Walton Arts Center president and CEO Peter Lane (left) and Fayetteville A&P commissioner Bob Davis discuss Lane’s recent request for help with a planned renovation of the arts center’s Dickson Street facility. Seated beside Lane is Terri Trotter, the arts center’s chief operating officer.
Photo: Todd Gill, Flyer staff
Walton Arts Center officials will have to wait at least another month for a decision on a plan that would help fund an expansion of the arts center’s Dickson Street facility.
The seven-member Advertising and Promotion Commission lacked a quorum on Monday, meaning the group couldn’t vote or give formal direction to executive director Marilyn Heifner regarding any of the items on this month’s agenda. The commission must have four members in attendance to represent a quorum.
Only commissioners Bob Davis, Matthew Petty and Ching Mong were present for the meeting. Commissioners Bill Lyle, Maudie Schmitt and Justin Tennant were absent. Newly selected commissioner Matt Behrend was in attendance, but his appointment hasn’t yet been ratified by the City Council.
A conceptual rendering shows what an expanded Walton Arts Center could look like at the corner of Dickson Street and West Avenue in Fayetteville
Courtesy graphic
The group was scheduled to consider Heifner’s recent proposal that would not only help pay for Walton Arts Center renovations, but also provide funding for a 200-acre regional park and a possible permanent home for the Arkansas Music Pavilion.
Heifner’s plan is to ask voters to approve a joint bond issue that would extend A&P bonds used to build the Fayetteville Town Center and issue a second bond using city funds. The two bond issues – totaling $23.7 million – would be repaid using both the commission’s and city’s share of Fayetteville’s 2 percent hotel, motel and restaurant tax.
Despite a lack of quorum, the commission devoted nearly 45 minutes to a discussion of Heifner’s plan and a related request from Petty who wants the group to partner with the City Council on a survey asking residents for their input on the issue.
Petty, who is also a City Council member, shared the results of an automated telephone poll some Fayetteville voters received in January, just two weeks after the commission voted to table his survey proposal.
The anonymous poll asked residents several questions, including if they would support using bonds to pay for the arts center renovation or the regional park.
“I think we need to find who conducted the survey and get that information,” said Davis.
A sign noting the future home of a regional park stands at Judge Cummings Road just off Cato Springs Road in southwest Fayetteville.
Flyer photo
Petty said he knew who commissioned the poll, but refused to release the person’s name and said doing so would “betray their trust.” Mayor Lioneld Jordan, Marilyn Heifner, Walton Arts Center officials, Chamber of Commerce president Steve Clark, and University of Arkansas political scientist Janine Parry have all denied any involvement with the telephone poll.
Petty said the results showed that only 40 percent of respondents would support using bonds for the Walton Arts Center renovations. He said that percentage was unchanged when paired against the regional park, and that only 22 percent favored the park while 18 percent were interested in the development of a third option.
“What this says to me is that any vanilla proposal isn’t going to pass,” said Petty. “We need to go to the voters and ask them open-ended questions…so we can get their input and develop something that will pass. Otherwise, we’re spinning our wheels and, frankly, being extremely presumptive about what the voters think.”
Petty, Davis and Mong each expressed concerns with Heifner’s suggestion to use parks funds for bond repayments and how that might limit the city’s ability to operate a new 200-acre park while maintaining its existing parks.
The long-planned regional park is set to include baseball, soccer, softball and multi-use fields; plus basketball, tennis and volleyball courts; playgrounds, trails, pavilions, a great lawn, water features and an amphitheater.
“It’s one thing to build something this large,” said Mong. “But how much money will it cost additionally each year to maintain the park?”
Petty called Heifner’s plan “a great start and a great conversation starter,” but suggested the commission emphasize caution before forwarding any proposal to the City Council and then to voters.
“If we were to pass this proposal right away, we’d really be gutting the rest of our development plans from our other parks to pay for this,” said Petty.
