[urban_encounter]

Field Poll: Bay Area most in love with California
By Peter Hecht - Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, April 19, 2007
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A4


Residents who are California Dreamin', believing the Golden State is among the best places to live, most likely reside in the San Francisco Bay Area, a new poll reveals.

In a Field Poll index on how residents view living and working in the state, 67 percent of residents in the nine-county Bay Area say they consider California "one of the best places to live."

No other California region was close in the poll results released Wednesday.

Fifty-five percent of residents in other Northern California counties and 41 percent of Central Valley residents felt California was among the best places to live.

By comparison, 47 percent of Los Angeles County residents, 46 percent of Orange County and San Diego County residents and 43 percent of other Southern California residents rated the state among the best.

"Whenever we've done surveys on California as a place to live, Bay Area residents have always scored higher" in giving their region positive ratings, said Mark DiCamillo, director of the California Field Poll. "You can only speculate: The weather is not extreme. There are cultural activities, sports activities and an employment base, both high tech and educational."

Fifty percent of respondents in the March 20-31 survey of 1,093 registered voters statewide rated California as one of the best places to live. Twenty-nine percent said the state was "nice but not outstanding." Sixteen percent rated the state as average and 4 percent said California was a poor place to live.

Those numbers were slightly better than the attitudes expressed by California voters in a similar poll in 2003. They were far better than in 1992 -- the year of economic turmoil and the Los Angeles civil unrest after the Rodney King police beating verdict -- when only 33 percent of state voters viewed California as one of the best places to live.

But Californians don't think nearly as much of their state as they did in Field Polls between 1967 and 1985 -- when 70 percent to 78 percent of respondents characterized the state as an outstanding place to be.

"You had the perspective then of California as a promised land, as a place where there is endless opportunity," DiCamillo said. "The housing prices hadn't yet started their steep rise. California was a place people felt really privileged to be."

But despite a current real estate slump, the new poll indicates a decided uptick among voters over how they view the state of the California economy.

Some 42 percent of poll respondents said they believe California is experiencing economic good times compared to 31 percent who believe the state is faring poorly.

In 2005, just 24 percent of poll respondents expressed confidence in the state's economy compared to 49 percent who believed California was in "bad times."

Forty-one percent of Californians in the recent poll said they are better off financially than a year ago compared to 28 percent who said they are worse off and 30 percent who reported no change.

The numbers were similar to results in polls since 2004 -- but less exuberant than during the technology boom from 1998 to 2000 when as many as 54 percent of California residents felt they were better off financially.

[dimondpark]

Very Interesting. I personally think that to most locals, its more a mandate on living in The Bay Area itself and not so much California. That would partially explain why the vast majority of households that move out of the region only go as far as the neighboring metro-is there any doubt that theyd still be here if homes didnt cost an arm and a leg? Also, not to sound pompous, but The Bay Area is significantly wealthier and more highly educated then the rest of California, maybe money doesnt buy happiness, but it doesnt hurt either.

[BTinSF]

I think it's simpler: The Central Valley has almost none of the things that I like about CA such as mild weather, sophisticated people, great food, gorgeous coastal scenery. Many of those same things in the southland have been obscured by negatives like unbearable traffic, sprawl and smog. I constantly marvel how fast and easy it is to go from downtown SF to the coastal beauty of Marin, Sonoma or Half Moon Bay, much of which is a lot more unspoiled than coastal areas in the south.

What I don't understand is why people living in coastal areas to the north of SF and in the inland mountain areas north and east of the Central Valley aren't pretty happy as well. Those places are all awesome and although they lack the things I enjoy in the city, not everybody likes the city.

[fflint]

Well, this would be the flipside of the crap some Angeleno forumers were slinging at us last month about SF being a "tiny fishing village"--the Bay Area is not so large as to be unmanageable. We've got all the amenities and options available anywhere in the state, and we don't have the overwhelming distances and crush of humanity that tends to erode one's ability to actually enjoy such things.

It would also be the flipside of the crap some Sacramento forumers sling at us all the time--a part of being "smug" is, no doubt, being content with where and how one lives.

