West Valley City 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

West Valley City 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 West Valley City survey and comparative information with other project cities and towns. In March 2026, West Valley 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?

  • 185 viable surveys were recorded in this 2026 survey effort.
  • The West Valley City 2024 survey had 149 responses.
  • The adult population of West Valley City was estimated at 96,888, based on the American Community Survey by the U.S. Census. The 185 survey responses in 2026 represent 0.2% of the adult population and have a conservative margin of error of 7.2%.

Survey Respondent Characteristics

Resident Statistics Value
Full Time Residents of West Valley City 98.4%
Part Time Residents of West Valley City 1.6%
Length of Residency — Range 1-76 years
Length of Residency — Average 26.1 years
Length of Residency — Median 23 years
Length of Residency 5 Years or less 14.1%

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 West Valley City. People who are adult females, have at least a 4-year college degree, are married, or own their homes were overrepresented, while those who are adult males, do not have a college degree, are Hispanic or Latino, are nonwhite, or are renters were underrepresented.

Dot Plot. Title: West Valley City 2026 Demographics. Subtitle: ACS = American Community Survey Estimate; UWS = Utah Wellbeing Survey Estimate Data — Age 18-29: ACS: 26%, UWS: 11%; Age 30-39: ACS: 21%, UWS: 11%; Age 40-49: ACS: 19%, UWS: 29%; Age 50-59: ACS: 15%, UWS: 16%; Age 60-69: ACS: 12%, UWS: 19%; Age 70 or Over: ACS: 8%, UWS: 14%; Income under $25,000: ACS: 8%, UWS: 7%; Income $25,000 to $49,999: ACS: 16%, UWS: 11%; Income $50,000 to $74,999: ACS: 17%, UWS: 21%; Income $75,000 to $99,999: ACS: 14%, UWS: 15%; Income $100,000 to $149,999: ACS: 26%, UWS: 34%; Income $150,000 or over: ACS: 19%, UWS: 12%; Adult Female: ACS: 49%, UWS: 71%; Adult Male: ACS: 51%, UWS: 28%; Adult non-conforming or non-binary*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 1%; Employed: ACS: 70%, UWS: 68%; Out of work and looking for work: ACS: 3%, UWS: 3%; Other: ACS: 27%, UWS: 29%; No College Degree: ACS: 84%, UWS: 55%; College degree (4-year): ACS: 16%, UWS: 45%; Rent home/Renter occupied/Other: ACS: 28%, UWS: 13%; Own home/Owner occupied: ACS: 72%, UWS: 87%; Married: ACS: 47%, UWS: 78%; Children under 18 in household: ACS: 45%, UWS: 42%; Disability*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 19%; Chronic Condition*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 35%; Hispanic/Latino: ACS: 43%, UWS: 15%; Nonwhite: ACS: 55%, UWS: 20%; Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 34%; Other Religion*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 25%; Agnostic/Atheist/No Religious Preference/Spiritual but Not Religious*: ACS: NA%, UWS: 42%

Overall Personal Wellbeing and Overall Wellbeing in West Valley City

Survey participants were asked about their overall personal wellbeing and overall community wellbeing in West Valley City. These wellbeing indicators were both measured on a 5-point scale from poor (1) to excellent (5). The average personal wellbeing score in West Valley City was 3.73 with 68% of respondents indicating their wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale. The average score for community wellbeing in West Valley City was 3.22 with 38% of respondents indicating community wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale.

Bar Chart. Title: Personal Wellbeing in West Valley City. Subtitle: How would you rate your overall personal wellbeing? Data — 1 Poor: 2% of respondents; 2: 7% of respondents; 3: 23% of respondents; 4: 52% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 16% of respondents

Bar Chart. Title: Community Wellbeing in West Valley City. Subtitle: How would you rate overall wellbeing in West Valley City? Data — 1 Poor: 4% of respondents; 2: 16% of respondents; 3: 43% of respondents; 4: 31% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 7% of respondents

When comparing survey data from West Valley City 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 West Valley City. Subtitle: (Wellbeing is rated on a scale from 1=Poor to 5=Excellent) Data — Community Wellbeing 2024: 3.38; Community Wellbeing 2026: 3.22; Personal Wellbeing 2024: 3.81; Personal Wellbeing 2026: 3.73

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. West Valley City is classified as a City of the 1st and 2nd Class. 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 more Urban city cluster, West Valley City 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 West Valley City

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 West Valley City were Family Life (73%), Living Standards (67%), Mental Health (63%), and Transportation (62%). The most important wellbeing domains were Safety and Security (98%), Mental Health (96%), Physical Health (94%), Living Standards (94%), and Family Life (94%).

Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Ratings in West Valley City. Subtitle: How would you rate your level of personal wellbeing in each of the following categories? Data — Category: Family Life - 27% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 73% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Living Standards - 33% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 67% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Mental Health - 37% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 63% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Transportation - 38% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 62% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Safety and Security - 40% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 60% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Physical Health - 44% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 56% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Leisure Time - 47% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 53% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Education - 49% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 51% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Social Connections - 49% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 51% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Connection with Nature - 56% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 44% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Cultural Opportunities - 57% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 43% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 68% of respondents rated it as 1 Poor, 2, or 3 while 32% rated it as 4, or 5 Excellent Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Importance in West Valley City. Subtitle: How important are the following categories to your overall personal wellbeing? Data — Category: Safety and Security - 2% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 98% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Mental Health - 4% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 96% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Family Life - 6% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 94% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Living Standards - 6% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 94% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Physical Health - 6% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 94% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Leisure Time -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 -12% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 88% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Education -16% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 84% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Connection with Nature -21% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 79% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Transportation -25% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 75% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Social Connections -26% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 74% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important; Category: Cultural Opportunities -33% of respondents rated it as 1 Not at all important, 2, or 3, while 67% rated it as 4 or 5 Very important

Wellbeing Domains Over Time in West Valley City

The graphs below show how the domains were rated over the years by West Valley City residents. The number of respondents changed over time. Since 2024, most domain ratings increased, except for Family Life, Physical Health, Leisure Time, and Cultural Opportunities which remained nearly the same.

Dot Plot. Title: Wellbeing Domain Ratings Over Time in West Valley City. Subtitle: (Wellbeing is rated on a scale from 1=Poor to 5=Excellent) Data — Connection with Nature 2024: 3.29; Connection with Nature 2026: 3.35; Cultural Opportunities 2024: 3.37; Cultural Opportunities 2026: 3.34; Education 2024: 3.31; Education 2026: 3.46; Family Life 2024: 4.01; Family Life 2026: 4.06; Leisure Time 2024: 3.55; Leisure Time 2026: 3.61; Living Standards 2024: 3.62; Living Standards 2026: 3.86; Local Environmental Quality 2024: 2.99; Local Environmental Quality 2026: 3.06; Mental Health 2024: 3.64; Mental Health 2026: 3.78; Physical Health 2024: 3.63; Physical Health 2026: 3.64; Safety and Security 2024: 3.29; Safety and Security 2026: 3.64; Social Connections 2024: 3.34; Social Connections 2026: 3.49; Transportation 2024: 3.53; Transportation 2026: 3.74

Wellbeing Matrix for West Valley City

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

Scatterplot. Title: West Valley City 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: Leisure Time and 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: Local Environmental Quality

Community Connection in West Valley City

Survey participants were asked about how connected they feel to West Valley City on a 5-point scale from not at all (1) to a great deal (5), and the average score of all respondents was 2.92.

Bar Chart. Title: Community Connection in West Valley City. Subtitle: How connected do you feel to West Valley City as a community? Data — 1 Not at All: 13% of respondents; 2: 20% of respondents; 3: 38% of respondents; 4: 20% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 9% of respondents

When comparing survey data from West Valley City over the years as shown in the information below, we can see that the average community connection score remained nearly the same between 2024 and 2026.

Dot Plot. Title: Average Rating of Community Connection Over Time in West Valley City. Subtitle: (Community Connection is rated on a scale from 1=Not at all to 5=A great deal) Data — 2024: 2.97; 2026: 2.92

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 West Valley City. Data — Of the 15 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a (Poor) 1, 2, 93% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 7% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 37 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 3, 81% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 19% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 83 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 4, 64% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 36% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 25 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a (Excellent) 5, 64% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 36% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Mental Health Rating and Community Connection in West Valley City. Data — Of the 16 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a (Poor) 1, 2, 81% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 19% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 41 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a 3, 73% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 27% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 57 respondents that rate their mental health rating as a 4, 72% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 28% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5; Of the 42 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. West Valley City ranked 49 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 West Valley City

Survey participants were asked how well West Valley City 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 (38%). For those expressing an opinion, respondents were split between opinions that they were somewhat (28%) or quite well (23%) included.

Bar Chart. Title: Inclusion for Individuals with Disabilities in West Valley City. Subtitle: How well does West Valley City include individuals with disabilities in social, recreational, and cultural activities? Data — 1 Not at all: 5% of respondents; 2 Somewhat: 28% of respondents; 3 Quite well: 23% of respondents; 4 Fully: 6% of respondents; No opinion/ Not relevant: 38% 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 (76%) and Walking or biking in your neighborhood or city (71%).

