Friday, February 3, 2012
The City/County/State Annexation Stand-off for Dummies
Posted by Jackson Baker on Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM
- JB
- City Councilman Jim Strickland and Mayor Wharton mull over crisis at Thursday night fundraiser.
The current version of the latest Memphis blow-up — one which all the involved principals appear to be accepting, perhaps for the sake of a momentary armistice — is that a local, almost casual impulse was the source of two radioactive bills regarding urban annexation in Shelby County.
The bills — one removing a key area from Memphis’ annexation reserve and another requiring a positive vote on the part of any community about to be annexed — were sponsored in the House by GOP members Curry Todd and Ron Lollar and in the Senate by no less than Majority Leader Mark Norris. All are legislators from suburban Shelby County.
It should be noted that Norris-Todd is the popular name for Public Chapter One of 2011, the bill governing the ongoing merger of Memphis City Schools and Shelby County Schools, and that Lollar was an unacknowledged co-author, along with Norris and Todd, of that legislation.
Supposedly the residents of tiny Fisherville, an unincorporated bedroom suburb on the rim of Memphis and squarely in the city’s annexation reserve, began agitating for legislation to protect them from potential absorption — some day, some way — by Memphis. And Todd and Lollar, innocently helpful in the latest telling, prevailed on the Majority Leader to — in Norris’ words — “sign the check,” and the bills got entered last week on the legislature’s filing deadline.
Whatever Messrs. Todd, Lollar, and Norris expected, it was probably not the rapid, almost instantaneous reaction they got from a unified Memphis city government, irrespective of Council members’ prior attitudes toward further annexations by the city. Perhaps a majority were opposed to pursuing any more such, and there is no evidence whatsoever that annexation of Fisherville or the larger Gray’s Creek unincorporated area was being contemplated by anyone in the Administration or on the Council.
Various Council members did, however, see the purpose of the new annexation bills to be that of bolstering the suburban municipal school districts now in the process of being birthed by enabling the availability for them down the line of a new population base and new sales tax and property tax revenues — all of which would be subtracted from Memphis’ own Christmas future.
Addressing an emergency meeting of the Council’s personnel, intergovernmental, and annexation committee Tuesday night, Mayor A C Wharton noted that the new legislation had been proposed “without even the courtesy of conversation with the bill sponsors and without regard to the standing annexation agreement signed by all Shelby County mayors in 1998.” This was a compact between all of Shelby County’s municipalities resolving the previous year’s infamous “Toy Town” controversy over a bill (subsequently found unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court) that would have allowed virtually unlimited incorporation of communities of any size whatsoever.
Upon learning of the legislation Monday, Wharton and Council chairman Bill Morrison had issued a joint statement, which recalled the City’s fight with the suburbs and state government in 2011 over school merger and said in part, “…This is a continued all-out assault on Memphis and its right to govern itself. We are calling upon all of our local leaders — whether they be leaders in politics, business, or the philanthropic arena — and the residents of Memphis to let their state representatives know that this will not stand.”
On Tuesday, the Mayor and Council agreed on a dual strategy of contesting the legislation in court (primarily on the basis that it was unauthorized private legislation) and of countering it with immediate steps to annex the Gray’s Creek/Fisherville area to Memphis. A resolution to begin the first of three required readings was set for Tuesday, with a resolve to fast-track readings two and three if need be.
Norris, who acknowledged that he was surprised by the swift City reaction, began to back-pedal from his own involvement with the annexation legislation and, after conversations with Harold Collins, chairman of the Council’s personnel, intergovernmental, and annexation committee and presumably with Wharton, apparently prevailed on Todd and Lollar to allow the bills to be “held on desk” while an Attorney General’s opinion on the bills’ legal status was requested.
This morphed into a general stand-down , during which Norris himself expressed doubt about the annexation bills’ constitutionality and the Fisherville thesis was surfaced, after which all parties — Wharton, the Council, and the legislators — appear to have consented to an indefinite cease-fire in place. (Council chairman Morrison said Thursday night, however, that he intended to speed the annexation process through at least the second reading, “just in case.”)
In any case, even in clearly distancing himself from the volatile and misfiring annexation bills, Norris made clear to the Flyer that he would hold fast to his de facto 30-day ultimatum to process legislation on the status of the school infrastructure sought at little or no cost by emergent suburban municipal school districts in Shelby County.
Norris had said that, in the absence of any general agreement between governmental and school authorities in on the status of the school buildings, he would introduce appropriate legislation to resolve the issue.
Simultaneously came an unexpected move from David Pickler, the former Shelby County Schools board chairman whose stated resolve in late 2010 to seek special-school-district status for his system is cited by many as the catalyst for the Memphis City Schools board’s fateful decision to surrender the MCS charter, thus forcing merger.
For the last several months, Pickler has been a member of both the Uniform School Board now governing SCS and MCS preparatory to their 2013 merger and the Transition Planning Committee created by Norris-Todd to advise in the merger process. During that time his public statements have been highly generalized and largely confined to the idea that everybody should work together to make the merger work.
In an interview with the Flyer this past week, however, Pickler abandoned that position, calling for the TPC to reconfigure its purpose around the idea of multiple school districts — including charter schools and the state’s Achievement School District as well as the municipal schools now clearly in the process of formation.
