Bottom of the pile?

Today's column by Clive McFarlane questioning the motivation and the reasoning of those looking to clear up the questions on hiring in the Worcester Public Schools has a number of problems.
First, Mr. McFarlane appears to believe that this is all a setup to turn over certain functions within the WPS to the City. While that idea has been raised, it isn't as though the entirety of the uproar over the past few weeks has been manufactured in order to turn functions over. It also isn't as though the City Council is begging to take over running the school system. To believe, as Mr. McFarlane appears to, that these problems are so minor as to be ignored is imprudent. It's also not in keeping with what many inside the system say privately.
Second, the notion that the superintendent gets to dismiss some requests by the School Committee fundamentally misunderstands the role of each. The superintendent answers to the School Committee. A superintendent can dislike requests made, a superintendent can try to change requests made, but a superintendent cannot ignore those requests. Yes, Mr. McFarlane, even if it involves the donation of school buses to foreign countries.
This is a problem not only because of the business that may not have been transacted, but because it demonstrates a breakdown in accountability. You wouldn't catch the City Manager ignoring requests from the City Council, and rightfully so. So why does the superintendent get to ignore requests from the School Committee?
He or she doesn't, if their relationship is working effectively.
It hasn't been, and that has as much to do with the breakdown up on Irving Street as anything. It isn't just about hiring and salaries; it isn't even just about transparency; it's about who does what job.