Inside Baseball Strikes Out In County Government

Here’s the real problem with the appointment of the new Shelby County Mayor.

It’s not the alliance between a couple of Republican commissioners to usher in the era of the Joe Ford Administration.

It’s not the parody of leadership that two days of serial voting produced.

It’s not even the laughable criticisms about the Wharton Administration’s financial stewardship by a leading candidate.

Hope Springs Eternal

The real problem is that from the beginning, the appointment of the interim county mayor was an insiders’ game. It was driven by an impulse that one of the commissioners should get the political plum. It was also about the devaluing of the county mayor’s job by suggesting that almost any commissioner could do the job.

The sad part is that there wasn’t anyone on the county legislative body unwilling to game the process in one way or another – either as a potential candidate or in return for political support. It was probably too much to hope that instead of turning to look at each other first, the commissioners would look beyond the county building to consider who in Memphis would be the qualified person to provide the sound management that the $1 billion enterprise needs over the next nine months.

We suspect that FedEx founder and guru Fred Smith may have even been willing to bivouac one of his top managers at Shelby County Government to keep it on sound footing, particularly to continue the debt reduction plan by the Wharton Administration. With little notice, the amount of debt service payments by county government actually went down last year for the first time in about 25 years.

Getting The Message Right

Or, if the Shelby County Board of Commissioners wanted to send a strong message about the future, its members could have chosen one of the talented, young people who are more than capable of setting the right agenda and sticking to it. It was a move that could have sent a dramatic message about the changing of the generational leadership in Memphis.

Instead, the commissioners sent a different message, the unmistakable one that it was politics as usual in county government. At a time when the hopeful attitude unleashed by the election of a new Memphis mayor could have spread to county government, the commissioners elected one of the hoariest names in local politics.

To put it bluntly, at the precise moment with the commissioners should have been sending a message about a new day and new hope, it chose to elect someone with political baggage that immediately makes half of all Shelby Countians instinctively abandon confidence in him and their county government.

Dashed Hope

This is not to say that Mayor-to-be Joe Ford is not a fine person. But that does not change the fact that his family name is anathema to so much of the public. In the end, a majority of the commissioners essentially said they just didn’t care and did it any way.

It was a valuable opportunity squandered, and because of it, the momentum that could have been born from new hope and enthusiasm has been muted, if not derailed completely.

To further complicate things, Commissioner Ford’s stinging and unfounded criticisms of CAO Jim Huntzicker, whose name was submitted at the 11th hour as a compromise candidate, will now require serious fence mending by the interim mayor. In fact, it’s hard to imagine Commissioner Ford succeeding without Mr. Huntzicker’s institutional knowledge and financial advice. We can only hope that the new mayor does not plan to make any changes to the major appointed officials who operate Shelby County Government day to day.

The Fallout

During deliberations about the mayoral appointment, Commissioner Ford exhibited a regrettable tendency to shoot from the hip wide of the mark. That continued after his election with his half-baked idea to eliminate the board of The Med. Hopefully, this behavior is an aberration and the real Ford style has not yet been previewed.

Already, there is speculation that Commissioner Ford – despite protestations to the contrary - is a possible candidate in the May primary for county mayor, but it’s hard to imagine a scenario where he could be elected. There are just too many barriers.

Fallout from the appointment came quickly. The two Republican commissioners who voted for Commissioner Ford – Wyatt Bunker and Mike Ritz – already have targets painted on their backs by some irate members of their party. It could be problematic for Commissioner Ritz, who already had created some discomfort for some party members with his iconoclastic brand of representation, and Commissioner Bunker’s critics suggest that he has simply taken his conservative constituents for granted with this vote.

Ups And Downs

It remains to be seen what will develop from the current political rumblings, but the political winner at first blush seems to be Commissioner Deidre Malone’s mayoral campaign. Her vote against Commissioner Ford strengthens her credentials with voters outside Memphis, a place where she needs to gain a stronger foothold and be identified as someone who’s not willing to go along to get along.

Speaking of county commissioners, Steve Mulroy continued his quixotic quest to save the rotting Zippin Pippin at the Fairgrounds. All that’s left are the wood and metal from the track and structure of the old roller coaster, because the cars, motors, and everything else were taken away years ago by a company who bought the ride.

It didn’t want to spend the money to move the track, and as Commissioner Mulroy acknowledged, the wood is in such bad shape that it would have to be replaced anyway. In other words, at this point, the controversy is essentially over whether to save the metal track.

Surreality

It’s reached a point where it’s just Kafkaesque – spending close to half a million dollars to disassemble rotting wood and rusty tracks and to store them until there is some unimaginable time when they are needed again.

It’s enough to make the commissioners’ deliberations about the next county mayor look reasonable.

Buehler Homes Taxes County Commissioners

Every once in awhile something makes its way to the agenda of Memphis City Council or Shelby County Board of Commissioners that simply defies imagination.

The resolution on Monday’s board of commissioners’ agenda to give 140 county-owned lots to Beuhler Homes for rental housing is one of them.

There are so many reasons that county commissioners should at least go slow – if not vote against – a plan that seems to have more questions than solid assurances. Perhaps, the best way to do it would to be to take the time to carefully analyze the implications of this plan rather than respond to the politics of it.

So far, the push for the 140 lots has raised eyebrows but the political urgency behind it has raised even more. There seems to be a “take no prisoners” strategy to get it passed which in itself does nothing so much as spark more questions.

Payment Due

Opponents contend that the company is the equivalent of a public-sanctioned slum lord and advocates claim it as a company committed to constructing affordable houses in the urban core. In other words, there are a lot of concerns that need to be answered about Beuhler Homes.

Commissioner Mike Ritz raised a huge reason when he pointed out that the company owes $1.1 million in overdue property taxes. At a time when so many people say that government should operate like a business, it’s hard to fathom a private partnership getting off the ground if one of the partners had that kind of encumbrance.

One Central Garden resident put it succinctly in her email: “Why take properties from people who can't pay taxes and give it to someone who is not paying his property taxes?” It’s a fair question. At the least, it would be prudent for the board of commissioners to have a signed, enforceable agreement from Buehler Homes for payment of its delinquent taxes before it considers doing anything with the company.

We’re not sure what Commissioner Steve Mulroy meant when we referred to making “some sort of moral statement,” but in truth, the only kind of statement that matters is a “paid in full” statement from the county trustee’s office.

Core Questions

The question by Commissioner Henri Brooks – who has been faithfully driving a core city initiative – proved there are concerns even more important than the monetary ones, citing the low-quality standards by Buehler Homes and complaints from many in the neighborhoods where they are located.

