Thursday, December 06, 2007

BSL Design Revisions - TDOT/SHPO Approvals

On December 5/6, the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) approved, and the State Historic Preservation Office conditionally approved, a set of proposed design changes for Beale Street Landing.
Quoting TDOT's letter, "[t]he assessment proposes several design changes including shifting and reducing the height and size of Island A, softening the transition between the project and the historic cobblestones, innovative interpretation techniques, and changing the red accent color to rust."

The complete Design Revision Submission, as prepared by the RDC, together with the TDOT cover letter dated December 5, 2007, can be downloaded as a 2.11 MB PDF file compatible with Adobe Reader v5 or later. Click here.

The Tennessee Historical Commission's "conditional" non-adverse-impact letter dated December 6 can be downloaded here (PDF, 105KB).

For more information about the Consultation Meeting that led to this, click here.

Note: The Librarian has made a non-substantive, technical change to the Design Revision document. An oversized and complex architectural drawing on page 10 made the document bulky and clumsy to read. We have substituted a 150dpi JPEG rendering of the same diagram. We also made it compatible with older versions of Adobe Reader.

For the convenience of those who cannot download the full document, the most important pictures from it are reproduced below.

Page 10. Architectural drawing shows the largest pod moved back toward Riverside Drive by approximately 40 feet.

Page 11

Page 12

Page 13

Page 14

Page 15

Page 16

Page 17

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Beale Street Landing Consultation Meeting

Updated: The minutes are now posted (click below for full article).

The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) - Environmental Division today sponsored a Consulting Parties meeting for the proposed Beale Street Landing Project. The TN State Historical Preservation Office (TN-SHPO), also known as the Tennessee Historical Commission, has commented that the current design would have an "adverse effect pursuant to 36 CFR 800.5."
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss ways to avoid the adverse effects to the Cotton Row Historic Preservation District that are thought to be associated with the current design of the proposed project.

The adverse effects associated with the current design were outlined in a document that was handed out at the meeting today. Click here (1.7 MB, PDF) for the document.

Updated: Click here (1.6 MB, PDF) for the official minutes that were taken of this meeting. Comments and recommendations from all sides are included.

Labels: , ,

[Read the complete article...]

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Beale Street Landing renderings

Courtesy of the RDC, we were able to obtain printed copies of the Beale Street Landing renderings that were furnished to City Council for the recent CIP review. We have scanned them in and they are below. There are four of them and they are dated May 11, 2007 Click the link(s) below each picture to enlarge to 100dpi or 200dpi, if printed landscape on lettersize paper.

Looking eastward. [Enlarge to 100 dpi] [200 dpi]

Looking westward. [Enlarge to 100 dpi] [200 dpi]

Looking north. [Enlarge to 100 dpi] [200 dpi]

Looking south. [Enlarge to 100 dpi] [200 dpi]

Labels: , ,

[Read the complete article...]

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

RDC Board of Directors Resolution re-approving Beale Street Landing

Signed and dated June 13, 2007 by Chairman Greg Duckett: "[R]e-affirms its previously stated support" and authorizes its staff to "move forward with the design and construction of the Beale Street Landing Project as previously approved."

Click here for a PDF scan of the signed resolution.[245KB]

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Friday, May 11, 2007

Corrected RDC Capital Improvements Program Budget 2008-2012

A corrected CIP budget was reviewed in committee today. Download all five pages in a single PDF file (508 KB). (Click here for the earlier, uncorrected version.)

Update: Click here to see the artist renderings of Beale Street Landing as of May 11, 2007, as provided to City Council members.

Labels: , ,

[Read the complete article...]

Friday, June 30, 2006

IRS Form 990: 2005-2006

Here is the RDC's IRS Form 990 for the fical year ended June 30, 2006 [PDF, 961 KB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

RDC financial report, 2005-2006

Click here for the RDC's audited financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 [PDF file, 2.8 MB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Thursday, June 30, 2005

IRS Form 990: 2004-2005

Here is the RDC's IRS Form 990 for the fical year ended June 30, 2005 [PDF, 999 KB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Letter: Spence to Lendermon re: Tennessee Open Meetings Act

During the question and answer session following a recent presentation to the League of Women Voters, Benny Lendermon told the audience that, while it is subject to the Tennessee Open Records Act, the RDC is not subject to the Tennessee Open Meetings Act. Here is the complete text of the local attorney's opinion letter upon which Mr. Lendermon apparently relied.

Robert L. J. Spence, Jr.
Attorney at Law

Spence Law Firm
119 S. Main Street, Suite 500, Memphis, TN 38103
901-312-9160, fax 901-312-5501

February 2, 2005


Benny Lendermon
Riverfront Development Corporation
22 N. Front, Suite 960
Memphis, TN 38103

Re: Tennessee Open Meetings Act

Dear Benny:

You have asked for our opinion as to whether the Tennessee Open Meetings Act[1] (the “Act”) is applicable to meetings of the board of directors of the Riverfront Development Corporation (“RDC”). For the following reasons we do not believe that it is applicable. RDC, as a private non-profit corporation, has no legal obligation to give public notice of meetings of its board of directors or to allow the public to attend and observe such meetings.

The Act sets out a declaration of state policy that the “formation of public policy and decisions is public business and shall not be conducted in secret.”[2] Toward that end the Act further provides that “[a]ll meetings of any governing body are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, except as provided by the Constitution of Tennessee.”[3] “Governing body” is defined in the Act to include the board of directors of several types of non-profit corporations, including those that (1) receive more than 30% of their funding through contracts with the state for community grant funds, [4] (2) provide utility or solid waste disposal systems on behalf of local governments pursuant to state law, [5] (3) provide certain sized cities with heat, steam or incineration services, [6] and (4) act as a municipal bond financing pool for local governments and receive more than 30% of their total annual income through related fees.[7] None of these categories would include the RDC.

    "Government body" is also defined in the Act as:

    (A)The members of any public body which consists of two (2) or more members, with the authority to make decisions for or recommendations to a public body on policy or administration.

The question thus becomes whether the RDC board meets the criteria for a “public body” for purposes of this definition. “Public body” is not defined in the Act. Nevertheless, the Tennessee Supreme Court, taking guidance from the legislative history and the policy declaration of the Act, has determined it to be:

    clear that for purposes of this Act, the Legislature intended to include any board, commission, committee, agency, authority or any other body, by whatever name, whose origin and authority may be traced to State, City or County legislative action and whose members have authority to make decisions or recommendations on policy or administration affecting the conduct of the business of the people in the government sector.[9]

Thus, the two criteria that must be satisfied in order for the RDC to be considered a “public body” and consequently a “governing body” are: (1) whether RDC’s existence and authority arises from a legislative action by the City, and (2) whether RDC has the authority to make decisions or recommendations about City government policy or administration.

RDC did not originate and was not formed by legislative action of the city. It is a private Tennessee non-profit corporation formed by an independent group of citizens. Although the Mayor of the City recommends persons to serve on its board of directors, its actual invitation to do so is made by the RDC board of directors itself. The Mayor has no appointment power and the City Council has no approval authority with regard to the RDC board of directors. The inclusion of City government officials as ex officio members of the RDC board gives the City a representative presence only, and does not provide or allow the City authority and control over the RDC board. RDC does receive grant money from the City. It also receives significant funding from private grants and contributions and contractual income. Consequently, the City’s grant funding is not so pervasive as to be tantamount to control over the actions and decisions of the RDC board. It appears that neither the original existence nor authority of the RDC can properly be traced to the City, and the RDC does not meet the first prong of the definition of “public body” under the Act.

Nor does the RDC have the authority to make decisions or recommendations about City government policy or administration – the second prong of the analysis of whether it is a “public body” and thus a “government body” subject to the Act. This criteria has been considered by the Tennessee Court of Appeals. In Fain vs. Faculty of the College of Law of the University of Tennessee, 552 S.W.2nd 752 (Tenn. App. 1988) the Court considered whether a faculty committee appointed and presided over by the Dean of the University of Tennessee College of Law was a “governing body” subject to the Act. The Court found that although the Dean had the responsibility and power to administer the College of Law, neither he nor the faculty committee had authority to formulate policies governing it. That authority resided solely in the Board of Trustees of the University of Tennessee. Therefore, the faculty committee was not a “governing body” and was not subject to the Act. Also, in the recent case of Allen v. City of Memphis, 2004 Tenn. App. LEXIS 403 (June 22, 2004), the Court was unable to determine that a committee of the Memphis City Council, formed to review an annexation matter, was a “governing body” due to the fact that the committee had no authority to delete, change or amend the relevant annexation ordinance and that the committee did not act in the capacity of making a “recommendation” regarding the annexation ordinance.

Consistent with its corporate purpose, the RDC is involved with public property located in the Memphis riverfront area. It has no absolute authority over same, however. RDC contracts with the City for capital improvement projects effecting city infrastructure in the riverfront area as well as comprehensive planning projects. The terms and conditions of these contracts are approved and administered by the Mayor and his staff, and funding is approved by the City Council. Pursuant to these contracts RDC implements the policies of the City, as would any similarly situated, independent construction or project management contractor or planning consultant. Similarly RDC manages certain of the City’s park properties located in the riverfront area pursuant to contract with the City. Any operaying policies and procedures that it formulates with regard to these properties are subject to review by the City, and the City retains ultimate authority and control over the use and disposition of such properties. Any proposals or recommendations by the RDC for development of these properties are presented to the City Council, for discussion and approval, in public meetings held pursuant to the Act. RDC does not obtain or exercise independent and absolute authority to make or implement its own policies with regard to its performance of its contracts with the City, including the management of City park properties. As a result the RDC does not meet the second promng of the definition of “public Body.”

Accordingly, we do not believe the RDC falls within any of the definitions of “governing body” in the Act, and is therefore, not subject to the Act.

I hope this responds adequately to your request, and that you will not hesitate to call if you have any questions.

Very truly yours,


Robert L.J. Spence, Jr.


[1] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-101 et seq.
[2] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-101 (a).
[3] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-102 (a).
[4] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-102(b)1)(B). “(b)(1) ‘Governing body’ means: (B) The board of directors of any nonprofit corporation which contracts with a state agency to receive community grant funds in consideration for rendering specified services to the public; provided, that community grant funds comprise at least thirty percent (30%) of the total annual income of such corporation….”
[5] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-102(b)(1)(C). “(b)(1) ‘Governing body’ means: (C) The board of directors of any not-for-profit corporation authorized by the laws of Tennessee to act for the benefit or on behalf of any one (1) or more counties, cities, towns and local governments pursuant to the provisions of title 7, chapter 54 or 58.
[6] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-102(b)(1)(D). “(b)(1) ‘Governing body’ means (D) The board of directors of any nonprofit corporation which through contract or otherwise provides a metropolitan form of government having a population in excess of five hundred thousand (500,000) according to the 1990 federal census or any subsequent federal census with heat, steam or incineration of refuse.”
[7] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-102(b)(1)(E). “(b)(1) ‘Governing body’ means (E)(i) The board of directors of any association or nonprofit corporation authorized by the laws of Tennessee that: (a) was established for the benefit of local government officials or counties, cities, towns or other local governments or as a municipal bond financing pool; (b) receives dues, service fees or any other income from local government officials or such local governments that constitute at least thirty percent (30%) of its total annual income; and (c) was authorized as of January 1, 1998, under state law to obtain coverage for its employees in the Tennessee consolidated retirement system.”
[8] Tenn. Code Ann. 8-44-102(b)(1)(A).
[9] Dorrier v. Dark, 537 S.W.2nd 888, 892 (Tenn. 1976).

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Wednesday, June 30, 2004

IRS Form 990: 2003-2004

Here is the RDC's IRS Form 990 for the fical year ended June 30, 2004 [PDF, 907 KB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Tuesday, May 18, 2004

City Council Public Session to debate and approve the Promenade Land Use Plan (audio)

At the links below, in MP3 audio format, are recordings of the entire debate in City Council public session with respect to "item 30" on the agenda the afternoon of May 18, 2004. "Item 30" was a resolution approving the RDC's Promenade Land Use Plan.

The plan was controversial, to say the least. The large public Council chamber was packed. Because Item 30 came at the end of the Council's other business, debate began late in the afternoon, after a break, and ran into the evening.

Council Chairman Joe Brown began by saying he that would allow both sides -- the RDC and the plan opponents -- 15 minutes each to present their cases. What he in fact did was allow the RDC 15 minutes to present and argue for the plan, the opponents 15 minurtes to argue against, and then the RDC and its supporters another 15 minutes to argue for.

Following that, the City Council members themselves made speeches. Meanwhile, a motion was made to delay a vote on the plan for another two weeks to allow the Council more time to study it. That motion was defeated and the Promenade Plan was finally approved (Chumney, Jones, and Sammons voting against).

The entire debate runs three hours and eight minutes. It is divided into seven parts below, corresponding to the tapes used.Click to listen or download:

Labels: , ,

[Read the complete article...]

Monday, June 30, 2003

IRS Form 990: 2002-2003

Here is the RDC's IRS Form 990 for the fical year ended June 30, 2003 [PDF, 553 KB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Sunday, March 23, 2003

ULI Briefing Book

In the late summer 2003, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) released the final report [PDF, 1 MB] of their review of the RDC's plans for the Memphis Riverfront. Their study was based on briefings and materials provided by the RDC during the ULI Panel's visit to Memphis, March 23-28, 2003. Much of this material was prepared by other RDC-paid consultants. Virtually all of it can be downloaded below.

The "ULI Briefing Book" refers to a looseleaf binder containing hardcopy of the presentations and other documents given to the ULI Panel for their study. Each participant received a copy.

Except for Appendix B, the contents of the ULI Briefing book, scanned into PDF files, can be downloaded at the links below. The contents of Appendix B (the cash flow projections) are posted in an earlier article. The documents are highly relevant because they form the study basis for the ULI's final report and conclusions.

Click here to download Tabs 1 through 6 of the Briefing Book binder. [Warning to dial-up users: This file is in excess of 5 MB.] Sections include:
  • Sponsor & Summary of the Problem
  • Questions to be Addressed
  • History
  • Boundaries and Context Map
  • Description of the Study Area
  • Economics

Click here to download Tabs 7 through 13 of the Briefing Book binder. [Warning to dial-up users: This file is in excess of 7 MB.] Sections include:
  • Demographics
  • Metro Memphis and MCBI Maps
  • Housing Market
  • Commercial Development
  • Government
  • Private Sector Involvement
  • Interview List

Click here to download the contents of Appendix A (Tab 14 of the binder). [Warning to dial-up users: This file is in excess of 7 MB.] This is a Powerpoint presentation of a Preliminary Market Analysis done in November, 2000.

Appendix B (Tab 15) can be found in this earlier article.

Labels: , , ,

[Read the complete article...]

Wednesday, January 15, 2003

ULI Briefing Book Appendix B: Projected Cash Flow Analysis

In 2003, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) released the final report of their study of the RDC's plans for the Memphis Riverfront. Their study was based on briefings and materials provided by the RDC, much of which was prepared by other RDC-paid consultants. The "ULI Briefing Book" refers to a looseleaf binder containing hardcopy of the presentations and other documents given to the ULI for their study.

One of those documents, inserted as "Appendix B" in the binder, was a cash flow forecast for the Riverfront project, including the land bridge, lake, and Mud Island development, but not including the fruits of the Promenade Land Use Plan still under development.

A copy of that Appendix, scanned into a PDF file, can be downloaded by clicking here. [Warning to dial-up users: The file is well over 3 MB.] The spreadsheets are dated January 15, 2003.

Here are some highlights, taken from page 13 of the Appendix (page 14 in the PDF):
  • The projections assumed that the City of Memphis would contribute $200 million toward the capital cost of the project.
  • The projections assumed the rest of the $340 million capital cost would be financed by the issuance of bonds.
  • It was calculated that the RDC (on an operating basis) would go into the red by another $131 million before it went cash flow positive in the 21st year. "Public revenues" would apparently be needed to cover the shortfall.
  • The unpaid bond debt would still be over $116 million in year 30.
That was Scenario A. Scenario B was based on more pessimistic assumptions.

Click to enlarge

Labels: , , ,

[Read the complete article...]

Sunday, June 30, 2002

IRS Form 990: 2001-2002

Here is the RDC's IRS Form 990 for the fical year ended June 30, 2002 [PDF, 625 KB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Tuesday, May 21, 2002

City Council resolution adopting the Riverfront Master Plan

Below is the complete text of the City Council resoltion "endorsing and supporting the Riverfront Master Plan as presented.


WHEREAS, the Memphis Riverfront Master Plan is a study of the Mississippi Riverfront Area defined by the Riverfront Development Corporation; and

WHEREAS, the goals of the master plan are to create an active, publicly accessible waterfront; to connect downtown directly to the Mississippi River; to provide a variety of riverfront experiences; and to ensure that the public realm is the most important aspect of the new riverfront; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE MEMPHIS CITY COUNCIL endorses and supports the Riverfront Master Plan as presented.

I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy and document was adopted, approved by the Council of the City of Memphis in regular session on
Date May 21, 2002
Deputy Comptroller - Council Records


[Read the complete article...]

Tuesday, May 07, 2002

City Council Meeting (portions)

Here are MP3 audio recordings of riverfront-related portions of the City Council meeting (executive and and public sessions) on May 7, 2002. The discussions evidence Council members' exuberance in a rush to endorse the RDC's Master Plan, which some mention they had just received only the night before.

Click these links to download and listen to the MP3 audio:

Portion of executive session (prior to public session) [MP3, 2.5 MB]
Portion of public Session [MP3, 1.8 MB]

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Tuesday, April 09, 2002

RDC By-Laws, as revised

Reproduced below is the text of the By-Laws of Riverfront Development Corporation, as revised through April 9, 2002. The text is accurate, but the pagination and formatting does not exactly match the original document. (Click here for a downloadable PDF scanned from the original [994 KB]).


Name and Offices

Section 1. Name. The name of the organization is RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION here-in-after referred to as the "Corporation".

Section 2. Offices. The principal office of the Corporation in the State of Tennessee ("the State") shall be located in the City of Memphis. The Corporation may have such other offices as the Board of Directors may determine or as the affairs of the Corporation may require from time to time.

The Corporation shall have and continuously maintain in the State a registered office, and a registered agent whose office is identical with such registered office if required by the laws of the State. Unless otherwise required by the laws of the State, the registered office may be but need not be identical with the principal office in the State, and the address of the registered office may be changed from time to time by the Board of Directors here-in-after referred to as the "Board."

Not-for-Profit Corporation

Not-for-Profit Corporation. The Corporation is not-for-profit-public-benefit established under the Tennessee Non-Profit Act (The ""Act"). The Corporation is irrevocably dedicated to and operated exclusively for non-profit purposes; and no part of the income or assets of the Corporation shall be distributed to or inure to the benefit of any individual.

