Sign/Prestige Home Comfort

Signature Ad

Signature Ad

Skyscraper - Grodon's


Arts & Life
Click here to see more
Community Calendar
Click here for full listings.
Do you agree with council's decision to move on to Phase 4 of the event centre study?

Total Votes: 137
View Results Past Polls
User Submitted Photo Gallery
Submit Your Own Photos
2014-04-04 at 11:39

Survey says

By Jamie Smith,
Do you want to BREAK YOUR BANK? Banks put holds on your cheque for up to 5 days. Why wait? For a better, quicker option visit XTRA CASH! Two locations Click here for full details.

A class at Lakehead University is trying to gauge public interest in the proposed event centre.

Students in Mike Yuan's tourism economics class have developed a survey of more than 20 questions in an effort to get unbiased results about everything from how much public support is out there, how much people are willing to pay for it and where they'd like it built.

Around 60 of a hopeful 300 have taken the survey so far but student Steven Anderson said so far it looks like the public wants an event centre.

"Essentially what we've found it people are willing to pay slightly more taxes for the multiplex as well as support for the multiplex is there," he said.

Yuan agreed.

"Overall i think that it's surprising how much support there is," he said.

Yuan wanted his students to tackle a real-life issue in the city without bias in order to get a true sense of public sentiment.

"That means we don't want outside influence to judge or colour how we interpret and design the study," he said.

As for the results, Yuan said the class can't be responsible for how the data is used once the survey wraps up April. But he's hoping it helps as part of the process.

"Public participation is critical to the planning process," he said.

The survey can be found here.

Click here to report a typo or error

Banner/Vector Construction


We've improved our comment system.
fastball says:
Apparently, I've heard that this report won't allow more than one user to fill out the survey from the same household.
Can anyone confirm this?
4/4/2014 11:51:42 AM
SomeGuy says:
It's a limitation of the software, you can either say "Fill this out as many times as you want from this computer, or fill this out once from this computer"
4/4/2014 1:40:24 PM
Enquirer says:
It appears as though IP address regulation is in use, so in essence, yes, multiple from one household (using the same Internet connection) cannot vote. One would need to find a new Internet connection that has not had someone vote on it yet to vote if someone in their household has already voted.

This is to avoid certain people from voting multiple times en masse; sadly this is easily circumvented, much akin to the TBNewswatch poll in place now.
4/4/2014 1:42:21 PM
fastball says:
Well, it's a shame - what if you've got 4 people in the household that would like to put their opinion forth?
Granted, I understand the limitations of the software - and the likelihood of some individuals entering data on multiple occasions, skewing the data results.
Certainly not perfect.
4/4/2014 4:33:28 PM
Jack Frost says:
Surveymonkey ?!!

This survey has glitches and flaws -- Hmmm...

LOL !!

4/4/2014 11:52:40 AM
musicferret says:
This is a completely invalid survey.
There is no control over who fills it out, and as of this morning it is making the rounds among young people on Facebook, who will likely support the events centre. Also, people outside thunder bay can fill it out.

You will end up with a survey comprised to an unequal percentage of more web-saavy younger people. Also, there is nothing stopping people from lying on the survey, using multiple devices, or IP blockers etc.

A plebiscite removes these biases.
Yes, the results from this will come out as being in favour of the events centre. No surprise. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean anything.

Ask yourself: will the impoverished in our city fill it out? Older people? People with language barriers? First Nations? People who don't spend much time on the internet? People who do spend time on the internet but don't happen upon the survey?

This survey is meaningless.
4/4/2014 11:54:43 AM
sd says:
Your comment is very intelligent and correct. I want to add to it by saying that the results of surveys done through TBNewswatch while entertaining to follow are as completely invalid as this one being undertaken by LU for the same reasons musicferret has pointed out.
Any informal non scientific survey is meaningless
4/4/2014 2:57:09 PM
bttnk says:
It is as useful as any comprehensive survey, no more, no less. It is not representative of the entire population, but what is? A democratic vote, which in Thunder Bay generally sees between 45-55% of the voting population turn out? Do the impoverished and First Nations turn out to vote? We would probably have some of the same limiters with a plebiscite, not that I am suggesting this survey is scientific, but they are a good measure of those surveyed.

I applaud this professor and his class for taking the initiative.
4/4/2014 4:48:46 PM
chezhank says:
This is most interesting!
""Essentially what we've found it people are willing to pay slightly more taxes for the multiplex as well as support for the multiplex is there," he said.'

When I look at the 2013 Ipsos Reid citizens survey for Thunder Bay,I see different results.

The proposed event centre for level of agreement for proposed capital projects is fifth out of six at 61%.

Waterfront development is higher at 66%%.

The conservatory is higher at 72%.

When it comes to agreement on which capital projects requiring city spending,the proposed event centre comes in ninth out of ten across all demographics.

Is the proposed event centre a public priority,I don't think so.

So is the Survey Monkey right or is Ipsos Reid .
I say let the residents decide with a plebiscite.

henry wojak
mayor in waiting
4/4/2014 11:59:11 AM
brandon says:
Perfect! This should give a good idea of what internet users and young people in this city who happen to find the survey think.
4/4/2014 12:00:20 PM
northofnipigon says:
I applaud the concept and the effort of trying to get some unbiased information into the debate. That said, I find it very unfortunate that by making a statement as to what the findings have demonstrated so far, that you have in fact invalidated your concept either way as the comments will only serve to inflame either side. A word of caution next time for this professor. By all means, inform the public of this effort, but please refrain from making a statement until the survey is closed.
4/4/2014 12:28:27 PM
Today1 says:
Let's get this straight. You're having a survey…it is only 20% complete and you are already giving out results. When there are elections, is there not a reason that results are are not broadcast during the voting process. This is flawed already.
4/4/2014 12:35:19 PM
Jack Frost says:
Survey says... ERRORS !!

With only a possible 60 to 300 completed LU "surveymonkey" questionnaires out of a potential city population of 110,000, +/-, how is it even remotely possible to conclude any kind of accurate scientific results and facts when this is clearly not a large enough cross section of the city population.

This LU survey / questionnaire = 0.0005% - 0.0027% potential accuracy at best...

This is scientifically NOT good enough to be taken seriously -- Hmmm...

Also, this LU survey / questionnaire has it's glitches and flaws to say the least.

LU's "surveymonkey" is nothing more than a
"Monkey Survey" at best !!

4/4/2014 1:31:44 PM
S Duncan says:
If this is supposed to be an event center and not a hockey rink, thn why are they asking so many questions about hockey?

The whole project stinks to high heaven. The simple fact that the city is pretending its a multiplex when its really just a hockey rink is the foundation for idiocy.

If you start off crooked the whole building will be crooked, and thats where this is headed.
4/4/2014 2:53:47 PM
Thor Odinson says:
Still more valid than Ray Smith telling a room full of like-minded people to take home multiple ballots regarding supporting the events center and bring them back filled out. That is the leader of the opposition to this project. And no one seemed to notice the flaw with this 'system'. "I asked a bunch of people who think like me to vote multiple times on whether or not they think like me! Look how much support I have!"
4/4/2014 3:11:31 PM
JYDog says:
What's wrong with lots of people filling out ballots? I was there when Ray said what he said, and he didn't tell the people to fill out as many as they wanted, he said to take the ballots in case they knew others that wanted to fill them out but couldn't attend. Why misrepresent things dishonestly to malign Mr. Smith? Agree or disagree, but to fabricate details is not cool at all. Let's stick to the facts please, as it's the fallacies that have inspired such rancorous vitriol.
4/4/2014 9:28:11 PM
reese says:
A lot of room for lies on that survey a property tax bill should be a requirement to decide on this issue
It is easy enough to spend someone elses money
4/4/2014 4:01:06 PM
sd says:
People who are opposed to this development and get enraged when they are insulted with terms like cane shaker are constantly making comments like this. You want fair and ethical treatment. Well stop trying to discriminate against people who rent and therefore do not have a tax bill. People who pay rent pay it to the landlord of a property who in turn uses some of that money to pay the taxes on the property. It is unfair and rude to belittle people who rent. And for the record I own property and have a tax bill. But does that mean that I am the only one living in my residence who is allowed to have a say in this matter and my partner is not permitted to vote
4/4/2014 4:46:20 PM
MistakeByTheLake says:
I agree 100%. Why should people who don't pay any property tax get to vote for something that they won't have to pay for?

The City can't even budget for winter snow removal, and people wanna put us further behind? and for what? because some 20 or 30's something in mommy's basement think it would be "cool" to have an AHL team?
4/4/2014 4:56:23 PM
john@otb says:
How can you say that? There are other ways that citizens of our city pay taxes, included 2nd hand through rent and a landlord, who pays property taxes. We are all hit with taxes, it's an everyday part of our lives. It wasn't just property taxpayers who voted this council in! FYI we do own property in and out of the city and we do pay our share of taxes. You can't single out people based on property taxes. That is just wrong! Does this mean that only property tax payers will be allowed to attend events at this event centre? I just love the way some people think!
4/4/2014 5:29:06 PM
SomeGuy says:
I'm sorry Reese but that is not how our democracy works. Land owners are not the only ones that get a vote.

In this case maybe we should base how much our vote is worth by the amount of taxes I pay. If I pay more than someone in the East End then I should have more of a say then they do.

If I own multiple properties then do I get multiple votes?
4/4/2014 5:50:46 PM
Watchmaker says:
Don't lament the fact that because three adults share the same internet connection invalidate the small scale litmus test this was. It is just as accurate as a plebiscite - only one of the adults in a residence may have cast a ballot...

In case you haven't been paying attention: the Gardens is at the end of its lifespan and has been on life support for 20 years. TURN THE PAGE.
4/4/2014 6:52:25 PM
Comments for this story are semi-moderated. Read our comment guideline.

Add a new comment.
You must log in to add comments.
Create a new account
Forgot password?
Log In