HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.a Community SurveyCITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
City Council Work Session Date January 12, 2005
ISSUE
The 2005 Budget includes money to conduct a bi- annual scientific attitudinal survey of City
residents
BACKGROUND
Attached for your review is a draft survey instrument of the Resident Survey to be conducted
by Decision Resources, Ltd
The survey closely mirrors the instrument used in May /June 2003 In addition to standard
resident satisfaction questions, the survey will also try to gauge residents' opinions on a
number of the higher priority goals of the City Council
Please review the draft prior to the meeting Representatives of Decision Resources will be
present at the meeting to answer questions about how the survey is conducted, how
questions are developed, and any other questions that Council might have
Following Council review and approval, it is anticipated that the survey would be in the field in
late January or early February Staff intends to have results in advance of the Council goal
setting retreat in April or May
SUMMARY
The authorization to proceed with the Resident Survey will require a formal action by the City
Council at its January 18 meeting Any final revisions or suggestions should be provided as
part of the Work Session discussion Decision Resources will present a final draft for Staff
approval before the survey is initiated
SPEC /AL REQUEST. In order to maintain the integrity of the scientific survey process,
please do not share the draft survey instrument outside Council discussion.
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM: COMMUNITY SURVEY
DISCUSSION
PREPARED BY: JAMIE VERBRUGGE, CITY
AGEN N 4
ADMINISTRATOR
1, w
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Survey,
APPROVED BY:
2003 Survey Results
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Give staff direction
ISSUE
The 2005 Budget includes money to conduct a bi- annual scientific attitudinal survey of City
residents
BACKGROUND
Attached for your review is a draft survey instrument of the Resident Survey to be conducted
by Decision Resources, Ltd
The survey closely mirrors the instrument used in May /June 2003 In addition to standard
resident satisfaction questions, the survey will also try to gauge residents' opinions on a
number of the higher priority goals of the City Council
Please review the draft prior to the meeting Representatives of Decision Resources will be
present at the meeting to answer questions about how the survey is conducted, how
questions are developed, and any other questions that Council might have
Following Council review and approval, it is anticipated that the survey would be in the field in
late January or early February Staff intends to have results in advance of the Council goal
setting retreat in April or May
SUMMARY
The authorization to proceed with the Resident Survey will require a formal action by the City
Council at its January 18 meeting Any final revisions or suggestions should be provided as
part of the Work Session discussion Decision Resources will present a final draft for Staff
approval before the survey is initiated
SPEC /AL REQUEST. In order to maintain the integrity of the scientific survey process,
please do not share the draft survey instrument outside Council discussion.
f0
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
�r Deeision
12/29/2004 13:59 #504 P.001 /014
Resources,
Lt do
4
Ob
Ik
To:
Company: C US2�✓ln OV
Fax Number: /1 l� SZ03
Phone Number: 5 !r
Date:
From
Subject and Comments:
rY►'l V 'Pi✓S I
Total Pages: I 1 (including cover page)
E
Decision Resources, Ltd.
3128 Dean Court
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416
Phone: (612) 920 -0337 Fax- (612) 920 -1069
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
DECISION RESOURCES, LTD.
3128 Dean Court
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416
12/29/2004 13:59 #504 P.002/014
ROSEMOUNT RESIDENTIAL
QUESTIONNAIRE
PRELIMINARY
Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a nationwide
polling firm located in Minneapolis. We've been retained by the
City of Rosemount to speak with a random sample of residents
about issues facing the city. The survey is being taken because
your city representatives and staff are interested in your opin-
ions and suggestions I want to assure you that all individual
responses will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of
the entire sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE)
1.
Approximately how many years
have you lived in Rosemount?
LESS THAN ONE YEAR 1
ONE OR TWO YEARS 2
THREE TO FIVE YEARS 3
SIX TO TEN YEARS 4
ELEVEN TWENTY YRS.....5
TWENTY THIRTY YRS 6
OVER THIRTY YEARS 7
REFUSED .................8
2
In what city and /or state were you located immediately prior
to your residence here?
3. As things stand now, how long in LESS THAN TWO YEARS I
the future do you expect to live TWO TO FIVE YEARS 2
in Rosemount? SIX TO TEN YEARS 3
OVER TEN YEARS 4
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
4. How would you rate the quality of EXCELLENT ...............I
life in Rosemount excellent, GOOD ....................2
good, only fair, or poor? ONLY FAIR ...............3
POOR ....................4
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
5. what do you like MOST, if anything, about living in Rose-
mount?
6. What do you think is the most serious issue facing Rosemount
today?
1
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069 12/29/2004 13:59 #504 P.003/014
When residents are
their communities,
residents think of
their town square,
Capitol.
7. What image coi
Rosemount?
asked what comes to mind when they think of
many things can occur to them. Minneapolis
the lake system, Chaska residents think of
and Saint Paul residents think of the State
nes to mind when you think about the City of
S. How would you rate the general EXCELLENT ...............I
sense of community among Rosemount GOOD— .................2
residents excellent, good, only ONLY FAIR ...............3
fair or poor? POOR ...................4
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
IF A RESPONSE IS GIVEN, ASK:
9. Why do you feel that way?
10. What things could be done to improve the sense of
community in Rosemount?
11. Now which of the following state- STATEMENT A .............1
ments comes closest to your STATEMENT H .............2
feelings? STATEMENT C .............3
A. 7 feel a real tie to the entire NONE (VOL.)_ 4
Rosemount community. DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 5
B. I have strong ties to my neigh-
borhood, but weak ties to the
rest of Rosemount.
C. I have neither strong ties to
my neighborhood nor the comm-
unity as a whole.
Moving on.....
12. How important do you think it is
to the quality of life in a com-
munity to have a strong arts and
cultural presence very impor-
tant, somewhat important, not too
important or not at all important?
VERY IMPORTANT 1
SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2
NOT TOO IMPORTANT 3
NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 4
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 5
2
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069 12/29/2004 13:59 #504 P.004 /014
13. What types of arts activities, if any, do you and other
household members regularly participate in?
IF "NONE," ASK:
14. Could you tell me one or two reasons why you and other
members of your household do not regularly participate
in arts activities
Many communities host arts and creative activities, such as local
art and photography shows, local music and drama groups, as well
as crafts groups and classes, in which residents may actively
participate.
15. Other than school- related program- YES .....................1
ming, do you feel there are enough NO ......................2
facilities and programs to meet DEPENDS ON TYPE 3
your household needs? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 4
16. How much, if anything, would you
be willing to pay in additional
property taxes per year to operate
and maintain a cultural facility
in Rosemount containing a theater,
as well as music and arts class-
rooms and exhibits? Let's say,
would you be willing to pay an ad-
ditional per year? (CHOOSE
A RANDOM STARTING POINT; MOVE UP
OR DOWN DEPENDING ON ANSWER) How
about per year? (REPEAT
PROCESS)
NOTHING .................1
$10.00 ..................2
$20.00 ..................3
$30.00 ..................4
$40.00 ..................5
$50.00 ..................6
$60.00 ..................7
DON'T KNOW ..............8
REFUSED .................9
17. All in all, do you think things in RIGHT DIRECTION 1
Rosemount are generally headed in WRONG TRACK .............2
the right direction, or do you DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3
feel things are off on the wrong
track?
IF A RESPONSE IS GIVEN, ASK:
16. Could you tell me why you feel that way?
3
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
12/29/2004
14:00 #504
P.005/014
I would like to read you a list of characteristics
of a communi-
ty.
For each one, please tell me if you
think Rosemount currently
has
too many or too much, too few or too little, or about
the
right amount.
MANY FEW/
ABOUT
D.K./
MUCH LITT
RIGHT
REF.
19.
Affordable housing, defined by
the Metropolitan Council as a
single family home costing less
than 7
1 2
3
4
20.
Affordable rental units?
1 2
3
4
21.
Luxury rental units?
1 2
3
4
22.
Condominiums?
1 2
3
4
23.
Townhouses?
1 2
3
4
24.
Starter homes for young families?
1 2
3
4
25.
"Move up" housing?
1 2
3
4
26.
Higher cost housing?
1 2
3
4
27.
Senior housing?
1 2
3
4
28.
Parks and open spaces?
1 2
3
4
29.
Trails and bikeways?
1 2
3
4
30.
Service establishments?
1 2
3
4
31.
Retail shopping opportunities?
1 2
3
4
32.
Entertainment establishments?
1 2
3
4
33.
Dining establishments?
1 2
3
4
34.
Day care opportunities?
1 2
3
4
Moving
on...
35.
Do you think the pace of develop-
TOO RAPID ...............I
ment in the city has been too
ABOUT RIGHT
.............2
rapid, about right, or not fast
NOT FAST ENOUGH
3
enough?
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
4
As I
read the following statements about
residential and business
development, please answer "yes" or "no."
(READ LIST)
YES
NO DKR
36. There is a good mix of business and
residential development in the City. 1 2 3
37. During the past few years, the appear-
ance and maintenance of business pro-
perties has improved. 1 2 3
38. Residents have adequate opportunity to
make their feelings known about pro-
posed development or redevelopment
projects. 1 2 3
39. There is sufficient open and natural
space in the community. 1 2 3
As you know, schools grade students on a scale from A to F,
including pluses and minuses
4
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
40. Using this scale, please give an
overall rating to development and
redevelopment in the City of
Rosemount?
On another topic....
12/29/2004 14:00 #504 P.006/014
A ......................01
A- .....................02
84 .....................03
B ......................04
B I 05
C .....................06
C 07
C 08
D .....................09
D......................10
D...................... 11
F .....................12
F....... ..............13
NO ANSWER ..............14
41. Would you support or oppose prior- STRONGLY SUPPORT 1
itizing the redevelopment of the SUPPORT .................2
Central Downtown Area? (WAIT FOR OPPOSE ..................3
RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly STRONGLY OPPOSE 4
that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
There have been discussion about the development of a commercial
and industrial area in eastern Rosemount.
42. Would you support or oppose the STRONGLY SUPPORT 1
City pursuing this development? SUPPORT .................2
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel OPPOSE ..................3
strongly that way? STRONGLY OPPOSE 4
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
There have also been discussions about the construction of a
larger athletic complex in the community. Facilities that may be
included are soccer fields, baseball fields, and softball fields.
43_ Would you support or oppose the STRONGLY SUPPORT 1
construction and operation of a SUPPORT ....2
large athletic complex in the City OPPOSE ..................3
of Rosemount? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) STRONGLY OPPOSE 4
Do you feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
44. Would you
support or oppose a
STRONGLY SUPPORT 1
property
tax increase to acquire
SUPPORT ................2
land for
a large athletic complex?
OPPOSE ............3
(WAIT FOR
RESPONSE) Do you feel
STRONGLY OPPOSE 4
strongly
that way?
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED. ....5
5
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
45. How much would you be willing to
pay in additional property taxes
for the construction of a large
athletic complex? How about
per month? (CHOOSE A RANDOM START-
ING POINT; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPEND-
ING ON RESPONSE) How about
per month? (REPEAT PROCESS)
12/29/2004 14:00 #504 P.007/014
NOTHING .................1
$—.00 ...................2
.00 ...................3
...................4
...................5
.......6
DON'T KNOW ..............7
REFUSED .................8
I would like to read you a list of facilities which could be
constructed by the City of Rosemount. Keeping in mind that the
construction of each facility would require a property tax in-
crease for EACH, please tell me if you would strongly support the
city constructing that facility, somewhat support, somewhat
oppose or strongly oppose the city constructing that facility.
STS SMS SMO STO DKR
46.
An aquatic center?
1
2
3
4 5
47.
A Senior Center?
1
2
3
4 5
48
A Youth Center?
1
2
3
4 5
49.
A second sheet of ice?
1
2
3
4 5
As you may know, property taxes are divided between the City of
Rosemount and various other units of local government. Thinking
about the amount going to the City....
50. Do you think the city portion of VERY HIGH ...............I
your property taxes, which funds SOMEWHAT HIGH 2
City services in Rosemount is very ABOUT AVERAGE 3
high, somewhat high, about average SOMEWHAT LOW.. 4
somewhat low or very low in com- VERY LOW ............5
parison with nearby suburban com- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 6
munities?
I would like to read you a list of a few city services. For each
one, please tell me whether you would rate the quality of the
service as excellent, good, only fair, or poor? (ROTATE)
EXC GOO FAT POO DKR
51.
Police protection?
1
2
3
4 5
52.
Fire protection?
1
2
3
4 5
53_
Recycling and hrush pick -up?
1
2
3
4 5
54.
Storm drainage and flood
control?
1
2
3
4 5
55.
Park maintenance?
1
2
3
4 5
$6,
City sponsored recreation
programs?
1
2
3
4 5
57.
Animal control?
1
2
3
4 5
Now, for the next three city services, please consider only city
maintained street and roads Do not consider state and county
roads, which are taken care of by other levels of government.
How would you rate....
5
From:DFCISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
58. City street repair and
maintenance')
59. Snow plowing?
6o. Street lighting?
12/29/2004 14:00 #504 P.008/014
EXC GOO FAI POO DKR
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
61. When you
consider the
property
EXCELLENT .........1
taxes you pay and the
quality of
GOOD ....2
city services you receive, would
ONLY FAIR ...............3
you rate
the general value of city
POOR ....................4
services
as excellent,
good, only
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
fair, or
poor?
62. Would you favor or oppose an in- FAVOR ...................I
crease in city property taxes, OPPOSE ..................2
if it were needed to maintain DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 3
city services at their current
level?
63. Would you favor or oppose a FAVOR ...................1
property tax increase to expand or OPPOSE ..................2
improve city services? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3
IF "FAVOR," ASK:
64. What city services would you be willing to pay higher
property taxes to expand or improve?
Thinking about another topic....
65. Do you generally feel safe in your YES ............1
home? NO..... ........2
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3
66. What do you consider to be the most serious crime issue in
Rosemount? (READ LIST)
VANDALISM AND PROPERTY DAMAGE ...............0
BURGLARY ..............................1
SHOPLIFTING AND THEFT .......................2
DRUGS................ ......................3
GANGS........... ...........................4
TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS AND SPEEDING .............5
DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED ...................6
ASSAULTS ..............................7
NONE VOL.) ..............................8
DON'T KNOW/ REFUSED ..........................9
7
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069 12/29/2004 14:00 #504 P.009 /014
67. How would you rate the amount of TOO MUCH..... ....1
police patrolling in your neigh ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT..2
borhood too much, about the NOT ENOUG21 ..............3
right amount or not enough? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 4
Again, as I read the following statements, please answer "yes" or
"no.
YES NO DKR
68.
This neighborhood is a good place
to raise children.
1 2 3
69.
People have pride and ownership in
our neighborhood.
1 2 3
70.
I feel a part of my neighborhood.
1 2 3
71.
Business and residential neighbor-
hoods are enjoyable and stable
places to live, work and recreate
in Rosemount.
1 2 3
72.
I have recently or plan to sign
ficantly remodel my residence in
the next couple of years.
1 2 3
73.
Using the scale of A to F, in-
A ......................01
cluding pluses and minuses, please
A- ............02
give an overall rating to your
B .....................03
neighborhood?
B ......................04
B- .....................05
C .....................06
C......................07
C- .....................08
D .....................09
D......................10
D-...... I
11
F .....................12
F..... ................13
NO ANSWER ..............14
As you may know, the City of Rosemount offers a wide variety of
neighborhood activities or events, such
as Leprechaun Days.
74
Have you or household members
YES .....................1
participated in Leprechaun Days
NO ......2
during the past two years?
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
1
75.
Have you or household members participated in any other
neighborhood events or activities during the past two years?
(IF "YES," ASK:) Which ones?
Continuing....
10
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069 12/29/2004 14:00 #504 P.010 /014
The Rosemount park system is Composed of larger Community parks
and smaller neighborhood parks, trails, and community ballfields.
Of these facilities, which have you or members of your household
used during the past year?
YES NO DKR
76.
Larger community parks?
1
2 3
77
Smaller neighborhood parks?
1
2 3
78.
Trails?
