Summary of 2006
WCVI Los Angeles River Phone
Survey
February 8th, 2007
WCVI Los Angeles River Phone Survey
 Recently, the William C. Velásquez Institute conducted a random phone
survey of 401 respondents of the Los Angeles River community. The
Greening of the Los Angeles River project part of the Institute’s Community
Development program started as part of a diverse alliance of local and city
nonprofits including the Anahuak Youth Soccer Association, the City Project,
Mujeres de la Tierra, and Remapping-L.A.
 This study seeks to examine the knowledge of the Los Angeles River
community and its constituents on the Los Angeles River Revitalization
project, development needs for the Los Angeles River community and
concerns and needs of the Los Angeles River neighborhoods.
 In addition, this study seeks to shed some light to policymakers on the
subtle differences between various demographics groups within the Los
Angeles River community and show some interesting findings with these
groups. Often neighborhoods can be clustered as having many of the same
issues and concerns and while in many cases this can be true, further
analysis shows that even within a five mile radius a community can be
diverse with matters.
Methodology
 Survey Methodology:
 The 2006 Los Angeles River Study reached 401 adults over the age
of 18 who live in cities bordering the Los Angeles River. The survey
was fielded from September 6th-8th, 2006.
 The survey was called using targeted Random Digit Dial
sample.Respondents were further screened by zip code. Only
respondents who lived within the following zip codes were surveyed:
91316, 91401, 91403, 91406, 91411, 91423, 91436, 91601, 91602,
91604, 91607, 90012, 90013, 90014, 90017, 90021, 90023, 90026,
90027, 90031, 90033, 90039, 90058, 90065, 90068, and 90071.
 The survey was administered in both English and Spanish by a
trained bilingual staff.
 The margin of error at the 95% confidence level is +/-4.9%.
Highlighted Groups:
 Some groups highlighted will include:
 Individuals who live within 2 miles of the river and those who live
over 2 miles
 White Non-Hispanic versus Hispanic
 Naturalized Citizen versus Non-Citizen
 Western Zip Codes versus Eastern Zip Codes
 Latinos who live within 2 miles of the Los Angeles River

According to the LA River study, 44% of those interviewed
identified living within 2 miles or less of the Los Angeles River. 46%
lived more than 2 miles. All phone respondents selected lived at
least within 5 miles of the Los Angeles River. 56% lived in the
Eastern zip codes while 44% resided in the Western portion.
How close do you live to the Los Angeles
River?
2. How close do you live to the Los Angeles River?
Don't Know/Refused
More than 3 miles
2-3 miles
1-2 miles
Less than a mile
0%
LA RIVER POP
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Less than a mile
1-2 miles
2-3 miles
More than 3
miles
Don't
Know/Refused
20%
24%
14%
32%
11%
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Have you heard of the plan to revitalize
the Los Angeles River?
 Only 27% heard of the plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River versus 71% who
identified no knowledge of the project. Of the 27% who identified knowledge of the
project, newspapers were the number one medium by which they learned of the
project at 59%. Television, 44% and meetings, 16% came second and third
respectively.
3. Have you heard of the plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River?
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
LA RIVER POP
30%
20%
10%
0%
LA RIVER POP
Yes
No
DK/Refused
27%
71%
2%
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
If yes, how?
4. If yes, how?
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Newspapers
Meetings
Television
None of the
Above
Meetings
Other
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
All of the
above
Type of Development
 The community was most interested in seeing green development in
the Los Angeles river community. The top 3 responses were green
choices: Parks, 43%, Open Green Spaces, 35% and California style
trees and plants instead of cement recreation facilities, 28%.
Affordable housing/apartments, 22% and schools, 22% were the
next choices in development for the community. It would stand to
reason that community members don’t separate the concepts of
quality green space and quality education or housing. To that end,
the next two suggestions are also green concepts: community
gardens, 17% and Soccer and baseball fields, 16%.

The last development idea to get over at least 10% was Job
creating business. In this community, the constituents understand no
progress will come unless the community has economic opportunity
and economic opportunity will come from new businesses.
What type of development would you like
to see on the river and its banks?
