Two Civic Lessons that Tell the True Tale of Our Kirkwood

The tragic events of February 7th brought our small community into the world of the nation’s sensationalism driven, 24-hours-a-day “news cycle.” We saw the national press, the regional press and even the local press give their impressions of our town. Some was good and fair reporting. Some simply was not.

The most disappointing aspect of these last few months of media coverage has been the editorials from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Webster-Kirkwood Times and now the Kirkwood Call, the Kirkwood High School newspaper. Reading their editorials chime in on our April city election and our at-large city council system showed how little our area professional journalists and budding journalists have an ability to take a fair and accurate look at Kirkwood.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial page from March 3, 2008 entitled, “A Long Time Healing” so drastically missed the mark. The Kirkwood Call’s recent editorial page from their group of journalists in-training did the same by simply parroting the distorted view of the trained professionals at the Post. Their uninformed and baseless demand that Art McDonnell resign if he was elected Mayor proves what little they know about how our or any other city government actually works. The Post claimed to be speaking out for those who feel like “outsiders” or claim to be “disenfranchised” in Kirkwood’s political arena. The Call attempted to speak for the entire community. Yet, both of their demands would have once again taken away the city council’s ability to have a quorum and conduct business. This would have further stifled the regular functioning of our community’s legislative body that has taken place as a result of Council Member Joe Godi’s illness and the tragic loss of Council Member Connie Karr and Council Member Michael Lynch. For Art McDonnell to resign if elected Mayor in a critical time like this would be both irresponsible and ridiculous. In addition, the Post and now the Call editors missed the mark by never making a single demand of those who claim to be the “outsiders” or the “disenfranchised” in Kirkwood’s political arena. They never offered this as an opportunity for Kirkwoodians to rally around their surviving City Council members to further the healing in our community. This only further emphasizes their failure to take a fair and accurate look at Kirkwood in their editorials.

The Webster-Kirkwood Times editorial by Don “Scoop” Corrigan did no better. He blatantly ignored so many facts that are readily available to him when he tried to dig up the bone of contention of a ward system for Kirkwood. These issues are dealt in this blog with my postings “What is the name of Scoop's dog in Kirkwood?” and “What is a "mandate" at the Times Newspapers?” His editorial is equally both irresponsible and ridiculous. Ward systems in St. Louis County do not produce any more of the attributes he claimed they do in his editorial when compared to the three at-large systems in St. Louis County. The election data speaks for itself. All he simply had to do was look at his own ward in Sunset Hills.

After such irresponsible and ridiculous editorials, I have to wonder if there is hope for the trained professionals at the Post or the Times. But, maybe the budding journalists at the Kirkwood Call have a chance to figure out how to bring a fair and accurate look at an issue with their editorial page. What all three of these journalistic bodies need is to have their editors take some lessons in Civics.

The necessary re-training of these three sets of editors should have included attending the last two Kirkwood City Council meetings. Those who attended the April 17th and the April 24th City Council meetings saw the high level of public service that we have been blessed to have in this community. These last two meetings are two great real life Civics lessons that tell the true tale of our Kirkwood.

On April 17th we saw Mayor Mike Swoboda defy the odds, work past the near fatal injuries he received on February 7th and fulfill his duty by attending his final council meeting of his 8 year administration. It is the crowning testimony to his many years of hard work and determination to give back to our community by serving as a City Council member and as our Mayor. These many years of service fly in the face of those who try to claim the “outsiders” or the “disenfranchised” are held back by some “hidden agenda” by an “old guard establishment.” Mike Swoboda has never been an “old guard establishment” man. Yet, he provided over these years a message, a platform and a campaign with corresponding actions that surely appealed to Kirkwood voters. The proof is in the number of times he was re-elected to serve. The only thing Mike has in common with any “old guard establishment” is his self-sacrificing and courageous actions on this night were the epitome of the high level of public service that we have been blessed to have from so many in this community.

On April 24th we saw our new Mayor, a re-elected member and two new members be sworn in to establish our new City Council. The voters of Kirkwood spoke and selected who they wanted to lead our community on April 8th despite the caterwauling of a select few demanding a delay of the election. This newly formed group of the same “disenfranchised” residents found a very willing local, regional and even national press to propagate their message. It is clear from the turnout and the results, however, that the vast majority of voters know who they wanted to lead our community through these times of healing and rebuilding in Kirkwood. Fortunately, our new Mayor and our newly formed City Council acted in the best interests of the community of Kirkwood as a whole. The Mayor did not resign and no one on the Council demanded his resignation. Not even the new City Council member the “disenfranchised” publicly backed, Gina Jaksetic. Yet, we saw all of the members of the City Council, but especially our new Mayor Art McDonnell make a commitment to reach out to those who claim to be the “outsiders” or the “disenfranchised.” Funny thing was I did not see any of the leaders of the supposed “outsiders” or “disenfranchised” at the meeting. How can they now realistically claim to be “Kirkwood Citizens Coming Together for a Bright Future?”

