BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Optimism Bias, and Recency Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.5% saturation with 210 hits. Analysis detected 1,418 faulty-reasoning hits from 978 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 32.6% and a BS Rank of 28% (20,619 of 28,461 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 72.40% of the article peer group.

Several of the South Dallas/Fair Park speakers at Jan. 14’s City Council meeting gather afterward in the flag room around City Councilman Adam Bazaldua, who is holding a “No Delay/ Our Park Today” sign. 
Stop leaving the community park in limbo. 
That, essentially, was the message to City Council last week from South Dallas neighborhood residents and Fair Park First leaders, punctuated by State Rep. 
Venton Jones and U.S. 
Rep. 
Jasmine Crockett . 
The long  promised community park within Fair Park was the target of the eight neighborhood residents, five business and organization leaders, and two elected officials who signed up to speak for three minutes each at last Wednesday’s City Council meeting, urging councilmembers to “hear our cries,” “honor the past,” “follow through,” “keep your promise,” “restore trust,” “get the dirt moving” and “turn this vision into a reality.” 
Their collective ask came in response to a series of actions (and inaction) over the past year that has placed the community park’s timeline in jeopardy, starting with the City terminating its contract with Oak View Group and Fair Park First and concluding with a City Council committee asking why the community park was omitted from staff’s most recent presentation on Fair Park’s future. 
That omission could be related to the City Council-appointed Park Board ’s discussion at September’s meeting , when two of the 15 board members expressed hesitations about re-entering a contract with nonprofit Fair Park First to focus solely on completing the community park. 
The board didn’t take any votes or action as the contract was expected to come up at its October meeting. 
Instead, Park Board Chair Arun Agarwal appointed a task force to “review the existing contract with Fair Park First.” 
The community park hasn’t made its way onto an agenda since. 
Fair Park Estates neighborhood association president Norma Shaw tells City Council, “Our ask is straightforward: Follow through with the original plans and build our park. 
Photos by Keri Mitchell 
Meanwhile, the State of Texas has committed $4.9 million to the community park project, the U.S. federal government has granted $8.7 million, and Fair Park First leaders say more than $30 million pledged by donors is still in play, leaving less than $6 million needed to complete the project. 
However, they caution, the clock is ticking on all of these funds. 
“At this point, the greatest threat to this project is not funding or feasibility  it is continued procedural delay,” said U.S. 
Rep. 
Crockett , who joined the meeting virtually, and whose admonitions were so extensive she exceeded the 3-minute time limit and couldn’t finish her statement. 
“Delays do not happen in a vacuum. 
They have real consequences for communities who were promised progress , and for partners who invested in good faith based on clear and repeated direction.” 
Agarwal’s task force is tasked with assessing Fair Park First’s “ability to fulfill obligations” and the “financial achievability of the project,” as well as to “analyze the status of all pledged contributions” and to “verify fundraising progress.” 
It’s perhaps ironic that the money needed to complete the park is roughly the same as the amount of donors’ money “misallocated” by for-profit OVG under the nonprofit’s watch. 
South Dallas resident Jason Brown , who now chairs Fair Park First’s board, wore a “No delay/ Our park today” button as he spoke to City Council, acknowledged that there have been “some hiccups.” 
However, he insisted, “important lessons have been learned and adjustments have been made.” 
“At this point, enough is enough,” Brown said. 
The community is “tired of the surveys. 
We’re tired of the meetings. 
We’re tired of sitting around talking, just to get ready, get ready, hurry up  and wait.” 
Councilmember Adam Bazaldua explains to community park supporters what just happened procedurally, and what comes next at the Jan. 28 meeting. 
Photo by Keri Mitchell 
Though 15 people asked the City Council to get a move on, the only action taken last Wednesday was South Dallas Councilmember Adam Bazaldua using his comments acknowledging the speakers to give “notice of intent” to “discharge the Park and Recreation Board from further consideration of the funding and development agreement with Fair Park First.” 
It appeared, from the clearly orchestrated speaker sign-ups, that Bazaldua intended to do more than just give notice. 
He said afterward that he was “ready to blow it up today and had to get talked off the ledge” by City attorneys in order to avoid an ethics violation. 
His official notice gives the Park Board and Agarwal’s appointed task force “an expectation to complete the tasks they have on hand  instead of slow rolling the process,” Bazaldua told us. 
His goal is for Councilmembers to vote on Jan. 28 to discharge the Park Board and remand the community park to Council’s Parks, Trails and the Environment Committee , which would give elected Councilmembers the power to move the process forward, rather than waiting any longer on their appointed board members . 
That way, Bazaldua stated in his comments, the community park could “break ground in September of this year, after FIFA vacates the park grounds” following the much anticipated Fan Festival at Fair Park this summer. 
The task force, appointed Dec. 5, according to Agarwal’s memo , has “all the tools necessary to give the findings and recommendations to our body; however, we haven’t gotten those yet,” Bazaldua said in his comments, adding later that his actions last Wednesday should shave three months from the process. 
“I tried to avoid getting it to this place, but time is of the essence,” he said, “and so I want us to be able to take action on the 28th  one way or the other.” 
The post South Dallas residents demand action on long-promised community park appeared first on Dallas Free Press . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.2%Keri Mitchell: 0.6%Dallas Free Press: 1.4%Confirmation Bias3.2%This article: 4.4%Keri Mitchell: 0.4%Dallas Free Press: 0.4%Anchoring Bias4.4%This article: 1.7%Keri Mitchell: 1.1%Dallas Free Press: 1.7%Availability Heuristic1.7%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.2%Dallas Free Press: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%Keri Mitchell: 0.8%Dallas Free Press: 0.6%Overconfidence Bias3.8%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 3.7%Dallas Free Press: 3.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%Keri Mitchell: 0.6%Dallas Free Press: 0.7%Loss Aversion7.6%This article: 6.2%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.5%Status Quo Bias6.2%This article: 6.5%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect6.5%This article: 12.1%Keri Mitchell: 3.7%Dallas Free Press: 2.9%Optimism Bias12.1%This article: 2.0%Keri Mitchell: 1.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.6%Pessimism Bias2.0%This article: 21.5%Keri Mitchell: 3.5%Dallas Free Press: 3.7%Negativity Bias21.5%This article: 6.3%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias6.3%This article: 2.2%Keri Mitchell: 0.3%Dallas Free Press: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error2.2%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.7%Keri Mitchell: 1.9%Dallas Free Press: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.7%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.9%Dallas Free Press: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 2.9%Dallas Free Press: 1.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.9%Keri Mitchell: 0.3%Dallas Free Press: 0.4%Recency Bias11.9%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 1.1%Dallas Free Press: 1.3%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 7.6%Keri Mitchell: 0.3%Dallas Free Press: 0.8%False Dilemma7.6%This article: 3.6%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Slippery Slope3.6%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.6%Keri Mitchell: 2.5%Dallas Free Press: 2.2%Hasty Generalization5.6%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 1.6%Dallas Free Press: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.5%Keri Mitchell: 8.3%Dallas Free Press: 3.3%Appeal to Emotion12.5%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.1%Dallas Free Press: 0.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 9.1%Keri Mitchell: 0.4%Dallas Free Press: 1.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.1%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.4%Dallas Free Press: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 1.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.2%Keri Mitchell: 0.3%Dallas Free Press: 0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.2%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 3.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.2%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy3.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.5%Dallas Free Press: 0.5%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.3%Dallas Free Press: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.6%Keri Mitchell: 3.8%Dallas Free Press: 2.5%Biased Writer Voice3.6%This article: 0.7%Keri Mitchell: 5.3%Dallas Free Press: 1.5%Indoctrination0.7%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.0%Dallas Free Press: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Keri Mitchell: 0.6%Dallas Free Press: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

978 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers29%attributed speech692writer words
100%flagged-word coverage
22 attributed words7.7% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Biased Writer Voice-3.9 ptsWriter: 3.9%U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-1.0 ptsWriter: 1.0%U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.