Board Candidates' Panels on Facebook

On Wednesday and Thursday of this week (August 26-27) Gretchen Barron hosted Facebook LIVE panels for Richland 2 school board candidates.  

On Wednesday candidates McFadden, Meisner, Shadd and Terry responded to questions, and on Thursday candidates Agostini, Jacobs, Bell-Williams and Wright were there. Monica Elkins had a conflict with another meeting, and James Mobley was not present.

The candidates and the host did a great job.

The panel discussions are archived on Gretchen Barron's Facebook page. Go to her FB page and look for Aug. 26 (Part 1) and Aug. 27 (Part 2).

Or click here for her page, and toggle on the left arrow to move from Part 1 to Part 2.

Just before the end of each night's recording each candidate provides contact information. If you'd to know phone numbers, email addresses, website, etc., you can find them there.

I may be the only person on the planet challenged around making Facebook LIVE perform. There was a chat window on the page I was viewing, but I was unable to see the questions provided by other viewers. Gretchen later guessed that I may have been on a "Watch" page (whatever that is).

McKie - No Payment. Not a Penny!

Amelia McKie owes $51,750 to the South Carolina Ethics Commission, as of today.

How much has she paid on her debt? Not a penny. Not a single penny.

The Ethics Commission fined her for numerous violations (Eight Counts) of filing requirements between 2015 and 2018. Not one. Not two. Numerous!

July 3, 2018 The Ethics Commission issued a Decision and Order against Amelia McKie and ruled that McKie owed a total of $41,000, composed of a Reduced Late-filing Penalty of $24,425 plus a Civil Penalty of $16,000 plus an administrative fee of $575. McKie was ordered to pay $20,000 by December 31, 2018 and the remaining $21,000 by June 30, 2019.

The Ethics Commission further ordered that, if McKie did not pay in full within the time period specified, then a judgment in the amount of $51,750 would be filed against her in Richland County Court.

She did not pay even one penny.

July 10, 2019 A judgment of $51.750 was entered in Richland County Common Pleas Count against McKie. The Case No. is 2019CP4003809. 

The judgment is supposed to be collected by the S.C. Department of Revenue.

According to the Ethics Commission today, the balance due is still $51,750.

The 2018-2022 term for a board trustee runs to November 2022. If McKie started paying monthly in equal installments, with a commitment to pay off her debt by the end of the current term, she would have to pay $1,990 every month. 

The Richland 2 School District deserves trustees with impeccable financial history. Trustees are responsible for multi-millions of dollars of money, bonds, and assets. It's bad enough that McKie owes $51,750 and worse that she has made NO payment toward her indebtedness in two years. Not even token payments.

Adding insult to injury is the fact that she is not even a legal member of the Board, since she has never taken the oath of office legally. When the District finds itself forced to recover the $900/month it improperly paid out to a person who was not a legitimate member of the board, that will add $19.800 ($900 x 22) to her debt load.

In January or February 2019 a parent in the District asked during Public Participation at a Board Meeting for McKie to step down. McKie did not, and the rest of the Board won't insist on it. 

There is no appeal to her Ethics Commission debt, and I've been told that the S.C. DOR doesn't negotiate. The time allowed for appeal ran out a long time ago. When will the DOR collect on that judgment? It can take assets, and it can garnish her Richland 2 wages.

No oath. Lose eligibility to serve?

What happens when a candidate for office is elected and is "qualified" to serve, but never takes the oath of office after becoming eligible* to take it?

According to South Carolina state law (S.C. Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110(A)), the person elected cannot take the oath of office OR begin serving in that office until his (her) Statement of Economic Interest has been filed.

What happens in the case where the person elected files the SEI but then does not take the oath of office? 

First of all, it is illegal for that person to serve and to perform the responsibilities of the elected office.

Secondly, the public body should not pay any taxpayer funds to that person, because she is not legally in office.

Thirdly, the person who serves without taking the oath of office is usurping public office.

Are low-paid employees of the public body (here, the Richland 2 School District), who are just doing their jobs as trained and directed, liable for disbursing public monies illegally?

Are their supervisors, managers and department heads liable? Is the school district's superintendent liable?

How about the Board of Trustees (here, the School Board)? If they know about the problem and do nothing about it, are they complicit in the violations of the law?

The Richland County Elections Commission has been asked to determine whether an elected person loses eligibility to take the oath of office after some period of time?

On November 6, 2018 Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes were elected to office.

On November 13, 2018 McKie and Holmes took the oath of office illegally. They had not filed SEIs. They were allowed to take seats at the November 13, 2018 Regular Meeting. They participated in the meeting and voted on motions. Although they were "qualified" for the office as Trustee, they were not eligible yet.

On December 4, 2018 McKie and Holmes filed their SEIs with the S.C. Ethics Commission. On that date they became eligible to take the oath of office and commence their official duties.

McKie and Holmes have not taken the oath of office (legally) on or after December 4, 2018. That is almost 21 months ago. Nearly two years!

The School District has paid them a monthly salary ($900.00?) and paid their expenses, such as S.C. School Boards Assn. memberships. No doubt that other expenses have been paid or reimbursed for them.

They are not legitimate board members. To become legitimate board members, all they need to do is take the oath of office on or after December 4, 2018. 

According to the Richland 2 School District, as of August 20, 2020 they have not done so (except for the oath they took improperly on November 13, 2018).

Do you agree that they should take the oath of office immediately or be prevented from further participation on the School Board? Please let me know by comment below, by phone or text (847/971-7083), or by email to gusphilpott@gmail.com. Your response will be treated confidentially.

* The oath of office should not have been administered to McKie and Holmes on November 13, 2018, because the Elections Commission had not yet certified their election. The election was certified on November 9th and the earliest they could have taken office was one week later, on November 16, 2018, had they already filed their SEIs, which they hadn't.

McKie Attempts Knock-out Punch

Continuing from the last post, about the 8/25/2020 board meeting and the attempt by Mrs. Agostini to amend the agenda for 9/8/2020 by adding a discussion of the board chair's authority to act individually on behalf of the board.

After the discussion had gone on for a while (and ranged out-of-control) McKie was recognized (at 2:17:50). She said she just wanted to make a comment and call for the vote.

Recently I quoted a section from Dummies about such a call for the vote during discussion. The author of Dummies labeled such a Call for a Vote as "rude".

Here's what I heard in McKie's comment: "I'm going to say what I want to say and then I'm going to shut you down!"

She said what she wanted to say. Then she said, "Let me say this and then I'm calling for the vote."

Then she said more and defended (her friend) Shadd's letter, which had been sent without Board knowledge or approval.

Then she said, "I call for the vote."

At that point Mrs. Agostini raised the point that it was necessary to vote on McKie's call for a vote (which should have been in the form of a Motion, but wasn't). 

Shadd was wrong when he said that once the vote was called for and recognized by the Chair, then they had to vote.

(2:20:00) Then McKie butted in and claimed motions had been commingled. They hadn't, but she apparently couldn't keep track of the order of them. Shadd was attempting to recite Agostini's Secondary Motion, when McKie began speaking. 

Discussion ended, and the vote began.

Then Elkins wanted to comment on why she had voted Yes. She said a Board member should not be "shut down".

Then Holmes weighed in during the voting and wanted to explain her No vote. She too was out of order.

The secretary (not the Secretary) announced the vote result: 2-5, but they failed to show the results to the public.

I suspect this will come up again, and it should. There should be a public discussion of the limits of the board chair's authority. 

When will the board hire Attorney McFadden to return and further train them on parliamentary procedure? Ever?

Keep in mind, of course, that McKie and Holmes are, today, not even legitimate members of the school board. To become legitimate members, all they have to do is take the oath of office. They have been eligible to take the oath of office since December 4, 2018.

School Board Needs Parliamentary Training

 After two hours of last Tuesday's Board Meeting (8/25/2020), I bailed out. I just could not take any more. This morning, after three cups of coffee, I felt like I had the strength to endure the balance of the meeting, and I began watching the YouTube replay.

I have referred to the majority of board members as "The Squad". Richland 2's "Squad" is four, sometimes five of them. And two of them aren't even legitimate board members.

The fun and games began during the Item pertaining to the Draft Agenda for the next (9/8/2020) board meeting. At 2:08:25 on the YouTube video-recording of the 8/25/2020 meeting, McKie motioned for approval with an amendment. During discussion, Mrs. Agostini made a motion to add an item to the agenda.

