% 59% 64% Crime prevention 55% 50% 46% 47% 61% 61% 69% 67% 66% 70% Police patrol 52% 51% 44% 47% 57% 65% 63% 63% 63% 72% Police visibility 51% 50% 50% 48% 61% 63% 69% 65% 64% 69% Traffic enforcement 41% 33% 33% 40% 46% 54% 53% 51% 52% 63% * More than 30% of respondents had “no opinion” when rating the asterisked items (See Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies for all responses including “no opinion”).Prior to 2023, “EMS/Fire services overall” was “Fire services overall”, “EMS/Fire response time” was “Fire response time”, and “Fire prevention/education/outreach” was “Fire prevention/education”. Page 33 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 21 - Transportation As in previous years, the top-rated transportation rating was ease of travel by bicycle, which received a positive rating of 85%. Other well evaluated items were ease of walking, the Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service, and Street maintenance, all rated favorably by two-thirds of respondents. The ease of travel by car was rated good or very good by 6 in 10 residents, while half of respondents also praised the safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation, the availability of parking in downtown and the accessibility for people with disabilities. Finally, about 4 in 10 residents gave positive ratings for the ease of traveling by public transportation, the availability of electric vehicle charging stations, and traffic flow. Some items, such as street maintenance (+10), the Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service (+13), ease of traveling by public transportation (+13), and availability of electric vehicle charging stations (+17) showed strong increases when compared to 2024. Fort Collins ranked much higher than the national and Front Range averages for ease of travel by bicycle, and higher than both benchmarks for street maintenance. For most other comparisons, Fort Collins ranked on par with the benchmarks. Figure 14: Transportation Ratings Compared by Year Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 21 20 1 9 20 18 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Ease of travel by bicycle 85% 82% 83% 83% 83% 86% 82% 81% 79% 83% Ease of walking 67% 62% 62% 62% 75% 75% 61% 59% 60% 67% Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service* 67% 54% 38% 42% 29% . . . . . Street maintenance 66% 56% 52% 50% 53% 59% 56% 58% 44% 50% Ease of travel by car 60% 59% 57% 58% 52% 49% 43% 39% 36% 52% Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation 54% . . . . . . . . . Availability of parking Downtown 48% 44% 46% 35% 37% 38% 35% 29% 26% 34% Accessibility for people with disabilities* 46% 38% 37% 48% . . . . . . Ease of traveling by public transportation 40% 27% 29% 31% 44% 42% 48% 46% 45% 41% Availability of electric vehicle charging stations* 39% 22% 26% 25% 41% . . . . . Traffic flow 36% 29% 29% 30% 20% 15% 16% 13% 13% 20% More than 30% of respondents had “no opinion” when rating the asterisked items (See Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies for all responses including “no opinion”). Page 34 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 22 - Environmental Health Environmental health includes a variety of factors that support residents’ physical health and ensure the protection and sustainability of the community’s natural resources. About 6 in 10 residents rated the city’s performance in promoting the health of the environment of Fort Collins as very good or good. This rating was above the rating received in 2024. Figure 15: Promotion of Environmental Health by Year Please rate the City’s performance in each of the following areas: Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins Percent very good or good About 8 in 10 respondents rated the overall quality of the environment as very good or good, which was similar to 2024 but higher than in 2023. Fort Collins ranked similarly to the national and Front Range benchmarks for overall quality of the environment. Figure 16: Overall Quality of the Environment Compared by Year Percent very good or good 58% 62% 49% 55% 56% 62% Promotion of the environmental health of Fort Collins 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 92%87%89%83%82%84%74%77%80%83% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 35 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 23 - City leadership also sought resident feedback on characteristics that contribute to Fort Collins' overall natural environment. Residents praised the city's visual appeal, with about 9 in 10 giving it a good or very good rating. Around 8 in 10 respondents positively appraised conservation efforts while over 7 in 10 were pleased with recycling programs and 6 in 10 with air quality. Other than the rating for recycling programs, which improved 12 points year over year (from 61% in 2024 to the current 73%), survey participants’ reviews for aspects of the environment remained mostly stable from 2024 to 2025. Compared to other communities, Fort Collins ranked higher than the national and Front Range averages for the overall appearance of the city. Meanwhile, it ranked similar to the national and Fort Range averages in air quality and recycling programs (see Appendix F: Benchmark Comparisons). Figure 17: Aspects of the Environment Compared by Year Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins on each of the items listed below. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Overall appearance of the city 88% 87% 85% 86% 90% 88% 88% 90% 89% 91% Conservation efforts 77% 71% 68% 68% 77% 75% 78% 84% 78% 82% Recycling programs 73% 61% 60% 66% 73% 70% 79% 82% 78% 83% Air quality 64% 62% 53% 56% 63% 70% 71% 73% 82% 90% Furthermore, when asked to prioritize the top three areas for the city to focus on over the next five years, the environment—including efforts to ensure clean water resources, good air quality, land conservation, and smart growth—ranked second, with 53% of the votes. This was significantly higher than culture, parks and recreation (37%) and safety (27%), on par with transportation (53%) and economy (50%), and only below neighborhood and community vitality (61%) (see Figure 32: Top Three Budget Priorities Compared by Year on page 36). Page 36 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 24 - Cultur e and Recreation Cultural and recreational opportunities provide residents with a chance to participate in their community and enhance their quality of life. About 9 in 10 residents rated the quality of recreational opportunities in Fort Collins as very good or good, on par with previous years. More than 8 in 10 gave high marks to the quality of public library services, a rating also similar to previous years. The quality of arts and cultural opportunities was rated positively by 65% of respondents, also on par with 2024 data. Fort Collins ranked higher than both the national and Front Range averages for the quality of recreational opportunities, higher than the Front Range benchmark for arts and cultural opportunities, and similar to both averages for public library services. Figure 18: Community Aspects of Culture and Recreation Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Percent very good or good Residents also provided their opinions about a number of city parks, recreational and cultural programs, and facilities in Fort Collins. Among the highest rated parks and recreation items were the Gardens on Spring Creek, trails, natural areas and open space, and parks overall. Each of these programs/facilities was rated positively by at least 9 in 10 respondents. Additionally, at least 8 in 10 residents gave high marks to Timberline Recycling Center, art in public places program, Fort Collins Senior Center, The Farm at Lee Martinez Park, Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Pottery studio, cemeteries, Lincoln Center programs, Northside Aztlan Community Center, golf courses, parks in my neighborhood and Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC). Among the lower-rated items there were dog parks and Mulberry Pool, which still received favorable reviews from at least 6 in 10 residents. A few items increased in positive ratings between 2024 and 2025. These items included youth/teen recreation programs (+10), senior recreation programs (+10), adult recreation programs (+8), and Fort 72% 65%70%68%69% 57%56% 63%64%65% 88%89%88%89%90%89%88%91%89%92% 85%87%89%86%84%85%84%83%83%85% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Quality of arts and cultural opportunities Quality of recreational opportunities Quality of public library services Page 37 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 25 - Collins Senior Center (+7). Fort Collins ranked higher to the Front Range and national benchmark for parks overall. The city also ranked higher and much higher than the national and Front Range averages for natural areas and open space. Figure 19: Ratings of Parks, Recreational, and Cultural Programs Compared by Year Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 The Gardens on Spring Creek 95% 90% 90% 89% 92% 92% 89% 93% 90% 91% Trails 95% 93% 93% 92% 94% 94% 93% 96% 96% 96% Natural areas and open space 93% 93% 92% 92% 94% 93% 93% 94% 95% 95% Parks Overall 93% 92% 91% 90% 94% 92% 92% 96% 94% 96% Timberline Recycling Center 88% 85% 81% 82% . . . . . . Art in Public Places program 88% 83% 86% 85% 86% 85% 86% 86% 82% 82% Fort Collins Senior Center* 88% 81% 83% 85% 87% 85% 84% 86% 90% 87% The Farm at Lee Martinez Park* 87% 88% 82% 87% 85% 90% 86% 90% 87% 87% Fort Collins Museum of Discovery* 87% 85% 87% 87% 86% 89% 89% 90% 88% 87% Pottery studio* 87% 81% 75% 76% 88% 82% 78% 79% 80% 83% Cemeteries* 86% 81% 74% 79% 83% 82% 79% 83% 83% 86% Lincoln Center programs 84% 81% 81% 80% 85% 83% 84% 86% 84% 85% Northside Aztlan Community Center* 84% 81% 78% 84% 84% 86% 86% 87% 86% 82% Golf courses* 82% 76% 68% 75% 79% 81% 79% 84% 83% 85% Parks in my neighborhood 81% 81% 80% 83% . . . . . . Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC)* 80% 80% 77% 78% 82% 86% 82% 81% 81% 85% Athletic fields* 78% 82% 79% 78% 79% 86% 81% 86% 83% 89% Foothills Activity Center* 78% 73% 68% 73% 79% 81% 79% . . . Senior recreation programs* 78% 68% 73% 72% 80% 78% 76% 80% 77% 82% Youth/teen recreation programs* 76% 66% 68% 72% 82% 73% 75% 76% 76% 79% Adult recreation programs* 73% 65% 66% 69% 81% 75% 76% 78% 75% 79% Dog parks* 64% 62% 62% 68% . . . . . . Mulberry Pool* 62% 56% 51% 55% 66% 68% 70% 73% 71% 72% * More than 30% of respondents had “no opinion” when rating the asterisked items (See Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies for all responses including “no opinion”). Page 38 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 26 - Economic Health About three-fourths of residents rated Fort Collins favorably as a place to work—an improvement over previous years. The city ranked higher than the Front Range benchmark and similar to the national benchmark in this area. Figure 20: Ratings of City as a Place to Work Compared by Year Percent very good or good Survey participants were also asked to rate several community aspects of economic health. About two- thirds of respondents gave positive ratings for the availability of quality healthcare, dining opportunities, and entertainment options. Around 6 in 10 rated shopping opportunities favorably, while roughly one-third gave positive marks for the availability of job opportunities in Fort Collins. All ratings were generally consistent with the results from 2023 and 2024. The city ranked higher than the Front Range benchmark and national benchmark for quality healthcare and shopping opportunities. Fort Collins also ranked similar to both sets of benchmarks for availability of job opportunities. Figure 21: Community Aspects of Economic Health Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Availability of quality healthcare 67% 68% 70% 75% 80% 78% 78% 75% 77% 75% Quality of dining opportunities 67% 64% 68% 75% 77% 77% 83% 85% 83% 82% Quality of entertainment opportunities 67% 63% 63% 66% 62% 66% 76% 76% 72% 68% Quality of shopping opportunities 58% 61% 55% 68% 69% 66% 69% 72% 67% 67% Availability of job opportunities 35% 37% 37% 46% 46% 48% 44% 46% 42% 35% 78%78%78%73%74%78%74%70%71%77% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 39 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 27 - Additionally, community members evaluated the city’s performance in supporting local businesses and promoting the economic health of Fort Collins. Just over 5 in 10 survey participants gave positive ratings for the city’s support of businesses, while a slightly lower proportion rated the city’s efforts to promote economic health as very good or good. The rating for business support was consistent with 2024 results, while the rating for economic promotion showed an improvement over last year. Figure 22: Business Support and Economic Promotion Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. Percent very good or good 72%67%68%68% 58%63% 55%57%55%55% 64%67%67%63% 53%54% 46%41%42%48% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 20212 2022 2023 2024 2025 Support of businesses Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins Page 40 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 28 - In terms of business health, about half of respondents gave the city positive ratings for encouraging a variety of businesses, while about 4 in 10 positively rated the city’s efforts to attract new businesses. Finally, roughly one-third of residents gave positive ratings for retaining existing businesses. All ratings were consistent with those from 2024. Figure 23: Business Health Compared by Year Please rate the City’s performance in each of the following areas. Percent very good or good 56% 60% 63% 55% 63% 65% 48% 55% 62% 45% 56% 62% 50% 52% 60% 38% 42% 52% 38% 38% 49% 33% 38% 48% 32% 42% 51% Retaining existing businesses Attracting new businesses Encouraging a variety of businesses 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 2018 2017 2015 Page 41 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 29 - Government Performance The survey included several questions aimed at measuring government performance, including interactions with city employees, planning, and providing public information. Resident input on perceptions of government performance is a valuable tool for identifying potential gaps in service, communication, or civic engagement. Overall Quality of City Services About 8 in 10 survey respondents rated the overall quality of city services as either very good or good. This rating was similar to that in 2024 but slightly higher than in 2023. Fort Collins ranked similar to the national and Front Range benchmarks for overall quality of services. Figure 24: Overall Quality of City Services Compared by Year Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? Percent very good or good 87%84%90%81%80%80%76%75%77%79% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 42 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 30 - City Government and Employees About 7 in 10 residents positively rated the city for respecting all community members regardless of background, and for creating a welcoming, inclusive environment where everyone feels a sense of belonging. Meanwhile, 6 in 10 residents praised the city’s overall direction, its efforts to encourage sustainability, the efficient operation of programs and services, and its openness to community member involvement. Lastly, about half of the residents gave positive ratings for the city’s partnership with the community to address climate change, for listening to residents, and for balancing development and growth, while 4 in 10 praised its approach to managing and planning for growth. All ratings were higher than in 2024, with the largest increases seen in balancing development and growth while maintaining the city’s character and identity (+12), the overall direction of the city (+11), and listening to community members (+10). When comparisons could be made, Fort Collins ranked similarly to national and Front Range benchmark comparisons. Figure 25: City Government Ratings Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background… 70% 62% 59% 62% 58% 60% . . . . Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging 67% 59% 55% 47% 55% 56% . . . . Overall direction of the City 63% 52% 55% 49% 59% 65% 62% 65% 65% 70% Encouraging sustainability in the community 63% 59% 56% 58% 64% 63% 69% 76% 69% 73% Efficient operation of programs and services 60% 56% 54% 55% 63% 60% 66% 65% 58% 65% Welcoming community member involvement 60% 52% 48% 52% 57% 60% 61% 66% 69% 67% Partnering with the community to address climate change 51% 43% 42% 38% . . . . . . Listening to community members 50% 40% 36% 40% 49% 46% 50% 52% 50% 53% Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods 49% 37% 38% 38% 48% 56% . . . . Managing and planning for growth 40% 33% 34% 35% 39% 49% 46% 44% 50% 56% Page 43 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 31 - Similarly to 2024, about half of respondents reported having contact with a city employee within the 12 months prior to the survey. Compared to peer communities across the nation and in the Front Range, Fort Collins ranked similar to the benchmarks for frequency of contact with a city employee. Figure 26: Contact with City Employees Compared by Year Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? Percent yes Those who had contact with a city employee were asked to rate various aspects of their interaction. Nearly 9 in 10 rated the courtesy of the employee as either very good or good. Additionally, 8 in 10 gave positive ratings for the employee’s promptness, knowledge, and overall impression. About three- fourths gave high marks for feeling valued during the interaction. All ratings were consistent with previous years, except for promptness, which improved by 5 points year over year. Fort Collins ranked on par with national and Front Range peer communities for residents’ overall impression of city employees. Figure 27: Users Ratings of City Employees Compared by Year Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate City employee(s) on each of the items below. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Courtesy 89% 88% 86% 88% 85% 86% 89% 88% 86% 88% Knowledge 83% 81% 80% 83% 82% 78% 83% 82% 83% 80% Promptness 83% 78% 80% 81% 82% 79% 84% 79% 79% 81% Overall impression 80% 79% 80% 81% 76% 82% 80% 80% 79% 80% Making you feel valued 74% 71% 72% 72% 73% 74% 72% 72% 69% 69% This question was asked only of those who reported having contact with a city employee in the last 12 months. 54%54%53%56%53%51%52%60%59%55% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 44 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 32 - Residents who had not had contact with a city employee were also given the opportunity to provide their feedback on Fort Collins employees. Nearly 8 in 10 gave high marks to the courtesy of city employees, while 7 in 10 respondents positively rated the promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests as well as for making community members feel valued. These three ratings were on par with previous years. Figure 28: Non-users Ratings of City Employees Compared by Year Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees treat Fort Collins residents. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. (Percent reporting very good or good) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 Courtesy 79% 76% 79% 83% 77% 81% 80% 84% 80% 79% Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests 70% 67% 67% 71% 72% 69% 74% 72% 76% 73% Making community members or customers feel valued 67% 61% 67% 67% 71% 66% 73% 73% 71% 68% This question was asked only of those who did not have contact with a City employee in the last 12 months. At least 30% of respondents said “no opinion” when evaluating each of these three characteristics of City employees (see Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies for all responses including “no opinion”). Page 45 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 33 - Fort Collins Utilities As in previous years, residents were asked to rate the overall quality and their overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities. About 8 out of 10 respondents gave positive ratings for both, and both ratings were consistent with the 2024 results. Figure 29: Fort Collins Utilities Compared by Year Thinking about all aspects of your utility services provided by Fort Collins Utilities (e.g., reliability, price, your bill, billing/payment services, etc.), please rate the overall quality of each of the following services. Percent very good or good Three-quarters of the survey respondents indicated that they would be at least somewhat likely to sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to them. The same proportion of respondents indicated that they would be very or somewhat likely to recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague. These ratings were similar to those given in previous surveys. Figure 30: Likelihood of Using and Recommending Connexion Compared by Year Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Percent very or somewhat likely 75% 81% 74% 76% 77% 81% 78% 82% Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities Overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities 2025 2024 2023 2022 82% 78% 73% 76% 75% 75% 75% 75% 77% 76% Sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to you Recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 Page 46 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 34 - Fiscal Management and Planning Survey respondents were asked to consider seven aspects of the community and identify whether the city should apply more effort, the same amount of effort, or less effort to each (see Figure 31 on the following page). These are aspects for which the city plays a role in sustaining, at least in part, and which map to the Strategic Objectives from the City’s Strategic Plan. Similar to previous years, at least 9 in 10 survey participants wanted the city to either maintain or increase its efforts in each of the seven areas. Neighborhood Livability and Social Health, Economy, and Transportation and Mobility received the highest proportions of respondents calling for increased effort, with at least half requesting more attention in these areas. In contrast, the Environment area showed a nearly equal split between those wanting increased and maintained efforts. Meanwhile, for Safety, General Government, and Culture, Parks & Recreation, the majority of respondents favored maintaining current levels of effort. Compared to the previous survey iteration, the proportions were generally consistent. Page 47 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 35 - Figure 31: Budget Priorities Compared by Year Please select the option that best describes how you think the City should address each of the following aspects of the community. 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 2018 2017 2015 2013 Economy: Includes economic planning and development activities, workforce training, childcare, education, employment opportunities More effort 54% 57% 55% 42% 53% 40% 40% 35% 36% 44% Same effort 44% 39% 43% 56% 43% 55% 54% 61% 61% 53% Less effort 2% 4% 2% 2% 4% 5% 7% 5% 4% 2% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Environment: Includes efforts to ensure good water resources, good air quality, land conservation, smart growth, the Climate Action Plan and an attractive community More effort 46% 47% 54% 48% 53% 50% 46% 39% 32% 37% Same effort 47% 47% 42% 47% 43% 47% 50% 56% 65% 59% Less effort 7% 6% 4% 5% 3% 3% 4% 4% 3% 4% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Neighborhood Livability and Social Health: Includes promoting good neighbor relationships, ensuring attractive neighborhoods, historic preservation, an adequate supply of quality housing for all socio-economic groups, addressing poverty and homelessness, creating an inclusive community More effort 55% 58% 65% 60% 53% 46% 48% 43% 33% 34% Same effort 39% 36% 29% 35% 41% 48% 47% 52% 63% 62% Less effort 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 6% 5% 6% 4% 4% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Safety: Includes police, fire, stormwater, emergency medical response, and building inspection More effort 20% 23% 25% 18% 17% 22% 26% 22% 17% 19% Same effort 71% 73% 69% 77% 79% 77% 72% 76% 81% 76% Less effort 9% 4% 6% 5% 4% 1% 2% 2% 3% 6% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Culture, Parks & Recreation: Includes operating and improving recreational facilities, Lincoln Center, Gardens on Spring Creek and the Museum of Discovery; providing recreational, arts and cultural programs and public art; maintaining parks, trails and cemeteries; and improving natural areas More effort 30% 26% 27% 25% 23% 25% 24% 21% 19% 22% Same effort 66% 71% 70% 72% 72% 71% 73% 76% 77% 74% Less effort 5% 3% 3% 3% 5% 4% 4% 3% 4% 4% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Transportation and Mobility: Includes transportation planning and development, maintaining roads and traffic operations, Transfort operations, and bicycle and pedestrian safety, Northern Colorado Regional Airport More effort 55% 57% 61% 55% 60% 64% 65% 61% 54% 53% Same effort 43% 41% 36% 43% 38% 33% 34% 35% 43% 45% Less effort 2% 2% 3% 3% 2% 3% 1% 4% 3% 2% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% General Government: Includes internal support functions, City management, Council, boards and commissions, volunteers, technology, communicating with community members and building maintenance and repair More effort 20% 23% 22% 17% 23% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% Same effort 72% 70% 71% 75% 71% 75% 76% 74% 76% 74% Less effort 8% 7% 7% 8% 6% 6% 5% 7% 5% 7% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Page 48 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 36 - Survey participants were asked to prioritize the same seven strategic plan areas by selecting the three they felt were most important for the city to focus on over the next five years. Neighborhood Livability and Social Health remained the most frequently mentioned area (61%), followed by Transportation (53%), Environment (53%), and Economy (50%). Lower on the list of priorities were Culture, Parks and Recreation (37%), Safety (27%), and General Government (13%). Compared to 2024, most priorities remained stable, except Neighborhood Livability and Social Health, which saw a slight increase. Figure 32: Top Three Budget Priorities Compared by Year Please select which three (3) should be the top priorities for the City to focus on in the next 5 years. Percent selecting as either first, second, or third priority 12% 21% 53% 62% 54% 10% 26% 31% 50% 61% 51% 64% 12% 24% 30% 48% 68% 55% 58% 9% 29% 34% 46% 59% 52% 64% 14% 28% 34% 50% 51% 55% 57% 13% 27% 37% 50% 53% 53% 61% General Government Safety Culture, Parks & Recreation Economy Environment Transportation Neighborhood Livability and Social Health 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 Page 49 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 37 - The survey included a question asking residents to identify, in their own words, the one item or focus area the city should prioritize for improvement over the next few years. Among those who provided a written response, housing issues—such as cost and affordability—were, as in previous years, the most frequently mentioned priority, with one-quarter of respondents addressing a related concern. About 1 in 10 residents mentioned transportation improvements, mobility, or paths and trails, while a similar proportion mentioned traffic, roads, and parking. Roughly 1 in 20 commented on topics such as government policies, slowing growth, the environment, homelessness, and recreation and parks. Figure 33: Community Member Priorities by Year Thinking about the next few years, what is ONE item or focus area you would like the City to improve on? Percent of respondents Respondents could write in their own response. The complete set of verbatim comments can be found in Appendix C: Verbatim Responses to Open-Ended Questions. 2% 4% 3% 4% 5% 6% 3% 6% 7% 4% 4% 8% 8% 11% 26% 1% 1% 3% 1% 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 3% 7% 7% 6% 16% 26% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% 8% 13% 24% Community events, groups, activities Neighborhood livability Infrastructure Diversity, equity, and inclusion Public Schools/Education/Childcare Other Growth and development, retail, amenities Cost of living/economy/jobs Recreation and parks, open space Homelessness Environmental issues, sustainability Safety, crime, policing Less growth and development; issues related to growth, planning and zoning Government policies, spending, service delivery, etc. Traffic, roads, and parking Transportation improvements, mobility, paths and trails Housing cost or affordability 2025 2024 2023 Page 50 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 38 - Public Information The quality of a community is reflected not only in residents’ perceptions of service performance, but also in their views of the resources available to stay informed about community news and events. About half of residents gave the city a positive rating for keeping the community informed. This rating, which had been steadily declining since the survey’s inception in 2013, rebounded in 2025—reaching its highest rating since 2021. Figure 34: Ratings of Informing Residents Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in the following area: Informing community members Percent very good or good 69%60%60%55%54%53%46%44%40% 51% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 51 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 39 - About 6 in 10 residents gave high marks to the city for providing volunteer opportunities to community members and providing emergency information. Meanwhile, about half of residents positively rated the city for providing opportunities to participate in government activities. These ratings were above those in recent years. Fort Collins ranked similarly to both national and Front Range averages for providing volunteer opportunities to community members and providing opportunities to participate in government activities. Figure 35: Providing Information and Opportunities to Participate Compared by Year Please rate the City performance in each of the following areas. Percent very good or good 54% 63% 57% 61% 56% 58% 60% 53% 62% 61% 49% 62% 58% 42% 54% 50% 42% 55% 54% 45% 58% 56% 55% 61% 63% Providing opportunities to participate in government activities Providing emergency information Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 2018 2017 2015 Page 52 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 40 - About 9 in 10 residents reported using word of mouth or the city’s website as information sources for city issues, services, and programs while about 7 in 10 indicated that they had used social media and the “Recreator” for information. Further, at least 6 in 10 respondents reported use of city employees or departments, newspaper, and newsletter/brochures from city departments. Figure 36: Information Sources Used Compared by Year Indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources for information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent of respondents who had ever used this as a source) 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2019 2018 2017 2015 2013 Word of mouth 92% 92% 90% 88% 91% 91% 91% 90% 87% 88% City's website (www.fcgov.com) 91% 88% 91% 86% 82% 77% 79% 79% 79% 80% Social media (Facebook, X/Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 73% 72% 73% 70% 77% 65% 67% 63% 60% 55% “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 69% 69% 70% 67% 67% 68% 71% 66% 70% 70% City employees or departments (by phone, email or in person) 65% 63% 60% 60% 61% 58% 56% 57% . . Newspaper (print or online) 60% 57% 57% 61% 67% 66% 67% 70% 72% 80% Newsletters or brochures from City departments 58% 58% 58% 59% 60% 59% 59% 60% 62% 64% City booth at local events 52% 49% 45% 39% 41% 36% 37% 38% 41% . Tracks and Trails (the guide to natural areas activities) 51% 69% 76% 74% 76% 67% 69% 73% 68% . City News eNewsletter 45% 38% 40% 35% 33% 33% 63% 65% 65% 67% Radio 44% 45% 43% 47% 52% 50% 56% 55% 63% 69% Television news 31% 31% 29% 35% 38% 41% 41% 45% 57% 69% Access Fort Collins 29% 30% 28% 27% 27% 22% 22% 20% 20% 17% OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 27% 23% 24% 26% 20% 16% 18% 18% . . Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 22% 21% 25% 19% 22% 22% 20% 19% 12% 17% Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 20% 20% 19% 17% 12% 12% 14% . . . The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 12% 12% 13% 13% 16% 12% 20% 20% 22% 30% Other 12% 13% 11% 10% . . . . . . * Prior to 2025 “Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities)” was “Tracks and Trails (the guide to natural areas activities).” Prior to 2023 "Access Fort Collins” was “City of Fort Collins mobile apps (Access Fort Collins, Digital Publications, Recreator).” Page 53 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 41 - For the third time since 2023, residents were asked to indicate their top three methods for receiving information from the city about issues, services, and programs. About half of respondents indicated that one of their top preferred methods of receiving information was from the city’s website, while about 4 in 10 selected social media as a preferred method. Further about one-third chose word of mouth. Newsletters and newspapers were selected by a quarter of respondents. Among the least popular preferred methods were Access Fort Collins, OurCity Platform, Engage Platform, online video FCTV, and the City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881. Figure 37: Top Three Preferred Methods of Receiving Information Compared by Year Indicate your top three (3) preferred methods of receiving information. Percent selecting as either first, second, or third preferred method 3% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 5% 4% 11% 17% 10% 22% 23% 21% 22% 26% 43% 64% 2% 1% 2% 3% 2% 3% 5% 3% 7% 14% 11% 22% 27% 22% 25% 25% 38% 57% 4% 0% 2% 2% 3% 3% 6% 7% 10% 10% 14% 22% 23% 24% 26% 32% 43% 54% Other The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) Access Fort Collins Television news City booth at local events Radio Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by… “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) Newspaper (print or online) Newsletters or brochures from City departments City News eNewsletter Word of mouth Social media (Facebook, X/Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) City's website (www.fcgov.com) 2025 2024 2023 Page 54 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 42 - Appendix A: Respondent Characteristics The following tables summarize the demographic characteristics of Fort Collins’s survey respondents in 2025. Table 1: Length of Residency About how many years have you lived in Fort Collins? Percent of respondents Less than 2 years 6% 2-5 years 22% 6-10 years 20% 11-20 years 17% More than 20 years 35% Total 100% Table 2: Respondent Student Status Are you a full-time or part-time student at a college or university in Fort Collins? Percent of respondents Yes 9% No 91% Total 100% Table 3: Respondent College or University Attended Which college or university do you attend? Percent of respondents Colorado State University 92% Front Range Community College 8% Another local college or university 0% Total 100% Asked only to those who indicated that they were full-time or part-time students at a college or university in Fort Collins. Page 55 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 43 - Table 4: Employment Status What is your employment status? Percent of respondents Working full time for pay 61% Working part time for pay 13% Unemployed, looking for paid work 3% Unemployed, not looking for paid work 3% Fully retired 20% Total 100% Table 5: Work in Fort Collins Do you work inside the boundaries of Fort Collins? Percent of respondents Yes, outside the home 49% Yes, from home 23% No 29% Total 100% Table 6: Respondent Age Which of the age groups below best describes you? Percent of respondents 18-24 8% 25-34 34% 35-44 14% 45-54 14% 55-64 10% 65-74 12% 75+ 8% Total 100% Page 56 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 44 - Table 7: Respondent Housing Type Which best describes the building you live in? Percent of respondents One family house detached from any other houses 57% Duplex or townhome 13% Apartment or condominium 29% Mobile home 1% Other 1% Total 100% Table 8: Respondent Housing Tenure Do you own or rent your residence? Percent of respondents Own 57% Rent 43% Total 100% Table 9: Respondent Household Income How much do you anticipate your household’s total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Percent of respondents Less than $25,000 6% $25,000-$49,999 17% $50,000-$99,999 29% $100,000 to $149,999 22% $150,000 or more 25% Total 100% Page 57 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 45 - Table 10: Respondent Gender What is your gender? Percent of respondents Nonbinary 2% Woman 49% Man 46% Transgender 2% Two-Spirit 0% Prefer to self-identify 0% Prefer not to answer 6% Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option. Table 11: Respondent Sexual Orientation Which term best describes your sexual orientation? Percent of respondents Asexual 4% Bisexual 7% Heterosexual 67% Lesbian or gay 6% Pansexual 3% Queer 5% Prefer to self-identify 0% Prefer not to answer 13% Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option. Page 58 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 46 - Table 12: Respondent Race/Ethnicity What is your race and/or ethnicity? Percent of respondents American Indian/Alaskan Native 3% African 0% African American/Black 3% Asian/Asian American 5% Hispanic/Latinx/Spanish Origin 6% Middle Eastern/North African 1% Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0% White 82% Prefer to self-identify 3% Prefer not to answer 8% Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option. Table 13: Geographic Area of Residence Area Percent of respondents Northwest 13% Northeast 13% West Central 30% East Central 24% Southwest 5% Southeast 16% Total 100% Page 59 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 47 - Table 14: Council District of Residence District Percent of respondents District 1 20% District 2 17% District 3 14% District 4 18% District 5 15% District 6 16% Total 100% Page 60 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 48 - Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies The following pages contain a complete set of responses to each question on the survey. For questions that included a “don’t know” or “no opinion” response option, two tables for that question are provided: the first excludes the “don’t know” or “no opinion” responses and the second includes those response options. Table 15: Question 1 without "no opinion" responses Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Overall, as a place to live 60% N=538 30% N=272 8% N=67 2% N=14 0% N=3 100% N=895 Overall safety of community members 41% N=368 46% N=416 10% N=85 3% N=25 0% N=4 100% N=898 Quality of shopping opportunities 26% N=232 32% N=287 34% N=306 6% N=52 2% N=19 100% N=897 Quality of dining opportunities 34% N=302 33% N=299 26% N=232 6% N=51 1% N=11 100% N=895 Quality of entertainment opportunities 25% N=219 42% N=365 25% N=214 7% N=62 1% N=9 100% N=869 Availability of job opportunities 8% N=55 27% N=198 42% N=306 18% N=133 5% N=38 100% N=730 Availability of affordable quality housing 3% N=26 7% N=60 28% N=243 33% N=281 29% N=253 100% N=863 Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 24% N=207 41% N=355 30% N=260 4% N=35 0% N=3 100% N=860 Quality of recreational opportunities 61% N=546 31% N=277 6% N=53 1% N=12 0% N=2 100% N=890 Availability of quality healthcare 31% N=261 36% N=304 23% N=191 7% N=63 3% N=29 100% N=847 Availability of affordable quality childcare 7% N=24 12% N=41 26% N=88 37% N=125 17% N=57 100% N=335 Quality of public schools 30% N=162 42% N=232 19% N=106 4% N=22 5% N=26 100% N=549 Quality of public library services 47% N=376 38% N=308 14% N=112 1% N=4 1% N=6 100% N=807 Page 61 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 49 - Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total As a place to raise children 48% N=317 37% N=248 12% N=80 1% N=8 2% N=10 100% N=663 As a place to retire 37% N=249 35% N=235 17% N=118 7% N=51 4% N=26 100% N=679 As a place to attend college 49% N=378 37% N=283 10% N=80 2% N=18 1% N=9 100% N=768 As a place to work 31% N=251 46% N=366 18% N=145 4% N=30 1% N=11 100% N=803 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 23% N=201 44% N=381 26% N=221 5% N=40 2% N=17 100% N=859 Overall appearance of the city 47% N=423 41% N=372 11% N=95 1% N=9 0% N=2 100% N=900 Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 44% N=399 43% N=385 10% N=90 3% N=23 1% N=5 100% N=901 Table 16: Question 1 with "no opinion" responses Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Overall, as a place to live 60% N=538 30% N=272 8% N=67 2% N=14 0% N=3 0% N=0 100% N=895 Overall safety of community members 41% N=368 46% N=416 10% N=85 3% N=25 0% N=4 0% N=0 100% N=898 Quality of shopping opportunities 26% N=232 32% N=287 34% N=306 6% N=52 2% N=19 0% N=4 100% N=901 Quality of dining opportunities 34% N=302 33% N=299 26% N=232 6% N=51 1% N=11 1% N=7 100% N=901 Page 62 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 50 - Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Quality of entertainment opportunities 24% N=219 40% N=365 24% N=214 7% N=62 1% N=9 4% N=32 100% N=901 Availability of job opportunities 6% N=55 22% N=198 34% N=306 15% N=133 4% N=38 19% N=167 100% N=897 Availability of affordable quality housing 3% N=26 7% N=60 27% N=243 31% N=281 28% N=253 4% N=32 100% N=895 Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 23% N=207 40% N=355 29% N=260 4% N=35 0% N=3 4% N=34 100% N=894 Quality of recreational opportunities 61% N=546 31% N=277 6% N=53 1% N=12 0% N=2 1% N=10 100% N=900 Availability of quality healthcare 29% N=261 34% N=304 21% N=191 7% N=63 3% N=29 5% N=49 100% N=896 Availability of affordable quality childcare 3% N=24 5% N=41 10% N=88 14% N=125 6% N=57 63% N=563 100% N=898 Quality of public schools 18% N=162 26% N=232 12% N=106 3% N=22 3% N=26 38% N=339 100% N=888 Quality of public library services 42% N=376 34% N=308 12% N=112 0% N=4 1% N=6 10% N=90 100% N=896 Page 63 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 51 - Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total As a place to raise children 35% N=317 28% N=248 9% N=80 1% N=8 1% N=10 26% N=238 100% N=901 As a place to retire 28% N=249 26% N=235 13% N=118 6% N=51 3% N=26 24% N=219 100% N=898 As a place to attend college 42% N=378 32% N=283 9% N=80 2% N=18 1% N=9 15% N=131 100% N=899 As a place to work 28% N=251 41% N=366 16% N=145 3% N=30 1% N=11 10% N=94 100% N=897 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 22% N=201 42% N=381 24% N=221 4% N=40 2% N=17 5% N=43 100% N=902 Overall appearance of the city 47% N=423 41% N=372 10% N=95 1% N=9 0% N=2 0% N=3 100% N=903 Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 44% N=399 43% N=385 10% N=90 3% N=23 1% N=5 0% N=0 100% N=901 Page 64 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 52 - Table 17: Question 2 without "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Your neighborhood as a place to live 45% N=409 40% N=364 12% N=107 1% N=13 1% N=6 100% N=900 Your neighborhood as a place to raise children 39% N=275 39% N=270 16% N=109 5% N=36 1% N=10 100% N=700 Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) 37% N=332 33% N=299 19% N=170 8% N=75 3% N=24 100% N=900 Table 18: Question 2 with "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Your neighborhood as a place to live 45% N=409 40% N=364 12% N=107 1% N=13 1% N=6 0% N=3 100% N=903 Your neighborhood as a place to raise children 30% N=275 30% N=270 12% N=109 4% N=36 1% N=10 22% N=201 100% N=901 Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) 37% N=332 33% N=299 19% N=170 8% N=75 3% N=24 0% N=2 100% N=902 Page 65 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 53 - Table 19: Question 3 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 Fort Collins to someone who asks 53% N=476 34% N=303 7% N=61 6% N=50 100% N=890 Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 63% N=551 24% N=215 6% N=56 7% N=57 100% N=879 Table 20: Question 3 with "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 Fort Collins to someone who asks 53% N=476 34% N=303 7% N=61 6% N=50 1% N=13 100% N=903 Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 61% N=551 24% N=215 6% N=56 6% N=57 3% N=23 100% N=902 Page 66 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 54 - Table 21: Question 4 without "don’t know" responses In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? 2 times a week or more 2-4 times a month Once a month or less Not at all Total Visited a neighborhood park or City park 37% N=338 34% N=308 24% N=220 4% N=35 100% N=901 Attended a neighborhood-sponsored event 1% N=6 6% N=55 36% N=325 57% N=510 100% N=897 Attended a government-organized event (open house, City Council session, forum, etc.) 0% N=3 3% N=23 33% N=298 64% N=572 100% N=896 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 14% N=127 24% N=212 25% N=226 37% N=329 100% N=894 Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 9% N=79 18% N=166 31% N=282 41% N=372 100% N=899 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 37% N=330 31% N=281 22% N=198 10% N=89 100% N=899 Done a favor for a neighbor 13% N=119 27% N=247 38% N=342 21% N=192 100% N=901 Visited a locally owned business operating within the city 48% N=431 38% N=345 12% N=112 1% N=13 100% N=902 Page 67 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 55 - Table 22: Question 4 with "don’t know" responses In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? 2 times a week or more 2-4 times a month Once a month or less Not at all Total Visited a neighborhood park or City park 37% N=338 34% N=308 24% N=220 4% N=35 100% N=901 Attended a neighborhood-sponsored event 1% N=6 6% N=55 36% N=325 57% N=510 100% N=897 Attended a government-organized event (open house, City Council session, forum, etc.) 0% N=3 3% N=23 33% N=298 64% N=572 100% N=896 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 14% N=127 24% N=212 25% N=226 37% N=329 100% N=894 Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 9% N=79 18% N=166 31% N=282 41% N=372 100% N=899 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 37% N=330 31% N=281 22% N=198 10% N=89 100% N=899 Done a favor for a neighbor 13% N=119 27% N=247 38% N=342 21% N=192 100% N=901 Page 68 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 56 - Table 23: Question 5 In the last 20 years, how often have you moved to a different place of residence in Fort Collins? Percent Number 2+ times a year 0% N=4 About once a year 6% N=56 Every 2-4 years 23% N=210 Every 5-7 years 13% N=115 Every 8-10 years 8% N=74 Every 11-15 years 6% N=52 16-20 years 5% N=44 I have not relocated in the last 20 years 15% N=132 I have not relocated within the City 24% N=212 Total 100% N=899 Page 69 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 57 - Table 24: Question 6 without "no opinion" responses Please tell us how safe you feel in or on each of the following in Fort Collins. Always safe Usually safe Sometimes safe sometimes unsafe Usually unsafe Always unsafe Total Downtown Fort Collins during the day 61% N=542 32% N=284 6% N=58 1% N=5 1% N=5 100% N=894 Downtown Fort Collins at night 18% N=158 51% N=442 22% N=193 6% N=54 2% N=14 100% N=860 Your neighborhood during the day 76% N=679 21% N=190 2% N=20 1% N=8 0% N=1 100% N=898 Your neighborhood at night 42% N=379 45% N=405 10% N=86 2% N=20 0% N=3 100% N=893 Parks 36% N=311 52% N=448 11% N=96 1% N=8 0% N=2 100% N=865 Natural areas/open spaces 39% N=330 48% N=407 12% N=105 1% N=7 0% N=3 100% N=852 Recreation facilities 51% N=385 41% N=309 7% N=55 0% N=3 0% N=3 100% N=756 Trails 35% N=293 50% N=418 13% N=111 1% N=8 0% N=3 100% N=834 Fort Collins overall during the day 51% N=457 42% N=381 6% N=55 0% N=4 0% N=3 100% N=901 Fort Collins overall at night 15% N=133 58% N=510 23% N=199 4% N=34 1% N=7 100% N=883 Transfort/MAX 21% N=102 45% N=214 27% N=130 5% N=22 2% N=11 100% N=479 Page 70 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 58 - Table 25: Question 6 with "no opinion" responses Please tell us how safe you feel in or on each of the following in Fort Collins. Always safe Usually safe Sometimes safe sometimes unsafe Usually unsafe Always unsafe No opinion Total Downtown Fort Collins during the day 60% N=542 32% N=284 6% N=58 1% N=5 1% N=5 1% N=5 100% N=898 Downtown Fort Collins at night 17% N=158 49% N=442 21% N=193 6% N=54 2% N=14 5% N=41 100% N=901 Your neighborhood during the day 76% N=679 21% N=190 2% N=20 1% N=8 0% N=1 0% N=0 100% N=898 Your neighborhood at night 42% N=379 45% N=405 10% N=86 2% N=20 0% N=3 1% N=10 100% N=904 Parks 35% N=311 50% N=448 11% N=96 1% N=8 0% N=2 4% N=34 100% N=900 Natural areas/open spaces 37% N=330 45% N=407 12% N=105 1% N=7 0% N=3 5% N=47 100% N=899 Recreation facilities 43% N=385 34% N=309 6% N=55 0% N=3 0% N=3 16% N=145 100% N=901 Trails 33% N=293 47% N=418 12% N=111 1% N=8 0% N=3 7% N=64 100% N=898 Fort Collins overall during the day 51% N=457 42% N=381 6% N=55 0% N=4 0% N=3 0% N=0 100% N=901 Fort Collins overall at night 15% N=133 57% N=510 22% N=199 4% N=34 1% N=7 2% N=18 100% N=901 Transfort/MAX 11% N=102 24% N=214 14% N=130 2% N=22 1% N=11 47% N=422 100% N=901 Page 71 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 59 - Table 26: Question 7 without "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 31% N=194 42% N=266 21% N=132 3% N=20 3% N=20 100% N=632 Disaster response and restoration of services 30% N=175 44% N=252 22% N=127 2% N=14 2% N=10 100% N=579 Fire prevention/education/outreach 30% N=204 39% N=264 24% N=159 4% N=25 3% N=20 100% N=673 EMS/Fire response time 48% N=276 38% N=215 12% N=70 1% N=5 1% N=3 100% N=570 EMS/Fire services overall 49% N=298 39% N=236 11% N=67 0% N=0 0% N=3 100% N=605 Crime prevention 14% N=101 40% N=280 33% N=227 9% N=63 4% N=25 100% N=696 Police patrol 16% N=117 36% N=270 36% N=267 7% N=54 4% N=33 100% N=740 Traffic enforcement 11% N=91 30% N=238 33% N=265 16% N=128 9% N=73 100% N=795 Police visibility 17% N=141 34% N=276 38% N=308 7% N=53 4% N=32 100% N=809 Police response time 25% N=105 36% N=151 29% N=122 7% N=28 4% N=17 100% N=423 Police services overall 18% N=121 41% N=282 33% N=225 5% N=34 4% N=26 100% N=689 Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 15% N=103 36% N=245 36% N=243 9% N=63 4% N=30 100% N=685 Noise enforcement 10% N=64 31% N=192 36% N=228 13% N=80 10% N=63 100% N=627 Animal control 18% N=107 40% N=246 33% N=202 6% N=36 3% N=19 100% N=610 Business property maintenance 19% N=127 49% N=331 27% N=182 3% N=22 1% N=8 100% N=671 Residential property maintenance 15% N=112 51% N=369 29% N=211 4% N=28 1% N=9 100% N=728 Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 52% N=410 36% N=287 11% N=85 1% N=6 1% N=6 100% N=795 Page 72 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 60 - Table 27: Question 7 with "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 22% N=194 30% N=266 15% N=132 2% N=20 2% N=20 29% N=258 100% N=890 Disaster response and restoration of services 20% N=175 28% N=252 14% N=127 2% N=14 1% N=10 35% N=318 100% N=896 Fire prevention/education/outreach 23% N=204 30% N=264 18% N=159 3% N=25 2% N=20 25% N=222 100% N=895 EMS/Fire response time 31% N=276 24% N=215 8% N=70 1% N=5 0% N=3 36% N=318 100% N=887 EMS/Fire services overall 34% N=298 26% N=236 8% N=67 0% N=0 0% N=3 32% N=285 100% N=890 Crime prevention 11% N=101 31% N=280 25% N=227 7% N=63 3% N=25 22% N=196 100% N=892 Police patrol 13% N=117 30% N=270 30% N=267 6% N=54 4% N=33 17% N=148 100% N=888 Traffic enforcement 10% N=91 27% N=238 30% N=265 14% N=128 8% N=73 11% N=99 100% N=894 Police visibility 16% N=141 31% N=276 34% N=308 6% N=53 4% N=32 10% N=86 100% N=895 Police response time 12% N=105 17% N=151 14% N=122 3% N=28 2% N=17 52% N=464 100% N=887 Police services overall 14% N=121 32% N=282 25% N=225 4% N=34 3% N=26 22% N=199 100% N=888 Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 12% N=103 27% N=245 27% N=243 7% N=63 3% N=30 23% N=207 100% N=892 Noise enforcement 7% N=64 22% N=192 26% N=228 9% N=80 7% N=63 30% N=264 100% N=891 Animal control 12% N=107 28% N=246 23% N=202 4% N=36 2% N=19 31% N=280 100% N=890 Business property maintenance 14% N=127 37% N=331 21% N=182 3% N=22 1% N=8 24% N=213 100% N=884 Residential property maintenance 13% N=112 41% N=369 24% N=211 3% N=28 1% N=9 19% N=166 100% N=895 Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 46% N=410 32% N=287 9% N=85 1% N=6 1% N=6 12% N=105 100% N=900 Page 73 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 61 - Table 28: Question 8 without "no opinion" responses Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Ease of travel by car 21% N=188 39% N=349 30% N=269 6% N=50 4% N=34 100% N=890 Ease of traveling by public transportation 8% N=51 32% N=216 29% N=195 21% N=140 9% N=63 100% N=665 Ease of walking 26% N=234 40% N=359 21% N=187 9% N=81 3% N=29 100% N=889 Accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g., people with low vision or in wheelchairs) 11% N=58 34% N=173 35% N=174 13% N=67 6% N=32 100% N=504 Ease of travel by bicycle 49% N=409 35% N=293 10% N=84 4% N=32 1% N=8 100% N=826 Availability of parking Downtown 15% N=131 33% N=290 31% N=270 14% N=119 7% N=60 100% N=870 Traffic flow 6% N=52 30% N=265 39% N=346 16% N=146 9% N=79 100% N=887 Street maintenance 21% N=185 45% N=401 27% N=238 5% N=43 2% N=22 100% N=890 Availability of electric vehicle charging stations 10% N=26 29% N=72 32% N=81 18% N=46 10% N=25 100% N=250 Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service 25% N=127 42% N=209 24% N=118 7% N=32 3% N=13 100% N=499 Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation 8% N=70 36% N=301 36% N=300 13% N=105 6% N=52 100% N=829 Page 74 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 62 - Table 29: Question 8 with "no opinion" responses Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Ease of travel by car 21% N=188 39% N=349 30% N=269 6% N=50 4% N=34 0% N=4 100% N=894 Ease of traveling by public transportation 6% N=51 24% N=216 22% N=195 16% N=140 7% N=63 26% N=232 100% N=897 Ease of walking 26% N=234 40% N=359 21% N=187 9% N=81 3% N=29 1% N=6 100% N=896 Accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g., people with low vision or in wheelchairs) 6% N=58 19% N=173 20% N=174 8% N=67 4% N=32 43% N=385 100% N=890 Ease of travel by bicycle 46% N=409 33% N=293 9% N=84 4% N=32 1% N=8 8% N=68 100% N=894 Availability of parking Downtown 15% N=131 32% N=290 30% N=270 13% N=119 7% N=60 3% N=28 100% N=898 Traffic flow 6% N=52 29% N=265 38% N=346 16% N=146 9% N=79 1% N=12 100% N=899 Street maintenance 21% N=185 45% N=401 27% N=238 5% N=43 2% N=22 1% N=8 100% N=897 Availability of electric vehicle charging stations 3% N=26 8% N=72 9% N=81 5% N=46 3% N=25 72% N=650 100% N=900 Northern Colorado Regional Airport/ Shuttle Service 14% N=127 23% N=209 13% N=118 4% N=32 1% N=13 44% N=392 100% N=891 Page 75 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 63 - Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation 8% N=70 34% N=301 33% N=300 12% N=105 6% N=52 8% N=70 100% N=898 Table 30: Question 9 without "no opinion" responses Thinking about all aspects of your utility services provided by Fort Collins Utilities (which may include electric, water, wastewater and stormwater services), please rate each of the following: Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total The overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities 44% N=378 38% N=327 15% N=129 2% N=14 1% N=11 100% N=859 Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities 40% N=352 38% N=329 18% N=161 2% N=19 2% N=14 100% N=875 Page 76 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 64 - Table 31: Question 9 with "no opinion" responses Thinking about all aspects of your utility services provided by Fort Collins Utilities (which may include electric, water, wastewater and stormwater services), please rate each of the following: Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total The overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities 43% N=378 37% N=327 15% N=129 2% N=14 1% N=11 3% N=30 100% N=889 Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities 39% N=352 37% N=329 18% N=161 2% N=19 2% N=14 3% N=24 100% N=900 Table 32: Question 10 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 Sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to you 63% N=487 14% N=112 7% N=54 16% N=126 100% N=779 Recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague 58% N=376 18% N=115 6% N=36 18% N=117 100% N=644 Page 77 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 65 - Table 33: Question 10 with "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 Sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to you 54% N=487 12% N=112 6% N=54 14% N=126 13% N=119 100% N=898 Recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague 42% N=376 13% N=115 4% N=36 13% N=117 28% N=255 100% N=898 Table 34: Question 11 without "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Air quality 19% N=162 46% N=401 24% N=211 10% N=90 2% N=14 100% N=878 Recycling programs 27% N=236 46% N=403 19% N=170 6% N=52 2% N=14 100% N=875 Conservation efforts 28% N=230 49% N=406 19% N=158 4% N=29 1% N=8 100% N=831 Overall quality of environment 30% N=263 53% N=469 14% N=124 2% N=20 0% N=3 100% N=879 Page 78 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 66 - Table 35: Question 11 with "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins on each of the items listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Air quality 18% N=162 45% N=401 24% N=211 10% N=90 2% N=14 2% N=19 100% N=897 Recycling programs 26% N=236 45% N=403 19% N=170 6% N=52 2% N=14 3% N=23 100% N=899 Conservation efforts 26% N=230 45% N=406 18% N=158 3% N=29 1% N=8 7% N=65 100% N=896 Overall quality of environment 29% N=263 52% N=469 14% N=124 2% N=20 0% N=3 2% N=15 100% N=893 Table 36: Question 12 without "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Natural areas and open space 63% N=553 30% N=260 5% N=42 1% N=11 1% N=5 100% N=871 Trails 68% N=585 28% N=239 4% N=35 1% N=7 0% N=0 100% N=865 Parks Overall 59% N=521 35% N=310 6% N=55 1% N=5 0% N=0 100% N=891 Parks in my neighborhood 46% N=394 35% N=305 14% N=125 4% N=31 1% N=8 100% N=864 Dog parks 22% N=97 42% N=183 27% N=119 6% N=28 3% N=14 100% N=440 Timberline Recycling Center 46% N=289 43% N=272 11% N=70 1% N=4 0% N=1 100% N=636 Cemeteries 41% N=141 45% N=156 13% N=47 0% N=1 1% N=2 100% N=348 Golf courses 40% N=128 42% N=136 16% N=51 1% N=3 1% N=4 100% N=321 Athletic fields 29% N=134 49% N=230 19% N=87 3% N=14 0% N=2 100% N=467 Northside Aztlan Community Center 37% N=157 46% N=195 12% N=52 3% N=13 1% N=3 100% N=421 Fort Collins Senior Center 36% N=169 51% N=238 11% N=52 1% N=3 1% N=3 100% N=465 Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) 34% N=163 45% N=216 17% N=83 3% N=14 0% N=0 100% N=476 Page 79 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 67 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Foothills Activity Center 30% N=87 49% N=142 17% N=50 4% N=13 0% N=0 100% N=292 Mulberry Pool 20% N=69 42% N=146 25% N=85 11% N=40 2% N=6 100% N=345 The Farm at Lee Martinez Park 41% N=207 46% N=233 11% N=55 2% N=8 0% N=1 100% N=505 The Gardens on Spring Creek 57% N=402 38% N=269 5% N=34 0% N=2 0% N=1 100% N=709 Pottery studio 45% N=84 41% N=76 10% N=19 2% N=4 1% N=1 100% N=184 Art in Public Places program 49% N=314 39% N=246 10% N=64 1% N=8 1% N=4 100% N=636 Lincoln Center programs 40% N=271 43% N=294 14% N=96 2% N=11 1% N=5 100% N=675 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery 51% N=314 36% N=224 12% N=74 1% N=5 0% N=3 100% N=620 Adult recreation programs 28% N=137 45% N=221 23% N=113 2% N=11 1% N=6 100% N=489 Senior recreation programs 35% N=110 43% N=132 19% N=59 2% N=6 1% N=3 100% N=311 Youth/teen recreation programs 32% N=91 43% N=122 19% N=53 4% N=11 2% N=6 100% N=282 Table 37: Question 12 with "no opinion" responses Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Natural areas and open space 62% N=553 29% N=260 5% N=42 1% N=11 1% N=5 2% N=15 100% N=886 Trails 65% N=585 27% N=239 4% N=35 1% N=7 0% N=0 4% N=32 100% N=897 Parks Overall 58% N=521 35% N=310 6% N=55 1% N=5 0% N=0 1% N=7 100% N=897 Parks in my neighborhood 44% N=394 34% N=305 14% N=125 4% N=31 1% N=8 3% N=30 100% N=895 Dog parks 11% N=97 20% N=183 13% N=119 3% N=28 2% N=14 51% N=456 100% N=896 Page 80 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 68 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Timberline Recycling Center 32% N=289 30% N=272 8% N=70 0% N=4 0% N=1 29% N=256 100% N=892 Cemeteries 16% N=141 17% N=156 5% N=47 0% N=1 0% N=2 61% N=548 100% N=896 Golf courses 14% N=128 15% N=136 6% N=51 0% N=3 0% N=4 64% N=570 100% N=891 Athletic fields 15% N=134 26% N=230 10% N=87 2% N=14 0% N=2 47% N=417 100% N=883 Northside Aztlan Community Center 18% N=157 22% N=195 6% N=52 1% N=13 0% N=3 53% N=472 100% N=893 Fort Collins Senior Center 19% N=169 27% N=238 6% N=52 0% N=3 0% N=3 47% N=420 100% N=885 Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) 18% N=163 24% N=216 9% N=83 2% N=14 0% N=0 47% N=418 100% N=894 Foothills Activity Center 10% N=87 16% N=142 6% N=50 1% N=13 0% N=0 67% N=603 100% N=895 Mulberry Pool 8% N=69 16% N=146 10% N=85 4% N=40 1% N=6 61% N=542 100% N=887 The Farm at Lee Martinez Park 23% N=207 26% N=233 6% N=55 1% N=8 0% N=1 43% N=380 100% N=885 The Gardens on Spring Creek 45% N=402 30% N=269 4% N=34 0% N=2 0% N=1 21% N=187 100% N=896 Pottery studio 9% N=84 9% N=76 2% N=19 0% N=4 0% N=1 79% N=704 100% N=888 Art in Public Places program 36% N=314 28% N=246 7% N=64 1% N=8 0% N=4 28% N=248 100% N=884 Lincoln Center programs 30% N=271 33% N=294 11% N=96 1% N=11 1% N=5 24% N=217 100% N=893 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery 35% N=314 25% N=224 8% N=74 1% N=5 0% N=3 31% N=276 100% N=896 Adult recreation programs 15% N=137 25% N=221 13% N=113 1% N=11 1% N=6 45% N=408 100% N=897 Page 81 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 69 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Senior recreation programs 12% N=110 15% N=132 7% N=59 1% N=6 0% N=3 65% N=578 100% N=890 Youth/teen recreation programs 10% N=91 14% N=122 6% N=53 1% N=11 1% N=6 68% N=613 100% N=895 Table 38: Question 13 without "no opinion" responses Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Managing and planning for growth 9% N=69 31% N=245 36% N=286 18% N=140 7% N=55 100% N=795 Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods 9% N=78 40% N=330 29% N=244 14% N=115 8% N=63 100% N=830 Efficient operation of programs and services 15% N=112 45% N=341 30% N=225 8% N=61 2% N=17 100% N=757 Encouraging sustainability in the community 22% N=180 41% N=331 28% N=224 7% N=55 3% N=21 100% N=810 Partnering with the community to address climate change 16% N=115 34% N=243 29% N=206 15% N=103 6% N=40 100% N=707 Overall direction of the City 17% N=142 46% N=391 23% N=197 8% N=70 5% N=42 100% N=842 Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (Human Services, Affordable Housing, Homelessness, Equity & Inclusion, etc.) 11% N=86 31% N=247 32% N=259 17% N=140 9% N=76 100% N=808 Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins 18% N=149 44% N=369 26% N=215 8% N=70 3% N=29 100% N=831 Page 82 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 70 - Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins 13% N=99 35% N=270 35% N=269 12% N=89 5% N=38 100% N=766 Support of businesses 14% N=97 41% N=291 31% N=218 11% N=75 3% N=23 100% N=703 Encouraging a variety of businesses 15% N=112 36% N=259 31% N=226 13% N=94 5% N=36 100% N=727 Retaining existing businesses 5% N=38 27% N=187 42% N=295 19% N=135 6% N=45 100% N=699 Attracting new businesses 8% N=54 34% N=223 36% N=238 15% N=97 6% N=41 100% N=653 Welcoming community member involvement 21% N=151 39% N=286 27% N=198 9% N=64 4% N=28 100% N=727 Listening to community members 17% N=121 33% N=227 29% N=200 13% N=88 9% N=62 100% N=699 Informing community members 14% N=110 37% N=297 30% N=239 14% N=112 5% N=37 100% N=795 Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 18% N=121 37% N=254 31% N=209 10% N=69 4% N=30 100% N=683 Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 24% N=165 38% N=259 29% N=198 5% N=31 3% N=21 100% N=674 Providing emergency information 16% N=114 44% N=310 30% N=208 7% N=52 2% N=17 100% N=701 Ensuring all community members can access and participate in City programs and services 18% N=120 40% N=267 31% N=202 7% N=48 4% N=24 100% N=662 Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background, gender, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, or marital status 27% N=206 42% N=318 23% N=173 4% N=27 4% N=30 100% N=753 Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging 27% N=205 41% N=316 22% N=171 7% N=55 3% N=25 100% N=771 Page 83 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 71 - Table 39: Question 13 with "no opinion" responses Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Managing and planning for growth 8% N=69 28% N=245 33% N=286 16% N=140 6% N=55 9% N=80 100% N=875 Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods 9% N=78 37% N=330 27% N=244 13% N=115 7% N=63 7% N=67 100% N=897 Efficient operation of programs and services 13% N=112 38% N=341 25% N=225 7% N=61 2% N=17 16% N=139 100% N=896 Encouraging sustainability in the community 20% N=180 37% N=331 25% N=224 6% N=55 2% N=21 8% N=73 100% N=883 Partnering with the community to address climate change 13% N=115 27% N=243 23% N=206 12% N=103 4% N=40 21% N=186 100% N=893 Overall direction of the City 16% N=142 44% N=391 22% N=197 8% N=70 5% N=42 5% N=45 100% N=887 Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (Human Services, Affordable Housing, Homelessness, Equity & Inclusion, etc.) 10% N=86 27% N=247 29% N=259 16% N=140 8% N=76 10% N=89 100% N=897 Page 84 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 72 - Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins 17% N=149 41% N=369 24% N=215 8% N=70 3% N=29 7% N=65 100% N=896 Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins 11% N=99 30% N=270 30% N=269 10% N=89 4% N=38 14% N=129 100% N=895 Support of businesses 11% N=97 32% N=291 24% N=218 8% N=75 3% N=23 21% N=192 100% N=896 Encouraging a variety of businesses 13% N=112 29% N=259 25% N=226 10% N=94 4% N=36 19% N=167 100% N=894 Retaining existing businesses 4% N=38 21% N=187 33% N=295 15% N=135 5% N=45 22% N=195 100% N=894 Attracting new businesses 6% N=54 25% N=223 27% N=238 11% N=97 5% N=41 27% N=238 100% N=891 Welcoming community member involvement 17% N=151 32% N=286 22% N=198 7% N=64 3% N=28 19% N=166 100% N=893 Listening to community members 14% N=121 26% N=227 23% N=200 10% N=88 7% N=62 21% N=191 100% N=891 Informing community members 12% N=110 33% N=297 27% N=239 13% N=112 4% N=37 11% N=97 100% N=892 Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 14% N=121 28% N=254 23% N=209 8% N=69 3% N=30 24% N=215 100% N=898 Page 85 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 73 - Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 18% N=165 29% N=259 22% N=198 4% N=31 2% N=21 25% N=220 100% N=894 Providing emergency information 13% N=114 35% N=310 23% N=208 6% N=52 2% N=17 21% N=188 100% N=889 Ensuring all community members can access and participate in City programs and services 13% N=120 30% N=267 23% N=202 5% N=48 3% N=24 26% N=231 100% N=893 Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background, gender, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, or marital status 23% N=206 36% N=318 19% N=173 3% N=27 3% N=30 16% N=141 100% N=894 Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging 23% N=205 35% N=316 19% N=171 6% N=55 3% N=25 14% N=121 100% N=892 Page 86 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 74 - Table 40: Question 14 without "no opinion" responses Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? Percent Number Very good 28% N=252 Good 50% N=447 Average 17% N=155 Bad 2% N=18 Very bad 2% N=14 Total 100% N=886 Table 41: Question 14 with "no opinion" responses Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? Percent Number Very good 28% N=252 Good 50% N=447 Average 17% N=155 Bad 2% N=18 Very bad 2% N=14 No opinion 1% N=5 Total 100% N=891 Table 42: Question 15 Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? Percent Number Yes 55% N=496 No 45% N=400 Total 100% N=896 Page 87 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 75 - Table 43: Question 15A without "no opinion" responses Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate City employee(s) on each of the items below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Courtesy 67% N=323 22% N=109 8% N=37 2% N=11 1% N=5 100% N=485 Promptness 59% N=285 25% N=120 10% N=50 3% N=17 3% N=15 100% N=486 Knowledge 57% N=276 26% N=128 11% N=52 4% N=19 2% N=10 100% N=485 Making you feel valued 52% N=245 22% N=105 16% N=77 6% N=27 4% N=19 100% N=472 Overall impression 57% N=279 23% N=115 12% N=61 4% N=22 3% N=14 100% N=491 *Asked only of those who reported having contact with a City employee in the 12 months prior to the survey. Table 44: Question 15A with "no opinion" responses Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate City employee(s) on each of the items below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Courtesy 66% N=323 22% N=109 7% N=37 2% N=11 1% N=5 1% N=5 100% N=490 Promptness 58% N=285 24% N=120 10% N=50 3% N=17 3% N=15 2% N=7 100% N=494 Knowledge 56% N=276 26% N=128 11% N=52 4% N=19 2% N=10 2% N=9 100% N=494 Making you feel valued 50% N=245 21% N=105 16% N=77 5% N=27 4% N=19 4% N=21 100% N=494 Overall impression 56% N=279 23% N=115 12% N=61 4% N=22 3% N=14 1% N=3 100% N=494 *Asked only of those who reported having contact with a City employee in the 12 months prior to the survey. Page 88 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 76 - Table 45: Question 15B without "no opinion" responses Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees treat Fort Collins community members. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad Total Courtesy 29% N=79 50% N=135 16% N=45 5% N=14 0% N=0 100% N=273 Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests 20% N=52 50% N=131 20% N=52 6% N=17 3% N=9 100% N=260 Making community members or customers feel valued 20% N=52 47% N=123 24% N=64 7% N=19 2% N=4 100% N=262 *Asked only of those who reported NOT having had contact with a City employee in the 12 months prior to the survey. Table 46: Question 15B with "no opinion" responses Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees treat Fort Collins community members. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Courtesy 20% N=79 35% N=135 11% N=45 4% N=14 0% N=0 30% N=117 100% N=390 Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests 13% N=52 33% N=131 13% N=52 4% N=17 2% N=9 34% N=132 100% N=392 Page 89 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 77 - Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees treat Fort Collins community members. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. Very good Good Average Bad Very bad No opinion Total Making community members or customers feel valued 13% N=52 31% N=123 16% N=64 5% N=19 1% N=4 33% N=129 100% N=392 *Asked only of those who reported NOT having had contact with a City employee in the 12 months prior to the survey. Table 47: Question 16 without "no opinion" responses Please select the option that best describes how you think the City should address each of the following aspects of the community. More effort Same effort Less effort Total Economy: Includes economic planning and development activities, workforce training, childcare, education, employment opportunities 54% N=441 44% N=360 2% N=20 100% N=821 Environment: Includes efforts to ensure good water resources, good air quality, land conservation, smart growth, the Climate Action Plan and an attractive community 46% N=402 47% N=405 7% N=58 100% N=864 Neighborhood and Community Vitality: Includes promoting good neighbor relationships, ensuring attractive neighborhoods, historic preservation, an adequate supply of quality housing for all socio- economic groups, addressing poverty and homelessness, creating an inclusive community 55% N=471 39% N=332 7% N=57 100% N=860 Safety: Includes police, fire, stormwater, emergency medical response, and building inspection 20% N=171 71% N=596 9% N=74 100% N=841 Page 90 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 78 - Please select the option that best describes how you think the City should address each of the following aspects of the community. More effort Same effort Less effort Total Culture, Parks & Recreation: Includes operating and improving recreational facilities, Lincoln Center, Gardens on Spring Creek and the Museum of Discovery; providing recreational, arts and cultural programs and public art; maintaining parks, trails and cemeteries; and improving natural areas 30% N=254 66% N=565 5% N=41 100% N=860 Transportation and Mobility: Includes transportation planning and development, maintaining roads and traffic operations, Transfort operations, and bicycle and pedestrian safety, Northern Colorado Regional Airport 55% N=469 43% N=367 2% N=19 100% N=854 General Government: Includes internal support functions, City management, Council, boards and commissions, volunteers, technology, communicating with community members and building maintenance and repair 20% N=151 72% N=560 8% N=63 100% N=774 Table 48: Question 16 with "no opinion" responses Please select the option that best describes how you think the City should address each of the following aspects of the community. More effort Same effort Less effort No opinion Total Economy: Includes economic planning and development activities, workforce training, childcare, education, employment opportunities 50% N=441 41% N=360 2% N=20 6% N=56 100% N=877 Environment: Includes efforts to ensure good water resources, good air quality, land conservation, smart growth, the Climate Action Plan and an attractive community 46% N=402 46% N=405 7% N=58 2% N=15 100% N=880 Page 91 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 79 - Please select the option that best describes how you think the City should address each of the following aspects of the community. More effort Same effort Less effort No opinion Total Neighborhood and Community Vitality: Includes promoting good neighbor relationships, ensuring attractive neighborhoods, historic preservation, an adequate supply of quality housing for all socio- economic groups, addressing poverty and homelessness, creating an inclusive community 53% N=471 38% N=332 6% N=57 2% N=21 100% N=880 Safety: Includes police, fire, stormwater, emergency medical response, and building inspection 20% N=171 68% N=596 8% N=74 4% N=32 100% N=873 Culture, Parks & Recreation: Includes operating and improving recreational facilities, Lincoln Center, Gardens on Spring Creek and the Museum of Discovery; providing recreational, arts and cultural programs and public art; maintaining parks, trails and cemeteries; and improving natural areas 29% N=254 64% N=565 5% N=41 3% N=22 100% N=882 Transportation and Mobility: Includes transportation planning and development, maintaining roads and traffic operations, Transfort operations, and bicycle and pedestrian safety, Northern Colorado Regional Airport 53% N=469 42% N=367 2% N=19 3% N=28 100% N=882 General Government: Includes internal support functions, City management, Council, boards and commissions, volunteers, technology, communicating with community members and building maintenance and repair 17% N=151 64% N=560 7% N=63 11% N=100 100% N=873 Page 92 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 80 - Table 49: Question 16 - Top 3 Priorities Please select which three (3) should be the top priorities for the City to focus on in the next 5 years. Percent selecting as top 1, 2 or 3 priority Number Economy: Includes economic planning and development activities, workforce training, childcare, education, employment opportunities 50% N=432 Environment: Includes efforts to ensure good water resources, good air quality, land conservation, smart growth, the Climate Action Plan and an attractive community 53% N=451 Neighborhood and Community Vitality: Includes promoting good neighbor relationships, ensuring attractive neighborhoods, historic preservation, an adequate supply of quality housing for all socio-economic groups, addressing poverty and homelessness, creating an inclusive community 61% N=526 Safety: Includes police, fire, stormwater, emergency medical response, and building inspection 27% N=230 Culture, Parks & Recreation: Includes operating and improving recreational facilities, Lincoln Center, Gardens on Spring Creek and the Museum of Discovery; providing recreational, arts and cultural programs and public art; maintaining parks, trails and cemeteries; and improving natural areas 37% N=317 Transportation and Mobility: Includes transportation planning and development, maintaining roads and traffic operations, Transfort operations, and bicycle and pedestrian safety, Northern Colorado Regional Airport 53% N=454 General Government: Includes internal support functions, City management, Council, boards and commissions, volunteers, technology, communicating with community members and building maintenance and repair 13% N=109 Page 93 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 81 - Table 50: Question 18 without "don’t know" responses Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources for information regarding City issues, services and programs. Always Frequently Sometimes Never Total The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 0% N=2 1% N=12 10% N=92 88% N=774 100% N=880 Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 0% N=3 4% N=31 19% N=160 78% N=671 100% N=865 City's website (www.fcgov.com) 8% N=71 30% N=262 53% N=463 9% N=82 100% N=878 City News eNewsletter 3% N=27 13% N=110 29% N=257 55% N=483 100% N=877 Newsletters or brochures from City departments 2% N=21 14% N=126 41% N=362 42% N=366 100% N=875 City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) 2% N=19 9% N=80 53% N=468 35% N=309 100% N=876 Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) 3% N=24 14% N=124 34% N=296 49% N=425 100% N=869 “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 10% N=86 18% N=156 41% N=364 31% N=278 100% N=884 Word of mouth 16% N=146 39% N=341 37% N=328 8% N=70 100% N=886 Newspaper (print or online) 8% N=73 19% N=164 33% N=284 40% N=353 100% N=874 Radio 5% N=47 10% N=85 29% N=254 56% N=494 100% N=880 Television news 3% N=24 8% N=72 20% N=175 69% N=601 100% N=872 Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 12% N=104 27% N=239 34% N=299 27% N=236 100% N=878 OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 2% N=17 6% N=49 20% N=169 73% N=629 100% N=863 Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 2% N=16 4% N=33 14% N=124 80% N=691 100% N=865 Access Fort Collins 2% N=15 5% N=42 22% N=194 71% N=620 100% N=870 City booth at local events 2% N=14 10% N=89 40% N=351 48% N=418 100% N=872 Other (please specify) 2% N=8 4% N=21 6% N=31 88% N=445 100% N=504 Page 94 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 82 - Table 51: Question 18 with "don’t know" responses Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources for information regarding City issues, services and programs. Always Frequently Sometimes Never Total The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 0% N=2 1% N=12 10% N=92 88% N=774 100% N=880 Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 0% N=3 4% N=31 19% N=160 78% N=671 100% N=865 City's website (www.fcgov.com) 8% N=71 30% N=262 53% N=463 9% N=82 100% N=878 City News eNewsletter 3% N=27 13% N=110 29% N=257 55% N=483 100% N=877 Newsletters or brochures from City departments 2% N=21 14% N=126 41% N=362 42% N=366 100% N=875 City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) 2% N=19 9% N=80 53% N=468 35% N=309 100% N=876 Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) 3% N=24 14% N=124 34% N=296 49% N=425 100% N=869 “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 10% N=86 18% N=156 41% N=364 31% N=278 100% N=884 Word of mouth 16% N=146 39% N=341 37% N=328 8% N=70 100% N=886 Newspaper (print or online) 8% N=73 19% N=164 33% N=284 40% N=353 100% N=874 Radio 5% N=47 10% N=85 29% N=254 56% N=494 100% N=880 Television news 3% N=24 8% N=72 20% N=175 69% N=601 100% N=872 Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 12% N=104 27% N=239 34% N=299 27% N=236 100% N=878 OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 2% N=17 6% N=49 20% N=169 73% N=629 100% N=863 Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 2% N=16 4% N=33 14% N=124 80% N=691 100% N=865 Access Fort Collins 2% N=15 5% N=42 22% N=194 71% N=620 100% N=870 City booth at local events 2% N=14 10% N=89 40% N=351 48% N=418 100% N=872 Other (please specify) 2% N=8 4% N=21 6% N=31 88% N=445 100% N=504 Page 95 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 83 - Table 52: Question 18 - Top 3 Priorities Indicate your top three (3) preferred methods of receiving information. Percent selecting as top 1, 2 or 3 priority Number The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 0% N=4 Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 2% N=17 City's website (www.fcgov.com) 54% N=461 City News eNewsletter 26% N=218 Newsletters or brochures from City departments 24% N=199 City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) 14% N=122 Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) 10% N=85 “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 22% N=183 Word of mouth 32% N=268 Newspaper (print or online) 23% N=197 Radio 10% N=84 Television news 6% N=49 Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 43% N=360 OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 3% N=25 Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 2% N=17 Access Fort Collins 3% N=26 City booth at local events 7% N=60 Other (please specify) 4% N=32 Page 96 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 84 - Appendix C: Verbatim Responses to Open -Ended Questions Following are verbatim responses to the open-ended question on the survey. Because these responses were written by survey participants, they are presented here in verbatim form, including any typographical, grammar or other mistakes. The responses are grouped by category and are in alphabetical order. Q17: Thinking about the next few years, what is ONE item or focus area you would like the City to improve? C OST OF LIVING /ECONOMY /JOBS • Affordability / Cost of Living • Affordability + gentrification • Affordability, both for residents and businesses • Affordability, so that people who work in our community can comfortably live in it. • Affordability. • Although my family has grown up here. We may not be able to stay because of housing & utility costs. • Blue collar affordability with less corporate gentrification • Cost of Living • Economic development, Affordable housing, SE community center. • Economic growth - the city is withering instead of growing and thriving. Businesses don't survive here, few will come here, and many leave. • Economic initiatives and buffers against inept federal executive leadership. • Economic sustainability • Economic Vitality - we need to ensure there are employment opportunities both with new companies and existing companies. This supports all other aspects of livability. Housing, environment, diversity, choice of retail, restaurants etc • Economy • Economy • Economy • Economy • Economy • Economy • Economy, attract more business. • Economy. • ECONOMY. Page 97 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 85 - • Focus on a more diversified economy with higher paying jobs • job growth and accessibility for all • job opportunities • Low income senior livability aide • Minimum wage • More businesses more jobs • More entrepreneurial and workforce development for teens and young adults. • More job opportunities and training, my partner struggles finding work. • Senior citizens who live alone and/or are increasingly being priced out of housing, food, and other costs. • Work on affordability issues. And somehow encouraging more job growth through encouragement of new businesses. Requiring more affordable housing. H OUSING COST OR AFFORDABILITY • 4 bedroom renter availability low income • Actual affordable housing. Rent is unattainable for many, especially seniors. • Address rising housing cost. • Adequate and affordable housing • affordable housing • affordable housing • affordable housing • affordable housing • affordable housing • affordable housing • affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing Page 98 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 86 - • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable Housing • Affordable Housing • Affordable Housing • Affordable Housing • Affordable Housing • Affordable Housing • Affordable Housing • Affordable Housing (which includes incentives for using less electricity/water and low -income rebates on property taxes for veterans and people with disabilities) • Affordable housing & ADU • Affordable housing and childcare options • Affordable housing and healthcare • Affordable housing and home ownership. • affordable housing especially for seniors • Affordable housing for all. • Affordable housing for families • Affordable housing including more houselessness resources Page 99 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 87 - • Affordable housing that is actually affordable by disabled individuals and people who make minimum wage. • Affordable housing with mixed use development (walkable neighborhoods w/ food, entertainment, retail nearby) • affordable housing, and not just more apartments. We have so many apartments. Mixed income developments. • Affordable housing, denser communities. • Affordable housing, groceries and utilities • Affordable housing, more affordable housing, even more affordable housing. Making homes more affordable should be the #1 absolute priority for our city! • Affordable housing, working on the ROOT causes of homelessness. • Affordable housing! • Affordable housing! • Affordable housing. • Affordable housing. • Affordable housing. • Affordable housing. • Affordable housing. • Affordable housing. I would be homeless if it weren't for my partner. • Affordable housing. The hurdles are too great currently • Affordable housing/development - both residential and commercial • Affordable quality housing • Affordable rentals and housing. • Affordable senior housing and services • Affordable single family housing • Affordable/adequate housing • affordable/attainable housing • Attainable housing across various income levels to allow people who work in different jobs to live in Fort Collins. • Availability of affordable housing. It's EXTREMELY expensive to live here. With my personal situation, I cannot move out because of relationship issues. There is absolutely no way for me to be able to support myself on my own here in Fort Collins. The pric e and availability of housing is preventing me from moving on and bettering myself. Our eldest child (19) wants to move out and be an adult, but he can't because, with going to school and working, he can't support himself, even having a place with 3 other people as roommates. We live in a 3-bedroom apartment with 5 people. This living situation was fine when we moved here 8 years ago. We now have 2 teenagers and an adult child. This living arrangement isn't working, but we can't move. We're stuck here. I work full time at $21/hr, and my husband is also full time at $23/hr and does Door Dash, and we Page 100 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 88 - still can't better ourselves. We still can't have a savings account, let alone a retirement fund. We're never going to be able to retire. If we had a medical emergency or a car accident and needed a new car, we couldn't afford to pay for those things. The cost of housing and the cost of living here in Fort Collins are preventing us from living the American Dream. We will never own a house. We will never be able to purchase brand-new cars. We will never retire. We have no chance at the American Dream. Just surviving paycheck to paycheck isn't living. It's sad and depressing. • BUILD MORE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING -- we are strangling this city with our NIMBY ways and lack of attainable housing options. Especially near transit, but anything and everything helps. Relax zoning! Give us a sustainable future so our kids might live here one day too. • Building more shelters and affordable housing units for our neighbors who are currently unhoused. • Capital A Affordable housing. • Cheaper housing • diverse affordable housing to allow people who work here to live here, to allow kids to stay once adults • Find ways to help those who work here to find and secure housing • Finding a way to support families in mobile home park communities and protect them against their landlords. The city should try to buy these plots of land to maintain low -income housing opportunities. this also provides support for these individuals and families wellbeing, safety and quality of life. • Greater abundance of housing • Growing toward an adequate supply of quality housing for all socio-economic groups to help address poverty and homelessness. • Having more housing that is affordable to low income families. • Housing • housing affordability • Housing affordability • Housing affordability • Housing affordability • Housing affordability and accessibility • Housing affordability and density, including elliminaiton of parking minimums • Housing affordability. • Housing availability and affordability • Housing choices for people of all ages and income levels. More lifelong housing and more affordable housing. • Housing costs. I make a decent salary at around 80k a year and I feel fairly significant pressure managing my expenses due to the cost of housing. I don't understand how college age adults are expected to live here without having 2/3 roommates or making ex tensive cuts to a comfortable quality of life. Page 101 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 89 - • Housing prices and availability of affordable housing, particularly in mixed use areas with supporting businesses. • Housing prices are out of control. Young people can't break into the market. • Increasing density of affordable housing in walkable areas, mixed zoning. • Increasing supply of affordable housing • Lack of housing is a real issue in Fort Collins. Rent is too expensive to allow people to live without multiple housemates, and prevents most people from saving to buy a home. People are frequently forced to look for the cheapest option, not the best option, for themselves and their families. • Low income housing • Lower rent for dowtown businesses • Lowering the cost of housing • Make it easier for young families to live in the city - housing, schools, child care • More afford & senior housing - more ease in working with clients. • more affordable housing • more affordable housing • More affordable housing • More affordable housing for low income people • More affordable housing options for renters. • More affordable housing options for those who do not qualify as low income but do not make enough to rent • More affordable housing without severe income restricted housing developments. It's great for low income families and that's great, but if you aren't rich, low income, or living with 3 other people it's incredibly hard to find affordable housing. • more affordable housing, New housing development being encouraged with inadequate streets. Better safety for cyclists and pedestrians • More affordable housing. • MORE AFFORDABLE LIVING. • More quality, affordable housing. • More truly affordable housing • Move FC to be a place where lower and lower-middle class people can live and thrive • Need more low-income housing • REAL affordable housing, i.e. housing units designed to be available below the current market rate. Also, I recommend separating "safety" into multiple categories for future surveys. I support the fire department efforts as-is but I think Fort Collins has an over-policing problem • Real affordable housing. "Attainable" is not a valid answer. • Rental assistance, because the cost of living keep rising. Page 102 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 90 - • Rents are on par with NYC and LA which is absurd. • resolve discrepancy between stated values of affordable housing/missing middle housing and the onerous process for development which causes housing costs to continue to grow beyond the affordability of many folks • The one area I'd like to see most improvement on is a combination of affordable housing and job opportunities. Lots of people graduate college in Fort Collins or move here soon after, a robust market of employment and housing will ensure these people stay in town and are able to contribute meaningfully. • There needs to be diverse, housing options for all types of incomes in Ft Collins. I work with highly- skilled young professionals who cannot afford to buy a home in Ft Collins. I am friends with great public school teachers who cannot afford to buy a home in Fort Collins. I see valuable public employees struggle to maintain a foothold in this community due to housing prices. We need to develop diverse housing options and create house-buying incentives for high-potential, effective people in this community and quit bowing to efforts from long-time locals that look to squash development within the city. • Vivienda de calidad asequible • Would like to see more 55+ neighborhoods w/smaller, but QUALITY 1200 to 1500 SF homes + condos + patio homes. T RAFFIC , ROADS , AND PARKING • Beltway around the city to reach the interstate with minimal stoppages. • Better traffic flow • BETTER TRAFFIC LIGHT SYNCHRONIZATION (2 WAY SYNCHRONIZATION SAN DIEGO DID THAT 60 YRS AGO). • Commercial vehicle traffic speeding in neighborhoods & car racing. Ex. Southridge Greens Blvd. east of Lemay • DO NOT REDUCE PARKING IN COMMERCIAL AREAS • Do not remove parking lot behind Tony's. Add more public parking downtown. • Enforce noise ordinances for cars and motorcycles. Too many drive around making excessive noise. • Enforcement of extreme speeding cars and very loud vehicles. • Enforcement of traffic laws and noise ordinances on motorcycles, street racers, and coal-rolling trucks. • Enforcing traffic laws • Fixing city roads like the frontage road off S College in front of the Pet Wellness Clinic • Following traffic laws. • Get e-bikes and scooters off the trails • hands on traffic enforcement • Improve driving cars in the city. Time the lights. Build more roads. Page 103 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 91 - • Improving traffic patterns for expanding population growth • Increased public parking areas for handicapped residents in Old Town and Public Libraries. • Less car traffic • Less enforcement on speeding tickets and more enforcement and education on actual driving abilities or better traffic flow engineering! • Less motor vehicle noise - especially motor cycles. • Less simultaneous road construction - it seems every year, every major road in the city undergoes some kind of construction. Though needed, there needs to be a more cohesive planning in terms of the time/order of the road construction based on their location. For instance, do not have simultaneous construction on roads that are in proximity to each other. This would create more driver frustration and promote road rage. Something to think about. Thank you. • More green arrow turn signals in old town • More traffic enforcement by the PD • Motorcycle traffic and noise enforcement • Noise control, especially relating to traffic and loud vehicles. • Noise reduction for cars/trucks/motorcycles that can be heard 1/2 mile away or farther away. • Paid parking downtown • Parking at natural areas • Parking downtown. • Parking in old town. Attracting more business and services East Mulberry and providing public transportation East side of Fort Collins • Road improvements vs cosmetic resun facing - widen prospect & 4 lane west of I-25. • Road maintenance • Roads • Roads, traffic and park upgrades. • SIDEWALKS!!! • Streetlight timing • Tax massive pickup trucks to get these safety hazards off our shared roads. • Ticketing racing cars and motorcycles on Harmony and sometimes Horsetooth on weekend evenings and nights. So loud and drag racing. Very irritating. Can't be safe. • TOO MUCH SURFACE PARKING AROUND OLD TOWN. • Traffic • Traffic • Traffic • Traffic • Traffic and mass transit • Traffic control Page 104 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 92 - • Traffic enforcement • Traffic enforcement safety • Traffic enforcement. • Traffic enforcement. Too many speeders and loud vehicles. • traffic flow • Traffic flow • Traffic flow • Traffic flow • Traffic Flow • Traffic flow. • TRAFFIC FLOW. • Traffic it is hard to get around the city without waiting at lights for a long time. Other cities have over passes over their trains why don't we. • Traffic law enforcement and pedestrian safety • Traffic laws enforcement!! • Traffic light at Timberline & Lincoln too many accidents. • Traffic noise pollution reduction (especially of loud motorcycles during summer). • Traffic noise, specifically from motorcycles and street racing modified cars. • Traffic safety • Traffic safety (especially bike and pedestrian safety) • Traffic speed & careless drivers. (Enforcement). • Traffic, fix Prospect • Traffic, homelessness, crime need more focus • Traffic! • Traffic. • Traffic. • Trails • Vehicle parking - easy access to businesses. E NVIRONMENTAL ISSUES , SUSTAINABILITY • Achieving 80% GHG reductions by 2030 • Air improvement. • Air Quality • Air quality -- specifically, can the City **please** consider doing something to educate motorists about the impact idling vehicles have on local air quality? I live near a school, and the parents waiting to pick up their kids are insufferable. There are days when 20-30 vehicles are idling for 15, 20, 30 minutes in my neighborhood. It's not good for anyone, least of all the kids who have to Page 105 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 93 - walk through a wall of exhaust! Same goes for shopping centers -- people leave their vehicles idling for 20-30 minutes while they shop. It's appalling!! • air quality, especially at our elevation as lungs are already working hard to compensate for elevation, let's minimize air pollution which exacerbates even minor lung issues • Air Quality. • Be on par with other co cities re environmental issues. • Clean our filthy air, mitigate climate change to the best of our ability, and quit going down the road of deregulation, calling it the only way to achieve affordable housing. Fort Collins looks to be in the pocket of the development industry, and has forgotten that clean air, a stable water supply, and a healthy environment are far more important than ensuring that already rich people have the chance to get even richer by mining the neighborhoods of Fort Collins for wealth. The City's job is to protect the health and safety of residents, not make things worse for them by deregulation and a focus on only growth. • climate action • climate change • Climate change fire and flood mitigation and preparadeness • environment • Environment • Environment • Environment • Environment - are there too many structures being built if not enough WATER? • Environment, particularly air quality. • Environment. • Environment. • Environment. • Environment. • ENVIRONMENT. • Environmental • Environmental • Environmental conservation/restoration • Environmental efforts and water conservation • Improved recycling, specifically compost and e-waste; city is so progressive in so many ways, yet so lacking compared to efforts of other environmentally concious cities and counties • Light pollution • Meeting climate goals • noise • Recycling. Page 106 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 94 - • Reduce our water use! Why do neighborhoods with HOAs require green lawns? Why do business centers need green lawns? It's insane! We live in an arid environment and it's only getting drier. Fort Collins should restrict wasteful water use and encourage the planting of native grasses and vegetation. I love the potted plants downtown, and I'm not talking about that, but wide scale wasteful watering of lawns that we don't need!!! • reducing greenhouse gas emissions • Sustainability • The climate crisis. Obviously Fort Collins can't control other communities, but we have to do our darndest to get people on board with public transportation, air quality, water conservation, reduce/reuse/recycle, etc. Because everything else is secondary to having a liveable planet. • Water • Water is our limiting factor in how many people can comfortably live in Fort Collins. We have reached our limit. • Water quality with respect forever chemicals • Wildlife friendly lighting. G ROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT , RETAIL , AMENITIES • A lot of businesses are disappearing - Macy's, Penney's, Joanna's, In a city of this size, that is perplexing making it very inconvient to find basic HH needs. Also, seem like doctors are disspearing or perhaps the whole healthcare system is changing, Not for the better. • Attracting and supporting LOCAL business • Attracting job creators, especially those in high paying and tech sectors. • Attracting more business and better shopping opportunities. • Attracting the big business that seems to keep choosing Loveland over Fort Collins. • Better shopping • Clothing shopping for all ages that are not at a sporting goods store like Dicks. A variety of stores that you find in Denver or even Loveland mall. • Commercial rental rates • Considering how to integrate businesses (grocery, coffee shops, etc) into areas of the city that are very car dependent (e.g. SE FoCo where we have to drive to almost anything). • Due to ridiculously high rents, retaining local businesses instead of the same old same old chains (that can afford those rents) • Find a way to have more retail businesses (especially dining and entertainment) thrive in the city. Wish we had a greater variety of options, especially at reasonable price points. • Focus on attracting new businesses and protect local business • Focus on retaining and attracting businesses • I wish there more corner shops and places to walk to/convenience stores/etc. • Improve business support • Improve shopping Page 107 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 95 - • It'd be nice to see new businesses in old town last longer • Keep helping local businesses flourish! Downtown and all over foco! • Let someone open a Jack in the Box in Fort Collins! • Making it much easier for business startup. Currently too many agencies to satisfy with no combined effort to have a cohesive, comprehensive one stop shop. This should be a top priority and measurement of the City Manager's effectiveness in making this a better place to live. We have the beautiful gateway to the City at Harmony. But why should they come here?Where do people shop when they come here? How are we increasing sales tax revenue?I know you only asked for one, but traffic enforcement is a joke. • new impactful businesses and quaintness of businesses looks • Our "Mall" is not a popular place to shop! Bring in some department stores. Get community opinion on mall! • Promoting growth • Retaining business particularly local restaurants in old town and around the city. We're seeing too many disappear bc of the high costs of rent and the city is not doing enough w dda to ensure local owners can stay in business • Small business friendly • Smart growth, including transportation & housing. • Support of small business. • Supporting small, local businesses. Forcing small, entrepreneurial to jump through the city planning maze and expense will result in less local, unique offerings and lead us towards bigbox, chain stores that have zero community appeal. • The variety of retail businesses in the City. We have multiple Targets and Walmarts, but only one true department store, and it is struggling. The renovated mall is a sad, empty shell of what it once was, and who wants to walk outside from business to business in the long winter? • Welcoming new businesses. Many are coming to Northern Colorado but finding us expensive and very bureaucratic to open here so they take those tax dollars outside the City limits to easier to operate towns. • Would love to see more tech employers in the city to create more local tech jobs. L ESS GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT ; ISSUES RELATED TO GROWTH , PLANNING , AND ZONING • Building Department - cut the red tape beaurocracy • Control of growth, limits on new development - FC is outgrowing its infrastructure - roads getting far too crowded. • duplication of outlets that provide food + shopping + recreation in separate districts. The traffic coming in from Timnath, windsor, and loveland make driving more difficult and biking more dangerous. • Efficiency and consistency of planning and zoning Page 108 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 96 - • Encourage LOW DENSITY, QUALITY housing development. Many of the new housing developments encouraged by the city look like Russian gulags and will be slum housing in a few years. • Focus on maintaining our city and not just on profit from growth. • Housing zoning laws. Put new legislation to replace U+2 • Improve zoning support for hyper local businesses including restaurants, shops and bars in neighborhoods to help build neighborhood culture, cohesion and livability. • Land use • Less building/expansion in open areas • Less density living in all of Fort Collins, especially downtown- keep green space! • Less growth and less traffic. • Limiting single family development, encouraging multi family, multi level homes with multiple usage types on ground and garden floors • Maintaining the city's heritage. Stop building ugly buildings and save the beautiful buildings we still have. • Managing sprawl and associated car-centric development • Planning of growth to include realistic forecasting of water available for residences. • Planning. Fort Collins has consistently been projected for growth since the 1970s and little has been done to plan for it. The streets are clogged, public transport is limited, and every new construction is a box of culture-less sludge that replaced a unique period building. Fort Collins is great, but the traffic is rivaling LA County, public transport and pedestrian only zones are very limited, and the aesthetic is being turned into dystopian garbage. It's all concrete and beige blocks. In the immediate future, Fort Collins needs to focus planning on:1. Pedestrian Zones & community/cultural areas - areas in old town would explode if they were pedestrian-only. (Linden, Walnut, Willow, etc). This would also allow more space for events, markets and culture.2. Handling Traffic - College/Harmony/etc. cant be widened, so invest in more bus routes and a light rail system? Get private companies to build it for you in exchange for tax benefits if funds are limited. Traffic negatively impacts the living experience significantly.3. Aesthetics - prevent large builders from stuffing every corner with cookie-cutter slop apartment buildings and stores. Mountain, Old Town - these are the areas that make Fort Collins unique. The history and look of the town being replaced by generic cheap garbage that looks the exact same all over the Colorado front range and western United States. Everything "new" is indifferent from Frederick, Dacono, Loveland, Erie, Timnath, and Greeley. Sure it's cheaper and faster, but its generic. • Please get smarter about development. There are ways to build new housing that are better than what is happening here. I live in NE Fort Collins and it has been so depressing. The "neighborhoods" are just soulless fields of housing built for developers to make a quick buck, not to actually develop community, and the way things are being built there are no thru streets so all the exiting roads are just becoming wider, faster, busier highways. The only business I can walk to is a Uhaul. I think about how different my neighborhood might be if there were a little coffee shop somewhere walkable. I might actually know some of my neighbors. One time a neighbor I don't know stopped me on my evening walk to tell me she thought it was creepy that I was walking Page 109 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 97 - around by myself if I don't have a dog. So you have to leave the neighborhood to get to anything, but the only way is to drive. Why are developers not required to build bike trails and plan for community connection? The "bike lane" on Vine is a joke when semis are roaring past at 55mph. I'd bike everywhere all year if I could feel safe, but instead I only drive my car because I don't want to die to prove a point. I love that the bus is free (and proud of that!) but the 14 bus stops running so early that I can only use it to go to Old Town on weekends, and it doesn't run on Sunday. I'm jealous of members of my book club who can take the bus to and from old town in the evening. There is SO MUCH to love about Fort Collins, and so much of the city programming is wonderful, but I see the lack of planning negating all of that and very quickly turning the city into a car- centric collection of isolated housing blocks and strip malls. • Preserving quality of life by not forcing densification and tapering off growth to a stable population • Protecting Hughes land from being developed and built on (LISTEN TO THE VOTERS); Addressing Climate Change concerns so our community can be successful in 20-30-40 years • Put more limits on high density housing developments • Putting parks in, into the new communities (i.e. mosaic/bloom) • Reduce condo development and go back to single family housing. Make it more affordable for developers to accomplish this change. Develope more right hand turn lanes at traffic intersections. • Reduce the amount of people moving here • Reduce the conversion of land/farms to housing communities, as the infrastructure is being overwhelmed • Relax some zoning restrictions to allow for more low-impact mixed-use within all single family areas. Corner stores, coffee shops, fitness studios, personal services and similar business should be permitted to operate on connector streets like Swallow, Stover, or Stuart. This ONE change addresses, climate, mobility, social health, and safety of our city. • Run away development • stop building more housing - the infrastructure is not here to support • STOP encouraging growth! (economic and otherwise). More people moving here will necessarily decrease the quality of life in Fort Collins. • Stop high density push - help make single family homes more affordable • Stop scaring people that their SFH neighborhoods will be mowed down for condos/apartments. • Stop the influx of condos! We want single family homes! • Stop trying to push multi-unit development on residential properties • They need to limit the multi family development in neighborhoods that are not designed to accommodate that increased vehicle traffic. • Zoning to promite density. T RANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS , MOBILITY , PATHS , AND TRAILS • 15 minute city initiatives. Page 110 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 98 - • Accessibility of public transit. • Accessible public transportation. • Actually get bike lanes that fully cross the city from east to west without disappearing for any distance or getting dumped onto the sidewalk. This seems like table stakes to claim any kind of biking friendliness. Drake and Harmony are the *only* roads that have this now. Why can't the bike lanes on Vine and Horsetooth get finished? And why do two major crossroads in a row (Mulberry and Prospect) not even pretend? • Alternate transportation improvements. Bus route improvements to access foothills area and powerline/maxwell trails. Possible improvements to decrease stolen bike incidents? Possibly a more affordable and readily available e-bike rental option? Possibly affordable electric car rental options for daily errands? • Alternative Modes of Transportation • Alternative transportation, getting people to leave their cars home. • Better connectivity by bicycle and public transport from SE Ft. Collins to the rest of the city. • Better public transportation we need to get cars off the road.we have bike paths that are good for recreation but not for daily commutes • Better services in bus , more routes more rides • Better transportation alternatives to reduce pollution and congestion • Bicycle and pedestrian safety • Bicycle and public transportation • Bicycle safety • Bike trail safety • Bike trails • Bus lines from Timberline/Vine to CSU/MAX. • CONTINUE TO EXPAND AND MAINTAIN BIKE PATHS. • Continue to make the City accessible by alternative transportation. • Dedicated lanes, trails and overpasses for bicyclists and pedestrians. • Doing better critical thinking and using some common sense when dealing with transportation/traffic/pedestrian issues. You guys do some seriously goofy and dumb/dangerous stuff compared to other places when it comes to streets engineering. • Effective transportation planning for the future growth. It should not be our job to convince you the traffic planning is lacking and it causes huge backups and problems. Bad roundabouts should be corrected. Lanes should be added. It's unbelievable how the master plan lacks so much! • Even better-connected bike networks • Even more focus on bike and pedestrian safety and accessibility and better mass transit with the stated and primary goal to reduce vehicular traffic Page 111 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 99 - • Expanding Transfort to serve the communities that live off Trilby. We deserve public transport too, and we're near the bus depot, so there could be a few morning buses and a few afternoon/evening buses to help get people to the city for the day and home for the evening. • Fix Tribly & College intersection -- How many years is it going to take. • Gaps in public transportation • I would love to see the trails expanded in the Maxwell Natural area and a bike park would be exciting. I'd like there to be more easily accessible bus transportation, even between close towns like Windsor/Loveland/Wellington. • I'm a transportation nerd but... I REALLY want to see people think there are more *feasible* alternatives to driving everywhere. Cars & traffic lower many aspects of quality of life (pollution, safety, general annoyance/rage, extra costs of ownership, etc.) • Improve public transportation effectiveness and viability, specifically including more robust options for transport to Denver and DIA at all times of day and night. (Also I know you only asked for one, but I'd love to see Connexion expand to Laporte so I can get my mom off TDS's terrible service lol) • Improving pedestrian safety • Improving public and alternative transportation • Improving road and trail access in District 1. We have received almost nothing besides Vine while southern fort collins has gotten tons of improvements. Right now there is only 1 road into my neighborhood that is never plowed, is in heavy disrepair, and during heavy snow will trap our entire neighborhood. Timberline north of mulberry is also a nightmare, potholes, heavy