Back to the Weekly Home Page

Classifieds

Palo Alto Online

Survey says...think small

by Geoff S. Fein

There's still hope for a library bond in November, but it may not be as ambitious as some desired.

The most recent voter survey showed Palo Altans want a smaller, less expensive bond than the $96 million or $78 million measures proposed by city officials. The inclusion of the Art Center -- a bone of contention among city activists the past few months -- will not sway enough voters to make a difference either way, according to pollsters.

Given such sentiments, the City Council must now piece together a plan that has a chance of succeeding in November. Among the options being considered are limiting the measure to just Children's Library; proposing a $43 million bond for Children's and Mitchell Park libraries and the Mitchell Park Community Center; or simply doing nothing this year.

The council has until August to decide what, if anything, to place on the ballot.

Speaking before the council Monday night, Ruth Bernstein of Evans/McDonough -- a Berkeley-based public opinion research firm that conducted three voter surveys on Palo Alto libraries and city facilities the past year -- said approximately 61 percent of the 600 voters polled in May stated they would support a $96 million bond. That support dropped to 56 percent after voters were told the assessment would cost $51 per $100,000 of a property's assessed value.

Fifty-nine percent of those surveyed would support a $78 million bond. By law, passage of a bond requires a two-thirds vote, or 66.6 percent.

According to Bernstein, a large number of those polled found the library bond proposal too big. Fewer projects with a lower total cost is more likely to meet with success, she said.

Only 51 percent of voters are likely to support some sort of bond, while 27 percent said they would not support any measure at all. That leaves 22 percent undecided -- a group the city should target, Bernstein said.

Among individual projects, considerable support was found for upgrading the Children's Library, which would only cost $6 million and probably not require a bond measure. Bernstein said the project's low price tag accounted for its 72-percent approval rating among those surveyed.

Expansion of the Mitchell Park Community Center ran a distant second, carrying only 59 percent support.

The Art Center, a point of friction between proponents of a libraries-only bond measure and those who support spending $9 million to expand the facility, received the least support. Only 49 percent said they would back expansion of the Art Center.

After survey participants heard the pros and cons for including the center, the percentages changed very little, Bernstein added.

"I don't think (the Art Center) is a significant issue," she said. "It does not appear that removing $9 million for the Art Center will increase the chances for (the bond's) approval."

If they were disappointed by the results, however, City Council members and library supporters showed little sign of such emotions Monday. Instead, they put a positive spin on the survey -- and took a swipe or two at the media for a perceived bias in its coverage of the issue.

"Seventy-six percent agree that libraries should be as good or better than (neighboring) libraries," said Tina Kass, chairwoman of the Library Advisory Commission.

City Councilman Jim Burch, who comes from a background in marketing, said he was deeply disturbed by the way the survey has been portrayed in the media. Statements made by newspapers suggesting a bond measure won't win were untrue, he said.

Councilwoman Nancy Lytle chimed in that it was a "real shame that newspapers did so much to discredit the survey."

The survey did have its share of critics, however.

Many of those polled said the questions were misleading, and some questioned the validity of the results.

Palo Alto resident Wayne Martin told the council the survey didn't discuss the true cost of the bond measure by failing to mention operational costs, including the cost for staffing the new libraries.

He added space currently exists at Mitchell Park Library to expand the facility.

"Nine percent of the building is tied up to non-library uses," he said. "You ought to kick them out."

Stephanie Munoz questioned why the survey didn't specifically ask about the Art Center being on a bond measure, even after the council was assured that question would be asked.

But most of those who spoke Monday showed their support for the library plan.

Karen White, co-founder of Libraries Now! -- a community group advocating a libraries-only bond measure -- said the city should support upgrading Children's and Mitchell Park libraries and hold off on any decision about Main Library and the Art Center.

Mitchell Park Library is an ideal choice because of its proximity to schools, Cubberley community center and the Stevenson House, White said, adding upgrading the Mitchell Park Community Center would also benefit children.

"The Mitchell Park Community Center will incorporate multi-purpose rooms, a dance studio and three classrooms," White said, "two of them specifically for arts and crafts classes."

Burch suggested placing three bond measures -- for $96 million, $78 million and $50 million -- on the November ballot and letting the voters decide which one is best

But Larry Tramutola, the city's bond strategist, said that idea won't work.

"This community wants clarity and leadership. It wants you to present a plan (and) they want it to be a frugal plan," he said. "Three measures creates confusion."

Tramutola said city officials need to create a proposal the public will be willing to work on together.

The current plan calls for renovating or rebuilding Children's, Main and Mitchell Park libraries along with the Mitchell Park Community Center and the Art Center. To do the complete plan would cost approximately $96 million. A scaled-back version would shave $18 million off of the cost.

One survey result that caught the attention of the council was how the public feels about its government.

In the seven months since the first city survey, the level of trust toward the city government fell from a high of 62 percent in November to 57 percent last month.

"It's something to be concerned about," Bernstein said. "Trust relates to tax measures."

It's hard to get support for a tax measure when there is a lack of trust, she said.

E-mail Geoff S. Fein at gfein@paweekly.com