Queen Annes County Economic Development Commission Survey Report (PDF)_201412300934062288

Queen Anne’s County
Economic Development Commission
Survey Findings

Conducted by:

BEACON
of the Franklin P. Perdue School of Business
At Salisbury University
August 2013


Table of Contents
Introduction

3

Participant Demographics

4

Importance of Issues to Queen Anne’s County

10

Recruiting, Retention, and Expansion Support

11

Business and Economic Issues

15

Workforce Issues

19

Infrastructure Issues

22

Government Planning and Management Issues

25

Social/Cultural Issues

28

Healthcare Issues

31

Environmental and Energy Issues

34

Education Issues

37

Growth and Change in the County

40

Queen Anne’s County’s Economy

43

Strengths and Challenges Analysis

47

Recommendations for Facing the Challenges

48

Vision for Queen Anne’s County

49

Appendix A-Survey

50

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

2


Introduction

This survey, conducted by the Business, Economic, and Community Outreach Network at the
Franklin P. Perdue School of Business at Salisbury University, was commissioned by the Queen
Anne’s County Economic Development Commission (EDC). The intent of the survey was gather
input from the local community on issues related to the strategic planning of the County and to
identify economic development priority in the County. The survey was distributed to a sample of
participants from the various industries in the County. Furthermore, the survey was made
available on the EDC’s website and publicized through local advertising media. A total of 456
respondents completed the survey. Of these, 21 participants were not residence of the county and
were therefore excluded from the analysis of the results contained in this report. The following
results and findings give an overview of the responses to each question in the survey, as well as,
a more detailed breakdown of responses by participant classifications.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

3


Participant Demographics
Participants were nearly equally split between male (51.3%) and female (48.7%). Approximately
89% of respondents were white, Black or African American respondent comprised 2.1% of
respondents, and all other ethnicities individually (American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian,
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Hispanic, some other race) comprised less than 2.0% of
respondents. Furthermore, 8.4% of respondents did not wish to indicate their ethnicity. Due to
the low number of responses form non-white participants, responses to the survey questions were
not able to be broken down by ethnicity. The majority of respondents were over the age of 35
with 17.3% of respondents between the ages of 35 and 44, 26.6% of respondents between the
ages of 45 and 54, 24%.2 of respondents between the ages of 55 and 64, and 24.0% of
respondents 65 years and older. Only 7.9% of respondents were below the age of 35 with the
majority of those respondents between the ages of 25 and 34 (7.2%).
The breakdown of respondents by education, identified by the highest level of school completed,

is provided in the Chart 1 below. A total of 434 participants responded to this question.
Chart. 1 Respondents by Education (Highest Level of School Completed)

1, 0%
0, 0%

22, 5%

Grade school or less (Grade 1-8)

9, 2%
Some high school (Grade 9-11)

29, 7%
56, 13%

59, 13%
26, 6%

90, 21%

High school diploma or equivalent
(e.g., GED)
Vocational/Technical/Trade School

142, 33%

Some college but no degree
Associate degree
Bachelor degree

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

4


The breakdown of respondents by length of residence is provided in Chart 2. A total of 447
participants responded to this question.
Chart 2. Respondents by Length of Residence in Queen Anne’s County

Less than 5 years
40, 9%
51, 11%

5-9 years

36, 8%
64, 14%

10-19 years
44, 10%
20-29 years
76, 17%

136, 31%
30-39 years
More than 40 years
All my life (please indicate
number of years)

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

5


The breakdown of respondents by household income is provided in Chart 3. A total of 402
participants responded to this question.
Chart 3. Respondent by Household Income

12, 3%
83, 21%

32, 8%
91, 23%

$0-$24,999
$25,000-$49,999
$50,000-$74,999

94, 23%

$75,000-$99,999
90, 22%

$100,000-$149,999
$150,000 and up

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

6

The breakdown of respondents by sector of employment is provided in Chart 4. A total of 413
participants responded to this question.
Chart 4. Respondent by Sector Employment

10, 2%

44, 11%

35, 8%

148, 36%
Public sector
Private sector
Non-profit
176, 43%

I don't know
Other

The breakdown of respondents by industry of employment is provided in Chart 5. All
participants responded to this question.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