To address this, the company said it improved its designs as a result of negotiations with a design review process set up by the board of commissioners. However, the designs bear scant improvement over the houses that have, in Commissioner Brooks’ words, disregarded the interests of the inner city. Hers are cautionary words since she actually represents part of North Memphis where the lots are located.

Buehler Homes has given a lot of promises to get county approval of its lots, but if the past is the best predictor of the future, it’s hard to feel too much optimism that things will fundamentally be any different.

That legacy is stark testimony to the ambivalence that county government has shown for the more than 20 years that it has been enabling Buehler’s housing business. After all that time, Buehler Homes isn’t ever named as an example of the kind of urban infill that strengthens neighborhoods and the urban fabric. More to the point, it’s regularly pointed to as an example of the kind of disregard that is often prevalent whenever the client is the working poor, whether it is public transit or urban housing.

Plugging In CDC’s

There is hope of do things differently, and community development corporations are showing how it can be done. Back when Buehler Homes’s relationship with county government began, CDC’s were few and far between. Fortunately, that is no longer the case, and the most inventive, effective strategies originate there.

Because of the evolution of the CDC’s, it seems reasonable that decisions about the best use of county-owned lots should directly involve them. Perhaps, this takes the form of the CDC’s vetting the proposed uses, or even better, that the county asks them to develop ways that the lots could be used as leverage for their revitalization plans.

As proposed now, the use of these 140 lots is entirely up to the discretion of Buehler Homes, and in this way, the rental housing to spring up there could be in direct conflict with the aspirations of its residents and the plans of the CDC in that area.

It’s a serious disconnect. Even if county government is not interested in the opinions of the CDC’s, it would seem logical that county government itself would at least not take action on 140 lots unless it had its own over-arching neighborhood redevelopment plan – one that answers what kind of neighborhoods county government wants to create, what tool box of county incentives – including its lots – could be created to stimulate healthy neighborhoods, what is the consensus vision of the neighborhood and its CDC and what could county government do to work with city agencies who are much more engaged in the life of Memphis neighborhoods.

A Better Way

Ironically, Buehler Homes moved to the county board of commissioners’ agenda while an item that supported legislation to allow the county to donate tax sale property to CDC’s for commercial purposes foundered. There are 250 of these ordinances in other communities, so we’re hard-pressed to understand why there’s foot-dragging here, but hopefully, approval will be given in coming weeks.

Meanwhile, supporters of the land transfer from county government to the Buehler Homes suggest that anything is better than what exists now, but that’s one step (a short one) away from the “anything goes” approach that plagues declining Memphis neighborhood.

There should be a better way. It should involve development of a master plan for the neighborhood in conjunction with University of Memphis planners, a CDC and neighborhood residents, the assembly of all city and county incentives, a city-county neighborhood design review team and involvement of civic resources like the CD Council, UrbanArt Commission and the AIA chapter.

In other words, it’s past time to quit talking about how important our neighborhoods are and do something to help them. It’s time to make them a priority and to concentrate our energy, focus our resources and engage our imagination to do something that sets national standards.

The Right Call

One thing for sure: there will be people at Monday’s board of commissioners meeting to urge a different way of doing business. The CD Council has expressed its concern about “Buehler’s track record of building unattractive and low-quality housing.” Another member said that if the company is given the 140 lots, it “totally undercuts the efforts of real transformation in our inner city/often historic neighborhoods.”

It’s likely that some North Memphis constituents and neighborhood redevelopment leaders will oppose the resolution Monday or at least ask for it to be evaluated within a larger context. We can only hope that the board of commissioners listens.

Et Tu Sixty-Nine, Part II

Present transportation policies are critical to creating the tax burden that drives people out of Memphis.

While density is one of those things that cause people’s eyes to immediately glaze over, it’s a factor that drives everything in government – from quality of service to the tax rate.

As we pointed out a year ago, within the 1970 city limits of Memphis, there are today 28% fewer people. This reduced density results in services being delivered over an area with fewer people, driving up costs and ultimately driving up taxes.

It doesn’t stop there for Memphis taxpayers. They are caught in a vise of taxes caused by the reduced density in the urban core and the cost of suburban sprawl. In other words, for 30 years, Memphians have been forced to subsidize policies that have eroded their own city.

Pro-Choice

That’s at the heart of what is wrong with transportation policy and so many public decisions here. There’s no sense that choices are being made. As Shelby County Government invested $1.5 billion to open up the greenfields of unincorporated Shelby County, it was in fact making the choice to fuel the decline of the urban core.

Of course, Memphis City Council members acted as co-conspirators since their approval was required for projects and zoning changes with its “extraterritorial jurisdiction,” as local government calls it. Regular people would say that Council members have to approve projects outside of the Memphis city limits for three or five miles.

Acting as puppets of the development and homebuilding industries, City Council rubber stamped project after project with no thought that they too were making a choice. They were in fact choosing development on the edge rather than redevelopment of the core.

Jared Diamond wrote in his book, Collapse, about how “societies choose to fail or succeed.” In other words, sprawl did not just happen in Shelby County. It was a choice. The suffocating county government debt did not just happen. It was a choice. The hollowing out of the urban core did not just happen. It was a choice.

Voting For Their Own City’s Decline

Diamond describes in his best-seller how civilizations that formerly flourished made choices that doomed them to catastrophe, and many of these bad decisions were tied to the squandering of resources, to ignoring trouble signs that the environment emits and to the cutting down of too many trees.

Using his yardstick, the threats to our small corner of Western culture seem obvious. They are seen in choices in favor of rapid population movement, degradation of the environment and instability of government.

For more than a decade, when Memphis City Council routinely approved any development within the 3-5 mile zone outside of the city limits, it never had the sense that it was making a choice. Developers wanted more development, and these areas were outside of the city limits, so there was no perceived cost in giving them what they asked for.

Actually, every vote on one of the developments in this area should have been weighed as a choice -- to shift public investments to the suburban fringe rather than spend them on strengthening the urban core and protecting the public infrastructure already paid for there.

Consequences

Meanwhile, across Civic Center Plaza, the Shelby County Board of Commissioners voted time after time to approve every development placed on its agenda, its members never had a sense that they were making a choice -- to fuel sprawl and set in motion their own financial decline, cuts in public services and erosion of their ability to take a leadership role in the community.

Like many of the societies described in Diamond’s book, Shelby County made the choice to ignore the warning signs, always believing that the flow of money was endless, short-term benefits were as good as long-term ones and its political power was unshakeable.

