Rep. John Reeves, R-Hinds, is a growing presence in the Jackson community. The 49-year-old father of five is a South Jackson resident who vows to stay in his community, despite the flight of many of his white friends and neighbors. He is well into his sixth term as a member of the State House of Representatives. The Jackson Free Press spied Reeves at community meetings all over the city at least three times in the last two months. He isn't afraid to field questions or demands from frustrated city residents and has yet to shrink from a fight within sight of the JFP.
Reeves has law offices in downtown Jackson and currently serves the city as an attorney, but is also working closely with the Jackson City Council on its legislative lobbying efforts.
Let's start with the basics. How long have you lived in Jackson? Most of your life?
I've lived here all my life. I went to Key Elementary School, then Peeples, and Wingfield High School in Jackson, and when I finished law school at Ole Miss, I came back to Jackson. I received a bachelor of public administration degree in 1970, and then received my juris doctor degree in 1982.
How long have you lived in your neighborhood?
I've lived in the general area all my life. I still live within walking distance of where I was raised.
I think I've seen your place. Really nice. Huge lot. Stands out among the other houses in the area.
It had been partially restored when we bought it. We continued the restoration. It was built in 1937. It's a federal-style home, sits on about three acres, about 4,000 square feet, and it's on the Jackson register of historic places. We've been here since 1992. I guess that's, what, 14 years?
How far along was your career when you invested in South Jackson?
I guess I was about 10 years into my career.
Your income at the time was pretty comfortable, right?
I guess so.
What made you break demographic tradition? To be frank, you're white, you're reasonably well-off. Why didn't you move out of the area along with the rest of the affluent whites in the 1980s and 1990s? You've been asked this before, haven't you?
Well, not like that, but yes.
Well, what's the answer?
Even as a child, I wanted to be a lawyer. And I was interested in politics as a child, as well. I would discuss politics with my mother and my family. I knew that's what I wanted to do at an early age. So when I finished law school in 1982, 1983 was an election year, so I was practicing law about nine months when the election came around. I decided to run for the state House against Farmer Jim Neal, a local radio disc jockey and a very popular man who'd been in office for 20 years. I had just turned 26.
I was unknown, had no money, but my mother and my girlfriend—who's my wife now—and five friends banded together and knocked on every door in the district 50 times. We telephoned everyone, worked ourselves literally to death, and the voters voted for me and replaced the incumbent.
So there I was, 26 years old, a lawyer and in the Legislature: the two things I'd always wanted to do, I did at 26. I was privileged to be elected and enjoyed practicing law.
We are getting to why you stuck around, aren't we?
We're getting to that. So I was re-elected in 1987, was re-elected in 1991, was re-elected in 1995, re-elected in 1999, and re-elected in 2003. The voters supported me all that time. I felt like I was really making a difference in the city and my community, and so even though the demographics of my area have changed, I stayed to try to make it better and be a part of it, and I have done that.
Do you ever have old neighbors and friends who ask why you don't move on yourself?
They have. There's just a lot of people—Jacksonians in general—ask that question: "Why don't you move?" Well, my answer is that Jackson is a good place. It offers a lot of opportunities, economically and otherwise. It is not the bad place that the media sometimes tries to portray it as. Sure, there are crimes committed, but it's a huge city, and crime in Jackson, statistically, is no greater than it is in other large cities of similar size.
My law practice is downtown; I own real estate in downtown, actually. I own my home here. So rather than tucking my tail and running out to the suburbs, I stayed here. Running is not my nature. My nature is to face a problem and tackle it with all I've got and to try to right whatever's wrong. That's what I have dedicated myself to do here.
And I think we're turning a corner in Jackson. I do. We're making strong strides in improvement. It's starting with the makeover in downtown Jackson, but that's where the movement begins all over the country.
You started late in life, when it came to kids, didn't you?
Well, I got married when I was 31. We dated for about six years prior to that. She went to (Mississippi College) and received her bachelor of business degree there, then she received her MBA from MC. Her name is Karen, formerly a Hudson, from Clinton.
Does she ever pressure you to move?
No. Never. She's very supportive of what I'm doing. I met her while I was teaching business law as an adjunct instructor at MC. I taught business law from '82 to 1989. It was the first year out there, 1982. Karen was a student of mine, and when the class was over we started dating and eventually got married.
We have a lot of friends over the tri-county area, and they will say often: "Why do you still live in Jackson. Why don't you get out of there?" And my answer is always that I like it, I'm committed to making my community a better place, and I do not believe that suburban sprawl is the answer to our problems.
Redevelopment and renovation: those are the keys to the vibrancy of any community, otherwise all you'll have is people moving farther and farther out like they do in other parts of the country. They move from the city to the suburb. Then, when the suburb becomes the kind of place they don't like anymore, and they move farther out.
Before you know it, you're driving two hours to work, and you're chewing up the countryside for no reason, and that's environmentally irresponsible to me. It doesn't promote proper use of our resources. We need to take what we have and make it better, not just move farther out and run from it.
There's a trend to move back into the city, all across the United States, and it's catching on here as well.
You speak on battling problems in the city. What are some of the hardest issues facing your neighborhood?
Every neighborhood in Jackson, or in any big city, faces the issue of dilapidated properties. Dilapidated properties are mainly owned by people who don't live in Jackson anymore. They've moved on and left their house behind as a rental house, or someone has died and the children may live out of town or out of state, and they may rent out the property instead of selling it. I think deteriorating, dilapidating properties are the No. 1 enemy of Jackson neighborhoods. It's a problem in every sector, and now it's spreading to the suburbs. So I support, for example, the city's council's effort to make landlords responsible for their property and make them pay fines when they don't keep it up. I support that whole audit thing; I support efforts to demolish dilapidated structures quickly and cut out the red tape, and I support a measure in the Legislature to do that, to cut out the red tape. I support putting that lot back on the tax rolls by selling it very cheaply to somebody willing to build a nice home or structure back on it.
Well, as you said, legislative changes are needed to help with this. What are the chances of getting them through this session?
I think they're good. There's been a tremendous refocus on the capital city by the Legislature. I think there's an awakening where people are learning that we don't need to let our city slide into complete disrepair and dilapidation—that we need to beautify and shore up the city.
Quality-of-life issues are the main issues facing the city. I even support the council's efforts to keep people from parking in their front yards, because that's a quality-of-life issue—a beautification issue. I support increased fines for littering and support demolishing dilapidated structures quickly, and of course, within the umbrella of quality-of-life comes law enforcement. We must act swiftly to arrest and put on trial people charged with crimes.
Which some would say comes back to making it legal to increase the number of judges in the county and providing more money to pay for the teams of prosecutors to help build new dockets.
Well, I hear many people talking about that in the recent crime-summit meetings, but I'm not certain whether more money, judges and prosecutors are needed as much as perhaps those who are there rolling up their sleeves and working a little harder.
You've occupied your spot in the House for while. Could we say you've built up a bit of a power base there?
Well, I wouldn't characterize it that way myself. Along with my seniority have come benefits for my district and my community. I'm on all the important committees because of my seniority. I've built up relationships that have endured for over 20 years, and I'm able to get some things accomplished because of that, and that's been real helpful for my city.
Give me some examples, would you?
Well, I was co-chairman of a committee that just announced the $50 million bond issue for a civil rights museum in Jackson. I'm on the special committee that announced plans to eventually build up the blind school property to a first class piece of development that will enhance the neighborhood over there in the city. We're going to get passed some legislation to get Jackson some state money to account for the fact that state property is non-taxable. There are just so many things that a member of the Legislature can do when he's been there a long time because of the committees you're on and the relationships you've established over the year.
I'm the senior member of the Legislature from Jackson.
You just used the words 'We're going to get passed …' in regard to a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes bill. You sound pretty confident.
I am.
We'll come back to that. What are some of the hardest bills to pass this session?
I would say this education funding is important. It always is, but it'll be more important this year because it's an election year. The governor proposed spending money one way, and the House leadership has proposed fully funding MAEP, and that's going to be an issue. I believe that the winner will be MAEP. I believe that the Legislature will fund that fully, even though it'll be a contentious issue. They'll still win out, I think.
There are so many issues that it's hard to guess what'll be the big issue before it starts. You may think that something simple will slide through, but then it doesn't. The Legislature will get hung up on whether or not to increase the deer season for two days. People will get angry with each other over something almost to the point of name calling, for something as simple as that. Then you may have an issue like education funding, which you would suspect would evoke the same passion and angst, but then it turns out it doesn't. It's odd how some of the most mundane issues flare up, and others don't.
Payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILT) bills have never been easy. What's your plan of attack on pushing for something to legislators who don't live here and who could not care less about the problems facing Jackson?
Well, members of the Legislature have complained. I hear them complaining about the streets, and how they have to ride on these streets while they're here. They've also complained about crime. Believe it or not, several legislators have had their cars stolen or broken into, and several have been robbed at the hotels they're staying in over the years. So these legislators are acutely aware of what some Jacksonians are facing.
I think that's the selling tool. So I'll say to the members: "Maybe you don't live here, but this is your capital city. This is where people come from all over the world to do business with the government, and this is the first—and sometimes only—impression that they get from the state. Right here." I think they realize that it's becoming critical to put on a better face for the capital city, and they're coming around to the fact.
Why should the state cough up more money for the city?
Years ago, the city benefited from state government. I would say the vast majority of state employees lived here. They bought homes here, ate here, bought their groceries and gas here. But that's changed now. The vast majority of state employees now live in suburbs. They gas up there, and sometimes they bring a brown-bag lunch with them to work. I'm not criticizing them. They have a right to live whenever they want to, but we don't have the economic model anymore that we used to have. There's no money added to it. They don't live here, they don't eat here, but the state government still doesn't pay taxes on their workplace. The rest of us who live here have to be taxed double, almost, to pay for the non-taxed property. Look at our tax rate. If you live in Jackson you're paying about 180 mills, total schools, county, city and all that, and many communities around us are paying 50 mills or less, so you see it costs twice as much or three times as much to live in Jackson than somewhere else, and it's largely because of the non-taxed property in the city.
Well, legislators in the outlying subdivisions seem to have some disdain for the city, sort of a 'put a fence around it and charge admission' kind of mentality.
Not so much anymore. That used to be the case, but I don't see that being true anymore.
Why would you think that?
Because the suburbs have grown up. Twenty years ago legislators were saying Jackson's wealthy. It has all the money, all the government and so forth, but they don't think that anymore because that's not the case.
So you never detect bias toward the city because of its majority black population?
No, I don't. I don't sense that at all. I sense people being upset about crime. Legislators are upset because the streets are bad, and crime is terrible because they've been victims of both crime and bad streets, but I don't hear anybody—I'm not aware of any disdain because the city is majority African American at all. I haven't heard anybody suggest that at all.
I've spoken to some city officials and lobbyists who seem to think differently.
Well I'm with legislators every day. I sit with them, and talk to them and I'm really not aware of anybody who feels negatively about Jackson because it's majority black.
I wonder what's fueling the suspicion that it exists, then?
Well, hell, I don't think it does. If some people say that, then that's their opinion, but that's not the reality of it.
Well, let's talk about you a little bit. How have you changed over the years? You weren't always a Republican, were you?
No. I ran as a Democrat in 1983.
Was your opponent a Democrat, too?
Jim Neal was a Democrat. Yes. I switched in 1991.
Why did you change over to Republican?
In Mississippi, everybody was a Democrat until the late 1980s or early 1990s, but I hate to be categorized. To be honest with you, I'd rather be known as a lawmaker who fights for the right thing, not according to what party I'm in. Parties label people and cause them to think one way or another about you. I don't like that aspect of it. Whether I'm a Republican or a Democrat, I'm still going to fight for the same things and believe the same way. I'm still the same guy I always have been: honest, moderate. A party label is just a party label. Some people live and die by the label. I'm not one of them.
Your comrades in the House sometimes have a hard time classifying you.
I'm known by my colleagues as a straight shooter. I don't play the race game with anybody. I don't race bait. I treat everybody fairly, and I've tackled each issue. I don't vote with the Republicans because they're Republicans. I don't vote with the Democrats because they're Democrats. My vote is based on the issues, across the board. I'm not going to be whipped by anybody to vote a certain way. They can't rope me in like that.