[dimondpark]

Well, this would be the flipside of the crap some Angeleno forumers were slinging at us last month about SF being a "tiny fishing village"--the Bay Area is not so large as to be unmanageable. We've got all the amenities and options available anywhere in the state, and we don't have the overwhelming distances and crush of humanity that tends to erode one's ability to actually enjoy such things.

It would also be the flipside of the crap some Sacramento forumers sling at us all the time--a part of being "smug" is, no doubt, being content with where and how one lives.

Yep, a "Small Fishing Village" whose downtown vibrancy and amenities just whallops the living hell out of any other downtown for damn near 2 thousand miles-period.

[rs913]

The Bay Area is significantly wealthier and more highly educated then the rest of California, maybe money doesnt buy happiness, but it doesnt hurt either.

I'm suspicious that wealth alone is much of a factor...there are lots of studies out there that show that money doesn't in fact breed satisfaction (at least at the upper end), simply because it leads to higher expectations as well. I think the other factors of Bay Area life are the main causes of the higher numbers.

[ozone]

I think it's simpler: The Central Valley has almost none of the things that I like about CA such as mild weather, sophisticated people, great food, gorgeous coastal scenery. Many of those same things in the southland have been obscured by negatives like unbearable traffic, sprawl and smog. I constantly marvel how fast and easy it is to go from downtown SF to the coastal beauty of Marin, Sonoma or Half Moon Bay, much of which is a lot more unspoiled than coastal areas in the south.

What I don't understand is why people living in coastal areas to the north of SF and in the inland mountain areas north and east of the Central Valley aren't pretty happy as well. Those places are all awesome and although they lack the things I enjoy in the city, not everybody likes the city.

Look I could care less if you hate the Central Valley but you should at least be truthful. The CV is not a single, monolithic entity. For example, Sacramento is very different than Bakersfield. You are completly delusional if you think every place in the Bay Area has sophisticated people and great food..and you are just as ignorant if you think that parts of Sacramento and other pockets in the CV do not have those things.

BTW the weather in the CV is still classifed as a mild Mediterranean climate -yeah in gets hot in the summer so what? It's like Seville but not anything like -say Houston. Having lived in SF and really disliking the cold wind and fog I don't mind the heat that much and the nights usually cool down just enough to be perfect. If the weather is so bad here then why does Sacramento have a higher precentage of sidewalk and patio cafes than San Francisco? Besides it's not always hot 24-7 and many summer days are quite nice. (Of course, I'll be joining everbody else bitching during one of our infamous 'heat waves').

If the CV is as bad as you say then why was the Greater Sacramento cited as one of the five "most livable" regions in America and why did Time magazine call Sacramento America's most integrated city? Greater Sacramento spreads into lower foothills and is thankfully forever separated from the Bay Area by the California Delta. So OK we don't have the dramatic ocean and mountains but we do have rivers and outlying farmland which is not totally devoid of scenery. It's just a hell of a lot more subtle and makes for easier bike riding o-o'

I would say that a lot of the CV, just like a lot of the Bay Area, is obscured by negatives like unbearable traffic, sprawl and smog almost as much as the Southland so you can get off of that high horse too.

OK so the one thing that we don't have is the gorgeous coastal scenery-that was the truest part of your statement. But most of the people in the coastal regions live, work and shop in suburbs that look and feel no different than ones in the Central Valley. Hell most of the people living in the CV came from the Bay Area and LA in the first place.

If after living in LA, SD and SF (and enjoyed it), after having travelled around the world, I can still say that I really like Sacramento a lot it can't be as bad as you say.

Maybe people's unhappiness comes from other factors like the precenatge of the residents that are lower and middle-class being higher in the CV than in the Bay Area. And since life in general for the lower and middle-classes has gotten worst since the corporates completely took over our government with the help of the extreme right-wing naturally they would not be as happy with the state of affairs.

