That’s the question everyone is debating around the water cooler. I’ll rush in where angels fear to tread and posit my opinion. I was going to leave this as a comment on my previous post, but decided to just post it separately due to its length.
The way I see it is this. First, we have to look at the possibilities.
Is it possible that racism was a factor in this vote? I think we have to say yes. We have to acknowledge that racism could be a factor. Why? For a few reasons. Ross has the education and experience to be president, but has been passed over twice now — this time by a president who ran for an unprecedented (I’m told) third term. The vote for president was along racial lines. And the school board has a history of strained race relations, resulting in lawsuits and mediation. I think there’s sufficient cause to suspect some degree of racism.
Next, is it possible that racism was not a factor? Well, from the standpoint of personal racial prejudice, I would have to say yes. As someone pointed out, we don’t know the hearts and motivations of the board members. I think in fairness to them we have to take them at their word (unless someone can provide hard evidence — not hearsay — that they had racist motivations) that race was not a factor in their vote. To accuse someone of racism (personal prejudice) is a serious charge, and it should not be leveled lightly. It attacks the character and motives of a person. I don’t think that voting for a white guy for president of the board is intrinsically a racist act. It would be incumbent on those making such claims to prove (a) Ross was better qualified and (b) the white board members voted against her anyway on the basis of her race. I think it’s clear from comments on the previous post that there were numerous reasons why a board member would vote against Ross — reasons that have nothing to do with race (e.g., voting record, lack of participation in important discussions, etc.).
But there’s one other thing to consider, and it’s called “structural racism” (also called “institutional racism” or “cultural racism”). This doesn’t get talked about much, but it should be. I think it’s the key to understanding what’s going on here. I found a good definition at, of all places, About.com:
The term “institutional racism” describes societal patterns that have the net effect of imposing oppressive or otherwise negative conditions against identifiable groups on the basis of race or ethnicity. […]
Examples:
- Opposing public school funding is not necessarily an act of individual racism; one can certainly oppose public school funding for valid, non-racist reasons. But to the extent that opposing public school funding has a disproportionate and detrimental effect on minority youth, it furthers the agenda of institutional racism.
- Most other positions contrary to the civil rights agenda–opposition to affirmative action, support for racial profiling, and so forth–also have the (often unintended) effect of sustaining institutional racism.
The idea here is that racism manifests itself in cultural norms that can’t be reduced to a single act or the result of personal racial prejudice.
In the case of the school board, we have to ask ourselves why all the white people on the board perceived Gorenz as the better candidate while all the black people perceived Ross as the better candidate. If you took race out of the equation, one could make a compelling case for or against either candidate. I think the answer is cultural, and not the result of intentional personal racial bias. Take a look around Peoria and look at how little integration there is in our neighborhoods. The result of that is that black people grow up predominantly around other black people and white people grow up predominantly around other white people. And this leads to certain cultural and value differences. Generally speaking, for instance, white culture places a higher value on individualism (and, in religious circles, a secular/sacred dichotomy), whereas black culture places a higher value on community and integrity (i.e., “the state of being whole or undivided”). I realize these are simplifications, but hey, this is a blog, not a doctoral dissertation. 🙂
So, when it comes to two candidates who are equally qualified for the job of president of the board, the white people don’t think “I’m going to vote for Gorenz because he’s white,” they think about what they value in a leader, and Gorenz fits those values, so they see him as their best choice. The black members of the board don’t think, “I’m going to vote for Ross because she’s black,” they think about what they value, and Ross fits those values, so they vote for her. And thus, all the board members can legitimately claim that they voted for who they thought was the “right” or “best” person for the job.
And this is where structural racism comes to a head. Because blacks are still a minority in the city and on the school board, the white guy wins under this scenario. And that’s why I think racism is in play to that degree in this decision.
When someone says that the vote of the board was racist, most people (I would wager) immediately think that such a claim is a personal attack on the motives of one or more board members. And it could be (there are still racist people among us, and there are those who play the “race card” unjustifiably). But I think we should consider the possibility that it might also be a reference to institutional racism — a racism that isn’t directed at anyone personally, but is directed at cultural norms and structures that can disadvantage minorities just the same.
I think institutional (or cultural) racism is a huge problem in Peoria. It’s evident in how racially divided our neighborhoods and schools and churches are. However, until people start speaking up about it in ways that are constructive and conciliatory, the culture will not change. It’s too easy to play the blame game instead of finding solutions.
AMEN!!! VERY well put, both of you.
