Laserfiche WebLink
_� <br />The following s[aff conclusions have been drawn irom [he questionnaire: <br />1. A strong grass mots citizen involvement ia necessary. <br />2. Park Bond Referendwos appear to be a controversial Sssue as 19 <br />of the 26 city referenduma either failed or passed by a 2 to 1 marBin. <br />3. A bond referendum is usually a one time ahot as 18 of the 26 <br />cities who returned the queationnaire said they would not attempt <br />another referendum within 3 yeare. <br />4. There is no "pat" formula for the auccess of a Park Referendum. <br />5. The following "ingredients" appear to breed success: <br />a. Offer something for everyone. <br />b. Grasa roots approach. <br />c. DE:velopment rather than acquiaition. <br />d. A good track zecord from sponsoring agency. <br />6. Public hearings are no[ as successful as other means of promotion <br />and publicity. <br />7. Thern are two distinct approaches to bond referertd�uns: <br />a. The so called "lucky approach" -*_hat ie a very low key approach <br />tha[ "soft sells" the iasue and only contacts the potential yee <br />wters. This approach does not attempt to "swuy" the no votere. <br />but rather make aure tha[ the yes voters get out to vote. <br />b. The co�mity "grasa roots, rah, rah, give it all you got" approach <br />involves a great deal of citizen input at a neighborhood level. Thie <br />approach at[empts to "hard sell" [he Sssue and inform each reeident <br />on a personal basis. . <br />Copies of [he completed referendum surveys are available for Commtseion <br />review in [he January reaource file. <br />