It must annoy Barbour Republicans to have you among their ranks. Like, for instance, how did you vote on the Partnership for a Healthy Mississippi issue?
Oh, let me tell you. I support raising the cigarette tax and lowering the grocery tax, but I support the cigarette tax not because of the money it'll bring in but because cigarettes kill people. They cause cancer and destruction in the lives of our people, and young people begin smoking not even knowing what they're doing. It's been proven that raising the price of cigarettes causes young people not to smoke because they then decide that they'd rather spend their cigarette money on their dates or clothes. Also, cigarette smoking costs the state of Mississippi about $800 million a year in health costs treating sick smokers, and yet we don't get enough revenue to pay for the damage.
If that's against the Barbour people, then so what? I respect them, but I'm going to continue to support and lobby for higher cigarette tax because that's the right thing to do.
Well, what about the Partnership vote last session?
I voted in favor of the Partnership and always spoke for it. The Partnership for a Healthy Mississippi has received national recognition for being in the top when it comes to smoking cessation and prevention. Why, oh why, would you tamper with something that's working so well?
Barbour said his reasoning was that the Partnership needed more legislative oversight. He called it unconstitutional, if you recall.
Well, we introduced a bill to do that. I did. We voted for that. The House of Representatives actually voted for a bill to make it statutory, but he vetoed it. I don't want you to paint me as against Barbour, but I supported that bill to make the Partnership statutory, but it didn't make it all the way through. But even so, with all the technical things aside, the Partnership was working. It was causing people to stop smoking and keeping our youth from beginning a deadly habit, so I supported it because that's what we needed to be doing. The Partnership was the right thing to do for our people, and I'm not going to be hornswoggled.
Hey, what are my colleagues saying about me, anyway?
Well, for instance, some people say you've changed tremendously just over the last five or so years. One guy I was talking to, when I told him about your support for the upcoming payment in lieu of tax bill, he said, 'I don't know what's come over him.'
Well, it's good that I'm hard to classify. Whenever they're assembling votes on a certain bill, it's good that they draw a blank when they try to guess how I'll vote. It's good that they can't guarantee that I'll vote Republican or Democrat. And I usually won't tell them how I will vote. They hardly ever get an answer from me when they're counting the votes. I won't tell them, and I like to keep it that way. It makes them have to come to you.
Would you have supported the PILT bill 10 years ago?
That PILT bill was not an issue 10 years ago. That wouldn't have come up, because that's a fairly new issue. I would have supported it. I live in Jackson, so I see firsthand our problems. I see firsthand that we need to come up with innovative ways to fix our problems, not just tuck and run to the suburbs. That doesn't solve our problems; it just expands them outward.
I don't think we need to just criticize Jackson—not just beat up on the leadership here, but really try to work with them to get the problem solved. I've got five children that are growing up here, and I want them to have a safe, nice place to live.
Can I ask where they go to school?
Of course. My youngsters go to First Presbyterian day school, and my older ones go to (Jackson) Prep.
Why do you take an interest in public-school affairs if your kids are in private school? I think you had voted recently on a bill to include more physical activity in schools, for instance.
That's this year. I'm chairman of a subcommittee in the education—excuse me for a minute. Sorry, We've got a beagle, and the girls were playing with him. He smells.
Anyhow, I pushed last year regarding the snacks and beverages they serve in school. We got that passed, where now the stuff they sell in schools has to be healthy, and they got rid of all the sugar-based drinks and all that.
I thought that was a State Board decision? I remember when the vote went down.
It was a State Board act, but it was based on what I did. I put the law in last year that forced the state board to do that. So anyway, (Rep.) Cecil Brown (D-Jackson) appointed me chairman of the subcommittee this year to study nutrition and phys-ed. We've been meeting all summer and all fall. Well, last week, we just came up with our final blueprint to introduce, and it's going to require a minimum of 30 minutes a day of physical education in K-8, and then at least one-half credit of phys-ed to graduate in 9-12. We also have addressed the issue of what they serve in cafeterias. We want to get the junk out of the cafeterias.
You mean pizzas? Cheeseburgers?
Basically, yeah—getting the cafeteria in line with what's healthy, and that's what we did. We recommended that last week, and it'll come up this year.
