By a margin of two to one, voters in Queen Anne’s County are in favor of the State Department security training center that is proposed on a 2,000-acre site adjacent to Tuckahoe State Park.
That’s according to a poll by Hart Research that randomly selected likely voters, who were questioned on January 16-17.
Hart Research reported that initial reactions to the facility among voters countywide are “generally positive.”
Pollster Fred Yang said, “Moreover, it is the rare issue that cuts through partisanship, with roughly equal proportions of Democrats, Independents and Republicans on the same side.”
Support for the training center, Yang reported, “is strongest among voters who have been paying the most attention.”
He added, “When provided with details about the positive benefits of the project, 66 percent of voters surveyed say that have a favorable reaction, 11 percent are neutral and 21 percent are unfavorable.”
Yant said voters were provided with the leading arguments made by proponents and opponents, and then re-asked their attitudes about the project.
“After providing equal numbers of positive and negative comments,” Yang explained, “three-fifths (60 percent) of county voters say they are favorable. . . 12 percent are neutral and 27 percent are unfavorable.”
Stephen Meehan, spokesman for the Eastern Shore Leadership Council, which commissioned the poll, said it showed that “jobs and the economy” is the number one issue in Queen Anne’s County.
“This view is not surprising with nearly 2,000 unemployed county residents, record foreclosures, and bleak prospects for 2010 high school graduates,” said Meehan.
He added, “This poll should help citizens and elected leaders to identify the public support for this project and to dispel the false impressions created by county politicians and special interest groups working to stop this project.”
Hart Research is one of the leading public opinion and market research forms. Since 1989 it has conducted regular polling for NBC News and The Wall Street Journal.
Warrior Bob Kramer says
<<<>>>
I guess this means that the QAC commissioners haven’t been paying attention as closely as they should.
Jay Falstad says
A PRESS RELEASE FROM QUEEN ANNE’ CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION
Queen Anne’s Conservation Association Calls FASTC Survey Unreliable and Self-Serving.
Responding to a recently released survey, and a press release by an unknown Eastern shore group, Queen Anne’s Conservation Association says it’s not surprised by the survey results supposedly showing citizen support for the proposed Hard-Skills facility in Queen Anne’s County.
“Well, of course they got that result,” said QACA Communications Director, Jay Falstad.
“The supporters of the Hard-Skills facility paid for this poll, and everyone knows that polls can be designed to get a pre-determined result. We’ve seen the questions, and many of them were loaded questions based on misrepresentations. The citizens of Queen Anne’s County might not have the tens of thousands of dollars to buy skewed political polls, but we have the voice of the people, and the local people will not be railroaded by a few Federal bureaucrats backed up by high-priced, out of town consultants,” Falstad said.
“In the end”, said Falstad, “the citizens have spoken out against this proposed Hard-Skills facility at least five separate times, including two Commissioner meetings, one where the Commissioners withdrew their support for the proposal. Further, this unreliable poll is utterly inconsistent with the nearly thousand citizens who packed the Queen Anne’s County H.S on January 5 to attend the GSA meeting. By most accounts, 70% of those attending citizens were opposed…and perhaps 30% were in favor of FASTC.”
Steve Kline says
This is a textbook example of a “push poll.”
The notion that this facility has a two-to-one margin of support doesn’t pass the laugh test for anyone who attended any of the public forums and hearings that have thus far taken place.
James Mills says
Where is Falstead getting his numbers for support his 70/30 claim regarding the HS meeting?
I was there at both meeting and I did not see anyone taking any sort of poll.
Falstead is criticizing a poll taken by a third-party as being biased —and then goes on to support his own twisted claims with statements like “By most accounts..” and “perhaps..”?!
Does he seriously get paid to make statements like this??????
Thomas F says
Isn’t that always the case? When a poll taken by a highly respected, independent research firm (https://www.hartresearch.com/) comes out with results that one group doesn’t like, they immediately cry foul. “They manipulated the poll….they have more money…..we’re louder so we’re the majority…..there have been improprieties, please investigate”…..wah, wah, wah. At least the results can be substantiated! Here a CLAIM is made that 70% of citizens in attendance on the 5th were opposed. WHO TOOK THAT POLL? WHERE ARE THOSE RESULTS DOCUMENTED?