5. What type of development would you like to see on the river and its banks?
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
LA RIVER POP
Open
Mkt
All of None Other Don't
Trees& Housin School Garde
Busine
Touris Pentho
Parks Green
Fields
value
the
of the (SPECI Know/
plants
g
s
ns
ss
m
uses
Space
housin
above above FY) Refuse
43%
35%
28%
22%
22%
17%
15%
10%
3%
3%
2%
2%
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
2%
5%
7%
Conditions Around the River
 Another area of concern for the community was
conditions around the Los Angeles River.
Air/water/land quality incited the most negative
responses with 66% responding that conditions
were “only fair or poor.” Physical landscape was
also a top concern with 64% respondents
identifying the area as “only fair or poor.” Public
safety, which will show up again, was also
identified negatively by 61%. Finally, recreation
facilities were also seen in a negative light by
58% of the constituents.
How would you rate the following
conditions in and around the Los Angeles
River-excellent, good, fair, or poor?
How would you rate the following conditions in and around the Los Angeles River- excellent,
good, fair, or poor?
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't
Know/Refused
PUB SAFETY
6%
24%
30%
31%
10%
LANDSCAPE
4%
23%
29%
36%
9%
AIR/WATER/LAND QUALITY
4%
21%
34%
32%
9%
RECREATION
4%
19%
25%
33%
18%
PUB SAFETY
LANDSCAPE
AIR/WATER/LAND QUALITY
RECREATION
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Most Important Problems in your
Neighborhood
 Following the theme of the previous question, “Gangs, crime, safety”
was identified as the most important problem in your neighborhood
at 34%. The prevailing theme of a lack of security seems to be tied
to a concern with green spaces as seen in earlier questions. To that
end, 13% identified “Trash/clutter” as the second biggest problem in
their neighborhood.

Two of the next three issues are concurrently related to gangs
and safety. 7% identified “lack of activities for youth” and 6%
“inadequate schools.” Both theses issues directly affect the youth in
Los Angeles river community and their involvement in the
community. Lack of activities can lead to lack of involvement and
with children coming from homes where parents work two to three
jobs, children need after school activities. Schools, once seen as a
stepping stone to success in communities like those around the Los
Angeles River have become overcrowded and outdated.
Problems in your neighborhood
TOP ISSUE
LA RIVER
POP
Gangs,crime,safety
34%
Trash,clutter
13%
Lack of activities for
youth
7%
Improve roads &
bridges
6%
Inadequate schools
5%
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study
conducted September 11,2006, margin of
error +/- 4.89%
In addition, community members, identify the need to build better infrastructure in the
form of roads and bridges, 6%. Tied with earlier themes, economic development
can’t take place unless better infrastructure is built in the community to attract
commerce.
Demographics
 The Los Angeles River community is an extremely sedentary
community with 67% identifying living in the neighborhood for at least
5+ years and 26% living there for more than 20 years. Only 32% have
lived in the community under 5 years and 13% under 2 years.
11. How long have you lived in your neighborhood?
Less than two years
More than 20 years
Between 2 and 5 years
(Don't know/Refused)
Between 5 and 20 years
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Country of Birth
 51% of the Los Angeles River sample identified as native born. 49%
identified as foreign born with Mexico receiving the most respondents of any
country, 22%. Other country, which a respondent had to specify received
15%, El Salvador, 7%, Guatemala, 4%, China, 1%, and South Korea, 1%.
Country of birth
Refused
Other (specify)
South Korea
China
Guatemala
El Salvador
Mexico
US
0%
LA RIVER POP
10%
US
Mexico
51%
23%
20%
30%
El
Guatemala
Salvador
7%
4%
40%
50%
60%
China
South
Korea
Other
(specify)
Refused
1%
1%
15%
1%
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Citizenship & Voter Registration
 68% of the sample were naturalized citizen, while 32%
identified not being citizen. Of those who identified being
a citizen, 77% were registered to vote.
Citizen / Non-Citizen
Voter Registration
23%
32%
68%
77%
Citizen
Not Citizen
Registered to Vote
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Not Registered
Race/Ethnic Groups
 Hispanic/Latino made up the largest racial/ethnic percentage at 48%.
White Non-Hispanics were 34% while Asian and Pacific Islander
were 9%. Other was 4%. African-American was 2%.
Race/Ethnic Groups
Refused
Other (specify)
Hispanic/Latino
Asian & Pacific
Islander
African American/Black
White Non-Hispanic
0%
LA RIVER POP
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
White NonHispanic
African
American/Bla
ck
Asian &
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic/Lati
no
Other
(specify)
Refused
34%
2%
9%
48%
4%
2%
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Age Groups
 The sample was fairly evenly distributed amongst age groups. 35%
of the sample was 34 or younger. 37% of the sample was between
the ages 35-54. Only 24% of the sample was 55 or older.
Age Groups
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
LA RIVER POP
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
Refused
16%
19%
22%
15%
10%
14%
4%
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Educational Attainment
 There were a disproportionate number of individuals who reported a high school
education or less, 45%, although these figures fall within Census reported statistics.
17% reported some college or vocational training. 32% reported being a college
graduate or higher. Crosstabs will show that these various greatly by the zip code
region one lives in within the Los Angeles river community.
Educational Attainment
Refused
Graduate education or
higher
College graduate
Some
college/vocational
HS graduate or
equivalent
Some HS or less
0%
5%
Some HS or
less
LA RIVER POP
21%
10%
15%
Some
HS graduate
college/vocati
or equivalent
onal
24%
17%
20%
25%
30%
College
graduate
Graduate
education or
higher
Refused
21%
11%
6%
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
Income
 23% make less than $15,000. 26% make between $15,000 and
$39,999. 17% make between $40,000 and $99,999. 7% make
$100,000 to $149,999. Again, crosstabs will bear out that these
various greatly by the zip code region one lives in within the Los
Angeles river community. Income
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
LA RIVER POP
Less
$10,000- $15,000- $20,000- $30,000- $40,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000than
Refused
14,999 $19,999 $29,999 $39,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999
$10,000
15%
8%
7%
9%
10%
5%
7%
5%
7%
LA RIVER POP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
27%
Household Languages
 Finally, 90% of the Los Angeles river communities speak either
English or Spanish with English being the dominant language at
54%. Other languages were identified at 7%. Chinese and
indigenous languages were identified at 1% respectively.
HOUSEHOLD LANGUAGES
1%
0%
7%
2%
1%
53%
36%
English
Spanish
Chinese
Korean
Indigenous Languages
Other (specify)
Refused
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
PROXIMITY CROSSTABS
 Proximity Crosstab: Highlights
 How close do you live to the Los Angeles
River?
 The following cross tabulation will examine the
Los Angeles River community by the variable of
proximity to the river: Less than or equal to 2
miles versus Greater than 2 miles.
 We will highlight the key findings:
 Individuals who live within 2 miles of the Los
Angeles River are significantly more
knowledgeable of the revitalization plans for the
river.
PROXIMITY CROSSTAB: Have you heard of the
plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River?
3. Have you heard of the plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River?
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BASELINE
≥ 2 MILES
< 2+ MILES
Yes
27%
35%
23%
No
71%
65%
76%
Don't Know/Refused
2%
1%
1%
Yes
No
Don't Know/Refused
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
PROXIMITY CROSSTAB: What type of development
would you like to see on the river and its banks?

As before, 3 of the top five issues for the crosstab were green issues with parks leading for both
variables at 40% and 45%, respectively.
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
California
Affordable
style trees & housing and
plants instead apartments
Parks
Open Green
Space
≥ 2 MILES
40%
38%
26%
< 2+ MILES
45%
32%
29%
Schools
Community
gardens
Soccer &
baseball
fields
Job creating
businesses
Market value
housing
24%
17%
17%
15%
11%
6%
2%
20%
24%
16%
13%
9%
2%
2%
≥ 2 MILES
Tourism
Penthouses &
based
condominium
development
s
All of the
above
None of the
above
Other
(SPECIFY)
Don't
Know/Refuse
d
3%
4%
2%
5%
6%
1%
1%
2%
5%
7%
< 2+ MILES
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
PROXIMITY DIFFERENCES
 The largest aggregate differences the quality of
the conditions of the area could be seen in the
air/water/land quality and the public safety. The
baseline for air/water/land quality showed a net
negative of 66% while individuals who live under
2 miles identified 58% negative responses and
individuals over 2 miles showed a net negative
of 60%. Similarly, in public safety, 61% identified
in the baseline negative responses, showed a
net negative of 61% while individuals who live
under 2 miles identified 56% negative responses
and individuals over 2 miles showed a net
negative of 66%.