1
2 3
79.
Community ballfields?
1
2 3
80. Have you or members of your house- YES .....................1
hold participated in any City NO ......................2
park and recreation programs? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3
IF "YES," ASK:
81. Which ones?
82. Were you satisfied or dis- SATISFIED ...............I
satisfied with your exper- DISSATISFIED 2
ience? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 3
83. Do you or members of your household currently leave the city
for park and recreation facilities or activities? (IF
"YES," ASK:) What would that be?
84. Do you leave the City of Rosemount
on a regular or daily basis to go
to work? (IF "YES," ASK.) HOW
many minutes does it take you to
get to work? (IF "NO," ASK:) Do
you work in Rosemount?
85. Have you used public transporta-
tion during the past two years?
NO /WORK IN ROSEMOUNT 0
NOT EMPLOYED/RETIRED I
YES /5 MINUTES OR LESS-2
YES /6 TO 10 MINUTES.....3
YES /11 TO 15 MINUTES....4
YES 116 TO 20 MINUTES 5
YES /21 TO 25 MINUTES 6
YES /26 TO 30 MINUTES 7
YES /OVER 30 MINUTES 8
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 9
YES .....................1
NO. ........2
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 3
9
r
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
86. How likely would you be to use
public transportation if a park
and -ride facility for bus service
were constructed in the City of
Rosemount very likely, somewhat
likely, not too likely, or not at
all likely?
Changing topics....
12'29/2004 14:00 #504 P.011/014
VERY LIKELY... ........1
SOMEWHAT LIKELY 2
NOT TOO LIKELY 3
NOT AT ALL LIKELY 4
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
87, other than voting, do you feel YES I
that if you wanted to, you could NO ....................1.2
have a say about the way the City DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 3
of Rosemount runs things?
IF "NO," ASK:
88, why do you feel you cannot have a say?
Moving on....
93. What is your principal source of information about Rosemount
City Government and its activities (PROBE)
10
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 5
92. From what
you have
seen or heard,
EXCELLENT ...............I
how would
you rate
the fob per
GOOD .................2
formance
of the Rosemount
City
ONLY FAIR ...............3
staff
excellent,
good, only
POOR ....................4
fair, or
poor?
SOMEWHAT DISAPPROVE_....3
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
Moving on....
93. What is your principal source of information about Rosemount
City Government and its activities (PROBE)
10
89. How much do you feel you know
GREAT DEAL ..............1
about the work of the Mayor and
FAIR AMOUNT .............2
city council a great deal, a
VERY LITTLE............
3
fair amount, or very little?
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
4
90. From what you know, do you ap-
STRONGLY APPROVE
I
prove or disapprove of the job
SOMEWHAT APPROVE
2
the Mayor and City Council are
SOMEWHAT DISAPPROVE_....3
doing? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) And do
STRONGLY DISAPPROVE
4
you feel strongly that way?
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
5
91. How much first -hand contact have
QUITE A LOT .............I
you had with the Rosemount City
SOME .............2
staff quite a lot, some, very
VERY LITTLE .............3
very little, or none at all?
NONE AT ALL
4
Moving on....
93. What is your principal source of information about Rosemount
City Government and its activities (PROBE)
10
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069 12/29/2004 14:01 #504 P.012/014
94. How would you prefer to receive information about Rosemount
City Government and its activities?
For each of the following items, please tell me whether it is a
mayor source, minor source or no source at all about Rosemount
news, activities, events or City policies?
103. Does your household currently sub- YES .....................1
scribe to cable television? NO ................2
REFUSED .................3
IF "YES," ASK:
As you may know, the City currently cablecasts City Council
and Planning Commission meetings.
104. How often do you watch City FREQUENTLY ..............I
Council or Planning Commis- OCCASIONALLY 2
sion meetings frequently, RARELY .3
occasionally, rarely, or NEVER.... ............4
never? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
105. Do you have access to the Internet HOME ONLY ...............I
at home? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do WORK ONLY ...............2
you have access to the Internet BOTH .......3
at work? NEITHER .................4
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
IF "YES," ASK:
106. Have you accessed the City's YES .....................I
web site? NO ............2
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3
IF "YES," ASK:
11
MAJ
MIN
NOT
DKR
95.
Weekly newspapers?
1
2
3
4
96.
Cable Television?
1
2
3
4
97.
"The Rosemount City News," the
city's newsletter?
1
2
3
4
98.
City mailings?
1
2
3
4
99.
Co- workers /Neighbors?
1
2
3
4
100.
Daily newspapers?
1
2
3
4
101.
Internet?
1
2
3
4
102.
Do you or any household members
YES .....................I
regularly read the City "s news-
No ......................2
letter, "The Rosemount City News
DON'T
KNOW/REFUSED
3
103. Does your household currently sub- YES .....................1
scribe to cable television? NO ................2
REFUSED .................3
IF "YES," ASK:
As you may know, the City currently cablecasts City Council
and Planning Commission meetings.
104. How often do you watch City FREQUENTLY ..............I
Council or Planning Commis- OCCASIONALLY 2
sion meetings frequently, RARELY .3
occasionally, rarely, or NEVER.... ............4
never? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
105. Do you have access to the Internet HOME ONLY ...............I
at home? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do WORK ONLY ...............2
you have access to the Internet BOTH .......3
at work? NEITHER .................4
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 5
IF "YES," ASK:
106. Have you accessed the City's YES .....................I
web site? NO ............2
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3
IF "YES," ASK:
11
From :DFCISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
107. Were you able to find
what you were looking
for'>
12/29/2004 14:01 #504 P.013/014
YES .....................1
NO......................2
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3
108. What information would you like to see on the City
of Rosemount's web site?
I would like to read you a list of potential on -line servic-
es which could be offered by the city. For each one, please
tell me if you would be very interested in the service,
somewhat interested, not too interested or not at all inter-
ested in the service.
Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes....
Could you please tell me how many people In each of the following
age groups live in your household. Let's start oldest to
youngest....
113. First, persons 65 or over?
114_ Adults under 65?
115. School -aged children?
116. Pre- schoolers?
12
0 .......................0
1 .......................1
2 OR MORE_ ............2
REFUSED .........3
0 .......................0
1 .......................1
2 .......................2
3 ..................3
4 OR MORE ...............4
REFUSED .................5
0 .......................0
1 .......................1
2 .......................2
3.. 3..
4 OR MORE ...............4
REFUSED .................5
0 .......................0
1 ..........1
2 OR MORE ...............2
REFUSED 3
VRI
SMI
NTI
NAA
DKR
109.
An e- mailed newsletter?
1
2
3
4
5
110.
Park and recreation
registration?
1
2
3
4
5
111.
Permit application?
1
2
3
4
5
112.
Schedule of building
inspections?
1
2
3
4
5
Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes....
Could you please tell me how many people In each of the following
age groups live in your household. Let's start oldest to
youngest....
113. First, persons 65 or over?
114_ Adults under 65?
115. School -aged children?
116. Pre- schoolers?
12
0 .......................0
1 .......................1
2 OR MORE_ ............2
REFUSED .........3
0 .......................0
1 .......................1
2 .......................2
3 ..................3
4 OR MORE ...............4
REFUSED .................5
0 .......................0
1 .......................1
2 .......................2
3.. 3..
4 OR MORE ...............4
REFUSED .................5
0 .......................0
1 ..........1
2 OR MORE ...............2
REFUSED 3
From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069
12/29/2004 14:01 #504 P.014 /014
117. Do you own or rent your prevent
residence'>
118. What is your age, please?
(READ CATEGORIES, IF NEEDED)
OWN .....................I
RENT ....................2
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 3
18-24 ...................1
25- 34 ...................2
35- 44 ...................3
45 -54 .................4
55-64 ..................5
65 AND OVER .............6
REFUSED .................7
119. Are you employed by a public en-
tity, such as state and local gov
ernment or a school district, a
private company, self- employed or
own a business, or currently not
working?
Thank you for your time. Good -bye.
120. Gender (BY OBSERVATION:
DO NOT ASK)
121. ZONE (FROM LIST)
LIST;
PHONER;
DATE!
PHONE
PUBLIC ENTITY..... .....I
PRIVATE COMPANY 2
OWN BUST /SELF- EMP 3
NOT WORKING .............4
REFUSED .................5
MALE .................1
FEMALE ..................2
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
1 ..............1
2 ..............2
3 ..............3
4 ..............4
5 ..............5
6 ..............6
13
I
City of Rosemount
2003 Residential Study
Presented to:
The City of Rosemount
Volume One
Frequencies and Analysis
Decision Resources, Ltd.
August 2003
4
Survey Overview
D ecision Resources, Ltd is pleased to present the results of this study to the City of
Rosemount This section provides a brief introduction to the specifications of the survey
and a guide to the organization of the written analysis
While the most statistically sound procedures have been used to collect and analyze the
information presented herein, it must always be kept in mind that surveys are not predictions
They are designed to measure public opinion within identifiable limits of accuracy at Specific
points in ume This survey is in no way a prediction of opinions, perceptions, or actions at any
future point in time After all, in public policy analysis, the major task is to impact these
rev ealed opinions in a constructive fashion
The Principal Investigator for this study was Dr William D Moms, the Project Director
overseeing all phases of the research and analysts was Ms Diane Traxler
Research Design
This study contains the results of a telephone survey of 400 randomly selected residents
of the residents of the City of Rosemount Survey responses were gathered by professional
interviewers across the community between June 4` and 12` 2003
The average interview took twenty -two minutes
All respondents interviewed in this study were part of a randomly generated sample of the
residents of the City of Rosemount In general, random samples such as this yield results
prolectable to their respective universe within f 5 0 percent in 95 out of 100 cases
Interviews were conducted by Decision Resources, Ltd., trained personnel from
telephone banks in St Paul, Minnesota Approximately tw enty percent of all interviews were
independently validated for procedure and content by a Decision Resources, Ltd supervisor
Completed interviews were edited and coded at the company's headquarters in Minneapolis,
Minnesota Statistical analysis and cross tabulations were produced by the company's C- Mentor
Analysis System and SPSS for Windows 11 0
Organization of the Study
The results of this study are presented in the following order
The Analysis consists of a written report of the mayor findings The results contained
herein were also presented verbally to the client
The Questionnaire reproduces the survey instrument as it was used in the interviewing
process This section also includes a response frequency distribution for each question
The Graphics section provides a visual representation of the data assembled in this
sun ey analysis
Any further questions the reader may have about this study which are not answered in this
report should be directed to either Dr Moms or Ms Traxler
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter One Residential Demographics
6
Residential Demographics
7
Residential Longevity
7
Future Intentions
8
Household Composition
8
Horne Ownership
9
Age of Respondents
10
Place of Employment
10
Gender
11
Residential Location
I1
Summary and Conclusion
.11
Chapter Two Quality of Life Issues
13
Quality of Life Issues
14
Reasons for Moving to the Community
14
Quality of Life Rating 1
15
Liked Most and Concerned Most about the City
15
Arts and Cultural Presence
17
Direction of Community
19
Neighborhood Characteristics
20
Leprechaun Days
23
Summary and Conclusions
24
Chapter Three City Taxes and City Services
25
City Taxes and City Services
26
City of Portion of Property Taxes
26
Value of City Services
27
Tax Increase for City Services
27
Tax Comparison to Nearby Areas
28
City Service Evaluations
29
Feel Safe in Home
33
Police Patrolling
33
Summary and Conclusions
33
Chapter Four City Government and Staff
35
City Government and Staff
36
Have a Say
36
City Government
37
City Staff
38
City Staff
39
Summary and Conclusions
40
3
V
3
Chapter Five Development Issues 41
Development Issues 41
General Development Preferences .47
General Development Preferences 49
Residential and Business De), elopment 49
Redevelopment of Central Downtown Area 50
Larger Athletic Complex 51
Open Space Piesenation 51
Sit -down Family Restaurants 53
Public Ti ansportation Issues 54
Summaryand Conclusions 55
ChapterSix Park and Recreation Issues 57
Park and Recreation Issues
58
Paik Facilities Usage Levels
59
Park Facilities Usage LeN els
60
Recreational Programs
61
Recreational Programs
61
Lea-, e the City for Park and Recreation
62
Summary and Conclusions
62
Chapter Seven Communications Issues 63
Communications Issues 65
Principal Source of Information 66
"Rosemount City News" 61
City's Web Site 61
Summary and Conclusions 62
Chapter Eight Reflections 64
Reflections 65
4
E
soi�do,��ouaaa
leiluopisoll
:ouo joldeLlo
Residential
Demographics
Adult residents of the City of Rosemount were asked a series of questions about their
demographic backgrounds These questions were asked for two reasons first, to validate this
sample against the preliminary 2000 U S Census findings, and, second, to track any differences
between subgroups and the rest of the population There were no statistically significant
differences between the findings of this survey and the census data And, throughout the course
of this study, subgroup differences will be discussed
Residential Longevity
Residents were initially asked.
Approximately how many years have you lived in
Rosemount?
The median adult residential longevity was found to be 9 1 years
LESS THAN TWO YEARS
TWO TO FIVE YEARS
FIVE TO TEN YEARS
TEN TO TWENTY YEARS
TWENTY TO THIRTY YEARS
OVER THIRTY YEARS
REFUSED
10%
20%
24%
23%
11%
10%
1%
Ten percent had lived in the community for at most two years, while ten percent had resided
there for at least thirty years
"Less than two years" was posted more often by empty nesters, eighteen to thirty -four year olds,
those who work for a private company, Precinct TA o residents and non readers of the city
newsletter "Two to five years" a as reported more frequently by eighteen to thirty -four year
olds, business owners, residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years and Precinct Six
residents "Five to ten years" was indicated at a higher rate by members of households
containing children, eighteen to thirty -four year olds, women, renters and Precinct Five residents.
"Ten to twenty years" was stated most frequently by members of households containing children,
thirty-five to forty -four year olds, men and those who work for a private company "Twenty to
thirty years" was cited more often by empty nesters, over fifty -four year olds, homeowners and
residents who don't ever intend to move "Over thirty years" was mentioned most often by
members of households containing seniors, empty nesters, over fifty -four year olds, homeowners,
those not working or retired, residents who don't ever intend to move, Precincts Two and Four
residents and city new sletter readers
Future Intentions
Respondents were queried
How long in the future do you expect to live in
Rosemount?
Seventy -three percent reported having no intention to move during the next decade
1997 2001 2003
LESS THAN TWO YEARS
.6%
4%
5%
TWO TO FIVE YEARS
12%
9%
10%
FIVE TO TEN YEARS
13%
5%
13%
OVER TEN YEARS
63%
64%
31%
REST OF LIFE
0%
0%
32%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
8%
19%
10%
Fifteen percent of the sample intended to leave the community during the next five years; thirteen
percent had plans to move durng the next six to ten years
"Less than two years" was cited more often by those with Internet access, while "two to five
years" was cited more often by homeowners and business owners "Over ten years" was posted
more frequently by members of households containing children, thirty -five to forty -four year
olds, renters and Precinct Three residents "Rest of life" was posted most frequently by city
residents for more than to enty years, members of households containing seniors, empty nesters,
os er fifty -four year olds, homeowners, those not working or retired, Precinct Four residents and
city newsletter readers
Household Composition
Residents were instructed
Could you please tell me how many people in each
of the following age groups live in your household.
Let's start oldest to youngest...
Four age ranges were then read
First, persons 65 or over?
Thirteen percent of the households contained senior citizens
0 87%
1 5%
3
2 OR MORE I 8%
Single couples outnumbered senior singles within the City of Rosemount
Adults under 65?
Sixty -eight percent of the households reported the presence of two adults
0 10%
1 10%
2 68%
3 OR MORE 13%
Ten percent of the households were composed entirely of senior citizens
School -aged children?
Forty -six percent of the households contained school -aged children
0 54%
1 19%
2 20%
3 OR MORE 7%
Most households with school -aged children had two or more in residence
Pre schoolers?
Seventeen percent of the households contained pre schoolers•
0 83%
1 12%
2 OR MORE 5%
Households with pre schoolers tended to have only one in residence
Home Ownership
Residents were asked
Do you own or rent your present residence?
Eleven percent rented their present iesidences
0
OWN 89%
RENT 11%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 0%
The overwhelming majority of residents owned their homes
Age of Respondents
Residents were queried
What is your age, please?
The average age of an adult resident was found to be 43 0 years old
18 -24
3%
25 -34
20%
35 -44
31%
45 -54
23%
55 -64
12%
65 AND OVER
11%
REFUSED
0%
Twenty -three percent posted ages under 35 years old, while twenty -three percent were over 54
years old
Place of Employment
Respondents were asked
Are you employed by a public entity, such as state or
local government or a school district, a private com-
pany, self employed or own a business, or currently
not working?
Just under one -half of the residents were employed by private companies
PUBLIC ENTITY
20%
PRIVATE COMPANY
49%
OWN BUSINESS /SELF- EMPLOYED
10%
NOT WORKING
20%
REFUSED
1%
Twenty percent worked for public entities, while ten percent were business owners or self
employed Another twenty percent did not work outside of the home
10
Gender
The gender of each respondent was noted
MALE 50%
FEMALE 50%
Men and women were equally represented in the sample
Residential Location
The precinct in the community of each respondent was also noted
PRECINCT 1
16%
PRECINCT 2
13%
PRECINCT 3
24%
PRECINCT 4
16%
PRECINCT 5
15%
PRECINCT 6
15%
The greatest number of households were located in Precinct Three, while the smallest number
«ere found in Precinct TNN o
Summary and Conclusion
At present, Rosemount's growth rate has continued to slow from the benchmark 1988 -1989
level Ten percent of the residents reported moving to the community within the past two years,
twelve years ago, almost twenty -five percent were newcomers Over one -half of the residents
have lived in Rosemount for five -to- twenty years, while twenty -one percent lived there for more
than twenty years The median residential longer ity proved to be 9 1 years Seventy -three
percent of the i esidents also anticipate staying for at least a decade, if not longer, this result
continued to be more consistent with maturing suburbs than fast growmg suburbs, where greater
transience is the rule
Senior households composed thirteen percent of the community's residences, down five percent
from the 2001 level School -aged children could be found in forty -six percent of the households,
while pre- schoolers resided in seventeen percent The average age of an adult resident was found
to be 43 0 years old In fact, thirty -one percent of the population lies in the 35 -44 year age range
Manned couples with at least one child ieinamed the typical household composition within the
city
11
Eighty -nine percent of the sample reported owning their current residence, basically unchanged
since the previous study Twenty -foul percent resided in Precinct Three, while sixteen percent
each lived in Precincts One and Four, and, fifteen percent each, in Precincts Five and Six Only
thirteen percent had homes in Precinct Two
Forty -nine percent of the respondents worked for private companies Twenty percent reported
working for a public entity Twenty percent also indicated they did not w ork outside of the
home A smaller ten percent were cithei business owners or self employed Men and women
were equally represented in the sample
12
Quality of Life
Issues
Residents were drawn to the community in search of good schools, small town ambience,
affordable housing, and good location High evaluations were posted on the current quality of
life Small town ambience proved key, followed by location and ease of access to key areas, but
so did the rui al nature of the area, good schools, and community cohesiveness As a result,
worries continued to focus on growth and lack of businesses Even so, most residents felt the
City was generally headed in the right direction The role of arts and culture in the duality of life
was explored in detail they were viewed as moderately important Finally, residents were asked
to evaluate their neighborhoods on a series of dimensions very strong iatings were the general
rule
Reasons for Moving to the
Community
Respondents were asked
Thinking back to when you first moved here, what
factors were most important to you in selecting
Rosemount?
Four key reasons weie indicated "schools," "small town ambience," "closeness to work," and
"affordable housing
ALWAYS ROSEMOUNT
LOCATION
SCHOOLS
SMALL TOWN
RURAL /OPEN SPACE
CLOSE TO FAMILY
CLOSE TO WORK
NEIGHBORHOOD /HOUSE
QUIETiPLACEFUL
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
LOW CRIME
SCATTERED
5%
4%
19%
15%
10%
9%
12%
7%
2%
12%
2%
4%
"Rural and open spaces" and "closeness to family" formed a close second tier of major decision
factors
"Schools" were key to members of households containing children, thirty-five to forty -four year
olds and Precinct Three residents "Small town" was important to fort} -five to fifty -four year
olds, while "close to work" was pointed to more often by empty nesters and non readers of the
14
city newsletter "Affordable housing" was cited at a higher rate by eighteen to thirty -four year
olds and iesidents who intend to move in the next five years "Rural /open space" was mentioned
at a higher rate by members of households containing children, renters, residents who intend to
move in five to ten yeai s and Precinct One residents
Quality of Life Rati
Respondents were queried
How would you rate the quality of life in Rosemount
excellent, good, only fair, of poor?
Ninety -four percent rated their quality of life in Rosemount as either "excellent" or "good
1997 2001 2003
EXCELLENT
34%
31%
36%
GOOD
57%
63%
58%
ONLY FAIR
9%
6%
5%
POOR
0%
1%
0%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
0%
0%
1%
Only five percent were more critical "Excellent" ratings increased by five percent
Ratings were higher among members of households containing children, those with Internet
access, homeowners and city newsletter readers They w ere lower among renters
Liked Most and Concerned
Most about the City
Residents were initially asked
What do you like MOST about living in Rosemount?
Twenty -four percent cited "small town feel
1997 2001 2003
NO ANSWER
3%
3%
4%
LOCATION
18%
21%
10%
NEIGHBORHOOD /HOUSING
3%
2%
5%
SMALL TO�k`N FEEL
26%
30%
24%
GOOD SCHOOLS
8%
9%
9%
GOOD COMMUNITY
6%
8%
0%
RURAL FEEL
9%
7%
11%
15
QUIET
7%
9%
7%
GOOD PEOPLE
13%
10%
11%
SAFE
4%
2%
0%
CLOSE TO FAMILY
0%
0%
4%
CLOSE TO WORK
0%
0%
4%
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
0%
0%
2%
SHOPPING CONVENIENCE
0%
0%
3%
PARKS
0%
0%
2%
SCATTERED
3%
1%
5%
Eleven percent mentioned "good people," and `rural feel," while ten percent liked the
community's `location
"Small town feel" was key to homeowners and those who work for a public entity "Rural feel"
was posted more often by over fifty -four year olds, residents who don't ever intend to move and
Precinct Two residents "Location" was important Precinct Six residents
Then, residents were asked
What do you think is the most serious issue facing Rose-
mount today?
Twenty -seven percent cited "growth," a decrease of ten percent in two years
1997 2001 2003
NO ANSWER
11%
16%
16%
NOTHING
0%
0%
2%
GROWTH
32%
37%
27%
TAXES
19%
8%
7%
CRIME
20%
3%
4%
SCHOOL FUNDING
3%
11%
6%
NEED MORE BUSINESS
7%
10%
12%
CITY PLANNING
2%
2%
3%
TRAFFIC
0%
2%
5%
CITY GOVERNMENT
0%
6%
2%
LOW INCOME HOUSING
7%
0%
0%
NEED MORE RESTAURANTS
0%
0%
2%
NEED TO REDO DOWNTOWN
0%
0%
3%
CITY BUDGET CONCERNS
0%
0%
3%
LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
0%
0%
2%
NOT ENOUGH TO DO
0%
0%
2%
SCATTERED
0%
6%
6%
Twelve percent pointed to "need more business," while seven percent focused on "taxes," and six
percent, on "school funding Fit e percent also noted "traffic congestion
"Growth" troubled members of households containing children, homeowners and those w ho
work for a public entity "Need more business" was a concern among city residents for more
16
than twenty years, members of households containing seniors, empty nesters, over fifty -four year
olds and those not working or retired "Taxes" were pointed to mole often by city residents for
eles en to twenty years and over fifty -four year olds
Arts and Cultural Presence
Respondents were asked a short series of questions about arts and cultural activities within the
community Initially, they weic queried
How important do you think it is to the quality of life
in a community to have a strong arts and cultural
presence ver emportant, somewhat important, not
too important or not at all important?
Seventy -eight percent rated its importance as either "very important" or "somewhat important
VERY IMPORTANT 21%
SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 57%
NOT TOO IMPORTANT 12%
NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 6%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 3%
In fact, twenty -one percent thought it was "very important
Greater importance was indicated by city residents for less than five years, members of
households containing children, women, renters and residents who don't intend to move in the
next ten years Lower importance was posted by members of households containing seniors,
men, homeowners and residents who intend to move in the next five years
Next, residents were asked about their participation
What types of arts activities, if any, do you and other
household members regularly participate in?
"Theaters and plays" as well as "concerts and music presentations" were the most common
activities
NONE
THEATER/PLAYS
CONCERTS /MUSIC
ARTS AND CRAFTS
MUSEUMS
DANCE
SCATTERED
Thirteen percent also participated in "arts and crafts" activities
35%
22%
20%
13%
6%
3%
2%
17
"None" was reported most often by over fifty -four year olds, men and non- readers of the city
newsletter "Theater and plays" was posted most often by forty -five to fifty-four year olds, those
with Internet access, homeowners and business owners "Arts and crafts" was cited at a higher
rate by renters
Respondents who undertook no arts activities were asked a follow -up question
Could you tell me one or two reasons why you and other
members ofyour household do not regularly participate
in arts activities?
Fifty -four percent reported a "lack of interest
UNSURE
NO INTEREST
NOT AWARE OF
NO TIME
AGE AND HEALTH
SCATTERED
2%
54%
7%
30%
4%
4%
Thirty percent simply had "no time "No time" was indicated at a higher rate by city residents
for less than five years and forty -five to fifty -four year olds
Residents were then told
Many communities host arts and creative activities, such
as local art and photography shows, local music and
drama groups, as well as crafts groups and classes, in
which residents may actively participate.
They were then asked
Other than school- related programming, do you feel
there are enough facilities and programs to meet your
household needs?
A large majority, seventy -five percent, felt there were enough facilities and programs to meet
their household needs
YES
75%
NO
15%
DEPENDS ON TYPE
2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
9%
"Yes" was stated more often by members of households containing children, over fifty -four year
olds and residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years "No" was selected at a higher
rate by women
Finally, residents were asked about their potential financial commitment to a cultural facility in
18
the City of Rosemount
How much, if anything, would you be willing to pay in
additional property taxes per year to operate and main-
tain a cultural facility in Rosemount containing a thea-
ter, as well as music and arts classrooms and exhibits?
Let's say, would you be willing to pay an additional
per year? How about per year?
The typical resident was willing to accept an S11 66 yearly property tax increase for this purpose
NOTHING
34%
$1000
12%
S2000
16%
$3000
9%
$4000
5%
$5000
3%
$6000
4%
DON'T KNOW
16%
REFUSED
1
However, thirty -four percent would accept no tax increase for this purpose, indicating a large
voter turnout would be needed to pass a referendum on this issue
"Nothing" was reported most frequently by city residents for more than twenty years, members of
households containing seniors, over fifty -four year olds and those not working or retired
"$10 00" was cited more often by empty nesters and business owners "$30 00" was mentioned
most frequently by city residents for less than five years, renters and Precinct Six residents
"$40 00" was posted at a higher rate by those who work for a public entity, residents who don't
intend to move in the next ten years and Precinct Six residents
Direction of Community
Respondents were asked
All in all, do you think things in Rosemount are
generally headed in the right direction, or do you feel
things are off on the wrong track?
A solid majority of sixty -three percent reported the City of Rosemount was generally headed in
the right direction
RIGHT DIRECTION 63%
WRONG TRACK 19%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 18%
Only nineteen percent thought things were "off on the wrong track
19
"Right dnection" was stated more often by members of households containing children, thirty
five to forty-four year olds, those with Internet access, residents who don't intend to move in the
next ten years and Precinct Six residents "Wrong track" was posted at a higher rate by over
fifty -four year olds, those not working or retired and Precinct One residents
Respondents responding to the question were asked a follow -up query
Could you tell me why you feel that way?
Positive perceptions were based upon "the new Mayor and City Council," "well planned
development," "lack of problems," and "maintaining small town feel
UNSURE
4%
NEW MAYOR AND COUNCIL
15%
OVER DEVELOPMENT
8%
DEVELOPMENT IS WELL PLANNED
28%
NO PROBLEMS
11%
LIKE REDEVELOPMENT OF DOWNTOWN
4%
GOOD HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
3%
GOOD SCHOOLS
3%
NEED MORE BUSINESS
5%
MAINTAINING SMALL TOWN FEEL
6%
DON'T LIKE NEW MAYOR AND COUNCIL
2%
SAFE COMMUNITY
2%
POOR PLANKING
2%
SCATTERED
8%
Negative perceptions stemmed from "over- development" and "the need for more businesses in
the community
"Development is well planned" was key to city residents for less than five years and non readers
of the city newsletter "Like new mayor and council" was posted most often by those with
Internet access, residents who don't ever intend to move, Precinct Three residents and city
newsletter readers "No problems" was mentioned most fi Precinct Six residents
Neighborhood
Characteristics
Respondents were instructed
Again, as I read the following statements, please answer
"yes" or 11 110."
A list of five statements was then read;
20
This neighborhood is a good place to raise children.
A nearly unanimous ninety -seven percent answered "yes
YES 97%
NO 2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 1%
Agreement was unanimous among members of households containing children, thirty -five to
forty-four year olds, those with Internet access and residents who don't intend to move in the
next ten years
People have pride and ownership in our neighborhood.
A very solid ninety -five percent answered affirmatively
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
95%
4%
1%
Agreement was higher among homeowners, residents who don't intend to move in the next ten
years and city newsletter readers It was lower among renters, residents who intend to move in
five to ten years and non- readers of the city newsletter
I feel apart of my neighborhood.
While eighty -nine percent answered "yes," ten percent responded "no
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
89%
10%
1%
"Yes" was cited more often by members of households containing children, homeowners and city
newsletter readers "No" was mentioned most often by empty nesters, eighteen to thirty -four
year olds, renters, residents who intend to move in the next five years and non readers of the city
newsletter
Business and residential neighborhoods are enjoyable
and stable places to live, work and recreate in Rose
inount.
Ninety -two percent responded affirmatively, while six percent answered "no
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
92%
6%
2%
21
"Yes" was indicated more often by members of households containing children, residents who
don't intend to move in the next ten years and Precinct One residents "No" was posted more
frequently by residents who intend to move in the next five years
I have recently or plan to significantly remodel my
residence in the next couple ofyears.
A high twenty -five percent recently had or planned to significantly remodel their residences in
the next couple of years
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
24%
74%
3%
"Yes" was posted at a higher rate by members of households containing children, forty -five to
fifty -four year olds and homeowners "No" was posted more frequently by members of
households containing seniors, empty nesters and over fifty -four year olds
Finally, residents were asked for an evaluation
Using the scale ofA to F, including pluses and minuses,
please give an overall rating to your neighborhood?
The mean grade given by residents to their neighborhood was 3 16, or B /B+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C_
D+
D
D-
F+
F
NO ANSWER
23%
6%
22%
28%
5%
5%
7%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
2%
"A" was given more often by members of households containing seniors, homeowners, those not
working or retired, Precinct Two residents and city newsletter readers `B" was posted at a
highei rate by thirty -five to forty -four yeai olds, those with Internet access, homeowners and
Precinct Four residents "C" was indicated at a higher rate by renters and Precinct Three
residents
22
Leprechaun Days
Residents were asked
As you may know, the City ofRosenhount offers a wide
variety of neighborhood activities or events, such as
Leprechaun Days.
Have you or household members participated in Lep-
rechaun Days during the past two years?
A very large sixty -five percent stated household members participated in Leprechaun Days
dining the past two years
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
65%
34%
1%
Participation increased among city residents for five to ten years, members of households
containing children, thirty -five to forty -four year olds, those with Internet access, those who work
for a public entity, residents who intend to move in five to ten years, Precinct Four residents and
city newsletter readers It decreased among city residents for less than five years, members of
households containing seniors, empty nesters. over fifty -four year olds, business owners, those
not working or retired, residents who intend to move in the next five years and non- readers of the
city newsletter
Next, they were asked-
Have you or household members participated in any
other neighborhood events or activities during the past
tivo nears?
