Purpose of This Study

Transcription

1 Purpose of This Study The results of this survey will be compared to a similar survey completed for the District in January, To explore voter reaction to a proposal to renew and increase the District s existing operating levy. To explore voter reaction to a number of ways levy funds are used. To determine a cost acceptable to a majority of local voters. 1

2 Survey Basics This survey involved 407 telephone interviews with registered voters in the Rochester Public School District. All interviews were completed between June 25 and June 28, The overall margin of error for the results of this survey is +/- 4.5%*. The sample was controlled to approximate the demographics of registered voters living within the communities served by the District. * Margin of error calculated using the American Research Group s web-based calculator. 2

3 70% Who Was Interviewed 56.2% 58.5% 43.8% 41.5% 20% 10% 0% Male Female File Survey 3

4 Who Was Interviewed 28.3% 27.3% 20% 17.4% 17.6% 22.1% 18.8% 18.7% 21.1% 21.1% 10% 9.6% 0% 1.4% 0.2% and over File Survey 4

5 90% 80% 70% 80.0% 74.4% Who Was Interviewed 20% 20.0% 25.6% 10% 0% Non-parent Parent File Survey 5

6 Who Was Interviewed 38.1% 32.6% 31.4% 35.1% 32.3% 30.5% 20% 10% 0% North Central South File Survey 6

7 Who Was Interviewed 43.0% 37.3% 22.4% 20% 16.4% 17.9% 19.4% 13.1% 12.3% 10% 4.4% 6.6% 6.4% 0% 0.7% 0 of 5 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 File Survey 7

8 The Uninformed Benchmark To continue to provide a more comprehensive educational program than would be possible using only state funds, the District may ask voters to renew and increase its existing local school operating levy. Would you favor or oppose such a proposal to renew and increase the District s existing operating levy? 8

9 Uninformed 48.6% 27.5% 22.4% 20% 10% 0% Favor Oppose Undecided 9

10 The Uninformed Benchmark June January 48.6% 46.9% 20% 27.5% 22.4% 20% 29.9% 21.4% 10% 10% 0% Favor Oppose Undecided 0% Favor Oppose Undecided 10

11 Presenting Information I am going to read some statements about the proposal to renew and increase the District s existing operating levy. Please tell me whether the information in each statement would make you more likely or less likely to vote for such a proposal. 11

12 Q9B: If not renewed and increased support for gifted and talented programs and specialists will be reduced 62.9% Q5: If not renewed and increased MS and HS electives will be cut (examples given) 62.2% Q4: If not renewed and increased class sizes will increase 61.7% Q6: If not renewed and increased the budget for supplies and textbooks will be cut 60.2% 70% 12

13 Q3B: If not renewed and increased specific budget cuts every four years presented 59.4% Q9A: If not renewed and increased support for gifted and talented programs, specialists and mental health services will be reduced 58.0% Q3A: If not renewed and increased average budget cuts every year of $3.6 million 53.2% Q7: If not renewed and increased the transportation budget will be cut 49.6% Q8: If not renewed and increased support for athletics and activities will be cut 47.4% 70% 13

14 The Informed Benchmark Now that you have heard some information about the proposal to renew and increase the District s operating levy, I want to see if it has changed your opinion. Would you favor or oppose a proposal to renew and increase the District s existing operating levy? 14

15 55.5% Informed 48.6% 27.5% 31.0% 20% 10% 22.4% 12.8% 0% Favor Oppose Undecided Uninformed Informed 15

16 The Uninformed Benchmark June January 70% 70% 55.5% 48.6% 56.9% 46.9% 20% 10% 0% 31.0% 27.5% 22.4% 12.8% Favor Oppose Undecided 20% 10% 0% 29.9% 26.4% 21.4% 15.7% Favor Oppose Undecided 16

17 Tax Rates I am going to ask you three questions about the cost of the proposal to renew and increase the District s existing operating levy. Each question presents you with an annual cost. For each, tell me if knowing the cost of the proposal the district is considering would make you favor or oppose such a proposal? Property taxes would be increased by $11.31 per month or $136 per year for a home with a value of $200,

18 80% 70% 67.3% 56.5% 41.8% $136 per $200k ($11.31) $183 per $200k ($15.28) $264 per $200k ($22) 18

19 Tax Rate 80% June 80% January 70% 67.3% 70% 56.5% 54.4% 41.8% 39.9% $136 per $200k ($11.31) $183 per $200k ($15.28) $264 per $200k ($22) 30.2% $125 per $200k $175 per $200k $225 per $200k 19

20 80% 70% 68.5% 70.0% 66.7% 64.3% 58.5% 60.0% 50.4% 42.3% Very Active Active Less Active/ New 36.4% $136 per $200k ($11.31) $183 per $200k ($15.28) $264 per $200k ($22) 20

21 Tax Rate June January 80% 80% 70% 70.0% 68.5% 64.3% 66.7% 58.5% 60.0% 70% 60.4% 55.1% 50.4% 42.3% 50.8% 47.9% 40.4% 37.5% 36.4% 35.9% 29.8% 20% $136 per $200k ($11.31) $183 per $200k ($15.28) $264 per $200k ($22) 20% 28.1% $125 per $200k $175 per $200k $225 per $200k 21

22 $183 and State Average Would you favor or oppose a tax rate of $183 per year if you knew that this rate would bring the cost of the District s referendum to the state average in terms of the support the referendum provides to the programs and services available to local students? 22

23 $183 and State Average 55.5% 56.5% 30.7% 37.3% In response to the presentation of the average 4.4% refused to answer the question. 20% 10% 9.3% 5.9% 0% Favor Oppose Undecided With Avg Info $183 23

24 $264 and Average for Similar The Rochester Public School District is the seventh largest in the state. Would you favor or oppose a tax rate of $264 per year if you knew that this rate would bring the cost of the District s referendum to the average for the state s 13 largest districts in terms of the support the referendum provides to the programs and services available to local students? 24

25 $264 and Average for Similar 44.5% 41.8% 40.0% 51.6% In response to the presentation of the average 4.7% refused to answer the question. 20% 10% 10.8% 5.9% 0% Favor Oppose Undecided With Avg Info $264 25

26 Demography Each of the next slides presents the percentage favoring a proposal to renew and increase the operating levy for each of the benchmark questions. 26

27 Gender 80% 70% 58.8% 45.0% 50.9% 51.3% Male Uninformed Informed Female 27

28 Age 80% 70% 66.2% 70.8% 49.4% 47.0% 41.4% 39.1% and older Uninformed Informed 28

29 Parent Status 80% 70% 66.4% 57.3% 54.1% 49.0% 50.0% 40.9% Parents Alumni parents Non-parents Uninformed Informed 29

30 80% Community Education 70% 62.3% 53.2% 46.2% 42.7% Participant Uninformed Non-participant Informed 30

31 80% Income 70% 61.3% 53.8% 43.8% 35.4% Below $75K Uninformed $75K and Above Informed 31

32 80% Education 70% 52.2% 55.1% 47.9% 43.4% HS/ Some College Uninformed BS/ BA or Graduate Sch Informed 32

33 80% Length of Residence 70% 59.4% 53.9% 45.5% 34.1% 15 yrs or Less More than 15 yrs Uninformed Informed 33

34 Defining Areas Three areas were defined using the Wards and Townships found in the voter data. North: Rochester W3, Rochester W6, Cascade Twps, Farmington Twp, Hammond, Hyde Park Twp, New Haven Twp, Oronoco, Oronoco Twp, Salem Twp, Viola Twp and Zumbro Twp. Central: Rochester W2, Rochester W5 and Haverhill Twp. South: Rochester W1, Rochester W4, Marion Twp, Pleasant Grove Twp, Rochester Twp and High Forest Twp. 34

35 80% Area of the District 70% 57.8% 54.8% 54.0% 51.0% 47.7% 46.8% North Central South Uninformed Informed 35

36 Registration Date 80% 70% 57.9% 55.1% 59.8% 50.4% 49.7% 41.5% Before After 2004 Uninformed Informed 36

37 Voter Activity Scale 80% 70% 63.3% 52.7% 56.0% 60.0% 46.5% 48.4% Very Active Active Less Active/ New Uninformed Informed 37

38 Conclusions and Recommendations The results of the June survey are very similar to the results of the January survey. In the June survey, before information about the use of levy funds was presented, 48.6% said they would favor such a proposal with 27.5% opposed and 22.4% undecided. In the January survey the same question made 46.9% say they would support such a proposal with 29.9% opposed and 21.4% undecided. After the presentation of information in the June survey, support increased to 55.5% with 31% opposed and 12.8% undecided. In the January survey, information made 56.9% say they would favor such a proposal with 26.4% opposed and 15.7% undecided. 38

39 Conclusions and Recommendations All but two of the statements about the use of levy funds presented in the June survey made at least more likely to support the proposal. Four statements made more than more likely to vote for such a proposal: Q9B. If the levy is not renewed and increased the District will be forced to reduce its support for its gifted and talented program and for its reading and math specialists. (62.9% more likely). Q5. If the levy is not renewed and increased the District will be forced to reduce the number of elective courses available to middle and high school students, potentially cutting its advanced levels of foreign languages, robotics, accounting, communications arts, career and tech education and Advanced Placement courses. (62.2% more likely). Q4. If the levy is not renewed and increased District class sizes will increase. (61.7% more likely). Q6. If the levy is not renewed and increased the District will be forced to reduce its budget for classroom supplies, including textbooks. (60.2% more likely). 39

40 Conclusions and Recommendations Tax tolerance has increased since January. In January, we recommended that the cost of increasing the levy not exceed $125 for a home with a value of $200,000. This cost made 54.4% say they would favor such a proposal with 37.4% opposed and 7.5% undecided. The results of the June survey allow us to recommend that the cost of increasing the levy not exceed $175 for a home with a value of $200,000. This recommendation allows for the margin of error for this study and takes into consideration unknown economic changes that may occur between now and Election Day. In the June survey, a cost of $183 made 56.5% say they would favor such a proposal with 37.3% opposed and 5.9% undecided. Reminding voters that a cost of $183 brings the cost of the levy to the state average has no impact on the level of support. 40