Public Participation

I might be wrong, but it seems that there is a new link on the Richland 2 website under the School Board section (under EXPLORE). Perhaps I just hadn't noticed it. Click on "Public Presentation". You'll see the "encouragement" from the school board to stay informed.

Scroll down and look at the "Request to Speak" Form that must be completed, if you wish to speak at a Regular meeting.

Read carefully the wording on the Form. Then read Board Policy BEDH. Then re-read the Form.

The Policy is broad. Basically, all it says is, "In order that the board may conduct the meeting in a civil and professional manner, comments from the public should not include gossip, defamatory words, or abusive and vulgar language."

Now, look closely at the "Request to Speak" Form and compare it to the Policy. Did the Board formally adopt the more-restrictive language in the Form? When did that happen? Why didn't the Board change the Policy?

The Guidelines on the Form are much more restrictive than the Policy. The first makes sense, that comments be on any subject "within Board authority", as one Board member emphasized in the recent meeting. What happens when a member of the public asks the Board to address an issue, but the Board ducks under their desks? For example, the School Board could take action against the two people who are no legally on the Board. In fact, they should take action. Some would say they must take action.

S.C. Code of Laws Section 59-19-60 allows for the removal of a School Board Trustee from office. A person can be removed "for cause". It wouldn't even take a super-majority. Four board members could get the job done.

Unfortunately, one against whom the Board would take action is the Chair of the Board who, with the Superintendent (an employee of the District) selects what goes on the Agenda - and what does not. Any board member can suggest an Agenda item, but that doesn't necessarily mean it gets on the Agenda.

The Board (meaning the Chair?) could refer questions from the audience to staff for research and recommendations, but that seems never to happen. Has there ever been a Motion on the Agenda to refer a question for research, recommendation and answer to a member of the public?

While the Policy directs "no inappropriate language", it does not state anything about "personal abuse". One person on the Board made a specific point about that at a previous meeting, but I do not know of any comment ever made at any Board meeting that I have attended that could be considered "personal abuse".

Now, if a person had a guilty conscience about something, then that person might feel that "personal abuse" occurred. Feelings and facts are two different things. I think it was someone in Washington, D.C. who said,  "You are entitled to your own feelings, but you are not entitled to your own facts."

The sentence in the Guidelines about threatened or pending litigation is superfluous, since the Board does not respond to any comments during the meeting.

And then there is that little grammatical error: "Speakers that [sic] discuss matters ..."  It's "speakers who...

Policy BEDH and the Guidelines certainly don't say anything about the Chair's gaveling a speaker into submission.

Who is for transparency and accountability?

I'm so glad I came across Brad Warthen's blog today. I got an education on the election race for the Richland 2 School Board in 2014. Remember that one? That's where race surfaced as an identity issue in the School Board race.

In case you forgot, check out Brad's blog right here.

In the linked article Brad leads off with "I really, really hated to see the first sentence of this story about the Richland School District 2 election:  'Race has become the defining issue in the Richland 2 school board election, as rumors circulate of a shift in power from a white-majority to a black-majority board.' "

Well down in the body of the article appears this "Because if Amelia McKie .. is elected, we’ll have a strong voice on R2’s school board who’ll fight for students, communicate with parents and demand real transparency and accountability."

Now that was back in 2014. Fast forward to 2018-2019.

Amelia McKie is the one who didn't file Campaign Disclosure Forms and Statements of Economic Interest Reports with the South Carolina Ethics Commission for several years. Amelia McKie now owes over $51,000 in fines and penalties to the Ethics Commission.

Amelia McKie is the one (well, one of them) who took the oath of office illegally on November 13, 2018 for her second term of office, 2018-2022.

How's that for transparency and accountability?

Who will demand "real transparency and accountability" from Amelia McKie? The Richland 2 Black Parents' Association has said that McKie's problem with the Ethics Commission is not about race; it's about ethics.

Will the BPA step up and put some pressure on McKie to obey S.C. Code of Laws 8-13-1110(A) and now legally take the oath of office?

Electronic Voting - what's wrong?

Are electronics supposed to simplify life and meetings?

If you have attended Richland 2 Board meetings in-person or viewed them on YouTube, you have seen the pauses and delays, when the Board votes on adoption of agendas, student matters, or adoption of policies.