Shelby County chose to see sprawl as “normal” and beyond its control. It called it “growth,” when it was no growth at all, but a massive subsidized There is no real growth in Shelby county because population increases are essentially births over deaths, not the result of an influx of new residents.

To understand the cost of the choices made in favor of sprawl, just do the math: every new single family detached house valued at $175,000 costs Shelby County Government more than $4,000 a year for 20 years in public services, primarily schools and roads.

It takes about 6,000 square feet of commercial/industrial development to offset the deficit to Shelby County that is produced by one residential unit. (This assumes of course that the commercial/industrial development is paying taxes in the first place, rather than receiving a tax freeze.)

Even Roses Have Thorns

Of course, it’s not just transportation policy that suffers from the lack of a clear, comprehensive analysis. Notably, there are the analyses conducted by City of Memphis before it annexes an area.

It’s not about choice at all. It’s about the rosiest scenarios – assuming no decline in the areas or exodus of residents – but more to the point, they never take into consideration the impact on existing neighborhoods of taking in new area. Instead, the exercise is about determining the amount of revenues and the cost of city services, and the answer is that in time, the annexation is a money maker for city government.

But they haven’t been. They have in fact diverted money to pay for infrastructure and services for the new areas of Memphis while the urban core received less attention and money. And as changes take place in the new area, as in Hickory Hill, city government has compounded the scope of the challenges facing it.

It’s essentially the same thing done in transportation planning here. There’s never a new road and more lanes of traffic that can’t be justified by engineers who make their living off such projects. It’s all about traffic flow, congestion and travel times and rows and rows of numbers.

Faux Planning

Unfortunately, it’s never about the impact that building a highway on the fringes of our community will have on our existing city and the infrastructure we’ve already paid for. Like annexation, it is at its essence a false equation and a faux exercise in planning.

In the end, the seminal question of Collapse is: How can society best avoid destroying itself?

The seminal question in our community is how do we create a balanced approach to decisions – weighing all factors rather than just the justifications of special interests – and how do we treat every decision as what it is – a choice.

Tomorrow: Et Tu Sixty-Nine, Part 3

Memphis Sides With Anti-discrimination

Coverage by the news media about the passage of the anti-discrimination resolution by the Shelby County Board of Commissioners suggested to some that yesterday's vote was a Pyrrhic victory.

That's not true.

The shift from an ordinance to resolution was irrelevant in the application and enforcement. They both have the same force of law and the same impact on county policy, according to Shelby County Attorney Brian Kuhn.

And while the language in the resolution may mirror wording in the county personnel policies book, there's a big difference now.

There is the legislative intent, and clearly, the intent of the county commissioners was to apply anti-discrimination to people of different sexual orientations or identities. That means that someone filing a complaint can cite the intent of the board of commissioners in passing the resolution and a judge can rely on that intent to decide a case. Even more, the county attorney can be called as a witness about intent.

It's a clear victory, not the one we had wanted, but one nonetheless. More to the point, it was a tribute to democracy. Board of Commissioners Chair Deidre Malone guided through the controversial shoals with care and dignity to all sides of the debate, and her decision to substitute "thumbs up, thumbs down" as signs of support rather than raucous cheering and clapping was brilliant, bringing the kind of somber deliberation that the issue needed rather than the environment of a pep rally.

More to the point, except for Commissioner Wyatt Bunker, whose bellicose and demagogic rants have now almost destroyed any veneer of patience toward him on the board of commissioners, the comments during the hearing were thoughtful, heartfelt and sincere.

We admire anyone who's willing to stand before a packed room and tell their public officials their personal feelings, so we salute speakers from both sides. In particular, we found the one-minute comments by gay, lesbian and transsexuals to be moving and courageous. The cause, our passion for it, became real in their words and its importance of it became clear to their lives.

Finally, for those of us who cared deeply about this issue and what it says about our city, we want to commend the nine commissioners who made the decision to stand for fair play, equity and equal rights. (Remarkably, we didn't see their names in this morning's Commercial Appeal.) They are Commissioners Mike Ritz, J.W. Gibson, Henri Brooks, James Harvey, Sidney Chism, Joe Ford, Matt Kuhn, Steve Mulroy and Deidre Malone.

The breakdown of the vote was reported in yesterday's blogging by CA reporter Alex Doniach, who now works the digital desk for our daily. It was an outstanding introduction to the power of instant reporting by a professional newsperson, and we look forward to more from her.

Anti-Discrimination Vote Is Good Business

Memphis has no margin for error.

Because of it, decisions like the one today on a county anti-discrimination ordinance are much more than parochial controversies.

To the contrary, all that we do now is amplified and magnified, and a vote by the Shelby County Board of Commissioners in favor of the fairness could become a much-needed positive national headline about our city.

At a time when tolerance is a selling point for cities, a vote against the ordinance would stake out our claim to intolerance and sanctimony. It will chill efforts to recruit young professionals and immigrants to Memphis, and make no mistake about it, the success of cities today are directly related to both.

We are at a seminal point in Memphis history. Everything matters.

Already, our economic development officials are hobbled by our reputation as a race-conscious city racked by conflict. Their sales pitches are shaken by crime statistics and corruption.

If you add to that the need to explain why guns are needed here in parks and restaurants and why discrimination would win in a vote by our county legislators, the Chamber is left to push a large boulder uphill with potential businesses.

We can only hope that our county elected officials do what is right. They will if they remember that they are public officials, not religious officials.

While their private religious beliefs are important in defining who they are, it should not define their votes today. In truth, their votes are about our future and the chance to break from past prejudices and to reject the brand of politics that would treat some of our citizens as “less than.”

It’s a historic vote today, and its ripples will reach far beyond our county borders and define us as a people. If we are to stand for anything as a city, surely it is for fairness, equal rights, and our common humanity. We can only hope that our county commissioners will do the same.

Here’s our earlier post about the economic consequences of today’s vote:

Memphis is like the actor looking for the chance to take a role against type.

We need something dramatic to send the message that we’re not your grandfather’s Memphis, that we’re not stuck in time and that we’re not a group of Bible-thumping, intolerant bigots.

That’s why the vote by the Shelby County Board of Commissioners on an ordinance promising non-discrimination against gays, lesbians and transgendered persons is a crucible for our community.

It’s not often that a legislative body has a chance to do something so right. Or so smart.

Starring In A New Role

That’s because the ordinance gives us a powerful opportunity to act against type and send the message that this old river city is shedding a reputation that we’ve had too long and that we now find repugnant.

