San Francisco Results

San Francisco, CA Survey Results
Q1 Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Q4 It was recently reported that developers, union
Jerry Brown’s job performance? leaders and others seeking city approvals were
told to contribute to a specific candidate and
Approve .......................................................... 70%
not to contribute to another candidate by then-
Disapprove...................................................... 16% mayor Lee, with the participation of his top staff
and top city Board of Supervisors members
Not sure .......................................................... 14%
and that “we will be watching”. Does this give
Q2 Some cities like Los Angeles ban city you very serious concerns, somewhat serious
appointees from contributing or raising money concerns, minor concerns or no real concerns?
for officials who appoint them or to candidates
backed by them. Do you think San Francisco Very serious concerns .................................... 62%
should ban appointees from fundraising or Somewhat serious concerns........................... 21%
contributing to candidates for election to City
Hall offices, or not? Minor concerns ............................................... 12%
Think San Francisco should ban appointees No real concerns............................................. 3%
from fundraising or contributing to candidates
for election to City Hall offices......................... 58% Not sure .......................................................... 2%
Do not think San Francisco should ban Q5 At the same meeting, billionaire City Hall
appointees from fundraising or contributing to insider Ron Conway also said that if the
candidates for election to City Hall offices ...... 24% developer donated money to the mayor's
Not sure .......................................................... 18% favorite candidate, that Conway would make a
donation in an equal amount to an organization
Q3 California allows for elected officials to ask supported by the developer. Does this give you
others to write checks for a special purpose, as very serious concerns, somewhat serious
it did for the America’s Cup debts or to concerns, minor concerns or no real concerns
celebrate City Hall’s 100th anniversary. This about Ron Conway and the candidates he
request can come at the same time the supports?
potential donor has decisions being made by
the official who requests the check. Do you Very serious concerns .................................... 56%
think people who have pending decisions being
Somewhat serious concerns........................... 24%
made by public officials should be banned from
being able to write checks for a special Minor concerns ............................................... 11%
purpose at that official’s request, or not?
No real concerns............................................. 3%
Think people who have pending decisions
being made by public officials should be Not sure .......................................................... 6%
banned from being able to write checks for a Q6 Ethics Commissioner Quentin Kopp has called
special purpose at that official’s request ......... 62% on the Ethics staff to fully investigate this
Do not think people who have pending incident, using subpeonas if necessary to
decisions being made by public officials guarantee that meeting participants testify
should be banned from being able to write
under oath. Do you support or oppose this
checks for a special purpose at that official’s
request............................................................ 20% ethics investigation?
Not sure .......................................................... 17% Support ........................................................... 73%

Oppose ........................................................... 7%
Not sure .......................................................... 21%
March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

Survey of 513 San Francisco voters Raleigh, NC 27604
information@publicpolicypolling.com / 888 621-6988
Q7 San Francisco takes some steps to block pay- Q11 If you are Hispanic or Latino, press 1. If white,
to-play City Hall decisions by prohibiting press 2. If Asian or Pacific Islander, press 3. If
contractors and lobbyists from contributing to African-American, press 4. If other, press 5.
officials who decide on their requests. Some
Hispanic / Latino ............................................. 10%
other cities also ban developers from
contributing to officials who approve their White .............................................................. 53%
building requests. Do you think San Francisco
Asian / Pacific Islander.................................... 22%
should also prohibit developers with pending
decisions from contributing or fundraising for African-American ............................................ 8%
officials who decide on their requests, or not?
Other............................................................... 7%
Think San Francisco should prohibit
developers with pending decisions from Q12 If you are 18-45 years old, press 1. If 46-65,
contributing or fundraising for officials who press 2. If older than 65, press 3.
decide on their requests.................................. 78%
18 to 45........................................................... 20%
Do not think San Francisco should prohibit
developers with pending decisions from 46 to 65........................................................... 46%
contributing or fundraising for officials who
decide on their requests.................................. 11% Older than 65 .................................................. 34%
Q13 Are you LGBT, or not? If you are LGBT, press
Not sure .......................................................... 11%
1. If not, press 2. If you don’t care to say, press
Q8 Do you think pay-to-play and corruption at City 3.
Hall has a very negative impact on quality of
life in San Francisco, a somewhat negative Yes.................................................................. 18%
impact, a somewhat positive impact or a very No ................................................................... 70%
positive impact, or does it not make a
difference? Don't care to say ............................................. 12%
Q14 Supervisor District
Very negative impact ...................................... 62%
1...................................................................... 6%
Somewhat negative impact............................. 23%
2...................................................................... 10%
Somewhat positive impact .............................. 4%
3...................................................................... 7%
Very positive impact........................................ 1%
4...................................................................... 7%
Not sure .......................................................... 10%
Q9 If you are a woman, press 1. If a man, press 2. 5...................................................................... 12%
If you prefer not to identify, press 3. 6...................................................................... 7%
Woman ........................................................... 49% 7...................................................................... 13%
Man................................................................. 44% 8...................................................................... 15%
Prefer not to identify........................................ 7% 9...................................................................... 7%
Q10 If you are a Democrat, press 1. If a Republican,
press 2. If an Independent, press 3. 10.................................................................... 6%
11 .................................................................... 11%
Democrat ........................................................ 65%
Republican...................................................... 10%
Independent.................................................... 26%

