Survey Summary & Take-Aways

FIGURE 2 SUPPORT FOR PROJECTS: BOND

S trongly fav or So me what fav or

Remove hazardous materials from school sites like lead and asbestos 58.6 21.7

Upgrade classroom c omputers and tec hnology 42 .8 35.8

Repair or replace roofs, plumbing, light ing, and elec tric al sy st ems 44.7 31.9

Upgrade library technology, Internet acc ess and research tools 41.5 34.4

Upgrade safety , sec urit y sy st ems 41.4 32.9

Install solar panels, make other energy -effic iency improvements 45.8 28.3

Upg rade and imp rove sc hool libraries 45.5 28.2

Make energy-efficient improvements and refinance Dist rict deb t 47.9 25.2

Rep lace deteriorat ing t emporary trailers w ith permanent c lassrooms 39.6 29.4

Retrofit classrooms for special purposes such as art , music, language 44.2 24.3

Improving technology to c reate science, engineering magnet school 35.0 31.9

Reno vate or replace out dated classrooms and sc hool buildings 32.0 33.6

Renovate old, w orn-out athletic fac ilit ies 24.5 38.0

Improve pick-up and drop-off zones at sc hool sites 27.0 30.4

Renovate the Claremont High School Theater 20.8 34.4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
% Respondents: Bond Version

Claremont Unified School District TBWB & True North Research © 2010
................
4
 Survey Summary & Take-Aways
Additional Advantages for a Bond in November 2010 In addition to the electoral and politi-
cal advantages that a bond enjoys, there are additional advantages and considerations.

• Through debt relief, cutting energy costs, and addressing technology issues currently being
financed through the general fund, a bond can provide general fund relief comparable to
that of a parcel tax, in a comparable time period (2011-12).
• We can make compelling arguments about a bond benefitting teachers and academic pro-
grams, as well as making much-needed facility improvements
• The District can begin improving classroom technology and facilities right away.
• Interest rates and construction costs are still low but are starting to rise. The sooner the Dis-
trict passes a bond, the more likely it will take advantage of low rates/costs.
• Acting now will position the District for federal stimulus programs/California Solar Incen-
tives before they expire.

FIGURE 1 SUPPORT FOR BOND AT INITIAL, INTERIM, AND FINAL BALLOT TEST

100
5.7 5.2
7.8
90 Re fus ed

22.4 23.3
80 20.5
No t s ure
33% 32% 35%
70
9.2 11.7
12.2
% Respondents

60 De finitely no

50 22.7
22.5 21.7
Probably n o
40 63% 60%
59%
30
Probably y es
20 40.0 38.1
36.0

10 De finitely y e s

0
Initial In terim Fin al
(Un info rmed , o nly ballot (Afte r he aring tax rates , (After h earin g tax rat es ,
lang uage) pro je c ts , p os itiv e arg umen ts) pro jec ts , p os itiv e and ne gativ e
argu ment s)

Ballo t Te st Ve rsion (Bo nd )

Claremont Unified School District TBWB & True North Research © 2010
................
3
 Survey Summary & Take-Aways
The Bond Enjoys Steady Support The bond option enjoys a natural level of support that is
above the margin necessary for success, and voters responded to the information in the poll by
increasing their support further—creating a welcome buffer of support above 55%.

• Support exceeds 55% throughout the poll, climbs to 63% once voters are exposed to positive
arguments, and is still at 60% even after negative arguments (see Support for Bond at Initial,
Interim, and Final Ballot Test on page 3).
• Opposition never climbs higher than 35% (45% +1 needed to defeat).
• All projects tested well (see Support for Projects: Bond on page 4), including those that
would provide general fund relief to help pay for teachers, maintain small class sizes, and
fund important academic programs.
• There is less sensitivity to the tax rates.
• Voters are not affected much by positive or negative information about the prior bond, likely
because it's been ten years since then.

The Parcel Tax will Require that Everything Goes Well Support for the parcel tax hovers
below two-thirds for much of the interview, and even after registering support for the services
that would be funded and being exposed to positive arguments, support barely reaches two-
thirds. There are clear concerns about the tax rate and the potential impact of opposition.

• Baseline support is 65%, but does not move much in response to positive messages or
descriptions of how the money would be used.
• There is tax rate sensitivity—with support dropping to 60% at $139. Climbing back to 66%
requires a substantial reduction in the actual tax rate ($79).
• After being exposed to negative arguments, support for the parcel tax is actually lower at
the end of the survey than at the beginning.
• Opposition is consistently in the 30%-32% range. It takes just 33.3% +1 to defeat a parcel
tax.
• The parcel tax survey had a sample that modeled the most favorable electorate we could
expect (40% of respondents had children in the household, somewhat higher % of Demo-
crats). Even with this type of turnout which would take a lot of effort for the campaign to
produce, support is still below the two-thirds threshold for most of the interview.

Election Timing Considerations Looking to the near future, there are fewer opportunities for
a Prop 39 bond than there are for a parcel tax election.

• November 2010 Gubernatorial

• November 2011 School Board Elections (lower turnout/risk that tax becomes a candidate
campaign issue)
• November 2012

Claremont Unified School District TBWB & True North Research © 2010
................
2
 Survey Summary & Take-Aways
S U R V E Y S U M M A R Y & T A KE - A W A Y S
True North Research and TBWB recently completed a survey of 600 voters in the Claremont Uni-
fied School District to produce an unbiased, statistically reliable evaluation of voters’ interest in
supporting a local revenue measure to fund school services and facilities. The telephone survey
was administered between April 23 and May 4, 2010 and the average interview lasted 16 min-
utes.

TESTING TWO ALTERNATIVES: PARCEL TAX & BOND One of the objectives of the
study was to determine how support for a local measure may vary depending on the type of
financial mechanism employed: parcel tax or general obligation bond. To reliably estimate sup-
port for both types of measures, a split-sample methodology was employed such that 300 voters
were administered a survey that focused on a parcel tax, whereas a separate 300 voters were
asked questions regarding a potential bond measure. All 600 respondents received generic
questions that applied to both types of measures.

SUMMARY & TAKE-AWAYS Although a more detailed report is forthcoming, at this point
we are able to highlight a number of key findings that speak to the feasibility of placing a reve-
nue measure on the November 2010 ballot.

Claremont Voters Greatly Value Education Claremont voters place extraordinary value on
education, and are much more connected to education on a personal level than typical of other
communities.

• Maintaining the quality of education in local schools is ranked as the most important issue
facing the community—nothing else comes close.
• Approximately 45% of likely voters are employed by a local school or college, are retired
from a career in education, or have a family member who fits this profile.
• Voters display a high level of familiarity with the District—just 11% did not have an opinion
about the District’s performance.
• Voters share a very positive assessment of the quality of education provided by the District.
Positive assessments outnumber negative assessments by more than 8 to 1.

Many of the Factors Needed for a Successful Measure are in Place There are a variety of
factors that need to be in place for a measure to be successful, and many of these factors are
present in Claremont.

• There is a high level of awareness that the District needs additional money
• Voters have positive opinions about the District’s performance
• The current, baseline support for a revenue measure is solid: 58% for a bond, 65% for a par-
cel tax.
• The services and projects that would be funded by a measure are popular—both services
and capital projects.
• Positive messages about the measures resonate with voters.
• External considerations are also favorable, including committed leaders and volunteers, and
adequate time to prepare and campaign for a measure.

Claremont Unified School District TBWB & True North Research © 2010
................
1