HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977
f
1
P
4 7
r
i
r
CITIZEN EVALUATIONS OF CITY SERVICES
w
AND PROBLEMS IN DENTON, TEXAS:
FINAL REPORT
'r
l'E
By
James J. Glass
I•! Director, Applied Policy Research Program
Russell N. Smith
Department of Political Science
C. Neal Tate
Department of Political Science
John R. Todd
Department of Political Science
Jerry L. Yeric
Department of Political Science
j_j i
Institute of Applied Sciences
North Texas State University
Denton, Texas r
February, 1977
E
Lj
t
RI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ii
LIST OF FIGURES iy
PREFACE
THE CITY OF DENTON SURVEY: PURPOSE AND METHODS I
C. Neal Tate
CITIZEN EVALUATION OF CITY SERVICES 18
John R. Todd
NEIGHBORHOOD PROBLEMS IN DENTON 40 i
James J. Glass f
EMERGENCY SERVICES IN DENTON 66
Russell W. Smith
60
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN DENTON
Jerry L. Yeria
CONCLUSIONS 16
_j APPENDICES
i
V
I '
i
I
r
r
~ LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table
14
I Social and
Denton, TEconomic exas: 1976 Composition nSuof the rvey andp19701on
of
Census
15
s of
2 Add iin Texas: 14 6 Denton
the Population of Denton,
Survey
3 Satisfaction with City Services 19
r 22
4 Averaye Service Ratings by Race
24
5 Average Service Ratings by Sex
6 Expenditures for City Services 25
7 Percent Favoring Greater Expenditures for Services 27
poll 8 Percent Favoring Greater Expenditures for Services 28
by Sex
g Percent Favoring Greater Expenditures for Services 30
by Age
i
`-10 Percent Favoring Greater Expenditures for Services 31
by Race
11 Taxes and City Services 33
1w 12 Percent Wilting to Pay Nigh^.r Taxes for Services by 34
Owner/Renter Status
13 Age by Homeowner/Renter Sta.us 35
14 Percent Willing to Pay Higher Taxes for Services by 37
Age
,
l5 Hear, Rating of Service Importance 38
16 Percentage of Respondents Citing Neighborhood Problems 41
~
17 Problems with Drinking Water 42
ii
60
r
Table page
Oft
18 Problems with Stray Animals by Age 43
~o
19 Percent Citing Various Types of Pests as a Problem 45
20 Type of Noise Problem 46
21 Percentage Citing Consumer Problem by Age 47
22 Percentage Citing Neighborhood Nuisances as Problems 48
23 Number of Times Electrical Service was Interrupted 49
.a
24 Number of Times Telephone Service was Interrupted 50
25 Number of Times Gas Service was interrupted 50
26 Percentage Having Library Cards by Income 51
27 Frequency of Library Use During Past Year 51
28 Frequency of Recreational Facil-ty Use During Past 52
Year
29 Ratings of Attributes of Life in Denton 52
30 Citizen Participation in Denton 61
31 Community Problems: Frequency of Discussion 62
32 Voice in Government 64
64
V
k'
1
/H
f '
i
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure page
1 Average Ratings for City Services 21
2 Citizen Participation: Influence of Age on 67
Perception and Role
l
3 Citizen Participation: Influence of Education 69
on Perception and Role
4 Citizen Participation: Influence of Income on 72
Perception and Role
5 Citizen Participation: Influence of Length of 73
Residence on Perception and Role
n _
4
4
j
-i
w
L j
j
I;
~ l
.
r
k.
4
f
PREFACE
During the spriitig of 1976, five North Texas State University
political scientists, interested in urban government and admlrtis-
tration, planned and conducted the first comprehensive survey
r designed to profile the attitudes of the citizens of Denton toward
their city, its government, and the services it provides. Carefully-
trained interviewers drawn from graduate and advanced undergraduate
classes in political science and public administration conducted
personal interviews with a representative sample of 299 residents of
1 Denton during the period from March 7 to March 120 1976, The inter-
viewers probed the citizens' attitudes toward the provision of basic
services by the city, their perceptions of the problems in their
neighborhoods and the community, and their feelings about the city
i~
of Denton as a place to live and work.
This report contains the results of that survey. The report is
primarily descriptive and includes sections on survey methodology,
t; citizen evaluation of city services, neighborhood problems, emergency
i` r• services, and citizen participation. Being descriptive, the report
contains no policy recommendations. The authors do hope the informa-
tion will be of some use to city policy makers. Information such as
this has not been available before rnd may allow citizen attitudes
p'f
ki and evaluations to be used as input into certain decisions the city
r ~
must make.
rK
I
i
{
Fk
(
7
Each of the principal investigators took resportisibility for
various aspects of the survey process and for writing a section of
the report. Special mention must be made of Victor G. Nielsen, who
} was involved in the survey process but, owing to other commitments,
P was unable to participate in the writing of the report. Additionally,
i4 the authors wish to thank William M. Carder who, as student
coordinator, was deeply involved in all aspects of the survey from
4
sample design to data analysis, and Sandy Thompson who assumed
most of the secretarial responsibilities associated with the project.
f i l
IF Responsibility for the administration of the project and for the
content of this report rests with the authors. The city of Denton
P ~
did not request the survey; however, city officials and administrators
f
! were aware of the project and gave the survey team complete cooperation
r and provided some support services. Project support, including final
n typing and publication costs, was also provided by the Institute of
i
Applied Sciences of ;forth Texas State University.
i
r ~
kit
it
N vi i
owl
THE CITY OF DENTON SURVEY: PURPOSE AND METHODS
C. Neal Tate
Four basic objectives underlay the conception and execution of
the 1976 Denton Survey:
(1) to measure with some accuracy the attitudes of the citizens
of Denton toward the operation of and services provided by their city.
'o
government;
(2) to gather information which would be representative of a
r
cross section of the resident adult population of the city of Denton,
(3) to gather lnformationwhich would be directly canparabie to_
w the citizens' attitudes information yieldedbyr the City Profile Surveys
conducted from 1974 to 1976 by the city of Dallas; and
(4) to provide high-quality training in survey research method_s_
i for graduate students to public administration and advanced under-
graduates in public opinion and research methods courses in political
science.
III
I The first two objectives emerged from consideration of a problem
which is of great theoretical significance for students of democracy
r~ and of substantial practical significance for local government officials
--how to obtain citizen feedback which 1s useful in evaluating the per-
formance of government and in planning resource allocation for the
j future. Local governments have traditionally used a variety of Informa-
tional devices in an effort to keep in touch with their communities. {
t~ ~
-
r
~ 2
E
However, the principal defect of such traditional devices as letters
M
and citizen contacts, mass communications media, public hearings, and
neighborhood meetings has been their lack of representativeness; they
4
invariably reflect the opinions of only the most involved and activist
citizens and frequently fall to provide any insight into the opinions
of the community as a whole.
In recent years the unrepresentativeness of traditional citizen
feedback devices has led to their supplementation by a nontraditional
l
but highly representative device, the citizen survey. By 1976, such
(7
surveys had become commonplace in a number of local ,Jurisdictions.
n
Since no previous comprehensive citizen survey had been conducted
in Denton, there was no past experience to guide the design of the 1976
r survey. The decision was made, therefore, to cast the initial survey
net widely by;
(1) selecting a sample which would produce a description of the
makeup of the population of the city, as well as the attitudes of all
r
its citizens;
i '
(2) using the most sensitive and reliable method of questionnaire
,.i administration, the personal interview; and
(3) constructing a questionnaire which covered all areas of the
operation and services of the city government, as well as citizen
f± attitudes toward the community as a whole.
b ~ 11
i
r
i
j'
J
i PA 3
N
Sample Design
M The desire to be able to describe with reasonable accuracy the
p makeup of the population of the city led to the selection of a sample
design appropriate for exploring essentially "unknown" populations,
F" the simple,systematic random sample. The sample size of 450 residences
within the city was decided upon by balancing two conflicting con-
; ;
r' siderations--sampling errorl and costs. Further considerations of
convenience and economy led to the decision to divide the 450 sampled
j residences into clusters of three adjacent dwellings. The sampling
9
rF task was to find a way to select randomly 150 clusters of three rest-
1 " dences in each of which one randomly selected adult would be interviewed.
In order to draw the sample of 150 three-residence clusters, it was
r. necessary to have a complete enumeration of all the residences within
the city. Fortunately, community development officers of the city of
Oenton had recently completed a census of residences b
y geographic areas
within the city. The summary report of the census indicated the number
of dwellings in each of sixty-four areas defined by the coordinates of
a standard aerial photo map of the city. To facilitate sample selection,
{
1 Sampling error is the margin of possible error which must be taken
into account in evaluating any tabulation of the answers to survey
questions. Our goat was to have a sampling error of no more than plus
or minus 5% on a question which our survey lndicated divided the citizens
50-50. In other words, if our survey showed 50% of the citizens having
a certain attitude or am;wering a question a certain way, we wanted to
be reasonably sure that the true percentage in the whole population of
citizens lay within the 45% Yo-195% range. ("Reasonably sure" means that
~j the odds against the percentage lying outside the z 5% range are 19 to Is
i.e., there are 95 chances out of 100 that the true population percentage
lies within the range defined by the sampling error.
M
a+rawal
,
I 4
the residences within the city limits were allocated identification
w
numbers, with the first residence in the first-listed area being
assigned number "l," the last residence in the last-listed area being
i
assigned a number equal to the total number of residences in the city
(15,947), and all in-between residences being numbered sequentially. i
ie To select the proper clusters of housing units,it was first
necessary to determine the appropriate "sampling interval" which would
yield 150 clusters if residences; that interval was 106.2 Then,
beginning with a randomly selected starter number (less than or equal
M
to the sampling interval ),which represented the middle dwelling in the
first cluster, every 106th group of three adjacent residences was
selected for the sample, working down the list of sequential identifi-
cation numbers allocated to the geographic areas in the housing census
report. While this process could have been done by hand, a computer
1011 program was written to accomplish this task more accurately and effi-
ciently.
( Having secured a list of the identification numbers of the 450
dwellings included in the sample, the next task was to locate those
residences. This was a simple, albeit tedious, process, since the
Is computer printout identified where each cluster was located relative
f
` to the beginning or end (whichever was closer) of the geographic area
+t
in which the cluster was to be found. With the northwest corner defined
t1
Ji
1 The sampling interval is computed by simply dividing the total number
h of housing units by the number of clusters desired in the sample.,
1 15,947/160 106.31, rounded to 106.
c
5 i
M
as the beginning and the southeast corner defined as the end of each
area, it was only necessary to count the specified numlr:r of dwellings
i Oft
i
from the beginning (or backward from the end) of the area to locate a
cluster on the aerial photo map.
f
Once the sampled housing units had been located on the map, tha
addresses of the units were ascertained by field inspection. Determina-
tion of the addresses was necessary in order to send a preliminary
letter to the household members informing them that one of them would
be selected as a respondent to the survey, giving details about the
survey, and soliciting their cooperation.
t
With the selection and ascertainment of the addresses of the
sampled residences, one last step remained in the sample selection
f t process--selection of the specific adult to be interviewed in each i
i
sampled household. If one is to secure a reliable sample of the t
` citizens, rather than the dwellings, of a community, this cannot be f
left to chance or to the discretion of the interviewer. Fortunately,
sampling statisticians have developed a variety of "selection keys" I
based on the sexual and age compositions of households which, when used
correctly, insure that a random sample of adults can be secured from
a random sample of residences. Such a set of sampling keys was used
to guide the interviewers in selecting the proper respondent in each
sampled household. (An example of one of the keys is attached to the
1
E interview schedule in Appendix C.)
I
f'!
iw
bd
~l
f
P
i
w 6
t
lnterviewinn
sa
r, The third and fourth objectives of the 1976 Denton Survey,
os maintaining comparability with the 1974-76 Dallas City Profile Surveys
and providing high quality training in survey research methods, were
among the factors which led to the selection of the personal interview
as the method of administration of the survey questionnaire. Other
factors involved were the principal advantages of personal
interview- based surveys over other forms of surveys, such as the telephone inter-
view and mail survey. These advantages include:
I M
(1) (usually) higher rates of completion of the questionnaire;
E (2) the ability to administer quite length
' y questionnaires;
(3) the ability to ask complicated questions with relatively
7 greater reliability,
(4) the ability to record some potentially sensitive information
(e.g., race, condition of housing, etc.) by observation; and
(5) the availability of the interviewer to alert the survey
investigator to problems of the interview or to nuances of the
responses to particular questions.
Ordinarily, the principal disadvantage of the personal interview
method is its cost; interviewers must be paid for their time and
expenses. Hiring a force of interviewers would not have been possible
{ financiaily, given the extremely limited budget available for the
{ initial Denton City Profile Survey. But since educational as well as
Informational objectives were sought, the cost of hiring professional
J
~T
J
7
re
interviewers was avoided by using students as interviewers. Graduate
w
students enrolled in public administration courses in quantitative
r. methods, social planning, and policy analysis and undergraduate
students enrolled in public opinion and research methods courses were
i
required to conduct a number of interviews (usually three per course)
as a part of their course work.
H
Since the assumption could not be made that the students were
"natural" and H ghly responsible interviewers, several steps were taken
to insure that the quality of the student-conducted interviews was as
high as possible. Well before the dates set for the interviewing,
students were given copies of the tentative questionnaire so they might
begin familiarizing themselves with it. Then each student was required
i
to attend a special four-hour interviewer training session presided
over by the five faculty investigators associated with the survey.
During these training sessions, rules for the.conduct of the interviews
p. were discussed, a list of "helpful hints" for interviewing was presented,
i' and a "demonstration interview" was conducted by two of the investigators.
iS After the interviewer training sessions, each student was required
^1 to conduct one or more practice interviews,using the tentative ques-
tionnaire. The results of these practice interviews were discussed in
l ' classes in an effort to secure useful feedback about the problems and
ambiguities present in the tentative questionnaire. The completed
~.a practice interviews were evaluated by the investigators as a pretest of
the questionnaire and interviewing process. Then a final questionnaire
was prepared,incorporating changes which the pretest showed to be desirable.
w..
F ~
k All interviews were to be conducted during the week of March 6-12,
1976. Prior to the beginning of the interviewing, a preliminary letter
(See Appendix A), was mailed to each sampled residence, in an effort to
inform citizens of the intentions of the survey and to assure them it
was not a front for some selling campaign. This letter appeared to
} increase respondents' acceptance of the interviewers when they came to
call. In addition, both the Denton Record-Chronicle and the North_ Texas
F4
1.
Daily_ carried news stories informing citizens about the forthcoming
~
' survey (See Appendix B).
When the interviewing period began, interviewers were required to
pick up from a central survey headquarters packets containing their
i
~ assigned questionnaires as well as copies of the preliminary letter,
the news reports, and an official name tag to help establish their
r credentials. The interviewers were given explicit instructions as to
the hours when they could and could not conduct interviews. The head-
quarters were always manned by a supervisor during eligible hours so 1
that questions by either interviewers or respondents could be answered
by phone or in person.
In seeking to complete the interviews, interviewers were required
r to call back at least three times at different hours, before reporting
an assigned interview as a noncompletion. (Many interviewers called
1r
back four or more times; some made as maps as ten callbacks before
giving upl) Only if a respondent firmly and explicitly refused to be
interviewed was the interviewer released from this callback requirement.
r'f
In order to maintain the integrity of the sample, noncanpleted inter- `
views were not replaced. y
v+
I
wf
MAI
Mt 9
Interviewers were sent to 450 sampled residences to conduct
N interviews. They secured 299 completed interviews. This number, 66%
i
the total, produced a completion rate somewhat lower than the hoped-
of for SO to 90%. There seem to be several reasons for this lower-than-
M desired completion rate. In the first place, the number of unoccupied
and destroyed residences was considerably greater than anticipated,
^ apparently reflecting -the high mobility of the population of Denton
and the extensive demolition activity undertaken by North Texas State
University in residential areas surrounding its campus during the months
prior to the survey.
r
Second, due to limited supervisory staff and interviewer time,
_ the interviewing period was set at only seven days, a considerably
shorter period than is the norm for similar community surveys. Some
respondents who could not be contacted during the single week of Inter-
viewing would undoubtedly have been reached in a more extended period
of time.
` Finally, it appears that the student interviewers should have been
required to make more than three, probably at least five, callbacks.
Even a conscientious interviewer could easily have missed a respondent
on three calls made during a two- or three-day interviewing period.
1
r• Needless to say, not all interviewers were perfectly conscientious,
despite the efforts of careful training and supervision.