I think it's cool to be proud of where you live. But how much of it was your doing? Or did you just happen to gow up there? I kind of like living in a place that is not already "figured out", over anyalized and overhyped. The thing I like about Sacramento is that my experience is not as prescribed as it was when I lived over there. Yeah it's going through a change right now..but no one here says "let's do it like they do in the Bay Area or LA". That's gotta tell you something? You are not our role model for how we want to evolve.

Speaking of which what would make my life perfect here in this 'horrible hell hole' would be a continuation of urban infilling -especially the riverfront and to have a high-speed train so I can get to the coast fast when I feel like it. You see unlike most bayareaites I don't hate other parts of my state. I love the diversity... even San Francisco :-).

[fflint]

Look I could care less if you hate the Central Valley
What motivates you to insist the phrase "doesn't have what I like" means "I hate"? It clearly doesn't mean that. You *will* stop attacking people who say innocuous things like "Sacramento isn't for me" with ad hominem personal attacks and region-based "us versus them" trolling, or you'll be moving on to some other forum. Your choice.

You are completly delusional...and you are just as ignorant
These kinds of personal attacks are absolutely unacceptable.

If the weather is so bad here then why does Sacramento have a higher precentage of sidewalk and patio cafes than San Francisco? Because SF zoning laws banned al fresco dining and drinking virtually everywhere until a couple years ago.

it can't be as bad as you say.
He never said it was bad. You're the one insisting the statement "it's not for me" equals "it's bad" and then attacking as if you had some sort of justification for doing so. You don't.

You are not our role model for how we want to evolve.
Oh, right--more of that "us versus them" crap. Who cares? Nobody asked you.

You see unlike most bayareaites I don't hate other parts of my state. What does the article at the top of this thread actually say about Bay Area residents' perception of the state of California? Yep--the very opposite of your agenda-addled statement right here. You've got it all completely backwards, because you want to--you want to hate on the Bay Area and you'll make reasons up if you have to. Quite the compulsion you've got there. Take it somewhere else.

[ozone]

"flipside of the crap some Sacramento forumers sling at us all the time" -you call our opinions crap and you're waving your finder at me? OK I understand that you're bias and that you'll reem my "personal atacks" -even though I consider them to be totally acceptable (in moderation) as part of good debate and conservation. My statement about the BA not being our role model is actually a good point-if a little off the topic and I certianly do not want to get into us vs them debate. I was a little zealous and I apologize if I offended you. I was just once again defending my city from unfair character assassinations. That's what is really getting boring.

"What does the article at the top of this thread actually say about Bay Area residents' perception of the state of California? Yep--the very opposite of your agenda-"

..."The Central Valley has almost none of the things that I like about CA such as mild weather, sophisticated people, great food, gorgeous coastal scenery." Humm I've got in completely backwards do I?

"you want to hate on the Bay Area and you'll make reasons up if you have to. Quite the compulsion you've got there. Take it somewhere else." I actually said the opposite.

What I really said was...."I don't hate other parts of my state. I love the diversity... even San Francisco :-)"

It seems to me that my original post is proved -if it is in the wrong place just as your fellow bay arean's rag on the CV was. How can one say they consider California "one of the best places to live" if they have such disdain for a such a huge chunk of it? IMHO I think you're being kind of being a admin bully on this one.

[fflint]

you call our opinions crap
I wrote no such thing. Example of 'crap': "You SF forumers are smug, but not that smart." Definition of 'some': not all. Read it again if you missed the actual meaning of my sentence the first time.

..."The Central Valley has almost none of the things that I like about CA such as mild weather, sophisticated people, great food, gorgeous coastal scenery." Humm I've got in completely backwards do I?

I asked you about the total dissonance between the article, which reports Bay Area residents embrace California as desirable in far greater numbers than residents of any other part of the state, with your negative claim about Bay Area residents' supposed dislike of the rest of California.

