Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03-11-20 Board Packet
1 OTAY WATER DISTRICT AND OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING DISTRICT BOARDROOM 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY March 11, 2020 3:30 P.M. AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY OF POWAY TO EXPRESS THEIR APPRECIATION TO THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT (ERIC HEIDEMANN, CITY OF POWAY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS) 5. PRESENTATION OF SCHOLARSHIP FUND FOR CUYAMACA COLLEGE’S CENTER FOR WATER STUDIES 6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURIS- DICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 7. CLOSED SESSION a) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS [GOVERNMENT CODE §54957.6] AGENCY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES: BOARD AD HOC GM RECRUIT- MENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS EMPLOYEE: JOSE MARTINEZ RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 2 8. APPROVE GENERAL MANAGER’S EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT 9. REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION 10. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION BY CHAIRMAN GREG COX, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 11. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF OCTOBER 2, 2019 AND SPECIAL BOARD MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2019 CONSENT CALENDAR 12. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A PARTICU- LAR ITEM: a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4377 DESIGNATING A CHANGE OF AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES FOR THE DISTRICT’S BANK ACCOUNTS AND AUTHORIZE THE NEW GENERAL MANAGER TO ENTER INTO BANKING CONTRACTS WITH MUFG UNION BANK, N.A. b) APPROVE AN INCREASE TO THE CIP S2070 BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,000 (FROM $150,000 TO $215,000) AND AUTHORIZE AN AGREEMENT WITH KAY CONSTRUCTION FOR THE HIDDEN MOUNTAIN SEWER PUMP STATION WET WELL RENOVATION PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO- EXCEED $142,940 c) APPROVE AN INCREASE TO THE CIP P2609 BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000 (FROM $800,000 TO $1,300,000) AND AUTHORIZE A CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH LB CIVIL CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE DICTIONARY HILL WATER LINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT – 2019 (CIP P2608, P2609, P2655) IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $1,345,315 ACTION ITEMS 13. BOARD a) DISCUSS THE 2020 BOARD MEETING CALENDARS INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 14. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS: a) SECOND QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO- GRAM REPORT (MARTIN) b) FISCAL YEAR 2020 MID-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE (SEGURA) 3 c) PRESENTATION ON THE CUSTOMER OPINION SURVEY (OTERO) REPORTS 15. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT 16. SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE 17. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS 18. PRESIDENT’S REPORT/REQUESTS RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 19. CLOSED SESSION a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION [GOVERN- MENT CODE §54956.9] MARK COZIAHR, ET AL. vs. OTAY WATER DISTRICT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY, ET AL.; CASE NO. 37-2015-00023413 b) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [GOVERN- MENT CODE §54956.9] KESSNER, ET AL. vs. CITY OF SANTA CLARA, ET AL.; CASE NO. 20CV364054, SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT c) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [GOVERN- MENT CODE §54956.9] OTAY WATER DISTRICT vs. CITY OF SAN DIEGO; CASE NO. 37-2017- 00019348-CU-WM-CTL d) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [GOVERN- MENT CODE §54956.9] OTAY WATER DISTRICT vs. RAINBOW MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT; CASE NO. 37-2020-00001510-CU-WM-CTL e) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [GOVERN- MENT CODE §54956.9] OTAY WATER DISTRICT vs. FALLBROOK PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT; CASE NO. 37-2017-00019348-CU-WM-CTL RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 4 20. REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. THE BOARD MAY ALSO TAKE ACTION ON ANY ITEMS POSTED IN CLOSED SESSION. OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY 21. NO MATTERS TO DISCUSS 22. ADJOURNMENT All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the Board. The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the District’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280. If you have any disability which would require accommodation in order to enable you to partici- pate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at (619) 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Certification of Posting I certify that on March 6, 2020 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least 72 hours in advance of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section §54954.2). Executed at Spring Valley, California on March 6, 2020. /s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary 1 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETINGS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AND OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY October 2, 2019 1.The meeting was called to order by President Thompson at 3:32 p.m. 2.ROLL CALL Directors Present:Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Director Absent:None Staff Present:General Manager Mark Watton, General Counsel Dan Shinoff, Chief Financial Officer Joe Beachem, Chief of Administration Adolfo Segura, Chief of Operations Pedro Porras, Asst. Chief of Engineering, Dan Martin, Asst. Chief of Operations Jose Martinez, District Secretary Susan Cruz and others per attached list. 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4.APPROVAL OF AGENDA A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Smith and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to approve the agenda. 5.APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF JUNE 5, 2019 A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Smith and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Director Croucher AGENDA ITEM 11 2 to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 5, 2019. 6.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA No one wished to be heard. CONSENT CALENDAR 7.ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A PARTICULAR ITEM: A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Smith and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to approve the following consent calendar items: a)AWARD A CONTRACT TO D & H WATER SYSTEMS, INC., FOR A PAX SYSTEM AT THE 803-4 RESERVOIR IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $298,308 b)APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH SUN LIFE FOR UP TO THREE YEARS (FROM JANUARY 1, 2020 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2022) AT AN APPROXIMATE COST OF $80,000 PER YEAR TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE LIFE; ACCIDENTAL, DEATH AND DISMEMBERMENT; AND SHORT/LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE c)ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4371 APPROVING THE AMENDMENTS TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE SPECIAL DISTRICT RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY AND OTAY WATER DISTRICT FOR THE HEALTH BENEFITS PROGRAM ACTION ITEMS 8.BOARD a)DISCUSS THE 2019 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR It was discussed that the meeting in December will be canceled. 3 A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Smith and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to cancel the District’s December 2019 board meeting. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 9.THE FOLLOWING ITEM IS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEM: b)FISCAL YEAR 2019 DIRECTORS’ EXPENSES Senior Accountant Julia Yang presented the Board of Directors expenses for fiscal year 2019. She indicated that per Government Code Section 53065.5, special districts are required, at least annually, to disclose the expenses of the Board of Directors. Please reference the Committee Action notes (Attachment A) attached to the staff report for the details of Ms. Yang’s report. There was discussion regarding the requirement for the reporting of meetings board members attended at the expense of the District and if this annual report fulfills the State Statute reporting requirements. District Secretary Cruz indicated she believes State Statute requires members of the board to report on meetings they attended at the next regular meeting of the board. General Counsel Shinoff indicated that State Statute (53065.5) indicates that each Special District shall, at least annually, disclose any reimbursement paid by the District within the immediately preceding fiscal year of at least $100 for each individual charge for services or products received. It was discussed, considering State Statute 53065.5, that board members will not be required to report on the meetings they attended at each board meeting. However, it was suggested that members of the board should share (during the Directors Reports portion of the meeting) information from meetings they attended that would be of interest to members of the board. REPORTS 10.GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT General Manager Watton presented information from his report which included an update on security improvements in the lobby, the America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, the 2019 annual fiscal year-end audit, the 2019 sewer debt, the change in the District’s rate plan with SDG&E for the Steele Canyon Lift Station, water deliveries to Mexico, and water sales and purchases. 4 The board suggested that the active shooter training program, that was provided to staff members, also be provided to the board. It was indicated that a training session would be set up. Staff responded to additional questions and comments from the board. 11.SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE Director Croucher shared copies of Guidelines for Sustainable Landscapes from CWA. Director Smith reported that CWA performed a 2019 Public Opinion Survey. He stated that some of the results showed that the public is focused on long term reliability, but what they found interesting from the survey is that water is no longer the top priority on the community’s mind. The top priority is now homelessness. He indicated that the full survey results are available on CWA’s website. He shared that the annual report for the Carlsbad Desalination Plant indicated that the cost to process water at the plant is $2685 per acre foot. He also stated that the emergency repair to Pipeline 4 in the northern part of the County will soon be completed. He lastly shared that a question was asked at a monthly East County member agency meeting (East County Caucus) regarding fixed and variable costs and revenues. Director Smith asked that staff provide an informational report on the District’s fixed and variable revenues. He additionally asked that staff request CWA to provide the same information at a District board meeting. The board also suggested when the two-year study for the Conveyance Pipeline, along with the three different alternatives being considered is completed, that a presentation on the results of the study be provided by CWA as well. 12.DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS Director Robak indicated that he attended the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce’s Mission to Washington, DC. He presented a powerpoint that provided an overview of the mission. He stated they discussed the cross-border sewage issue in the South Bay area, the City of San Diego’s Pure Water Project, and Mr. Jim Madaffer, Chairman of CWA, provided an update on San Diego water issues (see attached copy of presentation). He noted that the attendees from San Diego included San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and Imperial Beach Mayor Serge Dedina. Director Gastelum indicated he attended the WateReuse Symposium which was held in San Diego last month. He stated he also attended the South County Economic Development Council’s annual economic summit and the ACWA Legislative Forum. 5 13.PRESIDENT’S REPORT President Thompson reported on meetings he attended last month. His report is attached. He noted that he and Director Gastelum met with the new Executive Director, Jennifer Pillsbury, of the Water Conservation Garden (WCG). He stated that she is a very dynamic person who he hopes will have a positive impact to moving the Water Conservation Garden towards self-sufficiency. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 14.CLOSED SESSION General Manager Watton indicated that there was nothing new to report on the Blastco matter. He stated with regard to the City of San Diego matter, a briefing was provided to members of the board and asked if there was interest by the board in discussing the brief. He stated a closed session discussion would be convened if there was interest. There was no request to discuss the brief. Director Smith inquired when the next update would occur for the City of San Diego matter. Attorney Jeanne Blumenfeld indicated that the City of San Diego would be filing an opposition brief on October 25, 2019 and an update for the board would be provided at the November board meeting. The board waived closed session discussion of the following matters: a)CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.9] 1 CASE (BLASTCO) b)CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION [GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.9] OTAY WATER DISTRICT v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO; CASE NO. 37-2017- 00019348-CU-WM-CTL OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY 15.NO MATTERS TO DISCUSS There were no items scheduled for discussion for the Otay Water District Financing Authority board. 6 16.ADJOURNMENT With no further business to come before the Board, President Thompson adjourned the meeting at 4:34 p.m. ___________________________________ President ATTEST: District Secretary 7 President’s Report Mitch Thompson October 2, 2019 Board Meeting # Date Meeting Purpose 1 3-Sep SCEDC Board Meeting Represented the District at their Monthly Meeting 2 4-Sep OWD Regular Board Meeting Monthly Board Meeting 3 5-Sep Meeting w/ WCG Executive Director Jennifer Pillsbury Discussed matters related to the Water Conservation Garden 4 6-Sep OWD Employee Event Attended employee event (Padre's game) 5 13-Sep SCEDC 29th Annual Economic Summit Received an update on the status of the economy 6 18-Sep OWD Finance and Administration Committee Reviewed items that will be presented at the October board meeting 7 20-Sep ACWA Region 8 Legislative Forum Received an update on legislation 1 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OTAY WATER DISTRICT October 8, 2020 1.The meeting was called to order by President Thompson at 8:29 a.m. 2.ROLL CALL Directors Present:Gastelum, Robak and Thompson Directors Absent:Croucher and Smith Staff Present:General Manager Mark Watton, Attorney Jeanne Blumenfeld, Chief Financial Officer Joe Beachem, Chief of Operations Pedro Porras, Chief of Engineering Rod Posada, Chief of Administrative Services Adolfo Segura, Assistant Chief of Engineering Dan Martin, Assistant Chief of Operation Jose Martinez, Engineering Manager Bob Kennedy, Communications Officer Tenille Otero, District Secretary Susan Cruz and others per attached list. 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4.APPROVAL OF AGENDA A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by Director Gastelum and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Gastelum, Robak and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Directors Croucher and Smith to approve the agenda. 5.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA No one wished to be heard. 6.DISCUSSION AND TOUR OF THE FOLLOWING DISTRICT FACILITIES: 870-2 PUMP STATION AND THE 571-1 RESERVOIR President Thompson indicated that the board and staff would be leaving the District to tour District facilities that included the 870-2 Pump Station and 571-1 Reservoir located in the Otay Mesa area. AGENDA ITEM 11 2 Prior to leaving on the tour, Assistant Chief of Engineering Dan Martin presented a video showing the progression of the construction of the pump station. He stated that the designers of the pump station from Carollo Engineers and the staff of the construction management company, Michael Baker International, will accompany the board and staff on the tour. It was indicated that the total cost for this project is approximately $18 million which includes $2.5 million for the cost of the reservoir liner and cover. Construction on the project was started in March 2017. Staff lead the design under Senior Civil Engineer Jeff Machioro and Environmental Compliance Specialist Lisa Coburn-Boyd handled the permitting and environmental compliance matters. Construction Management and Inspections is being handled by Mr. Doug Cook of Michael Baker International, and General Contracting is being managed by Pacific Hydrotech. It was indicated that this project was required to replace aging facilities (high- head and low-head pump stations) built in the 1950’s. Once the new 870-2 Pump Station is completed, tested, and brought online, the high-head and low- head pump stations will be decommissioned. The board and staff left the boardroom at 10:10 a.m. The tour group arrived at the 870-2 Pump Station at 10:45 a.m. Mr. Cook provided the group a tour of the new pump station which is still under construction. Mr. Cook and staff responded to comments and question from the board. The group then walked over to the 571-1 Reservoir at 11:38 a.m. and viewed the new reservoir cover while it was being inspected. Staff and Mr. Cook responded to comments and questions from the board. The board and staff left the 571-1 Reservoir site at 12:30 p.m. to return to the District’s office. 7.ADJOURNMENT Board members and staff returned to the District’s boardroom at 1:03 p.m. and with no further business to come before the Board, President Thompson adjourned the meeting at 1:03 p.m. ___________________________________ President ATTEST: District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Eid Fakhouri, Finance Manager PROJECT: DIV. NO.All APPROVED BY: Kevin Koeppen, Assistant Chief of Finance Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4377 Designating a Change of Authorized Signatories for the District’s Bank Accounts and Authorize the New General Manager to Enter Into Banking Contracts with MUFG Union Bank, N.A. GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adopt Resolution No. 4377 designating a change of authorized signatories for the District’s bank accounts and authorize the new General Manager to enter into banking contracts with MUFG Union Bank, N.A. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A PURPOSE: To make a change to the authorized signatories on the District’s bank accounts by replacing retiring General Manager, Mark Watton, with the new General Manager, Jose Martinez. This change will pass signatory and contract authority for the District’s banking services with MUFG Union Bank, N.A. on to the new General Manager. BACKGROUND: The Otay Water District (District) currently utilizes MUFG Union Bank, N.A for its daily banking and treasury needs. According to the District’s Code of Ordinances, Chapter 3, Section 3, paragraph 3.01, “Only such person or persons authorized by the Board may sign checks to withdraw funds from any of such depositories.” AGENDA ITEM 12a Additionally, the existing agreement with MUFG Union Bank, N.A and their policy require that the Board of Directors (Board) adopt a resolution granting signature and contracting authority to its General Manager in order to facilitate our daily banking activities. On February 5, 2020, the Board selected Jose Martinez to succeed retiring General Manager, Mark Watton as the new General Manager of the District. In order to continue the existing banking relationship and activities with Union Bank, the District is required to adopt a resolution designating a change in signature authority from Mark Watton, retiring General Manager to the new General Manager, Jose Martinez and to authorize the new General Manager to enter into contracts with MUFG Union Bank N.A. The District currently has bank accounts with MUFG Union Bank, N.A. for the District’s checking, payroll, health flexible spending, money market, custody, and trust accounts. Resolution language was provided by MUFG Union Bank, N.A. as acceptable in order to continue our banking relationship. FISCAL IMPACT: Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer No fiscal impact as this item is designating signature authority and contracting authority to the new General Manager only. STRATEGIC GOAL: Demonstrate financial health through formalized policies, prudent investing, and efficient operations. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: A) Committee Action B) Resolution No. 4377 C) Union Bank Public Entity Resolution Template ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4377 Designating a Change of Authorized Signatories for the District’s Bank Accounts and Authorize the New General Manager to Enter Into Banking Contracts with MUFG Union Bank, N.A. COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance and Administration Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on February 18, 2020 and the following comments were made: •Staff is requesting that the Board adopt Resolution No. 4377 designating a change of authorized signatories for the District’sbank accounts and authorize the new General Manager to enter intobanking contracts with MUFG Union Bank, N.A. •Staff presented information from the staff report. •In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicatedthat the District has a very good relationship with Union Bank and its customer relations manager. The District has been ableto get responses fairly quickly to its questions and requests. •It was discussed this action is simply to change the signatory onthe District’s bank accounts and transfer existing authorizations from the retiring General Manager to the new General Manager. Upon completion of the discussion, the Committee supported presentation of this item on the consent calendar. RESOLUTION NO. 4377 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT DESIGNATING A CHANGE OF AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES FOR THE DISTRICT’S CHECKING AND PAYROLL ACCOUNTS WITH MUFG UNION BANK WHEREAS, California Government Code 53679 stipulates that money not under control of the treasurer but belonging to a local agency and under the control of any of its officers or employees other than the treasurer may deposit funds as active deposits or inactive deposits. WHEREAS, for deposits in excess of the amount insured under any federal law, a contract in accordance with Section 53649 is required. WHEREAS, Otay Water District (“District”) currently has bank accounts with MUFG Union Bank (“Union Bank”) for the District’s checking and payroll accounts District’s checking, payroll, health flexible spending, money market, custody and trust accounts (collectively “Bank Accounts”); and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the District desires to change the signatories on said Bank Accounts. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the District desires to authorize the General Manager to enter into any contract with Union Bank relating to any deposit, which in the General Manager’s judgment is to the public advantage including, but not limited to the following: - Establishing bank accounts and services. - Signing, or changing in writing, agreements with the Bank regarding the District's bank deposit relationship. - Specifying in writing to the Bank the individuals who are authorized in the name of and on behalf of the District to: o Withdraw funds from any of the District's banking accounts on the District's checks or orders. o Endorse and deliver to the Bank, for any purposes, and in any amount, negotiable or non-negotiable items of any kind, and owned by, or held by, or payable to the District. o Send, review, and/or authorize wire and electronic transfers of funds from District accounts. o Otherwise access the District's deposit accounts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District as follows: 1. That Mark Watton, General Manager, be removed as an authorized designated signatory for each of the District’s accounts with Union Bank and from having contracting authority with Union Bank on behalf of the District. 2.That Jose Martinez, General Manager, be added as an authorized designated signatory for each of the District’s accounts with Union Bank and have contracting authority with Union Bank on behalf of the District. BE IT RESOLVED FURTHER, that this authority shall remain in effect until the Bank receives written notice of revocation at the Union Bank Office where the District's banking relationship is maintained. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District at a regular meeting, held this 11th day of March, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ________________________________ President Attest: _______________________ District Secretary Distribution: ORIGINAL – Office Copy DUPLICATE – CCSU TRIPLICATE – Customer FORM 00219 (11/98) PUBLIC ENTITY RESOLUTION California Government Code 53679 stipulates that money not under control of the treasurer but belonging to a local agency and under the control of any of its officers or employees other than the treasurer may deposit funds as active deposits or inactive deposits. For deposits in excess of the amount insured under any federal law, a contract in accordance with Section 53649 is required. It is resolved that the officer now or subsequently holding the position of General Manager (Title) OTAY WATER DISTRICT (Public Entity) is authorized by the Governing Board under California Government Code 53649 to enter into any contract with Union Bank, N.A. relating to any deposit, which in his or her judgment is to the public advantage. Contracting requirements could include: ▪Establish bank accounts and services. ▪Sign, or change in writing, agreements with the Bank regarding the Public Entity's bank deposit relationship. ▪Specify in writing to the Bank the individuals who are authorized in the name of and on behalf of the Public Entity to: ▪Withdraw funds from any of the Public Entity's banking accounts on the Public Entity's checks or orders. ▪Endorse and deliver to the Bank, for any purposes, and in any amount, negotiable or non-negotiable items of any kind, and owned by, or held by, or payable to the Public Entity. ▪Send, review, and/or authorize wire and electronic transfers of funds from the Public Entity accounts. Such authority may be exercised by such authorized individual acting alone, regardless of any multiple signature requirements otherwise applicable to the accounts. ▪Otherwise access the Public Entity's deposit accounts. This authority has been granted by the Governing Board and shall remain in effect until the Bank receives written notice of revocation at the Office where the Public Entity's banking relationship is maintained. I, _________________________________, Clerk/Secretary to the Governing Board of the above referenced Public Entity, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution passed by the Governing Board on _______________________(Month and date) of _____________ (Year), and the resolution has not been revoked or amended. CLERK/SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNING BOARD SIGNATURE DATE X CERTIFICATION STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING:Regular Board MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 SUBMITTED BY:Stephen Beppler Senior Civil Engineer PROJECT: S2070-001103 DIV. NO.:5 APPROVED BY: Bob Kennedy, Engineering Manager Dan Martin, Assistant Chief of Engineering Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT:Approval to Increase the CIP S2070 Budget in an Amount of $65,000 and Award of a Construction Contract to Kay Construction for the Hidden Mountain Sewer Pump Station Wet Well Renovation Project GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board): 1.Approve to increase the CIP S2070 budget by $65,000 (from$150,000 to $215,000);2.Award a construction contract to Kay Construction and authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with KayConstruction for the Hidden Mountain Sewer Pump Station (Hidden Mt SPS) Wet Well Renovation Project (CIP S2070) in an amountnot-to-exceed $142,940.00 (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To increase the overall CIP S2070 budget in the amount of $65,000 (from $150,000 to $215,000) and to obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a construction contract with Kay AGENDA ITEM 12b 2 Construction for the Hidden Mt SPS Wet Well Renovation Project (Project) in an amount not-to-exceed $142,940.00. ANALYSIS: The District provides sanitary sewer collection service in the Jamacha drainage basin located in the northern area of the District. The Project involves improvements at the Hidden Mt SPS to eliminate septic conditions, reduce vactor truck cleaning of the wet wells at the Station, and provide access to the sanitary sewer to allow for video inspection. The construction contract’s scope of work at the Station generally consists of installing concrete fill in two (2) of the wet wells with forming a channel through them to remove areas of settlement away from the pump suctions, construction of a replacement sewer line between wet wells, furnishing and installing of a new sewer manhole on the sewer main west of the Station, pavement and surface restoration, testing, inspection, and all other associated work and appurtenances as required by the Contract Documents. The Project was advertised for bid on December 16, 2019 using BidSync, an online bid solicitation website. The Project was also advertised in the Daily Transcript. Additionally, notifications with a link to the BidSync website were emailed directly to twenty-eight (28) contractors that have previously worked for the District. This is in addition to the notifications provided by BidSync to contractors in the Southern California area, with several hundred identified for the project classifications checked for this Project. BidSync provided electronic distribution of the Bid Documents, including specifications, plans, and addenda. One (1) addendum was posted to BidSync to distribute the Pre-Bid Meeting minutes and address questions and clarifications to the contract documents during the bidding period. Bids were publicly opened on January 23, 2020, with the following result: CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID AMOUNT 1 Kay Construction, Santee, CA $142,940.00 2 DB Pipeline, Inc., Encinitas, CA $147,000.00 3 Fordyce Construction, Santee, CA $147,050.00 The Engineer’s Estimate is $120,000. A review of the bids was performed by District staff for conformance with the contract requirements and determined that Kay Construction was a responsive and responsible bidder. Kay Construction holds a Class A, General Engineering, Contractor’s License in the State of California, which meets the contract document’s requirements, and is 3 valid through April 30, 2021. The reference checks indicated a good to excellent performance record on similar projects. An internet background search of the company was performed and revealed no outstanding issues with this company. Kay Construction’s Project Manager has previously worked for the District and has recently performed similar work for Helix Water District, Imperial County, and the City of El Cajon and their performance was good. Staff verified that the bid bond provided by Kay Construction is valid. Staff will also verify that Kay Construction’s Performance Bond and Labor and Materials Bond are valid prior to execution of the contract. The Capital Improvement Program budget approved by the Board on June 5, 2019 for the Hidden Mt SPS Wet Well Renovation is $150,000. Approximately $37,000 has been expended to date on the planning and design phases of the Project, as shown in Attachment B of this staff report. With the award of the construction contract, staff has estimated that the Project budget of $150,000 for CIP S2070 is expected to be exceeded by $65,000. The approved Project budget of $215,000 for CIP S2070 will support the completion of the Project. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP S2070, as approved in the FY 2020 budget, is $150,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast including this contract, are $214,738.00. See Attachment B for budget detail. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that with a budget increase of $65,000, CIP S2070 will be completed within the new budget amount of $215,000. The Finance Department has determined that, under the current rate model, 100% of the funding for CIP S2070 is available from the Betterment Fund. GRANTS/LOANS: Engineering staff researched and explored grants and loans and found none available for this Project. 4 STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsive manner” and the District’s Vision, “To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. SB/BK/DM:mlw P:\WORKING\CIP S2070 Hidden Mountain Sewer Pump Station Wet Well Renovation\Staff Reports\BD 03-04-20 Staff Report Hidden Mt SPS Wet Well Award Construction Project.Docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – S2070 Budget Detail Exhibit A – Location Map ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2070-001103 Approval to Increase the CIP S2070 Budget in an Amount of $65,000 and Award of a Construction Contract to Kay Construction for the Hidden Mountain Sewer Pump Station Wet Well Renovation Project COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on February 19, 2020 and the following comments were made: •Staff recommended that the Board approve an increase to the CIPS2070 budget by $65,000 (from $150,000 to $215,000) and award aconstruction contract to Kay Construction for the Hidden MountainSewer Pump Station (Hidden Mt SPS) Wet Well Renovation Project (CIP S2070) in an amount not-to-exceed $142,940.00. •Staff shared that the existing Hidden Mt SPS constructed in 1978,consists of a wet well with pump suctions and two additional wetwells built in 2004, providing emergency storage volume. Additional details of the project were discussed and are providedon page 2 of the staff report. •It was noted that the project modifications will improve thesewage turnover in the station, reduce odors, and retain emergency storage provision. •Staff discussed the solicitation process and indicated that the District received three (3) bids and that each bid amount werewithin 3% of each other. •With the current bidding climate situation, the Committeeinquired about staff’s efforts to establishing a more accurate Engineer’s Estimate for projects. It was discussed that staffreviews project costs throughout the design stages and prior toadvertising for bids, not relying upon dated estimates. Staff isdeveloping a bidding trend line to update all CIP projects duringthe annual budget process and for use in the Cap Fee Study. A Preliminary Budget will be presented to the board in May 2020. •In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated thatthe CIP Budget is reevaluated annually. Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation of this item to the full board on the consent calendar. ATTACHMENT B – S2070 Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2070-001103 Approval to Increase the CIP S2070 Budget in an Amount of $65,000 and Award of a Construction Contract to Kay Construction for the Hidden Mountain Sewer Pump Station Wet Well Renovation Project Bud 1/24/2020 Budget 215,000 Planning Regulatory Agency Fees $50 $50 $0 $50 Standard Salaries $2,590 $2,590 $0 $2,590 Total Planning $2,640 $2,640 $0 $2,640 Design Consultant Contracts $4,840 $4,840 $0 $4,840 PSOMAS $310 $310 $0 $310 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Standard Salaries $33,000 $29,635 $0 $33,000 Total Design $38,150 $34,785 $0 $38,150 Construction Consultant Contracts $10,000 $0 $10,000 $10,000 Construction Management Construction Contract $142,940 $0 $142,940 $142,940 KAY CONSTRUCTION $11,008 $0 $11,008 $11,008 Contingency @ 7.7% of Construction Contract Standard Salaries $10,000 $0 $10,000 $10,000 Total Construction $173,948 $0 $173,948 $173,948 Grand Total $214,738 $37,425 $173,948 $214,738 Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost Vendor/Comments S2070 - Hidden Mountain SPS Wet Well Renovation Project Budget Details OTAY WATER DISTRICTHIDDEN MOUNTAIN SEWER PUMP STATION WET WELL RENOVATIONLOCATION MAP CIP S2070F P:\ W O R K I N G \ C I P S 2 0 7 0 H i d d e n M o u n t a i n S e w e r P u m p S t a t i o n W e t W e l l R e n o v a t i o n \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ E x h i b i t A - S t a f f R e p o r t . m x d 0 650325 Feet !\ VICINITY MAP DIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ÃÅ54 PROJECT SITE ÃÅ125 ÃÅ94 ÃÅ905 §¨¦805 FNTS PROJECT SITE HIDD E N M O U N T A I N JA M A C H A R D HIDDEN MESA RD HIDDE N SPRINGS DR DR CH A S E A V E EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING:Regular Board MEETING DATE:March 11, 2020 SUBMITTED BY:Kevin Cameron Senior Civil Engineer PROJECT: P2608-001103 P2609-001103 P2655-001103 DIV. NO.3 APPROVED BY: Bob Kennedy, Engineering Manager Dan Martin, Assistant Chief of Engineering Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT:Approval to Increase the CIP P2609 Budget in an Amount of $500,000, and Award a Construction Contract to LB Civil Construction, Inc. for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement Project – 2019 (CIP P2608, P2609, P2655) GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board): 1.Approve an increase to the CIP P2609 budget by $500,000 (from $800,000 to $1,300,000); 2.Award a Construction Contract to LB Civil Construction, Inc. (LB Civil) and authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with LB Civil for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement Project – 2019 (CIP P2608, P2609, P2655) in an amount not-to-exceed $1,345,315.00 (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To increase the CIP P2609 budget in an amount of $500,000 and to obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a AGENDA ITEM 12c 2 construction contract with LB Civil for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement Project - 2019 (CIP P2608, P2609, P2655) in an amount not-to-exceed $1,345,315.00. ANALYSIS: Dictionary Hill, located in Spring Valley just north of Sweetwater Reservoir, is a neighborhood with beautiful views, steep roads and deep canyons. The District maintains potable water pipelines in the area, most of which were constructed in the late 1950’s – 1960’s, making it the oldest service area in the District. The Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement Project - 2019 (Project) combines three (3) CIPs into a larger bid package in order to attract more contractors to bid. The scope of work generally consists of constructing approximately 1,250 linear feet of 8-inch Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) water line and 60 linear feet of 12-inch PVC water line, including appurtenances, rehabilitation of services, surface restoration, traffic control, and all testing and inspection as required by the Contract Documents. The three (3) CIPs are described below: P2608 - PL - 8-inch, 850 Zone, Coronado Ave, Chestnut/Apple The existing 6-inch asbestos-cement (AC) pipeline in Coronado Avenue is connected to the 640 Pressure Zone. This CIP will replace 1,300 linear feet of this pipeline with a new 8-inch PVC pipeline. The new pipeline will be connected to the higher 850 Pressure Zone to increase the pressure to residents at the high point of the street. This will also improve fire flow for the area. Also, as part of the CIP, approximately 286 feet of new 8-inch PVC pipe will be constructed in Birch Street to connect the new pipeline to the 850 Pressure Zone. This CIP was scheduled to be constructed during Fiscal Year 2021, however, during the planning stage in early 2019, the County of San Diego (County) repaved Coronado Avenue. Per County regulations, there is a three (3) year no-cut policy on new asphalt concrete pavement. The County has stated that they intend to repave Birch in the next few years. In order to coordinate this work with the County’s paving work, the District will split this CIP into two (2) Phases. This Phase will install the Birch Street portion (286 feet of 8-inch PVC) as part of this Project. The Coronado Avenue portion will be constructed after the paving moratorium has expired. 3 P2609 - PL - 8-inch, 1004 Zone, Eucalyptus St, Coronado/Date/La Mesa This CIP will abandon the existing 6-inch pipeline located within a 10 foot side yard easement that is inaccessible due to the steep slopes and dwellings in close proximity to the easement. The pipeline was built in 1965 and has experienced leaks. In order to abandon the problematic pipeline, the surrounding pipelines, which are 4-inch and 6-inch, will be upsized to maintain fire flow in the immediate area. The approximate total length of pipeline to be replaced is 1,600 linear feet. This CIP also had to be split into two (2) Phases to coordinate with the County’s paving schedule. The Project will replace 955 feet of 4-inch and 6-inch AC pipe with new 8-inch PVC pipe. This will include the pipelines in Coronado Avenue and Date Street. The nearby residents will be served through a temporary high-line during the construction. The La Mesa Avenue portion of the CIP was repaved in the summer of 2019 and is currently under the County’s three (3) year moratorium. This portion will be completed once the paving moratorium has eclipsed. P2655 – La Presa Pipeline Improvements This CIP will replace various 6-inch AC pipes and valves around the southwestern area of Dictionary Hill. Replacing these pipelines, installed circa 1959, with an 8-inch PVC pipeline will improve the fire flow in the area. This CIP also includes relocating an existing 12-inch AC pipe for the County’s replacement storm drain crossing in Kempton Street, near the Kempton Street Elementary School. The County requested the District to fast track the pipeline relocation. The Project will replace 60 feet of 12-inch AC pipe with new 12-inch PVC pipe at a lower elevation. The lowering is required to accommodate the County’s replacement of the existing storm drain culvert. The County has prior rights, therefore, the District will be responsible for the waterline relocation cost. On December 19, 2019, the Project was formally advertised for bid using BidSync, an online bid solicitation website. The Project was also advertised in the Daily Transcript and the District’s website. BidSync provided electronic distribution of the Bid Documents, including specifications, plans, and addenda. A Pre-Bid Meeting was held on January 16, 2020, which was attended by one (1) general contractor. Two (2) addenda were sent out to all bidders and plan houses to address questions and clarifications to the contract documents during the bidding period. 4 Bids were publicly opened on January 28, 2020, with the following results: CONTRACTOR SUBMITTED AMOUNT CORRECTED BID AMOUNT 1 LB Civil Construction, Inc. (Escondido, CA) $1,345,315.00 2 Ortiz Corporation (National City, CA) $1,385,048.00 $1,384,548.00 3 Capriati Construction Corporation, Inc. (Henderson, NV) $1,867,528.00 The Engineer’s Estimate is $1,426,000. Ortiz Corporation’s bid contained a number of minor discrepancies, which resulted in a corrected bid amount $500.00 less, as shown in the table above. A fourth bid was received after the bid deadline from Burtech Pipeline, Inc. (Encinitas, CA). In accordance with contract documents, Section 00030 – Invitation to Bid, which states: “…late bids will not be considered regardless of postmark or reason. Late bids will be returned to the bidder unopened.” Therefore, the bid was returned unopened to the Burtech representative. A review of the bids was performed by District staff for conformance with the contract requirements and determined that LB Civil was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. LB Civil holds a Class A, General Engineering, Contractor’s License in the State of California, which meets the contract document’s requirements, and is valid through December 31, 2020. The reference checks indicated a very good to excellent performance record on similar projects. An internet background search of the company was performed and revealed no outstanding issues. Staff verified that the bid bond provided by LB Civil is valid. Staff will also verify that LB Civil’s Performance Bond and Labor and Materials Bond are valid prior to execution of the contract. The CIP budget for P2609 was set in March 2019 at $800,000, and only preliminary planning had occurred at that point. A preliminary design report (PDR) was to be completed during the summer to better define the scope of work. Typically, after the PDR is completed, the 5 CIP budget is reevaluated to reflect the recommendations and scope outlined in the PDR. However, in this case, CIP P2609 was fast tracked due to the County’s request. The County was planning to repave a large portion of Dictionary Hill, and through a cooperative effort with District staff, the County agreed to delay repaving certain areas within CIP P2609. The planning and design efforts, done by Hazen & Sawyer, were streamlined to meet the shortened timeline. During the design, the District incorporated lessons learned during the recently completed construction of the Hillsdale Road Pipeline as well as Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Pipeline Replacement Projects. The Project scope was refined and adjustments for bidding climate of the local economy were incorporated. Staff discussed the individual bid item costs with the District’s design consultant to get current bid prices. This resulted in an increase in the engineer’s cost opinion to $796,300 for construction costs, and in the CIP budget amount of $1,300,000. CIP P2608 and P2609 both have Phase II improvements that will be implemented after the County’s 3–year moratorium has expired (approximate timing is FY 2023). Both CIPs will require budget increases to complete the work as previously described. These increases will be addressed as part of the FY 2021 budget cycle, and are briefly outlined below: During the FY 2021 Budget Process, CIP P2608 will require a budget increase of $1,000,000 to an overall budget of $1,820,000, and CIP P2609 will require a budget increase of $800,000 to an overall budget of $2,100,000, which includes the budget increase requested in this staff report. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP P2608, as approved in the FY 2020 budget, is $820,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, for Phase I are $364,261. See Attachment B-1 for the budget detail. An increase to the CIP Budget for Phase II will be added through the FY 2021 Budget Process. The anticipated total budget for FY 2021 will be $1,820,000. The total budget for CIP P2609, as approved in the FY 2020 budget, is $800,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, for Phase I are $1,294,953. The Project Manager anticipates that with a budget increase of $500,000, the CIP P2609 portion of the Project will be completed within the new budget amount of $1,300,000. See Attachment B-2 for the budget detail. An increase to the CIP Budget for Phase II will be added through the FY 6 2021 Budget Process. The anticipated total budget for FY 2021 will be $2,100,000. The total budget for CIP P2655, as approved in the FY 2020 budget, is $1,750,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, for Phase I are $245,572. At this time, the budget is sufficient to complete both Phase I and Phase II of the CIP. See Attachment B-3 for the budget detail. Based on a review of the financial budgets, the Project Manager anticipates that the budgets for CIP P2608 and CIP P2655 are sufficient to support those portions of the Project. Reviewing the financial budget for CIP P2609, the Project Manager anticipates that with a budget increase of $500,000, the CIP P2609 portion of the Project will be completed within the new budget amount of $1,300,000. The Finance Department has determined that, under the current rate model, 100% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund for all three CIPs. GRANTS/LOANS: Engineering staff researched and explored grants and loans and found none available for this Project. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsible manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices." LEGAL IMPACT: None. KC/BK:mlw OneDrive\Otay Water District\ENG CIP - Documents\P2608 & P2609 - PL's 8-inch 850 & 1004 Zone, Coronado & Eucalyptus Replacement\Staff Reports\3-11-20-Staff Report-Dictionary Hill Waterline Replacement-2019-kc- bk.docx 7 Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B-1 – Budget Detail for CIP P2608 Attachment B-2 – Budget Detail for CIP P2609 Attachment B-3 – Budget Detail for CIP P2655 Exhibit A – Location Map ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2608-001103 P2609-001103 P2655-001103 Approval to Increase the CIP P2609 Budget in an Amount of $500,000, and Award a Construction Contract to LB Civil Construction, Inc. for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement Project – 2019 (CIP P2608, P2609, P2655) COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on February 19, 2020 and the following comments were made: •Staff recommended that the Board Approve an increase to the CIP P2609 budget by $500,000 (from $800,000 to $1,300,000) and award a Construction Contract to LB Civil Construction, Inc. (LB Civil) for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement Project – 2019 (CIP P2608, P2609, P2655) in an amount not-to- exceed $1,345,315.00. •It was noted in the staff report that this project combines three (3) CIPs into a larger bid package in order to attract more contractors to bid. •Staff provided a background of the three CIPs and discussed the soliciting process and its results. Pages 2 through 4 of the staff report provides details of this discussion. •Staff indicated that the work within the CIPs was portioned into phases to avoid the County’s 3-year paving moratorium. Through a cooperative effort with District staff, the County agreed to delay repaving certain areas within the CIPs so the District could complete portions of the work. The project was accelerated to meet the County’s repaving window, as well as to fill for other projects that were delayed earlier in the fiscal year. •Page 4 of the staff report provides details as to why an increase for this project is required. •The Committee requested that staff provide additional information on the CIPs’ budgets and estimates. Staff provided the following information: CIP P2608 was created in Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 with an initial budget of $350,000. The budget was established to evaluate low pressures in the area through hydraulic analysis and make recommendations to alleviate the problem. During the FY 2019 budget process, the budget was increased to $450,000 in response to the increased bid climate, but the entire scope of the project had yet to be defined. In FY 2020, the project budget was increased to $820,000 using $62/inch/foot plus ancillary costs as a result of the bid prices received for similar pipeline replacement projects. During FY 2020, the planning and design phases were accelerated to meet the County’s repaving schedule and to reallocate staff resources from construction projects that had bids rejected earlier in the fiscal year. An Engineer’s Estimate was not created until the PDR stage, which occurred in FY 2020. The shorted project design timeframe required Staff to make the CIP budget adjustment at the time of award to complete Phase 1, and a budget increase during the FY 2021 budget process to complete Phase 2. The total anticipated cost of Phase 1 & 2 is $1,800,000. Staff will continue to evaluate the CIP. CIP P2609 was created in FY 2018 with an initial budget of $400,000. The budget was established to abandon an inaccessible pipeline that was nearing the end of its useful life and upsize nearby pipelines to improve fire flow. During the FY 2019 budget process, the budget was increased to $450,000 in response to the increased bid climate, but as with P2608, the entire scope of the project had yet to be defined. In FY 2020, the project budget was increased to $800,000 using $62/inch/foot plus ancillary costs as a result of recent bid prices received. In FY 2020, the CIP was combined with P2608 to create a larger project and the schedule was accelerated. The project budget will be increased during the FY 2021 budget process in order to complete phase 2. The total anticipated cost of Phase 1 & 2 is $2,100,000. Staff will continue to evaluate the CIP. CIP P2655 was created in FY 2020, and at this time a budget adjustment is not required. Staff will continue to evaluate this CIP. •Staff shared that in Fiscal Year 2018, the Vista Vereda Project (CIP P2574) received bids for 8-inch PCV pipe at a cost of $160 per linear foot. The Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement Project – 2019 bids are at $280 per linear foot for 8-inch PVC pipe. •The Committee commented that it is good practice to know the project’s FY 2021 budget increase ahead of time and thanked staff for the information. •To keep the District up-to-date with its public outreach guidelines, the Committee suggested that it would be a good idea to follow this project in terms of staff’s efforts to contact, provide information, and distribute information to homeowners. In addition, the Committee would like staff to monitor any impacts and feedback from homeowners as the project progresses, as well as feedback of residents’ overall satisfaction of the project once it is completed. Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation of this item to the full board as a Consent Item. ATTACHMENT B-1 – Budget Detail for CIP P2608 SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2608-001103 P2609-001103 P2655-001103 Approval to Increase the CIP P2609 Budget in an Amount of $500,000, and Award a Construction Contract to LB Civil Construction, Inc. for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement – 2019 Project (CIPs P2608, P2609, P2655) 1/30/2020 Budget 820,000 Planning Standard Salaries 10,000 9,724 276 10,000 Service Contracts -- -- Total Planning 10,000 9,724 276 10,000 Design Standard Salaries 35,000 26,453 8,547 35,000 Service Contracts 13 13 -13 DAILY JOURNAL CORP 4,280 4,280 -4,280 NINYO & MOORE 14,484 11,933 2,551 14,484 HAZEN & SAWYER Regulatory Agency Fees 58 58 -58 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Total Design 53,835 42,737 11,098 53,835 Construction Standard Salaries 40,000 40,000 40,000 Construction Contract 222,310 - 222,310 222,310 LB CIVIL CONSTRUCTION Service Contracts 20,000 - 20,000 20,000 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,000 - 1,000 1,000 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS 2,500 - 2,500 2,500 LAB TESTING Regulatory Agency Fees 3,500 54 3,446 3,500 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO-INSPECTION Project Contingency 11,116 - 11,116 11,116 5% CONTINGENCY Total Construction 300,426 54 300,372 300,426 Grand Total 364,261 52,515 311,746 364,261 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District P2608 - PL 8" 850PZ Coronado Ave Chestnut/Apple Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost ATTACHMENT B-2 – Budget Detail for CIP P2609 SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2608-001103 P2609-001103 P2655-001103 Approval to Increase the CIP P2609 Budget in an Amount of $500,000, and Award a Construction Contract to LB Civil Construction, Inc. for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement - 2019 Project (CIPs P2608, P2609, P2655) 1/28/2020 Budget 800,000 INCREASE to 1,300,000 Planning Standard Salaries 10,000 9,483 517 10,000 Service Contracts 33 33 -33 PETTY CASH Total Planning 10,033 9,516 517 10,033 Design Standard Salaries 40,000 38,070 1,930 40,000 Service Contracts 13 13 -13 DAILY JOURNAL CORP 10,700 10,700 -10,700 NINYO & MOORE 90,066 58,140 31,926 90,066 HAZEN & SAWYER Regulatory Agency Fees 316 316 -316 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Total Design 141,095 107,239 33,856 141,095 Construction Standard Salaries 90,000 494 89,506 90,000 Construction Contract 963,905 - 963,905 963,905 LB CIVIL CONSTRUCTION Service Contracts 30,000 - 30,000 30,000 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 3,225 - 3,225 3,225 HAZEN SAWYER 1,000 - 1,000 1,000 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS 2,500 - 2,500 2,500 LAB TESTING Regulatory Agency Fees 5,000 308 4,692 5,000 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO-INSPECTION Project Contingency 48,195 - 48,195 48,195 5% CONTINGENCY Total Construction 1,143,825 802 1,143,023 1,143,825 Grand Total 1,294,953 117,557 1,177,396 1,294,953 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District P2609 - PL 8" 1004PZ Eucalyptus St Coronado/Date Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost ATTACHMENT B-3 – Budget Detail for CIP P2655 SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2608-001103 P2609-001103 P2655-001103 Approval to Increase the CIP P2609 Budget in an Amount of $500,000, and Award a Construction Contract to LB Civil Construction, Inc. for the Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement – 2019 Project (CIPs P2608, P2609, P2655) 1/30/2020 Budget 1,750,000 Standard Salaries 50,000 21,426 28,574 50,000 Construction Contract 159,100 - 159,100 159,100 LB CIVIL CONSTRUCTION Service Contracts 20,000 - 20,000 20,000 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,000 - 1,000 1,000 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS 2,500 - 2,500 2,500 LAB TESTING Regulatory Agency Fees 5,000 119 4,881 5,000 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO-INSPECTION 17 17 -17 PETTY CASH Project Contingency 7,955 - 7,955 7,955 5% CONTINGENCY Grand Total 245,572 21,562 224,010 245,572 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District P2655-001000 - La Presa Pipeline Improvements Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost OTAY WATER DISTRICTDICTIONARY HILL WATER LINE REPLACEMENT - 2019LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A CIP P2608, P2609 & P2655F C:\OneDrive\Otay Water District\ENG CIP - Documents\P2608 & P2609 - PL's 8-inch 850 & 1004 Zone, Coronado & Eucalyptus Replacement\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\P2608, P2609, P2655 Location Map, Feb 2020.mxd P265512" Water MainRelocation onKempton St P2608New 8" Water Mainon Birch St P2609New 8" Water Main onCoronado Av and Date St Jamacha Blvd Apple St Kempton St Jamacha Rd Saint George St Grand Ave Piedmont St San Francisco St Cuyamaca Ave Coronado Ave San Miguel Ave Chestnut St Birch St G ala p a g o St San Bernardino Ave La Mesa Ave Date St Eucalyptus St Amys St Grand Ave VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITES NTSDIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ÃÅ54 !\ ÃÅ125 ÃÅ94 ÃÅ905 §¨¦805 F 0 1,500750 Feet LEGEND New Water Main STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Jose Martinez, General Manager W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO. APPROVED BY: Susan Cruz, District Secretary Jose Martinez, General Manager SUBJECT: Board of Directors 2020 Calendar of Meetings GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: At the request of the Board, the attached Board of Director’s meeting calendar for 2020 is being presented for discussion. PURPOSE: This staff report is being presented to provide the Board the opportunity to review the 2020 Board of Director’s meeting calendar and amend the schedules as needed. COMMITTEE ACTION: N/A ANALYSIS: The Board requested that this item be presented at each meeting so they may have an opportunity to review the Board meeting calendar schedule and amend it as needed. STRATEGIC GOAL: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: None. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachment: Calendars of Meeting for 2020 G:\UserData\DistSec\WINWORD\STAFRPTS\Board Meeting Calendar 03-11-20.doc AGENDA ITEM 13a Board of Directors, Workshops and Committee Meetings 2020 Regular Board Meetings: Special Board or Committee Meetings (3rd Wednesday of Each Month or as Noted) January 8, 2020 February 5, 2020 March 11, 2020 April 1, 2020 May 13, 2020 June 3, 2020 July 1, 2020 August 5, 2020 September 2, 2020 October 7, 2020 November 4, 2020 December 2, 2020 January 22, 2020 February 19, 2020 March 18, 2020 April 22, 2020 May 20, 2020 June 17, 2020 July 22, 2020 August 19, 2020 September 23, 2020 October 21, 2020 November 18, 2020 December 16, 2020 SPECIAL BOARD MEETINGS / BOARD WORKSHOPS: April 27, 2020 at 3:00 p.m.: Special Board Meeting/Workshop 1: Key Budget Assumptions STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Assistant Chief of Engineering PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item – Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 Capital Improvement Program Report GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To update the Board about the status of all CIP project expenditures and to highlight significant issues, progress, and milestones on major projects. ANALYSIS: To keep up with growth and to meet our ratepayers' expectations to adequately deliver safe, reliable, cost-effective, and quality water, each year the District staff prepares a Six-Year CIP Plan that identifies the District’s infrastructure needs. The CIP is comprised of four categories consisting of backbone capital facilities, replacement/renewal projects, capital purchases, and developer's reimbursement projects. The Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 update is intended to provide a detailed analysis of progress in completing these projects within the allotted time and budget of $17.22 million. Expenditures through the AGENDA ITEM 14a 2 Second Quarter totaled approximately $7.38 million. Approximately 43% of the Fiscal Year 2020 expenditure budget was spent (see Attachment B). FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer No fiscal impact as this is an informational item only. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsible manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices." LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:jf P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2020\Q2\Staff Report\BD 03-11-20 Staff Report Second Quarter FY 2020 CIP Report (DM-RP).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B - Fiscal Year 2020 Second Quarter CIP Expenditure Report Attachment C – Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: VARIOUS Informational Item – Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 Capital Improvement Program Report COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on February 19, 2020, and the following comments were made: • Staff indicated that the District’s FY 2020 CIP budget consists of 113 projects that total $17.2 million and is divided into four categories: o Capital Facilities= $5.2 million o Replacement/Renewal= $11.3 million o Capital Purchases= $.7 million o Developer Reimbursement= $2.0 thousand • Staff reviewed the PowerPoint presentation with the Committee and indicated that the expenditures through the second quarter of FY 2020 totaled $7.4 million, which is approximately 43% of the District’s fiscal year budget. Staff noted that expenditures were high earlier in the fiscal year due to multi- year projects that have been in progress. • The PowerPoint presentation included the following: o Total Life-to-Date Expenditures o CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures o Major CIP Projects that have been completed, are in design or are in construction o A review of CIP Projects in Construction o Construction Contract Status of projects, contract amount with allowances, net change orders, and percent of project completion o Consultant Contract Status of contract amounts, approved payments to date, change orders, dates when contracts were signed and the end date of contracts • Staff stated that during the second quarter of FY 2020 the rate for Change Orders with Allowance Credit equaled to 1.8%. • The Committee asked for an update on the RWCWRF Filtered Water Storage Tank Improvements (CIP R2120). Staff stated that the bids for this project were rejected at the November 6, 2019 board meeting because the District only received two bids. One bid was nonresponsive and the other was twice as high per square foot as previous contracts. Staff plans to combine this project with a larger project and solicit bids this summer. • Staff discussed that the FY 2020 total CIP expenditures are forecast to be approximately 80% of the FY 2020 budget. It was noted that multi-year projects that were in construction during FY 2019 and FY 2020 progressed faster than anticipated in FY 2019 resulting in approximately seven percent of the FY 2020 budget being expended in FY 2019. • At the request of the Committee, subsequent to the committee meeting, staff updated the Fiscal Year 2020 Second Quarter CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures slide to include a trend line that forecasts expenditures for the remainder of FY 2020 (see below – Q2 FY 2020 Forecast trend line). FY 2020 SECOND QUARTER - CIP BUDGET FORECAST vs. EXPENDITURES Following the discussion, the committee supported presentation to the full board as an informational item. $13,700,000 FISCAL YEAR 2020 2ND QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 12/31/2019)($000) ATTACHMENT B 2020 12/31/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2020 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments CAPITAL FACILITY PROJECTS - P2040 Res - 1655-1 Reservoir 0.5 MG Cameron 30$ 43$ (13)$ 143%4,500$ 640$ 3,860$ 14% The remaining budget will be used for environmental work. Legal review of project is in progress. P2405 PL - 624/340 PRS, Paseo Ranchero and Otay Valley Road Cameron 5 - 5 0%1,500 - 1,500 0% This project is tied to P2553 and is driven by the City of Chula Vista. Construction is scheduled for FY 2022. P2451 Otay Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection System Kennedy 10 - 10 0%3,975 3,823 152 96% EIR/EIS complete and Presidential permit issued. Continue meetings with DDW and AdR. P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations Marchioro 270 8 262 3%3,000 1,921 1,079 64% Schedule driven by Caltrans. Caltrans issued construction contract notice to proceed Q1 FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated for Q2 FY 2022. P2460 I.D. 7 Trestle and Pipeline Demolition Beppler 80 3 77 4%600 13 587 2% Environmental surveys proposed to be performed in spring of FY 2020; with demolition proposed for FY 2022. P2485 SCADA - Infrastructure and Communications Replacement Kerr 60 86 (26) 143%2,428 2,220 208 91% Advanced installation of additional security devices during this period. P2494 Multiple Species Conservation Plan Coburn-Boyd 30 - 30 0%1,000 928 72 93% It is anticipated that expenditures will occur in the second half of the fiscal year. P2516 PL - 12-Inch, 640 Zone, Jamacha Road - Darby/Osage Marchioro - - - 0%1,000 - 1,000 0% No expenditures anticipated in FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2025. P2521 Large Meter Vault Upgrade Program Carey 100 - 100 0%620 328 292 53%Most work to occur in Q3 & Q4 FY 2020. P2553 Heritage Road Bridge Replacement and Utility Relocation Cameron 40 13 27 33%3,500 42 3,458 1% Project is driven by the City of Chula Vista's schedule for replacement; the City has delayed the design. The City provided design parameters to the District in June 2019; additional information needed. Design will begin in Q4 FY 2020. P2584 Res - 657-1 and 657-2 Reservoir Demolitions Marchioro - - - 0%51 - 51 0% No expenditures anticipated in FY 2020. These Reservoirs are scheduled to be removed at the end of their useful life. P2608 PL - 8-inch, 850 Zone, Coronado Ave, Chestnut/Apple Cameron 50 27 23 54%820 49 771 6%Project is currently in design. P2611 Quarry Road Bridge Replacement and Utility Relocation Cameron 75 44 31 59%1,300 94 1,206 7% This is a County of San Diego driven project. Project is currently in design. P2612 PL - 12-inch, 711 Zone, Paso de Luz/Telegraph Canyon Rd Cameron 50 49 1 98%500 90 410 18% Project is in planning stage; expected to start design in late FY 2020. P2614 485-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron - - - 0%895 - 895 0%No expenditures in FY 2020. P2617 Lobby Security Enhancements Payne 150 56 94 37%225 111 114 49% Lobby work begins week of Jan 27, 2020; followed by Public Service Work Feb 3, 2020. Final phases in March and April of 2020. P2619 PS - Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station Redundancy Marchioro 2,000 61 1,939 3%3,200 458 2,742 14% Delivery of redundant trailer scheduled for Q3 FY 2020. Construction on track for completion in Q4 FY 2020. P2623 Central Area to Otay Mesa Interconnection Pipelines Combination Air/Vacuum Valve Replacements Marchioro 50 1 49 2%500 214 286 43% Easement offer sent to property owner Q4 FY 2019. Design phase for valve relocations scheduled to commence Q3 FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2021. P2626 803-4 Reservoir Water Quality Improvements – PAX System Purchase Coburn-Boyd 150 4 146 3%325 4 321 1% This budget is on track; expenditures to begin in the Q2 FY 2020. P2630 624-3 Reservoir Automation of Chemical Feed System Cameron 5 - 5 0%505 - 505 0%Budget for preliminary planning. P2638 Buildings and Grounds Refurbishments Payne 89 6 83 7%114 16 98 14%Admin paint solicitation in development; grounds work to be complete end of FY 2020. P2639 Vista Diego Hydropneumatic Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 25 - 25 0%2,800 - 2,800 0% Advance planning work scheduled to commence Q3 FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2022. P2640 Portable Trailer Mounted VFD Pumps Marchioro 458 8 450 2%550 64 486 12%Trailer delivery anticipated Q3 FY 2020. P2642 Rancho Jamul Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 5 - 5 0%2,500 - 2,500 0% Project will be coordinated with P2040, 1655-1 Reservoir. Completion of construction currently scheduled for FY 2024. P2646 North District Area Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro - - - 0%1,200 - 1,200 0% No expenditures anticipated in FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2024. P2647 Central Area Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro - - - 0%1,300 - 1,300 0%No expenditures anticipated in FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2024. P2648 Otay Mesa Area Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro 100 87 13 87%430 118 312 27% Completion of design phase scheduled for FY Q4 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2021. FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2020\03-11-2020\Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 CIP Report(DanM)\Copy of FY20 2nd qtr exp-FINAL Page 1 of 5 2/12/2020 FISCAL YEAR 2020 2ND QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 12/31/2019)($000) ATTACHMENT B 2020 12/31/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2020 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 P2649 HVAC Equipment Purchase Payne 44 - 44 0%130 10 120 8%Five year schedule; OPS scheduled for FY 2020. P2652 520 to 640 Pressure Zone Conversion Cameron 20 6 14 30%250 6 244 2%Planning will begin in FY 2020 Q2. P2654 Heritage Road Interconnection Improvements Marchioro 65 17 48 26%200 17 183 9% Project scope will change, pending City preference. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2021. P2658 832-1 Pump Station Modifications Cameron 15 5 10 33%600 5 595 1%Planning will begin in Q2 FY 2020. P2659 District Boardroom Improvements Kerr 180 8 172 4%200 8 192 4% Currently on target with planned FY 2020 project delivery and expenditures P2660 Camino Elevado Drive OWD and SWA Interconnection Upgrade Beppler 3 - 3 0%250 - 250 0% No work performed in Q2 FY 2020. Planning work and discussions with SWA to begin in Q3 FY 2020. P2663 Potable Water Pressure Vessel Program Marchioro 50 2 48 4%1,500 2 1,498 0% Advanced planning work for Rancho Jamul Hydropneumatic Station, hydropneumatic tank replacement will begin in Q2 FY 2020. Completion of construction scheduled for Q3 FY 2021. P2664 Otay Mesa Dual Piping Modification Program Beppler 10 - 10 0%350 - 350 0%No work performed in Q2 FY 2020. Planning work to begin in Q3 FY 2020. R2116 RecPL - 14-Inch, 927 Zone, Force Main Improvements Marchioro 25 22 3 88%2,250 2,214 36 98% Post construction mitigation work anticipated to complete Q4 FY 2020. R2118 Steele Canyon Sewer PS Large Solids Handling Improvements Beppler 5 - 5 0%175 174 1 99%Project in warranty until Q3 FY 2020. R2120 RWCWRF Filtered Water Storage Tank Improvements Cameron 390 15 375 4%575 48 527 8%This project was delayed until FY 2021. R2125 RecPRS - 927/680 PRS Improvements, Otay Lakes Road Marchioro 45 27 18 60%225 49 176 22% Project scope reduced. Completion of construction anticipated Q4 FY 2020. R2146 Recycled Pipeline Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro 40 - 40 0%700 - 700 0% Advanced planning work scheduled to commence Q3 FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2022. R2150 RWCWRF - Secondary Chlorine Analyzer and Feed System Beppler 1 - 1 0%55 53 2 96%Project in warranty until Q3 FY 2020. S2012 San Diego County Sanitation District Outfall and RSD Outfall Replacement Beppler 50 - 50 0%1,800 1,111 689 62%Annual County invoicing covers this project. No District involvement in design and construction. S2027 Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Beppler 5 - 5 0%3,060 3,050 10 100%Waiting on County to true-up cost to complete for finalizing contract budget and close project. S2043 RWCWRF Sludge Handling System Beppler 100 66 34 66%390 120 270 31% Preparation of final report in progress during Q2 FY 2020; final report to be submitted in Q3 FY 2020. S2047 Asset Management - Info Master Sewer Implementation Zhao 5 - 5 0%58 38 20 66%No expenditures planned in Q2 FY 2020. S2061 RWCWRF Aeration Controls Consolidation & Optimization Upgrades (S)Beppler 30 2 28 7%220 4 216 2% Evaluation of project alternatives and outreach to consultants for project input will be performed in Q2 FY 2020. S2067 RWCWRF Roofing Replacement and Natural Light Enhancement Payne 145 - 145 0%165 16 149 10% Consultant report is in and it is above budget. Adjustment to budget is being considered for next fiscal year. S2071 San Diego Metro Wastewater Capital Improvements Kennedy 132 66 66 50%1,546 66 1,480 4% Annual City of S.D. invoicing covers this project. No District involvement in design and construction. Total Capital Facility Projects Total:5,192 732 4,460 14%54,037 18,124 35,913 34% REPLACEMENT/RENEWAL PROJECTS P2083 PS - 870-2 Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 4,700 2,569 2,131 55%18,950 17,098 1,852 90% Construction on track for completion in Q4 FY 2020. P2174 PS - 1090-1 Pump Station Upgrade Beppler 350 3 347 1%2,000 37 1,963 2% Electrical scope of work and task order with as- needed electrical engineer performed in Q2 FY 2020. Design to continue through the end of FY 2020. P2507 East Palomar Street Utility Relocation Cameron 4 4 - 100%735 733 2 100% Budget is for staff time to collect final reimbursement. P2508 Pipeline Cathodic Protection Replacement Program Marchioro 50 28 22 56%1,250 1,237 13 99% Construction completed Q1 FY 2020. Project one year warranty scheduled to complete Q1 FY 2021. P2533 1200-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 25 5 20 20%895 29 866 3%Budget is for planning and design late FY 2020. P2534 978-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 1 4 20%650 603 47 93%Remaining budget is for warranty repairs. P2539 South Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Utility Relocations Cameron 20 27 (7) 135%1,090 978 112 90% Project is driven by SANDAG. Expenditures within overall project budget. P2543 850-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 810 31 779 4%940 40 900 4%This project was delayed until FY 2021. Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2020\03-11-2020\Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 CIP Report(DanM)\Copy of FY20 2nd qtr exp-FINAL Page 2 of 5 2/12/2020 FISCAL YEAR 2020 2ND QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 12/31/2019)($000) ATTACHMENT B 2020 12/31/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2020 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 P2544 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 5 79 (74) 1580%980 920 60 94% Project was in litigation, which has now concluded. Remaining budget is for warranty repairs. P2546 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 5 - 5 0%1,705 1,686 19 99% Project accepted in November 2018, and is in the 2 year warranty period. P2555 Administration and Operations Parking Lot Improvements Cameron 30 43 (13) 143%935 905 30 97%Budget is for warranty and ancillary items. P2561 Res - 711-3 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 50 57 (7) 114%2,300 2,146 154 93% Construction completed Q3 FY 2020. Project one year warranty scheduled to complete Q2 FY 2021. P2562 Res - 571-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 20 - 20 0%2,900 2,707 193 93% As part of the larger 870-2 Pump Station project, the 571-1 Reservoir was placed back into service April 2018. P2563 Res - 870-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 5 1 4 20%1,250 7 1,243 1% Advanced planning work scheduled to commence Q2 FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2022. P2565 803-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron 125 297 (172) 238%1,200 977 223 81% More work was completed in FY 2020 than anticipated. Project completed and in the 2 year warranty period. P2567 1004-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%965 - 965 0%No expenditures in FY 2020. P2573 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 803 Zone, Hillsdale Road Beppler 5 - 5 0%2,580 2,572 8 100%Warranty period expired in Q1 FY 2020. No further expenditures are anticipated at this time. P2574 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 978 Zone, Vista Vereda Beppler 230 311 (81) 135%1,785 1,380 405 77% Project construction substantially completed in Q2 FY 2020. Final acceptance expected in Q3 FY 2020 with start of one year warranty. P2578 PS - 711-2 (PS 711-1 Replacement and Expansion) - 14,000 gpm Marchioro - - - 0%13,000 - 13,000 0% No expenditures anticipated in FY 2020. Replacement scheduled for FY 2023-2025 to coincide with development of Villages 4, 8, 9, & 3. P2593 458-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%1,050 - 1,050 0%No expenditures in FY 2020. P2594 Large Meter Replacement Carey 60 10 50 17%650 463 187 71%On target; most work will occur after Q2 FY 2020. P2604 AMR Change-Out Carey 1,300 1,225 75 94%6,290 5,621 669 89% Change-out project set to begin in Nov 2020; product purchased in Q1 FY 2020. P2605 458/340 PRS Replacement, 1571 Melrose Ave Beppler 295 49 246 17%475 95 380 20% Project design completed in Q2 FY 2020, with bidding performed and rejected. Project to be reviewed during Q3 FY 2020 and scheduled for future rebidding. P2607 Douglas Ave SWA and OWD Interconnection Upgrade Beppler 20 1 19 5%50 3 47 6% Project being designed by SWA; design expected to be completed in Q3 FY 2020 and constructed this fiscal year. P2609 PL - 8-inch, 1004 Zone, Eucalyptus St, Coronado/Date/La Mesa Cameron 225 67 158 30%800 108 692 14% Project is designed. Project is scheduled to bid in Q3 FY 2020 and construction to begin in Q4 FY 2020. P2610 Valve Replacement Program - Phase 1 Cameron 50 - 50 0%275 22 253 8%Operations is taking the lead on this project. P2615 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 803 PZ, Vista Grande Beppler 25 8 17 32%2,200 28 2,172 1% Preliminary design report in progress during Q2 FY 2020 and to be completed this fiscal year. Further design needs to wait for paving restriction to elapse. P2616 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 978 Zone, Pence Dr/Vista Sierra Dr Beppler 170 59 111 35%3,300 126 3,174 4% Preliminary design report in progress during Q2 FY 2020 and to be completed in Q3 FY 2020, with project design to begin in Q4 FY 2020. P2625 PL - 12-inch, 978 Zone, Hidden Mesa Road Beppler 200 32 168 16%2,210 2,093 117 95% Project construction substantially completed in Q2 FY 2020. Final acceptance expected in Q3 FY 2020 with start of one year warranty. P2627 458/340 PRS Replacement, 1505 Oleander Ave Beppler 300 56 244 19%475 122 353 26% Project design completed in Q2 FY 2020, with bidding performed and rejected. Project to be reviewed during Q3 FY 2020 and scheduled for future rebidding. P2631 1485-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%1,055 - 1,055 0%No expenditures in FY 2020. P2653 1200 Pressure Zone Improvements Marchioro 200 40 160 20%325 40 285 12% Construction of Phase 1 on track for completion in Q4 FY 2020. Completion of Phase 2 construction scheduled for FY 2021. P2655 La Presa Pipeline Improvements Cameron 15 24 (9) 160%1,750 24 1,726 1%Budget is for warranty and ancillary items. P2656 Regulatory Site Desilting Basin Improvements Beppler 40 7 33 18%150 7 143 5% Preliminary design alternatives completed in Q2 FY 2020. Operations staff to implement first alternative in Q3 FY 2020 for assessment. P2657 1485-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%30 - 30 0%No expenditures in FY 2020. P2661 Replacement of Backflow Prevention Devices on Pipeline Interconnections on Otay Mesa Beppler 10 - 10 0%375 - 375 0% Engineering staff to coordinate with Operations' staff in Q3 FY 2020 to evaluate the system. Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2020\03-11-2020\Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 CIP Report(DanM)\Copy of FY20 2nd qtr exp-FINAL Page 3 of 5 2/12/2020 FISCAL YEAR 2020 2ND QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 12/31/2019)($000) ATTACHMENT B 2020 12/31/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2020 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 P2662 Potable Water Meter Change Out Carey - - - 0%1,950 - 1,950 0%No expenditures in FY 2020. R2121 Res - 944-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 60 - 60 0%1,800 19 1,781 1% Completion of design phase scheduled for Q4 FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2021. R2139 RWCWRF - Filter Troughs Replacement Beppler 1 - 1 0%40 34 6 85%Project in warranty until Q3 FY 2020. R2143 AMR Change-Out Carey 130 71 59 55%525 321 204 61% Change-out project set to begin in Nov 2020; product purchased in Q1 FY 2020. R2145 RWCWRF - Filter Media and Nozzles Replacement Beppler 1 - 1 0%130 117 13 90%Project in warranty until Q3 FY 2020. R2147 RWCWRF Fuel Lines Replacement Marchioro 10 36 (26) 360%225 222 3 99%Construction completed Q1 FY 2020. Project one year warranty scheduled to complete Q1 FY 2021. R2148 Large Meter Replacement - Recycled Carey 12 - 12 0%58 - 58 0%On target; most work will occur after Q2 FY 2020. R2151 RWCWRF - Bulk Chlorine Vapor Scrubber System Refurbishment Lintner 1 - 1 0%40 39 1 98% This project is complete and will be closed at the end of the fiscal year. R2152 Recycled Water Meter Change-Out Carey - - - 0%70 - 70 0%No expenditures in FY 2020. R2153 Recycled Water Pressure Vessel Program Marchioro 1 - 1 0%50 - 50 0%No expenditures anticipated in FY 2020. S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Beppler 1,500 1,215 285 81%10,980 10,846 134 99% Project construction substantially completed in Q2 FY 2020. Final acceptance expected in Q3 FY 2020 with start of one year warranty. S2045 Fuerte Drive Sewer Relocation Beppler 20 - 20 0%370 278 92 75% Warranty period expired in Q1 FY 2020. No further expenditures are anticipated at this time. S2046 RWCWRF - Aeration Panels Replacement Beppler 5 - 5 0%250 250 - 100%Project in warranty until Q3 FY 2020. S2048 Hillsdale Road Sewer Repairs Beppler 5 - 5 0%720 692 28 96%Warranty period expired in Q1 FY 2020. No further expenditures are anticipated at this time. S2049 Calavo Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 2 Beppler 40 26 14 65%1,000 64 936 6% Design services occurred in Q2 FY 2020. Final design not expected to be completed until FY 2021. S2050 Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 2 Beppler 5 - 5 0%820 7 813 1% No work performed in Q2. Planning services to be performed during FY 2020 as time allows. S2051 RWCWRF - Headworks Improvements Beppler 5 - 5 0%250 246 4 98%Project in warranty until Q3 FY 2020. S2053 RWCWRF - Sedimentation Basins Weirs Replacement Beppler 1 - 1 0%60 53 7 88%Project in warranty until Q3 FY 2020. S2054 Calavo Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Beppler - - - 0%10 - 10 0%No work planned for FY 2020. S2060 Steele Canyon Pump Station Replacement Beppler - - - 0%200 - 200 0%No work planned for FY 2020. S2066 Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Beppler - - - 0%10 - 10 0%No work planned for FY 2020. S2069 Cottonwood Sewer Pump Station Renovation Beppler 10 8 2 80%1,800 8 1,792 0% Planning work performed in Q2 FY 2020. Identification of additional property and owner outreach planned for Q3 FY 2020. S2070 Hidden Mountain Sewer Pump Station Wet Well Renovation Beppler 130 34 96 26%150 34 116 23% Design completed in Q2 FY 2020. Project advertised for bids in Q2 FY 2020 with award of contract planned in Q3 FY 2020. Construction to be performed in Q4 FY 2020. Total Replacement/Renewal Projects Total:11,286 6,424 4,862 57%99,078 56,037 43,041 57% CAPITAL PURCHASE PROJECTS P2282 Vehicle Capital Purchases Rahders 439 161 278 37%6,000 4,640 1,360 77% $59,994 expensed Q1 FY 2020 for the purchase of CP items 8 & 10 compact trucks. $167,297 encumbered against P2282 Q2 for the purchase of CP items 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 replacement trucks, and $122,112 encumbered against P2282 Q3 FY 2020 for the purchase of CP item 9 replacement truck. $349,403 plus an additional $25,000 for outfitting of vehicles, expected total expense P2282 $374,403 in FY 2020. P2286 Field Equipment Capital Purchases Rahders 203 53 150 26%2,250 1,870 380 83% $45,270 expensed Q1 FY 2020 for the purchase of CP Item 11 Fuel trailers and CP item 2 flow meter. $145,155 encumbered against P2286 Q2 FY 2020 for the purchase of CP12 (portable genset). Q3 FY 2020 anticipate purchase of $12,000 for CP item 2 (chlorine pump). P2571 Data Center Network Data Storage and Infrastructure Enhancements Kerr 100 7 93 7%200 119 81 60% Currently on target with project expenditures; maybe possibly overflow (expenditure/project) into next fiscal year. P2572 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Kerr - - - 0%130 - 130 0%Project to commence beginning of FY 2021. Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2020\03-11-2020\Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 CIP Report(DanM)\Copy of FY20 2nd qtr exp-FINAL Page 4 of 5 2/12/2020 FISCAL YEAR 2020 2ND QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 12/31/2019)($000) ATTACHMENT B 2020 12/31/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2020 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 12/31/19 Total Capital Purchase Projects Total:742 221 521 30%8,580 6,629 1,951 77% DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT PROJECTS P2595 PL - 16-inch, 624 Zone, Village 3N - Heritage Road, Main St/Energy Way Beppler 1 - 1 0%150 - 150 0% Project under construction; awaiting developer submission for reimbursement. R2084 RecPL - 20-Inch, 680 Zone, Village 2 - Heritage/La Media Beppler 1 - 1 0%365 1 364 0% Project under construction; awaiting developer submission for reimbursement. Total Developer Reimbursement Projects Total:2 - 2 0%515 1 514 0% 113 GRAND TOTAL 17,222$ 7,377$ 9,845$ 43%162,210$ 80,791$ 81,419$ 50% Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2020\03-11-2020\Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2020 CIP Report(DanM)\Copy of FY20 2nd qtr exp-FINAL Page 5 of 5 2/12/2020 Otay Water District Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2020 Second Quarter (through December 31, 2019) ATTACHMENT C 870-2 Pump Station/571-1 Reservoir 12/06/2019 Background The approved CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2020 consists of 113 projects that total $17.2 million. These projects are broken down into four categories. 1.Capital Facilities $ 5.2 million 2.Replacement/Renewal $11.3 million 3.Capital Purchases $ 0.7 million 4.Developer Reimbursement $ 2.0 thousand Overall expenditures through the Second Quarter of Fiscal Year 2020 totaled $7.4 million, which is approximately 43% of the Fiscal Year budget. 2 Fiscal Year 2020 Second Quarter Update ($000) CIP CAT Description FY 2020 Budget FY 2020 Expenditures % FY 2020 Budget Spent Total Life-to-Date Budget Total Life-to-Date Expenditures % Life-to-Date Budget Spent 1 Capital Facilities $5,192 $732 14%$54,037 $18,124 34% 2 Replacement/ Renewal $11,286 $6,424 57%$99,078 $56,037 57% 3 Capital Purchases $742 $221 30%$8,580 $6,629 77% 4 Developer Reimbursement $2 $0 0%$515 $1 0% Total: $17,222 $7,377 43%$162,210 $80,791 50% 3 Fiscal Year 2020 Second Quarter CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures 4 $7,377,000 $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 $18,000,000 $20,000,000 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July FISCAL YEAR PERIOD IN MONTHS Budget Forecast Total Expenditures Q2 FY 2020 Forecast $17,222,000 $13,700,000 5 CIP Projects in Construction 870-2 Pump Station Replacement Project (P2083/P2562) Replacement of existing 870 High Head and Low Head Pump Stations. Remove and Replace the existing 571-1 Reservoir liner and cover. $21.65M Budget Start: July 2017 Estimated Completion: April 2020 870-2 Pump Station –Fuel Storage Containment Division No. 2 Location: North East corner of Otay Mesa. Existing 571-1 Reservoir and High Head/Low Head Pump Station site. 6 12/09/2019 CIP Projects in Construction Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station (TLOPS) Redundancy Project (P2619) Add a second pump to the TLOPS. Project includes site work, yard piping, instrumentation and controls, and security improvements. $3.20M Budget Start: September 2019 Estimated Completion: June 2020 TLOPS –Pothole Excavation Division No. 1 Location: TLOPS is located south of Wueste Road at the south end of the Lower Otay Reservoir. 7 12/17/2019 CIP Projects in Construction 711-3 Floating Cover and Liner Replacement (P2561) Remove and replace existing floating cover and liner with new reinforced Chlorosulfonated Polyethylene (CSPE) geomembrane cover and liner. $2.3M Budget Start: August 2018 Completion: November 2019 711-3 (16.0 MG) –Interior Batten Bar Repair Division No. 5 Location: 711-3 is located at the north end of Hunte Parkway in Chula Vista. 8 10/05/2019 CIP Projects in Construction Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project (S2024) Replace existing 10- inch sewer with 7,420 linear feet of new 15- inch sewer. Reconnection of sewer laterals. Night work. $10.98M Budget Start: July 2017 Completion: December 2019 Campo Road –Final Paving Division No. 5 Location: Campo Road (SR 94) between Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center and Rancho San Diego Towne Center. 9 10/03/2019 CIP Projects in Construction Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement (P2574/P2625) Replace existing waterlines. Construct 3,700 LF of new 12-inch waterline. Construct 400 LF of new 8-inch waterline. $3.17M Budget Start: December 2018 Completion: December 2019 Vista Vereda –Final Paving Division No. 5 Location: Hidden Mesa Road and Vista Vereda in El Cajon. 10 11/07/2019 Construction Contract Status 11 PROJECT TOTAL % P2508 Pipeline CP Improvements - Phase II M-Rae Engineering Inc.$329,500 $347,000 $16,267 4.9%$349,386 $349,386 0.7%100.0%October 2019 P2561 Reservoir 711-3 Floating Cover and Liner Replacement Layfield USA Corporation $1,947,000 $1,997,000 $0 0.0%$1,957,000 $1,822,250 -2.0%93.1%November 2019 P2565 803-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Advanced Industrial Services Inc.$737,690 $951,690 ($117,080)-15.9%$690,360 $690,360 -27.5%100.0%October 2019 P2574/ P2625 Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement Cass-Arrieta Construction $2,718,239 $2,848,364 $279,978 10.3%$3,009,328 $2,941,615 5.7%97.7%December 2019 R2147 RWCWRF Fuel System Improvements Jauregui & Culver, Inc.$153,092 $158,092 $1,781 1.2%$154,873 $154,873 -2.0%100.0%September 2019 CIP NO.PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT W/ ALLOWANCES % CHANGE ORDERS W/ ALLOWANCE CREDIT** % COMPLETE EST. COMP. DATE NET CHANGE ORDERS LTD* FY 2020 CIP CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT TOTAL EARNED TO DATE Construction Contract Status 12 PROJECT TOTAL % FY 2020 CIP CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT TOTAL EARNED TO DATE CIP NO.PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT W/ ALLOWANCES % CHANGE ORDERS W/ ALLOWANCE CREDIT** % COMPLETE EST. COMP. DATE NET CHANGE ORDERS LTD* S2024 Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project Wier Construction Corporation $7,623,146 $7,816,646 $591,337 7.8%$8,407,983 $8,355,717 7.6%99.4%December 2019 P2619 Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station Redundancy Tharsos, Inc.$1,600,500 $1,647,000 $0 0.0%$1,600,500 $41,355 -2.8%2.6%June 2020 P2083 P2562 870-2 Pump Station Replacement/ 571-1 Reservoir Liner and Cover Replacement Pacific Hydrotech Corporation $16,500,900 $16,925,900 $550,379 3.3%$17,114,890 $15,503,089 1.1%90.6%April 2020 TOTALS:$31,610,067 $32,691,692 $1,322,662 4.2%$33,284,319 $29,858,645 1.8% **THIS CHANGE ORDER RATE INCLUDES THE CREDIT FOR UNUSED ALLOWANCES *NET CHANGE ORDERS DO NOT INCLUDE ALLOWANCE ITEM CREDITS. IT'S A TRUE CHANGE ORDER PERCENTAGE FOR THE PROJECT Consultant Contract Status 13 Consultant Contract Status 14 Consultant Contract Status 15 QUESTIONS? 16 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL SUBMITTED BY: Adolfo Segura, Chief of Administrative Services APPROVED BY: Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2020 MID-YEAR REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S FISCAL YEAR 2019-2022 STRATEGIC PLAN GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see “Attachment A”. PURPOSE: To provide a mid-year report on the District’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-2022 Strategic Plan for FY20. ANALYSIS: Summary The current District Strategic Plan is a four-year (4) plan ranging from the start of FY19 through the end of FY22. This report details the mid- year results for the second year of the four-year plan. Objectives – Target 90% Strategic Plan objectives are designed to ensure the District is executing mission designed objectives and making the appropriate high- level changes necessary to guide the agency’s efforts to meet new challenges and positively adapt to change. FY20 mid-year results are below target at 88%, with 36 of 41 active items completed or on schedule. Four objectives are on hold and one is not on target. AGENDA ITEM 14b The following objectives are on hold: 1.Recycled water long-term business plan – Staff continues to update the financial model and will finalize once the City’s Pure Water project and the future phases of Pure Water projects on the City’s long-term plan for recycled water are better defined. Staff is also looking for opportunities as a result of an increases in funding for wastewater at the border and monitor the potential funding of tertiary treatment facilities as these will significantly improve the financial feasibility of an alternative recycled water supply. 2.Treatment Plant long-term business plan – Staff continues to update the financial model and will finalize once the City's Pure Water project is better defined and the status of the Amended and Restated Agreement is known. 3.Evaluate enhancements to, or replacement, of the rate model program – Due to adding a Sewer Cost of Service Study and Capacity fee study as strategic objectives, this project has been placed on hold. The added objectives are to be completed by June 30, 2020, and at that time, this objective will be continued. 4.Financial activity-based cost cross-training - Due to staff rotations, performing a gap assessment of data requirements for activity-based costing measures, resolving data requirement gaps, and training management with the new practices has been placed on hold and extended out for one year. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 ON SCHEDULE BEHIND ON HOLD NOT STARTED 36 1 4 11 On Schedule Behind On Hold Not Started 36 of 41 Active Objectives are Below Target (88%) 3 Objective Not on Target 1. Customer electronic communication and outreach – Staff implemented, via the District’s website, an online Leak Adjustment Form (live as of February 2020), in which customers can electronically request a one-time adjustment, provided they submit proof of repair cost. In regard to service interruption due to non-payment, staff is sending courtesy text messages 48 hours prior stoppage of water service. Staff is still working with IT to complete the payment arrangement form and exit survey. Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) – Target 75% KPI’s are designed to track the District’s day-to-day performance. The District utilizes KPI’s based on established AWWA performance benchmarks and measure the effectiveness and efficiency of essential operational services. The overall goal is that at least 75% of these KPI’s be rated “on target”. FY20 mid-year results are above target with 34 of 35 (97%) items achieving the desired level or better. Seven KPI’s or measures are reported at year’s end: •Water Debt Coverage •Sewer Debt Coverage •Reserve Level •Accounts Per FTE •Leak Detection Program •Injury Incident Rate •Enterprise Technology Services 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 ON TARGET NOT ON TARGET 34 1 On Target Not on Target 34 of 35 Key Performance Indicators are On Target (97%) 4 KPI Not On Target 1.Sewer Overflow Rate – On December 24, 2019, a sewer overflow occurred at a manhole located on Fair Valley Road in Rancho San Diego. The blockage was due to vandalism. Staff found an opened manhole with various types of debris. The collection system in the area was televised and flushed to assure all debris was located and removed. Next Steps Staff will continue to execute the plan’s objectives and key performance indicators and track emerging trends. Committee Reports – Slideshow The Strategic Plan results are presented to both the Finance and Administration Committee, and the Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee with a specific focus on the most relevant information for each Committee (see “Attachment B”). Strategic Plan is available on the Board VPN All of the Strategic Plan results and associated details are provided in a real-time, interactive web-based application available to the Board via secured remote access, VPN. The District Secretary can facilitate any password or access issues. FISCAL IMPACT:Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer No fiscal impact; informational item only. STRATEGIC GOAL: Strategic Plan reporting is a critical element in providing performance reporting to the Board and staff. LEGAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Committee Action Report Attachment B – PowerPoint Presentation 5 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2020 MID-YEAR REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S FISCAL YEAR 2019-2022 STRATEGIC PLAN COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance and Administration Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on February 18, 2020 and the following comments were made: •Staff presented the mid-year report for the District’s fiscal year 2020 Strategic Plan. •Information was presented from the staff report and a powerpoint was presented that provided the mid-year results of each of the objectives and key performance indicators for FY 2020. •It was indicated that the District’s four-year plan is made up of strategies, objectives and key performance indicators (KPI). The objectives and KPI’s are focused in four perspectives: customer, financial, internal business processes and learning and growth. Additionally, the District’s Strategic Plan is influenced by AWWA’s performance indicators of organizational development, business operations, customer relations, water and wastewater operations. •In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that each Objective has a project plan that includes timelines, deliverables and indicates the project manager responsible for the objective. The Strategic Plan information is live and the status of each Objective and KPI can be viewed in real time on the District’s system. It was noted that the Otay Water District is the only organization that uses a live strategic plan. •In response to several questions and comments from the Committee with regard to the District’s live Strategic Plan, staff stated that the Strategic Plan will be updated to identify completed objectives such as Objective 18 – F06.1 Negotiate and implement new labor agreement and Objective 29 – 106.2 Evaluate the use of the Drone2Map technology for asset, field inspections, and condition assessment. 6 •The Committee inquired about the evaluation on the use of Drone2Map technology. Staff discussed several benefits for the District’s use of Drone2Map technology. It was indicated that the most noticeable benefit is the increased safety and efficiency for staff who perform routine inspections of water tanks and areas surrounding the tanks. The Committee recommended that staff provide an update of the Drone2Map technology evaluation at a future committee meeting; including information of areas where the technology has maximized efficiency. •The Committee inquired about the purpose of Objectives Not Started (Objective 5) 103.3 Pilot cloud-based human capital performance management system and implement, if determined necessary. Staff stated that the District is considering the implementation of paperless performance evaluations to increase savings by creating an online performance evaluation system. •There was discussion as to whether the District should lower its Target for the measure Water Rate Ranking (lowest cost provider) to five (5) or below rather than eleven (11) since the District is currently ranked third lowest. It was indicated that the target is based on AWWA standards. Staff noted that the District does not suspend its maintenance or O/M program to drive its rates downward and the District’s ranking has fluctuated over the years (sixth, seventh, etc.). Staff feels the target of eleven (11) is reasonable. •Staff indicated in response to another inquiry from the Committee that the result of 79.63% for the measure Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically does not include handwritten checks physically mailed to the District’s lockbox. It includes electronic payments made through customer bank accounts, the District’s website, and the phone system. •Staff indicated that the measure for Distribution System Loss of 3.8% incorporates an estimate into the unit sales component of the calculation. The estimate is necessary because there is a timing difference between CWA’s billing period cutoff, which is by calendar month, and the District’s meter data collection/readings, which occurs throughout the month. To match the timing between the unit sold data and unit purchase data, the District estimates the units sold from the last meter read date to the end of the month. The estimate is calculated based on an AWWA recommended formula. 7 •In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated with regard to the measure Project Closeout Time that “closeout time” is the time between the Notice of Substantial Completion and the Notice of Completion (45-day period). During that 45-day period, the contractor must complete the required documents/paperwork and punch list items. •The Committee inquired if staff could clarify the measure for Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning. The District has 40 potable reservoirs (38 steel and 2 with liners and covers). The steel reservoirs are to be cleaned and inspected once every 5 years and the reservoirs with liners and covers are to be inspected and cleaned annually. The goal of the measure is to inspect and clean eight (8) reservoirs per year with the two (2) reservoirs with liners and covers included in the eight (8). At mid-fiscal year reporting, the District has inspected and cleaned nine (9) reservoirs, exceeding the annual target. •The Committee recommended that the PowerPoint Presentation include a slide that provides annual information of the District’s Auto Aid/Mutual Aid deliveries to/from other agencies. Upon completion of the discussion, the Committee supported presentation as an informational item. FY20 Mid-Year Report Otay Water District FY19-22 Strategic Plan ATTACHMENT B Strategies and objectives are actionable steps or plans designed to achieve the vision/mission of the organization. The Regulatory Site in Rancho San Diego includes four reservoirs, two pump stations, and disinfection facilities. 88% 36 Objectives TRENDS ON TARGET/COMPLETED OVERALL TARGET 90% TOTAL OBJECTIVES 52 NOT ON TARGET OBJECTIVES ON HOLD 2% 1 Objective 10% 4 Objectives 75% 85% 95% FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 COMPLETED 14 NOT STARTED 11 RESULT TARGET ACTIVE 41 Objectives 1.F01.1 Recycled water long-term business plan. 2.F01.3 Treatment Plant long-term business plan (sewer portion). 3.F03.3 Evaluate enhancements to, or replacement, of the rate model program. 4.F04.3 Financial activity-based cost cross-training. ON HOLD | 4 1.I02.1 Customer electronic communication and outreach. NOT ON TARGET | 1 ON TARGET| 22 Objectives 1.C01.1 Continue implementation of and enhance the District’s community and business outreach, media, and government relations programs. 2.C01.2 Ensure consistency of branding and representation across the District, using consistent logos, colors, messaging, communications tools, and other collaterals through enhancement of internal and external marketing materials. 3.C01.3 Evaluate and enhance the District’s water conservation programs. 4.C02.1 Assess communications tools. 5.F01.2 South District Potable Water Supply Alternatives to San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) Pipeline 4 Supply Interruption (catastrophic event). 6.F02.2 In support of the Engineering Department, conduct recycled water and sewer business financial analysis. 7.F03.4 Implement Paperless Account Payable (AP) solution. 8.F04.2 Enhancement of the AM Program. 9.I01.3 Optimize Global Positioning System (GPS) fleet assignment and routing operations. 10.I05.1 Prioritize fourteen strategic project/initiatives, recently developed. 11.I06.2 Evaluate the use of Drone2Map technology for asset, field inspections, and condition assessment. ON TARGET| 22 Objectives 17.I07.5 Establish an access and defensible space vegetation mitigation program with maintenance schedules for District remote facilities, access roads, and off-road appurtenances. 18.I08.1 Enhance Customer and Public Service security in public lobby areas. 19.I08.2 Evaluate feasibility of incorporating electric and hybrid vehicles into District Fleet. 20.I09.1 Automate confined space regulatory and work forms (electronic conversion), add confined space data layer in the District’s enterprise Geographic Information System (GIS) and use data to electronically automate the District’s confined space inventory. 21.I10.1 Certify at Industry State Level and under the Incident Command System, streamline chlorine gas and confined space rescue training, operations, response and areas of responsibility and convert to inventory lists and equipment logs to electronic form. 12.I06.4 Standardization of District asset data and collection process. 13.I07.1 Analyze electric energy-saving programs as they become available. 14.I07.2 Evaluate the effectiveness of various methods to reduce nitrification events. 15.I07.3 Evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the District’s valve exercise preventative maintenance including proposed recommendations. 16.I07.4 Evaluate the impacts as a result of recent and upcoming regulatory changes including, but not limited to, Air Pollution Control District (APCD), State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), etc. 22.L01.1 Continue development of leadership and District-wide training programs. ON TARGET | 22 Objectives COMPLETED| 14 Objectives 1.F02.1 Conduct desalination (Rosarito) financial analysis. 2.F03.2 Evaluate, and if beneficial, implement a Cloud payroll system. 3.F04.1 Enhancement of the framework for systematic development, validation, and implementation of new CIPs. 4.F04.4 In support of the Engineering Department, enhance financial impact forecasting and analysis of future CIPs. 5.F05.1 Optimize funding and liability schedule. 6.F06.1 Negotiate and implement new labor agreement. 7.F06.2 Review Deferred Compensation Program for reduced fees and streamlined approach and ensure program offerings are fully utilized. 8.I01.2 Explore web-based options for meter reading and backflow test entry. 9.I03.2 Implement Human Resource Information System (HRIS) in coordination with payroll conversion. 10.I04.1 Adopt National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) cyber security framework and enhance disaster recovery planning. 11.I04.2 Advance business processes and operational efficiencies through effective implementation of information technology. 12.I04.3 Create framework to evaluate cost efficiency of new technology services and cloud vs. on-premise selection. 13.I04.4 Deploy next generation storage services and communication architecture. 14.I08.3 Streamline contract and purchase order (contract) management and lifecycle. ACTIVE| 41 Objectives 1.C01.1 Continue implementation of and enhance the District’s community and business outreach, media, and government relations programs. 2.C01.2 Ensure consistency of branding and representation across the District, using consistent logos, colors, messaging, communications tools, and other collaterals through enhancement of internal and external marketing materials. 3.C01.3 Evaluate and enhance the District’s water conservation programs. 4.C02.1 Assess communications tools. 5.F01.1 Recycled water long-term business plan. 6.F01.2 South District Potable Water Supply Alternatives to San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) Pipeline 4 Supply Interruption (catastrophic event). 7.F01.3 Treatment Plant long-term business plan (sewer portion). 8.F02.1 Conduct desalination (Rosarito) financial analysis. 9.F02.2 In support of the Engineering Department, conduct recycled water and sewer business financial analysis. 10.F03.2 Evaluate, and if beneficial, implement a Cloud payroll system. 11.F03.3 Evaluate enhancements to, or replacement, of the rate model program. ACTIVE| 41 Objectives 12.F03.4 Implement Paperless Account Payable (AP) solution. 13.F04.1 Enhancement of the framework for systematic development, validation, and implementation of new CIPs. 14.F04.2 Enhancement of the AM Program. 15.F04.3 Financial activity-based cost cross-training. 16.F04.4 In support of the Engineering Department, enhance financial impact forecasting and analysis of future CIPs. 17.F05.1 Optimize funding and liability schedule. 18.F06.1 Negotiate and implement new labor agreement. 19.F06.2 Review Deferred Compensation Program for reduced fees and streamlined approach and ensure program offerings are fully utilized. 20.I01.2 Explore web-based options for meter reading and backflow test entry. 21.I01.3 Optimize Global Positioning System (GPS) fleet assignment and routing operation. 22.I02.1 Customer electronic communication and outreach. 23.I03.2 Implement Human Resource Information System (HRIS) in coordination with payroll conversion. 24.I04.1 Adopt National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) cyber security framework and enhance disaster recovery planning. ACTIVE | 41 Objectives 25.I04.2 Advance business processes and operational efficiencies through effective implementation of information technology. 26.I04.3 Create framework to evaluate cost efficiency of new technology services and cloud vs. on-premise selection. 27.I04.4 Deploy next generation storage services and communication architecture. 28.I05.1 Prioritize fourteen strategic project/initiatives, recently developed. 29.I06.2 Evaluate the use of the Drone2Map technology for asset, field inspections, and condition assessment. 30.I06.4 Standardization of District asset data and collection process. 31.I07.1 Analyze electric energy-saving programs as they become available. 32.I07.2 Evaluate the effectiveness of various methods to reduce nitrification events. 33.I07.3 Evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the District’s valve exercise preventative maintenance including proposed recommendations. 34.I07.4 Evaluate the impacts as a result of recent and upcoming regulatory changes including, but not limited to, Air Pollution Control District (APCD), State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), etc. Objectives 39.I09.1 Automate confined space regulatory and work forms (electronic conversion), add confined space data layer in the District’s enterprise Geographic Information System (GIS) and use data to electronically automate the District’s confined space inventory. 40.I10.1 Certify at Industry State Level and under the Incident Command System, streamline chlorine gas and confined space rescue training, operations, response and areas of responsibility and convert to inventory lists and equipment logs to electronic form 41.L01.1 Continue development of leadership and District-wide training programs. 35.I07.5 Establish an access and defensible space vegetation mitigation program with maintenance schedules for District remote facilities, access roads, and off-road appurtenances. 36.I08.1 Enhance Customer and Public Service security in public lobby areas. 37.I08.2 Evaluate feasibility of incorporating electric and hybrid vehicles into District fleet. 38.I08.3 Streamline contract and purchase order (contract) management and lifecycle. ACTIVE | 41 NOT STARTED | 11 Objectives 1.F03.1 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)/Customer Information System (CIS)/Customer Relationship Management (CRM) validation and replacement evaluation. (ERP -FY21 Q1) 2.I01.1 Evaluation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) technology. (FY21 Q1) 3.I02.2 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)/Customer Information System (CIS)/Customer Relationship Management (CRM) validation and replacement evaluation. (CIS/CRM -FY21 Q1) 4.I03.1 Evaluate on-boarding programs and implement, if determined necessary. (FY21 Q1) 5.I03.3 Pilot cloud-based human capital performance management system and implement, if determined necessary. (FY21 Q1) 6.I06.1 Deploy ArcGIS Pro for 3D Analysis. (FY21 Q1) 7.I06.3 Migrate Geographic Information System (GIS) data structure from geometric network to utility network. (FY21 Q1) 8.L01.2 Review and enhance knowledge transfer process to ensure retention of District knowledge. (FY22 Q1) 9.F03.5 Re-evaluate prior payroll solutions and identify any new cloud-based payroll solutions (FY20 Q3) 10.F03.6 Complete a sewer cost of service study and recommend a rate structure that will provide for more stable sewer revenues. (FY20 Q3) 11.F03.7 Evaluate the Capacity and New Water Supply Fees, including an update of applicable costs, and, if possible, recommend a fee structure that is more efficient and effective than the current structure. (FY20 Q4) Key Performance Indicators show progress toward a desirable outcome and monitor operational performance. 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 LEARNING AND GROWTH CUSTOMERTRENDS ON TARGET KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FINANCIAL OVERALL TARGET INTERNAL BUSINESS PROCESSES 75% TOTAL KPIs 42 REPORTED QUARTERLY 35 REPORTED ANNUALLY 7 3% 1 KPIs NOT ON TARGET 97% 34 KPIs RESULT TARGET 1.I1.13 Sewer Overflow Rate NOT ON TARGET | 1 KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 1. C1.01 Answer Rate 2. C1.02 Technical Quality Complaint 3. C1.03 Potable Water Compliance Rate 4. F1.01 CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget 5. F1.02 Construction Change Order Incidence 6. F1.03 O&M Cost Per Account 7. F1.04 Billing Accuracy 8. F1.05 Overtime Percentage 9. F1.06 Sewer Rate Ranking 10. F1.07 Water Rate Ranking 11. F1.12 Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically ON TARGET | 34 12. F1.13 Distribution System Loss 13. F1.14 Planned Potable Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 14. F1.15 Planned Recycled Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 15. F1.16 Planned Wastewater Maintenance Ratio in $ 16. F1.17 Direct Cost of Treatment per MGD 17. I1.02 Mark-out Accuracy 18. I1.03 Project Closeout Time 19. I1.04 Annual Recycled Water Site Inspections 20. I1.05 Recycled Water Shutdown Testing 21. I1.06 Easement Evaluation and Field Inspection 22. I1.07 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Fleet Maintenance 23. I1.08 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Reclamation Plant KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 24. I1.09 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Pump/Electric Section 25. I1.10 System Valve Exercising Program 26. I1.11 Potable Water Distribution System Integrity 27. I1.12 Recycled Water System Integrity 28. I1.14 Emergency Facility Power Testing 29. I1.15 Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning 30. I1.16 Main Flushing and Hydrant Maintenance 31. I1.17 Critical Valve Exercising 32. L1.01 Employee Voluntary Turnover Rate 33. L1.02 Training Hours per Employee 34. L1.03 Safety Training Program ON TARGET | 34 KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 1. C1.01 Answer Rate 2. C1.02 Technical Quality Complaint 3. C1.03 Potable Water Compliance Rate 4. F1.01 CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget 5. F1.02 Construction Change Order Incidence 6. F1.03 O&M Cost Per Account 7. F1.04 Billing Accuracy 8. F1.05 Overtime Percentage 9. F1.06 Sewer Rate Ranking 10. F1.07 Water Rate Ranking 11. F1.12 Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically 12. F1.13 Distribution System Loss QUARTERLY | 35 13. F1.14 Planned Potable Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 14. F1.15 Planned Recycled Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 15. F1.16 Planned Wastewater Maintenance Ratio in $ 16. F1.17 Direct Cost of Treatment per MGD 17. I1.02 Mark-out Accuracy 18. I1.03 Project Closeout Time 29. I1.04 Annual Recycled Water Site Inspections 20. I1.05 Recycled Water Shutdown Testing 21. I1.06 Easement Evaluation and Field Inspection 22. I1.07 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Fleet Maintenance 23. I1.08 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Reclamation Plant 24. I1.09 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Pump/Electric Section KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 25. I1.10 System Valve Exercising Program 26. I1.11 Potable Water Distribution System Integrity 27. I1.12 Recycled Water System Integrity 28. I1.13 Sewer Overflow Rate 29. I1.14 Emergency Facility Power Testing 30. I1.15 Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning 31. I1.16 Main Flushing and Hydrant Maintenance 32. I1.17 Critical Valve Exercising 33. L1.01 Employee Voluntary Turnover Rate 34. L1.02 Training Hours per Employee 35. L1.03 Safety Training Program QUARTERLY | 35 1.F1.08 Water Debt Coverage 2.F1.09 Sewer Debt Coverage 3.F1.10 Reserve Level 4.F1.11 Accounts Per FTE 5.F1.18 Leak Detection Program 6.F1.19 Injury Incidence Rate 7.I1.01 Enterprise Technology Services Availability ANNUAL | 7 KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 98.80% 98.15% 98.59% 96% 97% 97% 98% 98% 99% 99% Q1 Q2 YTD AVG C1.01 ANSWER RATE Target: 97% average answer rate per quarter annually. TARGET Calculation: Number of all calls answered/Number of all calls received Customer Service staff member assisting a customer. C1.02 TECHNICAL QUALITY COMPLAINT (AWWA) (Customer Service) Target & AWWA: No more than 7.1 complaints per 1000 customer accounts annually. 0.99 0.98 1.97 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET & AWWA BENCHMARK 75th Percentile for population served between 100,0001-500,000 (combined utilities). Calculation: Number of technical quality complaints per year/ Number of active customer accounts per reporting period) Disinfection Tech examining potable equipment. C1.03 POTABLE WATER COMPLIANCE RATE (AWWA) (Water Operations) Target & AWWA: 100% of all health-related drinking water standards per quarter annually. 100%100%100% 90% 95% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET & AWWA BENCHMARK 75th Percentile for population served between 100,0001-500,000 (water). Calculation: Number of days the primary health regulations are met/Number of days in the reporting period District staff member refilling his reusable water bottle. F1.01 CIP PROJECT EXPENDITURES VS. BUDGET Target: 95% of budget but not to exceed 100% annually. 29.2% 42.8%42.8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Actual Expenditures/Annual budget 870-2 Pump Station Emergency Generator F1.02 CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDER INCIDENCE Target: No more than 5% annually. 2.4% 4.2%4.2% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Total cost of Change Orders (not including allowances)/Total original construction contract amount (not including allowances) The District’s contractor, Pacific Hydrotech Corporation, working on the 870-2 Pump Station Gallery concrete pour. F1.03 O&M COST PER ACCOUNT Target: Less than $553.00 per account annually. Target is based on Operating Budget. $127.00 $132.00 $259.00 $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Total operations O&M costs/Number of accounts District staff testing a large water meter to ensure accuracy. F1.04 BILLING ACCURACY (Customer Service) Target: 99.8% billing accuracy per quarter annually. 99.99%99.99%99.99% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100% 101% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Number of correct bills/Number of total of accurate bills Customer Service staff member assisting a customer with their bill. F1.05 OVERTIME PERCENTAGE Target: Less than 100% of budgeted overtime per quarter annually. Target is based on Operating Budget and historical trends; FY20 Overtime Budget is $185,500. 79% 64% 71% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Actual overtime costs (including comp time)/Budgeted overtime costs Utility Maintenance work crew conducting street repairs. F1.06 SEWER RATE RANKING 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 YTD Reported in Q1 TARGET Target: Bottom 50th percentile for the 28 sewer service providers in San Diego Otay ranks 3 out of 28 sewer service providers. Calculation: Ranking for the average monthly sewer bill. District Staff holding a CCTV camera, which are used to inspect the District’s collection system. F1.07 WATER RATE RANKING Calculation: Ranking for the average monthly water bill among CWA member agencies. 3 0 5 10 15 20 YTD Reported in Q1 TARGET Target: Bottom 50th percentile for the 22 member agencies in San Diego. Otay ranks 3 out of 22 member agencies. 640-1 and 640-2 Reservoirs F1.12 PERCENT OF CUSTOMERS PAYING BILLS ELECTRONICALLY Target: No less than 75% per quarter annually. 78.77%80.48%79.63% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Number of customers paying bills electronically/Total number of customers District customer making an online bill payment. F1.13 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM LOSS Calculation: Volume purchased from CWA, City of San Diego & RWCTP Production –volume sold to customers + volume used by District/Volume purchased from CWA, City of San Diego & RWCTP Production 3.5% 3.8%3.8% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% Q1 Q2 ANNUAL AVG TARGET Target: Less than 5%of unaccounted water annually. Calculation: Volume purchased from CWA, City of San Diego & RWCTP Production –volume sold to customers + volume used by District/Volume purchased from CWA, City of San Diego & RWCTP Production F1.14 PLANNED POTABLE WATER MAINTENANCE RATIO IN $ Target: 66% of all labor costs spent on preventative maintenance per quarter annually. 77% 73%73% 50% 60% 70% 80% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: PM + Daily Cost/Total Potable Labor Cost District staff connecting a customer’s meter after pulling a new copper service. F1.15 PLANNED RECYCLED WATER MAINTENANCE RATIO IN $ Target: 70% of all labor costs spent on preventative maintenance per quarter annually. Calculation: PM + Daily Cost/Total Potable Labor Cost 70% 76% 73% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET F1.16 PLANNED WASTEWATER MAINTENANCE RATIO IN $ Target: 77% of all labor costs spent on preventative maintenance per quarter annually. 93% 87% 90% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: PM + Daily Cost/Total Potable Labor Cost Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Recycling Plant F1.17 DIRECT COST OF TREATMENT PER MGD Target: No more than $1050 per MGD spent on wastewater treatment annually. $735.31 $1,123.91 $917.17 $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Total O&M costs directly attributable to sewer treatment/Total volume in MG for one quarter District staff checking the clarity and particulates of a final effluent sample. I1.02 MARK-OUT ACCURACY Target: 100% mark-out accuracy per quarter annually. 100.00%100.00%100.00% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Number of mark-outs performed without an at-fault hit, which is damage to a District facility that results from a missing or erroneous mark-out/YTD total number of mark-outs District staff conducting a mark-out. I1.03 PROJECT CLOSEOUT TIME Target: 45-day average annually. 37.3 37.3 37.3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Q1 Q2 YTD 0 projects closed in Q2 TARGET Calculation: Number of days between NOSC and NOC for all construction projects within the quarter/Number of construction projects within the quarter Board Tour at 870 Pump Station. I1.04 ANNUAL RECYCLED WATER SITE INSPECTIONS Target: 100% of recycled sites inspected annually. There are 147 recycled water use sites scheduled for FY20. 14.00% 44.00%44.00% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Cumulative percentage of recycled water sites inspected per quarter of those required by DEH Developer Contractors installing a recycled main line for Solstice Park in the Millenia Development. I1.05 RECYCLED WATER SHUTDOWN TESTING Target: 90% of recycled site shut down tests performed annually. There are 28 recycled water use sites scheduled for shutdown in FY20. Calculation: Cumulative percentage of recycled site shut down tests performed per year compared to those scheduled 32% 57%57% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET I1.06 EASEMENT EVALUATION AND FIELD INSPECTION Target: 100% assigned easements, evaluated via desktop tools, and inspected annually. 100 easements were assigned for FY20. Calculation: Number of easements evaluated, and inspected/Total easements assigned for the period 75.00% 128.00%128.00% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET I1.07 PERCENT OF PM’S COMPLETED –FLEET MAINTENANCE Target: 90% of scheduled preventative maintenance completed per quarter annually. Calculation: Number of PM’s completed for the quarter/Number of PM’s scheduled to be completed for the quarter. 100%100%100% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET I1.08 PERCENT OF PM’S COMPLETED –RECLAMATION PLANT 100%100%100% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Target: 90% of scheduled preventative maintenance completed each quarter annually. Calculation: Number of PM’s completed for the quarter/Number of PM’s scheduled to be completed for the quarter. Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant I1.09 PERCENT OF PM’S COMPLETED –PUMP/ELECTRIC SECTION Target: 90% of scheduled preventative maintenance completed per quarter annually. 100%100%100% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Number of PM’s completed for the quarter/Number of PM’s scheduled to be completed for the quarter. District Vehicle towing a genset. I1.10 SYSTEM VALVE EXERCISING PROGRAM Target: 3080 valves exercised annually. 989 824 1813 500 700 900 1,100 1,300 1,500 1,700 1,900 2,100 2,300 2,500 Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET Calculation: Total number of valves exercised per year. District Staff performing a valve exercise. I1.11 POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM INTEGRITY (Water Operations) Target: No more than 16 leaks or breaks per 100 miles of distribution system annually. AWWA: 16.1 leaks and breaks per 100 miles of distribution system 1.52 0.57 2.09 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q1 Q2 YTD AWWA BENCHMARK TARGET (50th percentile Potable Water System Integrity: Leaks and Breaks for population served between 100,001-500,000). Calculation: Annual total number of leaks + annual number of breaks/Total miles of distribution piping 1485-1 Pump Station I1.12 RECYCLED WATER SYSTEM INTEGRITY Target: No more than 6.6 leaks or breaks per 100 miles of recycled distribution system annually. Calculation: Number of leaks and breaks/Number of miles of recycled distribution system 0.00 0.00 0.000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q1 Q2 YTD No leaks and breaks in Q1 & Q2 TARGET I1.13 SEWER OVERFLOW RATE (AWWA) (Wastewater Operations) Target & AWWA: 0 overflows per quarter. 0 1 1 0 1 2 Q1 Q2 YTD TARGET & AWWA BENCHMARK is 0 75th Percentile for Sewer Overflow rate for population served between 0-50,000 Calculation: Total number of sewer overflows during the reporting period/Total miles of pipe in the sewage collection system District Staff operating and documenting the condition of the collection system. I1.14 EMERGENCY FACILITY POWER TESTING Target: Test 100% of all facilities scheduled per quarter to have all emergency facilities tested annually. There are 36 powered ready facilities. 100%100%100% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% Q1 Q2 YTD ANNUAL TARGET Calculation: Number of facilities tested/Total number of facilities Emergency standby genset at the Cottonwood Sewer Lift Station. I1.15 POTABLE TANK INSPECTION AND CLEANING Target: 8 potable water storage tanks and/or reservoirs cleaned annually. 1 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q1 Q2 YTD ANNUAL TARGET Calculation: Total number of tanks cleaned and inspected annually. 803-2 Reservoir I1.16 MAIN FLUSHING AND HYDRANT MAINTENANCE Target: 215 mains flushed and fire hydrants maintained annually. Calculation: Total number of mains flushed and fire hydrants maintained per year. 65 149 214 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Q1 Q2 YTD ANNUAL TARGET I1.17 CRITICAL VALVE EXERCISING Target: 631 critical valves exercised annually. 631 631 5 105 205 305 405 505 605 Q1 Q2 YTD ANNUAL TARGET Calculation: Total number of critical valves exercised in a year. Utility Maintenance staff member exercising a District valve. L1.01 EMPLOYEE VOLUNTARY TURNOVER RATE (Organizational Development) Target: Less than 5% turnover annually. 0% 2.17%2.19% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% Q1 Q2 YTD ANNUAL TARGET Calculation: Number of voluntary terminations (not including retirements)/Average number of employees. 2019 Employee Appreciation Luncheon L1.02 TRAINING HOURS PER EMPLOYEE (Organizational Development) Target: 12 hours per employee annually. Calculation: Total qualified training hours for all employees/Average number of FTEs. 8.43 12.91 21.44 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Q1 Q2 YTD/AVG District Staff training for their backflow certification L1.03 SAFETY TRAINING PROGRAM Target: 24 hours per field employee annually. 