Reporters were ordered to leave last Sunday's equality leadership summit in Fresno during a discussion of recent polling data after meeting organizers, and groups that paid for the poll, expressed fears that the "sensitive" information would provide ammunition to opponents of same-sex marriage.

An examination of the poll, a copy of which was leaked to reporters, shows that indeed, marriage equality supporters have a tough road ahead as they prepare for a ballot measure to repeal Proposition 8, which eliminated same-sex marriage after 52 percent of California voters approved it last November.

Rick Jacobs, founder and chair of the progressive Courage Campaign, opposed the poll findings being reported on.

"It gives $86,000 worth of information to the opposition," Jacobs told the Bay Area Reporter Sunday in the hallway outside the meeting room. "It's bad if it's published."

The poll was commissioned by Polling 4 Equality, a broad coalition of large and small state groups (including the Courage Campaign, Equality California, and Marriage Equality USA), and conducted May 9-13 by David Binder of David Binder Research and Amy Simon, a partner at Goodwin Simon Victoria Research. Overall, the poll shows that California is split down the middle when it comes to same-sex marriage, with 47 percent in favor and 48 opposed. Those figures mirror other statewide polls that have been done since last fall's election, suggesting that many voters' minds are made up on the issue and the percentage of persuadable voters is very small, about 5 percent, Binder said Sunday during an informal news conference after the closed session.

The poll also shows the marriage equality side doing better in 2012 than in 2010. On a series of similar questions, the poll results show more support for reinstating the right of same-sex couples to marry (46 percent yes, 49 percent no in 2012, compared to 45 percent to 51 percent in 2010), or a constitutional amendment to end California's ban on same-sex marriage (47 percent yes, 47 percent no in 2012, compared to 47 percent yes, 48 percent no in 2010).

However, Binder noted that a ballot measure in either year would be close.

"It's a very close race regardless of whether it's 2010 or 2012," Binder said. "People's opinions are very strong on both sides."

He gave a slight advantage to 2012, but noted that advantage wasn't so great, about 1 or 2 percentage points. The reason, he said, is mostly because of the net effect of voters in a presidential election year. Binder, who's been polling in California for 15 years, said that there was a "huge drop off" in the 2006 gubernatorial election compared to the 2008 presidential election – about 5 million fewer voters in 2006. But Binder said that he did not expect to see that much of a drop off in the 2010 gubernatorial election because it is an open seat. He also speculated that President Obama's likely 2012 re-election race would not draw as many voters as did his historic 2008 campaign.

Getting religion

Another important finding from the poll is that when a religious exemption is included in the ballot language, support for same-sex marriage increases. Such language means that the initiative would not mandate or require clergy of any church or religious institution to perform a service or duty that goes against their faith. When that question was asked, the results were 52 percent in support for same-sex marriage, compared to 39 percent against, according to the poll.

The religious exemption was a key part of then-Assemblyman Mark Leno's (D-San Francisco) two successful legislative efforts to secure marriage equality. Both of his bills – in 2005 and 2007 – included the phrase "religious freedom" in the title of the bill.

Titled both years as the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, the bills both passed in the Legislature but were vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. For the 2005 bill, Leno held his news conference announcing it at Glide Memorial United Methodist Church in San Francisco. The legislation would have added a new section to the code reaffirming in statute that religious institutions are free to exercise their religion without interference from the state and will not be forced to perform ceremonies that are not in keeping with their beliefs.

In contrast, Leno's first legislative effort, in 2004, was different. The bill was titled the Marriage License Non-Discrimination Act and would have amended the state's family code to allow same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses. It also included language that would permit, but not require, clergy to perform same-sex weddings, but the references to religious freedom were not in the title.

Leno pulled the 2004 bill when he failed to garner enough votes to ensure its passage.

Binder acknowledged that including a religious exemption "would help" in any future ballot fight.

A question on the poll shows the issue is close and that people are fearful that same-sex marriage will affect their place of worship. The question states, "Churches and religious groups that oppose gay marriage will be punished by the government, fined, or lose their tax exempt status because they can't in good conscience perform same-sex marriages or allow them to be performed in their churches or community halls." Of the respondents, 48 percent found the statement "very" or "somewhat" persuasive, compared to 49 percent who found it "not too" or "not at all" persuasive.

Opposing side

The Binder-Simon poll includes a series of questions that seem to be based on what the Yes on 8 campaign used in its messaging during last year's election. Those questions and respondents' answers seem to demonstrate the toughness of any future ballot fight and signal that California may not be as gay friendly as many people believe, particularly when it comes to same-sex marriage. The questions cover the usual arguments used by same-sex marriage opponents, including the "need to protect traditional marriage as a union between a husband and a wife, in order to have the best moral environment for our families and children" (52 percent of respondents believe that statement is "very" or "somewhat" persuasive, compared to 46 percent who find it "not too" or "not at all" persuasive).

There is also a question, "If same-sex marriage is legal in California, then the public schools will have to start teaching school children that homosexual marriage is just as good as marriage between a man and a woman" (48 percent of respondents believe that statement is "very" or "somewhat" persuasive, compared to 49 percent who said it was "not too" or "not at all" persuasive).

The Binder-Simon poll was a random telephone survey of 1,794 Californians. That figure included oversamples of Latinos (172), African Americans (258), Asian Pacific Islanders (265), and labor households (105). The base number of people surveyed was 1,008. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.8 percent. Of the respondents, 90 percent identified as heterosexual; 3 percent as bisexual, gay, or lesbian; and 7 percent did not know or refused to answer. On political party affiliation, 45 percent identified as Democrats, 34 percent as Republicans, 19 percent as decline to state, and 2 percent belonged to a minor party.

Nearly three-quarters of the respondents, 73 percent, said that they personally know or work with someone who is gay or lesbian, while 21 percent did not.

Confusing access

The equality leadership summit had conflicting access rules for the media. Initially, an agenda was sent out by Yes on Equality's Chaz Lowe stating that the summit would be closed to the press. After questions about that policy from the B.A.R. and other reporters last Friday, Lowe revised the policy and said that LGBT press would be invited, but not mainstream reporters. That prompted a complaint from the Associated Press.

The policy was subsequently changed to state that the summit would be open to the press, but would be off the record.

At Sunday's summit, facilitator Vincent Jones from Liberty Hill Foundation reiterated that condition, but was quickly shot down by bloggers and others who were in the room, as a decision had already been made to webcast the meeting.

"Today, we're talking to ourselves," Jones said at the beginning of the summit when he said it would be off the record before reversing himself and stating that paid media would be asked to leave during the discussion of the Binder-Simon poll. Bloggers were allowed to remain in the room but were asked to turn off their computers. Likewise, those tweeting from the summit were asked to turn off their cell phones.

The B.A.R. and a reporter from the Associated Press protested the decision that forced them to leave the room.

Jon Carroll, a gay Fresno resident who was handling media at the summit for Meet in the Middle, defended the decision to exclude reporters from the session, saying that the discussion among activists and leaders "needs to happen outside the media spotlight."

"It's only a couple of hours; it's sensitive data," Carroll said, adding that summit organizers Meet in the Middle and Yes on Equality made the decision. Carroll acknowledged the conflicting ground rules leading up to the summit and said that organizers should have made a decision and stuck with it.

It is unclear what information was deemed sensitive, since both sides of the Prop 8 campaign have been covered extensively in the media. Numerous public town hall meetings, including many with No on 8 executive committee members, have been held since the election. And numerous polls have been done showing similar results.