20161214 MB Light Rail Survey Exec Memo71
19 14
10
II McLaughlin & Associates
To: Mayor Philip Levine
From: John McLaughlin, McLaughlin & Associates
Re: Miami Beach, FL — Light Rail Survey — Executive Memo
Date: December 13th, 2016
Summary
McLaughlin & Associates conducted a 300 sample survey of likely general election voters in Miami
Beach, Florida. Our findings show overwhelming support for the creation of a light rail connection
between Miami Beach and the City of Miami.
Nearly three quarters of the voters, 71%, support the creation of a light rail system linking Miami
Beach and the City of Miami. Further, the support enjoys great intensity, as the majority of voters,
56%, "strongly support" the plan.
Do you support or oppose efforts for the city of Miami Beach to work with the County, State
and Federal Government to create a light rail connection between Miami Beach and the City
of Miami to relieve causeway congestion and reduce the number of vehicles that are currently
on Miami Beach streets?
111 n
I n 20
I
I AM IMAM II
80
70
60
50
40
30
10
0
SUPPORT Strong y Smwt. OPPOSE Smwt. Strong y DK/Ref.
Support for the creation of the Light Rail system is across the board by geography, party, and race.
TOTAL
Middle
Beach
North
Beach
South
Beach GOP DEM IND White Hispanic
Support 71 73 77 64 69 74 67 61 77
Oppose 19 21 12 23 23 17 19 30 11
DK/Ref 10 6 11 13 7 10 15 9 12
Conclusion:
Voters in Miami Beach clearly see the creation of a Light Rail system as a solution to the traffic problems that
plague Miami Beach and the entire Miami region. Support for the proposal is broad and wide.
Working together with the federal, state and county governments, Miami Beach has the opportunity, and the
public support, to move forward with plans to alleviate traffic in the region.
rd McLaughlin & Associates
Methodology:
This survey in the City of Miami Beach, Florida was conducted among 300 likely general election voters city-wide
between December 10 and 12, 2016.
All interviews were conducted via telephone by professional bilingual interviewers, allowing respondents the
choice of the language in which they would prefer to conduct the survey. Interview selection was random within
predetermined election units. These units were structured to correlate with voter turnout in a city-wide general
election.
The accuracy of the sample of 300 likely general election voters is within +/- 5.6% at a 95% confidence interval.