The purposes for which the Corporation is formed are exclusively charitable, scientific, literary and educational within the meaning of Section 501 (c) (3) and Section 170 (c) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code, such purposes being more specifically set forth as follows:

(a) To operate exclusively for the benefit of, to assist in the development of, and to carry out the public purposes of the City of Memphis, Tennessee. The Corporation will act in promoting, encouraging, and assisting economic development in the City of Memphis, with a focus on but not limited to Downtown development, by stimulating new capital investment, encouraging revitalization, undertaking the development, improvement and operation of public amenities and public spaces, coordinating public and private economic development strategies, acquiring and holding real property for future development by the public or private sectors, providing financial assistance and advice and otherwise serving to further the social welfare of Memphis, the area and its residents.

(b) To receive, accept, hold, in vest, rein vest, loan and administer any gifts, bequests, devises, benefits of trust (including charitable remainder unitrusts), endowments, funds and property of any sort, without limitation as to amount or value, and to use, disburse, or donate the income or principal thereof for exclusively charitable purposes.

(c) To enter into any contract or agreement necessary or incidental to the accomplishment of the purposes set forth herein above, to pay all costs and expenses associated therewith, and to do and perform all acts reasonably necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Corporation or otherwise permitted by law. Notwithstanding any other provision in the Charter, the Corporation shall not engage in any activity not permitted to be carried out by an organization exempt from federal income tax under Section 501 (c) (3) of the Code.


Classes of Members. The Corporation shall have no members or governing body other than those persons holding positions as Board members or other Officers of the Corporation.


Section 1. Quarterly and Annual Meetings. Quarterly meetings, one of which shall be the Annual meeting, will be held each fiscal year, with the specific dates and months to be set by the Board or the Chairperson of the Corporation. If the election of the Directors, as provided for in these By-Laws, shall not be held on the date designated for the Annual meeting or any adjournment thereof, the Board shall cause the election to be held at a Special meeting of the Directors as soon thereafter as is convenient.

Section 2. Special Meeting. Special meetings may be called, at any time, by the Chairperson, the Vice Chair, the Secretary, or a majority of the Board. No business shall be transacted at a special meeting except as stated in the notice unless by consent of three-fourths of the Directors present, either in person or by proxy.

Section 3. Place of Meeting. Meetings of the Directors shall be held at the principal office or place of business of the Corporation or at such other suitable place convenient to the Directors as may be designated by the Board.

Section 4. Notice of Meeting. Written or printed notice stating the place, day and hour of any meeting of Directors shall be delivered, either personally, electronically or by the Postal Service, to each Director entitled to vote at such meeting, not less than seven (7) nor more than fourteen (14) days before the date of such meeting, by or at the direction of the Chairperson, the Vice Chair, or the Secretary, or the Officers or persons calling the meeting. In the case of a special meeting, or when required by statute or by these By-Laws, the purpose or purposes for which the meeting is called shall be stated in the notice. If mailed, the notice of a meeting shall be deemed to be delivered when deposited in the United States mail addressed to the Director at his or her address as it appears on the records of the Corporation, with first class postage thereon prepaid.

Section 5. Quorum. At least one-half of the regular Directors shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any meeting of the Board; if less than one-half of the regular Directors are present at said meeting, a majority of the Directors present may adjourn the meeting from time to time without further notice.

Section 6. Manner of Acting. The act of a majority of the Directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the Board, unless the act of a greater number is required by law or by these By-Laws.

Board of Directors

Section 1. General Powers. The affairs of the Corporation shall be managed by its Board. The Board shall have all the powers necessary or appropriate for the administration of the affairs of this Corporation and may do all such acts and things as are not prohibited to the Directors by law, the Articles of Incorporation or these By-Laws. The Officers of the Board shall also be Officers of the Corporation; positions shall include a Chairperson, a Vice Chairperson, a Secretary, a Treasurer; and the Immediate Past Chairman; and, the Officers shall be elected by the Board for terms of one year. The President of the Corporation shall be a full-time employee, shall report to and meet with the Board but shall not be a member of the Board.

Section 2. Number. Tenure and Qualifications. The Corporation shall be managed by a Board in accordance with the following:

The affairs of the Corporation shall be managed by the Officers and a Board of not fewer than nine (9) nor more than twenty (20) regular Directors, with the number to serve to be determined from time to time by action of the Board, but by not fewer than one-half of the Directors, as provided for in these By-Laws. The Corporation shall indemnify each Director from and against individual liability to the fullest extent allowed by law, specifically Section 48-58-501 et. seq. of the Tennessee Nonprofit Corporation Act, or the corresponding provisions of any future law.

The organizing Chairman of the Board has been appointed by the Mayor of the City of Memphis doing business as the City of Memphis. The Chairman has appointed six (6) additional Directors and Officers whose appointments are confirmed with the acceptance of these By-Laws of the Corporation on the occasion of its organizational meeting on April 4, 2000, herein dated. All initial appointments are effective for a period of one (1) year or until the first Annual meeting of the Board, whichever occurs first. This initial period of service of the organizing Chairman, other Officers and Directors shall not count as a term of service as to those limited service terms or periods subsequently referred to in these By-Laws. Beginning in 2001, approximately one-third of the Board's elected Directors will be subject to election each year permitting staggered terms.

Subsequently, the Officers and approximately one-third of the regular Directors (members of the Board) shall be elected annually, for terms not to exceed three years, by the Board at the Annual meeting as provided for in these By-Laws. Members of the Board may be re-elected to an additional term, except that no Director shall served more than two three-year consecutive terms (a maximum of six years). Should a member of the Board be elected an Officer of the Board for the last year of his or her second three-year term, that Officer shall be eligible for a second term of one year, in that specific office, as a member of the Board.

At all times, the Board shall include as ex-officio, voting members: the Mayor of the City of Memphis, or his or her designee; the Chairman of the Memphis City Council, or his or her designee; and the Chief Administrative Officer of the City of Memphis. The terms of such designated Directors shall coincide with the terms of office of the individual described.

Additional ex-officio, non-voting, Directors may be appointed by the Board, on recommendation of the Chairman, at any Quarterly or Special meeting. Such appointments should be limited in number and used to enhance communications among related public service organizations or agencies that serve the City of Memphis. The terms of such ex-officio, non-voting Directors will be for one year with eligibility for reappointment at the pleasure of the Board.

All other Directors (regular Director) shall be selected from the private sector. A former member of the Board, who has served two three-year terms, may be re-elected to the Board after he or she has not served as Director for a period of at least one term (three years). The Board may act, at any Quarterly or Special meeting, to fill vacancies occurring in an Officers position or on the Board. Members of the Board shall not be salaried nor shall they receive other compensation for services rendered. Out-of-pocket expense reimbursement may be authorized for members by the Board. On recommendation of the Chairman, the President of the Corporation shall be employed by the Board which shall also determine the conditions of his or her employment, salary and other compensations and continued employment.

The Officers of the Corporation, who shall be Directors, as provided by the By-Laws, will be elected by the Directors, in the manner therein set out, and shall serve for one year or until their successors are elected and have qualified. The Directors shall elect the regular Officers of the Board at the Annual meeting for terms of one year.

Section 3. Removal of Directors. At any duly called meeting of the Board, anyone or more of the Directors may be removed, with or without cause, by a vote of two-thirds of the Directors present and voting.

Officers of the Board and the Corporation

Section 1. Officers. The Officers of the Board and the Corporation shall consist of a Chairperson (Chairman), a Vice Chairperson (Vice Chairman), a Treasurer, a Secretary, and the immediate Past Chairperson. Officers shall be elected by the Board and shall hold office until their successors are elected. In addition, the Board may elect one or more Assistant Secretaries, and Assistant Treasurers as it may deem proper.

Section 2. Other Officers and Agents. The Board may employ a President and such other Officers and Agents as it may deem advisable, who shall hold their office for such terms and shall exercise such power and perform such duties as shall be determined from time to time by the Board.

Section 3. Election and Term of Office. The Officers of the Board, who also hold such positions as Officers of the Corporation, shall be elected at the Annual meeting by the Board and may not serve more than two consecutive years in the same office except; however, the founding Chairperson or initial Vice Chairperson, or both may serve as many as three consecutive years in the same office. If the election of Officers is not held at such meeting, such election shall be held as soon thereafter as is convenient. New offices may be created and filled at any Quarterly or Special meeting of the Board Each Officer shall hold office until his or her successor shall have been duly elected and shall have qualified.

Section 4. Removal. At any duly called meeting of the Board, by a vote of two-thirds of the Directors present and voting, anyone (I) or more Officers may be removed by the Board whenever in its judgment the best interest of the Corporation would be served thereby, but such removal shall be without prejudice to the contract rights, if any, of the Officer so removed.

Section 5. Vacancies. A vacancy in any office because of death, resignation, removal, disqualification or otherwise, may be filled by the Board for the unexpired portion of the term.

Section 6. Chairman. The Chairman of the Board shall preside at all meetings of the Board and he or she shall have and perform such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him or her by the Board. The Chair, with the advice and consent of the Board, will appoint Committee Chairs and members.

Section 7. Vice Chairman. The Vice Chairman shall serve as a member of the Executive Committee and, shall, in the absence or disability of the Chairman, perform the duties and exercise the powers of the Chairman and shall perform such other duties and have such other powers as the Board may from time to time prescribe.

