HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-Handouts
o
o
wmD
&AssocIATES
4951 Mariposa Drive
San Bernardino, CA 92404
(714) 882-2485
SURVEY OF HIGH PROBABILITY VOTERS
BOND AND TAX QUESTIONS
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
JULY 7-8, 1989
pOlling conducted by: PERSON TO PERSON COMMUNICATORS
o
o
INDEX
TOPIC
BACKGROUND
PAGE
1
THE SAMPLE
2
THE SURVEY
3
THE RESULTS
4
ANALYSIS
5
o
o
BACKGROUND
On Thursday, July 6, 1989, representatives of the City of San
Bernardino contacted WOOD-HUSING to see if it was possible to
conduct a survey of high probability San Bernardino voters to
ascertain their feelings toward a bond election for the November
1989 ballot. The survey was to be designed, conducted and
analyzed by July 10, 1989, an extraordinarily short lead time.
Such a survey required several elements:
1. Access to a database of San Bernardino voters, flagged by
whether they voted in the last city primary and/or gen-
eral election. The database needed to contain telephone
numbers. WOOD-HUSING maintains a live database with this
information.
2. A random sample of 1,000 pulled from this database to in-
sure accuracy to within 95% accuracy and to pull suffic-
ient names from each ward to give 90% accuracy. WOOD-
HUSING'S computer was able to accomplish this task.
3. Telephoning capability to reach the sample rapidly. PER-
SON TO PERSON COMMUNICATORS is located in San Bernardino
and is one of the best and most experienced firms in this
business in California.
4. Tests of the survey question(s) to insure that accurate
responses are received.
5. The ability to analyze the results. Dr. John Husing tau-
ght quantitative analysis for 17 years and has analyzed
numerous surveys of this type.
WOOD-HUSING contacted PERSON-TO-PERSON COMMUNICATORS and deter-
mined that they would be able to carry out the field work. The
project thus was undertaken.
-1-
o
o
THE SAMPLE
In order to work with high probabil i ty voters, the sample was
drawn from a universe which only included those families who
voted in. the March, 1989 San Bernardino Primary City Election.
This universe was made up of slightly over 19,000 voters in some
14,000 households.
Pulling a sample of 1,000 meant that 1 in 14 households responded
to the survey. The result therefore exceeded the accuracy levels
desired. There were also sufficient households randomly drawn
from each Ward to give the desired level of accuracy in each
Ward.
The only bias in the sample was towards Wards 1 and 2 as they had
contested Council elections in the March Primary insuring a
slightly higher turnout. Allowance was made for this by testing
different weights by ward in calculating an overall city result.
The weighted averages were found to give results not significant-
ly different from the raw results.
-2-
o
o
THE SURVEY
Sampled voters were asked whether they would vote for a bond
issue for streets, a pOlice headquarters and parks. They were
also asked if they would vote for a utility tax for either police
only or streets only. The latter two questions were asked to
give a contrasting view to the bond election and to insure the
accuracy of the survey. In each case voters were given a dollar
figure per month so they did not feel they were being fooled as
to the probable impact of the measure on their family budget.
PERSON-TO-PERSON COMMUNICATORS called from 3: OOPM to 8: 30PM on
Friday, July 7 and from 10:00AM to 1:00PM on Saturday, July 8.
Altogether they completed 1,021 surveys.
The question text was:
Hi. My name is
to Person Communicators. We're
Mayor and Council... to see if
... ideas in the next election.
. I'm calling for Person
conducting a poll ... for your
you'd support one ... of three
May I ask you three short questions?
First, they are considering a bond issue ... to repave and
landscape streets allover the city... construct a modern police
headquarters ... and build new park facilities around the city.
The cost would be about $10 a month to a typical family.
How would you vote on this idea:
Yes
No
Don't Know
Instead ... voters may be asked to increase the utility tax about
$7 a month per family ... for expanded police protection only.
How would you vote on this idea:
Yes
No
Don't Know
Or ... they might ask voters to increase the utility tax about $7
a month for repaving and relandscaping streets throughout the
city. How would you vote on this idea:
Yes
No
Don't Know
Thank you for your time.
-3-
o
THE RESULTS
.L.
o
The breakdown of responses by Ward, and for the City, was as
follows:
Ward
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
City
$lO/mo. Bonds
Police/St./pks
Yes
Und
$7/mo. Utlty Tax
Police Only
35.5
30.0
20.8
36.7
39.0
37.6
27.2
Yes
36.2
46.0
62.3
46.4
42.1
45.2
49.8
No
Und
28.3
24.0
17.0
16.9
18.9
17.2
23.0
33.2 45.6 21.1
$7/mo. Utlty Tax
Streets Only
30.9
32.9
12.7
19.3
20.2
29.0
16.0
Yes
44.1
40.0
60.0
61.9
59.5
51.6
64.5
No
Und
25.0
27.1
27.3
18.8
20.2
19.4
19.5
22.2 56.5 21.4
If the undecided were to vote Yes/No in the same ratio as those
who gave a definite answer the results would be:
Ward
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
City
No
34.2
34.3
27.8
36.9
41.6
37.1
38.0
34.2
42.2
51.9
41.0
38.6
40.2
40.6
31.5
23.5
20.4
22.1
19.9
22.7
21.4
36.8 40.2 23.0
$10/mo. Bonds
Police/St./Pks
Yes
No
50.0
44.9
34.9
47.4
51.9
48.0
48.4
50.0
55.1
65.1
52.6
48.1
52.0
51.6
47.8 52.2
$7/mo. Utlty Tax
Police Only
Yes
49.5
39.5
25.0
44.2
48.1
45.5
35.4
No
50.5
60.5
75.0
55.8
51.9
54.5
64.6
42.1 57.9
-4-
$7/mo. utlty Tax
Streets Only
Yes
41.2
45.2
17.5
23.7
25.4
36.0
19.9
No
58.8
54.8
82.5
76.3
74.6
64.0
80.1
28.2 71.8
o
o
ANALYSIS
BOND ISSUE COSTING $lO/MO.
A review of the survey results indicates that at this time it is
very unlikely the voters would pass a bond issue,-COSting voters
$10 per month, to fix streets, build a new police headquarters
and build new park facilities.
Voters are split on the issue 36.8% YES and 40.2% NO with 23.0%
UNDECIDED. If the UNDECIDED were to split by the ratio of those
currently saying YES/NO, the result would be 47.8% YES, 52.2% NO.
While an election campaign on the issue might move these percent-
ages such that a majority would favor the bond issue, it should
be noted that bonds require a 66.7% super-majority to pass. That
would mean convincing every undecided voter to vote YES, and
changing the minds of some NO voters.
Looking at the Ward by Ward results, there does not appear to be
sufficient support in anyone of them to pass a bond issue today.
Only in the 5th Ward does as much as a majority (41.6% to 38.6%)
of those expressing an opinion favor the idea. The 1st Ward
split was (34.2% to 34.2%), with all others showing a majority
opposed.
UTILITY TAX COSTING $7/MO. FOR STREETS ONLY
The mention of the word "tax", in conjunction with repairing
streets is not a popular idea in San Bernardino at this time. On
raising the utility tax an average of $7 a month per family for
street repair only, the result was 22.2% YES, 56.5% NO, with
21.4% UNDECIDED. If the UNDECIDED were to split by the ratio of
those currently saying YES/NO, the result would be 28.2% YES,
71. 8% NO.
The Ward by Ward results show universal opposition to this idea.
UTILITY TAX COSTING $7/MO. FOR POLICE PROTECTION ONLY
The mention of the word "tax", even in conjunction with police
protection, does not enjoy majority support in San Bernardino at
this time. On raising the utility tax an average of $7 a month
per family for police protection only, the result was 33.2% YES,
45.6% NO, with 21.1% UNDECIDED. If the UNDECIDED were to split
by the ratio of those currently saying YES/NO, the result would
be 42.1% YES, 57.9% NO.
Though an election campaign conducted on
much better chance of passage than one
still would have a great uphill climb.
this issue would have a
for street repairs, it
It would require the
-5-
o
o
UNDECIDED to split 80%-20% in favor of the issue to reach 50%, or
some portion of the those answering NO would have to have their
minds changed, plus a distinct majority of the UNDECIDED.
Skilled election campaigns have accomplished the latter of these
tasks, though not with ease.
Wards 1, 5 and 6 show the least opposition to such a police
protection tax measure. Wards 2, 3 and 7 show the greatest
opposition.
The two Utility Tax questions would tend to indicate that the
word "tax. is received very negatively by the probable voters of
San Bernardino, though when connected to the idea of police
protection this opposition softens substantially (56.5% NO on a
tax for streets, 45.6% NO on a tax for police protection).
-6-