Even though the ne,mber of completed interviews was lower than
j hoped, there is no reason to suspect that the 299 interviews obtained
YJ
r
WT
le 10
1
do not constitute a reliable sample of the adult residents of the city
W of Denton. An analysis of the questionnaires returned marked "Not
at Home" or "Refused" showed no patterns which would have indicated
W
j: that the representativeness of the sample had been harmed. Furthermore,
W the demographic composition of the sample seemed normal. It matched
relevant census figures for the city quite closely, as will be illus-
trated later in this chapter.
quest Lonna ire
ii The questionnaire taken into the community by the interviewers
was adopted from the first City Profile Survey conducted for the city
of Dallas in 1474. The questions asked in the Denton survey followed
i
as closely as possible the exact wording of and the same sequence as
r. the Dallas survey.questions. Furthermore, the format of the Dallas
questionnaire was closely followed in the layout and typing of its .
r'' Denton counterpart (See Appendix C).
I r. Obviously, patterning the Denton survey questionnaire after the
t' Dallas questionnaire made the difficult task of questionnaire con-
struction much easier. But, aside from ease of construction, two
good reasons supported taking this course of action. first, the Dallas
questionnaire was, in most ways, a good example of an instrument
designed to elicit comprehensive citizen feedback on the whole range of
' services and activities provided by modern cities, It contained
relatively refined versions of many questions which have been of interest
to almost all those involved in citizen surveys. In short, it appeared
I to be a well-designed questionnaire for the purposes involved In the
Denton survey.
~1
11
M
i
The second reason for adopting the Dallas City Profile survey
N questionnaire for use in Denton was the desire to be able to compare
the feelings and attitudes of the citizens of Denton and Dallas. The
,
i' possibility of comparing citizen attitudes in suburban Denton and
w metropolitan Dallas was to the investigators intrinsically interesting,
I~
But beyond this, it was realized that any factual finding, such as
5% of the citizens of Denton believed their city to be a very good
plane to live," takes on much more meaning when it can be placed in a
comparative context. (For example, is this 75% a "high" level of satis-
faction with life in Denton? One might think so. But if ~y comparison,
085% of the citizens of Dallas believed their city to be a very good
r place to live," one might think riot.) Since answers to different
questions cannot, or should not, be compared, it was essential to ask
M
thi same questions in Denton which had been asked in Dallas If the
Denton answers were to have an appropriate comparative context.
It should be noted Vat the Denton survey questionnaire did
include a nurser of questions not included in its Dallas counterpart.
k These additional questions emerged from discussions with the city staff
and from the research interests of the fatuity associated with the survey.
Future Denton surveys need not, indeed, should not, slavishly copy
the questionnaires used in Dallas surveys. New areas of interest
.i
for inquiry in Denton will have been suggested by past surveys.
In addition, the results of past surveys will provide a basis for com-
parison with the data produced by future surveys. Nevertheless, it
-
I
Li ~
i
12
r
seems likely that,as long as Dallas continues its City Profile Surveys,
I much more can be learned by keeping Denton surveys comparable, at
least in part.
Representativeness of Sample
W
Despite the lower-than-desired interview completion ratio, the
N investigators have confidence that the Denton City Profile Survey sample
t` is highly representative of the city's adult population. This repre-
sentativeness is illustrated in Table 1, which compares several social
i~
and economic characteristics of the population as reported in the 1970
r.
census and as tabulated in the survey. The most relevant figures with
which to compare the survey results are those restricted to the "1970
Household Residents Population." Like the survey, these figures exclude
Dentonites living in "group quarters," i.e., dormitories and institutions.
ii
The "group quarters" population of Denton is, of course, overwhelmingly
r.
composed of the dormitory-dwelling students of Texas Woman's University
and North Texas State University. It is conventional to exclude the
iE
"group quarters" population from community surveys. This convention was
complied with in the Denton Survey because it was felt the majority of
Dentonites living in group quarters were probably only temporary
residents of the city who consumed relatively few city services, paid
0 few city taxes other than sales taxes, and were relatively unconcerned
with city affairs, except where city affairs meshed with university
rv affairs (as in the NTSU-City street-closings controversy) or affected
~.j
their life styles (as in the local option petition and election for sale
of beer and wine).
,y
i..
Ga E
a.WFWMCV4M+.rrh.au..e.uu.aw,,:u..,.w ama..........._a..-........__._..,...n..,.........,.. .__.._......,.,M,,,,.W,~
13
4
Certainly, the most striking element in Table 1 is the close match
r of the percentages in the first column, representing the survey sample
distributions, and the third column, representing the population from
M
I which the sample was drawn as it existed during the 1970 census period.
Y~ Given the size of the sampling error associated with a sample of 299,
the match between the sample and the population is truly amazing. On
f every one of the five characteristics summarized in Table 1, the sample
f,
succeeds in capturing an accurate cross section of the population.
Furthermore, even where the sample percentages deviate from the popula-
tion percentages by as much as two or three percent, the differences
are in the direction which probably would have been predicted by a
knowledgeable observer of patterns of population growth and change in
Denton from 1970 through 1976. For example, the increase in percentage of
femalesfrom just under to dust over a majority from 1970 to 1976 could
well reflect changes in the residency requirements for older females
at Texas Woman's University, allowing more of them to live in apartments
in the community instead of in university residence halls. (Of course,
~.a
a difference this small could also represent nothing more than sampling
error.)
I
The picture of the Denton population painted by the figures in
i Table 1 is supplemented by the additional tabulations in Table 2.
Tugether,these figures depict a community which is slightly more female
,y than male and predominantly "Angio" in population, but with a
1 noticeable one-seventh, non-Angio minority. The community's age dis-
tribution shows the influence of the two universities and, possibly,
r
t
tii ~
C
1
14
TABLE 1
r SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC COMPOSITION OF THE POPULATION OF DENION, TEXAS:
1976 DENTON SURVEY AND 1970 CENSUS
Social or City 1970 1970 Household
Economic Profile Total i Residents 2
p Characteristic Survey Population Population
r SEX: Male 48.8% 45.8% 50.7%
R Female 51.2 54.2 49.3
ETHNICITY:
Whites 86.1 85.73 91.4
Blacks 9.8 8.8 7.7
1S Mexican-Americans 1.4 4.44 NA5
Others 2.8 1.0 1.0
' AGE: 18-19 3.4 15.3 18-19 611
c 't 20-24 22.7 29.7 20-24 20.6
25-29 25-34 15'1 23.6% 4'9 25-34 21.2
i 30-34 8.5 6.5
35-39 35-44 7'5 14.3 5'7 35-44 14.9
40-44 6.5 5.3
45-49 45-54 5'2 10.2 5'4 45-54 14.1
50-54 5.0 4.9
i 55-59 6.2 4.6
r. 60.64 55-64 5.4 11.6 3.7 55-64 11.3
6 5 - y 65-74 55 5 3 4
.0 10.5 2.3 65-74 7.6
70-74 ~
75-79 2.0 l.7
'i 80 8 over 75 6 over 1.6 3.6 l 9 J5 14 over 4.3
HOME OWNERSHIP:
Owners 52.9 NA 51.3
Renters 47.1 NA 48.7
MEAN NUMBER OF
f ' PERSONS PER 2.6 3.4 2.8
' HOUSEHOLD
lIncludes 6,929 persons living in "group quarters," such as dormitories
1 or institutions. Such residences were excluded from the Denton survey
sample.
2Excludes 6,929 persons living in 11group quarterso" such as dormitories
or institutions. This is the population from which the Denton survey
sample was drawn.
3This percentage has been arrived at by subtracting the 4.4% of the popu-
lation listed as belonging to the "Persons of Spanish Surname or Heritage"
group.
I 4This is the census percentage for "Persons of Spanish Surname or Heritage."
This is a more Inclusive group than the "Mexican-American" group in the
Denton City Profile Survey.
5NA means "Not Ascertainablerl from published data. s
. j~pp6Ftlil.N.FYrltN~?:ff1NY.•.wM++n-.'n~•wro~nA.ea...,.....-..n-.........r..,..r..W.s..,..w.,.,.,~-..: d..,.........,.....,.... ...........r.H..r.wo-st
P
i
KM
15
-
TABLE 2
ADDITIONAL SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE POPULATION OF DENTON, TEXAS:
1976 DENTON SURVEY
e
FAMILY INCOME EMPLOYMENT STATUS YEARS OF SCHOOLING j
i Less than $3,000 13.2% Working Full Time 44.95 Less than 7 4.1%
i
$3,000-4,999 8.5 Working Parc Time 12.7 7-9 8.2 r
}
$5,000-61999 14.0 Unemployed 2.1 10-11 6.2 1
$7,000-99999 12.5 Retired 8.6 12 16.4
$10,000-141999 18.0 In School 13.0 13-15 29.0
$15,000-19,000 13.6 Keeping House 17.5 16 16.4
j $209000-24,999 7.7 Other 1.4 More than 16 19.5
1 ~
$25,000 or more 12.5
NUMBER OF PERSONS NUMBER OF CARS DOES RESIDENCE
I LIVING IN RESIDENCE IN FAMILY HAVE TELEPHONE?
i
1 21.5 0 8.2 Yes 88.2
2 41.6 1 41.6 No 11.8
3 12.3 2 34.8
4 12.3 3 11.6 i j
5 8.5 4 or more 3.8
i
6 or more 3.1
1 r
j
l
u~
i;,
I
WWI
I'
' 16
i of the town as a place of residence for younger workers; 40% of the
adult population is under 30 years of age. But there is also an over-
65 population amounting to one-seventh of the total.
p
Table 1 shows Denton to be a commmunity with slightly more home-
owners than renters, with an average of dust over two-and-one-half
persons per residence. Table 2 shows the community to have some
p
relatively poor and some relatively affluent population segments,
although the average Denton family had a definitely "middle class"
income of between $10-15,000 in 1415. One should remember that these
are self-reported income figures, undoubtedly subject to some error.
But the fact that one respondent in eight reported a family incume
over $25,000, while a similar proportion reported incomes under $3,000,
j suggests that Denton is characterized by some rather extreme differences
in wealth.
The model Denton family had only one car. However, slightly over
half the respondents reported living in families owning two or more cars.
The survey also reveals that seven of eight Denton residents have
telephones.
The survey showed 45% of the adult population to be employed full-
time with another 18% "Keeping House," another type of full-time employ-
ment, during the week of the survey. One Dentonite in eight vias working
part-time and an equal proportion was "in school." One resident in
twelve was retired. The overall strength of the area economy was
reflected ii the proportion of the residents reporting themselves unem-
ployed--only 2.1 percent.
4
s k `
t. wtY nn. Y.n.rn f°. n.M Ua ..P w. n.. r. v n
Ii
t~
ea.~
• au~
17
M
A final influence of penton's universities can be seen in the
~
of schooling
years
The number of
distribution of years of schoollng
which characterized the largest numbers of Dentonites was 12-16--
indicating high school and college graduates. However, one Denton
r resident in three reported at least some college (13-15 years of school-
} ing), while a substantial one in five reported one or more years of
p schooling beyond college graduation. Thus, fully 65% of the population
had completed at least one year of college. (This figure, o course,
includes currently enrolled college students maintaining community #
N' residences; so, it undoubtedly understates the proportion of college
graduates ariong those who have completed all their schooling.)
i
~ I~ ~ Sumnar
The intent of this first chapter is to document the methods
employed in the 1976 Denton Survey. The accuracy and representativeness i
1
of the survey, as well as the survey research techniques employed, have
meaning for all those using the results presented in this report. From
I
f a research perspective, a recounting of the methods employed will allow
individuals to use the data more precisely, particularly if comparisons
with other data sets are involved. For city officials, this documenta• (
1 tion should create a greater confidence in the results, which might
lead to their application in decision situations. This is not a definitive
r `
study of citizen attitudes and evaluations, but the information on the
1 spectrum of city services and problems provided should prove useful to
both researchers and city officials.
fi~
i
PO lg
f'
i
w CITIZEN EVALUAT104 OF CITY SERVICES
John R. Todd
In this section of the survey, the attempt was made to find out
w ,
how citizens of Denton evaluated a variety of public services, and to
find out what changes they would like to see made in the services
being provided by the :.Ay. Four questions were used to study these
attitudes. The first asked citizens to use a rating scale to evaluate
a list of services. The second asked on which of the listed services
Ih citizens would like to see the city spend more, less, or the same.
The third asked citizens which services they would be willing to pay
more taxes to support. The fourth required citizens to use the rating
scale to indicate the importance of each service to them, This series
( of questions should provide some insight into the citizens' view of
public services in Denton.
j
Service Ratings
To begin the probe into citizen attitudes about public services,
C
each respondent was asked to evaluate a list of services on a rating
scale from +3 (most favorable) to -3 (least favorable). For eich
service, the responses indicate whether the citizen was satisfied gave
` a positive rating) or unsatisfied (gave a negative rating) and the degree
of satisfaction or dissatisfaction (indicated by actual numerical place-
ment). Table 3 shows the percent who were satisfied or dissatisfied with
each service. Only two service areas failed to elicit favorable
I
w
,
19
TABLE 3
E;
SATISFACTION WITH CITY SERVICES
ax
Percenta Percentb
Satisfied Dissatisfied
Fire Protection 95 5
p
Police Protection 83 17
Neighborhood Parks and 67 33
Playgrounds
Recreation Centers, Swimming
Pools, Lakes and Other 60 40
Recreational Facilities
Garbage collection 89 11
Collection of Branches, 83 17
^ Leaves,and Large Items
Sidewalks 41 59
Street Cleaning 69 31
Street Maintenance and Repair 44 56
Beautification with Trees,
Flowers, Shrubs on Public 73 27
re Land
{ 88
Library Services 12
{ Traffic Signs and Signals in BO 20
Your Neighborhood
aincludes all who gave +3, +2, or +1 ratings
bIncludes all who gave -3, -2, or -1 rating,
,l
M
20
1A
responses from a majority of the citizenry: pruvision of sidewalks
and street maintenance and repair. For all other services, a rather
sizeable majority of the citizenry seems satisfied with the current
level of the service.
r
The degree of citizen satisfaction with each service is also
important. In Figure 1 each service is placed on the rating scale
according to the average rating given it by the citizenry, giving
a ranking of the services from most to least satisfactory. Fire
protection, garbage collection, and library services appear to be the
top three services, while street maintenance and sidewalks make rather
poor showings in the ratings.
In addition to the evaluation of services by the population as a
whole, there was interest in identifying subgroups of the population I
that might differ in their evaluation of the services. After examining
several classification, two were found which produced consistent
variations in service ratings: sex and race. Table 4, which shows the
S
average rating of each service by Whites and Blacks,' reveals
that Blacks consistently gave lower ratings to city services than did
r^ Whites. In several cases the differences are rather extreme. While
i
the average evaluation of police protection for Whites was 1.57, the
average evaluation arong Blacks was -.61. Parks and playgrounds and
recreation facil'cies show similarly large discrepancies between white
and Black evaldations. While a part of the discrepancy may be explained
by perceptu',1 differences, it seems quite likely that the rating differ-
ences arse out of real differences in services received from the city.
I
1 l..a
'Yirr f '
w.1 ~
21
+3
+2 Fire Protection
Garbage Collection
Library Services
Police Protection, Leaf Branch Collection
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals
+1 {
Beautification of Public Lands
Parks and Playgrounds, Street Cleaning j
,
i Recreation Facilities ;
i q !
U !
Street Maintenance I ,
Sidewalks
.1
EY
J !
Figure 1.
Average Ratings for City Services t
.3
0
22
TABLE 4
AVERAGE SERVICE RATINGS BY RACE
White Black
Fire Protection 1.84 1.35
Police Protection 1.57 -.67
F
Parks and Playgrounds 68 -.07 i
Recreation Facilities .54 -.03
Garbage Collection 1.77 1.82
Leaf/Branch Collection 1,43 1.61
E Sidewalks -.56 -.67
Street Cleaning .59 .54
Street Maintenance
-.39 -.11
Beautification of Public Lands ,88 .48
Library Services 1.87 .69
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 1.19 I
1.10 ~
{
rq
k1
i
I
RNiM~
23
The other breakdown of the population which revealed fairly con-
I
r sistent differences in service ratings was by sex. Table 5 shows that
i
w average evaluations by females ran higher than those by males for each
i of the services. The differences are large for only a few services,
N such as parks and playgrounds, recreation facilities, and library ser-
vices. It is interesting that those services which would be important
for females in child rearing roles are the ones where there is the most
marked difference between males and females. The fact that the females,
r^
who are the greater consumers of these services, give them higher evalua-
tions than do the males suggests these services are being targeted
F
correctly to the primary consumers. i
Allocating Resources for City Services
In addition to asking respondents to rate city services, they were i
also asked about changes they might wish to make in the allocation of
financial resources among the various services. Therefore, respondents
were asked to indicate whether they would like to have the city spend
more, less, or the same amount for provision of each service. Table b
i
r shows the results of that question. For only four services was there a i
ll majority favoring an increase in expenditure. The areas singled out for
C increases were parks and playgrounds, recreation facilities, sidewalks,
rr and street maintenance. A glance back at Figure l indicates that these
1± were the four lowest-rated services. Thus, there is some rationale in
the responses. Those areas which received the poorest evaluations are
also the ones which a majority of the respondents singled out for
additional financial resources.
