Because we strive to be an advocate for the vital concerns of the African-American community in St. Louis, and our community has opposed Mayor Francis G. Slay on many issues n including aldermanic redistricting, public schools, Fire Chief Sherman George n many commentators mistake our critical stance toward the mayor as something based only in race.
While we acknowledge that the election of Barack Obama as U.S. president has still left the U.S. n and Missouri and St. Louis, quite acutely n with a number of problems with a basis in race, we do not hold Slay personally responsible for our historic racial problems, nor do we think that simply electing a black mayor would dissolve these problems any more than electing Obama did.
True, we steadfastly refuse to forget the serious implications of the offensive and insensitive handling of Chief George and the way race was used against him (and other African-American firefighters) by the Mayor’s Office. Moreover, Slay has done nothing to suggest he would handle similar situations any differently in the future. Divide-and-rule by race remains the operative tactic with Slay, and we consider this counter-productive for the city and region, and particularly corrosive to the African Americans in St. Louis, whose optimum contributions we so desperately need if we are to progress in this competitive age.
We think St. Louis deserves a genuine contest for the Mayor’s Office in 2009 for many reasons that have little to do with race-based grievances or advocacy for our particular subset of the community. We see St. Louis as a city that faces grave challenges n a dwindling tax base, a looming budget crisis, too many of our young, bright people seeking opportunities elsewhere n and is beset by major scandals and disappointments that blew up during Slay’s tenure: a mismanaged and possibly corrupt police department, public schools that are left to rot while school privatization receives all of the mayor’s attention, major development deals that are announced and never realized.
Without question, Slay and his advisors are not the only blameworthy parties in these scandals and disappointments. But when Slay was doing away with Chief George, he grew fond of reminding everyone who was boss. If he is boss, he must answer for his role in causing these problems, allowing them to fester or failing to address them in creative, forward-looking ways. If he runs unopposed in this election cycle, or opposed only by marginal candidates, Slay could hardly be blamed for accepting that as a mandate to keep doing what he has been doing, without explanation or apology.
That is unacceptable, for a City that has not been managed to the best of its still considerable potential. No one in this city or region should be comfortable with the status quo in the Mayor’s Office in St. Louis. It is of the utmost importance to the future of this city and region that someone with vision, energy and credibility stand up now and challenge Slay and force him to defend his marginal record as mayor of St. Louis. The caliber of leadership does matter, and St. Louis needs to have a better than adequate manager. The city desperately needs an extraordinarily able leader who has credibility in all of the varied sectors n public and private n in the city and region.