Monday, December 28, 2020

Is Anti-White Racism Occurring in Richland 2?

This headline in The Daily Wire causes me to wonder what might be happening in Richland 2 School District.

School Wouldn’t Let Her Son Opt Out Of Class That Promotes Anti-White Racism. 

Now She’s Suing.

Is this coming to a school near you? Read the article. Be on the alert. What are your children telling you about their school experience?

Why would I ask such a question? How could I think such would happen right here in Richland County?

Well, I look at the composition of the school board. The composition of the administration. The racial make-up of appointments as Principals. The effort to put a teacher at the front of the class who "looks like the students." The superintendent's pet project - hiring 100 Premier Men of Color. (This is apparently his personal project and never approved by the School Board, because he reminded the board one evening that he is not evaluated on it.)

What happened to hiring the best available personnel for the money you have in the budget?

And my thought is, "Just wait until the students get in the real world, where they will make up 13% of the population, not 80%."

Last year I was asked, "Did you hear her (a school board member) call you a racist?"

And this year, when a different school board member wrote to me, "It's unfortunate that your motives are seemingly racially motivated with,  a poor attempt to hide behind pretending that you are not a racist by using a beard / beards to cover your true intentions and hateful nature." 

What does that even mean?

Wouldn't any proper beard feel insulted and highly indignant?

Wednesday, December 23, 2020

Critical Race Theory - coming to Richland 2?

If a new Secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Education espouses the idiotic ideas of critical race theory and they start filtering into Richland 2, parents are encouraged to wake up fast and find out what's going on. And speak out loudly to squash it. And what if it's already here (and you don't even know it)?

This article described one possible contender for that job. 

I suspect parents don't even know what is being crammed into the heads of Richland 2 students by their teachers. 

Dumb ideas like The 1619 Project (Richland 2 still has not responded to my October request) and any teachings or reference to a book titled White Fragility must be stopped at the curb. Liberals and the Left are trying to re-write history and put the USA on a bed of sand, instead of a foundation of rock.

Tuesday, December 22, 2020

What are students learning about socialism?

What are students in Richland 2 schools learning about socialism? 

With the strong influence of liberals and the Left among teachers and staff, are the students learning enough? It is shocking to me that the percentage of young adults favoring socialism is so high.

I am currently reading United States of Socialism, by Dinesh D'Souza. This book should be required reading by all students (and adults). 

His is a view of socialism that is needed to counter to teachings that students are probably getting in our schools.

Buy it or borrow it from the Richland County Library. 

Saturday, December 19, 2020

Coming soon to a school near you?

Is there any chance that this garbage is coming to Richland School District Two?

Read this article about what is happening in Seattle (and other cities).

Are any Richland 2 teachers or staff getting a sniff of "white privilege"? "spirit murder" of black children? systemic violence? gender-reference nonsense? race-labeling? anti-racist pedagogy? 

It's a good thing I am not a white teacher in schools these days. The first time some trainer yelled at me that I was a racist, I'd get up and walk out. The second time? Take a guess.

How big a deal is racism in Richland 2 school district right now? That is the discussion that is needed. nd does it exist only because of the talk that is generated by the leadership? What if it doesn't exist EXCEPT for the talk about it?

I didn't have the stomach or the patience to stick it out through last Tuesday's special-called meeting. The recorded version of the meeting starts with Mr. Manning's call to order. That happened after nine (9) minutes of silent waiting during unexplained technical difficulties. Watching the recorded version, you wouldn't know about that delay, because it was edited out.

The duration of the special-called board meeting was over two hours! Did they all just sit there like sheep? Did Helen Grant feed them anything that resembled the content of the article about Seattle schools? 

Thursday, December 17, 2020

"Dr." Jill Biden's degree and Richland 2's Three Ed.D's

In this news article about Jill Biden's degree and how she is called "Dr." Biden, one particular comment stands out.

"pete192" wrote:

"I have this same academic degree, The Doctor of Education (EdD). First, and as a minor correction to a few comments here, the EdD candidate does not do a "dissertation" but rather the shorter and far less strenuous "thesis." Also an EdD is NOT a PhD which is far far more difficult and requires a much higher set of test scores (which i was unable to achieve so settled for EdD). I most wish to point out here that upon graduation my school and my advisors sent me a kind and cordial but firm letter, instructing me that the EdD was an academic credential, and that i must refrain from asking anyone to call me "doctor," or put such a title on any correspondence or use it in any setting whatsoever outside the academy. In other words i [sic] one is employed in a school and teaching then DURING that work you are absolutetly [sic] entited [sic] to Dr. But once you depart the campus any given day, the Dr is not a valid title. Ever. Period. Stop using it "Dr" Jill unless and until you are teaching on a campus."

The Richland 2 school board has three women who are addressed as "Dr." at school board meetings.

I suggest it is time to begin addressing them as "Trustee (last name)" or "Ms. (last name)". 

Thoughts, anyone?

Name-change - Abraham Lincoln H.S., San Francisco

When I read that Abraham Lincoln High School in San Francisco was going to change its name, my first thought was, "Those jerks!" 

Why is it going to do that? Because, they think, Lincoln didn't do enough for blacks.

Oh, really?

Then today I came across this video by Dinesk D'Souza. I think he's right. What do you think? Post your thoughts in Comments below.

Wednesday, December 16, 2020

Should Board Members pay for meals?

When box dinners are provided for board members and staff at board meetings, should board members have to pay for them? Or have the price added to their taxable W-2 monthly income?

How much does a box dinner cost from Schlotsky's? $12.00 with delivery?

I think the part that "got" me at the December 8th board meeting was the board member who carried out two boxed meals. If a dinner is provided and eaten at the meeting, then maybe, m-a-y-b-e, the taxpayers could bear that cost.

When a board member carries out two meals, that's a no-pass from me. Was she taking them home? Feed family? Eat them herself? 

That's not what taxpayer money is for.

If the District is over-ordering, then it should cut down its future orders.

Tuesday, December 15, 2020

Tonight's special called board meeting - a waste

 5:57PM I'm out of there.

What a waste of time! I can't believe that grown people, adults, supposed professionals, school board members would sit there for that drivel. Who dreamed up that program?

If you want to see a little of it, you'll have to wait through nine minutes of silence for it to start. No excuses were offered for the delay. As soon as Supt. Davis opened with "with great pride and joy..." I started to check out.

When Chief Diversity and Multi-Culture Inclusion officer Helen Grant began speaking, she gushed away and was almost giddy about her topic tonight.

By 5:57PM I'd had enough. So glad I did not go in person. When I saw the agenda item, I expected what just they began spouting. 

You'd think the KKK was riding through the streets of Richland County. Well, it's not. 

Five people attended in person tonight. Monica Elkins was there by phone, although the Board Chair made no mention of her telephonic attendance. 

Lindsay Agostini was not there and was not mentioned. 

Since two of the six in attendance are not legitimate board members, there was no quorum (five) and the meeting should not have been held, even though the board vote to consent to the agenda was inconsequential.

An Anti-COVID Strategy

I recommend to your reading a presentation titled "A Sensible and Compassionate Anti-COVID Strategy," given on October 9, 2020 by a Stanford professor. And in it he refers to the Great Barrington Declaration which, as of today, has been signed onto by more than 51,000 medical and public health scientists and medical practitioners and by almost 700,000 concerned citizens.

See the true fatality rate for COVID-19 (it's much lower than you may think);
Read his explanation of "herd immunity";
Read why schools should re-open and why lockdowns hurt more than they help.

