— from Steve Smith for Madrona Voices —
Madrona Voices has released a summary of the key facts regarding the Port of Orcas Master Plan as well as a survey on the topic. We have sent an email invitation to our mailing list, asking people to take the survey. If you would like to be included in the invitations, please let us know by contacting us via our website, MadronaVoices.com. We are happy to include anyone who lives on-island or owns property here.
We use the methods we do to ensure fairness of one survey taken by each person and that the responses to the survey are representative of the community. We had great success with our public health district surveys, which predicted that the PHD would pass with 76% of the vote. That is, indeed, the percentage with which it passed. We continue to work hard to make sure our surveys and the information we provide are accurate and representative.
We believe that Madrona Voices provides various decision-makers with the ability to reach out to people who cannot attend the meetings that are often held during working hours. We hope it provides us all with the ability to learn what a representative sample of the public across the island thinks, rather than just the few involved in meetings and certain projects.
We share much more about our methods, purposes, and reasons on our website. Thank you to everyone for sharing your thoughts and ideas via Madrona Voices. We feel honored to be a part of this great community.
I have an open question.
I received this email and request to complete the survey. I read the questions. I wasn’t comfortable answering them. How a question is asked is a way to lock in a predetermined (desired) response.
My question is: what do others think about how these questions are framed?
I’ll be curious to read any and all responses.
Chris, I felt the same way as you when I looked at it. I don’t answer polls that only give me a choice of yes or no.
“The Orcas Island airport is not up to date with current FAA safety standards. Do you want the port commissioners to make long-range plans to keep the airport in compliance?”
The above question kicks off the survey.
Q: With the droves of upset residents accompanied by their many and fairly consistent objections to the airport proposal, what’s wrong with this question as it sets up the survey’s direction using built-in assumptions or, some might say, bias?
Madrona Voices has no preference as to how you answer the question or any of the other questions. We have tried to make sure that all preferences are available as possible answers.
It is a fact that the airport does not meet current FAA standards for some of the airplanes that are currently using the airport. The airport can continue to operate as it does now without modifications. The Port has that option. Or, they can make sure any plans for the future will modify the airport to better comply with FAA standards. Both are viable options, and both are explained in our summary. This two-page summary is embedded in the survey. The same summary is available on our website: MadronaVoices.com. That summary better explains the options than any one or two sentences can.
If you click on the question in the emailed invitation, it will take you to the survey. There, you can read all of the questions. What you choose is not recorded until you click on the “Done” at the bottom of the page. If you don’t click on that, we have no record of any of the options you have selected.
We currently have over 550 people who have participated in the survey. We believe that the information we place on our website gives a fair and accurate representation of the key facts about the issues we ask about. We believe our surveys give the public, including those who don’t attend one of the meetings, a way to participate and let their opinion be known. We discuss, on our site, how we gather the information, how we create the questions, our methods, our goals, what we do with the information, and how we make sure that the surveys are accurate representations of the community.
We are always open to suggestions and ideas on how to improve what we do. We are not perfect. We could have separated the statement about the airport being in compliance from the question as to whether a person wants future plans to bring the airport into better compliance. However, that would be assuming that the survey taker read the summary or attended the meetings and knew that “compliance” was optional.
People come to the survey with the fear of “no” meaning that they don’t care about safety and “yes” having the meaning that they are fine with expansion to allow larger, noisier, or more aircraft. However, those aren’t the options. We cannot control what preconceived ideas people come to the survey with, but we can try our best to inform on the issue with the data we gather from people who are in the position to know the subject. That is the purpose of our summary.
Thanks, Steve.
I do have high regard for Madrona Voices. I found it quite helpful in the PHD project.
However, not all devices fit the objective. The intricacies of these issues I’m not sure this survey helps or subtly misinforms/misleads, inadvertently.
Of course no survey is perfectly formatted. But some issues are by their nature multi-pronged and require a dynamic, interactive question/answer format in order to weed out unintentional bias and flush out problems with a lack of transparency with regards to available choices and options.
Thus, the use of a survey like this may not be the appropriate method for discovering “progress and understanding” —assuming that’s its intent.
For example:
Why are there only 4 alternatives?
Did they come from the FAA, or are they self-generated?
Could they have been crafted differently?
Will we or wont we lose FAA funding if we dont widen or alter Mt Baker road?
Do we have that in writing from the government?
Are there no exceptions /waivers? Did we
explore this?
Who said we may have to repay funds to the FAA under the No Build alternative? Is it in writing? Is it conjecture?
How have we managed for all these many years?
When did the FAA guidelines with which we are alleged not to be in compliance take effect?
What is the cost for adequate maintenance of the airport with its current configuration?
So many more questions exist…if we really want to know what’s what here?
This survey was based on information the airport officials have given to the public. I think part of the challenge on the airport issue is how the topic was introduced to the public. The graphs and figures that were distributed could easily be interpreted to mean expansion to accommodate larger aircraft than what are now using the airport. I don’t believe that is the intent or ever was the intent of the commissioners. But, many people have concluded differently.
I agree that complex issues need multiple approaches. On the hospital issue, we did two surveys. We also interviewed the clinics and the candidates. We published various reports. We may find it productive to do the same with this issue. I believe that we have time to do more like we did on the PHD issue. The Port process moves in increments of years rather than months.
We plan to work on a report about the survey this weekend. I am guessing that most people who intend to take the survey will have done so by then. We can already tell that the Port has a major messaging problem, and there is a large amount of distrust of the commissioners. I think the survey will cause the commissioners and Port to realize that many more are concerned than just the regular few who are vocally quite concerned about many topics.
This survey helps us all know what areas need more attention.
Thanks, Steve, for that clarification.
I think it would be productive to to see if we can persuade the Port, the manager, or their consultant or some combination to answer some questions. I think the ones that you have Chris are good. If you or anyone else has others, feel free to email them to us. You can find my email address on our website.
One question I have is this: Is the airport currently out of compliance with any mandatory safety standard and subject to being closed as a result?
Also, where can a citizen get data about commercial and general aviation use of the airport, and comparative data for the past ten years?
One question I have is this: Is the airport currently out of compliance with any mandatory safety standard and subject to being closed as a result?
Also, where can a citizen get data about commercial and general aviation use of the airport, and comparative data for the past ten years?
Will the Port post all public comments on its website?
Ok, sorry for the duplication. The first comment never showed. Until now.