Frank Melton vs. King Edward

I like the Watkins idea an awful lot; here's hoping his plan gets approved and the ball starts rolling.


Cheers,

TH

I don't think the answer is to just tear it down if this round of funding doesn't go through. Seems hasty to me.

I don't like anything that has "apartments" attached to it. You are gong to end up with a tenement in pretty short order. The ownership needs to get back from this apartment idea and get a major hotel franchise in there (mid market and meetings oriented for convention support). Half the building could be a hotel, say the lower floors with 150 rooms (that's big enough by todays hotel construction needs), and the top portion could be luxury apartments or better still condiminiums. The Four Seasons here in Atlanta is done that way. It's all about vertical mixed use in these older structures. There will be need for more hotel rooms in pretty short order once the Convention center gets hold, affordable hotel rooms. I imagine that block across from the convention center site is being eyed pretty closely now. But an historic hotel with a name brand franchise would be a big draw in an emerging downtown market like Jackson is working toward.

As far as the retail space is concerned, Deuce was quoted in the paper as saying he would like to see a Starbucks in the KEH. I say NO. We need local businesses.

...retail space for a coffee shop, book store and restaurant.

Maybe a Cups, a Lemuria, and ......somebody help me out on a local restaurant here!!

Actually, my understanding is that Watkins plan calls for condos in the King Edward rather than apartments. Condos won't turn into slums, don't worry. Home-ownership always stabilizes a neighborhood. That said, it's good to have rental units in a neighborhood where there are homeowners. A mix is nice because different people have different housing needs. But rest assured, both apartments and condos downtown will be upscale.

Ask Albriton's, Lewis Wilson, Stevens, McRae's, Kennington's, Emporium, and all the others. Retail doesn't work downtown...particularly on THAT end of the street. Emplode the damn thing and put in a parking lot.
The study is going to cost a million and a half and say it's not worth restoring, anyhow.

And, CONDO's?? Who's gonna live down there and risk getting shot after dark? Or maybe at noon. Been that way since the sixties. Ain't gonna change

I guess we'd all rather get shot in the McDonald's in Madison or that other fast-food lane in Ridgeland. If you'd check the crime stats, Sonny, you'd see that downtown Jackson is one of the safest places in the city.

What's been going on since the '60s is white flight. It's time for that ignorance to end -- if we ever want this state to be economically competitive, not to mention a place not known for people too scared to live with each other.

However, Sonny, feel free to go hide out somewhere. There are plenty of people who no longer have your attitude. Thank the Good Lord.

We see you are not a "sunny day!"

Yes business is needed down there. But, chain business is better then no business. So, if Cups can't expand (they are not in the Baptist Hospital anymore) or Lemuria doesn't want open another store, I think a Joe Muggs newsstand or starbucks is fine. Some nationwide chains may be what it takes to help spur the project. Jackson locals will open ancillary businesses as a result.

The non-logical reasoning is to just tear it down. It will cost the city well over a million to tear it down under OSHA/environmental guidelines as set forth by the gov't. How the city would pass on another Deuce Mc. project is beyond me? I guess Momentum MS didn't have allocations for Deuce in it... ;-) How much of that money is going to Jackson projects/eco. devo.? They may have other plans for it that don't involve the current developers? I hope it stays and they build
it.

I don't LIKE it. I liked downtown in the 50s and early 60s. Apartments and housing were within blocks of the downtown area. Movie theatres and restaurants florished evenings. Saturday was bustling with people from the delta and south Mississippi here to shop. I just think it's going to be a waste of more time and money to pursure this thing. And, I do believe that the 1.6 million dollar study is going to kill it anyway.
Let's work on stopping the flight of businesses from downtown to Highland Colony and other Rankin and Madison addresses.
Is downtown the safest place in the city because no one is there?
Downtowns all over the country (Memphis, etc) have failed to bring back a downtown social life with so much suburban availablility. Let's save something we CAN save...downtown business offices, law firms, and the like.

Actually it is "worth" restoring. There is little cahnce that a building of that size and architectural signifcance would ever be replaced in the present economy and development climate that exists in DT Jackson today. In the future, say ten fifteen years there will be significant development in DT. But for the immediate present, the direction for civic minded people in Jackson must be preservation and good adaptive reuse of the grand sturctures and period buildings that are left. The King Edward is such a building. Be it Condos or Hotel it must be saved. Look around DT. You have enough parking lots now.

SonnyDayL Retail doesn't work downtown...particularly on THAT end of the street.
...I liked downtown in the 50s and early 60s.

Bet you wish everything went back to the standard of the 50s and early 60s, huh?
(Where do these guys come from?)

I liked downtown in the 50s and early 60s.

Uh, it was segregated then. There is nothing to admire about back-ass ignorance.

You know, I was just waiting for one of you to attack a differing view with a
a comment on race. Did you participate in the Merideth March...or rally on Lynch street with the students?

ATLexile's comment does have merit. And logic.

So, Mr. Day, if you're liking downtown during the 50s and early 60s had nothing to do with the fact that it was segregated then, then why not explain to us what was so great about it then that had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that black people weren't allowed in the businesses, except to clean and such.

We're all ears.

Mr. Day: Let's save something we CAN save...downtown business offices, law firms, and the like.

From the Downtown Jackson Partners website: Downtown Jackson is business friendly and growing. Downtown Jackson Partners, along with real estate managers in the area, have been actively working to retain and expand Downtown businesses, as well as, to attract new ones. Office occupancy rates in Downtown Jackson recently topped 93%, up from 91% in 2001.

The area hotel market is thriving as Downtown businesses expand, cultural amenities improve and the number of special events grows. Additionally, many new restaurateurs and retailers have recently chosen Downtown as their business location including Broadstreet Express, McAllisterís Select, Seven All Arts Club, SNT The Skate Shop, 105 Capitol, Southern Wireless, Subway and 2-Brothers Deli.

In order to increase the viability of these markets, Downtown Jackson Partners is turning its attention to residential development opportunities. A strong pent-up demand for an urban-neighborhood lifestyle is evident.

A lot of things were in a state of change during that time.
By the early sixties, some merchants were beginning to adopt different policies, opening restrooms and water fountains, opening black charge accounts.
Keep in mind that all aspects of life in the deep south back then had to undergo massive readjustment. I think it was done in Jackson with a minimum of strive. It took time and there many trying times. Perhaps I didn't state my fondness of the downtown area then properly. It wasn't because of segregation, it was because most all activities centered on downtown...social, retail, business. It was the suburban shopping centers with dining and entertainment that drained the downtown, as it has most places. People gravitated to these areas rather than going "back downtown".
Supply and demand. I beleive it's still that way. Going to a reception or party at the University Club is still a chore.
I guess we've (they've?) become lazy.
For the racial aspect...did you live through it? It's difficult to understand just how complicated the situation was and the very vocal minority that then and now drew attention away from so many that were working to resolve a terrible situation.

Thanks, Steph. I had not researched it..only heard from a few people who were concerned.

A little aside and history of that site. there has been a hotel on that site bearing the Name "Edward" since the 1850's and all owned by a man from Edwards Mississppi. The first one, The Edwards House, was burned down by Generals Moyer & Sherman during the civil war (that is a tale unto itself). The second one was built in the mid 1870's or a little earlier with funds given to the Owner by the Federal government as complensation for the loss. It was torn down in the 1890's and replaced with a grander structure that looked similar to the old McRaes building on Capital and about the same size. That building was added to with an identical wing as expansion. All of that stood for about ten more years and then the entire thing was demolished and the present structure built in nine months between legislative sessions in the early 1920's.

It's run the gauntlet of history in Downtown. It means a lot to both Black and White. It is jackson and cn be an integral part of the new regime that represents the current climate of that city. It needs to be there.

and sorry about my hasty spelling.

You're very welcome, Sonny :-)

For the racial aspect...did you live through it?

I remember my school being integrated when I was in the third grade, Mr. Day, and grown-ups telling me horror stories about how black people were violent and inferior and lazy and so on. I remember everybody being terrified of the Black Panthers, whom I don't believe anybody i knew then ever actually saw in person. I remember drinking out of a white water fountain. I remember black people filing past me outside the Ellis Theater in Philadelphia to go to the balcony. I remember adults telling me that we couldn't go to certain parts of town because there were too many n*****s. I remember talking to my principal at Neshoba Central who was frustrated literally to tears because the school board got mad if five black basketball players were on the court at once. I remember being called a n*****-lover if I spoke up for civil rights or challenged people on their ugliness. I remember finding out when I was 14 that a heinous, ugly crime had happened in my tough-on-crime town that none of the tough-on-crimers gave a damn about prosecuting. I remember fathers of boyfriends laughing about the n*****s that "we" Neshoba Countians "put under a damn" because they got too uppity. I remember being yelled at for getting up and leaving the room when someone said something like that to me because I was being "rude" to the ignorant old bigots. I remember sitting in a bar in D.C. and some white preppy accusing me of being a racist because I came from somewhere where "your people" (his words) "put black people under a dam."

I'm a friggin' Mississippian, Mr. Day. I've lived "through it," and the denial of "it" my whole life. I ran from "it" for 18 years; then I came back to face "it" now.

The 1950s and '60s were not glory days in Mississippi, Mr. Day. They were very difficult and ugly for a good part of Mississippi's population, and they were not a standard by which to judge a damn thing. They are certainly no times to pine for now.

The future is what matters. We have good people in this state who don't go around denying or justiftying the ugliness of the past all the time, and using the very same crime rhetoric of the 1960s. We have moved on, and we invite others to come along with us. This state's glory is not in our past, anywhere in our past -- it is in our future. And we'll only get there when most of our residents stop glorifying a very ugly past because it happened to be good for them based on the color of their skin.

What an awesome history KEH has! Thanks, ATL!

I'll be back after Ladd takes a cold shower. I don't know who he was hanging with back then...but things apparently were a little different in Neshoba County. I remember being escorted out of the "Fair" by the high Sheriff because I was representing a Jackson televison station. They saw the network logo on the camera and went nuts. (1977!!!)
Thanks ALT and Steph. Enjoyed the adult discussion.

I know Iím going to stir up a hornetís nest by saying this, but Iíve heard about a few of them flying around already soÖ.

Iíve read a few items about African-Americans saying nothing should be done with the King Edward because it was a famous bastion of segregation. Therefore, its ruined condition is a fitting non-tribute to the hotel. The other side says that itís important to revitalize it because itís resurrection is vital to restoring downtown.

(speaking from a Judeo-Christian point of view now)

Some, especially those who follow God, might want to ponder a potential deeper meaning of 2 Samuel 5. Jerusalem started out as a pagan city (Jebusite). Yet David, with Godís help, captured it and it became a city built and maintained for the glory of God. Could it be that Deuce, David, etc. are ìcapturingî the historically shameful King Edward and transforming it into a new symbol of unity - banishing the ìuncleanî racism from it?

Something worth pondering, I think.

Day, "he" is a "she."

I'll remind you that you started this "adult discussion" with "Who's gonna live down there and risk getting shot after dark?" You are dismissing strong efforts at downtown redevelopment (and reconciliation) with one misinformed swoop. Then you told us how great everything was during the 1950s and 60s. Do you really not think that an "adult discussion" about the conditions in downtown Jackson, and the rest of the city, during that period can even occur without discussing the impact of segregation and then white flight?

Also, you can't let Jackson off so easily. Perhaps you're not aware of the efforts of the White Citizens Council here and the propaganda being being out by Bill Simmons and company. Or of the race murders that happened right here, or of Jackson police stuffing teenagers into 100-degree heat in the livestock pens at the state fairgrounds. Or, have you read the detailed account of the Woolworth sit-in in Anne Moody's wonderful "Coming of Age in Mississippi." And on, and on.

There was a very, very different Jackson than the one you romanticize about. And the efforts to keep it that way, and then to run from it when it integrated, is what led to the current condition of our downtown.

Attitudes like "Who's gonna live down there and risk getting shot after dark?" will only keep us living in the past, especially since it is such an uninformed statement.

I do believe renovating it is a symbol of unity, and it is important to note that some in the black community (including some of Mr. Melton's strong supporters) want it torn down.

Deuce addressed some of this in his JFP Interview.

I was born in Jackson in 1951 and I've lived here all my life. It always bothers me when only one side of the 60's and 70's is told about Mississippi. People want the story to be one of stark contrasts when it is really a story with many shades of gray.

The changes in the 60's and 70's were brought about by three main groups--black Mississippians, the influence from the outside of the federal government and social interest groups and individuals, and by white Mississippians. The success of the Civil Rights movement was the result of the work of all three groups and success would have been very difficult if any of the three parts were missing. Unfortunately, it has become very convenient to forget that there were many everyday white Mississippians who were involved in the changes of that era.

The Clarion-Ledger has gained national recognition with it investigative stories on the events from the 60's. I suggested that they do a piece on the white Mississippians of that era who risk a lot when they had very little to gain and the CL showed no interest. It's not the story people want to hear--it's not the story some people want to tell. My father is one of those who risked a lot and his name is forgotten unlike the Edgar Ray Killens and Byron De La Beckwiths of this world.

Was Mississippi perfect? It was far from perfect but there were plenty of people who wanted change and when the opportunity came along in 1964 they risked a lot to make those changes. While I agree with the above comment that "we have good people in this state who don't go around denying or justifying the ugliness of the past all the time", I wish we had more people who would recognize that we have always had good people in this state who have wanted change.