Great Barrington Declaration:


Sunday, December 13, 2020

Northwestern University gets it - - wrong!


Is she Dr. Biden? Or Mrs. Biden? Or Ms. Biden? Do you even know what advanced degree Jill Biden holds? Does it matter whether it's M.D. or Ph.D. or Ed.D?

I remember the first time a woman ever-so-proudly told me she had just gotten her Ph.D. We were on an escalator in Kansas City. I said, "Oh, that's too bad." I think her attitude of superiority had something to do with it. Or maybe that she was about 6'0" and was standing a couple of steps ahead of me on the ascending escalator.

For many years I have considered those with Ph.D's and Ed.D's and other non-M.D's as non-doctors. A doctor, to me, is a medical doctor. They have initials like M.D. or D.O. or D.C. after their names. The others have doctorates, and most of them worked hard for them. But, to me, they aren't the same, and I don't call them "Dr. ___." Standards vary from graduate school to graduate school. 

For example, on the Richland 2 school board, there are three women with doctorate degrees. All three have Ed.D. after their names. 

When they are recognized to speak by the Board Chair, they should be addressed as Trustee ____. Well, at least two of them should. The third should be addressed by her correct legal title, Trustee-elect.

But not as Dr. ____. They are equal members of the board and deserve no elevated approbation because of some educational degree received many years ago. 

You can read this article about Joseph Epstein, a former lecturer at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. The article says that Epstein hadn't even been a lecturer there since 2002. So why is Northwestern even weighing in? I guess they are just getting in line to suck up to the new president.

Epstein made the disgraceful error of writing that Jill Biden's use of Dr. before her name “sounds and feels fraudulent, not to say a touch comic". As a result, Northwestern U. "canceled" him.

And here are today's the three magic words. A statement is attributed to Northwestern University:    “Northwestern is firmly committed to equity, diversity and inclusion, and strongly disagrees with Mr. Epstein’s misogynistic views.”

Why is Epstein's words "misogynistic"? Men use Ed.D. and other initials for doctorates after their names!

Don't miss Tuesday night's (Dec. 15) special-called board meeting, where the focus will be "Addressing Systems of Inequity". 

Woke comes to Richland 2. (Actually, it's already here.)  R2i2 at 5:30PM. Limited seating. Wear your mask. 

Saturday, December 12, 2020

McKie Ethics Debt - still unpaid!!!

Richland 2 School Board Trustee-elect Amelia McKie still owes $51,750 to the South Carolina Ethics Commission!

Why hasn't she paid even one penny toward this debt?

The Ethics Commission filed a $51,750 judgment against McKie in the Richland County Common Pleas Court on July 10, 2019. That was one year after the Ethics Commission's Decision and Order that covered fines for several violations of ethics laws over a period of years.

The S.C. Department of Revenue is the agent for the Ethics Commission and is supposed to be collecting this debt. Why isn't it doing its job? Why doesn't the DOR garnish her wages that the District is illegally paying her for the board position?

I refer to McKie as "trustee-elect" because that is her legal title. McKie has never taken the oath of office legally. She did take an oath of office on November 13, 2018, but she was not eligible to do so because she had not filed her Statement of Economic Interests (SEI) with the Ethics Commission. She filed that SEI on December 4, 2018, but she has never taken the oath of \office since.

Why the five legal members of the board have tolerated her unlawful position on the board is anyone's guess. It's actually not too hard to figure out. She is getting "a little help from her friends" - those who make up the majority of the Richland 2 Board. They seem not to be concerned with laws or ethics.

Why did the Board reward McKie with the nomination to serve on the board of the South Carolina School Boards Association? She cannot legally hold the SCSBA Region 8 Director position.

McKie is not a legal member of the Richland 2 School Board; not because of her $51,750 debt, but because she has never taken the oath of office legally. How simple it would be to do so. It would take one minute to be sworn in legally. Then the Richland 2 District would have to wipe the mud off its face and nominate her properly to the SCSBA. 

And the SCSBA would have to wipe the mud off its own face. It knows about McKie's illegitimate occupancy of the Richland 2 board position.

(This article appeared as a Letter to the Editor in The Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County.)

Friday, December 11, 2020

Here we go, folks - "Addressing Systems of Inequity"

You will not want to miss this special-called meeting for Tuesday, December 15, 2020, at 5:30PM in the conference room on the second level at R2i2.

Just catch it on Zoom, since there won't be any public participation. Unless you want to be in the back of the room and express displeasure at any woke presentation that you hear.

My first question is, why didn't they just combine this with last week's school board meeting?

First of all, you have to have inequity. And there has to be a system of it. Only then can you address it! Who dreamed up this agenda? Normally, it's the Board Chair and the Superintendent who set the agenda. Was this the Board's idea or is it another pet project of the superintendent (like his 100 Premier Men of Color to be hired)? Now there's a system of inequity!

Okay, what will it be?

The 1619 Project?

Systemic racism?

White fragility?

School-to-prison pipeline?

I'll tell you the first system of inequity that should be addressed! It's why this board allows two women to be seated on the board illegitimately and one (of the two) who has a $51,750 debt to the S.C. Ethics Commission still hanging over her head! 

Once they solve that inequity, I'll be more open to listening to others.

Thursday, December 10, 2020

Protocol ignored at 12/8/2020 Board Meeting

On the agenda for the December 8, 2020 Executive Session was a student disciplinary item. Could the parents of that student claim that the board failed to take action and therefore the matter is settled?

I did not attend the December 8, 2020 board meeting from its onset at 5:30PM, but I watched the video this morning.

Board Chair James Manning was not in attendance (in person), and the meeting was opened by the Acting Chair, Vice Chair Teresa Holmes. (I won't belabor the point here that she is not a legitimate board member and cannot serve as Vice Chair.)

Although she was elected to the board in November 2018 (and has never legally taken office), she also has not learned the protocol for conducting meetings. She's had plenty of time to learn some of the rules for running a meeting, as she could be called on at any time to substitute for the Board Chair.

When she opened the meeting at 5:30PM, she asked for a motion to enter Executive Session.

The superintendent interrupted and asked for a "point of privilege". The correct thing for him to do (and he should know this) is to wait to be acknowledged and to be granted permission by the (Acting) Chair. The Chair might or might not grant that privilege. However, he launched right into his request.

He asked that the board make a motion to remove an item from the agenda for the Executive Session. That was the correct form for his request, since the superintendent is not a board member and cannot make a motion.

Holmes then asked for a second. That was an error. 

A board member needed to make the motion. Then, after a second and any discussion, there would have to be a vote.

Instead, a faint voice apparently indicated a second. Holmes failed to state who seconded the motion. There was no discussion. There was a hand vote and Manning, who was not present in person (but was attended by telephone), voted in the affirmative. (There had been no mention that he was attending by telephone!) Holmes stated that the motion passed but did not report the vote. The motion to remove the item from the Executive Session agenda and the vote were not shown to the public.

Then Holmes asked for a motion to go into Executive Session. 

Because no board member made the motion to remove the student disciplinary issue from the agenda for the Executive Session, does this invalidate the removal of the item? Did it legally remain on the agenda? Were the student and parent(s) waiting to enter the Executive Session and be heard? Did the Board's failure to act on the agenda item result in a de facto decision in the student's favor?

At 6:00PM the open meeting was called to order by Holmes, and she asked for a vote to "come out of Executive Session." The vote was 7-0 to adjourn the Executive Session. There was no vote to re-convene the open session.

