Mayor Francis G. Slay has sought to evade any public acknowledgement of his manifest errors in the debacle caused by his conduct in forcing Sherman George’s demotion as the city’s first African-American fire chief. Slay has refused to honestly acknowledge the destructive consequences to the city’s highly-sensitive racial climate as a result of his political blunders. These consequences – spreading beyond a heightened, stern disapproval of Slay from a unified African-American community – include negative national media attention that undermines costly public relations programs and major economic development initiatives.
Slay unwittingly has ignited a powerful response to Chief George’s demotion among African-American grass-roots groups in the city. Although the response to this resentment is being brokered by diverse leaders like the Rev. Douglas Parham, activist attorney Eric E. Vickers and others, this response to Slay’s action took root among ordinary people – men and women who are deeply offended by the disrespect shown to Chief George, one of our community’s most respected and admired public figures.
Slay could have handled this sensitive matter differently at several junctures. But he has done it his way and resorted to surrogates with no credibility – like his minion Charles Bryson and former Mayor Vince Schoemehl (who has a particularly low level of regard among African Americans) – as agents to attempt damage control.
Moreover, the conduct emanating from the Slay Administration in this matter reveals something of more concern than racial insensitivity. It reveals an apparent vision that the only issue at stake is the mayor’s electability next year. What is lost in this vision is the plain fact that winning an election doesn’t ensure effective governance. This is even more problematic because of the governance structure in the city of St. Louis and its eroding tax base. The tax base has been diminished by meager population and business growth and generous public subsidies that have had to be given to attract business investment.
As Slay continues his public denial of culpability for the city’s racial disruption after he pushed Chief George out of his post, he is increasingly seen by some informed business and civic leaders as a major obstacle to the collaboration needed to engineer this city out of its still tenuous economic situation.
Effective leaders of large, diverse cities must have the political strength to foster many needed structural reforms – many of which alienate powerful and entrenched special interest groups. A politically weakened mayor is unable to facilitate the strategies that stimulate ongoing economic investment, job creation and significant population growth. Under ideal circumstances, the challenges mayors of large cities face are daunting, so a highly compromised leader puts his city at a serious competitive disadvantage.
If Slay continues his current course and continues to ignore the fact that he has alienated a large segment of the city’s electorate, he may need more than a nudge to move in the right direction. He may need a shove. No real sustainable change will come to the city’s aspirations without broad public consent, and any leader who is unable to achieve and sustain that consent is expendable. That unequivocal message needs to be sent to Room 200.