8.09 16.42 16.42 0 5 10 15 20 Q1 Q2 YTD/AVG TARGET Calculation: Total qualified safety training hours for field employees/Average number of field employees. District Staff entering an excavation to complete a service replacement. Questions? STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Tenille M. Otero Communications Officer PROJECT: Various DIV. NO.All APPROVED BY: Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item: Customer Opinion Survey Report GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To present the Board of Directors with the findings of the Customer Opinion Survey. ANALYSIS: The Otay Water District’s Strategic Plan’s Customer Section goal is to execute and deliver services that meet or exceed customer expectations and increase customer engagement to improve District services. As part of the Strategic Plan’s efforts to enhance and build awareness and engagement among the District’s customers and stakeholders of the District’s strategies, policies, projects, programs, and legislative/regulatory issues, District staff implemented a Customer Opinion Survey in January 2020. The Strategic Plan outlines two separate surveys to be conducted in fiscal year 2020, one, a customer-awareness survey, in quarter three and the other, a call-center survey, in quarter four. Per the Board’s request, both surveys were conducted earlier, in quarter three. The District hired True North Research, Inc. (True North), a full- service survey research firm, to conduct the survey. True North also conducted the San Diego County Water Authority’s Public Opinion Poll in 2019. AGENDA ITEM 14c 2 The District has conducted two separate surveys in previous years, including a Customer Satisfaction Survey and Call Center Survey. After evaluating the District’s needs, True North recommended that the surveys be combined, with the goal of continuing to evaluate general customer awareness about the District and the customer service call center. To do this, True North oversampled additional customers. Since survey methodology trends have evolved, coupled with combining the two surveys in 2020, the methodology used for this report varies from previous reports. Although making comparisons to previous years’ data can be done, it is not recommended by the consultant due to sampling and data collection and methodology differences. Staff conducted previous Customer Awareness surveys in 2012 and 2015 and the Call Center Survey in 2012. The purpose of the Customer Opinion Survey is to obtain information from customers about their overall perception of the District's services, programs, and activities, with the ultimate goal of improving services, customer service, and communications. This study uses a methodology that avoids reliance on residents to initiate the feedback, thus also preventing the creation of a self- selection bias. On a daily basis, the District receives feedback mostly from those customers who are motivated enough to contact the District because they are either very pleased or very displeased, so those collective opinions are not necessarily representative of residential customers in the District’s service area as a whole. Therefore, the study provides a statistically reliable measure of customers’ perceptions, opinions, and satisfaction as they relate to the District and the services it provides. Ultimately, the survey results and analyses presented in the report provide the District with information that can be used to make sound, strategic decisions in a variety of areas, including measuring and tracking internal performance, customer service, community outreach, public education, marketing, planning, and budgeting. True North conducted the survey Jan. 7 through Jan. 15, 2020 to a random sample of 800 residential customers within the District’s service area. To evaluate the call center and customer service, the study oversampled 213 customers who had contacted the District about one or more issues within the last six months prior to the survey. The data was weighted prior to analysis to adjust for the oversample so that the figures presented in this report are representative of residential customers overall. Through the study, the consultant originally set out to complete 600 interviews, but had a strong response from participants, collecting 200 more than anticipated. The survey aimed to do the following: •Profile residents’ perceptions and opinions of the Otay Water District; 3 •Measure residential customers’ overall satisfaction with the District’s efforts to provide water services, their satisfaction with a variety of specific services, and the perceived value of service they receive from the District; •Assess perceptions of the District’s customer service; •Profile customers’ perceptions of water reliability, their support for potential solutions, as well as their household’s conservation behaviors; •Determine satisfaction with (and perceived effectiveness of) the District’s communication with residents; and •Gather relevant background and demographic information (demographics are included on page 43 of the report). The survey, conducted in English and Spanish, followed a mixed-method design that employed multiple recruiting methods (email and telephone) and multiple data-collection methods (telephone and online). Of the 800 completed surveys, 599 were gathered online and 201 by telephone. Based on the District’s estimated customer population, a sample size of 800 respondents allows a 95 percent confidence level that the results of the survey are within a plus or minus 3.4 percent of what the research would have found if True North interviewed every residential customer in the District. The cooperation rate for the telephone method was very high, with 73 percent of eligible customers reached agreeing to participate in the survey. A corresponding cooperation rate on the online side is not available as there is no measure of how many email invitations actually reached the intended recipients were opened and read. Spanish language respondents comprised approximately five percent of the final sample, which accounted for 11 percent of all surveys completed via cell phone, three percent of surveys completed via landline phone, and four percent of surveys completed online as a result of the emailed invitation. The average length of the survey was 17 minutes. All data is available in the detailed report in attachments C and D, but highlights of the survey are as follows: •89 percent of customers indicated they were satisfied with the job the District is doing to provide water services to their household. •Across various services provided by the District, the District received the highest rates of satisfaction for providing reliable water service and convenient hours of operation (each 95 percent), followed by keeping the water system in good 4 condition through timely repairs and maintenance (94 percent), provide good customer service (93 percent), and ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future (93 percent). •When presented with six services their household may receive, trash collection received the highest percentage of respondents indicating that the amount paid for the service was either too low or reasonable (57 percent), followed by sewer (39 percent) and water (35 percent). Cell phone service, electricity, and television received lower ratings, meaning they think those services are less reasonable in price. •Approximately 72 percent of respondents could not or would not provide an estimate when asked how much they thought the water that their household receives costs per gallon. •Among customers who contacted the District about an issue in the six months preceding the survey, 75 percent reported that the issue was ultimately resolved to their satisfaction. •More than three-quarters of customers who had been in contact with the District indicated that they were very or somewhat satisfied with the courtesy of the service representative (84 percent), their ability to reach a service representative (83 percent), and the knowledge and expertise of the service representative (75 percent). •Overall, 12 to 14 percent of respondents felt that the reliability of the water supplies in California, Southern California, and San Diego County would improve over the next 10 years, with the rating slightly higher for the Otay Water District’s service area at 16 percent. •Seventy-seven percent of respondents offered that they had taken one or more actions to reduce their household’s water usage in the past 12 months, whereas 18 percent confided they had not attempted to use less water. •Eighty-three percent of respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the District’s efforts to communicate with customers through newsletters, social media, bill inserts, web, direct mail, and/or other means. The consultant recommends that a report be conducted approximately every two years and not be conducted annually because that is generally not enough time to evaluate and implement changes. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. STRATEGIC GOAL: 5 Execute and deliver services that meet or exceed customer expectations and increase customer engagement in order to improve District Services. LEGAL IMPACT: None. General Manager Attachments: A)Committee Action B)Presentation C)Customer Opinion Survey Summary Report D)Appendix A, Cross Tabulations 6 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Informational Item: Customer Opinion Survey Report COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance and Administration Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on February 18, 2020 and the following comments were made: •Staff and District consultant, Mr. Timothy McLarney, the President of True North Research, Inc. presented the findings of the Customer Opinion Survey conducted in January 2020. •Information from the staff report was reviewed. •Mr. McLarney presented a PowerPoint that reviewed the following (see attached copy of the PowerPoint presentation): -Purpose of the Study -Methodology of the Study -Customer Overall Satisfaction o Additionally, data for customer overall satisfaction was broken down by the following: ▪Customers who have contacted District with an issue in the last six months ▪Age and Service location by City ▪Household Income and Ethnicity -Satisfaction with Service Aspects -Perceived Cost of Service -Percentage of Customers Who Contacted the District in the Past Six Months o Additionally, data for customers who have contacted with the District in the last six months was broken down by the following: ▪Issues Resolved to Satisfaction ▪Satisfaction with Service Representative -Expected Reliability of Water Supply -Support for Reliability Solutions -Satisfaction with Communication -Effectiveness of Communication Methods -Key Take-Aways from the Study’s Findings •The Committee inquired if data, broken down by ethnicity, was collected for responses on “Water Quality”. The Committee was interested as some customers may be from another Country where it is common for the community not to have confidence in the quality of public water. It was indicated that, possibly, more outreach can be done for these customers. Mr. McLarney indicated that the information is available potentially in the crosstabs, but he did not have it at the moment. He stated that he could include the information in the board meeting presentation. He also stated that the data from each question can be broken down by all the different variables. •It was discussed that 20 percent of the respondents to the Customer Opinion Survey have contacted the District’s service center, which is similar to the percentage of the overall customer database, where 17 percent have contacted the District’s service center. •Customer service staff indicated, in response to an inquiry from the Committee, that the District will be implementing an “exit survey” at the end of customer service calls to allow customers to provide immediate feedback on their experience with the District’s call center. It is anticipated that the system would go online in approximately two (2) to three (3) weeks. •There was discussion regarding the respondents’ support of desalinated water as a solution to provide water reliability. It was indicated that support for desalinated water was considerably lower in “other unincorporated areas of the District” than in Chula Vista, El Cajon, Jamul and Spring Valley. The Committee commented that El Cajon, Jamul, and Spring Valley are unincorporated, and if Mr. McLarney could clarify what areas are being identified as “unincorporated.” Mr. McLarney indicated that he would review the zip codes to those areas and clarify the “other unincorporated areas” during his presentation at the Board meeting. •The Committee asked that in the next survey, questions regarding potable reuse/recycled sewer water be asked using both phrases to see how the phrasing impacts responses. •It was discussed that customer satisfaction is high with nine (9) of ten (10) customers satisfied with the overall water service they receive from the District. •In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated they would look to see if the survey information could be sorted by director divisions. Subsequent to the meeting, it was confirmed that the data was not available by division. •The Committee commented that the survey was performed in a month when water bills are generally low (January) and asked if a customer survey has been performed when water bills are high (middle of the summer). Staff indicated the last survey was performed in October 2015 which is still a fairly high-water use month. Upon completion of the discussion, the Committee supported presentation of this item as an informational item. 3/5/2020 C USTOMER OPINION S URVEY C ONDUCTED FOR THE OTAY WATER D ISTRICT P RESENTED BY TIMOTHY MCL ARNEY PH.D. Attachment B 22 o Profile perceptions of Otay Water District o Measure satisfaction with water services o Gather feedback on customer service when customers contact the District o Profile perceptions of water reliability and support for potential solutions o Assess the effectiveness of District communications PURPOSE OF STUDY 33 o Conducted January 7th to January 15th, 2020 o Stratified Random Sample of 800 residents in the Otay Water District’s service area o Mixed-Method approach o Recruited via email and phone o Data collection via phone and online o 17-minute average interview length o English & Spanish o Overall margin of error is ±3.4% METHODOLOGY OF STUDY 44 OVERALL SATISFACTION Not sure 2.7 Prefer not to answer 0.8 Very dissatisfied 2.1 Somewhat dissatisfied 5.3 Very satisfied 55.4 Somewhat satisfied 33.8 55 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS 49.3 56.1 55.0 57.3 52.3 56.1 37.4 35.8 35.0 25.6 33.9 34.0 57.757.556.7 Very satisfied 66.3 32.230.430.6 Smwt satisfied 20.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) Contacted District in Past 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s 66 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS 62.3 50.8 57.5 65.3 67.2 62.5 31.0 37.3 33.2 26.4 24.6 26.1 Very satisfied 46.9 63.7 59.8 48.0 Smwt satisfied 37.9 28.9 31.1 38.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2)Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s 77 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY HOUSEHOLD INCOME & ETHNICITY 57.9 53.3 58.2 64.8 48.9 59.3 51.6 46.9 37.3 39.8 27.7 29.7 38.2 29.5 39.4 30.9 59.868.5 55.7Very satisfied 52.0 30.5 26.1 36.2Smwt satisfied 38.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8)Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s 88 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICE ASPECTS 29.0 35.0 57.8 48.7 55.8 57.3 57.7 54.4 60.2 57.5 61.9 58.8 63.0 67.0 37.6 34.9 27.7 38.3 32.6 31.4 32.2 36.7 30.9 35.4 31.3 35.5 32.2 28.2 21.1 18.9 9.5 8.8 7.3 7.2 5.1 5.0 12.3 11.1 5.0 4.2 4.2 3 3 5.3 4.6 4 3 4 2 2 4.1 4.9 4 3 3 2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Offer good value for the cost of water services Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances Provide sufficient water pressure Educate customers about ways to conserve water Provide high quality water Provide accurate billing statements Provide water that is safe to drink Communicate w customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related issues Provide water that is free of color and odor Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future Provide good customer service Keep system in good condition through timely repairs, maintenance Provide convenient hours of operation Provide reliable water service % Respondents Who Provided Opinion Very satisfied Smwt satisfied Smwt dissatisfied Very dissatisfied 99 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICE ASPECTS PROVIDING HIGH QUALITY WATER 1010 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICE ASPECTS PROVIDING WATER THAT IS SAFE TO DRINK 47.7 60.5 40.8 25.7 5.1 2.7 8.7 5.6 4.9 7.5 4.9 3.0 7.3 6.6 6.4 57.7 64.4 51.9 53.5 32.2 30.0 32.0 40.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Caucasian/White Latino/Hispanic Af-American/Black Asian American Mixed/Other Overall Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s Very dissatisfied Smwt dissatisfied Smwt satisfied Very satisfied 1111 PERCEIVED COST OF SERVICE 9.2 24.9 32.8 35.2 38.7 56.1 12.4 15.5 18.7 24.0 15.5 16.7 8.3 14.3 5.0 1 1 1 1 1 13.3 10.5 18.4 18.7 20.1 19.3 50.0 22.5 19.5 34.4 17.0 9.7 2 5.4 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Cable or satellite TV Electricity Cell phone Water Sewer Trash collection % Respondents Too low Reasonable A little too high Smwt too high Much too high Not sure / NA Prefer not to answer 1212 CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS No contact 77.5 Yes, contact 19.7 Not sure 2.7 1313 ISSUE RESOLVED TO SATISFACTION Prefer not to answer 2.0 Not sure 5.9 Satisfied 75.4 Dissatisfied 16.7 1414 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE 57.0 59.9 65.3 17.7 22.8 18.7 6.4 4.1 6.9 6.8 5.4 12.0 6.4 8.62 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Your ability to reach a service representative The courtesy of the service representative % Respondents Who Contacted District in Past 6 Months Very satisfied Smwt satisfied Smwt dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Not sure/Prefer not to answer 1515 EXPECTED RELIABILITY OF WATER SUPPLY 12.1 13.6 15.8 36.0 37.7 41.5 41.1 37.8 30.4 10.4 9.2 9.7 11.3 12.8 34.2 41.4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 California Southern California San Diego County Otay Water District's Service Area Q16 Reliability of water supply in . . . % R e s p o n d e n t s Prefer not to answer Not sure Getting worse Staying about same Improving 1616 SUPPORT FOR WATER RELIABILITY SOLUTIONS 25.9 33.1 29.0 18.4 26.8 1 0 51.3 21.4 56.3 5 5 4 4 5 7 5 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment technologies Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water % Respondents Strongly support Smwt support Smwt oppose Strongly oppose Not sure Prefer not to answer 1717 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION Not sure 9.4 Prefer not to answer 0.5 Very dissatisfied 2.1 Somewhat dissatisfied 5.2 Very satisfied 41.7 Somewhat satisfied 41.2 1818 EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNICATION METHODS 13.9 12.2 24.0 28.3 17.7 23.6 33.1 27.4 32.6 34.8 44.7 23.0 28.3 33.8 30.3 41.8 40.4 33.8 41.3 39.3 38.7 36.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Automated voice calls via telephone Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Notices hung on your front door handle Text messages Sponsoring community events Otay Water District website Information inserted into your water bill envelope Postcards mailed to your house Newsletters mailed to your house Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Email % Respondents Very effective Somewhat effective 1919 Customer Satisfaction is High o 9/10 customers are satisfied overall with the water service they receive from Otay Water o Satisfaction is also high for various aspects of water service including reliability, hours of operation, and keeping the system well-maintained o Customers give high marks to Otay Water’s customer service in general, and those who contacted District were positive about representative’s performance in resolving their issue o More than 8/10 customers were satisfied with the District’s communication efforts KEY TAKE-AWAYS 2020 Opportunities for Improvement o Stay the course o Raise customer awareness of the cost/good value of water o Rebate programs o Field representatives clearly explaining to the customer the nature of a problem and how it can be fixed o Revisit the District’s communication strategies as preferences and technologies continue to evolve KEY TAKE-AWAYS Attachment C THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 iOtay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T ABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iii List of Figures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Purpose of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Overview of Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Organization of Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Disclaimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 About True North. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Just the Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Satisfaction With Water Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Customer Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Water Reliability Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Satisfaction With Water Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Overall Satisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Question 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Reason for Dissatisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Question 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Specific Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Differentiators of Opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Value Relative to Other Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Question 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Cost per Gallon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Question 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Value for Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Question 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Customer Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 District Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Question 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Question 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Reason for Contact. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Question 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Specific Water-Related Service Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Question 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Field Representatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Question 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Question 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Number of Contacts Needed to Resolve Issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Question 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Issue Resolved to Satisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Question 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Satisfaction with Service Representatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Question 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Water Reliability Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Opinion of Water Supply. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 iiOtay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Question 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Solutions to Increase Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Question 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Conservation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Expected Home Water Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Question 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Taken Actions to Reduce Water Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Question 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Actions Taken to Reduce Water Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Question 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Question 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Question 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Communication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Overall Satisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Question 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Pipeline Newsletter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Question 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Pipeline Newsletter Readership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Question 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Communication Preferences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Question 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Background & Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Questionnaire Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Programming, Pre-Test & Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Sample, Weighting, Recruiting & Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Margin of Error Due to Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Data Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Rounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Questionnaire & Toplines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Li s t o f T a b l e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 iiiOtay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L IST OF TABLES Table 1 Satisfaction With Services by Overall Satisfaction With District. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Table 2 Support for Water Reliability Solutions by Service Address City & Otay Water District’s Service Area (Showing % Strongly Support) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Table 3 Support for Water Reliability Solutions Account by Setup Year & Taken Actions to Reduce Water Usage (Showing % Strongly Support) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Table 4 Effectiveness of Otay Water District Communication Efforts by Satisfaction With Communication & Age (Showing % Very Effective) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Table 5 Demographics of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Li s t o f F i g u r e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 ivOtay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L IST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Overall Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 2 Overall Satisfaction by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status & Contacted District in Past 6 Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 3 Overall Satisfaction by Age & Service Address City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 4 Overall Satisfaction by Hsld Income & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 5 Reason for Dissatisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Figure 6 Satisfaction With Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Figure 7 Reasonableness of Amount Paid for Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Figure 8 Estimated Cost of Water per Gallon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Figure 9 Estimated Cost of Water per Gallon by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status & Contacted District in Past 6 Months. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 10 Estimated Cost of Water per Gallon by Age & Service Address City . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 11 Estimated Cost of Water per Gallon by Hsld Income & Ethnicity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 12 Value of Water After Learning Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure 13 Value of Water After Learning Cost by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status & Contacted District in Past 6 Months. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 14 Value of Water After Learning Cost by Age & Service Address City. . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 15 Value of Water After Learning Cost by Hsld Income & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 16 Contacted District in Past 6 Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 17 Contacted District in Past 6 Months by Account Setup Year & Home Ownership Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 18 Contacted District in Past 6 Months by Age & Service Address City . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 19 Contacted District in Past 6 Months by Hsld Income & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 20 Reason for Contacting District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Figure 21 Problem With Water Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Figure 22 Field Representative Sent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Figure 23 Field Representative Service Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 24 Number of Contacts to Resolve Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 25 Issue Resolved to Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Figure 26 Satisfaction With Service Representative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Figure 27 Opinion of Reliability of Water Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Figure 28 Support for Water Reliability Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Figure 29 Future Water Usage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Figure 30 Future Water Usage by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status, Contacted District in Past 6 Months & Taken Action to Reduce Water Usage . . . . . 30 Figure 31 Future Water Usage by Age & Service Address City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Figure 32 Future Water Usage by Hsld Income & Ethnicity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Figure 33 Taken Action to Reduce Water Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Figure 34 Taken Action to Reduce Water Usage by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status & Contacted District in Past 6 Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Figure 35 Taken Action to Reduce Water Usage by Age & Service Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Figure 36 Taken Action to Reduce Water Usage by Hsld Income & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Figure 37 Actions Taken to Reduce Water Usage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Figure 38 Major Changes on Property to Reduce Water Usage in Past 5 Yrs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Figure 39 Major Changes on Property to Reduce Water Usage in Past 5 Yrs by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status & Contacted District in Past 6 Months. . . . . . 34 Figure 40 Major Changes on Property to Reduce Water Usage in Past 5 Yrs by Age & Service Address City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Figure 41 Major Changes on Property to Reduce Water Usage in Past 5 Yrs by Hsld Income & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Figure 42 Changes on Property to Reduce Water Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Figure 43 Satisfaction With Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Li s t o f F i g u r e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 vOtay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Figure 44 Satisfaction With Communication by Account Setup Year & Home Ownership Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Figure 45 Satisfaction With Communication by Age & Service Address City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Figure 46 Satisfaction With Communication by Ethnicity, Gender & Overall Satisfaction . . . . 37 Figure 47 Recall Receiving Pipeline Newsletter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Figure 48 Recall Receiving Pipeline Newsletter by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status & Contacted District in Past 6 Months. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Figure 49 Recall Receiving Pipeline Newsletter by Age & Service Address City. . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Figure 50 Recall Receiving Pipeline Newsletter by Hsld Income & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Figure 51 Frequency of Reading Pipeline Newsletter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Figure 52 Frequency of Reading Pipeline Newsletter by Account Setup Year, Home Ownership Status & Contacted District in Past 6 Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Figure 53 Frequency of Reading Pipeline Newsletter by Age & Service Address City . . . . . . . 41 Figure 54 Frequency of Reading Pipeline Newsletter by Hsld Income & Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . 41 Figure 55 Effectiveness of Otay Water District Communication Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Figure 56 Maximum Margin of Error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 In t r o d u c t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 1Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I NTRODUCTION Established in 1956, the Otay Water District provides water and recycled water services to cus- tomers in southeastern San Diego County, including the communities of Spring Valley, La Presa, Rancho San Diego, Jamul, eastern Chula Vista, and eastern Otay Mesa along the international border with Mexico. As a revenue neutral public agency, customers pay only their fair share of the District’s costs to operate and maintain the water, recycled water, and wastewater systems, including acquiring, treating, and transporting drinking water. As part of its commitment to provide high quality water services that meet the varied needs of its customers, the Otay Water District regularly engages customers through community outreach, social media, and other communications activities and receives periodic feedback regarding its performance. Although these informal feedback mechanisms are a valuable source of informa- tion for the District in that they provide timely and accurate information about the opinions of specific customers, they do not necessarily provide an accurate picture of residential customers as a whole. Informal feedback mechanisms typically rely on the resident to initiate the feedback, which creates a self-selection bias. The Otay Water District receives feedback only from those residents who are motivated enough to initiate the feedback process. Because these individuals tend to be those who are either very pleased or very displeased with their service, their collective opinions are not necessarily representative of residential customers in the District’s service area as a whole. PURPOSE OF STUDY The motivation for this present study was to design and employ a methodology that will avoid the self-selection bias noted above and thereby provide a statisti- cally reliable measure of customers’ perceptions, opinions, and satisfaction as they relate to the Otay Water District and the services it provides. Ultimately, the survey results and analyses pre- sented in this report provide the District with information that can be used to make sound, stra- tegic decisions in a variety of areas, including measuring and tracking internal performance, community outreach, public education, marketing, planning, and budgeting. To assist in this effort, the Otay Water District selected True North Research to design the research plan and con- duct the study. Broadly defined, the study was designed to: • Profile residents’ perceptions and opinions of the Otay Water District; • Measure residential customers’ overall satisfaction with the District’s efforts to provide water services, their satisfaction with a variety of specific services, and the perceived value of service they receive from the District; • Assess perceptions of the District’s customer service; • Profile customers’ perceptions of water reliability, their support for potential solutions, as well as their household’s conservation behaviors; • Determine satisfaction with (and perceived effectiveness of) the District’s communication with residents; and • Gather relevant background and demographic information. OVERVIEW OF METHODOLOGY A full description of the methodology used for this study is included later in this report (see Methodology on page 44). In brief, the survey was administered to a random sample of 800 residential customers within Otay Water District’s ser- In t r o d u c t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 2Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vice area. To accommodate the District’s interest in evaluating its customer service and call cen- ter performance, the study oversampled 213 customers who had contacted the District about one or more issues during the six months prior to the survey. The data were weighted prior to analysis to adjust for the oversample so that the figures presented in this report are representa- tive of residential customers overall. The survey followed a mixed-method design that employed multiple recruiting methods (email and telephone) and multiple data collection methods (telephone and online). Administered in English and Spanish between January 7 and January 15, 2020, the average interview was 17 min- utes. ORGANIZATION OF REPORT This report is designed to meet the needs of readers who prefer a summary of the findings as well as those who are interested in the details of the results. For those who seek an overview of the findings, the sections titled Just the Facts and Conclusions are for you. They provide a summary of the most important factual findings of the survey in bul- let-point format and a discussion of their implications. For the interested reader, this section is followed by a more detailed question-by-question discussion of the results from the survey by topic area (see Table of Contents), as well as a description of the methodology employed for col- lecting and analyzing the data. And, for the truly ambitious reader, the questionnaire used for the interviews is contained at the back of this report (see Questionnaire & Toplines on page 47), and a complete set of crosstabulations for the survey results is contained in Appendix A. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS True North thanks the Otay Water District for the opportunity to conduct the study and for contributing valuable input during the design stage of this study. The collective experience, insight, and local knowledge provided by district representatives and staff improved the overall quality of the research presented here. DISCLAIMER The statements and conclusions in this report are those of the authors (Dr. Timothy McLarney and Richard Sarles) at True North Research, Inc. and not necessarily those of the Otay Water District. Any errors and omissions are the responsibility of the authors. ABOUT TRUE NORTH True North is a full-service survey research firm that is dedicated to providing public agencies with a clear understanding of the values, perceptions, priorities, and concerns of their residents and customers. Through designing and implementing scientific sur- veys, focus groups, and one-on-one interviews, as well as expert interpretation of the findings, True North helps its clients to move with confidence when making strategic decisions in a variety of areas—such as planning, policy evaluation, performance management, establishing fiscal pri- orities, passing revenue measures, and developing effective public information campaigns. During their careers, Dr. McLarney (President) and Mr. Sarles (Principal Researcher) have designed and conducted over 1,000 survey research studies for public agencies—including more than 400 studies for California municipalities and special districts. Ju s t t h e F a c t s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 3Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J UST THE FACTS The following is an outline of the main factual findings from the survey. For the reader’s conve- nience, we have organized the findings according to the section titles used in the body of this report. Thus, if you would like to learn more about a particular finding, simply turn to the appro- priate report section. SATISFACTION WITH WATER SERVICES • The vast majority (89%) of respondents indicated they were either very (55%) or somewhat (34%) satisfied with the Otay Water District’s efforts to provide water services to their house- hold. Approximately 7% were very or somewhat dissatisfied, and 4% were unsure or unwill- ing to share their opinion. • When the small percentage (7%) of respondents who indicated that they were dissatisfied with the District’s efforts to provide water services were asked if there was a particular rea- son for their opinion, a concern about high rates or the cost of their bill was by far the most common (56%). Other reasons mentioned by at least 10% of dissatisfied respondents included inaccurate/incorrect billing (23%), water quality, taste, or smell (17%), and cus- tomer service issues (11%). • Among 14 specific service areas tested, respondents were most satisfied with the District’s efforts to provide reliable water service and convenient hours of operation (each 95% very or somewhat satisfied), followed by keep the water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance (94%), provide good customer service (93%), and ensure an ade- quate water supply now and in the future (93%). • At the other end of the spectrum, respondents were somewhat less satisfied with the Dis- trict’s efforts to offer good value for the cost of water services (67%) and provide rebate pro- grams that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances (70%). VALUE • When presented with six services their household may receive, trash collection received the highest percentage of respondents indicating that the amount paid for the service was either too low or reasonable (57%), followed by sewer (39%) and water (35%). • Comparatively, cell phone service (33%), electricity (25%), and television (10%) received lower ratings. • Approximately 72% of respondents could not or would not provide an estimate when asked how much they thought the water that their household receives costs per gallon. Just 7% of respondents correctly identified the cost of their household’s water at one cent per gallon, whereas 21% provided an incorrect estimate. Among those who provided an incorrect esti- mate, a per-gallon cost of two cents to five cents was the most frequent response (9% of all respondents). • After informing customers that the average cost of the water that their household receives is about one cent per gallon, the majority (59%) of residential customers rated the value of their water as excellent (29%) or good (30%), 25% offered that the value is fair, and about 10% rated it as poor or very poor. The remaining 6% of customers surveyed were unsure or unwilling to offer an opinion. Ju s t t h e F a c t s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 4Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CUSTOMER SERVICE • Overall, 20% of respondents had contacted the District in the six months prior to the inter- view. • Respondents were most likely to have contacted the District with billing or payment ques- tions (29% of those who contacted the District), followed by water-related services issues (25%), to make a payment (16%), and to request that their service be started or stopped (13%). • When the small subgroup of customers who had contacted the District about a water-related service issue (5% of all customers) was asked to describe the specific problem they were hav- ing, over two-thirds had contacted the District about a water leak or broken pipe (69%). Other water service issues that prompted contact included an unexpectedly high bill (14%), water pressure issues (12%), a broken sprinkler (10%), and poor water quality, odor, or taste (6%). • Over one-third (36%) of customers who had contacted the District about a water-related ser- vice issue within the past six months had a field representative sent to their property. • The majority of the small customer segment who had a field representative sent to their property (2% of all customers) indicated that the field representative arrived in a timely man- ner (58%) and accurately assessed the problem (56%). The remainder of respondents either could not or would not rate these two dimensions, with none indicating that the field repre- sentative failed to arrive in a timely manner or accurately assess the problem. When asked if the field representative clearly explained the nature of the problem and how it could be fixed, 44% of customers asked the question answered in the affirmative, 27% indicated that the field representative did not perform this task, and 29% were unsure or unwilling to pro- vide a response. • Turning back to the larger segment of customers whose household had contacted the Otay Water District within the past six months, close to seven-in-ten were able to resolve their issue with a single contact (69%). Thirteen percent (13%) required multiple contacts, 14% indicated that the issue was not resolved, and 5% were unsure or unwilling to state. • Three-quarters (75%) of the customers who had contacted the District indicated that their reason for contacting the Otay Water District was ultimately resolved to their satisfaction. • More than three-quarters of customers who had been in contact with the District indicated that they were very or somewhat satisfied with the courtesy of the service representative (84%), their ability to reach a service representative (83%), and the knowledge and expertise of the service representative (75%). WATER RELIABILITY SOLUTIONS • Overall, 12% to 14% of respondents felt that the reliability of the water supplies in California, Southern California, and San Diego County would improve over the next 10 years, with the rating slightly higher for the Otay Water District’s service area at 16%. • For both California and Southern California, respondents were more likely to indicate that the supplies would be getting worse (California: 41%, Southern California: 41%) over staying the same (California: 34%, Southern California: 36%), whereas opinions were evenly split for San Diego County (38% each). • For the District, respondents were more likely to feel that supplies would be staying about the same rather than getting worse (42% vs. 30%). The remainder of respondents were unsure or declined to state their opinion. Ju s t t h e F a c t s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 5Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • When asked if they would support or oppose the District taking action on three projects to expand the sources of drinking water and increase the reliability of the water supply, captur- ing, storing, and treating rainwater and stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water was rated the highest (85% strongly or somewhat support), followed closely by desalinating and purifying seawater to make clean drinking water (84%). Respondents were less likely to support recycling sewer water and purifying it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment technologies (47%). CONSERVATION • Seven-in-ten respondents (71%) anticipate their water use to remain about the same this year as compared with last year, 20% expect to use less water in 2020, 5% feel they will use more water this year, and 3% were unsure or unwilling to state. • Seventy-seven percent (77%) of respondents offered that they had taken one or more actions to reduce their household’s water usage in the past 12 months, whereas 18% confided they had not attempted to use less water and 5% were unsure or unwilling to answer the ques- tion. • Among respondents who had taken one or more actions to reduce water usage in their household during the past 12 months, over half turned off the faucet while brushing their teeth (63%), used less water while showering, washing their hands, or doing the dishes (61%), only ran the dishwasher or washing machine when full (59%), watered plants/lawn between 4PM and 9AM (52%), and did not hose down their driveway or walkways (51%). • Sixty-four percent (64%) of residential customers indicated that they had made major changes to their property over the past five years to reduce their use of water, whereas 31% had not made any changes and 5% were unsure or unwilling to state. • When respondents who had made major changes to their property within the past five years to reduce water usage were asked to detail the types of changes made, the majority (54%) indicated that they had made landscaping changes, such as installing drought tolerant land- scapes, artificial grass, or concrete. Other changes cited by at least 10% of households that had made major changes to their property to reduce water usage include purchasing water- efficient appliances (18%), reducing water use in general (15%), and installing a drip irriga- tion system (12%). COMMUNICATION • Overall, 83% of respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the District’s efforts to communicate with customers through newsletters, social media, bill inserts, web, direct mail, and/or other means, with 42% indicating that they were very satisfied and 41% some- what satisfied. The remaining respondents were either dissatisfied with the District's com- munication efforts (7%) or unsure or unwilling to provide an opinion (10%). • When asked if they recalled receiving the Pipeline Newsletter that is mailed or emailed to households on a quarterly basis, 49% of customers recalled receiving it, 33% did not recall receiving it, and 18% were unsure. • Among all respondents, 22% indicated that they always read the Pipeline Newsletter when it arrives, 20% said sometimes, 5% rarely, and 1% confided that they recalled receiving the newsletter but never read it. The majority (51%) of respondents did not recall receiving the newsletter or were unsure whether they had received it. • Respondents indicated that email was the most effective way for the Otay Water District to communicate with them (81% very or somewhat effective), followed by emailed/electronic newsletters (74%) and newsletters mailed to the home (72%). At the other end of the spec- Ju s t t h e F a c t s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 6Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . trum, automated voice calls via telephone (37%) and social media (41%) were perceived to be the least effective ways for the District to communicate with residential customers. • When asked whether there were any methods of communication not previously mentioned that they feel would be a very effective way for the Otay Water District to communicate with them, the vast majority (84%) of residential customers did not have anything to add, and no single suggestion was cited by more than one and a half percent of respondents. Co n c l u s i o n s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 7Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C ONCLUSIONS As noted in the Introduction, this study was designed to provide the Otay Water District with a statistically reliable understanding of customers’ perceptions, opinions, and satisfaction as they relate to the Otay Water District and the services it provides. Whereas subsequent sections of this report are devoted to conveying the detailed results of the survey, in this section we attempt to ‘see the forest through the trees’ and note how the collective results of the survey answer some of the key questions that motivated the research. How well is the Otay Water District perform- ing in meeting the needs of customers? Respondents were generally quite satisfied with the Otay Water District’s efforts to provide water services to their households. Close to nine-in-ten respondents (89%) were satisfied with the District’s overall performance in providing water services. The high levels of satisfaction exhibited by respondents as a whole were generally echoed across resident sub- groups, with overall satisfaction ranging from 78% to 95%. The high level of satisfaction expressed with the District’s performance in general was also mirrored in respondents’ assessments of the Otay Water District’s performance in providing specific services. For all but two service areas tested, at least 85% of respondents were satisfied with the District’s efforts—and for the majority of services, at least 90% were satisfied. Among the 14 services tested, respondents were most satisfied with the District’s efforts to provide reliable water service and convenient hours of operation, keep the water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance, provide good customer service, and ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future. How do customers rate the Otay Water District’s customer service? One of the objectives of this study was to profile the opinions of custom- ers who had reason to contact the District during the six months prior to taking the survey—focusing in particular on how they assess the cus- tomer service they received. Approximately 20% of customers surveyed reported that they had con- tacted the District in the six months prior to taking the survey regarding their water service, with the most common reasons being questions about billing/payments, a water-related service issue, to make a pay- ment, and to request a start/stop of service. Among this subgroup, seven-in-ten customers were able to resolve their issue with a single con- tact and three-quarters indicated that the reason for contacting the Otay Water District was ultimately resolved to their satisfaction. Additionally, more than three-quarters indicated that they were very of somewhat sat- isfied with the courtesy of the service representative, their ability to reach a service representative, and the knowledge and expertise of the service representative. Co n c l u s i o n s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 8Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Among the small subgroup of customers with a water service issue that required a field representative be sent to their property (2% of all resi- dential customers), none indicated that the field representative failed to arrive in a timely manner or accurately assess the problem. However, when asked if the field representative clearly explained the nature of the problem and how it could be fixed, 44% answered in the affirmative, 27% indicated that the field representative did not perform this task, and 29% were unsure or unwilling to provide a response. Where should the Dis- trict focus its efforts in the future? Perhaps the most important recommendation, one often overlooked in customer satisfaction research, is for the District to recognize the things it does well and to focus on continuing to perform at a high level in these areas. As noted throughout this report, the vast majority of customers were generally pleased. The top priority for the Otay Water District should thus be to do what it takes to maintain the quality of services it currently provides. Nevertheless, in the spirit of constant improvement, the results of the study suggest several opportunities to increase customer satisfaction further. Based on the survey findings, some residential customers saw room for improvement in offering good value for the cost of water ser- vices, providing rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances, and for field representatives to clearly explain the nature of the problem and how it could be fixed when sent to their property. Although the majority of respondents who provided an opinion were satisfied with each of these service areas, the rates of satisfaction were somewhat lower when compared to the other service areas tested. There is also an opportunity to increase customers’ knowledge regarding the per-gallon cost of the water their household receives. Overall, 72% of respondents could not or would not provide an estimate when asked how much they thought the water that their household receives costs per gallon. This figure is much higher than that found for the San Diego region as a whole (45%).1 With that said, 7% of Otay Water District’s cus- tomers correctly identified the cost of their household’s water at one cent per gallon compared with 2% of residents region-wide. What are residents’ views on water reliabil- ity? In March of 2019, the State of California was declared free of drought for the first time since December 2011, after more than seven years.2 Although the drought is ‘officially’ over, many residents nevertheless recognize that water reliability is likely to be an ongoing concern in Cali- fornia. 1. True North’s 2019 study for the San Diego County Water Authority can be found at: https://www.sdcwa.org/public-opinion-research 2. https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/california-drought/california-drought-officially-over-after-more-seven- years-n983461 Co n c l u s i o n s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 9Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . When asked specifically whether they expect that the reliability of water supplies in Otay Water District’s service area will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 10 years, 30% anticipated they would get worse, whereas 42% expected little change. Just 16% were of the opinion that the reliability of water supplies would improve during this period. Concerns about the reliability of the District’s future water supplies translate to widespread support for several initiatives designed to improve water reliability—including capturing, storing and treating stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water, and desalinating sea- water to make clean drinking water. More than eight-in-ten residential customers signaled their support for the District pursuing each of these strategies in an effort to expand sources of drinking water and overall water reliability. How well is the Otay Water District communi- cating with customers, and what are some of the main challenges? The public’s preferences for communication are growing increasingly diverse. Whereas older and long-time residents continue to rely on news- letters and printed forms of communication, younger and often newer residents generally show greater interest and reliance in digital forms of communication including social media, text, and smart phone apps. This pattern makes the challenge of agency-resident communication more difficult than in the past, when the sources residents relied on for infor- mation were fewer and more consistent across demographic subgroups. In turn, satisfaction with public agency communications has generally declined over the past few years. Against this backdrop of declining satisfaction with public agency com- munications in general, the survey results suggest the Otay Water Dis- trict is doing a solid job communicating with its residential customers. Just over eight-in-ten respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the District’s efforts to communicate with customers through newslet- ters, social media, bill inserts, web, direct mail, and/or other means. Additionally, when asked specifically if they recalled receiving the Pipe- line Newsletter that is mailed or emailed to households on a quarterly basis, close to half (49%) of customers answered in the affirmative, with 43% of all customers reporting that they always or sometimes read the Pipeline Newsletter when it arrives. Looking to the future, there are a variety of communication methods that residential customers generally viewed as being effective ways for the District to communicate with them, with email, emailed/electronic news- letters, and newsletters mailed to the home at the top of the list (see Communication Preferences on page 41 for more details). Sa t i s f a c t i o n W i t h W a t e r S e r v i c e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 10Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S ATISFACTION WITH WATER SERVICES The opening series of questions in the survey was designed to assess residential customers’ opinions about the District’s performance in providing various services. OVERALL SATISFACTION The first question in this series asked respondents to indicate if, overall, they were satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the Otay Water District is doing to pro- vide water services to their household. Because this question does not reference a specific pro- gram, facility, or service and requested that the respondent consider the Water District’s performance in general, the findings of this question may be regarded as an overall performance rating for the District. As shown in Figure 1, the vast majority (89%) of respondents indicated they were either very (55%) or somewhat (34%) satisfied with the District’s efforts to provide water services. Approxi- mately 7% were very or somewhat dissatisfied, and 4% were unsure or unwilling to share their opinion. Question 1 Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the Otay Water District is doing to provide water services to your household? FIGURE 1 OVERALL SATISFACTION The next three figures display how customers’ opinions about the District’s overall performance in providing water services varied by a host of demographic traits. The high levels of satisfaction exhibited by respondents as a whole (see Figure 1 above) were generally echoed across cus- tomer subgroups, with satisfaction ranging from a low of 78% to a high of 95%. Not sure 2.7 Prefer not to answer 0.8 Very dissatisfied 2.1 Somewhat dissatisfied 5.3 Very satisfied 55.4 Somewhat satisfied 33.8 Sa t i s f a c t i o n W i t h W a t e r S e r v i c e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 11Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 2 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS FIGURE 3 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 4 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY 49.3 56.1 55.0 57.3 52.3 56.1 37.4 35.8 35.0 25.6 33.9 34.0 57.757.556.7 Very satisfied 66.3 32.230.430.6 Smwt satisfied 20.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) Contacted District in Past 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s 62.3 50.8 57.5 65.3 67.2 62.5 31.0 37.3 33.2 26.4 24.6 26.1 Very satisfied 46.9 63.7 59.8 48.0 Smwt satisfied 37.9 28.9 31.1 38.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s 57.9 53.3 58.2 64.8 48.9 59.3 51.6 46.9 37.3 39.8 27.7 29.7 38.2 29.5 39.4 30.9 59.868.5 55.7Very satisfied 52.0 30.5 26.1 36.2Smwt satisfied 38.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s Sa t i s f a c t i o n W i t h W a t e r S e r v i c e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 12Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REASON FOR DISSATISFACTION The small percentage (7%) of respondents who indi- cated that they were dissatisfied with the District’s efforts to provide water services to their household were asked in a follow-up question if there was a particular reason for their dissatis- faction. Question 2 was asked in an open-ended manner, thereby allowing respondents to explain their position in their own words, without being prompted by—or restricted to—a partic- ular list of reasons. True North later reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown in Figure 5 below. A concern about high rates or the cost of their bill was by far the most common reason why some respondents were dissatisfied with the District’s performance (56%). Other reasons men- tioned by at least 10% of dissatisfied respondents included inaccurate/incorrect billing (23%), water quality, taste, or smell (17%), and customer service issues (11%). Question 2 Is there a particular reason why you are dissatisfied with the Water District's per- formance? FIGURE 5 REASON FOR DISSATISFACTION SPECIFIC SERVICES Whereas Question 1 addressed the District’s overall performance, the next question series asked respondents to rate their level of satisfaction with the District’s efforts to provide specific services. The order of the items was randomized for each respondent to avoid a systematic position bias. Figure 6 on the next page presents the services in rank order according to the proportion of respondents who were either very or somewhat satisfied with the Otay Water District’s efforts to provide the service. For comparison purposes between the services, only respondents who held an opinion (satisfied or dissatisfied) are included in the figure. Those who did not have an opin- ion were removed from this analysis. The percentage of respondents who provided an opinion (satisfied or dissatisfied) is presented in brackets beside the service label in the figure, while the bars represent the answers of those with an opinion. 2.3 4.5 8.1 11.2 17.2 23.1 55.7 0 102030405060 Not sure, no particular reason Low water pressure Excessive salaries, pensions, compensation Customer services issues Water quality, taste, smell Inaccurate, incorrect billing Rates, bills too expensive % Respondents Who Are Dissatisfied With Water District's Performance Sa t i s f a c t i o n W i t h W a t e r S e r v i c e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 13Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . At the top of the list, respondents were most satisfied with the District’s efforts to provide reli- able water service and convenient hours of operation (each 95% very or somewhat satisfied), fol- lowed by keep the water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance (94%), provide good customer service (93%), and ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future (93%). At the other end of the spectrum, respondents were somewhat less satisfied with the District’s efforts to offer good value for the cost of water services (67%) and provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances (70%). Question 3 Next, I'm going to read a list of specific services provided by the Otay Water Dis- trict. For each of the services I read, please tell me whether you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the District's efforts to provide the service. Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the District's efforts to: _____, or do you not have an opinion? FIGURE 6 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICES DIFFERENTIATORS OF OPINION For the interested reader, Table 1 on the next page displays how the level of satisfaction with each specific service tested in Question 3 varied according to residential customers’ overall performance ratings for the District (see Overall Sat- isfaction on page 10). The table divides customers who were satisfied with the District’s overall performance into one group and those dissatisfied into a second group. Also displayed is the difference between the two groups in terms of the percentage who indicated they were satisfied with the District’s efforts to provide each service tested in Question 3 (far right column). For con- venience, the services are sorted by that difference, with the greatest differentiators of opinion near the top of the table. When compared to their counterparts, those who were satisfied with the District’s overall perfor- mance in providing water services were also more likely to express satisfaction with the District’s efforts to provide each of the services tested in Question 3. That said, the greatest specific dif- 29.0 35.0 57.8 48.7 55.8 57.3 57.7 54.4 60.2 57.5 61.9 58.8 63.0 67.0 37.6 34.9 27.7 38.3 32.6 31.4 32.2 36.7 30.9 35.4 31.3 35.5 32.2 28.2 21.1 18.9 9.5 8.8 7.3 7.2 5.1 5.0 12.3 11.1 5.0 4.2 4.2 3 3 5.3 4.6 4 3 4 2 2 4.1 4.9 4 3 3 2 0 102030405060708090100 Offer good value for the cost of water services [91%] Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances [67%] Provide sufficient water pressure [96%] Educate customers about ways to conserve water [87%] Provide high quality water [91%] Provide accurate billing statements [94%] Provide water that is safe to drink [90%] Communicate w customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related issues [80%] Provide water that is free of color and odor [98%] Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future [81%] Provide good customer service [83%] Keep system in good condition through timely repairs, maintenance [84%] Provide convenient hours of operation [82%] Provide reliable water service [97%] % Respondents Who Provided Opinion Very satisfied Smwt satisfied Smwt dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Sa t i s f a c t i o n W i t h W a t e r S e r v i c e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 14Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ferentiators of opinion between satisfied and dissatisfied customers were found with respect to the District’s efforts to offer good value for the cost of water services, provide accurate billing statements, and provide high quality water. At the other end of the spectrum, there was much less difference between the two customer groups regarding their satisfaction with the District’s efforts to provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances, provide water that is free of color and odor, and ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future. TABLE 1 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICES BY OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH DISTRICT Very or somewhat satisfied Very or somewhat dissatisfied Offer good value for the cost of water services 66.0 15.9 50.1 Provide accurate billing statements 87.4 40.3 47.1 Provide high quality water 85.2 40.5 44.7 Provide good customer service 82.2 40.3 41.9 Communicate w customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related issues 77.4 39.8 37.6 Provide water that is safe to drink 84.6 50.3 34.2 Educate customers about ways to conserve water 78.9 44.7 34.1 Provide reliable water service 95.1 62.0 33.1 Keep water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance 82.2 49.3 32.9Provide convenient hours of operation 81.2 52.8 28.4 Provide sufficient water pressure 84.5 57.4 27.1Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future 78.2 52.2 25.9 Provide water that is free of color and odor 91.7 66.5 25.2Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances 50.0 27.7 22.2 % R e s p o n d e n t s S a t i s f i e d W i t h Ea c h S e r v i c e Satisfaction With District Services (Q1)Difference Between Groups For Each Service Va l u e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 15Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V ALUE The next section of the survey focused on the perceived value that residents place on water rela- tive to other services, their best estimate for the cost of water per gallon, and how they rate the value of their municipal water after learning the cost per gallon. VALUE RELATIVE TO OTHER SERVICES The first question in this series presented respondents with several services their household may receive and asked them to rate whether they feel the amount they pay is reasonable, too high, or too low given the quality of the service. Because the same response scale was used for each item, the results provide an insight into the perceived value of each service individually as well as how each service ranks relative to the oth- ers tested. To avoid a systematic position bias, the order in which the services were read to respondents was randomized for each respondent. Figure 7 presents each service tested, as well as the value assigned to each service by survey par- ticipants, sorted by reasonableness of the amount paid.3 Overall, trash collection received the highest percentage of respondents indicating that the amount paid for the service was either too low or reasonable (57%), followed by sewer (39%) and water (35%). Comparatively, cell phone ser- vice (33%), electricity (25%), and television (10%) received lower ratings. The percentage of resi- dents who were unsure or did not have an opinion ranged from a low of 2% (water service) to a high of 15% (sewer service). With that said, even when responses of not sure and no answer are filtered out, the relative rank order of the services remains the same. Given the purpose of this study, it is instructive to note that water service was viewed in the top three for reasonableness of amount paid relative to the quality of the service received. Question 4 Next, I'd like to ask you to consider the value you receive from various services. Considering the quality of the _____ service your household receives, would you say the amount your household pays for the service is reasonable, too high, or too low? If says too high, ask: Would that be much too high, somewhat too high, or a little too high? FIGURE 7 REASONABLENESS OF AMOUNT PAID FOR SERVICES 3. Services were ranked based on the percentage of respondents who indicated that the amount paid for the service was either too low or reasonable given the quality of the service. 