Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

Commission Reschedules Independent-Attorney Showdown for Wednesday

JB

The contending parties at a recent weekend retreat: L to r: County CAO Harvey Kennedy; Mayor Mark Luttrell; Commission Chairman Terry Roland; and Commissioner Heidi Shafer

All systems are still go on Wednesday for the showdown between a rebellious Shelby County Commission and the administration of Shelby County Mayor Mark Luttrell over the issue of an independent counsel to serve the Commission only.

Resolution of the matter was to have occurred at a special Commission meeting called for last Thursday by Commission chair Terry Roland, but Commissioner Willie Brooks had duties rolling out a new pay station for FedEx on Thursday and had to be excused — thereby taking his vote out of the occasion and making for a more marginal circumstance.

At Brooks’ request, his colleagues agreed on an alternate formula whereby action on the independent-counsel matter could be accomplished on this Wednesday’s committee day in the County Building. As Commissioner Heidi Shafer, one of the leaders of the independent-counsel action said, the Commission plans to adjourn its committee work midway of the session and would go downstairs to the Commission auditorium to hold a special meeting of the full Commission on all the matters pertaining to the counsel controversy.

“Then back up to finish committees,” Shafer explained, in imagining a finish for Wednesday that would be bound to feel anti-climactic.

The counsel controversy had been germinating for some time but achieved full bloom during the Commission’s budget season in the spring when the Commission bi-partisan majority developed suspicions that Luttrell and his CAO, Harvey Kennedy, had been disingenuous in handling a pending fiscal surplus, low-balling an estimate of it in the amount of $6 million rather than what later investigation revealed to be perhaps as much as $21 million and working to frustrate any effort by the Commission to carve a one-cent sales tax decrease out of the surplus.

The Commission’s desire for an independent counsel of its own to help it evaluate fiscal realities of this kind and other policy matters became an immediate goal — not merely as an end in itself but as a first step in underscoring the commissioners’ feeling that they, and not the executive branch, are the supreme ruling entity in Shelby County government.

On behalf of the Administration, County Attorney Ross Dyer issued a ruling, based on his reading of the county charter, refuting the viability of a permanent independent attorney for the Commission, suggesting only that the Commission, with his concurrence, could employ “special” attorneys for specific and limited ad hoc purposes.

Julian Bolton, a lawyer and former Commissioner, had been named by the Commission to serve as its attorney, but Dyer has indicated he would refuse to sign the necessary contact to legitimatize Bolton’s position, and Luttrell subsequently issued a veto to the resolution that is subject to override by simple majority vote of the Commission.

Voting that override is one likely action for Wednesday, and Roland has suggested that the Commission, as a bargaining tool, might also exercise an option to dispossess Dyer, an appointee of Mayor Luttrell who, like all such mayoral appointees, is subject to Commission approval. The Commission could theoretically reverse its prior approval of Dyer’s hiring with a simple vote of reconsideration.

Roland and Shafer had previously released a lengthy opinion by Bolton, acting as an ad hoc attorney, in favor of their hiring an independent commission attorney.

They have subsequently released additional supporting legal opinions from three former members of the Shelby County Charter Commission. Below are excerpts from these opinions:

George F. Higgs
former member, Shelby County Charter Commission:
…The legislative body is not limited, except by budgetary limitations, and it was the intention of the Charter Commission that traditional separation of powers doctrines be observed. Independent and separate legal counsel is necessary to ensure that the executive and legislative branches exercise independence and separation from one another, thus creating a balance of power. Therefore, in my opinion, the proposed resolution is appropriate….

Dr. Coby V. Smith
former Shelby County Charter Commission member
…The language was intended to allow the Shelby County Commission the freedom to solicit, select, and retain any talent or resources within their budgetary limits that they felt was essential to performing their legislative duties. This language specifically identified special (legal) counsel because of its importance and because of discussions regarding the various conflicts that occur between the Shelby County commission and the executive branch of Shelby County government…..
I have reviewed the proposed resolution, and have no hesitancy in recognizing that it is consistent with what the charter commission envisioned the Shelby County Commission should be empowered to do….

Herman Morris Jr.
former chairman of the Shelby County Home Rule Charter Commission
…The intention and plain meaning of the language, in my opinion, is to allow the Shelby County Commission to employ special legal counsel to assist it, in carrying out its legislative functions. The wording of the section is broad and does not limit the power of the legislative branch, in any respect, except in the event of budgetary constraints…..

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Showdowns in Shelby County

JB

Council runoff candidates at Hooks forum were (l to r) Jamita Swearengen (District 4); Worth Morgan and Dan Springer (District 5); and Anthony Anderson and Berlin Boyd (District 7)

As early voting ends this Friday and the final runoff election date of November 19th, next Thursday, beckons, most attention has been focused on two of the five district city council runoffs: District 5 (Midtown, East Memphis) between newcomer Worth Morgan and youthful activist Dan Springer, and the District 7 race (North Memphis, Frayser) between interim incumbent Berlin Boyd and challenger Anthony Anderson.

