My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 08 - Ballot Measure Polling Results
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2026
>
03/17/2026 Regular, Special HA
>
Item 08 - Ballot Measure Polling Results
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2026 11:01:15 AM
Creation date
3/11/2026 10:04:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
City Manager's Office
Item #
08
Date
3/17/2026
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
N EGATIVE ARGUMENTS <br />Whereas Question 8 presented respondents with arguments in favor of the measure, Question <br />10 presented respondents with arguments designed to elicit opposition to the measure. In the <br />case of Question 10, however, respondents were asked if they felt that the argument was a very ' <br />convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to oppose the measure. The <br />arguments tested, as well as voters' opinions about the arguments, are presented in Figure 13. <br />Question 10 Next, let me tell you what opponents of the measure are saying. Opponents of the <br />measure say: ------ Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all <br />convincing reason to OPPOSE the measure? <br />FIGURE 13 NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS <br />Residents, local businesses have been hit hard by inflation, high <br />interest rates, cost of living increases; many are struggling to <br />a stay afloat; now is not the time to raise taxes <br />Everyone is coming after us for tax increases incl state, county <br />o taxes, school bonds, other taxes that will be on the ballot next <br />Ej year. Enough is enough; we can't afford to keep raising our <br />taxes <br />There are no guarantees on how funds will be spent, which <br />o means City can divert money to pet projects without any say <br />p from voters; we can't trust City with tax dollars they will <br />mismanage money <br />'4 Santa Ana is an expensive place to live, especially for young <br />lu <br />_o families, seniors, those on fixed incomes; passing tax will make <br />a it even less affordable <br />6 City employees are making too much money in salary, <br />pensions, benefits, that's the problem; City needs to tighten its <br />a belt before asking residents to pay more taxes <br />v <br />dSanta Ana has the highest sales tax of any city in Orange County <br />w <br />This tax will last forever; there is no expiration date <br />a <br />â– very convincing Somewhat convincing <br />0 10 20 30 40 s0 60 70 80 90 100 <br />% Respondents <br />Among the negative arguments tested, the most compelling were: Residents and local businesses <br />have been hit hard by inflation, high interest rates, and cost of living increases. Many are strug- <br />gling to stay afloat. Now is not the time to raise taxes (75% very or somewhat convincing), Every- <br />one is coming after us for tax increases - including state and county taxes, school bonds, and <br />other taxes that will be on the ballot next year. Enough is enough. We can't afford to keep raising <br />our taxes (67%), and There are no guarantees on how funds will be spent, which means the City <br />can divert the money to pet projects without any say from voters. We can't trust the City with our <br />tax dollars. They will mismanage the money (67%). <br />Tf1P MFr.AT1\/F A0r'11MFMTC DV IMITIAI C11PPPr)T Table 5 on the next page ranks <br />the top five negative arguments (based on % very convincing) according to respondents' vote <br />choice at the Initial Ballot Test. <br />City of Santa Ana True North Research, Inc. © 2025 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.