,r
t
e
C 24
r
TABLE 5
AVERAGE SERVICE RATINGS BY SEX
-
Male Female
S`
Fire Protection 1.16 1.85
w 1.23 1.44
` Police Protection
Parks and Playgrounds .20 1'02
+t Recreation Facilities .04 .77
1.68 1.85
I; i• ps Garbage Collection
1 r4
Leaf/Branch Collection 1.38 1.45
Sidewalks -.81 -.26
Street Cleaning •34 '89
Street Maintenance -.18 -.07
Beautification of Public Lands 74 .95
i
Library Services 1.37 2.07
1
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 1.08 .31
I
ti
s 1, ,
ly i
t
{
i
i 25
r~
TABLE 6
EXPENDITURES FOR CITY SERVICES
r• Feel City Should:
Spend Spend Spend Spend More
More Less Same Rankinga
Fire Protection 29% 1% 70% 7
M
Police Protection 37 5 58 6
Neighborhood Parks and
Playgrounds 59 4 37 2
Recreation Centers, S-rimming
Pools, Lakes and Ot;lr
Recreation Facilities 53 3 44 4
Garbage Collection 17 2 81 11
Collection of Branches,
Leaves,and Large ]terns 16 4 81 12
Sidewalks 56 4 40 3
Street Cleaning 26 7 67 10
f' Street Maintenance and Repair 60 3 37 1
Beautification with Trees,
Flowers, Shrubs on Public
3 land 40 6 54 5
.w Library Services 27 2 71 8 tie
Traffic Signs and Signals in
Your Neighbo-hood 27 7 66 8 tie d
aThis is the ranking of the services according to the percentage
~A willing to spend more on each.
s
t j~
26
~ M
Again, subgroups of the population were examined to see if there
w were classifications which would reveal significant variations in
I
response patterns. Four breakdowns produced interesting patterns:
w
E' homeowner/renter status, sex, age, and race. Table 7 shows the owner-
renter differences. Renters are consistently more likely to favor
increased expenditure than are homeowners. This pattern probably occurs
because city taxes are not as obvious to renters as to homewoners.
Thus, renters teed to have the misconception that they can get a free
w►
ride on city expenditures.
Sex differences appear in response to the resource allocation
question, Just as they did for the service evaluation question. Table
i 8 shows that with few exceptions a smaller percentage of females than
males wished to increase expenditures for any service. The exceptions
{ ti
were in police protection (where a larger proportion of women favored
i ^ increased expenditure) and garbage collection (where the proportions
favoring increased expenditure were about equal for men and women).
There is, again, a reassuring consistency between this table and the
Ow examination of service evaluations by sex (Table 5). Women evaluated
services more hiyhly than mens and they were less likely to see a need
t~ for additional expenditures for the services. The reversal which occurs
a'
a concerning police protection may be the result of the greater vulnera-
It bility of women to physical assults, They may fear crime more, thus
making increased expenditure for police protection desirable. As will
be shown in the section on "Neighborhood Problems in Denton," females {
also felt less safe on the streets than did males.
M I
t1
r
,yon=,,.~.~~..., s. __._w,....
1
27
e
I"
TABLE 7
P
PERCENT FAVORING GREATER EXPENDITURE FOR
p SERVICES BY OWNER/RENTER STATUS
w Feel city should spend more for: Owners r Renters
{a
Fire Protection 23 37
w
°f Police Protection 33 42
Parks and Playground 49 70
j ` Recreation Centers 40 67
6 Garbage Collection 13 22
I „ Leaf/Branch Pickup 11 22
4
I Sidewalks 46 67
Street Cleaning 19 33
Street Maintenance 50 71
Beautification of Public Lands 32 49
36
Library Services 20 ,
n
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 20 34
n
I
{
s r
I
r~
R.
t
M 28
w
M
TABLE 8
PERCENT FAVORING GREATER EXPENDITURE
~ FOR SERVICES BY SEX
Should spend more for: Male -
Female
Fire Protection 37
22
Police Protection 32
r 42
Parks and Playgrounds 66
52 ,
Recreation Centers 60
46
Garbage Collection 16
18
Leaf/Branch Pickup 17
15
Sidewalks 63
50
Street Cleaning 32
20
Street Maintenance 65
54
Beautification of Public Lands 46
i 35
r Library Services 32 j 22
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 26 28
I I'r
f.J
n
s
U I
k.i
~1si'[~LIaV'MY.+MiWaWM~4Nf1„v...:e .~...s..
1
r
p
29
M f
f r
Attitudes toward allocation of financial resources among services
w
i are broken down by age groupings in Table 9. The table shows that the
r w desire to have the city spend more money on any given service tends
i to decline with increasing age. This may be the result of the supposed
general conservatism associated with advancing years. Or it may be
the result of sensitivity to the burdens of taxation as retirement
ra
r:. years approach. Whatever the cause, it is clear that,for any of the
services, older people were less likely to favor increased expenditure
than young.
w
1 The final classification found to be of interest with regard to
the resource allocation question was race. Table 10 shows that the
percent favoring increased expenditure for any service (except one) was
greater among Blacks than Whites. This is consistent with the previous
findings that Blacks found the services to be less satisfactory than
J ; did whites. Only in the area of expenditure for neighborhood traffic
signs and signals is the pattern reversed, with more Whites than Blacks
11 favoring increased expenditure. The reason for this reversal is not
obvious. One possibility is that traffic patterns are such that White
neighborhoods may be subjected to more through traffic, making traffic I
signs and signals more important. This is only speculatory, however.
Taxes and City Services
The acid test for determining the real desire to have the quality
rr
_i of a service improved is a willingness to pay for the improvement. It
rh is easy enough to say that a service should be improved and more money
should be spent on it; but being asked to pay for the improvement msy
i
y..
I I
i
I
30
r
(ABLE 9
PERCENT FAVORING GREATER EXPENDITURE
FOR SERVICES BY AGE
Should spend more for: 18-25 26-35 36-45 36-60 61+
Fire Protection 35 35 34 22 16
Police Protection 44 39 58 31 12
Parks and Playgrounds 72 77 63 38 27
- Recreation Centers 69 68 62 31 20
Garbage Collection 23 15 24 15 8
Lcaf/Branch Pickup 21 14 16 15 8
Sidewalks 67 65 51 46 41
5teet Cleaning 35 24 26 21 18
Street Maintenance 73 72 58 50 34
Beautification of Public Lands 51 52 35 22 24
i
Library Services 38 30 35 16 12
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 37 32 26 18 12
I -
k~
{
31
M
r
i
W t
TABLE 10
PERCENT FAVORING GREA'rk EXPENDITURE
FOR SERVICES BY RACE
. r
RACE
Should spend more for: White Black
Fire Protection 26 54
Police Protection 35 46
Parks and Playgrounds 57 70
Recreation Centers 50 68
Garbage Collection 15 25
i Leaf/Branch Pickup 13 33
i,
- Sidewalks 54 69
s
Street Cleaning 24 39
Street Maintenance 57 64
Beautification of Public Lands 38 57 i
_ Library Services 24 42 i
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 27 18
j
i i
1{ ~I
I
f
h
i
s I
Zvi
32
i
11
f
cast a wholly different light on the question. Recognizing this,
N
a question was included which asked the citizens if they would favor
w paying more, less, or the same taxes for each service listed. Table
11 presents these findings. The first obvious fact is
0^ that there is rot a majority favoring a tax increase to support
any of the areas in question. At the same time, it should be noted
that the largest percentages favoring increased taxes do occur for the
four areas which had the lowest average evaluations: parks and play-
grounds, garbage collection, sidewalks, and street maintenance and
repair. Thus, while a majority favored greater expenditures for the +
four lowest ranked services, less than a majority expressed a willing-
ness to pay more taxes to support those services.
I
Some light can be shed on this disappearing majority by looking
at breakdowns similar to those used for other questions. The most
informative in this regard turns out to be the homeowner/renter dis- ,
unction, which Table 12 displays. The clear message in this table
is that homeowners are cansiderably more tax conscious than renters.
While a majority or near majority of renters say that they would be willing
to pay higher taxes to support the four problem areas with low evalua-
tions (parks and playgrounds, recreation centers, sidewalks, street
maintenance and repair), the corresponding percentages for homeowners
are in the one-fifth to one-third range.
As Table 13 indicates, homeowner/renter status and age are related
in a way which may help explain the reluctance of homeowner/renter
~33 N.
t ,r,
e
t
aea:~
ra 33
Iw
TABLE 11
re
TAXES AND CITY SERVICES
Favor Paying:
More Less Same f1ore Taxes
Taxes Taxes Taxes Rankinga
r Fire Protection 23% 6% 71% 7 tie
Police Protection 28 9 63 5
Neighborhood Parks and
Playgrounds 39 it 50 2
Recreation Centers, Swimming
Pools, Lakes,and Other
Recreation Facilities 34 11 55 3 tie
Garbage Collection 8 6 83 12
Collection of Branches,
Leaves,and Large Items 9 11 80 11
Sidewalks 34 10 56 3 tie
Street Cleaning 13 12 75 10
1 r. Street Maintenance and Repair 43 8 49 1
Beautification with Trees,
r Flowers, Shrubs on Public
Land 23 11 66 7 tie
Library Services 25 5 70 6
Traffic Signs and Signals in
~ Your Neighborhood 17 9 74
rw aThis is the ranking of the services according to the percentage
willing to pay more taxes for each.
y
H
E
R
Fa .
4
c
6
I
wK
I M
34
I ~
TABLE 12
rs PERCENT WILLING TO PAY HIGHER TAKES
FOR SERVICES BY OWNER/RENTER STATUS
Would favor paying more taxes for: Owners Renters
Fire Protection 21 25
Police Protection 24 32
Parks and Playgrounds 26 53
Recreation Centers 20 49
I
Garbage Collection 4 13
Leaf/Branch Pickup 7 12
Sidewalks 25 45
Street Cleaning 11 17
Street Maintenance 33 56
Beautification of Public lands 14 33
Library Services 14 39
}
} Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 14 21
by
1
I
I
F, 35
I ~
TABLE 13
AGE BY HOMEOWNER/RENTER STATUS
Age Group Owners Renters ;
9
r~
2
18-25 3% 56% }
t
26-35 21 26
36-45 18 7
46-60 28 5
61 and over 29 6
99%a 100%
(N=156) (N=139)
a Does not sum to 100 because of rounding.
i rz
j
I k rl
I1
k
1LkiW6a Wnswaw:atrarear,+`...,:,,~s..nn.+a.«.-a;. ,o•
q G'
P
j
36
M
differences in taxes. Renters are predominantly young, over half of them
n
being in the 18-25 group and 81% of O em being in the 35-and-under group.
PM Thus, part of the enthusiasm of renters for more spending and taxing for
services may stem from youthful idealism,not tempered by the necessity of
'rt paying the taxman, This conclusion is reinforced by Table 14 which indi-
cates that the percentage favoring more taxes to support each service
M
declines with increasing age.
Importance of Services
The final probe into citizens' feelings about public services
involved an attempt to get the respondents to establish some priorities
among the services. They were asked to rate each of the services in the
list from very important (+3) to not very important (-3). The average
ratings for each service are shown in Table 15. Here it is clear that
the services which are really important to people (e.g., fire protection,
police protection, street maintenance) for the most part are already being
provided at a level which provides satisfaction for a majority of the
citizenry. The one rather significant exception to that is the fourth
ranked service--street maintenance--which only 44% thought was being
j ' provided at a satisfactory level. The other three services which were
given low approval-ratings (parks and playgrounds, recreation facilities,
and sidewalks) are ranked 8th, 4th, and 12th by these importance ratings.
i ,
Thus, it would appear that the one high priority service which the city
i ,
of Denton is failing to provide satisfactorily is well-maintained streets.
The other low-rated services are alsr down-rated in terms of importance,
so, perhaps, the city could be forgiven for neglecting them in a period of
i
r
f
y-ti.L..vM~jy'n.4trb ln.n.r a.~.s . . . ,
I
i
,
I ~
37
P
1
TABLE 14
PERCENT WILLING TO PAY HIGHER TAXES
FOR SERVICES BY AGE
r+ ~ AGE
Favor paying more taxes for: 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61+
Fire Protection 29 26 34 15 7
Police Protection 38 24 50 19 6
Parks and Playgrounds 51 58 45 13 13
Recreation Centers 44 53 32 15 9
Garbage Collection 15 8 11 4 0
Leaf/Branch Pickup 14 6 8 6 6
Sidewalks 43 36 29 36 23
Street Cleaning 20 8 11 20 6
Street Maintenance 62 49 37 42 13
i
Beautification of Public Lands 36 26 16 19 4
Library Services 36 33 28 13 7
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 26 17 16 13 9
i
01
` owl
i~
s,
i
`s
is
sR 38
r
i
TABLE 15
MEAii RATING Of SERVICE IMPORTANCEa
Mean Priority
Rating Ranking
ra '
2.69 1
Fire Protection
Police Protection 2.43 2
1.50 8
Parks and Playgrounds
1.36 9
Recreation Centers
Garbage Collection '.29 3
;.76 6
Leaf/Branch Pickup
1.22 12
Sidewalks
1.31 10
Street Cleaning
2.15 4
Street Maintenance
11
Beautification of Public Lands 1.24
1.67 7
Library services
Neighborhood Traffic Signs/Signals 1.92 5
i
# aQuestion reads: Use the plus-and-minus card to tell me how important
or how unimportant each service is for your neighbor-
hood. A rating of plus 3 would mean that you feel
the service is very important for your neighborhood,
and a rating of minus 3 would mean that you feel it
is not very important.
r~
~ wi
k,
w 39
tight resources. Street maintenance is important enough to the citizenry,
however, that it would behoove the city to direct attention to improving
the quality of the streets.
r.
Sunmar
PC
In this section citizen attitudes toward the quality of various
city services have been examined, and the question of what they would
like to have done about improving services has been addressed. It was
found that most areas of service studied were being provided at a level
that a majority of the citizens found satisfactory. A majority of the
~ citizens favored allocating more resources (spending more money) on the
four areas given the lowest ratings. Sizeable percentages, but less than
a majority, indicated they were willing to pay more taxes to support
those problem areas; but, of the four problem areas in service satis-
faction, only street maintenance was given a high importance rating
(ranked 4th out of 12). Thus, it appears that,if the city of Denton must
be selective in service areas which can be singled out for improvement,
r!
street maintenance appears to be the most appropriate candidate.
R
f1
~j 1 t 1
P~
i`
t
J
P~ 40
i
NEIGHBORHOOD PROBLEMS IN DENTON
James J. Glass
w
In the 1976 Denton Survey, respondents were asked a series of
Fe
la questions about neighborhood problems or nuisances. In most cases,
respondents first were asked whether noise, for example, was a problem
to them. If they responded positively, they were then asked to specify
the type of noise they considered to be a problem. Table 16 lists the
percentages of citizens citing various problems asked about in the
w
survey.
I _
More detailed analysis is required in order to understand the
specifics of the various problems and to determine whether certain
characteristics of residents appear to be related to the problems
identified. This section of the report presents that analysis. The
t problems cited by residents are divided into three categories:
frequ,.-ntly cited, less frequently cited, and other problems. Because
they concern a different type of service, problems with utilities (gas,
11 electric, and telephone) are considered separately. Also considered
separately are questions dealing with the extent of utilization of
library and recreational facilities. This section concludes with
ratings respondents gave to various aspects of life in Denton.
z
.,K
f
/V
s
a
{ 41
TABLE 16
W
PERCENTAGE Of RESPONDENTS CITING NEIGHBORHOOD PROBLEMS
Problem Percent Citing Problems
Drinking Water 70
Stray Animals 51
Spilled Garbage 46
Pests 46
f Minor Street Repair 41
Noise 35
Street Lights 24
Business Problem 21
Major Street Repair 16
! Vacant Lots 15
Standing Water 15
Abandoned Buildings 14
Garbage Collection Missed 13
Detractions from Neighborhood 12
Junked Cars 10
Alley 9
Neighborhood Cleanliness 7
f
- Air Pollution 7
Utilities: Electric Service 64
Telephone Service 55
} Gas Service 11
I1
9 '
{
i
t
W
42 r
a }
1
Frequently Cited Problems
Pin
Those problems identified y 30% or more o' the sample are
q classified as frequently cited. There is no intention of implying that
these are the most serious problems which residents experience.
Respondents were not presented a list and asked to rank all problems
from most to least serious. Rather, these are the areas of concern most
often cited by respondents, and any of them could range from being a
serious problem to an annoying nuisance, depending upon the circum-
stances of individual residents.