9.2 24.9 32.8 35.2 38.7 56.1 12.4 15.5 18.7 24.0 15.5 16.7 8.3 14.3 5.0 1 1 1 1 1 19.3 20.1 18.7 18.4 10.5 13.3 9.7 17.0 34.4 19.5 22.5 50.0 3 5.4 2 0 102030405060708090100 Cable or satellite TV Electricity Cell phone Water Sewer Trash collection Q4 c Q 4 b Q 4 a Q 4 f Q 4 e Q 4 d % Respondents Too low Reasonable A little too high Smwt too high Much too high Not sure / NA Prefer not to answer Va l u e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 16Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COST PER GALLON Customers were next asked how much they thought the water that their household receives costs per gallon. As shown in Figure 8 below, 72% of respondents could not or would not provide an estimate. Just 7% of respondents correctly identified the cost of their household’s water at one cent per gallon, whereas 21% provided an incorrect estimate. Among those who provided an incorrect estimate, a per-gallon cost of two cents to five cents was the most frequent response (9%). Question 5 If you had to guess, how much do you think it costs per gallon for the water your household receives? FIGURE 8 ESTIMATED COST OF WATER PER GALLON As displayed in figures 9-11 on the next page, the percentage of residential customers4 who cor- rectly estimated the cost of municipal water per gallon was highest among those who had their account set up prior to 2000, customers with a service address other than Chula Vista, El Cajon, Jamul, or Spring Valley, and those in a household earning $150,000 or more. 4. Responses of prefer not to answer were filtered out of this analysis. 5.1 67.2 4.4 2.4 3.8 9.3 6.9 0.8 0 1020304050607080 Prefer not to answer Not sure More than $.20 $.11 to $.20 $.06 to $.10 $.02 to $.05 $0.01 $0.00 % Respondents Va l u e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 17Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 9 ESTIMATED COST OF WATER PER GALLON BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS FIGURE 10 ESTIMATED COST OF WATER PER GALLON BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 11 ESTIMATED COST OF WATER PER GALLON BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY 5.9 11.2 6.9 5.8 9.8 6.8 3.3 5.0 1.1 6.9 0 10 20 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status(QD4)Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o C o r r e c t l y Es t i m a t e d $ . 0 1 C o s t p e r G a l l o n 6.3 6.3 7.9 6.0 8.6 16.3 9.39.1 4.9 6.7 0 10 20 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o C o r r e c t l y Es t i m a t e d $ . 0 1 C o s t p e r G a l l o n 6.8 4.4 11.3 8.3 5.4 4.9 7.3 1.81.9 4.8 6.8 3.1 0 10 20 Less than$25K $25K to< $40K $40K to< $60K $60K to< $80K $80K to< $100K $100K to< $150K $150Kor more Caucasian/White Latino/Hispanic Af-American/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o C o r r e c t l y Es t i m a t e d $ . 0 1 C o s t p e r G a l l o n Va l u e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 18Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VALUE FOR COST After informing customers that the average cost of the water that their household receives is about one cent per gallon, respondents were asked whether they thought that water is an excellent value, a good value, a fair value, a poor value, or a very poor value. As presented in Figure 12 below, the majority (59%) of residential customers rated the value of their water as excellent (29%) or good (30%) after learning that the cost averages one cent per gallon, 25% offered that the value is fair, and about 10% rated it as poor or very poor. The remaining 6% of customers surveyed were unsure or unwilling to offer an opinion. Question 6 To clarify, the cost of water is about 1 cent (one penny) per gallon. Knowing this, would you say that water is an excellent value, a good value, a fair value, a poor value, or a very poor value? FIGURE 12 VALUE OF WATER AFTER LEARNING COST For the interested reader, figures 13 through 15 on the next page display the value rating given to household water among various customer segments. Prefer not to answer 1.4 Good 29.8 Excellent 29.4 Fair 24.6 Poor 8.0 Not sure 4.5Very poor 2.3 Va l u e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 19Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 13 VALUE OF WATER AFTER LEARNING COST BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS FIGURE 14 VALUE OF WATER AFTER LEARNING COST BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 15 VALUE OF WATER AFTER LEARNING COST BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY 34.7 28.1 30.6 24.7 22.8 31.3 26.2 33.5 29.9 32.7 27.3 30.2 Excellent 25.6 27.9 22.8 28.8 Good 26.5 38.4 24.9 26.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) Contacted District in Past 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s 30.0 29.5 22.1 32.4 34.2 25.0 33.5 29.5 33.7 29.9 28.4 28.7 30.633.427.4Excellent 21.9 26.226.435.6 Good 26.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s 29.2 25.1 33.8 30.7 33.7 28.7 25.6 33.6 33.8 37.3 26.3 31.4 27.1 38.5 28.5 28.1 38.137.6 21.9 Excellent 40.8 25.725.8 33.6 Good 25.4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s Cu s t o m e r S e r v i c e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 20Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C USTOMER SERVICE The next section of the survey included questions to gauge whether residential customers had contacted the Otay Water District in the past six months, the reason for their most recent con- tact, if the reason that prompted contact was resolved to their satisfaction, and ratings for field representatives and service representatives. DISTRICT CONTACT Respondents were first asked if they had contacted the Otay Water District in the past six months, with the wording tailored based on whether or not each house- hold was flagged as having contact in the database. Figure 16 provides the combined findings of these questions and shows that 20% of respondents indicated that they had contacted the Dis- trict in the six months prior to the interview. When compared with their respective counterparts, customers who set up their account in 2019, those who rent their residence or live with others, respondents under the age of 35 years, and customers with a service address other than Chula Vista, El Cajon, Jamul, or Spring Valley were the most likely to report having contacted the Dis- trict during this period (see figures 17-19 on next page). Question 7 Our records show that your household contacted the Otay Water District in the past six months regarding your water service. Do you recall contacting the Otay Water District? Question 8 During the past six months, have you or anyone else in your household contacted the Otay Water District for any reason? FIGURE 16 CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS Not sure 2.7 Yes, contact 19.7 No contact 77.5 Cu s t o m e r S e r v i c e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 21Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 17 CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS FIGURE 18 CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 19 CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY 11.1 16.7 17.8 31.7 19.623.0 28.3 56.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o C o n t a c t e d D i s t r i c t in P a s t 6 M o n t h s 13.9 19.1 23.2 19.1 16.8 32.0 22.324.427.0 44.4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o C o n t a c t e d D i s t r i c t in P a s t 6 M o n t h s 23.5 17.4 19.9 18.7 21.5 24.5 17.7 22.224.7 17.6 25.7 29.4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o C o n t a c t e d D i s t r i c t in P a s t 6 M o n t h s Cu s t o m e r S e r v i c e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 22Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REASON FOR CONTACT Respondents who indicated that they, or someone in their household, had contacted the Otay Water District within the past six months were asked a series of follow-up questions about their contact. The first question in this series asked respondents to recall the main reason or issue that prompted their most recent contact with the District. Ques- tion 9 was asked in an open-ended manner to avoid respondents being prompted by or restricted to a particular list of options. True North later reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown in Figure 20. Overall, respondents were most likely to have contacted the District with billing or payment questions (29%), followed by water-related services issues (25%), to make a payment (16%), and to request that their service be started or stopped (13%). Question 9 Thinking of your most recent contact, what was the main reason or issue that prompted you to contact the District? FIGURE 20 REASON FOR CONTACTING DISTRICT SPECIFIC WATER-RELATED SERVICE ISSUE The small subgroup of customers who had contacted the District about a water-related service issue within the past six months (5% of all customers) was next asked to describe the specific problem they were having with their water service. Asked in an open-ended manner, Figure 21 shows that over two-thirds of this small cus- tomer segment had contacted the District about a water leak or broken pipe (69%). Other water service issues that prompted contact included an unexpectedly high bill (14%), water pressure issues (12%), a broken sprinkler (10%), and poor water quality, odor, or taste (6%). 0.3 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.8 2.5 3.4 12.8 15.6 29.0 24.9 4.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Learn about/Participate in rebate program Not sure Service interrupted for non-payment Relocate Request a payment extension or arrangement Change name, address on account Learn about/Participate in water conservation programs Learn how to read your meter Other reasons Find out how to reduce bill Request start/stop of service Make payment/Pay bill Water-related service issue (leak, water pressure, quality) Questions about billing/payments % Respondents Who Contacted Water District Cu s t o m e r S e r v i c e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 23Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Question 10 Can you describe the specific problem you were having with your water service? FIGURE 21 PROBLEM WITH WATER SERVICE FIELD REPRESENTATIVES The small customer segment (5% of all customers) who had contacted the District about a water-related service issue within the past six months were also asked whether their problem involved the District sending a field representative to their prop- erty. As shown in Figure 22, just over one-third (36%) of this subgroup of customers had a field representative sent to their property. Question 11 Did your problem involve the Water District sending a field representative to your property? FIGURE 22 FIELD REPRESENTATIVE SENT The next question in this section asked respondents who had a field representative sent to their property for a water-related service problem to rate the field representative on three dimensions. Presented in Figure 23 on the next page, the majority of this small customer segment (2% of all customers) indicated that the field representative arrived in a timely manner (58%) and accurately assessed the problem (56%). The remainder of respondents either could not or would not rate 2.7 5.5 9.8 11.6 13.5 69.1 0 1020304050607080 Not sure Poor water quality, odor, taste Broken sprinkler Water pressure Unexpectedly high bill Water leak, broken pipe % Respondents Who Had a Water Service Issue No, problem didn't involve rep 61.5 Yes, problem involved rep 35.8 Prefer not to answer 2.8 Cu s t o m e r S e r v i c e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 24Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . these two dimensions, with none indicating that the field representative failed to arrive in a timely manner or accurately assess the problem. When asked if the field representative clearly explained the nature of the problem and how it could be fixed, 44% of customers asked the question answered in the affirmative, 27% indicated that the field representative did not perform this task, and 29% were unsure or unwilling to provide a response. Question 12 Did the field representative: _____? FIGURE 23 FIELD REPRESENTATIVE SERVICE PERFORMANCE NUMBER OF CONTACTS NEEDED TO RESOLVE ISSUE Turning back to the larger segment of customers whose household had contacted the Otay Water District within the past six months, Question 13 asked if they were able to resolve their issue with a single contact, or whether multiple calls/contacts were required. Question 13 Were you able to resolve the issue with a single contact, or were multiple calls/ contacts required to resolve the issue? FIGURE 24 NUMBER OF CONTACTS TO RESOLVE ISSUE As displayed in Figure 24, close to seven-in- ten customers who had contacted the Dis- trict were able to resolve their issue with a single contact (69%). Thirteen percent (13%) required multiple contacts, 14% indicated that the issue was not resolved, and 5% were unsure or unwilling to state. 55.7 44.0 0.0 26.9 19.2 8.1 23.0 13.2 20.9 57.8 0.0 31.1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Arrive in a timely manner Accurately assess the problem Clearly explain the nature of the problem, how it can be fixed Q12 Did the field representative… % R e s p o n d e n t s W i t h F i e l d R e p Co n t a c t i n P a s t 6 M o n t h s Prefer not toanswer Not sure No Yes Prefer not to answer 0.4 Not sure 4.1 Issue was not resolved 13.9 Resolved with single contact 69.0 Multiple contacts required 12.7 Cu s t o m e r S e r v i c e True North Research, Inc. © 2020 25Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ISSUE RESOLVED TO SATISFACTION When asked if the reason for contacting the Otay Water District was ultimately resolved to their satisfaction, three-quarters (75%) of the customers who had contacted the District answered in the affirmative (see Figure 25). Question 14 Was the reason you contacted them ultimately resolved to your satisfaction? FIGURE 25 ISSUE RESOLVED TO SATISFACTION SATISFACTION WITH SERVICE REPRESENTATIVES The final question in this series asked customers who had been in contact with the District to provide their level of satisfaction with the service representatives’ accessibility, courtesy, and knowledge/expertise. As displayed in Figure 26, respondents provided high ratings for all three dimensions tested, with more than three-quarters of this customer segment indicating they were very or somewhat satisfied with the courtesy of the service representative (84%), their ability to reach a service representative (83%), and the knowledge and expertise of the service representative (75%). Question 15 When contacting the Water District, were you satisfied or dissatisfied with _____, or do you not have an opinion? FIGURE 26 SATISFACTION WITH SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE Prefer not to answer 2.0 Not sure 5.9 Satisfied 75.4 Dissatisfied 16.7 57.0 59.9 65.3 17.7 22.8 18.7 6.4 4.1 6.9 6.8 5.4 12.0 6.4 8.62 0 102030405060708090100 The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Your ability to reach a service representative The courtesy of the service representative Q1 5 c Q 1 5 a Q 1 5 b % Respondents Who Contacted District in Past 6 Months Very satisfied Smwt satisfied Smwt dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Not sure/Prefer not to answer Wa t e r R e l i a b i l i t y S o l u t i o n s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 26Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W ATER RELIABILITY SOLUTIONS The next series of questions in the survey was designed to profile customer’s perceptions and opinions as they relate to the reliability of the water supply in the Otay Water District’s service area. OPINION OF WATER SUPPLY The first question in this series started by informing respondents that a reliable water supply is one that can be depended upon to consistently pro- vide enough water to meet an area's needs. Respondents were then asked if they expect the reli- ability of water supplies in California, Southern California, San Diego County, and Otay Water District’s service area (in that order) to improve, stay about the same, or get worse over the next 10 years. As shown in Figure 27, perspectives regarding the reliability of water supplies over the next decade were nearly identical for the two largest geographic areas and trended more positive at the local levels. Overall, 12% to 14% of respondents felt that the reliability of the supplies in Cali- fornia, Southern California, and San Diego County would improve over the next 10 years, with the rating slightly higher for the Otay Water District’s service area at 16%. For both California and Southern California, respondents were more likely to indicate that the supplies would be getting worse (California: 41%, Southern California: 41%) over staying the same (California: 34%, South- ern California: 36%), whereas opinions were evenly split for San Diego County (38% each). For the District, respondents were more likely to feel that supplies would be staying about the same rather than getting worse (42% vs. 30%). The remainder of respondents were unsure or declined to state their opinion. Question 16 Next, I'm going to ask you a few questions about drinking water supplies. A reli- able water supply is one that can be depended upon to consistently provide enough water to meet an area's needs. Overall, do you expect that the reliability of water supplies in _____ will be improving, staying about the same, or getting worse over the next 10 years? FIGURE 27 OPINION OF RELIABILITY OF WATER SUPPLY 12.1 13.6 15.8 36.0 37.7 41.5 41.1 37.8 30.4 10.4 9.2 9.7 11.3 12.8 34.2 41.4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 California Southern California San Diego County Otay Water District's Service Area Q16 Reliability of water supply in . . . % R e s p o n d e n t s Prefer not toanswer Not sure Getting worse Staying about same Improving Wa t e r R e l i a b i l i t y S o l u t i o n s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 27Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SOLUTIONS TO INCREASE RELIABILITY The next question in this section was designed to provide the Otay Water District with a reliable measure of how residential customers, as a whole, support a variety of projects to which resources could be allocated in the future. The format of the question was straightforward: after informing respondents that there are several different ways to expand our sources of drinking water and increase the reliability of our water supply, respondents were asked whether they would support or oppose the District taking action on each project shown in Figure 28. The projects are sorted in the figure from high to low based on the proportion of respondents who indicated that they at least somewhat support the District taking action on the project. Among the reliability solutions tested, capturing, storing, and treating rainwater and stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water was rated the highest (85% strongly or somewhat sup- port), followed closely by desalinating and purifying seawater to make clean drinking water (84%). Respondents were less likely to support recycling sewer water and purifying it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment technologies (47%). Question 17 There are a several different ways to expand our sources of drinking water and increase the reliability of our water supply. Here is the (first/next) one: _____. Would you support or oppose the District taking this action? FIGURE 28 SUPPORT FOR WATER RELIABILITY SOLUTIONS For the interested reader, tables 2 and 3 on the next page provide the percentage of surveyed customers who strongly supported each project by their service address city, opinion of the reli- ability of water supplies in the District over the next 10 years, account setup year, and whether they had taken action to reduce water usage in the past 12 months. 25.9 33.1 29.0 18.4 26.8 1 0 51.3 21.4 56.3 5 5 4 45 7 5 1 0 102030405060708090100 Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment technologies Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water Q1 7 c Q 1 7 a Q 1 7 b % Respondents Strongly support Smwt support Smwt oppose Strongly oppose Not sure Prefer not to answer Wa t e r R e l i a b i l i t y S o l u t i o n s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 28Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TABLE 2 SUPPORT FOR WATER RELIABILITY SOLUTIONS BY SERVICE ADDRESS CITY & OTAY WATER DISTRICT’S SERVICE AREA (SHOWING % STRONGLY SUPPORT) TABLE 3 SUPPORT FOR WATER RELIABILITY SOLUTIONS ACCOUNT BY SETUP YEAR & TAKEN ACTIONS TO REDUCE WATER USAGE (SHOWING % STRONGLY SUPPORT) Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Improving Staying about same Getting worse Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water 54.7 50.4 70.7 61.7 61.0 51.9 63.9 54.9 Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water 50.6 56.6 49.7 55.9 32.2 55.7 49.8 56.8 Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using adv. water treatment tech 20.9 20.8 24.0 21.1 28.7 22.9 23.9 20.2 Service Address City District’s Water Reliability Over Next 10 Years (Q16d) 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Yes No Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water 59.3 54.1 56.7 56.0 55.4 57.0 55.5 61.4 Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water 56.7 37.2 50.7 51.0 51.3 54.4 51.6 52.1 Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using adv. water treatment tech 15.9 20.2 22.8 20.5 20.8 23.4 20.6 23.7 Taken Actions to Reduce Water Usage (Q19) Account Setup Year Co n s e r v a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 29Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C ONSERVATION Having measured satisfaction with water services, perceptions regarding the value of water ser- vice, customer service ratings, and attitudes about water reliability, the survey transitioned to the topic of water conservation—including anticipated water use and the actions customers may have taken to reduce usage. EXPECTED HOME WATER USE The first question in this series asked respondents to take into account their home water use (both indoors and outdoors) and forecast whether they expect to use more water, less water, or about the same amount of water in 2020 as they did in 2019. Seven-in-ten respondents (71%) anticipate their water use to remain about the same this year as compared with last year, 20% expect to use less water in 2020, 5% feel they will use more water this year, and 3% were unsure or unwilling to state. Question 18 Thinking about your home water use - both indoors and outdoors - do you think that you will use more water this year, less water this year, or about the same amount of water this year as you did in 2019? FIGURE 29 FUTURE WATER USAGE Figures 30 through 32 on the next page examine the percentage of respondents who expect to use more water in 2020 as compared with 2019. A higher than average percentage of customers who initially setup their account in 2015-2016 or 2019, had contacted the District within the past six months, whose household had not taken actions to reduce water usage over the past year, who have a service address other than Chula Vista, El Cajon, Jamul, or Spring Valley, earn a household income of $150,000 or more, and African-American respondents expected to use more water this year. About same 71.2 Use more 5.2 Use less 20.4 Not sure 2.6 Prefer not to answer 0.7 Co n s e r v a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 30Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 30 FUTURE WATER USAGE BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS, CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS & TAKEN ACTION TO REDUCE WATER USAGE FIGURE 31 FUTURE WATER USAGE BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 32 FUTURE WATER USAGE BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY 5.8 2.0 4.8 7.7 8.8 4.4 4.4 8.6 6.6 9.3 5.7 9.7 0 5 10 15 20 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) Contacted District in Past 6 Months (Q7,8) Taken Actions to Reduce Water Usage (Q19) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o E x p e c t t o U s e M o r e W a t e r 3.6 5.2 3.6 2.4 5.5 10.0 6.7 8.0 6.9 4.6 0 5 10 15 20 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o E x p e c t t o U s e M o r e W a t e r 4.6 3.8 8.3 5.3 3.0 11.2 6.4 4.54.24.5 2.4 6.1 0 5 10 15 20 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o E x p e c t t o U s e M o r e W a t e r Co n s e r v a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 31Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TAKEN ACTIONS TO REDUCE WATER USAGE The next question in this series asked residential customers whether—in the past 12 months—they have taken any actions to reduce their household’s use of water. As shown in Figure 33, 77% of respondents offered that they had taken one or more actions to reduce water usage during this period, whereas 18% confided they had not attempted to use less water and 5% were unsure or unwilling to answer the question. Question 19 In the past 12 months, have you taken any actions to reduce your household's use of water? FIGURE 33 TAKEN ACTION TO REDUCE WATER USAGE Figures 34-36 on the next page show that customers under 35 years of age, those with a service address other than Chula Vista, El Cajon, Jamul, or Spring Valley, and respondents with a house- hold income less than $25,000 per year were the least likely to have taken actions to reduce water usage. At least 70% of residential customers in each of the other subgroups indicated that they had taken at least one action in the past 12 months to reduce water usage. Have not taken action to reduce usage 18.2 Yes, taken action to reduce usage 77.3 Not sure 3.5 Prefer not to answer 1.0 Co n s e r v a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 32Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 34 TAKEN ACTION TO REDUCE WATER USAGE BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS FIGURE 35 TAKEN ACTION TO REDUCE WATER USAGE BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS FIGURE 36 TAKEN ACTION TO REDUCE WATER USAGE BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY 81.2 74.4 78.1 73.7 78.9 77.276.0 88.4 75.470.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status(QD4)Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s T h a t H a v e T a k e n A c t i o n to R e d u c e W a t e r U s a g e 79.5 77.1 78.4 85.6 79.4 63.161.8 79.5 71.2 79.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s T h a t H a v e T a k e n A c t i o n to R e d u c e W a t e r U s a g e 80.7 76.7 74.1 74.5 82.3 72.1 85.9 75.380.382.284.2 67.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s T h a t H a v e T a k e n A c t i o n to R e d u c e W a t e r U s a g e Co n s e r v a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 33Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ACTIONS TAKEN TO REDUCE WATER USAGE Respondents who indicated in Ques- tion 19 that they had taken actions to reduce their household’s water usage were asked to detail the specific actions taken. Question 20 was asked in an open-ended manner, allowing respon- dents to mention any action that came to mind without being prompted by or restricted to a par- ticular list of options. True North reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown in Figure 37, broken out by indoor and outdoor actions taken. Among respondents who had taken one or more actions to reduce water usage in their house- hold during the past 12 months, over half turned off the faucet while brushing their teeth (63%), used less water while showering, washing their hands, or doing the dishes (61%), only ran the dishwasher or washing machine when full (59%), watered plants/lawn between 4PM and 9AM (52%), and did not hose down their driveway or walkways (51%). Question 20 What specific actions have you taken to reduce your household's use of water? FIGURE 37 ACTIONS TAKEN TO REDUCE WATER USAGE Respondents were next asked whether they had made any major changes to their property over the past five years to reduce their use of water. Sixty-four percent (64%) of residential customers answered Question 21 in the affirmative, whereas 31% of respondents had not made any major changes to their property for the purpose of water conservation and 5% were unsure or unwilling to state (see Figure 38 on next page). 38.1 45.5 45.6 48.8 51.1 51.9 3.1 45.4 47.4 59.2 60.9 63.3 49.5 0 10203040506070 Installed drought tolerant landscapes/fake grass Adjusted sprinklers so they don’t run on driveway, sidewalks, waste water Watered plants less/use drip system Washed car less often/Used water-efficient methods to wash car Didn’t hose down driveway/walkways Watered plants/lawn between 4PM & 9AM Use a grey-water system Purchased water-efficient appliances (clothes washer, dishwasher, etc.) Fixed leaks Used water-efficient faucet and shower heads Only run dishwasher/laundry when full Use less water when taking shower, hand washing dishes, etc. Turn off faucet while brushing teeth Ou t d o o r I n d o o r % Respondents That Have Taken Action to Reduce Water Usage Co n s e r v a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 34Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Question 21 Over the past five years, have you made any major changes to your property to reduce your use of water - such as replacing grass with drought-tolerant landscaping, or install- ing water-efficient appliances? FIGURE 38 MAJOR CHANGES ON PROPERTY TO REDUCE WATER USAGE IN PAST 5 YRS Figures 39 through 41 show that custom- ers who set up their account before 2014, home owners, residents 55 years and older, customers in El Cajon and Jamul, and those with an ethnicity other than Afri- can-American were the most likely to have made major property changes to reduce water usage. Also noteworthy is how the percentage who made property changes steadily increased as the age of the respon- dent increased. FIGURE 39 MAJOR CHANGES ON PROPERTY TO REDUCE WATER USAGE IN PAST 5 YRS BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS FIGURE 40 MAJOR CHANGES ON PROPERTY TO REDUCE WATER USAGE IN PAST 5 YRS BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY Prefer not to answer 1.9 Not sure 3.2 Yes, made major changes to reduce water usage 64.2 No major changes on property to reduce water usage 30.8 69.0 70.4 67.5 43.5 62.2 65.065.0 48.447.450.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) Contacted District in Past 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s T h a t M a d e C h a n g e s on P r o p e r t y t o R e d u c e W a t e r U s a g e 69.5 62.8 72.6 71.9 62.3 64.0 42.8 52.1 58.6 65.7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s T h a t M a d e C h a n g e s on P r o p e r t y t o R e d u c e W a t e r U s a g e Co n s e r v a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 35Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 41 MAJOR CHANGES ON PROPERTY TO REDUCE WATER USAGE IN PAST 5 YRS BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY As a follow-up, respondents who indicated that they had made major changes to their property within the past five years to reduce water usage were asked in an open-ended manner to detail the types of changes they made. The majority (54%) of this subgroup of customers indicated that they had made landscaping changes, such as installing drought tolerant landscapes, artificial grass, or concrete. Other changes cited by at least 10% of households that had made major changes to their property to reduce water usage include purchasing water-efficient appliances (18%), reducing water use in general (15%), and installing a drip irrigation system (12%). Question 22 Can you describe the major changes you made to your property to reduce water usage? FIGURE 42 CHANGES ON PROPERTY TO REDUCE WATER USAGE 70.0 61.3 67.6 67.6 61.2 41.9 63.6 61.158.662.566.0 51.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s T h a t M a d e C h a n g e s on P r o p e r t y t o R e d u c e W a t e r U s a g e 0.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.4 3.4 8.3 11.6 15.4 54.2 8.8 18.2 0 102030405060 Used grey-water system Use rain barrels Installed tankless water heater Washed car less often / Used water-efficient methods Collected, reused water Watered plants early morning or late afternoon Not sure, cannot think of anything specific Used less water when taking shower, hand washing dishes Adjusted, changed irrigation system Used water-efficient faucet, shower heads, toilets Installed drip system Reduced water usage in general Purchased water-efficient appliances Installed drought tolerant landscapes, fake grass, concrete % Respondents Who Have Made Major Changes to Reduce Water Usage Co m m u n i c a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 36Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C OMMUNICATION The final substantive section of the report presents the results of questions that were designed to measure respondents’ satisfaction with the Otay Water District’s efforts to communicate with customers, profile respondents’ exposure to the Pipeline Newsletter, as well as identify the most effective ways for the District to communicate with residential customers. OVERALL SATISFACTION Question 23 asked respondents to report their overall satisfac- tion with the District’s efforts to communicate with customers through newsletters, social media, bill inserts, web, direct mail, and/or other means. Overall, 83% of respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the District’s efforts in this regard, with 42% indicating that they were very satisfied and 41% somewhat satisfied (Figure 43). The remaining respondents were either dissatisfied with the District's communication efforts (7%) or unsure or unwilling to pro- vide an opinion (10%). Question 23 In general, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the Otay Water District's efforts to communicate with customers through newsletters, social media, bill inserts, web, direct mail and/or other means? FIGURE 43 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION The next three figures display how satisfaction with the District’s efforts to communicate with customers varied across a series of key subgroups for those who provided an opinion. Satisfac- tion with the District’s communication efforts was widespread, with over 80% of respondents in nearly every subgroup reporting they were either very or somewhat satisfied. As might be expected, respondents dissatisfied with the District’s overall performance also tended to be less satisfied with the District’s communication efforts when compared with those who were gener- ally satisfied with the Otay Water District (54% vs. 95%). Not sure 9.4 Prefer not to answer 0.5 Very dissatisfied 2.1 Somewhat dissatisfied 5.2 Very satisfied 41.7 Somewhat satisfied 41.2 Co m m u n i c a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 37Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 44 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR & HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS FIGURE 45 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 46 SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION BY ETHNICITY, GENDER & OVERALL SATISFACTION 42.7 50.5 45.6 51.1 48.9 42.5 47.3 33.7 45.341.141.9 Very satisfied 52.3 45.152.946.5 Smwt satisfied 40.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o P r o v i d e d O p i n i o n 47.5 47.5 40.4 43.2 50.0 30.6 46.7 43.4 53.0 53.5 45.1 54.9 Very satisfied 48.3 43.7 43.7 48.5 Smwt satisfied 40.1 38.8 52.7 44.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o P r o v i d e d O p i n i o n 43.0 43.8 49.3 49.5 10.6 45.1 48.0 43.3 45.7 43.2 42.450.552.3Very satisfied 45.7 50.6 46.534.0 Smwt satisfied 48.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Caucasian/ White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American/ Black Asian American Mixed/Other Male Female Satisfied Dissatisfied Ethnicity (QD7) Gender (QD1) Overall Satisfaction (Q1) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o P r o v i d e d O p i n i o n Co m m u n i c a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 38Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PIPELINE NEWSLETTER Respondents were next asked if they recalled receiving the Pipe- line Newsletter, which is mailed or emailed to households on a quarterly basis. As shown in Fig- ure 47, 49% of customers recalled receiving the Pipeline Newsletter, 33% did not recall receiving it, and 18% were unsure. Question 24 Do you recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter, which is mailed to your home or emailed quarterly? FIGURE 47 RECALL RECEIVING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER Figures 48 through 50 show whether or not respondents recalled receiving the Pipeline Newslet- ter by a variety of subgroups (among those who provided an opinion). Higher than average per- centages of customers who set up their account in the past few years (2017-2019), those who rent their residence or live with others, residents 18 to 44 years of age, and African-American customers or those with a mixed/other ethnicity did not recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter. FIGURE 48 RECALL RECEIVING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS Did not receive Pipeline Newsletter 32.7 Received Pipeline Newsletter 48.9 Not sure 18.1 Prefer not to answer 0.3 31 40 61 54 57 75 61 48 54 61 69 60 39 46 43 25 39 52 46 39 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status(QD4)Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o P r o v i d e d O p i n i o n Received Pipeline Newsletter Did not receive Pipeline Newsletter Co m m u n i c a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 39Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 49 RECALL RECEIVING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 50 RECALL RECEIVING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY PIPELINE NEWSLETTER READERSHIP As a follow-up, respondents who indicated that they recalled receiving the Pipeline Newsletter were asked how often they read the newsletter when it arrives. Figure 51 on the next page presents the results of Question 25 in the context of all respondents. Among all respondents, 22% indicated they always read the Pipeline Newsletter when it arrives, 20% said sometimes, 5% rarely, and 1% confided that they recalled receiving the newsletter but never read it. The majority (51%) of respondents did not recall receiving the news- letter or were unsure whether they had received it. 31 33 61 59 70 57 71 69 59 686967 39 41 30 43 29 31 41 32 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o P r o v i d e d O p i n i o n Received Pipeline Newsletter Did not receive Pipeline Newsletter 60 52 63 49 59 58 60 67 55 41 54 46 40 48 37 51 41 42 40 33 45 59 46 54 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s W h o P r o v i d e d O p i n i o n Received Pipeline Newsletter Did not receive Pipeline Newsletter Co m m u n i c a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 40Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Question 25 How often would you say that you read the Pipeline Newsletter when it arrives? Would you say that you always read it, sometimes read it, rarely read it, or never read it? FIGURE 51 FREQUENCY OF READING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER Figures 52-54 show that Pipeline readership varied substantially across subgroups. Perhaps most striking is how overall readership increases as age of the customer increases (Figure 53 on next page). FIGURE 52 FREQUENCY OF READING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER BY ACCOUNT SETUP YEAR, HOME OWNERSHIP STATUS & CONTACTED DISTRICT IN PAST 6 MONTHS Sometimes 20.4 Always 22.1 Rarely 5.3Never 1.1 Did not recall receiving newsletter or unsure (Q24) 51.1 25.1 31.3 22.6 13.0 20.1 22.712.6 15.5 20.6 15.8 25.9 20.6 20.4 20.4 20.4 3.3 2.2 7.7 6.0 7.1 4.3 5.6 4.4 3.9 9.1 11.0 12.4 14.1 23.8 5.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before 2000 Own Rent/Live w/others Yes No Account Setup Year Home Ownership Status (QD4) Contacted District in Past 6 Months (Q7,8) % R e s p o n d e n t s Rarely Sometimes Always Co m m u n i c a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 41Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 53 FREQUENCY OF READING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER BY AGE & SERVICE ADDRESS CITY FIGURE 54 FREQUENCY OF READING PIPELINE NEWSLETTER BY HSLD INCOME & ETHNICITY COMMUNICATION PREFERENCES The next question in this series presented respon- dents with each of the methods shown to the left of Figure 55 on the next page and simply asked, for each, whether it would be an effective way for the Otay Water District to communicate with them. Overall, respondents indicated that email was the most effective method (81% very or somewhat effective), followed by emailed/electronic newsletters (74%) and newsletters mailed to the home (72%). At the other end of the spectrum, automated voice calls via telephone (37%) and social media (41%) were perceived to be the least effective ways for the District to communicate with residential customers. 28.5 21.2 27.4 26.4 20.8 22.07.3 14.4 22.5 23.0 19.0 20.0 19.7 21.6 37.7 6.3 5.2 7.0 3.5 4.9 4.5 9.8 9.0 6.0 24.218.1 4.58.3 23.7 0.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other Age (QD2) Service Address City % R e s p o n d e n t s Rarely Sometimes Always 19.8 19.9 23.3 26.3 18.6 7.3 17.6 13.7 25.1 21.9 18.7 23.9 19.9 20.5 23.7 18.7 25.8 16.1 15.6 4.2 4.0 7.6 2.0 4.6 7.7 5.6 5.1 6.6 5.5 4.1 23.7 12.6 21.5 16.5 22.8 1.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Less than $25K $25K to < $40K $40K to < $60K $60K to < $80K $80K to < $100K $100K to < $150K $150K or more Caucasian /White Latino/ Hispanic Af-American /Black Asian American Mixed/ Other Hsld Income (QD8) Ethnicity (QD7) % R e s p o n d e n t s Rarely Sometimes Always Co m m u n i c a t i o n True North Research, Inc. © 2020 42Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Question 26 As I read the following ways that the Otay Water District can communicate with residents, I'd like to know if you think they would be a very effective, somewhat effective, or not at all effective way for the District to communicate with you. FIGURE 55 EFFECTIVENESS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT COMMUNICATION EFFORTS For the interested reader, Table 4 displays the percentage of respondents who perceived each proposed communication method as very effective by their satisfaction with the District’s com- munication efforts and age, with the top three most effective methods within each subgroup highlighted in green to ease comparisons. TABLE 4 EFFECTIVENESS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT COMMUNICATION EFFORTS BY SATISFACTION WITH COMMUNICATION & AGE (SHOWING % VERY EFFECTIVE) The final substantive question of the survey asked respondents, in an open-ended format, whether there were any methods of communication not previously mentioned that they feel would be a very effective way for the Otay Water District to communicate with them. The vast majority (84%) of residential customers did not have anything to add, and no single suggestion was cited by more than one and a half percent of respondents. 13.9 12.2 24.0 28.3 17.7 23.6 33.1 27.4 32.6 34.8 44.7 23.0 28.3 33.8 30.3 41.8 40.4 33.8 41.3 39.3 38.7 36.2 0 102030405060708090100 Automated voice calls via telephone Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Notices hung on your front door handle Text messages Sponsoring community events Otay Water District website Information inserted into your water bill envelope Postcards mailed to your house Newsletters mailed to your house Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Email Q2 6 k Q 2 6 c Q 2 6 h Q 2 6 j Q 2 6 i Q 2 6 d Q 2 6 f Q 2 6 g Q 2 6 e Q 2 6 b Q 2 6 a % Respondents Very effective Somewhat effective Satisfied Dissatisfied Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Email 47.4 37.7 55.1 45.7 47.6 48.3 42.5 Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters 36.5 35.2 37.2 43.8 32.0 42.3 31.2 Information inserted into your water bill envelope 36.1 27.1 33.0 37.4 33.4 36.0 33.3 Newsletters mailed to your house 33.5 37.9 34.0 27.2 26.2 39.0 33.6 Text messages 30.9 17.0 34.3 48.0 36.8 26.4 23.9 Postcards mailed to your house 27.4 32.8 34.4 34.1 19.4 30.4 25.9 Notices hung on your front door handle 25.6 18.9 33.3 24.9 31.9 20.3 22.5 Otay Water District website 24.1 24.9 36.3 28.5 21.7 30.7 15.5 Sponsoring community events 17.2 26.7 22.3 33.2 18.8 17.7 12.8 Automated voice calls via telephone 15.9 6.0 18.1 15.6 16.0 10.6 14.6 Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram 12.1 11.6 19.3 21.4 22.4 13.3 4.6 Satisfaction WithCommunication (Q23)Age (QD2) Ba c k g r o u n d & D e m o g r a p h i c s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 43Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B ACKGROUND & DEMOGRAPHICS TABLE 5 DEMOGRAPHICS OF SAMPLE Table 5 presents the key demographic information col- lected during the survey. The primary motivation for collecting the background and demographic informa- tion was to provide a better insight into how the results of the substantive questions of the survey vary by demographic characteristics. Total Respondents 800 Gender (QD1) Male 52.4 Female 45.0 Prefer not to answer 2.6 Age (QD2) Under 35 5.8 35 to 44 10.3 45 to 54 15.0 55 to 64 19.2 65 or older 33.4 Prefer not to answer 16.4 Hsld Members (QD3) 18.5 229.3 318.5 414.7 5 or more 15.9 Prefer not to answer 13.1 Home Ownership Status (QD4) Own 85.9 Rent/Live w/others 12.1 Prefer not to answer 2.0 Home Type (QD6) Single family 89.3 Condo/Other 5.5 Prefer not to answer 5.3 Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/White 42.9 Latino/Hispanic 22.5 Af-American/Black 4.4 Asian American 11.3 Mixed/Other 6.9 Prefer not to answer 12.0 Hsld Income (QD8) Less than $25K 4.6 $25K to < $40K 4.9 $40K to < $60K 6.6 $60K to < $80K 9.8 $80K to < $100K 9.5 $100K to < $150K 17.9 $150K or more 17.4 Prefer not to answer 29.2 Service Address City Chula Vista 63.7 El Cajon 11.0 Jamul 3.3 Spring Valley 17.5 Other 4.5 Account Setup Year 2019 6.3 2017-18 8.9 2015-16 7.4 2010-14 17.7 2000-09 25.9 Before 2000 33.9 Me t h o d o l o g y True North Research, Inc. © 2020 44Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M ETHODOLOGY The following sections outline the methodology used in the study, as well as the motivation for using certain techniques. QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT Dr. McLarney of True North Research worked closely with the Otay Water District to develop a questionnaire that covered the topics of interest and avoided many possible sources of systematic measurement error, including position-order effects, wording effects, response-category effects, scaling effects, and priming. Several ques- tions included multiple individual items. Because asking items in a set order can lead to a sys- tematic position bias in responses, items were asked in random order for each respondent. Some questions asked in this study were presented only to a subset of respondents. For exam- ple, only respondents who indicated they recalled contacting the Otay Water District in the six months prior to the survey (Questions 7 & 8) were asked follow-up questions about their reason for contacting the District and their experiences (Questions 9-15). The questionnaire included with this report (see Questionnaire & Toplines on page 47) identifies the skip patterns used dur- ing the interview to ensure that each respondent received the appropriate questions. PROGRAMMING, PRE-TEST & TRANSLATION Prior to fielding the survey, the ques- tionnaire was CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing) programmed to assist interview- ers when conducting the telephone interviews. The CATI program automatically navigates the skip patterns, randomizes the appropriate question items, and alerts interviewers to certain types of keypunching mistakes should they happen during the interview. The survey was also programmed into a passcode-protected online survey application to allow online participation for sampled residents. The integrity of the questionnaire was pre-tested internally by True North and by dialing into random homes in the Otay Water District’s service area prior to formally beginning the survey. The final questionnaire was also professionally translated into Spanish to allow for data collection in English and Spanish. SAMPLE, WEIGHTING, RECRUITING & DATA COLLECTION Using a comprehen- sive database of residential customers provided by the Otay Water District, True North developed a stratified random sample of customers for the purposes of the survey. To accommodate the District’s interest in evaluating its customer service and call center performance, we purposely oversampled 213 customers who had contacted the District about one or more issues during the six months prior to the survey. The data were weighted prior to analysis to adjust for the overs- ample so that the figures presented in this report are representative of residential customers overall. Customers were recruited to participate in the survey through multiple recruiting methods. A random selection of customers was initially invited to participate in the survey online at a secure, passcode-protected website designed and hosted by True North. Each customer was assigned a unique passcode to ensure that only residential customers in the Otay Water District’s service area who received an invitation could access the online survey site, and that the survey could be completed only one time per passcode. Email reminder notices were sent to encourage participa- tion among those who had yet to take the survey. Following an initial period of online data col- lection, True North began placing telephone calls to land lines and cell phone numbers of Me t h o d o l o g y True North Research, Inc. © 2020 45Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . customers that had yet to participate in the online survey or for whom an email address was not present in the customer record. Telephone interviews averaged 17 minutes in length and were conducted during weekday eve- nings (5:30PM to 9PM) and on weekends (10AM to 5PM). It is standard practice not to call during the day on weekdays because most working adults are unavailable and thus calling during those hours would bias the sample. A total of 800 completed surveys were gathered online (n=599) and by telephone (n=201) in English and Spanish between January 7 and January 15, 2020. MARGIN OF ERROR DUE TO SAMPLING The results of the survey can be used to esti- mate the opinions of all customers with a residential account with the Otay Water District. Because not every residential customer participated in the survey, however, the results have what is known as a statistical margin of error due to sampling. The margin of error refers to the differ- ence between what was found in the survey of 800 residential customers for a particular ques- tion and what would have been found if all households with a residential account had been interviewed. Figure 56 provides a plot of the maximum margin of error in this study. The maximum margin of error for a dichotomous percentage result occurs when the answers are evenly split such that 50% provide one response and 50% provide the alternative response. For this survey, the maxi- mum margin of error is ± 3.4% for questions answered by all 800 respondents. FIGURE 56 MAXIMUM MARGIN OF ERROR Within this report, figures and tables show how responses to certain questions varied by demo- graphic characteristics such as age of the respondent and home ownership status. Figure 56 is thus useful for understanding how the maximum margin of error for a percentage estimate will grow as the number of individuals asked a question (or in a particular subgroup) shrinks. Because the margin of error grows exponentially as the sample size decreases, the reader should use caution when generalizing and interpreting the results for small subgroups. Sample of 800 Residential Customers ± 3.4% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Sample Size (Number of Respondents) Ma r g i n o f E r r o r Me t h o d o l o g y True North Research, Inc. © 2020 46Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DATA PROCESSING Data processing consisted of checking the data for errors or inconsis- tencies, coding and recoding responses, categorizing verbatim responses, and preparing fre- quency analyses and cross-tabulations. ROUNDING Numbers that end in 0.5 or higher are rounded up to the nearest whole num- ber, whereas numbers that end in 0.4 or lower are rounded down to the nearest whole number. These same rounding rules are also applied, when needed, to arrive at numbers that include a decimal place in constructing figures and tables. Occasionally, these rounding rules lead to small discrepancies in the first decimal place when comparing tables and charts for a given question. Due to rounding, some figures and narrative include numbers that add to more than or less than 100%. Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 47Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q UESTIONNAIRE & TOPLINES True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 1 Otay Water District Customer Survey Final Toplines (n=800) January 20, 2020 Section 1: Introduction to Study Hi, may I please speak with _____? Hi, name is _____ and Im calling from TNR on behalf of the Otay (Oh-tie) Water District. Were conducting a short survey of customers and we would like to get your opinions. If needed: This is a survey about your water services Im NOT trying to sell anything and I wont ask for a donation. Your answers will be confidential. If needed: The survey should take about 12 minutes to complete. If needed: If now is not a convenient time, can you let me know a better time so I can call back? Section 2: Satisfaction with Water Services Q1 Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the Otay Water District is doing to provide water services to your household? Get answer, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? 1 Very satisfied 55% Skip to Q3 2 Somewhat satisfied 34% Skip to Q3 3 Somewhat dissatisfied 5% Ask Q2 4 Very dissatisfied 2% Ask Q2 98 Not sure 3% Skip to Q3 99 Prefer not to answer 1% Skip to Q3 Q2 Is there a particular reason why you are dissatisfied with the Water Districts performance? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below. Rates, bills too expensive 56% Inaccurate, incorrect billing 23% Water quality, taste, smell 17% Customer services issues 11% Excessive salaries, pensions, compensation 8% Low water pressure 5% Not sure, no particular reason 2% Q3 Next, Im going to read a list of specific services provided by the Otay Water District. For each of the services I read, please tell me whether you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the Districts efforts to provide the service. Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the Districts efforts to: _____, or do you not have an opinion? (Get answer. If satisfied or dissatisfied, then ask): Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? Randomize Ve r y Sa t i s f i e d So m e w h a t Sa t i s f i e d So m e w h a t Di s s a t i s f i e d Ve r y Di s s a t i s f i e d No t s u r e Pr e f e r n o t t o An s w e r A Provide high quality water 51% 30% 7% 4% 8% 1% B Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future 47% 29% 4% 2% 18% 1% Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 48Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 2 C Educate customers about ways to conserve water 42% 33% 8% 4% 12% 1% D Keep the water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance 49% 30% 3% 2% 15% 1% E Provide reliable water service 65% 27% 3% 2% 3% 1% F Communicate with customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions and other water-related issues 44% 29% 4% 3% 18% 1% G Provide water that is safe to drink 52% 29% 5% 4% 9% 1% H Provide water that is free of color and odor 59% 30% 5% 3% 2% 0% I Provide sufficient water pressure 55% 27% 9% 5% 4% 1% J Offer good value for the cost of water services 26% 34% 19% 11% 9% 0% K Provide good customer service 52% 26% 3% 3% 15% 1% L Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances 24% 24% 13% 7% 30% 2% M Provide convenient hours of operation 52% 26% 3% 1% 16% 2% N Provide accurate billing statements 54% 30% 7% 4% 6% 0% Section 3: Value of Services Q4 Next, Id like to ask you to consider the value you receive from various services. Considering the quality of the _____ service your household receives, would you say the amount your household pays for the service is reasonable, too high, or too low? If says too high, ask: Would that be much too high, somewhat too high, or a little too high? Randomize To o l o w Re a s o n a b l e A l i t t l e t o o h i g h So m e w h a t t o o hi g h Mu c h t o o h i g h No t s u r e Pr e f e r n o t t o an s w e r A Cell phone 0% 33% 19% 19% 23% 5% 1% B Electricity 1% 25% 16% 20% 34% 3% 1% C Cable or satellite TV 1% 9% 12% 18% 50% 8% 1% D Trash collection 1% 56% 17% 11% 10% 5% 1% E Sewer 0% 39% 16% 13% 17% 14% 1% F Water 0% 35% 24% 19% 19% 2% 0% Q5 If you had to guess, how much do you think it costs per gallon for the water your household receives? $0.00 1% $.01 (correct) 7% $.02 to $.05 9% Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 49Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 3 $.06 to $.10 4% $.11 to $.20 2% More than $.20 4% Not sure 67% Prefer not to answer 5% Q6 To clarify, the cost of water is about 1 cent (one penny) per gallon. Knowing this, would you say that water is an excellent value, a good value, a fair value, a poor value, or a very poor value? 1 Excellent 29% 2 Good 30% 3 Fair 25% 4 Poor 8% 5 Very poor 2% 98 Not sure 5% 99 Prefer not to answer 1% Section 4: Customer Service Ask Q7 if sample indicates customer had call center contact, otherwise skip to instruction preceding Q8. Q7 Our records show that your household contacted the Otay Water District in the past six months regarding your water service. Do you recall contacting the Otay Water District? 1 Yes 77% Skip to Q9 2 No 18% Skip to Q16 98 Not sure 5% Skip to Q16 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Skip to Q16 Ask Q8 if sample does not show call center contact. Q8 During the past six months, have you or anyone else in your household contacted the Otay Water District for any reason? 1 Yes 11% Skip to Q9 2 No 86% Skip to Q16 98 Not sure 2% Skip to Q16 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Skip to Q16 Overall, 20% of customers surveyed indicated that their household had call center contact at Q7 or Q8. Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 50Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 4 Q9 Thinking of your most recent contact, what was the main reason or issue that prompted you to contact the District? Do Not Read List. 1 Water-related service issue (leak, water pressure, quality, etc.) 25% Ask Q10 2 Request start/stop of service 13% Skip to Q13 3 Questions about billing/payments 29% Skip to Q13 4 Make payment/Pay bill 16% Skip to Q13 5 Request a payment extension or arrangement 1% Skip to Q13 6 Service interrupted for non-payment 1% Skip to Q13 7 Find out how to reduce bill 5% Skip to Q13 8 Learn about/Participate in rebate program 0% Skip to Q13 9 Learn about/Participate in water conservation programs 2% Skip to Q13 10 Learn about/Participate in gardening /landscaping classes 0% Skip to Q13 11 Learn how to read your meter 2% Skip to Q13 12 Board meeting information 0% Skip to Q13 13 Other 3% Skip to Q13 14 Change name, address on account 1% Skip to Q13 15 Relocate 1% Skip to Q13 98 Not sure 1% Skip to Q13 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Skip to Q13 Q10 Can you describe the specific problem you were having with your water service? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below. Water leak, broken pipe 69% Unexpectedly high bill 13% Water pressure 12% Broken sprinkler 10% Poor water quality, odor, taste 6% Not sure 3% Q11 Did your problem involve the Water District sending a field representative to your property? 1 Yes 36% Ask Q12 2 No 61% Skip to Q13 98 Not sure 0% Skip to Q13 99 Prefer not to answer 3% Skip to Q13 Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 51Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 5 Q12 Did the field representative: _____? Read in Order Ye s No No t s u r e Do e s n t Ap p l y A Arrive in a timely manner 58% 0% 19% 23% B Accurately assess the problem 56% 0% 31% 13% C Clearly explain the nature of the problem and how it can be fixed 44% 27% 8% 21% Q13 Were you able to resolve the issue with a single contact, or were multiple calls/contacts required to resolve the issue? 1 Resolved with single contact 69% 2 Multiple contacts required 13% 3 Issue was not resolved 14% 98 Not sure 4% 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Q14 Was the reason you contacted them ultimately resolved to your satisfaction? 1 Yes 75% 2 No 17% 98 Not sure 6% 99 Prefer not to answer 2% Q15 When contacting the Water District, were you satisfied or dissatisfied with _____, or do you not have an opinion? (Get answer. If satisfied or dissatisfied, then ask): Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? Randomize Ve r y Sa t i s f i e d So m e w h a t Sa t i s f i e d So m e w h a t Di s s a t i s f i e d Ve r y Di s s a t i s f i e d No t s u r e Pr e f e r n o t t o An s w e r A Your ability to reach a service representative 60% 23% 4% 7% 6% 0% B The courtesy of the service representative 65% 19% 2% 5% 8% 0% C The knowledge and expertise of the service representative 57% 18% 6% 7% 11% 0% Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 52Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 6 Section 5: Water Reliability & Solutions Next, Im going to ask you a few questions about drinking water supplies. Q16 A reliable water supply is one that can be depended upon to consistently provide enough water to meet an areas needs. Overall, do you expect that the reliability of water supplies in _____ will be improving, staying about the same, or getting worse over the next 10 years? Read in Order Im p r o v i n g St a y i n g ab o u t t h e sa m e Ge t t i n g wo r s e No t s u r e Pr e f e r n o t t o an s w e r A California 13% 34% 41% 10% 1% B Southern California 12% 36% 41% 9% 1% C San Diego County 14% 38% 38% 10% 1% D Otay Water Districts service area 16% 42% 30% 11% 1% Q17 There are a several different ways to expand our sources of drinking water and increase the reliability of our water supply. Here is the (first/next) one: _____. Would you support or oppose the District taking this action? Get answer, then ask: Would that be strongly (support/oppose) or somewhat (support/oppose)? Randomize St r o n g l y Su p p o r t So m e w h a t Su p p o r t So m e w h a t Op p o s e St r o n g l y Op p o s e No t s u r e Pr e f e r n o t to a n s w e r A Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water 51% 33% 5% 4% 5% 1% B Capture, store and treat rainwater and stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water 56% 29% 5% 4% 5% 0% C Recycle sewer water and purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment technologies 21% 26% 18% 27% 7% 1% Section 6: Conservation Q18 Thinking about your home water use both indoors and outdoors do you think that you will use more water this year, less water this year, or about the same amount of water this year as you did in 2019? 1 More 5% 2 About Same 71% 3 Less 20% 98 Not sure 3% 99 Prefer not to answer 1% Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 53Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 7 Q19 In the past 12 months, have you taken any actions to reduce your households use of water? 1 Yes 77% Ask Q20 2 No 18% Skip to Q21 98 Not sure 3% Skip to Q21 99 Prefer not to answer 1% Skip to Q21 Q20 What specific actions have you taken to reduce your households use of water? If says, reduced water usage, probe: How specifically did you do that? Do NOT read list. Probe: Any other ways you conserved water? Check all mentioned. Inside the Home 1 Purchased water-efficient appliances (clothes washer, dishwasher, etc.) 45% 2 Used water-efficient faucet and shower heads 49% 3 Fixed leaks 47% 4 Only run dishwasher/laundry when full 59% 5 Used a grey-water system 3% 6 Turned off faucet while brushing teeth 63% 7 Used less water when taking shower, hand washing dishes, etc. 61% Outside the Home 8 Watered plants/lawn between 4PM & 9AM 52% 9 Watered plants less/use drip system 46% 10 Adjusted sprinklers so they dont run on driveway, sidewalks, waste water 45% 11 Washed car less often/Used water- efficient methods to wash car 49% 12 Didnt hose down driveway/walkways 51% 13 Installed drought tolerant landscapes/fake grass 38% 14 Other 8% 98 Not sure 0% 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Q21 Over the past five years, have you made any major changes to your property to reduce your use of water such as replacing grass with drought-tolerant landscaping, or installing water-efficient appliances? 