Those are some misguided rumors if that's why some people want it torn down or to stay a "symbol" of past segregation. We'll be tearing down and letting rot hundreds of buildings across the state then. Should we start with the Old Capital? The "other side" of Philips statement is the one from the more rational minds in town. And I would guess the majority thought? We have many other more important symbols of racism that can be attacked, like the flag, then a building - that once restored will be another step forward from the past. Of course if the building is that important to "remember" its place in segregationist history then we could dedicate a monument once the project is done or have a small display inside the foyer area for visitors. But, to let it rot or tear it down becasue of its history is misguided.

The point of having a revitalization authority is to actually revitalize something. And here we have the #1 project that needs development and it may get torn down instead of restored. In a twist on the Guinness commercial ñ ìBrilliant!î 8-p

Was Mississippi perfect? It was far from perfect but there were plenty of people who wanted change and when the opportunity came along in 1964 they risked a lot to make those changes. While I agree with the above comment that "we have good people in this state who don't go around denying or justifying the ugliness of the past all the time", I wish we had more people who would recognize that we have always had good people in this state who have wanted change.

Actually, I agree with all of that. The conversation above originated from the revisionist idea that things were so great here there, and in a segregated downtown in the 1950s and early '60s. My point is that it is disingenuous at best to say that things were so glorious downtown during a time when not all of our population could participate.

That is not negating the complexities, and in fact I have that discussion constantly with people. Even in my comments above for which Day wanted me to take a cold shower, notice that I mention the part where I am assumed to be racist because I come from Mississippi. There's a boatload of complexity here -- but we can't glorify the 1950s in this state, as so many try to do, without at least admitting that it was so glorious for some folks because whole swathes of people were cut out of it.

Does that mean we cannot discuss the gray areas? Absolutely not. In fact, we should. But we have to start from the willingness to honestly look at the causes of downtown destruction, even if they make us uncomfortable.

And I agree with you that it can be difficult to talk about what "good" white people then faced without sounding, or being assumed to be, apologist. I think that's one of the missing parts of the dialogue that is uncomfortable as well -- in fact, I've had very emotional discussions about this with black friends and co-workers and have been called an "apologist" for white racism by some of them because I try to talk about why some white people did not do enough -- understand not to excuse it, but to discuss how people go along with such horrible stuff to keep it from happening again. However, I understand the sensitivity.

Ultimately, though, I think we as white people will find it impossible to have this discussion if we are, individually or collectively, still trying to deny what really happened. Does that make sense? In other words, I think we can get to a place where we can have discussions about the "gray areas" once white folks in Mississippi don't, over all, pretend like it all wasn't such a big deal and that we shouldn't be talking about it at all. It is a little hard to imagine our black counterparts saying, "cool, let's talk about the reasons white folks went along with such horrible things," while white folks are saying, "there's no need to talk about the past. That's over and done with. Stop your whining." That shore don't make sense.

In other words, white people can't have it both ways on thisóeither we want to talk about it, all of it, or we don't. We can't just cherrypick history to make ourselves look better. Of course, once we've cleared that hurdle, we're also going to run into other people who don't want to address any of the complexities of "why?" and that's not going to be easy, either. But necessary it all is. Blame our ancestors. ;-) They put us in this boat.

Iíve read a few items about African-Americans saying nothing should be done with the King Edward because it was a famous bastion of segregation. Therefore, its ruined condition is a fitting non-tribute to the hotel.

Hogwash. Those are the bitter negroes who harbor their own segregated feelings about Jackson as a whole and not just about the King Edward.

Famous people from Cab Calloway to Elvis stayed in the King Edward Hotel. It was a happening place(I was told) back in the days. Lots of jobs, shoe shine guys outside, Barber shop across the street, valet parking, the works. It was one of the only Hotels of it's day that attracted big city people to Jackson. It helped us identify with the trendy styles of the more affluent of people of American culture who traveled through these parts.

Union Station has been revitalized, so should the King Edward. Uoutfitted with all the lastest technology and businesses to house. It could even has a restaurant in it on the first floor. Maybe a Cheescake Factory.. ;o)


JDP (Jackson Downtown Partners) should also look into
re-using/renovating/leasing out old buildings for newer businesses to help recreate the downtown experience.

Sonny, no offense, but it sounds to me like what you're saying is that you miss the way downtown Jackson was before so many of the affluent businesses moved to the suburbs. Well, the first factor that affected this was white flight, which was brought about by integration. If you lived through the era, you should know this.

Of couse there's more risk of crime in the inner city than there is in the suburbs. There always is. The inner city is where you'll find the worst poverty and degradation wherever you are, and that's where crime comes from. I've actually done volunteer work downtown; I know that when sundown hits you will see a lot of homeless men walking the streets, many of them panhandling (and most of the panhandlers seem to be white, I should add). But then you'll also see a lot of attorneys walking down multiple streets to get to their cars, or get a bite to eat.

I'm not 100% sure I'd want to live in the King Edward Hotel, either; Fondren would be more my speed. But the evidence just isn't there to suggest people are getting shot. And Donna's right about one thing: Pining for the pre-integration era is (a) profoundly selfish and (b) a waste of time. It will never be like that again. There are benefits to having an isolated ghetto if you're not one of the people stuck in it, but those days are over and all the Republicans in the world can't bring it back, so you'd better start thinking about how the Jackson of 2005 can get better--not the Jackson of 50 years ago, because that Jackson's dead and buried, thank God.


Cheers,

TH

I do believe renovating it is a symbol of unity

I don't believe it will be a symbol of unity, but when it's renovated it will be a symbol a city that still has a heartbeat.

I'm not 100% sure I'd want to live in the King Edward Hotel, either; Fondren would be more my speed.

With enough Police patrols to keep the area free of loiters and looters, I wouldn't mind taking up a night or two at the King. the area has great potential to market Jackson's downtown urban nightlife in conjunction with the FED(Farish Entertainment District)

That's a very nice way of putting it, Jocelyn. Thank you. ;-)

I'm going to address some things that were said in a post way back, about how suburban flight has drained downtowns, not just Jackson's, but downtowns across the U.S. It wasn't free market economics and the laws of supply-and-demand that killed our downtowns. The shift was a result of deliberate social engineering in the form of government policies and business practices. The government policies in question include the guidelines of federal home loan programs which favored the purchase of newly constructed suburban homes in the suburbs and zoning laws which have forbidden downtown-style mixed use development in many municipalities, especially in suburbs. The business practices in question include notorious "red-lining" practices in which private banks refused to provide home loans to buyers seeking to buy houses in older developed parts of towns and cities, but would lend the same person money to buy homes in newer developments and suburbs. When the residents left inner cities, the businesses failed because all their customers were gone, of course.

Without such obstacles, mixed residential and commercial downtowns can and do thrive. Portland, Oregon is a good example. The McKinney Ave area of Dallas is another success story. Philadelphia, PA, where I live, had a decayed and dilapidated downtown until our city government really started working hard at bringing residents back in. Now our downtown is a lively and exciting place with lots of businesses, residences, stores, restaurants, services and entertainment.

Trust me, just concentrating on the commercial offices downtown will only bring it so far. You might have lots of that downtown, but then your downtown will be a ghost town after 5:00 PM. Is that really the vision we want for downtown Jackson? A boring office park? Besides, if there are only offices downtown, everyone who works there will have to drive in from the far-flung suburban residential areas, creating lots of traffic jams, and requiring too much of your valubale downtown real estate be taken up by parking lots. There are better, more profitable uses for downtown property that bring more money into the city's tax coffers, too. No, I'd rather see the offices where people work accompanied by condos and apartments where people live, grocery stores where people shop, and restaurants where people dine and socialize.

You might not think those businesses can thrive, but they can if people live downtown and are there to patronize them. The two go together: you have to have residents to patronize businesses, and you need businesses to make downtown living convenient and attractive.

Let's face it, a downtown like this is a lot more exciting than the office park Jackson has now. My dream is that someday Jackson will be able to offer some kind of urban living, so that people like me who thrive in that kind of environment won't have to leave Mississippi in order to find a place where we feel at home. I had to travel halfway across the continent to find it, leaving friends and family so far behind. My hope is that in the future people like me will be able to find it closer to home.

I hope that, too, Mark. We need you here.

Intriguing discussion here. Personally, I don't know any black folks who want the King Edwards Hotel torned down (instead of renovated) because of its past history with respect to black folks. I wouldn't be surprised to learn otherwise. I do agree with Donna that it's a telling and backward idea or frame of mind to wish for the days of old that didn't include the rest of Mississippians. Is it possible to consciously wish for those lily-white days of old without subconsciously or consciously wishing for, or condoning, segregation, too? After all, the view would have been different with everyone included.

Undoubtedly, the segregated days of the past involved great pain, abuse, and the denial of civil and human rights to innocent others. Everybody knew this was the case. No one needed any teacher, preacher, politican or parent to tell them this. Even children could see this. Only falsehoods, hatred, fear and violence could continue Mississippi's closed and immoral social order. Why else did the Klan, Citizen Counsel, Sovereigntry Commission, and a multitude of other corrupt individuals, exist and thrive?

Morality and the truth were always trying to break loose but these corrupt organizations and individuals scared, killed and ran nearly everybody away from standing up for morality and the truth. Even most white folks feared death or economic reprisals of these organizations and individuals, so, they looked the other way for decades and centuries.

Unless we want to see the past repeated or the future smothered, we would be wise to not regret the inglorious and evil past.

I meant not regret the death of the inglorious and evil past.

I wonder who's making money on this King Edward deal. Someone is.
Why invest 35 million in a project that will be worth no more than 22 million when finished. And the risk factor, folks, is pretty high. What will the condos cost? Will people with those resources move into downtown and invest that much in an experiment, at best. Also, most of these young, affluents have children. What about kids downtown?
It's a nice thing to think about. But, somebody's making buck off this deal.

Everyone keeps trying to make this racial...a favorite scapegoat.
It's economic, people.

Sonny, when your entire economic argument hinges on white flight and the benefits of segregation and subsequent ghettoization, it is by definition racial. Pretending it's not is disingenuous.


Cheers,

TH

Why worry about what an individual or group wants to invest in with their money, Sonny? Even if it is a losing deal? It's America, welcome to the land of freedom to spend your money on bottled air if you wish! And let the parents worry about their children. Yeah, Deuce or someone is making a buck! Good job Deuce!

I think Jim Crow laws had an economic component too! That was a favorite scapegoat of the times too!

The question is "who" is making money on the deal if the building is torn down? Up until yesterday there were no plans to tear it down; only to let this current group come in and redevelop the space should the study/grant be done by the city. To me this new rash ultimatum seems like it will be conected to "someone" making some money that wasn't involved int he project that currently is on the table.

Well, I do understand that the few apartments that are available downtown having waiting lists a mile long. People like downtown living. As for young affluents with kids, that's not usually the target market when you start revitalizing a city. You try to draw young twenty-something professionals who don't have kids yet and affluent empty nesters whose kids have grown and moved away. Both groups have money to spend on upscale housin. Young people like to be near the action (restaurants, night clubs, etc.) while older people like the convenience of not having to drive everywhere and not having to take care of a three-bedroom house now that they only need one bedroom. You bring those people in and build the tax base, and then you'll start to be able to afford good schools that you'll need to attract families.

I don't think Deuce is making any money off this, and I'm confident (given the amount of attention focused on this project) that the $13M serves some practical purpose. Anyone who's concerned should request an item-by-item budget; I'm sure one has been drawn up.


Cheers.

TH

Mark, good point. Very good point.


Cheers,

TH

Tom, the point I was making is that what a private entrepeneur wants to do with their money is their business. Yeah, if Deuce makes money! Sonny was bemoaning that people may lose money on the deal. Whocares; but let's hope they do the project and it spurs lot's of growth for them and Jackson!

Well Im gonna jump back in and tell you guys the tale of the demise of the First Edwards house. Seems that during the last days of antebellum Jackson (not unlike Pompei) and just prior to the outbreak of the Vicksburg campaign, the state pen, then on the site of the new capitol, was also the holding cell for Union prisoners gathered up from early skirmishes prior to the full blown campaign breaking out. Haines Bluff, Port Gibson and some other little ones. The union soiders would be paroled down to the Edwards to take their meals. They only had US green backs and no coin. The inn keeper would not feed them unlesss they paid in Confederate dollars. Not a good thing for hungry men. They had to subsist on what they could scrounge on the way back to the Pen. jackson is captured on May 12th, 1863 (the first time)......the men are liberated. They first burned the state pen and guess where they go to get lunch? The Generals Moyer and Sherman gave them "free range" ,if not chicken, and told them to pay the innkeeper a courtesy call over to the Edwards! Burned her to the ground. Along with the Depots, all of the warehouses, rolling stock, factories, and merchant stores on both sides of Mill street. The second hotel was built over the first in about 1868. Also as far as being a bastion of segregation. Not really because the "ole gentleman" closed in 1968 (I was nine). It had been supplanted by the Heidleburg, The Downtowner and the Sun & Sand. Even the Robert E. Lee was out of business by the Height of the Civil rights movement.

As far as the structural integrity. My grandfather watched it go up. He was a freight clerk with the Illinois Central Railroad in the twenties. It is rivited steel with concrete encasing. It ain't going nowhere. The ole man needs to join the parade of great restorations in the South, The Hermitage in Nashville, The Peabody in Memphis, the Georgian Terrace in Atlanta. I hope that the ownership will consider a hotel and condos for this thing.