This board needs advice! Without a Parliamentarian, the Board often disregards protocol. The correct motion is to re-convene the open session, not to "come out of Executive Session." This error has been made for months.

Manning called back in, and his telephonic attendance was never disclosed to the public.

When will this Board schedule a intensive training session with the Robert's Rules of Order expert, Attorney Helen McFadden?

Is this really an answer?

On October 26, 2020 I emailed Supt. Davis about a rumor I had heard involving the Blythewood High School football team. The rumor was that the team had stayed in the locker room until after the National Anthem had been played. I wondered whether the rumor was true.

When I had not received any acknowledgement or reply from Supt. Davis by last Tuesday, I addressed the lack of response at the Regular Board Meeting. On Wednesday I emailed BHS Athletic Director Mizzell and asked him to inform the superintendent, so that a reply could be sent to me.

Notice that I did not ask AD Mizzell to reply to me. I wouldn't want him to risk his job by doing so!

Yesterday afternoon Supt. Davis did reply. Here it is.

Supt. Davis wrote, "After reviewing your question my office has determined that the alleged actions stated in your original email are neither a violation of current Board policy or school rules, therefore no further action is required on the part of the district or school administration." 

I re-read both my October 26th email and my December 9 email. I did not ask whether a violation of current Board policy or school rules had occurred. I asked f the rumor was true. His reply obfuscates the issue.

For the less-informed, "Obfuscation is the obscuring of the intended meaning of communication by making the message difficult to understand, usually with confusing and ambiguous language." Thanks, Wikipedia.

Why do you suppose the superintendent didn't just say it either happened or it didn't happen?

Reading between the lines, it is easy now to conclude that the actions of the BHS football team more than likely did occur. And that there is more to this story.

Are you on the Blythewood HS football team? Like to give me some information with an absolute guarantee of confidentiality? Are you a parent with information? Same guarantee. My sources for stories know they can depend on privacy and confidentiality! Call 847/971-7083. Block your number, if you want. Email me at from a blind email address (or your own). Same guarantee.

According to the Bengals' schedule -

On Oct. 2 the Bengals played Northwestern (Rock Hill) at Blythewood H.S..

On Oct. 16, the Bengals played Spring Valley at Spring Valley H.S.

On Oct. 23 the Bengals played Ridge View at Ridge View H.S.

Wednesday, December 9, 2020

Principal chooses potato over Biden; gets fired

Do we have this kind of oversight and censorship (censure-ship!) in Richland 2?

Former elementary school principal Amy Sacks is suing Perkiomen Valley Public School District in Collegeville, Pennsylvania. A parent complained about racism, apparently in regard to Amy's private posting on Facebook that she would have voted for a potato, rather than for Joe Biden.

Did it take only one complaint by a parent to torpedo that 20-year educator's career?

Are potatoes now a protected category against discrimination?

How do Richland 2 teachers fare, when they express themselves differently than the woke crowd here?

Prediction for Richland 2 Security Services

The District has announced a new Safety and Security Officer, Marq Claxton. In a press release, the District provided Claxton's extensive background with NYPD.

Claxton's LinkedIn profile indicates his experience with NYPD was 1985-2005. He was Chief of Security at Voorhees College (Denmark, S.C.) from July 2019-October 2020. Where was he during the fourteen years between 2005-2019? His LinkedIn profile mentions President of Goodwine LLC (2013-Present). What's that? It seems to have no internet presence that can be found through a Google search.

Here is my 2¢ worth for what is coming for Richland 2. This is based on what I saw happen in Illinois when McHenry County College hired a former California police officer to run its campus security operations. 

When you hire a cop (and I like cops) for a civilian job, you'd better believe that cop ideas are going to be showing up very soon. Did the school board consider that? Do you remember any public board meeting when this new position was discussed? Was it handled in confidential Executive Session and never revealed until today's press release?

I predict that Richland 2 will create its own police department and convert its security (non-police) employees to sworn police officers. They will have official police duties and will be armed. They will have powers of arrest and will exercise them.

Now, I don't have any problem with armed police officers (or even armed security officers or armed teachers) on campus. If the need arises to defend students, teachers, staff, visitors, etc., I want a legally- and responsibly-armed person nearby.

You may remember that in February 2018, right after the shooting in Parkland, Florida, I asked the board to survey parents, teachers, staff and community members on the topic of arming teachers. Two parents later that night were allowed to speak (without being registered before the start of the meeting) and stated their opposition to arming teachers. (Did anyone that night realize that I had not proposed arming teachers? I asked for a survey!)

Why do I see this coming?

The Richland County Sheriff's Department charges Richland 2 BIG BUCKS for the 30-or-so School Resource Officers (SRO). First-year SRO cost was reported at a school board meeting as being about $150,000 for the officer "and equipment". That's "renting" the equipment, not buying it.

Frankly, an SRO is a waste of Richland 2's money. Yes, if an SRO is needed, it'll be good for him to be there, IF he is in the vicinity of the need. Most of the time, an incident could be handled on campus while a deputy was responding to a call-for-service; i.e., dialing the sheriff's department and requesting a deputy.

For a lot less money than is currently being spent, Richland 2 could provide its own trained, qualified and armed security staff.

McHenry County College bought two Ford Interceptors. These were "desperately needed" to patrol its small campus and small parking lots for the relatively-small (7,000? and mostly part-time) campus crowd. Two police-equipped Ford Interceptors??? Seriously?

Is Ford licking its chops and getting ready to respond to an RFP for two (or more) police vehicles? 

You may also remember that I spoke in favor of the two men on the security staff being armed, but I thought the responsibility and authority should be granted by the school board and not by the superintendent. What did the board decide, in its infinite wisdom? The board rescinded a long-standing approval of firearms possession on campus by the two security department staffers. A 20-year agreement, made by a previous superintendent, was overturned. Both men were former police officers.

That's what happens when you have an anti-gun majority on a school board. All they hear is "gun", and anything after that is bad, bad, bad.

My guess is that at least six board members today are anti-gun. Will Claxton swing enough weight to keep Richland 2 safe?

Here is Richland 2's press release:

COLUMBIA, S.C. – Richland Two is welcoming a new safety and security officer. The superintendent recently recommended and the Richland Two Board of Trustees approved the hiring of Marquez “Marq” Claxton as the district’s Safety and Security Officer. Claxton’s duties and responsibilities include assisting in the planning, direction, and oversight of district safety/security programs; planning and conducting investigations to support a wide variety of both criminal and administrative proceedings; and providing safety and emergency response training as needed. 

Claxton, a native New Yorker, has resided in South Carolina for over a decade. He retired from the New York Police Department (NYPD) in 2005 where he was a first responder to the September 11 World Trade Center attack. During Claxton’s NYPD career, he had a wide range of assignments, including undercover operations in the Narcotics Division, working as a Domestic Violence/Child Abuse Coordinator, an Identity Theft Coordinator and as an investigator in Precinct Detective Squad, routinely investigating crimes ranging from burglaries to homicides. Since coming to the Palmetto State, Claxton has worked at Voorhees College in Denmark, as Director of Safety & Security. He is a Director for the Black Law Enforcement Alliance and is a national television media contributor on policing and law enforcement issues, frequently appearing on cable news networks, MSNBC and CNN.

Claxton will report to Richland Two’s Chief Operations Officer. He is married and has three children.

Tuesday, December 8, 2020

Respect the U.S. Flag

During the public participation segment this evening, I read the following statement to the board.

Members of the Board and Supt. Davis,

My name is Gus Philpott.

In many places in the United States professional, college and high school sports players are “taking a knee” when the National Anthem is played.

In order to prevent such gross disrespect of the United States Flag in the Richland 2 School District, I request the Board to formulate a policy that clarifies respect for the U.S. Flag.

This policy should provide that at any school event no player will take a knee or in any other way show any sign of disrespect, including not taking the field before the National Anthem is played. I heard a rumor recently that a Blythewood High School football team stayed off the field until the National Anthem was played. I attempted to learn whether there was any truth to the rumor, but Supt. Davis has not replied to my October 26th email yet. The Board and Coach Mizzell received a copy of my email to the superintendent.

As a concerned member of the community I offer to participate in the drafting of a policy that addresses this subject.

Thank you.


When the public participation was introduced tonight, the Acting Chair stated that no names were to be mentioned. That isn't actually how the Board Policy reads, but I was careful not to mention any names. I didn't dare risk getting gaveled into submission.

Robert's Rules Training - desperately needed

Tonight's Regular Meeting of the Richland 2 school board started on time. Manning's chair was empty. Four legal trustees were present. That is not a quorum.  No business could be conducted.

Present were Holmes (Acting Chair), Caution-Parker (Secretary), Agostini, Elkins, McFadden, and McKie. That's six people, but there were only four legitimate trustees present and two trustees-elect.

Just after the meeting was called to order by Holmes, an incoming call's ringing could be heard over a microphone. It sounded like someone said, "Someone's calling in."

As the meeting progressed, motions were made, seconded and voted on. Votes were 6-1 and 7-0. How could the vote be a total of seven? Manning's chair was empty.

What was missing was any explanation to the other board members and to the public that James Manning had apparently called in to attend by telephone (if that's what the ringing phone meant).

I guess I'm going to have to spend $18 on my own copy of Robert's Rules of Order and stop relying on the library's copy. I'm pretty sure telephonic attendance and protocol are covered in Robert's Rules.

What should have happened is the Chair should have announced that Manning would not be attending in person and would attend by telephone, which is permitted under Board policy. In many public bodies the board votes to permit such telephonic attendance. They don't just sweep it under the table.

I can appreciate that the Acting Chair might not know the rules. Then it's the job of the superintendent to coach her, so that protocol is followed.

Monday, December 7, 2020

U.S. Flag - half-staff

Do you know why the U.S. Flag is flown at half-staff today?

And what the correct procedure is for returning it to full-staff? 

Saturday, December 5, 2020

White Privilege training - San Diego

Leaked documents have revealed a White Privilege training in the San Diego Unified School District.

"What's that?" you say. 

Check it out by clicking here.

Is it here already (under another name) or is it coming to a school district near you soon?

As soon as I read "white fragility" in that article, I remembered checking out Robin DiAngelo's book from the Richland Library. What a waste of money that library purchase was. I don't think I read 10 pages before I returned it.

When I looked up articles about Gloria Boutee's Culturally Relevant Pedagogy, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. What I read in the top article about her work, was 

"Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP)" *

Culturally Relevant Pedagog
y (CRP)

Well, they got that right.

If I were a teacher and the district tried to jam that nonsense down my throat, they'd be looking for a new teacher the next day.

* Source:

Handwriting - becoming a lost art?

How is your penmanship?

Legible? I mean, to others... 

Are students learning cursive? Still? Again? I recall a middle-school teacher in Illinois who told me that my stepson didn't need to learn handwriting, because he could use a keyboard. 

She also told me he didn't need to know how to spell, beause he could use SpellChecker. And he didn't need to know arithmetic, because he could use a calculator.

I told her that, if we were playing baseball, she had just struck out!!!

Handwriting - legible handwriting - is an important life skill. Do you have it? Are you seeing that your children acquire it?

I still treasure my Cross pen and pencil set. I've had it for more than 30 years. And I still know exactly where I lost a Cross pen. In a library parking lot in Kansas City after a workshop I had presented. When I missed it, I knew where I had dropped it but, by the time I got back, it was gone.

I just purchased a new ballpoint pen, because I liked the design. Not cheap.

And I just purchased a new fountain pen and bottle of blue ink. There is something about writing with a fountain pen. When is the last time you wrote with a fountain pen? Ever?

In a recent Fireside Chat Dennis Prager mentioned his love for fountain pens. I sent this story to him.

When I was a life insurance salesman back in the late 1960s, I used a fountain pen. A new client complimented my use of a "real" pen and asked if he could use it to sign the application. I usually didn't loan my pen (you know why) but, in this case, I did. I uncapped it, put the cap on the end of the barrel and handed it to him. He signed the application and handed the pen back to me. I didn't notice that he had put the cap back on the pen. So I moved the cap to the other end and put the pen in my shirt pocket. You guessed it! I had to buy a new shirt!

Friday, December 4, 2020

Check out the Voice of Blythewood

Be sure to see the December 3rd article titled "R2 trustee threatens to sue constituent" in The Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County. 

Reporter Debra McCown did a good job of summarizing problems facing Teresa Holmes about the issue of her (il)legitimacy on the  Richland 2 School Board.

It's basically very simple and easy to understand. Holmes has never taken the oath of office legally. Thus, she is on the board illegally and is usurping public office. 

She (and Amelia McKie) became eligible to take the oath of office on December 4, 2018 and they have not done so. 

The next legal step for me is to get leave from a Circuit judge to file a usurping charge in the South Carolina Supreme Court. Because of the importance of keeping unauthorized people out of public office, the state Supreme Court would hear the case in a matter of days. My case would not have to go to the end of the line and wait ten years to be heard.

McKie and Holmes would have to prove that they are not violating the South Carolina statute. The poblem for both of them is in two parts. They signed an notarized oath of office form on November 13, 2018, and they filed their Statement of Economic Interest with the South Carolina Ethics Commission on December 4, 2018 - three weeks later.

They should have filed their SEIs first and then taken the oath of office. They did it backwards!

Since they can't prove their innocense, they'll be convicted. The penalties are not minor. Read South Carolina Code of Laws Title 15 - Civil Remedies and Penalties.

If they want me to stop complaining about their being in office illegally, all they have to do is take the oath of office - this time, legally.

Keep debtors out of public office

The following email is being sent to S.C. State Representative Ivory Thigpen (District 79) and State Senator Mia McLeod (District 22).

"As a constituent in your district, I am writing to request that you propose legislation in your chamber to prohibit a person who owes a debt to any division of the S.C. State Government, including the S.C. Ethics Commission, from holding public office. If that person holds office, the person must pay the debt within 90 days of the effective date of the legislation or resign from office.

"Will you please let me know if you will sponsor such legislation? I shall appreciate an individual reply, not just your standard auto-response without any follow-up."

Richland 2 School Board Trustee-elect Amelia McKie owes $51,750 to settle a judgment in favor of the South Carolina Ethics Commission. She hasn't paid even one penny toward this debt in more than two years.

The S.C. Department of Revenue (DOR) is charged with collecting the judgment. There is no sign of any activity on their part. The DOR should be attaching her wages from Richland 2 School District, filing a lien against any income tax refunds and against her home and automobile, and attaching her bank accounts. 

According to the Ethics Commission on November 30, 2020, she still owes $51,750!

Thursday, December 3, 2020

Mark Twain banned. What about here?

According to a recent email from Hillsdale College (Hillsdale, Michigan), Mark Twain's book
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn "has been banned in thousands of public schools across America."

The book, published in 1884, has been a staple in many households. What's wrong with it?

