Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Patience, please
Next Post: Another look ahead
Posted in:
* Global Strategy Group has a new poll out about the parking meter deal. I’ve seen all of the questions before these questions and it doesn’t set up the issue one way or another. The poll of 501 registered voters was taken May 9-12 and had a margin of error of +/-4.4 percent. It was conducted for the Illinois Restaurant Association, which has ties to Mayor Rahm Emanuel…
* “As you may know, in 2009, the city leased control of Chicago’s parking meters to a private company for a one-time payment of one-point-two billion dollars. Do you support or oppose this parking meter deal?”…
90 percent opposed. That’s what you call a radioactive issue.
* “Recently, Mayor Rahm Emanuel renegotiated some pieces of the parking meter lease agreement and the plan is now waiting for approval by the Chicago City Council. Have you heard anything about this deal between the city and the company leasing the city’s parking meters? [IF YES] Have you heard a lot about this plan, some, or only a little?”…
* “And based on what you know, do you support or oppose the city’s deal to renegotiate the terms of the parking meter lease agreement?”…
So the “uninformed” total isn’t bad. Now onto the “informed vote.”
* “Now I’m going to read you a bit more about the city’s deal to renegotiate the terms of the parking meter lease agreement and afterwards, I’d like to ask you about what you’ve just heard…. As you may know, the city of Chicago and the private firm holding the parking meter lease were in a legal battle over compensation for lost parking meter revenue due to street closures and other issues. Mayor Emanuel recently settled that lawsuit and now the city will be paying 20 million dollars a year less than the company had demanded, amounting to more than a billion dollars over the life of the deal. As part of the settlement, there will be free parking on Sundays in the city’s residential neighborhoods, but metered parking hours will be extended by at least one hour - from 9 pm to 10 pm - the other six days of the week. There will also be a new pay-by-cell option so that drivers can pay with their cell phone rather than going to the meter. Based on this new information, do you support or oppose the city’s deal to renegotiate the terms of the parking meter lease agreement?”…
But…
* “As part of this new deal, some changes would be made to the city’s parking meters… Under the new plan, parking would be free on Sunday in Chicago’s neighborhoods outside of downtown and River North. In exchange for free Sundays, the new plan would extend parking meter hours by one hour to 10 pm the other six days of the week. Residential parking in neighborhoods that ends at 6pm will continue to end at the same time. Within downtown and River North, parking would not be free on Sundays and parking hours would be extended by three hours until midnight the other six days. . Which system do you prefer? Do you prefer the new plan with free parking on Sundays in most neighborhoods or do you prefer the existing system with shorter hours on the other six days?”…
While a majority supports the new plan, it’s not exactly overwhelming.
Opposition to the plan is limited to the 42nd Ward (52% prefer the existing system). However, even though residents in the 42nd Ward will not receive free Sundays and will have extended hours of operation, nearly a third of respondents in the 42nd prefer the new plan (30%).
* In other polling news, this is pretty much what I believe…
Chicago voters in a Tribune/WGN poll have a message for Cubs executives and Wrigleyville rooftop owners locked in a feud over the team’s proposed ballpark overhaul: A plague on both your houses.
Nearly half said they side with neither the Cubs nor the rooftop owners in the ongoing debate to renovate Wrigley Field, the poll showed. The team’s efforts were backed by 28 percent of voters while the rooftop owners were backed by 21 percent.
* Graphic…
More…
The wealthiest voters were more likely to side with the Rickettses. Among those making more than $100,000 a year, 40 percent sided with the North Side team owners while only 24 percent backed the rooftops. The remaining 36 percent didn’t take sides.
Younger voters ages 18-35 were almost equally split — 30 percent for the Cubs and 29 percent for the rooftop owners.
Geographically, voters in North Side wards sided with the Cubs, 43 percent, to 19 percent for the rooftop owners, while 37 percent sided with neither.
* Meanwhile, if the latest Chicago Tribune poll is correct, Chicagoans have been all over the map on a city casino for the past few years…
The latest poll found that 49 percent of Chicago voters surveyed support a casino while 43 percent oppose it. Those numbers are nearly flipped from an October survey that had 49 percent of city voters opposed to a statewide gambling expansion that included a Chicago casino, compared with 40 percent who supported it.
Historically, Chicagoans appear to have hedged their bets on the gambling proposition. In February 2012, 54 percent of city voters backed gambling expansion. In a December 2010 poll, 47 percent supported a city-owned casino.
So, support is up nine points since October, but down five since a year ago February, but about the same as December 2010.
* Young voters and whites appear to be the most in favor…
The new poll indicated that younger voters by far were the most supportive of a Chicago-based casino. Fully 56 percent of voters ages 18-35 backed bringing gambling to the city, compared with 40 percent who disagreed.
