Larkspur-Corte Madera School District: 2015 Parcel Tax Renewal Survey - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Larkspur-Corte Madera School District: 2015 Parcel Tax Renewal Survey August 19, 2015 Page 1 August 19, 2015

Overview and Research Objectives Larkspur-Corte Madera School District commissioned Godbe Research to conduct a survey of local voters with the following research objectives: Ø Gauge the public’s perceptions of whether the District is providing a quality education to students, managing public funds effectively, and effectively managing renovation and modernization of schools; Ø Assess potential voter support for renewing a parcel tax to maintain quality education with funding that cannot be taken by the State; Ø Prioritize projects and programs to be funded with the proceeds; Ø Test the influence of supporting and opposing arguments on potential voter support; Ø Identify the rate at which voters will support the measure; and Ø Identify any differences in voter support due to demographic and/or voter behavioral characteristics. Page 2 August 19, 2015

Methodology Overview Ø Data Collection Telephone and Internet Interviewing Ø Universe 5,150 likely June 2016 voters in the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District, with a subsample of those likely to vote in the 2016 Mail Ballot election (4,806). Ø Fielding Dates July 13 through July 23, 2015 Ø Interview Length 20 minutes Ø Sample Size 299 Likely June 2016 voters 279 Likely Mail Ballot 2016 voters Ø Margin of Error ± 5.5% Likely June 2016 voters ± 5.7% Likely Mail Ballot 2016 voters Note: The data have been weighted to reflect the actual population characteristics of likely voters in the Page 3 Larkspur-Corte Madera School District in terms of their gender, age, and political party type. August 19, 2015

Key Findings Page 4 August 19, 2015

Q1. Opinion on Whether LCMSD is Providing a Quality Education Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) Very Unfavorable 2.3% Not sure [DK/NA] 13.3% Somewhat Unfavorable Very Favorable 3.1% 46.6% Somewhat Favorable 34.8% Fav to Unfav Ratio: 15.3 to 1 Page 5 August 19, 2015

Q2. Opinion on Whether LCMSD is Effectively Managing and Spending Public Funds Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) Not sure [DK/NA] Very Favorable 23.2% 25.0% Very Unfavorable 5.3% Somewhat Unfavorable Somewhat 9.9% Favorable 36.6% Fav to Unfav Ratio: 4.1 to 1 Page 6 August 19, 2015

Q3. Opinion on Whether LCMSD is Effectively Managing Renovation/Modernization Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) Not sure [DK/NA] Very favorable 21.1% 33.8% Very unfavorable 2.8% Somewhat unfavorable 10.9% Somewhat favorable 31.3% Fav to Unfav Ratio: 4.7 to 1 Page 7 August 19, 2015

Q4. Uninformed Support To maintain quality education in Larkspur and Corte Madera with 72.0% local funding that cannot be taken by the State, shall Larkspur-Corte Madera School District continue support for: 43.4% 28.6% 7.8% 15.5% 4.7% Mail Ballot 2016 • exceptional instructional programs, including math science, reading and writing; • small class sizes; and 71.9% • highly qualified teachers; by renewing the current minimum tax for eight years and 42.6% 29.3% 8.3% 15.2% 4.5% increasing it by $185 per parcel June 2016 as specified in the measure, with senior exemptions, independent citizen oversight, no money for administrators' salaries, and all funds staying local? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Definitely Yes Probably Yes Probably No Definitely No Not sure [DK/NA] Page 8 August 19, 2015

Q5. Support for Different Rates Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) 67.9% 67.3% 71.0% 75.4% 67% 21.5% 22.7% 21.5% 22.2% Probably Yes Definitely Yes 53.9% 46.4% 48.3% 45.1% 0% $185 $165 $145 $125 Annual Tax per Parcel Page 9 August 19, 2015

Q6. Features of the Measure Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) 1.35 Maintain math, science, reading and writing programs 1.29 Maintain small class sizes Tier 1 1.24 Attract and retain highly qualified teachers 1.19 Keep school libraries open 1.17 Protect art and music instruction 1.08 Support programs that prepare students for college 1.01 Tier 2 Support at-risk students to keep them on the right track .97 Upgrade/support computer & instructional technology .88 Maintain innovative & individualized instruction programs -2 -1 0 1 2 Somewhat Somewhat Much More Much Less Less Likely More Likely Likely Likely Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: Page 10 “Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2. August 19, 2015

Q7. Influence of Supporting Statements Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) 1.40 All $ will go to our elementary and middle schools 1.33 All $ go directly to Neil Cummins, Hall &The Cove Schools Tier 1 1.33 Maintain the outstanding art, music and electives 1.31 If fails and local funding expires, teachers may be laid-off 1.24 District been very fiscally responsible managing finances 1.23 None of the $ will be used for administrators' salaries 1.11 Keep our schools among the top 10 percent in the State 1.10 Indep oversight committee comprised of local community 1.06 Maintaining good local schools improve property values Tier 2 1.02 Protect pgms that help keep kids out of trouble, off drugs 1.00 Senior citizens can choose to be exempt from measure 0.97 After years of recession & budget cuts, funding still below 0.96 Larkspur and Corte Madera have proud tradition Sample A Sample B 0.95 Continuation of local school funding voters supported 0 1 2 Somewhat More No Effect Much More Likely Likely Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: Page 11 “Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0. August 19, 2015

Q8. Interim Support To maintain quality education in Larkspur and Corte Madera with 70.6% local funding that cannot be taken by the State, shall Larkspur-Corte Madera School District continue support for: 47.0% 23.6% 9.7% 15.4% 4.2% Mail Ballot 2016 • exceptional instructional programs, including math science, reading and writing; • small class sizes; and 70.8% • highly qualified teachers; by renewing the current minimum tax for eight years and 46.5% 24.3% 9.8% 15.4% 4.0% increasing it by $185 per parcel June 2016 as specified in the measure, with senior exemptions, independent citizen oversight, no money for administrators' salaries, and all funds staying local? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Definitely Yes Probably Yes Probably No Definitely No Not sure [DK/NA] Page 12 August 19, 2015

Q9. Potential Opposition Statements Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) 1.12 Reduces amount large commercial property owners pay Tier 1 1.06 Will really cost homeowners $679 in first year & 5% annual .86 In 2012, State increased income & sales tax for education Tier 2 .69 If SD learns to manage $ properly, not have to pay more Tier 3 .55 State funding for schools being restored in coming years 0 1 2 Somewhat More No Effect Much More Likely Likely Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: Page 13 “Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0. August 19, 2015

Q10. Informed Support To maintain quality education in Larkspur and Corte Madera with 66.6% local funding that cannot be taken by the State, shall Larkspur-Corte Madera School District continue support for: 36.4% 30.2% 9.2% 16.8% 7.4% Mail Ballot 2016 • exceptional instructional programs, including math science, reading and writing; • small class sizes; and 66.8% • highly qualified teachers; by renewing the current minimum tax for eight years and 36.8% 30.0% 9.2% 16.8% 7.3% increasing it by $185 per parcel June 2016 as specified in the measure, with senior exemptions, independent citizen oversight, no money for administrators' salaries, and all funds staying local? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Definitely Yes Probably Yes Probably No Definitely No Not sure [DK/NA] Page 14 August 19, 2015

Q11. Reasons for Voting No on Measure Mail Ballot 2016 (n=279) 11.9% No more taxes/Too much-high/Cannot afford 4.7% Mismanaged $/Don't trust to spend as promised 4.0% District has enough $/Need to better budget $ 3.4% Dollar amount is too high 2.7% Education has not improved 2.3% Every year they are asking for more money 1.7% Recent bond measures not spend as promised 1.5% Schools are fine/OK as is/Not needed 0.9% Automatic 5% increase 0.8% District has excessive staff/Overpaid 0.7% Need to focus less on building/construction 0.5% Need to be more transparent 1.7% Other mention 0.6% Undecided/Need more information 0.2% DK/NA/Unsure 0% 10% 20% Page 15 August 19, 2015