Should residents have more say than developers in how their town grows?
In February 2018, 2,031 people in and around Bowling Green, Kentucky voted on what should change in their area. The conversation was broad. Its most agreed statements were about who decides how the town develops.
A public Polis conversation in Bowling Green and Warren County, Kentucky
From a public Polis conversation in Bowling Green and Warren County, Kentucky, February 2018: “Improving Bowling Green / Warren County”. People wrote statements and voted agree, disagree or pass on each other’s. These rows are the statements most voters agreed with, the ones that split voters most evenly, and the ones the fewest agreed with, out of 606 that at least 15 people voted on. Statements about the voters themselves, insults and unchecked factual claims are left out. Passes are not counted.
Most agreed
More citizens need to be involved in the future development of BG. Too many developers who benefit financially are calling the shots.
Polis sorts voters into opinion groups by how they voted across the whole conversation. This one found 2: Group A (753 voters) and Group B (828 voters). These are the statements every group was most likely to agree with, ranked the way Polis ranks common ground: the chance of agreeing in each group, multiplied together. Under them is the statement the groups were furthest apart on.
Impact on traffic flow should be considered with any proposed new developments.
Group A339 agreed, 5 disagreed (99%)
Group B316 agreed, 15 disagreed (95%)
Bowling Green needs more competitive cable rates.
Group A284 agreed, 10 disagreed (97%)
Group B264 agreed, 13 disagreed (95%)
Bowling Green needs more competitive internet rates.
Group A248 agreed, 4 disagreed (98%)
Group B232 agreed, 11 disagreed (95%)
Where they split
Bowling Green should be become a carbon neutral city.
Written for the hearth so this question has a whole card on each side to argue with. No visitor wrote them, so the two parts only a person can fill are empty: what happened to you, and who on the other side called the case against fair.
Yes
Where this card stands
Yes. People who live with a development for decades should weigh more than people who profit from building it once.
How sure, before and after the case against
The strongest case against it
Residents who already have homes tend to block new building, and that pushes up prices for the people who don’t live there yet and have no say.
What would change this card’s mind
If towns that gave residents a veto ended up with housing too expensive for their own children.
No. Elected officials should decide after hearing residents and developers, because the people who come to meetings are not everyone who will live there.
How sure, before and after the case against
The strongest case against it
Officials with ties to a project vote on it, and the residents who come to meetings are the only check they face.
What would change this card’s mind
If officials kept voting on projects they had a stake in after being asked to step back.
“Argue with this card” opens the card on the front page with this card’s position as the case against you. You write where you stand and what would change your mind.