Tonight! All the Way from Portland, Oregon (By Way of Rhode Island)… Monstrous!
With Opening Act the Tim Turner Band

the Frosty Factory, 10PM

More on Monstrous:

THE Rock n’ Roll Band “MONSTROUS” are Three brothers from Rhode Island, Led Gethway -Guitar & vocals – Ken Gethway -Bass & Vocals – Alex Gethway – Drums & vocals . The brothers have been playing and stock piling songs over the last 10 years. Now in their 20′s they have been travling around the country in a big white candy truck playing shows , parties and writing their next record . Monstrous just made a studio record of 15 songs , intitled ” MOTHER NATURES SLAVES ” for release on September 19th 2006 on the New York City label MONSTROUS has just signed with (Howler Records.)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE TO ALL MEDIA

November 14, 2006

The transition blueprint is born of my campaign commitments to inclusive, controlled growth of our City. The organization will operate with a funneling effect, but also with a built-in check in the committee structure and use of key experts. We want a free agent group who can ensure that “groupthink” does not set in to foreclose other ideas—to get the most ideas and then separate from those the best ideas.

The mega-committees or spheres of inquiry shown below will be asked to organize themselves according to those persons best suited for more specific areas of inquiry. Overall, the committee structure will answer certain questions about the state of our community, and then compile, organize, and forward that information to the executive transition team, which in turn will use the information to assess delivery of governmental services by the City’s divisions—including whether divisions need re-organization or creation. Clarence Fields has graciously opted to chair the executive group; I am thankful for his leadership across the river and participation now to aid us and ultimately our region.

The spheres represent the macro-components of “smart” growth. Under each sphere, specific issues will be addressed, which may serve useful for organizational purposes by the committees; however, the committees may organize as each desires through its membership.

These issues include consideration of: planning, transportation, economic development, housing, community development, and natural resource development. To smartly grow and preserve what we have, Alexandria should protect its unique sense of community and identity (and further develop a thematic draw, such as its healthcare primacy in the region); preserve and capitalize on natural, infrastructural, and cultural resources (like our river, interstate system, and central location); fairly and inclusively distribute the costs and benefits of our numerous new developments (to reflect our demographics and equitably “grow” our town to avoid sprawl when appropriate); expand the choices for transportation, employment and housing (through mixed-use and other less-thought-of opportunities); value long-range, regional considerations of sustainability instead of immediate gratification (or what will work to make growth more diverse and not subject to deep fluctuations in our local economy and business community); and promote public health and healthful communities (better time spent by our youth after school with positive activities as well as physical health for our community by promoting quality of life initiatives and our hospital complexes).

The committee compositions are reflective of this City, and include some of our “best and brightest.” The goal of transition is to identify problem areas and allow the incoming administration to get a “snapshot” of government through the “fresh” eyes of caring community leaders—but not necessarily to move committed employees out of service. Ultimately, the central mission is to have the current city managers transition the new mayor into office. This administration seeks to identify avenues to revitalize and build our community better—locally and regionally.

Thank you for your support and patience.

–Jacques M. Roy, November 14, 2006

QUALITY OF LIFE, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

& COMMUNITY HEALTH

1. Victor Kirk

2. Lamar White

3. Graves Theus

4. Lee Gwinn

5. Reverend Larry Turner

6. Bart Jones, P.T.

7. Les Glankler

8. Todd Drury, M.D.

9. A.C. Buchanan

10. Reverend Dan O’Connor

11. Booker T. Booze, Jr.

12. Robert Leavines

13. Robert Bussey

14. Stephen Wright

Eight positions unfilled or unconfirmed

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Byron Salazar 1. Chad Juneau

2. David Pugh 2. Glenda Fitzpatrick

3. __________ 3. ______________

4. Martin Johnson 4. Sam Sansing

5. __________ 5. ______________

6. Joe Fuller 6. Rob Ratcliff

7. Jason Gamlin 7. Brandon Monceaux

8. Nancy Stich 8. Jo Betty Sterkx

9. Cliff Mollor 9. Kevin Switzer

10. George Robertson 10. ______________

11. Brent Caplan 11. Jay Lynch

EDUCATION, RECREATION & CHILDREN

1. ______________

2. Rodessa Metoyer

3. Gary Jones

4. ______________

5. Thelma Baker

6. Kristy Flynn

7. Greg Gormanous

8. Tim Tharpe

9. Rodney Jones

10. ______________

11. Paul Dauzat

12. Herbert Dixon

13. Stephanie Goodrich

14. Wally Fall

15. ____________

The mega-committees will work with the transition team to identify how well divisions are meeting their missions and if missions need redefining or retooling. Additionally, this interaction will consider:

