Editorial Opinion by Cindy Cotte Griffiths: None Of The Above
Nov 19, 2010 13:24 - 6 Comments
Recently a couple of public decisions in Rockville have involved three final choices which have not received overwhelming support.
After the Cultural Arts Commission reviewed the entries, the neighborhood associations were given three selections for the East Rockville art project. I’ve been told that some of the community leaders involved in the decision may not have liked any of the choices but they picked one because this was the process.
The branding campaign for Rockville has also resulted in three final designs. From my personal discussions, an overwhelming majority doesn’t seem to like any of them.
When I mentioned these instances to my husband, he mentioned the “none of the above” choice available on the Nevada ballot. If you don’t like any of the candidates, you can vote for the “none” option. Although it has been in place since 1975, I’d never heard of it. During this last election, the number of “none of the above” votes was expected to affect the outcome between Harry Reid and Sharron Angle, so the unusual ballot choice was getting some press.
Could we be so bold as to freely give our community a “none of the above” choice when deciding on bidders or artwork or other decisions? If we are truly not impressed, why go forward? Why settle? Wouldn’t we be a greater place if we didn’t settle?
Now, if our pipes are leaking underground and all the engineering bids are not perfect, we need to go forward with the best available contractor because the situation is in dire need of repair. Of course there will be instances where we absolutely need to accomplish a task.
But if there is no rush and the outcome is for aesthetics or an extra program, why not just say “none of the above”? Is this possible?
Perhaps it’s simply a matter of keeping the option in mind when volunteering in the community. This could mean having the courage to state that everyone should begin again or decide not to go forward at all. Such positions might be problematic and complicated, but necessary.
The Human Service Advisory Commission, which I chair, spent a long time studying an issue last year with the intent of having a summit. Even though we invested considerable time, we eventually decided the effort might not be needed. Sometimes it’s difficult to put on the brakes.
Often, the questions or the system is designed to go forward without other options. For instance, the branding survey at the City site wants feedback but the survey seems intent on proceeding. If you’re against the whole concept, the question doesn’t seem to invite this option.
We need to consider how to create systems where we aren’t forced to pick the “least worst” choice rather than the best one. Systems where we can answer, “You know what? None of the above. Should we be doing this and how?”
This Editorial Opinion is Cindy’s, and doesn’t represent Rockville Central.
6 Comments
Leave a Reply
Read our comment policy. Please be civil. Don't write something you would not say to someone's face. COMMENTS ARE MODERATED. We reject comments with vulgarities, obscenities, or that personally attack other commenters. We also reject comments that do not USE FULL NAMES. We may ban ip addresses where we detect multiple aliases posting.
Cynthia,
I completely agree. Not long ago I watched as some art decisions were being finalized by city government on the local Rockville channel, and it seemed they were narrowing down which pieces they disliked least, or which pieces were likely to cause the least harm or chance of liability. In my opinion we need to cast the net more widely for these public art projects, and if there is not a clear winner and a wonderful design, cast that net again. Public art is important for our city, but it is also an expensive proposition and I think perhaps some fresh blood and new perspectives might be helpful in the process.
I agree too Cynthia. You gave two perfect examples where “None of the above” should have been an option.
Cindy, driving back into Rockville today (11/20) and looking at the “Welcome to Our Neighborhoods” sign posted on Maryland Avenue @ Potomac Valley Road, I would be disappointed to see (imo) a silly branded sign replace it. Rockville is all about our neighborhoods and the focus point being Town Center! We are THE County Seat, and don’t need to brand ourselves to get the respect we already receive. Art is subjective, and you cant please everyone. A brand is a sign of ownership, none of those slogans represent Rockville!
Thanks for your thoughts. We do need procedures but we shouldn’t force ourselves to go forward when the results are not to our liking.
I was involved in the traffic meetings when the “Welcome” signs were first discussed for West Mont. and Maryland Avenues. They are an attempt to get drivers to realize they had left 270 and were now in residential areas so they should slow down. But they do have a good message too!
Wow…this is just what I was thinking. I re-read Rockville Reports over the weekend and I don’t care for any of the options on the “Branding”. None of them speak to me about Rockville.
Thank you. I hope this will have some impact. Like many others, I also was quite underwhelmed by the results of the branding exercise. It missed the mark. I thought that Brad’s editorial on the subject was very useful, and now, so is this one. I think that Rockville needs to define (or brand) itself or else it will be defined (or branded) - or continue to be defined (or branded) by others. For whatever reason, the consultant retained for this exercise was not able to hit the mark. At a time when the City budget, and all budgets, are under such strain, and needs are so great, the next iteration should be done in-house with input and involvement and volunteer or pro-bono help from some of Rockville’s talented and generous citizens. That kind of generosity and involvement has been a hallmark of this community. So has excellence.