Categories
Editorial Opinion

Metro Revisited

For Mayor Willie Herenton, there was good news and bad news related to the visit to Memphis Tuesday of one of his illustrious counterparts: outgoing Nashville mayor Bill Purcell.
The bad news first: Though, of course, it might not have been meant as a reflection on our own mayor’s candidacy for reelection, some members of the Memphis Rotary Club, where Herenton introduced Purcell for this week’s luncheon address, floated an interesting idea afterward. They affected to wonder privately if Purcell could be talked into taking up residence in Memphis and running for mayor here. Seriously, folks, he won’t. After an upcoming spell as a fellow at Harvard University, Purcell is almost certain to get set to run for governor of Tennessee in 2010. Indeed, over the next few years, you can expect to see Purcell speaking from Tennessee podiums ranging from here to Bristol.

Now the good news: In the course of a compelling speech to the Rotarians, in which he cited all the good things that have come to Nashville under his two terms, Purcell engaged in some special pleading for the idea of metro government. As he put it, “Metropolitan government is the smartest thing that Nashville ever did.” And, during his summing up on that point, Purcell suggested that if Memphians wanted a government that was too big, too expensive, and too political, they should keep things just the way they are.

All the while Nashville’s mayor was saying these things, Herenton was up there on the dais smiling. As well he might. For in his appearance before the Coalition for a Better Memphis last week (see Politics, p. 16), Herenton cited his well-known belief in metropolitan government as the one most important concrete proposal he intended to put forth if reelected to a fifth term. As stale as the idea may have sounded at the time, it was certainly revivified when Purcell itemized the positive effects of metro government in the three areas he considered most important to Nashville: education, public safety, and quality of life.

Ay, but there’s the rub. Systems of government are one thing. The people who run them are another, and when Purcell discoursed upon how he happened to choose his top police official — a seasoned cop with recent credentials in New Orleans and Washington state, selected after a national search — what he said contrasted starkly with the reality of what we have known in Memphis: serial police directors, mainly yanked up from the ranks by Herenton and sent back to them at various intervals.

Herenton, who made a point of noting that the popular Purcell, a former state legislator, had been term-limited out of office as mayor, may be right in his own estimation of the value of metropolitan government, but in his four terms so far, he has not been able to make the case for it with residents either of the city or of the county.

To what extent this is Herenton’s own fault is a subject worthy of debate in its own right (yet another reason why we regret the mayor’s shunning the opportunity for back-and-forth encounters with his electoral foes this year). But our mayor is right in one respect: As Purcell’s testimony corroborates, the idea of metro government itself is well worth reconsidering.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Forum Fever

Forums are all the rage these days as Labor Day approaches — after which the crowded 2007 pre-election calendar starts to overflow big-time.

Among the events to watch are two forthcoming candidate debates co-sponsored by the Flyer and the Memphis Rotary Club. On September 4th, candidates for the hotly contested District 9, Position 2 seat will square off, and one week later the major mayoral candidates will have at it. Both events are at noon at the Cook Convention Center.

Having thus done my duty by our own events, I must next tip the hat to the Coalition for a Better Memphis, which actually succeeded in getting all four major mayoral hopefuls — including the debate-leery Mayor Willie Herenton — on the same stage, though only one after the other, answering the same series of across-the-board questions.

The event last Thursday, at the Bridge Builders site downtown, wasn’t therefore a debate — as moderators Roby Williams and Bobbi Gillis stressed — but it may have been the next best thing.

Standing in front of a climbing wall in a cavernous, well-filled room, the four hopefuls appeared in sequence before the same audience and answered the same questions from Williams and Gillis, while members of the coalition set about grading the answers according to a four-level scale.

Based on what the candidates said, how they said it, and what others said about it later on, these are some broad conclusions:

John Willingham, who was first up, clearly meant to demonstrate that he was no crank but a serious man with serious proposals. The former Shelby County commissioner was a beneficiary, as he always is from time-restrictive formats, of the two-minute-per-answer limits on the nine questions asked.

Kept thereby from waxing prolix, Willingham was still able to offer a host of specific proposals. Some of them, e.g., drastically curtailing a mayor’s contractual authority and the number of his patronage positions, seemed good fits for the current debate on charter changes. Others, like his concept of turning the Fairgrounds into an Olympic training village that could generate 2,000 jobs and $2 billion in annual revenues, were of the sort that Willingham fans would consider visionary and non-fans might regard as fanciful.

Even under the time and format constraints, Willingham put forth too many proposals and statistics to be easily summarized. All that was consistent with the suggestion that the mayor’s job was to be both an executive and an idea man. Conversation among attendees afterward indicated that those who tend to see him as a crank will continue to do so; those who regard him as farsighted and misunderstood, likewise. A point of general agreement concerned his limited base and the small likelihood of his being elected.

Herman Morris was the second candidate to appear. He spoke briskly and without hesitation, letting general statements substitute for extended elaboration.

Contrasting his up-from-poverty background with his quality education (Rhodes College, Vanderbilt law school), Morris characterized himself as an able executive with a proven track record, especially at MLGW, which he headed for seven years. He also noted such involvements as his former chairmanship of the Greater Memphis Chamber of Commerce, experience on industry-seeking missions, and 20 years’ membership on a state lawyers’ ethics panel, two years as chairman.

In answer to a question about achieving diversity in government, Morris, an African American who emphasizes his potential appeal to both races, gave an answer that might resonate better with whites than with blacks.

The standard for city employment, he said, should be “not just diversity, but … merit, experience, talent, skills, history, track record of success,” as it was at MLGW under his administration, he said. That was a head-scratcher, unless, as a Republican well-wisher opined, it was one means of distancing himself from recent publicity regarding his well-received remarks at gay/lesbian forums.

Verdict: Morris, markedly less stiff than when he first announced, held his place in line. He’s viable if he can somehow generate better across-the-board traction than he’s managed so far. Among other things, he repeated his challenge for other candidates to follow his lead in taking a drug test. For all the trying, that one has not yet so much as blipped on the public radar screen.

He may have a way to go before convincing a majority that he is something “new and different and better.”

Willie Herenton was the third candidate to appear. Unsurprisingly, the mayor wanted to talk specifics — or at least those stats and achievements that suggested his first four terms had been a success.

Herenton eschewed the “hating on me” rhetoric of an earlier speech to the Whitehaven Kiwanis Club. Appearing stately and dignified, he warned against “novices,” boasted of his “40 years in public service,” recapped his career as a school principal, school superintendent, and mayor, and repeated his series of rhetorical challenges to the Chamber of Commerce concerning which mayor had presided over the city’s best economic growth, per capital income, etc. “Of course, I already know the answer to that,” he said.

Herenton declared, “We have virtually eliminated decayed public housing as we have known it in the past.” He also boasted a blameless personal record on ethics matters and claimed to have achieved the most diverse city workforce in Memphis history. Other professed achievements were more familiar — like downtown redevelopment in general and, in particular, the FedExForum and the NBA franchise that came with it.

So far, so good, except that such accomplishments are no longer regarded as unalloyed benefits and are the subject these days of a critical second sight.

All in all, the mayor may not have provided a fresh prospectus or a convincing rebuttal to his opponents’ insistence that it’s “time for a change.”

Carol Chumney was the final speaker, and her reception was every bit as revealing as anything explicit she said at the event. Council member Chumney’s persona as a persistent scold of the administration and of government and politics as usual continues to serve as both medium and message.

Unlike the other candidates, the former state legislator made few concrete proposals, couching her statements almost solely in terms of the shortcomings she perceives in the current city administration or in terms of general goals. Her very first sentence said it: “I’m running to bring about safe streets, safe schools, and safe neighborhoods and to clean this city up once and for all.”

Though her Web site contains specific proposals, Chumney on the stump rarely deals in such specific terms. Her remedies at the forum were more broadly stated: e.g., “more accountability … a mayor more capable of inspiring the city … stronger on children and youth … neighborhood watch programs … stronger code enforcement … partnerships with all kinds of people,” and so forth.

As during the nearly four years of her service on the council, Chumney proved most compelling when she presented herself as the avenger, as the dedicated scourge of everything that is wrong with city government. “You know, we have a lot of moonlighting going on at City Hall. People don’t talk about that,” she said at one point. And ears perked up.

Overall, to judge by word-of-mouth afterward, Willingham’s presentation was discounted more than it might have been if his prospects were deemed brighter; Morris held his own; Herenton came off well (if somewhat out of answers on the freshness front); and Chumney, questions about her financial wherewithal notwithstanding, is still getting the benefit of the doubt.

• Among the several other groups sponsoring candidate forums are Mid-South Democrats in Action (MSDIA) and One Hundred Black Men, who collaborated in an event last week at the University of Memphis Law School featuring candidates for the three council positions in Super-District 8.

Turnout by the candidates was good — as, in the opinion of most observers, was the content of candidate responses. The major absentees for the forum were Position 1 incumbent Joe Brown and Position 2 challenger Janis Fullilove (who was apparently conducting a simultaneous campaign event).

• Two District 9 races are attracting much attention. That for Position 2 is widely regarded as a showdown between lawyer/broadcast executive Shea Flinn and businessman Kemp Conrad — a Democrat and a Republican, respectively, though both have support across partisan lines. Newcomer Frank Langston also has good support. “Memphis Watchdog” blogger Joe Saino will have an impact, as may Joseph Baier.

Contenders for Position 3 include another well-connected newcomer, Reid Hedgepeth, businessman Lester Lit, lawyer/activist Desi Franklin, neighborhood activist and former interim legislator Mary Wilder, and Democratic activist Boris Combest. The first three named have most of the sign action so far.

A detailed version of these items is available in “Political Beat” at www.memphisflyer.com.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Who’s On First?

It may take some time to evaluate the enduring effects, but the fact is that the three main contenders in the Memphis mayor’s race all have found something to brag about in the several days since the candidate field became complete:

• Mayor Willie Herenton finished first in a straw poll held by the Shelby County Democrats at the Rendezvous Restaurant last Thursday night. And he did so by typically Herentonian means, without bothering to attend the event.

A few score Democrats showed up at the event to pay $50 a head for the privilege of voting in a mayoral straw poll while raising money for the party. The only mayoral candidate who was there from start to finish was Herman Morris. Carol Chumney came late and addressed the crowd, as had Morris earlier. John Willingham had a spokesperson on hand who talked him up before the attendees.

Only the mayor was absent and went unspoken for. But his was the name called out by party chairman Keith Norman when it came time to announce the winner. Norman declined to give out any numbers or declare who finished second or third.

What was proved by the event and by its outcome? That Herenton has a hard core of supporters and a network that serves him well, for all the fact that he’s not campaigning this year in the conventional sense: no fund-raisers, no polls, no inclination to participate in forums.

A scientific poll? Of course not. What it did prove, however, was that the mayor — who presided over a couple of weekend headquarters openings — is not lacking where G.O.T.V. (get-out-the-vote) is the game. And that’s what the game will be during early voting and on October 4th.

• For her part, Councilwoman Chumney turned up the leader in a fresh trial heat by pollster Berje Yacoubian showing her to be leading a second-place Herenton and a third-place Herman Morris. The numbers were 33 percent for Chumney to Herenton’s 29 percent to 14 percent for Morris.

Underlining the surprising showing for Chumney, whom many observers had thought to have declined from her peak as a leader in early spring polls, was the fact that Yacoubian had made public statements only a week earlier, telling Fox 13 News, which also broke the news of his poll, that Herenton was a “good bet” to be leading the field.

Au contraire, when Yacoubian got around to toting things up. His sampling of some 300 presumably representative voters showed Chumney to be considered a better bet than Herenton on issues like crime and education, with Herenton having a lead only on the matter of economic development.

Among other things, what that meant was that Chumney’s standing had apparently survived her widely publicized refusal to vote, back in April, for a council resolution asking for the resignation of Joseph Lee, then still at the helm of MLGW. The fact that the resolution, offered by colleague Jack Sammons, then failed by a single vote was thought to have been an embarrassment for Chumney. So was the fact that her own previously offered resolution, directing Herenton to accept a much earlier resignation offer from Lee, had failed to draw a second.

Both circumstances underscored Chumney’s reputation as a go-it-alone maverick with few if any allies in city government. Yacoubian’s poll results suggest that voters may find Chumney’s non-observance of the maxim “go along to get along” more attractive than not.

• Though Morris had reason to be discouraged by all of this, his demeanor, on a stepped-up round of activity, didn’t show it. He seemed unfeignedly confident as recently as Monday night, when the former head of both MLGW and the local NAACP (an alphabet spread that, in theory, encompassed a good deal of potentially centrist turf) addressed a meeting of the Germantown Democrats.

Parenthesis: One of the peculiarities of the current political season — as noticed both by ourselves and by Mediaverse blogger Richard Thompson — is the number of forums, fund-raisers, speaking appearances, and other events involving candidates in the Memphis city election that have taken place in the bordering municipality of Germantown.

That has to do both with the fact of overlapping populations (many members of the Germantown Democratic Club are residents of Cordova and Memphis voters) and with the circumstance that, with governmental consolidations of various kinds in the air, people in the near suburbs are taking an unusual interest in how things go in Memphis voting.

Consolidation was, in fact, one of the matters that Morris dealt with forthrightly during Monday night’s meeting. He endorsed it, categorically, and went so far as to express impatience with half-measures like the current intergovernmental talks involving an enhanced liaison of Memphis police with the county sheriff’s department.

“Consolidate everything!” Morris pronounced, and to that end, he recommended following the example of Louisville, where city and county voters voted consolidation in after an extensive period of public discussions. Similarly, he said, Memphis and Shelby County voters should be paid the “respect” of having the issue “put in front of us.”

When a club member said she was “tired” of questions about impropriety surrounding various officials now in office, Morris barely hesitated before responding, “I am, too. And I’m tired of people reelecting them.”

In general, Morris cast himself as Mr. Candor, attributing the financial problems of Memphis Networx, which he championed while leading MLGW, to the short-sightedness of the profit-focused private investors involved in the public/private initiative. He freely acknowledged hatching thoughts of a mayoral run in December 2003, immediately after being forced out of his utility perch by Herenton. And he flatly declared, “I don’t trust those numbers,” concerning Herenton’s current economic forecasts.

He suggested that his major opponents drew their strength from white or black enclaves, respectively, “while I’m 50-50, right in the middle.”

One note being struck resoundingly in private by Morris’ campaign people is the prospect, in fact, that he will shortly inherit some of the racially balanced support that was evidenced in the short-lived “Draft A C” campaign to induce a mayoral candidacy by Shelby County mayor A C Wharton.

With only two months to go, Morris needs a boost — more than he’ll get from the drug test which he successfully passed last week after challenging all the contenders to take one as well.

• The fourth name candidate in the Memphis mayor’s race, John Willingham, meanwhile, resolved to soldier on, despite the fact that few observers (and no polls to date) have given him much chance. “Look what happened in 2002,” he said, a reminder of his runaway upset win that year over the late Morris Fair, then an incumbent Shelby County commissioner. Last week’s cover story, by the way, erred in suggesting that Willingham had plans to convert Shelby Farms, now administered by the nonprofit Shelby Farms Conservancy, into an Olympic Village. It is the Fairgrounds that Willingham has in mind for his proposal. More of that anon.

Categories
Cover Feature News

Four More Years?

We have seen the field. That is the hard, inescapable fact of last week’s filing deadline. The next mayor of Memphis will almost certainly be one of three contenders — two of whom are familiar properties: the proud (some say reckless, some say haughty) incumbent Willie Herenton, and the determinedly independent (some say foolishly stubborn) City Council member Carol Chumney. A third candidate, former NAACP official and MLGW head Herman Morris, has yet to make his profile clear, and that is perhaps his major problem.

Oh, there is yet a fourth candidate, former Shelby County Commissioner John Willingham, who is well enough known. Respected, even beloved, by some for his densely detailed plans to fix virtually everything and regarded as an eccentric by a perhaps greater number, Willingham constitutes a relatively distant second tier all by himself.

And after him, among the 12 other candidates who qualified by the July 19th filing deadline, there is naught but anonymity, lacking as of now even Robert “Prince Mongo” Hodges, the barefoot denizen of the Planet Zambodia and the numbing punchline to an old joke which, for some time now, has been told only by himself to himself.

A perennial, Mongo filed his papers correctly but was disqualified for one more run because of unpaid fines relating to state election requirements. The now officially irrelevant Mongo did have one moment of historical importance, shaking loose a few hundred frivolous protest votes that likely would otherwise have gone to then-incumbent mayor Dick Hackett in 1991 and thereby making possible the victory, by a margin of 142 votes, of former Memphis City Schools schools superintendent Herenton as the city’s first elected black mayor.

If not for that, Mongo would have been no more consequential than a candidate who remains on the ballot — Bill (formerly Willie) Jacox, the perennial’s perennial, who disappeared from Shelby County ballots for a decade, as did his crude self-advertising handbills that used to litter telephone poles throughout the city, but who is back this year. Two other candidates — bus driver Carlos Boyland and businessman Randy Cagle — were so obscure that, when they tried to launch early candidacies at the Election Commission’s downtown office in 1996, they were erroneously given petitions to run for county mayor that year.

Cagle made something of a fuss at a recent neighborhood forum in southeast Memphis when he accused the media of downplaying his prospects and keeping him, and others like him, out of the charmed ranks of acknowledged contenders.

It doesn’t work like that, of course. Though here and there over the years an effort has been made to logroll somebody into or out of prominence, the media don’t make or break anybody. They — we — are still merely chroniclers of moods and momentums that stir of themselves, or, as in the case of Shelby County mayor A C Wharton, the reluctant warrior who last week finally and firmly squelched insistent draft efforts by a multitude of well-known and unknown courtiers desperate for a change at the city’s helm, are put into motion by specific forces in the community itself.

Now, as always before and (one hopes) forever, ours is a representative system. That, for better and for worse, is the root fact.

Who, then, do the major players represent? Here is a capsule of sorts:

Mayor Willie Herenton: By his own testimony, the incumbent mayor is still the man who, as he told an almost hysterically happy, cheering crowd of mainly African-American citizens at The Peabody on an October night in 1991, was “willed” by them into power and prominence as the culmination of historical justice and inevitability, whose accession to power was attended, at the last rally and at the first post-victory celebration, by no less a figure than Jesse Jackson, the civil rights avatar who had been on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel in 1968 with the slain martyr Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

One of the ironies of this mayor’s career is that he could not have represented outcasts from power and passions so long denied had he not, just prior to his ascension, been suddenly cast into disrepute with a civic establishment that had once embraced him and appointed him to its major power boards. Forced from his perch as head of the Memphis schools system by a sexual scandal (the late 1980s were post-Gary Hart and pre-Clinton times) and by alleged administrative irregularities, Herenton became a martyr for that moment of change.

Justin Fox Burks

The mayor, an able and commanding figure and (as he never tired of reminding people) a once-undefeated Golden Gloves champion, won three subsequent elections on the strength of his personal dominance and visible successes — mainly in civic (read: downtown) reconstruction and a record of (apparent) fiscal solvency. But his fourth term, which began with a thunderous denunciation of his City Council and a heady claim of divine sponsorship, proceeded into financial difficulties, an era of resurgent crime, and all-too-mortal wrangles with disbelievers, who included both council members and those members of a disaffected population who were challenged by Herenton to “leave” if they didn’t like how he did things in his dominion.

As it happens, the number so aggrieved has risen to the point, among blacks as well as among whites, that the mayor actually ran second (to Chumney) in the first set of polls conducted in this electoral season. Hence his reaching again for the martyr’s mantle and African-American solidarity, as in the now famous press conference of mid-June when he accused various disloyal “snakes,” in concert with a vengeful power establishment, of scheming to overthrow him with — shades of those late 1980s — a sexual-blackmail plot.

But as the Rev. Bill Adkins, a major ally in Herenton’s campaign of 1991 and co-founder of the ill-fated “Draft A C” movement, observed last week, “He really hasn’t done what he promised to do for black people. The truth is, on matters like minority contracting, he’s not even been as good as Dick Hackett was!”

Outlook: Though favored at the moment by prognosticators looking down track, Herenton fared no better than even with Chumney in the last major Wharton-less poll, taken the week before last for The Commercial Appeal by Ethridge and Associates. The mayor still has much to prove, even to his presumed hard-core base in the black community.

Carol Chumney: A maverick’s maverick, first-termer Chumney is, hands down, the most unpopular City Council member among her colleagues in city government, both on and off the council. More than once, she has put on the table a motion for an action or cause with more than plausible rationale, only to look in vain for a second. The most recent and telling case of this came back in April, when Chumney proposed a resolution asking Mayor Herenton to reverse course and accept the proferred resignation — initially rejected by the mayor — of the then beleaguered MLGW president Joseph Lee.

As so often before, Chumney’s motion failed for lack of a second. Accused by colleague Joe Brown of trying to advance her political chances and by member Brent Taylor of procedural irregularity, Chumney responded indignantly, “If I’m out of order, so be it!” A subsequent resolution by councilman Jack Sammons asking Lee to resign encountered racial-bloc voting and failed of approval by a single vote – Chumney’s. She had declined to vote for it on the technically correct ground that Lee had already tried to resign — or at least gone through the motions of doing so.

