Author Archives: André Natta

The spotlight's on education

With comments about a domed stadium, urban revitalization and other things, concern about our local educational system is rampant and dominating everything else, especially after word that the state wants the ctiy’s board of education to shut down 20 schools. There will be many that ask whether or not the closings need to happen, pointing to the same heartstrings that seem to control a great deal of the decision making that occurs in our region. There are those that do not want to see things to change; they like the way that things were. Unfortunately, we will only see the Birmingham that we want to exist if we allow ourselves to let go of certain “rules,” including those that keep us pining for the past while preventing us from reaching out for a new standard.

There are many that question whether or not Mayor Langford’s plans for a laptop in every school-age child is a good one. They say that there are more pressing issues that should be solved. It is an idea, and if nothing else it is something that will force the conversation about what needs to be done with not just our school system, but several suffering systems throughout the country, into the limelight (which is where it truly needs to be). It seems to be doing the job right now.

The focus of the forums, blogs and websites in recent weeks is the idea that a program for that was aimed at third-world countries will be tried in Birmingham. If we cannot help our own children, it makes us look just a little hypocritical to want to help others while turning a blind eye to our own problems.

The bigger issue is that the topic of education is one that people love to point to as one of great concern, but very few are willing to really make very hard decisions about what needs to be done for the good of the children and the city. The issue definitely ranked high among young professionals in our poll from earlier this month. A solution that many have looked to often is running to the next town over, not realizing that the problems will eventually follow them, if not in a different form. An overcrowded school is just as detrimental to a child’s educational future as a school that is not adequately funded. The problem continues to be one of our own making.

While Birmingham’ declining population has led to the need for these schools to be closed down, that does not mean that we need to lose the schools. If we can’t afford to run them and provide a quality education for our children, then we need can always reduce the financial strain by closing them and focusing on larger student populations with excellent resources. The closings may also allow us to renovate those “closed” schools during this period preparing them for a return to use later on, though on a much slower schedule than would have been necessary before.

The eternal optimist in me believes that if we’re successful in doing what needs to be done with those schools that are left open after this round of closings, that we’ll need to re-open those other schools. The immediate desire to sell them off or tear them down for new development opportunities will remove the ease at which the problem that we all want to see occur, an overcrowding problem, can and would be easily solved in the coming years in Birmingham than how it must be addressed with each shovel that must be turned in the ground of our surrounding neighbors.

The issue of laptop distribution is one that I think may serve a greater good. If all of the students have access to a laptop, they have a key to knowledge that is undoubtedly beneficial to our city and region. They may be willing to share ideas with each other and, with proper supervision, with others outside of our immediate area.  It’s also something that’s a bit selfish as the more people with access to a laptop, the more that become more comfortable with the notion of sharing information online and eventually carrying that conversation into action through Jones Valley and over the mountain. It’s a long term benefit to a long term solution to a long term problem.

What are your thoughts about the future of education in our region and what can be done to help it improve? Do you believe in the plan proposed by Mayor Langford?

André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.

As many teams as we want

I sat down with a representative from the United Football League before I headed out on my trip to Las Vegas last week. It was an interesting conversation as we went back and forth about being from big cities and wondering just how the league would be accepted if we were awarded one of the eight charter franchises.

I brought up some of the challenges that would face the new league, most notably the league’s plans to play on Friday nights. Now, even though I am more inclined to wander into a high school basketball game than a high school football game to this day, I am the exception to the general rule that Friday night high school football rules the South – as well as Saturday college football.

The folks at the UFL are attempting to make it more about civic pride, about whether or not we want a team. With financial backers like Mark Cuban (who incidentally for Cub fans out there said that he was interested in buying the team when he spoke at the BlogWorld conference last week), the league could wait out long term overarching fan support if those in The Magic City decided that we could support two teams. Past studies have shown that we could support a pro football team here in town. You could have the two leagues duke it out to determine which one reigns supreme (yeah, it was an Iron Chef reference; so?)

There are a few other things to consider. Most of the professional sports teams that have worn the name Birmingham on their person did not fold due to lack of fan support. Many met their demise due to the lack of support that the league brand they were associated with received. That being said, is the city of Birmingham ready to support two professional football teams after having none for so long?

My belief is that it can support both teams, at least for a while (with or without a dome, though our mayor has promised that a facility will be built). The All-American Football League (AAFL), once a coach is hired, will be able to play on the emotional heart strings of Alabama and Auburn fans who feel that their favorite player deserved a chance to go pro but, for whatever reason, the opportunity never materialized. Playing in the spring means that they can immediately fill the void that normally exists after the bowl national championship and Super Bowl are played.

The UFL faces a tougher challenge if it plans to succeed in the Southeastern United States. The league cannot immediately play on getting young players to come out and watch since they are planning to compete with them for fans by playing on Fridays. You also face the problem of folks already planning to get in the car and drive to Auburn or Tuscaloosa probably not feeling like spending that kind of money two days in a row. Play on the heart strings of those without ties to Alabama or Auburn (both locals and transplants) and those without children old enough to play football and you have found the beginnings of a fan base.

Can it really be about pride? At this point, the only thing holding the city back is the city itself. The success of both teams will rely on the willingness of Birmingham’s citizenry to want to will it to be successful. This is something that we can control.

André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.

A simple gesture

It wasn’t his promises for being tough on crime. It wasn’t his promise to build a dome in the city limits of Birmingham. It wasn’t his announcement that whether you agreed with him or not that “from the bottom of my heart, that I do not care” (though it was very much the attitude I’d expect from someone who is determined to move his hometown forward). It was one action that albeit simple made me understand just what it means to Mayor Langford to be the guy in charge of the state’s largest city.

Immediately after the oath of office was administered on stage at the same building he pledged to demolish to provide room for the Southeast’s largest public art museum to expand, he stepped to the mic to correct a wrong that was not done to him, but to the man he follows into office. He asked Mayor & Mrs. Kincaid to join him on stage and sit with the elected officials and invited guests that were already up there. Then he let the former caretaker of our city step to the mic.

Perhaps some would see it as simple, but it’s those simple acts that are more important to me than anything else. Whether or not I voted for him, I realized that he, like all of the others that ran for the office, care deeply for this city; enough that they were willing to be dragged through the dirt and be ridiculed by people who would smile to their faces and verbally stab them in the back later on.

One thing I prided myself on during the campaign was being as non-partisan as possible. I did not see it as my place to tell the people of Birmingham who to vote for; I’d rather let them tell themselves. That is the point of The Terminal; to get the dialogue going so that the crowd isn’t being led, but are leading. The ironic thing is that I didn’t vote for either of the “frontrunners” in the campaign (and I’ll never tell who I did vote for), though many thought that the site was leaning in one direction. It was a collective voice of those that wanted to see change occur.

I come from a place that’s long gone from most people’s minds that believes that after the battle is fought that the community should come together and do their part to move the city forward. Period. No name calling, no grandstanding, nothing but the willingness to see their community do what it needs to do. If I didn’t, I’d hate to think of what my father would say or do to me, no matter how much older or taller I am now.

For the better part of the last six months I’ve been so focused on making a certain website a success that I’ve forgotten how much fun it can be to just let things be and happen. I’ve “enjoyed” verbal assaults that may help some folks feel good about themselves when they look at themselves in the mirror but that really didn’t make any sense. In the end it’s supposed to be more important to be above the fray. That is what will help move the city and the region forward.

Whether or not you believe that he’s the man to do it, Mr. Langford carried more than 50% of the vote to avoid a runoff. Barring a decision by a judge, he will be serving the city of Birmingham for the foreseeable future. He took a huge step to proving that despite the battles that lay ahead and the rhetoric that will be spoken that he can honor those that need to be honored and do right by the city that elected him. He is probably more like a New Yorker than I thought. And that gesture involving Mayor Kincaid proved that he does care and that he can operate above the fray. It is his hometown after all.

Unless and until it changes, let’s see if we can help him do something. It is our city.

André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.

Should Cooper fade away?

Should Patrick Cooper’s lawsuit against mayor-elect Langford continue?

If there was a chance that he could win in court, I’d be all for him going ahead and seeing what happens. The funny thing is, most lawyers seem to be saying that the changes of Cooper’s contest being successful are quite slim, despite letters of support in Sunday’s Birmingham News. And even if Cooper was successful, Langford would be able to go and register for the race again seeing as how he would be able to claim residency a little easier now.

That or he would be getting written in by the more than 50% that voted for him last time, in addition to some who voted for Cooper that are becoming disenfranchised with him after this demonstration of doing just what he campaigned that he wouldn’t do.

There are many who are regular readers of this site that may disagree with me about the idea of Cooper letting it lie, but I have an interesting situation to lay before you. Let’s say that Cooper had conceded the race the morning after the election, pledging to work with the mayor-elect to move the city forward and truly lead Birmingham towards being the 21st century New South city that both men believe it can become. The two men combined carried nearly 80% of the popular vote on Election Day. Now let’s assume that Governor Riley decided to not make a special appointment to the Jefferson County Commission and that a special election was called to be held in February. Cooper could easily have taken part in the race and probably could have been seen as a contender for winning the position.

Let’s say that Cooper won – you’ve suddenly put two populist-elected officials in two extremely powerful positions in local and regional politics. If the city and region did not move forward then, people would have to answer for it. The people would have spoken not once, but twice, saying that the region must move forward and that they were willing to put their faith in people that were willing to do things outside of the box. (My biggest problem with that phrase is “why is there a box to begin with?”)

This scenario may have played out, though now it may not as many are becoming increasingly impatient with Mr. Cooper as he carries out a personal crusade against the man that promised he wouldn’t run against him for mayor. Well unfortunately for him he did, and he won. Removing Langford from the equation before Election Day would have landed him in a runoff; now it would open up a Pandora’s Box of uncertainty.

Cooper has said that he does not care about his political future, but there are many out there that do, many that decided to vote for you because of wanting a change who are not quite sure what they would have gotten.

The court of public opinion still appears to be out on both men as Birmingham prepares to buckle up for the interesting ride that is a Langford mayoral term and the promise of Patrick Cooper’s name remaining in the public eye, at least for the short term. The only fear that some of Cooper’s staunch supporters may have is his name becoming one of those in the coming months and years that when mentioned evokes comments like “he had so much potential; it’s a shame he acted the way that he did in ’07.”

André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.

How to change what's on the dial

I had two reminders in the last week that it was WBHM‘s (our local listener-supported station’s) fall pledge drive. The first was while I was driving to cover last week’s Design Review Committee (trust me, we did get a couple of things from the meeting, just nothing that we can publish… yet). Driving to the meeting I tuned into NPR’s All Things Considered (it’s a hold over from my days in Savannah – if I’m actually listening to something besides local talk in the morning, it’s ATC).

The second was from a MySpace bulletin sent by a regular reader of the site and someone that I really would like to hang out with some more just to figure out what makes him tick. It was the second reminder that made me begin to think about the power of the wallet.

Everyone is aware of the power of the wallet, or as it’s normally referred to, the “money talks” approach. Now I have heard both sides of the argument about whether or not people should use pledge drives to influence what a station plays, but I’ve never really offered an opinion about it, until now. It’s especially interesting to me as people who frequent the web are still upset about the pending forced shutdown of internet radio stations as we know them and the growing ability to find your “voice” on numerous websites and blogs without relying on a standard being placed before you.

People who have this belief that listener-supported radio can change at will don’t seem to realize that when they send in their contribution during the midday classical music show that they really can’t complain if they really want to hear jazz, or News & Notes, or see more in-depth series like Birmingham: The Urban Divide produced on a more frequent basis. They spoke with their wallet and said that they wanted to listen to classical. And there’s nothing wrong with classical. When you’re typing a story at lunchtime and you know that you want some background noise but realize that a) ESPN will distract you if you’re at home and b) you’ll just start singing along if you listen to just about anything else, you want classical.

I’m also not saying to hold back your contributions to WBHM or any other listener supported station. Trust me, if we were actually making money right now I’d be making my contribution to them either sometime during Marketplace or Tapestry. I just figured that those that say that nobody listens to them about programming options need to realize that the power is in your hands if you ever decide to use it. It will not change if you continue to not say anything.

The same argument could be applied to public television, but my use of the power of the wallet would be different there. I was silly enough to get an HDTV (for an insanely low price) a few years ago, leading to my new obsession over crisp clear pictures and what were incredible shows on the national PBS HD feed. I’m never going to blame APTV for not carrying the signal because the cost was insane and at the time it was only servicing those of us lucky (or crazy) to have paid for or found a good deal on a set. But I will still be upset with them for not getting Charlie Rose, though I guess I can watch it online nowadays, now can’t I?

Thoughts?

André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.

Using the bully pulpit in metro Birmingham

This morning people throughout metro Birmingham are waking up to fall-like weather and preparing for another full weekend of activities. Some will be visiting local libraries in Hoover and surfing the web to learn the results of an investigation into the Hoover Board of Education. Many residents have Hoover mayor Tony Petelos and the Hoover City Council to thank for that.

