Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (845) AGENDA ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL STUDY SESSION JANUARY 23, 2008 ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE STUDY SESSION - AT OR AFTER 5:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. PRESENTATION OF COMMUNITY SURVEY FINAL REPORT BY CHRIS BAKER OF MARKETING INTELLIGENCE, INC. 2. FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 MID-YEAR FINANCIAL STATUS REVIEW 3. PREVIEW OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 BUDGET PROCESS 4. DISCUSSION OF NARANJA TOWN SITE BOND ALTERNATIVES ADJOURNMENT POSTED: 01 17 08 3:00 p.m. cp The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify the Town Clerk's Office at (520)229-4700. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Page 1 of 1 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 1/23/08 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: DAVID ANDREWS, TOWN MANAGER SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF COMMUNITY SURVEY FINAL REPORT BY CHRIS BAKER OF MARKETING INTELLIGENCE, INC. SUMMARY: On October 17, 2007,the Town Council voted to award Marketing Intelligence, Inc. a contract to complete the Town's first community survey. As part of the adopted Town Strategic Plan, a biennial survey was required to assess community needs, evaluate existing community services, determine community priorities, and determine the community's willingness to pay for services. Specifically, the survey was designed to gauge residents' attitudes, perceptions, and levels of satisfaction with Town services. Vice Mayor Dankwerth, Council Member Parish, and Council Member Carter served on the community survey subcommittee that evaluated the proposals of potential consultants, as well as helped in the creation of the survey instrument. The subcommittee met initially to determine the goals of the survey effort and outline the scope of work they were requesting from potential consultants. After the consultant was selected, the subcommittee met with Marketing Intelligence to more clearly explain the needs of the Town and help to outline the information they were looking for from the survey. After the subcommittee approved the final survey instrument, Marketing Intelligence conducted the phone survey over a two-and-a half week period in early December. This evening, Chris Baker of Marketing Intelligence is here to explain the findings of the survey and answer any questions that the Council may have about the resident responses. The hope is that the Mayor and Council will be able to use the information gathered in this survey as a management tool to make decisions during the upcoming fiscal year. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Final Draft"Town of Oro Valley Community Survey Report" Uetej David Andrews, Town Manager , , . , 1 Tr-yiSURVEY , . : , . , MMUNI II! gr/ , , , , , -, i 1 , / , ' I - ' C t. ' —,"' -... A Report of Findings and Analysis PRESENTED TO . 0 ••• •••-..- - - - ---- - ', ,.,... .. ... ........_... .a„,...,..,cy 44, . . . . ..... . . . _ ., .. . 0 ..• ,-0 -, 1. ,... 7..... . ...,•.. _ . ir , ,i :. ' •'iiir- ...,,....,‘::1,-,,-', , - . „_-... . , . . . Tat.vn of ro _ ,. .. ..... .., . ._..., _ Valley it ,,,-. , ,- ' ' '' j"*-',' ,,.',='''4. ',- . ,•'---,r,',-:-- A, : -T: - '1,,, !;---:%,,,„ ;-,,,..:-7,,,,•,:,f;',--,:',Z.',,,-.;.,-, '..*-70Fri-4.t.::',_.* dr ,,,.t.:_:___-.-.1.1,, ,,.._., ..,,....,,,,p-,,,,iir.,A 7-.. ,7,7.-„,..;-,..,..,:„..,.. _-.1-. 4.;‘, ,, -.,,,,_ .. ,,.:-. _-, tt6 . .li i•i'i:'4 ..",,, '1,),,s.,..;.:47'..),,!:.;,;:-",,,Z.,--'7,...„_,,,-_-*.'„,:i„,'„,,,A,,,,t,„: _ ,,,,:ot,,,,,,,,",'.,4,_ v.,,,,,,,,,.,...,,,,,:‘,5:iir , , ,,,,,,7---7.-1/4-",,_,4,*"_.:4„.**14,-,, ;,. ,N,'-2:,,._,-,.4.-.4.A,,-:-.:'::.,03,,_„v7,----,,, ,',:ij,.,,f1----*:iz; .,-,s.-.-.-:.1:k,':-7-•—:"-,,,,t,_...,.___;„,, ,. '4,`.4.i_,-.4,s' ,, --- ' i "--;,4;.it4-44,44) January 2008 .,„ -IV.: arketing Intelligence ultants Marketing Research&Strategy Cons TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary . . i Survey Findings . . . . 1 Survey Respondents76 Survey Design and Methodology . . 77 Survey Instrument . . . 78 Statistical Tables . . 83 Open Ended Responses . . 131 . s, I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY „, ,,,„„,,„„,„ „„,„,„,„„ s„,„ Marketing Intelligence (MI) is a Tucson, Arizona based marketing research and strategy consulting firm that conducted a telephone survey from December 2nd — December 19th, 2007 on behalf of the Town of Oro Valley, in which 400 Town residents were randomly selected from two separate lists. A stratified sample plan (based an age groups proportionate to the most recent data from the United State Census)was also employed to maximally draw a representative sample of Town residents (see Section IV for a full explanation of the sampling method). The objectives of this study were to: • Gauge overall satisfaction with the Town of Oro Valley • Ascertain how residents define/describe quality of life • Gauge the services currently offered by the Town of Oro Valley • Identify the perceived strengths of the Town of Oro Valley • Identify the perceived weaknesses of the Town of Oro Valley • Identify areas residents feel are important and will lead to the sustainability of the Town of Oro Valley • Determine how psychographic and demographic segments differ in their perceptions and assessments The following key findings are based on the analysis of the survey data: Resident Satisfaction Overall, residents of Oro Valley are satisfied with the services and amenities provided by the Town. 86% are at least somewhat satisfied and 43% are very satisfied, with only 6% indicating dissatisfaction. Half of all respondents feel that the Town of Oro Valley is better at providing services and amenities than are other governments where they have lived, with only 12% responding that Oro Valley is worse than others. Even those who have a very negative opinion or somewhat negative opinion of local governments in general have mean satisfaction scores above the neutral (3.32 and 3.93 respectively on a five-point scale) for Oro Valley. In assessing the individual services and amenities provided within the Town, residents feel that the strengths of Oro Valley are library, police, fire and emergency services, trash pickup, and schools. High assessments of police and fire (along with schools) are significant because they are considered to be "quality of life" issues for residents (safety) as well as being rated as among the most important services/amenities offered. Safety (along with the community and people) is also considered by residents to be one of the best things about living in Oro Valley. The services and amenities with less than 50% satisfaction include: Public transportation, planning for growth, creating employment opportunities, customer service from elected officials, retail and dining opportunities and historical preservation. Planning for growth is also considered a quality of life issue and rated as one of the most important services. Drivers of Satisfaction Safety is considered the most important "quality of life" issue for more than one-third of Oro Valley residents. It may also be a prime factor for potential residents who are considering moving to the Town, as 51% of those who have lived in the community for two or fewer years consider safety their primary"quality of life" issue. Other important issues are growth and planning, schools and education, recreation and traffic/roads. Similar to the desirable "quality of life" issues, residents feel that the most important services/amenities provided by a Town are fire and emergency services, police, streets and roads, planning for growth, and schools. The comparatively less important services are historical preservation, public transportation, and activities for Seniors (though certain segments of the population may consider each of these relatively more important). Desired Improvements Oro Valley residents indicate that the best way to improve overall satisfaction is via additional recreation opportunities, retail and dining opportunities, improving traffic, and controlling new building. Based on a Quadrant Analysis, which compares the mean importance and assessment responses, the top priorities for the Town include planning for future growth, followed by streets and roads, open space, and retail and dining opportunities. Willingness to Pay for Additional Services _ One-fifth of Oro Valley residents would be very willing to pay for additional services and amenities for the Town, but only if they are services/amenities that are desired on an individual basis (meaning they may not be as willing to pay for the additional services/amenities if the particular service is not sought-after by them). An additional three-fifths are somewhat willing to pay, with 17% unwilling to do so regardless of whether or not they are services/amenities that may be desirable. Older residents (especially those 65 years and older who live in the North part of Oro Valley) are less likely to be willing to pay for additional services, while those with children in the household are more likely. User fees are the most acceptable mechanism to pay for additional services/amenities for all segments of residents. 78% are at least somewhat willing to consider user fees, while only 66% and 50% would consider an increase to the sales tax and property taxes respectively. Public Participation Nearly half of all Oro Valley residents (46%) have previously participated in a public forum, which is a relative high number given that only 10% are very interested (and an additional 50% somewhat interested) in participating. Those who are more likely to participate and be knowledgeable about meeting logistics are older residents (especially those who are 65 years or older and live in the North part of Oro Valley), more established residents, and those without children in the household. Of those who would like to participate, 23% of residents indicating that they are very interested 0 are unaware of Town Council meeting times and places and 40% of those who are somewhat interested also lack this knowledge. ii Also of interest is that participation in public forums has no effect on overall satisfaction with the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley. Participants are neither more nor less likely to be satisfied than non-participants. Communication with Residents Mail and Newspaper are the two most effective ways to reach the largest number of Oro Valley residents concerning news about the Town, with 18 — 34 year olds equally preferring the Town website as a communication medium. By combining Mail, Newspapers, and the Town Website, 99% of all residents would be reached by at least one of these media, which they indicate are an effective source. There were no other media identified by a large number of residents as an effective means for communications. iii Satisfaction With Town of O Overall Satisfaction 50% 42.5% 43.5% 40% 30% 20% 10% 8.3% 4.0% 1.8% 0% skim Very Somew hat Neutral Somew hat Very satisfied satisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied } 1 A/1 January,2008 When asked how satisfied they are with the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley, the vast majority of residents (86%) are at least somewhat satisfied and greater than two-fifths (43%) are very satisfied. Only 6%indicate being dissatisfied, with fewer than 2%responding"very dissatisfied." 1 Satisfaction With Town of O Valley Overall Satisfaction • Male : 4.15 c O Female x 427 18-34 4.17 a 35-44 4.31 2 45-54 4.12 O 55-64 4.14 < 65+(North) 4.33 65+(South) 420 2 or fewer F 423 O 3-5 4.19 6-10 428 } 11+ 4.12 a Under$35k 428 $35k-$50k 4.20 $50k-$75k w 4.12 < $75k-$100k ;-- 4.33 $100k+ 423 1 4.37 2 4.17 g 3-4 4.19 a 5+ 424 • Yes 4.16 423 1 2 3 4 5 1=Very dissatisfied,5=Very satisfied /1 r; January,2008 2 All of the mean satisfaction scores for each segment of the population are 4.12 or greater on a five-point scale. Though there are minor variations in the mean satisfaction scores within the demographic segments, there are no statistically significant differences (Independent Samples T-Tests and One Way ANOVAs used to test for significance). 2 Satisfaction With Town of OValley Comparison of Town of Oro Valley services vs. other local governments 45% 37.3% 30.3% 30% 20.5% 15% - 4 , raF1 9.8% 2.3% 0% Much better Sorrow hat About the Somew hat Much worse better same worse 3 January,2008 In comparing the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley to those provided by other town, city and/or county governments where residents have lived,just over half(51%)report that the Town of Oro Valley is better than others,with slightly more than 12% feeling that the services and amenities provided by the Town are worse. The remaining 37% indicate that the service/amenity levels are about the same. 3 Satisfaction With Town of O Valley Comparison of Town of Oro Valley services vs.other local governments Male 3.51 • Female 3.63 18-34IIM111111.1111.3.62 5- 35-44 3.60 2 45-54 1011111111111111=3.49 a, 55-64 3.59 a� Q 65+(nth) -, A.111=111.111111111 3.64 65+(South) 3.48 > 2 or few er 3.47 c 3-5 3.49 E26-10 3.61 >- 11+ 3.60 Under$35k 3.54 • $35k-$50k 3.44 $50k-$$107051 3.62 Q $75k- 3.69 $100k+ 3.59 1 3.59 2 3.56 a. 3-4 3.55 II- 5+ 3.66 Yes3.55 6 No 1 2 3 4 5 1=Much worse than others,5=Much better than others Nit 4 January,2008 A mean score of"3.00"would indicate that on average, the residents of a particular demographic segment feel that the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley are about the same as those provided by other government entities where a resident has lived. All of the mean comparison scores for each segment of the population are 3.44 or greater on a five-point scale, signifying that residents are likely to feel that the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley are better than those of other government entities where they have lived. Though there are minor variations in the mean comparison scores within the demographic segments, there are no statistically significant differences (Independent Samples T-Tests and One Way ANOVAs used to test for significance). 4 Satisfaction With Town of O Valley Feelings towards local governments in general 45% 39.3% 30% 26.8% 15.0% ; gym 143% 15% rq, 4.8% 0% Very Somew hat Neutral Somew hat Very positive positive negative negative January,2008 5 Just over half of the residents surveyed(54%) indicate that they have a positive feeling towards local governments in general. Nearly one-fifth(19%)have a negative feeling and the remaining 27% are neutral. 5 Satisfaction With Town of OValley Overall Satisfaction 5 4.36 4.01 3.93 4 3.32 3 2 to 1 Very positive Somew hat Neutral Somew hat Very positive negative negative Feelings towards local governments in general 6 January,2008 There is a significant positive correlation between overall satisfaction with the Town of Oro Valley and the feelings towards local governments in general (Pearson Correlation= .363). The more positive a resident is about local governments in general, the more likely they are to have a higher satisfaction rating for the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley. Also of note: Even those with a"very negative" feeling towards local governments in general have a mean satisfaction score (3.32 on a five-point scale) that is above the neutral response of 3.00. 6 Satisfaction With Town of O Feelings towards local governments in general 45 Male 3.39 (? Female 3.52 18-34 349 35-44 3.54 2 45-54 3A6 0 55-64 326 . 65+(North) 3.46 65+(South) ;s.K 3.52 2 or fewer : 3.37 0> 3-5 3.47 �, 6-10 y 3.45 >" 11+ 347 Under$35k 3.30 $35k-$50k 3.59 • $50k-$75k 3.51 $75k-$100k 3.39 $100k+ 3A8 1 3S 2 3.31 3-4 3.51 5+ _ 347 • Yes 346 3A5 1 2 3 4 5 =Very negative,5=Very positive January,2008 All of the mean"feeling" scores for each segment of the population are between 3.26 and 3.74 on a five-point scale. Though there are minor variations in the mean"feeling" scores within the demographic segments, there are no statistically significant differences (Independent Samples T-Tests and One Way ANOVAs used to test for significance). 7 Drivers of S Best thing about living in Oro Valley Safe . The community/people 24% Scenery/view s 11111111111..mgcl 17% Proximity 14% Clean/w ell-maintainedmismawref_- 11% Quiet/atmosphere -:3r:-: 10% Recreation INIEr, 7% RetaiVdining Eiv 4% Not in Tucson 11E.,.> 4% Traffic/roads W. 4% Schools 4% Weather FL. 3% Government :. 3% Misc MEW 7% Don't know 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 8 January,2008 When residents were asked what they feel is the best thing about living in the Town of Oro Valley in an open-ended response question,just over one-fourth cited a feeling of being safe and nearly a fourth mentioned the community and/or the people of the Town. Others mentioned the scenery and views of the area, the proximity to work or other destinations, a clean and well-maintained Town, lower noise/a quiet feeling and recreational opportunities. All of the verbatim responses are listed in Section VI. 8 Drivers of S Best thing about living in Oro Valley 35% 0 29% ° 25% 23% 25% 22% { 19% 20% 14% 14% 14% 15% 10% 0'4:1At: �;� Male Female Gender 0 Scenery/views 13 The corrrrunity/people❑Safe o Proximity 9 1\/_t January,2008 In the proceeding slides,the top four responses are graphically illustrated with the segmentation breakdown of each of the demographic categories. A full set of cross tabulations for this question is contained in Section V. For Males the two best things about living in Oro Valley are the community/the people and feeling safe, while for Females feeling safe is the most cited reason. 9 Drivers of S Best thing about living in Oro Valley 40% 34% 33% 31% ►€.r;, 30% , o 0 26%24% ���i 26/0 25%26/0 26% ° 23% 21/ j °, 20%20% 19°/ 16% 20 18% ° 12% 13%, 14/0 12% 13°/ 13% 11% 11% T to k .,. ..5��'K',�_ � '£_{�'rLK�' w:•' 0% 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+(North) 65+(South) Age Group o Scenery/view s o The community/people o Safe o Proxirrity 10 January,2008 Feeling safe is the most often noted best thing about living in Oro Valley for the youngest residents (18-34 year olds) and those who are 45 — 64 years of age. The community/people and feeling safe are the top choices for 35 —44 year olds. The scenery and views, the community/people, and feeling safe are the top responses for 55 — 64 year olds. For those who are 65 and older living in the North part of the Town of Oro Valley (defined as living north of Tangerine Road)the best things about living in the Town are the scenery/views and the community/people. Those who are 65 and older living in the South part of Oro Valley (living south of Tangerine Road) feel that the best part about living in Oro Valley is the community/people. Overall, younger respondents are more likely to focus on safety than are older respondents, with the oldest respondents (65 years old and above)most likely to respond that the community/people is the best thing about living in the Town. 10 Drivers of S Best thing about living in Oro Valley 300/0 28%28% 26% 26% 25%24% 25% 19% 19% ' ' 20% 20% 18% ° 19% 16/0 15% 12% 12% j14% '12% 10% a� K h \ M 2 or fewer 3-5 6-10 11+ Yea rsin Oro Valley e Scenery/view s El The community/people D Safe o Proximity 1V_L January,2008 11 Feeling safe is the best thing about living in Oro Valley for those who are newer to the Town(lived in Oro Valley for five or fewer years), while the community/people is equally enticing for those who have lived in the community for six or more years. 11 Drivers of S Best thing about living in Oro Valley 40% 32% 30% 27% 29% 30% 29%30% 24% p422% 216 20% 17% 16% :1; 16% 15% 16% 14% 15% 47.4: Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Household Income 15 Scenery/view s p The community/people o Safe p Proximity IVY January,2008 12 The number of respondents who indicated that feeling safe is the best part about living in Oro Valley increases as annual household income rises. The community/people is the best part of living in the Town for those with lower household incomes ($50,000 or less). 12 Drivers of S Best thing about living in Oro Valley 40% 0. 30% , 2 % � 8 30% 2. 26% 26% 0 20/0 22/o ° 22% 20% 20% 17% f 16% 13% 13% 13% 11% 11% 10% rf 4 ..: -' iii a iiitits. , , so itt ,,. III ilk 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size El Scenery/views 13 The community/people o Safe En Proximity 13 January,2008 Feeling safe is overwhelmingly the best part about living in Oro Valley for those in larger households (five or more people). Responses related to the community/people are given about as frequently as feeling safe for all other household sizes. 13 Drivers of S Best thing about living in Oro Valley 35% 30% 30% 25% 25% 23% 24% 21% 20% 15% 14% 4,4 14/o 10% f' 10% 0% Yes No Children in Home El Scenery/view s o The community/people o Safe o Proximity V114 January,2008 For households with children present, feeling safe, followed by the community/people, are the two best things about living in Oro Valley. 14 Drivers of S Can increase satisfaction with... Adt'I recreation mow 13.9% Improved retail/dining 13,6% Nothing-satisfied UMW 10.6% Improved traffic/roads Mir I 9.3% ControVreduce building 111111r,.' 8.8% � I Lower taxes/utilities NW 6.3% No Wal-Mart lit 1.4.8% Police-less tix 3.3% Enhanced public transit at: 2.3% I � 2,. 21.7% Msc �L° Don't know W`_.,._.,__ 12.9% '. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 15 ISV_L January,2008 Residents were also asked, in an open ended response question, what one thing the Town of Oro Valleycan do to increase their satisfaction with the amenities and services provided. Just under 14%would like to see additional recreation and another almost 14% would like improved retail/dining opportunities. Greater than 5% also mentioned improved traffic and roads, controlling or reducing building and lower taxes/utilities. About one-tenth do not feel that anything can be done to increase their satisfaction mostly because they are already content. 15 Drivers of S Can increase satisfaction with... 20% '0 0 13% 14% 15/° 12% 10% 11% 10% 7% 7% cA' t 6a2 3 0% Male Ferrule Gender Ei Improve retaiVdining Adt'l recreation Improve traffic/roads o Control/reduce building 16 January,2008 In the following slides, the top four responses are graphically illustrated with the segmentation breakdown of each of the demographic categories. A full set of cross tabulations for this question is contained in Section V. Males are slightly more likely to feel additional recreation is their top priority as a way to increase satisfaction with the Town of Oro Valley, while Females are slightly more likely to indicate that improved retail and dining would increase satisfaction. 16 Drivers of Satisfaction Can increase satisfaction with... 25% 22% 20% 20% 20% 200/0 17% 16% 15% 15% 14/ 14/ 2% 9% 10% 9% 9% 10% 8%1 8% 8% 8% 6% 6% 6% 4' 4% Iii rI. 3% 0% 1111111 IN 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+(North) 65+(South) Age Group o Improve retail/dining el Adt'l recreation o Improve traffic/roads o ControVreduce building January,2008 17 Improved retail and dining is the top mentioned way to improve satisfaction for 35 —44 year olds and especially for those who are 65 years old and above living in the North part of Oro Valley. Additional recreation opportunities is the most noted for the youngest residents (18— 34 year olds) and is also the top choice for one-fifth of the 35 — 44 year olds. 17 Drivers of S Can increase satisfaction with... iii, 20% 16%16% ° 14%14% 14%15% 15/0 10%10% 10% 9% 11%10% 7% 8% 5% 3,. Axa' p,,- 4 riii N.�,�"4 iii i' MI , ,. ,, pyik,,, 0% 2 or fewer 3-5 6-10 11+ Yea rsin Oro Valley o Improve retail/dining o Adt'l recreation o Improve traffic/roads o ControVreduce building IVI January,2008 18 The responses regarding ways to increase satisfaction with Oro Valley are similar regardless of how long a resident has lived in the Town. Newer residents (2 or fewer years in the community) are less likely to know how to increase satisfaction. 18 Drivers of S Can increase satisfaction with... 30% 20% 17% 18% 19% 2196 14% 13% % o 10 10% 10% 9% 11% } 10% 9% O -ate ..tyy. Fes; 11 as}+' Y4 � �- a= r �tt x> am 4it `e � -a k f h: 0% 11116 n Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Household Income El Improve retaiVdining Adt'I recreation o Improve traffic/roads o ControVreduce building 1\ ' January,2008 19 Those in the upper income categories ($75,000 and above) are most likely to respond that satisfactionp with the Town could be increased with additional recreation opportunities. Lower income residents ($35,000 or less) are most likely to feel that satisfaction could be increased by controlling/reducing building. Middle($50,000 - $75,000) and Upper income ($100,000 and above) residents are more likely to feel that satisfaction could be increased with improved retail and dining. g 19 Drivers of S Can increase satisfaction with... 40% 32% 30% 20% 19%19% 0 ° 13/0 12% 11/0 8% 10% 9% 9% 11% 10% 8% ° 4% 4% 0% " Milli kit_ 0% . 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size e Improve retail/dining a Adt'l recreation o Improve traffic/roads a Control/reduce building 1V—U January,2008 20 Larger households (five or more people) are most likely to feel that their satisfaction with the Town would be increased with additional recreation. Controlling and reducing building is the primary concern for single person households. Households with three to four individuals feel that satisfaction can be increased with both improved retail and dining as well as additional recreation. 20 Drivers of S Can increase satisfaction with... 30% 25% 25% 20% 17% 15% 12% 12% ,k 0 10% 10% 8% 8 = £ ' aLFiuy A•'Y 5% 1/0 0% 0 Yes No Children in Home 0 Improve retail/dining D Adt'l recreation o Improve traffic/roads D Control/reduce building 21 January,2008 Residents with children in the home feel that their satisfaction with the Town can be increased with additional recreation and secondarily by improving retail and dining. 21 Drivers of S Most important"quality of life"issues Safety 37.3% Growth/planning 1 A% Schools/education 13.971 Recreation 9.1% Traffic/roads 8.6% Taxes/budget/utility rates la7.3% Scenery/views 111 7,1% The community/people 6.3% Gov't/practices 5.3% l Retail/dining 4.5%i Medical services JAI 4.0% R-oximity j3111 4.0% Water pi 3.0% Keeping it clean 2.8% Don't know 5.3°f° Nis c MI=20.2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% January,2008 22 In attempting to uncover what is most critical to the residents of Oro Valley, respondents were asked what issues are most important to them when thinkingof their eir quality of life in the Town. Greater than one-third(37%) of residents feel that safetyis the o most important quality of life issue, while 17% feel that planning for growth is most important 14% p ant and mentioned schools and/or education. About 9% responded with recreation-related issues and another 9%/o cited traffic and roads. 22 Drivers of S Most important"quality of life" issues 45% ,I, 35% 30% 17% 18% 18% 15% � ' 10% g% 10% 9% 7% 1embitga Male Female Gender e Safety in Growth/planning 0 Schools/edu 0 Recreation a Traffic/roads 23 January,2008 In the proceeding slides, the top five responses are graphically illustrated with the segmentation breakdown of each of the demographic categories. A full set of cross tabulations for this question is contained in Section V. Males and Females are similar in their assessment of which issues are most important to their quality of life. Females are somewhat more likely to feel safety and schools/education are the most important quality of life issues. 23 Drivers of S Most important"quality of life"issues ay, 50% 44% 40% 4096 30% 30% 32% 30% 25% 26%28% 3% 20% 7496 ° 9% 11%11% 99(0,Q°16 13% 10/0 8°/9% 9% F x 796 ° �< T 8%8% 1111\ 11111L-1. iga 11"11162 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+(North) 65+(South) Age Group (e Safety®Growth/planning o Schools/edu D Recreation es Traffic/roads/oads I January,2008 24 Safety is the most important quality of life issue for all age groups with the exception of those who are 65 or older living in the Northart of Oro ro Valley, for whom growth and planning is the most important issue by a margin.slight g g n. Safety is by far the most mentioned issue for 18— 34 year olds and those who are 65ears old of Oro Valle y Y or more living in the South part Schools and education is important to manybetween the ages of 35 and 54. 24 Drivers of S Most important"quality of life"issues 60% 51% 44% 45% 32% 30% 27% ° /o 9% ° 14% 8/015% 16% 9 z 12% 0%12% 15% 7% 7% 7% 10% 8% „s„ 0% 2orfewer 3-5 6-10 11+ Years in Oro Valley ©Safety D Growth/planning o Schools/edu o Recreation a Traffic/roads 1\T January,2008 25 A majority of newer residents (two or fewer years) feel that safety is the most important quality of life issue, and this is the most cited issue for those in all other length of residency categories as well. I 25 Drivers of Satisfaction Most important"quality of life"issues 50% 39% 40% 37% 28%28% 30% 24% 21% 22% Li 18%18% 170 20% 15% 13% 8% 7%5% o i 9°/o 00,0 .._ , in 13%— hiliiii.1111111111—. Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Household Income p Safety ®Growth/planning 0 Schools/edu n Recreation 19 Traffic/roads l r 26 NI•. January,2008 Safety is the most important quality uali of life issue,regardless of household income. Although growth and planning just pmis as important to those with household incomes between$75,000 and $100,000, it is also nearly as important to those with AHHI below $35,000. 26 Drivers of Satisfaction Most important"quality of life" issues 50% 41 41% 40% 30% 26% 30% ►4% __ o R 19/0 20% ° ;rt, ° 1°/ 4 0 13/0 10% 1%9% 8% .� ;9 6/o 1 O% ° !iiii ,�.:�._-. ..w.,.m�a„t...amid La/--^._- �°k.�r. - ;t;. 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size ISaf et n Grow th/planning p Schools/edu D Recreation 5 Traffic/roads l ® y 27 9• - January,2008 p Responses for what is the most important quality of life issue are similar for residents regardless of household size,with the exception of those with households of three or more residents being more likelythan others to feel that schools and education are important. 27 Drivers Most important"quality of life" issues 50% 43% 40% 34% 30% 27% 19% 20% r x16% t ��� _ A 12% i s 7%o 8% 9% 8/o 10% 0% No Yes Children in Home m Safety ei Growth/planning nnin 0 Schools/edu o Recreation a Traffic/roads l 28 NI: January,2008 likely with children in the home are more to feel that safety and schools/education are the most important quality of life issues. I 28 Assessment/ImPortance of S Assessment of services/amenities Library NIMINIIIIIIIIIMEMPF 4.36 Police INMIIIIIIIIIMP 4.30 Fire/emerg svcs ' 427 Trash pickup NIIIIMINIMINIEr 4.14 Schools 111111111111111111111 '` 4.09 Bicycle/ped accessx.93 Parks&rec. INNIIIIIIIMOW73.90 , Streets/roadsy° 3.75 Activities for Seniors 3.72 Arts/culture opps 3.70 Youth sports,etc. iliiliiM111111 3.68 �.�,; 3.68 Cust svc-Tow n adminlstaff �. Open space 3.65 Historical preservation IIIIIIIMMIIIIi 3.39 Retail/dining 1111111111111C7. 3.35 Cust svc-Elected officials 3.22 Creating employment opps = i 321 Planning for growth = 3.16 Public transportation - m 2.37 j I 1 2 3 4 5 1=Very dissatisfied,5=Very satisfied 29 N't January,2008 Respondents were e asked about specific services and amenities associated with cities and towns (regardless of whether or not the Town of Oro Valley was the actual provider). They were asked to assess each for the Town of Oro Valley on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means very satisfied and 1 means very dissatisfied. Residents gave a mean response of"4" or greater for libraries, police, fire and emergency services,trash pickup, and schools (in that order). service byelected officials, creating employment opportunities within the Town, Customer planning for growth, andpublictransportationthe lowest assessed services for the Town are of Oro Valley, public with transportation the only service rated with a mean below the neutral response of"3.00". 29 Assessment/Importance of Assessment of services/amenities Library 86.40/ Police - 83.5% Fire/errerg svcs 83.4% Trash pickup 81.0% Schools k: 76.0% Bicycle/ped access 73.8% Parks&rec. 1111111111111111111E1 71.3% Streets/roads ' _; 64.6% ;E,�'�,. Arts/culture opps - 62.8% Youth sports,etc. 62.0% Open space 61.8% ' Cust svc-Town admin/staff 1111111111111 "4 61.0%. Activities for Seniors 58.0% Historical preservation ":_ '49.1% Retail/dining MEW 46.6% Planning for growth mom 41.3% Cust svc-Bected officials MEW 40.1'/° Creating employment opps 39.0% Public transportation ., 17.1% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% %indicating satisfied(4 or 5) 30 I\/_t January,2008 • For the same set of questions, when looking at the percentages of respondents who gave a satisfactory assessment(either a"4" or a"5"), greater than three-fourths of residents are satisfied with the library,police, fire and emergency services, trash pickup, and school services. Fewer than 50% are e satisfied with historical preservation, retail and dining opportunities, growth,for customer service by elected officials, creating employment opportunities within the Town, and public transportation. 30 Assessment/ImP0a11ce of Unable to assess services/amenities Activities for Seniors _� �_ ,� 39.3°A Youth sports,etc. 25.0% Public transportation _ 24.0% Creating employment opps 23.8% Cust svc-Bected officials dattigiONEM 22.8% Schools 21.8% bs*� Cust svc ;��;���::,,.. 0% HistoricalTown preservationadmin/staff :,: ; - 1719.3.% Trash pickup 9.3% Library 7.8% Arts/culture opps 6.0% Fire/emerg svcs ll- 5.3% Planning for growth 5.0% Parks&rec. 11 3.3% Bicycle/ped access t 2.5% Police 1 1.8% Open space 1.3% Streets/roads 0.5% Retail/dining ':0.3% 0% 15% 30% 45% 31 I\/_t January,2008 did not feel theyknew enough about the activities for Seniors Greater than one-third (39%) Likewise,nearlyone-fourth felt similarly unfamiliar with youth to offer an assessment. sports and other youth oriented opportunities,public transportation, creating employment opportunities within the Town, customer service of elected officials, and schools. Older residents are more likelyto be unable to assess schools and youth activities,while younger resident are more likelyto be unable to assess Senior activities (though greater than 20%of Seniors are also unable to make an assessment). 31 Assessment/Importance of Services Regression Analysis (Overall Satisfaction) Standardized Beta Police 0.307 Creating employment opps 0.231 Bicycle/ped access 0.203 Public transportation 0.190 32 January,2008 Regression analysis is a multivariate statistical test that is used to uncover latent associations with a dependent variable . In this instance,regression analysis was used to determine which of the services are most likely to be drivers of overall satisfaction with the Town of Oro Valley. Based on the overall satisfaction and individual assessment scores for the services, police, creating employment opportunities within the Town, bicycle and pedestrian access, and public transportation are significant predictors of overall satisfaction. 32 Assessment/Importance of Assessment of services/amenities 5 4 • •��•.`!, `+ i:7i����/• •• /• • • • 3 • • 2 c2 a c L t c o O ° = N Z ami U Y it m U E i m o' 0 a� ,. E a 0 Q aw d U a Q I•-ra�Male Female I 33 January,2008 Overall, Females are more likelythan Males to give a positive assessment of the individual services (Independentp Samples T-Test used to test for significance). Specifically, Females are statistically more likely to be more positive for: • Police • Parks and recreation • Library • Fire and emergency services • Schools • Arts and culture opportunities • Retail and dining opportunities • Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities • Customer service provided by Town administration and staff 33 Assessment/Importance of Services Assessment of fire/emergency services 5 4.65 4.43 4.30 4.06 4.13 4.08 4 4 - ! '—_ l 2 1 i 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ 65+ (North) (South) Age Group 34 INIIL January,2008 more likelytheyare to have a positive assessment of fire The younger the respondent,the the exce tion of those 65 years of age or older living in theand emergency services (with p VA used to North part of Oro Valley —who have the highest assessment)—One Way ANO test for significance. I .41 34 Assessment/Importance of Assessment of open space 5 3.97 3.85 3.78 4 3.47 3.44 3.32 3 2 ; ; isg1Aja [y R r yy; 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ 65+ (North) (South) Age Group 35 January,2008 dent the more likely they are to have a positive assessment of open The younger the respondent,p space(with the exception of those who are 65 years old or more and live in the North part of Oro Valley)— One Way ANOVA used to test for significance. 35 Assessment/Importance of Assessment of retail/dining 5 3.92 4 3.61 3.34 3.33 3.11 3 4$� 1 Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Household Income 36 1\41' January,2008 household income, the more likely the resident is to have a positive The lower the assessment of retail and diningopportunities (One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 36 Assessment/Importance of ervices Assessment of parks and recreation 5 4.27 3.94 3.87 4 3.45 I 3 a rte; �X,:S hrL J�t 2 " �'° 4d I 1 2 1 3-4 5+ Household Size 37 y 1\/t January,2008 el smaller the household size,the more likely the resident is to have a positive assessment The ofarks and recreation(One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). p 37 Assessment/Importance of Assessment of arts and culture opportunities 5 3.90 3.75 4 3.68 3.27 3 2 1 1 2 3_4 5+ Household Size 38 January,2008 The smaller the household size, the more likely the resident is to have a positive assessment of arts and culture opportunities (One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 38 Assessment/Importance of S ervic es Assessment of retail/dining 5 3.91 4 3.27 3.28 3.24 3 2 1 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size 39 January,2008 Single-member households are more likely than others to have a positive assessment of retail and dining opportunities (One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 39 Assessment/Importance of S Assessment of customer service of elected officials 5 4 3.69 3.14 3.22 2.86 3 2 1 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size 40 January,2008 The smaller the household size, the more likely the resident is to have a positive assessment of customer service provided by elected officials (One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 40 Assessment/Importance of S ervic es Assessment of parks and recreation 5 3.98 4 3.76 3 2 r 1 Yes No Children in Home 41 January,2008 Residents with children in the household are less likely to have a positive assessment of parks and recreation (Independent Samples T-Test used to test for significance). 