First, Mr. Walcott is not legally Chancellor, in my opinion - and I am not a lawyer. But I can read Education Law Section 2590-h, which states: "Powers and duties of chancellor. The office of chancellor of the city district is hereby continued. Such chancellor shall serve at the pleasure of and be employed by the mayor of the city of New York by contract. The length of such contract shall not exceed by more than two years the term of office of the mayor authorizing such contract." ....And Walcott has no contract. No one gives him a performance review, and he cannot be fired for any reason except by the Mayor. How is this good or even adequate public policy? Can we say that his 'rule' of the DOE is performed in bad faith because he will not permit a democratic vote on policy or his job?
Second, I do not know who Ms. Phillips and the pollsters are talking to, but over the past year, talking to everyone -parents, teachers, principals, superintendents, lawyers and arbitrators, dislike Mr. Walcott with a passion, not only in the way he seems to be arrogant as he delivers bad news, but in the fact that he stomps out dissent with a big stick, the Mayor's total control.