District 5 lies astride the Poplar corridor power nexus and is also the bailiwick of current Councilman and Mayor-elect Jim Strickland. Both Morgan and Springer are Republicans, though Springer, who has worked for both Senator Bob Corker and County Mayor Mark Luttrell, won the formal endorsement of the Shelby County Republican Party during the regular election process, in which seven candidates overall vied for the seat.

Morgan, who led by far in fund-raising, with receipts of more than $200,000 to Springer’s $60,000 or so, had the support of the city’s business elite. Now, both he and Springer have solicited support from the camps of losing candidates. 

A meet-and-greet for Morgan last week hosted by fifth-place finisher Charles “Chooch” Pickard, drew a diverse group including avowed Democrats, African Americans, and members of the city’s gay community. Springer, for his part, has actively pitched across party lines as well and has won the formal support of Democrat Mary Wilder, among others. 

Overall, Springer leads in formal endorsements of various kinds. Morgan finished ahead on October 8th, however, with 32 percent of the vote to Springer’s 23 percent.

At a forum last week at the Hooks Central Library for candidates in Districts 4, 5, and 7, Morgan and Springer differed only moderately on issues, though Morgan, who has seemed more at ease in debate formats, gave answers that were both more glib and more expansive. He spoke of having transcended several difficult illnesses as evidence of his resolve, while Springer emphasized his experience.

At the same forum, Boyd, too, stressed his existing connections and boasted of having brought $3.6 million into District 7. Anderson, a clergyman who is the entrepreneur behind the Memphis Business Academy charter-school network, countered with a figure of $8 million allegedly invested in MBA and with references to his numerous community involvements.

Both advocated revenue solutions involving assessments of nonresidents who work in Memphis, in the form of sticker fees (Boyd) or payroll taxes (Anderson). Both approaches would seem to require approval by the Tennessee General Assembly. The two differed most obviously on crime, which Boyd saw as a looming danger and Anderson saw as having diminished.

In the regular general election, Boyd had 26 percent of the total vote, and Anderson had 24 percent.

(Go to Politics Beat Blog at memphisflyer.com for more on these races and the three other Council runoffs: Frank Colvett Jr. vs. Rachel Knox in District 3; Patrice Robinson vs. Keith Williams in District 3; and Jamita Swearengen vs. Doris DeBerry-Bradshaw in District 4.)

The power struggle between the Shelby County Commission and the administration of county Mayor Mark Luttrell moved toward another showdown on Monday with the mayor’s veto of a recent commission resolution appointing former Commissioner Julian Bolton as its independent counsel.

Commission chair Terry Roland‘s public response was in a memo to his fellow commissioners, in which he wrote that he had in mind to call a special commission meeting for Thursday. “We must act as a body to protect our legislative duty to the people of Shelby County, Tennessee,” the memo concluded.

Roland had previously indicated privately that County Attorney Ross Dyer, who has resisted the independent-counsel idea on grounds that the County Charter does not allow it, might be confronted with a choice between altering his view and facing a possible ouster move from the commission. That could come with a vote to reconsider his hiring.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

The Battle Over Julian Bolton

Julian Bolton, the former Shelby County commissioner who was appointed two weeks ago by commission chairman Terry Roland as a “special purposes” lawyer to look into the legality of his (Bolton’s) being hired by the commission as its permanent independent counsel, responded to Roland on Monday with a lengthy series of citations from the County Charter. All seemingly attested that he could indeed be hired, a prior finding by County Attorney Ross Dyer to the contrary notwithstanding.

The commission promptly voted 8-5 on Monday in favor of a resolution from chairman Roland to carry out the hiring.

Jackson Baker

Chairman Roland and County Attorney Ross Dyer seemed focused on another matter here, but they were much on each other’s mind on Monday.

Dyer chose not to comment on the new development, other than to reaffirm his contention of two weeks ago that any permanent attorney hired by the commission would have to be a member of his (Dyer’s) staff, paid by him, and managed by him. And, since Dyer determined that he and the commission chair would have to agree on a candidate, the county attorney in effect had claimed veto power over any such appointment.

All that had seemingly scotched a resolution offered at the time by Roland to hire Bolton — as a decisive first move in a commission effort to assert its authority at the expense of County Mayor Mark Luttrell, who, a clear majority of commissioners believed, had over the months been ritually usurping prerogatives that either did not exist or that were more properly those of the commission to administer — both in determining policy generally and in fiscal administration, specifically.

Back in the 1990s, the Memphis City Council had engaged Allan Wade as its own independent attorney to sift evidence, make arguments, and determine policy in contradistinction to the city attorney and the office of the mayor. Wade was the model for the position the commission intended to create.

For weeks the commission had been battling Luttrell, and Dyer, both of whom had maintained the County Charter permitted only one county legal office under the direct administration of the mayor serving as legal advisor to all aspects of county government, including the affairs of the commission itself.

Two weeks ago, at the time of the first abortive resolution to hire Bolton as an independent lawyer, Dyer had, as indicated above, rejected that idea, but to mollify Roland et al., had suggested that, for specific, limited purposes, the commission could, as it had during moments of the city school-merger controversy of 2010-13, and, as it had during wrangling at Chancery Court over the various ways of reapportioning itself, hire an attorney for special, limited, non-recurring purposes.

“Fine,” announced Roland, who withdrew his original resolution and hired Bolton on the spot for the “single purpose” of countering Dyer’s case against the county commission’s hiring Bolton as a permanent and full-time independent counsel.

From that point, the Luttrell administration and the commission went on to hold what had been a preordained “budget summit” last Friday at St. Columbia Episcopal Conference & Retreat Center in Bartlett. The purpose was to reach a meeting of the minds on some of the issues dividing administration from commission and, if possible, to get on the same page regarding matters at large.

With Luttrell and Roland sitting side by side as co-chairs for the event, with principals from throughout county government sharing breakfast and lunch at the casual affair, and with a polite discussion of subjects ranging from revenue sources to the respective roles of the commission and the mayor in the budget process to the problem of OPEBs [Other Postemployment Benefits] to educational spending to recondite aspects of the county wheel tax and county infrastructure, all gathered did seem to achieve some sense of accord.

Interestingly, one idea that became something of a hit at the conference apparently derived from research by Bolton, who determined that in virtually every corner of Shelby County there were unused county-owned enclaves that could serve as office space for the county commissioner whose district happened to coincide with the available space.

One commissioner, Mark Billingsley, who represents Germantown, professed himself happy with the prospect.

So lingering was the mood of concord and free sharing of information on Friday, so warm and comfortable the sense of common purpose, that developments on the following Monday came as the proverbial cold shower.

By Monday morning, ad hoc attorney Bolton had made his report to chairman Roland, who distributed copies to the full commission.

Bolton’s report, based on his reading of the County Charter, said, in great and specific legal detail, that “the legislative power of the county is vested in the Board of County Commissioners of Shelby County [and] includes all lawful authority to adopt ordinances and resolutions governing the operation of government or regulating the conduct and affairs of the residents of Shelby County.”

From that broad first declaration, Bolton, citing codes and sections from the charter, went on to state that “the charter clearly subordinates the position of the chief executive officer, i.e., county mayor,” whose role is “to see that all resolutions and ordinances of the board of county commissioners and all laws of the state subject to enforcement by them or by the officers who are subject under this charter, to their direction and supervision are faithfully executed.”

Bolton’s memo went on and on in this vein, but its bottom line contention is that the commission, not the mayor, is the county’s chief governing authority. On the matter of the county attorney’s authority claimed by Dyer, Bolton writes, “The rules of statutory construction do not allow the subordinate office of the County Attorney, although chief counsel for the commission, to impair, frustrate, nor defeat the object of a statute, ordinance, or resolution by interpreting that ‘chief counsel’ means ‘sole counsel,’ absent specific statutory, or charter authority.”

All of this readily convinced Roland to add the new appointment resolution making Bolton a de facto independent attorney for the county commission. The actual vote on his resolution Monday was 8-4, in favor, with Democrat Van Turner demurring and four Republican commissioners — David Reaves, Billingsley, Steve Basar, and George Chism voting no.

Various reasons were adduced for the lack of solidarity with the commission — the fact that Dyer had reportedly interrupted their attempted executive session on the matter Monday morning, declaring it illegal, or allegations that interested Republicans from outside the commission had intervened with individual commissioners against the appointment of a Democrat, Bolton, as the commission’s attorney, rather than a Republican.

The 8-5 vote, underwritten by all Democrats save for Turner and by Republicans Roland and Heidi Shafer (whose argument for enhanced commission authority is this week’s Viewpoint, p. 15), holds for a document that contains a space for Mayor Luttrell to sign.

The county charter would allow the resolution of Bolton’s appointment to become official without the mayor’s signature or, should Luttrell choose to veto it, by a simple majority override on the part of the commission.

The remaining obstacle to the installation of Bolton as an independent attorney representing the county commission is contained in one of the resolution’s enabling clauses: “Be it further resolved that the Shelby County Attorney is directed to prepare a contract under the supervision of the chairman, or his designee, for execution by the parties in accordance with Section 3.03 (A) (D) of the Shelby County Charter.”

County Attorney Dyer has made it clear to his confidants that he has no intention of preparing such a contract, technically forestalling the effect of the document and likely throwing the whole matter into the jurisdiction of Chancery Court for final judgment.

Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

Restoring Balance Between the Shelby County Commission and the Mayor

The 2014 Shelby County election ushered in many first-time county commissioners to serve as the people’s representatives. It was the first full election under the single-member district division. Only five of the 13 commissioners had served a full previous term. So, while the changeover offers plenty of opportunity for positive change, it also creates a deficit in institutional knowledge.

Heidi Shafer

Previous large commission turnovers were somewhat mitigated by county attorneys who had years of service in the Shelby County Attorney’s offices. This time, however, a new county attorney was appointed by the mayor from outside Shelby County, creating opportunities for positive change along with a lack of practical historical knowledge.

The commission and mayor’s office are currently struggling over what powers appropriately belong to each according to the charter, and how to best serve the people who elected us.

Commissions in previous years have allowed the mayoral administration to borrow some of the commission’s powers, as it did when EDGE was created in 2010, and allowed mayoral contracting up to $100,000 during Mayor Wharton’s term. The commission is evaluating which of those powers should be taken back. 

We have been reviewing the Shelby County Charter for a clearer understanding of its mandates.

First, the charter proclaims: “The Legislature is given broad legislative powers inclusive of the rights to adopt County ordinances and is so constructed as to be truly representative of all the people of Shelby County.” And this: “The legislative power includes all lawful authority [my emphasis] to adopt ordinances and resolutions governing the operation of government or regulating the conduct and affairs of the residents of the county, to adopt the county budget, to fix the county tax rate, to make appropriations of county funds for all legal purposes, and to exercise all other authority of a legislative nature which is vested in the county by the Constitution, general statutes, or special, local or private acts of the General Assembly or this charter.”

Second, the commission may “adopt any ordinance or resolution [again, my emphasis] which is not in conflict with the Constitution or general laws of the state of Tennessee, or charter.”

Third, “The legislative branch is vested with all other powers of the county not specifically, or by necessary implication, vested in some other official of the county by the Constitution or by statute not inconsistent with this charter”. The mayor is given no similar provision.

The charter also lays out clear responsibility for the commission to order “such special audits as deemed necessary,” to establish purchasing policies, and to be the sole power to grant franchises, borrow money, and issue bonds. No county property or interests can be sold without express validation of the commission. The commission also sets its own budget.

All resolutions and ordinances become effective with or without a signature from the executive branch, unless the mayor chooses to veto. The commission can then override an executive veto with a majority plus one vote (unless the vote originally required a two-thirds majority to pass).

The commission has the power of approval and consent of all nominations by the mayor for any board, commission, agency, authority, chief administrative officer, county attorney, public defender, or divorce referee.

What are the duties of the county mayor? The mayor is charged with seeing that all resolutions and ordinances of the board of county commissioners are faithfully executed. He or she is to present the consolidated county budget to the commission, which has full rights to modify or amend. The mayor is also compelled to “take such other executive and administrative actions as are required by this charter or may be prescribed by the board of county commissioners.”

I am a believer in the separation of powers and of intra-governmental cooperation, when it doesn’t compromise the voice of the people.

But the charter makes it clear that the commission is the legal designee and guardian of that voice. The ongoing efforts of my colleagues and me to restore and safeguard the authority of the commission vis-à-vis the mayor should be seen in that light.

Heidi Shafer is a second-term member of the Shelby County Commission.

Categories
Editorial Opinion

Shelby County Commission: A Matter of Law

Not unexpectedly, a bid by the Shelby County Commission to hire Julian Bolton, a former commissioner, as the commission’s independent attorney has been turned back by the existing county attorney, Ross Dyer.

Jackson Baker

Terry Roland

Dyer cited the county charter in ruling basically that the new attorney — any new attorney — would have to be agreeable to him and would have to be a member of his staff. It is as if King George III determined that the 13 American colonies could function “independently,” so long as their actions were subject to approval by the House of Lords.

Those members of the commission who arrived at Monday’s meeting in a giddy state of expectation were understandably dismayed and predictably backed away from the substitute resolution that Dyer’s s staff had prepared.

Not to be foiled, the irrepressible commission chair, Terry Roland, immediately hired Bolton as a special attorney to figure out how to get around Dyer’s ruling. An odd quirk in the charter apparently allows for such ad hoc — and temporary — outsourcings.

At press time, Dyer had not responded, though he could conceivably claim to have the option of hiring Bolton himself to counter whatever move Bolton makes on behalf of the commission.

And we halfway expect to hear from somebody involved in this curious caper some variation of the ubiquitous Donald Trump punchline: “Julian, you’re fired.”

But let’s be serious. The background of this seemingly outlandish matter is a conviction on the part of a commission majority (transcending matters of race or party) that the administration of County Mayor Mark Luttrell has not played fair and square with commissioners on matters of county spending, and on the contrary has usurped the commission’s authority to approve a budget by issuing incomplete and/or misleading reports on the county’s fiscal situation, and by attempting to play commissioners off against each other by dangling now-you-seem-them-now-you-don’t “surplus” funds.

What the commission majority wants is the same wherewithal possessed by the Memphis City Council, which back in the 1990s was able successfully to engage its own permanent full-time attorney, Allan Wade, who continues in that role and is responsible to the council and only to the council. It is this capability that County Attorney Dyer, who insists he represents all county officials, administrative and legislative, maintains is denied the commission by the County Charter.

The issue of an independent attorney is by no means the only matter dividing the commission from the Luttrell administration, but it has become the lynchpin of a generalized rebellion in which the commission intends to assert itself not merely as the administration’s equal but also as its superior in matters of governmental oversight.

What has become a full-blown power struggle has come to rest on a legalistic point involving attorneys and may well end up being contested by adversary sets of attorneys and finally decided in a court of law. We know that we should be comforted by this fact, but for reasons we can’t fully explain, it is making us uneasy.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Memphis Politics as Seen From Afar

SPA, Belgium — In the last four days, I have experienced: 1) Oktoberfest in Munich; 2) a half-day tour of the concentration camp at Dachau; 3) a lumberjack contest in Luxembourg; 4) a tour of the Battle of the Bulge sites, focused on the Belgian town of Bastogne; and 5) immersion in Fort La Ferté, a key component of the Maginot Line, the series of French fortifications which were meant to halt the German invasion of France in 1940, but failed to do so.

I have also, through the miracle of modern science, been able to kibitz via the internet Monday’s meeting of the Shelby County Commission, which, at 10:40 p.m., Spa time, had really just gotten started. 

As we speak, they are about to deal with zoning regulations applicable to private sex clubs. One of the clauses of a new ordinance being proposed by Josh Whitehead of the Office of Planning and Development will read, “A private sex club shall not be considered a place of worship.”

Commissioner David Reaves asks to be excused from voting. “I just can’t vote on something involving sex clubs,” he explains. The item, a compendium of several zoning matters, still passes with 12 votes.

Did I mention that I experienced Oktoberfest in Munich?

I’m on a bucket-list trip to Europe. Still to go, before I return for the final few days of the city election, are trips to Normandy, where the group I’m with will spend a couple of days looking at the D-Day landing areas, and then to Paris (briefly) before coming home. 

If the Normandy tour is anything like those we’ve been through so far, we’ll learn one hell of a lot that you can’t get from books. We’ll also work hard at it. At one point in going through the Maginot fortifications, where passages were sardine-can-size cramped, we had to troop up 167 steps of a winding stairway. Huff and puff doesn’t begin to describe it. The 140 or so defenders of Fort La Ferté died from smoke asphyxiation under bombardment in those claustrophobic confines.

Meanwhile, in Memphis, audience member Jane Pierotti is inveighing against a proposed commission rules change that would drop the number of votes required for a rules change from two-thirds of the membership to a simple majority. She quotes Lord Acton and notes that Darth Vader did not start out on “the dark side” but sure as heck ended up there.

This item passes with 12 votes as well.

I cannot pretend that I know everything that has transpired in the city election since I wrote last week’s cover-story roundup of the various races. The trend lines seem to be still in place, however, and, as far as I can see, will continue all the way through early voting and right up to the final October 8th election date.

The mayoral debate that WMC anchor Joe Birch and I co-moderated last Tuesday at the Rotary Club of Memphis was so even-keeled and impressive that almost everyone, including a key supporter of Mayor A C Wharton who normally spins with the best of them, concluded that all four participants — Wharton, Councilmen Jim Strickland and Harold Collins, and Memphis Police Association director Mike Williams — had demonstrated they were capable of running the city.

Part of that has to do with the fact that frequent interchanges with each other and with the public have made them all conversant with the issues of importance — a process that, as we noted editorially last week, just can’t, or shouldn’t, be skipped or foreshortened.

That all of them, after that dignified affair, went after each other, slugfest-style, at the University of Memphis the same night, doesn’t contradict that fact; it just indicates that they all are aware of the importance of the stakes.

Meanwhile, the commission is announcing plans to go into budget matters with an intensity and thoroughness that have not previously been the norm. “It may not be to the advantage of the administration,” opines new chairman Terry Roland, “but it will be to the advantage of the people.”

The commission, says Roland, will also look into EDGE, the joint city/county industrial development board, with the idea of making some serious changes.

Meanwhile, through the auspices of Education First, on an itinerary planned by former Shelby County Schools chairman David Pickler, I’m getting lessoned up on other, more historic battlefields.

Back at you next week before the final vote.

Categories
Letters To The Editor Opinion

What They Said…

Greg Cravens

About Toby Sells’ post, “Zoo Grant to Renovate Herpatarium” …

This is good to hear. Long past time for the zoo to do something about that exhibit. Now if they could only get a grant to update the aquarium.

Jeff

Yes, the aquarium is very sad. The exhibit at a tropical fish store is better. Maybe they should just outsource it to a tropical fish store. I bet they’d do it for free.

DatGuy

How about a grant for parking, so the zoo can stop destroying our historical greensward?

Susan Williams

About the Flyer cover story, “The Lipscomb Affair” …

In 2005, my sisters and I got together with friends to form the group Save Libertyland. Mayor Herenton had just closed down the park out of the blue. In early 2006, Save Libertyland began meeting with city officials, mainly Robert Lipscomb. I dubbed him “Man of Many Hats” for his various high-profile, high-paying administrative positions.

For years, until we moved away, my sisters and I got strung along by Lipscomb. He played everyone in Save Libertyland with his “charrettes” and charades. We began calling for a HUD audit of Lipscomb’s offices. Memphis’ current breaking scandal and Lipscomb’s suspension (with pay?!) has shocked former members of Save Libertyland. The mounting allegations against him bring back a flood of sad memories from our long fight to save teenage summer jobs, recreation, tourism, and most importantly, family togetherness. We knew he was a liar with power over people’s lives and livelihoods; we did not know to what extent.

Denise Parkinson

On Bianca Phillips’ post about Troy Goode …

Many questions remain unanswered about the cause of death in the Troy Goode case. It seems to me that the Southaven district attorney’s office, mayor’s office, and police department are not doing anything to get to the bottom of this death. If it turns out that Troy Goode died as a result of police misconduct, this could be a criminal matter. I hope with all of my heart that they continue to look for facts in this matter and do not rest until justice is served for Troy Goode and the family he left behind.

Things the media tell us that are facts: Troy Goode was bitten by police dogs. He was thrown to the ground by police and hog-tied. He was strapped facedown on a gurney while still hog-tied and put into an ambulance. Troy’s family was not able to see him in the ambulance or the hospital. He died while in police custody. He was never arrested or read his rights. 

Troy left behind a wife and baby, as well as his parents, siblings, and many friends. Please help in any way you can to make sure Troy gets justice. 

Dan Tupis

About Eileen Townsend’s story, “With This Ring” …

I care about professional wrestling just a little bit more than I care about Donald Trump, which is to say, not much. But I found myself reading Eileen Townsend’s article about it simply because it’s so beautifully written. As with John McPhee, it’s the prose that dazzles, and the subject becomes secondary.

Corey Mesler

About Jackson Baker’s Politics column, “Close, But No Cigars” …

Terry Roland seems to have settled down to a mostly respectable politician the past couple of years. I honestly don’t know whether he’s angling for Mark Luttrell’s job. I’ve not given him much consideration or respect because of his behavior and rants of past years, but the new Terry Roland is making me consider changing my opinion of him.

Midtown Mark

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Wharton, Strickland Remain Close in Mayoral Race

With three weeks to go, the race for Memphis mayor is still a coin-toss affair. By most reckonings, incumbent Mayor A C Wharton and City Councilman Jim Strickland are running virtually neck and neck.

That circumstance was confirmed by a recent Mason-Dixon poll, published in The Commercial Appeal, which had Wharton at 30 percent and Strickland at 25 percent, with City Councilman Harold Collins and Memphis Police Association President Mike Williams at 12 percent each. Arguments promptly raged as to the nature of the sampling, but the general picture seemed clear enough. And so were candidates’ responses.

Strickland’s support among white voters and along the Poplar Corridor in general was obvious and unlikely to diminish much, if at all, by election day. If anything, came the word from his camp, his standing in the poll was low-balled. Strickland, who has certainly not forsworn the black vote but was lagging there, accelerated his appearances at African-American churches and other predominantly black venues to augment his prospects.

Wharton was maintaining a plurality among black voters, who constitute almost two-thirds of the eligible electorate, and was in the low double-digits among whites. The mayor kept pitching to his strength and was emphasizing support from fellow office-holders and established sources, including The Commercial Appeal, which gave him its endorsement.

Collins and Williams, meanwhile, maintained they were within striking distance and were working hard to present themselves as the change agents of choice in an environment in which voter discontent was obvious, both anecdotally and as measured in the polls.

The four principal mayoral candidates will participate next Tuesday at noon at the University Club in what could be the climactic mayoral forum in what has been a series of them this year. The forum is sponsored under the joint auspices of the Rotary Club of Memphis and the Flyer.

• Politics is politics, and education is education, but all too often, especially in Memphis and Shelby County in recent times, the two have merged. 

Everybody in Shelby County surely got their fill of education politics per se during the the city/county school merger controversy that raged from December 2010 to August 2014, when the six suburban municipalities of Shelby County got their independent school districts up and running, more or less.

But what’s this? Here, in its entirety, is an item reported in the current issue of the Nashville-based Tennessee Journal:

“The Memphis-Shelby County Education Association claimed through its attorney Wednesday to have seceded from the Tennessee Education Association and the National Education Association. Relations had been tense since Keith Williams, a former M-SCEA president whose term ended in July, was hired last month as the new executive director. 

Ken Foster, the director for 15 years, was ousted. TEA has notified teachers it has set up a new ‘TEA West’ office to serve them, and that despite actions of M-SCEA leaders, they are still members of TEA and NEA. According to a TEA email, TEA West was established ‘after M-SCEA leadership refused to allow NEA officials to conduct an audit, broke the agreement of the Memphis-Shelby County [schools] merger, forced out the long-serving executive director, and now has claimed to disaffiliate from TEA-NEA.'” 

For the record, the Keith Williams mentioned here is the same Keith Williams who is considered one of the main contenders in the race for the District 3 City Council seat being vacated by Harold Collins, now a candidate for mayor.

Williams’ pugnacity as an opponent of the charter surrender that was voted on by a majority of the old Memphis City Schools board on December 20, 2010, was rivaled only by that of then board member Kenneth Whalum Jr., now a candidate for the Super District 9, Position 2 seat.

As previously indicated in this space, Whalum is running as the unofficial head of a like-minded “education slate,” and, unsurprisingly perhaps, Williams is one of the six members of that slate he has endorsed.

By all accounts, the other major candidate for the District 3 seat is Patrice Robinson, who served alongside Whalum on the old MCS board and was a member of the majority which cast the fateful vote to surrender the MCS charter.

Robinson — who has been running hard in the current District 3 race, holding one meet-and-greet affair per week — previously tangled in the race for the District 9 Shelby County Commission seat now held by Justin Ford, who was able to eke out a win in that winner-take-all race.

Unlike that race, this one for city council is subject to a run-off if no one candidate is able to win a majority, and, inasmuch as the field includes five other candidates — some with name recognition from previous races of their own — it is not impossible that this latest showdown between Williams and Robinson will have another chapter beyond October 8th.

The other active contenders for the District 3 seat are Tanya Cooper, also an educator and the daughter of state Representative Barbara CooperKevin MottSherman Kilimanjaro; and Coleman Thompson. Rhonda Banks is listed on the ballot as a candidate, but she has suspended her race and is now supporting Robinson. • Runoffs, if they should be called for in the District 3 race or in any of the other six district races, will not be held on November 8th, as originally scheduled and announced as a runoff date, but on November 19th. This is according to a new clarification by the Shelby County Election Commission of state election law, which calls for runoffs to occur no sooner than 30 days from the posted election day and no longer than 45 days.

The clarification happens incidentally to avoid the awkwardness of holding an election on a date, November 8, which falls on a Sunday.

 

• Meanwhile, one de facto “runoff” election has already been held — that for the chairmanship of the Shelby County Commission. The commission’s original vote for chairman was held a month ago — on August 10th, when East Memphis Republican member Steve Basar won the election by a single vote.

Then, in a bizarre turnabout, one hour after the election, Memphis Democrat Eddie Jones, who had abstained for most of the ballot rounds that day before casting what had turned out to be the decisive vote for Basar, unexpectedly asked for a reconsideration ­— i.e., a revote on the matter.

Parliamentary protocol allows for such a reconsideration if the person seeking it was a member of the prevailing side on the original vote, and Jones, who had in the meantime had several sotto voce conversations with another chairmanship contender, Millington Republican Terry Roland, qualified.

After a vote which narrowly approved reconsideration, another vote was held, in which — thanks largely to a spoiler candidacy by Collierville Republican George Chism — neither the now un-elected Basar nor Roland could prevail, and a new election was called for this week, to accommodate Jones, who said he would be unable to attend the intervening commission meeting on August 14th.

Come Monday, and the new election was the first order of business after the commission’s approval of a consent agenda. With interim chair Van Turner presiding (outgoing chair Ford’s term having formally terminated), new nominations for chairman were called for, and the same three candidates as before — Basar, Roland, and Chism — were put in nomination.

Tellingly, Roland was nominated this time by Jones. In the end, after two ballots, Roland won election on the basis of five Republican votes, including his own, and those of two Democrats, Jones and Ford.

As a preamble to Monday’s rescheduled chairmanship election, several citizens, representing Democratic, Republican, and perhaps independent constituencies, had appeared before the commission, challenging its members to cast their votes on some basis other than deal-making.

Whatever degree of public cynicism that may have represented, victor Roland, whose election was a springboard of sorts for the county mayor’s race he intends to run in 2018, sought to be reassuring. Before the vote, he promised “from my heart” that, if elected, he would “break my neck” on behalf of his colleagues of all persuasions. After the vote, he professed to be humbled.

Basar — who, besides his two recent setbacks, had suffered an unanticipated loss to Ford in last year’s chairmanship vote ­— was sounding philosophical even before Monday’s vote was taken. “Déjà vu all over again,” he said.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Politics or Government in Shelby County?

Even as most political attention locally is trained on an ongoing city election season, Shelby County government has a political crisis on its hands in the form of an ongoing power struggle between branches of government.

When the Shelby County Commission concluded its last public meeting of the 2014-15 cycle on Monday, it was still in a state of uncertainty and division as to the nature of its own leadership in the year to come, having elected Steve Basar as its chairman two weeks ago, only to un-elect him in a reconsideration vote an hour later.

But the commissioners seemed to have less difficulty on Monday in unifying against a common foe: the administration of Shelby County Mayor Mark Luttrell, which has gotten involved in a power struggle with the commission — one that consistently has put the two entities at loggerheads as to just who is the boss in the county system.

The contest was joined in two ways on Monday. First, when Luttrell requested and was given the opportunity to address the commission to open the meeting, in his remarks, the mayor made an effort to review some of the differences between his administration and the commission on budgetary and spending priorities and proposed a forthcoming “summit” with the county’s legislative body to review priorities and to try to get them in sync.

One item mentioned in the mayor’s remarks — a workforce development grant of $175,000 to Seedco, a national nonprofit organization, to train local residents for retail positions — would become the focus of a debate and test-case vote, one that the mayor, who opposed the grant, would lose by a 10-2 vote.

Luttrell’s opposition to the Seedco grant, much of which would be in conjunction with the opening of a Just-A-Buck dollar store, was that routing economically at-risk citizens into relatively low-paying retail-sales positions was not the proper focus for the county’s workforce-development efforts.

In the commission’s later debate on the Seedco grant, the mayor’s position was supported by Commissioners Basar and David Reaves, two Republicans who often find themselves on opposite sides of the commission’s internal politics, but who concurred in opposition to the grant.

Basar, as Luttrell had, challenged the emphasis on retail sales vs. higher-paying kinds of employment, and pointed out that Seedco had in 2012 been charged by the federal government with fraud in its New York City job-placement operation.

Reaves made the point that the commission, once having made a grant to Seedco, would have no further oversight over its disposition, contrasting that with workforce development programs conducted under two existing entities, the Greater Memphis Alliance for a Competitive Workforce (GMACW), operated under the auspices of the city/county EDGE board, and the federally sponsored Workforce Investment Network (WIN).