41 Assessment/Importance of S Importance of services/amenities Fire/emerg svcs 4.6: Police IMMENIMME7 4.56 Streets/roads amimmit, 4.39 Planning for growth rnimmg 4.33 Schools 426 Library .1111111111111r72, 4.15 Open space 4.12 Parks&rec. 4.07 RetaiVdining ;3.95 Trash pickup 1111111111111111,E.;. .94 Bicycle/ped access 3.85 Cust svc-Tow n admin/staff 11111111111111111111.11L 3.84 Cust svc-Bected officials 3.76 Youth sports,etc. 11.11.1111111WF. 3.62 Creating employment opps 3.60; Arts/culture opps 3.53I Historical preservation 3.38 Pubic transportation 1111111111111111M: 329 Activities for Seniors --_. 3.27 1 2 3 4 5 =Much less important,5=Much more important 42 January,2008 After being asked to assess the individual services of the Town, residents were asked about the comparative importance(now and in the future) of the same set of services and amenities on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means much more important than the other services and amenities and 1 means much less important than the other services and amenities. Overall, the most important services are safety related (fire/emergency services and police), followed by roads, planning for growth, and schools. The least important services are historical preservation, public transportation, and activities for Seniors. It is important to note that this is a comparative as opposed to an absolute scale. A lower mean score does not imply that the service is unimportant, rather it is an indication that it is comparatively less important than other services. Also important to consider is that even if certain services are not comparatively important to the entire Town, specific services may be relatively more important to certain segments of the population. 42 Assessment/Importance of S Importance of services/amenities Fire/emerg svcs °T 9 .9% Police ., 90.,% Streets/roads '};_ 87.3° Planning for growth - " 83.7% SchoolsEimmigigur_ 79.5% Library :_... 78.1% Parks&rec. miummor 77.4% Open space 111111111=111111111Mn_. 76.6% Retail/dining 72.3% Trash pickup simminv 71.4% Bicycle/ped access 11111.1111111111■ 67.3% Cust svc-Tow n admin/staff imismow 64.7% Cust svc-!Elected officials 61.5% Youth sports,etc. 58.5% Creating empbyment opps 11•1111111111IPC"' 58.4% Arts/culture opps 55.8% Public transportation miumw, 48.8% Activities for Seniors 48.6% Historical preservation Emispir 45.3% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% %indicating important(4 or 5) 43 January,2008 For the same set of questions, when looking at the percentages of respondents who feel that the services are comparatively important(either a"4"or a"5"), greater than four-fifths of residents feel that fire and emergency services, police, streets and roads, and planning for growth are comparatively more important than other services. Fewer than 50% feel that public transportation, activities for Seniors, and historical preservation are comparatively more important than other services. 43 Assessment/Importance of S Importance of services/amenities 5 • • • \ere,* • `-;-•••••: 3 • • • 2 2 a a ca0 c E N N 2 ° J c �, u L 2 c o O o 2 ani a Y a� 5 c m E g -�—Male--0—Female 44 NitJanuary,2008 Overall, Females are more likely than Males to feel that the services mentioned are comparatively more important (Independent Samples T-Tests used to test for significance). They are statistically more likely to feel the service is comparatively more important for: • Police • Bicycle and pedestrian access • Parks and recreation • Library • Open space • Fire and emergency services • Arts and culture opportunities • Trash pickup services • Creating employment opportunities within the Town • Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities • Customer service provided by elected officials • Historical preservation 44 Assessment/Importance of S ervices 11 Importance of services/amenities by Age Group 5 45. 45 44 4.3 42 4.3 4.0 a~ 4.1 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.8 3.9 38 3.9 3.9 38 4.0 3.8 4 37 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.7 `�- 3.4 3.4 g , ,,, io .,_-,' ,, ,3 - `-4-.: N;4,-j. 't---,;;,',', ''''.Vg,, ''''',.'': :- eAkt 4k- ''.11t 1,1-,..4,\ '.' ' ;� .fi- 111111111 ',_ r'+ {�� �' Bicycle/ped Parks&rec. Schools Creating employment Youth sports opps 0 18-34 0 35-44 0 45-54 0 55-64 is 65+(North)0 65+(South) . I\/f 45 January,2008 Overall, the younger the respondent,the more likely they are to feel that bicycle and pedestrian access, parks and recreation, schools, creating employment opportunities within the Town, and youth sports and other youth related opportunities are comparatively more important(One Way ANOVAs used to test for significance). 45 Assessment/Importance o Importance of Senior activities 5 4.22 4 3.67 3.43 3.01 2.82 3 2.71 _ WP 1 j 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ 65+ (North) (South) Age Group 46 IVEJanuary,2008 In general, the older the resident, the more likely they are to feel that activities for Seniors are comparatively more important(One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). Activities for Seniors is also comparatively more important for those Seniors (65 years of age and older)who live in the North part of Oro Valley versus those in the South part. 46 Assessment/Importance of S ervic es Importance of public transportation 5 4 3.67 3.72 3.57 3.25 2.95 3 � Z Y 2 1 Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Household Income 1\41 47 January,2008 The lower the household income, the more likely the resident is to feel that public transportation is comparatively more important(One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 47 Assessment/Importance of S ervic es Importance of historical preservation 5 4.03 4 3.51 3.46 3.33 3.22 3 1 Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Household Income Nit 48 January,2008 The lower the household income, the more likely the resident is to feel that historical preservation is comparatively more important (One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 48 Assessment/Importance of S Importance of public transportation 5 3.88 4 3.25 3.27 2.97 3 2 1. 1 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size 49 14k/f January,2008 The smaller the household size, the more likely the resident is to feel that public transportation is comparatively more important (One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 49 Assessment/Importance of ervices Importance of trash pickup 5 4.35 3.88 3.97 4 3.59 3 2 v � r„f 1 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size 50 1\/_t , January,2008 The smaller the household size, the more likely the resident is to feel that trash pickup is comparatively more important(One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 50 Assessment/Importance of S Importance of Senior activities • 5 4 3.73 3.61 3 2.89 2.81 ii 2 iiii 1 111.1 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size 51 1V1 January,2008 The smaller the household size, the more likely the resident is to feel that activities for Seniors are comparatively more important (One Way ANOVA used to test for significance). 51 Assessment/Importance of S Importance of services/amenities by Household Size 5 4.34 4.05 4.03 4 3.83 3.42 3.10 WI, at ,',''.: Schools Youth sports p1 n2o3-4in5+ 52 1\41 January,2008 The larger the household size, the more likely the resident is to feel that"youth" oriented services such as schools and youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities are comparatively more important (One Way ANOVAs used to test for significance). 52 Assessment/Importance of Services Importance of services/amenities by children in home 5 • • 4 �• • -i • •• 71or • 3 • • 2 1 _ a) cn c D U U N a) - C m O C -v a) o rn a) o m E a ani O c E s E �.. 75- U C ` W r °) Q L C 2 (� E o 2 (1) .' qC� Ca2 --�-Yaacr)a) E m i es - No 53 1\41 January,2008 Residents with children in the home are more likely to feel that the following are comparatively more important (Independent Samples T-Tests used to test for significance): • Bicycle and pedestrian access • Parks and recreation • Schools • Creating employment opportunities within the Town • Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities They are more likely to feel that the following are comparatively less important: • Public transportation • Open space • Historical preservation • Activities for Seniors 53 Assessment/Importance of S `...5.00 4.75 4.50 o 4.25 G 4.00 rAIM t 3.75 3.50 o MN =3.25 3.00 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.00 2.001 2.251 2.501 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.501 3.75 4.001 4 251 4.501 4.75 5.00 Assessment 54 January,2008 When prioritizing which services or amenities to improve first, it is important to compare the assessment and important scores in a Quadrant Analysis. Letters that are located in the upper left quadrant (in yellow)represent services in which the assessments are comparatively lower than the importance. Planning for future growth (0)is the service with the second lowest assessment, but it has one of the highest mean importance scores and should thus be a priority for improvements. Streets and roads (B), open space(G) and retail and dining opportunities (M) are on the fringes of the quadrant and should be considered secondary priorities. Though the assessment scores for public transportation (C) are by far the lowest of any of the services, the importance score is also one of the lowest and so this should not be considered one of the main concerns. Key• A =Police, B = Streets and roads, C =Public transportation services, D =Bicycle and pedestrian access, E =Parks and recreation, F=Library, G = Open space, H=Fire and emergency services, I=Schools, J=Arts and culture opportunities, K= Trash pickup services, L = Creating employment opportunities within the Town, M=Retail and dining opportunities, N= Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities, 0 =Planning for future growth, P = Customer service provided by Town administration and staff, Q = Customer service provided by elected officials, R =Historical preservation, S =Activities for Seniors 54 Willingness to Pay Willingness to pay for desired additional services and amenities 75% 62.1% 50% 25% 21.2% �*� > 16.6% 0% Very Sorrow hat Not at all 55 r' = January,2008 Residents were asked how willing they are to pay for additional services and/or amenities that they wish the Town would either add or improve upon. Just greater than one-fifth would be"very willing"to pay for the additional services, with more than three-fifths being"somewhat willing" and 17% indicating they are "not at all willing". It is important to consider that no particular services were associated with this question—it is based on the ideal circumstances (services that the individual residents would want to have added or improved)that each respondent is answering the question. 55 Willingness to Pay Willing to pay for additional services Male 23% 58% 19% 6 Female 20% 67% 14% 18-34 14% 67% 19% 35-44 25% 70% 5% 45-54 23% 60% 16% 55-64 29% 51% 20% Q 65+(North) 18% 56% 26% 65+(South) 16% 69% 16% 2 or few er 17% 67% 17% O 3-5 22% 59% 19% 6-10 20% 68% 12% >- 11+ 25% 56% 20% Under$35k 14% 71% 14% $35k-$50k 10% 63% 27% Q $50k-$75k 20% 65% 16% $75k-$100k 25% 56% 20% $100k+ 29% 59% 12% 1 20% 78% 2° E 2 21% 54% 26% g 3-4 23% 65% 12% a a 5+ 19% 70% 11% Yes 22% 68% 10% 5 No 21% 59% 20% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% •Very■Somewhat•Not at all ISC January,2008 56 The older the respondent the least likely they are to be willing to pay for additional services or amenities, especially those who are 65 and older living in the North part of Oro Valley. Those from dual-person households are much less likely to be willing to pay for additional services than are single or multi-member households. Residents with children in the household are more likely to be at least somewhat willing to pay for additional or better services/amenities. Chi-square Tests for Independence were used to determine significance. 56 illingness to Pay Funding sources User fees 30% 49% 22% Sales taxes 19% 47% 34% Property taxes 9% 41% 50% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% •Very much in favor Somew hat in favor • Not at all in favor I r 57 January,2008 When considering three options to provide funding for the additional services and amenities they would like added or improved upon, user fees are the most acceptable followed by sales taxes and then property taxes. Half of all residents are not at all in favor of an increase inroprtY taxes to pay efor p additional or enhanced services/amenities. 57 Willingness to Pay At(east somewhat in favor of... 100% 81% 76% 80%o � 68% 64% 60% 49% � '- 51% 40% `4 20% 0% Male Female Gender ®Property taxes o Sales taxes o User fees 58 January,2008 1 There is little difference in the preferences of Males and Females related to the options for providing additional funding for services/amenities. 58 Willingness to Pay At least somewhat in favor of... 100% ° 86% 82% 79% 82/o 79% 80% .._._ _ 71% _ 70% 62% - ...„ 61% A : 61% 60% 57°/ r4% - 56%� _ I ; r,. 47/ k_: e 41%t 40% ',> ; 33/ fes ;,, ''` � nil s,:_ 20% 0% III 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+(North) 65+(South) Age Group ri Property taxes D Sales taxes D User fees 59 1V1L January,2008 All residents are more likely to feel that user fees, followed by sales taxes, are the best ways to provide additional funding for increased or enhanced services/amenities, regardless of their Age Group. Older residents (especially those in the South part of Oro Valley) are not very likely to accept an increase in property tax. 59 Willingness to Pay At least somewhat in favor of... 100% 81%0 78% 79% 77% 80% 69% - ri---.* 70% 61% ` � - 62% :::,,--;; 60% 54%_ � 52% izi-f. 50% 40% za ry; f y '+ #mak}ter r a 0% 2 or fewer 3-5 6-10 11+ Yea rs in Oro Valley el Property taxes In Sales taxes 0 User fees 60 1\4 January,2008 All residents are more likely to feel that user fees, followed by sales taxes, are the best ways to provide additional funding for increased or enhanced services/amenities, regardless of how long they have lived in Oro Valley. 60 Willingness to Pay At least somewhat in favor of... 100% 82% 85% 81% 78% 80% 76% 68/063�_- 66%r� o �-` 60% 41% 40% „ ' I}a . 20% 11,1 me 0% Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k 11$111' Household Income E3 Property taxes ci Sales taxes o User fees 61 1\/_t January,2008 Lower income residents are less likely to favor the use of property taxes as a means to raise funds for additional services/amenities as compared to higher income respondents. 61 Willingness to Pay At least somewhat in favor of... 100% 80% 82% 82% 80% 74% 74% 73% - - 68% = Pit w,--------1,1 :7-i;S:-4?-§: o '''''''''''7'' 60% 54°/o :, 54% '. 43/0 40% ' '€kfi kf{ it t+ r .�-_ ; a....:,., 20% II 0% 1 2 3-4 5+ Household Size p Property taxes o Sales taxes o User fees 62 A/I' January,2008 Dual-person households are the least likely to support an increase for any of the additional funding sources. 62 Willingness to Pay At(east somewhat in favor of... 100% 81%o 77% 80% 72% 62% 60% 550/0 47% €- - 40% 20% F y 0% Yes No Children in Home EI Property taxes in Sales taxes o User fees 63 January,2008 Residents with children in the home are more likely to support each of the three funding sources for additional services/amenities compared to those without children. 63 Public Participation Public participation 75% 60.3% 50% 45.5% 25% _ 6 r''4x ,=fit } * 9.5% 0% Attended public Listened to meeting Aw are of time/place meeting online for n-tgs 64 January,2008 Residents were asked whether or not they had ever attended any Town of Oro Valley public meeting, listened to a meeting online, and whether they were aware of the times and places for Oro Valley Town Council meetings. Just fewer than one-half have previously attended a public meeting, and nearly one in ten have listened to a meeting online. Three-fifths say that they are aware of the meeting times and places. 64 Public Participation Overall Satisfaction 5 4.21 4.21 4 3 2 1 Yes No/don't know Have attended a public meeting 65 January,2008 Attendance at public meetings is not a predictor of overall satisfaction with the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley. Those who have previously attended a public meeting are neither more nor less satisfied than those who have yet to attend(Independent Samples T-Test used to determine significance). 65 Public Participation Attended public meeting Male — 44484.11.11.49.2% 0 Female :,. —41.9% 18-34 r 16.9% 0. 35-44 -4,.1011111111 33.3% 8 45-54 =-.;r. 51.3% 55-64 Awa^, 56.1% 65+(North) ,A1111.11.45.9% 65+(South) .- 75.9% 2 or few er 411.123.3% O 3-5 123.6% N 6-10 F# �48.0% } 11+ -,A1111111.111=-., 66.9% Under$35k - 51.4% I $35k-$50k 0011111.34.1% $50k-$75k 55.3% $75k-$100k = 44.3% $100k+ AMEN 45.5% 1 '1411111.111.111 54.3% 2 77q11.111111 S 53.7% 3-4 37.5%I a 5+ 44.111111 31.6% Yes zTZANE.33.1% No :- _ 52.8% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 66 January,2008 The older the resident, the more likely they are to have attended a public meeting in the Town of Oro Valley, especially those who are 65 years or older and live in the South part of Oro Valley. While 76% of the previously mentioned group have attended a meeting, only 17% of respondents who are 18 —34 years old have done so. Residents who have lived in Oro Valley longer are also more likely to have attended a meeting. Approximately one-fourth of residents who have been in the Town for five or fewer years have attended, half of those who have lived in Oro Valley for six to 10 years have done so, and the proportion rises to two-thirds for those residing in the Town for 11 or more years. The smaller the household, the more likely the resident is to have attended a meeting. Greater than half of single and dual-member households have attended, while fewer than one-third of respondents with five or more people in the home have gone. Households with children are also less likely to have attended a meeting (about one- third). Chi-square Tests for Independence were used to determine significance. 66 Public Participation Listened to meeting online v Male 10.2% (S Female 8.9% 18-34 ;>>„� 9:,2% a 35-44 6.4% 8 45-54 7.9%1 ani 55-64 10.6% Q 65+(North) 16.4% 65+(South) a1 7.4% 2 or fewert 11.6% O 3-5 7.9% • 6-10 .5% >- 11+ -_ 10.2% Under$35k 13. $35k-$50k 4.9% $50k-$75k 6.6% $75k-$100k .3 13.1% $100k+ wall1111111111111 12.1% 1 4ARIMMINE 10.9% 2 = 13.0% 3-4 ,. 5.9% a 5+ 7.9% Yes AM.6.1% No 11.6% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 67 ff g, January,2008 Though there are minor variations in the percentage of residents who have listened to a meeting online among the demographic segments, there are no statistically significant differences (Chi-Square Tests for Independence were used to test for significance). 67 Public Participation Aware of time/place for meetings Male ..g44411 56.9% CD Female ,444M4111111111111 63.5% 18-34 41.5% a 35-44 --4111111111111.48.7% 8 45-54 A 61.8% C.5 w 55-64 71.2% Q 65+(North) 75.4% 65+(South) ;=- 66.7% 2 or few er _= 55.8% 8 3-5 AIM=41.6% c 126-10 464411MMIi 60.8% 1 }' 11+ mimill111. 74.6% Under$35k 59.5% j _ $35k-$50k 51.2% _• $50k-$75k -` 61.8% $75k-$100k -----741111111111MMIM 60.7% $100k+ 58.3% 1 MandleMOMME 652% 2 642% g_ 3-4 55.3% a a 5+ - i1 55.3% ' Yes - 51.4% No vaisommuomm 65.2% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 68 IVIL January,2008 Older residents, those without children in the household and who have lived in the Town the longest are more likely to state that they are aware of when and where Town of Oro Valley Council meetings are held. Chi-square Tests for Independence were used to determine significance. 68 Public Participation Interest in public forums 60% 50.3% 39.8% 40% 20% 10.0% :_ rr�t -rF 0% Very interested Sorrew hat interested Not at all interested 1 January,2008 69 One-tenth of Oro Valley residents are very interested in participating in public forums, such as Town Council or other public meetings, with half somewhat interested and two-fifths indicating they are not at all interested. 69 Public Participation Have attended a public meeting 100% 77.5% 80% 60% 43.8% 39.6% 40% 20% x � :1*,s; 0% Very interested Sornew hat interested Not at all interested Interest in attending a public meeting 70 J\,f January,2008 Of those residents who are very interested in attending a meeting,just over three- fourths have already done so. 44%of respondents who are somewhat interested have also already attended at least one public meeting. 70 Public Participation Aware of time and place for meetings 100% 77.5% 80% 56.7% 60.4% 60% 40% z 20% • N `tT 0% Very interested Somew hat interested Not at all interested Interest in attending a public meeting January,2008 71 23% of residents who are very interested in attending a public meeting indicate that they are unaware of the place and time of Town Council meetings and 43% of those who are somewhat interested responded similarly. 71 Public Participation Interest in public forums v Male 11% 51% 38% C9 Female 9% 49% 42% 18-34 6% 52% 42% a 35-44 17% 53% 31% 3 45-54 7% 58% 36% 55-64 11% 55% 35% 1 65+(North) 12% 34% 54% 65+(South) 7% 46% 46% > 2 or fewer 9% 56% 35% O 3-5 7% 54% 39% .c � 6-10 10% 50% 40% r-- 11+ 13% 47% 41% Under$35k 5% 54% 41% $35k-$50k 5% 61% 34% _ $50k-$75k 11% 51% 38% $75k-$100k 8% ° 56/° 36% $100k+ 13% 49% 38% v 1 9% 54% 37% t 2 11% 44% 45% 'c 3-4 8% 56% 36% a 0. 5+ 18% 50% 32% v Yes 11% 57% 32% _ . No 10% 47% 44% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% ■Very interested®Somewhat interested•Not at all interested 72 IVI r° January,2008 Though there are minor variations in residents' interest levels for participating in public forums among the demographic segments, there are no statistically significant differences (Chi-Square Tests for Independence were used to test for significance). 72 Communications Preferred communication method Mail 111.1111111WL 79.3% Newspaper 76.0% Oro Valley Vista 1111.111Mr 68.8% Tow n w ebsite 63.3% Broadcast rredia 60.3% Emma- Water new sletter --Zr 58.5°4) Email notification 55.3% f � Public meetings x 42.0% Face-to-face w/council member ;,-Z,; 37.0% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% January,2008 73 Residents were asked how likely they would be to seek important news or updates about the Town from a list of potential communication media. Greater than three- fourths responded that they would look for information about the Town of Oro Valley in the Mail and also from Newspapers. 94% of residents would seek information from at least of the combination of Mail and Newspapers. 99% of residents would seek information from at least one of the combination of Mail,Newspaper, and the Town website (there was minimal increase by adding the Oro Valley Vista to the combination of mail and newspaper). 73 COmmunications Oro Valley Town Broadcast Water E-mail Public Face-to-facew/council Mail Newspaper Vista website media newsletter notification meetings member Male 76.6% 75.1% . 68.0% 66.0% 59.9% 62.4% 56.3% 48.7% 42.1% Gender Female 81.8% 76.8% 69.5% 60.6% 60.6% 54.7% 54.2% 35.5% 32.0% 18-34 73.8% 75.4% 61.5% 76.9% 72.3% 46.2% 69.2% 44.6% 30.8% 35-44 71.8% 69.2% 69.2% 70.5% 56.4% 55.1% 65.4% 37.2% 30.8% 45-54 82.9% 73.7% ° 69.7% 67.1/° 55.3% 52.6% 56.6% 46.1% 42.1% 55-64 83.3% 69.7% 71.2% 59.1% 54.5% 60.6% 53.0% 42.4% 48.5% 65+(North) 80.3% 86.9% 73.8% 52.5% 60.7% 68.9% 42.6% 37.7% 37.7% Age Group 65+(South) 85.2% 85.2% 70.4% 44.4%' 64.8%, 72.2% 38.9% 44.4% 31.5% 2 or fewer 76.7% 74.4% 67.4% 67.4% 67.4% 60.5% 55.8% 37.2% 32.6% 3-5 80.9% 69.7% 59.6% 70.8% 57.3% 49.4% 67.4% 38.2% 40.4% Lived in Oro 6-10 74.3% 73.6% 74.3% 63.5% 59.5% 60.8% 46.6% 42.6% 31.1% Valley(years) 11+ 85.6% 84.7% 70.3% 55.9% 61.0% 62.7% 57.6% 45.8% 44.1% r Under$35k 83.8% 81.1% 75.7% 67.6% 78.4% 48.6%1 37.8% 56.8%, 37.8% $35k-$50k 87.8% 85.4% 63.4% 51.2% 73.2% 68.3% 36.6% 31.7% 36.6% $50k-$75k 81.6% 80.3% 71.1% 51.3% 61.8% 63.2% 57.9% 43.4% 44.7% $75k-$100k 78.7% 75.4% 67.2% 65.6% 62.3% 65.6% 47.5% 39.3% 32.8% AHHI $100k+ 75.8% 71.2% 65.9% 72.7% 52.3% 50.8% 70.5% 43.2% 34.8% , 1 89.1% 69.6% 78.3% 52.2% 63.0% 58.7% 32.6% 50.0% 41.3% 2 80.2% 80.2% 70.4% 53.1% 58.6% 63.6% 47.5% 40.7% 38.3% People in 3-4 77.0% 78.3% 67.8% 75.7% 59.2% 55.9% 65.8% 38.2% 32.9% home 5+ 73.7% 57.9% 57.9% 71.1% 68.4% 50.0% 76.3% 52.6% 44.7% Yes 75.0% 70.9% 64.9% 74.3% 62.8% 54.7% 70.3% 40.5% 33.1% Child under 18 No 82.0%_ 79.2% 71.6% 56.8% 58.8% 61.2% 46.8% 42.8% 39.6% MJanuary,2008 74 There is a general preference for either Mail or segments Newspaper for all of pthe population. 45 - 54 year olds, 55- 64 year olds, those living in the Town three to fiveear y s, single person households and those in larger households (five or moreeo le p p ) are all more likely to prefer Mail versus Newspaper to receive Town related information. Those who are 65 years of age and older living in the Northart of Oro Valley p a ley are more likely to seek information from the Newspaper compared to the Mail. 18- 34 year olds are more likely to seek information on the Town website. 74 Communications Count Table N% Visit residents 11 2.9% Signage 7 1.8% Telephone 5 1.3% IM(messaging) 1 0.3% Via schools 1 0.3% PSA's at the movies 1 0.3% Nothing else 293 76.7% Same as above 50 13.1% Misc 16 4.2% January,2008 75 Residents were asked if there are other ways that the Town n of Oro Valley should be communicating with them. The vast majority indicate that there are no other communication media necessary, with a few mentioningdirect visits ' signage and via telephone. sits with residents, 75 ,,-,..,...'............,..•...,•,..r,..,,..a.,.......,.....,,...,...,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,....,,..,....,,,,..........,,,,,.,..,," +,..,,,,,....T"....:.“..,, ....,......,,,'.....•-,............,..,... -,.....,...,,,. , ...,,,,,•...,• ,,., .._„,., .,,... . .. , ,,,,„. ..,*. ,.....,..,,..., ...,,,„,...,,„„...,,„.,,,,,, ..,,,,„,,......,.,....,.., .,.......,.„......_..._,...... III. SURVEY RESPONDENTS Demographics 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ii!: ! 1 Male 49% c , Female 51% . 0 , , . 18-24 16% 25-34 . , 2 35-44 All 20% 0 a) 45-54 „;,,IAII9% cr) 1 < 55-64 65+ . 1 29% 1 2 or few er :iii 1 1 0/0 0 .. 3-5 >, -0 0 6-10 .,..,,.,?:%4-re,1:- 37(3(0 i a) — > To ! 1 L.1 > 11+ !!!,,gp.4., - 30% 5 or few er Au 19% 6-10 I a) o !,-A! ,!!:,:i: 27% ! I 11+ !-1 -4-aiiiiii 54°4 te6 • Under$25k A 4% 1 I $25k-$35k 1 PA) 1 $35k-$50k 1-A 12% i < $50k-$75k 11111111 22% $75k-$100k $100k+ 1 .:4 12% _c w 2 !!,-*M11111 41% . , u) ! ! = (I) 3-4 i'P:,,,,'Mill..38% 0 = 5+ ;,110% 1 . 32 45 Yes ?IAN=3 % _!!!:.!-7,1---,!,--- 63% = No 76 IV. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY SURVEY EXECUTION A telephone survey was executed from December 2"d— December 19'h, 2007. SAMPLING FRAME The sample frame includes residents of the Town of Oro Valley, 18 years of age or older with a landline telephone number available for calling. The first part of the survey (250 completions) was completed using a voter list and the latter part of the survey (final 150 completions) was completed using a general list of Oro Valley residents (the sample was qualified by ensuring that the respondent did live in Oro Valley using their address as a pre-qualifier and confirming their residency during the telephone interview prior to any other survey questions being asked). SAMPLING METHOD MI employed a probability sampling method known as stratified sampling. In order to ensure a equitable representation of respondents, the sample was stratified based on age group. With a total population of 23,308 residents in the Town of Oro Valley who are at least 18 years of age (according to United States Census data from 2000), the sample plan was developed based on the relative proportion of residents within each age group. The following table illustrates the stratified sample plan and final sample by age group. of Target#of Actual#of Age group Population population completes completes 18-24 1345 5.8% 23 23 25- 34 2454 10.5% 42 42 35-44 4530 19.4% 78 78 45- 54 4401 18.9% 76 76 55-64 3838 16.5% 66 66 65+ 6740 28.9% 115 115 Total 23308 100% 400 400 SAMPLE SIZE The survey sample size is 400 thus, using a 95% confidence interval, the margin of error is calculated as +/- 4.9% when the entire sample is considered. RESPONSE/INCIDENCE RATE 5,261 telephone calls were attempted (not counting wrong numbers and disconnects), with 400 completes, 504 ineligible, 881 refusals and 3,476 unreachable, for a response rate of 17.18% (based on the CASRO response rate formula). 77 V. SURVEY INSTRUMENT Hello, my name is , and I am calling from Marketing Intelligence, a local third party research firm, on behalf of the Town of Oro Valley. You have been randomly selected to participate in a telephone survey designed to better understand your feelings in regard to the management of and living in the Town of Oro Valley. This is not a sales call, your identity will remain anonymous and all of your responses will remain completely confidential. The Town Council will only be given aggregated answers and not individual responses that can be attributed to a specific respondent. Depending on your answers, the survey will take between 10 and 15 minutes. Are you able to answer some of my questions at this time? Qualification Questions A. Coded gender 1. Male 2. Female B. Do you currently live within the Town limits of Oro Valley? 1. Yes 2. No (thank and terminate) C. In order to qualify you for the survey, we must first ask which of the following best describes your age group. 1. 18-24 2. 25- 34 3. 35 -44 4. 45-54 5. 55-64 6. 65 or above 7. Under 18 (ask if there is another individual above the age of 18 in the household to take the survey, if not, thank and terminate) General Perceptions I would like to start by asking you some general questions about living in Oro Valley. Q1. Overall, how satisfied are you with the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley. Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied? 1. Very satisfied 2. Somewhat satisfied 3. Neither satisfied, nor dissatisfied 4. Somewhat dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied Q2. What do you feel is the best thing about living in the Town of Oro Valley? 1. Open ended response Q3. What one thing can the Town of Oro Valley do to increase your satisfaction with the amenities and services provided? 1. Open ended response 78 Q4. How would you compare the overall services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley to those provided by other town, city and/or county governments in places where you have lived? 1. Oro Valley is much better 2. Oro Valley is somewhat better 3. They are about the same 4. Oro Valley is somewhat worse 5. Oro Valley is much worse Q5. How would you describe your feelings towards local governments in general? 1. Very positive 2. Somewhat positive 3. Neither positive, nor negative 4. Somewhat negative 5. Very negative Q6. What issues are most important to you when thinking of your quality of life in the Town of Oro Valley? 1. Open ended response Specific Town Services Next I would like to ask you about specific services and amenities associated with a city or town. After I have read the service and/or amenity, please tell me how you would assess each for the Town of Oro Valley on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means very satisfied and 1 means very dissatisfied. (ROTATE) Q7. Police Q8. Streets and roads Q9. Public transportation services Q10. Bicycle and pedestrian access Q11. Parks and recreation Q12. Library Q13. Open space 014. Fire and emergency services Q15. Schools Q16. Arts and culture opportunities Q17. Trash pickup services Q18. Creating employment opportunities within the Town Q19. Retail and dining opportunities Q20. Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities Q21. Planning for future growth Q22. Customer service provided by Town administration and staff Q23. Customer service provided by elected officials Q24. Historical preservation Q25. Activities for Seniors 79 I am now going to ask you about the same set of services and amenities that I just read to you. But this time, instead of telling me how you think the Town of Oro Valley is doing on each, I would like to know how comparatively important each is to you and your household now and in the future on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means much more important than the other services and amenities and 1 means much less important than the other services and amenities. (ROTATE) Q26. Police Q27. Streets and roads Q28. Public transportation services Q29. Bicycle and pedestrian access Q30. Parks and recreation Q31. Library Q32. Open space Q33. Fire and emergency services Q34. Schools Q35. Arts and culture opportunities Q36. Trash pickup services Q37. Creating employment opportunities within the Town Q38. Retail and dining opportunities Q39. Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities Q40. Planning for future growth Q41. Customer service provided by Town administration and staff Q42. Customer service provided by elected officials Q43. Historical preservation Q44. Activities for Seniors Paying for additional services Q45. Thinking of services and or amenities that you would like to have the Town of Oro Valley either add or do better, how willing are you to pay for the additional services and/or amenities? 1. Very willing 2. Somewhat willing 3. Not at all willing 4. Don't know (don't read) I am now going to read you three options to provide funding for the additional services and amenities you would like added or done better, please tell me how much you favor each as a means to pay for additional or enhanced amenities and services. (ROTATE) • Q46. Property taxes Q47. Sales taxes Q48. User fees 80 Coding for Q46— Q48 1. Very much in favor 2. Somewhat in favor 3. Not at all in favor Public Participation/Communications For our final set of questions, we would like to know a little more about your previous experience in public participation and how you would like the Town of Oro Valley to communicate with you. Q49. Have you ever been to any Town of Oro Valley public meeting? 1. Yes 2. No/don't know Q50. Have you ever listened to a Town of Oro Valley meeting online? 1. Yes 2. No/don't know Q51. In general, are you aware of the times and places for Oro Valley Town Council meetings? 1. Yes 2. No Q52. How interested are you in participating in public forums, such as Town Council or other public meetings? 1. Very interested 2. Somewhat interested 3. Not at all interested It is important for the Town of Oro Valley to know how residents would like to receive important news or updates about the Town. I am going to read you a list of potential ways in which you might receive information about the Town. After I read each one individually, please tell me whether or not you are likely to seek information about the Town from that particular choice. (ROTATE) Q53. Through the mail Q54. At a face to face meeting with a council member Q55. In the local newspapers Q56. In the broadcast media including television and radio Q57. In the town publication, known as the Oro Valley Vista Q58. By attending public meetings Q59. In the water utility newsletter Q60. By signing up for an automatic e-mail notification with a newsletter or web link Q61. By going to the Town of Oro Valley website Coding for Q53— Q61 1. Yes 2. No/don't know Q62. Are there any other ways you feel that the Town of Oro Valley should be communicating with residents? 1. Open ended response 81 Demographics Finally, we would like to get some additional information about you that will help us to better understand your opinions. This information will be used for classification purposes only, and as a reminder your identity will remain anonymous and all of your responses will remain completely confidential. Q63. Do you consider the Town of Oro Valley to be your primary residence for more than six months a year? 1. Yes 2. No Q64. How long have you lived within the Town of Oro Valley? 1. Open ended numeric response Q65. How long have you lived in the greater Tucson area? 1. Open ended numeric response Q66. Do you live North or South of Tangerine Road? 1. North 2. South 3. Don't know(don't read) Q67. Which of the following best describes your total combined annual household income? 1. Less than $25,000 2. Between $25,000 and $34,999 3. Between $35,000 and $49,999 4. Between $50,000 and $74,999 5. Between $75,000 and $99,999 6. $100,000 or more 7. Refused (do not read) Q68. How many people currently live or stay in your home? 1. Open ended response Q69. Are there any children under the age of 18 living with you in your home? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Refused (do not read) Q70. Coded Zip Code • 82 nsev.•. , .„ VI. STATISTICAL TABLES Q1. Overall, how satisfied are you with the services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley. Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied? 1. Very satisfied 2. Somewhat satisfied 3. Neither satisfied, nor dissatisfied 4. Somewhat dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied Satisfaction Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Very satisfied 170 42.5 42.5 42.5 Somewhat satisfied 174 43.5 43.5 86.0 Neutral 33 8.3 8.3 94.3 Somewhat dissatisfied 16 4.0 4.0 98.3 Very dissatisfied 7 1.8 1.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 83 Satisfaction - reverse scaled Mean Gender Male 4.15 Female 4.27 Age Group 18 -34 4.17 35-44 4.31 45-54 4.12 55-64 4.14 65+(North) 4.33 65+ (South) 4.20 Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 4.23 Valley 3 - 5 4.19 (years) 6 - 10 4.28 11+ 4.12 AHHI Under$35k 4.32 $35k-$50k 4.20 $50k-$75k 4.12 $75k-$100k 4.33 $100k+ 4.23 People in 1 4.37 home 2 4.17 3-4 4.19 5+ 4.24 Child under Yes 4.16 18 No 4.23 84 Q2. What do you feel is the best thing about living in the Town of Oro Valley? Count Column N % q2best Retail/dining 17 4.3% Scenery/views .67 16.8% The community/people 95 23.8% Safe 104 26.0% Quiet/atmosphere 40 10.0% Clean/well-maintained 45 11.3% Proximity 56 14.0% Recreation 27 6.8% Government 10 2.5% Schools 14 3.5% Not in Tucson 15 3.8% Weather 10 2.5% Traffic/roads 14 3.5% Misc 28 7.0% Don't know 16 4.0% Gender Male Female Column N % Column N q2best Retail/dining 4.6% 3.9% Scenery/views 14.2% 19.2% The community/people 25.4% 22.2% Safe 23.4% 28.6% Quiet/atmosphere 11.2% 8.9% Clean/well-maintained 8.1% 14.3% Proximity 13.7% 14.3% Recreation 5.6% 7.9% Government 2.5% 2.5% Schools 2.5% 4.4% Not in Tucson 5.1% 2.5% Weather 3.6% 1.5% Traffic/roads 4.1% 3.0% Misc 7.6% 6.4% Don't know 2.5% 5.4% 85 Age Group 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+(North) 65+(South) Column N% Column N% Column N% Column N% Column N% Column N% q2best Retail/dining 6.2% 5.1% 2.6% 1.5% 3.3% 7.4% Scenery/views 12.3% 12.8% 15.8% 22.7% 24.6% 13.0% The community/people 18.5% 25.6% 21.1% 19.7% 26.2% 33.3% Safe 30.8% 24.4% 34.2% 25.8% 13.1% 25.9% Quiet/atmosphere 12.3% 15.4% 3.9% 13.6% 6.6% 7.4% Clean/well-maintained 10.8% 11.5% 6.6% 15.2% 16.4% 7.4% Proximity 10.8% 14.1% 10.5% 12.1% 18.0% 20.4% Recreation 7.7% 7.7% 9.2% 3.0% 8.2% 3.7% Government .0% 3.8% 2.6% 1.5% 1.6% 5.6% Schools .0% 7.7% 9.2% .0% .0% 1.9% Not in Tucson 4.6% 1.3% 5.3% 3.0% 1.6% 7.4% Weather .0% .0% 1.3% 3.0% 9.8% 1.9% Traffic/roads 7.7% 2.6% 5.3% 1.5% 1.6% 1.9% Misc 10.8% 7.7% 1.3% 3.0% 11.5% 9.3% Don't know 6.2% 5.1% 3.9% 4.5% .0% 3.7% Lived in Oro Valley(years) 2orfewer 3- 5 6- 10 11+ Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % q2best Retail/dining 9.3% 2.2% 4.1% 4.2% Scenery/views 11.6% 12.4% 19.6% 18.6% The community/people 18.6% 18.0% 28.4% 24.6% Safe 25.6% 25.8% 28.4% 23.7% Quiet/atmosphere 14.0% 10.1% 9.5% 8.5% Clean/well-maintained 4.7% 13.5% 11.5% 11.0% Proximity 18.6% 15.7% 13.5% 11.9% Recreation 9.3% 5.6% 6.8% 6.8% Government .0% 3.4% 2.0% 3.4% Schools 2.3% 3.4% 5.4% 1.7% Not in Tucson 4.7% 3.4% .7% 7.6% Weather 2.3% 2.2% 2.0% 3.4% Traffic/roads 4.7% 4.5% 4.1% .8% Misc 2.3% 5.6% 6.1% 10.2% Don't know 4.7% 5.6% 4.7% 1.7% 86 AHHI Under$35k $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Column N % Column N % Column N % . Column N % Column N q2best Retail/dining 2.7% 7.3% 3.9% .0% 6.1% Scenery/views 27.0% 9.8% 17.1% 14.8% 15.2% The community/people 32.4% 29.3% 15.8% 21.3% 28.8% Safe 18.9% 14.6% 23.7% 29.5% 30.3% Quiet/atmosphere 5.4% 2.4% 10.5% 4.9% 15.2% Clean/well-maintained 10.8% 14.6% 14.5% 6.6% 10.6% Proximity 13.5% 22.0% 15.8% 16.4% 11.4% Recreation 8.1% 4.9% 2.6% 14.8% 5.3% Government 2.7% 2.4% 1.3% 1.6% 4.5% Schools .0% 2.4% 1.3% 6.6% 3.8% Not in Tucson 2.7% 2.4% 9.2% 1.6% 2.3% Weather 5.4% 4.9% 2.6% 1.6% .0% Traffic/roads 2.7% 7.3% 5.3% .0% 1.5% Misc 10.8% 7.3% 3.9% 6.6% 6.8% Don't know 5.4% 4.9% 7.9% 3.3% 2.3% People in home 1 2 3-4 5+ Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % q2best Retail/dining 4.3% 4.3% 3.9% 5.3% Scenery/views 21.7% 20.4% 13.2% 10.5% The community/people 28.3% 22.2% 26.3% 15.8% Safe 26.1% 19.8% 30.3% 36.8% Quiet/atmosphere 10.9% 9.3% 7.9% 18.4% Clean/well-maintained 10.9% 11.1% 12.5% 5.3% Proximity 10.9% 16.7% 12.5% 13.2% Recreation 4.3% 6.2% 7.2% 10.5% Government .0% 3.1% 3.3% .0% Schools .0% .6% 5.9% 10.5% Not in Tucson 4.3% 3.7% 2.6% 7.9% Weather 6.5% 3.7% .7% .0% Traffic/roads 2.2% 2.5% 4.6% 2.6% Misc 4.3% 6.8% 7.9% 5.3% Don't know 6.5% 4.9% 2.6% 2.6% 87 Child under 18 Yes No Column N % Column N % q2best Retail/dining 4.7% 4.0% Scenery/views 10.1% 20.8% The community/people 25.0% 23.2% Safe 29.7% 24.0% Quiet/atmosphere 11.5% 8.8% Clean/well-maintained 8.1% 12.8% Proximity 13.5% 14.4% Recreation 7.4% 6.4% Government 2.7% 2.4% Schools 8.1% .8% Not in Tucson 2.7% 4.4% Weather .7% 3.6% Traffic/roads 3.4% 3.2% Misc 6.8% 6.8% Don't know 5.4% 3.2% Q3. What one thing can the Town of Oro Valley do to increase your satisfaction with the amenities and services provided? Count Column N q3improve Improve retail/dining 54 13.6% Police-less tix 13 3.3% Adt'l recreation 55 13.9% Improve traffic/roads 37 9.3% Enhance public transit 9 2.3% Control/reduce building 35 8.8% Lower taxes/utilities 25 6.3% No Wal-Mart 19 4.8% Nothing-satisfied 42 10.6% Misc 86 21.7% Don't know 51 12.9% 88 Gender Male Female Column N % Column N % . q3improve Improve retail/dining 10.3% 16.8% Police-less tix 4.6% 2.0% Adt'l recreation 13.4% 14.4% Improve traffic/roads 11.9% 6.9% Enhance public transit 1.5% 3.0% Control/reduce building 6.7% 10.9% Lower taxes/utilities 7.2% 5.4% No Wal-Mart 2.6% 6.9% Nothing-satisfied 11.3% 9.9% Misc 24.2% 19.3% Don't know 10.8% 14.9% Age Group 18-34 35-44 _ 45-54 55-64 65+(North) 65+(South) Column N% Column N% Column N% Column N% Column N% Column N% q3improve Improve retail/dining 7.8% 22.1% 16.0% 9.1% 19.7% 3.8% Police-less tix 3.1% 7.8% 2.7% 3.0% 1.6% .0% Adt'l recreation 20.3% 19.5% 17.3% 13.6% 3.3% 5.7% Improve traffic/roads 6.3% 7.8% 8.0% 13.6% 11.5% 9.4% Enhance public transit 1.6% 2.6% 1.3% .0% 3.3% 5.7% Control/reduce building 6.3% 7.8% 5.3% 15.2% 9.8% 9.4% Lower taxes/utilities 3.1% 2.6% 9.3% 4.5% 9.8% 9.4% No Wal-Mart 3.1% 9.1% 2.7% 6.1% 1.6% 5.7% Nothing-satisfied 7.8% 6.5% 4.0% 10.6% 19.7% 18.9% Misc 23.4% 14.3% 24.0% 22.7% 16.4% 32.1% Don't know 25.0% 6.5% 14.7% 13.6% 8.2% 9.4% Lived in Oro Valley(years) 2orfewer 3-5 6 - 10 11+ Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % -g3improve Improve retail/dining 7.1% 15.7% 14.3% 13.7% Police-less tix 4.8% 2.2% 3.4% 3.4% Adt'l recreation 9.5% 15.7% 13.6% 14.5% Improve traffic/roads 9.5% 10.1% 7.5% 11.1% Enhance public transit 2.4% 2.2% 3.4% .9% Control/reduce building 4.8% 9.0% 8.8% 10.3% Lower taxes/utilities .0% 4.5% 6.8% 9.4% No Wal-Mart 4.8% 3.4% 6.8% 3.4% Nothing-satisfied 9.5% 9.0% 10.2% 12.0% Misc 23.8% 20.2% 18.4% 26.5% Don't know 31.0% 13.5% 12.2% 6.8% 89 AHHI 100k+ $50k $75k $75k $100k $ Under$35k $35k $50k Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % r q3improve Improve retail/dining 2.7% 9.8% 17.1% 8.3% 19.1% Police - less tix .0% .0% 2.6% 6.7% 3.1% Adt'l recreation 8.1% 7.3% 9.2% 18.3% 20.6% Improve traffic/roads 5.4% 9.8% 3.9% 13.3% 9.2% Enhance public transit 2.7% 2.4% 2.6% 3.3% 1.5% Control/reduce building 13.5% 7.3% 10.5% 10.0% 6.9% Lower taxes/utilities .0% 12.2% 7.9% 8.3% 6.9% No Wal-Mart .0% 2.4% 7.9% 5.0% 5.3% Nothing -satisfied 21.6% 24.4% 9.2% 10.0% 3.8% Misc 27.0% 14.6% 27.6% 20.0% 20.6% Don't know 24.3% 9.8% 14.5% 10.0% 9.2% People in home 1 2 3-4 5+ Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N g3improve Improve retail/dining 2.2% 13.1% 18.5% 10.5% Police- less tix .0% 3.1% 4.0% 5.3% Adt'l recreation 4.3% 8.1% 18.5% 31.6% Improve traffic/roads 4.3% 11.9% 8.6% 7.9% Enhance public transit 6.5% 1.9% 2.0% .0% Control/reduce building 10.9% 10.0% 9.3% .0% Lower taxes/utilities 6.5% 10.0% 4.0% .0% No Wal-Mart 2.2% 5.0% 6.0% 2.6% Nothing -satisfied 15.2% 15.0% 4.6% 7.9% Misc 30.4% 21.9% 21.2% 13.2% Don't know 21.7% 8.1% 13.2% 21.1% 90 Child under 18 Yes No Column N % Column N % q3improve Improve retail/dining 17.0% 11.7% Police-less tix 5.4% 2.0% Adt'l recreation 24.5% 7.7% Improve traffic/roads 5.4% 11.7% Enhance public transit .7% 3.2% Control/reduce building 7.5% 9.7% Lower taxes/utilities .7% 9.7% No Wal-Mart 6.1% 4.0% Nothing -satisfied 6.1% 12.9% Misc 17.7% 24.2% Don't know 15.6% 11.3% Q4. How would you compare the overall services and amenities provided by the Town of Oro Valley to those provided by other town, city and/or county governments in places where you have lived? 1. Oro Valley is much better 2. Oro Valley is somewhat better 3. They are about the same 4. Oro Valley is somewhat worse 5. Oro Valley is much worse Oro Valley services Cumulative Frequency _ Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Much better 82 20.5 20.5 20.5 Somewhat better 121 30.3 30.3 50.8 About the same 149 37.3 37.3 88.0 Somewhat worse 39 9.8 9.8 97.8 Much worse 9 2.3 2.3 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 91 Oro Valley services Mean Gender Male 3.51 Female 3.63 Age Group 18-34 3.62 35-44 3.60 45- 54 3.49 55-64 3.59 65+ (North) 3.64 65+ (South) 3.48 Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 3.47 Valley 3 - 5 3.49 (years) 6 - 10 3.61 11+ 3.60 AHHI Under$35k 3.54 $35k-$50k 3.44 $50k-$75k 3.62 $75k-$100k 3.69 $100k+ 3.59 People in 1 3.59 home 2 3.56 3-4 3.55 5+ 3.66 Child under Yes 3.55 18 No 3.58 Q5. How would you describe your feelings towards local governments in general? 1. Very positive 2. Somewhat positive 3. Neither positive, nor negative 4. Somewhat negative 5. Very negative Feelings toward gov'ts Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Very positive 60 15.0 15.0 15.0 Somewhat positive 157 39.3 39.3 54.3 Neutral 107 26.8 26.8 81.0 Somewhat negative 57 14.3 14.3 95.3 Very negative 19 4.8 4.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 92 Feelings toward gov'ts Mean Gender Male 3.39 Female 3.52 Age Group 18 -34 3.49 35-44 3.54 45- 54 3.46 55-64 3.26 65+(North) 3.46 65+ (South) 3.52 Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 3.37 Valley 3 - 5 3.47 (years) 6- 10 3.45 11+ 3.47 AHHI Under$35k 3.30 $35k-$50k 3.59 $50k-$75k 3.51 $75k-$100k 3.39 $100k+ 3.48 People in 1 3.74 home 2 3.31 3 -4 3.51 5+ 3.47 Child under Yes 3.46 18 No 3.45 93 Q6. What issues are most important to you when thinking of your quality of life in the Town of Oro Valley? 1. Open ended response Count Column N Quality Retail/dining 18 4.5% of Life Scenery/views 28 7.1% The community/people 25 6.3% Safety 148 37.3% Keeping it clean 11 2.8% Proximity 16 4.0% Recreation 36 9.1% Gov't/practices 21 5.3% Schools/edu 55 13.9% Traffic/roads 34 8.6% Taxes/budget/utility rates 29 7.3% Water 12 3.0% Growth/planning 69 17.4% Medical svcs 16 4.0% Misc 80 20.2% Don't know 21 5.3% Gender Male Female Column N % Column N Quality Retail/dining 4.6% 4.5% of Life Scenery/views 6.7% 7.4% The community/people 4.6% 7.9% Safety 34.9% 39.6% Keeping it clean 3.6% 2.0% Proximity 3.6% 4.5% Recreation 8.7% 9.4% Gov't/practices 5.6% 5.0% Schools/edu 9.7% 17.8% Traffic/roads 9.7% 7.4% Taxes/budget/utility rates 8.2% 6.4% Water 3.1% 3.0% Growth/planning 16.9% 17.8% Medical svcs 3.6% 4.5% Misc 22.6% 17.8% Don't know 3.6% 6.9% 94 Age Group 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+(North) 65+(South) Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N Quality Retail/dining 1.6% 7.7% 6.6% 6.2% 3.3% .0% of Life Scenery/views 4.7% 2.6% 10.5% 9.2% 6.6% 9.4% The community/people 14.1% 5.1% 7.9% 4.6% 3.3% 1.9% Safety 43.8% 39.7% 47.4% 32.3% 26.2% 30.2% Keeping it clean 1.6% 6.4% .0% 3.1% 3.3% 1.9% Proximity 9.4% 1.3% 2.6% 1.5% 4.9% 5.7% Recreation 10.9% 9.0% 13.2% 7.7% 4.9% 7.5% Gov't/practices .0% 3.8% 5.3% 4.6% 11.5% 7.5% Schools/edu 14.1% 29.5% 25.0% 4.6% 1.6% .0% Traffic/roads 10.9% 11.5% 6.6% 9.2% 4.9% 7.5% Taxes/budget/utility rates 3.1% 2.6% 6.6% 12.3% 8.2% 13.2% Water 3.1% .0% 2.6% 9.2% 1.6% 1.9% Growth/planning 9.4% 16.7% 17.1% 23.1% 27.9% 9.4% Medical svcs 1.6% .0% 1.3% 6.2% 13.1% 3.8% Misc 12.5% 23.1% 14.5% 24.6% 18.0% 30.2% Don't know 12.5% 5.1% 5.3% .0% 6.6% 1.9% Lived in Oro Valley(years) 2orfewer 3- 5 6 - 10 11+ Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N Quality Retail/dining 2.3% 7.9% 3.4% 4.3% of Life Scenery/views 7.0% 4.5% 8.2% 7.8% The community/people 2.3% 11.2% 5.4% 5.2% Safety 51.2% 27.0% 43.5% 31.9% Keeping it clean .0% 3.4% 4.1% 1.7% Proximity 4.7% 5.6% 2.7% 4.3% Recreation 7.0% 10.1% 6.8% 12.1% Gov't/practices 7.0% 4.5% 3.4% 7.8% Schools/edu 14.0% 14.6% 16.3% 10.3% Traffic/roads 7.0% 5.6% 11.6% 7.8% Taxes/budget/utility rates 4.7% 7.9% 6.1% 9.5% Water 2.3% 2.2% 4.1% 2.6% Growth/planning 7.0% 18.0% 19.0% 19.0% Medical svcs 4.7% 1.1% 2.7% 7.8% Misc 16.3% 22.5% 19.7% 19.8% Don't know 7.0% 6.7% 5.4% 3.4% 95 AHHI Under$35k _ $35k-$50k $50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k+ Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N % Quality Retail/dining .0% .0% 4.0% 10.0% 3.8% of Life Scenery/views 10.8% 7.3% 6.7% 6.7% 8.4% The community/people 10.8% 4.9% 1.3% 8.3% 8.4% Safety 24.3% 36.6% 38.7% 28.3% 45.0% Keeping it clean 5.4% 2.4% 1.3% 1.7% 3.1% Proximity .0% 7.3% 8.0% 5.0% 1.5% Recreation .0% 7.3% 8.0% 18.3% 9.2% Gov't/practices 5.4% 4.9% 8.0% 5.0% 3.1% Schools/edu 2.7% 4.9% 13.3% 18.3% 21.4% Traffic/roads 2.7% 2.4% 2.7% 6.7% 16.0% Taxes/budget/utility rates 13.5% 4.9% 6.7% 3.3% 5.3% Water 8.1% 4.9% 1.3% 1.7% 2.3% Growth/planning 21.6% 14.6% 12.0% 28.3% 16.8% Medical svcs 2.7% 4.9% 5.3% 3.3% 2.3% Misc 27.0% 31.7% 21.3% 13.3% 13.7% Don't know 10.8% 7.3% 6.7% 8.3% .8% People in home 1 2 3 -4 5+ Column N % Column N % Column N % Column N Quality Retail/dining .0% 2.5% 7.9% 5.4% of Life Scenery/views 17.4% 6.9% 4.6% 5.4% The community/people 4.3% 2.5% 9.2% 13.5% Safety 41.3% 30.0% 41.4% 45.9% Keeping it clean 4.3% 3.1% 2.0% 2.7% Proximity 6.5% 3.1% 4.6% 2.7% Recreation 13.0% 5.6% 10.5% 13.5% Gov't/practices 2.2% 8.1% 3.9% 2.7% Schools/edu 2.2% 4.4% 26.3% 18.9% Traffic/roads 2.2% 10.0% 9.2% 8.1% Taxes/budget/utility rates 2.2% 12.5% 4.6% 2.7% Water 8.7% 2.5% 2.6% .0% Growth/planning 23.9% 18.1% 16.4% 10.8% Medical svcs .0% 7.5% 2.6% .0% Misc 23.9% 20.6% 19.1% 16.2% Don't know 6.5% 6.3% 3.3% 8.1% 96 Child under 18 Yes No Column N % Column N % Quality Retail/dining 6.1% 3.6% of Life Scenery/views 4.1% 8.9% The community/people 11.6% 3.2% Safety 42.9% 33.9% Keeping it clean 1.4% 3.6% Proximity 5.4% 3.2% Recreation 11.6% 7.7% Gov't/practices 2.0% 7.3% Schools/edu 26.5% 6.5% Traffic/roads 8.2% 8.9% Taxes/budget/utility rates 3.4% 9.7% Water 1.4% 4.0% Growth/planning 15.6% 18.5% Medical svcs .7% 6.0% Misc 19.0% 20.6% Don't know 6.8% 4.4% Specific Town Services Next I would like to ask you about specific services and amenities associated with a city or town. After I have read the service and/or amenity, please tell me how you would assess each for the Town of Oro Valley on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means very satisfied and 1 means very dissatisfied. (ROTATE) Q7. Police Q8. Streets and roads Q9. Public transportation services Q10. Bicycle and pedestrian access Q11. Parks and recreation Q12. Library Q13. Open space Q14. Fire and emergency services Q15. Schools Q16. Arts and culture opportunities Q17. Trash pickup services Q18. Creating employment opportunities within the Town Q19. Retail and dining opportunities Q20. Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities Q21. Planning for future growth Q22. Customer service provided by Town administration and staff Q23. Customer service provided by elected officials Q24. Historical preservation Q25. Activities for Seniors 97 Count Mean Police 400 4.30 Streets/roads 400 3.75 Public transportation 400 2.37 Bicycle/ped access 400 3.93 Parks&rec. 400 3.90 Library 400 4.36 Open space 400 3.65 Fire/emerg svcs 400 4.27 Schools 400 4.09 Arts/culture opps 400 3.70 Trash pickup 400 4.14 Creating employment 400 3.21 opps Retail/dining 400 3.35 Youth sports, etc. 400 3.68 Planning for growth 400 3.16 Cust svc-Town 400 3.68 admin/staff Cust svc- Elected 400 3.22 officials Historical preservation 400 3.39 Activities for Seniors 400 3.72 98 Gender Male Female Mean Mean Police 4.12 4.47 Streets/roads 3.66 3.83 Public transportation 2.46 2.28 Bicycle/ped access 3.83 4.03 Parks& rec. 3.80 4.01 Library 4.17 4.53 Open space 3.67 3.62 Fire/emerg svcs 4.15 4.38 Schools 3.93 4.25 Arts/culture opps 3.52 3.86 Trash pickup 4.12 4.16 Creating employment 3.11 3.32 opps Retail/dining 3.21 3.49 Youth sports, etc. 3.54 3.81 Planning for growth 3.13 3.19 Cu st svc-Town admin/staff 3.51 3.87 Cust svc- Elected 3.15 3.30 officials Historical preservation 3.38 3.40 Activities for Seniors 3.60 3.86 99 Age Group 65+ 65+ 18-34 35-44 45- 54 55-64 _. (North) (South) r Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Police 4.14 4.36 4.27 4.12 4.40 4.51 Streets/roads 3.78 3.81 3.59 3.58 4.02 3.74 Public transportation 2.30 2.40 2.13 2.35 2.62 2.53 Bicycle/ped access 4.06 3.87 3.81 3.84 4.14 3.88 Parks&rec. 3.92 3.95 3.61 3.81 4.11 4.13 Library 4.25 4.36 4.32 4.29 4.42 4.57 Open space 3.97 3.85 3.47 3.44 3.78 3.32 Fire/emerg svcs 4.43 4.30 4.06 4.13 4.65 4.08 Schools 4.19 4.07 4.06 4.10 3.91 4.15 Arts/culture opps 3.52 3.70 3.47 3.73 3.89 3.96 Trash pickup 4.26 4.07 3.85 4.07 4.53 4.17 Creating employment 3.43 3.13 2.95 3.32 3.39 3.16 opps Retail/dining 3.57 3.21 3.08 3.32 3.52 3.56 Youth sports, etc. 3.73 3.60 3.58 3.76 3.74 3.78 Planning for growth 3.59 3.20 3.07 2.84 3.25 3.00 Cust svc-Town 3.82 3.73 3.46 3.72 3.78 3.64 admin/staff Cust svc- Elected 3.31 3.17 3.08 3.24 3.30 3.26 officials Historical preservation 3.44 3.58 3.06 3.20 3.71 3.37 Activities for Seniors 4.18 3.76 3.65 3.28 4.07 3.58 100 Lived in Oro Valley(years) 2 or fewer 3- 5 6- 10 11+ Mean Mean Mean Mean Police 4.23 4.21 4.30 4.36 Streets/roads 3.60 3.80 3.78 3.70 Public transportation 2.32 2.08 2.52 2.40 Bicycle/ped access 3.73 3.86 3.97 3.98 Parks& rec. 4.00 3.73 3.94 3.94 Library 4.27 4.16 4.41 4.46 Open space 3.76 3.54 3.78 3.52 Fire/emerg svcs 4.30 4.25 4.29 4.25 Schools 4.03 3.93 4.12 4.17 Arts/culture opps 3.60 3.54 3.77 3.75 Trash pickup 4.17 4.12 4.21 4.06 Creating employment 3.18 2.88 3.40 3.24 opps Retail/dining 3.33 3.27 3.33 3.44 Youth sports, etc. 3.45 3.60 3.67 3.83 Planning for growth 3.02 3.14 3.26 3.08 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 3.51 3.63 3.72 3.72 Cust svc- Elected 3.15 2.97 3.30 3.27 officials Historical preservation 3.27 3.20 3.62 3.28 Activities for Seniors 3.80 3.47 3.75 3.82 101 AHHI Under $35k- $50k- $75k- $35k $50k $75k $100k $100k+ MeanMean Mean Mean Mean _ Police 4.22 4.33 4.19 4.30 4.38 Streets/roads 3.73 3.68 3.73 3.80 3.76 Public transportation 2.58 2.64 2.16 2.45 2.27 Bicycle/ped access 4.09 3.56 3.94 3.98 4.02 Parks& rec. 4.00 3.95 3.95 3.97 3.76 Library 4.42 4.45 4.39 4.23 4.44 Open space 3.64 3.66 3.54 3.65 3.76 Fire/emerg svcs 4.35 4.33 4.24 4.29 4.19 Schools 4.10 4.10 4.02 4.04 4.21 Arts/culture opps 3.97 3.78 3.69 3.75 3.57 Trash pickup 4.26 4.09 3.97 4.24 4.21 Creating employment opps 3.45 3.17 3.28 3.33 3.15 Retail/dining 3.92 3.61 3.34 3.33 3.11 Youth sports, etc. 4.08 3.60 3.69 3.83 3.58 Planning for growth 3.32 3.21 3.07 3.12 3.15 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 3.83 3.76 3.66 3.79 3.59 Cust svc- Elected 3.35 3.34 3.17 3.33 3.10 officials Historical preservation 3.42 3.11 3.52 3.37 3.45 Activities for Seniors 3.70 3.93 3.58 3.87 3.70 • 102 People in home 1 2 3 -4 5+ Mean Mean Mean Mean • Police 4.44 4.23 4.28 4.42 Streets/roads 3.85 3.76 3.68 3.76 Public transportation 2.62 2.36 2.28 2.46 Bicycle/ped access 4.00 3.90 3.95 3.84 Parks& rec. 4.27 3.94 3.87 3.45 Library 4.50 4.35 4.37 4.14 Open space 3.70 3.51 3.75 3.74 Fire/emerg svcs 4.52 4.27 4.21 4.14 Schools 4.12 3.99 4.13 4.17 Arts/culture opps 3.90 3.75 3.68 3.27 Trash pickup 4.34 4.29 3.99 3.91 Creating employment 3.47 3.24 3.10 3.29 opps Retail/dining 3.91 3.27 3.28 3.24 Youth sports, etc. 3.94 3.67 3.66 3.53 Planning for growth 3.22 3.01 3.30 3.09 Cust svc-Town 4.05 3.61 3.69 3.47 admin/staff Cust svc Elected 3.69 3.14 3.22 2.86 officials Historical preservation 3.53 3.31 3.42 3.35 Activities for Seniors 3.69 3.72 3.71 3.85 103 Child under 18 Yes No Mean Mean Police 4.26 4.31 Streets/roads 3.78 3.72 Public transportation 2.35 2.37 Bicycle/ped access 3.95 3.91 Parks& rec. 3.76 3.98 Library 4.42 4.32 Open space 3.73 3.60 Fire/emerg svcs 4.21 4.30 Schools 4.19 4.00 Arts/culture opps 3.65 3.72 Trash pickup 4.02 4.22 Creating employment opps 3.20 3.21 Retail/dining 3.24 3.41 Youth sports, etc. 3.61 3.73 Planning for growth 3.22 3.11 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 3.66 3.69 Cust svc- Elected officials 3.17 3.23 Historical preservation 3.41 3.37 Activities for Seniors 3.89 3.65 I am now going to ask you about the same set of services and amenities that I just read to you. But this time, instead of telling me how you think the Town of Oro Valley is doing on each, I would like to know how comparatively important each is to you and your household now and in the future on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means much more important than the other services and amenities and 1 means much less important than the other services and amenities. (ROTATE) Q26. Police Q27. Streets and roads Q28. Public transportation services Q29. Bicycle and pedestrian access Q30. Parks and recreation Q31. Library Q32. Open space Q33. Fire and emergency services Q34. Schools Q35. Arts and culture opportunities Q36. Trash pickup services Q37. Creating employment opportunities within the Town Q38. Retail and dining opportunities Q39. Youth sports and other youth oriented opportunities 104 Q40. Planning for future growth Q41. Customer service provided by Town administration and staff Q42. Customer service provided by elected officials Q43. Historical preservation Q44. Activities for Seniors Count Mean Police 400 4.56 Streets/roads 400 4.39 Public transportation 400 3.29 Bicycle/ped access 400 3.85 Parks& rec. 400 4.07 Library 400 4.15 Open space 400 4.12 Fire/emerg svcs 400 4.68 Schools 400 4.26 Arts/culture opps 400 3.53 Trash pickup 400 3.94 Creating employment 400 3.60 opps Retail/dining 400 3.95 Youth sports, etc. 400 3.62 Planning for growth 400 4.33 Cu st svc-Town 400 3.84 admin/staff Cust svc- Elected 400 3.76 officials Historical preservation 400 3.38 Activities for Seniors 400 3.27 105 Gender Male Female Mean Mean Police 4.45 4.67 Streets/roads 4.32 4.45 Public transportation 3.17 3.41 Bicycle/ped access 3.66 4.03 , Parks& rec. 3.95 4.17 Library 3.95 4.35 Open space 3.94 4.30 Fire/emerg svcs 4.60 4.77 Schools 4.21 4.32 Arts/culture opps 3.28 3.77 Trash pickup 3.82 4.05 Creating employment opps 3.36 3.83 Retail/dining 3.87 4.02 Youth sports, etc. 3.48 3.76 Planning for growth 4.26 4.39 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 3.73 3.94 Cust svc- Elected officials 3.63 3.90 Historical preservation 3.15 3.61 Activities for Seniors 3.13 3.40 106 Age Group 65+ 65+ 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 _ (North) (South) Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Police 4.40 4.63 4.62 4.45 4.77 4.43 Streets/roads 4.29 4.41 4.30 4.41 4.51 4.44 Public transportation 3.39 3.05 3.23 3.25 3.56 3.40 Bicycle/ped access 3.94 4.18 3.95 3.74 3.61 3.49 Parks& rec. 4.26 4.45 4.04 3.88 3.78 3.85 Library 4.25 4.17 4.01 4.03 4.13 4.40 Open space 3.98 4.14 4.13 4.15 4.28 4.04 Fire/emerg svcs 4.62 4.73 4.64 4.64 4.87 4.62 Schools 4.51 4.74 4.43 3.83 3.89 3.92 Arts/culture opps 3.61 3.46 3.29 3.32 3.75 3.91 Trash pickup 3.92 3.87 3.86 3.69 4.28 4.07 Creating employment 3.83 3.95 3.77 3.43 3.36 2.98 opps Retail/dining 3.80 4.23 3.82 3.80 4.21 3.80 Youth sports, etc. 4.05 4.26 3.70 3.05 2.96 3.37 Planning for growth 4.34 4.40 4.21 4.41 4.46 4.11 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 3.87 3.69 3.80 4.06 3.80 3.81 Cust svc- Elected 3.74 3.77 3.71 3.89 3.75 3.73 officials Historical preservation 3.43 3.23 3.26 3.35 3.66 3.45 Activities for Seniors 2.82 2.71 3.01 3.43 4.22 3.67 107 Lived in Oro Valley(years) 2orfewer 3 -5 6 - 10 11+ Mean Mean Mean Mean Police 4.56 4.43 4.61 4.58 Streets/roads 4.51 4.18 4.48 4.40 Public transportation 3.28 3.22 3.23 3.46 Bicycle/ped access 3.53 3.90 3.95 3.82 Parks& rec. 4.14 4.11 4.06 4.01 Library 4.12 4.26 4.07 4.20 Open space 3.98 4.09 4.12 4.23 Fire/emerg svcs 4.72 4.67 4.70 4.66 Schools 4.23 4.43 4.28 4.12 Arts/culture opps 3.72 3.39 3.52 3.61 Trash pickup 3.81 3.84 4.00 4.00 Creating employment opps 3.67 3.66 3.68 3.41 Retail/dining 4.05 3.87 4.03 3.92 Youth sports, etc. 3.51 3.69 3.65 3.57 Planning for growth 4.52 4.20 4.31 4.38 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 3.79 3.71 3.86 3.91 Cust svc- Elected officials 3.79 3.47 3.83 3.89 Historical preservation 3.28 3.16 3.39 3.59 Activities for Seniors 2.88 2.94 3.33 3.58 108 AHHI Under $35k- $50k- $75k- $35k $50k $75k $100k $100k+ Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Police 4.47 4.63 4.56 4.51 4.59 Streets/roads 4.27 4.56 4.41 4.48 4.33 Public transportation 3.67 3.72 3.57 3.25 2.95 Bicycle/ped access 4.14 3.76 3.77 3.64 3.98 Parks& rec. 4.19 4.15 4.09 4.08 4.05 Library 4.32 4.27 4.12 4.41 4.01 Open space 4.43 4.07 4.05 4.30 4.05 Fire/emerg svcs 4.68 4.78 4.64 4.74 4.70 Schools 4.08 4.08 4.14 4.26 4.45 Arts/culture opps 3.81 3.37 3.50 3.77 3.48 Trash pickup 4.11 4.15 3.90 3.97 3.75 Creating employment 3.91 3.35 3.64 3.63 3.56 opps Retail/dining 3.65 4.00 4.01 3.97 4.05 Youth sports, etc. 3.83 3.26 3.51 3.44 3.75 Planning for growth 4.05 4.37 4.38 4.38 4.36 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 4.20 3.69 3.86 3.74 3.79 Cust svc- Elected officials 3.94 3.65 3.75 3.69 3.79 Historical preservation 4.03 3.46 3.51 3.33 3.22 Activities for Seniors 3.89 3.32 3.56 3.30 2.86 109 People in home 1 2 3-4 5+ Mean Mean Mean Mean Police 4.58 4.56 4.54 4.58 Streets/roads 4.52 4.40 4.36 4.34 Public transportation 3.88 3.25 3.27 2.97 Bicycle/ped access 3.82 3.64 4.11 3.79 Parks& rec. 4.07 3.82 4.28 4.24 Library 4.52 4.01 4.18 4.24 Open space 4.22 4.21 4.09 3.84 Fire/emerg svcs 4.72 4.68 4.69 4.66 Schools 4.05 3.83 4.66 4.71 Arts/culture opps 3.82 3.56 3.51 3.26 Trash pickup 4.35 3.88 3.97 3.59 Creating employment 3.72 3.31 3.83 3.71 opps Retail/dining 3.72 3.94 4.12 3.71 Youth sports, etc. 3.42 3.10 4.03 4.34 Planning for growth 4.48 4.24 4.38 4.34 Cust svc-Town admin/staff 4.05 3.83 3.77 3.84 Cust svc- Elected 4.00 3.69 3.74 3.86 officials Historical preservation 3.74 3.42 3.33 3.03 Activities for Seniors 3.73 3.61 2.89 2.81 110 Child under 18 Yes No Mean Mean Police 4.52 4.58 Streets/roads . 4.34 4.42 Public transportation 3.06 3.45 Bicycle/ped access 4.09 3.71 Parks& rec. 4.39 3.87 Library 4.22 4.12 Open space 3.98 4.22 Fire/emerg svcs 4.69 4.68 Schools 4.77 3.94 Arts/culture opps 3.52 3.55 Trash pickup 3.85 4.00 Creating employment 3.84 3.46 opps Retail/dining 4.05 3.90 Youth sports, etc. 4.19 3.26 Planning for growth 4.27 4.37 Cust svc-Town 3.77 3.87 admin/staff Cust svc- Elected 3.81 3.73 officials Historical preservation 3.21 3.49 Activities for Seniors 2.69 3.61 Paving for additional services Q45. Thinking of services and or amenities that you would like to have the Town of Oro Valley either add or do better, how willing are you to pay for the additional services and/or amenities? 1. Very willing 2. Somewhat willing 3. Not at all willing 4. Don't know (don't read) Willing to pay Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Very 83 20.8 21.2 21.2 Somewhat 243 60.8 62.1 83.4 Not at all 65 16.3 16.6 100.0 Total 391 97.8 100.0 Missing Don't know 9 2.3 Total 400 100.0 111 Willing to pay Very Somewhat Not at all RowN % RowN % RowN % Gender Male 23.0% 57.6% 19.4% Female 19.5% 66.5% 14.0% Age Group 18 -34 14.1% 67.2% 18.8% 35-44 24.7% 70.1% 5.2% 45- 54 23.3% 60.3% 16.4% 55-64 29.2% 50.8% 20.0% 65+ (North) 18.0% 55.7% 26.2% 65+ (South) 15.7% 68.6% 15.7% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 16.7% 66.7% 16.7% Valley 3- 5 21.6% 59.1% 19.3% (years) 6 - 10 19.9% 67.8% 12.3% 11+ 24.8% 55.8% 19.5% AHHI Under$35k 14.3% 71.4% 14.3% $35k-$50k 9.8% 63.4% 26.8% $50k-$75k 19.7% 64.5% 15.8% $75k-$100k 24.6% 55.7% 19.7% $100k+ 29.2% 59.2% 11.5% People in 1 20.0% 77.8% 2.2% home 2 20.8% 53.5% 25.8% 3 -4 23.0% 64.9% 12.2% 5+ 18.9% 70.3% 10.8% Child under Yes 21.8% 68.0% 10.2% 18 No 21.1% 58.7% 20.2% I am now going to read you three options to provide funding for the additional services and amenities you would like added or done better, please tell me how much you favor each as a means to pay for additional or enhanced amenities and services. (ROTATE) Q46. Property taxes Q47. Sales taxes Q48. User fees Coding for Q46- Q48 1. Very much in favor 2. Somewhat in favor 3. Not at all in favor 112 Property taxes Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Very much in favor 36 9.0 9.0 9.0 Somewhat in favor 164 41.0 41.0 50.0 Not at all in favor 200 50.0 50.0 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 Sales taxes Cumulative Frequency Percent , Valid Percent Percent r Valid Very much in favor 74 18.5 18.5 18.5 Somewhat in favor 189 47.3 47.3 65.8 Not at all in favor 137 34.3 34.3 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 User fees Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Very much in favor 118 29.5 29.5 29.5 Somewhat in favor 195 48.8 48.8 78.3 Not at all in favor 87 21.8 21.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 113 Property taxes Very much in Somewhat in Not at all favor favor in favor RowN % RowN % RowN % Gender Male 7.1% 41.6% 51.3% Female 10.8% 40.4% 48.8% Age Group 18-34 6.2% 50.8% 43.1% 35-44 11.5% 50.0% 38.5% 45-54 9.2% 44.7% 46.1% 55-64 12.1% 34.8% 53.0% 65+(North) 6.6% 34.4% 59.0% 65+(South) 7.4% 25.9% 66.7% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 7.0% 46.5% 46.5% Valley 3- 5 7.9% 37.1% 55.1% (years) 6- 10 11.5% 40.5% 48.0% 11+ 7.6% 42.4% 50.0% AHHI Under$35k .0% 40.5% 59.5% $35k-$50k 2.4% 41.5% 56.1% $50k-$75k 13.2% 34.2% 52.6% $75k-$100k 13.1% 45.9% 41.0% $100k+ 8.3% 47.7% 43.9% People in 1 6.5% 47.8% 45.7% home 2 10.5% 32.7% 56.8% 3 -4 8.6% 45.4% 46.1% 5+ 7.9% 50.0% 42.1% Child under Yes 8.1% 47.3% 44.6% 18 No 9.6% 37.2% 53.2% 114 Sales taxes Very much in Somewhat in Not at all favor favor in favor RowN % RowN % RowN % Gender Male 22.8% 41.1% 36.0% Female 14.3% 53.2% 32.5% Age Group 18 -34 15.4% 52.3% 32.3% 35-44 24.4% 57.7% 17.9% 45- 54 10.5% 52.6% 36.8% 55-64 24.2% 31.8% 43.9% 65+ (North) 19.7% 41.0% 39.3% 65+ (South) 16.7% 44.4% 38.9% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 11.6% 48.8% 39.5% Valley 3- 5 20.2% 48.3% 31.5% (years) 6 - 10 16.9% 45.3% 37.8% 11+ 22.0% 48.3% 29.7% AHHI Under$35k 13.5% 54.1% 32.4% $35k-$50k 14.6% 51.2% 34.1% $50k-$75k 17.1% 46.1% 36.8% $75k-$100k 24.6% 44.3% 31.1% $100k+ 18.9% 49.2% 31.8% People in 1 21.7% 52.2% 26.1% home 2 18.5% 37.7% 43.8% 3-4 17.1% 55.9% 27.0% 5+ 21.1% 47.4% 31.6% Child under Yes 17.6% 54.1% 28.4% 18 No 19.2% 43.2% 37.6% 115 User fees Very much in Somewhat in Not at all favor favor in favor Row N % Row N % Row N % Gender Male 35.5% 45.2% 19.3% Female 23.6% 52.2% 24.1% Age Group 18 -34 27.7% 50.8% 21.5% 35-44 38.5% 47.4% 14.1% 45-54 35.5% 43.4% 21.1% 55-64 21.2% 50.0% 28.8% 65+ (North) 26.2% 55.7% 18.0% 65+ (South) 24.1% 46.3% 29.6% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 27.9% 53.5% 18.6% Valley 3- 5 28.1% 49.4% 22.5% (years) 6 - 10 29.7% 49.3% 20.9% 11+ 30.5% 46.6% 22.9% AHHI Under$35k 13.5% 67.6% 18.9% $35k-$50k 22.0% 53.7% 24.4% $50k-$75k 23.7% 57.9% 18.4% $75k-$100k 39.3% 45.9% 14.8% $100k+ 33.3% 44.7% 22.0% People in 1 28.3% 52.2% 19.6% home 2 25.3% 48.1% 26.5% 3 - 4 32.2% 50.0% 17.8% 5+ 36.8% 44.7% 18.4% Child under Yes 35.1% 45.9% 18.9% 18 No 26.0% 50.8% 23.2% Public Participation/Communications For our final set of questions, we would like to know a little more about your previous experience in public participation and how you would like the Town of Oro Valley to communicate with you. Q49. Have you ever been to any Town of Oro Valley public meeting? 1. Yes 2. No/don't know Attended public meeting Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 182 45.5 45.5 45.5 No/don't know 218 54.5 54.5 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 116 Attended public meeting No/don't Yes know _ RowN % RowN % Gender Male 49.2% 50.8% Female 41.9% 58.1% Age Group 18-34 16.9% 83.1% 35-44 33.3% 66.7% 45- 54 51.3% 48.7% 55-64 56.1% 43.9% 65+ (North) 45.9% 54.1% 65+ (South) 75.9% 24.1% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 23.3% 76.7% Valley 3 - 5 23.6% 76.4% (years) 6- 10 48.0% 52.0% 11+ 66.9% 33.1% AHHI Under$35k 51.4% 48.6% $35k-$50k 34.1% 65.9% $50k-$75k 55.3% 44.7% $75k-$100k 44.3% 55.7% $100k+ 45.5% 54.5% People in 1 54.3% 45.7% home 2 53.7% 46.3% 3 -4 37.5% 62.5% 5+ 31.6% 68.4% Child under Yes 33.1% 66.9% 18 No 52.8% 47.2% Q50. Have you ever listened to a Town of Oro Valley meeting online? 1. Yes 2. No/don't know Listened to meeting online Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 38 9.5 9.5 9.5 No/don't know 362 90.5 90.5 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 117 Listened to meeting online No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 10.2% 89.8% Female 8.9% 91.1% Age Group 18 -34 9.2% 90.8% 35-44 6.4% 93.6% 45-54 7.9% 92.1% 55-64 10.6% 89.4% 65+ (North) 16.4% 83.6% 65+ (South) 7.4% 92.6% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 11.6% 88.4% Valley 3- 5 7.9% 92.1% (years) 6 - 10 9.5% 90.5% 11+ 10.2% 89.8% AHHI Under$35k 13.5% 86.5% $35k-$50k 4.9% 95.1% $50k-$75k 6.6% 93.4% $75k-$100k 13.1% 86.9% $100k+ 12.1% 87.9% People in 1 10.9% 89.1% home 2 13.0% 87.0% 3-4 5.9% 94.1% 5+ 7.9% 92.1% Child under Yes 6.1% 93.9% 18 No 11.6% 88.4% Q51. In general, are you aware of the times and places for Oro Valley Town Council meetings? 1. Yes 2. No Aware of time/place for mtgs Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 241 60.3 60.3 60.3 No 159 39.8 39.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 118 Aware of time/place for mt9s Yes No RowN % RowN % Gender Male 56.9% 43.1% Female 63.5% 36.5% Age Group 18 -34 41.5% 58.5% 35-44 48.7% 51.3% 45- 54 61.8% 38.2% 55-64 71.2% 28.8% 65+(North) 75.4% 24.6% 65+(South) 66.7% 33.3% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 55.8% 44.2% Valley 3 - 5 41.6% 58.4% (years) 6 - 10 60.8% 39.2% 11+ 74.6% 25.4% AHHI Under$35k 59.5% 40.5% $35k-$50k 51.2% 48.8% $50k-$75k 61.8% 38.2% $75k-$100k 60.7% 39.3% $100k+ 58.3% 41.7% People in 1 65.2% 34.8% home 2 64.2% 35.8% 3-4 55.3% 44.7% 5+ 55.3% 44.7% Child under Yes 51.4% 48.6% 18 No 65.2% 34.8% Q52. How interested are you in participating in public forums, such as Town Council or other public meetings? 1. Very interested 2. Somewhat interested 3. Not at all interested Participate in public forums Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Very interested 40 10.0 10.0 10.0 Somewhat interested 201 50.3 50.3 60.3 Not at all interested 159 39.8 39.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 119 - Participate in public forums Very Somewhat Not at all interested interested interested Row N % Row N % i Row N % Gender Male 11.2% 51.3% 37.6% Female 8.9% 49.3% 41.9% Age Group 18 -34 6.2% 52.3% 41.5% 35-44 16.7% 52.6% 30.8% 45- 54 6.6% 57.9% 35.5% 55-64 10.6% 54.5% 34.8% 65+(North) 11.5% 34.4% 54.1% 65+(South) 7.4% 46.3% 46.3% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 9.3% 55.8% 34.9% Valley 3 - 5 6.7% 53.9% 39.3% (years) 6 - 10 10.1% 50.0% 39.9% 11+ 12.7% 46.6% 40.7% AHHI Under$35k 5.4% 54.1% 40.5% $35k-$50k 4.9% 61.0% 34.1% $50k-$75k 10.5% 51.3% 38.2% $75k-$100k 8.2% 55.7% 36.1% $100k+ 12.9% 49.2% 37.9% People in 1 8.7% 54.3% 37.0% home 2 10.5% 44.4% 45.1% 3 -4 7.9% 55.9% 36.2% 5+ 18.4% 50.0% 31.6% Child under Yes 10.8% 56.8% 32.4% 18 No 9.6% 46.8% 43.6% It is important for the Town of Oro Valley to know how residents would like to receive important news or updates about the Town. I am going to read you a list of potential ways in which you might receive information about the Town. After I read each one individually, please tell me whether or not you are likely to seek information about the Town from that particular choice. (ROTATE) Q53. Through the mail Q54. At a face to face meeting with a council member Q55. In the local newspapers Q56. In the broadcast media including television and radio Q57. In the town publication, known as the Oro Valley Vista Q58. By attending public meetings Q59. In the water utility newsletter Q60. By signing up for an automatic e-mail notification with a newsletter or web link Q61. By going to the Town of Oro Valley website Coding for Q53- Q61 1. Yes 2. No/don't know 120 Mail Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 317 79.3 79.3 79.3 No/don't know 83 20.8 20.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 Mail No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 76.6% 23.4% Female 81.8% 18.2% Age Group 18 -34 73.8% 26.2% 35-44 71.8% 28.2% 45- 54 82.9% 17.1% 55-64 83.3% 16.7% 65+ (North) 80.3% 19.7% 65+ (South) 85.2% 14.8% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 76.7% 23.3% Valley 3 - 5 80.9% 19.1% (years) 6 - 10 74.3% 25.7% 11+ 85.6% 14.4% AHHI Under$35k 83.8% 16.2% $35k-$50k 87.8% 12.2% $50k-$75k 81.6% 18.4% $75k-$100k 78.7% 21.3% $100k+ 75.8% 24.2% People in 1 89.1% 10.9% home 2 80.2% 19.8% 3 -4 77.0% 23.0% 5+ 73.7% 26.3% Child under Yes 75.0% 25.0% 18 No 82.0% 18.0% Face-to-face w/council member Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 148 37.0 37.0 37.0 No/don't know 252 63.0 63.0 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 121 Face-to-face w/council member No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 42.1% 57.9% Female 32.0% 68.0% Age Group 18-34 30.8% 69.2% 35-44 30.8% 69.2% 45- 54 42.1% 57.9% 55-64 48.5% 51.5% 65+ (North) 37.7% 62.3% 65+ (South) 31.5% 68.5% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 32.6% 67.4% Valley 3-5 40.4% 59.6% (years) 6 - 10 31.1% 68.9% 11+ 44.1% 55.9% AHHI Under$35k 37.8% 62.2% $35k-$50k 36.6% 63.4% $50k-$75k 44.7% 55.3% $75k-$100k 32.8% 67.2% $100k+ 34.8% 65.2% People in 1 41.3% 58.7% home 2 38.3% 61.7% 3 -4 32.9% 67.1% 5+ 44.7% 55.3% Child under Yes 33.1% 66.9% 18 No 39.6% 60.4% Newspaper Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 304 76.0 76.0 76.0 No/don't know 96 24.0 24.0 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 122 Newspaper No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 75.1% 24.9% Female 76.8% 23.2% Age Group 18-34 75.4% 24.6% 35-44 69.2% 30.8% 45-54 73.7% 26.3% 55-64 69.7% 30.3% 65+ (North) 86.9% 13.1% 65+ (South) 85.2% 14.8% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 74.4% 25.6% Valley 3 - 5 69.7% 30.3% (years) 6- 10 73.6% 26.4% 11+ 84.7% 15.3% AHHI Under$35k 81.1% 18.9% $35k-$50k 85.4% 14.6% $50k-$75k 80.3% 19.7% $75k-$100k 75.4% 24.6% $100k+ 71.2% 28.8% People in 1 69.6% 30.4% home 2 80.2% 19.8% 3 -4 78.3% 21.7% 5+ 57.9% 42.1% Child under Yes 70.9% 29.1% 18 No 79.2% 20.8% Broadcast media Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 241 60.3 60.3 60.3 No/don't know 159 39.8 39.