Extension logo
western rural development center logo

USU County and Municipal COVID-19 Surveys Final Report, May 2020

Courtney Flint, USU Extension, and Don Albrecht, Western Rural Development Center

County and municipal leaders and staff are on the front lines of responding to emergencies. The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 presents considerable hardships for the people of Utah, as well as challenges for local officials. In response to the rapidly developing COVID-19 pandemic, we surveyed Utah county and municipal representatives in April 2020. We administered the survey using Qualtrics and email contacts for county representatives, and by using the Utah League of Cities and Towns’ (ULCT) newsletter for the municipal representatives. The ULCT survey had a smaller set of questions. We received 54 county responses from 24 counties and 58 municipal responses from 43 cities. Appendix A lists counties and municipalities represented. The surveys included the following questions:

Assets (county only)

  • In the current COVID-19 pandemic, what do you feel is going well for your city or county right now?
  • How confident are you about your city's or county's capacity to handle these issues (a) right now, or within the next six months, and (b) in six to 18 months?

Critical concerns

  • What are your critical needs and concerns (a) right now or within the next 6 months, and (b) in 6 to 18 months, as your city or county faces this pandemic and its broader implications? (Respondents selected from the categories health, economic, and social, and then elaborated.)
  • Are there specific ways USU and USU Extension can help your city or county address any of these emerging needs and concerns?

Contact

Dr. Courtney Flint

Community Resource Specialist, USU Extension
Email: courtney.flint@usu.edu
Phone: (435) 797-8635

Dr. Don Albrecht

Director of the Western Rural Development Center
Email: don.albrecht@usu.edu
Phone: (435) 797-9731

This material is based in part upon work that is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under award number 2019-51150-29875.

This report highlights the themes that emerged from the survey. We organized county findings in three clusters: Wasatch Front and Back Counties, Other Metro Counties, and Non-Metro Counties. We organized the municipal findings by the caucus groups arranged by ULCT: Cities of the First and Second Class, Established/Mid-Sized Cities, Rapid Growth Cities, Rural Hub and Resort Cities, and Traditional Rural Cities. 

The Western Rural Development Center and USU Extension assembled a set of resources to respond to the concerns and issues raised in this survey. Obtain this information from the Western Rural Development Center at https://wrdc.usu.edu/news/untitled and from the USU Extension COVID-19 resource website at https://extension.usu.edu/covid-19/.

Assets: Things Going Well (county survey only)

County-level respondents most often mentioned no or few cases or the flattening curve related to emergent cases and the responsiveness of citizens to calls for social distancing and helping neighbors. A number of respondents mentioned good communication and information flow and effective actions by elected officials and health providers.

Table 1. Assets: Things Going Well for Counties in Utah During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Wasatch Front and Back [a]

  • Responsive Citizens Social Distancing (5)
  • County Leadership and Teamwork (3)
  • Good Communication and Information (2)
  • Effective Health Department and Testing (2)
  • Curve is Flattening (2)

Other Metro [b]

  • Curve is Flattening (4)
  • Responsive Citizens, Solidarity (3)
  • County Leadership and Teamwork (3)
  • Effective Health Department (2)
  • Helpful Business Response (1)
  • County is Maintaining Services (1)

Non-Metro [c]

  • Curve is Flattening (17)
  • Responsive Citizens Social Distancing (12)
  • Good Communication and Information (7)
  • Helpful Business Response and Support (4)
  • County is Maintaining Services (4)
  • County Leadership and Teamwork (3)
  • Effective Health Department (2)
  • Time to Prepare
Note. Table displays the number of mentions in parentheses
[a] Counties include Davis, Utah, Weber, Morgan, Summit (10 people)
[b] Counties include Cache, Juab, Tooele, Washington (7 people)
[c] Counties include Carbon, Daggett, Duchesne, Emery, Garfield, Grand, Iron, Kane, Millard, Rich, San Juan, Sanpete, Sevier, Uintah, Wayne (37 people)

Critical Concerns: Categories

Regarding current needs and concerns, economics was the dominant category of concern for counties and municipalities (see Figures 1 and 2).

Figure 1. County economic, health care, and social critical current needs and concerns.

Figure 2. Municipal economic, health care, social, and other critical current needs and concerns.

Critical Concern Themes

At the county level, the most common current concerns include economic and business impacts (particularly to small businesses). Health care capacity and jobs or unemployment were notable concerns as well. Reliance on tourism was a concern for those from non-metro counties. Looking out 6 to 18 months, the most common emerging concerns for county respondents included economic and business impacts, maintaining public services and critical infrastructure given the tax revenue loss and issues related to local government fiscal solvency, jobs and unemployment, and ongoing health care capacity issues (see Table 2).

