1. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Public Opinion Survey Report Mississippi River Regional Planning Commission David Trechter, James Janke, and Shelly Hadley UW-River Falls/UW-Extension Survey Research Center Report 2011/9, June 2011

2. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Summary of Key Results

3. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Key Result #1 Regional residents support policies consistent with “sustainable development” principles

4. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Support for Sustainable Development 81% agreed that programs should be developed to increase the amount of locally produced food in schools and other local institutions 71% agreed that government regulations or funding is needed to protect natural areas 68% agreed that redevelopment his a higher priority than expanding into new areas 65% agreed that government regulations or funding is needed to protect farmland or forests 61% agreed that new housing should be focused in or adjacent to exiting communities where public services are available Large majorities support renewable alternative energy production

5. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Sustainable Development Ambivalence Only 52% agreed that sustainability principles should guide development in W. Wisconsin. (34% had no opinion. 14% disagreed) Only 48% agreed new business development should occur in or adjacent to established communities where services available (29% no opinion. 24% disagreed) Only 36% agreed more local land use planning is needed ( 34% no opinion. 30% disagreed) Education/Outreach Opportunity?

6. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Key Result #2 Respondents are willing to consider policy shifts to reduce property taxes

7. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Support for Ways to Reduce Property Tax for Local Government 79% agreed that counties should be allowed to share law enforcement costs 64% agreed that counties should be able to increase the sales tax rate to reduce property tax

8. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Mixed Opinions About Taxation Shifts for School Funding Only 52% agreed that primary funding for local schools should be shifted to the sales tax Only 45% agreed that state funding of schools should be increased to reduce property taxes even if there is some loss of local control

9. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Key Result #3 Regional residents are not so sure about incentives to businesses  Only 30% agreed that businesses that expand or start-up in Wisconsin should pay no corporate income tax for 5 years  Only 47% agree that local governments should provide incentives to reduce development in rural, low-cost areas

10. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Survey Nitty-Gritty “Can I believe these data?”

11. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Survey Facts Questionnaires sent to a random sample of 4,059 individual households in nine-county region Reminder postcard and second survey sent to non- respondents 1391 completed questionnaires were returned (34%) Estimated to be accurate to within plus or minus 2.6% with 95% confidence

12. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Survey Facts Sampling designed to achieve confidence interval (“margin of error”) of plus/minus 8% for individual counties Table 1 (p. 5)  Confidence intervals equal to or less than 8% in 5 of 9 counties.  Response rate among counties ranged from 30% to 42%  Results very similar across counties

13. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Survey Facts Found little evidence for non-response bias (when opinions of non-respondents are systematically different from respondents) Demographic profile: more men, better educated, and older. But relatively few differences among demographic groups (noted in survey report) SRC concludes this sample should represent opinions of regional residents very well

14. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Additional Survey Results

15. Agricultural Economics Program Review About 80% for local food in schools/sharing law enforcement costs 60%+ for studying econ/ecol impact of sand mining, shifting from prop to sales tax, pos business climate 50%+ agree good local internet access, manufacturing imp, pub-pri rec devel, school funds via sales tax 40%+ agree bus devel in built areas, dec ind devel rural areas, inc state school funding 30% or less agree state corp tax breaks and need more overnight lodging Survey Research Center

16. Agricultural Economics Program Review All rec/tourism activities “acceptable” to majority of respondents High acceptance + high success = fishing, hunting, camping, bicycling High acceptance + mod success = base/softball, agrotourism, nature rec, non-motor water activities, golf, motorized outdoor activities Survey Research Center

17. Agricultural Economics Program Review 60%+ agreed that need regs to protect nat’l resources and farms/ forests, should redevelop areas and build new houses where pub services available 50%+ agree community accepts diversity, need regs to protect hist/cult, sustain- ability guide devel Under 40% agree need more planning, good gov’t bus collaboration Survey Research Center

18. Agricultural Economics Program Review 50%+ agree affordable housing should be local priority, have adequate elder-appropriate housing Under 40% agree need for special needs housing Survey Research Center

19. Agricultural Economics Program Review Nearly 60% agree current quality of life is high Under 40% agree quality of life will improve in future Impact of recession? Survey Research Center

20. Agricultural Economics Program Review Solar most acceptable alt energy source Majority accept all except nuclear Most likely to succeed seen to be solar, burning biomass, wind, and methane Survey Research Center

21. Agricultural Economics Program Review Survey Research Center Comments? Questions?