Walton Arts Center CEO Peter Lane said he understood he’d have to wait for any official decision, but pressed the commissioners for a show of support for his request which includes $6.5 million in bond money and $2 million in A&P funds.
Lane said he needs an overarching “statement of intent and expressed good will” from the commission to use as leverage before beginning a campaign to secure the remaining funds needed for the estimated $20 million renovation project.
Each member said they’d personally favor helping the arts center in some way, but couldn’t speak for the commission as a whole without a quorum.
The group thanked Heifner for bringing forth the plan and asked that she consider working more closely with city and parks staff to fine-tune the proposal before the next regular A&P meeting in March.
Partial poll results
Matthew Petty, a member of both the A&P Commission and City Council, released the results of three questions from an anonymous, automated telephone poll that asked Fayetteville voters their opinion on a potential bond issue. Petty would not say who commissioned the poll. He, Mayor Lioneld Jordan, Marilyn Heifner, Walton Arts Center officials, Chamber of Commerce president Steve Clark, and University of Arkansas political scientist Janine Parry have all denied any involvement with the poll.
Do you support the Fayetteville Advertising and Promotion Commission giving $2 million from its operating reserves to the Walton Arts Center?
Yes – 42%
No – 36%
Undecided – 22%
If the bond election were held next month, would you vote to approve the $6.5 million bond issue to renovate the Walton Arts Center?
Yes – 40%
No – 36.7%
Undecided – 23.3%
Some people have suggested that the Fayetteville Advertising and Promotion Commission funds should go to build a new regional sports park instead of funding the Walton Arts Center renovations. Would you prefer:
a) funding for the regional park development, – 22%
b) funding for the Walton Arts Center renovation, 40.4%
c) support for other projects to support culture and the arts – 18%
d) none of the above – 19.6%
No more money for the WAC and no more DEBT!!!
No more debt? Explain to me how this works. Did you buy your house without a loan? Does your employer own his/her business outright? Do you think public parks and buildings are paid for with “saved taxes”?
Someone please explain why the City is so intimidated by the Arts Center? Grow a couple and stand up to them.
I do not understand why there wasn’t a quorum. Do these members not care? Was it a coincidence? Also is it fair to have a joint bond? Isn’t this really two separate issues?
I agree, no more debt. let’s spend money we have, not money we don’t have.
RE “no more DEBT!!!” and “I agree, no more debt.”
Now tell me that you think government should be run like a family or a business.
Where were all these debt hawks when we were getting tangled in wars and chopping tax rates for the rich?
Not studying up on public finance, that is for certain.
Just because our government runs an enormous amount of debt, it doesn’t make it right.
Correct! I couldn’t agree more. There are many reasons why it’s right for local governments to take on debt, not “just” one.
That doesn’t make it wrong, either. Debt is a necessary part of almost every growing fiscal enterprise. It’s the way that the debt is assumed that might or might not be the problem. Unlike the federal government, the City of Fayetteville was not saddled with an eight-year Bush presidency, and has a good record of exercising care when going into debt.
I’m bothered by the fact that one of the commissioners (Petty)—an elected city councilman no less, would attempt to use an anonymous survey to push forward his agenda. How do we know what the demographic was that received a call? What’s the sample size? What company conducted the survey? I saw it mentioned here back when Heifner was in trouble that Mayor Jordan pushed forward a bylaw requiring that the A&P operate in a more transparent fashion, and yet here is a commissioner (Petty) refusing to divulge the source of a survey that he is using to push forward policy. That’s not being open. If Petty couldn’t divulge the source of the survey, to say nothing about the method it was conducted in then it has no credibility and should not be introduced into a public meeting. The other commission members should have pressed this issue, and I am upset they did not, especially if it is going to be used to decide on how our tax dollars are—-or are not—spent.
In fairness, the “agenda” he is pushing is a proposal for the A&P, in conjunction with the City Council, to conduct a proper “official” survey which will include an opportunity for the community to provide open responses. He did not suggest that policy or budget decisions should be based on the results of the uncredited survey he was talking about.