Certainly is a boring discussion with everyone on the same side...
y'all have fun til they tear the damn thing down.

Here's some links on the history of the KEH:
-- The Case for the Preservation of the King Edward Hotel, Jackson, Mississippi
-- National Trust Site (there's actually an old KEH advert worth looking at)
-- King Edward Hotel: Landmark to get a facelift - Hotel Chatter

Considering that until now, the King Edward's most recent claim to fame was as a stop on the Civil Rights Movement Driving Tour for its role in the white power structure during the Civil Rights Movement (ouch), it looks like it's about time Jackson called up HRI.

Sonny, if you pine anywhere for the Mississippi of Governor Ross Barnett and the Jackson of Mayor Allen Thompson, I think you'll find that most people with an IQ of room temperature or higher will be "on the same side."


Cheers,

TH

Downtowns all over the country (Memphis, etc) have failed to bring back a downtown social life with so much suburban availablility.

San Antonio, Texas; Portland, Oregon; Oakland, California; and Indianapolis, Indiana are a few examples I know that prove this statement wrong (and I don't know much about urban redevelopment). There are many other examples to be sure, and sprawl is simply not sustainable.

Another interesting fact about the "glory" days of the 1950's and early 60's was that there was a much smaller discrepancy between the rich and middle class in the US during that period. Conservative thinker Kevin Phillips "Wealth and Democracy" notes also that the Federal tax rate for the top 1% earners was at about 85% during that period (now about 30%), whereas for median families it was about 10% (now about 25%).

The growth of the suburbs and decay of the inner city correlates with a large redistribution of wealth in this country. And there was Walt Disneyís vision of a fully automated suburban paradise. I'm sure that Tim Kynerd could also give us a history lesson on the influence the dismantling of public transportation and the increased emphasis on individual automobiles. I'd also be interested to know how investment in infrastructure changed during this period.

I am most interested in knowing how the understanding of the historical context has aided cities successful in urban renewal. I do think downtown Jackson has a huge potential, and I agree that what we need to target projects that bring in the 20-something entrepreneurs who have the energy, creativity and muscle to put the city back on the map.

Head: I don't think Deuce is making any money off this, and I'm confident (given the amount of attention focused on this project) that the $13M serves some practical purpose.

Do you think that this project is some sort of charitable endeavor for Mr. McAlister? What facts, if any, do you have to support that assertation?

The only "practical purpose" that this project represents is the (potential) return on the investment of the principals involved. Of whom Mr. McAlister is only one, and at that, likely a minority shareholder. Why in the world would you assume otherwise?

Captain, call me old-fashioned, but we're dealing with a situation where the evidence--an itemized budget, no doubt already prepared for the relevant officials--would be easy to obtain. If you're concerned about this issue, I suggest you check said budget before making any unkind comments about where you think the $13M is going.


Cheers,

TH

How do put value on a building like the King Edward? I believe it's impossible. How much is the Old Capitol, the governor's masion, city hall, the old dgnb building , and others, worth? In my opinion, they're all priceless.

I'd rather see it remain as is than be demolished. As someone above said, nothing will ever be rebuilt on that site that even comes close. As long as it exists, there's the chance of renovation. Once it's gone, it's gone.

Thanks for the pics, Knol. I drove by there today and saw to different young people taking pictures of the thing. There is tremendous interest in that building. It's value is priceless.

Work just started renovating the Mill Street viaduct area across the street. Things are happening.

To those who don't want the King Edward to survive, I say, just stay away from the damn thing. It won't bother you if you don't bother it. But my guess is, that about five years from now when the King is restored and returned to a spectacle, and that area of Capitol has been transformed into a hip, funky jazz district, all them ole naysayers'll come crawling out of the woodwork to marvel at the structure and attend the first ever two day King Edward Jazz Festival at Capitol and Mill, drawing musicans and fans from all over the nation.

HEAD: "Captain, call me old-fashioned, but we're dealing with a situation where the evidence--an itemized budget, no doubt already prepared for the relevant officials--would be easy to obtain. If you're concerned about this issue, I suggest you check said budget before making any unkind comments about where you think the $13M is going.:

You are assuming that Deuce isn't making any money off this; since you made the assumption, I suggest you find the relevant facts to back up your unsubstantiated assumption.

Captain, where I come from the burden of proof rests with the person making the accusation.


Cheers,

TH

HEAD: I don't think Deuce is making any money off this, and I'm confident (given the amount of attention focused on this project) that the $13M serves some practical purpose.

Any 'accusation' made by me exists only in your head (no pun intended). And since noone has been accused of (much less charged with) a crime or any civil wrong, what does any burden of proof have do do with anything?

Back to the point: what evidence, if any, do you have to support the assumption you made above?

Captain, if you feel that the burden of proof does not rest with the accuser except in civil or criminal cases, then I can only hope you're not a journalist.

The context of the original discussion was that the supporters are asking for $35M, and the new KEH would only cost $22M. I suggested that, given the transparency of the process, the other $13M almost certainly "serves some practical purpose." Someone disagreed with that assertion, and suggested under the same line of reasoning that Deuce McAllister was making money off the project.

Obviously Deuce is making no money off the project right now, since it hasn't been formally cleared yet.

I grow tired of arguing with anonymous hecklers who smear people without offering any proof to back up their assertions. Either find yourself a copy of the budget to back up your assertions, or buzz off.


Cheers,

TH

Sonny, if you pine anywhere for the Mississippi of Governor Ross Barnett and the Jackson of Mayor Allen Thompson, I think you'll find that most people with an IQ of room temperature or higher will be "on the same side."

Oh come ON.

In the 1950s and 1960s, Jackson had a lively downtown. That's a fact. It was a segregated downtown. That's another fact. But they're not intertwined.

I don't think that everyone who wishes Jackson had a lively downtown like it had in the 1950s and 1960s should be accused of racism. That's absurd. It's entirely possible to wish that Jackson had a downtown that's lively like it was back then without wishing that it was segregated like it was back then. That's what I'd like to see.

Further, you only need to read Mark M.'s posts carefully to understand that attributing the draining of Jackson's downtown entirely to "white flight" is a massive oversimplification. There were many other factors involved.

Best,
Tim

Gutsy post, Tim. Thanks. But I think you're mistaken on several fronts:

Further, you only need to read Mark M.'s posts carefully to understand that attributing the draining of Jackson's downtown entirely to "white flight" is a massive oversimplification.

That's odd, because it seems like only yesterday that Mark said: I'm going to address some things that were said in a post way back, about how suburban flight has drained downtowns, not just Jackson's, but downtowns across the U.S...

Now, he does proceed to say--by my reading--that this suburban flight wasn't necessarily due to direct racism (though racism no doubt played at least a small role in these suburb-friendly government policies). But I never claimed that white flight was due solely to racism, and in fact if you go back to my older posts you'll see that I have consistently affirmed that there are other significant reasons for white flight. Heck, I lived in Brandon myself for two years as a teenager.

As for whether segregation affected the liveliness of downtown Jackson: I can't say for sure. I do admit that I have a knee-jerk reaction whenever anyone says they wish Jackson was like it was in the years before integration, regardless of the context. I mean, white Mississippi had a pretty good antebellum agricultural economy, too, but we all know who paid the tab for it.


Cheers,

TH

I don't think it makes sense to use the term "white flight" to refer to anything that isn't based on racism. Otherwise the word "white" has no function in the phrase. And I think this is the exact reason why Mark used the phrase "suburban flight" rather than "white flight." Mark, correct me if I'm wrong.

I do admit that I have a knee-jerk reaction whenever anyone says they wish Jackson was like it was in the years before integration, regardless of the context.

I'm glad you're courageous enough to admit that that's a knee-jerk reaction. It would be worth getting rid of, because the sense of community that prevailed in many parts of the US, including Jackson, in the 1950s and 1960s is something to strive for, while the racism that accompanied it is not. And yes, I do think that that sense of community is possible without the racism.

though racism no doubt played at least a small role in these suburb-friendly government policies

A small role, probably. A significant role, I doubt it. It had more to do with the problems of housing returning GIs and their families (that's where the VA loan policies got started and later influenced the FHA lending policies as well) and with the "expert" opinions of transportation planners who viewed the automobile as the solution to all ills and public transport as a grudging necessity to be used only by the poor of all colors.

Best,
Tim

Yes, racism inthe form of white flight did play a role in the decline of downtowns. That's an important point: Racism helped kill the old downtowns; racism wasn't what made downtowns lively in the old days. So calling for a return to old downtowns is not a call for racist policies. Tim is right: just because someone (I think it was Sonny Day) called for a return to the liveliness that Jackson had in the 1950s and 1960s doesn't mean he's calling for a return to segregation, or supporting segregation in anyway.

Thanks, Mark.

(I'm also wondering what you and Tom are doing up at this hour -- particularly Tom; it's an hour earlier where he is than where you are! :-))

HEAD: ìObviously Deuce is making no money off the project right now, since it hasn't been formally cleared yet.î

While that is a brilliant (and completely obvious) statement, that differs entirely from your earlier statement that ì[You] don't think Deuce is making any money off this, and [youíre] confident (given the amount of attention focused on this project) that the $13M serves some practical purpose.î

The $22 million reference apparently was made by someone who, like you, cited no reference for that figure, and who further demonstrates a rather obvious lack of credibility in general.

Your statement above is unclear at best; obviously Deuce McAllister sees the King Edward project as one that will be financially lucrative at some point in the future. Your statement implied that his motivation is something other than financial. Itís a bit ironic that you lecture others on proper journalistic style while your own statements are lacking in that area.

As for being an ëanonymous heckler,í well, being a champion of First Amendment freedoms sometimes requires unconventional means, you see.

Gentlemen, careful with the re-characterization here. No one, I believe, is trying to argue that "white flight" alone was the only factor for people that faciliated people fleeing to the suburbs. I'm certainly not. That would be different from saying that ignoring the effect of segregation/integration/race when talking about the old glory days would be incredibly naive and revisionist. I am saying that.

Also, you can't accurately say that "white flight" was just a factor alongside a checklist of other factors that contributed to suburbanization -- being that the desire to live separately from black people was what helped drive a lot of the other "factors" in the first place. That truth hurts, but it is a truth.

So, the point is: You don't have to say that racism was the only factor that hurt downtowns in order to acknowledge that it was a primary factor that helped drive the other factors -- and to point out, as Tom does so well, that is intellectually dishonest to desire the conditions of the 1950s and 60s here (for white people, that is) without acknowledging that those conditions were created and sustained, in a significant way, by Jim Crow laws and practices.

Sure, want a busy downtown. But saying that you want to return to the way it was in the 1950s and 60s in downtown Jackson is not a very good way to express it, and you're not going to find a whole lot of help in looking at that era. It's kind of like those people who try to say that black people should be grateful for slavery because, well, look at the conditions of Africa today -- without taking into consideration the effects of decades of colonization and the slave trade on the continent. There are a few vital facts missing in that ignorant argument.

Quote o' the Day:

To those who don't want the King Edward to survive, I say, just stay away from the damn thing. It won't bother you if you don't bother it.

You tell 'em, dw.

Also, all the speculation about Deuce aside, no problem here with the investors making money, as long as the city's role in the whole thing is accountable. Also, no problem here if Deuce has further motives such as silly stuff like unity, building a progressive city core, bringing crowds back to downtown because, well, that's good for all of us, instead of hiding out in gated communities in the suburbs and making sh*t up about a city and people you don't understand.

Amen, Ms. Ladd; and some of us would go back to Africa, at least for a while, just to learn our personal family histories, i.e. who were my grandfathers, grandmothers, uncles and aunts a few generations removed. Instead, we face black history - lost, stolen or strayed.

Hopefully, before too long, we're on our way to being more like much of California, where no one particularly cares what race you are. I count working with, living around, and interacting with other races of people as my greatest learning achievement. I can't help but notice the differences and similarities, but the differences can't compare to the similarities if we're truly honest.

I picture downtown Jackson soon becoming like a mini-Atlanta or Houston where all of us can meet, greet, benefit and love each other irrespective of race or reprisals. This is right around the corner. Then, after a decade or two, I see a raceless Jackson, like portions of California. I might add, I'm sober, too. Not crazy either.

Just remember that California does have issues where it comes to relations between immigrants from Mexico and the U.S.-born English-speaking communities. We should watch California for lessons, because as more Latinos move to Mississippi, Mississippians will not only have to work through the lingering effects of racism against African-Americans, but it will be faced with the challenge of welcoming the new arrivals and not letting a new form of racism spring up even while an old one is being whittled away.

Certainly, Mark.

But saying that you want to return to the way it was in the 1950s and 60s in downtown Jackson is not a very good way to express it, and you're not going to find a whole lot of help in looking at that era.

With all due respect, Donna, the idea that wishing things were more like the way they were in the 50s and 60s in downtown Jackson automatically means wanting racism back is in your head. It's not a fact; it's not "the truth."

As I said above, there are aspects of the way things worked in downtown Jackson (and in hundreds of other downtowns) in that era that are worth looking at, evaluating and even emulating. Racial segregation is NOT one of them, but then looking at that era and seeing nothing but racial segregation is a form of blindness.

It's kind of like those people who try to say that black people should be grateful for slavery because, well, look at the conditions of Africa today -- without taking into consideration the effects of decades of colonization and the slave trade on the continent.

