Flow Job To the Editor, While I won't take the time to point out all the inaccuracies in Jim Wright's "Pumping Money" (Tucson Weekly, April 2), I will point out one glaring error. Wright incorrectly reported that I said it wasn't the Tucson City Council's fault that water rates were going to rise, and that if the public wanted to blame someone, it should look to the people responsible for Proposition 200 and "the people who voted for it." At no time did I state that the people who voted for Proposition 200 were to blame for the upcoming water rate increase. This same statement was also incorrectly reported in The Arizona Daily Star; however, realizing it erred, it printed a retraction the next day. I would expect the same level of professionalism from the Tucson Weekly. It is my opinion that the supporters of Proposition 200 misrepresented the facts to the voters. I have previously indicated that if members of the public wanted to place blame for rate increases, they should call Bob Beaudry, who financed Proposition 200, and Terry Pollock, who is employed by Beaudry and who choreographed its passage. The upcoming rate increase is not the fault of the people who voted for Proposition 200. They were misinformed. I hope now, after the voters have the facts, action to repeal this useless and wasteful proposition will be taken. --Michael J. Crawford Ward 3 Councilmember On The Stick To the Editor, For the love of God, will you embittered Tucson Weekly staffers get the stick--nay, the telephone pole--out of your asses? I used to be an avid reader of The Weekly, and everytime I make a pilgrimage home to Southern Arizona I exercise the ritual of picking up a Weekly and absorbing it over a beer at the Shanty, a Bear-Down-style burro at Sanchez Burrito Company or a cup of joe at Bentley's. But lately I can't get the bad taste out of my mouth after reading your rag. I can't quite identify this taste, but it's distinctively bitter. Week after week I read a destructive diatribe about how much Tucson and its various urban fauna are to be detested, and how bad life in Tucson has become. Coming from my perspective--I'm a Naked Pueblo native stuck unhappily living in the Great State of Maricopa--Baja Arizona has so much more going for it than does the rest of the state. Does the city have its problems? Is the community peppered with various numb-skulls and ne'er-do-wells? Of course. But since when did The Weekly become the custodian of the community conscience? What did the power structure in Tucson do to The Weekly staff to make you all so incapable of coping? You don't have the market cornered on the truth of what's really going on in our halls of government and over at Tucson Newspapers, Inc. Hell, half of the time you barely have a toe-hold on the truth. And you're no closer to perfect than those whom you blister on your pages. And can someone please explain where a two-bit, ad-crammed, mistake-riddled, laughing stock of a bird-cage liner like The Weekly gets off criticizing the Star and the Citizen over their lack of journalistic cojones? True, they're not great papers, but they don't compensate for their lack of quality by going negative and ripping on the competition. Your Skinny piece "This Just In" (Tucson Weekly, May 2) was pitiful. Please tell me you're capable of something--anything--better than that. I couldn't finish the tired tirade. Could there be a touch of jealousy in your far more successful big sisters? After all, your pages are just as crammed with advertisements, and your coverage of government, while often right on the mark when characterizing the butt-headed nature of our elected officials, is often so filled with factual mistakes, so given to playing fast and loose with the factual foundation of your stories, that you blow your credibility and fail to make your point stick. One is left with the impression that you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Over the past 10 years, looking at The Weekly's staff box has explained a lot. It's a virtual who's who of local news ink flunkies who either washed out of the Star or Citizen, or who worked at the Arizona Daily Wildcat but couldn't get anyone else to hire them but The Weekly. The one grand exception is Joe Forkan, one of the best talents to come out of the Wildcat, whose talents seem somehow out of place on your pages, and whose company you haven't earned. Jim Nintzel is your senior editor? I worked with Jim at the Wildcat. He was assigned to be the Wildcat's food critic because he wasn't qualified to do anything else. His one claim to fame was that he nearly drew a libel suit from a review of Rosie's Cantina over his review of the dog food they called Mexican food there. True, the food was indeed bad, the suit never was filed, and the restaurant was closed down after its owner was arrested for trying to bomb archrival Two Pesos. But administering a public horse-whipping to this pitiful restaurant, while perhaps necessary in order to warn unsuspecting diners, is not exactly fodder for a career in journalism. Though his style seems a good match for The Weekly. The point is, his abilities were subpar even for the Wildcat, and that's saying a lot. I know--I worked there for five long years. And if my memory serves, didn't Jim start out as circulation manager at The Weekly? Hey, if that's not the fast track to honing insightful, biting political commentary, I don't know what is. Guys, you're living in a very laid-back city with great sunsets, great food, a great mix of people, and a host of quirks that your paper used to know how to report with the right mix of outrage, detached amusement, and informativeness. Unclench, for the love of God. You're just no fun anymore. And even more deadly to a news organization--you're taken seriously by exactly no one. --Paul G. Allvin Tempe Jim Nintzel responds: Paul, thanks for recapping the high points of my career! For what it's worth, the owner of Rosie's actually threatened to pull his ads, not sue for libel, although I'm hardly surprised you don't draw a distinction between the two. After all, you're the guy who thinks we should be covering great sunsets and great food instead of politicians, developers and the media. God help us all if anyone ever lets you near a news desk again. As far as being "custodian of the community conscience," that's the responsibility of any self-respecting paper. Or have you forgotten the old chestnut about comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable? Oh, and by the way, Paul, if you're going to belittle someone's writing talent, try to avoid words like "informativeness" and "distinctively bitter." It doesn't help your case. And regarding my past positions at The Weekly, what can I say? Some of us move on and develop careers, while others stay at the school paper for five years and then move to--shudder--Tempe. We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com

		© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth