In May 2014, the Benenson Strategy Group conducted a survey of 2014 likely voters on

attitudes toward several constitutional amendments that have been filed to appear on the
statewide ballot in 2014. The goal was to gauge current opinions on the proposals, and also to
simulate what would happen in a campaign where a sizable opposition were launched against
each. Key results on two proposals that command strong support and survive a well-resourced
attack against them are presented below. The language of the two proposals as filed for the
ballot are:

2,000 Foot Setback: A state constitutional amendment that would change existing
setback requirements to require any new oil or gas well to be located at least one half
mile from the nearest occupied structure; authorize a homeowner to waive the setback
requirement for the homeowner's home; and establish that the statewide setback
requirement is not a taking of private property requiring compensation under the
Colorado constitution.

Local Conservation Rights: A state constitutional amendment which would say that
Colorado's environment is the common property of all Coloradans; specify that the
environment includes clean air, pure water, and natural and scenic values and that state
and local governments are trustees of this resource; require state and local
governments to conserve the environment; and declare that if state or local laws conflict
the more restrictive law or regulation governs? If the election were held today, would you
vote yes or no on this amendment or would you not vote on this amendment?

Current Support Strong for Both Proposals
Our polling shows that, by a wide margin, voters support requiring any new oil or gas well be
located at least 2,000 feet from schools, hospitals, and other high occupancy buildings. We
found that 64% would vote yes on a constitutional amendment increasing the setback to 2,000
feet, while just 21% would oppose. Support for this idea was strong across all major subgroups
and even led among registered Republicans by a 62%-26% margin
2,000 Foot Setback


In November 2014, voters will vote on several proposed constitutional amendments regarding
conservation and the environment. Please tell me if you had to vote on the following amendment
today, would you vote yes, no, or you would not vote on that particular amendment? Increasing
the mandatory minimum distance for oil and gas wells around schools, hospitals, and
other high occupancy buildings to two-thousand feet.
Q19
N=317
All
Gender Region Age Income Party Reg
M F
D/
B
J/A W S/E
<5
0
50
+
<
$60k
$60k
+
De
m
Re
p
Ind
Difference
+4
3
+3
8
+4
7
+4
7
+4
8
+3
4
+3
9
+4
2
+4
2
+50 +32
+5
4
+3
6
+3
6
Yes 64 64 64 65 67 61 61 63 64 68 59 71 62 57
No 21 26 17 18 19 27 22 21 22 18 27 17 26 21
Would not vote 10 5 14 9 9 9 11 9 10 9 10 7 8 15
Dont know 5 5 6 8 5 2 5 8 4 5 4 4 5 7
To: Interested Parties
From: Pete Brodnitz, Mike Gehrke, BSG
Date: June 27, 2014
We also asked whether voters would support a constitutional amendment which would declare
that all Coloradans have a right to clean air, pure water, and natural and scenic values in the
state and require state and local governments to protect the environment. Support for this idea
also ran better than two-to-one, with 64% saying yes and just 27% saying no. More than half
(35%) of those voting yes said they were strong supporters of the idea.
Local Conservation Rights


Public Support Remains Strong After Extended Attacks
We also read a series of negative arguments that opponents of the amendments would use to
increase opposition to both measures during a campaign. Every respondent heard five different
negative arguments that included most or all of the messages that opponents generally use in
campaigns to defeat amendments like this in Colorado and other states. These included, among
others, arguments that the measures would:

Impose new regulations on a successful, revenue and job generating Colorado industry
that would kill jobs,

Amount to a tax increase on middle class families;

Lead to a flood of new lawsuits and make trial lawyers rich;

Be a severe restriction on freedom by limiting what landowners could do on their own

land;

Duplicate strict Colorado laws and regulations already on the books;

Reduce revenue to state and local governments that could otherwise be available to
enforce environmental compliance and build new parks and preserve open space

Following a thorough battery of negatives far more than most voters would hear in the course of
a normal campaign the 2,000 foot setback measure retained majority support by a 56%-34%
margin. The negatives had little or no effect on the support of Democrats or Independents on the
measures. The local government amendment also survived a hard test of negatives. After every
respondent heard five negatives, the amendment retained s support of the majority (52% yes,
34% no).
In November 2014, voters will vote on several proposed constitutional amendments regarding
conservation and the environment. Please tell me if you had to vote on the following amendment
today, would you vote yes, no, or you would not vote on that particular amendment? A state
constitutional amendment which would declare that all Coloradans have a right to
clean air, pure water, and natural and scenic values in the state and require state and
local governments to protect the environment.
Q22
All
Gender Region Age Income Party Reg
M F
D/
B
J/A W S/E
<5
0
50
+
<
$60k
$60k
+
De
m
Re
p
Ind
Difference +37
+2
6
+4
7
+4
9
+3
7
+2
7
+3
5
+3
1
+4
1
+57 +23
+7
3
-1
+4
7
Yes 64 60 68 70 66 57 63 60 66 74 58 83 46 67
No 27 34 21 21 29 30 28 29 25 17 35 10 47 20
Would not vote 5 3 7 5 3 8 5 6 5 5 5 4 4 9
Dont know 4 3 4 5 2 4 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 4
Colorado 2014 Conservation Initiatives | 2
Ballot Progression 2,000 Foot Setback


Ballot Progression Local Conservation Rights


Following the battery of negatives, we then read three positive arguments for both the 2,000 foot
setback proposal and the local government amendment. These were designed to simulate what
might happen if a limited positive campaign were launched to defend each proposal. Both
amendments gained back some of their support. After a positive case was made, voters
supported the 2,000 foot setback 56%-34% and backed the local control measure 56%-32%.

This memo covers the results of 600 total interviews in Colorado with a sample of likely general election
voters. The interviews were conducted May 6 8, 2014. The margin of error for overall results is 4.00%
and higher among subgroups. All participants were registered to vote, had voted in the 2010 or 2012 general
election or registered after the 2012 election, and were screened to ensure they are all likely to vote in the
2014 election. BSGs clients include President Barack Obama, U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (VA), Jeff Merkley
(OR), Chris Coons (DE) and Mazie Hirono (HI) and U.S. Representative Tim Walz (MN). BSG has also
conducted polling on initiative campaigns including the successful campaign to increase New Jerseys
minimum wage in 2013 and to defeat the Personhood Constitutional Amendment in Mississippi.

Short Ballot After Attacks After Positives
Difference +43 +22 +25
Yes 64 56 57
No 21 34 32
Would not vote 10 7 8
Dont know 5 3 4

Short Ballot After Negatives After Positives
Difference +37 +18 +24
Yes 64 52 56
No 27 34 32
Would not vote 5 9 8
Dont know 4 6 4
Colorado 2014 Conservation Initiatives | 3