Actually it's nothing like that at all. Your argument is more like saying that anyone who wishes the US would return to a more agricultural economy (not that that's ever likely to happen) is automatically wishing for slavery, because during the period that the US economy was largely based on agriculture, much of that agriculture was carried out by slaves. The one does not automatically imply the other.

Best,
Tim

Could someone please tell us what specific things or aspects of the past could be emulated for the future yet inclusive of us all without any regards to race? This would be very helpful and demystifying.

Well, we could bring back downtowns that had mixed commercial, residential, and office space together in one neighborhood. That way people could work and shop within walking distance from home. In neighborhoods like that, you aren't dependent on cars, and you don't have to spend two hours each day stuck in traffic coming to and from work. You can mix and meet your neighbors out on the street when you're coming and going instead of being isolated in a far-flung development with no sidewalks. A town like this just has more life and more chances to interact with other people.

I guess those are the good things about towns of the past that we've lost, and can regain.

Ray, one thing I'd like to emulate from the 1950s is the relatively narrow gap between the richest and poorest americans, especially compared with today. As posted above:

Another interesting fact about the "glory" days of the 1950's and early 60's was that there was a much smaller discrepancy between the rich and middle class in the US during that period. Conservative thinker Kevin Phillips "Wealth and Democracy" notes also that the Federal tax rate for the top 1% earners was at about 85% during that period (now about 30%), whereas for median families it was about 10% (now about 25%).

If I get a chance, I'll try to dig up the stats I used to have, but it's really quite startling, that the 'good ole days' were actually a time of rising middle income families wealth, where as today, the only people who are seeing real gains in income seem to be the top 10% and top 1%. I've said it about a gazillion times on this board, but go read "Wealth and Democracy" for a very illuminating view of US History over the past 150 years.

Perfect timing, Ray, Tim, An old article from Washington Monthly magazine says it all!!!

"""A couple of days ago I implied that perhaps liberal metropolitan values were associated with dynamic, prosperous, moneymaking states (like California). I don't have any special proof of this, but think about a bill like this one. If you were a smart, hardworking, and mobile gay couple, would legislation like this make you more likely to move to California? You betcha, and we welcome these people.

On the other hand, intolerant, xenophobic societies that are obsessed with tradition aren't likely to embrace the change, chaos, and diversity associated with, say, Silicon Valley or Wall Street. On the contrary, they're rather more likely to drive out smart, hardworking gays who have the wherewithal and guts to pack up and move. Their loss.

"Creative destruction" isn't just a feature of successful capitalism, it's also a feature of successful cultures. And cultures that are open enough and dynamic enough to engage in creative destruction of social mores in favor of better ones are more likely to do the same thing when it comes to business and industry. As with capitalism, of course, there's always the risk of carrying things too far now and again, but the inevitable mistakes are trivial compared to the long-term rewards of being openminded about cultural change in the first place.

That's why California is rich and Mississippi isn't. It's the people, stupid.""" (Emphasis Mine)

Pardon my shameless plug for a thread, but this thread brings up the King Edward issue from a broader perspective.

With all due respect, Donna, the idea that wishing things were more like the way they were in the 50s and 60s in downtown Jackson automatically means wanting racism back is in your head. It's not a fact; it's not "the truth."

As I said above, there are aspects of the way things worked in downtown Jackson (and in hundreds of other downtowns) in that era that are worth looking at, evaluating and even emulating. Racial segregation is NOT one of them, but then looking at that era and seeing nothing but racial segregation is a form of blindness.

With all due respect, Tim, that is a vast over-simplification of what I said. I'd suggest you're going back and reading from the top of this thread, starting with Mr. Day's original comments, before further taking my comments out of context. I truly don't appreciate it.

And like Ray, I'm interested in the specifics of what we should emulate from the period, of course, exorcising any of the effects of segregation that might have contributed to said qualities.

Mark and Kate, I'd like to see these things, too. I will read "Wealth and Democracy".

Actually, I have to agree with Tim on the desire to ìreturn to the old timesî. While there undoubtedly are people who wish Jim Crow were still around, my experience tells me that itís more like naive nostalgia - turn back the clock and flip back the calendar to when a more ìmoralî life prevailed without any hint of irony (donít forget that ìmoralityî is often very narrowly defined, namely restricted to sex and drug issues). You see hints of it all the time on The 700 Club (is it still airing?) and other Fundie programming.

(Cue the music "Mr. Sandman...bring me a dream...")... now appears the requisite wholesome-looking All-American family at a wicket basket picnic, boys with short military-style haircuts, innocent girls in pigtails who won't even know what ESS-EEE-EXX is until they are 18 years old... and heaven forbid they wear a skirt higher than 2 inches above the knee... and NO WAY will that girl EVER go see "Elvis the Pelvis" gyrating his hips in such a vulgar way!!!!

In short, naÔve nostalgia is not so much the past as it actually was but the past as some want to remember it as being.

I never thought that suburbs were the result of white flight. I thought they were the result of upwardly mobile people wanting new, modern housing. Same then as today, Jackson ran out of land. Only now, the suburbs are being built in surrounding towns that still have land. I don't read anything racist into it. It's just natural progression. When back in Jackson last September, I did not note any housing being built in the city proper. Just a couple of things on Northside near Old Canton. I understand that there is alot of renovation going on in Fondren. But again 25 -30 years ago people really didn't renovate as much as move out to newer homes. Now there is interest in moving back into the grander older neighborhoods. That's pretty normal to. Only it seems to be happening earlier in Jackson than most towns. Remember all of that area in North Jackson around east Northside and way down into the Cheryls is now 35 plus years old. Not to mention north Ridgwood and out Old Canton past Riverwood. Those are older neighborhoods now. Belhaven, Fondren, Alta Woods, Milsaps Area are virtually antique housing now. Ooooh vintage houses! Better get the buldozers going. It's North State all over again! But seriously folks, there are a lot of ranchers sitting on two acres where four good houses could stand. That's been the trend here in Atlanta for about ten years now. Out of Land! Well clear a ranch or four out and start building!

Apologies to Donna,

I read Tim's thread before you made your response. Still, in a way it is good this aspect was brought up regardless of any dispute of context. The past-race-morality issue would be a whole lot easier if the time gap between granting legal racial equality and "loosening of morals" were a bit wider (not that I actually regret it wasn't. In a perfect world, these two things would not have been necessary at all - but since we're dealing with reality, just take my comment on that basis)

In short, naÔve nostalgia is not so much the past as it actually was but the past as some want to remember it as being.

Agreed, Philip. That is why when someone brings up how great downtown JACKSON was, of all places, in the 1950s and 60s and why can't we go back there, it's a pretty good time to remind them of the factors that are proppong up their vision of what it was then. The sad truth is that many people simply are not aware of many of the factors that propelled the flight to the 'burbs. Many people have never even heard of red-lining, for instance. Many people don't know how many thousands of white people fled Jackson and its public schools after the schools were forced to integrate in December 1970. There wasn't a whole lot of nuance to many of those decisions.

Does that mean there weren't any other factors behind burb-mania? Of course not. But denying the overriding factor that was behind many of the other factors ain't gonna help a whole lot when we're planning what to do now to bring Downtown "back." And it's kinda offensive to the people who weren't allowed to participate in the glory the first time around.

As for the King Edward condemnation threat....

I'm split two ways on this one. Maybe it's a political move by Melton to get something accomplished with the building. If his motive is to commit the developers to a time table, then I'm all for it. However, his 30 day ultimatum may or may not be a wise move - he does strike me as the type to plunge headlong onto the point of a spear. As I don't know about how well-developed the restoration plans are, I don't know.

It seems that just A LITTLE BIT (note the nod to Frank's supporters) of Harvey's manner might do some good in the long run.

Philip, that link you posted is interesting, but there's more to it than that. A few years ago, while in CA, I heard a great piece on NPR about the history of CA, which explained, in part, why CA is the way it is. It was a fascinating piece, about the long term effects of how communities begin, and how the past (150 to 200 years ago) has strong effects on cultures today. Bascially, this guy (prof in the UC System, I think, had written a book, etc - no more info on him - sorry) had the theory that CA attracted adventurers and money makers because of the gold rush. Essentially, gold was discovered in the 1840s, and California became a mecca for ambitious, energetic young men, wanting to get rich. Also, because of the huge population influx, CA's agricultural base was *commercially* focused from the very beginning (unlike many midwestern communities, which were small farmers, carving out subsistence life on the praire, for instance). So, you have instant wealth creation (at least for the people selling the shovels, if not for the actual miners), huge commercial agriculture (which supports an urban population), and a population of largely single men. CA was basically a big Fraternity House for a decade, which is how this guy put it. They were making money, sending it back east, and generally creating the "CA dream." The initial white population in CA was made up of people who embraced change, were out to make a quick buck, wanted some adventure in their lives, etc.

Add all that to the lovely climate, and you get California.

so, yes, CA embraces change more than other places, but it's more from an accident of history than anything else. And, as we've seen with the Internet bubble and a few other events recently, a blind attachment to rapid change is not necessarily any better than a blind attachment to the status quo.

he does strike me as the type to plunge headlong onto the point of a spear.

Ya think? ;-)

The tortoise and the hare metaphor is looking more apt every day.

I suspect he has good intentions both with this and all his threats to close delapidated housing. But one wonders if he EVER does any homework, or figures out what the laws and the "due process" considerations are. It's certainly not looking like it so far. I fear all the rash rhetoric is going to set us back much further than it moves us forward, regardless of the mayor's intentions.

Think tortoise-hare.

I'm all for emulating anything that's good for all and doesn't have a disparate or racist effect or impact on any group(s). I don't know how anyone can deny there was initial white flight to avoid intergration, and continued white flight to avoid a myriad of other so called fears such as loss of property value, moral decay, poor people, bad schools, racr mixing, dating, and a host of other pretended evils. Some suburbs, like private schools, were a direct result of white flights.

Actually a sad story is developing out of the King Edward rush to tear it down. Word is one of the main developers has a family member that is really sick; and the last thing on their minds is the King Edward. But, leave it to the city to come out with some ultimatium without all the facts. I thought that a Brownsfield study was being done on the Edward so that the grant they needed could be secured. Has anyone heard any info about this? I thought that the JRD blogged on here some? Do they have an answer to any specifics? There has to be more to this story since the city does have a contract with the group that is/was going to renovate it. Thus, why the need to just tear it down without exhausting all avenues and taking into account the developers needs too.

I mean the jackson redev. authority....sorry. Do they have any answers?

I don't know, tortoise. We're looking into it, though. Truly amazing, though.

As for Ray's comments -- absolutely agreed. Being able to look at the past without rose-colored glasses is NOT the same thing as saying everything is always about race. If it is, it is. If it was, it was.

As someone said to me once (because I write about race issues): "What does it always have to be about race?"

As I responded to him: "Why can it never be?"

There is simply no denying the huge role segregation/then integration had on the disintegration of cities such as Jackson. Sure, other factors helped get people to the suburbs. We can hold two thoughts at once. And should.

Tim, I don't want to pile on, but I should add here that I referred to the Jackson "of Governor Ross Barnett and Mayor Allen Thompson"--that comment had nothing directly to do with segregation. They were the unduly elected leaders of Mississippi and Jackson, respectively, during a big chunk of the era you described. They presided over this purported golden age of downtown Jackson, and if you see good in it that wasn't fed by the machine of segregation (though I don't see how you can separate this particular pair of conjoined twins), they deserve some credit for it.

You connected Barnett and Thompson to segregation. I technically didn't. So why does their name suggest segregation when mention of their capital city, during their era, does not? Why is it "not about race" when we talk about downtown Jackson of the 50s, but suddenly "about race" when I mention the folks who actually held policymaking power at the time? I'm not saying segregation wasn't what I had in mind when I referred to those two schmucks, but the question is worth thinking about.

It's much like what happened with Trent Lott and Strom Thurmond. I'm reasonably certain that Lott was not saying, directly or indirectly, that he wished the country was still segregated. His comment wasn't "about race." But Strom Thurmond was the segregationist Dixiecrat candidate... I think we have a tendency to look fondly back on the days of Grandpa Paul, forgetting that our ancestors had robbed Grandpa Peter to pay him.


Cheers,

TH

With all due respect, Tim, that is a vast over-simplification of what I said. I'd suggest you're going back and reading from the top of this thread, starting with Mr. Day's original comments, before further taking my comments out of context. I truly don't appreciate it.

Donna, I'm sorry, but I'm really not seeing that I'm the one doing the oversimplifying here. As soon as Sonny Day mentioned wanting downtown Jackson the way it was back then, you and others jumped right on him with castigation of the racial injustice that existed back then. Now THAT's oversimplification.

And like Ray, I'm interested in the specifics of what we should emulate from the period, of course, exorcising any of the effects of segregation that might have contributed to said qualities.

Mark M.'s previous post in response to Ray's question covered it at least as well as I could.

Tim, I don't want to pile on, but I should add here that I referred to the Jackson "of Governor Ross Barnett and Mayor Allen Thompson"--that comment had nothing directly to do with segregation. They were the unduly elected leaders of Mississippi and Jackson, respectively, during a big chunk of the era you described. They presided over this purported golden age of downtown Jackson, and if you see good in it that wasn't fed by the machine of segregation (though I don't see how you can separate this particular pair of conjoined twins), they deserve some credit for it.