Accordingly Pickler called for the TPC to be addressed by Jim Mitchell, a former Shelby County school superintendent who is now a consultant advising the sub urban municipalities on setting up their school systems. (A TPC committee met Thursday afternoon and suggested the proposal be dealt with at next week’s full meeting of the Committee. Shelb y County Mayor Mark Luttrell embroidered on the idea with an open invitation to all suburban mayors to address the full TPC.)
Citing Norris’ determination on the school-building issue, Pickler said, ““The Transition Planning Committee has to take under consideration this new initiative by Sen. Norris. If we ignore it, Sen. Norris seems to have a plan to implement.”
Comments (58)
Showing 1-50 of 58
It looks like Mark Norris stepped on his crank on this one. (That is an old Texas saying.) I don't understand why he would co-sponsor legislation that he thought was probably unconstitutional from the very beginning. I find it hard to believe he didn't anticipate Memphis moving towards an immediate annexation of Gray's Creek, not after the brisk surrender of the schools charter after the Republicans took over the General Assembly.
I guess there is nothing to do but wait and see how this plays out. It does serve as a distraction while the school buildings countdown clock continues to tick.
like
dislike
I don't know what he was thinking (other than perhaps he was in full-on battle mode against evil Memphis) but I'm thinking this is going to fizzle out. Memphis really doesn't need to annex huge new areas anytime in the near future, if ever, and as long as the state doesn't try to abrogate their right to do so, they would be smart not to.
Yeah but...
It sounds to me like a delaying action. They were surprised by the swiftness of the city's response. The city, by very capital-D Democratically agreeing to believe the cheating husband's declaration of innocence one more time, is going to wake up one day and find Gray's Creek carrying Nashville's baby.
True that, Jeff. Not much reason for Memphis to trust those guys at all. They'll agree now, then go back on their "word" next month. But from a practical standpoint, they don't need to annex that huge area.
Here goes Memphis again runing around without a plan. Annexing to be annexing with no idea how to pay for it or what the current citizens of Memphis actually get for the annexation. Same thing with school charter surrender/And of course there is the crime, blight, public corruption, etc., that runs rampant throughout Memphis.
It really makes Memphis look like a third-world city struggling through the basics of a civilized society. Is it any wonder why no one in the county wants to merge anything with Memphis? And go ahead Packrat and OTP, call names and type your ebonics-style replies, but you cannot put lipstick on this pig of Memphis.
Question flyhigh: why do you still live near Memphis if it sucks so badly?
Seems to me that the city should annex the reserve area then put a building moratorium on it for several years. Or even be really dicky and just annex everything outside a 1 mile radius of the intersection of Macon/Collierville-Arlington Rd. We have the Berryhill doughnut, why not a fisherville doughnut. We make the speed limit on the roads into/out of the doughnut 15 mph then have speed traps.
I do not blame Curry Todd or Mark Norris for this mess. They are just Right-wing Republicans who are representing the people that voted for them. But politicians like AC Wharton have no core beliefs. In fact he favors everything. He is a Democrat one day, and a Republican next. Wharton really stands for nothing.
Once again, this political pandering by Wharton to Tennessee Republicans has put Memphis in a negative situation.
I hope the state can find a legal way to limit Memphis' ability to annex any new areas. Memphis literally has a track record of systematic destruction of areas it annexes, and that needs to stop. I really don't understand how anyone who looks at the Memphis annexation map, and compares the before and after condition of the areas annexed, could possibly support further annexations.
"Memphis literally has a track record of systematic destruction of areas it annexes, and that needs to stop"
What exactly did the city of Memphis DO to "systematically" destroy annexed areas? Has most of East Memphis been "systematically" destroyed? Seriously, do you people listen to yourselves?
If you want to look at mismanagement, look at Shelby County government, which has until very recently been completely dominated by white republicans and their conservative developer allies. It's the Shelby tax rate which has been going up, not the Memphis city tax rate. It's Shelby County's debt which ballooned due to rampant development approved by jim Rout and his buddies. But again, everything is the fault of EEEEEEVIL Memphis. What a joke.
Bottom line, Memphis should not be treated differently by the state than any other large city in TN, but what you advocate is that it should be discriminated against as no other city has been. So when Wharton says it's racism (and buddy, he's an accommodationist if there ever was one), he's fucking right. This is ALL about the fact that the white GOP isn't satisfied with controlling state government, they want to squash Memphis through the state b/c they don't have the demographics to control Shelby County directly any more.
Packrat, any way you look at it, Memphis is a failure and it exports failure when it annexes other parts of the county. It is the kiss of death. I understand everyone around here uses the word "racism" like people in other parts of the country use the phrase "you know." I can't believe you are one of those who believe it is the fault of the people who leave the areas annexed that those areas go into the toilet, thus blaming the effect, not the cause.
I don't know anything about East Memphis. I do know that every big city has an area zoned to protect a group of well-off movers and shakers not very far from downtown. Maybe East Memphis serves this function locally.
If the state wants to freeze annexation for every city, town, burg, village, hamlet, and community in the state, then I'm in.
All you need is one rule mad_merc, let the people in the entire state vote if they want to be annexed.
Look, I'm not generally a big fan of annexation, and I really honestly think Memphis would be better off it had not spread itself out so far. Unfortunately this is not the case and this bill is nothing more than an attempted money grab (by securing potential students and land for potential future MSD/SSD), with a bit of a slap to the face to Memphis thrown in for sport.