Forty percent of the households reported members participated in other neighborhood events or
activities during the past two years
UNSURE
2%
NO
58%
BLOCK PARTIES
14%
FOURTH OF JULY
4%
NATIONAL NIGHT OUT
6%
EASTER EGG HUNT
4%
SCHOOL ACTIVITIES
3%
SCATTERED EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES
10%
"Block parties" were attended by fourteen percent, while "National Night Out" followed at six
percent
"No" was indicated more often by empty nesters, over fifty -four year olds and men "Block
23
parties" was cited more frequently by members of households containing children, thirty -five to
forty -four year olds, those with Internet access, residents who don't intend to move in the next
ten years, Precinct Five residents and city newsletter readers
Summary and
Conclusions
Rosemount citizens were again very contented with their community Ninety -four percent
approved of the quality of life there, thirty -six percent, strongly so, This level of approval, is
above the concur Metropolitan Area norm, and places Rosemount squarely within the top
quartile of communities Residents w ere drawn to the city for many reasons high quality
schools, small town ambience, rural and open spaces, location, affordable housing, and nearby
employment opportunities
When asked what they liked most about the community, residents primarily focused on its
convenient location and small town ambience As in the earlier studies, it was also the future
protection of these values which provoked the most concern in the citizenry In thinking about
serious issues facing the community, concerns about ov er development and lack of businesses
tended to be raised most often Overall, by over three -to -one, residents thought the City of
Rosemount was generally headed in the right direction
Residents considered the contribution of cultural and arts activities to the quality of life as
moderately important A majority of residents currently engaged in arts and crafts activities,
theater productions, and concert and musical presentation The minority who did not participate
in these types of activities cited lack of interest and lack of time as the principal reasons At
present, three- quarters of the residents considered the number of non school related arts and
cultural activities as sufficient to meet their household needs And, if a cultural facility were to
be built and operated by the City of Rosemount, the typical resident would be w ilhng to increase
property taxes by $11 66 per year to covers its costs
In assessing their neighborhood residents were overwhelmingly positive They saw it as a good
places to raise children, they reported both pride and ownership, they felt a part of the area, and,
in general, saw their neighborhood as enjoyable and stable In addition, about one quarter of the
residents had recently or shortly planned to significantly remodel their residences In assigning
an overall gi ade to their neighborhood, the average was a high BIB+
A sizable sixty -five percent reported household members participated in Leprechaun Days during
the past two years In addition, forty percent of the households had also participated in other
neighborhood events or activities during the past two years Celebrations, then, play a vital role
in the quality of life of the City of Rosemount
24
sz
saa�naaS nlio
PUB saxal AI! O
:aaaul as }d���
City Taxes and City
Services
Rosemount residents displayed modest tax hostility levels however, for the first time, a majority
supported a tax increase for the maintenance of current city service levels City service
evaluations were generally positive and mostly exceeded Metropolitan Area norms And, a
detailed focus on safety show ed residents felt secure in their homes and were satisfied with the
amount of police patrolling in their neighborhoods
City of Portion of Property
Taxes
Respondents were initially told
As you may know, property taxes are divided between
the City of Rosemount and various other aunts of local
government. Thinking about the amount going to the
City....
They were then asked.
Do you think the city portion of your property taxes,
which funds City services in Rosemount is very high,
somewhat high, about average, somewhat low or very
low in comparison with nearby suburban communities?
Twenty -five percent saw their city property taxes as either "very high" or "somewhat high,"
while thirty -nine percent saw them as "about a� erage
VERY HIGH
9%
SOMEWHAT HIGH
16%
ABOUT AVERAGE
39%
SOMEWHAT LOW
3%
VERY LOW
0%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
32%
"High" was posted more often by city residents for more than twenty years. while "about
aN erage" was indicated more frequent]} by men, homeowners and city newsletter readers
0
Value of City Services
Respondents were queried
When you consider the property taxes you pay and the
quality of city services you receive, would you rate the
general value of city services as excellent, good, only
fair or poor?
Seventy -four percent rated the value as either "excellent" or "good," while twenty percent rated it
lower
EXCELLENT
11%
GOOD
63%
ONLY FAIR
18%
POOR
2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
6%
Ratings were higher among members of households containing children, those with Internet
access, homeowners and city newslettei readers They w ere lower among Precinct One residents
Tax Increase for City
Services
Residents were asked
Would you favor or oppose an increase in YOUR city
property tax if it were needed to maintain city services
at their current level?
By a fifty percent to thirty -eight percent verdict, residents supported a property tax increase to
maintain city services at their current levels
1997 2001 2003
FAVOR
OPPOSE
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
32%
37%
50%
55%
55%
38%
13%
9%
12%
Counter to current trends, a majority supported an increase for the first time
Supporters tended to be city residents for five to ten years and those who work for a public entity
Opponents were more likely to be city residents for more than twenty years, over fifty -four year
olds and homeowners
Opponents of a tax increase were asked a follow -up query
27
What services would you be willing to see cut?
At twenty percent, "parks and recreation programs" was chosen most often for reductions
UNSURE
32%
NONE
26%
PARKS AND RECREATION
20%
ADMINISTRATION
9%
RECYCLING
2%
ANIMAL CONTROL
5%
POLICE
3%
SCATTERED
5%
Twenty -six percent thought no cuts would be needed to find the funds necessary to keep services
at their current levels "None" was indicated most often by those who work for a public entity
Tax Comparison to Nearby
Areas
Residents were asked
In comparison with nearby areas, do you feel that the
property taxes in Rosemount are very high, somewhat
high, about average, somewhat low, or very low?
While forty-two percent rated property taxes as either "very high "somewhat high," forty-three
percent saw them as "about average
VERY HIGH
10%
SOMEWHAT HIGH
32%
ABOUT AVERAGE
43%
SOMEWHAT LOW
1%
VERY LOW
0%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
15%
"High" w as posted more often by residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years and
Precinct One residents "About average" was indicated at a higher rate by homeowners, Precinct
Four residents and city newsletter readers
When residents consider their overall property taxes, the city's tax climate should be judged as
"generally benign
28
City Service Evaluations
Residents were told
I would like to read you a last of a few city services. For
each one, please tell nae whether you would rate the
quality of the service as excellent, good, only fair or poor.
A last of seven city services were then read
Police service?
Ninety -one percent of those with opinions favorably rated police services, up three percent from
two years ago
2001 2003
EXCELLENT
33%
33%
GOOD
51%
55%
ONLY FAIR
8%
7%
POOR 1
4%
2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
.5%
3%
Ratings were higher among members of households containing children, those with Internet
access, residents who don't intend to mos e in the next ten years and city newsletter readers
They were lower among empty nesters and non readers of the city newsletter
Fire protection?
A very high ninety -six percent of those posting opinions were positive about fire services, an
increase of two percent from the 2001 level
2001 2003
EXCELLENT
32%
.34%
GOOD
52%
57%
ONLY FAIR
4%
3%
POOR
1%
1%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
11%
6%
Ratings peaked among city residents for five to ten years, renters and residents who don't ever
intend to move
Recycling and brush pick -up?
Seventy -eight percent rated recycling and brush pick -up positively, while the remainder with
29
opinions were more negative in their judgments
EXCELLENT 19%
GOOD 50%
ONLY FAIR 15%
POOR 5%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 10%
Ratings were higher among members of households containing seniors, residents who don't ever
intend to move and city newsletter ieaders They were lo among those with Internet access,
men, homeowners, those who work for a private company and residents who intend to move in
the next five years
Storm drainage and flood control?
Among respondents posting opinions, seventy -nine percent rated storm drainage and flood
control highly, up eight percent in two years
2001 2003
EXCELLENT
15%
11%
GOOD
51%
58%
ONLY FAIR
16%
12%
POOR
11%
6%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
8%
14%
Ratings increased among city residents for less than five years, those with Internet access, men,
homeowners, Precinct Six residents and city newsletter readers They decreased among city
residents for more than twenty years, members of households containing seniors, over fifty -four
year olds and Precinct Three i esidents
Park maintenance?
A very solid ninety -one percent of those holding opinions were favorable about park
maintenance
2001 2003
EXCELLENT
26%
20%
GOOD
60%
65%
ONLY FAIR
6%
6%
POOR
2%
2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
6%
7%
Fay orable ratings were cited most often by city residents for five to ten years, members of
households containing children, those who work for a private company and residents who don't
intend to move in the next ten years Unfavorable ratings were mentioned most often by city
30
residents for eleven to twenty years and Precinct Six residents
City sponsored recreation programs?
Eighty -four percent of respondents with opinions rated City- sponsored programs highly
2001 2003
EXCELLENT
18%
17%
GOOD
53%
52%
ONLY FAIR
13%
11%
POOR
2%
2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
14%
18%
Favorable ratings were given more often by members of households containing children,
residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years and city newsletter readers
Unfavorable ratings were posted more often by residents who intend to move in the next five
years
Animal Control?
Seventy -seven percent of those with opinions rated animal control highly, up five percent in two
years
1997 2001 2003
EXCELLENT
10%
14%
12%
GOOD
38%
45%
56%
ONLY FAIR
14%
17%
14%
POOR
9%
6%
6%
DON T KNOW /REFUSED
29%
19%
12%
Ratings were higher among members of households containing children, thirty-five to forty-four
year olds and i esidents who don't intend to move in the next ten years They were lower among
city residents for more than twenty years, members of households containing seniors, empty
nesters, over fifty -four year olds, those not working or retired and residents who don't ever intend
to move
Residents were next instructed
For the next three city services, please consider only
thetrjoh on city- matinatned streets and roads. That
means do not consider state and county roads, which
are taken care of by other levels of government. How
would you rate....
A short list of three services was then read
31
City ,street repair and maintenance?
Seventy -eight percent of those having opinions posted favorable judgments, up eleven percent in
two years
2001 2003
EXCELLENT
11%
16%
GOOD
55%
61%
ONLY FAIR
26%
19%
POOR
7%
3%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
1%
1%
Twenty -two percent were more critical in their evaluations Ratings peaked among city
newsletter readers
Snowplowing?
Eighty -two percent of those with opinions rated city snow plowing and sanding of streets highly
2001 2003
EXCELLENT
25%
21%
GOOD
58%
59%
ONLY FAIR
13%
16%
POOR
3%
2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
2%
2%
Ratings increased among members of households containing seniors, over fifty -four year olds
and city newsletter ieaders They decreased among residents who intend to mope in the next five
years, Precinct Six residents and non readers of the city nev sletter
Street lighting?
Seventy -five percent of residents expressing opinions rated street lighting as either "excellent" or
"good
EXCELLENT
13%
GOOD
61%
ONLY FAIR
20%
POOR
5%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
2%
There were no statistically significant sub -group differences noted
In general, service evaluations consistently increased or remained the same during past two years_
32
Feel Safe in Home
Residents were asked
Do you generally feel safe in your home?
Ninety -six percent reported they felt safe in their homes
YES 96%
NO 3%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 1%
Only three percent reported feeling unsafe
"Yes" was cited at a higher rate by homeowners and those who work for a public entity "No"
was mentioned more often by renters and residents who intend to move in five to ten years
Police Patrolling
Respondents were quened
How would your rate the amount ofpoliee patrolling
in your neighborhood too much, about the right
amount, or not enough?
Sixty -eight percent rated the amount of police patrolling in their neighborhood as "about the right
amount
TOO MUCH
ABOUT RIGHT AMOUNT
NOTENOUGH
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
3%
68%
27%
2%
Twenty -seven percent, though, thought there was "not enough" police patrolling in their
neighborhoods "Not enough" was indicated at a significantly higher rate by Precinct Six
residents
Summary and
Conclusions
Between 2001 and 2003, there was a distinct reversal in the 1989 to 2001 deterioration in the tax
climate in Rosemount For the first time in a decade, by a fifty percent to thirty -eight percent
veidict, residents favoied a property tax increase to maintain city sersices at their current levels
33
Only in 1989 did another malonq support such an increase Ho'Aever, this result was not
unexpected Seventy -four percent thought the value of city services for the taxes paid was a
distinct positive Mote residents thought Rosemount property taxes vt ere consistent with nearby
areas rather than higher
In assessing city services, residential opinions was impressively favorable Among those offering
evaluations, strongly positive evaluations were awarded to police protection, fire protection, park
maintenance, and snow plowing And, solidly posim e ratings v ere given to recycling and brush
pick -up, storm drainage and flood control, city- sponsored recreation programs, animal control,
city street repair and maintenance, and street lighting Thi ee city services, though, should be
monitored, since they have already incurred moderate levels of dissatisfaction recycling and
brush pick -up, animal control, and street lighting
In assessing public safety concerns, a nearly unanimous ninety -six percent reported they felt
generally safe in then homes And, more impressively, over two thirds of the sample were
satisfied with the amount of police patrolling in their neighborhoods Only Precinct Six showed
a heightened level of concern about adequate police protection
34
Chapter Four: City
Government and
Staff
35
City Government
and Staff
Most residents felt they could have a say in the way the City of Rosemount runs things
Compared w rth other communities, the number of unempowered citizens was very low About
forty percent were familiar with the work of the Mayor and City Council Most residents
expressed a high sense of appro� a] of their jobs, particularly in light of the recent election
Similarly, about forty percent reported first -hand contact with the Rosemount City Staff Again,
Rosemount residents were generally satisfied with their City Staff, in fact, they awai ded the Staff
the highest positive rating of the past three studies
Have a Say
Residents were initially asked
Other than voting, do you feel that ifyou wanted to,
you could have a say about the way the City of Rose-
mount runs things?
A solid sixty -three percent felt if they wanted to do so, they could have a say about the way the
City of Rosemount runs things
YES 63%
NO 22%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 15%
Only twenty-two percent, very low in comparison with other suburban communities, felt
unempowered
"Yes" was stated most often by those with Internet access, residents who don't ever intend to
move and Precinct Four residents "No" was selected at a higher rate by city residents for eleven
to twenty years and residents who intend to moN e in the next five years
Residents feeling some level of alienation were asked a follow -up query
Why do you feel that way?
Most critics felt decision- makers would "not listen to them
UNSURE 7%
DON'T LISTEN 76%
DON'T ASK FOR INPUT 8%
DON'T KNOW HOW 8%
SCATTERED 1%
36
"Don't listen" was cited more often by city residents for more than twenty years and those not
working or retired
City Government
Respondents were asked
How much do you feel you know about the work of the
Mayor and Cit Council a great deal, a fair amount,
very little, or none at all?
Thirty -nine percent, eleven percent higher than the suburban norm, knew either "a great deal" or
"a fair amount" of the Mayor and City Council
A GREAT DEAL
5%
A FAIR AMOUNT
34%
VERY LITTLE
51%
NONE AT ALL
9%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
1%
Higher levels of knowledge were posted more often by city residents for more than twenty years,
members of households containing seniors, over forty -five year olds, men, homeowners,
residents who don't ever intend to move and city newsletter readers Lower levels were cited
most frequently by city residents for less than five years, eighteen to thirty -four year olds,
women, renters, those who woik for a private company, residents who intend to move in the next
five years and non readers of the city newsletter
Next, residents were asked
From what you know, do you approve or disapprove of
the job the Mayor and City Council are doing? And do
you feel strongly that way?
A comparatively high sixty -nine percent, much higher than the fifty -five percent suburban norm,
approved of the,lob of the Mayor and City Council
STRONGLY APPROVE 17%
APPROVE 52%
DISAPPROVE 4%
STRONGLY DISAPPROVE 5%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 21%
Approval was peaked among members of households containing children, thirty-five to forty
four year olds, men, Precinct One residents and city newsletter readers
37
City S taff
Residents were asked a short series of questions Initially, contact levels were established
How much first -hand contact have you had with the
Rosemount City staff quite a lot, some, very little,
or none at all?
Forty-one percent had either "quite a lot' or "some" first -hand contact with the Rosemount City
staff, down four percent from its 2001 level
1997 2001 2003
QUITE A LOT
7%
9%
.9%
SOME
32%
36%
32%
VERY LITTLE
42%
35%
33%
NONE AT ALL
19%
20%
26%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
1%
1%
1%
Higher levels of contact were reported more often by city residents for eleven to twenty years,
thirty -five to fifty -four year olds, men, homeowners and city newsletter readers Lower levels
were posted at a higher rate by eighteen to thirty -four year olds, women, renters and non readers
of the city newsletter
Next, respondents were asked
From what you have seen or heard, how would you
rate the job performance of the Rosemount City
staff excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
Sixty -six percent rated the job performance of the Rosemount City Staff as either "excellent' or
"good," up seven percent from the previous study
1997 2001 2003
EXCELLENT
13%
10%
10%
GOOD
59%
49%
56%
ONLY FAIR
13%
21%
18%
POOR
2%
6%
2%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
14%
14%
14%
Twenty percent were more negative, a decrease of seven percent since the 2001 study
Ratings were higher among members of households containing children, those with Internet
access, homeow ncrs and city newsletter readers They were lower among residents who intend to
move in the next five years and Precinct Six residents
Staff, then, has recovered nicely from the dip found in the 2001 study.
38
Summary and
Conclusions
Only twenty -two percent of the residents of Rosemount felt unempowered feeling they could
not have a say about the way the City runs things This level of alienation was lust over half the
suburban norm More impressive, however, sixty -two percent felt empowered and thought they
could make a difference
Thirty -nine percent an unusually high percentage, thought they knew at least "a faii amount"
about the fob of the Mayor and City Council And, a very solid sixty -nine percent ieported they
approved of thejob the Mayor and City Council were doing Similarly forty -one percent
reported having at least "some" first -hand contact with the Rosemount City Staff This contact
rate was higher than the Metropolitan Area suburban norm of twenty -nine percent An
impressive sixty -six percent rated the City Staff as "excellent" or "good," while twenty percent
were more critical This approval rating was also above the Metropolitan Area, a norm of fifty
six percent, and reflected an increase of seven percent from the 2001 level
39
OV
sanssi -w
juawdoIanaa
:9AIJ aaldaLla
Development Issues
Rosemount residents were asked a series of questions about development issues facing the
community If they could prioritize, residents would most prefer retail, dining, and entertainment
deN elopments Residents saw a good mix of business and residential development, well
maintained business properties, an open zoning and development approval process, and sufficient
open and natural spaces The Downtown Area was a key priority for redevelopment, as was the
acquisition of land foi pieservation as open space or green space areas The construction and
operation of a laige athletic complex was viewed as a secondary priority Next, residents were
found to be most demanding about the attraction of a sit -down restaurant to the City of
Rosemount Finally, public transportation issues were discussed and about one -in-ten
households contained members who ti ould be expected to use a park- and -ride facility in the city
General Development
Preferences
Residents were queried
I would like to read you a list of characteristics of a
community. For each one, please tell me if you think
Rosemount currently has too many or too much, too
few in too little, or about the right amount.
A list of sixteen characteristics was then read
Affordable housing, defined by the Metropolitan
Council as a single family home costing less than
$162,000?
While forty -seven percent thought the city already had adequate affordable housing
opportunities, thirty-five percent saw "too little
TOO MUCH 7%
TOO LITTLE 35%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT 47%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 12%
"Too much" was cited more often by residents who intend to move in five to ten years, while
"too little" was posted most often by women, renters and non- readers of the city newsletter
"About the right amount" was posted at a higher rate by members of households containing
children, those with Internet access, men, homeowners and business owners
Affordable rental units?
41
More uncertainty was evidenced in evaluating the number of affordable rental units
TOO MANY
10%
TOO FEW
25%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
34%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
32%
But, while thirty -four percent saw "about the right amount," twenty -five percent saw "too few
"Too many" was stated at a higher rate by city residents for eleven to twenty years, members of
households containing children, thirty -five to forty -four year olds, those with Internet access,
homeowners, residents who intend to move in five to ten years and Precinct Three residents
"Too few" was cited at a higher rate by women, renters, residents who don't intend to move in
the next ten years and Pi ecinet Six residents "About the right amount" was stated more often by
city residents for fiN e to ten years, members of households containing children, eighteen to thirty
four year olds, men, business owners and Precincts One and Five residents
Luxury rental units?
Again, uncertainty was very high with respect to the number of luxury rental units
TOO MANY
12%
TOO FEW
16%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
30%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
42%
Thirty percent thought the community contained "about the right amount
"Too many" was stated more often by women, while "too few" was mentioned at a higher rate by
business owners "About the right amount" was posted at a higher rate by thirty-five to forty
four year olds, men and Precinct One residents
Condominiums?
A moderate number of residents were uncertain about the number of condominiums in
Rosemount
TOO MANY
16%
TOO FEW
13%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
41%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
29%
The overall consensus, though, was the community contained "about the right amount
"Too many" was cited at a higher rate by those not working or retired, while "too few" was
indicated more often by city residents for more than twenty years, over fifty -four year olds,
homeowners, business owners and residents who intend to move in the next five years "About
42
the right amount" was cited more often by city residents for less than five years
Townhouses?
A fifty -two percent majority saw the number of townhouses as "about the right amount
TOO MANY
26%
TOO FEW
9%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
52%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
13%
"Too many" was posted more often by members of households containing children, while "about
the right amount" was mentioned more frequently by business owners, residents -,rho don't
intend to move in the next ten years and Precinct Four residents
Starter hones for young fanilies?
While forty -six percent saw the number of starter homes as "too few," thirty -six percent felt it
was "about the right amount
TOO MANY 7%
TOO FEW 46%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT 36%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 11%
"Too many" was indicated most frequently by Precinct Three residents, while "about the right
amount" was posted more often by members of households containing children, eighteen to
thirty-four year olds, those with Internet access and business owners
"Move up" housing?
A majority of fifty -six percent felt the number of "move up" housing was "about the right
amount
TOO MUCH 10%
TOO LITTLE 20%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT 56%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 14%
"Too much" was stated most frequently by city residents for five to ten years, eighteen to thirty
four year olds and women "Too little" was posted more often by city residents for eleven to
tw enty years and residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years, while "about the right
amount" was mentioned most often by members of households containing children, forty -five to
fifty -four year olds, those with Internet access, homeowners, Precincts Five and Six residents and
city newsletter readers
43
Higher cost housing?
A majority also thought the amount of higher cost housing was "about right
TOO MUCH 27%
TOO LITTLE 12%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT 51%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 10%
"Too much" was indicated most often by women and residents who don't ever intend to move
"Too little" was posted more often by residents who intend to move in the next five years and
Piecmct Six iesidents, while "about the right amount" was posted more often by those with
Internet access
Senior housing?
Residents split on the number of senior housing opportunities thirty -four percent saw "too little,"
while thirty -three percent felt there was "about the right amount
TOO MUCH 6%
TOO LITTLE 34%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT 33%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 27%
"Too much" was posted at a higher rate by Precinct Three residents, while "too few" was
mentioned most frequently by forty -five to fifty -four year olds, homeowners, residents who don't
ever intend to move and city newsletter readers "About the right amount" was cited at a higher
rate by city residents for more than twenty years
Parks and open spaces?
A solid sixty -two percent thought the amount of parks and open spaces in the community was
"about right
TOO MANY 8%
TOO FEW 24%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT 62%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 6%
"Too many" was posted at a higher rate by members of households containing seniors, over fifty
four year olds, women, those not working or retired and Precinct Two residents "Too few" was
indicated more often by city residents for more than twenty years, homeowners, those not
working or retired and residents who don't ei er intend to move "About the right amount" was
cited at a higher rate by those who work for a private company and Precinct Six residents
44
Trails and bikeways?
While forty -eight percent thought the number of trails and bikeways was "about right," thirty
seven percent saw "too few
TOO MANY
5%
TOO FEW
37%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
48%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
11%
"Too few" was stated more frequently by city residents for eleven to twenty years, members of
households containing children, those with Internet access and Precinct Six residents "About
the right amount" H as cited more often by renters, those who work for a private company and
residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years
Service establishments?
While forty -nine percent thought the number of service establishments was "about right," thirty-
nine percent fudged "too few
TOO MANY
6%
TOO FEW
39%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
49%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
6%
"Too many" was cited more often by non readers of the city newsletter, while "about the right
amount" was indicated at a higher rate by men
Retail shopping opportunities?
A decisive sixty -two percent thought there were "too few" retail shopping opportunities in the
City of Rosemount
TOO MANY
5%
TOO FEW
62%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
31%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
2%
"Too many" was mentioned more often by eighteen to thirty -four year olds and renters "Too
few" w as stated more frequently by over fifty -four year olds, women and those not w orkmg or
retired "About the right amount" was posted more often by thirty -five to forty -four year olds,
men and those who work for a private company
Entertainment establishments?
A solid fifty -nine percent also thought there were "too few" entertainment establishments in the
45
community
TOO MANY
3%
TOO FEW
59%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
35%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
3%
"About the right amount" was reported more often by members of households containing
children, men, homeowners and Precinct Four residents
Dining establishments?
A very impressive seventy -five percent saw "too few" dining establishments in the City of
Rosemount
TOO MANY
3%
Too FEW
75%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
20%
DON'T KNOW/ REFUSED
2%
"Too few" was posted at a higher rate by over fifty -four year olds
Day care opportunities?
A majority was uncertain about the number of day care opportunities in the City of Rosemount
TOO MANY
3%
TOO FEW
15%
ABOUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT
31%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
52%
The majority of residents thought the number of day care opportunities was "about right
"Too few" was indicated most frequently by Precinct Four residents, while "about the right
amount" was posted most often by members of households containing children, thirty -five to
forty -four year olds, those with Internet access and Precinct Six residents
Dining establishments, retail shopping opportunities, and entertainment establishments were the
top priorities for de
46
Residential and Business
Development
Residents were instructed
As I read the following statements about residential
and business development, please answer `yes" or "no."
A list of foul statements was then read
There is a good mix of business and residential develop-
ment in the City.
A very high sixty -three percent thought there was a good mix of business and residential
development in the community
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
63%
34%
3%
"Yes" was cited more often by members of households containing children, eighteen to thirty
four year olds and men "No" was mentioned more often by city residents for eleven to twenty
years, members of households containing seniors, women, those not working or retired and
residents who don't ever intend to move
During the past few years, the appearance and main-
tenance of business properties has improved.
Seventy -four percent saw improvements in the appearance and maintenance of business
properties during the past few years
YES 74%
NO 19%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 7%
Agreement was higher among city residents for five to ten years and members of households
contammg children It was lower among city residents for eleven to twenty years, empty nesters,
over fifty -four year olds and Piecinct Five residents
Residents have adequate opportunity to make their
feelings know about proposed development or redev-
elopment projects.
While fifty -eight percent thought there was an adequate opportunity to have meaningful input
into deN elopment proposals, twenty -nine percent disagreed
YES
58%
47
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
29%
14%
Agreement increased among city residents for less than five years, eighteen to thirty -four year
olds, residents who don't evei intend to move and city newsletter readers It decreased among
men
There is sufficient open and natural space in the com-
munity.
Seventy -three percent thought there was sufficient open and natural spaces in the community
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
73%
25%
2%
"Yes" v as cited most often by empty nesters, while "no" was posted more often by members of
households containing children, those with Internet access and residents who intend to move in
five to ten years
Respondents were then told
As you know, schools grade students on a scale from A
to F, including pluses and minuses.
They were then asked for an overall judgment
Using this scale, please give an overall rating to devel-
opment and redevelopment in the City of Rosemount?
The mean grade given to redevelopment and development in the community was 2 64, or B /C+
A
A-
B+
B
13-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F+
F
NO ANSWER
6%
1%
14%
31%
5%
7%
19%
5%
0%
5%
0%
0%
I%
6%
"A" was posted most often by renters, residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years
and Precinct One residents `B" was indicated moi e often by men and homeowners "C" was
49
posted more often by over fifty -four year olds, while "D" was given more often by Precinct Five
residents
Redevelopment of Central
Downtown Area
Residents were queried
Would you support or oppose prioritizing the redevelop-
ment of the central Downtown Area? Do t'ou feel
strongly that way?
By a 69 -22% margin, residents supported prioritizing the redevelopment of the central
Downtown Area
STRONGLY FAVOR
30%
FAy OR
39%
OPPOSE
10%
STRONGLY OPPOSE
12%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
9%
Opposition peaked among city residents for more than twenty years, members of households
containing seniors, over fifty -four year olds, homeowners and Precinct Four residents
Larger Athletic Comple
Respondents were told
There have been discussions about the construction
of a large athletic complex in the community. Faci-
lities that may be included are soccer fields, baseball
fields, and softball fields.
They were then asked
Would you support or oppose the construction and
operation of a large athletic complex in the City of
Rosenount? Do you feel strongly that way?
By a somewhat narrower 57 -32% margin, residents supported the construction and operation of
a large athletic complex in the City of Rosemount
STRONGLY SUPPORT
SUPPORT
27%
30%
MI
OPPOSE
STRONGLY OPPOSE
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
13%
19%
10%
Supporters tended to be members of households containing children, thirty-five to forty-four year
olds, those with Internet access and business owners Opponents w ere more likely to be city
residents for more than twenty years, members of households containing seniors, empty nesters
and over fifty-four year olds
Open Space Preservation
Respondents were asked
Would you support or oppose the acquisition of land to
the community for preservation as open space or green
space areas? Do you feel strongly that ways
By a solid 80%-14% judgment, residents supported the acquisition of land in the community for
preservation as open space or green space areas
STRONGLY SUPPORT
44%
SUPPORT
36%
OPPOSE
6%
STRONGLY OPPOSE
8%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
6%
Support was higher among residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years, while it was
lower among over fifty -four year olds and residents who intend to move in the next five years
As a follow -up question, residents were then asked
Would you support or oppose a property tax increase to
acquire land for preservation as open and green space
areas? Do you feel strongly that way?
A healthy 64 -37% majority supported a tax increase for this purpose
STRONGLY SUPPORT 20%
SUPPORT 34%
OPPOSE 13%
STRONGLY OPPOSE 24%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 9%
Supporters were more apt to be thirty -five to forty -four year olds, renters and Precinct One
residents Opponents tended to be city residents for more than rii enty years, members of
households containing seniors, over fifty -four year olds and homeowners
50
In general, an open space preservation referendum would have an excellent chance of passage in
a large turnout Presidential election
Sit -down Family
Restaurants
Residents were asked
How high a priority would you assign to the attraction
of a sit -down famil style restaurant to the City of
Rosemount very high priority, moderate, low, or not
a priority at all?
A fifty -two percent majority deemed the attraction of a sit -down family style restaurant as a "very
high priority
VERY HIGH PRIORITY
52%
MODERATE PRIORITY
32%
LOS'' PRIORITY
6%
NOT A PRIORITY
10%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
1%
Higher priorities were assigned more often by women, while lower priorities were indicated most
frequently by city residents for more than twenty years, men and homeowners
Public Transportation
Issues
Respondents were initially asked
Do you leave the City of Rosemount on regular or daily
basis to go to work? How many minutes does it take
you to get to work? Do you work in Rosemount?
