HomeMy WebLinkAboutOshkoshCitizenSurveyFinalReport20150
City of Oshkosh, Wisconsin
Citizen Survey 2015
5/8/2015
1
City of Oshkosh
Citizen Survey 2015
A survey of citizens in Oshkosh was undertaken by the Public Policy Analysis class at
the University of Wisconsin – Oshkosh in cooperation with the City of Oshkosh in the Spring of
2015. This report will analyze the results of this survey and provide insight into the perspectives
of the citizens on a variety of issues. The 2015 Oshkosh Citizen Survey included twelve primary
sections and multiple sub-sections, along with a question requesting general demographic data as
well as an opportunity for comments from the respondents. Three-hundred and nine (309)
surveys were returned and the resulting data has been entered into a statistical analysis program.
Depending upon the nature of the question, individuals were asked to respond to each question
based on four following possible rating options: 1.) excellent, good, fair and poor 2.) very
important, somewhat important, no opinion, somewhat unimportant, and very unimportant 3.)
strongly agree, somewhat agree, neither agree/disagree, somewhat disagree, strongly disagree
and no opinion or 4.) daily, weekly, occasionally, seasonally, and annually or less. The survey
was sent to 1,500 properties chosen randomly from the residential parcels provided from a data
base of utility customers in the City. The 309 responses constitute a 20.6 percent response rate
which is lower than the norm for citizen surveys. The survey response was 17.0 percent return in
2009, 22.5 percent return in 2010, 16.5 percent in 2011, 17.8 percent in 2012, 19.5 in 2013 and
21.9 percent in 2014. The relationship between sample size and precision of the survey
instrument at a 95 percent confidence rate frequently used in surveys is shown below. The 309
responses create a margin of error of approximately 5.5 percent. A level of 5 percent is
considered acceptable for most survey results. The confidence rate is 94.5 percent.
Sample Size Margin of Error
100 10%
300 5.5%
400 5.0%
800 3.5%
2
Question 1 – Utilization of City Services
1. Please indicate how frequently, if ever, you utilize the following City services.
The following table shows the responses on a percentage basis:
Most of the numbers stayed relatively the same from the previous year. In the case of annual
usage, there are issues with direct comparison, in that previous surveys did not have a “never”
option. It appears, based on these numbers, that people who wished to choose never defaulted to
the “annual” option. Another possible issue of comparison between multiple years is the change
from “monthly” to “occasionally.”
3
CHANGE Daily Weekly Monthly* Seasonally Annually
Bike and Pedestrian Trials 0.86%0.93%‐15.45%12.45% ‐34.99%
Lake Shore Golf Course ‐0.33%‐0.38%‐11.39%6.58% ‐66.37%
Pollock Aquatic Center 0.36%‐0.36%‐10.22%4.29% ‐61.67%
Leach Amphitheatre 0.00%‐0.37%‐35.97%18.00% ‐17.97%
Oshkosh Public Museum ‐0.03%‐2.33%‐36.20%11.43% ‐11.67%
Senior Services Center ‐0.35%‐2.84%‐10.77%1.93% ‐61.27%
Public Library Services 2.02%‐7.33%‐9.53%5.02% ‐15.28%
Police Services 0.38%‐1.33%‐16.82%2.51% ‐48.54%
Fire ‐0.39%0.00%‐8.41%1.01% ‐72.30%
EMS 0.31%0.00%‐9.42%2.40% ‐77.49%
Permits and Inspections ‐0.34%0.02%‐14.93%1.45% ‐55.60%
Enforcement of Codes 0.35%‐1.40%‐6.34%2.75% ‐79.96%
City Parking Facilities 0.34%4.48%‐21.15%5.84% ‐29.61%
Community Media Services 0.31%2.45%‐12.24%2.75% ‐65.87%
Transit System ‐0.74%0.13%‐4.36%1.28% ‐77.21%
Recycling Collection Services ‐0.52%‐9.75%7.78%3.46% ‐2.97%
Refuse Collection Service ‐0.57%‐5.97%0.18%4.52% ‐7.67%
Leaf and Brush Pick up 0.00%‐3.69%‐16.78%16.19% ‐11.02%
*Monthly is being compared with scores from the “occasionally” option on the 2014 survey.
Last year, the City of Oshkosh was interested in analyzing the use of the Oshkosh Public
Museum. This year, daily and seasonal usage went up. However, weekly, monthly, and annual
usage went down. Daily usage for Oshkosh's services had similar results for the most part.
However, Community Media dropped 10.7% from last year. Recycling services dropped 7.4%,
and Refuse Collection dropped 5.9%. Weekly usage for Oshkosh's services had similar results.
However, Public Library services went down 3.7%. Community Media went down 5.2%. Refuse
Collection went up 13.2%.Monthly usage for Oshkosh's services saw a major changed compared
to last year's usage. Bike trails (-18.4%), the Golf Course (-7%), Aquatic Center(-8.9%),
Amphitheatre (-26%), Public Museum (-24.7%), Library (-17.2%), Police (-24.5%), Fire (-9.9%)
4
and Emergency Service (-5.9%), Permits (-8.9%), Enforcement (-7.1%), Community Media (-
18.8%), Transit (-9%), and Brush pick up (-8.1%) all saw a dramatic decrease in monthly usage.
However, monthly usage of Recycling Services went up 9.7%.Much of the seasonal usage of
Oshkosh's services are similar to last year's results. Bike trails (6.7%), Golf Course (8.8%),
Amphitheatre (7.8), Public Museum (6%), Senior Services (4%), and Brush Pick up (12.4%) did
increase in usage compared to last year. Overall, annual usage of Oshkosh's services has gone
down significantly for each criteria.
There are some areas of potentially increased frequency utilization – particularly with
Bike and Pedestrian trails, where the daily, weekly, and season options all saw increases, despite
the drop due to the addition of “never” responses. Additionally, the Public Library appears to
have received some increased usage. However, future data will be needed to create direct
comparisons between responses.
Based on the crosstabs with Questions 6 and 7 (looking at Importance and Quality,
respectively), there aren’t a lot of things that stand out in terms of usage trends. People who use
services more often tend to rate them higher in importance and quality, but virtually all city
services have overall positive ratings, even amongst those who said that they never used them.
One area of concern might be Permits:
*For these graphs, “never” responses have been removed to make the data more clearly visible
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Permit
Excellent Quality Good Quality Fair Quality
Poor Quality Don't Know
5
Although the distribution of responses is fairly even across levels of quality, and the most
common response is “Don’t Know,” one thing that stands out among those that believe the
Permit program to be of low quality, the largest share are people who use it weekly – the highest
use rate for permits. This means that frequent users have a tendency to rate the program poorly.
Coupled with anecdotal evidence, this signals that improvements in the process should be a
priority for the City of Oshkosh.
One issue with the use of this data is the low sample size. Very few of the cross-
tabulations on programs have sufficient numbers for judgements to be made, simply because for
most programs, the majority of responses have been “never.”
The library is interesting to look at because the general feelings about its quality increase as
residents use it more often – those who used it daily considered it to be of excellent quality 71%
of the time, and the “excellent” responses correlate with frequency of use.
6
Regardless of how often they visited, most residents rated the Library as a very important service
to the city of Oshkosh. In fact, even amongst those who never used it, a solid majority (63%)
rated it as “Somewhat Important” or “Very Important.”
7
Question 2 - Opinions of the City of Oshkosh
On the whole, Oshkosh appears to be doing well. Most of the responses are on the
positive portion of the spectrum, and relatively few people rate any aspect of the city as poor.
However, when compared to previous results, there is some cause for concern.
On the following table, we can see that there is an across the board decrease in residents
describing the city as “Excellent.” There is an increase in the number of people rating the city
“Good” and “Fair” which seems to be primarily driven by the decrease in “Excellent,” although
some categories of “Poor” are also decreasing moderately.
