Home » News & Resources » Housing bond, put in new light, surges (Sept 29, 2006)

News

Housing bond, put in new light, surges

By Andy Furillo
Sacramento Bee
September 29, 2006

Trailing badly in July, a $2.8 billion housing bond slated for the November ballot has significantly improved its standing in the latest Field Poll -- proving the adage in the survey business that it's all in how you ask the question.

The three other infrastructure bond measures are all leading in the survey released Thursday, but their support barely tops the 50 percent margin.

With 40 days until the Nov. 7 election, poll Director Mark DiCamillo said the survey suggests potentially razor-thin outcomes for the infrastructure measures that generated bipartisan euphoria in the spring when the Democratic Legislature and Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger teamed up to place them on the ballot.

"They're getting just about the bare minimum for passage," DiCamillo said of the measures. "I guess I'm expecting a close election on just about all of these."

As far as turnarounds go, Proposition 1C -- the housing measure -- has flipped the switch from night to day. The Field survey in July had it losing badly, with 42 percent of respondents saying they'd vote against it while only 33 percent said they were in favor. Some 25 percent were undecided.

In the poll results released Thursday, Proposition 1C checked in with 58 percent support, a stunning change from the July results. Just 28 percent of respondents opposed the measure and 14 percent remained undecided.

DiCamillo attributed the turnaround to the way the pollsters asked the question.

In July, respondents were presented only with the proposition number and the cost. More recently, the 280 likely voters who responded in the survey conducted Sept. 14-24 had a virtual facsimile of the ballot summary read to them.

"I was struck by the influence the reading of the ballot label has," DiCamillo said. "It produces a much more positive response."

Rather than a proposition number with a big price tag, respondents this time were presented with a list of the underprivileged and sympathetic groups that stand to benefit if the measure passes.

"Proposition 1C provides shelters for battered women and their children; clean and safe housing for low-income senior citizens; home ownership assistance for the disabled, military veterans and working families; and repairs and adds accessibility improvements to apartments for families and disabled citizens," the question read, almost identical to the wording on the ballot summary.

Lillian Barnard of Sacramento supported Proposition 1C when she was surveyed in the Field Poll. Her response, she said, was totally framed by the question that was read to her.

"I had to go by what they said," Barnard said. "Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to read it. I still have some more research to do."

The bond includes a $50 million "emergency housing assistance program" that would fund shelters and transitional housing for battered women, homeless families with children and other individuals.

"Money going to shelters for battered women and children -- people tend to support that," DiCamillo said. "It's almost like a motherhood issue."

Yes on 1C spokesman Sam Delson said the measure sets aside a total of $640 million for low-income seniors, emancipated youth and veterans, including the $50 million for battered women and homeless families, as reflected in the ballot summary.

"I'm comfortable with it," Delson said of the wording. "The fact of the matter is, no other measure on the ballot this year will provide as much direct help for these most vulnerable populations."

The bond also provides more than $1.2 billion in down payment assistance, rental housing construction, rental assistance and home ownership programs. It sets aside another $850 million for "infill incentive grants," $300 million for housing near transit stops and $200 million for parks.

Wording for the ballot summary was laid out in the bill, written by state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, that placed the measure on the ballot.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which is opposing the housing measure, criticized the language for not reflecting how the lion's share of the bond money will be spent.

"It's a perversion of the initiative process," Coupal said. "This is certainly not the first time this has happened."

Coupal said voters may be unaware that rather than going through "a nonpartisan objective analysis," as initiatives do, the title and summary in this case was written by lawmakers themselves.

Perata spokeswoman Alicia Trost said in an e-mail that the summary "is an accurate description of what the bill does."

View full article. (May require log-in.)