Since I'm ranting, Packie is right that the majority of these issues have been caused by piss poor development planning on behalf of the county commission and planning board (for the record the city isn't much better either, just look at the CVS fiasco). The idiots on these boards have given the nod to every ill conceived neighborhood and whim of the developers without any thought to the long term impact.
mad_merc,
Isn't it true that the county commission is permanently controlled by commissioners elected by the citizens of Memphis?
Packrat, I totally agree with you. It appears that it is the annexation, per se, but, who will ultimately be in charge.
East Memphis has not gone to hell and the other portions of annexed areas of Memphis have not gone down because of annexation. Hickory Hill, for the residents that reside there, is still a nice place to live. Business have left, but not because of bad city management, but, rather, the demograpic shift left the area with residents that have different shopping patterns and tastes. KMart, Best Buy, Macys, white folks style restaurants, they are not what we cater to. That is just a fact. It was their desire and/or failure to adapt to the changing conditions of Hickory Hill that led to their demise, not management by city government.
GWCarver, you say let those communities that are in the reserve vote to see if they want to be annexed. Well, I don't recall a vote, when city sewers were extended to their areas. There was no vote when MLGW extended utilities, etc to those areas. Why vote now, after you have gotten all of the benefits that Memphis could afford you, saving you a lot of money.
Uhoh, do you still stand by your statement that Mark Norris is a very good attorney?
If Mark Norris trys to take the schools, located in the suburban municipalities, it will not work. Private, special legislation goes against the state constitution.
If you suburbanites want 20 years of litigation, then Memphis is up to it. I think it would be better for all concerned, to work together and try to come up with a plan that would settle these issues amicably. It is up to you.
It's a very recent phenomena that the county commission has ever considered itself as "part of" or representative of Memphis. The planning board has been at the beck and call of the developers since, well, forever. And the developers really could care less about anything sustainable, or for the good of the area overall. The people crying foul over annexation now, are the same people that were demanding that the city extend the sewer services a few years back.
Mad Merc, that has been the position of the suburban people all along. They want to build their pristine communities outside of Memphis, using all of the resources from Memphis, at little or no cost to themselves. The same can be said about getting their own municipal school districts. They want their own, however, they don't want to spend the money, necessary for property and/or schools. They want to leech off of Memphis and get them free.
It is time that they realize that the City of Memphis is the predominant city in Shelby County, alas, the county seat. It is also time that Memphis acted like it.
I am not for taking anything away from the suburbs, all I am saying is, if they want to be separate, pony up and pay all of the costs for maintaining their communities. If just one penny is derived from the City of Memphis, Memphis should insist on it's representation and/or political control.
In the landmark Stafford vs the Houston School District, Stafford won and formed their own school district. Stafford was far more poorer than the suburban cities of Shelby County. They didn't try to force the Houston School Board to give them school property and/or buildings; they sucked it up and built their own. It is only fitting that the suburban cities of Shelby County do the same.
The days of the suburban cities dictating to the City of Memphis is over.
Mad Merc, I am also researching the state and county finances to see if any county and/or state money was used to build and maintain the parks in Germantown, Collierville, etc. If so, those parks are also for the use of the people that reside in Memphis or anywhere else in Shelby County or Tennessee. What the suburban cities fail to understand is, when you open up a can of worms, it is no telling what will crawl out.
Suburbanites, be careful of what you ask for; it might come back to haunt you later.
The picture of Jim Strickland and AC Wharton says they were at a political fundraiser. Who was the fundraiser for? Why does the caption omit that? Please tell us who the fundraiser was for?
Hey OTP, how about doing a little research and show us how Raleigh Springs Mall has thrived since being annexed, and please, because it has nothing to do with the Dred Scott Decision, there is no need to mention it. :)
With regard to voting for annexation, it is already part of the law, and, the dual voting you were talking about is one of the options, with both Memphis and the target area needing a majority for the annexation to take place. (As if Memphis wouldn't vote to annex the moon if it were put on a ballot.) However, this doesn't mean it is in the new legislation proposed by Norris/Todd, and is pretty much irrelevant anyway. (Why would the city request a local election and waste the money running another "vote for unity" campaigh when it had already decided on the annexation?) From the Annexation Handbook:
_______________________________________
Within 30 to 60 days of the publication, the county election commission holds an election on the question for qualified voters living within the annexation area.
A majority vote carries.
OR
________________ Within 30 to 60 days of the publication, the county election commission holds an election on the question for qualified voters living within the annexation area and, at the city’s request, an election on the question for existing city residents. A majority vote of each group is required to carry.
________________________________________
So, it would seem like what is needed is to plug the loophole/alternative (probably the Annexation By Ordinance section) that allows cities to skip this procedure. Check out the arguments against annexation on page 10. Fisherville could make a good case.
http://www.mtas.tennessee.edu/Knowledgebas…
Note: You will have to copy and paste the above link into the URL bar, at least if you are running Firefox. The local interface isn't picking it up as a link, but i did copy and paste it and it worked. It is Annexation Handbook 2006 BW.pdf, which is highlighted as a link once you get there. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader or a plug-in that mimics it.
The schools were paid for Shelby County tax dollars which the suburban residents pay as well.
Some of the schools also had funding from rural school bonds which only the residents from OUTSIDE Memphis pay.
GWCarver. Raleigh Springs Mall was also anchored by JC Penney and had a lot of stores that just didn't cater to the tastes of African Americans. Hey, you like those stores, but I don't. I can't remember the last time I went to J C Penneys, Kmart, Sears, Macys, they are just not my kind of store. If you are selling apples, but the people want oranges; you won't survive. The stores that we like didn't move into those malls because of the high overhead, rent, etc. So, you can't equate annexation with the demise of those stores.
Annexation has already been signed for the reserve areas. It should be a done deal. Memphis was not attempting to annex anybody until Norris filed his bill. Now, regardless of what Norris says, we don't trust him, Memphis will proceed to the point that a final vote can be done in a matter of hours to complete it.
As for dual voting schemes, we will wait for Judge S. Thomas Anderson to rule on the lawsuit that was filed during the last Memphis-Shelby County Government Consolidation. If history is any precursor, dual voting for the consolidation of the city and county will be thrown out, just like the old run-off provisions for Memphis Mayor.
Taxpayer, what are you trying to say? Those schools, in the suburban cities, were paid for with money from Shelby County, all of Shelby County. Those rural bonds you say, just from the county, doesn't matter.
You must understand, the schools, in question, were all built to be used by the Shelby County School Board, as trustee, for the benefit of educating the children that reside within Shelby County, all of them, EXCEPT THE ONES THAT OPT OUT BY FORMING THEIR OWN MUNICIPAL SCHOOL DISTRICT. If those opting out to form their own msd, if they surrender that charter, the schools will still be there for the purpose intended, educating all of the children of Shelby County, with, of course, the Shelby County Board of Education as trustee.
This is so simple; Why, oh why can't you suburbanites understand this?
Call someone in another city, someone not familiar with this squabble. Explain when and how the schools were built, that the money, regardless of percentages, came from all of the taxpayers in Shelby County. Ask them what they think and get back with me.
OTP, I asked you to show us how Raleigh Springs Mall benefited from being annexed by Memphis. Instead, you told me how all of the stores closed. It sounds to me like Raleigh Springs Mall did not benefit from being annexed by Memphis.
You can trust Mark Norris to do what is best for Shelby County, not just what is best for Memphis, which has been the case for the last 140 years.
GWCarver, politically speaking, Memphis is Shelby County. You need to get that in your head now.
Annexation, in itself, doesn't have to show a physical benefit; it didn't hurt Raleigh either. The expenses that were made for the sewer, utilities, police and fire protection doesn't really show physically, but it is there.
GWCarver, in the long term, you can't win. The numbers are against you and won't get any better. Mark Norris can do a few things, however, it will only be a bump in the road; Memphis is the most prominent city and the county seat. We have just begun to act like it, so get used to it.
THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG ... !
Tuesday January 31, 2012
Press Release
Senator Norris and Representative Todd as well as Representative Lollar correctly represented us when they introduced the bills on Monday.
It is incorrect to assume that this move is motivated by racial differences at all. Out here in the Fisherville/Gray's Creek area, one of the oldest parts of Shelby County, we live together peacefully and do not make such differences. Everyone lives together peacefully, and we respect our neighbors. Frankly, we are concerned that the racially charged leadership of Memphis will bring their racial hate out here, which, as we see in this case, is always the first line of attack that they chose in an effort to get their way. Out here it is simply not so. Up to today, neighbor got along with neighbor just fine. It appears as though Memphis is trying to inflame racial hate.
Simply put: We not wish nor do we itend to be a part of the crime ridden, school-failing, race hating entity who has done nothing but utterly mismanged that which was given into their hands to manage.
It is our constitutional right to express how we wish to be represented and who will represent us.
When Memphis reached for us years early, they were already illegal in their greed and took us in without any legal basis for the hostile act. Now, that Memphis is trying to force us to be part of them, they are also unconstitutional! Their actions are nothing but hostile in attempt much like a hostile takeover in a business situation.
With the new annexation bill Senator Mark Norris introduced who knows, if Memphis gets their act together and shows that they can be responsible leaders who work for their citizens and not forever attempt to find sneakier ways to scander away the tax money into their own pockets, then the Gray's Creek area might even wish to become part of the City of Memphis "by our citizens' vote".
A quick exampe: Then other day, I was driving in South Memphis passing the Intermodal which was filled with trailors waiting to be loaded unto trains and trucks. More than eight (8) huge crane, that load and unload, the likes to find in the wharfts by the sea. Not doubt, millions of dollars were sitthing there waiting to be transported. Yet, Memphis is broke.
Clearly, this to me was a prime example, that although this is the "Distribution Hub" of the United States if not the World, but we are always at the bottom of everyone's list. Clearly, this is not because "the Haters" are out there, because the rest of the world really wants us to succeed, but because the leadership hides behind pretentious hating and does not want to move forward into the superpower we could be based on geographical area and our huge distribution system. It does not have to be this way! We are making the first step to change that. It behooves the leadership of Memphis to do the same.
Concentrate their efforts on managing correctly and successfully that which is legal and good, then we will see if they are ready for more. In the current state, why would you give more to those who have shown themselves no capable of managing that which they have already. No serious corporation would ever do business that way. Their ways have lead Memphis, the Ninth Congressional District, into utter poverty. They exploided the Memphians to the ultimate state of poverty. It does not have to be so. It all depends on good leadership.
Like I said earlier, if Memphis leadership ever gets its act together, under the new annexation law, we might want to join them ... later.
John Bogan, President
Fisherville Civic Club
Shelby County is going down the drain, and there's nothing you can do to stop it.
LIving in Gooberville won't help you.
OTP
"If just one penny is derived from the City of Memphis, Memphis should insist on it's representation and/or political control."
Based on your premise, I should have a say in the vote for the MCS board of education as well as the Memphis City representation. My county taxes have gone to support many things that you, the City of Memphis resident have as resources.
"Better be careful for what you wish!"
homer- did you know that 70% of Shelby County's residents live within the city of Memphis? Did you also know that something like 70% of all the tax revenue generated in Shelby County originates within the Memphis city limits? Keep that in mind when discussing how funding is derived and how/where it is spent.
OTP, Bartlett, Tn is the tenth largest city in Tennessee. It was founded in 1829 and incorporated in 1866. It isn't Memphis, and your insistence that it is part of Memphis is unfounded and silly. You should really try to find something else to hang your hat on.
For those opposed suburbs having their own school districts explain why? I still can't figure that arguement out. It will be less students for MCS/SCS to have to worry about and less buildings to maintain. The suburbs get no more money per student than MCS/SCS, so you're not losing money. For the most part the school buildings in the suburbs are old. I'm not seeing the cause of the hatred toward's independent cities (the suburbs) having local control of their schools.
Stapletondia, rest easy. Your anxieties about Democrats supporting Republicans and Republican causes being well known, let me assure you that the fundraiser attended last week by Councilman Strickland and Mayor Wharton was for a bona fide Democrat, County assessor Cheyenne Johnson. Feel better?
(The information was omitted from the caption because it was not germane either to the subject of the article or to the conversation which the photograph depicted.)
Barf -- Memphis has 70% of the population of Shelby County, but I challenge you to provide evidence that it produces 70% of the revenues for Shelby County.
The average annual income in Memphis is 33k. The average income for the 4 suburbs (Germantown, Collierville, Bartlett, and Arlington) is 92K. Hypothetically, let’s say the savings rate in Memphis is zero and 20% in the suburbs. Memphians still only generate 51% of the spending in the county. This means the suburbs generate a disproportional share of the sales tax revenue in Shelby County.
The average home value in the burbs is 4 times higher than that in Memphis (source Zillow.com). Meaning it takes, on average, 4 houses in Memphis to generate the same amount of Shelby County property taxes as one house in the suburbs. At that rate, it’s highly improbable that Memphis generates 70% of the property tax revenues in Shelby County.
@John Bogan
I am sorry for what could very well happen to your town and all.
Here is an interesting factoid. Until very recently, Shelby County used to cost-share on building new and widened roads with all of the municipalities of Shelby County with one exception: Memphis. So Memphis paid for all of its own roads by itself while germantown, Collierville, Bartlett, et al, got help from SHelby County.. As it stands now, the suburbs of SHelby probably do provide a somewhat greater amount of revenue proportionally than does Memphis as a whole. However, Memphians, for literally many decades, subsidized suburban development. So if now it's slanted a little the other way, what's wrong with that. Since it's all one county. That doesn't mean anyone should give up their autonomy or that they can't have a MSD, but we do have a common interest in seeing all of Shelby County do well and maybe we should act like it.
John Bogan, how dare you try to play the unconstitutional card, all of a sudden! For over 300 years, unconstitutional laws and things were done to citizens of Shelby County and nary a peep from the other side. The annexation agreement that was signed by the suburban mayors and the city of Memphis is constitutional. It is a valid agreement, a contract, that can be enforced by law. Mark Norris, himself, said that he had doubts about the constitutionality of his proposed bill. Did you not read the article? Oh, you only read what you wanted to.
You, Fisherville and Grays Creek will be annexed and the only thing you can do is fight a losing court battle, like the rest of some of the annexed areas did, or you can move out. The choice is yours.
The facts are, the city of Memphis did not have annexation on the horizon until you and your people talked Mark Norris into a pre-emptied strike. It is the same as David Pickler did; you see where that got him.
We will not be bullied and made to kow-tow to your demands. We are the county seat, the most prominent city in Shelby County. Since you suburbanites forced us, we are more than willing anvd able to flex our muscles.
Comanche Joe, first of all, you are not independent of Memphis. Second, we don't want a split school district, based on race and socio-economic classes. We fought and bled, and some died for a single unitary system.
If you read Brown vs Board of Education and other subsequent court rulings, diversity is also a compelling government interest.
I know that is not the answer you want, but, it is what it is.
So, what was the reason Memphis was left out?
This link says all of the road construction in Shelby County is funded by the state gas tax:
http://www.shelbycountytn.gov/index.aspx?N…
Comanhce-
It is actually pretty easy to find the info. Look at the appraised value as identified in the Shelby County budget. Compare to city appraised value as listed in their budget. The appraised value of all real property in Shelby Co. is around $58 Billion (assessed real value = 15.6 billion) while the appraised value of all real property within the Memphis city limits is around $37 Billion (assessed real value is $9.8 Billion). It’s pretty easy to figure out how higher home values out in Germantown are offset by property values in Memphis once you think about it. What do you think is worth more: The AutoZone Headquarters or the AutoZone store on Farmington? First Tennessee building downtown or the First TN branch at Germantown and Poplar? Once Commerce Square and Clark Tower or one of those anonymous office parks on Exeter? Wolfchase Mall or the Germantown Village Shops? The Ridgeway Center…well you get the point.