1 Yes 64% Ask Q22 2 No 31% Skip to Q23 98 Not sure 3% Skip to Q23 99 Prefer not to answer 2% Skip to Q23 Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 54Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 8 Q22 Can you describe the major changes you made to your property to reduce water usage? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below. Installed drought tolerant landscapes, fake grass, concrete 54% Purchased water-efficient appliances 18% Reduced water usage in general 15% Installed drip system 12% Used water-efficient faucet, shower heads, toilets 9% Adjusted, changed irrigation system 8% Used less water when taking shower, hand washing dishes 3% Watered plants early morning or late afternoon 2% Used rain barrels 2% Installed tankless water heater 2% Collected, reused water 2% Washed car less often / Used water-efficient methods 2% Not sure, cannot think of anything specific 2% Used grey-water system 1% Section 7: Communications Q23 In general, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the Otay Water Districts efforts to communicate with customers through newsletters, social media, bill inserts, web, direct mail and/or other means? Get answer, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? 1 Very satisfied 42% 2 Somewhat satisfied 41% 3 Somewhat dissatisfied 5% 4 Very dissatisfied 2% 98 Not sure 9% 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Q24 Do you recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter, which is mailed to your home or emailed quarterly? 1 Yes 49% Ask Q25 2 No 33% Skip to Q26 98 Not sure 18% Skip to Q26 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Skip to Q26 Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 55Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 9 Q25 How often would you say that you read the Pipeline Newsletter when it arrives? Would you say that you always read it, sometimes read it, rarely read it, or never read it? 1 Always 45% 2 Sometimes 42% 3 Rarely 11% 4 Never 2% 99 Prefer not to answer 0% Q26 As I read the following ways that the Otay Water District can communicate with residents, Id like to know if you think they would be a very effective, somewhat effective, or not at all effective way for the District to communicate with you. Randomize Ve r y So m e w h a t No t a t a l l No t s u r e / Pr e f e r n o t to a n s w e r A Email 45% 36% 15% 4% B Newsletters emailed to you/Electronic Newsletters 35% 39% 20% 6% C Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram 12% 28% 46% 13% D Otay Water District website 24% 40% 28% 8% E Newsletters mailed to your house 33% 39% 22% 6% F Information inserted into your water bill envelope 33% 34% 27% 6% G Postcards mailed to your house 27% 41% 25% 6% H Notices hung on your front door handle 24% 34% 36% 7% I Sponsoring community events 18% 42% 30% 10% J Text messages 28% 30% 33% 8% K Automated voice calls via telephone 14% 23% 55% 8% Q27 Are there any methods of communication I havent already mentioned that you think would be a very effective way for the Water District to communicate with you? If yes, ask: Please describe the communication method to me. Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below. No additional methods / Nothing comes to mind 84% Prefer not to answer 8% Emails 1% Texts 1% Face to face 1% Newsletter / Letter, flyers 1% Phone call, cell phone services 1% TV / Radio commercials 1% Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 56Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 10 Public forum / Meetings 1% Skywriting 1% Billing service / Billing statements 1% Section 8: Demographics Thank you so much for your participation. I have just a few background questions for statistical purposes. D1 What is your gender? (record by voice if telephone interview) 1 Male 52% 2 Female 45% 99 Prefer not to answer 3% D2 In what year were you born? Year recoded and later grouped into age categories shown below. 18 to 24 2% 25 to 34 4% 35 to 44 10% 45 to 54 15% 55 to 64 19% 65 or older 33% Prefer not to answer 16% D3 How many people, including you, live in your household? 1 9% 2 29% 3 18% 4 15% 5 or more 16% Prefer not to answer 13% D4 Do you own or rent your current residence? 1 Own 86% 2 Rent 12% 3 Live with family / friends and dont pay rent 0% 99 Prefer not to answer 2% Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 57Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 11 D5 Does your household pay the water bill directly, or is it paid for by someone else like a landlord or Home Owners Association? 1 Household pays bill directly 96% 2 Someone else pays bill 0% 98 Not sure 0% 99 Prefer not to answer 4% D6 Which of the following best describes your current home? 1 Single family detached home 89% 2 Apartment 0% 3 Condominium or townhome 5% 4 Mobile home 0% 99 Prefer not to answer 5% D7 What ethnic group do you consider yourself a part of or feel closest to? Read list if respondent hesitates 1 Caucasian/White 43% 2 Latino/Hispanic 23% 3 African-American/Black 4% 4 American Indian or Alaskan Native 1% 5 Asian -- Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, Filipino or other Asian 11% 6 Pacific Islander 1% 7 Mixed Heritage 3% 98 Other 3% 99 Prefer not to answer 12% D8 This last question is for statistical purposes only. As I read the following income categories, please stop me when I reach the category that best represents your households total annual income before taxes. 1 Under $25,000 5% 2 $25,000 to $39,999 5% 3 $40,000 to $59,999 7% 4 $60,000 to $79,999 10% 5 $80,000 to $99,999 9% 6 $100,000 to $149,999 18% 7 $150,000 or more 17% 98 Not sure 1% 99 Prefer not to answer 29% Qu e s t i o n n a i r e & T o p l i n e s True North Research, Inc. © 2020 58Otay Water District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otay Water District Customer Survey 1/20/2020 True North Research, Inc. © 2019 Page 12 S1 Service address city 1 Chula Vista 64% 2 El Cajon 11% 3 Jamul 3% 4 Spring Valley 17% 5 Other 5% S2 Account setup year 1 2019 6% 2 2018-17 9% 3 2016-15 7% 4 2014-10 18% 5 2009-00 26% 6 Before 2000 34% Those are all of the questions that I have for you! Thanks so much for participating in this important survey! Attachment D Appendix A, Cross Tabulations Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 1Page 1 Q1 Satisfaction with services Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 44355.4%44362.1%--3366.3%4056.7%3457.5%8257.7%10249.3%15256.1% 27033.8%27037.9%--1020.9%2230.6%1830.4%4632.2%7737.4%9735.8% 425.3%--4271.8%36.2%23.3%59.1%107.0%125.9%93.4% 172.1%--1728.2%12.7%22.5%--10.9%52.3%72.8% 212.7%----24.0%45.0%00.6%21.3%115.1%31.1% 60.8%------11.9%12.3%10.9%--20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 2Page 2 Q1 Satisfaction with services Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 8352.3%34856.1%1952.0%2255.7%3668.5%4759.8%4457.9%7653.3%8158.2% 5433.9%21134.0%1438.9%1436.2%1426.1%2430.5%2837.3%5739.8%3927.7% 159.3%264.2%25.3%37.1%24.3%22.9%22.0%53.8%128.6% 42.5%111.8%----11.2%44.6%--31.9%53.4% 31.9%182.9%11.7%01.1%--00.5%22.8%21.2%21.1% --61.0%12.1%----11.7%----11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 3Page 3 Q1 Satisfaction with services Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 11062.3%9356.9%2752.4%21352.3%2246.9%5263.7%7259.8%7448.0%16662.3% 5631.7%5936.1%2039.0%13533.3%1837.9%2428.9%3731.1%5938.3%8331.0% 63.3%63.9%11.8%286.9%13.1%23.0%86.7%127.8%114.1% 31.5%10.9%12.6%112.7%23.8%11.6%21.8%85.3%20.6% 21.3%21.5%12.6%153.8%35.5%22.8%10.7%10.6%31.2% --10.8%11.5%41.0%12.9%------20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 4Page 4 Q1 Satisfaction with services Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4159.9%12653.8%9061.1%7361.9%7055.1%33053.3%8860.8%37855.0%5657.3% 1927.4%8536.3%4932.8%3428.7%4636.1%21434.7%4631.9%24135.0%2525.6% 68.3%187.5%42.7%54.4%54.1%386.1%53.2%385.6%32.7% --31.4%21.5%21.8%32.6%142.2%31.8%142.1%22.2% 23.3%20.9%11.0%43.2%32.1%172.7%32.3%142.0%88.1% 11.2%--10.9%----61.0%--20.3%44.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 5Page 5 Q1 Satisfaction with services Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 23656.2%20356.4%40256.2%2148.2%25950.8%5157.5%1765.3%9467.2%2362.5% 14735.1%11431.7%24033.6%2045.9%19037.3%2933.2%726.4%3424.6%926.1% 215.0%195.3%385.4%12.8%295.6%44.8%14.2%53.7%39.1% 71.6%82.3%141.9%13.0%122.3%21.8%13.0%21.6%-- 92.1%92.6%172.4%--152.9%21.7%01.2%42.9%12.3% --61.7%30.5%--51.1%10.9%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 6Page 6 Q1 Satisfaction with services Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 22264.8%8848.9%2159.3%4751.6%2646.9% 10229.7%6938.2%1029.5%3639.4%1730.9% 144.0%137.1%01.2%11.5%59.1% 31.0%42.3%--11.5%47.4% 10.2%52.7%26.2%56.0%35.6% 10.2%10.7%13.8%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 7Page 7 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Rates, billstooexpensive Waterquality,taste, smell Customerservicesissues Low waterpressure Excessivesalaries,pensions, co-mpensation Inaccurate,incorrectbilling Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure, noparticularreason 59 -59 4 4 5 11 17 17 3355.7%--3355.7%360.4%242.7%231.9%547.6%952.8%1273.9% 1017.2%--1017.2%----349.7%111.9%320.4%315.9% 711.2%--711.2%--010.1%118.5%18.4%--425.2% 34.5%--34.5%130.2%----111.9%---- 58.1%--58.1%------111.9%17.9%212.5% 1423.0%--1423.0%09.4%120.0%236.3%111.9%527.4%426.3% 34.4%--34.4%--114.9%--111.9%13.6%-- 12.3%--12.3%--------17.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 8Page 8 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Rates, billstooexpensive Waterquality,taste, smell Customerservicesissues Low waterpressure Excessivesalaries,pensions, co-mpensation Inaccurate,incorrectbilling Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure, noparticularreason 19 38 2 3 3 6 2 8 17 1055.9%2156.1%168.5%134.1%3100.0%345.4%175.4%451.9%1379.4% 211.4%821.4%--128.4%--115.9%--116.4%212.6% 313.8%410.7%131.5%----115.9%024.6%---- 17.2%13.6%------------18.0% 29.2%38.2%----132.5%--024.6%--14.7% 528.5%718.4%131.5%015.1%121.3%122.7%----420.9% 16.6%13.6%--122.4%--122.7%------ --13.6%-------------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 9Page 9 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Rates, billstooexpensive Waterquality,taste, smell Customerservicesissues Low waterpressure Excessivesalaries,pensions, co-mpensation Inaccurate,incorrectbilling Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure, noparticularreason 8 8 2 39 3 4 10 20 13 448.1%564.7%141.3%2358.4%125.9%259.4%552.7%1468.4%752.0% 115.8%110.2%--820.5%----220.9%313.3%213.7% 04.5%112.9%--513.3%013.0%124.5%--315.5%03.0% ------36.8%----113.2%---- 229.5%112.2%--13.4%------13.9%321.1% 331.6%116.0%--821.3%125.9%--113.2%733.6%18.2% ------36.6%119.3%116.1%113.2%---- ------13.4%----113.2%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 10Page 10 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Rates, billstooexpensive Waterquality,taste, smell Customerservicesissues Low waterpressure Excessivesalaries,pensions, co-mpensation Inaccurate,incorrectbilling Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure, noparticularreason 6 21 6 7 9 52 7 53 5 465.0%1464.8%457.7%234.0%669.9%3159.6%228.8%3158.1%245.0% --316.5%115.0%229.2%115.7%917.1%118.1%814.9%248.4% 227.6%01.8%06.0%----510.2%118.1%47.2%358.5% ------118.4%--35.2%--35.1%-- --316.4%------59.3%--36.5%128.4% 118.3%419.2%--111.4%338.6%1121.2%336.3%1120.2%233.0% ------118.4%114.4%35.0%--23.7%113.1% ----121.3%----12.6%--12.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 11Page 11 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Rates, billstooexpensive Waterquality,taste, smell Customerservicesissues Low waterpressure Excessivesalaries,pensions, co-mpensation Inaccurate,incorrectbilling Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure, noparticularreason 27 27 52 3 40 6 2 7 3 1450.0%1866.3%3160.2%--2355.7%460.2%2100.0%338.0%262.5% 311.2%725.8%815.0%--716.5%226.8%--225.4%-- 413.4%29.1%58.8%124.0%24.8%226.4%141.8%231.0%-- --39.8%35.1%--36.6%-------- 312.5%14.9%36.6%--36.6%119.9%--112.7%-- 723.9%620.7%1120.4%124.0%1126.2%--141.8%118.3%125.0% 27.1%12.2%23.7%124.0%36.4%-------- --14.9%12.6%--13.3%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 12Page 12 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Rates, billstooexpensive Waterquality,taste, smell Customerservicesissues Low waterpressure Excessivesalaries,pensions, co-mpensation Inaccurate,incorrectbilling Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure, noparticularreason 17 17 0 3 9 1161.8%1163.8%--150.0%550.9% --421.1%----217.2% 16.8%------217.1% ------150.0%114.7% 17.7%17.8%------ 320.1%527.1%0100.0%--16.8% --315.0%------ 17.8%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 13Page 13 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Prefer not toanswer 59 -59 4 4 5 11 17 17 46.0%--46.0%--132.3%--18.4%17.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 14Page 14 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Prefer not toanswer 19 38 2 3 3 6 2 8 17 --49.4%----------331.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 15Page 15 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 8 8 2 39 3 4 10 20 13 --112.2%158.7%13.2%141.8%------217.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 16Page 16 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Prefer not toanswer 6 21 6 7 9 52 7 53 5 --210.4%------11.8%335.0%46.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 17Page 17 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Prefer not toanswer 27 27 52 3 40 6 2 7 3 27.9%--24.2%152.1%13.3%----112.7%137.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 18Page 18 Q2 Reason for dissatisfaction with Water District's performance Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Prefer not toanswer 17 17 0 3 9 420.4%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 19Page 19 Q3a Provide high quality water Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 40650.8%39655.5%712.1%2650.9%3143.0%2542.0%5639.8%11253.9%15758.1% 23829.7%21229.7%1728.4%1427.6%1723.8%1831.3%5538.5%5928.3%7527.7% 536.7%405.6%1322.8%36.1%68.1%35.6%1510.8%115.2%155.6% 313.8%121.6%1728.7%59.7%34.5%47.2%32.5%83.8%72.6% 668.2%527.3%58.0%35.6%1318.7%711.7%117.9%178.2%155.5% 60.8%20.3%----11.9%12.3%10.6%10.6%10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 20Page 20 Q3a Provide high quality water Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7749.0%31951.5%1950.0%2358.5%3260.7%4253.4%3546.4%7653.2%7352.8% 4126.0%19130.8%1439.0%819.8%1427.1%2025.3%2634.3%4330.0%3827.6% 1711.0%345.5%26.1%513.0%24.3%67.1%56.8%117.5%106.9% 95.5%203.3%13.8%24.2%11.2%11.2%10.8%85.3%85.5% 138.5%498.0%01.1%24.6%46.8%911.4%911.6%43.1%96.3% --61.0%------11.7%--10.9%11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 21Page 21 Q3a Provide high quality water Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 11364.0%8753.1%2345.3%18244.8%1635.1%3644.4%5848.3%8253.4%16160.5% 3922.3%5231.9%1630.9%12931.7%1633.5%2429.1%3831.4%4730.6%6825.3% 105.4%127.0%48.6%286.9%36.6%1012.3%119.3%106.5%114.3% 63.5%21.5%24.1%204.9%36.7%55.8%64.8%53.5%52.0% 74.0%85.2%611.0%4511.0%715.3%78.3%76.2%96.0%186.9% 10.8%21.3%--30.7%12.9%------31.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 22Page 22 Q3a Provide high quality water Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4160.0%12653.7%7953.3%6454.6%6148.0%30749.6%7752.8%35451.4%4546.6% 1319.0%7531.9%4430.0%3328.4%4031.6%17528.4%5034.7%20930.5%2323.9% 57.0%93.8%117.2%76.3%129.5%487.8%53.3%476.8%76.9% 56.9%41.9%31.8%65.3%64.9%254.1%53.6%253.7%44.4% 35.1%208.8%106.8%65.4%86.0%579.3%75.1%507.2%1414.5% 12.0%--10.9%----50.9%10.5%30.4%33.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 23Page 23 Q3a Provide high quality water Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 22353.3%17849.4%36851.5%1842.1%24648.2%4348.3%1452.1%7856.0%2671.4% 12730.2%10128.1%22130.9%1125.5%16231.7%2426.9%727.5%3827.0%720.6% 235.5%308.3%466.4%410.0%367.1%66.6%27.2%96.6%-- 102.4%195.3%233.2%48.0%173.4%44.0%--96.3%13.4% 348.2%287.7%547.6%511.4%438.5%1213.3%313.2%64.2%24.6% 10.3%41.1%30.4%13.0%51.1%10.9%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 24Page 24 Q3a Provide high quality water Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 20459.4%8949.2%1747.6%3538.0%2444.3% 9427.4%5329.6%1131.7%3437.1%1527.6% 154.4%137.1%39.2%77.4%917.1% 82.3%116.0%01.2%55.9%12.5% 236.6%137.4%26.5%1111.6%58.5% --10.7%13.8%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 25Page 25 Q3b Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 37246.5%36350.8%46.8%2753.2%3448.4%2542.3%6344.6%9143.9%13248.7% 22928.6%19527.3%2745.4%1224.7%1419.6%1830.8%4732.9%6028.9%7828.8% 303.7%223.1%610.5%35.1%56.4%34.5%10.7%167.6%31.2% 162.0%81.1%814.0%12.7%11.9%23.7%10.9%41.9%62.3% 14418.0%12016.8%1423.2%714.3%1621.9%1016.4%2819.7%3517.1%4817.8% 91.1%50.7%----11.9%12.3%21.2%10.6%31.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 26Page 26 Q3b Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7648.0%28746.3%1951.3%1640.5%3260.2%4354.8%3141.4%6545.3%7251.4% 4528.4%17628.3%1027.9%924.3%1121.3%1822.6%3039.9%4632.4%3323.6% 63.8%233.7%26.1%11.6%22.9%33.4%10.8%53.5%85.6% 53.2%101.6%11.7%12.7%--11.7%--42.8%53.4% 2616.6%11618.6%512.9%1127.5%815.5%1215.8%1216.1%2316.0%2115.0% --91.5%--13.4%--11.7%11.8%--11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 27Page 27 Q3b Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10157.2%7948.3%2039.9%17142.0%2146.2%3947.5%5747.3%6945.2%14052.5% 4424.8%5131.0%1834.7%11528.4%1020.6%1922.7%4033.4%4529.6%7026.3% 52.7%74.5%00.8%174.2%11.3%78.8%32.7%63.8%52.1% 31.4%21.2%12.6%112.6%12.9%22.8%21.5%74.4%31.2% 2413.8%2112.9%1020.0%8821.7%1226.1%1518.2%1714.0%2516.3%4516.7% --32.1%11.8%51.2%12.9%--11.1%10.6%31.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 28Page 28 Q3b Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3348.5%10444.6%7550.6%6151.8%6550.8%27243.9%7954.0%31946.5%4647.5% 1624.0%7331.2%4228.7%3731.3%3225.0%18229.4%3725.6%19828.8%2626.7% 10.9%125.0%32.2%--96.8%254.1%42.8%263.8%43.7% 10.9%52.1%31.9%--64.5%152.4%10.9%142.1%22.0% 1725.7%3916.8%2215.2%1915.9%1612.9%11719.0%2215.3%12418.0%1616.5% --10.3%21.5%11.1%--71.1%21.5%60.8%33.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 29Page 29 Q3b Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 20849.6%15743.6%33246.5%1944.2%22544.2%3539.4%1246.1%7554.0%2568.0% 11828.1%10629.3%20929.3%1329.8%14628.6%3033.6%1036.6%3827.0%617.1% 204.7%92.5%263.6%13.0%234.5%22.7%--43.0%-- 61.5%92.5%121.6%48.9%132.6%10.9%--21.6%-- 6615.9%7320.2%12918.0%614.1%9618.8%1921.7%517.4%1913.7%514.8% 10.3%72.0%71.0%--71.3%21.8%--10.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 30Page 30 Q3b Ensure an adequate water supply now and in the future Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 17751.5%8748.0%1440.9%3942.8%2443.5% 10229.6%4826.4%925.0%2931.9%1425.1% 51.4%116.3%25.6%32.9%11.1% 51.4%63.3%--32.9%11.1% 5415.8%2815.3%822.0%1617.9%1629.2% 10.2%10.7%26.5%11.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 31Page 31 Q3c Educate customers about ways to conserve water Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 33842.2%32946.1%610.4%2345.2%2434.4%1933.1%5639.6%8440.5%13148.3% 26633.2%23432.8%2034.3%1121.1%2636.9%2135.9%4934.7%7837.8%8129.7% 617.6%476.6%1017.2%611.0%79.4%814.3%96.3%167.5%165.7% 293.6%162.2%1322.0%35.3%45.8%23.7%64.4%42.2%103.5% 10012.5%8411.7%916.1%917.3%1013.6%610.7%2114.5%2311.3%3111.5% 70.9%40.6%------12.3%10.4%10.6%41.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 32Page 32 Q3c Educate customers about ways to conserve water Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 6239.1%26642.8%1437.9%2051.7%2749.9%4152.1%3140.6%5437.4%5842.0% 5736.1%20432.9%1334.0%410.0%1528.9%2025.1%2736.0%5135.8%4733.5% 106.0%497.9%512.2%25.5%35.4%67.1%56.4%1410.0%85.5% 127.3%132.2%12.1%37.7%11.2%33.7%10.8%42.8%96.6% 1811.5%8113.1%412.1%1025.1%814.6%810.3%1216.2%1913.1%1611.4% --71.1%11.7%----11.7%--10.9%11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 33Page 33 Q3c Educate customers about ways to conserve water Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10257.9%8451.1%2140.5%13032.0%1429.8%3138.2%4840.3%7146.2%12346.0% 5128.8%6036.8%1732.3%13834.0%1838.2%1923.6%4839.9%4630.3%8833.1% 84.3%63.5%23.1%4410.9%510.3%910.4%129.9%117.5%145.3% 21.0%10.4%24.6%246.0%36.7%910.7%43.7%53.0%41.4% 137.2%137.8%1019.6%6415.8%715.0%1417.1%86.3%2013.0%3613.5% 10.8%10.4%--51.2%--------20.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 34Page 34 Q3c Educate customers about ways to conserve water Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3349.0%10544.7%6544.1%5042.1%5139.8%25140.6%6544.9%28841.9%4041.5% 1623.2%7531.9%5134.5%3530.0%4837.8%21835.3%3826.3%23434.0%2828.7% 811.5%156.5%96.3%97.8%107.5%487.7%128.0%517.4%77.4% 00.6%41.9%42.4%43.5%129.4%233.7%64.2%263.7%43.8% 1115.7%3213.9%1811.9%2016.7%65.0%7311.8%2315.7%8412.2%1616.6% --31.1%10.9%--10.5%50.9%21.1%50.7%22.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 35Page 35 Q3c Educate customers about ways to conserve water Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 17341.3%15944.2%30142.2%1840.8%20941.0%3539.4%1140.1%6647.3%1747.3% 13933.2%11832.7%24634.4%1330.6%17434.2%3438.5%933.5%4129.4%821.5% 399.2%195.2%517.2%512.2%397.7%56.2%312.0%96.6%410.3% 153.5%133.6%223.1%35.9%183.5%22.7%01.2%53.6%410.6% 5112.2%4713.0%8812.4%510.6%6412.5%1213.2%313.2%1712.3%410.3% 20.5%51.3%60.8%--61.2%----10.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 36Page 36 Q3c Educate customers about ways to conserve water Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 15444.8%8446.6%1336.4%3133.7%2748.5% 12135.3%4625.4%1029.0%3639.3%1528.1% 195.6%1810.0%514.8%44.0%611.2% 72.0%126.4%01.2%33.3%35.3% 4212.3%2111.6%514.8%1617.7%47.0% ----13.8%22.2%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 37Page 37 Q3d Keep water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 39449.3%38453.8%58.9%2856.1%3650.1%3152.4%5740.1%9345.1%14955.0% 23829.8%20328.4%2440.4%816.4%1622.0%1322.5%5639.6%7636.9%6925.3% 222.8%162.2%711.4%12.1%23.2%34.6%32.3%83.9%51.8% 162.0%71.0%914.8%23.4%11.9%22.7%--52.6%62.1% 12015.0%9913.8%1321.3%1122.0%1521.6%915.5%2517.4%2311.2%3613.4% 101.3%60.8%23.2%--11.3%12.3%10.6%10.4%62.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 38Page 38 Q3d Keep water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7950.2%30549.1%1848.0%1847.4%3667.1%4658.9%3951.0%7048.7%6849.0% 4025.2%19431.3%1231.0%819.8%917.7%1923.7%2532.6%4632.0%4431.5% 63.7%142.2%25.1%13.5%12.5%11.2%--74.8%42.6% 63.8%81.4%13.8%12.7%12.5%----42.8%21.5% 2616.7%9014.5%412.1%923.2%510.1%1013.3%1216.0%1711.6%1813.1% 10.6%91.4%--13.4%--22.9%00.4%00.2%32.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 39Page 39 Q3d Keep water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10760.7%8350.7%2344.2%18044.4%2247.1%4352.3%6050.2%7548.8%14453.9% 4123.2%5533.7%1529.6%12731.3%1225.0%2125.6%4133.9%4831.2%6925.9% 21.2%42.7%12.3%133.2%00.9%44.7%22.1%42.4%72.5% 32.0%10.6%12.6%102.4%25.0%11.6%32.1%32.0%41.5% 2212.2%1811.2%1019.7%7017.1%1022.0%1315.8%1311.1%2314.9%3814.3% 10.8%21.2%11.5%61.5%----10.7%10.6%51.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 40Page 40 Q3d Keep water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3957.6%11850.5%7450.4%6252.3%6450.1%30349.0%7350.1%33648.9%5152.6% 1217.9%7029.7%4630.9%3327.8%4333.6%19130.8%3825.9%21130.6%2324.2% 57.1%52.3%42.4%21.3%21.5%193.0%32.1%182.7%32.8% 10.9%31.5%31.8%10.7%54.0%111.8%53.3%142.0%22.0% 1116.5%3615.3%1912.9%2017.2%1410.6%8714.0%2517.3%10214.8%1616.3% --20.7%21.5%10.7%00.2%81.3%21.3%71.0%22.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 41Page 41 Q3d Keep water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 21551.4%17348.1%35649.8%2045.8%23245.6%4045.2%1246.1%8560.9%2568.0% 13030.9%10228.2%21329.9%1330.7%17133.5%2730.5%932.4%2517.6%720.6% 122.9%82.3%172.4%25.4%112.2%21.8%--85.9%13.4% 61.5%82.2%121.7%36.7%112.2%22.6%13.0%11.0%-- 5112.1%6518.0%11015.4%511.4%7915.5%1618.1%313.2%1813.2%38.0% 41.0%41.1%70.9%--51.1%21.8%15.4%21.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 42Page 42 Q3d Keep water system in good condition through timely repairs and maintenance Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 19356.4%8546.9%2161.2%3437.6%2850.5% 9126.5%5329.1%718.8%3942.8%1933.8% 82.2%95.2%01.2%---- 51.5%42.4%--32.9%11.8% 4412.8%2915.9%515.0%1213.7%813.8% 20.6%10.5%13.8%32.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 43Page 43 Q3e Provide reliable water service Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 51864.7%49970.0%1119.0%3875.7%4765.5%3661.0%8761.3%12359.6%18769.0% 21827.2%17925.1%2543.0%816.3%1621.9%1626.9%4733.0%6531.5%6624.5% 212.7%111.6%1016.9%24.5%11.9%23.9%10.9%83.6%72.4% 162.0%50.7%1118.7%12.7%23.2%12.1%21.4%52.2%51.8% 212.7%162.2%12.5%00.8%57.5%23.9%53.4%52.4%31.3% 50.7%30.4%------12.3%--10.6%31.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 44Page 44 Q3e Provide reliable water service Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 10466.0%40064.5%2360.8%2564.1%3871.1%5873.7%5370.0%9163.6%9568.4% 3924.6%17528.2%1026.4%922.7%1120.1%1721.4%1925.3%4330.2%3424.6% 53.0%162.7%39.1%01.1%12.5%22.0%10.8%42.7%11.0% 63.5%81.3%11.7%24.7%11.2%----53.5%11.0% 42.8%152.5%12.1%24.0%35.1%11.2%33.8%--64.2% --50.9%--13.4%--11.7%----11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 45Page 45 Q3e Provide reliable water service Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 13375.5%11268.2%3465.6%23958.7%2655.6%5870.9%7662.9%10870.3%17967.2% 4022.5%4225.7%1528.6%12229.9%1430.2%1619.3%3730.8%3523.1%7026.1% --42.4%00.8%174.2%24.0%45.2%32.3%32.3%41.5% 21.0%10.4%12.6%112.8%12.9%22.8%21.5%53.4%31.3% 21.1%53.3%12.3%133.2%37.3%21.9%32.5%10.9%72.5% ------51.3%--------41.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 46Page 46 Q3e Provide reliable water service Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4972.3%15767.1%10067.7%8068.2%8364.7%38562.3%10672.5%44364.5%6364.8% 1319.7%6728.8%3624.5%3126.7%3527.1%17928.9%3121.1%19127.8%2424.7% 22.6%41.5%42.4%21.8%32.5%162.5%53.6%192.7%32.8% 10.9%41.6%31.7%--43.5%142.2%31.8%131.9%22.0% 34.5%31.1%31.8%43.3%32.3%203.2%10.9%182.7%33.0% ----31.8%----50.9%--30.4%32.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 47Page 47 Q3e Provide reliable water service Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 26863.9%24066.7%46965.7%2658.8%30559.9%5663.3%2076.6%10877.6%2878.3% 12530.0%8523.5%19627.4%1023.4%16031.4%2832.2%520.4%2014.6%410.3% 122.9%92.5%192.6%11.4%152.8%10.9%13.0%31.9%26.9% 51.2%92.4%111.6%35.9%132.6%10.9%--21.6%-- 61.4%154.1%152.1%510.6%112.2%22.7%--64.3%24.6% 30.6%30.7%40.6%--51.1%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 48Page 48 Q3e Provide reliable water service Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 25875.2%10055.4%2364.3%5055.5%3360.0% 7521.8%5228.6%823.0%3437.8%1832.4% 51.6%116.0%25.0%--12.4% 10.4%73.7%--32.9%23.7% 41.1%105.6%13.8%22.3%11.5% --10.7%13.8%11.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 49Page 49 Q3f Communicate with customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related iss Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 34843.6%34348.1%34.8%2142.0%3244.8%2542.5%6042.2%7737.2%13449.3% 23529.4%20929.3%2135.0%1326.2%1926.9%1830.7%4229.9%7536.1%6825.1% 324.0%253.5%712.3%23.1%11.9%34.9%42.6%104.9%124.6% 253.1%101.5%1525.0%24.7%45.2%34.4%64.4%73.3%31.3% 14818.4%11716.4%1322.9%1223.9%1419.4%1017.5%2719.0%3717.9%4717.5% 121.4%91.2%----11.9%--32.0%10.6%62.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 50Page 50 Q3f Communicate with customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related iss Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 6842.8%26642.9%1643.4%1538.5%3159.0%4455.5%3546.3%5337.1%5942.6% 4830.5%18629.9%1335.4%1333.4%1120.2%1924.2%2127.5%4430.9%4633.2% 95.8%233.7%--25.5%35.4%34.1%34.5%85.4%21.7% 106.3%121.9%11.7%25.3%--22.9%10.8%64.4%32.4% 2314.6%12319.8%614.9%513.9%713.0%1013.3%1620.9%3021.0%2517.7% --121.9%24.6%13.4%12.3%----21.1%32.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 51Page 51 Q3f Communicate with customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related iss Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 9151.6%7847.7%1835.4%16039.4%1940.0%3846.4%5445.1%6039.4%13048.6% 5028.1%4829.3%1834.2%12129.7%1533.3%1923.5%4134.2%5032.7%7226.9% 42.2%63.5%11.8%215.2%23.8%56.2%43.6%53.6%103.9% 31.4%21.1%23.4%184.3%23.8%56.7%22.0%63.9%31.2% 2715.5%2716.3%1325.2%8119.8%816.3%1417.2%1713.8%3019.6%4918.4% 21.2%32.1%--61.5%12.9%--21.3%10.9%31.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 52Page 52 Q3f Communicate with customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related iss Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3247.7%9841.9%7047.1%5345.2%5442.6%26342.5%6544.9%29242.4%4849.1% 1521.8%6728.5%4429.8%3831.9%4736.6%18329.7%4329.2%21130.7%2323.9% 69.3%93.8%64.0%32.1%64.4%284.5%42.7%304.3%22.4% 22.9%21.0%32.2%11.0%86.5%233.8%10.9%202.9%43.9% 1218.3%5523.4%2114.5%2319.1%139.9%11117.9%3121.0%12618.3%1818.4% --41.5%32.3%10.7%--101.6%21.3%91.4%22.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 53Page 53 Q3f Communicate with customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related iss Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 18644.5%15743.7%30843.2%2147.4%21041.2%3337.6%1038.3%7553.4%2056.5% 12429.6%10228.4%21730.4%1228.2%15430.2%3236.7%934.2%3121.9%1026.4% 194.6%123.2%273.8%37.9%173.4%44.4%13.0%96.3%13.4% 92.1%133.7%182.5%48.7%193.7%21.8%--43.2%-- 7417.7%7219.9%13418.7%37.8%10320.1%1617.7%520.4%2014.5%410.3% 71.6%41.2%101.4%--71.3%21.8%14.2%10.7%13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 54Page 54 Q3f Communicate with customers about scheduled repairs, service disruptions, other water-related iss Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 17049.7%7742.8%1954.0%3336.5%2137.5% 9427.3%5128.2%927.1%2730.2%2138.6% 113.2%137.2%--44.0%11.4% 10.4%105.5%01.2%44.4%47.0% 6518.9%2815.6%513.9%1920.4%813.9% 20.5%10.7%13.8%44.4%11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 55Page 55 Q3g Provide water that is safe to drink Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 41652.0%40256.3%915.1%2142.2%3650.2%2441.5%6545.8%10550.9%16460.5% 23229.0%20228.3%2135.2%1632.2%1317.9%1626.4%4733.3%6531.2%7628.0% 374.6%294.0%814.3%47.9%67.8%35.3%96.6%94.3%62.3% 354.4%212.9%1322.7%36.6%34.3%59.3%63.9%104.9%82.9% 749.2%578.0%712.6%611.2%1419.8%915.3%149.9%167.6%155.7% 60.7%30.5%------12.3%10.4%21.1%20.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 56Page 56 Q3g Provide water that is safe to drink Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7547.5%33053.3%1745.5%1743.3%2852.3%4760.2%3850.6%7048.7%8560.7% 4729.7%18029.0%1436.8%1129.0%1833.6%1924.8%2228.8%5034.7%3323.4% 106.2%254.1%37.5%24.5%24.3%34.1%34.0%85.8%64.1% 106.6%223.5%37.4%37.1%----10.8%85.6%74.7% 1610.0%579.2%01.1%513.6%59.8%79.3%1215.7%75.2%96.1% --61.0%11.7%12.4%--11.7%----11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 57Page 57 Q3g Provide water that is safe to drink Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 11163.1%9357.1%2141.8%18846.4%1940.4%3441.2%6453.1%8152.6%16059.9% 4424.7%5332.1%1936.5%11628.5%1634.2%1721.1%3529.2%5133.6%7327.2% 52.9%31.9%35.0%266.5%35.6%911.2%87.0%42.9%72.5% 73.7%42.3%48.0%215.2%37.1%67.1%43.4%74.3%83.1% 84.8%106.0%48.7%5112.6%612.7%1619.4%97.4%96.1%176.4% 10.8%10.6%--40.9%------10.6%20.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 58Page 58 Q3g Provide water that is safe to drink Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4160.5%13557.5%7852.8%6756.8%5441.9%31150.2%8256.2%36352.8%4748.8% 1319.8%7632.4%4027.1%3126.5%4131.9%17928.9%4530.8%20129.2%2525.5% 33.7%52.0%106.9%32.6%118.4%294.8%64.0%334.8%44.4% 58.0%52.1%42.8%86.9%86.5%335.4%21.6%304.4%43.8% 58.0%145.9%149.3%97.3%1310.0%619.9%107.0%578.3%1515.5% ----21.2%--21.2%50.9%10.4%40.6%22.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 59Page 59 Q3g Provide water that is safe to drink Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 24358.0%16545.7%37552.5%2046.0%24548.2%4652.8%1762.9%8258.6%2570.0% 12730.4%9927.3%21630.3%920.1%16331.9%2630.0%518.5%3122.3%718.6% 163.8%215.8%334.6%12.7%244.7%33.6%13.0%85.6%13.4% 102.3%236.3%263.7%715.0%265.0%21.8%--74.9%13.4% 235.4%4713.1%618.5%716.2%479.2%1011.9%415.5%117.6%24.6% --61.7%40.5%--50.9%----11.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 60Page 60 Q3g Provide water that is safe to drink Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 20960.8%8145.2%1748.0%3942.8%2850.9% 9728.3%5027.8%1336.7%3336.6%1221.6% 92.5%147.6%25.0%44.4%36.3% 102.8%116.3%--55.9%35.4% 195.5%2111.6%26.5%99.6%915.9% --31.5%13.8%10.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 61Page 61 Q3h Provide water that is free of color and odor Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 47259.0%45563.8%916.1%3162.3%4056.7%3560.0%7452.6%12560.2%16661.2% 24230.3%19927.9%3050.4%917.0%1825.9%1424.2%4833.8%6832.8%8531.4% 425.2%365.0%610.8%612.1%710.5%35.6%96.5%73.5%93.2% 283.5%141.9%1220.2%36.6%11.9%57.9%74.9%63.1%51.9% 141.7%101.4%12.5%12.0%45.1%--32.3%10.5%51.9% 30.3%--------12.3%----10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 62Page 62 Q3h Provide water that is free of color and odor Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 8956.2%36859.4%2053.8%2360.3%3157.5%5164.3%4762.6%8559.4%8661.9% 4729.6%19130.8%1642.4%514.1%2037.4%2227.5%2329.8%4028.2%3726.3% 85.1%325.2%--616.4%--33.7%56.1%139.0%53.7% 95.6%172.8%13.8%24.2%12.6%--11.6%42.8%74.8% 63.5%81.3%--25.0%12.5%22.8%--10.5%32.2% --30.4%------11.7%----11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 63Page 63 Q3h Provide water that is free of color and odor Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 12369.6%10162.0%2141.9%22555.4%2349.5%4756.8%7260.3%8957.7%17565.5% 4223.7%5231.7%2243.3%12530.8%1124.5%1923.4%3730.9%5334.3%7026.3% 52.7%52.8%36.0%297.2%612.5%1113.7%43.5%63.7%113.9% 52.9%42.5%47.6%153.6%36.3%45.1%54.5%63.8%41.6% 21.2%21.0%11.2%92.3%37.3%11.1%10.8%10.4%62.1% ------30.7%--------10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 64Page 64 Q3h Provide water that is free of color and odor Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4363.8%13959.3%10067.7%7361.9%6954.4%35557.4%9162.2%40458.8%5859.5% 1825.8%8034.0%3523.6%3227.3%3829.7%19030.8%4329.4%21230.8%2626.7% 34.3%72.8%75.0%76.1%118.8%365.8%53.7%355.1%55.6% 34.4%52.0%32.0%43.8%85.9%243.9%32.4%233.3%55.2% 11.8%41.9%10.7%11.0%21.2%111.7%32.2%121.8%21.6% ----10.9%----30.4%--10.2%11.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 65Page 65 Q3h Provide water that is free of color and odor Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 25761.4%20857.6%42259.2%2863.1%28555.9%5461.1%1557.4%9266.0%2671.4% 12329.3%11030.4%22331.2%920.2%16933.2%2326.5%1141.4%3223.2%617.1% 256.0%164.5%355.0%35.9%306.0%55.3%--64.0%13.4% 61.4%195.3%202.8%49.4%153.0%55.8%--75.2%-- 81.9%51.3%121.7%11.4%71.4%11.3%01.2%21.6%38.0% --30.7%10.2%--30.5%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 66Page 66 Q3h Provide water that is free of color and odor Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 22465.3%9552.7%1954.0%5257.6%3054.7% 9928.9%5731.8%1131.8%2932.0%1628.3% 92.6%147.5%26.6%55.9%610.4% 61.9%116.2%--33.4%23.7% 51.4%31.8%13.8%11.1%22.9% ----13.8%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 67Page 67 Q3i Provide sufficient water pressure Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 44355.4%42559.5%1016.7%2957.3%4359.7%3051.1%7955.7%10349.7%16058.9% 21226.5%17825.0%2440.6%1121.5%1622.4%1830.6%2820.0%6531.3%7427.3% 739.1%618.6%915.1%59.9%68.4%47.2%1813.0%209.6%197.1% 384.8%263.7%1117.9%59.3%34.3%46.5%96.3%115.2%72.6% 303.8%233.2%58.0%12.0%33.9%12.3%64.5%94.2%103.7% 40.5%10.1%11.6%--11.3%12.3%10.4%--10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 68Page 68 Q3i Provide sufficient water pressure Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 8855.5%34455.4%2157.2%2358.1%3972.8%4556.8%4558.9%7250.0%7553.7% 3019.1%17528.2%1233.4%923.1%1019.6%1924.3%2329.8%4229.5%3525.4% 2314.4%497.9%36.9%37.5%--1113.5%56.3%1510.3%149.9% 95.8%284.5%--38.8%24.3%11.2%22.0%96.2%75.1% 74.6%233.6%12.5%12.6%23.3%22.5%23.0%64.0%53.9% 10.6%30.4%------11.7%----32.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 69Page 69 Q3i Provide sufficient water pressure Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10861.4%9860.0%2446.7%21152.0%2758.9%4858.9%6150.9%8052.5%16562.0% 4223.6%4024.6%1631.8%11327.7%1123.8%1113.8%3831.3%4328.0%7026.1% 148.2%169.7%712.8%368.8%13.0%1214.4%97.5%1912.1%176.2% 63.5%21.3%24.1%286.8%47.9%810.1%75.6%63.9%62.3% 63.3%74.0%24.6%153.8%36.4%22.8%54.1%42.9%82.9% --10.4%--40.9%----10.5%10.6%10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 70Page 70 Q3i Provide sufficient water pressure Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3855.5%12955.2%8859.6%7563.9%6752.5%32252.1%9666.2%37855.1%5253.6% 1521.8%7331.0%3121.1%2622.3%3628.2%17728.6%2718.3%18526.9%2424.5% 912.9%166.9%128.3%97.3%1411.2%589.3%139.1%639.2%109.8% 22.3%83.4%106.7%32.5%86.5%345.5%43.0%334.8%55.6% 57.5%73.1%53.4%54.1%11.1%243.9%53.3%253.7%55.2% --10.4%10.9%--10.5%40.7%--30.4%11.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 71Page 71 Q3i Provide sufficient water pressure Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 25260.1%18150.2%39755.5%2453.8%27053.0%4854.0%1556.3%9064.2%2056.3% 10625.3%10228.3%19627.4%715.7%14227.9%2832.3%623.4%2417.3%1131.2% 368.7%339.2%608.4%921.6%509.8%99.7%311.4%107.2%13.4% 153.7%205.6%344.8%24.5%265.1%22.2%13.0%86.0%13.4% 92.2%215.8%253.5%24.5%193.6%21.7%26.0%64.6%25.7% --30.9%30.4%--30.6%----10.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 72Page 72 Q3i Provide sufficient water pressure Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 21161.4%9955.1%1439.4%4650.2%3053.6% 9026.2%4424.5%1132.1%3235.0%1425.2% 236.8%158.6%719.2%66.6%712.8% 82.2%116.1%11.8%77.6%34.8% 113.3%105.7%13.8%10.7%12.5% ----13.8%--11.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 73Page 73 Q3j Offer good value for the cost of water services Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 21126.3%20729.1%11.6%1733.9%2231.4%1220.9%3625.3%4321.0%8029.4% 27334.1%26436.9%814.3%1223.3%2434.2%2339.0%5740.2%6631.9%9133.6% 15319.1%12617.7%1525.9%1020.0%1318.4%1322.1%2517.7%4923.6%4315.8% 8911.2%547.6%3152.3%611.9%79.3%24.0%139.1%2914.0%3212.0% 718.9%608.4%35.9%510.9%56.8%814.0%107.2%209.5%238.4% 30.4%20.2%--------10.6%--20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 74Page 74 Q3j Offer good value for the cost of water services Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 4226.9%16326.3%1025.8%1232.2%2139.4%2734.9%2229.4%3020.9%3424.2% 4226.7%22536.2%822.1%1538.3%1732.0%2025.2%2837.4%5437.4%4935.4% 3320.9%11618.8%925.5%38.4%1121.1%1417.8%1519.8%3222.2%2316.8% 2616.4%619.8%718.0%26.4%35.0%911.0%68.2%1410.0%1410.4% 149.1%528.5%26.1%614.7%12.5%911.1%45.3%149.5%1712.2% --30.5%12.5%----------11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 75Page 75 Q3j Offer good value for the cost of water services Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 5833.0%4326.3%1019.9%9824.1%1429.1%2732.5%3730.4%3220.8%7728.7% 6436.1%5533.8%2141.9%13332.6%1327.3%2834.0%4336.2%5234.2%9334.8% 2715.1%3521.4%1324.9%7719.0%1429.3%1416.6%2419.6%3019.3%5119.3% 169.2%116.8%47.6%5814.3%36.8%67.2%97.6%2818.3%248.9% 126.6%1810.7%35.7%399.6%47.5%89.8%76.2%117.4%217.8% --21.1%--10.3%--------10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 76Page 76 Q3j Offer good value for the cost of water services Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2638.6%5724.2%4329.4%3428.5%3124.6%15925.8%3524.3%17325.2%3131.9% 1623.2%8034.2%5839.1%4437.0%4434.5%19832.0%6343.2%23634.3%3233.2% 1014.5%5021.2%2718.1%1916.4%2922.7%12820.7%2013.7%13619.8%1515.1% 1014.0%2812.0%96.2%75.7%1411.0%8012.9%96.4%7611.0%1212.5% 79.7%198.0%96.3%1512.4%97.2%518.3%1711.9%649.3%66.5% --10.4%10.9%----20.4%10.5%20.3%10.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 77Page 77 Q3j Offer good value for the cost of water services Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 11126.5%9526.4%18926.5%1022.4%11722.9%1820.8%622.7%5640.4%1335.6% 14735.2%12133.5%24834.7%1636.6%17734.8%3135.0%1038.9%4834.2%718.6% 7517.9%7320.3%14019.7%716.8%10119.8%2326.1%416.2%1913.4%615.8% 4911.7%359.8%7810.9%510.3%6412.6%910.2%416.2%75.2%512.6% 358.4%359.6%588.1%613.9%499.5%67.0%26.0%96.2%617.4% 10.2%10.4%10.2%--10.3%10.9%--10.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 78Page 78 Q3j Offer good value for the cost of water services Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 9226.9%5631.2%926.3%1920.6%1527.8% 12335.8%5128.5%1439.3%3437.8%1933.7% 7020.4%3519.3%721.0%1921.1%610.8% 308.7%2212.3%01.2%88.8%915.5% 288.2%168.6%38.3%1111.8%610.4% ----13.8%--11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 79Page 79 Q3k Provide good customer service Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 41351.6%40256.3%610.5%3161.3%3954.4%3050.6%5941.7%9847.2%15757.7% 20926.1%18525.9%1829.9%917.7%912.3%1526.1%4632.7%5928.5%7025.9% 253.1%142.0%1017.1%35.1%45.8%35.3%21.5%94.5%41.4% 212.6%60.8%1525.4%23.5%11.9%12.1%42.6%62.7%72.7% 12315.4%10114.1%915.8%611.1%1723.7%813.7%2920.6%3316.2%3010.9% 101.3%60.8%11.3%11.2%11.9%12.3%11.0%20.9%31.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 80Page 80 Q3k Provide good customer service Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 9157.8%30749.5%2054.9%2461.2%3667.7%4962.1%4255.1%6545.4%7453.0% 3622.9%17027.4%923.0%717.8%1223.0%1620.9%2025.8%3826.8%3524.8% 95.9%152.3%411.6%11.6%--22.0%--75.1%64.3% 95.4%91.4%11.7%13.7%--11.2%--43.0%53.5% 116.8%11218.0%37.2%513.7%59.3%810.6%1317.4%2718.7%1712.5% 21.2%81.3%11.7%12.0%--33.3%11.8%10.9%31.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 81Page 81 Q3k Provide good customer service Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 11263.6%9658.9%2548.7%17843.8%2350.3%4757.6%6352.3%7850.9%14855.4% 3922.2%4527.3%1222.5%11327.9%612.2%1720.3%3529.5%3724.4%7327.2% 32.0%21.2%35.4%174.1%49.6%34.0%43.4%42.6%52.1% 31.9%10.6%12.6%143.4%12.9%22.8%32.6%64.0%41.5% 179.6%1811.2%1120.8%7718.9%1123.7%1315.3%1512.2%2617.2%3312.5% 10.8%10.9%--71.8%11.3%----10.9%31.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 82Page 82 Q3k Provide good customer service Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3957.1%11247.9%8557.8%6656.4%6752.6%31550.9%8256.7%34650.4%5758.8% 1521.5%7130.3%3523.4%3025.4%3628.3%16626.9%2919.6%19027.7%1717.4% 46.2%31.3%64.3%21.4%53.5%193.0%64.2%223.2%33.4% 22.9%41.5%21.3%00.3%64.5%182.9%31.8%172.4%32.8% 812.2%4017.0%1711.4%1916.5%1411.0%9114.7%2517.1%10515.3%1414.7% --52.0%31.8%----91.5%10.5%71.1%32.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 83Page 83 Q3k Provide good customer service Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 20950.0%19554.0%37252.2%1841.2%24147.3%4247.3%1558.6%9265.6%2362.5% 11928.3%8724.0%19226.9%1125.2%14428.3%2629.6%727.0%2518.2%615.8% 122.8%123.3%172.4%511.6%142.7%44.4%--42.9%39.1% 82.0%102.7%162.2%35.9%142.7%33.6%14.2%31.9%-- 6515.5%5415.0%10915.2%716.1%8817.3%1213.3%310.2%1611.4%512.6% 61.4%30.9%81.1%--91.7%21.8%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 84Page 84 Q3k Provide good customer service Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 19757.4%9552.6%2160.8%3639.7%2647.9% 8123.6%4826.8%618.3%2831.0%1425.4% 92.7%94.8%13.8%--23.8% 41.1%63.5%01.2%32.9%22.8% 5014.6%2212.3%410.3%2122.7%1018.6% 20.6%--25.6%33.6%11.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 85Page 85 Q3l Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 18923.6%18626.1%23.9%1530.3%1824.9%814.4%2618.2%4421.2%7828.6% 18823.5%17123.9%1423.9%511.0%1420.3%2238.1%3524.9%5225.3%5821.5% 10212.7%8912.5%813.5%510.2%1013.4%69.8%2013.8%3818.1%249.0% 607.5%334.6%2238.0%612.3%811.6%46.6%1611.1%104.7%166.0% 24130.2%21930.7%1220.7%1631.6%1926.1%1728.8%4128.7%6029.0%8933.0% 202.5%162.2%--24.5%33.8%12.3%53.3%41.7%51.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 86Page 86 Q3l Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 3723.2%14723.8%514.1%1129.4%2037.3%2025.9%1924.6%3021.0%3122.6% 3924.4%14423.3%925.1%38.5%1324.6%1822.4%2532.3%3423.7%3424.7% 2314.6%7712.4%718.4%513.1%22.9%1113.6%68.5%1913.1%1611.3% 1711.0%406.4%37.4%38.2%48.0%810.0%34.4%139.0%128.4% 4126.1%19531.4%1129.7%1538.3%1427.2%2024.9%2329.8%4229.4%4230.2% 10.8%172.7%25.3%12.4%--33.3%00.4%53.7%42.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 87Page 87 Q3l Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 5732.5%4829.2%918.5%7418.2%1021.7%1923.0%2823.2%3422.1%7126.7% 4324.5%4930.0%1427.4%8220.1%714.3%1923.6%3529.1%3623.6%6825.4% 2112.0%1710.5%610.9%5814.3%714.1%1012.6%2621.3%2214.4%186.9% 31.6%105.8%24.6%4410.8%715.8%1112.8%54.5%1610.1%134.7% 4525.7%3521.2%1936.7%14235.0%1430.0%2126.1%2520.6%4428.6%9234.6% 73.8%53.2%11.8%71.7%24.2%21.9%21.3%21.1%51.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 88Page 88 Q3l Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 1825.9%4921.1%4732.0%2924.5%2419.2%14924.1%3020.6%15722.9%2323.7% 1421.2%5623.9%3322.3%2823.9%3628.1%15424.9%2718.5%17024.7%1616.3% 710.6%2611.0%1510.4%97.4%2519.7%8012.9%1812.2%8412.2%1717.4% 56.8%114.7%149.4%65.0%1410.8%518.3%85.5%517.4%77.6% 2434.8%8536.5%3624.1%4336.9%2620.0%16827.1%6040.9%21030.6%2930.1% 00.6%72.8%31.7%32.3%32.2%172.7%32.2%152.2%54.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 89Page 89 Q3l Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 9723.1%9024.9%16723.4%715.9%11422.3%1820.8%517.9%3625.8%1643.9% 10023.8%8423.3%17824.9%714.8%11522.6%2326.6%623.4%3827.5%513.7% 5613.3%4512.5%9012.7%715.1%6512.8%1112.8%415.0%1812.5%410.3% 307.2%267.1%527.3%37.3%458.8%44.0%14.2%96.5%13.4% 12930.8%10529.0%20929.3%2146.9%15630.5%3134.9%1038.4%3524.7%1028.7% 81.8%113.2%172.3%--152.8%10.9%01.2%43.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 90Page 90 Q3l Provide rebate programs that encourage customers to purchase water-efficient appliances Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 10430.3%3519.7%412.8%1415.6%1222.0% 8424.4%4424.6%616.9%2931.8%712.6% 246.9%2916.0%925.9%1516.0%712.2% 144.0%2312.7%25.0%66.2%916.8% 11333.0%4324.1%1235.6%2628.3%1934.0% 51.5%52.9%13.8%22.2%12.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 91Page 91 Q3m Provide convenient hours of operation Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 41351.7%40456.6%47.2%3060.6%3752.4%2848.2%6747.4%9747.1%15356.4% 21126.4%17624.6%2745.6%1019.1%1724.5%1221.0%4531.6%6029.1%6724.6% 212.6%131.8%712.5%24.5%--58.0%21.5%104.8%20.8% 111.3%50.7%69.9%00.8%33.8%11.0%10.9%31.5%30.9% 12916.2%10715.0%1423.5%714.9%1217.5%1119.5%2518.0%3215.5%4014.9% 141.7%91.3%11.3%--11.9%12.3%10.6%41.9%72.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 92Page 92 Q3m Provide convenient hours of operation Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 9157.4%31250.4%2259.2%2358.9%3158.4%5265.8%4458.4%6747.1%6949.6% 4327.5%16125.9%513.6%718.1%1121.3%1822.4%2026.7%4027.9%4028.6% 84.8%122.0%411.1%--23.2%10.8%10.8%21.5%43.0% 42.4%50.8%--13.7%--11.7%--31.9%11.0% 127.9%11618.7%513.6%513.7%917.1%67.7%911.3%2718.9%2316.8% --142.3%12.5%25.5%--11.7%22.8%42.8%11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 93Page 93 Q3m Provide convenient hours of operation Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10961.6%9759.1%2344.6%18445.3%2552.9%4251.1%6150.8%7951.8%15257.1% 4022.8%4326.1%1630.4%11327.8%918.5%2126.1%4234.7%4831.0%5520.7% 21.3%31.6%11.2%143.5%12.7%22.4%21.9%64.1%31.1% 21.0%--35.0%61.6%24.2%11.6%00.3%31.7%20.9% 2111.8%2012.2%1018.8%7919.4%1021.7%1518.8%1512.2%1711.3%4617.1% 31.5%21.1%--102.4%--------83.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 94Page 94 Q3m Provide convenient hours of operation Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4160.0%11850.2%8456.8%7261.1%6248.4%32151.9%7349.9%35351.3%5253.2% 1116.7%6226.4%4429.5%2823.8%3829.6%16827.1%3524.3%18827.4%2021.1% 22.9%41.6%10.9%10.5%64.5%183.0%31.9%142.0%66.4% 00.6%10.6%21.3%--42.9%91.5%10.9%101.4%11.2% 1217.9%4318.4%1610.5%1714.5%1914.7%9014.6%3221.9%11316.4%1414.5% 12.0%72.8%10.9%----122.0%21.1%111.5%33.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 95Page 95 Q3m Provide convenient hours of operation Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 21952.2%18852.3%37853.0%2044.7%24848.7%4247.7%1556.3%8862.6%2157.6% 10825.8%9626.6%18926.5%1329.3%14027.5%2730.1%726.4%2820.2%1026.4% 112.7%92.4%152.1%23.7%152.8%33.1%13.0%21.3%13.4% 41.1%51.4%81.2%24.5%81.6%21.8%--10.9%-- 6816.3%5916.4%11415.9%714.8%8817.3%1415.5%311.4%2014.3%512.6% 82.0%31.0%101.3%13.0%112.1%21.8%13.0%10.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 96Page 96 Q3m Provide convenient hours of operation Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 19857.8%9150.4%1645.7%4448.4%2851.6% 8023.3%5027.7%1131.8%2931.7%1221.8% 41.0%115.9%13.8%11.5%11.8% 20.6%31.9%01.2%32.9%-- 5616.3%2413.4%513.7%1112.6%1221.7% 31.0%10.7%13.8%32.9%23.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 97Page 97 Q3n Provide accurate billing statements Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 43153.9%41558.1%1016.2%2958.7%4359.9%3153.2%7150.1%9947.6%15858.3% 23629.5%20929.2%1424.1%1122.6%1824.7%1627.7%4733.0%7034.0%7427.3% 546.7%385.3%1424.5%23.2%34.3%69.8%63.9%2813.4%103.8% 313.9%131.9%1627.7%24.3%44.9%23.1%63.9%52.5%134.6% 445.5%385.3%35.9%611.1%23.0%46.1%139.1%52.4%155.5% 40.5%10.2%11.6%--23.2%------10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 98Page 98 Q3n Provide accurate billing statements Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 8050.4%34155.0%2155.9%2256.1%4075.9%4658.1%3647.1%7652.8%7856.1% 4729.8%18630.0%1231.3%820.6%610.4%1924.0%3444.5%5034.7%3928.0% 116.7%426.8%49.5%38.3%47.5%78.7%11.8%64.2%75.4% 116.7%182.8%11.7%49.6%23.7%45.4%--43.1%32.4% 95.8%315.0%11.7%25.5%12.5%33.9%56.6%85.3%96.5% 10.6%30.4%------------21.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 99Page 99 Q3n Provide accurate billing statements Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10860.9%9960.8%3058.8%19347.5%2452.7%4960.3%6655.1%7850.9%15859.2% 3921.9%4728.7%1427.6%13733.6%1124.1%2024.8%4033.4%4026.4%7528.1% 158.3%106.0%35.3%276.6%24.4%33.9%86.9%1610.3%145.2% 42.5%53.0%23.8%184.5%510.9%22.1%21.4%96.2%51.9% 116.4%21.5%24.6%286.9%25.0%78.8%43.2%95.7%145.1% ------40.9%12.9%----10.6%10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 100Page 100 Q3n Provide accurate billing statements Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4363.7%12051.3%8456.9%7765.3%6550.7%31851.5%9162.7%36753.4%5556.5% 1724.6%7632.4%4328.8%3126.5%3729.4%19030.7%3826.0%20529.9%2626.7% 45.2%156.5%117.3%10.8%1310.2%457.3%64.2%486.9%66.5% 23.5%52.0%42.9%43.7%64.8%274.4%42.5%253.7%44.2% 23.1%187.5%53.2%43.7%65.0%345.5%74.6%385.6%66.0% --10.4%10.9%----40.6%--40.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 101Page 101 Q3n Provide accurate billing statements Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 22353.2%20055.4%39355.1%2045.8%24948.8%5057.1%1558.1%9366.7%2364.5% 12930.8%10328.5%21129.5%1328.5%16732.7%2629.2%933.5%3122.3%411.2% 256.1%267.3%466.4%511.5%407.8%44.0%01.2%53.9%513.7% 123.0%164.4%243.4%37.3%244.8%10.9%13.0%42.9%12.3% 296.9%154.1%365.1%37.0%275.4%88.9%14.2%53.6%38.3% --10.4%40.5%--30.5%----10.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 102Page 102 Q3n Provide accurate billing statements Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 20760.4%9854.3%2056.4%3740.3%2952.1% 10129.5%4122.9%1234.7%3740.5%1731.7% 144.0%2212.0%13.9%32.8%58.8% 41.1%126.6%01.2%32.9%35.3% 185.1%84.2%--1111.9%12.2% ----13.8%11.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 103Page 103 Q4a Cell phone Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 40.5%30.5%--------21.6%--10.5% 26232.8%23733.3%1524.8%2345.5%2940.1%1627.4%4733.3%6531.3%8330.5% 15018.7%13819.4%813.1%815.6%1115.8%1119.3%2819.8%4019.5%5118.8% 14918.7%12918.1%1627.1%1121.7%1622.4%1322.2%3323.3%3617.2%4115.1% 18022.5%16022.4%1830.7%815.1%1521.1%1626.5%2417.3%5727.6%6022.3% 435.4%385.4%11.3%00.8%--12.3%74.7%83.7%2710.1% 111.4%81.1%23.0%11.2%00.6%12.3%--10.6%72.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 104Page 104 Q4a Cell phone Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 00.3%30.5%--13.5%--22.9%------ 5132.5%20633.2%1643.2%1949.0%2241.0%2329.8%2330.4%3927.5%4129.7% 3321.0%11117.9%13.7%616.2%59.7%2026.0%1823.1%3222.7%2920.9% 3018.8%11919.1%38.2%513.5%1120.7%1113.8%1316.7%3322.8%2518.3% 3220.5%14323.1%923.7%615.4%1223.1%1418.0%1824.1%3524.5%3524.8% 84.8%325.1%821.2%12.4%24.3%67.9%45.7%42.5%85.7% 32.2%61.0%----11.2%11.7%----10.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 105Page 105 Q4a Cell phone Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 ------40.9%12.0%------00.2% 6034.0%5533.6%1530.2%13132.3%1941.9%2733.1%3831.9%4227.6%10138.0% 4424.9%2615.9%916.7%7117.5%919.1%1215.2%2017.0%2818.6%5319.9% 2312.8%3722.5%510.7%8520.8%612.9%2429.4%2722.1%3321.8%3513.1% 3620.4%3621.7%1630.7%9322.9%818.0%1417.6%3327.8%4327.8%5119.0% 105.7%105.9%611.7%184.4%23.8%44.8%11.1%31.7%249.0% 42.2%10.5%--51.2%12.2%----42.5%20.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 106Page 106 Q4a Cell phone Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 ----10.9%21.9%--30.4%10.6%40.5%-- 2638.9%7331.3%5134.2%4537.9%3830.1%20032.3%5336.4%22032.0%3940.1% 811.8%4720.0%2315.6%2118.2%3124.0%12119.6%2315.8%13619.8%1111.5% 1116.1%4519.3%3221.4%2319.3%2217.3%11919.3%2315.7%13419.5%1313.6% 1419.9%5322.5%3422.7%2521.5%3325.7%14122.9%3222.2%15622.7%2223.2% 913.4%166.7%74.4%11.1%32.4%294.8%138.9%355.0%99.1% --10.3%10.6%--10.5%50.8%10.4%30.4%22.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 107Page 107 Q4a Cell phone Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 20.4%20.5%40.5%--10.3%----21.6%-- 14133.6%11933.0%23733.1%1533.7%16231.9%2832.2%621.5%5539.1%1131.2% 8420.0%6317.5%14019.6%716.8%9819.2%2022.2%415.5%2316.6%513.6% 7718.4%6718.7%13719.2%817.6%9518.7%1820.8%416.2%2618.6%514.7% 8620.6%8724.0%15722.0%1125.7%12123.7%1618.6%934.7%2618.8%720.6% 235.4%205.5%344.8%36.1%255.0%55.3%312.0%64.3%411.7% 71.6%30.7%50.7%--61.2%10.9%--11.0%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 108Page 108 Q4a Cell phone Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 20.7%00.2%----11.7% 11734.1%5329.1%1132.0%3234.8%1832.9% 6318.5%2815.4%721.3%1819.9%1322.9% 6117.7%4424.2%926.2%1111.7%1019.0% 6920.2%5027.8%412.8%2527.2%1323.4% 247.1%42.2%37.6%66.4%-- 61.8%21.1%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 109Page 109 Q4b Electricity Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 40.5%40.6%--------10.9%10.4%20.8% 19924.9%18425.8%814.0%1223.5%2130.1%1118.3%4028.2%5225.1%6323.3% 12415.5%11616.2%610.4%918.4%1216.6%915.0%2618.5%2713.1%4115.2% 16120.1%14820.7%813.4%1020.7%1216.8%1321.5%3424.1%4622.0%4617.0% 27534.4%23332.7%3356.4%1836.3%2534.6%2339.2%3625.6%7536.2%9836.2% 253.1%202.7%23.5%--12.0%11.3%42.7%52.6%135.0% 111.4%91.2%12.3%11.2%--34.5%--10.6%72.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 110Page 110 Q4b Electricity Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 10.5%40.6%------44.6%----10.6% 3623.0%15925.7%1745.7%1128.0%1325.1%1823.0%1925.6%4229.0%3122.1% 2918.1%9315.1%25.0%717.6%917.2%2228.1%56.4%2114.9%2014.6% 2918.6%12720.5%925.0%614.9%1018.6%1113.7%2432.0%2819.9%1711.9% 5836.5%21033.9%924.3%1436.0%1834.3%2127.2%2533.3%4733.0%6244.6% 21.4%203.2%--13.4%23.7%11.7%22.3%21.7%96.4% 31.9%71.1%----11.2%11.7%00.4%21.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 111Page 111 Q4b Electricity Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 --10.5%--40.9%--------20.8% 4726.8%3823.1%1223.1%10225.0%1533.3%1922.8%2117.2%3522.5%8532.0% 2816.0%3018.1%917.6%5714.1%1021.2%1720.8%2117.1%2214.1%3914.5% 2715.5%3521.4%59.0%9323.0%613.0%2023.9%2419.7%2516.2%5119.0% 6536.8%5433.1%2548.7%13132.3%1429.4%2226.4%5344.3%6743.7%7729.0% 42.4%53.1%11.5%153.7%11.8%56.1%21.8%21.4%103.8% 42.5%10.8%--41.1%11.3%----32.0%20.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 112Page 112 Q4b Electricity Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 --20.9%10.6%11.1%--30.6%10.6%40.6%-- 2536.1%5523.4%3523.8%3227.1%2821.6%15525.1%3323.0%16924.6%2727.8% 1014.9%3916.7%1510.2%2420.4%1915.3%9415.3%2718.6%11616.8%99.1% 1522.6%4217.8%3825.9%1915.7%2519.2%12219.8%2919.8%13319.3%2424.9% 1724.4%8937.9%5235.3%3731.8%5240.8%22135.8%4631.4%24034.9%3333.9% --72.8%64.2%43.8%32.4%172.7%85.2%233.3%22.2% 12.0%10.3%----10.7%50.8%21.3%20.4%22.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 113Page 113 Q4b Electricity Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 20.4%30.7%40.6%--30.5%10.9%--10.7%-- 10023.9%9426.2%17624.7%1328.6%13827.1%1618.6%29.0%3827.4%411.2% 7517.9%4612.7%11416.0%1022.0%8316.2%1112.4%517.4%1712.3%925.0% 7618.2%8222.7%14019.6%1226.2%10420.4%1820.3%312.5%3021.1%617.1% 14635.0%12233.7%25435.5%1023.2%16231.8%3742.5%1556.9%5237.1%924.3% 133.2%102.9%213.0%--132.6%44.4%13.0%21.3%514.0% 61.5%41.0%40.6%--71.4%10.9%01.2%--38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 114Page 114 Q4b Electricity Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 41.3%-------- 7120.8%5128.3%1028.5%3336.0%1323.4% 5114.7%3016.5%513.2%1617.8%1120.6% 6920.2%4022.1%1028.3%1314.0%1221.1% 13037.7%5630.8%924.4%2527.9%1933.8% 123.6%21.2%25.6%32.9%11.1% 51.6%21.1%--11.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 115Page 115 Q4c Cable or satellite TV Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 40.5%40.6%--00.8%----10.9%10.4%20.6% 749.2%638.9%711.4%1019.6%1014.4%46.8%139.1%167.5%217.7% 9912.4%9212.9%35.2%611.3%811.3%47.4%2517.6%2712.8%3011.0% 14718.4%13418.7%915.5%611.9%1723.4%712.1%2920.8%4119.6%4717.4% 40050.0%35149.2%3762.3%1937.7%3245.0%3559.3%6042.5%10852.3%14653.7% 678.3%618.6%23.3%917.5%46.0%814.3%128.4%126.0%217.7% 101.2%81.1%12.3%11.2%----10.7%31.3%51.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 116Page 116 Q4c Cable or satellite TV Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 10.9%30.4%01.0%----22.9%----10.6% 2012.6%528.4%719.8%819.6%46.7%79.3%56.1%118.0%118.2% 1912.1%7812.5%514.2%512.8%611.7%911.5%79.7%1610.9%1812.6% 2314.9%12219.7%410.4%922.3%1018.1%1721.8%1925.3%2819.5%139.1% 7949.7%31150.1%1644.0%922.0%2853.0%3746.6%3647.2%8257.4%8460.2% 127.9%508.0%38.1%923.4%59.3%67.9%911.7%64.2%139.2% 31.9%50.8%12.5%--11.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 117Page 117 Q4c Cable or satellite TV Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10.3%10.5%--30.7%00.8%--10.5%--10.3% 169.2%1811.0%59.8%348.3%714.3%78.9%1311.1%74.6%3412.9% 2413.8%2213.2%814.7%4611.3%612.5%78.4%1411.8%2113.9%2910.8% 4324.3%3119.2%917.7%6315.6%36.5%1113.2%2117.3%3019.9%4918.4% 7944.5%8451.5%2547.9%21352.3%2145.8%3745.1%6150.8%8756.5%13951.9% 116.2%74.1%48.0%4511.0%918.8%2024.4%108.5%42.5%145.1% 31.7%10.6%11.8%30.8%11.3%----42.6%10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 118Page 118 Q4c Cable or satellite TV Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 --10.3%21.1%21.5%--30.4%10.6%40.5%00.4% 1116.7%135.7%117.8%1512.8%1511.7%569.1%128.0%588.4%1313.7% 56.8%3213.8%128.3%119.6%2519.2%7612.3%1912.9%9113.2%87.8% 1116.2%5121.6%2718.5%2319.6%1511.7%10917.7%2718.7%13019.0%1212.7% 3856.0%12352.4%7853.0%5849.2%5644.0%31951.7%7148.7%35251.3%4546.5% 34.3%145.8%149.8%97.3%1612.8%508.1%1510.6%507.3%1616.9% --10.4%21.5%--10.5%50.7%10.4%20.3%22.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 119Page 119 Q4c Cable or satellite TV Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 20.5%20.5%40.5%00.9%20.4%11.3%--10.7%-- 378.8%359.6%648.9%510.3%458.9%55.3%27.2%1913.4%38.3% 5713.5%4111.5%9212.9%49.1%6612.9%1011.1%415.5%1410.3%514.7% 8420.1%6117.0%13418.8%920.2%9618.9%1820.0%520.4%2215.7%616.0% 20348.5%18350.9%36250.7%2250.1%25750.4%4955.7%1246.7%6647.1%1644.4% 296.9%3710.2%547.6%49.4%397.7%66.6%310.2%1611.5%38.3% 71.7%10.3%40.6%--50.9%----21.3%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 120Page 120 Q4c Cable or satellite TV Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 41.1%------00.7% 298.4%179.4%38.2%1212.8%611.2% 3610.5%2111.6%720.0%1415.7%610.1% 5817.0%3821.2%822.4%2022.1%46.4% 18654.1%8848.6%1541.6%3538.1%3055.2% 288.1%137.4%25.0%1011.2%814.6% 30.9%31.8%12.7%--11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 121Page 121 Q4d Trash collection Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 40.5%40.6%------11.0%10.9%--20.8% 44956.1%40957.3%2948.8%3366.4%4056.2%3152.4%8761.3%11555.5%14352.7% 13416.7%12217.1%813.5%612.1%1825.0%610.4%2517.4%3315.7%4617.1% 8410.5%7210.1%711.8%00.8%67.9%58.3%128.5%2612.7%3513.0% 779.7%638.8%1017.6%48.4%57.1%711.9%117.5%2512.0%269.5% 405.0%354.9%46.0%611.1%33.8%711.5%53.8%63.1%134.9% 111.4%91.2%12.3%11.2%--34.5%10.6%21.0%51.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 122Page 122 Q4d Trash collection Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 10.4%40.6%----12.5%11.2%11.8%10.4%-- 8453.1%35457.1%1642.8%2256.3%2851.8%4557.2%4863.6%8358.1%8460.5% 3421.7%9715.7%514.8%410.7%610.7%2025.3%1215.9%2718.8%2316.3% 159.4%6710.9%616.5%38.9%916.4%68.1%810.2%85.4%128.4% 127.8%6210.1%513.0%513.0%59.2%34.4%56.4%1812.3%107.3% 95.8%284.5%410.4%49.1%48.3%22.2%22.1%53.5%117.6% 31.9%71.2%12.5%12.0%11.2%11.7%--21.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 123Page 123 Q4d Trash collection Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 ------41.0%----10.5%--31.0% 9151.4%9659.0%3466.0%22755.8%2349.7%4757.9%7663.2%8555.6%15959.4% 3117.6%2314.1%611.2%7418.2%1020.8%1518.1%1714.1%2315.0%4416.6% 2112.0%2414.4%59.5%358.5%24.2%810.2%129.9%1912.3%228.3% 1810.4%137.9%510.0%4110.1%614.0%33.5%119.4%1912.3%238.7% 116.4%53.2%23.4%225.3%510.0%78.7%32.9%42.8%145.4% 42.1%21.4%--41.0%11.3%11.6%--32.0%20.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 124Page 124 Q4d Trash collection Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 --10.6%10.6%--21.5%20.3%21.6%40.5%10.6% 3754.8%12854.5%8457.2%6857.5%7962.2%34756.2%8759.9%39858.0%4546.9% 1014.7%4017.0%2214.9%2420.4%2317.9%10216.4%2718.3%11817.2%1313.6% 812.1%2811.8%1711.7%98.1%86.5%7211.6%96.2%7010.2%1212.5% 68.6%2510.7%139.1%1210.2%86.5%6210.1%117.7%649.3%1313.0% 68.7%114.8%106.4%32.7%64.9%274.3%95.9%294.2%1111.3% 11.2%20.7%--11.1%10.5%71.1%10.4%40.6%22.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 125Page 125 Q4d Trash collection Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 41.0%--40.6%--30.6%----10.7%-- 23756.7%20155.9%41457.9%2351.4%31561.8%3944.6%1454.4%6647.4%1439.1% 7618.2%5415.1%12617.7%410.0%7715.1%1213.3%519.2%3021.4%1028.2% 429.9%4111.5%7510.5%48.9%5210.1%1112.9%13.0%1712.2%39.1% 348.0%4011.1%649.0%612.9%428.3%1011.5%28.4%2014.5%26.9% 194.5%205.5%263.6%716.8%152.9%1516.9%312.0%43.1%38.3% 71.6%31.0%50.7%--61.2%10.9%13.0%10.7%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 126Page 126 Q4d Trash collection Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 20.7%--11.8%11.5%-- 19155.7%11262.3%1851.8%5156.5%3054.1% 5315.4%2514.0%924.4%1516.9%1222.2% 4112.0%168.7%37.3%1112.6%35.7% 277.8%1810.3%39.2%910.2%611.7% 236.7%73.7%25.6%22.3%34.6% 61.7%21.1%----11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 127Page 127 Q4e Sewer Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 10.1%10.1%----------10.4%-- 31038.7%29341.0%1221.1%2141.3%2434.1%2439.9%6445.1%7837.8%9936.5% 12415.5%11616.3%34.9%48.5%1621.9%1322.1%2618.1%3416.5%3111.6% 10713.3%9112.7%1016.5%713.0%1014.4%57.9%139.1%2311.2%4918.1% 13617.0%10414.5%2846.9%917.9%1013.8%1016.3%1812.9%4119.6%4817.8% 11514.3%10114.1%610.6%918.0%1013.9%813.7%2114.8%2914.1%3813.8% 91.1%91.2%--11.2%11.9%----10.5%62.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 128Page 128 Q4e Sewer Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 10.5%--------------10.6% 5736.3%24439.4%1436.6%1332.3%2445.6%3240.2%3444.3%6343.7%5942.4% 2616.5%9615.5%49.5%614.9%612.2%1519.3%89.9%2115.0%1611.6% 2515.5%8213.2%617.1%615.9%916.3%1317.0%1215.2%2315.8%85.5% 2717.1%10516.9%822.2%37.7%713.3%1215.1%1417.9%2416.6%2417.1% 1912.1%8814.3%514.7%923.3%611.5%78.5%912.3%117.8%3222.9% 31.9%50.9%--25.9%11.2%--00.4%21.1%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 129Page 129 Q4e Sewer Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 --10.5%------------10.3% 6938.9%6137.4%2140.2%15838.9%1736.1%3947.2%5747.2%5032.8%11141.6% 3117.8%2515.1%59.1%6315.6%714.1%1720.4%1814.6%2214.3%4015.1% 2212.6%2716.7%47.2%5313.1%714.5%810.3%1311.0%2214.4%3914.7% 3318.5%2414.5%612.0%7217.7%1122.8%911.1%2016.8%3120.5%3212.0% 179.7%2515.2%1631.5%5613.9%511.1%910.9%1210.4%2214.6%4115.3% 42.5%10.7%--30.8%11.3%----53.4%20.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 130Page 130 Q4e Sewer Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 --10.3%------10.1%--10.1%-- 2638.1%9239.4%6443.2%4740.0%5442.3%23838.5%6041.6%27339.7%3435.2% 68.2%2711.4%3222.0%1412.2%2318.1%9515.4%2214.9%11016.0%1111.6% 1014.1%3514.9%149.5%2017.1%1511.9%9014.6%149.9%9213.4%1313.7% 913.7%4619.6%1711.7%1815.5%2015.7%10917.6%1812.7%11016.0%2223.1% 1825.8%3313.9%2013.5%1613.9%1310.5%8213.3%2819.4%9714.1%1515.7% --10.3%--11.1%21.5%30.5%21.6%50.7%10.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 131Page 131 Q4e Sewer Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 10.2%--10.1%----10.9%------ 16439.2%14339.6%28339.6%1738.2%19638.5%3034.5%623.4%6848.9%924.0% 6615.9%5415.1%11916.7%35.9%8717.1%1213.7%26.0%1611.3%720.4% 6214.9%4111.3%9212.9%818.6%7915.5%910.1%13.0%1611.4%25.7% 7317.4%5515.2%11616.3%817.6%10420.3%1214.2%--128.5%821.5% 4510.8%6618.4%9813.7%919.7%418.0%2325.7%1765.3%2719.3%720.0% 71.7%20.4%50.7%--30.6%10.9%12.4%10.7%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 132Page 132 Q4e Sewer Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 10.2%-------- 14040.9%6737.1%1645.2%3639.3%2851.0% 4212.1%3720.3%616.7%2022.0%48.1% 4513.2%2715.1%412.1%1112.7%713.6% 4613.3%3217.7%25.0%1819.7%916.0% 6519.0%158.2%721.0%44.8%611.3% 41.3%31.6%--11.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 133Page 133 Q4f Water Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 20.3%20.3%----------10.4%10.5% 28135.2%27338.2%59.3%1835.7%2332.6%1525.3%4834.0%7938.3%9836.1% 19224.0%18125.4%69.9%1224.0%2231.0%2135.0%4129.3%4220.3%5419.8% 15419.3%13619.1%916.1%1224.6%1723.6%813.1%2718.8%3717.9%5419.9% 15619.5%10915.3%3864.7%612.4%912.9%1525.3%2518.0%4521.8%5520.2% 141.7%111.6%--12.1%--11.3%--31.3%93.4% 10.1%10.1%--11.2%---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 134Page 134 Q4f Water Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 10.5%10.2%------11.7%----10.6% 4327.0%23237.4%1437.3%1744.7%2342.3%3139.8%3039.9%5739.5%4733.9% 3723.6%14924.1%718.9%922.3%917.6%2329.4%1013.1%3826.7%3021.3% 3119.7%12019.3%820.7%923.8%1223.4%1215.1%1925.3%2316.0%2618.4% 4528.5%10717.3%923.1%49.2%815.5%1012.3%1621.6%2416.9%3021.4% 10.7%101.6%------11.7%--10.9%64.5% --10.1%----11.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 135Page 135 Q4f Water Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 --10.5%--10.3%--------20.8% 7542.4%5131.2%1936.4%13633.4%1531.5%3239.1%4940.9%4328.2%11342.3% 3821.5%4125.0%1427.9%9924.3%1122.9%2834.4%2823.5%3019.5%6022.7% 2815.6%3722.6%1019.7%7819.3%1224.9%1214.4%1613.6%3825.0%4918.3% 3318.9%3018.6%816.0%8420.6%919.4%78.4%2520.9%4126.7%3814.1% 31.5%32.1%--81.9%--33.7%11.1%10.7%51.9% ------10.2%11.3%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 136Page 136 Q4f Water Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 --20.9%------20.3%--20.3%-- 3551.0%8134.5%5537.4%5143.4%4132.1%21134.2%5739.4%24035.0%3738.6% 710.6%5222.1%4429.8%2823.7%3225.1%14924.2%3725.2%16824.5%2020.1% 1217.3%4920.9%2416.5%1714.5%2923.0%11819.1%2718.9%13820.1%1313.9% 1419.9%4619.8%2114.2%2218.4%2216.9%13021.0%1913.1%12518.2%2526.1% 11.2%41.8%32.1%--32.4%81.3%43.0%131.9%10.6% --------10.5%--10.4%--10.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 137Page 137 Q4f Water Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 10.2%10.4%20.3%--10.3%10.9%------ 15236.3%12334.2%25435.6%1738.1%15831.0%2831.8%622.7%8460.3%513.7% 9823.4%9125.3%17624.7%1022.6%12123.7%2023.0%1037.2%2618.6%1542.5% 8119.4%7119.6%13819.4%921.3%11422.4%1617.7%517.4%1611.7%411.2% 7918.8%6818.8%13318.6%715.0%10620.9%2325.7%622.7%128.4%924.3% 71.8%61.8%91.3%13.0%91.7%10.9%--11.0%38.3% 10.1%--10.1%--10.1%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 138Page 138 Q4f Water Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Too low Reasonable A little toohigh Somewhattoo high Much toohigh Not sure / NA Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 20.6%-------- 13338.6%5631.1%1541.6%3538.3%2646.4% 7622.1%4826.4%926.9%1921.4%1424.5% 6719.5%4323.7%615.9%1718.8%712.0% 5817.0%3117.0%39.9%2021.5%916.4% 72.2%31.5%25.6%--00.8% --10.3%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 139Page 139 Q5 Estimated water cost per gallon Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 $.0 $.01 (correct) $.02 to $.05 $.06 to $.10 $.11 to $.20 More than$.20 Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 70.8%50.7%12.3%----23.0%10.9%10.6%20.8% 556.9%527.2%46.1%23.3%34.9%11.0%96.3%125.6%2910.7% 759.3%679.5%711.4%48.7%45.5%46.1%2014.1%2311.0%207.5% 303.8%283.9%34.5%35.0%22.4%35.2%64.3%84.0%93.3% 192.4%192.7%--23.2%10.9%34.3%74.7%31.6%51.7% 354.4%294.1%12.3%611.9%45.5%22.9%85.7%83.9%72.6% 53867.2%47967.1%3762.1%3467.9%5577.4%4271.9%8056.2%13967.1%18869.2% 415.1%344.8%711.3%--33.6%35.6%117.7%136.2%114.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 140Page 140 Q5 Estimated water cost per gallon Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore $.0 $.01 (correct) $.02 to $.05 $.06 to $.10 $.11 to $.20 More than$.20 Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 10.7%60.9%----12.6%--11.0%31.9%21.3% 159.4%406.4%11.7%24.4%46.8%23.0%56.6%64.3%1510.8% 127.3%599.5%36.8%24.5%47.8%56.7%56.9%139.3%1813.2% 85.2%213.4%38.3%--58.8%22.5%11.8%117.8%42.9% 64.1%132.1%24.2%13.4%35.4%11.5%11.0%53.6%32.0% 138.5%223.5%13.8%01.1%59.5%33.3%67.9%43.1%85.5% 9761.4%42768.9%2362.3%3178.6%3159.0%6278.9%5572.4%9767.9%8359.7% 53.4%335.4%512.9%37.9%--34.2%22.3%32.2%74.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 141Page 141 Q5 Estimated water cost per gallon Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older $.0 $.01 (correct) $.02 to $.05 $.06 to $.10 $.11 to $.20 More than$.20 Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10.8%10.9%11.5%30.8%00.9%--11.1%31.7%20.8% 2212.7%95.4%48.8%204.8%36.4%44.9%118.8%148.9%166.1% 2011.3%148.9%36.3%379.1%36.7%1012.3%1814.7%149.0%197.2% 74.2%95.6%--143.4%11.7%77.9%64.9%63.9%93.4% 42.3%63.6%23.4%81.9%23.4%56.6%43.0%21.3%41.5% 52.7%95.6%12.7%194.8%35.8%45.3%1411.4%74.3%31.2% 10660.3%10866.0%3976.5%28469.8%3371.4%5161.8%6352.7%10166.1%20476.4% 105.6%74.0%00.8%225.4%23.8%11.1%43.4%74.8%93.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 142Page 142 Q5 Estimated water cost per gallon Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others $.0 $.01 (correct) $.02 to $.05 $.06 to $.10 $.11 to $.20 More than$.20 Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 --20.7%21.3%32.6%--61.0%00.3%71.0%-- 12.0%198.3%95.9%75.5%118.5%436.9%106.6%456.6%55.4% 23.3%2510.7%1611.0%1412.1%118.8%558.9%1812.4%689.9%55.6% 69.5%41.5%85.3%65.3%43.3%243.9%42.9%294.2%21.8% 23.3%21.0%53.6%43.3%53.9%152.3%42.9%162.4%33.1% 12.0%93.7%42.4%87.1%86.6%284.6%74.6%294.2%66.2% 4972.5%16470.1%10067.5%7059.3%8465.6%41567.2%9766.7%46267.3%6870.6% 57.4%104.1%43.0%64.9%43.2%325.2%53.6%314.5%77.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 143Page 143 Q5 Estimated water cost per gallon Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C $.0 $.01 (correct) $.02 to $.05 $.06 to $.10 $.11 to $.20 More than$.20 Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 61.4%10.2%70.9%--50.9%21.8%--00.3%-- 358.3%174.7%476.6%37.9%306.0%77.5%26.0%118.0%515.2% 409.5%339.3%699.7%13.0%5210.3%55.7%28.4%149.9%13.4% 194.5%113.2%273.8%37.0%214.2%44.4%13.0%32.3%13.4% 112.5%92.5%182.5%12.6%61.3%55.8%13.0%43.0%37.9% 184.2%174.8%324.4%24.2%316.1%22.2%13.0%10.9%-- 26563.2%25972.0%48267.5%3068.7%33966.5%6068.6%2076.6%9668.3%2363.3% 266.3%123.5%334.6%36.6%254.8%44.0%--107.3%26.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 144Page 144 Q5 Estimated water cost per gallon Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er $.0 $.01 (correct) $.02 to $.05 $.06 to $.10 $.11 to $.20 More than$.20 Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 51.4%10.3%------ 288.0%95.1%24.9%66.9%11.7% 277.8%2312.8%27.1%1011.0%47.7% 123.4%73.8%25.6%55.9%34.7% 133.9%10.8%13.4%--22.8% 113.1%137.0%25.0%32.9%47.3% 23769.1%11865.2%2673.9%6267.8%3970.6% 123.4%95.0%--55.5%35.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 145Page 145 Q6 Opinion of water value Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 23529.4%22531.6%59.1%1325.6%2027.9%1322.8%4128.8%7234.7%7628.1% 23829.8%22531.6%69.7%1326.5%2738.4%1524.9%3826.6%5426.2%9133.5% 19724.6%17124.0%1728.3%1530.3%1419.6%2338.3%3826.9%4722.6%6022.3% 648.0%425.9%1729.5%48.2%45.4%711.1%117.5%188.5%217.8% 192.3%101.4%914.9%--22.7%12.3%53.4%31.2%82.9% 364.5%304.2%46.3%47.1%34.1%00.6%85.8%115.5%103.7% 111.4%101.4%12.3%12.5%11.9%--11.0%31.3%51.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 146Page 146 Q6 Opinion of water value Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 3622.8%19431.3%1540.8%821.9%2037.6%3038.1%2229.2%3625.1%4733.8% 4327.3%18730.2%925.4%1333.6%1425.8%2025.7%2633.8%5437.3%3726.3% 4427.9%14823.9%718.4%1230.5%1425.5%1924.5%1924.9%3222.5%2921.0% 149.1%487.8%26.1%01.1%24.3%34.2%79.2%139.3%1510.5% 84.8%101.6%11.7%--24.3%11.7%--53.6%42.6% 106.5%254.1%24.4%49.5%--34.2%22.8%32.1%74.8% 31.6%71.1%13.3%13.4%12.5%11.6%----11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 147Page 147 Q6 Opinion of water value Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 6537.0%4125.1%1326.2%11528.3%1021.9%2227.4%4033.4%4730.6%8030.0% 5028.1%5935.9%1427.0%11628.5%1226.2%2935.6%3226.4%4026.2%8933.5% 3821.4%4930.2%1529.4%9523.3%1532.1%2227.0%2722.5%3321.3%6825.4% 137.4%63.9%610.9%399.5%47.7%33.1%1311.1%138.3%155.5% 42.5%21.4%12.6%112.6%12.9%21.9%--117.1%41.3% 52.9%42.3%23.9%256.2%36.4%33.5%75.5%106.5%83.0% 10.8%21.2%--71.6%12.9%11.5%11.1%--31.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 148Page 148 Q6 Opinion of water value Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2638.4%5724.3%4933.4%3328.2%4837.9%18930.6%3926.7%21030.6%2424.7% 1522.1%8435.7%5235.3%3328.0%3527.8%17428.1%5236.0%20629.9%3232.7% 1522.2%5824.6%3221.7%3328.4%2922.8%15925.6%3020.7%16624.2%2323.6% 812.1%166.7%106.8%119.0%86.1%508.1%128.0%517.5%1212.7% --73.1%10.9%10.8%21.5%121.9%42.7%152.2%10.6% 23.3%125.2%10.9%54.5%53.9%274.3%75.1%324.6%33.6% 11.8%10.3%10.9%11.0%--81.3%10.9%71.0%22.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 149Page 149 Q6 Opinion of water value Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 13131.3%10027.8%22030.8%1022.9%15029.5%1922.1%932.4%4834.2%925.0% 12128.8%11331.3%21329.8%1535.2%15029.5%3033.7%829.9%4028.4%1028.7% 10023.8%9426.2%17524.5%1125.3%12324.1%2427.0%414.4%4028.5%718.6% 368.6%267.2%517.2%511.3%469.0%910.2%310.2%64.0%12.3% 102.5%71.9%142.0%13.0%102.0%----21.3%718.6% 153.5%174.7%324.5%12.3%224.3%56.2%310.2%53.7%13.4% 61.4%30.9%91.3%--91.7%10.9%13.0%--13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 150Page 150 Q6 Opinion of water value Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 10530.7%6133.7%1028.7%2325.6%1833.6% 10831.4%4927.1%1338.5%2628.5%1528.1% 8324.3%4122.7%822.2%2224.3%1628.7% 216.0%126.4%26.8%1112.5%59.0% 123.4%31.6%--32.8%-- 123.6%115.9%13.8%44.8%00.7% 20.6%52.6%--11.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 151Page 151 Q7 Contact water District for water service in past 6 mos Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 101 89 7 29 14 9 18 11 20 7877.3%6876.5%791.7%2483.6%966.1%888.1%1479.3%873.0%1571.9% 1817.9%1718.6%18.3%310.1%431.6%17.1%315.0%327.0%422.0% 54.8%44.9%--26.3%02.3%04.8%15.8%--16.1% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 152Page 152 Q7 Contact water District for water service in past 6 mos Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 78 18 8 7 11 11 10 17 17 78100.0%--562.7%688.4%770.7%874.5%880.9%1377.7%1481.9% --18100.0%219.6%06.1%329.3%325.5%112.7%316.7%214.5% ----117.7%05.5%----16.4%15.6%13.6% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 153Page 153 Q7 Contact water District for water service in past 6 mos Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 17 26 5 52 16 18 23 13 22 1588.8%1869.1%5100.0%4077.1%1381.0%1579.4%1982.2%964.5%1673.5% 17.5%624.6%--918.0%317.0%315.2%312.5%432.4%521.7% 13.7%26.3%--34.9%02.0%15.4%15.3%03.1%14.7% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 154Page 154 Q7 Contact water District for water service in past 6 mos Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 7 17 22 15 29 73 22 72 28 683.8%1482.3%1985.8%1281.0%2068.0%6081.7%1569.0%5575.8%2280.2% --317.7%314.2%18.5%827.8%1013.6%627.4%1318.3%517.6% 116.2%----210.5%14.3%34.6%13.6%45.8%12.2% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 155Page 155 Q7 Contact water District for water service in past 6 mos Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 47 51 85 11 64 11 3 17 6 3676.3%4078.1%6677.4%978.0%4976.9%989.3%254.5%1167.5%6100.0% 1021.2%714.6%1517.4%218.2%1320.2%17.1%118.2%422.5%-- 12.4%47.3%45.2%03.8%22.9%03.6%127.3%210.0%-- ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 156Page 156 Q7 Contact water District for water service in past 6 mos Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 33 33 8 9 10 2679.8%2578.2%681.3%664.3%772.5% 514.7%515.8%118.7%335.7%216.7% 25.6%26.0%----110.7% ---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 157Page 157 Q8 Contact water District for a reason in past 6 mos Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 699 625 51 21 58 50 124 196 251 8011.4%6810.9%1223.1%418.9%1119.2%611.7%1411.0%157.5%3112.2% 60286.1%54286.8%3771.7%1781.1%4780.8%4486.7%10786.8%17187.6%21686.2% 141.9%142.2%------11.6%32.2%63.1%41.6% 30.5%10.1%35.2%--------31.8%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 158Page 158 Q8 Contact water District for a reason in past 6 mos Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 80 602 29 32 43 67 66 127 122 80100.0%--413.9%12.4%614.5%1521.8%1015.1%129.5%1411.3% --602100.0%2481.5%2991.7%3685.5%5378.2%5684.9%11087.0%10384.0% ----14.6%25.9%------43.5%43.6% ----------------11.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 159Page 159 Q8 Contact water District for a reason in past 6 mos Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 160 137 46 355 31 64 97 140 245 1710.6%1410.2%35.4%4713.1%826.0%811.9%1010.7%2618.3%218.6% 13987.3%12087.5%4291.2%30184.8%2269.7%5383.3%8587.1%11279.8%22089.7% 10.8%32.3%23.4%72.1%14.3%34.7%22.2%11.0%41.7% 21.3%------------11.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 160Page 160 Q8 Contact water District for a reason in past 6 mos Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 61 217 126 102 99 545 123 615 69 1016.2%2310.8%118.9%1110.7%1414.3%6511.8%1210.1%6711.0%912.4% 5183.8%19087.7%11087.3%9087.6%8081.2%46986.0%10685.7%53486.8%5985.7% --31.5%32.7%21.7%44.4%81.5%54.3%111.9%11.9% ----11.1%----30.6%--20.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 161Page 161 Q8 Contact water District for a reason in past 6 mos Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 372 310 629 33 446 77 23 123 30 369.7%4012.8%7111.4%412.9%4810.8%1114.1%313.8%129.9%518.2% 32788.1%26284.8%54586.6%2987.1%38987.4%6381.8%2086.2%10887.8%2271.8% 82.2%51.7%111.7%--51.2%23.0%--32.3%310.0% --20.7%20.3%--30.6%11.0%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 162Page 162 Q8 Contact water District for a reason in past 6 mos Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 310 148 27 82 45 3812.3%139.0%28.4%1012.6%511.5% 26585.5%13289.4%2591.6%6882.5%3985.5% 72.2%10.6%--33.3%12.9% --10.9%--11.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 163Page 163 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Water-relatedservice issue(leak, waterpressure,quality, etc.) Requeststart/stop ofservice Questionsabout billing-/payments Makepayment/Paybill Request apaymentextension orarrangement Serviceinterruptedfor non-payment Find out howto reduce bill 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 3924.9%3424.6%525.0%01.3%733.1%645.7%517.1%1042.7%1225.5% 2012.8%1813.3%29.4%1345.7%17.0%110.7%28.4%29.5%-- 4629.0%4029.2%527.8%931.9%526.7%324.3%517.9%418.7%1941.7% 2515.6%2417.6%--517.5%312.8%--827.8%312.5%714.5% 21.2%21.3%--------12.2%--12.7% 10.8%10.5%13.3%--13.1%----12.7%-- 84.8%32.4%422.9%--29.7%02.8%27.0%15.8%24.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 164Page 164 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Water-relatedservice issue(leak, waterpressure,quality, etc.) Requeststart/stop ofservice Questionsabout billing-/payments Makepayment/Paybill Request apaymentextension orarrangement Serviceinterruptedfor non-payment Find out howto reduce bill 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 3924.9%--335.9%227.0%537.6%417.3%317.1%519.6%621.7% 2012.8%--111.3%111.6%--29.6%29.2%624.8%517.8% 4629.0%--16.7%228.2%319.3%940.6%952.4%521.8%827.6% 2515.6%--332.6%118.0%217.5%519.5%318.9%624.2%25.9% 21.2%--16.7%06.1%---------- 10.8%------14.5%-------- 84.8%----19.0%214.3%15.8%----311.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 165Page 165 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Water-relatedservice issue(leak, waterpressure,quality, etc.) Requeststart/stop ofservice Questionsabout billing-/payments Makepayment/Paybill Request apaymentextension orarrangement Serviceinterruptedfor non-payment Find out howto reduce bill 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 927.9%517.1%221.6%2327.1%418.2%415.9%621.9%926.9%925.6% 25.6%410.9%116.1%1415.9%525.2%940.7%26.2%13.6%26.4% 1134.5%1133.3%118.3%2326.3%420.8%521.6%828.6%1236.4%1233.1% 310.5%723.1%336.0%1112.9%419.4%28.9%620.9%515.6%615.2% 13.3%----10.9%----13.5%---- ------11.4%----12.1%11.8%-- 11.9%01.2%--77.6%16.5%12.8%14.6%01.1%410.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 166Page 166 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Water-relatedservice issue(leak, waterpressure,quality, etc.) Requeststart/stop ofservice Questionsabout billing-/payments Makepayment/Paybill Request apaymentextension orarrangement Serviceinterruptedfor non-payment Find out howto reduce bill 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 531.5%1129.9%828.4%522.3%823.1%3528.1%414.4%3529.1%412.7% --36.8%517.8%418.7%618.9%1411.6%517.3%1612.7%515.3% 422.4%1334.0%1033.7%835.7%618.7%4031.9%519.7%3932.1%414.5% 317.5%616.5%39.9%416.2%514.9%1814.3%724.8%1311.0%1136.7% ------12.6%01.2%11.0%----25.9% --11.6%----11.8%11.0%--10.5%12.0% 320.8%--13.3%--25.8%86.1%--75.7%12.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 167Page 167 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Water-relatedservice issue(leak, waterpressure,quality, etc.) Requeststart/stop ofservice Questionsabout billing-/payments Makepayment/Paybill Request apaymentextension orarrangement Serviceinterruptedfor non-payment Find out howto reduce bill 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 1824.8%2024.8%3525.6%326.3%2424.7%630.2%06.2%521.8%432.2% 1014.5%810.6%1813.3%17.8%1414.2%316.9%--312.4%-- 2230.1%2329.2%4230.3%428.4%3132.3%524.5%471.9%624.4%-- 912.1%1518.3%2014.8%218.3%1414.5%419.0%--728.4%-- --22.3%21.3%--10.6%--115.7%01.8%-- --11.6%10.9%--11.3%-------- 45.9%34.2%75.1%14.8%77.4%01.9%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 168Page 168 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Water-relatedservice issue(leak, waterpressure,quality, etc.) Requeststart/stop ofservice Questionsabout billing-/payments Makepayment/Paybill Request apaymentextension orarrangement Serviceinterruptedfor non-payment Find out howto reduce bill 64 39 9 16 12 1523.9%615.4%222.8%425.0%434.1% 812.4%615.9%04.9%211.4%213.2% 2030.6%1229.8%115.7%746.2%328.4% 913.6%717.1%449.5%18.3%214.2% 11.2%12.7%------ --11.6%----15.0% 23.0%513.5%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 169Page 169 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Learn about/-Participate inrebateprogram Learn about/-Participate inwaterconservationprograms Learn about/-Participate ingardening/landscapingclasses Learn how toread yourmeter Boardmeetinginformation Other Change name,address onaccount 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 00.3%00.3%--------01.5%---- 31.8%32.1%--------310.2%---- ------------------ 42.5%32.2%15.0%--14.7%------36.6% ------------------ 53.4%43.0%16.6%--13.1%17.6%01.1%28.1%23.4% 21.4%21.7%------03.1%14.4%--11.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 170Page 170 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Learn about/-Participate inrebateprogram Learn about/-Participate inwaterconservationprograms Learn about/-Participate ingardening/landscapingclasses Learn how toread yourmeter Boardmeetinginformation Other Change name,address onaccount 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 00.3%---------------- 31.8%--------------310.3% ------------------ 42.5%--------------13.4% ------------------ 53.4%--16.7%--02.3%01.8%--15.5%-- 21.4%------14.5%12.7%--12.5%01.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 171Page 171 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Learn about/-Participate inrebateprogram Learn about/-Participate inwaterconservationprograms Learn about/-Participate ingardening/landscapingclasses Learn how toread yourmeter Boardmeetinginformation Other Change name,address onaccount 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 01.3%---------------- --38.8%--------39.7%---- ------------------ 39.5%----11.1%------411.5%-- ------------------ 13.4%14.3%18.1%22.6%28.0%--01.1%11.8%37.5% 11.9%----21.9%--12.8%01.4%--11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 172Page 172 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Learn about/-Participate inrebateprogram Learn about/-Participate inwaterconservationprograms Learn about/-Participate ingardening/landscapingclasses Learn how toread yourmeter Boardmeetinginformation Other Change name,address onaccount 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 ----------00.3%----01.4% --------38.4%--310.3%32.3%-- ------------------ --12.5%------10.8%--10.8%-- ------------------ 13.9%37.0%13.6%--13.1%43.1%25.6%43.1%25.0% 13.9%11.6%--01.8%11.8%21.5%01.5%21.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 173Page 173 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Learn about/-Participate inrebateprogram Learn about/-Participate inwaterconservationprograms Learn about/-Participate ingardening/landscapingclasses Learn how toread yourmeter Boardmeetinginformation Other Change name,address onaccount 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 --00.5%----------01.8%-- 33.9%--32.1%----------324.6% ------------------ 34.2%--10.7%--------14.0%326.0% ------------------ 22.6%44.4%43.0%19.6%21.9%13.8%06.2%01.8%217.3% 10.9%22.1%21.6%--21.9%----01.8%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 174Page 174 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Learn about/-Participate inrebateprogram Learn about/-Participate inwaterconservationprograms Learn about/-Participate ingardening/landscapingclasses Learn how toread yourmeter Boardmeetinginformation Other Change name,address onaccount 64 39 9 16 12 ---------- 34.4%-------- ---------- 34.7%-------- ---------- 22.4%12.4%17.2%02.6%15.0% 11.6%11.6%--13.8%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 175Page 175 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Relocate Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 10.9%11.0%--13.5%--03.1%------ 10.6%10.7%------02.8%12.2%---- ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 176Page 176 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Relocate Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 10.9%--------12.7%02.3%01.5%-- 10.6%---------------- ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 177Page 177 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Relocate Not sure Prefer not toanswer 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 --01.3%--11.2%--14.5%--01.2%-- ------11.2%01.8%12.8%------ ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 178Page 178 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Relocate Not sure Prefer not toanswer 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 ----13.3%--01.2%--15.1%00.3%13.2% ------12.6%01.1%10.5%01.4%10.5%01.2% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 179Page 179 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Relocate Not sure Prefer not toanswer 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 11.1%10.8%10.6%14.8%10.6%01.9%--01.8%-- --11.3%10.7%--10.6%01.9%------ ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 180Page 180 Q9 Reason for contacting District Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Relocate Not sure Prefer not toanswer 64 39 9 16 12 11.5%----02.6%-- 00.6%-------- ---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 181Page 181 Q10 Problem with water service Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Water leak,broken pipe Brokensprinkler Unexpectedlyhigh bill Poor wat erquality, odor,taste Waterpressure Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 28 24 3 0 4 5 3 8 8 2069.1%1769.9%251.6%--369.8%469.4%272.1%564.5%674.9% 39.8%311.7%----133.6%111.7%----110.0% 413.5%29.4%136.2%--130.2%114.4%011.0%112.2%17.5% 25.5%13.3%123.5%------127.9%110.2%-- 311.6%313.8%----------342.7%-- 14.4%15.2%------------115.0% 12.7%13.2%--0100.0%--07.2%------ 12.2%12.6%------111.7%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 182Page 182 Q10 Problem with water service Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Water leak,broken pipe Brokensprinkler Unexpectedlyhigh bill Poor wat erquality, odor,taste Waterpressure Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 28 -2 1 2 3 2 5 5 2069.1%--2100.0%150.0%133.2%3100.0%2100.0%360.0%350.4% 39.8%--168.5%----------111.7% 413.5%----------022.0%07.7%228.9% 25.5%--------------114.9% 311.6%------------240.0%125.5% 14.4%------166.8%-------- 12.7%---------------- 12.2%----150.0%---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 183Page 183 Q10 Problem with water service Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Water leak,broken pipe Brokensprinkler Unexpectedlyhigh bill Poor wat erquality, odor,taste Waterpressure Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 7 5 1 15 4 1 6 5 7 577.6%346.4%040.4%1175.4%257.8%1100.0%354.7%359.1%578.6% --115.1%159.6%18.9%135.7%------112.2% 114.5%06.9%--216.4%132.2%024.8%110.6%118.1%05.6% 111.4%114.2%--------113.4%115.1%-- --124.3%--213.0%----110.6%351.6%-- ------18.3%----121.3%---- 05.5%----02.5%010.1%-------- ------14.1%--------19.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 184Page 184 Q10 Problem with water service Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Water leak,broken pipe Brokensprinkler Unexpectedlyhigh bill Poor wat erquality, odor,taste Waterpressure Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 4 7 7 4 5 25 3 25 3 244.3%682.5%686.1%08.0%588.3%1766.8%285.8%1767.0%387.2% --112.0%--115.9%125.5%15.7%150.4%15.7%145.4% 010.4%05.5%227.1%129.4%--313.6%014.2%415.0%-- 121.5%----120.2%--26.2%--26.2%-- ------134.5%237.2%313.0%--312.9%-- 134.1%--------14.9%--14.9%-- ----05.3%----13.0%--01.5%012.8% ----18.6%----12.4%--12.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 185Page 185 Q10 Problem with water service Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Water leak,broken pipe Brokensprinkler Unexpectedlyhigh bill Poor wat erquality, odor,taste Waterpressure Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 12 14 26 2 15 5 0 4 4 865.3%1068.5%1972.6%130.6%1278.5%349.8%0100.0%4100.0%122.2% --319.7%310.9%--213.2%------122.2% 15.5%322.2%415.0%--14.2%121.1%0100.0%122.5%122.2% --211.1%13.1%138.8%--229.1%------ 326.4%--312.9%--322.2%-------- 19.9%--14.8%----------133.3% 16.1%--01.5%----114.1%------ --14.4%--130.6%14.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 186Page 186 Q10 Problem with water service Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Water leak,broken pipe Brokensprinkler Unexpectedlyhigh bill Poor wat erquality, odor,taste Waterpressure Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 4 2 1 4 883.8%358.4%2100.0%--242.4% 18.3%113.9%------ 216.9%------131.6% 17.9%------118.8% --113.9%168.5%1100.0%-- --------129.8% ---------- --113.9%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 187Page 187 Q11 Problem involved sending a Water District representative Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 28 24 3 0 4 5 3 8 8 1035.8%728.6%388.6%--245.7%236.8%258.7%335.5%224.4% 1761.5%1668.1%011.4%0100.0%254.3%363.2%013.5%564.5%675.6% ------------------ 12.8%13.3%--------127.9%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 188Page 188 Q11 Problem involved sending a Water District representative Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 28 -2 1 2 3 2 5 5 1035.8%----150.0%--129.4%--479.6%355.5% 1761.5%--2100.0%150.0%2100.0%270.6%2100.0%120.4%244.5% ------------------ 12.8%---------------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 189Page 189 Q11 Problem involved sending a Water District representative Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 7 5 1 15 4 1 6 5 7 454.2%349.8%159.6%320.5%132.2%1100.0%234.6%240.9%228.9% 234.4%350.2%040.4%1279.5%367.8%--465.4%244.0%571.1% ------------------ 111.4%------------115.1%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 190Page 190 Q11 Problem involved sending a Water District representative Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 4 7 7 4 5 25 3 25 3 117.0%345.3%227.1%4100.0%111.7%1038.6%014.2%1037.5%120.9% 261.5%454.7%572.9%--588.3%1558.3%285.8%1559.4%279.1% ------------------ 121.5%--------13.1%--13.1%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 191Page 191 Q11 Problem involved sending a Water District representative Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 12 14 26 2 15 5 0 4 4 541.7%535.0%1037.3%130.6%638.9%243.2%0100.0%122.5%122.2% 758.3%859.5%1662.7%130.6%961.1%242.2%--377.5%377.8% ------------------ --15.5%--138.8%--114.6%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 192Page 192 Q11 Problem involved sending a Water District representative Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 4 2 1 4 330.4%255.5%--1100.0%127.8% 661.7%244.5%2100.0%--372.2% ---------- 17.9%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 193Page 193 Q12a Arrive in a timely manner Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 7 3 -2 2 2 3 2 657.8%462.4%254.6%--166.2%148.6%018.8%151.1%2100.0% ------------------ 219.2%19.0%145.4%--133.8%--181.2%---- 223.0%228.6%------151.4%--148.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 194Page 194 Q12a Arrive in a timely manner Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 --1 -1 -4 3 657.8%----1100.0%--1100.0%--240.0%278.9% ------------------ 219.2%------------115.8%-- 223.0%------------244.1%121.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 195Page 195 Q12a Arrive in a timely manner Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 4 3 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 264.1%128.6%--387.7%1100.0%1100.0%169.4%136.9%131.5% ------------------ 135.9%122.5%--------130.6%--168.5% --148.9%1100.0%012.3%------163.1%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 196Page 196 Q12a Arrive in a timely manner Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 1 3 2 4 1 10 0 10 1 1100.0%257.0%148.6%249.6%1100.0%556.2%0100.0%661.5%-- ------------------ --143.0%131.9%----220.0%--114.0%1100.0% ----019.6%250.4%--223.9%--224.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 197Page 197 Q12a Arrive in a timely manner Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 5 5 10 1 6 2 0 1 1 236.8%479.9%555.1%1100.0%232.1%283.7%0100.0%1100.0%1100.0% ------------------ 237.5%--220.5%--233.9%-------- 125.7%120.1%224.4%--233.9%016.3%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 198Page 198 Q12a Arrive in a timely manner Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 3 2 -1 1 387.5%150.0%----1100.0% ---------- --125.0%------ 012.5%125.0%--1100.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 199Page 199 Q12b Accurately assess the problem Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 7 3 -2 2 2 3 2 655.7%571.4%126.5%--020.8%280.4%018.8%151.1%2100.0% ------------------ 331.1%19.0%273.5%--179.2%019.6%181.2%---- 113.2%119.6%----------148.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 200Page 200 Q12b Accurately assess the problem Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 --1 -1 -4 3 655.7%----1100.0%--1100.0%--240.0%271.6% ------------------ 331.1%------------125.6%128.4% 113.2%------------134.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 201Page 201 Q12b Accurately assess the problem Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 4 3 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 264.1%128.6%1100.0%260.7%031.4%1100.0%169.4%136.9%131.5% ------------------ 135.9%122.5%--139.3%168.6%--130.6%--168.5% --148.9%----------163.1%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 202Page 202 Q12b Accurately assess the problem Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 1 3 2 4 1 10 0 10 1 1100.0%257.0%148.6%244.1%1100.0%554.0%0100.0%659.3%-- ------------------ --143.0%151.4%121.4%--332.3%--326.7%1100.0% ------134.5%--113.7%--114.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 203Page 203 Q12b Accurately assess the problem Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 5 5 10 1 6 2 0 1 1 236.8%475.6%552.8%1100.0%242.8%283.7%0100.0%1100.0%-- ------------------ 237.5%124.4%333.1%--233.9%016.3%----1100.0% 125.7%--114.0%--123.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 204Page 204 Q12b Accurately assess the problem Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 3 2 -1 1 387.5%275.0%----1100.0% ---------- 012.5%125.0%------ ------1100.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 205Page 205 Q12c Clearly explain the nature of the problem, how it can be fixed Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 7 3 -2 2 2 3 2 444.0%459.9%----020.8%2100.0%018.8%122.5%161.2% 326.9%19.0%271.9%--133.8%--181.2%128.6%-- 18.1%--128.1%--145.4%-------- 220.9%231.1%----------148.9%138.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 206Page 206 Q12c Clearly explain the nature of the problem, how it can be fixed Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 10 --1 -1 -4 3 444.0%----1100.0%------249.7%144.7% 326.9%------------115.8%126.9% 18.1%--------------128.4% 220.9%--------1100.0%--134.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 207Page 207 Q12c Clearly explain the nature of the problem, how it can be fixed Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 4 3 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 243.2%--1100.0%273.1%031.4%1100.0%130.6%--131.5% 135.9%151.1%--------169.4%--168.5% ------126.9%168.6%-------- 121.0%148.9%----------2100.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 208Page 208 Q12c Clearly explain the nature of the problem, how it can be fixed Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 1 3 2 4 1 10 0 10 1 1100.0%131.9%168.1%123.9%1100.0%441.9%0100.0%446.9%-- --143.0%131.9%120.2%--328.0%--222.2%1100.0% ------121.4%--18.5%--18.7%-- --125.1%--134.5%--221.7%--222.2%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 209Page 209 Q12c Clearly explain the nature of the problem, how it can be fixed Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 5 5 10 1 6 2 0 1 1 236.8%351.6%440.4%1100.0%242.8%132.6%0100.0%1100.0%-- 237.5%115.8%328.7%--233.9%133.7%------ --116.7%18.7%----------1100.0% 125.7%115.8%222.2%--123.2%133.7%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 210Page 210 Q12c Clearly explain the nature of the problem, how it can be fixed Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 3 2 -1 1 274.1%275.0%----032.6% --125.0%----167.4% ---------- 125.9%----1100.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 211Page 211 Q13 Issue resolved in a timely manner Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Resolvedwith singlecontact Multiplecontactsrequired Issue was notresolved Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 10969.0%10275.1%525.9%2485.7%1155.4%856.7%2175.3%1458.9%3169.5% 2012.7%1511.0%420.4%12.2%315.4%321.6%310.0%521.5%612.5% 2213.9%1410.1%843.2%15.1%629.2%321.7%414.7%29.2%512.0% 64.1%43.3%210.5%14.7%------210.3%36.0% 10.4%10.5%--12.2%---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 212Page 212 Q13 Issue resolved in a timely manner Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Resolvedwith singlecontact Multiplecontactsrequired Issue was notresolved Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 10969.0%--886.5%575.9%962.4%1563.8%1054.8%2081.0%1866.5% 2012.7%----19.0%213.5%210.8%420.3%26.5%413.3% 2213.9%--16.7%115.1%319.6%625.4%213.1%01.7%620.3% 64.1%------14.5%--211.9%310.8%-- 10.4%--16.7%------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 213Page 213 Q13 Issue resolved in a timely manner Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Resolvedwith singlecontact Multiplecontactsrequired Issue was notresolved Not sure Prefer not toanswer 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 2785.3%2576.7%455.9%5361.3%1675.4%1777.7%2482.5%1956.6%2568.1% 38.0%410.9%220.3%1214.4%29.0%12.8%26.3%719.1%513.5% 26.7%14.4%18.1%1820.5%315.5%210.7%311.2%618.1%513.1% --38.0%115.7%33.1%--16.0%--26.2%25.3% ------10.7%--12.8%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 214Page 214 Q13 Issue resolved in a timely manner Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Resolvedwith singlecontact Multiplecontactsrequired Issue was notresolved Not sure Prefer not toanswer 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 959.3%2566.5%2478.8%1876.6%2266.5%7963.5%2588.8%7763.3%2788.3% 29.9%615.9%414.7%15.8%514.6%1814.7%26.4%1814.8%14.3% 530.8%514.1%14.5%311.9%514.9%2116.5%14.8%2016.6%25.4% --13.6%12.1%15.7%14.0%64.8%--65.3%-- ----------10.5%----12.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 215Page 215 Q13 Issue resolved in a timely manner Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Resolvedwith singlecontact Multiplecontactsrequired Issue was notresolved Not sure Prefer not toanswer 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 4968.0%5771.3%9266.7%1184.2%6465.5%1781.1%471.9%1669.3%975.0% 1013.5%89.5%2014.3%--1111.0%15.6%112.3%623.6%217.9% 1013.7%1214.6%1914.2%215.8%1717.5%29.5%115.7%15.3%17.1% 34.8%33.8%64.4%--55.4%13.8%--01.8%-- --10.8%10.4%--10.6%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 216Page 216 Q13 Issue resolved in a timely manner Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Resolvedwith singlecontact Multiplecontactsrequired Issue was notresolved Not sure Prefer not toanswer 64 39 9 16 12 4875.2%2565.5%779.5%1064.7%759.6% 69.1%615.4%--214.8%219.4% 812.4%614.6%220.5%212.2%216.0% 23.3%24.5%--18.3%15.0% ---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 217Page 217 Q14 Satisfaction with issue resolved Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 11975.4%11382.8%318.0%2693.5%1363.1%1077.2%2278.3%1462.9%3373.8% 2616.7%1410.5%1264.5%15.1%525.6%217.2%516.9%625.9%714.9% 95.9%75.1%212.5%--16.6%15.6%14.8%15.8%510.0% 32.0%21.6%15.0%01.3%14.7%----15.4%11.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 218Page 218 Q14 Satisfaction with issue resolved Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 11975.4%--771.9%684.9%1071.4%1773.2%1582.5%2392.9%1866.5% 2616.7%--328.1%115.1%319.6%416.9%14.4%01.7%827.9% 95.9%------19.0%29.9%29.6%15.4%12.2% 32.0%----------13.5%--13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 219Page 219 Q14 Satisfaction with issue resolved Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 2578.5%2577.3%794.5%6271.9%1679.6%1986.5%2790.7%2366.1%2567.7% 515.3%310.6%05.5%1820.4%418.5%27.5%39.3%927.3%514.0% 26.2%412.1%--34.0%--16.0%--13.9%513.2% ------33.7%01.8%----12.7%25.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 220Page 220 Q14 Satisfaction with issue resolved Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 954.4%2668.9%2688.1%1981.6%2779.1%8871.0%2591.8%8670.4%2891.4% 636.9%514.1%27.8%26.9%720.9%2620.8%--2419.7%27.4% 16.3%49.6%14.1%311.5%--75.6%28.2%97.3%01.2% 02.4%37.4%------32.5%--32.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 221Page 221 Q14 Satisfaction with issue resolved Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 5373.9%6277.8%10375.1%973.7%7071.9%1679.2%368.5%2084.9%1082.1% 1014.2%1619.7%2216.1%326.3%2020.1%313.4%231.5%27.1%17.1% 68.8%22.5%96.5%--77.4%15.6%--14.0%-- 23.1%--32.3%--10.6%01.9%--14.0%110.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 222Page 222 Q14 Satisfaction with issue resolved Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 64 39 9 16 12 5382.4%2975.2%779.5%1379.5%867.5% 813.1%922.3%220.5%13.8%327.4% 23.6%11.6%--316.7%15.0% 11.0%01.0%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 223Page 223 Q15a Your ability to reach a service representative Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 9559.9%8864.9%524.9%2279.2%1366.7%855.5%1658.4%1041.6%2656.5% 3622.8%3022.3%525.5%39.6%420.4%215.7%723.6%1045.2%1022.2% 74.1%42.9%313.8%12.2%16.2%319.7%13.6%12.7%00.8% 116.8%53.9%528.7%12.8%--19.1%39.6%27.9%49.3% 95.9%75.4%17.2%26.2%16.6%--14.8%12.7%49.4% 10.5%10.6%------------11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 224Page 224 Q15a Your ability to reach a service representative Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 9559.9%--441.5%569.8%859.3%1462.2%1055.1%1767.8%1968.6% 3622.8%--330.4%115.1%218.1%520.1%633.9%416.2%416.0% 74.1%--------12.7%17.5%14.0%27.8% 116.8%--16.7%115.1%319.6%--13.5%01.2%27.6% 95.9%--221.3%--03.1%315.0%--310.8%-- 10.5%---------------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 225Page 225 Q15a Your ability to reach a service representative Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 1961.2%2063.2%568.8%5057.4%1361.0%1881.8%2069.6%2059.2%1746.2% 516.7%824.0%220.3%2124.8%526.1%16.1%619.2%925.3%1025.7% 01.2%11.9%--66.4%29.0%--14.6%25.7%12.0% 25.1%24.8%05.5%78.3%01.8%--26.7%37.5%411.0% 413.4%26.1%05.5%33.1%02.0%312.1%--12.3%512.9% 12.5%--------------12.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 226Page 226 Q15a Your ability to reach a service representative Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 741.6%1950.7%2066.4%1357.8%2367.5%6653.3%2383.0%6654.4%2477.2% 529.9%1129.7%722.5%627.2%413.0%3527.9%14.5%3226.2%413.1% --12.6%01.3%13.5%39.7%75.2%--65.0%01.4% 215.0%25.6%39.9%14.0%25.8%108.3%--107.8%12.0% 213.5%39.2%--27.5%14.0%75.3%39.7%76.0%26.4% --12.1%--------12.8%10.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 227Page 227 Q15a Your ability to reach a service representative Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 4257.7%4861.0%8159.1%753.6%5455.9%1469.6%240.4%1670.2%764.3% 2129.5%1316.6%3223.5%326.3%2323.3%313.4%237.7%522.7%328.6% 33.8%34.3%64.4%--54.6%13.7%--01.8%17.1% 56.3%67.8%96.6%19.6%88.7%15.7%06.2%13.6%-- 22.7%79.3%85.8%110.5%77.5%13.8%115.7%01.8%-- --11.0%10.6%----13.8%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 228Page 228 Q15a Your ability to reach a service representative Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 64 39 9 16 12 4163.5%2359.9%665.1%956.4%652.2% 1218.7%717.5%115.6%531.4%542.7% 34.2%25.0%17.2%---- 45.7%49.6%04.9%13.8%15.0% 46.6%38.0%17.2%18.3%-- 11.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 229Page 229 Q15b The courtesy of the service representative Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 10365.3%9569.8%632.4%2381.8%1574.4%965.3%1658.6%1253.7%2860.9% 3018.7%2417.4%529.0%27.0%312.8%325.6%726.2%522.5%920.0% 32.0%10.6%212.7%--14.1%14.5%12.8%12.7%00.7% 95.4%53.7%418.8%12.8%02.1%14.5%14.8%29.2%37.3% 138.1%118.0%17.2%28.4%16.6%--27.6%311.9%49.4% 10.5%10.6%------------11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 230Page 230 Q15b The courtesy of the service representative Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 10365.3%--439.3%684.9%859.3%1772.2%1265.0%1768.7%2174.7% 3018.7%--332.6%--218.1%210.1%527.2%314.0%39.9% 32.0%--16.7%--------01.2%13.0% 95.4%----115.1%319.6%--13.5%--312.5% 138.1%--221.3%--03.1%417.6%14.4%416.1%-- 10.5%---------------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 231Page 231 Q15b The courtesy of the service representative Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 1960.0%2268.8%681.0%5664.5%1677.6%1880.5%2172.3%2263.3%2053.4% 516.0%516.2%113.5%1821.1%312.5%14.7%723.1%720.2%718.5% 12.5%24.8%--11.0%14.0%----14.1%00.8% 13.1%----88.8%13.9%--14.6%13.9%410.2% 515.9%310.2%05.5%44.7%02.0%314.9%--38.5%615.0% 12.5%--------------12.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 232Page 232 Q15b The courtesy of the service representative Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 745.3%2463.6%2170.9%1562.5%2368.8%7660.8%2279.8%7359.7%2581.7% 316.3%923.1%621.3%416.8%515.2%2822.3%14.9%2722.0%38.6% 18.9%----14.9%--32.5%--32.1%12.0% 211.1%12.1%27.8%12.6%37.9%96.9%--86.7%01.4% 318.4%39.2%--313.3%38.1%97.5%312.5%118.9%26.4% --12.1%--------12.8%10.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 233Page 233 Q15b The courtesy of the service representative Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 4461.2%5467.5%9065.3%758.4%6061.9%1467.6%240.4%1979.6%871.4% 1825.2%1113.5%2619.0%215.3%2020.6%211.4%121.9%415.1%221.4% 00.4%33.6%21.3%111.0%11.3%13.8%06.2%--17.1% 67.7%33.2%85.5%14.8%76.8%15.7%--13.6%-- 45.4%911.2%118.4%110.5%99.5%27.7%231.5%01.8%-- --11.0%10.6%----13.8%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 234Page 234 Q15b The courtesy of the service representative Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 64 39 9 16 12 4671.4%2359.0%668.7%1060.9%1079.8% 913.3%1024.6%03.6%214.8%215.2% 11.7%------15.0% 23.3%38.5%220.5%13.8%-- 69.1%38.0%17.2%320.5%-- 11.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 235Page 235 Q15c The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 136 19 28 20 14 28 23 45 9057.0%8662.8%419.5%2276.5%1157.0%755.2%1657.5%939.1%2554.3% 2817.7%2518.3%29.5%310.8%420.4%18.7%28.4%835.8%920.1% 106.4%75.5%313.8%--16.2%324.3%27.2%28.5%23.4% 116.9%43.0%736.2%14.3%13.1%19.1%39.6%13.4%49.7% 1811.5%139.7%420.9%28.4%313.3%02.8%517.3%313.3%510.7% 10.5%10.6%------------11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 236Page 236 Q15c The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 -9 7 14 23 18 25 28 9057.0%--448.2%569.8%962.4%1667.3%1266.1%1351.0%1657.8% 2817.7%--219.2%06.1%213.6%417.7%213.3%623.5%413.4% 106.4%------14.5%--212.8%12.5%414.8% 116.9%--16.7%224.1%319.6%----12.9%27.6% 1811.5%--225.9%----315.0%17.9%520.1%26.3% 10.5%---------------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 237Page 237 Q15c The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 32 32 8 86 21 22 29 34 37 1856.8%1856.5%794.5%4754.0%1364.2%1673.6%1963.3%1956.5%1644.2% 413.1%721.5%05.5%1619.1%316.4%15.0%414.6%618.1%822.4% 12.5%25.7%--78.6%16.0%--310.8%412.9%11.7% 13.1%14.2%--99.9%01.8%14.7%26.7%38.0%39.3% 722.1%412.1%--78.4%211.5%416.8%14.6%24.6%820.3% 12.5%--------------12.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 238Page 238 Q15c The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 16 38 30 23 34 125 28 122 31 636.3%2156.5%1654.7%1459.6%2163.2%6451.2%2176.0%6251.2%2375.0% 422.6%820.6%930.1%418.8%24.9%2620.5%27.1%2419.9%39.9% 15.0%12.5%14.1%16.2%513.7%108.1%--97.4%13.4% 215.0%25.6%39.9%01.3%27.0%118.8%--107.9%14.0% 321.1%512.7%01.3%314.1%411.2%1411.5%414.0%1612.9%27.7% --12.1%--------12.8%10.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 239Page 239 Q15c The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 72 79 137 13 97 20 5 23 12 3852.1%4860.4%7755.8%753.6%5556.0%1154.5%240.4%1666.7%757.7% 1622.3%1013.1%2618.8%110.5%1414.6%522.6%06.2%520.4%435.1% 57.6%45.3%86.0%111.0%77.3%13.8%--15.8%17.1% 57.4%67.0%96.6%214.5%88.0%15.7%121.9%13.6%-- 810.5%1113.3%1712.2%110.5%1414.1%29.5%231.5%13.6%-- --11.0%10.6%----13.8%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 240Page 240 Q15c The knowledge and expertise of the service representative Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 64 39 9 16 12 4164.5%1949.2%665.1%1064.7%436.1% 913.3%819.5%--214.8%645.4% 34.8%38.2%222.8%--15.0% 46.0%411.1%04.9%--15.0% 710.3%511.9%17.2%320.5%18.5% 11.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 241Page 241 Q16a California Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 10312.8%9713.6%35.8%1019.5%913.3%1219.6%2316.0%2914.2%207.3% 27334.2%25435.7%1424.5%1938.5%2433.8%1729.3%4632.6%6933.1%9836.1% 32941.1%28239.5%3457.2%1427.8%2636.8%2440.7%5639.5%8842.3%12144.8% 8310.4%7410.4%47.2%714.2%1115.3%58.1%1510.6%199.1%269.7% 121.5%60.8%35.3%--10.9%12.3%21.2%31.2%52.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 242Page 242 Q16a California Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 2515.8%7512.1%719.8%1127.3%1120.2%1721.6%810.6%1913.0%139.3% 5736.3%21033.8%1233.2%1026.3%1936.4%2632.6%3849.5%5034.8%5841.4% 6037.9%26041.9%1335.6%1230.2%2037.4%2228.1%2127.7%5941.3%6144.0% 1610.0%6410.3%38.9%512.7%36.0%1316.0%912.2%1410.1%75.3% --121.9%12.5%13.4%--11.7%--10.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 243Page 243 Q16a California Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 2916.2%2414.4%48.3%4611.4%817.8%1620.0%2520.8%1710.8%249.0% 5933.7%5835.3%916.7%14736.2%1226.9%2631.4%4234.6%5938.7%9635.8% 7643.0%6540.0%3772.3%15036.8%2043.0%2833.6%4537.1%6542.3%11442.8% 116.1%159.1%12.7%5613.8%511.0%1215.0%97.6%138.2%2910.7% 21.0%21.1%--81.9%11.3%------41.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 244Page 244 Q16a California Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 912.6%156.5%2214.6%2521.2%2519.8%9014.6%107.2%8412.3%1717.0% 2231.8%8235.0%5940.0%4034.1%5039.1%21033.9%5336.6%24335.3%2728.2% 2739.9%10946.7%5738.3%4437.5%4131.9%24639.8%6746.2%28341.2%3737.8% 1115.7%2310.0%96.4%87.2%129.2%6210.1%139.2%6910.0%1313.2% --41.9%10.6%----101.6%10.9%81.2%43.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 245Page 245 Q16a California Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 4310.2%5916.3%9212.9%614.4%6713.2%99.7%39.5%2417.5%-- 15937.9%10930.4%25335.4%1432.2%17334.0%3134.9%621.5%4532.3%1850.8% 17942.8%13938.6%29341.0%1738.0%20941.1%3843.4%1452.7%5438.8%1336.7% 317.4%4913.5%699.6%715.4%5410.5%1112.0%313.2%128.7%39.1% 71.6%41.2%71.0%--61.2%--13.0%42.7%13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 246Page 246 Q16a California Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 349.9%3419.0%821.7%1213.2%1017.6% 12636.9%6938.1%1336.8%2932.2%1730.8% 14542.4%6234.2%1235.4%3437.1%1935.4% 349.9%168.7%26.1%1213.1%814.6% 30.9%----44.4%11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 247Page 247 Q16b Southern California Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 9712.1%9513.3%12.0%1019.9%811.1%1016.3%2114.5%3215.3%176.3% 28836.0%26437.0%1831.4%2039.3%2637.0%1627.0%5438.1%7134.3%10137.2% 33141.4%28539.9%3355.2%1529.4%2839.4%2542.3%5437.9%8541.3%12445.9% 739.2%659.1%46.1%611.4%811.6%712.1%128.3%167.8%248.9% 111.4%50.7%35.3%--10.9%12.3%21.2%31.2%51.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 248Page 248 Q16b Southern California Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 2214.1%7211.6%718.1%821.2%815.9%1823.3%810.2%2315.9%128.5% 5635.2%22736.5%1642.8%1127.3%2241.9%2734.3%3950.9%4431.0%5942.4% 6642.0%25541.1%1028.2%1332.7%2037.4%2127.0%2330.0%6545.7%6244.7% 148.7%569.0%410.8%615.3%34.8%1113.8%78.9%96.5%64.5% --111.7%--13.4%--11.7%--10.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 249Page 249 Q16b Southern California Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 2514.2%2213.6%23.8%4711.7%714.3%1821.5%2016.6%2012.8%228.2% 6838.8%5835.6%1631.7%14535.6%1328.2%2935.8%4839.8%5536.0%10338.7% 7341.2%6841.8%3262.9%15738.5%2042.4%2530.2%4436.3%6944.8%11543.0% 84.8%148.4%11.5%5012.4%613.7%1012.5%97.3%106.4%238.4% 21.0%10.6%--81.9%11.3%------41.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 250Page 250 Q16b Southern California Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 710.0%187.8%1912.6%2218.4%2620.6%8213.3%128.6%8211.9%1313.4% 2233.0%8134.5%5738.3%5143.4%5542.9%21935.4%5839.6%25637.2%2930.0% 2841.2%11348.1%6443.0%3933.1%3728.6%25441.0%6343.2%28441.4%3738.6% 1115.7%198.1%85.4%65.1%107.9%548.8%117.8%588.5%1414.2% --41.5%10.6%----91.4%10.9%71.0%43.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 251Page 251 Q16b Southern California Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 4310.3%5214.5%8712.2%614.4%6412.6%1011.0%13.5%2215.8%-- 15837.8%12534.6%26537.1%1533.6%19337.9%2831.4%518.5%4733.6%1541.6% 18644.4%13537.3%29641.5%1636.5%19939.1%4247.4%1762.9%5740.9%1745.8% 266.1%4412.3%598.3%715.4%479.2%910.2%312.0%117.7%39.1% 61.4%41.2%71.0%--61.2%--13.0%32.0%13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 252Page 252 Q16b Southern California Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 339.6%2815.8%720.0%1516.1%1018.6% 12636.7%8044.5%1438.9%3032.5%1832.6% 15344.7%5731.7%1233.3%3336.0%2036.7% 288.2%148.0%37.8%1011.0%712.1% 30.9%----44.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 253Page 253 Q16c San Diego County Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 10913.6%10614.9%24.0%1121.2%68.3%1220.0%2215.3%3517.1%248.7% 30237.7%28339.7%1627.5%2141.5%2332.2%1932.0%5840.9%7636.7%10538.8% 30337.8%25435.6%3559.2%1326.0%2941.3%2135.5%5035.1%7837.6%11241.2% 789.7%679.3%46.1%611.4%1217.3%610.2%107.4%167.9%279.9% 91.1%40.6%23.2%--10.9%12.3%21.2%10.6%41.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 254Page 254 Q16c San Diego County Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 2012.8%8714.0%821.7%819.7%1121.5%1823.4%810.7%2517.3%139.5% 6742.2%22936.9%1541.2%1434.8%2343.1%2531.9%4052.7%4934.5%6043.4% 5534.9%23738.3%1129.9%1127.8%1528.8%2127.0%2228.9%5840.3%6043.1% 1610.0%589.4%37.2%614.3%46.6%1316.0%67.7%118.0%53.9% --91.4%--13.4%--11.7%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 255Page 255 Q16c San Diego County Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 3117.8%2616.0%48.3%4711.7%817.0%1923.2%1714.5%1912.5%3111.6% 7240.9%6137.5%1937.7%14936.6%1328.1%3238.7%6049.7%5334.7%10539.4% 6436.3%5936.2%2651.3%15237.3%1940.7%2226.3%3730.9%6743.4%10439.1% 84.5%169.8%12.7%5212.9%612.9%1011.8%64.9%149.3%249.1% 10.4%10.6%--61.5%11.3%------20.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 256Page 256 Q16c San Diego County Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 811.4%219.1%2114.3%2319.9%2620.7%9415.3%138.8%9113.3%1616.3% 2435.4%9038.3%6141.2%5445.8%4837.6%22536.4%6041.5%26338.3%3333.7% 2638.2%10042.6%5738.5%3428.6%4132.0%23437.8%6040.9%26538.5%3233.1% 1014.9%219.1%96.1%75.7%129.7%579.3%138.8%639.2%1313.1% --21.0%------81.3%--50.7%43.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 257Page 257 Q16c San Diego County Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 5112.1%5715.8%9813.7%919.6%7113.9%1011.5%311.4%2518.1%-- 16439.0%13336.8%27338.2%1738.4%19137.5%3338.0%413.7%5438.4%2055.6% 17641.9%11732.5%27438.4%1329.6%19237.7%3539.8%1659.9%4733.5%1335.2% 256.0%4913.7%648.9%512.3%509.8%910.6%312.0%128.7%39.1% 40.9%41.2%50.7%--61.2%--13.0%21.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 258Page 258 Q16c San Diego County Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 3510.2%3419.1%925.5%1617.6%916.8% 14241.3%7441.1%1438.9%3033.2%1934.7% 13539.5%5530.6%1029.5%3032.9%2036.4% 308.8%179.2%26.1%1111.9%712.1% 10.3%----44.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 259Page 259 Q16d Otay Water District's service area Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 12615.8%12117.0%23.9%1122.8%810.8%1423.0%2316.3%3919.0%3111.4% 33241.5%31444.0%1423.8%2345.6%2737.8%2441.4%6344.3%7837.7%11743.3% 24330.4%19827.7%3660.5%714.9%2535.7%1424.2%4330.1%6933.3%8431.1% 9111.3%7710.8%69.7%816.7%1114.8%59.2%128.7%188.8%3613.2% 81.0%40.6%12.1%--10.9%12.3%10.6%31.2%31.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 260Page 260 Q16d Otay Water District's service area Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 2515.6%9815.8%923.4%1127.7%1223.5%2227.9%810.0%2416.8%1410.4% 6541.4%26142.0%1745.3%1435.1%2547.3%2734.2%4660.7%5638.9%6546.5% 4729.6%18830.2%924.1%821.9%1018.6%1721.9%1418.2%4934.1%4834.2% 2113.3%6610.7%37.2%511.9%610.7%1114.3%811.2%139.3%128.9% --81.3%--13.4%--11.7%--10.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 261Page 261 Q16d Otay Water District's service area Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 3821.3%2716.8%510.1%5513.6%919.0%1923.1%2318.9%2214.6%3613.6% 7844.3%6841.5%2242.4%16440.5%1431.1%3441.7%5747.5%5938.7%11643.5% 4927.6%4829.7%1835.1%12731.1%1532.8%1923.3%3125.8%5535.9%8531.8% 116.3%2012.1%612.4%5313.2%715.8%1011.8%97.8%1710.8%2710.1% 10.4%----71.6%11.3%------31.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 262Page 262 Q16d Otay Water District's service area Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 913.4%2812.1%2315.8%2622.1%2922.9%11218.1%128.3%10615.4%1818.6% 2435.2%9339.8%7248.7%5446.3%6046.8%24038.9%7350.3%29242.5%3435.3% 2435.1%8235.2%4228.4%2823.5%2821.8%19131.0%4329.8%21230.8%2626.7% 1116.3%2711.7%107.0%108.2%118.5%6811.1%1610.7%7210.5%1616.5% --31.1%------61.0%10.9%50.8%32.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 263Page 263 Q16d Otay Water District's service area Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 5813.9%6718.5%11416.0%919.6%8717.0%77.9%26.5%2921.0%13.4% 18544.1%14239.4%30342.4%1738.4%20439.9%4045.1%828.7%6344.7%1952.2% 14233.8%9125.4%21630.3%1228.2%15831.1%2731.0%1143.7%3424.6%1231.8% 307.3%5715.8%7610.6%613.7%5510.8%1415.9%518.0%139.6%39.1% 40.9%31.0%50.7%--61.2%--13.0%--13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 264Page 264 Q16d Otay Water District's service area Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Improving Stayingabout thesame Gettingworse Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 4312.4%3620.0%1232.9%2022.5%1017.8% 15946.3%8245.6%1233.3%3032.5%2138.2% 10530.5%4625.7%822.2%2325.8%1731.4% 3610.5%168.7%411.6%1314.8%712.5% 10.4%----44.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 265Page 265 Q17a Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 41151.3%37452.4%2949.3%2856.7%2737.2%3050.7%7251.0%10651.3%14854.4% 26533.1%24133.7%1118.4%1019.3%3041.5%1831.0%4531.6%6732.3%9635.3% 435.4%385.3%58.2%23.2%46.2%34.4%53.6%157.0%155.5% 334.1%283.9%59.2%59.0%23.2%69.8%96.0%94.3%31.1% 445.5%314.3%711.7%510.5%710.2%24.1%117.7%83.8%103.7% 40.6%30.4%23.2%11.2%11.7%----31.2%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 266Page 266 Q17a Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7346.3%32552.4%1951.2%1640.7%3157.8%3747.2%3951.4%8156.5%8258.9% 4729.5%21334.3%821.0%1435.0%1833.6%2936.4%3140.7%4329.8%3323.7% 116.7%315.0%38.0%--12.3%55.9%23.1%85.5%118.0% 106.4%213.4%24.2%411.2%23.4%22.9%--96.3%85.8% 1710.7%274.3%411.9%411.5%11.8%67.6%44.8%10.9%53.5% 10.4%40.6%13.6%11.6%11.2%----10.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 267Page 267 Q17a Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 9755.2%7646.5%3057.9%20751.0%2553.1%3947.1%6352.3%9360.6%12647.3% 5832.6%5634.1%1630.6%13433.0%1226.3%2631.2%3731.1%3623.4%10539.2% 116.3%117.0%35.4%184.4%24.6%44.8%97.3%74.9%145.4% 52.8%159.2%12.6%122.9%24.5%56.5%43.5%117.2%103.6% 53.1%42.4%23.6%338.0%48.9%89.7%75.8%53.0%114.0% --10.8%--20.6%12.7%10.8%--10.9%10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 268Page 268 Q17a Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3550.9%11951.0%8255.5%5849.1%7155.7%31951.6%7652.1%35952.3%4546.8% 1928.2%9138.7%4429.9%3832.6%3325.8%20032.3%5235.7%22733.0%2829.2% 57.2%73.2%117.6%75.6%97.4%386.2%53.3%385.6%55.0% 23.1%72.8%85.2%65.4%85.9%243.9%85.4%274.0%55.4% 710.5%93.8%31.9%97.4%43.2%355.7%32.2%344.9%1010.4% --10.5%----32.0%20.3%21.3%10.2%33.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 269Page 269 Q17a Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 23556.2%17047.2%37352.2%2146.9%25850.6%5056.6%1349.7%7855.9%1232.2% 14434.3%11130.8%23232.5%1430.9%17033.3%2730.1%830.5%4330.8%1748.1% 174.2%257.0%395.4%37.5%305.9%22.2%311.4%64.3%25.7% 112.7%205.5%304.2%25.7%183.6%55.7%01.2%64.6%38.3% 81.9%349.3%375.2%37.6%306.0%55.3%27.2%64.3%12.3% 30.8%10.2%30.4%11.4%30.6%------13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 270Page 270 Q17a Desalinate and purify seawater to make clean drinking water Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 18253.0%9552.5%1543.5%4853.4%2546.0% 11734.2%5430.1%1338.1%2325.3%1832.9% 174.8%105.4%01.2%78.0%59.4% 123.6%63.3%515.5%44.0%36.3% 144.1%137.4%11.8%89.3%35.4% 10.4%31.4%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 271Page 271 Q17b Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 45056.3%41257.7%2542.8%3059.3%3954.1%3356.7%7956.0%11555.4%15457.0% 23229.0%20428.7%2033.4%1222.9%1723.4%1627.5%4028.3%6531.2%8330.8% 374.6%334.7%12.4%35.1%22.4%00.6%75.0%73.4%186.6% 344.3%283.9%610.0%12.9%68.1%610.9%53.7%105.0%51.8% 445.5%354.9%58.2%48.5%710.2%34.3%107.0%94.4%113.9% 30.4%10.2%23.2%11.2%11.7%----10.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 272Page 272 Q17b Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 8956.4%34856.1%2157.6%1845.8%2953.9%4556.8%4964.6%7250.3%9467.3% 4025.1%18730.1%1129.9%1129.0%1425.6%1620.2%2330.5%5236.6%3324.0% 84.8%294.7%12.5%25.9%47.7%810.3%11.8%42.7%32.0% 95.4%243.9%11.7%36.9%34.8%33.4%11.4%96.2%85.6% 127.9%304.8%38.3%410.9%46.8%79.3%11.8%53.5%21.1% 10.4%20.4%--11.6%11.2%----10.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 273Page 273 Q17b Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10861.2%9859.9%3058.8%21452.6%2146.2%5364.6%6856.5%10165.9%14353.6% 5028.4%4627.9%1631.0%11929.4%1022.5%1721.0%3428.3%3723.9%9134.2% 105.5%74.4%24.1%174.3%23.5%33.9%43.2%10.5%176.6% 53.1%63.7%35.2%204.9%613.3%45.1%86.3%53.5%41.7% 31.8%74.0%00.8%348.3%511.8%44.6%75.7%106.3%93.5% ------20.6%12.7%10.8%----10.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 274Page 274 Q17b Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4362.6%13055.5%8154.9%6958.3%8063.1%34455.5%8961.4%39156.9%5354.2% 1725.2%7130.4%4430.0%3328.2%3224.8%18329.6%4128.5%20429.7%2122.0% 34.9%114.6%85.2%54.0%21.2%294.7%42.9%273.9%88.6% 11.8%93.6%95.9%43.8%86.3%304.8%42.9%304.3%44.5% 45.4%125.3%64.1%75.8%53.6%335.3%43.0%345.0%98.8% --10.5%----11.0%10.1%21.3%10.2%21.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 275Page 275 Q17b Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 24758.9%19754.7%40857.2%1943.5%27954.7%4450.4%1970.7%8661.7%2261.0% 11728.0%10729.6%20829.1%1432.6%15129.6%3235.8%622.7%3726.1%720.7% 215.1%154.1%283.9%37.9%224.4%56.2%12.4%64.0%26.9% 194.5%123.5%304.3%48.4%254.9%22.7%--53.3%25.7% 133.1%297.9%385.3%36.2%316.0%44.9%14.2%74.9%12.3% 20.4%10.2%20.3%11.4%20.4%------13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 276Page 276 Q17b Capture, store, treat rainwater, stormwater runoff to produce clean drinking water Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 19657.1%10960.2%1646.0%4651.2%3462.4% 11032.0%4424.2%926.8%2628.3%1426.3% 154.4%52.7%25.9%44.0%35.0% 92.7%105.6%412.0%77.3%23.4% 123.5%126.6%39.4%89.3%22.9% 10.4%10.7%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 277Page 277 Q17c Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 17121.4%15922.2%1016.7%815.9%1420.2%1322.8%2920.5%4320.8%6323.4% 20725.9%18325.7%1626.7%1428.2%1622.1%1932.7%3424.1%5827.9%6624.5% 14718.4%13318.6%712.6%611.5%1217.1%914.4%2719.0%3215.4%6222.9% 21426.8%18826.3%1830.5%2040.4%2231.3%1322.7%3524.4%5827.8%6624.3% 536.6%456.4%610.3%11.6%57.6%47.3%1711.9%146.8%114.1% 70.9%50.8%23.2%12.5%11.7%----31.2%20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 278Page 278 Q17c Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 3119.8%13221.3%718.8%821.7%917.6%1823.4%1317.8%2819.4%4330.9% 3823.8%16827.2%1129.4%614.9%1325.0%1823.0%2938.0%3423.4%3625.7% 2515.6%11919.2%513.9%410.7%814.2%1214.9%1621.2%2819.8%2517.7% 5434.0%15424.8%1130.6%1333.5%2139.5%2126.5%1316.6%4732.6%2820.2% 96.0%416.6%24.7%514.1%12.5%1012.2%56.4%53.4%85.5% 10.8%61.0%12.5%25.0%11.2%----21.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 279Page 279 Q17c Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 4726.7%3621.8%918.0%7919.4%818.2%2227.2%3226.3%3422.2%5119.2% 4425.2%4426.8%1631.1%10325.4%1328.7%1923.0%3125.6%4327.8%6524.5% 3218.1%2817.2%815.9%7919.4%36.1%1518.7%2218.2%2113.5%5319.9% 4223.9%5131.0%1528.8%10726.2%1839.2%1822.1%2822.9%4529.3%7929.5% 105.4%42.7%36.2%348.4%23.8%78.1%87.0%117.2%165.9% 10.8%10.6%--41.1%24.0%10.8%----31.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 280Page 280 Q17c Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 1826.8%5121.6%2718.4%2420.3%3224.8%12720.6%3423.7%15222.1%1616.4% 1319.2%6427.4%3926.4%3529.4%3124.7%15425.0%4530.7%17825.8%2526.0% 812.4%4519.3%3121.2%2017.2%2015.5%11718.9%2315.7%13018.9%1212.7% 2333.6%5925.2%4228.2%3227.2%3326.0%17428.1%3524.4%17825.9%3435.4% 57.9%135.7%85.4%75.9%108.1%416.7%64.3%446.4%77.7% --20.9%10.4%--11.0%50.8%21.3%50.8%21.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 281Page 281 Q17c Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 10424.9%6518.0%15621.8%715.5%10720.9%1820.8%624.0%3021.1%1028.7% 11828.3%8222.8%18225.5%1430.9%13726.8%2326.5%519.2%3625.9%617.1% 8420.0%6317.4%13318.6%817.7%9318.3%1314.6%621.5%2719.6%822.0% 9522.6%11030.5%19427.1%1023.8%13626.7%2831.4%726.9%3424.4%925.3% 133.0%3910.7%446.2%510.7%326.3%66.6%28.4%128.3%13.4% 51.1%20.5%50.7%11.4%51.0%----10.7%13.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 282Page 282 Q17c Recycle sewer water, purify it to clean drinking water standards using advanced water treatment Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Stronglysupport Somewhatsupport Somewhatoppose Stronglyoppose Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 7120.8%4625.5%411.0%1819.8%1120.6% 9427.5%3921.6%821.6%2831.4%1222.4% 7020.3%3318.3%514.0%1516.4%611.6% 8524.7%4524.9%1749.6%2426.1%2138.8% 216.3%147.9%13.8%44.9%34.9% 10.4%31.8%--11.5%11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 283Page 283 Q18 Frequency of future water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 More About same Less Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 415.2%344.8%47.5%59.7%45.7%59.3%96.6%125.8%62.0% 57071.2%51772.5%3558.9%3671.5%4968.9%3966.6%10070.7%14067.8%20575.7% 16320.4%14620.5%1322.9%815.7%1419.9%1119.0%3122.1%4823.1%5118.7% 202.6%111.5%610.6%23.2%34.1%35.2%10.6%73.3%51.9% 50.7%50.8%----11.4%------41.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 284Page 284 Q18 Frequency of future water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore More About same Less Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 148.8%274.4%26.1%12.4%24.5%34.2%34.6%53.8%128.3% 9962.4%45773.7%2875.5%2463.0%4076.0%5063.9%6179.8%10271.0%9568.5% 3723.5%12019.4%616.7%1025.9%1019.5%2228.5%1215.6%3121.9%3222.6% 53.4%132.1%11.7%37.6%--33.4%--53.3%10.6% 31.9%20.4%--01.1%---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 285Page 285 Q18 Frequency of future water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older More About same Less Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 84.6%95.6%47.2%205.0%36.7%78.0%86.9%74.6%103.6% 12369.6%11872.1%3567.7%29472.4%3269.3%5769.4%7562.1%10467.8%20677.3% 4022.6%3621.8%1121.0%7718.9%714.6%1720.8%3428.6%3724.3%4516.9% 31.5%10.5%24.1%143.3%37.2%11.7%32.4%21.4%62.1% 31.7%----10.3%12.2%----32.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 286Page 286 Q18 Frequency of future water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others More About same Less Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 23.3%62.7%128.1%54.4%118.3%274.4%138.6%334.8%77.7% 5377.7%16972.2%10772.6%8269.3%8566.5%42969.3%11881.3%49271.6%6870.2% 1218.1%5222.3%2819.0%2722.9%3124.3%15024.2%96.0%14721.4%1616.8% 10.9%62.8%00.3%43.5%10.6%132.1%53.8%152.1%44.6% --------00.3%--00.3%00.1%10.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 287Page 287 Q18 Frequency of future water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C More About same Less Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 245.7%164.5%395.5%--265.2%33.6%12.4%85.5%410.0% 29871.2%25771.2%50971.3%3375.9%35970.5%6371.7%2077.9%10172.1%2672.6% 8821.1%7420.6%15221.3%715.4%11221.9%1617.7%413.7%3122.2%13.4% 40.9%133.7%121.7%48.7%112.1%67.1%26.0%--25.7% 51.1%--20.2%--20.4%----00.3%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 288Page 288 Q18 Frequency of future water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er More About same Less Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 185.3%53.0%411.2%66.4%24.5% 25774.9%12368.0%2469.1%5964.7%3868.5% 5716.7%5027.9%615.9%2325.5%1120.5% 82.2%21.1%13.8%32.9%46.5% 30.9%----00.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 289Page 289 Q19 Taken actions to reduce water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 61877.3%54476.2%5287.5%3570.5%5475.4%5288.4%10876.0%16881.2%20274.4% 14518.2%13518.9%712.5%918.8%1621.9%711.6%2618.6%3215.4%5520.4% 283.5%263.7%--59.4%11.9%--64.4%62.8%103.6% 81.0%81.2%--11.2%10.9%--10.9%10.6%41.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 290Page 290 Q19 Taken actions to reduce water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 12578.9%47977.2%2567.9%3384.2%4482.2%6380.3%6180.7%11076.7%10374.1% 2817.5%11218.0%924.1%512.4%916.3%1316.3%1215.8%2920.0%3323.4% 31.7%254.1%26.3%13.4%11.5%33.4%33.5%53.3%32.5% 31.9%50.7%11.7%------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 291Page 291 Q19 Taken actions to reduce water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 14280.3%13180.1%3772.5%30775.6%2961.8%6579.5%8671.2%12279.3%21279.5% 2312.8%3119.2%1325.1%7819.3%1429.4%1416.6%2924.5%2516.1%4416.7% 73.7%10.7%12.3%194.6%37.5%33.1%54.4%42.6%103.9% 63.2%----20.5%11.3%10.8%--32.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 292Page 292 Q19 Taken actions to reduce water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4769.6%19181.7%11578.2%8774.0%10380.7%618100.0%--53678.1%7173.7% 1826.4%3715.7%2617.7%2319.6%2317.8%--145100.0%12618.3%1919.5% 34.0%62.6%64.2%64.8%21.5%----233.3%55.5% ------21.7%------30.4%11.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 293Page 293 Q19 Taken actions to reduce water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 32577.7%27977.3%56178.6%2965.6%39377.1%6978.4%2385.6%11179.4%2363.1% 7818.5%6217.2%12517.5%1227.4%9017.7%1617.7%414.4%2618.4%1028.6% 102.4%184.9%243.4%23.9%214.2%44.0%--32.2%-- 61.4%20.5%30.5%13.0%51.0%------38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 294Page 294 Q19 Taken actions to reduce water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 25674.5%14882.3%2572.1%7885.9%4175.3% 7321.1%2513.8%1027.9%88.5%1324.0% 123.4%63.5%--55.6%00.7% 30.9%10.3%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 295Page 295 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Purchased w-ater-efficientappliances (c-lothes washe-r, dishwasher,etc.) Used water-efficientfaucet andshower heads Fixed leaks Only run dish-washer/laun-dry when full Use a grey-water system Turn offfaucet whilebrushingteeth 618 544 52 35 54 52 108 168 202 28145.4%24545.0%2243.6%1131.8%2139.3%1732.3%5449.9%8047.4%9848.7% 30649.5%27049.6%2650.8%1439.7%1934.9%2344.0%4945.2%8751.6%11556.9% 29347.4%24845.6%3262.8%926.7%2037.6%2853.8%4642.9%8751.8%10250.6% 36659.2%32559.7%3058.5%1541.7%3463.0%3566.4%6762.2%9858.6%11758.2% 193.1%173.0%12.6%----11.5%33.2%53.2%104.8% 39263.3%34463.2%3466.4%1645.1%3565.8%3566.7%7064.7%11266.4%12461.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 296Page 296 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Purchased w-ater-efficientappliances (c-lothes washe-r, dishwasher,etc.) Used water-efficientfaucet andshower heads Fixed leaks Only run dish-washer/laun-dry when full Use a grey-water system Turn offfaucet whilebrushingteeth 125 479 25 33 44 63 61 110 103 4636.7%23048.0%1143.2%1338.9%1636.9%3352.9%2743.7%5146.3%4341.5% 5947.3%24150.3%1767.6%1442.6%2455.2%2946.2%2947.0%5348.1%4341.6% 5443.0%23048.1%1247.7%1443.0%1432.5%3251.4%2235.6%4541.1%4947.5% 7056.2%28659.8%1144.8%1855.6%2353.7%4367.5%3759.7%5852.9%6663.9% 43.4%143.0%29.0%--11.4%12.1%23.8%32.4%11.3% 6855.0%31465.6%1973.7%1752.5%2045.6%4469.3%4064.9%6357.3%6057.