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 123 Broadcast media No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 59.9% 40.1% Female 60.6% 39.4% Age Group 18-34 72.3% 27.7% 35-44 56.4% 43.6% 45- 54 55.3% 44.7% 55-64 54.5% 45.5% 65+(North) 60.7% 39.3% 65+ (South) 64.8% 35.2% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 67.4% 32.6% Valley 3 -5 57.3% 42.7% (years) 6- 10 59.5% 40.5% 11+ 61.0% 39.0% AHHI Under$35k 78.4% 21.6% $35k-$50k 73.2% 26.8% $50k-$75k 61.8% 38.2% $75k-$100k 62.3% 37.7% $100k+ 52.3% 47.7% People in 1 63.0% 37.0% home 2 58.6% 41.4% 3 -4 59.2% 40.8% 5+ 68.4% 31.6% Child under Yes 62.8% 37.2% 18 No 58.8% 41.2% Oro Valley Vista Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 275 68.8 68.8 68.8 No/don't know 125 31.3 31.3 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 124 Oro Valley Vista No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 68.0% 32.0% Female 69.5% 30.5% Age Group 18-34 61.5% 38.5% 35-44 69.2% 30.8% 45-54 67.1% 32.9% 55-64 71.2% 28.8% 65+(North) 73.8% 26.2% 65+(South) 70.4% 29.6% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 67.4% 32.6% Valley 3- 5 59.6% 40.4% (years) 6- 10 74.3% 25.7% 11+ 70.3% 29.7% AHHI Under$35k 75.7% 24.3% $35k-$50k 63.4% 36.6% $50k-$75k 71.1% 28.9% $75k-$100k 67.2% 32.8% $100k+ 65.9% 34.1% People in 1 78.3% 21.7% home 2 70.4% 29.6% 3-4 67.8% 32.2% 5+ 57.9% 42.1% Child under Yes 64.9% 35.1% 18 No 71.6% 28.4% Public meetings Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 168 42.0 42.0 42.0 No/don't know 232 58.0 58.0 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 125 Public meetings No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 48.7% 51.3% Female 35.5% 64.5% Age Group 18 -34 44.6% 55.4% 35-44 37.2% 62.8% 45- 54 46.1% 53.9% 55-64 42.4% 57.6% 65+(North) 37.7% 62.3% 65+(South) 44.4% 55.6% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 37.2% 62.8% Valley 3- 5 38.2% 61.8% (years) 6- 10 42.6% 57.4% 11+ 45.8% 54.2% AHHI Under$35k 56.8% 43.2% $35k-$50k 31.7% 68.3% $50k-$75k 43.4% 56.6% $75k-$100k 39.3% 60.7% $100k+ 43.2% 56.8% People in 1 50.0% 50.0% home 2 40.7% 59.3% 3-4 38.2% 61.8% 5+ 52.6% 47.4% Child under Yes 40.5% 59.5% 18 No 42.8% 57.2% Water newsletter Cumulative Frequency i Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Yes 234 58.5 58.5 58.5 No/don't know 166 41.5 41.5 100.0 • Total 400 100.0 100.0 126 Water newsletter No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 62.4% 37.6% Female 54.7% 45.3% Age Group 18 -34 46.2% 53.8% 35-44 55.1% 44.9% 45- 54 52.6% 47.4% 55-64 60.6% 39.4% 65+(North) 68.9% 31.1% 65+ (South) 72.2% 27.8% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 60.5% 39.5% Valley 3- 5 49.4% 50.6% (years) 6 - 10 60.8% 39.2% 11+ 62.7% 37.3% AHHI Under$35k 48.6% 51.4% $35k-$50k 68.3% 31.7% $50k-$75k 63.2% 36.8% $75k-$100k 65.6% 34.4% $100k+ 50.8% 49.2% People in 1 58.7% 41.3% home 2 63.6% 36.4% 3-4 55.9% 44.1% 5+ 50.0% 50.0% Child under Yes 54.7% 45.3% 18 No 61.2% 38.8% E-mail notification Cumulative FrequencyPercent Valid Percent Percent , Valid Yes 221 55.3 55.3 55.3 No/don't know 179 44.8 44.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 127 E-mail notification No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 56.3% 43.7% Female 54.2% 45.8% Age Group 18-34 69.2% 30.8% 35-44 65.4% 34.6% 45-54 56.6% 43.4% 55-64 53.0% 47.0% 65+(North) 42.6% 57.4% 65+(South) 38.9% 61.1% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 55.8% 44.2% Valley 3 -5 67.4% 32.6% (years) 6 - 10 46.6% 53.4% 11+ 57.6% 42.4% AHHI Under$35k 37.8% 62.2% $35k-$50k 36.6% 63.4% $50k-$75k 57.9% 42.1% $75k-$100k 47.5% 52.5% $100k+ 70.5% 29.5% People in 1 32.6% 67.4% home 2 47.5% 52.5% 3 -4 65.8% 34.2% 5+ 76.3% 23.7% Child under Yes 70.3% 29.7% 18 No 46.8% 53.2% Town website Cumulative Frequency PercentValid Percent Percent _ Valid Yes 253 63.3 63.3 63.3 No/don't know 147 36.8 36.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 128 Town website No/don't Yes know RowN % RowN % Gender Male 66.0% 34.0% Female 60.6% 39.4% Age Group 18-34 76.9% 23.1% 35-44 70.5% 29.5% 45- 54 69.7% 30.3% 55-64 59.1% 40.9% 65+ (North) 52.5% 47.5% 65+(South) 44.4% 55.6% Lived in Oro 2 or fewer 67.4% 32.6% Valley 3 - 5 70.8% 29.2% (years) 6- 10 63.5% 36.5% 11+ 55.9% 44.1% AHHI Under$35k 67.6% 32.4% $35k-$50k 51.2% 48.8% $50k-$75k 51.3% 48.7% $75k-$100k 65.6% 34.4% $100k+ 72.7% 27.3% People in 1 52.2% 47.8% home 2 53.1% 46.9% 3 -4 75.7% 24.3% 5+ 71.1% 28.9% Child under Yes 74.3% 25.7% 18 No 56.8% 43.2% Q62. Are there any other ways you feel that the Town of Oro Valley should be communicating with residents? 1. Open ended response Count Column N % q62comms Visit residents 11 2.9% Telephone 5 1.3% Signage 7 1.8% IM 1 .3% Via schools 1 .3% PSA's at the movies 1 .3% Same as response 50 13.1% from Q53 -Q61 Misc 16 4.2% Nothing else 293 76.7% 129 130 VII. PE - O N ENDED RESPONSES The open-ended responses shown in the proceeding section are verbatim comments typed exactly as they were given by the respondents. The responses were taken down word for word and therefore may include grammatical errors or other incorrect syntax. Q2. What do you feel is the best thing about living in the Town of Oro Valley? Please note that there were respondents who gave "don't know" and "no comment" answers to this question, however these have not been included since they give no additional information. Safe • Crime rate • Don't know... crime rate is low • Feel safe from crime • I am hard pressed for that. I cannot think of anything... police protection • I am very happy with the police department. I think it is quite a comforting thing that groups don't want to come through Oro Valley because of the police department. No complaints, but traffic and building • I feel it is somewhat safer than living in other parts of the City • I like it here because it's safe • I like that it is safe and pretty • I like the idea that the neighborhoods are somewhat controlled. Most of the areas are pretty nicely kept • I like the police protection, that I do know • I see the police quite frequently • I think the police department • It is safe • It's extremely safe • Its police service - they came to our door and it was quick • It's safe • It's safe, it's clean and convenient, everything I need is right here • It's safe, it's very beautiful • Just safety • Lack of crime • Lack of crime • Lack of crime • Lack of crime, we just live in a nice neighborhood, and the schools - CDO - are great, great stores and services • Less crimes • Low crime • Low crime • Low crime rate • Low crime rate • Low crime rate and lots of recreation • Lower crime and higher class of people 131 • Nice and safe place to live • Police department • Police protection • Police protection • Police response, view • Police responses, police traffic patrol • Presence of police • Probably the safety and the environment • Public safety • Safe • Safe • Safe and clean • Safe and clean neighborhood • Safe environment and clean streets • Safe place to live • Safe, controlled, kept up, plenty of police infrastructure kept up pretty well, side streets in bad shape • Safe, pristine, clean • Safety • Safety • Safety , • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety, police department • Safety, quiet • Security, safety • Seems to be a law-abiding area • The emergency response is excellent • The good police department • The low crime rate • The police • The police coverage • The police presence, convenience of the shopping • The police protection • The police protection is above average • The police service • The police service • The police service and how they manage commercial development • The quick police responses • The safety • The security • The security of residents • Their own police department • There is hardly any crime at all 132 • Uh... I like the police presence, I like [that] it's clean, it seems to be a friendly community - I think those are the things • Very safe community, and there's a lot of land around • Very safe place to live • Very stabilized • We have a great infrastructure in terms of police and fire and emergency services • Zone free crime • Combination of scenery and low crime rate • Family oriented, safe community • It's clean, neat, safe, lots to do, and it's growing • Its cleanliness, safety • It's small, nice police force - take care of traffic issues, keeping [the] Town safe, clean, community involvement • Management and police department • Many things to do, cultural opportunities, it's safe, the police • Neighbor[s] - close-knit, safety • Peace, the safe neighborhoods • Probably its cleanliness -there's very little trash ever present on the road anywhere. It's just a clean place. Security-wise it's awesome - police do a grade-A job • Quiet and good police protection • Quiet, safe • Quiet, safe, and well planned • Quiet, safety, the schools - that's the number one reason I'm living here • Sense of community as well as a sense of protection • Suburban life, lack of crime, police service is outstanding • The areas itself, the police, and the cleanliness • The general feeling of good management, safety • The open spaces and natural landscape and relative safety • The view[s] are the best thing about living in Oro Valley and [the] lack of crime • Well, where I live it's quiet and we got good police protection • The amenities, beautiful area, non-crime zone The community/people • (Laugh)Well, my neighbors • Being a more residential community • Community that's over 55 • Family and less traffic • Family oriented, safe community • Feeling of community • Friendliness of the people • I don't know - it's nice, it's ok • I like the community itself • I like the neighborhood because of the parking restrictions and the up-keep of the common area • I like the quality of life and the views and open spaces and quality services provided by the Town • I think it is a nice community and the stores are convenient 133 • I would say it has a small-town feel • I would say the smaller suburban lifestyle with the amenities of a large city • I'm prejudiced because I'm involved with the arts, the quality of life • It is [a] nice town - nothing else • It is a nice area - there are pockets of undeveloped land and that is nice • It's a small town • It's small, nice police force - take care of traffic issues, keeping [the] Town safe, clean, community involvement • It's very well planned, has a beautiful scenic view • It's wonderful, friendly, the people with the Town work so hard to make this the best community in the State • Just a well planned community • Less riff-raff than Tucson • Lifestyle • Living with people who had the same lifestyle that he does • More of a higher-end and quiet • Neighbor[s] - close-knit, safety • Neighborhood is good • New community, quality residents • Nice area and nice houses - lovely area • Nice community, upscale • Nice place to live - no problems • Nice quiet community • Not a lot of apartments or low-rate stores like Wal-Mart • People - I love the people here. I like people, like the community, like the golf • People, neighbors • Planned community and well thought out • Progressive community • Property values • Residential community and quite • Sense of community as well as a sense of protection • Size & accessibility • Small community and good views, good shopping • Small town but still has all that you need • Small town feel • Small town living • Suburban life, lack of crime, police service is outstanding • Suburbia life, with a lot of families and children • That it feels small and comfortable but everything you might need or want is not very far away • The best thing about living in Oro Valley is that it's a small community • The best thing, uh, (thought), I guess there's several things: 1)the residential situation - houses, parks, post office, and library; which we like • The character of the community • The community • The community • The community and what the Town offers • The community is good 134 • The community itself • The family atmosphere with the parks and all the kids • The general sense of community • The growing commitment to the community • The mix of people living here and the location • The people • The people • The people • The quality of life, that it is a newer city • The residents • The semi-rural • The sense of community • The size • The small community is separate from Tucson and there is a lot of community functions • The small town feeling and still convenient to shopping and Phoenix • The small-town feeling -friendly • The small-town feeling and knowing neighbors • The uniformity of homes and it [is] very clean and family friendly • Uh... the fact that I am not, that there's not a lot of people living out here - population. More so than that, we live on 3 1/3 acres - more space for homes and lower population • Unique place to live • We are close to our friends • Atmosphere and people • Convenience, a nice and clean community, the people who live here are good, and it's [a] friendly town • Convenient place and pleasant place to live • Feels a little more secluded, like our own little community - small but growing • Good restaurants, good stores, people are really nice • I think it's a well kept town and it's a great area • I'm close to my work and it is a good community, good neighbors • It's beautiful, the people are different from the people in the City of Tucson - completely different space; I just love it! • It's very clean and the people are nice • Lack of crime, we just live in a nice neighborhood, and the schools - CDO - are great, great stores and services • Lower crime and higher class of people • Not having fast food everywhere, the residential areas are well laid out, and all the good schools • Quiet and nice • The climate and the neighbors • The location is close to work and the people are nice • The location, it is a good mix of residential and business • The location, the small community feeling • The quiet and family friendly atmosphere • The scenery, the quality of life here, people maintain their homes and the facilities are maintained, as well as the schools • Views and the people • I like the location, cleanliness, and the caliber of people 135 • The location, very good schools, good community • Uh... I like the police presence, I like [that] it's clean, it seems to be a friendly community - I think those are the things • That they have good schools, nice parks, it's close to the City but it feels rural Scenery/views • Beautiful • Because of the location being in the mountains • Combination of scenery and low crime rate • Hmm... the views • I like just kind of like the landscape, views, driving around, cycling around, that's nice. I kind of like what's around. I wish there was more car shops - if we had a Checker or something, or AutoZone, that'd be great • I like the look of the Town • I would say the landscape of the area • It was the open spaces, but we're close to Town now • It's a pretty environment to live in • It's beautiful, the people are different from the people in the City of Tucson - completely different space; I just love it! • Its natural beauty, excellent roads, and the building codes for homes and property • It's pretty up here • Living in this part of Arizona, the proximity of shops • Mountain • Mountain view • Nice view, jogging paths are nice • Pusch Ridge • Scenery and area • Settings • She likes the view of the mountains and the quiet area • Space • The area • The areas itself, the police, and the cleanliness • The beauty • The beauty and its proximity • The beauty of the mountains, and nice and clean • The country atmosphere • The desert and the mountains • The limited light pollution, mountain views, the River Front Park • The location is close to work and the people are nice • The mountain view, and it's clean and well maintained • The mountains and the night sky • The natural areas • The natural surroundings • The open spaces and natural landscape and relative safety • The scenery, the quality of life here, people maintain their homes and the facilities are maintained, as well as the schools • The surroundings 136 • The view • The view, the traffic is not that bad • The view, we're happy with the parks and amenities • The view[s] are the best thing about living in Oro Valley and [the] lack of crime • The views • The views • Uh, I like the, um, views, and, you know, that the topographical areas is beautiful • View • Views and the people • Views, like the fact [that] it's not too over-developed • Well, I like most of the time that I live beneath Pusch Ridge • Clean and pretty • I like that it is safe and pretty • I like the quality of life and the views and open spaces and quality services provided by the Town • I like the weather and the scenery • It is a nice area - there are pockets of undeveloped land and that is nice • Its location and proximity to the Catalina Mountains • It's safe, it's very beautiful • It's very well planned, has a beautiful scenic view • Location, proximity to the mountains • Nice area and nice houses - lovely area • Police response, view • Proximity towards Tucson for shopping and the view at night time • Small community and good views, good shopping • The amenities, beautiful area, non-crime zone • The location and the scenery • The location is pretty nice, the views are nice -this is a nice place to be • The Parks and Recreation Department, beautiful scenery, and wildlife • The quietness, the scenic value, there is wildlife such as birds and coyotes • The weather, climate, and the mountain views. Good roads and good shopping • Very safe community, and there's a lot of land around • I like the bike trails and not much traffic. I like the views and the mountains • The weather, the bike lanes, scenery Proximity • (Sigh) It's hard to say... the location - the stores are nearby, we don't have [to go] too far for anything • Access to retail and dining • Being close to shopping and everything you need • Convenience, a nice and clean community, the people who live here are good, and it's [a]friendly town • Convenient place and pleasant place to live • Convenient to Tucson • Everything is close • Everything is convenient • Everything is conveniently around and plenty of grocery stores 137 • For me, it's proximity to work • Having restaurant[s] that are [near] to me • I guess, everything that I need is pretty much there where I need it. I don't have to go very far to get what I need • I have no idea - location maybe • I like its location, 'cause I work for several school districts that are very close to me • I like the closeness to all the service and amenities • I like the location, cleanliness, and the caliber of people • I'm close to my work and it is a good community, good neighbors • It's a convenient place to live for me - everything is close by and you don't have to deal with the traffic of the City! • Its location and proximity to the Catalina Mountains • It's part of Tucson and their library • Location • Location • Location • Location • Location • Location • Location and newness of [the] Town • Location, community programs, and parks • Location, I was here before it was incorporated • Location, proximity to the mountains • Proximity to Phoenix • Proximity towards Tucson for shopping and the view at night time • The amenities such as gas stations and grocery stores are close to where we live • The location • The location • The location and the scenery • The location is pretty nice, the views are nice - this is a nice place to be • The location to work • The location, it is a good mix of residential and business • The location, the peace • The location, the small community feeling • The location, very good schools, good community • The proximity to my work • They are in one of the better locations • I like everything about it— I like the grocery store, Target, and the Home Depot. There is an advantage of not having to go elsewhere • I think it is a nice community and the stores are convenient • It's clean and has everything needed • Living in this part of Arizona, the proximity of shops • Size & accessibility • Small town but still has all that you need • That it feels small and comfortable but everything you might need or want is not very far away • The beauty and its proximity • The mix of people living here and the location 138 • The police presence, convenience of the shopping • The schools and everything is close by • The small town feeling and still convenient to shopping and Phoenix • It's safe, it's clean and convenient, everything I need is right here • That they have good schools, nice parks, it's close to the City but it feels rural Clean/well-maintained • Clean and pretty • Clean and traffic design • Clean town • Cleanliness • Everything is new • Fairly new community so it's not all run down • How new everything is, the facilities are really nice • I like the center planting on the medians, plantings on the outside of streets, backlight signs, the Hohokam Park with the dog park that dogs can really use • I think it's a well kept town and it's a great area • It's clean • It's clean • It's clean and has everything needed • It's clean, neat, safe, lots to do, and it's growing • Its cleanliness, safety • It's very clean and the people are nice • New and clean • Nice and clean • Probably its cleanliness -there's very little trash ever present on the road anywhere. It's just a clean place. Security-wise it's awesome - police do a grade-A job • The area is clean • The general appearance • The town is clean and environmentally kept up • Very clean and they do a lot for the City • Climate, well taken care of • I like the idea that the neighborhoods are somewhat controlled. Most of the areas are pretty nicely kept • I like the location, cleanliness, and the caliber of people • I like the neighborhood because of the parking restrictions and the up-keep of the common area • It's nice and quiet and the properties are pretty well groomed • It's safe, it's clean and convenient, everything I need is right here • Less traffic, clean, and environment is much nicer than Tucson • Location and newness of [the] Town • Quiet, clean, nice town • Safe and clean • Safe and clean neighborhood • Safe environment and clean streets • Safe, controlled, kept up, plenty of police infrastructure kept up pretty well, side streets in bad shape 139 • Safe, pristine, clean • The beauty of the mountains, and nice and clean • The mountain view, and it's clean and well maintained • The quality of life, that it is a newer city • The uniformity of homes and it [is] very clean and family friendly • Uh... I like the police presence, I like [that] it's clean, it seems to be a friendly community - I think those are the things • Convenience, a nice and clean community, the people who live here are good, and it's [a]friendly town • Its natural beauty, excellent roads, and the building codes for homes and property • It's quiet, roads are nice, and nice and clean • The areas itself, the police, and the cleanliness • It's small, nice police force - take care of traffic issues, keeping [the] Town safe, clean, community involvement Quiet/the atmosphere • Atmosphere and people • Good atmosphere • It is quiet and away from the big city • It's a nice quiet town and not a lot of street lights • It's a peaceful and quiet zone • It's nice and quiet • It's nice and quiet and the properties are pretty well groomed • It's nice and quiet here - we just moved here from Seattle • It's quiet • It's quiet • It's quiet, roads are nice, and nice and clean • No[t] crowded • Not too crowded • Peace, the safe neighborhoods • Peaceful • Peacefulness and the city planning • Quiet • Quiet • Quiet • Quiet • Quiet • Quiet and good police protection • Quiet and nice • Quiet, clean, nice town • Quiet, safe • Quiet, safe, and well planned • Quiet, safety, the schools - that's the number one reason I'm living here • The quiet and family friendly atmosphere • The quietness and peacefulness of the Town • The quietness, the scenic value, there is wildlife such as birds and coyotes • Well, where I live it's quiet and we got good police protection 140 • It's too far from metro Tucson, but it is nice and quiet • More of a higher-end and quiet • Nice quiet community • Probably the safety and the environment • Residential community and quite • Safety, quiet • She likes the view of the mountains and the quiet area • The location, the peace • Uh... the fact that I am not, that there's not a lot of people living out here - population. More so than that, we live on 3 1/3 acres - more space for homes and lower population Recreation • A lot of community activities • Good public places • I like the bike trails and not much traffic. I like the views and the mountains • I like the Riverside Park • Many things to do, cultural opportunities, it's safe, the police • Open air and open space • Open space • The bike paths • The Christmas parade - I'm in charge of it. The schools • The library, parks, and other services • The Parks and Recreation Department, beautiful scenery, and wildlife • Umm... bike lanes • How new everything is, the facilities are really nice • I like the center planting on the medians, plantings on the outside of streets, backlight signs, the Hohokam Park with the dog park that dogs can really use • It's part of Tucson and their library • Location, community programs, and parks • Low crime rate and lots of recreation • Nice view, jogging paths are nice • People - I love the people here. I like people, like the community, like the golf • Schools, parks, and etc. to better those places • That they have good schools, nice parks, it's close to the City but it feels rural • The best thing, uh, (thought), I guess there's several things: 1)the residential situation - houses, parks, post office, and library; which we like • The family atmosphere with the parks and all the kids • The limited light pollution, mountain views, the River Front Park • The view, we're happy with the parks and amenities • The weather, the bike lanes, scenery • I like the quality of life and the views and open spaces and quality services provided by the Town • It's clean, neat, safe, lots to do, and it's growing • The scenery, the quality of life here, people maintain their homes and the facilities are maintained, as well as the schools • The small community is separate from Tucson and there is a lot of community functions 141 Retail/dining • A lot of new shopping • Good restaurants, good stores, people are really nice • I like everything about it— I like the grocery store, Target, and the Home Depot. There is an advantage of not having to go elsewhere • New infrastructure in the works, new stores and amenities • Not having fast food everywhere, the residential areas are well laid out, and all theg ood schools • The amenities, beautiful area, non-crime zone • The new businesses • The shopping and the restaurants (and they're local) • The way that they control the zoning in retail • Use to be there was not commercial, it's out[side] Tucson • Various shopping stores available • Access to retail and dining • Everything is conveniently around and plenty of grocery stores • Not a lot of apartments or low-rate stores like Wal-Mart • The police service and how they manage commercial development • Small community and good views, good shopping • Lack of crime, we just live in a nice neighborhood, and the schools - CDO - are great, great stores and services • The weather, climate, and the mountain views. Good roads and good shopping Not in Tucson • Being away from Tucson, quality of schools, and the City Council has nothing to do with it!!! • Far from everything • Feels a little more secluded, like our own little community - small but growing • I'm not in the City of Tucson and not in Pima County • It is away from town • It isn't Tucson • It['s] not in the City... away from the smog • It's a secluded area • It's away from Tucson and a little bit nicer • It's not Tucson • It's outside of Tucson • Outside the City • You can avoid Tucson taxes • It is quiet and away from the big city • The small community is separate from Tucson and there is a lot of community functions • Use to be there was not commercial, it's out[side] Tucson • Less traffic, clean, and environment is much nicer than Tucson Schools • I would say the schools • School district when the kids were younger... now, not sure 142 • Schools • Schools, parks, and etc. to better those places • That they have good schools, nice parks, it's close to the City but it feels rural • The schools • The schools and everything is close by • Wilson School • Being away from Tucson, quality of schools, and the City Council has nothingto do with it!!! • The Christmas parade - I'm in charge of it. The schools • The location, very good schools, good community • Lack of crime, we just live in a nice neighborhood, and the schools - CDO - areg reat great stores and services • Not having fast food everywhere, the residential areas are well laid out, and all theg ood schools • Quiet, safety, the schools - that's the number one reason I'm living here • The scenery, the quality of life here, people maintain their homes and the facilities are maintained, as well as the schools Traffic/roads • Less traffic, clean, and environment is much nicer than Tucson • Right now it is probably the lack of traffic • The reduced traffic • There's a lot of factors - less traffic • Clean and traffic design • Family and less traffic • I like the bike trails and not much traffic. I like the views and the mountains • It's a convenient place to live for me - everythingis close byandyou don't don t have to deal with the traffic of the City! • Its natural beauty, excellent roads, and the building codes for homes andro e p p rtY • It's quiet, roads are nice, and nice and clean • Police responses, police traffic patrol • The view, the traffic is not that bad • It's small, nice police force - take care of traffic issues, keeping [the] Town safe, clean, community involvement • The weather, climate, and the mountain views. Good roads and good shopping pp g Government • Forward thinking [on] how they want the City to run • Good government • Like [the] individual attention to problems • Management and police department • Small but responsive city management • The general feeling of good management, safety • The Town Council - if they feel there is a need to get something done, there is usually no lag time to get it done • They're pretty consistent with rules 143 • It's wonderful, friendly, the people with the Town work so hard to make this the best community in the State • Peacefulness and the city planning • Very clean and they do a lot for the City Weather • Climate • Climate, well taken care of • Generally the climate • Heat • I like the weather and the scenery • The climate and the neighbors • The weather • The weather, climate, and the mountain views. Good roads and good shopping • The weather, the bike lanes, scenery • We like the climate - we like the sunshine here • Weather Everything—like it • Everything • • I just like living here • I really like living in Oro Valley • I think it's a wonderful place to live • It's just nice here! • It's perfect Nothing—don't like it • I am not glad I am living in Oro Valley • None • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing Miscellaneous • I got grandkids here and that is the only reason why I am in Oro Valley • I live right off Oracle Road • I think that they have not caught up with the big city • Is the same as living in the County - I haven't seen any differences compared to the County • It used to be that we didn't have a Wal-Mart • It's a lot better than 15 years ago • It's too far from metro Tucson, but it is nice and quiet • More house for you[r] money, no property taxes • Of course, you're still expanding 144 • That would be, I don't know... just probably more house for your money than other parts around Tucson • The dumpsters they put in the neighborhood • The planning looks good but it seems to be falling apart • We've lived out here for a long time, before it was Oro Valley • You get more house for your money • It's away from Tucson and a little bit nicer • The community and what the Town offers • Quiet, safe, and well planned 145 Q3. What one thing can the Town of Oro Valley do to increase your satisfaction with the amenities and services provided? Please note that there were respondents who gave "don't know" and "no comment" answers to this question, however these have not been included since they give no additional information. Additional recreation • A park with a swimming pool for kids, a park with shade • Add more parks & recreation areas • Add some more recreational facilities other than parks • Bathroom in parks should be updated and functional • Better bike paths • Build a gym • Build a youth and opportunities for kids to do - there is hardly nothing for kids. There is no parks and no tennis courts or anything else • Build an ice rink • Build more parks • Build more parks for the kids! • Build parks, development • Create more parks _ • Don't charge you for the park • Finish the Town Site • Have more parks and shopping and restaurants • I don't really think I have any problems or thing I wish were different. I mean maybe just, the park going up near Copper Creek, that's taking forever. I wish that would be taken care of more quickly. Construction projects can always go more quickly. They're going to get done whenever they get it done • I think a pool closer up to Rancho Vistoso, something for the teenagers to do • I want to see more trees and green grass and clean • I would add more public spaces - continue to move forward with the Naranja Park, provide more opportunities for recreation for children more, and bike and pedestrian paths • I would like there to be more things to do for families - more recreation, more parks, or more biking paths for families and young kids, like skate parks and things like that • I would like to see them move forward with the Town Site proposal • I would say just build more parks with activities and recreation centers and more pools • Increase park and recreation spaces - in general, we need a lot more parks • Increase recreation for youths and families • Is for city park • It can establish the Naranja Town Site as an established full operating park • Keep putting in walking trails • More family parks on the east side of Oro Valley • More indoor recreation facilities • More park development • More parks • More parks • More parks 146 • More parks and free things to give back to the community, i.e. free concerts. Why a regular mall and not like the La Encantada Mall? • More parks and recreation • More pedestrian pass[es], connecting all the parks together • More places for teens • More programs for children • More programs for the schools (after-school programs) • More senior activities - no senior recreation • More things to do for teens and less dick-head cops • Need to have more bike and hiking trails • No place for children to play - boys [in] particular • Open a new park • Park development increased • Parks and Rec • Probably more trails • Provide a recreational facility for families • Put in a new park • Put more tennis courts in - I mean there's only one and it's silly for this town. There's a couple in Rancho Vistoso • The only thing is more public parks near Rancho Vistoso or even just places to gather for athletics and those things. Our kids play sports and we have to drive so far to the nearest park that they practice at or have games at • They can get the community center done • They could build the Naranja Park ENTIRELY!!! • They need to build the Naranja Town Site • Wants a gym • We need a community center, health club... something more than YMCA, no Wal-Mart • Would like a live theater or auditorium or convention center • I think they need to be more vigilant about road conditions - speedier about road construction, improve and widen roads. Let's see, I like the police presence, but moving the Headquarters to the northern part of the Town is not the greatest, unless satellites [are] placed. The Oro Valley Park on Naranja to get started - years planning Improve retail/dining • A new marketplace would be good • Add more grocery stores and more restaurants • Add more restaurants - I'm cooking right now... I mean add more things, more kid- friendly things, more places to shop I guess, and I think they're working on that. Fire protection, instead of having to pay it out of pocket- $400 a year that you have to pay, if you have an emergency, it's $1000 a truck. People living in Tucson pay it through their taxes • Be a little more lucrative - help businesses come in more • Better blend of commercial business. I was expecting the development at Tangerine & Oracle to be like the one in Campbell and Ina but it seem[s] to be downgraded • Better restaurants • Better restaurants, better shopping - remove Wal-Mart and create better stores • Bring in more restaurants • Bring in more restaurants 147 • Expand more restaurants • Get the shopping center done, and a build up a movie theater • Getting more commercial properties such as restaurants, stores, health clubs, a mall with department stores would be great • I think that we would like a little more shopping on the north end of Oracle Road • I think we could use more restaurants • I would like to have a Nordstrom Department Store • I'm excited about the new mall • Increase retail service • Increase the number of restaurants • Increase the size of [the] Farmer's Market, more books in the library • Like to see [a] few fine dining and cinema • Maybe allowing more retail businesses up in our direction • More places to shop and not to travel to Tucson • More restaurants • More restaurants • More restaurants and bars • More restaurants and retail and a theater • More restaurants needed • More restaurants over where I live • More variety of restaurants • Movie theater • New shopping center- it will be nice if all the stores were upscale instead of having a Wal-Mart • Nothing... more good restaurants, good theatres, few box stores like the Super Wal-Mart • Provide more businesses and restaurants • Restaurants • Shopping • Shopping • Should be a little more pro-business - more retail shopping so I don't have to go to Tucson • Some higher quality shopping, like Nordstrom's • The restaurants are too far away • There are not enough services, such as entertainment • They are putting in more retail space • They can finish up the development on Tangerine and Oracle Road • They can improve by building a theater • They should continue to work on bringing in and getting more locally owned businesses in the Town • Very pleased -would like more restaurants • We could use more restaurants • We need more shopping centers with lights to make them more attractive so people can shop out here instead of Tucson Mall. More lit areas will be more attractive to people and feel safer. Need a seafood place • Well, I'd love to have more restaurants, more sit-downs - more like "Village-Inn's" • GET RID OF THE WAL-MART!!!! and give us a Mall that we were promised instead of the Wal-Mart • Have more parks and shopping and restaurants 148 • Lower water rates -encourage more gas stations in Oro Valley • More parks and free things to give back to the community, i.e. free concerts. Why a regular mall and not like the La Encantada Mall? • More public transportation as well as restaurants and movie theatres • Shut off all newcomers, retail stores, restaurants • That the police should not concentrate so much on "little", unimportant traffic infractions. Also, we could use more restaurants or movies in the area • They should really work on the street sizes. They take too long to complete projects - it does not take 20 years to complete one. I think that Oro Valley deserves a better shopping area, not just a Wal-Mart Improve traffic/roads • Be a little more constructive in the streets and roads • Better road maintenance in the older neighborhoods • Better roads • Continue to improve the roads and streets • Do something about the traffic- I don't mean more traffic signals. They've got to make traffic flow a little easier • Give better traffic control outside Oracle Road • I live in Saddlebrook. One thing that would be really nice would be coordinating the lights • I think they need to be more vigilant about road conditions - speedier about road construction, improve and widen roads. Let's see, I like the police presence, but moving the Headquarters to the northern part of the Town is not the greatest, unless satellites [are] placed. The Oro Valley Park on Naranja to get started - years planning • I would like to see something done about the heavy traffic • Improve road repair-just there's pothole[s] in many streets that are in need of repair • Improve the street maintenance • Improve traffic • Improving the roads • Like to see more highway maintenance • More bike lanes • Not really. A little bit of road management, but all the roads are pretty well maintained, safer bike lanes - that's important • Oh boy, improving roads • Probably more roads or wider roads - the main roads going up North, La Canada and La Cholla, those are the only major thoroughfares. A lot of construction going on north Tangerine • Probably reduce traffic congestion • Repaint my road • Sidewalks • Sort out traffic problems • They can fix the streets better • They can time their traffic lights • They could widen the roads • They should fix our roads • They should really work on the street sizes. They take too long to complete projects - it does not take 20 years to complete one. I think that Oro Valley deserves a better shopping area, not just a Wal-Mart 149 • To not do road construction on parallel section and not do it on parallel roads • Too much traffic on Oracle Road • Traffic control • Traffic is not good, specifically the stoplight or area at Northern and Magee near the new Wal-Mart grocery store -there's too much traffic and it takes too long to get out of the area. It's really bad • Traffic management and lights on their timing • Traffic signals to enter or exit the park • We need a traffic light so I can get out of this area instead of going in a different direction • Well, we have to do something about the traffic. We moved here in 1994 and the traffic has tripled or quadrupled, with the exception of more red lights. [A] freeway or some other road to get north, more so than Oracle Road • Concern about water resources and general upkeep of the roads • Stop building, it's getting too congested -the building is for no reason Control/reduce building • A little better overseeing of the building codes • As it grows, to keep up with the growth of City • Control development • General opposition to growth • Hmm, well I have a problem with the Mall coming in • I dislike how the shopping center was put in and did not like how tax incentives were initiated • I wish that they would quit building • I would say, gosh, guarding against growing too fast and ensuring the decisions they make maintain the high standard of living • I'm pretty happy the way it is. I'm pretty upset with all the building going on - I like it quiet • Less apartments • Less construction • Less shopping centers • More restriction on development • No more big box stores, and Wal-Mart is not upscale • Reduce the amount of new construction • Shut off all newcomers, retail stores, restaurants • Stop building • Stop building homes • Stop building them and adding them - less density and more attractive and more arts • Stop building, it's getting too congested -the building is for no reason • Stop expanding • Stop expanding and stop putting in business • Stop the building of malls and homes • Stop the commercial construction • Stop the crazy commercial business expansion • Suppress growth, no new malls • The need to be more selective on what businesses they let operate in the Town • The one thing that bothers is building up so fast, building homes, and it's becoming a problem 150 • Tighter zoning regulations • Try to keep an eye on the development • We need to slow down development to maintain safety • When they do construction projects, they do it once and do it right • No taxes, no dirty industry • Police should be less concerned with minor speeding, one block north of Moore Road 25 mph is too low -the street doesn't have driveways. It should be at a higher speed. La Canada and Moore Road are major collectors - speed should be higher. They shouldn't grant variances in height for buildings - it seems like they do it willy-nilly • They could be a lot more careful with the way they develop open spaces - more green and sustainable development Lower taxes/utility rates • Continue to do it with no new property taxes • Curtail their spending • Decrease taxes • Do not impose taxes • I don't think I need anymore - they keep raising the taxes and that's what they seem that [they] want to do • I wish they would get more realistic with services regarding funding - the needs of [the] Town, with who will use the services • I'm not to happy with the property taxes being raised • Lower the cost of utilities and taxes • Lower the taxes of property and sewer • Lower water rates -encourage more gas stations in Oro Valley • No more taxes • No taxes, no dirty industry • Not raise taxes • Not raise the cost for services and amenities • Not specifically, other than lowering the water rate • Realistic budget • Stop raising taxes • Stop the taxes • They are making it hard for people who are on a fixed income to live here and they have taxed everything and I do not know how long I can live here because of this • • They are spending too much taxes • They could reduce the cost of the water and sewer • Tighten their budget, and not raise taxes • To cut the amount of money they spend • Try and balance the budget • Water rates • Well, I know they are wrestling with the budget so I guess the uncertainty is that if the Town keeps growing they are going to have to expand the taxes No Wal-Mart • Do not put in Wal-Mart • Don't let the Wal-Mart in 151 • GET RID OF THE WAL-MART!!!! and give us a Mall that we were promised instead of the Wal-Mart • Get rid of Wal-Mart • Get rid of Wal-Mart! Enlarge [the] post office with more staff and open on Saturdays • No Wal-Mart Store and the safety will be jeopardized • Not allow Wal-Mart to come here • Not have a Wal-Mart!!! • Not satisfied with the Wal-Mart coming in • Not to build a Wal-Mart • Problem with new shopping facilities at Oracle and Tangerine -Wal-Mart, we could do without that • They can't do anything now, but they should not have allowed Wal-Mart to come in. We were told an "upscale shopping center" would be built at that intersection, but it's all big box stores • Undo the Wal-Mart thing • Wal-Mart should not be built in Oro Valley! The low cost is a high cost to Oro Valley • Better restaurants, better shopping - remove Wal-Mart and create better stores. • New shopping center- it will be nice if all the stores were upscale instead of having a Wal-Mart • No more big box stores, and Wal-Mart is not upscale • Nothing... more good restaurants, good theatres, few box stores like the Super Wal-Mart • We need a community center, health club... something more than YMCA, no Wal-Mart Police —less tickets • A better reputation with the police department- the police will issue too many traffic tickets for speeding. There are a lot of police here and I like that • Get a grip on their policemen • I feel that the police are trying too hard and giving too many tickets • I would say put policeman where they should be instead of trying to catch people making wide right turns • Less speed traps • More friendly police department • Police are out of their minds on the speed limits. I feel oppressed and I feels it should stop • Police do things other than catch speeders • Police should be less concerned with minor speeding, one block north of Moore Road 25 mph is too low -the street doesn't have driveways. It should be at a higher speed. La Canada and Moore Road are major collectors - speed should be higher. They shouldn't grant variances in height for buildings - it seems like they do it willy-nilly • Quit giving as many tickets as they do - speed traps • That the police should not concentrate so much on "little", unimportant traffic infractions. Also, we could use more restaurants or movies in the area • The cops could loosen up on the speeding • They should give out less speeding tickets • More things to do for teens and less dick-head cops 152 Enhance public transit • Bus services - more routes, Foothills through Ina [and] Sunrise • Bus services improved and the garbage services improved • Had an experience going to [the] hospital on release - no transportation after release late at night • Increased availability of public transportation - extend hours and weekends • More public transportation as well as restaurants and movie theatres • More transportation possibilities • Need to have some type of transportation for the elderly that can't drive anymore • Public transportation • Senior Coyote Run is too expensive - they need buses to go to past Oracle • They need to provide public transportation • Transportation Preserve views/open spaces • I would like it to be a little dimmer at night - park light[s] are too bright • Main thing will be not to tear up all the desert for building • Make things like water tanks less conspicuous • More landscaping in public places • Space • They could be a lot more careful with the way they develop open spaces - more green and sustainable development • They need to go further in protecting open space • Expedite permitting and keep open space open • Stop building them and adding them - less density and more attractive and more arts Better government/practices • Be more consistent] with the rules • Change the Council Members • Don't use them -does not like tax breaks to contractors • Get better people on [the] Town Council • If they will do their job, right! • No hand-outs to large business - like Wal-Mart • Stop taking money from contractors - kickbacks • The Town should be more honest • I dislike how the shopping center was put in and did not like how tax incentives were initiated Fire protection • Consolidation of the fire department • Fire department • I think that they are hooking up with another fire control thing that I'm not very pleased with • I would like to have a fire department 153 • Provide fire [as] part of the tax bill, instead of making it a separate thing we have to purchase - have it included • Remove the fee for fire protection • Why pay for fire department services and not include it in sales taxes • Add more restaurants - I'm cooking right now... I mean add more things, more kid- friendly things, more places to shop I guess, and I think they're working on that. Fire protection, instead of having to pay it out of pocket- $400 a year that you have to pay, if you have an emergency, it's $1000 a truck. People living in Tucson pay it through their taxes Police —increased presence • Enforce speed laws • I live up on the mountain. We have speeders, you know, and it's 25 miles an hour. I wish someone was posted to catch them. They just come down and there's a blind spot, and I can't even get out my driveway • I would like to have the police patrol the roads more often • Keep up police • Make sure the crime stays out • Reduce speeding on my street-which they can't do, 'cause I'm on a private road. More traffic patrol • Traffic enforcement • I think they need to be more vigilant about road conditions - speedier about road construction, improve and widen roads. Let's see, I like the police presence, but moving the Headquarters to the northern part of the Town is not the greatest, unless satellites [are] placed. The Oro Valley Park on Naranja to get started - years planning Improve garbage/recycling services • Make it easier for recycling • Recyclables' bins are too small - they need bigger bins like Tucson • They could force apartment complexes to recycle • They need a central recycle system • Trash pickup are hard on roads • We need recycling bins • Bus services improved and the garbage services improved Better relationships with businesses • Business permits -to get is very challenging • Expedite permitting and keep open space open • Limit it- sign regulation on businesses • Quit trying to shut places down • Work with business better Better communications with residents • Give more info about things • Information being passed to us 154 • Listen more to the people of the Town of Oro Valley • Maybe just to have us be a little better informed when new buildings or businesses go up (Inform the public on these projects) • Pay attention to it - citizens Keep to a "Plan" • Complete as it is designed - improve the total design, don't do it "piece-meal". Complete the restoration of Steam Pump Ranch • Follow through on promises and agreements with residents • I would say to get better organized, but they are starting to do so now • Management agree on size and future development • My view is that the planning needs to get back to the original vision of the Town Increase development(general) • I think they're doing fine - I'd like to see some more development • I voted against the stopping of new construction • Build parks, development Address the water issue • Concern about water resources and general upkeep of the roads • The water system needs to be re-evaluated. They're relying too much on what was here previously. The situation changed and they haven't dealt with it now • Water control regulations are followed by all Keep it clean • For somebody to clean the street better, not so much the litter but more so the debris after accidents • I want to see more trees and green grass and clean More schools • Building the other middle school would be good, but I don't know that that is a Town thing Build Wal-Mart • Build a Wal-Mart Nothing—satisfied • Do nothing • Does a good job • Everything is okay • Happy as it is • I can't think of anything off hand that should be done. It is well run 155 • I can't think of anything. I mean, their services are good. I can't think of anything off-hand • I don't know. We're very satisfied • I have no complaints • I really don't know. I'm happy and I'd hate to see them go overboard and spend money • I'm happy • I'm satisfied with everything • It's perfect as it is • No complaints • None • None • Nota one for now • Not much - we get mailers • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing - I am happy • Nothing really • Nothing there • Really satisfied as it is • Satisfied • Think just fine • Very happy here - not one thing Everything —dissatisfied • Cease to exist • Everything - it's miserable here • That's hard because I am so dissatisfied [that] I am going to move away from here. They've totally ruined it. They just don't care 156 Miscellaneous • Concerns: Confused. Lived here 3 1/2 years [and] police cars have doubled - overflow. A fearful time, perhaps, yet a large number of police cars • Get rid of [the] Opera Center- burden on people • Have a light post at Naranja at Sawtooth • Increase the amount • Let us put up signs when we have things for sale, i.e. yard sale signs. They said that I needed permission, a permit or something like that • Maintain services • More services • Open after 10 PM • Quite doing too much • Reliable wireless services and street lighting • The additional annexation of State Land -for it • The animal control services is lacking and not responsive • They do not provide anything for me. I am a taxpayer here and I just live here • They need to not destroy the amenities and to continue to invest in services • They need to pass property tax to stop developers that are empty. We need to pay property tax!! • They should work on more community involvement. You feel isolated from your neighbors. Maybe have monthly get together at the Town Hall • Well, you know, I'm 77 years old. I like the library, and I go down to the Tucson Symphony Orchestra. I'd love that if it was here. I've been a volunteer at the Catalina Detention School and spiritual guidance - I've worked four years for the government. I taught also at Pima -fulfilled my dream and then had heart surgery. Then had to rest - I'd work 18 hours a day (teacher with a special teaching interest) • Work towards greater diversity in the community • Get rid of Wal-Mart! Enlarge [the] post office with more staff and open on Saturdays • I would say, gosh, guarding against growing too fast and ensuring the decisions they make maintain the high standard of living • Increase the size of [the] Farmer's Market, more books in the library • Stop building them and adding them - less density and more attractive and more arts 157 Q6. What issues are most important to you when thinking of your quality of life in the Town of Oro Valley? Please note that there were respondents who gave "don't know" and "no comment" answers to this question, however these have not been included since they give no additional information. Safety • 1. Low crime rate 2. Excellent schools 3. Not being half fulled by local government, home owner etc. • Being safe • Children's safety and furthering their education, business taxes and future growth • Community safety, city services: responsive police, access to services: shopping, entertainment • Crime • Crime • Crime prevention • Crime prevention and safety for my family • Crime, education and parks and rec • Crime, infrastructure • Crime, property value, school system and parks • Crime, safety • Emergency response and retail services and cleanliness • Emergency services and growth • Feeling safe, which I do • Good police force, credible schools • Good police protection • I think the fact that we're well police patrolled and [have a] reasonably good Town Council • I think we have good police force, the ease of getting around • Just overall safety- I want to see a police presence, I want to enforce the law • Lack of crime • Lack of crime. I think they should also change "The Yogurt Shop". The owners had to close down because they couldn't put a sign out letting people know they were there. The owners wanted a sign on the sidewalk and couldn't because of Oro Valley, on the corner[of] La Canada and Lambert (the southwest corner) • Law enforcement • Less crime • Low crime • Low crime rate • Low crime rate • Low crime rate, good schools, strong property values, and, I guess, easy access to shopping and services • Most important issue is security of the residents and providing adequate recreational resources for residents • Number one, the safety • Oh dear, I don't know. Okay, let's see, I guess good police work, keeping the Town clean and stop raising the taxes 158 • Police and traffic • Police department • Police protection • Police protection, city response to particular needs such as chalk wash -example: flood at Rancho Vistoso Golf Course and [it] was repaired immediately and no regards to [the] highlands wash except [the] Mayor's house that was protected (citizens at risk) • Police protection, good roads • Police/safety • Probably like, safety for one - safety is big for me. And I'm trying to think what else... As far as safety, I think the quality of safety right now is more than adequate. I'd like it to stay that way. That's about it... Less stoplights - I don't like the amount of stoplights around here • Probably safety and schools • Protection • Public safety • Public safety • Public safety. The streets - I don't think the county roads are included because they're right on the border • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety • Safety - big factor • Safety -feeling safe in public places; and making sure the schools stay good • Safety (lives alone) • Safety (probed for others) - that's about it • Safety again • Safety and cleanliness 159 • Safety and convenience • Safety and crime • Safety and delivery of services • Safety and education • Safety and education • Safety and education of kids • Safety and not overcrowding, and a good school system • Safety and schools • Safety and schools • Safety and schools and road conditions • Safety and security • Safety and transportation • Safety for my kids • Safety is major-fire and police basic core services, vandalism and graffiti • Safety issues • Safety, community participation in [the] decision making of the Town • Safety, cultural activities • Safety, education • Safety, I guess - drugs and gangs and that sort of thing; just that the schools are good • Safety, protection • Safety, schools, diversity • Safety, street maintenance • Safety, water, and growth • Safety, with more traffic and more people in the area. Also, I'm concerned about any annexation • Security • Security • Security • Security • Security and schools • Security, taxes • The law enforcement • The police • The safety and the services provided • The safety, roads, and bicycle paths • The safety, the schools are good and well supported, and keeping things like the library and the Farmer's Market running and intact as they are today • We need good police protection and we need good fire protection, with fire hydrants - we have none in the area I live in • Well, I guess, keeping it pretty much the way it is. You know, I would expect the police department to keep out or arrest, or whatever it takes, for people... for example, stealing from residents - I would expect [the] police to do a good job • Well, safety and [a] good police department; zoning • Ability to get around, law enforcement • Education and safety • Education and safety • Education and safety, low crime rate • Education, police and fire because it's a safety issue 160 • Fire & police protection • Fire and police • Good roads, police • I believe the parks, amenities, and safety • I don't know how to answer that question. I sent a letter to where I live. I'd like to have more sidewalks, more safety. Going to shop from my house, there's no sidewalks. I live in La Reserve, off of Oracle. There's not any sidewalks - it's like every time a car comes over, we yell "get over, get over" • I like the library and police dept • I live in an apartment complex and I was hoping the landlords would rent to better people in my complex. I wish they would be more selective - not necessarily discriminatory by any means, but the cops have been here often and there was a meth bust here and it's just sad. I guess that's everywhere though. I just like to be surrounded with good people in a good environment • Medical and police • Medical facilities, safety - low crime • Oh wow, um, I don't know. Uh, what is the most important...? Clean, safety factor is huge for me • Over-development, crime, water • Roads and police - they have done a good job in managing them • School, crime is low • Schools and crime • Schools, safety, and recreational activities • Strong education, safety, more parks needed • The City Government control on crime • The enjoyment of the outdoor areas and pubic safety • The parks, public safety • The schools, don't give bs tickets, the police do protect us [but] too many bs tickets, not happy with the Wal-Mart • The views - the mountains. The neighborhood is very secure, nice community, very helpful • Too much traffic, police force • Traffic and police protection • traffic and safety • Water, public safety, and sustainable infrastructure • We've had a problem with a person across the street from me, regarding the courts. We took care of it, "a bully" across the street, and the courts took care of it well • Accessibility to family stuff, stores, entertainment, having good police security, safety issues • Education for my kids, parks and safety • Encompasses so many things, a though - the location in the area of Pusch Ridge, beauty and safety, the cultural base of the community, broad services in general are improving • I think the neighborhood itself- more residential, the area. The peace and quiet and safety • Parks, open space, and safety • Taxes, schools, and crime • The living conditions and the atmosphere - I'd rather raise my kids here than Downtown because of crime and things like that 161 • The public schools are important, congestion is very important -those are the main things that come to mind. Well, there's safety and no crime, which I would say that's important • Quality- I'd have to give that a little thought. Orderliness and cleanliness and stop "adding to" - so often everyone wants to add. To maintain and keep pretty and clean, and free of crime as we can • The water, then education, and access to health care and emergency services Schools/education • Education • Education and safety • Education and safety • Education and safety, low crime rate • Education for my kids, parks and safety • Education, police and fire because it's a safety issue • Good schools • Quality of schools and education • School • School, crime is low • Schools • Schools • Schools • Schools • Schools • Schools • Schools and crime • Schools and parks • Schools and transportation and [a] medical facility • Schools, safety, and recreational activities • Schools, water, roads • Strong education, safety, more parks needed • The education • The education - I have school age children, controlled growth, traffic management • The education and proximity of amenities • The education[al]facilities and also development • The public schools are important, congestion is very important-those are the main things that come to mind. Well, there's safety and no crime, which I would say that's important • The schools • The schools, don't give bs tickets, the police do protect us [but] too many bs tickets, not happy with the Wal-Mart • Um, education • 1. Low crime rate 2. Excellent schools 3. Not being half fulled by local government, home owner etc. • Business and education • Children's safety and furthering their education, business taxes and future growth • Clean Town and nice school • Crime, education and parks and rec 162 • Good police force, credible schools • Issues of development and education • Low crime rate, good schools, strong property values, and, I guess, easy access to shopping and services • Open space and education • Probably safety and schools • Safety -feeling safe in public places; and making sure the schools stay good • Safety and education • Safety and education • Safety and education of kids • Safety and schools • Safety and schools • Safety and schools and road conditions • Safety, education • Safety, I guess - drugs and gangs and that sort of thing; just that the schools are good • Safety, schools, diversity • Security and schools • Taxes, schools, and crime • The development plans, expanding the City, having schools and parks in the plan • The safety, the schools are good and well supported, and keeping things like the library and the Farmer's Market running and intact as they are today • The water, then education, and access to health care and emergency services • Crime, property value, school system and parks • Safety and not overcrowding, and a good school system • I don't think it has to do with where I'm living - you can't really link quality of life to where you're living. I'd like to see more parks, more activities for children and teens - we've got the library, the pool. I would have liked to not seen Wal-Mart being built- I think it could have been built in Catalina. I'd like to see more restaurants. We've got the growth of home[s] - we just don't have the infrastructure of stores and restaurants. I think the homebuilding surpassed the stores and the restaurants, and schools. The schools are overcrowded too Controlling building • Construction on First Avenue, a stretch from Tangerine to La Canada • Continue to build without bringing any more big box stores • Control growth • Control the development of construction • Did not handle commercial development well • Don't want [the] City overrun by big stores, feels helpless when government acts' - community activism empowers • Expansion -too much development • Housing is maxed out. I don't like mass production of homes - big developments, the lined up homes • How to control growth, water, provisions for parks, open space • I think the type of development going on • Keeping it more for high-end development, no more apartments • Keeping the expansion to zero at this point- keep everything stabilized as is • Keeping the smallness, not to over build 163 • Keeping the standards of business allowed • Limit and control of growth and not bowing down to development • Limiting growth and improving parks and rec • Limiting growth, slowing it • Lower building - numbers of homes • Not having big box stores • Not to let Oro Valley become overgrown, like a big city or even Tucson • Not too much growth - building under control • Over-development, crime, water • Pretty good, but does not like big box in Tangerine and Oracle • Probably the room for growth • So much building - losing wildlife and coziness of Oro Valley and not as much amenities, real estate gouging • Stop the over-development • The building is too much out of control • They should stay as small as possible and not try to do too much • To limit the growth regarding homes in the area, we need more restaurants, movies, things like that • Too much development, does not like giving tax breaks to contractors • What kinds of stores and things are allowed to come here and making sure the standards stay the same • Wish to not build so much commercial property • Zoning • Affordability - don't want to see it too much developed, such as malls and big stores • Growth - we need less housing in the area, more culture [and] retail • I'd say, the, I think, the um... I think a good infrastructure - roads, boulevards, buildings. The proper vision - seeing what's to come and building to prepare for it - roads, etc. There are so many ways to build these shopping structures, there are so many ways - be creative. I think just the basic bike trails, invest in your parks, not on the road. Bike trails are dangerous on the road. Limestone, fine, compact with rail-ties like other cities, in park reserves, with 20 - 30 miles of bike paths, winding around, weaving in and out. Horseback trails. Have a beautiful suburb. City officials that are visionaries - go to other cities and check it out, don't be prideful, don't fight growth. Do it in a way that benefits • More commercial enterprises, which are being built- disappointed in shopping centers touted, then not being built. I do like the fact that there is more commercial development. Restrict residential development • Not having a property tax, ensuring the Town does not grow so fast that it outstrips demand, and insuring that local conveniences are brought into Oro Valley to ensure sales tax revenues are in lieu of a property tax • Planning and zoning • The voiding of the desert, disappearance of land, shopping centers popping out everywhere, corner of Lambert and La Canada (shop has been empty) • The water issue - there's going to be a problem with water, slowing down on the building would be great • Traffic and not too many more houses • Well, safety and [a] good police department; zoning • Progressive government, clean industries - smokeless, and research - innovation 164 Recreation • Addressing concerns of family places to go • Community activities • Dog park, more recreation, more ethnic food restaurants - Thai, theater • I believe the parks, amenities, and safety • I don't think it has to do with where I'm living -you can't really link quality of life to where you're living. I'd like to see more parks, more activities for children and teens - we've got the library, the pool. I would have liked to not seen Wal-Mart being built - I think it could have been built in Catalina. I'd like to see more restaurants. We've got the growth of home[s] - we just don't have the infrastructure of stores and restaurants. I think the homebuilding surpassed the stores and the restaurants, and schools. The schools are overcrowded too • Issues by City Council - Naranja Town Site is sitting, Lambert Park is not being used. All a waste of money - boys need football [and] baseball fields, only girls' softball field[s] are being built. What about little league? Build baseball fields!!! • More kids involved with more activities • Opportunities for recreation • Outdoor activities, keeping open areas • Park development and environmental growth • Parks, open space, and safety • Recreational opportunities such as bike paths, hiking trails, and more sidewalks leading to the parks and shopping areas • Services for children, like parks and recreation centers • The enjoyment of the outdoor areas and pubic safety • The parks and the walking paths • The parks, public safety • They have things for seniors • Uh, oh... I guess, to me, it's recreation, parks, activities for the citizens • Community and recreation • Education for my kids, parks and safety • Family life... um, uh, uh... family and child-related activities and things • Green friendly environment, kid and family friendly • Green space - open space • Limiting growth and improving parks and rec • Most important issue is security of the residents and providing adequate recreational resources for residents • Safe roads, recreation, good shopping in the Town • Schools and parks • Transportation, and probably really gets back to park/recreation areas for public use • Crime, education and parks and rec • How to control growth, water, provisions for parks, open space • Schools, safety, and recreational activities • Strong education, safety, more parks needed • The development plans, expanding the City, having schools and parks in the plan • The safety, roads, and bicycle paths • Crime, property value, school system and parks • I'd say, the, I think, the um... I think a good infrastructure - roads, boulevards, buildings. The proper vision - seeing what's to come and building to prepare for it - roads, etc. 165 There are so many ways to build these shopping structures, there are so many ways - be creative. I think just the basic bike trails, invest in your parks, not on the road. Bike trails are dangerous on the road. Limestone, fine, compact with rail-ties like other cities, in park reserves, with 20 - 30 miles of bike paths, winding around, weaving in and out. Horseback trails. Have a beautiful suburb. City officials that are visionaries -go to other cities and check it out, don't be prideful, don't fight growth. Do it in a way that benefits • Tax rates, congestion of roads, dark sky- aren't allowed to have bright lights, need something available for seniors Traffic/roads • Better traffic control in the neighborhood • Good roads, police • I don't know how to answer that question. I sent a letter to where I live. I'd like to have more sidewalks, more safety. Going to shop from my house, there's no sidewalks. I live in La Reserve, off of Oracle. There's not any sidewalks - it's like every time a car comes over, we yell "get over, get over" • I like how they have done things. The streets projects are very well planned and [there are] a lot of nice amenities • I'd say, the, I think, the um... I think a good infrastructure - roads, boulevards, buildings. The proper vision - seeing what's to come and building to prepare for it - roads, etc. There are so many ways to build these shopping structures, there are so many ways - be creative. I think just the basic bike trails, invest in your parks, not on the road. Bike trails are dangerous on the road. Limestone, fine, compact with rail-ties like other cities, in park reserves, with 20 - 30 miles of bike paths, winding around, weaving in and out. Horseback trails. Have a beautiful suburb. City officials that are visionaries -go to other cities and check it out, don't be prideful, don't fight growth. Do it in a way that benefits • Keep the road maintained • Roads and police - they have done a good job in managing them • Safe roads, recreation, good shopping in the Town • Something to complain about (only thing) is traffic • The roads and traffics needs to be fixed • Too much traffic, police force • Traffic • Traffic and not too many more houses • Traffic and police protection • traffic and safety • Traffic laws • Traffic, health facilities, property tax • Well, the one that I mentioned before is their traffic planning and the way they allow big contractors to do basically whatever they want in the expense of others • Concerned about water issues - it's a problem for everybody in Tucson. We don't seem to have enough ground water. Oh, and traffic • Library, roads • Mainly the cleanliness and maintenance of the roads • Open space, lack of congestion • Police and traffic • Police protection, good roads 166 • Probably like, safety for one - safety is big for me. And I'm trying to think what else... As far as safety, I think the quality of safety right now is more than adequate. I'd like it to stay that way. That's about it... Less stoplights - I don't like the amount of stoplights around here • Public safety. The streets - I don't think the county roads are included because they're right on the border • Recreational opportunities such as bike paths, hiking trails, and more sidewalks leading to the parks and shopping areas • Safety, street maintenance • Tax rates, congestion of roads, dark sky- aren't allowed to have bright lights, need something available for seniors • The management of how [the] Town or City manages the growth, and this includes the roads • The public schools are important, congestion is very important -those are the main things that come to mind. Well, there's safety and no crime, which I would say that's important • The safety, roads, and bicycle paths • Safety and schools and road conditions • Schools, water, roads • The education - I have school age children, controlled growth, traffic management Taxes/budget/utility rate • Concern about the tax basic • I am on [a] limited income so not to increase property tax, and water is a big concern - we want to keep it, we need to be careful with it • I think the services and taxes need to be improve[d] and it is important to me such as we have a balance • I would say the cost issue of the sewer and water • Low property taxes, that taxes are on corporations rather than residents • Low taxes • Lower taxes, additional taxes • Maintaining low taxes • Money should come from other resources than retail establishments • Money spending - government needs to be more frugal • Not having a property tax, ensuring the Town does not grow so fast that it outstrips demand, and insuring that local conveniences are brought into Oro Valley to ensure sales tax revenues are in lieu of a property tax • Property taxes, natural beauty • Tax rates, congestion of roads, dark sky- aren't allowed to have bright lights, need something available for seniors • Taxes • Taxes • Taxes - anything additional [on] taxes.When I fixed my pool, the taxes were $400 more than usual • Taxes and fees for water • Taxes are too high • Taxes, schools, and crime 167 • That is a tough question. The fact that they give away all the taxes. They don't get the tax revenue and that puts more of a burden on the people • The costs of electricity and water • They should be more interested in saving money then spending it • Fairness, taxes, houses - something about taxes. We complain about our house taxes. People may have the same house but have lower or higher sales taxes and they can't explain that • Fiscal responsibility of Town Council - consider retired residents' income, give them tax breaks • Ig uess my problem is that we have board members that want to spend a lot of money. It's a nice quiet area and [I] would like to keep it that way • Less government is definitely my priority, but also less taxation • Security, taxes • Water and taxes • Children's safety and furthering their education, business taxes and future growth • Making sure neighborhoods stay decent and allowing more retail stores to increase revenue without raising taxes • Oh dear, I don't know. Okay, let's see, I guess good police work, keeping the Town clean and stop raising the taxes • Traffic, health facilities, property tax Growth/planning • Control the development of the area • Controlled growth • Economic development • Future growth and development • Future plans for growth • Growth • Growth - we need less housing in the area, more culture [and] retail • Growth and related issues • Growth management • I don't know. When there's issues of bringing in business or not bringing them in • I think that the main issue is that they manage the growth real well • Issues of development and education • Managing growth • Managing the growth and getting rid of Wal-Mart • Planning and zoning • Population growth • Quality- I'd have to give that a little thought. Orderliness and cleanliness and stop "adding to" - so often everyone wants to add. To maintain and keep pretty and clean, and free of crime as we can • So it doesn't get too crowded • The development plans, expanding the City, having schools and parks in the plan • The management of how [the] Town or City manages the growth, and this includes the roads • Thinking of the population -there are too many people • What are they planning on building and how are they going to use the land - I mean land use 168 • Safety and not overcrowding, and a good school system • Safety, with more traffic and more people in the area. Also, I'm concerned about any annexation • The education - I have school age children, controlled growth, traffic management • The education[al]facilities and also development • Water management and urban sprawl are the big issues • Emergency services and growth • I'd say, the, I think, the um... I think a good infrastructure - roads, boulevards, buildings. The proper vision - seeing what's to come and building to prepare for it- roads, etc. There are so many ways to build these shopping structures, there are so many ways - be creative. I think just the basic bike trails, invest in your parks, not on the road. Bike trails are dangerous on the road. Limestone, fine, compact with rail-ties like other cities, in park reserves, with 20 - 30 miles of bike paths, winding around, weaving in and out. Horseback trails. Have a beautiful suburb. City officials that are visionaries - go to other cities and check it out, don't be prideful, don't fight growth. Do it in a way that benefits • • I'm living a positive life - nice library and hospital. Growing, I like that • Safety, water, and growth • Children's safety and furthering their education, business taxes and future growth Scenery/views • Green friendly environment, kid and family friendly • Green space - open space • Maintaining open space • Maintaining the natural desert as much as possible • Maintaining the rural quality of [the] Town • Not eating up all the land • Once again, I would like to see them not tear up all the desert • Open space and education • Open space, lack of congestion • Preservation of environment • Preserve the environment- it is getting more squeezed by the money interest. They should listen a little more to people who live here rather than money and commercial interest[s] • Preserving the environment • Protecting the environment • The protection of the open space • The scenery • The views - the mountains. The neighborhood is very secure, nice community, very helpful • The voiding of the desert, disappearance of land, shopping centers popping out everywhere, corner of Lambert and La Canada (shop has been empty) • Encompasses so many things, a though - the location in the area of Pusch Ridge, beauty and safety, the cultural base of the community, broad services in general are improving • Outdoor activities, keeping open areas • Park development and environmental growth • Parks, open space, and safety • Places kept looking nice, cleanliness and landscape wise, cost of living 169 • Property taxes, natural beauty • Property values maintained and green spaces also • So much building - losing wildlife and coziness of Oro Valley and not as much amenities, real estate gouging • The climate and the view • Quality- I'd have to give that a little thought. Orderliness and cleanliness and stop "adding to" - so often everyone wants to add. To maintain and keep pretty and clean, and free of crime as we can • Tax rates, congestion of roads, dark sky- aren't allowed to have bright lights, need something available for seniors • How to control growth, water, provisions for parks, open space The community/people • Community and recreation • Community outreach and clean environment • Environment • Family friendly • Family life... um, uh, uh... family and child-related activities and things • Family values • I live in an apartment complex and I was hoping the landlords would rent to better people in my complex. I wish they would be more selective - not necessarily discriminatory by any means, but the cops have been here often and there was a meth bust here and it's just sad. I guess that's everywhere though. I just like to be surrounded with good people in a good environment • I think the neighborhood itself- more residential, the area. The peace and quiet and safety • It would be protection for our quality of life to continue • Like the neighborhood • Making sure neighborhoods stay decent and allowing more retail stores to increase revenue without raising taxes • Making sure that all ages of residents are represented • Making sure that I have a good place to raise my family • Neighborhood and friendly people • Not having over-population, clean-air- that's probably it • The living conditions and the atmosphere - I'd rather raise my kids here than Downtown because of crime and things like that • The rural environment • Too many foreigners in Oro Valley • We've had a problem with a person across the street from me, regarding the courts. We took care of it, "a bully" across the street, and the courts took care of it well • Green friendly environment, kid and family friendly • Safety, schools, diversity • So much building - losing wildlife and coziness of Oro Valley and not as much amenities, real estate gouging • The views - the mountains. The neighborhood is very secure, nice community, very helpful • 1. Low crime rate 2. Excellent schools 3. Not being half fulled by local government, home owner etc. 170 • Encompasses so many things, a though - the location in the area of Pusch Ridge, beauty and safety, the cultural base of the community, broad services in general are improving Government/practices • Concern that the government is not up front with the local people • Fair regulations across the board • Fairness, taxes, houses - something about taxes. We complain about our house taxes. People may have the same house but have lower or higher sales taxes and they can't explain that • Fiscal responsibility of Town Council - consider retired residents' income, give them tax breaks • Government was not honest with us regarding Wal-Mart-will destroy small businesses • Honest[y]from government • I don't know - privacy and less government interference • I guess my problem is that we have board members that want to spend a lot of money. It's a nice quiet area and [I] would like to keep it that way • Just having good responsive and responsible government • Less government is definitely my priority, but also less taxation • No tax incentives to unwanted businesses • Open disclosure • Progressive government, clean industries - smokeless, and research - innovation • The City Council • The City Government control on crime • Don't want [the] City overrun by big stores, feels helpless when government acts' - community activism empowers • I think the fact that we're well police patrolled and [have a] reasonably good Town Council • Money spending - government needs to be more frugal • Too much development, does not like giving tax breaks to contractors • Well, the one that I mentioned before is their traffic planning and the way they allow big contractors to do basically whatever they want in the expense of others • 1. Low crime rate 2. Excellent schools 3. Not being half fulled by local government, home owner etc. • We don't need the Wal-Mart, we need more high end shopping. The builder built a Wal- Mart after something else was approved. I don't think Wal-Mart needs a subsidy to operate Retail/dining • More commercial enterprises, which are being built- disappointed in shopping centers touted, then not being built. I do like the fact that there is more commercial development. Restrict residential development • Not enough restaurants and other services, like medical and entertainment • Start building up more restaurants • Accessibility to family stuff, stores, entertainment, having good police security, safety issues • Addressing concerns of family places to go 171 • Convenience to medical and restaurants • Dog park, more recreation, more ethnic food restaurants - Thai, theater • I don't want to have a Wal-Mart here or K-Mart or similar store. We need to keep up the quality of our town and bring more nice retailers like Nordstrom's, not lower our standards. We have both the population and tourism to support this • Making sure neighborhoods stay decent and allowing more retail stores to increase revenue without raising taxes • The quiet, few street lights, would be nicer if they had more restaurants • To limit the growth regarding homes in the area, we need more restaurants, movies, things like that • We don't need the Wal-Mart, we need more high end shopping. The builder built a Wal- Mart after something else was approved. I don't think Wal-Mart needs a subsidy to operate • Well, just now, recently, they added a new hospital. I am very happy. Oro Valley needs to wake up and add stuff that people want (seafood) • Community safety, city services: responsive police, access to services: shopping, entertainment • Emergency response and retail services and cleanliness • Growth - we need less housing in the area, more culture [and] retail • I don't think it has to do with where I'm living - you can't really link quality of life to where you're living. I'd like to see more parks, more activities for children and teens -we've got the library, the pool. I would have liked to not seen Wal-Mart being built- I think it could have been built in Catalina. I'd like to see more restaurants. We've got the growth of home[s] -we just don't have the infrastructure of stores and restaurants. I think the homebuilding surpassed the stores and the restaurants, and schools. The schools are overcrowded too • I think, uh well... hospitals, for one - medical care, arts, and entertainment • Safe roads, recreation, good shopping in the Town Proximity • Ability to get around, law enforcement • Access to services at my age, and it goes back to public transportation • Accessibility • Accessibility to family stuff, stores, entertainment, having good police security, safety issues • Encompasses so many things, a though - the location in the area of Pusch Ridge, beauty and safety, the cultural base of the community, broad services in general are improving • Everything being so close • I guess, having everything nearby • I think everything offered to be considered to not be very far, because I don't like to drive in any traffic • Places are too far from homes • Community safety, city services: responsive police, access to services: shopping, entertainment • I think we have good police force, the ease of getting around • Safety and convenience • The education and proximity of amenities 172 • Affordable housing, easy transit, accessible services • Not having a property tax, ensuring the Town does not grow so fast that it outstrips demand, and insuring that local conveniences are brought into Oro Valley to ensure sales tax revenues are in lieu of a property tax • Recreational opportunities such as bike paths, hiking trails, and more sidewalks leading to the parks and shopping areas • Low crime rate, good schools, strong property values, and, I guess, easy access to shopping and services Medical services • Availability of health care • Close to a medical facility • Convenience to medical and restaurants • Health - hospitals and doctors, medical services • Health care • I think, uh well... hospitals, for one - medical care, arts, and entertainment • Medical and police • Medical facilities, safety - low crime • Quite satisfied with the medical facilities • The medical services - transportation • Well, just now, recently, they added a new hospital. I am very happy. Oro Valley needs to wake up and add stuff that people want (seafood) • I'm living a positive life - nice library and hospital. Growing, I like that • Not enough restaurants and other services, like medical and entertainment • Traffic, health facilities, property tax • Transportation and medical facilities • Schools and transportation and [a] medical facility • The water, then education, and access to health care and emergency services Water • Concerned about water issues - it's a problem for everybody in Tucson. We don't seem to have enough ground water. Oh, and traffic • Lack of water • Mostly concerned with the ground water. Other people complain about property tax but I'm not involved in that • The water issue - there's going to be a problem with water, slowing down on the building would be great • The water, then education, and access to health care and emergency services • Water and taxes • Water management and urban sprawl are the big issues • Water, public safety, and sustainable infrastructure • How to control growth, water, provisions for parks, open space • I am on [a] limited income so not to increase property tax, and water is a big concern - we want to keep it, we need to be careful with it • Safety, water, and growth • Schools, water, roads • Over-development, crime, water 173 Keeping it clean • Clean Town and nice school • Mainly the cleanliness and maintenance of the roads • Oh wow, urn, I don't know. Uh, what is the most important...? Clean, safety factor is huge for me • Places kept looking nice, cleanliness and landscape wise, cost of living • Community outreach and clean environment • Not having over-population, clean-air- that's probably it • Oh dear, I don't know. Okay, let's see, I guess good police work, keeping the Town clean and stop raising the taxes • Progressive government, clean industries - smokeless, and research - innovation • Quality- I'd have to give that a little thought. Orderliness and cleanliness and stop "adding to" - so often everyone wants to add. To maintain and keep pretty and clean, and free of crime as we can • Safety and cleanliness • Emergency response and retail services and cleanliness Public transportation • Driving bus service community pickup • I'm glad to see they got that "Coyote Run," which I don't use but it's good • Transportation and medical facilities • Transportation infrastructure • Transportation, and probably really gets back to park\recreation areas for public use • Access to services at my age, and it goes back to public transportation • Affordable housing, easy transit, accessible services • Safety and transportation • Schools and transportation and [a] medical facility • The medical services - transportation Fire protection • Fire & police protection • Fire and police • Fire service • Great fire department- everything is just great • Emergency response and retail services and cleanliness • Emergency services and growth • Safety is major-fire and police basic core services, vandalism and graffiti • We need good police protection and we need good fire protection, with fire hydrants - we have none in the area I live in • Education, police and fire because it's a safety issue 174 No Wal-Mart • I don't want to have a Wal-Mart here or K-Mart or similar store. We need to keep up the quality of our town and bring more nice retailers like Nordstrom's, not lower our standards. We have both the population and tourism to support this • The building of an unnecessary Wal-Mart • We don't need the Wal-Mart, we need more high end shopping. The builder built a Wal- Mart after something else was approved. I don't think Wal-Mart needs a subsidy to operate • Government was not honest with us regarding Wal-Mart - will destroy small businesses • I don't think it has to do with where I'm living - you can't really link quality of life to where you're living. I'd like to see more parks, more activities for children and teens - we've_got the library, the pool. I would have liked to not seen Wal-Mart being built- I think it could have been built in Catalina. I'd like to see more restaurants. We've got the growth of home[s] - we just don't have the infrastructure of stores and restaurants. I think the homebuilding surpassed the stores and the restaurants, and schools. The schools are overcrowded too • Managing the growth and getting rid of Wal-Mart • The schools, don't give bs tickets, the police do protect us [but] too many bs tickets, not happy with the Wal-Mart Affordability • Affordability - don't want to see it too much developed, such as malls and big stores • Affordable housing, easy transit, accessible services • Being able to afford to live here • This is like a high income place. I work at the apartment complex where I live, otherwise I could not afford to live here • Fiscal responsibility of Town Council - consider retired residents' income, give them tax breaks • Places kept looking nice, cleanliness and landscape wise, cost of living • So much building - losing wildlife and coziness of Oro Valley and not as much amenities, real estate gouging Quiet/the atmosphere • Quiet • The quiet rural setting • The quiet, few street lights, would be nicer if they had more restaurants • I think the neighborhood itself- more residential, the area. The peace and quiet and safety • The living conditions and the atmosphere - I'd rather raise my kids here than Downtown because of crime and things like that • I guess my problem is that we have board members that want to spend a lot of money. It's a nice quiet area and [I] would like to keep it that way Economy • Good employment 175 • Property values maintained and green spaces also • Stability and financial stability • Crime, property value, school system and parks • Low crime rate, good schools, strong property values, and, I guess, easy access to shopping and services Communications with residents • I would like to be informed ahead of time before [a] Council vote • I'd like to know that there is a realm of complacency in the Town - that we get info and there is someone who cares what happens in the Town • Preserve the environment- it is getting more squeezed by the money interest. They should listen a little more to people who live here rather than money and commercial interest[s] • Safety, community participation in [the] decision making of the Town Weather • Climate • The climate • The climate and the view Town's relationship with businesses • Business and education • Lack of crime. I think they should also change "The Yogurt Shop". The owners had to close down because they couldn't put a sign out letting people know they were there. The owners wanted a sign on the sidewalk and couldn't because of Oro Valley, on the corner[of] La Canada and Lambert (the southwest corner) Nothing—satisfied • All otherwise is very good • Can't think of anything • No need for more services • None • None • Nothing • Nothing • Nothing really • Nothing to say • We are please[d] of everything Everything—dissatisfied • I'm going to vote no for everyone -they're terrible. I just can't stand Oro Valley anymore 176 Miscellaneous • ? • I like the library and police dept • I'm living a positive life - nice library and hospital. Growing, I like that • It's not the government's responsibility to make me happy. All they are supposed to do is provide basic service[s] (fire and utilities). It's fine to have parks, yet provide services for everybody's activity? Services - no, basics • Library, roads • Not having burning bodies in my backyard • Public works department • Services given by the Town • Stopping illegal immigration • The amenities that were important to her are available • The quality of life is better • • Crime, infrastructure • I think, uh well... hospitals, for one - medical care, arts, and entertainment • Police protection, city response to particular needs such as chalk wash - example: flood at Rancho Vistoso Golf Course and [it] was repaired immediately and no regards to [the] highlands wash except [the] Mayor's house that was protected (citizens at risk) • Safety and delivery of services • Safety, cultural activities • The safety and the services provided • The safety, the schools are good and well supported, and keeping things like the library and the Farmer's Market running and intact as they are today • Water, public safety, and sustainable infrastructure 177 Q62. Are there any other ways you feel that the Town of Oro Valley should be communicating with residents? Please note that there were respondents who either mentioned a communication method already included in Questions 53—61 or said they could not think of any other way, and these responses have not been included since they offer no additional information. Visit residents • (Sigh, hmmm, laugh) I would like to know more of what's going on. Come out and meet us, especially the new annex part • Actually take time to visit communities and find out who your constituents are • Coming to community board or open meetings • Doing through speaker at various locations • Door-to-door • HOA & Explorer are the best ways • Just public forums • No, they're doing a good job — maybe to the HOA's • Outreach • Pass out information at [the] library or mailrooms in apartment complexes • Supermarket • We get a lot through our Home Owners' Association so I guess I can't think of any other ways • Word of mouth Signage • I don't know how effective it would be, but putting up notices on store bulletin boards • Posted signs • Postings at building sites • Publications at [the] park on letter boards • They could advertise the Council meetings with a sign out [in] front of the Town Hall • No - broadcast media, mailings and posting on [the] website. And then, of course, flashing signs on the road — "barricade" signs • No - I think if they can mail and people want to accept e-mail that that's a great way. If there is a specific sort of mail or meeting, post it on street corners —"signage" Telephone • An automated call system to all residents • By phone calls • Could sign up for like a phone list or something • Oro Valley magazine is fine with me, or maybe a toll-free number • They have the new phone system that I believe is excellent Instant messaging • New options — instant messaging 178 Via schools • Through schools — maybe teach schools more about the community and what it has to offer PSA's at the movies • Through the theater—a two minute clip 179 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 2 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: January 23, 2008 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Stacey Lemos, Finance Director SUBJECT: Town of Oro Valley FY 2007/08 Mid-Year Budget Review SUMMARY: The purpose of this communication is to provide the Town Council with a mid-year update of the Town's financial status, as well as compare and contrast our forecast to that of the State of Arizona. Included as an attachment to this agenda item is a summary of the Town's revenue sources and actual versus budgeted expenditures through December 31, 2007. Summary Total revenue for FY 07/08 for all funds is forecasted to be $738K higher than the budgeted amount of $69.5M at fiscal year end, and $8.5M (13.8%) higher than FY 06/07 total revenue. Revenue collections from local sales tax along with connection fee revenue in the Water Utility fund are trending higher than budgeted. Although an economic outlook presented by The University of Arizona, Eller College of Management has stated economic conditions have declined significantly in recent months and believe Arizona's economy is already in a recession that will stretch well into 2008; Oro Valley's conservative, needs- based budgeting approach for FY 07/08 seems to be insulating us from needing to make major budget revisions. The best measures of spending by Arizonans are retail sales and restaurant and bar (R&B) sales. According to the economic outlook, compared to 12 months prior, retail sales are down 4.0% and R&B sales are up less than 1.0%. The softness in retail is due primarily to auto sales and building/hardware. The Town of Oro Valley's forecast shows retail and R&B sales continuing to grow at a small pace due primarily to the growth of new commercial development in the area. The chart below depicts a four year history of total town-wide revenues received, along with the FY 2008 forecast. Total Actual Revenues 80.0 60.0 .................... a 40.0 _....................................... 20.0 3 1 i r i 1 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ci:\,BLII)GET\FY 07-08'::MidYr 0708 Budget Update.doc TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of 5 General Fund Fiscal year-to-date revenue collections indicate that revenues in the General Fund are projected to be approximately $1.1M above budget (3.8%) at fiscal year end. Local taxes are projected to exceed budget by $775K (5.9%) and revenue from commercial building permits is projected to be $340K above budget. General Fund revenue collections are up 16.4% when compared to same period last year. As reported by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC), General Fund collections for the State of Arizona are down 0.6% when compared to last year. The enacted FY 2008 budget was based on a projected growth rate of 6.0%. The largest revenue categories in this fund are forecasted to grow by 1.5% in FY 2008 and 1.0% in FY 2009. Local Sales Tax Collections: • Construction sales tax collections are tracking to be above budget by $556K (11.6%) at fiscal year end. • Retail sales tax collections are 14.9% higher compared to the same period last year. Due to the timing of new commercial business, retail sales tax for FY 07/08 is anticipated to be $104K below their budgeted amount of $4M. Base retail businesses, without new commercial development, continues to grow at a modest rate of 4.1% over last year. 2Q Retail Sales Tax 83 $1,500 *MOW $1 300 ::%,,�;:%:r: %v,. $43......................................................................................................•---•-----------..............-...... %�%,�%•'�1%��a'��.tea_ $1,100 $900 $1,202 $1,237 $1,288 $700 $1,002 $500 2005 2006 2007 2008 ■Base Retail Businesses a New Comm'l Dev • Restaurants and Bar sales tax collections are 8.9% higher compared to the same period last year and is projected to be $93.5K below budget for FY 07/08 due to the timing of new commercial businesses. Base business, without new commercial development, is up 1.1% over last year. • Revenue generated from one-time sales tax audits for the first two quarters of the year has already exceeded budget. Revenue is forecasted to be $471 K, compared with the budgeted amount of$250K. (a:`:.BUDGE'l\FY 07-08`•MidYr 0708 Budget Update.doc TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 3 of 5 • The 2% utility sales tax has generated $516K year-to-date, which will help offset expected shortages in state shared revenues this year. Sales tax collections for the State of Arizona are flat compared to last year. The table below compares the year to date growth rates on major sales tax categories for the State of Arizona and Oro Valley. Retail and contracting collections together account for two-thirds of all sales tax revenues for the State. YTD Sales Tax Growth Rates ......................... ..................... Arizona * Oro Valley Retail (1.2)% 14.9% Contracting (5.1)% 37.5% Restaurant & Bar 1.6% 8.9% *Source: Joint Legislative Budget Committee State/County Shared Revenues Total State/County shared revenues are expected to be $81.8K below budget for FY 07/08. Collections from the state sales tax are estimated to be under budget by $298K. Vehicle License Tax revenue is estimated to exceed budget by $220K. Residential Building Permits Residential building permit revenues are annualizing at $971K compared to a budget of $IM. 250 single family residential building permits are forecasted to be issued for FY 07/08 compared to a budget of 320 permits. Statewide, the number of single family residential building permits fell by 35.3% on a year-over-year basis reaching levels not seen since 1993. In Oro Valley, permits are 8.0% higher compared to same period last year. It is important to note the current value per permit of $3.4K has increased 8.7% over last year. Commercial Building Permits Commercial building permit revenues are estimated to exceed budget by $340K for FY 07/08. The table below represents the various commercial development components of the budget and what is estimated for year-end. I Year End Commercial Development Budget Estimate Steam Pump Village $12,600 $- Pulte Headquarters 11,200 - Oro Valley Marketplace 393,000 440,000 Sanofi Aventis 55,800 130,000 Miscellaneous 87,400 330,000 Total $560,000 $900,000 (1: Bt IDGEIFY 07-08\.M idYr 0708 Bud het Update.doc TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 4 of 5 Bed Tax Fund Bed Tax collections are projected to meet the budgeted amount of $1.4M. Highway Fund Revenue collections in the Highway Fund are projected to be $262.7K (3.6%) below budget. HURF (gas tax) collections are tracking to be $408.6K below budget. Collections from the construction sales tax are estimated to exceed budget by 3.3%. Public Transportation Fund Revenues are projected to be $43K (5.5%) below budget. This shortfall is due to the Town only expecting to receive $64K of the budgeted amount of $116K in LTAF II funds to purchase two replacement transit vans. Therefore, only one van will be purchased, rather than two. Also, an intergovernmental agreement is currently being drafted to request RTA reimbursement for the budgeted Transit Coordinator position. This RTA revenue was budgeted for $64K, but will be less due to the delay in hiring this position. Townwide Development Impact Fee Fund Development impact fee collections are estimated to be $1.5M under budget for FY 07/08. Revenue from development impact fees is tracking to be $236K below budget due to the decline in single family residential building permits as discussed in the above section. The remaining shortfall is due to a $2M budgeted reimbursement from the Pima Association of Governments (PAG) for the First Ave. project, in which $1.3M was received in late FY 06/07. Oro Valley Water Utility Water Utility Fund revenues are estimated to exceed budget by $870K for FY 07/08. • Revenue from connection fees is forecasted to be $717K higher than budget due to higher than anticipated commercial and multi-family connections. • Revenue from water sales is forecasted to be $90K higher than budget Stormwater Utility Revenue is forecasted to be $390K higher than budget due to a $500K reimbursement received from FEMA which was expected in FY 06/07. The Stormwater Utility fee was implemented in January of this year at a rate of $2.90 per ERU. Revenue from this fee is anticipated to generate $361K for the last six months of the fiscal year. G:'.Ql_'DGET`;FI'07-08`:Mid1'r 0708 Budget Update.doc TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 5 of 5 To close, varying reports predict anywhere from a 1.0% decline in retail spending for the coming year, to a modest growth rate of 1.0% for the State of Arizona. The recession of 2007-08 should last a year, give or take a few months, and be relatively mild. Arizona's economy, because of its heavy reliance on growth-related activities will take a bigger hit than most other states, but fortunately the population is projected to grow at a small pace. Although year to date revenue collected has been down a small percentage for the State, Oro Valley has continued to experience positive growth year- over-year in General Fund revenue. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Departments are making progress on this year's adopted CIP program, with General Fund projects at 53% completion overall, and Highway Fund projects out to bid with completion expected before year end. A copy of the CIP Project Report is attached to this communication for your information. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Finance Report for Quarter Ended December 31, 2007 2. FY 2007/08 Capital Improvement Program Project Report S acey Le s Finance D ector L/4, `, David L. Andrews Town Manager CI:'\:BIJDGETTY 07-08`..:MidYr 0708 Budget Update.doc Revenue Estimates v Budget Fiscal Year 2007 - 2008 4) 9 a 2007/2008 12/31/07 % Year End Budget to Year End Budget YTD Actuals YTD Estimate Estimate General Fund Local Sales Tax 13,034,840 5,331,984 40.9% 13,810,075 775,235 License&Permit Fees 1,832,000 1,313,817 71.7% 2,099,735 267,735 Federal&State Grants 868,366 158,047 18.2% 707,072 (161,294) State/County Shared 11,141,691 5,020,145 45.1% 11,059,904 (81,787) Charges for Services 873,041 462,705 53.0% 934,166 61,125 Miscellaneous 1,677,711 573,780 34.2% 1,930,711 253,000 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 29,427,649 12,860,478 43.7% 30,541,663 1,114,014 Highway Fund Construction Sales Tax 2,885,758 1,320,147 45.7% 2,980,628 94,870 Highway User Tax 3,308,579 1,222,284 36.9% 2,900,000 (408,579) PAG Reimbursement 900,000 - 0.0% 900,000 - Miscellaneous 208,500 137,662 66.0% 259,500 51,000 TOTAL HIGHWAY FUND 7,302,837 2,680,093 36.7% 7,040,128 (262,709) Bed Tax Fund 1,387,293 399,036 28.8% 1,391,893 4,600 Public Transportation Fund 489,286 276,507 56.5% 446,000 (43,286) Townwide Development Impact Fee Fund Federal&State Grants 12,100,000 8,745,461 72.3% 10,796,150 (1,303,850) Pima County Bond Proceeds 620,000 - 0.0% 620,000 - Development Impact Fees 1,080,000 469,938 43.5% 843,750 (236,250) Miscellaneous 145,000 120,338 83.0% 234,000 89,000 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND 13,945,000 9,335,737 66.9% 12,493,900 (1,451,100) Water Utility Water Sales 11,343,000 5,478,390 48.3% 11,433,300 90,300 Charges for Services 1,573,000 800,555 50.9% 1,596,200 23,200 Special Assessments 947,500 942,391 99.5% 1,664,532 717,032 Development Impact Fees 588,000 176,293 30.0% 475,000 (113,000) Miscellaneous 826,000 479,909 58.1% 978,400 152,400 TOTAL WATER UTILITY FUNDS 15,277,500 7,877,538 51.6% 16,147,432 869,932 Stormwater Utility Fund 620,854 497,074 80.1% 1,010,707 389,853 Other Funds 1,020,816 658,778 64.5% 1,177,113 156,297 Carry-Forward Fund Balances 49,296,238 - 0.0% 49,296,238 : : ..Wv� .�. ... ; r {� , .�� ac.� �.r. . .: • � ��...�,....<wf.. R �:.34 5 8 5241 29 � ��„ . � "� �� � Omo7773 1. . . .. . I Does not include transfers in G:\BUDGET ANALYST\Financial Reports 2007-2008\2Q\2Q Reports 1/16/2008 Budgeted Expenditures vs Actuals Fiscal Year 2007 - 2008 :s : -ti._ p , .. : - , 2007/2008 12/31/07 Available % of Budget YTD Actuals Budget Budget Completed General Government Town Council 230,547 91,916 138,631 39.9% Town Clerk 512,827 158,192 354,635 30.8% Town Manager 938,456 436,315 502,141 46.5% Human Resources 369,516 167,216 202,300 45.3% Economic Development 184,798 81,901 102,897 44.3% Finance 962,699 472,571 490,128 49.1% Information Services 1,289,853 471,055 818,798 36.5% General Administration 1,428,739 66,648 1,362,091 4.7% Legal 997,178 403,295 593,883 40.4% Magistrate Court 752,002 318,020 433,982 42.3% Bed Tax 1,457,791 337,743 1,120,048 23.2% Municipal Debt Service 1,401,639 971,231 430,408 69.3% Oracle Rd Debt Service 377,578 89,557 288,021 23.7% Steam Pump Ranch 475,000 128,933 346,067 27.1% Honey Village Villa e 206,500 447,341 (240,841) 216.6% 11,585,123 4,641,935 6,943,188 40.1% Development Services Building Safety 1,635,301 844,151 791,150 51.6% Development Review 532,816 231,277 301,539 43.4% PlanningZoning& 1,167,311 526,268 641,043 45.1% 3,335,428 1,601,696 1,733,732 48.0% Public Safety Administration 2,148,381 969,313 1,179,068 45.1% Support Services 4,573,127 2,188,988 2,384,139 47.9% Field Services 6,580,059 3,113,845 3,466,214 47.3% 13,301,567 6,272,147 7,029,420 47.2% Parks & Recreation Administration 465,529 192,260 273,269 41.3% Parks 954,615 392,525 562,090 41.1% Recreation Programs 397,012 175,180 221,832 44.1% Trails ils 74,630 31,817 42,813 42.6% Aquatics 632,911 251,931 380,980 39.8% 2,524,697 1,043,713 1,480,984 41.3% Library Services 1,385,423 561,301 824,122 40.5% Public Works Administration 906,367 346,341 560,026 38.2% Operations 2,024,088 815,051 1,209,037 40.3% Engineering 3,645,231 582,602 3,062,629 16.0% Facilities s 234,828 107,392 127,436 45.7% wa Construction 14,965,000 3,306,214 11,658,786 22.1% Roadway 238,403 552,154 30.2% Transit 790,557 Stormwater 420,882 630,296 (209,414) 149.8% Municipalp Operations Center 2,285,000 267,898 2,017,102 11.7% 25,271,953 6,294,198 18,977,755 24.9% G:\BUDGET ANALYST\Financial Reports 2007-2008\2Q\2Q Reports 1/15/2008 Budgeted Expenditures vs Actuals Fiscal Year 2007 - 2008j �`'��.. 9 P 2007/2008 12/31/07 Available % of Budget YTD Actuals Budget Budget Completed Water Utility Administration 6,617,844 1,785,182 4,832,662 27.0% Engineering 586,432 231,591 354,841 39.5% Production 2,452,104 1,242,420 1,209,684 50.7% Distribution 1,052,641 521,352 531,289 49.5% Capital Improvements 5,364,575 228,536 5,136,039 4.3% Alternative Water 7,262,618 744,946 6,517,672 10.3% Connection Fees 2,201,920 731,164 1,470,756 33.2% 25,538,134 5,485,191 20,052,943 21.5% Contingency 35,825,148 - 35,825,148 0.0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES I $ 118,767,473 $ 25,900,181 $ " "` 92,867,292 21.8%1 Does not include transfers out G:\BUDGET ANALYST\Financial Reports 2007-2008\2Q\2Q Reports 1/15/2008 0 co r- 0) 000EXmOX7) * 00 < 0077777om o0 `< x 3 Cn rn CD v a % -0v c N cD 0 0 0.c00 0 CD n CD 3 C0rD 0 C W CD� O O m N CSD A- s CT n -o m -D < EC N v 0 7J E < 0 (n 0 0 co < o - -, m O - 'S �' m N con `< m -I c - m --i m �• D v v _ " O < 0 ? -a2 3 3 3 m cn o CD CD n v -* Co m -.LA --1 0 -o (D m m a00 70 o 6 O U) , 73 g 7r co Cn x ° o o o 3 C,< o o �. CD m o o m c <. < — rn cn a� .. 3 -o cn 0 7-1 la 3 ' O ° C ha �' � O m � � n � O cmc al N lv 2 _a a 5 nni C a C 212 =13 ti) M ; (7 m 3 O W 0 cu o 0 sr: - zT (_, cn m cQ 03 x 0 w cn o to 3 = v ‹ °' d - .=+ a m aR. o• Ea O N ? w v c a 0 x m N (moi) 3 3 cD a s _ q a �c _ �' a D ,`�v M ( n cin `° CI m a -� ?. ,� a t o m co a 3 .-. cn °• w o, {° c o v � — a) o � 3 °� a cli n N -� a CD Cp (ND (D c) N o n 0 � n3 CD - CD C) 0 n o in EA *ft EA EA Off EA 4A EA EA EA EA-EA+A EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA-En EA-EA D a. o -n N -' O o a -' -i o -� N ---,, r..) N N (D -_.t -� 4, _a 1 •.a -' 0) 00 CO .A O W WJS 03 CN (Ji 01 01 0 •-. ^,1W 0 co N C3) 4, (0 (0 O Co O (G CO N O N 0 0 0 01 O 0 0) 0 0 0 0 N 00 ,10 (Y10 (..003 J O a 00 00 -co �1 _, ., O O O O o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In 00 ,1 0 N N -.t W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0) 0 O 0 0 Cft N W0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0) 00000000030 ,... f!9 4A *A 4A EA Off Eff Efl Off IA Etf 4A to 4A EA EA EA -EA 4A EA-EA EA Eft-EA EA b9 EA CYI _' CO N4, w CO01 O 0 CO0P 01 01 v cn oA - -� J 0) c0 '''' 01 CO CD J 03 v v 1 t 01 v 00 1 t leo leo t t t (.4 t 0 0) t t t t 0 0 1 til EE9 Et/ 4A EA VI EA EA EA 40 4A 49 EA 4A EA-EA Off EA 4A 4A EA EA EE9-EA EA-CA 4A C) -I 0 0 (I) co B' 11 -1 C) 0 O. D e t 1 t t . t t t t t t t t t t i t t t t t t t t t t 0 , O Q E O n Q 0 Iv-0 = 0 0 4' -' Q) o 000o000000 u1 oOo ('`., -' o 3 n C 0 O, \o o Oo 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o W o -a p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ c*: \ \ \ c \ o c \ \ \ \ o \ 'a o ar 3 00 < 0 1 O O Eff EA d9 Eff EA- W 0. .-t Ol Eff EA EA Eff H9 EA 4A 4A EA EA EA +A EA EJ9 4A EA EA E19 k/3-Ell 4A 4A � � 1) -- -< N c70Q `< N rn rt O0 co y-C , .p -, N - N A N (.0 O -� C) 3 O a) -.. -a C) CO 00 .A 0 W W 01 CJS N CJS CTt 01 0 (D •1 N 0 co H 4, 00 (o O 0 D A. 3 (D (D 00 0) N N 0 W W0 0 03 0 0 0 O Cr.) 0 (D -,1 0 03 W ',1 -,1 0 r� CO 00 C71 O th O p -� OD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co O -. O O 0o CT, O v O N a. N N 00 O 00 4 O H (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .A 0 0) 0 0 - 0) H W o 0 0 W 0 W . 0 4, H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -.. 0 CTt o 0 t 0 0 0 Cn 0 m c0 �o -o -ommmmmmm JoWmmcm -o - cn U) 0 c c O Q X X X X X X X CD co o cn 5 0 Cn -, v CD 3 0 • � -o -a -o13 -6` "8 <. 3 =• =' o• o m CD Cp u,' tn' CD m m Cn CD m mC7 m• a m' -+, k) -1 0 c c a- 0 0 0 0 n3i w rn a o �< cn m m 00- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 5 C�73 a * o a O a g a a a a a a a a C]_ (o . ,r = < O. c a O O -00 , -0 -00 -00 -0 -0 N =O O - n J m Pt 0 CD < < o o o D O D D v � 3 0 a 3 m a 5--2- o 0 m m c �_ �' o o =-cn (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 cn - ca- F3 (2).. m ° m + m 3 m co '''• m m N N N N N 4, N 8 o gi 0 O O �. 3 v7 2 O • • N N N N N N N = 3 0 = R. .-. m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2• CD CD -0 .0 3 CD 0 = X X a 8 c '' 73 00 CO03 00 0o 03 CO v O (�D O. 0- -• 5 m m - if o .-. m 0 n ..-.. a (0n (mn (mn (0n (mn cmn (0n 3 v 0 p0) a (le paj to _co._-03 m _ m (j - N N D X 0 0 0 11) - - 0000000<' <' m -) 0 0 0 0 a•D 0 0 ,,-,. m m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 o o - 0 0 co CD CO C n.- ' 13 1 -0 13 1 -0 m O CO n co (b ;...t. H 0 '0-�• v 5' 5 m m m m m m m ,--. O0 X c m 0 CI 0 0 CD W W o' o' o' o' O. o' o' (o ° a o CO a N N D D D D > D D W 3 NO 3 m { m 0Ornrno)� 0) 0 0 N cn C) 3 C) <' 0 0 N N N ? N N N p n m W O CD 0 CD O0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 7. a 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 � N p Oo 00 0o Q. Oo Oo 00 COO0 0 0 N a c) o -=.7, (n ~° v J o) : 3 0) - ia ��iNo N .0 cn o U) 0 N OD • N m 69 .� N a m �' a C p 0 = a a N O (0 a) po 3 r-=1 (0 o v ^ 0 � 0) a � ,2 < m s a 3 v r � � �m � 5 cn02ZOCo (nz * * o ZTrrn � r _1 ° — --I O o -, -, n- p c Iv (D N Do N o 5 m o ° Fr;" o D ° n ° (� w 0 ° s rn m sv n n 0 C7 --1 �' Fr D ° Cv n j nco ' rmm �. ao o cnDD 0 • 3 ''' 73 73 Co , — aa) 73w ° n) Oo (n < w — — �- ° (u p m U) CD * O w --I o 0 0 cn o o S = n D coc� (n = v 0) CL "- v, 3 , v n o o C a) a � 0 gEl 0 r ° C ca a) sv O <' rn ° co_ ,� (Da �' m a o a o a j a: N 0 n ° o p p N p 0 cn 73 N 5' o ° Iv -o C = m — o f -, CD a, a w cD D _ ('D < 3 O U1 0 Ca '.-4-). -7-t Q) 0 (D0 Co N 3 O 8 , O 5 - -0 �_ O' c<D X ' -' N ''* g a) O "p O g m N Iv 0 (D o O N S O• r (<D c)D ,. v r- -6.)- Fe) 0 7 - D rf,- AI C) O .-� .7.1'7 'r1 v (n (D D-CO Z -0 .� C) 0) 70 o v C �. CP m m G�C �' = 'n C7 C7 C7 m sv O, C N utaD > > -n (p (D (D '' N 1fl '_ cep > > n (0� o ° 8 ° aD o CD a o T 0 C ,.y .O+ Sv > > N' -11 fl' fl D o O rr r* '� o- -n a. ° cD ° n o C 13 Iv * o r o 3 n cD a O (D D, d O. CDD 'D �• O m O < o �' 0 CU (D r. �' m = 'T1 O, 0 (0 C) C) 0 (D a C O• ,+ m �+ -n N �. co Q. o ? O v co co cn 0 O, v c a c f. a u) 49 EA EA EA Ef9 EA4A V9 49EA4A49EflEAEAE1)4fl4AE1EflEfl49 VI 4flEAEA-EA EA494fl D a 0 -< (J1 4 - v, -, N co a 0 O Cn O C11 CJ1 N — 0) 01 0) N) b., 01 --• 11 0) CO 00 O -A 010 CP 0 11 -.I 0 C71 -.J 01 0) C11 (J1 01 N O O N) 01 CO 0) 0 W O O -- O N O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O 03 01 03 01 O O O 01 O O CP CD 0 CD 0 O O O O O O O O a 00 O O O O O b b O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0000000 (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,... Eft! EAEfl4A V) E9 EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA 4A EAEflEflEAEA-EA 4/9 -EA-EA 49-EA-EA EA-EA W N -.a - CA 0) .. C11 -.I W 4 () 03 --, 0) O) 0) 4 Co 01 W 0.) J 0) 0) •A 0 4, 0) •i .P .p CO CJ1 Co -.I 01 •A 0o O 0 CD 0 ( O 00 00 CP 01 00 00 IV •P C11 -, '-J -.I -- W O 0) O) — 1 N 01 O CO CO O) 0) 0 G.) -.I W CJl C11 CJ1 -.• W CP -.1 -.I O O N , N -1 . , . , •A - . 01 U1 . •, , . Co C11 N) . . W . N Oo E19 EA EA EA if) EA EA EA 4.9 EA 49 Eft 4A EA EA-EA EA VI EA n -.I 0 O0 -.. -• N _a Nr 5 r .ice CI) 0) - O O o -n 0 -a -- C) o) 01 al co -< 0) Q) 0) .p •A Q) -.a 0 ,1 4). D N-01 -a — O) 0) (h U1 O - 0 N7.4":. . . N . N 00 i i co CA . i i i , CJ1 -, CD ,... 0 C >y - -�, y — p n p 0 N'p W W O -1 'p O O C.) O O O O O W O -� — O 71 0 0 W N 0 0 0 2 0 0 01 n 0 o 0 o o o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ? o a \ \ ° 3 00 < Q 0 0 0 (p CT -� 3 -, p -, O O CD 4A to 49 EA Eft EA 413 Eft EA 4A EA 69 VI-EA EA fig EA Eft Eft EA EA 4i9 Eft 414 69 EA EA 4A 411 V/ ." 0 = 1,3 _a 0o N N rn 4.. a m 01 0 4,=a 0) CP 01 0) — N) w --% --, EO n -1 0 CJ1 -., CJ) 0) 0) -4 C3) W C>1 N) O - N co (a) CO O -- O Co CTT 0 d P. 3 C11 O --4 -.1 A •A N CP N C 01 O 01 --.1 O 0 C O 00 -, 0 O O O O O r+ Q) O (0 -I Co DD 1 O O O O - O O O O - O O O O O-co O N a �1 0 N 4, CO Oo 01 0 0 0) O O W O O O O (J1 W 01 O O O CO O O CO 0) N . N "40 . O . 400010000 . 00 4 N . O O O N 0 CO COC 7) 13 CD_ OC -0 > 0 > < DD50co z > mHm -Oao (D CD O .--.--•— 0 -, O (D D (D CD (D •-' D. (D X X (D (O CO a O.O. - O O O. a < a cn (n (n a O. a (O v D .11'D O.(O O O (D (D (D n ; 0 (�. V,' n. N(O.(O. 0 (D c0 O _,: (D 'D (D () O. O O O (D 0 X O 0 (7 Ca ,C1.-) CO W * ° CO O- j 0 0 0 > > X 0 O O -+, o (D (D to , O O fD O (D -p � CJ1 O = > > ),,, ,am, a O � (D 3 C) (n " 3 3 3 s a- (O 0 o (p O 3 C C a (D 0 4A 3 O O O El) C) 0 0 (D 2 * O-0 N. O C a s 2. C a o N (D (D O 0 Fr o O (,D -, 0 7- -I (3 () (3 CSD g. 0 0 0 (D o a l' a m a x 0 3 3 0 -•• (D O O a O 9 O D O O O ,.. O ,_• C -, •a -, O 3 ? O CO V'.co •+ O 8 ca) N N 0 0 3 O n O o -5-0 .TI? CD (D (D • N O (O , j 1 N O O .-. ° rNtD = a O OON - O O O 0`CUc D D 09998 (D O O O (n + ' O O .+DO Oo v (D CO Oo O. Oo (D -, = a ,« U• -0 O .O+ -0 --I m O t�D -n O -n N v O (�D 0 O 0 u) 00 n W xO O N n ° > (D 00 Oo O -f+ 2 'I! n 3 O o O N O 3 - .-• O O N N O. • a� O v ONO CDDO O (D 3 cn n7OO p (D O , --"3O Obq OO • (D 3 0 O 0 = O N 0- O CO a (D O (So , 0) C o N (hD 0) a N 2 • N CO N n (D 0 --< O O) • gD O03 O - N 0 N O ( D O< OcD O (t Op0 `G o) O a O O O O (,D. p M O CO OO (• ( a o OI j O Opp ' CO _a 3 O EA .-. 'O (c) O C {D 0 —' O — O0 •a -• -, D O N`< (1) 03,,F C O O 0 O 0 .� O• 3 o CD o a v0, (<D O0 0 �� 003 n in • -, < N (ill..fA 0 CD 0 C CD ("D ----- O O -� = 3 c c o a D N O O o) o (D a Pr) � 0 a D oD ( cn D NO 3 O (n Q ° .-+ (O ,F -n O N • CO p O O = -< O CD EA O N 0 = O N ry O 00 co O N O < co cD O P O O � O p Oo < CO O (D CD 1 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: January 23, 2008 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Stacey Lemos, Finance Director SUBJECT: Preview of the Town of Oro Valley Fiscal Year 2008/09 Budget Process SUMMARY: The purpose of this agenda item is to brief the Council on the following: • The budget process for the coming 2008/09 fiscal year; • Discuss the program-based budgeting format and development of operations and maintenance (O&M) budget targets; • Provide some preliminary trends and projections for the General Fund; • Review the budget calendar attached; • Solicit feedback from the Town Council regarding service level assumptions and number and format of the proposed budget work sessions. FY 2008-2013 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Preparations for the FY 2008/09 budget have already begun with the 5-year CIP process commencing in November, 2007. The departments have submitted their requests totaling $1.415 million in the General Fund and $1.259 million in the Highway Fund. On February 14, 2008, the CIP Technical Advisory Committee (CIPTAC) will meet to review the FY 08/09 CIP process and review and discuss the CIP project requests. Two (2) additional CIPTAC meetings are tentatively scheduled for February 29th and March 14th to score and rank the projects and recommend a draft CIP to the Mayor and Town Council. This draft CIP will then be presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 1st, and then to the Town Council at a May budget study session. The first year (FY 08/09) of the 5-year plan will be incorporated into the tentative budget scheduled for approval by the Town Council on June 18th, with final approval set for July 16th It is recommended again that cash reserves be allocated to fund next year's CIP projects. Program-Based Budgeting and O&M Targets In FY 2007/08, the program-based budgeting format was fully implemented in which major program areas were identified and budgeted for within each department. During this fiscal year, Finance staff undertook an effort to further analyze each department's historical operations and maintenance (O&M) costs for the past three (3) fiscal years to determine a base average recurring O&M target budget for each department to use when developing their FY 2008/09 O&M budgets. For FY 2008/09, we are asking the departments to develop their O&M budget requests by providing separate detail on recurring costs versus new or non-recurring expenditures (i.e.new programs, program expansions, additional staff, etc.). The purpose of this effort was twofold: (1) to further G:\STACEY\Council Communic\FY0809 Budget Preview 1-23-08.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 2 OF 4 analyze the use and justification of resources in the department budgets, and (2) to identify any available budget capacity in the O&M budgets that may be saved or reallocated to other areas. Proposed Budget Calendar and Budget Contents The proposed budget calendar for FY 08/09 is attached and shows budget forms and instructions to be distributed to department and division heads on January 24th and due on February 29th . The Town Manager is scheduled to hold budget review sessions with the departments from March 17th through April 4th. The Town Manager's Recommended Budget is scheduled to be distributed to the Town Council and the Finance and Bond Committee on April 23rd, and Council work sessions are scheduled through the month of May. Adoption of the tentative budget is targeted for June 18th, and final adoption of the FY 08/09 budget is set for July 16th It is anticipated that the update of the 10-year Financial Sustainability plan by the Finance and Bond Committee will coincide with the schedule noted above, with a draft version of the plan to be presented to the Council in late April or early May. Also included in the Town Manager's Recommended Budget document will be a summary of current year highlights and achievements by each department, as well as a listing of FY 08/09 goals and objectives in support of the Town's Strategic Plan. Each department's budget will also include updates to the performance metrics or workload indicators that were included in the current year budget. It is anticipated that the Town will transition to the implementation of more qualitative performance measures in the coming years as the Town's enterprise resource planning (ERP) system is fully functional and methods for administering those performance measures are in place. Preliminary General Fund Projections for FY 2008/09 Beginning Fund Balance Based on the Town's revenue and expenditure estimates through the end of the current fiscal year 2007/08, it is estimated that the beginning fund balance going into FY 2008/09 will be approximately $14 million in the General Fund. The FY 2008/09 beginning fund balance in the Highway Fund is expected to remain stable at approximately $3.6 million. Revenues It is anticipated that we will continue to budget for one-time revenue from construction sales taxes as commercial construction activity that has begun in this fiscal year progresses into next fiscal year, although the levels may slightly decrease from this current fiscal year due to the completion of some large projects, such as the First Avenue Widening, Oracle Crossings, Mercado at Canada Hills, Ventana Medical expansion and Oro Valley Retail Center. Construction sales tax revenue will also be expected from activity at the Oro Valley Marketplace in anticipation of their September, 2008 opening date. G:\STACEY\Council Communic\FY0809 Budget Preview 1-23-08.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 3 OF 4 Sales tax revenues from existing local businesses are expected to increase slightly between 2% and 3% for inflation. An incremental increase from new commercial activity will also be included in the budgetary figures for revenues. Budgeted revenue for residential building permits will be slightly lower than the current year budget (320 permits) to adjust for the current and continued downturn in the housing industry. The budget will also reflect only a half year of 2% utility sales tax collections, as this revenue source is due to sunset in January of 2009 unless renewed by the Town Council. This equates to a reduction in revenues of approximately $600,000 next fiscal year, with a full-year reduction totaling approximately $1.2 million. State shared revenue distribution amounts are also expected to decrease as the economy slows and the State faces an estimated $1 billion budget deficit for this year. Program Expenditures/Service Level Assumptions When the Town Manager's Recommended Budget is delivered to the Council in mid-April, it will detail the costs of specific program areas within each department and include specific service level assumptions and the costs associated with providing those levels of service. Some examples of this are as follows: • Police officer per capita ratio of commissioned officers per 1,000 residents • Continued implementation of the Building Safety Department's process improvement plan • Set aside of funding for FY 2008/09 capital asset replacement fund • Costs and resources needed to further progress on the Planning & Zoning Work Plan • RTA-funded circulator bus service • Planning for the Municipal Operations Center construction • Planning for Steam Pump Ranch preservation • Planning for development of the Naranja Town Site • Pavement preservation program needs Direction from the Town Council Thep roposed budget calendar for FY 2008/09 is attached outlining a series of six (6) Council budget work sessions throughout the month of May. Staff is requesting feedback from the Council regarding the number and format of the work sessions. Last year, an all-day Saturday budget work session was held to review the Recommended Budget as a whole and focus on more policy-related issues, such as service level and service quality assumptions, new employee requests, review of salary and benefit projections, and the funding of merit and cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs). We would like to G:\STACEY\Council Communic\FY0809 Budget Preview 1-23-08.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 4 OF 4 know if this might work again this year, or possibly hold a half day session on a Friday and continue with another half day session on a Saturday. It is further anticipated that should there exist a deficit whereby expenditure requests exceed estimated revenues, staff would provide proposals to close the gap from cost savings generated from reduced levels of service and/or additional revenue sources for Council consideration. ATTACHMENT: 1. FY 2008/09 Budget Calendar St cey Lemo Finance Dire or David L. Andrews Town Manager G:\STACEY\Council Communic\FY0809 Budget Preview 1-23-08.DOC Town of Oro Valley Financial Planning Calendar FY 2008 — 2009 , �1UGU$T 2007 SEPTEMBER 2007 OCTOBER 2007 NOVEMBER 2007 Illid111113121111111 110113E111131.11111131 S M T W Th F S S M T W Th F S 1 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 � ;, 4 5 6 7 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 9 11 12 13 14 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 16 18 19 20 21 22 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 MEI 24 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 25 26 27 28 29 28 29 30 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 30 DECEMBER 2007.. ; e .;,z;..rvJANUARY 2008 ,FEBRUARY 2008 MARCH 2008 gaziffinsisuctio ���mum0n 1111110111111811111111111E1 QOOOmniO 1 m ; 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 12 13 14 15 16 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 M, 22 23 24 25 26 174 19 20 21 22 23 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 31 24 26 27 28 29 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 30 31 APRIL 2.008 :�,,.�.�MAY,2008,,.,.,, », . JUNE 2008 JULY 2008 S M T W Th F S 1011111101110111111111E11 EIMILIUMEZIE111111121 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 33 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 11 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 18 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 25 � 27 28 29 30 .31 29 30 31 27 28 29 30 31 ,,.. Date Activity November 1, 2007 CIP request forms distributed to departments December 10 — 31, 2007 Review O&M Targets with Departments December 14, 2007 CIP department requests completed and submitted to Finance January 3 — 16, 2008 Prepare FY 2007/08 mid-year financial status update January 3 — 23, 2008 Prepare budget work papers and instructions January 23, 2008 Council Study Session on mid-year FY 2007/08 financial status and preview FY 2008/09 budget process January 24, 2008 Distribute budget request forms and related materials to Department Heads February 14, 2008 CIPTAC meetings to present department projects February 22, 2008 New Personnel and Employee reclassification requests due to Human Resources February 29, 2008 Department budget requests along with supporting documentation due to Finance February 29 & March 14, 2008 CIP project scores are tallied and ranked; draft CIP plan presented to CIPTAC with recommendation for Council adoption March 10, 2008 Employee staffing, compensation and benefits analyses due from Human Resources March 3 — 14, 2008 Finance Department reviews and analyzes departmental budget requests April 1, 2008 CIP presented to Planning & Zoning Commission March 17 — April 4, 2008 Town Manager's budget reviews with Department Heads April 7 — 11, 2007 Finance Department assembles Town Manager's Recommended Budget G:\BUDGET\FY 08-09\Planning Calendar.doc 1 Town of Oro Valley Financial Planning Calendar FY 2008 — 2009 Date Activity April 23, 2008 Deliver Town Manager's budget to Mayor and Council, and Finance and Bond Committee Saturday, May 3, 2008 Tentative - Council Budget Work Session w/Department Heads May 5— 30, 2008 Council's Budget Work Sessions (Including Finance and Bond Committee) June 2 — 6, 2008 Finance prepares budget packet materials for delivery to _ Town Manager's office (June 6 packet distribution date) June 18, 2008 Adoption of Tentative budget and CIP June 19 — July 3, 2008 Finance prepares budget packet materials for delivery to Town Manager's office (July 3 packet distribution date) July 16, 2008 Adoption of Final budget and CIP July 21, 2008 State imposed deadline for adoption of Tentative budget Council Budget Work Sessions Saturday, May 3 Tentative — Council Budget Work Session Monday, May 5 Overview/Revenues/Administration Monday, May 12 Police/Legal/Court Wednesday, May 14 Building Safety/Planning/Parks & Recreation Monday, May 19 Public Works Wednesday, May 28 Water Utility G•\BUDGETFY 08-09 Plannin9Calendar.doc 2 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY S Page 1 of 4 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: JANUARY 23, 2008 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR& COUNCIL FROM: STACEY LEMOS, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING $80 MILLION BOND AUTHORIZATION FOR NARANJA TOWN SITE (NTS) SUMMARY: At the December 19, 2007 Town Council meeting, staff presented a motion to call for the Naranja Town Site bond election on November 4, 2008 to authorize the issuance and sale of general obligation bonds in the amount of $49.1 million to construct the earthwork, infrastructure, playfields, courts, outdoor recreation elements, support and parking of the park. At that meeting, the Town Council voted to continue this item and directed staff to explore the inclusion of other elements, including a community center or other amenities, up to an amount of $80 million while not exceeding an average property tax rate of $0.35 per $100 of secondary assessed valuation. It was also the consensus of the Town Council to remove the request to reimburse the Town for the $499,800 in prior costs of park studies and master planning from the originally proposed bond authorization amount of$49.1 million. This reduces the bond authorization needed for the outdoor recreation elements phase to $48.6 million. PROPERTY TAX IMPLICATIONS OF $80 MILLION BONDS In order to keep the average property tax rate at $0.35/$100 of assessed valuation for an $80 million bond authorization, the payment schedule on the bonds would need to extend to 30 years from the originally recommended schedule of 25 years, and the $80 million bond authorization would need to be split into two (2) separate bond issuances. The first issue could be in early 2009, but the second bond issuance would have to be pushed to late 2011, given the statutory assumptions on future assessed property value growth in the Town. This average tax rate would result in an average monthly cost of approximately $7.40 for a homeowner of a $300,000 market value home. As a result of the proposed timing of the second bond issue, the construction costs outlined below have been escalated to 2011 dollars using an escalation factor of 7% per year, as recommended by the Town's cost consultants on this project. $80 MILLION NARANJA TOWN SITE (NTS) PARK PROPOSAL In addition to the outdoor recreation elements described above, there has been some discussion that the Town should look at providing other amenities in the park proposal to include a lap pool, a community center, a bandshell, and/or a small theater for a total proposed bond package of around $80 million. Our consultants on this project, Burns Wald-Hopkins, had prepared cost breakdowns for the aquatic facilities proposed in the concept design report for NTS, as well as estimates for a bandshell/performance stage. In these cost estimates, an 8-lane, 25-yard length lap pool is estimated to cost $710,000 (in 2011 dollars), and a bandshell/performance stage ranged in cost from $2.8 million to $3.6 million (in 2011 dollars), depending on whether back-of-house facilities were included with the stage. With these estimates, staff offers the following to determine how much of the $80 million might remain to design and build a community center/theater facility with furniture, fixtures and equipment(FFE): TOWN OF ORO VALLEY • Page 2 of 4 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: JANUARY 23, 2008 Proposed Bond Authorization $ 80.0 million Less: Infrastructure/Outdoor Recreation Elements ($ 48.6 million) Bandshell/Stage with Back-of-House ( 3.6 million) Lap Pool ( .7 million) Subtotal Deductions ($ 52.9 million) Remaining Amount for Community Ctr/Theater/Furniture & Equipment $ 27.1 million Asro osed in the concept design report, the original community center/theater was programmed to be 147,726 p p square feet (105,806 sq. ft. for community center and 41,920 sq. ft. for 500-seat theater). The estimated cost to construct and furnish this facility in 2011 dollars was approximately $73 million, resulting in a $500 cost per square foot to design, build and furnish. Applying this same cost per square foot, it is possible that the above remaining amount of$27.1 million could fund the construction of a 54,200 square foot facility. DIRECTION REQUESTED FROM TOWN COUNCIL In order to meet the goals of the Mayor and Town Council and the community, additional areas of clarification are needed as outlined below: 1. Clarification on whether the above-listed amenities of a lap pool and bandshell/performance stage with back-of-house facilities are desirable as presented. 2. If the Council desires the bandshell/performance stage, should a theater also still be included with the community center at this time? 3. If the theater is still a desired facility, how many seats should it be? 4. Does the Council still feel that the 147,726 square foot community center/theater should eventually be fully built? If so, the design of this smaller facility should allow for expansion in future years. 5. Should the priorities identified in the Master Plan for the Naranja Town Site guide the programming of the smaller community center? (Various segments from the Master Plan document are attached to this communication for your review as Exhibit A). David Wald-Hopkins and David Burns of Burns Wald-Hopkins will be in attendance at this study session to give some perspectives on downsizing the community center/theater building for Council consideration. Also attached as Exhibit B are the specific programming pages from the Naranja Programming and Concept Design report related to the community center and 500-seat theater for your reference. REVISED PROPOSAL RETURNED TO TOWN COUNCIL BY APRIL Given this revision in square footage from the originally proposed community center/theater, there will be the need to revise the concept design and programming for this size of a facility, which will require further assistance from the Town's cost and design consultants. Additionally, revised estimates may need to be created for the operations and maintenance (O&M) needs of this scope of facility. As such, staff proposes taking the TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Page 3 of 4 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: JANUARY 23,2008 information and direction from tonight's meeting and going back to our consultants for this revision process with the goal of bringing a more defined design and facility programming back to the Town Council in April. PUBLIC EDUCATION EFFORT BY GORDLEY DESIGN Given the possible changes in scope of the project, we have put the education and outreach effort on hold. It is important that we be able to not only present the full park concept, but also be able to answer citizen questions with respect to what components will be included in the bond election, what will the costs be, etc. Given that we do not have this information finalized, it would not be prudent to launch the education effort. If Council goes forward with redesigning the elements noted above, and an education program does not begin until April or later, this will substantially reduce both the timeline and the audience for an education program. Given the shift on the calendar, many residents will leave for the summer break, families will be traveling and vacationing, and business and community groups where speaking opportunities might have existed will put their agendas on hold. Finally, the condensed timeline will have an impact on citizens who may wish to form action committees either for or against the bond initiative, reducing their ability to campaign effectively. ADDITIONAL FOLLOW-UP INFORMATION FROM DECEMBER 19TH MEETING A number of otherq uestions were asked of staff at the December 19th meeting on this issue. Those questions/requests for clarification are listed below with responses following: 1. Justification requested for the number of fields/courts in the plan and information requested about public process and input that went into creating the Naranja Master Plan Response: Attached to this communication as Exhibit C are the relevant pages from the 2002 Naranja Master Plan document outlining the public participation process and groups involved. Also included in this section is information pertaining to the stakeholder groups' priorities of desired facilities. 2. Request for cost of liability insurance for the park Response: The estimated cost for liability and property insurance coverage for the entire, fully built park as proposed in the Naranja Concept and Design Report is approximately $100,000 per year. For a scaled-back facility, the insurance premium will be a fraction of this cost depending upon the facilities and amenities included. 3. Question was posed as to whether the City of Gilbert, AZ has a primary property tax Response: The City of Gilbert does not have a primary property tax. It only has a secondary property tax, which is $1.15 per $100 of assessed valuation used for debt repayment only. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Page 4 of 4 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: JANUARY 23,2008 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit A — Pages 31 -35 of Master Plan for Naranja Town Site — Community Design Workshop Priority of Uses 2. Exhibit B — Pages 3.1 — 3.4 of Naranja Town Site Programming & Concept Design — Community Center and 500-Seat Theater Space Program 3. Exhibit C — Pages 1, 2, 11-15, 19-23 of Master Plan for Naranja Town Site — Community Participation Program /71 Stacey Lemosl 'nance Director David L. Andrews, Town Manager EXHIBIT A COMMUNITY DESIGN WORKSHOP PRIORITY OF USES (NTS MASTER PLAN) EXHIBIT 6 COMMUNITY DESIGN WORKSHOP PRIORITY OF USES 1 } H high 12-14 86%-100% • Naranja Town Site Master-Plan-7 Matrix of Amenities • January 7, 2002 Community.Design-WorkshopM medium 7-11 50%-78% L low 6-0 43%-0% CULTURAL RECREATION, ,` PASSIVE OUTDOOR OTHER PI aw -- > : z x x U) a - ¢ = a z ] w z rn zw . z -0. ° ¢ o �� `ax - w o z a c cD 3 0 z E. c4W � 0 < ¢ rx UC4 W p- 0. Q QQ OR WCL IX z Q W z � d W O 0 a W n-13 W E- W a W E•. gWWtoA4c�W W CL W U W.-a 0 W .-a f.. tL13 Q f~ Q z n f~ . U W x? �:] p F'" d Q Q U z ;•a u pl a C!? .-, Uzaz W z x ¢ x Q 0O -v1 -1Q x E..z O Q C� O C� �0 e w• oo w wwO�w c� w F-- x .4 000¢ ¢ _¢ ¢w OY x0 .-a ¢ 0 0 0G a ¢w f-+ < a.< 0 0 tr.. cx_0 <0 E-- 0 c'' CO CIS u) L=. v)CA 3 f-- •-1 z O < 0 N a. 0 0 C) a F-• a. a.C� I 3Ill limn Milli IIIIIIIIII _111 . . 4IIMI IIII . 11111I III = Ili trilii III Mil III . ■ 9 04III 1111 11111111 III : . • • 1111 - is 12 - . -i , • . EMI . 1 13 II _R_ . 1 14 INF 111111 EMI . ______ . . _ ,._ . .,._: .- • : . ._ :. . . .. . .... . O . . H• 12 12 74 8.. 12 � 10 .2 • 14 14 _11 :9 414. 6 14 3 5 5 1 «112 6 8• _7 2 0 � 4 priority H HMIL .M !HM . LIH HMMLHH _ LMMLL H LHLLLL Task Force M, L ' H H H H L H MMM ., same as TF V V VI./ e/-I/ 1/ - VI V , .. t/ 1/. 1/ 1/ . /1 ' Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 31 Si EXHIBIT 7 TASK FORCE COMMITTEE PRIORITY OF USES Master Plan Program Priority of Uses February 4,2002 Task Force Meeting } Recreational Sport Fields Use Votes % Priority Top 17 Uses *see below Softball 920 Ci'j ';Little League Erb 02k01 Jr/Sr Baseball 151, .583) L f Football (7) 25% low CD • Pop Warner €10 100°o high . Soccer Full Size 8 q5"-)% !U CD Soccer Youth Size tab 92% high CD Lacrosse (i ) 8% (loW Field Hockey 41:11Q":5*-) - tow CD Multi-Use Field OBIo high Playground 1 0high C;:e Recreational Sport Courts - Use Votes % Priority Top 17 Uses Tennis el 1010°o high Basketball el //', high sC ?$ Volleyball (73) 83% high C) Tetherball CD 100% ( 7jh2) Handball I '�� /OW Racquetball *11 Horseshoe Pits 10 83% high C) Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 32 , Recreational Other Use Votes % Priority Top 17 Uses Aquatic Center ....)8 QDGX) eCJ�1 Skate Park 1,,Z 100°o high C: 5 BMX Park Wil 92% high CD Skate Surface al 100°, _ high CiK Community Center (Gym,Multi-Purpose Room, (is) hih Fitness Center,Classrooms) 1Z 10f0 (hih)Nature Center - ' - Senior Center 10 83% high Aquarium 0 0% (7 Golf Course 0 Cef_.