Exhibit 2 - Survey Results — Alameda City Council, May 10, 2022

Alameda Voter Views of Potential
Finance Mechanisms
Key Findings of a Survey Conducted February 2-13, 2022
220-6272

2 Dates February 2-13, 2022
Survey Type Dual-mode Voter Survey
Research Population Likely November 2022 Voters in the City of Alameda Total Interviews 480
Margin of Sampling Error (Full Sample) ±4.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Half Sample) ±6.9% at the 95% Confidence Level
Contact Methods
Data Collection Modes
Languages English, Spanish and Chinese
(Note: Not All Results Will Sum to 100% Due to Rounding) Survey Methodology
Telephone
Calls
Email
Invitations
Telephone
Interviews
Online
Interviews

3 Survey Goals
• Update views of the City’s
overall direction and ratings for
particular City departments
• Assess voters’ priorities for
community investments
• Identify potential revenue
measure mechanisms that may
be able to achieve the level of
support needed for passage in a
future election
• Determine support for a police
oversight commission measure

4 Key Numbers
65%
31%
58%
54%
Think the City is headed in the “right direction” – down 11 points from 2020
Approve of Alameda City government overall
See a need for additional funding to provide City services Support the creation of an independent police oversight commission
5 Voter Mood and
Perceptions of the City
6 Would you say that things in the City of Alameda are generally headed in the right direction, or do you feel that things are pretty seriously off on the wrong track? More voters are divided on the direction of the
City than ever before, and just three in ten say
things are headed in the right direction.

Q1.

February 2022
January 2020
June 2018
January/February 2018
July 2017
December 2015
June 2008
31%
42%
55%
59%
57%
59%
61%
45%
37%
17%
18%
18%
19%
17%
24%
21%
28%
22%
25%
22%
22%
Right Direction Mixed/Don't Know Wrong Track
7 Majorities approve of Alameda’s city
government, overall; half approve of the
City’s management and elected officials.

Q2.

I am going to read you a brief list of public officials and agencies.

Please tell me whether you approve or disapprove of the job each is doing.

Alameda City government, overall
Alameda Mayor and City Council
Alameda City management
7%
7%
7%
51%
42%
43%
13%
20%
21%
18%
18%
16%
11%
14%
13%
Strng. Appr. Smwt. Appr. Don't Know Smwt. Disappr. Strng. Disappr. Total Appr.

Total
Disappr.
58% 29%
48% 31%
50% 29%
8 Quality of park facilities
Quality of fire services
Quality of recreation programs
Level of neighborhood safety
Quality of library programs for children…
Quality of street maintenance
Quality of customer service at the library
Quality of police services
City's management of budget…
26%
34%
16%
12%
18%
12%
24%
11%
55%
39%
44%
45%
36%
42%
28%
36%
16%
12%
6%
11%
27%
9%
29%
5%
28%
21%
14%
17%
14%
14%
20%
26%
34%
42%
12%
45%
Excellent Good Only Fair Poor No Opin./Don’t Know
Broad shares give high marks to the City for the
quality of its park facilities and fire services.

Q4.

I am going to ask you about some specific services that the City of Alameda provides. Please tell me whether you think the City is doing an excellent, good, only fair, or poor job in providing that service. If you have no opinion or don't know about a particular function of government that I mention to you, you can tell me that too.

Exc./Good
81%
73%
60%
56%
54%
54%
52%
47%
20%
9 Ratings for police services, neighborhood safety, and library services have declined.

Q4. I am going to ask you about some specific services that the City of Alameda provides. Please tell me whether you think the City is doing an excellent, good, only fair, or poor job in providing that service. If you have no opinion or don't know about a particular function of government that I mention to you, you can tell me that too.
(Excellent/Good)
Public Official/
Agency
July
2017
January
2020
February
2022
Δ
Between
Jan. 2020 &
Feb. 2022
Quality of street maintenance 57% 49% 54% +5%
Quality of park facilities 80% 78% 81% +3%
Quality of fire services 81% 74% 73% -1%
Quality of library programs
for children and adults 65% 59% 54% -5%
Quality of recreation programs 70% 65% 60% -5%
City’s management of
budget and finances 32% 26% 20% -6%
Level of neighborhood safety 81% 65% 56% -9%
Quality of customer service at the library 66% 68% 52% -16% Quality of police services 78% 68% 47% -21%
10 Housing costs are a top worry; broad majorities are
concerned about climate change and traffic safety.

Q3. ^Not Part of Split Sample
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Alameda that other people have mentioned.

Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or a not too serious problem in Alameda.

The cost of housing
A lack of housing affordable for working
families
^Climate change
Traffic safety on local streets and roads
Traffic and congestion on local streets and
roads
Lack of adequate shelter for people who
are homeless
^Crime
36%
35%
36%
24%
32%
31%
27%
31%
27%
22%
34%
25%
26%
24%
24%
22%
24%
22%
24%
21%
26%
8%
14%
17%
18%
19%
20%
21%
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don’t Know Ext./Very
Ser.

Prob.
67%
61%
58%
58%
57%
57%
51%
11 Relatively few are concerned about City tax rates and waste in local government.

Prob.
44%
44%
43%
43%
43%
42%
41%
31%
31%
12 Concern about crime and traffic safety
have increased in the last two years.

Q3. I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Alameda that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or a not too serious problem in Alameda. ^Not Part of Split Sample (Extremely/Very Serious Problem)
Problem June
2008
Dec.
2015
July
2017
Jan.
2020
Feb.
2022
Δ
Between
Jan. 2020
& Feb.
2022
^Crime 28% 9% 17% 36% 51% +15%
Traffic safety on local streets and roads -- -- -- 45% 58% +13% Traffic and congestion on local streets and roads 27% 47% 60% 52% 57% +5% Litter and nuisances from homeless encampments -- -- -- 41% 43% +2% ^Too much growth and development -- 38% 47% 40% 42% +2% The risk of disasters such as floods or earthquakes -- -- -- 40% 41% +1% Lack of adequate shelter for people who are homeless -- -- -- 57% 57% 0% ^Climate change -- -- 49% 59% 58% -1%
The amount people pay in City taxes 32% 15% 26% 33% 31% -2% Waste and inefficiency in local government 43% 18% 23% 33% 31% -2% The cost of housing 55% 69% 73% 71% 67% -4%
A lack of housing affordable for working families -- -- 68% 67% 61% -6% Sea-level rise -- -- 42% 53% 43% -10%
13 Spending and Investment
Priorities
14 A majority of Alameda voters see at least some need
for additional funding for city services.

Q5.

Would you say that to provide city services in general, the City of Alameda has a great need for additional funding, some need, a little need, or no real need for additional funding? Great need
Some need
A little need
No real need
Don't know
16%
38%
11%
14%
21%
Great/
Some
Need
54%
A Little/
No Real Need
25%
15 Their highest priorities for funding include response times, bridge upgrades and flood prevention.

Q6. ^Not Part of Split Sample
I am going to read you a list of ways in which any additional funding provided to the City of Alameda could be spent. Please tell me how important each project or element would be to you personally:
extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important.

Ext./Very
Impt.
85%
84%
81%
79%
79%
79%
Maintaining 911 emergency
medical response times
Maintaining 911 response times to
fire emergencies
Upgrading bridges to withstand
major earthquakes
^Maintaining 911 police response times
Preventing flooding in the tubes
Maintaining police response to
property crimes, such as burglaries
54%
51%
40%
46%
45%
44%
31%
33%
42%
33%
35%
35%
10%
13%
14%
13%
11%
13%
6%
6%
6%
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt. Don't Know 16 Seven in ten or more also rate infrastructure repairs and response to violent crime highly.

Q6. I am going to read you a list of ways in which any additional funding provided to the City of Alameda could be spent. Please tell me how important each project or element would be to you personally: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. Split Sample Ext./Very
Impt.
76%
76%
74%
73%
70%
70%
Maintaining police response to
violent crimes
Maintaining and repairing storm drains to
prevent street flooding
Protecting natural areas along shorelines
to help prevent flooding
Addressing City infrastructure needs
Repairing deteriorating streets
Maintaining and repairing storm drains to
keep pollution out of the Bay
46%
35%
33%
26%
31%
30%
30%
41%
41%
47%
39%
40%
16%
18%
16%
19%
25%
25%
7%
5%
7%
6%
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt. Don't Know 17 Two-thirds or more value improving cyclist and
pedestrian safety and preparing for disaster.

Q6. I am going to read you a list of ways in which any additional funding provided to the City of Alameda could be spent. Please tell me how important each project or element would be to you personally: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. Split Sample Ext./Very
Impt.
69%
69%
68%
67%
67%
66%
65%
65%
Improving safety for people who
walk or bike
Addressing climate change impacts,
including sea-level rise
Repairing and upgrading
City infrastructure
Providing safe routes to school
Better preparing for natural disasters such
as flooding or earthquakes
Repairing potholes
Providing programs to make housing more
affordable
Improving traffic safety
36%
36%
27%
41%
36%
36%
40%
33%
33%
33%
41%
26%
31%
30%
26%
32%
20%
19%
23%
19%
26%
30%
19%
25%
10%
11%
5%
11%
14%
9%
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt. Don't Know 18 Majorities value improving traffic flow and public
transit and improving parks.

Q6. I am going to read you a list of ways in which any additional funding provided to the City of Alameda could be spent. Please tell me how important each project or element would be to you personally: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. Split Sample Ext./Very
Impt.
64%
64%
64%
61%
61%
60%
59%
58%
Improving traffic flow
Improving public transit to address traffic
congestion
Maintaining trees along city streets and in
parks
Repairing deteriorating sidewalks
Providing programs for youth and young
adults
Improving park safety with lighting and
pathways
Maintaining the condition of neighborhood
parks
Building seawalls to help prevent flooding
35%
28%
16%
24%
23%
18%
21%
31%
29%
36%
48%
37%
37%
41%
39%
27%
21%
23%
29%
30%
28%
29%
36%
17%
15%
12%
7%
9%
7%
8%
18% 7%
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt. Don't Know 19 A new Aquatic Center, upgraded playgrounds and
athletic fields, and trees rank lower.

Q6. I am going to read you a list of ways in which any additional funding provided to the City of Alameda could be spent. Please tell me how important each project or element would be to you personally: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. Split Sample Ext./Very
Impt.
56%
54%
50%
45%
43%
34%
30%
21%
Providing public infrastructure to support
new affordable housing
Upgrading City buildings to meet current
earthquake safety standards
Building new affordable housing
Planting new trees along city streets and in
parks
Repairing and upgrading parks
Repairing and upgrading City
athletic fields and courts and its gym
Upgrading playgrounds
Building a new City Aquatic Center
33%
17%
32%
17%
14%
17%
6%
7%
23%
37%
19%
28%
29%
17%
23%
14%
20%
34%
22%
34%
46%
44%
44%
29%
19%
10%
25%
21%
11%
18%
24%
49%
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt. Don't Know 20 Voters value affordable housing investments
for a variety of key populations.

Q7.

Ext./Very
Impt.
79%
77%
76%
72%
71%
69%
69%
Helping domestic violence survivors…
Helping homeless residents get out of…
Providing programs to help residents who nee…
Providing housing for homeless and…
Providing supportive housing where homeless…
Providing housing affordable for youth…
Providing affordable housing for veterans
42%
42%
38%
37%
39%
35%
34%
38%
36%
38%
35%
32%
34%
35%
16%
14%
18%
17%
17%
22%
22%
5%
8%
5%
9%
10%
7%
7%
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt. Don't Know There are several specific populations that could be served by investments in affordable housing and housing supports. Please tell me how important each type of housing or service is to you:
extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. 21 Assessing Revenue
Measure Mechanisms
22 Only two of the two-thirds requirement
approaches begin with bare two-thirds support.

Q8 b, e, g, i, j. The City is considering placing a measure or measures on an upcoming ballot in a future election, though the final structures of these potential measures have not been developed. However, I am going to read to you a list of different approaches to raising funds the City is currently considering, and after I read each one, please tell me whether you would vote “yes” or “no” on that measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample Two-Thirds Requirement Measures
^Issuing $95 million in bonds to fund major
infrastructure projects
^Establishing a real estate transfer tax for
homes over $2 million to fund…
Issuing $95 million in bonds to fund building
affordable housing
Establishing a property tax of 25 centsper
square foot to fund building affordable…
Establishing a property tax of 12.5 cents per
square foot to support programs make housin…
17%
35%
20%
17%
13%
33%
20%
23%
18%
15%
18%
11%
15%
15%
13%
7%
5%
6%
6%
14%
8%
12%
8%
8%
10%
12%
10%
11%
16%
17%
25%
31%
Def. Yes Prob. Yes Undec., Lean Yes Undecided Undec., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
68% 25%
67% 30%
58% 41%
51% 46%
41% 53%
23 All of the simple-majority requirement measures
exceed 50%, but to varying degrees.

