Government Channel of Fayetteville, Arkansas

January 2012 meeting of Fayetteville AR telecommunication board

2012-01-24T21:31:00.000-06:00

Former Fayetteville cable administration manager and member of the telecom board cites problems with proposed new telecom ordinance

2012-01-16T13:09:00.002-06:00

From Richard Drake's Street Jazz blog on the Arkansas Times Web site

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Tuesday, January 17, 2012 - 12:14:04

Fayetteville City Council and the Telecom Board: the questions that aldermen really should be asking - though I doubt they will

Our ignorance of history causes us to slander our own times. - Gustave Flaubert
I don’t do this very often, but I’m going to turn over the last part of of my blog today to Marvin Hilton, former Cable Administrator for the city of Fayetteville. I will be printing a letter that he wrote to Mayor Lioneld Jordan and to the aldermen on the Fayetteville City Council.
Like many, Hilton is concerned about some of the proposed changes that are being suggested for the Telecommunications Board, which grew out of the old Cable Board.
Hilton, whose termination from the city in 2008 had the nasty smell of politics about it, isn’t just an ordinary men or woman off the street - though they should be treated with as every bit as much respect as him.
Actually, they should probably be treated with more respect than Hilton has gotten. As of 11:30 this morning, no elected official he had sent the letters to had seen fit to even acknowledge that they had received them.
The former Cable Administrator ( who served for eight years in his job) was also a former Telecom Board member, public access producer and earned his BGS in Communication at the University of Kansas 1979. No mere technocrat, Hilton spent his time studying communications law and maintained regular contact with other access centers across the United States, something long-considered vital in access.
This is not to say that the man who succeeded him is not a good, competent man. He is.
I’ll let Hilton speak for himself.
As the title of this piece indicates, there are questions that the Fayetteville City Council needs to satisfy itself on before it changes anything with regards to the Telecom Board.
Victor Hugo (how I wish I could shake your hand!) once wrote that we legislate not for today, but for tomorrow, and the “Tomorrow Test” should be stringently applied in this case.
Today, in 2012, we have a progressive city administration which hasn’t done too much irreparable harm to public access television (I’ve written about this before), and has the best interests of the people of Fayetteville at heart.
2012
There is an upset at the polls, and most of the progressives lose their seats, or at least by 2014. We have a city administration which is openly hostile not only to public access but to the Government Channel, as well. The Telecom Board, which has long set policy - despite some revisionist history - is made up of political lackeys and resume builders.
How might these changes affect our city? Has anyone even thought of that?
In the early 1990s there was one Fayetteville project in which literally thousands of people from all across our community were asked their hopes and dreams, and immediate goals.
The Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce wanted the television cameras taken out of City Hall.
******
And here, for your reading pleasure, Mister Marvin Hilton
This is the letter that Hilton wrote to Mayor Jordan, which he also sent to aldermen.

Dear Mayor Jordan,

In 2000 the City of Fayetteville recognized the rapidly expanding communication technology by changing the Cable Board to a Telecommunications Board. Again, in 2003 Fayetteville made progressive changes by broadening the scope of the Telecom Board to keep abreast of advancing technology.

This progressiveness will be reversed by the proposed changes to the Telecom Board, which are on the City Council Agenda, for January 17, 2012. Removing those definitions and duties that were added in 2003 will imply a more narrow view. Specifically the following are proposed to be removed:

• 33.205 (a) (4) The broad definition of “Telecommunications Infrastructure.”

• 33.210 (a) (6) “Funding for the development and maintenance of the City’s telecommunications infrastructure.”

• 33.210 (b) (6) “Identify telecommunications needs and solutions in the City and define innovative approaches to the use of expanding digital capacity.”

These changes will remove the broad view that could facilitate efficiency and integration across the specialties of the different city departments, such as the Television Center, Information Technology and Parking Enforcement and Telecommunications. A specific example would be to enable citizen participation
in meetings, via two-way video, from their living rooms. Unforeseen technological advances would also more likely be overlooked.

The City Attorney’s recommendations, in regard to the proposed changes, seem to be more in line with the broader view where he states: “With further advances and changes in this exploding technological area, we will probably learn of new forms of service and new names for future providers” He recommends adding to the
scope of the Board to include Internet Protocol (IP) television provider. Isn’t this in opposition to the three regressive changes noted above?

Why are we proposing these regressive changes? I urge you to retain the broad view of the three items noted above in the present Telecom Board Ordinance and keep Fayetteville progressive.

I am doing this because I want Fayetteville to be exemplary in communication. I am available to discuss this through email, my cell phone or in person. I hope to hear from you soon.

Sincerely,

Marvin Hilton
Former Cable Administrator 1994-2008
Former Telecom Board Member 2008-2010
Public Access Television Producer of the Year 1989
Fayetteville Resident for 20 years
BGS in Communication University of Kansas 1979
*****
Quote of the Day
We are all living a life sentence in the dungeon of self. - Cyril Connolly
rsdrake@cox.net

In 2000 the City of Fayetteville recognized the rapidly expanding communication technology by changing the Cable Board to a Telecommunications Board. Again, in 2003 Fayetteville made progressive changes by broadening the scope of the Telecom Board to keep abreast of advancing technology.

This progressiveness will be reversed by the proposed changes to the Telecom Board, which are on the City Council Agenda, for January 17, 2012. Removing those definitions and duties that were added in 2003 will imply a more narrow view. Specifically the following are proposed to be removed:

•    33.205 (a) (4) The broad definition of “Telecommunications Infrastructure.”

•    33.210 (a) (6) “Funding for the development and maintenance of the City’s telecommunications infrastructure.”

•    33.210 (b) (6) “Identify telecommunications needs and solutions in the City and define innovative approaches to the use of expanding digital capacity.”

These changes will remove the broad view that could facilitate efficiency and integration across the specialties of the different city departments, such as the Television Center, Information Technology and Parking Enforcement and Telecommunications. A specific example would be to enable citizen participation in meetings, via two-way video, from their living rooms. Unforeseen technological advances would also more likely be overlooked.

The City Attorney’s recommendations, in regard to the proposed changes, seem to be more in line with the broader view where he states: “With further advances and changes in this exploding technological area, we will probably learn of new forms of service and new names for future providers” He recommends adding to the scope of the Board to include Internet Protocol (IP) television provider. Isn’t this in opposition to the three regressive changes noted above?

Why are we proposing these regressive changes? I urge you to retain the broad view of the three items noted above in the present Telecom Board Ordinance and keep Fayetteville progressive.

I am doing this because I want Fayetteville to be exemplary in communication. I am available to discuss this through email, my cell phone or in person. I hope to hear from you soon.

Sincerely,

Marvin Hilton
Former Cable Administrator 1994-2008
Former Telecom Board Member 2008-2010
Public Access Television Producer of the Year 1989
Fayetteville Resident for 20 years
BGS in Communication University of Kansas 1979

689 East Winbaugh Lane
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703
marvinhilton@cox.net
479 466 9240

In 2000 the City of Fayetteville recognized the rapidly expanding communication technology by changing the Cable Board to a Telecommunications Board.  Again, in 2003 Fayetteville made progressive changes by broadening the scope of the Telecom Board to keep abreast of advancing technology.  
 
This progressiveness will be reversed by the proposed changes to the Telecom Board, which are on the City Council Agenda, for January 17, 2012. Removing those definitions and duties that were added in 2003 will imply a more narrow view. Specifically the following are proposed to be removed: 
 
•    33.205 (a) (4) The broad definition of “Telecommunications Infrastructure.” 
 
•    33.210 (a) (6) “Funding for the development and maintenance of the City’s telecommunications infrastructure.” 
 
•    33.210 (b) (6) “Identify telecommunications needs and solutions in the City and define innovative approaches to the use of expanding digital capacity.”  
 
 These changes will remove the broad view that could facilitate efficiency and integration across the specialties of the different city departments, such as the Television Center, Information Technology and Parking Enforcement and Telecommunications. A specific example would be to enable citizen participation in meetings, via two-way video, from their living rooms. Unforeseen technological advances would also more likely be overlooked.      
 
The City Attorney’s recommendations, in regard to the proposed changes, seem to be more in line with the broader view where he states: “With further advances and changes in this exploding technological area, we will probably learn of new forms of service and new names for future providers” He recommends adding to the scope of the Board to include Internet Protocol (IP) television provider. Isn’t this in opposition to the three regressive changes noted above?  
 
Why are we proposing these regressive changes?  I urge you to retain the broad view of the three items noted above in the present Telecom Board Ordinance and keep Fayetteville progressive. 
 
I am doing this because I want Fayetteville to be exemplary in communication. I am available to discuss this through email, my cell phone or in person.  I hope to hear from you soon.
 
Sincerely,
 
Marvin Hilton
Former Cable Administrator 1994-2008
Former Telecom Board Member 2008-2010
Public Access Television Producer of the Year 1989    
Fayetteville Resident for 20 years
BGS in Communication University of Kansas 1979 
 
689 East Winbaugh Lane
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703
marvinhilton@cox.net
479 466 9240

Jim Bemis, longtime producer on public-access channel and former member of Telecom Board clarifies purpose of his previous comments to that board

2012-01-16T11:24:00.000-06:00

If you have questions, please call: 966 7426.

Jim

January 16, 2012

Fayetteville City Council Members, Mayor Jordan, and City Staff:

My note here is to correct possible misinterpretations of “Jim Bemis’ complaints”, as mentioned in the proposed Telecommunication Ordinance (Agenda, Jan.17, 2012)

For the record:

· My earlier requests for services or “complaints” have never suggested removal of language in the current Ordinance, as might be implied by the current letter of submittal for the Resolution. Rather, I have strongly supported strengthening of the Board and City Council roles in oversight of Fayetteville’s telecommunications infrastructure (see summary request for service below).

· The current Board’s suggested heavy revisions represent a sharp and unwarranted reversal of the far-sighted provisions of the current (2003) ordinance, which is based on the recommendations of a City Council Adhoc Telecommunications Subcommittee led by then-aldermen Jordan and Marr.

· Similarly, the Board’s current recommendations contradict those made by the Telecommunications Board in 2009, as reflected in the attached documents. (See 2009 Forum Summary and Brainstorming Session report.)

Given the above, I anticipate that my requests for services will be considered in the context as originally presented (per Bemis initial Request for Service, August 2011):

Requested Board Action: That the full Board join with the City Staff and City Council in a team effort to inventory the community’s telecommunications needs and jointly update the Board’s Administrative Rules and the Telecommunications Ordinance. With community-wide input, this team would be equipped to prepare a longer-term telecommunications plan and budget, including a City-government organizational chart to designate the respective responsibilities for Fayetteville’s telecommunications infrastructure. Similar joint approaches were first suggested by the Board’s Forum and Brainstorming sessions of 2009 and in the City’s FayettevilleForward Communications Initiative. (see attachments)

Thank you for your consideration,

Jim Bemis

Reference: A Resolution Approving Telecommunications Board Revisions to Chapter 33: Department Boards, Commissions, and Authorities Ordinance Article IX : Telecommunications Board. For Council consideration January 17, 2012.

Telecom Board struggled to maintain balance between City Council and mayor's PR lady in 2007-08

2012-01-07T22:57:00.002-06:00

Direct link to video on You Tube.

Thanks to the Iconoclast for recording and sharing so much of the history of 2007-2009

2012-01-07T21:04:00.000-06:00

(From Iconoclast_ ADG column below : "Shut up, she explained"! )

Lunch with George Arnold

George Arnold has an interesting commentary in today's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on the nature and future of news and information in the public sphere. Unlike the editors at the Northwest Arkansas Times, Arnold gets out and chats with folks outside the office on a regular basis and considers their views. He tries to engage in a conversation with citizens instead of the unilateral preaching and navel gazing of certain other editorial and opinion writers. That was evident from his editorial column today, wherein he reflected on the national trend of newspaper downsizing and the rise of alternative information sources.

As Arnold tells it, "I sat down for lunch last week with some residents of Northwest Arkansas who keep close eyes on what's going on around them. They're veterans of community activism, politically engaged. What was on their minds? Judging from many of their questions to me, they are just as concerned about the future of news and newspapers as those of us working in the business. My lunch partners have been watching as the Internet, and blogs especially, redefine the meaning of news, and how news is delivered." At the other local newspapers, these kind of people are labeled extremists and dismissed as having nothing worthwhile to say.

George Arnold has learned what too many of his colleagues in the local press fail to understand or acknowledge. "Gone are the days when those of us in journalism school were trained to be the gatekeepers of information for the rest of the public. As newspaper reporters and editors, we would be deciding what was important enough to pass along to our readers each day. The responsibility was a serious one, and not to be taken lightly."

"The gatekeeper function hardly exists any more," he admits with a sense of caution. "Everybody with a computer has become his own editor, seeking out the news of interest to him and perhaps, like some of those at lunch with me, running a blog or at least contributing their own thoughts to blogs. The gathering of news has gone viral. I willingly admitted to the group that I scanned several must-read blogs in the course of my working day, along with the obligatory review of several newspapers. Without all of them, I'd be at a disadvantage in trying to keep up with what's going on in the world around me".

The mainstream media depend on advertsing revenue from business and government, while bloggers depend more on passionate opinions than paychecks and have less concern about offending the powerful. Arnold also knows "that there is a lot of bogus information on blogs, too. Anybody who refers to blogs has to be his own gatekeeper these days, sorting out the worthwhile from the trash. No easy task, as any newspaper reporter could testify." He should have said as any newspaper readers could testify as well.

It is asking a lot of readers to expect them to think critically, evaluate arguments, challenge evidence, and draw their own conclusions, but we think it is worth it. Bloggers and their readers sometimes get it wrong, but that is usually because government, corporate, and other institutional gatekeeppers (including the hired press) are less forthcoming about their true motives and prevent them having access to all of the relevant information. Bloggers must then speculate on what is missing and decide for themselves what news and views are "fit to print." Readers are not reluctant to let them know whether they agree.

But George, I thought what happened at lunch stayed at lunch

*******************************************************************************************

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette questions administrative take over of Government Channel

EDITORIALS : Shut up, she explained
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette Northwest Edition
Posted on Saturday, May 31, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/227285/
LAYING DOWN fair rules for freespeech can cause government to go bonkers. Such seems to be the case in Fayetteville, where the city administration has managed to shut down some public forums that have long had their place on the city’s Government Channel. A lot of the channel’s programming involves broadcasts of governmental meetings—a worthy undertaking in itself. But the channel has also produced public forums, in which members of the community discuss topics of interest that often involve controversy. After all, it’s Fayetteville, where a comment on the weather can start an argument.

What are some hot topics in Fayetteville these days ? Perhaps the future location of the high school. Or what’s going to become of the Walton Arts Center on Dickson Street.

Those subjects are getting a lot of talk in the papers, over the air, and in countless conversations in coffee shops and on street corners. But you won’t find them being discussed in forums on the Government Channel these days. The city’s would-be propaganda minister, Susan Thomas, has decided otherwise. The public forums have been dismantled.

Ms. Thomas’ actual title is public information officer. Right now she’s busy limiting public information. It seems she agrees with the latest word from the city attorney. Kit Williams has opined that the forums on the Government Channel might be an illegal use of the channel. So Susan Thomas now has a rationale for killing the forums. Or as she put it in pure doublespeak, she didn’t really cancel the forums. She just announced that planning them had been stopped. Another distinction without a difference. Censors have a million of ’em.

The decision bothered the chairman of the city’s Telecommunications Board, which was originally created to put a buffer between the channel and an overzealous city administration. Richard Drake, the board’s chairman, was stunned to hear that the city had stopped planning the forums—without checking with the board. There was no need, according to Susan Thomas. The city council, she said, makes policy decisions on matters like public forums.

Not so fast there, Ms. Thomas. Your decision to stop planning for the forums amounts to setting policy. Which is not your prerogative.

This is just the latest flare-up between the city’s administration and the Government Channel. Earlier, the city fired its cable administrator, Marvin Hilton, for reasons that have yet to be adequately explained. At the latest meeting of the Telecommunications Board, Ms. Thomas presented the administrator’s report that used to be given by Mr. Hilton. And she said she expected to continue giving the report at future meetings. The term for it is power grab.

What’s going on here ? Why the city administrator’s sudden interest in programming on the Government Channel ? And why, after all these years, are the public forums on the channel deemed illegal ? These issue forums have long been done remarkably well. They’re balanced. Every side is heard.

One suggestion has been to move the forums to the community access channel. That channel would probably do a good job on the forums. But there’s no requirement on the community access channel that all sides be heard. A producer could decide to leave out one or more of the sides. That would be a step down from the practice long used by the Government Channel.

The bigger concern is that the administration’s latest intrusions open the door to further meddling in programming on the Government Channel. Some future administration might be inclined to tamper with the policies even more. The programming could become just what it was designed not to be: a tool to put the current administration in the most favorable light.

Nancy Allen, an alderman, wants the city council to look into this flap over the Government Channel. It’s a good idea. Maybe the city council can get to the bottom of the administration’s growing interest in what can and cannot be said in public forums on the channel.

We’d especially like to hear something unequivocal from Dan Coody, the mayor. He’s notoriously touchy about public information that doesn’t come out the way he thinks it should. What’s his role in this flap ? Does he support undermining the independence of the Telecommunications Board ? And Susan Thomas’ fiddling with programming ? Good questions. Answers are needed.

The board also deserves to know where it stands with this administration. Does the board set policy for the Government Channel, or is the board just there to do the bidding of others—in this case, the city administration ?

The public forums on the Government Channel have been a good source of information about various topics of community interest. To undermine that success—for whatever reason—is a mistake. The city council needs to get to the bottom of this. Soon. Before silence becomes standard operating procedure. Even in once free-speaking Fayetteville.

*******************************

-***************************************************

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Jim Bemis <nputjim@gmail.com> wrote:

More rude facts from the Iconoclast, plus kick-ass quote from Richard., TBoard chair. See also, "Through the Looking Glass Darkly" below.

Ah, we miss the clarion tones of the Iconoclast.... to rid us of this current folly!

Aubrey's uploaded another video of the more glorious days. Keep'em coming, Aubrey.

Why not a replay of this one (below) on your blog, Richard or the one borrowed from Alice?. All of these will make a lot of folks re-think (doublethink?) the Board's current savaging of the Ordinance.

Jim

******************************************8888

Minister of Information Control

Chair Richard Drake has sent a letter on behalf of the Fayetteville Telecommunications Board to Mayor Coody and the City Council. It appears to be a finding of fact and a complaint that two issue forums that had already been approved for production on the Fayetteville Government Channel were "unceremoniously yanked from the planning stages" and vetoed by Dr. Susan Thomas, PhD, the mayor's public relations and policy advisor. At its June meeting, the Board voted unanimously to urge the City Council "to allow these two forums to take place."

One of the issue forums dealt with the future of Fayetteville High School, and the other was to deal with the future of the Walton Arts Center in Fayetteville. Both are timely issues of public concern, and both were requested by Alderman Nancy Allen in accordance with the existing Government Channel policies adopted by the City Council in 2006.

Ignoring the city policy and acting on the assumed authority of the Mayor to do whatever he wants regardless of law and policy, Dr. Thomas canceled both of the programs requested by Alderman Allen. Is Mayor Coody afraid that these public forums might limit his ribbon cutting ceremony replays to showing only once a day? Is he afraid that someone might inquire about why he has done nothing about the almost certain moving of the Walton Arts Center to Benton County? Is it just a petty grudge against Alderman Allen who asked him to explain the sewer plant debacle?

I suppose it doesn't matter. The Telecommunications Board has no power. The cable administrator was fired and has not been replaced. If the Council took action on the policy, the Mayor would veto it and Gray-Thiel-Rhoads would vote to sustain. Dr. Thomas will not be reprimanded. And we will still get to see Dan's press conferences and self-promotions on the Government Channel every day.

Coody has not been held accountable for much worse transgressions of the public trust, so what's one more insult to the public?

