The Wisconsin Transportation Builders Association and the Wisconsin Realtors Association subsidized a Tarrance Group survey that resulted in the Republican property tax focus in the Joint Finance Committee. Here is an abstract of the survey.

Pocketbook issues continue to dominate the issue matrix, with 24% saying that jobs and the economy is the most important issue for the Governor and state legislature to work on, followed by 19% taxes and 14% the budget deficit. That's a 57% pocketbook focused.

Doyle's job approval hovers at 49%, just down slightly from our last survey, with 25% disapproving, and 25% remaining unsure.

Seventy-six percent (76%) agree that Doyle cannot call his budget a "no tax increase state budget" if property taxes increase as a result of it.

However, there is nothing to indicate that voters have had the Doyle budget defined as a cause of property tax increases. The continuing, although lukewarm, favorables with Republicans suggest that the base has yet to be told the truth.

Wisconsin voters are more concerned about the looming threat of tax increases, specifically property tax increases, than they are the threat of cuts to government services.

  Fifty-seven percent (57%) are more concerned about tax increases in light of the budget deficit, while 35% are more concerned about cuts to government services.

Given four types of possible tax increases, 54% are most concerned about property tax increases, and 26% about income tax increases, with just 6% sales tax and 2% cigarette tax.

On an importance scale of 0 to 10, 42% say it is extremely important (a "10"), and another 32% say it is very important (a "7," "8," or "9") to "put strict limits on state and local government spending." That is 74% combined, the highest scoring among any of the principles.

Note that limiting local governments is palatable to voters only when  accompanied by limits on state governments.  Information in previous surveys suggests that the state putting limits on localities and school districts did not score well when they stand alone.

  However, in this survey, 84% of voters said that they would be more likely to support limiting local spending if they knew that the state was also strictly limiting its own spending.

Voters are split over whether local governments can cut spending and maintain services. However, a majority is still interested in property tax protection, regardless of the possible impacts on local services.

Overall, voters are split over whether local governments can cut spending and maintain services or whether local governments will have to raise property taxes to maintain services. Forty-nine percent (49%) say that they can cut, while 41% say that they will have to raise taxes.

Given a strong counterargument that "a property tax freeze will devastate local services such as schools, and police and fire protection" that 33% agreed with, a majority of 58% of voters agreed with the statement that "property taxes are too high and state lawmakers should protect property taxpayers by freezing property tax increases."

  The 33% are predominantly core Democratic voters. While there would definitely be hits taken from the localities screaming about drastic cutbacks, voters are willing to accept belt-tightening, so long as it is across the board.

And as noted, the limits to local government spending become more palatable once voters know that the state government is also going to strictly limit its own spending. Even the 33% who said cuts would devastate localities say that they would be more likely to support cuts knowing that the state was cutting too.

Most voters in the state are willing to allow some level of property tax increase, especially once they learn the extent of the property tax increase that would occur because of the Governor's budget.

Once informed that property taxes would have to increase by almost ten percent to ensure no cuts to local services, a quarter of respondents (25%) stick to favoring no property tax increase, while 29% would be willing to go somewhere between one and four percent, 20% would be willing to allow property taxes to increase 5%, and 19% would allow 6% or higher.

Asked another way, 53% of voters would prefer limiting the growth of the property tax bill to the rate of inflation, while 3 5 % would like to freeze property tax rates for two years, and 6% would allow local governments to raise property taxes as much as they think is necessary.

Given the low levels of information that currently exists among the voters, the freeze concept in its purity remains more favorable. However, if voters hear a unified Republican message that informs them about the truth of Doyle's budget, the limiting the growth of voters' property tax increases is the preferable opinion, and a freeze may become too draconian.

Finally, protecting Seniors should remain a key budget principle to maintain throughout the process. Seventy-two percent (72%) say that it is either extremely or very important to "protect and take care of Seniors." Part of "telling the truth" about Doyle's budget is pointing out how the property tax increases balance the budget on the backs of Seniors.

Important Findings

1. Tolerance for Property Tax Increases.

Respondents were next told that "the nonpartisan legislative fiscal bureau has reported that if state aid to local governments is reduced, that property taxes would have to increase by almost ten percent to ensure that there would be no cut to local services, like police and fire protection." They were then asked to volunteer on a scale of zero to ten percent, how much they would be willing to allow property taxes in their area to increase to avoid cuts in police and fire protection.

Twenty-five percent (25%) said zero percent, and would not be willing to allow property taxes to increase at all. Another 29% would allow property taxes to increase between one and four percent. Twenty percent (20%) would allow taxes to increase five percent, and 19% would allow taxes to increase between six and ten percent. Eight percent (8%) were unsure.

Alternatively, 53% of voters would prefer to "limit the growth if your property tax bill to the rate of inflation, which is about three percent." Meanwhile, 35% prefer to "freeze your property tax bill for the next two years." Just 6% want to "allow local governments to raise property taxes as much as they think is necessary."

2. Attitudes on Local Government

Given that cuts have to be made to state aid to local governments, 49% of voters think that local governments can cut spending and still maintain services (41% strongly), while 41 % believe local governments will have to raise property taxes to maintain services (28% strongly). Those who believe they can cut and maintain are more intense in that opinion.

Republicans are more likely to say that the local governments can maintain services, although Democrats are only slightly more likely to say that they must raise taxes.

The selection was among two viewpoints about property taxes. Fifty-eight percent (58%) agreed with the statement that "property taxes are too high and state lawmakers should protect property taxpayers by freezing property tax increases," while 33% agreed that "a property tax freeze will devastate local services such as schools, and police and fire protection."

The voters driving the opinion that it will devastate local services tend to come from Dane County (42%), urban voters (38%), working women (39%), voters under age 45 (39%, with just 25% of Seniors agreeing), Democrats (39%, especially younger), liberals (49%), union household voters (39%), and those who rent their home (43%).

Finally, assuming that the state is going to limit local government spending by freezing property taxes, 83% of voters say that they would be more likely to support it if they knew that the state was also going to be strictly limiting its own spending (56% strongly). Just 7% would be less likely.

The 83% statewide includes 81% of both Democrats and Independents and reaches 88% more likely among Republicans. Ninety percent (90%) of the very conservative are more likely to support it.