My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1998 Residential Survey
Roseville
>
Studies, Task Forces, Special Committees, Reports
>
Surveys
>
1998 Residential Survey
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 12:33:44 PM
Creation date
5/23/2012 3:29:10 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
481
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
POOR SERVICES . , , ?% <br />"1'oor services," on the other hand, motivated the other one-third of critics. There �ti-ere no <br />statistically significant subgroup differences noted. <br />Augmenting and <br />Contractin Ci Services <br />Residents were told: <br />As you may knolv, for the past ten years the Citv of <br />Roseville has had a policy of limiting its increase in <br />city property taxes tn less than the rate of in�lation. <br />At times, this has required the Itilayor and City Coun- <br />crl to make diffrcult choices a6out continuing, enhan- <br />cing and curtailing various serviees andPrngrams. <br />As a result, city services provided in Rosevrlle may <br />not be as extensive �r as complete a.s in other comm- <br />unities. But, ciry properry tax increases have been <br />minimal. <br />`�'hey were initially asked: <br />What services, _facilities, or programs, if any, do you <br />feel are missing from the City of Roseville? <br />The only response indicated by a moderate namb�r of respondents, at nine percent, was a <br />"community center:" <br />NO AI�ISWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29°/a <br />NONE.............. ................... .. 48% <br />COMMUNITY CENTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9% <br />LEAF PICK-UP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% <br />MORE POLICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% <br />SIDEWALKS....... ............................... 4% <br />Y�JUTH PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% <br />Five percent waated "more youth programs," while four percent suggested "more sidewalks." <br />But, an overwhelming seventy-seven percent were unable to make any suggestions for additional <br />programs, facilities, or services. <br />"None" was reported by city residents for over twenty years, owners of homes valued at under <br />$1GQ,000.00 and Precincts One, Two and Three residents. "Communiey Center" was cited by <br />college graduates and owners of homes valued at over $150,000_00. "Youth programs" were <br />mentioned by households containing childreri. <br />45 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.