That’s only 64%. The rest comes from the 15% of revenue sources that include things like sales tax, fees, fines, wheel tax, rental car tax and motel tax among other items. The vast majority of retail space in Shelby County is located within the Memphis City limits. 3 of the county's 4 functioning regional malls are located within the Memphis City limits (sales tax… cha-ching). The vast majority of the car dealerships in Shelby County are located in Memphis and the same goes for grocery stores, gas stations, liquor stores, etc... What the city lacks in disposable income it makes up for in sheer volume. But let's not underestimate the spending power located in neighborhoods such as Central Gardens, High Point, the Village, Chickasaw Gardens, East Memphis, River Oaks, the University area and downtown. As home to 70% of the county’s population, a similar proportion of fees and (especially) fines originate within the Memphis city limits. The vast majority of hotel rooms (and all of the higher end major locations) are within the city limits. Similarly the majority of vehicles are registered to residents of Memphis. As home to 70% of the county’s population, a similar proportion of fees and (especially) fines originate within the Memphis city limits.
Sorry, but I didn’t use sources like “Zillow”. Instead I got my info from Shelby County and the city of Memphis budget reports:
http://www.shelbycountytn.gov/
http://www.memphistn.gov/
http://www.memphisshelbyinform.com/
By the way, I looked at Zillow and your 4 to 1 ratio as far as home value is concerned was way off. Maybe if only compared to Germantown and Collierville, but include the rest of the County- Bartlett, Millington, Arlington (where home value is not nearly as high as I would have expected), etc… and it drops a lot.
Comanche and homersimpson, what have you got to say about Bart's figures? Can you dispute them with facts?
I am glad he answered, because I had the same information, however, it would have been suspect coming from me.
Without Memphis, the suburban cities would wither on the vines.
The city of Memphis takes care of the streets in the boundaries of Memphis, not the county. Read the city charter of Memphis.
OTP, you might want to check your own figures there, buddy. "Over 300 years," you say? Neither the Constitution nor the County are that old.
Hey Packrat, that home page I linked to says it is responsible for Shelby County. However, the following link says it is only the unincorporated areas:
http://www.shelbycountytn.gov/index.aspx?N…
Carver, that's what they do now. It's what they should have done all along. In the past, the county subsidized road construction in the suburban municipalities, but not in Memphis. They do not do that any more. They quit during Rout's regime, I think. Mainly b/c they were running out of money.
OTP I’ll respond.
First all budgets Memphis, Shelby County, Collierville, etc…. are unaudited. The reason to use 3rd party data (Zillow, MLS, etc) is that they are independent and therefore, deemed more reliable and unaudited numbers.
The Budget Summary reports the per capita personal income for Memphis MSA as $37,792. Ah ha! That’s higher than the number I used earlier. Correct until you understand what a MSA is. A MSA is a Metropolitan Statistical Area, which for Memphis includes not only those living in the city limits, but also all the suburbs, North Mississippi (Olive Branch, Southaven, Hernando, etc), Fayette County and West Memphis. For the comparison between Memphis and rest of Shelby County that number is not valid. That’s why 3rd party numbers are most of the time better than internals, especially budgets.
Since per capita and median numbers can be all over the place depending on what’s included and excluded from a particular calculation, a better comparison will be with raw numbers. For all numbers, the source is CLRSearch.com (www.clrsearch.com) , which pulls data from Nielsen, OnBoard Infomatics, and government data. All data is from 2010, which is the most complete available.
Let’s start with the malls. There are 4 malls in Memphis – Wolfchase, Oak Court, Hickory Ridge Mall, and Southland. The Southland and Hickory Ridge malls have about the same occupied retail space as Saddle Creek North & South in Germantown. I guarantee the average revenue per square foot in Saddle Creek is higher than Southland and Hickory Ridge malls combined. That leaves only Oak Court and Wolfchase. Oak Court is directly offset by the Avenue Crossing in Collierville. I’ll give you Wolfchase.
Let’s move to overall retail analysis between Memphis and the Suburbs. The basis of this analysis is the population as a percentage of the total population for Shelby County. When referring to Memphis, the analysis is referring to activity and population within the current borders of the City of Memphis. When referring to the Suburbs, the analysis is combining the population and activity from Collierville, Germantown, Bartlett, Arlington, Lakeland, and Millington.
The population of Shelby County is 920,745, of these citizens 66% live in Memphis and 18.6% in the suburbs. During 2010 Shelby County produced $13,663,133,000 of retail sales. Retail sales numbers come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of the Census and include 95% of all expenditures, including cars, major appliances, rent, utilities, etc. Out of this total, Memphis produced $7,944,641,000 (58.1%) and the suburbs produced $ 4,565,176,000 (33.4%). Interesting that 18.6% of the population produces 1/3 for the overall retail sales in Shelby County. The State of Tennessee collects 7 percent sales tax or $956,419,310 from Shelby County. A portion of this money is returned to Memphis and the Suburbs, but it’s returned based on population not on the production source (reference Budget Summary section of Memphis 2012 Budget). Though Memphis only produced 58.1% of the state sales tax revenue, they’ll receive 66% of the total portion returned to Shelby County from the state. Looks to me like the Suburbs are towing their share and part of Memphis’ too.