In a city that has suffered from the bitter fruit of bigotry and discrimination, it would seem self-evident that we should jump at the opportunity to be on the side of fairness and equality. But despite the lessons that we should have learned, we remain a place where intolerance flourishes on occasion.

As a result, the new ordinance – which only applies to county employees and companies working for county government – is a welcome development, and Commissioner Steve Mulroy deserves a commendation for the political courage to advance it to a board of commissioners’ agenda, but we’re sure that some commissioners will instead opt to vote for discrimination, but such is the lingering brand of prejudice cloaked in the flag and Scripture verses to hide its ugliness.

Despite this, we’re hopeful that a majority of our county commissioners will understand the importance of this moment in history for our community. You see, while voting for this ordinance is morally right, it is also economically wise.

That’s because tolerance is no longer a virtue. It’s essential to compete in the knowledge economy.

Prima Facie Case

Here’s how the dots connect: the presence of talent in a city today determines its economic success, the percentage of 25-34 year-olds in a city is the key determinant and these crucial members of the workforce are looking to work and live in cities that are clean, green and safe and that are places where they can live the life they want to live.

In other words, they want a city open enough to accept them as they are, welcoming enough to offer ways to plug in with others like themselves and accepting enough to reserve their judgments.

In this way, gays are the canaries in the coal mine. It’s been said that cities with significant gay populations are more successful, but it’s not just because gays have been key to neighborhood revitalization, development of the cultural and arts scene and to a city’s vibrancy.

More to the point, if a city is welcoming to gays, it is prima facie evidence that it is diverse and welcoming to everyone, and it is the presence of that level of tolerance and acceptance of others that is a magnet for talented young people looking for place where they can live the life they want to live.

Undervalued Tolerance

Tolerance as a selling point is vastly underrated and misunderstood in Memphis. But more and more, it is becoming a priority for cities that understand how it helps to attract and retain knowledge economy workers.

In our work in developing talent strategies for a half dozen large cities, it’s a common and compelling theme. It’s not simply something that comes up as a footnote in interviews, focus groups and research. To the contrary, it is uppermost in the minds of the young, college-educated people as they decide where they will work and live. It’s not that they are asking if cities have a vibrant gay culture. Rather, they ask about ways in which the city welcomes their opinions and accepts their choices, and there is no more telling indicator that the presence and acceptance of gays and lesbians.

It is in this way that the gay population is an indicator of the fundamental character of a city and serves as a foreshadowing to other indicators of economic success. To prove the point, Memphis’ rank at the bottom of the list of cities with gay populations is also where it is ranked on variety of other economic measurements.

The need for the ordinance is a sad commentary on the discrimination and bigotry still directed at gays, lesbians and transgendered people in our nation, but already, cities that are seen as open-minded are on the right side of the great national migration of young, talented workers.

A Better Image

Memphis and Shelby County are way on the wrong side of this migration. Since 1990, Shelby County has lost 33,300 25-34 year-olds, and we’ve already lost more of this group in the first six years of this century than in all of the 1990s. We’re in the process of determining how many of these had college degrees, but based on the preliminary numbers, it’s doesn’t look promising.

It’s worth remembering that two out of three of these people – the gold standard for the knowledge-based economy – pick where they live before they pick where they work, and they say that they want to live in a city where each can “live the life that I want to lead.”

Here’s the thing about the Board of Commissioners’ vote. If it fails, it’s a devastating blow to our already faltering national image through a toxic display of intolerance that will undoubtedly garner national media coverage. The good news is that if it passes, it will garner even more.

Maybe, before it’s over, we can actually attract some national attention for our ability to transcend our differences and abandon the bomb-throwing judgmental behavior that defines us too much nationally.

Setting The Future Context

As we said, voting for the county ordinance is much more than simple decency (although that would be reason enough). Rather, it’s an exercise in economic necessity.

In a world of multitudinous ethnic groups, an assortment of religions, different sexual orientations and collections of cultures, a city that can’t respect its own differences can never connect - or compete - in a world whose overwhelming characteristic is its diversity.

Or put another way, a city that is open, inclusive and tolerant has the best chance of competing for the kinds of jobs – and workers - that matter most in a knowledge-based economy.

Ruminations From A Fallen Southern Baptist

No religious denomination acted more often as apologists for segregationists during the civil rights movement than preachers in the Southern Baptist Convention.

It was of course a time of all-white churches but none was more devoted to white pride. Sermons across the South used the analogy that God did not allow a beautiful songbird and the conniving crow to intermingle, but instead, He established a natural order where some creations were simply on a higher plane than others, such as the difference between the white man and the black man.

It was such a popular sermon that it was printed on brochures and handed out in numerous church vestibules.

Today, the denomination likes to say that it has apologized to the race which was so often the object of its disaffection, but it still manages to mangle its theology with an anti-intellectualism that has been the subject of research and books.

Yeah, Right

Logic is as scarce as African-American ministers in its pulpits.

And yet, ministers like Bellevue Baptist Church’s Steve Gaines would have black Memphians believe that he and his colleagues best understand the reality of their fight for equal rights and against bigotry. They have adopted the vocabulary of the civil rights movement and offer up pandering statements as if listeners suffer from historical amnesia.

It all seems so convenient and politically calculated. After a church history anchored in racial separation and unequal rights, they truly expect and believe that African-American ministers will accept the premise that Southern Baptist ministers feel their pain.

We believe that while a handful of African-American preachers will be seduced by this newfound concern about racial equality, most black Memphians will see through the political expediency of this unholy alliance.

Talking The Talk But What About The Walk

If politics makes strange bedfellows, there’s little question that this one will involve twin beds. And yet, we don’t want to be too hard on churches like Bellevue Baptist Church, which proudly points out its smattering of African-American members. Meanwhile, its 60-member administrative/program staff is all-white 100 percent.

To its credit, Bellevue Baptist does have a person assigned to Hispanic outreach, but in light of its recent rhetoric, it’s certainly a surprise that it doesn’t have anyone on its staff reaching out to the majority race in our region.

It’s the sort of curious contradiction that is so often a regular part of the denomination. They now offer lip service to the importance of women in church leadership – just as long as this doesn’t involve putting them behind the pulpit. The Southern Baptist Convention still requires that all ministers are men.

“Homosexuality is not a valid alternative lifestyle,” the denomination says, raising the question of what alternative lifestyles would it find acceptable – perhaps referring to don’t ask, don’t tell lesbians who tell ministers at Bellevue Baptist that they are simply friends living together.

Bible Beating

We received emails yesterday asking how we could ignore the Bible’s admonitions against homosexuality. But the problem for us is that most of the people who claim to know the meaning of the verses have never traced the translations back to their original Greek or Hebrew. When you do this and factor in the historical realities of the Jewish experience of the time, there are alternative explanations that illuminate the verses’ true meanings.

For example, these Christian fundamentalists have no quotations from Jesus about homosexuality or from any Jewish prophet. They don’t exist.

But here’s the thing: even if people oppose legal protection for gays on their interpretation of the Bible, they are still conveniently selective about which verses they choose to emphasize, because there’s no similar orthodoxy about verses dealing with usury, obligations to the poor, stoning disobedient children and no divorces. In addition, there are verses about when husbands can use prostitutes and verses against masturbation and coitus interruptus.

Golden Oldies

Here’s a few of our favorite verses that never get mentioned by people who argue that the Bible is inerrant and must be literally followed:

Deuteronomy 22:13-20:
If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate…If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.

Leviticus warns heterosexuals that having sex during a woman’s period can lead to execution.

Another Deuteronomy favorite:
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.

Mark 12 talks about a widow having sex with each of her husband’s brothers in turn until she bears a son:
Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19"Teacher," they said, "Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother.

Quoting Scripture

We don’t want to belabor this point any longer, except to say that it’s been said that even the devil can quote Scripture in support of his own purposes, and there’s little question that the Southern Baptist Convention is not alone is using Biblical verses as justification for its bigotry. There have been the crusades, the Inquisition, murder of Jews in the Holocaust, suicide in Guyana by Jim Jones followers, and opposition to inter-racial marriage and equal rights for African-Americans, and that’s for starters.

More pertinent to our current debate in Memphis is the fact that a number of gays have been killed in recent years by people who considered it the natural extension of their obeying of God’s will. In fact, they even quoted Bible verses as their justification

That’s the pitfall of fundamentalism. Even if you believe that the Bible is inerrant, that doesn’t mean that your interpretations are. In fact, the history of religion in Western civilization shows that interpretations change and doctrine shifts.

Quicksand

But we really didn’t mean to get this deep into the debate about Bible verses, and the decision on the anti-discrimination ordinance shouldn’t be about the Bible either. It’s about making sure that all Americans have equal protection under the law, the fundamental principle of our democracy.

Contrary to Rev. Gaines’ clever rhetoric, this vote isn’t about special privileges for gays. It’s about ensuring that they receive the same rights as the rest of us and providing a workplace that does not require Memphis gays and lesbians to live two lives as has been the case for way too long.

WWJD? Surely Not Discriminate Or Hate

It’s tempting to dismiss Shelby County Commissioner Wyatt Bunker and his fundamentalist preacher friends as merely the latest incarnation of the flat earth society.

Surely, it’s hard to identify a group in recent memory that has so cavalierly dismissed scientific evidence, that has so conveniently picked and chosen selective Bible verses, that has calculatedly misstated our national history and that has so graphically missed the lessons of the civil rights movement.

What would Jesus do?

What would Dr. King do?

Standing Up For Prejudice

We imagine that they both would have stayed as far away from today’s pro-discrimination demonstration by Mr. Bunker and his colleagues outside the Shelby County Administration Building, where our community’s first anti-discrimination resolution protecting gays, lesbians and transgendered persons will be voted on in coming days.

In fact, if an unmarried man in his early 30’s who spent most of his time living and traveling with 12 other men talking about love had shown up outside the county building, he probably would have been condemned rather than worshiped by the gaggle of religious demagogues purporting to represent the essence of his gospel.

Here, we believe that when these anti-gay people arrive at the Pearly Gates, God will be there with two questions: “What were you thinking? How in my name did you get what you thought out of anything I said?”

Of course, Commissioner Bunker and the others would immediately say that we have no idea what God is thinking and that we are misrepresenting His teachings. That too is our response to them.

No Joking Matter

There’s nothing quite as disconcerting as the spectacle of Christians when they are so defiantly and proudly unChristlike. If those without sin should cast the first stone, we seem blessed in Memphis with an awful lot of people with a firm sense of their own perfection.

In Shelby County Government, there’s a popular joke punctuated with a punch line featuring a closet, Commissioner Bunker and former evangelical leader Ted Haggard. But in truth, this isn’t funny. It isn’t entertaining. It’s simply appalling, especially when members of the majority race of the majority religion should have so little regard for the foundational principles of our society – fair play, equality, brotherhood and tolerance.

In a way, however, we owe these misguided African-American ministers our thanks for their honesty about their gay bigotry (which isn't unlike the anti-Semitic bigotry shown to Congressman Steve Cohen), because for just a few minutes listening to them all of us got a sense of why most African-American gays and lesbians live their lives deeply in the recesses of the closet.

It’s absolutely impossible to imagine a scenario where Dr. King would have stood with his fellow Baptists on this issue. We can only imagine that he would have updated one of his many statements about the cancer of prejudice to include gays, lesbians and transgendered people. “Discrimination is a hellhound that gnaws at (gays) in every waking moment of their lives to remind them that the lie of their inferiority is accepted as truth in the society dominating them. Almost always, the creative dedicated minority has made the world better.”

God Told Us Something Totally Different

Just as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson mistakenly believed that God takes sides in presidential elections, many fundamentalist ministers of both races mistakenly believe that He takes sides in the political wars. To most of us who become spectators to these kinds of events and the regular pronouncements about “family values,” we end up feeling like our faith is being stolen and it’s time to reclaim it.

As a result of the kind of behavior that took place outside the county building downtown and the anti-gay vitriol spewed by these Christian leaders, there is a misperception by the news media that somehow these views represent Christianity and that these people are typical of our faith. The truth is they are uniformly 180 degrees from what our faith means to us.

That’s the striking irony of this discussion. Commissioner Bunker says he opposes the anti-discrimination ordinance because of his religious beliefs, because of his sense of morality and because of his commitment to a life of faith.

Funny, those are the same reasons that lead us to support the ordinance.

What Gives Him The Right?

That in a nutshell sums up the danger of injecting private religious viewpoints into public policies that govern all of us. After all, why should Commissioner Bunker’s definition of sin trump ours? To him, homosexuality is a sin. To us, intolerance and sanctimony are. Why does he think his version of Christianity trumps those of us whose Christianity leads us to a totally different destination in our lives, most notably away from those who see their religion as a hammer to bludgeon anyone who is different?

As a school board member, Mr. Bunker thought that stickers should be put on biology books saying that evolution is only a theory and creationism deserves equal stature. That lack of respect for science and lack of basic understanding of scientific theory surfaces yet again in the midst of this debate as he picks up the fundamentalist refrain that homosexuality is a choice.

