CENTRIST MEDIA

posted by James Reel

I haven't blogged in the past few days because the temptation has been too great to make some sort of political comment, and this is not a political blog. You can probably guess where I stand on many issues from the mere fact that I write for an alternative weekly--but it's not safe for you to make assumptions about anyone's politics just because they work in public broadcasting. Here at KUAT radio, I'd guess that the liberals and conservatives are pretty evenly balanced. (I count Libertarians and their sympathizers as conservatives: free-market Republicans who lean liberal on social issues.) So don't let me hear you complain about the "liberal media." What's the most talked-about cable news network? The arch-conservative Fox News. Which direction do almost all the talk-radio hosts you're likely to hear lean? Right. Have the nation's major newspapers gone easy on the Bush Administration after having obsessed over trivial and non-existent issues during the Clinton Administration? Obviously. There is a very strong, loud conservative voice in the American media, and only in comparison to that does centrist public radio seem to skew to the left.

SHELKO VS STAR

posted by James Reel

The Arizona Daily Star has been slamming the downtown Rio Nuevo project pretty heavily this year, documenting huge expenditures with few results. Now Greg Shelko, the director of the project, is fighting back with a response to the most recent Star article (now gone from the free part of the Web site). I don't know how much play Shelko's response will get, so I'll post it here (distributed by Ward 1 City Council member Regina Romero):

Many of you have read recent coverage by the Sunday, October 27, 2008 Arizona Daily Star of the City’s Rio Nuevo project has been inaccurate, misleading, biased, absent essential facts and fraught with the selective use of others to support the reporter’s opinions about the redevelopment of downtown. There are (4) key areas of concern. False Reports of Audit Activity The City’s financial management systems meet all professional governmental accounting standards (GASB; http://www.gasb.org/), withstand annual independent audit scrutiny, and are always deemed proper. The Star’s assertion that it has performed “the first public audit” (July 27, 2008) is false. The Star’s Arbitrary and Misleading Accounting The Star reports Rio Nuevo expenditures in ways that do not accurately reflect how funds were spent. The amount spent on construction is around $30 million- nearly twice what was reported by the Star! That’s a big difference and seriously misinforms the readers. The Star made much ado about “public relations” expenditures, implied wrongdoing and solicited harsh comments from members of the public. The Star failed to report that those “public relations” expenditures included legally required public notices published in the Star, neighborhood notification mailings, Spanish language materials, and workshops for Citizen Advisory Committee members- expenditures that are necessary to keep the public informed of meetings and enable public participation in the process. This reporting is dishonest and a disservice to the public. Biased Allegations and Purpose of the District The Star reported that we are spending money on “things that while not prohibited, aren’t what excited voters” in 1999. This recurring theme is simply not true. The stated purpose of Rio Nuevo tax increment multipurpose facilities district is to support multifaceted development including cultural and recreational amenities and improvements, historic recreations, new and expanded museums, mixed use development, and the Tucson Convention Center (TCC) Arena. These are quite clearly the purposes for which the money has been used and how bond authorization requires future funds to be spent. Lack of Information about Progress: The Star never reports in any meaningful (quantifiable) detail what private activity is taking place, the time it takes to revitalize a downtown, or the impacts of the financial markets and state of the economy on those efforts. We have spent $37.1 million on design and construction. We have spent $11.3 million on real estate acquisition and archaeological and environmental clearances. We have spent $3.6 million on planning activities. These are necessary predevelopment investments the City must make if it’s going to realize $2 to $3 billion invested in downtown over the years and decades to come. Although the Star repeatedly wants to use the 1999 vote as the starting line for measuring performance, (1) tax increment revenue (money) to support projects and planning did not start accumulating until 2004. (2) without the revenue extension approved the State Legislature in 2006, the City would not have the financial capacity to deliver on museums and other cultural attractions, hotels, an arena, and the infrastructure necessary to leverage private sector reinvestment. As we all know, the challenges to downtown revitalization are extraordinary and complex. The Star’s routine visitations to the past, and its consistently biased reporting on downtown affairs, are a disservice to the community, financially harmful to downtown stakeholders, and undermines years of planning and investment. The Star’s irresponsible journalism is not only replete with violations of the Star’s own ethical code. It is also a disservice to the community. And it is also financially damaging to property owners, businesses and investors in the downtown.