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 297Page 297 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Purchased w-ater-efficientappliances (c-lothes washe-r, dishwasher,etc.) Used water-efficientfaucet andshower heads Fixed leaks Only run dish-washer/laun-dry when full Use a grey-water system Turn offfaucet whilebrushingteeth 142 131 37 307 29 65 86 122 212 7653.9%5340.4%1642.0%13644.2%1346.9%3249.2%3540.4%5746.6%9343.7% 8257.7%6448.8%1231.8%14848.3%1346.1%2234.3%4451.8%6250.8%10247.9% 7351.9%6146.8%1540.4%14346.6%1654.1%2741.6%3540.6%5746.9%9946.8% 9768.3%7658.3%1643.2%17757.5%1861.8%3553.3%4956.9%7662.6%12860.3% 53.8%32.3%24.6%92.9%----22.0%21.7%73.4% 10372.7%7557.1%1747.1%19663.9%1759.9%4061.1%4957.4%8267.1%12960.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 298Page 298 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Purchased w-ater-efficientappliances (c-lothes washe-r, dishwasher,etc.) Used water-efficientfaucet andshower heads Fixed leaks Only run dish-washer/laun-dry when full Use a grey-water system Turn offfaucet whilebrushingteeth 47 191 115 87 103 618 -536 71 2144.4%9248.0%5144.4%3439.4%4543.4%28145.4%--25146.8%2737.7% 2552.6%9851.0%6152.6%4349.8%3937.7%30649.5%--27350.8%3041.4% 2145.2%10253.4%4942.1%3034.9%4442.3%29347.4%--25647.7%3447.7% 2858.1%12565.6%6354.8%4854.9%5856.1%36659.2%--32861.2%3549.1% 24.8%52.4%32.8%21.8%54.5%193.1%--152.7%45.4% 3266.7%12867.1%6758.0%5260.3%5755.7%39263.3%--34363.9%4563.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 299Page 299 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Purchased w-ater-efficientappliances (c-lothes washe-r, dishwasher,etc.) Used water-efficientfaucet andshower heads Fixed leaks Only run dish-washer/laun-dry when full Use a grey-water system Turn offfaucet whilebrushingteeth 325 279 561 29 393 69 23 111 23 13942.7%13649.0%25745.8%1139.7%18446.9%3245.8%836.4%4843.3%938.0% 15949.0%14150.5%28250.2%1139.8%19349.2%3448.6%1460.2%5650.5%1041.6% 16249.8%12143.5%26146.4%1449.9%20351.6%3246.9%1046.2%4237.7%523.5% 17353.3%18566.3%33760.0%1654.8%23860.7%4362.8%1464.3%5246.6%1878.3% 113.3%83.0%173.0%--92.2%45.1%210.5%54.2%-- 19359.2%19168.4%35863.8%1757.8%25564.8%4768.4%1461.6%6357.2%1254.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 300Page 300 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Purchased w-ater-efficientappliances (c-lothes washe-r, dishwasher,etc.) Used water-efficientfaucet andshower heads Fixed leaks Only run dish-washer/laun-dry when full Use a grey-water system Turn offfaucet whilebrushingteeth 256 148 25 78 41 10942.4%7349.2%625.3%4253.2%2355.9% 12849.9%7248.8%937.2%4354.8%1842.3% 11545.1%6745.1%623.4%4456.7%1946.4% 16263.3%8557.0%1352.2%4354.5%2355.9% 103.9%42.4%----13.2% 16062.6%8959.9%1246.7%5063.5%2867.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 301Page 301 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Use lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes, etc. Wateredplants/lawnbetween 4PM& 9AM Wateredplantsless/use dripsystem Adjusted spri-nklers so the-y don’t run o-n driveway, s-idewalks, wa-ste water Washed car l-ess often/Us-ed water-effi-cient metho-ds to wash c-ar 618 544 52 35 54 52 108 168 202 37660.9%33060.7%3058.6%2056.0%3666.4%3262.2%6257.8%10160.1%12562.1% 32151.9%28251.8%2753.3%1131.4%2953.2%3567.3%5753.4%8550.7%10351.3% 28245.6%23743.6%3160.1%1440.4%2851.6%2649.1%4239.4%7343.6%9948.9% 28145.5%24244.4%2853.6%1440.2%1936.0%2446.8%4945.9%8550.6%8944.0% 30248.8%26047.8%2955.4%1335.6%2342.9%3158.6%5248.6%8148.0%10351.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 302Page 302 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Use lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes, etc. Wateredplants/lawnbetween 4PM& 9AM Wateredplantsless/use dripsystem Adjusted spri-nklers so the-y don’t run o-n driveway, s-idewalks, wa-ste water Washed car l-ess often/Us-ed water-effi-cient metho-ds to wash c-ar 125 479 25 33 44 63 61 110 103 7459.2%29461.4%2080.6%2370.8%3170.6%3454.4%4065.6%5550.2%5351.3% 6048.5%25553.2%1352.5%1029.9%2352.3%3454.3%3760.9%5348.0%5856.5% 5745.7%22146.2%1247.0%1341.1%1329.7%2641.1%2133.9%4945.0%5654.6% 5342.6%22045.9%1247.9%722.5%2044.7%2336.3%2845.2%5651.4%5048.5% 5443.4%24050.2%1039.6%1236.7%1943.3%3556.0%3455.0%4339.5%5351.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 303Page 303 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Use lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes, etc. Wateredplants/lawnbetween 4PM& 9AM Wateredplantsless/use dripsystem Adjusted spri-nklers so the-y don’t run o-n driveway, s-idewalks, wa-ste water Washed car l-ess often/Us-ed water-effi-cient metho-ds to wash c-ar 142 131 37 307 29 65 86 122 212 10070.6%8262.3%1849.6%17657.4%1965.3%4163.7%5159.3%6150.4%13162.0% 7754.2%6650.4%1334.6%16553.7%1552.0%3350.8%4653.8%7158.8%10348.3% 7552.8%5642.8%1539.7%13644.3%1864.2%2234.0%3844.6%5645.8%9545.0% 7250.8%5139.1%1746.8%14145.7%1241.0%2843.0%3439.6%5848.0%9946.6% 7754.0%5844.1%1335.9%15450.1%1447.8%2437.3%4350.3%6250.7%10147.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 304Page 304 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Use lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes, etc. Wateredplants/lawnbetween 4PM& 9AM Wateredplantsless/use dripsystem Adjusted spri-nklers so the-y don’t run o-n driveway, s-idewalks, wa-ste water Washed car l-ess often/Us-ed water-effi-cient metho-ds to wash c-ar 47 191 115 87 103 618 -536 71 3471.3%11560.0%6052.1%5664.0%6462.5%37660.9%--32360.2%4968.8% 2247.5%10353.8%5951.1%4248.1%5452.2%32151.9%--28052.2%3650.9% 2042.0%10554.9%4539.1%3641.4%3735.9%28245.6%--24746.0%3042.3% 2143.9%10253.2%4539.3%3539.7%4342.0%28145.5%--25146.7%2839.3% 2245.8%11057.6%5446.4%3236.6%4745.6%30248.8%--26449.2%3448.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 305Page 305 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Use lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes, etc. Wateredplants/lawnbetween 4PM& 9AM Wateredplantsless/use dripsystem Adjusted spri-nklers so the-y don’t run o-n driveway, s-idewalks, wa-ste water Washed car l-ess often/Us-ed water-effi-cient metho-ds to wash c-ar 325 279 561 29 393 69 23 111 23 18757.4%18064.6%33960.4%2275.6%24462.1%3753.6%1462.2%6357.0%1878.3% 16450.3%15154.3%29853.1%828.1%21955.8%3550.3%939.2%4842.8%1045.2% 14745.2%12545.0%25845.9%829.0%17644.7%4565.5%1463.7%3430.3%1356.1% 14043.0%13649.0%26246.7%726.0%18847.9%3855.3%1356.7%3228.5%1045.2% 14945.8%14753.0%27649.1%1240.4%19950.6%3855.4%732.2%4742.3%1045.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 306Page 306 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Use lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes, etc. Wateredplants/lawnbetween 4PM& 9AM Wateredplantsless/use dripsystem Adjusted spri-nklers so the-y don’t run o-n driveway, s-idewalks, wa-ste water Washed car l-ess often/Us-ed water-effi-cient metho-ds to wash c-ar 256 148 25 78 41 15159.2%9362.4%1558.0%4658.8%2355.1% 13352.1%7349.2%1245.7%4658.5%1741.7% 12448.5%5637.6%728.9%3545.3%1639.8% 12147.2%6744.9%830.6%3646.2%1638.0% 12649.2%7047.4%1039.9%4152.3%2047.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 307Page 307 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Didn’t hosedown drivew-ay/walkways Installeddroughttolerant land-scapes/fakegrass Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 618 544 52 35 54 52 108 168 202 31651.1%27550.6%2854.3%1233.4%2648.8%2955.8%5147.8%8751.5%11154.9% 23638.1%20838.3%2140.6%1336.4%1732.2%1324.7%4037.3%6438.3%8843.7% 518.3%458.2%47.1%25.6%24.0%24.2%76.1%169.7%2211.1% 10.2%10.2%------------10.5% 20.3%10.1%12.6%--------10.8%10.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 308Page 308 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Didn’t hosedown drivew-ay/walkways Installeddroughttolerant land-scapes/fakegrass Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 125 479 25 33 44 63 61 110 103 5342.4%25753.6%1560.7%1648.3%2045.4%2843.8%3658.4%4843.8%5250.3% 3629.2%19440.5%313.8%1029.5%1330.8%3250.9%1626.2%4238.0%4139.7% 129.7%388.0%13.1%12.9%512.3%46.8%58.3%98.6%88.2% --10.2%13.7%------------ 10.6%----------11.3%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 309Page 309 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Didn’t hosedown drivew-ay/walkways Installeddroughttolerant land-scapes/fakegrass Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 142 131 37 307 29 65 86 122 212 8056.4%5743.8%1642.7%16352.9%1654.9%3146.8%3843.9%6250.9%11453.7% 6042.3%4433.8%1643.0%11637.6%1242.9%2030.0%2630.6%4133.7%8439.4% 118.0%1410.8%49.5%237.3%14.8%34.1%78.6%86.3%2511.6% --10.7%------------10.4% ----12.1%--------10.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 310Page 310 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Didn’t hosedown drivew-ay/walkways Installeddroughttolerant land-scapes/fakegrass Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 47 191 115 87 103 618 -536 71 2347.6%11962.3%5345.6%3843.4%4442.6%31651.1%--28352.7%3142.7% 2348.3%8644.8%3832.7%2630.2%3533.7%23638.1%--21440.0%1925.9% 24.3%189.4%1311.1%1011.1%32.7%518.3%--468.6%34.8% 12.0%--------10.2%--10.2%-- ----------20.3%--10.1%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 311Page 311 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Didn’t hosedown drivew-ay/walkways Installeddroughttolerant land-scapes/fakegrass Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 325 279 561 29 393 69 23 111 23 15748.4%15354.9%29652.7%827.0%18847.7%4565.0%1463.7%5448.4%1566.9% 12538.4%10838.8%22139.3%39.5%13734.8%3652.0%1463.0%3632.8%1254.3% 268.0%259.0%488.5%12.8%287.0%811.9%28.4%109.1%416.3% 10.3%--10.2%--------10.8%-- 10.2%--10.1%--10.3%11.1%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 312Page 312 Q20 Actions taken to reduce water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Didn’t hosedown drivew-ay/walkways Installeddroughttolerant land-scapes/fakegrass Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure Prefer not toanswer 256 148 25 78 41 14356.1%7047.1%1038.3%3848.2%1844.4% 10842.1%4932.9%622.4%3342.6%1639.1% 186.9%106.7%313.0%89.9%613.9% 10.4%-------- 10.3%10.9%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 313Page 313 Q21 Changes on property to reduce water usage in past 5 yrs Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 51364.2%45563.7%4373.2%2550.3%3447.4%2948.4%9265.0%14369.0%19170.4% 24630.8%22331.3%1322.9%1835.6%2940.7%2746.3%4632.7%5526.6%7126.0% 253.2%233.2%11.6%510.8%45.1%34.5%21.6%83.7%41.3% 151.9%131.8%12.3%23.3%56.9%00.7%10.7%10.6%62.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 314Page 314 Q21 Changes on property to reduce water usage in past 5 yrs Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 9862.2%40365.0%1949.9%2051.2%3566.0%4962.5%4458.6%10070.0%8561.3% 5031.4%19130.7%1334.8%1640.9%1426.6%2633.3%2937.8%3826.5%5338.0% 53.0%182.9%24.6%25.9%47.4%34.2%23.0%42.6%10.7% 53.3%81.3%410.6%12.0%----00.5%10.9%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 315Page 315 Q21 Changes on property to reduce water usage in past 5 yrs Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 13677.3%11167.6%3874.7%22856.1%2042.8%4352.1%7058.6%10165.7%18569.5% 3218.1%5131.0%1121.9%15237.4%1531.6%3542.9%4638.5%4629.9%7427.8% 42.1%10.6%23.4%194.6%816.9%21.9%32.5%42.4%52.1% 42.5%10.8%--81.9%48.6%33.1%00.3%32.0%20.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 316Page 316 Q21 Changes on property to reduce water usage in past 5 yrs Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4261.7%15967.7%10067.4%7362.1%7357.1%42468.5%6544.4%46467.5%4243.5% 2638.3%6427.1%4127.8%3731.2%5341.2%17227.8%7450.9%19728.7%4545.9% --72.9%42.7%76.2%21.8%162.5%53.4%192.7%76.8% --52.2%32.1%10.5%--71.1%21.2%71.1%43.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 317Page 317 Q21 Changes on property to reduce water usage in past 5 yrs Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 26663.4%24467.6%47967.1%1636.9%32062.8%6472.6%1971.9%8762.3%2364.0% 13933.1%9626.7%20729.0%2556.1%16632.6%2225.2%623.9%4230.2%925.4% 92.2%143.8%202.8%37.0%163.1%11.3%01.2%85.6%-- 61.4%71.9%81.1%--71.4%10.9%13.0%31.9%410.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 318Page 318 Q21 Changes on property to reduce water usage in past 5 yrs Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 23267.6%11061.2%1541.9%5863.6%3461.1% 9828.6%6234.6%1850.5%2931.4%1832.5% 82.3%63.1%13.8%44.5%12.4% 51.5%21.1%13.8%00.5%24.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 319Page 319 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Installeddroughttolerantlandscapes,fake grass,concrete Used lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes Purchasedwater-efficientappliances Installed dripsystem Adjusted,changedirrigationsystem 513 455 43 25 34 29 92 143 191 27854.2%24854.5%2353.5%1456.4%1647.5%1240.3%4548.7%7653.3%11560.4% 173.4%143.1%13.1%12.4%--14.1%22.3%64.0%84.0% 9318.2%7917.5%818.8%729.7%1234.3%619.5%2122.9%2618.4%2111.1% 5911.6%5111.3%613.8%27.7%411.6%620.3%1112.3%1510.8%2111.0% 438.3%367.9%613.3%14.1%410.4%311.3%33.6%149.4%189.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 320Page 320 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Installeddroughttolerantlandscapes,fake grass,concrete Used lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes Purchasedwater-efficientappliances Installed dripsystem Adjusted,changedirrigationsystem 98 403 19 20 35 49 44 100 85 4747.7%22355.2%634.3%1049.7%1441.2%2959.8%2964.1%5857.6%4248.7% 33.1%143.4%17.2%--24.9%11.3%13.0%22.3%45.1% 2626.2%6516.1%314.5%420.1%926.8%816.5%1022.4%1918.9%1517.6% 1211.9%4711.6%211.4%13.9%25.6%713.4%510.6%99.0%1821.1% 99.1%348.4%211.4%14.7%26.5%611.7%25.3%1111.2%67.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 321Page 321 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Installeddroughttolerantlandscapes,fake grass,concrete Used lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes Purchasedwater-efficientappliances Installed dripsystem Adjusted,changedirrigationsystem 136 111 38 228 20 43 70 101 185 8361.0%6457.7%1539.5%11650.8%838.9%2250.8%3550.0%4544.3%10858.2% 85.6%00.3%25.6%73.1%13.1%--22.8%11.3%84.4% 1511.3%2825.1%923.9%4117.9%522.8%920.2%2636.9%2222.2%2211.6% 1511.1%109.0%49.8%3113.4%13.1%614.7%46.0%1616.4%2312.2% 1410.0%22.0%411.5%239.9%29.4%819.8%34.9%1010.3%158.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 322Page 322 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Installeddroughttolerantlandscapes,fake grass,concrete Used lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes Purchasedwater-efficientappliances Installed dripsystem Adjusted,changedirrigationsystem 42 159 100 73 73 424 65 464 42 2251.9%8553.8%6565.1%3649.8%3852.8%23354.9%3452.7%25755.3%1842.3% 25.1%53.4%21.7%11.4%23.1%143.3%23.2%132.9%36.3% 922.6%2113.5%1716.8%1318.1%1926.3%7818.5%1015.7%8217.6%1127.0% 717.7%1811.7%1615.8%56.9%811.0%5011.9%811.9%5612.0%48.7% 37.3%138.1%98.7%911.7%56.8%378.8%23.3%398.4%49.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 323Page 323 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Installeddroughttolerantlandscapes,fake grass,concrete Used lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes Purchasedwater-efficientappliances Installed dripsystem Adjusted,changedirrigationsystem 266 244 479 16 320 64 19 87 23 15056.5%12752.0%26855.9%531.3%17956.0%3757.9%1263.3%3945.0%1146.4% 51.9%125.0%122.5%18.3%123.7%34.2%14.2%22.2%-- 3312.3%6024.8%8818.5%29.9%6018.8%710.3%314.2%1719.2%730.6% 3513.0%2510.2%5511.4%321.3%3912.2%1422.6%314.2%22.2%15.4% 248.9%197.8%408.4%--247.6%711.0%316.7%67.0%28.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 324Page 324 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Installeddroughttolerantlandscapes,fake grass,concrete Used lesswater whentakingshower, handwashingdishes Purchasedwater-efficientappliances Installed dripsystem Adjusted,changedirrigationsystem 232 110 15 58 34 12955.4%5146.5%747.3%3561.1%2266.1% 94.0%54.2%--12.3%14.0% 3716.1%2825.1%210.6%1017.6%822.5% 3515.0%76.6%214.5%47.0%515.3% 208.5%86.8%214.5%59.3%24.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 325Page 325 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Wateredplants earlymorning orlateafternoon Used water-efficientfaucet,showerheads, toilets Use rainbarrels Installedtanklesswater heater Used grey-water system Collected,reused water Washed carless often /Used water-efficientmethods 513 455 43 25 34 29 92 143 191 122.3%112.5%------26.0%11.5%75.1%10.7% 458.8%398.7%36.7%312.6%39.1%27.4%44.8%139.4%199.9% 81.6%61.2%36.2%15.3%----21.9%53.7%-- 91.7%81.8%----14.0%--22.5%53.7%-- 30.6%20.4%--12.4%----11.5%10.9%-- 102.0%71.6%25.3%--12.3%13.3%22.3%42.8%21.3% 101.9%81.8%13.1%01.7%--13.3%11.5%42.5%31.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 326Page 326 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Wateredplants earlymorning orlateafternoon Used water-efficientfaucet,showerheads, toilets Use rainbarrels Installedtanklesswater heater Used grey-water system Collected,reused water Washed carless often /Used water-efficientmethods 98 403 19 20 35 49 44 100 85 00.4%112.8%----13.8%11.3%--21.7%44.7% 1313.5%317.7%423.2%14.7%411.1%816.2%511.6%87.8%89.9% 33.1%51.3%17.2%----12.7%--21.6%11.6% 32.7%61.6%----13.8%12.7%--11.3%33.3% 10.6%30.7%------11.3%--11.3%-- 43.7%71.7%15.1%13.1%--24.6%23.5%---- 21.7%71.7%--13.1%410.5%--13.0%11.3%11.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 327Page 327 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Wateredplants earlymorning orlateafternoon Used water-efficientfaucet,showerheads, toilets Use rainbarrels Installedtanklesswater heater Used grey-water system Collected,reused water Washed carless often /Used water-efficientmethods 136 111 38 228 20 43 70 101 185 32.0%21.8%--73.1%----22.8%32.7%31.4% 1410.5%1211.2%24.1%177.4%419.7%36.9%1014.0%88.4%179.1% 32.0%00.3%--52.3%----11.9%44.0%31.6% 21.7%11.2%24.5%41.6%--48.5%11.3%43.6%-- --11.2%--20.9%13.1%------10.7% 10.5%11.2%12.0%83.3%--12.2%22.2%--31.7% 53.4%11.3%13.5%21.0%02.1%12.2%--11.3%52.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 328Page 328 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Wateredplants earlymorning orlateafternoon Used water-efficientfaucet,showerheads, toilets Use rainbarrels Installedtanklesswater heater Used grey-water system Collected,reused water Washed carless often /Used water-efficientmethods 42 159 100 73 73 424 65 464 42 --31.7%33.1%11.8%34.5%102.3%11.0%122.5%-- 717.0%106.6%88.4%911.6%912.1%327.5%914.7%398.5%512.5% 36.4%42.7%----11.8%81.9%00.6%81.8%-- 12.2%31.7%--56.2%--81.8%12.1%91.9%-- ----11.3%10.8%11.8%10.3%23.0%30.6%11.5% 24.7%32.0%22.3%22.1%--102.4%--81.7%25.4% 11.5%63.6%22.0%11.9%--102.3%--102.1%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 329Page 329 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Wateredplants earlymorning orlateafternoon Used water-efficientfaucet,showerheads, toilets Use rainbarrels Installedtanklesswater heater Used grey-water system Collected,reused water Washed carless often /Used water-efficientmethods 266 244 479 16 320 64 19 87 23 72.5%52.1%112.3%13.8%113.5%00.6%------ 155.5%3112.5%439.0%18.6%3210.0%57.3%17.4%78.0%-- 10.5%72.9%81.7%--72.1%00.6%----15.4% 52.0%41.5%91.9%--51.7%--14.2%33.2%-- 31.2%--30.7%--31.0%-------- 41.4%72.8%81.8%13.8%61.9%22.4%--33.2%-- 31.3%62.5%91.9%13.8%72.1%11.2%--22.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 330Page 330 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Wateredplants earlymorning orlateafternoon Used water-efficientfaucet,showerheads, toilets Use rainbarrels Installedtanklesswater heater Used grey-water system Collected,reused water Washed carless often /Used water-efficientmethods 232 110 15 58 34 20.7%54.2%--47.0%-- 229.4%87.4%214.5%36.0%514.4% 31.3%11.1%--12.3%-- 21.0%22.1%16.4%12.3%-- 20.8%-------- 31.3%43.5%--11.4%-- 41.7%22.1%--12.3%11.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 331Page 331 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Reducedwater usagein general Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure,cannot thinkof anythingspecific Prefer not toanswer 513 455 43 25 34 29 92 143 191 7915.4%7416.3%48.5%14.1%12.8%14.1%2223.8%2618.0%2814.8% 71.4%51.1%25.4%----12.2%--10.7%63.0% 122.4%102.2%24.9%13.0%14.0%--32.9%53.4%31.3% 519.9%4710.3%24.1%310.7%513.8%414.4%1617.0%85.3%168.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 332Page 332 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Reducedwater usagein general Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure,cannot thinkof anythingspecific Prefer not toanswer 98 403 19 20 35 49 44 100 85 1010.6%6616.5%15.6%210.7%1130.4%24.6%715.1%1211.9%910.1% 10.6%71.7%28.4%--------32.7%10.9% 33.5%92.1%------35.4%13.0%54.8%-- 1010.3%409.8%210.1%316.7%39.4%47.4%23.9%98.5%56.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 333Page 333 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Reducedwater usagein general Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure,cannot thinkof anythingspecific Prefer not toanswer 136 111 38 228 20 43 70 101 185 2417.2%119.8%1128.3%3414.8%29.9%615.0%1318.8%1413.5%3217.2% 21.3%21.8%--41.6%------43.6%31.4% 21.3%11.2%410.5%52.2%01.9%13.1%22.4%44.0%31.4% 139.4%1110.3%24.9%2510.8%420.3%48.5%11.9%109.5%158.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 334Page 334 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Reducedwater usagein general Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure,cannot thinkof anythingspecific Prefer not toanswer 42 159 100 73 73 424 65 464 42 36.9%2717.0%1716.7%912.0%1216.3%5613.2%1624.8%7015.1%512.5% 11.5%32.2%22.3%----71.7%--61.2%23.7% 26.0%31.8%11.3%45.5%--112.5%12.1%122.6%-- 512.6%148.6%55.3%68.3%46.0%4410.4%46.8%429.1%716.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 335Page 335 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Reducedwater usagein general Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure,cannot thinkof anythingspecific Prefer not toanswer 266 244 479 16 320 64 19 87 23 3914.7%4016.3%7415.5%--4413.9%1320.1%420.9%1618.8%15.4% 41.7%31.2%61.2%13.8%51.4%11.2%--22.2%-- 72.6%52.1%122.5%--82.5%34.9%--11.1%-- 2810.6%208.2%428.9%319.1%298.9%58.6%210.0%1314.9%28.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 336Page 336 Q22 Changes on property to reduce water usage Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Reducedwater usagein general Other (uniqueresponses) Not sure,cannot thinkof anythingspecific Prefer not toanswer 232 110 15 58 34 3816.4%1715.0%16.4%69.9%515.4% 41.7%10.9%----11.8% 52.2%32.8%--34.6%14.0% 219.2%109.1%321.2%69.8%25.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 337Page 337 Q23 Satisfaction with communication Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 33441.7%32445.4%59.2%2345.1%2636.0%2338.3%5941.9%7837.7%12546.2% 32941.2%29941.9%2237.4%1835.2%2940.0%2949.3%5941.8%8943.2%10638.9% 425.2%294.0%1118.8%12.5%46.1%34.5%107.3%104.7%134.9% 172.1%30.4%1221.1%23.5%33.9%11.0%21.6%52.6%41.4% 759.4%557.7%813.4%713.7%912.1%46.8%117.4%2411.6%217.7% 40.5%40.5%----11.9%----00.2%20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 338Page 338 Q23 Satisfaction with communication Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7044.6%25441.0%1747.0%2154.7%2750.9%4051.2%3241.6%5337.0%5741.0% 6239.3%26342.4%1540.4%1024.9%1936.3%2836.1%3444.9%7250.4%5740.6% 106.4%284.6%24.2%13.4%12.5%45.1%34.3%53.2%118.1% 53.3%91.4%13.8%12.7%--22.9%--31.9%32.1% 85.2%6410.3%24.6%410.9%510.3%44.7%79.2%117.6%96.8% 21.1%20.3%--13.4%--------21.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 339Page 339 Q23 Satisfaction with communication Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10861.1%7143.7%2243.1%13232.4%1940.9%3239.5%5041.4%6542.4%11944.5% 5833.2%8351.0%2141.4%16540.7%1633.9%2935.1%6049.9%6038.9%11743.7% 52.7%10.4%11.5%358.7%23.8%1012.2%32.7%63.9%124.4% 31.5%10.4%12.6%112.6%36.0%33.5%10.7%32.1%31.0% 31.5%74.0%611.3%6014.7%612.6%79.1%65.3%1912.6%155.6% --10.5%--30.8%12.9%00.5%----20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 340Page 340 Q23 Satisfaction with communication Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2942.4%9138.9%6846.2%5445.5%6147.6%25941.9%6141.9%28441.4%4344.0% 2840.8%10042.7%6845.7%5344.6%4333.8%24940.3%6343.2%29542.9%2829.0% 35.1%145.9%32.3%32.8%1310.1%345.5%74.8%334.8%88.6% 22.9%31.5%10.9%21.4%32.0%152.4%21.5%111.6%44.4% 57.6%2610.9%74.8%75.7%86.1%579.3%138.7%608.7%1414.0% 11.2%------00.3%40.6%--40.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 341Page 341 Q23 Satisfaction with communication Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 16539.4%16245.0%30042.0%2148.9%21642.3%3135.4%1038.3%6647.1%1129.6% 18143.2%14239.5%30142.1%1432.2%19738.7%4146.5%1247.4%6042.6%1953.0% 256.0%164.5%354.9%13.0%305.8%33.1%13.0%43.0%411.7% 61.4%82.2%91.3%48.9%112.2%22.7%--21.6%12.3% 389.1%318.6%669.2%37.0%5310.4%1112.4%28.4%85.4%13.4% 30.8%00.1%40.5%--30.5%--13.0%00.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 342Page 342 Q23 Satisfaction with communication Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Very satisfied Somewhatsatisfied Somewhatdissatisfied Verydissatisfied Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 14542.1%8547.3%1749.6%3335.8%2240.7% 15444.8%5530.8%1645.7%3942.8%2442.7% 123.6%179.5%11.8%44.4%58.4% 61.6%52.9%01.2%11.5%22.8% 267.5%168.8%11.8%1314.0%24.5% 10.2%10.7%--11.5%00.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 343Page 343 Q24 Recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 39148.9%36551.1%1831.3%1224.9%2230.6%2745.5%6042.6%10048.3%17062.6% 26232.7%22431.5%2847.1%2856.4%3245.1%1729.0%5136.3%7737.1%5620.8% 14518.1%12317.3%1119.3%918.7%1622.9%1525.5%3021.1%2913.9%4516.6% 20.3%10.1%12.3%--11.4%----10.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 344Page 344 Q24 Recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7245.3%30949.8%2053.0%1538.5%2953.6%2937.2%3850.4%6948.4%7151.2% 6038.1%19731.8%1334.9%1435.4%1731.1%3138.8%2634.5%5135.4%4834.6% 2616.6%11318.2%512.1%1025.0%815.3%1924.0%1115.1%2316.2%2014.2% --10.2%--01.1%---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 345Page 345 Q24 Recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 176100.0%163100.0%51100.0%--1124.8%2125.2%6050.2%8051.9%15257.0% ------26264.4%2655.5%4351.8%3932.1%5536.2%6624.8% ------14535.6%817.5%1923.0%2117.6%1811.9%4918.2% --------12.2%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 346Page 346 Q24 Recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3957.1%12654.0%7349.2%5244.0%5643.9%31050.1%6745.9%34450.0%3738.6% 2131.1%6126.2%5134.3%4740.1%4838.0%19331.2%6141.7%22032.0%4041.7% 811.8%4619.8%2416.5%1915.9%2317.8%11518.5%1812.1%12317.9%1819.1% --------00.3%10.2%00.3%00.1%10.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 347Page 347 Q24 Recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 19947.4%18551.3%35149.2%2454.2%23045.0%5461.6%1558.1%7050.4%2259.7% 14033.3%11431.7%23232.5%1329.0%17434.2%2325.6%726.4%4834.4%1027.7% 8019.2%6117.0%13018.3%716.8%10420.4%1112.8%415.5%2114.9%512.6% 00.1%--00.1%--20.4%----00.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 348Page 348 Q24 Recall receiving the Pipeline Newsletter Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Yes No Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 19557.0%8044.5%1337.5%3639.2%1833.5% 9427.5%6737.0%1953.1%3133.7%2138.8% 5315.5%3217.8%39.4%2426.7%1527.7% --10.7%--00.5%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 349Page 349 Q25 Frequency of reading the Pipeline Newsletter Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Always Sometimes Rarely Never Prefer not toanswer 391 365 18 12 22 27 60 100 170 17645.1%16645.4%845.9%536.3%835.9%727.3%2033.2%5251.9%8550.0% 16341.8%15241.7%841.7%650.5%1150.8%1452.3%2948.3%3332.7%7041.4% 4210.8%3910.8%15.1%213.2%27.1%516.9%814.1%1514.6%126.8% 92.3%82.1%17.3%--16.1%13.5%34.4%10.8%31.8% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 350Page 350 Q25 Frequency of reading the Pipeline Newsletter Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Always Sometimes Rarely Never Prefer not toanswer 72 309 20 15 29 29 38 69 71 3244.3%14145.5%944.7%532.8%1140.1%1344.3%1539.3%2841.1%3345.6% 3245.0%12640.9%947.3%856.8%1242.5%1550.4%1847.4%2841.1%2940.0% 68.5%3511.2%28.0%210.4%414.1%25.3%49.2%1115.9%810.9% 22.2%72.4%----13.3%--24.1%11.9%33.5% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 351Page 351 Q25 Frequency of reading the Pipeline Newsletter Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Always Sometimes Rarely Never Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 -11 21 60 80 152 176100.0%------433.4%417.8%2236.0%3746.6%7650.0% --163100.0%----329.6%1257.1%2947.2%3543.4%6140.4% ----4282.7%--325.3%420.5%813.9%56.8%138.6% ----917.3%--111.6%14.6%22.9%33.1%21.0% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 352Page 352 Q25 Frequency of reading the Pipeline Newsletter Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Always Sometimes Rarely Never Prefer not toanswer 39 126 73 52 56 310 67 344 37 1947.8%6450.8%2940.2%1835.7%2341.6%14245.7%2333.7%15645.3%1333.8% 1537.9%5140.1%3244.7%2751.6%2645.7%13142.3%3147.0%14241.3%2052.8% 614.3%97.2%912.7%59.4%611.0%309.8%1116.1%3811.1%411.3% --21.9%22.4%23.3%11.7%72.2%23.2%82.4%12.1% ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 353Page 353 Q25 Frequency of reading the Pipeline Newsletter Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Always Sometimes Rarely Never Prefer not toanswer 199 185 351 24 230 54 15 70 22 9145.7%8244.5%15243.2%1356.1%10847.2%2444.5%745.4%2941.3%836.9% 8743.7%7540.6%15443.8%833.1%9742.2%1832.4%533.9%3042.8%1463.1% 199.3%2312.2%3810.8%15.2%2310.0%915.9%215.5%811.9%-- 31.3%52.7%82.1%15.6%10.6%47.2%15.2%34.0%-- ------------------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 354Page 354 Q25 Frequency of reading the Pipeline Newsletter Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Always Sometimes Rarely Never Prefer not toanswer 195 80 13 36 18 9046.2%3441.9%319.5%1645.0%841.0% 8141.6%3442.1%968.7%1541.1%946.7% 189.0%1214.8%14.7%513.9%212.3% 63.2%11.2%17.2%---- ---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 355Page 355 Q26a Email Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 35844.7%32645.7%2338.6%2753.6%3954.9%2543.2%5941.4%10852.1%10036.9% 29036.2%26036.4%2237.8%1836.8%1825.8%2542.5%5841.0%6732.2%10338.2% 12015.0%10314.4%1118.3%48.0%1013.5%69.8%2115.0%2813.6%5118.8% 324.1%253.5%35.2%11.6%45.7%34.5%42.7%42.1%176.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 356Page 356 Q26a Email Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7044.1%27945.0%1746.5%1742.8%2648.6%3746.9%3545.8%5941.4%6848.9% 5836.8%22336.0%924.8%1435.2%1528.3%2734.9%2938.8%6041.8%5136.8% 2314.5%9315.0%719.0%718.0%1222.6%1114.3%1215.4%1812.6%1913.4% 74.6%254.0%49.7%24.0%00.6%33.9%--64.3%11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 357Page 357 Q26a Email Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 8849.9%6438.9%1835.1%18846.2%2655.1%3745.7%5747.6%7448.3%11342.5% 5229.4%6942.4%1937.7%14936.8%1328.3%3745.2%4537.6%5032.8%9535.7% 3117.3%2716.7%1019.7%5112.4%47.8%78.2%1512.6%2415.5%5219.4% 63.4%32.0%47.5%194.6%48.8%11.0%32.2%53.4%72.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 358Page 358 Q26a Email Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3348.9%9540.3%7147.9%5748.6%6550.8%28946.8%5437.0%31445.7%4040.8% 1318.9%9641.1%5738.2%4538.1%4031.6%22436.2%5537.9%25036.4%3637.6% 1927.9%3414.5%1812.4%1210.0%2116.6%8513.7%3121.5%10014.6%1616.6% 34.3%94.0%21.5%43.4%11.0%213.3%53.6%233.4%54.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 359Page 359 Q26a Email Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 19847.2%15743.7%32445.4%2147.8%23145.3%3742.0%1246.7%6446.0%1336.4% 14334.1%13337.0%26236.7%1228.0%19237.7%3135.4%830.5%4532.4%1337.2% 6214.8%5515.4%10614.8%818.6%7013.7%1617.7%518.5%2316.3%718.1% 163.9%144.0%223.1%25.7%173.3%44.9%14.2%75.3%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 360Page 360 Q26a Email Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 14542.3%9753.5%1234.2%4246.7%2647.1% 13439.0%5027.8%1440.7%3538.7%1833.3% 4914.2%2916.2%822.4%89.1%915.8% 154.4%42.4%12.7%55.5%23.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 361Page 361 Q26b Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 27934.8%25836.1%1322.6%2141.4%2535.4%2135.6%4834.0%7938.2%8531.2% 31038.7%28139.4%2339.7%2040.2%2433.9%2643.5%6042.7%7435.5%10639.0% 16320.4%13719.2%1729.6%816.0%1217.2%711.8%2719.2%4622.1%6323.3% 486.0%385.3%58.1%12.3%1013.4%59.1%64.2%94.1%186.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 362Page 362 Q26b Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 4931.3%21735.0%1334.6%1025.4%1528.6%2936.8%2938.0%4631.8%5942.3% 6440.2%24239.1%1232.7%1436.6%2342.3%3139.6%3242.4%6444.5%5136.9% 3623.1%12219.6%822.9%1230.6%1527.9%1316.1%1418.5%2416.8%2517.9% 95.4%396.3%49.7%37.4%11.2%67.5%11.0%106.9%42.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 363Page 363 Q26b Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 7341.2%5231.9%1528.4%13934.2%1737.2%3643.8%3832.0%6542.3%8331.2% 6235.0%7042.9%1734.1%16039.4%1737.2%3542.3%5142.7%5435.2%10037.6% 3419.5%3320.5%1733.1%7719.0%613.8%911.4%2722.6%2617.1%6825.6% 84.4%84.7%24.4%307.4%511.7%22.6%32.7%85.3%155.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 364Page 364 Q26b Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2943.0%8636.8%4731.5%3731.8%5139.6%22536.4%4530.7%24936.2%2626.7% 1724.9%8436.1%6846.1%4840.5%5241.0%23838.5%5739.3%25637.3%4445.9% 1927.6%4820.6%2818.9%2319.8%2217.3%11919.3%3524.3%14020.4%2121.3% 34.5%156.5%53.5%98.0%32.1%355.7%85.7%426.2%66.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 365Page 365 Q26b Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 15136.0%12735.2%24934.8%1738.8%17834.9%2932.7%1141.4%4934.9%1233.4% 17241.0%12835.6%27738.8%1636.2%20339.8%3540.3%1037.1%5036.1%1131.0% 7618.0%8423.3%15021.0%716.2%10019.5%2022.2%621.5%2719.0%1233.3% 215.1%215.9%385.4%48.7%295.7%44.8%--1410.0%12.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 366Page 366 Q26b Newsletters emailed to you / Electronic Newsletters Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 11433.3%7441.2%925.6%3032.8%2443.1% 14341.6%6837.6%1748.1%3740.6%1527.9% 7221.0%2815.7%823.6%1718.2%1323.5% 144.2%105.5%12.7%88.4%35.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 367Page 367 Q26c Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 9712.2%9012.6%59.2%1122.8%1115.5%1118.0%1813.1%2914.0%176.2% 22628.3%21329.8%1221.1%1530.6%2129.8%1627.8%5840.7%4622.2%7025.7% 37146.4%32345.2%3255.1%2040.4%2637.0%2745.0%5035.4%10851.9%14051.8% 10513.1%8812.4%914.7%36.2%1317.7%59.2%1510.8%2411.8%4416.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 368Page 368 Q26c Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 2213.9%7411.9%411.8%922.8%1120.7%67.2%912.4%1812.3%2115.2% 4528.5%17027.4%1027.3%717.4%1629.2%2328.8%2128.0%4531.6%4733.4% 7547.6%28946.5%1541.4%1948.7%2038.2%4050.9%3850.3%6444.7%6748.1% 169.9%8714.1%719.5%411.1%612.0%1013.1%79.3%1611.3%53.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 369Page 369 Q26c Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 2212.7%2112.6%48.4%5012.2%919.3%1821.4%2722.4%2013.3%124.6% 5833.1%4728.6%1122.1%11027.0%1431.2%3340.4%3932.3%3825.0%6925.9% 7240.7%8049.1%3058.6%18846.2%1431.2%2732.4%4638.2%7549.2%15357.5% 2413.6%169.6%610.9%5914.6%818.3%55.8%97.1%1912.4%3212.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 370Page 370 Q26c Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 710.1%166.8%117.5%2017.2%3426.6%8113.2%138.8%8312.1%1313.7% 1217.0%6327.1%4933.0%3832.2%4233.1%17528.3%4027.6%19728.7%2424.3% 4160.5%12653.6%7248.7%4336.9%4837.7%28145.5%7954.6%32347.0%4344.6% 812.4%2912.5%1610.9%1613.8%32.5%8113.0%139.0%8412.2%1717.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 371Page 371 Q26c Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 4611.0%4813.4%8712.1%818.3%6713.2%99.7%14.2%1813.1%26.9% 12529.9%9927.4%20428.6%1227.9%14628.7%1820.3%520.4%4330.7%1438.3% 19646.7%16846.5%33747.2%1841.9%23145.4%4955.8%1869.5%5639.9%1746.5% 5212.4%4612.7%8712.2%511.9%6512.8%1214.2%26.0%2316.4%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 372Page 372 Q26c Social Media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 205.8%4524.9%412.6%1718.3%59.0% 9527.6%5932.7%926.2%3033.3%1831.8% 18754.4%5731.8%1748.0%3234.7%2749.6% 4212.2%1910.6%513.2%1213.7%59.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 373Page 373 Q26d Otay Water District website Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 18923.6%17624.7%915.6%1632.6%2332.2%1017.8%3424.1%4823.3%5721.0% 32340.4%29541.4%1831.4%1733.9%2433.5%2542.1%6445.1%8139.1%11341.5% 22628.3%19026.6%2745.6%1529.2%1520.4%1829.7%3524.8%7033.7%7527.6% 627.7%527.3%47.5%24.3%1014.0%610.4%96.0%83.9%279.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 374Page 374 Q26d Otay Water District website Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 4125.7%13922.4%1130.2%922.3%1325.1%2633.6%2228.7%2618.4%2819.9% 6037.8%25641.2%1336.1%1232.0%2342.5%2329.3%3039.1%6847.3%6244.8% 5132.3%17127.6%923.9%1332.8%1527.4%2026.0%2026.5%4128.8%4230.5% 74.2%548.8%49.7%512.9%35.0%911.2%45.8%85.5%74.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 375Page 375 Q26d Otay Water District website Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 5028.6%3722.4%612.3%9623.5%1736.3%2328.5%2621.7%4730.7%4115.5% 7643.1%7948.6%1936.6%14836.5%1429.7%3846.5%6352.2%5737.2%11141.5% 4223.7%3823.5%2243.6%12230.1%1021.5%1821.5%2420.3%4227.2%9535.7% 84.6%95.5%47.5%409.9%612.5%33.5%75.9%85.0%207.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 376Page 376 Q26d Otay Water District website Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 1623.3%4720.0%2818.8%3025.6%4534.9%14223.0%3825.9%15823.0%2626.3% 1725.3%10243.3%6946.8%4538.0%5543.0%25341.0%5437.2%28341.2%3232.6% 3145.5%6427.2%4731.8%3226.8%2519.2%17929.0%4027.5%19528.3%2930.1% 45.9%229.4%42.6%119.6%42.8%447.1%149.3%517.4%1110.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 377Page 377 Q26d Otay Water District website Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 10424.9%8122.5%16022.5%1534.6%12524.6%1820.8%414.4%3021.6%1232.2% 17241.0%14640.4%30142.1%1125.8%20440.1%3337.6%1143.7%5841.2%1746.1% 11126.6%10930.2%20328.5%1329.1%14428.2%2932.8%932.9%3726.6%821.7% 317.5%256.9%496.9%510.5%377.2%88.8%29.0%1510.7%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 378Page 378 Q26d Otay Water District website Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 6218.0%6234.3%925.0%2224.3%1730.0% 15144.0%6536.0%1235.5%3538.0%2037.1% 10831.4%4524.9%1130.7%2426.3%1425.7% 236.6%94.8%38.7%1011.4%47.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 379Page 379 Q26e Newsletters mailed to your house Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 26132.6%23633.0%1932.5%1326.3%2535.2%1729.0%4632.2%6832.9%9133.7% 31439.3%28539.9%1830.9%2142.3%2231.0%2440.8%5740.3%7938.1%11140.9% 17822.2%15621.9%1627.8%1529.1%1419.3%1423.3%3323.4%5426.2%4817.8% 485.9%375.2%58.8%12.3%1014.5%46.8%64.1%62.8%217.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 380Page 380 Q26e Newsletters mailed to your house Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 5635.5%19631.6%1233.1%1538.5%2648.2%2936.9%2533.3%4128.8%4331.1% 6037.8%24840.0%1848.7%1436.5%2037.5%3342.4%3546.1%6545.4%4632.7% 3321.0%13822.3%412.1%49.7%713.4%1214.9%1418.8%2920.3%4934.9% 95.7%386.1%26.1%615.3%00.8%55.8%11.8%85.6%21.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 381Page 381 Q26e Newsletters mailed to your house Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 9151.8%5835.4%815.6%10325.4%1634.0%2227.2%3126.2%6039.0%9033.6% 6235.3%6942.0%1938.0%16340.2%2042.4%2935.7%4638.0%5536.0%11543.0% 179.7%3219.6%2038.5%10826.5%611.9%2429.6%4134.3%3120.4%5018.7% 63.2%53.0%47.9%327.9%511.7%67.5%21.6%74.6%124.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 382Page 382 Q26e Newsletters mailed to your house Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2739.4%8234.9%4832.8%3932.8%3930.7%21534.8%3725.7%22332.5%3233.3% 2739.8%10243.6%5436.4%5244.4%4131.9%24038.8%6242.5%26939.1%4344.2% 1218.0%4017.0%4127.7%1613.9%4837.4%13021.0%3926.9%16123.4%1415.0% 22.8%104.4%53.1%118.9%--345.5%74.8%355.0%77.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 383Page 383 Q26e Newsletters mailed to your house Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 14334.2%11231.1%23132.4%1943.5%16031.4%2731.0%1350.9%5136.5%925.1% 15637.3%15442.6%28940.4%1636.7%19638.4%3944.3%934.1%5539.1%1643.5% 9322.1%7821.7%16222.7%511.1%12524.6%1719.5%415.0%2316.4%823.0% 276.5%164.5%324.5%48.7%295.6%55.3%--118.0%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 384Page 384 Q26e Newsletters mailed to your house Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 9828.4%7441.1%1235.2%2527.9%2037.1% 15244.3%5128.2%1543.7%3943.3%2239.3% 7521.9%4826.5%618.4%2022.3%1018.0% 185.3%74.2%12.7%66.5%35.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 385Page 385 Q26f Information inserted into your water bill envelope Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 26533.1%24233.9%1931.5%1938.9%2129.8%2033.9%5035.2%7335.2%8130.0% 27133.8%24734.6%1627.1%1020.0%2535.3%1525.2%4632.3%7536.0%10037.1% 21326.6%18125.4%2034.8%1938.8%1622.7%1830.5%3927.5%4823.1%7326.8% 516.4%446.1%46.5%12.3%912.1%610.4%75.0%125.7%176.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 386Page 386 Q26f Information inserted into your water bill envelope Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 6138.6%19731.8%1541.7%1230.5%2344.2%3240.4%2736.1%4330.1%4230.2% 5031.8%21434.5%1231.1%1435.0%2139.4%2835.8%2532.7%4934.0%4934.9% 3723.7%17027.3%821.1%1027.0%814.6%1418.0%1722.4%4229.2%4733.9% 95.9%406.4%26.1%37.5%11.8%55.8%78.8%106.7%11.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 387Page 387 Q26f Information inserted into your water bill envelope Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 8749.4%5835.6%1019.2%10926.9%1533.0%3137.4%4033.4%5536.0%8933.3% 5933.2%7344.5%1632.0%12330.3%1429.5%2429.2%4033.3%5636.5%10137.8% 2513.9%2615.8%2344.4%13934.1%1123.0%2631.3%3428.2%3824.5%6424.1% 63.5%74.2%24.4%368.7%714.5%22.1%65.1%53.0%134.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 388Page 388 Q26f Information inserted into your water bill envelope Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2537.3%7029.9%4530.4%4840.3%4938.8%20933.8%4329.7%22933.3%3131.6% 2740.4%8335.3%4631.3%3529.6%4737.2%20633.2%5336.5%22933.4%3838.7% 1521.8%6326.9%4832.3%2824.0%2922.5%16025.9%4329.7%18627.0%2122.1% 00.6%197.9%96.1%76.0%21.5%437.0%64.1%436.3%77.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 389Page 389 Q26f Information inserted into your water bill envelope Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 13632.5%12434.5%23432.8%1635.8%17734.8%2326.1%831.7%4230.0%1439.0% 16238.7%10228.4%24534.2%1534.6%16833.0%3337.6%830.5%4935.4%1233.2% 9422.5%11431.8%19527.3%818.8%13125.7%2730.5%1037.7%3525.2%1027.7% 276.4%195.3%415.7%510.9%336.5%55.7%--139.3%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 390Page 390 Q26f Information inserted into your water bill envelope Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 9828.6%8346.2%1440.1%3033.6%1731.5% 12035.0%5329.1%1132.7%3538.2%2137.7% 10430.4%3821.0%924.4%1819.8%1221.2% 206.0%73.8%12.7%88.4%59.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 391Page 391 Q26g Postcards mailed to your house Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 21927.4%20228.3%1220.9%1428.6%2230.9%1831.4%4230.0%4923.5%7327.1% 33041.3%30242.3%1729.0%1937.6%2332.5%2848.1%5740.1%9445.4%10940.2% 20325.4%17224.1%2541.9%1530.6%1521.2%916.0%3625.1%5827.9%7025.9% 475.9%385.4%58.1%23.2%1115.3%34.5%74.8%73.2%196.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 392Page 392 Q26g Postcards mailed to your house Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 4629.1%16626.8%1232.8%1230.2%2138.6%3139.4%1722.4%3021.3%4129.5% 5937.0%26542.7%1644.1%1435.2%2444.3%2532.2%3951.6%7149.3%5439.0% 4226.3%15525.0%616.0%1127.5%815.9%1721.8%1723.0%3625.1%4028.9% 127.6%355.6%37.2%37.1%11.2%56.6%23.0%64.4%42.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 393Page 393 Q26g Postcards mailed to your house Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 5631.6%4930.0%714.3%10726.3%1634.4%2834.1%2319.4%4730.4%6925.9% 8246.6%6540.0%2038.4%16340.1%1634.1%3036.6%6352.4%6844.1%11241.9% 3318.6%4326.6%2242.9%10425.5%716.1%2125.1%3024.7%3221.1%7628.4% 63.3%63.4%24.4%338.1%715.4%34.2%43.5%74.5%103.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 394Page 394 Q26g Postcards mailed to your house Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2131.1%6025.7%4127.5%3630.4%3729.4%17628.5%3423.6%18727.2%2929.8% 2739.0%10042.7%6141.4%5143.3%5140.0%25140.6%6444.1%28942.0%3940.7% 1927.4%6326.7%4228.6%2117.9%3829.6%15625.2%4229.0%17926.1%2121.6% 22.6%114.8%42.5%108.4%11.0%365.8%53.3%324.7%88.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 395Page 395 Q26g Postcards mailed to your house Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 11527.5%10228.2%19827.7%1226.7%13626.7%2225.2%725.7%4431.2%1129.6% 17541.7%14841.1%30542.7%1535.2%21141.4%3640.7%1141.9%5841.7%1439.1% 10424.7%9626.7%18025.2%1124.9%13526.5%2528.8%932.4%2618.8%823.0% 266.2%143.9%314.3%613.2%285.5%55.3%--128.3%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 396Page 396 Q26g Postcards mailed to your house Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 8223.8%6234.2%1130.5%2831.3%1527.7% 15144.0%6837.5%1954.2%3841.9%2443.8% 9427.5%4323.6%411.5%1920.6%1221.8% 164.7%84.7%13.8%66.1%46.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 397Page 397 Q26h Notices hung on your front door handle Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 19224.0%17524.5%1016.7%1631.5%2332.0%1729.6%3423.7%4120.0%6122.4% 27033.8%24534.3%1932.8%1632.0%2230.6%1932.5%4934.4%7234.7%9334.1% 28535.6%25035.0%2543.3%1834.9%1926.7%1627.5%5035.5%8742.0%9535.0% 536.7%446.1%47.2%11.5%810.8%610.4%96.4%73.2%238.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 398Page 398 Q26h Notices hung on your front door handle Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 5031.8%13521.7%1231.7%1127.3%2140.4%2632.7%2026.7%2719.2%3525.2% 4729.8%21835.1%822.2%1129.1%1427.2%3037.5%3140.4%5034.6%5237.2% 5031.4%22636.5%1438.8%1537.6%1629.5%1924.0%2229.4%5538.2%5035.7% 116.9%426.7%37.2%26.0%22.9%55.8%33.5%118.0%31.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 399Page 399 Q26h Notices hung on your front door handle Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 4424.9%5030.4%1223.0%8621.1%1533.3%2024.9%3831.9%3120.3%6022.5% 6436.5%5533.8%1528.9%13633.4%1634.5%3036.9%3730.9%5435.0%9335.0% 6134.7%5030.9%2141.0%15137.1%918.9%2834.0%4235.3%6039.3%9635.9% 73.8%84.9%47.1%348.4%613.3%34.2%21.9%85.4%186.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 400Page 400 Q26h Notices hung on your front door handle Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 2231.9%4720.1%3422.8%3227.0%3930.4%15625.2%3222.0%15622.8%2930.2% 1319.1%9038.5%5436.6%3530.1%4334.1%21334.4%4833.0%23734.6%3232.8% 3145.1%8335.3%5134.2%4235.5%4333.9%21234.3%5738.9%25236.6%3030.8% 33.9%146.1%96.4%97.3%21.7%386.1%96.1%426.1%66.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 401Page 401 Q26h Notices hung on your front door handle Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 10124.2%8523.6%17224.0%1227.9%10620.9%1819.9%517.4%5035.8%1336.4% 14334.2%12434.3%24934.9%1635.4%17734.8%2831.5%934.7%4935.0%719.2% 14735.0%13136.3%25836.1%1021.9%19337.9%3641.1%1244.9%3021.8%1336.0% 276.6%215.8%355.0%714.8%336.4%77.5%13.0%107.3%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 402Page 402 Q26h Notices hung on your front door handle Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 7321.2%5731.4%1338.5%1819.7%1528.0% 11232.5%5731.5%1440.0%3943.1%1833.1% 13840.2%5731.5%718.9%2831.3%1628.5% 216.1%105.6%12.7%55.9%610.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 403Page 403 Q26i Sponsoring community events Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 14117.7%12717.8%1219.7%1224.1%1622.9%1424.3%2416.8%3316.2%4215.3% 33541.8%30843.2%2237.2%2346.3%3041.7%2439.9%6042.6%8139.2%11743.1% 24330.4%21229.7%2135.2%1224.5%1419.2%1525.5%4632.7%7234.6%8431.1% 8110.1%679.4%57.9%35.1%1216.2%610.2%118.0%2110.1%2810.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 404Page 404 Q26i Sponsoring community events Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 3119.4%10316.6%821.1%820.6%1426.5%1620.3%79.4%2618.5%2920.8% 6641.6%26142.1%1233.3%1642.4%2444.9%3241.1%4458.5%6243.4%5136.9% 4628.8%19531.5%1232.0%1127.6%1425.7%2227.5%1519.3%4128.6%5338.0% 1610.2%619.8%513.6%49.4%22.9%911.2%1012.8%149.5%64.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 405Page 405 Q26i Sponsoring community events Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 3821.4%2716.4%1019.8%6716.4%1022.3%2733.2%2318.8%2717.7%3412.8% 8447.4%7445.5%1426.9%16139.6%1634.1%3137.9%5445.3%7045.5%11141.4% 3821.6%4929.7%2345.8%13332.7%1327.2%1923.7%3327.4%4428.7%10137.9% 179.6%148.4%47.5%4511.2%816.4%45.1%108.6%128.0%217.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 406Page 406 Q26i Sponsoring community events Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 1217.0%3012.6%3020.4%2118.0%3427.0%11418.5%2517.3%11616.9%2122.0% 2739.2%10143.1%6040.5%5042.3%5643.6%25841.7%6141.7%29743.2%3132.5% 2638.1%7733.1%4631.1%3327.7%3426.6%18630.1%4832.9%21331.0%3031.3% 45.7%2611.1%127.9%1412.0%42.8%609.7%128.0%629.0%1414.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 407Page 407 Q26i Sponsoring community events Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 7317.4%6518.0%12116.9%1022.3%9618.8%910.2%15.4%2820.0%820.9% 16439.0%16345.3%30542.7%1840.0%21341.9%3540.3%1246.1%6244.3%1232.3% 14434.4%9626.6%22531.5%1023.3%15129.6%3337.6%1348.6%3424.0%1336.2% 389.2%3610.1%648.9%614.4%509.8%1011.9%--1611.7%410.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 408Page 408 Q26i Sponsoring community events Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 4212.3%5832.2%1131.4%1313.8%713.5% 14542.4%7441.2%1441.3%4245.9%2138.7% 12235.5%3620.2%718.6%2730.0%1832.4% 349.8%116.4%38.7%910.3%815.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 409Page 409 Q26j Text messages Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 22728.3%21229.7%1321.6%2550.7%2737.7%2237.3%4330.6%5828.1%5118.7% 24330.3%21730.3%2033.2%1326.0%1825.3%1628.0%4229.8%6832.9%8531.3% 26533.2%23332.6%2136.4%1019.8%1623.1%1424.2%4833.6%6229.9%11542.5% 658.2%527.3%58.8%23.6%1014.0%610.4%96.0%199.0%207.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 410Page 410 Q26j Text messages Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 4528.6%17528.2%1026.1%1436.1%1527.7%1924.2%2532.4%5337.3%4532.1% 4729.9%18930.5%1438.9%614.9%1629.2%2632.6%2938.3%4632.1%4532.1% 5333.7%20633.2%923.0%1640.1%2240.5%2430.6%2026.5%3423.8%4532.4% 137.9%508.1%411.9%38.9%12.5%1012.6%22.8%106.8%53.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 411Page 411 Q26j Text messages Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 4927.8%4024.7%2242.2%11528.3%1634.3%3948.0%4436.8%4026.4%6423.9% 6436.3%5232.0%1121.7%11528.3%1634.4%2024.1%3831.3%6240.2%7126.5% 4927.6%6137.0%1631.6%13934.1%714.2%1822.1%2924.3%4227.6%12045.1% 158.3%106.3%24.4%389.2%817.1%55.8%97.6%95.9%124.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 412Page 412 Q26j Text messages Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 1725.4%4418.8%4732.0%3933.1%5341.4%17928.9%4229.1%19027.6%3434.7% 1521.8%7632.6%5335.9%3630.7%3426.6%19331.3%3725.4%21531.3%2425.1% 3348.2%9841.7%4027.1%2924.3%3628.2%19731.9%5739.4%23634.3%2525.6% 34.5%167.0%75.1%1412.0%53.8%497.9%96.1%476.8%1414.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 413Page 413 Q26j Text messages Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 11928.4%10428.9%20428.5%1533.1%14929.2%1820.3%831.2%4733.6%513.7% 12730.4%11030.5%22531.5%1430.8%16732.7%2427.0%624.5%3928.0%718.1% 14534.7%11331.4%23933.4%1125.6%15229.9%4045.7%1141.3%4028.8%2259.9% 276.6%339.2%476.6%510.5%428.2%67.1%13.0%139.6%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 414Page 414 Q26j Text messages Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 7521.9%7742.5%1130.7%2830.8%1833.5% 10329.9%5027.7%1234.0%3740.2%1527.7% 13940.5%4223.4%1027.4%1718.7%1831.9% 267.7%126.4%37.8%910.3%46.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 415Page 415 Q26k Automated voice calls via telephone Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 11113.9%10414.6%59.0%714.6%79.8%915.4%2819.6%2713.0%3312.3% 18423.0%17123.9%1118.8%1326.5%2028.5%1626.4%3021.5%5225.4%5219.2% 43854.7%38353.7%3762.1%2957.3%3244.6%2949.4%7351.4%11655.8%16058.9% 678.4%567.8%610.1%11.5%1217.2%58.9%117.5%125.8%269.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 416Page 416 Q26k Automated voice calls via telephone Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 2314.8%8413.5%820.3%616.4%1223.5%1620.6%1012.7%1610.9%1913.6% 3622.6%14323.0%820.9%1229.7%1426.0%2127.2%2127.5%4128.6%2518.0% 8755.1%34054.8%1643.0%1744.0%2648.0%3342.5%4357.0%7653.1%9064.9% 127.5%548.7%615.9%49.9%12.6%89.7%22.8%117.5%53.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 417Page 417 Q26k Automated voice calls via telephone Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 2514.1%2313.9%815.5%5613.7%818.1%1315.6%1916.0%1610.6%3914.6% 4324.2%4225.5%1428.2%8520.9%919.1%1821.4%3428.4%4730.4%5320.0% 9855.4%8954.6%2548.8%22455.2%2145.4%5060.8%6150.4%7951.3%15859.4% 116.3%106.0%47.5%4210.2%817.4%22.1%65.2%127.7%166.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 418Page 418 Q26k Automated voice calls via telephone Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 1014.3%2611.0%2516.7%1915.8%1914.8%9315.0%1610.9%8912.9%1818.1% 1015.3%4820.5%3825.6%3530.0%3426.7%15224.5%2718.9%16323.7%1920.1% 4566.2%14461.4%7550.7%5445.7%7155.7%32652.7%9363.8%38355.8%4950.2% 34.2%177.1%107.0%108.4%42.8%487.7%96.4%537.7%1111.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 419Page 419 Q26k Automated voice calls via telephone Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 419.8%6919.1%9713.5%817.6%6412.6%910.1%622.2%2618.8%616.0% 9723.2%8423.2%16623.3%1226.9%12524.6%1921.7%624.5%3021.4%39.1% 24658.6%18350.8%39855.8%2146.7%28155.1%5057.1%1453.3%6949.1%2466.6% 358.4%256.8%537.4%48.7%397.7%1011.1%--1510.7%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 420Page 420 Q26k Automated voice calls via telephone Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Veryeffective Somewhateffective Not at all Not sure /Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 3610.6%3619.8%926.1%1112.0%1018.8% 6519.0%5228.8%1029.9%3133.9%1119.4% 22164.5%7943.8%1440.1%3841.5%2953.4% 205.9%147.5%13.8%1212.7%58.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 421Page 421 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Emails Text s Face to face Newsletter /Letter, flyers Phone call,cell phoneservices TV / Radiocommercials Public forum /Meetings Skywriting Billing service/ Billingstatements Mailing /Snail mail 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 60.7%60.8%----00.6%00.7%--21.0%31.0% 70.9%70.9%--11.2%11.9%00.7%00.3%21.0%20.8% 50.6%20.3%34.6%11.2%--35.1%--10.4%10.3% 111.4%81.2%34.5%------21.6%73.5%20.6% 70.9%60.8%11.3%11.2%--00.7%21.1%21.0%20.8% 50.6%50.7%--------10.4%10.7%31.1% 50.6%30.5%12.3%11.2%--12.3%21.4%--10.3% 50.6%40.5%--------21.5%--31.1% 60.7%30.4%12.3%--------21.0%31.3% 30.4%30.4%----------10.4%20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 422Page 422 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Emails Text s Face to face Newsletter /Letter, flyers Phone call,cell phoneservices TV / Radiocommercials Public forum /Meetings Skywriting Billing service/ Billingstatements Mailing /Snail mail 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 21.1%40.6%----00.8%22.2%------ 10.5%61.0%------11.3%--10.9%10.7% 42.8%10.1%11.7%------10.8%10.4%32.4% 10.8%101.6%--12.4%--11.7%--10.9%32.1% 42.4%30.5%--12.4%23.7%00.5%10.8%--11.0% 32.0%20.3%------11.2%10.8%10.9%10.7% 10.8%30.6%--------11.9%10.4%11.0% --20.3%------------32.2% --40.7%12.1%----11.7%----10.6% 10.4%20.3%----11.2%------10.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 423Page 423 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Emails Text s Face to face Newsletter /Letter, flyers Phone call,cell phoneservices TV / Radiocommercials Public forum /Meetings Skywriting Billing service/ Billingstatements Mailing /Snail mail 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 31.5%21.1%--10.3%00.9%----00.3%31.0% 31.5%21.0%--30.7%00.9%11.6%10.5%10.6%-- 10.4%10.9%--30.7%00.9%10.8%10.5%31.8%10.3% 42.3%21.0%--61.4%--11.1%11.1%10.4%62.1% 10.8%----51.4%12.9%10.8%11.1%10.5%10.2% 10.7%21.5%--10.3%--00.5%11.0%--20.9% --10.5%--41.0%--11.5%11.1%--20.8% 10.4%----41.1%--33.7%------ --10.8%--30.7%------10.9%20.6% 10.8%----20.4%--------20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 424Page 424 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Emails Text s Face to face Newsletter /Letter, flyers Phone call,cell phoneservices TV / Radiocommercials Public forum /Meetings Skywriting Billing service/ Billingstatements Mailing /Snail mail 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 12.0%10.6%10.9%10.7%10.7%40.7%10.9%60.8%-- 12.0%10.6%21.3%21.8%00.3%50.8%21.6%71.0%-- 10.9%20.7%--00.4%32.0%50.8%00.3%40.6%11.3% 23.3%20.8%31.8%--32.3%101.6%10.9%91.3%11.4% ----21.3%21.5%21.9%71.1%--71.0%-- --10.6%21.3%11.0%00.3%40.6%10.9%50.7%-- 12.0%--10.5%--32.0%30.5%10.9%50.7%-- --------32.4%20.3%32.1%30.4%22.2% ----32.0%----30.6%10.5%40.6%-- 10.9%10.3%10.5%----30.5%--30.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 425Page 425 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Emails Text s Face to face Newsletter /Letter, flyers Phone call,cell phoneservices TV / Radiocommercials Public forum /Meetings Skywriting Billing service/ Billingstatements Mailing /Snail mail 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 00.1%51.4%60.8%--40.8%10.9%--10.6%-- 40.9%31.0%71.0%--50.9%10.9%--21.3%-- 51.1%10.2%50.6%11.4%30.6%21.8%--00.3%-- 61.3%61.5%111.6%--91.8%----21.3%-- 61.3%10.3%71.0%--40.8%10.9%13.0%11.0%-- 20.5%30.8%40.6%11.4%30.6%----21.3%-- 20.5%30.7%30.5%13.0%40.8%--13.0%---- 30.7%20.6%----10.3%--13.0%--38.3% 20.5%20.6%40.6%--40.8%10.9%13.0%---- 10.1%20.7%30.4%--10.1%21.8%13.0%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 426Page 426 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Emails Text s Face to face Newsletter /Letter, flyers Phone call,cell phoneservices TV / Radiocommercials Public forum /Meetings Skywriting Billing service/ Billingstatements Mailing /Snail mail 343 180 35 91 55 30.8%00.2%--00.5%-- 20.7%21.3%--00.5%-- 10.3%21.1%11.8%--11.1% 30.7%21.3%--11.0%47.3% 20.6%10.7%--21.9%11.7% 10.2%31.8%--10.7%00.8% 20.6%31.4%------ 30.9%10.7%------ 20.5%42.2%------ 20.6%-------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 427Page 427 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Educationalprograms Other (uniqueresponses) No additionalmethods /Nothingcomes tomind Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 30.3%30.4%----------31.3%-- 101.2%60.9%23.9%--11.3%--10.9%52.5%30.9% 67183.9%60985.3%4474.1%4691.6%5983.4%5084.5%12185.8%16780.6%22884.1% 648.0%567.8%47.0%35.9%912.8%47.5%106.9%188.7%207.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 428Page 428 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Educationalprograms Other (uniqueresponses) No additionalmethods /Nothingcomes tomind Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 --30.4%--13.4%--------11.0% 42.7%60.9%----11.5%11.0%11.6%10.5%21.6% 12679.9%52985.3%3183.2%3385.6%4483.6%6683.4%7193.9%12788.7%11179.9% 127.9%518.1%513.0%26.1%59.3%68.0%11.8%107.1%107.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 429Page 429 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Educationalprograms Other (uniqueresponses) No additionalmethods /Nothingcomes tomind Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10.8%----10.3%----11.1%10.9%-- 20.9%21.0%11.5%61.5%----10.7%63.7%20.8% 14783.3%14387.3%4486.2%33883.0%3678.0%7489.6%10184.0%12380.0%23989.6% 148.1%85.2%612.3%348.3%818.1%21.9%118.9%1711.0%93.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 430Page 430 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Educationalprograms Other (uniqueresponses) No additionalmethods /Nothingcomes tomind Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 ------32.3%--30.4%--30.4%-- --73.1%--11.1%11.0%71.2%10.9%101.4%-- 5987.0%20587.3%12786.3%9883.5%10683.4%52284.3%12585.6%57984.3%8284.8% 12.0%146.0%96.3%119.1%75.3%457.3%107.2%507.2%1010.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 431Page 431 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Educationalprograms Other (uniqueresponses) No additionalmethods /Nothingcomes tomind Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 --30.7%30.4%--30.5%-------- 61.4%30.8%101.4%--51.1%22.7%01.2%21.3%-- 34983.3%30785.3%60684.8%3987.9%42783.9%7787.6%2283.8%11682.9%2980.0% 368.5%256.9%527.3%36.3%407.9%44.4%13.0%1510.6%411.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 432Page 432 Q27 Effective methods of communication Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Educationalprograms Other (uniqueresponses) No additionalmethods /Nothingcomes tomind Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 10.4%10.7%------ 20.5%21.2%----23.0% 29686.4%14580.2%3085.2%8087.9%4683.8% 247.0%147.8%513.0%88.4%12.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 433Page 433 QD1 Gender Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Male Female Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 41952.4%38353.6%2746.6%2344.9%3752.2%2441.4%6747.6%10148.8%16661.4% 36045.0%31844.5%2746.5%2754.3%2738.2%3356.4%7150.4%10048.2%10237.5% 212.6%131.9%46.8%00.8%79.6%12.3%31.9%63.0%31.2% Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Male Female Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 7245.7%33754.4%1746.8%1333.1%2954.0%4556.9%3951.1%8659.9%8561.2% 7950.2%27043.5%2053.2%2666.9%2446.0%3341.5%3748.9%5639.1%5338.1% 64.1%132.1%------11.7%--10.9%10.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 434Page 434 QD1 Gender Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Male Female Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 9151.5%8753.0%2141.0%22054.1%2248.2%3037.1%5445.3%9662.9%16160.4% 8246.7%7545.9%2853.8%17543.1%1838.3%5262.9%6352.5%5636.5%10639.6% 31.9%21.1%35.2%112.7%613.5%--32.2%10.6%-- Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Male Female Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3044.3%14762.6%7953.4%6050.8%6349.7%32552.6%7853.4%38055.4%2930.4% 3855.7%8536.4%6946.6%5647.6%6148.2%27945.0%6242.7%29542.9%6162.6% --21.0%--21.7%32.1%142.3%63.9%121.7%77.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 435Page 435 QD1 Gender Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Male Female Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 419100.0%--38654.0%1739.2%26952.7%4449.5%1453.9%7151.0%2158.8% --360100.0%31744.4%2454.7%22644.4%4349.2%1246.1%6446.0%1439.0% ----111.6%36.1%152.9%11.3%--43.0%12.3% Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Male Female Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 18955.1%8345.8%1954.1%5661.4%3258.9% 15344.6%9451.9%1645.9%3336.7%2137.9% 10.4%42.2%--21.9%23.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 436Page 436 Q2 Age Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 141.8%131.8%00.7%48.0%1014.7%-------- 324.0%273.7%34.7%1325.1%1217.1%34.3%21.6%20.8%10.3% 8210.3%7610.6%46.5%1529.8%1621.8%1627.6%2417.3%73.3%41.5% 12015.0%10915.3%1017.2%612.0%1115.2%1017.5%3423.8%4722.9%124.4% 15319.2%13218.5%2034.1%510.0%1014.4%1219.9%2618.3%5024.4%5018.5% 26733.4%24934.9%1321.4%815.1%1216.9%711.9%2820.1%5727.8%15456.9% 13116.4%10815.1%915.3%----1118.8%2719.0%4320.9%5018.5% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 437Page 437 Q2 Age Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 53.3%91.5%514.6%--11.2%00.5%------ 159.8%152.4%38.6%39.0%00.8%45.5%11.0%74.6%43.1% 2214.0%569.0%38.6%513.6%48.4%1012.7%911.7%2617.8%1611.2% 2918.6%8714.1%24.9%411.0%917.8%910.9%1621.2%1712.1%4129.1% 3421.6%11618.7%615.1%614.3%1019.7%2026.0%1519.8%2718.7%3928.3% 3723.5%22536.2%1334.3%1847.1%2547.4%2532.2%3343.4%5739.4%3424.7% 159.2%11218.1%513.9%25.0%34.8%1012.2%23.0%107.3%53.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 438Page 438 Q2 Age Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 21.1%31.6%--92.3%1431.2%-------- 21.1%10.4%48.3%256.1%3268.8%-------- 42.1%127.2%510.1%6115.1%--82100.0%------ 2212.3%2917.4%1019.7%6014.7%----120100.0%---- 3721.0%3521.1%815.5%7418.1%------153100.0%-- 7643.1%6137.5%1528.7%11528.2%--------267100.0% 3419.3%2414.6%917.8%6315.4%---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 439Page 439 Q2 Age Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 00.6%--10.9%00.3%21.9%71.2%53.4%--1312.9% 11.7%52.3%32.1%97.3%64.4%213.5%96.0%284.1%44.1% 11.4%93.8%1812.2%2218.9%2821.8%6510.5%149.4%649.3%1819.0% 69.4%93.9%2516.7%3529.5%4233.3%8613.8%2920.2%10615.5%1414.4% 811.3%5222.1%2819.3%2219.0%2923.0%12219.7%2517.0%14320.8%76.7% 4160.8%13356.8%5637.6%1411.6%1511.9%21234.3%4430.6%25336.8%1414.4% 1014.8%2611.1%1711.2%1613.4%53.8%10517.0%2013.5%9313.6%2828.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 440Page 440 Q2 Age Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 61.5%61.6%50.8%00.9%112.2%11.3%--21.6%-- 163.9%123.3%273.8%37.1%183.6%44.8%14.2%53.8%38.0% 307.3%5214.3%7110.0%614.5%5310.4%55.3%13.5%2014.6%38.3% 5413.0%6317.5%11416.0%511.2%8616.9%88.9%310.2%1913.9%411.3% 9623.0%5615.5%14320.1%511.6%10520.6%1516.8%311.4%2517.9%515.2% 16138.5%10629.3%25135.2%1535.1%14929.3%4045.7%1557.6%4532.3%1747.0% 5412.9%6618.3%10114.2%919.7%8717.0%1517.3%313.2%2215.9%410.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 441Page 441 Q2 Age Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 20.5%31.4%--10.7%23.1% 92.5%95.2%11.8%55.8%47.4% 205.9%3419.0%411.7%88.4%917.1% 3610.4%4525.2%924.5%1819.7%1017.6% 6719.5%3218.0%1131.2%2123.5%1017.2% 18052.6%3418.9%1029.1%1415.9%1526.8% 308.7%2212.3%11.8%2426.0%610.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 442Page 442 QD3 Hsld members Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 1 2 3 4 5 or more Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 688.5%598.3%69.6%59.5%22.8%46.6%85.4%157.4%3412.7% 23429.3%21129.6%2135.5%713.2%1724.2%1321.3%2719.1%5024.3%12144.5% 14818.5%13919.4%610.7%1019.6%1014.1%915.0%2719.1%4120.0%5118.7% 11814.7%10715.0%712.4%1325.0%1116.1%1119.4%3021.3%3818.3%145.3% 12815.9%11616.3%914.5%1020.7%1825.1%1626.8%2618.2%4019.6%176.3% 10513.1%8111.4%1017.4%611.9%1317.7%610.8%2416.9%2210.5%3412.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 443Page 443 QD3 Hsld members Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore 1 2 3 4 5 or more Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 1610.0%518.2%821.5%821.0%916.2%810.1%45.3%106.8%53.3% 3823.8%19331.2%717.5%717.8%1426.0%2329.0%2938.5%5135.8%3726.9% 3018.9%11318.2%411.9%615.4%917.8%1519.6%1722.1%3323.0%2920.8% 2314.8%9114.7%513.7%1128.7%712.9%1418.2%1215.7%2416.6%2719.1% 3421.4%8814.2%513.1%513.6%1425.6%1417.2%1216.2%2014.3%3928.0% 1711.1%8313.5%822.3%13.4%11.5%55.9%22.3%53.6%31.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 444Page 444 QD3 Hsld members Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older 1 2 3 4 5 or more Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 1910.5%159.0%610.9%297.2%23.4%11.1%65.3%85.0%4115.5% 6436.4%5131.0%1222.5%10826.5%511.8%910.8%97.6%5233.8%13349.9% 2916.6%3219.9%1121.4%7518.5%49.6%1821.9%2520.5%2818.6%5620.8% 1810.5%2716.3%712.9%6616.2%919.2%2227.1%3528.9%2214.6%145.1% 2313.2%2615.7%713.9%7117.5%817.2%2833.9%4235.3%2919.1%155.7% 2312.9%138.2%918.5%5714.1%1838.8%45.2%32.2%148.9%83.