traffic congestion, dangerous intersections, dangerous bike lanes, complete lack of any kind of street sweeping, and at least 2 sinkholes sinking the road are just the tip of the iceberg. • Intersection of Vine and Timberline. TRAINS! • Light rail from Fort Collins to Denver • Make all parts of the city accessible for non car options. Re-zone areas so that neighborhoods can have nearby stores and services withing walking/biking distance. Not just Old Town. • Make Fort Collins less car dependent. • Make Midtown walkable • More bike friendly transportation paths in north west FC • More bike trails, and turn downtown roads into pedestrian only zones. Cars should be more scarce. • More bike/ pedestrian underpasses for safety. One is needed at Harmony and Straus cabin intersections. These underpasses will improve safety and reduce mortality. • More emphasis on bike trails, walking, lower pollution transportation options to improve air quality and/or reduce need for driving, and greater development and support of neighborhood essential services to reduce driving. • More free public transportation • More underpasses for pedestrians + cyclists. • More useful bus/mass transit system Page 112 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 100 - • Need safe bike lanes over I-25 on mulberry & prospect. I live in Clydesdale park + not safe to ride bike over I-25. • Pedestrian and bike safe crossings of College Avenue in Midtown, not just better walk signals but safety from cars in a hurry simply not paying attention to bikes or pedestrians. • Plan Zero, focusing on bicycle deaths by improving bike lane corridors and adding safety barriers. • Please improve the public transport services • Public transport linking further out neighborhoods to old town • Public transportation • Public transportation • Public transportation • Public transportation • Public Transportation • Public Transportation • Public transportation & walkabilty • Public Transportation and Mobility • Public transportation and non-car infrastructure • Public transportation: tighter net, more frequent departures, generally PT as the superior option over driving. • Public transportation. • Public Transportation. The MAX line is a tremendous service, and Fort Collins & CSU's renewed focus on Transfort is a fresh breath of air. The city will always be hamstringed by 20th century decisions about our mile-based street grid. The best way to combat transportation issues is continuing to create a desirable public transit system that is accessible in combination with promoting mixed-use development that places common needs like grocery near residential areas in a manner that does not require personal automobiles. • Quick access to Denver via rail, and FIX the glitching railroad crossings for God's sake. • Railroad crossings, more overpasses, like Vine and Timberline • Reducing reliance on cars to conduct day-to-day business • Stop taking away our traffic privileges and traffic lanes. Traffic is already horrible and these BS cameras are nothing more than an easy money grab. They're not saving lives, let's be real here. • Strong focus on improving and extending non-automobile transportation systems. • Support front range rail initiatives to the maximum extent possible • Supporting transfort • The #1 is to reroute all those gosh darn trains and tracks! Loud, obnoxious and often stop traffic. It takes so long just to get from north to south foco. Plus, not encourage more homeless people, sorry but on north side they are a nuisance. Then overall, better streets and flow (there are soooo many traffic lights and now red light ticketing). • The public transportation system. Page 113 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 101 - • Think about soft trails to connect neighborhoods, parks, open spaces and shopping. • Train line to Denver • Transforming into a 15-minute city with better walking and biking options. • Transfort bus service; if you're not going to or from CSU, it's nearly useless. • Transportation • Transportation • Transportation • Transportation • Transportation • Transportation • Transportation • Transportation • TRANSPORTATION • TRANSPORTATION • TRANSPORTATION - ENFORCEMENT OF SPEED LIMITS, RUNNING RED LIGHTS. • Transportation in particular, traffic light coordination. • Transportation is the biggest issue for me. I used to rely on direct flights from the NoCo airport to LA all the time. Losing that route has made travel much harderI truly hate having to drive to Denver for so many things, especially flights. The NoCo airport is wonderful and has the potential to serve not just Northern Colorado but also parts of Wyoming. Driving I-25 is intense... nonstop constructions, terrible traffic jams, horrific accidents.We need better, more frequent, and more accessible transportation between Denver and Fort Collins. I recently had a delayed flight, missed my Groome shuttle, and ended up stranded late at night. The only way to get home without a three-hour delay was Lyft- which came to $130. Fort Collins should not be so isolated in 2025.Another important issue is attracting people from diverse backgrounds to our city. As an example, I have a friend in Denver who's thinking about movingshe's dating someone in Fort Collins, so I asked if she'd consider relocating here. Her response stuck with me: as a Black woman, she said, "H*ll would have to freeze over before I move to a place that's over 80% white."It made me sad to hear, but I understood. Living somewhere where you're rarelyif everaround people who share your racial or cultural identity can be isolating and exhausting. It's not just about demographics; it's about feeling seen, safe, and supported in everyday life. I'm sure the City of Fort Collins is aware of this challenge, and yes, this is a complex issue. I believe it's importan t enough to keep naming and addressing. Our city has so much to offer. • Transportation issues (car, bike, and pedestrian) on the NE side of the city. • Transportation safety • Transportation to Longview • transportation- make it easier to get around Page 114 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 102 - • Transportation: public transport, walking, and cycling. The city already does well here, but has the opportunity and should aim to be world class. More protected bike lanes, better pedestrian infrastructure, and trails. • Walkability. SAFETY , CRIME , POLICING • A sort of overhaul of "policing" wherein people with guns aren't primary responders to (reasonably speaking) ~most issues. • Add more police on the streets to address traffic issues and crime, and remove the radar/camera revenue generators. • Better police presence and protection. • Crime and drug clean up • Crime and homlessness/drug addicts. I don't want to see people passed out at 8pm downtown when I'm with my child. What has happened to fort collins. Don't let the dregs of society take over. • CRIME! - CRIME! CRIME! I'm lived here 30 years + crime getting horse. • Downtown safety. • Finding places for the homeless so they aren't in the streets of Old Town as a minimum. • Fire safety • Get a police chief in that gives a **** about the people he represents. • increase in safe, affordable housing • Making the entire Poudre trail feel safe again • More enforcement of codes and laws, especially with camping,/homelss, open drug use, traffic violations, roaming animals and noise ordinances. My neighbor has been deteriorating rapidly and homeless people are creating health and safety hazards. • More police officers. • Overall safety and protection of citizens from rampant petty theft and impact of the houseless population on safety. • Public safty • Response to police reports • Safery • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety - fewer vagrants please. Discourage loitering. Page 115 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results -103 - •Safety - the transient population is getting out of hand, especially in the downtown area. This is the only area I feel unsafe in Fort Collins. I've frequently seen drugged out individuals downtown day and night, and have had some direct encounters with these individuals. It's not simply an "inconvenience" as some say. This is a real problem that needs to be dealt with. •Safety & cleaning up town. •Safety and affordability especially since the cost of living/affordability here has increased dramatically over the last 20 years and continues to increase, hence crime/homelessness/poverty has dramatically increased along with it...they go hand in hand! Retirees can no longer afford to live here and Fort Collins appears to cater to those with higher incomes, it's really sad! Expenses such as utilities and property taxes continue to increase and the city continues to ask for more money in the way of increased fees, sales taxes, school bonds, etc. while the quality of living in Fort Collins depreciates yearly! Many parks are in dire need of repair and upgrades but the city doesn't seem to have the money to get that done, but can consider installing a bike park at the former Hughes Stadium site!? I absolutely DO NOT AGREE with the so called Civic Assembly process with only 20 people having a voice in the fate of the former Hughes Stadium site! Is this what the residents can expect in the future? Doesn't appear to be a fair process in any way! •Safety and managing the homeless population along the River Trail (issues with safety, littering, damage to env't, etc.) •Safety from cars: bike safety on roads, more pedestrian only squares in old town. •Safety. •Safety. •SAFETY. •Safety. I work w/the juvinille justice system. It is awful! •Safety. I've only lived here 1 year & I am surprised at the level of crime sems worse than in Littleton where I lived prior. •The police do not care about safety or doing their jobs. I have called for help with people driving aggressively, for harassment from men, and cars blocking my driveway. They have never acted like they care about safety at all. I have had a police officer try to talk me out of filing a police report against a man who was stalking me telling me "it would make it worse." I have had another officer tell me that he was sure the aggressive driver would have another opinion about the incident and refused to address the issue. I had an officer tell me they DO NOT patrol on the south east side of town ON PURPOSE because there is NO CRIME on this side of town. There was a girl murdered in the parking lot at whispering pines. There was a murder /suicide in the neighborhood near Boltz middle school. All in the past 3 years. I have called about a fight next door and watched as the cop drove by the fight in the street and didn't stop. There was a shooting at the mall, people hit by cars on bikes, people shot on trails, etc on the south east side of town. •Unsolved neighborhood crime. Show presence, follow up after a gun crime automatically with apartment management and residence. •Value and support local businesses who contribute to sales taxes and stop allowing the unhoused criminals to wreck downtown making it unsafe for businesses and communities. Public areas should remain accessible to the public not just to groups of drug users and people who do not Page 116 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 104 - care about Fort Collins. Support our police by enforcing laws to the fullest extent especially for repeat offenders. H OMELESSNESS • Addressing homelessness. • Addressing issues and needs of the homeless population. • Addressing Poverty & Homelessness • Addressing poverty and homelessness • Be more diligent about dismantling homeless camps. • Cleaning up the homelessness around downtown & prominent areas. • Continue to build resources for the homeless and mentally ill. • GET HOMELESS OFF THE SIDEWALKS AND OUT OF EYESIGHT STOP BUILDING TOO BIG WHERE IS COMING FROM. • Get the homeless off the streets and away from public areas. It doesn't matter what else you do to improve areas. If they are there, it drags everything down and is a reson to avoid the area. • Homelessness • Homelessness • Homelessness and panhandling is out of control. • Homelessness is getting more and more out of hand • Homelessness, the people sleeping everywhere. • Homelessness, transient issues • HOMELESSNESS. • Homelessness. How about more low income housing. What about those mini homes that some cities are building to get people off of the street and help them become productive members of society again? • Homelessness. You have to be kidding small-town charm? Lived here all 46 of my years. What's charming about all the transients?!? • Homelessness/transients. Remove from downtown/business areas. • housing for the homeless • I am all for supporting the homeless population • I am concerned about the number of homeless people you see around town. I mean, not about seeing them, but clearly affordable housing is a problem for a number of people in our community. • I'd like the city to improve in helping keep homeless people off the streets and getting established as productive members of society again. • Increase shelters / help for people experiencing homelessness • Keep NACC public, but have another place specifically for the homeless population. . . . And better policing of drivers on their cell phones. Page 117 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 105 - • reducing homeless population • Reducing homelessness & discovering ways to deal with transients. • Support for homelessness • The growing homeless population in the downtown area • The overall attitude towards homeless people, ie getting help beyond short term solutions. • Try to figure out what to do with the homeless population, effort on addiction recovery. G OVERNMENT POLICIES , SPENDING , SERVICE DELIVERY , ETC . • Address the mill levy to stop raising our property taxes to make up for government incompetence. • Citizen participation on important local issues • Communication. (That said, this survey is better than similar past surveys. Thanks for realizing that sometimes safety concerns are due to aggressive drivers not aggressive burglars.) • Communications about developments: housing starts, retail starts, etc. • Curbside composting service. • Do what community members have voted for not what special interest groups want. • Encouraging more community involvement in city's direction. • Executing the city's vision rather than talking about it and passing ordinances. • First: my poor rating of noise/waste/animal enforcement is because I think we're TOO strict as a city on those measures--too quick to penalize based on complaints. The ONE area to focus on is affordable housing. Please, PLEASE don't let us become Boulder. I hate the idea of this fabulous city slowly turning into a snobbish, exclusive enclave for the privileged and wealthy. I couldn't afford to move here now, but I'm so grateful to be here and want others to have the chance, regardless of wealth. • Fiscal responsibility and Improvements to North Fort Collins • Flexibility to address current issues whatever they are. • Get rid of those damn money grab speed trap cameras. The jeeps, provided by a non government company, the undercover cars that aren't even registered as government vehicles but still make traffic stops, the whole lot. • government • I am disengaged with local government, partly from being generally unaware of opportunities to participate. • I would like more communication of what decisions are made at city council. I would like council members to reach out to their constituents in the form of a newsletter, to show what they are doing for us. • I would like the city to make less planning decisions based on who can show up to a meeting. Even if it is over zoom, who can show up to a meeting is not representative of the population. • improve basic functions of government • Improve listening and internalizing community input at the City Council level vs. driving own agendas. Page 118 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 106 - • In the recent land use code and Hughes stadium discussions, the city was only pretending to listen. No real openness. No real willingness to discuss alternate ideas or points -of-view. Ideas get stronger if we are willing to listen and consider to the reasons why others might have a difference of opinion. We need to quit looking at these issues as binary issues - i.e. either you win or I win. This leads to nothing but division. • Less funding for police and more funding for helpful emergency services. • Less regulation on landlords • less-punishing tax rates on businesses and families. • Lower taxes offset by growth • MANAGE BETTER FINANCES - STOP SPENDING/WASTING MONEY. • Manage better the money spending. Stop program that are useless and focus on citizens needs. It's unfair to charge 3 times the cost of electricity to families. It's unfair for people who choose to opt out of trash to charge a fee to them that go to Republic trash company. The city supposed to work for us not private companies. • Managing with a focus on residents, not city staff priorities and show projects • More attention to basic services • More communication with citizenry. • PLEASE LOWER THE CITY TAX ON PURCHASING CARS. I have never been stolen from so blatantly by any government agency. Lowered my opinion of the city by a mile. Please fix the potholes everywhere. Please consider doing away with all the homeless programs; it's having the opposite effect of its intent. Fort Collins attracts homeless from everywhere and they are camping all over our parks. I have seen used needles near Lee Martinez walkways and now I'm not comfortable allowing kids to walk anywhere near the park. • Proactive code enforcement! It should not be up to residents to have to call and/or write over and over to get people to put their trash cans away, mow, keep vehicles off lawns and sidewalks. • Reduce government waste • Reduce regulations on landlords and development projects • Reducing utility and tax cost • Representing people who actually live in our city as opposed to trying to accommodate people who don't live here. • Start a compost program • Stop raising taxes on seniors who own homes, you are making it unaffordable to retire in my home with increased taxes etc to provide affordable housing for other groups while making it very difficult to stay in one's home. It's very frustrating that my property taxes, insurance and utilities keep rising by large percentages year over year, yet I would like to retire, but there is no end in sight to the increases to the cost of living in Fort Collins. I am 60 this year and the cost to stay in my home has doubled and continues to rise by 30% each year. I want the city to not push out existing homeowners with price increases and higher taxes etc. let's keep living in a paid off home affordable for 60 year olds. I have worked very hard for 25 plus years to pay off and maintain my home and I am not sure that I can keep up with all the increases in taxes. Page 119 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 107 - • Streamlining systems and processes to make it easier to do business with the City. • Supporting Community members in getting help to make older homes more efficient and new homes big, small, multifamily or other be Climate efficient and cost effective. It seems to me the City's answer to efficiency is to charge more in the hopes people will use less but that is not how it works in reality. Seminars, grants, knowledgeable support and assistance. • Teach/Inform the public what their local government and tax dollars are doing for them • The city process for developing a piece of property needs someone from the city that helps an applicant move forward in the process. Each of the many departments that a development applicant needs to qualify have their own narrow piece of the picture, and no sense of the importance of providing their piece in a timely fashion, but no one on the city side has the applicants best interest in mind. So many details get forgot and thrown in too late in the process and the goal line keeps getting moved. • The City should do more to cooperate with Federal government immigration enforcement activites and not be a sanctuary city. • The landuse code and Hughes stadium debacles really highlighted the need for much better and inclusive community dialogue without the need to resort to voter referendums that are sneaky NIMBY tactics. The city needs to almost have an office or staff that is dedicated to large, consistent feedbacks and engagement where average people are represented in decisions, as opposed to warring factions of a debate. Sometimes people get what they want entirely, but most times they get to compromise and build a community together. • The number of recent successful ballot measures that contravened direction expressed by city council (e.g. city plan, Hughes stadium) indicates that they have often been driven more by other agendas than by the will of the community. I would like to see council do a better job of listening and responding to the community.. • Transparency in city government • Using existing tax revenue more efficiently vs asking for additional taxes/increasing taxes • Whatever is possible at the local level to resist the Trump admin. I know there's not much but leading in this area will be important at some point. • Would like simple was of finding out current street conditions or do sure. R ECREATION AND PARKS , OPEN SPACE • Access at the Lincoln Center • Adult Recreation • Continuing balance between development and outdoor recreating opportunities • Culture, Parks & Recreation • Culture, Parks, and Recreation: this also supports Neighborhood Livability and Social Health • Culture, Parks, Rec • Former Hughes stadium land converted into a bike park/multi use outdoor recreation facility • Gardens on Spring Creek. • Golf courses not up to standards of neighboring municipal courses. Page 120 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 108 - • I think the purchase of open space is more important than improving existing parks, open spaces etc. Please ban the use of chimneas and firepits in the summer months. In my opinion, noise pollution should also be addressed. I would love it if there was some enforcement of ebikes, scooters and skateboards on the bike trails. Someone is going to be seriously hurt by a reckless rider! • I would like to see a covered enclosed playground for free or slicing scale. • I'D LIKE THE HUGHES STADIUM LAND TO REMAIN UNDEVELOPED / AS IS. • Investment in currently own city facilities that are failing like mulberry pool and museum of discovery. • Keeping up the good work with public green spaces • Maintaining natural areas we have, not allowing, big golf courses to take natural areas. • Maintaining open spaces and addressing increased housing density • Management of open spacr • More free recreation sources for families • More green space, fewer new apartments • More natural areas and hiking trails to lessen congestion and parking issues • More natural areas and more attention to air quality • More Open Space • More open space, less development. • More open spaces. • More parks and open spaces with better connectivity; less urban sprawl. • Mulberry • Natural landscapes • open space and natural areas • Parks, especially the underserved pickleball community. Sad that I have to say that but our council does not listen. • Preserving natural land to ensure community and wildlife have a place to relax and live • Preserving open space • Reduce the glut of homebuilding - taking away any open space and building apartments, condos or homes • Senior services and recreation • The city needs more recreational facilities, outdoor and indoor, for children/youth, taking into consideration climate change and the importance of physical activities for children/youth. • The city needs to improve the recreational facilities. Mulberry pool needs updated and EPIC is not far behind. City recreation buildings are falling behind other communities. • The tennis courts at Rolland Moore • upkeep of parks and trails Page 121 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 109 - • Windsor, Greeley, Johnstown have much nicer youth sports facilities (baseball/ softball). One of the fields my son played on had no bathrooms and was not handicap accessible. D IVERSITY , EQUITY , AND INCLUSION • Attracting and improving diversity inclusion and acceptance • Diversity • Encouraging diversity in all it's forms, and making sure people feel safe. • Inclusivity • Increase population of people of color. • Need more information to answer, But: -> Be more inclusive of all options. • Please do everything you can for social cohesion. • Racism is pervasive within the City of Fort Collins. The City Council and City Manager engage in a cover up of how bad it is for people of color in our community. Deal with it. Tell the truth about how bad it is for non-white community members. You have the data. Stop suppressing the truth! Stop the waste of our tax dollars by employing the Equity Office to hide the racism that actually exists within the community. The City's Equity Plan is essentially a gaslighting tool to further the oppression of people of color. The Human Relations Commission is complicit in the cover up, as is the media, which furthers the suppression of the truth of the existence of severe and pervasive racism within the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County. • Stop hiring racist police. • To not point out differences of people (race, gender, etc), but look at our community as one race - human race who respect all. • Community Vitality. • Essential services near or in neighborhoods (such as shopping/grocery). • Focus on encouraging neighborhood - based gathering places. Jessup farm is a good example. Little, Beavers, Stodgy, Fox Den in old town is an example as well people who practice "bridging social capital" are nicer & more productive in a community. Make more opportunities for people to cross paths. • Improve quality of life north of Old Town- not by gentrifying • maintaining historic neighborhoods; assisting seniors and other disadvantaged groups in keeping/getting housing • Neighborhood & community vitality. • Neighborhood & community vitality. • Neighborhood and community vitality. • Neighborhood and community vitality. • Neighborhood code enforcement • Neighborhood Livability and Social Health • Neighborhood Livability and Social Health • Neighborhood vitality & safety. Page 122 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 110 - • Preserving historical neighborhoods and Old Town. C OMMUNITY EVENTS , GROUPS , ACTIVITIES • Getting back to what attracted so many of us to Fort Collins to begin with. It has always been expensive here, but there used to be festivals every weekend, no litter, no drug users lying on the sidewalk. That has changed, but is now even more expensive and is driving people away for lower cost of living with better quality of life. • I would love to see more of a focus on creating spaces for people to conveniently interact with each other and make new friends. As someone almost a decade removed from college and not quite ready for family life yet, I feel like there aren't a lot of oppo rtunities for me outside of work to conveniently make new friends. For example, I love volleyball and upon moving to Fort Collins, I wanted to join the volleyball league through the city. I was stunned to find that they didn't offer a free agent sign up. That would have helped me meet new people in the community who have similar interests and values and would have made me feel much more welcome moving to a new city by myself. I do also want to add that I love how many events the city puts together (FoCoMx, Taste of Fort Collins, Tour de Fat, etc.), I just feel a lot of these are great things to do with an already established friend group and not necessarily a great place to make new friends and build community. Of course, this is very possibly just a symptom of being at this age in this time period and not necessarily reflective of the city's efforts to create a welcoming and strongly founded community. • more opportunities for special kids • More vigorous group fitness classes for women at the Senior Center - specifically less dance, more strength training • Toddler/young children activity SAFELY ie:clean up parks natural areas so it's safer for young children to be outside P UBLIC S CHOOLS /E DUCATION /C HILDCARE • Affordable early childhood care options. • Anything that benefits children in the community - or families. • Child education • Childcare prices • College corridor • Community health • Focus on balancing between public school quality and needing to close schools • Funding of our public schools, I feel like they are the canary in the mine. If you have well funded and respected public schools people will want to stay in and maintain the city. • health and vitality of the Poudre river through town • Improve public school core values; remove the woke! • Increased access for mental health and substance use. • Social Health • Social welfare programs for those needing immediate medical related financial support Page 123 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 111 - • The education for K-12 in this town is too woke. Remove that agenda from your script. Teaching should be about education of the basics, leave the personal stuff to the family! I NFRASTRUCTURE • Biking infrastructure • Cell phone signal throughout the city. It's dangerously low. • Cellular coverage improvements. • Electric Infrastructure • Emergency preparedness • Even up sidewalks • Improving the internet and to everyone to getting the serp • INFRASTRUCTURE. • Internet coverage via towers in all areas! Worst I've over seen experienced. • Investing in infrastructure to support the growth in the north and northeast part of the city. • MORE BIKE/PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE. • Pedestrian infrastructure/Public transportation • Pedestrianize additional streets in Old Town including Linden and Walnut • Sidewalks along south college avenue • Spending more time on fixing roads, addressing the fact that for our current infrastructure we have too many people.Speed limits are far to low on major roads, traffic control is a mess.Zero synchronidity between lights, causing more idling from vehicles.Leading to further unnecessary pollution of our environment.We currently spend more money on adding speeding cameras then optimizing our roads for the betterment of both the people and our environment.Coming from the south, Fort Collins should feel ashamed... I'm from Texas and yet I feel like my small town with a limited budget managed it's roads and infrastructure better.People chop those complaints up to simply people getting upset at traffic and stuff like that, but I genuinely think if America optimized it's traffic system we could probably make a solid dent in our current pollution of our environment. • Stop monopolizing (internet, trash). Have competition • Update Infrastructure and thing more about traffic before building more houses/businesses etc. O THER • Accessibility for young families. Jobs for parents that can pay a mortgage in Fort Collins, and education and child care. • Back to basics. Focus on what got Fort Collins in all best places ranking. Quit all the DEI and social inclusion, plus environment stuff local government can't control. • Be more conservative - Do not push gay & trans people. • Community access to agriculture • Condo development Page 124 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 112 - • Continue improving the sense of community • Depart from solar and wind and plan on using natural gas and nuclear power • fishing in all local areas----you don't broadcast what type of fish are were----yet you tell me who bought what property????? • Focus on improving the CITY not THE WORLD. • Home Owner's Association founding and overreach • I have been told by my council member that FOCO has money in the budget for new parks but we don't have money to maintain our current parks. If this is in fact true, I find it ridiculous to even contemplate and incredibly short sighted of the Mayor, the City Manager, the City Council and all those responsible. If this really is the case, the budget should be revised immediately! • I've participated in the water reduction program (zip) and think more rebates could be beneficial to get wider adoption. I basically saved $0.10 on a dollar with my rebate. It would be nicer if there was more money for that program. • Keeping fees low for young parents with children and supporting young families • Keeping the culture of FOrt Collins similar while stil trying to find ways to help affordability • Listening to and responding to needs of families with working parents - in transportation, recreation, housing, natural areas, services. Policies and programs feel so skewed toward retirees or wealthy families. • maintaining the positive vibe in Fort Collins • Making Fort Collins supportive of working families. • Mitigation efforts of invasive species in the city neighborhoods (rabbits, ground hogs etc.) • Permanent food truck lot • Protect civil rights! • Quit acting like communists who believe they are much more intelligent than the public. • REDUCTION OF STRS & ELIMINATION OF ALL NP-STRS. • Remove camping along Spring Creek & Poudre River Trails. • STOP "FOCO MOVES" projects!! Curb extensions at Wabash & Bent haven are an eyesore. Install in your neighborhood! There are many near misses between vehicles; & vehicles/foot traffic/bicycles. Waste of money-grant $ or/not. SHAME!! • Stop becoming BOULDER! • Stop putting all your efforts into DEI. Stop ostracizing conservatives. Learn what it means to be truly inclusive and supportive. Support businesses. • Stop trying to control the community members so much with traffic cameras, trash pick up and making sure we are walking everywhere rather than driving. Also, make it easier for new businesses to come to fort collins. • Take your pick - with the current presidential/dictator type regime now, everything is under attack. There is no wrong or right answer but to protect our city as much as possible. Page 125 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 113 - • This is broad, but I'd like to improve our city culture without influence from California, Honor farmers & ranchers & hard working values that are a blend of conservative to more liberal! • To be original and [?] from other citys. • Too much emphasis on a minority group (trans/non-binary/etc). I'm fully affirming but it is annoying the extensive conversation about people based on their gender/sexual identity. I care more about what you do/how you contribute to society or our city as a person and not as a sexual being. That information feels not relevant. Snowplows to be more prompt on major travel roads (college, shields, etc) They are late to plow as compared to Loveland. Main roads have been hard to travel and uncleared as late as 8am on weekdays. • Water, particularly as it relates to high costs and the impact to development, housing costs • Young kid programming. D ON ’T KNOW • Can't think of anything • I can't choose among these 7 categories because they are all too broad, each combining both high and low priorities for me. • No answer • No thoughts. • Not sure. Q18: Other sources for information regarding city issues, services, and programs. • Activist Email group, utility district engagement • asdf • Board meetings • candidates for city-council offices • City employees • City employees in the neighborhood • City staff • City websites, city meetings • Coloradan, digital • Colorado Sun, KUNC • Coloradoan • Coloradoan • Coloradoan • Coloradoan • Coloradoan, Recreator, Word of mouth • Coloradoan. • COLORADOAN. Btw i am OFFENDED by the gender question below. There are two sexes, no genders. Page 126 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 114 - • Community network • Community organizations • Denver based media • Did not even know about these. • Didn't know about most of these.. • Direct contact at city functions • Direct mail - post office. • Direct mail. • Events • events fort collins online • Fc.gov • fcgov.com • Food banks and Doctors offices and brochures. • Forwarded to me • Google. • habits with season by living here a long time. We look for it as it comes and tell our customers about events as positivity • Had to answer something. Have no example of "other" connections. • I always read the inserts that come with my utility bills. • I don't have any problems with overall services but think attention to the basics - public safety, utilities and education are most important. • I don't use anything regularly • I selected "never"...so, do not have anothe source. • I typically don't have much need for new information. FS is 5 -6 times bigger than when I moved here. I had a single question to ask a city employee last month, decided to walk down to the City building and just ask. You can guess the reaction of someone who once knew where every city office was1 • I've never heard of most of these • If you are unaware of what is offered you don't know what to seek. • In person at facilities • Internet • Internet. • KUNC • Larimer County Health and Human Services • library • Library Library City & Library. Staff are exemplan\the Coloradoan is awful! Page 127 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 115 - • local psychics • Local TV news & Recreator & web site fcgov.com • Mail • Mail. • Mailings • Mainly emails or flyers sent via the mail. • My wife works for the city, so her. • Na - I feel like I don't get the info unless I sign up for newsletters for a specific program or department. The barrier is too many newsletters, sign ups, platforms, etc instead of a centralized newsletter or info. I throw out the mail from the city and am not on social media often, would prefer one monthly newsletter about all city happenings to my email over anything else • neighbors • Neighbors • News included with mailed city utility bills. • Newsletters or word of mouth • Next Door • Nothing comes to mind - just can't unselect the option :) • Notices mailed to homes • Online sources • Posted notices. • posters at city and recreation buildings • Posters at city buildings and around town • postings at the Council Tree library • Reddit • Reddit • Reddit • Reddit • Reddit (r/Fort Collins). • Reddit Fort Collins • Reddit r/Fort Collins. • Reddit.com/r/fortcollins • Reddit's fort collins subreddit • Rooster magazine • Senior center. • Social media Page 128 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 116 - • Someone needs to repair the zebra crossing bear bacon elementary, it is broken towards the sidewalk and when my kids ride their bike over zebra crossing, my daughter fell down • SRO's - in schools. • SUGGEST SEND BROCHER INDICATING ALL WAYS TO GET INFO. • Telephone messages. • Texts. • The Coloradoan • The Fort Collins "Subreddit" on Reddit. • To be honest, I had no idea these other platforms existed - so going out in my Connexion/Utility bill would be a great way to reach out. • TV news • Usually go to website pertaining to information I'm seeking • Usually just the City website • Utility bills and direct mail • Web sites, Church, Friends, School. • website • word of mouth • Word of mouth Fort Collins facebook page. D10: Prefer to self-identify gender. • Not genders. • Sick. • There are only two genders. I identify as deeply annoyed by the government's embrace of radical gender ideology. Keep it out of civic life! • This I do not like! God created male and female. I am female. D11: Prefer to self-identify sexual orientation. • Also, I would not include on any survey. • Fuck you. • I identify as deeply annoyed by the government's embrace of radical gender ideology. Keep it out of civic life! • Sick question. • Why? • Why? D12: Prefer to self-identify race/ethnicity. • AMERICAN • Eastern & Southern European • European Page 129 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 117 - • European • Human race no one is totally any of above. • Human. • HUMAN. • HUMAN. • I would leave this out too. • Jewish • MEXICAN AMERICAN - DINE. • Scotch, French, English, German, Indiad. • Slovenian. • The only white people I have known were albino. Color is a stupid way to classify people. • Uropean american. • Which ever makes my opinion worth more. Page 130 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 118 - Appendix D: Responses to Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics The subgroup comparison tables contain the cross tabulations of selected survey questions by respondent characteristics. Most ratings are shown as an average rating on 100-point scale (e.g., 0=very bad, 25=bad, 50=average, 75=good, 100=very good), all others are shown as percent positive ratings (e.g., percent “very good” and “good”). 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. For each pair of subgroups that has a statistically significant difference, an upper-case letter denoting significance is shown in the category with the larger column proportion. The letter denotes the category with the smaller column proportion from which it is statistically different. Differences were marked as statistically significant if the probability that the differences were due to chance alone were less than 5%. Categories were not used in comparisons when a column proportion was equal to zero or one. Items 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, on Table 53 on the next page homeowners (A) gave a significantly higher average rating (88) for Fort Collins as a place to live than renters (B; 85). This significant difference is denoted by the “B” in the homeowners cell for that line item. Page 131 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 119 - Comparisons by Respondent Characteristics Comparisons by respondent length of residency, tenure (rent/own), employment status, gender, age, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Table 53: Aspects of Quality of Life and Community by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall, as a place to live 87 D 91 D 88 D 84 88 B 85 86 89 87 As a place to raise children 83 86 D 83 80 84 B 79 82 84 82 As a place to attend college 86 D 83 84 81 83 83 82 85 83 Quality of public schools 77 D 70 74 71 75 B 68 71 74 72 As a place to retire 77 D 74 78 D 69 76 B 69 70 81 A 73 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 74 D 70 72 68 71 70 70 72 71 Availability of affordable quality childcare 40 35 38 39 40 35 38 40 39 Availability of affordable quality housing 32 29 28 30 34 B 26 28 36 A 30 Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 83 D 85 D 83 79 84 B 79 81 84 82 Page 132 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 120 - Table 54: Aspects of Quality of Life and Community by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall, as a place to live 87 88 85 88 86 87 89 B 84 89 88 87 As a place to raise children 81 84 80 82 83 82 83 82 83 86 82 As a place to attend college 83 C 85 C 71 85 B 78 83 B 85 B 79 84 85 83 Quality of public schools 74 72 67 73 71 73 75 B 67 76 73 72 As a place to retire 72 75 86 A 73 69 77 B 75 73 75 74 73 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 71 70 71 71 70 71 73 B 65 71 74 71 Availability of affordable quality childcare 42 B 35 48 35 38 45 A 38 37 37 45 39 Availability of affordable quality housing 31 C 30 C 18 28 27 37 A B 31 27 33 B 25 30 Page 133 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 121 - Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 82 83 81 82 80 83 84 B 78 84 82 82 Table 55: Resident Loyalty by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following:(Average rating 0=very unlikely, 100=very likely). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks 84 D 82 D 82 D 70 78 79 79 77 78 Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 80 79 82 83 88 B 72 79 87 A 81 Page 134 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 122 - Table 56: Resident Loyalty by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following:(Average rating 0=very unlikely, 100=very likely). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks 79 80 76 83 B C 75 75 81 80 80 84 78 Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 81 81 87 76 83 A 86 A 83 B 75 84 B 76 81 Table 57: Promotion of Social Health by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (Human Services, Affordable Housing, Homelessness, Equity & Inclusion, etc.) 55 54 58 D 51 57 B 50 53 57 54 Page 135 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 123 - Table 58: Promotion of Social Health by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (Human Services, Affordable Housing, Homelessness, Equity & Inclusion, etc.) 54 C 56 C 42 53 51 58 B 56 B 49 57 53 54 Table 59: Quality of Neighborhoods by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Your neighborhood as a place to live 82 83 83 82 85 B 78 81 86 A 82 Your neighborhood as a place to raise children 78 79 77 76 82 B 70 76 83 A 77 Page 136 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 124 - Table 60: Quality of Neighborhoods by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Your neighborhood as a place to live 82 84 78 79 83 A 85 A 83 81 84 B 78 82 Your neighborhood as a place to raise children 76 78 83 73 80 A 80 A 77 77 80 B 72 77 Table 61: Access in Neighborhood to Everyday Needs by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) 71 74 72 75 75 B 71 72 77 A 73 Page 137 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 125 - Table 62: Access in Neighborhood to Everyday Needs by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) 73 C 75 C 60 72 71 77 A B 74 70 75 73 73 Table 63: Ratings of Neighborhood-related Services by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 68 C D 66 D 62 57 62 63 63 60 62 Noise enforcement 58 D 54 54 52 55 54 56 B 50 55 Residential property maintenance 74 B C D 70 D 69 D 65 68 70 69 68 69 Page 138 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 126 - Table 64: Ratings of Neighborhood-related Services by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 60 65 A 74 A 64 61 60 64 61 62 67 62 Noise enforcement 54 57 53 57 C 54 52 56 58 56 55 55 Residential property maintenance 69 70 70 70 69 67 70 70 71 70 69 Page 139 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 127 - Table 65: Community Engagement by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? (Percent who had ever done each) Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Visited a neighborhood park or City park 98% D 99% D 97% D 93% 96% 96% 97% B 93% 96% Attended a neighborhood-sponsored event 44% 42% 43% 43% 49% B 35% 41% 50% A 43% Attended a government-organized event (open house, City Council session, forum, etc.) 30% 35% 41% A 40% A 41% B 30% 37% 34% 36% Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 70% D 63% 62% 59% 62% 66% 67% B 52% 63% Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 48% 64% A 61% A 63% A 59% 58% 59% 57% 59% Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 82% 94% A 88% A 95% A C 95% B 83% 88% 96% A 90% Done a favor for a neighbor 67% 80% A 77% A 87% A C 88% B 65% 75% 89% A 79% Visited a locally owned business operating within the city 100% C D 100% C D 98% 98% 99% 99% 99% 98% 99% Page 140 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 128 - Table 66: Community Engagement by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? (Percent who had ever done each) Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Visited a neighborhood park or City park 96% 96% 100% 98% C 99% C 92% 96% 97% 96% 97% 96% Attended a neighborhood- sponsored event 39% 47% A 47% 36% 46% A 51% A 43% 40% 43% 36% 43% Attended a government- organized event (open house, City Council session, forum, etc.) 37% 34% 38% 33% 39% 39% 34% 45% A 38% 30% 36% Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 57% 69% A 81% A 77% B C 55% 50% 64% 65% 63% 69% 63% Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 56% 61% 58% 56% 62% 59% 57% 64% 56% 61% 59% Page 141 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 129 - In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? (Percent who had ever done each) Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 88% 92% 90% 84% 91% A 98% A B 89% 91% 91% B 81% 90% Done a favor for a neighbor 76% C 81% C 58% 67% 80% A 94% A B 78% 75% 79% B 65% 79% Visited a locally owned business operating within the city 99% B 98% 100% 99% 99% 98% 99% 97% 99% 100% 99% Page 142 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 130 - Table 67: Overall Safety in City by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall safety of community members 84 D 84 D 82 D 77 82 81 81 82 81 Table 68: Overall Safety in City by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall safety of community members 83 82 81 82 80 81 83 80 83 82 81 Page 143 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 131 - Table 69: Ratings of Personal Safety by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please tell us how safe you feel in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=always unsafe, 100=always safe) Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Downtown Fort Collins during the day 92 C D 90 D 86 84 87 89 88 87 88 Downtown Fort Collins at night 75 C D 72 D 68 65 69 71 70 68 70 Your neighborhood during the day 95 C D 94 D 92 91 93 92 93 93 93 Your neighborhood at night 83 D 84 D 81 80 84 B 80 82 83 82 Parks 86 C D 83 C D 78 77 79 83 A 81 80 81 Natural areas/open spaces 85 C D 84 C D 79 78 79 84 A 81 81 81 Recreation facilities 90 C D 88 C D 83 82 85 86 85 86 85 Trails 84 C D 82 D 79 76 79 81 80 80 80 Fort Collins overall during the day 89 C D 87 D 84 83 86 86 86 85 86 Fort Collins overall at night 74 C D 74 C D 69 67 71 70 71 70 71 Transfort/MAX 77 B C D 70 66 65 69 70 68 76 A 69 Page 144 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 132 - Table 70: Ratings of Personal Safety by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please tell us how safe you feel in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=always unsafe, 100=always safe) Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Downtown Fort Collins during the day 89 88 91 90 B C 86 87 90 B 84 88 90 88 Downtown Fort Collins at night 72 B 68 80 A B 72 B C 68 68 71 71 71 71 70 Your neighborhood during the day 93 94 96 94 93 92 94 B 91 94 94 93 Your neighborhood at night 84 B 81 82 81 83 81 83 80 83 81 82 Parks 81 80 87 B 84 B C 77 79 82 79 81 85 A 81 Natural areas/open spaces 83 B 80 82 85 B C 77 79 81 82 81 85 A 81 Recreation facilities 85 86 93 A B 88 B C 83 85 86 85 86 87 85 Trails 82 B 78 81 83 B C 76 78 80 83 80 83 80 Fort Collins overall during the day 86 86 91 87 B 84 85 87 B 83 86 88 86 Fort Collins overall at night 73 B 69 74 72 B 69 70 72 71 71 72 71 Transfort/MAX 68 71 79 A 70 67 71 70 70 70 70 69 Page 145 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 133 - Table 71: Community Safety Services Ratings by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 75 74 71 73 77 B 69 72 79 A 73 Disaster response and restoration of services 75 74 77 74 77 B 71 73 80 A 75 Fire prevention/education 74 68 74 74 B 76 B 68 71 78 A 73 Fire response time 85 82 85 82 84 82 81 88 A 83 Fire services overall 87 82 87 83 85 84 83 88 A 84 Crime prevention 66 63 64 62 64 62 62 67 A 63 Police patrol 68 B D 62 64 60 64 62 62 66 A 63 Traffic enforcement 60 B D 53 55 51 56 53 55 54 55 Police visibility 70 D 65 D 65 D 58 63 64 64 63 64 Police response time 71 D 72 D 69 63 69 66 66 73 A 68 Page 146 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 134 - Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Police services overall 69 D 65 71 B D 63 68 B 63 64 71 A 66 Animal control 75 B C D 63 67 62 65 67 66 65 66 Business property maintenance 77 C D 74 D 69 D 65 71 70 71 70 70 Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 90 B C D 85 D 84 D 80 83 87 A 85 82 84 Table 72: Community Safety Services Ratings by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 73 75 70 69 74 78 A 76 B 68 76 B 69 73 Disaster response and restoration of services 75 75 77 70 76 A 78 A 77 B 69 76 72 75 Page 147 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 135 - Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Fire prevention/education 72 74 70 69 74 A 77 A 75 B 68 74 70 73 Fire response time 82 85 89 82 81 86 B 84 81 85 82 83 Fire services overall 84 85 92 84 83 86 86 B 82 85 84 84 Crime prevention 63 64 75 A B 63 61 66 B 65 62 66 63 63 Police patrol 61 65 A 81 A B 63 60 65 B 65 B 60 64 66 63 Traffic enforcement 51 58 A 74 A B 55 52 56 56 52 56 55 55 Police visibility 63 65 79 A B 66 B 60 64 65 66 66 65 64 Police response time 67 72 A 72 67 64 71 B 70 64 72 69 68 Police services overall 65 68 68 64 64 70 A B 68 65 70 B 60 66 Animal control 66 66 71 67 65 65 67 65 67 68 66 Business property maintenance 69 73 A C 64 72 70 69 72 71 72 73 70 Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 84 86 80 88 B C 82 82 86 B 78 85 88 84 Page 148 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 136 - Table 73: Promotion of Environmental Health by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins 69 D 67 68 63 67 65 66 66 66 Table 74: Promotion of Environmental Health by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins 65 C 69 C 56 67 65 66 69 B 61 68 70 66 Page 149 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 137 - Table 75: Overall Quality of the Environment by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall quality of environment 80 D 80 D 77 75 79 76 78 77 78 Table 76: Overall Quality of the Environment by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall quality of environment 78 78 76 78 78 78 79 76 78 81 78 Page 150 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 138 - Table 77: Aspects of the Environment by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Air quality 71 B C 64 65 67 67 68 68 65 67 Recycling programs 71 73 75 73 76 B 68 72 75 73 Conservation efforts 75 77 D 79 D 72 76 B 73 75 75 75 Overall quality of environment 80 D 80 D 77 75 79 76 78 77 78 Overall appearance of the city 86 D 83 83 82 84 82 83 84 83 Page 151 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 139 - Table 78: Aspects of the Environment by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Air quality 70 B 66 63 71 B C 64 66 68 70 69 68 67 Recycling programs 72 73 71 70 74 A 76 A 74 B 68 74 B 70 73 Conservation efforts 76 C 74 67 73 75 76 76 72 77 B 72 75 Overall quality of environment 78 78 76 78 78 78 79 76 78 81 78 Overall appearance of the city 82 86 A 88 A 84 82 84 86 B 80 84 85 83 Page 152 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 140 - Table 79: Transportation Ratings by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Ease of travel by car 74 B C D 68 D 68 D 61 68 67 67 68 67 Ease of traveling by public transportation 58 C D 53 D 51 46 52 52 51 58 A 52 Ease of walking 71 66 72 B 68 71 B 67 68 73 A 69 Accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g., people with low vision or in wheelchairs) 53 61 A 59 59 A 61 B 55 56 62 A 58 Ease of travel by bicycle 86 D 83 83 D 79 84 B 81 82 82 82 Availability of parking Downtown 66 B C D 60 D 58 54 61 58 60 56 59 Traffic flow 61 B C D 52 47 47 53 51 52 53 52 Street maintenance 77 B C D 70 D 65 65 70 68 70 67 69 Availability of electric vehicle charging stations 50 60 D 64 A D 46 52 54 53 51 53 Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service 72 70 76 D 67 70 71 70 72 70 Page 153 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 141 - Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation 57 58 59 55 58 B 55 57 58 57 Table 80: Transportation Ratings by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Ease of travel by car 67 69 67 69 B 65 68 68 68 68 69 67 Ease of traveling by public transportation 52 52 56 55 B 46 55 B 53 52 51 59 A 52 Ease of walking 70 68 71 66 67 77 A B 69 69 72 B 65 69 Accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g., people with low vision or in wheelchairs) 63 B C 55 C 38 55 55 64 A B 59 57 63 B 53 58 Page 154 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 142 - Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Ease of travel by bicycle 84 81 82 83 81 82 84 B 79 85 84 82 Availability of parking Downtown 61 59 52 61 C 59 56 60 61 62 B 57 59 Traffic flow 52 52 63 A B 52 50 53 53 52 54 53 52 Street maintenance 69 70 77 70 70 67 71 68 71 70 69 Availability of electric vehicle charging stations 52 55 56 59 B C 47 50 49 65 A 54 51 53 Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service 68 73 A 71 72 B 66 72 B 71 70 70 76 70 Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation 57 C 59 C 47 55 57 59 A 58 55 60 B 52 57 Page 155 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 143 - Table 81: Community Aspects of Culture and Recreation by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 72 72 72 69 72 70 70 75 A 71 Quality of recreational opportunities 89 91 C D 86 87 89 87 88 89 88 Quality of public library services 84 85 D 82 80 84 B 80 81 84 82 Table 82: Community Aspects of Culture and Recreation by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 70 73 A 72 71 69 74 B 74 B 62 71 73 71 Quality of recreational opportunities 87 89 91 89 B 86 88 89 B 85 89 89 88 Quality of public library services 81 85 A C 74 81 82 84 84 B 78 83 84 82 Page 156 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 144 - Table 83: Ratings of Parks, Recreational and Cultural Programs and Facilities by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Natural areas and open space 91 D 91 D 88 86 90 B 87 89 89 89 Trails 94 D 91 D 91 D 88 91 91 91 89 91 Parks Overall 89 D 89 D 89 86 89 B 86 88 88 88 Parks in my neighborhood 81 82 81 78 83 B 77 79 84 A 80 Dog parks 70 66 72 67 71 B 64 68 69 68 Timberline Recycling Center 87 B D 82 86 D 81 84 82 83 83 83 Cemeteries 86 C D 82 80 78 81 81 81 82 81 Golf courses 81 82 80 78 79 81 81 77 80 Athletic fields 80 B D 71 76 75 79 B 72 75 78 76 Northside Aztlan Community Center 85 C D 81 77 76 79 79 79 81 79 Fort Collins Senior Center 84 C 80 78 81 80 81 80 82 81 Page 157 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 145 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) 84 C D 82 C D 74 75 78 77 78 78 78 Foothills Activity Center 85 B C D 75 71 74 75 78 75 79 76 Mulberry Pool 73 C 70 63 66 66 70 67 69 67 The Farm at Lee Martinez Park 87 C D 83 82 79 82 81 82 81 82 The Gardens on Spring Creek 89 88 89 87 88 87 88 88 88 Pottery studio 83 82 87 80 82 83 83 80 82 Art in Public Places program 88 C D 85 D 83 80 82 87 A 84 83 84 Lincoln Center programs 82 81 80 78 80 81 80 81 80 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery 87 D 86 D 83 82 83 86 A 84 84 84 Adult recreation programs 79 B D 73 74 72 75 73 72 78 A 74 Senior recreation programs 87 B C D 77 75 75 78 76 77 78 77 Youth/teen recreation programs 80 C D 78 71 73 74 75 75 77 75 Page 158 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 146 - Table 84: Ratings of Parks, Recreational and Cultural Programs and Facilities by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Natural areas and open space 87 C 91 A C 81 89 88 88 91 B 84 89 90 89 Trails 90 92 A 87 92 B C 89 89 92 B 89 92 92 91 Parks Overall 86 90 A 89 88 88 88 89 B 84 88 91 A 88 Parks in my neighborhood 78 83 A 87 A 77 82 A 82 A 81 B 77 81 80 80 Dog parks 68 70 62 64 71 A 71 A 69 69 71 68 68 Timberline Recycling Center 81 86 A 88 84 84 82 84 B 81 84 85 83 Cemeteries 78 83 A 93 A B 83 80 80 83 B 76 81 85 81 Golf courses 78 82 80 83 C 78 77 82 B 74 79 86 A 80 Athletic fields 74 80 A 82 73 76 79 A 79 B 68 77 76 76 Northside Aztlan Community Center 77 82 A 86 A 80 80 78 80 81 80 82 79 Fort Collins Senior Center 79 82 88 A 81 79 81 82 78 82 82 81 Page 159 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 147 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) 78 78 85 79 76 79 79 78 79 76 78 Foothills Activity Center 74 77 90 A B 78 73 77 79 B 69 76 80 76 Mulberry Pool 69 66 69 70 B 63 69 68 67 68 66 67 The Farm at Lee Martinez Park 80 84 A 82 82 81 82 83 80 82 85 82 The Gardens on Spring Creek 86 90 A 86 89 87 87 89 B 84 88 87 88 Pottery studio 78 88 A 78 86 C 80 79 88 B 73 83 86 82 Art in Public Places program 81 87 A 86 88 B C 81 81 87 B 79 83 90 A 84 Lincoln Center programs 79 82 C 72 82 C 79 78 82 B 75 80 81 80 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery 84 85 88 87 B C 82 83 85 83 84 87 84 Adult recreation programs 73 76 75 74 71 76 B 75 74 74 76 74 Senior recreation programs 74 79 A 98 A B 81 75 77 80 75 77 84 A 77 Page 160 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 148 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Youth/teen recreation programs 74 75 97 A B 78 B 71 77 B 77 75 75 81 75 Table 85: Ratings of City as a Place to Work by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) As a place to work 78 D 74 79 B D 73 78 B 72 75 76 75 Page 161 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 149 - Table 86: Ratings of City as a Place to Work by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) As a place to work 74 78 A C 67 76 73 77 77 B 71 78 75 75 Table 87: Community Aspects of Economic Health by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Quality of shopping opportunities 75 B D 65 71 B D 64 68 70 68 70 68 Quality of dining opportunities 73 B 66 77 B 75 B 74 72 72 76 A 73 Quality of entertainment opportunities 72 71 73 69 73 B 68 69 76 A 71 Availability of job opportunities 50 49 60 A B 55 A B 57 B 49 53 55 53 Availability of quality healthcare 70 70 71 72 75 B 65 68 79 A 71 Page 162 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 150 - Table 88: Community Aspects of Economic Health by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Quality of shopping opportunities 69 69 79 A B 71 B 65 69 B 71 B 66 69 71 68 Quality of dining opportunities 73 74 76 72 70 78 A B 74 72 74 72 73 Quality of entertainment opportunities 69 73 A 70 70 67 76 A B 72 B 67 71 74 71 Availability of job opportunities 55 C 54 C 36 50 54 A 60 A B 55 B 50 56 B 45 53 Availability of quality healthcare 72 C 71 C 51 65 69 79 A B 72 B 65 74 B 65 71 Page 163 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 151 - Table 89: Business Support and Promotion of Economic Health by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins 64 B D 59 66 B D 55 61 59 59 64 A 60 Support of businesses 69 B D 62 68 D 58 64 63 62 65 63 Table 90: Business Support and Promotion of Economic Health by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins 58 62 72 A B 60 58 61 62 B 57 61 65 60 Support of businesses 61 66 A 71 A 65 62 62 65 B 61 64 67 63 Page 164 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 152 - Table 91: Business Health by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Encouraging a variety of businesses 69 B C D 59 59 57 60 63 60 64 61 Retaining existing businesses 57 B D 51 52 48 51 52 51 54 51 Attracting new businesses 64 B C D 57 D 57 D 50 54 60 A 56 55 56 Table 92: Business Health by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Encouraging a variety of businesses 57 65 A 74 A 63 B 58 60 64 B 57 61 66 61 Retaining existing businesses 51 52 65 A B 52 49 53 52 54 52 56 51 Attracting new businesses 54 59 A 72 A B 62 B C 51 52 59 56 57 64 A 56 Page 165 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 153 - Table 93: Overall Quality of City Services by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? 