Friday, November 15, 2019

Re-zoning to affect Catawba Trail Elementary

At the end of the November 12, 2019 Board meeting, Supt. Davis mentioned (2:10:09 on the video-recording) that Richland 2 will hold a second public community meeting to get feedback on the re-zoning of two subdivisions.

The make-up meeting for parents concerned about the re-districting will be held on Monday, November 25, 2019 at 6:00PM at Bookman Road Elementary School.

Parents also can provide feedback on a form on the District's website. Visit this District webpage for more information. To find it directly, go the www.Richland2.org. Click on Explore; click on News.

Richland 2 is proposing to re-zone Jacobs Creek and Forest Creek subdivisions from Catawba Trail Elementary to Bookman Road Elementary.

The proposal will be up for a vote at the Special Board Meeting scheduled for December 3, 2019, starting at 5:30PM.

NOTE: There is commonly no Public Participation segment scheduled at Special Board Meetings, and there has commonly been no voting by the Board at Special-Called Meetings. This appears to represent a change in Board practice.

No announcement of the November 25th meeting is on the Catawba Trail Elementary School calendar.

What are "wheels in a cog"?

Appreciation should be expressed to Trustees Shadd and Elkins-Johnson for not wasting the audience's time (and the time of others on the board) with useless comments during the Board & Superintendent's Comments portion at the end of the November 12, 2019 School Board meeting. And thanks to Trustee Agostini for her concise comments, which were clear and direct.

Trustee-elect Holmes wanted all to know that she has never lumped children together.

The prize last week goes to Trustee-elect Amelia McKie for telling all, as she proceeded to ramble through thanking just about everybody on the District staff, that "there are a lot of wheels in the cog". You can hear it for yourself at 2:07:13 on the YouTube recording.

Does she really need to hear her own voice? Thanking everyone for "taking care of our babies"??? What's wrong with just "Have a good evening" at the end of a 2-hour-plus meeting?

Citizens' Arrest

It worked in Clark County, Illinois. Could it work in Richland County, South Carolina?

A watchdog group performed a citizens' arrest on members of the Clark County Park District Board in 2014 for violating the Illinois Open Meetings Act "by not allowing the public to speak."

The sheriff showed up and did not halt the citizens' arrest. 

https://takebackyourpower.net/entire-county-board-arrested-following-citizens-arrest-2-military-veterans/?fbclid=IwAR3qs9-gCqAPiuwPUKxxCB_nDF-3Jw0oUsLWbwhlYRf0Cxby1Q0eGURekbc

Could it happen here?

Two trustees-elect of the Richland 2 School Board have never legally taken the oath of office. By sitting at the Board they are usurping public office, which is a crime under South Carolina Code of Laws Section 15-63-60.

Appeals to the Richland County Sheriff, SLED and the S.C. Attorney General's Office have not (yet) resulted in enforcement of South Carolina law.

One internet reference explains the use of a militia to enforce this law. 

The major problem with the two trustees-elect could be resolved in 60 seconds by their raising their right hands and taking the oath of office - legally. They became eligible to do so on December 4, 2018, after they filed the required Statements of Economic Interests with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. (They took the oath illegally on November 13, 2018.)

If they ever do take the oath legally, then the School District will have to review every decision made on and after November 13, 2018 (which in itself was an illegal Board meeting, because the term-of-office of the four elected on November 6, 2018 would not begin until November 16, 2018, one week after it was certified by the Richland County Board of Elections). Trustees-elect McKie and Holmes have voted on many Motions, and there were times when their votes swayed the decision one way or the other. All those votes will have to be corrected.

When this issue was first raised in February 2019, only three months' worth of decisions would have needed review. Now, 12 months of decisions must be reviewed.