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
Efficiency of the deperrtment stcrff? <br />Eighty-two percent rated the efficiency of the department staff as "excellent"or '-�ood:" <br />EXCELLENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l�% <br />GOOD........................................... ?3% <br />ONLY FAIR ......... .. ........................... �% <br />P�OR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �°/a <br />DON'T KNOW/R�FUSED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% <br />��`ourteen percent rated the staff's efficiency lower. iJnfavorable ratings �uere reportcd by <br />residents who feel the quality af iife is good or only fair. <br />Courtesy of the clepartment staff? <br />Ninety-five percent rated the courtesy of the departm�nt statf as "excellent" or "good:" <br />EXCELLENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19% <br />GOOD........ ................................. 23% <br />C?NLY FAIR ........................................ 2% <br />PO4R................................,.......... 0% <br />DON'T KNOW/REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0°/a <br />Or�ly �ive percent regarded staff courtesy more negatively. <br />Ratings were higher among households containing children, and lower among households <br />containing chiidren ur►d owners of homes valued at o ver $150,000.00. <br />On three dimensions, the staff was regarded as providing high quality customer service. On two <br />dimensions, "waiting time for service" and "efficiency of the department staff," ratings were just <br />below the accepted level of high quality servicc. <br />Summary ar�d <br />Conclusions <br />Both City Government and City Staff were very well-regarded by the citize�uy. Thirty-four <br />percent, dawn six percent since the 199Q study, felt they knew "a great deal" or "a fair amount" <br />about the v✓ork of the Mayor and City Council. An unusuaily high sixty-two percent <br />"approved"of the job of the Mayor and City Council. Nine percent expresscd "disapproval," <br />while twenty-nine percent were unable to provide a rating. The approval rating had improved <br />twelve percent since the 1990 study. <br />Twenty-seven percent exper=enced "quite a lot" or "some" first-hand contact with the Roseville <br />City Staff. A very solid sev;.nty percent, albeit down five percent from ihe 1990 study, rated the <br />City Staff as "excellent" or "good." Fifteen percent rated them as "only fair" or "�oor," while <br />�I� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.