Participation Guidelines
The City of Flagstaff (the “City”) has partnered with OpenGov, a third-party online forum provider, to create a civic engagement platform that will allow the citizens of Flagstaff get more involved in City government. Flagstaff Community Forum is a forum for the discussion of proposed City projects and upcoming policy topics related to local government in the City and its partner agencies. The topics are generated by City staff, commissions, and Council for the purpose of public participation in current government decision making.
To ensure that all voices are heard and that forum participants are able to speak freely about the posted topics, participants who register to use the forum must agree to not post disruptive statements. Disruptive statements include the following:
- Statements that do not relate to the posted topic;
- Personal attacks and statements that threaten or abuse other forum participants, members of the public, City staff or City officials;
- Statements that discriminate on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual preference, age, region, disability, etc.
- Hate speech of any kind;
- Statements containing any sort of commercial advertising or soliciting funds, goods, or services;
- Repetitive or meaningless messages (“spam”);
- A statement from a user who has falsified their registration information with the intent to post multiple statements in one topic or to misrepresent their city of residence; and
- Statements that include obscene, pornographic, abusive, or otherwise illegal material.
OpenGov, acting as the forum monitor, will remove any disruptive statements that are posted on the forum. Forum participants who post disruptive statements may lose their posting privileges.
Frequently asked questions about the participation guidelines
Why does Open Town Hall monitor for disruptive statements?
OpenGov is a non-partisan company dedicated to building public trust in government and broadening civic engagement. Many people will not participate, if the forum has disruptive statements.
Does Open Town Hall find many disruptive statements?
No. Disruptive statements are quite rare - less than one in a thousand statements on OpenGov moderated topics nationwide are disruptive.
What does Open Town Hall do if they find a disruptive statement?
OpenGov
- moves the statement to a different web page,
- describes the problem in an email to the author, and
- invites the author to change the statement.
Does Open Town Hall ever edit or delete statements?
Never. Only the statement's author can edit or delete a statement. If a statement is removed from the public website, it will still be seen by the City of Flagstaff and be part of the public record.
If I disagree with someone, can I post my opinion?
Yes. Open Town Hall encourages open dialog and debate which, by necessity, includes disagreements.
How do I know if my statement is a 'disagreement' or a 'personal attack'?
Personal attacks are disparaging remarks which impute motives to a person's action. Statements of fact, or of your own opinion are generally not personal attacks.
Here are some examples of statements which are, and are not, personal attacks.
Personal Attack v. Not A Personal Attack
He is a liar. V. He said he did X, but in fact he did Y.
She misrepresented the truth. V. I don't believe what she said.
He is greedy. V. He is making money from this project.
It is merely a power play on her part. V. She will announce her candidacy soon.
Translate
Please be as specific as possible and note which growth ideas you are referring to in your response.
Given that Flagstaff has no new water sources and we have to keep pumping from further down in the aquifer, no growth is the only responsible and only sustainable option. There is no indication that water conservation would provide enough additional water for reducing our growing consumption, let alone to offset further growth.
Please be as specific as possible and note which growth ideas you are referring to in your response.
lack of water, added carbon footprint not in keeping with our current Regional Plan's goal of net zero by 2030, inadequate forest thinning exposes entire community to risk of catastrophic wildfire, the details of poor planning resulting in substandard development design and implementation, why has there been no code to block plumbing of new construction for fossil fuels?, is prep for electric car charging stations required in each new development?, why are new developments not REQUIRED to be within walking distance for food, work, and services?, why is there no "Sustainability Impact Analysis" required for new development proposals?, why are the anti-sprawl goals of our current Regional Plan ignored when new development proposals are considered?, etc...
Are we missing anything we should consider as we develop and model scenarios?
Yes, all the things I mentioned in my last answer and more:
lack of water, added carbon footprint not in keeping with our current Regional Plan's goal of net zero by 2030, inadequate forest thinning exposes entire community to risk of catastrophic wildfire, the details of poor planning resulting in substandard development design and implementation, why has there been no code to block plumbing of new construction for fossil fuels?, is prep for electric car charging stations required in each new development?, why are new developments not REQUIRED to be within walking distance for food, work, and services?, why is there no "Sustainability Impact Analysis" required for new development proposals?, why are the anti-sprawl goals of our current Regional Plan ignored when new development proposals are considered?, etc...
Are you affiliated with any of the community organizations listed below? (Select all that apply) If you are affiliated with an organization not listed, please enter the name in the "Other" response option.