8
CHANGE Excellent Good Fair Poor No
Opinion
Oshkosh as a place to live? ‐7.05%1.62%5.57% 0.16%‐0.31%
Feeling a part of the community? ‐3.60%‐0.68%2.92% 2.46%‐1.10%
Your neighborhood as a place to live? ‐9.44%4.69%3.57% 1.44%‐0.27%
Oshkosh as a place raise children? ‐5.14%0.68%5.27% ‐1.12%0.31%
Oshkosh as a place to retire? ‐1.83%3.75%‐2.23% ‐4.57%4.87%
Community openness and acceptance of
diversity? ‐4.28%‐0.06%1.77% ‐0.60%3.17%
The overall quality of life in Oshkosh? ‐2.06%‐0.37%2.90% 0.14%‐0.61%
Oshkosh as an environmentally friendly city? ‐5.05%5.34%1.52% ‐1.04%‐0.77%
Oshkosh as a place to work? ‐1.12%‐4.78%1.13% ‐2.41%7.19%
The direction Oshkosh is moving in the future? ‐1.66%‐1.94%5.15% ‐2.34%0.78%
Affordability of living in Oshkosh? ‐5.34%1.11%6.05% ‐2.25%0.42%
The availability of entertainment/events? ‐1.26%1.24%‐0.30% 0.75%‐0.42%
The quality of entertainment/events? ‐0.83%1.67%‐1.55% 1.04%‐0.33%
One bright spot is the perceptions of Oshkosh as a place to retire. Although the
“Excellent” responses fell somewhat, there was an overall decrease in the number rating it
poorly, and an increase in the number rating it “Good.”
9
These graphs also serve to demonstrate that this high rating is amongst the most
important constituencies to judging the retirement quality of Oshkosh – people over the age of
60, who are either retired or nearly so, and those who stated that they were retired. Both groups
consistently rated the city as either excellent or good.
However, one area that might be of some concern is the 41-60 age group. While they are
most likely not at retirement age, they are also fairly likely to be at an age where they are
considering it and weighing their options. This may be concerning because citizens between the
ages of 41-60 only gave “excellent” or “good” responses a combined 32% of the time, indicating
that many people do not see Oshkosh as a good place to retire in the future.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Less than $24,999
$25‐49,999
$50‐74,999
$75‐99,999
$100‐149,999
$150,000 +
Oshkosh as a Place to Raise Children by Income
Excellent Good Fair Poor No Opinion
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
18‐40 41‐60 Over 60
Oshkosh as a Place to Retire by
Age
Excellent Good Fair Poor No Opinion
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Oshkosh as a Place to Retire by
Employment Status
Excellent Good Fair Poor No Opinion
10
While Oshkosh is overall rated as a good place to raise children, the rating changes
according to income. We can see in this graph a trend towards “excellent” responses as the
income of the family increases, while the good responses decline as income declines. This shift
may indicate a need for programs or services focused on poorer families in Oshkosh.
Oshkosh as a place to work
The following graphs compare how residents responded compared to employment status,
profession, and highest education degree completed.
11
The results are not necessarily surprising – those who said that they were presently
unemployed rated the city poorly as a place to work, while those employed full time tended to
rate it much better. Some of this is likely also reflected in the degree of educational attainment,
with residents possessing less education being more likely to rate the city poorly.
Crosstabs with industry showed the most variation, with those in the management,
professional, and educational fields most likely to rate the city as “excellent.” However, areas
where Oshkosh may be suffering is in the construction, maintenance, production, and
transportation industries – in other words, heavily blue collar professions which have faced
employment issues nation-wide for some time.
With education, there are not many strong patterns – the residents rate Oshkosh roughly
the same regardless of their education background, although notably those with Associates
Degrees and Masters Degrees (but not Bachelors) are slightly more likely to rate the city as
“excellent.”
12
On neighborhood quality, there were a significantly higher number of residents rating the “North
of the Fox River” as being a poor place to live as a neighborhood. What is interesting about this
is that there aren’t other areas that this pattern can be seen. For example, when looking at how
they rate Oshkosh as a whole:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
North of the Fox River South of Fox River/East of
US 41
South of Fox River/West of
US 41
Place to Live (Neighborhood) ‐Location
Excellent Good Fair Poor No Opinion
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
North of the Fox River South of Fox River/East of
US 41
South of Fox River/West of
US 41
Place to Live (Oshkosh) by Location
Excellent Good Fair Poor
13
The difference disappears almost entirely, with little difference between locations. There
also weren’t any significant patterns related to affordability, or how well Oshkosh was rated as a
place to work.
Affordability of living in Oshkosh
Here, we can see a large disconnect. Residents who own a home are far more likely to
rate Oshkosh’s affordability as excellent or good – 57% to just 36% of renters. Respondents
rating affordability as poor were also more likely to be renters – 12% for renters’ vs 7%
amongst homeowners.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Own Rent
Affordability by Own/Rent
Excellent Good Fair Poor No Opinion
14
Questions 3, 4, and 5 - Safety in Neighborhoods
3. Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel in your neighborhood after dark by checking the box
that most accurately represents how you feel.
Of the 2015 responses, 26% felt “very safe”, 52% felt “safe”, 14% felt “neither safe nor
unsafe”, 7% felt “unsafe” and 1% felt “very unsafe”. In 2014, 46% of the respondents felt “very
safe” versus 21% of respondents in 2015. In 2014, 33% of the respondents felt “safe”, versus
50% of the respondents in 2015. As you can see, there is a shift in the number of responses for
2014 and 2015 for feeling “very safe” and “safe”. Overall, in 2015, 50% of the respondents
indicated they felt “safe” in their neighborhood after dark.
Number of responses
Very Safe Safe Neither Safe
or Unsafe
Unsafe Very
Unsafe
Don’t Know
2012 68 122 37 22 21 18
2013 109 151 46 16 5 1
2014 151 109 46 16 5 9
2015 66 155 50 19 5 2
Table 1
Percentage by Year
Table 2
15
This question along with 4 and 5 was cross tabulated in regards to gender, age, location, income
level, higher education level and race.
3A. How safe you feel based on Gender.
In 2015, male respondents seemed to feel safer in their neighborhoods than females after
dark. Of the Male respondents, 14% felt “very safe” compared to 8% of female respondents.
There were 26% of male respondents who felt “safe”, compared to 24% of females.
Number of Responses
Very Safe Safe Neither Unsafe Very Unsafe Don’t Know
Male 42 80 21 9 1 0
Female 24 75 29 10 4 2
Table 3
3B. How safe do you feel based on age.
When analyzed by age groups, 24% of the “over 60” age group seem to feel overall
“safe” in their neighborhood after dark compared to only 9% of the “18-40” and 20% from the
“41-60” age group. Only 3% of respondents age 41-60 indicated they felt” unsafe” compared to
less than 1% of respondents feeling “very unsafe” or “don’t know”.
Number of Responses
Age
Very Safe Safe Neither Unsafe Very
Unsafe
Don’t
Know
18-40 12 27 7 2 1 0
41-60 28 59 19 10 2 1
Over 60 26 72 24 8 2 0
Total 66 155 50 20 5 1
Table 4
3c. How safe do you feel by the location of where you live?
The respondents from all three locations seem to feel overall “safe” in their neighborhood
after dark. 4% of respondents who live North of the Fox river indicated they felt “unsafe”
compared to 2% who live South of Fox River/ East of US 41 and less than 1% who live South of
Fox River/West of US 41. This could be a possible addition to the question as to “why they
don’t feel safe” in future surveys.
16
Number of Responses
Very
Safe
Safe Neither Unsafe Very
Unsafe
Don’t
Know
North of Fox River 20 57 27 12 3 1
South of Fox/East US41 27 54 17 6 0 0
South of Fox/W US41 19 43 6 2 2 1
Table 5
Percentage by Location
Table 6
3d. How safe do you feel based on Income levels?
The majority of respondents in all income level brackets have indicated that overall, they
feel “safe” in their neighborhoods after dark. There were 12% of respondents in the bracket of
$25-49,999, 13% in the bracket of $50-74,999, and 10% in the bracket of $75-99,999 income
level bracket.
Number of Responses
Very Safe Safe Neither Unsafe Very Unsafe Don’t Know
Less than $24,999 3 17 6 4 1 1
$25-49,999 16 33 11 3 1 1
$50-74,999 15 35 18 2 1 0
$75-99,999 16 28 7 7 1 0
$100-149,999 8 16 1 2 1 0
$150,000+ 9 12 2 1 0 0
Table 7
3e. How safe you feel based on higher education levels.
Those respondents who indicated they have a high school/GED 16% or a Bachelor’s
Degree 15% had similar number of responses of feeling “safe”. 4% of respondents who reported
17
they have an Associate Degree/some college had the highest “unsafe” responses compared to
others.
Number of Responses
Very
Safe
Safe Neither Unsafe Very
Unsafe
Don’t
Know
High School/GED 16 46 15 2 3 1
Associate Degree/Some College 15 39 14 11 0 1
Bachelor’s Degree 20 45 11 4 1 0
Master’s Degree or Higher 16 22 9 3 1 0
Table 8
4. During the past 12 months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of a crime?
There were 9% of respondents who answered “Yes” they were a victim of a crime and
85% who answered “No” with 6% who did not respond. As you can see in table 9, the numbers
reported for the “yes” and “no” answers are very similar to the 2014 survey. As noted in the
2014 survey, it is not known if the crimes were committed in the City of Oshkosh.
Number of Responses
Yes No No Response
2014 33 291 4
2015 29 262 18
Table 9
Percentage of Households – Table 10
18
4a. Victim of a crime by gender.
There was 46% of males who answered “no” compared to 44% of females; however it
could also indicated that they can still be a victim of a crime. Both Males and Females had
similar “yes” responses, both being at 5%.
Number of Responses
Male Female
Yes 14 15
No 135 127
Table 11
4b. Victim of a crime by age
The responses are broken down into three age categories: 1) 18-40, 2) 41-60, and 3) over
60. Age 41-60 and over 60 had the highest percentage of “no” responses at 77% versus 18-40
with “no” responses being at 14%. Both age groups of 41-60 and over 60 had the same “yes”
responses at 7% which was higher than the age group of 18-40 who was at 0%. As you can see,
the two older age groups had the higher percentage of responding to the questions all together.
Number of Responses
Age
Victim of a crime? 18-40 41-60 Over 60
Yes 6 11 11
No 41 108 117
Table 12
4c. Victim of a crime by location
The respondents who indicated their location to where they live,36% live north of the
Fox River, 31% live south of the Fox River/East of US 41 and 24% live south of the Fox
River/West of US 41 had responded “no”. It may also indicate that not all crimes could be
reported. What is not known, (which was also noted in the 2014 survey) was “if the crime was
being committed in Oshkosh”. What would have been helpful is to know is what type of crime is
being committed as some may perceive one crime as being more severe as what another person
may perceive.
Number of Responses – Table 13
Victim? North of the Fox
River
South of Fox
River/East of US 41
South of Fox
River/West of US 41
Yes 14 10 5
No 106 90 66
19
4d. Victim of a crime by income level.
Those respondents who answered “no”, 63% indicated their income levels to be between
$25-49,999 and $75-99,999. No matter what income level was indicated, the majority of the
respondents indicated they were not a victim of a crime
Number of Responses
Income
Victim
?
<$24,999 $25-49,999 $50-74,999 $75-99,999 $100-149,999 $150,000 +
Yes 4 8 6 5 0 4
No 28 55 64 52 28 19
Table 14
4e. Victim by Highest Education Level
There were more respondents who answered “no” to this question than “yes”.
Respondents with a High School/GED (25%), Associate Degree/Some College (28%) and
Bachelor’s Degree (28%) answered “no”. Respondents with a High School/GED (2%) and a
Master’s Degree or Higher (2%) had the lowest number of “yes” responses. No matter what
level of education the respondent has, the majority answered “no” to this question.
Number of Responses
Highest Education Level
Victim? High
School/GED
Associate
Degree/Some
College
Bachelor’s
Degree
Master’s Degree
or Higher
Yes 5 11 8 5
No 73 69 72 46
Table 15
5. If “Yes, did you report all of these crimes?
The number of responses for those who answered this question was very low. As you
can see below in table 16, there is a shift with the “no” answers from 2014 to 2015.
Respondents indicated, “No” (2%), “yes” (2%) and 28% being a “no response”. It could be that
the majority of respondents were not a victim of a crime at all or they did not want to report for
other reasons such as the question does not pertain to them.
20
Number of Responses
Yes No Don’t Know No Response
2014 36 291 0 1
2015 19 12 3 275
Table 16
Percentage by Household
Table 17
5a. Crime reported based on gender.
Females (38%) were more likely to report the crime versus males (18%).
Number of Responses
Male Female
Yes 6 13
No 8 4
Don’t Know 1 2
Table 18
5b. Crime reported by age
Respondents who indicated their age between 41-60, (27%) reported “yes” they would
report the crime. Those respondents over 60, (18%) indicated they would not report the crime.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Yes No No Response
2014
2015
21
Number of responses
Age
Report? 18-40 41-60 Over 60
Yes 4 9 5
No 3 3 6
Don’t Know 1 1 1
Table 19
Percentages by age
Table 20
5d. Crime reported by Location
Respondents who indicated they live north of the Fox River, 26% would more likely
report the crime. Those respondents living south of the Fox River/East of US 41, (21%) would
more likely report the crime and south of the Fox River/West of US 41, only (.09%) indicated
they would report the crime.
Number of responses
Location
North of the Fox
River
South of the Fox
River/East of US 41
South of the Fox
River/West of US 41
Yes 9 7 3
No 5 5 2
Don’t Know 0 1 2
Table 21
22
5e. Report of a crime by income level
Respondents who indicated their income level to be between $25-49,999, 16% had the
highest “no” answers. These respondents would most likely not report a crime. The respondents
in the income levels of < $24,999 (13%); $25-49,999 (13%); $50-74,999 (13%); and $150,000 +
(13%) are more likely to report a crime.
Number of responses
Income
Report? Less than
$24,999
$25-49,999 $50-74,999 $75-99,999 $150,000 +
Yes 4 4 4 2 4
No 1 5 2 2 1
Don’t Know 0 1 1 0 1
Table 22
5f. Crime reported by Highest Education Level
Respondents who have a High School/GED diploma, (18%) would most likely report a
crime. Those having an Associate Degree/Some college (15%) and Bachelor’s Degree (15%)
were most likely to report the crime. Those with a Master’s Degree or Higher, only (.09%) were
more likely to report a crime.
Number of Responses regarding highest education level
High
School/GED
Associate Degree/Some
College
Bachelor’s
Degree
Master’s Degree
or Higher
Yes 6 5 5 3
No 3 5 3 1
Don’t Know 1 1 1 0
Table 23
*We did a comparison of all three questions in regards to race. The data was not sufficient as the
sampling size was very low. The results would have been insufficient and our opinion would not
be valid.
23
Question 6 - Importance of Services
The 2015 Oshkosh citizen survey data is utilized as a tool to provide city officials with
insight into areas of improvement and areas that Oshkosh is doing well within the community in
the time since the previous year’s survey. The citizen survey data has the ability to reflect the
atmosphere of the city. It is able to provide the city manager and elected officials with hard
evidence of the citizens’ satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the services provided. The survey
questions regarding importance will allow the city officials to see where they should try to focus
more energy and areas where they may be able to provide less focus or maintain the status quo.
Overall, all of the city services are important, in which over 60% of citizens agree, except
in Community Media and the Lakeshore Golf Course, this is represented on the graph on the
following page. These are specialty areas; therefore, citizens may not understand the importance
or may not use the services. In the case of community media, the citizens may not understand all
of the services provided related to community media. If community media refers to general
spread of public information (newspaper, public access, and other similar mediums), then maybe
citizens input would provide a stronger rating for its importance. As for the Lakeshore Golf
Course; there may be only so much importance in relation to those who use it. For example, Golf
is a selective sport and not a necessity for all citizens to be provided with this service.