The typical Rosemount resident had a 20 2 minute commute to their place of work
NO/WORK IN ROSEMOUNT
13%
NOT EMPLOYED /RETIRED
16%
YES /5 MINUTES OR LESS
3%
YES /6 TO 10 MINUTES
7%
YES /I I TO 15 MINUTES
12%
YES /16 TO 20 MINUTES
16%
YES /21 TO 25 MINUTES
10%
YES /26 TO 30 MINUTES
7%
51
YES /OVER 30 MINUTES 16%
DON T KNOW /REFUSED 0%
"No/Work in Rosemount" was posted more often by homeowners and business owners "Not
employed/Reuied" was indicated most frequently by city residents for more than twenty years,
members of households containing seniors, empty nesters, over fifty -four year olds, homeowners,
residents w ho don't ever intend to move, Precinct Four residents and city newsletter readers
"Yes, eleven to fifteen minutes" w as posted more often by eighteen to thirty -foui year olds,
renters those who work for a private company, residents who don't intend to move in the next
ten 5 ears and non- readers of the city newsletter "Yes, sixteen to twenty minutes" was cited most
often by those w ho work for a priN ate company and residents who intend to move in five to ten
years "Yes, twenty -one to twenty -five minutes" was mentioned more often by city residents for
eleven to twenty years, members of households containing children, thirty -fiN e to forty -fow year
olds, those who work for a public entity and residents who don't intend to move in the next ten
years "Yes, twenty -six to thirty minutes" was cited at a higher rate by forty-five to fifty -four
year olds, men, residents who intend to move in the next five years and those who work for a
private company "Yes, over thirty minutes" was posted more often by city residents for five to
ten years, those with Internet access and Precinct Four residents
Next, residents were queried
Have you used public transportation during the past
two years?
Only eight percent reported using public transportation during the past two years
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
8%
92%
0%
Use was higher among eighteen to thirty-four year olds, women and renters It was lower among
city residents for more than twenty years, men and homeowners
Finally, respondents were asked
How likely would you be to use public transportation if
a park -and -ride facihy for bus service were constructed
in the City of Rosemount very likely, somewhat likely,
not too likely, or not at all likely?
Twenty -two percent were either "very likely" or "somewhat likely" to use public transportation if
a park- and -nde facility were constructed in Rosemount
VERY LIKELY
7%
SOMEWHAT LIKELY
15%
NOT TOO LIKELY
21%
NOT AT ALL LIKELY
55%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
2%
52
Using standard market projection techniques, 7 25% of the households in the city would be
expected to use the new facility
Likelihood increased among women and Precinct Four residents; it decreased among men
Summary and
Conclusions
When asked to evaluate various aspects of the community, residents tended to feel the city
currently had about the right amount or number of each Majorities thought there were too few
retail shopping opportunities, entertainment establishments, and dining establishments A
plurality also thought there were too few starter homes for young families On two other
characteristics, about one quarter of the residents saw too many units townhouses and higher
cost housing On other development issues, Rosemount residents believed there was a good mix
of business and residential deg elopment, improvements in the maintenance and appearance of
business properties, adequate opportunity to share their feelings about proposed development or
redevelopment projects, and sufficient open and natural space in the community Overall,
residents gave a mean grade of B /C+ to development and redevelopment in the City of
Rosemount
By over three -to -one, residents supported prioritizing the redevelopment of the central
Downtown Area By a somewhat closer margin, a majority of residents also supported the
construction and operation of a large athletic complex But, by over five -to -one residents
supported the acquisition of land in the community for preservation as open space or green space
areas, and, by 64 -37 a majority also supported a property tax increase to acquire land for
preservation as open and green space areas One other key finding a decisive majority deemed
the attraction of a sit -down family style restaurant as a "very high priority
The typical commuter spent about twenty minutes in going to and from work, however, 16%
reported their commute was over thirty minutes Eight percent of the city's residents used public
transportation dui mg the past two years If a park- and -ride facility were built in Rosemount,
about seven percent of the households in the city could be expected to use it initially Overtime,
that percentage could increase to fourteen percent
R91
Chapter Six: Park.
and_ Recreation
Issues
54
rka u Re creation
Issues
Rosemount residents were asked a series of questions about the park and recreation system Both
smaller neighborhood parks and larger community parks proved to be popular with residents A
large thirty -cigbt percent participated in City park and recreation programs, the most popular
were baseball/softball, soccer, and AAA Satisfaction with the programs was almost unanimous
Forty -six percent of the households also reported members left the city for facilities or programs
elsewhere This "leakage level" was somewhat lower than the suburban norin
Park Facilities Usage
Levels
Residents were instructed
The Rosen :aunt park system composed of larger com-
munity parks and smaller neighborhood parks, trails,
and community ballfields. Of these facilities, which
have you or members of your household used during
the past year?
A list of four park system components was then read
Larger community parks?
Fifty -eight percent reported household members visited larger community parks during the past
year
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
58%
41%
1%
"Yes" was cited more often by members of households eontammg children, eighteen to thirty
four year olds and city newsletter readers "No" was mentioned more often by city residents for
more than twenty years, members of households containing seniors, empty nesters, over fifty -four
year olds, those not working or retired and Precinct Two residents
Smaller neighborhood parks?
Sixty -five percent reported members of their households visited smaller neighborhood parks
during the past year
YES
65%
55
NO 35%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 1%
Use increased among city residents for five to ten years, members of households containing
children, thirty-five to forty -four year olds, those with Internet access, those who work for a
private compan} and Precincts Four and Six residents It decreased among city residents for
more than twenty years, members of households containing seniors, empty nesters, over fifty -four
year olds, those not working or retired, residents who don't e� er intend to moN e and Precincts
Two and Three residents
Trails?
Forty -nine percent stated household members used city trails during the last year
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
49%
50%
1%
Use increased among city residents for five to ten years, members of households containing
children, thirty -fn e to forty -four year olds, those with Internet access, those who work for a
private company and residents who intend to move in next five years It decreased among city
residents for less than five years, members of households containing seniors, empty nesters, over
fifty -four year olds, those not working or retired and Precinct Two residents
Community ballfields?
Among households in the City of Rosemount, forty percent reported they visited community
ballfields during the past year
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
40%
60%
0%
"Yes" was stated most frequently by city residents for five to ten years, membeis of households
containing children_ thirty -five to forty -four year olds and those with Internet access "No" was
selected at a higher rate by city residents for more than twenty years, members of households
containing seniors, empty nesteis, over fifty -four year olds and those not working or retired
Two park system components were used by a majority of households in the community smaller
neighboi hood parks and larger community parks
56
Recreational Program
Respondents were queried
Have you or members of your household participated in
any City park and recreation programs?
Thirty -eight percent reported household members had participated in city- sponsored recreational
programs
2001 2003
YES
35%
38%
NO
64%
62%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
1%
0%
This participation level was ten percent higher than the twenty -eight percent suburban norm
Participation was higher among city residents for five to ten years, members of households
containing children, thirty -five to forty -four year olds, those with Internet access, residents who
don't intend to move in the next ten years and city newsletter readers It was low er among city
residents for more than twenty years, members of households containing seniors, empty nesters,
over fifty -four year olds, those not working or retired and Precincts Two and Four residents
Participants were asked a follow -up query
Which ones?
Baseball and softball led the list, at twenty -five percent
BASEBALL /SOFTBALL
SOCCER
SAFETY CAMP
PUPPETS IN THE PARK
ICE SKATING
HOCKEY
AAA
SWIMMING
TENNIS
VARIOUS OTHER SPORTS
TINY TOTS
JC ACTIVITIES
SCATTERED
25%
15%
3%
9%
6%
3%
13%
3%
2%
6%
2%
2%
12%
Soccer and AAA programs ranked second, at fifteen percent and thirteen percent, respectively
"Baseball /Softball" was indicated more often by non readers of the city newsletter "Soccer" was
posted at a higher rate by renters and non readers of the city newsletter "AAA" was cited more
often by thirty -five to forty -four year olds and Precinct Six residents "Puppets in the Park" was
57
stated at a higher rate by city residents for more than twenty years and women
Participants were also asked
Were you generally satisfied or dissatisfied with these
progran
Ninety -seven percent reported they were "satisfied" with these programs
2001 2003
SATISFIED 93% 97%
DISSATISFIED 3% 1%
BOTH 1% 0%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 2% 2%
Only one percent was "dissatisfied Satisfaction was unanimous among men
Leave the City for Park
and Recreation
Respondents were asked
Do you or members ofyour household currently leave
the city for park and recreation facilities or activities?
What would that be?
Fifty -four percent reported household members did not leave Rosemount to recreate elsewhere
NO
SWIMMING
FISHING
CAMPING
OTHER PARKS
SOCCER
SOFTBALL /BASEBALL
TRAILS /HIKING
GOLF
LAKES /BOATING
ICE ARENA
VARIOUS OTHER SPORTS
SCATTERED
54%
6%
3%
4%
8%
2%
4%
5%
2%
4%
2%
2%
4%
The most popular draws from the community were "other parks" and "swimming opportunities
"No" was reported more often by city residents for more than twenty years, members of
households containing seniors, empty nesters, over fifty-four year olds, those not working or
M
retired and Precincts One and Two residents "Other parks" was cited more often by those with
Internet access, women, residents who intend to move in the next five years and Precinct Six
residents "Swimmmg "was pointed to mote often by eighteen to thirty -four year olds, renters and
Precinct Five residents
Summary and
Conclusions
Neighborhood parks and larger community parks were the most frequently used components of
the system, sixty -five percent reported ,isrting the former, while fifty -eight percent went to the
latter Trails attracted members of forty -nine percent of the households Community ballfields
were visited by fort} percent of the households in the city The Rosemount Park and Recreation
System still ianked among the most highly utilized and well regaided in the Metropolitan Area
Thirty-eight percent of the sample indicated household members had participated in city
sponsored recreation programs Softball /Baseball teams, soccer teams, and AAA programs
dominated the list A cry high ninety -seven percent reported satisfaction with these programs,
while only one percent was more critical
A not unusually high number of residents left the community to recreate elsewhere They sought
other parks, swimming opportunities, and trails /hiking, among a number of other facilities and
programs
59
Chapter Seven:
Communications
Issues
mo
Communications
Issues
Rosemount residents were asked a small number of questions about their sources of information
The "City Newsletter" and "local newspapers" dominated the information system with respect to
city government and its activities ON er eighty percent of the sample reported they had access to
the Internet, with over one -third accessing the City of Rosemount's web site In fact, the
percentage using the website had effectively doubled since the 1997 study
Principal Source of
Information
Respondents were asked
What is your principal source of information about
Rosemount City Government and its activities?
Twenty -six percent relied upon "Rosemount Town Pages," while twenty -four percent cited the
"Rosemount City News
NONE
4%
ROSEMOUNT TOWN PAGES
26%
ROSEMOUNT CITY NEWS
24%
)YORD OF MOUTH
15%
FLYERS /MAILINGS
2%
SUN CURRENT
7%
"THIS WEEK"
4%
ROSEMOUNT TIMES
3%
TV
5%
COUNCIL MEETINGS
3%
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
2%
SCATTERED
4%
The "grapevine" also proved active, with fifteen percent using it as their principal information
source
"Rosemount Town Pages" was key to thirty-five to forty-four year olds, those with Internet
access, Precincts Five and Six residents and city newsletter readers "Rosemount City News"
was posted more often by men, Precinct Three residents and city newsletter readers "Word of
mouth" was important to over fifty -four year olds and non readers of the city newsletter
61
"Rosemount City News
Respondents were asked
Do you or any household members regularly read the
Caty's newsletter, "The Rosemount City News
Seventy -nine percent, a figure at the suburban norm, regularly read "The Rosemount City News
YES
NO
DON'T KNOW'REFUSED
79%
20%
1%
Readership was higher among city residents for more than twenty years, those with Internet
access, homeowners and residents who don't ever intend to move It was lower among city
residents for less than five years, eighteen to thirty -four year olds, renters and those who work for
a private company
City's Web Site
Respondents were initially asked
Do you have access to the Internet at hone? Do you
have access to the Internet at work?
Eighty -three percent were able to access the Internet at home or at work
HOME ONLY
31%
WORK ONLY
7%
BOTH
45%
NEITHER
17%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
0%
"Home only" was stated more often by over fifty -four year olds and those not working or retired
"Work only" was posted more often by city residents for five to ten years, eighteen to thirty -four
year olds, renters and Precinct Five residents `Both" was indicated at a higher rate by city
residents for eleven to twenty years, members of households containing children, thirty -five to
fifty -four year olds, homeowners, those who work for a private company, business owners,
residents who don't intend to move in the next ten years Precincts Five and Six residents and
city newsletter readers "Neither" was mentioned most often by city residents for more than
tw enty yeai s, members of households containing seniors, empty_ nesters, over fifty -four year olds,
rentei s, those not working or retired, residents who don't ever intend to move. Precincts One and
Two residents and non readers of the city newsletter
Residents with access were asked a follow -up query
62
Have you accessed the City's web site?
Thirty -six percent had visited the web site-
2001 2003
YES 37% 36%
NO 63% 63%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 1% 1%
"Yes" was stated most often by those who work for a public entity and Precinct One residents
Web site visitors were then asked a follow -up query
What additional information would you like to see on
the City ofRosemount's web site?
"City events news" and "development information" were the major suggested additions to the
web site
2001 2003
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
53%
34%
NOTHING
18%
9%
CITY EVENTS
8%
15%
GENERAL INFORMATION
12%
6%
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
4%
9%
DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION
3%
11%
PARKS AND RECREATION INFORMATION
0%
7%
CITY NEWS
0%
4%
CITY SERVICES
0%
3%
PERMITS AND ORDINANCES
0%
3%
SCATTERED
3%
0%
"City events" was suggested more often by city residents for five to ten years, thirty -five to forty-
four year olds, renters, Precinct Five residents and non readers of the city newsletter
"Development information" was key to those who work for a public entity, while "parks and
recreation information" was cited at a higher rate by eighteen to thirty-four year olds and Precinct
Two residents
Summary and
Conclusions
Rosemount remained somew hat split in their principal source of information about city
government and its activities Twenty -four percent indicated the "city newsletter" and thirty
seven percent pointed to "local newspapers The grapevine was a source of information for
fifteen percent In fact, seventy -nine percent reported they regularly read "The Rosemount City
63
News No other source was relied upon by more than five percent of the residents In
comparison with other communities, the split was very close to the norm
Eighty -three percent of the respondents reported access to the Internet through a home or office
computer Of those w ith access, thirty -six percent had accessed the city's v ebsite the latter
was a comparatively high figure m companson with other suburbs Users of the website were
particularly interested in seeing more information about events, as well as planning and
dcN elopment activities posted there
M
Reflections
Rosemount citizens remained very pleased with their community They were greatly satisfied
with past policies and actions But, an on -going theme in the now completed four studies is the
crucial role "small town ambience" plays in community identity This must be balanced against
a development imperative, one seeking more retail business establishments and entertainment
and /or dining opportunities Rosemount has essentially passed from the Stage I reaction to
C
th "it's too fast" to the State 11 reaction "it should be more targeted to my needs
While the turn- around on increased taxes to maintain city services was significant, there is an
underlying concern here Residents were not granting "willy nilly" permission to increase taxes
on a whole host of projects or auxiliary services They were indicating that current services were
very important to them and they would opt for a tax increase, if demonstrably needed, to protect
tbose services The City has placed itself overtime --in a box, given current financial times
Residents have become used to the current level of city services, to which they awarded very
solid satisfaction ratings, however, these ratings are now the new "baseline," and residents will
not react well to major cutbacks or eliminations on any front
Given these challenges, the major task facing decision- makers remains daunting preserving the
aspects of "small town ambience" key to so many residents, while targeting development efforts
to meet current household needs At the same time, residents wil l also expect city services to
keep pace with growth and tax base expansion But, Rosemount elected officials and city staff
possess an advantage very rarely found the past election was a clear breakpoint to much of the
public That break was viewed as overwhelmingly positive, therefore the current Mayor and City
Council, together with the new City Manager, have significant latitude to pursue policies they
feel will move the City ahead without losing its well established sense of community
M
DECISION RESOURCES, LTD.
3128 Dean Court
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416
City of Rosemount
Residential Survey
FINAL May 2003
Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a polling firm
located in Minneapolis. We have been retained by the City of
Rosemount to speak with a random sample of residents about
issues facing the community. This survey is being conducted
because the City Council and City Staff are .interested in your
opinions and suggestions about current and future city needs. I
want to assure you that all individual responses will be held
strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire sample will
be reported.
1. Approximately how many years have
you lived in Rosemount?
