The Richland 2 website carries an announcement of "The PREMIER 100" conference to be held on March 28. Clicking on the link on www.Richland2.org takes you off the District's website to a Google site.
What is it? The conference "is an annual conference supporting Richland School District Two's effort to not only recruit, but to retain male educators of color."
As a matter of fact, this seems to be the First Annual Conference (if you get the joke). Since the program kicked off on November 13, 2019, this is the first conference. It will only be an annual conference, if it is held again.
The superintendent referred to The Premier 100 at the February 11th Board Meeting as "men of color".
I was curious about the application and tried to click through to examine how "color" is asked on the application for the conference. You can't pass into the application without an account.
Is "white" a color? Can a white "male educator of color" attend this conference?
The last Q&A in the FAQs answers that question (sort of): "I am Not a Minority Male Eductaor (sic). Can I still attend?"
A. "ABSOLUTELY! We know that we cannot affect change in our industry alone. We welcome all current and future educators to attend this event."
What on Earth does this mean? "We know that we cannot affect change in our industry alone."
Men of color in Richland 2 (black men) might be a high percentage within the boundaries of Richland 2 School District and even in the total Columbia metropolitan area and in South Carolina. But blacks are 14% (including multi-racial) of the population in the United States. There is a whole wide world out there into which they are going to have to learn to fit.
So much for Equal Employment Opportunity in Richland 2. The superintendent's #1 Initiative is to hire 100 men of color. Why isn't that discrimination?
This district should be hiring the top 100 applicants and be as color-blind as it expects teachers and staff to be.
Friday, February 14, 2020
MSD H.S., Parkland, Fla. - two years later
It was two years ago on Valentines Day, February 14, 2018 that a nut got loose at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida and killed 17, and injured more.
Read this interview and listen to the podcast with Max Eden, co-author of Why Meadow Died: The People and Policies That Created The Parkland Shooter and Endanger America's Students. Meadow Pollack was a student at MSD. Her father, Andrew Pollack, and Eden spent a year writing that book, and they nailed it.
To view the book on Amazon and read a sample, click here. I bought the Kindle edition on the day it was released. After reading only a few pages, I ordered the print edition.
The article and podcast are here.
Why am I writing about this again now? Because every parent, every student, and every teacher and school staff person and SRO should read it. And then read it a second time.
Could this happen in Richland 2? You bet it could.
With the crimes (ex., sex assaults at Ridge View H.S., etc.) happening right in our own district, the potential is for some kid to go off the rails and commit the same crazy act that the punk in Parkland, Florida did.
How do you keep it from happening? You learn what allowed it to happen. It's all in this book.
Parents, you had better start showing up at board meetings and getting involved.
The Richland 2 School District refused my request at the end of February 2018 to survey the teachers, staff, parents and community members on the topic of arming teachers. They wouldn't even ask the community how it felt. And the superintendent refused to apply for a School Safety Shield Grant from the NRA.
That money would have been a no-strings-attached grant; perhaps as much as $10,-15,000, to be used to improve safety for students. I felt the sole reason was that the NRA was the source of the grant. He said he had other sources of funds.
The SRO program, by itself, is not the answer. Buy Why Meadow Died. Read it. Discuss it. Ask questions. Get involved and put a stop to what is happening in Richland 2 now that might produce a Parkland incident right here.
Read this interview and listen to the podcast with Max Eden, co-author of Why Meadow Died: The People and Policies That Created The Parkland Shooter and Endanger America's Students. Meadow Pollack was a student at MSD. Her father, Andrew Pollack, and Eden spent a year writing that book, and they nailed it.
To view the book on Amazon and read a sample, click here. I bought the Kindle edition on the day it was released. After reading only a few pages, I ordered the print edition.
The article and podcast are here.
Why am I writing about this again now? Because every parent, every student, and every teacher and school staff person and SRO should read it. And then read it a second time.
Could this happen in Richland 2? You bet it could.
With the crimes (ex., sex assaults at Ridge View H.S., etc.) happening right in our own district, the potential is for some kid to go off the rails and commit the same crazy act that the punk in Parkland, Florida did.
How do you keep it from happening? You learn what allowed it to happen. It's all in this book.
Parents, you had better start showing up at board meetings and getting involved.
The Richland 2 School District refused my request at the end of February 2018 to survey the teachers, staff, parents and community members on the topic of arming teachers. They wouldn't even ask the community how it felt. And the superintendent refused to apply for a School Safety Shield Grant from the NRA.
That money would have been a no-strings-attached grant; perhaps as much as $10,-15,000, to be used to improve safety for students. I felt the sole reason was that the NRA was the source of the grant. He said he had other sources of funds.
The SRO program, by itself, is not the answer. Buy Why Meadow Died. Read it. Discuss it. Ask questions. Get involved and put a stop to what is happening in Richland 2 now that might produce a Parkland incident right here.
McKie's telephonic attendance on 2/11/2020
Will the Board Secretary, Cheryl Caution-Parker, document in the Minutes of the February 11, 2020 Regular Meeting of the School Board to reflect the absence of Amelia McKie and the authorization of her attendance at that meeting by telephone? Will the Minutes include the reason she did not attend the meeting in person and a copy of McKie's request to the Chair, the Vice-Chair, or the superintendent to attend by telephone?
Board Policy BEDM allows telephonic attendance only in exceptional circumstances, such as "special medical and/or travel situations, military service, or job constraints."
When a Board member is absent, should the Board Chair explain to the other Board members and to the public why that member is absent? Since this is the second meeting in 2020 that she has missed, is this the beginning of a pattern? The only way to determine a pattern is to keep records. Public mention and record in the Minutes would create such a record. Last year McKie was absent related to a death, but it was never mentioned how close the relationship was or when any service was in relation to the date of the meeting she was missing.
Shouldn't the Board vote on allowing an absent member to attend by telephone? This is done in meetings of many public bodies. The Secretary could inform the Chair of protocol and reference in Robert's Rules of Order. Is that part of her responsibilities as Board Secretary? To see that things are done correctly? Her role of Secretary is not just to sign her name, when someone tells her to do so.
Since McKie has never taken the oath of office legally and owes $51,750 to the Ethics Commission, isn't it time for McKie to leave the board? Actually, she can't "leave" the board, because she has never legitimately been on it. To become a legal member, all she has to do is raise her right hand and take the oath. Even now, it's not too late. She became eligible to take the oath on December 4, 2018. Of course, she'd have to refuse her trustee wages since November 13, 2018.
What will be the effect of a garnishment of School Board Trustee wages, when the S.C. Department of Revenue attaches McKie's wages in collection of the debt to the Ethics Commission? How will the Secretary record that? Will she?
Why isn't the Board Secretary throwing a red flag on the field over this? Cheryl Caution-Parker, as Board Secretary (versus the secretary on the District staff who writes up the Minutes) is the keeper of the official records. I wonder if she even knows this.
Under Board Policy AR BD-R a duty of the Board Secretary is to "prepare such reports ... as may be prescribed by the statutes or directions of the chairman of the board." Has she ever been directed to prepare a report? This Policy allows for a staff person only to record minutes and proceedings. Does the Secretary review and approve them before they are presented for Board approval? Does the Secretary know what is required of her under the South Carolina Code of Laws?
Board Policy BEDM allows telephonic attendance only in exceptional circumstances, such as "special medical and/or travel situations, military service, or job constraints."
When a Board member is absent, should the Board Chair explain to the other Board members and to the public why that member is absent? Since this is the second meeting in 2020 that she has missed, is this the beginning of a pattern? The only way to determine a pattern is to keep records. Public mention and record in the Minutes would create such a record. Last year McKie was absent related to a death, but it was never mentioned how close the relationship was or when any service was in relation to the date of the meeting she was missing.
Shouldn't the Board vote on allowing an absent member to attend by telephone? This is done in meetings of many public bodies. The Secretary could inform the Chair of protocol and reference in Robert's Rules of Order. Is that part of her responsibilities as Board Secretary? To see that things are done correctly? Her role of Secretary is not just to sign her name, when someone tells her to do so.
Since McKie has never taken the oath of office legally and owes $51,750 to the Ethics Commission, isn't it time for McKie to leave the board? Actually, she can't "leave" the board, because she has never legitimately been on it. To become a legal member, all she has to do is raise her right hand and take the oath. Even now, it's not too late. She became eligible to take the oath on December 4, 2018. Of course, she'd have to refuse her trustee wages since November 13, 2018.
What will be the effect of a garnishment of School Board Trustee wages, when the S.C. Department of Revenue attaches McKie's wages in collection of the debt to the Ethics Commission? How will the Secretary record that? Will she?
Why isn't the Board Secretary throwing a red flag on the field over this? Cheryl Caution-Parker, as Board Secretary (versus the secretary on the District staff who writes up the Minutes) is the keeper of the official records. I wonder if she even knows this.
Under Board Policy AR BD-R a duty of the Board Secretary is to "prepare such reports ... as may be prescribed by the statutes or directions of the chairman of the board." Has she ever been directed to prepare a report? This Policy allows for a staff person only to record minutes and proceedings. Does the Secretary review and approve them before they are presented for Board approval? Does the Secretary know what is required of her under the South Carolina Code of Laws?
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Caution-Parker - faux outrage
Trustee Cheryl Caution-Parker became emotional and angry at the end of the February 11, 2020 board meeting. You can see and hear it, beginning at 1:57:16 on the YouTube video-recording of the meeting.
After thanking everyone, she said, "And I just want to make a point here. This really has affected me. It is bothering me after almost 40 years in this district, a superintendent is being questioned, or challenged, about going out of state - going to a conference, a national conference, and representing our district. I find it reprehensible, and I really am questioning the real - the REAL - reason behind all of this. Thank you."
Explain to me why a concerned citizen should not be able to ask questions and why even board members should not be able to ask questions about a superintendent.
Caution-Parker is now one year into her current four-year term. She does not demonstrate the critical thinking skills of a Manager or Executive needed to function professionally as a school board trustee.
The superintendent' could have answered Trustee Agostini's question about who is paying for his trip in 15 words. "The League of Innovative Schools is paying my expenses and there is no speaking fee." Why did he ramble on and on?
When she had a student who gave her a long-winded, circuitous answer to a very straight-forward, basic question, didn't she ever want to know the real - the REAL - reason behind it?
After thanking everyone, she said, "And I just want to make a point here. This really has affected me. It is bothering me after almost 40 years in this district, a superintendent is being questioned, or challenged, about going out of state - going to a conference, a national conference, and representing our district. I find it reprehensible, and I really am questioning the real - the REAL - reason behind all of this. Thank you."
Explain to me why a concerned citizen should not be able to ask questions and why even board members should not be able to ask questions about a superintendent.
Caution-Parker is now one year into her current four-year term. She does not demonstrate the critical thinking skills of a Manager or Executive needed to function professionally as a school board trustee.
The superintendent' could have answered Trustee Agostini's question about who is paying for his trip in 15 words. "The League of Innovative Schools is paying my expenses and there is no speaking fee." Why did he ramble on and on?
When she had a student who gave her a long-winded, circuitous answer to a very straight-forward, basic question, didn't she ever want to know the real - the REAL - reason behind it?
Wednesday, February 12, 2020
Schools belong to the public
Oh, really?
I wonder how recently any board member has read this message:
Maintaining excellent public schools requires the cooperation and effort of everyone in the community. Members of the school board are aware that schools belong to the public, and they recognize the importance of keeping the community involved with and informed about the activities of the schools and the school board. Your school board members encourage you to stay informed about education issues and to attend board meetings regularly.
The above paragraph was lifted straight from the District's website. You can read it here.
If a member of the public had been in attendance last night to witness the attacks by McKie, Caution-Parker and Shadd on a local resident and community member (me), would he ever come to another board meeting? Would he ever stick his neck out and risk making a three-minute comment during Public Participation? Would he have the courage to speak out?
Or would he say, "Whoa! I'll never do that!"
The Public Participation Requst to Speak form informs the prospective speaker that the board does not participate in debates. Speakers are requested to refrain from any form of personal abuse.
That request obviously does not apply to the members of the board themselves. Watch the video of last night's meeting, including the discussion at Item 13.1 (beginning at 1:33:40 on the timer) and the Board and Superintendent Comments (beginning at 1:55:50 on the timer). Listen carefully to the attacks by McKie, Caution-Parker and Shadd.
Remember this at the next election of Board members.
I wonder how recently any board member has read this message:
Maintaining excellent public schools requires the cooperation and effort of everyone in the community. Members of the school board are aware that schools belong to the public, and they recognize the importance of keeping the community involved with and informed about the activities of the schools and the school board. Your school board members encourage you to stay informed about education issues and to attend board meetings regularly.
The above paragraph was lifted straight from the District's website. You can read it here.
If a member of the public had been in attendance last night to witness the attacks by McKie, Caution-Parker and Shadd on a local resident and community member (me), would he ever come to another board meeting? Would he ever stick his neck out and risk making a three-minute comment during Public Participation? Would he have the courage to speak out?
Or would he say, "Whoa! I'll never do that!"
The Public Participation Requst to Speak form informs the prospective speaker that the board does not participate in debates. Speakers are requested to refrain from any form of personal abuse.
That request obviously does not apply to the members of the board themselves. Watch the video of last night's meeting, including the discussion at Item 13.1 (beginning at 1:33:40 on the timer) and the Board and Superintendent Comments (beginning at 1:55:50 on the timer). Listen carefully to the attacks by McKie, Caution-Parker and Shadd.
Remember this at the next election of Board members.
Supt. Davis already on conference agenda
Last night the School Board approved a change in the date for the second Regular Meeting in March. The meeting is being changed from March 24 to March 31.
This is being done to accommodate Supt. Baron Davis, so that he can travel to L.A. for a conference sponsored by the Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools and Compton and El Segundo USDs.
Supt. Davis' photo and bio already appear on the League's website! He is to speak on Monday, March 23 at 2:30PM P.T.. Scroll down to below the fold on the Davis' webpage there.
So what was all the uproar about last night?
