Laserfiche WebLink
1 - -- _ <br />Y.- _. Ic'__ .: ,""s.. - --u... E-;% . : . . _ . _ _ .._s . _;-`- . ,'-`"" : .,_ .-_.. 1 _ r=` -- -i`- — __::s:i Ni.i'f . e <br />F i <br />Initially, they were informed: <br />I worrld 1 i Ike o read you a 1 ist of <br />chan ges ir city services whict could <br />Ibe wade ita avroid increases in axes <br />or special assessioer s. Far eac one, <br />please tell ae if you w o ld favor that <br />chanqe as an alternative o higher <br />taxes, c r if you woul oppose tha <br />c ange ew n+ if i t oneanit hig er taxes. <br />In only one case did a majority not oppose the service cut, and <br />even there, a plurality still feit that the cut should not be <br />made. <br />Increas h i ne it itakes police to <br />respornd to a non-ereergerncy call to save <br />furading o re positions2 <br />A healthy majority opposed the service reduction: <br />FAVOR.....e .............. <br />a.....e...a...... <br />36% <br />OPPOSE.,.e .................. <br />n............. <br />57% <br />D N'T KNOW/REFUSED .........................8% <br />Groups more in favor of the cut: <br />Planning to stay b-10 years <br />18-24 year olds <br />Professional/Technical househnlds <br />Groups more opposed: <br />6-10 and over 30 year residents <br />45-54 year olds <br />Under 10,000 and over 60,000 yearly income <br />households <br />In terms of ranking, this cut wauld create a lot of <br />discontent among residents. <br />Increase ithe ti e it itakes o plow <br />city s kr ee ts af er a sr a s orr? <br />Substantial opposition arose to this proposal: <br />FAVOR.,....ee .......................... <br />e..38% <br />QPPOSEee.e .......................... <br />ee.... <br />56Ye <br />DON'T KNOW/REFUSEDe ........................bY. <br />Groups more in favor: