Wednesday, October 12, 2011


IISD Admin Lunchroom Chatter #6

Nosher #1: Do you sometimes think that maybe five of the board members have difficulty making tough decisions? Does it seem as if they suffer from temporary ‘brain freeze’ when it comes to concluding matters critical to the overall betterment of the district?

Nosher #2: No kidding. Look how many sessions or discussions they have had on redistricting board districts. I guess some board members are awaiting “administrative enlightenment” before they leap into this political quagmire. Of course, this “enlightenment” replaces their old terminology of “rubber stamping.” Independent thinking may not be part of their decision making skills set.

Nosher #1: Really! Maybe some foremost thinkers and supporters in the community will come forward and attend the board meeting on Monday, October 17, nudge them along in this process. This could even counter the activist that might be in attendance with their self-serving rhetoric. After all, board members cannot keep their collective heads in the sand indefinitely. The district needs to move forward -- one way or another -- and attend to more pressing matters.

Nosher #2: I agree. And splitting the district into single member districts is not an answer for overall improvement. Can you spell “fiefdoms?” All one has to do is check other local school districts to witness how this can divide a school district more than improve it.

Ed. Note: Agendas for Irving ISD meetings are found on the following link:

A note from counsel: These “candid” lunchroom conversations have been injected with fabricated nouns, verbs, adjectives, conjunctions, adverbs, modifiers and maybe a few dangling participles. Mark Holbrook

A reader sez: I do not understand why the “politicians themselves” are ever involved in “redistricting”. Seems to me that we ought to give this task to one of the math departments of one of the award winning universities we have and have them draw the “grid”. Oh, and that is right under my new system of all “districts” follow state boundaries, or are drawn square (no horseshoes or “fingers” of voters in a real system).

We Say: While your proposal is “spot on,” the flaw is that the politicians would not be able to: go to a lot of meetings, hire a gaggle of consultants, bicker for territory, or appear to know what they are doing. Mark Holbrook