1991 Residential Survey - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The Mayor and Council were awarded a job approval rating of forty-eight percent and fifty-three percent, respectively. Disapproval ratings of nineteen percent and nine percent were also recorded. The level of the approval rating in both cases is at the norm for Metropolitan Area suburbs, but the five-to-one approval-to-disappraval rating of the Council is exceptionally strong. But, nearly fifty�seven percent of the cQmmunity felt they knew very little about the Mayor and the City Council, thus the positive ratings were based upon generalized feelings that things were "going well." Criticism of the Mayor was based upon three factors: issues, past personnel decisions, and the poss�bility of improvement. For the council, criticism was primarily based upon potential improvement, rather than issues or decisions. Eighty-five percent ot those expressing opinions felt the working relationship between the City and School District was "excellent" or "good." A lack of communications between the two was the only criticism leveled. Future areas of cooperation specified by respondents included the disposition of schools, drugs programs, and teen programs. Overall, then, there is no percei.ved problem between the Roseville School District and the City of Roseville. Residents supported two programs to renovate housing in Roseville. By a sixty-three percent to thirty-two percent margin, citizens favored a city--aperated loan program to home owners to caver the costs of repairs to bring a hame up to code standards. By a seventy-two percent to twenty-ane p�rcent margin, they also favored a city-operated revolving loan program for the rehabilitation and/or remodeling of the residences of seniors. Consistent with other findings, residents take a very pragressive approach on issues of neighborhood improvements. There was wide support for redevelopment effarts on three fronts: residential, given top priority by twenty-nine percent; office, supported by fourteen percent; and light industrial, key to eleven percent. Opposition was strongest against attracting more retail opportunities, heavy industrial, and apartments. Most residents, then, hope for a balanced approach ta future growth. There appeared to be general agreement about a vision for the future of Roseville. Ninety percent rejected the need for mare retail shopping malls, while fi.fty-seven percent felt similarly about more office buildings. Eighty-eight percent rejected a future as another Sun City, Arizona, senior settlement. Sixty-eight percent rejected the placement of more apartments and condominiums along Highways 36 and I-35w; sixty- seven percent alsa rejected the placement of more retail deve].opment there. A forty-four percent to farty-six split occurred over the placement of high density light industriaZ and office complexes in those two locations. Along the two major highways, then, a mixed development would work best, combining residential with office and light industrial apportunities. The 7