80 B D 75 77 D 72 77 B 74 75 77 76 Table 94: Overall Quality of City Services by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? 75 77 77 76 75 76 78 B 73 78 78 76 Page 166 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 154 - Table 95: Equitable Access to Programs and Services by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Ensuring all community members can access and participate in City programs and services 71 B D 63 68 D 62 67 64 66 65 65 Table 96: Equitable Access to Programs and Services by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Ensuring all community members can access and participate in City programs and services 65 67 63 65 65 66 68 B 60 67 66 65 Page 167 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 155 - Table 97: City Government Ratings by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Managing and planning for growth 61 B C D 54 52 51 56 53 52 60 A 54 Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods 68 B C D 56 55 52 57 59 57 59 57 Efficient operation of programs and services 72 B C D 65 65 61 67 64 65 67 66 Encouraging sustainability in the community 71 D 71 D 70 D 64 68 69 69 68 68 Partnering with the community to address climate change 62 60 64 58 63 B 56 60 60 60 Overall direction of the City 76 B C D 66 D 65 D 58 65 67 66 63 65 Welcoming community member involvement 73 B D 66 68 D 61 67 65 67 65 66 Listening to community members 69 B C D 62 D 61 D 51 59 60 60 57 59 Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background, gender, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, or marital status 74 D 73 D 77 D 66 72 70 71 71 71 Page 168 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 156 - Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging 76 B D 71 D 73 D 64 71 69 70 69 70 Table 98: City Government Ratings by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Managing and planning for growth 54 56 68 A B 54 51 58 B 57 53 56 54 54 Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods 56 60 A 69 A 60 B 53 58 61 B 52 60 61 57 Efficient operation of programs and services 65 68 61 66 66 65 68 B 62 68 66 66 Page 169 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 157 - Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Encouraging sustainability in the community 68 71 64 69 67 68 71 B 63 69 73 68 Partnering with the community to address climate change 61 61 54 58 61 62 63 B 53 64 B 57 60 Overall direction of the City 66 66 75 A B 70 B C 63 62 69 B 63 68 70 65 Welcoming community member involvement 66 68 63 69 64 65 68 66 68 69 66 Listening to community members 59 62 59 64 B C 57 56 62 60 63 62 59 Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background, gender, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, or marital status 73 72 65 72 71 71 74 B 66 74 73 71 Page 170 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 158 - Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging 71 71 66 71 70 68 73 B 63 72 74 70 Table 99: Contact with City Employees by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Percent yes Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? 56% 47% 54% 61% B 60% B 49% 55% 56% 55% Page 171 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 159 - Table 100: Contact with City Employees by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Percent yes Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? 56% 53% 66% 50% 60% A 59% A 55% 57% 58% 49% 55% Page 172 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 160 - Table 101: Users Ratings of City Employees by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate City employee(s) on each of the items below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Courtesy 93 D 89 D 89 D 84 88 88 87 91 A 88 Promptness 89 D 87 D 85 D 76 84 82 82 85 83 Knowledge 91 C D 86 D 83 D 76 82 85 83 83 83 Making you feel valued 87 D 80 D 81 D 70 77 80 77 80 78 Overall impression 89 D 84 D 85 D 74 81 84 81 83 82 Page 173 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 161 - Table 102: Users Ratings of City Employees by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate City employee(s) on each of the items below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Courtesy 88 89 87 92 B 83 88 B 90 B 85 90 87 88 Promptness 83 85 81 88 B 77 83 86 B 77 87 82 83 Knowledge 84 85 81 90 B C 77 80 87 B 79 86 86 83 Making you feel valued 77 82 75 84 B 70 79 B 81 76 82 78 78 Overall impression 82 84 75 88 B C 75 81 B 85 B 78 85 82 82 Page 174 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 162 - Table 103: Non-users Ratings of City Employees by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees treat Fort Collins residents. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Courtesy 80 76 75 74 78 B 73 75 77 76 Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests 76 B 64 69 70 73 B 65 67 74 A 69 Making community members or customers feel valued 71 70 68 68 72 B 65 68 72 69 Page 175 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 163 - Table 104: Non-users Ratings of City Employees by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees treat Fort Collins residents. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Courtesy 75 76 79 73 79 A 77 78 B 67 74 80 76 Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests 68 71 53 63 76 A 73 A 72 B 60 68 73 69 Making community members or customers feel valued 68 70 63 64 75 A 71 A 72 B 59 68 72 69 Page 176 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 164 - Table 105: Fort Collins Utilities Ratings by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Thinking about all aspects of your utility services provided by Fort Collins Utilities (e.g., reliability, price, your bill, billing/payment services, etc.), please rate the overall quality of each of the following services. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) The overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities 82 81 80 80 83 B 77 80 83 80 Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities 81 D 79 77 76 81 B 75 78 80 78 Page 177 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 165 - Table 106: Fort Collins Utilities Ratings by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Thinking about all aspects of your utility services provided by Fort Collins Utilities (e.g., reliability, price, your bill, billing/payment services, etc.), please rate the overall quality of each of the following services. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) The overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities 79 83 A 82 79 80 83 A 83 B 78 83 82 80 Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities 77 81 A 80 77 77 80 81 B 76 81 78 78 Page 178 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 166 - Table 107: Likelihood of Using and Recommending Connexion by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: (Average rating 0=very unlikely, 100=very likely). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to you 80 D 83 C D 72 68 77 B 72 77 B 68 74 Recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague 77 D 77 D 73 67 77 B 65 75 B 66 72 Page 179 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 167 - Table 108: Likelihood of Using and Recommending Connexion by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: (Average rating 0=very unlikely, 100=very likely). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to you 76 74 85 79 C 79 C 65 78 B 69 77 78 74 Recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague 73 74 66 75 C 79 C 63 76 B 68 77 72 72 Page 180 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 168 - Table 109: Ratings of Informing Residents by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Informing community members 68 B C D 58 62 D 56 62 B 58 60 63 60 Table 110: Ratings of Informing Residents by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Informing community members 60 63 55 60 60 61 63 58 63 61 60 Page 181 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 169 - Table 111: Providing Information and Opportunities to Participate by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 71 B D 61 66 D 60 65 B 61 63 66 63 Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 76 B D 64 72 B 67 70 69 70 68 69 Providing emergency information 70 B D 65 66 65 68 64 65 68 66 Page 182 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 170 - Table 112: Providing Information and Opportunities to Participate by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 63 65 58 62 63 66 66 B 58 65 64 63 Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 67 72 A 73 70 67 70 71 68 68 76 A 69 Providing emergency information 65 68 70 64 67 68 68 B 63 66 67 66 Page 183 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 171 - Table 113: Sources of Information by Respondent Length of Residency, Housing Tenure, and Employment Status Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources of information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent at least sometimes) Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 10% 10% 8% 17% A B C 13% 11% 11% 15% 12% Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 24% 20% 24% 21% 23% 23% 22% 24% 22% City's website (www.fcgov.com) 88% 92% 94% A 91% 92% 89% 92% B 86% 91% City News eNewsletter 39% 42% 49% 49% A 51% B 36% 43% 50% 45% Newsletters or brochures from City departments 49% 56% 60% A 66% A B 66% B 48% 56% 62% 58% City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) 56% 60% 71% A B 71% A B 73% B 53% 62% 72% A 65% Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) 40% 68% A C D 51% A 50% A 56% B 44% 51% 53% 51% “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 50% 78% A 76% A 74% A 78% B 56% 67% 75% A 69% Word of mouth 92% 93% 90% 93% 92% 93% 93% B 88% 92% Newspaper (print or online) 52% 61% 65% A 63% A 61% 57% 58% 64% 60% Radio 34% 45% A 52% A 47% A 49% B 38% 43% 45% 44% Page 184 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 172 - Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources of information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent at least sometimes) Length of residency Respondent tenure Employment status Overall 5 years or less 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Own Rent Working full or part time for pay Not working for pay (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (A) (B) (A) (B) Television news 21% 28% 35% A 38% A B 36% B 24% 27% 43% A 31% Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 75% 71% 78% D 69% 68% 79% A 78% B 59% 73% OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 25% 27% 28% 28% 30% 24% 27% 26% 27% Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 18% 17% 23% 23% 24% B 16% 19% 23% 20% City of Fort Collins mobile apps (Access Fort Collins, Digital Publications, Recreator) 23% 23% 36% A B 33% A B 34% B 21% 28% 29% 29% City booth at local events 50% 61% A D 53% 48% 55% 49% 53% 50% 52% Page 185 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 173 - Table 114: Sources of Information by Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources of information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent at least sometimes) Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 / 881 11% 13% 14% 9% 12% 17% A 10% 19% A 11% 14% 12% Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 23% 21% 29% 21% 23% 24% 20% 36% A 22% 20% 22% City's website (www.fcgov.com) 90% 90% 100% A 91% C 94% C 86% 90% 91% 90% 95% 91% City News eNewsletter 42% 47% 34% 35% 51% A 52% A 43% 45% 44% 41% 45% Newsletters or brochures from City departments 54% 61% 68% 48% 62% A 68% A 58% 53% 58% 54% 58% City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) 63% 66% 58% 54% 66% A 79% A B 64% 63% 65% 60% 65% Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) 51% 52% 40% 46% 55% A 55% A 50% 59% A 51% 54% 51% “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 62% 75% A C 50% 56% 77% A 78% A 68% 69% 72% B 58% 69% Page 186 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 174 - Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources of information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent at least sometimes) Respondent gender Respondent age Race/ethnicity Sexual orientation Overall Male Female Non- conforming 18- 34 years 35- 54 years 55 years or older White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Heterosexual Another sexual orientation (A) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (C) (A) (B) (A) (B) Word of mouth 89% 94% A 97% 93% 92% 91% 92% 94% 91% 96% 92% Newspaper (print or online) 60% 60% 57% 54% 60% 67% A 60% 61% 62% 57% 60% Radio 44% 43% 37% 38% 47% A 50% A 43% 47% 47% B 37% 44% Television news 32% 28% 30% 17% 32% A 49% A B 27% 41% A 33% B 19% 31% Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 69% 77% A 86% A 82% B C 75% C 57% 72% 85% A 71% 84% A 73% OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 26% 26% 48% A B 23% 34% A C 26% 27% 26% 27% 28% 27% Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 18% 21% 37% A B 15% 26% A 22% 19% 22% 21% 15% 20% City of Fort Collins mobile apps (Access Fort Collins, Digital Publications, Recreator) 28% 27% 28% 20% 38% A 31% A 27% 28% 29% 26% 29% City booth at local events 52% 52% 72% A B 54% 48% 53% 50% 65% A 50% 63% A 52% Page 187 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 175 - Comparisons by Geographic Area and Council District AREAS COUNCIL DISTRICTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 NW NE WC SW SE EC Page 188 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 176 - Table 115: Aspects of Quality of Life and Community by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Overall, as a place to live 87 87 86 88 86 88 88 89 F 89 E F 86 82 84 87 As a place to raise children 81 81 83 85 E 78 84 81 82 84 81 79 81 82 As a place to attend college 83 83 81 82 82 86 C 85 E 85 E 84 E 82 E 74 81 83 Quality of public schools 71 68 75 B 74 68 75 71 73 75 D 68 65 75 D 72 As a place to retire 75 E 71 69 75 E 66 82 BCD E 75 75 76 71 72 70 73 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 72 E 70 72 E 74 E F 66 68 68 75 AD 71 69 72 70 71 Availability of affordable quality childcare 43 39 37 39 34 41 36 48 C 37 38 44 39 39 Availability of affordable quality housing 27 33 A 31 31 32 29 25 31 32 A 30 38 A 30 30 Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 82 80 81 83 81 84 83 83 84 F 81 78 79 82 Page 189 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 177 - Table 116: Resident Loyalty by Geographic Area and Council District Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following:(Average rating 0=very unlikely, 100=very likely). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks 81 80 75 80 76 78 75 80 E 81 E 81 E 68 75 78 Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 85 E F 80 84 E 82 77 78 78 85 E 79 83 74 84 81 Table 117: Promotion of Social Health by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (Human Services, Affordable Housing, Homelessness, Equity & Inclusion, etc.) 52 51 59 ABE 57 E 51 53 49 54 56 A D 51 54 57 A 54 Page 190 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 178 - Table 118: Quality of Neighborhoods by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Your neighborhood as a place to live 81 81 86 ABDE 81 80 84 E 83 E 79 82 E 82 E 75 86 BDE 82 Your neighborhood as a place to raise children 73 81 AE 80 A E 81 A E 71 77 E 75 70 77 B 81 B 79 78 B 77 Table 119: Access in Neighborhood to Everyday Needs by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) 67 83 A C D E 68 74 A 71 78 ACE 74 B E 62 76 BEF 81 A B C E F 64 68 B 73 Table 120: Ratings of Neighborhood-related Services by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 64 60 59 65 C 59 63 61 63 64 61 56 60 62 Noise enforcement 55 53 53 57 54 56 56 59 D 56 D 50 52 54 55 Residential property maintenance 68 72 E 69 68 64 71 E 69 69 67 70 67 70 69 Page 191 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 179 - Table 121: Community Engagement by Geographic Area and Council District In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? (Percent who had ever done each) Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Visited a neighborhood park or City park 98% B 94% 97% 95% 97% 95% 95% 98% 96% 96% 94% 97% 96% Attended a neighborhood-sponsored event 45% 40% 39% 39% 45% 51% D 49% 43% 43% 42% 51% 38% 43% Attended a government-organized event (open house, City Council session, forum, etc.) 39% B 26% 34% 31% 40% B 47% BCD 51% CDF 42% C D 32% 31% 45% 33% 36% Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 65% B 54% 68% B 61% 68% B 64% 60% 61% 64% 62% 61% 68% 63% Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 55% 63% E 61% 58% 50% 65% E 61% 52% 57% 62% 53% 63% 59% Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 85% 92% 92% A 92% A 93% A 88% 90% 82% 90% B 92% B 97% B 92% B 90% Done a favor for a neighbor 73% 85% A 76% 82% 76% 81% 76% 70% 78% 84% B 94% ABCF 76% 79% Visited a locally owned business operating within the city 100% 98% 98% 97% 99% 98% 97% 100% 99% 99% 98% 98% 99% Page 192 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 180 - Table 122: Overall Safety in City by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Overall safety of community members 81 79 83 81 81 83 82 E 81 E 83 E 80 74 81 E 81 Page 193 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 181 - Table 123: Ratings of Personal Safety by Geographic Area and Council District Please tell us how safe you feel in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=always unsafe, 100=always safe) Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Downtown Fort Collins during the day 89 B 85 86 89 B 89 B 91 B C 89 91 D F 90 D F 85 85 86 88 Downtown Fort Collins at night 71 B 64 69 69 71 B 74 BCD 74 DEF 72 D 71 D 66 64 68 70 Your neighborhood during the day 91 92 93 94 94 93 92 E 92 95 BDE 92 E 87 93 E 93 Your neighborhood at night 81 80 84 82 83 81 80 81 83 81 79 85 D 82 Parks 78 78 79 81 85 ABC 83 ABC 82 D E 79 85 BDEF 78 75 78 81 Natural areas/open spaces 80 80 76 82 C 84 B C 83 C 84 E F 81 F 85 DEF 80 75 76 81 Recreation facilities 84 84 82 87 C 87 C 89 ABC 88 F 85 88 D E F 84 81 82 85 Trails 79 81 C 76 80 C 81 C 81 C 81 F 77 82 B E F 81 E F 75 75 80 Fort Collins overall during the day 86 83 84 86 87 88 B 86 86 88 D E F 85 82 83 86 Fort Collins overall at night 70 68 71 70 72 74 A B 72 D E 72 D E 73 D E 67 65 70 71 Transfort/MAX 71 C 67 C 59 70 C 74 B C 74 C 74 DEF 75 DEF 74 D E F 67 E F 55 59 69 Page 194 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 182 - Table 124: Community Safety Services Ratings by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 70 76 A 72 76 A 74 73 73 74 76 71 72 73 73 Disaster response and restoration of services 70 77 A 73 81 ACEF 72 74 73 74 77 73 77 74 75 Fire prevention/education 71 76 F 70 75 74 69 71 72 76 E F 73 67 70 73 Fire response time 83 84 82 85 80 84 84 80 83 85 83 82 83 Fire services overall 84 85 85 85 81 85 85 82 83 85 83 85 84 Crime prevention 62 64 62 67 E 61 62 66 65 64 61 62 62 63 Police patrol 63 66 E 61 66 60 62 66 63 63 63 62 60 63 Traffic enforcement 54 54 55 56 54 55 57 E 55 E 58 D E 52 E 43 54 E 55 Police visibility 64 65 62 63 60 67 E 65 64 64 63 58 63 64 Police response time 67 68 61 72 C 66 71 C 73 F 66 67 68 70 63 68 Police services overall 68 E 66 68 67 62 64 64 68 65 66 65 68 66 Animal control 69 DE 68 67 62 63 67 66 67 63 68 59 68 66 Page 195 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 183 - Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Business property maintenance 72 C 75 CDE 67 69 69 71 66 74 AE 72 A E 73 A E 62 68 70 Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 87 84 82 83 85 85 85 86 E 84 85 79 82 84 Table 125: Promotion of Environmental Health by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins 67 66 67 68 64 65 64 70 E 69 E 65 60 64 66 Table 126: Overall Quality of the Environment by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Overall quality of environment 79 78 75 78 76 79 79 E 81 E F 78 E 77 71 76 78 Page 196 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 184 - Table 127: Aspects of the Environment by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Air quality 67 71 CD 64 64 67 71 CD 69 E 69 E 69 E 68 E 53 64 E 67 Recycling programs 72 74 E 73 E 75 E 68 74 E 71 76 D 75 D 70 69 73 73 Conservation efforts 77 C 75 70 77 C 72 76 C 75 79 DEF 77 E F 73 69 71 75 Overall quality of environment 79 78 75 78 76 79 79 E 81 E F 78 E 77 71 76 78 Overall appearance of the city 84 85 83 81 82 86 DE 85 85 83 84 79 82 83 Page 197 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 185 - Table 128: Transportation Ratings by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Ease of travel by car 69 65 64 64 71 BCD 68 69 E F 68 E 69 E F 67 E 57 63 67 Ease of traveling by public transportation 52 55 E 48 54 E 47 56 CE 52 E 50 E 56 E F 53 E 37 47 52 Ease of walking 72 E 68 68 70 E 64 73 E 74 CEF 70 E 68 E 71 E 59 68 69 Accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g., people with low vision or in wheelchairs) 58 59 56 61 E 52 62 E 57 63 57 56 56 60 58 Ease of travel by bicycle 83 81 85 81 80 84 84 E 80 83 E 82 E 73 84 E 82 Availability of parking Downtown 59 55 60 58 62 B 59 60 58 60 58 52 59 59 Traffic flow 53 53 51 49 55 50 52 E 54 E 53 E 53 E 41 50 E 52 Street maintenance 71 68 70 68 70 69 67 71 71 69 64 68 69 Availability of electric vehicle charging stations 52 58 C 43 55 48 57 50 48 56 57 48 48 53 Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service 71 76 E F 72 72 66 65 66 70 66 76 AC 69 73 AC 70 Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation 54 61 AE 57 61 A E 51 58 E 57 55 59 E 57 48 57 57 Page 198 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 186 - Table 129: Community Aspects of Culture and Recreation by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 71 73 71 73 68 72 72 72 71 71 71 70 71 Quality of recreational opportunities 87 90 88 88 88 88 88 88 89 88 84 87 88 Quality of public library services 81 82 82 83 82 84 81 81 84 82 80 82 82 Table 130: Ratings of Parks, Recreational and Cultural Programs and Facilities by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Natural areas and open space 89 89 88 88 90 87 84 90 AE 91 A E 89 A E 82 88 AE 89 Trails 90 91 90 91 90 90 90 E 90 E 92 E 91 E 84 90 E 91 Parks Overall 88 88 89 89 86 86 86 88 89 E 88 E 83 88 88 Parks in my neighborhood 79 79 78 82 81 82 80 76 85 BEF 81 76 76 80 Dog parks 65 72 68 71 68 64 64 68 70 68 72 68 68 Timberline Recycling Center 84 82 85 84 82 82 83 82 83 84 79 84 83 Cemeteries 85 DE 84 E 78 78 74 85 E 86 C E F 81 E 78 86 CEF 69 78 81 Golf courses 77 79 79 79 80 85 83 E 77 82 E 78 71 80 80 Page 199 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 187 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Athletic fields 76 76 70 79 C 75 78 C 78 F 75 79 F 76 F 73 69 76 Northside Aztlan Community Center 79 78 75 78 79 84 C 85 C F 79 78 79 76 75 79 Fort Collins Senior Center 80 82 80 78 79 84 D 87 CDEF 82 79 80 77 80 81 Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) 78 79 75 76 75 82 C E 74 76 81 A 79 74 75 78 Foothills Activity Center 77 75 72 73 78 81 83 F 76 77 76 70 72 76 Mulberry Pool 62 68 63 64 69 74 ACD 74 D E F 67 70 E F 64 56 62 67 The Farm at Lee Martinez Park 83 C 82 77 81 83 C 83 C 83 81 83 F 83 F 77 77 82 The Gardens on Spring Creek 88 87 87 90 E 85 88 87 89 89 87 85 87 88 Pottery studio 78 75 90 ABE 86 77 88 ABE 88 D 80 82 75 83 89 D 82 Art in Public Places program 85 E 85 84 82 80 86 E 87 E 84 E 83 E 85 E 75 83 E 84 Lincoln Center programs 79 81 80 80 79 83 86 CDF 80 79 79 78 80 80 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery 85 85 82 83 81 88 CDE 91 BCEF 82 E 83 E 86 E F 72 81 E 84 Page 200 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 188 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Adult recreation programs 76 76 77 E 74 70 71 71 72 72 77 75 75 74 Senior recreation programs 80 75 78 79 73 80 82 75 77 78 73 78 77 Youth/teen recreation programs 77 71 78 72 72 81 B 87 BCDE 73 73 72 66 78 75 Table 131: Ratings of City as a Place to Work by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) As a place to work 75 78 E 76 76 72 76 73 77 76 76 71 75 75 Page 201 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 189 - Table 132: Community Aspects of Economic Health by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Quality of shopping opportunities 69 69 67 70 66 70 66 68 71 69 66 67 68 Quality of dining opportunities 75 E 78 E F 75 E 75 E 66 70 71 74 72 75 72 75 73 Quality of entertainment opportunities 73 E 71 E 70 72 E 65 72 E 70 75 F 71 70 70 69 71 Availability of job opportunities 49 54 61 A B DEF 53 54 53 52 52 53 51 52 60 A B C D 53 Availability of quality healthcare 66 76 AEF 75 AEF 72 68 68 69 74 70 69 74 73 71 Table 133: Business Support and Promotion of Economic Health by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City’s performance in each of the following areas. Average rating on 100-point scale (0=very bad, 100=very good). D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins 61 56 60 63 B 58 61 60 58 62 59 60 60 60 Support of businesses 66 61 63 63 62 63 58 66 A 65 A 63 66 61 63 Page 202 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 190 - Table 134: Business Health by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Encouraging a variety of businesses 62 62 62 63 F 59 56 55 62 61 62 64 62 61 Retaining existing businesses 54 F 52 50 52 51 48 45 54 A 52 A 53 A 55 A 52 51 Attracting new businesses 57 57 54 56 56 53 55 54 56 57 56 55 56 Table 135: Equitable Access to Programs and Services by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Ensuring all community members can access and participate in City programs and services 67 67 67 67 61 63 61 70 A 65 66 61 66 65 Page 203 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 191 - Table 136: City Government Ratings by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Managing and planning for growth 56 53 53 54 54 55 55 56 54 54 52 53 54 Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods 62 B C D 55 56 55 58 57 57 60 E 58 E 58 E 49 55 57 Efficient operation of programs and services 68 64 65 63 65 69 65 68 E 67 E 65 58 65 66 Encouraging sustainability in the community 70 E 69 E 69 E 70 E 63 70 E 66 E 74 ADE 70 E 66 E 57 69 E 68 Partnering with the community to address climate change 60 62 62 61 57 61 60 E 65 D E 63 D E 57 49 61 E 60 Overall direction of the City 69 B 62 64 65 65 67 67 E 70 DEF 69 DEF 63 E 49 63 E 65 Welcoming community member involvement 71 CEF 68 62 66 64 64 61 72 AEF 66 69 AEF 59 63 66 Listening to community members 63 58 57 57 56 62 59 E 65 E 61 E 58 E 45 57 E 59 Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background, gender, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, or marital status 74 E 71 E 76 E 73 E 64 70 E 68 75 70 71 66 75 A 71 Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging 74 E 69 74 E 71 E 63 69 68 76 ACD 69 69 67 72 70 Page 204 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 192 - Table 137: Contact with City Employees by Geographic Area and Council District Percent yes Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? 65% B C E 52% 52% 59% E 47% 56% 51% 59% 52% 60% 68% C 52% 55% Table 138: Users Ratings of City Employees by Geographic Area and Council District Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate City employee(s) on each of the items below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Courtesy 89 87 86 87 87 90 90 E 93 E 88 E 88 E 78 86 88 Promptness 86 C 79 76 84 83 87 BC 86 E F 90 DEF 85 E F 82 E 71 76 83 Knowledge 87 B 79 81 82 80 87 B 85 E 89 E 86 E 82 E 62 81 E 83 Making you feel valued 81 74 73 77 79 82 83 E 84 E F 80 E 77 E 59 74 E 78 Overall impression 85 80 77 79 82 85 86 E 87 E F 84 E 82 E 61 77 E 82 Page 205 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 193 - Table 139: Non-users Ratings of City Employees by Geographic Area and Council District Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees treat Fort Collins residents. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Courtesy 79 F 76 F 78 F 75 F 82 F 64 65 77 A 78 A 77 A 83 A 76 A 76 Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests 79 DF 71 F 74 F 65 F 80 DF 49 53 75 A 71 A 74 A 76 A 68 A 69 Making community members or customers feel valued 79 DF 71 F 71 F 66 F 76 DF 54 54 76 A 72 A 73 A 71 A 67 A 69 Table 140: Fort Collins Utilities Ratings by Geographic Area and Council District Thinking about all aspects of your utility services provided by Fort Collins Utilities (e.g., reliability, price, your bill, billing/payment services, etc.), please rate the overall quality of each of the following services. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) The overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities 80 79 79 80 84 82 79 78 84 ABEF 81 75 78 80 Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities 78 78 76 77 81 79 76 78 81 E F 79 73 76 78 Page 206 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 194 - Table 141: Likelihood of Using and Recommending Connexion by Geographic Area and Council District Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: (Average rating 0=very unlikely, 100=very likely). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to you 75 B 65 70 74 79 B 83 BCD 80 DEF 76 E 80 DEF 70 59 69 74 Recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague 69 65 69 71 81 ABC 79 B 77 D E 77 DE 78 DEF 65 55 69 72 Table 142: Overall Quality of City Services by Geographic Area and Council District (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? 77 74 73 76 75 77 77 79 E F 76 75 71 73 76 Table 143: Ratings of Informing Residents by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Informing community members 62 62 59 59 60 60 59 64 E 63 E 59 53 59 60 Page 207 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 195 - Table 144: Providing Information and Opportunities to Participate by Geographic Area and Council District Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. (Average rating 0=very bad, 100=very good). Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 67 B C 60 58 67 C 63 63 64 70 DEF 67 D F 61 59 57 63 Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 74 DEF 71 D 70 65 68 66 68 74 CEF 68 72 E 63 67 69 Providing emergency information 65 70 E 68 67 64 64 67 66 66 66 65 66 66 Page 208 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 196 - Table 145: Sources of Information by Geographic Area and Council District Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources of information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent at least sometimes) Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 12% 16% F 14% 9% 15% 7% 11% 11% 8% 16% C 20% C 14% 12% Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 18% 24% 34% ABDF 16% 30% ADF 15% 22% 19% 17% 22% 22% 34% ABCD 22% City's website (www.fcgov.com) 86% 90% 96% A 94% A 90% 89% 87% 85% 92% B 91% 96% B 94% A B 91% City News eNewsletter 46% 41% 55% B D F 42% 50% F 36% 41% 45% 39% 46% 54% 54% A C 45% Newsletters or brochures from City departments 56% 50% 64% B 63% B 58% 59% 60% 54% 56% 57% 67% 62% 58% City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) 67% 62% 68% 62% 60% 69% 64% 61% 59% 69% C 72% 71% C 65% Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) 46% 57% A 52% 53% 50% 48% 46% 46% 48% 56% 63% 54% 51% “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 63% 76% A F 68% 76% A F 66% 63% 65% 68% 68% 72% 76% 66% 69% Word of mouth 92% 95% F 94% 89% 96% D F 88% 93% 89% 90% 95% 94% 93% 92% Newspaper (print or online) 61% E 59% 72% BDEF 59% 50% 58% 63% 59% 52% 61% 64% 70% C 60% Page 209 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 197 - Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources of information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent at least sometimes) Council District Geographic area of residence Overall D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 NW NE WC EC SW SE (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Radio 53% CDE 42% 41% 41% 40% 44% 49% C 51% C 37% 46% C 48% 44% 44% Television news 32% E F 37% E F 49% ABDEF 32% E F 19% 19% 14% 32% A C 22% 36% A C 41% A C 50% ABCD 31% Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 74% 69% 73% 72% 80% B 72% 77% 72% 73% 71% 70% 74% 73% OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 26% 23% 26% 22% 36% B D 30% 31% 24% 27% 27% 28% 26% 27% Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 20% 13% 19% 19% 25% B 24% B 25% D 23% 22% 16% 15% 19% 20% City of Fort Collins mobile apps (Access Fort Collins, Digital Publications, Recreator) 29% 31% 26% 31% 33% F 21% 21% 32% 27% 32% A 43% ACF 26% 29% City booth at local events 50% 47% 45% 57% C 51% 63% ABCE 60% B F 46% 54% 52% 50% 46% 52% Page 210 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 198 - Appendix E: Detailed Benchmark Comparisons Comparison Data Polco’s database of comparative resident opinion comprises resident perspectives gathered in surveys from over 400 communities whose residents evaluated the same kinds of topics on the City of Fort Collins Community Survey. 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. The communities in the database represent a wide geographic and population range. National benchmark comparisons and Front Range benchmark comparisons have been provided when similar questions on the City of Fort Collins Community Survey are included in Polco’s database. Interpreting the Results Ratings are compared when there are at least five communities in which a similar question was asked. Where comparisons are available, four columns are provided in the table. The first column is Fort Collins’ “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, in 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. The second column is the rank assigned to Fort Collins’ 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 Fort Collins’ rating to the benchmark. In that final column, Fort Collins’ 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 residents is statistically similar to or different (greater or lesser) than the benchmark. Being rated as “higher” or “lower” than the benchmark means that Fort Collins’ average rating for a particular item was more than 10 points different than the benchmark. If a rating was “much higher” or “much lower,” then Fort Collins’ average rating was more than 20 points different when compared to the benchmark. Page 211 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 199 - National Benchmark Comparisons Table 146: Quality of Life Quality of Life Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 87% 129 365 Similar Overall, as a place to live 91% 121 351 Similar Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks 88% 136 324 Similar Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 87% 97 328 Similar Table 147: Governance Governance Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall direction of the City 63% 104 338 Similar Welcoming community member involvement 60% 62 337 Similar Listening to community members 50% 4 8 Similar Informing community members 51% 7 8 Similar Overall impression 80% 104 346 Similar Knowledge 83% 12 16 Similar Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? 79% 101 347 Similar Page 212 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 200 - Table 148: Economy Economy Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Quality of shopping opportunities 58% 84 326 Higher As a place to work 77% 93 350 Similar Availability of job opportunities 35% 177 336 Similar Table 149: Mobility Mobility Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Traffic flow 36% 215 338 Similar Ease of travel by car 60% 227 332 Similar Ease of traveling by public transportation 40% 96 315 Similar Ease of travel by bicycle 85% 13 329 Much Higher Ease of walking 67% 138 332 Similar Availability of parking Downtown 48% 198 314 Similar Traffic enforcement 41% 278 344 Similar Street maintenance 66% 33 358 Higher Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 63% 16 312 Higher Page 213 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 201 - Table 150: Community Design Community Design Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall appearance of the city 88% 40 328 Higher Your neighborhood as a place to live 86% 192 338 Similar Availability of affordable quality housing 10% 265 339 Similar Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 51% 89 336 Similar Table 151: Safety Safety Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall safety of community members 87% 142 340 Similar Police services overall 59% 316 360 Lower Crime prevention 55% 244 340 Similar Animal control 58% 230 324 Similar EMS/Fire services overall 88% 248 346 Similar Fire prevention/ education/outreach 70% 234 324 Similar Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 73% 94 321 Similar Your neighborhood during the day 97% 122 331 Similar Your neighborhood at night 88% 4 5 Similar Downtown Fort Collins during the day 92% 149 320 Similar Downtown Fort Collins at night 70% 4 5 Similar Parks 88% 4 10 Similar Page 214 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 202 - Table 152: Natural Environment Natural Environment Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall quality of environment 83% 160 330 Similar Air quality 64% 256 325 Similar Natural areas and open space 93% 7 311 Much Higher Recycling programs 73% 134 338 Similar Table 153: Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Parks Overall 93% 41 343 Higher Quality of recreational opportunities 92% 21 331 Higher Adult recreation programs 73% 116 325 Similar Table 154: Health and Wellness Health and Wellness Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Availability of quality healthcare 67% 70 323 Higher Table 155: Education, Arts, and Culture Education, Arts, and Culture Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 65% 84 334 Similar Quality of public library services 85% 209 335 Similar Availability of affordable quality childcare 19% 272 323 Lower Quality of public schools 72% 146 331 Similar Page 215 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 203 - Table 156: Inclusivity and Engagement Inclusivity and Engagement Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark As a place to raise children 85% 161 354 Similar As a place to retire 71% 118 350 Similar Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 68% 62 331 Similar Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 63% 175 321 Similar Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 55% 197 319 Similar Table 157: Participation Participation Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? 55% 66 333 Similar Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 59% 8 320 Much Higher Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 10% 6 6 Much Lower Done a favor for a neighbor 79% 5 6 Similar Visited a neighborhood park or City park 96% 1 12 Similar Page 216 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 204 - Front Range Benchmark Comparisons Table 158: Quality of Life Quality of Life Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 87% 11 30 Similar Overall, as a place to live 91% 9 29 Similar Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks 88% 8 22 Similar Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 87% 4 21 Similar Table 159: Governance Governance Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall direction of the City 63% 5 27 Similar Welcoming community member involvement 60% 4 29 Similar Overall impression 80% 7 27 Similar Knowledge 83% 3 6 Similar Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? 79% 7 28 Similar Table 160: Economy Economy Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Quality of shopping opportunities 58% 4 26 Higher As a place to work 77% 5 30 Higher Availability of job opportunities 35% 10 26 Similar Page 217 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 205 - Table 161: Mobility Mobility Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Traffic flow 36% 14 25 Similar Ease of travel by car 60% 16 27 Similar Ease of traveling by public transportation 40% 5 24 Higher Ease of travel by bicycle 85% 4 27 Much Higher Ease of walking 67% 14 27 Similar Availability of parking Downtown 48% 9 20 Similar Traffic enforcement 41% 19 28 Similar Street maintenance 66% 1 28 Higher Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 63% 3 20 Higher Table 162: Community Design Community Design Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall appearance of the city 88% 3 23 Higher Your neighborhood as a place to live 86% 15 27 Similar Availability of affordable quality housing 10% 16 24 Similar Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 51% 5 27 Higher Page 218 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 206 - Table 163: Safety Safety Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall safety of community members 87% 11 23 Similar Police services overall 59% 21 28 Similar Crime prevention 55% 13 25 Similar Animal control 58% 15 25 Similar EMS/Fire services overall 88% 15 22 Similar Fire prevention/education/outreach 70% 11 20 Similar Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 73% 2 22 Higher Your neighborhood during the day 97% 11 24 Similar Downtown Fort Collins during the day 92% 13 24 Similar Parks 88% 2 5 Similar Table 164: Natural Environment Natural Environment Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall quality of environment 83% 9 24 Similar Air quality 64% 12 22 Similar Natural areas and open space 93% 2 22 Higher Recycling programs 73% 7 23 Similar Page 219 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 207 - Table 165: Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Parks Overall 93% 3 22 Higher Quality of recreational opportunities 92% 5 25 Higher Adult recreation programs 73% 11 26 Similar Table 166: Health and Wellness Health and Wellness Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Availability of quality healthcare 67% 1 21 Higher Table 167: Education, Arts, and Culture Education, Arts, and Culture Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 65% 5 24 Higher Quality of public library services 85% 13 22 Similar Availability of affordable quality childcare 19% 17 22 Similar Quality of public schools 72% 7 22 Higher Page 220 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 208 - Table 168: Inclusivity and Engagement Inclusivity and Engagement Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark As a place to raise children 85% 14 30 Similar As a place to retire 71% 9 30 Similar Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 68% 2 25 Higher Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 63% 11 23 Similar Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 55% 13 24 Similar Table 169: Participation Participation Items Percent positive Rank Number of communities in comparison Comparison to benchmark Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? 55% 6 25 Similar Volunteered your time in Fort Collins 59% 1 21 Much Higher Page 221 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results -209 - Appendix F: Comparisons of Survey Results by Year This appendix contains the average ratings for all evaluative questions compared by year; the percent positive is shown for questions on a non-evaluative scale that have trend data. Differences between 2024 and 2025 can be considered “statistically significant” if they are plus or minus three points or more on the 100-point scale or plus or minus six percentage points or more around any given percent. Table 170: Promotion of Social Health of the Community Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (Human Services, Affordable Housing, Homelessness, Equity & Inclusion, etc.) 54 47 47 51 52 50 . . . . . . . . . . Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Overall, as a place to live 87 85 84 86 88 86 88 89 89 91 90 88 88 79 81 80 Availability of affordable quality housing 30 27 25 26 29 34 32 31 38 53 54 58 52 40 43 37 Quality of public schools 72 70 71 73 75 77 78 80 82 80 80 77 76 76 . . As a place to raise children 82 79 79 80 82 84 83 84 87 87 86 84 83 81 84 81 As a place to retire 73 69 68 69 73 74 73 73 79 80 79 79 77 76 73 74 As a place to attend college 83 81 80 82 81 81 82 83 85 84 85 85 84 81 84 84 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 71 67 64 67 65 65 67 71 72 76 72 69 70 64 67 64 Availability of affordable quality childcare 39 40 41 42 43 38 . . . . . . . . . . Page 222 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 210 - Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Overall quality of life in Fort Collins 82 79 79 80 81 81 82 84 85 86 84 83 82 . . . Table 172: Resident Loyalty Compared by Year Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks 78 73 74 74 79 78 79 79 . . . . . . . . Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years 81 77 76 77 77 78 77 80 . . . . . . . . Table 173: Quality of Neighborhoods Compared by Year Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Your neighborhood as a place to live 82 81 80 80 81 82 83 82 83 82 80 78 80 80 . . Your neighborhood as a place to raise children 77 76 75 77 78 77 78 77 77 75 75 72 73 78 . . Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) 73 74 73 78 80 79 80 79 79 . . . . . . . Page 223 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 211 - Table 174: Ratings of Neighborhood-related Services Compared by Year Please rate quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) 62 58 58 60 62 64 64 62 64 65 66 63 63 . . . Noise enforcement 55 53 55 57 60 60 63 61 62 65 66 . . . . . Residential property maintenance 69 65 65 64 67 68 68 69 70 70 69 67 68 . . . Table 175: Overall Safety in City Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Overall safety of community members 81 79 77 79 81 81 81 82 81 84 83 81 81 72 76 78 Page 224 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 212 - Table 176: Ratings of Personal Safety Compared by Year Please tell us how safe you feel in each of the following areas. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Downtown Fort Collins during the day 88 85 86 88 87 88 87 87 89 93 92 88 88 86 . . Downtown Fort Collins at night 70 67 65 67 68 68 68 66 68 71 69 70 69 67 . . Your neighborhood during the day 93 91 91 92 92 92 91 92 93 94 93 91 91 89 . . Your neighborhood at night 82 80 79 79 79 80 79 81 81 82 81 78 78 79 . . Parks 81 78 77 78 81 79 77 77 79 79 80 80 79 76 . . Natural areas/open spaces 81 78 78 78 80 79 79 79 79 80 79 80 78 . . . Recreation facilities 85 84 81 82 85 84 84 84 84 86 83 84 82 79 . . Trails 80 77 77 77 79 78 77 78 78 78 77 76 74 72 . . Fort Collins overall during the day 86 85 84 86 86 86 86 87 87 90 88 . . . . . Fort Collins overall at night 71 68 68 70 73 71 71 71 72 74 73 . . . . . Transfort/MAX 69 67 64 68 72 71 . . . . . . . . . . Page 225 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 213 - Table 177: Community Safety Services Ratings Compared by Year Please rate the quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) 73 72 71 70 77 76 75 77 76 77 75 . . . . . Disaster response and restoration of services 75 73 72 72 76 75 75 77 76 78 . . . . . . Fire prevention/education 73 73 70 68 74 73 75 74 77 76 75 . . . . . Fire response time 83 81 80 79 81 82 81 83 83 83 81 . . . . . Fire services overall 84 82 80 79 83 82 81 82 82 82 81 86 86 . 85 87 Crime prevention 63 61 59 60 69 68 70 69 69 71 70 74 72 . . . Police patrol 63 61 58 62 66 70 70 69 69 73 72 72 72 . . . Traffic enforcement 55 51 49 55 60 62 63 62 62 67 69 68 68 . 61 61 Police visibility 64 61 61 62 68 70 71 69 70 72 72 71 72 . . . Police response time 68 65 63 67 71 75 73 72 73 74 72 70 71 . 74 76 Police services overall 68 64 61 66 69 74 73 70 71 74 72 70 71 . . . Animal control 66 65 63 65 68 68 69 69 65 68 69 67 70 . . . Business property maintenance 70 70 66 67 71 71 72 72 71 73 73 71 72 . . . Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 84 83 82 81 82 82 80 79 79 78 78 . . . . . Page 226 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 214 - Table 178: Promotion of Environmental Health of the Community Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following areas. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins 68 64 62 62 68 66 . . . . . . . . . . Table 179: Overall Quality of the Environment Compared by Year Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Overall quality of environment 78 76 74 73 78 77 79 81 81 83 81 81 80 76 . . Table 180: Aspects of the Environment Compared by Year Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins in each of the following areas. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Air quality 67 66 62 64 68 70 72 74 78 83 80 80 78 71 67 63 Recycling programs 73 69 67 69 74 73 77 80 77 80 79 77 76 71 68 69 Conservation efforts 75 72 70 71 75 74 76 79 77 79 78 78 75 . . . Overall quality of environment 78 76 74 73 78 77 79 81 81 83 81 81 80 76 . . Overall appearance of the city 83 82 79 80 82 83 84 83 83 84 81 80 82 78 75 70 Page 227 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 215 - Table 181: Transportation Ratings Compared by Year Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Ease of travel by car 67 66 65 66 62 58 56 53 51 61 65 61 57 50 . . Ease of traveling by public transportation 52 44 45 48 56 56 58 59 57 56 54 48 51 38 . . Ease of walking 69 68 67 68 74 73 68 67 67 71 71 67 68 60 . . Accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g., people with low vision or in wheelchairs) 58 53 51 59 . . . . . . . . . . . . Ease of travel by bicycle 82 80 80 81 80 81 81 79 77 79 81 78 78 68 . . Availability of parking Downtown 59 57 56 51 53 52 51 47 46 49 51 51 52 . . . Traffic flow 52 48 49 48 45 38 38 37 33 45 50 48 44 . 32 27 Street maintenance 69 65 62 62 63 66 64 65 57 61 61 52 60 . 59 59 Availability of electric vehicle charging stations 53 44 45 44 51 . . . . . . . . . . . Northern Colorado Regional Airport 70 63 49 55 45 . . . . . . . . . . . Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation 57 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 182: Community Aspects of Culture and Recreation Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Quality of arts and cultural opportunities 71 69 69 65 67 72 72 72 71 74 70 68 69 67 . . Quality of recreational opportunities 88 86 85 85 85 85 86 85 85 86 84 83 81 81 . . Quality of public library services 82 82 80 82 82 82 82 84 83 81 81 79 77 75 76 78 Page 228 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 216 - Table 183: Ratings of Parks, Recreational and Cultural Programs and Facilities Compared by Year Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Natural areas and open space 89 89 87 86 89 88 88 89 88 87 86 85 84 82 78 76 Trails 91 89 87 86 89 89 89 90 89 88 87 86 86 83 82 81 Parks Overall 88 87 85 85 88 87 88 88 87 87 86 84 85 82 83 83 Parks in my neighborhood 80 81 78 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . Dog parks 68 69 68 72 . . . . . . . . . . . . Timberline Recycling Center 83 81 78 79 . . . . . . . . . . . . Cemeteries 81 79 73 76 81 78 78 80 79 81 78 75 75 74 73 72 Golf courses 80 73 68 76 78 77 78 80 79 79 78 76 79 78 78 78 Athletic fields 76 76 74 75 78 79 78 81 79 81 80 78 79 76 78 77 Northside Aztlan Community Center 79 78 73 79 79 82 81 81 81 80 81 80 79 67 . . Fort Collins Senior Center 81 79 78 79 80 82 82 82 84 82 82 81 82 83 . . Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) 78 77 74 75 77 80 80 78 78 79 79 78 78 79 . . Foothills Activity Center 76 74 71 72 74 79 78 . . . . . . . . . Mulberry Pool 67 64 61 64 70 72 72 72 74 74 75 74 71 72 . . The Farm at Lee Martinez Park 82 81 77 81 81 83 81 82 81 81 80 79 79 81 . . The Gardens on Spring Creek 88 86 84 84 86 85 85 85 85 84 84 81 82 76 . . Pottery studio 82 77 73 76 78 81 76 77 79 80 77 76 74 74 . . Art in Public Places program 84 80 81 81 81 81 82 82 79 80 78 72 74 67 . . Lincoln Center programs 80 78 78 79 79 80 81 80 80 80 80 76 77 76 77 78 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery 84 82 83 82 83 84 85 84 84 83 78 71 70 72 70 72 Adult recreation programs 74 71 70 71 76 75 76 76 75 78 76 74 73 73 71 74 Page 229 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 217 - Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Senior recreation programs 77 73 74 74 77 79 77 78 78 80 78 77 78 78 75 78 Youth/teen recreation programs 75 70 71 73 77 76 76 76 75 78 77 74 72 67 69 63 Table 184: Ratings of City as a Place to Work Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 As a place to work 75 73 72 75 76 75 76 76 76 77 77 73 71 . 