You connected Barnett and Thompson to segregation. I technically didn't.

Then what DID you mean with this sentence:

Sonny, if you pine anywhere for the Mississippi of Governor Ross Barnett and the Jackson of Mayor Allen Thompson, I think you'll find that most people with an IQ of room temperature or higher will be "on the same side."

If you weren't invoking racism and segregation, then you did a damn good imitation of it.

So why does their name suggest segregation when mention of their capital city, during their era, does not? Why is it "not about race" when we talk about downtown Jackson of the 50s, but suddenly "about race" when I mention the folks who actually held policymaking power at the time?

Obviously, because those two men are historical figures who are associated with the maintenance of the Jim Crow system at any price, while downtown Jackson back then was an aggregation of people with many different lives and many different opinions that's a lot more complex.

I'm not saying segregation wasn't what I had in mind when I referred to those two schmucks, but the question is worth thinking about.

I'll say it again: To look at downtown Jackson during that era and see NOTHING BUT racism is a form of blindness. Consequently I don't find that this question is particularly interesting. It has a rather banal answer.

Best,
Tim

Agreed, Philip. That is why when someone brings up how great downtown JACKSON was, of all places, in the 1950s and 60s and why can't we go back there, it's a pretty good time to remind them of the factors that are proppong up their vision of what it was then.

Perhaps the person in question is bringing up downtown JACKSON because it's the urban area he or she happens to have known, by virtue of having grown up in Mississippi, and that's as far as it goes.

As a reminder, here's what Sonny Day said he (assuming "Sonny" is a he) liked about downtown Jackson decades ago:

Apartments and housing were within blocks of the downtown area. Movie theatres and restaurants florished evenings. Saturday was bustling with people from the delta and south Mississippi here to shop.

Isn't that basically what we'd all like to see in downtown Jackson again?

Saying that racism and segregation "propped up" this vision implies that we can't have a lively downtown without going back to the vicious racism and segregation that existed then. I don't accept that.

Best,
Tim

I'm not saying that we can't have a lively downtown without segregation; I think we'll have a much livelier downtown without segregation. But I also think that pining for the era of segregation is the wrong approach to take as we try to figure out how to improve the Jackson of 2005. And that isn't in reference to specific suggestions like inner-city housing (note that Sonny was against the KEH renovations, by the way)--that's in reference to the general sense that the 1950s were so swell and gee why don't we go back. I think that kind of false "golden age" idealism appeals to an image of Jackson that only benefits white Jacksonians, and has nothing to say to non-white Jacksonians.


Cheers,

TH

I'm sorry, but I still say y'all are reading things into Sonny Day's comments that are neither explicitly there nor even implied by those comments.

The fact that Sonny Day doesn't think downtown revitalization of the kind the rest of us are talking about will work, doesn't mean:
(1) that he's a racist or is invoking racist images, or
(2) that the things he remembers and likes about downtown Jackson, as he described them, aren't desirable.

Best,
Tim

the nostalgic look of downtown(i.e. king edward) should remain, just open up the hotel with parking and start swinging those unique revolving doors it has on the front again...and... get.... going. anyone who'd rather see this place stay vacant is courting insanity.

Tim, you are not hearing what I am saying. I'll ask again: please stop rewriting me. I did not say either of the numbered items you just, presumably, attributed to me. I did not say that Mr. Day is a racist (I have no way of knowing) or that the things he remembers are not desirable.

Again, you are vastly oversimplifying my comments -- and not even responding directly to anything I said. When you do that, I will respond back and engage in a discussion about it. Meantime: stop mischaracterizing me. If you don't understand something I wrote, ask me to clarify, please.

Donna, here's what you posted in response to Sonny's comment about liking downtown Jackson in the 50s and 60s:

I liked downtown in the 50s and early 60s.

Uh, it was segregated then. There is nothing to admire about back-ass ignorance.

YOU are the one who immediately jumped to the issue of segregation. Sonny hadn't brought it up at all.

You omitted his description of WHAT it was that he liked about downtown Jackson back then. Why didn't you include that?

And then you posted this:

So, Mr. Day, if you're liking downtown during the 50s and early 60s had nothing to do with the fact that it was segregated then, then why not explain to us what was so great about it then that had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that black people weren't allowed in the businesses, except to clean and such.

I'm neither rewriting nor mischaracterizing you. Your linking of Sonny's comments about downtown Jackson with segregation, together with your subsequent comments in this thread, can only be interpreted as connecting a liking for downtown Jackson in the 50s and 60s with a liking for racism and segregation.

If that isn't what you meant, then I think some of what you posted is, at best, ill-considered. And if you don't think I'm hearing what you're saying, perhaps that's because you're not saying what you think you're saying.

I can still recall being a young lad just out of college and before deciding what political party I would join. At the time, I worked in nearly lily-white corporate america where blacks comprised maybe 2 percent of the workforce. I kept hearing white people say I'm republican because I'm conservative and I want things to be as they once were. Though, I heard this comment countless time, I didn't ever hear anybody say a single time exactly what about the past they romanticized or wanted to return to. Nor did I ever hear anybody say how far back they wished to return. I kept listening and waiting for further explanations that I never got.

As I continued to watch those co-workers, I eventually saw their great affection for Ronald Reagan and the things he preached. I then said to myself, "hell, I now see what they're failing to talk about. I, then, knew instantly that I was a democrat. I consider it a scary prospect to wish for the days of old without clarifying exactly what it is you're referring to. There is often a very good and conscious reason for not being specific. I'm not sure it's wrong to assume a person desires an exact relica of old Mississippi when they fail to specify. To assume otherwise, some would say, is to deny knowlwdge of Mississippi and Southern history.

Needless to say, many of us aren't planning on going one step backward without knowing specifically and exactly where we're supposedly returning.

I consider it a scary prospect to wish for the days of old without clarifying exactly what it is you're referring to. There is often a very good and conscious reason for not being specific. I'm not sure it's wrong to assume a person desires an exact relica of old Mississippi when they fail to specify.

Apparently I'm going to have to quote Sonny Day's post yet another time:

I liked downtown in the 50s and early 60s. Apartments and housing were within blocks of the downtown area. Movie theatres and restaurants florished evenings. Saturday was bustling with people from the delta and south Mississippi here to shop.

No failure to specify there. And no racist spectres in those words either. They have to be imagined in. If you want to do that, fine, but please acknowledge that that's exactly what you're doing.

I do note some specifications. I still maintain my position when there are not specifications. I never said there wern't any specifics. I understand, Tim. Your point is well-taken when this is (truthfully) done. I know, how do we decide truthfully? After proof!?

Ray, you beat me to it. :-) I actually came back to post again because I wanted to emphasize that I respect your experience and I definitely do not blame you for being wary when white people start getting nostalgic for "the old days" without specifying what they mean. It's just that in this specific instance, I don't think Sonny Day's post was treated fairly, because he did make clear what it was that he liked about "the old days."

Best regards,
Tim

Yes, I did bring up segregation immediately, Tim, because the downtown of the 1950s and '60s that some folks think was so glorious was SEGREGATED and, thus, only glorious for people who were allowed access. Some of those people naively believe that it can never be that way again, using very tired crime rhetoric of old. Many people do not even think about that fact when they bring up the "glory days" -- they just pine for the days of old without thinking about the down side, and the fact that it was that way at a cost. That is an important, important factor to bring up -- and it isn't calling someone "racist" to do that. *I* never said it was the "only" factor, as I have been mischaracterized; I said it was a factor that must be considered in a discussion of how things used to be downtown. Too many people do not want ANY discussion of racism even when it is very pertinent to the conversation.

Making this point, by no stretch of actual logic, means I was saying, and I quote you:

1) that he's a racist or is invoking racist images, or
(2) that the things he remembers and likes about downtown Jackson, as he described them, aren't desirable.

That is a very poor and unfortunate reading of something that is a lot more complex than you are allowing.

Now, I will remind you of Mr. Day's other initial statements that you are not focusing on (which are the ones that got my dander up):

Retail doesn't work downtown...particularly on THAT end of the street.

"THAT"??? What does THAT mean? Mr. Day is giving a certain impression there, whether he means to or not.

Who's gonna live down there and risk getting shot after dark? Or maybe at noon. Been that way since the sixties. Ain't gonna change

Feel free to analyze that one while you're at it. There wasn't a lot to commend in Mr. Day's initial statements. I agree with him about hustle-bustle and the rest he said later that you quoted, but the answer to getting that back is not continued fear of the THAT end of Capitol Street or of spreading false perceptions about getting shot downtownóa notion that was perfected in the 1960s as a scare tactic about integration. (By similar logic, I can also want a crime-free city and believe that you have to deal with causes of crime, not just lock kids up, in order to reduce crime. It doesn't mean that everyone who isn't willing to look at causes are "racist" by design; but it can mean that their actions do not take in vital factors that then mean that the prisons end up filled with young black men and cities aren't much safer.)

Whether or not Mr. Day is saying these horrible things about THAT part of Jackson due to race fears, or merely because he's been told it so long that he believes it, without intending racism, is not up to me to know or characterize. But, the chacterization itself is a serious problemóand is not going to help return to the days that Mr. Day misses. And I believe strongly that it is rooted in the legacy of Jim Crow and the rhetoric used to support it. Disagree with that if you will, but do NOT try to put words in my mouth about what I'm calling Mr. Day. You would be wrong. It may well be that he just hasn't thought it through very well and passes on the same myths as other Jackson-bashers. Regardless, I believe it needs to be challenged -- ironically if we are ever to get that downtown hustle-bustle back again.

And, if you read what he wrote carefully, you will find that (a) he misses the pre-early 60s crowds downtown that (b) started running from the city due to integration by the mid-1960s (that's a fact, whether he understands it or not), but now (c) is not willing to go downtown after dark, or at noon, especially on THAT end of Capitol Street (which is the part that hits Gallatin) in order to help return the hustle-bustle to downtown.

If he misses the hustle-bustle, why won't he be part of the solution (just go back downtown), post early-1960s?

Tim, Sonny is in favor of mixed-mode housing, or so goes the theory--but he's against renovating the KEH hotel to do exactly that, because it's in the "wrong" part of town. He also pines for the 50s and 60s, where folks had stuff much like what has been proposed in terms of the KEH renovations...but presumably in a "better" part of town, where it would be more to his liking. I never said he was a racist or segregationist, but his comments do come across, at the very least, as being profoundly ignorant about the implications of what he's saying.

I appreciate your reluctance to see someone ganged up on. I've been there. But what this guy posted isn't worthy of your chivalry.

I won't deny that the KEH is near some high-crime real estate, but the only way to reduce crime is to increase traffic. I mean, why do you think the area is high-crime to begin with? Ley lines?


Cheers,

TH

As usual, Tom sums up my points much more succinctly. Thanks, Dude. ;-)

When I finally mature, I hope I'm as smart as Tom Head.

What a coincidence! When I finally mature, I hope I'm as smart as Ray Carter. :o) Thanks, you two.


Cheers,

TH

(Or as smart as Tim Kynerd either, for that matter--I can really appreciate what he's trying to do for the newbie here... I just think his kindness is misplaced.)

I know, Ray is my idol, too. I talk about justice; he lives it. ;-)

Yes, I did bring up segregation immediately, Tim, because the downtown of the 1950s and '60s that some folks think was so glorious was SEGREGATED and, thus, only glorious for people who were allowed access. ... Too many people do not want ANY discussion of racism even when it is very pertinent to the conversation.

As should be obvious by now, I'm questioning whether it is pertinent to this particular conversation. And the fact is that you brought up segregation immediately while saying nothing about the reasons Sonny explicitly GAVE for why he liked the old downtown Jackson.

As for your further attempts at exegesis, I'll confine myself to saying that the western end of downtown has been run down for decades, much more so than the eastern end of downtown. (Since I was going to "the bars" there in the early to mid-1980s, I know that as well as anyone.) I don't see, in what Sonny wrote, any reason to assume that he meant more than that.

I appreciate your reluctance to see someone ganged up on. I've been there. But what this guy posted isn't worthy of your chivalry.

Thanks. But I also don't like seeing a potentially worthwhile discussion about good urban development degenerate into wrangling about racism and segregation when they really are not relevant to the discussion. I particularly don't like seeing what I think of "the good side" ;-) swing the discussion over to that subject, derailing a productive discussion over important issues. And the point isn't really what's "worthy" of my chivalry; worthy or not, I still believe that far too much was read into what Sonny wrote. That doesn't move the discussion, or Jackson, forward at all.

Best,
Tim

Tim, Tim, Tim -- when I first responded to Mr. Day's outrageous comments, he had not given any reasons, certainly not explicit ones.

As should be obvious by now, I'm questioning whether it is pertinent to this particular conversation.

Actually, you've been doing much more than that -- putting words into my, and others', mouthsóincluding saying I called someone "racist." We can agree to disagree on the pertinence pointóI and some others absolutely believe it's pertinent to the discussion for many reasons stated (which you haven't really discussed). You don't. That's fine, but it's no reason to make up things other people aren't saying. I and others will continue to discuss this issue as we desire; you feel free to post comments about the points you think are relevent. Deal?

I agree, by the way, that the west side of downtown has been rundown since at least the mid-1980s when you were going there. However, it goes back further than that, and there were reasons for it.

Otherwise, we will agree to disagree on pertinence and what you thought about other people's responses to Mr. Day. Please move the discussion forward now.

If and when I grow up, I hope I'll be as courageous as Donna (and I wouldn't mind being as good a writer), as smart as Tom, and as wise as Ray. :-D Seriously. I admire all of y'all very much. I hope y'all don't totally hate me after this discussion, and my respect for all of you remains undiminished.

Best,
Tim

Thanks, Tim. No one hates you. Just don't get caught up on a point that you're reading differently.

Hi again Donna,

When you initially responded to Sonny's first two posts, I thought that response was fairly reasonable.

However, I think that at that point you made an assumption about where he was coming from that blinded you to the rest of what he said. I assume (yeah, I know) that that's why you didn't address his explicitly given reasons for liking the old downtown Jackson.

Since you did make that assumption, I'm afraid I find it a bit rich for you to accuse me of "putting words into my, and others', mouths." AFAICT that is precisely what you, and others, did to Sonny. It might be well for you to keep in mind that just because you (AFAICT from what you've written here) think racism and segregation were the salient characteristics of downtown Jackson in the 50s and 60s, that doesn't mean that everybody is looking at that place during that era in that way.

I'll quote you again:

As someone said to me once (because I write about race issues): "What does it always have to be about race?"

As I responded to him: "Why can it never be?"

That's not really responsive. The fact that racism (and other kinds of prejudice as well) is an important issue doesn't make it a valuable and useful lens through which absolutely everything can productively be viewed. Sometimes it's just not about race.

Meanwhile, this was really annoying to me (posted above by tortoise):

Actually a sad story is developing out of the King Edward rush to tear it down. Word is one of the main developers has a family member that is really sick; and the last thing on their minds is the King Edward. But, leave it to the city to come out with some ultimatium without all the facts.

Or, leave it to our buddy Frank. :rolls eyes: What is the matter with him? I'd like to see the King Edward redeveloped soon as much as just about anyone, but I can't see that threatening to tear it down is a good way to advance the project.

Best,
Tim

OK, I'm posting again to hold out an olive branch (is that the right metaphor?). I can't honestly see that I've put words in other people's mouths, but to the extent that I've done that without realizing it, or just made anyone feel that I did, I sincerely apologize.

Back to the main story.

Best,
Tim

Sometimes it's just not about race.

And sometimes it is.

"It," in this case, being the old, crowded-with-white-folk downtown Jackson. My point was that Sonny was ignoring this very relevant point -- on purpose or not, I do not know, nor did I say. And I did not accuse him of being a "racist" -- your word, not mine, thus my "rich" statement that you were putting words in my mouth. That point seems rather cut and dried to me.

Otherwise, apology accepted. I've grown quite weary of this thread and of repeating the same thing over and over again. I'm movin' out.

The fact that racism (and other kinds of prejudice as well) is an important issue doesn't make it a valuable and useful lens through which absolutely everything can productively be viewed.

I didn't say that, either, for the record. That would a stupid assertion to make. Personally I get really tired of being accused of saying that everything is "about" race whenever I try to talk about something we've been told all our lives not to talk about in this state. And for the record, false accusations won't make me stop talking about it when I believe that it's necessary or pertinent to a discussion. Nor should it anyone else.

Over and out.

I didn't say that, either, for the record.

No, but what you've posted has implied it pretty clearly. Someone mentioned downtown Jackson in the 50s and 60s, and the first word from you was "segregation." At best, it's a bit one-note.

Personally I get really tired of being accused of saying that everything is "about" race whenever I try to talk about something we've been told all our lives not to talk about in this state.

Of course I agree that it's important to be able to talk openly about race when that's the subject at hand, or when it's relevant to the subject at hand. But I don't see, and nobody has said (all of you were too busy jumping on Sonny), how the revitalization of downtown Jackson is race-related or in any way influenced by racial issues. (We've had that discussion in other threads here, but not in this one.)

So since this thread is supposed to be about the revitalization of downtown, and specifically about the King Edward: How does race play into these efforts?

Best,
Tim

I wonder why Sonny has been so quiet despite all of this. Why hasn't he told us what he really meant or thought, and whether he pictured a dominating lily-white jackson as he looked back? Can he not explain and defend his comments and thoughts? I realize I'm a suspicious person, but, the silence is alerting to me. It seems to me that Tom hit the nail on the head a few posts ago.

Tim, race is often left out of discussions when it's clearly a silent consideration. Our Mississippi is inundated with the creed, scheme, or motif to act like race doesn't matter yet create policy, positions and situations that clearly benefit the majority while purposefully screwing the known minorities. The record is replete with this since the Emancipation Proclamtion- our alleged first freedom, and the Sixties, our alleged real freedom.

I, too, hate to talk about race when it's not a consideration. Blacks and women are frequently accused of bringing up race when it's not a consideration. Our big concern is that people will think we don't know anything else, or, are too sentimental, which ain't true. Donna and I both understand this.

Pretense about race doesn't help solve the race situation. I'm not saying you're pretending about it, but I don't know whether Sonny was or is.

You know, Sonny's silence in all this, to me, is the most damning bit of evidence. If we were wrong, he could have said so by explaining his reasoning. Instead, his attitude was more like "How dare you people ask that question? I'm out of here." That's the very definition of white privilege.

Which was, incidentally, also what convinced me Trent Lott was so wrong on the Thurmond thing--his attitude afterwards was not "I'm sorry" or even "No, you're wrong, and here's why"; it was "You're not important enough to me for me to even bother defending myself." Pathetic.


Cheers,

TH

I imagine he is a bit stunned at where this thread has gone. I believe the comments that he made had to do with the hustle and bustle of Capital street in the Fifties and Sixties. Who among us doesn't. I am 46 and remember the Lamar Theater, JC Penny, the Original Oriental Shoppe, Gus Mayer, Lewis Wilson, Albrittons, the Primos Restaurants, McRaes, Kenningtons, the Heidleberg Hotel, and yes the King Edward. My Grandmother owned and operated the travel agency in the lobby of the KEH. It was called Rightway Travel. I was dropped off at the Patio Club pool many a summer day as a baby sitting service. I remember hearing the trains over on the viaduct and wondering where the sound was coming from. You could not see them for the high security fence. That was big time for a seven year old.

It will take plenty of people to bring all that back but it could happen. Black, White, Brown, and Yellow is what makes up a prosperous southern city now. All are welcome. Let's get it movin Downtown.

Also read this morning about a new retail development proposed for Fortification (corner of Jefferson and Fort). Hope it doesn't end up looking like one of those tired strip malls up in Madison county.............oops did a type that out loud!

No, but what you've posted has implied it pretty clearly. Someone mentioned downtown Jackson in the 50s and 60s, and the first word from you was "segregation." At best, it's a bit one-note.

Tim, you have officially offended me. Thank you for continuing to stuff your interpretations down my throat, ignore everything I've said and then berate me for something I did not say. The first word out of my mouth at his outrageous initial comments about THAT end of downtown and getting shot after dark was not "segregation." That, my friend, is an outright lie. Or at least extreme hyperbole. You have not, at all, tried to grasp or discuss my point.

Olive branch rejected. I'm tired of being badgered by you for something I did not say. I must say I'm surprised, but that makes me no less offended by this thread.

Tim Kynerd - So since this thread is supposed to be about the revitalization of downtown, and specifically about the King Edward: How does race play into these efforts?

I am not in opposition of the revitalization of downtown --or specifically the KEH-- but there are certainly racial implications. My viewing is that the revitalization, at least in part, is somewhat an obscure effort in issuing the return of ìwhite flightersî to Jackson!

And with that said, it would appear that the ëpowers that beí have come to realize that Jacksonís progressive long term interest is not that of a majority black citizenship.

Head: "You know, Sonny's silence in all this, to me, is the most damning bit of evidence. If we were wrong, he could have said so by explaining his reasoning. Instead, his attitude was more like "How dare you people ask that question? I'm out of here." That's the very definition of white privilege."

Interpreting the silence of a poster on an internet forum as some sort of an admission is hardly evidence of any sort. Kamikaze has yet to respond to many posts questioning the meaning of several terms and phrases contained in his most recent column . . . should that also be considered as 'evidence' or some sort of an admission, in fairness? I don't think so, although his failure to respond generally doesn't reflect well on him (or Sonny). But that's no admission of anything.

Re: Trent Lott, IMO after his fateful 'Strom' reference, blood was in the water and, unfortunately for him, the sharks circling him were his own GOP brethren that time. Hence his strategical silence . . until his profuse apologies and subsequent appearance on BET, which were all for naught.

Interpreting the silence of a poster on an internet forum as some sort of an admission is hardly evidence of any sort.

I agree with Cap'n on that point. However, Tom's point is correct that Mr. Day offered some truly outrageous comments, and offensive ones to those who live and work in the city every day and even like THAT side of town, and did not bother to try to explain those comments. I don't think anyone on here missed the point that it would be cool for downtown to be active and crowded and all that again. I remember it when I was a child, and I loved it, too. I just didn't happen to know that a good portion of the population wasn't allowed to do what I was doing. Learning that made it little hard for me to romanticize the good ole days in the same way.

Soócrowds on Capitol Street? I think we can stipulate that that's a cool idea. However, Mr. Day was shooting it down by saying that no one would ever do it again since the early 1960s. I still would like him to tell us: Why not? And why from the early '60s? If we, for the sake of argument, rule out the issue of segregation as a factor, what else happened right then in the early 1960s to run all those people out of downtown and ensuring that they would never be seen on THAT side of Capitol again. Again, his scenario, not mine.

Sure, you can say that factors such as transportation, cheap housing loans, etc., hastened moves to the suburbs -- but that is not the point that Mr. Day was making, contrary to the reinterpretation by the urban planners in our midst. He was declaring, and rather sassily, that people would never return to THAT side of Capitol again and one would get shot if they decided to. That is what I was responding toóand it deserved a hearty response, IMHO. I'd appreciate if no one tries to bait and switch what we were actually talking about.

I'm glad Mayor Melton is taking charge on the old King Edward Hotel. The building closed in the 60's and you folk had 30 plus years to trying to come up with a plan. 30 plus years in nothing to brag about. I find it an embarrassment that Jackson would let an old bulding just decay like that. You can call it racist, but I call it just stupidity on everyones part. I say get a wrecking ball demolish the old building.

Who ever made the commit about "I guess we'd all rather get shot in the McDonald's in Madison or that other fast-food lane in Ridgeland." Hey all our suspects are behind bars at Trowbridge's house in Canton (The Madison County Jail). The Madison suspects have a 2 million dollar bond. Why is Frank Melton adopting the idea of having 2 million bond for anyone who hurts someone with a weapon? I believe Mr Melton wants to be like Madison (The city), Mississippi. Madison County Rocks!

http://www.geocities.com/madisoncountymississippi/welcome.html

Who are "you folk," buzzoff? Your approach sounds mighty us-vs-them to be anything I'd be interested in being involved with. Enjoy.

"you folks" mean Jackson citizens...Not more, nothing less...

Actually, when I turned on public access TV and ran across Melton speaking earlier tonight, I'm sure I heard him ask for a $500,000 bond rather than a $2M bond.


Cheers,

TH

(And if you think Madison invented the practice of high bail for violent offenders, you're dreaming...)

Ok, a high bond. I'm sorry!

No problem. And I actually support increasing minimum bail for violent offenders, FWIW.


Cheers,

TH

If Melton is trying to get the developers to move a little faster, that's nice...in theory. In practice, however, people are going to get tired of being treated like children. That may work at the YMCA ("Hey, put that kid down or you're outta here!"), but you have to take a more well thought out approach in city government. I'm sure many enjoy the "Joe Clark" approach, but even Mr. Clark had to back down a couple of times. (I love that scene in "Lean on Me" when he argues with the superintendent!)

Buzzoff, thanks for stopping by, and it is good to like your place of residence, wherever that may be. However, I would leave out the condescending comments since there is no perfect city (a la Walgreens). This site focuses on the improvement of Jackson, okay?

Yes, I went to the web site and marveled at all of the gabled mendacity that composes the Madison tableau. I will say that the Wrights Mill structure is, I think, the finest thing there and that antebellum cottage on Main isn't bad either. But that little house looks just like the "Oaks" in Jackson and always has. I've never seen a Lowes that looks so much like a Baptist Church. But considering what most Lowes look like I would say not bad. The bridge over "The River I-55" is a bit Disneyesque.

My point, The ole King Edward, even in it's present state, has more integrity, grace, architecutral style than anything I saw on that Web site. That "old building" is as architecturally signifcant as anything we have here in Atlanta including the Georgian Terrace hotel on Ponce. It would be a great loss to the history and the architectural record of the Metropolitan area to lose that building. What it would be eventually replaced with would not be any better than what clutters the streetscape now in Madison. If you can't copy History Right then for Gods sake don't copy it at all.......you will always end up with the contrived or worse, mediocrity.

Tim, you have officially offended me. Thank you for continuing to stuff your interpretations down my throat, ignore everything I've said and then berate me for something I did not say. The first word out of my mouth at his outrageous initial comments about THAT end of downtown and getting shot after dark was not "segregation." That, my friend, is an outright lie. Or at least extreme hyperbole. You have not, at all, tried to grasp or discuss my point.

Uh-uh, sorry. It's true that when Sonny first mentioned downtown in the 50s and 60s, the first thing you said was:

Uh, it was segregated then. There is nothing to admire about back-ass ignorance.