Survey of 513 San Francisco voters Raleigh, NC 27604
Gender Gender
Woma- Prefer not Woma- Prefer not
Base n Man to ident... Base n Man to ident...
Brown Approval Ban Appointees From
Contributing to
Approve 70% 71% 74% 35%
Candidates Yes/No
Disapprove 16% 13% 19% 15% Think San Francisco 58% 52% 69% 33%
Not sure 14% 16% 7% 50% should ban appointee-
s from fundraising or
contributing to candi-
dates for election to
City Hall offices
Do not think San Fran- 24% 25% 21% 36%
cisco should ban app-
ointees from fundrais-
ing or contributing to
candidates for electio-
n to City Hall offices
Not sure 18% 23% 10% 30%
Gender Gender
Ban on People With Those Seeking
Pending Decisions Approvals Told to
Writing Special Contribute to Specific
Checks Yes/No Candidates Level of
Concern
Think people who hav- 62% 59% 71% 34%
e pending decisions Very serious concerns 62% 59% 67% 41%
being made by public
Somewhat serious 21% 18% 22% 27%
officials should be ba-
nned from being able concerns
to write checks for ... Minor concerns 12% 17% 5% 29%
Do not think people w- 20% 22% 18% 29% No real concerns 3% 3% 3% 2%
ho have pending deci-
sions being made by Not sure 2% 3% 2% 0%
public officials should
be banned from being
able to write checks...
Not sure 17% 20% 11% 37%

survey of 513 San Francisco voters Raleigh, NC 27604
Gender Gender
Level of Concern Ethics Investigation
About Conway Support/Oppose
Very serious concerns 56% 60% 57% 28% Support 73% 76% 74% 38%
Somewhat serious 24% 20% 27% 28% Oppose 7% 5% 8% 6%
concerns
Not sure 21% 18% 17% 56%
Minor concerns 11% 9% 9% 33%
No real concerns 3% 1% 5% 7%
Not sure 6% 10% 2% 4%
Gender Gender
Prohibit Contributions Pay-To-Play and
from Developers with Corruption Impact on
Pending Decisions Quality of Life
Yes/No
Very negative impact 62% 61% 68% 31%
Think San Francisco 78% 78% 83% 41%
Somewhat negative 23% 25% 23% 6%
should prohibit devel-
opers with pending d- impact
ecisions from contrib- Somewhat positive 4% 2% 3% 29%
uting or fundraising f- impact
or officials who deci...
Very positive impact 1% 2% 1% 3%
cisco should prohibit Not sure 10% 11% 5% 31%
developers with pend-
ing decisions from co-
ntributing or fundraisi-
ng for officials who ...
Not sure 11% 13% 6% 30%

Party Party
Base Democr... Republic... Independe... Base Democr... Republic... Independe...
Contributing to
Approve 70% 80% 34% 56%
Candidates Yes/No
City Hall offices
Not sure 18% 21% 15% 12%
Party Party
Concern
Not sure 17% 17% 15% 17%

Party Party
concerns
Not sure 21% 16% 31% 29%
Not sure 6% 8% 1% 4%
Party Party
Yes/No
Very positive impact 1% 1% 4% 1%
Not sure 11% 12% 12% 9%
Race
Hispani- Asian / Pacifi- African-
Base c / Lati... White c Islander Americ... Other
Brown Approval
Approve 70% 81% 70% 56% 82% 78%
Disapprove 16% 5% 24% 8% 6% 7%
Not sure 14% 15% 5% 37% 12% 15%

Race Race
Hispani- Asian / Pacifi- African- Hispani- Asian / Pacifi- African-
Base c / Lati... White c Islander Americ... Other Base c / Lati... White c Islander Americ... Other
Ban Appointees From Ban on People With
Contributing to Pending Decisions
Candidates Yes/No Writing Special
Checks Yes/No
Think San Francisco 58% 47% 65% 47% 33% 78%
should ban appointee- Think people who hav- 62% 59% 65% 58% 52% 72%
s from fundraising or e pending decisions
contributing to candi- being made by public
dates for election to officials should be ba-
City Hall offices nned from being able
to write checks for ...
Do not think San Fran- 24% 13% 20% 32% 50% 17%
cisco should ban app- Do not think people w- 20% 22% 18% 28% 16% 20%
ointees from fundrais- ho have pending deci-
ing or contributing to sions being made by
candidates for electio- public officials should
n to City Hall offices be banned from being
Not sure 18% 40% 15% 21% 16% 5%
Not sure 17% 19% 17% 14% 31% 8%
Race Race
Those Seeking Level of Concern
Approvals Told to About Conway
Contribute to Specific
Very serious concerns 56% 63% 64% 36% 42% 69%
Candidates Level of
Concern Somewhat serious 24% 19% 21% 39% 13% 14%
Very serious concerns 62% 70% 72% 35% 44% 78% concerns
Minor concerns 11% 5% 11% 13% 7% 14%
Somewhat serious 21% 10% 17% 38% 22% 9%
concerns No real concerns 3% 9% 3% 1% 3% 2%
Minor concerns 12% 18% 8% 17% 31% 2% Not sure 6% 5% 1% 11% 35% 1%
No real concerns 3% 1% 3% 5% 3% 2%
Not sure 2% - 0% 6% - 10%
Race
Hispani- Asian / Pacifi- African-
Base c / Lati... White c Islander Americ... Other
Ethics Investigation
Support/Oppose
Support 73% 61% 81% 50% 79% 87%
Oppose 7% 26% 6% 1% - 9%
Not sure 21% 13% 13% 48% 21% 4%

Race Race
Yes/No
Very negative impact 62% 65% 60% 65% 48% 76%
Think San Francisco 78% 65% 83% 68% 83% 80%
Somewhat negative 23% 15% 28% 8% 48% 10%
ecisions from contrib- Somewhat positive 4% 4% 4% 6% 4% 1%
Very positive impact 1% 1% 1% 1% - 5%
Do not think San Fran- 11% 10% 9% 18% 8% 12%
cisco should prohibit Not sure 10% 14% 6% 20% - 8%
Not sure 11% 24% 8% 14% 9% 8%
Age Age
18 to 46 to Older 18 to 46 to Older
Base 45 65 than ... Base 45 65 than ...
Contributing to
Approve 70% 67% 71% 70%
Candidates Yes/No
City Hall offices
Not sure 18% 20% 21% 13%

Age Age
Concern
Not sure 17% 20% 17% 15%
Age Age
concerns
Not sure 21% 32% 17% 19%
Not sure 6% 9% 7% 3%

Age Age
Yes/No
Very positive impact 1% - 1% 3%
Not sure 11% 10% 11% 12%
LGBT Yes/No LGBT Yes/No

Don't car- Don't car-
Base Yes No e to say Base Yes No e to say
Contributing to
Approve 70% 82% 68% 60%
Candidates Yes/No
City Hall offices
Not sure 18% 17% 17% 28%

