The Nashville Mayoral Debates debut on May 18
Top Stories
A right-leaning disgruntled Republican comments on the news of the day and any other thing he damn-well pleases.
Medical and Legal experts will discuss the impact of new laws governing reproductive freedom on Nashville residents
Metro Nashville Press release, August 4, 2022 - The Office of Mayor John Cooper and Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi will host a forum on Thursday, August 11 to discuss how the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade impacts Nashvillians. Medical and legal experts will provide critical information about how residents can access the information and resources they need as new laws governing reproductive freedom in Tennessee go into effect.
Nashville Post-Roe Forum Event Details
Metro press release, 12/5/2019 - Mayor John Cooper today announced that his administration has signed the Global Covenant of Mayors as a precursor to participating in the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, a coalition of 94 leading cities around the world focused on tackling climate change and driving urban action that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Mayor Cooper also introduced multiple local initiatives underway by his administration to address climate change and sustainability in Nashville and Davidson County.
“Since entering office, I began addressing immediate impediments to the function of our city – namely our financial condition,” said Mayor Cooper. “But my administration has been keenly aware of other longstanding concerns, including threats to our environment and the protection of our limited natural resources. Members of my staff have been focused on identifying opportunities to improve the stewardship of our city’s clean air, water, tree canopy, and other natural amenities.”
Nashville’s participation in the Global Covenant of Mayors requires ambitious local climate and energy action and a transition to a low-emission and resilient urban environment to benefit public and environmental health and to lay the foundation for a prosperous economy.
“Since Nashville is my home, I am honored to help Mayor Cooper advance our city’s work to address the climate crisis,” said former Vice President Al Gore. “He is taking important steps forward that should lead to even greater commitments. He is thinking globally and acting locally -- as we all should.”
Mayor Cooper’s administration will also work toward reducing Nashville’s community-scale emissions 30 percent by 2030 and 70 percent by 2050. To lead by example, CO2-reduction targets for Metro Government will be 40 percent by 2030 and 80 percent by 2050. Using Nashville’s most recent emissions inventories as a baseline, these targets were developed upon surveying those adopted by peer and aspirational cities and align with science-based recommendations in the Paris Climate Accord to reduce absolute CO2 emissions by three percent annually until 2050 in order to hold global warming to 2°C.
Mayor Cooper’s initial climate change and sustainability initiatives include:
By Rod Williams - John Cooper raised the most money in the Second Quarter, which covers the period of April 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019, having total receipts of $850,137, of which, $555,000 was a loan from himself to his campaign.
David Briley raised $443,116, but started the second quarter with over $400,000 on hand. Cooper had no money on hand at the start of the second quarter, entering the race late. Clemmons follows with less raised and less on hand and Carol Swain brings up the rear.
Entering the finale stretch of the campaign, Briley leads with $440,194 on hand, followed by Cooper with $142,312, Clemmons with $120,006, and Swain with only $49,669. While candidates my continue to raise money, the "on-hand" amount is important because it tells you who can buy TV and radio ads, billboards, and print media advertising. Of course, a candidate may also contribute to his own campaign or make a loan to his own campaign.
To see who the contributors were to the candidates, you can follow this link and find the full copies of the candidates campaign financial disclosures. Below is a summary of their reports. I have not bothered to review the campaign reports of the other candidates for mayor, but if interested you can find their financial reports at the same link.
David Briley
Balance on hand last report: $416,209
Total receipts this period: $443,116
Total Dismemberment this period: $419,113
Balance on hand: $440,194
No outstanding loansJohn Ray Clemmons
Balance on hand last report: 109,227
Total receipts this period: $168,445
Total Dismemberment this period: $157,666
Balance on hand: $120,006
Outstanding loans:$150,000
Balance on hand last report: $0
Total receipts this period: $820,137
Total Dismemberment this period: $677,824
Balance on hand: $142,312
Outstanding loans: $555,000.
Balance on hand last report: $116,198
Total receipts this period: $111,779
Total Dismemberment this period: $178,309
Balance on hand: $49,669
No outstanding loans
Last night candidates for mayor took part in a forum sponsored by NOAH, Nashville Organized for Action and Hope. This is a progressive coalition of interfaith and labor groups. About 500 people attended the event but unfortunately I was not able to attend. One of the topics of this forum was affordable housing. In addition to this event, the mayoral candidates shared their views on affordable housing at a televized event on June 25th and each talked about affordable housing when interviewd by the Tennessean editorial board. Below in a nutshell is the opinion of the candidates on affordable housing:
David Briley
David Briley says affordable housing is a "human right." I am bothered by categorizing the things to which society may determine people are entitled as "rights." Liberals do not know the difference or do not recognize a difference between liberties and entitlements. Categorically, freedom of speech and a right to paid maternity leave are different things. Right off the bat, Briley is losing me by calling affordable housing a "human right."
