Atchison survey: residents say property taxes, streets and city communication are top concerns

City Manager Mark Westoff told the Atchison City Commission on May 2025 that a statistically significant community survey of 463 households shows growing resident concern about property taxes, local infrastructure and city communications.

The survey, conducted for the city in late 2024 and summarized by Westoff, covered neighborhood-level responses and compared results to the prior surveys in 2018 and 2021. Westoff said the survey met the project's goal of 400 responses and that the results have a roughly 95% confidence level with a margin of error of about ±4.5 percentage points.

Westoff said property-tax concern rose sharply to 67% of respondents in 2025, up from roughly 50% in 2018 and 2021. He reviewed how property-tax bills are calculated in Kansas, saying appraisal values are set by the county appraiser, assessment rates are set by the Kansas Legislature and the local mill levy is set by local taxing entities. Westoff provided the assessment rates used in the survey summary: 11.5% for residential property and 25% for commercial and industrial. He also reported the city collected about $3,600,000 in property taxes in 2022 and $4,100,000 in 2025, a four‑year average annual increase of about 2.8%.

The report grouped resident priorities and satisfaction. Streets, sidewalks and bridges and the quality of utility services were the highest-priority areas where residents were least satisfied. Westoff said the condition of alleys and sidewalks was broadly rated as poor across neighborhoods and that street maintenance concerns rose substantially compared with earlier surveys. He noted that brick-street repairs cost about 10 times more than typical pavement repairs.

City communications also declined in resident satisfaction. Westoff cited increases in negative responses on transparency (from 24% to 38% negative), staff availability (19% to 26% negative) and whether leaders listen (27% to 38% negative). The survey showed the city website and the city's Facebook page are the most-used channels for city news.

Code enforcement and neighborhood aesthetics were notable findings. When asked whether the city is too strict or too lenient on code enforcement, 36% said too lenient and 60% said "I don't know." A separate question found 72% of respondents think the city should play an active role in acquiring vacant or dilapidated properties to advance redevelopment efforts; Westoff said the city will continue using its land‑bank tools.

Westoff outlined initial staff responses tied to the findings: increasing Facebook and website content, pursuing accessibility updates to the website, expanding press communications, launching a "Beautiful Atchison" cleanup initiative this summer (including expanded special trash pickups and a volunteer cleanup program), and reviewing code‑enforcement procedures with municipal court. He said some immediate steps can be taken within the current budget but that larger changes—especially street repairs—will be addressed during the commission's summer budgeting process.

Westoff emphasized the survey will be used to guide the budget workshop and future CIP prioritization. "We will continue to do everything we can to keep property taxes as low as possible in 2026 budget year," he said, and encouraged residents to review the full report and maps posted on the city's website.

Why it matters: the survey will shape the commission's budget conversations this summer and helped pinpoint specific neighborhoods with concentrated dissatisfaction on infrastructure and code enforcement. The data also identifies areas where grants or program changes could be targeted.

Context and next steps: Westoff said staff will present the survey findings during budget workshops and that the city will pursue grants and other funding sources for large infrastructure work. He noted the property‑tax discussion reflects limits of local control: appraisal is set by the county appraiser, assessment rate by the state and mill levies by multiple local taxing entities.