It seems the business community, which tried with unprecedented fervor to insert itself into the selection process for a new superintendent of the Clark County School District, is apoplectic over the withdrawal of New York educator Eric Nadelstern from consideration. It’s understandable: The ad hoc Citizens for a Better Nevada located, recruited and promoted Nadelstern’s candidacy, even going so far as to invite themselves along on a trip to New York where Clark County school trustees were checking his accomplishments.

But in the end, Nadelstern quit, and Citizens for a Better Nevada chief Maureen Peckman sent out an incredibly incendiary e-mail explaining that Nadelstern didn’t want to work for a divided board, and the district wasn’t ready for “true reform.” (The embarrassing e-mail, first unearthed by my friend and colleague Jon Ralston, was published today in the Las Vegas Sun.)

It’s ironic, too, since the true reform that we think the business community wants is a total takeover of the Clark County School District itself. How else to explain university Chancellor Jim Rogers’ outburst in today’s Review-Journal: “This is an outrage. This is a non-functional board, and something has to be done about it. … I don’t think they’ll ever fix the damage they’ve done,” he fumed.

Hold on there, Mr. Chancellor. And hold on, business leaders.

First, this is not the end of civilization as we know it. A candidate (who wasn’t even on the list produced by headhunters hired by the district) dropped out. From all appearances, he was a good candidate. But he’s not the only good candidate in the universe. The search may begin anew, and another slate of good candidates can and will be found.

Second, why cry over somebody else’s spilt milk? Neither the university system nor the business community is in charge of the Clark County School District. The people are. And in our little representative democracy, the people are represented by trustees, who stand for popular election. They run the district, and that includes choosing the superintendent. That may not sit well with the business types, but that’s our system. Deal with it.

Third, why not sit back and let the trustees do their jobs, instead of following them around the country trying to peer over their shoulders and hold their hands until they come to the “right” conclusion? Business people are citizens, and they have every right to suggest candidates, offer input and have their say. But they do not have the right to jam their favored candidate down our throats. They don’t own the school district, and with every heavy-handed action and shrill e-mail, they arouse suspicion that all they’re doing is simply trying to buy it.

Why should we be concerned about that? Because, at some point, the interests of educators and the interests of business diverge. Business wants good schools to attract more business, and produce more workers, skilled enough to fill the jobs that need to be done, but perhaps not skilled enough to demand higher wages or better working conditions. They see education as a means to an end, which is keeping our capitalist machine firing on all cylinders. But education is really an end in itself.

And that’s why, apart from private schools, education needs to remain a public construct. Because a well-educated population is an undeniable public good, not just another tool to help industry leaders make more money.

As far as we could tell (and we, unlike members of the Council for a Better Nevada, didn’t tag along on trustees’ New York trip) the board did nothing “outrageous.” They did what they were supposed to do, investigating a candidate, and voicing their views.

The Sun and the R-J both opined on their editorial pages today that the board should start a new search, rather than simply appointing interim Superintendent Walt Rulffes. We happen to think they’re right. But they should move forward with the business community’s input, not under it’s watchful eye. Every resident of Nevada — whether they have money or not, whether they own a business or not — has an interest in getting a good superintendent. Let’s let the people’s representatives — the board of trustees — do the job. Because to outsource control of the district to anybody else, no matter their intentions, would be the true outrage.

Boy, we bet the reporters at the Review-Journal’s Business section are red-faced today. Imagine, being scooped by their own colleagues at the Living section! But that’s surely what happened, as Living writer Sonja Padgett uncovered the brand-new phenomenon of slot clubs.

Apparently, it works like this: They give you a card, and you put it in a slot machine or video poker machine, and they keep track of how much you gamble. Then, the more you play, the more things they give you. Free buffets! Free trips to the coffee shop! Clothes! Hats! Even cash! Why, it’s the Discover card of gambling: It pays you, just for losing all your money in the slots!

We can’t understand how the normally reliable Business section staff missed this big story. We’d hate to be them today.

Speaking of Living, writer John Przybys (who we mistakenly guessed had penned the slot club expose; it’s right up his alley) actually had a good piece today. He wrote about the chance that Nevada Episcopal Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori may be elevated to be presiding bishop of the United States.

It was a solid, workmanlike piece that covered all the bases. For our money, we think the R-J should put Przybys on the news staff and have him cover religion full-time. It’s a fascinating subject, there are plenty of religion stories around town, he’s done a fairly good job writing about religion in the past and — best of all — he wouldn’t come up with what we can all agree are subpar ideas for the Living cover anymore. (Seriously, window washing? Fanatical football fans?)

C’mon, R-J. Do your readers a double service!