Likert Graph. Title: Frequent Recreational Activities in West Valley City. Subtitle: How often have you participated in any of the following activities over the past year? Data — Category: Gardening at home - 24% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 76% 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 - 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: Recreating in parks in your city - 40% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 60% 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 - 49% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 51% 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 - 52% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 48% 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 - 52% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 48% 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 - 53% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 47% 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 - 64% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 36% 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 - 76% of respondents indicated it was Rarely (a few times per year) or Never, while 24% 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 community events.

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 West Valley City respondents was natural landscapes.

Likert Graph. Title: Importance of Urban and Rural Settings to Wellbeing in West Valley City. Subtitle: To what degree does your personal wellbeing depend on spending time in: Data — Category: Natural landscapes - 27% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 73% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important; Category: Agricultural landscapes - 56% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 44% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important; Category: Cities or urban places - 64% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 36% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important; Category: Rural communities - 70% of respondents indicated it was 1 not at all, 2 slightly, or 3 somewhat important, while 30% of respondents indicated it was 4 important or 5 very important

Perspectives on Population Growth and Economic Development

The majority of respondents in West Valley City indicated that they felt the population growth was too fast (68%). For the pace of economic development, respondents were split between opinions that it was too fast (34%), just right (28%), and too slow (27%).

Bar Chart. Title: Population Growth in West Valley City. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in West Valley City? Data — Too Slow: 3% of respondents; Just Right: 20% of respondents; Too Fast: 68% of respondents; No Opinion: 9% of respondents

Bar Chart. Title: Economic Development in West Valley City. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic development in West Valley City? Data — Too Slow: 27% of respondents; Just Right: 28% of respondents; Too Fast: 34% of respondents; No Opinion: 10% of respondents

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

Line Graph. Title: West Valley City Change in Perceptions of Rate of Population Growth. Subtitle: (Remaining Percentage Each Year is No Opinion) Data — 2024: 0% rated it too slow, 31% just right, and 49% too fast; 2026: 3% rated it too slow, 20% just right, and 68% too fast

Line Graph. Title: West Valley City Change in Perceptions of Pace of Economic Development. Subtitle: (Remaining Percentage Each Year is No Opinion) Data — 2024: 20% rated it too slow, 42% just right, and 16% too fast; 2026: 27% rated it too slow, 28% just right, and 34% too fast

The graphs below show perceptions of population growth and economic development for West Valley City compared to other participating cities and towns in the Cities of the 1st & 2nd Class cluster.

Likert Graph. Title: Population Growth for Cities of the 1st & 2nd Class. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in your city/town? Data — City: West Valley City - 3% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 20% just right, 68% too fast, and 9% had no opinion; City: South Jordan - 0% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 21% just right, 68% too fast, and 10% had no opinion; City: West Jordan - 2% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 21% just right, 66% too fast, and 10% had no opinion; City: Millcreek - 2% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 24% just right, 60% too fast, and 13% had no opinion; City: Ogden - 2% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 29% just right, 58% too fast, and 11% had no opinion; City: Sandy - 2% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 29% just right, 57% too fast, and 12% had no opinion

Likert Graph. Title: Economic Development for Cities of the 1st & 2nd Class. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic development in your city/town? Data — City: Millcreek - 7% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 42% just right, 38% too fast, and 13% had no opinion; City: West Valley City - 27% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 28% just right, 34% too fast, and 10% had no opinion; City: Sandy - 11% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 46% just right, 31% too fast, and 12% had no opinion; City: West Jordan - 23% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 32% just right, 30% too fast, and 15% had no opinion; City: Ogden - 34% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 32% just right, 29% too fast, and 6% had no opinion; City: South Jordan - 10% of respondents indicated that it was too slow, 48% just right, 29% too fast, and 13% 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 mentioned needing more affordable housing options, with many expressing concerns about the rapid development of high-density apartments and the strain it puts on resources and open spaces. Additionally, they would like to see more local businesses, particularly small, independent shops, and showed a preference for community spaces that foster a sense of ownership and pride amongst locals. Overall, respondents valued a balance between economic growth and community character, desiring more thoughtful planning and governance to ensure that development aligns with the needs and values of the community.

Cost of Living in West Valley City

Respondents were asked to indicate how affordable certain expenses were in West Valley City. The most difficult expenses were Childcare (73%), Healthcare (52%), and Housing (51%). Note that a high percentage (66%) of respondents found Childcare expenses not relevant to them.

Likert Graph. Title: Cost of Living in West Valley City. 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 - 66% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 73% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 27% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Healthcare - 3% 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: Housing - 3% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 51% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 49% 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, 38% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 62% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Utilities - 3% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 30% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 70% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford; Category: Transportation options - 10% said it was not relevant. Of those that found it relevant, 26% of respondents indicated that it was difficult or very difficult to afford, while 74% indicated that it was just affordable, easy, or very easy to afford

Transportation in West Valley City

Respondents were asked to indicate the most common barriers to transportation in West Valley City. The most problematic barriers were Cost (66%), Safety (49%), and Travel time (45%).

