One of the most important meetings of the Richland 2 School Board will be held on Tuesday, June 30.
At that meeting the final action of the Board will be to elect the Officers for the 2020-2021 School Year. The officers to be elected are Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary.
Each is an important and responsible role. An officer of the school board must be a member of the Board. The unstated requirement is that an officer must be a legal member of the school board.
Since November 13, 2018 the Richland 2 School Board has done business with two women sitting as if they are board members. The fact is that neither is a legal member of the board.
Both Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes took the oath of office on November 13, 2018, before they were eligible to do so. They became eligible to take the oath upon filing their Statements of Economic Interests with the South Carolina Ethics Commission on December 4, 2018. Neither has legally taken the oath of office on or since December 4, 2018.
In spite of this irregularity, District 2 has allowed them to serve and has paid them monthly remuneration for doing so. The District 2 has also paid expenses for functions as if they were board members. By doing so, the District has expended public funds not in accordance with policies and laws.
Holmes served, improperly, as Vice Chair during the 2019-2020 school year; that term of office ends June 30, 2020.
Neither McKie nor Holmes is eligible to serve as an officer of the school board for the 2020-2021 school year.
Shadd should be ineligible to serve as an officer because of his numerous tax liens and unpaid tax indebtedness.
That leaves four possible Trustees for the three officer positions: Manning, Agostini, Elkins-Johnson, and Caution-Parker.
Watch carefully to see how the board acts on June 30.
Wednesday, June 17, 2020
Tuesday, June 16, 2020
R2 Students Can Learn from the Death of Rayshard Brooks
Rayshard Brooks, 27, died in Atlanta on June 12, 2020. He didn't have to die.
Richland 2 students of all ages and races can learn from his death. And should learn from it. And they should learn to separate the "wheat from the chaff". Instead of making an immediate emotional decision about what you think happened, take it apart. Understand exactly what did happen.
And understand exactly what is wrong with the media reporting non-stop about it. And understand what the exact cause of the resulting violence is.
Why did Brooks die?
He resisted arrest.
He fought with two officers.
He disarmed one officer of his taser.
He fled with the officer's taser.
He fired the stolen taser at the officers who were chasing him.
Brooks' actions resulted in his death.
Watch the 20-minute video, not the 2-min. one on CNN.
The officer was polite to Brooks. Brooks was calm, until he realized he was being arrested. Are reports correct that he was on probation or bail and had been court-ordered to stay out of trouble?
Is DUI (a BAC of .108) staying out of trouble? Was he headed to jail for violating the terms of his release, not just for the DUI?
Don't be influenced by the Brooks' family mouthpiece. He is just doing what lawyers do. They plead their case in the media. He'll sue for $20,000,000 (40% contingency fee (commission)) and the City of Atlanta will roll over and pay.
Now, do you, students, need to worry about getting shot by police?
If you don't do stupid stuff, the answer is No. If you do stupid stuff but straighten up when the cops grab you, the answer is No. If you do dumb stuff, like fight with cops, disarm them, run, shoot at them? Yep, you'll probably die.
Use your education. Use your brains. Just be as smart as you can, and you'll live to a ripe, old age.
NOTE: At 6:30PM, hours after I wrote the above, I read this newspaper article in The Augusta Chronicle. I suggest you read it.
Richland 2 students of all ages and races can learn from his death. And should learn from it. And they should learn to separate the "wheat from the chaff". Instead of making an immediate emotional decision about what you think happened, take it apart. Understand exactly what did happen.
And understand exactly what is wrong with the media reporting non-stop about it. And understand what the exact cause of the resulting violence is.
Why did Brooks die?
He resisted arrest.
He fought with two officers.
He disarmed one officer of his taser.
He fled with the officer's taser.
He fired the stolen taser at the officers who were chasing him.
Brooks' actions resulted in his death.
Watch the 20-minute video, not the 2-min. one on CNN.
The officer was polite to Brooks. Brooks was calm, until he realized he was being arrested. Are reports correct that he was on probation or bail and had been court-ordered to stay out of trouble?
Is DUI (a BAC of .108) staying out of trouble? Was he headed to jail for violating the terms of his release, not just for the DUI?
Don't be influenced by the Brooks' family mouthpiece. He is just doing what lawyers do. They plead their case in the media. He'll sue for $20,000,000 (40% contingency fee (commission)) and the City of Atlanta will roll over and pay.
Now, do you, students, need to worry about getting shot by police?
If you don't do stupid stuff, the answer is No. If you do stupid stuff but straighten up when the cops grab you, the answer is No. If you do dumb stuff, like fight with cops, disarm them, run, shoot at them? Yep, you'll probably die.
Use your education. Use your brains. Just be as smart as you can, and you'll live to a ripe, old age.
NOTE: At 6:30PM, hours after I wrote the above, I read this newspaper article in The Augusta Chronicle. I suggest you read it.