As always………laughable retort by the misinformed, unbending, irrational opposition.
Rachel says
“Further, this unreliable poll is utterly inconsistent with the nearly thousand citizens who packed the Queen Anne’s County H.S on January 5 to attend the GSA meeting. By most accounts, 70% of those attending citizens were opposed…and perhaps 30% were in favor of FASTC.”
70 to 30 based on…? 70 to 30 Of The small group who spoke, maybe. To say that 70/30 was the split of all of the few hundred who attended that meeting is conjecture.
It reminds me of Eric Wargotz’s statement using “the majority” of QA’s citizens – NO – maybe a majority of the people speaking their minds publically – but that group is it’s own entity – for or against – it is not an absolute nor a direct reflection of the entire population of QA’s County.
Rachel says
The poll picked a random selection of resident’s to get a better overall view – this group was picked thru a professional polling process – vs the entity of vocal citizens mentioned in my comment above who are claiming – or being claimed as – having more opponents as the majority.
TY, rcg
Steve Kline says
We should note the irony in Thomas’ comment. Those who don’t like the results of a poll, attempt to poke holes in the results, if I may be allowed to paraphrase him. Yet those who agree with the results of a poll, use them as an indefatigable shield, never questioning their veracity.
I am not claiming any level of support or opposition to the facility. But let’s see the questions. Let’s see the sample size. Why wouldn’t a “highly respected” polling firm be willing to publish the sample size and the questions? Those are what make all the difference in the world when it comes to polling.
Deb says
I am strongly opposed to the FASTC location.
There needs to be a FASTC, but not in the heart of rural, residential, farm land…….not in Ruthsburg.
The promises and enticements from the US Government, to the public, are nothing more than a sales pitch…..which can be amended and revised at any time.
Do not allow the US Government to pull the wool over the eyes of the public……due to the expectations their promises pose.
The manner in which this “deal” originated was not forth right, hence my concern, for the future “Phases”.
Please people……..help preserve what is left of Queen Anne’s County for future generations.
Thomas F says
Steve and Deb are perfect examples of the people who are not willing to do any homework. The information is out there.
Steve…if you want to see the questions, ask Mr. Falstad. He claims to have seen them. He must have them. Contact the company that took the poll! Are you waiting for them to hand them over? Get off your butt and do some homework for a change.
Deb, your “not in my backyard” attitude is just that. Attitude. You make a claim that there was a “deal” that was not forth right. Please substantiate. We’re all willing to listen. If you’ve got some proof that the government is pulling the wool over our eyes or that they’ve acted inappropriately according to the law of our land, stand up and prove it! I’ll be the first one to back off if there have been some shady dealings.
It’s such a monotonous argument. “The government is lying. The government has conspired to get this land behind our backs.” C’mon….prove to the proponents that ANYTHING you’re saying is true!
J Costello says
I was a recipient of one of those calls and I felt as if the research company represented both sides quite evenly. The points discussed from both proponents and opponents were issues that have been publicly debated over the last month. It was quite a lengthy call and much detail was presented to respond to – both positive and negative.
And for anyone to intimate that I was led by the nose to react in a pre-determined manner is insulting my intelligence.
Gren Whitman says
I’m following the FASTC development brouhaha from Rock Hall. As such, I don’t have a dog in this battle … but … watching houses, indeed entire developments, pop out of seemingly nowhere like overnight mushrooms—especially in Queen Anne’s County—I’ve reached the point of being pretty much against any more building projects unless I’m convinced it’s necessary and good.
Naturally, my initial reaction to FASTC was “no way, Jose,” per the above. Having camped and fished and kayaked thereabouts for 35 years, I know Ruthsburg and Tuckahoe Park/Creek very well, and would hate to see any of those big, beautiful fields developed in any way. Given a choice, however, a training “campus” is preferable to another buncha million-dollar mansions plopped onto one-dollar lots!