I have a boxed set of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, illustrated by Norman Rockwell. No, not first edition (darn it), but they are as old as I am.

I guess it's time to re-read them and find out how warped my upbringing was, just by having them in the same house.

What about in Richland 2 schools? Is it read? Is it ever mentioned? Has it been banned here?

Tuesday, December 1, 2020

Legal action against public body? Ex., SCSBA

Should legal action be taken against a public body or a non-profit corporation, when it knowingly violates South Carolina statutes or its own By-Laws? 

Should a private citizen have to pursue such legal action at personal expense or should there be a public agent, such as the Attorney General or the Solicitor of the S.C. Secretary of State, who would take on the investigation and prosecution of these violations.

One of three organizations that come to mind is the South Carolina School Boards Association (SCSBA), which is being presented with the nomination of Amelia McKie as its Region 8 Director (representing Richland 1 and Richland 2 School Districts). The SCSBA is a South Carolina non-profit corporation.

It's my understanding that a Regional Director must be a member of a school board in the district being represented. If McKie were a legal member of the Richland 2 School District, she would be eligible to be nominated and to serve the SCSBA.

BUT, she is not legal school board member, because she has never taken the oath of office legally.

At a Richland 2 school board meeting in February or March 2019 I proposed an easy remedy. Just administer the oath of office to her. She became eligible to take the oath of office on December 4, 2018, when she filed her Statement of Economic Interests with the South Carolina Ethics Commission.

The oath that she took on November 13, 2018 was invalid and meaningless, because she was not eligible to take the oath on that date. (S.C. Code of Laws 8-13-1110(A))

McKie has been nominated by Richland 2 to the SCSBA. The Richland 2 Board never should have nominated her.

The SCSBA should refuse to appoint her to the Region 8 District Director position.

If it does so, then legal action against the SCSBA should begin.

Every single person in the Richland 2 School District should ask Amelia McKie to explain why she will not take the oath of office legally.

While you are at tit, ask the Richland 2 School District to explain why they allow her (and Teresa Holmes, who also has never taken the oath of office legally) to serve on the school board.

Monday, November 30, 2020

The 1619 Project? - Teach THIS to Students

Do you know what The 1619 Project is?

Watch this new PragerU video.

Why did a group of historians, almost all on the Left according to the speaker in this video, call The 1619 Project a "distortion of historical understanding by ideology"?

Watch this PragerU video presented by Wilfred Reilly, Associate Professor of Political Science at Kentucky State University.

Richland 2 - going, going, gone Woke

This article by Charles Fain Lehman in the November 30, 2020 Washington Free Beacon is a must-read! Titled "America's High Schools Go Woke", it contains many very familiar words - words often heard at Richland 2 school board meetings.

What words?

Racism. Injustice. Diversity. mandatory Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training  systemic racism. Racial bias. Insensitivity. Director of Diversity. 

Other words in the article got my attention and caused me to think of Richland 2 School District.

Critical Race Theory. Diversity consultancies (think Gloria Boutte). Racial discontent. The 1619 Project (still waiting for the District to reply to my question at the board meeting about the extent this is being taught in schools).

Robin DiAngelo's book White Fragility is mentioned. I checked that out of the Richland Library, read a few pages and returned it. It has one good use - wrap the fish in it.

What's the REAL problem at Richland 2? There isn't any actual racism, except for all the talk about racism. They are creating a problem, so they can impose an expensive solution for it. This is the problem. The progressive influence on education. 

Get back to the basics.

Is Racism Dead?

Larry Elder SHUTS DOWN Racism. Really? Take time right now to listen and watch.

He opens with "Have you ever noticed some people search for racism, even when the alleged victim of racism doesn't believe he or she is a victim of racism?"

Toward the end of his show, he quotes Thomas Sowell.

"Racism is not dead, but it is on life support - kept alive by politicians, race hustlers and people who get a sense of superiority by denouncing others as 'racists.'" 

Why was I reminded of a Richland County person who is insinuating that my complaints about her almost-official position on a school board are racially motivated?

Maybe she is viewing the world through race-tinted glasses. Thanks, Larry.

Friday, November 27, 2020

The Problem with the Nov. 17 Special Meeting

The Special-Called Board Meeting on November 17 had three important items on the agenda.

1. Elect a Board Chair;

2. Nominate a board member to the South Carolina School Boards Association; and

3. Discuss the SCSBA Resolutions on which the SCSBA Nominee would be expected to vote.

Success on No. 1. Failure on Numbers 2 and 3.

#1 James Manning was elected by the board to serve for a "couple of months" (as described multiple times by Acting Chair Teresa Holmes), but actually for more than seven months until June 30, 2021.

Let's take #3 next.

Richland 2 "staff" and the superintendent looked at all the (36?) SCSBA Resolutions, at least to some extent, and recommended them. If you listen carefully to the superintendent's wording, at times he was close to saying that "he" reviewed all of them, but what he really said was that his staff and he had reviewed them. And he called out 11 of them for special attention.

To me that meant that 11 of them needed discussion by the board and a decision made whether to support them or not.

 Mrs. Agostini brought up at the beginning of the meeting that, because of the wording of the agenda, no vote could be taken on the Resolutions. The board could have amended the agenda to allow a vote. Did Holmes know that?

And that's exactly what happened. Mrs. Agostini brought up several of the Resolutions and commented on them.

Why didn't any of the other Trustees (or Trustees-elect) bring up questions? Mrs. McFadden gets a pass. She has since said she read all the Resolutions and took notes. Much of it may have been Greek to her, because November 17 was her first Richland 2 board meeting. But what about Holmes? McKie? Manning? Caution-Parker? Had they read and studied all the Resolutions?

What about the "special attention" brought to 11 of the Resolutions by the superintendent? How will McKie know what the will of the Richland 2 Board is, since the board did not vote one way or the other on the superintendent's stated support of all of them? What she knows is that staff supports them (or most of them), but she won't really know whether the board does!

Without guidance from the board, the FACT is that the board has not voted to support ANY of the Resolutions.

Why is #2 a Failure? Amelia McKie can't serve as the District's representative to the SCSBA, because she is not a legal Richland 2 board member.

And, if she were, she would have no guidance from Richland 2 on any discussion or vote on them.

What did Board Chair Manning mean when he briefly commented that Trustee Caution-Parker will be the representative at "that" meeting (the meeting at which the Resolutions would be voted on?)?

There are supposed to be seven wise people on the Richland 2 elected board. Right now there are only five legal trustees. The jury is out on the level of wisdom with which some of them direct Richland 2.

Monday, November 23, 2020

Nov. 17 Special-Called Board Meeting - a joke

Why did Trustee Agostini called the November 17th meeting a "joke"?

Watch the meeting on YouTube and it will be clear.

The Richland 2 nominee to the South Carolina School Boards Association is supposed to represent Richland 2 (and Richland 1).

The superintendent read off numerous Resolutions that will come before the SCSBA in December for a vote. Mrs. Agostini suggested that the nominee (currently, Trustee-elect Amelia McKie) should know what the position of Richland 2 was on each Resolution. 

This make 100% sense; right? And how would McKie know, if the Board didn't discuss, make a decision, and vote to instruct her?

What Legislative Resolutions (of the SCSBA) did the superintendent mention? At 18:20 on the video timer:

Staff recommends supporting all Resolutions, with special attention to Numbers 7, 9, 13, 16, 17, 19, 24, 30, 33, 35, and 36.

What are they? Ah, not a word. They were buried in the board packet distributed to board members before the meeting.

