Posted on 28 November 2006 by Antonio D. French
While other urban mayors are fighting to take the reigns of their city’s failing school districts, Mayor Francis Slay continues to push instead for the state’s Republican governor to take over St. Louis Public Schools. And he’s finding an ally in the woman he first appointed to the school board.
After denials four months ago by his aides, Robin Wahby and Ed Rhode, of secret conversations first reported by PUB DEF in July in which the mayor’s office called on the state to intervene following the defeat of his hand-picked school board candidates, Mayor Slay, a Democrat, has grown more and more vocal about his desire for Gov. Matt Blunt to take control over St. Louis’ beleaguered schools.
“A State takeover of the district is a needed first step,” the mayor wrote on his website Saturday.
“If legislation is needed to make the law clear and to protect a takeover from legal challenge, the Missouri General Assembly should pass a bill the first month it is in session — and the Governor should sign it.”
The current school board president, who Slay appointed to the board in 2004 after former member Rochelle Moore was removed because of her erratic behavior, has joined Slay in calling for state intervention.
Veronica O’Brien said that while she doesn’t yet support an all-out “takeover,” she does think the state should do away with the superintendent’s office.
“A state takeover in the truest sense would be disastrous and it would not help the children,” O’Brien told KSDK this week. But she said she wants to see the position of superintendent completely eliminated and replaced by two positions; a chief operating officer and a chief academic officer.
O’Brien also has begun to undermine the credibility of the very woman she abruptly introduced as superintendent just four months ago.
“Dr. [Diana] Bourisaw does not have the experience to handle some things in this district,” O’Brien told Channel 5. She said she once believed Bourisaw had the “potential to grow,” but no longer.
O’Brien said she doesn’t believe she personally deserves any of the blame for the current state of the district. “I don’t think I bear the burden of many years of the district falling apart,” she said.
In that regard, she and the mayor are again on the same page.
For three years, between April 2003 and April 2006, Mayor Slay enjoyed unprecedented influence over St. Louis Public Schools. Under the direction of his original slate of candidates — Vince Schoemehl, Bob Archibald, Ronald Jackson and Darnetta Clinkscale, who later became the heavy-handed board majority — the district embarked on an expensive experiment, overseen and co-directed from the mayor’s own office, that turned control of the district over to a New York City-based corporate turnaround firm and a superintendent that had absolutely no prior experience in education.
When the dust settled, the district was left in debt, the community was even more divided, and the New Yorkers where back in New York preparing for their next adventure in New Orleans.
But Slay, like O’Brien, accepts no blame for his role in today’s mess.
“It would be controversial to give up local control of the St. Louis Public Schools, but it would be plain wrong to allow the district to continue to betray the futures of thousands of students,” Slay wrote today on his website. “It’s past time for a state takeover. Why not just say that?”
If Slay and O’Brien get their way, 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.
Now the commentary:
It is not leadership to jump to the front of a steady march and join in the chorus. Indeed, it is cowardice for elected leaders to abandon their mission and turn over the power voters invested in them to outsiders — whether they be from New York City or Jefferson City.
If Mayor Slay wants to be a good leader and if he truly wants someone to have the authority to “put the district in the hands of a strong administrator with a mandate to stabilize the district and start it on the long road to recovery,” as he says, then he should ask for that power, not pass the buck to a governor who has repeatedly voiced his own insensitivity to this state’s urban people.
Instead of giving our power over to the state, the mayor should ask for control over his city’s schools — as mayors have done in Chicago, Cleveland and Los Angeles, and as is currently being considered in Seattle and Washington D.C.
It would be controversial, but no more so than if a governor who is not directly accountable to St. Louisans was given control.
And at least there would finally be one person the voters of this city could hold accountable for the future of our public schools.