The Chair calls for the question (Let's vote!) and then it's time for a nap. Somebody has to type up the question, and then the Board members must touch a button on their tablet screens.

Instead of a quick show of hands, there is a long silence. And then it's even longer, when the question is worded incorrectly. Or the wrong Board-member name is entered for the person making or seconding the motion. Or the vote is incorrect and must be corrected.

This needs to be fixed between meetings, so that the flow is smooth and fast.

Aren't electronics supposed to save time, not waste it?

Consent Agenda - what is it?

At each meeting of the Richland 2 School Board, a motion is made to approve the Consent Agenda. When the Board members are asked if there is discussion, there is none. When the vote is taken, it is unanimous.

What is the Consent Agenda?.

It could be approval of accounts payable. It could be forgiveness of debt owed to the District. It could be school remodels. It could be expense accounts. It could be Board or employee travel, meetings, conferences. It could be promotions and raises.

In many "public bodies" (city, county, village, town governments, school boards) approval is needed for business to happen. One way to approve all the administrative detail is to bury it in the Consent Agenda. The Administration (Superintendent, Staff) will seek approval of the Board on many matters.

The Board members will know what is on the Consent Agenda. They should receive lengthy reports, posted to their Board-issued tablets. In olden days (not all that long ago), thick packets of reports were distributed to Board members (city councils, etc.), so that they could read, understand, highlight, question the contents. Now it's electronic. This saves money. It also makes it hard for the public to get the information in advance of a decision.

Sometimes the full Board packet for a public body (legal term for a taxpayer-supported entity) is available by a visit to official offices or a public library. Has anyone ever asked to see the "packet"?

When the Motion is made to approve the Consent Agenda, any Board member can ask for an item to be pulled. This means the item will be temporarily set aside for discussion for a vote. The public body then votes on all the other items. Then the public body returns to the "pulled" item, discusses it (or them) and votes.

The public is entitled to know what the Board is approving.

Is the Consent Agenda available for inspection before a Board meeting? How far ahead is it available? Where? During what hours?

Do Board members read all the information in the semi-monthly meeting packets? At the February 26 Board meeting, Theresa Holmes asked a question of a staffer about which teachers were in the Gifted & Talented Program. The speaker hesitated and then said the information was in the report (in the packet). Obviously, Ms. Holmes hadn't read the report. In a future article, I shall address the propriety of a Board member's visiting a G&T classroom.

Several years ago I identified the danger in electronic packaging of reports into Board-distributed tablets. This was back in Woodstock, Ill., when the city council opted to move away from paper packets to electronic tablets. "To save money", don't you know? Who has time to read all that information?

Longleaf Middle School praised

At the March 12, 2019 Richland 2 School Board meeting Principal Robert Jackson and Longleaf Middle School (Columbia, S.C.) made a presentation, and students were recognized for their achievements. Two students addressed the Board.

In his closing remarks, Principal Jackson referred to the late Coach John Wooden and quoted these words, "Don't let what you can't do, keep you from doing what you can do."

These are words to live by!

By coincidence, on Wednesday, March 13, I received an email from a high school classmate with a recorded presentation on TED by Coach Wooden. It was only after I watched the video-recording of the Board meeting that Coach Wooden's name jumped out at me. Not having participated in sports in high school or followed sports afterwards, I was not familiar with Coach Wooden (1910-2010 (Age 99)).

Take 15 minutes and watch this presentation, titled "The Difference Between Winning and Succeeding.". It's one that every teacher and many students should hear. This TED presentation was published on YouTube on March 26, 2009, about 14 months before his death at age 99. Be sure to reach some of the comments, too.

To share this with educational professionals you know (or anyone else), just click on the "Share" button above. No record is seen or kept of your email address or that of anyone to whom you forward this article.

How much security needed at school board meetings?

After the February 12, 2019 Richland 2 School Board meeting I questioned the number of deputies present from the Richland County Sheriff's Department (Columbia. S.C.). I had noticed about six uniformed officers but, when I inquired of one of them, I learned that only three were deputies and the others were Richland 2 security officers.

