An article in today’s Republican by Mike Plaisance would appear to remove four mayoral contenders from the scorecards of those following closely the upcoming mayoral race.
Out of the running: Melinda Phelps (focusing on her family), Patrick Sullivan (content in current job as director of parks and rec), City Council President Kateri Walsh, and State Rep. Cheryl Coakley-Rivera (wishing to avoid politicizing her position as a witness in the current ward-representation lawsuit against the city).
Not yet committed either way: incumbent Mayor Charles Ryan (will announce one way or the other within "a few weeks") and City Councilor Domenic Sarno (will "clarify things by next month").
Waiting on the incumbent’s decision: City Councilors Bruce Stebbins (doesn’t wish to run against Ryan) and Timothy Rooke (same, but also wants "a business person with a strong management reputation" to run if Ryan doesn’t).
Speaking of Coakley-Rivera and the ward-rep lawsuit, a report by ABC40 over the weekend drew from her affidavit in the case, adding layers of complexity to questions of city leadership as well as the pursuit of justice overall.
"At the end of the ten-page affidavit," the station reports, "Rivera points the finger at Michele Webber, Mayor Charles Ryan’s chief of staff. She claims the number two person in the mayor’s office has made some shocking racist statements." The station later followed up with Mayor Ryan, who disputed the veracity of the claims. Today’s Republican publishes his follow-up comments as well in a report by Mike Plaisance.
Some on MassLive.com’s Springfield forum have rallied a cry that the claims in Coakley-Rivera’s affidavit are signs that she is preparing to run for mayor, and is somehow priming the pump. Her comments published in Plaisance’s article today would seem to show that she may not necessarily be in the pursuit of her own political advantage.
The affidavit itself seems to contain second-hand information, and so the claims are tough to verify as a mere bystander watching the news, especially when we hear Mayor Ryan outright denying them in response.
Who’s telling the truth, and what’s a city resident peacemaker to make of it—as so many of Springfield’s people are at heart? Either way, allegations against Webber of racial slur-slinging are profoundly disturbing, whether because they are true or because they are not.
Being on the wrong end (is there a right end?) of label-affixing when it comes to prejudice, racial discrimination, and their cousins, one may seem to enter a world without gravity. There are few indicators of a better direction to take, and sometimes few allies to be found. This is generally the effect when invoking one of the most vital, challenging issues in our country—the issue of race—as a blunt instrument, rather than leveraging it carefully as a learning opportunity, and an asset, in the interest of justice.
Justice and community-building ought to be our goal. We might measure our success with that by gauging how well it raises us all up, ennobling everyone, not pushing some down in order to advance someone else. There is a better direction to take, and it must fundamentally be grounded on facts and first-hand knowledge, what one sees with one’s own eyes, and hears with one’s own ears.
When we become disoriented by injury, even name-calling, I think we find that everyone ranging from the most biased among us to the most enlightened will tend to shut down and default to pre-ordained thinking, maybe denial, and we’re no better off. Justice is not advanced that way.
It’s as though words really do hurt us, and sticks and stones would be preferable. Some words are like fire, and do serious damage, and some are like light, showing us the way home. It’s the light we need now in this city, not the fire.