7


Chart 5. Respondent Industry of Employment

Arts, entertainment, or recreation
2%
Agriculture, fishing,

Transportation and
Warehousing
1%
Telecommunications
1%
Software
Scientific and
1%
Technical
Services Retail
4%
2%
Religious
0%

forestry, or hunting
6%
Unemployed
0%

Wholesale
1%
Utilities
1%

Broadcasting

0% Education - College,
University, or Adult
2%

Other
14%

Education - Primary/Secondary (K12)
16%
Education Other
2%

Real Estate, Rental, or Leasing
6%
Construction
6%
Non-profits
6%

Finance and Insurance
6%
Manufacturing
4%

Publishing
1%

Government and Public
Adiministration
8%

Mining
0%
Military
1%

Legal Services
2%

Hotel and Food Health Care and
Social
Services
Processing
Assistance
2%
0%
4%
Information - Other
Information - Services and Data
Queen Anne’s County Economic Development
Commission Survey
0%
2%

8


Which of the following categories best describes your primary area of employment?
Answer Options
Homemaker

Retired
Student
Unemployed
Agriculture, fishing, forestry, or hunting
Arts, entertainment, or recreation
Broadcasting
Education - College, University, or Adult
Education - Primary/Secondary (K-12)
Education - Other
Construction
Finance and Insurance
Government and Public Administration
Health Care and Social Assistance
Hotel and Food Services
Information - Services and Data
Information - Other
Processing
Legal Services
Manufacturing
Military
Mining
Non-profits
Publishing
Real Estate, Rental, or Leasing
Religious
Retail
Scientific and Technical Services
Software
Telecommunications
Transportation and Warehousing

Utilities
Wholesale
Other (please specify)

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

Response
Percent
1.8%
19.2%
0.5%
0.0%
5.3%
1.5%
0.3%
2.0%
14.6%
2.3%
5.6%
5.6%
7.1%
3.3%
1.8%
1.8%
0.0%
0.3%
2.0%
3.3%
0.5%
0.0%

5.6%
0.8%
5.3%
0.0%
2.0%
3.5%
0.5%
0.8%
0.8%
1.0%
1.3%

Response
Count
7
76
2
0
21
6
1
8
58
9
22
22
28
13
7
7

0
1
8
13
2
0
22
3
21
0
8
14
2
3
3
4
5
52

9


Importance of Issues to Queen Anne’s County
Participants identified the level of importance for a number of key issues within the County. A summary of the overall responses to
each question is provided, as well as, a breakdown of participant categories that differed from the overall response set. A participant
category (by occupation, gender, age, education, length of residence in the County, income level, and sector of employment) is
determined to differ from the overall response set if the majority of the given category of participants selected a response that was two
options away from (on the Likert scale from Very Important to Not Important) the overall response.
Following the graphical display of the results for each question the weighted scores for each issue are provided in a table format. The
issues are sorted in order of the issue scored as most important to respondents to those rated as least important. To calculate the

weighted score of each issue, each response option was given a weight with “very important” or “excellent” a higher score (either a 4,
5, or 6 depending on the total number of response options). More negative response options were scored lower and “no opinion” was
given a weight of zero. Thus, the issue with higher weighted scores indicated that a higher percentage of respondents indicated that the
issue is very important and fewer indicated that the issue is unimportant.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

10


Recruiting, Job Retention, and Expansion Support
Overall a majority of participants rated recruiting, job retention, and expanding support for the agriculture and agricultural products
industry, the waterman and seafood industry, the education and educational services industry and small business as very important or
important. The transportation and utilities industry, the energy industry, the healthcare industry, services related to the retired or older
adult population, the technology industry and the tourism and hospitality industry are also commonly rated as very important or
important in this regard. Respondents in the manufacturing, transportation, and utility occupations varied from the overall responses in
regards to recruiting, job retention and expanding support for manufacturing, which was rated very important more often than the
overall response, and health care which was rated important or somewhat important compared to the overall results indicating very
important. Respondents in non-profit occupations varied from the overall responses in regards to biotechnology and medical research
and telecommunications, which were rated as not important more frequently than important and very important as the overall ratings
indicate respectively.
When examined by age group it is found that the only differences lie in the construction and trades industry which was rated as
somewhat important more frequently by respondents between the ages of 24 and 35 and was rated very important more frequently by
respondents between the ages of 54 and 65. The construction and trades industry was also rated differently by participants based on
level of education with those having some college education rating construction and trades as very important and those with graduate
or professional degrees rating it as somewhat important. Likewise, ratings for the manufacturing industry showed that those with a
high school diploma rated recruiting, retention, and support for the manufacturing industry as important more frequently while those
with professional degrees rated the industry as not important more frequently. Similarly, services for retired and elderly population
were rated as very important more frequently by those with some college and associates degrees but rated as somewhat important
more frequently by those with graduate degrees. Recruiting, retention and support for the telecommunications industry was rated as