We won’t even dignify it with the obvious answer, but here’s the question: even if it is a choice, why does Commissioner Bunker believe that it gives him the right to discriminate against other Americans?

We’d like to think that the essence of Christianity (not to mention our common humanity) calls on us to support equal treatment and love for all of God’s children, regardless of their private lives and the legal options they choose for themselves.

Power Politics And Rules As Religion

As George Lakoff points out in his book, Moral Politics, the Religious Right is based on a “strict father” metaphor of morality, in which a wise father (whether church or political leader) sets the rules and the children (the people) do what they are told. These black-and-white moral values exist, in the father’s view, not just to help people behave morally but to maintain social order and discipline.

Adherence to these rules implies the legitimacy of the “father,” who often is treated or sees himself as speaking for God. As a result, the people who move away from that established order are doing much more than misbehaving or acting immorally. More to the point, they are threatening the rules by showing that other paths are possible and calling into question the “father’s” authority.

We don’t do the theory justice here, but clearly, Commissioner Bunker and his preacher supporters are so invested in this father-child view of the world that even an ordinance outlawing discrimination becomes a threat. It’s too bad, because in the end, anytime we strengthen the rights of every one in society, we strengthen our own. In fact, there’s no greater lesson from the civil rights movement than that.

County Ordinance Vote Is A Vote For The Future

Memphis is like the actor looking for the chance to take a role against type.

We need something dramatic to send the message that we’re not your grandfather’s Memphis, that we’re not stuck in time and that we’re not a group of Bible-thumping, intolerant bigots.

That’s why the vote by the Shelby County Board of Commissioners on an ordinance promising non-discrimination against gays, lesbians and transgendered persons is a crucible for our community.

It’s not often that a legislative body has a chance to do something so right. Or so smart.

Starring In A New Role

That’s because the ordinance gives us a powerful opportunity to act against type and send the message that this old river city is shedding a reputation that we’ve had too long and that we now find repugnant.

In a city that has suffered from the bitter fruit of bigotry and discrimination, it would seem self-evident that we should jump at the opportunity to be on the side of fairness and equality. But despite the lessons that we should have learned, we remain a place where intolerance flourishes on occasion.

As a result, the new ordinance – which only applies to county employees and companies working for county government – is a welcome development, and Commissioner Steve Mulroy deserves a commendation for the political courage to advance it to a board of commissioners’ agenda, but we’re sure that some commissioners will instead opt to vote for discrimination, but such is the lingering brand of prejudice cloaked in the flag and Scripture verses to hide its ugliness.

Despite this, we’re hopeful that a majority of our county commissioners will understand the importance of this moment in history for our community. You see, while voting for this ordinance is morally right, it is also economically wise.

That’s because tolerance is no longer a virtue. It’s essential to compete in the knowledge economy.

Prima Facie Case

Here’s how the dots connect: the presence of talent in a city today determines its economic success, the percentage of 25-34 year-olds in a city is the key determinant and these crucial members of the workforce are looking to work and live in cities that are clean, green and safe and that are places where they can live the life they want to live.

In other words, they want a city open enough to accept them as they are, welcoming enough to offer ways to plug in with others like themselves and accepting enough to reserve their judgments.

In this way, gays are the canaries in the coal mine. It’s been said that cities with significant gay populations are more successful, but it’s not just because gays have been key to neighborhood revitalization, development of the cultural and arts scene and to a city’s vibrancy.

More to the point, if a city is welcoming to gays, it is prima facie evidence that it is diverse and welcoming to everyone, and it is the presence of that level of tolerance and acceptance of others that is a magnet for talented young people looking for place where they can live the life they want to live.

Undervalued Tolerance

Tolerance as a selling point is vastly underrated and misunderstood in Memphis. But more and more, it is becoming a priority for cities that understand how it helps to attract and retain knowledge economy workers.

In our work in developing talent strategies for a half dozen large cities, it’s a common and compelling theme. It’s not simply something that comes up as a footnote in interviews, focus groups and research. To the contrary, it is uppermost in the minds of the young, college-educated people as they decide where they will work and live. It’s not that they are asking if cities have a vibrant gay culture. Rather, they ask about ways in which the city welcomes their opinions and accepts their choices, and there is no more telling indicator that the presence and acceptance of gays and lesbians.

It is in this way that the gay population is an indicator of the fundamental character of a city and serves as a foreshadowing to other indicators of economic success. To prove the point, Memphis’ rank at the bottom of the list of cities with gay populations is also where it is ranked on variety of other economic measurements.

The need for the ordinance is a sad commentary on the discrimination and bigotry still directed at gays, lesbians and transgendered people in our nation, but already, cities that are seen as open-minded are on the right side of the great national migration of young, talented workers.

A Better Image

Memphis and Shelby County are way on the wrong side of this migration. Since 1990, Shelby County has lost 33,300 25-34 year-olds, and we’ve already lost more of this group in the first six years of this century than in all of the 1990s. We’re in the process of determining how many of these had college degrees, but based on the preliminary numbers, it’s doesn’t look promising.

It’s worth remembering that two out of three of these people – the gold standard for the knowledge-based economy – pick where they live before they pick where they work, and they say that they want to live in a city where each can “live the life that I want to lead.”

Here’s the thing about the Board of Commissioners’ vote. If it fails, it’s a devastating blow to our already faltering national image through a toxic display of intolerance that will undoubtedly garner national media coverage. The good news is that if it passes, it will garner even more.

Maybe, before it’s over, we can actually attract some national attention for our ability to transcend our differences and abandon the bomb-throwing judgmental behavior that defines us too much nationally.

Setting The Future Context

As we said, voting for the county ordinance is much more than simple decency (although that would be reason enough). Rather, it’s an exercise in economic necessity.

In a world of multitudinous ethnic groups, an assortment of religions, different sexual orientations and collections of cultures, a city that can’t respect its own differences can never connect - or compete - in a world whose overwhelming characteristic is its diversity.

Or put another way, a city that is open, inclusive and tolerant has the best chance of competing for the kinds of jobs – and workers - that matter most in a knowledge-based economy.

Single Source Funding May Follow Single-Minded Dedication

After 20 years of talking about it, it’s likely that there will soon be a single source funding plan for public education.

It’s a landmark moment for two reasons.

It is the first substantive action to inject fairness into a tax structure that punishes Memphians.