The mayor did something that will be fresh in the minds of many in Birmingham for months to come as we deal with our own educational system. He went into the belly of the beast and used the bully pulpit that comes with the role of mayor and strongly urged that the results of the report be released. He even went the extra mile and went on television explaining why he did it. The city council followed suit, providing the necessary pressure (and attention) to the situation that appeared to be needed.

The actions taken were extremely important and not necessarily unusual to the city of Birmingham and its dealings with its own board. The difference was the quietly aggressive approach taken by Mayor Petelos. He recognized it as an issue that was beginning to have an effect on the city and the school system and that it was leading to the city being viewed differently from the outside and he decided to take actions accordingly. There are some that live in Hoover that are always ready to say that they are going to surpass Birmingham in terms of size and importance – well this is a taste of what’s may come with it, though it will exist whether or not those goals are met. The city is growing and is close to having to deal with being urban, one of the very things that residents that moved out there originally were moving away from. It must begin to respond to that challenge, one that its mayor met head on and passed with flying colors.

The ability of the mayor’s office to affect change outside of its normal parameters is possible as proven by that recent incident in Hoover. There are many that see mayor-elect Langford as more than capable of bringing that mindset to the 3rd floor of Birmingham’s City Hall at the beginning of November. The opportunity to see it in use will no doubt come sooner rather than later.

One interesting thing about his pending first example is the fact that the citizens will hold him responsible for many things outside of his purview. He also will be criticized if it is not the general consensus of the city’s residents. Part of this first phase for Langford will be seeing how he reacts to those who share different viewpoints. He has already demonstrated that he is willing to work with area leaders to address changes and he is moving forward with an agenda without taking a back seat to efforts to call for a runoff from Patrick Cooper. This means that he may have already played that bully pulpit card, albeit quietly, for the first time, and it’s led to some interesting and progressive ideas for the region.

The mayor-elect said on Tuesday night that we needed to buckle up. We also need to be prepared for what’s to come in terms of Langford’s hopes for this city, just how that bully pulpit will be used to accomplish those goals and for the dialogue that will take place because of it.

André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page. Otherwise, simply submit your comments below.

Thoughts about Birmingham's mayoral election

It’s definitely been a thrilling ride so far and it does not appear to be ending in the immediate future. Last night, nearly 45% of registered citizens in the city of Birmingham elected Larry Langford as its next mayor. As I write this it appears that Patrick Cooper plans to ask for a recount. A decision on that will come in the near future. Another decision will also follow if the results stand about who will fill the seat vacated by Mr. Langford on the Jefferson County Commission from Montgomery.

I’ve been checking the math with results from other areas of the Southeast and while many may feel that it was a pathetic turnout, our city has outperformed its contemporaries in terms of its level of participation. Hopefully the issues of voting irregularities and any formal requests for a recount will be dealt with swiftly and quickly.

For the record, I was necessarily surprised not by the fact that Langford won the popular vote, but that, if the numbers stand, he has become the next mayor of the city of Birmingham without having to first go through a runoff.

Based on what our polls said, it would be safe to say that the majority of our readership is disappointed with the unofficial results. There are many that are upset and who feel that their voices were not heard. I’d beg to differ.

Birmingham’s young professional population demonstrated that they would not sit by quietly during this election. They made sure that people knew where they stood on the issues and – whether it was here or elsewhere on the web, in print, or in broadcast media – and definitely made people aware of their presence.

The Magic City’s online population demonstrated that the web, with all of its issues and with criticism coming from all sides, could in fact play a major role in discussions about what faces the city and the region. Mainstream media joined in on the act, relying on video podcasts and online forums to aid voters in making an important decision about where the city needs to go next.

So, what are our next steps?

Well, one of the great things about the Internet in general and the blogosphere in particular is the ability to engage people in dialogue. To that end, we have already extended an invitation to Larry Langford to write a column in this very section of The Terminal on a regular basis. If it is determined that a runoff is necessary and Mr. Cooper wins, we will extend the same opportunity to him. NOTE: We have not received a response as of yet, but we will let you know when we do.

The only way we think you can move the city forward is to continue this level of interest and conversation. If those that feel they lost clam up and say nothing afterwards then all is lost. Hopefully providing a platform for open, honest dialogue will help us see tangible progress that all are happy with.

In my original plans for this site, I had never intended to give the election the type of coverage and attention that we did, but I am extremely happy that I did. I am quite grateful to those of you that decided to check in with us from time to time as we all went on this ride together. I am also grateful to those candidates that took the time to answer the questions submitted by The Terminal’s readers. I only hope that we will be able to continue to push more people to become engaged in talking about this city and all that it has to offer.

André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.