Mrs. Agostini's motion was to add a discussion of the Board Chair's authority to act individually on behalf of the Board. 

Shadd declared Agostini's Motion to be a "friendly amendment" that would require McKie's consent. McKie said she wanted her motion to stand "as is". If only she could have said it in those few words...

And then the meeting headed off the rails.

Manning jumped in and said "we" don't do 'friendly amendments' anymore. He suggested it would correct for Mrs. Agostini to make a Secondary Motion. Then he added that "friendly amendments are not technically a part of Robert's Rules."

Although Mrs. Agostini tried to get a second so that discussion could begin, when Shadd was slow on the uptake, Mrs. Agostini gave two examples as reasons for requesting a discussion at the Board level: 1) a board chair (Manning) had commissioned a policy (spending District money) to have a policy drafted by the District's attorney without getting board authority; and 2) the board chair (Shadd) had sent a letter recently on behalf of the Board without there having been a discussion and authorization.

During the clamor of voices, Elkins seconded.

The superintendent interrupted and began speaking. Remember: protocol is to ask the Chair to be recognized. He didn't. He should speak when spoken to and only after authorized. He is not a board member. Then he wrongfully said that Agostini's motion was not germane to the motion to approve the agenda.

Of course it was!!!

Manning disagreed with the superintendent and said Agostini's motion was germane.

At that point Shadd had lost control of the meetng and didn't know what to do. Manning bailed him out by explaining what was on the table and that Elkins had seconded.

Shadd called for discussion and Elkins jumped in. Robert's Rules give the first comments to the person who made the motion. Agostini should have had the floor first.

Then Manning said, "This is another tactic to tie the board chair's hands, so we can get nothing done." SLAM!!! And then he piled on with "This is another tactic to drag us down in unnecessary bureaucracy." SLAM!!! SLAM!!!

Elkins objected to Manning's choice of wording, "tactic".

Agostini disagreed with Manning.

And then McKie stepped into the ring and attempted a knock-out punch.

Continued in the next article.

Long Board Meetings - Insanity

This week's Richland 2 School Board meeting was two hours forty minutes long. That's absurd.

During the time of the actual Zoom meeting, I was more than bored after two hours and abandoned the meeting. Others in the audience may have fled, too. Today I returned to listen to the question by Dr. Elkin-Johnson's about whether high school juniors and seniors would be allowed to leave campus at lunch time. I didn't think her question was answered, and it wasn't.

Board members, however, don't have the luxury of escaping by merely clicking on "Leave Meeting". 

A reasonable maximum length of a meeting would be about 90 minutes.

The August 25, 2020 Regular Meeting didn't even have a large agenda.

It is the Board Chair's responsibility to move the meeting along. Perhaps a count-down timer should appear in front of each board member, showing them how much time remains for the meeting. The  Chair should cut off long-winded comments, extraneous comments and remarks that could be stated in 15 seconds, when the speaker rambles on and on and on.

You've heard the sentence, "Work expands to fill the time available for its completion"? Commonly known as Parkinson's 1st Law, wikipedia offers this: "A proverb coined by the twentieth-century British scholar C. Northcote Parkinson, known as Parkinson's Law. It points out that people usually take all the time allotted (and frequently more) to accomplish any task."

And that's even truer when there is no time-limit, as at a school board meeting. It starts, and then it continues until everybody runs out of wind.

Perhaps a Board member (one of the five legal members) will make a Motion or propose a Policy that meetings are to be completed within 90 minutes.

Candidates' Panel - Thurs., Aug. 27

Tonight there will be a panel discussion by five candidates for the Richland 2 School Board. At 6:00PM EDT on the Facebook page of Gretchen Barron, there will be a LIVE event.

The five candidates will be Lindsay Agostini, Monica Elkins, Deon Jacobs, Dee Bell-Williams, and Maryann Wright.

The host for the panel will be Gretchen Barron.

Gretchen hosted a panel last night at 6:00PM for Lashonda McFadden, Rhonda Meisner, James Shadd, and Lawrence Terry. That panel discussion may be archived on Gretchen's Facebook page for playback.

Go to Gretchen's page. From there, good luck. I had to experiment with many clicks and repeats until I finally spotted the LIVE button near the upper right.