PROXIMITY CROSSTAB: How would you rate the
following conditions in and around the Los Angeles Riverexcellent, good, fair, and poor? (Air, water, land quality
around LA river)
6. Air, water, land quality around LA River
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Don't
Know/Refused
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
BASELINE
4%
21%
34%
32%
9%
≥ 2 MILES
5%
24%
24%
34%
12%
< 2+ MILES
3%
16%
27%
33%
20%
BASELINE
≥ 2 MILES
< 2+ MILES
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
PROXIMITY CROSSTAB: How would you rate the
following conditions in and around the Los Angeles Riverexcellent, good, fair, and poor? (Public safety around LA
river)
9. Public safety around LA River
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't
Know/Refused
BASELINE
6%
24%
30%
31%
10%
≥ 2 MILES
5%
30%
27%
29%
8%
< 2+ MILES
6%
21%
32%
34%
8%
BASELINE
≥ 2 MILES
< 2+ MILES
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
PROXIMITY CROSSTAB: Top Issues in
Neighborhood
 The top issues for this crosstab are not dissimilar to the baseline with
Gangs/Crime/Safety topping the list in both variables. Trash and clutter also comes in
second.
Top Issue in Neighborhood
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Gangs,crime,safety
Trash,clutter
Lack of activities
for youth
Inadequate
schools
Availability of
housing
BASELINE
34%
13%
7%
6%
5%
≥ 2 MILES
31%
12%
5%
7%
6%
< 2+ MILES
38%
14%
9%
5%
4%
BASELINE
≥ 2 MILES
< 2+ MILES
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
ETHNIC DIFFERENCES
 The individuals who live closer to the river tend to be a
more vested in the community than those who live father
away, 66% to 71%.
 When we disaggregate other races and look at only
White Non-Hispanic and Latinos, the two communities
look very different ethnically. Closer to the river, they are
evenly split 53% to 47% between White and Latino but
further away beyond 2 miles, the variation is about 35%
to 65% towards Latinos.
Lived in your neighborhood?
11. How long have you lived in your neighborhood?
(Don't
know/Refused)
More than 20 years
< 2+ MILES
≥ 2 MILES
BASELINE
Between 5 and 20
years
Between 2 and 5
years
Less than two years
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
(Don't
More than 20
know/Refused
years
)
Less than two
years
Between 2
and 5 years
Between 5
and 20 years
< 2+ MILES
12%
20%
38%
28%
1%
≥ 2 MILES
12%
17%
44%
27%
0%
BASELINE
13%
19%
41%
26%
1%
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
White vs. Latino Comparison
White vs. Latino Comparison
< 2+ MILES
≥ 2 MILES
BASELINE
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
BASELINE
≥ 2 MILES
< 2+ MILES
Latino
59%
35%
65%
White
41%
53%
47%
White
Latino
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
70%
ETHNIC CROSSTABS
 The following cross tabulation will examine the
Los Angeles River community by the variable of
Race/Ethnicity.
 We will highlight the key findings:
 Whites tend to live closer to the river within 2
miles, 55% to 44%.
ETHNIC CROSSTAB:
Proximity to the River
Proximity to the Los Angeles River
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Less than a mile
1-2 miles
2-3 miles
More than 3 miles
Don't
Know/Refused
BASELINE
20%
24%
14%
32%
11%
WHITE
30%
25%
17%
22%
6%
HISP
11%
23%
12%
40%
15%
BASELINE
WHITE
HISP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
ETHNIC CROSSTAB:
Knowledge of Los Angeles River
 Whites are significantly more knowledgeable of
the revitalization plans for the river than Latinos.
3. Have you heard of the plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River?
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BASELINE
WHITE
HISP
Yes
27%
38%
21%
No
71%
60%
78%
DK/Refused
2%
2%
2%
Yes
No
DK/Refused
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
 As before, 3 of the top five issues for this crosstab were green issues with
parks leading for both variables at 35% and 48%, respectively. Unlike last
time, Latinos see Parks as a significant issue in the community at nearly
50%.