I
Drinking Plater: Of all respondents, 70% said that they had a.<perienced a
pra,',lem with the taste, odor, or appearance of drinking water within
the last 12 months. More specifically, Table 17 indicates the per-
centage of respondents citing the type of problem they encountered.
i
TABLE 17
PROBLEMS WITH DRINKING WATER
Problem Percent Responding Positively
Taste 37
Odor 23
kE " Appearance 51
E All Three 24
Any One of the T'.ree 70
s Lj
rr
~a ,
t
43
w.
Consistently higher percentages of homeowners than renters said that
they had problems with the drinking water. This is illustrated by the
a response pattern to the first question in which respondents were asked
whether they had any problem with the water: 77% of the homeowners
said yes, compared to 62% of the renters. Differences between the
` i
percentages varied, but a higher percentage of homeowners than renters
cited problems with taste, odor, and appearance.
Stray Animals: Another frequently cited neighborhood problem was that of
stray animals. Referring to Table 16, 51% of the respondents said that
they had a problem with stray animals. Again, homeowners cited this as a
problem more often (59%) than did renters (42%). The percentage of
respondents citing this as a problem also increased with age as the
following table indicates:
w
TABLE 18
PROBLEMS WITH STRAY ANIMALS
r Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61+ r
~ t
Percent 39 45 55 50 77
i
I ,
A further breakdown suggests household pets are the primary cause
of the stray animal problem. When respondents were asked to identify
the kind of stray animal causing the problem, 43% said dogs and 20%
said cats. Insignificant percentages of respondents (less than 2%)
4
M~
i -1
1
,
44
M
cited farm animals, wild animals, or other kinds of animals as the cause
of the problem.
Garbage: Missed garbage collection does not appear to be much of a
i
problem in Denton. Eighty-seven percent of the respondents said that
n
collectors had not missed their garbage within the last 12 months, and
only 5% said collection had been missed three or more times during the
same period. Spilled garbage was cited as a problem much more frequently,
however, with 52% saying this occurred one or mere times within the past
year. The highest percentage, 16%, said their garbage had been spilled
6-10 times.
Respondents were also asked to identify what they believed to be
the cause of the spilled garbage. The majority, 73%, stated animals were
the cause, 10% cited collectors, 4% said children, and 12% said some
other cause. Apparently, not only are stray animals themselves a
nuisance, they also may be the primary cause of another frequently cited
problem.
y
,
Pests: As Indicated in Table 19, mosquitoes, flies, rats, and other
pests were cited as a problem by 46% of the respondents. Again homeowners, i
50%, cited pests as a problem more often than did renters, 41%.
L~
1+1
k'k
iM,ru,
F
45
TABLE 14 '
PERCENTAGE CITING VARIOUS TYPES OF PESTS AS A PROBLEM
Pest Percent Citing Problem
Mosquitoes
33
Rats 10
Flies 3
Mice 5
Other 9
r
i
4 Street Repairs: Minor street repairs were seen as being needed by
I 41% of the respondents, major street repairs were seen as being needed
by 16%,and 42% felt that no repairs were needed at present. Renters
i
were more dissatisfied w10 streets than were homeowners. Fifty-six
percent of the renters as compared to 37% of the homeowners thought that
minor repairs were needed, 22% of the renters and 11% of the homeowners
felt that major repairs were needed, and 32% of the renters compared to
~N
52% of the homeowners said that no repairs were required.
~ i
Noise: A significant percentage of respondents, 35%, thought noise
w i
t
was a problem. In specifying the type of noise problem experienced,
the following percentages, indicated in Table 20, resulted.
{
f"
►a
N
t •
t
sii•: 1, iVY l ,
ra.
NW Wfe(
rr:r:IYC~ 7■
46
TABLE 20
TYPE OF tiOiSE PROBLEM
Type Percent Citing Problem
Traffic 22
People/Children 10
Animal 4
Other 7
c Analysis of the data did not indicate that any resident characteristics
were particularly related to the noise problem.
Less Frequently Cited Problems
The problems discussed under this heading were mentioned by 10-25%
of the respondents. While the difficulties an individual may encounter
as a result of one of these problems may be serious, the problems
themselves were experienced by fewer respondents than those previously
discussed.
Street Lighting: More street lighting is needed according to 24% of
those surveyed. More renters (29%) than homeowners (20%) thought more
j lighting was needed. The majority of the respondents, 78%, said that the
^ present level of lighting was about right,
Consumer Protection: Twenty-one percent of the respondents stated that
I, they had been taken advantage of in a business deal within the past 12
€ "y months. More renters (28%) than homeowners (15%) experienced this
I
11
tY 47
problem. Also, younger persons reported the p-oblem more often than did
6. older persons as the following percentages indicate.
TABLE 21
w
PERCENTAGE CITING CONSUMER PROBLEM BY AGE
OW
Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61+
Percent 27 24 21 21 10
ry
Of those who reported having a problen in a business transaction,
only 28% contacted the city or some other organization for assistance.
'i Those who sought assistance ware asked to identify what office they
r contacted. However, the number involved Is so small, the 28% 1
represents only 17 individuals, the results tell very little: 2 people 1
I,
j contacted the police, 3 the Bette; Businass Bureau, and 14 called some
other agency. Far more meaningful is the fact that 72% of those who
had a business-related problem did not contact any organization for ,
i
assistance.
Neighborhood Nuisances: A number of questions were asked about the
existence of common neighborhood nuisances. Table 22 indicates the
percentage of respondents citing the various nuisances as a problem,
l
E r
,
Ifs{ _ t.: .
E
48
I
TABLE 22 `
MA J
PERCENTAGE CITING NEIGHBORHOOD NUISANCES AS PROBLEMS
Nuisance Percent Citing Problem _
Vacant Lots 15
Standing Water 15
Abandoned Buildings 14
Problems Detracting 12
r from Neighborhood
Of those reporting a problem with vacant lots, 72% said weeds on
the lot caused the problem. The 15% who said standing water was a
problem breaks down into 7% who said it was a problem after every rain
and 8% wno said it was a problem only after heavy rains. Damage from
standing water was reported by 8% of the respondents. Open abandoned
houses or apartments and poor maintenance were the most often cited
nuisances associated with abandoned buildings. Responses to the type
of problems that detract from neighborhoods (residence used for a
business, house divided into apartment, etc.) were so scattered that no
I
specifics may be added.
i
M Other Problems
Problems discussed under this heading were cited by less than 10%
~ of the respondents and include Junked cars, alleys, neighborhood cleanli-
ness, and air pollution. Of the 10% who reported Junked cars to be a
E problem, most stated the abandoned cars were located in the street.
According to the 9% of the respondents who mentioned r,lleys as a problem,
rq
i~
4P
rsa saw
49
i
the major difficulties were garbage and overgrown weeds in 'he
l
alley. Nast respondents thought that their neighborhood was always or
always dirty,
usually clean. Only 2,t said that their neighborhood Waswas the most
with 5% saying their neighborhood was usually dirty. Dust common complaint of the 7% who said air pollution was a problem.
" Utilities
Utilities are considered separately because they represent a
distinct service problem and do not fall into the category of general
neighborhood nuisances or problems.
Electricity: Of those respondents with electric service (4% had none),
36% said they experienced no problem. The respondents who reported a
` problem (64%) were asked how many times the problem occurved within
months. Table 23 contains those responses.
the past twelve
TABLE 23
l
NUMBER OF TIMES ELECTRICAL SERVICE WAS INTERRUPTED
i
No. Interruptions 1 2 3-5 6-10 more than 10
j
Percent 18 25 16 3 3
J._------
' Telephone: Fourteen % of all respondents reported having no telephone ser-
vice. Of those having service, no problem was reported by 45%, while 55%
reported having a problem one or more times during the past 12 onths.
The following table indicates the number of times respondents reported
having interruptions in telephor,2 service.
~i
.
F+
NMI
aT.n
r.
5u
Ir
TABLE 24 10
y NUMBER OF TIMES TELEPHONE SERVICE WAS INTERRUPTED
No. Interruptions 1 2 3-5 6-10 more than 10
Percent 23 17 13 1 5
Gas Service: Interruptions in gas service were reported less often
than problems with the other utilities. No problem was reported by
89% of those having service; 18% of those surveyed had no gas service.
Table 25 presents the number of times interruptions were experienced
by the 71% who reported having problems with gas service.
a
- TABLE 25
NUMBER OF TIMES GAS SERVICE WAS INTERRUPTED
No. Interruptions 1 2 3-5 6-10 more than 10
Percent 7 .8 2 .4 .8
t
f 0it Facilities
Respondents were asked to respond to questions about city library
and recreational facilities. In this section,they were not asked to
evaluate the facilities but were asked how often they used the
facilities.
rA
1-i
1.y
i
J i
r'
{
Ar
f
c
~ 51
I
Library: Forty-two Percent of Ue respondents had one or more library
cards for the Denton Public Library. Homeowners mere more likely to
I
have cards than renters, 53Q as compared to 29k. The percentage
of those having cards increased with family income as Table 26 indi-
cates.
TABLE 26
PERCENTAGE HAVING LIBRARY CARDS BY INCOME
Y~ 1
Income $4,999 or less $5,000-9,999 $10,000-19,999 $20,000 and over I
Percent 24 26 52 64
I ~ r
I Frequency of library use by those having cards is reported below.
v
r
i
TABLE 27
FREQUENCY OF LIBRARY USE DURING PAST YEAR !
~i
Usage 12 or more times 4-11 less than 4 Not at all
r#
' Percent 46 25 14 14
w}
Recreational Facilities: Some use of recreational facilities was reported
~a
by 56% of the respondents. Usage increased with income and education. f
i~ Frequency of use is reported in Table 28.
i0
f!
i
i
I
►n 52
I Y
TABLE 28
ti FREQUENCY OF RECREATIONAL FACILITY USE DURING PAST YEAR
04 e or " Usage AAlmilost On ca Week re Onca knthre Less Than MonthOnce
r+
f, Percent 8 23 14 11
r
i
Overall City Ratings_
Each respondent -nas asked to rate a series of attributES of life
in Denton. The possible ratings ranged from +39 the best, to -3, the
} r,
worst. A summary of positive and negative ratings is presented V
Table 29.
TABLE 29
RATINGS OF ATTRIBUTES OF LIFE 14 DENTON
Attribute % Positive % Negative
Getting around the city 60 40
Downtown Denton as a convei-iient 50 51
I ^ place to shop
Downtown Denton as a convenient 58 42
3 place to conduct business
Shopping facilities in Denton 81 19
Cultural facilities in Denton 76 24
I
Denton as a good place to live 93 7
w
9'
I'
Y
W:J 4A'
~j
i
5s
Those who nave resided in Centon the longest, more than ten years,
' yr
consistently rated each attribute higher (more +1 and +2's) than other
' residents. This was particularly true of the "Denton as a good place to
live" category in which 65% of the residents of morr, than ten years gave
r the city a +3 rating. The specific ratings for each attribute are
reported below, with additional connents added only when appropriate.
Getting around the city:
+3 +2 +1 .l -2 -3
16 22 23 12 12 16
Downtown as convenient place to shop:
+3 +2 +1 .1 .2 ,3
i
r- 12 1s 23 1s 20 16
Downtown as convenient place to conduct business:
+3 +2 +1 .1 -2 -3
13 20 25 15 15 13
}
j Shopping facilities in Denton: f
J +3 +2 +1 -1 .2 -3
26 33 23 10 5 3
Mote should be taken that respondents rate overall shopping in Denton
positively; the
they dust do not view the downtown area favorably.
Cultural facilities:
f(" +3 +2 +1 .1 .2 .3
25 32 20 34 4 5
s
A Y:
i
54
r~
i
Cultural facilities received the second highest overall rating, with
57% of the respondents giving a +3 or +26.
i
►.a nenton as a good place to live:
~ i+3 +2 +l -1 -2 -3
i
ii 48 29 16 2 3 2
"R Respondents expressed the greatest overall satisfaction with Denton as
s
a place to live, with only 7% giving the city a negative rating. The
o•
highest rating of +3 was more likely among homeowners than renters,
1
65% compared to 29%; females than males, 53% compared to 43%; older
4 t 'i persons, 77% of those 61 years and older and 69% for ages 46-60 com-
pared to less than 50% for the younger age groups; and long-term
residents, 65% for 10-year-plus residents and 54% for 6-10 year resi-
dents compared to 31% for 1-5 year residents and 19% for those residing
r, in Denton for less than one year.
Summary,
ii The City of Denton is not free of neighborhood problems and
i nuisances. Substantial percentages of respondents indicated they had
l' experienced problems with drinking water, stray animals, spilled gar-
Ws
bage, minor street repairs, and noise. The aggregate responses Indi-
cate the percentage of respondents encountering the specific problems.
i~
rr The percentages do not suggest whether the problems are considered to
be very serious or more of a nuisance to individual respondents. The
usefulness of the problem section to decision makers comes from the
identification of those problems most ofter; experienced by respondents
This information might be u!eful in city programming efforts.
p
55
r
t
While high percentages of respondents reported experiencing
r
f specific problems, they also appeared to be quite satisfied with various
A attributes of life in Denton, particularly cultural facilities, shop-
ping facilities, and Denton as a place to live. The encounters with
problems, which often may be classifiel as common nieghborhood nuisances,
Is
do not appear to affect the positive feelings respondents had toward
I'M
certain quality of life factors in Denton. The satisfaction expressed,
however, should nit be taken as an indication that residents have no
criticisms and that they would not appreciate efforts to alleviate the
` f
I problems which they do encounter.
i
~y k
r
Pali!
,J
i
r
1
t
c' J
' 1
r.
56
r.
P0 EMERGENCY SERVICES IN DENTON
i Russell W. Smith
w
The section of the survey on public safety services in Denton
indicated a generally high satisfaction by residents. Over 80% of the
respondents indicated that they felt reasonably safe or very safe in
their neighborhoods at night, and 68% of the respondents further indicated
that the response time for tmergency services was either good or excellent.
Sex
Although approximately equal percentages of female and mate respon-
I,
dents (17% and 14%, respectively) indicated that they had been victims of
i
crimes, almost three times as many fetales(23%) as males (8%) Indicated that
i
they felt "not safe at all" in their neighborhoods. This disparity in
evaluations of police protection is somewhat surprising because approxi-
mately 70% of each sex group felt that response time for emergency
j services was good or excellent, approximately 65% of each group
rated the quality of emergency services as good or excellent, and,
finally, approximately 65% of each group felt the police were "generally
j
fair" in the way they treat people. The females who felt unsafe in
their neighborhoods need to be pru~^d further to determine why they feel
E unsafe (i.e., low police patrol profile or perceived high crime rate),
Race
M+ Seven percent of the Black respondents indicated that they had been
r•• victims of crin,as, as did 17% of the White respondents, However, the
j
a two groups of respondents indicated very different opinions on feeling
id
r 57
safe in their neighborhoods after dark--almost 33" of the Black respon-
r~
den'i felt "not safe at all," compared with only 14% of the Whites.
Th i disparity among Black respondents in their feeling of safety and
victimization rate may be attributed to other aspects of their evalua-
tions of emergency services. Sixty percent of the Black respondents
i
felt the response times of emergency services was fair or poor
(compared to 29% of the Whites responding similarly), and 60% of the Block
i
respondents rated the quality of emergency services fair or poor
(versus 21% of the White respondents). Finally, a very large number
of the Black respondents (62%) felt that the police treated
people unfairly (compared to 16% of the Whites responding similarly).
More than with female respondents, there is a need to determine
j_
what factors have given Black respondents negative attitudes toward
emergency services. Clearly, the disparity among Black respondents in
their victimization rate and service evaluations suggests a need for
i
further investigation.
Housing Cost
The survey indicated that there was no relationship between a
respondent's housing costs and rate of victimization, but that one's
t evaluation of police protection was related to housing costs.
Specif- ically, the lower the costs of housing, the greater the proportion of
respondents who felt "not safe at all" in their neighborhoods after
dark. Housing costs are somewhat associated with race, but race
wi atone would not account for different evaluations of emergency services.
i
ki I,
a.:
f
58
1
Victimization rates ranged from 131 for the lowest housing-costs
group (those wha pay up to $100 per month) to 16% for the highest costs
1
group (those who pay over $300 per month). However, 23% of the former
Pe
group felt "not safe at all" versus only 3% of the latter group. The sur-
vey also indicated that, the higher the housi-g costs of respondents, the
i greater the percentage who used emergency services (from 14% to 27%).
Finally, the higher the housing costs of respondents, the greater the
percentage who rated the quality of emergency services as good or
excellent (51% of the lowest housing cost group versus 78% of the
highest housing cost group).
Summary
i The female respondents genFrslly felt that emergency services were
w
prompt and of qood or excellent luality as well as that the police were
i
j fair in their treatment of people. Despite these opinions and a low rate of
victimization (relative to male respondents), a large proportion of
the female respondents did not feel safe in their neighborhoods after
dark. Although a third of the Black respondents felt unsafe, they had
a lower rate of victimization than Whites, Unlike the female respon-
dents, however, a large percentage of the Black respondents did not
i
evaluate emergency services' response time, quality, or treatment of
people favorably. The disaffection by Blacks runs deeper than for females
,
and, like the females, is apparently not related to victimization rates.
The importance of a respondent's housing costs in evaluating
emergency services is tenuous at best. The sample size was too small to
FN
L41 control for the effects of race, income, and other variables on the
i _
{
r 59
}
relationship between housing costs and service evaluations. The data
indicated that people with low housing costs (both renters and owners),
like females and Blacks, were inconsistent in evaluating services
because of past victimization.
The common pattern which seems to be operating here is attitudinal
M in nature. Despite their rate of victimization, certain groups in
i~ Denton felt unsafe in their neighborhoods. Presumably, the Police
i
w Department should work to change attitudes about the prevalence of crime
in Denton in order to reduce the proportion of people with negative
i
i opinions about police protection.
i i
I
Ill '•I.
i
I}
I
f
j
~ ~ .w. '♦nra'<...+<....w.«.wacnr..wnrv..N.w.. w.»a.:.a...~...,.,.w............_ .,....,,...111
i
60
i
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN DENiON
M
Jerry L. Yeric
r+
I There has been a greatdealof concern about the need for citizen
r' participation in the local governmental process, as witnessed by vast
amounts of energies that have been spen'. both by citizen groups and
those who run city ha;ls throughout the county. However, one must
! remember participation takes two fonns. The first aspect is the citizens'
" perception of having a say in the governmental process if they desire.
The second aspect is that of actual participation in one of the many forms
3 citizens have available to them.
i^
One of the areas of concern in the Denton Survey was that of
citizen participation. In order to have effective citizen involvement,
there needs to be an atmosphere in which the members of the community
feel their desires will have a fair and effective hearing. Table 30 .
indicates the respondents' perception of the local governmental process
in Denton rs well as their role in it. As the table suggests, a
majority (55%) of those interviewed felt they could have a voice in
I government if they wished. However, only about one-fifth (19%) had
I ~r
taken time to become involved by attending meetings themselves or had
members of their households who had done so. Among those who did attend
a city meeting, the vast majority (82X) felt their time was well spent.
Among those interviewed, slightly more than half were not willing to
tt attend monthly meetings to discuss city problems (52%),
a w•.MR4W'LY~
I
I'r
2
61
i
TABLE 30
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN DENTON
t
fr y
Perceptions of Government Yes No
P Do you feel that you could have a voice in the way
the city government is running things if you 55% 45% i
wanted to?
Ouriny the past twelve months have you or any other
members of your household attended any meetings
or hearings of City Council or any other govern- 19 81
4 mental groups?
THOSE WHO ATTENDED: Was the time well spent? 82 18
Would you attend monthly meetings of city officials,
{ administrators, and citizens to discuss the
existing problems and future goals of Denton? 48 52
Have you ever worked with others in this community 93 61
to try to solve some communit, problem?
Hrve you ever taken part in forming a new group or
j a new organization to try to solve some community 16 84
problems?
,
n
- J
I
,~4UY--wwi,-areuw.M .!sa,Ae.rv,v .~.ruu~aw vws.rr ~..~n~.. au.'
h"
t
V~
I '
62
1 I
A more generalized citizen attitude toward local governmental
involvement can be seen when one looks at the remaining questions in
the table. The general conclusion is that the majority of citizens
n
ire not interested or at least have not demonstrated a willingness to
p become involved in city-and community-related problems. Only one-
; i,
third claimed ever to have worked with others to solve a community
! on problem, and only 16% have taken part in forming a new group or organi-
zationto try to solve a community problem.
0 i
While this finding is not unlike the results found in other surveys,
it dces point out a potentially serious problem for those in goveenment
who are attempting to find out what the citizens' desires are in terms i
v F 1
of long- and short-range policy. Perhaps the most revealing finding
regarding local participation is that of the low level of importance
the citizen plac:s upon local community problems. As illustrated in
r-
Table 31, over one-half of those interviewed seldom or never discuss I
r-, community problems, while only 11% of those interviewed discuss community 1
problems on a daily basis.
j `4l
TABLE 31
CORIUNITY PROBLEMS: FREQUENCY OF DISCUSSION ;
,r+ Discussion of Problems Daily Weekly At Times Never
c .
How often do you usually 1
discuss local community 11% 25% 64 14%
problems with others?
i
,
y
r
A
1
63
r.
i,
The general picture of the citizens' involvement in Denton is one
of apathy on the part of the majority, with only asmall segment of
the population being concerned eno,jgh with the community's problems that
they make them a part of their daily life. This presents enormous
difficulties for those in city hall in their effort to set priorities
n r
for the future growth and development oi' the city. In addition, it may
maintain a system in which a few have a disproportionate voice in
the governmental process.
Table 32 includes a series of questions used by social scientists,
i beginning in the mid-1950's,to ascertain the citizens' feelings as to
3
' whether they believed they had a voice in government. Those interviewed
were asked about their "feelings toward local politics." It is most
interesting to see the respondents' answers to these questions in
light of the findings in Tables 30 and 31. Fir Instance, Table 32 a
Indicates that a majority (54%) of those interviewed did not feel +
1
that public officials cared about what they thought. This may be a
~A
partial explanation of why there was low citizen involvement in Denton.
In addition, the respondents were divided equally on what actually
accounts for the way things are decided and how they can affect govern-
ment, Half the sample agreed with the statement ghat voting is the main
i thing that decides how things are run. In a related question, half
It felt their vote was the only way they could have a say in the actions of
government in Denton. At the same time, they did not feel they had no
k say in government. This is coupled with the strong belief that govern-
ment is complex and comliicated (62%).
N i
j
r
5
~i•
l
I
it
PQ 64
r• TABLE 32
VOICE IN GOVERNMENT
Attitude Toward Politics -
_ Agree Disagree
I don't think public officials care much about r`-
what people like me think.
54% 46%
The way people vote is the main thing that
decides how things are run in this country. 50
50
Y^ Voting is the only way that people like me
can have any say about how government runs
things.
50 50
People like me don't have any say about what
the government does. F 38 62
i Sometimes politics and government seem so
complicated that a person like me can't
really understand what is going on.
62 38
I
The overall picture presented in Table 32 is a mixed one, with the
citizens interviewed s:eing the public officials of the city as less
than concerned about their wishes, yet not having a clear picture of how
they could best have an impact on city affairs. Fifty percent of the
respondents saw voting as the major mechanism by which they could inter-
act with government, while the other 50% did not view the vote as impor-
tant. The general conclusion to be drawn is that,whlle respondents do
r not necessarily feel the leaders are receptive to their wishes and do
not have a clear idea of how best to make their wishes known, they still
strongly hold on to the belief that they can have a say in the governing
of Denton.
w
H
•
j
M
E
65
M
1
Some Analyses of Participation
in order to obtain a more accurate picture of participation in
Denton, the questions in Tables 30.32 were broken down by selected
demographic characteristics of the city: age, education, income, and
length of residence. This allows one to view more clearly the impact
of a single characteristic upon the individual's responses to a par-
ticular question. While an examination of each question in the earlier
tables is not presented here, characteri.tfcs were selected that were
found to have the greatest impact on four selected questions,
M
I
As mentioned earlier, participation has two main dimensions--how
i
citizens perceive government and their role in it and what citizens
actually do to participate in government. While the study was not
E specifically designed to test these particular aspect of participation,
1
responses to four questions give an indication of these asperts.
One can get some idea of how the citizens perceiva their
role in government and the government's willingness to listen by
examining the question: "Do you feel that you could have a voice in
INS
i the way city government is running things if you wanted to?" and by
looking at those persons who did not a ree with the statement, "I don't
think public officials care much about what people like me think."
The second dimension is that of actual participation. Using the
question from Table 31, "How often do you usually discuss local community
~i problems with others?" as the minimal involvement one could take, those
rt who responded to the question by saying they did so on a daily basis
i
F~ I
f
1►j
' I
I
- I
I
~i
f
M
66
r
may be identified as persons who were involved, although indirt: iy,
M
In the participation process. The final question is the straightforward
one of 'During the past 12 months have you or any other members of your
household attended any meeting or hearing of city council or any other
government groups?"
r The responses to these questions were then analyzed with regard
to the respondent's age, education, income, and the number of years
residency in Denton. These categories were selected because, after
ilooking at all the characteristics,thev provide the clearest picture of
r~ the participant in Denton community affairs.
i
Arne: Looking at age with regard to the two items dealing with perceived
} l
involvement, Figure 2 indicates that the older one becomes, the more he
F+
feels he could have a voice in government. There is a steady
increase from 479 of those between the ages of 18-25 to 63% of those
~l persons 60 years or older.
j The second item dealing with whether or not public officials care
i shows a similar pattern emerging, but not as distinct, for the younger
i members of the community between the ages of 18-25, with only 31%
!i feeling officials care or, put anoth,r way, 694 feeling they do not care.
There is a perceptible increase among the 26-35 year old category of 17%.
F~
Fi percent. Yet, it 13 not until the 46 year old and over group where a
majority feel that public officials care.
~ff
b
h
f 67
A
i'
70
` 63 Item 1
62 Y`oice in
Government
i.
60 57
56
55
Officals
r 5 Ca re
50
47 48 48j `
42
A
4 i
r W
f Z \
K /
LLI
31/
30
1 ~
1. 22/ 20 18 \
/f 116••` k
14
j r' I tem 4
10 10 Attend
1 Meetings
l~ {
4 Item 3 a
_L Discuss Daily
18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 60+
AGE
♦r
Figure 2. Citizen Participation: Influence of Age on Perception and Role. 1
i
1ti
r
,r
68
r How citizens perceive their participation role in government and
I' how they behave are often quite different. Among the respondents who
claimed to discuss community problems daily, the least active were the
i^
younger members of the survey. It is not until one reaches midage,
35-46, that community problems are more frequently discussed. In fact,
discussion peaks with this age category and then begins to fall as
M
fi Item 3 in Figure 2 indicates. An even more dramatic pattern appears
with regard to attendance of city meetings. Attendance more than ;
lc doubles going from 9% in the youngest group (18-25) to 22% in the next
p' group (26-35),and finally peaks at 42% in the 36-45 age group (See
Item 4, Figure 2). Then, an interesting pattern emerges. The 46-60 j
age group of the population rarely attend city meetings,with only i6% i
claiming they or members of their family have attended. This drastic j
decrease of 26% is difficult to explain, particularly in light of their
"perceived" participation.
i E
r Nonetheless, a pattern of participation is clear. The older one
4 4 becomes, the more he or she sees an opportunity to have a voice in
government. The aging process also provides a more positive view of
public officials. In terms of actual participation, clearly those in
the 36-45 age category are far more apt to attend meetings as well as
i
r4 discuss community problems more regularly.
Education: This is an important factor In almost all political behavior.
Clearly, for those interviewed in the Denton Survey, education was an
F^
r~ interesting division. As Figure 3 illustrates, among those interviewed,
1+ s
kJ t
w~
b9
70 ? r
i'
Item 1
j n Yoke in
Government
I 60 59 59 59 s'
P0 i 56
j i 56~i 55 i
54 i! enf 2
t a % UTFc fa1s
° 5o 42i~ Care
46
f
40 % i
;6//
1 W i 32
r S
30
a 30 1 /
Item 4
AMR
j ; 261 Me
etings
25 / r
20 19 17 17
16
15 1 item 3
MESS
Dally
4
I.
f 0 i ,
1-8 9-11 12 13-15 16 17+
EDUCATION (years)
Figure 3. Citizen Participation: Influence of Education on Perception and 1
Rote. 1
i.l
e,, as
f
I
70
only one educational level did not believe that they could have a voice in
M
government. Those persons who had completed 9-11 years of education
w most markedly perceived that they did not have a voice in government
(item 1), with no more than 25% claiming a voice. In all other cate-
gories, citizens firmly believed that they could have a +oice.
i !t
The pattern concerning whether public officials care (Item 2)
is somewhat less positive, with only those with 17 years education or
more having a majority who believed that officials care. Again, those in
the 9-11 years of school completed category were the least likely to
i
believe in the public officials. Generally, the pattern seen here is
not dissimilar to that of age; that 1s, as educational level increases,
perceptions of being able to participate increase.
i The actual particlp+llion pattern 1s strikingly different in one
r aspect. Those persons who least felt they could have a voice in govern-
ment discussed community problems on a daily basis more than those who
believed they could have a voice in the way government operates (See
Item 3, Figure 3). This may be due to frustration with the political
system, little knowledge of the actual process, the need for conver-
sational topics to pass the time of day, or any number of other reasons.
~i
r~ Actual attendance of meetings conforms to the earlier patternsi
i.~ that is, as the educational level increases, so does one's attendance
Fi at public meetings (See Item 4, figure 3).
i.3
{
If
M 71
f
q
Income: The results with respect to income are generally what one would
jO anticipate; that is, as income level increases, one's participation
i'.
increases. Mention should be made, however, that,for Denton residents
with a family income of less than $10,000,the majority do not perceive
themselves as having a voice in government or believing that city
officials care (See Items 1,21 Figure 4). In the category $5,000 to
$9,999, only one-third of those responding believed that officials cared.
The same pattern emerges with regard to actual participation, with
those families over $10,000 participating at twice the level of those
earning between $5,000 and $9,999. A striking increase is seen with
regard to those over $20,000 a year, for they discuss community problems
more regularly than any other income group and attend public meetings
III nearly two times more frequently than those earning between $10,000 and
I $19,000 (See Items 3,4, Figure 4). Thus, participation, either
i perceived or actual, is highly related to one's income, with the
affluent participating the most frequently.
Length of Residency: The final question involved the effect length of
~ residency has on participation. Normally,lt might be expected that the
I ! longer the length of residency, the grater the participation. As can
be seen in Figure 5, all categories, from those living in the city less
than one year to those who have been residents over a decade, believe that
they could have a voice in government should they wish. However, it is
most interesting to note that those living in Denton between 6 am 10
:a
i years have the highest score, nearly 10% higher than either of the extreme
1
I
A_YAWN
t~
r
I rp 7 2
70 1
if
M` Item I
Voice in
63 Government
60
N 5 /59 Item 2
-UMcTals care
533 x'
A f
1R 50 j
9
E' 45 44
► Item 4
40 XtTen3 Meetings
} 3;
~a x..33/ /
!ti Uw 30
Ui r
74;'
i•
20 % 19 Item 5
isscuss Problems
i' Daily
1t 12
10
r^1
0 - -
4,999 50000- 10,000- 20,000+
9 , 999 199000
INCOME t
Figure 4. Citizen Participation: Influence of Income on Perception and
Role. i
I
i
owl
13
p
701
~s
sr 61 {
60 57
Item 1
~"n o ce in
52 Government
50 50 48
E Item 2
46 46 0ffcials Care j
42
` A 40
V
r~ cc
w
a
30
1^ 29
21 Item 4
Attend Meetings
1 20 20 i
/17'
14 Item 3
scuss Problems
j Daily
r f}f
3
i.~ 0
cl i-S 6-10 10+
LENGTH OF RESIDENCE (years)
GJ ;
Figure 5. Citizen Participation: Influence of Length of Residence on
w Perception and Role.
;r
I 74
P1
i
categories. Furthermore, those living in the city less than one year
A
score nearly the same as those residents of more than a decade (50%
to 51%).
The question of whether city officials care produces only a 6%
difference between those residents of less than one year and the 10
r years or more category, with the greater length of residency having a
very slight impact in favor of the city officials (Item 2, Figure 5).
With regard to actual participation, the data again leave a dis-
tinct pattern, with residents of 6 to 10 years being the most active
on both measures (items 3,4, Figure 5). While participation activity
i
peaks at the 6 to 10 year period, the drop of b% in attendance of
i city meetings and 6% in daily discussion is a significant decline in
actual participation and one that was not expected. ?
I
Summary
Participation in Denton has been broken into two forms: (1) the
citizens' perception of their having a voice and (2) their actual
i
participation in the process. The study indicates that a citizen's per-
ceived voice in government is mixed; for while respondents do not
;w necessarily feel that the leaders are receptive to their wishes and do not
have a clear idea of how best to make their wishes known, they still
strongly adhere to the belief that they can have a say in the governing
of Denton if they wish. The study's picture of actual participation
«.i
in clear--only a very small proportion of those interviewed either
attended meetings or talked of community problems on a regular basis.
