DN Editorial: SRC loses 2 but who replaces them is key

MANY PEOPLE will be relieved at the news that Robert Archie has resigned from the School Reform Commission . . . and that undoubtedly includes Archie himself.

Archie joined the SRC in 2009 and has presided over one of the more fractious periods the schools have seen - and that's saying something for a district that has seen lots of turmoil. While not responsible for the hiring of Arlene Ackerman - that was done by former member Sandra Dungee Glenn - Archie and fellow SRC members, including Johnny Irizarry, who also resigned yesterday, were left to manage the Ackerman reign.

A polarizing figure almost from the start, Ackerman was not exactly an easy leader to manage, but the SRC seemed almost immediately to step back from much oversight. And while, by the end, it was perceived as primarly a rubber-stamp board, the actions it did manage to take were often problematic. For example, renewing Ackerman's contract months before her departure, despite steep separation terms - which the SRC then fumbled when it passed the hat among anonymous donors to help pay her buy-out.

To be fair, the SRC as currently constituted is a pretty thankless job: five volunteers sit on the firing line for public education and its management, at a time of profound changes in how education is funded, delivered and valued.

Nutter - whose appointments these are - faces a big challenge. In the absence of a permanent superintendent, it's imperative that he fills the two vacancies quickly. That said, the SRC needs structural improvements, philosophical clarity - and cooperation from Harrisburg.

What is the proper role for the SRC? Should we expect major policy direction and input, or simple fiscal and management oversight? Should the SRC continue as a volunteer board, at its current size? These important questions don't have easy answers, but we have two simple ones the mayor can start with:

Why so many lawyers? Archie is a partner at Duane Morris; member Joseph Dworetzky and yet-to-be confirmed Pedro Ramos are also lawyers. Why? The district has 13 in-house counsels who must handle much of the legal work. Yet the district spends about $3 million a year on outside legal fees. It's worth asking whether this is necessary and whether it provides potential conflicts for any lawyer sitting on the SRC?

More to the point, shouldn't the background of SRC members be more directly aligned with education? A member representing parents' interests could also help. With five members, the SRC is probably too small to draw a wide enough range of expertise that could actually help the district.

The second simple question for the mayor and SRC: What are the schools doing right that should be built on? Given the turmoil of the past few months, it's important to remember that not everything is broken.