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
Do you support widening the right of way on Milton Road for the purpose of:
Do you have any additional comments about widening Milton Road or not?
I think that it is necessary to widen Milton to some degree to achieve the safety and level of service required for long term sustainability.
How many buildings would you be willing to remove in order to add the following features?
Do you have any other comments about potential impacts to buildings on Milton Road?
Minimizing building impact is preferred, but I don't think realistic. It is necessary to develop this corridor for vehicular traffic primarily. It supports so many other amenities in the City, that investing up front to move buildings will pay off in the long runHow many parking lots would you be willing to remove in order to add the following features?
Do you have any other comments about potential impacts to parking lots on Milton Road?
Sufficient parking needs to remain for remaining buildings. But there does seem to be an excess of surface parking available currently, to afford removing some and reconfiguring/sharing others. Encouraging and developing for transit connectivity will also support needing less surface parkingWhat types of enhancements are needed on Milton Road? Please rate each improvement.
Do you think there are other enhancements that are needed on Milton Road?
A raised median on Milton Road could improve safety but would limit access and left turning movements to and from individual business driveways. Would you support the construction of a raised median on Milton Road?
In 2040, if nothing is done, it is estimated to take 7 mins to drive from Forest Meadows St to Humphreys St on Milton Rd. How much of an increase in vehicle travel time would you be willing to accept in order to bring improvements for bus users, cyclists and pedestrians to an acceptable level?
Do you have any other comments about Milton Road enhancements that you would like to share?
Crossing Milton needs to be safe for bicycle/pedestrian connectivity. I think it's a waste to try to make Milton a one-size-fits-all corridor for all modes, when parallel routes are available and much more pleasant, especially for bicyclistsPlease rate how much you support each of the below Milton Road alternatives. [1 = Strongly Oppose, 3 = Oppose, 5 = Neutral, 7 = Support, 9 = Strongly Support]
Why do you support your preferred alternative? Why do you not support others?
Reading the original report, my first choice would be Alternative 3, because it adds the necessary travel lane in each direction. This could be dedicated to transit in the future if necessary, or always used for open flow traffic. It seems like a good balance of investing in some purchased ROW to gain some tangible benefit in terms of vehicular safety and level of service. Median with controlled turns is crucial I think. Pedestrian facilities and crossings should be improved for consistent transit/ped access to businesses/services along the corridor -- I think this could be accomplished either by a wider sidewalk or a set-back. I think a landscape strip greater than 5' is a waste of money to invest in the ROW. I imagine those strips would be either landscaped and difficult/expensive to maintain, or they'd be plain gravel and look no better than pavement (which would have more utility). There should be a thoughtful plan to maintain aesthetics if landscaping is planned. Alternative 6b is my favorite remaining alternative, because it balances these things. I think the landscape width is excessive in that alternative however. The alternatives with the dedicated bike lane, I do not favor. I am a cyclist and I would rather see investment in parallel routes. Milton is a busy arterial, it's ok for it to focus on vehicular flow and ensure safe interactions/crossing between cars and peds/bikes. Simply adding a bike lane is not going to make Milton a safe or pleasant place to ride.Which enhancements do you feel are needed to make Milton Road a “Great Street”? (select as many as you want)
Please rate how well each alternative would make Milton Road a “Great Street”? (1 = Very Poorly, 3 = Poorly, 5 = Fairly Well, 7 = Well, 9 = Very Well)
Please provide any additional comments about Milton Road as a “Great Street” here:
No response.