Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Is Proposed Policy BEDGA even Legal?

There was a robust discussion about proposed Policy BEDGA at yesterday's board meeting.

The two sharp trustees who pay attention to detail, Lindsay Agostini and Monico Elkins-Johnson (neither a member of the Squad) asked pointed questions.

Elkins-Johnson asked whether Richland 2 had created this proposed policy or if it had come from the South Carolina School Boards Association. Or if Richland 2's legal counsel (Kathryn Mahoney) had written it. Who thought it up?

The superintendent provided a long-winded, convoluted answer. He basically objected to the question.

Then Lindsay Agostini asked who had commissioned the proposed policy? (In other words, who authorized spending District money?)

The superintendent blinked and passed the buck to James Manning. He acknowledged that he had done so. It was clear that Agostini thought the Board should have discussed the topic of the proposed policy and then voted whether to authorize the Chair to engage the attorney for the District to proceed. And spend District money doing so. Instead, Manning just went forward.

There is no doubt in my mind that it was the superintendent who wanted this policy. He wants it so that HE can decide whether a board member's request for information is "reasonable". He forgets that he works for, and at the direction of, the Board.

Agostini asked if such a policy is legal and referred to an opinion of the South Carolina Attorney General. Manning said the attorney wrote it.

Agostini knew, and I agree, that just because the attorney wrote it doesn't mean it is legal.

Look how the superintendent is "bullet-proof" through this proposed policy.

If a board member makes a request and the superintendent doesn't like it, he will deny it. Then the board member must get the Board to approve her request, and then the superintendent will comply. The superintendent knows that a board member (ex., Agostini or Elkins-Johnson) will never get the majority of the board (Shadd, Holmes, McKie, Caution-Parker (even though Holmes and McKie are not even legitimate members of the board)) to approve over-riding the superintendent's denial (veto).

Voters will have a chance in November 2020 to retain Agostini and Elkins-Johnson (if they run for re-election) and replace Shadd. Voters may elect a wise, concerned, intelligent, management-oriented candidate (such as voters in Richland One did on December 31, 2019, when they elected Jonathan Milling), if such a candidate can be found. In November 2022 voters can dump McKie, Holmes and Caution-Parker, and then the Board can once again begin directing the District.

I can almost hear the thunk of the rubber-stamps hitting the bottom of the waste basket.

No comments:

Post a Comment