Members of the Springfield City School Committee debated whether the district should reinstate an assistant or associate superintendent position and how the authority for such positions is allocated between the superintendent and the committee.

Mister Collins and other committee members recalled a prior legal opinion and guidance indicating the superintendent has responsibility for the day‑to‑day organization of the district. Vice Chair Gonzales cited Chapter 71, Section 59 — the statute that governs school committee authority — noting that the statute allows the school committee to establish and fix compensation for assistant or associate superintendents “upon the recommendation of the superintendent,” and that disapproval should not be “unreasonably withheld.” Gonzales asked counsel to confirm that reading.

An attorney at the meeting (identified in the record as Attorney Keith) said he needed more time to review the statute but indicated Gonzales’s summary appeared accurate on a preliminary read. Attorney Murphy added that the committee should ensure the superintendent has the resources she needs and said the district previously had an assistant superintendent in earlier organizational charts.

Superintendent Dr. Dennal said the day‑to‑day organization is her jurisdiction and that if she decides to propose a change she will bring a recommendation forward. Several committee members, including Miss Gresham and Miss Harris, said they favored discussing the matter in a working session or subcommittee so the board could consider pros and cons and succession planning without rushing the superintendent.

No formal motion or vote to create or fill such a position occurred at the meeting. Committee members agreed to allow the superintendent time to study organizational needs and to bring forward a recommendation if appropriate.