In January there had been an alternation of sorts involving one Board member and three non-Board members - (Mr.) Stacy McKie (husband of Board Chair Amelia McKie), Sen. Mia McLeod and her sister. I can't wait to learn how this case turns out. I watched the video of the lobby at R2i2, and it surely looked to me like somebody got right in Dr. Elkins-Johnson's face and provoked her. Where I come from, you can't pick a fight and then cry "Victim".

An issue of ethics was a hot topic at the meeting, and it appeared that there were many in the audience who had been invited to support the person under fire.

The aggressive presence of additional security in the form of sheriff's deputies was due to safety concerns. It is unknown at this writing who requested the increased security. Did they Board vote on the decision to order security and the expense?

At the March 12, 2019 school board meeting I again noticed the high level of security. When I arrived, I made it a point to thank a couple of the deputies for being there to protect "us" from the (whole) Board. I meant it, of course, as a joke. What reason should I have to fear the power of the School Board?

After the meeting I again questioned the additional security, and I learned that the School Board has hired (HIRED!) the three deputies to be there "just in case". I protested that but, of course, I needed to be protesting it to the Board, which had hired the deputies and was paying for them.

Now this is not downtown Columbia. There is no need whatsoever to have hired deputies on the premises of a school board meeting. If a problem arises, dial 9-1-1.

I wonder what the cost of this added security is. I'm going to take a wild guess that the deputies are there on an over-time basis at a possible hourly rate of $60.00. Three deputies ($180.00) for four hours would cost Richland 2 School District $720.00 for each board meeting. There is an easy way to learn the cost. All I would have to do is file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with Richland 2.

Two board meetings per month. $1,460/month - wasted! How long will this go on?

Oh, say, can you hear?

At each Richland 2 school board meeting I wonder just how many people can really hear everything that is said. If you have attended in-person, have you heard everything?

I distinctly remember the first meeting at which I actually heard a speaker who was addressing the Board from the podium. A man from the South Carolina Education Association was there to present a proclamation to the Board. He spoke up. I mean, loudly and clearly, so that he could be heard throughout the room. I wanted to stand up and applaud him!

Are you hard of hearing? Do you know that hearing-assistance devices are available at meetings? No, I didn't know that, either. All you have to do is ask. Ask at the front right of the room (from the audience's view) before the meeting starts.

I'll admit to some degree of hearing loss. After all, these ears have been listening for 80 years. But they are not worn out. When people speak clearly in conversational tones, I don't have any trouble hearing.

If the Board members spoke up, firmly and clearly and actually into the microphones, they could be heard.

I know this is true, because at the March 12th meeting, Teresa Holmes spoke right into her microphone, as she defended herself against remarks I had made during the Public Participation segment of the meeting. You can hear her comments near the end of the March 12, 2019, video recording of the meeting on YouTube.

Ethics - do they matter?

How important are ethics in business? in personal lives? to you?

In the Columbia, S.C. news since late last year have been items of ethical issues involving members of the Richland 2 School Board members.

Most of these matters have now been cleared up.

There is one major matter outstanding. It involves the fines and penalties assessed against Amelia McKie, Chair of the Richland 2 School Board. She owes more than $51,000 to the South Carolina Ethics Commission.

Mrs. McKie's first term on the Board was 2014-2018. She ran for re-election and was successful on November 6, 2018. In the latter half of 2018 she served as Chair of the Board, having been elected to that position by the Board members serving at the time of the election of officers of the board.

On November 13, 2018, Mrs. McKie was administered the oath of office and commenced her duties as Board member for the term of office 2018-2022.

Mrs. McKie had failed to file numerous required documents with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. These required documents included quarterly campaign financial disclosure filings and annual Statements of Economic Interests.

Other media have reported the details of the missing reports and the starting levels of fines. As Mrs. McKie refused to pay the fines that were being levied against her, the amounts increased. Other media have reported that, when she failed to make a payment by December 31, 2018, a large penalty was added, and her fines and penalties now total over $51,000.

Where is the outrage over the Chairperson of a public School Board owing this sizable sum of money to the Ethics Commission?

Only a handful of parents have spoken up at school board meetings. There has been, up until now, no way for one parent to know of another parent's complaints.

There is, on the part of some parents, a feeling that Mrs. McKie was not legally entitled to have her name on the November 2018 General Election ballot, due to her lack of compliance with required filings at the S.C. Ethics Commission. I have not researched that myself.

It was a close election for the four open seats (seven Board members). The top five vote-getters were

• Amelia McKie (I) 26,033
• James Manning (I) 21,740
• Teresa Jones Holmes 20,398
• Cheryl Caution Parker (I) 19,182
• Craig Plank (I) 17,313

Is there a valid school board?

At the March 12, 2019, school board meeting, I read the following statement:

Members of the Board and Supt. Davis,

My name is Gus Philpott.

As much as anyone here tonight, I regret having to bring this issue again to your attention. It will continue to come up until the problem is resolved.

I believe that two of the Board members are not legally entitled to sit. I believe you must immediately leave your seats. I hope the attorney for the School District is present now to advise you.

To sit at these desks, to act as Board members and make decisions involving student affairs and millions of dollars of District assets, each of you must be duly elected and properly sworn in.

This Board has had an unresolved legal problem since November 13, 2018. Why do I say this?

Election day was November 6, 2018.

According to a message from Richland 2 School District, on November 13 Mrs. McKie was administered the oath of office for the 2018-to-2022 term of office and entered upon the duties of Board member. If the oath of office was administered to Ms. Holmes on that date, this applies to her, too. I assert that administration of the oath of office to them was in violation of State law.

South Carolina Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110(A) reads in part, “No public official … may take the oath of office or enter upon his official responsibilities unless he has filed a statement of economic interests in accordance with the provision of this chapter with the appropriate supervisory office.” Violating this Section is a misdemeanor under Code of Laws Section 8-13-1520.

As of November 18^th Mrs. McKie had not filed the State of Economic Interests Report with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. She did not do so until December 4, 2018. Ms. Holmes also filed her first Statement of Economic Interests on December 4^th.

Thus, having not filed the required Statement, neither was eligible to take office.

The proper action is for Mrs. McKie and Ms. Holmes to stand up now and step away from the Board. Immediately. Mrs. McKie is not legally a Board member and cannot be the Chair of this Board.

When the Chair’s position is vacant, the Vice-Chair assumes the duties of the Chair.

If she does not immediately leave the Board, then all of you become complicit in the illegal functioning of this Board.

Should they be administered the oath of office at some future date, then they can become Board members. Mrs. McKie cannot reclaim the position of Chair, unless she would be elected to it a future regular election of officers.

As both were not legally Board members, I request that the District recover all funds improperly paid to them. A review of all decisions made by this Board should be made. If their votes were the deciding votes in any decision regarding a student suspension, expulsion or transfer or in any financial or other matter, I request a new vote on each matter.

At the end of the March 12th Board meeting, Ms. Holmes made her Board comments. You can hear her toward the end of the YouTube video. It was the only time during the entire meeting that any Board member spoke loudly and clearly into the microphone. She defended her legitimacy of Board membership.

After the end of the meeting, I approached Teresa Holmes. A Richland County deputy stood by our conversation. Ms. Holmes told me in no uncertain terms that she was doing nothing wrong and was properly on the Board.

By the time I was 18 (and that was quite a few years ago), I had become acquainted with the phrase "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." I think those words do not exist in her vocabulary.

New (unofficial) blog

Greetings to all parents, students, teachers, staff, community members and taxpayers.

This blog has been established to give you a chance to share your voices about school board matters. I am a resident of Richland 2 in Columbia, South Carolina. I am not a parent of a Richland 2 student; however, I have advocated for a special education student in Richland 2, complained about how a School Resource Officer involvement was mishandled in Richland 2, and have advocated for years in a special ed department in a school district in northern Illinois before moving to Columbia in 2014.

Richland 2 school board meetings are video-recorded and are archived on YouTube. To find them, go to www.youtube.com and search for Richland 2. That's the easy part. The hard part will be staying awake for 3½ hours, if you start watching a number of them prior to March 12, 2019.

This blog is my personal opinion. Comments will be open, with this decision subject to review and change. If comments are respectful and contain language that you would use in your mother's presence, they will remain. Please post comment under your true name. Anonymous comments containing offensive, personal attacks will be deleted. You can whine about deleted comments, if you want; it won't do any good.

OK, onto the meat...