Chatham County government evaluates LTT poll results

Posted Friday, September 28, 2007

 E-mail this page    Printer-friendly page

Pittsboro, NC - Chatham County government evaluated the poll results and came up with the following conclusions.

PUBLIC MOOD: The overall responses related to how voters feel about the county and its key issues are generally very positive compared to similar types of polls. The fact that only 8% of respondents said that the county is growing too slow is significant, especially since there appears to be more countywide agreement on this issue than some would expect. The southwestern part of the county had more than twice as many people concerned about fast growth than slow growth.

VOTER INTENT: It seems odd that 91% of voters polled said they would vote in the November election, even though the majority of them do not live in towns with elections. However, many voters do not want to admit that they might not vote and this is a common response. It is a more significant finding that the anticipated voting rate dipped a bit if either the land transfer tax or liquor by the drink was on the ballot. For the land transfer tax, it means that a major effort would be needed to make this a “hot” issue for potential supporters by connecting it to their top concerns/issues.

POTENTIAL SUPPORTERS: Those under 35 are the most supportive of the county and the land transfer tax, but are a hard group to get to the polls (national trend). Non-white voters shift from negative to positive about the tax when informed, but also are somewhat harder to get to the polls. Women are the largest group wanting more information, their opinions are not as extreme and do tend to vote. People with school-aged children are under-represented in the poll and this is a group that might be supportive if revenues were used for schools, especially those with 3+ children. The central area, including Pittsboro, and Hadley are areas that have potential to be more solidly supportive.

PUBLIC INFORMATION: A major public information effort is critical because about 50% of the voters were not very familiar with the land transfer tax, yet just a brief description of what the tax is doubled the number of supporters. Most of these new supporters came from the undecided/need more information groups, but they also came from the northeast, southeast and central areas. Information must not advocate any position, but should be clear, concise, fact-based and note that the issue is up to the voters…it is their choice.

TOP ISSUES: The proposed land transfer tax has a direction connection to the top issues identified by the voters, so clarifying the connection is important. For example, revenues could be dedicated to schools and water/sewer, which helps the county keep up with the impact of development. Water-sewer and good schools also will help the county secure jobs, which are the top concerns of non-white residents. It is noteworthy that education was a top issue, even though 84% had no children under 18 at home.

USE OF REVENUES: Surprisingly, the options for reducing/eliminating existing taxes or impact fees did not increase overall support of the land transfer tax, but did alienate a sizeable group of supporters. However, dedicating the revenues to schools and/or water/sewer did make a substantial difference. An interesting point is that about half of those who said that county taxes are too high were much more likely to support the land transfer tax if revenues were dedicated to either schools and water/sewer. This also held true for non-white respondents, who did not list schools as top concerns. More women shifted from undecided into the support category under this scenario.

MIXED SIGNALS ON TIMING: It is not uncommon to see increases in undecided voters and decreases in supporters once you nail down a specific election to vote on it, but the opposition did not waver much and there is a fairly large group needing more information over the next 2.5 months.
Related to this question, there was a drop in intent to vote in the November election if the tax was on the ballot, but the largest drop was in the part of the county with the most opposition (west). The southeast was the only area indicating a bit more interest in this election than the May primaries. However, a supportive age group (age 35-50) reports they are less likely to vote in this election than in May.

The May election is generally more popular, but it appears that the strongest opponents of the transfer tax, including those in the southwest, are more likely to vote then, along with the less committed transfer tax supporters. One unknown factor is how many people will vote in the town elections and how this might impact the land transfer tax, especially given that Pittsboro and Siler City vary in terms of support for the tax.

LIQUOR BY THE DRINK: This issue also showed mixed results. People have stronger opinions about it and fewer undecided voters. There is a notable correlation between those who support/oppose the land transfer tax and who support this issue, but mostly in terms of those with the strongest opinions. The moderates are much more divided.

Those with stronger pro/con opinions said they are somewhat less likely to vote if this is on the ballot. Those under age 35 are strong supporters of both the land transfer tax and liquor by the drink, but they traditionally are not big voters and, surprisingly, reported they would more likely show up for the land transfer tax ballot than liquor by the drink.

Polls have generally struggled to predict voter turnout and outcomes for liquor-related issues, mainly because some groups that don’t typically vote on anything else will cast their votes on this issue. Since there is at least some correlation between supporters & opponents of both issues, the outcome of both likely will depend more on which groups show up or don’t show up for this issue, if they are on the same ballot.