Thrive
Livability survey highlights St. Pete’s strengths, weaknesses
While St. Petersburg residents overwhelmingly appreciate the city’s quality of life, their views on governance, affordability and natural disaster safety are decidedly less favorable.
Local leaders will use those sentiments, derived from the 2024 Community Survey, to help inform budget and policy decisions. City Council members heard the report’s much-anticipated results Thursday at a committee meeting.
The livability survey was part of the National Research Center’s nationwide initiative. Administrator Rob Gerdes credited Mayor Ken Welch for his willingness to participate.
“Sometimes feedback, as we all know, can be a little painful in some areas,” Gerdes said. “But that’s good – that’s the kind of information we need to make ourselves better.”
Polco, a civic communication and analytics platform, conducted the survey from Jan. 16 through March 5. The organization mailed questionnaires to 5,000 randomly selected households and received 590 responses.
Polco also offered an open survey that garnered 2,497 responses. Questions focused on aspects of community livability, including the economy, safety, mobility, parks and recreation, education, arts and culture.
“The last time something like this was done, it was done on a typewriter,” said Amy Foster, housing development administrator. “So, this is a long time coming.”
The study had a 95% confidence interval with a +/- 4% margin of error. Polco weighted responses to reflect the city’s demographics.
The firm compared favorability ratings to over 500 communities with more than 50 million residents. St. Petersburg mostly achieved similar results in the broad, primary categories.
Parks and recreation paced the city as 82% of residents considered the local offerings “excellent or good,” which aligned with national benchmarks. Education, arts and culture’s 80% favorability rating was higher than most other cities.
A graphic highlighting how St. Petersburg compared to other communities in broad, primary categories. Screengrab.
St. Petersburg scored considerably higher in subcategories. Cultural, arts and music activities (86%) ranked 5th nationally, and downtown vibrancy placed 8th.
“Overall, I felt very good about what people thought about the city … whether they would recommend it to somebody and whether they’re going to continue to live here or not,” said Councilmember Copley Gerdes. “I thought those were all positive things.”
Despite somewhat lower scores, community design (62%), inclusivity and engagement (60%), the economy (57%) and mobility (53%) mirrored nationwide responses. The utility category (48%), which included privately provided electricity, fell below national standards – and residents believe it is the most important livability aspect (93%).
The city scored poorly in several governance metrics. Less than half of respondents think officials act in their best interests or treat all residents fairly. Just 40% believe they are open and transparent.
Councilmember Ed Montanari noted that just two of the 10 governance subcategories received a favorability rating above 50%. “I’m very proud to be an elected official in the City of St. Petersburg because I think we … operate at a very high level, a very responsive government,” he said.
“And so I expected some of these numbers to be above the national benchmarks.”
Living costs (16%) and housing affordability (13%) received the lowest favorability ratings. While that mirrors statewide and national trends, most comparison communities received higher scores.
Administrator Gerdes said utility and property tax costs affect affordability, one of the study’s many broad metrics. He also believes the city’s negative response to available public parking (35% favorable) will help inform the council’s ongoing “philosophical discussions” regarding developmental requirements.
Foster noted that 900 public parking spaces are under construction in the Edge District. The Historic Gas Plant District’s impending redevelopment will significantly aid those efforts.
A graphic highlighting discrepancies between quality and importance. Screengrab.
St. Petersburg’s stormwater management (47%) and utility infrastructure (48%) also lagged national benchmarks. Just 53% of residents believe they are safe from fires, floods or natural disasters, the city’s only “much lower” benchmark comparison.
Polco, notably, conducted the study before Tropical Storm Debby caused flooding in August and torrential downpours inundated much of the city earlier this month.
While 70% of respondents reported an overall feeling of safety, Council Chair Deborah Figgs-Sanders said that number is likely exponentially lower in some zip codes. Foster said administrators made a concerted effort to ensure equal representation.
Foster explained that officials now have baseline data to measure improvements and regression in what will become an annual initiative. She said the city would continue conducting the survey early in the year, allowing officials to incorporate feedback into budgetary discussions.
“We all have strengths and weaknesses,” said Councilmember Lisset Hanewicz. “And this is a very comprehensive way of looking at the city, seeing places where we are doing great work and seeing places where we have to improve.”
To view the results, visit the website here.
JudyToo
September 16, 2024at10:40 pm
SB is absolutely correct. Read it again and weep.
“City Council members heard the report’s much-anticipated results Thursday at a committee meeting.”
Sure they heard but will not act. Governance in St Petersburg has nothing to do with the residents, they have their own agenda, not ours.
We do not need to be paying for a stadium, we do not need a failed bus system that has cost taxpayers $2 Billion over the last ten years while ridership declined to 1.5% of the residents.
We do not need fake affordable housing that will never make a difference to a significant number of residents.
We need infrastructure improvements that benefit 100% of the residents.
We need to wake up and get rid of the mayor and city council and all their puppets who are taking our tax dollars and putting floods in our streets contaminated with sewage.
Our “governance” is a joke and we the people put them there.
We are not allowed to vote on mass expenditures we do not need, most of us will never ever go to that stadium. It is the Rays and the developers dreams come true and who will benefit? Follow the money!
PSTA cost us $188 Million this year for 1.5% of our residents to ride almost free. Half that amount would have put those who really need it in Ubers that require no waiting, get them where they need to go.
They have increased our water bills every year for “infrastructure improvements.” How’s that working out?
They are getting their new stadium, more high rise condos and apartments while we get what for our property tax increases?
We voted for the wrong people. They are taking advantage of us.
Wake up folks, it is time for a change because if we let this go on, we keep paying more and getting less every year.
John Donovan
September 14, 2024at7:50 pm
More road potholes than I can recall in 40 years. Poor road drainage; same heavily traveled streets and avenues.
Meanwhile, more cement barriers being poured. Let’s address the basics and not worry about winning some municipal award for pretty crosswalks.
SB
September 14, 2024at4:40 pm
### St. Petersburg’s Real Priority: Fixing Flood Control, Not Offering Subsidized Housing to Outsiders
It felt like a scene ripped straight from a dystopian science fiction movie: a summer storm the other day, far from extreme by Florida standards, turned parts of St. Petersburg into a waterlogged mess. Streets became rivers, homes were flooded, and cars were submerged under feet of water. But here’s the real issue—it wasn’t the storm itself that caused the flooding. It merely exposed decades of neglect and underinvestment in the city’s flood control system, showing just how fragile the city’s infrastructure has become in the face of what should have been a manageable weather event.
While the city grapples with this flooding crisis, its leadership seems distracted by another initiative: trying to attract more people with the promise of government-subsidized housing. On the surface, affordable housing sounds noble, but it raises critical questions. Do we really want to entice outsiders with housing handouts when long-time residents are facing skyrocketing insurance premiums, costly repairs, and a crumbling flood control system? Worse yet, these housing subsidies are open to anyone, not just those who have lived and contributed here for years.
The problem is, St. Petersburg’s flood control system has been on the verge of failure for decades. Poorly maintained culverts, inadequate drainage systems, and outdated infrastructure have left the city vulnerable. The recent storm simply revealed these long-standing issues for what they are. It wasn’t an extraordinary amount of rainfall that caused the flooding—it was the city’s inability to manage the water. If the flood control system had been properly maintained and modernized over the years, much of the damage could have been avoided. The storm didn’t cause the flooding; it simply pulled back the curtain on problems that have been ignored for far too long.
One of the most serious issues is that many of the homes that flooded recently are now facing long-term financial impacts that residents may not yet fully realize. For many, this storm marked the first time their properties experienced flooding, which brings with it an unenviable problem: they must now disclose this flooding when they sell their homes. The result? A massive reduction in property values. This is an ugly reality that homeowners are about to confront, though many haven’t yet felt the full sting of it. It’s not just the damage from the flood itself—it’s the long-term hit to their home equity, the nest eggs they worked so hard to build.
Meanwhile, the financial burden on residents continues to grow. Comprehensive car insurance rates will spike, flood insurance will become more expensive, and for those without coverage, the cost of repairs will be devastating. Every time another storm hits, the cost of living in St. Petersburg rises, and the city becomes less affordable for the people who have lived here for years.
Yet, instead of addressing these urgent issues, the city is focusing on attracting newcomers with subsidized housing programs. What good is affordable housing when the city itself is becoming increasingly unaffordable due to rising insurance costs and deteriorating infrastructure? The city’s attention should be on fixing the flood control system, not offering housing handouts to outsiders who may not contribute to the community.
Rather than pulling in people who can’t afford the going rates for housing, St. Petersburg needs to focus on making the city livable for the residents who are already here. Long-time homeowners, business owners, and renters are facing rising costs that no amount of subsidized housing will fix. The recent storm should serve as a wake-up call: St. Petersburg must prioritize infrastructure and flood control if it wants to remain a sustainable and livable city for all its residents. Otherwise, the city risks becoming a place where no one can truly afford to live, regardless of how affordable the housing is made to look on paper.