%) �pyy CD Frisbee Golf Course 0) 8% low CD Childrens Zoo 0 0% low CD - Pond/Lake €0 -1)1% low -CD Dog Park/ al ioc°o Cllegi-D Dog Obedience Ice Arena 0 CR) tOW .D C---) Trails Use Votes % Priority Top 17 Uses Paved Multi-Use Trail C1.-2) 100°0 hih (-, Nature Trail al Cl075D0 high Mountain Bike Trail 0 0% low . C") 8'Wide,10-15 Miles Racing Bike Path 0 0% fOW CD Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranjo Town Site 33 . } Cultural Facilities Use Votes % Priority Top 17 uses Performing Art Center Outdoor amphitheatre 10 $.3°yo high CD Performance Hall 6 Qp% if ilt.sii C11) (300 Seat Theatre,Art Gallery,Museum) Art Gallery/Exhibit Space ONO C4374D l__.91)Y CD (stand alone) Museum (p) 0% low CID (stand alone) Outdoor Festival Area eh 92% . hih Meeting Rooms 4110 100% high (wit Community Center) Classrooms WO 100°o high CS6/ (wit Community Center) Community College 0 CO2) low CD Gardens Community 4,0 17) low CD Garden y Diversity (ii) 0°o low CD Gardens Sculpture co) 0% low CD Park Administrative Facilities Use (all uses taken as one vote) Votes % Priority Top 17 Uses OV Operations Center 8 q-73) i iugi CD OV Public Works/Water C-0 67% ettl Utility Administration CD OV Police Department r� TrainingCenter (7) 67% eiu CD Miscellaneous UseVotes % Priority Top 17 Uses Commercial Support 4 33% low CD (Snack Bar,Coffee Shop) * Priority Ranking Includes high(10-12 votes or 83%- 100%) medium(6-9 votes or 50%-75%) low(5 or less votes or 42% or less) Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Nara* TownSite 34 EXHIBIT 8 MASTER PLAN PROGRAM LIST OF HIGH PRIORITY USES List of high priority uses as determined by Task Force Committee (February 4, 2002) and at Community Design Workshop (January 7, 2002). Desired number of facilities shown pursuant to stakeholder interviews, August-November, 2001. Recreational Sport Fields Softball (four field complex, Amateur Softball Assn, Bobbysox) Little League (two fields, CDO Little League) Football (one field, Pop Warner) Soccer (two youth size and four full size, CDO Soccer Club, AYSO) Multi-Use Field (one field, OVPR) Playground (undefined number, OVPR, Monterra HOA) Recreational Sport Courts Tennis (16 courts, Don Dickinson, Andy Caldwell, OVPR) Basketball (6 courts, OVP R) Volleyball (undefined number) Tetherball (undefined number, Copper Creek School) Horseshoe Pits (undefined number, OVPR) Recreational Other Community Center (70,000 sf building, OVPR) Skate Park (35,000 sf area, Andy Kern, Copper Creek School, OVPR) Skate Surface (basketball court size, Dianna Coonce) BMX Park (35,000 sf outdoor area, Andy Kern) Nature Center (undetermined size, Copper Creek School) Senior Center (within Community Center, Margaret Wilson) Friends of Oro Valley Park (one acre fenced, Do g Park) Dog Obedience (4000 sf area, Great Pet Tenders) Trails Multi-Use Trail (paved 12'-20' wide, OVPR, OV Trails Task Force, HOAs) Nature Trail (OVPR, HOAs) Cultural Facilities Amphitheater (2000 seat outdoors, GOVAC) Performance Center (70,000 sf building, GOVAC) Festival Area (three acres, GOVAC, OVPR) Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranjo Town Site 35 EXHIBIT B COMMUNITY CENTER AND THEATER SPACE PROGRAM (NTS SITE PROGRAM AND CONCEPT DESIGN) :7-7--- .rrc a--e•3_ �,t.• c ;_ 1-77'1---- ,.. t_:7- J D @ Y ]� \ TOWN-1 T -s , _ c--4.-- ' ,;-- -,:', - --_,, N,--,# , 4.,,f, . '^�"' PX .r`sa i,.'. "`' s �..K 7, {,,,,'� ,may' e _ PPOGfING CONCET{as" £ 3i s - , -,4,w,, . -,---,, ,, or ,..,../ c., iii, r,„„--ar .; ,-- * - A '' ., - . r ---,--'.'..• ,S., -..**,4tgr'- ' ,., ". ' A,_. 4 _ , , ,,_, .. , • zio,„____,:4.. ., — :.; . : .,1,- _ _ i tt ' -- ,i--- - •a-. --, i-P —- -___-,- , — - — 4.,„., --- '7, - . .... ---,.. ,s ,-. ; .,; ,...., i-- - , .' c .., `�°_ .'^- "jam'.. _-- _ _ ' - - ,lb----,: -- ,j..,,J * :611‘,*‘ -;-'7- t.,-,, `',-- to 441„ -.:- , -, ,, ,,..,: 1;.'„', %*:': • l-, w.::, ,:.:, la,.,•-•-; " • IL:ii::it-' *ttiV - '',''', : '4-.'"'-*-1-41::4.:'-:1-.:::=1'-'' ramming . g rog „, : , -. _ . . ----- : '„ _ .. y ^.k .a _ Therocess bywhich we gather information about site and facility needs is referred to as "programming". During this p process the Design Team met with representatives of Oro Valley Parks and Recreation, visited other similar facilities and benefited from the experience of many consultants including Webb Management, McGann &Associates, Barker Rinker Seacat, Theatre Consultants Collaborative and AquaDesign. The lists of site and facility needs are the basis for planning on the site, leading to the Alternative Site Utilization Drawings included in the next section. BUILDINGS: Theater: The Preliminary Space ace Program for the major buildings is • 500-seat auditorium includedorganized in this section, bythejor • Stage, orchestra pit and fly-loft major components. The tables list the individual spaces, the • Dressing rooms & green room p finallys • Scene and costume shops lumber of spaces, net square feet and gross quare dimension for each • Storage feet. Net square feet refers to theroom • Administration space. Gross area includes circulation area—corridors and feet gross square hallways — and building services — restrooms, mechanical and electrical rooms and wall thickness. Music Pavilion: • Phased development These are the major features of each facility: • Full stage and support facilities • Phase I: 1,100 seats under cover Community Center: • Phase II: Balconies and openable walls • Four-court gymnasium • Lawn seating for 2,000 • Elevated walk/jog track 35,160 gross square feet • Weight/fitness areas • Aerobics/dance studios Support Building: • Climbing wall • Concessions • Therapy pool • Public restrooms • Box office • Babysitting and pre-K program • Wet arts & crafts rooms • Ushers' changing room 8,115 gross square feet • Music classrooms • Administration GRAND TOTAL 191,001 GSF 105,806 gross square feet blw ` . $' programming -3.1 ORO VALLEY NARANJA TOWN SITE , PRELIMINARY SPACE PROGRAM8/28/2006 (Revised 1/16/0 ) Burns Wald-Hopkins Architects I _ Job No.0603.000 I - Level Split Floor1 SPACE/FUNCTION NUMBER OF NET SQ.FT. TOTAL NET SQ1 FLOOR LEVEL LOCATION SPACES PER SPACE FT. NOTES COMMUNITY CENTER LEVEL 1 LEVEL2 . ' share s�specs �rs� - , AGILITY ADMINISTRATION 5 200 sem- _, 5200 d a�s�� �� �. Parks&Rec Admin Offices 1 1,500 1,500 Recreation Facility Offices 1 1,200 1,200 GOVAC Offices 1 2,500 2,500 , , ,r _.- _ To BUIL IN:"�.iUPi OR SPACE$ 1 r, :: � 10,820_ , 8,0 . ' zi x t Pre-Control Lobby 1 t 1,200 1,200 1,200 Lounge 1 850 850 850 Control Desk 1 7 300 300 300 Men's Locker 1 1,200 1,200 1,200 Women's Locker 1 1,200 1,200 1,200 Family Lockers(8) 1 2,000 2,000 2,000 First Aid 1 _ 80 80 80 Men's Toilets 1 400 400 200 200 Women's Toilets 1 400 400 _ 200 200 Custodial Closets 1 150 150 150 Building Mechanical Room 1 400 400 V 400 Sprinkler Valve Room 1 _ 90 90 90 Main Electrical Distribution Room 1 250 250 250 Maintenance/Receiving/Loading - 1 900 900 900 Custodial Workroom/Supply 1 300 300 300 Maintenance Office 1 100 100 100 General Building Storage 1 1,000 1,000 1,000 *NM*BAR - _ - 1 ro ..1,000 Irg . - - - . .�- '3? _3 J^�_^�-J�" ,' - -m-w AccornodiAi a - kids _ ; n_ Babysitting 1 1,200 1,200 Provide outdoor play area Tot toilet 1 40 40 Storage 1 100 100 PR 3,:..,_�_ � �.,. <3. .. <,n._ mss- � <. <,� � _.��- -�-. r' 7`*'� t - ,: -.. :•.:^'�.. �.eNlm�i�.? _.:�6 :r. �>. .. v.. ��'r.✓ ..-.ear.•4�.F � - � ?�5 ...._ .r. .- ,.'-i.. -. --+.-h- -_. ... ._-... �v h_._'..,. - y::' �:�. .l''. a.F-h lr �::. Ali•,} k , r�- . .� ,:Y.. .f;_�,-T�.�-:., .-_.$- Y:r- 1>..�rS.:i .'.�.,-.�F.:..e - �:.^ �`` i�� - x.Y'._ VSA r_. Y.t-.'f �Y<��.. _. .��: ., PRE-K RROG �. z �, y _ - �� �. Activity Area 1 1,200 1,200 Adjacent to babysitting Tot toilet 1 40 40 Storage 1 100 100 Game Room 1 600 600 May be in room or alcove off public lobby Storage 1 80 80 Coordinator's Office 1 120 120 .�- � a �"-.-.3 a - - P_' ,�-'.,;�,. � "i�� ���f' -..v�.'irr:-v.�: CHILDREN'S INDOOR PLAYGROU ,Com-- ," 4 SOO � 600 :i.; zoo = Indoor Playground 1 500 500 With play structure-aout$175,000 Storage 1 100 100 MEDIUM CLASSROOt _ 3,850 , 50 : .311M1::;.1. a_ : Classrooms 4 900 3,600 20-30 persons each Storage 1 250 250 t a W.:4- ARTS&CRAFTS ROOMS -°•_ - .- "'` Wet classroom 1 1,500 1,500 Art classroom 3 900 2,700 Storage r 1 200 200 Wet pottery storage 1 200 200 Kiln 1 200 200 MUSIC CLASSRt0M _ 3;- '::1,,,,44:-.!.--:'mil •4•_1. .:- , Classrooms 2 1,500 3,000 Acoustic treatments;AV infrastructure Storage 1 _ 250 250 3.2-.programming - : .- :.. q f-,1....,-,..,,i-,,:;?'::-:..- biw r SPACE/FUNCTION NUMBER O' NET SQ.FT TOTAL NET S FLOOR LEVEL LOCATION SPACES PER SPACE FT. NOTES OMMUNITY ROOWEVENTS . 4 -:,;2,,,,,7-a4,-::;,:-- -,•:.� +g` -, - 4 4;0"00. 4,000 . . _ Community Room 1 3,500 3,500 Seats 220 for bang/conf;280 for meeting Storage 1 500 500 CATERING KITCHEN ,_ .- , -600 _ 600_ 600 _ `- Allow aboul$7a,odd' GYMNASikf _ hter��Rr_. •.:. ' _ ����°�v . � 1 Mf _ ,, 21,200 3. „_ .s.- � y_. 1 Gymnasium 1 20,000 20,000 Four 42x74 courts;seating for 200 Storage 1 1,200 1,200 '=� 6,500 _EVATED WA = _ ,._ . _ _ L�t,J�G TRACK �� , :r��.��. �. F - s, Walk/jog track 1 5,900 5,900 9 laps per mile;3 lanes Stretching Area 1 600 600 WEIGHT/FITNESS 5,550 , 50 Allow$ . ,w- : _.� .� . _,Z-t _ _ 5 5 300, •s t ,� nt Cardiovascular Training Equipment 1 2,400 2,400 Circuit Resistnce Training 1 1,400 1,400 Free Weights 1 800 800 Fitness Supervisor Station 1 50 50 Assessment Room 1 200 200 Stretching Area 1 500 500 Storage 1 200 200 AEROBICS/DANCE STUDIOS 4_.3 74,900 4,9011_,-' FXAAccom --�. s Large Aerobics/Dance/Spinning Studio 1 2,500 2,500 Medium Aerobics/Dance/Spinning Studi. 1 1,800 1,800 Storage 1 600 600 Storage for spinning bikes BOULDERING WALL , t. : 600 - 600 --�. . V t A. Bouldenng feature 550 550 10'high monolith for free climbing;about$50,000 Storage 50 50 SMALL CLIMBING WALT;,. ., _ 400 400 -. Climbing Wall 1 350 350 2-story high space for 6 climbers;about$75,000 Storage 1 50 50 ..._ .-..- �.: ...- ,.� .---' _. ,''o�.�.,.-,. :._�,. _,>.,e" .:r,= - - mit- - 4'.� .<.� cf ,.t� �:i'a�.z*-4�. -- �t ,,gg��(( ...�..._.. :. _ :.� ; . :..•.:s--. `,'t,• �f :h. ,d,..�. .. - B'. ,s'Fvi."'� -. �Ps` �-.S Bey... di . .. t�:..:.. .� � ...ra-.�.,�'.. -.�.� e� '�.< 's �` -,?`��fk.�.. ;ms's•. � e - ..o.:i. ,,`;t "..t,.-.a�: .' _ ''6a'yc - -.,i a_k . i*,- w- r_:a, . .: RACQUETBALL COURTS: :�.: ': - r v. '1,600, 8 ..1 600 Courts 2 800 1,600 AQUATICS - .A er-; .. � 3,4p0 � i H �. :ra r. _ s�- ., Guard Room Aquatics Superv.Off. 1 1,000 1,000 Therapy Pool 1 2,000 2,000 Equipment/Storage Room 1 400 400 :cd" cls � rrt...� ,�P�-�•h �, Vis" st a�� --- , < CLASSROOM/PARTY ROOM r. _ - 900` �-� � x, �� 90� Classroom 1 800 800 Dvisible into two 360sf rooms Party Room Storage 1 100 100 LIBRARY'w.,. 1 . , . 0 ,,.. s `... . k. ._ . 1A - k*.- 74�tt, .,f. Friends of the Library Work/Stor 1 1,000 Display/Sales Area 500 n�� N ti�.., ... SEC 1�1TY flFFi �•:t .��.-� �-�-. ,J:, 4#� -,.�:-Q��- -. ��_ - .�_ , .�.. . ..� - 223.: ---- .. _ .� Open Office/Conference 1 225 OVPD presence TOTAL NET AREA 83,575 56,850 27,525 CIRCULATION&SERVICES 22,231 15,122 7,322 At.266 TOTAL GROSS AREA 105,806 71,972 34,847 biw ,i ti tit rok k iz itic`t } •,:" i ;v'' ,_ . programming -3.3 SPACE/FUNCTION NUMBER OF NET SQ.FT. TOTAL NETS FLOOR LEVEL LOCATION SPACES PER SPACE FT. NOTES 500-SEAT THEATRE _1 PUBLIC SPACEft1 —. P;.--,-:,_.2,71-c.,T-. ; ii W:ms# _it ih 6164 u- ..3 r - , - - - Public Lobby _ 1 2500 2,500 5 sf/seat; 2-story space;potentally shared with CC Public Circulation 1 2500 2,500 ,5sf/seat Auditorium sound&light locks , 1 in gross Concessions 1 120 120 Concessions storage 1 60 60 Public Restrooms(male) _ 1 360 360 8 units @ 45sf Public Restrooms(female) _ 1 600 600 12 unis C,50sf Front-of-House Storage - 1 150 _ 150 includes coat room Box Office-sales 1 150 150 Box Office-office&storage _ , 1 200 200 L PERFORMANCE SPA_.:.'� r � ,- �-{. �; :� :� >. Y ��r_ `�;.� . 10,770_s._ Fes,_ _ -- . � - 10 f/ at •- - -_ --, � .�. Auditorium 1 5000 5,000 - Stage and Wings 1 3600 _ 3,600 40'deep and 90'wide Stage Apron _ 1 150 150 45'proscenium opening Orchesttra Shell Storage1 160 160 Orchestra Pit 1 400 _ 400 , 20 musicians Trap Room _ 1 800 800 12'minimum vertical clearance Stage Sound and Light Locks 1 120 120 in gross Lighting Control Booth 1 120 120 Sound Control Booth120 0 Followspot Booth1 120 120 In-house Sound Control 1 80 80 , Dimmer Room 1 140 140 , Sound Rack Room 1 80 80 FOH catwalks 2 in gross Grid1 in gross _ Stage Galeries/Catwalks _ 1 in gross STAGE SUPPORT �w- 4fY� �� � - - - kP r Zga' .it a;1i Piano Storage 1 120 120 Backstage restroom(male) _ 1 150 150 3 units @ 50sf Backstage Restroom(female) 1 150 150 3 units @ 50sf PERFORMER SUPPORT a 'b ��: �"�ac ��•.. , tMl" Art 'aigm * Performers'Lounge,/Green Room L 1 300 300 Dressing Room 4 560 2,240 w/sink,toiet,shower,lockers,make-up Vending _ 1 30 30 •CENE&COSTUME SHOPS` 4190 ,,,!;-,'F.,. g." .. 7:.�:; 1 .F _, _ Scene Shop 1 1500 1,500 20'clear height Scene Shop Office _ 1 120 120 Mateials Storage1 200 200 Tool Storage 1 60 60 - Paint Storage 1 60 „ , 60 Scenery Storage , 1 800 800 20'clear height Prop Storage 1 250 250 Fumiture Storage _ 1 400 _ 400 Costume Shop 1 400 400 Costume Storage 1 400 400 L�DMNSTRATi4.1 � ,,4. d�:.:if � w , __ _ ... 'C 1,250 1 . Reception 1 200 200 Office-Staff , 2 , 150 300 Workroom 1 250 250 Conference Room 1 _ 300 300 Storage _ 1 200 200 Catering support 1 240 240 Housekeeping Closets 3 _ 40 , 120 Trash/Recycling Storage&Disposal 1 _ Dumpster Pad Loading Dock 1 _ in gross TOTAL NET AREA26,200 CIRCULATION&SERVICES15,720 At.6 TOTAL GROSS AREA 41,920 3.4-;programming 1 - s, - ':.;.,„4::4*.,',',,, _ , ti EXHIBIT C COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROGRAM (NTS MASTER PLAN) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Town of Oro Valley, in concert with Executive Committee members, Task Force Committee members, and concerned citizens developed the Naranja Town Site Master Plan. The Master Plan process was completed in fourteen months, through citizen participation in a variety of public workshops and meetings. Town of Oro Valley Paul Loomis Mayor Richard Johnson Vice-Mayor Paula Abbott Council Member Bart Rochman Council Member Werner Wolff Council Member Chuck Sweet Town Manager Executive Committee Don Chatfield Chair Lyra Done Vice-Chair Kit Donley Member Bonnie Haymore Member John Wickham Member Brent Sinclair Project Manager Task Force Committee Richard Eggerding Chair Donna Kelley Vice-Chair Ainsley Reeder Parks and Recreation Administrator Bill Jansen Town Engineer Daniel Sharp Town Chief of Police Mark Brosseau Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Member Doug White Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Chair (replacement) Pam Cleveland Monte Del Oro Resident Dennis Lindblad Monterra Resident Mike Borens Monterra Resident (replacement) Nancy Mager Development Review Board Member Bill Moody Planning and Zoning Commission Member Crissie Rowley Copper Creek Resident Bob Schlichting Budget and Bond Committee Member Colleen Wampler Monterra Hills Representative Stan Weintraub Citizen-at-Large Brent Sinclair Community Development Director Consultants Gordon Stone Stantec Consulting Inc. Richard Fe Tom The Architecture Company Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The Master Plan summarizes a fourteen month planning process aimed at providing a long-range plan for the development and use of the Naranja Town Site. The property is located on the north side of Naranja Drive, one-half mile east of La Canada Drive and consists of approximately 212 acres. The planning process included an extensive community participation program, including stakeholder group presentations, a web-based survey, public workshops, and monthly meetings of the Executive Committee and Task Force Committee. A series of six meetings to solicit input from 38 stakeholder groups, three community workshops and seventeen public meetings were held to determine the uses and design for the project. Proposed Facilities The Naranja Town Site Master Plan design incorporates a variety of recreational and cultural facilities to serve the needs of the Oro Valley community. The cost to construct the following facilities is estimated at $52.3 M, pursuant to the Opinion of Probable Construction Cost, Exhibit 11. { • Community Center building (80,000 s.f.) • Performing Art Center building (80,000 s.f.) • Outdoor Amphitheater (2500 fixed seating/2500 lawn seating) • Eight Softball/Baseball Fields • Four Soccer/Multi-Use Fields • Thirteen Tennis Courts • Six Basketball Courts • Four Sand Volleyball Courts • Four Tetherball Courts • Five Playgrounds with integrated play structures • 25 meter Lap Pool • Leisure Pool • Dog Park I Dog Obedience Area • Skate Park • BMX Park • Natural Surface Trails I Paved Multi-Use Trails Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 2 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROGRAM Community Participation Program The Community Participation Program for the Naranja Town Site Master Plan was initiated on July 23, 2001 at the Task Force Committee project kick-off meeting. Staff and the consultant initially agreed upon a schedule of two meetings per month during August, September and October at which time the Task Force Committee would hear presentations from various interest groups and individuals regarding their vision for the site. The following stakeholder groups and individuals made presentations: August 13, 2001: Oro Valley Parks & Recreation Division, Ainsley Reeder Oro Valley Trails Task Force, Joe Winfield Tucson Water Polo Club, Bruce McHale Pusch Ridge Swim Team, Cindy Gastreich August 27, 2001: Jazzercise, Shawna Dorame Community Education, Hilary Jones-Wujcik Tal Chi, Edna Silva Arizona Youth Handball Association, John Henning Sept. 10, 2001: Greater Oro Valley Arts Council (GOVAC), Robert Weede, Carmen Feriend and Rob Wright Oro Valley Economic Development, Jeff Weir Oro Valley Public Works, Martin Roush Oro Valley Police Department, Chief Daniel Sharp Margie Valenzuela, (Community Garden and Aquarium) Sept. 24, 2001: Jim Humphreys, (Cycling) Robert Gay, (Environmental Design) CDO Soccer Club, Tim Dejonghe American Youth Soccer Organization, Henry Montano Pop Warner Football, Steve Marshall 1 Tucson Lacrosse, Jason Owens Friends of Oro Valley Dog Park, Myrna Shimberg Great Pet Tenders, Bobbi Cawein Tucson Women's Soccer League, Deborah Botker Senior Softball, John Dineen and Ron Sanders Oro Valley Bobbysoxers Youth Softball, Bill Popp October 22, 2001: Copper Creek School, Brandon Wileman, Adi Catts, Julianne DeFilippis, Katie Snyder, Kimberly Neihart and Donna Kelley Don Dickinson, (Tennis and Basketball) Andy Caldwell, (Tennis) CDO Little League, Dan Leiva Coronado Little League, Dick Allison Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 11 Monterra Knolls HOA, Dennis Lindblad Monterra Hills HOA, Colleen Wampler Copper Creek HOA, Crissie Rowley November 5, 2001: Chuck Sweet, Oro Valley Town Manager, (Town Facilities) Andy Kern, (Skateboarding/BMXIlnline Skating) Slater Harper, (Skateboarding) Diana Coonce, (Skate School) Monte Del Oro HOA, Pam Cleveland Oro Valley Parks & Recreation Advisory Board, Doug White Additional components of the community participation program included a questionnairedeveloped that was dlo ed as another aid in soliciting input from the community. The questionnaire was posted on the Town's website and distributed to neighborhood associations and other mailings. An article was written for the North Pima County Chamber of Commerce newsletter in which the public was asked to share their opinions. In addition, publicity materials for the Oro Valley General Plan Update included information about the Naranja Town Site Master Plan, and gave information about how citizens could get involved. In October, it was determined that the meetings where the Task Force takes input from the public needed to be extended into the first week of November and as summarized above six stakeholder presentations were made on November 5, 2001. On November 19, 2001, the Task Force Committee was provided with the cumulative input from the 38 stakeholder groups as documented in Exhibit 4. Ideas fortypes of facilities were grouped into general categories, such as recreational sport fields and courts, other recreational uses, cultural facilities and administrative facilities. Also at this meeting, the consultant presented the results of their site opportunities and constraints analysis, which described and evaluated site conditions and features, which may either facilitate or hinder development of the Naranja Town Site. Community Design Workshop The first community design workshop was held on January 7, 2002. There was an excellent response from the community. So much so that fourteen teams were created, varying from six to ten members, to study the Naranja Town Site and develop design concepts; When people arrived at the workshop, they were initially asked about their primary area of interest in this project. People were generally directed to a specific table so that a variety of interests would be represented in each group. However, this procedure was not strictly enforced. Some teams resulted that had an interest in a single issue, such as the environment or the arts. Once the teams were formed, each group was provided with an aerial topographic base map of the site, opportunities and constraints exhibit and pre- Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 12 printed "cut outs" representing different facilities at the same scale as the base I map. They were also given tables showing types of facilities, typical building I size, parking requirements, and total site area. There was a great degree of interaction among each of the teams. After about one and one-half hours, the teams were asked to post their design concepts and select a representative to 1 explain it. 1 The following chart shows the major elements and whether they appeared in a design concept. - - a CUL'IURAL RECREATION PASSIVE OUTDOOR OTHER . C4 rx < E ,Q 2 . I W p t� a z a x rn z �$ '� z 1 g z . d o ¢ o o 0 —� ;QP. , z n x o 0 zw U U ¢ w 0 a 0 n a b a 0 ¢ <. ()a ,, a a •a .�<q << 5 (A. a a 2 w z r.) �w ..I x 00. N a . Q z W p Q UE� C� J Q Q 0 Q g._ n xa tx .a tn U. U z ¢ U o d p z -o 0"' d U Wrtc� oo W 69WaW N [r�i 000< 5 zI o' Uo < 0 o 0Cc WU <a - E¢ UU k aU <O - E- 0 to 0. to f, to0. < N 0. 0.E-. 4. 2 ': - -' ' IIIR - - ---. 1. . - -- • ,t, 2,.. .11.1. .. El 1 3 ' :,-. ‘..'',.. 2.s.-: -- - ..' ,VII ' ' - - - ': al . , . '.,•:.:',1:;.4-,,,, 11111 s, • , " 4 ., .: Mal , '..- '; III , , • _ - 5 I ' -%':- ' . al . ' _- -- ' " ,;. ,_ --, II . ,,. ill No _ 8 _s 1111 � r 1 - , . ..., . - - - " All s III :INN 1111 ' 11 Ns., ,,,______,.. M a_fit■ ;4'41-jr.''''.*"i`H 12 /1 al' ` .. ...r. ,�■ . �� ��.�J .■1 14 ■■ =` as ■ a :s H 0 12 12 7 4 8 12 10 2 14 14 11 9 1 14 12 6 8 7 2 0 14 6 14 3 5 5 4 As can be seen, tennis courts, other courts, soccer/football fields, playgrounds, and a dog park appeared in every concept. Almost as frequently, amphitheater, performing arts center, recreation center and softball/baseball fields were included. A trail around the perimeter of the site appeared in almost every concept. In addition to the elements identified above, another common feature that was 1 evident in almcist all design concepts was the clustering of uses into activity zones. Three zones became apparent: cultural, recreation and office. The pictures of each design concept can be found in Exhibit 5, along with the activity zones and major elements highlighted. Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 13 MASTER PLAN PROGRAM The Master Plan Program, which formulates the goals and parameters for the design of the Naranja Town Site, is derived in large part by the stakeholder group's input, the results of the Community Design Workshop and direction from the Task Force Committee. The prioritization of Town Site facilities is an important step in the Master Plan Program phase in order to avoid potential conflicts or constraints during future detailed site design phase. The designer/consultant needs to know which elements and uses have the highest priority, so that they may be addressed first. In addition, it also aids in identifying the sequence for incorporating these features into the park construction program and identifying future funding sources. Community Design Workshop Priority of Uses The consultants used the results of the January 7, 2002 workshop to guide them during the design of alternative concept plans. In order to determine the priority of uses as expressed at the Community Design Workshop, the matrix of uses shown above was refined to rank the priority of uses from highest to lowest. As shown on Exhibit 6, the high priority uses for the site included amphitheatef,, performing arts center, recreation center, tennis courts, other sport courts, soccer/football fields, softball/baseball fields, playgrounds, and dog park. Medium priority uses included museums, festival area, aquatic center, skate park, bmx track, lake, and nature center. Task Force Committee Priority of Uses On February 4, 2002, the Task Force Committee was asked to provide further direction on the prioritization of facilities. A polling of Task Force Committee members was used to determine the highest to lowest priority uses. Priorities of the Task Force mirrored the design concepts created at the community workshop. Little League fields, Pop Warner football fields, multi-use fields, playgrounds, tennis courts, basketball courts, tetherball, skate park, skate surface, community center (gym, multi-purpose room, fitness center, classrooms), nature center, dog park/dog obedience, paved multi-use trail, nature trail, meeting rooms (within community center), and classrooms (within community center) all received unanimous votes from the Task Force. As a result, these facilities were given a "high" priority rating. Though not unanimous other high priority uses included softball fields, youth soccer fields, volleyball courts, horseshoe pits, bmx park, senior center, outdoor amphitheater and outdoor festival area. Medium priority ratings were given to baseball fields, full- size soccer fields, aquatic center, performance hall and Town administrative facilities. Other uses and their ratings can be found in Exhibit 7. Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 14 Exhibit 8 includes a list of high priority uses as determined by the Community Design Workshop and the Task Force Committee, as well as the desired number of facilities requested during stakeholder presentations and interviews. On February 4, 2002 Town staff gave a presentation on Parks, Open Space and Trails planning standards that were adopted as part of the Focus 2020: Oro Valley General Plan. These standards are based on the number of residents in Oro Valley, and can be used to determine future needs. Based on these standards, the facilities with the greatest need in the community are tennis courts, picnic ramadas, sports fields (including baseball, Little League, soccer, football, and softball), and basketball courts. These needs are consistent with the facilities that received the highest priority ranking by the Task Force Committee. MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT Concept Plan Alternatives The next step in the process is the creation of the Town Site Master Plan, which is based on the Master Plan Program derived from community input and the Task Force Committee direction, as well as, from the findings of the Site Opportunities and Constraints Analysis. The consultant designed two alternative concept plans denoting various development options. Each alternative concept plan depicted recreational and cultural facilities, buildingfootprints, parking P � layouts and circulation, pedestrian walkways, bicycle paths, trail linkages, and project focal points, i.e., plazas. A Task Force review meeting was held on April 15, 2002 and a public workshop was held on April 29, 2002 to evaluate each alternative concept plan. Master Plan Subsequent to the public workshop held on April 29, 2002, the best elements of the Concept Plan Alternatives were then combined into a refined Master Plan. The draft Master Plan was then reviewed by the community at anotherp ublic workshop held on August 19, 2002. The Master Plan refinement by the Task Force Committee and Executive Committee occurred during September 2002. The final Master Plan is now ready for approval by the Oro Valley Town Council on NovembeF 20, 2002. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost The preliminary estimate of construction costs for the Naranja Town Site project _ is attached as Exhibit 11, Opinion of Probable Construction Cost. Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 15 EXHIBIT 4 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROGRAM / STAKEHOLDER GROUP USES USE QUANTITY REQUESTING PARTY RECREATIONAL SPORT FIELDS SOFTBALL 2 fields 275' deep John Dineen/Amateur Softball Association 4 field complex Bobbysox/Bill Popp 1 field (lighted) Dan Leiva/Dick Allison undefined # Monte Del Oro LITTLE LEAGUE 2 fields (lighted) Dan Leiva/Dick Allison undefined # Monte Del Oro JR/SR BASEBALL 1 field 300' deep Dan Leiva/Dick Allison (lighted) FOOTBALL undefined # Monte Del Oro POP WARNER 1 field Pop Warner/ FOOTBALL Steve Marshall SOCCER FULL SIZE 4 fields CDO Soccer Club 3 fields (lighted) AYSO 3 practice fields AYSO 2 fields (lighted) Debrorah Butker SOCCER YOUTH SIZE 2 fields CDO Soccer Club LACROSSE 2 fields 60 yds x 110Y ds Jason Owens (lighted) 4 field complex Dan May MULTI-USE FIELD dogpark one acre fenced Friends of OV Dogpark dog obedience 4000 sf. Great Pet Tenders/Bobbi Cawein PLAYGROUND undefined # OVPR/Monter ra RECREATIONAL SPORT COURTS TENNIS 16 courts Don Dickinson/ Andy Caldwell Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 19 6 courts minimum OVPR BASKETBALL 6 full-size courts OVPR VOLLEYBALL TETHERBALL undefined # Copper Creek School HANDBALL/ 4 outdoor courts AZ Youth Handball Assoc/ RACQUETBALL Yes-2-Kids/John Henning RECREATIONAL OTHER AQUATIC CENTER lap pool OVPR play pool OVPR 8' deep pool Tucson Water Polo divingand lappool Pusch Ridge Swim Team undefined # Monterra/Copper Creek SKATEPARK 35,000 sf. outdoor Andy Kern and friends undefined # OVPR undefined # Copper Creek School BMX PARK 35,000 sf. outdoor Andy Kern and friends SKATE SCHOOL basketball court size Dianna Coonce flat, smooth area RECREATION CENTER OVPR/Monterra/Copper Creek 2000 sf. classrooms Jazzercise, Shawna 2000 sf. classrooms Community Education/ Hilary Wujcik 2000 sf. classrooms Tai Chi, Edna senior center Margaret Wilson, et al ice arena Paul Huttner amateur radio facility Stan Weintraub NATURE CENTER Copper Creek School COMMUNITY GARDEN one-half ne half acre Margie Valenzuela AQUARIUM underground Margie Valenzuela Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 20 t TRAILS paved fitness trail OVPR natural surface trail OVPR nature trail OVPR/Monterra/Monte Del Oro/Copper Creek j. hiking, biking and OV Trails Task Force equestrian trails mountain bike trail Jim Humphreys 8' wide, 10-15 miles bike path Monterra/Monte Del Oro POND/LAKE non-motorized boats Bill Adler bird watching Bill Adler swimming/fishing Cindy Maidman/No. Pima County Chamber CULTURAL FACILITIES PERFORMING ART 2000 seat amphitheater GOVAC CENTER 2000 seat perform. Hall GOVAC 300 seat theater GOVAC gallery space GOVAC outdoor festival area GOVAC classrooms/offices GOVAC ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES OV Operations Center 7.8 acres OV Public WorksMlater 2.3 acres Utility Admin. OV Police Department 3.0 acres Training Center Growth Factor 1.9 acres Total Acres 15.0 acres Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranjo Town Site 21 • EXHIBIT 5 SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY WORKSHOP TEAM CONCEPTS GROUP PRESENTER CONCEPT 1 Mark Amphitheater with shared parking next to ball fields. Scattered playgrounds around the site. Perimeter multi-use trail, approximately 6 miles in length. Lake with CAP water. Police and Public Works Facilities in southeast corner. Suggest skatepark/BMX be located at Lambert. 2 Eric Voted on elements and ranked importance. Arts Center with Amphitheater sited to maximize panoramic views to southeast. Parking in small clusters, and limited to 1,000 spaces. Shuttles from off-site lots will be used during events. • Concentrated uses in the disturbed area. Left the perimeter natural. Located a dog park and playground where the lake is currently. Did not include town facilities. The consensus was that this is the town people's site. 3 Warren Courts (tennis, basketball) are located on the west side where the structures will help to buffer noise. Outdoor amphitheater is oriented so the audience has views to the southeast. Also included community garden, gym, arts/crafts, playground, and soccer fields that can also be used for festivals. 4 Bob Located amphitheater in a "cove" in the northeast corner of the site. Split parking into two large lots. Performing arts complex and recreation center are located in the middle of the site with ball fields, including snack bars, to the south. A Police Substation in the Rec. Ctr. would be manned during the } summer. Playgrounds are located off of the main drive. Dog park is located on the west side near Copper Creek neighborhood. Viewing area with restaurant located on a high point in northwest portion of site with panoramic views. Included a children's museum and gallery in the arts & rec. ctr. Located the Police shooting range underground with parking on top. Scattered ramadas and_gardens around the site with walking trails. _ 5 Nancy Group did not want to include all of the uses. One person wanted a golf course, but it excluded other uses. No golf course was included on their final concept. Included a bike path at the perimeter, 8 baseball fields, 5 sports fields, a half- size amphitheater, performing arts facility with 3 small museums, a few courts and a festival area. Left the west side natural with an interpretive center. Provided a maintenance/office facility for the Parks Dept., but no other Town facilities. 6 Steve Arts & Fields. Amphitheater to the north with performing arts facility. Lots f parking. Dog park. Field complex— soccer, lacrosse, 2 baseball or 4 baseball with other fields in the center. Trails at perimeter. Half of requested area for Police Training. Aquatics. Gymnasium. Playground. Seasonal lake. Public Works Operation in less area than requested in southeast corner. Pursue north entrance to site. 7 Jerry Lake with ramadas, fishing, picnicking. Rec. ctr. Parking integrated with site by terracing & landscaping. No baseball fields because of lights. Half-size amphitheater. Festival area on east side of site. Scattered sport courts and one soccer field. Trail system on steep slopes and at perimeter (approx. 7 miles). Aquatics center with lap swimming. Rec. Ctr. With indoor track, game tables, etc. Public Works located wherever it fits. 8 Ada Indoor performing arts center connected to outdoor amphitheater oriented with views of the mountains. Lake with paddle boats and sunfish rentals. One ball field. One soccer field. Tennis & handball courts. Small grocery store or snack bar. Diversity garden and small museums. Trail around perimeter. 9 Liz Maintain natural entrance. Public Works in southeast corner. Dog Park in Flood Plain. A small lake (filled with treated effluent or CAP water— no ground water), primarily for waterfowl. Performing arts facil. near south entrance. Parking lots centralized in middle of site. No commercial ventures. Small Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Naranja Town Site 22 1 gardens in hilly areas. Nature center, near the school. Gymnasium. Skate to & BMX park. Four baseball and soccer fields with linear oriented fieldsoin Amphitheater built intog g north. Lights in lowest area. the ground to buffer lighting and sound. 10 Deborah Group decided content, but not location. Main concern is that site be kept as natural as possible. Three fields. Combined skate/BMXp park. Basketball and tennis courts. Indoor/outdoor pool. No lake—this is not Scottsdale or Phoenix. Dog park. Lighting should be limited in height to below the east bank. Scattered ramadas and benches. Children's playground with shad and swings. Half an amphitheater. No shootingrange. No commercial. g Leave as much desert as possible. Limit hard surface. Should be peaceful and quiet. All about community. 11 Greg Lake. No Town facilities. Group uses along SW/NE axis. Centralized shared parking. To the north, tennis courts, scattered playgrounds, performing arts, and amphitheater. Open turf with dog park, scattered ramadas around courts. Open along edge to the west and south. Ball fields in middle of scared area. 12 Don Accommodate a diverse population while preserving nature. Add street northrth to Tangerine. To the north — arts center, performing arts facility, parkinglot & festival area. Two sports fields and four baseball fields on east side. Sport courts in west central area. Aquatics in the center. Cut back on parking • — require joint use. Lake. Split town services into two blocks on either side of Naranja entry. 13 John Culture and education important. Performing arts facil., theater andaller� g yes in center of site. Recreation center to east. Park Administration office. No aquatics center—too high maintenance. Sports courts to north. Four baseball fields in west central area. 16 sports fields in southeast. Some bleachers. Snack bar. Nature center in arts complex. Dog park in east central area. Sculptures throughout arts center. No Public Work Operations. No commercial. 14 Glenn[ Festival area/amphitheater/performing area/amphitheater/performingarts in north area. Parking in center. Field complex to south. Smaller parking area. Rec. center/Senior complexlex(arts/crafts)_ Skate & BMX park by existing road. Scattered playgrounds. Courts. Lake. Perimeter trail. Assumed an eventual entry Tangerine. of Tan erine. Town of Oro Valley Master Plan for Nara*Town Site 23