One year. One city. Endless opportunities.

Face Off

The smack talk between the Detroit City Council and the Detroit Board of Education — and between supporters and opponents of a proposal to give the mayor control of the foundering public schools — got nastier today after the Council president pro tem took a hard shot at the school board.

During today's public comments, a statement from Council member Gary Brown led to outbursts and angry comments from the audience. Brown told school board member Rev. David Murray that he and former DPS board president Otis Mathis are the “face of the school board.”

Murray is the preacher who lost custody of his five children after facing state charges of neglect and abuse. He's also the same leaning tower of rectitude who defended former board president Otis Mathis after Mathis admitted he masturbated in front of the school superintendent. And Mathis is the same guy who, even before he left the board after he was caught playing with himself, had already brought more stinging national ridicule on Detroit after it was revealed that he couldn't pen a legible sentence.

Needless to say, Brown did not mean his remark as a compliment.

Murray and Mathis are also reflective of exactly why, as much as I don't believe in handing Bing control of the schools, I don't think any Detroiter of conscience can continue to defend the school-board status quo. As insulting as his comment was, Brown's statement also had merit: When the region and the country consider the Detroit school board, too often all they see are the embarrassing headlines that these clowns generate. If we want to rebound, want to be taken seriously as a national player again, we can't keep electing people who are either too venal to see local politics as anything but a personal ATM or too stupid to enact policy that will do us any good.

But to Brown's deeper suggestion: Is the election of hacks, fools, bumblers, crooks and chicken-chokers — even in this troubled corner of America — in and of itself enough justification to do away with a board that the majority of citizens want to keep? And most importantly of all, will doing away with the board ensure that poor children in the city get the same quality of education as their more affluent peers in other districts? Is shoving the schools' problems onto the mayor's overflowing plate going to raise a singe test score or make one more fifth-grader proficient in mathematics?

I also wonder, does Brown's insult extend to the City Council, too? Surely, the council has provided us with enough scandal, incompetence, silliness and ineffectiveness over the years that it too could be assessed according to its lowest common denominators. Like Mathis from the school board, Monica Conyers is gone from the Detroit City Council — but given the cloud of scandal still looming over City Hall amid the ongoing FBI corruption investigation, can she fairly be called the Council's "face?"

As I figured, the mayoral control battle already has become the most hotly contested issue of the still-young Detroit political season. A board member has already suggested that she might question the necessity of the Council if the city leaders agree to move foward with the ballot proposal. Given this start, I expect that the sticks and stones being hurled will grow heavier and sharper as the days go by.

And maybe it won't do any good in this battle, but it's worthwhile for these "august" bodies to remember that calling someone else's face ugly, even if true, is a sure-fire way to get everybody looking at yours, too.

  • Print
  • Comment
Comments (3)
Post a Comment »
  • 1

    This sets the stage for my firm's proposal on a new threshold leadership paradigm 'Universal Candidacy'

  • 2

    I agree as most of the opponents of Mayoral Control of DPS that we must do a better job of 'vetting" board candidates and strengthening the academic outcomes for our children. However, I find it interesting that not one comment out of over 200 citizens present (at both Council meeting over the last two weeks) was provided by the mainstream media. Instead the focus is on the sensationalized comments by Gary Brown, who in my opinion is "bought off"! He has his retirement, his $4 million settlement from tax payers money and his council salary and does not represent the interests of the citizens of Detroit! Kudos to you Mr. Dawsey for at least raising a more objective view of the dynamics of this issue of the Takeover attempt. Detroiters voices are not being heard in context nor their real issues!

  • 3

    I'd guess the answer to all three of Mr. Dawsey's questions is "no." There's nothing wrong with having a democratically elected school board--what matters is who is elected to the board and the capacity of the board collectively to recruit and hire an effective superintendent and stand back and let that superintendent do his/her job. Posturing and politics on school boards, as occurs with the DPS, harms the education of children because it is associated with the turnover of superintendents and too frequent changes in educational policy. Perhaps a solution is to greatly reduce the size of the school board and the pay and perquisites of its members. Small groups can reach a consensus easier than large groups. The lower pay and perquisites for the members of suburban school boards don't tend to attract people who are politically ambitious. Thus, there's less posturing and politics. Superintendents can work within an environment where, although they are agents, and accountable to the school board, they do not need to spend all of their time on politics and building majority support on the school board, but rather are given the discretion to attend to what really matters for the education of students.

Add Your Comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Detroit Blog Daily E-mail

Get e-mail updates from TIME's The Detroit Blog in your inbox and never miss a day.

More News from Our Partners

Quotes of the Day »

NICHOLAS FISHER, expert at Stony Brook University in New York who took part in a study which found that bluefin tuna contaminated with radiation believed to be from Fukushima Daiichi were present off the coast of California just five months after the nuclear meltdown.