William Matt
It is my pledge to always seek justice on behalf of the City of Lansing. As your neighbor, I will work diligently to find responsible solutions to our challenges, and lead with a vision guided by a hope of an ever-better city.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Free Speech versus Offensive Speech?
Monday night at the City Council meeting Darnell Oldham Sr. displayed a small hangman's noose at the conclusion of his remarks, and tossed it on to the floor when he finished. Today the LSJ picked up the story:
(LINK)
There are some interesting comments already being left on the board after the article. I would encourage you to comment here or at the LSJ.
Part of the article says that Council President Leeman "plans to meet with the city attorney so that they can draw up a letter possibly demanding that Oldham, a black man, cannot attend council sessions for a year. He also might demand that Oldham write or verbalize an apology or attend counseling at his own expense if he wishes to return to council sessions."
A most of you know, Mr. Oldham is a community activist from the Churchill Downs neighborhood. He takes his role in the community very seriously, and he is very outspoken. The protest was based on last weeks meeting when a speaker was ejected and following audience protests by Oldham and John Pollard, they were ejected from the council meeting as well. He claimed that the noose represented a lynching of his free speech rights by Leeman.
As offensive as the noose ploy was, it has certainly generated attention, which was probably the whole point.
When I took the job on City Council, I knew that insults and personal attacks came with the territory. You have to come into this position with some very thick skin. I have been publicly called "the Mayor's Boy" by Mr. Oldham, another racial taunt, and I do my best to ignore this and other insults.
Did the noose go beyond the realm of good taste and proper decorum? Any reasonable person would likely say yes. Does Mr. Oldham have the right to use props to add emphasis to his speeches. Sure. He has displayed pom-poms that glow in the dark (I don't even want to know where he bought those!) when admonishing Cmbr. Kathie Dunbar and alluding to her relationship with the Mayor in the past.
I wish he would have been more sensitive in this particular case, and what he is doing in my mind hurts his own credibility, effectively offending some people to the point that they will not listen to his arguments. He is hurting his case more by this type of heated rhetoric more than he is helping it.
Is that his right in America? Yes.
We provide a forum for people to speak to council. Some people attend every week and insult and attack Council members who they disagree with. That is the way a representative government works. If they have good points, and council doesn't listen, then the people can choose new representation at the next election.
Is banning Mr. Oldham from council for a year appropriate? No. We have more serious and important issues to deal with. If Mr. Oldham wants to embarrass himself every week, then I don't really care. Does Mr. Oldham need counseling? Not my call. I'm not a professional behavior specialist. Most weeks he is restrained. Last week he spoke very calmly and eloquently. He is clearly passionate, and that sometimes is expressed in an offensive nature.
Should we allow speaker's comments toward Jerry Ambrose, the city's finance director? I have no problem with speakers talking to other city officials present at the meeting.
So what to do about this situation? Ignore it. No harm was done. If I am asked, I will not support banning Oldham for a year, counseling, or a public apology. It is his own credibility at stake.
I may not agree with Oldham, but I will defend his right to speak his mind.
(LINK)
There are some interesting comments already being left on the board after the article. I would encourage you to comment here or at the LSJ.
Part of the article says that Council President Leeman "plans to meet with the city attorney so that they can draw up a letter possibly demanding that Oldham, a black man, cannot attend council sessions for a year. He also might demand that Oldham write or verbalize an apology or attend counseling at his own expense if he wishes to return to council sessions."
A most of you know, Mr. Oldham is a community activist from the Churchill Downs neighborhood. He takes his role in the community very seriously, and he is very outspoken. The protest was based on last weeks meeting when a speaker was ejected and following audience protests by Oldham and John Pollard, they were ejected from the council meeting as well. He claimed that the noose represented a lynching of his free speech rights by Leeman.
As offensive as the noose ploy was, it has certainly generated attention, which was probably the whole point.