Utilities and rent are included in the retail sales numbers but are not taxable. Breaking them may result in a net 3% point swing. This is not material for the overall analysis so they were left in.
Onto personal income. The total 2010 personal income in Shelby County is $26,544,402,440. The total personal income for Memphis is $15,001,325,719 (56.5% of Shelby County). This number is for all of Memphis, including the high income areas like Chickasaw Gardens, East Memphis. High Point Terrace. The total in the Suburbs is $7,331,870,210 (27.6% of Shelby County). The Suburbs have 18% of the population but 27.6% of the personal income. It’s not a big jump to say that citizens in the suburbs crossover over into the Memphis retail sector more than Memphis does into the suburbs.
I’ll address property taxes later.
OTP, your walls are crumbling. As soon as the first municipality holds their referendum on creating a municipal school district passes, that part of Norris-Todd becomes "ripe," and Judge Mays will rule on it within 90 days. Since the rest of the bill was found to be a) NOT ex post facto, and b) constitutional, there is no reason to believe that the rest will be found otherwise.
"You must understand, the schools, in question, were all built to be used by the Shelby County School Board, as trustee, for the benefit of educating the children that reside within Shelby County, all of them, EXCEPT THE ONES THAT OPT OUT BY FORMING THEIR OWN MUNICIPAL SCHOOL DISTRICT."
Um, no, that is not the case. They are for use by any public school system authorized by the State of Tennessee to educate the children in any geographic area. They are not held in trust by the SCSB, they are held in trust by Shelby County, which includes Bartlett, Collierville, et. al. The schools within the muni districts will go to the munis at no charge. Without fanfare and without prolonged litigation. After all, the old MCS "opted out" of Shelby County Schools and formed their own district over 150 years ago, and they got SCS schools for free. They even used the Lennox decision (not an annexation case) in support of their taking the schools.
As far as re-segregation, that issue is a non-starter. At least in the beginning, the munis will invite their current attendance zones. Since the current attendance zones have already been approved by all parties to the desegregation suit, including Fields (the plaintiff's attorney) and Donald (the Federal judge over the case), there can be no challenge. If the racial makeup of the schools was OK under the old MCS/SCS model it has to be OK now.
Down the road, maybe 10 years from now, as the munis fill up with young families with kids, and the unincorporated areas have fewer places in the muni districts, there may be a problem. That issue, however, is currently not yet "ripe."
OTP, you are 0 and whatever, and in the end, you will not pick up a single point.
HellenicLad, what a reach! Now you are proposing to say what Judge Mays will rule. A many people have been left out in the cold tyring to guess what a federal judge, with a lifetime appointment, will rule. Felix Frankfurter, supposedly one of the most conservative judges ever to be put on the supreme court. Alas, when he got there, he made a complete 180 and became one of the courts most liberal judges in history.
As far as re-segregation, that is a valid point. From the Brown vs Board of Education to subsequent and present court rulings, diversity is a compelling government interest. The attendance zones previously approved under the federal school desegregation order are now, moot. You see, Shelby County was cleared and released from that order in 2009. Please google, diversity, compelling government interest. Under present state law, interdistrict transfers can be blocked by either the receiving and/or the losing school district. The SCS would not have to let students within the SCS, outside of the proposed msd's leave the district
As far as the finding that the other parts of SB 25 were constitutional, please peruse Judge Mays opinion. He stated that those parts were constitutional and not post ex facto because, they did not change the end result, the surrender of the MCS charter and subsequent merger of the two districts. Those portions of the law were only clarifying and thus have no effect on the surrender and merger. Laws that merely fills a void, clarifying issues, can reach back and still be constitutional. But the smart judge, went even further. He ruled that the old SCS districts were unconstitutional and had to have an immediate remedy. That effectively stopped Pickler and his cohorts from stripping the MCS and giving away the suburban schools, prior to the merger. He ruled that the transition team was constitutional, but, only as an advisory board, with no plenary power. In other words, they lack authority to make and/or force change. All decisions concerning the policies and operation of the merged districts would have to be made by the new SCS Board.
What you got, lad, is a hollow victory. It is like Irwin Rommel's initial victory over the americans at the battle of the Kasserene Pass, in WWII. Rommel's forces had lost over 30% of its equipment and manpower, in acheiving that victory. One of Rommel's aides remarked, what a great victory it was. Rommel retorted, if we win every battle this way, we will have lost the war. LOL
PS: State law mandates that the ADA money follow the student, it did not say that the schools had to follow the students. If the state wants to pass a law taking away the county schools local control over its property and schools throughout the state, have at it. That would not pass in the legislature. Only take away SCS, now that is special legislation, with is forbidden by the state constitution.
OTP
#1
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2012/…
"Jim Mitchell of Southern Educational Strategies, who conducted the municipal schools feasibility study for five of the suburbs, has consistently noted that 44 county schools were absorbed by the Memphis City Schools because of annexation since the mid-1960s. Mitchell said their research shows the city did not pay for any of those buildings.
