FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION

FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street, Suite 900 San Francisco, California 94108 415-392-5763 Tabulations From a Survey of California Registered Voters About a Proposal by Some of the State s Northern-most Counties to Secede from California or Designate Themselves as a Territory - prepared for the - Capitol Alert and the Sacramento Bee December 11, 2013

Introduction This volume presents the statistical data developed from a Field Poll survey of registered voters in California about a proposal by some of the state s Northern-most counties to Secede from California or designate themselves as a territory. The survey was conducted by The Field Poll among a representative sample of 1,002 registered voters in California conducted by telephone in English and Spanish November 14 - December 5, 2013. Sampling The sample was developed from telephone listings of individual voters selected randomly from a listing of statewide voter registration rolls. Once a voter s name and telephone had been selected, interviews are attempted only with the specified voter. Interviews can be conducted on either the voter s landline or cell phone, depending on the source of the telephone listing from the voter file and the preference of the voter. Prior to the start of data collection, professionally-trained telephone interviewers were briefed with regard to the survey s proper calling and interviewing procedures by the Study Director. This session provided both interviewers and supervisors with an overview of the study and includes a question-by-question review of all items in the survey. Interviewers then completed survey interviews by telephone through the computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) system. CATI controls the telephone scripts read to individual respondents by displaying the appropriate questionnaire items and their valid response code alternatives in their proper sequence on computer screens at each interviewer's booth. The interviewer then reads each question aloud to the respondent from the screen and enters each respondent's pre-coded answer category through the keyboard directly to a computer disk. All answers are automatically stored in computer memory. In order to bring hard-to-reach respondents into the survey, up to six attempts (an initial call plus five callbacks) were made to each telephone number selected for inclusion into the sample. Callbacks were made at different times and on different days to increase the probability of finding voters available for the interview. Where possible, appointments are made at specified dates and times to maximize convenience and cooperation rates.

Data Processing The data file resulting from CATI interviewing is itself virtually error-free. Even so, a final series of data checks were performed by means of a specially designed cleaning program that scrutinizes each respondent record for internally inconsistent information. Once the data were determined to be clean and error-free, the overall sample was weighted to align it to its proper statewide proportions by demographic characteristics of the state s registered voter population.

Guide to Reading the Tables The following is an explanation of the detailed statistical tabulations contained in this report: The question or questions upon which the data are based is shown at the top of each table Tables are percentaged vertically with the raw percentage base appearing at the top of each column. The data have been weighted to known parameters of the statewide registered voter population. All percentages and frequencies reported in each table are therefore weighted tabulations. In instances where percentages are calculated on small bases (e.g., when the base is fewer than 100 respondents) the reader is urged to interpret the data with caution, since results are subject to larger levels of sampling error. Throughout the tables an asterisk is used to denote a value of less than 1/2 of 1%. A hyphen indicates zero value. On some tables the percentages may add to more than 100% due to multiple mentions. Bases of subgroups used in the tabulations may add to less than the total number of respondents due to some respondents not reporting that characteristic.

Regional Definitions The following are some of the definitions applicable to some of the voter subgroups reported in this volume: Southern California: Northern California: Coastal Counties: Inland counties: Los Angeles: San Diego/Orange: Other South: SF Bay Area: Central Valley: Other North: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Imperial, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Kern, and San Luis Obispo counties all other 48 California counties San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Monterey, Santa Cruz, San Mateo, San Francisco, Contra Costa, Alameda, Marin, Napa, Solano, Sonoma, Santa Clara, Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte counties all other 38 California counties Los Angeles County San Diego County and Orange counties San Bernardino, Riverside, Imperial, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo San Francisco, Marin, Napa, Sonoma, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo Butte, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehema, Tulare, Yolo, and Yuba Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Del Norte, El Dorado, Humboldt, Inyo, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa, Mendocino, Monterey, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Plumas, San Benito, Santa Cruz, Sierra, Siskiyou, Trinity, and Tuolumne

