Your $7.00 monthly contribution will go a long way to helping us expand the coverage and services you enjoy.
GET THE LATEST PUBDEF NEWS 24/7:
ABOUT PUB DEF
PUB
DEF is a non-partisan, independent political blog based in the
City of St. Louis, Missouri. Our goal is to cast a critical eye
on lawmakers, their policies, and those that have influence upon
them, and to educate our readers about legislation and the political
processes that affect our daily lives.
CONTACT US
Do you have
a press release, news tip or rumor to share?
How about local control of our police department first? After all, that is where about a third of our city's annual budget goes. But then, why should city folks have any say over how one out of every three of our dollars is spent?
Perhaps Mayor Slay could be calling for local control of our schools — even mayoral control. No, wait. That's right, he was the one pushing for the state's Republican governor to take control of our $450 million-per-year school system.
Well, it's not like crime or schools have anything to do with the quality of life here in the city — at least not like the Arch grounds anyway!
As a matter of fact, we're so out of practice with controlling our own destinies around here, if the U.S. government did give up control of the Arch grounds, they should probably just turn it over to the State of Missouri.
At least that'll keep Hizzoner from building a parking garage or a Walgreens on it.
The following is an editorial from Congressman Wm. Lacy Clay...
"State Violence Should Be Subject to Oversight By New Commission"
The business of death is a serious one that merits extensive and exhaustive oversight. Although I argue that the death penalty should not be employed in Missouri, Attorney General Jay Nixon deems the practice necessary and appropriate. Due to extensive support for reintroduction of the incorporation of the death penalty and in line with the Federal ruling, the re-introduction of the death penalty is inevitable. Although the Federal bench may have ruled Capital punishment to be a legitimate form of punishment, not cruel or unusual, unjust prosecution and execution is cruel and unusual. Missouri is behind the times in finding new ways to prove guilt on defendants part.
A specific example of this failure exists in the case of Reginald Clemons. Clemons was convicted in 1991 of murdering two girls near the Chain of Rocks Bridge. Although he is on death row, his case has not been re-opened. Although over-whelming evidence and one confession points to guilt in another direction of another party, his case has not been reviewed.
Thinking along the same logical lines, the state of New Jersey seeks to eliminate the death penalty. This desire stems from a number of reasons not the least of which are cost and mounting cases of false conviction. Many New Jersey-ites have come together and joined with the Innocence Project (created by attorneys Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld) which works to abolish the death penalty. New Jersey death penalty opponents cite the case of Byron Halsey. Halsey was found guilty of one of the most vicious murders known to New Jersey residents at the time. With the introduction of DNA testing and other new methods of legal investigation, Halsey was found innocent.
On death row previous to his acquittal, Halsey is a prime example of the possibility of error within the judicial system. The Criminal Justice Reform Commission of New Jersey works to reform and eventually abolish the death penalty through examinations of false accusation cases involving introduction of DNA evidence.
In Missouri, if we are to reinstitute this violent and irreversible action, we are required to incorporate bodies to regulate this violent action. We must follow New Jersey’s example and create a commission to ensure that Clemons is not wrongfully executed. Missouri must establish a board of commissioners to investigate all death-row cases extensively for error or discrimination before any inmate can be executed. In title II, section 201, of Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr.’s 2001 death penalty bill, it discusses and supports the creation of a national commission on the death penalty. In co-sponsoring Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr.'s bill, the “National Death Penalty moratorium Act of 2001”, I hope to establish a local version of the aforementioned commission.
Much like every man-made system, the judicial system is rife with errors large and small. With introductions of DNA testing, psychological examination, along with many other methods of investigation, legal systems around the U.S. are reevaluating their guilty-convictions in cases that result in a death sentence. According to Innocence Project data, since 2000, there have been 104 exonerations throughout the U.S. based on DNA evidence alone. Without a commission to investigate, these exonerations might not have taken place.