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
California
Affordable
style trees & housing and
plants instead apartments
Open Green
Space
WHITE
35%
43%
34%
17%
14%
21%
10%
7%
3%
4%
HISP
48%
27%
21%
25%
32%
15%
20%
11%
2%
3%
Schools
Community
Soccer &
Job creating
gardens
baseball fields businesses
WHITE
Market value
housing
Tourism
Penthouses &
based
condominium
development
s
Parks
All of the
above
None of the
above
Other
(SPECIFY)
Don't
Know/Refused
1%
2%
2%
4%
6%
3%
2%
1%
4%
7%
HISP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89% *Responses more than100% due to multiple
responses
ETHNIC CROSSTAB:
Recreation Facilities
 The largest aggregate differences can been seen in the views of the conditions of
the recreation facilities. Latinos didn’t see them as poorly as Whites, 30% to 37%.
How would you rate the following conditions in and around the Los Angeles
River - excellent, good, fair, or poor?:
Recreation Facilities
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't
Know/Refused
BASELINE
4%
19%
25%
33%
18%
WHITE
6%
15%
21%
37%
21%
HISP
3%
21%
30%
30%
15%
BASELINE
WHITE
HISP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
ETHNIC CROSSTAB:
Top Issues in your Neighborhood
 The top issues for this crosstab are not dissimilar to the baseline with
Gangs/Crime/Safety topping the list both variables. Trash and clutter also comes in
second.
Top Issues in the Neighborhood
Availability of housing
Inadequate schools
Lack of activities for
youth
Trash,clutter
Gangs,crime,safety
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Gangs,crime,saf
ety
Trash,clutter
Lack of activities
for youth
Inadequate
schools
Availability of
housing
HISP
44%
15%
7%
3%
5%
WHITE
24%
13%
8%
9%
5%
BASELINE
34%
13%
7%
6%
5%
BASELINE
WHITE
HISP
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
50%
CITIZENSHIP CROSSTABS
Citizenship Crosstab: Highlights
Citizens versus Non-Citizens
The following cross tabulation will examine
the Los Angeles River community by the
variable of Citizenship.
We will highlight the key findings:
Citizens tend to live closer to the river
within 2 miles, 47% to 36%. 42% of NonCitizens live 3 miles or farther.
CITZENSHIP CROSSTAB:
Proximity to the LA River
Proximity to the Los Angeles River
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Less than a mile
1-2 miles
2-3 miles
More than 3 miles
Don't
Know/Refused
BASELINE
20%
24%
14%
32%
11%
CITIZEN
23%
24%
15%
27%
10%
NON-CITIZEN
16%
20%
10%
42%
12%
BASELINE
CITIZEN
NON-CITIZEN
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
CITZENSHIP CROSSTAB:
Knowledge of the Los Angeles River
 Individuals who live within 2 miles of the Los Angeles
River are significantly more knowledgeable of the
revitalization plans for the river.
Citizenship
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BASELINE
WHITE
HISP
Yes
27%
38%
21%
No
71%
60%
78%
DK/Refused
2%
2%
2%
Yes
No
DK/Refused
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%

As before, 3 of the top five issues for this crosstab were green issues with
parks leading for both variables at 39% and 52%, respectively. Unlike last
time, Non-Citizens see Parks as a significant issue in the community at over
50%.
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Calif ornia Af f ordable
Open
Parks
st yle t rees
housing
& plant s
and
Space
inst ead of
apart ment
s
20%
18%
17%
26%
32%
16%
CITIZEN
39%
35%
cement
27%
NON-CITIZEN
52%
38%
30%
Schools
Communit
Green
y gardens
Soccer &
Job
Market
baseball
creat ing
value
f ields
businesses
housing
15%
9%
15%
13%
CITIZEN
Tourism
Pent house
based
s&
developme condomini
All of t he
None of t he
Ot her
above
above
(SPECIFY)
Don't
Know/ Ref u
sed
nt
ums
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
5%
8%
5%
4%
1%
2%
2%
5%
3%
NON-CITIZEN
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89% *Responses more than100% due
to multiple responses
ZIP CODE CROSSTABS
 The following cross tabulation will examine the
Los Angeles River community by the variable of
Zip codes: Individuals who live in the Eastern Zip
Codes versus Western Zip Codes.
 We will highlight the key findings:
 The largest aggregate differences in the quality
of the area could be seen in public safety.
Individuals in the Eastern zip codes rated public
safety at the farthest spectrum, “poor”, 35% ,
nine points lower than those in the Western zip
codes.
