Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

Less Is More

As I write, the state primary and county general elections are in full swing, and candidates on the August 2nd ballot are making a last-ditch effort to get out the vote.

There are 446,747 active registered voters and another 150,000 inactive but eligible voters assigned to 200 or so precincts in Shelby County. Unfortunately, and even with the impetus in the suburbs for municipal school referenda, a relatively low percentage of that number is expected to go to the polls to vote.  

Voting is a constitutional right and a civic duty, but the age-old ward-and-precinct model has become a hindrance to it. In all 50 states, there are more than 3,000 counties and approximately 13,000 voting districts, many of them, like our own, grappling with voting issues that have become a nightmare.

On July 25th, following a committee meeting at the Shelby County Board of Commissioners, I was engaged in a lunchtime chat with two fellow county commissioners about the local primary races and the upcoming presidential race in November, and a thought occurred to me.

Consider this: I think the democratic process could still work — and work perhaps more effectively and efficiently — with just one-fourth of Shelby County’s current 200-odd precincts in operation during election cycles.

For all I know, there might be statutes in place to prevent it from happening. But imagine, if you will, perhaps 50 or so “super precincts,” geographically distributed in the way that early-voting venues are now. That number is large enough to making voting accessible to people living anywhere. Voters could cast their ballots at the super precinct nearest their home or at any of the super precincts scattered evenly throughout the county. 

As the experience of early voting has taught us, the technology exists to load a ballot from anywhere in the county on any voting machine regardless of the voting location. As of this week, more than 60,000 people had early-voted, many of them outside their assigned ward and precinct. Increasingly, people prefer to early-vote, and the convenience of that process is one reason.

The electorate today is much more mobile than it was when wards and precincts were first employed. A model that has been in operation since the 1800s has become cumbersome. It is a dinosaur of sorts, and not many people know their ward and precinct anyway.

Reducing the number of precincts would:

• Save the government money by reducing the cost of poll workers.

• Make voting convenient and more manageable for a mobile population.

• Allow for more efficiency with fewer human errors.

• Reassure voters who may find the current process tainted and troublesome.

For any business, sometimes it’s necessary to revamp the operation if the existing business model is not effective in both creating new business and keeping the current clientele happy. A businessman myself, I am a proponent of good customer service and providing backup procedures to avoid any foul-ups.

Voters are customers too, and they want a foolproof system to make their trek to the poll less taxing and trouble-free. No system is foolproof, but any system can be adjusted to make voting less problematic.

My party, the Republican Party, now has control of the Shelby County Election Commission. Republicans have long advocated open, free, and fair elections, and commission chairman Robert Meyers, I feel, fully intends to “depoliticize” the election commission and to reinforce confidence in the election process.

But a number of well-publicized glitches have undermined that confidence, as has the impression that some members of the election commission, in both parties, are concerned with promoting partisan ideals. Both factors have caused people at large to question the integrity of their elections.

A significant and systemic reduction of ward and precincts may be one answer to righting the wrongs that confront the system and to breaking down barriers between us. During early voting, it struck me that I might have been the only white guy who voted that day at Dave Wells Community Center, within a historically black precinct area in North Memphis.

Along with convenience, I gained a sense of belonging to a larger public. That by itself would be worth voting for.

Brent Taylor is a former member of the city council and an interim member of the Shelby County Board of Commissioners.

Categories
News News Feature

CITY BEAT

ROAD WARRIORS

Transportation master planning is the process by which Memphis delays the onset of projects it badly needs while advancing projects it doesn’t need at all.

At least that’s the way it seems sometimes. While drivers stuck in traffic jams await a new or expanded road through Shelby Farms, planning is moving along on a light rail line from downtown to the airport that could cost $400 million.

Memphis is nationally famous for the road it didn’t build, Interstate 40 through Overton Park and Midtown. Some of the ramps and bridges currently being knocked down for the Midtown-Interstate 40 widening were built 35 years ago and never carried a single car.

