This is the first of two articles about the mayoral election of 2002, when Ed May was first elected.
Eight years ago Bessemer was at a crossroads. Of course, we say that every time an election rolls around, don't we? But during the summer of 2002 the nation was still recovering from 9-11 and the country was more united than we are now. The people of the 7th congressional district had just elected Artur Davis in the primary to represent them. Some of us ended up being disappointed in Artur Davis. I could write about that, but he's already moving toward the history books.
In the summer of 2002 we were entering the election season for our city offices, and Ed May was the main challenger to Mayor Quitman Mitchell. Many of us wanted change, and in a letter to the Western Star I outlined some of the problems and the solutions we were seeking.
Our city is listed as one of the poorest in the nation. Our city core, the downtown area and older neighborhoods are in disrepair. We need a mayor who will work to solve these problems and restore the earning potential of our citizens. This will involve improving our schools, improving safety, restoring our neighborhoods and downtown. But just as important, we need a mayor who will restore our faith in our city and in ourselves. Our self image is dealt a blow each time we hear about how poor we are, or how unsafe we are, or how bad our schools are. We can’t be proud of our city when we drive through it and see buildings crumbling. And we can’t expect people to want to return to our city when they don’t feel safe here. We need a mayor who will do things that will restore our pride and improve our quality of life so that those who live here will have better lives and that those who don’t live here will want to move here to enjoy what we know our city can be.
Eight years later, the problems remain.
We elected Ed May that summer. Like Artur Davis, elected that same year, he has turned out to be a disappointment. Seventy two per cent of respondents on a poll on this web site say that Ed May has not addressed the important issues of the city.
In part 2 of this series, I will outline Ed May's promises as reflected in another letter I had published in The Western Star after his election, and how those promises have not been fulfilled.
Well the unjust war has ended. The work continues. The problems are not solved. The troops responded to the call honorably.
I wrote a letter to The Western Star in March 2003 before the war began, but President Bush didn't read it. Or if he did, he ignored it.
Here is the letter, which followed an editorial the week before about patriotism.
March 5, 2003
I agree with your editorial comment about dissent being patriotic. It is hard to speak out against war when those who do so are criticized as being pro-terrorist. No one denies that Saddam Hussein is evil, or that he needs to be removed from power. But why is war the answer? When we see or hear of violence among young people, everyone agrees that people need to be taught, at an early age, about conflict resolution, that violence is not the answer. Yet, what kind of example are our leaders setting for them when they have tunnel vision that can only focus on war? They are saying that violence is the only answer and do not want to give diplomacy and inspections a chance. Either they are blinded by this “ratings grabbing” war and their desire to control more of the world’s oil, or they just don’t have the brain power to think of any other way to resolve this crisis.
We hear over and over that terrorism is the enemy, yet the worst terrorist in the world hunkers down and hides for a year or so, and we forget all about him, while he regroups and makes plans for more acts against us. How many times have you heard President Bush speak of Osama bin Laden in the last year? All he had to do is hide and he is forgotten.
Saddam will probably do the same thing…we tear up his country, he tosses a few chemical weapons at our troops or Israel, killing our troops and our allies, then he can go into hiding for a while so we can forget about him.
How many of those leaders, from the president on down, have a son or daughter in the armed forces that is on the way or already in the Middle East? Probably none. I would be willing to bet that a large majority of citizens whose children or spouses are about to enter this war are not for it. Yet they, and the rest of us, find ourselves in the position of being loyal and supportive to our troops, while not supporting the cause for which they might die.
If we find, through war, that Saddam has no weapons of mass destruction, we will have spent billions of dollars and killed thousands to discover what we could have learned through peaceful means. If fact if he does have weapons of mass destruction, no one thinks we will be able to find and destroy all of them before he has used them on someone, somewhere. Iraq is like Pandora’s Box, and by opening it who knows what the consequences will be.
Unfortunately, we will probably soon find out.
Then the war started and two weeks later the Western Star published another of my letters.
March 26, 2003
The war against Iraq has begun and our attention must now focus on supporting our troops and praying that this conflict will end quickly with minimal loss of life.
We do not know how far the effects of this war will reach, so let us remember in our thoughts and prayers not only for our soldiers and their loved ones, but those who are affected throughout the world, including the innocent citizens of Iraq, who have already suffered through two recent wars and years of repression and sanctions.
As we learn of the tragedies and casualties of this war, let us use this as motivation to become adherents of nonviolence, and to study the works of Gandhi and King, who taught us that we must be the change we wish to see in the world.
President Obama was very generous in his speech last night, avoiding placing blame for the unjust invasion or saying "I told you so" about the weapons of mass destruction or the obvious truths about Iraq not being responsible for 9-11 or any of the other made up reasons that the prior administration used do fight "daddy's war."
I'll just be generous too, other than that last paragraph, and wish only the best for the troops returning home, that they will be able to return to normal life, and for those who are being re-deployed to Afghanistan, I wish you safe passage and a quick resolve to the conflict in that country so that you, too, can return home safely, soon.
