School District Resumes Following State Law

At last night's School Board meeting, the board was set to cause a newly-elected trustee to join the board before the legal beginning date of her term-of-office.

On Monday I wrote an email to all trustees, trustees-elect, the District's attorney, the District's Robert's Rules of Order consultant, the sheriff, the attorney general, and others, asking the District to follow S.C. Code of Laws 59-19-315.

S.C. CODE OF LAWS SECTION 59-19-315. Commencement of trustee's term of office.
The term of office of every elected trustee of a school district must commence one week following the certification of his election.

Supt. Davis explained to the public that the District had misinterpreted the law since 2010. After a "concerned citizen" raised the issue, the District got legal advice and will follow the law.

Mrs. McFadden was sworn in last night by Columbia Mayor Benjamin, and her term-of-office begins on Friday, November 16, 2020.

This is what the conference room on the second level of R2i2 looked like. The board was waaaayyyyy down at one end of the room, and visitors were seated at the other, socially-distanced.

New Procedure is Faulty

The District has announced a new procedure for public participation at board meetings.

It was published with the announcement for the Tuesday, November 10, 2020 board meeting. It reads:

"As the meeting is being held in person, the Board will return to the standard process for Public Participation. The Board sets aside a maximum of 30 minutes (15 minutes at the beginning and 15 minutes prior to the end of the public portion of the meeting). As each speaker is allotted three minutes, Public Participation will be limited to the first 10 people who sign up to speak (five during the first Public Participation and five during the second Public Participation). The sign-up to speak will open at 5 p.m. and close at 6 p.m. on Nov. 10 in the lobby of R2i2."

Why is it faulty?

1. If someone wishes to attend the meeting in person, he must arrive early and well before the 5:00PM starting time of the Installation Ceremony. Seating will be limited and on a first-come, first-seated basis. This person will be IN the room, in his seat, and unable to sign up, because the sign-up sheet will be outside the room in its usual place.

If the early bird leaves the room to sign up, will he be locked out when someone takes his seat?

2. Fifteen glorious meetings are set aside out of what is often a 2-3 hour meeting for the first Public Participation session, and fifteen minutes are allocated in the second half.

Time could be saved by calling out the names of the first three speakers, such as "The first speaker will be (Name), followed by (Name) and (Name). Be ready to step to the podium when the speaker ahead of you finishes." Then, "The next speaker is (Name), followed by (Name) and (Name).

Now the District is going to "let" five (only) people speak in the first segment and five in the second.

What is 15 people wanted to speak and each took only one minute? If a speaker talked as quickly as Mrs. Roof reads, he could say a lot in one minute and step aside for the next speaker. Then the board would get a big earful.

Why does the board make the second five speakers sit there and twiddle their thumbs while they plod through the meeting? Why not make the 30-minute Public Participation segment in one continuous block?

Perhaps future meetings won't be 2-3 hour marathons. November 10 will be James Shadd's last meeting as a trustee and as Board Chair. If the Board is wise enough (assuming it actually follows state law), will it elect a new Board Chair who is organized and methodical and who will keep the board on-task?

 

Will Richland 2 Follow the Law?

Will the three successful candidates in the school board election insist that state law be followed? 

The Board is planning an installation ceremony for Tuesday, November 10, at 5:00PM. This is three days before the official term-of-office begins because, if the election is certified on November 6, state law mandates the beginning of the term-of-office as one week later (this year, November 13, 2020.

In 2018 the Board and the District committed an as-yet-uncorrected error, when it swore in McKie and Holmes on November 13, 2018, before they were eligible to take the oath. Then Holmes was allowed to be seated on the board. McKie legally sat on the board on November 13, because it was her last official meeting in her 2014-2018 term-of-office.

But McKie has sat at the board illegally ever since, as has Holmes.

Elkins, Agostini and McFadden must file Statements of Economic Interests (SEI) with the South Carolina Ethics Commission before they can take the oath of office for the 2020-2024 term. There is probably no reason they cannot take the oath on November 10, if they have filed their SEIs.

But McFadden cannot commence her official responsibilities until her term-of-office begins on November 13, which is after the November 10 board meeting.

Elkins and Agostini will attend the November 10th board meeting as their final meeting of their 2016-2020 terms-of-office.

State law requires an election of Chairman and Clerk (Secretary) at the first meeting after a new trustee joins the board. That will be in December. Will the District observe this law?

Holmes should be replaced as Vice Chair. She is not a legal board member (has never taken the oath of office legally) and, thus, is not eligible to serve as a board officer. 

Caution-Parker should be replaced as Secretary. 