Estimates of Sampling Error In any survey based on a sampling, there is some sampling error introduced into the data by the process of sampling itself. When the sample has been drawn using random processes, it is possible to apply probability principles to determine the potential range of such error. While survey samples of human populations rarely, if ever, meet all of the criteria theoretically required for the application of these principles, it is customary to use them as an approximation of error that is introduced as a result of sampling. The table below shows the range of error associated with samples of various sizes at the 95% confidence level, which is customary for most public opinion surveys. For example, if 50% of the overall sample of registered voters answered yes to a specific question, this statistic would have a sampling error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. This means that there is a 95% chance that had the overall population of registered voters statewide been interviewed using the same questionnaire and methods, the results of such a census would yield a result between 46.8% and 53.2%. The same procedure can be used to estimate the sample error ranges of any other statistic contained in this report. Approximate percentage distribution of replies to question Approximate sample size 10% 30% 50% 70% 90% 100 +/- 6.0 +/- 9.2 +/- 10.0 +/- 9.2 +/- 6.0 300 +/- 3.5 +/- 5.3 +/- 5.8 +/- 5.3 +/- 3.5 500 +/- 2.7 +/- 4.1 +/- 4.5 +/- 4.1 +/- 2.7 800 +/- 2.1 +/- 3.2 +/- 3.5 +/- 3.2 +/- 2.1 1000 +/- 1.9 +/- 2.9 +/- 3.2 +/- 2.9 +/- 1.9 There are many other possible sources of error other than sampling variability in this and any other public opinion survey. The overall design and execution of the survey minimized the potential for these other sources of error.

Questions Asked Local government officials in some of the state s rural, northern-most counties have proposed splitting off from California and joining with several southern Oregon counties to create a new state called Jefferson. Do you approve or disapprove of allowing these rural northern-most counties to withdraw from California and form a new state called Jefferson along with several counties from southern Oregon? Others are proposing that these counties designate themselves as Jefferson territory, which would technically remain part of California and Oregon, but would be a first step toward creating a new state. Do you approve or disapprove of California s rural, northern-most counties and Oregon s southern counties calling themselves Jefferson territory, but remaining part of their respective states?

Late November/Early December 2013 Field Poll Table 100 Page 100 Q28. Local government officials in some of the state's rural, northern-most counties have proposed splitting off from California and joining with several southern Oregon counties to create a new state called Jefferson. Do you approve or disapprove of allowing these rural northern-most counties to withdraw from California and form a new state called Jefferson along with several counties from southern Oregon? Base : Registered Voters Region Area Party Regis. Congres- Gender Like- ----------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------- sional ----------- ly District June Orng/ Cen- S.F. Non- Party Seat Prim- South North In- San Other tral Bay Other Part/ ----------- Fe- ary Total Cal Cal Coast land LA Diego South Vally Area North Dem Rep Other Dem Rep Male male Voter ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== Unweighted 1002 585 417 703 299 259 153 155 158 215 62 464 275 263 715 287 491 511 605 Weighted 1002 594 408 703 299 263 167 149 164 209 52 438 290 274 703 299 469 533 603 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 APPROVE 246 131 114 143 103 47 40 40 55 42 21 80 96 70 153 93 137 108 153 24.5 22.1 28.0 20.3 34.4 17.7 24.1 27.2 33.4 20.3 41.3 18.3 33.0 25.5 21.8 31.0 29.3 20.3 25.4 DISAPPROVE 591 358 233 435 156 169 96 84 91 127 24 284 155 152 434 157 268 323 352 59.0 60.2 57.1 61.8 52.3 64.2 57.4 56.7 55.4 61.0 46.8 64.9 53.3 55.5 61.7 52.5 57.2 60.5 58.4 NO OPINION 166 105 61 126 40 48 31 24 18 39 6 74 40 52 116 50 63 103 98 16.5 17.7 14.9 17.9 13.3 18.1 18.4 16.1 11.2 18.7 11.9 16.9 13.7 19.0 16.5 16.6 13.5 19.2 16.2 Adds to: ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Rows 1002 594 408 703 299 263 167 149 164 209 52 438 290 274 703 299 469 533 603 Respondents 1002 594 408 703 299 263 167 149 164 209 52 438 290 274 703 299 469 533 603 Project #2013-003 Field Research Corporation