very important more frequently by those with high school diplomas and graduate degrees and rated as somewhat important more
frequently by those with bachelor’s degrees. The last industry that differed in response based on participants’ education level was
biotechnology which was rated as important more frequently by those with high school diplomas and graduate degrees and not
important more frequently by those with professional degrees.
The only industries which varied in their responses based on participants’ length of time living in Queen Anne’s County are the
construction and trades industry and the tourism industry. The construction and trades industry was rated as somewhat important more
frequently but those who have lived in the county less than five years and between five and nine years while it was rated as very

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

11


important by respondents who have lived in the county for between 20 and 29 years and over 40 years. Respondents living in the
County for between 5 and 30 years (those in the 5-9, 10-19, and 20-29 years of residence in the County) rated recruiting, retention,
and support for the tourism industry as very important more frequently than the overall response by participants. Those who have
lived in the county for between 30 and 29 years rated support for tourism as somewhat important more frequently.
Participants also varied in their responses for several industries based on their level of income. Responses in regard to the construction
and trades industry varied from the overall responses for those earning $100K-$149K, who rated support for this industry as very
important more frequently, and those earning over $150K who rated it as somewhat important more frequently. Recruiting, retention,
and support for the telecommunications industry was rated as somewhat important more frequently by those earning $50K-$74K
while it was rated as very important more often by those earning $100K-$150K and those earning over $150K.
The only differences in responses by participant sector were in regards to the manufacturing and biotechnology industries. In regards
to the manufacturing industry those in the private sector more often rated support for the industry as important, whereas, those in the
non-profit sector more often rated support as not important. Similar results were found in regard to the biotechnology industry with the
addition of those in the public sector rating the support for biotechnology as important more frequently than the overall response set.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

12

50

0
46
13
23
139

158

62
16
62

71
119

112
105
120

62
46
46
69
13

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

261

103
89

24
47
7

129

150
164
171

155

73

166

63

19

168

121
Not Important

68

13

163
133

109
94
93

18
23

35
Tourism and hospitality

256
193

Technology

151

Services related to the retired and older adult
population

134

63

Professional services (law, accounting, finance,
etc.)

218

Non-profit sector

141
139

118

Health care

169
139

Small business

145
104

Energy

250
134
72

Education/ Educational Services

94

Construction and trades

132

Telecommunications

400

Biotechnology and medical research

100
129

Arts, crafts and music

200

Manufacturing

150
250

Waterman and seafood industry

350

Transportation and utilities

300

Agriculture and agricultural products

Recruiting, job retention, and expanding support for the following types of businesses:

500

450

54
134
153
170

135

Very Important

Important

Somewhat Important

No Opinion


Recruiting, job retention, and expanding support for the following
types of businesses:
Issue

Rating
Small business
3.435
Agriculture and agricultural products
3.368
Education/ Educational Services
3.350
Waterman and seafood industry
3.259
Health care
3.165
Technology
3.002
Energy
2.984
Tourism and hospitality
2.982
Services related to the retired and older adult population
2.947
Transportation and utilities
2.927
Telecommunications
2.812
Construction and trades
2.758
Biotechnology and medical research
2.617
Manufacturing
2.562
Arts, crafts and music

2.437
Professional services (law, accounting, finance, etc.)
2.384
Non-profit sector
2.382
This table provides the weighted scoring of each issue. The higher the score, the higher the importance respondents give to the issue.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

14


Business and Economic Issues
Overall, the business and economic development issues of access to capital, competitiveness with other counties in the region, the
cost of employer-provided benefits (including healthcare), new incentives for businesses, the revitalization and re-utilization of idle
and/or underutilization properties, support for working farms, forests, and water resource-based industries, the costs associated with
compliance with state and federal regulations, and the cost of utilities as very important or important. The only issue for which
participants differed based on their occupation is the competitiveness of the county, both with other counties in the region and with
other states. Participants in retail and non-profits, as well as, retirees rated the competitiveness with other states as somewhat
important more frequently than the overall response of very important. Those in non-profits rated the County’s competitiveness with
other counties in the region as not important more frequently while the overall response set indicated the issue is very important. The
ratings of competitiveness with other states also varied based on respondents’ age group with those between the ages of 24 and 54
rating the competitiveness with other states as very important more often and those in the 55 to 65+ age groups rated the issue as
somewhat important more often than the overall response set. The importance of the cost of utilities also varied by participants’ age
with those in the 25 to 34 age group rating the issue as very important more frequently and those in the 35 to 44 age group rating the
issue as somewhat important more frequently.
The ratings of several issues differed based on participants’ level of education including: competitiveness with other states, the cost of
employer-provided benefits, global competitiveness, new incentives for businesses, the costs associated with compliance with of
government regulations, and the cost of utilities. Competitiveness with other states was rated as very important more frequently by
those with a high school diploma or graduate degree and rated somewhat important more frequently by those with a professional

degree. Similarly, the cost of employer provided benefits (including healthcare) was rated as very important more frequently by
respondents with a high school diploma or post-graduate degree and somewhat important by those with a professional degree. Global
competitiveness was rated not important more often by those with a post-graduate degree and rated by important more often by those
with a high school diploma. Both new incentives for businesses and the costs associated with compliance with state and federal
regulations were rated as very important more frequently by those with bachelor’s degrees and graduate degrees (in regards to the cost
of compliance) or post-graduate degrees (in regards to incentives). Both issues were rated as somewhat important more frequently by
those with professional degrees as compared to the overall response set. Lastly, the cost of utilities was rated more frequently as very
important by those with post-graduate degrees and somewhat important by those with graduate degrees.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

15


Respondents differed, based on their length of residence in the County, in their responses to the issues of competitiveness with other
states and the exodus of traditional industries. In regards to the competitiveness with other states those who have lived in the county
for less than five years and between 20 and 29 years more often rated the issue as very important while those that have lived in the
County for between five and nine years and 10 and 19 years rated the issue as somewhat important more frequently. This pattern is
found in reverse in regards to the exodus of traditional industries. Those that have lived in the County for less than five years and
between 20 and 29 years rated the exodus as somewhat important while those that have lived in the County between five and nine
years and between 10 and 19 years rated the issue as very important.
Concern for the exodus of traditional industries also differed based on participant income level. Participants in the $25K-$49K income
group rated the exodus of traditional industries from the County as very important while those earning more than $150K rated it as
somewhat important.
The only issue for which participants differed based on their sector of employment was the County’s competitiveness with other
counties in the region. Those in the public and private sector, as well as, those that did not know with which sector they identify more
often rated the competitiveness with other counties as very important. Only respondents in the non-profit sector more frequently rated
the issue as not important.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

16


50

0

150

91

68

45
65
109

80
47
110

23

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey
137

208

300

134
122
160

89
68
99

53
35
13

17

129

66
33
19
Cost of transportation of goods

163
158

165

Cost of utilities

109

112

Costs associated with compliance with
State/Federal regulations

121

126

Support for working farms, forests, and
water resource-based industries

100
126
166

Revitalization and re-utilization of idle
and/or underutilized properties

250
135

New incentives for businesses

400

Global competitiveness

180
170

Exodus of traditional industries

146

Cost of employer-provided benefits,
including health care

23

Competitiveness with other states

200

Competitiveness with other counties in the
region

350

Access to capital

Business and Economic Development Issues:

500

450

46
94

181

122
115
128

104
39

Very Important

245
Important

161
Somewhat Important

Not Important

No Opinion


Business and Economic Development Issues:
Issue
Support for working farms, forests, and water resource-based industries
Revitalization and re-utilization of idle and/or underutilized properties
Cost of employer-provided benefits, including health care
Access to capital
Cost of utilities
Competitiveness with other counties in the region

New incentives for businesses
Costs associated with compliance with State/Federal regulations
Competitiveness with other states
Exodus of traditional industries
Cost of transportation of goods
Global competitiveness

Rating
3.333
3.154
3.071
3.005
2.956
2.954
2.916
2.888
2.739
2.704
2.703
2.190

This table provides the weighted scoring of each issue. The higher the score, the higher the importance respondents give to the issue.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