Election Results - Congratulations

Unofficial, pre-certification results of the Richland 2 School Board election are

Monica Elkins 32,401 votes

Lindsay Agostini 26,790 votes

Lashonda McFadden 21,664 votes

Elkins and Agostini have been re-elected. McFadden joins the board as a new member; her term-of-office offically begins on November 13, 2020. Shadd departs after the November 10th board meeting. 

(NOTE: The totals keep changing...)

(NOTE: 11/6/20 Final votes. Election certified by the Richland County Elections Commission)

Is this Grading-System Change happening in Richland 2?

"Equality is out and 'equity' is in." 

That is the first sentence in an article about the San Diego (Calif.) Unified School District, titled "Discipline Suffers as San Diego Schools Adopt ‘Anti-Racism’ Grading System". This article was publish by The Daily Signal from the Heritage Foundation.

The article, by Jarrett Stepman, author of "The War on History: The Conspiracy to Rewrite America's Past, examines "a change to their grading system that coincides with broader ideas of restorative justice and 'anti-racism'”.

These same buzzwords are popular with the majority of the Richland 2 School Board and the superintendent. Restorative justice. Anti-racism. Systematic racism. Equality. Equity. Diversity. Critical race theory. Cultural Awareness. Let's throw in police brutality, too. And school-to-prison pipeline.

I remember one particular school board meeting when cultural awareness was being discussed. James Shadd said it was important to remember that young, black men just sometimes express themselves with loud voices. I immediately thought to the black kid disrespectfully mouthing off to a white teacher "in a loud voice". Finally, Trustee James Manning stuck up for white teachers. That defense came very late in the discussion and was close to not being said at all.

One candidate for school board this year said that black students are now 70% of the Richland 2 population. Yes, and they are part of the 13% of black population nationally. When they leave the sheltered island of Richland 2, how will they fare in the "real" world?

When those young, black men speak to an employer's supervisor or manager "in a loud voice", they are likely to hear "You're Fired!", instead of, "You know? We understand and sympathize with your ancestry." Should James Shadd's "young, black men" learn what they are doing to their own chances for success in the business world? 

What The BPA says about school board candidates

You'll want to read this week's The Independent Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County newspaper. Grab the "real thing" or read it online at www.blythewoodonline.com

Look for the article with the title, "R2 Black Parents Assocation grades board incumbents"

The BPA gives Lindsay Agostini an A for the past four years on the board and concludes with "she undoubtedly deserves 4 more years."

The BPA gives Monica Elkins a B+ and recommends another four years for her.

James Shadd? He gets a NI for Needs Improvement. Rather than demonstrating integrity in its ratings by adding a Not Recommended, the BPA chose to end with "you decide". But read what they had to say about Shadd. Then you will decide - to vote for someone else.

A huge error in the BPA statement about Shadd was the sentence, "He was elected and assiduously became Chairman of a contentious board." 

Can you use "assiduously" correctly in a sentence? Dictionary.com defines it as "with careful and consistent effort; diligently or tirelessly" and "constantly; ceaselessly"

Some (many? most?) will argue that is the wrong adverb with which to describe his ascension to the Board Chair role on June 30, 2020.

He was nominated, and no one else was nominated for the position. Why? I'm going to guess that Lindsay Agostini and Monica Elkins knew that the deck was stacked. There had been a round of telephone calls before the June 30th meeting to assure that Shadd would get at least the four necessary votes. Not every board member was included in that round of calls. But you can bet that McKie, Holmes and Caution-Parker were. With Shadd's own vote, that made four - the majority.

Agostini and Elkins are working hard to be re-elected. Several of the challengers are working hard. There could be two new faces on the board. Hopefully, not three.

Why do I think James Shadd does not deserve re-election? Since he was elected Board Chair, he has not acknowledged or replied to even one email or letter from me.

I can understand that, as only a board member, he would duck a reply, claiming he can't speak out for the board. Of course, he could speak for himself. But, when he receives a letter addressed to Board Chair (and a Certified Mail letter at that, with a Return Receipt Requested), then he should reply. So it's just plain rude and unprofessional not to reply. It was his duty and obligation to reply. 

And he didn't.

What was that Certified Letter about? It was about correcting the situation of two illegitimate women on the school board.

By now you've probably voted. If not, you can vote absentee/in-person today, tomorrow and Monday. Or you can vote in-person on Tuesday, November 4.

Be Courageous

Be sure to watch Dennis Prager's Fireside Chat No. 158 on Courage in the Face of a Mob. He has so many good things to say that apply right here in the Richland 2 School District.

The best thing I can say is, Watch It Now.