What can be learned from these two great real life Civics lessons that tell the true tale of our Kirkwood?

First and foremost, our political and election system in Kirkwood is not broken or flawed as some in the press and a select few of Kirkwood residents like to claim. It has served and continues to serve our community well.

Secondly, the editors at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Webster-Kirkwood Times and the Kirkwood Call have a lot to learn about the community of Kirkwood before they attempt any more editorials. They have not served their profession well.

Now is your chance to give your answer to:

What can be learned from these two great real life Civics lessons that tell the true tale of our Kirkwood?

Just click on the comment link below.

What is the name of Scoop's dog in Kirkwood?

On February 29, 2008 the Webster-Kirkwood Times’ ran an editorial from Editor-In-Chief Don “Scoop” Corrigan entitled “Lessons From A Class Long-Ago.” This editorial dealt with the some of the issues former City Council member Connie Karr talked about when she spoke to one of Scoop’s journalism classes at Webster University just prior to the tragedy of February 7, 2008. He quoted Mrs. Karr as saying,

"Everyone deserves a seat at the table in a democracy; it is part of the mission of journalists to make sure that those seats are available."

Scoop went on to say,

“Karr said her belief that everyone deserves a seat at the table inspired her to fight for a ward system in her city, instead of electing representatives at large. She said she regretted "taking on the fight like gangbusters," instead of taking time to convince voters about the advantages of wards.

After the carnage at Kirkwood City Hall, students asked if wards would have made a difference: Would two aldermen from southeast Kirkwood been able to better negotiate the grievances of an outraged resident? Would they have interceded to rein in an unruly resident, before the situation spun out of control?

We will never know the answers to these questions. Folks in Kirkwood and Webster Groves defend at-large elections as appropriate because the towns are too small and close-knit for wards. Maybe. Then are wards wrong for even smaller towns like Des Peres, Crestwood and Sunset Hills?”

I found Scoop’s rehashing of the ward debate after the tragedy as incredibly ignorant and outrageously insensitive. I clearly remember him in a previous editorial regarding the K-Fair 2003 ward proposal describing it as an “intense battle.” Scoop said in that previous editorial, “There's a lot of passion on both sides of this contentious issue, but I'm sorry, I just don't feel it.”

On March 4, 2008, I sent an email entitled ““Uninformed and Callous” to Scoop, other area journalists and several Kirkwood civic leaders questioning the purpose of his editorial. I said,

“Did I read an editorial trying to bring healing to the citizens of Kirkwood? Did I read an editorial trying to bring the citizens of Kirkwood together? Did I read an editorial pointing our community in a positive and productive direction?

No. Why would you ever want to do that at a time like this?

Instead you decide to do a piece that wants to rehash the most contentious issue of at least the past decade in Kirkwood. You want to pick up the 15-year-old wedge of contention of a ward proposal and drive it once again into our community. Yes, the ward issue and its present backers got their start in your paper all the way back to the “Robinson Woods/Craig Forrest Lane” issue in 1992.

Might I suggest before you write another editorial on wards that you at least pretend to be a journalist and do a little factual research. It would keep you from proving your ignorance of election results can only be out done by your insensitivity toward a community trying to heal.”

Ever since that editorial, I have heard a few Kirkwoodians parroting Scoop’s words at different meetings I have attended around town. I heard a call for a ward system during citizen’s comments at a City Council meeting. I heard a call for wards from a Mayoral write-in candidate at the Meacham Park Candidate forum. I heard wards offered as a solution by a small group discussion participant at a recent “Community for Understanding and Healing” meeting.

It is interesting how this all seems to “just happen” in Kirkwood. Or does it really “just happen?”

It is interesting how Scoop, the trained journalist who trains budding journalists, wants our community to ignore the fact that during the K-Fair 2003 ward proposal the issue of wards was researched and debated in our community for almost a year. It is interesting how Scoop, the editor of our "Hometown Newspaper," wants our community to ignore the fact that K-Fair’s 2003 ward proposal was soundly defeated 3.2-to-1 by the voters of Kirkwood. It is interesting how Scoop, the trained journalist, wants our community to ignore the facts regarding the election data of the ward community he lives and votes in.

What would drive a trained journalist talking about his class of budding journalists to ignore these three key facts, much less a myriad of other facts that contradict the statements made in his editorial about wards?

I do not have an answer to that question.

Clearly, though Scoop has gone out of his way with his editorial to get the ball rolling toward yet another “contentious” ward proposal in our community. We need, therefore, to call into question that previously mentioned editorial Scoop wrote regarding the K-Fair ward proposal back in 2003.

It was from July 25, 2003. It was artfully entitled, “No Dog In That Fight.”

Scoop said in that editorial,

“Nevertheless, skeptics abound -- they always know better. They call convinced that the latest coverage is biased. I will sometimes respond with: ‘Hey, I don't even have a dog in that fight.’ This means I just don't have a strong opinion one way the other.”