Concern
sions being made by Not sure 2% - 2% 8%
Not sure 17% 25% 12% 32%

concerns
Not sure 21% 13% 20% 35%
Not sure 6% 13% 4% 10%

Yes/No
Very positive impact 1% - 1% 3%
Not sure 11% 16% 6% 30%
Supervisor District Supervisor District

Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Contributing to
Approve 70% 63% 67% 73% 56% 89% 52% 48% 72% 81% 87% 77%
Candidates Yes/No
Disapprove 16% 24% 15% 17% 18% 4% 4% 40% 17% 11% 6% 9% Think San Francisco 58% 73% 64% 61% 68% 60% 36% 64% 53% 63% 38% 54%
Not sure 14% 13% 17% 10% 26% 7% 44% 12% 10% 7% 7% 14% should ban appointee-
City Hall offices
Do not think San Fran- 24% 18% 15% 24% 18% 30% 29% 25% 21% 36% 24% 24%
Not sure 18% 8% 21% 14% 14% 10% 35% 10% 26% 2% 38% 21%

Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
55% 79% 77% 65% 56% 45% 66% 59% 80% 43% 57% Concern
Think people who hav- 62%
e pending decisions Very serious concerns 62% 56% 69% 80% 69% 59% 31% 79% 77% 83% 38% 21%
officials should be ba- Somewhat serious 21% 40% 30% 19% 18% 13% 25% 11% 5% 13% 34% 41%
to write checks for ... Minor concerns 12% 4% 1% 1% 13% 19% 9% 7% 16% 3% 27% 30%
Do not think people w- 20% 32% 15% 7% 20% 16% 27% 21% 22% 11% 32% 25% No real concerns 3% - - - - 3% 16% 2% 2% - - 8%
sions being made by Not sure 2% - 0% - - 6% 19% 1% - - - 0%
Not sure 17% 12% 6% 16% 15% 28% 28% 13% 19% 9% 25% 18%

Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Very serious concerns 56% 57% 77% 69% 56% 56% 24% 73% 50% 61% 70% 29% Support 73% 85% 88% 81% 80% 91% 58% 74% 77% 78% 54% 30%
Somewhat serious 24% 32% 16% 21% 21% 22% 28% 11% 28% 18% 17% 46% Oppose 7% 5% 5% 6% 6% 1% 1% 12% 8% 1% 29% 2%
concerns
Not sure 21% 10% 7% 13% 14% 9% 40% 13% 14% 21% 17% 68%
Minor concerns 11% 5% 6% 9% 22% 2% 6% 9% 17% 9% 8% 19%
No real concerns 3% 3% 0% 1% 1% 3% 1% 5% 1% 11% 3% 5%
Not sure 6% 3% - - - 16% 41% 2% 5% - 2% 0%

Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Yes/No 54% 76% 67% 50% 57% 59% 69% 57% 81% 45% 59%
Very negative impact 62%
Think San Francisco 78% 89% 88% 84% 76% 82% 63% 80% 83% 66% 68% 67%
Somewhat negative 23% 42% 21% 20% 30% 39% 15% 18% 29% 11% 19% 6%
ecisions from contrib- Somewhat positive 4% 1% - 6% 10% 0% 1% 5% 7% 2% - 10%
Very positive impact 1% - - 1% 5% 1% - 2% 1% 1% 5% 0%
Do not think San Fran- 11% 7% 2% 9% 3% 9% 16% 10% 7% 25% 7% 29%
cisco should prohibit Not sure 10% 3% 4% 5% 6% 3% 25% 5% 5% 6% 31% 25%
Not sure 11% 5% 10% 7% 21% 9% 21% 10% 10% 10% 26% 4%


San Francisco Results

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

San Francisco Results

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

San Francisco, CA Survey Results

Not sure .......................................................... 17% Support ........................................................... 73%

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

LGBT Yes/No LGBT Yes/No

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

LGBT Yes/No LGBT Yes/No

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

Supervisor District Supervisor District

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

Supervisor District Supervisor District

Supervisor District Supervisor District

March 28-29, 2018 3020 Highwoods Blvd.

You might also like