18


Workforce Issues
Overall, the availability of childcare services, qualified/technical workers, affordable housing, of high-paying jobs, vocational training

and job opportunities, effective work habits and attitudes and employment opportunities for youth and recent college graduates are all
workforce issues rated by a majority of respondents as either very important or important. Those in non-profit occupations differed
from the overall response set on the issues of availability of affordable housing and effective work habits and attitudes. Both of these
were rated more frequently as somewhat important, compared to the overall rating of very important. The availability of housing and
the availability of affordable housing were rated differently by participants based on their level of education. The availability of
housing was rated as very important more frequently by those with some college education while it was rated as somewhat important
more frequently by those with post-graduate and professional degrees. The availability of affordable housing was rated as somewhat
important more frequently by those with post-graduate degrees. Participants with some college education, bachelor’s degrees, and
graduate degrees rated the availability of affordable housing as very important more frequently than the overall response set.
Participants’ responses regarding the availability of affordable housing also differed based on the length of residence in the County.
Those that have lived in the county for between 10 and 19 years more often rated the availability of affordable housing as somewhat
important, whereas, those that have lived in the County between 20 and 40+ years rated the issue as very important more frequently.
Lastly, both the availability of affordable housing and the availability of high paying jobs (both full-time and part-time) were rated as
very important by the majority of participants while those in the non-profit sector rated both issues as somewhat important more
frequently.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

19


50

0
147

110
103

37

25
19
165

143

79

73
66

55
49
22

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey
131

130

52

116

184
163

116

90

130

41
34
42

20
87
86

24
18
14

Employment opportunities for youth and
recent college graduates

150
86

Effective work habits and attitudes

164

75

Availability of vocational training and job
opportunities

300

Availability of employment incentive program

182
203

Availability of employee-training programs

122
172
38

Availability of entry-level jobs

170
83

Availability of multilingual communication in
the workplace

172
109

Availability of seasonal agricultural workers

200
152

Availability of high-paying jobs (both full-time

and part-time)

350
126

Availability of affordable housing

98

Availability of housing

100

Availability of qualified/technical workers

250

Availability of child care services

400

Availability of adult care services

Workforce Issues:

500

450

152

168

171

136

197

157
148

131
64

Very Important

Important

Somewhat Important

159
Not Important

No Opinion


Workforce Issues:
Issue
Employment opportunities for youth and recent college graduates

Availability of high-paying jobs (both full-time and part-time)
Availability of qualified/technical workers
Effective work habits and attitudes
Availability of vocational training and job opportunities
Availability of affordable housing
Availability of child care services
Availability of employee-training programs
Availability of housing
Availability of adult care services
Availability of entry-level jobs
Availability of employment incentive program
Availability of seasonal agricultural workers
Availability of multilingual communication in the workplace

Rating
3.227
3.188
3.075
3.051
3.025
2.968
2.881
2.802
2.746
2.727
2.667
2.652
2.566
2.009

This table provides the weighted scoring of each issue. The higher the score, the higher the importance respondents give to the issue.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

21


Infrastructure Issues
Overall, the adequacy of local streets and roads, availability of public water systems, recycling systems, the adequacy of solid waste
systems, broadband/high-speed internet infrastructure and access, traffic congestion on local roads, and traffic congestion on highways
are all infrastructure issues rated by a majority of participants as either very important or important. It is notable that broadband and
high-speed internet infrastructure and access was rated as very important by over 60% of all participants who responded to this
question.
Participants in the agricultural and other resource-based industry occupations differed from the overall results on their rating of the
importance of the adequacy of recycling systems rating this issue as more frequently somewhat important, rather than very important.
Those in manufacturing, transportation, and utility occupations also rated the adequacy of recycling systems as somewhat important
more often than the average respondent. Respondents in these occupations also varied from the overall response set rating the issue as
less important than the overall rating. Respondents in F.I.R.E. (Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate) occupations more frequently rated
traffic congestion on local roads as somewhat important. Lastly, those in non-profit occupations more frequently rated the connectivity
of transportation systems as very important.
Participants also varied by age on their rating of the adequacy of local public transportation and the adequacy of sidewalks, trails, and
bike paths. Participants between the ages of 25 and 54 rated the adequacy of local public transportation as somewhat important more
often while those between the ages of 55 and 64 more frequently rated the issue as very important. In regards to the adequacy of
sidewalks, trails, and bike paths, respondents between the ages of 45 and 64 more frequently rated the issue as somewhat important
while those between the ages of 25 and 34 more often rated the issue as very important.
Breaking down responses by participants’ level of education shows a difference in the rating of the adequacy and access to local
transportation and the adequacy of public sewer systems. Participants with some college education rated the adequacy and access to
local transportation services as very important more often while those with bachelor’s degrees rated this issue as somewhat important.
The adequacy of public sewer systems was rated as somewhat important more frequently compared to the rest of respondents which
rated this issue as very important more frequently.

