1998 Residential Survey - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Summary and Conclusions Roseville residents were particularly pleased with the city services provided to them. City services provided to the neighborhood were gcneral�_v vvell-regarded. �xceptionally high ratings wcre awarded for "street maintenance," "sno�y plowing of sireets," '`street Iight replacement." "park maintenance," "curb and gutter repair," and ``tree maintenance along the boulevards." Moderately high negative ratings were posted for "having reasanab[c property taxes" and '`street traffic." When faced wfth a trade-off between an emphasis an providing excelient se:vices OR minimizing ta�c costs, forty-seven percent prioritized "excellent services." Thirty-six percent chose "minimizing taxes," and eighteen percent were "unsure.'' When asked abaut missing services, facilities, or programs, seventy-sev�n perccnt either were unable to respond to the query or stated "none." Nine perccnt suggested a Community Ccnter. while five percent urged more youth programs. VJhen asked what city serviccs, facilities, or �rograrras should be cut, eighty-seven percent either were unable to respond to the question or indicated "none." Ten percent suggested the "swimming pool." Eighty-five percent were unable to identi£y services currently provided by city govez'nr�ient which could be jusi as or more effectively provided by the prir•ate sector or public-private partnerships. Eight percent indicated "building inspec#ion," and seven percent pointed to "park maintenance." Similarly, ninety-seven percent were unable to identify services currently provided by city government whieh could be just as or more eficctively provided �y a different level of government. The typical resident offering a response placed the City's share of the property tax at 19.b%. A somewhat above normal forty-one percent were eanable to even hazard a guess. T��+enty-eight percent felt it was in the "1 Q% to 20%" range, while seventeen percent saw it 'sn the "21 % to 30%" .*ange. Even so, by a solid fifty-eight percent to twenty-seven percent margin, residents supported a city property ta�c increase if it were needed to maintain city services as their current level. Forty-seven percent saw Roseville progerty taxes as "about average" in cotnparison with nearby areas. Thirty-six percent felt they were comparatively "high," while two percent felt they were comparatively "low." But, an overwhelming eighty-seven percent viewed the value of city services in terms of the property taxes paid as "exce(lent" or "good." If it were required to expa�d or improve basic city services, the typical resident would support a property tax increase of $2.55 per nnonth beyond the rate of inflation; however, sixteen percent would support "no increase." A large twenty-seven percent would support a$5.00 per month increase beyand the rate of inflation. Residents were asked to indicate the percentagc of the cost of providing eiglit city services which should bc funded through general tax revenues as opposed to user fees. Seventy-five percent felt emergency fire and police calls should be totally funded through t� revenues. The median estimate for the c±ty inspection of residentiai housing was 87.6% underwritten with general tax revenues. "I'4ie average estimate for the curbside pick-up of recycling was 73.5% covered through 53