The ghost of Martha Long reports on proposed performing arts center

GREENSBORO, NC -- The News & Record, and Greensboro at large, would benefit greatly from putting a reporter on the city government beat who doesn't approach her job as if she's writing a society column. A little skepticism and inquisitiveness is sorely needed and sorely lacking.

From an article today that claims to report "everything you need to know" about the proposed performing arts center:

"The center will be on a block of North Elm Street downtown. City officials determined this spot was better than other options because it allowed for paid parking spaces."

The community went through a long and well publicized process of public meetings, charettes and consultations involving hundreds of volunteers from across the city assembled into a task force to study, evaluate and make recommendations for a proposed arts center. This was done through the Community Foundation of Greensboro at the official charge of and with financial support, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, from the Greensboro City Council.

The task force studied several possible locations including the one now deemed best by—according to the News & Record—unnamed "city staff," and they recommended a different site: The old YWCA location. It was with this imprimatur of an inclusive process and well considered recommendation that City Council approved a pledge of financial support and under which assumption private donors made contributions to the effort and opinion writers gave their support.

Now, without explanation, the conclusions of the community have been tossed by the wayside in favor of the recommendations of anonymous "city staff."

Thus there are thee big gaping holes in the N&R's "everything you need to know" story:

1. What was the genesis for "city staff" ignoring the recommendations of the volunteers of the Community Foundation task force? At whose direction did this effort begin and why?
2. The story mentions speculative expectations for increased revenue from premium parking; what is the very real and empirically measurable loss from taking a block of private property off the tax rolls and the loss of the existing city-owned public parking already on the site?
3. Who owns the property "city staff" is proposing be purchased at this new location? Not just the corporate entities, but the stockholders. 

I have little confidence the local media will answer these questions and every expectation City Council will ignore them too on its way to approving this as they make the year-long process undertaken by community volunteers the butt of a big joke.

Too bad Martha Long won't be around to report on the inaugural gala. We'll have the next best thing though.