The article has expired, so unfortunately Lewis Segal's opinion is hard to comment on.
I don't know what San Francisco is doing that works, but part of our problem is the supremacy of an Artistic Director and a Board which don't put the dancers front and centre. Audiences want to know about the performers (scandals and all) -- hockey does that very well -- not about the administrators. Maria Callas and Rudolph Nureyev excelled at this, keeping attention on the stage, not on the politics.
Is it inappropriate to suggest that as long as Boards insist on using the Artistic Director to do their function (raising money, promoting the company), then micro-managing Artistic decisions (hiring, repertoire, season content), ballet cannot go forward?