AT LAST WEEK’S City Council meeting, Mayor Eddie DeLoach made a statement — which he said had full support of the rest of Council — addressing the recent events in Charlottesville, Va., and the ensuing controversy about Confederate monuments.
“We must all denounce these forms of domestic terrorism… we must not just be on the right side of history, we must write the right version of history,” Mayor DeLoach said.
City Council tasked City Manager Rob Hernandez with an effort to “expand the story” surrounding the Confederate monument in Forsyth Park, to make the monument more inclusive in nature. It is currently dedicated to Confederate war dead.
DeLoach said the goal is to “expand the story this monument tells to be inclusive of all Savannahians, regardless of race, creed, or color, who paid the ultimate sacrifice in the Civil War.”
City Attorney Brooks Stillwell reminded Council that a state law passed in 2016 prohibits cities from removing any monument to military service in any war the U.S. has fought.
“State government has preempted the City’s authority” just as they preempt cities in Georgia “from banning assault rifles,” Stillwell said.
However, state law does allow for reinterpretation of monuments, as well as moving them to another visible location.
Echoing a resolution from previous years, City Council will vote on a resolution to Governor Nathan Deal requesting that the Eugene Talmadge Bridge, currently named for a segregationist governor, be renamed.
To applause, Alderman John Hall said “The name Eugene Talmadge is not what this city represents.”
City Attorney Stillwell said the state has final say on the name of the bridge, and that “the City has no say.”
Alderman Van Johnson said, “If the City had the power to change the name we would have done it years ago.”
The last effort to rename the bridge – this is the second bridge over the Savannah River bearing the governor’s name – ended when Talmadge’s descendants were consulted and disapproved of the name change.
Alderman Julian Miller urged that a vote on both issues not be taken at that meeting, but that “The public has a right to be heard on these issues before we go forward with it…we are constantly being asked to change the names of things.”
A decision was made to hold a public forum in September, to be held outside of the regular Council meeting, to discuss the monument issue and the bridge renaming resolution and allow full public input.
The forum will be held after the previously scheduled “Span The Gap” meeting on Sept. 5, which is to be moderated by former Savannah Mayor Otis Johnson.
Alderman Tony Thomas suggested using the Civic Center to guarantee that everyone who wanted to participate could get in, with adequate parking.
Mayor DeLoach was adamant that City Council will not let the issues go without some kind of action.
“I already know how I feel” and how City Council feels about the issues, DeLoach said.
The mayor stated that “who shows up the most isn’t going to determine” what Council thinks and decides on the monument and bridge issue.
This article appears in Aug 23-29, 2017.
Taking down statues of Civil War persons on the Confederate side may seem justified, but there are more justified things we could do. Since Christianity is responsible for the genocide of 6 million Jews and many native Americans, why don’t we shut down Christian churches and burn Christian books? There is all of Western Civilization guilty of genocide, persecution, intolerance and oppression. Let’s burn Christian theological writings, lets tear down places built to encourage Christian intolerance and violence. What about statues in Catholic churches to Dominican and Franciscan saints? These two religious orders specialized from the 13th century on in arousing urban antisemitism and in expelling and/or killing Jews. The bishop of Savannah is a Franciscan. What should we do with him — before a statue of him is erected? Tell me.
I realize this seems extreme, but it is more justified than putting down a few statues to people who thought they were doing the right thing in fighting for states rights and for their property in slaves, which was totally legal.
Only in the USSR was history periodically revised according to political needs. Subscribers to the Soviet Encyclopedia got in the mail from time to time new pages to replace those they were instructed to destroy in their copies of the Encyclopedia. History is not nice and needs to be remembered; why destroy those things which help us to remember? Beats me.
I’d love to learn more about the passionate Christianity of Nazi Germany. Please do provide citations.
I believe that 21st Century Americans are entirely capable of remembering the atrocities of the Civil War without honoring with statues those who fought for the enslavement of an entire race. States’ rights indeed…
Christianity, Stryker FSU, was no hinderance to Nazi genocide of the Jews. Most Christians in Europe, especially central and eastern Europe, had been raised on Jew hatred as part of mother’s christian milk for centuries. They stood by as Jews were rounded up and killed; a few objected, some did help Jews secretly but had to hide the fact from anti-semitic neighbors and friends. Some were eager to help the Nazis, especially in the Baltic States and in UKraine. While the Nazis were theoretically anti-christian the Christian clergy and establishment made no important moves to oppose genocide of the Jews as they had opposed the killing of the (gentile) infirm and handicapped. American Christians have forgotten the anti-Jewish themes in their religion; just read the Passion stories in the Gospels.
What’s the point about a public forum concerning taking down Confederate statues? Just another opportunity for ignorant people to shout at one another and cause trouble. Political leaders should make the decisions they were elected to make and voters at the next election can sustain or oppose them. Public forums are a perversion of the Republic.