I’m cancelling my PJStar subscription, you put things really nicely & well balanced! OK, not really… gotta get my obits somewhere. But… very well written. Good job!
Yes this was very enlightning. I have to wonder…could this also be considered reverse racism? I mean and I am not blaming any board member but just for the heck of it, what if the black members were voting for Ross simply because she is black, qualifcations aside? If there were more black board members than white on the board, do you think the white would cry racism?
You see this is all hearsay and like you said, no one knows what was in the hearts and minds of those Board members.
Institutional racism runs very deep in Peoria and even deeper in the Peoria Public Schools. White people have been voting for their own for centuries…who the heck cares if black people vote for a candidate for no other reason than that they would like to see a school board president who looks like them for the first time. When will these white leaders in Peoria realize that running the first black woman superintendent out of town, voting to expel black students from school at disproportionate rates, and the schools that disproportionately house black students to fail at unparalleled levels are all indicators of institutional racism. Anyone white person who has ever engaged in a private conversation with white folks in Peoria knows that votes against Martha Ross and disgust with Kay Royster are rooted in race and that talk of “qualifications” is just a guise. If Gorenz cared about the community and the students of color he “serves” he would step aside and let someone from their community with shared experiences lead them.
Wow and Amen.
What a great post. It doesn’t take newcomers to the area long to see what people who’ve lived here for years fail to recognize. My family has been shocked and saddened not just by the subtle racism that exists in this area but more by the overt and glaring prejudice so many have.
Excellent post, CJ!! You are correct in saying:
” If Gorenz cared about the community and the students of color he “serves” he would step aside and let someone from their community with shared experiences lead them.”
There’s no such thing as “reverse racism” Racism is racism and the African Americans on the board can be accused of being racist just as they are accusing (Hinton’s term) European Americans. This whole debate is stupid. Martha Ross may be educationally qualified to be President, but her record and attitude as a board member disqualifies her. SHE is a racist. SHE is THE racist on the board.
CJ gotta love ya. There’s nothing left to be said. You have conveyed both sides of the argument in a nutshell and very eloquently I might add.
FYI, the “CJ” who left the fourth comment is not me. My posts are always signed “C. J. Summers” and have a different color border. Just didn’t want there to be any confusion. 🙂
Also, thanks to everyone for the comments.
It is possible for something to be racial without being racist. All that can be concluded is that the vote was along racial lines and any allegation of racism is simply inflammatory and ignorant. It was inappropriate for Ms. Ross’ reflexive (although her diatribe seems to be well prepared; perhaps canned victory and loss speeches were in hand)reaction to be throwing the race card.
Ah yes, the ‘Black vs. White’ issue [not to be confused with Black Spy vs. White Spy – MAD Magazine].
What I want to know is how many Jews are on the board…voting for their own?!?!?!? We ALL know ‘they’ have an agenda!
Are their any Middle or Near Eastern people on the board or even loosely connected with Dist 150? If so, kiss your butts good-bye. Just wait until we get a high ranking Black Muslim administrator working for the district!
The fact that Ross and Royster are mere Women is reason enough for me to say hit the road! Asians and/or Hispanics? Lets not even go there!
Any Methodists? I HATE Methodists!
I prefer being PREJUDICE over ‘racist’ any day. That way I get to harp on everybody!
Regarding Kay Royster … She went on to become superintendent in Jennings, MO, a north St. Louis suburb that is predominantly African-American. Most, if not all, the Jennings school board is black, and they encouraged her resignation after they had the same problems as D150 with nepotism and financial mismanagement.
Sometimes a duck is a duck, no matter what color the plumage. Royster was bad for District 150, and it’s good that she’s gone.
I must also agree with the consensus … fantastic post, C.J.
I completely agree with Knight. I am not familiar with the COMPLETE background of Ross [or Royster for that matter]. CJ’s conviction that “someone from their community with shared experiences lead them.” I am assuming “their” refers to African Americans…? What if the only thing Ross shares with most African American [children] attending Dist 150 is skin color? The ‘Brothers and Sisters’ mentality is a myth. Levels of education, wealth, upbringing, etc… divide the African American ‘community’ as much as they divide the White American ‘community’. Just being ‘BLACK’ does not mean that Ross is going to automatically identify with or ‘reach’ the students and parents of 150.
Sorry, C.J. Summers, for not distinguishing myself. I appreciate this dialog as I’ve been a longtime reader but have never posted.
It is quite possible given Royster’s long list of bought out contracts that she’s a poor manager. Its also quite possible that the institutional racism and sexism present in any organization means she is held to a higher standard than, say, a white man regardless of the race and gender of her bosses. This stuff is totally implicit in the system and we have to be open to it.
Obviously the black community, and all others, is incredibly diverse and it would be narrow-minded to suggest otherwise. Perhaps Ross doesn’t relate to the students of color in the district. But I would claim with much confidence that the black students and parents in District 150 (who not coincidently are disserviced by the district as measured by test scores) relate much more to Martha Ross than to a rich, white medical doctor whose children reaped the benefits of the district.
In closing, I share a conversation I had with a school board member prior to Royster’s hiring. The conversation is indicative of the underlying racial attitude mentioned earlier in the thread that is present among most whites in Peoria. When I queried about the future of the Peoria superintendency he scoffed that the black community would demand a black superintendent regardless of quality. His dissatisfaction with having his hands tied (as if he’s not supposed to represent the needs and wants of his constituents) seemed to suggest that he questioned the qualifications of black candidates and failed to realize how crucial it is for the sake of the community as a whole to embrace people of color as leaders and decision-makers. With this attitude prevalent among white local leaders, how can one ever expect a black superintendent (Royster or Hinton) to be successful? I could be off base on this one since it appears that the much of the black community has wholeheartedly embraced his present campaign commercials…
“But I would claim with much confidence that the black students and parents in District 150 (who not coincidently are disserviced by the district as measured by test scores) relate much more to Martha Ross than to a rich, white medical doctor whose children reaped the benefits of the district.”
CJ,
No sarcasm intended, but can you explain the above statement? I am a little unclear as to who [whom?] is being disserviced and who is reaping, and why you believe this is the case.
Wow, good post.
All I’m saying is while it might be the case that Ross doesn’t connect with all black students and parents…its still powerful to have a black woman in charge. Its likely that black parents in the district connect more with Ross than with Gorenz.
Also, I’m saying black students are not served well by the Peoria schools and point to dropout rates, test scores, school conditions, etc as evidence. Gorenz’s kids all reaped the rewards (graduated, went to college) while many black students in the district don’t achieve those goals.
CJ (the fake one) : You say blacks are not well served in District 150, How so? Is it this Districts fault some students drop out? I know many black students, some of whom went to school with my sons at Manual who made the best of their education and are successful today. Should we hold their hands and force them? Should we just pass them on and then get them a job?
I say the education opportunities in this District are the same for every student. What happens is that home life and lack of a parental member there for support is what throws a lot of kids out of school. After all, with no influence from an adult, a kid will learn off the streets. Do you really expect the schools to educate, babysit, influence, feed, and then find a job for its students? Just because you are poor doesn’t mean you can’t get an education. Many poor kids have buckled down, got an education and went on to be very successful in life. It happens in this District all the time, just that kind of news isn’t want feeds the few that want to use race as an issue and say otherwise. I will say it is getting harder and harder to get student loans for college. It can be done but with Bush in office, the last 7 years have seen cuts.
BTW, what more can this district do to better serve the black student? We have a black Superintendent (and half his family is also employed by the District) 3 people on the Board are black. What can be done?
I am replying to your last paragraph Emtronics. Just because you are black does not mean you represent black. Hinton black??????????????We wonder sometimes,we know what he represents. Just because your skin color is black or tan etc… DOES NOT MEAN YOU REPRESENT THE BLACK CHILDREN IN OR OUT OF THE SCHOOLS NOR THEIR PARENTS! I AM AFRAID WITH YOU BEING WHITE WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND THAT.
I’m just asking some questions RED. Hinton, BTW, is black. So based on your answer RED, would Ross qualify?
Emtronics, I live in Ross’ district also and she does not and would not respond to me and I am a black parent with 3 children in the district. Bottom line pryor to Butler and Parker who have not been there very long, everyone else including the adminstration need to go!We need to start all over from scratch. I have never seen the morale of the employees so low. When you walk into the administration building it feels cold just like a morgue. So many unhappy people. You just can not keep throwing money away. I agree with Diane, Mr. Vallas should had been allowed to try and help us out of a bad situation. My opinion is they really don’t want it fixed, especially if it is not doing it their way.
PS You have to try and understand, just because a person is black it does not mean that all the black people are behind them when we know they are wrong. Do you thnk just because he is black and Ross is black I am no longer a free thinker? I am sorry to say I know black folks that can not stand Hinton nor Hannah and don’t want either one of them there in any capacity. Further more did not Hinton move money like Royster did, that sounds like a double standard. I feel that Hinton and etc should had been let go just like they did Royster, what is so special about him and them? What have they done lately? When the money is gone and Hinton and Cahill are walking out the door maybe one will be so kind and shut off the lights. Other than that, I can not tell you what is behind all this except $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
CJ,
Red’s line of thinking is where I was going.
Red, CJ,
I know Emtronics can be a bit…’harsh’, but he does make a valid point when he brings up parental responsibility, stability at home, etc. Somewhere there is a cause and effect.
Again, I have no stats to prove or disprove anything, but consider the schools in Dist 150 which have a predominately African-Amer student population. What percentage of the teachers African -American?
New Voice, I would say there are about 10% African-American teachers in Dist 150.
Red, I agree with you and NO I don’t think that just because a person is black, the blacks get behind them. That was kind of the point I was trying to make because some people here felt that simply because the blacks voted black on the Board, this must be racism. I too, live in Ross’ District and found her, well, no where like you did but some here don’t believe that. I also agree that Hinton and his buddies should go as he is not bringing the school board and community together. Also, teachers and administrators (like ass’t principals and principals) that are black is more like 20%.
I’m late coming to this discussion and for good reason—any discussion of racism and, in particular, the latest situation in District #150 is easily misunderstood and potentially hurtful to those involved. As a south side teacher for forty-three years (7 at Roosevelt Jr. High and 36 at Manual), I have always had to look at race as a factor. My Roosevelt students first taught me what it was like to be black in America and in Peoria in the 1960s. I will forever be grateful for the lessons they taught me. First of all, C. J. Summers, I found your analysis of racism, etc., to be extremely thorough and thought-provoking and heartwarming for very personal reasons that someday I will explain to you personally. I cannot speak for all of my colleagues at Manual but certainly for most of them, but I believe we did our very best to be sure that our black students were not underserved. For my own part, I have loved so many children (black and white) in my lifetime and received that love back tenfold. There are so many factors that keep black young people–especially young men–from academic success, and, of course, racism—in general, if not specifically–is probably one of the core reasons. So many of the ills of our country can be traced to racism—the greatest sin of our country. I know some will take offense at what seems to be a “victim mentality” point of view. At the same time, I think that we as educators (black and white) and parents, etc., should do everything possible to convince black young people that they are not victims—that they can control their own futures, etc. The “victim mentality” does not help the victims of racism.
I found the Royster era so very uncomfortable because for the first time in my career, my opinions differed strongly from those of many of my black colleagues, friends, and former students. I hated that. I especially know that all of that conflict was especially difficult for Martha Ross. Martha and I are belong to the same generation—a generation that saw racism close up and personal, and she—not I—was often its victim. Even when I disagree with Martha on District #150 issues, I always understand and respect her motivations and as the cliché goes “where she is coming from.”
Then, of course, there is Jim Stowell, who is the only white board member who attempted to explain his vote for Gorenz instead of Ross. Jim was also my student, and I think I know him well enough to know that his vote was not racially motivated. Jim comes from a family that has long served the young people (black and white) of Peoria’s south side. His brother Jerry, himself a former Manual teacher, cared deeply for the young people at Manual. Now and before he was a board member, Jim has spent much of his “spare” time in that area of our city—more so than probably any of the board members. And that isn’t even the area of the city he represents on the board. I hope that Martha and Jim can make peace on this issue.
Everything I know of Mary Spangler and David Gorenz (and I don’t know Debbie Wolfmeyer at all) makes it very difficult to believe their vote was racially motivated. I have only begun to get to know Rachael Parker and met Linda Butler only once—but I do not think their vote was racially motivated either. For my own part, I believe—obviously—that the vote was racially split, but not racially motivated. To believe otherwise, I would have to judge the hearts and motivations of these people, and I cannot do that.
I knew that this would be a difficult vote for these seven people. While I disagree with four of them on their vote for the shortened school day, I hesitate to even speculate as to how they should have voted for president of the board. I see almost all points of view as legitimate. I am glad I didn’t have to vote. This is a decision that affects them and how they will work together much more than it affects any of us—so it was their decision.
“For my own part, I believe—obviously—that the vote was racially split, but not racially motivated. To believe otherwise, I would have to judge the hearts and motivations of these people, and I cannot do that.”
Thank you Mrs. Crews. This point was tried to become established by several blog posters on this issue. Some chose to hear what they wanted. While I and a couple others said that this vote was racial, we never said it was racist.
sakgen: say what?