Likert Graph. Title: Barriers to Personal Travel in West Valley City. Subtitle: Are any of the following a barrier to you personal travel? Data — Category: Cost - 34% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 66% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Safety - 51% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 49% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Travel time - 55% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 45% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Lack of routes - 69% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 31% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Knowledge - 70% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 30% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Disability - 78% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 22% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Lack of transport - 80% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 20% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier; Category: Language - 88% of respondents indicated it was not a barrier or seldom a barrier, while 12% of respondents indicated it was sometimes, often, or always a barrier

Concerns in West Valley City

Survey respondents indicated the degree to which a number of possible local issues were a concern as they look to the future of West Valley City. Traffic (88%), Public Safety (87%), and Air Quality (86%) were the top concerns. Since 2024, moderate or major concern about the Great Salt Lake (+14%), traffic (+12%), and water supply (+11%) notably increased, while concern about shopping opportunities (-18%), access to health care (-11%), and access to healthy/quality food (-11%) notably decreased.

Likert Graph. Title: Concerns in West Valley City. Subtitle: As you look to the future of West Valley City, how much of a concern are the following issues? Data — Category: Traffic - 12% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 88% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Public Safety - 13% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 87% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Air Quality - 14% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 86% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Water Supply - 16% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 84% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Great Salt Lake - 22% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 78% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Homelessness - 22% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 78% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Open Space/Green Space - 22% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 78% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Affordable Housing - 23% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 77% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Opportunities for Youth - 27% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 73% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Water Quality - 29% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 71% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Climate Change - 32% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 68% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Recreation Opportunities - 37% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 63% 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: Employment Opportunities - 43% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 57% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Wildfire - 47% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 53% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Mental Health Care - 48% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 52% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Suicide - 48% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 52% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Social and Emotional Support - 49% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 51% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Trails & Paths - 51% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 49% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Health Care - 52% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 48% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Substance Use - 53% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 47% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Accessible Transportation - 62% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 38% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Shopping Opportunities - 64% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 36% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Substance Use Treatment - 70% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 30% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Culturally Appropriate Food - 74% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 26% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern

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 West Valley City

Survey respondents were asked to comment on what they value most about West Valley City. 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 shared great appreciation for the community’s diversity, which they valued as a important part of living in West Valley City. They mentioned the city’s ability to bring people together from various cultures and backgrounds, creating a sense of unity and belonging and the city’s diversity was also reflected in the community events, food options, and cultural centers, making West Valley City a place where people could feel at home and express themselves freely. Additionally, many respondents valued the city’s proximity to natural amenities, such as mountains and open spaces, as well as its convenient location and easy access to services, employment, and recreation.

A word cloud of some of the most popular words and phrases about what people value living in West Valley City includes: community, close, valley, neighborhood, people, cultures, housing, neighbors, access, and safe.

Local Environmental Quality in West Valley City

Survey respondents were asked if there are specific aspects of local environmental quality that they feel pose a significant threat to wellbeing in West Valley City. Respondents mentioned concerns about air quality, with many mentioning poor air quality and pollution from various sources, including traffic, industry, and the Great Salt Lake. Several respondents noted that the taste of water is often bad or that they worry about water availability and quality. Additionally, some respondents were frustrated with construction and development in the area, which they believe contribute to dust and trash issues.

Improving Wellbeing in West Valley City

Survey respondents were asked if there is anything that could be done to improve wellbeing in West Valley City. Many respondents expressed frustration with the city’s traffic congestion and called for improved infrastructure, such as bike lanes and expanded public transit options. Housing affordability was also a major concern, with respondents suggesting that the city prioritize programs to support low-income families and address overcrowding in single-family homes. Additionally, respondents emphasized the importance of safety, mentioning concerns about gang activity, crime, and traffic violence.

Additional Comments

Respondents were also asked if they had any additional comments on wellbeing in West Valley City. West Valley City respondents expressed a mix of sentiments about their community, with many touching on the city’s potential and others highlighting its shortcomings. Many praised the city’s natural landscapes, parks, and recreational activities, as well as its affordability and welcoming atmosphere. However, concerns were also voiced about issues like safety, crime, and traffic congestion, which detract from the overall quality of life. Respondents felt that the city has become overcrowded with new developments, leading to a decline in community character and a sense of disconnection. Several comments also discussed concerns about the city’s image and reputation, with some suggesting that it has a negative public perception, and that they would like to see the city’s negative reputation changed for the better.

On This Page