ZIP CODE CROSSTAB:
Public Safety
How would you rate the following conditions in and around the Los Angeles
River - excellent, good, fair, or poor?: Public Safety
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't
Know/Refused
BASELINE
6%
24%
30%
31%
10%
EAST
6%
23%
26%
35%
10%
WEST
5%
25%
34%
26%
9%
BASELINE
EAST
WEST
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
ZIP CODE CROSSTAB: TOP ISSUES
 As before, two out of the top five issues in the
neighborhood are not dissimilar to the baseline
with Gangs/Crime/Safety topping the list for both
variables. Trash and clutter also comes in
second. There is a lack of consensus on the
next issues. In the East, after Trash, improving
roads & lack of activities for youth were
important. In the West, all the issues seemed
important as well as the lack of youth activities
and non listed issues.
ZIP CODE CROSSTAB: Top Issues
TOP ISSUE
BASELINE
TOP ISSUE
EAST
TOP ISSUE
WEST
Gangs,crime,safety
34%
Gangs,crime,safety
37%
Gangs,crime,safety
31%
Trash,clutter
13%
Trash,clutter
15%
Trash,clutter
11%
Lack of activities for
youth
7%
Improve roads &
bridges
10%
All of the above
8%
Inadequate schools
6%
None of the above
9%
Other (specify)
7%
Availability of housing
5%
Lack of activities for
youth
9%
Lack of activities for
youth
6%
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89
ZIP CODE CROSSTAB: Languages
Spoken
 The study shows an even split in language usage of between
English and Spanish in the Eastern region. Overall, Spanish is 16
points more prevalent in the Eastern region.
Languages Spoken in LA River Community
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
English
Spanish
Chinese
Korean
Indigenous
languages
Other
Refused
BASELINE
54%
36%
1%
0%
1%
7%
2%
EAST
49%
43%
1%
0%
1%
5%
2%
WEST
61%
27%
1%
0%
2%
9%
1%
BASELINE
EAST
WEST
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89
“LATINO 2 MILE” CROSSTABS: Latinos
who live within 2 miles Crosstabs
 Latinos who Live within 2 Miles Crosstabs:
Highlights
 The following cross tabulation will examine the
Los Angeles River community by the variable of
Latinos who live within two miles of the Los
Angeles river.
 We will highlight the key findings:
 Latinos who live within 2 miles are significantly
less knowledgeable of the revitalization plans for
the river, 20% to 27%.
LATINO 2MILE CROSSTAB: Heard of
plans to revitalize LA River
3. Have you heard of the plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River?
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Yes
No
DK/Refused
BASELINE
27%
71%
2%
LAT2MILE
20%
80%
0%
BASELINE
LAT2MILE
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
LATINO 2MILE CROSSTAB: Zip codes
 77% of individuals who lived within 2 miles fell within the
Eastern zip codes, a marked difference from the
baseline.
Western and Eastern Zip Codes
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BASELINE
LAT2MILE
Western Zip Codes
44%
23%
Eastern Zip Codes
56%
77%
Western Zip Codes
Eastern Zip Codes
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
LATINO 2MILE CROSSTAB: Nativity
 63% of individuals who lived within 2 miles were Foreign
Born, a marked difference from the baseline.
Native Born / Foreign Born
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BASELINE
LAT2MILE
Native Born
51%
37%
Foreign Born
49%
63%
Native Born
Foreign Born
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
LATINO 2MILE CROSSTAB: Citizenship
 Another corollary would be citizenship rate. 40% of
individuals who lived within 2 miles were non citizens,
another marked difference from the baseline.
Citizen and Non Citizen
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BASELINE
LAT2MILE
Citizen
68%
60%
Non Citizen
32%
40%
Citizen
Non Citizen
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%
LATINO 2MILE CROSSTAB:
Language Usage

Finally, we see major differences in language usage. 62% of Latinos who lived within
2 miles reported Spanish as their household language versus only 36% in the
baseline.
HOUSEHOLD LANGUAGES
Refused
Other (specify)
Indigenous Languages
Korean
Chinese
Spanish
English
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
English
Spanish
Chinese
Korean
Indigenous
Languages
Other
(specify)
Refused
LAT2MILE
30%
62%
0%
0%
2%
6%
0%
BASELINE
54%
36%
1%
0%
1%
7%
2%
BASELINE
LAT2MILE
Source: WCVI LA River Phone Study conducted September 11,2006, margin of error +/- 4.89%