When I took the job on City Council, I knew that insults and personal attacks came with the territory. You have to come into this position with some very thick skin. I have been publicly called "the Mayor's Boy" by Mr. Oldham, another racial taunt, and I do my best to ignore this and other insults.
Did the noose go beyond the realm of good taste and proper decorum? Any reasonable person would likely say yes. Does Mr. Oldham have the right to use props to add emphasis to his speeches. Sure. He has displayed pom-poms that glow in the dark (I don't even want to know where he bought those!) when admonishing Cmbr. Kathie Dunbar and alluding to her relationship with the Mayor in the past.
I wish he would have been more sensitive in this particular case, and what he is doing in my mind hurts his own credibility, effectively offending some people to the point that they will not listen to his arguments. He is hurting his case more by this type of heated rhetoric more than he is helping it.
Is that his right in America? Yes.
We provide a forum for people to speak to council. Some people attend every week and insult and attack Council members who they disagree with. That is the way a representative government works. If they have good points, and council doesn't listen, then the people can choose new representation at the next election.
Is banning Mr. Oldham from council for a year appropriate? No. We have more serious and important issues to deal with. If Mr. Oldham wants to embarrass himself every week, then I don't really care. Does Mr. Oldham need counseling? Not my call. I'm not a professional behavior specialist. Most weeks he is restrained. Last week he spoke very calmly and eloquently. He is clearly passionate, and that sometimes is expressed in an offensive nature.
Should we allow speaker's comments toward Jerry Ambrose, the city's finance director? I have no problem with speakers talking to other city officials present at the meeting.
So what to do about this situation? Ignore it. No harm was done. If I am asked, I will not support banning Oldham for a year, counseling, or a public apology. It is his own credibility at stake.
I may not agree with Oldham, but I will defend his right to speak his mind.
Labels: 3rd Ward, Bill Matt, Darnell Oldham, lansing city council, LSJ, noose
Saturday, October 27, 2007
No love from the Journal
Well this morning the Lansing State Journal endorsed my opponent, along with Harold Leeman, Carol Wood, and Gina Nelson. Noticably missing was Derrick Quinney and myself! (LINK)
In the explanation, the journal seemed to like Carol and Harold's experience, and Gina and my opponent's energy and ideas. All endorsements are valuable and coveted, so I wont lie to you and say that I wasn't disappointed. I wasn't surprised either. Politics are a funny business, and not in a ha ha sort of way. I really felt that I led the room during the combined interview with the ward candidates, and that my written answers were substanative and superior to my opponents answers (also available on the LSJ web). Of course I would think that, and it may be rationalization. No matter, what is done is done, and it is beyond my control at this point.
I was really shocked that Derrick was not endorsed, more so than for myself. Derrick has run a beautiful campaign and has been a solid council member. What exactly does a council member need to do to get the endorsemet besides having served for 8-12 years?
Lets also remember back to the fall of 2006 when the LSJ endorsement was not enough for Bob Johnson to overcome Kathie Dunbar. And come to think of it, in that piece last year I distinctly remember people who didn't get the nod (John Pollard) at least being mentioned in the article! Not so for me and Derrick, or Eric Hewitt or Robert Clark. Ahem. Maybe the slight was unintentional, but to not even mention my 6 months and Derricks 10 months of service on council, or any portion of our votes or issues certainly raises eyebrows.
As I said, no matter. The Journal's revelance is not what it once was. Oh, it is still read, but often more with curiosity than reverence. After the State wage fiasco this year, along with the rise of non-tradional media, and alternative news (City Pulse), the LSJ just does not posses the strength of swaying voters they way they once did, before all these competing medias were available, and they were taken more seriously.
So, on a rainy windy morning, after receiving this slap in the face by the LSJ, what does a candidate do? Lace them up and hit the doors! I made good progress in a key precinct and talked to quite a few likely voters. Many people that I saw I had met before, and they reaffirmed their desire to vote for me. Other people I had never met, but it was obvious that neither had my opponent, and they were appreciative of the attention of a council member at their door. Score. Still others indicated that they had already voted for me via absentee ballot. So I ended the day assured that the race was not lost with the LSJ endorsement.
Everytime I walk, I come home more confident than when I left. My prediction for the race is that both me and Derrick will win. I will not predict the other candidates or my preferences, but I think Derrick and I share the bonds of both being newly appointed and recently dissed. And you know what else I found from knocking on doors all day? Not a single person so much as mentioned the LSJ.
In the explanation, the journal seemed to like Carol and Harold's experience, and Gina and my opponent's energy and ideas. All endorsements are valuable and coveted, so I wont lie to you and say that I wasn't disappointed. I wasn't surprised either. Politics are a funny business, and not in a ha ha sort of way. I really felt that I led the room during the combined interview with the ward candidates, and that my written answers were substanative and superior to my opponents answers (also available on the LSJ web). Of course I would think that, and it may be rationalization. No matter, what is done is done, and it is beyond my control at this point.
I was really shocked that Derrick was not endorsed, more so than for myself. Derrick has run a beautiful campaign and has been a solid council member. What exactly does a council member need to do to get the endorsemet besides having served for 8-12 years?
Lets also remember back to the fall of 2006 when the LSJ endorsement was not enough for Bob Johnson to overcome Kathie Dunbar. And come to think of it, in that piece last year I distinctly remember people who didn't get the nod (John Pollard) at least being mentioned in the article! Not so for me and Derrick, or Eric Hewitt or Robert Clark. Ahem. Maybe the slight was unintentional, but to not even mention my 6 months and Derricks 10 months of service on council, or any portion of our votes or issues certainly raises eyebrows.
As I said, no matter. The Journal's revelance is not what it once was. Oh, it is still read, but often more with curiosity than reverence. After the State wage fiasco this year, along with the rise of non-tradional media, and alternative news (City Pulse), the LSJ just does not posses the strength of swaying voters they way they once did, before all these competing medias were available, and they were taken more seriously.
So, on a rainy windy morning, after receiving this slap in the face by the LSJ, what does a candidate do? Lace them up and hit the doors! I made good progress in a key precinct and talked to quite a few likely voters. Many people that I saw I had met before, and they reaffirmed their desire to vote for me. Other people I had never met, but it was obvious that neither had my opponent, and they were appreciative of the attention of a council member at their door. Score. Still others indicated that they had already voted for me via absentee ballot. So I ended the day assured that the race was not lost with the LSJ endorsement.
Everytime I walk, I come home more confident than when I left. My prediction for the race is that both me and Derrick will win. I will not predict the other candidates or my preferences, but I think Derrick and I share the bonds of both being newly appointed and recently dissed. And you know what else I found from knocking on doors all day? Not a single person so much as mentioned the LSJ.
Labels: 3rd Ward, Bill Matt, City pulse, Derrick Quinney, lansing city council, LSJ
Saturday, August 4, 2007
The South Grand Ramp
An issue before us on the ballot Tuesday is decision on whether to sell the South Grand Avenue parking ramp.
City of Lansing Sale or Disposition of Waterfront Property LINK
Did you get all that? Me either. If a paragraph is harder to follow than that, I don't know where it is!
A number of people have asked what I thought, so I'll give you my take.
The vote is required for the city to sell any riverfront property. A developer has proposed a large retail housing mix with parking. Their plan calls to tear down the old City Club property which is adjacent to the ramp to the South. This vote authorizes the city to develop property on the river, be it for this development or another. The city cannot develop all of the river fontage on our own, so we must work with developers to get a nicer riverfront. This is just like the vote that we just had for the Ottawa power station, where it makes obvious sense to sell some dated and depleted assets for a chance to develop it. It is in fact such a given that this type of developement is a great business decision, that there is talk of making a broader riverfront ordinance that would be more efficient and flexible. We will try to identify parcels to be rehabilitated and parcels like green space, to be protected so we can move forward with opportunities, be it public, private or grant driven, quickly.
The ramp itself does generate a revenue, but frankly, it's just getting too old to maintain it. The fact that the ramp is on the river which makes it an attractive parcel is actually very fortunate for us. Why would we want an old deteriorating ramp that we couldn't fix or sell. The thinking is that the development, even with tax abatements for 12 years, would be a net positive financially for the city, plus with a denser population of residents, the economic advantage is larger still. Well, we did not get specifics on these projections, but I would be confident that the gain is greater than 200 grand revenue from the South Grand Ramp minus repairs, etc.
There are still questions for the developers and the EDC. What is the estimated tax revenues for the new development? How much public parking will be available? Which parts of the small parking lot on the City Club parcel will be used? How exactly do you "sell or otherwise dispose of that portion of the South Grand Avenue parking ramp"? A Portion of a ramp? What?
The plan also mentioned maintaining (and actually replacing a broken) riverwalk access to the public. We will want to ensure this, and again, it should be a net investment to the city compared to our cost of fixing and maintaining that section of riverwalk. I would expect all departments, especially Planning, along with LEPFA and the downtown PSC to get a riverfront master plan for Lansing completed.
When I see the Grand River in Lansing Michigan, I want to see a sprawling boardwalk with parks and stores filled with couples and families, retail and entertainment, and yes, even condos. This vote will help us develop and highlight our greatest natural asset, so I plan to vote YES.
City of Lansing Sale or Disposition of Waterfront Property LINK
A portion of Lots 3 and 4 of Block 112 and Lots 1, 2 and 3 Block 113 Original Plat and vacated Allegan St. east of Grand Avenue beginning at the intersection of a line 22 feet north of the south property line of Lot 3 Block 112 Original Plat and the Grand River thence west 25 feet parallel to the south lot line of Lot 3 Block 112 Original Plat, thence south along a line parallel to the west bank of the Grand River to a point 4 feet south of the north line of Lot 3 Block 113 Original Plat thence east along a line parallel to the north line of Lot 3 block 113 Original Plat to the Grand River, City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan?
Did you get all that? Me either. If a paragraph is harder to follow than that, I don't know where it is!
A number of people have asked what I thought, so I'll give you my take.
The vote is required for the city to sell any riverfront property. A developer has proposed a large retail housing mix with parking. Their plan calls to tear down the old City Club property which is adjacent to the ramp to the South. This vote authorizes the city to develop property on the river, be it for this development or another. The city cannot develop all of the river fontage on our own, so we must work with developers to get a nicer riverfront. This is just like the vote that we just had for the Ottawa power station, where it makes obvious sense to sell some dated and depleted assets for a chance to develop it. It is in fact such a given that this type of developement is a great business decision, that there is talk of making a broader riverfront ordinance that would be more efficient and flexible. We will try to identify parcels to be rehabilitated and parcels like green space, to be protected so we can move forward with opportunities, be it public, private or grant driven, quickly.
The ramp itself does generate a revenue, but frankly, it's just getting too old to maintain it. The fact that the ramp is on the river which makes it an attractive parcel is actually very fortunate for us. Why would we want an old deteriorating ramp that we couldn't fix or sell. The thinking is that the development, even with tax abatements for 12 years, would be a net positive financially for the city, plus with a denser population of residents, the economic advantage is larger still. Well, we did not get specifics on these projections, but I would be confident that the gain is greater than 200 grand revenue from the South Grand Ramp minus repairs, etc.
There are still questions for the developers and the EDC. What is the estimated tax revenues for the new development? How much public parking will be available? Which parts of the small parking lot on the City Club parcel will be used? How exactly do you "sell or otherwise dispose of that portion of the South Grand Avenue parking ramp"? A Portion of a ramp? What?
The plan also mentioned maintaining (and actually replacing a broken) riverwalk access to the public. We will want to ensure this, and again, it should be a net investment to the city compared to our cost of fixing and maintaining that section of riverwalk. I would expect all departments, especially Planning, along with LEPFA and the downtown PSC to get a riverfront master plan for Lansing completed.
When I see the Grand River in Lansing Michigan, I want to see a sprawling boardwalk with parks and stores filled with couples and families, retail and entertainment, and yes, even condos. This vote will help us develop and highlight our greatest natural asset, so I plan to vote YES.
Labels: Bill Matt, lansing, LSJ, South Grand Ramp
Thursday, July 26, 2007
3rd Ward profile coming up soon
Tom Lambert did a quick phone interview with me this morning as part of a profile on the 3rd Ward Primary Election. It may run this weekend, but really, they stay flexible depending on any other breaking news. Last week the LSJ did an article on Harold Leeman and the 1st Ward, along with his challengers.
We talked about the vision and plan I have for the 3rd Ward, and things I've already accomplished. There is really so much to say, that only a snippet of information will probably be in the article. Tom does a nice job, and has always treated me fairly. He must balance the coverage from many clamoring sources, so I don't envy him at all. then his work is probably edited, much beyond his control. He complimented me an speaking so frankly and hinted that sometimes politicians are guarded when talking to reporters. Tom, I'm not a politician! I'm just a neighbor and father looking to help the community and represent your views downtown. The reason some people are guarded is because they try not to offend people, and maybe sometimes are not completely forthright and honest. I don't have a problem being honest, so I can speak freely. If I change my mind or make a mistake, I won't be afraid to admit it. I've already heard from one office holder who was offended by one of my posts. Tough. I stand by what I say. I don't expect that being an office holder will change me, and if it does, please let me know!
In the article I talked about the NAN project in Churchill Downs neighborhood, and rallying MSU resources for Lansing. I talked about how Lansing's Southwest has a negative perception that is entirely false,a nd how I want to change that. I mentioned the way I arranged for the Michigan PSC to send engineers to volunteer at the Boys & Girls club for 240 hours a year tutoring, but that part will probably get cut at least until the General Election. I also talked about how I'd like to work with Planning, Parks, and EDC to focus on the Risdale Park-Pleasant View Magnet School-Boys and Girls club as a hub of prosperity and how I want to connect Washington Park, through Victor Woods, Ingham Park and Francis Park and the river trail with trails and bike lanes. I think I have accomplished a lot, and have some exciting ideas for Lansing.
Are there any ideas that you have for improved living and development in Lansing?
We talked about the vision and plan I have for the 3rd Ward, and things I've already accomplished. There is really so much to say, that only a snippet of information will probably be in the article. Tom does a nice job, and has always treated me fairly. He must balance the coverage from many clamoring sources, so I don't envy him at all. then his work is probably edited, much beyond his control. He complimented me an speaking so frankly and hinted that sometimes politicians are guarded when talking to reporters. Tom, I'm not a politician! I'm just a neighbor and father looking to help the community and represent your views downtown. The reason some people are guarded is because they try not to offend people, and maybe sometimes are not completely forthright and honest. I don't have a problem being honest, so I can speak freely. If I change my mind or make a mistake, I won't be afraid to admit it. I've already heard from one office holder who was offended by one of my posts. Tough. I stand by what I say. I don't expect that being an office holder will change me, and if it does, please let me know!
In the article I talked about the NAN project in Churchill Downs neighborhood, and rallying MSU resources for Lansing. I talked about how Lansing's Southwest has a negative perception that is entirely false,a nd how I want to change that. I mentioned the way I arranged for the Michigan PSC to send engineers to volunteer at the Boys & Girls club for 240 hours a year tutoring, but that part will probably get cut at least until the General Election. I also talked about how I'd like to work with Planning, Parks, and EDC to focus on the Risdale Park-Pleasant View Magnet School-Boys and Girls club as a hub of prosperity and how I want to connect Washington Park, through Victor Woods, Ingham Park and Francis Park and the river trail with trails and bike lanes. I think I have accomplished a lot, and have some exciting ideas for Lansing.
Are there any ideas that you have for improved living and development in Lansing?
Labels: 3rd Ward, lansing city council, Lansing State Journal, LSJ, Tom Lambert
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