Late November/Early December 2013 Field Poll Table 101 Page 101 Q28. Local government officials in some of the state's rural, northern-most counties have proposed splitting off from California and joining with several southern Oregon counties to create a new state called Jefferson. Do you approve or disapprove of allowing these rural northern-most counties to withdraw from California and form a new state called Jefferson along with several counties from southern Oregon? Base : Registered Voters Age Ethnicity Political ideology Marital Status ----------------------------- ----------------------- ----------------------------- Parent of ----------------- child under Mar- White Strng Mod. Mid. 18 ried/ non- Asian Con- Con- of Mod. Strng ----------- Live Sprtd Never 65 or Hisp- La- / serv- serv- the lib- lib- toge- Dvecd Mar- Total 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-64 Older anic tino Black Other ative ative Road eral eral Yes No ther Widwd ried ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== Unweighted 1002 170 187 133 282 230 567 238 67 116 175 127 393 124 148 278 709 569 177 234 Weighted 1002 186 160 167 274 215 615 233 59 102 180 116 402 123 151 274 719 574 178 236 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 APPROVE 246 41 49 49 58 48 166 45 8 26 51 32 103 22 30 86 159 151 41 49 24.5 22.3 30.5 29.4 21.2 22.4 26.9 19.4 13.3 25.3 28.5 27.7 25.5 18.3 19.7 31.2 22.1 26.3 23.3 20.9 DISAPPROVE 591 118 83 86 165 139 348 153 42 56 100 66 233 79 96 141 444 323 110 150 59.0 63.5 51.6 51.5 60.2 64.8 56.5 65.8 71.2 54.5 55.2 57.2 58.0 64.5 63.8 51.2 61.8 56.3 61.7 63.6 NO OPINION 166 26 29 32 51 27 102 35 9 21 29 18 67 21 25 48 116 100 27 37 16.5 14.2 17.9 19.2 18.6 12.8 16.6 14.9 15.5 20.2 16.3 15.1 16.5 17.3 16.5 17.6 16.2 17.4 15.0 15.6 Adds to: ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Rows 1002 186 160 167 274 215 615 233 59 102 180 116 402 123 151 274 719 574 178 236 Respondents 1002 186 160 167 274 215 615 233 59 102 180 116 402 123 151 274 719 574 178 236 Project #2013-003 Field Research Corporation

Late November/Early December 2013 Field Poll Table 102 Page 102 Q28. Local government officials in some of the state's rural, northern-most counties have proposed splitting off from California and joining with several southern Oregon counties to create a new state called Jefferson. Do you approve or disapprove of allowing these rural northern-most counties to withdraw from California and form a new state called Jefferson along with several counties from southern Oregon? Base : Registered Voters Union Affiliated Education Household Income Household Religion Tea Party ----------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------- ----------------------- ID H.S. Some Yes ----------- Grad- Col- Post ----------- Prot/ uate lege/ Col- Grad- Less More Publc Other No Not or Trade lege uate Than $20 $40- $60- Than Empl- Chris Cath- Pref- A lot at Total less Schol Grad Work -20K -40K -60K -100K $100K No Total oyee -tian olic Other ence /some all ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== Unweighted 1002 180 306 294 208 160 163 134 235 202 801 163 102 378 257 147 179 355 594 Weighted 1002 176 298 305 214 162 151 134 242 209 811 157 104 378 264 144 182 365 588 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 APPROVE 246 42 87 70 47 44 39 35 58 48 193 48 34 102 50 40 46 126 110 24.5 23.7 29.0 22.9 22.0 27.0 26.1 26.0 23.9 23.1 23.8 30.3 32.5 27.0 19.1 28.0 25.5 34.5 18.7 DISAPPROVE 591 115 163 176 130 97 90 74 138 128 476 91 57 209 174 79 105 187 383 59.0 65.4 54.7 57.7 60.9 59.7 59.7 55.1 57.0 61.2 58.7 57.6 54.8 55.2 66.1 55.1 57.5 51.2 65.0 NO OPINION 166 19 49 59 36 22 21 25 46 33 141 19 13 67 39 24 31 52 95 16.5 10.9 16.3 19.3 17.0 13.3 14.2 19.0 19.2 15.7 17.4 12.2 12.7 17.8 14.8 16.9 16.9 14.3 16.2 Adds to: ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Rows 1002 176 298 305 214 162 151 134 242 209 811 157 104 378 264 144 182 365 588 Respondents 1002 176 298 305 214 162 151 134 242 209 811 157 104 378 264 144 182 365 588 Project #2013-003 Field Research Corporation