Posted by Jonah at Friday, June 27, 2008

The City's Idea of Public Information

An informed public can be inconvenient for those in power. When the people have the facts, keep a close eye on the actions of public officials, and express their concerns or make suggestions, well, it is a democratic distraction. The most recent suggestion for cutting city expenses reflects the administration's conception of public information as a controlled one-way process.

In a late coming email yesterday, Susan Thomas, Mayor Coody's public information and policy adviser, laid out the administration's proposal to gut the community's unique Public, Education, and Government cable system in the name of efficiency. Fewer meetings of public boards and commissions will be covered on the government channel, and it will likely kill that pesky community access television that thinks it's about freedom of expression.

There might be good reasons to replace some of the city employees involved, but it would be difficult to make a case that the function is less important to citizens than funding out-of-state travel by administrators. It appears to be more of an excuse to curtail the ability of citizens to keep an eye on public meetings and to express their views on community access cable. You'll recall that the last cost savings measure was to abolish transcripts of meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission, and timely website updates to the council agenda appear to be a thing of the past.

Adding insult to injury, Thomas says the administration will add one loyal full-time public information coordinator position to feed the people the government's positions in a monthly e-newsletter and updates on the wastewater cost overruns and street bond program. They want to be able to tell you what they want you to know, but they can do without having you knowing what they're really doing or letting them know what you think. When you do speak up, they'll say you're misinformed and don't know what you're talking about. I mean even more than they do already.

There are cuts to be made and programs to be abolished, but eliminating an informed citizenry should not be among them.

Posted by Jonah at Thursday, November 15, 2007

Government Channel Changers

One of the comments posted yesterday touched on the firing of City Cable Administrator Marvin Hilton and suggested that Mayor Coody could now use the Government Channel as "a 24 hour propaganda machine." Somehow I doubt that, but there does seem to be considerable email chatter about recent events at the PEG Center down at Rock 'n' Block.

Telecommunication Board Chairman Richard Drake maintains an interesting blog called Street Jazz and has been all over this topic for the last few days. He knows as much or more about such things as anyone except those Media Mandarins on the city payroll, so his comments will be of great interest to people who have great interest in such things. Drake also predicts that the Telecommunication Board meeting this Thursday will be an interesting one. Somehow I doubt that, too.

I hope that they get it all worked out and that we will continue to have the state's best cable line-up of public access, educational, and government channel coverage.

Posted by Jonah at Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Through the Looking Glass Darkly

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master— that’s all.”

-- Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

Richard Drake, Chairman of the Fayetteville Telecommunications Board, appeared to be upset during last night's meeting about partisan political agendas influencing informational programming on the city's Government Channel 16. In the past, the channel has carried balanced programs with citizens discussing public policy issues such as Road Impact Fees and the Freedom of Information Act. Nevermore, it now seems.

Mr. Drake and others expressed concern that Dr. Susan Thomas, Ph.D., Mayor Dan Coody's Public Relations and Policy Advisor, had ignored existing city policy regarding the Government Channel and had canceled two citizen-initiated issue forums about the location of Fayetteville High School and the future of the Walton Arts Center.

“So we’ve actually canceled these without waiting for any sort of policy decision from the Telecom Board?” Drake asked Thomas.

No, Dr. Thomas replied, the administration had not canceled the programs, it had only suspended planning them, and any future consideration of such illegal issue forums had also been stopped immediately.

Oh.

Posted by Jonah at Friday, May 23, 2008

Cable Imbroglio or Coody Implosion?

There were signs during last week's City Council meeting that something was not quite right. Planning Director Tim Conklin, a very competent and highly regarded city employee, is resigning to take a job in Springfield, Missouri. The City Council passed a Resolution of gratitude for Conklin's 15 years of service, then Mayor Coody announced that Conklin's position would not be filled until next year, dumping his responsibilities on the other employees. Quite a slap at the staff just honored by the Council in a 7-0 vote, then later in the same meeting he berated the Council for not respecting the staff and adding two burdensome weeks to the time it would take to fill a vacant position. Bizarre or Bipolar?

This week it got worse. No one has seen the Mayor at City Hall, and perhaps for good reason. Dr. Susan Thomas, Ph.D., Public Relations and Policy Adviser, has usurped all power granted to the Telecommunications Board by ordinance and declared it merely advisory. She decided to unilaterally draft new regulations. She has also suspended all public affairs forums on the Government Channel and decreed that even previously recorded and shown forums cannot be replayed. All of this comes on the heels of her firing the city's long-time Cable Administrator and having him removed by the police.

Then, yesterday, Dr. Susan Thomas Ph.D., Public Relations, Policy Adviser, and Self-Appointed Cable Czar, fired off a memo to Mayor Coody declaring that "the conflict of opinion between me and certain member of the Telecom Board in this matter has become untenable and has created a negative working environment in which I am no longer willing to participate." Big surprise. She asked the Mayor to relieve her of responsibility for the FUBAR situation.

It gets even more weird. If you have forgotten Dan Coody's bold statement before the Fayetteville City Council on September 19, 2000, that control of the Government Channel should be by the Telecom Board and not the Council and that there should be more citizen debates and not less, Richard Drake has that and more on his Street Jazz blog today. Now in power, Coody wants his office to control everything and squelch all public debate in that forum. City Attorney Kit Williams has also sent Mayor Coody a memo supporting that new position and repudiating as unwise the stance taken by candidate Coody when he ran for office.

It would still be okay under Coody's new scheme for Coody, himself, to use the Government Channel to present one-sided "educational" programs like the campaign to increase the sales tax or his press puffery of whatever he wants to brag on himself about endlessly. It would not be okay for citizens to request and present a balanced discussion of proposed impact fees or even proposed regulations of the Government Channel. The government will tell you anything they want you to know.

Although I had a couple of earlier blog entries about this topic, I haven't followed it closely and really don't know much about all of this stuff, so chime in if you have a better handle on what's going on here. I do think it looks like the end times for this administration. It seems to be so riddled with contradictory positions that the mayor has lost the public trust. Coody should be very glad that Scott McClellan didn't work for him. The rest of us can be glad that there are 217 days left in this year.

Posted by Jonah at Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Even the Democrat-Gazette Gets It

"What are some hot topics in Fayetteville these days? Perhaps the future location of the high school. Or what’s going to become of the Walton Arts Center on Dickson Street. Those subjects are getting a lot of talk in the papers, over the air, and in countless conversations in coffee shops and on street corners. But you won’t find them being discussed in forums on the Government Channel these days. The city’s would-be propaganda minister, Susan Thomas, has decided otherwise. The public forums have been dismantled. "Ms. Thomas’ actual title is public information officer. Right now she’s busy limiting public information. It seems she agrees with the latest word from the city attorney. Kit Williams has opined that the forums on the Government Channel might be an illegal use of the channel. So Susan Thomas now has a rationale for killing the forums. Or as she put it in pure doublespeak, she didn’t really cancel the forums. She just announced that planning them had been stopped. Another distinction without a difference. Censors have a million of ’em. ...
"What’s going on here? Why the city administrator’s sudden interest in programming on the Government Channel? And why, after all these years, are the public forums on the channel deemed illegal? These issue forums have long been done remarkably well. They’re balanced. Every side is heard. ...
"The bigger concern is that the administration’s latest intrusions open the door to further meddling in programming on the Government Channel. Some future administration might be inclined to tamper with the policies even more. The programming could become just what it was designed not to be: a tool to put the current administration in the most favorable light. ...

"We’d especially like to hear something unequivocal from Dan Coody, the mayor. He’s notoriously touchy about public information that doesn’t come out the way he thinks it should. What’s his role in this flap? Does he support undermining the independence of the Telecommunications Board? And Susan Thomas’ fiddling with programming? Good questions. Answers are needed. ...

"The public forums on the Government Channel have been a good source of information about various topics of community interest. To undermine that success—for whatever reason—is a mistake. The city council needs to get to the bottom of this. Soon. Before silence becomes standard operating procedure. Even in once free-speaking Fayetteville."
Editorial, "Shut Up, She Explained," Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Posted by Jonah at Saturday, May 31, 2008

Fair and Balanced

It seems that most of the discussion about Fayetteville's Government Channel has been about the unilateral decision of Dr. Susan Thomas, Ph.D. to suspend the production and cablecasting of forums on local issues of public concern. That edict applied to all forums requested by elected Aldermen as well as private citizens.

City Attorney Kit Williams is quoted in the Northwest Arkansas Times as saying the problem is that any forums on the Government Channel programming should be "fair and balanced," but that government is prohibited from deciding what or who is fair and balanced. Baloney. The Fairness Doctrine of the FCC, from 1949 until abolished under Ronald Reagan, said private broadcasters had an obligation to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on controversial issues of public importance. The Commission also held that stations were also obligated to actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming that addressed those issues. The government made the call as to whether they did so.

Williams also said something else very interesting. He said the Government Channel should "just be a purveyor of unvarnished information, just what the government is doing, whether it’s good, bad or indifferent." Right. What that does not address is who will be the designated Decider of what information is offered up. Who would decide to replay an excerpt of a city council meeting from more than a year ago? What objective standard would suggest that it was now in demand or even of current interest?

Would a Mayor dominate the Government Channel then try to claim that major financial problems are due to a "failure to communicate"? Would a Mayor or his Public Relations Adviser schedule a replay of events which made him look like an idiot?

Would they load up programming to support elections on taxes they wanted to raise and starve discussions about city ballot issues they opposed? Who, for example, would hog all the space on the City Website for one side of the issue and run a saturation schedule of 30 programs in the two days before the September 2006 sales tax election to "educate" the voters? Or, who would decide that in the two days before the April 2007 election on road impact fees, which the Mayor opposed, to program only three showings of a balanced forum requested by an alderman to present and discuss both sides of the issue?

The Telecommunications Board has the responsibility to recommend a new Government Channel Policy for consideration by the City Council. Can it craft a policy to guard against an administration that would abuse that public resource for blatant political purposes? Would the Council approve it? Would the Mayor veto it?

[Click on schedule to enlarge]

Posted by Jonah at Thursday, June 05, 2008

All Coody, All the Time

FAYETTEVILLE COODY16

THE NEW CITY ORDER

GOVERNMENT CHANNEL

PROGRAM GUIDE

June 22-28, 2008

FEATURING AN EXCITING LINE-UP OF:

8 Repeats of Coody's Press Conference on Bottled Water

6 Repeats of Coody’s Sewer Treatment Plant Ribbon Cutting

1 Repeat of City Council Meeting: June 17

0 Citizen Forums on Issues of Public Concern

Set your TiVo now! Look for the updated program guide in the Cable Administration section on the city's lame website, but don’t bother looking for Telecommunications Board Policies. Contact Dr. Susan Thomas PhD, Public Relations, Policy, and Government Channel Adviser at sthomas@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

SUNDAY, June 22

11:15 p.m. Waste Water Treatment Plant Ribbon Cutting

4:30 p.m. City Council Meeting: June 17

MONDAY, June 23

8:30 p.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

9:00 p.m. Waste Water Treatment Plant Ribbon Cutting

TUESDAY, June 24

8:30 a.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

1:00 p.m. Waste Water Treatment Plant Ribbon Cutting

WEDNESDAY, June 25

2:30 p.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

3:30 p.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

10:15 p.m. Waste Water Treatment Plant Ribbon Cutting

THURSDAY, June 26

3:15 p.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

11:30 p.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

FRIDAY, June 27

8:30 a.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

9:00 a.m. Waste Water Treatment Plant Ribbon Cutting

9:45 p.m. Waste Water Treatment Plant Ribbon Cutting

SATURDAY, June 28

3:00 p.m. Mayor Coody's Press Conference On Bottled Water

Posted by Jonah at Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Minister of Information Control

Chair Richard Drake has sent a letter on behalf of the Fayetteville Telecommunications Board to Mayor Coody and the City Council. It appears to be a finding of fact and a complaint that two issue forums that had already been approved for production on the Fayetteville Government Channel were "unceremoniously yanked from the planning stages" and vetoed by Dr. Susan Thomas, PhD, the mayor's public relations and policy advisor. At its June meeting, the Board voted unanimously to urge the City Council "to allow these two forums to take place."

One of the issue forums dealt with the future of Fayetteville High School, and the other was to deal with the future of the Walton Arts Center in Fayetteville. Both are timely issues of public concern, and both were requested by Alderman Nancy Allen in accordance with the existing Government Channel policies adopted by the City Council in 2006.

Ignoring the city policy and acting on the assumed authority of the Mayor to do whatever he wants regardless of law and policy, Dr. Thomas canceled both of the programs requested by Alderman Allen. Is Mayor Coody afraid that these public forums might limit his ribbon cutting ceremony replays to showing only once a day? Is he afraid that someone might inquire about why he has done nothing about the almost certain moving of the Walton Arts Center to Benton County? Is it just a petty grudge against Alderman Allen who asked him to explain the sewer plant debacle?

I suppose it doesn't matter. The Telecommunications Board has no power. The cable administrator was fired and has not been replaced. If the Council took action on the policy, the Mayor would veto it and Gray-Thiel-Rhoads would vote to sustain. Dr. Thomas will not be reprimanded. And we will still get to see Dan's press conferences and self-promotions on the Government Channel every day.

Coody has not been held accountable for much worse transgressions of the public trust, so what's one more insult to the public?

Posted by Jonah at Friday, June 27, 2008
Minister of Information Control

Chair Richard Drake has sent a letter on behalf of the Fayetteville Telecommunications Board to Mayor Coody and the City Council. It appears to be a finding of fact and a complaint that two issue forums that had already been approved for production on the Fayetteville Government Channel were "unceremoniously yanked from the planning stages" and vetoed by Dr. Susan Thomas, PhD, the mayor's public relations and policy advisor. At its June meeting, the Board voted unanimously to urge the City Council "to allow these two forums to take place."

One of the issue forums dealt with the future of Fayetteville High School, and the other was to deal with the future of the Walton Arts Center in Fayetteville. Both are timely issues of public concern, and both were requested by Alderman Nancy Allen in accordance with the existing Government Channel policies adopted by the City Council in 2006.

Ignoring the city policy and acting on the assumed authority of the Mayor to do whatever he wants regardless of law and policy, Dr. Thomas canceled both of the programs requested by Alderman Allen. Is Mayor Coody afraid that these public forums might limit his ribbon cutting ceremony replays to showing only once a day? Is he afraid that someone might inquire about why he has done nothing about the almost certain moving of the Walton Arts Center to Benton County? Is it just a petty grudge against Alderman Allen who asked him to explain the sewer plant debacle?

I suppose it doesn't matter. The Telecommunications Board has no power. The cable administrator was fired and has not been replaced. If the Council took action on the policy, the Mayor would veto it and Gray-Thiel-Rhoads would vote to sustain. Dr. Thomas will not be reprimanded. And we will still get to see Dan's press conferences and self-promotions on the Government Channel every day.

Coody has not been held accountable for much worse transgressions of the public trust, so what's one more insult to the public?

Posted by Jonah at Friday, June 27, 2008

Misfeasance or Media Manipulation?

The Fayetteville City Council this week abdicated any role in the Government Channel operations. In identical 4-3 votes, Adella Gray, Brenda Thiel, Robert Rhoads, and Bobby Ferrell voted against a resolution asking the Coody administration to follow the existing ordinance setting city policy and against enforcing that policy that allows an alderman to request production of a forum on issues of public concern. They cared not that one of Coody's assistants vetoed the alderman's legitimate request nor that the Telecommunications Board objected to that arbitrary action.

Dan Coody now has unfettered control to decide what appears on the Government Channel 16 -- as well as the power to prevent programs from being on the regular cablecast. While the Mayor kept questioning who would pay for production of a public forum requested by an alderman, he didn't have any problems with or explanations of who paid for producing his numerous press conferences and ribbon-cutting publicity stunts. Coody also complained that producing a forum would put a strain on the reduced staff of the Government Channel -- caused by his firing the professional Cable Administrator and replacing him with his public relations advisor -- that is somehow greater than or different from taping and showing the mayor talking about whatever he did yesterday.

Events last weekend provide a good example of what to expect. Coody's Government Channel programmers scheduled replays of the regular monthly Ward 4 Meeting for just after midnight on Saturday night and again at 7:00 a.m. on Sunday morning, not exactly Prime Time even on the Government Channel. Then, mysteriously, the Government Channel went off the air from about 9:00 p.m. on Saturday night until sometime Sunday afternoon. This "accidental glitch" did not affect the showing of any of Coody's press conferences or ribbon-cuttings. It did prevent two showings of the most recent Ward 4 Meeting of citizens with their Aldermen, Shirley Lucas and Lioneld Jordan, to discuss the benefits of joining the Regional Mobility Authority, proposals by developers, and other issues of concern to local residents.

Probably just a coincidence.

Posted by Jonah at Thursday, July 17, 2008

Let's Keep a Good Thing Off the Channel

Dan Coody's effort to keep citizen issue forums from the Government Channel has been effective. After firing the City Cable Administrator then assigning public relations assistant Dr. Susan Thomas, Ph.D. to take control of programming and jerking issue forums requested by an Alderman, the administration has effectively guided the Telecommunication Board toward its desired goal of more Coody publicity and less citizen commentary.

Not everyone has fallen for their game nor fallen into line. One of the Telecom Board's subcommittees is struggling to resist the mayor's scheme by proposing a revised policy to continue the forums, but that brave effort is unlikely to make much difference. It has to be approved by the full board, which seems accommodating to the administration's demands, then it goes before the City Council, where the mayor has three sure votes and veto power. Even if the new policy were to be implemented, it is unlikely that any citizen forums could be produced and aired before the November election, and that appears to be Coody's primary concern.

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette has called a censor a censor. "The board has been in an uproar for months now—ever since Susan Thomas, the unelected information czar of Fayetteville, killed one of the best and most popular features on the Government Channel, or at least sent it into a deep coma. We’re talking about the forums devoted to topics of public interest in town. Ms. Thomas called a halt to those forums after the city attorney—Kit Williams—wondered out loud about their possibly being unfair to somebody or other. The problems weren’t constitutional or legal, he added. But his reservations were enough for Ms. Thomas, whose formal job title at City Hall is public information officer. In this case, she’s acted to squelch public information by shutting down the forums. This is happening in Fayetteville—a city proud of its reputation for vigorous debate."

Like Coody's specious claims about broken bones on the square and a wave of citizen complaints about his opponents' yard signs, the editorial said, "Ms. Thomas’ worries that the forums might be unfair never seemed well grounded in fact. Quite the contrary. For years, going back at least to 1992, these shows have provided worthwhile information on topics of interest to local residents. There haven’t been any significant complaints about the forums, which present all sides of an issue. What could be more fair than that? And what were the subjects of the two pending forums that were cancelled by Ms. Thomas? Why, the future location of Fayetteville High School and possibly moving the Walton Arts Center out of town—two of the hottest local issues around. How can limiting discussion of them help inform the public? Answer: It can’t—and it shouldn’t be allowed to. Not in the free republic of Fayetteville."

The City Council cannot fire Dr. Thomas . The "city administration’s unelected minister of propaganda" answers only to Mayor Coody, who is quite pleased that she is following orders without complaint and has taken most of the heat for his designs. If Fayetteville citizens want a return to open government, they will have to fire Dan Coody.

Posted by Jonah at Tuesday, August 12, 2008

The Resistance Struggles On

If you care about Fayetteville's Government Channel, there will be a discussion of the most recent suggested policy for such programming at the Telecom Board meeting today: Cox Channel 16, at 5:30 in Room 219 City Hall. You'll also be able to call in or send an email. (The phone number and email address should be on the screen or available at 444-3436.)

The Northwest Arkansas Times is against trying to continue public forums on the Government Channel, and they don't care much for the proposed requirements for fairness, preferring to let our Mayor control and dominate the programming between now and November 4th. The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette has a more thoughtful analysis of the controversy.

Maybe things will be resolved after the election.