• Community-based planning
• How to articulate a vision and who is passionate in our city to achieve it
• Promoting an image for the city, and overcoming the limitations to that image
• How to best create and sustain numerous partnerships and collaborations
• What would division and department heads like to see different
• What resources are missing

There will be a committee known as the Personal Advisory Committee to the Mayor-Elect:

This committee is composed of personal advisors to the mayor-elect, who were instrumental in the campaign. The committee will not serve in a formal transition capacity, but will interact directly with the executive team. This committee will cease to exist December 3, 2006, and is in place to help with the day-to-day activity of transition for the mayor-elect. The membership will be:

John Flynn, Chris Roy, Sr., Chris Roy, Jr., Deborah Randolph, Thomas Antoon, Larry Accosta, Mike Johnson, W. Jay Luneau and Mark Brown

The personal advisory committee and executive transition committee will have key advisors regarding the spheres. Those persons are experts in relevant fields of inquiry:

QUALITY OF LIFE: Johnie Varnado

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: ________________

INFRASTRUCTURE: Thomas David

EDUCATION: Kay Michiels

VISION: ________________

The executive or functioning committee for transition, and the actual body which will interface with the personal advisory group and the administration, is the Executive Transition Committee to the Current Administration:

Clarence Fields (chairperson of Committee), Richard Rozanski (Vice-Chair of Committee), Jacqueline Whittle (secretary of committee), Charles “Chuck” Johnson, William Allen, “Willie” Spears, Tammi Salazar, Ed Larvadain, III, Linda Dyess Stewart, Randy Gilchrist, and Rob Antoon

This committee will meet with the chairpersons from the “sphere” committees and present information, after consultation with the key advisors, to the mayor-elect. During this process, important staff decisions will also be made after consideration of the credentials for the positions requiring filling by the mayor. This committee will cease to exist December 3, 2006.

Part Three of Three: What the Roy/Brewer Run-Off Teaches Us About Alexandria

In today’s Town Talk, Jodie Belgard writes about how Jacques Roy inspired her to feel more engaged in the political process and how he reached out and included young people who would otherwise never be involved in a political race. Jodie witnessed something at the Roy victory party she was surprised to see: throngs of young people all celebrating a new spirit of leadership.

But, as I have mentioned before, Roy ran on a platform of true inclusiveness, and for him, it meant more than just rallying young people; it meant traveling all across the city and getting everyone motivated for a change.

One prominent supporter of the Brewer campaign wrote an article of endorsement in a citywide Brewer mail-out (which was distributed in gas stations and grocery stores) about the need for getting out the vote in his neighborhood, Charles Park. When I read the article, I must admit: I was disappointed. The mayor’s race wasn’t simply about ONE neighborhood, and it seemed to me at least that any attempt to specifically target a neighborhood like Charles Park– while ignoring other parts of the city– was a strategy designed to embolden one group of people in one neighborhood to determine our city’s leadership. This is not to suggest that Mrs. Brewer didn’t attend events in South Alexandria. She did. And I have personally heard her speak about the need for infrastructure improvements throughout our community. But during the last few weeks of the campaign, it became evident that her campaign hoped to drastically increase voter turn-out in specific parts of the city– and I think we all know what areas those are and why it was perceived as politically advantageous for Mrs. Brewer to embark on this strategy.

However, this election taught us that in order to win an election in Alexandria, one must be willing to motivate citizens throughout the entire community. That means canvassing in the Sonia Quarters, Acadian Village, Martin Park, and Charles Park. It’s more than just attending social events; one must be willing to literally walk door-to-door and ask people for their vote.

For me, one of the biggest surprises of the mayoral election wasn’t the margin of victory; it was the immense turn-out in precincts that have historically voted in lower numbers. Mr. Roy could have won 60/40 if he had only focused on traditionally white neighborhoods, but that was not the mission of his campaign.

Inclusiveness means bringing everyone to the table; it means paying attention to the needs and hopes of people from all walks of life. And as we look forward to the next four years, we must remember that Jacques Roy wasn’t elected by just one group of people from one or two neighborhoods; he was elected by the entire community.

Part One of Three: What the Roy/Brewer Run-Off Teaches Us About Alexandria

When Jacques Roy officially announced his candidacy for mayor, more than 200 people, primarily young professionals and their families, showed up to his office on Martin Luther King Jr Drive to hear him speak about his vision for Alexandria’s future.

But despite the enthusiasm and the high turn-out, critics dismissed Roy’s chances, claiming (correctly) that young people do not historically vote in higher numbers and that the winning candidate would be the one who could best speak to the needs of older Alexandrians. They felt that Roy must have just been positioning himself for another race, that it was too little too late.

But Jacques Roy understood something that others didn’t: Young people were interested.

