My name is Ethan Avanzino. I’m a local business owner and a proud resident of Eureka Springs. I’m someone who usually prefers to stay out of the spotlight. But with Local Issue #3 on the ballot, I felt compelled to speak up. This issue has the potential to deeply affect the future of our town, our businesses, and the essential city services every Eurekan relies on, and it’s too important to remain silent.

The effort to educate residents about Local Issue #3 has been nothing short of remarkable. What stands out is the diverse group of people who have come together — Trump supporters, Kamala supporters, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents; from millennials in their 30s to baby boomers in their 70s; from Christians to atheists to agnostics. In a time when political differences often divide us, the shared passion to save the CAPC and its associated tax has transcended those barriers. It’s a testament to how vital tourism, local businesses, infrastructure, and essential city services are to everyone in Eureka Springs, regardless of their background or beliefs.

Unfortunately, this measure feels like a cheap shot. Rather than addressing concerns with City Council or the mayor, the organizers chose to target a department that doesn’t have the power to change how funds are allocated, alter its mission, or fight back. This approach wasn’t just misguided — it was manipulative. They used threats, misinformation, and gaslighting, tactics that suggest a troubling inability to communicate, collaborate, and compromise. Frankly, it must be exhausting to be around people who resort to such methods.

To those responsible, I would genuinely recommend learning how to work constructively with others, manage frustration, and engage in healthy dialogue — after all, they are valuable skills, and it’s never too late to improve. After all, you can teach an old dog new tricks, but if that dog refuses to learn how to play nice, maybe it’s best to keep it inside, where it can’t cause harm to others.

My big concern is the confusing language of this issue. An “against” vote means you want to keep the CAPC, while a “for” vote means you support abolishing it. I urge everyone to understand this nuance. It’s challenging to advocate for something positive when you have to frame your stance as “against,” but that’s the reality we’re facing. The CAPC has brought about significant positive change over the past year, and it deserves better than to be associated with red flags and negative phrasing. Yet, we must work within the system we have.

Local voter, if you don’t fully understand how abolishing the CAPC would lead to defunding our police, fire, EMS, schools, The Auditorium, and other critical services, please take the time to educate yourself before casting your vote. If you’re still unsure, I urge you to vote “against” the measure so that the consequences don’t rest on your shoulders, or consider not casting a vote on the measure at all.

Looking forward, let’s focus on the real issues — our community’s infrastructure needs and affordable housing. These are the kinds of topics we should be asking our future mayoral and city council candidates to solve. In two years, we’ll have the opportunity to elect leaders who can provide real solutions that support every corner of Eureka Springs. Let’s ensure we’re having these conversations now so we can build a stronger, more unified future, together: residents & business owners, Republicans & Democrats, and everywhere in between.

Thank you.

— Ethan Avanzino Eureka Springs