More recently, roads helped put Shelby County in a financial bind because of their cost and because of the growth they encouraged in places like Cordova, Collierville, and Hickory Hill. So it’s worth keeping tabs on roads and the people who influence them, like the Memphis Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO).

In the big picture, Memphis is not doing badly, trafficwise.

“Our road system isn’t that congested yet,” MPO coordinator Carter Gray told board members this month. There is still a lot of “free flow,” and measures to alleviate traffic, like high-occupancy vehicle lanes, are lightly used. The trend is more people making longer commutes, and often doing it alone. But planners are looking 20 years down the road.

The creation of light-rail corridors is moving along, step by bureaucratic step, with every meeting of the MPO, defying the popular notion that government at every level is going broke. By 2026, the MPO and the Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA) envision a system that would spread from downtown to the airport, southeastern Shelby County, and well into DeSoto County.

“The basic premise of our plan,” says an MPO planning document, “is increased investment in transit to fund a new light-rail network to increase urban density along these corridors and in so doing prevent sprawl.”

The total cost of such a light-rail system would be well over $1 billion. Yet the combined population of Shelby County is projected to increase by a modest 22 percent by 2026, from 897,000 to 1.1 million. The federal government typically pays half of a project’s capital costs, with state and local governments paying the rest.

How can this be? Because the Memphis Area Transit Authority estimates that it will receive $800 million in dedicated funding over the next 20 years.

Meanwhile, getting a road built through Shelby Farms is still one tough nut. There may be no other area of government in which a handful of dedicated activists can have such influence over public policy. The Friends of Shelby Farms Ñ often represented at public meetings by Art Wolf, his wife and former city school board member Bert Wolf, and Laura Adams (Art Wolf’s daughter) Ñ has had a substantial impact on various plans to increase traffic through Shelby Farms.

They know the rules. At a board meeting of the MPO this month, speakers were limited to three minutes each in an effort to move things along. Art Wolf and another member of his group promptly donated their time to Bert Wolf, lest anyone cut her off.

Developers, on the other hand, are sometimes just another voice. Boyle Investment and its executive vice president Rusty Bloodworth are a prime example.

“It is critical to all of our tenants and residents in our developments, as well as the economic health of Shelby County, to have as many linkages into and through Shelby Farms with at least the number of lanes indicated in the current draft,” Bloodworth told road planners earlier this month.

That has been his stance for roughly 30 years. During that time, Boyle has built such developments as Century Center, Humphreys Center, and Regalia. But no new roads have been built through Shelby Farms.

The latest approach to widening Walnut Grove in and around Shelby Farms is to take it in segments, with the section between Interstate 240 and the Wolf River getting first attention. But the Friends of Shelby Farms are wise to the fact that whatever is done there will affect what is done in the park. Traffic will continue to pile up in front of Baptist Memorial Hospital for quite a while.

Categories
News

MLGW’S MORRIS GETS THE SACK

SPECIAL TO THE FLYER — After six years with Memphis Light Gas & Water, CEO Herman Morris was given his walking papers Monday morning. In a closed meeting with Memphis Mayor Willie Herenton and MLGW Board Chair Dr. James Netters, Morris was told he would not be re-appointed.

By Wednesday, Morris had only informed top staff he would be leaving.

City Councilman E.C. Jones, who heads up the Council’s General Services, Utilities and Communications committee said appointments – and non-renewals – are within the Mayor’s purview but pointed out that Christmas might not have been the best time to break the news.

“The only problem I have is maybe the timing,” Jones said. “But I realize the new term starts on January 1st and the Mayor does not have a lot of time to advise those people that he’s not going to reappoint them.”

Netters said the Mayor was complimentary in the Monday meeting, warning the two that the news might not be so well-received.

“It was such a shock to me,” said Netters, who also expressed concern over the future of the utility’s Board itself. Herenton told Netters he was still awaiting the results of a charter review before making a decision about the Board, but mentioned he had no one in mind to replace the current board members.

