Agenda packet — Escondido City Council, July 13, 2022

CITY of ESCONDIDO

Council Meeting Agenda
WEDNESDAY, JULY 13, 2022
4:00 PM - Closed Session - Cancelled
5:00 PM - Regular Session
Escondido City Council Chambers, 201 North Broadway, Escondido, CA 92025

WELCOME TO YOUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
We welcome your interest and involvement in the legislative process of Escondido. This agenda includes information about topics coming before the City Council and the action recommended by City staff.

MAYOR
Paul McNamara

DEPUTY MAYOR
Tina Inscoe (District 2)

COUNCILMEMBERS
Consuelo Martinez (District 1)
Joe Garcia (District 3)
Michael Morasco (Disctrict 4)

CITY MANAGER
Sean McGlynn

CITY ATTORNEY
Michael McGuinness

CITY CLERK
Zack Beck

HOW TO WATCH
The City of Escondido provides three ways to watch a City Council meeting:

In Person On TV Online

201 N. Broadway Cox Cable Channel 19 and U-verse Channel 99 www.escondido.org

1 Wednesday, July 13, 2022

HOW TO PARTICIPATE
The City of Escondido provides two ways to communicate with the City Council during a meeting:

In Person In Writing

Fill out Speaker Slip and Submit to City Clerk https://escondido-ca.municodemeetings.com

ASSISTANCE PROVIDED
If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact our ADA Coordinator at 760-839-4869.

Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable to city to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired – please see the City Clerk.

2 Wednesday, July 13, 2022

REGULAR SESSION
5:00 PM Regular Session

MOMENT OF REFLECTION
City Council agendas allow an opportunity for a moment of silence and reflection at the beginning of the evening meeting. The City does not participate in the selection of speakers for this portion of the agenda, and does not endorse or sanction any remar ks made by individuals during this time. If you wish to be recognized during this portion of the agenda, please notify the City Clerk in advance.

FLAG SALUTE
The City Council conducts the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of every City Council meeting.

CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call: Garcia, Inscoe, Martinez, Morasco, McNamara

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
In addition to speaking during particular agenda items, the public may address the Council on any item which is not on the agenda provided the item is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. State law prohibits the Council from discussing or taking action on such items, but the matter may be referred to the City Manager/staff or scheduled on a subsequent agenda. Speakers are limited to only one opportunity to address the Council under Oral Communications.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are not discussed individually and are approved in a single motion. However, Council members always have the option to have an item considered separately, either on their own request or at the request of staff or a member of the public.

1. AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION, MAILING, AND POSTING (COUNCIL/RRB) -

2. APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTER (COUNCIL) -
Request approval for City Council and Housing Successor Agency warrant numbers:
364185 – 364196 dated June 9, 2022
364197 – 364422 dated June 15, 2022
364423 – 364645 dated June 22, 2022
3 Wednesday, July 13, 2022

364646 – 364817 dated June 29, 2022
Staff Recommendation: Approval (Finance Department: Christina Holmes)

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meetings of June 15, 2022 and June 22, 2022, and Special Meeting of June 27, 2022.

CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (COUNCIL/RRB)
The following Resolutions and Ordinances were heard and acted upon by the City Council/RRB at a previous C ity Council/Mobilehome Rent Review meeting. (The title of Ordinances listed on the Consent Calendar are deemed to have been read and further reading waived.)

4. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE

DEPUTY CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CDBG, HOME, AND ESG CONTRACTS, INCLUDING THOSE

INVOLVING NON-SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES -
Approved on June 15, 2022 with a vote of 4/0 (Inscoe- Absent) a. Ordinance No. 2022-11 (Second Reading and Adoption)

CURRENT BUSINESS

5. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF REVENUE MEASURE SURVEY RESULTS AND DIRECTION TO STAFF - Request the City Council review and consider the results of the May 2022 community survey and provide direction to staff.

Staff Recommendation: Provide Direction
Presenter: Tim McLarney, True North Research

6. DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE – LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE - Request the City Council designate the Voting Delegate and up to two alternates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference in Long Beach, California on September 7-9, 2022.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (City Clerk’s Office: Zack Beck) Presenter: Zack Beck, City Clerk

4 Wednesday, July 13, 2022

FUTURE AGENDA

7. FUTURE AGENDA
The purpose of this item is to identify issues presently known to staff or which members of the City Council wish to place on an upcoming City Council agenda. Council comment on these future agenda items is limited by California Government Code Section 54954.2 to clarifying questions, brief announcements, or requests for factual information in connection with an item when it is discussed.

Staff Recommendation: None (City Clerk's Office: Zack Beck)

COUNCILMEMBERS SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND OTHER REPORTS
CITY MANAGER’S WEEKLY ACTIVITY REPORT
The most current informa tion from the City Manager regarding Economic Development, Capital Improvement Projects, Public Safety, and Community Development. This report is also available on the City’s website, www.escondido.org.

ADJOURNMENT

UPCOMING MEETING SCHEDULE
Wednesday, July, 20, 2022 4:00 & 5:00 PM Regular Meeting, Council Chambers Wednesday, July, 27, 2022 4:00 & 5:00 PM Special Meeting, Council Chambers

SUCCESSOR AGENCY
Members of the Escondido City Council also sit as the Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, Escondido Joint Powers Financing Authority, and the Mobilehome Rent Review Board.

5 Consent Item No. 1 July 13, 2022

A F F I D A V I T S

I T E M

P O S T I N G - NONE
6 Item1.

STAFF REPORT

July 13, 2022
File Number 0400-40

SUBJECT

APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTER (COUNCIL)

DEPARTMENT
Finance

RECOMMENDATION
Request approval for City Council and Housing Successor Agency warrant numbers:
364185 – 364196 dated June 9, 2022
364197 – 364422 dated June 15, 2022
364423 – 364645 dated June 22, 2022
364646 – 364817 dated June 29, 2022
Staff Recommendation: Approval (Finance Department: Christina Holmes)

FISCAL ANALYSIS
The total amount of the warrants for the following periods are as follows:

June 9 – June 15, 2022, is $3,143,011.73
June 16 – June 22, 2022, is $5,105,385.06
June 23 – June 29, 2022, is $3,765,257.48

BACKGROUND

The Escondido Municipal Code Section 10-49 states that warrants or checks may be issued and paid prior to audit by the City Council, provided the warrants or checks are certified and approved by the Director of Finance as conforming to the current budget. These warrants or checks must then be ratified and approved by the City Council at the next regular Council meeting.

7 Item2.

June 15, 2022 Escondido City Council Minutes Page 1 of 5

REGULAR SESSION
5:00 PM Regular Session

MOMENT OF REFLECTION
City Council agendas allow an opportunity for a moment of silence and reflection at the beginning of the evening meeting. The City does not participate in the selection of speakers for this portion of the agenda, and does not endorse or sanction any remarks made by individuals during this time. If you wish to be recognized during this portion of the agenda, please notify the City Clerk in advance.

FLAG SALUTE
The City Council conducts the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of every City Council meeting.

CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call: Garcia, Martinez, Morasco, McNamara

PRESENTATIONS
2022 San Diego County Fair

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion: Morasco; Second: Martinez; Approved: 4-0 (Inscoe – Absent)

1. AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION, MAILING, AND POSTING (COUNCIL/RRB) -

2. APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTER (COUNCIL) -
Request the City Council approve the City Council and Housing Successor Agency warrant numbers:
363791 – 363957 dated June 1, 2022.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Finance Department: Christina Holmes) 8 Item3.

June 15, 2022 Escondido City Council Minutes Page 2 of 5

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: none scheduled

4. ISSUANCE OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2020-2 (THE VILLAGES) SPECIAL TAX BONDS -Request the City Council, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2020-02 of the City of Escondido (The Villages) (the “District”), adopt Resolution No. 2022- 59 (the “Resolution”) to authorize the issuance and sale of Special Tax Bonds, Series 2022 (the “Bonds”) and approve certain documents and the taking of certain other actions in connection therewith.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Finance Department: Christina Holmes, Director of Finance) Presenter: Christina Holmes
a. Resolution No. 2022-59

5. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT OF $157,760 FOR BEFORE & AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM - Request the City Council authorize a budget adjustment in the amount of $157,760 for the Before & After School Program.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Community Services Department: Joanna Axelrod) Presenter: Robert Rhoades

6. GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION – NOVEMBER 8, 2022 – REQUEST THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT

RESOLUTIONS CALLING FOR AN HOLDING A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FOR THE OFFICE OF MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 1 AND CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 AND REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION WITH THE NOVEMBER 8, 2022, STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION - Request the City Council Adopt Resolutions calling for and holding a General Municipal Election and requesting consolidation with the November 8, 2022, Statewide General Election.

Adopt Resolution No. 2022-55, calling for and giving notice of a General Municipal Election on November 8, 2022 for the following elective offices: One (1) City Council Member with a four-year term to represent District One, One (1) City Council Member with a four-year term to represent District Two, and One (1) Mayor with a four-year term to be elected at-large.

Adopt Resolution No. 2022-56 requesting the Board of Supervisors, County of San Diego, to consolidate the City’s General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (City Clerk’s Office: Zack Beck) Presenter: Zack Beck
a. Resolution No. 2022-55
9 Item3.

June 15, 2022 Escondido City Council Minutes Page 3 of 5

b. Resolution No. 2022-56

CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (COUNCIL/RRB)
The following Resolutions and Ordinances were heard and acted upon by the City Council/RRB at a previous City Council/Mobilehome Rent Review meeting. (The title of Ordinances listed on the Consent Calendar are deemed to have been read and further reading waived.)

PUBLIC HEARINGS

7. 2021 REPORT ON DRINKING WATER PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS -
Request the City Council receive and file the Drinking Water Public Health Goals Report for years 2019 - 2021, and accept public comment on the report.

Staff Recommendation: Receive and file (Utilities Department: Christopher W. McKinney, Deputy City Manager / Director of Utilities ).

Presenter: Reed Harlan

8. ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (“HUD”) FUNDING OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (“CDBG”) , HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (“HOME”) FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES AND EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANTS (“ESG”) -
Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-75 approving the CDBG and HOME budgets and allocations, and adopt Ordinance No. 2022-11 authorizing the Deputy City Manager to execute contracts with service providers. It is also requested that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-84 approving the FY 2022-2023 One-Year Action Plan to HUD.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (City Manager Office: Rob Van De Hey, Deputy City Manager/ Director of Information Systems)
Presenters: Holly Nelson and Johnathan Lung
a. Ordinance No. 2022-11 (first reading and introduction) b. Resolution No. 2022-75
c. Resolution No. 2022-84
Motion: Garcia; Second: Morasco; Approved 4-0 (Inscoe – Absent) Ed Gallo – Expressed support to allocate CDBG funding to low-income seniors and mobile home park residents.
10 Item3.

June 15, 2022 Escondido City Council Minutes Page 4 of 5

Mirjana Rodriguez – Expressed support to allocate funding to Education COMPACT.

Jack Anderson – Expressed support to allocate funding to Education COMPACT and services that assist the population experiencing homelessness.

Susan Johnson – Expressed support for the staff recommendations.

Rick Paul – Expressed support for the staff recommendations.

Cori Austin – Expressed support to allocate funding to Center for Community Solutions.

Danny Sherlock – Expressed support to allocate funding to the Boys and Girls Club.

9. SHORT-FORM RENT INCREASE APPLICATION FOR WESTWINDS MOBILEHOME PARK (FILE NO. 0697-20-10302) -
Request the City Council review Westwinds Mobilehome Park short-form application and if desired, adopt the Rent Review Board Resolution No. RRB 2022-74.

Staff Recommendation: Consider the short -form rent increase application submitted by Westwinds Mobilehome Park and if approved, adopt Rent Review Board Re solution No. RRB 2022-74 (City Manager Office: Robert Van De Hey)
Presenter: Holly Nelson
a. Resolution No. 2022-74
Motion: Martinez; Second: Garcia; Approved: 4-0 (Inscoe - Absent) Jim Younce – Expressed support for this item.

Joan Devries – Expressed opposition to this item.

FUTURE AGENDA

10. FUTURE AGENDA
The purpose of this item is to identify issues presently known to staff or which members of the City Council wish to place on an upcoming City Council agenda. Council comment on these future agenda items is limited by California Government Code Section 54954.2 to clarifying questions, brief announcements, or requests for factual information in connection with an item when it is discussed.

Staff Recommendation: None (City Clerk's Office: Zack Beck) 11 Item3.

June 15, 2022 Escondido City Council Minutes Page 5 of 5

COUNCILMEMBERS SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND OTHER REPORTS
Garcia – Attended a meeting with the Escondido Chamber of Commerce. Will attend the “One Safe Place” Ribbon cutting on June 23. Commended Bernadette Bjork for going above and beyond the call of duty.

Martinez – Attended a San Diego County Water Authority meeting and a League of California Cities meeting.

CITY MANAGER’S WEEKLY ACTIVITY REPORT
The most current information from the City Manager regarding Economic Development, Capital Improvement Projects, Public Safety, and Community Development. This report is also available on the City’s website, www.escondido.org.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor McNamara adjourned the meeting at 6:48 p.m.
12 Item3.

CLOSED SESSION
JUNE 22, 2022 4:00 PM

CALL TO ORDER

1. Roll Call: Garcia, Inscoe, Martinez, Morasco, McNamara

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.

CLOSED SESSION
I. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (GOVERNMENT CODE section 54956.8)

a. Property: 272 E. Via Rancho Pkwy, Escondido City Negotiator: Sean McGlynn, City Manager, or designee Negotiating Parties: (i) Larry Green, L. Green Investment & Development, LLC (ii) Kimberly Brewer, Unibail-Rodamco-Westfield
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of leases

II. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code section 54957.6)

a. Agency Representative: Sean McGlynn, City Manager, or designee Employee Organization: Police Officers' Association Sworn Personnel Bargaining Unit

b. Agency Representative: Sean McGlynn, City Manager, or designee Employee Organization: Police Officers' Association Non-Sworn Personnel Bargaining Unit

c. Agency Representative: Sean McGlynn, City Manager, or designee Employee Organization:

Firefighters Association Safety and Non-safety Bargaining Unit

d. Agency Representative: Sean McGlynn, City Manager, or designee Employee Organization: ECEA Unit (ACE and SUP)

e. Agency Representative: Sean McGlynn, City Manager, or designee Employee Organization: Maintenance and Operations Bargaining Unit (Teamsters)

13 Item3.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor McNamara adjourned the meeting at 4:50 p.m.

______________________________ _______________________________

MAYOR CITY CLERK

14 Item3.

REGULAR SESSION
5:00 PM Regular Session

MOMENT OF REFLECTION
City Council agendas allow an opportunity for a moment of silence and reflection at the beginning of the evening meeting. The City does not participate in the selection of speakers for this portion of the agenda, and does not endorse or sanction any remarks made by individuals during this time. If you wish to be recognized during this portion of the agenda, please notify the City Clerk in advance.

