Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Opinion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local survey finds broad support for Carpinteria advanced purification project; many remain undecided on costs
Summary
FM3 Research polled 269 Carpinteria Valley Water District residents in March 2025 and found broadly favorable views of the district and roughly two-thirds support for the Advanced Purification Project (CAP) after a brief explanation; cost concerns were the most common reason for opposition.
Miranda Everett, a partner at FM3 Research, told the Carpinteria Valley Water District board that a March 2025 telephone and online survey of 269 residents found generally positive impressions of the utility and substantial initial support for the district’s Advanced Purification Project (CAP).
The poll showed that 42% of respondents had heard at least a little about CAP and 7% had heard a great deal. When given a brief explanation of the project, roughly two‑thirds of respondents indicated they would support it; 38% said they would strongly support CAP while about 18% opposed it. After more detailed pro and con messaging in the survey, support settled around two‑thirds while opposition rose but remained a minority.
Respondents cited several reasons for backing CAP: improved disaster preparedness and response, higher water quality, local control of supplies and increased reliability. Among opponents (a much smaller group), cost sensitivity was the most frequently cited concern; about 30% of opponents flagged price as a primary reason to oppose the project.
FM3 characterized the sample as random and representative by age and gender. Everett emphasized the results were recent (March 2025) and that additional outreach and education could move undecided residents (roughly 17% in initial questions) toward informed support or opposition.
Board members praised the presentation as useful contextual data for the district’s outreach strategy. The packet and slides included topline percentages and verbatim open‑ended comments that the firm grouped into themes.
The presentation did not change any board policy at the meeting; it provided staff and directors with a market‑research snapshot to guide public communication and education ahead of future decisions.