LESS THAN TWO YEARS 10%
TWO TO FIVE YEARS 20%
FIVE TO TEN YEARS 24%
TEN TO TWENTY YEARS 23%
20 TO 30 YEARS........ 11
OVER THIRTY YEARS 10%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 1%
2. Thinking back to when you moved to Rosemount, what factors
were most important to you in selecting this location?
ALWAYS ROSEMOUNT, 5 LOCATION, 4 SCHOOLS, 19 SMALL
TOWN, 15 RURAL /OPEN SPACE, 10 CLOSE TO FAMILY, 9
CLOSE TO WORK, 12 NEIGHBORHOOD /HOUSE, 7 QUIET /PEACE-
FUL, 2 °s, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, 12%; LOW CRIME, 2 SCAT-
TERED, 4
3. As things now stand, how long in LESS THAN TWO YEARS 5%
the future do you expect to TWO TO FIVE YEARS 10%
live in Rosemount? FIVE TO TEN YEARS 13%
OVER TEN YEARS... ....31%
REST OF LIFE.......... 32%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 10%
4. How would you rate the quality of EXCELLENT .............36%
life in Rosemount excellent, GOOD ..................58%
good, only fair or poor) ONLY FAIR ..............5%
POOR ...................0%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 1%
5. What do you like most, if anything, about living in Rose-
mount?
UNSURE, 4 LOCATION, 10 SCHOOLS, 9 SMALL TOWN, 24
RURAL /OPEN SPACE, 11 CLOSE TO FAMILY, 4 CLOSE TO WORK,
4 PEOPLE, 11 NEIGHBORHOOD /HOUSE, 5 QUIET /PEACEFUL,
7 AFFORDABLE HOUSING, 2 SHOPPING CONVENIENCE, 3
PARKS, 2 SCATTERED, 5
1
6. What do you think is the most serious issue facing Rosemount
today?
UNSURE, 16 NOTHING, 2 TOO MUCH GROWTH, 27%; NEED MORE
BUSINESS, 12 TAXES, 7 NEED MORE RESTAURANTS, 2%;
SCHOOL FUNDING, 6 9 o; NEED TO REDO DOWNTOWN, 3 TRAFFIC,
5 1 6, CRIME, 4 CITY COUNCIL, 2 LACK OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, 2 CITY BUDGET CONCERNS, 3 NOT ENOUGH TO DO,
2 CITY PLANNING, 3 9 SCATTERED, 6
7. How important do
you think it is
VERY IMPORTANT
21%
to the quality of
life in a com-
SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT....
57%
munity to have a
strong arts and
NOT TOO IMPORTANT.....
12%
cultural presence
very impor-
NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT
6%
tant, somewhat .important, not too
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.....
3%
important or not
at all important?
8. What types of arts activities, if any, do you and other
household members regularly participate in?
NONE, 35 THEATER /PLAYS, 22 CONCERTS /MUSIC, 20 ARTS
AND CRAFTS, 13 MUSEUMS, 6 DANCE, 3 SCATTERED, 2
IF "NONE," ASK: (N =140)
9. Could you tell me one or two reasons why you and other
members of your household do not regularly participate
in arts activities?
UNSURE, 2%; NO INTEREST, 54%; NOT AWARE OF, 7 NO
TIME, 30%; AGE AND HEALTH, 4 SCATTERED, 4
Many communities host arts and creative activities, such as local
art and photography shows, local music and drama groups, as well
as crafts groups and classes, in which residents may actively
participate.
10. Other than school related program- YES ...................75%
ming, do you feel there are enough NO ....................15%
facilities and programs to meet DEPENDS ON TYPE 2%
your household needs? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 9%
11. How much, if anything, would you
be willing to pay in additional
property taxes per year to operate
and maintain a cultural facility
in Rosemount containing a theater,
as well as music and arts class-
rooms and exhibits? Let's say,
would you be willing to pay an
additional per year?
(CHOOSE A RANDOM STARTING POINT;
MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON
ANSWER) How about per
year? (REPEAT PROCESS)
NOTHING ...............34%
$10.00 ................12%
$20.00 ...............16%
$30.00 .................9%
$40.00 .................5%
$50.00 .................3%
$60.00 .................4
s
DON'T KNOW
16%
REFUSED ................1%
2
12. All in all, do you think things in RIGHT DIRECTION 63%
Rosemount are generally headed in WRONG TRACK 19%
the right direction, or do you DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 18%
feel things are off on the wrong
track?
IF A RESPONSE IS GIVEN, ASK: (N =330)
13. Could you tell me why you feel that way?
UNSURE, 4 NEW MAYOR AND COUNCIL, 15 OVERDEVELOP-
MENT, 8 DEVELOPMENT IS WELL PLANNED, 28 NO PROB-
LEMS, 11 LIKE REDEVELOPMENT OF DOWNTOWN, 4 GOOD
HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS, 3 GOOD SCHOOLS, 3 NEED MORE
BUSINESS, 5 MAINTAINING SMALL TOWN FEEL, 6 DON'T
LIKE NEW MAYOR AND COUNCIL, 2 SAFE COMMUNITY, 2
POOR PLANNING, 2 SCATTERED, 8
I would like to read you a list of characteristics of a communi-
ty. For each one, please tell me if you think Rosemount currently
has too many or too much, too few or too little, or about the
right amount.
MANY FEW/ ABOUT D.K./
MUCH LITT RIGHT REF.
14. Affordable housing, defined by
the Metropolitan Council as a
single family home costing less
than $162,000?
15. Affordable rental units?
16. Luxury rental units?
17. Condominiums?
18. Townhouses?
19. Starter homes for young families?
20. "Move up" housing?
21. Higher cost housing?
22. Senior housing?
23. Parks and open spaces?
24. Trails and bikeways?
25. Service establishments?
26. Retail shopping opportunities?
27. Entertainment establishments?
28. Dining establishments?
29. Day care opportunities?
7 9
35%
47%
12
10 °6
25%
34%
32%
12%
16%
30%
42%
16%
13 0 6
41%
29%
26%
9%
52%
13 0 6
7%
46 0 6
36%
11 0 6
10%
20%
56%
14%
27%
12%
51%
10 0 6
6%
34%
33 9
27 0 6
8 °s
24%
62%
6 0 6
5%
37%
48%
11%
6%
39 0 6
49 0 6
6%
5%
62%
31 0 6
2 0 6
3%
59%
35 0 6
3%
3%
75%
20%
2%
3%
15%
31%
52%
As I read the following statements about residential and business
development, please answer "yes" or "no." (READ LIST)
YES NO DKR
30. There is a good mix of business and
residential development in the City. 63% 34% 3%
3
YES NO DKR
31. During the past few years, the appear-
ance and maintenance of business pro-
perties has improved. 74% 19% 7%
32. Residents have adequate opportunity to
make their feelings known about pro-
posed development or redevelopment
projects. 58!k 29% 14%
33. There is sufficient open and natural
space in the community. 73% 25% 2!k
As you know, schools grade students on a scale from A to F,
including pluses and minuses.
34. Using this scale, please give an A ......................6%
overall rating to development and A- .....................1%
redevelopment in the City of B ....................146
Rosemount? B .....................310
B- .....................5%
C .....................7%
C.....................19%
C...................... 50
D .....................0%
D......................5%
D- .....................0%
F .....................0%
F......................1%
NO ANSWER ..............6%
On another topic.......
35. Would you support or oppose prior-
STRONGLY FAVOR
30t
itizing the redevelopment of the
FAVOR .................39%
central Downtown Area? (WAIT FOR
OPPOSE ................10%
RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly
STRONGLY OPPOSE.......
12%
that way?
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.....
9%
There have been discussions about the construction of a large
athletic complex in the community. Facilities that may be in-
cluded are soccer fields, baseball fields, and softball fields.
36. Would you support or oppose the
STRONGLY SUPPORT......
27%
construction and operation of a
SUPPORT .........30%
large athletic complex in the City
OPPOSE ...........13%
of Rosemount? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE)
STRONGLY OPPOSE.......
19%
Do you feel strongly that way?
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED....
10$
37. Would you support or oppose the
STRONGLY SUPPORT......
44%
acquisition of land in the com-
SUPPORT ...............36%
munity for preservation as open
OPPOSE .................6%
space or green space areas? (WAIT
STRONGLY OPPOSE........
8%
FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.....
6%
that way?
N
38. Would you support or oppose a
property tax increase to acquire
land for preservation as open and
green space areas? (WAIT FOR RE-
SPONSE) Do you feel strongly that
way?
STRONGLY SUPPORT...... 20%
SUPPORT 34%
OPPOSE .............13%
STRONGLY OPPOSE...... 24%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 9%
39. How high a priority would you VERY HIGH PRIORITY.... 52%
assign to the attraction of a sit- MODERATE PRIORITY..... 32%
down family style restaurant to LOW PRIORITY 6%
the City of Rosemount very high NOT A PRIORITY 10%
priority, moderate, low, or not a DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 1%
priority at all?
As you may know, property taxes are divided between the City of
Rosemount and various other units of local government. Thinking
about the amount going to the City....
40. Do you think the city portion of
your property taxes, which funds
City services in Rosemount is very
high, somewhat high, about average
somewhat low or very low in com-
parison with nearby suburban com-
munities?
VERY HIGH ..............9%
SOMEWHAT HIGH......... 16%
ABOUT AVERAGE 39%
SOMEWHAT LOW........... 3%
VERY LOW ...............0%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 32%
I would like to read you a list of a few city services. For
each one, please tell me whether you would rate the quality of
the service as excellent, good, only fair, or poor? (ROTATE)
EXCL GOOD FAIR POOR DK /R
41.
Police protection?
33%
55%
7%
2%
3%
42.
Fire protection?
34%
57%
3 0 6
1%
6 0 6
43.
Recycling and brush pick -up?
19%
50%
15%
5%
10 9 6
44.
Storm drainage and flood
control?
11%
58%
12%
6%
14%
45.
Park maintenance?
20%
65%
6%
2%
7%
46.
City- sponsored recreation
programs
17%
52%
11%
2%
18 9
47.
Animal control?
12%
56%
14%
6%
12%
Now, for the next three city services, please consider only
their fob on city- maintained street and roads. That means do not
consider state and county roads, which are taken care of by other
levels of government. How would you rate
EXCL GOOD FAIR POOR DK /R
48. City street repair and
maintenance? 10 61 9 6 19% 3% 1%
49. Snow plowing? 21 9 6 59% 16 2% 2%
50. Street lighting? 13% 61% 20% 5% 2%
E
51. When you
consider the property
EXCELLENT .............11W
2%
taxes you pay and the quality of
GOOD ..................63
°s
city services you receive, would
ONLY FAIR .............18%
you rate
the general value of city
POOR ...................2%
4%
services
as excellent, good, only
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.....
6%
fair, or
poor?
60.
Business and residential neighbor-
52. Would you favor or oppose an in- FAVOR .................50%
crease in city property taxes, OPPOSE ................38-
if it were needed to maintain DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 12%
city services at their current
level?
IF "OPPOSE," ASK: (N =152)
53. What services would you be willing to see cut?
UNSURE, 32 NONE, 26 PARKS AND RECREATION, 20
ADMINISTRATION, 9 9 RECYCLING, 2 ANIMAL CONTROL,
5 POLICE, 3 SCATTERED, 5
54. In comparison with nearby areas, VERY HIGH .............10%
do you feel that the property SOMEWHAT HIGH......... 32 0 6
taxes in Rosemount are very high, ABOUT AVERAGE 43%
somewhat high, about average, SOMEWHAT LOW........... 1%
somewhat low, or very low? VERY LOW ...............0%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 15%
Thinking about another topic....
55. Do you generally feel safe in your YES ...................96%
home? NO ....................3%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 1%
56. How would you rate the amount of TOO MUCH ...............3%
police patrolling in your neigh- ABOUT RIGHT AMOUNT 68%
borhood too much, about the NOT ENOUGH 27%
right amount or not enough? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 2%
Again, as I read the following statements, please answer "yes" or
"no."
YES NO DKR
57. This neighborhood is a good place
0
to raise children.
97%
2%
1%
58.
People have pride and ownership in
our neighborhood.
95%
4%
1%
59.
I feel a part of my neighborhood.
89 9 6
10 9 6
1%
60.
Business and residential neighbor-
hoods are enjoyable and stable
places to live, work and recreate
in Rosemount.
92%
6%
2%
61.
I have recently or plan to signi-
ficantly remodel my residence in
the next couple of years.
24%
74%
3%
0
62. Using the scale of A to F, in- A .....................23%
cluding pluses and minuses, please A- .....................6%
give an overall rating to your B ....................22%
neighborhood? B .....................28W
B- .....................5%
C .....................5%
C......................7%
C- .....................1%
D .....................0%
D......................1%
D- ....................0%
F .....................0%
F ......................1 °s
NO ANSWER ..............2%
As you may know, the City of Rosemount offers a wide variety of
neighborhood activities or events, such as Leprechaun Days.
63. Have you or household members YES ..................65%
participated in Leprechaun Days NO ....................34%
during the past two years? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 1
64. Have you or household members participated in any other
neighborhood events or activities during the past two years?
(IF "YES," ASK:) Which ones?
UNSURE, 2 NO, 58 BLOCK PARTIES, 14%; FOURTH OF JULY,
4 NATIONAL NIGHT OUT, 6 EASTER EGG HUNT, 4 SCHOOL
ACTIVITIES, 3%; SCATTERED EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES, 10
Continuing....
The Rosemount park system is composed of larger community parks
and smaller neighborhood parks, trails, and community ballfields.
Of these facilities, which have you or members of your household
used during the past year?
69. Have you or members of your house- YES ...................38.
hold participated in any City NO ....................62%
park and recreation programs? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 0%
IF "YES," ASK: (N =151)
7
YES
NO
DKR
65.
Larger community parks?
58%
41%
1%
66.
Smaller neighborhood parks?
656
350
1%
67.
Trails?
49%
500
1 9
68.
Community ballfields?
400
60%
0%
69. Have you or members of your house- YES ...................38.
hold participated in any City NO ....................62%
park and recreation programs? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 0%
IF "YES," ASK: (N =151)
7
70. Which ones?
BASEBALL /SOFTBALL, 25 SOCCER, 15 SAFETY CAMP, 3
PUPPETS IN THE PARK, 9 ICE SKATING, 6 HOCKEY, 3
AAA, 13 SWIMMING, 3 TENNIS, 2 VARIOUS OTHER
SPORTS, 6 TINY TOTS, 2 JC ACTIVITIES, 2 SCAT-
TERED, 12 1 6.
71. Were you satisfied or dis- SATISFIED.. ..........97%
satisfied with your exper- DISSATISFIED 1%
ience? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 2%
72. Do you or members of your household currently leave the city
for park and recreation facilities or activities? (IF
"YES," ASK:) What would that be?
NO, 54 SWIMMING, 6 FISHING, 3 CAMPING, 4 OTHER
PARKS, 8 SOCCER, 2 SOFTBALL /BASEBALL, 4 TRAILS/
HIKING, 5 GOLF, 2 LAKES /BOATING, 4 ICE ARENA, 2
VARIOUS OTHER SPORTS, 2 SCATTERED, 4
Moving on....
73. Do you leave
on a regular
to work? (IF
many minutes
get to work?
you work in
the City of Rosemount
or daily basis to go
"YES," ASK:) How
does it take you to
(IF "NO, ASK) Do
Zosemount?
NO /WORK IN ROSEMOUNT..13%
NOT EMPLOYED /RETIRED..16%
YES /5 MINUTES OR LESS..3%
YES /6 TO 10 MINUTES.... 7%
YES /11 TO 15 MINUTES..12%
YES /16 TO 20 MINUTES..16%
YES /21 TO 25 MINUTES..10%
YES /26 TO 30 MINUTES 76
YES /OVER 30 MINUTES 16%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 0%
74. Have you used public transporta-
tion during the past two years?
75. How likely would you be to use
public transportation if a park
and -ride facility for bus service
were constructed in the City of
Rosemount very likely, somewhat
likely, not too likely, or not at
all likely?
Changing topics....
