Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public‑safety survey shows mixed initial support for bond and sales tax; staff to return with options
Summary
A 400-sample live-caller survey commissioned by the city found cost of living and housing topped resident concerns, while municipal public-safety services rated positively. A $40M bond tested near parity and a proposed public‑safety sales tax gained support after explanation; staff will return May 26 with refined options for ballot consideration.
City consultants presented results of a 400‑respondent live-caller public-safety survey May 5 and discussed how messaging and proposal design could affect voter support for a bond or sales tax.
Paul Bence of High Ground Public Affairs said respondents ranked cost of living (40.5%) and housing (23.8%) as top issues; public safety was lower as a spontaneous top issue but municipal police and fire/medical services received generally positive ratings (police 3.69/5; fire/medical 3.88/5). Bence explained that voters who are satisfied with current services may not perceive a funding gap until shown specific programmatic needs.
The firm tested a $40 million general-obligation bond (ballot language describing capital items such as wildland firefighting equipment, emergency medical equipment and dispatch upgrades). The bond began near parity in pre‑testing (about 46% yes) and moved slightly upward after program descriptions (about 49% yes, within margin of error). A public‑safety sales-tax measure began with lower baseline support (≈33% yes) but rose to slightly above 50% in a post‑test after respondents heard staffing and program details; Bence said clear, specific messaging about staffing, response times and publicly reported spending would be essential to increase viability.
Council and public comments emphasized trade-offs (household cost concerns, potential regressivity of sales tax, and competing budget priorities) and the need to show how proposals avoid worsening housing affordability. City staff said they will return May 26 with a deeper analysis, recommended package options (quarter‑cent vs. half‑cent scenarios), and proposed phasing of capital and staffing investments. Public‑safety speakers (police and fire representatives, including a public-safety dispatcher) described overtime and staffing strains and urged council to consider a ballot package that includes both capital upgrades and staffing.