Equally important, it is a testament to the benefits of new leadership as exemplified by Shelby County Commissioner Mike Carpenter – who began the discussion about changes in school funding with his one-man crusade – and Chair Deidre Malone – who refused to accept predictions of failure when she convened her process to resolve the school funding question once and for all.

The New Guard

We’ve never embraced term limits for a variety of reasons, but there’s no denying that this breakthrough is fueled by the new energy, the new ideas and the new people on the Shelby County Board of Commissioners. In fact, it’s impossible to imagine that this could have happened with the former board of commissioners, which seemed at the end more focused on longevity than leading edge thinking.

This new group – like the revamped Memphis City Council – demonstrates convincingly that long-time elected officials who so often adopt the attitude that they’ve seen everything before and that nothing can be done to change things sometimes just need to get out of the way.

So often, while the old guard is being nabobs of negativity, our city slowly sinks under the weight of its troubling challenges. In this way, the new momentum for change could not come at a better time, because there’s no question that we have to shake up the status quo or our city will fall off a cliff.

That’s exactly what the special ad hoc committee on school funding has been doing. As it began its work, it was told that it couldn’t be done. After all, there had been repeated efforts to find a solution over the past 20 years and every time the end result was failure.

On The Verge

And yet, today, they stand on the verge of success. It is interesting to note that the past failed efforts were always begun by mayors, but this time around, it was commissioners and City Council members who decided to see if they could do anything about the double taxation that Memphians pay for public education.

This seems more and more to be accepted as a major public policy challenge in our community. When the Shelby County Board of Commissioners was presented with a variety of cost-cutting measures by the Wharton Administration, Commissioner Henri Brooks said they didn’t address the real problem of tax equity.

She was precisely right, and we’re encouraged by the fact that the interest in getting this right crosses all political, racial and geographic lines. In this way, perhaps, the most important outcome of the process may not be single source funding itself.

A draft of the plan said: “Shelby County Government is the logical local funding source for both the Memphis City Schools system and the Shelby County schools system. Having the County as the local single-source equalizes the tax burden, recognizes that every child in Shelby County has equal value and simplifies the local funding model. It can also avoid protracted and counterproductive litigation to determine the funding responsibilities of the City of Memphis.”

The First Cut Is The Hardest

This shift in school funding responsible would be transitioned from city government to county government over a three-year period. Best of all, the proposal contains a provision that ties the cut in funding to a cut in the Memphis property tax rate.

We learned last year that it’s hard to pass up the lure of new money. Although City Council courageously slashed funding for Memphis City Schools, it did not convert the entire amount into the tax cut that is needed if Memphis is to have a level playing field with suburban cities.

In this way, single source funding, or health department funding, or other services in which city taxpayers are paying twice isn’t just about making county government responsible. In truth, the end game has to be a reduction in the city tax rate so that this disincentive for Memphians to stay here is removed.

Several inducements should encourage the two school districts to cooperate in the process, chiefly that school funding will be tied to the property tax rather than being a fixed annual funding amount. To ensure that the school districts do not receive windfalls from surpluses in strong economic times as has taken place in the past.

Game Changers

An encouraging development in school accountability is that if county government becomes the only source for public education, both school districts must submit to the same budgetary oversight. This has not been the case in the past regarding Memphis City Schools.

As part of the shared agreement, all the parties – city government, county government, city school district and county school district – will pursue a lawsuit against state government about the level of funding for Shelby County. This follows up extensive research by Commissioner Mike Ritz that showed that county government has been shortchanged by almost $20 million a year. Finally, the parties to the agreement will agree to seek an amendment to Tennessee state law that requires for schools to be merged if the governments are.

At this point, we are told that the ad hoc committee on education funding is advancing two options for single source funding, apparently in response for the school districts’ interest in having taxing authority. While there appears to be little support among the public for giving yet another elected group the authority to tax them, all of us should be willing to engage in a public discussion of the idea.

It’s beginning to look like single source funding might actually take form about the 10th anniversary of the process inspired by local business leader Russell Gwatney, who became an expert in the arcania of school funding in his campaign for rational funding for better schools.

Knock On Wood

The ad hoc committee report embraced some of Mr. Gwatney’s concepts, and that’s good news. But the truth is that despite Chamber of Commerce and business support a decade ago, the campaign derailed, chiefly because of the lack of political will needed to change things.

That, most of all, is what makes the current process so impressive. We hope that it is just the first big step in a continuing journey toward tax equity so that finally Memphis will have a fair and logical tax structure.

Hard Ball Vote Makes It Tough To Play Ball

Matt Kuhn deserves better.

He’s smart, attractive and has an impeccable pedigree, his mother a long-time Democratic activist and his father the Shelby County attorney on and off for a couple of decades.

However, the decision by the Democratic majority of the Shelby County Board of Commissioners to name Mr. Kuhn to a vacant set formerly held by Republican David Lillard does him no favors.

Political Marker Or Marked Man

He is now a marked man in expansive District 4, where he is likely to be a pariah among the people he has been elected to serve.

In this demonstration of hard-ball politics by the “D” side of the board of commissioners, they’ve hardened the lines for compromise – always tenuous these days – and sacrificed fair play on the altar of opportunism.

Sadly, it’s Mr. Kuhn who will now pay the price.

Thrown Into The Well

To give the Democratic commissioners the benefit of a doubt, perhaps they have heard so much for so long about the Shelby County Republican Party reaching out to African-American voters that they decided to try their own twist on the strategy – trying to reach out to the solidly Republican district outside of Memphis in Shelby County by proving that Democrats don’t have horns.

It will make little difference. The Democratic commissioners have sent Mr. Kuhn into a district that is so solidly Republican that normally no Democratic candidates even file for District 4 positions.

Meanwhile, the power in District 4 lies with the five town mayors, who have solidly Republican roots, meaning that they are likely to give him lip service but they aren’t going to give him any results that he can then use sell in a future election.

Post Patterns

While we have indeed entered a post-Republican era in Shelby County, it’s still years before that will be happen in District 4. That’s why someone like Tommy Hart would have made more sense for the district. First, he has been a county commissioner for that district before and there would be no time lost figuring out how things work. Second, he took the oath that he would not run for election when his partial term ended.

We’re not sure if Mr. Kuhn took such a vow, but he might as well have. The chances of his being elected by the voters of District 4 are akin to one of us here hitting the lottery.

In the end, the action by the seven Democratic commissioners suggests that they have not reached the maturity of the former Republican majority, which did in fact appoint Democrats when seats held by Democrats became vacant. In fact, on those occasions, there was never any consideration of doing otherwise.

About Winning Or Governing?