Which board members read them? My guess is that Agostini and Elkins read them.

Did Caution-Parker? Holmes? McFadden? Manning? McKie?

Care to place any bets?

Dr. Elkins wisely asked whether they would be any discussion of those SCSBA proposed Resolutions or would it just be up to Amelia McKie?

Mrs. Agostini had obviously read the board packet and the Resolutions, because she wanted to discuss Numbers 2, 6, 25, 28, and 31. 

Manning said something about Caution-Parker's being the representative at "that" meeting; yet she did not open her mouth and ask even one question. Had she even read and studied all the Resolutions?

Mrs. Agostini was right. That whole "discussion" item was a waste of time.

One more mess to correct

The Richland 2 School Board now has one more mess to clean up.

At the November 17, 2020 special-called board meeting Amelia McKie was voted on as the District's representative to the South Carolina School Boards Association. She will serve as the SCSBA's Region 8 (Richland 1 and Richland 2) Director.

The problem?

For McKie to serve on the SCSBA, she must first be a member of the Richland 2 School Board. She is not.

Because she has never taken the oath of office legally, McKie is not a member of the Richland 2 school board. She, like Teresa Holmes, is a trustee-elect (only). So McKie cannot serve on the SCSBA board of directors.

When I addressed this with the SCSBA, the executive director, Scott Price, responded on November 16, 2020 with this message:

"With all due respect, it is not up to you to determine anyone's eligibility for the SCSBA Board of Directors.  Nor is it up to you to determine whether someone is a "bonafide" member of the Richland 2 board of trustees."

McKie (and Holmes) violated state law by taking the oath of office before they filed their Statements of Economic Interests with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. They became eligible to take the oath on December 4, 2018, after they filed their SEIs. They have never done so.

One of these days the Richland 2 School Board is going to have to go back and correct everything that it has done, on and since November 13, 2018, if the vote was by votes of McKie and Holmes. 

This is not a case of "possession is 9/10th of the law." They don't get to claim their seats on the board just because they've kept them warm for two years.

What would YOU do?

I received this email from School Board Trustee-elect Teresa Holmes this morning. She sent it at 12:21AM today.

Mr. Philpott,

I have been more than patient and have excused you slanderous/liable behavior long enough. I will be speaking to my attorney on Monday and I am planning to take legal action against you.  Enough is enough.  You are well aware that what you are saying is not true  which, the state of SC has given you in writing. Additionally, you have been asked several times to stop repeating slanderous statements. It's unfortunate that your motives are seemingly racially motivated with,  a poor attempt to hide behind pretending that you are not a racist by using a beard / beards to cover your true intentions and hateful nature. 

Dr. Teresa Holmes 

What would you do?

I remember my interview at the Richland County Sheriff's Department on March 20, 2019, after Holmes filed a report accusing me of harassing her. The meeting was with a Sergeant Investigator and the Deputy Chief of the Criminal Investigations Division. 

After I pointed out that the deputy's report, based on Holmes' statements, contained nothing but lies, the Deputy Chief quickly decided that no crime had been committed.

At one point the sergeant said, in a harsh tone, "You just want these women kicked off the board!"

I paused and then responded calmly. "No, I just want them to take the oath of office and become legal members of the board."

That was 18 months ago. They still haven't taken the oath of office - legally.

Sunday, November 22, 2020

Teresa Holmes for Board Chair? Seriously?

At the November 17, 2020 special-called board meeting, trustee-elect Teresa Holmes threw her bonnet in the ring for future Board Chair.

Seriously? She is not even a legal board member. She is not a legal board Vice Chair (because she isn't a legal board member). And she brashly started her own campaign to lead Richland 2 School District's board.

Watch the beginning of this board meeting. Her pitch starts at 1:50 on the timer.

She claimed a "moment of privilege for just a second to say something".

Listen carefully. She wanted the public to understand that the person elected that night would only serve for the "next couple of months". She repeated that at least three times. Does she not know that there are seven full months until the next board election of officers?

I was reminded of what Ph.D. often stands for. Piling it Higher and Deeper. That she did.

She didn't need to say any of that. If she was nominated, she could have declined. And that would have been the end of it.

But she was giving a formal heads-up to The Squad that, come June 22, 2021, she expects to be selected as the board chair for 2021-2022. And don't get in the way of that gavel. y'all.

Notice the way she opened the meeting. She grabbed that gavel like she was the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Was it really necessary to rap the gavel five times to silence the multitudes?

The room was already silent. I don't recall any Board Chair ever having to demand the silence of the room. Others just gently started the meeting with calling the meeting to order.

Complacency or Complicity

How serious a matter is it for the Richland 2 Board of Trustees not to force Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes to either step away from the board or to take the oath of office legally?

The only response I have received from the school district is that the Board cannot address the issue. That's the lie of the century.

If the five legal members of the board cannot address two women who have been usurping public office for TWO YEARS, what else can they do or not do?

When James Shadd did not attend his final board meeting on November 10, 2020 (reportedly due to self-quarantining after a family member's positive COVID test), the Board did NOT have a quorum. But it conducted business by erroneously counting trustees-elect McKie and Holmes as legitimate board members. Since they have never taken the oath of office legally, they are not board members.

The FBI and SLED have been asked to investigate why Richland School District Two has been paying out public monies illegally to trustees-elect McKie and Holmes. They are not entitled to receive monthly pay for attending board meetings, and they are not entitled to have association membership fees paid or be reimbursed for any expenses. The School District should stop paying them and bill them to recover the monies paid out illegally.

The S.C. Attorney General's Office has been asked again to charge McKie and Holmes with usurping public office.

SECTION 15-63-60. Action against usurpers, for forfeiture of office or against persons acting as corporation.

An action may be brought by the Attorney General in the name of the State upon his own information or upon the complaint of any private party or by a private party interested on leave granted by a circuit judge against the parties offending in the following cases:

(1) When any person shall usurp, intrude into, or unlawfully hold or exercise any public office, civil or military, or any franchise within this State or any office in a corporation, created by the authority of this State;

(2) When any public officer, civil or military, shall have done or suffered an act which, by the provisions of law, shall make a forfeiture of his office; or...

The immediate solution is simple. The oath of office should be administered to them, this time legally. They became eligible to take the oath of office on December 4, 2018, after the filed finally their Statements of Economic Interests (thanks to The Independent Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County newspaper).

McKie and Holmes have never taken the oath of office for the 2018-2022 term legally.

SECTION 8-3-10. Oath and commission prerequisite to assumption of duties.

It shall be unlawful for any person to assume the duties of any public office until he has taken the oath provided by the Constitution and been regularly commissioned by the Governor.

It can be understood that this statute means "taken the oath" legally.

When the five legal trustees have knowledge of the illegal presence of McKie and Holmes on the Board, do they individually become complicit in the violation of state law? Do they condone the presence of McKie and Holmes on the board by not raising at every meeting that McKie and Holmes are illegally present at the board seats?

Even if the minority group of trustees cannot get a Motion passed to remove McKie and Holmes, they should try it at every meeting, so that there is an official record of their attempt.

The problem, of course, is getting it on the agenda at all. Board Chair Manning will be slow to act, and the superintendent doesn't want it on the agenda. But at every meeting a Trustee could request that it be added to the agenda for the next meeting. It'll be voted down by the majority, but it will be on the record.

And then the voters can decide at the November 2022 election how they feel about about the "majority" on the board.

Saturday, November 21, 2020

Race and Richland 2

What is being taught about race in Richland 2? 

