Tremonton Wellbeing Survey Findings 2026

By Dr. Courtney Flint, Nicolas Holden, and Team

utah wellbeing survey logo

Contact Information

Dr. Courtney Flint

435-797-8635

Summary

Tremonton is one of 57 cities and towns participating in the Utah Wellbeing Survey Project in 2026. This project is designed to assess the wellbeing and local perspectives of city residents and to provide information to city leaders to inform general planning processes. Additional analysis is underway, and this report may be updated over time.

We are grateful to all those who took the survey and to our city partners who helped make this possible. A special thank you goes to the Utah League of Cities and Towns and the following cities for funding this project: Cedar City, Delta, Heber, La Verkin, South Weber, Vernal, West Bountiful, and West Valley City. We also acknowledge support from the Institute for Disability Research, Policy & Practice (IDRPP).

This report describes findings from the 2026 Tremonton survey and comparative information with other project cities and towns. In March 2026, Tremonton City advertised the survey for residents. All city residents age 18+ were encouraged to take the online Qualtrics survey. Cities and towns generally advertised the survey through newsletters, social media, emails, or other various efforts.

How many people responded?

  • 465 viable surveys were recorded in this 2026 survey effort.
  • The Tremonton 2024 survey had 534 responses and the Tremonton 2022 survey had 337 responses.
  • The adult population of Tremonton was estimated at 7,801, based on the American Community Survey by the U.S. Census. The 465 survey responses in 2026 represent 6.0% of the adult population and have a conservative margin of error of 4.41%.

Survey Respondent Characteristics

Resident Statistics Value
Full Time Residents of Tremonton 97.8%
Part Time Residents of Tremonton 2.2%
Length of Residency — Range 0.2-80 years
Length of Residency — Average 22.5 years
Length of Residency — Median 18 years
Length of Residency 5 Years or less 23.7%

Demographic characteristics of the survey respondents were compared below with U.S. Census information from the 2020-2024 American Community Survey. In the graph below, gray bars indicate differences between the American Community Survey estimates and the Utah Wellbeing Project surveys. The wider the gray bars, the larger the differences. Also note that estimates for religious affiliation, adult non-conforming or non-binary gender, disability, and chronic conditions are unavailable from the census data. There can also be a variable margin of error in the American Community Survey estimates, and caution should be used when comparing estimates. Not all respondents provided demographic information. As the graph shows, 2026 survey respondents were not fully representative of Tremonton. People who have at least a 4-year college degree, are married, have children under 18 in their household, or own their homes were overrepresented, while those who do not have a college degree or are renters were underrepresented.

Dot Plot. Title: Tremonton 2026 Demographics. Subtitle: ACS = American Community Survey Estimate; UWS = Utah Wellbeing Survey Estimate Data — Age 18-29: ACS: 28%, UWS: 14%; Age 30-39: ACS: 23%, UWS: 25%; Age 40-49: ACS: 17%, UWS: 19%; Age 50-59: ACS: 16%, UWS: 16%; Age 60-69: ACS: 10%, UWS: 15%; Age 70 or Over: ACS: 6%, UWS: 10%; Income under $25,000: ACS: 8%, UWS: 6%; Income $25,000 to $49,999: ACS: 12%, UWS: 7%; Income $50,000 to $74,999: ACS: 31%, UWS: 20%; Income $75,000 to $99,999: ACS: 17%, UWS: 20%; Income $100,000 to $149,999: ACS: 21%, UWS: 30%; Income $150,000 or over: ACS: 11%, UWS: 16%; Adult Female: ACS: 45%, UWS: 58%; Adult Male: ACS: 55%, UWS: 41%; Adult non-conforming or non-binary*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 1%; Employed: ACS: 68%, UWS: 66%; Out of work and looking for work: ACS: 4%, UWS: 3%; Other: ACS: 28%, UWS: 31%; No College Degree: ACS: 84%, UWS: 60%; College degree (4-year): ACS: 16%, UWS: 40%; Rent home/Renter occupied/Other: ACS: 34%, UWS: 17%; Own home/Owner occupied: ACS: 66%, UWS: 83%; Married: ACS: 54%, UWS: 84%; Children under 18 in household: ACS: 40%, UWS: 58%; Disability*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 16%; Chronic Condition*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 27%; Hispanic/Latino: ACS: 13%, UWS: 5%; Nonwhite: ACS: 12%, UWS: 11%; Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 60%; Other Religion*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 13%; Agnostic/Atheist/No Religious Preference/Spiritual but Not Religious*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 27%

Overall Personal Wellbeing and Overall Wellbeing in Tremonton

Survey participants were asked about their overall personal wellbeing and overall community wellbeing in Tremonton. These wellbeing indicators were both measured on a 5-point scale from poor (1) to excellent (5). The average personal wellbeing score in Tremonton was 3.72 with 65% of respondents indicating their wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale. The average score for community wellbeing in Tremonton was 2.94 with 31% of respondents indicating community wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale.

