Editor's note: The following is a response to this column, which was written in response to this piece, titled “Eddie, Eddie, Pay Attention.”

***

Fernie, Fernie, your partisanship has blinded you.

At NPT, we call it like we see it. We're not part of any political agenda, unlike you, who made no bones of bringing city Rep. Eddie Holguin on your radio show at least once a week, almost blindly parroting the angry callers on any issue, as long as it reflected poorly on the current City Council majority, and bleating for a recall election.

Bleating? Yes, as a lawyer, you know the meaning of words. I could have picked a different word, but this is the style in which you chose to engage. You seem intent on turning David Crowder's column into something it wasn't -- a political attack -- and your use of words is such that you ought to look in the mirror and wonder who it is relying on the very thing you're complaining about. You fail to address the substance of Crowder's piece, in favor of calling us names. Weak, Fernie. I thought you had more than that. Maybe you're the apple falling from the El Paso Forum tree.

In regards to the big issues confronting the city, NPT has examined the Regional Mobility Authority, the Downtown Plan, the public corruption case, growth and development issues, and, or course, the stormwater utility. The range of writers, ideas and issues in NPT is unmatched. In fact, I've heard you throw down some heady praise for us, which was much appreciated, because I would have loved to publish more of your writings in NPT.

Crowder set out to describe his observations about Eddie's failure to do homework on policy issues. Mistrust is not a policy. If a city representative continually makes assertions that turn out to be untrue, and worse, that easily could have been verified before making the assertion, it points to a lack of study at best, demagoguery at worst.

I, like Crowder, like Eddie personally. And I believe he has a legitimate concern about being out of the policy loop and in the minority.

I also believe he would be far more effective if he were able to verify facts before going on the attack.

Here's a personal example: I was on the radio and said that I saw a set of plans for the stormwater utility to focus future drainage infrastructure on areas that Eddie represents. Eddie called and said, stop telling people that, it's not true, they're not spending any money there. I replied that I did not say the utility was spending money there, but that EPWU CEO Ed Archuleta had told me it planned to. Eddie repeated his first statement, and we went around a few times.

If Eddie has his doubts the PSB will carry out the plans I saw and mentioned, fair enough. Let's figure out what those plans are, and then hold the PSB to the plans.

But to call me and start arguing as a knee jerk response to something I didn't say does not advance the interests of this community.

Because it is a community, and whether Eddie is in the minority, or if things swing the other way in the next round of elections and he's suddenly leading a majority, everyone has to work together.

And it sure helps to do the homework.

That's not too much to ask of a city representative, or, as the case may be, of a bleating partisan whose feelings got hurt.