Q8 a, c, d, f, h. The City is considering placing a measure or measures on an upcoming ballot in a future election, though the final structures of these potential measures have not been developed. However, I am going to read to you a list of different approaches to raising funds the City is currently considering, and after I read each one, please tell me whether you would vote “yes” or “no” on that measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample Simple Majority Requirement Measures
Increasing the business license tax for medium and
large businesses to fund general city services and bring the tax rate up to that of neighboring cities
^Establishing a tax on cannabis to fund general city
services
^Increasing the transient occupancy tax, also known as
a hotel tax, paid by hotel and Airbnb guests, from 10%
to 14% to fund general
city services
Increasing the business license tax to fund general city services and bring the tax rate up to that of
neighboring cities
^Increasing the tax on natural gas to fund general city services and discourage its use in homes and
businesses to address
climate change
22%
34%
22%
15%
16%
35%
25%
33%
23%
24%
14%
10%
14%
18%
12%
5%
7%
6%
8%
11%
7%
7%
12%
12%
13%
12%
15%
9%
19%
22%
Def. Yes Prob. Yes Undec., Lean Yes Undecided Undec., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
70% 26%
69% 27%
69% 27%
56% 40%
52% 45%
24 The Impact of Pro
and Con Arguments
25 Voters heard or read support and opposition messages applying to all measures.

Q9. I will read you some statements from both supporters and opponents of the City placing a measure on the ballot to raise funds for Alameda city services, and then ask you again about each of the potential measures the City is considering.

Supporters say that now is the time for the City of Alameda pursue one or more ballot measures over the next few years to address a variety of critical issues. To begin with, a ballot measure could create locally controlled funding that will be used to address our backlog of infrastructure needs now, while interest rates are low and before construction costs rise even more. Repairing and maintaining our streets, protecting the Bay from pollution, and keeping our parks safe and clean will help maintain our quality of life.

In addition to addressing those critical basic infrastructure needs, the City needs additional funding to address urgent, near-term problems like traffic safety and housing affordability and longer-term problems like sea-level rise caused by climate change. And all funds generated from any measure will be subject to tough fiscal accountability requirements, including full public review of all spending and independent financial audits, to ensure that the money is spent consistent with community priorities.

Opponents say the cost of living in the Bay Area is out of control, with many people being priced out of our community by the cost of rent and other basic needs. Additionally, the City has a windfall of tens of millions of dollars from the taxes generated by the booming housing market, and the state and federal governments are sending millions more to local cities.

They should use that before coming to existing residents and struggling businesses to ask for more money. We simply can’t afford any more tax increases for any reason. 26 The infrastructure retains two-thirds support, while other two -thirds requirement measures fall well short of the margin needed for passage after pros & cons.

Q8 & Q9. (b, e, g, i, j) The City is considering placing a measure or measures on an upcoming ballot in a future election, though the final structures of these potential measures have not been developed. However, I am going to read to you a list of different approaches to raising funds the City is currently considering, and after I read each one, please tell me whether you would vote “yes” or “no” on that measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample Two-Thirds Requirement Measures
Measure
Initial Vote Vote After Messaging
Total Yes Total No Total Yes Total No
^$95 Million Infrastructure Bond 68% 25% 67% 26%
^RETT >$2 Million 67% 30% 62% 34%
$95 Million Housing Bond 58% 41% 57% 35%
Property Tax for Housing 51% 46% 50% 46%
Parcel Tax for Housing 42% 53% 35% 61%
27 The tax on medium and large businesses,
cannabis tax, and TOT measures retained
strong support after pros & cons.

