By News-Register staff • 

Newspaper poll results differ from recent city survey

Only current online subscribers may access this article and/or our N-R e-editions.

One-day subscriptions available for just $3.

For all subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please

Comments

CubFan

Thank you NR for conducting your own, easy to understand, survey. I'm not surprised these results differ from the City survey. Presuming you've shared these results with Mayor Drabkin + city council? It'll be interesting if they consider this different public sentiment when making their decision later this month. In today's climate, it's very predictable and understandable that people favor the return of the $1.50/M to taxpayers. The $1.50/M was originally the fire levy, which is now being assessed at $2.00/M. The city needs to remove the $1.50 from the taxpayers backs. And if for some lame reason they think they need to keep the $1.50/M, then it makes total sense that basic needs such as maintenance, repairs, safety and housing should be prioritized over parks/rec/culture. C'mon city leaders... Listen to your constituents!

Chris Chenoweth

I have seen it. Thank you!

Northof60

Of course these survey results differed quite markedly from the city's survey. In my experience with prior city surveys, they are always written with a bias to obtain the results the city staff members want to see, rather than offer all potential options on the table. I stopped wasting my time on these surveys several years ago. Thank you so much News-Register for creating an open and non-biased survey that offered us the opportunity to choose an actual option that fits our opinion and current needs. As an aside, there are a number of us who own multiple residential properties for rental investment income. And we pay enormous amounts in property taxes each year. I found it interesting in these results that most owners of property are against continuing with the $1.50 taxing authority while renters are more supportive. Hmmmm ... no one really wins in this scenario. Owner/landlords will be forced to continue increasing the rent, while renters take on a larger burden. I urge the City Council to remove the $1.50 remaining taxing authority post haste. Then, if necessary, please bring a well thought out bond issue forward that outlines, explains and provides solid numbers for whatever additional projects are necessary.

BC

If there is anyone out there who is surprised by the difference in results, I have a bridge to sell.

The City paid big bucks to lead every survey taker down the path they wanted them to travel. If the person was lucky enough to find the option to "not" implement the $1.50 at all, the wording shamed them for wanting to choose it.

Life in the land of illusions; where you're conned into thinking you have a choice.

  • Most viewed
  • Most commented
Web Design and Web Development by Buildable