Your response ignored the article and placed one forumer's opinion above all others, probably because in your mind that was the only way you could justify continuing your ongoing negative mischaracterizations of Bay Area residents. You have one of the most consistently aggressive civic inferiority complexes I've ever seen. You have some sort of compulsive need to belittle and demean the Bay Area, and it's pathetic. It's also unacceptable. Take it somewhere else.

your fellow bay arean's rag on the CV was. How can one say they consider California "one of the best places to live" if they have such disdain for a such a huge chunk of it? IMHO I think you're being kind of being a admin bully on this one.
My fellow "bay arean?" Enough with the regionalism already. This isn't "us versus them." This is one forumer who expressed an opinion you don't share. He didn't "rag" on Sacramento. He didn't say it is "bad." He didn't call it a "hell hole." He didn't "assassinate its character." He said it wasn't for him and he gave his reasons. You don't agree. I generally don't agree. But that doesn't mean it's open season on him with the personal attacks, and open season on the Bay Area with the regional trolling, or open season on me because I happen to be a "fellow" resident of the same region, or open season on anyone else. Control your anger and stop lashing out. I'm not going to warn you about this any more. If you truly believe Bay Area residents are smug and stupid and insufferable and boring and insulting and horrible and all that, then it's extraordinarily easy for you to avoid the Bay Area subforum altogether and save us all the grief.

[BTinSF]

[B]..."The Central Valley has almost none of the things that I like about CA such as mild weather, sophisticated people, great food, gorgeous coastal scenery." Humm I've got in completely backwards do I?

It seems to me that my original post is proved -if it is in the wrong place just as your fellow bay arean's rag on the CV was. How can one say they consider California "one of the best places to live" if they have such disdain for a such a huge chunk of it? IMHO I think you're being kind of being a admin bully on this one.

I guess what you are calling a "rag" would be my comment. I'll assume you aren't arguing there's coastal scenery in the CV and I hope you aren't arguing its summer temps in the upper 90s are "mild". So your disagreement would, I'm guessing, be with my characterization about the food and sophistication of the populace.

Actually, I wasn't thinking so much about Sacramento as places like Fresno and Modesto, but last I checked even Sacramento doesn't have the world-class arts or restaurant scene that the inner Bay Area has. If I am wrong, I'd love for you to tell me about the wonders of Sacramento--maybe not here, but in the Sacramento section where, if you do, I promise not to start a gratuitous argument with YOU.

Still, the fact remains that the original article says Bay Area folks are happier with California than folks in other parts of the state. And unless we in the BA are all drinking "funny" Koolade, it seems likely to me that that's because "our" California has more to be happy about. I was simply trying to pin down what there was about the Bay Area that's different from the rest of the state--at least as I perceive it.

[dimondpark]

Still, the fact remains that the original article says Bay Area folks are happier with California than folks in other parts of the state.....it seems likely to me that that's because "our" California has more to be happy about.

if ur happy and u know it clap ur hands!

[fflint]

*dead silence*

Haha!

[Reminiscence]

I found no clapping icon ... :(

so I guess this will have to do! ==== > :cheers:

Go California ! :)

[dimondpark]

*dead silence*

Haha!

LOL

[Fusey]

Look I could care less if you hate the Central Valley but you should at least be truthful.

I think you're reading too much into what people say, dude. I love Sacramento as well (especially the summer weather) but it's not for everyone--just like San Francisco, L.A., San Diego, etc., may not be for everyone.

[otnemarcaS]

I think you're reading too much into what people say, dude. I love Sacramento as well (especially the summer weather) but it's not for everyone--just like San Francisco, L.A., San Diego, etc., may not be for everyone.

I agree. I see why O went off but I think there needs to be restraint from the 'us vs them' mentality. Hey, having lived in both SF and Sac, I shook my head too at the notion that Sac lacked sophisticated people and good food. Having seen Sac really continue to evolve in the last few years, I really also assumed it was more about the Fresnos, Modestos, Stocktons or Bakersfields.

Reality is very few cities in the world can compare to SF and all it has to offer, much less cities in America. But it's still not for everyone. While I like living in Sacramento, my personal favorite city in California is San Diego.

I think it's okay to be passionate about where you live without showing disdain for where others live in a 'you vs us' manner.

One comment I disagree with is highlighting the unbearable traffic in the southland. Traffic in the Bay Area is no picnic either as it is consistently ranked in the top 3 worst congested areas in the country. Certainly not one of the reasons they love California.

[bennywah]

^
yeah I would have considered Sacramento to be in the northern california section of the poll and not the central valley which would be more of stockton fresno, bakersfield ect. If one uses public transit in S.F/bay area then traffic wouldn't be a concern, but spend an hour at 11pm, or 3 am going over some of the bridges to S.F and I wouldn't say traffic is great there. Of all of the major cities in california I have to admit the traffic here in San Diego surprises me, it only really is bad for about 45 min and it moves. In any case I love California and would have a hard time moving from this state anytime soon!!!!! GO CALI!!!!!

[BTinSF]

Traffic in the Bay Area is no picnic either as it is consistently ranked in the top 3 worst congested areas in the country. Certainly not one of the reasons they love California.

If you live downtown without a car as I do, the horrible freeway traffic is an irrelevency, though.

I watch the reporters describe the evening's gridlock on the local news shows and laugh. Sometimes I even log onto the webcam of the I-80/101 split for entertainment.

[fflint]

While the Bay Area certainly has heavy automobile traffic in spades, the West's most comprehensive public transportation system provides a viable alternative for those who seek to avoid commuting in heavy traffic. And that goes not only for the central cities, but also for vast swathes of inner and outer suburbia.

Every workday, about 1,375,000 Bay Area residents hop on board a bus, train or ferry. Regional rail lines--BART, Caltrain, Capitol Corridor, San Joaquin, and Altamont Express--integrate the localized light rail systems (Muni, VTA) and regional bus and ferry systems (Muni, VTA, AC Transit, SamTrans, Golden Gate Transit, etc.). BART also integrates our two busiest airports into the public transportation system.

Just as some have noted the Bay Area's heavy traffic is a downside to living here, I'll note the unusual viability of public transit here is an upside--and one that other congested Western metros cannot match.

[otnemarcaS]

It's true that the transit options in the Bay Area is second to none in the west coast. In fact, I currently take the capitol corridor into SF daily from Sac rather than drive. When I lived in the city, I had a car but did not use it much as I could have because parking was a nightmare. But trying to catch a cab or night bus from, say, North Beach to my place on Franklin st after a Saturday night out at 2am was also a frustrating experience.

I know city streets tend to be less congested than the freeway traffic. But it's still pretty bad a lot of times. I think Jerry Brown was the one that had ads out there a few years ago that said, "Oakland, we are closer to San Francisco than San Francisco is to San Francisco". For many, the defining point of congestion is freeway traffic into, out of and through a city. Whether it's Sac, San Diego and even LA, you can always find less congested routes through city streets. The traffic is just a little more amplified here in SF because of the size of the city, the narrow streets and just sheer number of cars on those roads.

[rs913]

I watch the reporters describe the evening's gridlock on the local news shows and laugh.

I sometimes do the same when I ride my bike on the pedestrian bridge over I-80 in Berkeley...

I think it's okay to be passionate about where you live without showing disdain for where others live in a 'you vs us' manner.

Very well said. :tup:

I think a great example of this is the NY Times travel section. While NYers aren't known for humility and many of them like to belittle everything west of the Hudson, the NYT travel writers have a much better outlook. They do sometimes mention their own city, and clearly appreciate its perks, but they also appreciate and respect the places they write about, how they differ from NYC and even how they offer some things NYC doesn't. I always thought many NYers (and maybe some Californians) ought to follow that example.

[greenmidtown]

IMO San Francisco is the greatest city in the West Coast. Anybody who can afford to live comfortably in the City is very lucky. But at the same time Bay Area residents are the richest in the state. I'd like to see how happy working-class people are in the Bay Area and how much that differs from the working-class in other areas. SF also seems very responsive to its citizenry and it seems to get a lot of 'leftist refugees' from more conservative regions of the country. The joy of living in an openly accepting society would make any gay kid from Ohio cling to SF for life and proclaim the wonders of California.