Los Angeles County Transportation Long Range Plan Issues Survey Survey Conducted: March 17-29, 2015 220-4101

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Key Findings  Support for both measures is initially strong and the intensity of support – those saying definitely yes – increases for both measures after education.  Self-reported likely November 2016 voters are less supportive of the measures and many of their individual features than all County residents. However, support among self-reported likely November 2016 voters appears relatively strong.  The Augmentation/Extension Measure is susceptible to a simple explanation of what the measure actually does, after which support drops to below two-thirds.

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

1

Key Findings Continued  To be successful, a measure must include funds for a package of local roads, freeways and public transportation improvements.  Specifically: freeway improvements; traffic congestion relief; keeping fares low for seniors, the disabled and students; earthquake retrofitting bridges and tunnels; and pothole repairs and local street paving top the list of many important features.  Selecting voter-preferred individual regional projects can make a difference in passing the measure.

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

2

Key Findings Continued  Concern about the growing population of drivers and the desire for traffic congestion relief are top reasons why all residents and self-reported definite voters would be more inclined to vote yes on a measure.

 Metro continues to have more favorable ratings among all residents and self-reported likely November 2016 voters than the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

3

Methodology  Conducted a Random Digit Dial Survey by telephone (landlines and cell phones) between March 17th – March 29th, 2015  Interviews with 1,414 Los Angeles County residents ages 18 years or older  Survey was available in English and Spanish  Some percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding  Margin of error for the full sample is +/- 2.6% and half the sample is +/-3.3%  Margin of error for each Metro Planning Area is +/-6.9% and half sample is +/-9.8% DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

4

Methodology Continued  Margin of error for self-reported registered voters likely to vote in the November 2016 General Election (n=863) is +/-3.4% and half sample is +/-4.8% Note: This sample of self-reported registered likely Nov 2016 voters is different from a typical voter population, which is based on actual registration information and voter history.

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

5

METRO Planning Areas Sample Actual % Size of County

Planning Area

Largest Cities in the Area

Westside

City of Los Angeles, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Culver City and Beverly Hills

200

13%

South Bay

City of Los Angeles, Torrance, Carson, Inglewood, Redondo Beach and unincorporated sections of Los Angeles County

201

14%

Central

City of Los Angeles

204

10%

San Gabriel Valley

Pasadena, Pomona, West Covina, Alhambra, Arcadia, Diamond Bar, El Monte, Glendora and unincorporated sections of Los Angeles County

201

19%

San Fernando Valley

Burbank, Calabasas, Glendale, La Canada/Flintridge, City of Los Angeles, San Fernando, Unincorporated

202

18%

North County

Lancaster, City of Los Angeles, Palmdale, Santa Clarita, Unincorporated

205

7%

Southeast

Long Beach, Downey, Lakewood, Norwalk, Compton, Cerritos, Bellflower, Pico Rivera, South Gate, Whittier and unincorporated sections of Los Angeles County

201

19%

1414

100%

Total DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

6

7

Ballot Summary for the ½-cent Sales Tax Augmentation/Extension Measure Shall voters authorize continuing to advance and improve the Los Angeles County transportation system, provide traffic congestion relief, and economic and job growth by: extending light rail, subway, neighborhood shuttles and bus systems in Los Angeles County; improving connections to jobs, schools and local airports; improving freeway and local street traffic flow and safety; repairing potholes; synchronizing local signals; and keeping seniors, disabled and student fares low; approval augments by one-half cent and extends the existing County sales tax, with independent financial audits, and citizen oversight; all funds controlled locally? Q7. If the election were held today on this measure, do you think you would vote yes in favor or no to oppose it?

8

Brief Explanation of the Augmentation/Extension Measure In 2008, Los Angeles County voters approved a one-half cent traffic relief sales tax for 30 years. The measure I just described would make that sales tax permanent and increase the county transportation sales tax by one-half cent.

Q8. If the election were held today on this measure, do you think you would vote yes in favor or no to oppose it?

9

Seventy percent of self-reported likely voters initially say they would vote yes on the augmentation/extension measure. While support drops to below the two-thirds threshold after receiving a brief explanation of the measure, support exceeds initial vote after more education. Def. Yes

Prob. Yes

Initial Vote

Und./ Lean Yes

Und./Lean No

46%

Vote After Explanation

20%

36%

Final Vote After Information

22%

49%

0%

20%

Prob. No

60%

Und.

15%

7%

10%

25%

40%

Def. No

19%

5%

80%

6%

Total Total Yes No

5%

70% 25%

6%

63% 31%

79% 18%

9%

100%

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT Q7/Q8/Q15 (Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). If the election were held today on this measure, do you think you would vote yes in favor or no to oppose it? Split Sample

10

Ballot Summary for the ½-cent Sales Tax Increase Measure Shall voters authorize continuing to advance and improve the Los Angeles County transportation system, provide traffic congestion relief, and economic and job growth by: extending light rail, subway, neighborhood shuttles and bus systems in Los Angeles County; improving connections to jobs, schools and local airports; improving freeway and local street traffic flow and safety; repairing potholes; synchronizing local signals; and keeping seniors, disabled and student fares low; approval increases the County sales tax by one-half cent, with independent financial audits and citizen oversight; all funds controlled locally? Q9. If the election were held today on this measure, do you think you would vote yes in favor or no to oppose it?

11

Seventy-two percent of self-reported likely November 2016 voters initially support the ½-cent sales tax increase measure, and overall support remains stable after education, with “definitely yes” voters increasing by 6%. Def. Yes

Prob. Yes

Initial Vote

Und./ Lean Yes

Und./Lean No

42%

Final Vote After Information

26%

48%

0%

20%

Prob. No

23%

40%

60%

Def. No

5% 7%

5%

Und.

Total Total Yes No

13% 7% 72% 21%

17%

80%

5%

73% 23%

100%

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT Q9/Q16 (Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). If the election were held today on this measure, do you think you would vote yes in favor or no to oppose it? Split Sample

12

All three major areas of transportation investment are considered the top priority by between roughly one-quarter to one-third of respondents, respectively. Self-Reported Likely November 2016 Voters

All Residents (B) Local street and road improvements

35%

32%

(C) Freeway and highway improvements (A) Local and regional light rail and bus transportation improvements

27%

30%

24%

25%

Both A and B, A and C, B and C/All

12%

10%

None of them/Other/DK/NA

3%

1% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT Q10 (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). I am going to read you three uses of existing transportation funding in LA County. Please tell me which one is your top priority for transportation funding.

13

Potential Transportation Features by Metro Planning Area (Ranked by All Residents % Very Important to be included in the measure - 6 or 7 rating) Features

All Westside Residents

South Bay

Central SGV SFV

North Southeast County

Earthquake retrofitting bridges, tunnels and overpasses

81%

81%

81%

77%

83% 83%

75%

83%

Improving freeway traffic flow on the 5, 10, 14, 60, 101, 110, 138, 210, 405, 605 and the 710 freeways

80%

78%

78%

78%

83% 83%

70%

79%

Keeping seniors, disabled and student fares low

79%

70%

79%

78%

84% 80%

84%

81%

Preventing polluted toxic roadway runoff from entering storm drains and flowing into creeks, rivers and coastal waters and onto County beaches

79%

83%

82%

84%

77% 72%

80%

83%

Repairing potholes and repaving local streets

79%

78%

76%

86%

77% 76%

81%

83%

Improving freeway traffic flow

78%

80%

77%

80%

73% 75%

85%

82%

Continuing to advance and improve the Los Angeles County transportation system to provide traffic congestion relief

75%

77%

69%

81%

79% 66%

86%

76%

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Q12 (All Residents/Planning Area). I want to return to the transportation sales tax measure we were discussing earlier. I am going to mention some features of the proposed Los Angeles County Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after I mention each one, please tell me how important it is to you that the feature be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of one to seven, where one means NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and seven means it would be VERY IMPORTANT. ^Not part of Split Sample

14

Continued (Ranked by All Residents % Very Important to be included in the measure 6 or 7 rating) Features

