|
opposed it. As long as the cost stayed around a $40. 00 yearly
<br /> increase in property taxes, majority support could be maintained.
<br /> But, even at that figure, there is a core of twenty-three percent
<br /> of the residents who would not vote for any tax increase for the
<br /> construction of a center. Fifty-eight percent of the sample also
<br /> thought it was a good idea to attach a new City Hall to the
<br /> Community Center combining the construction of both facilities.
<br /> City residents seem, then, to endorse the idea of a City Center
<br /> complex, combining administrative facilities with meeting : . rooms
<br /> and other facilities for the public.
<br /> Fourteen- different facilities for possible inclusion in a
<br /> community center were read to each interviewee. ;'Over° eighty
<br /> percent supported the inclusion of a teen center..
<br /> Over seventy percent favored a large community room, a- senior
<br /> citizens center, and group meeting rooms. Over sixty .` percent
<br /> were supportive of an exercise and fitness room, an indoor
<br /> running/walking facility, a gymnasium, and an arts and crafts
<br /> room. An indoor ice skating rink, an indoor swimming pool,
<br /> racquetball courts, a community theatre, a nursery school/day,
<br /> care facility,- and an aerobics and dance room split the citizenry
<br /> and provoked high levels of opposition. Support, then, tended to
<br /> build around indoor meeting facilities, and to a lesser extent,
<br /> passive !'dry" - individual recreational and wellness facilities.
<br /> Residents were also asked to choose their top two priorities
<br /> • from the list. Four facilities were chosen by at least- ten
<br /> percent of the sample: in rank order, a teen center, a senior
<br /> drop-in center, a large community room, and group meeting rooms.
<br /> The teen and senior centers were chosen by over one-quarter of
<br /> the sample as their top priorities. Opposition to any of _the
<br /> facilities was also measured. Four facilities were opposed by
<br /> more than five percent of the residents: an indoor ice skating
<br /> rink, an indoor swimming pool, , an aerobics and dance room, and _
<br /> racquetball courts Only the first facility, however, reach an
<br /> opposition level which is worrisome. Overall, then, Elk- River. `_
<br /> citizens have a clear hierarchy of facilities in mind for their'
<br /> communit y center.
<br /> A community center would draw users from sixty-six s percent
<br /> of the city's households. Fifty-nine percent of the households
<br /> reported at least one member who would visit on a weekly basis or
<br /> more " There is a : clear �. demand in the community for the
<br /> facilities and services that a community center could supply
<br /> On' the subject;: of operrating costs, residents split on-,a pay
<br /> as-you go system y-nine :-.percent oppose -.the =ci.ty x
<br /> subsidization' of operating costs, even if user =`-fees increase,
<br /> forty-four percent favor a city subsidy. Fifty-eight ercent' of..
<br /> the sample;would not be impacted by, a moderate daily fee; twenty
<br /> five percent' felt it depended on the size ' of 'y' the fee, oni,y
<br /> fourteen percent `felt their usage' would significantly::,', decline,
<br /> --0 Forty-one percent 3 of the sample would pay -$100< yearly for a
<br /> family membership. But, ;when, informed about comparable-ti costs? in
<br /> the area, .-' forty-four percent- of the respondents ,. :indicated a
<br /> „ $
<br />
|