Laserfiche WebLink
1986 Metropolitan Community <br /> <br />First Banks <br />Members F~rsl Bank System <br /> <br />Quality of Life <br />Report <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br /> Can our quality of life be mea- <br />sured? If so, is it improving or declin- <br />ing over the years? And what can we <br />do to make it better? <br /> This is the fourth in a series of First <br />Banks reports on the Quality of Life in <br />the Twin Cities. Beginning with a two- <br />page "Social-Environmental Audit" in <br />1972, the report has been expanded to <br />provide original data--notably the <br />perceptions and attitudes of the public <br />at large and of selected community <br />leaders. <br /> The statistical indicators point out <br />problems in education, teen-age un- <br />employment, certain health and en- <br />vironmental measures and in public <br />transportation, as well as improve- <br />ments in charitable contributions and <br />traffic safety. <br /> In addition to the statistical indi- <br />cators, this report contains results of <br />the 1986 First Banks Poll, in which: <br /> · The public and community lead- <br />ers generally agreed on communities' <br />priorities as reflected in spending for <br />education, welfare, public safety, cul- <br />ture and recreation, and environmen- <br />tal control. But compared with com- <br />munity leaders, the public rated <br />spending on health and housing more <br />important and gave transportation <br />and administration lower priorities. <br /> · The public gave significantly <br />higher spending priorities to health <br />and housing than in 1981. <br /> · Compared with community lead- <br />ers, a larger percentage of the public <br />was very satisfied with the quality of <br />education and with crime prevention. <br />Conversely, a larger percentage of <br />leaders was very satisfied with the <br />quality of medical care, the quality of <br /> Continued on page 2 <br /> <br />PERCEPTIONS: Satisfaction <br /> <br />I I I <br /> <br />General Public ~ Community Leaders <br /> <br /> Less than very satisfied Very satisfied <br /> <br />Quality education/or children <br /> <br />The quality of medical care <br /> <br />Employment opportunities in the <br />Oime Vreventio. T ....... . ..... .:......:....! .J ti.. <br /> <br />Assistance for economicaUy <br />disadvantaged families <br />Current environmental standards ] <br /> <br /> ! <br /> <br />The quality of housing <br /> <br />Moving freely and easily from place to place <br /> <br />Number of volunteer orl~anizations and <br />opportu ni ty for political participation <br />Diversity of cultural and arts offerings <br /> <br />Public school efforts to prepaxe <br />children for the future <br /> <br /> II <br /> <br />QUALITY OF LIFE FOCUS: Children and Senior Citizens <br />~[ ExceLlent ~ Good ~ Only Fair ~ Poor ~ Don't Know/Refused <br /> How do you r-ate the Twin Cities How do you rate the Twin <br /> area as a place for children and Cities area ~s a place for senior <br /> teens to grow up in? citizens to live in? <br /> <br />103 <br /> <br />80 <br /> <br />60 <br /> <br />40 <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br /> o <br /> <br />Leaders Public Leaders Public <br /> <br />PAC} <br /> <br /> <br />