Click here for Salisbury Post article
or read manuscript below:
I watched the entire three-hour video of Tuesday’s City
Council meeting, as I often do, and I listened carefully to the discussion
around the mayor’s travel to Salisbury, England, both from the council and
during the public comments. I am concerned about where the council can go from
here. I see an almost forced division, which is likely to work counter to what
any councilperson or citizen wants for our local government, but it’s not
inevitable.
I see two separate issues at work in the discussion. First,
that of systemic racism. Racism is very real and arguably the base of, not only
our national, state, and local political division, but most of the divisiveness
of our culture, intricately and indistinguishably interwoven with our economic
and criminal justice systems. We
desperately need open and civil discourse on these issues, because, while most
of us do not self-identify as racist, it’s the nature of systemic bias that we
will always see the world through the lens of our own backgrounds, and this
feeds oppression. While we might never know from experience what it’s like to
wake up black, or female, or gay, or
Jewish, or Hispanic, or poor . . ., we can choose to listen with open hearts
and minds to the diverse voices crying out around us to be heard. Did some of
the public commentary push the education forward in a positive way? Did some of
it slam doors, adding more divisive tension to our council and city?
The secondary issue, framed as the primary one, is that of
our mayor’s requested reimbursement for travel to Salisbury, England. While I’m not sure there can be any possible
interaction between black and white human beings without race playing some kind
of underlying part, negative or positive, race is not the primary divider I saw
at work here, but rather the also very common that’s-not-how-we’ve-always-done-it phenomenon, coupled with some gaps in
communication.
Despite passionate and emotional public reaction, including
some personal name-calling and shaming of individual council members, I saw
respectful disagreement from every council member. Diversity of opinion is good
in a governing body, and how fortunate we are that our council is also diverse
in race, religion, and orientation. This assures us that we are well
represented and that decisions will be made, not perfectly, but fairly and
reasonably.
The council has been injured in this debacle. Future communication will be stifled and
difficult for each one of the councilpersons and for the mayor. Does
disagreeing with the mayor on any given issue mean a councilperson is not
sensitive to the black community? Must a councilperson agree with another on
every issue to avoid being called an antisemite, or with another to prove they
are not anti-LGBT? Is it OK, on the
other hand, to disdainfully call a councilperson an Alabama redneck or a
country clubber?
My intent here is not to answer the reimbursement question,
but to ask the rest of us to allow our mayor the grace to work this out. To
juggle the demands of any political position is difficult, and many at
national, state, and local levels fail, selling themselves out to their
supporters. Mayor Heggins is finding her own way, taking pride in her vision of
the council as the People’s House, hearing and caring for all people. With all
the public and media attention, if she makes this trip, will her travel story
be received only with negative politics? If she does not take the
reimbursement, will she be accused by some of selling out? Has the public outcry trapped her? As
citizens, can we give our mayor and every member of our council the respect and
support they need to work together for our diverse city? And can you, can I,
make a real effort to hear the cries of all our neighbors with compassion and
grace?
No comments:
Post a Comment