The way I read it, he is using the document to push policy with concerns to spending tax money to fund a survey he wants, a survey that I assume won’t be cheap. It seems fishy that two weeks after he requests a survey—which was subsequently tabled–that a survey magically gets done in time for the next commission meeting and handed to him.
What I don’t like is the precedent that is being set…that you can bring uncredited, unverifiable material to a public meeting, hold it up as fact, and influence public decisions with it. It may see harmless in this case, but its a slippery slope and appears to be against the bylaw that Mayor Jordan supposedly added in regards to being open…surely you can agree that a secret survey is opposite of that ideal? What if he brought a secret survey that said the public thinks the A&P should spend all of our money on a go-kart track and used that to convince the other commissioners to vote for it? Yeah that’s a lot more than what was done above, but again stuff like that starts small. It’s just a shady way to operate and I think we should expect more up and up behavior in our local government….but I’m being an idealist I admit.
I read it as the complete opposite. Petty is pushing for accountability and transparency in A&P and Council operations. Yes, it may come at the cost of conducting some surveys, but his motive is to get the public’s opinion on these matters before wasting precious time and money on initiatives that the public may not support.
Still, I understand what you’re saying. It is no coincidence that this anonymous survey “popped up.” Someone commissioned and conducted this survey, but apparently they are not currently making the specifics available to the public, which is within their rights for sure. They paid to gather the information, and they own it. We may never know, and I don’t blame Petty for refusing to divulge the source if it would be a breach of confidence between Petty and the third party. Politicians have connections with whom they share information, and many of them choose to remain anonymous. Certainly some of those relationships are nefarious, while others are innocuous. With that in mind, his uncited numbers should be taken for what they are…unsubstantiated. That doesn’t mean they are worthless, or wrong or right. It also doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t be able to bring them up at meetings, which are forums where members share all sorts of ideas and opinions which come from many different sources. Whether one chooses to accept or dismiss the numbers quoted by Petty, I think his proposal to conduct a formal survey seems to be absolutely within the spirit of openness, accountability, and transparency that we all want from the A&P and our City Council. It does cost money to conduct surveys, but my god, that is money well-spent, in my opinion. These people are supposed to represent us, and how better to facilitate that representation than to ask the public for its opinions on these huge multi-million dollar projects? Petty was faced with making a commission vote on the bond proposal and he is basically saying, whoa, lets get some opinions and information from our constituents before we proceed. It is a voice of reason that has been sorely lacking on the A&P over the last few years.
@Open Gov’t, Please -
Thank you for participating and taking the time to speak your mind.
I want to respond personally to your criticism. First, for what its worth, I stake my reputation on the accuracy of the poll numbers I cited. Second, anyone can run their own poll to verify the numbers if they don’t believe me. Just sample registered voters who have voted in primary and special elections and you’ll get the same results. Any number of institutions have the funds to conduct such a poll, which would cost $1000 or less. The Flyer, the Times, Walton Arts Center, etc can run a poll for a fraction of their annual budgets. It is the media’s job to fact-check us. I welcome it.
Now, the real point: I will continue to advocate that we involve the public in a substantial way for any proposal to use debt for cultural projects. The state mandates that the public have the final say in this decision, and that makes it clear they should have a seat at the table from the beginning. Conducting a survey, as I’ve proposed, is setting the bar for public participation at the lowest possible level. It is the lowest standard that our government should agree to, and the A&P Commission is questioning spending (up to) 0.32% of their 2013 budget.
Regardless of whether or not the A&P Commission will agree to involve the public in their planning and decision-making regarding taking on additional debt, the City Council unanimously stated their support in January of this year. If the A&P Commission sends us a proposal that we know a majority of the public doesn’t like, the Council will do what it takes to fix it.
A final point… all polls are surveys, but not all surveys are polls. The poll that was conducted asked simple yes/no and multiple choice questions. A survey asks open ended questions and illuminates public sentiment more accurately than simple polling. It is an critical task in the creation of a any campaign that requires a vote of the people like this.
I appreciate the opposing viewpoint, even if I do not necessarily see it that way. I also appreciate your willingness to respond to my comment.
In other words it was a non scientific poll, that cost no money. Anyone can pick up the phone and call folks off a voter registration list.
How many respondents were there for the poll? Another sample won’t yield the exact same results and no individual or institution would be able to ascertain whether their sample results are significantly different without this information. Aside from that, to have an apple to apple comparison, any new pollsters would need the exact wording of the questions.
Is any of this information available? If not, it would be impossible for anyone to take you to task on this challenge in any meaningful way.
What I have said, over and over, is that the results are enough for me to go on and that they reinforce the need to give the public a seat at the table. The results I’m citiing show a ~10 point swing. 10 points!! That disparity won’t be made up in a margin of error and I am confident any new poll conducted with sound methodology will reinforce the statements I have already made.
I am of the opinion that the public deserves a seat at the table regardless of the poll results. The poll is unimportant, unless you think the public should only be involved if they must be to get something passed. Unfortunately, there are leaders in this community, at the A&P Commission and elsewhere, who do think that way. The only reason I cited the numbers at all is because I think the ~10 point swing transforms public involvement from a “mere” responsibility into an absolute necessity and it is my job to convince those leaders to dedicate resources for engaging the public in this proposal to take on debt for the cultural projects we are considering.
If you question whether or not the public should be involved and if that ~10 point swing from the results I’ve cited isn’t enough for you, run your own poll. If a new poll shows my trust in the person/firm who ran the poll to be naive, so be it. I’ll take my lumps and I’ll keep my chin up and I will continue to insist that the public be given a seat at the table, because it is the right thing to do.
If these commissioners weren’t on board with financing a public survey before, how is a mysterious poll with secret methodology going to convince them?
RE “If these commissioners weren’t on board with financing a public survey before…”
How do you know they weren’t? Has anybody ever proposed this before?
RE “…how is a mysterious poll with secret methodology going to convince them?”
The poll is not mysterious, and the methodology is not secret, to the people who paid for the poll, or to Mr. Petty. We can’t stop the world just because /you/ don’t know something.
Mr. Petty might well be able to convince them. This is the first time I know of that anyone with his particular interests and expertise has been on the A&P Commission.
“How do you know they weren’t?”
First, the commission had the chance approve his survey proposal, but the item was tabled. Second, his own words in the comment above mine make it clear he is facing resistance in getting the survey approved.
“We can’t stop the world just because /you/ don’t know something.” I’m not asking you to. I happen to trust Mr. Petty and I think he’s absolutely right with regards to public involvement in this process. I, like many others commenting here, have already been convinced of the usefulness of his proposal. It’s clear that some of his fellow commissioners haven’t, though, and I’m not sure how this opaque poll is capable of convincing them.
It’s entirely possible that they wouldn’t be agreeable even if Mr. Petty or the financiers of the poll made themselves and their methodology known. Even so, I think Mr. Petty could have effected more political leverage with a transparent poll.
“Mr. Petty might well be able to convince them.”
I know I’m not alone in hoping this is the case. Good luck, Mr. Petty.
RE “First, the commission had the chance approve his survey proposal, but the item was tabled.”
Discussion items are generally tabled while more information is gathered. If the Commission were truly “not on board”, they would have voted it down instead of tabling it.
RE “he is facing resistance in getting the survey approved.”
But the resistance is not decisive; it is argumentative. That is, the proposal is still being discussed. How scary would it be if all of the commissioners agreed on everything all the time?
RE “I, like many others commenting here, have already been convinced of the usefulness of his proposal.”
I’m glad to hear it. Your previous posts appear to join in blaming Mr. Petty for doing something that is somehow underhanded rather than unhelpful.