66 73 Table 185: Community Aspects of Economic Health Compared by Year Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Quality of shopping opportunities 68 67 66 73 73 72 73 75 72 72 70 68 68 66 . . Quality of dining opportunities 73 70 73 78 79 78 82 83 82 82 83 80 81 80 . . Quality of entertainment opportunities 71 69 69 71 69 72 75 75 73 73 69 68 67 68 . . Availability of job opportunities 53 55 56 61 59 60 58 60 57 55 52 48 49 50 . . Availability of quality healthcare 71 73 73 77 79 77 77 75 77 76 77 74 73 . . . Page 230 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 218 - Table 186: Business Support and Promotion of Economic Health Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins 60 56 55 59 62 62 68 69 69 67 65 57 57 56 . . Support of businesses 63 63 63 63 66 65 70 70 69 70 69 63 63 . . . Table 187: Business Health Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Encouraging a variety of businesses 61 61 60 62 65 66 66 69 69 . . . . . . . Retaining existing businesses 51 52 54 56 61 56 62 64 65 . . . . . . . Attracting new businesses 56 54 55 57 62 62 65 67 66 . . . . . . . Table 188: Overall Quality of City Services Compared by Year 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? 76 74 73 73 76 76 78 81 79 79 78 74 73 . . . Page 231 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 219 - Table 189: City Government Ratings Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Managing and planning for growth 54 48 48 51 54 57 57 57 58 63 62 59 53 43 44 40 Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods 57 51 50 52 57 60 . . . . . . . . . . Efficient operation of programs and services 66 64 63 64 67 67 70 68 66 69 66 63 63 53 . . Encouraging sustainability in the community 68 65 63 65 68 67 71 74 71 72 71 . . . . . Partnering with the community to address climate change 60 56 55 54 . . . . . . . . . . . . Overall direction of the City 65 60 60 60 63 67 67 68 68 71 70 65 63 . . . Welcoming community member involvement 66 61 60 62 66 67 67 69 71 71 70 64 66 48 . . Listening to community members 59 53 51 56 60 59 60 62 61 63 63 58 57 55 . . Informing community members 60 55 56 59 63 63 64 66 67 71 70 66 67 62 63 62 Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 63 59 57 58 60 64 66 65 64 . . . . . . . Page 232 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 220 - Table 190: Contact with City Employees Compared by Year Percent yes 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? 55% 59% 60% 52% 51% 53% 56% 53% 54% 54% 55% 46% 46% 55% 58% 58% Table 191: Users Ratings of City Employees Compared by Year Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate City employee(s) on each of the items below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Courtesy 88 86 84 85 83 85 86 86 84 85 84 82 81 83 81 84 Promptness 83 79 80 79 80 80 82 79 81 79 79 76 76 77 75 77 Knowledge 83 81 80 83 81 79 81 82 81 79 79 79 77 78 77 78 Making you feel valued 78 76 75 76 75 77 75 77 75 74 75 75 75 75 75 76 Overall impression 82 79 79 81 78 80 80 80 79 79 78 78 77 . . . This question was asked only of those who reported having had phone or in-person contact with any City employee(s) within the last 12 months Page 233 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 221 - Table 192: Non-users Ratings of City Employees Compared by Year Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, please rate City employees on each of the items below. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Courtesy 76 76 75 76 75 75 78 78 74 77 76 80 72 72 73 69 Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests 69 71 70 73 72 70 73 73 74 74 74 67 68 66 69 65 Making community members or customers feel valued 69 69 68 70 71 69 74 74 71 73 72 72 69 67 67 64 This question was asked only of those who reported no phone or in-person contact with any City employee(s) within the last 12 months Table 193: Ratings of Informing Residents Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Informing community members 60 55 56 59 63 63 64 66 67 71 70 66 67 62 63 62 Table 194: Providing Information and Opportunities to Participate Compared by Year Please rate the City's performance in each of the following in Fort Collins. 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Providing opportunities to participate in government activities 63 59 57 58 60 64 66 65 64 . . . . . . . Providing volunteer opportunities to community members 69 64 65 64 65 69 68 . . . . . . . . . Providing emergency information 66 65 64 64 68 68 67 68 70 . . . . . . . Page 234 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 222 - Table 195: Sources of Information Compared by Year Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources for information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent of respondents who had ever used this as a source) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 12% 12% 13% 13% 16% 12% 20% 20% 22% 30% 30% 36% 41% 35% 28% 26% Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV 22% 21% 25% 19% 22% 22% 20% 19% 12% 17% 15% 12% 14% . . . City's website (www.fcgov.com) 91% 88% 91% 86% 82% 77% 79% 79% 79% 80% 74% 71% 72% 50% 54% 12% City News eNewsletter 45% 38% 40% 35% 33% 33% 63% 65% 65% 67% 63% 61% 71% 76% 76% 56% Newsletters or brochures from City departments 58% 58% 58% 59% 60% 59% 59% 60% 62% 64% 56% 57% 64% 67% 64% 17% City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) 65% 63% 60% 60% 61% 58% 56% 57% . . . . . . . . Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) 51% 69% 76% 74% 76% 67% 69% 73% 68% . . . . . . . “Recreator” (guide to recreation programs) 69% 69% 70% 67% 67% 68% 71% 66% 70% 70% 64% 62% 60% 70% 60% 40% Page 235 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 223 - Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources for information regarding City issues, services and programs. (Percent of respondents who had ever used this as a source) 20 2 5 20 2 4 20 2 3 20 2 2 20 2 1 20 1 9 20 1 8 20 1 7 20 1 5 20 1 3 20 1 2 20 1 0 20 0 8 20 0 6 20 0 3 20 0 1 Word of mouth 92% 92% 90% 88% 91% 91% 91% 90% 87% 88% 87% 85% 88% 82% 87% 54% Newspaper (print or online) 60% 57% 57% 61% 67% 66% 67% 70% 72% 80% 80% 81% 87% 89% . 76% Radio 44% 45% 43% 47% 52% 50% 56% 55% 63% 69% 60% 64% 66% 61% . 27% Television news 31% 31% 29% 35% 38% 41% 41% 45% 57% 69% 60% 65% 69% 58% 63% . Social media (Facebook, X/Twitter, Nextdoor, etc.) 73% 72% 73% 70% 77% 65% 67% 63% 60% 55% 44% . . . . . OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) 27% 23% 24% 26% 20% 16% 18% 18% . . . . . . . . Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) 20% 20% 19% 17% 12% 12% 14% . . . . . . . . . City of Fort Collins mobile apps (Access Fort Collins, Digital Publications, Recreator) 29% 30% 28% 27% 27% 22% 22% 20% 20% 17% 15% . . . . . City booth at local events 52% 49% 45% 39% 41% 36% 37% 38% 41% . . . . . . . Page 236 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 224 - Appendix G: Survey Methodology About the Survey The City of Fort Collins Community Survey was first administered in 2001. General resident surveys, such as this one, ask recipients about their perspectives about the quality of life in the city, their use of city amenities, their opinions on policy issues facing the city and their assessment of city service delivery. The City of Fort Collins funded this research. Please contact William Bevil of the City of Fort Collins at wbevil@fcgov.com if you have any questions about the survey. Developing the Questionnaire The 2025 survey instrument was developed by starting with the version from the previous implementation in 2024. Few changes were made to the survey in order to maximize comparisons over time. In an iterative process between Fort Collins staff and Polco staff, a final six-page questionnaire was created. Selecting Survey Recipients “Sampling” refers to the method by which survey recipients are chosen. The ‘sample” refers to all those who were given a chance to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Fort Collins was purchased from Go-Dog Direct based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service, updated every three months, providing the best representation of all households in a specific geographic location. Polco used the USPS data to select the survey recipients. A larger list than needed was pulled so that a process referred to as “geocoding” could be used to eliminate addresses from the list that were outside Fort Collins’ boundaries. Geocoding is a computerized process in which addresses are compared to electronically mapped boundaries and coded as inside or outside desired boundaries; in this case, within Fort Collins. All addresses determined to be outside the study boundaries were eliminated from the list of potential households. Each address identified as being within city boundaries was further identified as being within both geographic areas and Council Districts. A random selection was made of the remaining addresses to create a mailing list of 4,400 addresses. To choose the 4,400 survey recipients, a systematic sampling method was applied to the list of households. 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 rates to surveys than do those in single-family housing units. In general, because of the random sampling techniques used, the displayed sampling density will closely mirror the overall housing unit density (which may be different from the population density). While the theory of probability assumes no bias in selection, there may be some minor variations in practice (meaning, an area with only 15% of the housing units might be selected at an actual rate that is slightly above or below that). Page 237 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 225 - An individual within each household was randomly selected to complete the survey using the birthday method. The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person whose birthday has most recently passed” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the cover letter accompanying the questionnaire. The survey was also available online in Spanish, and all mailings contained instructions in Spanish on how to access the online survey. In addition to the scientific, random sample, a link to an online “opt-in” survey was publicized through various community channels. This opt-in survey was identical to the scientific survey and open to all city residents. The open participation survey was also available in Spanish. Survey Administration and Response Rate Each selected household was contacted two times. First, a prenotification announcement was sent on April 11, 2025, informing the household members that they had been selected to participate in the 2025 City of Fort Collins Community Survey. Approximately one week after mailing the prenotification, each household was mailed a paper survey containing a cover letter signed by Mayor Jeni Arndt and City Manager Kelly DiMartino enlisting participation. The packet also contained a postage-paid return envelope in which the survey recipients could return the completed questionnaire directly to Polco. All mailings contained instructions in both English and Spanish, and the online survey was also available in Spanish. Data collection was open through May 31, 2025. The online “opt-in” survey became available to all Fort Collins residents on May 16, 2025 and remained open for the final two weeks of data collection. One hundred and sixty-three of the 4,400 surveys mailed were returned because the housing unit was vacant, or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the 4,237 households presumed to have received a survey, 548 completed the survey, providing a response rate of 13%. The response rates were calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 1 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons. Additionally, 373 residents completed the online “opt-in” survey, providing a grand total of 921 completed surveys. One survey was completed in Spanish. M ARGIN OF E RROR The 95% confidence interval (or “margin of error”) quantifies the ‘sampling error” or precision of the estimates made from the survey results. A 95% confidence interval can be calculated for any sample size and indicates that in 95 of 100 surveys conducted like this one, for a particular item, a result would be found that is within three percentage points of the result that would be found if everyone in the population of interest was surveyed. The practical difficulties of conducting any resident survey may introduce other sources of error in addition to sampling error. Despite best efforts to boost participation and ensure potential inclusion of all households, some selected households will decline participation in the survey (referred to as non-response error) and some eligible households may be unintentionally excluded from the listed sources for the sample (referred to as coverage error). 1 See AAPOR’s Standard Definitions here: https://aapor.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Standards-Definitions-10th- edition.pdf for more information Page 238 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 226 - While the margin of error for the survey is generally no greater than plus or minus three2 percentage points around any given percent reported for the entire sample, results for subgroups will have wider confidence intervals. Where estimates are given for subgroups, they are less precise. Survey Processing (Data Entry) Upon receipt, completed 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 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. A series of quality control checks were also performed to ensure the integrity of the web data. Steps may include and not be limited to reviewing the data for clusters of repeat IP addresses and time stamps (indicating duplicate responses) and removing empty submissions (questionnaires submitted with no questions answered). 2 Although this has become the traditional way to describe survey research precision, when opt-in results are blended with scientific results, assumptions about randomness of responses are not the same as when results come only from the random sample. Consequently other terms sometimes are used in place of "confidence interval" or "margin of error," such as "credibility intervals." Page 239 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 227 - Weighting the Data Upon completion of data collection for both the scientific (probability) and online “opt-in” (non- probability) samples, data were compared in order to determine whether it was appropriate to combine, or blend, both samples together. In the case of Fort Collins, the non-probability sample’s characteristics were similar to the probability sample, in both respondent trait and opinion, indicating that the samples could be blended. This decision reflects a growing trend in survey research toward integration of traditional scientific probability samples and non-probability samples (opt-in). The demographic characteristics of the survey sample were compared to those found in the 2020 Census and the 2022 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Fort Collins. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey sample reflective of the larger population of the community. Both samples were weighted independently and then combined into one final dataset. The characteristics used for weighting were respondent gender, age, race, housing unit type (attached or detached), housing tenure (rent or own), and geographic area of residence. This decision was based on: • The disparity between the survey respondent characteristics and the population norms for these variables • The saliency of these variables in differences of opinion among subgroups • The historical profile created and the desirability of consistently representing different groups over the years A special software program using mathematical algorithms is used to calculate the appropriate weights. Several different weighting ‘schemes” are tested to ensure the best fit for the data. The results of the weighting schemes for both the scientific, random sample and open participation surveys are presented in the tables on the following pages. Page 240 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 228 - 2025 City of Fort Collins Community Survey Weighting Table – Address-based Sample Characteristic Population Norm Unweighted Data Weighted Data Housing* Own home 52% 75% 56% Rent home 48% 25% 44% Detached unit 54% 67% 56% Attached unit 46% 33% 44% Race* White 84% 94% 85% Not white 16% 6% 15% Ethnicity* Not Hispanic 89% 95% 93% Hispanic 11% 5% 7% Sex and Age* Male 50% 45% 49% Female 50% 55% 51% 18-34 years of age 49% 15% 42% 35-54 years of age 26% 29% 27% 55+ years of age 25% 56% 32% Males 18-34 25% 7% 22% Males 35-54 13% 13% 13% Males 55+ 12% 24% 14% Females 18-34 23% 8% 22% Females 35-54 13% 15% 13% Females 55+ 14% 32% 16% District** District 1 19% 22% 21% District 2 16% 16% 17% District 3 15% 15% 14% District 4 17% 20% 17% District 5 17% 13% 15% District 6 16% 14% 16% *Source: 2020 U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 American Community Survey Population Estimates **From geocoded USPS mailing list, April 2025 Page 241 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 229 - 2025 City of Fort Collins Community Survey Weighting Table – Open Participation Sample Characteristic Population Norm Unweighted Data Weighted Data Housing* Own home 52% 81% 58% Rent home 48% 19% 42% Detached unit 54% 76% 59% Attached unit 46% 24% 41% Race* White 84% 93% 85% Not white 16% 7% 15% Ethnicity* Not Hispanic 89% 96% 94% Hispanic 11% 4% 6% Sex and Age* Male 50% 52% 49% Female 50% 48% 51% 18-34 years of age 49% 17% 42% 35-54 years of age 26% 39% 30% 55+ years of age 25% 45% 28% Males 18-34 25% 10% 22% Males 35-54 13% 20% 14% Males 55+ 12% 23% 14% Females 18-34 23% 7% 21% Females 35-54 13% 18% 15% Females 55+ 14% 23% 14% District** District 1 19% 21% 18% District 2 16% 17% 17% District 3 15% 11% 15% District 4 17% 20% 18% District 5 17% 13% 16% District 6 16% 18% 17% *Source: 2020 U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 American Community Survey Population Estimates **From geocoded USPS mailing list, April 2025 Page 242 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 230 - Analyzing the Data The electronic dataset was analyzed by Polco staff using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). For the most part, frequency distributions and mean ratings are presented in the body of the report. A complete set of frequencies for each survey question is presented in Appendix B: Complete Survey Frequencies. Also included are results by respondent characteristics (Appendix D: Responses to Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics). Chi-square or ANOVA tests of significance were applied to these breakdowns of selected 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. Where differences between subgroups are statistically significant, they have been denoted with capital letters. Page 243 Item 1. The City of Fort Collins Community Survey July 2025 Report of Results - 231 - Appendix H: Survey Materials The following pages contain copies of the survey materials sent to randomly selected households within the City of Fort Collins. Page 244 Item 1. Dear Fort Collins Community Member, We invite you to help shape the future of our community! You've been randomly selected to participate in the Fort Collins 2025 Community Survey. Your feedback is important. It will impact decisions that affect our community. To hear from a representative group of residents, the adult 18 or older in your household who most recently had a birthday should complete this survey. Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. You can wait a few days for a paper survey to arrive in the mail, or go online now and complete the confidential survey at: polco.us/xxplaceholder Survey closes on May 31st. If you have any questions about the survey, please call 970-416-2209. Thank you for helping create a better city! Sincerely, Estimado miembro de la Comunidad de Fort Collins, ¡Ayúdenos a pensar nuestro futuro! Ud. ha sido seleccionado al azar para participar en la Encuesta Comunitaria de 2025 de Fort Collins. Sus opiniones son importantes y afectarán el fututo de nuestra comunidad. Para escuchar a un grupo representativo de residentes, el adulto de 18 años o más en su hogar que cumplió años más recientemente debe completar esta encuesta. Por favor no comparta el enlace de su encuesta. Esta encuesta es únicamente para hogares seleccionados al azar. Para acceder a la encuesta en español elija la opción ‘español’ en la parte superior de la pantalla de la siguiente página web: polco.us/xxplaceholder La encuesta cierra el 31 de mayo. Si tiene alguna pregunta sobre la encuesta, por favor llame al 970-416- 2209. ¡Gracias por ayudar a crear una ciudad mejor! Atentamente, Jeni Arndt Mayor/Alcalde Kelly DiMartino City Manager/Administradora de la Ciudad Page 245 Item 1. Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID Boulder, CO Permit NO. 94 Tell us what you think! Complete the Fort Collins community survey by scanning the QR code. ¡Su opinión nos interesa! Participe en la Encuesta Comunitaria de Fort Collins escaneado el código QR. QR Code Placeholder Communications & Public Involvement Office PO Box 580. Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Page 246 Item 1. City Manager’s Office 300 LaPorte Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6505 970.224.6107 - fax fcgov.com Dear City of Fort Collins Community Member: Join us in shaping the future of Fort Collins! You've been randomly selected to participate in the 2025 Fort Collins Community Survey. If you've already completed the survey online, thank you. If you have not already filled out the survey online, please fill out the enclosed survey. Your feedback is crucial since your household is among a select number invited to participate. Survey results will impact decisions that affect Fort Collins. Important things to keep in mind: • Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. • Your responses are confidential and no identifying information will be shared. • Complete the survey if you're 18 or older. If there are multiple adults in your household, have the one who most recently had a birthday fill it out. This way, the person within your household is also randomized. • You may return the survey by mail in the enclosed postage-paid envelope, or you can complete the survey online at: Survey closes on May 31st. If you have any questions about the survey, please call or email the Communications & Public Involvement Office at 970-416-2209 or cpiocom@fcgov.com. Thank you for your time and participation! Querido Integrante de la Comunidad de Fort Collins: ¡Ayúdenos a moldear el futuro de Fort Collins! Usted ha sido seleccionado al azar para participar en la Encuesta Comunitaria de Fort Collins de 2025. Si ya completó la encuesta en línea, gracias. Si aun no completó la encuesta, por favor siga el enlace que esta más abajo. Su participación es muy importante - especialmente porque su hogar es uno de los pocos que han sido invitados a participar. Algunas cosas que recordar: • No comparta el enlace de su encuesta. Esta encuesta es únicamente para hogares seleccionados al azar. • Sus respuestas son confidenciales y no se compartirá ninguna información de identificación. • Complete la encuesta si tiene 18 años o más. Si hay varios adultos en su hogar, el adulto que cumplió años más recientemente debe completar la encuesta. • Para acceder a la encuesta en español elija la opción ‘español’ en la parte superior del siguiente enlace: La encuesta cierra el 31 de mayo. Si tiene alguna pregunta acerca de la encuesta o para solicitar una encuesta en español, favor de llamar la Oficina de Comunicaciones y Participación Pública al 970-416-2209 o enviar un correo electrónico a cpiocom@fcgov.com. ¡Gracias por su tiempo y participación! Sincerely / Atentamente, polco.us/xxplaceholder QR Code Placeholder Jeni Arndt Mayor/Alcalde Kelly DiMartino City Manager/Administradora de la Ciudad Page 247 Item 1. 2025 Fort Collins Community Survey -- 1 -- Please complete this questionnaire if you are the adult (age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had a birthday. The adult’s year of birth does not matter. Your responses to this survey are completely confidential. 1. Please rate Fort Collins as a community on each of the items listed below. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Overall, as a place to live ............................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Overall safety of community members ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality of shopping opportunities .............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality of dining opportunities .................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality of entertainment opportunities ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Availability of job opportunities ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Availability of affordable quality housing ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality of arts and cultural opportunities .................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality of recreational opportunities ......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Availability of quality healthcare ................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Availability of affordable quality childcare ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality of public schools ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality of public library services................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 As a place to raise children ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 As a place to retire ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 As a place to attend college ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 As a place to work ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Overall appearance of the city ................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Overall quality of life in Fort Collins............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 2. Please rate the quality of your neighborhood on each of the items listed below. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Your neighborhood as a place to live ......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Your neighborhood as a place to raise children ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) ................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t likely likely unlikely unlikely know Recommend living in Fort Collins to someone who asks .................. 1 2 3 4 5 Remain in Fort Collins for the next five years .................................... 1 2 3 4 5 4. In the last 12 months, about how many times, if at all, have you or other household members done each of the following in Fort Collins? 2 times a 2-4 times Once Not week or more a month a month or less at all Visited a neighborhood park or City park ................................................. 1 2 3 4 Attended a neighborhood-sponsored event ............................................ 1 2 3 4 Attended a government-organized event (open house, City Council session, forum, etc.) ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone............ 1 2 3 4 Volunteered your time in Fort Collins ...................................................... 1 2 3 4 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors ................................ 1 2 3 4 Done a favor for a neighbor ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4 Visited a locally owned business operating within the city ...................... 1 2 3 4 Page 248 Item 1. 2 0 2 5 F o r t C o l l i n s C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y -- 2 -- 5. In the last 20 years, how often have you moved to a different place of residence in Fort Collins? ❑ 2+ times a year ❑ About once a year ❑ Every 2-4 years ❑ Every 5-7 years ❑ Every 8-10 years ❑ Every 11-15 years ❑ 16-20 years ❑ I have not relocated in the last 20 years ❑ I have not relocated within the City 6. Please tell us how safe you feel in or on each of the following in Fort Collins. Always Usually Sometimes safe Usually Always No safe safe sometimes unsafe unsafe unsafe opinion Downtown Fort Collins during the day ................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Downtown Fort Collins at night .............................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Your neighborhood during the day ........................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Your neighborhood at night ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Parks ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Natural areas/open spaces ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Recreation facilities ................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Trails ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fort Collins overall during the day .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fort Collins overall at night ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Transfort/MAX ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. Please rate the quality of each of the following in Fort Collins. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) .............. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Disaster response and restoration of services ........................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fire prevention/education/outreach ......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 EMS/Fire response time ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 EMS/Fire services overall ............................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Crime prevention ........................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Police patrol ................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Traffic enforcement .................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Police visibility ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Police response time .................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Police services overall ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Code enforcement (weeds, rubbish/trash, etc.) ........................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Noise enforcement ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Animal control ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Business property maintenance ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Residential property maintenance ............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Natural Areas and Park Ranger services ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 8. Please rate the following areas of transportation in Fort Collins. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Ease of travel by car .................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ease of travel by public transportation ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ease of walking ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g., people with low vision or in wheelchairs) ....................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ease of travel by bicycle.............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Availability of parking Downtown .............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Traffic flow .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Street maintenance .................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Availability of electric vehicle charging stations ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service ................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Page 249 Item 1. 2 0 2 5 F o r t C o l l i n s C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y -- 3 -- 9. Thinking about the services provided by Fort Collins Utilities (which may include electric, water, wastewater and stormwater services), please rate each of the following: Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion The overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities .................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 10. Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t likely likely unlikely unlikely know Sign up for Connexion internet, TV or phone service when available to you ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Recommend Connexion service to a friend, relative or colleague ................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 11. Please rate the quality of the environment in Fort Collins on each of the items listed below. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Air quality.................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Recycling programs ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Conservation efforts ................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Overall quality of environment ................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 12. Please rate the quality of each of the programs or facilities listed below. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Natural areas and open space .................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Trails ........................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Parks overall ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Parks in my neighborhood .......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Dog parks .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Timberline Recycling Center ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Cemeteries .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Golf courses ................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Athletic fields .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Northside Aztlan Community Center .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fort Collins Senior Center ........................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Foothills Activity Center .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mulberry Pool ............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 The Farm at Lee Martinez Park ................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 The Gardens on Spring Creek ..................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pottery studio ............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Art in Public Places program ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Lincoln Center programs ............................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery .............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Adult recreation programs ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Senior recreation programs ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Youth/teen recreation programs ................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Page 250 Item 1. 2 0 2 5 F o r t C o l l i n s C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y -- 4 -- 13. Please rate the City’s performance in each of the following areas. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Managing and planning for growth ......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Efficient operation of programs and services .......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Encouraging sustainability in the community ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Partnering with the community to address climate change ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Overall direction of the City ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Promotion of the social health of Fort Collins (human services, affordable housing, homelessness, equity & inclusion, etc.) ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Promotion of the health of the environment of Fort Collins................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins .................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Support of businesses .............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Encouraging a variety of businesses ........................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Retaining existing businesses .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Attracting new businesses ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Welcoming community member involvement ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Listening to community members ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Informing community members .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Providing opportunities to participate in government activities ............................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Providing volunteer opportunities to community members ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Providing emergency information ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ensuring all community members can access and participate in City programs and services ................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background, gender, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, or marital status ............... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging .................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 14. Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by the City of Fort Collins? ❑ Very good ❑ Good ❑ Average ❑ Bad ❑ Very bad ❑ No opinion 15. Have you had contact with any City employee(s) by phone, in person, via email or online within the last 12 months? ❑ Yes ➔ Answer Q15A ONLY ❑ No ➔ Answer Q15B ONLY 15A. Thinking about your most recent contact, please rate the City employee(s) on each of the items below. Very Very No good Good Average Bad bad opinion Courtesy ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Promptness .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Knowledge ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Making you feel valued ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Overall impression ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 15B. Although you may not have had any recent personal contact with City employees, we would like to know your impression of how City employees interact with Fort Collins community members. Please rate City employees on each of the items below. Very No good Good Average Bad Very bad opinion Courtesy ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Promptness in responding to inquiries and service requests ........................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Making community members or customers feel valued ..... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Page 251 Item 1. 2 0 2 5 F o r t C o l l i n s C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y -- 5 -- 16. First, please select the option that best describes how you think the City should address each of the following aspects of the community. Then, please select which three (3) should be the top priorities for the City to focus on in the next 5 years. More Same Less No Top 3 effort effort effort opinion priorities Economy: Includes economic planning and development activities, workforce training, childcare, education, employment opportunities ......... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Environment: Includes efforts to ensure good water resources, good air quality, land conservation, smart growth, recycling, Our Climate Future (climate action, zero waste, energy policy), and an attractive community ..... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Neighborhood and Community Vitality: Includes promoting good neighbor relationships, ensuring attractive neighborhoods, historic preservation, an adequate supply of quality housing for all socio-economic groups, addressing poverty and homelessness, creating an inclusive community .... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Safety: Includes police, fire, stormwater, emergency medical response, and building inspection ......................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Culture, Parks & Recreation: Includes operating and improving recreational facilities, Lincoln Center, Gardens on Spring Creek and the Museum of Discovery; providing recreational, arts and cultural programs and public art; maintaining parks, trails and cemeteries; and improving natural areas ...... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Transportation and Mobility: Includes transportation planning and development, maintaining roads and traffic operations, Transfort operations, and bicycle and pedestrian safety, Northern Colorado Regional Airport ..... 1 2 3 4 ❑ General Government: Includes internal support functions, City management, Council, boards and commissions, volunteers, technology, communicating with community members and building maintenance and repair ................ 1 2 3 4 ❑ 17. Thinking about the next few years, what is ONE item or focus area you would like the City to improve? _______________________________________________________________________________________________ 18. Please first indicate how frequently, if ever, you or other members of your household use each of the following sources for information regarding City issues, services, and programs. Then indicate your top three (3) preferred methods of receiving information. Always Frequently Sometimes Never Top 3 methods The City of Fort Collins local channels 14 and 881 ......................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Online video FCTV on www.fcgov.com/FCTV ................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ City’s website (www.fcgov.com) .................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ City News eNewsletter ................................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Newsletters or brochures from City departments ......................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ City employees or departments (e.g., contacting by phone, email or in person) ......................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Explorer (the guide to natural areas activities) .............................. 1 2 3 4 ❑ Recreator (guide to recreation programs) ...................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Word of mouth ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Newspaper (print or online) ........................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Radio ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Television news............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, YouTube, etc.) .......... 1 2 3 4 ❑ OurCity Platform (ourcity.fcgov.com) ............................................. 1 2 3 4 ❑ Engage Platform (engage.fcgov.com) ............................................. 1 2 3 4 ❑ Access Fort Collins ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ City booth at local events ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Other (please specify) _____________________________ .......... 1 2 3 4 ❑ Page 252 Item 1. 2 0 2 5 F o r t C o l l i n s C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y -- 6 -- This section is optional. However, we ask for the information below so that we can better understand and address concerns about and differences with City service delivery. Your responses will remain completely confidential and no identifying information will be shared. D1. About how many years have you lived in Fort Collins? ❑ Less than 2 years ❑ 11-20 years ❑ 2-5 years ❑ More than 20 years ❑ 6-10 years D2. Are you a full-time or part-time student at a college or university in Fort Collins? ❑ Yes ➔ GO TO QUESTION D3 ❑ No ➔ GO TO QUESTION D4 D3. Which college or university do you attend? ❑ Colorado State University ❑ Front Range Community College ❑ Another local college or university D4. What is your employment status? ❑ Working full time for pay ❑ Working part time for pay ❑ Unemployed, looking for paid work ❑ Unemployed, not looking for paid work ❑ Fully retired D5. Do you work inside the boundaries of Fort Collins? ❑ Yes, outside the home ❑ Yes, from home ❑ No D6. Which of the age groups below best describes you? ❑ 18-24 ❑ 45-54 ❑ 75 + ❑ 25-34 ❑ 55-64 ❑ 35-44 ❑ 65-74 D7. Which best describes the building you live in? ❑ One family house detached from any other houses ❑ Duplex or townhome ❑ Apartment or condominium ❑ Mobile home ❑ Other D8. Do you own or rent your residence? ❑ Own ❑ Rent D9. How much do you anticipate your household’s total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income from all sources for all persons living in your household.) ❑ Less than $25,000 ❑ $25,000 to $49,999 ❑ $50,000 to $99,999 ❑ $100,000 to $149,999 ❑ $150,000 or more D10. What is your gender? (Select all that apply.) ❑ Nonbinary ❑ Woman ❑ Man ❑ Transgender ❑ Two-Spirit ❑ Prefer to self-identify:_________________ ❑ Prefer not to answer D11. Which term best describes your sexual orientation? (Select all that apply.) ❑ Asexual ❑ Bisexual ❑ Heterosexual ❑ Lesbian or gay ❑ Pansexual ❑ Queer ❑ Prefer to self-identify:_________________ ❑ Prefer not to answer D12. What is your race and/or ethnicity? (Please mark any race or ethnicity you identify as) ❑ American Indian/Alaska Native ❑ African ❑ African American/Black ❑ Asian/Asian American ❑ Hispanic/Latinx/Spanish Origin ❑ Middle Eastern/North African ❑ Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander ❑ White ❑ Prefer to self-identify:___________________ ❑ Prefer not to answer Thank you very much! Please return the completed questionnaire to National Research Center, Inc., PO Box 549, Belle Mead, NJ 08502-9922 in the postage-paid envelope provided. Page 253 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here EVP of Data & Insights Polco Sonya Wytinck The City of Fort Collins Community Survey Presentation of Results 2025 August 2025 Page 254 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here2025 Survey Overview 2 The Community Survey serves as our annual consumer report card for the City by providing residents the opportunity to rate the quality of life in the city and their satisfaction with community amenities and local government. •16th year of conducting scientific survey •2025 Survey conducted from April 21 –May 31. •Informs strategic master plans, operational & department objectives, and the budget •Executive summary and full report available online. Page 255 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 3 Advanced Survey Science & Performance Analytics Data insights to help communities move forward. The premiere provider of professional civic surveys and performance benchmarking analyses. Civic Communication & Analytics Platform Smarter, better-connected communities. A civic surveying, policy polling, and constituent communication tech platform. Visit us online at polco.us Partners with: Page 256 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 4 Polco’s Benchmarking Database More than 400 comparison communities across the nation. Representing the opinions of more than 50 million residents. Page 257 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes HereSurvey Methodology 5 Outreach approach: •Probability-based random sample of 4,400 households o postcard invitation (with online link) o paper survey with postage paid return envelope o 548 total responses received (224 paper + 324 online) •Open participation link shared by City: 373 responses Total: 921 survey responses •Statistically weighted to reflect Fort Collins •±3% margin of error (95% confidence interval) •Differences between 2025 and 2024 are statistically significant if they are ±6% or more. Page 258 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Overview of Survey Results 6 Page 259 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes HereComparisons to National Benchmarks 7 47 received similar ratings 3 received lower ratings 11 received higher ratings Page 260 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes HereComparisons to Front Range Benchmarks 8 37 received similar ratings 0 received lower ratings 17 received higher ratings Page 261 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Key Findings 9 Page 262 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Fort Collins residents enjoy an excellent quality of life, but housing affordability continues to be a concern. Page 263 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 11 Overall Quality of Life 92%89%91%87%88% 85%85%85%83% 87% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Percent very good or good Page 264 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 12 Neighborhood Quality of Life 68% 72% 82% 68% 74% 81% 70% 78% 86% Access within your neighborhood to everyday needs (i.e., grocery shopping, services, and amenities) Your neighborhood as a place to raise children Your neighborhood as a place to live 2025 2024 2023 Percent very good or goodPage 265 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 13 Aspects of Quality of Life 7% 17% 59% 65% 70% 84% 83% 89% 9% 16% 61% 65% 66% 80% 84% 87% 10% 19% 68% 71% 72% 85% 86% 91% Availability of affordable quality housing Availability of affordable quality childcare Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds As a place to retire Quality of public schools As a place to raise children As a place to attend college Overall, as a place to live 2025 2024 2023 Percent very good or good Lower than the national benchmark Higher than the Front Range benchmarkPage 266 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 14 Community Member Priorities Housing cost or affordability Transportation improvements, mobility, paths and trails Traffic, roads, and parking Government policies, spending, service delivery, etc. Less growth and development; issues related to growth, planning and zoning Safety, crime, policing Top Ranked 24% 13% 8% 6% 6% 6% Page 267 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Residents feel safe in the city, and feelings of safety at night and while using Transfort have improved since 2024. Page 268 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 16 Overall Safety in the City 91% 88%90% 86%86%85% 82%80%82% 87% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Percent very good or good Page 269 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 17 Ratings of Personal Safety 59% 60% 66% 82% 82% 83% 81% 86% 92% 93% 96% 59% 63% 65% 81% 83% 83% 84% 92% 91% 93% 95% 66% 70% 73% 85% 86% 88% 88% 92% 92% 93% 97% Transfort/MAX Downtown Fort Collins at night Fort Collins overall at night Trails Natural areas/open spaces Your neighborhood at night Parks Recreation facilities Downtown Fort Collins during the day Fort Collins overall during the day Your neighborhood during the day 2025 2024 2023 Percent always or usually safe Page 270 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 18 Ratings of Safety Services 33% 50% 44% 46% 51% 70% 73% 85% 87% 88% 33% 50% 51% 50% 57% 69% 71% 83% 84% 88% 41% 51% 52% 55% 59% 73% 74% 86% 88% 88% Traffic enforcement Police visability Police patrol Crime prevention Police services overall Emergency preparedness Disaster response and restoration services EMS/Fire response time EMS/Fire services overall Natural Areas and Park Ranger services 2025 2024 2023 Percent very good or good Lower than the national benchmark Higher than the Front Range benchmarkPage 271 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Ease of travel by bicycle remains highly valued, while other transportation ratings show notable improvement. Page 272 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 20 Transportation Ratings Percent very good or good29% 26% 29% 37% 46% 57% 52% 62% 38% 83% 29% 22% 27% 38% 44% 59% 56% 62% 54% 82% 36% 39% 40% 46% 48% 54% 60% 66% 67% 67% 85% Traffic flow Availability of electric vehicle charging stations Ease of traveling by public transportation Accessibility for people with disabilities Availability of parking Downtown Safety from motor vehicle accidents when walking, biking or using public transportation Ease of travel by car Street maintenance Ease of walking Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service Ease of travel by bicycle 2025 2024 2023 Higher than the Front Range benchmark Higher than the National benchmark Page 273 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 21 Transportation Ratings YoY (2025-2024) +1% +3% +4% +5% +7% +8% +10% +13% +13% +17% Ease of travel by car Ease of travel by bicycle Availability of parking Downtown Ease of walking Traffic flow Accessibility for people with disabilities Street maintenance Ease of traveling by public transportation Northern Colorado Regional Airport/Shuttle Service Availability of electric vehicle charging stations Difference 2024-2025 Higher than the Front Range benchmark Higher than the National benchmark Page 274 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Fort Collins as a place to work received its highest rating in recent years, but residents still want more job opportunities in the city. Page 275 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 23 Ratings for Fort Collins as a Place to Work 78%78%78% 73%74%78%74% 70% 71% 77% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Percent very good or good Higher than the Front Range benchmarkPage 276 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 24 Community Aspects of Economic Health 37% 55% 63% 68% 70% 37% 61% 63% 64% 68% 35% 58% 67% 67% 67% Availability of job opportunities Quality of shopping opportunities Quality of entertainment opportunities Quality of dining opportunities Availability of quality healthcare 2025 2024 2023 Percent very good or good Higher than the Front Range benchmark Higher than the National benchmark Page 277 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 25 Business Support and Economic Promotion 72% 67%68%68% 58% 63% 55%57%55%55% 64% 67%67% 63% 53%54% 46% 41%42% 48% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Support of businesses Promotion of the economic health of Fort Collins Percent very good or good Page 278 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Residents appreciate city employees and many aspects of city services. Page 279 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 27 Rating of City Services Very good, 28% Good, 50% Average, 17% Bad, 2%Very bad, 2% Overall Quality of City Services 87%84% 90% 81%80%80% 76%75%77%79% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Overall Quality of City Services by Year Percent very good or good Page 280 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 28 City Government Ratings 34% 38% 36% 42% 48% 54% 55% 56% 55% 59% 33% 37% 40% 43% 52% 56% 52% 59% 59% 62% 40% 49% 50% 51% 60% 60% 63% 63% 67% 70% Managing and planning for growth Balancing development and growth while maintaining the character and identity of the City and neighborhoods Listening to community members Partnering with the community to address climate change Welcoming community member involvement Efficient operation of programs and services Overall direction of the City Encouraging sustainability in the community Creating a welcoming, inclusive community where all community members feel a sense of belonging Respecting all community members regardless of race/ethnic background, gender, etc. 2025 2024 2023 Percent very good or good Page 281 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 29 Fort Collins Utilities 74% 76% 77% 81% 78% 82% Your overall impression of Fort Collins Utilities Overall quality of Fort Collins Utilities 2025 2024 2023 Percent very good or good Page 282 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here 30 Contact with City Employees 54%54%53%56%53%51%52% 60%59%55% 2013 2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Contact with City Employees by Year Percent yes 72% 80% 80% 80% 86% 71% 79% 78% 81% 88% 74% 80% 83% 83% 89% Making you feel valued Overall impression Promptness Knowledge Courtesy 2025 2024 2023 Users Ratings of City Employees by Year Percent very good or good Page 283 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Questions? 