Section 8. Secretary. The Secretary shall attend all meetings of the Corporation and of the Board and its Executive Committee and be responsible for maintaining records of the proceedings of these meetings in a book to be kept for those purposes and shall perform like duties for standing committees, if required. He or she shall give or cause to be given notice of all meetings of the Board and shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the Board, under whose supervision he or she shall be. He or she shall have custody of the corporate seal of the Corporation, if any, and he or she or an Assistant Secretary shall have authority to affix the same to any instrument requiring it, and when so affixed, it may be attested by his or her signature or by the signature of such Assistant Secretary. The Board may give general authority to any other Officer to affix the seal of the Corporation and to attest the affixing by his or her signature.

Section 9. Treasurer. The Treasurer shall be responsible for the custody of the corporate funds and securities and shall keep full and accurate accounts of receipts and disbursements in books belonging to the Corporation and shall deposit all monies and other valuable effects in the name and to the credit of the Corporation in such depositories as may be designated by the Board. The Treasurer shall disburse funds of the Corporation as ordered or allowed by the Board, taking proper vouchers for such disbursements, and shall render to the Board, at regular meetings or when the Board so requires, an account of all his or her transactions as Treasurer and of the financial condition of the Corporation.

Section 10. Immediate Past Chairman. On replacement by a duly elected Chairman, the retiring Chairman may be elected the Immediate Past Chairman of the Corporation. He or she shall serve as a member of the Executive Committee and as Chair of the Nominating Committee. In the absence of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman, the Immediate Past Chairman shall preside at meetings of the Board or Executive Committee.

Section 11. President. The President of the Corporation shall be the Chief Administrative Officer of the Corporation and report directly to the Board. The President shall, in general, supervise the day-to-day business affairs and represent the Corporation in public capacities.


Section 1. Standing Committees. The Corporation shall have the following Standing
Committees: (a) By-Laws Committee; (b) Development Committee; (c) Executive Committee; (d) Finance Committee; and (e) Nominating Committee.

By-Laws Committee. To maintain current, revise and otherwise update the By-Laws and to assist the Directors and Officers in assuring compliance with the By-Laws and Charter of the Corporation, The Board, by resolution, shall appoint a By-Laws Committee of not fewer than five (5) not more than seven (7) regular elected and ex-officio Directors to this Committee. Members of the Committee shall have served for at least one year as a Director and be familiar with the projects, activities and By-Laws of the Corporation. The Membership of the Committee should be staggered with reappointments or new appointments on an annual basis and the total duration of service should not exceed five years.

The Nominating Committee shall recommend a slate of candidates and a Chair for election at the Annual Meeting each year.

Development Committee. At the time of the Annual meeting of the Board and on recommendation of the Chair of the Corporation, the Board, by resolution, shall appoint a Chair and not more than three (3) additional Directors as members of the Development Committee. The Chairman of the Corporation or the Treasurer, or both, would preferably be included as members of such committee. The Chair of the Committee, with the advice and consent of the additional Directors, shall identify not fewer than three (3) nor more than five (5) non Director, private sector individuals whose appointment will be confirmed by the Board or its Executive Committee. AIl appointments shall be for one (1) year; however, on the basis of outstanding service to the Corporation, re-appointment may be made on an annual basis. The Chair of the Development Committee shall serve as a member of the Executive Committee.

The Development Committee shall advise and assist the Directors, the President and other Officers in more specifically defining the purposes, goals and objectives of the Corporation especially as these relate to the art and science of "friend raising and fund raising" programs and activities. To that end, the Committee is expected to propose to the Chair and the Board processes to involve public spirited and philanthropically minded kindred individuals, groups and associations that might individually or collectively assist in enhancing the fiscal and other resources of the Corporation. Specific plans and requests for budget allocations shall be presented for approval to the Board or its Executive Committee and the Chair of the Committee shall regularly report to the Board at the Annual and other Quarterly meetings.

Meetings of the Development Committee may be held at such time and place as may be from time to time determined by the Development Committee upon the giving of notice, personally or by e-mail, telephone, or facsimile (fax) prior to the meeting date.

Executive Committee. The Board, by resolution adopted by a majority of regular Directors in office, shall designate and appoint not fewer than seven (7) nor more than nine (9) Directors and Officers which shall include the Chair, the Vice Chair, the Immediate Past Chair, the Secretary, the Treasurer, the Chair of the Development Committee and the President of the Corporation (ex -officio) to constitute the Executive Committee. The Chairman of the Board shall recommend non-mandated appointees (including an Assistant Treasurer or an Assistant Secretary, or both); and, he or she shall preside at all meetings of the Executive Committee except that in his or her absence the Vice Chairman will preside. In the absence of the Chair and the Vice Chair, the Immediate Past Chairman shall preside. The Secretary shall maintain the minutes of the Committee.

The Executive Committee shall have and exercise the authority of the Board and the management of the Corporation; provided, however that no such Committee shall have the authority of the Board in reference to amending, altering or repealing the By-Laws; electing, appointing or removing any member of any such Committee or any Director or Officer of the Corporation; amending the Articles of Incorporation; adopting a plan of merger or adopting a plan of consolidation with another corporation; authorizing the sale, lease, exchange or mortgage of a11 or substantially all of the property and assets of the Corporation; authorizing the voluntary dissolution of the Corporation or revoking proceedings therefore; adopting a plan for the distribution of assets of the Corporation; or amending, altering or repealing any resolution of the Board which by its terms provides that it sha11 not be amended, altered or repealed by such Committee. The designation and appointment of any such Committee and the delegation thereto of authority sha11 not operate to relieve the Board or any individual Director of any responsibility imposed upon it or him or her by law.

The members of the Executive Committee shall be appointed, by resolution of the Board, at the time of the Annual meeting and no regular Director may serve more than two consecutive terms except as required by position of office. Should a vacancy on the Executive Committee occur doing the year, the Board may fill that vacancy at the time of any Quarterly or Special meetings of the Board.

Meetings of the Executive Committee may be held at such time and place as may be from time to time determined by the Executive Committee upon the giving of notice, personally or by mail, e-mail, telephone, or facsimile (fax) prior to the meeting date.

Finance Committee. The Treasurer shall serve as Chair of the Finance Committee. By resolution of the Board and on recommendation of the Treasurer, at the Annual meeting at least one additional Director shall be appointed to such committee. The Director(s) appointed by the Board and the Treasurer shall identify additional appointees who need not be members of the Board. However, the Committee members should number not fewer than three (3) nor more than five (5) persons. The Board or its Executive Committee shall confirm these additional appointees.

The Finance Committee should assist the Treasurer in preparing the annual budget of the Corporation and provide advice and recommendations on fiscal aspects of all functions of the Corporation. The Committee shall monitor and regularly report to the Board on the financial status, disbursement, deposits and investment of the resources of the Corporation.

The Finance Committee shall develop an Investment Plan for the resources of the Corporation, present that plan to the Directors for their consideration at the Annual Meetings and update the plan at least on an annual basis.

Meetings of the Finance Committee may be held at such time and place as may be from time to time detem1ined by the Finance Committee upon the giving of notice, personally or by mail, email, telephone, or facsimile (fax) prior to the meeting date.

Nominating Committee. Ordinarily, the Nominating Committee shall be Chaired by the Immediate Past Chairman of the Corporation and include regular elected and ex-officio Directors not fewer than five (5) nor more than seven (7) in number. By resolution, at the time, of the Annual Meeting, on recommendation of the Chairman and members present, the Committee membership shall be confirmed by the Board.

The Nominating Committee shall meet on a quarterly basis, or more often if necessary, to assist the Board in identifying philanthropically minded persons prepared to serve as members of the Board or as members of the Standing or Special Committees of the Board, or both. Such potential appointees are expected to contribute effort, time, expertise and substance to the Corporation.

All appointments shall be for a period of one (1) year; however, to provide continuity and to preserve the expertise of experience, at least two (2) years of service is expected of most Directors appointed to this essential Standing Committee of the Board.

The Nominating Committee will seek the input and specific recommendations of all Directors and will report to the Directors at the Quarterly meetings of the Corporation. A slate of nominations for Officers, Directors and Committee members will be presented by the. Nominating Committee Chair at the Annual meetings of the Corporation.

Meetings of the Nominating Committee may be held at such time and place as may be from time to time determined by the Nominating Committee upon the giving of notice, personally or by mail, e-mail, telephone, or facsimile (fax) prior to the meeting date.

Section 2. Other Committees. Other committees not having and exercising the authority of the Board and the management of the Corporation may be designated by a resolution adopted by a majority of the Directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is present or may be designated, on an interim basis, by the Chairman of the Corporation. Except as otherwise provided in such resolution, chairpersons of each such committee shall be Directors of the Corporation, but other members of the committees need not be Directors of the Corporation. Any member thereof may be removed by the person or persons authorized to appoint such member whenever in their judgment the best interest of the Corporation shall be served by such removal.

Section 3. Term of Office. Each member of a committee shall serve as such until the next Annual meeting of the Directors of the Corporation unless the committee shall be sooner tem1inated or unless such member shall be removed from such committee or unless such member shall cease to qualify as a member thereof.

Section 4. Chairperson. One member of each committee shall be appointed Chairman by the person or persons authorized to appoint the members thereof.

Section 5. Vacancies. Vacancies in the membership of any committee may be filled by appointment made in the same manner as provided in the case of the original appointment.

Section 6. Quorum. Unless otherwise provided in the resolution of the Board designating a committee, a majority of the whole committee shall constitute a quorum and the act of a majority of the members present at a meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the committee.

Section 7. Rules. Each committee may adopt rules for its own government not inconsistent with these By-Laws or with rules adopted by the Board. Each committee shall make a full report of all actions to the next meeting of the Board.

Contracts, Checks, Deposits, Investments and Funds

Section 1. Contracts. The Board may authorize the President and the Chairman to enter into any contract or execute and deliver any instrument in the name of and on behalf of the Corporation and such authority may be general or confined to specific instances.

Section 2. Checks. Drafts. Etc. All checks, drafts or orders for the payment of money, notes or other evidences of indebtedness issued in the name of the Corporation shall be signed by the President and the Treasurer or other Officers so authorized as Agents of the Corporation, and in such manner as shall from time to time be determined by resolution of the Board. In the absence of such determination by the Board, such instrument shall be signed by the President and the Chairman of the Board of the Corporation. In the absence or disability of these Officers, the Board may designate other Directors to sign instruments on behalf of the Corporation.

Section 3. Deposits. All funds of the Corporation shall be deposited from time to time to the credit of the Corporation in such banks, trust companies or other depositories as the Board may select.

Section 4. Gifts. The Board may accept, on behalf of the Corporation, any contribution, gift, bequest or device for the general purposes or for any special purpose of the Corporation. By resolution, or otherwise as deemed appropriate, the Board may recognize significant contributions that help advance the goals and objectives of the Corporation.

Section 5. Investments. As previously described in these By-Laws, the Treasurer, with advice by the Finance Committee, shall develop an investment plan for corporate resources. Following approval of the scheme by the Board, the Treasurer, on behalf of the Committee, shall regularly report to the Chairman and the Board on the status of corporate investments.

Books and Records

Section 1. Books and Records. The Corporation shall keep correct and complete books and records of account and shall also keep minutes of the preceding meetings of its members, Board and committees having any of the authority of the Board and shall keep at the registered or principal office a record giving the names and addresses of the Directors. All books and records of the Corporation may be inspected by any Director at any reasonable time.

Books and accounts of the Corporation shall be kept under the direction of the Treasurer of the Corporation in accordance with the requirements of any loan agreement, Regulatory Agreement or any other agreement entered into.

Section 2. Auditing and Reports. At the close of each fiscal year, the President of the Corporation shall cause to be prepared a full and correct statement of the affairs of the Corporation, including a balance sheet and financial statement of operations for the preceding fiscal year which shall be submitted at the Annual meeting and filed with the Secretary of the Corporation.

Fiscal Year

Fiscal Year. The fiscal year of the Corporation shall begin on the 1st day of July and end on the 30th day of June of each year. The commencement date of the fiscal year herein established shall be subject to change by the Board.

Bonding and Indemnity

Section 1. Fidelity Bonds. The Board may require that all Officers and employees of the Corporation having custody or control of corporate funds furnish adequate fidelity bonds. The premium on such bonds shall be paid by the Corporation.

Section 2. Indemnity. To the extent permitted by law, specifically as provided in TCA 48 58-501 et. seq., each Officer and Director of the Corporation shall be indemnified by the Corporation against expenses reasonably incurred by him or her in connection with any action, suit or proceeding to which he or she may have been made a party by reason of his or her being or having been an officer or a director of the Corporation except in relation to matters in which he or she shall be finally adjudged in such action, suit or proceeding to have been negligent in the performance of his or her duty as Officer, Director or employee.


Seal. The Corporation shall have no corporate seal.

Conflict of Interest

Conflict. All members of the Riverfront Development Corporation Board, including ex-officio members and voting and non-voting members, shall be subject to and governed by such Conflict of Interest provisions as the Board may adopt or amend by resolution.

Roberts Rules of Order

Order. The procedural rules and guidelines contained in the Corporation's By-Laws shall officially prescribe the conduct of all the Corporation's meetings. In the absence of guidance from within the By-Laws, the Corporation will conduct its business according to Robert's Rules of Order.

Waiver of Notice

Notice. Whenever any notice is required to be given under the provisions of State law, the Articles of Incorporation or these By-Laws, a waiver thereof in writing signed by the person or persons entitled to such notice whether before or after the time stated therein shall be deemed equivalent to the giving of such notice.

Amendments to By-Laws

Amendments. These By-Laws may be altered, amended or repealed and new By-Laws may be adopted by majority approval of the Directors present at any regular meeting or any special meeting of the Corporation, with a quorum, subject to notice requirements in compliance with these By-Laws.


I, John W. Stokes. Jr., Chairman of the Riverfront Development Corporation, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of By-Laws originally adopted in a meeting assembled and duly held on the 2nd day of June, 2000; and revised in a meeting assembled and duly held on the 9th day of April, 2002.

WITNESSETH MY SIGNATURE, this 9th day of April, 2002.


By: John W. Stokes, Jr., Chairman


Benny O. Lendermon III, President

Revised 04/09/02


[Read the complete article...]

Saturday, June 30, 2001

IRS Form 990: 2000-2001

Here is the RDC's IRS Form 990 for the fical year ended June 30, 2001 [PDF, 696 KB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Friday, June 30, 2000

IRS Form 990: 1999-2000

Here is the RDC's IRS Form 990 for the fical year ended June 30, 2000 [PDF, 618 KB].

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Monday, February 07, 2000

RDC Corporate Charter

Here is the Charter for the Riverfront Development Corporation [PDF, 159 KB], signed January 29, 2000, by John Stokes and filed February 7 with the State of Tennessee.

Labels: ,

[Read the complete article...]

Tuesday, February 16, 1999

The Waterfront Center: Memphis Riverfront Redevelopment Workshop

Here is the complete text of the written report issued by the Waterfront Center several weeks after the Memphis Riverfront Workshop.

HTML version: [click here] Pagination and formatting does not exactly match the report, but the HTML text is complete and accurate -- and easier to read.

Original (added 6/07): Click here for the entire document scanned into a PDF file (1.1 MB).

For more background, also see the Commercial Appeal reporting: Meeting Aims to Plot Future of Riverfront and 100 Cast About, Snag Some Ideas for Riverfront.

Summary & Recommendations
Memphis Riverfront Redevelopment Workshop

City of Memphis, Tennessee
Tuesday, February 16, 1999

Workshop facilitated and
Report Prepared by
the Waterfront Center
Washington, D.C.

Memphis Riverfront Workshop
February 16, 1999
Consensus Comments of Participants

Importance of Riverfront
  • The Riverfront is an important asset. Development of the riverfront is a priority.
  • Any development should be unique to Memphis, should complement downtown revival and be designed for the benefit of local citizens as well as tourists.

Access Issues
  • Pedestrian linkages should be strengthened:

    • Between downtown and the riverfront
    • From riverfront to Mud Island Park
    • Across Riverside Drive - make Riverside more pedestrian friendly
    • Along the entire riverfront.

  • Uniform sign system needed along riverfront

  • A better, permanent docking facility is needed for river boats, charters, and recreational boats.
  • Investigate options for the dock. Some ideas were: the previously used "river elevator" or locating dock at south end of cobblestones using Tom Lee park for access.

  • It is an historically important asset to preserve and interpret for visitors (tourists and residents
  • Animate by highlighting the historic role of cobblestones and features such as flood gauge.

Mud Island River Park
Make Park more attractive to local residents
  • Overcome barrier of entrance fee
  • Overcome barrier of monorail access
  • Upgrade and enhance current facilities
  • Add programming, events, exhibits and attractions to continuously draw locals.

Parks and Public Space
  • Animate with various activities. Some ideas were: refreshment stand; rentals - bike, roller blades, paddle boats; picnic facilities; children's playground; basketball, volleyball, tennis facilities.
  • Addition of more public art.
  • More interpretation (signs, markers) of sites and events.

Table of Contents


Summaries of WorkGroups

Recommendations of the Waterfront Center Team


"If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water."
Loren Eiseley



The City of Memphis convened a Memphis Riverfront Redevelopment Workshop on the morning of Tuesday, Feb. 16, 1999. The focus was the Mississippi riverfront and the immediate adjoining downtown, although discussions ranged further up and down river as well as taking into account developments elsewhere in the city. Generous support for the workshop came from the Plough Foundation.

Preceding the workshop was a reception on Monday at AutoZone Headquarters, John Adams and Tim Vargo hosts. Here people unable to take part in the half-day workshop, as well as participants, received a briefing from Mayor Willie W. Herenton, outlining his aims and objectives for the riverfront, and a short illustrated talk by Ann Breen of The Waterfront Center, a "teaser" for the next morning’s slide presentation. John Stokes, Vice Chairman of Morgan Keegan & Co., welcomed the assembled and made introductory and closing remarks.

Mayor Herenton in his brief talk said, "I firmly believe that revitalizing the Riverfront will be a catalyst for bringing the community together. That’s why it's important. That’s why I’m spending the time to go back to the public." He pointed to the great popularity of Tom Lee Park and the growth of "Memphis in May" as an index of the potential of the Memphis riverfront.

Approximately 130 people from various parts of the community took part, representing a portion of the leadership of Memphis and a diversity of viewpoints. The workshop was open to the public. See Appendix for a list of attendees.

The workshop was run by The Waterfront Center, a not-for-profit organization based in Washington, D.C. since 1981. An organizational profile of The Waterfront Center is appended to this report. The Center has provided waterfront community consulting services of varied kinds to over 100 communities of all sizes in North America and elsewhere.

