I was not actually going to post on Lawrence

 ...which, State House News Service reports, has now lost its fully elected school committee, as Governor Healey has now signed the bill empowering mayoral appointment for some of the seats. 

Lawrence, of course, has been in receivership since 2011, faithfully electing a school committee that lacks authority over its own district ever since. Rather than moving out of receivership, it moved to a receivership committee; it is difficult not to see Lawrence's fate tied far too closely with the previous Commissioner, the only one with power to remove it from receivership, having served as a receiver there himself. Riley, of course, did not remove any district from receivership during his time; Acting Commissioner Johnston has moved Holyoke out, despite having served less than a year, as yet. 

It was the remark in support of the mayoral appointment that particularly catches my ire: "There was a superintendent that was indicted. All of us knew what was going on with that superintendent. Yet that person kept getting bonuses, was never fired," as State House News Reports.

Yes, the former Lawrence superintendent was indicted in 2014. 
Lawrence's mayor, though he avoided being himself legally held responsible, at the time was subject to a federal investigation, as well as a host of...a lot of mess, including a lot of people close to him actually being held legally responsible.

All of that is bad. But here's the thing: not only is no one saying that because the mayor in 2011 was at least contiguous to a lot of bad stuff, Lawrence should never elected a mayor; the argument is that the current mayor should have more power and the school committee less because the superintendent in 2011 did bad stuff. 

This makes no sense. And it does a disservice to the people of Lawrence. 

And frankly, the way the Legislature and the Governor just went along with this is lousy.

Also, this is being regarded, by many who keep an eye on such things, as lack of support for local elected control of schools. That this could be a pattern was the source of Senator Fattman's objection to the bill; those in Boston hoping to regain elected control of their own schools are watching; and frankly, anywhere that the school committee occasionally goes head to head with the municipal side is a bit shaken today.

Not good. 

___
PS: The T&G appears to have reviewed the above and taken it that this is a move towards trying to get Lawrence out of receivership. It has no bearing on that. This isn't a "new pathway" out; that's just off base.