RE “It’s clear that some of his fellow commissioners haven’t, though, and I’m not sure how this opaque poll is capable of convincing them.”
Only one of the three commissioners present is quoted as wanting to know more about the source of the poll, and his quote seems to indicate curiosity more than opposition. The full commission has not yet met with the poll results n hand. We should give them a chance to do so.
RE “Even so, I think Mr. Petty could have effected more political leverage with a transparent poll.”
That might well be the case. But making the argument for the necessity and feasibility of a survey with some poll results in hand is better than doing so on pure speculation.
Please note that I am addressing my comments not just to you, but to the others whose posts appear to show suspicion of the poll, Mr. Petty’s motives, or some combination, even if they support the idea. I generally find that if I favor something, it is better to not feed the opposition.
RE “If the Commission were truly “not on board”, they would have voted it down instead of tabling it.”
Perhaps. Correct me if I’m wrong, but just because the measure was tabled at the last meeting does not preclude it from being tabled again. What better way to avoid taking a stand against public involvement?
You seem pretty optimistic that the other commissioners will support the proposal. I’m curious what you think of Mr. Petty’s statement from above: ‘Unfortunately, there are leaders in this community, at the A&P Commission and elsewhere, who do think that [the public should only be involved if they must be to get something passed.]‘ Mr. Petty is closer to the situation than either of us are, I’d wager, and from his comment there seems to be more than curiosity holding up the survey’s approval.
“I generally find that if I favor something, it is better to not feed the opposition.”
Sure, but where’s the fun in that? Often times there are things to be learned from one’s opponents.
RE “What better way to avoid taking a stand against public involvement?”
Voting the proposal down would have been a better way.
RE “You seem pretty optimistic that the other commissioners will support the proposal.”
No; I’m just not pessimistic. I’m willing to let the normal course of Commission business run without making dire predictions.
RE [Mr. Petty's statement]
Mr. Petty never said that there is no hope for his proposal. He never said that a majority, or even a controlling number, of leaders and commissioners are against it– he simply acknowledged that some people will need to be persuaded. That’s not a death knell– it’s just the way public policy is.
RE “Mr. Petty is closer to the situation than either of us are, I’d wager, and from his comment there seems to be more than curiosity holding up the survey’s approval.”
Indeed: the lack of a quorum at the last meeting is a major part of the hold-up. Half of the commissioners were absent, and one commissioner in attendance has not yet been officially appointed. That has, as far as I can tell, no bearing on the viability of Mr. Petty’s proposal.
RE “Often times there are things to be learned from one’s opponents.”
Feeding into the negativity isn’t learning. I see and acknowledge the negativity; however, I choose to not reinforce the negativity by wallowing in it, or reading too much into it.
If the opposition to Mr. Petty’s proposal does in fact win out, I prefer that it does so as a result of its own strength, rather than of strength given to it by people who are actually in favor of the proposal.
RE “Voting the proposal down would have been a better way.”
Yes, but doing so could incur a lot of negative publicity. Better to table it indefinitely under the guise of “needing more time” to make a decision.
Your next three responses get no disagreement from me. I will admit to being pessimistic.
RE “Feeding into the negativity isn’t learning.”
It depends. By voicing our concerns we have given Mr. Petty an opportunity to hone his rebuttals to any critiques that might appear at the next official meeting of the Commission, and we might actually strengthen the proposal. Maybe I’m being naive, but this is one awesome benefit we all enjoy from his continued engagement on these forums.
RE “By voicing our concerns we have given Mr. Petty an opportunity to hone his rebuttals to any critiques that might appear at the next official meeting of the Commission,…”
Which would be better done in a private conversation, and which ignores the fact that Mr. Petty is closer to the situation than the rest of us.
RE “…and we might actually strengthen the proposal.”
Not if similar public comments regarding Mr. Petty’s proposal and the poll results are taken to be actual public sentiment rather than debate preparation for Mr. Petty. There’s a place for everything.
RE “Maybe I’m being naive, but this is one awesome benefit we all enjoy from his continued engagement on these forums.”
I agree that Mr. Petty offers a benefit in his willingness to interact here and general accessibility.
No on debt for Southpass or the WAC expansion or another parking garage.
What do you propose instead?
RE “I’m bothered by the fact that one of the commissioners (Petty)—an elected city councilman no less, would attempt to use an anonymous survey to push forward his agenda.”
Never minding the question of what might be your objection to his agenda, what would you prefer that he had used?
RE “If not, it would be impossible for anyone to take you to task on this challenge in any meaningful way.”
I don’t believe Mr. Petty is presenting any of the results of the poll as a hard-and-fast result; rather, he is simply using the poll results to show the wisdom– and the relative ease– of having a survey done.
Mr. Petty has a good idea, and– et voila!– he has evidence that it is a good idea. He’s way ahead of a lot of people who have ideas. If you work hard enough, you can make this poll out to be a problem. Of course it will be a waste of effort, but do as you like.
RE “I don’t believe Mr. Petty is presenting any of the results of the poll as a hard-and-fast result; rather, he is simply using the poll results to show the wisdom– and the relative ease– of having a survey done.”
I must disagree with you on this point. Petty states in his comment that he stakes his reputation on the poll numbers cited and that he invites others to challenge him to verify his numbers. It is impossible to verify his poll without the number of respondents, at the very least, and the questions. These are necessities for accurate replication and comparison, which Petty has invited people to do.
The poll is useless without methodology. For all we know, they only called 100 people. I don’t think anything under 1000 would be a large enough sample, based on my estimation of the number of registered Fayetteville voters.
I’m actually in support of Petty’s plan, but it cannot possibly serve as “evidence” to support his idea when no one else has access to the questions, results, or methodology of the survey and when Petty refuses to reveal who commissioned the survey. Why the secrecy? I like and trust Petty a lot, but who’s to say that he isn’t making these numbers up to push his agenda? (I don’t believe he is, but with the current information he has given, there is no possible way to verify.)
If public money is to be spent on going to voters with an open-ended survey as he proposes, I don’t want this private telephone poll he cites to be “evidence” that that should happen when all we have to go on in Petty’s word as to the results and accuracy of the poll.
Mr. Petty never claimed, however, that a subsequent survey would yield the same results; indeed, he points out the difference between a poll, which is what was taken, and a survey, which he proposes. Instead, his challenge appears to be part of his avowal that he is representing the results accurately, as well as a vote of confidence for having a survey done by a reputable company.
As to the need for a survey, what evidence would you prefer?
If and when the A&P Commission has a survey done, the methodology, sample size and questions will be known.
With all due respect, calling the poll “useless” indicates a lack of understanding of the most basic statistical practices. I didn’t conduct the poll and I don’t have the raw data to perform my own analysis. There is much information about the poll that I would personally like to know, but that information hasn’t been given to me. Nevertheless, I have enough understanding of statistical methods to understand both the usefulness and limitations of the poll results.
I never called it conclusive; I called it “enough to go on.” Let’s dive in and see exactly how limited the poll results really are.
First, so long as the sample size is 5% or less of the population and the population is large, the effect of population size on the margin of error is negligible. Here is a table for margins of error for the “only 40% would vote for a proposal to fund the WAC if it were held next month” statistic, for simple random samples of large populations, rounded to two decimals:
size
error (SE)
for population parameter
The confidence intervals should be interpreted like this: “If the sample size of the poll were 600 Fayetteville voters who vote in primary and special elections, we are 95% confident that between 36.08% and 43.92% of the voters would vote yes to pay for the WAC expansion with a bond issue.”
These confidence intervals were calculated using the standard technique for proportions, that being that the standard error is equal to the square root of the proportion times its complement divided by the sample size, and the 95% confidence interval = 40% +- 1.96*SE). It took me longer to type these numbers into the comment box than to set up the spreadsheet to calculate them.