Monday, June 15, 2020
Open Letter to Board about Politics
The following letter has been sent to the Richland 2 School Board.
What do you think? Should the superintendent get a pass on this? Please comment below.
Mr. Manning, Board Members, and Trustees-elect McKie and Holmes,
What do you think? Should the superintendent get a pass on this? Please comment below.
Mr. Manning, Board Members, and Trustees-elect McKie and Holmes,
I am writing to register a formal complaint about remarks made by Supt. Davis at the June 9, 2020 Regular Meeting of the Richland 2 School Board.
At 44:50 in the YouTube video-recording of that meeting Supt. Davis said, "Congratulations to our school board vice chairperson woman, Dr. Teresa Holmes, on her election as a delegate to the 2020 Democratic National Convention in August. The Democratic Party is scheduled to convene in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to formally nominate the next president and vice-president of the United States."
First of all, I object to his making a partisan statement during his official duties at the meeting.
Secondly, he was inaccurate. The DNC will not "formally nominate the next president and vice-present of the United States," in spite of that language on the DNC website. The DNC will select the Democratic nominee for the offices of POTUS and VPOTUS.
I request the board to admonish the superintendent regarding his partisan statement and to make a public statement at the next school meeting to assure the public that the School Board operates in a non-partisan manner.
Sincerely,
Gus Philpott
www.Richland2.info
Sunday, June 14, 2020
R2 Trustee Shadd owes $50,000 in tax liens
I was catching up on my newspaper reading tonight. Look what I found!
The Independent Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County newspaper published an article on June 11 about tax lien debts of Richland 2 School Board member James Shadd. Read that article by clicking here.
Shadd owes personal and law-practice back taxes. You can read the breakdown in Michael Smith's article.
These three sentences in The Voice really tell it all.
Shadd's record ought to disqualify him totally from an elected position on the school board where, as he says, he is one of seven trustees directing the budget.
From my point-of-view, he is one of five legal trustees. Two women on the board have never taken the oath of office legally after becoming eligible to do so, and they never should have been allowed to serve on the board since their 2018 election. Those women are Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes.
McKie is infamous for her unpaid debt to the South Carolina Ethics Commission, which filed a $51,750 judgment against her in July 2019. The Ethics Commission recently indicated that McKie has made no payment toward her debt.
Shadd's term of office as School Board Trustee ends in November. Will he run for re-election?
Will it matter to the public that he hasn't paid taxes for a number of years. Should it matter?
Of course, it should matter. His opinion is that owing $50,000 doesn't impede his abiliity to vote. To vote, all he needs is the energy to press Yes or No on his school-issued tablet.
Being able to comprehend the important matters and make good decisions? Well, you be the judge.
The Independent Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County newspaper published an article on June 11 about tax lien debts of Richland 2 School Board member James Shadd. Read that article by clicking here.
Shadd owes personal and law-practice back taxes. You can read the breakdown in Michael Smith's article.
These three sentences in The Voice really tell it all.
"Shadd said he’s working to resolve the tax liens, calling them a 'personal matter.'
“'I am actively working to make sure that I take care of those matters,' he said.
"Shadd didn’t think owing $50,000 in unpaid income taxes impedes his ability to vote on multi-million dollar budget matters."
Sometimes people get behind on their taxes for one year, maybe two.Shadd's record ought to disqualify him totally from an elected position on the school board where, as he says, he is one of seven trustees directing the budget.
From my point-of-view, he is one of five legal trustees. Two women on the board have never taken the oath of office legally after becoming eligible to do so, and they never should have been allowed to serve on the board since their 2018 election. Those women are Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes.
McKie is infamous for her unpaid debt to the South Carolina Ethics Commission, which filed a $51,750 judgment against her in July 2019. The Ethics Commission recently indicated that McKie has made no payment toward her debt.
Shadd's term of office as School Board Trustee ends in November. Will he run for re-election?
Will it matter to the public that he hasn't paid taxes for a number of years. Should it matter?
Of course, it should matter. His opinion is that owing $50,000 doesn't impede his abiliity to vote. To vote, all he needs is the energy to press Yes or No on his school-issued tablet.
Being able to comprehend the important matters and make good decisions? Well, you be the judge.
Thursday, June 11, 2020
Partisan Politics Allowed at Board Meeting
Is it appropriate for the superintendent, or any other official, to make partisan political statements at a school board meeting?
On Tuesday I thought I heard the superintendent do so toward the end of the June 9th board meeting. When the recording was published on YouTube this morning, I listened to his statement again. I had understood it correctly the first time.
Why didn't Chairman Manning interrupt him? Did he say anything to the superintendent after the meeting?
Supt. Davis said (at 44:50 in the YouTube recording), "Congratulations to our school board vice chairperson woman, Dr. .Teresa Holmes, on her election as a delegate to the 2020 Democratic National Convention in August. The Democratic Party is scheduled to convene in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to formally nominate the next president and vice-president of the United States."
Let me tell you to what, exactly, I object. The superintendent's wording as to just what the DNC will do at its convention. (For the record, I would be just as picky if he had referred to the RNC.)
The superintendent said that the Democratic Party will formally nominate "the next president and vice-present of the United States".
No, it won't.
The DNC will nominate the Democratic Nominee for POTUS and VPOTUS. And that is substantially different.
Who else picked up on that careless but intentional reference by the superintendent? I say intentional, because the superintendent was reading his prepared remarks.
How do we teach students to be careful and exact in their words. We do it by Leading.
On Tuesday I thought I heard the superintendent do so toward the end of the June 9th board meeting. When the recording was published on YouTube this morning, I listened to his statement again. I had understood it correctly the first time.
Why didn't Chairman Manning interrupt him? Did he say anything to the superintendent after the meeting?
Supt. Davis said (at 44:50 in the YouTube recording), "Congratulations to our school board vice chairperson woman, Dr. .Teresa Holmes, on her election as a delegate to the 2020 Democratic National Convention in August. The Democratic Party is scheduled to convene in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to formally nominate the next president and vice-president of the United States."
Let me tell you to what, exactly, I object. The superintendent's wording as to just what the DNC will do at its convention. (For the record, I would be just as picky if he had referred to the RNC.)
The superintendent said that the Democratic Party will formally nominate "the next president and vice-present of the United States".
No, it won't.
The DNC will nominate the Democratic Nominee for POTUS and VPOTUS. And that is substantially different.
Who else picked up on that careless but intentional reference by the superintendent? I say intentional, because the superintendent was reading his prepared remarks.
How do we teach students to be careful and exact in their words. We do it by Leading.
California Professor Suspended
Did you read about the California professor who was suspended for upholding the school policy on grading and exams?
Only in California; right? Wrong. This nonsense is sweeping the country.
Prof. Gordon Klein is at UCLA's Anderson School of Management, where he has taught for 39 years. Some would call that a lifetime.
He was suspended because he refused to grant students' demands regarding finals and course work. Apparently, students decided to spend their time protesting, instead of studying.
Everyone has a choice; right?
So Dean Bernardo slammed the good professor with a three-week suspension and called the professor's actions "troubling".
Some will say, "Well, that's just California." Except it isn't.
Just look closely at what is happening throughout the USA right now.
I said again this morning that this country is heading for a civil war. Is it? Are we going to let the mobs rule? Are you?
Only in California; right? Wrong. This nonsense is sweeping the country.
Prof. Gordon Klein is at UCLA's Anderson School of Management, where he has taught for 39 years. Some would call that a lifetime.
He was suspended because he refused to grant students' demands regarding finals and course work. Apparently, students decided to spend their time protesting, instead of studying.
Everyone has a choice; right?
So Dean Bernardo slammed the good professor with a three-week suspension and called the professor's actions "troubling".
Some will say, "Well, that's just California." Except it isn't.
Just look closely at what is happening throughout the USA right now.
I said again this morning that this country is heading for a civil war. Is it? Are we going to let the mobs rule? Are you?
Saturday, June 6, 2020
School Board about to Transfer Property
The agenda for the June 9, 2020 school board contains an item regarding Transfer of Property. What property?
What's the secret? And what's the rush?
The board will discuss Item 2.2 Legal Matter regarding Transfer of Property in an Executive Session scheduled to start at 4:30PM.
Then, in the Open Session that starts at 5:00PM, the board will be asked to vote on Item 6.1, a Resolution - Transfer of Property.
There are no details whatsoever contained in the agenda or an attachment that would explain what this "Transfer" is.
Did the board members receive a complete description and background on the Resolution far enough in advance to give adequate consideration to the issue, raise questions and get answers?
Or will their first knowledge of it be sprung on them at 4:30PM.?
Will they have the backbone to have a full discussion in public and vote No on Tuesday night, in order to allow time for reflection and public input?
Why is the board being asked to vote on a first hearing on the Resolution? Is this Transfer something that should properly have public input?
So much for transparency from Richland 2!!!
What's the secret? And what's the rush?
The board will discuss Item 2.2 Legal Matter regarding Transfer of Property in an Executive Session scheduled to start at 4:30PM.
Then, in the Open Session that starts at 5:00PM, the board will be asked to vote on Item 6.1, a Resolution - Transfer of Property.
There are no details whatsoever contained in the agenda or an attachment that would explain what this "Transfer" is.
Did the board members receive a complete description and background on the Resolution far enough in advance to give adequate consideration to the issue, raise questions and get answers?
Or will their first knowledge of it be sprung on them at 4:30PM.?
Will they have the backbone to have a full discussion in public and vote No on Tuesday night, in order to allow time for reflection and public input?
Why is the board being asked to vote on a first hearing on the Resolution? Is this Transfer something that should properly have public input?
So much for transparency from Richland 2!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)