The commission would have significant input in either of those workforce development programs without having to “spend a nickel,” said Reaves, who called the proposed Seedco grant an exercise in “pork.” He offered a motion, seconded by Basar, to refer the matter of the Seedco grant back to committee while the commission looked into doing something with GMACW or WIN.

The motion went down, however, and it became apparent that something more than pure cost-accounting or workforce-development policy was involved in the debate when influential GOP Commissioner Heidi Shafer, the body’s budget chair and normally an opponent of grants in principle, came down hard for the Seedco grant.

Shafer has made no secret of her view that the Luttrell administration had arrogated too much authority to itself, particularly in its dealings with the commission during recent budget negotiations, when the administration declared a $6 million surplus but opposed efforts by Republican members to offset enough of that amount to allow for a one-cent decrease in the county tax rate.

Other members, Democrats and Republicans, have nursed other grievances, and there developed an apparent post-budget consensus on the commission for the body to look into having its own legal recourse and independent vetting sources.

The commission has meanwhile pressed for more candor from the administration on the county fiscal situation and secured an administration pledge in last week’s committee sessions for a “truing-up” this fall of the county’s fluid revenue status.

At one point in Monday’s discussion of the Seedco grant, after Luttrell had left the auditorium, GOP Commissioner Terry Roland confronted administration CAO Harvey Kennedy with an accusation that “it was kind of disrespectful for the mayor to come up here and talk about a summit when he has run roughshod over us for five years. … When you look at that charter, what it says is that this body has the power. … At the end of the day, we are the governing body.”

Later in the debate, Kennedy called Roland’s characterization of relations between the commission and administration “extremely inaccurate” and insisted that the county charter provided “shared responsibility” for the branches of government and that “we don’t work for the commission.”

Whatever the case, relations between the two branches could hardly be more strained, and it would seem that Luttrell’s desired “summit” with the commission, if and when it ends up taking place, could be the last best chance of patching things up.

Meanwhile, the commission will attempt once again to resolve its chairmanship question at its September 14th public meeting, with Commissioner Van Turner, a first-term Democrat, presiding as acting chair.


DOGGING THE VOTE:

JB




Three candidates in the Memphis city election who are running along similar and somewhat unorthodox lines are including an emphasis on shoring up animal rights in their platforms and
collaborated in a meet-and-greet at the Overton Bark dog park at
Overton Park on Saturday.



It didn’t take long for this little terrier, belonging to an attendee, to commit himself and come looking for a constituent service — to wit, a dog biscuit — from (l to r) mayoral candidate Mike Williams; Lynn Moss, candidate for City Council, District 9, Position 2; and Robin Spielberger, candidate for Super district 9, Position 1.



Two other issues held in common by the three are support for
retaining the Mid-South Coliseum and restoration of lost benefits for
city employees.

Categories
Editorial Opinion

The Shelby County Commission Kerfluffle

“It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.” Those lines are familiar to most students of literature as the first words in Charles Dickens’ classic A Tale of Two Cities. After Monday, they may have a somewhat different meaning to Steve Basar, a member of the Shelby County Commission.

Basar, who represents an East Memphis district and has a major concern with economic development, has desired to be chairman of the commission for some time. Two years ago, he was elected to serve as the body’s vice chair, an office which, once upon a time, positioned one to ascend to the chairmanship in a year’s time. Harboring such expectations, which were reinforced by another commission tradition, that the chairmanship should be rotated from year to year by party, Republican Basar made ready for his ascension to the chairmanship a year ago, at the end of outgoing Democrat James Harvey’s one-year term.

Like Harvey before him, Basar even had a speech ready. But, for reasons that have never been fully explained and that may be as much personal as political, Basar was not elected. His fellow Republicans, whom he expected to serve as his base, not only deserted him, they ended up voting in Democratic Commissioner Justin Ford.

Stunned and understandably aggrieved, Basar fell into a pattern of cooperating with the commission’s Democrats on key matters. The positive lure of bipartisanship may have been one of his reasons, but there were other reasons for the de facto alliance, which has held firm for most of the succeeding time. For, just as Basar felt he’d been done wrong by his fellow Republicans, the Democrats on the commission were suspicious that Ford, to gain his chairmanship, had made some deal with the Republicans.

Nobody wants to use the term “payback,” but the ad hoc Basar/Democrat coalition set out on a systematic campaign to depose chairman Ford, and, if not that, then at least to set limits on his powers. They succeeded in the latter aim, reducing from eight to seven the number of commission votes necessary to overrule the chairman’s control of the agenda.

Came Monday, and Basar, more or less on the strength of his Democratic alliance, won election as chairman by the whisker-width of a single vote. The best of times. 

But payback is a two-edged sword, and to the astonishment of Basar (and everyone else, except whoever was in on the deal), the new chairman-elect saw his chairmanship abruptly taken away from him an hour after he got it, when one of his previous voters, whether induced or not, went over to the other side and forced a reconsideration vote that went against Basar. The worst of times.

For the time being, the commission is leaderless and won’t have another chairmanship election until next month. Other people’s ambitions, and other factors, including no doubt some real issues, went into this outcome. But, at root, what it signifies is that political gamesmanship has gotten the upper hand in what is constitutionally the supreme legislative body in Shelby County and which has real business to accomplish. Any more of this hanky-panky just won’t do.