Updating Emeryville Voter Views
of a Funding Measure
Key Findings of a Survey of Emeryville Voters
Conducted May 24-June 8, 2022
220-6424
2 Survey Methodology
Dates May 24-June 8, 2022
Survey Type Dual-mode Voter Survey
Research Population Likely November 2022 Voters in the City of Emeryville Total Interviews 226
Margin of Sampling Error ±6.5% at the 95% Confidence Level Contact Methods
Data Collection Modes
(Note: Not All Results Will Sum to 100% Due to Rounding) Text
Invitations
Telephone
Calls
Email
Invitations
Telephone
Interviews
Online
Interviews
3 Political Context
4 Q1.
Right
Direction
53%
Wrong
Track
22%
Don't
Know
26%
2019 2021/2022
Right
Direction
48%
Wrong
Track
25%
Don't
Know
27%
Do you feel that things in Emeryville are generally going in the right direction or do you feel things have gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track? Three in five voters believe the
city is headed in the right direction.
Right
Direction
62%
Wrong
Track
19%
Don't
Know
19%
2022
5 Q2.*Worded Slightly Different in Previous Years
15%
16%
14%
37%
35%
33%
32%
35%
34%
11%
9%
11%
5%
8%
2022
2021/2022
2019
Strng. Fav. Smwt. Fav. *NHO/Don't Know Smwt. Unfav. Strng. Unfav. Total Fav.
Total
Unfav.
52% 16%
52% 13%
47% 19%
Do you have a strongly favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable or strongly unfavorable opinion of the Emeryville Mayor and City Council? If you have never heard of them, please just say so.
Majorities have a favorable view of the Mayor and
City Council – consistent with the prior survey.
6 Two-thirds believe that the City has at least some
need for additional essential service funds.
Q5.
In general, would you say that to maintain essential services, the City of Emeryville has a great need for additional funding, some need, a little need, or no real need for additional funding? 29%
23%
16%
36%
42%
37%
8%
11%
11%
13%
7%
10%
13%
16%
26%
2022
2021/2022
2019
Great Need Some Need A Little Need No Real Need Don't Know Great/
Some
Need
A Little/
No Real
Need
66% 21%
66% 19%
53% 21%
7 Views of a Transfer Tax
Ballot Measure
8 Q3. Would you vote yes or no?
Shall the measure to fund general City services including fire/emergency response/police; street/sidewalk/park
maintenance; water pollution prevention; disaster
preparedness; affordable housing; senior/childcare/recreation services, by increasing the City of Emeryville Real Property Transfer Tax to $15 per thousand for property sales between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000 and $25 per thousand for property sales above $2,000,000, raising $5,000,000 annually until ended by voters, with citizen oversight, audits, and public disclosure of all spending be adopted?
Voters heard or read the
language of a potential ballot measure.
Simple Majority Requirement
9 35%
30%
4%
3%
8%
15%
6%
Definitely yes
Probably yes
Undecided, lean yes
Undecided, lean no
Probably no
Definitely no
Undecided
Total
Yes
69%
Total
No
25%
Q3. Would you vote yes or no?
Nearly seven in ten support the measure
based on ballot language alone.
Simple Majority Requirement
±6.5% Margin of Error
10 Support is broad across
major demographic groups.
Demographic Group Total Yes Total No Undecided
Democrats 70% 24% 6%
Independents 72% 22% 6%
Republicans 31% 60% 9%
White Voters 80% 16% 4%
Voters of Color 61% 30% 8%
Men Ages 18-49 68% 27% 5%
Men Ages 50+ 71% 28% 2%
Women Ages 18-49 68% 26% 6%
Women Ages 50+ 68% 19% 12%
Homeowners 67% 25% 9%
Renters 72% 25% 3%
11 In a few words of your own, why would you vote YES on this ballot measure? Q4a.
46%
13%
8%
7%
5%
4%
3%
2%
8%
8%
3%
Funds essential services/Improved services
Makes sense to tax high-income homebuyers
General support
Affordable housing
Need to improve infrastructure as the city grows
Tax won’t impact me
Need more information
Everyone should pay their share fair
Other
Don't Know/Unsure
Refuse/No Comment
(Open-ended; Asked of Yes Voters Only, n=155)
Supporters of the measure cite the need to
invest in essential services and improvements.
12 In a few words of your own, why would you vote NO on this ballot measure? Q4b.
36%
25%
14%
11%
4%
4%
19%
4%
No more taxes
Oppose spending more funding on police
Cost of living is too high/Can’t afford
Don't trust the government
Need more information
Use the funds you have
Other
Refuse/No Comment
(Open-ended; Asked of No Voters Only, n=57)
Opponents are against additional taxes; onequarter oppose additional police funding. 13 Voter Priorities
for Funding
14 Voters highly value pollution prevention,
disaster preparation, and affordable housing.
Q6.
Ext./Very
Impt.
81%
80%
78%
73%
72%
70%
69%
45%
39%
52%
32%
38%
37%
26%
35%
41%
26%
41%
34%
33%
43%
15%
14%
13%
22%
19%
21%
26%
5%
7%
7%
8%
5%
Preventing water pollution
Preparing for natural disasters
Providing affordable housing
Maintaining streets and sidewalks
Providing childcare to working
families
Providing recreation programs to
youth, seniors and other residents
Maintaining parks
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt. Don't Know I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if voters approve a ballot measure generating additional revenue for City services. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. 15 Messaging and
Movement
16 35%
30%
4%
3%
8%
15%
6%
Total
Yes
69%
Total
No
25%
Initial Vote
After Positives
and Critique
After Positive
Messages
43%
30%
4%
0%
11%
8%
4%
Total
Yes
77%
Total
No
19%
31%
31%
4%
1%
16%
12%
6%
Total
Yes
66%
Total
No
28%
Q3, Q8 & Q9. Would you vote “yes” in favor of this measure, or “No” to oppose it? Definitely yes
Probably yes
Undecided, lean yes
Undecided, lean no
Probably no
Definitely no
Undecided
Positive messaging lifts support above threequarters; a critique resets it at two-thirds. 17 Q7. I am going to read some statements from people who support the measure. Please tell me whether you find it very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not convincing as a reason to support it on a future ballot.
Messages in Support of a Measure
(Ranked Very Convincing)
(FAIRNESS) Currently, the owner of a one-bedroom condo and the owner of a huge biotech firm pay the same real-estate transfer tax. This measure would update the current law to be fairer, charging less to those whose properties are smaller, while providing funding for our basic needs.
(WATER) Nothing is more important than water - especially when you live, work and play on the Bay. This measure will fund storm drain repairs and maintenance to prevent flooding during major storms, protect against sea-level rise, and help keep our creeks, streams, and the Bay free of pollution.
(FUTURE COSTS) Delaying maintenance and repairs to Emeryville's roads, sidewalks, parks and storm drains only increases costs in the long run. This measure will invest in the routine repairs needed to keep our infrastructure safe and in good shape. (SAFETY) This measure will improve the safety of Emeryville's streets, sidewalks and bike lanes. By repairing roads and preventing potholes, it will reduce damage to vehicles and help to prevent accidents for drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists. (GROWTH) As our City grows to welcome more neighbors and families, we need stable, locally controlled funding to help keep pace. This measure would ensure that people and businesses who move into our community pay their fair share for maintaining parks, roads, sidewalks, public safety and other essential services.
(ACCOUNTABILITY) This measure has strict accountability requirements including public review of expenditures and independent annual financial audits, which will be available online. These financial protections will ensure funds will be used efficiently and effectively for local City services.
18 Q7. I am going to read some statements from people who support the measure. Please tell me whether you find it very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not convincing as a reason to support it on a future ballot. 49%
44%
43%
43%
37%
29%
31%
39%
36%
34%
37%
38%
80%
83%
79%
77%
74%
68%
Fairness
Water
Future Costs
Safety
Growth
Accountability
Very Convincing Somewhat Convincing
Fairness, water quality, safety, and the costs
of delay are compelling messages in favor.
19 Text of Opposition
Message Tested
The cost of living in the Bay Area is already out of control – and this measure would drive up the outrageous cost of housing even more. Anyway, the City of Emeryville doesn’t need this new funding; they still have a robust budget reserve, and state and federal stimulus money is paying for many of these investments.
In addition, this measure puts an unfair burden on businesses, who are already paying more than their fair share to fund city services. Now is not the time to put more burden on small and local businesses.
20 Conclusions
21 Conclusions
• A general-purpose real-estate transfer tax is well-positioned for passage in November with the support of a strong campaign in favor and limited formal opposition messaging.
▪ It begins with support from seven in ten voters, including broad majorities across age, gender, race/ethnicity, income level and among both homeowners and renters.
▪ Messaging in favor increases support to nearly three-quarters, with two in five saying they would “definitely” vote yes.
▪ A brief critique resets support at two-thirds: still well over the margin needed for passage plus the survey’s margin of error.
• Two-thirds see at least “some need” for new funding for essential city services.
• A majority gives favorable ratings to the mayor and council. • Voters prioritize affordable housing, preventing water pollution, and preparing for natural disasters among a set of highly-valued essential services.
For more information,
contact:
Dave Metz
[email protected]
Miranda Everitt
[email protected]
Bonnie Moss
[email protected]