Table 2.
Critical Concerns of County Representatives in Utah During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Wasatch Front and Back [a]

Other Metro [b]

Current Concerns

Future Concerns

Current Concerns

Future Concerns

  • Economic and Business Impacts (7)
  • Health Care Capacity and Medical Supplies (3)
  • Jobs and Unemployment (3)
  • Vulnerable populations
  • Health-Wellness-Mental Health
  • Affordable Housing
  • Reopening Logistics
  • Maintaining Service
  • Economic and Business Impacts (7)
  • Maintaining Services with Declining Revenue
  • Jobs and Unemployment
  • Health Care Capacity
  • Reopening Logistics
  • Vulnerable Populations
  • Economic and Business Impacts (3)
  • Jobs and Unemployment (3)
  • Reliance on Tourism
  • Vulnerable Populations (esp. Seniors)
  • Distance from Urban Areas, Resources
  • Maintaining Services with Declining Revenue (3)
  • Economic and Business Impacts (2)
  • Jobs and Unemployment (2)
  • Affordable Housing
  • Reliance on Tourism

Non-Metro [c]

Current Concerns

Future Concerns

  • Economic and Business Impacts (15)
  • Reliance on Tourism (11)
  • Health Care Capacity and Medical Supplies (10)
  • Jobs and Unemployment (7)
  • Vulnerable Populations (esp. Seniors, Youth) (6)
  • Risks from Tourists, Others Coming In (3)
  • Distance from Urban Areas, Resources (2)
  • Livestock Producers (2)
  • Maintaining Services
  • Economic and Business Impacts (22)
  • Health Care Capacity (6)
  • Maintaining Services with Declining Revenue (5)
  • Jobs and Unemployment (4)
  • Reliance on Tourism (4)
  • Reopening Logistics (3)
  • Health-Wellness-Safety (3)
  • Vulnerable Populations (Seniors, Low Income) (3)
  • Risks from Tourists, Others Coming In (2)
  • Promoting Economic Diversification
  • Livestock Producers
  • Population Loss
  • Affordable Housing
  • Rural Needs
  • Note. Table displays the number of mentions greater than 1.
    [a] Counties include Davis, Utah, Weber, Morgan, Summit (10 people).
    [b] Counties include Cache, Juab, Tooele, Washington (7 people)
    [c] Counties include Carbon, Daggett, Duchesne, Emery, Garfield, Grand, Iron, Kane, Millard, Rich, San Juan, Sanpete, Sevier, Uintah, Wayne (37 people)

    At the municipal level, immediate and longer-term needs and concerns mentioned focused heavily on the economy and concern for small businesses, and the ability to provide services, utilities, and capital projects given revenue shortfalls (see Table 3).

    Table 3.
    Critical Concerns of County Representatives in Utah During the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Cities of the First and Second Class 7 people/6 cities

    Established/Mid-Sized Cities 15 people/14 cities

    Current Concerns

    Future Concerns

    Current Concerns

    Future Concerns

    • Revenue Shortfall, Providing Services (4)
    • Tourist Economy Concerns (1)
    • Unemployment (1)
    • Community Identity Loss with Cancelled Events (1)
    • Housing Downturn (1)
    • Domestic Violence (1)
    • Revenue Generation, Providing Services (3)
    • Economic Recovery (2)
    • Housing (1)
    • PPE Expenses (1)
    • Unemployment Insurance (1)
    • Getting Residents to Reengage (1)
    • Revenue Shortfall, Providing Services (5)
    • Economic Uncertainty, Supporting Businesses (2)
    • Recreation Facility and Program Closures (1)
    • Loss of Community Connectivity (1)
    • Refugee Population (1)
    • Revenue Shortfall, Providing Services (5)
    • Jobs (3)
    • Economic Recovery (2)
    • Need Projection Methods for Sales Taxes (1)
    • Utility Deferment (1)

    Rapid Growth Cities 16 people/15 cities

    Rural Hub and Resort Cities 14 people/14 cities

    Current Concerns

    Future Concerns

    Current Concerns

    Future Concerns

    • Economic Uncertainty, Concern for Businesses (4)
    • Revenue Shortfall, Providing Services (2)
    • Facility Closures (1)
    • Citizen Wellbeing (1)
    • Revenue, Budget (5)
    • Economic Welfare (3)
    • Meeting Service Needs (3)
    • Health Resources, Mental Health (2)
    • Jobs (2)
    • Housing (1)
    • COVID-19 in the Fall (1)
    • Maintaining Rec Program (1)
    • Tourism impacts (4)
    • Businesses, Economy (4)
    • Revenue Shortfall, Providing Services (2)
    • Jobs and Unemployment (1)
    • Elderly and Disadvantaged Populations (1)
    • Economic Recovery, Small Businesses (3)
    • Jobs (2)
    • Staff Costs, Revenue (2)
    • Tourism and Reopening Parks (1)

    Traditional Rural Cities 6 people/6 cities

    Current Concerns

    Future Concerns

  • Loss of revenue
  • Property tax deferment
  • Event cancellation
  • Economic uncertainty
  • Loss of revenue, provision of services
  • Economic recovery
  • Tourism
  • Keeping residents safe
  • Note. Table displays number of mentions in parentheses. Names of cities can be found in the appendix

    Capacity to Respond

    When asked about the capacity to respond to immediate needs and concerns, the majority of county respondents indicated “somewhat confident” (56%) followed by “very confident” (26%). When looking forward 6 to 18 months at emerging needs, 52% of county respondents were “somewhat confident” and 27% were “somewhat unconfident.” Figure 3 shows levels of confidence across county clusters.

