Decatur’s 2012 Citizen Survey: Residents Split on Stronger Tree Ordinance, Support Using Tax Funds for Beacon Hill
Decatur Metro | June 25, 2012Every two years, the city of Decatur commissions a city-wide survey of its populace from the National Research Center to get an updated read on opinions on everything from “quality of life” to safety perceptions, to opinions of various city’s services. As has been the case in other years of late, the full survey made its first appearance in the appendix of the city’s budget, so you’re already welcome to view it HERE (PDF).
The ever-changing “custom questions” for this year seem to indicate that Decatur is pretty evenly divided over whether the city needs a stronger tree ordinance, is OK with the current level of traffic enforcement, and a large majority “strongly” or “somewhat” support using tax funds to renovate Beacon Hill.
Among questions that have been asked in previous years, the quality of life is at an all-time high with 92% rating it as “excellent/good”. The quality of economic development is up from two years ago to 73%, but still a bit below 2006 and 2008′s ratings. Quality of natural environment is also notably higher at 81% excellent/good vs. 75% two years ago. Ease of bicycle use is also up 6 points to 69% from 2 years ago.
Among the lower scores, positive views on the amount of public parking is higher than previously perceived (38% vs. 32%) but still comparably low, while quality of traffic enforcement dipped 6 points to 65% from 71% two years ago. Additionally, 45% of residents rated the availability of affordable quality public housing as excellent/good (up 2 points from 2 years prior), with only 9% rating it as “excellent”. Availability of affordable quality child care registered at similar levels. You can see many of the year-to-year comparisons throughout the budget’s narrative section.
Overall, according to the survey’s summary, “Most ratings tended to be stable or show an upward trend over time.”
I recall some questions being raised here about the meaning of the survey question regarding Beacon Hill, but I never followed up regarding whether they were answered. The survey question: “Please indicate the extent you would support or oppose financing that would use tax
funds for the renovation of the old Beacon School complex, including construction of a
new Decatur Police Department headquarters on West Trinity Place.”
Were we being asked about reallocating tax funds? If so, reallocating away from what? What would be defunded? Or were we being asked whether we would support a tax increase? If so, how much of a tax increase? (I assume it would require a 3rd bond either way, but I don’t know.) I wonder how respondents interpreted the question.
The custom question regarding Beacon Hill is detailed below:
Custom Question 3
Please indicate the extent you would support or oppose financing that would use tax
funds for the renovation of the old Beacon School complex, including construction of a
Percent of new Decatur Police Department headquarters on West Trinity Place.
Strongly support 26%
Somewhat support 51%
Somewhat oppose 14%
Strongly oppose 8%
Total 100%
Decatur Metro published the CSD Supt’s reccs. previously, that if I recall correctly, offered two alternatives for the admin office part of this renovation or relocation costing between $4-5million.
I don’t recall it including the cost of the Police Dept. HQ.
I would be curious to know if the Supt. estimate was to include the Police as well, or if that is an additional amount.( Can the Police even use SPLOST?–I have no idea)
Also, too bad the custom question did not discuss the $4-5million cost. I wonder if attaching the pretty high cost estimate would have brought some responses back to earth.
I also did not find the number of respondents used for the survey. That would have been nice to know as well.
This is an issue that will need some pretty strict vetting before going forward.
We need Westchester as a school again, we shouldn’t have to pay a fortune to get it there.
The dollars are very significant and should be tied to a long term plan CSD should develop or be required to have in place that will offer some long term stability for the admin offices.
I do not think most citizens think its OK to move them every 8 -10 years at multi million dollar expense and to resort to SPLOST for new construction only.
(the move into Westchester cost a bundle as well.)
Isn’t admin on the operating budget after all? Shouldn’t capital expenses like SPLOST be reserved for instruction and teaching facilities?
Let the discussion begin
SPLOST funds can legally be used for capital purposes and are not restricted to to instructional facilities.
I thing the Supt’s figure is for the school district’s portion of the project; the total project is much more than that.
SPLOST funds are for the school district’s use only; the police department or any other agency of government cannot use them.