YES ....................8%
NO ....................92%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 0%
VERY LIKELY 7%
SOMEWHAT LIKELY....... 15%
NOT TOO LIKELY........ 21%
NOT AT ALL LIKELY 55%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 2%
76. Other than voting, do you feel YES ...................63%
that if you wanted to, you could NO ...................22%
have a say about the way the City DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 15%
of Rosemount runs things?
IF "NO," ASK: (N =89)
"I
77. Why do you feel you cannot have say?
UNSURE, 7 DON'T LISTEN, 760; DON'T ASK FOR INPUT,
8 DON'T KNOW HOW, 8 9 6; SCATTERED, 1 9
78.
How much do you feel you know
A GREAT DEAL 5%
about the work of the Mayor and
A FAIR AMOUNT
34.
°s
City Council a great deal, a
VERY LITTLE ..........51%
1 9 6
fair amount, very little, or none
NONE AT ALL ...........9%
at all?
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED
1%
79.
From what you know, do you approve
STRONGLY APPROVE......
17%
or disapprove of the job the Mayor
APPROVE ...............52%
and City Council are doing? (WAIT
DISAPPROVE .............4%
FOR RESPONSE) And do you feel
STRONGLY DISAPPROVE....
5%
strongly that way?
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED....
21%
80.
How much first hand contact have
QUITE A LOT
9%
you had with the Rosemount City
SOME ..................32%
staff quite a lot, some, very
VERY LITTLE
33%
little or none?
NONE ..................26%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.....
1%
81.
From what you have heard or seen,
EXCELLENT .............10%
how would you rate the job per-
GOOD ..................56%
formance of the Rosemount City
ONLY FAIR .............18%
staff excellent, good, only
POOR ...................2%
fair, or poor?
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED....
14%
Moving
on......
82.
What is your principal source of information
about Rosemount
City Government and its activities?
NONE, 4 ROSEMOUNT TOWN PAGES, 26 ROSEMOUNT CITY NEWS,
24 9 WORD OF MOUTH, 15 FLYERS /MAILINGS, 2%; SUN CUR-
RENT, 7 "THIS WEEK," 4%; ROSEMOUNT TIMES, 3 TV, 5
COUNCIL MEETINGS, 3 PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, 2 SCATTERED,
4%.
83. Do you or
any household members
YES ...................79%
regularly
read the City's news-
NO ...................20
°s
letter, "The Rosemount City News
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.....
1 9 6
84. Do you have access to the Internet HOME ONLY .............31%
at home? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do WORK ONLY ..............7%
you have access to the Internet BOTH .................45%
at work? NEITHER ...............17%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 0%
IF "YES," ASK: (N =332)
85. Have you accessed the City's YES ...................36%
web site? NO ....................63%
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 1%
7
86 What information would you like to see on the City of
Rosemount's web site?
UNSURE, 34 NONE, 9%; GENERAL INFORMATION, 6
PARKS AND RECREATION, 7 EVENTS, 15 NEWS, 4%;
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, 9 PLANNING /DEVELOPMENT,
11%; CITY SERVICES, 3%; PERMITS AND ORDINANCES, 3
Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes....
Could you please tell me how many people in each of the following
age groups live in your household.
87. Persons 65 or over?
88. Adults under 65?
89. School -aged children?
90. Pre schoolers?
91. Do you own or rent your present
residence?
92. What is your age, please?
93. Are you employed by a public en-
tity, such as state or local gov-
ernment or a school district, a
private company, self employed or
own a business, or currently not
working?
94. Gender
NONE ..................87%
ONE ....................5%
TWO OR MORE 8%
NONE ..................10
ONE ...................10%
TWO ...........68%
THREE OR MORE......... 13%
NONE ..................54%
ONE 19%
TWO 20
THREE OR MORE.......... 7%
NONE ..................83%
ONE ..................12%
TWO OR MORE 5%
OWN ...................89%
RENT ..................11%
REFUSED ................0%
18- 24 ..................3%
25- 34 .................20%
35- 44 .................31%
45- 54 .................23%
55- 64 .................126
65 AND OVER 11%
REFUSED ................0%
PUBLIC ENTITY 20W
PRIVATE COMPANY....... 49%
OWN BUSI /SELF- EMP 10%
NOT WORKING 20%
REFUSED ................1%
14ALE ..................50%
FEMALE ................50%
10
95. Precinct PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
PRECINCT
ONE.......... 16%
TWO.......... 13 °s
THREE........ 24$
FOUR......... 16$
FIVE........ 15 9 6
SIX 15%-
Itc
ReSO wee
wig
ta
Factors in Move to City
2003 City of Rosemount Study
City of Rosemount
2003 Residential Survey
Decision Resources, Ltd
Unsure
Location
Housing 1a
Schools �t
Small Town Feel 1° M1997 Study
Good Comm /Neigh 02001 Study
Family Here 1z X2003 Study
Job a
QuieVRural
1z
Always Home 7
Scattered 6
0 5 10 15 20 25
Decision Resources Ltd
Quality of Life Rating
2003 City of Rosemount Study
70
63
60 57 55
s0
40 36 IN 1997 Study
34 31 02001 Study
30 X2003 Study
20
10 9
8 5
0
0 1 0 0 0 1
Excellent Good Only Fair Poor Unsure
Decision Resources Ltd
Like Most about City
2003 City of Rosemount Study
Unsure
Location
Housing
Small Town Feel
Good Schools
Good Community
Rural /Open Space
Quiet
People
Safe
Shop Convenience
Scattered
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Decision Resources Ltd
ra Presence
Cul e Study
Strang p3 �tty of Fose
F a cing
Mo s efloo s is ue ountStudY
2003
n >r
GrowN
A
Taxe% r94 1
Cnrrra 020
sctwma
No
BOSr
Da�abPrnent Issues
DttY SON
Gmet
TraMiu
D4Y rnnenl
Crime
$c q0
ah� t 10
20
0
D,c mn Resoutms t-td
F acility
r ax In OQease p s e ou study
40 34 TYWcai Tax lgcreesa 51166
35
17
30
25 r L$
20 6
3 4
s
2 5 3
W 3°%W
s4%
0 ..s,DOW
/10 DO Pet Year
N ,m�oo
a„nwnranc�°M SaY°
Decrst°n Resources I.fd
0 p, V^
12%
G Study
D i re ction
2003 'Ity °t Rosemount
M r%
NM MnYarb
RtgtM1 Drreclwn N °vronum°
Wr �rack
Deaswn Resogtce% Ltd
_w.maMM 11K
UO.aOn Resource %Ltd
CamrnunitY
Asp ects of the o studv
2003 City the aH
69
PNordabie HWSfn9 58
ntai Un 70 H7
PO Lu rY R Units
Condominw 6
Townh 9 0
Stader H
M"e-up HO 11 F 94
H9her Ceu H� slnA 90 Senior HS aces 94
psLkTrait ays IKew
Trads� H7
S'W�' EsteWishm 98
Estahkis" 0 p 520
Ms
qg
Enterta EStatk�sl hits 60 80
Day Care OPR°M 0 20 utRt9 mT� F —!a
40 ht
�MUCh t7Abo
0*Ton
9lnn Reaonrnaa, Ltd
ects
Development Prof
Study
2003 Crty C
Pnordize CerNat Downto`"n
Area
Large AtMeUc GomPle
Preservsw of open Spa
Tax inaeese for Acquis
D"rswn
R
Developm
200 "y of Rosemount Study
Good Mlx m CdY
Melmain Suo "Rr�edles
Ade4u'" GPPoOtY 1
SufficterM1 OPan SPa� I
0
peasron Reswross Ltd
14
100
Be
40
Yes IMNo
egt8l
Sit -Down F arm'�Y Ft ur" Study
2003 Glty 01
Him
P w dY
very
Moderate Pnoriw
32%
sctsan Resources Ltd
tonb
0 w
re Cjty property Taxes
aratl
Comp 2003 city of Rosemount Study
gomew+hat High
16 °to
About AeraO
39%
S a tat Low
3%
pec�s�on Resources Ltd
aar-
lerf Fngh
9%
ces
Value of City Seedy
2003 city Of Rosemount Study
Good
63%
Ie
;tenant
11%
Unsure
6%
Poor
2%
favorable Rating of Services
of Rosemount Study
2003 City e
Police sennco 59 es
Arnmal Control 54 Si
Fire a e9
Regclrn9�bnrsh Pick -uR as ■2001 c
s9 252003'
Control Be
Storm pra'niFbod es
a....arM t1
Park M 99
coy-zgonsorad PrOgram5 as 11
BJ
Street
a�dMalntenewe H0
Rep Sn "Piawrn9
T! 120
h4n9 1 W
Sireel U9 40 40 80 60
0
DeoisOn Resources Ltd
Tax Increase to Maintain
oPVo
0ec,ron Resources lid
e t'Ons
S a l etl P e s m t Stuav
T
Total Prop
Gompara t ►ve o tFtosem ountSwM
2003 City
Somewhat W9h
D e �t e8% Y� sy
SW
IIN� m
lea—amNol 4% auresNM'�+
96
Vet, 1 1 0
1o�
1-7
S ate nrne
Unsura
16k
hatLdw oso"n ResWrr'e4
S.—
Apou1 Averao
A3°k
l7ecL4fQn Resources Ltd
d perceptions
tod lbprhoo osemuLlnt Study
2003 CM °i R 9r
Cacod place Sa CpAdren i
Pods and pwnershlP
F pert
En)oYaNe aril 8ts»le I
elk 9 I
St9nt6cam Rem°d IL
6
®0 80
26
120
Ar "nt of Patto
`r participation
haul" Dao emu untStu d y
epreC,2003 city
Yea
ad
petlswn ResoWCes Ltd
Decistan Resaurcas ild
Use of Park System
2003 City of Rosemount Study
Trails
Neighborhood Parks
Community Parks
Communty Ballheld!
0 10 20 30 AO cu W 1�
Decision Resources Ltd
Public Transportation
2003 City of Rosemount Study
Yaa
9%
No
B2f6
Used Public Transportation
during Past Two Years
M1IN TOa LIMNY 11% SomexLN ULNY 1.%
Very LIk.1v M
N Unrure zA
NN MAN LaNY 99%
Use Public Transportation d
Park- and -Ride Facility m
Rosemount
City- Sponsored Recreation Programs
2003 City of Rosemount Study
o1sseasnedrAllx9d 3
No Y99 mtiNNd 97
91 1 9 4 39
Household ParticrpatM m Reaction to Programs
Programs during Pest Year
Decision Resources, Ltd
Mayor and City Council
2003 City of Rosemount Study
Strong APPr
APProva 53%
Decision Resources Ltd
S%
Decision Resources Ltd
City Staff Rating
2003 City of Rosemount Study
70
60 59 56
50 49
40
30
20 21 18
13 13 14 14 14
10 0 0
6
2 2
0
Excellent Good Only Fair Poor Unsure
Dectson Resources Ltd
01097 Study
072001 Study
02003 Study
"The Rosemount City News"
2003 City of Rosemount Study
Y
7
Decision Resources Ltd
_Unsure
1%
7
Major Information Source
2003 City of Rosemount Study
Local Newspaper
40%
City Newsletter
26%
None
J 4%
Scattered
8%
TV /Meetings
Grapevine 8%
15%
Decision Resources Ltd
Internet Access
2003 City of Rosemount Study
Yes
36%
No Yes
17 63%
No
64%
Access to the Internet
at Home or Office Awareness of Cdys Web Site
Decision Resources Ltd
f ya
r CITY OF ROSEMOU NT
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date July 24, 2003
Contact lance Verbrugge, City Administrator
(651) 322 -2006
RE ROSEMOUNT RESIDENT SURVEY
CITY HALL
2875 —145th Street West
Rosemount, NIN
55068 -4997
Phone 651 423 4411
Hearing Impaired 651 423 6219
Fax 651 423 5203
ROSEMOUNT IS HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
That is the finding of a scientific survey of Rosemount residents conducted in late May and early June of
2003 by Decision Resources, Ltd, a respected polling firm that is widely used among Twin Cities
metropolitan communities The survey team polled a total of 400 households on a variety of topics from
quality of life to satisfaction with City services to mternet access The final results indicated that
residents feel very positively about their neighborhoods and are very satisfied with City services
Rosemount residents are extremely satisfied with their community, with a 94% Quality of Life Rating of
good or excellent The 36% who responded "excellent" placed Rosemount in the top quartile of other
communities surveyed by Decision Resources, according to Dr William D Morris, DRL President
As in earlier studies, when asked what they liked about the community, many residents focused on its
convenient location and small town ambience In thinking about serious issues facing the community,
27% of the respondents indicated that the rapid growth is a concern for them, but that concern was down
significantly hom just two years ago when 37% cited growth as a serious issue
2003 Resident Survey
July 24, 2003
Paee 2 of
Regarding City provided services, a strong majority of those surveyed appreciate the value of City
services based upon taxes paid Almost 3 of every 4 respondents rated the value of services as good or
excellent (74 Consistent with that finding was that only 25% perceive the City share of property taxes
to be "somewhat high" or "very high"
When asked whether they would support or oppose a tax increase to maintain the current level of City
services, 50% said they would favor such an increase to only 38% that were opposed This finding
represented a complete reversal from 2001 when only 37% supported such an increase and 55% were
opposed According to Dr, Morris, Rosemount is the only community of more than 25 surveyed in the
past two years to show such a swing in taxpayer opinion
Other positive findings
97% believe their neighborhood is a "Good Place for Children"
96% feel safe in their home
95% believe others take pride and ownership in the neighborhood
89% say "I feel a part of my neighborhood"
70% approve of the Job being done by the Mayor and City Council, only 9% disapprove
Dr Moms said such a high ratio of almost 8 1 approving of the City Council was tremendous Residents
also gave City staff good marks, with more than a 3 1 approval (66 -20 Both ratios placed
Rosemount among the top- ranked communities metro -wide,
When considering the general direction that the City is taking, residents tended to be generally upbeat
63% thought things were headed in the "right direction" with 19% holding the opposite opinion
2003 Resident Survey
July 24, 2003
Page 3 of 4
Interestingly, well planned development was most often cited (28 by those who responded "right
direction," while overdevelopment was the reason given most (8 by those believing the City was off
track
The survey results also demonstrate a very close connection between the sentiments of the community
and the goals that have been established by the City Council, an area that was of significant interest to the
Council
The City Council adopted a set of goals earlier in the year that prioritized issues such as a sit -down family
restaurant, open space preservation, and downtown redevelopment The goals also include consideration
of an athletic complex and evaluation of the need for an arts and culture center Each of the issues
resonated with Rosemount residents
Regarding a sit -down family restaurant, 84% of respondents said the attraction of such a
restaurant is a priority for the community Over half felt it was a high priority
Dr Morris reported that 80% of respondents were in favor of acquiring land for preservation as
open space or green space, with an "amazing" 44% saying they strongly supported such an
approach When asked if they would support or oppose a property tax increase to acquire
preservation lands, 54% said they would support That finding is very similar to the 53% of
Rosemount residents that voted in favor of the Dakota County Farmland and Natural Areas
Preservation referendum question in 2002
On the question of downtown redevelopment, by more than 3 to 1 respondents favored
prioritizing the redevelopment, 69% supporting to only 22% opposing
Fifty -seven percent (57 said they would support construction and operation of a large athletic
complex in the City, although no specific proposal or details of any such proposal currently exist
2003 Resident Survey
July 24, 2003
Page 4 of 4
Finally, 79% of respondents felt that a strong arts and culture presence was important to a
community's quality of life About half indicated they would be willing to pay additional
property taxes to operate and maintain a cultural facility in Rosemount
"These results are very good news for the community," said Mayor Bill Droste "Clearly, the residents of
Rosemount are paying attention to what the City is doing and they are giving us good marks The survey
results will help the City Council in the coming months as we plan the 2004 budget and continue to
implement the adopted goals for 2003 2004
In general, random samples such as this survey yield results that are reliable within five percentage points
The last resident survey was conducted in 2001
You can review more detailed survey response information on the City's website at
www ci losemount inn us