Transportation Authority of Marin SB83/VRF Feasibility Survey June 2010

Page 2 June 2010 Overview and Research Objectives The Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) commissioned Godbe Research to conduct a survey of voters in Marin County with the following research objectives:  Track potential voter support for levying a vehicle registration fee to maintain and improve local roads and public transportation services with the results from a voter survey conducted in February 2010;  Prioritize the potential transportation improvements to be funded based on voter reception;  Test the influence of supporting and opposing arguments on potential voter support for the measure; and  Identify any differences in voter support due to demographic and/or voter behavioral characteristics.

Page 3 June 2010 Methodology Overview  Data Collection Telephone Interviewing  Universe109,968 registered voters in the County of Marin who are likely to vote in the November 2010 election  Fielding DatesJune 10 through June 15, 2010  Interview Length16 minutes  Sample Size 450 voters  Margin of Error± 4.6% Note: The data have been weighted to reflect the actual population characteristics of the likely voters in the County of Marin in terms of their gender, age, political party type, and supervisorial district of residence.

Page 4 June 2010 Initial Ballot Test To help reduce local traffic congestion, maintain roads, improve safety, and promote climate protection which: Maintains local and residential streets and pathways for all; Funds transportation options for seniors and disabled persons; Reduces school-related congestion and provides safe access to schools; and, Supports a cleaner environment and reduced commute trip congestion; shall Marin County voters authorize a $10 fee on the registration of vehicles, with citizen’s oversight, to be spent entirely within Marin County? [74 words] February 2010 Survey Definitely Yes: 41%Definitely No: 22% Probably Yes: 24%Probably No: 8% DK/NA: 4%

Page 5 June 2010 Features of the Measure I Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.

Page 6 June 2010 Features of the Measure II Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.

Page 7 June 2010 Supporting Arguments Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0.

Page 8 June 2010 Potential Opposition Arguments Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0.

Page 9 June 2010 Final Ballot Test To help reduce local traffic congestion, maintain roads, improve safety, and promote climate protection which: Maintains local and residential streets and pathways for all; Funds transportation options for seniors and disabled persons; Reduces school-related congestion and provides safe access to schools; and, Supports a cleaner environment and reduced commute trip congestion; shall Marin County voters authorize a $10 fee on the registration of vehicles, with citizen’s oversight, to be spent entirely within Marin County? [74 words] February 2010 Survey Definitely Yes: 43%Definitely No: 22% Probably Yes: 22%Probably No: 10% DK/NA: 3%

Page 10 June 2010 Summary and Recommendations I  The tracking survey results indicate continued strong voter support for a $10 vehicle registration fee increase to reduce traffic congestion, maintain local roads, improve safety, and promote climate protection in Marin County. Godbe Research recommends that the Transportation Authority of Marin finalize its expenditure plan and move forward with placing a measure on the November 2010 ballot.  After hearing the summary of a measure that replicates the language that would be placed on the ballot, 62 percent of the voters surveyed indicated their “Yes” vote.  Support increased to fully 67 percent after voters had heard additional information on the measure, including potential programs and services to be funded. In contrast, 30 percent indicated opposition, and the remaining 2 percent were undecided.  Given the 5 percent margin of error for the study, we can conservatively estimate that support among all likely November 2010 voters is not below 62 percent, well above the simple majority required in an election.  Additionally, current support for the measure is consistent with previous polling. The survey conducted in February 2010 found 65 percent support for a $10 fee on registration of vehicles and 32 percent opposition.

Page 11 June 2010 Summary and Recommendations II  The survey results indicate the following critical considerations should the Transportation Authority of Marin decide to place this measure on the ballot:  Substantial communications are needed to maximize success during the pre-electoral phase and by an independent campaign committee after a measure has been placed on the ballot.  Clearly explain the need for additional funding for transportation above and beyond the sales tax increases in 2004 and Also address voter misperceptions about the Authority not managing its budget efficiently, and head off voter concern around a competing measure that would increase vehicle registration fee by $18 to keep State Parks open.  The ballot question should feature funding needs that are the highest priority to voters in Marin County:  Provide senior and disabled transportation options;  Support Whistlestop Wheels and other local services;  Help fix potholes and maintain major streets and roads;  Provide emergency pothole repair on local and residential streets, sidewalks and pathways;  Maintain and expand the School Crossing Guard and Safe Routes to Schools programs;  Reduce congestion by improving existing intersections and by better timing of traffic signals; and  Provide additional service on existing transit routes for students going to and from local schools.

Page 12 June 2010 Summary and Recommendations III  An education campaign should emphasize the key supporting arguments that speak to why a vehicle registration fee is necessary: Generate funds for improving local roads and transportation services  The measure would help make public transportation more accessible, especially for seniors and disabled residents;  The measure will help better connect all of the different transportation and transit alternatives in Marin County; and  The measure would provide for safer neighborhood roadways for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians. Reduce traffic congestion and pollution on freeways and local streets and roads  The measure would help reduce traffic congestion on Highway 101 within Marin County;  The Marin-Sonoma Highway 101 corridor is the fourth most congested corridor in the Bay Area. It is critical to have well funded public transportation options, such as bus service; and  The measure would help reduce traffic congestion on local roadways.

Page 13 June 2010 Summary and Recommendations IV Accountability and proper management of funds  Every penny from this measure will benefit local transportation programs, no funds will go to the State;  The State cannot take these funds from Marin; and  Safeguards like independent citizens’ oversight and annual audits will ensure that the money will be spent properly. Environmental benefits of the measure  The measure will help reduce air pollution;  With climate change and greenhouse gas emissions getting worse, we need to implement more environmentally friendly transportation options in Marin County; and  The measure will help reduce water pollution caused by oil, gas and exhaust particles running into storm drains.

Transportation Authority of Marin SB83/VRF Feasibility Survey June 2010