Posted by Jonah at Thursday, August 28, 2008

Old Iconoclast posts drew a lot of public comment. Sorry to have to quote someone, but I am not as good a blogger as Jonah

2012-01-07T19:08:00.000-06:00

Minister of Information Control

Posted by Jonah at Friday, June 27, 2008

2004 Telecom Board round-table discussion important background for a council vote on Jan. 17, 2012

2012-01-05T23:07:00.002-06:00

December 20, 2011, meeting of Fayetteville AR city council draws comment on several important local issues on a 3-hour, 37-minute video

2012-01-01T02:09:00.000-06:00

December 15, 2011, meeting of the Fayetteville, Arkansas telecommunication board

2011-12-21T08:23:00.002-06:00

Direct link to Dec. 15, 2011, meeting of Fayetteville's telecom-board meeting on You Tube.

Direct link to December 15, 2011, meeting of telecom board on Fayetteville AR Web site.

Government censorship of You Tube, blogs, facebook, My space, etc., etc., not a good idea

2011-11-30T21:56:00.000-06:00

The SOPA Scoop: Anti-Piracy Bills Enrage Web Freedom Groups, Divide Congress

Wednesday 30 November 2011

by: Mike Ludwig, Truthout | Report

(Photo: Ciccio Pizzettaro)

Misuse of copyrighted content is a fact of life on the Internet. Everyday, YouTube users upload homemade videos with copyrighted songs and peers share files that could have originated from a torrent site like Pirate Bay. Now, imagine that the US government granted itself sweeping legal authority to shut down alleged pirate sites and intervene when web sites host any kind of content that infringes a copyright. Imagine web users facing felony charges for streaming copyrighted content without permission.

Two bills aimed at fighting Internet piracy are currently making their way through Congress and would give the Justice Department such authority. The bill's proponents say the legislation could save the US economy billions of dollars and protect consumers from fraudulent products like fake prescription medicine.

A growing movement of opponents, including members of Congress from both parties, claim the bill is an Internet job killer that would open a Pandora's box of legal actions that could cripple online innovation and entrepreneurship while putting anyone connected to pirated content under threat of legal action.

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House and the Protect IP Act in the Senate have reopened the fierce debate over the government's role in regulating the Internet, and both bills could be up for a vote within months.

A movement to stop the bills has gone viral online. Web companies like Mozilla, Google, AOL and Facebook have come out against the legislation.

Both bills would allow the Justice Department to take down sites deemed to be "dedicated to infringing activities" and both the department and copyright owners would be allowed to sue alleged infringers. The bills also allow the Justice Department to demand that search engines, payment processors like PayPal, social media sites and service providers remove links and block access to targeted sites.

In addition, SOPA would make the unauthorized web streaming of copyrighted content a felony carrying a sentence of up to five years in prison, a measure that prompted the American Censorship coalition to claim "singing a pop song on Facebook could be a felony."

Broad language in both bills targets web pirates, but because many pirating sites operate outside the US and copyrighted content is mixed in with user generated media, a wide range of third-party search engines and sites would be forced into the legal process.

Under SOPA, private companies could ask the Justice Department to force search engines and providers to remove links to infringing sites and demand social networking sites police and censor users.

The authors of the bills claim that third-party sites could challenge court orders and would not have to police pirating beyond what is technically feasible, but opponents say big media and entertainment companies would be granted new legal tools to tie up smaller competitors in expensive legal battles and squash up-and-coming social media sites like Soundcloud and Tumblr.

"SOPA and [Protect IP] would place a major burden on all sorts of sites that accept user generated content, but it's heaviest for innovators and smaller organizations that don't have large legal teams," said Parker Higgins, an activist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Under SOPA or [Protect IP], these sites may never be able to get off the ground."

Censoring user-generated media could drive consumers toward more conventional sources, and it turns out the entertainment industry is a big supporter of the legislation. Comcast, Viacom, NBC Universal and industry groups like the Recording Industry Association of America have all joined the US Chamber in Commerce in supporting SOPA. Together, these groups have contributed more than $3.9 million to top members of Congress.

Sen. Patrick Leahy's (D-Vermont) introduced the Protect IP Act, and the television, movie and music industries are his second-biggest campaign donor group, donating a total of $371,806 since 2007, according to OpenSecrets.org. The entertainment industry is top SOPA sponsor Lamar Smith's (R-Texas) biggest donor with a total of $59,300 in contributions since 2011.

But some lawmakers are wary of regulating the Internet in tough economic times, and bipartisan opposition to both bills is building in Congress, with leaders like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) coming out against the legislation in recent weeks. (Pelosi took a side via Twitter.)

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) recently told members of the House Judiciary Committee that their legislation is a threat to the Internet as Americans know it.

"In other words, the wrong approach to combating infringement could fundamentally change the Internet as we know it, moving us towards a world where transactions are less secure, ideas are less accessible and starting a website wouldn't be an option for anyone who couldn't afford a lawyer," Wyden said.

SOPA is expected to receive markups on December 15 in the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate could vote on Protect IP by the end of the year or in early 2012.

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

Thursday, November 17, 2011, meeting of the Telecom Board shortest anyone can remember

2011-11-29T00:13:00.000-06:00

Agenda for November 17, 2011, meeting of Fayetteville's telecommunication board

2011-11-15T11:49:00.000-06:00

Please click on image to ENLARGE for easy reading.

Telecommunication board's Oct. 20, 2011, meeting in two parts: Opening for a seventh member exists. Residents who are registered voters may apply in City Clerk's office

2011-10-26T07:25:00.000-05:00

Richard Drake, former chairman of Telecom Board, comments on recent changes in board function

2011-10-22T17:59:00.002-05:00

Hotmail Active View
Fayetteville AR Telecommunications Board Subcommittee October 17 2011

Go to YouTubePlay video
Fayetteville Telecommunications Board -Subcommittee for Review of Telecommunications Ordinance -- October 17, 2011
00:13:58
Added on 10/20/11

Somewhere along the line, revisionist history came into play, and the TB came to believe that its role was merely "advisory," rather than a body which sets policy and oversees the channels. It is very sad that a number of TB members over the years have allowed themselves to believe this.

They COULD look at heir own history, , or even talk to past members, and see what the TB has accomplished in the past.

There are two immediate problems with the board.

A) The city of Fayetteville maintains an archaic policy of replacing board members, which can take an abominable amount of time. As a result of which, TB members often drop off, and the city may not fill the empty seats for far too long a period of time. This really needs to be fixed.

B) As with all boards - city or nonprofit - too many members over the years have merely been resume padders, using the experience on the board to add to their resume.

THe TB is a very important board, especially with the changes happening in the world around around us.

It DOES need to get back to basics, and the board needs to be aware of just why it was created in the first place.

If the TB is interested, there ARE written reports in the city archives from the board every year on what the board has accomplished every year. At least, there are SUPPOSED to be. I can always pass along the one that I wrote.

Richard S. Drake

---- Jim Bemis wrote:
>
>
> Fellow producers:
>
> This is the URL to the Oct 17 Telecom Board Subcommittee for ordinance
> review meeting. The Ordinance will be reviewed at today's Board meeting
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gUzyIVYesc
>
>
> Jim

Telecom Board subcommittee meeting October 18, 2011

2011-10-20T21:35:00.002-05:00

Contact information for members of Fayetteville's telecommunication board as of October 11, 2011

2011-10-11T18:58:00.000-05:00

City of Fayetteville Telecommunications Board

e-mail	Name	Address	Phone	Terms
aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com	Aubrey Shepherd	1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 444-6072	01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013
blake@niblocklawfirm.com	Blake Pennington	927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 430-1221	07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014
mike_ehrig@netzero.com	Michael Ehrig	2007 W. Custer Lane Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 521-4420	07/1/2011 thru 06/30/2015
libertas479@gmail.com	Stephen Smith	340 N. Rollston Ave. Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 409-7842	07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015
spencerm@usa.redcross.org	Michael Spencer	2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704	(202) 713-5480	01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013
spearman@uark.edu	Mitchell Spearman	615 W. Lafayette St., Apt. 105, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 287-4433	01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013

Jim Bemis provides video from Fayetteville Telecom Board subcommittee meeting of September 30, 2011

2011-10-05T19:43:00.000-05:00

Fayetteville Government Channel subcommittee meeting Friday: Everyone invited.

2011-09-28T21:09:00.000-05:00

Downtown Off Street Improvement District

City Clerk

Time: 3:00 PM

Location: Room 111

Telecommunications Board Committee Meeting

City Clerk

Time: 12:00 PM

Location: Room 111

Willam 'Mitchell' Spearman joins Telecommunication Board

2011-09-27T12:10:00.000-05:00

Meeting Times

Regular meetings are held the third Thursday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building.

City of Fayetteville Appointees

Name	Address	Phone	Terms
Aubrey Shepherd	1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 444-6072	01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013
Blake Pennington	927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 430-1221	07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014
Michael Ehrig	2007 W. Custer Lane, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 521-4420	07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015
Michael Spencer	2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704	(202) 713-5480	01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013
Stephen Smith	340 N. Rollston, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 409-7842	07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015
William "Mitchell" Spearman	The Monterey, 615 W. Lafayette St. Apt. 105, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 287-4433	10/01/2011 thru 06/30/2014

September 15, 2011, meeting of the Telecommmunication Board of Fayetteville AR

2011-09-20T21:37:00.000-05:00

Telecom Board down to five members of the standard 7. Hope two are appoiinted by Fayetteville City Council on Tuesday. However, there was only one opening when the interviews were held and thus it can't happen

2011-09-15T22:47:00.000-05:00

Telecommunications Board

The Telecommunications Board, formerly known as the Cable Board, was created by City Ordinance No. 3549 on May 21, 1991. On February 1, 2000, the Cable Board was renamed Telecommunications Board by Ordinance No. 4219. On July 15,2003, Ordinance No. 4504 was created to redefine the composition, officers, staffing, procedures, and the duties of the Board. The purpose of the Telecommunications Board is to advise the City Council on telecommunication issues and to coordinate and oversee telecommunications franchise systems and use of the public rights of way designated for public access, educational, and governmental (PEG) use in the City of Fayetteville as part of the City’s telecommunication infrastructure.

Contact

Lindsley Smith, (479) 575-8330

Terms

Staggered four-year terms.

Membership

The Board shall be composed of seven members as follows:

Seven members from the public-at-large with experience in any one of the following areas:
Telecommunications infrastructure management, public policy development regarding communication and telecommunications issues, television, or other appropriate expertise. Members shall be registered voters and residents of the City of Fayetteville, and shall have resided therein for at least six months prior to their appointment.

Appointment

Vacancies on the Board are filled by appointment from the governing body of the City.

Public Notification

A weekly meetings list is prepared by the City Clerk’s office which is distributed to the press and posted on the City’s web site: www.accessfayetteville.org

Meeting Times

Regular meetings are held the third Thursday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building.

City of Fayetteville Appointees

Name	Address	Phone	Terms
Aubrey Shepherd	1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 444-6072	01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013
Blake Pennington	927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 430-1221	07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014
Michael Ehrig	2007 W. Custer Lane, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 521-4420	07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015
Michael Spencer	2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704	(202) 713-5480	01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013
Stephen Smith	340 N. Rollston, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 409-7842	07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015

Email exchange involving government channel, public-access channel, education channel and the Fayetteville Telecom Board and city staff and city council

2011-08-23T21:25:00.000-05:00

Mr. Bemis,

I have attached a copy of the form to which you refer. The original intent was for it to be used by Staff in helping people document their complaints. It has not been vetted by the Telecommunications Board, and probably should be before it is released to the public for use. You are, however, welcome to use it if you wish.

Regarding your request of me to reference "the portion of the Telecom Board Ordinance that provides the City such authority" I will present these facts for your consideration:

1. The Telecommunications Board ordinance was passed by the City Council. By doing so it did not delegate authority to the Telecommunications Board to create policy for, establish procedures for, or operate any of the access channels. The Board is tasked with ensuring contract compliance if the City enters into a contract with an outside entity (such as Fayetteville Public Schools) to operate one of the access channels. This has been well-discussed and supported by opinions of the City Attorney's office.

2. The access channels are afforded the City of Fayetteville on both Cox Communications' cable system and AT&T's Uverse system through agreements with the City. Nothing in those agreements delegates authority over the operation of any of the access channels to any entity other than the City.

3. The City contracts with an outside entity to provide training, support, programming and outreach services for the Public Access channel. That relationship and the duties and authorities of that outside entity are defined in that contract. Nowhere in that contract does it state that the Public Access operator has the authority to determine operating policies or procedures for the Public Access channel. The City does not relinquish any of its authority or responsibility for the operation of the Public Access channel to the contracted Public Access operator or any other entity.

If you have any other questions I may assist you with, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Regards,

Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel

The City of Fayetteville Television Center

fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

101 W. Rock Street

Fayetteville, AR 72701

Voice: 479-444-3434

Fax: 479-444-3437

Mr Gisler --]
Thank you for your note below, which I will consider in submitting my complaints. However, again I must disagree with your interpretation of the City's authority to write Public Access Channel policy. I believe that we have differing views and definitions of the terms "policy" and "procedure" to be written by the Board and City staff, which have been included in my earlier complaints. I would appreciate your reference to the portion of the Telecom Board Ordinance that provides the City such authority.

I am attaching a scanned copy of a "Formal Request " form that was included with earlier versions of the new Administrative Rule for Complaints and Feedback. Please advise if this is the latest version that I should use for my submitting my revised concerns to the Board.

I will plan to pick up the DVD copy on Wednesday, about noon.

Thanks for your consideration,

Jim Bemis.

--- On Mon, 8/22/11, Frederick Gisler

Jim Bemis.

--- On Mon, 8/22/11, Frederick Gisler wrote:

From: Frederick Gisler
Subject: Re: Recent versions of the Telecommunications Board Administrative Rules
To: "Jim Bemis"
Cc: "Anne Shelley" , "Aubrey Shepherd" , "Blake Pennington" , "Don Marr" , "Joel Walsh" , "Lindsley Smith" , "Michael Spencer" , "Mike Ehrig" , "Russ Davis" , "Stephen Smith"
Date: Monday, August 22, 2011, 9:36 AM

Hello Mr. Bemis:

Attached is the latest revision of the Telecommunications Board's Administrative Rules, which include the new complaint/feedback procedure. Also attached are the operating policies for Fayetteville Public Access Television, which describe the procedure to be followed to submit complaints regarding programming or operations of that service. Please keep in mind that these policies are not determined by the Public Access operator, but are merely implemented by them. While the contracted provider of Public Access services is a valuable consultant regarding these policies and procedures, the operation of the Public Access channel is the responsibility of the City. The operating policies are determined by the City Administration.

Also attached is a copy of the Fayetteville Government Channel Operating Policies, which describe the procedure to be followed to request a review regarding the denial by the Channel Manager of a program request. All other complaints regarding the operation of the Government Channel are handled as are complaints regarding any other City Division, specifically they may be presented to the Division Head, Department Head, the Chief of Staff or the Mayor.

In addition is attached the agreement the City has with Fayetteville Public Schools to operate the Education Channel. Any complaints regarding the Education Channel would appropriately be first communicated to Fayetteville Public Schools Administration, and subsequently to City Staff if necessary.

Since the Telecommunications Board is charged with facilitating the resolution of disputes regarding the operations of the access channels, we present the information of all complaints, resolved or not, to them each month at their meetings. Many times the complaints have already been satisfactorily resolved and require no further action by the Board.

For your complaints to be placed on the agenda for the September meeting of the Telecommunications Board, you will need to present them to me in writing no later than August 31, which is 15 days before the meeting of the Board. Please state each complaint separately in the most direct and specific language as possible. You should strive to avoid several complaints in one statement, but rather each complaint should be focused on one specific subject. This will greatly assist me in any investigation or research I may need to do. If you provide me with such complaints by August 31 they will be placed on the Board's meeting agenda for September as individual items of new business. If you do not submit them by August 31, you can request that a member of the Board place them on the agenda when they consider the agenda at the beginning of the meeting. Please note, however, that the complaint then will not be actually considered at that meeting, but will be placed on the next meeting's agenda for consideration.

As for any complaint procedures that may have been in place prior to the procedures documented in the items I have sent , I do not have any knowledge. You may be able to obtain documentation of previous complaint procedures followed by the Public Access operator prior to January 1, 2011 by contacting the current operator, Your Media, at 479-444-3433. Please remember, however, any procedures that were followed prior to the date of adoption of the items I have sent you would be of historical interest only, and are no longer valid.

Regarding any complaint/feedback procedures or polices for any of the City's other electronic media, I advise you to contact Lindsley Smith, Director of Communication.

I will have a DVD copy of the meeting made for you. We telecast the meetings of the Telecommunications Board on The Fayetteville Government Channel every Friday at 4:00p and 4:00a. The most current schedule of the Channel can be viewed by going to http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/city_tv/index.cfm and clicking on the "Current Program Schedule" link. You will notice the Board meeting is on the schedule on Friday, August 19. It will be telecast again on Friday, August 26 at 4:00p and 4:00a. It also should be available on our Video on Demand (VOD) service later today. We usually have it available the day after the meeting but we experienced a technical glitch and were not able to upload it Friday. I apologize for any inconvenience that may have caused.

If you have any other questions I may assist you with, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Thank you,

Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel

The City of Fayetteville Television Center

fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

101 W. Rock Street

Fayetteville, AR 72701

Voice: 479-444-3434

Fax: 479-444-3437

TDD: 479-521-1316

>>> Jim Bemis 8/21/2011 3:48 PM >>>

Mr. Gisler and Telecommunications Board:
As a response to the Board's request, I am preparing more succinct versions of my earlier requests and complaints that were submitted to the Telecommunications Board in 2010. Thus I plan to submit revised versions to be placed on the Board's Agenda for the September meeting. I understand that these revisions will be considered as a "trial or test" of the City staff's suggested version (July 2011) of the "complaint and feedback" process, which has been accepted by the Board for inclusion in the Board"s Administrative Rules. I am assuming that the Board will consider my revised versions as an agenda item for the September meeting.

In my preparations to follow the newly accepted rules,I find that I have only a 2009 version of the Board's Administrative Rules. (See attached). I do not know if this is the current version now being used, thus would like to confirm that it is the most recent.

Thus I am asking that your office please advise me as to where earlier or more recent electronic versions of their Rules might be obtained? I understand that the Board has not had such guidelines in the past. Similarly, I would like to obtain electronic copies of current and previous PEG-channel policies for comments and appeals that are now being used by all three Channels. And, if there are any complaint/feedback policies or procedures used by the City's other electronic media, please advise as to where they may be obtained.

In addition, I would like to obtain a DVD copy of the August Board meeting, as I do not find the video on AccessFayetteville or scheduled on the current weekly FGC schedule. If possible, I would like to obtain a copy on Wednesday, August 24. I will contact you by phone to see if I can pick up the DVD on that date.

Thank you for your consideration

Jim Bemis

Blake Pennington elected chairman of the Telecommunication Board on August 18, 2011

2011-08-23T07:24:00.000-05:00

Traditional landscapes suck Energy, Water and Money, says Neil Diboll at The Native Plants in the Landscape Conference

2011-08-20T20:37:00.000-05:00

Please click on individual images to ENLARGE. Click on enlargement for closer view.