    Figure 3. County level of confidence in capacity to handle emerging issues.

    Municipal respondents were only asked to indicate confidence in response capacity in the next 6 months, and nearly half indicated they were somewhat confident (48%), followed by very confident (35%) and not confident (9%). Figure 4 shows levels of confidence across city clusters.

    Figure 4. Municipal level of confidence in capacity to handle issues through the next 6 months.

    Ideas on How USU and USU Extension Could Help

    County and municipal respondents had a number of ideas for how USU and USU Extension could help in these challenging times. Table 4 summarizes these ideas.

    Table 4. County and Municipal Responses on How USU Can Help Utah Communities Respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Wasatch Front and Back 10 people/5 counties

    • Play a key role in helping citizens get back to some of the basics taught in the field of family and consumer sciences. (e.g., home-based food production and preservation)
    • Keep in touch and share relevant information
    • Help find PPE – possibly 3D printing
    • Provide academic leadership in economic forecasting and behavioral economics
    • Remind students to follow COVID-19 rules
    • Join the Morgan Economic Development Partnership Board and participate in discussions about planning and modeling to address these issues going forward
    • Partner on diversifying economic base, consistent with carbon footprint goals (e.g., sustainable forestry and agriculture)

    Other Metro 7 people/4 counties

    • Support local businesses
    • Provide market research on consumer optimism in core markets
    • Provide data validating safe travel
    • Provide data showing which markets are safe
    • Keep gathering hopeful and helpful resources for businesses and individuals

    Non-Metro 37 people/15 counties

    • Support local businesses (including agricultural producers) and communities with information, accessing resources and grants, paperwork assistance
    • Stay positive and share web-based programs and learning opportunities with public
    • Provide information on restarting economy
    • Adapt curriculum and training to current and emerging workforce
    • Help with economic development, market research, and strategic planning
    • Continue to do your part and follow health department guidelines
    • Continue offering the helpful digital programming with library
    • Provide online job training
    • Showcase rural needs

    Municipalities

    • Help identify project revenue sources and the estimations and data to help in forecasting and planning, stay current on economic trends, and projection methods for sales taxes
    • Share information on how communities are helping local economies and dealing with budgets
    • Help get economy back on track by providing strategies for businesses and identifying grants for utility expenses
    • Provide public and community outreach, including strategies for mental health
    • Publish data quickly to provide direction to local governments
    • Provide tools or ideas on how to quantify the effects of COVID-19
    • Promote objective distribution of local government relief funds

    Appendix A. Counties and Municipalities Represented in Survey Data

    Counties Represented

    Wasatch Front and Back

    • Davis
    • Morgan
    • Summit
    • Utah
    • Weber

    Other Metro

    • Cache
    • Juab
    • Tooele
    • Washington

    Non-Metro

    • Carbon
    • Daggett
    • Duchesne
    • Emery
    • Garfield
    • Grand
    • Iron
    • Kane
    • Millard
    • Rich
    • San Juan
    • Sanpete
    • Sevier
    • Uintah
    • Wayne

    Municipalities Represented (Based on Utah League of Cities and Towns’ caucus groups)

    Cities of the First and Second Class

    • Millcreek
    • Provo
    • St. George
    • South Jordan
    • West Jordan
    • West Valley City

    Established/Mid-Sized Cities

    • Clearfield
    • Cottonwood Heights
    • Emigration Canyon
    • Holladay
    • Lindon
    • Logan
    • Midvale
    • Murray
    • North Salt Lake
    • River Heights
    • Roy
    • South Salt Lake
    • Washington Terrace
    • West Bountiful

    Rapid Growth Cities

    • Hooper City
    • Kaysville
    • La Verkin
    • Mapleton
    • Marriott-Slaterville
    • North Logan
    • Payson
    • Perry
    • Pleasant View
    • Saratoga Springs
    • Springville
    • Vineyard
    • Washington
    • West Haven
    • Woodland Hills

    Rural

    • Aurora
    • Bear River Town
    • Castle Valley
    • Leamington
    • Orangeville
    • Wales Town

    Rural Hub/Resort Cities

    • Blanding
    • Boulder
    • Brian Head
    • Bryce Canyon City
    • Heber
    • Hideout
    • Kanab
    • Moab
    • Nephi
    • Park City
    • Rockville
    • Roosevelt
    • Springdale
    • Vernal