Do you honestly think I don't go back and review the thread before I write these things? Because I do. That's why sometimes we end up posting at exactly the same time -- because I'm sitting here reviewing and revising what I've written, and reviewing the thread as well in an attempt to ensure that I'm not being unfair.

You asked me earlier to go back and review the thread. I think it's your turn to do that.

My point, The ole King Edward, even in it's present state, has more integrity, grace, architecutral style than anything I saw on that Web site. That "old building" is as architecturally signifcant as anything we have here in Atlanta including the Georgian Terrace hotel on Ponce. It would be a great loss to the history and the architectural record of the Metropolitan area to lose that building. What it would be eventually replaced with would not be any better than what clutters the streetscape now in Madison. If you can't copy History Right then for Gods sake don't copy it at all.......you will always end up with the contrived or worse, mediocrity.

Exactly. Also, as someone else posted previously, at a point where downtown Jackson badly needs mixed-use developments, it would be an absurd waste of resources to demolish a building that would be extremely expensive to replace even with a less architecturally worthwhile building of the same size.

Best,
Tim

I am not in opposition of the revitalization of downtown --or specifically the KEH-- but there are certainly racial implications. My viewing is that the revitalization, at least in part, is somewhat an obscure effort in issuing the return of ìwhite flightersî to Jackson!

And with that said, it would appear that the ëpowers that beí have come to realize that Jacksonís progressive long term interest is not that of a majority black citizenship.

Hi K. Rhodes,

I'm afraid your post confused me this morning, and I decided to wait a few hours before commenting. Now that I'm at work and looking at it, I'm sorry to say I'm still confused.

Are you saying that the only point of downtown revitalization is to bring back "white flighters"? If so, I don't think that makes much sense, because I think that "white flighters," of whom there are several in my family, ain't coming back to Jackson no matter what. I think downtown revitalization will attract people with a very different mindset from "white flighters."

As for Jackson's progressive long-term interest not being that of a majority-black citizenship, that comment really puzzled me. Do you think there is some reason why Jackson cannot survive as a majority-black city? If not, why not? AFAIK Atlanta and Washington, DC, are majority black and doing very well, thank you.

Puzzled,
Tim

I have to believe that, Melton being Melton, he would have gone on and ordered the demolition of the King Edward Hotel if that's what he had in mind. I suspect the 30 days business is an attempt to scare folks into pushing the plan forward, which might not be a bad idea as long as he doesn't stick to his guns if the time limit expires; may as well exploit the "He's crazy--there's no telling what he might do!" vibe for as long as it lasts because in a year or two, he'll be seen as part of the establishment.

Agreed on all counts. I think we need a renovated KEH, and the plan that has been submitted sounds almost perfect to me (though I do have doubts about the profitability of a third independent bookstore in downtown Jackson).


Cheers,

TH

I have to believe that, Melton being Melton, he would have gone on and ordered the demolition of the King Edward Hotel if that's what he had in mind.

That's what scares me: that he doesn't seem to respect the architectural heritage of the city, nor the resources that would be wasted by just demolishing the building.

I think we need a renovated KEH, and the plan that has been submitted sounds almost perfect to me (though I do have doubts about the profitability of a third independent bookstore in downtown Jackson).

(I assume you meant, basically, "If we're going to get a third independent bookstore, I have doubts about it being profitable if it goes into downtown." IOW, I don't assume you meant that downtown already has two independent bookstores.) That's a valid concern, I think. If and when the resident population of downtown reaches critical mass, they'll need a good local bookstore, but I don't think that will happen for a while.

BTW, I know about Lemuria, but what's the second existing independent bookstore?

Best,
Tim

Choctaw Books on North Street (voted "Best Used Books by the JFP), run by Fred Smith (son of the legendary Frank Smith). Great place to visit if you haven't already been. Lots of local history, and a fantastic first editions room. (I'm biased; I used to work there before my writing career took off.) Choctaw technically is downtown, and I guess I just kind of forgot where Lemuria was in relation to everywhere else. (This all ties into why I don't drive: No meaningful sense of three-dimensional space. My parietal lobe got smushed when I was an infant, so I channel spatial mapping through verbal processes. End result: Constant internal monologue, but until recently I'd get lost in unfamiliar buildings and that kind of thing.)

And I'm more concerned about it being independent than anything else. Chain bookstores are eating independents alive right now because of the volume discounts, etc. You pretty much have to be the Square or Lemuria, or a smaller-scale outfit like Choctaw, to make ends meet. If they're considering a bookstore, I would almost say they'd be better off selling the property to (don't hit me, folks) Barnes & Noble. But I would be thrilled to be wrong on this point, and if they do open an independent bookstore there, it'll get my full support.


Cheers,

TH

Thanks, Tom. How silly of me; I ordered Mississippi: Conflict and Change from Choctaw about four or five years ago. I guess I think of them as a used bookstore, though, and I was thinking here in terms of retailers of new books.

Agreed on the dire need for independent bookstores. Makes me think of Paul Fussell's discussion (in Class) of how prole drift (AKA "dumbing-down") has meant, among many other things, that what used to be referred to as an "order" through a bookstore is now referred to as a "special order," as if it were a big, huge deal for a bookstore to obtain a book that you particularly wanted but that they didn't have in stock. That's the kind of service you used to get at real bookstores that's disappearing fast.

This all ties into why I don't drive: No meaningful sense of three-dimensional space. My parietal lobe got smushed when I was an infant, so I channel spatial mapping through verbal processes. End result: Constant internal monologue, but until recently I'd get lost in unfamiliar buildings and that kind of thing.

Oh my goodness. Jackson is the only place where I really know my way around by car, actually. I don't think of Choctaw as being "downtown," but maybe my concept of the boundaries of downtown is outdated. For me, downtown's north boundary is High Street. In a pinch I can stretch it to Fortification.

Where is Choctaw now exactly, I mean where on North Street? When I went there looking for something in the 1980s, when I was still living in Jackson, they were over off West Street just north of Fortification (sort of behind Manship House).

Best,
Tim

Tim: I think that "white flighters," of whom there are several in my family, ain't coming back to Jackson no matter what. I think downtown revitalization will attract people with a very different mindset from "white flighters."

I entirely agree! I've seen this pattern in person in Memphis and Dallas - and it even shows up in their precinct-by-precinct voting patterns. Where it concerns middle and upper income people, the closer they live to downtown the less conservative / traditionalist they tend to be. This is true even in metro Jackson (i.e. Fondren vs. Madison and Rankin Co.'s - and even vs. Clinton and Byram). Every other metro in the region of comparable size to Jackson also has this pattern (Little Rock, Fayetteville, Shreveport, Lafayette, Baton Rouge, Biloxi - and probably Mobile and Pensacola as well). When considering only whites', a good general rule of thumb is the closer they live to downtown the more non-conservative they tend to be. Go to the Hinds Co. Election Commission and click on "Election Results" and "Polling Locations", then compare the two. Pay attention to Precincts 6,8, 15 and numbers in that range (that's Fondren and Belhaven). In the 2000 election, they tended to have the metro areas's strongest Ralph Nader supporters (on the albeit oversimple left-right scale, Nader makes Al Gore look like Ronald Reagan. What does that tell you?)

Downtown will attract the twenty-something children of the white-flighters who want to be where the action is, and the maybe even empty nesters who don't want to maintain three bedrooms and a half-acre lot anymore now that there are only two people in the house.

Where is Choctaw now exactly, I mean where on North Street? When I went there looking for something in the 1980s, when I was still living in Jackson, they were over off West Street just north of Fortification (sort of behind Manship House).

I thought Choctaw Books was in Belhaven, just a block east of N State and not far north of Fortification.

Downtown will attract the twenty-something children of the white-flighters who want to be where the action is, and the maybe even empty nesters who don't want to maintain three bedrooms and a half-acre lot anymore now that there are only two people in the house.

Yep, except that I'd say it would attract the less traditional empty-nesters. The really conservative/traditional ones, many of whom would qualify as "white flighters" or close to it, won't move downtown. In my judgment.

I thought Choctaw Books was in Belhaven, just a block east of N State and not far north of Fortification.

It may well be, now. As I say, my memory of its location is from the 1980s :-). I had to go to Mapquest to see whether North Street ran north of Fortification, but of course it does, as far as Poplar Blvd. Is that where Choctaw is now, Tom?

Best,
Tim

The building closed in the 60's and you folk had 30 plus years to trying to come up with a plan. 30 plus years in nothing to brag about. I find it an embarrassment that Jackson would let an old bulding just decay like that.

I agree. But that was due to poor city management and a Mayor with *uts. Frank should re-invent himself and invest in the idea of reopening the King Edward.

Union Station will be where a lot of people come through Jackson. conferences, etc....the King would be a great place for them to stay. walking distance to the FED, etc...

You worry about Madison, We'll worry about Jackson.

Demolish the old building. Frank Melton wants Jackson to look better. The King Edward is an eye sore. Hopefully a new office buiding will be built on the site. We folks in the suburbs love Melton. Let Melton do his job, and Jackson will be "Jewel of The South."

Refurbishing/Renovating the King Edward building with new millennium technology is more cost effective and BETTER LOOKING than tearing down the King Edward only to have a vacant lot for the next 20 years. It will hurt the entertainment district.

If any building that needs to be torn down it's the Coliseum. put a drag strip on it. or a lake...lol

Is the JRA or HRI involved with the National Trust for Historic Preservation or something similar. Maybe they can help save the "old gentleman".

Refurbishing/Renovating the King Edward building with new millennium technology is more cost effective and BETTER LOOKING than tearing down the King Edward only to have a vacant lot for the next 20 years.

Renovating the King Edward is more cost-effective than building a new building even if the new building were to be built right away, I'm pretty sure.

If any building that needs to be torn down it's the Coliseum. put a drag strip on it. or a lake...lol

I'm inclined to agree. Now that's a geniune eyesore.

Best,
Tim

Here are the 11 most endangered historic sites/buildings in Mississippi:

FED on the list:

Farish Street Historic District
300 N. Farish Jackson, MS 39202
11 Most Endangered Places - 1995

Once the heart of a thriving African-American community, this neighborhood was listed because of widespread deterioration and the demolition of more than 200 structures in less than a decade. With help from the National Trust, a cluster of historic shotgun houses has been rehabbed to provide 35 units of elderly and low-income housing. A bond bill for the district passed the state legislature, and CDBG funds will be used for addditional property acquisition and stabilization.

Are you saying that the only point of downtown revitalization is to bring back "white flighters"? If so, I don't think that makes much sense, because I think that "white flighters," of whom there are several in my family, ain't coming back to Jackson no matter what. I think downtown revitalization will attract people with a very different mindset from "white flighters."

I think you are both right. I sense that there is a bit of disconnect between the visions of downtown revitalization efforts at this point. The Two Lakes proposal, for example, does seem to be focused on attracting "white flighters" back to Jackson (though most of the benefits admittedly would be felt in Rankin County). The emphasis I have gleaned is on developing high value lake front commercial and residential properties, rather than emphasizing open space for recreation that would be more attractive to the 20-somethings we all seem to agree are the drivers to a successful redevelopment effort.

From what I have learned developing the Pearl River basin into a greenway (using the DOT rails to trails program and making smart use of levees required for flood control) would make the areas much more attractive to the young entrepreneurial energy we want to attract. The Two Lakes proposal appears to win on short-tern benefits to developers and the property tax base, but I think the long-term prosperity of Jackson would be better served by linking the city to the existing natural resources.

I donít want to make this about race (and think Tim and Donna should have taken their discussion offline about 25 iterations ago) but there does seem to be a mindset that the redevelopment goal is to attract the rich folk back into Jackson, and that just seems an uphill battle to me. Conservative folks (and I consider myself conservative, though I donít get much traction with that argument in MS) want security, and are not in a position to be trendsetters. We have kid and mortgages, and may not be as good at adapting to new situations as we once were (or have just become lazy).

That will likely change, for me at least, when I am an empty nester, I can have a comfortable apartment downtown within walking distance of a good bakery, produce store and butcher shop, movie theater and restaurant. There will be a bike path from downtown into the Pearl River Greenway along the now abandoned rail right-of-way behind Belhaven, where we can picnic on a sandbar, and the laws will have changed so that Hal and Malís will be producing world-class micro-brews (assuming they can compete with the other micro-breweries that will have sprung up by that time). I also look forward to a public park with an outdoor amphitheater just on the other side of the levee from downtown Jackson for recreation and cultural events, all designed to be easily hosed down after flooding.

The Two Lakes proposal appears to win on short-tern benefits to developers and the property tax base, but I think the long-term prosperity of Jackson would be better served by linking the city to the existing natural resources.

I think you nailed that one. I agreed with the rest of your post as well.

Best,
Tim

Buzzoff, given that Melton won with 88 percent, I think your "we suburbanites are running the show" attitude is a joke. Truth is that you folks don't get a vote. Nor will you ever get one, unless and until you move to Jackson. Nor can you really say that you'd elect Melton in Madison--I mean, let's face it, the odds of a black Democrat ever being elected rank somewhere near the odds of Jerry Falwell getting an ampalang. So stop trying to make him your mayor; we voted him in on a landsllide, but you folks would reject him before he even left the gate because of his skin color and political affiliation.

Nor is Melton interested in demolishing the KEH site, obviously; he is making a threat in hopes of jarring people into cutting through the red tape and getting the show on the road. I can't say I blame him for that.

