Some residents think opponents of the sale are behind the survey, according to several people who have been called. Some think it is what is known in the business as a “push poll,” designed more to influence opinion than to gauge it.
Pinehurst Mayor Pro Tem George Hillier, Civic Group President Joan Thurman and John Ruggles, a retired hydrogeologist and member of the Well Field Protection Committee, said Monday that they were called. Surveyors asked a number of multiple-choice questions that took about 15 to 25 minutes to answer.
A man asking the questions identified his company, only when pressed by a caller, as Competitive Edge Research and Communications. He would not disclose who was paying for the survey, which consisted of about 25 questions.
Two political action committees and various other individuals have been publicly opposing the village’s proposed purchase of the water and sewer system related assets in the village from Moore County Public Utilities Department. The purchase is subject to voter approval of a $16 million bond issue Nov. 4.
Competitive Edge Research and Communications has specialized in conducting political polls, market research, voter contact and grassroots lobbying since 1987, according the recording on the company’s answering machine. The Pilot was unable to reach anyone with the company for comment.
The Pilot was also unable to reach representatives of one of the two political action committees opposing the bond issue, Citizens For Responsible Government, which has raised the most money so far. That group, which includes mostly homebuilders and Realtors, had raised about $3,900 in contributions, based on a campaign report filed with the Board of Elections.
Phone surveys are not cheap, as the village discovered last year, when it spent $15,000 to conduct a random survey of 400 residents in developing the Comprehensive Long-Range Plan for the village.
Mayor Steven Smith, who was not called, said he has heard from numerous people about the telephone survey. Some reported that the caller was rude and some hung up on him. Others, like Ruggles, Hillier and Thurman, chose to answer the questions to find out more about the purpose of the survey.
Ruggles said he felt the surveyor “skewed questions a little bit.” He added: “I feel they are trying to confuse people and cause doubts.”
Ruggles’ daughter is treasurer of the lone political action committee favoring passage of the bond issue, We Want Our Water.
Hillier said one of the first questions asked what he thought was the most important problem facing Pinehurst and gave a long list of issues “including education, growth…and finally water” to choose from. Hillier said he did not volunteer that he is a member of the Village Council and that he favors the village’s purchase of the water and sewer system.
Hillier, who is running unopposed for re-election this year, as are Smith and Councilwoman Virginia Fallon, said he didn’t think the survey was “slanted” except to guide the respondents to saying “the biggest problem is water.”
Other questions included whether the respondent thinks Pinehurst is heading in the right direction, and to give a favorable or unfavorable opinion of specific public officials. The surveyor specifically asked opinions about the Moore County Commissioners, Citizens for Water Sanity (the other opposition group), Citizens for Responsible Government, Smith, and the Pinehurst Village Council. The group favoring the bond issue, We Want Our Water, was not mentioned.
The questioner asks point blank, Hillier recalled, whether the person will vote on the $16 million bonds and why. Another question is worded to elicit a positive response, about whether Moore Public Utilities is providing good water service, he said.
Other questions ask whether the respondent is satisfied with the quality, quantity and present cost of water.
Another question asks if the person’s vote on the bond issue will be affected by the recent information that Moore County Utilities Director Dennis Brobst “will not work for the village” should it acquire the system.
One of the questions, Hillier said, asks whether people believe the village officials’ statements that water and sewer users will have only three rate increases in the next 10 years, of 1 percent a year.
Another question asks if the village is purchasing the utilities to “control growth,” and a comment that “some citizens think it is wasteful…since the county owns the system.” Callers are asked whether they are more or less likely to vote in favor of the bonds because the Village Council has endorsed it.
Moore County Board of Elections Supervisor Glenda Clendenin said earlier this week that the source of funding for the survey would have to be disclosed if the communication were to be determined under state elections law to be “express advocacy” to persuade a person to vote a certain way. However, defining whether this is express advocacy, since certain words are not used to clearly define it that way, is “a gray area,” she said.
Clendenin said one of the definitions of express advocacy, which requires the funding source to be reported to the elections board, is whether a “reasonable person” could determine the purpose as being advocacy of nomination, election or defeat” in the election. This part of the state law is currently being challenged in court, she said.
The Board of Elections had not received any written complaints about the survey as of the end of the week.
“If a communication is determined to express advocacy, disclosure requirements must be followed and adhered to by those individuals or groups responsible for the communication,” the elections manual states.
Clendenin said she will report any complaint for State Board of Elections investigation if she receives one in writing.
Elections law requires that even one person spending more than $100 to influence the outcome of a referendum or election to report to the elections office.