Briley has outlined an affordable housing initiative called Under One Roof 2029,
which would spend $750 million over 10 years, primarily towards the
redevelopment of aging public housing into mixed-income communities. This plan has come under a lot of criticism. Critics says it takes pieces of what is on the drawing board anyway and puts it in a new package. Also it calls for increasing funding to the Barnes Fund, the money to come from the operating budgets. Budgets are approved each year and there are competing needs. This intent to fund the Barnes Fund at a higher level is no more than a good intention. One mayor or council cannot obligate the next.
$350 million of the money Briley proposed would come from issuing new general obligation bonds. This is at a time when Nashville has the highest debt obligation per person of any city in America. We need to be lowering our debt, not adding to it.
$250 million would come from voluntary investments in affordable housing by the private sector. This is pulling money out of thin air. He could have made his plan a billion dollar plan by saying the private sector would make $500 in voluntary investments.
Briley's plan is smoke and mirrors based on wishful thinking.
John Cooper
At the NOHA event, Cooper pandered and said he advocates putting a NOHA representative on MDHA's board. While I generally have a negative view of NOHA, and while I would not want to specify than any one political group be entitled to a representative on the MDHA board, I would not oppose that their be a low-income person from a "pocket of poverty" or low-income census track be on the board. In my view, MDHA is too focused on building luxury condo's and one advocate for poor people on the board, would not hurt. That is not much of a solution to the problem of the declining availability of affordable housing however.
Cooper has a modest, practical affordable housing plan on his website. He advocates small changes that can make a difference. It is not a bold creative vision; he is not reinventing the wheel, but I like that. It includes better management of what resources we already have, a new revolving fund for affordable housing, and greater leverage of federal and state housing funds for affordable housing.
Carol Swain
Carol Swain has a plan she says is based on parcels of land owned by the city. She would make those excess parcels available for development of homes costing about $200,000. While I like this, those parcels are already being made available for development under an existing program. I am not sure, this is anything new. One thing she does advocate is to "use modular technology, new creative ideas to get the price down even further." It is a shame Nashville stands in the way of the development of affordable housing by the private sector by effectively prohibiting the use of factory build housing in Nashville. I am pleased to see the advocacy of modular construction.
John Ray Clemmons
He says affordable housing is a "real
crisis." He would commit at least $50 million a year to the Barnes Fund
using a dedicated revenue stream, but he does not identify that revenue
stream. There is nothing magic about a dedicated revenue stream. If
the city, for instance, should take $50 million that now is paid in
codes fees and direct that money to the Barnes Fund, that is $50 million that
now goes into the city coffers to pay for education, police protection
and everything else the city does. That is not free money. That means
the city would have to make $50 million in cuts to other services or
raise taxes.
He would also
create "income-source protection" for people with Section 8 housing
vouchers, and a land bank for surplus public property. I am not sure how
"income-source protection" works. So, I would have to know more to know
what he is talking about. For a primer on Land Banks, follow this link.
I tend to favor letting property be developed to its highest and best
use but am not opposed to land banks playing a limited role in
helping low income people become homeowners but it is no magic bullet
that will solve the housing "crisis."
Rod's thoughts
First of all I do not think we have a housing "crisis." We have an "issue" or "problem." For the person making the median income in Nashville, the median priced house is still affordable. We are in much better shape than many other cities in America where the median income person cannot afford the median priced house.
In one sense, this is what we asked for. When you attract people to move from elsewhere to Nashville and those people make a much higher income than most Nashvillians, they are going to drive up housing prices. A lot of what we are experiencing is simply supply and demand. That is not to say that for lower income people that they are not priced out of the market. What we are experiencing is an issue to be addressed but not a crisis.
I am disappointed that none of the candidates took the position that Nashville should stop taking actions that make the problem worse. Much of the
fault for loss of affordable housing, is directly due to government
policy.