"That is not what's been done in this county for 45 years," Mitchell told a crowd of about 350 people at a Bartlett town hall forum on the feasibility study."
#2
http://www.shelbycountytn.gov/index.aspx?n…
"The Education Fund accounts for tax collections allocated for the operations of the Shelby County and Memphis City School Education. Education is a high priority for the County as shown by the fact that Education receives 58% of all property tax revenues, when both operating and debt service for the schools are considered. Education represents about 31% of total countywide expenditures or $361.2 million."
"The Debt Service Fund accounts for the accumulation of resources for and payment of general long-term debt principal, interest and related expenses. Some policies that guide the use of debt funding include:
Debt is issued primarily for school construction and major capital improvements, facilities and equipment with a cost in excess of $100,000.
Debt Service is funded primarily from property taxes, receiving 18.7% of the tax rate."
Of the $1.6 billion in county debt that the county holds, $1.2 billion is related to the schools."
#3
http://www.memphisdailynews.com/news/2012/…
"The resolution setting three options for the possible transfer of public school buildings to municipal school districts was debated vigorously by the Shelby County Commission Monday before it was ultimately voted down on a 6-6 tie vote."
#4
If the city and the county and everyone else cannot come to terms on the school building issue, Mark Norris will do it for them. He will. He just will. Mark Norris gave both the city and the county a warning, took it back, and is waiting in the wings to settle this issue sooner rather than later. Trust me on that. Do I dig any of this personally? Well, no, man I do not.
Basically, we all just have to see how the school buildings issue will pan out. No offense. It is just that guessing at things has been getting goofy as of late. Everyone has to wait on the school buildings issue. It is truly up in the air at this point for everyone. But, I doubt the schoolchildren of Bartlett are to be taught in a tent in front of a vacant public school building any time soon. I just do not see that happening.
But, if Mr. Jones did not speak of this school buildings issue in terms of blackmail from the later portion of last year onward, none of this would be happening now. He is the one who has brought it up from the break. It is an easy thing to look back upon and remember or you could even Google it. He played his one hand far too early.
If there was a better handling of things within MCS, I have a feeling none of this would be happening now. I really do not. MCS should have bee proactive and worked from within to straighten themselves out ages ago. It could have been done ages and ages before it was well run into the ground.
It is like with the latest annexing bit. The City of Memphis has to think in terms of improving its own infrastructure (as well as a myriad amount of other things) well before it takes in an area which does not even want them to begin with. Just like with the schools. No one in that little area Memphis now wants out of spite would mind being annexed if Memphis had a past history of doing well with annexing. That is just being blunt is it not intolerant minded nor cruel to state the obvious.
Merlin, nice to hear from you. What you say makes logical sense. It is neat and plausible, however, its is filled with flaws.
Yes, Memphis received schools when areas were annexed. Yes, they payed for them. The portion of taxes, county taxes paid by the residents of Memphis also payed for the building and upkeep of those schools from day one. That is why, even if msd's were formed, the cities involved will still pay county taxes in support of the county schools. That is one of the flaws in your observation.
The debt that you mentioned the county has, is the responsibility of Shelby County, all of Shelby County, including Memphis. It doesn't matter what percentage of debt is for schools, the entire county is responsibility for the debt service. That is the flaw in that theory.
The county commission will not vote to transfer any of the schools, regardless of options, to the suburban cities. It would not hold up because the local education association, the SCS is a constitutional entity and, as long as they have use for those schools, it would not pass muster for the commission to transfer them. The schools are not now and by closing down inner-city decrepit schools, they will never be surplus.
As far as the children of Bartlett using tents to school their children, they don't have to do that. The constitutional mandated school system of the county, the SCS have a place for them. It is the wish of Bartlett to have their own school district, so let Bartlett and any other city that don't want to avail themselves of the school district, mandated by law, build their own schools. If you haven't the money and/or insurance and you get sick and need to be hospitalized, the Regional Medical Center is available, The Med is mandated by the county to take all patients, regardless of their ability to pay. If one, in that situation, refuses to go to the med, then, it is on them.
Legislation for the purpose of specifically helping and/or punishing a class of people is called special legislation. That type of legislation that is not for the general welfare of the entire state and only directs itself to one group of people is unconstitutional under tenness constitution. I am not worried about Mark Norris, because he would have to craft a law that takes power over the schools away from every county board of education in the state. That, I feel, would not pass. The other 94 counties probably would not like being stripped of local control of the schools.
Finally, annexation. The annexation of the areas in the Memphis reserves were agreed upon by the suburban mayors and the city of Memp[his. It is valid and enforceable by law. If Mark Norris wants to outlaw those type of agreements in the future, have at it, however, he will not be able to break a perfectly binding agreement that has already been made.
Your whole post is based on the supposition that the suburban cities, barring forming their own school districts, would not be able to school their children in accordance to the state constitution. That is totally false. The constitutionally mandated county school district is there for them, completely free of charge. The people that don't want to be annexed have a remedy available. They are not being forced to be a part of Memphis, even though there communities would nat have been possible if not for Memphis, sewer lines, utilities, etc. Those that don't want to be a part of Memphis, the county, the state, the country, can move. When the state makes something available to you, free of charge and you opt for something else, good, however, you will be responsible for what you opted for.
See how simple that was?
Top Commenters
THIS WEEK'S ISSUE
SPECIAL ISSUES