31 Page 284 Item 1. Headline Copy Goes Here Thank you! 32 Page 285 Item 1. File Attachments for Item: 2. Staff Report: PRPA Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement The purpose of this item is to provide an update on the PRPA Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement which will be presented to Council for consideration at the September 16 Council and Electric Utility Enterprise Board meeting. Page 286 City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 1 August 26, 2025 WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council PRESENTER Tyler Marr, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Staff Report: PRPA Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide an update on the PRPA Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement which will be presented to Council for consideration at the September 16 Council and Electric Utility Enterprise Board meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Presentation Page 287 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here Deputy City Manager Tyler Marr 8/26/2025 Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement Update and Timeline Page 288 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here 3 Organic Contract & Power Supply Agreement Relationship Page 289 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here 4 What is the Organic Contract? Four-way agreement among Platte River’s member owner cities Serves as Platte River’s “constitution” —establishes the governance structure Colorado law empowers governmental units to contract with each other to jointly provide any function, service, or facility (C.R.S. §§29-1-203) including a governmental power authority (C.R.S. §§, 29-1-204)) Grants Platte River enumerated powers, including bonding authority, similar to a power authority under state statute With proper authorization, Platte River may also provide additional services for its owner communities The current agreement runs through December 31, 2060Page 290 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Organic Contract Updates •Support long-term planning and stability Extend Agreement Terms •Align with current law; recognize industry and model shifts •Clarifies board and staff roles Modernize Language •Remove references to specific product offerings Increase Flexibility Page 291 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here 6 What is the Power Supply Agreement? Separate bilateral agreements between Platte River and each owner community Terms are essentially identical across all agreements Reflects each owner community’s mutual commitment to follow shared rules Secures all revenue bonds issued by Platte River Revenues from energy purchases by owner communities Fund Platte River’s operations, capital investments, and debt service Page 292 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here 8 Power Supply Agreement (PSA)–“All Requirements” What “All Requirements” Means: •Platte River supplies nearly all electricity to each owner community •Owner communities must purchase nearly all of their electricity exclusively from Platte River Three Key Exceptions: •Legacy generation •Pre-1974 generation resources owned by the community •New small-scale generation •Up to 1 MW or 1% of the owner community’s peak load (whichever is greater) •Net-metered energy •Includes distributed energy such as solar, battery storage, and other customer-owned DERs Page 293 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here 10 PSA: Modernizing Carve-Out Language to Support Shared Goals •Ongoing, shared efforts toward a reliable, affordable, and rapidly decarbonized energy portfolio Replace detailed carve-out terms with a broad commitment to: •Current clean energy goals •A more collaborative and adaptive approach Update recitals to reflect: •Use flexible, enabling language that supports innovation and adaptation Shift away from prescriptive meeting requirements around distributed generation •Should not determine how a resource is treated in terms of carve- outs or eligibility Clarify that interconnection point (high voltage vs. distribution) Page 294 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here 11 PSA: Contract Term and Market Compatibility Updates •Support long-term planning and stability Extend Agreement Terms •Align with current law; increase flexibility for solar Modernize Net Metering Language •Ensure compatibility with organized market rules •Enable transmission cost recovery via formula rates Update Rate Provisions •Support efficient participation in organized markets Revise Market & Surplus Sales Terms Page 295 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here Dec 12, 2024 Jan – Feb 2025 March 2025 April 2025 May- June 2025 July 2025 Aug 2025 Mid-Sept 2025 Sept 25th October 2025 12 Timeline and Next Steps Kickoff discussion with Platte River Board Present key concepts to Platte River Board Owner community outreach Present initial redlined drafts to owner communities Gather feedback and refine proposed amendments Final check-in with owner community attorneys Board council Review Platte River Board Confirmation “Pens down” – circulate final documents for approval processes City councils and town board approve Organic Contract & PSA amendments Platte River board approves PSA amendments All parties sign Page 296 Item 2. Headline Copy Goes Here Questions? 13 Page 297 Item 2. File Attachments for Item: 3. Visioning Our Future: Budget & Organizational System Alignment The purpose of this item is to provide an update on the work staff has been doing to improve upon the Budgeting for Outcomes process and understand feedback on proposed changes. Information will be provided on the following topics: • Budget Timeline and proposed changes • Budget Snapshot: Current sources and uses of revenue • Organizational Alignment Page 298 City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 7 August 19, 2025 WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Caleb Weitz, Chief Financial Officer Rupa Venkatesh, Assistant City Manager Victoria Shaw, Interim Finance Director, Special Projects SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Visioning Our Future: Budget & Organizational System Alignment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide an update on the work staff has been doing to improve upon the Budgeting for Outcomes process and understand feedback on proposed changes. Information will be provided on the following topics: • Budget Timeline and proposed changes • Budget Snapshot: Current sources and uses of revenue • Organizational Alignment GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Is Council aligned on the direction staff is taking with the budget process? 2. What information would enhance understanding of base and discretionary spending? 3. Are there priority areas where Council members would like to see scenario planning for the next budgeting cycle? 4. What feedback and additional consideration does Council have regarding the Council onboarding process? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Based on Council feedback received during the last budget cycle, which concluded with the adoption of the 2025-2026 budget in November 2024, the City Manager identified a significant need for a comprehensive review and revision of the City's budget processes. This determination was driven by a recognized and increasing divergence between resource prioritization and the City's evolving operational environment. Furthermore, there is a clear desire to enhance the clarity of communication with both the community and Council regarding the strategic deployment of public resources to achieve programmatic goals and advance shared community outcomes. Page 299 Item 3. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 7 In addition, it is important to note that these challenges are not fully solved by just changing the budget process and will not be resolved in the immediate term. Importantly, the upcoming 2026 Council onboarding, priority setting, and Strategic Planning processes present valuable and immediate opportunities to inform the budget development process, and these should be intentionally aligned, along with the City Manager’s Organizational Priorities. Feedback on Budgeting for Outcomes process During and after the most recent budget cycle, Council and staff shared feedback on how to improve the Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process. Common themes to focus on while developing a new process included:  Transparency and Clarity: o Make budget information easier for the community and decision-makers to understand o Provide more context and plain language that resonates with a wider audience  Insight and accountability o Offer deeper scrutiny into ongoing program budgets o Include clearer measures of the effectiveness of funded services  Tradeoffs and prioritization o Provide a better understanding of tradeoffs in resource allocation o Explore potential shift toward a priority-based budgeting model  Administrative efficiency o Reduce the administrative burden on staff while retaining valuable elements of BFO While moving towards a new process, there was feedback as to what should be kept or enhanced to include:  Maintaining a balanced budget  Aligning investments with Strategic Objectives  Applying a “One City” perspective across departments  Building upon the current information to offer more insight on balancing the value of core assets with new opportunities  Ensuring intentional and well-informed investments  Providing horizontal insight across service areas Snapshot of Current Budget The City’s annual budget of approximately $900 million reflects a complex mix of funding sources, many of which are legally or traditionally restricted for specific purposes. While this structure ensures compliance and targets investments in directed areas which have been designated by voters, it also limits flexibility in how resources can be allocated. Of the total budget, about $150 million is from unrestricted sales taxes, which would be the most fungible source and could be directed toward a wide range of needs at Council’s discretion. This flexible portion is also critical for sustaining many core City services, such as public safety, transportation operations, and parks maintenance, which lack substantial other alternative or dedicated funding streams. Page 300 Item 3. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 7 The breakout of revenues projected in the 2025/2026 budget is shown in the following exhibit: Various payments for services represent the largest portion of forecasted revenues. The fee structures which are recommended for payments are typically not to exceed the costs of providing the associated service, which means these revenue sources are often directly linked to associated costs, and the revenue cannot be redirected from funding the associated services. The sales taxes shown of approximately $200M per year include the dedicated ¼ cent taxes for Community Capital Improvement Plan (CCIP), Natural Areas, and Street Maintenance, in addition to the ½ cent 2050 Page 301 Item 3. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 7 tax for Parks and Recreation, Our Climate Future, and Transportation. These taxes are restric ted by their associated ballot language requirements to be used for those specific purposes. Of the total sales taxes forecasted, approximately $150M per year would be the general sales tax and Keep Fort Collins Great (KFCG) collections which are considered available for most uses. That revenue is then paired to prioritized offers through the BFO process. In 2025/2026, the funding was recommended as follows: These expense categories represent the type of costs being budgeted for, with the majority of Citywide costs going towards services purchased, while for General Fund costs, the majority of costs budgeted are employee pay and benefits. Page 302 Item 3. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 7 With the unrestricted sales tax funding source (~$150M), here is where the expenses were budgeted by City Service Area: The allocation of unrestricted General Fund dollars generally follows three primary themes. First, many of these resources support departments that provide core governmental services that do not have other significant funding sources. Examples include Police Services and Parks Maintenance within Community Services. Second, funding is also directed to areas where General Fund support is used to leverage other revenue streams, such as grants or fee-based income. For example, Planning, Development and Transportation often combines City funding with federal, state, or local partner contributions to deliver infrastructure and mobility projects. Third, a portion of unrestricted funding supports internal City services, such as Information and Employee Services, which includes the Information Technology department, and Financial Services. These functions are essential to maintaining effective operations and enabling all departments to deliver services to the community. Outlook Towards Future Budgeting Process The City’s biennial budget process is one of the most important tools for aligning resources with community priorities and delivering on objectives and outcomes identified in the citywide Strategic Plan. However, the feedback on the process indicates that the current Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) model does not meet expectations for transparency, accessibility, and alignment with Council priorities. In response, staff has explored a transition toward a priority-based budgeting approach, beginning with a transitional process for the 2027–2028 budget cycle and culminating in a fully implemented model for the 2029–2030 cycle. Police Services $58.6 Planning, Dev & Transportation $27.8 Information & Employee Svcs $23.5 Community Services $22.1 Sustainability Services $6.6 Financial Services $5.2 Executive Services $5.1 Legal Services $3.8 Judicial Services $2.2 Utility Services $0.3 2025 General Fund -Ongoing Revenue Appropriation by Dept $M Page 303 Item 3. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 7 The transitional process will use existing budget systems and timelines while incorporating immediate improvements in clarity, decision support, and priority alignment. This approach will also serve as a learning phase, allowing staff to test changes and gather Council feedback before launching the permanent model. The transitional process will be guided by the following principles:  Provide greater scrutiny and insight into ongoing programs and ensuring Council can evaluate the effectiveness of existing services and investments.  Achieve simplification and agility by making budget information easier to navigate and adapt as conditions change.  Create stronger alignment with the Strategic Plan and Council priorities by organizing information in a way that clearly links resource allocation to desired community outcomes.  Assess siloed processes and identify opportunities for integration to streamline how information is developed, reviewed, and presented.  Increase standardization and strengthen long-term planning towards improving consistency across the organization and connecting biennial budgets to long-range financial forecasts. While the City will continue to use familiar budget tools and timelines for the 2027–2028 cycle, the structure and focus of the process will shift. These changes are intended to make the budget more accessible, better aligned with Council direction, and more effective in showing tradeoffs and investment decisions. Key elements of this transitional process include: 1. Maintaining fiscal discipline: tradeoffs will remain necessary and economic constraints will not be eliminated. 2. Using existing systems, inputs, and timelines to minimize disruption while rethinking the structure and presentation of budget information. 3. Shifting away from the BFO offers format to a more thematic, priority-aligned structure. 4. Providing clearer, more concise information on ongoing programs, their effectiveness, and associated tradeoffs. 5. Engaging Council earlier in the process to confirm priority themes before development of the proposed budget. Once the transitional process is complete, staff will apply lessons learned to a fully implemented priority- based budgeting framework. The long-term vision includes:  More directly linking biennial budgets to long-range forecasts to understand the future impacts of current decisions.  Further strengthening alignment between Council priorities, community input, and resource allocation based on feedback from the transitional process.  Providing more digestible budget documents for the adopted budget by including more interactive, visual ways to engage with the budget. NEXT STEPS Staff will incorporate Council feedback as they work on design of the transitional 2027/2028 budgeting process, which will kick off in Q1 of 2026. Council onboarding and priority setting discussions will continue throughout the remainder of 2025 with Leadership Planning Team and Council. Page 304 Item 3. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 7 ATTACHMENTS 1. Presentation Page 305 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes Here Caleb Weitz, CFO Rupa Venkatesh, Assistant City Manager Victoria Shaw, Interim Finance Director Council Work Session Visioning our Future: Budget & Organizational System Alignment 08-26-25 Page 306 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes Here 2 Why are we doing this? Following the last budget cycle, the City Manager requested a comprehensive review and revision of the budget process based on Council feedback and direction Pain points were identified that underscore the entire system needs to be evaluated –not just the budget process. In the short window we have to implement changes, what can we begin this cycle that would be impactful? Page 307 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereDirection Sought •Is Council aligned on the direction staff is taking with the budget process? •What information would enhance understanding of base and discretionary spending? •Are there priority areas where you'd like to see scenario planning? •What feedback and additional consideration does Council have regarding the Council onboarding process? Page 308 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes Here 4 Today’s Session Outcomes and Council Input •Budget •Council and staff feedback on process •Budget Snapshot •2027-2028 budget timeline and proposed changes •Improving how we tell the budget story •Organizational Alignment •Strategic Plan •Council Onboarding and Priority Setting •Council Input Page 309 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereWhat We Heard Input from Council and Staff •Desire for more transparency, “digestibility,” and context for community. •Too much complexity, hard to understand, some of the language used doesn’t resonate •More scrutiny and insights needed into ongoing budgets and measures of effectiveness of services funded •Better understanding of tradeoffs •Curiosity about a shift into priority based-budgeting •Administrative burden on staff Keep/Enhance Balanced budget Alignment to Strategic Priorities “One City” perspective Tradeoffs –More insight on how to balance maintaining the value of core assets with new opportunities Intentional investments Horizontal insight Page 310 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereCity Budget Snapshot: Revenues •Payment Revenues are associated with linked costs and have various restrictions around their use •~75% of the Sales Taxes funding is considered unrestricted and is our most fungible funding source Page 311 Item 3. City Budget Snapshot: Expenses Citywide Expenses 2025 2026 Services Purchased from External Businesses, including Local $277.7M $262.5M Employee Pay and Benefits $232.0M $243.2M Energy Purchased from Platte River Power Authority $116.3M $123.7M Capital, Including Land, Buildings, Vehicles, Large Machinery, etc. $108.2M $63.7M Internal Payments Between City Departments* $96.7M $72.2M Debt Service $47.0M $55.6M Other Supplies $32.6M $34.3M Other Expenses $21.1M $21.1M Page 312 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereCity Budget Snapshot: Expenses General Fund Expenses 2025 2026 Employee Pay and Benefits $104.4M $109.2M Services Purchased from External Businesses, including Local $74.3M $73.0M Internal Payments Between City Departments*$47.5M $49.9M Other Supplies $8.0M $8.2M Other Expenses $6.7M $6.9M Capital, Including Land, Buildings, Vehicles, Large Machinery, etc. $6.5M $4.4M Page 313 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereWhere unrestricted General Fund is going •Departments which are core government functions without other significant funding sources •Police Services •Parks Maintenance •Areas with ability to leverage funding •Grants and Fees, like in PDT •Revenue supported departments, like in Recreation •Internal support services Police Services $58.6 Planning, Dev & Transportation $27.8 Information & Employee Svcs $23.5 Community Services $22.1 Sustainability Services $6.6 Financial Services $5.2 Executive Services $5.1 Legal Services $3.8 Judicial Services $2.2 Utility Services $0.3 2025 General Fund Revenue Appropriation by Dept $MPage 314 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereBudget and Strategic Plan Timing Budgeting Strategic Plan Council Election Council Onboarding and Priority Adoption Strategic Plan Page 315 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereGuiding Principles –Next Budgeting Process 11 Provide Scrutiny & Insight into Ongoing Programs Achieve Simplification and Agility in the Budget Process Create Better Alignment with Strategic Plan and Council Priorities Assess Siloed Processes and Opportunities for Integration Increase Standardization and Improve Long-term Planning Page 316 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereThe Future of Budget •Budget process won’t eliminate fiscal constraints •Goal to better inform decisions and provide meaningful insights on tradeoffs •2027-2028 Budget will be transitional and bridge to long-term process •Move away from Budgeting for Outcomes •Existing systems will be used •Timeline and inputs will remain similar •2029-2030 Budget would incorporate feedback from transitional process •Goal to link future biennial budgets into long-range forecasts Page 317 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereWhat’s Changing and Why Existing Process Focus with Priority Based Budgeting Focused on enhancements, Less scrutiny of base Evaluate all programs, including base services, alongside new demands Offers built per outcome Programs grouped by mandate, alignment to strategic priorities, and value Complex and staff-intensive Simplified structure Dense and lengthy budget document Streamlined, digestible format with visuals and context Page 318 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereWhat’s Changing and Why Page 319 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereImproving How We Tell the Budget Story • Clearer summaries for the public •Visualization of base and discretionary spending •Better alignment with strategic plan and council priorities Page 320 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereDirection Sought •Is Council aligned on the direction staff is taking with the budget process? •What information would enhance understanding of base and discretionary spending? •Are there priority areas where you'd like to see scenario planning? •E.g. Level of service tradeoffs, cost recovery scenarios, specific investment areas Page 321 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes Here 17 Leadership System ADAPT & INNOVATE Once identified, adopting new ideas to make meaningful change to improve processes and results. MEASURE & VALIDATE Organizational performance measurement and review focuses on results important to our community and our organization. DELIVER SERVICES Service Area delivery of high-quality services, programs and projects provide value to our community, and enhance loyalty, satisfaction, and engagement. SET VISION & STRATEGY A clear vision sets direction and short-and long-term strategy provides the roadmap for achievement. ALLOCATE RESOURCES Budgeting and managing workforce capacity and assets supports the accomplishment of the organization’s strategic objectives. ALIGN TALENT Our success relies on an engaged workforce that benefits from meaningful work, clear direction, the opportunity to learn, and accountability for performance. Page 322 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereGoals of Council Onboarding 18 Clarify Roles and Responsibilities 1 Build a Cohesive and Collaborative Team 2 Provide Foundational Knowledge 3 Ensure Legal and Ethical Compliance 4 Build Trust and Set Expectations 5 Provide tools to effectively serve the community 6 Page 323 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereDraft Council Onboarding Timeline –Everyone invited! 19 From November –Early January •Orientation around form of government, benefits, roles and responsibilities, administrative, legal, public relations •URA orientation •Meet direct reports, key support staff •Distribution of Council Resource Guide •CML Workshop for Newly Elected Officials •Mock Council meeting •Council Meeting Rule and Procedures training •Ethics, Gifts, Conflicts of Interest Training From Swearing In (Jan 13)–March •Finance & Budget •Other select topics •Council Selection of Board & Commissions and Other Committees liaisons •Council Retreat ⎻Weekend 1: Team building and ground setting ⎻Weekend 2: Council Priority Setting •Council considers adoption of Strategic Plan & Council priorities •And Council meetings and Work Sessions in between! Page 324 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereGoals of Council Priority Setting 20 Focus Limited Resources Provide Strategic Direction to Staff Translate a Long- term Vision into Short-Term Action Build Council Cohesion and Consensus Enhance Transparency and Public Accountability Page 325 Item 3. Headline Copy Goes HereQuestion for Council 21 •What feedback and additional consideration does Council have regarding the Council onboarding process? Page 326 Item 3. File Attachments for Item: 4. Proposed Tree Preservation and Mitigation Policies The purpose of this item is to seek Council feedback on potential tree policy updates in the Municipal and Land Use Codes. Page 327 City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 7 August 26, 2025 WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Sr. Policy & Project Manager Kendra Boot, City Forester SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Proposed Tree Preservation and Mitigation Policies EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to seek Council feedback on potential tree policy updates in the Municipal and Land Use Codes. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed tree policies? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Rooted in Community, the Fort Collins Urban Forest Strategic Plan, was adopted in March of 2025. The plan provides seven future growth strategies to support and maximize the community benefits that arise from fostering a healthy, urban tree canopy. The plan outlines the current state of the urban forest, emphasizes why trees are an important component of our community’s infrastructure, and identifies key opportunities to continue improving the urban tree canopy. Highlights of Findings:  Overall, the urban tree canopy has grown/expanded in most land use types over the last 10 years.  Several commercial zoning types as well as “Institutional” (CSU Campus) are the areas that have lost canopy over 10 years.  88% percent of the urban canopy is on private property and the remaining 12% is on public property. Future Growth Strategies The following strategies are listed in more detail with supporting initiatives (Foundational and Transformational Initiatives) in the plan. The supporting initiatives serve as a menu of options that were identified as opportunities through our community and focus group engagement. These options create pathways for the community and the Forestry Division to focus on and refine over the next twenty years as the urban forest and community evolves, as Council Priorities change, and as other technologies or advancements become available. Page 328 Item 4. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 7 The adopted Growth Strategies: 1. Strategically invest in growing tree canopy where it will promote resilience and quality of life in Fort Collins. 2. Complete the shift to proactive management of Fort Collin’s public trees. 3. Strengthen city policies to protect trees. 4. Collect data to track changes to tree canopy over time and to inform Forestry activities. 5. Sustainably resource the Forestry Division to keep pace with growth of the urban forest. 6. Deepen engagement with the community about tree stewardship. 7. Expand the network of Forestry Division partners. Growth Strategy Number 3 - Strengthen City Policies to Protect Trees: In spring of 2025, an interdisciplinary team from Planning, City Manager’s Office and Forestry began working with a landscape consultant to analyze the impact of proposed tree policies on future development in Fort Collins related to potential changes in both Municipal and the Land Use Code. In addition to drawing from community engagement conducted during the formation of the Urban Forest Strategic Plan, the team engaged focus group participants in conversations regarding potential tree policy changes. The team then utilized that feedback to create potential tree mitigation policy standards and other changes to simplify and strengthen tree policies and code standards. Much of the work of this team within this time period has focused on Growth Strategy Number 3. Project Goals 5 Project Goals were created to ground the work of the team:  Maintain current levels of tree canopy coverage  Prioritize protection of larger trees  Incentivize tree preservation with development  Support tree-health infrastructure improvements (silva-cells, structural soils, Low Impact Development (LID), wider parkways, double row of street trees, etc.)  Balance mitigation requirements (new tree plantings) while supporting new mixed-use and affordable housing development These 5 Project Goals are in addition to the most relevant Council Priorities for this work:  Council Priority No. 1: Operationalize City resources to build and preserve affordable housing  Council Priority No. 4: Pursue an integrated, intentional approach to economic health  Council Priority No. 8: Advance a 15-minute city by accelerating our shift to active modes Land Use and Canopy Cover Across Fort Collins, tree canopy has grown in most land use types over a 10-year period (between the 2011 and 2021 study period). Where canopy is growing includes residential areas, mixed-use areas, open spaces, and industrial areas. Canopy loss has occurred in commercial areas and “institutional” areas, which is the CSU campus. Commercial area losses often correspond to increased development intensity, including housing unit density, new and infill redevelopment where trees may have existed due to previous development and required tree planting at that time, as well as tree mortality related to tree health or other cumulative urban stressors. Many of these commercial areas along College Avenue and adjacent arterial Page 329 Item 4. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 7 streets are also where some of the highest canopy density is within the community. Therefore, canopy loss through higher-intensity redevelopment can be a consequence or trade-off for higher density development along major transit corridors. However, trees remain an important part of city infrastructure and green spaces in higher density development, too. Therefore, staff have attempted to balance these trade-offs in recommended code updates and potential tree mitigation changes. Existing Land Use Code Tree Policies Existing policies toward tree protection and canopy growth include:  Tree and Habitat Protection in environmentally critical areas (Natural Habitat Buffer Zones)  Robust landscape requirements result in increased canopy in new greenfield development areas  Quality standards for soil amendments, plantings and irrigation Current Land Use Code Tree Mitigation Requirements:  Based on tree size, condition and species  Applies to trees 6” caliper size and larger  Each tree assigned a value of 1 to 6 replacement trees  Based on assessment by Forestry staff  Payment-in-Lieu allowed for mitigation trees that cannot be planted on site Concerns heard regarding existing policies:  May not be adequately valuing large trees based on recent development projects  Do not provide incentives to protect existing trees with development Focus Groups Several focus groups were held to explain potential policy changes and how those would affect existing development projects. General support was offered for the recommended policy changes, including expanding species exemptions, enhanced tree protection during construction, the 3-year establishment period for street trees, and the proposed tree removal permit program. Regarding proposed tree mitigation strategies, several scenarios were shared to show how different mitigation strategies would affect costs for existing develo pment projects if different requirements were applied. Several participants noted that while trees are very important for development projects, mitigation requirements that are too high and may affect the feasibility of development projects, especially affordable housing projects. For additional detail, see the attached Focus Group feedback document. After the focus group meetings, staff revisited the proposed policy changes and restructured them to favor the preservation of larger, established trees, to better balance the mitigation requirements. Staff then applied those to existing and approved projects as case studies. Those examples are attached to this AIS and three case studies are addressed in the presentation. Previous Council Priority (2021-2023): Improve Tree Policies Under the previous Council priority, several positive changes have occurred. These include continued overall growth in tree canopy cover based on existing tree policies; the addition of a Forestry Zoning Inspector position; municipal code improvements, including dedicating trees as important community Page 330 Item 4. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 7 infrastructure; land use code improvements including dedicated irrigation to trees, mulching and other small technical clarifications; and the adoption of the Urban Forest Strategic Plan (UFSP). Proposed Policy Changes Staff are working to prepare education and outreach materials around residential tree preservation for community members making changes to their properties that may impact tree canopy long-term. Proposed Code Changes 1 Establish Commercial Tree Removal Permit Program 2 Enhanced measures for tree protection during construction 3 3-year establishment period for Street Trees 4 Expand exemptions for tree mitigation to include Russian-olive, ash, and Siberian elm species under 11” 5 Enhanced Tree Mitigation Policies Establish Commercial Tree Removal Permit Program There have been cases where a commercial property, outside of the development review process, will choose to remove trees from their property. In some cases, there may be alternatives to removing the tree. Establishing a commercial tree removal permit would create a requirement for commercial property owners to seek a no-cost permit to remove a tree 15-inches in diameter or larger. The idea behind this proposed policy is to create additional communication prior to tree removal in hopes that the City, commercial property owners and licensed tree companies can partner to slow down or omit preemptive removal of well-established trees in the community. Enhanced Measures for Tree Protection During Construction There have been many times when a development commits to preserving existing trees onsite, but the trees are either not properly protected and/or damaged during construction unintentionally. Enhanced measures for tree protection during construction include alignment with other protection provisions currently listed in the code to support enforcement of tree protection standards, requiring the tree protection plan to be onsite and always adhered to, tree protection zone signage, and updates to fencing placed at the driplines (outer edge of canopy) of trees. If a development commits to preserving existing trees onsite, these proposed tree protection measures will help set the preserved trees up for survival during construction and for longevity, providing long-term community benefits, to both the development site and the surrounding area. 3-year Establishment Period for Street Trees In the current code and plan requirements, street tree establishment is very gray in terms of when the City takes over responsibility for maintenance and care from the applicant. In some cases, this can be upwards to 5-6 years or more. Setting a three-year establishment period creates more predictability for the development community and gives clear parameters for both the City and development of when the applicant is done replacing trees before the City takes over maintenance and care for street trees. Other parameters have already been codified (March of 2025) to further set this effort up for success. For example, planting street trees in phases and planting trees during the shoulder seasons to avoid planting in the hottest and coldest timeframes of the year. Expand Exemptions for Tree Mitigation Currently the Land Use Code requires mitigation of Russian-olive, ash, and Siberian elm at the following diameter thresholds: 9-inches, 8-inches, and 11inches, respectively. While these species provide urban canopy benefits as well as habitat for wildlife, staff are looking for ways to simplify this section of the code. Page 331 Item 4. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 7 Expanding the exemptions for tree mitigation to include Russian-olive, ash, and Siberian elm under 11- inches would decrease the numbers of trees currently required for mitigation. These species are either invasive or susceptible to infestation (emerald ash borer) and are seen to be less valuable than larger trees for mitigation. These three species are also high in population numbers, creating monocultures across the community. Expanding these exemptions will assist with diversifying and creating a more healthy and resilient urban forest in the future and could reduce costs for development. Enhanced Tree Mitigation Policies As mentioned above, tree mitigation currently applies to all trees on a new development proposal. Well- established and larger trees provide the most benefits in our community and staff believe that the current policy does not value larger, established trees enough. Other communities utilize different strategies. For more details on peer City standards, please see the attached Clarion Associates report. These different strategies include:  Greater restrictions and mitigation requirements for larger trees  Canopy coverage by lot size  Canopy coverage by zoning district (i.e., different canopy goals for residential zone districts vs. commercial districts)  Replacement based on equal tree canopy  Assessing large fees and fines  Appraised value of tree based on a standardized appraisal process  Prohibiting tree removals in Environmentally Sensitive Areas  Incentives/reduced mitigation for saved trees After reviewing case studies and engaging with both internal departments and external entities within the development community, staff has worked to find a similar approach to the current tree mitigation requirement that is intended to be more predictable early in development and emphasizes mitigation of larger trees. The proposed mitigation requirements include a softening of the originally proposed mitigation requirements to find a good fit for Fort Collins. Staff have been weighing the importance of the community’s tree canopy and the changes that will occur over time as we continue to support housing and commercial development as a community. Below is a comparison of the current and newly proposed mitigation requirements. Page 332 Item 4. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 7 In addition to the newly proposed mitigation requirements, staff created the potential for mitigation reductions, which does not exist in today’s land use code. Below is a list of how mitigation can be reduced or omitted when trees are saved on site as well as other site improvements for tree and landscape health that further reduce an applicant’s mitigation requirement. Staff have also explored additional reductions for affordable housing projects as defined in LUC 5.2.1. Tree Mitigation Reductions  For each tree saved with development, allow reduction in overall tree mitigation requirements based on 50% of the mitigation value of each tree saved  For Payment-in-Lieu for mitigation trees that cannot be planted on site, allow up to 25% reduction in Payment-in-Lieu fees for equal value of enhanced tree planting measures: o Silva cells o Structural soils o Low Impact Development (LID) improvements o Wider parkways o Double row of street trees  For affordable housing projects, for each tree saved with development, allow reduction in overall tree mitigation requirements based on 75% of the mitigation value of each tree saved Potential Benefits of Proposed Policy:  Prioritizes protection of larger trees  Incentivizes tree preservation with development: o Reduction in mitigation requirements for trees saved o An additional reduction in mitigation when trees are saved with affordable housing projects Page 333 Item 4. City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 7 o Development projects that protect larger trees may have no mitigation for removal of smaller trees on site  Allows for enhanced tree planting measures instead of PIL for off-site tree planting  Balances mitigation requirements (new tree plantings) with supporting new mixed-use and affordable housing development NEXT STEPS Staff will incorporate feedback from this Council Work Session and work to draft updated code language based on the Council’s direction. Depending on Council feedback, staff can engage the Planning and Zoning Commission, follow up with focus groups, and return for Council Adoption in the fall. ATTACHMENTS 1. Urban Forest Strategic Plan Growth Strategy 3 Initiatives 2. Focus Group Feedback 3. Best Practices Report – Clarion Associates 4. Presentation Page 334 Item 4. 66 Future Growth Strategies FO R T C O L L I N S U R B A N F O R E S T S T R A T E G I C P L A N FO R T C O L L I N S U R B A N F O R E S T S T R A T E G I C P L A N Growth Strategy 3. STRENGTHEN CITY POLICIES TO PROTECT TREES. In 2024, Fort Collins’ municipal code focuses on the stewardship of public trees; however, only 12% of the City’s tree canopy is publicly owned. Opportunities to protect trees on both public and private land—whether through policy or incentives—can help curb canopy losses, mitigate heat, and protect community tree beneﬁts. Outcome Areas: • Neighborhood & Community Vitality • Environmental Health FOUNDATIONAL INITIATIVES • Engage the community in adopting a citywide land use code to improve tree preservation and protection while balancing other priorities and needs of the community. • Draft a heritage tree program that allows for the elective enrollment and protection of trees that have cultural, historic, or ecological value. • Create policy summaries or tip sheets that clarify the responsibility for tree maintenance in spaces including alleyways, property boundaries, and ditches. • Plan for education and outreach that will guide tree protection for development scenarios on private land. • Reference existing good practices—best management practices and manuals, ISA Certiﬁed Arborist requirements, wood utilization program—in city code. • Develop an adaptable response strategy for current and future threats from insect and disease. 67 TRANSFORMATIONAL INITIATIVES • Clarify the legal responsibility for trees within vacant and boundary areas (land without ownership) to encourage the protection and growth of tree canopy. • Plan for tree preservation and tree canopy expansion within areas in the Growth Management Area that are to remain as future green space as identiﬁed by the Parks & Recreation Master Plan and the Natural Areas Strategic Framework. • Demonstrate the role for trees in outdoor water efficiency by creating water- smart landscapes that incorporate trees on City property. • Explore and expand tree protection and preservation policies within the Land Use Code to apply to non-development scenarios. • Create educational support, incentives, and potential policy improvements to help homeowners and private property owners achieve long-term success in tree planting and preservation. • Require landﬁll diversion for wood waste that originates from private land. Page 335 Item 4. Tree Policy – Mitigation Stakeholder Outreach Summary Targeted feedback from code users, development community, business community (ULI NOCO, Development Review Advisory Committee, Chamber of Commerce LLAC) and Development Review Team staff 6/13/2025 Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs Committee - Requirements for trees often compete with other city requirements (stormwater, detention, utilities, sight distance at intersections) - Can we utilize incentives vs. penalties? - Requiring private landowners to solve a community-wide issue - Need to clarify what trees would fall under the Commercial Tree Permit for removal. Should not include suckers or naturalizing detention pond trees. - Could requirements to save older trees increase liability for property owners? - Increasing tree requirements can create barriers to development/redevelopment - What is long-term impact of adding multiple new trees to replace each tree? 6/13/2025 Planning and Zoning Commission Work Session/Update - Support the reduction for saving existing trees with development - When payment-in-lieu occurs, could the developer know where the $ goes, where ‘their’ trees will be planted? - Should mitigation be based on tree age rather than size? 6/17/2025 City of Fort Collins Development Review Team - Code should prioritize tree protection vs payment-in-lieu to remove trees - Tree preservation ‘incentives’ should be stronger to be effective - Street trees should be considered Infrastructure – important for the community - Should we consider voluntary ‘landmarked’ trees? - Mitigation seems complex – can we make it simple to understand and enforce? - Support for reducing payment-in-lieu when tree health measures are included with development plans - Should we consider requiring more green/open space in inﬁll/commercial areas? Page 336 Item 4. 6/17/2025 and 6/24/2025 Tree Policy Engagement Meetings (2 total) - High land costs and development costs make it difficult to develop and redevelop in the city. This policy will add cost. - Is the city willing to give up density to save trees? - Increasing tree mitigation conﬂicts with city’s goals for higher density mixed use development - City already has robust planting, stormwater requirements - 3-year Street Tree warrantee is too long, moves the maintenance and replacement responsibility to the HOAs instead of the Developer. - City requires rain gardens and other LID that could support trees, but does not allow these in street Rights-of-Way - Requiring wider tree lawns, double row of street trees conﬂicts with PFA requirements for building access - Support idea of saving trees with development - Need to understand regulations early in the planning process (clear, predictable) - Cumulative impact of multiple regulations. It feels like every department is requiring ‘above and beyond’ requirements. These requirements will make it more difficult to develop/redevelop in inﬁll areas. What are other communities doing? - What is the rate of tree loss that we’re trying to replace? - Should requirements vary in different parts of the city? Or by use type? - The requirements and incentives are confusing. - Required trees should be allowed for tree mitigation. There is no room for additional trees on higher-density inﬁll sites. - Sometimes we can’t place a building to protect a tree due to other city requirements (i.e. build-to standards) - Do not support changing mitigation to apply to 3” diameter and above (from current 6”). This will have signiﬁcant impacts. - Will you have different requirements/incentives for affordable housing? Page 337 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City May 2022 Page 338 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS Background ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Soil Amendments .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Best Practices ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Other Valuable Practices ........................................................................................................................... 6 Xeriscaping .................................................................................................................................................. 10 Best Practices .......................................................................................................................................... 10 Other Valuable Practices ......................................................................................................................... 21 Tree Protection and Tree Canopy Enhancement ........................................................................................ 27 Best Practices .......................................................................................................................................... 27 Other Valuable Practices ......................................................................................................................... 35 Page 339 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 1 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Fort Collins: Nature in the City Additional Targeted Best Practices Report May 2022 Background Since 2020, Clarion Associates has been assisting the City of Fort Collins to implement its Nature in the City (NIC) initiative. To date, that support has included: • Preparation of a Land Development Code Audit to identify barriers to implementing different components of the initiative; • Finalizing definitions of several key terms that are often used loosely, but which need to be defined objectively in order to be used in regulatory documents like the Land Development Code; and • Preparation of draft text amendments to the Land Development Code to implement the following aspects of the NIC initiative: o Requirements for inclusion of common open space; o Limits on impervious surfaces in new development; and o Requirements that certain types of development earn at least a minimum number of points is a new Nature in the City Score system, which provides numerous flexible options related to site and building design. Before the proposed regulatory changes were included in the Land Development Code, however, the City asked that Clarion Associates prepare additional research on Best Practices to promote the NIC goals in four discrete areas: 1. Soil amendments to ensure that new vegetation survives, thrives, and provides maximum environmental and experiential benefits; 2. Xeriscape practices to reduce outdoor water consumption without compromising the public experience of being in nature or the environmental benefits that healthy vegetation provides; 3. Tree protection during site work and construction phases and during the creation of landscaping and planting plans for the proposed development and redevelopment; and 4. Tree canopy enhancement in order increase public perception of nature, increase shading, and reduce the impacts of urban heat islands over time. To identify these best practices, Clarion Associates agreed with the City staff to: Page 340 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 2 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • Focus on regulations or incentives suitable for inclusion in a Land Development Code or related regulations – rather than advisory policy statements or plans that do not have regulatory effect; • Identify up to 20 communities across the United States for detailed web-based research on these four topics; • Focus the research on soil amendment and xeriscape on communities in the Rocky Mountain west, because of the unique dry climate and soil conditions in this region; • Make initial contact with each community to confirm the accuracy of published regulations and incentives, as well as the continued enforcement and effectiveness of those regulations. • Refine the list of research communities to eliminate those where initial contacts suggest that further research would not be fruitful, and if possible, replace them with other communities where regulation and incentives appear to be more effective. After this additional research program was initiated in late 2021, initial contacts revealed that several communities have integrated or overlapping regulations for tree protection and tree canopy protection. In order to reflect these Best Practices accurately, we combined these two topics into a single inquiry and agreed to research a larger number of target communities in that combined category. After contacting, eliminating, and substituting communities as described above, our initial research and interviews focused our Best Practices research on the following communities: • Soil Amendments: Denver, CO; Thornton, CO; Castle Rock, CO; Brighton, CO; and Greeley, CO. • Xeriscape: Aurora, CO; Castle Rock, CO; Las Vegas, NV; San Antonio, TX; and Tucson, AZ. • Tree Protection and Canopy Enhancement: Boulder, CO; Bloomington, IN; Fort Wayne, IN; Lake Forest Park, WA; Madison, WI; Portland, OR; Reno, NV; San Antonio, TX; and Seattle, WA. This document includes Clarion Associates’ recommended Best Practices in each of these areas, subject to internal discussion with the City as to which of the recommended practices would best “fit” with the City’s goals and administrative systems. “Best Practices” is, of course, a subjective term, and professionals often differ about what is “best” and why. For this report, we focused on the following factors to identify those regulations that we think are worthy of additional consideration by Fort Collins: • The clarity and understandability of the regulations to both staff and citizens; • The administrability of the regulation—i.e., whether the regulation can be efficiently implemented, monitored, and enforced with reasonable levels of effort by City staff; and Page 341 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 3 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • The host community’s comments on the effectiveness of the regulation in achieving its purpose. Within each topic area, we single out a few communities with regulations that we think best meet these criteria. We also identify additional cities whose regulations or incentives include a provision, incentive, or approach that is worthy of additional consideration. We have termed the first group “Best Practices” and the second group “Additional Valuable Practices.” In several cases, even those communities that meet these criteria stated that their regulations, procedures, and enforcement mechanisms were imperfect and provided suggestions for improvements that would make them mor effective. Soil Amendments This section summarizes information from communities that require soil amendments to be added to new landscaping to ensure the proper growth and survival of vegetation. Soil amendments also help conserve water, because newly installed landscaping typically needs to be irrigated more than established landscaping. By increasing the probability that newly planted material survives, the use of soil amendments can help reduce long-term water demand. Best Practices Thornton, CO Thornton’s development code (Chapter 18 of its City Code) establishes basic soil amendment requirements. All landscape areas, except for side yards not visible from public areas and rear yards of singe-family dwellings, are required to be amended with at least four cubic yards of organic amendment per 1,000 square feet of ground, and the amendments must be tilled at least six inches into the soil. Sec. 19-538(a)(4). The code references Section 800, Landscape Improvements, of the Thornton Standards and Specifications document, which imposes additional obligations on developers. Prior to the addition of soil amendments, applicants are required to remove all construction debris from the soil, including large rocks, concrete, asphalt, and soil clods; all building materials such as boards, insulation, shingles, rebar, wire, and grading stakes. Applicants must then rip the soil to a minimum depth of 12 inches if it has been compacted by heavy machinery or by working it while wet, in rows no greater than 18 inches apart. Ripping operations must be timed to commence when soil moisture is adequate enough to allow penetration but is not wet or muddy. The soil amendments are required to be incorporated throughout the landscape areas, not just around areas where trees and shrubs are planted. At least four cubic yards must be distributed across the soil surface in a uniform 1⅓ inch depth and incorporated into the top eight inches of Page 342 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 4 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 soil with a rototiller capable of tilling to eight inches in depth.1 Additional soil amendments are required for City-maintained landscapes and metropolitan district parks (six cubic yards per 1,000 square feet, distributed to two-inch depth) and for landscaped medians (27 cubic yards, distributed to a 36 inch depth). Compliance with the regulations is assessed at three inspections performed during the landscape installation process: • The first inspection takes place prior to soil amendment and tilling and looks for the presence of weeds, especially noxious weeds. • The second inspection involves a review of the soil amendment before it is tilled into the soil. • Finally, after tilling and fine grading, the third inspection reviews the prepared soil to ensure it was tilled to the required eight inches, and for overall quality and absence of construction debris. In addition, the developer/applicant may be required to provide City staff soil amendment load tickets and affidavits that confirm soil amendments have been installed for a set of dwellings before the construction of the next phase of dwellings is authorized. Primary Contacts Grant Penland, Planning Director, gpenland@ci.thornton.co.us; Warren Campbell, Current Planning Manager, wcampbell@ci.thornton.co.us. Denver Water Soil Amendment Program The requirements of Denver Water’s Soil Amendment Program are clearly identified on its website. • The reasons for amending soil are explained in plain language understandable by the public and contractors. • Areas larger than 300 square feet must incorporate soil amendments before landscaping is installed. • The standards encourage (but do not require) that organic compost meeting at least Class II standards be installed, lists Class II compost suppliers, and includes a table listing the chemical requirements for Class I and Class II compost (shown below): 1 While the City’s development code requires tilling down to six inches, the Standards and Specification document, which