24
25
Shown below is a graph reflecting the participants’ frequency of very important and
somewhat important services for the top 10 services of importance in the city of Oshkosh, which
is based on the survey data. Police is identified as the most important overall service for the
participants of the Oshkosh city survey with 98.7% of participants answering somewhat
important or very important. It is evident that the city of Oshkosh takes great value in the
importance of a safe community with 3 of their top 5 most important services being police, EMS
and fire protection.
Top 10 Most Important Services in 2015 (based on Oshkosh city survey data)
What is interesting is that street repair has continued to be an area of strong focus for the
city of Oshkosh. In the 2014 Oshkosh city survey, 97.6% participants answered somewhat
important or very important for the street repair. Since Wisconsin has such long and cold
winters, it is of no surprise to see snow removal in the top 10 services of importance in the city
of Oshkosh with 96.4%. The top five services rated for the most important by the participants
remain to be police, EMS, fire, street repair and snow removal, based on both the 2014 survey
data and still today in 2015.
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
Frequency of Very/Somewhat Important
Police
EMS
Street Repair
Fire
Snow Removal
Traffic Signs
Refuse Collection
Recycling
Street Lighting
26
Shown on the below is a graph of the 5 services with the lowest frequency of participants
choosing very or somewhat important based on the survey data. 43.8% of participants answered
very/somewhat important for the golf course in Oshkosh. 52% of participants answered
very/somewhat important for the community media in Oshkosh.
5 Least Important Services in 2015 (based on Oshkosh city survey data)
It is interesting to see that the data from 2014 Oshkosh city survey reflect very similar
percentages. In 2014, 71.6% of participants answered very/somewhat important for the Oshkosh
public museum; Now, in 2015, 71%. In 2014, 68% of participants answered very/somewhat
important for the aquatic center and now in 2015, 68.2%. The services in Oshkosh that are not
of importance to the majority of Oshkosh participants are consistent from 2014 to 2015, based on
the survey data.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Frequency of Very/Somewhat
Important
Golf Course
Community Media
Aquatic Center
Permits &
Inspections
Museum
27
.
6. We would like you to rate the importance of city services. For each service listed
below, please check the box that best reflects your opinion of the importance to you
of each City service.
Importance of City Services Very
Important
Somewhat
Important
Somewhat
Unimportant
Very Un-
important
No Opinion/
Neutral
Community Services
Support for Neighborhood Revitalization Programs 28.3 47.0 12.8 3.0 8.9
Oshkosh Public Museum 25.7 45.3 17.6 5.5 5.9
Oshkosh Community Media Services 15.9 36.1 23.8 7.9 16.2
Public Library Services 59.0 28.0 6.5 2.6 3.9
Senior Services Center 39.9 37.6 9.8 3.6 9.2
Transit System 39.3 35.4 11.5 3.9 9.8
Appearance of City-Owned Buildings 28.6 50.7 13.5 3.9 3.3
Parks
Bike and Pedestrian Trails 44.1 36.6 8.8 3.9 6.5
Lake Shore Golf Course 12.1 31.7 20.3 20.3 15.7
Appearance of City Parks & Greenways 47.4 42.8 4.9 2.9 2.0
Pollock Aquatic Center 25.6 42.6 12.1 8.9 10.8
Economic Development
Economic Development Assistance to Businesses 36.4 40.1 9.9 1.7 11.9
Efforts to Improve the Quality of Housing 37.2 43.9 8.6 3.0 7.3
Building Permits and Inspections 23.6 45.5 17.3 4.3 9.3
Enforcement of Property Maint/Nuisance Codes 35.0 42.2 14.2 3.3 5.3
Land Use, Planning, and Zoning Services 29.8 45.2 12.7 2.7 9.7
Refuse and Recycling
Leaf and Brush Pick up 57.5 34.0 4.9 1.0 2.6
Recycling Collection Services 76.1 19.0 2.3 1.0 1.6
Refuse Collection Service 75.7 19.4 1.6 .3 3.0
Protective Services
Police Services 85.2 13.4 .7 .3 .3
Emergency Medical Services (ambulance) 85.0 12.7 .7 .3 1.3
Fire Protection and Prevention Services 84.9 11.8 1.6 1.0 .7
Road Maintenance and Construction
City Parking Facilities 22.4 54.8 14.2 4.0 4.6
City’s Sidewalk System 41.4 45.4 9.3 2.0 2.0
Removal of Snow and Ice From City Streets 75.7 20.7 1.6 .7 1.3
Traffic Signs and Signals 58.7 37.0 2.3 .7 1.3
Street Lighting 58.2 34.9 3.9 1.6 1.3
Street Maintenance and Sweeping 50.3 37.9 7.8 2.3 1.6
Street Repair 75.2 22.5 1.0 .7 7
Storm Drainage Systems 69.3 23.4 3.3 1.7 2.3
28
Question 7 - Quality of Services
The quality of services provided by the city of Oshkosh, based on participants’ opinions,
is a key part to understand in order to maintain satisfaction or improve services as needed. There
is no better way to see how well the city is providing their services and meeting the expectations
of their citizens than hearing it directly from the citizens. The survey question regarding quality
is able to demonstrate to the city of Oshkosh their strengths and weaknesses with providing the
highest quality services possible and maintaining once the expectations are met. This
information is essential in order to maintain status quo when appropriate and further prepare for
the future ensuring that Oshkosh has all of the tools and data necessary in order to provide the
best quality of services to their citizens.
It is an interesting observation to bring to focus that 20% of the survey participants
responded with “don’t know” in the 2015 Oshkosh city survey; in 2014, this percentage was
19%. This may indicate a lack of citizen engagement, lack of citizen participation or lack of
citizen interest in public services. There are multiple ways to analyze this percentage of “don’t
17.0
39.019.0
5.0
20.0
Overall Percentage of Quality of Services
in 2015
Excellent Quality
Good Quality
Fair Quality
Poor Quality
Don't Know
29
know” responses. Over half of the overall quality of services (56%) in 2015 is good quality or
excellent quality which is something that the city of Oshkosh should be very proud to observe.
This year’s percentage is precisely 5% higher than the survey results in 2014 (51%
good/excellent quality), which represents that Oshkosh is moving in the right direction with
quality of services.
The top ten services that rated the highest quality in the combination good and excellent
categories, are shown above. It is evident that the Library Services, Street Lighting, Traffic
Signs and Signals, Refuse Collection Services, Recycling Collection Services, Leaf and Brush
Pick up, Police Services, Emergency Medical Services, and Fire Protection and Prevention
Services continue to meet the high quality expectations of the Oshkosh citizens because in the
2014 survey, these same services were identified as above 60% excellent/good quality.
The two highest quality rated services Recycling Collection Services and Refuse
Collection Services at 91.8% and 89.4% in combined excellent and good quality have rose
71.7%
72.7%
73.1%
76.8%
77.5%
77.8%
79.9%
81.4%
89.4%
91.8%
Street Lighting
EMS
City Parks
Leaf and Brush Pick Up
Fire Protection
Library
Police
Traffic Signs
Refuse Collection
Recycling Collection
Highest Percentages (out of 100%) Excellent/Good Quality of Services
(based on Oshkosh survey data)
30
dramatically from the 2014 survey data, 85% and 84%. This is an impressive area of
improvement with more than 5-6% increase in quality of service.
The services shown above are areas that need improvement in order to provide the
excellent/good quality services that every community strives to provide to their citizens. The
street repair service with only 27.1% excellent/good quality is of no surprise for the city of
Oshkosh because Oshkosh is aware of this challenge in the community regarding improvements
on their street repairs. In 2014, this same service received the most responses of poor quality at
32%. Now in 2015, the street repair service received 35.8% poor quality responses. The issue of
street repair is obviously a continuous issue with these statistics maintaining similar responses.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Enforcement of Property
Maintenance/Nuisance Codes
Economic Development Assistance
to Businesses
Efforts to Improve the Quality of
Housing
Land Use, Planning, and Zoning
Services
Street Repair
Lowest Percentage of Excellent/Good Quality Services in 2015
(based on Oshkosh survey data)
Percentage of Excellent/Good Quality
of Services in 2015
31
7. We would like you to rate the quality of city services. For each service listed
below, please check the box that best reflects your opinion of the quality to you of
each City service.
