THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, September 10, 1995 TAG: 9509080212
SECTION: SUFFOLK SUN PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
SOURCE: John Pruitt
LENGTH: Medium: 73 lines
For the past several Suffolk City Council meetings, at least two community leaders have alleged that racism is at the root of problems with the city's housing-inspections programs.
The city attorney - who is white - refuses to work with the housing inspector - who is black - and her staff, they hold, and this is out-and-out racism that is just causing the downtrodden to live in awful conditions that the city should be working to remedy instead of stonewalling the inspectors.
Finally, the city responded Wednesday night. A committee listened to both sides, Mayor S. Chris Jones said: no, there was no evidence of racism; yes, there were differences between the city attorney and city inspector, but those have been worked out, and differences will continue to be worked as they develop.
He didn't say this, but we know there inevitably will be differences, whether we're talking about city officials or neighbors. Suffolk's housing mess - and it remains just that, largely because of too much talk and too little action - didn't just happen. It isn't going to get fixed overnight either, and something so complicated is bound to involve conflict.
Unless one is foolish enough to be like beleagured detective Mark Fuhrman of O.J. Simpson trial fame and record racist remarks for all to hear - and even in that matter there's the issue of context - weighing allegations of racism can be oh so difficult. To the city's credit, it at least tried.
I believe it's racist that so many of the Suffolk people who occupy slum dwellings, whether they're in confined, urban conclaves or out in the boonies, are black. It's criminal that (1) even if they work as hard as their bodies will let them, they can't hope to earn enough to get into better surroundings; (2) the have-nots have such a weak voice that few others even know of their plight; and (3) for so long, they city has just taken the approach that it doesn't have the money to fix things for its hopeless residents.
That still begs the question of allegations by Paul C. Gillis and T.C. Williams.
It's never surprising when they see things in black and white. I don't know if that's in the best interest of oppressed blacks, but I do know this: it's about time somebody started speaking up for them.
There's reason for their agitation. I don't question at all their conviction that if some of the conditions that have endured for years and years in some black Suffolk communities developed in other communities - especially areas occupied by monied, politically active - and yes, white - people - there'd be resolution instead of stonewalling.
I don't know that their approach is right. Indeed, I've written before about what I see as their sometimes-extremist views. But I commend them for pressing until they got an answer on this issue of racism's dividing the attorney and city inspector.
The real foolishness was in the council's response: a vote of confidence for the city attorney, their hire. What about the inspector? Where's her thanks?
The city has promised a systematic inspections program that, over time, will remedy many situations that now go from minor to major simply because the city doesn't force remedies. It won't work if the city attorney's office is just another hurdle for inspectors, whether the cause is racism or so many cases that it can't handle them all.
Systematic means all elements of the inspections program, including the city attorney, work hand in hand. They owe that to the people for whom Mr. Gillis and Mr. Williams would speak, people who for too long have had no voice.
The City Council, in turn, must monitor progress and see to it that racism doesn't hamper this systematic approach.
Comment? Call 446-7553. by CNB