Perhaps, that was in a time when there was a stronger air of civility and stronger emphasis on consensus at the Shelby County Board of Commissioners. Ironically, those were the days when Vasco Smith and Jesse Turner Sr., firebrands for the civil rights movement, were members.

They could at times vociferously express their disagreements with the white majority, but because they knew how to skillfully negotiate and compromise in ways in which they could guide the ultimate outcome, the board of commissioners could still maintain the respect between its members that was necessary for the effective governing of Shelby County.

Today, the currency for the commission appears to be all about power and a brand of “stick it to them” political philosophy. Some say that it reflects the same level of understanding by African-Americans of Caucasian voters as is so often the reverse. These observers suggest that a motivating factor was the naivete that just being white is the primary qualification outside of Memphis.

Powerful Temptation

It’s hard for us to embrace such a theory, because of the deep experience possessed by some of the long-time Democratic Party leaders now on the board of commissioners. To us, it seems that they simply could not resist the political temptation to engage in political oneupsmanship.

While it is tempting to say that the Republican push for partisan county elections 15 years or so ago has finally come home to roost, it’s more concerning that Democrats’ years of promising that they would be fairer and more egalitarian than Republicans has quickly fallen prey to the lure of majority power.

Most ironically of all, there is the chance that the vote may in the end be the equivalent of the Democratic members shooting themselves in the foot. There have been plenty of issues in the past couple of years where each member had the power to influence an issue because every vote was necessary for the 7-6 majority.

A Possible Miscalculation

Now, there is a margin for error, and if one Democrat holds out, there is the chance to put the seven votes together without the need for every Democrat to be on board. It will prove interesting to see who’s vote is now devalued as a result of Mr. Kuhn’s election.

In brushing aside Republicans pleas for District 4 to be served by the same party that the voters there have supported in every election for 20 years, the Democrats also sent the message that the environment in county government is likely to be more adversarial and decidedly less civil.

The hard-ball vote may have left members of the majority party smiling at their cleverness, but it was ultimately a shallow victory. The real win would have been if the Democratic majority had demonstrated in a dramatic and powerful way that they are about healing the divisions between us and about proving that they are intent to be a vehicle for a community bound together by a common respect and a mutual commitment to a shared future.

Deidre Malone: New Year's Resolution For Memphis

Deidre Malone is chair of the Shelby County Board of Commissioners:

In 2009, I hope we can solve some of the long standing problems facing our community or at least make a substantial dent in finding solutions.

Examples include finding sustainable funding for Memphis and Shelby County Schools, realizing that efficiency and accountability go hand in hand with that solution. Over the years single source funding has been discussed for schools. Maybe we can put that in the achieved column for 2009.

I also wish that we can get a better handle on our healthcare disparity and funding issues this year. We are on all the “worst” lists when it comes to health related issues – obesity, heart disease, high blood pressure and infant mortality.

It would be a terrific year if we can turn some of those statistics around and become more serious about our health.

I’m really hoping for a major positive impact with our economy. Job loss is at an all time high. I’m hopeful that President Obama’s plan can help get this country on the right track and stabilize our economy.

For Sale: Coliseum And Common Sense

It’s hard for us to fathom, but a Shelby County commissioner – whose constituents are Memphians - is proposing that county government should not get out of the way and allow Memphis City Hall to redevelop the Fairgrounds until it wrings money from city government.

Of course, money from city government only comes from city taxpayers, so in effect, for Memphians, it’s like moving money from their city taxpayer pocket to their county taxpayer pocket and comes at a time when Shelby County’s overriding interest these days should be to give Memphians a fairer tax burden.

This issue could have been the poster child for fairness for city taxpayers. After all, the suggestion is for Shelby County Government to waive any rights to Mid-South Coliseum and Liberty Bowl Memorial Stadium. Now, county government owns only 40% of the Coliseum and in addition, there’s a small sliver of land under the stadium that belongs to county government.

Schizophrenia

Because we respect Steve Mulroy, we were especially baffled that this response came from him after Commissioner Sidney Chism called for Shelby County Government to deed over its minority interests at the Fairgrounds, clearing the way for Memphis to proceed with its plan for redevelopment of the site.

It’s all so schizophrenic, like so many decisions reached by local government, and it speaks again for the need for consolidation of city and county governments. It seems like just this once, the emphasis should be on doing what’s fair, rather than thinking that Memphians – who are the majority of county taxpayers – should now pay their county halves money to allow their city halves to move ahead with the Fairgrounds project.

The Shelby County Board of Commissioners previously rejected a proposal to give up its ownership of these two properties along with The Pyramid for $5 million. In those discussions, there was the general sentiment that the payment would be for the latest former arena and that the older former arena would be lagniappe in the deal.

We Just Don’t Understand

It’s almost as if the suggestion that the city should pay for the Coliseum and the sliver of land is based on the county’s perceived “nuisance value.”

Let’s say it one more time. When the Coliseum was built, Memphis taxpayers paid 100% of the city’s 60% costs, and then paid 75% of the county’s 40%. If our math is right, that means that Memphians paid for 90% of the cost of the Coliseum in the first place.

It sounds like to us that if Memphis taxpayers are owed anything, it’s an apology for being taxed twice for the same facility and they deserve a credit from Shelby County Government for overpayment.

Taxing Hotel Stays

Meanwhile, Commissioner Mulroy is pushing a proposal to sue on-line travel companies for failure to accurately pay the county’s 5% hotel-motel tax. With one of the highest motel-motel tax rates in the U.S., we’re sympathetic with visitors who choke when told they need to cough up 16% in taxes on a night’s room, but there’s no reason that Memphians should be subsidizing big companies like Travelocity and Expedia to the tune of about $2 million, the back-of-the-envelope estimate by Commissioner Mulroy. (We resist the urge to point out that there are a couple of beneficiaries of county tax freezes that are waived more than that amount.)

While he’s at it, we hope that Commissioner Mulroy will look into the collection of the hotel-motel taxes on the ground in Shelby County. The last time we checked, the taxes paid by local hotels and motels are produced by a system of self-reporting companies. The checks mailed to the county clerk’s office are what the businesses say they owe, and perhaps, it’s time to get really serious about auditing and collecting the so-called “bed tax” in our county to make sure that all of it is being collected.

With so much hanging in the balance – Memphis Cook Convention Center, the international marketing programs of Memphis Convention and Visitors Bureau and a complicated swap of Tourism Development Zone funds so that FedEx Forum could, well, come to think of it, it’s more than you want to know.

Here’s the thing: we need to make sure that every cent of hotel-motel tax is collected.