Bar Chart. Title: Personal Wellbeing in Tremonton. Subtitle: How would you rate your overall personal wellbeing? Data — 1 Poor: 3% of respondents; 2: 8% of respondents; 3: 25% of respondents; 4: 43% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 21% of respondents

Bar Chart. Title: Community Wellbeing in Tremonton. Subtitle: How would you rate overall wellbeing in Tremonton? Data — 1 Poor: 11% of respondents; 2: 22% of respondents; 3: 37% of respondents; 4: 25% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 6% of respondents

When comparing survey data from Tremonton over the years as shown in the information below, we can see that from 2024 to 2026, both the average personal wellbeing score and the average community wellbeing score declined. Note that the number of respondents differed between years, and there is no tracking of individuals from one year to the next.

Dot Plot. Title: Average Rating of Personal and Community Wellbeing Over Time in Tremonton. Subtitle: (Wellbeing is rated on a scale from 1=Poor to 5=Excellent) Data — Community Wellbeing 2022: 3.33; Community Wellbeing 2024: 3.09; Community Wellbeing 2026: 2.94; Personal Wellbeing 2022: 4.10; Personal Wellbeing 2024: 3.81; Personal Wellbeing 2026: 3.72

Comparing Wellbeing Across Utah Cities

The Utah League of Cities and Towns clusters cities and towns into five different categories based on size and growth rates. We utilize these clusters in our analysis. Tremonton is classified as a Rural Hub/Resort Community. Some cities may fit within more than one cluster. Each cluster average represents the mean of the city and town means within each cluster.

Within the Rural city cluster, Tremonton was below the average overall personal wellbeing score and below the average overall community wellbeing score.

Dot Plot. Title: Overall Personal Wellbeing Scores from Participating Utah Cities (2026). Subtitle: (On a scale from 1=Poor to 5=Excellent). Data — Group: Cities of the 1st & 2nd Class — West Valley City Average Score 3.73; Ogden Average Score 3.80; West Jordan Average Score 4.00; Millcreek Average Score 4.23; Sandy Average Score 4.23; South Jordan Average Score 4.25; Group: Established/Mid-sized Cities — Tooele Average Score 3.66; Logan Average Score 3.79; Cedar City Average Score 3.80; Woods Cross Average Score 4.03; Murray Average Score 4.07; North Salt Lake Average Score 4.07; South Ogden Average Score 4.16; West Bountiful Average Score 4.20; Bountiful Average Score 4.22; Lindon Average Score 4.23; Cottonwood Heights Average Score 4.27; Alpine Average Score 4.35; Cedar Hills Average Score 4.35; Group: Rapid Growth Cities — Lehi Average Score 3.88; Eagle Mountain Average Score 3.92; Saratoga Springs Average Score 3.95; Grantsville Average Score 3.97; Mapleton Average Score 4.00; Wellsville Average Score 4.04; Enoch Average Score 4.08; Herriman Average Score 4.08; Bluffdale Average Score 4.16; Kamas Average Score 4.19; Kaysville Average Score 4.19; South Weber Average Score 4.20; Providence Average Score 4.26; Uintah City Average Score 4.34; Ivins Average Score 4.45; Group: Rural Hub/Resort Communities — Wendover Average Score 3.67; Tremonton Average Score 3.72; Vernal Average Score 3.75; Blanding Average Score 3.78; Moab Average Score 3.81; Bluff Average Score 3.98; Richfield Average Score 3.99; Nephi Average Score 4.01; Manila Average Score 4.13; Heber Average Score 4.19; Morgan Average Score 4.23; Springdale Average Score 4.27; Midway Average Score 4.38; Alta Average Score 4.44; Group: Traditional Rural Communities — Delta Average Score 3.77; Ferron Average Score 3.89; Stockton Average Score 3.92; Orangeville Average Score 3.96; La Verkin Average Score 3.97; Lake Point Average Score 4.13; Lewiston Average Score 4.22; Toquerville Average Score 4.24; Mayfield Average Score 4.27