Tim and Mark, you're right about where Choctaw is.


Cheers,

TH

HA HA HA TOM!!!!! That's hilarious about Falwell and an ampalang!!! Classic, I tell ya!!! BUT.....I think Jackson would be more laid back about a mayoral candidate, or even council person, with one sooner than other municipalities in the area.:-P

Holy frickin' hell, you people. Don't gross me out like that -- my old heart can't take it! :-P

Tim Kynerd - "Hi K. Rhodes,

I'm afraid your post confused me this morning, and I decided to wait a few hours before commenting. Now that I'm at work and looking at it, I'm sorry to say I'm still confused.

Are you saying that the only point of downtown revitalization is to bring back "white flighters"? If so, I don't think that makes much sense, because I think that "white flighters," of whom there are several in my family, ain't coming back to Jackson no matter what. I think downtown revitalization will attract people with a very different mindset from "white flighters."

As for Jackson's progressive long-term interest not being that of a majority-black citizenship, that comment really puzzled me. Do you think there is some reason why Jackson cannot survive as a majority-black city? If not, why not? AFAIK Atlanta and Washington, DC, are majority black and doing very well, thank you."

Puzzled,
Tim

No, what I said was that the revitalization, at at least in part is an obscure effort to attract ëwhite flightersí back into Jackson! Surely, youíre not so unwitting as to believe that those with an invested interest in the revitalization wouldnít like to see white flighters return to Jackson.

Ultimately, I see the revitalization as being tremendous economic growth and development for Jackson! As to Jackson ìsurvivingî as a majority black city, one could certainly debate how Jackson has faired thus far with a majority black demographic.

Your comparison is that of apples to oranges, omitting the fact that all of the cities are majority black. Atlanta and D.C. are light years ahead of Jackson in many regards! Moreover, how has any of these cities benefited from having a majority black populace?

I'm off to liberal Santa Clara, Clifornia for a week, and then to an impossible to win trial the next week. Will be back and involved aterward. Don't y'all hurt anybody while I'm away.

No, what I said was that the revitalization, at at least in part is an obscure effort to attract ëwhite flightersí back into Jackson!

Isn't that what I said you were saying? *puzzled still*

Surely, youíre not so unwitting as to believe that those with an invested interest in the revitalization wouldnít like to see white flighters return to Jackson.

I don't know who "those with an invested interest in the revitalization" are. Inform me! :-)

As to Jackson ìsurvivingî as a majority black city, one could certainly debate how Jackson has faired thus far with a majority black demographic.

Hmm. I wonder if that could possibly have anything to do with mostly-white suburbs sucking it dry?

Moreover, how has any of these cities benefited from having a majority black populace?

Having a majority black population has helped DC, where I used to live, because diversity tends to attract talented, creative people (a discussion we've had here before) and also because DC has been a magnet specifically for talented and creative BLACK people, more than any other city in the US that I can think of.

Atlanta I don't know well enough to speak to in that sense (although I do know that it has a majority-black population, which is what I posted previously).

I'll also note that you are shifting ground here. You posted this:

Jacksonís progressive long term interest is not that of a majority black citizenship.

I replied to that by saying that Atlanta and DC have done just fine with majority-black populations, which is equivalent to saying merely that having majority-black populations has not hurt them.

Now you are asking how having majority-black populations has helped them (rather than just not hurting them), which is a different question. Even though I could answer that question for DC, it goes beyond the point I was making before. So I'll count that point as conceded.

I'm off to liberal Santa Clara, Clifornia for a week, and then to an impossible to win trial the next week. Will be back and involved aterward. Don't y'all hurt anybody while I'm away.

Have a nice stay in California, Ray! I hope that's a vacation. I'm sure you can use it before that trial!

Best,
Tim

ampalang I learned a new word today!

Steph, I've noticed that one doesn't usually make it to the regional spelling bees. :P

K. Rhodes, I use the term "white flight" to refer to the general suburban flight that took place in the wake of integration, regardless of the actual race of the person leaving the city. (I suspect this is also what most socologists refer to when they use the term.) Suffice to say that I have no interest in living in a "white" city, and if you do, a city that is 74% African-American is probably not your best choice. I believe that African Americans already make up the heart and soul of this city; the issue is not whether the city benefits from black folks, but rather whether black folks (along with whites and other minorities) benefit adequately from the city. And bringing back more affluent residents, black or white, would contribute to that cause by boosting the city's tax base and private economy.


Cheers,

TH

(I keep going back to K. Rhodes' statement: "Jacksonís progressive long term interest is not that of a majority black citizenship." How exactly does a statement like this not qualify as racist? I mean, it could be the first sentence of a Klan flier.)

Donna: Please delete the post of mine above. K. Rhodes has been misquoted in this thread. What s/he actually said was "it would appear that the ëpowers that beí have come to realize that Jacksonís progressive long term interest is not that of a majority black citizenship." Thanks.


Cheers,

TH

(Please delete the 8:10pm post, that is--not the earlier 8:07pm post, which I'd like to leave intact.)

"given that Melton won with 88 percent, I think your "we suburbanites are running the show" attitude is a joke."


Who said the suburbs are running the show?
It me who only running the show. The first thing I do when I get up in the morning is to see how many people I can get mad.



"Truth is that you folks don't get a vote. Nor will you ever get one, unless and until you move to Jackson."

I'll remember that when one of you liberals makes a snide remark about Madison, or any other suburban city around Jackson.



"Nor can you really say that you'd elect Melton in Madison."

I don't know, all the white people like Melton. The only people I see that don't like him are the blacks, and the liberals.



"So stop trying to make him your mayor."
Who said I called him my mayor?




"You folks would reject him before he even left the gate because of his skin color and political affiliation."

Political affiliation yes! Mr. Melton would have to be a Republican, but skin color your dead wrong Mr Tom!



"Nor is Melton interested in demolishing the KEH site"

Hello, Tom are you new! Have you seen the Bottom Line? Melton's only word for the King Edward is Koboom!

I'm sorry that I went off on you Tom but I guess, I had it coming.

"'Truth is that you folks don't get a vote. Nor will you ever get one, unless and until you move to Jackson.'

I'll remember that when one of you liberals makes a snide remark about Madison, or any other suburban city around Jackson."

Buzzoff, I'm sure you mean well. But there is a lot of built up frustration on this point (and I'm conservative - trust me). I can't have a conversation with people who live outside of Jackson without them trashing it. It's like they have nothing else in the world to do or worry about except what shape Jackson is in.

For instance, I've never seen a patron of a business - yet - go into a Madison or Ridgeland establishment and bash it to the owners. Nor have I seen a Jackson employee in Madison bash Madison to the customers. Yet when I go out in Jackson - and this has happened on numerous occasions - I get some employee, who lives in Madison but WORKS in Jackson, who trashes the city to my/our faces. We just get sick of it.

We/I really don't care if some people feel that way. It's big world. Go live and work where you would like.

But don't come work in our city, and then have the audacity to trash the city to the customers who live in the city. For the people who talk like that, if your community is so great to live in, then work there as well. Otherwise, quit whining and be a part of the solution of the problem you are talking about - e.g., Habitat. Quite retreating from the problem at which you are pointing.

The above example applies to only certain businesses, but I hear it every.single.day.from.people.who.work.in.jackson.but.don't.live.here. It's annoying.

I can't change some of these people's minds, and that's fine, but I/we just don't like to hear it. And it happens all the time. In part, it's the fault of the citizens of Jackson. They've allowed other communities to push them around psychologically, when those communities have no grounds on which to do it (or grounds on which they can be attacked as well - we just don't go into their backyard and do it -it's called TACT).

Buzzoff writes:

"Truth is that you folks don't get a vote. Nor will you ever get one, unless and until you move to Jackson."

I'll remember that when one of you liberals makes a snide remark about Madison, or any other suburban city around Jackson. <i>

If you don't already, that's probably part of the problem.

<i>"Nor can you really say that you'd elect Melton in Madison."

I don't know, all the white people like Melton.

I think that if you checked the demographics of the 88 percent that went to the Democrat candidate Melton versus the 12 percent that went to the Republican candidate Whitlow, you would find this to be false.

The only people I see that don't like him are the blacks, and the liberals.

I never knew liberals qualified as a separate ethnic group, but about 45 percent of voters you're presumably referring to as "the blacks" voted for Melton in the primary, and it seems a safe bet that the figure was closer to 85 percent in the general election. The truth is that Melton is a black man, he is active in a predominantly black community, he had a multiracial campaign staff that I would argue had more black members than white, and he had the support of numerous local prominent black businessmen and politicians.

As far as "the liberals" go: He was endorsed by the AFL-CIO over Johnson. 'Nuff said?

The main thing I don't like about your post, Buzzoff, is the racial undertone. You can diss Jackson all you like (though good response, Mark)--we're used to it. But when I see ignorant, back-assward white suburban rednecks dribble saliva down their chins while they prattle on incoherently about "the blacks," leading non-southerners to suspect Deliverance was a documentary, I think they alienate pretty much everybody who still has a fully functioning cerebral cortex. Including Melton, a strong-willed contrarian who probably doesn't enjoy being referred to as a figurehead for suburban whites.

We got a reasonably conservative Democrat for mayor who was elected because the majority of Jackson voters put him in the seat. Madisonians had no say in the decisions. You fellas have fun with Mary Hawkins and your color-coordinated toilet paper. We city slickers will do just fine.


Cheers,

TH

Thank you, Tom. I wish people would stop making assumptions and going on hearsay about how "the blacks" feel and ask one of "the blacks"...like me, for example. However, I would prefer to be called an "African Warrior Princess". 8-P

I was driving by the KEH yesterday and I thought about Sonny Day's comment at the beginning of this discussion that created such a firestorm. To be specific, Sonny said "Retail doesn't work downtown...particularly on THAT end of the street."

The use of all caps in "THAT" caused the controversy but it occurred to me that the KEH wouldn't be standing today if it weren't on "that" end of the street. Would it still be unrenovated and standing if it were prominient in the city skyline as seen from I-55? Would it still be standing if it were located across from the governor's mansion? The fact that the KEH is still standing is proof of a sort that the area of Capital Street near the railroad station is very different from the section near the Old Capital Building.

As obvious as that last statement is, I get the feeling that a lot of people don't want to specifically say that for the KEH project to work there has to be a lot of cleanup and revitalization of the entire area. To criticise the surrounding area can easily be taken the wrong way as we have seen. But, you can't just go in and redo the KEH and think it will be a success unless you also plan on doing a lot to the surrounding area. Would a restored KEH be enough to bring about this urban renewal--I don't know. It seems 50-50 to me that the KEH could revitalize the surrounding area or the surrounding area could lead to the failure of a renovated KEH. As an investor, I wouldn't like those odds. Maybe the only way to revitalize that area will be to tear down the biggest eyesore in that area, namely the KEH.

It's a tough call either way but I do think that it's time that a decision be made one way or the other.

Tom Head, I never said Liberal are separate ethnic group. You said that! I believe your the one with the racist attitued! I can't see how the King Edward plays into the race card that you just have pull. The building is run down, and crappy looking building that should have been demolished in the 80's. I think the race card you just pulled is very ignorant of you. You don't know who I'm, nor do you have the right to call me racist! So, Stop it!

The problem with Whitlow he doesn't appear to be political. I believe he would have been a good Mayor, and I like how Melton invited him to his inaugural speach. That showed that Frank Melton has high morals.

It looks like Fank must be doing something right it has y'all posting.

As obvious as that last statement is, I get the feeling that a lot of people don't want to specifically say that for the KEH project to work there has to be a lot of cleanup and revitalization of the entire area.

I think that's fairly obvious. Who "doesn't want to specifically say" that?

It seems 50-50 to me that the KEH could revitalize the surrounding area or the surrounding area could lead to the failure of a renovated KEH. As an investor, I wouldn't like those odds.

That's why, before you invest in a project like this, you GAUGE DEMAND for it. You don't have to guess, or live with 50-50 odds. If the demand is there, then there will be people using the building. That will naturally lead to the revitalization of the west end of downtown.

Maybe the only way to revitalize that area will be to tear down the biggest eyesore in that area, namely the KEH.

How would that help? There's already a vacuum there; why make an even bigger hole?

It looks like Fank must be doing something right it has y'all posting.

Is the "F" too close to the "W" on your keyboard?

Just curious.

Buzzoff, it is plain silly to say that people are posting and talking only because an elected official is doing "something right." That defies common sense.

Otherwise, your comments seem designed just to offend and get rises out of people (much as Mr. Day's original ones were, and did)óand then complain when they respond to your near-racist taunts. I'll let it go for the moment because I think the responses are managing to stick to discussing bigger issues; however, the second I believe you've crossed the line into trolling and are derailing the conversation, you're suspended. So this is your warning: Talk about issues, and don't cross the line into trolling and, thus, hijack the conversation. And cut out the "you liberals" and "the blacks" crap.

You folks (forum) read too much into words. If I offended any I'm sorry, but not going to let anyone bash me. If you feel I need to be ban please go ahead do that.

It looks like Fank must be doing something right...

Oh yea. doing something... Wrong on his authority to unilaterally close a club.
Wrong on his authority to unilaterally close apartments.
Wrong on his authority to unilaterally taer down a building.
Wrong on his authority to unilaterally force resignations and set up puppet boards and commissions.
...right, Frank.