is incorporated into the code by reference, states that tilling is required down to eight inches. Page 343 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 5 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • Four cubic yards of compost per 1,000 square feet of permeable areas (including tree lawns and permeable portions of rights-of-way adjacent to the property, which are often owned by the City rather than individual property owners) roto-tilled to a depth of four to six inches, except in the following situations: o Two cubic yards of compost per 1,000 square feet of permeable area are required for native grass areas (subject to Denver Water confirmation of seed mix); and o Twelve cubic yards per 1,000 square feet are required for amended topsoil. • The contractor must supply an invoice or load ticket showing that a specific soil amendment product was being delivered to the subject property address, as well as a map showing the square footages of areas required to be amended, and if native grasses are to be installed, a sample of the seed mix. Denver Water can then confirm that the amount of soil amendment was adequate for the area required to be amended and can provide phone or e-mail confirmation that the requirement had been met. • Water service to the property can be withheld until Denver Water has confirmed that adequate amendment product had been delivered to the property. • Site inspections are not required, but contractors are warned that spot inspections might occur. • Although the requirements are publicized as a cost-saving measure for property owners, who would experience higher rates of plant survival, its primary interest is the associated water savings through more effective water absorption and reduced runoff. As a regional water utility, Denver Water has regulatory authority to enforce the requirements against property owners only when water service is being installed, and even then its capability to do so is limited. The various jurisdictions served by Denver Water have a broad range of landscaping requirements, and many of the governments’ land use and other regulations incorporate only limited water conservation controls and few if any soil amendment requirements. Denver Water works with local governments to encourage landscape regulations Page 344 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 6 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 similar to those included in the agency’s soil amendment program, and staff is hopeful more consistent regulations will be adopted by local governments over the next several years. To the (limited) extent that they are enforced, Denver Water’s actions to enforce the soil amendment requirements are taken against the landscape contractors who install the landscaping materials. This is similar to the approach used by many cities to enforce sign regulations (i.e., require licensing of sign contractors and make them responsible for compliance with the regulation with the knowledge that violating the regulation could result in suspension or revocation of their license to install signs). Although the soil amendment program indicates that spot site inspections may take place, Denver Water staff reported that inspections generally have not occurred for the past six years. Previously, when spot inspections did take place, inspectors found that around 95 percent of contractors complied with the requirements. Compliance with the requirement to provided receipts is generally high, although new development projects are more likely to comply than redevelopment projects, and compliance is higher from large developers than from smaller contractors who redevelop individual single-family properties. Overall, the resources devoted to administration of the soil amendment program occupy about 0.5 FTE of staff time. In an effort to encourage compliance, Denver Water does not charge fees for participation in its soil amendment program. Primary Contact Austin Kcmarik, Water Conservation Specialist, Austin.Krcmarik@denverwater.org Other Valuable Practices Castle Rock, CO The Town of Castle Rock landscaping and irrigation standards are contained in its Landscape and Irrigation Criteria Manual, which is adopted by reference into the Municipal Code. Sec. 1.13 of the Manual defines Soil Amendment as “Organic material added to the soil to improve texture, moisture holding capacity, nutrient capacity, water and air infiltration.” Sections 4.4.1 through 4.4.3 of the Manual includes specific provisions for how to amend soil that are mandatory for all new developments and changes to landscaping. The provisions require that: • A soil analysis to be conducted by professional soil scientist to evaluate texture, exchange capacity, conductivity, organic matter, and acidity along with nitrogen, potassium, phosphorus, zinc, iron, copper, manganese, and lime content in the soil. • Stripping and stockpiling of indigenous topsoil during construction for successful plant material establishment • At least four cubic meters of amended soil added per 1,000 square feet planting areas for turf, trees, shrubs, perennials, and annuals. Page 345 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 7 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • Soil amendments material to be compost, which is defined as a “fully finished, stabilized, and mature product, derived from organic materials such as leaves, grass clippings, wood chips, and other yard wastes. Finished compost is dark and crumbly, does not resemble the original contents, and has an earthy smell. Acceptable compost will not contain any human or animal waste.” Staff emphasized that the inclusion of any amount of “hot compost” (compost that has not fully broken down) is prohibited, and that on occasion they have required contractors to remove inappropriate soil amendment from the surface and install replacement amendments that meet Town standards. • As an exception to the requirement of compost as defined above, soil amendments for native seed areas to be consistent with detail #17 in the Castle Rock Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Manual. The Town may require written documentation of the types and amounts of soil amendments installed. • Where soil amendments are required, soil that is roto-tilled to a minimum depth of six inches, and rocks, debris, and clods greater than ¾-inch diameter must be removed (except that dry land seed areas may include clods up to two inch diameter). Castle Rock pairs these requirements with a robust inspection regime. Single-family detached and attached, duplex, triplex, and fourplex residential properties) are inspected once, after the soil amendment has been added, the soil tilled, and the site graded. Multifamily and nonresidential properties are inspected twice. The first inspection takes place after the soil amendment has been added to ensure that an adequate amount has been used. The second inspection takes place after tilling and grading. Staff believes compliance with the requirement for adding soil amendment is high, particularly for nonresidential buildings, since the compost is relatively inexpensive and providing the required amount (or even a little more) is less expensive than pausing construction while fixing the work and awaiting reinspection. The high compliance rate is also attributed to Castle Rock’s consistent inspection process and withholding certificates of occupancy until inspections have been completed. The Town’s water conservation programs are managed by a four-person team, including the water efficiency supervisor, a technician who handles the rebate programs and inspections, an inspector, and an office assistant who manages administration, scheduling, and customer contact. Currently, the site inspections are conducted by an inspector who is a seasonal employee who works four days per week (0.8 FTE), generally from May through October or November. Three other members manage the administration of the programs, including potential updates to the regulations to address any necessary changes. This staff has been managing about 1,000 residential inspections and 50-60 permits per year. Residential projects pay a $45 inspection fee. For each required reinspection, the fee doubles, which discourages landscape contractors from scheduling inspections before they are ready. Page 346 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 8 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 For commercial projects, compliance with the soil amendment regulations is confirmed through the irrigation permit inspection process. The permit inspection fee is $610, with a reinspection fee of $110 if necessary. Primary Contact Rick Schultz, Water Efficiency Supervisor, 720-733-6027 Greeley, CO Section 24-804, Plant Specifications, of the Greeley Development Code includes non-regulatory Xeric Guidelines and offers a reduction in raw water requirements for applicants whose landscaping plans include these elements. • Guideline (d)4 states: “Incorporate soil amendments and use of organic mulches that reduce water loss and limit erosion. All plant areas should receive soil amendments of at least 3 cubic yards per 1,000 square feet.” • Guideline 5(e) provides that: “Prior to the installation of turf-grass and/or other plant materials in areas that have been compacted or disturbed by construction activity, such areas shall follow soil amendment procedures pursuant to Title 20 and the Water and Sewer lawn installation specifications.” Section 14, Vegetation and Irrigation, of the City’s Construction Standards for water detention areas provides detailed standards that could be applied to mandatory soil amendment ordinances. • Compost is defined as: 100% humus rich organic matter. The compost shall be a well decomposed, stable, weed free organic matter derived from agricultural, food, or industrial residuals; biosolids (treated sewage sludge); yard trimmings, or source- separated or mixed solid waste. o Product must be certified as fully composted at a permitted solid waste processing facility. o Product must be registered with the Colorado Department of Agriculture and approved for use on Colorado Certified Organic Farms by the Division of Plant Industry of the State of Colorado. o Product shall contain no solid particle greater than one-half inch in length or diameter and be free from un-composted or non-stabilized wood bulking agents. o Product shall contain no substances toxic to plants and shall be reasonably free (<1% by dry weight) of man-made foreign matter. o The compost shall possess no objectionable odors and shall not resemble the raw material from which it was derived. Page 347 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 9 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • In addition, the applicant shall provide the City a signed statement that the compost has been texted and meets the following standards: o Organic Matter Content: 30 - 70% (dry basis) o Soluble Salt Concentration (EC paste test): 5 dS (mmhols/cm) or less (as received) o PH range: 5.5 to 8.0 (as received) o Final carbon to nitrogen ratio: 20:1 or less. o Nutrient Content (dry weight basis): N 1% or above, P 1% or above, K 0.5% or above. o Bulk Density: 800 - 1,000 pounds/cubic yard o Moisture Content: 35% - 55% Primary Contact Sean Chambers, Director of Water & Sewer, sean.chambers@greeleygov.com; Paul Trombino, Public Works/Construction Standards, Paul.Trombino@Greeleygov.com. Brighton, CO Article 8, Landscape and Site Design, of Brighton’s Land Use and Development Code establishes requirements for water-conserving landscaping: • All landscape plans are required to incorporate soil amendments and use organic mulches that reduce water loss and limit erosion. • Plant areas are encouraged to receive soil amendments of at least three cubic yards per 1,000 square feet. City staff reported that though these soil amendment provisions are included in the city’s development regulations and apply to all development projects, they are typically not enforced. There are no provisions in the code requiring an applicant to demonstrate that soil amendments have been acquired or installed. Most site inspections take place after the soil has been prepared and sod and other landscaping materials installed, and evaluations for compliance are limited to whether the landscaping is consistent with the regulatory requirements, not the specifics of soil amendment installation. Primary Contact Louis Morris, Project Coordinator, 303-655-2243, lamorris@brightonco.gov. Page 348 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 10 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Other Communities In addition to the programs listed above, we reviewed development codes, landscaping and engineering criteria, and related manuals and regulations for Westminster and Greenwood Village but did not identify regulatory approaches or standards of sufficient detail or difference from those described above to justify inclusion in this report. While a number of Front Range communities’ land development codes, engineering standards, or park and recreation manuals refer to requirements for including soil amendments in the design and construction of detention areas, we view these as public works standards rather than regulations intended to apply to general landscaping. Xeriscaping Best Practices This section identifies three communities that incorporate low-water-use landscaping requirements in their land use regulations and that offer robust turf rebate programs to reduce the number of water-intensive grasses and plants used in residential yards and commercial spaces the City will want to consider. Five other valuable practices are included for further consideration. Castle Rock, CO Background The Town of Castle Rock has taken aggressive steps to promote and require water conservation. Its landscaping regulations limit the types of turf that can be incorporated in new development, and also operates two key programs that offer financial rebates to existing residential and commercial property owners who implement specific low-water-use landscaping techniques. Landscaping Regulations Castle Rock’s landscaping regulations limit the amount of high-water-use landscaping material that may be installed. High-water-use grasses such as Kentucky bluegrass and similar turf are prohibited, and other types of turf are also restricted. Single-family and two-family lots that are 7,000 square feet or less in area are allowed to have turf over no more than 30 percent of the lot. Lots larger than 7,000 square feet in area up to 17,000 square feet may have turf over no more than 20 percent of the lot. Lots larger than 17,000 square feet in area may have turf over no more than 20 percent of the lot, up to a maximum of 5,000 square feet of turf. Staff reports that they are developing updated regulations for new development that would prohibit turf in front yards and limit the turf area in the back yard to a maximum of 500 square feet. These proposed changes are part of the Town’s continuing efforts to reduce its water consumption from an average gallons per capita per day (GPCD) of 118 today to 100. Page 349 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 11 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Coloradoscape Renovation Program Castle Rock’s Coloradoscape Renovation water-wise landscaping program is an effort to encourage property owners to convert water-intensive landscaping into water-wise landscapes. It provides incentives to current landowners to redesign their landscaping to be more water- efficient in ways that are similar to the Town’s regulations for new development. The program uses a variety of tools to encourage participation, including rebates, educational classes, and the opportunity to water landscaping on days that would otherwise not be permitted. The details of this program include: • A rebate of $1.20 per square foot of turf removed on any existing development (not new construction) that use Castle Rock water services. The City’s water service area extends beyond City limits in some cases, so some unincorporated properties are also able to participate. • For residential customers, a minimum of 400 square feet (or the entire area of the yard, if smaller) must be removed to qualify for a rebate. The City sets a maximum rebate payment of $1,800, which translates to an eligible turf area of 1,500 square feet. • Nonresidential customers are also limited to a maximum rebate amount of $1,800 for removal of 1,500 square feet of turf. • The replacement landscaping may be zero-water use or require a small amount of water, consistent with the multiple landscaping options available through the Coloradoscape program. • To qualify for the rebate, nonresidential properties are required to have at least 50 percent of the landscaped area be made up of healthy, irrigated turf. Areas with dead or unhealthy turf are deducted from the eligible square footage. The purpose of this provision is to ensure the program is effective in reducing water usage, and not for beautifying unirrigated landscaping. • In addition to the rebate incentives, applicants are required to participate in a Water- Wiser workshop to learn how to maintain a low-water yard effectively. Those who complete the workshop are exempt from complying with the City’s regulations that restrict watering to once every three days. • Following the final inspection, compliance with the xeriscape standards is maintained by adjustments to the property’s water irrigation budget. Like many communities, Castle Rock Water uses a tiered structure, Tier 1 is the lowest fee schedule, Tier 3 the highest, and Castle Rock Water imposes a surcharge for water use in excess of the Tier 3 cap. Tier 1 rates are charged for indoor uses, and Tier 2 rates are charged for irrigation. The water budget for Tier 2 is established by reference to the monthly water needs of the irrigated plant material on the site. Typically, when a turf lawn is replaced with xeriscape, the water needed for landscaping declines substantially, and the Tier 2 water budget is reduced accordingly. If water is used for irrigation in excess of the water budget, the higher Tier 3 rates or surcharge fees are imposed. Page 350 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 12 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 In 2021, the City noted that participation was modest. There were 48 residential properties that participated in Coloradoscape; 38 additional properties received an initial inspection but did not qualify for the program or did not complete the sod replacement process. Four nonresidential properties participated in Coloradoscape, with four additional properties not qualifying for or completing the process. City staff also noted that the Coloradoscape program is labor-intensive because it requires two site visits by City staff in order to complete the rebate process. One visit occurs before turf removal to demonstrate compliance with the terms of qualification. The second visit occurs after turf removal and new landscaping installation in order to ensure the final result meets City standards. Staff noted that accommodating property owner schedules and providing enough Water-Wiser workshop sessions has been a challenge. In addition, some applicants who are not eligible for the program (generally because they do not have existing high-water-use landscaping) apply anyway, increasing administrative burden required to inspect the property and confirm that the non-eligibility. The program also has a modest budget and available funds can be quickly exhausted. The residential application can be found here; the nonresidential application be found here. Smart Irrigation Controller System Castle Rock’s second incentive program is a rebate program for updating irrigation system controllers to Smart Evapotranspiration (ET) irrigation controllers. Smart controllers automate watering by adjusting the watering schedule based on the current moisture content of the soil and local weather. This results in reduced run off and creates money-saving water efficiency benefits to landowners. Residential and nonresidential development are eligible to receive a rebate for installing Smart ET irrigation controllers through the voluntary Smart Irrigation Controller Rebate program. Participation in a Water-Wiser workshop is required to be eligible for these rebates. Residential property owners can receive a rebate to cover 50 percent of the price of a Smart controller, up to $200, while nonresidential property owners qualify for rebates to cover 50 percent of the cost of up to five controllers. Primary Contact Rick Schultz, Town of Castle Rock Water Efficiency Supervisor, 720-733-6027 Page 351 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 13 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Aurora, CO Aurora has decided that lush, green lawns of Kentucky bluegrass require levels of that the City cannot continue to serve over the long run. Aurora has adopted regulations and financial incentive programs that act as “carrots and sticks” to encourage implementation of xeriscape principles and the use of other water-conservation techniques on landscaping throughout the community. Landscaping Regulations Aurora’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) includes extensive water-conservation measures, a fact that is emphasized by the title of a key chapter of the UDO, “Landscape, Water Conservation, Storm Water Management.” Section 4.7.3, General Landscaping Standards, integrates water-conservation measures throughout all required site landscaping. All shrubs, perennials, groundcovers, and ornamental grasses, and 75 percent of all annuals and trees, are required to be selected from the city’s Water-wise Plant List, a xeriscaping fact sheet maintained by the Colorado State University Cooperative Extension, or other Water-wise or xeriscape plant material references. The list of eligible materials is currently being updated. Except for playfields and golf courses, cool-season grass sod and seed is limited to 33 percent of a site’s landscaped area, and all cool-season grasses must generally be contiguous. Separate irrigation hydrazone areas are required for water-conserving areas versus non-water-conserving areas. Section 4.7.4 prohibits private covenants that purport to invalidate the xeriscaping provisions in the UDO. Section 4.7.5 incorporates additional specific landscaping requirements relating to water conservation. Single-family detached and duplex dwellings on lots 4,500 square feet or larger may install no turf at all, or may install between 400 and the lesser of 40 percent or 1,000 square feet of turf, provided that the turf areas are continuous. Homeowners can choose to follow Water-wise options that allow additional landscaping flexibility. Rock or inorganic mulches may be used in the front yard if a Water-wise option is chosen, and permeable pavers such as brick and natural stone can be used on up to 40 percent of the landscape area if a xeric or no-turf option is used. In all cases, rear yards on single-family and duplex lots with no public view may include no more than 45 percent turf. If the rear yards are visible to the public (for example, in a through lot), the front-yard standards apply. An image from the UDO of a suggested front-yard landscaping configuration is included below. Page 352 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 14 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Compliance with the landscaping regulations is verified during zoning inspections. Irrigation systems are also inspected and are required to comply with regulations in the Aurora Engineering Standards Manual. Staff is proposing amendments to the UDO to further limit the use of high-water grasses. This summer, the City Council is anticipated to consider a proposal to prohibit the use of cool- season turf in the front yards of all new houses, as well as in tree lawns or curbside landscaped areas. Water-Wise Landscaping Program To incentivize residents to retrofit their properties to avoid water-intensive landscaping, Aurora Water created the Water-Wise Landscaping Rebate Program, which includes detailed manuals on compliance for both residential and commercial properties. The program pays residents to eliminate water-intensive varieties of turf such as Kentucky bluegrass and fescue and promotes the exclusive use of xeric landscaping for all plants included in the landscape design. Aurora offers a rebate up to $3,000 for residential lawns from which at least 500 square feet of water-intensive grass is removed. The proposal for removal must include at least 60 percent of the water-intensive grass located in a front or side yard and visible to the public. The rebate is calculated using pre-tax material (not labor) costs, verified by inspection of receipts for materials purchased, as well as the amount by which the water bill is reduced after one growing season. Unlike other communities that determine rebate amounts based on the square footage of converted landscaping, Aurora’s program reimburses property owners for documented money spent on the plants and materials purchased to be installed in their place. Sixty-five percent of the rebate is paid after final installation, and the remaining 35 percent is paid following one growing season if the property owner demonstrates that actual water use is less than 110 percent of the recommended xeric water use amount. Page 353 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 15 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 As part of the program, applicants are required to enroll in the “Know Your Flow” program which educates about the appropriate levels of indoor and outdoor water use. The landowner establishes eligibility for the rebate by providing photographs of the existing healthy turf, which also must be visible to the public, and by submitting a proposed alternative landscape design. Previously, the City also reviewed the landowner’s existing water use to ensure the project would result in a reduction of water use, but it stopped doing so because the water use could reflect underwatering of areas of landscape other than the turf. The program provides free design services for property owners and offers optional virtual and in-person Water-wise landscaping classes on how to tend to low-water landscaping and how to save water and money. Staff noted that Aurora would be moving to a new program in which applicants take a design class and work with instructors to develop a design for their own site, with the goal of making the design process a little more efficient. A separate rebate program is offered for large and commercial properties. The commercial rebate covers all documented material (not labor) costs for the approved project, based on a schedule of item-by-item rebate amounts, up to a maximum of $15,000. Half of the rebate is paid upon final installation and approval of the system, and the remaining half in two equal installments after each of the next two growing seasons documenting water use less than 110 percent of the xeric recommended water use amounts. All approved participants are required to participate in the Large Property Variance Program, which provides monthly emails that evaluate the site’s actual water usage based on recommended water consumption. This information is designed to help participants monitor their water efficiency and may identify any scheduling adjustments required to ensure receipt of the remaining rebate payments. Previously, under both the residential and commercial programs, two inspections were required. The first inspection took place after plants and irrigation had been installed to confirm everything had been installed according to plans. The second and final inspection was performed after issues identified in the initial inspection are addressed and the mulch is installed. However, the City recently eliminated the second inspection, as being generally not necessary or helpful to ensure compliance with the program. The City reports that the program has been successful with commercial properties. By contrast, it has underperformed in residential neighborhoods, with fewer than 25 rebates issued to single-family residences in the last year, a low level of participation even on a per-capita basis. Staff suggested that the low participation rate is a function of the complexity of the program, the high cost of re-landscaping even with the Water-Wise rebate, and the fact that the rebate covers only material costs (and not labor costs). Xeric Landscaping Credit Program To incentivize the implementation of xeric landscaping, Aurora also created a Xeric Landscaping Credit program. The program is designed to encourage the use of xeric landscaping that does Page 354 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 16 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 not require irrigation in so-called “z-zones.” Implementation of zero-water landscaping includes the installation of an irrigation meter that is used only while the native xeric plants are acclimating to their new environment. After the plants have matured and no longer require watering, the irrigation meter is removed from the z-zone. Other portions of the landscaping may continue to be irrigated and permanent irrigation meters remain in place for those areas. This allows savings in initial landscaping installation costs for developers and encourages them to install native, low-water landscapes in common areas watered by irrigation meters. This program is only available to new irrigation-only connections. Existing residential and commercial meters that measure indoor and outdoor use are not eligible. Irrigation meters can be installed in both new residential and commercial properties, and the cost of the connection charges varies based on the type of landscape on the property: • Irrigation systems for non-water conserving landscapes can be connected a rate of $3.05/sq. ft. (or $30,500 for 10,000 square feet of landscaped area). • Irrigation systems for water-conserving landscapes can be connected at a rate of $1.63/sq. ft. (or, $16,300 for 10,000 square feet of landscaped area). • In a z-zone, the irrigation system can be connected for no cost, subject to a $20,000 deposit that is refunded after the three-year establishment period has run and the irrigation system is removed. The following conditions must be met to establish a z-zone and qualify for the irrigation refund: • The developer must express interest early on in the building process. • The developer must submit a hydrozone map as part of the landscaping plan that delineates no-water, low-water, and high-water areas. If there are multiple irrigation meters, each must be clearly indicated on this map. • The hydrozone map is paired with a water budget that applies during the xeric plants’ three year establishment period. The budget allows for a maximum amount of water that should be used to establish the xeric landscaping. It also employs a reduced assessment for the gallons of water used. However, if the number of gallons used surpasses the maximum allowed amount of water, the assessment rate will be higher. • After three years, Aurora Water will use the irrigation meter readings to determine whether the xeric landscaping was watered according to the water budget. • If successful in complying with the water budget and establishing xeric landscaping, the irrigation meter is removed and the $20,000 deposit refunded. If landscape development is occurring in phases, the responsible parties must contact Water Conservation and submit a phasing map. Staff stated that the program was paired with significant increases in the City’s tap fee for outdoor-only use and that it has been highly successful, with a significant reduction in high- water-use grasses on new development and an increase in native grasses. Page 355 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 17 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Administrative Support Overall, water conservation staff–part of the City’s Water Department, which is funded separate from the City’s general fund–consists of nine full-time employees and up to 15 seasonal employees. One person is responsible for managing the City’s rebate programs. Several staff perform inspections, in addition to other duties. Primary Contact Tim York, Water Conservation Supervisor, City of Aurora, tyork@auroragov.org 303-326-8819 Albuquerque, NM Landscaping Regulations The City’s water conservation measures relating to landscaping are not located in its Integrated Development Ordinance, but in City Code Sec. 6-1-1, Water Conservation Landscaping and Water Waste. These regulations limit the amount of landscaping that can use high-water-use turf. Non-city owned properties other than golf courses and single-family residences may cover only 20 percent of the landscaped area with high-water-use turf and other restricted plants, with a minimum of 300 square feet and a maximum of 3,000 square feet allowed. In addition, the ordinance voids homeowners’ association restrictions or covenants that restrict the use of xeriscape. According to staff, while existing single-family dwellings are excluded from the landscaping regulations, new single-family home developments must comply, so a developer who is preparing a 60-lot single-family subdivision is subject to the high-water-use turf restrictions. Staff also reports that existing single-family dwellings have made great strides in reducing overall water usage, measured by both external irrigation use and internal water use, so updating the turf regulations to include existing single-family development has not been a priority. Rebate Administration The Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority (“Water Authority”) has a variety of incentive programs. These programs are operated by a staff including six full-time employees and four seasonal employees. Staff includes an administrator who processes applications, answers customer calls, and answers questions; a xeriscape inspector whose full-time job is to inspect sites applying for xeriscape rebates (about three to four inspections per day), and conservation specialists who focus on overall water conservation measures with homeowners’ associations and multifamily developments. The Water Authority also uses a contractor who provides leak audits, inspections, and water management tools to their large users. Page 356 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 18 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Xeriscape Rebate Program The Water Authority has a Xeriscape Rebate program that provides a rebate on a water utility bill if the customer replaces traditional landscaping with low-water use xeriscaping. The program has existed for almost 20 years and has resulted in the conversion of 4,700 single- family residential and 600 commercial properties to low-water landscaping. In total, 10 million square feet of turf have been replaced with xeric landscaping. Currently, about 400,000 square feet of landscaping is converted to xeriscaping each year, and staff hopes a recent increase in payments from $1 to $2 per square foot of high-water-use turf removed and replaced will increase participation to 1,000,000 square feet per year. There is no minimum removal requirement, as the goal to replace as much aging, water- intensive landscaping with xeric landscaping as possible. While applicants sometimes do not understand that they are required to have healthy living turf to qualify for the rebate, staff try to interpret the requirement leniently to encourage removal of turf and implementation of higher-quality xeric landscaping. In addition, large turf removal projects may be done in phases. Eligibility for the rebate is confirmed through two inspections: • The first inspection can occur before an application is filed and involves a site visit from a Water Authority staff member who measures the area, provides landscaping tips, and estimates a potential rebate amount. Alternatively, the first inspection can occur after the application is submitted, with staff visiting the site to ensure that the current landscaping proposed to be removed consists of healthy, spray-irrigated turf. • The second inspection occurs after the xeric landscaping is installed. During this inspection, staff verifies that the plants included in the landscaping plan are installed on the property. The required number of plants is determined by reference to a point system that assigns a certain number of points to each plant, and the final landscaping must meet a certain number of points. (For example, to convert 1,000 sf of turf, the applicant must install 500 points of plants, and a low-water-use tree might be worth 50 points). The inspector also confirms that at least 50 percent of the area for which a grass removal rebate is awarded is covered with xeric plants, and that only drip irrigation (if any) is installed. Water Authority staff noted that the approved xeric plant list is flexible and that it is easy to satisfy the plant requirements because the plant list includes 270 plants that are native to New Mexico. In addition, Water Authority staff contact participants one year following the final inspection to offer a consultation by an irrigation specialist. Participants who later are suspected of overwatering may be contacted, but no other enforcement actions are taken following final approval. This program is notable for its relatively high reimbursement rate compared to other systems and its successful track record. Staff said they expect that the recent increase in reimbursement rates will incentivize more participation in the program. Page 357 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 19 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Tree-Bate Program The Water Authority also offers a Tree-Bate Program that offers customers 25 percent off the cost of professional tree care services or for the purchase of a new low- or medium-water use tree from the Water Authority Xeriscape Plant/Tree List Guide. The maximum rebate for residential customers is $100 per year while nonresidential customers are eligible for up to $500 per year in rebates. Rainwater Harvesting Rebate Under this program, the Water Authority provides rebates to property owners that acquire barrels and cisterns to capture rainwater for use in irrigation or other purposes. The rebate amount increases with the capacity of the barrel or cistern: • $25 for 50–149 gallons in rain barrel or cistern capacity • $50 for 150–299 gallons • $75 for 300–499 gallons • $100 for 500–999 gallons • $125 for 1000–1499 gallons • $150 for more than 1500 gallons Efficient Irrigation Rebate Programs The Water Authority offers five Efficient Irrigation Rebates for the installation of water-saving irrigation controllers, sensors, pressure regulators, and sprinkler bodies and nozzles. These rebate programs were just instituted in 2020, and represent a change from the Water Authority’s prior focus on incentivizing indoor efficiency. About 150 households take advantage of the program each year. • The WaterSense Smart Irrigation Controller Rebate offers 25 percent of the cost of irrigation controllers (up to $100 for residential and $500 for nonresidential customers) • The Smart Flow Sensors Rebate offers 25 percent of the cost of smart flow sensors (up to $100 for residential and $500 for nonresidential customers). These sensors communicate the flow rate of water to the WaterSense irrigation controller to help with leak detection. • The Smart Pressure Regulators Rebate offers 25 percent of the cost of smart pressure regulators (up to $100 for residential and $500 for nonresidential customers). Smart Pressure Regulators (from a specific list of qualified products) are important for optimizing delivery of water via sprinkler or drip irrigation to landscaping. This allows for consistent water distribution throughout the irrigated area. Page 358 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 20 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • The WaterSense Pressure Spray Sprinkler Bodies Rebate offers a $4.00 rebate per sprinkler body with no annual limit. These WaterSense sprinkler bodies reduce water waste by optimizing the rate of water expenditure to efficiently cover the landscape. • The Smart High Efficiency Rotating Sprinkler Nozzle Rebate offers a $2.00 rebate per nozzle with no annual limit. These smart nozzles apply the water stream at a lower rate which allows the water and nutrients to better penetrate the soil. Water Smart CPR Program The Water Authority also offers a Water Smart Customized Performance Rebate (CPR) Program to commercial customers. This program incentives landowners to update and improve existing irrigation systems with smart irrigation systems that can save as much as 100,000 gallons of water per year. This rebate program is performance-based to incentivize greater water savings. A customer qualifies for $10 in rebates for every 748 gallons of water saved per year. The maximum rebate is $50,000 or 50 percent of project costs, whichever is lower, and may include costs such as materials, hardware, and software. Landowners who apply for the program and whose applications are approved are assigned a “CPR concierge” to guide them through the process of acquiring and installation the irrigation system. The smart irrigation system must be installed within six months after the application is approved, and the applicant must submit receipts for the cost of implementing the upgrades. Within 30 days of completion, the property owner must schedule the post-installation inspection where project cost estimates are revised based on inspection findings. The final rebate amount is determined after 12 billing cycles (one year) after project completion, and the rebate is then applied to the water bill. The property owner must commit to sustaining the project for five years or until the property title is transferred, whichever occurs first. About 150 landowners participate in the program annually. Customer Outreach To target areas where significant water savings may be possible, the Water Authority does targeted outreach to the top five percent of water users within each ZIP code. This outreach includes offers for a free consultation to determine ways to save water, such as changes to the landscaping, changes to the irrigation schedule (over-watering is a common problem), and simple changes to the irrigation system such as replacing spray bodies. Of the approximately 5,000 landowners contacted each year, about 100 reach out to the Water Authority for water- saving advice, while others reduce water usage on their own. About 100,000 email addresses are subscribed to the Water Authority’s newsletter, called “505 Outside,” and the Water Authority does other advertising such as outdoor billboards and television ads. Primary Contact Carlos A. Bustos, Water Conservation Program Manager, cbustos@abcwua.org Page 359 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 21 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Other Valuable Practices Tucson, AZ Due to its location in the Sonoran Desert, the City of Tucson has implemented a host of water conservation measures, including several relating to landscaping. The City’s Unified Development Code (UDC) includes restrictions on the types of plants that may be used in landscaping (Section 7.6.4, Landscape Standards), and those regulations have been effective in replacing existing water-intensive vegetation with more drought-tolerant varieties. In general, all plants must be chosen from the Arizona Department of Water Resources’ low water use/drought tolerant plant list, which includes only those plants that can survive in the Sonoran Desert without using significant water resources. Areas that have been graded and seeded must use Native Seed List approved species listed in the City’s technical standards. The landscaped area must also be designed to take advantage of storm-water runoff and/or include a water-conserving irrigation system. Other plants may be installed only in defined “oasis areas” that will return maximum benefit in terms of cooling, aesthetic pleasure, and exposure to people, or for special uses such as public parks and botanical gardens. In multifamily residential developments, only five percent of the site, 100 square feet per dwelling unit, or eight percent of the open space (whichever is greater) may be a designated oasis area. For all other uses, no more than 2.5 percent of the site may be an oasis area. Oasis areas are encouraged to be located near main buildings, active use areas, pedestrian areas, and outdoor seating and gathering areas. Although the City’s restrictions limiting the use of turf to oasis areas and other water- conservation landscaping requirements do not apply to single-family dwellings, staff reports that the conservation ethos in Tucson is strong and that turf is rarely found in the front yards of single-family homes. City staff noted that this program requires fairly intensive administration due to the need for regular inspection and enforcement. When applicants have trouble complying with the detailed specifications of the code, staff work to ensure that the landscaping meets the intent and purpose of the ordinance. Tucson Water has spearheaded public outreach to educate property owners on the requirements. Staffing continues to be a challenge both for public outreach and enforcement of the regulations. There is only one staff member who reviews landscape plans for compliance with regulations (although the City plans to hire more) and only three inspectors. The final constructed landscaping and trees are not always installed or maintained consistent with the approved plans, and the City is not aggressive about enforcing compliance. A Green Storm Water Infrastructure fee of $0.13/100 cubic feet (748 gallons) of water, first assessed in 2020, raises about $3 million per year to help divert and harvest storm drainage from public streets and parking lots to vegetated water harvesting areas. The City has also Page 360 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 22 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 recently instituted a requirement that captured rainwater supply 50 percent of landscaping irrigation needs. Staff reports that the overall program has been successful and that Tucson ranks high in water conservation among Arizona municipalities. Primary Contact Anne Warner, Lead Planner, Planning and Development Services, Landscape/NPPO Section, anne.warner@tucsonaz.gov Scottsdale, AZ Land Use Regulations Section 49-245 of the Scottsdale Code of Ordinances sets forth limitations on water intensive landscaping and turf areas for new schools, churches, resorts, hotels, motels, and cemeteries, and Section 49-246 does the same for new multi-family residential, commercial/industrial, and nonresidential uses. • Section 49-245 requires that all new facilities limit water intensive landscaping and turf areas, with the majority of landscaping required to be from the Arizona Department of Water Resources’ Low Water Use Plant List. Churches and schools are required to limit water-intensive landscaping to 15 percent of the total lot area, while resorts (including hotels and motels) are limited to between five and 10 percent of the total lot area. • Sec. 49-246 requires that all new commercial and industrial sites limit the use water intensive landscaping and turf areas to 10 percent of the lot area for sites 9,000 square feet or less. For larger sites, the first 9,000 square feet are limited to 10 percent water- intensive plants and the remainder of the site is limited to five percent water-intensive plants. For these uses, all plants installed must comply with the Low-Water Use Plant List. Notwithstanding the lack of regulations prohibiting turf use on single-family residential property, staff generally does not see excessive turf installed on new single-family residential development. In addition, the northern part of the City (which is where much recent development has occurred) includes land designated as Natural Area Open Space which cannot be developed or irrigated. Most turf is found in South Scottsdale, which has long been developed and where the incentive programs are the approach used to encourage a transition to more water-conserving landscaping. Rebate Programs The City also offers a variety of rebate programs that are codified in Section 49-243 of the City’s ordinances. A single-family residential property can receive $1 per square foot of turf removed, with a maximum rebate of $5,000 and a minimum turf removal requirement of 500 square feet. Page 361 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 23 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 The turf must be replaced with City approved low-water-use plants and other compatible landscaping material, and the City’s Water Conservation Staff are required to verify eligibility before turf is removed. Rebates are not paid until the replacement landscaping is installed. The current rules require that the first 1,000 square feet of replacement landscaping is the homeowner’s choice, but the second 1,000 square feet has to be a xeriscape landscape with 25 percent mature plant coverage. Existing plants, including high-water plants but excluding turf, can be used to meet the plant coverage standard. While the program terms and conditions state that the landscaping may be inspected in the future for continued compliance, in practice those have not occurred. New rules scheduled to be implemented July 1, 2022, will change some of the rebate program rules. The 500 square foot minimum will be eliminated and the rebate amount will increase to $2 per square foot, although the maximum rebate will remain $5,000. The revised rules may include a requirement that sprinkler heads be decommissioned for the second 1,000 square feet of landscaping as well. Three staff members have been performing inspections, and the City has recently hired two additional inspectors. At times, the pre-inspection is performed using photography provided by the applicant, but other times an inspector visits the site. There is at least one in-person inspection for each rebate. Staff reports that about one-third of those who enter the program are awarded a rebate. Some enter the process but never complete it or do not comply with the program terms (e.g., they want to install more artificial turf than the program allows). About 150 are awarded rebates each year, although staff is hopeful the increase in rebate and the removal of the minimum turf requirement will increase participation. Multi-family residential and commercial properties can receive rebates for a minimum of 2,000 square feet of turf removal. Properties with up to 10,000 square feet are eligible for up to $10,000 in rebates (limit one per year and two per lifetime), and properties with more than 20,000 square feet of turf are eligible for up to $20,000 in rebates and one per lifetime. Staff reported that fewer than 10 landowners participated in the program in 2021. However, with an increase in water bills scheduled to take place in November, staff expects increased interest in the program. While only six homeowners’ associations reached out to participate in water- saving programs in fiscal 2021, in the first six months of the current fiscal year 40 homeowners’ associations have contacted the City. Incentives are also offered for removal of pool and spas. While not often used, staff reports that it is often cost-effective for homeowners with aging pools who would have to pay as much or more to repair or remodel the old pool. The City offers $200 plus $1 per square foot of pool removed. Page 362 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 24 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Rebates for installation of a WaterSense irrigation controller are also offered. For single-family residential properties, the maximum is $250 per controller or the cost of the controller, if less; multi-family and commercial properties, as well as nonresidential common areas, are eligible for rebates for up to 50 irrigation controllers, at a maximum rebate of $400 per controller. Primary Contact Elisa Klein, Water Conservation Program Supervisor eklein@scottsdaleaz.gov San Antonio, TX The City of San Antonio uses a combination of techniques to preserve water in landscaping. In 2021, the City’s Gallons per Capita per Day (GPCD) water consumption rate was 111 gallons, which was lower than average due in part to a wet summer. San Antonio’s goal is to reduce the GPCD to less than 100 gallons. Landscaping Regulations The City requires all plants in the city to be chosen from a list of drought-resistant plants in Appendix E of the City’s Unified Development Code. The recommended plant list is specifically tailored to xeriscape planting methods, and all are water-friendly. City staff noted that this plant list is limited and could include additional drought-tolerant species. However, applicants are permitted to propose the use of other shrubs or plants, provided they are native or near- native and the applicant can demonstrate they can survive in the area with limited or no irrigation. The City enforces compliance with the regulations through site visits performed by a team of five inspectors. Drought Ordinance Water conservation is also emphasized through the City’s drought ordinance, enacted in 2014, which is tied to existing conditions in the Edwards Aquifer that provides much of the water for the city. Once aquifer levels fall below 665 feet (measured as elevation above mean sea level), the City begins preparation for drought restrictions. These restrictions are “staged” in four levels based on the level of the aquifer and are enforced by the City. During all stages, irrigation of commercial and residential properties is staggered based on the property’s address. • In Stage I, which is implemented when the aquifer has dropped to 660 feet, irrigation with a soaker hose, hose-end sprinkler, or in-ground irrigation system is only permitted between 7:00 p.m. and 11:00 a.m. on weekdays specified by address. • In Stage II, which is triggered when the aquifer has dropped to 650 feet, the irrigation methods allowed in Stage I may only take place from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Irrigation with a drip irrigation system or five-gallon bucket is allowed during Stage II at any hour of the day, as is irrigation with a handheld hose. • In Stage III, which is triggered once the aquifer has dropped to 640 feet, irrigation is only allowed every other week on the designated days beginning on the second Monday Page 363 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 25 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 after Stage III has been declared, between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. and between 7:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. Irrigation with a drip irrigation system or five-gallon bucket is allowed on every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, and irrigation with a handheld hose is allowed at any time on any day. • In Stage IV, which is triggered at the City Manager’s discretion following a 30-day monitoring period once Stage III has been declared, the Stage III irrigation requirements remain in effect, but a surcharge is assessed on nonresidential San Antonio Water Service accounts whose consumption exceeds 5,236 gallons per month and residential accounts whose consumption exceeds 12,717 gallons in a billing cycle. Rebate Programs The City also offers a variety of rebate programs through its wholly owned public utility, the San Antonio Water System (SAWS). For residential clients, SAWS offers landscaping coupons that provide $100 coupons for landowners planning to remove grass. A landowner can receive one $100 coupon for each 200 square feet of grass and sprinklers proposed to be removed, and can redeem coupons at participating plant vendors. Once the plants are installed, the landowner is required to send a photograph back to SAWS and, if approved, the landowner can participate in additional SAWS rebate programs. Water conservation staff reported that the coupon program was implemented in 2014 and replaced an earlier program that involved pre-rebate and post-rebate inspections and more extensive requirements to update landscaping. SAWS has found that the rebate program is more popular, and in particular was used much more by lower-income households who were less likely to engage in more holistic landscape makeovers. While staff noted that the biggest water savings come from instituting xeriscaping on higher-income households, which generally have larger landscapes and are willing to spend more on water, they believe it is important to reach the entire community. However, staff also noted that a separate “Outdoor Living” program will be implemented on June 1, 2022, which will be an inspection-based program that encourages households to revise their landscaping to contain no more than 1/3 turf, 1/3 planting area, and 1/3 pervious living area such as pavers. An irrigation rebate program allows residential homeowners to earn up to $5,000 for removing their irrigation system or making it more efficient. The largest rewards are offered for removal of active irrigation systems, and smaller rewards are offered for removal of non-functional irrigation system, removal of an irrigation zone, conversion from spray to drip irrigation, and other conservation-friendly efforts. SAWS also offers a separate irrigation consultation program at no cost to homeowners that provides recommendations for revising an irrigation schedule. These efforts, according to staff, are generally effective in reducing water usage.2 Staff has 2 Staff reported that it can be tricky to evaluate the effectiveness of individual programs due the variability of weather and other