The latest survey also found a racial gap in the support of expanded gambling. Among white voters surveyed, 54 percent supported a casino with just 38 percent opposed. African-American voters were evenly split at 46 percent, and Latino voters narrowly backed a casino, 49 percent to 46 percent.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 10:42 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Patience, please
Next Post: Another look ahead
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The 2nd image is the same as the first.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 10:50 am
Helping the rooftops is like buying a new keyboard for a computer hacker.
Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 10:55 am
In the Wrigley poll what does it mean to back neither side? That there’s another set of choices that was polled? That they (literally) have no opinion (and could care less)?
Given choice A or choice B — how does one arrive at “neither”? What is the thinking here?
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 10:58 am
Anon, thanks. Oops. Fixed.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 10:59 am
I think you can kiss the Gambling bill good bye! It is evident that Gov. Quinn is holding it hostage. He is telling people he will not support it unless a pension bill is approved first but yet who is going to trust him on that. I’m thinking there are senators and representatives out there who would not trust him on that deal so it looks like the gambling bill is a mute point! Also Rep. Lang came out last night saying he might have to tweak it again for the Governor such as no slots for the airport. If you start making changes this late in the game the ship will have people going overboard and not support it. This is just my prediction no gambling bill and no pension agreement! So what do we have a misfit Governor and also senators and representatives who won’t do their jobs. Time for term limits for everyone maybe! What is your prediction?
Comment by Coach Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:02 am
I oppose the meter changes because they unfairly punish River North bars and restaurants as opposed to similar places in Wicker Park or Lincoln Park. Why should parking be free on Sundays at North Pond but not at Naha? Why give the one an advantage?
That being said, while I think the proposal is bad for business in the 42nd Ward, it does not seem bad for residents.
The 42nd Ward is unlike most wards in that most residents do not park on the street. This doesn’t impact garage so most 42nd Ward residents will not see any impact that is different from the residents of any other ward.
Comment by Skeeter Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:06 am
The indifference to the battle between billionaires and millionaires in Wrigleyville is well-deserved.
A pox on both, indeed. They’re still charging World Series-contender prices for a AAA-lineup.
Cubs attendance is down 4,800 a game compared to last year at this time.
Curiously, Sox attendance is up over 800 a game. Must be that renowned South Sider sunny optimism!
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:09 am
===Must be that renowned South Sider sunny optimism!===
Well it ain’t their record, that’s for sure.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:14 am
===Well it ain’t their record, that’s for sure. ===
No kidding.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:16 am
Chicago Teachers Union is going to sue re: school closings, alleging civil rights violations.
More PR for Karen Lewis’ 2015 mayoral run?
Comment by Ravenswood Right Winger Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:21 am
Regarding casinos, Rahm has shown his hand and it seems clear he wants the Chicago one at McCormick Place.
Unless, of course, you believe that $300 million entertainment venue is for 18 DePaul basketball games, which will, of course, leverage two big hotel developments (Coach Ray must be coming back, along with Mark Aguirre and Terry Cummings).
A couple points to this: McCormick Place officials have maintained they don’t want a casino near their show floors. One of their selling points has been that unlike Vegas, show attendees stay on the floor at Mac Place, rather than go gamble.
Once Emanuel comes down to Springfield to grab some of that Mac Place bond money, it will be interesting to see how Wirtz and Reinsdorf play it.
I doubt if they’ll sit still for a taxpayer-financed competing entertainment venue to United Center.
Back in the day, Dollar Bill Wirtz and Reinsdorf invited Mike McCaskey to join them on the West Side in developing a multi-venue sports complex a la the Meadowlands.
McCaskey played along, then went behind their backs and tried to cut a deal with Edgar for a domed stadium at McCormick Place.
When Wirtz and Reinsdorf caught wind of that, they sent an army of lobsters down to Springfield and beat McCaskey so badly that his momma fired him. And the Bears didn’t get a stadium deal for years.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:23 am
I got the call about the Emanuel poll. I just took it to be an informational poll–they didn’t care what I thought, they just wanted me to know Rahm was out there working the issue.
Except I don’t own a car–a question someone should have thought to include if they’re polling in the city, where car ownership is optional for a great many people. I think the parking meter deal stinks, but it really doesn’t have much of an impact on my life and Rahm attempting to weasle out of it makes me think his priorities are quite frankly whack. He doesn’t care that children will be killed because he’s closed their neighborhood school, but people outside the Loop and River North will get to park longer for free.
Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 11:35 am
“He doesn’t care that children will be killed because he’s closed their neighborhood school, but people outside the Loop and River North will get to park longer for free. ”
There isn’t anything close to 90% opposition to the school closings.
Comment by Chris Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 1:35 pm
I don’t care how little or how much opposition there is–making kids walk through multiple gang territories is going to get some of them killed.
Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Wednesday, May 15, 13 @ 3:57 pm