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 445Page 445 QD3 Hsld members Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others 1 2 3 4 5 or more Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 68100.0%--------477.7%1812.3%639.2%54.8% --234100.0%------19130.9%3725.3%22132.1%1212.8% ----148100.0%----11518.7%2617.9%13018.9%1717.3% ------118100.0%--8714.1%2315.9%10915.8%88.6% --------128100.0%10316.6%2315.6%10815.7%1919.8% ----------7412.0%1913.0%578.3%3636.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 446Page 446 QD3 Hsld members Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C 1 2 3 4 5 or more Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 307.2%3810.5%578.0%1124.7%356.9%1011.5%416.2%1510.6%410.3% 14735.0%8523.7%21830.5%1535.3%12925.3%3742.1%1244.4%4331.1%1336.5% 7918.8%6919.1%14320.0%24.5%10220.0%1415.8%310.2%2719.4%25.5% 6014.3%5615.5%11115.5%715.9%8416.5%910.6%27.7%1712.3%514.0% 6315.1%6117.1%12116.9%25.1%9117.8%44.8%28.4%2316.7%719.6% 409.5%5114.1%659.0%614.6%6913.5%1315.1%313.2%149.9%514.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 447Page 447 QD3 Hsld members Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er 1 2 3 4 5 or more Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 4312.5%74.0%26.6%33.2%713.1% 13840.1%2815.3%924.8%2123.5%1731.2% 6519.0%3821.3%1234.7%1111.8%1120.2% 4412.8%3318.2%412.1%2224.2%59.4% 339.6%5631.0%718.9%1819.4%1018.0% 216.0%1910.3%13.0%1617.8%48.1% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 448Page 448 QD4 Home ownership status Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Own Rent Live withfamily, others Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 68785.9%61986.7%5389.7%3468.3%4968.5%4880.6%11782.7%18991.4%25092.3% 9411.7%7710.8%58.0%1530.5%2129.6%1016.3%2315.9%167.6%103.5% 30.4%30.4%------11.7%10.4%--10.5% 162.0%152.0%12.3%11.2%11.9%11.3%10.9%20.9%103.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 449Page 449 QD4 Home ownership status Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Own Rent Live withfamily, others Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 12277.3%54788.3%2052.6%3282.0%4787.6%6684.0%7092.5%13191.5%13798.3% 3019.2%629.9%1745.7%718.0%611.2%1316.0%67.5%128.5%21.7% 00.2%30.4%11.7%--11.2%-------- 53.3%91.4%-------------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 450Page 450 QD4 Home ownership status Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Own Rent Live withfamily, others Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 15688.2%14286.7%4690.2%34384.4%2860.3%6477.5%10688.4%14393.4%25394.8% 116.4%1911.3%59.8%5914.4%1634.7%1822.5%1311.1%74.3%135.0% 10.8%10.8%--00.1%00.8%--10.5%--10.2% 84.6%21.2%--41.1%24.2%----42.4%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 451Page 451 QD4 Home ownership status Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Own Rent Live withfamily, others Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 6393.2%22194.1%13088.0%10992.3%10884.4%53686.7%12686.3%687100.0%-- 56.8%114.7%1711.4%87.1%1813.8%6911.2%1812.3%--9497.0% --10.6%----21.3%20.3%10.7%--33.0% --10.6%10.6%10.7%10.5%111.7%10.6%---- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 452Page 452 QD4 Home ownership status Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Own Rent Live withfamily, others Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 38090.8%29581.9%64890.8%3374.5%43885.9%7787.7%2492.8%11581.9%3391.7% 286.7%5916.4%578.0%1022.4%6011.8%1011.0%27.2%2216.1%-- 10.3%20.4%30.4%--30.5%00.4%------ 92.1%51.3%60.8%13.0%91.8%10.9%--32.0%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 453Page 453 QD4 Home ownership status Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Own Rent Live withfamily, others Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 32494.4%15184.0%2468.4%7987.3%4785.1% 144.0%2715.0%1131.6%88.4%814.9% 00.1%10.3%--22.2%-- 51.4%10.7%--22.2%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 454Page 454 QD5 Water bill responsibility Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Hsld pays billdirectly Someone elsepays bill Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 76495.5%68796.3%5695.4%4793.2%6591.0%5796.4%13696.3%20096.4%26095.9% 00.1%00.1%------00.7%------ 10.2%10.2%------------10.5% 344.2%253.5%34.6%36.8%69.0%22.9%53.7%73.6%103.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 455Page 455 QD5 Water bill responsibility Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Hsld pays billdirectly Someone elsepays bill Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 15094.7%59495.8%3388.9%39100.0%53100.0%7798.3%76100.0%143100.0%139100.0% ------------------ --10.2%-------------- 85.3%254.0%411.1%----11.7%------ Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 456Page 456 QD5 Water bill responsibility Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Hsld pays billdirectly Someone elsepays bill Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 16593.6%16299.2%4893.2%38895.3%3779.3%8097.6%120100.0%14997.4%267100.0% ------00.1%---------- --10.8%-------------- 116.4%--36.8%194.6%1020.7%22.4%--42.6%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 457Page 457 QD5 Water bill responsibility Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Hsld pays billdirectly Someone elsepays bill Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 68100.0%23399.7%14598.2%11799.5%12799.7%59395.8%14197.0%68799.9%7072.5% ----------00.1%--00.1%-- ----10.9%----10.2%----11.4% --10.3%10.9%10.5%00.3%243.9%43.0%--2526.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 458Page 458 QD5 Water bill responsibility Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Hsld pays billdirectly Someone elsepays bill Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 40797.1%34295.0%71099.4%4399.0%48795.6%8596.0%2597.0%13495.7%3391.7% 00.1%----01.0%------00.3%-- --10.4%10.2%--10.3%-------- 122.8%174.7%30.4%--214.1%44.0%13.0%64.0%38.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 459Page 459 QD5 Water bill responsibility Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Hsld pays billdirectly Someone elsepays bill Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 33898.6%17496.3%35100.0%8896.4%5498.3% --00.2%------ --10.7%------ 51.4%52.7%--33.6%11.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 460Page 460 QD6 Home type Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Single familydetachedhome Apartment Condominiumor townhome Mobile home Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 71489.3%64289.9%5288.8%4182.8%6185.4%4982.8%12588.7%18790.4%25092.3% ------------------ 435.4%415.7%34.4%611.7%45.6%813.6%96.2%104.6%72.7% 00.1%00.1%------00.7%------ 425.3%314.3%46.8%35.6%69.0%22.9%75.2%105.0%135.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 461Page 461 QD6 Home type Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Single familydetachedhome Apartment Condominiumor townhome Mobile home Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 13787.0%56090.2%2978.1%3180.9%5195.6%6988.4%7497.4%13493.6%13496.4% ------------------ 138.1%314.9%49.9%616.7%24.4%89.9%22.6%85.4%21.4% ------------------ 85.0%304.8%412.0%12.4%--11.7%--10.9%32.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 462Page 462 QD6 Home type Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Single familydetachedhome Apartment Condominiumor townhome Mobile home Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 15286.0%15494.1%4688.9%36289.2%3370.9%7186.9%11494.8%14393.5%25194.2% ------------------ 137.6%84.8%35.0%204.8%37.5%67.8%54.1%53.3%155.8% ------00.1%---------- 116.4%21.1%36.0%245.9%1021.6%45.3%11.1%53.2%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 463Page 463 QD6 Home type Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Single familydetachedhome Apartment Condominiumor townhome Mobile home Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 5784.1%21893.0%14396.8%11194.1%12194.5%56190.8%12585.9%64894.4%6062.0% ------------------ 1115.9%156.6%21.3%75.9%21.7%284.6%128.3%324.7%1010.2% ----------00.1%--00.1%-- --10.4%31.8%--53.7%284.6%95.9%60.9%2727.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 464Page 464 QD6 Home type Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Single familydetachedhome Apartment Condominiumor townhome Mobile home Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 38692.1%31787.9%714100.0%--45088.3%7888.5%2597.0%13193.4%3083.4% ------------------ 174.0%246.7%--4399.0%377.2%66.6%--10.7%-- 00.1%----01.0%------00.3%-- 163.8%195.4%----234.5%44.9%13.0%85.6%616.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 465Page 465 QD6 Home type Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Single familydetachedhome Apartment Condominiumor townhome Mobile home Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 32093.3%15786.8%3292.2%8492.7%4887.9% ---------- 164.6%169.1%37.8%22.2%47.3% --00.2%------ 72.1%73.8%--55.1%34.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 466Page 466 QD7 Ethnicity Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Caucasian /White Latino /Hispanic African-American /Black AmericanIndian orAlaskanNative Asian --Korea-n, Japanese,Chinese, Viet-namese, Filipi-no or other A-sian PacificIslander MixedHeritage Other 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 34342.9%32445.4%1729.2%2039.0%1520.9%2440.0%4531.6%7636.8%16460.5% 18022.5%15722.0%1729.1%1631.1%2231.3%1932.8%3827.1%5124.9%3312.3% 354.4%314.4%00.7%35.6%45.5%57.8%106.9%73.4%72.6% 50.6%50.6%----------21.1%20.8% 9111.3%8311.6%34.5%510.0%913.2%58.9%2215.7%2813.5%217.7% 60.8%40.6%23.3%12.1%----31.9%20.9%10.3% 222.8%192.6%22.9%12.1%46.2%--43.1%41.9%93.1% 222.7%152.1%59.2%23.1%34.8%11.0%53.5%94.3%20.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 467Page 467 QD7 Ethnicity Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Caucasian /White Latino /Hispanic African-American /Black AmericanIndian orAlaskanNative Asian --Korea-n, Japanese,Chinese, Viet-namese, Filipi-no or other A-sian PacificIslander MixedHeritage Other 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 6440.7%27043.6%1539.2%1230.1%2953.8%3038.7%3951.0%6948.0%7150.7% 3924.6%13722.1%821.9%1436.0%2036.7%1924.8%1115.0%3423.5%2920.5% 95.4%264.3%11.7%49.4%23.5%67.6%45.9%64.0%107.3% 10.6%40.6%----------10.9%21.7% 1610.2%7111.4%410.0%49.4%--1114.1%1316.5%2013.8%1611.7% 21.0%30.6%------10.8%00.5%21.5%11.0% 53.4%162.6%26.1%24.4%23.5%33.6%33.9%53.5%10.7% 42.7%172.7%26.3%25.9%00.7%56.3%45.3%10.7%42.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 468Page 468 QD7 Ethnicity Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Caucasian /White Latino /Hispanic African-American /Black AmericanIndian orAlaskanNative Asian --Korea-n, Japanese,Chinese, Viet-namese, Filipi-no or other A-sian PacificIslander MixedHeritage Other 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 9051.1%8149.8%2446.5%14836.3%1022.4%2024.6%3629.7%6743.5%18067.6% 3419.0%3420.7%1325.0%9924.3%1225.9%3441.8%4537.8%3221.2%3412.8% 31.4%95.5%23.0%225.4%11.3%45.0%97.1%117.1%103.8% 10.4%10.4%12.6%20.5%------21.0%31.1% 169.1%158.9%59.7%5513.5%612.6%89.3%1814.9%2113.9%145.4% 10.4%00.3%--51.3%00.9%22.4%11.1%10.4%-- 10.7%63.8%11.8%143.4%24.7%67.5%32.7%31.7%41.7% 52.7%10.9%--153.8%37.0%11.6%54.3%53.0%72.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 469Page 469 QD7 Ethnicity Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Caucasian /White Latino /Hispanic African-American /Black AmericanIndian orAlaskanNative Asian --Korea-n, Japanese,Chinese, Viet-namese, Filipi-no or other A-sian PacificIslander MixedHeritage Other 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 4362.8%13858.8%6544.2%4437.4%3325.7%25641.4%7349.9%32447.2%1414.5% 710.5%2811.8%3826.0%3327.8%5643.9%14824.0%2517.1%15122.0%2828.5% 23.4%93.7%128.2%43.6%75.2%254.1%106.7%243.5%1111.4% --20.7%21.5%--10.5%30.5%10.9%50.7%-- 34.3%219.1%117.3%2218.7%1813.8%7812.6%85.3%7911.5%109.9% --20.8%21.3%11.1%--50.8%21.2%60.9%00.4% 45.2%73.1%42.9%--43.2%172.7%53.8%172.5%55.3% 45.5%62.7%31.8%43.2%54.1%172.7%53.2%192.8%32.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 470Page 470 QD7 Ethnicity Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Caucasian /White Latino /Hispanic African-American /Black AmericanIndian orAlaskanNative Asian --Korea-n, Japanese,Chinese, Viet-namese, Filipi-no or other A-sian PacificIslander MixedHeritage Other 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 18945.1%15342.4%32044.8%1635.7%18035.3%5765.1%2074.9%5942.3%2774.9% 8319.7%9426.0%15721.9%1738.4%14428.2%56.2%13.5%2719.0%410.3% 194.5%164.5%324.5%36.2%224.4%22.7%01.2%107.2%-- 30.7%20.5%50.6%--20.4%--13.0%21.3%-- 5613.3%339.3%8411.8%24.5%7715.1%44.0%01.2%96.2%13.4% 10.3%51.5%60.9%--51.0%10.9%--00.3%-- 133.1%82.1%202.7%12.1%91.8%10.9%14.2%96.6%25.7% 153.7%61.7%182.5%37.0%142.7%33.9%--43.0%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 471Page 471 QD7 Ethnicity Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Caucasian /White Latino /Hispanic African-American /Black AmericanIndian orAlaskanNative Asian --Korea-n, Japanese,Chinese, Viet-namese, Filipi-no or other A-sian PacificIslander MixedHeritage Other 343 180 35 91 55 343100.0%-------- --180100.0%------ ----35100.0%---- --------58.4% ------91100.0%-- --------611.7% --------2240.7% --------2239.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 472Page 472 QD7 Ethnicity Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 9612.0%7610.6%1221.0%47.1%1318.0%69.4%1410.2%2713.1%3211.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 473Page 473 QD7 Ethnicity Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 1811.4%7512.1%514.7%24.8%11.8%34.1%11.8%64.2%53.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 474Page 474 QD7 Ethnicity Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 2615.0%169.8%611.3%4711.5%1225.3%67.8%32.4%128.1%134.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 475Page 475 QD7 Ethnicity Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 68.4%229.3%106.8%108.1%53.6%7011.2%1711.9%629.0%2627.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 476Page 476 QD7 Ethnicity Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 409.6%4412.1%7210.2%36.1%5611.1%1416.4%312.0%2014.0%25.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 477Page 477 QD7 Ethnicity Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 ---------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 478Page 478 QD8 Household income Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Less than$25,000 $25,000 toless than$40,000 $40,000 toless than$60,000 $60,000 toless than$80,000 $80,000 toless than$100,000 $100,000 toless than$150,000 $150,000 ormore Not sure Prefer not toanswer 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 374.6%344.7%23.3%612.1%57.4%46.3%53.4%62.7%124.3% 394.9%365.0%34.7%612.0%57.0%22.6%53.4%84.1%134.8% 536.6%507.0%34.9%36.8%23.4%35.6%85.7%115.5%259.1% 799.8%719.9%610.0%611.6%811.6%712.4%1510.5%136.1%3010.9% 769.5%7210.1%22.6%48.5%1014.5%23.6%117.9%167.9%3211.7% 14317.9%13318.7%813.8%1122.1%1420.2%1424.2%2618.1%3617.6%4215.3% 13917.4%12016.8%1728.5%612.3%1115.2%1322.2%2718.7%4722.5%3613.3% 50.6%40.5%----00.5%--10.7%10.6%31.0% 22928.6%19427.2%1932.1%714.8%1420.2%1423.0%4531.6%6833.0%8029.6% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 479Page 479 QD8 Household income Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Less than$25,000 $25,000 toless than$40,000 $40,000 toless than$60,000 $60,000 toless than$80,000 $80,000 toless than$100,000 $100,000 toless than$150,000 $150,000 ormore Not sure Prefer not toanswer 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 95.8%254.1%37100.0%------------ 74.3%304.8%--39100.0%---------- 148.7%406.4%----53100.0%-------- 2314.6%569.0%------79100.0%------ 1811.3%579.3%--------76100.0%---- 2515.7%11318.2%----------143100.0%-- 2817.6%10517.0%------------139100.0% 21.0%40.6%-------------- 3320.9%19130.8%-------------- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 480Page 480 QD8 Household income Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Less than$25,000 $25,000 toless than$40,000 $40,000 toless than$60,000 $60,000 toless than$80,000 $80,000 toless than$100,000 $100,000 toless than$150,000 $150,000 ormore Not sure Prefer not toanswer 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 95.0%95.7%23.1%174.3%918.6%33.9%21.5%63.6%134.8% 52.8%85.2%23.0%235.8%37.5%56.4%43.5%63.6%186.9% 116.5%127.4%59.7%256.1%12.2%45.4%97.9%106.8%259.4% 137.3%159.0%23.0%4912.1%510.2%1012.2%97.1%2013.3%259.5% 158.5%1811.1%59.9%389.3%11.6%910.8%1613.4%159.8%3312.3% 2816.1%2817.4%1224.2%7418.2%714.2%2631.2%1714.5%2717.5%5721.2% 3318.4%2917.5%1020.0%6816.7%49.3%1619.0%4133.7%3925.7%3412.9% 20.9%----40.9%00.8%------51.8% 6134.4%4426.7%1427.0%10826.7%1735.7%911.1%2218.4%3019.6%5721.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 481Page 481 QD8 Household income Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Less than$25,000 $25,000 toless than$40,000 $40,000 toless than$60,000 $60,000 toless than$80,000 $80,000 toless than$100,000 $100,000 toless than$150,000 $150,000 ormore Not sure Prefer not toanswer 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 811.8%72.8%43.0%54.3%53.8%254.1%96.2%202.8%1818.1% 812.0%72.9%64.1%119.5%54.1%335.3%53.3%324.6%77.2% 912.7%145.9%96.4%75.8%1410.7%447.1%96.0%476.8%76.8% 811.6%239.7%1510.4%1412.2%1410.6%6310.2%138.8%669.6%1313.0% 45.9%2912.5%1711.3%1210.1%129.7%619.9%128.2%7010.2%65.8% 1014.3%5121.9%3322.3%2420.2%2016.0%11017.8%2919.7%13119.1%1212.5% 56.8%3716.0%2919.6%2722.6%3930.5%10316.7%3322.4%13719.9%22.5% 12.0%31.5%--00.3%--20.4%21.2%50.7%-- 1623.1%6326.8%3422.9%1815.0%1914.6%17728.6%3524.2%18026.2%3334.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 482Page 482 QD8 Household income Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Less than$25,000 $25,000 toless than$40,000 $40,000 toless than$60,000 $60,000 toless than$80,000 $80,000 toless than$100,000 $100,000 toless than$150,000 $150,000 ormore Not sure Prefer not toanswer 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 174.1%205.5%294.1%48.4%224.4%33.1%13.0%107.2%13.4% 133.1%267.2%314.4%614.7%163.1%55.3%14.2%1410.2%38.3% 296.9%246.8%517.1%25.3%305.9%33.1%01.2%1812.5%26.9% 4510.7%339.0%699.7%817.8%5611.0%44.9%--1611.3%26.9% 399.3%3710.3%7410.4%24.5%5210.3%1112.4%518.5%85.6%-- 8620.5%5615.6%13418.8%817.8%9318.3%2224.8%312.5%1913.6%615.8% 8520.3%5314.7%13418.8%24.5%9117.9%1214.2%519.2%2216.0%821.9% 20.4%41.0%50.7%--10.3%00.4%--10.7%26.9% 10424.8%10829.9%18626.0%1227.1%14728.8%2831.8%1141.4%3222.9%1130.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 483Page 483 QD8 Household income Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Less than$25,000 $25,000 toless than$40,000 $40,000 toless than$60,000 $60,000 toless than$80,000 $80,000 toless than$100,000 $100,000 toless than$150,000 $150,000 ormore Not sure Prefer not toanswer 343 180 35 91 55 154.2%84.5%11.8%44.1%58.4% 123.4%147.8%410.4%44.0%47.3% 298.3%2010.8%25.4%--24.1% 308.9%1910.8%617.1%1112.2%815.2% 3911.3%116.3%412.8%1313.8%713.5% 6920.0%3418.7%616.4%2021.7%917.1% 7120.6%2915.8%1029.2%1617.9%915.5% 10.4%10.7%----00.7% 7922.9%4424.5%27.0%2426.2%1018.2% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 484Page 484 S1 Service address city Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 51063.7%44962.9%4068.7%3162.3%5070.3%3864.1%9768.8%14570.1%14854.6% 8811.0%8011.2%69.9%59.9%57.1%813.8%117.4%209.8%3914.4% 263.3%243.4%23.2%11.2%23.1%11.3%53.2%52.4%134.8% 14017.5%12818.0%712.6%918.1%1115.5%1118.6%2416.7%3014.7%5520.1% 364.5%324.5%35.6%48.5%34.1%12.1%53.8%63.0%166.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 485Page 485 S1 Service address city Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 9761.7%40264.9%2259.9%1640.5%3056.7%5671.3%5268.9%9365.2%9165.7% 2012.9%6410.3%37.3%512.0%35.1%45.5%1114.4%2215.2%129.0% 53.2%203.3%12.1%12.8%00.6%--56.4%32.3%53.6% 2314.9%11218.0%1027.3%1436.8%1833.0%1620.1%810.3%1913.3%2216.0% 127.3%223.5%13.3%37.8%24.7%23.2%--64.0%85.7% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 486Page 486 S1 Service address city Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 10861.4%9759.3%2447.6%27868.4%3063.6%5364.6%8671.7%10568.5%14956.0% 2413.7%1810.7%1324.4%348.3%511.6%55.7%86.5%159.7%4015.1% 73.9%53.2%36.2%112.7%12.4%11.1%32.2%31.9%155.7% 2916.5%3018.5%1121.8%6917.0%816.2%2025.0%1916.2%2516.3%4516.9% 84.5%148.3%--153.6%36.2%33.7%43.4%53.6%176.4% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 487Page 487 S1 Service address city Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 3551.6%12955.0%10269.0%8471.4%9171.0%39363.6%9062.0%43863.7%6364.5% 1014.9%3715.8%149.4%97.9%43.3%6911.2%1610.7%7711.2%1010.4% 46.3%125.0%31.8%21.7%21.7%233.6%42.6%243.5%21.9% 1521.8%4318.5%2718.4%1714.6%2318.3%11117.9%2617.7%11516.7%2223.2% 45.5%135.6%21.4%54.3%75.6%233.7%107.1%334.8%-- Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 488Page 488 S1 Service address city Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 26964.1%22662.8%45063.0%3783.7%510100.0%-------- 4410.4%4312.0%7810.9%613.2%--88100.0%------ 143.4%123.4%253.6%------26100.0%---- 7117.0%6417.9%13118.3%13.1%------140100.0%-- 215.1%143.9%304.2%----------36100.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 489Page 489 S1 Service address city Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul Spring Valley Other 343 180 35 91 55 18052.4%14479.6%2263.8%7784.9%3055.1% 5716.7%53.0%26.7%43.9%59.1% 205.7%10.5%00.9%00.3%23.4% 5917.2%2714.8%1028.6%99.5%1628.6% 277.9%42.1%--11.4%23.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 490Page 490 S2 Account setup year Base Overall Overall Satisfaction(Q1) Satisfied Dissatisfie-d Account Setup Year 2019 2017-18 2015-16 2010-14 2000-09 Before2000 2019 2018-17 2016-15 2014-10 2009-00 Before 2000 800 714 59 50 71 59 142 207 271 506.3%446.1%47.5%50100.0%---------- 718.9%628.7%47.0%--71100.0%-------- 597.4%527.3%59.1%----59100.0%------ 14217.7%12717.8%1119.1%------142100.0%---- 20725.9%18025.2%1728.7%--------207100.0%-- 27133.9%24934.9%1728.5%----------271100.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 491Page 491 S2 Account setup year Base Contacted District inPast 6 Months (Q7,8) Yes No Hsld Income (QD8) Less than$25K $25K to <$40K $40K to <$60K $60K to <$80K $80K to <$100K $100K to <$150K $150K ormore 2019 2018-17 2016-15 2014-10 2009-00 Before 2000 158 620 37 39 53 79 76 143 139 2817.8%203.2%616.3%615.5%36.4%67.4%45.6%117.7%64.4% 2012.8%518.2%514.1%512.9%24.5%810.5%1013.6%1410.1%117.8% 148.6%447.1%410.0%24.0%36.2%79.3%22.8%1410.0%139.4% 2817.6%11017.7%513.1%512.3%815.3%1518.9%1114.7%2617.9%2719.1% 2314.6%17428.1%615.0%821.7%1121.5%1316.2%1621.4%3625.4%4733.5% 4528.6%22135.6%1231.5%1333.7%2546.2%3037.7%3241.9%4229.0%3625.9% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 492Page 492 S2 Account setup year Base Frequency of Reading Newsletter (Q24,25) Always Sometimes Rarely/Ne-ver Don't recallreceiving it Age (QD2) Under 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older 2019 2018-17 2016-15 2014-10 2009-00 Before 2000 176 163 51 406 46 82 120 153 267 52.6%63.9%23.2%389.3%1735.8%1518.2%65.0%53.3%82.8% 84.4%116.8%35.6%4811.9%2348.8%1618.9%119.0%106.7%124.5% 74.1%148.6%510.7%327.9%35.5%1619.8%108.6%127.6%72.6% 2011.3%2917.8%1121.7%8120.0%24.9%2429.8%3428.0%2616.9%2810.7% 5229.4%3320.0%1530.1%10626.0%23.4%78.4%4739.5%5032.9%5721.5% 8548.1%7043.0%1528.6%10124.9%11.7%44.8%129.9%5032.7%15457.8% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 493Page 493 S2 Account setup year Base Hsld Members (QD3) 1 2 3 4 5 or more Taken Act ions t o Redu-ce Water Usage (Q19) Yes No Home OwnershipStatus (QD4) Own Rent/Livew/others 2019 2018-17 2016-15 2014-10 2009-00 Before 2000 68 234 148 118 128 618 145 687 97 57.0%72.8%106.7%1310.6%108.1%355.7%96.5%345.0%1515.8% 23.0%177.4%106.8%119.8%1814.0%548.7%1610.7%497.1%2121.8% 45.7%135.4%96.0%119.7%1612.4%528.4%74.7%486.9%1111.0% 811.2%2711.6%2718.3%3025.6%2620.2%10817.4%2618.1%11717.0%2323.9% 1522.5%5021.4%4128.0%3832.2%4031.7%16827.2%3221.9%18927.5%1616.3% 3450.5%12151.5%5134.3%1412.1%1713.5%20232.6%5538.0%25036.4%1111.3% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 494Page 494 S2 Account setup year Base Gender (QD1) Male Female Home Type (QD6) Singlefamily Condo/Ot-her Service Address City Chula Vista El Cajon Jamul SpringValley Other C 2019 2018-17 2016-15 2014-10 2009-00 Before 2000 419 360 714 44 510 88 26 140 36 235.4%277.6%415.8%613.4%316.1%55.6%12.4%96.5%411.7% 378.9%277.6%618.5%49.0%509.8%55.7%28.4%117.9%38.0% 245.8%339.2%496.8%819.1%387.4%89.3%13.0%117.8%13.4% 6716.1%7119.8%12517.6%919.8%9719.1%1111.9%517.4%2417.0%514.7% 10124.1%10027.7%18726.2%1021.8%14528.5%2023.1%519.2%3021.7%617.1% 16639.7%10228.2%25035.1%716.8%14829.1%3944.4%1349.7%5539.1%1645.0% Appendix AAppendix A Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020Otay Water District Customer Service Survey 2020 CrosstabulationsCrosstabulations True North Research, Inc.© 2020True North Research, Inc.© 2020 Page 495Page 495 S2 Account setup year Base Ethnicity (QD7) Caucasian/-White Latino/His-panic Af-America-n/Black AsianAmerican Mixed/Oth-er 2019 2018-17 2016-15 2014-10 2009-00 Before 2000 343 180 35 91 55 205.7%168.6%38.0%55.5%46.6% 154.3%2212.4%411.2%910.4%814.3% 246.9%1910.7%513.2%55.8%11.1% 4513.0%3821.3%1027.8%2224.5%1221.9% 7622.2%5128.5%720.0%2830.7%1731.2% 16447.8%3318.5%719.8%2123.1%1424.9% STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING:Regular Board MEETING DATE:March 11, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Jose Martinez General Manager W.O./G.F. NO: N/A DIV. NO. N/A APPROVED BY: Jose Martinez, General Manager SUBJECT:General Manager’s Report ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES: GIS: •Joint Effort of Image Acquisition – Over the last 12 years, Otayhas been working with various public agencies, districts and interested parties to acquire county-wide aerial imagery. Thisregional approach to acquisition has been beneficial for all; specifically, this has saved the District over $20,000 dollars.Staff recently signed the purchase agreement with the San DiegoRegional Image Consortium for the new sub 3” resolution image. Human Resources: •Water Utilities Human Resources Consortium (WUHRC) – HR hosted the WUHRC quarterly meeting at the San Diego County Water Authority.The WUHRC group consists of HR staff from all water agencies in theSan Diego County Region. The group meets on a quarterly basis for networking and to discuss HR best practices and trends. •New Hires/Promotions/Recruitments: o The Board of Directors appointed Jose Martinez to serve as the District’s next General Manager. Mr. Martinez served as theAssistant Chief of Water Operations since 2014 and has been with the District since 2012. Mr. Martinez has more than 18 years ofprogressive management and leadership experience in private andpublic organizations within highly regulated utility industries. o The District is recruiting for a Utility Services Manager, Engineering Manager, Utility Worker I/II, and Reclamation PlantSupervisor. o The District is preparing to recruit for an Electrician I/II. Agenda Item 15 2 IT Operations: • EDEN Upgrade – Staff formally kicked off the annual Eden Management System upgrade, version 5.22, which will include functional upgrades and a new validation testing process. For this year’s criteria, all testing was held in the Computer Lab with IT staff coordinating this task. After the completion of scheduled tests, staff will perform a District-wide upgrade in early March. • Monthly Board Meeting Audio Streaming - During the District’s February Board meeting, 16 customers engaged in the listening of the live monthly meeting. The live audio broadcast was aired for 1 hour and 29 minutes. Purchasing & Facilities: • Public Service Conference Room Update - As part of the Lobby Enhancement program, Grace Builders has completed the expansion of the Public Service (PS) Conference room, which incorporates various security features. Southwest Millworks, Inc., the Customer Service (CS) desk fabricator, is finalizing shop drawings to face the PS desk with the same ballistic liner and paneling utilized in the CS desk as well as a new counter surface, which will be topped with ballistic barrier glass. Safety & Security: • Update -- America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 (AWIA 2018) – Staff is on schedule to complete and have parts 1 of 2 of the Risk and Resilience Assessment ready for meetings with stakeholders on March 11th. The target date for certification and submission to the EPA is March 28 – 30. • Board Room Active Shooter Risk Assessment – The Lizardi Group will be conducting a risk assessment of the Board Room on March 9th. The results will be available for review within 2 weeks after assessment completion. • Prescription Safety Glasses Voucher Program – This new program has been completed and is currently in place. The vouchers facilitate the procurement of prescription safety glasses for qualified District staff. Finance: • Sewer Cost of Service Study -– Staff is working with HDR to complete a Sewer Cost of Service Study. The purpose of the study is to examine alternative rate structures that will provide for more stabilized revenue and rates as the sewer operation has and will be issuing debt. Staff is looking at modifying the structure to change from a one-year winter average to a multi-year winter average for residential customers. The study and evaluation of 3 alternatives will be presented at the May Board meeting. Staff will be requesting that the Board direct staff to incorporate the recommended changes into the budget, and to mail the 218 notices to the sewer customers. • Capacity Fee Study -– Staff is working with HDR to complete a Capacity Fee Study. Due to significant changes in construction costs over the past few years, staff determined that a study should be undertaken to ensure the District’s capacity fees are sufficient. In addition, staff will recommend consolidating the capacity and new water supply fees into a single capacity fee. The consolidation will reduce and simplify the capacity fee, and also help manage the risk of stranding new water supply funds. Staff is planning to present an informational item regarding the study at the April Board meeting, followed by meetings with Developers in April. The final results of the Capacity Fee Study are anticipated to be presented for approval at the June Board meeting. • Annual SDRMA Insurance Renewal -– On February 20, 2020, Finance staff filed the FY 2020-21 property, liability, and workers’ compensation renewal forms with the Special District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA). Along with filing the renewal forms, District staff also reviewed and verified the list of covered assets; including facilities, vehicles/trailers and mobile equipment. • Cross-Connection Control Policy Handbook -– Assembly Bill 1671, signed into law in October 2017, requires the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to adopt standards for backflow protection and cross-connection control through the adoption of a policy handbook. Staff participated in the stakeholder’s workshop on February 20th remotely via the web. SWRCB plans to have a draft of the policy handbook in June. Staff has been working with the AWWA Backflow Programs Committee to make recommendations/comments regarding this policy. Staff will continue to keep the General Manager and Board updated on this process. Financial Reporting: • The financial reporting for January 31, 2020 is as follows: o For the seventh month ending January 31, 2020, there are total revenues of $62,969,525 and total expenses of $61,110,817. The revenues exceeded expenses by $1,858,708. 4 • The financial reporting for investments for Januarys 31, 2019 is as follows: o The market value shown in the Portfolio Summary and in the Investment Portfolio Details as of January 31, 2020 total $73,934,473 with an average yield to maturity of 1.935%. The total earnings year-to-date are $843,514. ENGINEERING AND WATER SYSTEM OPERATIONS: Engineering: • 870-2 Pump Station Replacement: This project consists of a new Pump Station to replace the existing Low Head 571-1 and High Head 870-1 Pump Stations. The project also includes the replacement of the existing liner and cover for the 571-1 Reservoir (36.7 MG). In February 2020, the station’s contractor Pacific Hydrotech continued work to perform initial unwitnessed testing of the station’s equipment. Witness testing will be performed as part of the station’s start-up activities, which is scheduled for March 2020. The contractor also completed the installation of the station’s exterior facilities including curbs and drainage V-ditches. The area around the pump station was also paved. Environmental compliance during construction continues to be monitored by Helix Environmental. The project is within the budget and the construction contract is scheduled to reach substantial completion in April 2020. (P2083 & P2562) • Campo Road Sewer Replacement: The existing sanitary sewer from Avocado Road to Singer Lane was undersized and located in environmentally sensitive areas that are difficult to access. The Campo Road Sewer Replacement project installed approximately 7,420 linear feet of new 15-inch gravity sewer pipe and includes abandonment of the existing sewer main. During the month of February 2020, an operational review of the project was completed, and punch list items were identified. Wier Construction, the contractor for the project, is scheduling completion of those punch list items required for contract acceptance. The project is within budget. (S2024) • Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Water Pipelines Replacement: The existing 1950’s steel water line along Vista Vereda between Vista Grande Road and Hidden Mesa Trail in the Hillsdale area has experienced leaks and is nearing the end of its useful life. The existing water main is located primarily within easements, many of which have had significant improvements performed over the years since the water line was constructed. This project replaced the existing water lines with new water lines in both Vista Vereda and 5 Hidden Mesa Road. During February 2020, the District’s construction contractor, Cass Arietta Construction, Inc., worked on completing punch list items required for contract acceptance. This punch list work includes restoration work associated with a contractor caused cellular concrete spill that occurred in November 2019. This project is within budget. (P2574 & P2625) • Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station Redundancy: This project will add a second pump to the District’s existing Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station (TLOPS) to provide redundancy. The redundant trailer vendor’s (Hawthorne) equipment builder subcontractor (Chillicothe Metal Company located in Illinois) delivered the trailer on February 27, 2020 and is being stored at the Operations employee parking lot until the District’s construction contractor Tharsos, Inc., is ready to complete the installation at the site. During February 2020, Tharsos, completed structural cut off walls, slab, and retaining wall foundation. Tharsos’s construction contract also includes mechanical, electrical, instrumentation and control, and installation of the trailer. It is anticipated that work on the project will be completed in June 2020. A change order in the amount of $57,133 was awarded to Tharsos for unrelated 1485-2 Pump Station diesel fuel remediation work (P1320, see project description below). Expenses for 1485-2 Pump Station remediation work (P1320) and TLOPS (P2619) will be tracked separately. (P2619) • 1485-2 Pump Station Diesel Fuel Leak: District staff, in coordination with the County of San Diego (County) Department of Environmental Health and the Office of Emergency Services, completed remediation of diesel fuel on the neighboring resident’s property and the area on District property from where the leak originated from June 5 through October 21, 2019. Staff solicited quotes to remediate the remainder of diesel fuel in the tight area at the rear of the site and awarded remaining work to Tharsos via a $57,133 change order to Tharsos’s TLOPS (P2619) construction contract. Expenses for 1485-2 Pump Station remediation work (P1320) and TLOPS (P2619) will be tracked separately. (P1320-010000) • 711-3 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement: The existing cover/liner at the 711-3 Reservoir was installed in 2002 and shows substantial deterioration that has necessitated its replacement. During November 2019, the construction contractor Layfield performed work to locate and repair leaks found at the Reservoir vault locations. On November 27, 2019, the 711-3 Reservoir was placed back into service and obtained substantial completion of the construction contract. Layfield is finalizing items required to close out the contract. This project is within budget. (P2561) 6 • Portable Trailer Mounted VFD Pumps: This project consists of procurement of a portable trailer mounted hydropneumatic pump station designed for deployment at up to seven (7) existing sites including four (4) hydropneumatic pump stations and three (3) small pressure zones each fed by a single gravity reservoir. The trailer vendor’s (Cortech Engineering) shop drawings were approved for Cortech’s trailer builder subcontractor (PremierFlow) on December 5, 2019. Delivery of the trailer is anticipated in April 2020 timeframe. This project is within budget and on schedule. (P2640) • 1200 Pressure Zone Improvements: The first phase of this project consists of connections for a Portable Trailer Mounted VFD Trailer Pump (P2640) at the 1200-1 Pump Station/978-1 Reservoir site in support of the 1200-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Project (CIP P2533) starting late fall. The first phase also includes demolition of an existing vault and widening of an existing driveway to provide access and a location to operate the trailer pump. In February 2020, the District’s contractor, Piperin, continued work on construction contract submittals. This project is within budget and the first phase work is scheduled to complete in May 2020. (P2653) • Dictionary Hill Water Line Replacement - 2019: This project consists of constructing 1,250 linear feet of 8-inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) water line and 60 linear feet of 12 PVC water line, including appurtenances, rehabilitation of services, and surface restoration. The project combines three (3) CIPs in order to create a larger bid package and evoke more interest from contractors. In order to avoid the County of San Diego’s large pavement restoration project, the CIPs had to be split into phases, this project being Phase 1. The project was advertised on December 19, 2019, and bids were opened on January 28, 2020. LB Civil submitted the lowest bid at $1,345,315, and a recommendation to award the contract as well as a budget increase of $500,000 to CIP P2609 will be presented at the March 11, 2020 Board Meeting. The project is on schedule. (P2608, P2609, P2655) • Hidden Mountain Sewage Pump Station Wet Well Renovation: This project will resolve septic conditions that exist at the pump station by eliminating dead storage areas below the pump operating level. The work will also add a sewer manhole to a segment of gravity sewer that is inaccessible to CCTV equipment. The scope of work consists of installing concrete fill with a wastewater flow channel in two (2) of the station wet wells, construction of a replacement sewer line between wet wells, new sewer manhole, appurtenances, and surface restoration. The project was advertised on December 16, 2019, and bids were opened on January 23, 2020. Kay Construction submitted the lowest bid at $142,940, and a recommendation to award the contract as well as a budget increase 7 of $65,000 to CIP S2070 will be presented at the March 11, 2020 Board Meeting. The project is on schedule for completion by July 2020. (S2070) • For the month of January 2020, the District sold 5 meters (11.5 EDUs), generating $102,087 in revenue. Projection for this period was 102.6 meters (122 EDUs), with a budgeted revenue of $1,073,544. Total revenue for Fiscal Year 2020 is $2,817,596 against the annual budget of $3,757,404. Water System Operations (reporting for January): • On Monday, January 6th, staff performed an emergency unplanned shutdown at 10108 Calle Marinero in Spring Valley to replace a defective 8-inch gate valve. Eight (8) residential meters were affected from 2:00 PM to 10:30 PM and a water trailer was available on site. • On Tuesday, January 7th, the Water Systems Supervisor prepared and sent the annual report for water discharges as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). • On Wednesday, January 8th, staff performed a planned shutdown on Pershing Road in Chula Vista as part of a developer project to remove a temporary end cap and install a permanent end cap at the end of the line/cul-de-sac. Ten (10) residential meters were affected from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM and a water trailer was available on site. • On Thursday, January 9th, staff responded to a leak on the PRV located on Jamacha Blvd and Pecos Street in Spring Valley. No customers were affected as staff repaired a sensing line. • On Thursday, January 16th, the Water Systems Supervisor and Leads met with Customer Service to discuss customer calls and how to enhance and make the current process more efficient. • On Saturday, January 18th, staff discovered that the 944-1 Pump Station Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS) did not transfer to normal utility power after an unplanned power outage and ran for approximately seventeen (17) hours, including the outage. Staff had the ATS repaired and serviced. The ATS maintenance schedule has also been adjusted to ensure the ATS performs properly in the future. • On Tuesday, January 21st, Disinfection staff scheduled the annual scrubber maintenance inspection and troubleshot the low-discharge 8 pressure with one of the pumps. During the inspection, it was discovered that one of the check valves needed replacement. Both check valves were replaced on Wednesday, February 12th. • On Wednesday, January 29th, staff performed a planned shutdown on Camino Elevado in Chula Vista to replace an 8-inch tee with an 8-inch line valve. Twenty-one (21) residential meters were affected from 8:00 AM to 1:30 PM and a water trailer was available on site. Purchases and Change Orders: • The following table summarizes purchases and Change Orders issued during the period from January 15, 2020 through February 14, 2020, that were within staff’s signatory authority: Date Action Amount Contractor/ Consultant Project 01/15/2020 P.O. $41,559.00 Grace Builders, Inc. Lobby Security Enhancements 01/16/2020 P.O. $2,026.44 Protective Life Insurance Company Annual Life Insurance Premium 01/21/2020 P.O. $2,602.00 Zoho Corporation Business Application Software License 02/05/2020 P.O. $3,600.00 24 Hour Elevator, Inc. Elevator Load Test 02/05/2020 P.O. $7,064.83 Watchlight Corporation Security Equipment Installation 02/13/2020 P.O. $9,500.00 OT Electric Board Room Audio Visual Upgrade Electrical Work 02/14/2020 P.O. $7,125.00 Castle Steel Buildings Warehouse Gutter Replacement 9 Water Conservation and Sales: • Water Conservation - January 2020 usage was 10% lower than January 2013. Since January 2019, customers have saved an average of 16% over 2013 levels. • The January potable water purchases were 1642 acre-feet which is 2.1% above the budget of 1,609 acre-feet. The cumulative purchases through January were 16,841 acre-feet which is 0.2% below the cumulative budget of 16,881 acre-feet. 10 • The January recycled water purchases and production were 44 acre-feet which is 32.7% below the budget of 65 acre-feet. The cumulative production and purchases through January were 2,187 acre-feet which is 3.5% below the cumulative budget of 2,265 acre- feet. • Potable, Recycled, and Sewer (Reporting up to the month of January): • Total number of potable water meters: 50,966. • Total number of sewer connections: 4,739. • Recycled water consumption for the month of January: o Total consumption: 62.4 acre-feet or 20,316,428 gallons. o Average daily consumption: 655,369 gallons per day. o Total cumulative recycled water consumption since January 1, 2019: 2,322 acre-feet. o Total number of recycled water meters: 734. 11 • Wastewater flows for the month of January: o Total basin flow: 1,649,194 gallons per day. This is decrease of 1.71 percent from January 2019. o Spring Valley Sanitation District flow to Metro: 547,228 gallons per day. o Total Otay flow: 1,101,935 gallons per day. o Flow processed at the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility: 498,387 gallons per day. o Flow to Metro from Otay Water District: 603,548 gallons per day. • By the end of January there were 6,750 wastewater EDUs. Otay Water District Investment Portfolio: 01/31/2020 $5,701,916 7.72% Total Cash and Investments: $73,815,901 (Book Value) 67,341,901 91.23% 1.05% D Banks (Passbook/Checking/CO) • Pools (LAIF & County) D Agencies & Corporate Notes Check Total 3,622.37 7,402.28 1,350.00 2,976.00 24,300.00 CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2053758 01/29/20 02071 ACCOUNTEMPS 551372720 01/16/20 TEMPORARY LABOR - ACCOUNTING 1,972.47 55029119 12/31/19 TEMPORARY LABOR - ACCOUNTING 1,266.72 55059592 01/06/20 TEMPORARY LABOR - ACCOUNTING 383.18 2053759 01/29/20 02071 ACCOUNTEMPS 54802462 11/26/19 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,158.80 54953396 12/18/19 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,158.80 55007620 12/25/19 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,158.80 55135022 01/15/20 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,126.51 54903514 12/11/19 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 945.29 54853885 12/04/19 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 695.28 55048211 01/01/20 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 695.28 55088613 01/08/20 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 463.52 2053827 02/12/20 02071 ACCOUNTEMPS 55176259 01/22/20 TEMPORARY LABOR - CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,111.88 1,111.88 2053870 02/19/20 17989 ADS CORP 22446.22-1219 12/27/19 ADS FLOW MONITORING 675.00 22446.22-0120 01/25/20 ADS FLOW MONITORING 675.00 2053828 02/12/20 07732 AIRGAS SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC 131634695 01/21/20 AS-NEEDED AQUA AMMONIA 2,449.50 131634696 01/21/20 AS-NEEDED AQUA AMMONIA 406.50 131634593 01/21/20 AS-NEEDED AQUA AMMONIA 120.00 2053760 01/29/20 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 2312312019 01/06/20 AS-NEEDED UTILITY LOCATING (DEC 2019)15,463.75 15,463.75 2053829 02/12/20 14256 ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC 1124079 01/02/20 INSURANCE CONSULTING 7,250.00 7,250.00 2053761 01/29/20 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM20201 01/13/20 CMIS (10/1/19-12/31/19)9,300.00 CM20203 01/13/20 CMIS (10/1/19-12/31/19)9,280.00 CM20202 01/13/20 CMIS (10/1/19-12/31/19)2,845.00 CM20205 01/13/20 CMIS (12/1/19-12/31/19)2,000.00 CM20204 01/13/20 CMIS (11/1/19-11/30/19)875.00 2053762 01/29/20 03492 AQUA-METRIC SALES COMPANY 0076278 01/03/20 INVENTORY 6,953.06 6,953.06 2053830 02/12/20 17264 ARTIANO SHINOFF ABED 303154 01/15/20 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (THRU 12/31/19)30,797.91 30,797.91 2053871 02/19/20 06412 AYALA-MASON, TANYA 021320 02/13/20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 200.00 200.00 2053796 02/05/20 20016 BELLALUKA ENTERPRISES INC Ref002580321 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000251113 67.96 67.96 2053797 02/05/20 20024 BRAYCO ENGINEERING INC Ref002580329 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000259007 1,453.14 1,453.14 2053798 02/05/20 20019 BROOKFIELD RESIDENTIAL Ref002580324 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000253431 2,086.24 2,086.24 2053872 02/19/20 20045 BROOKFIELD RESIDENTIAL Ref002581745 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000252296 440.85 440.85Page 1 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 850.00 38,293.90 2,187.90 2053872 02/19/20 20045 BROOKFIELD RESIDENTIAL Ref002581745 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000252296 440.85 440.85 2053831 02/12/20 08156 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER 788269 01/24/20 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY CONSULT SERV 2,848.99 2,848.99 2053873 02/19/20 00848 CASS CONSTRUCTION INC 1312312019 12/31/19 WATER LINE REPLACEMENT (ENDING 12/31/19)11,918.70 11,918.70 2053874 02/19/20 20048 CEVA LOGISTICS Ref002581748 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000257579 543.16 543.16 2053763 01/29/20 08895 CITY OF LA MESA 21683 01/15/20 FINGERPRINTING SERVICES 20.00 20.00 2053764 01/29/20 04119 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC 14567 12/31/19 BACTERIOLOGICAL TEST (12/19/19-12/21/19)306.00 14564 12/31/19 BACTERIOLOGICAL TEST (12/9/19)188.00 14565 12/31/19 BACTERIOLOGICAL TEST (12/17/19)178.00 14566 12/31/19 BACTERIOLOGICAL TEST (12/19/19)178.00 2053799 02/05/20 20007 COMMUNITY PARTNERS 01312020 02/03/20 PUBLIC RECOGNITION AND AWARDS 2,500.00 2,500.00 2053800 02/05/20 17923 CONCORD UTILITY SERVICES 2998 01/27/20 REGISTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 21,332.82 2992 01/20/20 REGISTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 16,961.08 2053832 02/12/20 17923 CONCORD UTILITY SERVICES 3012 02/03/20 REGISTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 17,259.83 17,259.83 2053875 02/19/20 17923 CONCORD UTILITY SERVICES 3019 02/10/20 REGISTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 331.24 331.24 2053801 02/05/20 20010 CONSUELO PIZARRO Ref002580314 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000065645 97.35 97.35 2053765 01/29/20 18331 CORE & MAIN LP L630867 01/13/20 INVENTORY 1,996.61 1,996.61 2053833 02/12/20 18331 CORE & MAIN LP L655620 01/27/20 INVENTORY 4,926.33 4,926.33 2053802 02/05/20 00099 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DPWMWD1219 01/13/20 EXCAVATION PERMIT (DEC 2019)6,677.20 6,677.20 2053766 01/29/20 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO E602351219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/11/19)734.40 E602141219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/18/19)229.50 E602151219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/18/19)229.50 E602201219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/13/19)229.50 E602361219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/18/19)229.50 E602371219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/13/19)229.50 E602401219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/13/19)153.00 E625851219 01/04/20 SHUT DOWN TEST (12/13/19)153.00 2053876 02/19/20 03098 CROUCHER, GARY D 011720013120 01/31/20 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 5.22 5.22 2053834 02/12/20 11797 D&H WATER SYSTEMS INC I 2020-0055 01/17/20 W&T ANALYZER PARTS 4,745.58 4,745.58 2053767 01/29/20 11797 D&H WATER SYSTEMS INC I 2020-0012 01/06/20 RCS TRAILER/WATER MIXER - 944-2 RES 6,465.00 6,465.00 2053862 02/19/20 20046 DANIEL AMIRE Ref002581746 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000253146 100.00 100.00Page 2 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 3,686.52 597.49 2053862 02/19/20 20046 DANIEL AMIRE Ref002581746 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000253146 100.00 100.00 2053863 02/19/20 20049 DENNY TRAN Ref002581749 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000258897 48.72 48.72 2053877 02/19/20 05134 DYCHITAN, MARISSA MD021120 02/11/20 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 3,000.00 3,000.00 2053878 02/19/20 20042 EASTLAKE LITTLE LEAGUE Ref002581742 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000177553 1,634.68 1,634.68 2053768 01/29/20 20008 EDGAR GONZALEZ 0012012820 01/28/20 CUSTOMER REFUND 1,011.04 1,011.04 2053803 02/05/20 20014 EDWARD PAULA Ref002580319 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000249917 1,738.68 1,738.68 2053769 01/29/20 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0698882-2 01/23/20 INVENTORY 3,491.10 0702810 01/13/20 INVENTORY 195.42 2053835 02/12/20 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0702573 01/23/20 INVENTORY 7,620.62 7,620.62 2053770 01/29/20 17888 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC 9003401219 12/31/19 DOCUMENT SERVICE (MONTHLY)99.00 99.00 2053804 02/05/20 11962 FLEETWASH INC 1768051 12/31/19 FLEET WASH SERVICES 342.65 1788564 01/10/20 FLEET WASH SERVICES 94.66 1779886 12/27/19 FLEET WASH SERVICES 87.37 1782698 01/03/20 FLEET WASH SERVICES 72.81 2053836 02/12/20 11962 FLEETWASH INC 1798098 01/24/20 FLEET WASH SERVICES 109.22 109.22 2053805 02/05/20 19640 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2580359 02/06/20 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 75.00 75.00 2053879 02/19/20 19640 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2581763 02/20/20 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 75.00 75.00 2053880 02/19/20 19768 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2581765 02/20/20 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 125.00 125.00 2053806 02/05/20 19768 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2580361 02/06/20 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 125.00 125.00 2053881 02/19/20 17855 GASTELUM, HECTOR 120119012520 01/25/20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT (12/1/19-1/25/20)62.51 62.51 2053837 02/12/20 18333 GEOCON INCORPORATED 1913172 01/24/20 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (12/2/19-12/29/19)925.00 925.00 2053771 01/29/20 19968 GEORGINA BIDWELL 1823012320 01/23/20 CUSTOMER REFUND 815.57 815.57 2053772 01/29/20 03537 GHA TECHNOLOGIES INC 101023001 01/10/20 CRADLEPOINT MODEM 1,848.99 1,848.99 2053773 01/29/20 00101 GRAINGER INC 9392351418 12/20/19 INVENTORY 925.34 925.34 2053774 01/29/20 12907 GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE INC 18966 01/02/20 LANDSCAPING SERVICES 9,144.00 9,144.00 2053775 01/29/20 18235 GROUPWARE TECHNOLOGY INC 75228 12/31/19 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,080.00 1,080.00 2053882 02/19/20 17024 GUIRIBA, DIANNE 021220021320 02/13/20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 176.64 176.64 2053776 01/29/20 09715 GUTIERREZ, JUAN JG011520 01/15/20 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 190.00 190.00Page 3 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 3,080.76 2,933.28 11,801.25 5,350.00 29,166.30 2053776 01/29/20 09715 GUTIERREZ, JUAN JG011520 01/15/20 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 190.00 190.00 2053807 02/05/20 20023 HAPPY LABS Ref002580328 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000259006 718.44 718.44 2053838 02/12/20 03668 HARRELL & COMPANY ADVISORS LLC 011620 01/16/20 PREP & FILING OF DISCLOSURE ANNUAL RPTS 3,250.00 3,250.00 2053777 01/29/20 19978 HASA INC.669555 01/09/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,005.07 669488 01/02/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 983.22 669554 01/09/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 546.24 669561 01/09/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 469.76 669556 01/09/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 76.47 2053839 02/12/20 19978 HASA INC.670298 01/23/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,092.47 670171 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,043.31 670172 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 797.50 2053808 02/05/20 20022 HAZARD CONSTRUCTION CO Ref002580327 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000258687 2,046.00 2,046.00 2053840 02/12/20 18436 HAZEN AND SAWYER DPC 200940032 01/24/20 ASSET MANAGMENT SVCS (DEC 2019)1,270.00 1,270.00 2053778 01/29/20 19825 HDR ENGINEERING INC 1200240619 01/09/20 CAPACITY FEE STUDY 6,057.50 1200240623 01/09/20 SEWER COST OF SERVICE STUDY UPDATE 5,743.75 2053841 02/12/20 02008 HELIX ENVIRONMENTAL 100117 01/27/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (ENDING 1/19/20)2,000.47 2,000.47 2053842 02/12/20 13349 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES 2019120016 01/16/20 LAND SURVEYING SERV (11/30/19-12/31/19)4,590.00 2019120015 01/16/20 LAND SURVEYING SERV (11/30/19-12/31/19)760.00 2053843 02/12/20 15622 ICF JONES & STOKES INC 0144444 01/27/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (11/30/19-12/31/19)18,133.92 0144224 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (11/30/19-12/31/19)3,379.81 0144231 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (11/30/19-12/31/19)3,211.78 0144225 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (11/30/19-12/31/19)3,053.00 0144227 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (11/30/19-12/31/19)590.39 0144221 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (11/30/19-12/31/19)437.40 0144229 01/16/20 AS-NEEDED ENVIRO (11/30/19-12/31/19)360.00 2053809 02/05/20 20015 IMELDA MURPHY Ref002580320 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000249952 14.82 14.82 2053779 01/29/20 17816 INDUSTRIAL SCIENTIFIC CORP 2285862 01/12/20 GAS DETECTION PROGRAM 316.93 316.93 2053780 01/29/20 08969 INFOSEND INC 164860 12/31/19 BILL PROCESSING SERVICES 11,802.59 164859 12/31/19 BILL PROCESSING SERVICES 6,161.07 165126 01/02/20 BILL PROCESSING SERVICES 2,461.89 Page 4 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 20,802.86 9,527.13 163926 12/11/19 BILL PROCESSING SERVICES 377.31 2053883 02/19/20 08969 INFOSEND INC 166126 01/24/20 BILL PROCESSING SERVICES 6,989.96 166125 01/24/20 BILL PROCESSING SERVICES 2,537.17 2053864 02/19/20 20040 IVY HAYS Ref002581740 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000173713 14.32 14.32 2053810 02/05/20 17106 IWG TOWERS ASSETS II LLC 526780 02/01/20 ANTENNA SUBLEASE 1,845.00 1,845.00 2053865 02/19/20 20047 JAIME PEREZ LOPEZ Ref002581747 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000256997 79.79 79.79 2053866 02/19/20 20050 JOSEPH BOHLEN Ref002581750 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000258919 1,272.99 1,272.99 2053811 02/05/20 20020 JOSEPHINE SOWERS Ref002580325 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000256362 63.18 63.18 2053844 02/12/20 14808 KOEPPEN, KEVIN 013120 02/04/20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 281.78 281.78 2053884 02/19/20 03336 KREINBRING, THERESA 021120021220 02/12/20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 266.57 266.57 2053812 02/05/20 20026 LESLIE GRAY Ref002580331 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000051899 149.96 149.96 2053813 02/05/20 20018 LOURDES VALDEZ Ref002580323 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000252714 7.43 7.43 2053814 02/05/20 20013 MARCUS SMITH Ref002580318 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000239051 11.02 11.02 2053885 02/19/20 20044 MCV23 LLC Ref002581744 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000251039 1,758.59 1,758.59 2053815 02/05/20 03745 MEDEROS, CHARLES CM020320 02/04/20 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 164.53 164.53 2053845 02/12/20 16608 MICHAEL BAKER INT'L INC 1071592 01/14/20 870-2 PS INSPECT SERVICE (ENDING 12/31/19)31,760.00 31,760.00 2053816 02/05/20 20021 MICHAEL SITTO Ref002580326 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000257907 1,311.08 1,311.08 2053846 02/12/20 16613 MISSION RESOURCE CONSERVATION 409 02/03/20 OUTSIDE SERVICES 99.00 99.00 2053886 02/19/20 07488 NEWMAN, DAMON 020220020720 02/07/20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 367.94 367.94 2053817 02/05/20 18172 NIGHTCODERS 188 01/21/20 WEBSITE SUPPORT SERVICES 9,542.50 9,542.50 2053847 02/12/20 00761 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL 234981 01/21/20 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (11/29/19-12/27/19)5,580.00 5,580.00 2053867 02/19/20 20038 NORMA NATALIA Ref002581738 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000015757 62.81 62.81 2053848 02/12/20 06646 PACIFIC HYDROTECH CORPORATION 2512312019 01/17/20 870-2 PS REPLACEMENT (ENDING 12/31/19)231,390.71 231,390.71 2053781 01/29/20 06646 PACIFIC HYDROTECH CORPORATION 2411302019 12/19/19 870-2 PS REPLACEMENT (ENDING 11/30/19)211,641.12 211,641.12 2053849 02/12/20 18562 PACIFIC WESTERN BANK 2512312019 01/17/20 RET/PACIFIC HYDROTECH (ENDING 12/31/19)12,178.46 12,178.46 2053782 01/29/20 18562 PACIFIC WESTERN BANK 2411302019 12/19/19 RET/PACIFIC HYDROTECH (ENDING 11/30/19)11,139.01 11,139.01 2053850 02/12/20 19310 PALM LAUNDRY INC owd013 01/29/20 TOWEL LAUNDRY SERVICE 206.80 206.80 Page 5 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2,794.98 19,167.98 2053850 02/12/20 19310 PALM LAUNDRY INC owd013 01/29/20 TOWEL LAUNDRY SERVICE 206.80 206.80 2053818 02/05/20 20017 PARKHOUSE TIRE SERVICE INC Ref002580322 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000251674 141.07 141.07 2053819 02/05/20 14444 PATHFINDER RAINTREE 2 Ref002580316 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000186397 68.58 68.58 2053851 02/12/20 15081 PINOMAKI DESIGN 5924 01/01/20 GRAPHIC DESIGN SERVICES 85.00 85.00 2053820 02/05/20 20011 POWER SONIC CORP Ref002580315 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000072178 229.25 229.25 2053852 02/12/20 03613 PSOMAS 152937A 01/16/20 LAND SURVEYING SERVICES (ENDING 5/30/19)50.00 50.00 2053821 02/05/20 20025 RANCHO RIOS HOA Ref002580330 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000259024 504.19 504.19 2053783 01/29/20 15647 RFYEAGER ENGINEERING LLC 20002 01/02/20 CORROSION SERVICES (12/1/19-12/31/19)2,005.00 2,005.00 2053853 02/12/20 08972 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 0072366 01/24/20 CAMPO RD SUPP SVCS (11/30/19-12/31/19)1,500.00 1,500.00 2053784 01/29/20 08972 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 0072285 01/06/20 TRAFFIC ENG SERVICES (10/26/19-11/29/19)2,661.98 0072121 12/31/19 CAMPO RD SUPP SVCS (10/26/19-11/29/19)133.00 2053854 02/12/20 00521 RICK POST WELD & WET TAPPING 12467 01/22/20 WELDING, PUMP 5326 2,625.00 2,625.00 2053887 02/19/20 04542 ROBAK, MARK 010120013120 01/31/20 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (JAN 2020)53.94 53.94 2053822 02/05/20 20009 ROBERT MEDINA Ref002580313 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000007646 19.93 19.93 2053868 02/19/20 20041 ROSA MARTHA DELGADO DE NADER Ref002581741 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000176905 137.36 137.36 2053785 01/29/20 09148 S & J SUPPLY COMPANY INC S100147043.001 01/17/20 INVENTORY 3,491.10 3,491.10 2053786 01/29/20 19377 SAGEVIEW ADVISORY GROUP LLC 201940146 01/02/20 INVEST ADVISOR SVCS - DEFERRED COMP 5,750.00 5,750.00 2053787 01/29/20 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 1947 01/07/20 SOCAL WATER SMART HEW HET WBIC 307.11 307.11 2053855 02/12/20 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 1961 01/27/20 SOCAL WATER SMART HEW HET WBIC 599.00 599.00 2053788 01/29/20 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 012020 01/20/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)13,152.94 012220 01/27/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)5,954.31 012420 01/28/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)60.73 2053823 02/05/20 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 012920C 01/29/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)35,304.17 012920B 01/29/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)15,817.53 013020 01/30/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)15,064.59 012920A 02/03/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)14,055.86 012720 01/27/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)9,278.16 6157012120 01/21/20 UTILITY SERVICES -(MONTHLY)3,303.77 Page 6 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 95,765.94 77,529.42 762.38 15,473.51 1,063.56 658.29 9,597.75 012720A 01/27/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)2,272.19 012420A 01/24/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)669.67 2053856 02/12/20 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 020420 02/04/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)77,148.70 020520 02/05/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)380.72 2053888 02/19/20 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 021020 02/18/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)682.37 020420A 02/04/20 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)80.01 2053889 02/19/20 20043 SHEA HOMES LP Ref002581743 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000226162 1,902.65 1,902.65 2053824 02/05/20 20012 SLF IV MILLENIA LLC Ref002580317 02/03/20 UB Refund Cst #0000224243 1,511.86 1,511.86 2053890 02/19/20 16229 SMITH, TIMOTHY 010120013120 01/31/20 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (JAN 2020)18.56 18.56 2053789 01/29/20 01460 STATE WATER RESOURCES WD0171624 01/08/20 ANNUAL PERMIT FEES 260.00 260.00 2053825 02/05/20 15974 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 38166010120 02/03/20 LIFE INSURANCE AND STD/LTD 9,979.79 9,979.79 2053826 02/05/20 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 477980 12/20/19 UNLEADED GAS & DIESEL 10,391.49 477981 12/20/19 UNLEADED GAS & DIESEL 5,082.02 2053857 02/12/20 18376 SVPR COMMUNICATIONS 1328 12/31/19 COMMUNICATION CONSULTANT 2,500.00 2,500.00 2053790 01/29/20 19272 THARSOS INC 112312019 01/01/20 TLOPS REDUNDANCY PROJ (ENDING 12/31/19)39,287.49 39,287.49 2053891 02/19/20 14177 THOMPSON, MITCHELL 010120013120 01/31/20 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (JAN 2020)51.04 51.04 2053791 01/29/20 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 18dsbfe7076 01/01/20 DIG SAFE BOARD FEES (MONTHLY)619.61 122019490 01/01/20 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (MONTHLY)443.95 2053858 02/12/20 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 114-9735221 01/16/20 PORT. TOILET RENTAL 392.58 114-9735047 01/16/20 PORT. TOILET RENTAL 98.25 114-9735044 01/16/20 PORT. TOILET RENTAL 87.50 114-9730835 01/15/20 PORT. TOILET RENTAL 79.96 2053792 01/29/20 08028 VALLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SD107714 01/02/20 CMIS (12/1/19-12/31/19)3,235.00 3,235.00 2053869 02/19/20 20039 W FRANCIS MAGUIRE Ref002581739 02/14/20 UB Refund Cst #0000065161 52.21 52.21 2053859 02/12/20 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION 654101 12/23/19 SECURITY EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION 5,735.38 656272 01/15/20 SECURITY ALARM MONITORING 2,532.92 654114 12/24/19 SECURITY EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION 1,329.45 2053793 01/29/20 15726 WATER SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 4338 12/31/19 HYDRAULIC MODELING (ENDING 12/31/19)10,472.50 10,472.50 2053860 02/12/20 19784 WEBER WATER RESOURCES CA LLC 1072 01/10/20 MECHANICAL SEAL REPAIR PUMP #2 832-1PS 15,995.00 15,995.00 Page 7 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 1/23/2020 - 2/19/2020 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2053794 01/29/20 18173 WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK 2911302019 01/23/20 RET/WIER CONSTRUCT A#2222 (NOV 2019)1,794.23 1,794.23 2053892 02/19/20 18173 WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK 3012312019 02/05/20 RET/WIER CONSTRUCT A#2222 (DEC 2019)4,556.90 4,556.90 2053893 02/19/20 18101 WIER CONSTRUCTION CORP 3012312019 02/05/20 SEWER REPLACEMENT (DEC 2019)86,581.62 86,581.62 2053795 01/29/20 18101 WIER CONSTRUCTION CORP 2911302019 01/23/20 SEWER REPLACEMENT (NOV 2019)34,090.27 34,090.27 2053861 02/12/20 18215 ZAYO GROUP LLC 2020020024566 02/01/20 COLOCATION SERVICES 2,117.20 2,117.20 Amount Pd Total:1,310,615.96 Check Grand Total:1,310,615.96 Page 8 of 8