FLAG SALUTE
The City Council conducts the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of every City Council meeting.

CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call: Garcia, Inscoe, Martinez, Morasco, McNamara

CLOSED SESSION REPORT

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mark Stradovich – Expressed concern regarding the City’s structural budget deficit.

Lucifa Molloch – Expressed concern with respect to cultural changes in the United States.

Tracy Baxter – Expressed concern regarding police brutality.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion: Garcia; Second: Martinez; Approved: 5-0

1. AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION, MAILING, AND POSTING (COUNCIL/RRB) -

2. APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTER (COUNCIL) -
Request approval for City Council and Housing Successor Agency warrant numbers 363958 – 364184 dated June 8, 2022.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Finance Department: Christina Holmes) 15 Item3.

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting of June 08, 2022

4. AMENDMENT TO PUBLIC SERVICES WITH REDWOOD SENIOR HOMES FOR SENIOR

NUTRITION PROGRAM -
Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-80 authorizing a First Amendment to the Public Services Agreement with HumanGood SoCal, dba Redwood Senior Homes and Services in the amount of $230,000 for preparation and delivery of Senior Nutrition Program meals to the Park Avenue Community Center.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Community Services Department: Joanna Axelrod, Deputy City Manager/Director of Community Services)
Presenter: Robert Rhoades
a. Resolution No. 2022-80

5. SAN DIEGO COUNTY CAL-ID GRANT -
Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-93 authorizing the Police Department to accept a five-year San Diego County Cal-ID Grant from the County of San Diego Remote Access Network (RAN); approve a budget adjustment to spend the funds; and authorize the Mayor to execute grant documents on behalf of the City.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Police Department: Edward Varso, Chief of Police) Presenter: Edward Varso
a. Resolution No. 2022-93

6. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCESS AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND

COMMUNITY FORM CHAPTER RELATED TO SINGLE-ROOM OCCUPANCY (SRO) USES - Request the City Council authorize the processing of an amendment to the General Plan Land Use and Community Form Chapter to address Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) uses in commercial land use designations for consistency with the Hotel Conversion Ordinance adopted in July 2021.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Development Services Department: Julie Procopio, Interim Director of Community Development)
Presenter: Veronica Morones

7. ADOPTION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023 ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION

ACCOUNT PROJECT LIST AND ANNUAL STREET REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE

PROGRAM UPDATE -
16 Item3.

Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-73, containing the initial Project Location proposed to be completed with Fiscal Year (FY) 22-23 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) funds, and receive a report on the Street Rehabilitation and Maintenance Program.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Development Services Department, Julie Procopio, Interim Director of Community Development)
Presenter: Matt Souttere
a. Resolution No. 2022-73

8. CONTRACT AMENDMENTS FOR THE CITRACADO PARKWAY EXTENSION PROJECT - Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-82, authorizing a First Amendment to the Consultant Agreement with TY Lin International in the amount of $982,162.51, and adopt Resolution No. 2022-81 authorizing a Tenth Amendment to the Consultant Agreement with AECOM in the amount of $467,249, for the Citracado Parkway Extension Project (“Project”).

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Development Services Department: Julie Procopio, Interim Director of Community Development)
Presenter: Matt Souttere
a. Resolution No. 2022-81
b. Resolution No. 2022-82

9. $157,660 PUBLIC SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR SENIOR TRANSPORTATION - Request the City Council adopt Resolution 2022-79 authorizing a Public Services Agreement with Full Access & Coordinated Transportation, Inc., dba Facilitating Access to Coordinated Transportation (“FACT”) in the amount of $157,660 for transportation services for seniors to and from the Park Avenue Community Center to participate in the Senior Nutrition Program.

Staff Recommendation: Approval ( Community Services Department: Joanna Axelrod, Deputy City Manager / Director of Communications and Community Services) Presenter: Robert Rhoades
a. Resolution 2022-79

17 Item3.

CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (COUNCIL/RRB)
The following Resolutions and Ordina nces were heard and acted upon by the City Council/RRB at a previous City Council/Mobilehome Rent Review meeting. (The title of Ordinances listed on the Consent Calendar are deemed to have been read and further reading waived.)

PUBLIC HEARINGS

10. FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 OPERATING BUDGET ADOPTION -
Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-69 approving the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Annual Operating Budget; and adopt Resolution No. 2022-70 approving the Appropriations Limit (Gann Limit) for Fiscal Year 2022/23.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Finance Department: Christina Holmes, Director of Finance) Presenter: Christina Holmes
a. Resolution No. 2022-69
b. Resolution No. 2022-70
Robroy Fawcett – Expressed concern regarding the cost of a potential special election.

Lauren Sayegh – Expressed concern regarding funding for the Tiny Tots program.

Christopher Sayegh – Expressed concern regarding funding for the Tiny Tots program.

Gloria Conejo – Requested the City Council legalize cannabis sales in Escondido.

Marissa Allen – Requested the City Council legalize cannabis sales in Escondido.

Sara Matta – Expressed support for this item.

Robert Gilson – Expressed support for this item.

Jose Jaimes – Expressed support for this item.

Motion: Morasco; Second: Inscoe; Approved: 5-0

CURRENT BUSINESS

11. APPROVAL TO COMMENCE JUDICIAL VALIDATION PROCEEDINGS FOR PENSION OBLIGATION

BONDS -
Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-89, authorizing judicial validation 18 Item3.

proceedings relating to the issuance of bonds to refund certain pension obligations of the City, approving the form and authorizing the execution of a trust agreement and bond purchase agreement, and approving additional actions related thereto.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (Finance Department: Christina Holmes) Presenters: Christina Holmes, Sara Oberlies Brown, and Scott Smith a. Resolution No. 2022-89
Motion: Morasco; Second: Garcia; Approved: 5-0

FUTURE AGENDA

12. FUTURE AGENDA
The purpose of this item is to identify issues presently known to staff or which members of the City Council wish to place on an upcoming City Council agenda. Council comment on these future agenda items is limited by California Government Code Section 54954.2 to clarifying questions, brief announcements, or requests for factual information in connection with an item when it is discussed.

Staff Recommendation: None (City Clerk's Office: Zack Beck)

COUNCILMEMBERS SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND OTHER REPORTS
CITY MANAGER’S WEEKLY ACTIVITY REPORT
The most current information from the City Manager regarding Economic Development, Capital Improvement Projects, Public Safety, and Community Development. This report is also available on the City’s website, www.escondido.org.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Danielle Polson – Requested the City Council legalize cannabis sales in Escondido.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor McNamara adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m.

______________________________ _______________________________

MAYOR CITY CLERK
19 Item3.

June 27, 2022 Escondido City Council Minutes Page 1 of 2

SPECIAL MEETING
June 27, 2022 - 4:00 PM Special Meeting

MOMENT OF REFLECTION
City Council agendas allow an opportunity for a moment of silence and reflection at the beginning of the evening meeting. The City does not participate in the selection of speakers for this portion of the agenda, and does not endorse or sanction any remarks made by individuals during this time. If you wish to be recognized during this portion of the agenda, please notify the City Clerk in advance.

FLAG SALUTE
The City Council conducts the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of every City Council meeting.

CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call: Garcia, Inscoe, Martinez, Morasco, McNamara

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Sara Matta – Apologized on behalf of the California Center for the Arts for a co ntroversial painting that was displayed at a recent art exhibit.

CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (COUNCIL/RRB)
The following Resolutions and Ordinances were heard and acted upon by the City Council/RRB at a previous City Council/Mobilehome Rent Review meeting. (The title of Ordinances listed on the Consent Calendar are deemed to have been read and further reading waived.)

CURRENT BUSINESS

1. WESTFIELD / NORTH COUNTY SHOPPING CENTER GROUND LEASE AMENDMENTS - Request City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-94, authorizing the Mayor and/or Authorized Officers to execute lease amendments and related documents to (1) extend the Westfield / North County Shopping Center Ground Lease for a period of twenty-four years from the current expiration date of June 30, 2053 to June 20, 2077, and (2) authorize a lease term of twenty years with seven five-year options for Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”) and, declare the leasehold interests as Exempt Surplus Land pursuant to Government Code section 54221(f)(1)(G).
20 Item3.

June 27, 2022 Escondido City Council Minutes Page 2 of 2 Staff Recommendation: Approval (City Manager’s Office: Jennifer Schoeneck, Deputy Director of Economic Development)
Presenter: Christopher McKinney
a. Resolution No. 2022-94
Susan Luka – Expressed support for this item.

Bonnie Marblestone – Expressed opposition to this item.

Motion: Morasco; Second: Garcia; Approved: 5-0

FUTURE AGENDA

2. FUTURE AGENDA
The purpose of this item is to identify issues presently known to staff or which members of the City Council wish to place on an upcoming City Council agenda. Council comment on these future agenda items is limited by California Government Code Section 54954.2 to clarifying questions, brief announcements, or requests for factual information in connection with an item when it is discussed.

Staff Recommendation: None (City Clerk's Office: Zack Beck) Councilmember Morasco/Mayor McNamara – Review of management relationship with the California Center for the Arts.

COUNCILMEMBERS SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND OTHER REPORTS
CITY MANAGER’S WEEKLY ACTIVITY REPORT
The most current information from the City Manager regarding Economic Development, Capital Improvement Projects, Public Safety, and Community Development. This report is also available on the City’s website, www.escondido.org.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor McNamara adjourned the meeting at 4:25 p.m.
21 Item3.

ORDINANCE NO. 2022-11

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DEPUTY

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CDBG, HOME, AND ESG

CONTRACTS, INCLUDING THOSE INVOLVING NON-
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES.

The City Council of the City of Escondido, California does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council makes the following findings:
a) The City of Escondido (“City”) receives an annual allocation from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Dev elopment (“HUD”) for Community Development Block Grant (“CDBG”), HOME investment Partnership Program (“HOME”) and Emergency Solutions Grants (“ESG”).
b) The City has received one-time, limited funding from the CARES Act for CDBG-CV, ESG-CV, and HOME-CV.
c) To improve efficiency of contract execution and amendments, the Deputy City Manager is hereby authorized to execute agreements , on behalf of the City, with specific providers involving payment of CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds, provided such agreements have been approved by the City Attorney, HUD , and meet all applicable requirements, including environmental review standards.
d) In addition, the Deputy City Manager is hereby authorized, on behalf of the City, to authorize and execute amendments to such agreements involving non-substantial changes to the CDBG, HOME, and ESG budgets within 25%, whether above or below the projected allocation, which may be proportionally dispersed to current distributions and activities. 22 Item4.

STAFF REPORT

July 13, 2022
File Number 0650-90

SUBJECT

REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF REVENUE MEASURE SURVEY RESULTS AND DIRECTION TO STAFF

DEPARTMENT
City Manager’s Office

RECOMMENDATION
Request the City Council review and consider the results of the May 2022 community survey and provide direction to staff
Staff Recommendation: Provide Direction
Presenter: Tim McLarney, True North Research

PREVIOUS ACTION
On October 13, 2021, City Council appointed Mayor McNamara and Councilmember Morasco to serve on the Revenue Measure Subcommittee.

On April 20, 2022, the Revenue Measure Subcommittee provided an update, and the City Council provided direction to staff to move forward with conducting a survey of likely November 2022 voters as to their support for a sales tax increase.

On June 20, 2022 , the Revenue Measure Subcommittee received a briefing on topline results of the survey.

BACKGROUND
True North Research was retained to conduct a community survey to determine support for a local sales tax increase. The survey was conducted from May 19 – May 29, 2022 on a random sample of 1 ,022 registered voters likely to part icipate in the November 2022 election. Participants were recruited via email, text message, and via telephone. Data was collected in both English and Spanish. With an overall margin of error of +/- 3%, the survey concludes that:
- Respondents continue to be highly satisfied with the quality of life and City services provided in Escondido;
- Respondents continue to prioritize public safety, public works, and addressing homelessness; and 23 Item5.

- A one-cent sales tax until ended by voters shows solid viability for the November ballot across all demographic categories.

The full survey report is provided as Attachment “1.”

In light of the results of the survey, staff request that the City Council consider and give direction on the next steps it wishes to take to address the prospect of placing a local sales tax measure on the November 2022 ballot.

ATTACHMENTS
a. Attachment “1” Community Opinion Survey Report
24 Item5.

Attachment "1"
25 Item5.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Attachment "1"
26 Item5.

Table of Contents
iCity of Escondido True North Research, Inc. © 2022
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T ABLE OF C ONTENTS
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii List of Figures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Motivation for Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Overview of Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Organization of Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Disclaimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 About True North . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Key Findings & Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Quality of Life & City Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Quality of Life. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Question 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Changes to Improve Escondido . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Overall Performance Rating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Question 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Initial Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Question 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Initial Support by Subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Reasons for Opposing Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Question 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Projects & Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Question 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Service Ratings by Initial Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Positive Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Question 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Positive Arguments by Initial Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Interim Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Question 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Support by Subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Negative Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Question 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Negative Arguments by Initial Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Final Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Question 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Change in Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Final Ballot Test at Lower Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Question 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Related Attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Economic Expectations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Question 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Fiscal Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Question 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Background & Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Questionnaire Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Programming, Pre-Test & Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Statistical Margin of Error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Recruiting & Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Attachment "1"
27 Item5.

Table of Contents
iiCity of Escondido True North Research, Inc. © 2022
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Data Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Rounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Questionnaire & Toplines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Attachment "1"
28 Item5.

List of Tables
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 iii
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

L IST OF T ABLES
Table 1 Demographic Breakdown of Support at Initial Ballot Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 2 Top Projects & Services by Position at Initia l Ballot Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Table 3 Top Positive Arguments by Position at Initial Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Table 4 Demographic Breakdown of Support at Interim Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Table 5 Top Negative Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Table 6 Demographic Breakdown of Support at Final Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Table 7 Movement Between Initial & Final Ballot Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Table 8 Demographics of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Attachment "1"
29 Item5.

List of Figures
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 iv
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

L IST OF F IGURES
Figure 1 Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 2 Quality of Life by Years in Escondido, Overall Satisfaction, Child in Hsld & Homeowner Voter on File . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 3 Quality of Life by Age, Gender & Council District. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Figure 4 Changes to Improve City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Figure 5 Overall Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 6 Overall Satisfaction by Years in Escondido, Child in Hsld, Homeowner on Voter File & Gender. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 7 Overall Satisfaction by Age & Council District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 8 Initial Ballot Test by Duration of Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 9 Reasons for not Supporting Measure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figure 10 Projects & Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Figure 11 Positive Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 12 Interim Ballot Test by Duration of Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 13 Negative Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Figure 14 Final Ballot Test by Duration of Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 15 Final Ballot Test at One-Half Cent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Figure 16 Opinion of Economy in 6 Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Figure 17 Opinion of Economy in 6 Months by Party & Ag e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Figure 18 Fiscal Management Rating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Figure 19 Fiscal Management Rating by Party & Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Figure 20 Fiscal Management Rating by Council District & Position Initial Ballot Test . . . . . . 30 Figure 21 Maximum Margin of Error Due to Sampling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Attachment "1"
30 Item5.

