We were struck last week by a couple of intersecting items in the news—both involving Mayor R.T. Rybak—that we hope will not be indicative of the mayor’s priorities during the next four years. The first had to do with Rybak’s intention to become more active in the city’s public schools. The second speculated on his interest in running for the U.S. Senate. Neither inspires confidence about the direction he may be headed in this second term.

Rybak’s sudden interest in fixing the public schools—by diving into what will clearly be an emotional and bitter School Board election season and by hoping to lead the district into creating a long-range financial plan—smells like political posturing. It was a major issue in last year’s mayoral campaign, albeit one that the mayor easily deflected by noting—quite accurately—that the mayor has no influence over the stubbornly independent School Board. To say now that it’s become a priority is to somehow pretend that the lines of authority have suddenly changed and that the mayor’s views are now welcome at district headquarters.

That this broadening of his vision for the city comes at a time when DFL insiders are begin to make noises about a Rybak run for the Senate looks to us as if the mayor is misreading his November mandate.

Last fall’s landslide re-election was a validation of Rybak’s ability to focus on fiscal priorities while maintaining cost-effective government services. He has properly responded to concerns about public safety, but he has also promised in his second term to deliver a more visionary approach to governing with his Great City Agenda.

And while one component of that agenda aims to address the challenges facing city kids, Rybak’s promise last week to increase his role in public education, coming as it did on the heels of Superintendent Thandiwe Peebles resignation, seemed naïve and empty.

It’s one thing to support the city’s Youth Coordinating Board, which Rybak chairs, and look for ways in which city policy can encourage young families to settle and stay in the city--and its schools. This is clearly in the purview of the mayor and city council. It’s another thing altogether, however, to meddle in the district’s financial planning or to pick favorites among School Board candidates. These are areas in which the mayor has no authority, little real knowledge or information, and certainly no mandate.

We’re not about to speculate on Rybak’s political aspirations, but if last week’s foray into education issues is a sign of a broadening political agenda, we’re not amused. The voters of Minneapolis last fall awarded the mayor another four years to continue the good work he’s been doing at City Hall—not to begin testing the waters for higher political office.