Conducting the workshop were the directors of The Waterfront Center, namely:
  • Matt Arnn, executive director of the Center, with an advanced degree in urban design and planning and finishing a master's degree in landscape architecture, with experience in group facilitation, waterfront design and work with disadvantaged youth;

  • Ann Breen, co-director of the Center, an urban planner by training with involvement in urban waterfront planning and development issues worldwide since 1975, and

  • Dick Rigby, co-director of the Center, with a background in journalism and government/politics before beginning a concentration on urban waterfronts in 1981.

The basic idea of the Memphis Riverfront Redevelopment Workshop was to bring together a group of representative citizens, assisted by outside experts, to begin to develop their own vision for the city's central riverfront. An earlier initiative of the Public Works Division, as was explained and outlined to the workshop by City Engineer John Conroy, that called for construction of dams in the harbor providing links from downtown to Mud Island, had faltered over funding. This provided the occasion to take a step back and reexamine the city’s objectives and aspirations with respect to its Mississippi River frontage. The first major step in this process was the convening of the riverfront workshop.

The workshop recommendations are meant to be the beginning point. Followup — in both the organizational sense and in more detailed planning — is needed, building on the preliminary consensus established in the half-day work sessions.

The recommendations summarized represent a good deal of give and take and a considerable amount of discussion. The citizen's workshop is both a significant community planning event itself and key to the next step — preparation of a citizen-based master plan for the Memphis riverfront and downtown.

This report consists of four parts. First is the introduction and background leading to the workshop. Second is a summary of the work group discussions and recommendations. Third are the preliminary findings and recommendations of the Waterfront Center Team, and fourth is an Appendix.

Note: This report and most particularly the Waterfront Center Team recommendations have not been reviewed by any persons other than the Waterfront Center Team. Any mistakes are the full responsibility of the Waterfront Center and its Team.


Summaries of Work Groups

Attendees were assigned to one of three, color-coded groups, which met separately. Care was taken to see that persons from the same organization were placed in different groups. Ann Breen led the yellow group discussion, Matt Arnn the blue and Dick Rigby the red. The discussions were held at the Marriott Hotel.

Rick Masson, Chief Administrative Officer of the City of Memphis, opened the workshop. He reiterated the mayor’s desire to reach out to the public at this time for its ideas and assured the audience that there was an effective blank slate and the opportunity to build on the expansion of Tom Lee Park, the initiation of riverwalk and other steps along the river. He also introduced and thanked representatives of the Plough Foundation in attendance, Diane Goldstein, Chairman of the Board; Jocelyn Rudner, Board Member; Rick Haynes, Executive Director, and Barbara Jacobs, Program Director.

City Engineer John Conroy followed with a chronological review of the previous riverfront planning, ending in the proposal for dams in the harbor for which Federal funding was not obtained. Ann Breen then gave an illustrated presentation, drawn from the Center’s extensive waterfront slide collection, showing what other cities have done and are doing with their riverfronts. She included an emphasis on design details, opportunities for public art and interpretation, as well as showing commercial mixed-use and other types of uses.

Closing out the workshop was Benny Lendermon, Director of the city's Public Works Division, who assured participants that their deliberations were the beginning of a continuing public consultation. He remarked about the degree of consensus that was achieved during the morning’s group discussions and stated there would be a continuing outreach from the city to the citizens as a revised riverfront redevelopment strategy was devised.

Recommendations of the YELLOW GROUP, summarized by Sonya Walton, Ann Breen, facilitator.

Before discussing priorities and concerns about the riverfront, the group was asked to consider whether or not its redevelopment should be a city priority at this time.

The group concluded that the riverfront is currently very important to Memphis. Future development should have a positive economic development on the city, but at the same time whatever occurs should compliment the central downtown business district (CBD). Any development should be unique to Memphis and simple solutions should be sought. In the words of one participant "KISS (keep it simple)." The riverfront should be open and user-friendly, aimed at the day-to-day users first and foremost.

From an alphabetical listing of topics: access, cobblestones, docking, interpretation, Mud Island's future and parks/public realm, the group added economic development, resource management and visual impact of improvements to the list. After being asked to select which issues were the most important, the group reached consensus in the order of discussion below and agreed on several specific items,

The riverfront was felt to be unsafe for pedestrians (except for Tom Lee Park). Access, both physical and visual, was identified as the most important issue of all with the following as the main points:
  • Don’t obstruct the river view. Concern over the visual impact of either a bridge from the end of Beale Street over to Mud Island and/or a possible dam was expressed.

  • Strengthen parallel and vertical pathways to the river (all modes - vehicles and pedestrians). Some of the ideas discussed to overcome the vertical distance (especially considering elderly) were people movers, a cog railway, pedicabs/rickshaws or cable cars. Taming Riverside Drive was another consideration since it is an obvious hazard to pedestrians. Linkage from the Welcome Center to the Pyramid needs improvement.

  • Strengthen links to the downtown through signage and interpretation.

  • Make the riverfront pedestrian-friendly by creating more shaded areas and improving directional and informational signage. Avoid using gates.

There was a general feeling that this park should be a family-oriented place and needs a number of improvements to make it more viable to the Memphis riverfront and the community.
  • Removal of the entrance fee and keeping the park open year-round were unanimous sentiments. Memphians go once if at all. If the entrance fee was removed more locals might go and use it, especially if pedestrian and vehicular access were improved. Several suggestions including providing a parking area/garage on the island were put forward.
  • More activities for children should be provided, including more opportunities for environmental education. Perhaps an ecology center tied into the school curricula that could also serve as a summer camp could be installed.
  • Overall, the facility needs a general upgrade and enhancement along with improved maintenance.
  • Tied to this is better asset management with the cautionary note of not expanding until the present facility is running optimally.
  • To improve access, the group would like to test the possibility of running the trolley out to Mud Island. It was noted that this could also serve the growing residential communities on the island.

The historic importance of the cobblestones was recognized as well as recognition of the docking problems and the significant water level fluctuation.
  • Preservation of the cobblestones was unanimous. The method of preserving them was up for debate.
  • Docking facilities are key. Further research is needed to solve the various engineering and water level concerns. Different ideas were put forward including a "river elevator" (used historically) as a low-tech solution. The protection of recreational boating was another point raised.

The following points received agreement by all in the group:
  • Tom Lee Park could be improved and made more friendly by installing such facilities as little refreshment stands, picnic facilities and providing more shade either with trees, structures or gazebos. Other suggestions included a monumental sculpture and a sand volley ball court.
  • More public art should be installed throughout the riverfront focusing on and interpreting the river history, as an important feature to the history of Memphis.
  • Fountains and creative play areas should be features included in riverfront improvements.

Miscellaneous. A number of individuals put forward ideas and concerns not mentioned above, that did not receive consensus or have sufficient time for discussion. These included:
  • Identifying and protecting any special natural areas along the riverfront that could be destroyed when development pressures increase;

  • visual access to the river exists but the ability and opportunity to actually touch the water is limited — how could we change this?;

  • a family-oriented hotel on Mud Island;
  • an air-conditioned, enclosed facility to connect the Welcome Center with the Pyramid;
  • planning facilities and activities especially for teens who represent a major market force;
  • having the Corps of Engineers and Coast Guard facilities be more user-friendly;
  • Riverside Drive be reduced to two lanes with buried utilities and,
  • explore possibility of building a retaining wall to stabilize the cobblestones.
  • an air-conditioned, enclosed facility to connect the Welcome Center with the Pyramid;
  • planning facilities and activities especially for teens who represent a major market force;
  • having the Corps of Engineers and Coast Guard facilities be more user-friendly;
  • Riverside Drive be reduced to two lanes with buried utilities and,
  • explore possibility of building a retaining wall to stabilize the cobblestones.

Recommendations of the BLUE GROUP, summarized by Dianne Dixon, Matt Arnn, facilitator.

The group felt that the riverfront should be a number one priority for the city. Important to this objective was to define the area being considered, taken by the group to include the Mississippi River frontage to the Wolf River on the north and DeSoto Park on the south, and including the harbor channel. The role of the west side of Mud Island was not clear.

It was agreed that the riverfront should be regarded within these boundaries and planned as a comprehensive unit. It should not be segmented with piecemeal projects and narrowly-focused plans. Where possible, the riverfront should be seen as an extension of the regenerating downtown and as an amenity aiding downtown redevelopment.

In considering general accessibility to the riverfront, the group noted that this involves pedestrian access, visual access and active use of the river. The river bluff has a major visual impact on the city of Memphis and, it was noted, represents something of a psychological barrier in that it requires ascending to it from the river or overcome it to get down to the river. This reality contrasts somewhat with Memphis' image as a "Bluff City" and a "River City," the group observed.

The first-listed issue was Riverside Drive, where the present speed of traffic was stated to be a problem that has to be overcome. The addition of lighting along the river was recommended to make it more accessible at night. Bridges over the roadway/rail line and connecting the CBD with Mud Island were called for.

The group recommended a bikeway be installed on Riverside Drive and that consideration be given to extending the trolley service to the road — both of which would have the affect of narrowing the existing road and slowing traffic. There was also discussion of changing paving surface, reducing the speed limit, creating a median and adding plantings to make if more like a grand promenade. The whole riverfront area needs a system of signs that tie it together.

Two immediate needs to facilitate greater use of Mud Island Park are the addition of more docking facilities for recreational boats and provision of a ferry service shuttling passengers from the mainland. The ferry idea generated considerable positive discussion.