N
tiv
{
NMI
N
I 75
The active citizen is most likely to have a high degree of formal
r
education, earn over $25,000 per year, have been a resident of the city
a
i r from 6 to 10 years, and be hetween the ages of 36 and 45.
i,
~I
j
s
E
r
i
f
i
I
►1
Y+
~o
f
. 1
~5~3'AC3l~a:9~F6JU.ifK.M1X~.a`I"%GrWtila:;wrmac.ae:~wc.F..n..wr..:m.»..w.m..:~».,....,.......«.......,. ...._•___•.....e.~...nu,yy~!!~' 11M~VMf
i
CYI
II
1
76
i
P
I
CONCLUSIONS
j
r. While the Denton survey was the first comprehensive examination
of citizen attitudes in the city of Denton, other communities have
employed similar methods to determine citizen attitudes toward city
services and problems. In the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, both the
w
cities of Dallas and Grapevine have utilized the citizen survey in
recent years. Citizen surveys are similar in form to the nationwide
polls conducted to determine public opinion on issues and political
candidates. However, the purpose of citizen surveys differs from the
! familiar opinion polls in that surveys are designed to provide informa-
tion on citizen attitudes which city officials might use in making
- policy decisions. Citizen surveys are an effective form of citizen
participation, avoiding many of the problems commonly associated with
{
participatory techniques. In surveys,a representative sample of all
i
_ citizens is assured, data on attitudes may be generalized to the entire E
population, and specific types of information may be elicited from
t respondents. Surveys are not free from error, but the margins of error
may be identified and taken into account in the analysis.
Me Denton survey provides useful information on citizen attitudes
toward city services and city problems. City officials may with to
focus on those services, particularly street maintenance, given the s
~j lowest ratings by citizens and concentrate on those problems mentioned
M1
most often by respondents {drinking water, stray animals, spilled
I
A
I
f
i
I
N 77
4
garbage, pests, and street maintenance). With respect to emergency
q
Services, some attention might be given to those groups, females an
P Blacks, who had the least favorable view of these services. Finally,
i` the ,ection on citizen participation provides some insights into the i
w attitLd?s citizens have toward city government. While the responses
are not unusual, city officials may wish to devise methods by which
p citizens can have clearer and easier access to city officials and
administrators. This discussion of findings is only a broad overview.
Pat Many, more detailed views may be found in the various sections of the
report. It is not possible to indicate specifically how the Informa-
tion might be used, for this depends upon particular decisions and
issues.
Application of the results of the survey depends upon those
i,
involved in Denton government. The authors believe the data may be of
use in many different policy decisions. However, it must be remembered
that the survey was not done for, or at the request of, the city of
Denton. Therefore, some of the information might not be as useful to
officials as it would have been had the city asked for the survey and
specified the type of data they desired. This is not meant to be a
criticism; it is only mentioned in order to reiterate that the authors
are responsible for the information gathered and the contents of this
tti report.
f~
By no means is the survey definitive. Rather, it is a reflection
j of attitudes at one point in time. Since attitudes change,as time
9
r{
x=
I `
78
w !
t I
passes and different events occur, new information is needed. The
authors suggest that the city give some thought to replicating this
survey or to designing other methods, in order to gather information
on citizen attitudes which might be of use in making policy decisions
in the future.
r •
I
r
f
r i
1
1
4r
J'F.t
64 r
f
f
i
i ,
k i
9 .
i~
E.
~ r
APPENDIX A
~i
EE
~l }
A
rum
rf IJ
3
j
i
x
r
6, v
S
+
March 2, 1976
orih Tsars
L
Un1virs;ty
Osntom Texas
7020.7
L
imtituls
of
ApPllad
Scisncss
Dear Resident of Denton:
Your residence has been chosen in a random selection process to
be part of a citizen survey of the City of Denton.
Within the next week, a trained interviewer will call at your
home and ask a member of your household to answer a series of qu:stions
dealing with the City of Denton and the services provided by the city
government.
The survey is a project of the Applied Policy Research Program of
the Institute of Applied Sciences. North Texas State university. The
- survey has been prepared with the cooperation of the City of Denton and j
ip intended to show what residents regard to be the most important city
j services and what their opinions are of the quality of those services.
l _ The information should be extre..+ely valuable to the city in evaluating '
and improving what they are doing.
The information which you provide in the survey will be kept
completely confidentia L Only total figures will be reported.
i
Thank you in advance for your help. If you have queetions regard-
ing this survey, or if you are not visited by an interviewer before
March 21, please call 788-2321.
j ~
Sincerely,
Jemes J. /,ass, Director i
Applied Policy Research Program
JJG/ms '
i
r~ ~ l
cN ~
i
N,L Boa JOJI • AC811-188.1541 i
I
k~
r
r
APPENDIX B
i
r
i-l
i. s
. .rP.a•: M»w^.14+w~r ~ U~:.?.'J;ti r.a.n.~.: .ss~,'mmmnw'. ~"wv-•.w w+w rn....«.i ~yihdti~w9Jl~du 6rw`.e.
l
r THE NORTH TEXAS DAIL)
Poll Begins Monday
On City's Services
r., By Iik:1.FV R. RRO%N'NJ%G Lion lags and will select one inlerviewee
I i lastly Reporter mit each ethod based on thehnumber sor adults
Denton rt6dcnh will be ghtn a living in•residcnce.
chores to air grievances end make
recommendations about Donlon city cq to d residents It opporhhe
sen i es dnring a door to door sur:cy to 1im to find s at home are late
he conducted Monday through Ntarch afternoons, evenings and weekends,
12 by members of fiat political aclence most of the polling will probably be
claques done then, Dr. Todd said However, in.
The surrey was initiated by five terviews may be arranged any time
members of the pol-tical science faculty: bcl%c n 9 ism. and 9 p.m. on the
Dr. James J. Gars, Dr. Victor 0 scheduled days, tech or the oral
Nielsen, Dr. Neal Tate, Or. John Todd 9uestionnaiies takes about40 minutes tes
and Dr. Jerry L. Ycric. It will be a complete, he said
cooperative effort with the Institute or Interested persons may call 188.2121
Applied Sciences and the city of between 9 am, and 9 p.m. on survey
Denton, Dr. Yeric said Thursday. days for information concerning the
poll.
Sl'RVE1' Q11SIIONS will cover a
range of services from Denton city
government to city beautification and
recreational facilities, Also included will
be questions concerning Denton
i utilities, fire and police protection, com-
munity participation, housing and I
welfare services.
The poll will be based on a method of
surveying lnown as "cluster sampling." ;
In Denton, this Involves aeleciing every
1061h house or apartment within a {
neighborhood beginning with a random
house sampling, he wid. Excluded will
be institution'Al residencex Iiht College
lk dormitories and convoltuent homes.
1 The purpose of the survey is threefold,
according to Dr. Idle. In addition to
leaching political aclence students how
to do survey research and to learn
methods of evaluating Qeblie programs
and services, the op.nion poll will
provide useful information to Denton
officials in evaluating public services and
programs.
wl DONT believe students should
lake peopie's lime frholouly: some pray
Iicel and scientific benefits must be
gained," Dr. Tale said. "We regard out.
put to the city as being of equal ImpoI.
lance to the benefits to be derived by
students."
The cooperation of the city his been
of crucial Importance In orgsnieing the
survey, Dr. Tote said. Denton has wp•
plied housing surveys, serial survey
maps and questionnaire constellations,
° be said.
All of the approsimalel 1W students
to conduct the survey hale received
(wining in the methods of scientific poll.
roll procedures "and have previously I
conducted one full-fledged survey," Dr.
Tate said. Surveyors will wear Wentifica.
e
w
I
1
tr
~ ma
! Tie DENTON RE(0II1)•CNR0NICI.I'
a _
I Thursday. March 11, 194
NT Students To Poll
Residents On Services
About 4m Denton residenls ' The attitude survey's
soon will gel the opportunity Diufx se lb to determine what
to evaluate the 6er5'ICCti Denton citizens think of the
i provided by their city, way their city carries out tta
Next week, ISO North dutles and what suggestions
I Texas Slate University citlzcnb 15ave about cervices
political xcienca students they would Ilke the city to
sill visit randomly selected provide, Dr. %1ctor Nedsen
Denton households to ask told the Planning and Zoning
} citizens to evaluate such Commission Wednesday.
elements of city respon• Such altitude surveys are
' sibilily as the local crime "a new method of citizen
rate, utility service, air participation that many
I n pollution av4Babllily of city cities are using now."
officials and disposluon of Neilsen sol&
abandoned buildings
5 In the PgZ's only public
i r. hearing Wednesday, the
r{ vommission okayed a
i re<ryest by J. H, Briscoe that
the zoning classification at
n the northeast corner of
University Chive and Bonnie
Brae be changed from
general retail to com•
mtticial,
+'-1 The zoning change was
necessary if an aalornii
e dealership is to be allowed to
locale at the ii as planned.
+.y
M
bJ
i
I+i E
R-
l
i
M
i
n
rr
r~.
I
i r
~ I
' APPENDIX C
n
t
;a
r.
I
n
I
j
r.
I
y
i
A
ee
INTERVIENSRU Aswrd Information (Ad) at
E aM below for this A. Q,T,PIUNNAIAr NUMnSAf
right
intervlev, Interview Number
M b. IUDRLSE,~~_r
C. p4oct, type of musing unit. SrN7Lt-SAHILY, DrTAC= . ,
SINGLE-FAMILY, Armct= CrOWMMSE 0. . .D. ..U. . . . 7
a~ Di.'RLEr (1 HOUSING UNITS IN On SUILD2N0), 3
APAA1?@ T (MJITr-rANILY), LESS TKU 10 UNIT. . . . . .
ATARTMEW, (WLTI-rA1U LY), Io OA W" UNITY, . .
AEAIDEN77AL IIDTSL, ACCMING OR SOARDINO DOUSr. . • • • • S
MOBILE ROME OA TRAILER. • • , • • • . d
r C hrl ATARTIO:TtT. " • • " • ' • • . . ' . I
orHER tsrecrrrf) d
d. Record whether oc cu7f e~ rr raoent. _i
I ^ OCCUPIED.
VACANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
INl'RCX%KT20N, tome to
Denton, TA , and I u ha IPing with a survey of the City of
De a nnusa~"'hee been selected oc"IgtalY at raMm to heir, us find out how you
fool about public sorvieea and Other ieaaea in the City. Your opinion, will be kept
in strict confidence--we are interested only in overall opinions, We rill not reveal
opinion, Of particular individuals. (dRW COPY Cr IZMIk if RrQVrWW.)
I
3. SKTSRVILN 666ANf Date Tias j
a. xf no Interview obtained record dates and times of Call-backs.
. I 'i112i1D ~
3. lbw many parsons 10 years and over live beret
1. Kew may are men?
RtSMRDrNt-SSLOCTi0W KEY
NLMn Of ADOLTR 271 KOUSIRG UNIT
1 adult e 3 adults 3 adults -
0 Ken Or more
1 Adult youngeet-
Noman youngest Oldest
NOYn 1kI1YR
( 1 Man Adult Nan
Oldest ~
~ Naaum
7 Ken
e Man N„u;
r, b Kan osd.s!
Ken ilo~an
t.J y Youngs •t ek..n ar~
KaR oldest RNYA
1 or
Korn oldest
~ ~ Kan
i
I
i- ~
i
eh
i
e"
INrERVI f.VERI Notice that ail queationa in ehl■ ante-Sew are on the 7aPt-hand aS de Of each pare and
Pf prIn Cad in CePitale and 1wer-csse lattrrs All pre-calyd an
Ins This). A1
right-hand sida of each page and GPITAW . Pant each quoetlon Jos Miss e!l I
swers you a e on the
ff All ttentabu!)doKE THIpthiel notes for
intarsiewing that 11 printed in ALL CAPITALS, Wri, no sad sn you are also In
Code number that cnrrospOnde to the "news" ivr'To rec"I ""plies to oury ng to the person you are
buck eenc!]). S _r wtitn Ve Pner`yrywh-_[e indlcateds p1ay
p ypeatioft
I. First Of all, I'M going to elk you eb,ut several city aelvicee, and 1 would ,As
minus card fs yuw CAPL} to tell me hew high Or hew low you would totr the
Mist the rat Inge go fr:m a high o} You to u:1 this p1, t
plus 7, "a llty o! he
each s re ice. Roc _
lowest or vOrat set In the highest of beat Feting You can give, down
the
on how you feel. Thngfintcsrrvgive. Of lcr t wantou0higou clee s i rating toe ■ would
Y rate n IJrr ratin! annYwhere Sn between
, depend inq
You rate the quellty of tRe lire protection lrcv lded bya n th ge City of Dentnn)~w high or how low would
11SI FOR EACH SERVICE SEPAMULr) RATINGS T1
A. Fire protection RAT `f NC
b. Police protection . . . . ♦3 a1 +1 -1 -2
c, Re! -3
9hborhood parks and playgrounds. ♦3 42 43 -1 .2 s
d. Recreation centers, rwimmS ' ' ' • • • • • . ♦3 t•2 F1 -1 -2 _3 g
recreation fecllltfn ,Mo1a, lakes end her
!
e. Ca rbage collection. e1 +2 ♦1
Collection of branches, lewas and largo items, , . . +3 a2 +1 -1 -2 d S
g. fidawallo 02 tl -1 -1
h, strut elaanlnq ' • • • . . . . . . e] +2 41 -1 -2 -3 )
. ♦3 f2 ♦1 -1 -2 .2 s
1. street malnte.Ance and repairs, s
1• esautificAtion with tree:, !lowers, end shrubs on ' aJ ♦2 ♦1 -1 -2 -3 [
k. Library services, public land ♦1 42 - 9
1. Traffic signs end ofgnals in N •I ♦1 -3
g - your a i-t„+^_+,
z N ♦2 ♦1 -1 -2 •3 g
-
2. suppose you were helping proper* the Denton city budget. Just based on what 4
services, would you budget more, leas or about the rams amount of you knot About thus city
city money for each easels
- nnei0 Leta begin with fin protect ton--do You f the ity ho
saf' of eltput the s amount its they do now for fir ptolactionCAsr:sinald devote sqn o! thi W"t0
Your halghborhood, f
_ FEEL CITY SM0.^.bt
IASR FOOL EACH SERVICE SEPARATELY) °PDO SPEND SPpD NO
A. Plrs probetlon NOR US; s 1201f
b. Police protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' • 1 2
e. Neighborhood 1 1
P461 and playgrounds. 2 2 ~
d. Recreation centers, swimming Poole, lsksa and other 1 2 =
recreation facilities , , , , , ,
2 2 3 S
loves and largo items. 1 2 3 g
4• sidewalks l 2 3
h. strut cleaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 f
j 1, strut maintenance and repair:. . ' , , ' • ' • . 2 3 s
1. Ileoutification with traea, !lowers and shrubs on public land, 1 2 3 d
j Llbtary urricas. 1 2 3
Traffic r]gns and signals
1 in your 2 3
3 '
1
{
,
{
i
[
I
1. Still thinking About three same services, would ltm fever having yo.r totes increased, deceased or left
the same to pay for each service--let's mart with fire._r tact ion--wcuLi Yn: favor paying more taxes
than you are now, lest thin yeti are now, or atcut tTo enure as yw arc now far fire protection?
2i!
rhVOR PAYING, _
Moir LESS
(ASR FOR G:.11 SrR!'I m u¢' w^r ,EPPLRAT, LY) TUCES TAXIS TAXES OPINION
W
' e. rite protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7 S `9
b. Police protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 1 9
c. Neighborhood parks and playgrounds. . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 1 9
d. Recreation eent,rs, nwl'mnirq poola, lakes end other
04 recreation fac111tics 1 2 S 0
1.
e. Cartage collection. . . . . 1 1 3 9
I. Collection of branches, leaves and large items. . . . . . . . . . 1 1 S 9
PM 9. Sidewalks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 3 9
h, Stteet cleaninq I 7 1 9
I. Street maintenance and repalrr. . . . . . . . . . . I 1 7 9
A J. Beautification with trees, flowers, and shrubs on pl.iblic land . . . . 1 2 3 9
It. Library services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 1 9
i 1. Traffic signs and signals in your neighborhood. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 1 9
r 1, rinally, the lest question about these service@ is hw important you feel each one is for you, here in
your neighborhood. Ces this plus-and-minus card again (SHOW CARD) to tell aw how important or hw
unimportant each are it, Nememberr a rating of plus 7 would mean that you last the service is to
important for your neighborhood, ■nd a rating of minus 1 would mean that you feel it is not vary tiportant--
or you can give a ratLng anywhere in between. How high or host low would you rate ebe Lmportanee of fire
F protection here in year neighborhood?
(ASK FOR EACH SERVICE SEPARATELY) RATIWGS RATTNG
a. Plea protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
♦3 ♦1 -1 -1 -1 9
b. Police protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +3 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
c, Neighborhood parks and playgrounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
f ff d. Recreation centers, swimming pools, lakes and other
recreation facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +3 +1 +1 -1 -2 -7 9
e. Garbage collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +3 4-2 +1 -l -P -3 9
f. Collection of branches, leaves, and Jorge Seams . , . . , , . . , +3 e2 +1 -1 -1 -3 9
9• sidewalks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
h. Street clemniAq +3 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
j I
L. Street maintenance and repairs. . . . . . +J +2 +1 .1 -2 -3 9
beautification with trees, flowers and shrubs on public land. . . +3 +-7 +1 -1 -1 -3 9
f - rte, k. Library services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +3 N +1 .1 -2 -3 9
1. Traffic signs and signals Lh Icur neighborhood. . . . . . . . . . +7 +2 +1 -1 -2 -S 9
( S. Would you may the amount of street lighting in LIGHT(NO IS Ab" NIGHT , . .
your nfighborhood a; night is about right, or MORE LIGHTING it NEEDED . . . . . . . }
to more lighting needed, or is there more NORM LIGMIING WAN THAN NECESSARY. . . . . , 1
1 llg tt ~q rqw than is really neeaasaryP DON'T KNOW ON NO ARMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
See. to you or any member of your houshold have a YES, CWE ON HORS NAVE CAFbS . . . 1
library card for the Denton Public Library? No WS Hb CARD (SKIP To Q. 7a1 . .
DON'T K11(R OR NO ANSWER (SKIP TO 9. 761 . . . . . . •
I
ib. About law often during the pant 12 months have you or allmc members of your household, including
children, used the Denton Public Library in any way , . .
r^t Would you may members of the family mass as 12 ON Hon TIMES. . . . . . .
of the library 2 or more times In the last 1 OR MORE ?"I (rrMER THAN 111. . . . , 1
I wee year, S or to times, ewer thin / times, rrMeR THAN 1 TIMES. . . . . . . . . . .
at not at al NOT AT ALL, , . , , . ,
DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
t
I
a
7e. During the put twelve months, do you feel that YES • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
anyone ham taken advantage or you in any of NO (SKIP TO Q. 8) . . . . . . . . . . . . T
your buaincss dealings in Denton? DON'T ANON OR NO ANSWER (SKIP TO Q. 8). , , . . . . 9
sw
(IF YES, ASKI) Did You contact any Denton YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C
I City office or other organiration for NO (SKIP TO 0. 8) . . . . . . 1
I help with the problem) DON'T KNOW OA NO ANSWER (SKIP TO Q. 8). . . . . . . 9
mn I
C. (TT YES, ASK,) What office or CITY ATTORNEY'S OrrICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
organization did you contact first DElTON POLICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
w. ' for help with the problem? CHAMBER Or COMMERCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J
BrMR BUSINESS RUREAU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 ,
OTTER (SPWITY11 S
I DON'T KNOW OR ND ANSWER . . . . . . . . 9
I
I. Nov, I would 100 to find out If any of the following are problems here in your neighborhood
a. Is nOiN a problem around here? NO, NOT A PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
YES--
(IF YES, ASKI) What type of noise Is TRAFFIC NOISE. . . . . . . . . . . 7
a problem? INDUSTRIAL OR rACTORY NOISE. . . . . . . . . . . 1
AIRCRAFT NOISE . . . . . . 4
PEOPLE SW TZvK) OR CNILORM PLAYINO. . . . . . . S
ANIMALS, DOCY• CATS, CATTL, ETC.. . . . . . . . 6
GENERAL NOTES (UNSPBCtrTill). . . . . . . . . . . 7 ;
CTIER (BTECIFTO
DON'T F" OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I
b, Are junked or abandoned curs a problem? NO, NOT A PWSLEI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
YES--
(IF YES, ASXm) Where are they located! IN OTHER PEOPLE'S Two . . . . . . . . . . . . . P
IN THI STREET. . . . . . . . . . 1 j.
IN APARTXW PANIINO LOTS. . . . . . . . • 1
OTHER (SPECITYI)
DON'T 1101011 ON NO ANSWER. . . . . . . • 0
c. Are there problems that detract from the N0, NOT A PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
quallty e! your neighborh)od, such as YES--
moving violations, constructing Improper PRIVATS ASSIDWca USED FOR BUITNSSS, . . I
I r~ buildings or things of that typal HOUSE IVBDrVIDED INTO SMALL APARTMEN'S . . . . . P
f IVBSTANDARD ADDITIONS BUILT OI HWIRS,
(IT YBI, ASKI) What IM of problem GAAAOSS, . . . . . . . . . . 4
'I detracts from the quality OTHEA (IPWIrYII It
` of your neighborhood? DON'I KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I ~ 1
d, Is the conditions of your alley a problem? NO ALLEY. . . . . . . . . . . . 0
N0, NOT A PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
(IF YES, ASKS) What is Wrong with the YES-
al Y? STANDINO WATIAI POOR DRAINAGI. . . . . . . 7
OVERGROWN WIT" TREES OR VMS. . . . . . . . 1
CARNAO1 AND LITTER SCATTIPED AA0VHD. . . . , . . 4
TOO MUCH TRAFFIC IN ALLY. . . . . . . • ,
Ili OTHER (SPICIrVO e
DON'T 1" ON 110 ANSWIN. .
s. Do you I.mrs a problem with deteriorated N01 NOV A PNOILFII . • . • . • . . . . . . . . • l
„w or abandoned house or other buildings? YES••
i OPEN, ABANDONED SWISS OR APARTMENTS . . • . • . I
(IF III, READ What is the nature of the OPEN, AMNDONISD C'ONEROIAL SVILDINOS . . . . . . I
problem? VAHOALISED NOISES AHD SUILDMI . . , , • . . 4
POOR. 10tvrov" of HOMES, APARMWI ON
OTMA WHA)ING/ . . . , . , , , • . , . , . , I
OTHER (/PICIFYI)
r. DON'T KNOW OR 116 ANSWER. . . . . . . . 9
nJ
17
4 r
{
S M i
r
f l i
i
Rini
5
I f. Ia air pollution a problem around NO, NGT A PAOSLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S
here? Y iS--
DUST . . . . . . . . . . . 1
911 (If YES, ASK,I What na of air UNPLEASANT ODOR, SMELLS • . . . . . . . . . • . . . 1
I pollution Ss a MAzE DR SMOG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
problem? AUTO EXHAUSTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
GINER.AL SAD Q1IALITY or AIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
DIM (SPECIrYI) _ /
DON'T XNON OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
t;
q. Do you have a problem with loose or rtrff NO, NOT A PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
animals? YES--
DOGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
(r? YES, ASK+I Whet kinl of animals are CATS . . . . . . . . . E
a problem? FARM ANIMALS (CONS, CHICUNS,• HORSES). . . . . . . . 1
WILD ANIMALS (SKUNKS, RACOONS, ETC.) . . . . . . . . !
EXOTIC ANIMALS (LIONS, SNAKES, ETC.) . 6
OIKER (SPNCIFY,) /
DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
r
b. Do you have a problem with mosquitoes or NO, NOT A PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
rate or other pests of that type? YES--
MosQU ITOC9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
pr YES, ASK0 What kind of of pelts FLICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
are a problem? AATS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
NICE !
O:HEA (sPCC1rY.) 1
DON'T 1010W OR NO ANMR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Oo yon Mw R Droblm with Yacant lots N0, NOT A PPOSLEM . 1
that are not taken care of? YES—
I
M7GN WEEDS 1
' IIF YEA, ASK0 What kind of problem? LITPER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I " '
( JUNK "SO ON LOT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1 O"MR (SPWISY,) 1 I 1
DON'T KNdf OR N9 ANEWFR. . . . . . . 9 1
i
9a. Thinking hw about nsighbothood clsanlinafa, ALMOST ALWAY7 C72AN . . . . . . . . . 1
Would you say your eeighborbood is almost USUALLY CLEAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
always clean, usudly c1un, usually dirty, USUALLY DIRTY . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
{ or almost always dirty? ALMOST AL%hyd 91 RTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I DON'T WX OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
i
b. During the past twelve months, did the N0, %MR MISSED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
garbage collectors weer miss picking up YES, MISSED
your garbage on the scheduled pick-up days? on Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
TWO TINN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
(IF YES, WiK Mw many time? 1, 4, OR ! TIMES • • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • • 4
6 TO 10 TIMFJ. . . . . . . • . . . . . . . !
t MORE THAN 10 TIM . . . • • . . . . , • . . . 1
i DON'T KNOW OR No ANSWER. . . . . . . . . . . . i !
t c. During the past twelve months, haw you had N0, WMR SPILLED (/RtP TO Q. 10) . . . . . . . , • . 1
a problem with spilled Or scattered troth YEA, SPILLED-•
j or 9arbags? 0%1 TIME . . . . . . . 1
r+. TWO TIMES. . . . . . . . I
$ (if YES, ASK,► Nw many tiles? 1, 4, oR ! TIML • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • • 4
.w 6 TO f0 TIM?/. . . d
MOBS THAN 10 TLQJ . , . . . . . , . . . . . g `
,w DON'T tow OR 00 ANSWER. . . . . . . . . .
IUP Its , AIX1l W
I
Id. 1RAt do you think wee the aura of ORAEAOt COL7iCTORS. 1
I the problem? KtOE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 1
I OTWEA IIPECtPY,) _ 1 !
4~
' i - WHIT JI" OR MO ANSWCO • . • • l . . , g
4I
(
r .a uT"$
ar
6
P.a 10. During the summer months of last ynar (19751, NO, NEVER USED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
did you or another member of your hnume- YES, USSD•-
hold use any Denton public parks, swimming AIRM EVERY CRY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
pool or similar recreation facilitles7 ONCE (OR MAE) A WEEK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
OlIC~ (OR MORE) A MCWTN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
e+' (IF YES, ASK0 About how often was that? LESS TKAX ONCE A MOWTN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
i
Ila. Do you have city voter? NO (SKIP TO Q. 12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
YES. .......2
(IF YES, ASK llb AND lid DON'T XNCW OR NO ANSWER (SXIP To Q. 12). . . . . . . . .
Daring the .
past tve`.ve months, here HAVE CITY WATER, BUT No FROSLFMS . . . .
1
there been any time' when your water YES, HAD PROBLEM--
( stoppeX flowing or when your water ONE TIE, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 2
( pressure wag much less than usual? TWO TINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1, e, OR S TLMZS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,
(IF YES, ASX0 About how nervy time=? 6 To 10 TINS . . 3
I MORE THAN 10 TIMES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
( DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
c. During the past twelve months, hare NO, NEVER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
you had any problem with the taste, YES, PROBLEM WITH.- .
I odor or appearance of your drink- TASTE . 2
I lnq water? ODOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l
I APPEAAANCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
I (IF °:,S, ASK,) Which problen have ALL OY THE AZWE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S
I you had--with the DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
took", the odor or
the appearance?
,
- 124. During the past twelve months, have you NO, WMR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
bees @G-i mely inronvenlencsd by water YES, pwatAm AMR--
ste. Mlrp In the streets of your neighbor- AIA406T MAT RAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
hood after a rainstorm? CNLY APM VERY NAVY RUIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 t
DON'T KNOW ON NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
(If YES, ASK,) When does it happen--
sites almost every rain
or only after a vary
heavy rain?
b. Have you ever *Verienced any property NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
damage due to standing rater after flood- YES. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 ing or rainstorm? ",I 101011 OR No ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
c. Would you say the streets in your neighbor- NEFD samoR REPAIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
hood now naed ease minor repairs, Pose NSSb MAJOR REPAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
to or repairs or no repairs at all at the NEED NO REPAIRS AT PRESENT TIME . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Present tine? DON'T XNOW OR NO ANSIRR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
134, During the past twelve sanths, has your HAVE NO ELECI'AIC SERVICE . . . 1
electric pows: gone off without warning? ROIVE ELECTRIC a mcf, RI7f NO PI(OBLSS(S . . . . . . . . . 2
j yES, RAD PROSLOi--
(IF YES, ASX,) About how many times? ONE TIME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
TWO TIM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~
3, 6, OR S TIM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S
6 TO 10 TIM . . . . , . . . . . 6
11072 TNAN 10 TIMES.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
OMIT E." OR NO AN51RR . . . , . . . . , . 9
b. During the past twelve months, has . 1
Your M-i NO TELCPNdIE IN bCML.
` - telephone failed to operate--that is, did Rf /9: Ttl401100M, BUT NO PROBLIDt9. . . . . . . . . . . . 7
((C it go dead, not receive calls or not let t..~E, HAD P*=L74--
you Call outs ON! TIME. . . . . . , 3
TI10 TIM . . . . ,
III? Yte, ASKt) About how ferny times? 31 61 OR r. 113499. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S
6 TO 10 TEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
NOR! THAN 10 TIM. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
t . DOII'T IOM OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I
a
t
i
f~
7
c. During the pest twelve months, has your
natural (pipodJ es Service stopped RhV NO PIPED NATLMU Gila SERVICE . .
out varnl With. nAVz OAK, bVf NO PRODI.ENS - 1
ng, or has the pressure dropped YEa, i01D PAOBL12P • • • ' ' • r
or caused a problem in any other way)
ONE IZME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(IF YES. ASw,I About how 1W TIMES. • 1
r. many tlmeo7 3, s, OR 5 TIRES . ' ' ' . ' . • • 1
I 6 TO 10 TIMES. • • • • • • • i
NORE THAN 10 TIMM • • • • • • • 6
N _ DON'T AT10N OA No ANSWER, . . , • • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' T
ii. Are there any other kinds or problems in your neighborhood-problems that I haven't already eked about?
csa IIr YES, ASY:1 what other problems do you have around here? (PROSE,) Anything else?
OTHER PROBLEMS,
r.!
NO DMI PROBI.ENS OR 40 ANSwIR.
I5, Up to this point, I have asked you a lot of quest lons about your neighborhood.. Taking
considaratlon, what would you say you like ao_st aM Sedwt about this neighborhood eve ing into
e. .trot, tell me what ycn like most about your neighborhood, (PAOP3,1 Anytt.lnq alp?
LIKW Weft
iI
i
DON'T ANOw OR No ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
b. And what do you like least about your neighborhood?
(PAObE,) Anything e1sN
LIKED LEASTi
I
i '
DON'T 1G0ow OR NO ARSwER I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
16s. Meat, I have some vasti,me about police V111y
protection and public safety. row SA" ' ♦ 1
how safe would you feel walking ale" In NM 9A 2A TALL , . . . , • , , • ' ' • ' ' •
this neighborhood at night--v r ~ In ~ TM AT ALL . • ' ' ' ' ' . ' • • 0
reasonably safe, or not safe at 2117e, DON'T iNgf OR no ANSNEA i
• b. During the past twelve menthe, have you at Tits WX Q. 17a'el. .
any others in your household been the • • ' '
vletla of a erLxi DDO OI: IT lek]► Dow TO OR Q, 100 ill. ANSWER (S 1
KIP TO • Q. 10) . . . . , • • • !
. 9
QUESTION lid-C P011 VICTIMS Or CRIME,
r--
f +17s. Altogether, how aany crimes did yur aM
others In your household experience? t1q . • ' ' ' ' ' . ' • ' • . . . . . . . . . . 1
1 ~
I rOOll. . . . . . . 4
1 ►IYl OA !bill. . • • • s
D001'T 11000f 011 M MSwEA , . . 9
a.v
1
*SWAMI
as
B
am
I b. Were all the crime reported
to the police? YES, ALL CRIMES REPORTED (SKIP TO 0. 1B) . . . . . , .
NLL ROPE REPORTED. ' i
~ (IF NOT, ASK,) Nov er0y crimes were not ALL REPORTED tRClpT_.• • • 7
we ( rsportsd to the police? OME
TWO . . . . . . . • . . . 1
I TIM' ........•.e
( room (OR Mope) . . . . . 66
INS DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
' 0. (Tr ONE OR MDPJ CRIMES WERE NOT REPORTED
( ASRr) . DIDN'T WART TO OO TO COURT 1
( DIDR T TRIER IT WAS IMPORTANT ENO" . • • . • • . .
er DIDN'T THIN[ IT WOOLD DO ANY GODD, , 7
r What "a the main reasm for not report- DIDN'T MINT TO GET INVOLVED. • • • • • • • • • •
1 1ng the crime !o Che pollee? DIDN'T MINT TO GET
IN TROUBLE. S
1 "RAID MY rNSCAA" WC(UY 00 Up.
(DO NOT READ AMSWEAS) OTMEA (SPECIFY, d
I DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER. 9 .
18. During the past twelve monan, have you YES (ASX
or any other nrntkr of ymr 0. 19s-d) , , • , , • . 1
'T KNOW TO Q. 70A , , , . . .
called for mnergency Beni ahsuchhasdan DON'(SFtP T NO
OR NO ANSWER (SKIP•TO 7
amhutann, ff roman or the police? Q. 7ia-D)
9
QUE5TION 19a-d FOR 7NO5E no CAL120,
'1g&. Nov many tiews did you call for emergency ONE TIME , ,
aervlce daring the past twelve months? TWO TIMES. • • • • • • • • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' ' . • ' • 1
TEPEE TIMES. . • • • • • • • • • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' • 7
MM OR MDRS TIMES . • , • • • • • • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' ' ?
! i DON'T KNOW OR NO kp"kR. . ' • • ' • • • • • • • • • • ' e
b. WMch service did
you call lor7
- I POLICE
(13' WVJ TMAN OKI, ASR,) FIRE 1
I AMBL11-wr. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
( •
RI one did you call for mat RM211 (SPECIFY aEEWEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e
recently? DON'T KNOW OR 1eD AN5W2A. . . , 9
e. Nov would you rate the speed In respond. ExceLl27fr. .
ing to your Rost recent call--sxallent, 0000 • • ' • • ' ' ' ' • ' • • • • • 1
E ( good. fair or poor? ' . ' • • • • • • . . . . . .
/AIR • '
POOR . . . ' 7
0[Ae'T x11011 Wl.MO ANBWEII • • • •
. .
d. How would you rate the qullty-at the ExchLLEAT. , • • '
r emergency sarvfet You recelveedd -excellent. • • • ' ' ' ' ' ' • • • • • • • . . . . .
( good, fair or poor? FAIR . . • • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . i
POOR . I
L - •
Dte1'T KNOW OR NO ANSMEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
70a. Do you feel that the police in Denton sea POLICE ARE OENERAMY.-
9e11erally fair Or unfair in the way they PAIR (SKIP TO 0. 71), . ,
treat people? UWAIR (ASK p, ]Ob) . • • • • • • • • • • ' ' ' ' i
DEPEND! (An Q. 70b). . • • • • • • • • • • • • • ' ' 7
DON'T A71011 OR NO ANSWtlI (LKIP TO Q. 71) . • • • • • • ? .
`D. (IF SAID DWAIR ON ( DEPEND!, ASR I In what ways are the P01 let unfair? (►ROEE,) Any other cart?
Amami
r ( DON'T RHOW OR NO ANRWg1. . . . . . . . . . 9
i
16
esw
ea ,
to 9
E 21. During the past twelve ronthm, halt you NO, NO CONTACTS (SKIP TO Q. 23) . . . . , . , 2
or any other member of your household YES, HAVE CONTACTYD CITY (ASK Q. 22a-f) . . . . . . . . 2
contacted the city about a complaint, DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER (SKIP TO Q, 23) , , . . . , , . 9
00 request for service or information--
for example, about a stray animal,
( araat repairs or things of that typo?
P QUESTION 22a-f FOR THOSE WHO CONTACTED CITY,
~ 2r. Now many different problems did you call ONE . . , , , . . . . . . . . . I
M I about? TWO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 i •
FOUR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • a
FIVE OR MORE, 3
w DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I
b. What kind of problem was your meat recent cell about--can you tell me about it briefly?
I
MOST RECENT PROBLEM.
I
I
I
I
DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . 9
I
C. Who did
you contact about thin (most DENTON CITY OFFICES--
I recent) problem? SPECIFIC DEPARTMNT (SPECIry,) 2
I CITY SWITCHBOAAD 2
! OFFICE OF MAYOR OR CITY,000NCIL. . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . 3
OFFICE OF CITY AXNAGER a
POLICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . 3
NEWS )MIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
I oTT2A (SPECIFY,) a
• d .
r„ 1 DON'T KNOW OR RO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1
) I
( d. Were you generally satisfied with the RESPONSE NOT YET COWLVM. , , • • • • • • . . . 3
results you got, or not? YES, SATISTIEO. • , , . . . 2
NO, NOT SATISFIED AECAUSL--
1
I KEYER REEPOLIDFD. 3
{ ( bID NOT CORRECT P"LEN . . . . . • . a
DON'T KNOW ON NO ANSWER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Were the persons you contacted courteous to res . .
you when you called, or not? 00. . I2
1 DON'T KNOWER NO ANSWER 9
f
f. The nett tire you need to call the city DENTON CITY OFFICER--
about a -complaint or a request for sorvice, SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT (SPECIrY,) I
who will you Call? CITY EWITCHDOARD . . . . . . . . . _ 2
1 OFFICE or MAYOR OR CITY 000NCIL. . . . . . . . . . . 1
OFFICE OR CITY KARR= . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <
FOLrC't . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
NEWS MEDIA. . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
i NEICMVA bVARTMWT11EEDED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T
5 1 0MA (SPEC2FY,) 9
( DON'T KNOW OR no ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2). Dm you, personally, feel that you could Ytb . . . . . . . . .
hors, a "lot in the wa the cit . . . ' I
c ant is, running things, if you wanted to? DON'T KROW OR NO ANSWER , . , . 9 .
I
i
10
i
24a. During the past twelve months, have yos or YES (ASK Q. 24b) .
any other members of your household attend. NO (SKIP TO Q. 751 , . • . . . . . 7 -
ad any meeting or hearing of the city DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER '(SKIP TO Q. 25). . , . , , , . 9
Council or any other government graups?
Ib. 1111 YES, ASKr) Do you feel that your. TIME WELL-SPEW. . . . . . . . . . , , , I
their attendance at those meetings WASTE OF Tra. . . . • • 3
I vas time well-spent, or a waste of DON'T KNOW OR RO ANSWER. . . . • • , • , 9
e. I time?
25. Would you attend monthly meetings of city YES. . , , , I
officials, administrators, and eitirens to No
discuss the existing problems and future DON'T KNOW OR No ANSWER, . . . . . • , • . . . • 9
goals of Denton?
26a. How often do you usually discuss local DAILY. • . I
community problems with others--daily, WEEKLY . . . . • . . . • . . . 2
weekly, at times, or never? AT TINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
NEVER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
DON'T KNOW OR No ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
b. Have you ever worked with others in this YES. . . . • , , , . . • 1
community to try to solve some community NO . , , . . , . • . , . • • • • 2
problem? DON'T MCV OR No ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
C. Have you over taken part in forming a new YES, . . . . . , , , , , . I
group or a new organization to try to NO , , , , , , , , • ' • ' . • • ' • ' • 2
solve some community problen? DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
27. Now, here are some questions about the City of Denton as a whole, rather than just about your noI hbor-
hood. Please use this plus-and-minus card again ISSOW LARD) to tell me how high or bow low you mould
rate the things I'll read to you. The first one Is "getting around in the city--9ettin9 to where you
want to go. A rating of plus 3 would mean that you feel it is ya easy to get around and Mere you
want to go, but a rating of minus 3 would mean that It it very difficult for you to get around. of
course, you can give any rating In between, depending on hoe you feel,
(ASK ROOM EACH ONE SEPARATELY) I10
MTINOS MT1NO 'a. fitting around in tha eity--getting to where you want to go . . . . ♦3 +1 -1 -7 -3 9
b. Downtown Denton as a convenient place to shop . . . . . . . 43 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
C. Downtown Denton as a convenient place to conduct business . . . 43 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
d. Shopping facilities in Denton . . . . . . . . . 43 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
s. Cultural facilities, such as theater, art shown, and so on. +3 +2 41 -1 -7 -3 9
f, Denton In general, as a good place to live. . a3 +3 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
I IS. Rare are same additional problems that communities in Tezaa have experienced. Tp what extent do you
1 - think these are problems in Denton? (SHOW CARD)
(ASK ABRyr EACH ONE SEPAMTELT) No
MT7NCB MTINO
a. Providing services and rare for the elderly . . . . . . . . . . . , r3 +2 41 -1 -2 -3 9
b. Unemployment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . +1 +2 41 -1 .2 -3 9
i c. Adequate low-coat housing . • . . . . . . . . . • . 03 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 9
d. Substandard housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • . +3 47 41 -1 -2 •3 9
e. Rae relations. . 43 42 41 -1 -I -1 9
19. Talking about the sane problems, to you think the city should take a great deal of responsibility, some
rasponelbility, a little responsibility, or no responsibility for providing services or solving probleml
i .
{ (ASK ABOM PACK ONE SEPAMTELY) ART f" UrM MOVE DW'RMBWPK OR
1j a. Providing services and care for the elderly . • . . . 4 3 2 1 9
1 b. Kadueing unemployment . . . . . , . . . . . 4 1 2 1 1 .
c, Providing low cost housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 2 1 9
t III d. Improving substandard housing . . . . . . . . . 4 3 2 1 9
Improving race relations. . . . . . . . , 1 4 3 7 1 9
F
t
I
ruvn~
ll
N 70. New long have you lived here in the Denton LESS TIM 1 YEAR ' ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
area? 1 TO S YIUM • I
6 TO 10 YEARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
OVER 10 YEARS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e
N DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER. . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . 9
31. Now long have you head here at this I.ESS THAN I YEAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
address? 1 TO S YEARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6 TO 10 YEARS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
j ( OVER 10 YEARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER. . . . . . . 9
W
37, Where did you live before you .roved to ELSEKCKERE IN TEXAS (SPECIFY!) 1
Denton? OUTSIDE OF TEXAS (SPECIM) 3
Rw "IT KNOW OR NO ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
33a. Do you hope to Stay here, where you are MOVE ELSEWHERE (ASK Q. 33b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
living now, or do you hope to move some- STAY ItERE (SKIP TO Q. 3e). . . . . . . . . . . , . . 2
W where else? DON'T KNOW OR NO ANSWER (SKIP TO Q. 31) . . . . . . . . . 9
'b. (1? HOVE ELSEVHM, ASK,) EKSLSMEPE IN DE'V" (SPECITY.I i
Eunwr RE iN TEXAS (sPECIPY,) 3
w ) ere would that to?
wh
OUTSIDE Of TEXAS (SPECiryt)3
DON'T KNOW OR NO A61751M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I
34. About how much do you pay for this (house) d . . I N S
(apartment) per month, including what you K . . . . . . . . . 1 R . 6
pay for utilitiaa--heat, gas, electricity, L . . 3 9 . . 7
water (not telephonel--usinq We card x . . . . . . ♦ . . e T . . . . . . . . . E
I (SHOW CAPD 9), just tell me the letter
code that comes closest to what your TAW'? KNOk OR Boo 1ssWER. . . . . . . . . . . 9
j (auae) (apartment) costs per month.
tIIII ~
35. If you had your choice, would you prefer 911043LE-FARILY . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . •
ou 1
live Ln a single-family home, a town- TOWNHOUSE. • • 3
house (attached to another house), a D(1PIn . • 3
duplex, aA apartment, a mobile hams, ATAATMIM. . . . . . . . . . 9
or what? 1101IL9 IM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'i
( OTHER (MCI3Yt1
DON'T MAN OR No ANSWER. . . . . . . • 9
I i
36. Now many rooms do you have in your living NUMER Cr ROOtSs
quarters, mt counting bsthrocae, porches, "IT I" OR No ANSWER. . . . 9
balconiu, MI1d
i
i
S 37a. Are there any serious ways that th13 home YES (ASK Q. 37b) . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
is not a good place for you (and your No (SKIP TO Q. In . • . . • • _
family) to ilive? DON'T KNOW OR W5 ANSWER (SKIP TO Q.301. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1 ib. (If YES, Am) In what way is your home not a good place to live? (PROM) My other ways?
1
+ I ANSWER, .
+ t.t I DON'T RNCM OR NO ANSWER. . . . . . , 9
li I
E r4
PQ
12
( ry'
18• Do you own this home, cr are you renting? OID7E2 (ASE Q, ]9A-dl
RIr77'SA (SKIP TD Q. 601 . . . . . . . . 1 .)l.
on - DON'T R" OR 110 ANSNEA (SKIP •TO Q, X101. • 2
t Q SITION 79e-d FOR 9
NOME(MiNEA9 ONLY Do You have a anrtgaga on S•DUr home?
YES. . . .
No
DON IT,IMM OR,NO 1
ANSNER. • • • ' 2 i/
1 D• During the poet two Years, have you made '
1 any major repairs or leprovwents on NS' g
1 Your home--such Of A new kitchen, new NO 1
bothroce fixtures, a new r DON'T KNOM OR NO AR5r!'R. 2
Pointing, or things like that? 9
I
1 C. Are there some major repalre needed that
1 have not been made? YES. . . .
1 NO j
DON'T FNd! . • 2
1 d• During the past two years, have you 9
attempted to get a home npefe loan! NO YES . ' , , • . . • , .
1 • - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
' (IF YES, ASK() Mare you successful? Ar7WrMj StX"SSM ,
1 ATTEMPTEDi UNSVOCtSSFVL 2
A7TVQTEDI STILL M PAOGAESS, 1
DON'T "04 opt No ANSNER. . 1
10. Row many care (do yon) (does your family) NONE
r own? (INCLUDE PZCK-UPS, CAMPERS,
ETC.)
on, . . • . . . 1
I?tM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y
1 _ FOUR ORS" . . 1
DON'T a" OR 170 ANSNER. • ' • • • • 9
9 1
11' Sow WS would like to uk
ACPZL or DISAGREE with tA~lol04% queatlons concerning Your feelings *bout local I`
politico, Mould you
a. I don't think public officials Care j
1 much about Out people lik► me AGR12' . • • ' • .
think. DISAORt6 . . . . j
" DON't KNOM OR1p ANSI7ER ' • • • '
. . . . . 2
9
D' 'rho way people trots
that deoldaa how in
lhlN eo the are run main in thing AGREE.
!hf it country. I . . , 1
DISAGREE
DON'T RROM no Am" I . . . ' • • • • . ' ' ' • • • :
e. Voting is the only way that people like AGREE, .
me can have any may about how the • • • •
goverwen! tuna things. D76ACRE6 . j
•-r...._ DMIT MKV •Mp • . . . . . . . .
AIIsm. . !
d. People like me don't have any say About M"t. ,
What the government does. . .
DISAGREE . 1
DON'T KNeV Olt NO ANSNER. . • • . ' ' ' ' '
. . . . I . . I . . . I
s• SomecLmes politics and government
j. esan ao AGREE. .
c'oeipllemted the! a pettoo like DISAORy.E , ' • • ,..1.
as can't rutty underatond vha'
..i going on. D011 T E1'Idl OR,MO ANSIIER.
17. AStogetMr, bw -Man -y persona lire here?
17• NOV MAY yore of school have
you COMPlsted?
I
a+
nws.w
e
i.
s
13
1! 44. Whet is your age?
{
45. Ust weak were you working full time, MORKTOG FUU-171212 (1S M. OR MORE) . {
Mtltbw, going to School, keeping WOAKINO PART-T17a l
hoase, or what? (1 To 14 RR.9.I. 3
WITH A JOB, an NOT AT w= BECAUSE Cr •TDT0RAjky•
IUXESS, VACATION, STRIKZ. . . . . . . . . . 1 j.
E VNEXPLC D, L11D. OFT, LoMwa TOR WM. . . . . . . . 4
[ [ RETIP.® 1
rM SCHOOL • 5
KEEPING HOUSE . . • • • 6
DON'T KNOW OR NO AN91flIR B
466. What is your main occupation? (what sort of work do
7y you do?)
b. we are also interested in the occupation of the head of this household the
family's inoome)--Would that be you? ( person who earns most of ti s
(If YES. RECORD R 19 HEAD, IT NO, ASK,) What would his/her occupation be?
.+t
47. And now would
you please look at this card J. 1 R
(SHOW CARD C1 and tell me which code letter K. . . . . . . . 7 S S
comes close at to Your total family income L, S T ' ' . , • • • • 6
i; lost year, before taxes and frca all sources. M. • • . • • . • • ?
E , 4 U . B
{ DON'T RHOW OR No ANSWER . . . . . . . . . g
412, In case my supervisor in the office wants NAME, r_
to check my work, what is your name?
49, In else my supervisor in the office wants
to check my work, what is l
~I number? your telephone No ypp12• , .
RETUBEp ' ' ' ' ' ' . • 7 '
i
of i So. Thank YOU Tory much! That completes the questions i have to s.k, but lot ms check back quickly to be
sure I haven't overlooked anything,,,
51. RECORD rmie aROUP BT osari AT1cN, 1
S7. BEE-- I
Mrs (AN=) . . . ~s • . . • . . . 1 ~ - ~
roy ►14RRL• . , • g
RIJ.CR (WORO) . . . . . . . . . . I
MIOIICM-AMERICAN, . • • • . 1 $3. DATE ar IWIERVIEW,
AMERICAN MALI . . . . . . 4
OTHER (Spec[rT:)
- B 54. Tea IN17EAVIEW ENDED,
r.
5S. LAMM OF IWIERVI1vt
J
56. 13MAVIAM WWWR,
TOR D17ICE USE ORM
P y VaurlED aye
i