And let's not forget the 50,000 troops that remain in Iraq. We hope for your safety and await your return home as well.
I come in from a week in Nirvana and discover that the world did not stop spinning while I was gone. I had planned to bore you with details of our trip to New Mexico, but then I looked at the newspapers that had collected while I was gone.
Something happened that makes me lose all faith in the state Democratic Party. Maybe the Party can do something to reverse this, but I don't know what it might be.
The Alabama State Democratic Executive Committee met and handed down an unbelievable, race based decision to replace Kenya Lavender Marshall with Elisabeth French (who did not run in the primary during which Marshall defeated Nicole Still, who came in second both in the primary and in the runoff) as the party nominee for Jefferson County Circuit Judge place 17. Still had gobs of endorsements, including Stonewall Democrats and Bessemer Progressives.
Still also had the support of French during her campaign.
I don't know Elisabeth French (and neither do a majority of the Jefferson County voters) but I understand she considers herself qualified. But Nicole Still was determined to be the most qualified of the candidates who ran for this office by the Birmingham Bar Association, plus she has a few month's experience, having been appointed to the position by Bob Riley.
I understand the voting among the committee members did not fall along racial lines, with both white and black members voting for both Still and French, and French winning 90 - 41 - 1 (Peter Johnson Davis got 1 vote). Still is white. French is black.
While French herself did not campaign for this position along racial lines, her supporters sure did. Joe M. Reed (not the Joe Reed you are thinking of) said by voting for French "we (blacks)will have a friend, we will have a loyal friend, we will have a family member ... a sister."
Alvin Holmes said "This is not a race issue." Then he kept talking and proved that it was. "This seat was won by a black person because a majority of people in Jefferson County chose a black person over a white person."
Watch the video of the proceedings, recorded and uploaded by Left in Alabama.
But even if it wasn't a race issue, they also claimed Nikki Still was a Republican, and had supported Republicans, something she denies.
But even if she did, since when does the SDEC regard prior support of Republicans a reason not to support a candidate? Two words. Charlie Grimsley. He was chief of staff for Republican Lt. Governor Steve Windom and contributed at least $25,000 to Republicans and their special interest groups, including the Bush-Cheney campaign and Roy Moore.
When this was brought before the SDEC earlier this year, they rejected a motion to keep him off the ticket, and allowed him to run for treasurer. He is now your nominee for treasurer, having won the primary (over a much more progressive candidate Jeremy Sherer), because the SDEC did not care that he supported Roy Moore and George Bush and Dick Cheney.
And do the Democratic voters of Jefferson County care that Nikki Still was appointed by Bob Riley? Would they rather he appoint a Republican?
Did they not prove they don't mind a Riley appointment when they elected George Bowman as county commissioner?
And this race for Circuit Court was to be only voted on by Jefferson County voters.
Jefferson county voters made Nikki Still their second choice.
The Jefferson County Democratic Party Executive Committee recommended Still to the SDEC over French. The Jefferson County chapter of the New South Coalition voted to support Still. Grover Dunn, chairman of the Jefferson County ADC, was selected by their executive committee to nominate Still to the SDEC, and he did.
Rep. John Rogers warned the SDEC about what this result in come November. Democrats in Jefferson County will not be as excited about the election. This will greatly reduce Ron Sparks chances of being elected governor, and some are saying Jim Folsom may even lose his bid for Lt. Governor if the race is close, if Jefferson County voters are not inspired.
And there is nothing inspirational about a race based, demonizing campaign within the bowels of the party.
Update: The Jefferson County chapter of the Alabama New South Coalition has called on Elisabeth French to reject her appointment as the nominee. They say that Nikki Still is a victim of racism.
James Laster, their president, made the case in an opinion article in today's Birmingham News (the column is not posted online yet).
"Now, Democratic leaders Joe Reed, Joe Turnham and John Rogers no longer need to concern themselves with how many people will show up to the polls, but with retaining Democrats thinking of fleeing the Democratic Party after such a blatant show of racism."
Rejecting her appointment would be a radical thing for French to do. But it might also save the Democratic Party from this self inflicted wound, suicide, if you will. An online poll on al.com currently has 88% of respondants saying the SDEC made the wrong choice.
If you remember, in July I attended a Town Hall meeting after being invited by mayor Ed May. And if you remember, he asked me to turn off my video camera, after telling me it wasn't a "public meeting." And I thought that may have been been a violation of Alabama's Open Meetings Act. And I sent an inquiry to the Attorney General's office.
Well I received a response today and let's just say the mayor is being put on notice.
Mayor Ed May at another meeting held in a church.
I won't give details, but the office of the Attorney General tells me the steps necessary to bring action against the mayor.
It included this:
In response to your correspondence regarding Alabama's Open Meetings Act, as stated by Section 36-25A-6 of The Alabama Code, "A meeting of a governmental body, except while in executive session, may be openly recorded by any person in attendance by means of a tape recorder or any other means of sonic, photographic, or video reproduction provided the recording does not disrupt the conduct of the meeting.