There are no official candidates to replace Morris either, although that has been the source of some political scuttlebutt, with some sources hinting that Roland McElrath, a former Memphis schools administrator is in the running.

Netters said during his 20-year tenure on the Board, he has been tapped to fill the top spot on an interim basis. But he said the Mayor hasn’t suggested that as a possibility in this instance, perhaps because of Netters’ own plans to retire within the first six months of 2004.

Herenton first turned up the heat on Morris at a December 2nd Council committee meeting. Councilmembers were debating a rate-hike, but the Mayor stole the show, decrying MLGW administration and hinting that change was in the wind.

(Darrell Phillips first broke this story on WMC-TV Action News Five. This version is expressly for the Flyer, courtesy of the station.)

Categories
Sports Sports Feature

ALL OVER BUT THE SHOUTING…

Two years ago, Dennis Freeland, editor of this newspaper from 1992 to 2000, passed away after a long, courageous battle against cancer. In addition to running the Flyer, Dennis also covered Memphis sports for the paper. His favorite “beat,” unquestionably, was Tiger football. So I hope readers will understand my catching him up here with recent developments:

Dear Dennis:

I hope you’re sitting down. Because you won’t believe what happened while you’ve been gone: the U of M actually had a winning football season. Not just a winning season: 9-4, if you can believe it, ending with a bowl game we actually won.

Remember how you always used to say that Memphis was at heart a football town, and that if the gridiron Tigers ever got their act together, the city would go wild? Well, they did, and it has. Tommy WestÕs is now a household name in these parts. I know that’ll bring a smile to your face, since from the first, you were TommyÕs biggest fan. “This new defensive coordinator, Ken,” I remember you telling me back in 1999, ÒheÕs the real deal. A winner.”

you always knew what you were talking

about, my friend. Better than most.

The next year, right after Rip Scherer was fired, you wrote a column entitled “The Case for Tommy West,” in which you pointed out that the University of Memphis had a rare opportunity to hire “a proven commodity” who “wants to stay at Memphis and see if he can see succeed where the past six head coaches have failed.”

The University, of course, paid no heed to your advice, and offered the job to then-Auburn assistant Noel Mazzone. Fortunately, Mazzone turned it down; the rest is history. When it came to Tiger football, you always knew what you were talking about, my friend. Better than most.

I remember an afternoon earlier that fall, when youÕd just come back to the office from practice, and you were hopping mad. The 2000 season, like so many before it, had started to disintegrate, and Rip Scherer’s coaching job was clearly on the line. “All season long I’ve been trying to understand why he won’t play this freshman quarterback from New Orleans,Ó you fumed. ÒDanny WimprineÕs the best theyÕve got, I’m telling you, and not playing him is gonna cost Rip his job. Wait and see.”

We didn’t have to wait long, Dennis; just a few weeks later, Scherer was gone. I only wish you could have seen Danny Wimprine holding up the MVP trophy at the New Orleans Bowl last week. Good things sometimes come to those who wait.

We all wish you could have waited with us, and been around to bring some common sense to this somewhat hysterical new Golden Era we’ve suddenly found ourselves in. You would not have let success go to your or our heads. “Near-perfect season?Ó you would have written when another local columnist used those words last week to describe 2003. ÒHow can you be “near-perfect” when you lose four games?”

I wish you could still go out for coffee with Coach West, and marvel together at the fact that heÕs gotten his mug on page one of the CA half a dozen times this past month. “Not like the bad old days, is it, Coach?” YouÕd both have a good laugh.

I also wish you could have been here to write this damn column for me this season, and brought a little more wit and a lot more savvy to bear upon this space. You would have written a detailed article about irony, about how the 1999 and 2000 teams Ð squads equally as good as this one, I suspect you would have insisted Ð lost eight games by a total of 20 points. ÒItÕs better to be lucky than good,Ó you would have written about these 2003 Tigers, Òand itÕs especially nice if you can be lucky and good.Ó

I know you would have waxed eloquent about the victory at Papa JohnÕs Stadium last month, when we beat the living “daylights” out of a highly- regarded Louisville team, 37-7. You would have called it Ð ahead of the famous 1996 UT game — the greatest victory in Tiger football history, I feel certain. It was that special a day.

And you would have loved to watch DeAngelo Williams weave his magic week in and week out, and, yes, of course, watching Danny Wimprine come of age. ÒThe next Bret Favre, I’m telling youÉÓ

And yes, we would have loved watching you write all about it. We miss you, Dennis. We always will. Go Tigers!

( Kenneth Neill is the publisher/CEO of Contemporary Media, Inc., the parent company of The Memphis Flyer.)

Categories
News News Feature

LESSON LEARNED

When I began my year as city council chairman, a colleague told me there would be two special days to cherish–my first day on the job and my last. I’m happy to be returning to the ranks in 2004, but there are some benefits to the chairman’s job.

You get a corner office at City Hall. You can take some unilateral actions (I got rid of cell phones and other council perks). As the public face of the council, you get more attention.

But there’s a more important benefit. My year as chairman taught me about the responsibility of leadership.

To lead, you have to

rise above narrow interests and look at the big picture.

When you’re a normal, garden-variety councilman you have relative freedom. You can position yourself against the council, act the role of “lone ranger”, vote “no” a lot. If you’re in the political minority, you can be content to represent your district. Stand on your principles and refuse to compromise. Being the “loyal opposition” can be fun.

The job of chairman is different. You must lead, and that requires persuading others to go along. Otherwise, things bog down and nothing gets accomplished. To lead, you have to rise above narrow interests and look at the big picture.

For the most part, the deliberations of the City Council are collegial and free from rancor. We try to express mutual respect. But there’s no denying the existence of factions. We’re divided by race, party, economics, interests, personality–just like the citizens we serve.

As chairman, you have to deal with the various factions. On each issue, the combination of forces may shift. The chairman has to negotiate, cajole, beg and plead to reach a consensus. And once you reach that consensus, you have to support it. No retreating to the comfort and freedom of being the loyal opposition. The responsibility of leadership requires that you find common ground, bring doubters into the fold, and assemble a majority of at least seven votes. That’s how you accomplish things for the city.

The process can be messy. Finding a compromise opens you up to criticism from both sides. Allies accuse you of abandoning your principles. But the responsibility of leadership includes flexibility and creativity. You work for the best deal you can get, consistent with your beliefs and your commitment to your constituents. Stalemate benefits no one.

Consider the case of Trent Lott, Republican senator from Mississippi and former Senate majority leader. Lott was known as a conservative’s conservative, but once he assumed the leadership position, his role changed. He moderated his language. He looked for compromise. He had a responsibility to get things done, not just stand on the sidelines and carp. And for his efforts he was accused of caving in to the Democrats. The current majority leader, Tennessee’s Bill Frist, is on the same hot seat. In the debate over the Medicare prescription drug bill, he drew fire from both ends of the political spectrum. The bill threatens Medicare, liberals cried. It costs too much, said conservatives. But Frist worked to achieve what could be achieved and pass a bill that fulfilled a promise to senior citizens. That’s the responsibility of leadership.

Working on a much smaller scale, on local instead of national issues, that’s the lesson I’ve learned as council chairman. Our legislative system depends on compromise. You can remain “pure” and above the fray. Or you can accept the responsibility, engage in give and take, and pass an ordinance that helps the people.

As 2003 ends, I’m passing on the responsibility to my successor and returning to the rank and file. What I’ve learned about leadership will make me a better, more-effective councilman. Leading the council is like herding cats–and I’ve got the scratches to prove it. But I’ve learned that people of good will, working together in an atmosphere of respect, can get a lot done to help their fellow citizens.

(Brent Taylor, who represents Cordova, was chairman of the Memphis city council for the last year.)

Categories
News News Feature

HOW IT LOOKS

Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

Lesson Learned

When I began my year as City Council chairman, a colleague told me there would be two special days to cherish — my first day on the job and my last. I’m happy to be returning to the ranks in 2004, but there are some benefits to the chairman’s job.

You get a corner office at City Hall. You can take some unilateral actions (I got rid of cell phones and other council perks). As the public face of the council, you get more attention.

But there’s a more important benefit. My year as chairman taught me about the responsibility of leadership.

When you’re a normal, garden-variety councilman you have relative freedom. You can position yourself against the council, act the role of “lone ranger,” vote “no” a lot. Being the “loyal opposition” can be fun.

The job of chairman is different. You must lead, and that requires persuading others to go along. Otherwise, things bog down, and nothing gets accomplished. To lead, you have to rise above narrow interests and look at the big picture.

For the most part, the deliberations of the City Council are collegial and free from rancor. But there’s no denying the existence of factions. We’re divided by race, party, economics, interests, personality — just like the citizens we serve.

On each issue, the combination of forces may shift. The chairman has to negotiate, cajole, beg, and plead to reach a consensus. And once you reach that consensus, you have to support it. No retreating to the comfort and freedom of being the loyal opposition. The responsibility of leadership requires that you find common ground, bring doubters into the fold, and assemble a majority of at least seven votes.

The process can be messy. Finding a compromise opens you up to criticism from both sides. Allies accuse you of abandoning your principles. But the responsibility of leadership includes flexibility and creativity. You work for the best deal you can get, consistent with your beliefs and your commitment to your constituents. Stalemate benefits no one.

Consider the case of Trent Lott, Republican senator from Mississippi and former Senate majority leader. Lott was known as a conservative’s conservative, but once he assumed the leadership position, his role changed. He moderated his language. He looked for compromise. He had a responsibility to get things done, not just stand on the sidelines and carp. And for his efforts he was accused of caving in to the Democrats. The current majority leader, Tennessee’s Bill Frist, is on the same hot seat. In the debate over the Medicare prescription drug bill, he drew fire from both ends of the political spectrum. But Frist worked to achieve what could be achieved and to pass a bill that fulfilled a promise to senior citizens. That’s the responsibility of leadership.

Working on a much smaller scale, on local instead of national issues, that’s the lesson I’ve learned as council chairman. Our legislative system depends on compromise. You can remain “pure” and above the fray. Or you can accept the responsibility, engage in give and take, and pass an ordinance that helps the people.

As 2003 ends, I’m passing on the responsibility to my successor and returning to the rank and file. What I’ve learned about leadership will make me a better, more effective councilman. Leading the council is like herding cats — and I’ve got the scratches to prove it. But I’ve learned that people of good will, working together in an atmosphere of respect, can get a lot done to help their fellow citizens.

Brent Taylor, who represents Cordova, was chairman of the Memphis City Council in 2003.

Categories
News News Feature

HOW IT LOOKS

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

ON THE MEDIA

FEED THE MACHINE

By William Powers,

National Journal

© National Journal Group Inc.

Friday, Dec. 19, 2003

Remember that awkward moment at Paul Bremer’s We-Got-Him news conference, when images of the captive Saddam Hussein came up on the screen and a few men suddenly jumped up and started shouting wildly in Arabic?

Presidential politics is a

perpetual-motion machine that runs on news, and any news will do.

Ê

At first, it seemed that something dangerous might be happening. Had bloodthirsty supporters of Saddam broken into the room? Who were these people, and what the heck were they saying?

They were Iraqi journalists, we later learned, and no pals of the disheveled despot. What they were saying was, “Death to Saddam” and

“Kill him!” among other unambiguous suggestions. Given what they and their country have been through, it was a perfectly understandable outburst. This was a powerful historic moment, and they were just being human beings.

Most American reporters watching Bremer’s announcement, whether in person or on TV, didn’t whoop it up in Arabic or any other language. This makes sense, too. Because they had not personally been tortured or silenced by Saddam, their reaction to the news was less visceral, more muted. Besides, the Americans had work to do, important new thoughts to process. Thoughts such as: Hmmm, I wonder what this Saddam thing means for Howard Dean? Does this give Joe Lieberman a new edge?

The Saddam story was huge, of course, and it dominated the news for much of this week. But, as with most big national and international stories these days, no sooner had the breathtaking events in Adwar, Iraq, hit the street in Washington and New York City than journalists were studying them, like gypsies with a tarot deck, for new answers to the question that matters most in America’ newsrooms: Who’s on top in the White House race?

Saddam’s capture arrived with breakfast, and by lunch the political inflection was well under way, helped along by a presidential candidate who looked at the story and saw a brand-new vision of his own future. “This news makes clear the choice the Democrats face next year,” Lieberman said. “If Howard Dean had his way, Saddam Hussein would still be in power today, not in prison, and the world would be a much more dangerous place.”

That’s a juicy journo-burger, Joe. Thanks! In no time, it was all over the wires and on television. Dean had his own statement, and John Kerry was on Fox, and on and on. By the next morning, when the newspapers hit the street, the transformation was complete. Sure, Saddam’s hairy face was spread across the front of USA Today, under the huge red headline “Captured.” Bah, that was ancient history! Savvy readers knew it was one of the smaller black headlines stacked just next to the face that really mattered: “Bush Savors Day: Howard Dean in Crosshairs.” All the other major outlets had their own Saddam-and-politics stories.

Why does this happen? I suppose it’s the inevitable result of presidential politics becoming a full-time, year-round calling. There are always people running for president now, and there are always journalists following them. When one of the former says something hot about the news of the hour, the latter have little choice but to put it out there for public consumption. Presidential politics is a perpetual-motion machine that runs on news, and any news will do.

There’s another reason that the political story line can’t be suppressed. Facts — the who, what, and where of a story — used to be the prime commodity of journalism, the measure of achievement. But thanks to technology and the instant delivery of news, facts have lost a lot of their competitive value. Once the capture was all over television, much of this story’s factual riches had been depleted. So the game moved naturally to the place where ambitious news outlets know they can still win points: the unknowable future. Big news that has

already happened might have implications for big news that hasn’t yet happened. And there’s no bigger news that hasn’t yet happened than the presidential race.

The other eternal unknown is the economy. Within hours after it broke, the Saddam story had been converted into a likely stimulator of the stock market, not to mention the broader economy. “Saddam Capture Could Boost Holiday Sales,” said the headline over an Associated Press story that I saw on the ABC News Web site. “With 11 days until Christmas,” it began, “shoppers crowded the nation’s malls and stores over the weekend, their spirits buoyed by news of Saddam Hussein’s capture. But it was unclear whether stores met their sales goals.” (Funny, isn’t it, how the spiritual trend can be so clear, while the numbers are murky?)

Meanwhile, a Reuters story headlined “Stocks and Dollar to Get Saddam Lift” popped up on several news Web sites on Sunday. Alas, the Saddam lift was brief, indeed: After a little rally early Monday, the markets were down for the day.

In a way, I suppose it’s good and useful that the American media have become so adept at seeing every story through the prism of politics and money. Basically, journalists have learned to think like the powerful people they cover. We hear that a brutal tyrant is finally captured and, click click click, our minds are instantly reworking the odds in the various contests we cover. If the pols’ brains work that way — and they certainly do — why can’t ours?

Sometimes, though, I wish there was a little space, maybe just 48 hours, in which a big story like this one could exist on its own terms. When journalists could process the news not as if they were politicians or stock market analysts, but as if they were people.

William Powers is a staff correspondent for National Journal

magazine, where “On The Media” appears.

Ê

Categories
News News Feature

HOW IT LOOKS