As an example of this, there is a new plan to redevelop Dickerson Pike. The Dickerson Road area has long been one of the cheapest parts of the
city to live. In addition to affordable apartment buildings along
Dickerson, the neighborhoods adjacent to the thoroughfare have lots of
modest affordable homes. On Dickerson Road there are several
old-fashion junky trailer parks. On Dickerson Road itself there are
businesses that serve the people who live in the vicinity. There are
businesses such as laundromats, payday lenders, convenience stores, and
discount tobacco stores, and used car lots. Dickerson Road has always
had a problem with hookers walking the street and the area has a lot of
drug dealers.
Metro has a plan to improve this bad part of town. The plan envisions a
dense collection of modern offices, shops and multifamily housing,
widened streets and added transit hubs, greenways, crosswalks, sidewalks
and bike lanes. The city is going to beautify and upgrade one of the
worst parts of the city. The Tennessean says, "But the increased investment is expected to send property values soaring
in one of the few areas where relatively affordable housing can still
be found near downtown." I am pleased to see this recognition of the effect of improving parts of the city.
We are talking about hundreds of units of housing are going to be lost.
Thousands of people will no longer be able to afford to live there.
Some of the people living in trailer parks rent by the week. Where are
they going to go? No one likes to have a seedy part of town, but when
you beautify and upgrade a seedy part of town you are destroying the
only place poor people can afford to live. Every community can't look
like Brentwood and still have affordable housing.
Less ambitious than a master plan such as is planned for Dickerson Road
are city policies that little by little destroy affordable communities
and thereby affordable housing. These are policies that make busy
corridors look nice. These are rules which say used car lots must have
an attractive decorative fence in front of them, that say one can not
have in close proximity businesses of the same or similar type such as
used tire stores and auto repair businesses, and rules that say all
dumpsters must be placed on a reinforced concrete pad behind the
building, and rules that require a certain distance between pay day
lenders. These rules drive out the kind of business that serve
low-income people. They make unattractive parts of town more attractive
and change the character of the community and make it attractive for
people who make more money. They turn low-income parts of town into
middle-income parts of town.
Another way in which Nashville destroys affordable housing is by the
policy of making large parts of the county single-family only. Almost
every Council meeting, there is a bill to down-zone a neighborhood from a
zoning which allows duplexes to a zoning which does not. Such
legislation may change a zoning from R20 to RS20. I understand people
wanting to preserve the character of their neighborhood. I understand
people wanting things to stay the same. However, this has an impact on
future home prices. This makes future affordable housing less likely
and it encourages urban sprawl. With higher density, there are fewer
places to build houses and this causes the available places to be more
expensive. Also, with less available building spaces close in, it
causes people to move further out.
Another way the city causes a loss of affordable housing is by driving
up the cost of development and stifling the development of more
affordable housing. Take the policy that requires a sidewalk in front of
every house. Sidewalks can add thousands of dollars to a the price of a
house. This means developers will build more expensive homes rather
than less expensive homes to absorb in the home price the cost of the
sidewalks. Also, I have talked to developers who say they have tried to
build communities of affordable housing and instead of getting
assistance from planning, they got obstacle after obstacle thrown in
their way. It is simply easier to build pricey homes rather than
affordable homes.
Another way government destroys affordable housing, is my stringent
codes enforcement. I own a little rental house in Woodbine. I only own
one rental property. It is the house I lived in myself until I moved
to my current home. It is a two-bedroom one-bath house. A few months ago I got
a codes complaint and I had to deal with it. It is not the first time.
It was a headache and an annoyance. I have a tenant who has different
taste than I do and likes "yard art." He also keeps a lot of stuff that
he might can sell to make a little money. The stuff was stored neatly
in covered storage. He also was parking a car on an unpaved or graveled
area.
I only charge the tenant a modest price for rent. I could put central
heat and air in the house and dress it up just a little and rent it for
about half again what I am getting, or I could sell the house. I get
about two postcards a week from someone wanting to buy that house. If I
sold it they would tear it down, and build an expensive house on the
lot. There would go a unit of affordable housing.
Quite frankly, I don't need the money I could get from selling the house
or from upgrading and raising the rent. My tenant is a Cuban refugee
who really did come to America by a raft made of intertubes. He has
been here about twenty years or so but has a heavy accent and little
education. He makes a living by selling scrap metal. He would have a
difficult time paying more rent. I rent to him at a modest rent more
out of a sense of doing a good deed than anything else. When I get a
codes letter, however, I am tempted by the postcard offers to buy my
house. I have talked to other landlords who get harassed by codes. I
know we have to have codes enforcement, but there is an effect. When
codes officials harass property owners they destroy affordable housing.
The other way Metro government contributes to the loss of affordable
housing is by refusing to zone property for greater density if what is
planned to be build on the property is affordable housing. Worse yet,
is the taking away of ones property rights in order to stop them from
building affordable housing. This was attempted in Antioch. Ultimately,
the person's property rights were not taken but the threat hung over the
owners head for two years and the affordable property was never build.
Nashville could have more affordable housing if would embrace manufactured housing. There is a certain snobbish elitism that doesn't want "trailer trash" in Nashville and Nashville has had a long-standing attitude that we would keep "mobile homes" or "trailers" out of Nashville. A lot of the prejudice against manufactured housing is irrational. Manufactured housing could play a major role in insuring there was housing available at various price points.
The best way to make housing affordable is to increase incomes for those at the bottom of the income scale. Rather than subsidizing poverty, in my view, we should strive to lift people out of poverty. You can't lift all people out of poverty, but we should have as a goal to have fewer poor people.
The loss and increasing lack of affordable housing is of concern, but
much of the blame can be laid at the doorstep of the same people who
bemoan the fact that we are losing affordable housing. You can't have
affordable housing if you don't want affordable neighborhoods. You
can't have affordable housing and have every neighborhood look like
Brentwood. You can't have affordable housing, if you are going to ban
greater density or fight having affordable housing in your neighborhood.
For source material and more information, follow these links: link, link, link, link, link.
The Tennessean has done a profile of each of the four major candidates for mayor. Each piece tells the biography of the candidates and essential facts about the candidate and lets the candidate share his or her vision for Nashville. With a word length of about 2600 words, the articles are long enough to do the candidates justice and let their personality shire through. None of the articles are a hatchet-job and none of the top four are slighted. Good reporting.
David Briley, after an improbable political comeback, wants to finish what he started
Carol Swain is running for Nashville mayor after 'a life of beating the odds'
Cooper sees bipartisan path to win in election
John Ray Clemmons: A mayoral candidate underdog who wants to change Nashville
Nashville police union backs John Cooper for mayor, other Metro Council candidates
When you go to vote in the August 1st election, you will see a lot of candidates name's on the ballot of whom you have never heard. Why do people put their name on the ballot who have zero chance of winning? I don't know. Maybe they are delusional and think they can win. Maybe they know they can't win but have a point of view that they want to express and running for office gives them a platform to be heard, at least by a few people. Maybe they have a big ego and get satisfaction by seeing their name on the ballot.
You will see some names that you have heard of but of whom you know very little. It is a shame that so many people are elected by voters who just pull the lever for a person because he had a lot of yard signs. It is a shame so many people are elected because they got the most votes from uninformed people. If you have a strong political philosophy, and know you want to only vote for a Democrat or a Republican and there are only two choices, then party label can be a good guide for whom to vote. In the race for mayor and council, people do not run on party labels so a voter cannot be guided by party identity of the candidate. I tend to think that is a good thing. There are very few votes a member of the council cast where political affiliation would be an indication of how the council member would vote. There are no Democrat or Republican pot holes.
I am posting below the list of candidates for mayor. Next to each list I will provide links to the candidates website, Facebook page or blog or news stories about the candidate. For some of the candidates I will tell you what I know about them, or if I know nothing. If I have a favorite, I will let you know. I plan to do the same for council races, but this may prove to take more effort than I want to give it. We'll see.
Candidates for Mayor
Jody Ball: He is a Republican and good sensible candidate but doesn't have a chance. The Republican vote will be split between Carol Swain and John Cooper and even if all Republican voted for one candidate that candidate could not win. Republicans are outnumbered about two to one in Davidson County. Ball ran for the 5th Congressional District as a Republican and lost that November 6, 2018 election to incumbent Jim Cooper. Cooper beat Ball 67.8 percent to 32.2 percent but some of the areas where Ball did best lay outside Davidson County. I like Ball but won't vote for him. I appreciate him carrying the banner and providing a token alternative to Cooper in the congressional election but why he thinks he can be elected mayor, I don't know. For more information see this link, Twitter feed, Jody Ball for Mayor.
| Mayor David Briley |
| John Cooper |
| Erica Gilmore |
| Jim Shulman |
| John Cooper |
4/15/2019 Update: It looks more certain every day that John Cooper will run for mayor. Sources tell me to look for an announcement anytime. There may be an announcement as early as tomorrow.