Since May is so close to being voted out of office I think I will hold off on pursing anything.
But I guess all the Bessemer office holders should realize that Open Meeting Laws are to be observed.
Be sure to take part in my new poll to the left, which explores why Ed may did so poorly in the election.
Congratulations to all the winners and runoff candidates of yesterday's Bessemer elections, even to those who had to dupe their constituents in order to win. You know who you are.
And a note to those who were elected (or who may still be elected): you will be held accountable these next 4 years. The council will be more functional, and citizens interest will remain higher.
As for the mayor's race, Ken Gulley had a good showing with 2,112 votes, or 37%. He will be in a runoff with Ed May, whose 1, 312 represented only 23% of the voters who want Bessemer to continue on the path it is currently on.
Out of 5,637 people who voted in the mayor's race 4,325 voters did not want Ed May to return to office. That doesn't mean the runoff will be smooth sailing for Gulley, but optimism for him, and for the city, is inevitable.
Council district 1 - David Vance - winner (a positive change for the city)
Council district 2 - runoff - Chester Porter and Sherrina Rice - this will be positive change for the city if Chester Porter wins. Remember when John McCain was running for president and it his candidacy was labelled Bush's third term? Think of Rice as a continuation of Louise Alexander.
Council district 3 - Sarah Belcher - winner - this does nothing for our city
Council district 4 - Donna Thigpen - winner - let's just hope that she comes around on the school board money owed by the city. Other than that issue, I think she will be an upgrade to the council, and will help to return the body to civility.
Council district 5 - runoff - Ron Marshall and Albert Soles - Marshall got 7% more of the votes that the incumbent. I predict he can hold on to win the runoff. Ron Marshall has wanted to put his management skills to work for our city for a long time.
Council district 6 - Jesse Matthews - winner - the only incumbent with a recommendation from the Progressive coalition, and in part because we were frightened of his opponent, Ed May II. The voters must have felt the same way as he only got 18% of the vote. I think Ed May II's poor showing is a direct result of how the voters feel about his father.
Council district 7 - runoff - Earl Cochran and Cleo King - Cleo has a mountain to climb to reach 50% but the voters who cast their lot for Labrenda for the most part don't appreciate Earl, the man who beat their favorite 4 years ago. So if they come back out to vote, they may chose Cleo King. Let's hope they do.
School Board - Hattie Aikerson retains her seat and Earlene Cochran wins the other open seat. I don't have a lot of insight on how this will affect the board, but we can't expect too much change with only one new member. However, is much change needed? The board, for the most part, is doing a good job.
I will be writing about the candidates who are still in the running until the runoff in October. But for the next few days, I get to take some time off from politics. For the candidates, they had better be out there today, courting voters.
Whether you are reading this on Monday or Tuesday, consider the following.
Do you want to continue to have crime ignored?
Do you want to continue to keep the money we pay for the schools in taxes to be hoarded and mis-spent by the city on lord knows what?
Do you want to continue to have the city finances kept secret?
Do you want to continue to have a mayor and council at odds, who act as though they have taken a vow to act like tom cats all after Miss Kitty?
Do you want Bessemer to pay its first responders so poorly that once they are trained they are tempted to go elsewhere just because the pay is better?
Do you want the business community, which brings dollars, jobs, dollars, tourists, dollars, prestige and more dollars to our coffers, to continue to be ignored?
Do you want outside business entities that are considering a site for business to continue to overlook our city, thus losing potential, no actual, jobs that our citizens could hold?
If these are the things you want for our city, just don't vote. Let things stay the same.
But if you want the opposite of the above, if you want to see Bessemer improve, vote for change in Bessemer;
These signs have sprouted up around the city. However, it's hard to stop and read them. So here. Take your time.
The first item - violence in our city? Crime in Bessemer - there has been at least one more murder in Bessemer since I posted that. Christopher Ward was killed on August 7.
The other night at the candidates forum the candidates were asked what the most important issue to the city Bessemer is. The answers varied: "Perception," said Darayl Blue (with a positive reaction from the audience); Ed May agreed.
In Ed May's eyes, that's all crime is, perception. See this column from the Western Tribune, June 10, 2009.
I know a victim of violent crime in Bessemer. It was not perception that his front door was busted in. It was not perception that he was knocked around. It was not perception that he was forced at gunpoint and told he was going to die.
Crime is a reality in Bessemer.
Ken Gulley was the only candidate to look the citizens in the eye and unabashedly tell them that the number one issue in the city is crime.
Picture credit - Nancy Hartzog
Do away with crime, and perception will improve. Do away with crime, and home sales will increase. Do away with crime, and children will have a better environment in which to learn. Do away with crime, and businesses will want to locate here. Do away with crime, and the citizens will spend time outdoors, will get to know their neighbors, will not be reluctant to work in their yards.
Do away with crime, and our quality of life will improve.
I'm no fool, however, and I don't think we will ever completely do away with crime.
But it certainly is not going to improve until we have a mayor that recognizes it as a problem.
Just one more reason that Ken Gulley should be our next mayor.