I fear that although improvements regarding unwarranted executions are being made, they may already be too late for some. There is increasing evidence that points to the notion that Larry Griffin, executed in June of 1995, was innocent of the charges for which he was executed. Due to lack of an adequate review of the proceedings of his case, Griffin was executed. The amount of overwhelming evidence present against the guilty verdict of this case is daunting and leaves me disheartened.
The very essence that makes the death penalty dangerous is its permanence. One cannot un-ring a bell. A board of commissioners established to review death row cases in Missouri would ensure exonerations when appropriate and fewer inappropriate and unjust executions. I urge Missourians to support every effort to create this commission and to limit rampantly unwarranted use of the death penalty in our state.
On Tuesday, both boards of the St. Louis Public Schools will meet. The elected board meets in the morning for a closed meeting on legal matters. The appointed board meets in the evening for public comments. Presumably, the superintendent will be at both.
Oh, so this is what stability looks like.
Perhaps it's true that we anarchists here in St. Louis wouldn't even know a stable school district if we saw it. Because from my way of thinking, I would have thought that an organization with two dueling board of directors would be more chaotic, not less.
From my contaminated city resident logic, I would have thought a superintendent might find it more difficult to operate with two different bodies looking over her shoulder.
I would have voted that having a board appointed by politicians ADDS politics to the situation, not take it away. (Good thing I didn't get to vote.)
I would have thought it would have been a terrible idea to have a board made up of only three people, meaning no two of them can ever speak privately about education issues without violating the state Sunshine Law.
Starting off with a no-bid contract to an out of town law firm doesn't just finally allow non-St. Louis businesses to get a taste of our half-billion dollar honey pot. That's just the cynic in me.
Finally being in control of a St. Louis government, without actually having to live here, isn't a Republican's midnight fantasy. Again, that's just that northside paranoia talking.
"The state knows best. The state knows best. The state knows best." I'll just have to keep saying those words over and over to myself and hope I will be cured of my distrustful, backwards way of thinking.
UPDATE:Jake Wagman of the Post-Dispatchobserved on his blog today what we noted back in November of last year: St. Louis is now the only city in America than controls neither its police or its public schools.
"If Slay and O'Brien get their way," we wrote at the time, "it would put St. Louis City residents in the very unique position of being perhaps the only city population in America with no control over either its own police force or its own public schools."
For some time I have wondered privately to my closest friends if I am not wasting my time with Pub Def. By spending so much of my life writing about, learning about, and working in St. Louis City politics, am I just planting my seed in infertile ground?
As just about anyone who's grown up here knows, St. Louis is not exactly known as the land of opportunity for young people. In fact, just the opposite. After high school those that can often do exit the Gateway City for greener pastures in Chicago, Atlanta, New York, or anywhere else.
Hard work, it has seemed for so long, is not enough in a town with so few opportunities for young — and especially young, black — people.
Which is why Tuesday night was so gratifying for me. It felt as though a glass ceiling had been finally broken and that new possibilities had filled the air.
As a close witness to the tireless efforts of both Lewis Reed and Kacie Starr Triplett, I felt like finally the same rules applied regardless of race or youth. Finally, if you outwork your opponent... if you run a better campaign... if you pay attention to the fundamentals of political organizing... you can win any election in a mixed-race district — even if you are black.
THE RACE AVOIDERS
There are those that have argued that race should not even be discussed in these two contests. Most notably, fellow blogger and friend Steve Patterson and I debated this very topic the night before the election on KDHX. Steve said that the fact that Lewis Reed would (and now has) become the first African-American elected to position of Aldermanic President was irrelevant and should not be a part of the discussion of this campaign.
I cannot disagree more.
Beyond the opportunity to have someone in the President's chair with a much wider vision of the office, and beyond the possibilities for finally getting true parity in spending in northside and southside neighborhoods, the feeling of inspiration so desperately needed in neighborhoods across this city that have double-digit unemployment rates, no jobs within miles, high crime, and a general feeling among the residents of being ignored in decisions affecting their lives and that of their children — for this large population, seeing a black man do what has never been done before does matter.
And doing what it took to get that black man elected, I believe, will have far-reaching effects.
