Showing 1 – 4 of 4 results.
Curated
Washington Post District of Columbia Poll, July 2006 (ICPSR 22167)
Released/updated on: 2008-06-13
Geographic coverage: District of Columbia, United States
Time period: 2006-07-01--2006-07-31
This special topic poll, conducted July 13-18, 2006, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. This poll surveyed 1,350 residents of the District of Columbia, including 1,013 registered voters. Residents were asked about their level of interest in the upcoming mayoral election and whether they were registered to vote. Registered Democrats were polled on the likelihood that they would vote in the Democratic primary election for mayor and DC city council chairman, for whom they would vote in these races, and how strongly they supported their candidates. Views were sought on the quality of life in the District of Columbia, the biggest problems facing the district, and the quality of local public schools and municipal services. Opinions were solicited on mayoral candidates Michael Brown, Linda Cropp, Marie Johns, Adrian Fenty, and Vincent Orange, how well Mayor Anthony Williams was handling his job, and the type of people who should be elected as the next mayor and city council chairman. Respondents were asked about the perceived level of safety in their neighborhood, the effect of immigration on their community, and their confidence in the district's ability to respond to a terrorist attack in the area. A series of questions addressed redevelopment efforts in the city, including which groups would benefit, the likelihood that it would force respondents to move out of their current neighborhood, whether they owned or rented their current residence, and the affordability of relocating within the city. Information was also collected on which ward respondents resided in, how often they voted in local elections, how long they had lived in Washington, DC, and whether anyone in their household was employed by the federal or city government. Additional topics addressed plans to build a stadium for the Washington Nationals baseball team, and whether the District of Columbia should become a voting member in the United States House of Representatives. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, household income, education level, presence of children in the household, political party affiliation, political philosophy, and voter registration status.
Curated
Security by Design: Revitalizing Urban Neighborhoods in the United States, 1994-1996 (ICPSR 2777)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1994-01-01--1996-12-31
This study was designed to collect comprehensive data on the types of "crime prevention through environmental design" (CPTED) methods used by cities of 30,000 population and larger, the extent to which these methods were used, and their perceived effectiveness. A related goal was to discern trends, variations, and expansion of CPTED principles traditionally employed in crime prevention and deterrence. "Security by design" stems from the theory that proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the incidence and fear of crime and an improvement in quality of life. Examples are improving street lighting in high-crime locations, traffic re-routing and control to hamper drug trafficking and other crimes, inclusion of security provisions in city building codes, and comprehensive review of planned development to ensure careful consideration of security. To gather these data, the United States Conference of Mayors (USCM), which had previously studied a variety of issues including the fear of crime, mailed a survey to the mayors of 1,060 cities in 1994. Follow-up surveys were sent in 1995 and 1996. The surveys gathered information about the role of CPTED in a variety of local government policies and procedures, local ordinances, and regulations relating to building, local development, and zoning. Information was also collected on processes that offered opportunities for integrating CPTED principles into local development or redevelopment and the incorporation of CPTED into decisions about the location, design, and management of public facilities. Questions focused on whether the city used CPTED principles, which CPTED techniques were used (architectural features, landscaping and landscape materials, land-use planning, physical security devices, traffic circulation systems, or other), the city department with primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with CPTED zoning ordinances/building codes and other departments that actively participated in that enforcement (mayor's office, fire department, public works department, planning department, city manager, economic development office, police department, building department, parks and recreation, zoning department, city attorney, community development office, or other), the review process for proposed development, security measures for public facilities, traffic diversion and control, and urban beautification programs. Respondents were also asked about other security-by-design features being used, including whether they were mandatory or optional, if optional, how they were instituted (legislation, regulation, state building code, or other), and if applicable, how they were legislated (city ordinance, city resolution, or state law). Information was also collected on the perceived effectiveness of each technique, if local development regulations existed regarding convenience stores, if joint code enforcement was in place, if banks, neighborhood groups, private security agencies, or other groups were involved in the traffic diversion and control program, and the responding city's population, per capita income, and form of government.
Curated
Governmental Units Analysis Data (ICPSR 28)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Mississippi, Montana, United States, Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Florida, Maryland, South Carolina, Idaho
This data collection provides information on the demographic, social, economic, political, and civil characteristics of selected municipalities with populations of 25,000 or more in the United States during the 1960s. Information is provided on population characteristics, such as the number of native-born persons residing in the state of birth, percentage of persons aged 5 years and older who were migrants, percentages in 1962 of non-white, foreign-born, and native-born populations of foreign or racially mixed parentage, median school years completed by those aged 25 years and older, percentage of elementary school children in private school, median income of families, number of full-time city employees per 1,000 population, percentage of civilian labor force that was unemployed in 1960, percentage of employed persons in white-collar occupations and in manufacturing industries, and percentage of the employed civilian labor force that was professional and that were managers, officials, and proprietors. Other variables provide information on city characteristics, such as the age of the city, the presence of dormitory city, balanced city, central city, independent city, and the suburbs, the density of population per square mile, the employment-residence ratio, the presence or absence of application for the Model Cities Program, and the number of applications for, and whether the city was a winner of, the All-American City award between 1952 and 1967. Further variables detail information on the city housing situation, such as the number of dwelling units built in 1929 or earlier, the number of dilapidated dwellings, the presence or absence of a local housing authority and jurisdiction of local housing authority, participation in programs of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (Public Law 412), the presence or absence of a low-rent housing program and of slum clearance, and the number of low-rent housing units per 100,000 population. Additional variables give information on city politics, including the presence of mayor-council government, city-manager government, and nonpartisan elections, the number of city councilmen, the percentage of city council elected at large, the percentage of the county presidential vote for the Democratic party and for the Republican party in 1960, and the numbers of registered voters. Other items cover city services and programs, such as the presence or absence of poverty programs, the number of dollars per capita for poverty programs as of June 30, 1966, the presence or absence of urban renewal programs and their execution or completion as of June 30, 1966, the current per capita amount raised for Community Chest, and the presence or absence of action on fluoridation of city water. There are also variables that identify a subset of cities for urban renewal analysis, Community Chest analysis, analysis of fluoridation decisions, and analysis of decisions about public housing.
Curated
ICPSR Instructional Subset: Citizen Attitudes Toward Local Government (ICPSR 7522)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection was based on the Ten Cities Survey of Citizen Attitudes Toward Local Government conducted under the supervision of the Urban Observatory Program. The research for the project was funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and administered by the National League of Cities. Each Urban Observatory network city had autonomy over the study in its area. This instructional subset includes responses from surveys administered in four of the ten cities: Atlanta, Boston, Baltimore, and San Diego. The four were selected because they represented regional diversity and also because examination of the distribution of responses suggested four rather different patterns of citizen attitudes. Variables provide information on respondents' views of local government and services, public officials, local schools and racial integration, public transportation, police protection, neighborhood safety, the uses of city funds, most urgent city problems, most problematic groups in the city, effects of urban renewal on the city, courts, city wages, and strikes by public employees. Other items probed respondents' opinions of local problems in the areas of schooling, housing, public transportation, drugs, law and order, and city taxes. Demographic items specify age, sex, education, ethnicity, family income, home ownership, length of stay in the city of residence, and interests in politics.