Quality of City Services Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t
Know
Community Services
Neighborhood Revitalization Programs 4.3 29.4 28.4 6.4 31.4
Oshkosh Public Museum 18.5 46.2 15.8 2.3 17.2
Community Media Cable TV, Radio, Internet
Services 7.1 30.7 19.3 2.4 40.5
Public Library Services 33.8 44.0 11.6 1.3 9.3
Senior Services Center 16.0 30.3 10.3 1.3 42.0
Transit System 11.0 40.8 16.1 4.7 27.4
Appearance of City-Owned Buildings 8.7 54.3 25.3 4.3 7.3
Parks
Bike and Pedestrian Trails 14.3 47.8 17.9 2.0 17.9
Lake Shore Golf Course 7.6 30.9 11.6 1.0 48.8
Appearance City Parks & Greenways 15.3 57.8 19.9 1.3 5.6
Pollock Aquatic Center 14.6 39.1 7.3 0.3 38.7
Economic Development
Economic Development Assistance to
Businesses 1.7 22.7 16.1 7.7 51.8
Efforts to Improve the Quality of Housing 2.7 22.3 24.7 6.0 44.3
Building Permits and Inspections 4.7 23.6 22.9 6.6 42.2
Enforcement of Property
Maintenance/Nuisance Codes 4.6 17.5 22.5 11.9 43.4
Land Use, Planning, and Zoning Services 3.0 22.2 22.9 5.7 46.1
Refuse and Recycling
Leaf and Brush Pick up 28.5 48.3 16.2 1.7 5.3
Recycling Collection Services 45.4 46.4 6.3 0.7 1.3
Refuse Collection Service 45.5 43.9 6.0 0.3 4.3
Protective Services
Police Services 39.3 40.6 9.9 2.3 7.9
Emergency Medical Services (ambulance) 37.2 35.5 5.0 0.0 22.3
Fire Protection and Prevention Services 39.4 38.1 6.0 0.3 16.2
Road Maintenance and Construction
City Parking Facilities 6.0 43.9 26.6 3.7 19.9
City’s Sidewalk System 9.6 54.8 28.6 4.7 2.3
Removal of Snow and Ice From City Streets 14.2 45.2 27.7 12.2 0.7
Traffic Signs and Signals 21.3 60.1 15.3 2.3 1.0
Street Lighting 16.6 55.1 24.3 3.7 0.3
Street Maintenance and Sweeping 11.9 52.0 25.5 7.9 2.6
Street Repair 5.4 21.7 36.1 35.8 1.0
Storm Drainage Systems 10.2 33.2 33.9 10.2 12.5
32
Analysis of Importance and Quality of Services
Shown on the following page is a side-by-side comparison of importance and quality in
2014 and 2015. Excellent, good, and fair quality answers were added together, with very
important and somewhat important answers in hope to provide insight on the quality of the
important city services from highest to lowest. What was determined is that in 2014 there is a
particular area of the city services where the quality is not leveling with the importance. The area
of the service titled “Economic Development” (between Economic Development Assistance to
Businesses and Land Use, planning, and Zoning Services) has a large range between importance
and quality. The importance is as high as 71% and quality is as low as 39.1%. Thus, averaging an
importance of 66.72% compared to an average quality of 43.36%. However, importance leveled
with quality expectation in a few services, such as Public Library Services, Appearance of City
Buildings, City Sidewalk System, Traffic Signs and Signals, Street Lighting, Street Maintenance
and Sweeping, and all of Refuse and recycling. These services resulted in less than 1%
difference in importance and quality.
In 2015, not much has changed in the percentage points. The largest range was the area of
Economic Development, in that the importance of these services averaged 75.76% and the
quality of the service averaged 46.84%. Although there was an increase in importance and
quality, the range between the two are much the same, as in 2014. However, importance leveled
with quality expectation in a few services, such as, Public Library Services, Appearance of City
Buildings, City Sidewalk System, Traffic Signs and Signals, Street Lighting, Street Maintenance
and Sweeping, and all of Refuse and recycling. These services resulted in less than 2.5%
difference in importance and quality.
33
The Oshkosh citizens identified seven of the top ten services, Street Lighting, Traffic
Signs, Fire Protection, EMS, Police, Refuse Collection and Recycling Collection, as very or
somewhat important and excellent or good quality. This is extremely beneficial for the city of
Oshkosh to see that they are provided excellent/good quality for the services that are of high
importance to their citizens.
The services identified as high importance and low quality demonstrate that the City must
make action plans in order to improve the quality of these important services to their citizens.
These services are identified as snow ice removal, enforcement of codes, street maintenance,
street repair, neighborhood revitalization, and housing.
34
Overall, the survey data reflects that most of the city services that are of high importance
to the citizens have fair or higher quality. There are red flags, which were identified with
services that reflected high importance and low quality are areas that the city of Oshkosh. These
red flags may be areas to focus more time, energy, or financing. The red flag areas are street
repair, snow ice removal, and neighborhood revitalization.
35
Questions 8 & 9 - Budget Priorities
Questions eight and nine ask survey respondents to both allocate and subtract a
hypothetical one million dollars from the city budget based on specific services provided by the
city. The nine service areas listed for consideration include: Community Services, Economic
Development, Refuse and Recycling, Finance and Administration, Police Protection, Fire
Suppression and Prevention, Parks, Storm Water Management and Road Maintenance. When
comparing response results for questions eight and nine, 2015 experienced a slight decrease in
question eight and almost the same response rate for question nine. In 2014, question eight had
274 responses, while 2015 only had 248 responses. Question nine, however, remained virtually
unchanged with 233 responses in 2014 and 234 responses in 2015. Overall survey respondents
totaled 309.
Budget Surplus
Question eight of the survey asked respondents to allocate a hypothetical budget surplus
of one million dollars amongst the nine categories. Much like the past few years, Road
Maintenance continues to be the area which receives the most amount of money. The average
allocation given to Road Maintenance was $287,311 of the one million dollars. Also continuing a
similar trend, Finance and Administration continues to be the category which received the least
amount of money. The average allocation for Finance and Administration was $33,414. There
has been little shift in regards to the overall rankings between 2014 and 2015. The top four
categories and the bottom three categories remain the same. The only change in rankings come in
the areas of Community Services and Fire Protection. In 2014, Community Services was ranked
number five and Fire number six. This year, those services have switched places, with Fire being
36
number five and Community Services being number six. Figure 1 shows the average allocations
for all services in 2015.
Comparing all rankings from 2014 to 2015, very little has changed with regard to the
order; however there has been some change in the overall average allocation to each category. In
terms of increases in the allocation amounts, Road Maintenance and Economic Development
saw the largest increases. Road Maintenance had an increase of approximately $17,000, while
Economic Development had an increase of approximately $7,000. In examining overall
decreases in allocations, Fire, Community Services and Parks all had decreases. Community
Services had the largest decrease, which was approximately $12,000, while both Fire and Parks
were around $9,000 (Figure 2).
37
Interestingly, the top four categories all received increases in allocations, while the bottom five
all received decreases when comparing 2014 to 2015 responses.
Another way to examine the responses to question eight is to review the survey responses
from question six, Importance of Services and question seven, Quality of Services. When focuses
on the top category where the most money was allocated, Road Maintenance, is viewed with
high importance but lacks the same high level of quality according to survey respondents. In
question six and seven, Road Maintenance is broken down into two areas: Street Repair and
Maintenance. With regards to street repair, 97% of respondents felt that it was either very or
somewhat important; however only 30.5% of respondents felt that the quality of street repair was
either excellent or good. An overwhelming majority, 73% felt the quality was only fair or poor.
