Key Findings  

Ø      Opposition to removing the Keys’ Critical Concern status is remarkably high and intense.  Public opinion at this point is overwhelmingly against de-designation. 

o       Initially, voters oppose this proposal by a 52-point margin (73 oppose to 22 percent support).  Nearly two-thirds of the electorate strongly oppose removing the Critical Concern status and this strong opposition grows to 75 percent after a simulated debate and messages against removing this protection from the Keys. 

o       Strong opposition to removing the Critical Concern designation cuts across the political spectrum.  Over eight in ten Democrats (84 percent) oppose this proposal, while two thirds (67 percent) of both Republicans and independents are opposed. 

Ø      Voters report a high level of familiarity with the Critical Concern designation and the majority says they have heard of the effort to remove this protection.   

Ø      The most likely outcomes of removing the Critical Concern designation, according to voters, are that roads, highways, and bridges in the Keys will be congested and that developers will build high-priced high-rises.  They also identify these two possible outcomes as being of highest concern. 

Ø      Overdevelopment in the Keys and in South Florida is a particular source of concern to voters and they express a clear desire to protect open space and undeveloped areas in the Keys.    

Ø      Voters are decidedly negative toward candidates who support this proposal.  Two-thirds of voters say they would be much less likely to support a candidate for elected office who favors removing the Critical Concern status. 

Ø      Messages against removing the designation that resonate most focus on developers who will come in and develop high-priced condos and cause traffic problems, higher taxes, and make hurricane evacuation more difficult.   

Ø      Other top message elements include focusing on the Keys’ natural and pristine environment that is protected by the Critical Concern designation, as well as arguments that removing this designation will allow development to run rampant and will do nothing to solve the problem of affordable housing, and that it is premature to remove the designation while water quality and open space problems still exist.   

Summary Findings 

Context 

Ø      Voters in the Keys hold a generally positive view of the quality of the environment, with two-thirds expressing a positive view (18 percent excellent, 48 percent good).   Roughly three in ten (28 percent) rate environmental quality as just fair and only 6 percent say it is poor.   

Ø      These positive feelings notwithstanding, voters believe the environment is on the decline.  Slightly more than half (52 percent) say the environment has gotten worse compared to five years ago, while 36 percent say it has stayed about the same and only 8 percent feel that it has gotten better. 

Ø      Overdevelopment in the Keys and in South Florida is a particular source of concern to voters.  Fully two-thirds say that there is too much commercial and residential development in the Florida Keys and three quarters say there is too much development in South Florida generally.  A quarter of voters say the amount of development in the Keys is about right and 21 percent say this is true of South Florida.  Very few say there is not enough development (7 percent say not enough development in the Keys; 3 percent say not enough in South Florida).    

Ø      Additionally, there is a strong consensus around the importance of preserving space and undeveloped areas in the Keys.  Three quarters (76 percent) place a significant amount of importance on this issue (44 percent extremely important, 31 percent very important). 

Area of Critical Concern Designation 

Ø      Voters report a high degree of familiarity with the Keys’ designation as an Area of Critical State Concern (74 percent familiar, 38 percent very) and a majority (57 percent) say they have heard of the effort to remove this protection.   

Ø      There is intense opposition to removing the Critical Concern designation at the outset of the survey.  Over seven in ten (73 percent) oppose this proposal, with 65 percent expressing strong opposition. 

o       Strong opposition to removing the Critical Concern designation cuts across the political spectrum.  Over eight in ten Democrats (84 percent) oppose this proposal, while two thirds (67 percent) of both Republicans and independents are opposed. 

Ø      After a simulated debate and messages against removing this protection, opposition becomes even stronger and more intense, with 75 percent strongly opposed (82 percent opposed overall). 

Ø      Voters are decidedly negative toward candidates who support this proposal.  Two-thirds of voters say they would be much less likely to support a candidate for elected office who favors removing the Critical Concern status. 

Outcomes of Removing Critical Concern Designation 

Ø      Three quarters or more of voters see each of the negative outcomes as likely should the Critical Concern status be removed.   They say it is most likely that roads, highways, and bridges in the keys will be congested (75 percent very likely) and that developers will build high-priced high-rises (74 percent).   Voters also identify these two outcomes as being most concerning as well (74 percent and 79 percent very concerned respectively). 

Ø      Majorities also believe other possible outcomes – like harm to natural areas, animal habitat and water, less affordable housing, increased taxes, and insufficient hurricane plans – are likely and concerning outcomes of this proposal.

Positioning and Messages 

Ø      In an engaged debate, both pro Critical Concern arguments clearly trump the opposition’s argument.   The argument that removing the Critical Concern designation would give developers free reign to develop natural areas for new commercial and residential uses works slightly better than the argument that it is premature to remove the designation (66 percent to 24 percent vs. 61 percent to 26 percent). 

Ø      The top message tested is one that focuses on developers who will come in and develop high-priced condos and cause traffic problems, higher taxes, and make hurricane evacuation more difficult.  Other top message elements focus on the Critical Concern designation being necessary for preserving the Florida Keys natural and pristine environment, that removing this designation will allow development to run rampant and will do nothing to solve the problem of affordable housing, and that it is premature to remove the designation while water quality and open space problems still exist.  People find convincing a government corruption argument that removing the designation will cause local and state government to turn their backs on the needs of the Keys. 

Ø      The message that resonates least is the argument that Critical Concern designation has provided the area with millions of dollars from the state for buying land and wastewater treatment.