to be promoted to Superintendent,
Just as is; whether she is actually
the best qualified candidate.
Those are both legitimate questions and worthy of at least some consideration at some point in the process. Right now, she happens to be really, really convenient.
The immediate problem; the de-legitimization that flows from the fact that the entire decision making process will take place behind closed doors; in secret from the people whose power and interests are at stake.
For any one of a number of good and ethical reasons, some of any interview process can and should take place behind closed doors. But not all of it.
There is no good and ethical to ask every question behind closed doors; to respond to every question behind closed doors.
Should Supt. Reedy be asked about becoming the senior-most administrative role model in the entire APS?
What does she think that looks like?
They are going to ask her that, right?
They are going to ask her about becoming the senior-most role model for staff and students, of accountability to the standards of conduct that she will expect them to embrace, right?
Why shouldn't she have to answer those questions in particular, in public? Why wouldn't she want to? Isn't in public kind of the whole idea in role modeling?
There is no such thing an as inconspicuous role model.
The concept is oxymoronic. ... except maybe in spy-craft.
The worst thing they could possibly do in this process,
is anything they do in unnecessary secret.
Yet that is their deliberate intention.
It is for no other reason than to hide from inconvenient but nevertheless legitimate questions about the public interests
and about their public service.
They do it because they can.
They can do whatever they want, whenever they want,
and they seem always, to get away with it.