Daily Texan Staff
An anti-light-rail group's first television spot has drawn harsh criticism, as well as possible legal action just a day after its premier.
Reclaim Our Allocated Dollars, a local anti-light-rail group, debuted their commercial with less than a week away from the Nov. 7 election that will decide the fate of the potential fixed-rail system in Austin.
The 30-second spot, which aired Monday, criticized the light-rail referendum, alleging that a rail system in Austin would not reduce congestion and would cost tax payers billions of dollars.
"Vote No on Light Rail, costs too much, does too little," the ad says.
Representatives from Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce, the Capital Metro Board of Directors and Get Austin Moving, a local pro-rail group, criticized the commercial, calling it misleading and accusing ROAD of distorting quotes and figures for their benefit.
"After running three campaigns in this town, I've never seen an ad this misleading," said Barbara Rush, campaign manager for Get Austin Moving. "The things they are saying are simply not true."
Rail advocates, like Rush, criticized ROAD's use of an Austin American-Statesman headline in the commercial reading "Capital Metro: Under FBI Investigation" with Oct. 8, 2000, placed at the bottom of the screen as a source date. However, the headline was printed in 1997.
City councilman and Capital Metro board member Daryl Slusher said the headline was very damaging and misleading because it was printed before Capital Metro experienced improvements, such as several staff and administrative changes following the 1997 legislative session.
"The agency [Capital Metro] was dysfunctional, and I wouldn't have even suggested a rail program," Slusher said. "But now, if you look at the perfect federal report card we received and the way we stay under our budget, you can tell we're ready."
Kathy Pilmore, executive director for ROAD, said the group will stick by their commercial but said they will add the correct date of the headline to avoid any confusion.
Pilmore said the October 2000 date refers to the narrator saying that there is an on-going investigation, not the Statesman article.
"They can call it whatever they want, but it's all based on facts," Pilmore said. "The change will only be for clarification."
Regardless of Pilmore's explanation, the Austin American -Statesman contacted ROAD about their use of the headline in the commercial, warning that it was copyright infringement, and the paper's content would be protected, Pilmore said.
Arnold Garcia Jr., the Statesman's editorial-page editor, said the paper has contacted their lawyers and is currently drafting another letter to ROAD.
"We can't be content police and control whether what we print is used out of context, but what we print is our property," Garcia said. "We view this as protecting our property."
Be the first to comment on this article!