Well Scoop … one thing is for sure about the ward issue in Kirkwood … you can no longer claim “No Dog In That Fight” anymore. You have gone out of your way to have your dog dig up that bone of contention in Kirkwood.

So, what is the name of Scoop’s dog in Kirkwood?



Please take a moment and give your best guess of what is the name of Scoop’s dog in Kirkwood. Just click on the “Comments” link below. If your comment is just a guess of a name it can be totally anonymous. If it is a lengthier comment, then please abide by the posting policy and give your name.

What is a "mandate" at the Times Newspapers?

It is interesting to note in one of the Times publications, the South County Times, that Mr. Svoboda's impressive win of Sunset Hills’ Mayoral race this last week is reported as a "mandate" from the people. The count was 1,248 to 574. I do not think anyone with any political sense could deny that a 2.1-to-1 victory has the true ring of a "mandate." Especially since with usually over 6,000 registered voters in Sunset Hills, the community had around a 30% voter turnout.

But, for some bizarre and unknown reason that concept of a “mandate” is not the case in the Webster-Kirkwood Times.

Kirkwood voters in November 2003 even more soundly defeated a ward proposal 3.2-to-1. The facts are 5,405 Kirkwoodians said "NO" to wards while only 1,667 said "YES" with a turnout of over 36% of voters.

Sounds like an even greater “mandate” to me. This is even more the case given the fact that the issue was researched and debated in Kirkwood for an entire year. Plus, the community as a whole spent over $50,000 campaigning and voting on the issue.

Yet, on February 29, 2008 the Times Editor-In-Chief and a Sunset Hills resident, Don "Scoop" Corrigan wrote an editorial pushing for wards in the community of Kirkwood.

I know it is hard to believe, but in a time of our community trying to heal from the unbelievable tragedy of February 7th, Scoop’s editorial brilliance is to rehash the 15-year-old bone of contention his newspaper has fostered in Kirkwood.

He ended his callous and uninformed editorial by saying,

“Folks in Kirkwood and Webster Groves defend at-large elections as appropriate because the towns are too small and close-knit for wards. Maybe. Then are wards wrong for even smaller towns like Des Peres, Crestwood and Sunset Hills?”

The question in our community is not about if wards are right or wrong as Scoop tries to present. This is not the question that any community would need to answer when deciding the issue. It is a question of which is better for our community.

The facts are the voters of Kirkwood clearly gave a “mandate.” In November 2003 voters once again overwhelmingly chose ... to use the better at-large system ... to elect our City Council. Facts Scoop chose to deny for some bizarre and unknown reason.

So, the question that needs to be asked of the Times…

What is a "mandate" Scoop?


Post your own thoughts on the issue by clicking the "Comments" link below:

Four Questions For A Better Kirkwood

The Webster-Kirkwood Times for some reason decided not to print my Mailbag Letter submission below.

I was responding to Mr. Dick Reeves Mailbag letter from April 4, 2008 entitled "Three Suggestions For A Better Kirkwood." I do not know why the Times only wants to give one point of view, but the citizens of Kirkwood still need to read a response to Mr. Reeves "Suggestions." I hope our community will be able to get a response from Mr. Reeves to these questions. I will gladly post them for all to see.

It is time to bring the dialogue in the community back to reality rather than the just getting only the viewpoint of the same group of residents in Kirkwood who now go by the name "Kirkwood Citizens Coming Together For A Bright Future."


=============================================================


Four Questions For A Better Kirkwood

I am writing in response to Mr. Dick Reeves’ letter “Three Suggestions For A Better Kirkwood.” Here are 4 questions it would “behoove” Mr. Reeves to answer in his alleged quest for “A Better Kirkwood.”

1. When in all the decades you have lived in “Dear Ole Kirkwood” have you ever done anything positive, concrete and productive to deal with the “concerns of the residents of Meacham Park?” Your “suggestion” would carry much more weight if your shoulder was to the plow doing and having done what you want others to do to “benefit the entire Kirkwood family.”

2. Could you please provide a list of all the former Kirkwood residents who have been “forced to move from their homes” by “gigantic ‘McMansions?’” I would like to see their name, former address, the original purchase price and selling price of the home, in addtion a detailed description of exactly how the “McMansions” surrounding the house accomplished forcing the owner out. To make the claim that people should “feel and be secure in their homes” you must have documented proof of this phenomenon.

3. Why do you want the new City Council to violate the will of the people of “Dear Ole Kirkwood” and set aside their vote regarding curbside recycling? In April, 2004 our responsive City Council put this question before the people. Kirkwoodians declared by a margin of over 2.8 to 1 that we did not want curbside recycling. Now all of a sudden you want to be undemocratic and throw that vote away!

4. Have you “resolved” to “treat all people everywhere with respect, decency and kindness” like you suggested at the end of your letter? Your insulting and outrageous comments attacking a City Staff member who is a fellow Kirkwoodian at the March 6th City Council meeting, (which were appropriately stopped by Deputy Mayor Griffin), lacked all three of these attributes.


=============================================================

Post your own thoughts on the issue by clicking the "Comments" link below: