After the April 28, 2022 special-called board meeting convened and the agenda was approved, the Chair stated what that day's (she called it "night's" meeting; it started at 4:30PM) meeting was to be about.
Holmes said she wanted to "make a little clarity to the public" about the meeting.
What in the world does that mean? "make a little clarity to the public"? Those are the words of a 35-year educator who is head of a board of trustees managing a business with a $300,000,000 annual budget. Seriously?
Holmes said they had to go through that meeting first, so that they could get to the public forum that they planned to have.
No, they didn't have to go through that meeting first to "get to the public forum". It was what they chose to do.
What "public forum"? The Committee had not yet decided on any public forum. The Committee hadn't even met yet!
Then Holmes said they had to do this (meeting) first, before they went into private things of having people come in ...
What "private things"? There aren't going to be any "private things". This is a public body!
Then Holmes called for a motion to go into executive session.
Trustee-elect McKie made the motion: (livestream.com/richland2 at 06:45) "I move to convene in executive session for the purpose of a safety and security meeting." The motion was seconded by Trustee Agostini. The motion was approved by a hand-vote of 7-0.
Was the executive session legal?
McKie said the purpose was "a safety and security meeting". No, the purpose was not a safety and security meeting. Holmes had just explained that the purpose was to establish how the Committee of the Whole ("Committee") would conduct its business (my words; not hers).
Setting the purpose and scope of the Committee is not an eligible exclusion for leaving public session and entering executive (private, secret) session.
If the board members intended to discuss school safety and security, that is an eligible exclusion for which the board could enter executive session and met out of the public view. But that's not why they were meeting.
Are Minutes kept of executive sessions? While those Minutes would not normally be available to the public, a judge could order them to be available in camera.
Unfortunately, in South Carolina the only way to hold a public body (ex., a school board) accountable for violation of the State's Freedom of Information Act is to haul them into court.
The District's in-house legal counsel is not going to do that. The SCSBA is not going to do that. The County Council is not going to do that. Our State Rep and State Senator will not do that. Will a member of the public fork over his own money to hire an attorney and force Richland 2 into court?
No comments:
Post a Comment