Only one issue varied by the length of residence within the County: adequacy of sidewalks, trails, and bike paths. Respondents that
have lived in the county for 5 to 19 years rated this issue more often as important while respondents who have lived in the county for
more than 40 years more frequently as not important. Lastly, the adequacy of local public transportation was more often rated as very

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

22


0

50
94

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey
42
48
71
149
146
120

14
98

133

97

141

106

161

300
269

122

162

143
95

38
39
31
14

52
8

23

87
94
82

36

31
Traffic congestion - Highways

142

165

Traffic congestion - Local roads

157

157
157

Connectivity of transportation systems
(ex., bike racks on buses, sidewalks by
bus stops, park-n-ride lots)

185

Broadband/high-speed internet
infrastructure and access

176
106

Adequacy of solid waste systems

141
78

Adequacy of recycling systems

139
74

Adequacy and availability of public
sewer systems

150
19

Adequacy and availability of public water
systems

200

30

Adequacy and accessibility of freight air
service within 100 miles

350
141

Adequacy and accessibility of freight
railroad service

142
152

99

Adequacy and accessibility of Airport
passenger service

112
89

Adequacy of LOCAL streets and roads

100

Adequacy and accessibility of sidewalks,
trails and bike paths

250

Adequacy and accessibility of REGIONAL
public transportation services

400

Adequacy and accessibility of LOCAL
public transportation services

important by those earning between $25K and $49K and more often rated as somewhat important by respondents earning between
$50K and $150K+.

Infrastructure Issues:

500

450

30
82
171

135

176

171
144

108

Very Important

126
Important

Somewhat Important

131
Not Important

No Opinion

Infrastructure Issues:
Issue
Broadband/high-speed internet infrastructure and access
Traffic congestion - Highways
Adequacy of solid waste systems
Adequacy of LOCAL streets and roads
Traffic congestion - Local roads
Adequacy and availability of public sewer systems
Adequacy of recycling systems
Adequacy and availability of public water systems
Adequacy and accessibility of LOCAL public transportation services
Adequacy and accessibility of REGIONAL public transportation services
Adequacy and accessibility of sidewalks, trails and bike paths
Connectivity of transportation systems (ex., bike racks on buses, sidewalks by bus stops, park-n-ride lots)
Adequacy and accessibility of freight air service within 100 miles
Adequacy and accessibility of Airport passenger service
Adequacy and accessibility of freight railroad service

Rating
3.436
3.046
3.046
3.037
2.991
2.957
2.954
2.947
2.739
2.637
2.567

2.436
2.028
1.938
1.843

This table provides the weighted scoring of each issue. The higher the score, the higher the importance respondents give to the issue.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

24


Government Planning and Management Issues
Overall, a majority of respondents identified the following growth planning and management issues as either very important or
important: active local government role in managing growth, activity community participation in economic development planning,
adequacy of community emergency preparedness and encouraging the reuse of abandoned or underutilized sites. These issues are
closely followed in importance by incentivizing the redevelopment of idle or abandoned sites and encouraging regional coordination
of growth issues and strategies. The only occupation group of respondents that differed from the overall responses of participants was
those in the F.I.R.E occupations in regards to incentives to redevelopment of idle or abandoned sites. Those in F.I.R.E. occupations
more often rated this issue as somewhat important and important.
In regards to the regulations to control development, respondents were highly divided based on age group. The ratings of those
between the ages of 25 and 34 were split between not important, somewhat important, and important. Respondents between the ages
of 35 and 44 viewed this more often rated as somewhat important and those aged 54 and over more frequently rated this issue as very
important. This issue was also rated differently by participants based on their length of residence in the County. Those living in the
County for 5 to 9 years tended to rate the regulations to control development as somewhat important while the rest of respondents
tended to rate the issue as very important. The only issue for which respondents differed based on their level of education was the
adequacy of community emergency preparedness. Respondents with some college education more often rated the adequacy of
community emergency preparedness as very important while those with a professional degree more often rated the issue as somewhat
important compared to the overall results. Lastly, the availability of workforce housing was rated as very important more often by
those in the $25 to $49K income group and somewhat important more importantly by those in the $50 to $75K income group.

Queen Anne’s County Economic Development Commission Survey

25