Check out this article by Dennis Prager. The title is What American Schools Should Teach About Race, Racism, and Slavery

Do you know what The 1619 Project is? Dennis Prager summarizes it as "that the United States was founded to preserve and protect slavery".

Have you looked at the book White Fragility? Don't waste your time buying it. I started reading it and quickly abandoned it. If you want to save your money and waste some time, the Richland Library system has both the e-book and audiobook. (Let me guess why...)

Is the District still buying and indoctrinating teachers with Gloria Boutte's "Culturally Relevant Pedagogy" training? I'm still laughing over former-Trustee James Shadd's defense of young, black men in classrooms who tend to "speak loudly". All I could think of at that board meeting was how a white teacher was supposed to respond, when some young, black man stood up in a classroom and spoke "loudly" and disrespectfully. At that meeting James Manning finally came to the rescue of white teachers before the discussion ended.

I don't care if the students (or teachers) are black, white, brown, yellow, red. There should be one expected decorum in the classroom. Period.

If you have any information that The 1619 Project is being taught in the classrooms of Richland 2, please let me know.

How long must I wait?

 At the October 13th school board, my emailed communication was read to the board. I wrote:

Members of the board,

I request a response from the District to my two questions.

To what extent is The 1619 Project being introduced, taught or discussed in any classrooms in the Richland 2 School District?

If it is not yet in the Richland 2 School District, will the School Board be consulted before it is taught?

I look forward to your response.

Today is November 21, 2020. I am guessing that I shall not be receiving a reply from the Richland 2 Board or the superintendent.

The Board may or may not be listening, when the question is asked. Their eyes may be open; their ears are in working order but may be tuned in elsewhere. And some of their minds? It's anyone's guess.

Here is why you will never receive an answer to any question asked of the board.

1. The Board does not discuss any comments or answer any questions at a board meeting.

2. The Board does not formally ask or direct the superintendent to respond to any comment or question from the audience.

3. The superintendent will not take it upon himself to answer any question or respond to a comment. He'll excuse his lack of response by saying that the board never told him to respond.

Where does this leave the member of the audience or of the public?

You can write directly to the superintendent; or

You can file a FOIA Request with the District. For information and the email address of the FOIA Officer, go to the District's website and search for "FOIA".

I recently did submit a FOIA Request to the FOIA Officer. My email was undeliverable. When I forwarded my returned email to R2 Public Affairs, I was informed that the FOIA Officer's name had changed. A few days later the name and email address were correctly shown on the District's website.

Then I suggested a better email address would be "" 

Let's hope that the District preserved all of the emails sent to and from the previous email address. A better step would have been an auto-forwarding of the first email, with advice to the sender that the email address had changed.

Friday, November 20, 2020

Is this happening in Richland 2?

 Are girls in Richland 2 sports being beaten out by boys? 

Watch this video. Are transgender boys competing against girls in our school district?

If they aren't (yet), keep a close eye out and get organized now to prevent it from happening.

It's. Just. Wrong.

Wednesday, November 18, 2020

Abbott & Costello Routine - alive and well in Richland County

Depending on your age, you will be familiar with the old routine by Abbott & Costello, "Who's on First?"

I feel like I am on the field right here in Richland County. 

Somewhere, somebody knows the answer and is going to lead to the right office.

The Goal? Either get McKie and Holmes off the Richland 2 School Board or get them to take the oath of office and become legitimate members of the board.

Where have I been?

Richland School District TWO

Sheriff of Richland County

Solicitor of Richland County

S.C. Attorney General (AG)

Back to the Sheriff

Back to the AG

S.C. Department of Education

S.C. School Boards Association



Back to the AG's office

Back to SLED

Richland County Elections Commission

Richland County District 8 Rep. (Manning)

S.C. State Rep. Ivory Thigpen

S.C. State Senator Mia McLeod

The South Carolina Supreme Court would hear a case about usurping public office in a matter of days. The matter would go to the front of the docket. That's how important protecting public office is.

The AG should have taken my complaint and run with it. 

SECTION 15-63-60. Action against usurpers, for forfeiture of office or against persons acting as corporation.
An action may be brought by the Attorney General in the name of the State upon his own information or upon the complaint of any private party or by a private party interested on leave granted by a circuit judge against the parties offending in the following cases:
(1) When any person shall usurp, intrude into, or unlawfully hold or exercise any public office, civil or military, or any franchise within this State or any office in a corporation, created by the authority of this State;

Surely, I cannot be the only resident in Richland 2 who thinks the School District should follow the law.

Why won't the District and the Board require trustees-elect McKie and Holmes to take the oath of office legally?

Recover the Money!

On November 17, 2020 the board voted to approve Amelia McKie as its nominee for Region 8 Director to sit on the South Carolina School Boards Association. McKie was previously at the SCSBA without official designation or authorization and should not have been there.

She has already been inserting herself in the SCSBA - but not legitimately. Perhaps she should have devoted that "spare" time to a part-time job, so that she could make some payments on her $51,750 debt to the S.C. Ethics Commission.

Richland 2 should recover all public monies for her to participate in SCSBA functions. 

There are two trustees who pay attention to what the other five will call "the small stuff". 

The public should appreciate the close attention of Lindsay Agostini and Monica Elkins. They are the trustees to whom Lashonda McFadden should look for guidance, training, mentoring, advice.

Tuesday, November 17, 2020

Worst Meeting Ever (corrected)

You must watch the beginning of the Special Called Board Meeting for November 17, 2020. I'm so glad that I viewed it online and did not waste my time going to R2i2. I probably would have pulled a "Joe Wilson" and shouted "You lie."

Teresa Holmes, as Vice-Chair (although not really), opened the meeting. Notice right from the top how many times she pounded the gavel on the table. The room was quiet and waiting to begin. How many times? Five. FIVE! One rap would have been enough. Was she feeling the power of the Chair?

The first order of business was the approval of the agenda. Why aren't trustees ready to respond as soon as the Chair calls for the motion. Actually, the interval was pretty short this week. Shorter than usual.

The next item on the agenda was the nomination for a Board Chairman, (who would succeed James Shadd and serve until June 30, 2021).

Before she even called for a motion, Holmes grabbed the floor tooted her own horn by making a long-winded statement that, should she be nominated, she would prefer to serve out her term as Vice Chair. At least three times she referred to the period between this meeting (November 17, 2020) and the end of the School Year (June 30, 2021) as a "couple of months". She's got a Ph.D. Can't she count? November, December, January, February, March, April, May, June. Looks like seven-plus months to me. She spoke some drivel about the pandemic being the reason for not considering her as Board Chair until the June election for the board officers for 2021-2022.

She babbled on and on about the need for "consistency" during the pandemic. She showed clearly her lack of understanding of how business boards function. It was clear that she wants to be Board Chair. Maybe one of her friends on The Squad told her that she would be nominated. Her reasoning and plea were unnecessary and very poorly presented.

Talk about ego and being presumptious!!! 

There was a very simple way for her to avoid being considered as an interim Board Chair. If she had been nominated, when asked if she accepted the nomination, all she would have to do is say a single word. "No." Listen for yourself to her grandstanding and to her statement that she does want to be Board Chair.

What was she really saying? "Pick me. Pick me. Pick me - but later." Like a kid on a playground.

You can be sure that The Squad will nominate her in June 2021.

It's for the children, don't you know? Consistency is needed. Baloney!

Somebody should have interrupted her with "Point of Order!"