With a speaking date on March 23, he easily could have flown back to Columbia on Monday and fulfilled his superintendent's duties at the March 24 meeting!!! Or he could have designated an Assistant Superintendent to fill in on Tuesday night.
Instead, seven Board members and 15-20 staffers will be expected to adjust the personal time and evening hours to show up. How many already had something else planned for that evening?
How long ago did he accept the speaking engagement?
Did they come to him, or did he approach them and submit his topic for consideration?
The Board got snookered last night, and they fell for it.
This is being done to accommodate Supt. Baron Davis, so that he can travel to L.A. for a conference sponsored by the Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools and Compton and El Segundo USDs.
Supt. Davis' photo and bio already appear on the League's website! He is to speak on Monday, March 23 at 2:30PM P.T.. Scroll down to below the fold on the Davis' webpage there.
So what was all the uproar about last night?
With a speaking date on March 23, he easily could have flown back to Columbia on Monday and fulfilled his superintendent's duties at the March 24 meeting!!! Or he could have designated an Assistant Superintendent to fill in on Tuesday night.
Instead, seven Board members and 15-20 staffers will be expected to adjust the personal time and evening hours to show up. How many already had something else planned for that evening?
How long ago did he accept the speaking engagement?
Did they come to him, or did he approach them and submit his topic for consideration?
The Board got snookered last night, and they fell for it.
Who wants to run for R2 school board?
It's not too early to toss your hat in the ring to be one of the three trustees to be elected in November for the Richland 2 School Board.
On November 3, 2020 District voters will elect persons to fill the expiring terms of James Shadd, Monica Elkins-Johnson and Lindsay Agostini.
I hope Lindsay Agostini will run again. Her insight and attention to detail are obvious. From her questions at school board meetings, it is obvious that she studies the board packets before meetings and begins pondering decisions to be made at meetings. Lindsay absolutely merits re-election, although I won't be surprised if she decides not to run. Too many board votes are 6-1, with Lindsay's standing up for what is right, exercising independence and voting for what is right for the District. - and seeing the vote go against her position.
Monica Elkins-Johnson asks insightful questions, too. I usually must learn what she said at meetings by watching the YouTube video-recording, because she has a soft voice and turns her head away from the microphone to look at the person she is addressing. She merits re-election. Monica occasionally breaks from the herd mentality.
James Shadd should be replaced. He sides every time with the superintendent, as happened last night. The superintendent can defend himself (with many words) on any issue, but Shadd jumps right in with his 2¢ worth. He refuses to speak loudly or into the microphone without mumbling. Last night was an exception. Watch his closing attack in the Board & Superintendent Comments just before the end of the meeting. Shadd too has had problems with the Ethics Commission and recently allowed a $1,400 debt in Ethics Commission fines to hit the media. Board members should be squeaky clean.
Requirements to run are publicly available. Learn them, including requirements of the S.C. Ethics Commission.
Start your campaign early. For suggestions for low-cost campaigning, call me. I'll be glad to give you ideas. Note the word: give.
The November 2022 election will be even more important. At that time voters will have the opportunity to say Good-bye to Caution-Parker and .McKie. Maybe by then Holmes will have taken the oath legally and have become a legitimate member of the Board.
On November 3, 2020 District voters will elect persons to fill the expiring terms of James Shadd, Monica Elkins-Johnson and Lindsay Agostini.
I hope Lindsay Agostini will run again. Her insight and attention to detail are obvious. From her questions at school board meetings, it is obvious that she studies the board packets before meetings and begins pondering decisions to be made at meetings. Lindsay absolutely merits re-election, although I won't be surprised if she decides not to run. Too many board votes are 6-1, with Lindsay's standing up for what is right, exercising independence and voting for what is right for the District. - and seeing the vote go against her position.
Monica Elkins-Johnson asks insightful questions, too. I usually must learn what she said at meetings by watching the YouTube video-recording, because she has a soft voice and turns her head away from the microphone to look at the person she is addressing. She merits re-election. Monica occasionally breaks from the herd mentality.
James Shadd should be replaced. He sides every time with the superintendent, as happened last night. The superintendent can defend himself (with many words) on any issue, but Shadd jumps right in with his 2¢ worth. He refuses to speak loudly or into the microphone without mumbling. Last night was an exception. Watch his closing attack in the Board & Superintendent Comments just before the end of the meeting. Shadd too has had problems with the Ethics Commission and recently allowed a $1,400 debt in Ethics Commission fines to hit the media. Board members should be squeaky clean.
Requirements to run are publicly available. Learn them, including requirements of the S.C. Ethics Commission.
Start your campaign early. For suggestions for low-cost campaigning, call me. I'll be glad to give you ideas. Note the word: give.
The November 2022 election will be even more important. At that time voters will have the opportunity to say Good-bye to Caution-Parker and .McKie. Maybe by then Holmes will have taken the oath legally and have become a legitimate member of the Board.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)