A GRAND COALITION
What I mean by that is that for the first time in a long time, black politicos put their differences aside for the greater good. State Representative Rodney Hubbard and Alderwoman April Ford-Griffin put their 5th Ward squabbles away and worked together brilliantly. Alderman Jeffrey Boyd and former Alderman Kenny Jones, who were fighting each other in the 22nd Ward all the way up to Election Day, put their differences aside in the Reed campaign office. Radio show host and activist Lizz Brown and former Alderwoman Irene Smith were able to put aside old redistricting beefs to work with southside aldermen Stephen Gregali and Jennifer Florida. There were countless examples of this kind of political maturity which so many have pleaded for for years — and because of it, we won.
These factions may go back to fighting tomorrow — and that is okay, that's politics — but when a job had to be done, they put personalities to the side to get it done. As the motto of the Congressional Black Caucus preaches: "No permanent friends and no permanent enemies, just permanent interests." Amen.
For me, this campaign was not about Board President Jim Shrewsbury. I have always had a good relationship with him and members of his staff and I hope that in time wounds will heal and we can work together in the future.
This was not personal. This was about power. To get power, you must take power. And African-Americans and true progressives deserve more power in city government.
The coalition of pro-black, pro-development, and true progressives proved that big things are possible when the small stuff is left at the door.
The night before the election, I thoroughly believed that Reed and Triplett both outworked their opponents and deserved to win. But having seen too many efforts go unrewarded in the past, I told several colleagues that what the next day was really going to show is what kind of city do we live in.
St. Louis did not let me down. I am proud of my city and the people in it. Tuesday's election has filled me with new hope about the future of our city and a new energy to help where I can to make it even better.
The 21st Ward delivered more votes for Lewis Reed than any other ward in north St. Louis that did not have a contested aldermanic race. With nothing else on the ballot, the 21st Ward delivered 773 votes for Reed.
The ward's current committeeman, Arthur "Chink" Washington, and its alderman, Bennice Jones King, broke with nearly every other northside elected official and endorsed incumbent Jim Shrewsbury.
The only other ward in the city that delivered more votes for Reed and did not have a contested aldermanic race was the 28th Ward with 781 votes, just 8 more than the 21st.
The following letter comes from activist Eric Vickers...
January 5, 2007
Completely left out of the glowing remarks about the City and County made this morning by Mayor Slay and County Executive Dooley during their address at the St. Louis Business Journal's "State of St. Louis 2007" annual breakfast is a problem that is severely stifling the area's progress: economic disparity.
Studies and newspaper editorials too numerous to mention have pointed out that, even with all the development taking place, we have not elevated the poor and low income as much as we have just shifted them around. These officials can talk all they want about improving the school system and combating crime, but unless and until there is an escalation in the economic status of the black community, their words will amount to no more than an aspiration.
In the same way these elected leaders coalesce and collaborate to promote development, they need to come together and develop a plan specifically to address the debilitating, pernicious and growing economic disparity.
To the Editor: As a member of the St. Louis Board of Education since last April and as a mother of three children in the schools, I want to assure your readers that there has been a turnaround in the schools since September under experienced education and finance administrators with proven records. A drastic remedy such as a state takeover of the schools is unnecessary. Further, a hastily called closed meeting of the School Board on January 2 gave an alarming indication that any state takeover would bring back the kind of uncertainty -- and even chaos -- that plagued the system during the three years that the board was in the hands of a majority controlled by Mayor Francis Slay.