Q8 & Q9. (a, c, d, f, h) The City is considering placing a measure or measures on an upcoming ballot in a future election, though the final structures of these potential measures have not been developed. However, I am going to read to you a list of different approaches to raising funds the City is currently considering, and after I read each one, please tell me whether you would vote “yes” or “no” on that measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample Simple Majority Requirement Measures
Measure
Initial Vote Vote After Messaging
Total Yes Total No Total Yes Total No
Medium/Large BLT 70% 26% 64% 31%
^Cannabis Tax 69% 27% 67% 29%
^TOT 69% 27% 67% 28%
BLT 56% 40% 48% 48%
^Natural Gas UUT 52% 45% 48% 45%
28 Police Oversight Measure
29 Two-thirds of voters said they would support an
independent police oversight commission.

Q10.

I am going to ask you about an entirely different ballot measure that some people have proposed in the City of Alameda. This measure would create an independent police oversight commission, with a group of residents appointed to review police policies, training, and other issues.

Please tell me whether you would vote “yes” or “no” on that measure.

Definitely yes
Probably yes
Undecided, lean yes
Undecided, lean no
Probably no
Definitely no
Undecided
32%
24%
8%
3%
3%
21%
8%
Total
Yes
65%
Total
No
27%
30 Conclusions
31 Overall Conclusions
• While Alamedans hold increasingly mixed views about the direction of the city, they overall approve of City government and management. They are more mixed in their views of the Mayor and City Council.
• Housing costs are a broadly shared concern. Notably, concern about traffic safety has increased over the last two years, as has concern about crime. • A majority believes in principle that the City has “a great” need or “some” need for additional funding, though most say “some” rather than “great” – an indication that voters are unaware of the investments the City requires. • Voters most highly prioritize investments in maintaining emergency response times, infrastructure upgrades, and preparation for and prevention of natural disasters including flooding and earthquakes.
• Specific to housing, voters highly value support for victims of domestic violence, housing and services for people who are homeless, and other key communities 32 Ballot Measure Conclusions
• Mechanisms with a two-thirds vote threshold appear challenging for November 2022, evenly those addressing the high-priority issue of housing. § As concepts, a $95 million infrastructure bond and establishing a real estate transfer tax for home greater than $2 million start essentially at two-thirds, though only the bond stayed at that level after an exchange of pros and cons. • However, three simple-majority measures begin with support from broad majorities, and retain that support after an exchange of pros and cons. • These approaches include:
§ A business license tax for small and medium businesses in the city § A cannabis tax
§ A transient occupancy tax
• Notably, this survey tested these in a very limited fashion. These approaches may next merit further exploration, including testing voter reactions to potential 75- word ballot labels (which include the amount each would raise, accountability provisions, and the projects and services the measures would fund) and assessing the impacts of a more-robust set of pros and cons on support. In the case of a cannabis tax, a rate and mechanism would also need to be tested. 33 Ballot Measure Cheat Sheet
Likely Viable in 2022 Borderline Viability Not Currently Viable • Increasing the business license
tax for medium and large
businesses to fund general city
services and bring the tax rate
up to that of neighboring cities
• Establishing a tax on cannabis
to fund general city services
• Increasing the transient
occupancy tax, also known as
a hotel tax, paid by hotel and
Airbnb guests, from 10% to
14% to fund general city
services
• Issuing $95 million in bonds to
fund major infrastructure
projects
• Establishing a real estate
transfer tax for homes over $2
million to fund affordable
housing
• Increasing the business license
tax to fund general city
services and bring the tax rate
up to that of neighboring cities
• Increasing the tax on natural
gas to fund general city
services and discourage its use
in homes and businesses to
address climate change
• Issuing $95 million in bonds to
fund building affordable
housing
• Establishing a property tax of

12.5 cents per square foot to
support programs make
housing more affordable
• Establishing a property tax of
25 cents per square foot to
fund building affordable
housing, and supporting
programs to making housing
more affordable
*Would need to test mechanism and rate
For more information,
contact:
1999 Harrison St., Suite 2020
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone (510) 451-9521
Fax (510) 451-0384
Curt Below
[email protected]
Miranda Everitt
[email protected]

Alameda City CouncilMay 10, 2022

Alameda City Council
May 10, 2022