Analysis: Forget the noise, O'Connell is poised for reelection
The next mayor's race may seem like it's far away, but the Metro courthouse intrigue knows no offseason.
Political gossip has bubbled up lately that Mayor Freddie O'Connell could face a legitimate challenger to his reelection bid in 2027, but such talk seems to be divorced from reality.
State of play: O'Connell enjoys wide public approval that elected officials at any level rarely find in this rancorous political environment.
A new Vanderbilt poll puts O'Connell's approval rating at 67%. Even more noteworthy, 58% of residents think the city is on the right track, a sharp improvement from just a few years ago.
O'Connell's support is powered by the historic victory of his Choose How You Move transportation funding referendum and the passage of the ambitious East Bank redevelopment plan.
The big picture: The polling data says he's stabilized Metro government following a tumultuous seven years dating back to Mayor Megan Barry's resignation.
Incredibly, an incumbent Nashville mayor hasn't won reelection since Karl Dean in 2011, but O'Connell is poised to put that streak to rest.
What we're hearing: Although the election is more than two years away, this is exactly the time when names of potential candidates for mayor start to emerge.
O'Connell captured the mayor's office thanks in part to progressive support. Some of those backers have been frustrated with his administration's support for policing initiatives like the Fusus surveillance video program and license plate readers.
Conversely, some business leaders are antsy that O'Connell hasn't been more aggressive in pursuing economic development projects like the fairgrounds racetrack. Sources say that a racetrack offer is within reach that would improve on the agreement reached by former Mayor John Cooper by shifting more financial burden to Speedway Motorsports.
Complicating a reelection bid is that O'Connell is likely to propose a substantial property tax increase in the coming months.
The intrigue: If challengers decide to enter the race, some names I've heard bandied about include Metro Councilmembers Zulfat Suara and Joy Styles.
Three of Nashville's last four mayors, including O'Connell, were council members before winning the corner office. Some conservative leaders have mentioned former Councilmember Emily Evans, who led the opposition to the transportation referendum.
Yes, but: O'Connell's next two years are likely to focus more on affordable housing and pocketbook issues that residents want the city to pursue, according to the Vanderbilt poll.
He's already started fundraising with an eye toward 2027. A fundraiser delayed because of last week's storms featured a notable list of political influencers whose support is necessary to bankroll a campaign.
The bottom line: In addition to all that, O'Connell proved in 2023 to be an excellent campaigner who vanquished a strong field of candidates across the political spectrum.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
5 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ___ AP college sports: Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Chicago Tribune
5 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Fox Sports
5 hours ago
- Fox Sports
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Associated Press Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ___ AP college sports: recommended in this topic