With regards to maintenance, 88% felt that the service was either very or somewhat important;
however only 57% of respondents felt the quality was either excellent or good. These
38
comparisons likely explain the reasoning behind why Road Maintenance received the most
allocation.
Although importance of the service appears to be a driving factor for receiving more
allocation, it cannot be applied across the board. For example, there is widespread agreement of
the importance Police Protection, which 98.7% of survey respondents felt was either very or
somewhat important, however, there is no representation of this high importance when it relates
to mean allocation. Police Protection ranked third for the second year in a row, but is
considerably behind Road Maintenance in terms of the amount of money allocated. Unlike Road
Maintenance; however, Police Protection received high marks with regards to quality of services
provided. 79 % of survey respondents felt that police provided either excellent or good quality of
service. This difference could imply that respondents of the survey believe that Police Protection,
while very important, is not the area they wish to spend money on as they feel the quality of
service is already high. Respondents appear to spend money on areas they feel are important but
lacking the quality desired.
Budget Deficit
Question nine of the survey asked respondents to make decisions on how to cut a
hypothetical one million dollars from the city’s budget. Again, respondents were asked to choose
amongst the same nine categories as in question eight as to how to allocate this shortage. Much
like 2014, the top two categories that received the biggest cuts remained unchanged. The
rankings for 2015 are as follows: Finance and Administration, Economic Development, Parks,
Community Services, Storm Water Management, Refuse and Recycling, Road Maintenance,
Police Protection and Fire Suppression. Finance and Administration came in first with a mean
allocation of $254,090 Economic Development was second with a mean allocation of $161,426
39
(Figure 3). The biggest change from 2014 to 2015 is in the area of Road Maintenance, which was
ranked ninth in 2014, but moved up to seventh in 2015. This was also one of the largest
differences in allocations as well. In 2014, the mean allocation was approximately $51,000 and
this year that number jumped to $71,000.
Although the rankings did not change for the top two categories, both saw a decrease in
the amount of money that respondents would like taken from those areas between 2014 and
2014. In Finance and Administration, the amount was reduced by approximately $12,000 and
even more interesting was that the amount for Economic Development was reduced by
approximately $26,000 (Figure 4). When compared to questions six and seven regarding
importance of service and quality of service, it makes it difficult to ascertain why there would be
such a large change. 76.9% of respondents felt that Economic Development was either very or
somewhat important; however 33% of those responding didn’t know whether the quality was
40
good or not. Perhaps this can be seen as citizens viewing the economy in better terms and that
they are ready for more community growth.
Net Increase or Decrease
Another way to look at responses from the hypothetical addition and subtraction of the
one million dollars is to combine the two numbers so that they reflect citizen opinion of a budget
with neither a shortfall nor a surplus (Figure 5). This provides a great representation for the
respondents in regards to their priorities of the nine different categories of service. On surveys in
which respondents answered both questions eight and nine could be used, which brought the
response rate to 228 out of 309 total surveys.
41
The first four categories which are Road Maintenance, Storm Water Management, Police
Protection and Fire Suppression were the only categories to receive a net positive allocation.
This is the same status as last year and is a good representation of what the citizens feel are both
the most important services as well as what services lack the most quality and need improvement
within the City of Oshkosh.
Survey Data - Question Eight
#8 - Extra $1 Million 2014 Rank 2014 Mean* 2015 Rank 2015 Mean*
Road Maintenance 1 270.29 1 287.31
Storm Water Management 2 138.64 2 143.44
Police Protection 3 113.63 3 116.90
Economic Development 4 107.47 4 114.31
Fire 6 99.31 5 90.06
Community Services 5 100.50 6 88.20
42
Parks 7 91.28 7 80.65
Refuse and Recycling 8 46.58 8 45.72
Finance and Administration 9 32.39 9 33.41
*In thousands
Survey Data - Question Nine
#9 - Reduce $1 Million 2014 Rank 2014 Mean* 2015 Rank 2015 Mean*
Finance and Administration 1 266.87 1 254.09
Economic Development 2 187.01 2 161.43
Parks 4 104.11 3 117.18
Community Services 3 107.59 4 112.14
Storm Water Management 5 80.27 5 81.03
Refuse and Recycling 6 74.98 6 74.98
Road Maintenance 9 51.69 7 71.64
Police Protection 8 62.18 8 66.94
Fire Suppression/Prevention 7 65.57 9 60.57
*In thousands
Section Eight and Nine - Net Change
2015 Add* 2015 Subtract* Difference*
Road Maintenance 287.31 71.64 215.67
Storm Water Management 143.44 81.03 62.41
Police Protection 116.90 66.94 49.96
Fire Suppression/Prevention 90.06 60.57 29.49
Community Services 88.20 112.14 -23.94
Refuse and Recycling 45.72 74.98 -29.23
Parks 80.65 117.18 -36.53
Economic Development 114.31 161.43 -47.12
Finance and Administration 33.41 254.09 -220.68
43
Question 10 and 11 – Vehicle Registration Fees
Question 10 asked respondents about their opinion on a new $20 wheel tax. There were a
total of 309 respondents to the question. The overwhelming consensus among respondents was
very unsupportive with 48.9% of them against the implementation of a wheel tax. 14.2% were
somewhat unsupportive, 6.1% were very supportive and 15.2% were somewhat supportive while
12.9% were neutral.
Question 11 asked the respondents about how a registration fee should be used if one
were to be imposed on cars. It scales the questions on a five-point Likert scale from Strongly
Agree to Strongly Disagree. 40.8% of respondents indicated they either agreed or strongly
agreed that the fee should be used for construction improvements. 69.9% of respondents either
agreed or strongly agreed that the fee should be used for street maintenance. Ultimately more
people would prefer the revenue generated from the wheel tax be used for street maintenance
rather than for construction improvements.
6.1
15.2 12.9 14.2
48.9
Very Supportive Somewhat
Supportive
Neutral Somewhat
Unsupportive
Very
Unsupportive
Support for Vehicle Registration Fee
44
19.1 21.7
17.2
5.8
20.1
47.6
22.3
6.1 3.2
13.6
Strongly Agree Agree Nuetral Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Use for Vehicle Registration Fee
Construction Improvements Road Maintenance
45
Question 12 - Additional Comments
Over the past 5 years common themes have been identified in the written comments of the
survey: poor road conditions, business/economic development, high taxes and the development
of bike/walking paths. This year’s survey highlights many of the same themes.
Included in the 2015 Citizen Survey responses for the City of Oshkosh were 145 additional
written comments. These comments varied in their content: some were very broad
generalizations while others were very detailed in nature. Comments also varied in tone; some
very negative and frustrated while other complimentary and supportive. The topic with the most
comments this year was regarding the poor road conditions, with high taxes as a very close
second. New to this year’s survey was the wheel tax. Respondents commented on this with third
highest frequency.
City roads and infrastructure received significant comments. The narrowing of Main Street was
brought up several times. Some comments were positive regarding the change, but many felt it
was not reconstructed appropriately and that additional changes to the north should be
considered. Overall the citizens of Oshkosh would like to see continued improvement in their
roadways throughout the city.
High taxes were also a hot topic for the residents of Oshkosh. Many felt that their property taxes
were extremely high. Many noted that city workers are paid too much while others noted the
“extra” non-essential services should not be on tax bills. Respondents also expressed concern on
how taxes were spent in regards to the Oshkosh School System; some respondents stated that
there was not enough money or support for education, while others commented that too much
money was going to the city’s educational system.
Concerns regarding public safety, police protection, and crime prevention were also a consistent
theme. Many citizens expressed concern about the safety of our streets. Many “speed zones” and
bike safety issues were also mentioned on several different occasions. The citizens of Oshkosh
want to feel safe in their community.
On a positive note; Oshkosh parks and recreation received some constructive comments in
regards to the river walk and bike trails. Some challenges still exist with dog-friendly parks and
garbage and refuse, but overall comments were fairly complementary. Economic development
46
was another bright spot in the survey comments. Citizens are taking notice of development
efforts and applauding the City for their involvement. Some expressed concern over wages and
job skills, however.
47
Question 13 - Analysis of Survey Result to Demographics of City
The following survey demographics were requested from the participants and compared to the
census data from 2010 for the City of Oshkosh.
Type of
Demographic
Demographic
Breakdown
Survey
Responses
Survey Response
Percentages
2010 US Census
Percentages
Gender Male 153 51.2% 51.2%
Female 146 48.8% 48.8%
No Response 10
Age 18-40 49 16.2%
41-60 120 38.8%
Over 60 133 44% 16.7%
No Response 7
Marital Status Married 184 60.5% 49.9%
Not Married 86 28.3% 33.4%
Widowed 34 11.2% 6.25%
No Response 5
Time - Oshkosh 5 Years or Less 21 6.9% 6.8%
6-20 Years 68 22.4% 24%
20+ Years 214 70.6% 67%
No Response 6
Own/Rent Own 277 91.4% 55.1%
Rent 26 8.6% 44.9%
No Response 6
No. of Children None 225 74.8% 71%
One 25 8.3% 9.7%
Two 37 12.3% 11.5%
Three + 13 4.3% 5.7%
No Response 8
Location North of the Fox River 122 40.8% 42.7%
South of the Fox
River/East of US 41 104 34.8% 37.6%
South of the Fox
River/West of US 41 73 24.4% 14.3%
No Response 10
Income Less than $24,999 33 11.7% 28.6%
$25-49,999 66 23.5% 28.6%
$50-74,999 71 25.3% 20.4%
$75-99,999 59 21% 11.3%
$100-149,999 28 10% 8.2%
48
$150,000 + 24 8.5% 3%
No Response 28
Type of
Demographic
Demographic
Breakdown
Survey
Responses
Survey Response
Percentages
2010 US Census
Percentages
Employment
Status Employed Full Time 146 49.2% 59%
Employed Part Time 17 5.7% 2.5%
Self-Employed 15 5.1% 2.3%
Presently Unemployed 10 3.4% 3.8%
Retired 109 36.7% 37.3%
No Response 12
Profession Homemaker 5 2.6% 2.2%
Management,
Professional or related 72 37.1% 15.4%
Service Occupation 26 13.4% 9.7%
Farming, Fishing,
Forestry 1 0.5% 0.4%
Sales and Office 26 13.4% 4.7%
Construction,
Maintenance 8 4.1% 2.2%
Education 20 10.3% 8.2%
Production,
Transportation, Moving
Materials 13 6.7% 6.5%
Other 23 11.9% 10.4%
No Response 115
Highest
Education Level High School/GED 84 28.3% 36.1%
Associate Degree/Some
College 80 26.9% 6.6%
Bachelor's Degree 81 27.3% 15.3%
Masters Degree/ Higher 52 17.5% 7.2%
No Response 12
Race White 283 96.6% 90.5%
Black 1 0.3% 3.1%
Two or more races 6 2.0% 1.7%
Asian 1 0.3% 3.2%
Some other race 2 0.7% 0%
No Response 16
Gender – The sample replying to the survey is representative of the population in
Oshkosh.
49
Age- The age of the survey participants was divided into four categories, different than
that of the US Census data. The majority of the citizens are either 41-60 or over 60.
Marital Status – The percentage of married respondents to the census population data is
quite high which may result in different views on child related services, public safety
needs and more vested interest in the community.
Lived in Oshkosh – The percentage of respondents that have lived in Oshkosh for 20+
yrs is at 69%, which may demonstrate a long term commitment to the community.
Own/Rent – The percentage of respondents that own their own home in Oshkosh was
89.6% which may demonstrate a commitment to the community.
No. of Children – The highest percentage of respondents to the survey have no children,
which could indicate differences in community values.
Location in the City - The percentage of survey respondents on both sides of the river
seem relatively equal.
Income – The annual incomes of the respondents show the majority of them fall in the
three lowest income ranges.
Employment Status – The survey results appears to replicate the census data from 2010
for the most part. There is a high level of the population that is employed full time or
retired.
Profession – There was a high level of no responses, which may be indicative of there
not being a category representing the survey respondents. There does appear to be a
high number of responses from those in the management and professional areas as well as
sales and services.
Highest Education Level – The highest level of education among respondents seems to
have gone up in the associate degree/some college category and Bachelors degree
categories. There is also an even larger jump in the Masters degree or higher level of
education in Oshkosh. A significant amount of the respondents have high education.
Race – The city of Oshkosh is predominantly white with a percentage of 91.6% of the
respondents. There is not much diversity.