During those years, the district had four different superintendents and lost 25 accreditation points reaching such a low level in the 2005-2006 that the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education could classify the system as unaccredited. The district had been moving steadily toward full accreditation, which it had been when the Slay-backed majority took control. Further, and far more alarming, is an action by Veronica O'Brien, Ron Jackson and Bob Archibald on January 2. In that hastily called private executive board meeting, two of the members, O'Brien and Jackson, subjected Superintendent Diana Bourisaw -- who had no advance notice of the agenda -- to harsh bullying trying to intimidate her to resign. The session ended with those three members voting to fire Bourisaw after another member finally got the floor -- in a procedural maneuver -- and made motion to retain Bourisaw, which received 4 votes. By a 4-3 voting margin in July Bourisaw became the superintendent when Creg Williams chose to resign. The system was in such disarray that schools might not have even been able to open on time in September. On January 2 the vote to retain Bourisaw was also 4 to 3, the difference being that Board President Veronica O'Brien, who voted to hire her, was one of the three who voted for dismissal. Flint Fowler, who had not voted for Bourisaw last summer, came to her support in the January meeting.
The January 2 meeting was recorded and contrary to both policy and law, after the meeting O'Brien personally took the audio tape with her and then to Jefferson City and played the tape to friends and associates. With much of the push for a state takeover coming from the mayor's office, it is frightening to contemplate the unrest that will be created under a committee, with one member appointed by the mayor, which would be created to oversee the St. Louis schools. The seven elected board members would become figureheads and St. Louis voters having no direct say in how the schools are run or in how their local school tax dollars are being used.
With the schools now performing so well and an election for two board seats due in April, surely the state should take another look based on this year's performance before taking any new action. Donna Jones Member, St. Louis Board of Education
An abridged version of a public letter from renowned activist Percy Green on the Special Advisory Committee on St. Louis Public Schools appeared in today's Post-Dispatch as a letter to the editor. It reads:
Commissioner of Education Kent King's Special Advisory Committee is a fraud. Mr. King appointed to the committee people who supported St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay's failed policies. Such policies led to the accreditation drop from 64 to 39 points, three years of mismanagement, outsourcing, turmoil and five superintendents. Two fair election processes have begun to repair the problems that the Slay board majority created for our St. Louis Board of Education.
The final two Slay members of the board (Ronald Jackson and William Archibald) are up for election in 2007 and must be replaced for the sake of our children and stability on the board. Because the community rejected Mr. Slay's failed experimental programs for public education, he now calls for a state takeover of public education, implying that St. Louisans are too stupid to vote correctly.
Board president Veronica O'Brien's behavior is a distraction from moving the new board majority's agenda forward. Ms. O'Brien launched a series of attacks on Superintendent Diana Bourisaw. After Ms. Bourisaw refused to be intimidated, Ms. O'Brien supported state control.
The committee recommended that the current elected school board members should not have full authority over the St. Louis Public School District. The excuse was a survey that everyone knows was not representative or credible.
If Mr. King should accept the Danforth-Freeman committee's recommendation, lawsuits and protest demonstrations should emerge targeting those throughout the state who are responsible.
For years, Green has been a vocal critic of Mayor Slay and policies of SLPS under the Slay-backed majority. In August he lost a lawsuit against the city in which he claimed Slay fired him as director of the Minority- and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Certification program because he was openly critical of what he called a "broken" certification system.
At Friday's press conference on the need for public hearings before any state action, Green called out Post education reporter Steve Giegerich for what many see as biased reporting.
It would help "if the newspaper would print the news fairly," said Green after a question by Giegerich.
"I know you don't like me saying that, but it's the truth, Steve," he said.
In New Book, Newly Re-Elected Judge Attacks the "Tyranny of Tolerance"
By Antonio D. French
Filed
Thursday, December 21, 2006 at 2:51 PM
PUB DEF EXCLUSIVE
A new book by Circuit Judge Robert H. Dierker Jr. is sure to make some waves in the new year.
In "The Tyranny of Tolerance", which goes on sale December 26, Judge Dierker examines why a Christian is fired when he voices opposition to his employer's favoring homosexuals? Why are white and Asian students denied admission to colleges and universities in the name of "diversity"? And why does a judge who defends a monument to the Ten Commandments in a courthouse lose his job?
According to his publisher's website, "Even those outraged by America’s courts will be shocked by Judge Dierker’s story of activist judges, deep-pocketed special interest groups, pandering politicians, and others who claim to stand for tolerance, equal rights, and social justice, but actually stand for something quite different—something closer to totalitarianism."
"Judge Dierker shows how we can defeat the radical liberals’ tyranny of tolerance. By wresting back control of the courts and restoring the legal, moral, and religious principles embedded in the Constitution, we can ultimately reclaim the republic the Founders bequeathed to us."
Funny how this book wasn't released before Dierker was re-elected last month by nearly 70% of the vote in this "liberal", Democrat-leaning city.
It Didn't Have to Go Down Like This, Board Becoming What it Hated
By Antonio D. French
Filed
Sunday, July 16, 2006 at 12:39 PM
Last week, in an off the record conversation with a member of the St. Louis school board's minority, he and I agreed that the tensions between the board's majority and Superintendent Creg Williams could only be solved in one of three ways:
(A) Williams and the board could try harder to work together, coming to a working agreement about each other's roles in reforming SLPS; (B) The board can get rid of Williams; or (C) The state could get rid of the board.
He and the Mayor opted for C. The board majority opted for B. And both Williams and the majority seemed unwilling or unable to take the A option.
There may have been reason to dismiss Creg Williams. To date, he had offered no plan to deal with the estimated $50 million financial crisis facing the district in less than 18 months. He was often unwilling to provide board members with information they felt they needed to make informed decisions. He routinely overreached his authority in hiring high-priced consultants, reassigning employees, and making major moves without the approval of the school board, as was contractually required. And he was often openly insubordinate to his bosses -- something that the mayor has fired his own high-profile employees for.
When rumors began to spread about possible action against Williams, I offered the following advice: Make your public demands of the superintendent, allow him time to comply or not. If the tensions persist, then make your case for the need for new leadership. Over 30-60 days, talk to opinion makers and editorial boards. Tell them what Williams is doing wrong. Build public support for a change in direction.
If it is true, as some board members have said, that Williams has made so many poor decisions that the district is being set up for a chaotic and disastrous first week of school, then the board should have kept Diana Bourisaw "in waiting" for a few more weeks, let the disaster happen, then come in to save the day.
But now, if any little thing happens during that first week (and it always does), it's going to be seen as the board's fault for throwing the district into chaos just weeks before the start of school.
This thing should have gone done much smoother than this. As I write, nearly 48 hours after the bloodbath at 801, the board still has not held a press conference. The board still has not said why Williams (or even Floyd Irons) was dismissed. The board still has not explained why a quarter million dollars of taxpayer money is going to paid by an already bankrupt school district to get rid of a man who had a higher approval rating than the board of education.
The new school board majority has disappointed many of its supporters who backed them because they were upset with the secretive and arrogant manner in which the former majority operated.
That school board, backed by Mayor Francis Slay, made major decisions, costing the district millions of dollars, without any regard for public input. It thumbed its nose and the state's Sunshine Laws and operated like a private corporation whose major stockholders resided in City Hall and not in the poorest neighborhoods of our city.
This board is now on the brink of becoming what it said it hated.
Two months ago, after the board agreed to hold off on Williams’ recommendation to close Cleveland High School to allow time for public input, Board President Veronica O’Brien, a Slay appointee, called a special public meeting with less than 24 hours notice. Some school board members were out of town and couldn’t even attend. Some aldermen who showed up at the hastily called meeting complained that it appeared that O’Brien had called the meeting just to “get it out of the way.”
As we all know now, O’Brien again this week -- with far less than 24 hours notice -- called an emergency meeting to replace Williams with a woman that some board members had never met before and clearly the public does not know. After the deed was done, neither she nor board members Bill Purdy, Peter Downs or Donna Jones had anything to say to the media or the public about what they had done.
The level of arrogance of this board has shown this week matches, and maybe even exceeds, that of the Slay/Schoemehl/Roberti board. It has squandered much of the good will coming from the April election and has done two things that many thought were impossible: made Archibald and Jackson the voices of reason, and made this reporter agree with Mayor Francis Slay.
It is a damn shame how this thing went down. It didn’t have to be this way and the damage may be irreparable.