extrinsic factors that may affect water usage. For some projects they try to do a randomized Page 364 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 26 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 found that many households over-irrigate their landscapes, and that by providing a consultation that involves modifications to the irrigation schedule, along with less wasteful irrigation equipment, these households use significantly less water. For commercial water users, SAWS has implemented a custom rebate program that offers payments for the implementation of a variety of water-conservation techniques. The amount of the rebate depends on the amount of water saved, and eligible options can include installation of smart irrigation systems, upgrades to irrigation systems to include water-saving technology, replacement of irrigated landscaping with xeriscape landscape, and other actions. SAWS also offers a commercial irrigation rebate program similar to the program offered to residential homeowners. Savings are based on the acre-feet of water use that the modifications are projected to eliminated, based on estimates that staff has developed over time. However, it is a complex program, and staff is investigating whether more straightforward, menu-based options would increase participation. Rewards Program SAWS also encourages water-conserving landscaping through a points-based WaterSavers Rewards program. Participants can earn points by attending events relating to water-efficient landscaping. These events are sponsored by third-party organizations (some of which are under contract with SAWS) and approved by SAWS. With the points earned, participants receive coupons at local retailers that can be used towards water-conserving materials such as plants, mulch, compost, and rain barrels. Staff reports the program attracts between 100,000 and 200,000 attendees at events each year and has attracted a committed following. Customer Outreach The centerpiece of SAWS’ public outreach efforts is the Garden Style San Antonio website, which provides water-conservation advice, as well as evapotranspiration-based accurate watering advice and information about any current watering restrictions due to drought. More then 20,000 people subscribe to the Garden Style newsletter, which provides watering advice and information about other programs offered by SAWS. Primary Contact Herminio Griego, Assistant City Arborist, herminio.griego@sanantonio.gov Karen Guz, Senior Director, Conservation, San Antonio Water System, karen.guz@saws.org control trial by matching the participants in a rebate program with non-participants with similar household income and pre-intervention water usage, but that it is complicated and difficult to implement. Page 365 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 27 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Tree Protection and Tree Canopy Enhancement Best Practices Lake Forest Park, WA Background The City of Lake Forest Park, Washington is a small suburb of Seattle with a population approaching 14,000 across approximately four square miles. The City has had one part-time arborist since 2018, which was the first year the City hired an in-house employee dedicated to forestry. The City previously relied on a resident that was an arborist and expensive consulting services follow the retirement of the resident arborist to implement its tree protection and canopy enhancement program. Tree Protection Chapter 16.14 of the Lake Forest Park Municipal Code is focused on tree canopy preservation and enhancement. • The City uses a two-tiered permit structure that prioritizes protection of “significant” trees, trees in environmentally critical areas or buffers, and native tree species. A Minor Tree Permit, which can be obtained without City Arborist review, generally requires replacement of any trees removed from a development site (at a one tree to one tree ratio as long as canopy coverage is equal to or greater than before). If 1:1 replacement will not result in equal or greater tree canopy coverage, a Major Tree Permit based on arborist review will be required. • Any application for a Major Tree Permit requires approval of a tree replacement plan that maintains canopy coverage or meets the canopy coverage goal for the property (depending on the project type). • The City offers a Proactive Forest Management Permits for property owners as a method of expediting projects in exchange for increased collaboration with the City on tree maintenance and management and following an arborist plan to maintain canopy coverage. A similar Utility Forest Management Permit offers utility providers an opportunity to work with the City on a plan to balance the needs of utility providers and community goals for canopy coverage. • Tree removal is generally not permitted in areas that the City has identified as Environmentally Critical Areas and Buffers—regulated by Chapter 16.16—which includes floodplain, stream buffers, wetlands, steep slopes, landslide hazard areas, erosion hazard areas, and seismic hazard areas. However, trees that present a risk (based on defined standards), are causing damage to buildings and infrastructure, or are invasive species, may be removed. Page 366 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 28 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • The City Arborist notes that standards for protection of trees during construction are vital but not something addressed in the Code. Current uncodified practice is to require that the critical root zone be protect to a distance equal to one foot of radial distance from the tree trunk for every one inch in tree Diameter at Breast Height (DBH). The City often negotiates for an even wider protection area. • Historically, the City has required chain link fencing on pier blocks to protect the critical root zone, but the City Arborist has found that pier blocks tend to be shifted around, so the City is starting to require that fencing be attached to posts driven into the ground. Lake Forest Park highlighted the following successes and challenges with enforcement of tree protection regulations: • The City is generally unable to do proactive code enforcement due to limited staff. Because it is a small city, Lake Forest Park relies on a small number of highly active residents that will report tree removal when they see it. Sometimes reports are made related to removal of trees for which valid Tree Permits have been issued, but false alarms are better than not knowing about the illegal removals for which permits have not been issued. • The City has a Tree Account for payment of fees and fines for tree removal, which is an effective way to ensure a direct link between funds and tree programs. The process for determining a fine is generally as follows: o The City addresses violations of the Code by hiring an appraiser to determine the value of the removed tree(s) and notifying the property owner (and sometimes tree removal company) of the value to be paid. Local tree removal companies have become well aware of the costs of removing a tree without a Tree Permit, which has reduced the number of violations. o The City Arborist highlighted the ability of a resident to provide the City with information on the circumstances of the tree removal and to outline financial hardship before paying the fine. o Sometimes the City Attorney and an attorney for the Code violators meet to agree on the final fee amount. o In practice, the City Arborist noted that although the process of appraisal, fine, appeal, and reaching agreement on the fine amount is generally effective, it is also time consuming. To reduce this time commitment, the City has been assessing a fine for unpermitted tree removals that is essentially double the cost of the Tree Permit fee that should have been paid before removal, but only in circumstances where the City Arborists agrees that the removed tree was one for which removal would have been approved following the Code process. Page 367 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 29 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Urban Canopy Management Lake Forest Park has more tree canopy than most surrounding communities and generally prioritizes protecting and expanding tree canopy more than neighboring communities. Existing regulations have been successful in the following ways: • The City has a clear understanding of parcel-by-parcel tree canopy coverage (see Canopy Coverage Maps) and clear goals for canopy coverage by zoning district and lot size (see Community Forest Management Plan). This information is used in determining tree replacement requirements. • The Code has clear definitions, which make it easier for staff to implement the Code and for community members to understand what is expected. Valuable terms that are defined by Code include: o “Canopy coverage” means the area covered by the canopy of trees on the lot. When a tree trunk straddles a property line, 50 percent of the canopy shall be counted towards each property’s canopy coverage. The canopy coverage of the immature trees and newly planted trees is determined using the projected canopy areas in the Lake Forest Park general tree list. o “Landmark tree” means a significant tree that is at least 24 inches in diameter (DBH). o “Significant tree” means a tree six inches or greater in diameter (DBH) or a required replacement tree of any size. Dead trees shall not be considered significant trees. o “Exceptional tree” means a viable tree, which because of its unique combination of size and species, age, location, and health is worthy of long-term retention, as determined by the city’s qualified arborist. To be considered exceptional, a tree must meet the following criteria:  The tree must be included in and have a diameter at breast height (DBH) that is equal to or greater than the threshold diameters listed in an adopted table;  The tree shall exhibit healthful vigor for its age and species;  The tree shall not be considered a significant risk in regard to existing utilities and structures as evaluated per the tree risk assessment defined in LFPMC 16.14.080(A)(1);  The tree shall have no visual structural defects that cannot be mitigated by one or more measures outlined in the International Society of Arboriculture Best Management Practices; and  If retained under current tree growth conditions, the tree can be expected to remain viable with reasonable and prudent management and care. Page 368 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 30 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 o “Viable (tree)” means a significant tree that a qualified arborist has determined to be in good health with a low risk of failure, is relatively windfirm if isolated or exposed, is a species that is suitable for its location, and is therefore worthy of long-term retention • Although residents often expect that the City is responsible for maintenance of trees in the public right-of-way, the Code makes it clear that the property owner is responsible for those in the tree lawn along property frontages, even if they are located in the public right-of-way. • The City maintains a detailed Tree List that include information on the expected canopy area of each species, typical characteristics, drought tolerance, and preferred soil type. Lake Forest Park has also identified the following improvements that they would like to see in the future: • The City Arborist would like to see the Code have stronger standards for retaining trees before allowing replacement. Currently, standards allow a tree to be replaced by a tree that will mature into a tree with equal or greater canopy, but replacement trees take years to mature and provide the same benefits as the original, removed tree. • The City Arborist is concerned about recent changes to the Code that allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) more broadly and future efforts that could rezone areas to allow for higher density housing, both of which could potentially result in the loss of tree canopy. Historically, the City has not seen much development or redevelopment or its generally large residential lots, so the Code may need to be updated to prevent canopy loss due to more intensive development. • The City Arborist would like to increase education of new and existing property owners to prevent accidental and unpermitted tree removal. Primary Contact Ashley Adams, City Arborist, aadams@ci.lake-forest-park.wa.us, (206) 957-2804 Portland, OR Tree Permits Trees on private property and in City of Portland rights-of-way are regulated by Title 11 of City Code, Trees, which is focused on implementation of the City’s Urban Forest Management Plan (2004) and Urban Forest Action Plan (2007) and tracking progress on those initiatives. Title 11 establishes the Urban Forestry Program, including appointed supervisory boards and regulations and procedures for tree permits, tree preservation, tree planting, and enforcement of these regulations. Page 369 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 31 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Chapter 11.30, Tree Permit Procedures outlines a highly nuanced approach to tree protection with permits and standards varying based on ownership and location (private property or public property/street) and the type of activities proposed. Trees that are designated as “Heritage Trees” per Section 11.20.060 (“trees that because of their age, size, type, historical association or horticultural value, are of special importance to the City”) earn the strongest level of protection and regulation, and require approval by the Urban Forestry Commission (UFC) to remove the designation (and subsequent removal of the tree). In other cases, the code requires City Forester approval for any tree removal or maintenance. Chapter 11.40, Tree Permit Requirements (No Associated Development), details the permit requirements and review criteria when tree removal or maintenance is not associated with development activity. This chapter generally applies to all street trees, City trees three inches or greater in diameter, and private trees 12 or more inches in diameter (among other, more specific situations). Permit standards and review criteria are organized into two categories: City and Street Trees (Section 10.40.040) and Private Trees (Section 10.40.050). City and Street Trees require a Type A tree permit, which requires City Forester review with no public notice period or opportunity for the public to appeal, for the following: • Tree planting; • Pruning branches (greater than ½ inch) and roots (greater than ¼ inch); • Removal of dead, dying, or dangerous trees (with one replacement tree required per removed tree); or • Removal of up to four healthy trees (per year) that are less than three inches in diameter (with one replacement tree required per removed tree). City and Street Trees require a Type B permit, which may result in a public notice period and opportunity for public appeal of a pending City Forester decision, for removal of trees that are greater than three inches in diameter if either of the following conditions apply: • Tree for tree replacement of removed trees is required for trees less than 20 inches in diameter (only if less than four healthy trees are removed per year). If any tree is 20 inches or larger in diameter or more than four health trees larger than 12 inches in diameter are removed, trees replacement must be “inch for inch,” which means that trees of an equivalent total diameter are required to be planted. • Similarly, if any tree is 20 inches or larger in diameter or more than four healthy trees larger than 12 inches in diameter are removed, public notice and opportunity for public appeal of the City Forester approval is required. Private Trees require a Type A permit for pruning native trees in specified overlay districts, removal of a tree that is dead, dying, dangerous, a nuisance species, located within 10 feet of a building, or no more than four healthy trees smaller than 20 inches in diameter are removed. Page 370 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 32 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Any tree removal under a Type A permit requires tree for tree replacement. Removal of up to four trees that are 20 inches in diameter or larger or removal of more than four trees larger than 12 inches in diameter require a Type B permit, inch for inch replacement, and public notice and opportunity for public appeal. Chapter 11.50, Trees in Development Situations, details the permit requirements and review criteria when tree removal or maintenance proposed as part of a development activity. A Tree Plan is generally required for all development projects, unless: • There are no private trees 12 inches or larger in diameter; • There are no city trees six inches or larger in diameter; • There are no street trees three inches or larger in diameter; • The site or activity is exempt from on-site tree density standards; and • The site or activity is exempt from street tree planning standards. Sites larger than one acre (or where all work is occurring in the public right-of-way) may establish a Development Impact Area that provides some flexibility for tree preservation and planting. It also includes a requirement that one street tree be planted or retained for each full increment of 25 linear feet of street frontage with the option of paying a fee-in-lieu if the required number of trees cannot be provided. Section 11.50.040, Tree Preservation Standards, details the standards for retention of trees and mitigation of trees not preserved, both on-site and in the public right-of-way. Mitigation is based on payment into the Tree Planting and Preservation Fund with the cost depending on the size of tree(s) to be removed. Chapter 11.45, Programmatic Tree Permits, outlines a program to avoid going through individual Tree Permit applications for regular or continuing work by utilities and other public agencies. Although the City Code does not generally apply to State and Federal lands or highways), this permit establishes a method for the City to engage with these agencies to ensure that City regulations are understood and followed while allowing less oversight of day- to-day operations that could result in maintenance or removal of certain trees less than six inches in diameter. Programmatic Tree Permits may be approved by the City Forester for up to five years. Tree Protection Section 11.60.030, Tree Protection Specifications, offers both prescriptive and performance- based option for protection of both privately- and publicly owned trees. Importantly, the prescriptive path does not require any knowledge of trees or plants and is therefore frequently used by homeowners and small developers. It has been adjusted over time and seems to work well, based on the following standards: Page 371 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 33 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • The root protection zone is one foot for each one inch in tree diameter; • To provide flexibility for existing encroachments, provided the encroachment does not affect more than 25 percent of the root protection zone and does not penetrate the inner half of the zone radius; • Six-foot chain link protection fencing on eight foot metal posts are required at the edge of the root protection zone; and • The same standards apply to protection of street trees unless the City Forester requires more or less protection. The performance path is most often used for larger projects and by larger developers because it allows a professional arborist to create a plan for tree preservation that reflects any unique circumstances of the project or site. The performance plan is reviewed for adequacy by City staff. Urban Canopy Management To support the goals of the Urban Forest Action Plan to increase tree canopy coverage to 35-40 percent in residential areas, 15 percent in commercial/industrial areas, 30 percent in parks and open spaces, and 35 percent in rights-of-way, Section 11.50.050 includes on-site tree density standards that specify a minimum required tree area based on the size of the site and the type and size of proposed and existing development. All new development and exterior alteration to existing development above a certain valuation are generally required to comply with these requirements, with a few exceptions. Applicant are provided with two options as follows: • Option A requires the following minimum tree area: o One- and two family residential: 40 percent of site or development impact area; o Multi dwelling residential: 20 percent of site or development impact area; o Commercial and mixed-use: 15 percent of site or development impact area; o Industrial: 10 percent of site or development impact area; o Institutional: 25 percent of site or development impact area; and o Other: 25 percent of site or development impact area. • Option B requires that the entire site area, minus existing and proposed building coverage be designated as part of the tree canopy area. This section also requires that the required tree area by planted with some combination of canopy trees that meets specific standards for number of trees required per size of tree area and the minimum required planting area per tree. The Code provides tree density credits towards any required tree density for trees planted to meet required stormwater or Page 372 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 34 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 landscaping requirements, existing healthy trees that are retained on-site, payments in-lieu of planting, and flexibility for small sites where existing trees are retained. Section 11.60.030, Tree Protection Specifications, outlines the minimum size and species diversity for all trees required by this Code. Standards include the following: • Broadleaf trees must be 1.5 inches in caliper for one- and two-family residential development (on-site or on street) or on-site for all other development types. • Broadleaf street trees are required to be a minimum of two inches caliper for multi- dwelling residential and 2.5 inches caliper for all other types of development types. • Coniferous trees are required to be at least five feet in height. • Native trees are permitted to be ½ inch caliper less than required. • When more than eight but fewer than 24 trees are required, no more than 40 percent of trees may be of one species. When more than 24 trees are required, no more than 24 percent may be of one species. In some overlay districts all trees provided are required to be native species. Portland also uses some unique approaches to enforcement of tree planting, maintenance, and removal requirements, including the following: • Street trees are included in the warranty period for infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks and streets) that require a Public Works permit, which generally lasts two years. This means that any required street trees that are damaged, poorly maintained, or die during the warranty period are required to be replaced by the applicant. Staff noted that this has worked well and does not require a separate process for enforcement. • Penalties for failure to comply with the Code standard for trees and landscaping is based on an internal document that is informed by the Technical Specifications of Chapter 11.60. The City’s current approach is not to make it more expensive to follow the Code, which may disincentivize people from coming info conformance. This approach still allows the City to require planting of three to seven trees when a tree is illegally removed. City staff hopes to eventually establish an administrative manual outside of the Code that clarifies penalties for noncompliance that can be easily updated if those penalties change in the future). • The City Forester is permitted to require payment (based on an adopted fee schedule) into the Tree Planting and Preservation Fund instead of requiring replacement trees if the Forester finds there is insufficient or unsuitable area to accommodate some or all of the replacement trees within the street planting area or site. Although not a complete success, City staff mentioned that they recently completed a study showing that compliance with various landscaping standards varied from 50 to 75 percent. The City currently enforces landscaping and tree regulations based on complaints by neighbors and Page 373 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 35 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 concerned citizens, which can make it difficult to ensure that required landscaping on private property is provided and maintained with limited resources. Additional Portland tree-related regulations are documented in Title 33, Planning and Zoning. Primary Contact Rick Faber, Permitting and Regulation Coordinator, Urban Forestry Division of Portland Parks and Recreation, Richard.Faber@portlandoregon.gov Other Valuable Practices San Antonio, TX The San Antonio Unified Development Code (UDC) was amended in 2010 to include Section 35- 523, Tree Preservation. The regulations are based on a required minimum canopy coverage, which is 38 percent for single-family residential properties, 25 percent for multi-family and nonresidential properties, and 15 percent in the Community Revitalization Action Group (CRAG) area, which generally encompasses central San Antonio. Based on these final tree canopy coverage requirements, the applicant may use one of two methods for determining tree preservation. The tree survey method establishes a minimum percentage of all diameter inches of significant or heritage trees, or canopy area, which must be preserved or mitigated (e.g., 35 percent of six inch caliper trees are to be preserved on a single-family dwelling lot). The tree stand delineation method requires a minimum percentage of tree canopy coverage (not including floodplains and environmentally sensitive areas) to be preserved (e.g., 35 percent of non-heritage tree canopy for any project that requires any permit after the master development plan stage or 30 percent with a master development plan). San Antonio allows various alternatives when trees that are required for preservation are removed, including a fee- in-lieu payment into the Tree Mitigation Fund and protection and maintenance of natural areas within the surveyed area. The City also offers tree preservation incentives, which include: • Reduction of one required parking space for every four diameter inches of trees protected or mitigated on-site, up to a maximum of 15 percent of required parking spaces (or 30 percent with approval of the Planning Director). Preservation of woodlands and significant tree stands may qualify the site for a 50 percent reduction in parking spaces; • Reduction in sidewalk width or elimination of a sidewalk requirement; • Additional tree protection credits for preservation of tree clusters; • Credit for trees provided to meet required landscape buffers and on-site landscaping (see Sec. 25-511, Landscaping); • Credit for preservation of native understory plants alongside trees; Page 374 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 36 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • Reduction of lot size and setback requirements for exceeding tree protection requirements. • Exemption from City tree protection requirements for projects certified under the Texas Parks and Wildlife (TPW) Texas Wildscape Program; • Credit for planting trees on the south and west sides of habitable buildings (to benefit energy conservation); • Additional credit for preservation of woodlands, significant trees, and heritage trees; • Reduction of required tree canopy for athletic fields; and • Additional credit for incorporation of Low Impact Development (LID) to aid in stormwater management. San Antonio defines the root protection zone as being one linear foot of radial distance for each one inch in tree diameter, which allows construction within five feet on one side of the tree. Alternatively, the City allows applicants for multi-family and nonresidential development to warranty the trees for five years to ensure trees are otherwise protected and maintained. City staff noted that the codified list of approved plants and trees should be expanded and also highlighted the need for more detailed direction in the Code and clearer definition of terms. The San Antonio tree protection program is complex, but offers a variety of possible methods, alternatives, and incentives for the City of Fort Collins to consider. Primary Contact Herminio Griego, Assistant City Arborist, herminio.griego@sanantonio.gov Bloomington, IN The City of Bloomington recently adopted an updated Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that includes a unique approach to preserving urban canopy during land-disturbance activities. Section 20.04.030(i), Tree and Forest Protection establishes a minimum required canopy cover based on how much of the property is currently covered with tree canopy as shown below: • 80-100 percent baseline canopy cover requires 50 percent of that coverage to be retained; • 60-79 percent baseline canopy cover requires 60 percent of that coverage to be retained; • 40-59 percent baseline canopy cover requires 70 percent of that coverage to be retained; • 20-39 percent baseline canopy cover requires 80 percent of that coverage to be retained; and • 0-19 percent baseline canopy cover requires 90 percent of that coverage to be retained. Page 375 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 37 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 This approach requires that more of the canopy be preserved when there is less canopy available. City staff indicated that this approach is somewhat complicated because it requires calculation and sometimes on-site review, but general found that the approach is fair to developers and seems to work well. Section 20.04.080, Landscaping, Buffering, and Fences, also establishes standards for landscaping on private property (including single-family dwelling development) and in the public right-of-way, which includes regulations for species diversity, minimum tree sizes, and protection of existing trees. The City notes the following improvements to the UDO that could help with clarity and implementation of the Bloomington Urban Tree Canopy Assessment Summary Report (2019): • A clearer definition of “closed canopy,” or an alternative method of determining what constitutes tree canopy. • A requirement that trees located in boxes include suitable soils. • A fee-in-lieu option, especially for sites where there are conflicts between existing and potential planting areas and utility infrastructure). • Coordination of tree-related regulations between Chapter 12.24, Trees and Flora, which applies to street trees in the public right-of-way, and Title 20 of the Unified Development Code, which governs private development. City staff highlighted several enforcement challenges and potential solutions or alternatives. The City needs: • Clearer standards for tree-protective fencing during construction and better enforcement of the required 10 foot setback beyond the dripline, which tends to be encroached upon; • Clearer direction on who determines when a tree is a “heritage tree,” which is defined as “a tree that is unique and important to the community because of its species, age, size, location, or historic significance;” • An escrow payment program to ensure street tree maintenance. Currently, the City is responsible for street tree replacement, and poor private maintenance of street trees leads to higher costs to the City for tree replacement. • Potentially updating UDO standards to require a minimum 10 foot wide tree lawn (where possible) and greater emphasis on planting and protecting native trees. • A bond funded program (2022) for tree planting with emphasis on creating a more equitable urban canopy. Primary Contacts Linda Thompson, Senior Environmental Planner, thompsol@bloomington.in.gov; Beth Rosenbarger, Planning Services Manager, rosenbab@bloomington.in.gov Page 376 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 38 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 Boulder, CO The City of Boulder Code adopted an Urban Forest Strategic Plan in 2018 to establish a policy framework for urban canopy management. Today, the City offers limited protection for trees on private property (see Chapter 9-9, Development Standards). During the development process the applicant is required to identify all trees greater than four inches caliper and have a qualified arborist conduct an inventory of the trees worthy of preservation. The City reviews this inventory and works with the applicant on a tree protection plan, including identifying the trees to be preserved and the fencing and measures required to ensure protection during development of the property (see drawings 3.01, 3.02, 3.03, and 3.04). Trees required to be preserved can be removed with payment of a mitigation fee. Although the City does not currently have a permit process for removal of street trees, the City Forester noted that the City would like to formalize the process with a permit (see Chapter 6-6, Protection of Trees and Plants). Currently, the City Forester determines what trees are required to be preserved and the mitigation payment to compensate the City for any removed trees. Boulder uses the trunk formula method, which determines the value of trees to be removed based on the value of similar sized trees in a local nursery, the cost of installation, and other factors. Any tree that is illegally removed during the development process results in a mitigation fee to be paid before other permits are issued. Otherwise, the City documents the illegal tree removal and issues a fine (almost always) or requires replacement (rare because of the large share of development that takes place on infill sites that are too small to accommodate additional trees). Tree mitigation fees and fines go towards Capital Improvement Projects in the Parks and Recreation Budget. The City Forester supports the use of mitigation fees instead of tree replacement because it is easier to administer and because funds can be carried forward from year-to-year so that mitigation fees collected late in the year aren’t lost when trees cannot be planted during the winter. Boulder has an Approved Tree List to guide tree planting in the right-of-way and on other municipal property, including information on tree spacing, hardiness zone, water needs, canopy size, and soil preferences. The City Forester did note the following challenges and potential improvements to Boulder’s current Code and practices: • Standards for mulching and irrigation of trees are only identified during the permitting process and are otherwise difficult to enforce. • The City could better educate property owners about when they are responsible for care and maintenance of street trees. The City generally manages street trees adjacent to residential properties and businesses manage those adjacent to their property. Alternatively, the City could explore taking over responsibility for all street trees. Page 377 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 39 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • The City should consider alternative arrangements to ensuring required trees are maintained, including having developers prepay for cost of maintenance when the City is required to provide maintenance. An escrow payment program has been considered before, but it is not always clear which party should pay, or be responsible, or receive any funds required to be rebated if not used within a specific period of time. Primary Contact Kathleen Alexander, City Forester, alexanderk@bouldercolorado.gov Madison, WI The City of Madison requires private development (except for one- and two-family dwellings) to provide trees and landscaping through a menu of options in Section 28.142, Landscaping and Screening Requirements. These regulations establish a point value for distinct types of vegetation, which encourages the installation of higher quality (and larger) trees and requires a greater number of “points” for larger lots. Higher points are also provided for protection of “existing significant specimen trees” (those greater than 2.5 inches caliper) to prioritize preservation of large trees over removal and replacement with smaller trees that take longer to provide similar benefits. This section also requires any development that provides five or more trees to provide a specified diversity of tree species (with greater diversity required when more than 50 trees are provided) and at least three different street tree species per block. Once landscaping is installed, however, the City does not require or enforce tree protection on private property. Trees in the right-of-way, however, are highly protected, primarily through Section 10.101, Regulation of Tree Trimming, Pruning and Removal within the Public Right-of-Way of Any Street, Alley or Highway). These standards require permits for tree trimming, pruning, and removal of trees in the public right-of-way, which include requirements for tree inventories and/or street tree report prepared by a certified arborist for any request to remove, prune, or perform most construction activities. The reports are typically triggered by a proposal to do any work that could impact the urban canopy or impact a tree that is six inches or greater in caliper. The City noted that tree protection regulations are relatively cumbersome, but that developers view the street tree report as a way to expedite the process because they can hire a certified arborist to conduct the review. Madison is unique for codifying detailed standards for how the City and any contractors must protect trees in the right-of-way. Section 107.13 of the City’s Standard Specifications for Public Works projects require that a five-foot area around each tree remain undisturbed, provide information on what City Forester markings indicate, describe methods of root cutting to limit damage to trees, lists best practices for trimming, pruning, and avoiding soil compaction, and. establishes penalties for damage to trees. The City Forester noted that current practice has Page 378 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 40 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 been to collect a deposit of $125 per trunk diameter inch (measured 4.5 feet above the ground) prior to any work being done near trees. This ensures that the City is able to collect any damages without hassle. The City noted that they will be reviewing the City Code in the next year to ensure implementation of the Urban Forestry Task Force Final Report (2019) and had the following suggestions to improve the effectiveness of current standards. • Codify standards for soil volumes and require a third-party review and approval for the City to evaluate during the development review process. • Modify parking lot landscaping requirements to require different parking lot tree arrangements. • Assess development regulations in urban neighborhoods where the required setbacks are less than five feet, because it can prevent the full, healthy growth of trees if the sidewalk width is also narrow. • Explore recommendations from the Tree Board for improving maintenance of public and private trees. Primary Contacts Heather Strouder, Planning Division Director, HStouder@cityofmadison.com; Marla Eddy, City Forester, MEddy@cityofmadison.com Seattle, WA The City of Seattle’s 2020 Draft Urban Forest Management Plan has established a goal of increasing tree canopy coverage to 30 percent by 2037. Currently, Chapter 25.11, Tree Protection focus on preserving “exceptional trees” as opposed to thinking about the overall urban canopy. This reflects an increase in interest in tree protection from citizens and elected officials due to rapid development the past several years. Generally, Seattle has very few standards related to the planting, preservation, or maintenance of trees on private property (no tree removal permits, no tree planning requirements, no standards for tree size, no required species diversity, etc.). Street trees have more protections (removal requires permit approval), but standards for maintenance and replacement are minimal. Although Seattle takes a more hands-off approach to tree preservation, they are in the process of updating some regulations. Fort Collins may consider some of the following existing valuable practices: • The City has developed an interactive tree list (using Tableau) to allow residents to tailor any new tree plantings to site conditions (sun exposure, width of planting strip for street trees, presence of overhead wires) and desired tree characteristics (drought tolerance, size, native/non-native, and flower and fall colors). Voluntary planning does not require any specific tree type or size to be provided. Page 379 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 41 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 • Removal of a street tree without City approval results in a fine that is triple the cost of the permit that should have been obtained prior to tree removal. The City is considering alternative penalty structures (including charging a dollar value per caliper inch of the removed tree), but staff notes that City officials are weary of fines that could disproportionately impact underserved communities. Primary Contacts Chanda Emery, Senior Planner, Chanda.Emery@Seattle.gov; Nolan Rundquist, City Arborist, Seattle.Trees@Seattle.gov Fort Wayne, IN Fort Wayne has struggled with the loss of large trees and clear-cutting of trees on private property prior to or during the development review process, partly because existing regulations are very permissive about tree removal (see Section 157.408, Landscape Standards). Over the past decade, the City found that they have lost about six percent of existing tree canopy coverage. The City is in the early stages of looking at solutions (and assessing community support) for addressing the issue with new regulations and further implementing the City’s Urban Forest Management Plan (2014), but does have the following regulations and practices that have proven successful or provide lessons learned from current practice: • To limit conflicts with trees and infrastructure in utility easements, the City recently adopted provisions that allow landscaping to be provided elsewhere without requiring a waiver of standards. This is not yet reflected in the Code. • Instead of requiring that trees be replaced at one-tree-to-one-tree ratio, the City is considering requiring tree replacement at a ratio of one-inch of tree caliper for every one-inch of tree caliper being removed. The current standard is not resulting in quality replacement trees. • The City has been actively protecting about 1,000 of the highest value Ash trees (along key corridors, in parks, etc.) with TREE-äge Insecticide Treatment and has removed about 10,000 other Ash trees to manage Emerald Ash Borer damage. Any removed tree is replaced with guidance from the Parks Department to ensure species diversity. Otherwise, there is no species diversity requirement for new trees. Primary Contact Derek Veit, Superintendent of Urban Forestry, Derek.Veit@cityoffortwayne.org Reno, NV The City of Reno is in the process of updating standards for tree protection, installation, and maintenance. Although this example does not offer an analysis of existing standards, it reflects Page 380 Item 4. Fort Collins Nature in the City 42 Additional Best Practices Report May 2022 related discussion with City staff about what is working well or proving to be challenging, this community does offer an opportunity to see what another Western community is trying based on best practices. The draft ordinance language (as of 3/28/22) is set for review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, which has already been recommended to City Council for adoption by the Urban Forestry Commission. The draft ordinance focuses on many of the issues identified by the City of Fort Collins, including soil standards, tree protection regulations, enforcement mechanisms, and updated definitions—all with the goal of improving and expanding tree canopy. New standards in Chapter 8.32, Trees and Shrubs, and Title 18, Land Development Code: • Establish a landmark tree designation for tree protection on private property; • Establish a process for removal of a public tree by an adjacent property owner; • Establish a methodology for tree appraisal and financial assurances in public trees are not adequately protected during construction; • Clarify minimum soil volume and quality standards based on tree size; • Increase quality standards for street trees and parking lot trees; • Enhance standards for tree maintenance and replacement if required trees are damaged or removed; • Establish procedures for landscape permits if required landscaping is removed or negatively impacted; and • Expand penalties to apply based on number of trees impacted instead of applying the penalty based on a particular property not following regulations. Primary Contacts Matt Basile, Urban Forester, basilem@reno.gov; Kelly Mullin, Principal Planner, mullink@reno.gov. Page 381 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here August 26, 2025 Municipal and Land Use Code changes Proposed Tree Preservation and Mitigation Policies Sylvia Tatman-Burruss –Sr. Policy &Project Manager Kendra Boot –City Forester Page 382 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 2 What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed tree policies? Page 383 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 3 Background Page 384 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes HereTree Canopy Cover 4 CANOPY PERCENT BY BLOCK GROUP ●Citywide: 13.7% ●City + GMA: 12.6% Page 385 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Tree Mitigation Policy •Canopy coverage is generally high within these areas (15% to greater than 25%) •Often, these are established trees that were a result of past development standards •Take many years to get same canopy coverage as large trees •Commercial and Institutional land use types have lost canopy •Balance mitigation requirements (new tree plantings) with supporting new mixed-use and affordable housing development •Prioritize protection of larger trees Page 386 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 6 Tree Policy Goals Council Priority Council Priority No. 1:Operationalize City resources to build and preserve affordable housing Council Priority No. 4:Pursue an integrated, intentional approach to economic health Council Priority No. 8:Advance a 15-minute city by accelerating our shift to active modes Goals Balance mitigation requirements (new tree plantings) with supporting new mixed-use and affordable housing development Prioritize and incentivize protection of larger trees Maintain current levels of tree canopy coverage and support tree-health infrastructure improvementsAc t i v e M o d e s 8 Af f o r d a b l e h o u s i n g 1 Ec o n o m i c H e a l t h 4 Page 387 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes HereUFSP: Seven Growth Strategies 7 1. Strategically invest in growing tree canopy where it will promote resilience and quality of life in Fort Collins. 2. Complete the shift to proactive management of Fort Collins' public trees. 3. Strengthen city policies to protect trees. 4. Collect data to track changes to tree canopy over time and to inform forestry activities. 5. Sustainably resource the Forestry Division to keep pace with growth of the urban forest. 6. Deepen engagement with the community about tree stewardship. 7. Expand the network of Forestry Division partners. Page 388 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 8 Current Policies Benefitting Tree Canopy Tree and Habitat Protection in environmentally critical areas (Natural Habitat Buffer Zones) Existing LUC Policies include these tree health benefits: Quality standards for soil amendments, plantings and irrigation Robust landscape requirements = increased canopy in new greenfield development areas Page 389 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 9 Recommended Tree-Related Policies Recommendation 1 Establish no-fee Commercial Tree Removal Permit –to help address removal of large trees outside the development review/construction process •Municipal and land use codes •For trees 15-inches and greater •Intervention or conversation prior to tree removal •Slow down or omit preemptive tree removal •No expected increase to staffing or resources needed Page 390 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 10 Recommended Tree-Related Policies Recommendation 2 Enhanced measures for tree protection during construction •Alignment with enforceable protection provisions, updated signage and fencing, etc. •Better support for large tree preservation through construction 3 3-year establishment period for Street Trees •Currently there is no set period, depends on tree health and staff’s discretion as the SMEs •Current timeline is long and unpredictable 4 Expand exemptions for tree mitigation for undesirable species (Russian-olive, ash, and Siberian elm) under 11” •Effort to decrease unwanted species in the community and simplify exemption criteria •Could reduce costs for developments Page 391 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 11 Recommended Tree-Related Policies Recommendation 5 Update tree mitigation policies to better support goals •Aligns with current mitigation code process, yet more predictable •Encourage larger tree preservation •Additional mitigation reduction for affordable housing projects defined in LUC 5.2.1 How to best balance mitigation requirements (new tree plantings) with supporting new mixed- use and affordable housing development Protection of all trees and increasing cost to development Protection of larger trees and balancing development costs Page 392 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 12 Tree Mitigation -Peer Communities What other communities are doing: Greater restrictions for larger trees Canopy coverage by lot size Canopy coverage by use type or district Replacement based on equal tree canopy Assessing fees and fines Appraised valuation Prohibit tree removals in Environmentally Sensitive Areas Incentives/reduced mitigation for trees saved Lake Forest Park WA Lake Forest Park WA Source: Fort Collins Additional Targeted Best Practices Report, 2022 Portland OR, San Antonio TX Lake Forest Park WA, San Antonio TX Portland OR, Madison WI San Antonio TX Lake Forest Park WA Boulder, Longmont, Denver CO Page 393 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 13 Tree Mitigation –Proposed Changes Proposed Tree Mitigation Requirements Tree mitigation required for each tree removed: Poor Condition = no mitigation required 6”-14” = 1 tree 15”-19” = 2 trees 20”-29” = 5 trees 30”-39” = 10 trees 40” and larger = 20 trees Payment-in-lieu allowed if mitigation cannot be completed on site Current LUC Tree Mitigation Requirements Tree mitigation required for each tree removed: Each tree assigned a value of 1 to 6 replacement trees Off-site plantings or payment-in-lieu allowed if mitigation cannot be completed on site Tree Mitigation Reductions For each tree saved with development, allow reduction in overall tree mitigation requirements based on 50% of the mitigation value of tree saved, 75% reduction for Affordable Housing For Payment-in-Lieu for mitigation trees that cannot be planted on site, allow up to 25% reduction in PIL fees for equal value of enhanced tree planting measures Page 394 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 14 Tree Mitigation –Proposed Changes Benefits Prioritizes protection of larger trees Incentivizes tree preservation with development: •Reduction in mitigation requirements for trees saved •Development projects that protect larger trees may have no mitigation for removal of smaller trees on site Allows for enhanced tree planting measures instead of PIL Attempts to balances mitigation requirements (new tree plantings) with supporting new mixed-use and affordable housing development Page 395 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 15 Spectrum of Options –Tree Mitigation Retain Existing Standards Protection of all trees and increasing cost to development Tensions: Payment for mitigation easier than protecting large trees with development Tree Mitigation – •Increased mitigation for very large trees •Decreased for small trees •50% reduction in mitigation for trees protected, 75% for Affordable Housing •Up to 25% reduction in PIL costs for enhanced tree planting measures Species and Poor Health Exceptions Mitigation -where not feasible to protect or transplant on-site, trees must be replaced: •1-6 replacement trees for each tree removed OR Payment in Lieu –when not feasible to plant required mitigation trees on site (currently $500 per tree) Proposed Code Changes Mitigation – •Based on appraised value, inch for inch •increases tree mitigation •difficult to plant back increased # of trees on development sites •No mitigation reductions for trees protected Guiding Principle: Enable more housing and mixed-use buildings, especially along roads with frequent bus service Protection of larger trees and balancing development costs Tensions: Impedes higher density mixed-use development, increases costs Options to Dial Further Page 396 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 16 Proposed Recommendations Tree Preservation and Mitigation Recommendations Recommendation Number Recommendation 1 Establish Commercial Tree Removal Permit –to help address removal of large trees outside the development review process 2 Enhanced measures for tree protection during construction 3 3-year establishment period for Street Trees 4 Expand the exemptions for tree mitigation to include Russian-olive, ash, and Siberian elm species under 11” 5 Update tree mitigation policies for commercial development: Tree Mitigation by size, with reductions for trees saved Page 397 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 17 What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed tree policies? Page 398 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 18 Scenarios Recent Infill and Greenfield Projects Illustrated Examples: •Union on Elizabeth •Kum & Go at Prospect/Lemay •Prospect Sports •Worthington Storage •Village at Horsetooth •Timberline Road Expansion Others Analyzed: •Stodgy Brewing •The Grainary (Fairway) •Copperleaf Subdivision •Tapestry Page 399 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 19 Union on Elizabeth Multi-family, 102 Units Infill Site, 2.3 acres S S h i e l d s S t W Prospect Rd W Mulberry St W Elizabeth St Page 400 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 20 Union on Elizabeth 26 trees removed, 4 protected Developed site -55 new trees added + $1,350 for off-site mitigation Site before development Page 401 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 21 Union on Elizabeth Mitigation Type Value Current Land Use Code $21,000 or 42 mitigation trees Proposed Mitigation with 50% Reduction for Trees Saved $20,000 or 40 mitigation trees Compared to current Land Use Code: 2 fewer mitigation trees required or $1,000 decrease in payment-in-lieu fees/value 5% decrease in mitigation trees/fees required Page 402 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 22 Kum & Go -Prospect Commercial/Mixed Use Infill Site, 1 acre E Prospect Rd Page 403 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 23 Kum & Go -Prospect 29 trees removed, 8 protected Developed site -37 new trees approved Site before development Page 404 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 24 Kum & Go -Prospect Compared to current Land Use Code: 14 additional mitigation trees required or $7,000 increase in payment- in-lieu fees/value or 35% increase in mitigation trees/fees required Mitigation Type Value Current Land Use Code $20,000 or 40 mitigation trees Proposed Mitigation with 50% Reduction for Trees Saved $27,000 or 54 mitigation trees Page 405 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 25 Prospect Sports Club Commercial/Recreation Infill Site, 2.5 acres E Prospect Rd S T i m b e r l i n e R d Sh a r p Po i n t D r Page 406 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 26 Prospect Sports Club 9 trees removed, 40 protected Developed site -23 new trees addedSite before development Page 407 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 27 Prospect Sports Club Compared to current Land Use Code: 67 fewer mitigation trees required or $33,500 decrease in payment-in-lieu value or 319% decrease in mitigation requirements Due to significant number of trees protected Mitigation Type Value Current Land Use Code $10,500 or 21 mitigation trees Proposed Mitigation with 50% Reduction for Trees Saved $0 or 0 mitigation trees Page 408 Item 4. Headline Copy Goes Here 28 Scenarios –Comparison with Current LUC Current Land Use Code Change with Proposed Mitigation Changes Union on Elizabeth $21,000 or 42 mitigation trees $20,000 or 40 mitigation trees 5% reduction Kum&Go $20,000 or 40 mitigation trees $27,000 or 54 mitigation trees 35% increase Prospect Sports Club $10,500 or 21 mitigation trees $0 or 0 mitigation trees 319% reduction Worthington Storage $24,500 or 49 mitigation trees $3,500 or 7 mitigation trees 85% reduction Village on Horsetooth $7,000 or 14 mitigation trees $8,750 or 18 mitigation trees 25% increase Timberline Road $25,500 or 51 mitigation trees $29,500 or 59 mitigation trees 16% increase Stodgy Brewing $28,250 or 57 mitigation trees $0 or 0 mitigation trees 168% reduction The Grainary (Fairway) $140,750 or 282 mitigation trees $189,000 or 378 mitigation trees 34% increase Copperleaf $10,750 or 22 mitigation trees $19,750 or 40 mitigation trees 84% increase Tapestry $4,500 or 9 mitigation trees $500 or 1 mitigation tree 89% reduction Page 409 Item 4.