« Welcome to The Native Plants in the Landscape Conference

The Future of Gardening by Neil Diboll

The Future of Gardening: Why Going Native is the Answer

Presented at the 20^th Millersville Native Plant Conference
Millersville, PA
June 4, 2010

by Neil Diboll
Prairie Nursery, Inc.
P.O. Box 306
Westfield, WI 53964
www.prairienursery.com
800-476-9453 (800-GRO-WILD)
Traditional landscapes suck. They suck Energy, Water, and Money. These three “Future Factors” will determine to a large degree the shape and structure of our landscapes in the coming years.
The old whipping boy, the lawn, indeed deserves a good whipping. It is emblematic of an expensive, unsustainable, energy and chemical hungry landscape that supports few forms of life and consumes valuable resources that could be better invested elsewhere.
Size of the American Lawn
There are over 50 million acres of lawn in the United States, twice the size of the state of Pennsylvania.
The total American corn crop for 2009 was 86 million acres.
The total American soybean crop for 2009 was 77 million acres.
The total American wheat crop for 2009 was 65 million acres.
Lawn is the fourth largest crop grown in America today.
Water Use by the American Lawn
Thirty percent of the water consumed on the East Coast of the US goes to watering lawns. Sixty percent of the water used on the West Coast is dedicated to maintaining green lawns, in a region that is facing looming water shortages.
A 1000 square foot lawn requires an average of 10,000 gallons of water per year to maintain in good condition.
One acre of irrigated lawn requires nearly half a million gallons (435,000) of water every year!
Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides Applied to the American Lawn
The average lawn receives 10 times as much chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides as the typical farm field, according to a Yale University graduate study.
Over 80 millions pounds of chemical pesticides are applied to American lawns each year according to the USEPA.
More than 70 million tons of chemical fertilizers are applied to American lawns per year.
The USEPA estimates that 40 to 60 percent of the Nitrogen fertilizer applied to lawns ends up in our surface water and groundwater.
Forty four percent of the Nitrogen and 28 percent of the Phosphorus applied in the Mississippi River watershed ends up in the Gulf of Mexico, greatly exacerbating the anoxic “dead zone” that preceded the BP oil spill of 2010.
Solid Waste Created by Lawns
The EPA also estimates that grass clippings and yard debris account for 20 to 40 percent of the landfill space consumed in America.
Energy Consumption by Lawns
The amount of energy required to mow and maintain manicured lawns is surprisingly large, and is used in every phase of lawn care:
Mowing: Gasoline or diesel fuel to is required to power riding mowers and most push type rotary mowers. Electricity that powers electric lawn mowers is produced primarily by fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas, and by nuclear power plants.
Pesticides: Most herbicides and insecticides are derived from or combined with petroleum-based compounds. Of the 80 million pounds of pesticides applied to lawns in American every year, most are synthesized from oil.
Fertilizers: Fertilizers are applied to lawns in staggering quantities. The energy required to mine and transport the 70 million tons of chemical fertilizers that are dumped on lawns every year is significant. Most Nitrogen fertilizers are produced using the Haber Process, in which Nitrogen in the air is converted into a solid or liquid form that can be readily handled and applied. The Haber Process is extremely energy intensive, and vast quantities of natural gas are consumed to produce nitrogen fertilizer for lawns.
Irrigation: Even watering the lawn consumes energy. Electricity is used to purify water at treatment plants, and to pump water to homes and businesses. The underground plastic pipes that are used in lawn irrigations systems are produced from petrochemicals derived from crude oil.
Carbon Footprint of Lawns
As an energy-dependent landscape, the carbon annual footprint consumption of lawns is high compared to prairies and other natural landscapes that require only occasional mowing, no fertilizers, no irrigation, and few if any pesticides. Prairies release carbon into the atmosphere when burned, and when dead organic matter such as leaves and stems decompose through microbial action. However, these releases are offset by new plant growth which absorbs carbon dioxide from the air and incorporates it into new leave, roots, and stems.
The incredibly rich prairie soils of the American Midwest are a result of the accumulation of organic matter in the soil over hundreds and thousands of years. Unlike most forest ecosystems, in which organic matter is sequestered in the upper 12- 18 inches of soil, prairie soils typically exhibit high organic matter content from three to six feet in depth. They also have significantly higher total organic matter content than forest soils. This would indicate that over time, prairies are one of the most efficient plant communities at removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and providing long term carbon sequestration in the soil.
Economic Costs of Lawn
Americans spend over $25 billion per year on lawn care (USEPA).
Americans spend over $2 billion per year on lawn and garden chemicals.
A 4000 square foot lawn (1/10 acre) produces an average of 1200 pounds of grass clippings per year. The City of Philadelphia Streets Department reported in 2005 that it costs $75 per year to dispose of this material.
Wildlife and Lawns
The US EPA estimates that between 60 and 70 millions birds are poisoned annually due to the application of lawn pesticides.
On lawns that receive regular applications of pesticides, 60 to 90 percent of the earthworms in the soil are killed.
Air and Noise Pollution
In summer months, 5 percent of air pollution is attributable to gas powered lawn and garden equipment (National Vehicle and Fuel Assessment Lab, Ann Arbor, MI)
Per hour of operation, a typical lawnmower emits 10-12 times as much hydrocarbons as an automobile.
Health and Safety
Of the most commonly used lawn pesticides, 13 are known to cause cancer, 14 can cause birth defects, 11 can interfere with reproduction, and 21 can cause damage to the nervous system. (US EPA)
111,000 Americans are sickened every year due to exposure to pesticides. (US EPA)
Over 230,000 people are treated in the Emergency Room every year for accident related to lawn equipment. (US EPA)
Time
The average homeowner spends 40 hours a year mowing his or her lawn – the equivalent of a week’s vacation!
HOW DID WE ARRIVE AT OUR LAWN-DOMINATED LANDSCAPE MODEL?
AN HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
The New World of North America once appeared to be a seemingly inexhaustible resource that held immense promise for the early colonists and settlers. True to their culture, the northern Europeans that swarmed into the vast hinterlands of America created a landscape in the image of their forebears: cut, grazed, plowed, and fenced into submission. The newly broken land yielded great bounty for a growing nation. As the country expanded, the towns and villages took on the names and character of our former homes across the Atlantic: Amsterdam, Birmingham, Gloucester, Berlin, Warsaw, and Rome, to name but a few.
Our goal as a nation and a culture was to tame the wilderness and make it safe for civilization. In so doing, we re-created the Old Country in the New World. As we brought the wilderness under our heel, we took little time to appreciate its unique character and beauty. Most settlers sought bounty, not beauty. In the rush to convert forests and meadows into farms and fields, the flowers mostly went unnoticed. Unplowed, unproductive wild land was a sign of sloth, savagery, and the devil’s work. Indeed, our mandate was to subdue the earth. And subdue it we did.
When our work was finally done, we sat back to take stock of our immense labors, and it appeared that it was good. Mostly. What we had not considered were the terrible losses associated with our great gain. We had gained ascendancy over our young country. In the process, we lost the character of a continent.
Yea, even unto our gardens, we banished the wildflowers and wild things to the far reaches of the countryside and to the corners of our consciousness. And nothing suffered the utter demise and near-total destruction such as that which was visited upon the American Prairie.
The American Prairie: the once-vast kingdom of flowers, grasses, bison and butterflies. This unbelievably rich, unique ecosystem blanketed millions of acres of America’s heartland. These were the flower gardens of North America. Hidden deep underground, among the intertwined roots of a universe of prairie plants, lay the black gold that was to become the currency of the prairie farmer. Here was the inheritance of a million sunny days, hoarded away in the bank account of the prairie soil.
Agricultural, the Industrial Revolution, and the Rise of the American Middle Class
The farmers that tapped into this prairie trust fund found the dividends to be prodigious. No fertilizers were needed to grow bumper crops. The immense yields increased agricultural productivity to levels previously unheard-of, revolutionizing the farmer’s relationship with the land. Now one family could produce food for dozens of others. The day of the subsistence farm was over. Human labor was set free to tend the factory instead of the field. The dawn of the American Industrial Revolution was reflected in the glow of the forge that John Deere used to construct the first sod-busting steel plow in 1836. With the industrial dawn came the sunset of the American Prairie.
The Eastern Tallgrass Prairie of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska was all but obliterated in the span of a few short decades at the close of the nineteenth century. That which was not plowed under was closed in with fences and grazed to the ground by millions of cattle. What were once wide open spaces became food factories and feedlots. Still, we knew not what we had done.
A full century later, we are just beginning to grasp the scope of the loss. The Eastern Tallgrass Prairie is now one of the rarest plant communities in the entire world. Rainforests are commonplace by comparison. Less than 1/10th of 1% of the Tallgrass Prairie remains today. The small refuges where it can be found occur only in small tattered fragments, ripped from the original cloth. Only those pieces that could not be drained, plowed, grazed, or otherwise turned to the service of mankind remain. There was simply no place for wildness in this new American landscape.
The conversion of the New World into the Old Country was complete. All that remained now was to tend the fields and the gardens of plants brought over from Europe, and to make sure that the lawns that replaced that prairie were kept mown and in order.
Order. The watchword of a Puritanical culture that sought to carve structure from the chaos of wilderness. Everything in control. Nothing out of place. Even our gardens reflect this directive. Designs are precise, with each plant in its pre-ordained place, ensconced in a thick bed of bark mulch. The vegetable world must supplicate itself to our omnipotence. Those plants that fail to stay in their assigned seats are branded as weeds, and banished from the garden. And if they should grow wild in nature, how could such peasant plants of common breeding be sufficiently refined to have a place in our gardens?
If the garden is truly the place where people and nature meet, it is almost always the gardener who determines the terms of the meeting. Will the gardeners of the earth choose to work with Nature to create beauty in the landscape? Or will we attempt to overpower her with an arsenal of chemicals, machines, and “maintenance programs?”
We are finally coming to realize that the practice of paying homage to a uniform, idealized landscape of seamlessly interconnected lawns is an illusion. This becomes eminently clear when one realizes that the centerpoint of this landscape is a nearly lifeless, two dimensional expanse of turf, to which we slavishly devote much of our increasingly rare and precious free time. We pour on the chemicals, mow the grass to within an inch of its life, and kill any and all bugs that have the temerity to share the landscape with us. Perhaps most annoying, this national pastime called Lawn Care is really quite expensive.
For many, their lawns are like an addiction. They will pay almost any price to satisfy the cravings. The price is paid in money, time, environmental degradation, and in some cases, one’s health. We have so completely divorced ourselves from Nature that the only connection to the natural world is by watering and mowing their green carpets!
It is indeed a costly divorce from Nature. Enforcement of our unnatural landscapes consumes billions of dollars every year. Lawns, ornamental plantings, and even perennial gardens require constant attention if the desired order is to be maintained. Without intervention by the human hand on a regular basis, these landscapes soon fall victim to the invading hordes of weeds, trees, brambles and vines. Left unguarded, the walls of the domestic garden are stormed by the Vandals and Visigoths of the Vegetable Kingdom. Without the indulgences of their human benefactors, the meeker and fairer plants of the garden are quickly pillaged and displaced by the roving thugs of the plant world.
History of the American Lawn
The modern lawn has it origin in the country estates of landed gentry in England in the 16^th and 17^th centuries. It was a status symbol of the wealthy, for the working classes typically possessed no land, and could ill afford a lawn eve if they did. With our Anglo-American heritage, we looked to the mother country for our social cues in the 18^th century as the American middle class emerged during the industrial revolution. The newly wealthy purchased homes and estates and installed lawns as one of their symbols of having “made it.” Lawns quickly became one of the status symbols associated with the new middle and upper classes.
The great American landscape architect, Frederick Law Olmstead, referred to the lawn in the late 18^th century as “The Great Democratizer” of a newly ascendant nation. Rather than installing fences and barriers between neighboring properties as was common in Europe, Americans had a seamless carpet of green grass unifying their properties, all sharing in the new ethos of a mutual affluence.
The lawn quickly became a socio-economic symbol, denoting order and devotion to a non-economic crop that only those with expendable income could afford. As the middle class in America grew after World War II, the occupants of newly-built suburbs embraced the lawn as one of their icons of success and comfortable living.
The lawn was now cemented into American culture. Woe be unto he who violated the unspoken contract of “keeping up appearances” and allowing one’s turf to “go native” and grow beyond the socially acceptable four inches in height. An un-mowed, unkempt lawn was a sign of slovenliness and anti-social tendencies. Social breakdown and chaos could not be far behind.
This is why the lawn is so ardently defended by so many. It is a symbol of an entire social class and lifestyle. It is far more than a near-lifeless green expanse that requires an inordinate amount of time, money and chemicals to maintain. It embodies the hopes and dreams of average Americans, and symbolizes the triumph or order over entropy. It is a shared middle class bond that transcends politics, religion, and ethnicity. In many communities you are judged by your lawn first, and your character as a human being second. And do not for one minute believe that the first does not influence the second.
Why do we Persist with Our Addiction to Lawns? What About Wildlife?
1)    It’s simple and easy! We know how to do it: Fertilize it, spray it, and mow it!
2)    You don’t really have to know anything about plants or gardening to grow and manage a lawn – just follow the directions provided by the purveyors of fertilizers, herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides provide you!
3)    Lawn is a cheap fix. Although less costly to install than native landscapes, lawn has a high life cycle cost over a period of many years. Native landscapes typically have low long-term maintenance costs, with lower life cycle costs.
4)    Lawns don’t attract bugs or wildlife (except for geese), so you know you and your family will be safe from snakes, vermin, and those annoying insects! So what if insects are the foundation of the food chain, and support a myriad of birds and other desirable creatures. We’ve been brainwashed that bugs are bad, so we have to make sure they don’t inhabit our outdoor living spaces.
5)    NO BUGS, NO BIRDS!
6)    Everybody says they love Nature, but nobody ever invites her over to their yard.
7)    I knew my prairie was a success when I saw Meadow Jumping Mice (Zapus hudsonianus) and Hog Nosed Snakes (Heterodon platirhinos) in it. These creatures provided evidence that I now had a functioning ecosystem, not just a garden. If you like hawks and owls, you better be able to feed them: rodents and reptiles are some of their preferred foods.
WE ARE NOT A NATION OF GARDENERS:
WE ARE A NATION OF MOWERS!
WHY DO WE CARE WHAT WE PLANT IN OUR GARDENS
AND LANDSCAPES?
Many of us care deeply about the state of our planet and the loss of biodiversity that is occurring on a global scale. Although we all think globally, most of us can only act locally. Together, we can have an impact in our own gardens and landscapes, as well as those of our friends and neighbors. For those of us in the landscape design business, we can promote sustainable landscapes composed of native plants that require little or no fertilizers, pesticides, watering, or mowing (just burning!). This alone, when compounded over time as more people opt for sustainable landscapes, can have an impact.
The looming question for us today is the on-going loss of biodiversity. Restoring native ecosystems is one way we can help support not just native plants, but also invertebrates such as rare butterflies and moths, bees, wasps, and all manner of the generally unloved lower castes of bugs and creepy crawly things. Yet they are all important, and each has an important place in the web of life.
Homo sapiens, is presently presiding over what is believed to be the Sixth Great Extinction. Although we have yet to reach the catastrophic levels of past extinction events, we are well on our way and showing only a few signs of abatement in our drive to subdue and conquer the earth, as we serve our ever-expanding need for food, fuel, water, and living space.
But does it really matter what we do as individuals? A society is composed of all its individuals, and their actions determine the face of that society. Most of us are working to restore the integrity of native ecosystems because we believe it is the “right” and good thing to do, and that we are “doing it for the planet.” But does it really matter? Does the planet really respect our actions? Or is it all irrelevant?
The Earth has been subjected to massive extinctions in the past, some fairly recent in geological history. The planet has always recovered, with the development of new species and a wealth of new life forms. Nature does indeed abhor a vacuum, and she apparently fills it rapidly. All of the work I am doing on my property to control invasive species and restore native plants will someday be negated by the next advance of the glacier, as unlikely as that may seem at this point in geological and meteorolical history. Of course, my landscape will probably be invaded by garlic muster, buckthorn, honeysuckle and other non-native thugs soon after my demise, unless some equally deranged and determined individual picks up where I leave off.
SO WHY RESTORE THE PLANET? DOES IT REALLY MATTER?
If one takes a long-term geological perspective, it doesn’t really matter what we do. Even if we nuke the joint, something will survive and a whole new set of life forms will evolve. Maybe the next sentient beings will be smarter than us, and actually take care of the planet.
We Restore the Earth Because It Is Good for Us!
We need a quality of life that includes clean air, clean water, trees, flowers, ferns, birds, and all the wonderful life forms with which we share the planet. We aren’t just preserving habitat and restoring native plant communities out of the goodness of our hearts – Our very economic and psychic survival depend upon it!
We have yet to fully value the economics of a healthy environment. But as the planet is further degraded, the value of high quality living spaces only increases.
THE BOTTOM LINE: Ultimately, our future landscapes will be in large part determined more by economics than ecology. This is an unfortunate consequence of the human condition. As a quality living space becomes more valuable, more value will be placed upon it. We will protect it more diligently. It will sell for a higher price. People will begin to view the natural environment more as an asset, rather than as a resource to be exploited.
All of this will most likely be precipitated by shortages of water, rather than a shortage of oil or other energy source. You can live without oil, but you cannot live without water. As the price of water increases, the incentive to conserve it will increase. We will need landscapes that do not require huge inputs of water and chemicals to sustain them. We will need to overcome our cultural taboos of “messy” natural landscapes and move beyond viewing lawns as status symbols and a rite of passage into the middle and upper classes.
Someday pride of place will belong to those with the least lawn, lowest water bill, and no chemicals in their garages. Society will value those who work to preserve our environment, rather than those who can make the most money by despoiling it. I personally cannot wait much longer for that day to come.
AT A GLANCE:
TODAY: LAWN, an ecological and economic disaster

TOMORROW: SUSTAINA LE ECOSYSTEMS, composed of native plant
communities that require little or no fertilizers, pesticides, or irrigation, o
TODAY: MONOCULTURES of mowed lawns

TOMORROW: DIVERSE ECOSYSTEMS that support a wide variety of life
TODAY: FEAR and mistrust of the natural world and its attendant organisms (bugs,
mice, snakes, etc)

TOMORROW: RE-INTEGRATION of people into nature and an understanding that
everything is connected and interdependent
WE MUST ENTER INTO A JOINT VENTURE WITH NATURE TO PRESERVE OUR PLANET AND THE SYSTEMS UPON WHICH ALL LIFE DEPENDS.

ONLY THEN WILL WE LIVE IN HARMONY WITH OUR FELLOW CREATURES ON THIS PLANET.

OUR QUALITY LIFE AND LONG-TERM SURVIVAL DEPENDS UPON THE SURVIVAL OF THE SYSTEMS AND ORGANISMS THAT SUPPORT US.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 26th, 2011 at 3:39 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

University of Vermont Extension
Department of Plant and Soil Science

Summer News Article
FUEL-EFFICIENT LAWNS AND LANDSCAPES
Dr. Leonard Perry, Extension Professor
University of Vermont
With the price of gasoline and natural gas on the rise, most are looking for ways to cut their costs and save energy. If you have a lawn or garden, you may not realize just how much fossil fuels you are using. By knowing where these are used, you can look for ways to reduce consumption. This will reduce your costs, and help the environment.
In a recent PPPro online newsletter Paul Tukey, editor of People, Places and Plants magazine, provides some sobering facts and helpful suggestions. Each year, a family with a one-third acre lawn will on average:
*consume five gallons of gas for mowing and trimming;
*apply the equivalent of seven gallons for fertilizing;
*burn up to five gallons for watering; and
*consume an additional gallon for cleanup.
That’s 18 gallons of fuel per household. With 120 million U.S. households, that’s the equivalent of almost 2.2 billion gallons of fuel used just for lawn care each year. This does not count other landscaping activities. So just how do we use so much?
Yale University has estimated that the United States uses more than 600 million gallons of gas to mow and trim lawns each year — about two gallons of gas for every man, woman and child, or five gallons per household. Mowers also consume engine oil in their crankcases, and two-stroke mowers consume oil in their fuel.
In addition to fuel consumption, mowers and outdoor power equipment contribute heavily to air pollution. Operating a typical (4 HP) gasoline-powered lawnmower for one hour produces as much smog-forming hydrocarbons as driving an average car between 100 and 200 miles under average conditions. Gasoline-powered string trimmers are actually more polluting than many lawn mowers. One estimate (mindfully.org) states that “the 20,000,000 small engines sold in the U.S. each year contribute about one tenth of the total U.S. mobile source hydrocarbon emissions, and are the largest single contributor to these non-road emissions.” These include power blowers, rakes, and brooms.
Creating synthetic nitrogen for fertilizers requires the heating of natural gas to combine atmospheric nitrogen and hydrogen into ammonia. The amount of natural gas required to make approximately 200 bags of lawn fertilizer would heat your home for a year. Each 40-pound bag contains the fossil-fuel equivalent of approximately 2.5 gallons of gasoline. Transporting these bags of fertilizer from the factory and to your home requires additional fuel.
According to a California study, in many areas — especially in the West, where water must be moved great distances from reservoirs — the amount of fuel needed to pump the water is at least equal to the fuel used in mowing.

