By Antonio D. French
Filed Thursday, January 24, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Reporter Lucas Hudson interviews Mayor Francis Slay in this week's issue of the Vital VOICE. Labels: Francis_Slay, Mayor, Media_Watch, Race
From Hudson's intro:The city’s sweltering racial thermometer portends an all-out political meltdown as Mayor Francis Slay was booed right out of the Old Courthouse by supporters of the city’s ousted first black fire chief, Sherman George, as he gave a speech Jan. 21 honoring Martin Luther King Jr. This humiliating show of resentment demonstrates that Slay’s legacy is in danger of being permanently branded with the scarlet R of racial unrest.
From the interview:
African-American displeasure with his administration did not start with the political game of chicken that resulted in the public demotion of George, but that event lit the match in an environment already filled with the fumes of African-American distrust, suspicion and anger at what some have described as Slay’s "racial politics."
In a Jan. 11 interview with the Vital VOICE, Mayor Slay speaks to these issues, and also outlines African-American progress that has taken place under his administration, declaring that "There isn’t enough coverage of positive news."The Vital Voice: We both know that some of the city’s African-American leaders are up in arms over what many have described as your “racial politics.” With racial tension inflamed in the wake of Fire Chief Sherman George’s removal, The National Society of Black Engineers has threatened to move its 2011 conference scheduled to take place in St. Louis unless the situation changes. In addition, a citizen’s group primarily made up of African-Americans called the Citizens to Recall Mayor Slay has started an effort to recall you from office.
Click here to read the entire Vital VOICE interview.
Consultant and blogger Antonio French’s site (www.PubDef.net) lists major gripes the black community has with your administration, which I have paraphrased. They include:
Mayor Slay, if you don’t agree with African-American disillusionment regarding your administration, can you at least understand it?
Mayor Slay: I am very aware of some racial unrest in the City of St. Louis. I am very aware of some of the reaction to what happened in the Fire Department. I will also tell you that if Chief George had made the promotions, he would still be the chief. I talked to civic, political and clergy leaders throughout the community during the process before any decisions were made. I want you and the community to know that I did everything I could to try and get the promotions done without confrontation or controversy. I respect Sherman George as a man of principle, but ultimately, we disagreed how to handle that situation.
There isn’t anybody in St. Louis that agrees with every decision I have made, but there are some people that want to divide the city. However… I don’t think anybody can argue with the fact that St. Louis is much better today than it was seven years ago. We were losing jobs and people faster than virtually any other city in America. Now, our job base has stabilized, our population is on the increase, and we’re getting national and international recognition for our successes. Chief Mokwa and I just announced that crime in the city has dropped 16 percent from last year. Crime is now at a 35-year low. That is something that impacts everybody positively.
Have we solved all the issues? We have not. And some of those allegations like disassembling the largest black ward in the city…Well, the people are still there. If that was the largest black voting ward the city, it is still the largest black voting ward in the city, but it just has a different number on it.
Most people only hear the negatives, and there is no balanced view. For example, the affordable housing initiative that I helped pass is spending $5 million a year, with much of that money impacting people of color. When I took office in the year 2000, 31 percent of the kids tested were positive for lead, and now it is only six percent. The neighborhoods with high incidences of lead poisoning are in predominately African-American areas. I am not suggesting there are no more challenges and everything is fine, but there isn’t enough coverage of positive news.
VV: What specifically have you done, and what more can you do to defuse the current racial tension in the city?
MS: I have been working hard to call upon fair-minded people who are very interested, regardless of what they think of my decision or how it was done—to pull together, begin the healing process and move the city forward. I believe that is going to take some time, but I have been very encouraged by conversations with a number of black leaders. I believe I realize how deep this issue goes, and I am not taking this tension for granted. It is going to take a lot of work and leadership from me and my office.
17 Comments:
Slay dodged the redistricting issue: The people are still there, but north StL now has one fewer ward (and one less alderman, committeeman and committeewoman).
He didn't have to dodge that question, because the facts are actually on his side. Ever since the progressive "one [person] one vote" Supreme Court decision in the 1960s, wards are constitutionally required to be apportioned by population. In the 2000 census, after all adjustments, the area comprising the then 13 wards that elected African American aldermen only had enough population for 11.5 wards. Slay tried his best to make a new south side ward that would elect an African American (and even changed its number from 10 to 20, the number of the displaced north side ward), but in the two aldermanic elections in that ward since redistricting, no African American candidate has filed. Not one! You can't elect an African American alderman if nobody runs.
An overlooked fact: Then-alderman Lewis Reed supported the redistricting plan for which Slay is being criticized.
1/24/2008 3:20 PM
Oracle, the point you're missing is that the particular northside ward that was eliminated (which not coincidentally was the largest voting ward in north St. Louis) was not one of the wards which suffered nearly as large of a population loss as others.
No, the 20th Ward was eliminated for purely political reasons.
The 3rd Ward, the 4th Ward, the 22nd Ward—these are all wards that you could possibly argue needed to be merged with others because of population loss. But the 20th Ward? No way.
And you're right, several black aldermen put their own short-sided ends above the bigger picture. Unfortunately, the then-alderman of the 20th Ward had a way of getting on the wrong side of her colleagues.
The thing those officials forgot then, and the thing elected officials must remember today, is that the individuals don't matter as much as keeping the offices.
Individuals can be replaced, but once a community gives up an office, it is very hard to get it back.
The Troupe/Shelton feud paved the way for Pat Dougherty and then Jeff Smith (both guys whom I personally like).
Black Aldermanic beefs paved the way for breaking up the largest block of black Democrats in the region and helping new mayor Francis Slay eliminate one of his outspoken political enemies.
These lessons must not be forgotten.
1/24/2008 3:45 PM
breaking up the largest block of black Democrats in the region
Every ward starts out with the same number of people. The wards are realigned every ten years because people move from one area of the City to another -- in that decade, from north to south within the city, from south out of the city, and from north out of the city.
The population in neighborhoods of the former 20th ward remained the same. They became members of adjacent blocks of black Democrats.
The only argument with the move is that it affected the 20th ward alderman, rather than the 3rd, 4th, or 22nd ward aldermen.
1/24/2008 3:55 PM
"The population in neighborhoods of the former 20th ward remained the same. They became members of adjacent blocks of black Democrats."
But the political organization is not there. The mobilization is not there. The high-voting is not there.
Love her or hate her, Sharon Tyus literally filled churches with her ward meetings. There is nothing like that now.
1/24/2008 4:18 PM
The redistricting argument is really a long shot Antonio. I know you hate Slay but your being pretty rediculous with this one.
As to the interview, Slay sounds like he is actually dealing with this stuff. Maybe he is doing more than he is given credit for.
Now is the time where Nat, Antonio and Zacki start accusing me of being a Slay fan and a racist. Enjoy gentlemen.
1/24/2008 4:21 PM
Why is the Vital Voice not asking about GLBT issues?
Last I heard the highest ranking city official with the strongest ties to the GLBT community is still very much in the closet.
Seriously, why not ask questions about the GLBT community and what Slay is doing in our city to help.
1/24/2008 4:23 PM
That damn Slay has nothing to say of relevance to me unless he is saying "I tender my resignation immediately"!
1/24/2008 6:58 PM
Why are people always insinuating that Mike McMillan is gay? Is he gay or not?
1/24/2008 10:41 PM
Antonio, your site is more fun than talk radio! Who needs Lizz Brown when we can come here and get facts plus the nutcases who respond to your work! Why would someone think Mike M is gay?
Oh I see - must be the haters out there who have nothing else to do. Get a life. Just because you dont like him doesnt mean you have to start a rumor to try to get him not to run or make people not want to vote for him as mayor.
So childish.
1/25/2008 8:21 AM
The redistricting of the wards was like Florida in the 2000 election a master political power move. Anonymous has little understanding of what effect that had on this city. Politics is long term and forever, I would be interested to see a profile of those that speak out on these issues, most on the other side would be economically tied into the current power structure and its use of poverty as a development tool. The others would just scare me.
1/25/2008 8:35 AM
I never said Mike was gay.
There is a certain priest that may someday come back to St. Louis and tell us who he was canoodling with. But I never made the statement that Mike in particular was gay.
If he is then that it is up to him to decide whether or not to tell anyone. Doesn't make him any less of an elected license collector to me.
1/25/2008 9:05 AM
if he is it makes him bisexual
the only way you can call him gay is if you slept with him, I did and I'm not a man
1/25/2008 10:54 AM
People call Mike M gay because he's 36 and whenever he goes out to events you never see a woman on his arm.
You would think a 36 year old man with good looks and a good career would be married or at least have a significant other that you would see him at events with.
but thats just what i hear...
why don't you people just go ask him for yourselves stop bringing it up on here!
1/25/2008 12:14 PM
What a wonderful admission, "I slept with him." Where are the black clergy when we need them or "po righteous teacher?"
St. Louis politics. What a city! Sounds like the Roman empire when it was in its worst decline.
1/25/2008 8:24 PM
Anon 10:54 AM,will you sleep with me?
1/25/2008 10:46 PM
The leadership in St.Louis has failed the Black Community on alot of issues and it will continue until we elect new some new black blood.Most white people of this city is racist as hell and the media here is right in the back pocket of this racist Mayor Slay and they will try to make Slay look like a All American white boy at every chance.Without black weekly radio that use to inform us,we are be lost in the dark big time.
1/27/2008 11:21 AM
anonymous at 11:21 "white boy?" sounds a little racist, doesn't it.
Just wondering,,,are you a black boy?
1/28/2008 2:36 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home