King County Land Conservation and Preservation November 2016 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

King County Land Conservation and Preservation November 2016

Methodology • Live telephone survey of registered voters in King County including landlines and cell phones • Conducted December 6 th – 11 th , 2016 • 500 total interviews, margin of error: + 4.4 percentage points overall at the 95% confidence interval • Interviewing conducted using trained, professional interviewers • Data weighted to be demographically representative of a voter population. • This poll is of the voter population. The voting population is whiter, older, more likely to speak English, and is more affluent than the King County population at large. Please note that due to rounding, some percentages may not add up to exactly 100%. EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 2

The Most Important Priority in King County Unprompted, the environment is not a pressing concern. Transportation/traffic 26% Education 10% Homelessness 10% Housing prices 10% Safety/crime 8% Economy/jobs 5% Environment 4% Politics 3% Taxes 2% Healthcare/human services 2% Poverty 2% Budget/city spending 1% Nothing/no problems 1% Other 10% Don't know 5% Refuse 1% Q4. In your opinion, what is the most important priority in the area today? EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 3

Top Land Conservation Priorities While everything is considered a priority, water is by far the top priority, both overall and in intensity. Mitigating against climate change, salmon, and habitat are also top priorities. 7 - Very High Priority to Fund 6 Protecting water from polluted stormwater runoff 52% 19% Lessening the impact of climate change 46% 15% 36% 22% Helping restore natural salmon runs Protecting habitats critical for biodiversity 36% 22% Protecting agricultural lands and urban farms 38% 19% Protecting recreational lands and parks 34% 22% Protecting urban and rural forest lands 31% 22% Q5-17. Please indicate how high of a priority it is to you to use public funding for each of the environmental issues using a scale of 1 to 7 where 1 means not at all a priority and 7 means a very high priority. EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 4

Other Land Conservation Priorities The following are still high priorities, but the intensity begins to wane. Less than 2 in 5 think trails are a very high priority. 7 - Very High Priority to Fund 6 Improving air quality 33% 20% 33% 17% Protecting open space from development 28% 18% Ensuring equal share in our environmental progress Restoring habitat and improving access on publicly owned 20% 23% lands Creating access to green spaces in urban areas 20% 19% Expanding and enhancing trails 17% 17% Q5-17. Please indicate how high of a priority it is to you to use public funding for each of the environmental issues using a scale of 1 to 7 where 1 means not at all a priority and 7 means a very high priority. EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 5

Plan Support Without any context of other priorities or the cost of implementing the plan, there is near universal support for the plan initially, with more than 50% saying they strongly support it. “King County, with cities, is developing a plan to fund the conservation and preservation of all of the remaining high community and conservation value open spaces in both rural and urban spaces in King County. This plan would protect, improve and provide access to natural lands, parks, river corridors, urban green space, forests and farmland to ensure clean air, healthy water, sustainable forests, biodiversity, recreation, and to ensure our region is more resilient in the face of climate change.” Support 85% Somewhat 34% Strongly Oppose Don't Know/ 51% 13% Refused 6% 2% 6% Q18. Would you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this plan? EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 6

Benefits About Plan – Overall While all of the information about the benefits of the plan is considered important to know, the big picture statement about how healthy forests sustains much about what makes the region special resonates the most, both overall and in intensity. Information about human health, healthy waters and healthy salmon. While not rated a top piece of information overall, mitigation against climate change is considered very important to more than half. Very Somewhat Total Important Important Important (HEALTHY FORESTS) 71% 23% 94% (HUMAN HEALTH) 57% 34% 91% (NATURAL RIVERS, SALMON, PUGET SOUND) 57% 33% 91% (PROTECT HABITAT AND BIODIVERSITY) 33% 90% 57% (PROTECT FOOD SOURCES) 54% 34% 89% (COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE) 58% 30% 88% (GROW SMART/PROTECT GREENSPACE) 58% 30% 88% (ACCESS GREEN SPACE IN CITIES) 52% 32% 84% (PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP) 43% 40% 83% (SOCIAL EQUITY) 49% 33% 81% (TRAILS) 35% 45% 80% (PROTECT AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE) 55% 23% 78% Q19 – Q35. Now I’m going to read you some information about this land conservation plan. After each statement please tell me if that information is very important, somewhat important, or not important to you. If it makes no difference, please just say so. EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 7

Drawbacks About the Plan – Overall Drawbacks of the plan are considered less important than benefits. That the plan would be ill-planned in facilitating growth and that it would have a cost are considered the biggest drawbacks overall. There is a minority that also react poorly to the idea of government being involved in preserving open space. Very Somewhat Total Important Important Important (DIRECTING GROWTH TO ALL THE WRONG 27% 35% 62% PLACES) (TOO EXPENSIVE) 27% 34% 61% (ANTI-GOVERNMENT CONTROL) 31% 25% 55% (NOT KING COUNTY’S JOB) 18% 24% 42% (ALREADY HAVE PLENTY OF LAND CONSERVED) 24% 41% 18% Q19 – Q35. Now I’m going to read you some information about this land conservation plan. After each statement please tell me if that information is very important, somewhat important, or not important to you. If it makes no difference, please just say so. EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 8

Key Findings • There is wide and strong voter support for the concept initially; but this initial test does not include costs or drawbacks. • While the environment is not top of mind, elements of the plans were tested and widely supported. The highest support is for elements relating to water quality, protecting forests, and restoring salmon runs; and support for these items is noticeable higher than others. • The biggest potential concerns among voters are that this proposal might not facilitate smart growth and may come with a cost; a majority of voters express some degree of concern about both of these issues. EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 9

Contacts Ian Stewart Ian@EMCresearch.com 206.204.8032 Riley Jones Riley@EMCresearch.com 206.204.8042 EMC # 16-6262 KC Conservation | 10