Late November/Early December 2013 Field Poll Table 103 Page 103 Q29. Others are proposing that these counties designate themselves as Jefferson territory, which would technically remain part of California and Oregon, but would be a first step toward creating a new state. Do you approve or disapprove of California's rural, northern-most counties and Oregon's southern counties calling themselves Jefferson territory, but remaining part of their respective states? Base : Registered Voters Region Area Party Regis. Congres- Gender Like- ----------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------- sional ----------- ly District June Orng/ Cen- S.F. Non- Party Seat Prim- South North In- San Other tral Bay Other Part/ ----------- Fe- ary Total Cal Cal Coast land LA Diego South Vally Area North Dem Rep Other Dem Rep Male male Voter ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== Unweighted 1002 585 417 703 299 259 153 155 158 215 62 464 275 263 715 287 491 511 605 Weighted 1002 594 408 703 299 263 167 149 164 209 52 438 290 274 703 299 469 533 603 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 APPROVE 273 146 127 171 102 62 37 43 57 58 17 103 97 73 185 88 149 124 160 27.2 24.5 31.2 24.3 34.1 23.4 22.3 28.6 34.9 27.8 32.0 23.5 33.4 26.8 26.3 29.5 31.7 23.3 26.6 DISAPPROVE 580 357 223 420 160 159 97 91 87 118 27 268 154 158 418 162 270 310 352 57.9 60.0 54.7 59.8 53.4 60.7 58.5 61.1 53.0 56.6 52.8 61.2 52.9 57.7 59.5 54.1 57.6 58.1 58.4 NO OPINION 149 92 58 112 38 42 32 15 20 32 8 67 40 42 100 49 50 99 91 14.9 15.4 14.1 15.9 12.6 15.9 19.2 10.3 12.1 15.6 15.2 15.3 13.7 15.5 14.3 16.4 10.7 18.6 15.0 Adds to: ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Rows 1002 594 408 703 299 263 167 149 164 209 52 438 290 274 703 299 469 533 603 Respondents 1002 594 408 703 299 263 167 149 164 209 52 438 290 274 703 299 469 533 603 Project #2013-003 Field Research Corporation

Late November/Early December 2013 Field Poll Table 104 Page 104 Q29. Others are proposing that these counties designate themselves as Jefferson territory, which would technically remain part of California and Oregon, but would be a first step toward creating a new state. Do you approve or disapprove of California's rural, northern-most counties and Oregon's southern counties calling themselves Jefferson territory, but remaining part of their respective states? Base : Registered Voters Age Ethnicity Political ideology Marital Status ----------------------------- ----------------------- ----------------------------- Parent of ----------------- child under Mar- White Strng Mod. Mid. 18 ried/ non- Asian Con- Con- of Mod. Strng ----------- Live Sprtd Never 65 or Hisp- La- / serv- serv- the lib- lib- toge- Dvecd Mar- Total 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-64 Older anic tino Black Other ative ative Road eral eral Yes No ther Widwd ried ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== Unweighted 1002 170 187 133 282 230 567 238 67 116 175 127 393 124 148 278 709 569 177 234 Weighted 1002 186 160 167 274 215 615 233 59 102 180 116 402 123 151 274 719 574 178 236 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 APPROVE 273 52 52 57 68 44 176 57 8 30 44 34 118 33 38 92 178 162 49 60 27.2 28.1 32.2 34.1 24.8 20.6 28.6 24.6 14.1 29.3 24.4 29.6 29.3 26.9 25.6 33.6 24.8 28.2 27.8 25.2 DISAPPROVE 580 116 86 84 156 138 343 148 43 54 105 68 230 71 87 139 436 323 101 149 57.9 62.1 53.7 50.0 57.0 64.5 55.8 63.5 72.6 52.7 58.5 58.7 57.2 58.1 58.0 50.8 60.6 56.2 57.0 62.9 NO OPINION 149 18 22 27 50 32 96 28 8 18 31 14 54 18 25 43 105 90 27 28 14.9 9.8 14.0 16.0 18.2 15.0 15.6 12.0 13.2 18.0 17.1 11.7 13.5 15.0 16.5 15.5 14.6 15.6 15.2 11.8 Adds to: ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Rows 1002 186 160 167 274 215 615 233 59 102 180 116 402 123 151 274 719 574 178 236 Respondents 1002 186 160 167 274 215 615 233 59 102 180 116 402 123 151 274 719 574 178 236 Project #2013-003 Field Research Corporation

Late November/Early December 2013 Field Poll Table 105 Page 105 Q29. Others are proposing that these counties designate themselves as Jefferson territory, which would technically remain part of California and Oregon, but would be a first step toward creating a new state. Do you approve or disapprove of California's rural, northern-most counties and Oregon's southern counties calling themselves Jefferson territory, but remaining part of their respective states? Base : Registered Voters Union Affiliated Education Household Income Household Religion Tea Party ----------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------- ----------------------- ID H.S. Some Yes ----------- Grad- Col- Post ----------- Prot/ uate lege/ Col- Grad- Less More Publc Other No Not or Trade lege uate Than $20 $40- $60- Than Empl- Chris Cath- Pref- A lot at Total less Schol Grad Work -20K -40K -60K -100K $100K No Total oyee -tian olic Other ence /some all ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== Unweighted 1002 180 306 294 208 160 163 134 235 202 801 163 102 378 257 147 179 355 594 Weighted 1002 176 298 305 214 162 151 134 242 209 811 157 104 378 264 144 182 365 588 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 APPROVE 273 50 94 73 55 49 43 40 67 50 217 52 37 104 55 50 58 124 136 27.2 28.7 31.5 23.8 25.8 30.6 28.4 29.9 27.6 24.1 26.7 33.1 35.5 27.5 20.9 34.7 32.1 33.9 23.1 DISAPPROVE 580 105 164 176 128 87 91 75 140 124 472 87 54 219 171 74 92 192 368 57.9 59.8 54.9 57.7 59.9 53.6 60.2 56.2 57.8 59.5 58.3 55.0 51.9 57.9 64.9 51.3 50.3 52.5 62.5 NO OPINION 149 20 41 56 31 26 17 19 35 34 122 19 13 55 38 20 32 50 85 14.9 11.5 13.7 18.5 14.3 15.8 11.4 13.9 14.7 16.4 15.0 11.9 12.6 14.6 14.2 14.0 17.5 13.6 14.4 Adds to: ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Rows 1002 176 298 305 214 162 151 134 242 209 811 157 104 378 264 144 182 365 588 Respondents 1002 176 298 305 214 162 151 134 242 209 811 157 104 378 264 144 182 365 588 Project #2013-003 Field Research Corporation