Howardcounty

OK, the preliminaries are over, and here’s my first campaign sign 2014 face-off. I’m starting with the courthouse races, and in particular the race for Howard County Sheriff, which pits incumbent James Fitzgerald against challenger John Newnan in the Democratic primary. (John McMahon is unopposed in the GOP primary, and I wasn’t able to find a sign for him.) Both Fitzgerald and Newnan have multiple types of signs; I think I got pictures of all of Newnan’s but may have missed one of Fitzgerald’s. Here are the signs, in alphabetical order by candidate and from small to large for each candidate, along with my comments. ...

Thanks to those who sent in pictures of campaign signs for Eric Ebersole; I’m still looking for signs for other candidates mentioned in my previous post. I’ll soon start posting my opinions on signs I do have. In the meantime I wanted to recap some of my comments from last time on campaign signs and what I personally look for in judging them. I should say up front that it’s not clear at all that campaign signs are actually effective in persuading to vote for one candidate rather than another. As a 2012 Slate article notes, some research has shown that non-specific campaign signs urging people to vote (though not for a particular candidate) can be effective, but that says nothing about candidate-specific signs. On the other hand, a Vanderbilt University study seems to indicate that signs can be effective in promoting candidates in races in which they are a large number of candidates and voters have little information about them. There are some political consultants who feel strongly that yard signs are a waste of money, and others who are happy to advise you on which types of signs are more effective. ...

Pity the poor political candidates of Howard County. It’s hard enough running a campaign as it is, but they also have pesky bloggers grading their performances in public forums, evaluating their direct mail pieces, and keeping track of their social media activities. In an upcoming series of posts I’ll be adding to their woes by rendering aesthetic judgements on their campaign signs. (I did this once before after the 2010 elections, but now I’ll be doing it in a more timely manner.) ...

How can we best promote the future of the Inner Arbor plan? I had a few thoughts following up from my previous post containing my testimony at the joint board meeting of Columbia Association and the Inner Arbor Trust. “Showing up is half the battle.” Apparently the original quote was “showing up is 80% of life,” which only reinforces the point and is coincidentally apposite, since apparently 80% of the resident speak-outs at the meeting were in favor of the Inner Arbor plan. (Per Julia McCready, of the speakers who expressed a clear opinion on the plan 12 out of 15 expressed support.) Promoting the plan online is great, but I think one speaker at an in-person meeting outweighs dozens of blog posts, tweets, and Facebook likes. There will be other opportunities for Inner Arbor supporter to show up and let their voices be heard, whether through speak-outs or written testimony or both. Let’s continue this practice. ...

In this post I look into the current schedule for the proposed Merriweather Post Pavilion renovations. For background information see part 1 and part 2 of my discussion of the renovations themselves and their budgeted costs. Recall again that the costs and dates for the renovations are laid out in Exhibits A and B of Amendment 2 to Amendment 12 [PDF] to Council Bill 24-2014. The proposed renovations are based on (but not identical to) the set of renovations described in the recent draft 2014 Ziger/Snead Merriweather Post Pavilion Physical Review Update [PDF], which updated the Ziger/Snead report included in the 2005 final report of the citizens advisory panel on Merriweather Post Pavilion [PDF]. ...