The group advocated free admission to the island and the provision of more opportunities both for access and enjoyment once there. It was the position of the group that opening Mud Island freely to visitors (not to the museum/Mississippi River model) would encourage people to buy food, drink and concession items and that the revenues from these vendors would contribute to the island’s enhancement. The addition of amenities to Mud Island, that would serve both a visitor population and the residents were recommended. Suggested additions include: Programming the amphitheater with popular music and dance, using re-enactment groups for festivals, bike rentals, volley ball tournaments, environmental education, and generally, more interactive opportunities for young people and families.

Overall, the group saw a need for a public relations campaign on behalf of Mud Island, to refurbish its image in the community. In a related area, the group said an emphasis on security was going to be needed to encourage greater use.

In order to encourage a comprehensive river experience, the group called for a link of the south end of Mud Island to the mainland, near Beale Street. Such a pedestrian link would help overcome now what is seen to be a psychological inhibition for Memphians to use Mud Island.

The group felt strongly about the historic importance of the cobblestone area to Memphis and the overall historic context in which they played such an important role, as in their links to the cotton warehouses above the riverfront.

As a center of riverfront activity, the cobblestone area should be the focus of a ferry operation, should be lined with kiosks selling various items and be a jumping off place for recreational boating and

The cobblestones need repair in order to preserve them and for safety reasons. There's also a need for signs and interpretation of the significance of the cobblestones and their role.

There want to be walkways through the cobblestones to the river boats that dock alongside them. Parking on the cobblestones was thought by the group to be a problem.

Overall, the group's four recommendations were for there to be a balance among use and accessibility to the cobblestones, that there be a program of communication and education about them, that the overall context of their importance be stressed (don't just consider the cobblestones in isolation), and that public-private partnerships be employed to generate the funds needed in their improvement and protection.

The group agreed on the need for permanent docking facilities for major tour boats and that the economic impact of both large and small cruise boats was significant for Memphis. Some negative aspects were noted, such as the wash of the boats damaging the cobblestones.

The issue of the major flux in levels that the Mississippi River undergoes in the Memphis area is a major engineering consideration in locating docks. Given this, the group called for development of a boat landing and dock plan. Considerations to be addressed in the plan, among others, are passenger safety and protection of the cobblestones from wash.

Provision of access to the city's amenities for boat passengers was seen as another issue for a dock/landing plan.

The group was skeptical that the City's "lake plan" would balance the docking, access and cobblestone preservation issues. The hope was expressed that a more comprehensive docking plan could adequately address these as well as the real economic significance of the riverboats.

First listed by the group was the need for better maintenance of the existing public spaces. There was consensus that better park and public space maintenance and operation (litter collection, rat control, basic repairs, lighting) would do wonders for Memphians1 perception of riverfront open space. The group discussed how these basic functions are linked to community pride, or lack of it.

Next suggested was the additional need for better design of the facilities in the parks and for more public art pieces. The establishment of design standards for the city's public spaces was suggested. It was agreed that investment in quality design and details would help change negative stereotypes that Memphians have about the riverfront and its relationship to the city. The desirability of tying together public spaces with amenities and attractions was stated. And, the importance of making all public spaces open to the handicapped was called out.

In order for public space to be attractive, it was noted that the water in the harbor had to be kept clean. On the negative side, it was noted that rats are present along the riverfront.

The group felt it was important to recall the industrial character of the river in considering historic interpretation and how this past shaped the river in Memphis. While the group recognized the importance of preserving industrial uses for their character, visual diversity and heritage, they cautioned against allowing industry to act autonomously along the river and stressed environmental considerations. The group would have welcomed more industrial representation at the workshop. Adequate public access to and through existing or planned industrial use was called for.
The relationship of the city of Memphis to its river and how the citizens embrace the various activities along the Mississippi was cited. A river educational program should keep in mind the various audiences, namely families, teenagers and adults.

For river museum facilities, living history re-enactrnents were suggested to add vitality. Interactive features and storytelling were additional suggestions.

To be the subject of future discussions, the group
suggested: (1) Communication about the riverfront with local news media, (2) a Web site and e-mail capability for exchanging information about the riverfront and (3), establishment of a Riverfront Bureau within the city government to manage future planning and development.

Recommendations of the RED GROUP, summarized by Clifton Harris, Dick Rigby, facilitator.

The group first dealt with the issue of whether riverfront redevelopment should in fact be a priority in Memphis at this time, not to take it for granted.

With the exception of a "maybe" expression or two, the group said it agreed to placing an emphasis on the riverfront at this time. The main reasons put forward for so doing were to advance the economic development of the city, to spur tourism and to encourage investment. It was noted, that redevelopment will generate additional tax revenues to support such other priority needs as the schools.

An expanded riverfront was seen as complementing downtown revival efforts, not competing with same. It was advocated that the riverfront be made accessible to all in the community as it is improved.

Work along the river offers an opportunity to celebrate the heritage of Memphis and the diversity of its people. Along this line, another reason given for a riverfront priority is the cause of historic preservation.

A point about the nature of the river was brought out, namely that it needs to be treated with respect, but it is not as treacherous as is sometimes portrayed.

The problem that Riverside Drive presents for ready access to the river was first-mentioned by the group. One solution suggested was a lower speed limit (35 m.p.h.), perhaps a narrowing of the lanes and/or placing a median in the middle, all in the name of making it more like a boulevard than a high-speed connector. Links of the riverfront and the CBD were noted to be weak.

More boating opportunities were recommended, namely additional boat launches, which were felt now to be inadequate. One specific suggestion was for a launch on the north end of Mud Island.

Improved and free access to Mud Island was suggested (see below), with a Beale Street-to-Mud Island linkage recommended. Another suggestion: a water taxi service in the harbor, tying together various stops (Pyramid, Mud Island, Visitor's Center, Beale Street, Tom Lee Park etc.)

Keeping the harbor open to boat traffic, both commercial and recreational, was recommended by the group.

The issue of renaming one or more parks to make them more inviting came up but failed to achieve consensus. Another issue of accessibility was the need to balance a police presence for security purposes with a non-intimidating appearance, encouraging youth, for instance, to use and enjoy the riverfront. Police in shorts on bicycles help in this regard, it was noted.

The group wanted to see a public walkway beside the Pyramid and was advised that is in current city plans (along the outside perimeter of the flood wall).

Lastly, the need for service vehicle access was noted.

The group was clear in its desire to open up the island to residents and to make admission free. Charging admission to the museum and Mississippi River model was fine. There was solid opposition to the idea that $8 be charged to get on the island (including museum entry).

Again the suggestion was put forward that there be a link from Beale Street to Mud Island, namely a pedestrian bridge.

A hands-on educational program was a suggested addition to the island's offerings. Plus a reconstituted children's playground. Also, the addition of a boat launch (see above).

Additional restaurants were recommended, and a lift of the current ban on concessionaires. It was suggested that the museum itself be updated and that it have changing exhibits so that locals would have reason to make repeat visits. The consensus was that the museum currently is somewhat static as far as Memphis residents are concerned.

Suggested additional facilities on Mud Island ranged from a Ferris wheel to an aquarium, without achieving general consensus.

The employment of local artists, both performing and visual, in enlivening the island did win broad group support. The issue of perhaps renaming the island was again raised, with opposition encountered, but a general re-imaging was seen as needed.

Other suggestions included: extending the monorail and/or extending the riverfront trolley line; expanding the Memphis Belle exhibit to a larger World War II display; adding more parking to the north end, and providing affordable housing on Mud Island.

The group agreed on the historic importance of the cobblestones along the harbor and felt that they should be stabilized and preserved in place. A suggestion that they be moved to Tom Lee Park to again front the river, as they did historically before Mud Island, was not favored.

The cobblestones were felt to be important to the character and atmosphere of the river, and in their uniqueness, a tourist attraction. For this to happen, however, there needs to be explanations and interpretation for visitors (and incidentally, residents) about the role the cobblestone played.
It was recommended that walkways to and along the cobblestones be installed, that the city step up its maintenance of them and that the flood gauge imbedded in the cobblestones be featured, perhaps with a sign. Removal of daytime parking by downtown office workers was suggested as a way of helping maintenance.

One of the major issues facing the city is provision of better docking facilities for riverboats. This is seen as necessary to accommodate existing and prospective vessels which the city is interested in bringing to Memphis. It was noted that the boats now use bow thrusters when they land in Memphis, which damage the cobblestones.
Something of a consensus emerged to locate docking facilities, preferably floating vs. fixed, at the north end of Tom Lee Park, perhaps carving out a piece of land to make this addition. Wherever docks are, there will be a need for safe pedestrian access to and from them, it was noted.

It was recommended that the river boats contribute to the landside facilities serving them. Docks for other types of boats, namely recreational, was also noted. Also, it was suggested that there is a market for small boat charters.

A point was made that Front Street currently turns its back to the river and does not present an inviting facade to people arriving on riverboats. Another point brought up is the need to make the river boats accessible to kids, perhaps having school tours or otherwise opening them up.

In considering how to improve and enhance public park spaces along the river, the group suggested the addition of more public art, more sculptures and the addition of fountains. Artistically lighting various features was also recommended.

Accessible and safe rest rooms in the parks was recommended. A repeat of the suggestion of a major children's playground somewhere in the riverfront was made.

Another consensus area was the expanded Tom Lee Park and how well it is enjoyed and used in the community as a whole. The suggestion was made that festivals there be made free and donations be requested, rather than charging an admission.

Additional offerings recommended include such sports facilities as basketball and tennis courts, and the provision of kiosks renting bicycles or rollerblades and perhaps paddleboats in the harbor.