Introduction
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 1
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I NTRODUCTION
Nestled in the foothills of North County, the City of Escondido is a diverse community known for its rich history, small town-charm, vibrant downtown, world-class arts, and a progressive vision for its future. Established in 1888 and currently home to an estimated 151,038 residents 1, the City’s team of full-time and part-time employ ees provides a full suite of municipal services including police, fire, public works, water and wastewater utilities, planning, parks, and commu- nity services.

Over the past decade, the City of Escondido’s revenues have not kept pace with the growing costs associated with providing municipal services and facilities. Although the City has been pro- active in responding to this challenge by reducing its costs, deferring maintenance projects, cut- ting back on basic services where feasible, and through effective financial management practices, the practical reality is that existing revenues simply do not support the high quality services that residents have come to expect. The City is facing an $8,000,000 deficit in the next fiscal year that is expected to grow to $10,000,000 annually over the next five years. To provide the funding required to maintain and improve the quality of essential city services, the City of Escondido will need to establish a local revenue measure.

MOTIVATION FOR RESEARCH The primary purpose of this study was to produce an unbiased, statistically reliable evaluation of voters' interest in supporting a general sales tax measure to provide the funding noted above. Addi tionally, should the City decide to move for- ward with a revenue measure, the survey data can guide how best to structure the measure so it is consistent with the communit y's priorities and expressed n eeds. Specifically, the study was designed to:
• Gauge current, baseline support for enacting a local sales tax to ensure adequate funding for general municipal services;
• Identify the types of services voters are most interested in funding, should the measure pass;
• Expose voters to arguments in favor of, an d against, the proposed tax measure to assess how information affects support for the measure; and
• Estimate support for the measure once voters are presented with the types of information they will likely be exposed to during an election cycle.

It is important to note at the outset that voters’ opinions about tax measures are often some- what fluid, especially when the amount of information they initially have about a measure is lim- ited. How voters think and feel about a measure today may not be the same way they think and feel once they have had a chance to hear more information about the measure during the elec- tion cycle. Accordingly, to accurately assess the feasibility of establishing a sales tax increase to fund municipal services, it was importa nt that in addition to measuring current opinions about the measure (Question 5), the survey expose respon dents to the types of information voters are likely to encounter during an election cycle, including arguments in favor of (Question 8) and opposed to (Question 10) the measure, and gauge how this type of information ultimately impacts their voting decision (Questions 9 & 11).

1. Source: US Census April 1, 2020.

Attachment "1"
31 Item5.

Introduction
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 2City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OVERVIEW OF METHODOLOGY For a full discussion of the research methods and tech- niques used in this study, turn to Methodology on page 32. In brief, the survey was administered to a random sample of 1,022 voters in the City of Escondido who are likely to participate in the November 2022 election. The survey followed a mixed-method design that employed multiple recruiting methods (email, text, and telephone) and multiple data collection methods (telephone and online). Administered between May 19 and May 29, 2022, the average interview lasted 16 minutes.

ORGANIZATION OF REPORT This report is designed to me et the needs of readers who prefer a summary of the findings as well as those who are interested in the details of the results.

For those who seek an overview of the findings, the section titled Key Findings & Conclusions is for you. It provides a summary of the most important findings of the survey and a discussion of their implications. For the interested reader, this section is followed by a more detailed question- by-question discussion of the results from the survey by topic area (see Table of Contents), as well as a description of the methodology empl oyed for collecting and analyzing the data. The questionnaire used for the interviews is contained at the back of this report (see Questionnaire & Toplines on page 35).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS True North thanks the City of Escondido for the opportunity to assist the City in this important effort. The collective expertise, local knowledge, and insight pro- vided by city staff and represen tatives improved the overall quality of the research presented here. A special thanks also to Catherine Lew and Rhonda Ammouri (Lew Edwards Group) for assisting in the design of the survey.

DISCLAIMER The statements and conclu sions in this report are those of the authors (Dr. Timothy McLarney and Richard Sarles) at True North Research, Inc. and not necessarily those of the City of Escondido. Any errors and omissions are the responsibility of the authors.

ABOUT TRUE NORTH True North is a full-service survey research firm that is dedicated to providing public agencies with a clear understanding of the values, perceptions, priorities, and concerns of their residents and voters. Through designing and implementing scientific surveys, focus groups, and one-on-one interviews as well as expert interpretation of the findings, True North helps its clients to move with confidence when making strategic decisions in a variety of areas—such as planning, policy evaluation, performance management, establishing fiscal priori- ties, passing revenue measures, and developing effective public information campaigns.

During their careers, Dr. McLarney and Mr. Sarl es have designed and conducted over 1,200 sur- vey research studies for public agencies, includ ing more than 400 revenue measure feasibility studies. Of the measures that have gone to ballot based on Dr. McLarney’s recommendation, 95% have been successful. In total, the research that Dr. McLarney has conducted has led to over $34 billion in voter-approved local revenue measures.

Attachment "1"
32 Item5.

Key Findings & Conclusions
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 3
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

K EY F INDINGS & C ONCLUSIONS
The bulk of this report is devot ed to conveying the details of th e study findings. In this section, however, we attempt to ‘see the forest through the trees’ and note how the collective results of the survey answer the key questi ons that motivated the research . The following conclusions are based on True North’s interpretations of the survey results and the firm’s collective experience conducting revenue measure studies for public agencies throughout the State.

Is it feasible to place a
local sales tax measure
on the November 2022
ballot?
Yes. Most Escondido voters have a positive opinion of the quality of life in the city, and they value the servi ces they receive from the City of Escondido while also seeing opportunities for improvements. Together, these sentiments translate into solid natural support (ranging between 62% to 68%) for establishing a one cent sales tax to provide funding for general city services such as polic e patrols and crime prevention, fire protection, paramedic, and 911 em ergency response, keeping streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, parks, and facilities safe, clean, and well-main- tained, addressing homelessness, traffic management, and other city services. The natural support levels fo r the measure tested in this study are well above the simple majority (50% +1) that is required for passage.

The results of this study suggest that if structur ed appropriately, focused on projects and services that voters identify as their priorities, and combined with effective public outreach/education and a solid inde- pendent campaign, the proposed sales tax measure has a good chance of passage if placed on the November 2022 ballot.

Having stated that a general sales tax measure is feasible, it is important to note that the measure’s prospects will be shaped by external factors and that a recommendation to place the measure on the November 2022 ballot comes with several qualifications and conditions. Indeed, although the results are promising, all revenue measures must overcome chal- lenges prior to being successful. The proposed measure is no exception.

The following paragraphs discuss some of the challenges and the next steps that True North recommends.

Which services do Escon-
dido voters view as pri-
orities?
A general tax is “any tax imposed for general governmental purposes” 2 and is distinguished from a special tax in that the funds raised by a gen- eral tax are not earmarked for a spec ific purpose(s). Thus, a general tax provides a municipality with a great deal of flexibility with respect to what is funded by the measure on a year-to-year basis.

Although the Escondido City Council would have the discretion to decide how to spend the revenues, the survey results indicate that voters are most interested in using the proceeds to fund public works, public safety, and address homelessness. S pecifically, voters most strongly

2. Section 1, Article XIIIC, California Constitution.

Attachment "1"
33 Item5.

Key Findings & Conclusions
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 4City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
favored using measure proceeds to repair and maintain local streets, sidewalks and infrastructure (92% strongly or somewhat favor), keep parks and public areas safe, clean, and well-maintained (92%), provide quick responses to 911 emergencies (90%), provide fire protection and paramedic services (89%), clean up p iles of trash and litter that people dump along streets, sidewalks, and in public areas (89%), and address homelessness (88%).

Does the duration of the
measure strongly shape
voter support?
To assess how support for the measure may vary based on the duration of the measure, the survey employed a split-sample approach to test two options: until ended by voters and for 20 years. The overall sample of voters was split into two representati ve subsamples, with half receiving one version and half receiving the alternative. Consistent with the find- ings of other similar studies, this survey found that voters tend not to assign much weight to the duration of a measure in their decision calcu- lus. At the Initial Ballot Test, overall support for the sales tax measure was modestly lower for the measure that would last until ended by voters (62%) when compared to the measur e with a 20 year duration (68%).

However, this difference evaporated quickly as the interview proceeded, with support at the Final Ballot Test being 63% for a measure that would last until ended by voters, 64% for a measure that would extend for 20 years. At no point after the Initial Ballot Test was there a statistically sig- nificant difference in support fo r the proposed measure based on the duration.

How might a public
information campaign
affect support for the
proposed measure?
As noted in the body of this report , individuals’ opinions about revenue measures are often not rigid, especially when the amount of information presented to the public on a measure has been limited. Thus, in addition to measuring current support for the measure, one of the goals of this study was to explore how the introd uction of additional information about the measure may affect voters’ opinions about the proposal.

It is clear from the survey results that voters’ opinions about the pro- posed measures are somewhat sensitive to the nature, and amount, of information they have about the me asure. Information about the proj- ects and services that could be fun ded by the measure as well as argu- ments in favor of the measure were found by many voters to be compelling reasons to support the measure—effectively increasing sup- port for the measure to 67% at the Interim Ballot Test. That said, voters also exhibited some sensitivity to o pposition arguments, and there is a risk they could be swayed by divi sive and hyper-partisan campaigning during the November election cycle. Accordingly, one of the keys to building and sustaining support for a measure will be the presence of an effective, well-organized public outr each effort and a separate, indepen- dent campaign that focuses on the need for the measure as well as the many benefits that it will bring.

Attachment "1"
34 Item5.

Key Findings & Conclusions
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 5City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

How might changes to
the economic or politi-
cal climate alter support
for the measure?
A survey is a snapshot in time—which means the results of this study and the conclusions noted above mu st be viewed in light of the current economic and political climates. On the one hand, this should provide some reassurances to the City of Escondido that a sales tax measure is feasible. Even with concerns regarding the pandemic, inflation, high gas prices, and the trajectory of the ec onomy, more than six-in-ten Escon- dido voters were supportive of the measure at every ballot test. Support for the proposed measure also appears to be quite resilient, as the sup- port levels found in the present su rvey were reasonably close to those found in a 2019 survey conducted for the City (prior to the pandemic). 3 On the other hand, the months leading up to the November 2022 elec- tion are likely to be punctuated wi th dramatic events on the public health, economic, and political fron ts. Exactly how these events unfold and may shape voters’ opinions remains to be seen. Should the economy and/or political climate improve, support for the measure could increase. Conversely, negative economic and/or political developments (including devolving into a hyper-pa rtisan environment), could dampen support for the measure below what was recorded in this study.

3. In October 2019 and in the absence of the pandemic, inflation, high gas prices, etc., support for a one-cent sales tax increase to fund general city services ranged between 65% to 70% among Escondido voters.

Attachment "1"
35 Item5.

Quality of Life & City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 6
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q UALITY OF L IFE & C ITY S ERVICES
The opening section of the survey was designed to gauge voters’ opinions regarding the City of Escondido’s performance in providing municipal services, as well as their perceptions of the quality of life in the City.

QUALITY OF LIFE At the outset of the interview, voters were asked to rate the quality of life in the City of Escondido using a five-point scal e of excellent, good, fair, poor, or very poor. As shown in Figure 1 below, six-in-ten voters shar ed favorable opinions of the quality of life in Escondido, with 5% reporting it is excellent an d 55% stating it is good. Approximately one-third (33%) of voters surveyed rated the quality of life in the City is fair, whereas about 6% used poor or very poor to describe the quality of life in Escondido.

Question 2 How would you rate the overall quality of life in Escondido? Would you say it is excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor?
FIGURE 1 QUALITY OF LIFE
Figures 2 and 3 show how ratings of the quality of life in Escondido varied across a range of subgroups.

Although the majority of nearly all subgroups provided
favorable quality of life ra tings, the most positive
assessments were provided by those who had lived in
Escondido less than 10 years, those satisfied with the
City’s overall performance in providing municipal ser-
vices, residents without ch ildren in their household,
home owners, seniors, males, and those living in Coun-
cil Districts 3 or 4.

FIGURE 2 QUALITY OF LIFE BY YEARS IN ESCONDIDO, OVERALL SATISFACTION, CHILD IN HSLD & HOMEOWNER VOTER

ON FILE
Not sure/Prefer
not to answer

0.7Very poor

1.6 Poor

4.8 Fair

32.7 Good

55.2 Excellent

4.9 7.0 0.7 5.2 4.8 6.1 3.2

66.8 26.9

49.6 58.5 59.6

49.3 5.12.36.3Excellent

4.4 65.0

50.8 51.8
Good

58.4 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Satisfied Dissatisfied Yes No Yes No Years in Escondido (Q1) Overall Satisfaction (Q4) Child in Hsld (Q15) Homeowner on Voter File
% Respondents
Attachment "1"
36 Item5.

Quality of Life & City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 7City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURE 3 QUALITY OF LIFE BY AGE, GENDER & COUNCIL DISTRICT CHANGES TO IMPROVE ESCONDIDO The next question in this series asked voters to indicate the one thing that city government could change to make Escondido a better place to live, now and in the future. Question 3 was posed in an open-ended manner, allowing residents to mention any aspect or attribute that came to mind without being prompted by or restricted to a particular list of options. True North late r reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown in Figure 4 on the next page.

Among specific changes desired, addressing homeless issues was the most common, mentioned by one-third (33%) of voters surveyed. Other top issues included improvi ng infrastructure, streets, and sidewalks (14%), im proving public safety (12%), cleaning up and beautifying the City/landscaping/removing graffiti (9%), and providing more affordable housing (7%). Eleven per- cent (11%) of respondents could not think of a desired change (9%) or reported that no changes are needed (2%) to make Escondido a better place to live.

9.5 5.9 4.0 2.4 2.5 7.0 7.3

64.8 60.1

50.4 39.9

55.7 61.6 57.2
Excellent

0.0 2.2 5.9 4.5
Good

49.7 53.556.3

47.3 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
18 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 or older Male Female One Two Three Four Age Gender Council District
% Respondents
Attachment "1"
37 Item5.

Quality of Life & City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 8City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Question 3 If the city government could change one thing to make Escondido a better place to live now and in the future, what change would you like to see? FIGURE 4 CHANGES TO IMPROVE CITY
OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING The final question in this series asked respondents to indicate if, overall, they were satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Escondido is doing to provide city services. Because this question does not reference a specific program, facil- ity, or service and requested that the respondent consider the City’s performance in general, the findings of this question may be regarded as an overall performance rating for the City.

As shown in Figure 5 on the next page, two-th irds of Escondido voters surveyed indicated that they were satisfied with the City’s efforts to provide municipal services , with 14% saying they were very satisfied and 53% somewhat satisfied. Approximately 25% reported that they were dis- satisfied with the City’s overall performance, and 8% were unsure or unwilling to state their opin- ion. For the interested reader, figures 6 an d 7 display how the percentage of respondents satisfied with the City’s overall performance varied across several demographic subgroups.

32.5 13.9

12.1 9.3

9.3 6.6

4.9 4.7

4.6 3.3

3.3 2.8

2.6 2.4

2.2 2.2

2.0 2.0

1.8 1.8

1.7 2.9

3.4 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Address homeless issues
Improve infrastructure, streets, sidewalks
Improve public safety
Clean-up, beautify City, landscape, graffiti
Not sure / Cannot think of anything specific
Provide more affordable housing
Improve, parks, recreation
Improve, maintain downtown area, Grand Ave, more walkable Reduce traffic congestion
Enforce traffic laws
Attract more high-end dining options
Less residential density, high rise apartments, condos
Provide more police presence, support police, funding
Provide more community events, activities for all ages
Improve schools, education
Improve local economy, job opportunities
No changes needed / Everything is fine
Address parking issues
Renovate, repurpose old, empty buildings
Attract, support small businesses
Enforce city codes
Improve environmental efforts, preparedness
Reduce taxes, fees
% Respondents
Attachment "1"
38 Item5.

Quality of Life & City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 9City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Question 4 Generally speaking, are you satisfied or diss atisfied with the job the City of Escon- dido is doing to provide city services?
FIGURE 5 OVERALL SATISFACTION
FIGURE 6 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY YEARS IN ESCONDIDO, CHILD IN HSLD, HOMEOWNER ON VOTER FILE & GENDER Very satisfied

14.0 Somewhat
satisfied

53.4 Somewhat
dissatisfied

18.0 Very
dissatisfied

6.7 Not sure

7.3 Prefer not to
answer

0.6 12.8 14.7 14.9 12.8 16.5 11.5

51.7 53.9 59.3

45.4 56.3

50.5 Ver y
satisfied

20.4 16.5 8.7 12.3
Smwt
satisfied

50.7 52.161.0

55.9 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Yes No Yes No Male Female Years in Escondido (Q1) Child in Hsld (Q15) Homeowner on Voter File
Gender
% Respondents
Attachment "1"
39 Item5.

Quality of Life & City Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 10City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURE 7 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY AGE & COUNCIL DISTRICT

20.5 10.0 12.7 16.4 15.6

56.1 48.8

54.1 53.4 54.7

13.617.3

7.9 Ver y
satisfied

7.4 55.6

56.4 53.3
Smwt
satisfied

44.3 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
18 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 or older One Two Three Four Age Council District
% Respondents
Attachment "1"
40 Item5.

Initial Ballot Test
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 11
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I NITIAL B ALLOT T EST
The primary research objective of this survey was to estimate voters’ support for establishing a one-cent sales tax to provide funding for general city services in the City of Escondido, such as police patrols and crime preventi on, fire protection, paramedic, and 911 emergency response, keeping streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, parks, and facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained, addressing homelessness, traffic management, and other city services. To this end, Question 5 was designed to take an early assessment of voters’ support for the proposed measure.

The motivation for placing Question 5 near the front of the survey is twofold. First, voter support for a measure can often depend on the amount of information th ey have about a measure. At this point in the survey, the respondent has not been provided inform ation about the proposed measure beyond what is presented in the ballot la nguage. This situation is analogous to a voter casting a ballot with limited knowledge about the measure, such as what might occur in the absence of an effective campaign. Question 5, also known as the Initial Ballot Test, is thus a good measure of voter support for the proposed measure as it is today, on the natural. Because the Initial Ballot Test provides a gauge of natural support for the measure, it also serves a second purpose in that it provides a useful baseline fr om which to judge the impact of various informa- tion items conveyed later in the survey on voter support for the measure.

Question 5 Later this year, voters in Escondido may be asked to vote on a local ballot measure.

Let me read you a summary of the measure. To provide funding for general services in the City of Escondido, such as police patrols and crime prevention; fire protection, paramedic, and 9-1-1 emergency response; keeping streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, parks, and facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained; addressing homelessness, traffic management, and other city services; shall an ordinance establishing a one-cent sales tax be adopted, providing approximately 28 mil- lion dollars annually for general government use <<until ended by voters | for 20 years>>, with independent audits, citizen oversight, and all money locally controlled? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?
FIGURE 8 INITIAL BALLOT TEST BY DURATION OF MEASURE

10.6 13.8

14.9 10.0 6.4

31.930.7

36.131.7

12.7 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Until ended by voters Duration of 20 years
Initial Ballot Test
% Respondents
Prefer not to
answer
Not sure
Definitely no
Probably no
Probably yes
Definitely yes
Attachment "1"
41 Item5.

Initial Ballot Test
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 12City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

To assess how support for the measure may vary based on the duration of the measure, the sur- vey used a split-sample approach to test two options: until ended by voters and for 20 years. The overall sample of voters was split into two representative subsamples, with half receiving one version and the other half receiving the alternative.

As shown in Figure 8 on the previous page, there was a modest difference in voters’ initial levels of support for the sales tax renewal measure based on the version tested. Among those who received a measure that would extend until end ed by voters, 62% supported the measure, 27% opposed, and 11% were unsure at the Initial Ballot Test. Voters who received the 20-year version were somewhat more supportive initially, with 68% indicating they would support the proposal, 26% opposed, and 7% unsure.

The support levels recorded at the Initial Ballot Test were 12% and 18% above the simple majority required for passage of a general tax under California law, depending on the version tested. The findings of this survey also suggest that voters’ opinions about the proposed measure have remained relatively stable over the past two year s, despite the pandemic and trends in inflation, gas prices, and other factors. Approximately 70% of likely November 2020 voters surveyed in October 2019 (prior to the pandemic) supported a similar sales tax measure (prior to the pan- demic).

INITIAL SUPPORT BY SUBGROUPS For the interested reader, Table 1 on the next page combines responses for the two tax durations and shows how support for the measure at the Ini- tial Ballot Test varied by key demographic traits . The blue column (Approximate % of Voter Uni- verse) indicates the percentage of the likely November 2022 electorate that each subgroup category comprises, whereas the green column (% Probably or Definitely Yes) conveys the level of support for the measure. The most striking pattern in the table is that support for the measure was widespread at the Initial Ballot Test, exceeding a simple majority in all identified subgroups with the exception of one: respondents who ra ted the City’s performance in managing its finances as poor or very poor.

Attachment "1"
42 Item5.

Initial Ballot Test
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 13City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLE 1 DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN OF SUPPORT AT INITIAL BALLOT TEST Approximate %
of Voter
Universe
% Probably or
Definitely Yes % Not sure
Overall 100.0 65.2 8.2
Less than 5 16.7 66.7 11.0
5 to 9 16.6 77.2 5.2
10 to 14 8.3 61.7 10.1
15 or more 58.4 61.6 7.9
Satisfied 73.2 69.6 6.6
Dissatisfied 26.8 52.7 10.5
Yes 28.7 69.6 3.8
No 71.3 65.0 9.6
Better 9.5 80.7 5.3
About the same 35.7 74.3 7.6
Worse 54.8 55.6 9.2
Excellent, good 30.2 84.9 2.8
Fair 44.4 63.4 6.3
Poor, very poor 25.4 44.5 12.9
Democrat 37.1 72.5 9.0
Republican 35.1 56.4 7.7
Other / DTS 27.8 66.5 7.8
18 to 29 16.1 66.4 13.0
30 to 39 17.1 67.7 4.8
40 to 49 14.1 69.3 9.0
50 to 64 25.9 60.9 6.7
65 or older 26.7 64.8 8.5
Since Nov '18 11.8 73.8 6.6
Jun '12 to <Nov '18 24.8 64.3 10.3
Jun '06 to <Jun '12 11.2 59.7 5.7
Before Jun '06 52.2 64.8 8.1
Single dem 19.9 74.4 8.7
Dual dem 10.5 70.0 9.6
Single rep 14.2 58.4 5.6
Dual rep 13.3 58.9 7.9
Other 17.0 62.1 10.6
Mixed 25.1 65.1 7.1
Yes 57.8 64.0 7.6
No 42.2 66.8 9.0
Male 49.8 64.6 7.9
Female 50.2 65.9 8.5
One 13.6 70.5 5.1
Two 34.7 63.4 10.1
Three 21.0 70.9 5.8
Four 30.6 60.9 9.1
Yes 74.4 65.3 8.9
No 25.6 64.9 6.0
Yes 65.5 64.3 8.3
No 34.5 66.9 8.0
Years in Escondido (Q1)
Fiscal Management
Rating (Q14)
Registration Year
Homeowner on Voter File
Gender
Household Party Type
Age
Opinion of Economy in 6
Months (Q13)
Party
Overall Satisfaction (Q4)
Child in Hsld (Q15)
Likely to Vote by Mail
Likely Jun 2022 Voter
Council District
Attachment "1"
43 Item5.

Initial Ballot Test
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 14City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REASONS FOR OPPOSING MEASURE Respondents who opposed the measure (or were unsure) at the Question 5 Initial Ballot Test were subsequently asked if there was a particular rea- son for their position. Question 6 was asked in an open-ended manner, allowing respondents to mention any reason that came to mind without be ing prompted by, or restricted to, a particular list of options. True North subsequently reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown in Figure 9. Among spec ific reasons offered for not supporting the mea- sure or being unsure, a belief that taxes are already too high (41%) and the perception that city funds have been/will be mismanaged or misspent (30%) were the most common, followed by a need for more information (12%).

Question 6 Is there a particular reason why you do not support or are unsure about the mea- sure I just described?
FIGURE 9 REASONS FOR NOT SUPPORTING MEASURE

40.9 29.5

12.1 6.4

6.1 5.0

4.3 3.8

2.3 1.3

1.9 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Taxes already too high
Money is misspent, mismanaged
Need more information
Other ways to be funded
Police do not need more money
Do not trust government
Other higher priorities in the city
Not sure / Cannot think of anything specific
City has enough money
Measure should have a sunset
Money will go to employees, union pensions, salaries
% Respondents Who Do Not Support Measure
Attachment "1"
44 Item5.

Projects & Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 15
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

P ROJECTS & S ERVICES
The ballot language presented in Question 5 indicated that the proposed measure would provide funding for general city services in the City of Escondido such as police patrols and crime pre- vention, fire protection, para medic, and 911 emergency respon se, keeping streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, parks, and facilities safe, clea n, and well-maintained, addressing homelessness, traffic management, and other city services. The purpose of Question 7 was to provide respon- dents with a full range of services that may be funded by the proposed measure, as well as iden- tify which of these services voters most favored funding with the proceeds of the measure.

After reading each service, respondents were as ked if they would favor or oppose spending some of the money on that particular item a ssuming that the measure passed. Descriptions of the services tested, as well as voters’ response s, are shown in Figure 10 below. The order in which the services were presented to respondent s was randomized to avoid a systematic posi- tion bias.

Question 7 The measure we've been discussing will provide funding for a variety of services in your community. If the measure passes, would you favor or oppose using some of the money to:
_____, or do you not have an opinion?
FIGURE 10 PROJECTS & SERVICES
Overall, the services that resonated with the la rgest percentage of resp ondents were repairing and maintaining local streets, sidewalks and infrastructure (92% strongly or somewhat favor), keeping parks and public areas safe, clean, and well-maintained (92%), providing quick responses to 911 emergencies (90%), providing fire protection and paramedic services (89%), cleaning up piles of trash and litter that people dump along streets, sidewalks, and in public areas (89%), and addressing homelessness (88%).

68.7 65.5

66.2 64.7

61.8 69.3

52.6 55.7

56.1 45.7

54.0 47.9

44.7 43.6

14.9 23.1

26.4 23.3

24.2 26.9

19.0 32.0

27.2 26.5

34.5 26.0

31.4 34.0

31.4 26.7
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Repair and maintain local streets, sidewalks, and infrastructure Keep parks and public facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained Provide quick responses to 911 emergencies
Provide fire protection and paramedic services
Clean up piles of trash and litter that people dump along streets, sidewalks, and in public areas
Address homelessness
Promote economic development to retain local businesses, attract new employers, and attract good paying jobs to Escondido
Preserve natural open space and parkland
Provide police services, including neighborhood police patrols, investigations, and crime prevention
Remove graffiti
Improve environmental sustainability by planting more trees, improving energy efficiency, and using water more efficiently
Make improvements to reduce traffic congestion on city streets Provide programs for at-risk youth
Improve the City’s long-term financial stability
Reduce the City’s unfunded pension liability
Q7d Q7eQ7c Q7b Q7n Q7f Q7iQ7kQ7a Q7hQ7mQ7gQ7lQ7j2 Q7j1
% Respondents
Strongly favor Somewhat favor
Attachment "1"
45 Item5.

Projects & Services
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 16City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SERVICE RATINGS BY INITIAL SUPPORT Table 2 presents the top five services (show- ing the percentage of respondents who strongly favor each) by position at the Initial Ballot Test.

Not surprisingly, individuals who initially opposed the measure were generally less likely to favor spending money on a given service when compar ed with supporters. Nevertheless, initial sup- porters, opponents, and the undecided did agree on four of the top five priorities for funding.

TABLE 2 TOP PROJECTS & SERVICES BY POSITION AT INITIAL BALLOT TEST Position at
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5) Item Project or Service Summary
% Strongly
Favor
Q7f Address homelessness 78
Q7e Keep parks and public facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained 77 Q7d Repair and maintain local streets, sidewalks, and infrastructure 76 Q7c Provide quick responses to 911 emergencies 76
Q7b Provide fire protection and paramedic services 73
Q7d Repair and maintain local streets, sidewalks, and infrastructure 52 Q7f Address homelessness 52
Q7b Provide fire protection and paramedic services 48
Q7c Provide quick responses to 911 emergencies 47
Q7e Keep parks and public facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained 44 Q7d Repair and maintain local streets, sidewalks, and infrastructure 64 Q7f Address homelessness 58
Q7c Provide quick responses to 911 emergencies 56
Q7n Clean up piles of trash and litter that people dump along streets, sidewalks, and in public areas 56
Q7b Provide fire protection and paramedic services 53
Probably or
Definitely Yes
(n = 666)
Probably or
Definitely No
(n = 265)
Not Sure
(n = 84)
Attachment "1"
46 Item5.

Positive Arguments
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 17
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

P OSITIVE A RGUMENTS
If the City chooses to place a measure on an up coming ballot, voters will be exposed to various arguments about the measure in the ensuing months. Proponents of the measure will present arguments to try to persuade voters to support a measure, just as opponents may present argu- ments to achieve the opposite goal. For this study to be a reliable gauge of voter support for the proposed sales tax measure, it is important that the survey simulate the type of discussion and debate that will occur prior to the vote taking place and identify how this information ultimately shapes voters’ opinions about the measure.

The objective of Question 8 was thus to present respondents with arguments in favor of the pro- posed measure and identify whether they felt the arguments were convincing reasons to support it. Arguments in opposition to the measure were also presented and are discussed later in this report (see Negative Arguments on page 22). Within each series, specific arguments were admin- istered in random order to avoid a systematic position bias.

Question 8 What I'd like to do now is tell you what some people are saying about the measure we've been discussing. Supporters of the measure say: _____. Do you think this is a very convinc- ing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to SUPPORT the measure? FIGURE 11 POSITIVE ARGUMENTS

39.7 38.2

36.7 34.2

31.8 33.4

29.3 32.9

27.1 34.2

28.8 29.0

33.3 31.3

32.7 34.5

33.9 32.1

35.9 31.0

36.5 27.3

32.4 29.4
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Fast response times for 911 calls critical for saving lives; measure will ensure enough police, firefighters, dispatchers, paramedics to respond quickly to 911
Nearly all sales tax goes to State, County, SANDAG; measure will ensure Escondido has local control over local revenue for services residents expect deserve
Measure will allow City to keep up with repairs, maintenance to facilities, storm drains, streets, sidewalks; take care of it now or will be more expensive to repair in future
By keeping city safe, clean, well-maintained, measure will help protect property values, keep Escondido a great place to live
Measure will provide funding to avoid deep cuts in all service areas, police, fire, 911 response times, maintenance of streets, parks, public facilities, programs for youth, seniors
All money raised by measure will be used to fund essential services, facilities here in Escondido; by law, it can’t be taken away by State High quality parks and recreation programs help keep kids healthy, active, and away from drugs, gangs and crime
There will be a clear system of accountability incl independent citizen oversight, annual reports to community to ensure that money is spent properly
Measure will help fund economic development programs City needs to retain local businesses, attract new employers, good paying jobs to Escondido
Measure will provide funding to avoid deep cuts to public safety services, police, fire protection, paramedics, 911 response, closing a fire station City has done good job keeping costs down; deferred maintenance, cut back on services, kept small staff; still facing $8M deficit that is expected to grow to $10M annually over next 5 yrs
Measure will cost just 1 dollar for every $100 purchased, food, medicine, many other essential items are excluded from the tax
Q8cQ8gQ8eQ8fQ8k1Q8bQ8jQ8aQ8hQ8k2Q8iQ8d
% Respondents
Very convincing Somewhat convincing
Attachment "1"
47 Item5.

Positive Arguments
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 18City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 11 on the previous page presents the truncated positive arguments tested, as well as vot- ers’ reactions to the arguments. The arguments are ranked from most convincing to least con- vincing based on the percentage of respondents who indicated that the argument was either a ‘very convincing’ or ‘somewhat convincing’ reason to support the sales tax measure. Using this methodology, the most compelling positive arguments were: Fast emergency response times for 911 calls are critical for saving lives. This measure will ensure that we have enough police offi- cers, firefighters, dispatchers, and paramedics to respond quickly to 911 emergencies (73% very or somewhat convincing), Currently, nearly all of the sales tax generated locally goes to the State of California, the County of San Diego, or SAND AG. This measure will ensure that Escondido has local control over local revenue for the services residents expect and deserve (70%), and The funding raised by this measure will allow the City to keep up with basic repairs and maintenance to public facilities, storm drains, streets, and sidewalks. If we don't take care of it now, it will be a lot more expensive to repair in the future (69%).

POSITIVE ARGUMENTS BY INITIAL SUPPORT Table 3 on the next page lists the top five most convincing positive arguments (showing the percentage of respondents who cited it as very convincing) according to respondents’ vote ch oice at the Initial Ballot Test. The positive arguments resonated with a much higher percentage of voters initially inclined to support the measure compared with those who initially oppose d the measure or were unsure. Nevertheless, two arguments were ranked among the top five most compelling by all three groups.

Attachment "1"
48 Item5.

Positive Arguments
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 19City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLE 3 TOP POSITIVE ARGUMENTS BY POSITION AT INITIAL BALLOT TEST Position at
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5) Item Positive Argument Summary
% Very
Convincing
Q8c Fast response times for 911 calls critical for saving lives; measure will ensure enough police, firefighters, dispatchers, paramedics to respond quickly to 911 52 Q8g Nearly all sales tax goes to State, County, SANDAG; measure will ensure Escondido has local control over local revenue for services residents expect deserve 51 Q8e
Measure will allow City to keep up with repairs, maintenance to facilities, storm drains, streets, sidewalks; take care of it now or will be more expensive to repair in future
48 Q8k2 Measure will provide funding to avoid deep cuts to public safety services, police, fire protection, paramedics, 911 response, closing a fire station 48 Q8f By keeping city safe, clean, well-maintained, measure will help protect property values, keep Escondido a great place to live 46
Q8e
Measure will allow City to keep up with repairs, maintenance to facilities, storm drains, streets, sidewalks; take care of it now or will be more expensive to repair in future
14 Q8c
Fast response times for 911 calls critical for saving lives; measure will ensure enough police, firefighters, dispatchers, paramedics to respond quickly to 911 12 Q8g Nearly all sales tax goes to State, County, SANDAG; measure will ensure Escondido has local control over local revenue for services residents expect deserve 11 Q8f By keeping city safe, clean, well-maintained, measure will help protect property values, keep Escondido a great place to live 9
Q8h Measure will help fund economic development programs City needs to retain local businesses, attract new employers, good paying jobs to Escondido 9 Q8c Fast response times for 911 calls critical for saving lives; measure will ensure enough police, firefighters, dispatchers, paramedics to respond quickly to 911 33 Q8k1
Measure will provide funding to avoid deep cuts in all service areas, police, fire, 911 response times, maintenance of streets, parks, public facilities, programs for youth, seniors
32 Q8g Nearly all sales tax goes to State, County, SANDAG; measure will ensure Escondido has local control over local revenue for services residents expect deserve 27 Q8a There will be a clear system of accountability incl independent citizen oversight, annual reports to community to ensure that money is spent properly 26 Q8h Measure will help fund economic development programs City needs to retain local businesses, attract new employers, good paying jobs to Escondido 25 Probably or
Definitely Yes
(n = 666)
Probably or
Definitely No
(n = 265)
Not Sure
(n = 84)
Attachment "1"
49 Item5.

Interim Ballot Test
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 20
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I NTERIM B ALLOT T EST
After informing respondents about the services that could be funded by the measure as well as exposing them to positive arguments voters may encounter during an election cycle, the survey again presented respondents with the ballot language used previously to gauge how support for the proposed sales tax measure may have changed. As shown in Figure 12, at this point in the survey there was little difference in support base d on the duration of the measure. Two-thirds (67%) of voters at the Interim Ballot Test supported a measure that would extend until ended by voters, whereas 24% opposed and 10% were unsure or unwilling to share their opinion. Two- thirds (67%) of voters also supported a comparable measure that would last for 20 years, while 25% opposed and 8% were unsure or unwilling to share their opinion.

Question 9 Sometimes people change their mind about a measure once they have more infor- mation about it. Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a sum- mary of it again. To provide funding for general se rvices in the City of Escondido, such as police patrols and crime prevention; fire protection, paramedic, and 9-1-1 emergency response; keep- ing streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, parks, and facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained; addressing homelessness, traffic management, and other city services; shall an ordinance estab- lishing a one-cent sales tax be adopted, providing approximately 28 million dollars annually for general government use <<until ended by voters | for 20 years>>, with independent audits, citi- zen oversight, and all money locally controlled? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?
FIGURE 12 INTERIM BALLOT TEST BY DURATION OF MEASURE
SUPPORT BY SUBGROUPS Table 4 on the next page show s how support for the measure at this point in the survey varied by key voter subgroups, as well as the change in subgroup sup- port when compared with the Initial Ballot Test. Positive differences appear in green and negative differences appear in red. As shown in the table, support for the sales tax measure increased by modest amounts (less than 5 percentage points) bet ween the Initial and In terim Ballot Test for

10.1 12.9 15.0

8.8 6.9

35.3 33.6

31.2 33.2

11.1 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Until ended by voters Duration of 20 years
Interim Ballot Test
% Respondents
Prefer not to
answer
Not sure
Definitely no
Probably no
Probably yes
Definitely yes
Attachment "1"
50 Item5.

Interim Ballot Test
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 21City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
most voter subgroups. Notable exceptions includ e recent registrants (+13%) and those who had lived in Escondido between 10 to 14 years (+7%).

TABLE 4 DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN OF SUPPORT AT INTERIM BALLOT TEST Approximate %
of Voter
Universe
% Probably or
Definitely Yes
Change From
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5)
Overall 100.0 66.6 +1.4
Less than 5 16.7 71.5 +4.8
5 to 9 16.6 73.4 -3.8
10 to 14 8.3 68.7 +7.0
15 or more 58.4 62.8 +1.2
Satisfied 73.2 71.9 +2.4
Dissatisfied 26.8 52.8 +0.1
Yes 28.7 72.5 +2.8
No 71.3 66.0 +1.1
Better 9.5 84.8 +4.1
About the same 35.7 76.6 +2.3
Worse 54.8 56.2 +0.6
Excellent, good 30.2 87.6 +2.7
Fair 44.4 66.0 +2.6
Poor, very poor 25.4 42.4 -2.2
Democrat 37.1 73.4 +1.0
Republican 35.1 56.5 +0.1
Other / DTS 27.8 70.2 +3.8
18 to 29 16.1 71.3 +4.9
30 to 39 17.1 70.0 +2.3
40 to 49 14.1 69.3 +0.0
50 to 64 25.9 61.2 +0.2
65 or older 26.7 65.5 +0.7
Since Nov '18 11.8 86.6 +12.8
Jun '12 to <Nov '18 24.8 62.5 -1.8
Jun '06 to <Jun '12 11.2 62.8 +3.1
Before Jun '06 52.2 64.8 +0.0
Single dem 19.9 74.4 +0.0
Dual dem 10.5 73.9 +3.9
Single rep 14.2 61.9 +3.5
Dual rep 13.3 58.2 -0.6
Other 17.0 65.7 +3.6
Mixed 25.1 65.1 +0.0
Yes 57.8 63.5 -0.5
No 42.2 70.9 +4.1
Male 49.8 67.0 +2.4
Female 50.2 66.3 +0.5
One 13.6 75.3 +4.8
Two 34.7 66.5 +3.2
Three 21.0 68.9 -2.0
Four 30.6 61.3 +0.3
Yes 74.4 66.8 +1.5
No 25.6 66.0 +1.1
Yes 65.5 63.9 -0.3
No 34.5 71.7 +4.8
Years in Escondido (Q1)
Overall Satisfaction (Q4)
Child in Hsld (Q15)
Opinion of Economy in 6
Months (Q13)
Fiscal Management
Rating (Q14)
Party
Age
Registration Year
Likely to Vote by Mail
Likely Jun 2022 Voter
Household Party Type
Homeowner on Voter File
Gender
Council District
Attachment "1"
51 Item5.

Negative Arguments
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 22
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N EGATIVE A RGUMENTS
Whereas Question 8 of the survey presented respondents with arguments in favor of the sales tax measure, Question 10 presented respondents with arguments design ed to elicit opposition to the measure. In the case of Question 10, however, respondents were asked whether they felt that the argument was a very co nvincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to oppose the measure. The arguments tested, as we ll as voters’ opinions about the arguments, are presented below in Figure 13.

Question 10 Next, let me tell you what opponents of the measure are saying. Opponents of the measure say: _____. Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to OPPOSE the measure?
FIGURE 13 NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS
Overall, the most compelling negative arguments were: Local businesses and residents have been hit hard by the pandemic, inflation, and high gas prices. Many are struggling to stay afloat.

Now is not the time to raise taxes (74% very or somewhat convincing), There are no guarantees on how funds will be spent, which means the City can divert the money to pet projects without any say from voters. We can't trust the City with our tax dollars (70%), and Taxes are already too high - we can't afford another tax increase. This is especially true for seniors and others on fixed incomes (70%).

NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS BY INITIAL SUPPORT Table 5 on the next page ranks the negative arguments (showing the percentage of respondents who cited each as very convincing) according to respondents’ vote choice at the Initial Ballot Test.

41.5 39.5

38.4 34.7

33.3 28.4

28.0 24.5

32.4 30.6

31.6 30.1

29.0 26.4

26.7 26.5
0 1 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0 1 0 0
Local businesses, residents have been hit hard by pandemic, inflation, high gas prices; many are struggling to stay afloat; now is not the time to raise taxes
No guarantees on how funds will be spent, which means City can divert money to pet projects without any say from voters; we can’t trust City with tax dollars
Taxes are already too high, we can’t afford another tax increase; this is especially true for seniors, others on fixed-incomes It is already very expensive to live here, especially for young families, seniors, those on fixed-incomes; measure will make it even less affordable
This tax will last forever; there is no expiration date City employees are making too much money in salary, pensions, benefits, that’s the problem; City needs to tighten its belt before asking residents to pay more taxes
This tax will last for 20 years; that’s too long
Measure is not supported by the local Taxpayers Association; if the Taxpayers Association doesn't support this, why should we? Q10a2Q10d1Q10a1Q10bQ10eQ10cQ10fQ10d2
% Respondents
Very convincing Somewhat convincing
Attachment "1"
52 Item5.

Negative Arguments
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 23City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLE 5 TOP NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS
Position at
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5) Item Negative Argument Summary
% Very
Convincing
Q10d1 No guarantees on how funds will be spent, which means City can divert money to pet projects without any say from voters; we can’t trust City with tax dollars 31 Q10a2 Local businesses, residents have been hit hard by pandemic, inflation, high gas prices; many are struggling to stay afloat; now is not the time to raise taxes 29 Q10e This tax will last forever; there is no expiration date 25 Q10a1 Taxes are already too high, we can’t afford another tax increase; this is especially true for seniors, others on fixed-incomes 25
Q10c City employees are making too much money in salary, pensions, benefits, that’s the p 23 Q10a2 Local businesses, residents have been hit hard by pandemic, inflation, high gas prices; many are struggling to stay afloat; now is not the time to raise taxes 71 Q10a1 Taxes are already too high, we can’t afford another tax increase; this is especially true for seniors, others on fixed-incomes 67
Q10b It is already very expensive to live here, especially for young families, seniors, those on fixed-incomes; measure will make it even less affordable 64 Q10d1
No guarantees on how funds will be spent, which means City can divert money to pet projects without any say from voters; we can’t trust City with tax dollars 61 Q10e This tax will last forever; there is no expiration date 54 Q10a2 Local businesses, residents have been hit hard by pandemic, inflation, high gas prices; many are struggling to stay afloat; now is not the time to raise taxes 54 Q10a1 Taxes are already too high, we can’t afford another tax increase; this is especially true for seniors, others on fixed-incomes 49
Q10b It is already very expensive to live here, especially for young families, seniors, those on fixed-incomes; measure will make it even less affordable 42 Q10f This tax will last for 20 years; that’s too long 39 Q10d1 No guarantees on how funds will be spent, which means City can divert money to pet projects without any say from voters; we can’t trust City with tax dollars 39 Probably or
Definitely Yes
(n = 666)
Probably or
Definitely No
(n = 265)
Not Sure
(n = 84)
Attachment "1"
53 Item5.

Final Ballot Test
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 24
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F INAL B ALLOT T EST
Voters’ opinions about ballot measures are often not rigid, especially when the amount of infor- mation presented to the public on a measure has been limited. A goal of the survey was thus to gauge how voters’ opinions about the proposed measure may be affected by the information they could encounter during the course of an election cycle. After pr oviding respondents with the wording of the proposed measure, services th at could be funded, and arguments in favor of and against the proposal, the survey again asked voters whether they would vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the proposed sales tax measure.

Question 11 Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a sum- mary of it one more time. To provide funding for general services in the City of Escondido, such as police patrols and crime prevention; fire protection, paramedic, and 9-1-1 emergency response; keeping streets, sidewa lks, infrastructure, parks, and facilities safe, clean, and well- maintained; addressing homelessness, traffic management, and other city services; shall an ordinance establishing a one-cent sales tax be adopted, providing approximately 28 million dol- lars annually for general government use <<until ended by voters | for 20 years>>, with indepen- dent audits, citizen oversight, and all money locally controlled? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?
FIGURE 14 FINAL BALLOT TEST BY DURATION OF MEASURE
At this point in the survey, support for a general sales tax that would continue until ended by voters was found among 63% of likely November 2022 voters, with 30% indicating that they would definitely support the measure. Approximately 25% of respondents opposed the measure at the Final Ballot Test, and 12% were unsure or unwilling to state their vote choice. Support for a sales tax measure that would last for 20 years was found among 64% of likely November 2022 voters, with 29% indicating that they would definitely support the measure. Approximately 27% of respondents opposed the measure at the Final Ballot Test, and 9% were unsure or unwilling to state their vote choice.

10.0 13.9 16.6

10.6 9.1

29.330.0

34.833.0

11.1 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Until ended by voters Duration of 20 years
Final Ballot Test
% Respondents
Prefer not to
answer
Not sure
Definitely no
Probably no
Probably yes
Definitely yes
Attachment "1"
54 Item5.

Change in Support
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 25
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C HANGE IN S UPPORT
Combining the results for both versions of the measure, Table 6 provides a closer look at how support for the proposed measure changed over th e course of the survey by calculating the dif- ference in support between the Initial, Interim, and Final Ballot Tests within subgroups of voters.

The percentage of support for the measure at the Final Ballot Test is shown in the column with the heading % Probably or Definitely Yes. The columns to the right show the difference between the Final and the Initial, and the Final and Inte rim Ballot Tests. Positive differences appear in green, and negative differences appear in red.

TABLE 6 DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN OF SUPPORT AT FINAL BALLOT TEST Approximate %
of Voter
Universe
% Probably or
Definitely Yes
Change From
Initial Ballot
Test (Q2)
Change From
Interim Ballot
Test (Q9)
Overall 100.0 63.5 -1.6 -3.1
Less than 5 16.7 66.0 -0.6 -5.4
5 to 9 16.6 73.3 -3.8 -0.0
10 to 14 8.3 68.1 +6.5 -0.6
15 or more 58.4 59.1 -2.5 -3.7
Satisfied 73.2 68.9 -0.6 -3.0
Dissatisfied 26.8 49.7 -3.0 -3.1
Yes 28.7 70.8 +1.1 -1.7
No 71.3 62.5 -2.5 -3.5
Better 9.5 84.4 +3.7 -0.4
About the same 35.7 73.1 -1.1 -3.4
Worse 54.8 53.1 -2.4 -3.1
Excellent, good 30.2 85.4 +0.5 -2.2
Fair 44.4 64.0 +0.7 -2.0
Poor, very poor 25.4 38.8 -5.7 -3.6
Democrat 37.1 70.5 -2.0 -2.9
Republican 35.1 52.2 -4.2 -4.3
Other / DTS 27.8 68.4 +2.0 -1.8
18 to 29 16.1 67.7 +1.4 -3.6
30 to 39 17.1 67.6 -0.2 -2.4
40 to 49 14.1 67.7 -1.6 -1.6
50 to 64 25.9 56.7 -4.3 -4.5
65 or older 26.7 62.9 -1.9 -2.6
Since Nov '18 11.8 82.4 +8.6 -4.2
Jun '12 to <Nov '18 24.8 57.5 -6.8 -5.0
J
un '06 to <Jun '12 11.2 64.0 +4.3 +1.2
Before Jun '06 52.2 62.0 -2.8 -2.8
Single dem 19.9 72.3 -2.1 -2.1
Dual dem 10.5 69.1 -0.9 -4.8
Single rep 14.2 54.4 -4.0 -7.5
Dual rep 13.3 55.6 -3.2 -2.6
Other 17.0 65.5 +3.4 -0.2
Mixed 25.1 62.3 -2.8 -2.9
Yes 57.8 60.8 -3.2 -2.7
No 42.2 67.3 +0.5 -3.6
Male 49.8 63.6 -1.0 -3.4
Female 50.2 63.6 -2.3 -2.8
One 13.6 73.4 +2.9 -1.9
Two 34.7 63.0 -0.4 -3.5
Three 21.0 68.2 -2.8 -0.7
Four 30.6 56.6 -4.4 -4.7
Yes 74.4 63.0 -2.2 -3.8
No 25.6 64.9 +0.0 -1.1
Yes 65.5 61.2 -3.0 -2.7
No 34.5 67.9 +1.0 -3.8
Years in Escondido (Q1)
Overall Satisfaction (Q4)
Child in Hsld (Q15)
Opinion of Economy in 6
Months (Q13)
Fiscal Management
Rating (Q14)
Party
Age
Registration Year
Likely to Vote by Mail
Likely Jun 2022 Voter
Household Party Type
Homeowner on Voter File
Gender
Council District
Attachment "1"
55 Item5.

Change in Support
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 26City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

As expected, voters generally responded to the negative arguments with a reduction in their sup- port for the sales tax measure when compared with the levels recorded at the Interim Ballot Test.

The general trend over the course of the entire survey (Initial to Final Ballot Test) was also one of slightly declining support for most voter subgroups, averaging -1.6 percentage points overall.

Nevertheless, even with this de cline, support for the proposed measure at the Final Ballot Test remained well above the simple majority required for passage of a general tax.

Whereas Table 6 displays change in support for the measure over the cour se of the interview at the subgroup level, Table 7 displays the indivi dual-level changes that occurred between the Ini- tial and Final Ballot tests for the measure. On th e left side of the table is shown each of the response options to the Initial Ballot Test and the percentage of respondents in each group. The cells in the body of the table depict movement within each response group (row) based on the information provided throughout th e course of the survey as recorded by the Final Ballot Test.

For example, in the first row we see that of the 31.3% of respondents who indicated that they would definitely support the measure at the Initial Ballot Test, 22.9% also indicated they would definitely support the measure at the Final Ballot Test. Approx imately 6.0% moved to the proba- bly support group, 0.6% moved to the probably oppose group, 0.6% moved to the definitely oppose group, and 1.1% stated they were now unsure of their vote choice.

To ease interpretation of the table, the cells are color coded. Red shaded cells indicate declining support, green shaded cells indicate increasing support, whereas white cells indicate no move- ment. Moreover, within the cells, a white font indicates a fundamental change in the vote: from yes to no, no to yes, or not sure to either yes or no.

TABLE 7 MOVEMENT BETWEEN INITIAL & FINAL BALLOT TEST
As one might expect, the information conveyed in the survey had the greatest impact on individ- uals who either weren’t sure about how they would vote at the Initial Ballot Test or were tentative in their vote choice (probably yes or probably no). Moreover, Table 7 makes clear that although the information did impact some voters, it did not do so in a consistent way for all respondents.

Some respondents found the info rmation conveyed during the co urse of the interview to be a reason to become more supportive of the measure, whereas a slightly larger percentage found the same information to be a reason to be less supportive. Despite 15% of respondents making a fundamental4 shift in their opinion about the measure over the course of the interview, the net impact is that support for the measure at the Final Ballot Test was approximately five percentage points lower than support at the Initial Ballot Test.

4. This is, they changed from a position of support, opposition or undecided at the Initial Ballot Test to a differ- ent position at the Final Ballot Test.

Definitely
support
Probably
support
Probably
oppose
Definitely
oppose Not sure
Definitely support 31.3% 22.9% 6.0% 0.6% 0.6% 1.1%
Probably support 33.9% 6.0% 24.0% 1.1% 0.2% 2.6%
Probably oppose 11.6% 0.0% 1.9% 5.8% 2.0% 1.9%
Definitely oppose 14.3% 0.0% 0.6% 1.6% 11.6% 0.6%
Not sure 8.9% 0.6% 1.5% 1.4% 0.8% 4.6%
Initial Ballot Test (Q5)
Final Ballot Test (Q11)
Attachment "1"
56 Item5.

Final Ballot Test at Lower Rate
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 27
City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F INAL B ALLOT T EST AT L OWER R ATE
The ballot language tested throughout the survey indicated that the measure would increase the local sales tax rate by one cent and be used to fund general city services. Voters who did not support the proposed measure at the Final Ballot Test (Question 11) were subsequently asked if they would support the measure if the rate were set at a lower amount: one-half cent.

As shown in Figure 15, lowering the tax rate to one-half cent generated a modest amount of additional support for the proposed measure. For the version that would last until ended by vot- ers, and additional 7% of voters indicated they would support the measure if the tax rate were lowered to one-half cent, although all but 0.6% of the additional support for the measure was ‘soft’ (probably yes). Similarly, for the measure that would last for a period of 20 years, an addi- tional 6% of respondents indicated they would support the measure if the rate were lowered, but just 0.7% indicated they would definitely do so.

Question 12 What if the measure I just described raised the sales tax by a lower amount: one- half cent? Would you vote yes or no on the measure?
FIGURE 15 FINAL BALLOT TEST AT ONE-HALF CENT

8.8 9.1

11.5 14.7

7.9 5.5

63.0 64.0

0.6 0.7

5.56.6 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Until ended by voters Duration of 20 years
Final Ballot Test @ One-half Cent
% Respondents
Prefer not to
answer
Not sure
Definitely no
Probably no
Probably yes
Definitely yes
Def, prob yes @
one-cent (Q11)
Attachment "1"
57 Item5.

R ELATED A TTITUDES
In addition to questions that were focused on the proposed sales tax measure, the survey also inquired as to voters’ expectations for the economy and their assessment of the job the City has done in managing its finances to date.

ECONOMIC EXPECTATIONS When asked about their expec tations for the economy six months into the future, Escondido voters were mostly pessimistic, with 53% expecting the econ- omy to be worse, 35% anticipating it will be about the same as today, while just 9% expected the economy will be better. An additional 3% preferred to not answer the question (Figure 16). When compared to their respective counterparts, R epublicans and those between the ages of 50 and 64 were the most pessimistic regarding the direction of the economy (Figure 17).

Question 13 Looking ahead six months from now, do you think the economy will be better than today, be about the same as today, or will it be worse than today? FIGURE 16 OPINION OF ECONOMY IN 6 MONTHS
FIGURE 17 OPINION OF ECONOMY IN 6 MONTHS BY PARTY & AGE Better

9.2 About the same

34.9Worse

53.4 Prefer not to
answer

2.5 10 9 9
14 41
72 46 44
55 54 57 54
15 4
9 2
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Democrat Republican Other / DTS 18 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 or older Party Age
% Respondents
Better Worse
Attachment "1"
58 Item5.

FISCAL MANAGEMENT The final substantive question of the survey asked respondents to rate the job the City of Escondido has done in managing its financial resources. As shown in Fig- ure 18, approximately one-quarter rated the City’s performance as excellent (2%) or good (21%), 35% rated it as fair, while one-in-five respondents used poor (13%) or very poor (7%) to describe the City’s performance in managing its finances. An additional 22% were not sure or preferred to not answer the question. For the interested read er, figures 19 and 20 show how the percentage who rated the City’s performance in managing its finances as excellent or good varied by parti- sanship, age, Council District, and position at the Initial Ballot Test.

Question 14 In your opinion, has the City of Escondido done an excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor job of managing its financial resources?
FIGURE 18 FISCAL MANAGEMENT RATING
FIGURE 19 FISCAL MANAGEMENT RATING BY PARTY & AGE
Excellent

2.0 Good

21.4 Fair

34.5 Poor

13.0 Very poor

6.7 Not sure

20.9 Prefer not to
answer

1.5 2.7 2.1

10.0 17.2 18.5

35.2 Excellent

2.7 1.6 1.6 1.3 3.7
Good

22.8 19.019.221.7
0 10
20 30
40 50
Democrat Republican Other / DTS 18 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 or older Party Age
% Respondents
Attachment "1"
59 Item5.

FIGURE 20 FISCAL MANAGEMENT RATING BY COUNCIL DISTRICT & POSITION INITIAL BALLOT TEST

2.6 27.8

9.4 7.6

0.4 Excellent

2.3 1.3 1.9 2.7 0.9
Good

23.7 21.121.520.8
0 10
20 30
40 50
One T wo T hree Four Def, prob yes Def, prob Not sure Council District Position at Initial Ballot Test (Q5)
% Respondents
Attachment "1"
60 Item5.

B ACKGROUND & D EMOGRAPHICS
TABLE 8 DEMOGRAPHICS OF SAMPLE
In addition to questions direct ly related to the proposed mea- sure, the study collected basic demographic information about respondents and their households . Some of this information was gathered during the interview, although much of it was col- lected from the voter file. The profile of the likely November 2022 voter sample used for this study is shown in Table 8.

Total Respondents 1022
Years in Escondido (Q1)
Less than 5 17
5 to 9 16
10 to 14 8
15 or more 58
Prefer not to answer 1
Child in Hsld (Q15)
Yes 28
No 69
Prefer not to answer 3
Gender
Male 50
Female 50
Prefer not to answer 0
Party
Democrat 37
Republican 35
Other / DTS 28
Age
18 to 29 16
30 to 39 17
40 to 49 14
50 to 64 26
65 or older 27
Registration Year
Since Nov '18 12
Jun '12 to <Nov '18 25
Jun '06 to <Jun '12 11
Before Jun '06 52
Household Party Type
Single dem 20
Dual dem 11
Single rep 14
Dual rep 13
Other 17
Mixed 25
Homeowner on Voter File
Yes 58
No 42
Likely to Vote by Mail
Yes 74
No 26
Likely Jun 2022 Voter
Yes 66
No 34
Attachment "1"
61 Item5.

M ETHODOLOGY
The following sections outline the methodology used in the study, as well as the motivation for using certain techniques.

QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT Dr. McLarney of True North Research worked closely with the City of Escondido to develop a question naire that covered the topics of interest and avoided possible sources of system atic measurement error, incl uding position-order effects, wording effects, response-category effects, sc aling effects, and priming. Several questions included multiple individual items. Because asking items in a set order can lead to a systematic position bias in responses, items were asked in random order for each respondent.

Some of the questions asked in this study were presented only to a subset of respondents. For example, only individuals who di d not support the sales tax or were unsure at the Initial Ballot Test (Question 5) were asked to describe the reason for their position (Question 6). In some cases, two versions of a project or argument were tested to identify how wording differences impact perceptions of the item. In such cases, half of the sample received the item with version 1 wording (e.g., Question 8, item K1) and the other half received version 2 (e.g., Question 8, item K2). The questionnaire included with this report (see Questionnaire & Toplines on page 35) iden- tifies the skip patterns and programming instructions used in the survey to ensure each respon- dent received the appropriate questions.

PROGRAMMING, PRE-TEST & TRANSLATION Prior to fielding the survey, the ques- tionnaire was CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing) programmed to assist interview- ers when conducting telephone interviews. Th e CATI program automatically navigates skip patterns, randomizes the appropriate question item s, and alerts the interviewer to certain types of keypunching mistakes should they occur. The survey was also pr ogrammed into a passcode- protected online survey application to allow online participation for sampled voters. The integ- rity of the questionnaire was pre-tested internally by True North and by dialing into voter house- holds in the City prior to formally beginni ng the survey. Once finalized, the survey was professionally translated into Spanish to allow for data collection in both English and Spanish languages.

SAMPLE The survey was administered to a random sample of 1,022 registered voters in the City who are likely to participate in the November 2022 election, including a subset who are also likely to participate in the lower turnout June 2022 primary election. Consistent with the profile of this universe, the sample was stratified into clusters, each representing a combination of age, gender, and household party-type. Individuals were then randomly selected based on their pro- file into an appropriate cluster. This method ensures that if a person of a particular profile refuses to participate in the study, they are replaced by an individual who shares their same pro- file.

STATISTICAL MARGIN OF ERROR By using the probability-based sampling design noted above, True North ensured that the final sa mple was representative of voters in the City who are likely to participate in the November 2022 election. The results of the sample can thus be used to estimate the opinions of all voters likely to participate in this election. Because not all voters participated in the study, however, the results have what is known as a statistical margin Attachment "1"
62 Item5.

Methodology
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 33City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
of error due to sampling. The margin of error refers to the difference between what was found in the survey of 1,022 voters for a particular qu estion and what would have been found if all 49,610 likely November 2022 voters identified in the City had been surveyed for the study.

Figure 21 provides a graphic plot of the maximum margin of error in this study. The maximum margin of error for a dichotomous percentage re sult occurs when the answers are evenly split such that 50% provide one response and 50% prov ide the alternative response. For this survey, the maximum margin of error is ± 3%.

FIGURE 21 MAXIMUM MARGIN OF ERROR DUE TO SAMPLING
Within this report, figures and tables show ho w responses to certain questions varied by sub- groups such as age, gender, and partisan affilia tion. Figure 21 is thus useful for understanding how the maximum margin of error for a percentage estimate will grow as the number of individ- uals asked a question (or in a particular subgro up) shrinks. Because the margin of error grows exponentially as the sample size decreases, the reader should use caution when generalizing and interpreting the results for small subgroups.

RECRUITING & DATA COLLECTION The survey followed a mixed-method design that employed multiple recruiting methods (email, text, and telephone) and multiple data collection methods (telephone and online). Te lephone interviews averaged 16 minutes in length and were conducted during weekday evenings (5:30PM to 9PM) and on weekends (10AM to 5PM). It is stan- dard practice not to call during the day on we ekdays because most working adults are unavail- able and thus calling during those hours would likely bias the sample.

Voters recruited via email and text were assigned a unique passcode to ensure that only voters who received an invitation could access the online survey site, and that each voter could com- plete the survey only one time. During the data collection period, an email reminder notice was 1,022 Respondents
± 3%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 Sample Size (Number of Respondents)
Margin of Error
Attachment "1"
63 Item5.

Methodology
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 34City of Escondido
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
also sent to encourage participation among th ose who had yet to take the survey. A total of 1,022 surveys were completed between May 19 and May 29, 2022.

DATA PROCESSING Data processing consisted of checking the data for errors or inconsis- tencies, coding and recoding responses, weighting, and preparing frequency analyses and cross- tabulations.

ROUNDING Numbers that end in 0.5 or higher are rounded up to the nearest whole num- ber, whereas numbers that end in 0.4 or lower are rounded down to the nearest whole number.

These same rounding rules are also applied, when needed, to arrive at numbers that include a decimal place in constructing figures and tables. Occasionally, these rounding rules lead to small discrepancies in the first decimal place when co mparing tables and charts for a given question.

Due to rounding, some figures and narrative include numbers that add to more than or less than 100%.

Attachment "1"
64 Item5.

Q UESTIONNAIRE & T OPLINES

True North Research, Inc. © 2022 Page 1
City of Escondido
Revenue Measure Feasibility Survey
Final Toplines (n=1,022)
June 2022
Section 1: Introduction to Study
Hi, may I please speak to _____. My name is _____, and Im calling on behalf of TNR, an independent public opinion research firm. Were conducting a survey of voters about important issues in Escondido (ES-con-DEE-doh) and Id like to get your opinions.

If needed: This is a survey about important issues in your community. Im NOT trying to sell anything and I wont ask for a donation.

If needed: The survey should take about 12 minutes to complete.

If needed: If now is not a convenient time, can you let me know a better time so I can call back?

If the person asks why you need to speak to the listed person or if they ask to participate instead, explain: For statistical purposes, at this time the survey must only be completed by this particular individual.

If the person says they are an elected official or is somehow associated with the survey, politely explain that this survey is designed to measure the opinions of those not closely associated with the study, thank them for their time, and terminate the interview.

Section 2: Quality of Life & City Services
Id like to begin by asking you a few questions about what it is like to live in Escondido.

Q1 How long have you lived in Escondido?
1 Less than 1 year 2%
2 1 to 4 years 14%
3 5 to 9 years 16%
4 10 to 14 years 8%
5 15 years or longer 58%
99 Prefer not to answer 1%
Q2 How would you rate the overall quality of life in Escondido? Would you say it is excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor?
1 Excellent 5%
2 Good 55%
3 Fair 33%
4 Poor 5%
5 Very Poor 2%
98 Not sure 1%
99 Prefer not to answer 0%
Attachment "1"
65 Item5.

Q3
If the city government could change one thing to make Escondido a better place to live now and in the future, what change would you like to see? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below.

Address homeless issues 32%
Improve infrastructure, streets, sidewalks 14%
Improve public safety 12%
Clean-up, beautify City, landscape, graffiti 9%
Not sure / Cannot think of anything specific 9%
Provide more affordable housing 7%
Reduce traffic congestion 5%
Improve, maintain downtown area, Grand
Ave, more walkable 5%
Improve, parks, recreation 5%
Less residential density, high rise
apartments, condos 3%
Attract more high-end dining options 3%
Enforce traffic laws 3%
Provide more police presence, support police,
funding 3%
Improve schools, education 3%
Provide more community events, activities for
all ages 3%
Address parking issues 2%
Improve environmental efforts, preparedness 2%
Reduce taxes, fees 2%
Improve local economy, job opportunities 2%
Enforce city codes 2%
Attract, support small businesses 2%
Renovate, repurpose old, empty buildings 2%
No changes needed / Everything is fine 2%
Q4
Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Escondido is doing to provide city services? Get answer, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? 1 Very satisfied 14%
2 Somewhat satisfied 53%
3 Somewhat dissatisfied 18%
4 Very dissatisfied 7%
98 Not sure 7%
99 Prefer not to answer 1%

Attachment "1"
66 Item5.

City of Escondido Survey June 2022
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 Page 3
Section 3: Initial Ballot Test
Later this year, voters in Escondido may be asked to vote on a local ballot measure. Let me read you a summary of the measure.

Split Sample. Sample A receives until ended by voters, Sample B receives for 20 years.

Q5
To provide funding for general services in the City of Escondido, such as:

/g120 Police patrols and crime prevention
/g120 Fire protection, paramedic, and 9-1-1 emergency response /g120 Keeping streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, parks, and facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained
/g120 Addressing homelessness, traffic management, and other city services

shall an ordinance establishing a one-cent sales tax be adopted, providing approximately 28 million dollars annually for general government use <<until ended by voters | for 20 years>>, with independent audits, citizen oversight, and all money locally controlled? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Until Ended by
Voters For 20 Years
1 Definitely yes 31% 32% Skip to Q7
2 Probably yes 32% 36% Skip to Q7
3 Probably no 13% 11% Ask Q6
4 Definitely no 14% 15% Ask Q6
98 Not sure 10% 6% Ask Q6
99 Prefer not to answer 1% 0% Skip to Q7
Q6
Is there a particular reason why you do not support or are unsure about the measure I just described? If yes, ask: Please briefly describe your reason. Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below.

Taxes already too high 41%
Money is misspent, mismanaged 30%
Need more information 12%
Other ways to be funded 6%
Police do not need more money 6%
Do not trust government 5%
Other higher priorities in the city 4%
Not sure / Cannot think of anything specific 4%
City has enough money 2%
Measure should have a sunset 2%
Measure is too expensive 1%
Money will go to employees, union pensions,
salaries 1%

Attachment "1"
67 Item5.

Section 4: Projects & Services
Q7
The measure weve been discussing will provide funding for a variety of services in your community.

If the measure passes, would you favor or oppose using some of the money to: _____, or do you not have an opinion? Get answer, if favor or oppose, then ask: Would that be strongly (favor/oppose) or somewhat (favor/oppose)?
Randomize. Split Sample J1/J2
Strongly
Favor
Somewhat
Favor
Somewhat
Oppose
Strongly
Oppose
Not sure
Prefer not
to answer
A
Provide police services, including
neighborhood police patrols, investigations,
and crime prevention
56% 27% 5% 6% 3% 3%
B Provide fire protection and paramedic
services 65% 24% 3% 2% 4% 3%
C Provide quick responses to 9-1-1 emergencies 66% 23% 2% 2% 3% 3% D Repair and maintain local streets, sidewalks,
and infrastructure 69% 23% 3% 1% 2% 2%
E Keep parks and public facilities safe, clean,
and well-maintained 65% 26% 3% 1% 1% 3%
F Address homelessness 69% 19% 4% 3% 2% 3%
G Make improvements to reduce traffic
congestion on city streets 48% 31% 11% 2% 4% 3%
H Remove graffiti 46% 35% 7% 3% 7% 3%
I
Promote economic development to retain
local businesses, attract new employers, and
attract good paying jobs to Escondido
53% 32% 5% 3% 4% 3%
J1 Reduce the Citys unfunded pension liability 15% 27% 17% 12% 22% 6% J2 Improve the Citys long-term financial stability 44% 31% 8% 4% 8% 4% K Preserve natural open space and parkland 56% 27% 6% 3% 5% 4% L Provide programs for at-risk youth 45% 34% 8% 4% 6% 3% M
Improve environmental sustainability by
planting more trees, improving energy
efficiency, and using water more efficiently
54% 26% 8% 5% 4% 4%
N
Clean up piles of trash and litter that people
dump along streets, sidewalks, and in public
areas
62% 27% 4% 2% 2% 3%

Attachment "1"
68 Item5.

Section 5: Positive Arguments
What Id like to do now is tell you what some people are saying about the measure weve been discussing.

Q8 Supporters of the measure say: _____. Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to SUPPORT the measure? Randomize. Split Sample K1/K2
Very
Convincing
Somewhat
Convincing
Not At All
Convincing
Don t
Believe
Not Sure
Prefer not to
answer
A
There will be a clear system of accountability
including independent citizen oversight and
annual reports to the community to ensure
that the money is spent properly.
33% 31% 15% 15% 3% 4%
B
All money raised by the measure will be used
to fund essential services and facilities here
in Escondido. By law, it cant be taken away
by the State.
33% 32% 14% 11% 4% 4%
C
Fast emergency response times for 9-1-1 calls
are critical for saving lives. This measure will
ensure that we have enough police officers,
firefighters, dispatchers, and paramedics to
respond quickly to 9-1-1 emergencies.
40% 33% 11% 9% 3% 4%
D
This measure will cost just 1 dollar for every
100 dollars purchased and food, medicine
and many other essential items are excluded
from the tax.
29% 29% 22% 10% 6% 4%
E
The funding raised by this measure will allow
the City to keep up with basic repairs and
maintenance to public facilities, storm drains,
streets, and sidewalks. If we dont take care
of it now, it will be a lot more expensive to
repair in the future.
37% 33% 15% 9% 2% 4%
F
By keeping our city safe, clean and well-
maintained, this measure will help protect our
property values and keep Escondido a great
place to live.
34% 34% 16% 8% 2% 4%
G
Currently, nearly all of the sales tax
generated locally goes to the State of
California, the County of San Diego, or
SANDAG. This measure will ensure that
Escondido has local control over local revenue
for the services residents expect and deserve.
38% 31% 13% 10% 4% 4%
Attachment "1"
69 Item5.

H
This measure will help fund the economic
development programs the City needs to
retain local businesses and attract new
employers and good paying jobs to
Escondido
27% 37
% 19% 10% 3% 5%
I
The City of Escondido has done a good job
keeping costs down. It has deferred
maintenance projects, cut back on basic
services, and kept a small staff despite a
growing population. Even with these cost-
cutting efforts, the City is facing an 8 million
dollar deficit next year that is expected to
grow to 10 million dollars annually over the
next five years. There is no more room to cut
if we want to keep our community a safe,
clean place to live. We need to support this
measure.
29% 32% 17% 13% 5% 4%
J
High quality parks and recreation programs
help keep kids healthy, active, and away from
drugs, gangs and crime.
29% 36% 16% 10% 4% 4%
K1
This measure will provide the funding needed
to avoid deep cuts in all service areas,
including police, fire protection, 9-1-1
emergency response times, the maintenance
of streets, parks and public facilities, as well
as programs for youth and seniors.
32% 34% 12% 14% 4% 4%
K2
This measure will provide the funding needed
to avoid deep cuts to public safety services
including police, fire protection, paramedics,
9-1-1 emergency response, and closing a fire
station.
34% 27% 17% 14% 4% 4%

Attachment "1"
70 Item5.

Section 6: Interim Ballot Test
Sometimes people change their mind about a measure once they have more information about it. Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a summary of it again.

Split Sample. Sample A receives until ended by voters, Sample B receives for 20 years.

Q9
To provide funding for general services in the City of Escondido, such as:

If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Until Ended by Voters For 20 Years
1 Definitely yes 35% 34%
2 Probably yes 31% 33%
3 Probably no 11% 10%
4 Definitely no 13% 15%
98 Not sure 9% 7%
99 Prefer not to answer 1% 1%

Section 7: Negative Arguments
Next, let me tell you what opponents of the measure are saying.

Q10 Opponents of the measure say: _____. Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to OPPOSE the measure? Randomize. Split Sample A1/A2, D1/D2
Very
Convincing
Somewhat
Convincing
Not At All
Convincing
Don t
Believe
Not sure
Prefer not to
answer
A1
Taxes are already too high we cant afford
another tax increase. This is especially true
for seniors and others on fixed-incomes.
38% 32% 18% 6% 3% 3%
A2
Local businesses and residents have been hit
hard by the pandemic, inflation, and high gas
prices. Many are struggling to stay afloat.

Now is not the time to raise taxes.
41% 32% 17% 5% 2% 2%
Attachment "1"
71 Item5.

B
It is already very expensive to live here,
especially for young families, seniors, and
those on fixed-incomes. This measure will
make it even less affordable.
35% 30
% 21% 8% 4% 2%
C
City employees are making too much money
in salary, pensions and benefits thats the
problem. The City needs to tighten its belt
before asking residents to pay more taxes.
28% 26% 24% 13% 5% 3%
D1
There are no guarantees on how funds will be
spent, which means the City can divert the
money to pet projects without any say from
voters. We cant trust the City with our tax
dollars.
40% 31% 14% 8% 5% 3%
D2
This measure is not supported by the local
Taxpayers Association. If the Taxpayers
Association doesn't support this, why should
we?
24% 26% 32% 7% 8% 2%
Only Sample A receives item E.

E This tax will last forever. There is no
expiration date. 33% 29% 23% 7% 4% 3%
Only Sample B receives item F.

F This tax will last for 20 years. Thats too long. 28% 27% 26% 11% 5% 3%

Section 8: Final Ballot Test
Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a summary of it one more time.

Split Sample. Sample A receives until ended by voters, Sample B receives for 20 years.

Q11
To provide funding for general services in the City of Escondido, such as:

shall an ordinance establishing a one-cent sales tax be adopted, providing approximately 28 million dollars annually for general government use <<until ended by voters | for 20 years>>, with independent audits, citizen oversight, and all money locally controlled? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Until Ended by
Voters For 20 Years
1 Definitely yes 30% 29% Skip to Q13
2 Probably yes 33% 35% Skip to Q13
3 Probably no 11% 10% Ask Q12
4 Definitely no 14% 17% Ask Q12
98 Not sure 11% 9% Ask Q12
99 Prefer not to answer 1% 0% Skip to Q13
Attachment "1"
72 Item5.

Q12
What if the measure I just described raised the sales tax by a lower amount: one-half cent? Would you vote yes or no on the measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)?
Until Ended by Voters For 20 Years
Def, prob yes @ one cent (Q11) 63% 64%
1 Definitely yes 1% 1%
2 Probably yes 7% 6%
3 Probably no 9% 9%
4 Definitely no 12% 15%
98 Not sure 8% 5%
99 Prefer not to answer 2% 0%

Section 9: Background & Demographics
Thank you so much for your participation. I have just two background questions for statistical purposes.

Q13 Looking ahead six months from now, do you think the economy will be better than today, be about the same as today, or will it be worse than today? 1 Better 9%
2 About the same 35%
3 Worse 53%
99 Prefer not to answer 2%
Q14 In your opinion, has the City of Escondido done an excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor job of managing its financial resources?
1 Excellent 2%
2 Good 21%
3 Fair 34%
4 Poor 13%
5 Very poor 7%
98 Not Sure 21%
99 Prefer not to answer 1%
Q15 Do you have children under the age of 18 living in your household? 1 Yes 28%
2 No 69%
99 Prefer not to answer 3%
Those are all of the questions that I have for you. Thanks so much for participating in this important survey.

Attachment "1"
73 Item5.

City of Escondido Survey June 2022
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 Page 10
Post-Interview & Sample Items
S1 Gender
1 Male 50%
2 Female 50%
99 Prefer not to answer <1%
S2 Party
1 Democrat 37%
2 Republican 35%
3 Other 6%
4 DTS 22%
S3 Age on Voter File
1 18 to 29 16%
2 30 to 39 17%
3 40 to 49 14%
4 50 to 64 26%
5 65 or older 27%
S4 Registration Date
1 Since Nov 2018 12%
2 Jun 2012 to before Nov 2018 25%
3 Jun 2006 to before Jun 2012 11%
4 Before June 2006 52%
Attachment "1"
74 Item5.

S5 Household Party Type
1 Single Dem 20%
2 Dual Dem 11%
3 Single Rep 14%
4 Dual Rep 13%
5 Single Other 12%
6 Dual Other 5%
7 Dem & Rep 4%
8 Dem & Other 11%
9 Rep & Other 10%
0 Mixed (Dem + Rep + Other) 1%
S6 Homeowner on Voter File
1 Yes 58%
2 No 42%
S7 Likely to Vote by Mail
1 Yes 74%
2 No 26%
S8 Likely June 2022 Voter
1 Yes 66%
2 No 34%
S9 Likely November 2022 Voter

1 Yes 100%
2 No 0%
S10 Council District
1 One 14%
2 Two 35%
3 Three 21%
4 Four 31%
Attachment "1"
75 Item5.

City of Escondido Survey June 2022
True North Research, Inc. © 2022 Page 12
S11 Ballot Test Version
1 Until ended by voters 50%
2 Duration of 20 years 50%

Attachment "1"
76 Item5.

STAFF REPORT

July 13, 2022
File Number 0130-10

SUBJECT
DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE – LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE

DEPARTMENT
City Clerk’s Office

RECOMMENDATION
Request the City Council designate the Voting Delegate and up to two alternates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference in Long Beach, California on September 7-9, 2022.

Staff Recommendation: Approval (City Clerk’s Office: Zack Beck) Presenter: Zack Beck, City Clerk

FISCAL ANALYSIS
Costs to attend this conference are included in the City Council’s Training / Meeting budget.

BACKGROUND
The Conference is scheduled for September 7-9, 2022 in Long Beach, California. At the Annual Business Meeting the League membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish League policy.

In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, the City Council must designate a voting delegate. The City Council may also appoint up to two alternat e voting delegates, one of whom may vote in the event that the designated voting delegate is unable to serve. Attached to this Staff Report is the Voting Delegate Form.

ATTACHMENTS
a. Attachment “1” - Voting Delegate Packet
77 Item6.
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org DATE: June 1, 2022
T
O: City Managers and City Clerks
RE
: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES
League of California Cities Annual Conference & Expo – September 7-9, 2022 Cal
Cities 2022 Annual Conference & Expo is scheduled for September 7-9, 2022 in Long Beach. An important part of the Annual Conference is the Annual Business Meeting (during General Assembly) on Friday, September 9. At this meeting, Cal Cities membership considers and acts on resolutions that establish Cal Cities policy.

I
n order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, your city council must designate a voting delegate. Your city may also appoint up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity.

P
lease complete the attached Voting Delegate form and return it to Cal Cities office no later than Friday, September 2. This will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference.

Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference. • Action by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council.

When completing the attached Voting Delegate form, please attach either a copy of the council resolution that reflects the council action taken, or have your city clerk or mayor sign the form affirming that the names provided are those selected by the city council. Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone. • C
onference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be r
egistered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration will open by June 1 on the Cal Cities
website. In order to cast a vote, at least one voter
must be present at the Business Meeting and in possession of the voting delegate c
ard. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference b
adges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the Voting Delegate Desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name b
adges that will admit them into the voting area during the Business Meeting.

Council Action Advised by August 31, 2022
78 Item6.

• Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the Business Meeting, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official.

• Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the Business Meeting, individuals with the voting card will sit in a separate area. Admission to this area will be limited to those individuals with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate or alternate. If the voting delegate and alternates wish to sit together, they must sign in at the Voting Delegate Desk and obtain the special sticker on their badges.

The Voting Delegate Desk, located in the conference registration area of the Long Beach Convention Center, will be open at the following times: Wednesday, September 7, 8:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.; Thursday, September 8, 7:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.; and Friday, September 9, 7:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m. The Voting Delegate Desk will also be open at the Business Meeting on Friday, but will be closed during roll calls and voting.

The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo.

Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates.

Once again, thank you for completing the voting delegate and alternate form and returning it to Cal Cities office by Friday, September 2. If you have questions, please call Darla Yacub at (916) 658-8254.

Attachments:
• Annual Conference Voting Procedures
• Voting Delegate/Alternate Form

79 Item6.

1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org

Annual Conference Voting Procedures

1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Annual Conference, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the Voting Delegate Form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.

3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the Voting Delegate Desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the Voting Delegate Desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the Business Meeting.

4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the Credentials Committee at the Voting Delegate Desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.

5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and be registered with the Credentials Committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate or alternate.

6. Voting Area at Business Meeting. At the Business Meeting, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission will be limited to those individuals with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate or alternate.

7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the Credentials Committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the Business Meeting.

80 Item6.

CITY:________________________________________

2022 ANNUAL CONFERENCE

VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM

Please complete this form and return it to Cal Cities office by Friday, September 2, 2022. Forms not sent by this deadline may be submitted to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area. Your city council may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates.

To vote at the Annual Business Meeting (General Assembly), voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council.

Please note: Voting delegates and alternates will be seated in a separate area at the Annual Business Meeting. Admission to this designated area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special sticker on their conference badge. This sticker can be obtained only at the Voting Delegate Desk.

1. VOTING DELEGATE

Name:

Title:

2. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE 3. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE

Name: Name:

Title: Title:

ATTACH COUNCIL RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES OR

ATTEST: I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate(s).

Name: ____________________________________ Email_________________________________

Mayor or City Clerk_________________________ Date____________ Phone________________ (circle one) (signature)

Please complete and return by Friday, September 2, 2022 to:

Darla Yacub, Assistant to the Administrative Services Director E-mail: [email protected]; Phone: (916) 658-8254

81 Item6.

KEY-

CONSENT CALENDAR CURRENT BUSINESS

PUBLIC HEARING WORKSHOP
7/20/2022
CONSENT CALENDAR - (J. GOULART) - ANNUAL FUEL PURCHASE - Request the City Council adopt Resolution 2022-67 authorizing the City Council to approve the purchase of unleaded and diesel fuels from SC Fuels.

CONSENT CALENDAR - (J. MURDOCK) - FY2022 CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES (Cal OES) HIGH FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS GRANT PROGRAM AND BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - Request the City Council authorize the Escondido Fire Department to accept FY 2022 Cal OES Grant funds in the amount of $55,516; authorize the Fire Chief or his designee to execute grant documents on behalf of the City; and approve budget adjustments needed to spend grant funds.

CONSENT CALENDAR - (C. HOLMES) - COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) 2006-01 (EUREKA RANCH) ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX LEVY - Request the City Council adopt Resolution No.2022-85 that will set the Special Tax Levy for Community Facilities District No. 2006-01 (Eureka Ranch) (the “District”) for Fiscal Year 2022-23 CONSENT CALENDAR - (C. HOLMES) - COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) 2000-01 (HIDDEN TRAILS) ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX LEVY - Request the City Council adopt Resolution No.2022-86 that will set the Special Tax Levy for Community Facilities District No. 2000-01 (Hidden Trails) for Fiscal Year 2022-23 CONSENT CALENDAR - (C. HOLMES) - COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) 2020-01 (PUBLIC SERVICES) ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX LEVY - Request the City Council adopt Resolution No.2022-87 that will set the Special Tax Levy for Community Facilities District No. 2020-01 (Public Services) for Fiscal Year 2022-23 CONSENT CALENDAR - (C. HOLMES) - COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) 2020-02 (THE VILLAGES) ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX LEVY - Request the City Council adopt Resolution No.2022-88 that will set the Special Tax Levy for Community Facilities District No. 2020-02 (The Villages) for Fiscal Year 2022-23 CONSENT CALENDAR - (J. PROCOPIO) - REQUEST TO INITIATE AN ANNEXATION FOR A 5.09 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 0 ASH STREET (PLANNING CASE NO. 22- 0154)
CONSENT CALENDAR - (J. PROCOPIO) - OUT-OF-AGENCY SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 2314 FELICITA AVENUE - PL22-0196 CONSENT CALENDAR - ( J. PROCOPIO) - FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH STEVEN SMITH LANDSCAPE, INC. FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF ESCONDIDO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.

CONSENT CALENDAR - (J. PROCOPIO) - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCESS A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION PLANNED OFFICE (PO) TO INCLUDE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
CONSENT CALENDAR (J. PROCOPIO) - FINAL MAPS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL CONSENT CALENDAR - (C. MCKINNEY) - CHANGE ORDERS AND AMENDMENT FOR THE SAN PASQUAL UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT - Request the City Council take the following actions: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-100, authorizing change orders to the Public Improvement Agreement with Sukut Construction, LLC, in the amount of $7,949,581.24 for the San Pasqual Undergrounding Project (“Project”); and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-101, authorizing a Second Amendment to the Consulting Agreement with Arcadis U.S. Inc., in the amount of $569,797.00 for the Project.

CONSENT CALENDAR - (C. MCKINNEY) - Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-XX, authorizing an amendment to Exhibit B of the 2003 Agreement Relating to Supplemental Water Among the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the San Luis Rey Settlement Parties, and the United States.

CONSENT CALENDAR - ( C. MCKINNEY) - MWD/SDCWA AGREEMENT

CONSENT CALENDAR - (E VARSO)- BODY WORN CAMERA (BWC) AND CONDUCTED ENERGY WEAPON (CEW) HARDWARE, SOFTWARE, USER LICENSES, TRAINING, AND SERVICE CONTRACT. It is requested that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-95 authorizing the Mayor to execute a Public Services Agreement (PSA).

Page 1 ends

82 Item7.

KEY-

CONSENT CALENDAR CURRENT BUSINESS

PUBLIC HEARING WORKSHOP

CONSENT CALENDAR - (J, PERPETUA OF HUMAN RESOURCES) AMENDMENT TO ESCONDIDO FIRE ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO

INITIATE PARTICIPATION IN THE CALIFORNIA FIREFIGHTERS BENEFIT TRUST AND A CHANGE TO THE CITY'S MANAGEMENT AND UNCLASSIFIED SALARY AND BENEFITS PLAN 2021-2022 - Request the City Council Approve Resolution 2022-96 First Amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding Between Representatives of the Escondido Firefighters' Association - Safety Personnel - Non Safety Personnel, and The City of Escondido, January 1, 2021 - December 31, 2022 and Resolution 2022-97 Authorizing the City Manager to modify the Management and Unclassified Salary and Benefits Plan 2021-2022 to mandate continued contributions to the Retiree Medical Trust used by the Escondido Firefighters' Association for Employees Promoted to Fire Management positions.

CURRENT BUSINESS - (J. PROCOPIO) - ADOPTION ORDINANCE 2022-10 - UPDATES TO CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE SECTION 22358.8 TO RETAIN EXISITING SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREET SEGMENTS (first reading and introduction) 7/27/2022

Page 2 ends

83 Item7.

Escondido City CouncilJuly 13, 2022

Escondido City Council
July 13, 2022