When Lee’s dormant resignation finally was accepted, on the heels of his misguided (and apparently misinformed) blackmail threat against an MLGW board member, the suddenly ubiquitous Nick Clark, Chumney claimed vindication. But the consensus among many neutral observers was that she had lost face — not just by virtue of her colleagues’ rejection but because she had appeared too unyielding and unwilling to consider compromise, that mother’s milk of consensus politics.

It is, of course, her very intransigence that has accounted for Chumney’s surprisingly high standing in the polls and for the fact that the former Democratic state representative from Midtown draws cheers when she appears before government-bashing conservative groups anywhere in the city.

If Herenton has cast himself as the symbol of a long-suffering race, Chumney has succeeded in becoming the Joan of Arc of the disaffected. Moreover, she has genuine reformer’s credentials, having played a leading role in exposing and correcting child-care abuses while a member of the state House and, as a council member, taking damn-the-torpedoes positions against questionable, if long-accepted, practices in city government. A case in point was the now-vanished arrangement whereby only 12 years of city service entitled one to a comfortable lifetime pension.

Chumney can also take credit for go-it-alone probes that in the last year or two turned up evidence of the city’s fluctuating credit rating and its tenuous budgetary predicament.

Jackson Baker

Mayoral candidate Carol Chumney: Joan of Arc of the disaffected?

Outlook: Though boosted by a grass-roots network of sorts and by recent trends that arguably favor female candidates, all other factors being equal, Chumney seems doomed to run a cash-poor campaign, and though her unquestioned ability to garner free media will help her in that regard, her long-range prospects among black voters remain a mystery, while at the same time she has real competition for the city’s white vote.

Herman Morris: Once a star scholar and athlete and, in his adult years, a man of considerable professional attainment, this up-from-humble-origins success story has found himself cast all too often as a contemporary member of what used to be called “the black bourgeoisie.” This is despite a long early history of legal and political activism on behalf of civil rights causes and candidates.

Morris’ reputation in the public mind is largely fixed from his seven years’ service as president of MLGW, an important (and, these days, crucial) administrative venue that depends disproportionately on behind-the-scenes activity, even more so than other appointed positions of less obvious public urgency. Even in moments of crisis — like the “Hurricane Elvis” windstorm of 2003 — it is elected officials, notably the mayor, who bear the brunt of public attention.

Until this year, when he followed through on a long-nursed ambition to run for mayor — at least partly, many think, to atone for what he regarded as ill treatment by Herenton — Morris was mainly known for the falling-out with Herenton that led to his ouster from MLGW in late 2003 or for the supposed “golden parachute” that, perhaps unfairly, he was considered to have left with or perhaps even for his championing of utility investments, including the now-controversial Memphis Networx, a public/private fiber-optic venture that is popularly believed to have been a financial bust and is on the verge of being abandoned, at a fire-sale price, to a private financial concern.

Morris is the kind of public figure who requires careful scrutiny to properly “get” him, and the same is apparently true of Networx, which, in February of this year, long before the taxpayer-funded investment became an issue, newly announced mayoral candidate Morris made a point of publicly touting. Indeed, in an age in which Memphis is encumbered by a “connectedness” gap (see Editorial, p. 16), Networx might, as the Flyer‘s Chris Davis has suggested in a series of articles, have been the foundation of a viable public utility in its own right.

If Morris is to succeed in the politics of this year, however, he has to stake out some basis for popular appeal. He is funded well. This month’s disclosures showed him well into the six figures — though still considerably below the half-million dollars and up that Herenton has in cash on hand. Morris’ voter support, too, has so far depended largely on affluent sectors of the community and on Republican sources as much as on Democratic ones.

With that need in mind, we may be treated to further quirky moves like Morris’ recent demand that other candidates join him in having drug tests — a patent play to so far wholly unsubstantiated rumors concerning the incumbent mayor.

Outlook: With his mixture of black and white support, based disproportionately in the middle class, Morris may well turn out to be the default anti-Herenton candidate, but his long-term prospects depend on further progress in what has been a slow evolution from his naturally reserved private persona into the kind of glad-handing bonhomie type that a mayoral race requires.

John Willingham: What can we say that we have not said many times already about this gallant and largely misunderstood public figure, to whose gadfly-like prodding of the governmental structure the public owes much — not only in the realm of exposing abuse (à la the now-notorious FedExForum deal, private garage and all) but in the determined venting of alternate public courses, like Willingham’s various proposals for serious tax overhaul?

Willingham has a reputation in too many quarters as a crank, though he overcame it big-time with his upset victory in 2002 over an establishment pillar, the late Morris Fair, to become a member of the Shelby County Commission. That triumph was owing to Willingham’s becoming a channel for massive discontent over the way public funds were used, sans public consent, to bait the Grizzlies into relocating to Memphis.

Forced into an ill-advised race against Shelby County mayor Wharton in 2006 by his correct perception that too many forces, financial and otherwise, were committed to defeating his bid for reelection to the commission, Willingham is once more a private citizen, and, unfortunately for his electoral prospects, even many of his veteran well-wishers have written off his chances, casting their lot with other candidates. His devoted but long-suffering wife Marge has made no secret of her wish that her husband would cease and desist from his flirtations with public office, especially now that his chances seem so slim.

But he is still there, for one more Revere-like ride, it would seem, passing out pamphlets showing he still has an ambitious eye for redesigning the public sphere (most recently to convert the much-pondered-over Fairgrounds into an Olympic Village).

Outlook: The ex-Nixon administration aide, multi-patented inventor and engineer, and well-known barbecue maven is the longest of long shots, eminently more qualified than, say, the unlamented Mongo, but in most quarters given no greater potential for success than the Zambodian would have had. Indeed, some longtime friends wonder if Willingham isn’t taking votes away from the other potentially viable challengers.

Whoever is destined to be mayor of Memphis after October 4th is guaranteed to be dealing with a City Council with a majority of newly elected members. That outcome was foreshadowed by accelerated attrition and by the wave of indictments for public corruption that swept aside two veterans, and it was made certain when council mainstays Tom Marshall and Jack Sammons, both of whom apparently considered mayoral runs themselves, opted out of reelection races just before filing deadline.

That means that such front-burner issues as what to do with the Fairgrounds (a legislatively vetted proposal from developer Henry Turley awaits possible implementation), whether or not to seek functional merger of the city police with the Sheriff’s Department, and how finally to dispose of the ghost facility known as the Pyramid (tomb of a previous governmental generation’s civic imagining) will all come under the purview of fresh eyes and — we are entitled to hope — fresh perspectives.

This new council and the newly elected (or reelected) mayor will also have the advantage and the challenge of dealing with recommendations for change by the Charter Commission that was elected last year and has dutifully and quietly gone about what could turn out to be momentous labors.

In any case, a new team will be taking the field, and the game of Memphis city government will almost surely take new and unexpected turns, no matter who the manager of record turns out to be.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Coming to Shove

As was noted here last week, momentum for a mayoral candidacy by Shelby County mayor A C Wharton — and pressure on that famously reluctant (or coy) official — has seriously intensified as the clock keeps on ticking toward next week’s filing deadline.

Things were patently coming to a head with the public emergence of a “Draft A C” movement led by, among others, the Revs. La Simba Gray and Bill Adkins. Despite Mayor Willie Herenton‘s attempted dismissal of the effort, and of the two African-American ministers as relatively unimportant figures motivated by “personal” or even mercenary reasons, the fact is that both had once been key members of Herenton’s political team.

Adkins especially was a major force in the epochal first race by Herenton in 1991, relentlessly proselyting for the then “consensus” black candidate on his daily radio show.

These days, neither Adkins nor Gray is regarded as necessarily “first tier” among African-American leaders, though Gray made a serious effort to become so last year in his sponsorship of forums designed to produce a single black candidate around whom other blacks might cohere.
No such figure materialized in a race ultimately won by then state senator Steve Cohen. But if Wharton, who agreed to meet with his newly energized suitors, ended up saying yes to their entreaties, there would be no need to look further to find consensus, and the resultant combination of African-American forces with a business community already avid for A C to run was bound to be a first-tier effort.

In famous lines by T.S. Eliot, the poet’s probable stand-in, J. Alfred Prufrock, opined, “I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be.” Well, A C was meant to be. And it has to be remembered that in the play Eliot was referencing, Hamlet does finally act.

Meanwhile, other mayoral candidates were increasingly making themselves available. Several hopefuls were scheduled to appear at a Tuesday night meeting of the Southeast Memphis Betterment Association at Asbury Methodist Church, including newcomer Randy Cagle and, er, oldcomer Robert “Prince Mongo” Hodges.

Among the promised attendees generally acknowledged to be “serious” challengers were council member Carol Chumney, former MLGW head Herman Morris, and former Shelby County commissioner John Willingham.

Scheduled to make what would seem to be his first public appearance as a candidate for mayor was former FedEx executive Jim Perkins, who is the unknown quantity of the mayoral race so far. Perkins reportedly has a million dollars of his own money to spend on the race, and that fact alone has been enough to encourage speculation that he might figure significantly in the outcome.

Coincidentally, Tuesday happened also to be the deadline for candidates’ filing disclosures for the second quarter of the year, just ended. Preliminary indications have been that candidate Morris will show cash on hand in the six figures, with Chumney lagging behind, and Willingham pulling up the rear.

Meanwhile, Willingham is doing what he can to engender what, in our time, is rather quaintly called “free media” (i.e., news coverage).

At a recent meeting of the Southeast Shelby Republican Club at the Pickering Center in Germantown he used the club’s traditional “introduce-yourself” round asked of all guests by delivering what amounted to a campaign address that was standard Willingham.

Contained within it was a litany of the maverick former commissioner’s sworn foes — including old ones like establishment Republicans David Kustoff, Kemp Conrad, John Ryder, Maida Pearson, and Alan Crone, all former party chairmen who announced their support of his then potential 2006 commission opponent, Mike Carpenter, early enough to help persuade Willingham out of a reelection race and into one for county mayor.

But there were some new names, too — prominent among them Bruce Saltsman, former governor Don Sundquist‘s transportation commissioner, whom Willingham, without further explanation, held liable for the “shenanigans” of the now suspect FedExForum deal. And the former commissioner intimated he knew of dark deeds committed by some well-known developers.
But all of this would definitely play second or even third feature to the potential restaging, right here in River City, of Shakespeare’s most famous play.

Categories
Editorial Opinion

Rush the Judgment

Ordinarily we favor patient deliberation in the pursuit of justice — particularly when, as in the case of the current special investigation into charges of a blackmail plot against Memphis mayor Willie Herenton, there are political implications involved. But since there is a mayor’s race on, and especially since this year’s city election is shaping up to be as epochal in its way as the one in 1991 which first elected

Herenton, we incline to the view that we as citizens are entitled to the equivalent of a speedy trial. Once so distant in our mind’s eye, the filing deadline for mayoral candidates and other city candidates — July 19th — is now almost upon us.

Given the gravity of our political situation — a City Council decimated by charges of corruption, a growing schism between the community’s economic leadership and the mayor’s office, a sense of civic confusion symbolized by the entangled Networx and MLGW dilemmas — this is one case in which due process could morph into “long overdue.”

There are two questions in particular that special prosecutor Joe Baugh should quickly get to the bottom of: 1) Was there a “blackmail” plot or any other criminal enterprise of the sort charged by Herenton in his bizarre press conference of some weeks back? 2) Has there been a legitimate ongoing investigation by law enforcement authorities into improper relationships between city officials and topless clubs or similar enterprises?

It seems clear now that answering those two questions would not constitute the be-all or end-all of everything we need to know politically or, for that matter, the completion of an investigation into possible corruption and illegalities. But having some sort of reliable focus on those two issues is crucial to our ability to shape our own destiny this election year.

We understand the unlikelihood that Baugh can provide those basic preliminary answers in the next two weeks. Depending on what he might say, accusations of haste or political slanting or whatever might well come from this or that quarter and become embedded in the dynamics of the campaign. It is far more probable that the special prosecutor could speak with completeness and authority at some later point before the October 4th general election itself, and that, too, would be worth something.

But we think some earlier resolution, before July 19th, is worth the risk. It should be possible, at least in partial or general terms, to provide some guidance to the community on the two indicated issues. Putting it bluntly: There is reason to believe that the mayoral field is still incomplete, and there is a definite “need to know” on the part of major candidates still meditating on whether their candidacies would be matters of genuine urgency for Memphis itself and for the city’s greater metropolitan area.

Let us say too: What we have learned in the last couple of weeks about private interventions into the public weal has been disquieting. We don’t doubt, for example, that Nick Clark is motivated by religious conviction in his concern about topless clubs. But there are aspects to his own freebooting investigation that smack of vigilantism and commercial self-interest. What we need, as quickly as possible, are public answers to public questions from a duly constituted public source.

Categories
Opinion

Why Herenton Will Win

Mayor Herenton filed his reelection papers Tuesday. He could still drop out, and more candidates can get in the race until July 19th. But assuming that he doesn’t and even if they do, here’s why I think he will win.

Winner Take All. Even if the polls are right and at least two-thirds of the voters don’t like him, Herenton only needs one more vote than the second-place finisher. Mathematically, he could win with 32 percent of the vote, like Steve Cohen did last year in the congressional Democratic primary. A Herenton hater who lives outside the city or stays home on Election Day doesn’t hurt him. The more challengers he has, the better he does. I don’t see a 2007 version of the 1991 convention that chose Herenton as the consensus black candidate. Polls that show Herenton losing in a head-to-head race with so-and-so are misleading because he probably won’t be running against one person.

The Numbers. Democrats from Harold Ford to Bill Clinton to Herenton win elections in Memphis by rolling up huge margins in scores of black precincts. Clinton actually won every vote in some precincts in 1996. If Herenton gets 80 or 90 percent of the vote in several precincts, he can beat a challenger whose best showing is 50 or 60 percent. Where are Herman Morris or Carol Chumney going to win 80 percent?

The Record and the Rhetoric. The mayor’s recent rhetoric about racial solidarity was a nice try, but his record doesn’t live down to it. He’s been a supporter of optional schools, downtown development, and occasional Republican political candidates. He has appointed way too many white division directors and police directors. As a black racist, he simply doesn’t cut it. Absent a consensus candidate and public repudiation by key business leaders, he’ll hold his own in East Memphis.

Snakes. As Herenton knew they would, members of the media took the bait and are acting like Nick Clark and Richard Fields are the ones running for mayor, not the four-term incumbent. Clark and Fields are not running for anything. Fields is an attorney. Clark is a businessman and member of the MLGW board. They don’t work for the city of Memphis. They don’t make a single appointment to a public board or government job. They can’t award a single no-bid contract. But Herenton, who has done all those things hundreds of times for 16 years, called them snakes and the chase was on. The mayor’s hint that unnamed snakes are still out there was so much more useful than confronting them head-on — as Fields, whatever you may think of him, did with Herenton in a three-hour meeting in March when he suggested he look for another line of work. How old-fashioned! The way to slur someone these days, as everyone knows, is anonymously.

Machine Politics. Taking a page from Boss Crump’s book, Herenton has appointed or assisted scores of friends and even some former rivals to city jobs. People like former school board member Sara Lewis, former City Council members Janet Hooks and Tajuan Stout Mitchell, and former mayoral spokeswoman Gale Jones Carson know how to campaign and win elections. Ordinary incumbency is an advantage, but 16 years of control over power, access, contracts, and jobs is an overwhelming advantage.

The City Charter reads: “No full-time employee shall engage in political activity, directly concerned with city government or any candidate for political office thereunder.”

That means no political phone calls, e-mails, letters, or strategy meetings on city time. But the ban is a paper tiger, more toothless than an ethics ordinance. “Uncovering” politics in a government office would be like finding mud in the Mississippi River.

Money. The mayor has more than $500,000 in his campaign fund even if he did only raise $1,650 in the first reporting period this year. By August, if he makes a few phone calls, he should have more than all his challengers put together. Chumney, at last report, had under $30,000. But Herenton managed to turn even that to his advantage by accusing the media of giving her free publicity.

Crime and MLGW. There is no simple solution to crime, and the latest numbers are running Herenton’s way. What do you propose to do differently if you’re Herman Morris or Carol Chumney or even, say, FBI special agent My Harrison? On MLGW and Memphis Networx, Morris was running the show for seven years, and there is plenty of blame to go around.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

New Mayor, New Council?

Naming “crime, cronyism, and corruption” as major issues in this year’s mayoral election, candidate Carol Chumney addressed the Germantown Democratic Club at the Pickering Center Monday night, pledging if elected to “get a good team” in order to bring renewed efficiency to Memphis city government.

Subsequently, City Council member Chumney fielded at least two questions from the membership (which includes several Memphis voters who live in Cordova) about her reported difficulties with the mayor’s office and fellow council members.

One member asked: What about her “relation-building” and “leadership style”? Would these be obstacles?

Chumney responded that she had developed good relations with fellow legislators while a state House member for 13 years and said, “City government has been a little different because there’s been, quite frankly, some corruption. Many times I would be the only one who would stand up and say anything. Some folks are going to get mad at you. I’m a strong leader, I will tell you that.”

When another member followed up by asking if the City Council would back her proposals if she were elected mayor, Chumney said, “We’re going to elect a new City Council.” Noting the virtual turnover of membership in the County Commission in last year’s elections, she expressed confidence that city voters would follow suit. “It’s going to happen here. They’re going to vote in a new team.”

Pledging to renew cooperation between city and county law-enforcement agencies, Chumney said, “It’s disrespectful to expect the police to go two years without a pay raise while asking them to risk their lives for us.”

She repeated her objections to the Riverfront Development Corporation’s proposals, including the recently approved Beale St. Landing project, and called both for the city’s retention of the Coliseum and for “something classy” in the downtown Pyramid.

Chumney said she’d heard “disturbing rumors” about the past management of Memphis Networx and reported plans for its pending sale and promised “to get to the bottom of it.” She said the council’s authority over a prospective sale was uncertain but said she was seeking authoritative word on that from the state Attorney General’s Office.

• Germantown is becoming an important campaign venue for candidates running for office in Memphis. A week or so earlier, members of the Republican Women of Purpose organization heard a presentation at the Germantown Public Library from Brian Stephens, City Council candidate in District 2, the East Memphis-suburban seat being vacated by incumbent Brent Taylor.

Stephens has been active in an effort to strengthen laws regulating sexually oriented businesses (S.O.B.s in the accepted jargon) and specifically to make sure that veteran topless-club entrepreneur Steve Cooper does not convert a supposed “Italian restaurant” now under construction in Cordova into an S.O.B.

He discussed those efforts but offered other opinions as well, some of them surprising (a statement that “consolidation is coming, whether we like it or not,” for example) and some not (like his conviction, à la Taylor, that tax increases are not necessary for the city to maintain and improve basic services).

In general, Stephens, who seems to have a head start on other potential District 2 aspirants, made an effort to sound accommodationist rather than confrontational, stressing a need for council members to transcend racial and urban-vs.-suburban divisions and expressing confidence in the ability of currently employed school personnel to solve the system’s problems.

• Also establishing an apparent early lead over potential rivals is current school board member Stephanie Gatewood, running for the District 1 council seat being vacated by incumbent E.C. Jones. Gatewood’s fund-raiser at Fresh Slices on Overton Park Avenue last Thursday night drew a respectable crowd, and her membership in Bellevue Baptist Church on the suburban side of District 1 provides an anchor, in addition to an expected degree of support from the district’s African-American population.

• Last Wednesday night was a hot one for local politics, with three more-than-usually significant events, and there were any number of dedicated and/or well-heeled visitors to all three:

Residents of the posh Galloway Drive area, where U of M basketball coach John Calipari resides, are surely used to long queues of late-model vehicles stretching every which way in the neighborhood, especially in election season, when Calipari’s home is frequently the site of fund-raisers for this or that candidate.

But Wednesday night’s event, a $250-a-head fund-raiser for District 5 City Council candidate Jim Strickland, was surely a record-setter — outdoing not only Calipari’s prior events but most other such gatherings in Memphis history, including those for senatorial and gubernatorial candidates. A politically diverse crowd estimated at 300 to 500 people netted Strickland more than $60,000 for the night and brought his total “cash on hand” to $100,000.

Meanwhile, mayoral candidate Herman Morris attracted several hundred attendees to the formal opening of his sprawling, high-tech campaign headquarters on Union Avenue, the same HQ that, week before last, suffered a burglary of computers containing sensitive information — a fact that some Morris supporters find suspicious in light of various other instances of hanky-panky currently being alleged in the mayoral race.

Yet a third major political gathering took place Wednesday night, as Shelby County mayor A C Wharton was the beneficiary of a big-ticket fund-raiser at the Racquet Club. Proceeds from that one have been estimated in the $50,000 range — a tidy sum for what the county mayor alleges (and alleged again Wednesday night) is intended only as a kind of convenience fund meant for charitable donations and various other protocol circumstances expected of someone in his position.

Right. Meanwhile, Wharton declined to address the most widely speculated-upon subject in Memphis politics: Will he or won’t he enter the city mayor’s race? As the county mayor has informally acknowledged, he is the subject these days of nonstop blandishments in that regard, and there’s very little doubt that these have accelerated since a recent press conference by Memphis mayor Willie Herenton alleging “the 2007 Political Conspiracy.”

While some of Mayor Wharton’s intimates at the Wednesday night affair were keeping to the line that the chances of his running for city mayor were minimal to nonexistent, their answers to inquiries about the matter were delivered after what we’ll call meaningfully inflected pauses. The door may be shut for now, but it clearly isn’t padlocked.

Jackson Baker

Carol Chumney

NASHVILLE — The name McWherter, prominent in Tennessee politics for most of the

latter 20th century, will apparently resurface in fairly short order, as Jackson lawyer and

businessman Mike McWherter, son of two-term former governor Ned McWherter, is

making clear his plans to challenge U.S. senator Lamar Alexander‘s reelection bid next year.

Apparently only one thing could derail Democrat McWherter: a renewed Senate candidacy by former Memphis congressman Harold Ford Jr., who last year narrowly lost a Senate race to the current Republican incumbent, Bob Corker. “I don’t think I would compete against Harold. But I don’t think he will run,” McWherter said in an interview with the Flyer at Saturday’s annual Jefferson-Jackson Day Dinner in Nashville.

The 52-year-old activist sees Alexander as a slavish follower of President George W. Bush.

“With one or two exceptions, he’s done everything the president has wanted him to do. He’s toed the party line,” said McWherter, who has recently paid courtesy calls on ranking Democrats, both in Tennessee and in Washington, D.C., informing them of his interest in running next year and soliciting their support.

• Keynote speaker at the Democrats’ dinner in Nashville was presidential hopeful Bill Richardson, whose situation somewhat paralleled that of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who earlier this month had been the featured speaker at the state Republicans’ Statesmen’s Dinner, also in Nashville.

On that occasion, Romney — who had been invited before the entrance of former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson became likely — was a de facto lame-duck keynoter, and mindful of the attendees’ expected loyalty to favorite-son Thompson, cracked wanly, “I know there’s been some speculation by folks about a certain former senator from Tennessee getting into the presidential race, and I know everybody’s waiting, wondering. But I take great comfort from the fact than no one in this room, not a single person, is going to be voting for — Al Gore.”

That bit of verbal bait-and-switch got the expected laugh, and so did a joke Saturday night by New Mexico governor Richardson, who uttered some ritual praise of native Tennessean and former presidential candidate Gore and then, when the crowd warmly applauded the former vice president, jested, “Let’s not overdo it. I don’t want him in this race!” — JB

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Snake, Rat, or Martyr?

Whatever the final resolution of Memphis’ current political soap opera — dubbed “The 2007 Political Conspiracy” by chief protagonist Mayor Willie Herenton — there would seem to be little doubt as to the fate of one principal, lawyer Richard Fields. One way or another, Fields will take a fall; indeed, he has already suffered one.

Designated as the chief villain of what Herenton alleges is a blackmail plot against him — a “snake,” in Herenton’s term — Fields is now in an untenable situation. Even if, as many believe, he ends up being exonerated of the mayor’s specific charges (orchestrating an elaborate sex sting against Herenton), Fields will have inevitably plummeted to earth from a once-lofty position, his wax wings burnt and melted like some presumptuous Icarus come too close to the sun.

In the classical sense, Fields is an object lesson in hubris — a Greek term denoting prideful and ultimately ruinous overreaching. Well-regarded for years as a dedicated civil rights attorney, Fields seems to have made a decision some years back to establish himself as a power broker second to none in the city’s history.

That phase of his life may have begun as far back as the school-superintendent years of Willie Herenton (see “City Beat,” p. 12) and crystallized in 1991 when Fields was one of the few whites who actively supported Herenton in his successful bid to become the city’s first elected black mayor.

For some time thereafter, Fields remained close to the mayor, but he quarreled seriously with other mayoral intimates, like former city attorney Robert Spence, who would later accuse Fields of wanting to dictate city contracts. And, after an off-and-on period of close collaboration, Fields — or Herenton — decided in the last year or two, for whatever reason, to open up some real distance in the relationship.

That fissure seems to have coincided with turbulence in Fields’ private life — including the latest of four divorces, all from African-American women. (Fields himself is Caucasian, and his enemies — notably blogger Thaddeus Matthews — have broadly insinuated an almost Freudian hostility on his part to black men, especially those holding public office.)

In the meantime, Fields had made a somewhat feckless Democratic primary race against then state senator John Ford in 2002, finishing well out of the money (in every sense of that term). The experience, along with his long proximity to the city’s powerful and often imperious mayor, seems to have pushed him in the direction of kingmaking.

Largely on the strength of his ties to Herenton, Fields got himself elected to the Shelby County Democratic executive committee in 2005, in a party convention dominated by Herenton ally Sidney Chism and reformist leader Desi Franklin. (If Fields’ relations with Chism, since elected to the County Commission, are now necessarily strained, he apparently remains close to Franklin, a possible City Council candidate this year.)

Then came Fields’ pro bono involvement, alongside the legal team of the state Republican Party, in an effort to void the state Senate victory of Democrat Ophelia Ford over the GOP’s Terry Roland. Though the effort was ultimately successful, Fields had meanwhile been forced off the local Democratic committee amid accusations of a political conflict of interest.

Undaunted, Fields got his hand back in the political process almost immediately, with widely circulated broadsides enumerating the purported liabilities of certain judicial candidates in the 2006 August general election and calling for their defeat, while touting the prospects of others. His efforts seemed to some an attempt to replicate the influence of the old “Ford ballots,” voter guides put out at election time by former congressman Harold Ford Sr.

Since many of the candidates opposed by Fields were black and since his ballot choices, by design or otherwise, received most attention in largely white precincts of Midtown and East Memphis, he was accused — perhaps ironically, given his personal history — of a racial bias.

Whether for that reason or some other, Fields amended at least two early judicial choices, substituting African-American candidates for white candidates he had promised to support. To some, that took the gloss of his supposed high-mindedness.

Fields was back at it again for the fall elections last year, with newly distributed ballot choices in partisan races, taking sides with a number of Republican candidates against their Democratic opponents. That brought new outcries, especially among fellow Democrats, some of whom tried anew earlier this year to expel Fields, newly elected to a new version of the Democratic committee. That attempt was ruled out of order by the party’s new chairman, Keith Norman.

During the runup to the party’s reorganization, Fields had made public statements about “vetting” Norman that suggested to some he had handpicked the new chairman — a fact that prompted a clearly offended Norman to make a public disavowal of that scenario.

Fields continued in his new career as would-be power broker, sending out letters attacking old foe Spence in the latter’s Democratic Party primary contest against ultimate winner Beverly Marrero in yet another special-election contest, this one also for a state Senate seat.