The parks need interpretive signs and historic markers, the group said. Overall, the group said the city needs to do a better job of marketing itself, certainly to outsiders, perhaps even to its own.

The last recommendation was to convert the Post Office to a city museum, taking advantage of its commanding site overlooking the river.


Findings and Recommendations of
The Waterfront Center

Below are a set of findings about Memphis and its riverfront, both positive and negative, by The Waterfront Center team during its several day reconnaissance and interviews. Accompanying are a series of recommendations to the community. Obviously preliminary in nature, these were presented at the conclusion of the workshop summary session.

Positive Findings
  • The beginning point: the tremendous asset that the Mississippi River represents to the city.
  • The resourcefulness of and demonstrated ability to accomplish things by the people of Memphis.
  • The surprising amount of residential living downtown, in contrast with, for instance, Louisville.
  • The richness in the architecture of the downtown.
  • Most of the riverfront is in city ownership, giving the city complete control of what happens — unlike many cities.
  • A riverwalk is developing with major pieces in place — an asset to build on.
  • The riverfront trolley and stations are well done; the horse-drawn carriages downtown are colorful.
  • Revived Beale Street is a major plus and reflects the city's wonderful musical heritage.
  • The arts community appears strong and an asset to be brought into play in future riverfront projects.
  • The cobblestones are unique and have an evocative aura.
  • The literary heritage of the Memphis area, past and present, is strong.
  • Memphis is a funky city, a welcome contrast with many homogenized and sanitized urban environments.
  • There is a strong private sector and major philanthropic assets in Memphis.
  • The vibrancy downtown, declining retail sector notwithstanding, evident in the restaurant scene and the many museums, for instance.
  • The relatively benign climate. While summers are hot, it also is a time of major visitation ("Don't come to Sun Studios in August!").
  • Memphis does festivals well, most particularly the month-long "Memphis in May" celebration.
  • The range of museums represents a cultural richness today and is expanding.
  • The downtown baseball stadium will add a new dynamism to the center city.
  • The Mississippi River model and Maritime Museum at Mud Island are both impressive.
Negative Findings

  • The riverfront at present is generally speaking underused (Tom Lee Park a notable exception).
  • There is a serious disconnect between the city and the riverfront with high-speed Riverside Drive a major barrier.
  • There is a detectable undercurrent of racial divide still palpable in Memphis.
  • The weakness of the retail sector downtown, given the emphasis on revival and other positives, is dramatic.
  • The facilities and design at Mud Island seem antiquated.
  • There is a lack of historic/cultural interpretation along the riverfront.
  • There would seem to be a lack of communication within the city and a somewhat confused governmental apparatus.
  • Street crime is a major concern of the citizens.
  • The new Visitors Center isn't well connected to the city.
  • There is the absence of a lead agency in charge-of riverfront planning and redevelopment.
  • There is an absence of public art or artist participation along the river.
  • The overall public realm in the city suffers from neglect.
  • There would seem to be a collective poor self-image in Memphis.
  • There is reported a lack of consistency and follow through in public initiatives.
  • Despite features like Graceland and Beale Street and events like Memphis in May, the marketing of the assets of Memphis seems relatively weak.
  • There is an apparent underestimate of the potential of recreational boating in Memphis.
Preliminary Recommendations

  • There should be continued, meaningful public involvement in riverfront planning, building on the workshop of February 16. Perhaps members of the workshop could constitute a Mayor's Riverfront Advisory Committee.

  • The biggest issue to tackle is overcoming the barrier of Riverside Drive to the river — one or more pedestrian bridges, narrowing the road and reducing its speed, changing its paving, or a more radical partial burying — major action is needed.

  • We question the stated objective of Mud Island River Park to turn a "profit." Better in our view is opening the island free at least to residents and provide concessions and vendors. A major redesign is needed, but we would favor a cautious approach to redoing the island rather than looking for some "big bang" solution. We suggest the decision-making at Mud Island be broadened to include a citizens advisory panel -- "Friends of Mud Island"?

  • Can the north end of Tom Lee Park be a suitable site for river boat docking? Some solution is clearly needed. Raising the. question of who pays for new docks?

  • We would like to see significant involvement of the artistic community on the riverfront beginning now, in the planning stages. It's our feeling that this community, given encouragement, could develop creative solutions to such issues as how to make the parking lot and highway pylons at the Pyramid more attractive.

  • There probably will want to be established some riverfront coordinating entity within local government, given a clear mandate and a fulltime focus, given the complexity of the issues to be dealt with — and the opportunities.

  • The developing walkway needs a local place name — perhaps a contest in the schools, or the newspaper. Plus banners, a logo and locational and interpretive signs.

  • Before residential development pressure heats up, the issue about whether or not to retain industry at the north end of the harbor (blue collar jobs vs. higher-value land use) should be carefully thought through.

  • Could the major museum assets of the area be tied together in a joint promotion, joint ticket effort. And could the Mississippi River Museum be included in such?

  • Would small police substations in the parks be a good idea. Many cities employ these (New York, Rio de Janeiro — in 7-11's in Washington, D.C.).

We note again that these findings and recommendations are prefatory only. They are meant to be the beginning point. Real results will only come from a continued commitment to the planning and organization process, building on the preliminary consensus established in the half-day work sessions. It is this commitment that will allow Memphians to realize the potential of their Mississippi Riverfront.


Memphis Riverfront Redevelopment Workshop

Ms. Lisa Andrews
Mr. Ralph Bagwell
Mr. Steve Barlow
Ms. Regina Bearden
Ms. Kathy Bingham
Mr. Antonio Bologna
Mr. Sam Bond
Mr. Williams Boswell
Ms. Tarina Boswell
Ms. Patti Bowlan
Mr. James Boyd
Mr. Richard Brewer
Mr. Clifton Brown
Mr. Ray Bryant
Ms. Cindy" Buchanan
Ms. Madge Clark
Ms. Carol Coletta
Ms. Bonnie Collins
Mr. Ray Colson
Mr. Boris Combest
Mr. John Conroy
Mr. Darrell Cozen
Mr. Ed Cross
Mr. John Currin
Mr. Walter Cygan
Ms. Dianne Dixon
Ms. Mary Douglas
Mr. John Dudas
Mr. Timothy Duke
Ms, Shelly Durfee
Ms. Lorraine Ferguson
Mr. Brantley Feuzer
Lt. Bruce Fisher
Ms. Karen Focht
Mr. Van Ford
Mr. Patrick Frese
Mr. James Fri, Jr.
Mr. Andy Gaines
Mr. Charles Galatt
LCDR Michael Gardner
Mr. Charles Gaushell
Ms. Dione Gerber
Mr. Frank Gianotti
Ms. Tandy Gilliland
Ms. Diane Goldstein

Mr. Chad Greer
Mr. Andy Griffin
Mr. John Hager
Mr. Reb Haizlip
Mr. Erin Hanafin Berg
Ms. Kelley Hankins
Mr. Vernua Hanrahan
Mr. Clifton Harris
Mr. Roy Harrover
Mr. Rick Haynes
CMR John Hollowell
Mr. John Hopkins
Ms. Constance Houston
Mr. Will Hudson
Ms. Carissa Hussong
Mr. Steve Hutcherson
Mr. Phil Hwang
Ms. Suzanne Jackson
Ms. Barbara Jacobs
Ms. Kristi Jemigan
Ms. Judith Johnson
Ms. Susan Jones
Ms. Brenda Jones-Sanford
Ms. Gale Jones Carson
Mr. Larry Keenan
Mr. Carl Kemodle
Ms. Diane Kroll
Mr. Tom Krolf
Ms. Verna Lambert
Mr. Pierre Landaiche
Mr. Benny Lendermon
Mr. Michael Lewis
Mr. Brent Little
Ms. Dale Lozier
Mr. Larry Lynch, Jr.
Mr. Rick Masson
Mr. Wayne Max
Mr. Don McCrory
Mrs. Pat Merrill
Mr. Burt Merrill
Mr. Lee Millar
Mr. James Murray
Ms. Ronna Newburger
Ms, Janay Nienhuis
Mr. Jimmy Ogle

Ms. Jill Owens
Mr. James Parker
Mr. Tim Parker
Mr. Brent Perkins
Ms. Janet Pfaff
Ms. Libby Pritchard
Mr. Kevin Quinn
Mr. Tom Reeves
Ms. Cindy Roberts
Mr. Joe Royer
Ms. Jocelyn Rudner
Mr. Jeff Sanford
Mr. Linley Schmidt.
Mr. Jerry Sexton
Mr. Joe Sills
Mr. Ritchie Smith
Mr. Ham Smythe
Mr. Robert Snowden
Mr. Mark Stansbury
Mr. Michael Starens
Mr. Michael Stevens
Mr. John Stokes, Jr.
Mr. Troy Taylor
Mr. Granville Taylor
Mr. Eugene Thibodeaux
Mr. Blanch Thomas
Mr. Gary Thompson
Ms, Lissa Thompson
Mr. Henry Turley
Mr. Tom Turri
Ms. Jodie Vance
Ms. Cecilia Varino
Ms. Sonya Walton
Ms. Karen Ward
Mr. Lee Warren
Mr. Guy Weaver
Ms. Cheri Wells
Mr. Jason Wexler
Ms. Eldra White
Ms. Sue Williams—
Mr. David Williams
Mr. Phil Woodard
Ms. Pattie Woods
Mr. Clarence Wright

Labels: , , , , , , ,

[Read the complete article...]