I don’t mind being challenged, but let’s base our discussion on facts and accepted statistical practices instead of on hyperbole. The poll isn’t conclusive, but it IS useful.
PS – I *really* love math. Also, I provided copies of the referenced poll questions and results to all in attendance at the meeting. The Flyer apparently didn’t get a copy so I have sent it to them via email.
Staff note: The poll questions have been added to the story above
The Flyer system deleted my perfect white space in that table. :(
Staff note: We’re working now to fix that.
I’ve been thinking on this for a couple days. I misspoke when I said the poll was useless. It is definitely useful and provides you with enough evidence to pursue a larger study of the issue. My point was that no one else should simply take your word on it, which I still believe to be the case. However, so many decisions are made based on much less, which I should have kept in mind.
I think I was a bit overzealous with my comments, and I thank you for taking the time to address them. I am very happy with everything you’ve done and are doing for Fayetteville. I trust your leadership, even if I might slightly disagree on this issue. I’m thankful that you are bringing the public to the table, and I hope that your larger study will reveal support for the bonds. I don’t think some understand that taking on debt isn’t always a bad thing and is often the only way to invest in the future (imagine paying for college only once you had the money to pay for it outright). You truly exemplify what it means to be a public servant, and I am proud to live in your ward. Fayetteville is blessed to have you.
@Joyce – Thank you. That is generous of you to say. I really do appreciate everyone who takes the time to have a constructive conversation. Cheers to you and yours!
Petty’s trying to bring more openness to the A&P, a body that sorely needs it. I’d like to know who opposes more transparency from this group that has shown a history of closed-door dealings.
I don’t get it. All Mr. Petty is saying is that his phone poll suggests that sending the current proposal to voters isn’t likely to be well-received and that citizens need to be formally polled BEFORE further planning is conducted.
The reason this is met with opposition isn’t because a poll/survey will cost money, but because the poll/survey will tell the A&P what they don’t want to hear.
Mr. Petty is advocating for citizen participation in this large and costly decision. How can this be a bad thing?
How dare anyone question the wisdom of Marilyn? Who do you people think you are?
How kind of you, Mr. Petty, to give the voters “a seat at the table.” I think the voters will roar their disapproval of this in any election. Thank you, Mayor, for “no to any 25 year commitment of funds.”
My guess as to the as-yet-unnamed sponsor of the poll: Dan Coody.
Dear David, you are a kook. Please fixate on someone else for a while.
It hardy requires a fixation to make a good guess. You had a poll done before, and the WAC and eventual fate of the land at Southpass are subjects that interest you. I was rather hoping that you had taken an interest in civic life once again.
There’s no need for you to continue to be so rude.
It takes money to do a poll. Quite a bit if it is legit. Look for someone who has money to blow or has a financial interest of some sort. I don’t fit the profile. It doesn’t require posting on the Flyer or paying for a poll to take an interest in civic life. At least that is how things work in my reality.
RE “It doesn’t require posting on the Flyer or paying for a poll to take an interest in civic life.”
Glad to know that you are also aware of that. See you at some public meetings.
Just glad to know Coody is still alive. Musta taken longer to recover from that whuppin’ than I thought it would.
Name-calling and a prickly, petty demeanor are the reasons you weren’t elected in November.
Mr. Coody, you were so active on the Flyer with your agenda before the election and have been essentially mute since. For a man who aspires to hold political office, you show a thin skin and a lack of maturity and I’m disappointed that your only comment in months has been to “defend” yourself against a lighthearted joke.
Take a page out of Matthew Petty’s book and respond to citizens in a calm, measured, unemotional tone. There’s a reason people love the guy.
RE “I’m disappointed that your only comment in months has been to “defend” yourself against a lighthearted joke.”
I wasn’t joking: I really thought that Mr. Coody had commissioned the poll. And as I had shown approval of the poll and had expressed my belief in its value, I don’t see why Mr. Coody took such umbrage. If anything, I would think he’d be flattered (or relieved) that I associated him with such a worthwhile thing as the poll. It appears he didn’t actually read the thread.
I’m just so glad Matthew Petty is on the A&P commission now.
I applied for a future public seat on the A & P commission and they don’t make it easy to apply. It was suggested to me by a city employee not to apply, and it took most of the morning and several attempts to be given the correct info on where to apply. It’s obvious that the A&P commission doesn’t want input from citizens. It’s also obvious that corporate donors should pay for WAC improvements, and that A&P funds should benefit the public.
RE: “It’s obvious that the A&P commission doesn’t want input from citizens.”
Has the A&P ever been picketed?
It only takes a dozen pieces of posterboard and bodies to make giant “TRANSPARENCY” sign across from their meeting place.
Where does the A&P meet again?
Share the stick Petty. Cough cough.
And this lame cheap-shot advances the debate… how? Way to contribute, man!
Automated telephone polls use landlines exclusively, which skews the results. This had much to do with why the last presidential election was thought to be so close until after the results were in. It is thought that such polls over-represent a conservative, anti-tax voter base.
What would it take for an online poll? ….maybe on an alternative news site that awesome folks like us visit??
eh…. flyer?
@Daniel Maner – Everything you said about landline polling is correct, but your first sentence isn’t necessarily true. Many pollsters now use random digit dialing, so every possible phone number has an equal chance of being called. They have their own limitations but they get passed the landline bias.
This poll called the numbers of registered voters as recorded by the Washington County Election Commission. So if a voter gave a cell phone number, it could have been called. This method also has limitations (every polling method does), but it eliminates the landline bias, too.
Isn’t a bond issue voted on anyway? Are we trying to find a higher rate of successful passage of a bond proposal by polling? Why do we need a bond or two?
RE “Isn’t a bond issue voted on anyway?”
Yes.
RE “Are we trying to find a higher rate of successful passage of a bond proposal by polling?”
Of course. Most of us learned a lesson from the experience of the Fayetteville school district when they had to propose two bond issues in order to get a new high school built.
RE “Why do we need a bond or two?”
Polling will help to answer that question, as well as helping to determine the bond amount and term, the tax rate, and amounts of revenue devoted to whatever projects are deemed most needed, most wanted and most likely to pass.
Funding the development of the regional park on land the city already owns for that purpose seems like a popular idea in the Flyer threads, particularly in conjunction with an outdoor performance venue. Funding for expanding appears to be less so. However, the Flyer threads are probably no more representative of the will of the citizenry than no poll at all is.
Thank you for taking time to respond David Franks., but I don’t care for your point of view. I was replying to mpetty.
@anotherpointofview -
Not all bond issues require a vote by the people, but any bonds backed by HMR tax revenues do.
The intention of incorporating public input is to structure a proposal that the people want and therefore has a fair chance of being passed.
The “need” for a bond is a matter of opinion. It is my opinion that both the Walton Arts Center expansion on Dickson and a regional park are good investments for Fayetteville. I think most folks who undertake a careful examination of the facts reach the same conclusion. I believe the details and deliverables of each project will make or break the support of the public, and that the best way to craft the proposals is in collaboration with the public.
Thank you.
RE “Thank you for taking time to respond David Franks., but I don’t care for your point of view.”
The answers to your particular questions are independent of the point of view of the person who answers them.
RE “I was replying to mpetty.”
Notice the similarity of Mr. Petty’s answers to my answers. I guess you don’t like his point of view, either.
No , just yours David.
Try to cope.
Quit walking on my post and we’ll be fine.
Because, you know, when talking about taking a survey of public opinion, we need FEWER voices, not more…
Franks can post anywhere , anytime he wants. I do not care for his opines on my post.
Thank you for your kind permission. It is a good first step. Now you need to get over your adherence to the genetic fallacy.
I stand corrected- thank you. Random digit dialing does have a non-responder bias but as you said every method has it’s flaws.