Also, tell me if this was you: There was a legislative move to claim that evolution was just another theory in Mississippi textbooks. Were you in on that?
That wasn't me. That was Representative (Joey) Fillingane (R-Sumrall). He's now a senator, but he was wanting to put a sticker in the textbook saying that evolution is a theory, not a fact, and that kids ought to have an open mind about it.
Did you have an opinion on that at the time?
I didn't get involved in that. I voted on it, though.
Did you vote for it or against it?
The measure would have required telling students that evolution ought to be considered together with other theories of the beginning of life, and I voted for that, so that when kids learn they can learn various theories, including creationism and make up their own minds.
That's been a very partisan issue in other parts of the country. Is there really such a need for more spirituality in public schools?
I think so. I think there's a void of spirituality among our youth, and we can't legally mandate anything to address it because of the separation of church and state, but that comes from parents. The lack of spirituality manifests itself in the crime rate among our youth. There's just no respect for property, human life and the dignity of other people, and when people grow up that way, for them committing a crime is nothing. We need spirituality in our lives. Our children need it.
Has the Legislature become more partisan?
Oh, there's no question about that. I'm one of the few Republicans who you can see out to lunch with the Democrats. It's become more partisan, I'd say, in the last two or three years, even more so than during the (Gov. Kirk) Fordice years. The partisanship surfaces during debates, and it becomes a situation where you expect the vote to go this way or that, based on whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, and that's counterproductive. There's an implicit demand that if you're a Democrat or Republican, you're expected to vote this way. This is about the freedom to vote on what the right thing to do is, rather than just voting in strict party line.
How do you maintain a support base in an area that seems to be increasingly going Democrat?
The last time a Democrat ran against me, I got 70 percent of the vote three years ago. Seventy percent means I'm getting bipartisan and bi-racial support. I was very proud of that. That means I'm getting support from Democrats, Republicans, blacks and whites. I think the voters appreciate a free thinker and an independent mind that will vote for the right things, not just political things.
How else do you do this? You must get your face out in the community a lot.
I was president of my homeowner's association twice. I'm a member of the Association of South Jackson Neighborhoods, which is an umbrella group to promote neighborhood development; I'm a member of the South Hinds County Rotary Club. I go to all the homeowner meetings; I attend church events all through my district, all year—not just around Christmas. I knock on doors. The people know me personally. They know me by my first name, and I think they like what I'm doing.
Do you think you'll ever be a Democrat again?
I haven't even thought about party matters. My goal is to be effective, so party considerations are secondary to my goals.
Since you know the neighborhood so well, tell me about its cohesiveness. I hear that neighbors don't form the bonds with each other that they used to.
Any urban neighborhood has its transitional element. It always has people moving in and out. That's just the way it goes, but neighbors around here generally know each other. It's a quiet neighborhood.
But I hear the appearance of so many renters in a modern Jackson neighborhood makes it difficult to form bonds.
That's true all over. Even out in the suburbs I hear complaints that some of the starter-home neighborhoods have become renter based. Renters are typically transitional; they come and go so you don't get to know them well. I personally want to encourage home ownership. People who own their homes typically get to know their neighbors better. Jackson needs to be a place for renters, of course, but home ownership needs a greater emphasis. We need to encourage it. As I'd said earlier, absentee landlords all over Jackson really fuel the dilapidation. They own the property and live somewhere else and milk the property for the few months they can get out of it. They just run it into the ground and don't care. Those are the people we need to go after.
Last question: How much longer do you intend to keep your seat in the House? Are you thinking of running for the Senate or retiring from the House?
No, there's no difference between the House and the Senate, first of all, and I've got 23 years in the House right now. I'm not going to give that up. I enjoy what I'm doing. I'm a practicing attorney in Jackson. I'm only 49 years old. I was fortunate to get elected at an early age, and I have no intention of retiring from either my law practice or the House. There's still a lot of things that I want to do for my state, city and community. Even though I could retire, I have no intention to do so. I'm running for election full throttle the next time around.
Previous Commentsshow
What's this?More like this story
More stories by this author
Support our reporting -- Follow the MFP.
Comments
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.