50
Appendix A – Internet Survey Results- 2015 – XXX Responses
1. Frequently of utilization of the following City services – percentages.
Frequency of City Services Daily Weekly Monthly Seasonally Annually Never
Bike and Pedestrian Trails 12.5 8.3 0 41.7 8.3 29.2
Lake Shore Golf Course 4.3 0 4.3 26.1 17.4 47.8
Pollock Aquatic Center 4.3 4.3 0 13.0 13.0 65.2
Leach Amphitheatre 4.2 0 8.3 45.8 12.5 29.2
Oshkosh Public Museum 0 0 4.3 8.7 60.9 24.0
Senior Services Center 8.7 8.7 0 0 8.7 68.0
Public Library Services 15.0 15.0 35.0 5.0 5.0 25.0
Police Services 4.8 0 4.8 0 28.6 61.9
Fire Protection and Prevention Services 4.5 0 0 0 9.1 86.4
Emergency Medical Services (ambulance) 4.5 0 0 4.5 4.5 86.4
Building Permits and Inspections 4.5 0 0 0 40.9 54.5
Enforcement of Property
Maintenance/Nuisance Codes 4.8 0 0 0 14.3
81.0
City Parking Facilities Building 4.3 17.4 34.8 8.7 13.0 21.7
Oshkosh Community Media Services 0 22.7 13.6 9.1 13.6 40.9
Transit System 4.8 4.8 0 0 9.5 81.0
Recycling Collection Services 4.2 58.3 20.8 0 4.2 12.5
Refuse Collection Service 4.2 58.3 12.5 8.3 0 16.7
Leaf and Brush Pick up 4.3 8.7 4.3 39.1 8.7 34.8
2. How Oshkosh Citizens feel about their City results –percentages:
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No
Opinion
Oshkosh as a place to live? 13.6 63.6 18.2 4.5 0
Feeling a part of the community? 4.5 45.5 36.4 13.6 0
Your neighborhood as a place to live? 13.6 63.6 13.6 9.1 0
Oshkosh as a place to raise children? 13.6 50.0 18.2 9.1 9.1
Oshkosh as a place to retire? 4.5 40.9 31.8 13.6 9.1
Community openness and acceptance of diversity? 0 45.5 27.3 27.3 0
The overall quality of life in Oshkosh? 0 68.2 22.7 9.1 0
Oshkosh as an environmentally friendly city? 4.5 36.4 45.5 8.0 4.5
Oshkosh as a place to work? 9.5 42.9 33.3 14.3 0
The direction Oshkosh is moving for the future? 13.6 36.4 22.7 22.7 4.5
Affordability of living in Oshkosh? 18.2 40.9 40.9 0 0
Availability of entertainment/events? 9.5 33.3 42.9 14.3 0
The quality of entertainment/events? 9.1 36.4 40.9 13.6 0
3. How safe or unsafe you feel in your neighborhood after dark - percentages.
Very Safe Safe Neither Unsafe Very Unsafe Don’t Know
45.5 40.9 13.6 0 0 0
51
4. Were you or anyone in your household the victim of a crime – percentages.
Yes No
9.1 90.9
5. If “Yes”, did you report all of these crimes- percentages.
Yes No Don’t Know
100 0
6. Importance of services – percentages.
Importance of City Services Very
Important
Somewhat
Important
Somewhat
Unimportant
Very
Unimportant
No Opinion/
Neutral
Community Services
Support for Neighborhood Revitalization Programs 50.0 38.9 5.6 0 5.6
Oshkosh Public Museum 41.2 35.3 23.5 0 0
Oshkosh Community Media Services 38.9 27.8 22.2 11.1 0
Public Library Services 16.7 61.1 16.7 0 5.6
Senior Services Center 38.9 50.0 5.6 0 5.6
Transit System 33.3 44.4 22.2 0 0
Appearance of City-Owned Buildings 38.9 38.9 16.7 5.6 0
Parks
Bike and Pedestrian Trails 33.3 50.0 11.1 5.6 0
Lake Shore Golf Course 47.1 11.8 11.8 17.6 11.8
Appearance of City Parks & Greenways 55.6 33.3 11.1 0 0
Pollock Aquatic Center 33.3 27.8 22.2 16.7 0
Economic Development
Economic Development Assistance to Businesses 44.4 22.2 22.2 11.1 0
Efforts to Improve the Quality of Housing 33.3 38.9 27.8 0 0
Building Permits and Inspections 38.9 16.7 33.3 5.6 5.6
Enforcement of Property Maintenance/Nuisance Codes 44.4 22.2 27.8 0 5.6
Land Use, Planning, and Zoning Services 33.3 27.8 33.3 0 5.6
Refuse and Recycling
Leaf and Brush Pick up 44.4 33.3 11.1 5.6 5.6
Recycling Collection Services 27.8 55.6 11.1 0 5.6
Refuse Collection Service 41.2 52.9 5.9 0 0
Protective Services
Police Services 33.3 55.6 5.6 5.6 0
Emergency Medical Services (ambulance) 38.9 50.0 11.1 0 0
Fire Protection and Prevention Services 38.9 50.0 11.1 0 0
Road Maintenance and Construction 0
City Parking Facilities 44.4 16.7 38.9 0 0
City’s Sidewalk System 33.3 44.4 22.2 0 0
Removal of Snow and Ice From City Streets 22.2 66.7 5.6 0 5.6
Traffic Signs and Signals 38.9 44.4 11.1 0 5.6
Street Lighting 38.9 44.4 11.1 0 5.6
Street Maintenance and Sweeping 50.0 27.8 5.6 11.1 5.6
Street Repair 22.2 66.7 5.6 5.6 0
Storm Drainage
Storm Drainage Systems 27.8 50.0 8.0 5.6 5.6
52
7. Quality of service –percentages.
Importance of City Services Excellent
Quality
Good
Quality
Fair
Quality
Poor
Quality
Don’t
Know
Community Services
Support for Neighborhood Revitalization
Programs
17.6 35.3 35.3 0 11.8
Oshkosh Public Museum 23.5 52.9 17.6 0 5.9
Community Media Cable TV, Radio, Internet
Services
25.0 37.5 25.0 0 12.5
Public Library Services 43.8 31.3 12.0 0 6.3
Senior Services Center 23.5 23.5 17.6 0 35.3
Transit System 6.3 31.3 25.0 0 37.5
Appearance of City-Owned Buildings 12.5 37.5 31.3 0 18.8
Parks
Bike and Pedestrian Trails 6.7 53.3 33.3 0 6.7
Lake Shore Golf Course 7.7 15.4 23.1 0 53.8
Appearance of City Parks & Greenways 18.8 31.3 37.5 6.3 6.3
Pollock Aquatic Center 21.4 28.6 21.4 0 28.6
Economic Development
Economic Development Assistance to Businesses 13.3 33.3 20.0 0 33.3
Efforts to Improve the Quality of Housing 0 46.7 26.7 0 26.7
Building Permits and Inspections 0 21.4 35.7 7.1 35.7
Enforcement of Property Maintenance/Nuisance
Codes
0 33.3 20.0 13.3 33.3
Land Use, Planning, and Zoning Services 0 38.5 23.1 15.4 23.1
Refuse and Recycling
Leaf and Brush Pick up 13.3 46.7 26.7 6.7 6.7
Recycling Collection Services 40.0 33.3 20.0 0 6.7
Refuse Collection Service 43.8 25.0 25.0 0 6.3
Protective Services
Police Services 40.0 33.3 20.0 0 6.7
Emergency Medical Services (ambulance) 28.6 42.9 0 0 28.6
Fire Protection and Prevention Services 46.7 33.3 0 0 20.0
Road Maintenance and Construction
City Parking Facilities 14.3 35.7 35.7 0 14.3
City’s Sidewalk System 6.3 37.5 37.5 12.5 6.3
Removal of Snow and Ice From City Streets 13.3 33.3 20.0 26.7 6.7
Traffic Signs and Signals 12.5 50.0 25.0 0 12.5
Street Lighting 20.0 26.7 40.0 0 13.3
Street Maintenance and Sweeping 12.5 37.5 37.5 0 12.5
Street Repair 6.7 20.0 40.0 26.7 6.7
Storm Drainage
Storm Drainage Systems 13.3 46.7 26.7 0 13.3
53
8. and 9. – Budgeting Priorities - Dollars
Extra $1
million
Reduce $1
million
Net
Increase or
(Decrease)
Community Services 377,778 187,500 112,500
Economic Development 44,444 218.750 -168,750
Refuse and Recycling 22,222 81,250 -56,250
Finance and Administration 33,333 143,750 -106,250
Police Protection 72,222 112,500 -31,250
Fire Suppression/ Prevention 33,333 37,500 0
Parks 177,778 37,500 162,500
Storm Water Maintenance 133,333 131,250 18,750
Road Maintenance 105,556 50,000 68,750
10. How willing are you to have Oshkosh impose a new $20 a year registration fee on
vehicles for transportation related programs?
Very
Supportive
Somewhat
Supportive
Neutral Somewhat
Unsupportive
Very
Unsupportive
18.2 27.3 18.2 9.1 27.3
11. If Oshkosh were to create a registration fee, how should it be used?
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Don’t
Agree
Strongly
Don’t Agree
Construction/related projects 20.0 30.0 10.0 10.0 30.0
General street maintenance 40.0 20.0 10.0 10.0 20.0
Question 13 – Analysis of Survey Demographic Results
Survey Survey
Results %
Gender Male 6 24.0
Female 4 16.0
Missing 15 60.0
Year Born 18 to 40 3 12.0
41 to 60 5 20.0
Over 60 2 8.0
Missing 15 60.0
Marital Status Married 5 20.0
Not Married 5 20.0
Widowed 0 0
Missing 15 60.0
Time Lived in 5 or less 3 12.0
Oshkosh 6 to 20 2 8.0
>20 5 20.0
Missing 15 60.0
Own or Rent Own 6 24.0
54
Rent 4 16.0
Missing 15 60.0
Number of None 7 28.0
Children 1 1 4.0
2 2 8.0
3 or More 0 0
Missing 15 60.0
Place of North of Fox 3 12.0
Residence South of Fox/East of 41 4 16.0
South of Fox/West of 41 3 12.0
Missing 15 60.0
Income Under 24,999 1 4.0
25k to 49,999 1 4.0
50k to 74,999 3 12.0
75k to 99,999 2 8.0
Over 100k 3 12.0
Missing 15 60.0
Employment Employed Full Time 6 24.0
Status Employed Part Time 1 4.0
Self Employed 1 4.0
Presently Unemployed 0 0
Student 0 0
Retired 2 8.0
Missing 15 60.0
Occupation Homemaker 1 4.0
Service Occupations 0 0
Sales 0 0
Education 2 8.0
Professional Management 2 8.0
Farming, Fishing, or Forestry 0 0
Construction, Maintenance 0 0
Production/Transportation 0 0
Other 3 12.0
Missing 17 68.0
Education Less than HS 0 0
HS/GED 2 16.0
Associates/Some College 2 8.0
Bachelors 4 16.0
Masters or higher 2 8.0
Missing 15 60.0
Race White 7 28.0
Native Hawaiian 0 0
Hispanic or Latino 0 0
Asian 0 0
African-American 1 4.0
American Indian 0 0
Two or More Races 1 4.0
Other 1 4.0
Missing 15 60.0