New Rules - - Arrive Early

New rules - only 20 members of the public will be admitted to Tuesday's board meeting on October 26.

To be sure I'd get in the door in time, I arrived Saturday night about 9:15PM. I'm a little concerned about bathroom and showering facilities, but everything always works out okay. With 20 members of the public allowing in that Large meeting room, any extra odors in the room from 3½-day camp-out won't be noticeable.

I debated whether to pitch my sleeping bag by the door, but I remembered the threats in the District's announcement about loitering and lingering and blocking the main entrance. Gee, I certainly wouldn't want to be accused of exercising my First Amendment rights. 

OK, have to get some sleep now. I hope they don't have any roving patrols. Good night, all.

Shameful cowardice of Richland 2 Board!!!

The Richland 2 board should be ashamed of itself for not informing the public on October 12th that harsh new "security procedures" were on the way.

What if 10,000 people showed up at R2i2 on Tuesday afternoon and just walked in. Peacefully, of course. The entire sheriff's department couldn't keep them out. Should this happen?

How the new "safety procedures" were announced was shameful!!! An announcement late on Friday afternoon. Such cowards!!!

It looks to me now like the new rules were presented to the board in executive session on October 12th. The agenda had this item for the executive session: "Security at Public Meetings".

The October 12th Agenda is MIA right now. I'm sure it will be found and restored, but you won't find it on the website right now. You have to watch the livestream.com/richland2 video to see the agenda.

Did the superintendent tell the trustees about his plans to alter significantly the public's presence, attendance and participation at future board meetings?

Why did the trustees not inform the public on October 12 that the wind was going to blow in a different direction on October 26? I can tell you one good reason. They flinched. They ducked. They chickened out. They knew a tornado would strike, and they didn't want it at that meeting on October 12.

The superintendent must have informed the board of his draconian plans to begin on October 26. Why did the board allow this? Apparently, he didn't ask for permission, because the board cannot make a decision in executive session. Did he just say, "I am going to do this, whether you like it or not"? Of course, four of the trustees (The Squad) would have liked the new rules, but even they didn't get a chance to vote on them. At least, I don't think so. You don't get to vote in executive session. And you can't "agree to agree".

I went to the livestream video to see the agenda that is projected onto the screen in the meeting room. There is "dead air" until 15:03. The agenda for the Executive Session included "Security at Public Meetings". 

When the meeting got to the point of voting on any executive session item beyond the first two (2:04:25), there was no mention of the "Security at Public Meetings" item on the executive session agenda. 

The agenda item for voting on executive session items did not include "Security at Public Meetings". But it does have this very important line: Item 7.3 "As Needed for items Discussed in Executive Session." 

This was the perfect place to bring it up for a vote!!!

One of The Three could have made a motion to disapprove the superintendent's scheme for "improved" safety procedures. A Second could have been made by another of The Three. That would have opened the item for discussion. Can you just hear the "Out of Order" screams from the Chair? And that poor desk would have taken a beating from the gavel. But to no avail. 

A vote after discussion could possibly have passed, if the Motion had been carefully worded. One of the board members seems to have trouble voting correctly, and she might have voted FOR (the motion to disapprove the security scheme). Then it would have passed!