[hjelle]: http://www.review-news.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=971&SectionID=60&SubSectionID=126&S=1
[1]: http://www.eastsidereviewnews.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=670&SectionID=64&SubSectionID=&S=1
[2]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/06/20/more-maplewood-minnesota-fireworks/#comment-1255
[3]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/08/07/whew-its-been-a-while/
[4]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/07/26/it-seems-the-maplewood-city-council-attention-has-waned/
[5]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/04/29/the-local-paper-is-at-it-again/
I’d wanted to comment on some of the Aug. 7th articles concerning the Maplewood City Council in the East Side Review. Since then two weeks have past, and some of my interest has waned, or at least been swallowed up in busy-ness. Nevertheless, the [Mayor’s comments today][2] renewed my interest a little, so I’ll briefly note what I thought was interesting.
First, as I already alluded to, somehow Maplewood City Council member Will Rossbach got some really special treatment in [the first article, *Council member wants new interim city manager*][1]. The article’s writer, Katy Zillmer, seemed to do very little beyond give Rossbach a forum for his views. Of course, it’s perfectly fine that he has a forum for his views, but that’s not news. That’s an editorial or letter to the editor. In fact, there was only one non-narrative quote by someone from a differing perspective (Interim City Attorney Alan Kantrud). And the writer follows that quote with:
> In a follow-up interview Rossbach said he only wanted the council to discuss whether Copeland had the qualifications for the job he was doing.
So Rossbach got a *follow-up interview*? Virtually no other person had any say in this entire article, and they guy who got almost all the ink also got a follow-up interview? Wow. If I ever run for office, I hope I get such favorable reporting.
The article continues (the context is public discussion of the controversial background report of Interim City Manager Greg Copeland):
> “I don’t want to talk about things that I am not supposed to. It is not my mission or desire to do anything to unduly injure Mr. Copeland,” Rossbach said.
Probably just a poor choice of words, but I couldn’t help thinking “so you only want to see that Copeland is *duly* injured?”
Later, in the narrative portion of the article, Council member Rebecca Cave said…
> “You cannot talk about that report.”
>
> “Legally I can talk about it,” Rossbach fired back.
As dramatic as that sounds, legal council says that’s not so certain. I wonder why Council member Rossbach is so willing to ignore his legal council.
OK, suppertime is almost here. I’ve got to finish this up.
Another Maplewood City Council member, Erik Hjelle, got a [letter to the editor published][hjelle] in the same paper. Apparently he didn’t rate a personal scribe-cum-reporter like Rossbach. Anyway, he brought forward a couple of gems.
First…
> Our former Mayor, Bob Cardinal, and City Manager, Richard Fursman, have stated publicly that they were disappointed our city attorney, Patrick Kelly, resigned. While I respect their public and political commentary, I recall their private comments and e-mails that were contrary.
So, is there a reporter around who will ask former Mayor Bob Cardinal, and former City Manager Richard Fursman some pointed questions concerning their current and past opinions of the former City Attorney? Can we ask the city for those emails?
But the second thing is what made my day. I [commented on a KSTP-TV report][4] and brought forward what I considered to be good reasons to be suspect of ‘resident’ Dale Trippler’s on-screen comments, and it appears my instincts beat the reporter’s:
> On July 24, KSTP Channel 5 aired a news story that was false. A Maplewood Planning Commission member was interviewed and stated that city projects are not getting done. The report referenced Gladstone as “stalled” and in “limbo.” On July 10, the “split” council voted 5-0 to start Phase1 of the Gladstone project. On July 17, city staff submitted a $2.5 million grant request to the Met Council for Gladstone. On July 20, a developer announced a proposal to build a 150+ unit Class A development at the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site with $0 public financing. All of this activity occurred in just 10 days.
The TV story *and Dale Tippler’s comments* were on July 24th. All of those events noted by Hjelle happened within two weeks of Tippler’s comments. I think we can all agree right now that it is not only justifiable but wise to think twice about his feedback from now on. Shameful politics from this member of Maplewood’s Planning Commission.
However, I do feel some sense of satisfaction for having [my][5] [suspicions][4] verified.
I’m emailing the reporter again. Just to inform and ask. Not bicker. Not scold. She pretty much only showed one point of view in her report, and a key portion of that view was (in the best possible light) a misrepresentation. Does this make you think about what you see on TV news? It does me. I really wonder if the fast pace of TV news allows facts to really get out. What fact-checking actually takes place?
Also, notice the editor-supplied title to Hjelle’s letter: *Criticism of council ‘un-American’*.
Talk about shameful. He didn’t say that. He said “Attacking our form of government and attempting to negate the will of the people is improper, unjust and un-American.” The only antecedent for “attacks” is politically-motivated and incorrect reporting. Not “criticism”.
Of course, the false *title* became the focus of a number of responses, which would bring me down a rabbit hole of illogic were I to pursue commenting on them. It’s amazing how misdirected and poorly thought out some were.
Anyway, [Mayor Longrie’s comments today][2] also touch on the TV news story, in case you’re interested.
Yes, I wrote some after dinner.
Previously on this topic:
[g]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/07/31/reporting-on-the-report-concerning-the-report/
[f]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/07/26/it-seems-the-maplewood-city-council-attention-has-waned/
[e]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/07/24/maplewoods-city-council-draws-more-attention/
[d]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/07/15/maplewood-mn-and-greg-copelands-background-check/
[c]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/06/20/more-maplewood-minnesota-fireworks/
[b]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/04/29/the-local-paper-is-at-it-again/
[a]: http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/04/20/a-tiny-peek-at-local-politics/
– [Reporting on the report concerning the report][g]
– [It seems the Maplewood City Council attention has waned][f]
– [Maplewood’s City Council draws more attention][e]
– [Maplewood, MN and Greg Copeland’s background check][d]
– [More Maplewood, Minnesota fireworks][c]
– [The local paper is at it again][b]
– [A tiny peek at local politics][a]