From the get-go, Bob Mirabito has been the unlikeliest of administrators to run the Capital Area Transit System. Hired nearly two years ago on an interim basis by the racially divided CATS board, Mirabito is a white guy with no background in mass transit or public administration. He has no apparent political connections, never worked in a municipal bureaucracy and, in fact, brought nothing to the table except experience from the IT side of the private sector.
How he wound up running Baton Rouge’s beleaguered bus system is still something of a mystery. That he ended up doing it so reasonably well is an even bigger one.
Since taking over CATS in 2013 from former CEO Brian Marshall, who resigned amid a barrage of criticism, Mirabito has brought a businessperson’s leadership style to a sloppy, inefficient bureaucracy. He has uncovered corruption, cleaned up the books, cast off those who weren’t performing and convinced Federal Transit Authority auditors not to fine the agency for transgressions that took place under his predecessor.
In other words, he has done a good job in less than two years and should have been riding high going into the March 17 CATS board meeting, at which the matter of his contract renewal and pay raise were to be discussed. Instead, Mirabito has found himself on the defensive of late, battling allegations of racism and even fighting to keep his job.
The criticism stems from some poorly worded comments Mirabito made in a podcast interview earlier this month on the subject of race and racial tensions inside the CATS office. Speaking to podcast host Clay Young, Mirabito said he wishes the CATS workforce, which is 95% African American, better reflected the racial demographics of Baton Rouge, which is only about half black. He went on to say he believes the system’s low ridership numbers are due in part to the fact that some people in Baton Rouge don’t want to ride a bus driven by a black driver.
Taken out of context, the comments come off as curious at best, insulting at worst—though, the way I read it, the remarks could be perceived as more offensive to white, nonbus riders than to black people. But within the context of the interview, which you really have to hear before passing judgment on it, the comments do not appear to me to reflect any racism on Mirabito’s part at all.
Rather, he was attempting—albeit in a clunky, ineffective way—to put into words the sensitive dynamics and the reality of racial prejudices and tensions he has observed in his 18 months on the job.
Is this so wrong?
Apparently so, in the eyes of many. The Advocate duly reported the statements, soliciting reaction from union leaders and Mirabito’s chief critic on the CATS board, Metro Councilwoman C. Denise Marcelle. She immediately called on her fellow board members to fire the CEO and demanded an apology, which he issued in a written statement later in the day. Her fellow council member, John Delgado, also jumped into the fray, calling Mirabito “an idiot.”
It’s important to note that Marcelle has been gunning for Mirabito for quite some time. She was personal friends with his predecessor, Marshall, and many of Mirabito’s housecleaning measures have made Marshall look bad—not that anyone outside of CATS circles necessarily remembers him or cares. Of late, she has gotten the union all stirred up and angry with him over allegedly unsafe working conditions. They have staged pickets outside the office and involved, apparently, the NAACP.
In other words, he was already in the hot seat with a handful of critics who have any number of reasons for disliking him, though until the podcast they were never able to clearly articulate their beef with him. Now they have some powerful ammunition—never mind that there appears to be no racist intent behind his remarks. Mirabito crossed some invisible line in the lexicon of political correctness, and now he’s fair game.
In the immediate aftermath of the controversy, two board members, Ken Perret and Jim Brandt, both of whom are white, came out in support of Mirabito. Board chair and Metro Councilwoman Donna Collins-Lewis, who initially told Daily Report she thought the whole issue had been blown out of proportion, subsequently issued an apology on behalf of the agency. She later said she still supports him, but her tepid remarks are not exactly a ringing endorsement.
How all this affects Mirabito’s future with the agency remains to be seen. Even if he survives in the short run, his long-term credibility within the agency is tarnished. He has been branded a racist by his critics, and there’s no amount of logic or proof to the contrary that can undo that kind of damage.
There’s a simple takeaway from all this, namely that it is virtually impossible to have an honest conversation about race in this country. Despite the fact that pundits, activists and elected officials are forever invoking the need to have a substantive dialogue, we’re not really able to talk frankly about the problems, prejudices and cultural differences that make race relations so inherently challenging. As the saying goes, anything you say can and will be used against you.
Perhaps if Mirabito had more experience over the years pushing papers in the office of municipal bureaucracy, he’d have known what not to say on that podcast. Now he’s learning that lesson the hard way.