Steve Kline says
Thomas
Do you really think that a private polling firm, which has entered into a relationship with a client, is going to just give a citizen off the street priviledged information pertaining to that aforementioned relationship? Pollsters do not release information about their polls or their clients…they leave that up to the clients. Pete Hart (who I know professionally) or one of his client reps, sat down with the folks at the Leadership Council, and explained his polling results to them and explained to them how best to use them in public. A conscious decision was made not to release the sample size and the questions.
And how about my point from earlier? It is okay for you to cling to polling results as scripture sent down from on high, but it is irresponsible for anyone else to have a healthy curiosity about the nature of those results?
Thomas F says
Steve Kline says above, “I am not claiming any level of support or opposition to the facility. But let’s see the questions.” ……. hmmmm…….should we believe anything Mr. Kline says now? When responding to a proponent on a facebook discussion group, he said, “I appreciate your comment. But I would counter by saying this: you may already have your mind made up, AS DO I, so we would not be the prime targets for push polling.” Wait….rewind…”as do I”? I guess you ARE claiming some level of opposition.
Do your own homework folks. Facts is facts.
Thomas F says
Mr. Falstad & Mr. Kline:
I wonder if you would consider the following information a fair poll:
Petition by opponents – online since 12/17/09 – 166 signatures. (https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ruthsburg/signatures)
Petition by proponents – online since 1/15/10 – 260 signatures. (https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/proposedtrainingfacilityruthsburgmd/signatures)
Thomas F says
The spin just keeps going folks. Even Mr. Falstad has back-pedaled on his own press release by changing the ending paragraph. First read his initial response at the top claiming 70% opposition. Then read his latest at https://cgc.centreville-md.net/HuntRay/QACApressRelease20100119.pdf.
It’s like I always said…..do your own homework……draw your own conclusions.
Steve Kline says
Just as a point of clarification for anyone who might still be reading this, I meant to say that I do not claim any level of PUBLIC support or opposition to this facility. My own opposition has been clear and consistent.
In terms of online petitions, I think they are great tools for gauging the effectiveness of the public relations campaigns of differing sides of an issue. However, I do not think polls or petitions are effective methods for making public policy. After all, what is right isn’t always popular, and what is popular, isn’t always right.
And how about my point from earlier? It is okay for you to cling to polling results as scripture sent down from on high, but it is irresponsible for anyone else to have a healthy curiosity about the nature of those results?
Thomas F says
Thank you for the clarification. All is reversed now because of what you “meant to say”. There’s been a lot of back-pedaling today. LOL
Feel free to quote anything I say by the way. You won’t find I have said anywhere that the poll is scripture down from on high. You also won’t find where I’ve put myself in a position to correct any of my statements.
’nuff said on this topic.
Do your own homework folks…..get educated and informed and make your own decisions.
Warrior Bob Kramer says
Poll or no poll, why hasn’t any of the QAC commissioners picked up the phone and called some folks who have some first hand dealings with the Feds and Law Enforcement Training Centers. The most (in)famous center is Glynco in Glynn County, Georgia.
Chamber of Commerce (Woody Woodside @ 912-265-0620 can give you the entire history of the project).
Economic Development Assoc (912-265-6629)
Glynn County Commissioners (912-554-7400)
and U. S. Congressman Jack Kingston’ Brunswick office (912-265-9010)
I found people more than willing to share their comments about the impact that FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Center, as it is called down there) has had on the area.
Both Artesia, NM and Charleston, SC have centers also… for anyone so inclined to get additional facts on the subject, if they don’t like the ones they get about Glynco.
Brian says
Regardless of whether or not the poll or any of the numbers in the comments are reliable, it really would not seem surprising to me that so much of the county would be in support. It is only a part of the county that will be directly and strongly affected by this project in the long-term, and to most others the only major effect will be new jobs.
It would seem likely that those very local to the site would tend to have the greatest concern, as the possibility of noise, water resources, and traffic problems are very real to them. Many of these people have done their homework, attended the meetings, and voiced their concerns. But the truth is that despite the large amount of information presented, questions as prominent as noise mitigation have not yet been well answered.