Report Inappropriate Comments

That's a great question, Cat. I think the city council has been scapegoating the school committee, in all honesty: As long as the council can blame the school committee for something, it can distract attention from the council's own decisions.

What the council is trying to do -- and what they have admitted as a goal, with their recent discussion about starting up the charter review commission again -- is have more direct line-item control over the school budget.

But if this program audit is any indication, they still won't have the impact they think they will.

Consider, for example, when the WTU contract gets close to expiring again -- do they really think they'll get a more financially favorable contract?

That's highly doubtful, given the audit's findings that Warwick has a disproportionate number of top-step teachers as compared to other urban ring school departments -- which means that Warwick teachers cost more to retain or lay off.

Whether the council wants to admit it or not, the school department has the upper hand here. The best the council can do it limit the potential impact, and as I suggested, find a way to cover the school department's request -- whether it's voluntary or by court order.