So what can you do? Here are ten tips to have a “fuel-efficient” landscape.
*Use an electric or non-powered push mower. An electric mower maintaining one-third of an acre for a season consumes only $3 of electricity on average. Electric mowers are 75 percent quieter than gas mowers. Push mowers, of course, consume no fuel and make little noise.
*Similarly, use traditional hand rakes and brooms instead of power ones and blowers to save fuel, and at the same time reduce air and noise pollution. If you employ a landscape maintenance firm, encourage their use of these too. Minimize the need for string trimmers. Mulch along walks and around structures such as lamp posts to avoid having to trim weeds in these areas.
*If you have an old mower, consider replacing it. Newer small engines run much cleaner. EPA emission standards for such engines, to be in effect by 2007, are expected to reduce ground-level ozone emissions by 70 percent or 350,000 tons each year.
*Reduce the area mowed through use of groundcovers. This is especially true in areas with water shortages. Allow parts of large areas to grow, only mowing once or twice a season, creating a natural meadow. You can still mow areas near drives and homes to maintain the more formal manicured effects in such highly visible and high traffic areas.
*Save rainwater and gray water. Gray water is that water from home use, except from toilets, and can make up from 50 to 80 percent of home waste water. It comes from sinks, showers, and laundry and can be used for irrigating landscapes and lawns.
*Water deeply once per week on average, rather than frequently. Drip irrigation and mulches also conserve water. Using less water saves on energy use, whether you’re buying water that has to be pumped, or are paying an electric bill to pump your own.
*Use natural, organic fertilizers not derived from fossil fuels.
*Recycle grass clippings, mow higher and mix 5 percent clover into your lawn seed. All these help recycle nutrients back into the soil. Mulching-type mowers allow you to leave grass clippings on the lawn. If you don’t have such a mower, and remove the clippings, add them to compost or use them to mulch gardens.
*Compost all yard wastes, except for diseased plants and plant parts. They can go into compost piles, saving gasoline hauling such to landfills and recycle centers. If your landscape generates many twigs and other brush, consider buying or renting a home-size brush chipper.
*Finally, consider landscaping to reduce up to 25 percent of home energy consumption. Foundation plantings can lessen heat loss from buildings. Evergreen windbreaks can reduce heating costs in winter in windy areas. Deciduous shade trees can reduce energy needs for cooling in summer. According to the Department of Energy, only three properly placed trees may

Return to Perry's Perennial Pages, Articles

]

		Gardening

		What to do with a Lawn

THIS ZONE
climate
cultivation
natural patterns
pests
lawns
seedsaving
soil
sprouting

THE SITE
home
news
monocult
actions
evolution

RESOURCES
sitemap
books
links
search

US
contact us
our aims
logo/banner

"You can't learn much from a lawn,
but a garden has a whole world of wonders."

history

Lawns started out as grazing areas around the manors of the landed gentry. Having a nice lawn around the house was a sign of power as you owned sufficient land to raise sheep and cow.
As the industrial revolution took hold and animals were less a sign of wealth, the lawn itself became the status symbol. You could indulge yourself in sparing land and time to recreational grounds.
As people moved to the cities so did the grass, on ever smaller plots. First lawns were cut by hand and later with the mechanical lawnmower, (an automated, resource depleting, pointless cow.)
The 20th Century saw an explosion of lawn making as commercial interests produced endless grass seed, fertiliser, pesticides, mowers, spreaders and irrigation equipment whilst developers discovered they could pass off cheap ‘gardens’ by spreading 3 inches of soil over hard subsoil and laying turf on top.
Nowerdays, many lawns are rarely used and some are so covered with chemicals children have been permanently injured after walking barefoot on them.[1]

the modern lawn - a waste of resources

The modern pure grass lawn is artificial... you need effort and chemicals to maintain a monoculture.

Misuse and the inherent toxicity of standard pesticides cause short and long term poisoning, cancer and disease in people and wildlife. [a]

Extensive use and overuse of fertilisers (due to lack of restrictions) causes water pollution problems and wastes resources. [b]

Endless summer irrigation to keep lawns green wastes massive amounts of water and depletes water tables. [c]

Lawnmowers, strimmers and other lawn machinery unregulated for environmental emissions, use vast amounts of petrol and are a significant factor in urban air and noise pollution. [d]

The lawn is the worlds third agriculture. It is probable that westerners spend more person hours, energy and resources on their lawns than any agricultural resource of the third world.[8]

In the early 1990’s in the United States…

$ 25 billion a year was spent on lawn care products.
Of this,
$ 5,250 million was spent on fossil fuel-derived fertilisers and...
$ 700 million was spent on 28 million kgs of poisonous synthetic pesticides.

Meanwhile 20 million acres were planted in residential lawns
and the average city sprayed its lawns with 30 to 60 % of its fresh water supply.[2]

The lawn is a green desert. Adoption of a monoculture for a garden drastically reduces the habitats available for wildlife. Birds, bees, butterflies and other animals all begin to disappear. Often leaving an unstable ecosystem where common ‘pest’ species seem to flourish.

alternatives

Aside from keeping animals or ripping up the turf to plant trees and bushes, build vegetable beds, a pond or a greenhouse there are many things you can do to keep the same purpose of a lawn whilst adding diversity and removing chemical and mechanical dependence. (Unless the area you have is subject to heavy traffic and abuse, where turf is probably the most suitable thing to use.) If you just want somewhere to sit, try making a bench a focal point of your garden.
Lawns can be made more edible, medicinal, beautiful and nice smelling by adding low growing aromatic herbs and flowers. The plants below have been specially selected because they will tolerate at least infrequent mowings. For best results don’t cut as often or as short as a normal lawn and try to lay off for at least 3 weeks in the summer to let the taller plants flower and set seed. You could try sowing them into small gaps in the grass or better still plant them out. For low maintenance choose plants that will like your local conditions.

	lively lawns Apart from the obvious dandelions (Taraxacum officinale), daisy (Bellis perennis) and plantains (Plantago major, plantago media) which are all excellent in lawns, freely self seed, add variety and can also be eaten once you get past seeing them just as ‘weeds,’ try… White Clover, Trifolium repens: 10cm H, spreads, adds nitrogen to the soil, attracts bees and butterflies. You can eat the flowers and leaves, (bit fiddly though) Camomile, Chamaemelum nobile: 15cm H 30cm W, Plants for a future[9] recommend for smell but not for medicine, (no flowers), a cultivar called ‘Treneague’ which is low growing, spreads and will succeed if the grass is cut low and often, however you'll have to find a cutting, there are no seeds. Wild thyme, Thymus serpyllum: 10cm H 30cm W Forms spreading clumps, pink flowers attract bees in summer, drought tolerant, needs sun. High in antioxidants and an essential kitchen herb. Lemon thyme, Thymus x citiodorus: 10cm H 30cm W. Likes light well drained soil and full sun, can be planted by division. Coltsfoot, Tussilago farfara: 25cm H, spreads invasively. Tolerates shade, does well in all soils, flowers edible mar-apr, leaves appear afterwards, used for treatment of respiratory problems. Rough Hawkbit, Leontodon hispidus: 40cm H 30cm W. Similar to dandelion, prefers chalky soil, flowers all summer, attracts bees & butterflies, edible leaves most of the year.
	Salad burnet, Sanguisorba minor: 55cm H 30cm W. Prefers chalky soil and slightly longer grass, flowers May-Aug and provides edible young leaves all year round. Self Heal, Prunella vulgaris: 15cm H spreading to form clumps 30cm W. Prefers moist soil, tolerates low cutting and shade, flowers mid to late summer, attracts bees & butterflies, eaten in salads and an healing herb for cuts and wounds. Yarrow, Achillea millefolium: upto 60cm H spreads, hardy, drought resistant, good in poor soils, and a very useful medicinal herb. beautiful bulbs By lengthening the time between mowings you can also grow taller plants such as bulbs. Planted surreptitiously they are a nice surprise. All below are edible and most spread naturally. It is advisable to plant bulbs of similar flowering times together to make any lawn maintenance more straightforward. Field & Crow garlic, Allium oleraceum & A. vineale: 60cm H, 5cm W. Both almost invasive in grass if left to form bulbils in jul-aug, tolerant of mowing, leaves edible autumn to following summer. If cows eat them, their milk is tainted. Quamash, Camassia quamash: 50cm H 10cm W. Does well in short grass and under trees, flowers late spring, very edible bulbs when cooked.
	Dog's Tooth Violet, Erythronium den-canis: 15cm H 10cm W. appears in spring for a few months each year. bulbs edible raw or cooked, also try E. revoltum 'pagoda' for a bigger, version. Tassel Hyacinth, Muscari botryoides: 40cm H clumps 20cm W. Easy to grow, does well in short grass, almost invasive, 3.5cm bulbs edible, but a little bitter. Or for beauty, there are many other bulbs, such as daffodils, bluebells, crocus etc that can be planted into the lawn. wonderful wildflowers Perhaps you could turn some of your lawn into a ‘wildflower meadow’. This will attract butterflies and insects as well as bringing nature a bit closer to home. Choose a sunny position on poor soil to get the most flowers. Mow only after the seeds have set (around August) and remove the clippings to keep fertility low. Sow a mix of wild flowers into bare earth, or if grass is already established, grow in pots and plant out in Autumn or Spring, this is more work but gets better results. Most of the above taller lawn plants will do well as these edible ones below... Meadowsweet, Filipendula ulmaria: 120cm H. Likes moist rich soil non acid soils, a useful medicinal and culinary herb. Sheep sorrel, Rumex acetosella: 30cm H. prefers suny and moist spot, sharp edible salad leaves all year round. Red clover, Trifolium pratense: 60cm H. attracts butterflies, moths and bees, put round apple trees for better fruit, edible leaves, fixes nitrogen. Alternatively you could purchase a conservation wildflower mix from a local supplier, you won't be able to eat them though. For some more lawn fun see the guerrilla gardening pages. Notes [a] Many pesticides have never been adequately tested for toxicity to humans or wildlife. According to the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides, 13 of the most commonly used lawn care pesticides can cause cancer, 14 can cause birth defects, 21 can damage the nervous system, 15 can injure the liver or kidney, and 30 are sensitizers or irritants. [3] The pesticide MCPA, used as an ingredient is some lawn pesticides, has been found to damage the blood brain barrier which protects against neurological illness.[4] Organophosphate pesticides have been shown to cause memory loss and short attention spans.[5] Other studies have linked long term pesticide use with prostate[6], brain and lung cancer.[7] It is estimated that each year in the US, 67 million birds are poisoned by legally used pesticides.[3] Pesticides are often misused especially by homeowners, increasing the risks. [b] Fertiliser is often over applied, causing runoff problems in nearby watercourses, as well as the obvious waste of fossil fuels in its manufacture and transport. [c] It is estimated that 44% of domestic water consumption in California is used for lawns[8] In many areas ground water tables are being depleted. [d] The manufacture of garden machinery uses energy, depletes resources and creates pollution as do the engine fumes or the power plants producing the electricity they run on. In the early 90’s it was estimated that 580,000,000 gallons of petrol were used to run lawnmowers in the US every year.[2] References [1] The Pesticide Scandal, Sayan, Kathyrne, Family Circle 2 April 1991. [2] Redesigning the American Lawn, F. Herbert Bormann, Diana Balmori, Gordon T. Geballe, Yale University Press, 1993 [3] Spring, 1997 edition of The Arlington Environment, Volume Four, Number Four [4] Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 65:23, 1982 [5] Annual Reviews in Public Health, 7:461, 1986 [6] Occupational Environmental Medicine, 56(1):14-21, 1999 [7] Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 71(1), July 1983 [8] Permaculture a designers manual, Bill Mollison, Tagari publications, 1988. [9] Plants for a future- edible and useful plants for a healthier world, Ken Fern, Permanent publications, 1997.

home . sitemap . search . contact us . top

		Gardening

		What to do with a Lawn

THIS ZONE
climate
cultivation
natural patterns
pests
lawns
seedsaving
soil
sprouting

THE SITE
home
news
monocult
actions
evolution

RESOURCES
sitemap
books
links
search

US
contact us
our aims
logo/banner

"You can't learn much from a lawn,
but a garden has a whole world of wonders."

history

the modern lawn - a waste of resources

The modern pure grass lawn is artificial... you need effort and chemicals to maintain a monoculture.

Misuse and the inherent toxicity of standard pesticides cause short and long term poisoning, cancer and disease in people and wildlife. [a]

Extensive use and overuse of fertilisers (due to lack of restrictions) causes water pollution problems and wastes resources. [b]

Endless summer irrigation to keep lawns green wastes massive amounts of water and depletes water tables. [c]

Lawnmowers, strimmers and other lawn machinery unregulated for environmental emissions, use vast amounts of petrol and are a significant factor in urban air and noise pollution. [d]

The lawn is the worlds third agriculture. It is probable that westerners spend more person hours, energy and resources on their lawns than any agricultural resource of the third world.[8]

alternatives

	lively lawns Apart from the obvious dandelions (Taraxacum officinale), daisy (Bellis perennis) and plantains (Plantago major, plantago media) which are all excellent in lawns, freely self seed, add variety and can also be eaten once you get past seeing them just as ‘weeds,’ try… White Clover, Trifolium repens: 10cm H, spreads, adds nitrogen to the soil, attracts bees and butterflies. You can eat the flowers and leaves, (bit fiddly though) Camomile, Chamaemelum nobile: 15cm H 30cm W, Plants for a future[9] recommend for smell but not for medicine, (no flowers), a cultivar called ‘Treneague’ which is low growing, spreads and will succeed if the grass is cut low and often, however you'll have to find a cutting, there are no seeds. Wild thyme, Thymus serpyllum: 10cm H 30cm W Forms spreading clumps, pink flowers attract bees in summer, drought tolerant, needs sun. High in antioxidants and an essential kitchen herb. Lemon thyme, Thymus x citiodorus: 10cm H 30cm W. Likes light well drained soil and full sun, can be planted by division. Coltsfoot, Tussilago farfara: 25cm H, spreads invasively. Tolerates shade, does well in all soils, flowers edible mar-apr, leaves appear afterwards, used for treatment of respiratory problems. Rough Hawkbit, Leontodon hispidus: 40cm H 30cm W. Similar to dandelion, prefers chalky soil, flowers all summer, attracts bees & butterflies, edible leaves most of the year.
	Salad burnet, Sanguisorba minor: 55cm H 30cm W. Prefers chalky soil and slightly longer grass, flowers May-Aug and provides edible young leaves all year round. Self Heal, Prunella vulgaris: 15cm H spreading to form clumps 30cm W. Prefers moist soil, tolerates low cutting and shade, flowers mid to late summer, attracts bees & butterflies, eaten in salads and an healing herb for cuts and wounds. Yarrow, Achillea millefolium: upto 60cm H spreads, hardy, drought resistant, good in poor soils, and a very useful medicinal herb. beautiful bulbs By lengthening the time between mowings you can also grow taller plants such as bulbs. Planted surreptitiously they are a nice surprise. All below are edible and most spread naturally. It is advisable to plant bulbs of similar flowering times together to make any lawn maintenance more straightforward. Field & Crow garlic, Allium oleraceum & A. vineale: 60cm H, 5cm W. Both almost invasive in grass if left to form bulbils in jul-aug, tolerant of mowing, leaves edible autumn to following summer. If cows eat them, their milk is tainted. Quamash, Camassia quamash: 50cm H 10cm W. Does well in short grass and under trees, flowers late spring, very edible bulbs when cooked.
	Dog's Tooth Violet, Erythronium den-canis: 15cm H 10cm W. appears in spring for a few months each year. bulbs edible raw or cooked, also try E. revoltum 'pagoda' for a bigger, version. Tassel Hyacinth, Muscari botryoides: 40cm H clumps 20cm W. Easy to grow, does well in short grass, almost invasive, 3.5cm bulbs edible, but a little bitter. Or for beauty, there are many other bulbs, such as daffodils, bluebells, crocus etc that can be planted into the lawn. wonderful wildflowers Perhaps you could turn some of your lawn into a ‘wildflower meadow’. This will attract butterflies and insects as well as bringing nature a bit closer to home. Choose a sunny position on poor soil to get the most flowers. Mow only after the seeds have set (around August) and remove the clippings to keep fertility low. Sow a mix of wild flowers into bare earth, or if grass is already established, grow in pots and plant out in Autumn or Spring, this is more work but gets better results. Most of the above taller lawn plants will do well as these edible ones below... Meadowsweet, Filipendula ulmaria: 120cm H. Likes moist rich soil non acid soils, a useful medicinal and culinary herb. Sheep sorrel, Rumex acetosella: 30cm H. prefers suny and moist spot, sharp edible salad leaves all year round. Red clover, Trifolium pratense: 60cm H. attracts butterflies, moths and bees, put round apple trees for better fruit, edible leaves, fixes nitrogen. Alternatively you could purchase a conservation wildflower mix from a local supplier, you won't be able to eat them though. For some more lawn fun see the guerrilla gardening pages. Notes [a] Many pesticides have never been adequately tested for toxicity to humans or wildlife. According to the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides, 13 of the most commonly used lawn care pesticides can cause cancer, 14 can cause birth defects, 21 can damage the nervous system, 15 can injure the liver or kidney, and 30 are sensitizers or irritants. [3] The pesticide MCPA, used as an ingredient is some lawn pesticides, has been found to damage the blood brain barrier which protects against neurological illness.[4] Organophosphate pesticides have been shown to cause memory loss and short attention spans.[5] Other studies have linked long term pesticide use with prostate[6], brain and lung cancer.[7] It is estimated that each year in the US, 67 million birds are poisoned by legally used pesticides.[3] Pesticides are often misused especially by homeowners, increasing the risks. [b] Fertiliser is often over applied, causing runoff problems in nearby watercourses, as well as the obvious waste of fossil fuels in its manufacture and transport. [c] It is estimated that 44% of domestic water consumption in California is used for lawns[8] In many areas ground water tables are being depleted. [d] The manufacture of garden machinery uses energy, depletes resources and creates pollution as do the engine fumes or the power plants producing the electricity they run on. In the early 90’s it was estimated that 580,000,000 gallons of petrol were used to run lawnmowers in the US every year.[2] References [1] The Pesticide Scandal, Sayan, Kathyrne, Family Circle 2 April 1991. [2] Redesigning the American Lawn, F. Herbert Bormann, Diana Balmori, Gordon T. Geballe, Yale University Press, 1993 [3] Spring, 1997 edition of The Arlington Environment, Volume Four, Number Four [4] Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 65:23, 1982 [5] Annual Reviews in Public Health, 7:461, 1986 [6] Occupational Environmental Medicine, 56(1):14-21, 1999 [7] Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 71(1), July 1983 [8] Permaculture a designers manual, Bill Mollison, Tagari publications, 1988. [9] Plants for a future- edible and useful plants for a healthier world, Ken Fern, Permanent publications, 1997.

home . sitemap . search . contact us . top

Next week's shortakes on public-access television previewed on You Tube: See link below

2011-08-12T21:39:00.002-05:00

Parts 1, 2, 3 & 4 of August 9, 2011, complaint-procedure and policy subcommittee of Fayetteville AR Telecommunication Board

2011-08-09T19:45:00.004-05:00

In his Street Jazz post, Richard Drake asks when is a meeting not a meeting?

2011-08-03T15:18:00.000-05:00

Street Jazz

Archives | RSS

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - 10:15:58

Fayetteville Government Channel: When is a meeting not a meeting?

While not a monumental issue, perhaps, this may be of some importance for those who get most of their news about the inner workings of Fayetteville government from watching Fayetteville Government Channel.
Fayetteville is fortunate in the regard that not only are meetings shown on FGC, but citizens have an opportunity to make a real difference by exploring issues even further on Fayetteville Public Access Television. Before FGC came into being in the early 1990s City Council (then City Board of Directors) meetings and Washington County Quorum Court meetings were both shown on Fayetteville Open Channel, the city’s access provider.
We all owe a great deal to the hardworking folks at FGC.
FGC attempts to show all of the meetings that time and money allow, but are there times when value judgments are being made, that some meetings are more equal than others?
Obviously, you have the meetings with more marquee value, such as City Council or Planning Commission meetings, but there are many other commissions, boards and committees which meet as well, and some may not be shown on FGC, simply because a quorum of its voting membership may not have shown up to a particular meeting.
Should this be the case? If no actual voting takes place, does the meeting then have no value for the viewing public?
Let’s take, for example, the Telecommunications Board. I’ll use this because I sat on (and chaired, okay) the board for several years. On more than one occasion we didn’t have a quorum of members show up at meetings.
Anyone familiar with committees (both government and non-profit) can attest to the fact that not everybody shows up when they should. It’s a pain in the neck, but it’s cold, hard reality.
So you can’t vote on anything. If you are a non-profit, well, you can just sit around and grouse and drink coffee (or whatever) and eat pizza. If you are a government body, you have a couple of choices.
You can fold up the deck chairs and go home.
That kind of sucks. Because not only the ones on the body who actually care about business have shown up, but folks at home turn on television and expect to be informed. To just say, “Well, looks like we’re all dressed up with no place to go. Better luck next time,” just seems sort of cavalier.
OR:
A board or committee could hold an “informational meeting.”
What’s an informational meeting when it’s at home, you ask, Gluttonous Reader? Well, in the specific case of the Telecom Board, there would be agencies which would come to make reports to the city, such as the public access provider, the Cable Administrator and UA TV.
The beauty of having an informational meeting was that, even though it wasn’t “official” (in that no votes were taken or calls to action called for) the board could still hear the reports.
More importantly, the viewing public(taxpayers/voters) could hear the reports, and know what was going in the world of Fayetteville Telecommunications. In the case of UA TV, falling back on informational meetings when you lacked a quorum was especially important, since they were only scheduled to come in every few months.
These folks don’t come before the boards and give their reports just to kill time, because they have nothing else to do that particular night. These are reports that they have worked hard on, and they deserve the respect to be heard, both by the board (even if not a quorum) and the public.
Is UATV performing well?
Is Fayetteville Public Access Television making new inroads into the ever increasing diversity that is Fayetteville?
How well is the Cable Administrator doing his job?
This is how the public learns, from these public reports, and learns even more from the questioning of Telecom Board members, which can go beyond the surface of the reports.
I have used the Telecom Board as an example, but fill in any name you want.
There is a school of thought that believes that if there if no quorum present nothing of interest is likely to be said in the room, but nothing could be further from the truth. I’m not sure how many folks in City Hall feel that way, but I’ve talked to more than a few FGC viewers, and they would like to see and hear what is going on.
******

Get rid of the “resume padders”
Some folks only apply for board positions because it looks good on a resume, and then they never show up at meetings. If you have those on your board, dump ‘em with the recycling.
Why the recycling? Because no doubt they will find another board they will con soon, and they will be dead weight there, as well, while they add another few lines to their resume.
*****
Quote of the Day
The contents of someone's bookcase are part of his history, like an ancestral portrait. - Anatole Broyard
rsdrake@cox.net

Telecommunication board's July 21, 2011, meeting video

2011-08-02T12:19:00.000-05:00

Telecom Board subcommittee on complaints' July 2011 meeting

2011-07-23T06:53:00.003-05:00

Fayetteville Public Schools' report for July 2011 meeting of the Telecom Board: Thanks to Susan Norton

2011-07-20T16:21:00.000-05:00

Report to Telecommunications Board

July 21, 2011

Information on TV & Multimedia Services

Fayetteville Public Schools’ TV & Multimedia Services department produces a broad range of media including: community interest stories, coverage of school events, student performances, athletics, professional development for teachers, and school board meetings. FPS has a state-of-the-art television studio used both by students in broadcast classes and by professional staff. Fayar.tv is the official broadcast station for the Fayetteville Public Schools.

Fayar.tv, is made possible by an agreement with the City of Fayetteville under its franchise agreements which provide for the cable companies to host an Education Channel as well as a Government and Public Access Channel. Fayar.tv is broadcast on Cox Channel 217 and Uverse 99. The district also serves up this programming via web stream on its home page: www.fayar.net.

The symbol [Picture]on the far bottom right of the home page will activate the stream.

Information on TV Programming Guidelines

Per specifications for broadcast content on the Fayetteville COX and AT&T U-Verse PEG channel use agreement with the city, the Fayetteville Public School District utilizes our educational channels to publish locally-produced content relating to the district, its student population and their parents. We broadcast athletic events and competitions, academic events and competitions, district and citywide social events, school specific events including theatrical, musical and academic events. We emphasize activities and events designed to engender familial and community interest and participation in the education of our youth. Additionally, we broadcast the monthly school board meetings to update community awareness of the decisions and directions of the district’s governing body.

We maintain an interstitial bulletin board and RSS feed from the district’s community web-blog to announce upcoming events, commendations awarded and other items of general interest to our community.   Also included in our daily offering are early programs, now in the public domain, for their historic content. These programs range from early motion pictures by Charlie Chaplin, screen plays produced from literary classics like Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist, Ernest Hemmingway’s A Farewell to Arms, Rudyard Kipling’s Jungle Book to name a few. We’ve also included a few cartoons like early Popeye and Betty Boop for their cinematic historical value. All selections are age appropriate and can be related to studies of World and American History, cinema and Americana.

Today's Schedule (July 20, 2011)

6:00 AM - Beverly Hillbillies: Getting Settled

6:30 AM - Beverly Hillbillies: Hair Raising Holiday

7:00 AM - The Last Time I Saw Paris

9:00 AM - Fayetteville Public Schools Volunteer Banquet April 26, 2011

10:00 AM - Bulldogs vs Rogers Basketball February 8, 2011

11:40 AM - Sight

11:55 AM - Take Me Home

12:00 PM - Fayetteville Public Schools Volunteer Banquet April 26, 2011

1:00 PM - Woodruff: A Lesson Of Non-Violence

1:30 PM - The Bulldog Show January 19, 2011

2:00 PM - Bulldog Football vs Southside October 15, 2010

4:30 PM - A.C.E. Competition February 28, 2011

5:30 PM - The Bulldog Show April 6, 2011

6:00 PM - The Dog Dish May 2011

6:20 PM - 2011 Fayetteville High School Lib Dub

6:30 PM - The Bulldog Show April 27, 2011

7:00 PM - 2011 FHS Film Festival

8:30 PM - 2011 Woodland Jr. High Band Spring Concert

9:40 PM - Moment of Silence Concert

10:00 PM - Ramay Jr. High Gifted & Talented Puppet Shows 2011

10:30 PM - School Board Workshop June 14, 2011

We invite the Telecommunications Board to offer feedback and guidance!

Next month, I will show you the new web pages we are launching to better showcase the work of the students and staff. For now, thanks!

Susan Norton

Chief Information Officer

Fayetteville Public Schools

Draft of complaint procedure compiled by city staff members

2011-07-20T15:34:00.000-05:00

Complaint and Feedback Procedure for
The City of Fayetteville
Telecommunications Board
June 2011

The Telecommunications Board, through assistance of City Staff, will manage a process whereby residents can communicate their comments, complaints or feedback regarding:

a. The activity of the Telecommunications Board
b. The programming or operations of The Fayetteville Government Channel
c. The programming or operations of Fayetteville Public Access Television
d. The programming or operations of the Education Channel
e. The operations of the City of Fayetteville Television Center
f. Any other issue involving telecommunications or telecommunications services providers that have an impact on the residents of Fayetteville

Individuals may communicate comments, complaints or feedback by:

1. Contacting the Mayor’s designated City Staff liaison to the Telecommunications Board
2. Contacting a member of the Telecommunications Board
3. Communicating directly with the Board in a Board meeting

Complaints

Complaints regarding the operations or programming of The Government Channel or Fayetteville Public Access Television will be initially investigated and responded to by the respective management of each channel following currently established procedure. Each procedure provides for an appeal process.

It is the responsibility of the City Staff liaison to initially document, investigate and respond to any complaints communicated to the Telecommunications Board. A complaint will only be investigated and responded to if it is the desire of the complainant to file a formal complaint. To qualify as a formal complaint, the complaint must be submitted in writing with the complainant providing their name and contact information. The Staff liaison will make available a form that can be used to submit a formal complaint to the Telecommunications Board, and provide assistance to those requiring help in completing the form.

1. Complaints communicated to the City Staff liaison will be immediately investigated by the City Staff liaison in accordance with the procedure described herein.
2. For complaints communicated to a member of the Telecommunications Board, the complainant will be referred to the City Staff liaison for follow up.
3. Complaints that are presented directly to the Telecommunications Board at a Board meeting will be documented by the City Staff liaison for follow up. The complainant will be advised that the City Staff liaison will investigate the complaint and present findings to the complainant and the Telecommunications Board at its next regular meeting.

After a formal complaint is submitted, the Staff liaison will follow this procedure:
1. Document the complaint, recording:
a. Date
b. Time
c. Nature of the complaint
d. Contact information of the complainant
e. As many details as possible to facilitate the investigation of the complaint
2. Immediately communicate to the complainant their complaint is being investigated, and they will receive a preliminary response, in writing, regarding their complaint within 3 business days.
3. Advise the City’s Director of Communication of the complaint.
4. Investigate the complaint to determine all pertinent information, documenting the process, the findings and the recommendations of City Staff to the Telecommunications Board.
5. Provide a written response to the complainant detailing the investigation of their complaint, any findings thereof, and any initial action taken in response to the complaint. The complainant will be advised their complaint will be included on the agenda to be considered by the full Telecommunications Board at their next regular meeting. If the complaint is received within 15 days of a regular meeting of the Board, it will be scheduled to be heard at the subsequent regular meeting.
6. Provide all information regarding the complaint to members of the Telecommunications Board via the meeting information packet.
7. Document all action taken and information regarding the complaint, including any pertinent meeting minutes, and keep such documentation in a file in the archives of the Telecommunications Board.

When considering a complaint at a full meeting of the Telecommunications Board, the following procedure will be followed:

1. A new complaint will be an individual item of new business on the meeting agenda.
2. The City Staff liaison will present the results of their investigation of the complaint, along with any information regarding applicable laws, regulations or ordinances, and any other information that may be pertinent or useful to the Telecommunications Board in making any determinations.
3. The complainant will be provided an opportunity to present any information and their position regarding the complaint.
4. The Telecommunications Board will discuss the complaint and ask any questions that may be necessary of either the City Staff liaison or the complainant.
5. The Board will present its determination and vote on the subsequent action.

In response to the complaint The Telecommunications Board may take one of the following actions:

1. The Board requires further information, or investigation of the complaint.
2. Determine the complaint is unfounded; no further action to be taken by the Telecommunications Board.
3. Determine the complaint is valid; no further action to be taken by the Telecommunications Board.
4. Determine the complaint is valid; The Telecommunications Board directs City Staff to present the complaint to the City Council. If this action is selected, the Telecommunications Board must state the action they are advising the City Council to take.
Consideration and response to complaints will follow all administrative and meeting conduct rules and procedures, including a formal motion and vote on the action to be taken. In all cases, the Board must provide supporting reasons and justifications for the determination and action taken.

After the Board has determined action, the City Staff liaison will provide a written response to the complainant within three (3) business days, detailing the complaint, the action taken by the Telecommunications Board, the justification and reasons for the action taken, and the process for appealing the action of the Telecommunications Board, should the complainant so desire.

Telecom Board agenda for Thursday, July 21, 2011

2011-07-19T13:39:00.003-05:00

Staff Representatives

Don Marr
Chief of Staff

Lindsley Smith
Communications Director

Fritz Gisler
Government Channel Manager

Committee Members

Aubrey Shepherd, Chairman
Blake Pennington
Michael Spencer
Mike Ehrig
Mike Russell
Russ Davis
Steve Smith
Final Agenda
City of Fayetteville Arkansas
Telecommunication Board
July 21, 2011

A meeting of the Telecommunication Board will be held at 5:30 P.M. July 21, 2011, in Room 326 of the City Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Call to Order

Call roll and WELCOME new members, Michael Ehrig and Steven Smith, to the board and thank previous members for service.

(1) Approval of May 2011 meeting minutes

(2) Adoption of July 21, 2011, agenda

(3) Government Channel Television Report

(4) Public Access Television Report from Fayetteville Public Access Television by Your Media Executive Director or representative of Your Media Board.

(5) Education Channel Report from a representative of the Fayetteville Public School system.

(6) Report from complaint-subcommittee that met Wednesday.

(7) Invite new members to join the Internet sub-committee and complaint-policy committee

(8) Telecom Board discussion of Cox Cable's changes in channel lineup affecting PEG channels. How can we make the public more aware of where to find the public stations?

(9) Compliments, complaints and coverage-area residents’ comments*

(10) Agenda suggestions for August 18, 2011, meeting. Election of chairman and vice chairman to be held in August.

(11) Announcements from Board Members

(12 ) Adjournment

*The public will be invited to speak after each presentation. but the comment period near the end of the meeting will offer the public time to speak about any previous item or to bring up questions, complaints, complaints and suggestions for future agenda items considered important.

Telecommunication board information and member list as of June 2011, according to the list on the city Web site

2011-06-26T15:13:00.001-05:00

Telecommunications Board

Contact

Lindsley Smith, (479) 575-8330

Terms

Staggered four-year terms.

Membership

The Board shall be composed of seven members as follows:

Seven members from the public-at-large with experience in any one of the following areas:
Telecommunications infrastructure management, public policy development regarding communication and telecommunications issues, television, or other appropriate expertise. Members shall be registered voters and residents of the City of Fayetteville, and shall have resided therein for at least six months prior to their appointment.

Appointment

Vacancies on the Board are filled by appointment from the governing body of the City.

Public Notification

A weekly meetings list is prepared by the City Clerk’s office which is distributed to the press and posted on the City’s web site: www.accessfayetteville.org

Meeting Times

Regular meetings are held the third Thursday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building.

City of Fayetteville Appointees

Position	Name	Address	Phone	Terms
Chairman	Aubrey Shepherd	1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 444-6072	01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013
Vice Chairman	Blake Pennington	927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 430-1221	07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014
	Michael Ehrig	2007 W. Custer Lane, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 521-4420	07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015
	Michael Spencer	2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704	(202) 713-5480	01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013
	Mike Russell	1303 E. Joyce Blvd., Fayetteville, AR 72703	(479) 871-0975	07/01/2009 thru 06/30/2014
	Russ Davis	1155 E. Rolling Hills Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72703	(479) 236-0453	01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013
	Stephen Smith	340 N. Rollston, Fayetteville, AR 72701	(479) 409-7842	07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015

Tonight's meeting canceled for lack of a quorum: Please see May meeting of Fayetteville Telecommunication Board online video

2011-06-16T17:28:00.002-05:00

Email from manager of gov channel:
The June 16, 2011 meeting of the City of Fayetteville Telecommunications Board scheduled for this evening has been canceled due to lack of a quorum. We apologize for any inconvenience. The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for July 21, 2011.
Thank you

Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel
The City of Fayetteville Television Center
fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us
101 W. Rock Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Voice: 479-444-3434

Email from gov channel manager including three board members' email that they would not attend tonight:

Aubrey,

Here are the emails from Russ, Brandon and Blake notifying us of their inability to attend tonight's meeting.

I will be forwarding the cancellation notice momentarily.

Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel

The City of Fayetteville Television Center

fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

101 W. Rock Street

Fayetteville, AR 72701

Voice: 479-444-3434

Fax: 479-444-3437

TDD: 479-521-1316

(Telecommunication Device for the Deaf)

--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: Russ@urguru.net
To: fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us; anne@your-media.org; aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com; blake@niblocklawfirm.com; brandon.leder@hp.com; dmarr@ci.fayetteville.ar.us; fredcusanelli@gmail.com; jwalsh@nwaonline.com; lfsmith@ci.fayetteville.ar.us; ms@journeypr.com
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:46:05 -0700
Subject: RE: June 16 Meeting

I will be out of town June 16^th and unable to attend this Telecomm Meeting.

Russ Davis

Managing Member

103 N College Ave, Ste 6
Fayetteville, Arkansas

1-855-GET-GURU Ext 700

Direct :: 479.935.9888

Fax :: 479.935.9509

From: Frederick Gisler [mailto:fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 9:32 AM
To: Anne Shelley; Aubrey Shepherd; Blake Pennington; Brandon Leder; Don Marr; Fred Cusanelli; Joel Walsh; Lindsley Smith; Michael Spencer; Russ Davis
Subject: June 16 Meeting

Hello All,

Attached is the Agenda and supporting information for the June 16, 2011 meeting of the Fayetteville Telecommunications Board. There is one agenda item requested from the last meeting that is not on the agenda. Mr. Spencer asked for a response to his request regarding direction for the Telecommunications Board from the Administration and/or the City Council. I apologize that I was unable to fulfill that request for this meeting.

As always, if you know you will be unable to attend the meeting, please notify me as soon as possible.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to seeing you next week.

Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel

The City of Fayetteville Television Center

fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

101 W. Rock Street

Fayetteville, AR 72701

Voice: 479-444-3434

Fax: 479-444-3437

TDD: 479-521-1316

(Telecommunication Device for the Deaf)

--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: BPennington@NiblockLawFirm.com
To: fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us; anne@your-media.org; aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com; brandon.leder@hp.com; dmarr@ci.fayetteville.ar.us; fredcusanelli@gmail.com; jwalsh@nwaonline.com; lfsmith@ci.fayetteville.ar.us; ms@journeypr.com; russ@urguru.net
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:56:51 -0500
Subject: RE: June 16 Meeting

I apologize for the late notice but I will be unable to make this evening’s meeting.

Hello All,

As always, if you know you will be unable to attend the meeting, please notify me as soon as possible.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to seeing you next week.

Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel

The City of Fayetteville Television Center

fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

101 W. Rock Street

Fayetteville, AR 72701

Voice: 479-444-3434

Fax: 479-444-3437

TDD: 479-521-1316

(Telecommunication Device for the Deaf)

--Forwarded Message Attachment--
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:24:00 -0500
Subject: Fwd: June 16 Meeting
From: anne@your-media.org
To: fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Leder, Brandon <brandon.leder@hp.com>
Date: Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:41 AM
Subject: RE: June 16 Meeting
To: Frederick Gisler <fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>, Anne Shelley <anne@your-media.org>, Aubrey Shepherd <aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com>, Blake Pennington <blake@niblocklawfirm.com>, Don Marr <dmarr@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>, Fred Cusanelli <fredcusanelli@gmail.com>, Joel Walsh <jwalsh@nwaonline.com>, Lindsley Smith <lfsmith@cifayetteville.ar.us>, Michael Spencer <ms@journeypr.com>, Russ Davis <russ@urguru.net>

Due to an out of town business meeting, I will not be back until late, the night of June 16, therefore, will be unable to attend this month’s meeting.

Thanks,

Brandon Leder

Enterprise Account Manager | HP PSG | Arkansas-Oklahoma

(479) 595-9792 Cell | brandon.leder@hp.com

Inside Account Manager

John Q Trujillo

Inside Sales manager/HP PSG/ Arkansas-Oklahoma

(800) 277-8988 ext. 7718176

John.qui.trujillo@hp.com

From: Frederick Gisler [mailto:fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 9:32 AM
To: Anne Shelley; Aubrey Shepherd; Blake Pennington; Leder, Brandon; Don Marr; Fred Cusanelli; Joel Walsh; Lindsley Smith; Michael Spencer; Russ Davis
Subject: June 16 Meeting

Hello All,

As always, if you know you will be unable to attend the meeting, please notify me as soon as possible.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to seeing you next week.

Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel

The City of Fayetteville Television Center

fgisler@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

101 W. Rock Street

Fayetteville, AR 72701

Voice: 479-444-3434

Fax: 479-444-3437

TDD: 479-521-1316

(Telecommunication Device for the Deaf)

Anne Shelley

Executive Director

Your Media (formerly Community Access Television)

anne@your-media.org

479-287-4066 (Your Media Office)

479-444-3433 (Fayetteville Public Access Television)

Your Media is the service provider for Fayetteville Public Access Television

Telecom Board members as of May 2011

2011-06-16T11:09:00.002-05:00

Please click on image to ENLARGE. Click on enlarged view for even easier reading.

May 16, 2011, Ward 4 meeting in Fayetteville, Arkansas, includes discussion of upcoming City Council consideration of the 2030 master plan

2011-06-04T20:26:00.002-05:00

Fayetteville city governent shares SEVERE WEATHER WARNING

2011-05-24T17:11:00.003-05:00

Hazardous Weather Expected in Northwest Arkansas Tonight

The National Weather Service out of Tulsa, Oklahoma, has issued a hazardous weather outlook for Northwest and West Central Arkansas, as well as much of Eastern Oklahoma. The City of Fayetteville asks that you consider these alerts seriously and make needed safety precautions.

A widespread severe weather episode is expected this afternoon and evening across eastern Oklahoma and Northwest Arkansas. The developing weather pattern is highly favorable for long track supercells capable of strong tornadoes, large hail, and winds in excess of 70 mph. These storms will develop across central Oklahoma late this afternoon and spread eastward during the evening. By late this afternoon a strong upper level system will be moving out of the southwest U.S. with an unstable airmass in place over much of Central and Eastern Oklahoma. Scattered thunderstorms are expected to develop along the dry line in Central Oklahoma late this afternoon and become severe very quickly.

Storms will increase in coverage through the evening as they move into Northwest Arkansas with the threat of widespread damaging severe weather continuing late into the evening. In addition, dangerous flooding remains ongoing over parts of Northeast Oklahoma and Northwest Arkansas due to heavy rainfall Monday. Any additional significant rain will only enhance the flooding issues. Below are emergency procedures in the event of a tornado:

If you are in a structure:
Go to a pre-designated shelter area such as a safe room, basement, storm cellar, or the lowest building level. If there is no basement, go to the center of an interior room on the lowest level (closet, interior hallway) away from corners, windows, doors, and outside walls. Put as many walls as possible between you and the outside. Get under a sturdy table and use your arms to protect your head and neck. Do not open windows.

If you are in a vehicle or mobile home:
Get out immediately and go to the lowest floor of a sturdy, nearby building or a storm shelter. Mobile homes, even if tied down, offer little protection from tornadoes.

If you are outside with no shelter:

Lie flat in a nearby ditch or depression and cover your head with your hands. Be aware of the potential for flooding. Do not get under an overpass or bridge. You are safer in a low, flat location. Never try to outrun a tornado in urban or congested areas in a car or truck. Instead, leave the vehicle immediately for safer shelter. Watch out for flying debris. Flying debris from tornadoes causes most fatalities and injuries. For additional information, please see information from the Federal Emergency Management Association on tornadoes at http://www.fema.gov/hazard/tornado/index.shtm.

Fayetteville city governent shares SEVERE WEATHER WARNING

2011-05-24T17:11:00.000-05:00

Hazardous Weather Expected in Northwest Arkansas Tonight

2009 meeting of PEG center employees, Telecom Board members and AT&T officials

2011-05-19T21:18:00.000-05:00

Richard Drake's memory of the 1993 effort to get planning commission to allow Government Channel to record and broadcast its meetings

2011-05-11T10:03:00.000-05:00

Street Jazz

Archives | RSS

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 - 09:23:18

Fayetteville, 1993: Convincing Planning Commission to do the right thing took a form of video guerilla warfare

This is sort of an instructive lesson in why every community needs public access television.
When the Fayetteville Government Channel First came into being in 1992, most of the volunteer committees set up by the city agreed to have their meetings shown on TV, except for the Planning Commission. Long considered to be one of the most important government bodies, their decision seemed unfathomable. And yet they were unapproachable on the subject
Some folks would have gone, “Ah well, maybe they will see the light one day,” but then again, that would have been stupid. A group of us determined to tape their meetings and put them on public access until the Planning Commission agreed to allow FGC cameras to tape them.
The entire process took several months. It needs to be noted for the “Tsk, tsk” crowd that, unlike the pasty-faced little thugs who did the job on ACORN some time back, we presented the commission meetings in their entirety - even when we were having fun editing.
Hell, no, we won't go - on Television
Fayetteville, 1993: Convincing Planning Commission to do the right thing took a form of video guerilla warfare
Many communities across the United States enjoy a form of television known as a PEG system - channels provided by the city, for the benefit of the local citizens. PEG (Public, Education and Government) channels are very popular across the country. Not only do they offer locals the chance to speak out on a wide variety of topics, but the government channels also serve as a local form of C-Span, offering gavel-to-gavel coverage of city/county meetings.
It provides a window into the process of government usually not afforded to those unable to physically attend meetings. As a result, such channels are at once very popular with local citizens, and a little unnerving to elected officials - especially in towns who don't offer these channels, but whose citizens would like them.
There is nothing like a little empowerment to make some elected officials nervous.
In Fayetteville, before 1992, everything was offered on just one public access channel, Fayetteville Open Channel. Because of time constraints, only the meetings of the Fayetteville City Council and the Washington County Quorum Court were aired on FOC.
In 1992, things changed radically, when the city of Fayetteville officially offered three separate PEG channels. It was hardly a seamless operation, though. From the very beginning, some were determined to be dragged kicking and screaming into the age of television - if at all.
It took several months for the new Fayetteville Government Channel to set things up so that they could tape as many meetings as they needed to. Then, as now, much depended upon both time and the availability of personnel.
Nevertheless, the new channel was very popular with the citizens of Fayetteville. For the first time, not just city council or county meetings were shown, but also committee and commission meetings, made up of citizen volunteers.
Fayetteville itself has long had a reputation for being one of the most politically diverse - and divisive - cities in Northwest Arkansas. The home of the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville has been known for many years as "The Athens of the Ozarks" - a place not only known for its beauty, but also for the spirited and intelligent debate that often marked public controversies.
In fact, public access television itself had almost been lost due to bitter public debates in the community. But by 1992, all of this was behind Fayetteville; not only was there a new access provider, but a new government channel that everyone was pleased about.
Well, not quite everyone.
The entire subject of having cameras in public meetings was a sore point with some in the business community. In fact, during a public survey (The Fayetteville Vision Project), several in the Chamber of Commerce had felt that cameras should be removed from City Hall entirely.
The chief problem with "empowerment" is that all too often the "wrong" sort of people are empowered. And for several years, activists of all stripes had utilized public access well in Fayetteville. Not only that, but folks were not too shy about expressing themselves at council meetings.
Take the cameras away, some felt, and the activists would melt away into the woodwork.
Though those who would remove cameras altogether failed to make any headway, there was still another way to thwart those activists - or "aginners" as one daily newspaper referred to them, meaning that they were against progress for their community.
Though most committees and volunteer boards at City Hall, had no problem with going on Fayetteville Government Channel, there were a few holdouts - chief among them being the Planning Commission.
Though each and every city board and commission (made up of unpaid citizens who volunteer their time and energy) is important, some deal with issues that can directly affect every man and woman among us, and the Planning Commission is one of those.
One of the commission's jobs is to see that Fayetteville, which is growing by leaps and bounds, has some control over that growth. A city that doesn't endeavor to plan for the future may well find itself turning into an urban nightmare.
Naturally, the workings of such a body will attract a lot of public attention, some of it unwanted. To the consternation of much of the viewing public of Fayetteville, in July of 1993, the Planning Commission voted formally not to allow FGC to videotape and show their meetings.
That should have been the end of it. Nothing to see here, folks. Everybody move along, now.
Some might have whined. Some might have said, "oh, well, you can't have everything." But if you're gonna live in a town known as the Athens of the Ozarks, you gotta earn the right to call yourself that.
The Planning Commission hadn't factored public access television into their calculations.
October: it must have surprised the Planning Commission to see volunteer public access producers come into the city council chambers (where the commission held their meetings) and set up field cameras.
Full Disclosure Time: I was part of that crew.
Though cameras were in operation, no one seemed to be playing to them, even though some in the audience obviously cared very much about the subjects they spoke about, namely their neighborhoods.
The meeting went by without a hitch. Although we didn't use the city cameras that were in place for meetings, the meeting - which aired on Fayetteville's public access station - looked as good as any seen on the FGC.
Through back channels, however, we learned that there were some on the Planning Commission who were very annoyed that the cameras were there, though there was nothing they about do about it.
There were other issues at stake, other than simply having important meetings shown to the public. Several of the members of the commission had uncomfortably close business ties - not only with each other, but with developers coming before the commission.
The situation went on for several months. Public access producers taking time out of their lives to tape and edit a government meeting, because the body in question still refused to allow "official" cameras into their meetings. There didn't seem to be much logic involved.
Looking back, I can only assume that they thought we'd get tired of it after a while, and leave them alone.
In fact, just the opposite happened. While the Government Channel, like the aforementioned C-Span, offers gavel-to-gavel coverage of meetings, there was a distinct advantage independent public access producers had over government employees. Though we had taken pains to make our tapes look as professional as possible, we realized we weren't bound by that.
The Planning Commission was going to tired of us long before we got tired of them.
We started small, with just a few innovations. "NYPD Blue" was still in its infancy, and handheld camera shots were all the rage. Accordingly, while one of our cameras remained on a tripod, one of our camera people would hoist a camera over his shoulder and walk around the room, getting angles that were creative, to say the least.
Then, in the editing room, some parts of the meeting might end up being in black and white. Film noir, anyone?
And for those who liked foreign films - ala Godzilla - some sequences might find a commission member opening their mouth to speak, and their voice catching up with them a few seconds later.
Still, no luck. Though we were having great fun at the commission's expense, they weren't budging. Though we were all adults, we were tolerated as though we were a neighbor's particularly backward children. So, we upped the ante, just a little.
We already knew of the close business ties that at least two members had with each other, and with those who came before the Planning Commission. On-screen, when they would appear, their business connections would be linked via graphics.
That went on for a few meetings, and then the ultimate touch was added. As Gilbert and Sullivan played over the end credits, all of the members' financial ties were listed, along with information as to which business interests had donated money to their various failed political campaigns.
Applause followed at the end of the program.
That seemed to do the trick. We were officially "invited" to a Planning Commission meeting, where not a word was said about the content of the meetings that had been shown on public access television. Instead, those of us who stood up spoke about the First Amendment, the People's right to Know, and I even talked about how much better the meetings would look, using the Government Channel equipment.
With no discussion, they voted to allow their meetings to be shown on FGC.
Life went on. We all went back to our own projects, the Planning Commission was on television on a regular basis, and the citizens at home learned more about their city government.
That's as close to a happy ending as you get in politics, most days.
Richard S. Drake is the author of a science fiction novel, "Freedom Run," and "Ozark Mosaic: Adventures in Arkansas Alternative Journalism, 1990-2002."
Little Rock Free Press - February, 2007
rsdrake@cox.net

Tentative minues of April 2011 Telecom Board meeting

2011-05-03T16:29:00.002-05:00

Telecommunications Board Meeting Minutes
April 21, 2011, 5:30pm Room 219, City Administration
Chairman Aubrey Shepherd welcomed.
Present were Aubrey Shepherd, Blake Pennington, Russ Davis and Michael Spencer. Not present were Brandon Lederl and Fred Cusanelli. Also present were Fritz Gisler, the Government Channel Manager; Anne Shelley, Fayetteville Public Access Television Executive Director: Lindsley Smith, City of Fayetteville Director of Communication
APPROVAL OF MINUTES of February 17 meeting. Pennington motioned and Davis seconded. All approved.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA: Gisler requested that Item 6 be moved to immediately after adoption of the agenda. Pennington motioned and Spencer seconded. All approved the change and adopted the agenda.
REPORT FROM THE MANAGER: FAYETTEVILLE PUBLIC ACCESS TELEVISION
Anne Shelley, Fayetteville Public Access Television Executive Director, highlighted a few points from the submitted report.
1. Exceeded contractual obligation of new candidate producers by one
2. 67 offered classes first quarter vs. 52 last year
3. 217 new programs. More new shows than repeat
4. Sense of professionalism and team effort
5. All forms updated
6. Tracked users by Wards
7. Outreach- created a Fayetteville Public Access TV brochure and quarterly Highlight Newsletter on website.
8. Your Media- Board Task Force strategy: Outreach, Finance/fundraising, FPATV Operations. Perhaps an insert in the water bill
9. Training- new class schedule
Shelley spoke of the complaint, which is included in the packet, and the satisfactory resolution. Shelley expressed satisfaction with the complaint process. Spencer asked if Mr. Wells was satisfied.Shelley responded that Mr. Wells appeared to be. Pennington asked “ What do you intend to fill with now?” Shelley said there is plenty of programming in the library to use.Davis complimented the numbers and Shelley added she would be watching cancellations and no- shows from the classes. Spencer suggested tracking the cancellations as a good gage of public interest. Spencer complimented the good work and
thanked the staff. Shepherd asked if there had been any complaints about the COX channel move and Shelley answered that there had been none.
REPORT FROM THE MANAGER: FAYETTEVILLE TELEVISION CENTER/GOVERNMENT CHANNEL Gisler remarked on the City's satisfaction and confidence with the operation of Fayetteville Public Access by Your Media and talked about the website revisions of faypublic.tv. Gisler talked about accessfayetteville.org and the link to faypublic.tv. He added that all the information about Fayetteville Government Television has been updated. Gisler told the board that a regular program schedule has been implemented. Davis asked if the content was available on COX's guide. Gisler said that it is a goal to get that done and that he plans to enhance the website so there will be an automatically updated schedule.
Davis asked if the Fayetteville Public Access domain was owned by the City or Your Media. Shelley replied that it is owned by the City. Shepherd asked the cost and Shelley said she believed $120 for two years with Green Geeks and just the name not the hosting service.Flint Woods, staff, builds and maintains the site. Shepherd asked about the bandwidth and Davis asked if any social media was driving traffic to faypublic.tv. Shelley said that was an outreach goal for next quarter. Your Media has a U of A public relations/marketing focused intern.
Gisler complimented the staff for the work day painting. He also talked about the new graphics being created for the Government Channel and signage. He mentioned visits to the Television Center by State Representative Debbie Hobbs and the Spring International students.
Spencer talked about page 13 and obligations of the contract with Your Media and the number of producers. He asked if any other obligations of the contract were being measured. Did any fall short? Spencer asked that a chart of deliverables be sent to him. Spencer also asked that areas that need work be included in the reports.
BOARD DISCUSSION OF COX COMMUNICATIONS ISSUES Gisler talked about the free wifi on the downtown square which COX provided. Shepherd reported that Jim Bemis tested all around and it was easy. Pennington said the Market vendors liked it. Spencer asked for monthly reports of usage if it can be tracked. Spencer also asked what is being done to advertise the free wifi and suggested signage.
Gisler reported that there have been no calls concerning the channel migration. Shepherd said that COX will still provide the converter box.
REPORT ON THE STATUS OF THE AGREEMENT WITH FAYETTEVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO OPERATE THE EDUCATION CHANNEL Gisler said the draft of the contract has been sent to the Board members and included in the packets. He reported that ta preliminary agreement was in legal review with the School and the City.The agreement is to go before the School Board and then to City Council at the second meeting in May. Gisler asked for advisory information to be submitted quickly. Davis and Pennington said they did not see any concerns. Spencer asked if staff had any problems or concerns about page 3, sponsor credits. Gisler said it legally bound the channel to be non-commercial. Davis asked how the channel could bridge the gap, how to continue to maintain programs, without the sponsorship to help raise funds. Gisler explained the sponsorship opportunities.
Shepherd called for a motion. Davis moved to approve the contract as it is but if any major changes were made by the lawyers the Telecom Board see them and discuss them at the next meeting. Pennington said he does not want to approve a document that is not finalized but that he supports the meaning of the document. Spencer said he would like to see it when it came back from the attorneys.
Davis mentioned again that they all had read it and were in favor of it. Gisler suggested adding “baring any substantial changes” to the motion. Shepherd asked when the School Board would see it and Gisler responded that the School Board would like to have it effective July 1.
Spencer asked who are the City representatives in the negotiation. Gisler answered Lindsley Smith, City Communications Director; himself; and Susan Norton, Chief Information Officer for the Fayetteville Public Schools. He added that Alan Wilbourn, Public Information Officer, was present. Gisler also added that Peggy James, Video Production Instructor and Cary Pollock, Technical Director for F.P.S.T.V., were at the meeting.
Davis asked the board members if they would want to approve the contract if there were no major changes. Shepherd said that historically contracts go through the Telecommunications Board and asked if the School Board needed the contract approved for budgetary reasons. Gisler said it has no budget impacts. Spencer asked if there was any reason it had to be voted on. Gisler explained the advisory position of the Telecommunications Board for City Council. Spencer asked if the board took the time to review it after the attorneys would there be any impact to business operations. Davis answered that the school year was about up and asked when it was set to go into effect. Gisler said before the end of the fiscal year, the end of June, and reiterated that he and Smith planned for it to go before City Council the second meeting in May. Shepherd asked if the School Board would have seen it and Gisler replied yes and that their attorney would have signed it,
Davis mentioned waiting to review it at the next meeting. Pennington said it would go to Council with or without the Telecommunications Board opinion. Gisler added that if the board had an opinion it would be included in the packet presented to City Council.
Penningotn said to go with Davis's earlier motion. Davis restated the motion and added pending no significant changes and assuming that Mr. Gisler would let them know before the next meeting if there were any significant changes. Davis then said assuming the significant information stays the same he moved to say that the board was in agreement with this document. Pennington seconded. Spencer asked how the board's opinion would be drafted. Shepherd said it would be in the minutes. Pennington asked if Smith and Gisler would present the opinion at the City Council meeting. Gisler told them a statement written by Smith would be included in the supporting documentation for the agenda item. He added that he would be present at the meeting to represent the Telecommunications Board as liaison.
Motion passed with 3 ayes.
REPORT FROM THE INTERNET SUB-COMMITTEE No report but it was confirmed that Spencer is to be a member. It was not decided when they would meet.
REPORT FROM THE COMPLAINT PROCEDURE COMMITTEE Shepherd said that Jim Bemis wished to hear the report. Davis said he believed Bemis had read it and was pleased. Pennington gave a brief report. He said the committee had met with City staff to prepare a proposed document for the Telecom Board to view. Pennington said that he has had it for a few weeks but not had the time to closely look at it or schedule a meeting. Pennington said that he would schedule a meeting in the next two weeks with Leder, Davis and anyone else who wanted to look at it more closely. Shepherd said he had tried to find the document and added that he hoped the board would maintain the policy that any business related to this goes to anyone involved, including Bemis and Marvin Hilton. Pennington clarified that the document had gone to the sub-committee members but in the future he would include the other board members and Bemis and Hilton.
COMPLIMENTS/COMPLAINTS AND COVERAGE-AREA RESIDENTS' COMMENTS
Gisler added information about Windstream/KDL, an internet service provider, and their request to use the City of Fayetteville's rights of way to install fiber optic to provide wholesale internet connectivity services. He stressed that this issue is within the purview of the Telecom Board. Gisler said that the City wants to have more meetings with Windstream before agreeing to anything. Shepherd asked about digging in the rights-of-way and Gisler said he would keep the question of their construction process on a list. Davis said he was curious about specifically where the lines would be run.
Davis asked if Gisler personally anticipate this to be fast tracked and moved quickly or drawn out over several months. Gisler responded that the City Administration had very specific questions for Windstream and would hold special meetings. Davis asked if the meetings would be public or private and Gisler answered that they would initially be private but if it goes forward there would be public input meetings and that representatives of the company should address the Telecom Board. Davis said that Windstream could be good a good thing but would appreciate that Gisler let the board know when it is on the horizon.
Gisler then said there was a telecommunication issue for consideration very shortly which was facing the entire country concerning the use of City rights-of-way for telecommunication infrastructure. Telecommunication service providers are going to State Legislature to ask for State wide franchising. The question of what governmental organization will control the franchising with the various telecommunications service providers is something directly within the pervue of this Telecom Board. Gisler mentioned three specific concerns. 1. The City may lose some of it's ability to negotiate and control some of it rights-of-way for Telecommunication Infrastructure. 2. As this has happened through out the country many of the protections and provisions for public and government television have been eliminated. Public Access channels are going dark because of state wide franchising. Federal legislation, Community Access Preservation Act (CAP Act), will be brought before Congress. Gisler recommended that the board members research this and suggested Alliance for Community Media and NATOA .
Gisler said this Board is the point for the City to be looking at these types of issues because they have direct impact on the telecommunication infrastructure of our City. He added that the City needs to be well represented at the State Legislature and that the City of Fayetteville needs to be a leader. Shepherd asked that Gisler provide the Board with documents as they come available and Gisler responded that he absolutely would.
AGENDA SUGGESTIONS FOR MAY 19, 2011 MEETING Pennington proposed that the next three meetings be held in room 326. Davis mentioned that if the Board hates room 326 they could move back after one meeting. Shepherd asked that the Board members watch meeting the meetings recorded in each room and see if they come up to standards. Spencer asked for staff's opinion and Gisler said that what Pennington had said about room 326 being a more conversational,more intimate, more comfortable environment was most important. Davis asked what constituents were saying about meetings in room 326 versus room 219. Gisler answered that he had gotten no specific complaints. Shepherd mentioned not seeing the speakers and Gisler added that he has had more negative comments about meetings in 219 not being conducive to discussion with the public.
Motion to move to room 326 for a three month trial was made by Pennington and seconded by Davis. The motion was approved.
Davis added that it was important to invite public feedback.
Shepherd complained about the scheduling and about there being no schedule in the newspapers. Gisler mentioned it was voted by the City Council not to run agendas and schedules in the papers as a cost saving.
Pennington announced that Mike Russell has resigned and thanked him for his two years of service on the Board and as vice-chairman. It was decided to open nominations for vice-chairman and put that on the agenda for next month. Shepherd appealed to the public that new board members are needed.
ADJOURNMENT Motioned by Pennington and seconded by Davis.