All Westside Residents

South Bay

Central SGV SFV

North Southeast County

Widening freeways to improve traffic flow

75%

62%

71%

83%

82% 75%

82%

73%

Improving connections to jobs, schools and local airports

72%

77%

72%

77%

71% 61%

63%

80%

Improving safety on buses and light rail lines, and at bus stops and rail stations

70%

73%

80%

79%

73% 49%

71%

72%

Improving van service for seniors, the disabled and veterans

70%

57%

64%

75%

73% 68%

75%

79%

Improving freeway safety

70%

53%

82%

73%

68% 63%

71%

79%

Adding and upgrading crosswalks and sidewalks to improve student and pedestrian safety

70%

64%

64%

78%

69% 68%

73%

74%

Synchronizing signals in every area of the County

68%

63%

68%

65%

65% 68%

63%

79%

Reducing diesel emissions from trucks and trains

67%

60%

66%

80%

72% 53%

61%

78%

Continuing to advance and improve the Los Angeles County transportation system to help economic and job growth

66%

63%

61%

73%

68% 61%

67%

73%

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Q12 (All Residents/Planning Area). I want to return to the transportation sales tax measure we were discussing earlier. I am going to mention some features of the proposed Los Angeles County Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after I mention each one, please tell me how important it is to you that the feature be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of one to seven, where one means NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and seven means it would be VERY IMPORTANT. ^Not part of Split Sample

15

Continued (Ranked by All Residents % Very Important to be included in the measure 6 or 7 rating) Features

All Westside Residents

South Bay

Central SGV SFV

North Southeast County

Improving safety at rail crossings

65%

58%

59%

78%

65% 58%

76%

71%

Improving the flow and safety of truck traffic on freeways and roads near the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach

64%

59%

58%

66%

63% 65%

71%

71%

Connecting public transit to LAX, Burbank, Long Beach and Palmdale airports

64%

61%

57%

80%

55% 70%

73%

65%

Upgrading freeway on- and off-ramps to improve traffic flow

64%

66%

49%

78%

60% 56%

72%

73%

Synchronizing local signals

64%

60%

69%

71%

58% 64%

56%

71%

Upgrading and redesigning local streets to balance motorist concerns with better and safer access for pedestrians, bicycles and bus travel

63%

64%

60%

72%

63% 56%

64%

68%

Extending light rail, subway and bus service in Los Angeles County

63%

59%

63%

71%

68% 51%

55%

69%

Extending the light rail system to more places in the County

62%

59%

61%

65%

68% 51%

66%

65%

Improving and expanding Metrolink service

61%

54%

58%

73%

65% 48%

66%

67%

^

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Q12 (All Residents/Planning Area). I want to return to the transportation sales tax measure we were discussing earlier. I am going to mention some features of the proposed Los Angeles County Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after I mention each one, please tell me how important it is to you that the feature be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of one to seven, where one means NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and seven means it would be VERY IMPORTANT. ^Not part of Split Sample

16

Continued (Ranked by All Residents % Very Important to be included in the measure 6 or 7 rating) Features

All Westside Residents

South Bay

Central SGV SFV

North Southeast County

^

Improving opportunities for getting from public transportation stops and stations to your final destination, by improving pedestrian, bike and neighborhood shuttle services

61%

61%

60%

72%

65% 52%

63%

61%

Creating a safe network of bicycle paths, physically separated from motor vehicle traffic

61%

62%

54%

73%

62% 52%

59%

67%

Adding carpool lanes on local freeways

58%

55%

52%

53%

53% 58%

61%

74%

Expanding bus service, including adding more Rapid Buses

58%

46%

57%

63%

59% 63%

58%

59%

Improving frequency of and connections to bus service

57%

50%

56%

77%

60% 45%

60%

59%

Establishing and improving Express Bus Service on freeways

56%

43%

67%

64%

65% 49%

55%

52%

Establishing and improving neighborhood shuttles

55%

51%

58%

59%

56% 53%

63%

51%

Building more Park and Ride lots at transit stations

48%

42%

49%

58%

43% 48%

50%

52%

^

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Q12 (All Residents/Planning Area). I want to return to the transportation sales tax measure we were discussing earlier. I am going to mention some features of the proposed Los Angeles County Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after I mention each one, please tell me how important it is to you that the feature be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of one to seven, where one means NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and seven means it would be VERY IMPORTANT. ^Not part of Split Sample

17

West Los Angeles residents and self-reported likely November 2016 voters are more likely to vote for the measure if the Crenshaw LAX Light Rail Line is extended and traffic flow on the 10 freeway is improved. (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Extending the Metro Crenshaw LAX Rail Line, which is currently under construction, to the Metro Purple Line on Wilshire and through West Hollywood to the Metro Red Line in Hollywood

Improving the traffic flow along the 10 freeway between the 405 freeway and downtown LA by widening the road at key bottlenecks and upgrading the on- and off-ramps

Smwt. More Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

44%

All Residents

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

All Residents

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

No Diff.

29%

42%

0% DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Smwt. Less Lkly.

29%

DK/NA

18%

74% 5%

21%

71% 6%

47%

27%

44%

35%

5%

60%

80%

20%

40%

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

18%

5%

73% 7%

13% 79% 7% 100%

Q13 a-e (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 1 – West Los Angeles County) 18

West Los Angeles Continued (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Connecting LAX to the San Fernando Valley by a subway line under the Sepulveda Pass

Extending the Metro Purple Line Subway, currently under construction, beyond UCLA and Westwood toward Santa Monica

Connecting LAX to the San Fernando Valley by a subway line under the Sepulveda Pass. This would be funded partially by a new toll Express Lane travelling along the 405 from LAX to the Valley in both directions

Smwt. More Lkly.

Smwt. Less Lkly.

38%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

37%

19% 13%

All Residents

35%

27%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

35%

25%

24%

All Residents Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

16%

26%

No Diff.

All Residents

0% DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Much Less Lkly.

28% 38%

20%

40%

8%

DK/NA

26%

64% 8%

27%

56% 16%

30% 6%

15%

60%

62% 5% 60% 10%

27%

11%11% 21% 7%

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

21% 80%

5%

52% 22%

54% 22% 100%

Q13 a-e (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 1 – West Los Angeles County)

19

South Bay residents and self-reported likely November 2016 voters are more probable to vote for the measure if it improves traffic flow on major streets in the area, and local street maintenance and traffic flow along the 405 freeway. (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Improving street maintenance, such as pothole repair, on major streets throughout the South Bay Removing key bottlenecks and improving traffic flow on Pacific Coast Highway, Hawthorne and Crenshaw Boulevards, and Western Avenue Improving traffic along the 405 freeway between the 105 and the 110 freeways by widening the road at key bottlenecks and upgrading the on- and off-ramps Extending the Metro Green Light Rail Line south towards San Pedro through Redondo Beach and Torrance DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Smwt. More Lkly.

Smwt. Less Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

No Diff.

All Residents

54%

25%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

53%

24%

All Residents

51%

27%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

47%

5%

28%

DK/NA

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

14%

78% 5%

12%

77% 8%

16%

78% 4%

15%

75% 6%

All Residents

55%

20%

6%

13%

75% 8%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

56%

17%

7%

13%

73% 10%

6% 6%

14%

69% 12%

All Residents

44%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

42% 0%

20%

25% 20% 40%

5% 7%

60%

23% 80%

62% 12% 100%

Q13 f-i (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 2 – The South Bay) 20

Central Los Angeles residents and self-reported likely November 2016 voters are more likely to vote for the measure if it extends the Crenshaw LAX Light Rail Line; improves freeway connections in Downtown; and extends the northbound bus and carpool lane on the 110 freeway. (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Extending the Metro Crenshaw LAX Light Rail Line, which is currently under construction, to the Metro Purple Line on Wilshire and through West Hollywood to the Metro Red Line in Hollywood Improving freeway connections around Downtown Los Angeles on the 5, 10, 60 and 101 freeways through East LA Extending the northbound bus and carpool lane on the 110 freeway past the current bottleneck at Adams Boulevard into Downtown LA, thereby improving traffic flow, reducing congestion and improving safety Establishing frequent bus service along Vermont Avenue that operates in its own dedicated lane with fewer stops; connecting South Los Angeles with the Metro Red Line and Purple Line subway at Wilshire and Vermont DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Smwt. More Lkly.