Despite all of the positive changes affected during Randolph’s twenty years, young Alexandrians are still leaving in droves. For many, the educational and employment opportunities in larger cities are simply too good to ignore, and for others, Alexandria is too provincial, too quaint, and too complacent. But for those of us who have stayed or returned to Alexandria, there is a growing frustration and a sense that we can become a better place to live, if we only work together.

To be fair, young Alexandrians worked in the campaigns of all seven mayoral candidates, but only Jacques Roy understood how to best motivate young people; in part, because he belongs to the same generation, but also because Jacques Roy specifically reached out to young people. He didn’t just ask for their vote; he asked for their help.

Behind the closed doors of the Roy campaign, there were between forty and fifty young Alexandrians, each working in a unique role. They canvassed in every single neighborhood in the city. They encouraged Mr. Roy to speak at block parties, concerts, and coffee shops– gathering places for those whose voices are not frequently heard or respected in the political process.

And the message they sent was clear: We need a leader who recognizes that in a growing city, there must be more opportunities for young people. They must not be cut off from the discussions, because they are, in fact, the future of our city.

This is, in part, what I meant when I discussed how Mr. Roy created a movement. By motivating young Alexandrians to become a part of this process, Mr. Roy excited people from all walks of life; they saw the positive energy behind his campaign and voted in droves. (Mr. Roy actually received more votes than Ned Randolph did during his final election four years ago).

It will be important to parlay this energy into real, tangible results. But for now, we should recognize this movement for what it is: A clear statement in support of proactive, intelligent leadership, leadership that reaches across racial and political lines, leadership that is committed to growing our community, and leadership that believes it is possible for Alexandria to become a business and entertainment hub for the entire state.

Hindsight is 20/20: What Republican Campaign Tactics Teach Us About the State of American Democracy.

In 1970, a nineteen-year-old Karl Rove played a little prank on the campaign of Alan Dixon, who was running for State Treasurer of Illinois. Rove used a fake name, walked into Dixon’s campaign office, and stole 1,000 sheets of paper with the Dixon letterhead. The young Rove then used the stationary to print a flier promising “free beer, free food, girls, and a good time for nothing” and dispersed the flier to homeless shelters and rock concerts. To some, this may seem like a harmless juvenile prank, but to others, this is the very first example of the Rovian political strategy.

During the past fifteen years, Americans have become very familiar with the Rove strategy, and his model for victory, in one form or another, has been executed by countless campaigns across the country. The Rove strategy relies on targeted fear and deception, and it is anchored by deep pockets and a network of loosely-formed political action committees.

Often, journalists and political analysts overstate Rove’s singular influence; what Rove has provided is simply a formula, a blueprint, and a method. Rove led, and others followed by example.

The formula is quite elementary: Target voters who can be manipulated, and paint your opponent, through both official and unofficial channels, as morally and ethically bankrupt.

In Texas, Rove helped George W. Bush win the governor’s race by alleging that the late Ann Richards was a lesbian (which she was not). He helped win the South Carolina primary for George W. Bush by spreading the rumor that McCain had a “black baby.” And during the last Presidential election, he found a group of Vietnam veterans who were willing to speak out against Kerry, formed a political action committee, funded the whole enterprise through a Houston real estate developer, and taped a series of powerful commercials, claiming that Kerry hadn’t actually served with distinction. None of these veterans actually served with Kerry, but they still said they had. (In truth, they were simply acting out on an old grudge against Kerry).

Rove famously courted the evangelical vote, and many of his most defamatory and misleading campaign attacks were carried out from the pulpit. (It’s important to note that all the while, behind closed doors, Rove and others insulted and disparaged the very evangelicals they were courting).

What we witnessed on Tuesday was not simply the end of the Republican majority in Congress; we also witnessed the end of Rovian political strategy. Quite simply, Americans are tired of negative campaigning, particularly when the negativity is so transparent in its objectives. During the last election, Republicans pulled out every play in the Rove play book: race-baiting, fear-mongering, and outright divisiveness. It is one thing to campaign on the issues, and it is quite another to scare people into voting (or not voting) based on deception. Republicans may fairly take issue with the Democratic tax plan, and Democrats may also fairly question Republicans on the Iraq War. But when campaigns only appeal to our lowest common denominator, when they preach fear and not hope, when they claim an exclusive hold on morality and God, and when they use our airwaves to spread vitriol, we must stand up, regardless of our party affiliation.

Last Tuesday, Americans did just that. We should all be thankful that there is now a check against the unfettered spending, the misguided war policies, and the culture of corruption that exists any time one party is allowed to rule unopposed.

We should also recognize that the Republicans had actually done a fantastic job of fooling Americans into thinking that our country was more conservative than it actually is and that the only way to move forward is by addressing the needs and concerns of the Great American Middle. During the last election, Democrats received between 25%- 33% of the evangelical vote, a clear sign of the shifting winds.

Next: What the Roy/Brewer Run-off Teaches Us About Alexandria.