SLIDE 1
METHODOLOGY
2
A DDITIONAL I NFORMATION : P ROP . 15 A ND C OMMUNITY R EINVESTMENT - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
A DDITIONAL I NFORMATION : P ROP . 15 A ND C OMMUNITY R EINVESTMENT - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
L OS A NGELES C OUNTY C OMMUNITY R EINVESTMENT AND H OUSING S TABILIZATION B ALLOT M EASURE F EASIBILITY S TUDY 1,200 L IKELY N OVEMBER 2020 V OTERS J ULY 2020 M ETHODOLOGY Survey conducted June 25-July 2, 2020
SLIDE 2
SLIDE 3
KEY FINDINGS
3
- 1. Considerable political will exists among voters to set aside tax dollars for
services and supports that will revitalize underserved and low-income communities, stabilize housing, and promote racial equity.
- 2. When presented with draft ballot measure language for a measure to dedicate a
percentage of existing revenues to address these issues, fully 67% of voters say they are inclined to vote “yes” in favor, including nearly two-in-five (38%) who say they would “definitely vote yes.”
- 3. The measure enjoys high levels of support across each of the five Supervisorial
Districts, with especially high levels of commitment among union members, African Americans, Latinx voters,White voters, and Asian Americans.
SLIDE 4
DETAILED FINDINGS
SLIDE 5
- PROP. 15: SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES FIRST DESCRIPTION
5
Next, I would like to ask you about a couple of measures that may appear on the ballot in the upcoming November Election. INCREASES FUNDING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES BY CHANGING TAX ASSESSMENT OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
- PROPERTY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Increases funding for K-through-12 public schools, community colleges, and local governments by requiring that commercial and industrial real property be taxed based on current market value. Exempts from this change: residential properties; agricultural properties; and owners of commercial and industrial properties with combined value of $3 million dollars or less. Increased education funding will supplement existing school funding guarantees. Exempts small businesses from personal property tax; for other businesses, exempts $500,000 dollars worth of personal property.
SLIDE 6
MORETHAN 3-IN-5 VOTERS SUPPORT SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES FIRST
6
Q: If this measure were on the ballot and the election were held today, would you vote “yes” in favor of it or “no” to oppose it?
37% 21% 7% 6% 6% 14% 8% 1%
0% 20% 40%
Definitely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes Undecided, Lean No Probably No Definitely No Undecided Prefer Not To Say Total Yes 63%
Percent of Respondents
Total No 28%
SLIDE 7
COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AND HOUSING STABILIZATION POTENTIAL BALLOT MEASURE LANGUAGE
7
Split Sample A (½ of Respondents):
❖ To invest in residents and families earning less than the County median income and underserved communities, with small business support, healing and resiliency centers, job training and placement services; ❖ Establish a Los Angeles County Office of Racial Equity that administers a Community Justice Fund; ❖ Establish a new Los Angeles County Youth Development Department that focuses services
- n
highly-policed communities; and ❖ Provide homes for all. Shall Los Angeles County allocate 10 percent of existing Los Angeles tax receipts to fund these services with citizen oversight and annual audits?
Split Sample B (½ of Respondents):
To address the disproportionate impact
- f
racial injustice, historic over-use of criminal justice responses, lack of economic opportunity, underinvestment, and housing insecurity in low-income and underserved communities shall Los Angeles County allocate 10 percent of existing tax receipts to fund: ❖ Community-based responses to maintaining community safety; ❖ Job training and placement services; ❖ Affordable housing development and rent subsidies; ❖ Small business lending and support services; and ❖ Mentoring/youth development programs. Shall Los Angeles County allocate 10 percent of existing Los Angeles tax receipts to fund these services with annual independent audits and citizen’s oversight?
SLIDE 8
A MEASURE DESIGNEDTO ADDRESS RACIAL INJUSTICE GARNERS SLIGHTLY MORE SUPPORT
8
To Invest in Low-Income and Underserved Communities To Address the Disproportionate Impact of Racial Injustice
37% 21% 7% 6% 6% 14% 9%
0% 20% 40%
Definitely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes Undecided, Lean No Probably No Definitely No DK/PNTS Total No 27% Total Yes 64%
Percent of Respondents * May not sum precisely due to rounding.Percentages below 5% not displayed.
Total Yes 69% 40% 20% 9% 5% 15% 8%
0% 20% 40%
Total No 23%
SLIDE 9
REACTIONSTO HIGHER SET ASIDE PERCENTAGES ARE MIXED
SOMEWOULD BE MORE LIKELYTO SUPPORT; OTHERSWOULD BE LESS LIKELY
9
29% 31% 37% 31% 11% 15% 23% 24%
More Likely Makes No Difference DK/PNTS Less Likely Percent of Respondents
Q: Suppose the measure I just described to you set aside __ percent of existing tax revenues, instead of 10 percent. If that were the case, would you be more or less likely to support it—or, would it make no difference to you? (Split Sampled)
15% of existing tax revenues 20% of existing tax revenues
SLIDE 10
2/3RDS OFVOTERS SUPPORT A POTENTIAL MEASURE
TO DIRECT AT LEAST 10% OFTHE BUDGETTO UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES
10
Q: If this measure were on the ballot and the election were held today, would you vote “yes” in favor of it or “no” to oppose it? (Splits Combined)
38% 21% 8% 5% 6% 15% 4% 4%
0% 20% 40%
Defintely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes Undecided, Lean No Probably No Defintely No Undecided Prefer Not To Say Total Yes 67%
Percent of Respondents
Total No 25%
SLIDE 11
THE POTENTIAL MEASURE ENJOYS SOLID SUPPORT ACROSS LOS ANGELES SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICTS
11
% of Sample →→ (22%) (21%) (22%) (17%) (18%) 43% 48% 45% 32% 27% 29% 30% 26% 28% 32% 22% 17% 21% 31% 32% 7% 6% 9% 9% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60%
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5
Definitely Yes Probably Yes/Undecided Lean Yes Total No DK/PNTS
Total Yes: 72% Total Yes: 78% Total Yes: 60% Total Yes: 59% Total Yes: 71%
Ballot Measure Vote by Supervisorial District Splits A and B Combined *
* Percentages below 5% not displayed.
SLIDE 12
SUPPORT IS HIGHEST AMONG BLACKVOTERS
12
41% 40% 56% 31% 25% 32% 28% 42% 25% 21% 10% 19% 10% 7% 5% 7% 0% 20% 40% 60%
Whites Latinos African Americans Asian Americans
Definitely Yes Probably Yes/Undecided Lean Yes Total No DK/PNTS % of Sample →→ (35%) (34%) (10%) (7%)
Total Yes: 66% Total Yes: 72%
Total Yes: 84%
Total Yes: 73%
Ballot Measure Vote by Race/Ethnicity Splits A and B Combined *
* Percentages below 5% not displayed.
SLIDE 13
MORETHAN 7-IN-10 UNION MEMBERS ARE INCLINEDTOVOTE YES
13
44% 37% 29% 29% 24% 25% 9% 0% 20% 40% 60%
Union Members Non-Union Members
Definitely Yes Probably Yes/Undecided Lean Yes Total No DK/PNTS % of Sample →→ (28%) (66%) * Percentages below 5% not displayed.
Total Yes: 73% Total Yes: 66%
Ballot Measure Vote by Union Membership Splits A and B Combined*
SLIDE 14
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
- PROP. 15 AND COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT & HOUSING STABILIZATION
14
The first measure I asked you about—The Schools and Communities First Measure—is estimated to generate approximately $3.4 billion dollars in new tax revenue for Los Angeles County every year—if it passes. The second measure—The Los Angeles Community Reinvestment and Housing Stabilization Measure—would NOT raise taxes. Instead, it would ensure that at least 10 percent of the Los Angeles County budget is directed to underserved and low-income communities. Now that you have heard more about it, if the election were held today, would you vote “yes” in favor of setting aside at least 10 percent of the County budget for underserved and low income communities, or “no” to oppose it?
SLIDE 15
SUPPORT REMAINS HIGH INTHE CONTEXT OF SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES FIRST
15
Q: If this measure were on the ballot and the election were held today, would you vote “yes” in favor of it or “no” to oppose it?
Percent of Respondents
38%
29% 11% 15% 8%
0% 20% 40%
Definitely Yes Probably/Lean Yes Probably/Lean No Definitely No Undecided Total Yes 67% Total No 25% Initial Vote 39% 30% 8% 14% 10%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Total Yes 69% Total No 22% After Information About SCF
SLIDE 16
ATTITUDESTOWARD POTENTIAL BALLOT MEASURE PROVISIONS
SLIDE 17
VOTERS DO SUPPORT SUBSTANTIAL ANNUAL INVESTMENTS
17
44% 19% 24% 22% 11% 19% 5% 15% 16% 26%
Strongly Support Somewhat Support DK/PNTS Somewhat Oppose Strongly Oppose Percent of Respondents
Q: The structure of the Community Reinvestment and Housing Stabilization Measure has not been finalized. I am going to ask you about a variety of potential features that might be included as a part of the measure.After each one, please tell me if you support or oppose that feature.
* Split sampled.
Total
Support
69% Total
Support*
40% *Would set aside at least $750 million dollars in funding every year for underserved communities Would only set aside funding generated through property taxes
SLIDE 18
A MAJORITYWOULD STRONGLY SUPPORT SHIFTING FUNDING FROM
LAW ENFORCEMENT INTO COMMUNITY PROGRAMS
18
51% 45% 38% 16% 16% 20% 7% 7% 15% 6% 9% 10% 19% 23% 16%
Strongly Support Somewhat Support DK/PNTS Somewhat Oppose Strongly Oppose Percent of Respondents
Q: The structure of the Community Reinvestment and Housing Stabilization Measure has not been finalized. I am going to ask you about a variety of potential features that might be included as a part of the measure.After each one, please tell me if you support or oppose that feature.
Total
Support
67% Total
Support*
61% Total
Support*
59%
* Split sampled.
*Shifts funding from law enforcement to community-based programs proven to address the root causes of crime *Reduces the Sheriff’s Department budget by at least 10 percent and re- directs the funding to programs and services in underserved communities Would target funding to historically
- ver-policed communities
SLIDE 19
MORETHAN 3-IN-5 VOTERS SUPPORT DIRECTING FUNDINGTO
THOSE EARNING LESSTHANTHE MEDIAN INCOME AND BLACK RESIDENTS
19
43% 43% 24% 22% 9% 12% 10% 7% 15% 16%
Strongly Support Somewhat Support DK/PNTS Somewhat Oppose Strongly Oppose Percent of Respondents
Q: The structure of the Community Reinvestment and Housing Stabilization Measure has not been finalized. I am going to ask you about a variety of potential features that might be included as a part of the measure.After each one, please tell me if you support or oppose that feature.
*Would target funding to residents and families earning less than the County’s median income *Would target funding to Black residents and communities
Total
Support*
66% Total
Support*
64%
* Split sampled.
SLIDE 20
VOTER FUNDING PRIORITIES
SLIDE 21
3-IN-5 SUPPORT FUNDINGTO ENSURE RESIDENTS PAY NO MORETHAN 30% OF INCOME ON HOUSING
21
Q: Next, would you support or oppose using funding from this measure to ensure Los County residents pay no more than 30 percent of their total income on housing?
41% 22% 6% 17% 14%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Strongly Support Somewhat Support Somewhat Oppose Strongly Oppose DK/PNTS Total Support 63%
Percent of Respondents
Total Oppose 23%
SLIDE 22
INCREASING MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND PROGRAMS
FORYOUTH RANK ASTOP-TIER PRIORITIES
22
49% 45% 43% 39% 27% 28% 29% 31% 12% 13% 15% 16% 6% 9% 6% 6% 9% 8% 8%
Extremely Important Very Important Somewhat Important DK/PNTS Not Too Important Percent of Respondents * Percentages below 5% not displayed.
Q: I’d like to ask you about other ways funding from this measure might be spent. After you hear each one, please tell me how important it is to you personally that each one receive funding—extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. Increasing community-based counseling and mental health services Increasing funding for restorative justice programs to keep young people
- ut of the criminal justice system
Providing job training and placement services to low-income residents Increasing funding for mentoring and youth development programs
Total Ext./Very 76% 72% 72% 70%
SLIDE 23
3-IN-5 VOTERS IDENTIFY RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND GRANTS FOR
SMALL MINORITY OWNED BUSINESS AS HIGHLY IMPORTANT
23
36% 35% 30% 31% 26% 26% 25% 23% 17% 21% 25% 22% 6% 7% 7% 14% 14% 12% 16%
Extremely Important Very Important Somewhat Important DK/PNTS Not Too Important Percent of Respondents * Percentages below 5% not displayed.
Q: I’d like to ask you about other ways funding from this measure might be spent. After you hear each one, please tell me how important it is to you personally that each one receive funding—extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. Providing rent assistance and housing vouchers to those at-risk of losing their housing Establishing a funding grant program to help support small minority owned businesses Enhancing incentives for employers to hire job candidates who have a prior criminal conviction but have served their time and are trying to get a job Providing rental support programs for people at risk of eviction
Total Ext./Very 63% 62% 55% 54%
SLIDE 24
HOME DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE FOR BLACK RESIDENTS AND SECURITY DEPOSIT GRANTS ARE CONSIDERED LOWER PRIORITIES
24
29% 24% 29% 25% 25% 25% 18% 18% 18% 20% 22% 23% 7% 12% 10% 10% 21% 19% 22% 24%
Extremely Important Very Important Somewhat Important DK/PNTS Not Too Important Percent of Respondents * Percentages below 5% not displayed.
Q: I’d like to ask you about other ways funding from this measure might be spent. After you hear each one, please tell me how important it is to you personally that each one receive funding—extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. Establishing a funding grant program to help support small Black owned businesses Establishing healing and resiliency centers Increasing down payment and closing cost assistance to African American homebuyers who seek to live in historically red-lined communities Providing funding grants for apartment security deposits
Total Ext./Very 54% 49% 47% 43%
SLIDE 25