Dot Plot. Title: Overall Community Wellbeing Scores from Participating Utah Cities (2026). Subtitle: (On a scale from 1=Poor to 5=Excellent). Data — Group: Cities of the 1st & 2nd Class — Ogden Average Score 3.19; West Valley City Average Score 3.22; West Jordan Average Score 3.53; Millcreek Average Score 3.81; Sandy Average Score 3.91; South Jordan Average Score 4.06; Group: Established/Mid-sized Cities — Tooele Average Score 3.06; Cedar City Average Score 3.23; Logan Average Score 3.42; North Salt Lake Average Score 3.71; Woods Cross Average Score 3.74; Cottonwood Heights Average Score 3.81; Murray Average Score 3.86; Bountiful Average Score 3.93; South Ogden Average Score 3.99; Alpine Average Score 4.04; West Bountiful Average Score 4.06; Cedar Hills Average Score 4.16; Lindon Average Score 4.24; Group: Rapid Growth Cities — Grantsville Average Score 3.08; Eagle Mountain Average Score 3.29; Saratoga Springs Average Score 3.38; Kamas Average Score 3.50; Lehi Average Score 3.56; Herriman Average Score 3.66; Enoch Average Score 3.69; Mapleton Average Score 3.71; South Weber Average Score 3.75; Bluffdale Average Score 3.78; Wellsville Average Score 3.93; Kaysville Average Score 3.95; Ivins Average Score 4.00; Providence Average Score 4.03; Uintah City Average Score 4.13; Group: Rural Hub/Resort Communities — Wendover Average Score 2.92; Tremonton Average Score 2.94; Moab Average Score 3.12; Vernal Average Score 3.21; Blanding Average Score 3.33; Heber Average Score 3.51; Manila Average Score 3.51; Nephi Average Score 3.51; Richfield Average Score 3.57; Springdale Average Score 3.71; Bluff Average Score 3.80; Morgan Average Score 3.89; Alta Average Score 4.15; Midway Average Score 4.24; Group: Traditional Rural Communities — Stockton Average Score 3.30; Delta Average Score 3.35; La Verkin Average Score 3.57; Lake Point Average Score 3.62; Orangeville Average Score 3.72; Ferron Average Score 3.76; Toquerville Average Score 3.83; Lewiston Average Score 3.99; Mayfield Average Score 4.08

Wellbeing Domains in Tremonton

According to national and international entities that track wellbeing, there are a number of common dimensions or domains of wellbeing. Survey respondents rated twelve domains on a 5-point scale from poor to excellent. They were also asked to indicate the importance of each domain to their overall personal wellbeing on a 5-point scale from not at all important to very important. The highest rated wellbeing domains for respondents in Tremonton were Family Life (71%), Safety and Security (71%), and Mental Health (66%). The most important wellbeing domains were Mental Health (93%), Safety and Security (93%), Family Life (92%), and Living Standards (92%).

Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Ratings in Tremonton. Subtitle: How would you rate your level of personal wellbeing in each of the following categories? Data — Category: Family Life - 29% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 71% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Safety and Security - 29% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 71% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Mental Health - 34% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 66% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Living Standards - 36% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 64% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Physical Health - 37% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 63% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Transportation - 41% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 59% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Leisure Time - 50% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 50% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Connection with Nature - 52% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 48% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 57% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 43% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Social Connections - 62% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 38% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Education - 68% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 32% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Cultural Opportunities - 77% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 23% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Importance in Tremonton. Subtitle: How important are the following categories to your overall personal wellbeing? Data — Category: Mental Health - 7% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 93% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Safety and Security - 7% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 93% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Family Life - 8% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 92% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Living Standards - 8% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 92% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Physical Health -11% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 89% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Local Environmental Quality -17% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 83% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Leisure Time -20% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 80% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Connection with Nature -24% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 76% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Education -36% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 64% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Social Connections -42% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 58% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Transportation -46% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 54% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Cultural Opportunities -51% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 49% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important

Wellbeing Domains Over Time in Tremonton

The graphs below show how the domains were rated over the years by Tremonton residents. The number of respondents changed over time. Since 2024, almost all domain ratings increased, except for Mental Health and Connection with Nature which remained nearly the same.

Dot Plot. Title: Wellbeing Domain Ratings Over Time in Tremonton. Subtitle: (Wellbeing is rated on a scale from 1=Poor to 5=Excellent) Data — Connection with Nature 2022: 3.51; Connection with Nature 2024: 3.43; Connection with Nature 2026: 3.42; Cultural Opportunities 2022: 2.86; Cultural Opportunities 2024: 2.47; Cultural Opportunities 2026: 2.76; Education 2022: 3.33; Education 2024: 2.81; Education 2026: 3.05; Family Life 2024: 3.88; Family Life 2026: 4.04; Leisure Time 2022: 3.17; Leisure Time 2024: 3.16; Leisure Time 2026: 3.45; Living Standards 2022: 3.64; Living Standards 2024: 3.49; Living Standards 2026: 3.78; Local Environmental Quality 2022: 3.31; Local Environmental Quality 2024: 3.11; Local Environmental Quality 2026: 3.28; Mental Health 2022: 3.73; Mental Health 2024: 3.74; Mental Health 2026: 3.76; Physical Health 2022: 3.70; Physical Health 2024: 3.54; Physical Health 2026: 3.66; Safety and Security 2022: 3.61; Safety and Security 2024: 3.68; Safety and Security 2026: 3.92; Social Connections 2022: 3.30; Social Connections 2024: 3.04; Social Connections 2026: 3.19; Transportation 2024: 3.04; Transportation 2026: 3.60