The Nashville Scene is now reporting it: John Cooper Might Change His Mind and Run for Mayor. At this point, I will be very surprised if he does not run.
by Rod Williams, April,11, 2019 - At least a reliable source told me he was. Early on, Cooper was often mentioned as a potential candidate for mayor, then in early February he announced he would not be seeking the mayor's office. Rumors keep floating that he will get back in the race. Assuming this is true, this is good news. I like Carol Swain but frankly, doubt she can win. She has a lengthy record of expressing her views on social issue. I tend to share her views, but think they would hurt her in city as liberal as Nashville. I wish she could, but just don't think she can win.
John Cooper is a Democrat and I don't know his views on social issues and I don't want to know. He has not made his views public. I don't know his position on illegal immigration, abortion, or other social issues. Really, I don't care that much. I care about these issues but they are mostly irrelevant to administering the city of Nashville. I know that Nashville is the city with either the most or the second most debt per person in America. That matters more than these social issues. Our basic services are underfunded and we waste an enormous amount of money on delivering city services. Corporate welfare and cronyism are rampant. Our schools are failing and getting worse. I believe John Cooper grasp this. I think he would get our financial house in order. At this time, that is what is most important to me. If Cooper is not fully decided, I would encourage him to throw his hat in the ring.
As soon as his decision to run is confirmed from other sources or Cooper issues a statement, I will post it.
From No Tax 4 Tracks: We pay a lot of attention to what Metro Council member at large
John Cooper says.
John Cooper
He’s thoughtful. He does his homework. And he’s committed to a better Nashville.
So, when we saw his comments on Facebook about the $9-billion light rail plan, we took notice.
Mayor Briley and pro-transit people consistently say the plan is flexible, it can adapt.
Cooper doesn’t see it that way.
“By state law, there are 250 words that are going to be on the ballot that describe
this transit. And this is a proxy. The 250 words are a proxy for the
55-page document which is available online, which I do encourage people
to read. And that document is very important. It’s very detailed, and it
really has an effective…force…of law. And so, the four bus rapid
transit lines and the five railroad lines, and the tunnel is all in this
document. And for that document to be changed, it has to be declared
impossible, financially unfeasible, then the council has to say that it
was unfeasible and then there has to be another referendum. So, it’s not
that flexible of a plan.”
Charlotte, North Carolina. Lots of talk about their system. So, Cooper went.
“I went to City Hall and showed myself around and learned what I
could, and they were very nice. And every single person there said,
“What are you telling people in Nashville about transit”? And I said,
well, congestion. That’s a big problem in Nashville. And to a person,
everyone in Charlotte said, “You cannot say that. Congestion will get
worse with transit.” And then I said, “Well why’d you do it in
Charlotte?” and they said, “Development, development.”
“Fundamentally, this transit bill is about adding a large number of
people to downtown Nashville — on the order of 200,000 people to
downtown Nashville. If your transit-oriented development districts run
at the density they feel it needs to be run at — in Charlotte that’s 22
people an acre — we have over 9,000 acres that’s going to a
transit-oriented development district, that is relocating a city the
size of Chattanooga or Orlando, Florida to downtown Nashville. So,
ultimately this plan probably does not address congestion at all; it
probably creates congestion.”
Congestion. I-65, 24, 40 and 440 and this plan. Cooper says:
“They’re two entirely separate systems. One will serve downtown
Nashville, and the other will not — there’s no way that you can pull off
the interstate and use the transit. Now the internal downtown Nashville
transit system will serve the people, but those are people who are not
yet here. They are not yet here. So, the federal projections for
population growth in Davidson County between now and 2032 is only, we
will go from 685,000 to 740,000 — that’s more people for sure. But most
of those people are already moving into downtown Nashville and really
don’t need a regional transit system. Where the great growth is coming
from are in all the surrounding counties — the Sumner, the Wilson, the
Rutherford, and Williamson; and fundamentally they don’t link
into this transit system. Now they may one day, but it is like that
baseball movie “Field of Dreams” — build it and they will come. You’re
taking this speculative idea of development in the future.”
It’s not that flexible of a plan.
...this plan probably does not address congestion at all; it probably creates congestion.
It is like that baseball movie “Field of Dreams” — build it and they will come. You’re taking this speculative idea of development in the future.
We think Cooper makes a lot of sense.