Education Channel agreement between Fayetteville public-school system and Fayetteville city government moving toward final form

2011-04-23T05:45:00.000-05:00

Telecom Board meeting begins at 5:30 p.m. today in the City Hall's main second-floor meeting room

2011-04-21T16:59:00.002-05:00

Jim Bemis shares information on his effort to get a clear resolution to some of his long-standing complaints to the Telecom Board at the April 21, 2011, meeting of the Telecom Board

2011-04-14T21:17:00.001-05:00

April 14, 2011
Telecom Board and City Staff --
At the Board's March Subcommittee meeting, I was encouraged by the Subcommittee's and Staff's thoughtful approach to improving the complaint and appeal process. In preparation for the Board's further discussion at their April meeting, I've summarized the Subcommittee's main topics below, as seen from my perspective as complainant and requester, as well as public access video producer.

In my view, there was general agreement that:
1. the current complaint/appeal process requires updating and clarification and specification of the terms and procedures used (i.e.:complaint, appeal, request, comment, suggestion.) The revised step-wise process would also specify the roles and responsibilities of the Board, the City Staff, the contracted PEG channels, and the City Council, and/or other related entities. The process would include a form for submitting items, as well as a standardized means for documenting/archiving the results of Board consideration, with provision for maintaining access via the City's web site.
2. Documentation of all actions taken would be quickly available to the requester/complainant and the public at each step within the process, with time-certain provisions for responses to be made by PEG channel staff and the Board. Similarly, the responses and actions taken would be systematically archived and maintained by the City.
3. As a specific request by City staff, the Board would provide a written response regarding all actions taken by the Board, including the Board's rationale and findings of fact regarding their decision, preferably with a vote by the Board.
3. City staff was asked to prepare a draft of the above suggested process for discussion by the full Board at the Board's April 21 monthly meeting. The resulting approved process would then be used for identification of and timely consideration of earlier complaints and requests that currently remain unaddressed.
4. Similarly, the Subcommittee and Staff expressed a general need for further clarification of the Board's Administrative Rules. ( I heard no specific recommendations as to how the complaint/appeal process and the Administrative Rules would be related in term of Board policy, City staff procedures, and related PEG channel policy and procedures. ) There was general agreement that the Board should conduct all of its communications so as to comply with FOIA criteria, with careful attention given to complying with open-meeting provisions when Board members exchange emails regarding Board business.
5. Additionally, Subcommittee discussion centered on the need for a more timely Agenda setting process and delineation of the process to be used. A tentative suggestion was that a draft Agenda be prepared for circulation to the Board at least 10 days before the scheduled monthly Board meeting. (Thus, as I understand the discussion, City staff and the Board chair would work jointly to prepare a draft for Board review. The draft would be sent to the Board on Monday of the week previous the week of the Board's monthly meeting ( which is held on the third Thursday of each month.)
I hope that the above notes will be useful for the Board’s discussion and at future meetings of the ad hoc Subcommittee, as well as the Board’s Policy Subcommittee. The Subcommittee meeting video can be reviewed on You Tube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FllWQAEiQwg . The video is also being shown on the public access channel previous to the Board meeting.
I would appreciate copies of this note being made available to the Board in its April meeting packet, as wall as to the newly-organized Your Media Board. I would also appreciate receiving copies of the monthly Board packet for April, as well as any related Board communications.
Thank you for your consideration,
Jim Bemis

Video running this week (11 a.m., 5 p.m. and 11 p.m. Monday through Friday on Fayetteville public-access television

2011-04-05T00:03:00.000-05:00

Almost complete meeting of Telecom Board's complaint subcommittee on March 14, 2011

2011-03-20T15:33:00.004-05:00

Part 2 of March 14, 2011, meeting of the Fayetteville Telecom Board's complaint committee

2011-03-16T17:49:00.000-05:00

Part 3 of March 14, 2011, meeting of the Fayetteville Telecom Board's complaint committee

2011-03-16T17:12:00.001-05:00

Your Media Board of Directors

2011-03-02T18:30:00.002-06:00

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000174 EndHTML:0000014110 StartFragment:0000003569 EndFragment:0000014074 SourceURL:file://localhost/Users/hogeyeart/Desktop/Board%20List.doc

Board of Directors – 2011

Shikkiah Jordan, M.S.W. – Board Chair

Shikkiah is a research associate for the School of Social Work at the University of Arkansas and former Deputy Director of Peace at Home Domestic Violence Shelter. Shikkiah was instrumental as a consultant during the Your Media (formerly CAT) RFP 10-14 proposal-writing process to become the City’s public access outsourced provider in 2011.

Roger Henry – Board Treasurer

Roger is a Computer Support Specialist for the University of Arkansas. Roger produces one of Fayetteville Public Access Television’s longest running series, One Whirled View, which has been telecast for 18 years.

Maribel Albarran – Board Member

Maribel works for Legal Aid of Arkansas and is a graduate of the Walter J. Lemke Department of Journalism at the University of Arkansas. Active in the community, she serves on the Scholarship Committee of Hispanic Women of Arkansas and is an active member of LULAC # 769 – Fayetteville Chapter.

Bruce Castleberry – Board Member

Bruce is Community Outreach Coordinator for Credit Counseling of Arkansas where his emphasis is on grant-writing and outreach. He is a graduate of the Walter J. Lemke Department of Journalism at the University of Arkansas and has a long working history in print media, including thirteen years working for The Morning News.

Todd Daniels – Board Member

Todd recently took a corporate position with Coca-Cola, Inc. after nine years as a business executive for Walmart/Sam’s Club, most recently serving as Category Financial Planner in the Grocery Division at Sam’s. Todd was also Walmart Team Leader for the American Heart Association and is glad to bring his non-profit service and experience in marketing, financial planning and business to Your Media.

Bertha Gutierrez – Board Member

Bertha works for Credit Counseling of Arkansas and is a graduate of the Walter J. Lemke Department of Journalism at the University of Arkansas. Bertha, a local artist, writer and photographer, serves as a mentor for the Lemke Journalism Project, which gives high school students of diverse backgrounds an opportunity to write and produce their own newspaper with help from journalism faculty and mentors.

Peggy James – Board Member

Peggy James is an instructor of television production at Fayetteville Public High School. Peggy is an award-winning teacher who oversees Bulldog Television which is cablecast as the Fayetteville Education station on Cox Channel 217.

Molly Jensen, Ph.D. – Board Member

Molly is a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Marketing Department of the Sam M. Walton College of Business at the University of Arkansas. Molly was instrumental in spearheading the CAT re-branding process which led to many exciting changes, including the new name, Your Media.

Dave Johnston – Board Member

Dave does production work for KNWA, the local NBC/FOX affiliate station. Dave has been an active independent producer and volunteer for Fayetteville Public Access Television for several years.

Dennis Kirkpatrick, M.A. – Board Member

Dennis is an Assistant Professor of Broadcast Journalism at the Walter J. Lemke Department of Journalism at the University of Arkansas. Dennis has over 20 years of experience in sports journalism including work for Fox Sports Network and CNN.

Isiah Reese, M.B.A. – Board Member

Isiah does marketing and strategic planning consulting for organizations both for profit and non-profit as the CEO of Speak 2 ME Communication LLC. Isiah was active in Fayetteville Public Access Television for over four years before joining the board.

Rose Sparrow – Board Member

Rose is a Resource Specialist at the Arkansas Workforce Center. Rose also volunteers as a youth mentor and is a committee member of the NWA Women’s Conference. She brings her skills in community-building and networking to her board service for Your Media.

Your Media provides the way for you to freely express yourself through media.

February 17, 2011, meeting of Fayetteville Telecommunication Board

2011-02-24T16:30:00.000-06:00

February 17, 2011, Telecom Board meeting caught on video by Jim Bemis, former member of the board and longtime producer on public-access television in Fayetteville, Arkansas: two parts

2011-02-22T20:20:00.001-06:00

Government Channel schedule through Thursday, February 24, 2011

2011-02-21T10:40:00.001-06:00

Please click on individual images to ENLARGE for easy reading.

Part 1 of public input on streamside ordinance at Feb. 15, 2011, City Council

2011-02-18T17:13:00.002-06:00

Telecom Board live broadcast canceled to make way for Quorum Court meeting, but viewer says Quorum Court broadcast not completed

2011-02-17T22:45:00.000-06:00

Marcie, that is truly strange. I can't explain it. When I opened the Telecom Board I asked why we didn't have the monitor as usual to see a delayed view of whoever was speaking. The Govt. Channel manager said that the quorum court was being shown live BECAUSE it is a govt. entity.
When I got home, I found online that the Telecom Board was still shown on Granicus as being shown at that time. I understood the importance of the quorum court and accepted the explanation. Has the quorum court always been on the third Thursday? I often watch the Quorum Court but have attended very few times.
Where was it advertised that the quorum court was to be shown tonight? I missed that.
Thanks for sharing with me and I'll find out whatever I can.
Odd that the normal Telecom Board was NOT shown but the quorum court wasn't either.
Please keep in touch,
Sincerely,
Aubrey James Shepherd

Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:20:31 -0600
Subject: Washington County Quorum Court Meeting
From: queenmarcelline@gmail.com
To: aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com

I was very disappointed tonight to see that the monthly Washington County Quorum Court Meeting was not televised even though it was advertised as being available. The first few minutes were on with audio only and then the audio dropped off and there was only your scrolling gallery of upcoming programs.

Is there not someone from the Government Channel on hand to see that these programs go forward as scheduled? Will it be replayed at another time?

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Marcie Williams

Agenda for February 17, 2011, meeting of Telecommunication Board

2011-02-14T09:51:00.001-06:00

Staff Representatives

Don Marr
Chief of Staff

Lindsley Smith
Communications Director

Fritz Gisler
Government Channel Manager

Committee Members

Aubrey Shepherd, Chairman
Blake Pennington
Brandon Leder
Frederick Cusanelli
Michael Spencer
Mike Russell, vice chairman
Russ Davis

Final Agenda
City of Fayetteville Arkansas
Telecommunication Board
February 17, 2011

A meeting of the Telecommunication Board will be held at 5:30 P.M. February 17, 2011, in Room 219 of the City Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Call to Order

Call roll and WELCOME new members to the board and thank previous members for service.

(1) Approval of October and December 2010 meeting minutes

(2) Adoption of February 17, 2011, agenda

(3) Government Channel Television Report

(4) Public Access Television Report from Community Access Television by CAT Executive Director or representative of CAT Board.

(5) Telecom Board discussion of Cox Cable's announcement of changes in channel lineup affecting PEG channels

(6) Education Channel Report from a representative of the Fayetteville Public School system.

(7) Invite new members to join the Internet sub-committee

(8) Compliments, complaints and coverage-area residents’ comments*

(9) Agenda suggestions for March 17, 2011, meeting

(10) Announcements from Board Members

(11) Adjournment

October 7, 2009, orientation session for new members of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Telecommunication Board

2011-01-27T17:34:00.000-06:00

New list with email addresses of 2011 members of Telecom Board

2011-01-25T21:05:00.004-06:00

City of Fayetteville Telecommunications Board
e-mail
Name
Address
Phone
Terms
aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com
Aubrey Shepherd, Chairman
1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 444-6072
01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013

bpennington@wilson-assoc.com
Blake Pennington
927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 430-1221
07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014

brandon.leder@hp.com
Brandon Leder
1817 N. Fallbrook Way, Fayetteville, AR 72704
(479) 587-0440
04/10/2010 thru 06/31/2011

fredcusanelli@gmail.com
Frederick Cusanelli
334 E. Malinda Drive, Fayetteville, 72703-4016
(479) 521-6289
01/01/2007 thru 06/30/2011

spencerm@usa.redcross.org
Michael Spencer
2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704
(202) 713-5480
01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013

russell.cm.2@pg.com
Mike Russell, Vice Chairman
1303 E. Joyce Blvd., Fayetteville, AR 72703
(479) 871-0975
07/01/2009 thru 12/31/2011

russ@urguru.net
Russ Davis
1155 E. Rolling Hills Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72703
(479) 236-0453
01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013

Government Channel of Fayetteville, Arkansas

January 2012 meeting of Fayetteville AR telecommunication board

Former Fayetteville cable administration manager and member of the telecom board cites problems with proposed new telecom ordinance

From Richard Drake's Street Jazz blog on the Arkansas Times Web site

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Fayetteville City Council and the Telecom Board: the questions that aldermen really should be asking - though I doubt they will

Jim Bemis, longtime producer on public-access channel and former member of Telecom Board clarifies purpose of his previous comments to that board

Telecom Board struggled to maintain balance between City Council and mayor's PR lady in 2007-08

Thanks to the Iconoclast for recording and sharing so much of the history of 2007-2009

Fair and Balanced

Old Iconoclast posts drew a lot of public comment. Sorry to have to quote someone, but I am not as good a blogger as Jonah

2004 Telecom Board round-table discussion important background for a council vote on Jan. 17, 2012

December 20, 2011, meeting of Fayetteville AR city council draws comment on several important local issues on a 3-hour, 37-minute video

December 15, 2011, meeting of the Fayetteville, Arkansas telecommunication board

Government censorship of You Tube, blogs, facebook, My space, etc., etc., not a good idea

The SOPA Scoop: Anti-Piracy Bills Enrage Web Freedom Groups, Divide Congress

Thursday, November 17, 2011, meeting of the Telecom Board shortest anyone can remember

Agenda for November 17, 2011, meeting of Fayetteville's telecommunication board

Telecommunication board's Oct. 20, 2011, meeting in two parts: Opening for a seventh member exists. Residents who are registered voters may apply in City Clerk's office

Richard Drake, former chairman of Telecom Board, comments on recent changes in board function

Telecom Board subcommittee meeting October 18, 2011

Contact information for members of Fayetteville's telecommunication board as of October 11, 2011

City of Fayetteville Telecommunications Board

Jim Bemis provides video from Fayetteville Telecom Board subcommittee meeting of September 30, 2011

Fayetteville Government Channel subcommittee meeting Friday: Everyone invited.

Willam 'Mitchell' Spearman joins Telecommunication Board

Meeting Times

City of Fayetteville Appointees

September 15, 2011, meeting of the Telecommmunication Board of Fayetteville AR

Telecom Board down to five members of the standard 7. Hope two are appoiinted by Fayetteville City Council on Tuesday. However, there was only one opening when the interviews were held and thus it can't happen

Telecommunications Board

Contact

Terms

Membership

Appointment

Public Notification

Meeting Times

City of Fayetteville Appointees

Email exchange involving government channel, public-access channel, education channel and the Fayetteville Telecom Board and city staff and city council

Blake Pennington elected chairman of the Telecommunication Board on August 18, 2011

Traditional landscapes suck Energy, Water and Money, says Neil Diboll at The Native Plants in the Landscape Conference

« Welcome to The Native Plants in the Landscape Conference

The Future of Gardening by Neil Diboll

University of Vermont ExtensionDepartment of Plant and Soil Science

Next week's shortakes on public-access television previewed on You Tube: See link below

Parts 1, 2, 3 & 4 of August 9, 2011, complaint-procedure and policy subcommittee of Fayetteville AR Telecommunication Board

In his Street Jazz post, Richard Drake asks when is a meeting not a meeting?

Street Jazz

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

Fayetteville Government Channel: When is a meeting not a meeting?

Telecommunication board's July 21, 2011, meeting video

Telecom Board subcommittee on complaints' July 2011 meeting

Fayetteville Public Schools' report for July 2011 meeting of the Telecom Board: Thanks to Susan Norton

Draft of complaint procedure compiled by city staff members

Telecom Board agenda for Thursday, July 21, 2011

Telecommunication board information and member list as of June 2011, according to the list on the city Web site

Telecommunications Board

Contact

Terms

Membership

Appointment

Public Notification

Meeting Times

City of Fayetteville Appointees

Tonight's meeting canceled for lack of a quorum: Please see May meeting of Fayetteville Telecommunication Board online video

Telecom Board members as of May 2011

May 16, 2011, Ward 4 meeting in Fayetteville, Arkansas, includes discussion of upcoming City Council consideration of the 2030 master plan

Fayetteville city governent shares SEVERE WEATHER WARNING

Fayetteville city governent shares SEVERE WEATHER WARNING

2009 meeting of PEG center employees, Telecom Board members and AT&T officials

Richard Drake's memory of the 1993 effort to get planning commission to allow Government Channel to record and broadcast its meetings

Street Jazz

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Fayetteville, 1993: Convincing Planning Commission to do the right thing took a form of video guerilla warfare

Tentative minues of April 2011 Telecom Board meeting

Education Channel agreement between Fayetteville public-school system and Fayetteville city government moving toward final form

Telecom Board meeting begins at 5:30 p.m. today in the City Hall's main second-floor meeting room

Jim Bemis shares information on his effort to get a clear resolution to some of his long-standing complaints to the Telecom Board at the April 21, 2011, meeting of the Telecom Board

Video running this week (11 a.m., 5 p.m. and 11 p.m. Monday through Friday on Fayetteville public-access television

Almost complete meeting of Telecom Board's complaint subcommittee on March 14, 2011

University of Vermont Extension
Department of Plant and Soil Science