Skip to content

Archive for April 23rd, 2008

Town Talk’s Reporting Often Detrimental to Development

As is common knowledge, both Lamar and Daniel also work for the City of Alexandria, in addition to writing for this blog and working on their other projects. Well, I don’t. Although I work hard as an individual to support development within our community, I have no direct ties the city, nor do I have any predisposed loyalties. I do, however, feel a responsibility to point out what I feel is a destructive abuse of the journalistic process by The Town Talk that may have, in the past, cost our community development opportunities, often politicizes governmental processes, and continues to detract from the work being done by developers and government officials alike.

For being an organization that generally refuses to use any sort of investigative journalism when covering a story that might run the slightest risk of upsetting their advertisers or certain local religious groups, The Town Talk has suddenly whole-heartedly adopted the public records request. This has mostly been in issues involving the Alexandria Mayor and City Council. Of course, rarely has anything come of these requests. Usually the request involves some simple procedural aspect of government. And, of course, as in their recent set of articles culminating with todays story here, The Town Talk generally uses its pages to run several articles talking about how there should be a records request, how they plan to file a records request, how they have filed a records request, an additional story on what a records request is, a story on how the target of their ‘investigation’ has thus far refused their request, and finally an article about some government official giving in to their triumphant records request — usually with no story to actually be reported.

This works great for The Town Talk — they get 4 to 5 days of fill-articles out of usually nothing. But that’s generally where it stops working for Cenla. I personally find it rather convenient that so many of The Town Talk‘s exploits in the arena seem to center around Mayor Jacques Roy, whom, if you will remember, was basically the progenitor of local governmental transparency. He actually ran his campaign based on this, on getting people involved, on developing the city with the city in mind, of moving us away from a long tradition of good ole boy politics and backroom deals.

The fact is, The Town Talk has yet to report much of value as the result of these great newspaper epics. What they have done, however, is run the risk of derailing important development projects. One of the worst things that can happen with any project, whether it be a personal effort, a government plan, or the work of private business is for word to get out too soon — for people to see an unfinished plan or to be told of something that is undecided or hasn’t gotten all of the kinks worked out yet.

Letting the cat out of the bag can sometimes lead to interested parties pulling out, or concerned citizens making a stink because they’ve been given false or incomplete information. And for businesses this can lead to attacks from competitors, unfair speculation from those wishing to make an extra buck, and any number of other scenarios.

Is that to say the local newspaper should not report on the goings on of government? Hardly — we want them involved. But when that reporting is detrimental to the development of a struggling economy it goes quickly from journalistic integrity to journalistic speculation — to making an advertising buck while costing out area jobs and opportunity — usually opportunities that don’t come this way very often or very easily.

The recent rant about Mayor Roy’s SPARC presentation calling for joint development and planning efforts between Alexandria and Pineville is one such situation where The Town Talk is creating a problem where there is none. In fact, this is one area in which any efforts to merge the planning of the two cities is a good thing. Any move, no matter how small or trivial to move us toward some semblance of metropolitan government can only help the entire region. We are the only metro area in the state that does not benefit from the existence of a common shared planning and marketing division, of the shared resources and cost-cutting of unified services. Not to mention that, the presentation — even in its working ‘idea’ form was clearly and openly shared with the public at a meeting which the Town Talk attended and reported on.

They were allowed to see a preliminary plan, so were the other attendees. They were able to discuss it and be let in on this exciting development opportunity. However instead of reporting on the possibilities such cooperative efforts hold for Cenla, or by reporting on the successes of other metro area in the state, The Town Talk chose to make this non-issue their issue of the week.

Now, before it’s even off the rough-draft phase, this promising idea of combining the skills, efforts, and attributes of our various municipalities to support a planned regional development effort is in jeopardy. There are already black marks in the public eye against a plan that hasn’t even been fully born yet, and suspicion is being cast on city leaders on both sides of the river with no basis whatsoever.

Thanks Town Talk.

Money, Money, Money! MONEY!

Since George W. Bush (approval rating: 28%) is in Louisiana tonight to help raise money for John Neely Kennedy’s Senate campaign, Ryan (at the Daily Kingfish) and I thought it appropriate to pose a series of questions for Mr. Kennedy.

Ryan’s questions:

1. You ran for re-election to the State Treasurer post last fall saying that the “job was not yet done.” Is it done now that you’re running for Senate, a mere 6 months later?

2. In 2004, when you ran for the Senate, you were in favor of stem cell research, affirmative action, and minimum wage hikes. The Republican Party is opposed to these things. Have you flip-flopped?

3. In 2004, you stated that President Bush’s policies were “cold” and “mean.” Do you still believe that?

4. Do you approve of Sinator Vitter’s extracurricular activities? After all, you are using him as a host for your fundraiser tonight.

5. You recently endorsed Woody Jenkins for Congress in LA-06. Do you agree with his stated beliefs that we should abolish the Departments of Energy, Education, Housing and Urban Development and Commerce?

My questions:
1. Do you support proposals that would allow the government to negotiate prices for prescription medications with pharmaceutical companies?

2. Please explain why you felt it appropriate to use public tax dollars to promote your name and whether or not you believe Joe McPherson’s bill was appropriate.

Context: Kudos to the National Republican Senatorial Committee:

A Fellow Democrat Introduced Legislation To Stop Kennedy From Politically Capitalizing On State Programs. “Public officials should not be using taxpayers’ dollars to promote themselves, Sen. Joe McPherson, D-Woodworth, said Wednesday. The Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee approved two bills that he said would end the practice. Senate Bill 77 would prohibit spending public money on commercial or public service advertising that contains the name of a public official.” (Robert Morgan, “Bills Restrict Ads Bought With Taxes,” Daily Town Talk, April 19, 2001)

• The Bill Was Named After Kennedy

“That’s a (state Treasurer) John Kennedy bill. Last year there was a specific appropriation to basically allow an elected official to get on TV and promote himself,’ McPherson said.” (Robert Morgan, “Bills Restrict Ads Bought With Taxes,” Daily Town Talk, April 19, 2001)

“The author called his legislation the John Kennedy bill, not for the late president but for the
incumbent state treasurer. By whatever name, the bill prohibits public officials from using
taxpayer dollars on media campaigns to tout state programs.” (“Notes And Quotes From The
Legislature,” The Associated Press, April 19, 2001)

“The Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee approved Sen. Joe McPherson’s bill Wednesday and sent it on to the full Senate. Last year, Kennedy was getting free publicity in television advertisements promoting the return of unclaimed property to rightful owners, McPherson said, contending the treasurer was promoting himself at the same time.” (“Notes And Quotes From The Legislature,” The Associated Press, April 19, 2001)

‘“We had that program years before former Gov. Buddy Roemer ever heard of John Kennedy,’ [Democrat State Senator Joe] McPherson said.” (“Notes And Quotes From The Legislature,” The Associated Press, April 19, 2001)

3. How do you respond to the accusations from Republicans that you have cost the State over $1.4 million?

Again, kudos to the opposition research team at the NRSC (how embarrassing!):

• Kennedy’s Department Lost Louisiana $1.4 Million Because Of Inefficiency. “[State Treasurer Ken] Duncan said Kennedy’s office also took too long to deposit tax payments in the
bank, and the delays cost the state $1.4 million a year in lost interest. ‘The average deposit takes eight days, and sometimes it takes 15 to 25 days in peak (tax season),’ Duncan said, pointing to a critical legislative auditor’s report on the subject. Duncan said most other states deposit tax revenue in a day or two.” (Randy McClain, “Treasurer Race Hinges On Trust,” The [Baton Rouge] Advocate, October 12, 1999)

4. Do you support Senator McCain’s notion of a 50-100 year presence in Iraq?

5. Why should Louisianans relinquish their seniority in the Senate and a seat on the appropriations committee in order to elect a freshman member of the minority party?

And just in time, the DSCC puts this out: