Laserfiche WebLink
Uroup meeting rooms? <br />By a sixty-six percent to twenty-one percent verdict, respondents supported the inclusion of <br />group meeting roocns: <br />STRONGLY FAVOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24% <br />F'AVOR ........... ............. ............... 46% <br />OPPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13% <br />S1'RONGLY ��'POSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S% <br />DON'T KNOW/REFUSF,D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I2% <br />Favorable ratings were posted by households containing chiIdren, f`orty-%ve to sixty-faur year <br />olds, college graduates, owners of homes valued at $100,000.00 to $150,000.00, over $SO,OOO.OQ <br />annual income households and residents who feel the quality of life is exccllcnt. Unfavorable <br />ratings werc posted by under $50,000.00 annual income households and residents who feel the <br />quality of iife is good or only fair. <br />A teen center? <br />Residents favored the inclusion of a teen center by a margin of seventy percent to cighteen <br />percent: <br />STR(�NGLY FAVOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25% <br />FAVOR.......................................... 44% <br />OPPOSE....................................._..... 8% <br />STROhGLY OPPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10°�0 <br />DON'T KNOW/REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% <br />Support soared among city residents for fivc years or less, households containing children, <br />owners of homes valued at $IO�,OOG.40 to $150,000.00, over $50,000.00 annual income <br />households and residents :vho feel the quality of life is excetient. It decreased among res;dents <br />who feel the quality of life is good or only fair. <br />A relocated senior citizens center? <br />Rosevillc residents supported the inclusi�n of a relocated senior citizens center by a sixty-four <br />percent to twenty-one percent margin: <br />STR�NGLY FAVOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25% <br />FAVOR.......................................... 39% <br />OPPOSE.......................................... lI% <br />STRONGLY OPPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% <br />DOrl'T KNOW/REFiJSED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I S% <br />Support was higher among city residcnts for five years or less, owners of homes valucd at <br />$100,000.04 to $150,000.00 and over $50,OOO.CO annual income households. It was lower <br />81 <br />