This survey, similar to one conducted earlier in the year, shows divided public opinion about how to handle a budget crunch driven by the city's unfunded pension debts.

Few questions listed in the survey showed widespread support for a possible response, although most residents agreed a Headlee override would be the best option for the city if it sought to pursue millage increases.

Residents chose this option at a 40 percent clip, beating out millages for parks and recreation, public safety, pensions and infrastructure. No other option garnered more than 22 percent support.

The Headlee Amendment to the state constitution rolls back the tax rate as property values increase. A Headlee override would restore the 2.4 mills East Lansing has lost as a result of the amendment, while the other options would add 3 additional mills.

It was far more common to see a lack of consensus, as was the case for the issue of restricting revenues from the possible income tax.

Forty percent of respondents voted for an unrestricted tax to go into the city's general fund, while 38 percent supported investing solely in public safety, as those departments face potentially significant staffing cuts. 

The remaining 22 percent voted to dedicate revenues to legacy costs, like the city's unfunded pensions.

Residents were also divided on how to best raise revenues, as the most popular revenue option for the city was to implement an income tax. Thirty-five percent voted for the tax, beating out a combination of millage increases and an income tax by 10 percentage points.

There were marked differences between the in-person and online voting results, potentially as a result of the differing online and in-person sample sizes. 

When asked what income tax option most supported, 53 percent of in-person voters selected an unrestricted, indefinite income tax. Meanwhile, 51 percent of the much larger online voting pool voted for an income tax with both a specified purpose and a time limit. 

Lahanas said considering the results, including a time limit on any potential income tax, would likely appeal to more citizens, although not by a significant margin.

"Some time restriction would capture people or encourage people who believe it should be time limited, plus it would also hopefully appeal to people who voted for unrestricted," Lahanas said.