[RP TownTalk] My proposal to repeal the Town Crier section of the Code

Fri Dec 2 16:39:22 UTC 2005

My proposal to repeal  the Town Crier section of the CodeThis is such an interesting discussion.  I don't have any solutions to proffer, but I'm a resident of Hyattsville and a former Councilmember there, and I can share our newsletter / newspaper experiences with my fine Riverdale Park friends & neighbors, and hope that it stimulates consideration.  The City of Hyattsville currently has a bi-weekly newsletter, and has had one in past years as well, that is published by its community services coordinator.  

It's a very nice newsletter, very well done; however it serves as a government communication organ: paving, trash & leaf pick-up schedules, police tips, weather and seasonal advice, project announcements, summaries of motions passed, agendas to come, a message from the Mayor, notices of hearings, volunteer opportunities, job announcements: that sort of thing.  But it had lacked the news, op-ed, interviews, and journalistic components that a newspaper has.  

Independent reporting is very difficult for a government-related publication, especially a local government, to perform.  Concerns about and ultimately accusations of slant, bias and spin always factor into the publication of information. That's even the reality of large newspapers, whose corporate sponsors twist advertising budgets as a means of influencing editorial and journalistic content.  Few corporate boards have the spine to resist fighting bites from the bottom line.   The Hyattsville community felt a void in the content of the municipal newsletter and has yearned for a "local newspaper" like the Takoma Voice.

It is admirable if a governing board is capable of resisting influencing the content and tone of a communication device like a town newsletter.  But it is inevitable for political representatives to try to do this, even with the best intentions, and fiscal policy prudence at heart.  I've seen that close-up.

In the past, in the days before the Gazette ( whose focus is not local, and whose content is poorly researched, mediocre, and biased to an extreme) we had a small, independent publisher, Davis Kennedy, who published the Hyattsville Local Paper (the Gazette drove him out of business), and he utilized local writing talent to provide much of his content.  It was a lively and enjoyable, community-centered medium.  We miss it sorely. ( Fair disclosure: I used to contribute regularly to a restaurant review column and and wrote some environment-related columns).

Almost two years ago, some neat, retired Hyattsville businessmen got together to propose the development of an all-volunteer newspaper to the City.  They were tired of all the negativism, and lurid headlines in the Gazette, and wanted to focus on positive, real life profiles of residents and organizations. They developed a business model and plan, and presented it to the City Council.  Their idea was to propose the monthly publication of the City's Newsletter, "The Hyattsville Reporter," as an advertising supplement inserted in the newspaper, through a contract agreement.  

Now, once a month the Reporter is a stand alone mailer printed on distinctive green paper, and once a month it goes in the newspaper.  The net result was two-fold.  First: the initial contract got the paper on its feet, while it developed an advertising base. Second: the newsletter publication and distribution costs to the City actually lowered.  The next year's contract lowered the advertising fee further, and it's possible that eventually this paper might wean itself entirely from its reliance on a City advertising contract, or further lower the publication costs of the newsletter.

So now, once again we have a local paper, "The Hyattsville Life & Times."

Now this newpaper is not universally loved.  It has its legitimate critics: a few of them very fierce.  Some of the volunteer writers have been accused of being administration-friendly (we know what a sin that can be).  Councilmembers have been known to regularly offer submissions.  Occasional editorial missteps and glitches have occurred as the paper develops: in an election issue, one candidate profile got dissimilar treatment from the rest and another was omitted due to factors disputed by the parties.  Conspiracy or volunteer overload? I don't know the answer, or think it makes a huge difference one way or the other ( for legal reasons our municipal newsletter won't touch candidate profiles and statements). Since the newspaper is publishing interesting profiles of otherwise unknown residents and documenting life in Hyattsville in a way no one else does, the volunteerism & dedication is admirable, whatever warts may or may not be present in the paper as a whole. 

Interestingly, because of their antipathy to the initial tone of the paper, some community members have refused to contribute as volunteers to provide content and submission material: as they don't want to be "associated" with the paper.  A  Catch Twenty -Two of sorts: since some critics won't offer an opposing point of view, it doesn't appear to emerge in the paper's forum.  So: for good or ill, that's what's happening to the south & west in my fair, but ever-expanding hamlet.

I'm interested to see how Riverdale Park resolves its newsletter/paper issue.  My family has many friends in your town, and I go way back with some of your residents and leaders.  I think that Hyattsville and Riverdale Park have many common interests and need to work more closely together as the inner beltway develops further and revitalization opportunities emerge.  I hope your list and newsletter successfully capture the essence of your Town's unique and treasured character, and wish you success in endeavoring to do so.

Regards,
Stuart Eisenberg

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: bruce.wernek at mindspring.com 
  To: Gerard Kiernan ; TownTalk at riverdale-park.org 
  Cc: Kenneth Webb ; msnovella19 at aol.com ; lawrencetaylor at mris.com ; msmarydon at yahoo.com 
  Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 9:44 AM
  Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] My proposal to repeal the Town Crier section of the Code

  All

  I think Gerry has the right idea.  Since the Town funds the Crier they should have oversight by default.  By repealing Chapter 3, they will be able to direct the editor (who works for them, after all they pay him don't they) to put whatever they want into the Crier.  Since the Mayor and the folks on the council work for us, we let them know what we want in the Crier and everybody is happy.

  Bruce

  -----Original Message----- 
  From: Gerard Kiernan 
  Sent: Dec 1, 2005 7:05 PM 
  To: TownTalk at riverdale-park.org 
  Cc: Kenneth Webb , msnovella19 at aol.com, lawrencetaylor at mris.com, msmarydon at yahoo.com 
  Subject: [RP TownTalk] My proposal to repeal the Town Crier section of the Code 

  Dear Town Talkers, 

  I would like to shed some light on the issue of repealing the newsletter ordinance from the town code.  Below you will find the resolution I intend to propose at an upcoming meeting of the town council. Let me explain the background of it and why I am proposing this course of action.  

  First, did you know that Riverdale Park is the only municipal government in Maryland to have a law defining the operation of its town newsletter?  The staff at the Maryland Municipal League was amazed to hear that we had such a law, when I called to ask if anyone else had one. Many officials of other towns when asked about this topic showed a similar bewilderment. Also, the Town Crier was published for many decades without this law, which was only passed in 2001.

  Clearly, I would not be seeking the repeal of this law had it worked out well in practice.  The very reason for the existence of the Crier is to allow the town government to effectively communicate with residents. You elect a mayor and council to work on your behalf and part of doing that effectively is communicating town policies and actions to the community. Can you depend on that occurring if the mayor and council CANNOT exercise authority over the Crier?  Chapter 3 forbids any elected official to "direct" the editor or publisher (the town administrator functions as the publisher) about ANYTHING regarding the Crier.  

  Some of the ways the former editor has used Chapter 3 to ignore stated town policy over the last six months include:
  . Refusing to stay within budget (and apparently feeling no need to come to the council to request additional funding).
  . Refusing to include any information in Spanish<while simultaneously expanding the size of the Crier.
  . Refusing to include advertising for the Riverdale Farmer¹s Market, which is funded by an entirely separate account from that which funds the Crier. 

  Because of the wording of the Chapter, the Mayor is prohibited from including the Crier in his annual performance review of the Town Administrator. The publisher does not seem to be giving appropriate oversight, but the Mayor can't do anything about it.

  When this issue was first raised several months ago, Mary Donaldson introduced a measure to just repeal the sentence denying the mayor and council oversight. It failed by one vote, but the two votes against change had first asked to table the motion for further study.  The Mayor mistakenly ruled that the matter could not be tabled after a vote was underway, so the measure failed (one person abstained thereby denying the 4 votes needed for passage). I therefore felt that the three votes for against immediate action actually wanted more time to study the issue and gather information.  

  Here is the current version of the resolution that I plan to introduce. Since a resolution must be published in a newspaper of general circulation before it is voted on, and because there is no regular Town Crier in January, and because a resolution must be voted on within 60 days of its introduction, I may hold it to January to introduce and vote on it in February.  

  Ordinance Resolution 2005-OR-xx

  Repeal of Chapter 3 of the Code of the Town of Riverdale Park

  Whereas, the Town of Riverdale Park is the only municipality in the State of Maryland to have Code section defining the operation of its newsletter, and 

  Whereas, Chapter 3 of the Code of the Town of Riverdale Park limits the powers of the Town Council to provide Community Services as enumerated in § 302 of the Charter of Riverdale Park, and 

  Whereas, Chapter 3 of the Code of Riverdale Park limits the powers of the Mayor as chief executive and administrative officer as defined in § 404 of the Charter of Riverdale Park,

  Therefore, be it resolved that Chapter 3 of the Code of Riverdale Park,  "Town Crier or Newsletter", be repealed in its entirety.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  TownTalk mailing list
  To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
  TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org is for automated subscription processing only
  http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/
  towntalk_riverdale-park.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.10/189 - Release Date: 11/30/2005
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20051202/cf66f945/attachment-0003.html>