At 03:45 on the timer the superintendent took charge of the meeting (without a proper introduction) to read the procedure for board officer elections (as they happen in June). There was no reason whatsoever to read all of that for the election of a single officer at this time. In fact, he ignored state law, when he said they would nominate and elect only the Board Chair.

State law dictates that TWO officers were to be elected, but the Richland 2 Board and superintendent ignored it.

SECTION 59-19-70. Chairman and clerk of board.
The trustees shall, as soon as practicable after the appointment of any new trustee, organize by the election of one of their members as chairman and another as clerk of the board. The chairman shall preside at meetings of the board and perform other duties imposed on him under the law, and the clerk shall keep a record of the proceedings of all meetings in a book provided for that purpose and perform all other duties required of him by law.

The Secretary of the Board is the "clerk" referred to in the law. Richland 2 failed to elect a clerk/Secretary tonight.

A question was asked of the superintendent whether a second was need. He said there wasn't. Then he was asked if there was discussion. Again he said there was not.

Here's a question. What if a member knew of information that, if the board knew about it, they would not elect the nominee? We'll never know. (I have no reason to think that was the case regarding Mr. Manning's nomination.)

Dr. Elkins wanted some discussion, but the superintendent said Robert's Rules of Order didn't call for discussion following a nomination, although it does for a Motion. But Robert's doesn't say you cannot have discussion. Elkins failed to make that follow-up point and assert her privilege of speaking. I can't imagine what she wanted to "discuss", since there was only one nomination. But why wasn't she allowed to say what she wanted to say? And why didn't she demand the time to speak?

Dr. Franklin summarized from her copy and found nothing about discussion. The superintendent said he had done his own research. Discussion should have been allowed.

James Manning was nominated and elected (5-2 vote) to serve as Board Chair until June 30, 2021.

At 12:55 on the timer, the superintendent turned the meeting over to the elected Chair, James Manning. 

Be sure to watch Holmes tell him to "Come get your gavel." Whoa! Wait just a minute. She should have gotten up and taken the gavel to him. What was that all about??? The superintendent stood up and delivered the gavel. 

Bad move, Teresa. You don't deserve to ever be Chair!

At 13:25 then the real game of the evening began. This was the nomination of a Region 8 Director for the South Carolina School Boards Association (SCSBA).

Manning explained that there was already a letter into the SCSBA for McKie to be on their board. "Somebody" brought to the board's attention that they needed to do it correctly and vote on it. 

Agostini was nominated and McKie was nominated. At this point Dr. Elkins raised a question about the letter. That was the wrong time for her question. There was a motion on the floor. It should have been seconded before discussion or questions.

The "somebody" who brought it to the attention of the Richland 2 board was Trustee Agostini. Dr. Elkins asked why the nomination was on tonight's agenda. The SCSBA wanted the board to vote to confirm the action that had previously been taken and the letter that had been sent that named McKie. So the Board was being asked to retroactively approve something that a single board member had done. The Board was being asked to clean up a mess that Manning had created when he was Chair. 

Manning also disallowed further discussion, based on the false position of the superintendent. 

With two nominees for the one position on the SCSBA board, Manning should have called for a paper vote. Instead, he asked, in fairness to all, for a vote on the first nomination. The entire room could not be seen on the Zoom broadcast, and the vote was not announced. It was probably 2-5. (See the next vote.) Well,, that was fair, wasn't it? NOT. There should have been a secret vote, with only the result announced!!!

Then McKie was voted on, and the vote was 5-2.

No record of the vote was shown to the public. Who voted against Mrs. Agostini? My guess is that The Squad voted against her, with a little help from their friends.

Dr. Elkins wisely asked how long the Region 8 Director would serve on behalf of Richland 2. Only until the end of the 2020-2021 School Year? No, it's for the remainder of the SCSBA term, 2020-2024.

The Region 8 Director serves Richland 1 and Richland 2, and Amelia McKie slid into that position in some mysterious fashion after Richland 1's Jamie Devine vacated the post. Manning authored a letter when he was chair of the board. He said he had the support of the board, but there never was a vote that selected McKie as the Region 8 Director.

Mrs. Agostini made an emphatic statement that the Board had never voted on McKie's appointment to the SCSBA Board Region 8 Director position, which is a four-year term (McKie was serving the remainder of Jamie Devine's term).

The new member of the board, Lashonda McFadden, lined right up with The Squad. I wonder how many phone calls she got from "certain" board members to encourage her to support McKie.


Amelia McKie cannot serve as the SCSBA Region 8 Director, because she is not a legal member of the Richland 2 School Board.

The problem of two illegitimate board members continues. All McKie and Holmes have to do to become legitimate board members is raise their right hands and be sworn in. They became eligible to take the oath of office on December 4, 2018, when they filed their Statements of Economic Interests with the South Carolina Ethics Commission.

Is anyone disgusted about this?

[EDITED 11/18/20 3:30PM after the video-recording was published.]

Expiration Date?

For several months I have wondered whether there is an expiration date on a trustee-elect qualification to take an oath of office.

If a candidate for office wins an election but never takes the oath of office, is the office really vacant?

The situation in the Richland 2 School District is this.

Two candidates in the November 6, 2018 election were voted into office. However, they have never legally taken the oath of office. Two years have passed.

They have usurped public office by sitting on the board, and the Board and the District have allowed them to do that. 

They took an oath of office on November 13, 2018, but that was before they were eligible to do so. They took the oath illegally, and that's the same as never having taken it at all.

They became eligible to take the oath of office (legally) on December 4, 2018, but they have not done so.

What will the Richland County Elections Commission say? Has the period for taking the oath (legally) expired?

The November 10, 2020 Board meeting did not have a quorum, but the meeting was held anyway. One of these days the District is going to have to go all the way back to November 13, 2018 and fix all the mistakes that have occurred. The District should also recover all monies paid to, and for the benefit of, those two trustees-elect.

Monday, November 16, 2020

SCSBA - Hear No Evil

You know about the three wise monkeys; right? Hear No Evil (Kikazaru); Speak No Evil (Iwazaru); See No Evil (Mizaru).

Kikazaru is alive and well at the South Carolina School Boards Association. Last week I copied the Executive Director and the current President of the SCSBA on correspondence to the Richland 2 School Board.

Both the Executive Director (Scott Price) and the current President (Chuck Saylors, of Greenville County) have replied to me and have told me to delete their names from my email list.

What did Saylors say late last week? "If you have so many issues with this Board, put your name on a ballot! PLEASE take me OFF your distribution list."

What did Price say today? "With all due respect, it is not up to you to determine anyone's eligibility for the SCSBA Board of Directors.  Nor is it up to you to determine whether someone is a "bonafide" member of the Richland 2 board of trustees."

These are certainly interesting responses from people at the top of a state organization.

I won't engage in a battle of words with them, because I'm not interesting in "winning". But their directions not to email them again are worthless. If I want to write to them again, I'll do it. They seem to think I have their names on a "distribution list". I don't. I sent copies of my email to them because, in their positions with a State organization, they ought to know when something is wrong.

What's wrong at the SCSBA? 

A Regional Director of the SCSBA should be a legal member of the local school board that is an SCSBA Member. If the Regional Director is not a legal/legitimate/bonafide member of the local school district, that person cannot be a Regional Director of the SCSBA.

Amelia McKie has been the SCSBA Region 8 Director for Richland 1 and Richland 2. To become a bonafide school board member of Richland 2, all she needs to do is take the oath of office - legally. She has been eligible to do since December 4, 2018.

Is that too hard for an educated person to understand?