The present fracas over firefighter pensions in the city of St. Louis is an outcome of the many structural and chronic problems with its political process.
Over the years the city has agreed to a pension system for its firefighters that it can’t afford. These ill-advised commitments were the result of compliant leadership in city government when confronted by the political clout of the firefighters union ruthlessly pursuing the collective self-interest of its members.
It is a fact that Francis G. Slay played a large role in making these ill-advised commitments when he was an alderman and then aldermanic president. It is also a fact that as mayor in 2012, Slay has acted boldly in opposition to the firefighters union by pushing city legislation that would radically remake the pension system and take major strides in controlling the untenable pension burden.
Slay has been blocked by current aldermanic president Lewis Reed, who is exploiting the city’s weak mayoral government structure. If Reed can get key committee chairs to follow his leadership, as he has lately with veteran and well respected alderman Greg Carter, the mayor can’t do much with a board bill.
Reed claims to be serving the public good in his actions for two reasons: he claims Slay’s plan is illegal and would cost the city in future lawsuits, and he claims to have united city firefighters, who have long been segregated by race and internally antagonistic.
With all due respect to the need for cooperation between the races in St. Louis, any momentary truce between white and black firefighters on this issue is nothing to boast about. Uniting to protect a lucrative pension plan that doles out green to both white and black firefighters is hardly evidence of racial harmony or understanding.
As for the substance of Reed’s claim regarding the legality of Slay’s proposal, there is confusing evidence. When pressed, Slay produced a legal memo from an independent claiming the proposal is legal, but the same firm is on the record in a similar case claiming that these sorts of changes can not be instituted for the pensions of firefighters employed when the city made the commitment. We do agree with Reed that Slay’s administration has a track record of running roughshod over the city charter and legal precedent when pursuing a policy or personnel objective.
Slay and the Post-Dispatch accuse Reed of merely playing the politics of a mayoral hopeful here, grand-standing for attention. Reed is partly to blame for laying himself open to this accusation. St. Louis firefighters are often first responders who brave life-threatening situations to save lives and property, as no one could deny. But politically, they are never anyone’s friend but themselves for long. If you are going to make a dramatic political play on an issue with dire economic ramifications, it would be wise to stand up for a constituent group with more compelling grievances than the pampered firefighters union.
The Post goes far too far in claiming (in an editorial last Friday) that Reed has shown himself unworthy of being mayor by making this one bad play, but politically we agree it was a poor play. The virulence of the Post‘s response to one mistake is out of line, but then everyone knows that the Post has been with Francis Slay and is going to be with Francis Slay. Lewis Reed can expect nothing from its Editorial page.
The Post reprints as its own opinion Slay’s claims that Reed’s counter-proposal in the state Legislature is dead on arrival. In fact, a hearing has been scheduled. Given the plain fact that the current pension commitments are untenable, the pressure is on Reed to deliver on his proposal now that he has blocked Slay’s bill at the Board of Aldermen.
We do predict one outcome from Reed’s new commitment to battling Slay politically. The weakness in our city’s government structure will be dramatized through their battle, and the Post will paint Reed as an obstructionist. Reed may provide proponents of charter reform with a powerful image – an angry black man – for the current, defective structure of city government. Reed may or may not be able to mount a successful mayoral challenge to Slay and the Post, but he is well on his way to making charter reform an easier sell to the voters.