Wellbeing Matrix for Tremonton

The graph below illustrates the relationship between the average rating and the average importance of wellbeing domains for survey respondents from Tremonton. Family Life, Living Standards, Mental Health, Physical Health, and Safety and Security were highly important and rated above average among the domains. Leisure Time and Local Environmental Quality fell in the “red zone” of higher importance and lower ratings.

Scatterplot. Title: Tremonton Wellbeing Matrix. Subtitle: Domains are classified into four quadrants depending on their average rating and average importance as compared to the average of all the average domain ratings and the average domain importance ratings. Data — High rating, high importance (green quadrant) domains include: Family Life, Living Standards, Mental Health, Physical Health, and Safety and Security; High rating, lower importance (blue quadrant) domains include: Transportation; Lower rating, lower importance (yellow quadrant) domains include: Connection with Nature, Cultural Opportunities, Education, and Social Connections; Lower rating, high importance (red quadrant) domains include: Leisure Time and Local Environmental Quality

Community Connection in Tremonton

Survey participants were asked about how connected they feel to Tremonton on a 5-point scale from not at all (1) to a great deal (5), and the average score of all respondents was 2.53.

Bar Chart. Title: Community Connection in Tremonton. Subtitle: How connected do you feel to Tremonton as a community? Data — 1 Not at All: 22% of respondents; 2: 27% of respondents; 3: 32% of respondents; 4: 14% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 5% of respondents

When comparing survey data from Tremonton over the years as shown in the information below, we can see that the average community connection score declined between 2024 and 2026.

Dot Plot. Title: Average Rating of Community Connection Over Time in Tremonton. Subtitle: (Community Connection is rated on a scale from 1=Not at all to 5=A great deal) Data — 2022: 2.92; 2024: 2.71; 2026: 2.53

A positive relationship was found between individuals’ community connection and mental health, and to some extent between community connection and overall personal wellbeing.

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Overall Wellbeing and Community Connection in Tremonton. Data — Of the 10 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a (Poor) 1, 90% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 10% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 32 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 2, 97% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 3% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 89 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 3, 88% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 12% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 175 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 4, 83% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 17% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 76 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a (Excellent) 5, 59% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 41% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Mental Health Rating and Community Connection in Tremonton. Data — Of the 13 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a (Poor) 1, 100% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 0% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 34 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a 2, 97% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 3% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 80 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a 3, 91% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 9% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 153 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a 4, 81% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 19% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 95 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a (Excellent) 5, 62% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 38% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5

The graph below shows how Wellbeing Project cities and towns compare on feelings of community connection based on the percentage of respondents who answered 4 or a 5 on a 5-point scale from “1 Not at all” to “5 A great deal” connected to their city or town. Tremonton ranked 57 out of the 57 cities that participated.

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Community Connection Across Cities. Subtitle: How connected do you feel to your city as a community? 1 being not at all and 5 being a great deal. Data — City: Bluff 35% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 65% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Uintah City 39% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 61% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Wellsville 40% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 60% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Lindon 43% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 57% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Alta 43% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 57% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Midway 45% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 55% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Morgan 46% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 54% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Alpine 48% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 52% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Murray 49% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 51% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: West Bountiful 50% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 50% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Kamas 53% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 47% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Bountiful 53% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 47% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Ogden 53% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 47% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Ivins 53% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 47% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: La Verkin 54% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 46% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Moab 54% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 46% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Cedar Hills 54% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 46% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Mayfield 55% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 45% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Wendover 55% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 45% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Ferron 56% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 44% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Delta 56% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 44% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Springdale 57% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 43% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Richfield 57% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 43% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Orangeville 57% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 43% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Cottonwood Heights 57% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 43% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: South Weber 57% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 43% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Lewiston 58% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 42% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Heber 58% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 42% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Manila 60% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 40% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Nephi 60% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 40% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Enoch 60% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 40% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: South Jordan 61% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 39% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Mapleton 62% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 38% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Sandy 62% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 38% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Toquerville 62% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 38% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Kaysville 63% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 37% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Millcreek 63% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 37% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Logan 64% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 36% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: North Salt Lake 65% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 35% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Vernal 65% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 35% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Bluffdale 65% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 35% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Blanding 65% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 35% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Herriman 66% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 34% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Providence 67% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 33% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Lake Point 68% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 32% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Cedar City 69% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 31% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Woods Cross 70% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 30% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: South Ogden 70% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 30% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: West Valley City 71% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 29% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Tooele 73% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 27% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Stockton 74% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 26% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Lehi 75% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 25% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: West Jordan 76% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 24% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Eagle Mountain 77% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 23% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Grantsville 77% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 23% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Saratoga Springs 81% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 19% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5; City: Tremonton 81% of respondents indicated a 1, 2, or 3 while 19% of respondents indicated a 4 or 5

Disability in Tremonton

Survey participants were asked how well Tremonton included individuals with disabilities in social, recreational, and cultural activities. The largest proportion of respondents indicated they had no opinion or that the question was not relevant (36%). For those expressing an opinion, the largest proportion of respondents felt that they were somewhat (30%) included.

Bar Chart. Title: Inclusion for Individuals with Disabilities in Tremonton. Subtitle: How well does Tremonton include individuals with disabilities in social, recreational, and cultural activities? Data — 1 Not at all: 13% of respondents; 2 Somewhat: 30% of respondents; 3 Quite well: 14% of respondents; 4 Fully: 7% of respondents; No opinion/ Not relevant: 36% of respondents

Participation in Recreation and Nature-Related Activities

Respondents were asked to indicate how often they participated in various activities over the past year. The activities in which respondents most commonly participated at least sometimes (about once a month or more frequently) were Gardening at home (71%) and Walking or biking in your neighborhood or city (69%).

Likert Graph. Title: Frequent Recreational Activities in Tremonton. Subtitle: How often have you participated in any of the following activities over the past year? Data — Category: Gardening at home - 29% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 71% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: Walking or biking in your neighborhood or city - 31% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 69% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: Recreating in parks in your city - 42% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 58% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: Non-motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah - 56% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 44% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: Community events - 57% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 43% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: Buying food from a farmer's market - 60% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 40% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: Motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah - 63% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 37% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: Using trails in or near your city - 65% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 35% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week); Category: City recreation programs - 67% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 33% of respondents indicated it was at least Sometimes (once a month), Regularly (about once per week), or Often (more than once per week)

Higher levels of community connection correlated with more frequent participation in all activities except participation in non-motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah and participation in motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah.

Wellbeing and Urban/Rural Settings

Respondents were asked to indicate how important spending time in the different settings were to their wellbeing. The most important setting for Tremonton respondents was natural landscapes.

Likert Graph. Title: Importance of Urban and Rural Settings to Wellbeing in Tremonton. Subtitle: To what degree does your personal wellbeing depend on spending time in: Data — Category: Natural landscapes - 19% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 81% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important; Category: Rural communities - 36% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 64% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important; Category: Agricultural landscapes - 38% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 62% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important; Category: Cities or urban places - 85% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 15% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important

Perspectives on Population Growth and Economic Development

The majority of respondents in Tremonton indicated that they felt the population growth was too fast (83%). For the pace of economic development, respondents were split between opinions that it was too slow (48%) and too fast (38%).

Bar Chart. Title: Population Growth in Tremonton. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in Tremonton? Data — Too Slow: 2% of respondents; Just Right: 11% of respondents; Too Fast: 83% of respondents; No Opinion: 4% of respondents

Bar Chart. Title: Economic Development in Tremonton. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic development in Tremonton? Data — Too Slow: 48% of respondents; Just Right: 10% of respondents; Too Fast: 38% of respondents; No Opinion: 5% of respondents

The graphs below show how perceptions of population growth and economic development in Tremonton have varied across recent years of Wellbeing Surveys.

Line Graph. Title: Tremonton Change in Perceptions of Rate of Population Growth. Subtitle: (Remaining Percentage Each Year is No Opinion) Data — 2022: 1% rated it too slow, 11% just right, and 83% too fast; 2024: 1% rated it too slow, 15% just right, and 77% too fast; 2026: 2% rated it too slow, 11% just right, and 83% too fast

Line Graph. Title: Tremonton Change in Perceptions of Pace of Economic Development. Subtitle: (Remaining Percentage Each Year is No Opinion) Data — 2022: 16% rated it too slow, 21% just right, and 56% too fast; 2024: 51% rated it too slow, 16% just right, and 24% too fast; 2026: 48% rated it too slow, 10% just right, and 38% too fast

The graphs below show perceptions of population growth and economic development for Tremonton compared to other participating cities and towns in the Rural Hub/Resort Communities cluster.

Likert Graph. Title: Population Growth for Rural Hub/Resort Communities. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in your city/town? Data — City: Heber - 1% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 8% just right, 89% too fast, and 2% had no opinion; City: Midway - 0% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 14% just right, 86% too fast, and 0% had no opinion; City: Tremonton - 2% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 11% just right, 83% too fast, and 4% had no opinion; City: Morgan - 0% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 20% just right, 75% too fast, and 5% had no opinion; City: Nephi - 3% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 23% just right, 71% too fast, and 3% had no opinion; City: Moab - 5% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 24% just right, 60% too fast, and 11% had no opinion; City: Vernal - 5% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 29% just right, 56% too fast, and 10% had no opinion; City: Richfield - 5% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 45% just right, 46% too fast, and 5% had no opinion; City: Manila - 26% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 28% just right, 38% too fast, and 9% had no opinion; City: Springdale - 4% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 41% just right, 32% too fast, and 23% had no opinion; City: Alta - 9% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 45% just right, 23% too fast, and 23% had no opinion; City: Blanding - 20% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 51% just right, 17% too fast, and 12% had no opinion; City: Wendover - 40% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 27% just right, 13% too fast, and 20% had no opinion; City: Bluff - 22% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 54% just right, 8% too fast, and 16% had no opinion

Likert Graph. Title: Economic Development for Rural Hub/Resort Communities. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic development in your city/town? Data — City: Heber - 21% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 11% just right, 61% too fast, and 7% had no opinion; City: Midway - 5% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 39% just right, 55% too fast, and 2% had no opinion; City: Springdale - 13% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 28% just right, 52% too fast, and 7% had no opinion; City: Moab - 33% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 13% just right, 48% too fast, and 6% had no opinion; City: Tremonton - 48% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 10% just right, 38% too fast, and 5% had no opinion; City: Nephi - 25% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 32% just right, 37% too fast, and 6% had no opinion; City: Morgan - 34% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 24% just right, 27% too fast, and 16% had no opinion; City: Vernal - 37% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 33% just right, 23% too fast, and 7% had no opinion; City: Alta - 17% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 43% just right, 22% too fast, and 17% had no opinion; City: Manila - 51% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 32% just right, 15% too fast, and 2% had no opinion; City: Richfield - 49% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 36% just right, 10% too fast, and 5% had no opinion; City: Bluff - 29% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 49% just right, 8% too fast, and 14% had no opinion; City: Blanding - 62% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 26% just right, 4% too fast, and 9% had no opinion; City: Wendover - 73% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 17% just right, 3% too fast, and 7% had no opinion

Survey respondents were asked if there are any aspects of the local economy they would like to see changed in the next five years. Respondents from Tremonton expressed a strong desire for more businesses and amenities to be established in the town, rather than just focusing on building new homes. They noted that the current lack of shopping options and dining establishments forces them to travel elsewhere to meet their needs. There were a number of comments about growth and development.

Cost of Living in Tremonton

Respondents were asked to indicate how affordable certain expenses were in Tremonton. The most difficult expenses were Childcare (74%), Housing (57%), and Healthcare (52%). Note that a high percentage (58%) of respondents found Childcare expenses not relevant to them.

Likert Graph. Title: Cost of Living in Tremonton. Subtitle: How EASY or DIFFICULT is it for your household to COVER EXPENSES related to the following? Among respondents for whom each expense was relevant; 'Not relevant' shown separately. Data — Category: Childcare - 58% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 74% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 26% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Housing - 5% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 57% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 43% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Healthcare - 2% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 52% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 48% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Food - 1% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 44% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 56% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Utilities - 0% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 36% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 64% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Transportation options - 13% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 32% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 68% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford

Transportation in Tremonton

Respondents were asked to indicate the most common barriers to transportation in Tremonton. The most problematic barriers were Cost (68%) and Travel time (53%).

Likert Graph. Title: Barriers to Personal Travel in Tremonton. Subtitle: Are any of the following a barrier to you personal travel? Data — Category: Cost - 32% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 68% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Travel time - 47% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 53% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Knowledge - 72% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 28% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Lack of routes - 72% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 28% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Safety - 73% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 27% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Lack of transport - 84% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 16% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Disability - 85% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 15% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Language - 93% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 7% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier

Concerns in Tremonton

Survey respondents indicated the degree to which a number of possible local issues were a concern as they look to the future of Tremonton. Water Supply (85%), Open Space/Green Space (73%), and Affordable Housing (73%) were the top concerns. Since 2024, moderate or major concern about the Great Salt Lake (+21%) notably increased, while concern about shopping opportunities (-14%), public safety (-12%), opportunities for youth (-11%), and recreation opportunities (-10%) notably decreased.

Likert Graph. Title: Concerns in Tremonton. Subtitle: As you look to the future of Tremonton, how much of a concern are the following issues? Data — Category: Water Supply - 15% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 85% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Affordable Housing - 27% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 73% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Open Space/Green Space - 27% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 73% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Opportunities for Youth - 29% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 71% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Water Quality - 31% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 69% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Public Safety - 37% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 63% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Employment Opportunities - 38% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 62% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Traffic - 38% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 62% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Recreation Opportunities - 40% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 60% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Shopping Opportunities - 42% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 58% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Healthy/Quality Food - 43% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 57% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Great Salt Lake - 44% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 56% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Suicide - 44% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 56% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Air Quality - 47% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 53% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Trails & Paths - 48% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 52% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Wildfire - 56% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 44% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Mental Health Care - 57% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 43% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Health Care - 58% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 42% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Social and Emotional Support - 59% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 41% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Homelessness - 60% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 40% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Climate Change - 63% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 37% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Substance Use - 63% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 37% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Substance Use Treatment - 68% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 32% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Culturally Appropriate Food - 73% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 27% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Accessible Transportation - 74% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 26% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern

Additional Questions for Tremonton

In 2025, Tremonton City performed a Community Needs Assessment around Parks, Recreation, Trails, Events and Open space. The following questions are follow-up questions related to that needs assessment.

Amenities in Tremonton

The 2025 Needs Assessment indicated that many residents are dissatisfied with current park facilities and interested in new recreation facilities and amenities. Respondents of the wellbeing survey were given various facilities and amenities and asked to indicate their level of importance in each. The most important amenities to the wellbeing of respondents’ households included fishing, nature areas, and natural open space (90%), a library (86%), pavilions and playgrounds (84%), and an indoor recreation/wellness space (82%).

Likert Graph. Title: How important are the following amenities to the wellbeing of your household?. Data — Category: Athletic Fields and Courts (outdoor) - 27% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 73% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Community Gatherings and Events - 20% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 80% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Fishing, nature areas, natural open space - 10% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 90% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Indoor Recreation/Wellness Space - 18% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 82% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Library - 14% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 86% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Outdoor Pickleball Courts - 49% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 51% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Pavilions and Playgrounds - 16% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 84% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Swimming / Aquatics facility - 23% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 77% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important; Category: Trail Development - 21% of respondents indicated it was not important, while 79% of respondents indicated it was somewhat or very important

Respondents were also asked their level of support in the same amenities if it meant a modest increase in property taxes. Responses were generally split across response options. The most supported facilities and amenities included a library (43%), fishing, nature areas, and natural open space (38%), trail development (34%), and pavilions and playgrounds (28%). 

Likert Graph. Title: Please indicate your level of support or opposition to the following if it meant a modest increase in property taxes. Data — Category: Athletic Fields and Courts (outdoor) - 43% of respondents opposed it, 36% were neutral, and 21% of respondents supported it; Category: Community Gatherings and Events - 36% of respondents opposed it, 40% were neutral, and 24% of respondents supported it; Category: Fishing, nature areas, natural open space - 29% of respondents opposed it, 33% were neutral, and 38% of respondents supported it; Category: Indoor Recreation/Wellness Space - 47% of respondents opposed it, 29% were neutral, and 24% of respondents supported it; Category: Library - 28% of respondents opposed it, 29% were neutral, and 43% of respondents supported it; Category: Outdoor Pickleball Courts - 57% of respondents opposed it, 29% were neutral, and 14% of respondents supported it; Category: Pavilions and Playgrounds - 33% of respondents opposed it, 39% were neutral, and 28% of respondents supported it; Category: Swimming / Aquatics facility - 46% of respondents opposed it, 28% were neutral, and 26% of respondents supported it; Category: Trail Development - 36% of respondents opposed it, 30% were neutral, and 34% of respondents supported it

Events in Tremonton

The 2025 Needs Assessment indicated that many residents are interested in additional community events. Respondents in the wellbeing survey were asked to indicate their level of support to various events if it meant a modest increase in property taxes. Responses were generally split across response options. The most supported events included patriotic events (36%) and rodeo/fair supporting events (33%).

Likert Graph. Title: Please indicate your level of support or opposition to the following if it meant a modest increase in property taxes. Data — Category: Car Show / Cruising events - 46% of respondents opposed it, 39% were neutral, and 15% of respondents supported it; Category: Food Based Events - 36% of respondents opposed it, 42% were neutral, and 22% of respondents supported it; Category: Large Events/ Parades/Festivals - 43% of respondents opposed it, 40% were neutral, and 17% of respondents supported it; Category: Music Events - 34% of respondents opposed it, 38% were neutral, and 28% of respondents supported it; Category: Patriotic Events - 32% of respondents opposed it, 32% were neutral, and 36% of respondents supported it; Category: Rodeo/Fair Supporting Events - 33% of respondents opposed it, 33% were neutral, and 33% of respondents supported it

Tremonton City has historically hosted downtown events at Midland Square such as Trick or Treat Main Street, Farmers Market, Holiday Extravaganza, Midland Square Chalk Affair. Etc.. Respondents were asked their level of support or opposition to Tremonton City continuing to utilize Midland Square to host downtown events. 48% of respondents indicated their support, 36% were neutral, and 15% opposed it.

Bar Chart. Title: Please indicate your level of support or opposition to Tremonton City continuing to utilize Midland Square to host down town events?. Data — Oppose: 15% of respondents; Neutral: 36% of respondents; Support: 48% of respondents

Services in Tremonton

Survey participants were also asked to rate their satisfaction with various Tremonton City services on a scale from 1 (Not at all satisfied) to 5 (Very satisfied). The highest rated services with a 4 or 5 were the Fire Department (57%), Police Department (55%), Garbage/Recycling Service (48%), and the City Library (48%).

Likert Graph. Title: Satisfaction with Tremonton Services. Subtitle: Scale is rated from 1 - Not at all satisfied to 5 - Very satisfied Data — Category: Building Inspections - 83% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 17%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: City Library - 52% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 48%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: City Parks - 58% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 42%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: City Sponsored Events - 73% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 27%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Communication Efforts - 79% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 21%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Fire Department - 43% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 57%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Food Pantry - 60% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 40%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Garbage/Recycling Service - 52% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 48%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Planning and Zoning - 92% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 8%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Police Department - 45% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 55%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Recreation and Sports Programs - 70% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 30%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Senior Center - 60% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 40%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Snow Removal - 66% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 34%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Street Maintenance - 82% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 18%% rated it as a 4 or 5; Category: Water Services - 70% of respondents rated it as a 1, 2, or 3, while 30%% rated it as a 4 or 5

Open Comments

All open comments collected in the survey were shared with city leaders. General observations and themes are shared here. The authors acknowledge the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, including the Llama 3 large language model, accessed locally through Ollama, and a machine learning classifier, in the analysis of open comments. These tools were used for initial topical coding and draft summaries of comments. All comments, codes, and summaries were reviewed and edited by the authors for accuracy and clarity.

What Respondents Value Most in Tremonton

Survey respondents were asked to comment on what they value most about Tremonton. The most common words and phrases from all comments are included in the word cloud below. It is possible that negative or unrelated words may appear since these words have been taken out of context, and they may not indicate the respondent’s intended meaning.

Respondents from Tremonton valued their small-town community, citing a sense of safety, familiarity, and connection with their neighbors as highlights. They appreciated the quiet atmosphere, lack of traffic, and peaceful surroundings that allow for a slower pace of life. However, there were also many negative comments about the impacts of growth and a decline in valued aspects of the community.

A word cloud of some of the most popular words and phrases about what people value living in Tremonton includes: small town, people, town feel, quiet, family, love, neighbors, safe, traffic, and kids.

Local Environmental Quality in Tremonton

Survey respondents were asked if there are specific aspects of local environmental quality that they feel pose a significant threat to wellbeing in Tremonton. Comments highlighted concerns about environmental issues in Tremonton. Respondents were worried about water shortages and contamination, citing the lack of infrastructure to support population growth. They also expressed concern about air pollution from industrial activities, factory farming, and increased traffic. Additionally, some respondents noted the need for more walking trails, parks, and outdoor recreational spaces.

Improving Wellbeing in Tremonton

Survey respondents were asked if there is anything that could be done to improve wellbeing in Tremonton. Respondents valued Tremonton’s sense of community and small-town charm, but also expressed frustration with limited shopping options, poor road conditions, and concerns about growth and development. They highlighted the importance of preserving rural lifestyle and natural areas, while also seeking more recreational opportunities and community events. Some emphasized the need for better services, such as public transportation and mental health resources, while others stressed the importance of addressing issues like drug use and crime in the community.

Additional Comments

Respondents were also asked if they had any additional comments on wellbeing in Tremonton. Tremonton respondents expressed concerns about growth and development, citing issues with undesired change in local character, overdevelopment of housing, and an unaffordable economy. Some mentioned a lack of community events and things to do. Comments suggested social tensions in the community and some expressed frustration with local government.

On This Page