Meanwhile, Fields was increasingly given to temperamental outbursts — some marginally understandable, as when he became unruly in Criminal Court judge Rita Stotts‘ courtroom last year and had to be removed by her bailiff during a legal process in which he apparently thought his son had been unfairly targeted.

There were instances of alleged assault — one against lawyer Jay Bailey; another against radio talk-show host Jennings Bernard, who filed a formal complaint. There were hostile reactions by Fields to routine, even friendly media attention, which culminated in an attempt by the erstwhile civil-libertarian and First Amendment supporter to have the media banned from public meetings of the Democratic committee.

Though this action would patently have violated the state’s Sunshine Law, Fields’ motion was formally vetted by Norman before being dismissed out of hand. (After last week’s events, Norman demanded and got Fields’ resignation, his second in two years, from the executive committee.)

That brings the Fields saga to the present and the ongoing legal/political saga pitting the mayor, his allies, and double (perhaps triple) agent Gwen Smith, who alleges that Fields hired her to entrap Herenton sexually, against Fields and other alleged adversaries of the mayor, some of whom may have had no other involvement in things than to favor Herenton’s taking leave of his office.

It is hard to imagine that an FBI agent would, as Herenton charged, take part in an illegal conspiracy designed to defeat his reelection. What seems more likely is that a sting may have been getting under way, perhaps urged on by Fields, centering on the relations of the mayor and beer-board chairman Reginald French, a Herenton ally, with topless clubs seeking liquor licenses.

Just what is what in this affair may be determined — and in short order — by the special prosecutor requested by District Attorney General Bill Gibbons. And whatever the legal and political consequences to others, the options available to Richard Fields in the end game seem rather starkly circumscribed.

In this age of the real Tennessee Waltz and the fictionalized Sopranos, they range from possible criminal charges on one end to political “rat” on the other. Even if Fields proves to have had the purest of motives, he seems above all to have been an overreacher.

Categories
Opinion

Flashback to 1991

In the immortal words of Mary Winkler after she whacked her husband, our “ugly got out” last week.

The bizarre events involving Mayor Willie Herenton, attorney Richard Fields, and his client-turned-accuser Gwen Smith promise an ugly year of retro politics driven by religion, race, revenge, and fear.

Doubtless there are plenty of snakes of all kinds in Memphis, but the city’s biggest problem are the old bulls who still run the show. The relationship between Herenton and Fields goes back to 1969, when, as principal and teacher, they joined a school boycott called “Black Mondays” to get black representatives on the school board.

Fields supported Herenton and the NAACP when the school board tried to appoint a white superintendent in 1978. When Herenton was elected mayor in 1991 by just 142 votes, Fields was one of only two prominent white citizens to publicly support him. In federal court that year, he helped strike down the runoff provision in mayoral elections, enabling Herenton to win with 49.4 percent of the vote. He represented Herenton in his divorce and in well-publicized lawsuits filed by a teacher and a police officer.

“I know how to keep confidences,” Fields said in a Flyer interview last week.

An activist at heart, he also knows how to take matters into his own hands. He tried to influence county and judicial elections last year by recommending some candidates and criticizing others with information gleaned from public records. He got in the middle of a state Senate election involving attorney Robert Spence earlier this year. And in March, he took a mayoral poll, and when it showed strong signs of Herenton fatigue, he took it to the top floor of City Hall.

“That’s been my role,” Fields said. “I get to disagree with him. That’s the kind of relationship we have.”

Or had, anyway. Fields says they met cordially that afternoon for three-and-a-half hours, talking about old times and the mayor’s legacy as well as the poll and the people surrounding Herenton, particularly Reginald French, an unsuccessful candidate for sheriff last year and head of the beer board. Fields suggested Herenton not run again. “I was trying to help him go out gracefully without any mess,” Fields said.

Herenton gave a much different account. At a news conference, he mocked Fields and said his sincerity and concern for his legacy were bogus. Then he called him a snake.

Fields said he was “distressed” by that, and, moreover, he is tired of activism.

“I would really like to get out of the business of being the person on the front lines,” he said. “I wish some young black lawyers would come forward. But there’s a lot of resentment out there because of the judges’ survey that I did.”

He denied having a sexual relationship with Gwen Smith, who was jailed in Nashville last week for violating probation, or giving her any files or indictments that are not public record. He said businessman and Joseph Lee accuser Nick Clark is “my client,” but he isn’t working for any mayoral candidate, announced or otherwise.

Not that anyone is knocking on his door. Rough-cut, outspoken, and married and divorced four times, Fields is one-of-a-kind. Five years ago, when they were still on good terms, Herenton said, “A lot of my friends don’t understand my friendship with Richard because he irritates the hell out of them.”

The mayoral campaign of 2007 will be the most interesting and bitter one since 1991. On New Year’s Day, Herenton cast himself in biblical terms of being “on the wall” like Nehemiah at Jerusalem. He quoted Scripture at his press conference last week and drew a chorus of “amens” from police officers and supporters in attendance.

Addressing black Memphians specifically, he warned of efforts to divide them and said, “This time, divide-and-conquer ain’t going to work.”

Ominously, he said, “There are those in this community who would like to see me removed by any means,” and, without naming anyone, “They might resort to what happened to Dr. [Martin Luther] King in Memphis.”

A bit stunned by that one, I asked the mayor’s friend and former campaign chairman Charles Carpenter, who was there, if he heard what I heard. At first, he said there had been death threats against the mayor, but when I said I thought that should be reported, he said he wasn’t sure. Standing nearby, police director Larry Godwin said he was unaware of any such threats.

By appealing for racial solidarity, Herenton has little to lose. He already cast black challenger Herman Morris as a “boy” in league with whites from the geriatric set. He has more than $500,000 in his campaign account but has raised only $1,650 this year, and much of what he raised last fall came from supporters in Detroit and Atlanta. In 1999 and 2003, he raised more than $300,000 each year.

And he is right that the polls showing him on the skids are biased and misleading. As the four-term incumbent, he can rally old warriors including attorneys Carpenter and Ricky Wilkins, former MLGW presidents Joseph Lee and Rev. James Netters, and political hands French, Sara Lewis, Deidre Malone (the Shelby County commissioner who orchestrated the Gwen Smith media festival), Sidney Chism, Gale Jones Carson, Stephanie Dowell, Pete Aviotti, Rick Masson, and TaJuan Stout Mitchell. Even some of the now-maligned “wealthy business leaders” may get over it and join Team Herenton once they see how the field shapes up and which way the wind is blowing.

Herenton’s demand for a federal investigation of “an ongoing civil/criminal conspiracy designed to entrap African-American leaders in the city of Memphis” was a politically shrewd reminder that the scorecard so far in Operation Tennessee Waltz and Main Street Sweeper shows six black elected officials in Memphis and no whites. The unpopular Republican attorney general Alberto Gonzales, who is barely hanging on to his job, probably won’t do a thing. And if any federal indictments come out of the investigation of Ralph Lunati’s strip clubs, they can be spun as the work of snakes if they touch anyone close to the mayor.

Divide-and-conquer may not work, but that is assuredly the strategy. The latest one to employ it is Herenton.