ZAP! #74...January 1, 2012
On January 5, 2012, the ISD Board of Trustees will meet to allow citizen input on the proposal of single member districts. While some board members have expressed that their minds are not made up, this wishy rejoinder is best designed to keep agitators and activists at bay until it is time to actually vote on this issue.
Seriously, how much more data, surveys, hearings, and blathering does a board member need before expressing an opinion? One either favors or disapproves of single member districts. Single member districts are good or bad for the school district. Single member districts will provided effective or non-effective representation on the board under a 5-2 plan (five districts and two at-large seats).
Or, could board members be totally swayed by activists whose agenda is more in tune with demographic politics (a 7-0 plan -- all elected by districts) than it is with acting in the best interest of what the district actually needs to be a viable educational institution.
Regardless, the board agenda for the meeting (noted below) has an interesting caveat in the wording. While the emphasis is ours, will the board hold to the letter of the agenda and only allow “registered voters of the district” (meaning Irving) to speak on this matter? One hopes so, as it is getting rather tedious listening to the same rants, tired rhetoric and veiled threats from activists who do not live in the community, pay taxes in the community or have children attending Irving schools.
IISD Board Agenda:
A. Registered voters of the District may comment on whether or not they are in favor of the Board of Trustees adopting an Order that Trustees should be elected from not fewer than five (5) single member districts with two (2) Trustees continuing to be elected from the district at large.
When the board finally gets around to resolving this issue, will they cave to pressure, or do what is right for the community? If the board responds as they did for most of last year, the squeaky wheel will probably be over oiled and another inane decision will be chalked up by the Floundering Five.