Smwt. Less Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

55%

All Residents Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

28%

58%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

17%

48%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

34% 0%

20%

40%

15%

5%

67% 10%

76% 6%

71% 9%

17%

22%

6%

20% 22%

6%

20% 8% 66% 6%

17%

44%

All Residents

17%

6%

23%

54%

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

11% 80% 7%

18%

44%

All Residents

DK/NA

24%

39%

All Residents

No Diff.

7% 5%

6%

16%

8% 8%

22%

60%

80%

62% 10%

69% 12%

6%

56% 16%

100%

Q13 j-m (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 3 – Central Los Angeles County) 21

Within each respective group, there are no statistical differences in the likelihood of voting with respect to each San Gabriel Valley project, with one exception - upgrading the 71 Freeway scores lowest among self-reported likely November 2016 voters. (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Extending the Metro Gold Light Rail Line further east from East LA along the 60 freeway towards the 605 freeway in South El Monte

Connecting North Hollywood, Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena by light rail Extending the Metro Gold Light Rail Line which is currently under construction to Azusa, further east through Glendora and San Dimas toward Claremont

Upgrading the 71 freeway from a four- and six-lane expressway to an eight-lane freeway between Mission Boulevard and the 60 freeway in Pomona DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Smwt. More Lkly.

Smwt. Less Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

52%

All Residents Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

48%

All Residents

49%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

19%

21% 21%

48%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

19%

42%

23%

49%

All Residents Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

17%

43% 0%

20%

DK/NA

17%

6%

71% 6%

18% 7% 19% 7% 66% 8%

41%

All Residents

No Diff.

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

20%

70% 7%

11% 16%

7%

22%

5%

67% 7%

6%

65% 13%

7%

66% 8%

5%

8% 5% 16%

20%

62% 15%

14% 8% 9% 17% 8% 57% 18% 40%

60%

80%

100%

Q13 n-q (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 4 – San Gabriel Valley) 22

San Fernando Valley residents and self-reported likely November 2016 voters are more likely to vote for the measure if it improves traffic flow on the 101 freeway and connects the San Fernando Valley to LAX by a subway line under the Sepulveda Pass. (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Improving the traffic flow along the 101 freeway between the Ventura County line and the Hollywood Freeway in Universal City by widening the road at key bottlenecks and upgrading the on- and off-ramps

Smwt. More Lkly.

53%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

53%

23%

50%

29%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

20%

No Diff.

27%

42% 0%

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Much Less Lkly.

All Residents

All Residents

Connecting the San Fernando Valley to LAX by a subway line under the Sepulveda Pass

Smwt. Less Lkly.

DK/NA

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

9%

80% 7%

17%

76% 6%

14% 79% 7%

16% 11% 12% 18% 40%

60%

80%

59% 23%

100%

Q13 r-v (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 5 – San Fernando Valley)

23

San Fernando Valley Continued (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Connecting the San Fernando Valley to LAX by a subway line under the Sepulveda Pass. This would be funded partially by a new toll Express Lane travelling along the 405 from the Valley to LAX in both directions Converting the Metro Orange Line Busway to a light rail line connecting Woodland Hills, North Hollywood, the Burbank Airport, Pasadena and the Greater San Gabriel Valley Creating a dedicated light rail along Van Nuys Boulevard connecting Sylmar and Van Nuys Civic Center through the communities of Panorama City, Pacoima and the of San Fernando DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Smwt. More Lkly.

Smwt. Less Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

49%

All Residents Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

28%

56%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

33%

37%

All Residents Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

31% 0%

20%

21% 21%

DK/NA

14%

19%

44%

All Residents

No Diff.

7% 7%

16%

25%

19% 8% 7%

23%

40%

60%

36% 80%

77% 16% 75% 20%

18%

8% 10%

12% 8% 11%

5%

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

5%

65% 13% 53% 18%

5%

56% 15% 43% 18%

100%

Q13 r-v (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 5 – San Fernando Valley)

24

Within each respective group, there are no statistical differences in the likelihood of voting with respect to each North County project, with one exception – improving streets near the hospital and medical buildings scores lowest among self-reported likely November 2016 voters. (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Improving the traffic flow along the I-5 freeway in Santa Clarita, Newhall and Castaic by widening the road at key bottlenecks and upgrading the on- and off-ramps north of the 5 and 14 interchange

Building a new highway, also known as the High Desert Corridor, between the 14 freeway in Palmdale and 15 freeway in Victorville, which would be located north of the 138 through Palmdale, Littlerock, Sun Village and Lake Los Angeles DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Smwt. More Lkly.

Smwt. Less Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

51%

All Residents

21%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

42%

26%

All Residents

41%

30%

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

36% 0%

20%

No Diff.

30% 40%

5%

5%

18%

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

5%

72% 8%

6%

68% 7%

15%

10% 14%

7% 60%

DK/NA

71% 11%

17% 8% 67% 8% 80%

100%

Q13 w-z (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 6 – North County) (N=205)

25

North County Continued (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Improving existing streets and constructing new streets to the regional Antelope Valley Hospital and surrounding medical facilities in Lancaster to increase access for emergency vehicles, patients and visitors

Improving the traffic flow along the 14 freeway by widening the road at key bottlenecks, including improving the Avenue S bridge in Palmdale and upgrading the onand off-ramps north of the I-5 and 14 interchange in Canyon Country

Smwt. More Lkly.

Smwt. Less Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

No Diff.

44%

27%

7%

All Residents

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

36%

47%

All Residents

Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters

20%

6%

20%

41% 0%

DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

19%

25% 40%

60%

DK/NA

5%

70% 10%

16%

28%

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

10% 55%

18%

7%

8%

66% 8%

20% 8% 67% 6% 80%

100%

Q13 w-z (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 6 – North County) (N=205)

26

Southeast Los Angeles County residents and self-reported likely November 2016 voters are more likely to support the measure if it adds a carpool and a regular lane on the 5 freeway, improves traffic flow along the 710 freeway and constructs a light rail line from downtown to the Orange County line. (Ranked by All Residents Total More Likely Vote for the Measure) Much More Lkly.

Smwt. More Lkly.

Adding a carpool and a regular All Residents lane on the 5 freeway between the 605 and the 710 freeways Self-Reported Likely through Commerce and Downey Nov 2016 Voters Improving the traffic flow along the 710 freeway by widening the road at key bottlenecks and upgrading All Residents the on- and off-ramps between downtown LA and the Ports of Self-Reported Likely Los Angeles and Long Beach Nov 2016 Voters through such southeast cities as Bell, South Gate and Paramount Constructing a light rail line from All Residents downtown LA to the Orange County Line through Paramount, Self-Reported Likely Nov 2016 Voters Bellflower and Cerritos Extending the Metro Gold Light Rail Line to East Los Angeles All Residents further east toward Whittier along Washington Boulevard through Self-Reported Likely Commerce, Pico Rivera, and Nov 2016 Voters Montebello 0% DRAFT WORK PRODUCT

Smwt. Less Lkly.

Much Less Lkly.

53%

22%

49%

DK/NA

12% 6% 76% 6%

23%

57%

5% 5%

23%

49%

23%

50%

19%

36%

29%

43% 40%

5%

5%

7%

14% 5% 72% 8%

68% 11%

17%

31% 60%

79% 9%

13% 75% 9%

23%

13%

9%

12% 5% 75% 8%

26%

52%

20%

No Diff.

Total Total More Less Lkly. Lkly.

80%

7%

64% 6%

6%

57% 7%

100%

Q13 aa-dd (All residents/Self-reported Definite vote Nov. 2016). While the last list I read you directly benefits all areas of Los Angeles County, I would now like to read you a detailed list of projects or services that will specifically benefit your area. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the measure. (Asked Only Voters In Planning Area 7 – Southeast Los Angeles County) (N=201)

27

For more information, contact:

John Fairbank

Richard Bernard

[email protected]

[email protected]

12100 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 350 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Phone (310) 828-1183 Fax (310) 453-6562

28