"A Product of Spring Valley H.S."

At the October 26, 2021 Richland 2 school board meeting, Teresa Holmes said (3:31:44), "I am a product of Spring Valley High School"

She seems to be proud of being a graduate of Spring Valley High School.

Is the Spring Valley High School proud of her?

Read this comment Holmes submitted to The Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County, after the paper published a long story about the disastrous school meeting on September 14, which disintegrated under Holmes' leadership. That was the meeting when three responsible trustees walked out, because they refused to vote on the superintendent's proposed contract amendment without having had sufficient time to consider it. 

DrTeresa Holmes says

September 16, 2021 at 1

This article is yet again another example Yellow Journalism. I urge the community to watch the board meeting for the real events of the meeting. The rag of a paper might as well be the Gus Philpot show along with who him and his band of racist choose to endorse or follow. The community is well aware of how this paper hacks up a story to suit their hate. The real story is how parents and the community were cheated out of information they needed by reckless behavior and dereliction of duty. I know this paper and the crew working for this rag will continue slant and half report stories to deface those of us like myself who have called them out as the racist they are and I have a filed legal complaint against their silent stooge Gus z Philpot .Truth in journalism does not exist for minority leaders in the let’s get them grudge fill piece of trash. Again to see what really happened log into R2 Livestream."

So Holmes is a "product of Spring Valley High School".

Now, read her comment to the newspaper slowly and carefully. For all the grammatical mistakes to be clear, read it slowly aloud. Is it a well-written comment by a person with a doctorate, even if it is from a 100% online school (business) in California? 

Or is it an embarrassment to the education received at Spring Valley High School? Presumably, high school, middle school and elementary school are where a student learns good grammar and the ability to write well. Those skills should be in place before getting a high school diploma!

R 2 - No complaint procedure re Board member?

Would it surprise you to learn that there is no formal complaint procedure if you have a gripe against a board member of the Richland 2 School Board?

Probably not.

On October 13 I emailed the superintendent to ask what the formal procedure is for filing a complaint against a board member. I wished to file a complaint and have it heard in-person by the board. This was my request:

"Good afternoon, Supt. Davis,

"I am writing to request the District's formal procedure for filing a complaint against a school board member. I desire that the full board hear my complaint in person and determine what action(s) including, but not limited to, sanctions, reprimand, discipline, removal, request for resignation, should be taken against the member.

"Will you please provide me with the form or forms, along with instructions, to initiate this complaint?"

When I had received no acknowledgement or reply by October 26, I emailed the board chair and sent cc's to all the other board members, the superintendent and the General Counsel.

On October 27th the General Counsel replied on behalf of the superintendent and answered my October 13th email.

Now, there were several possibilities:

1. When the superintendent received my email on October 13, he put it in the "Ignore This" file.

2. On October 13 the superintendent forwarded that email to the General Counsel and asked her to reply for him, and she didn't do so.

3. Upon receipt of my October 26 the superintendent told the General Counsel to reply to me.

4. On October 26 the General Counsel asked the superintendent whether she should reply for him.

There may be other possibilities.

The General Counsel's reply was 

"Dr. Davis is in receipt of your email dated October 13, 2021, and has referred it to me for a response. You request [sic] Richland School District Two's formal procedure for filing a complaint against a school board member. Please be advised that the district does not have a procedure responsive to your request."

I've dealt with attorneys for years, and I don't mind terse replies.

However, I would have appreciated being informed of procedures, if any, that were not "formal". There is, of course, always the recourse of submitting a FOIA request for any complaint procedure or filing legal action. Presumably, the District would like to avoid the expense and embarrassment of finding themselves on the wrong end of a lawsuit.

The reply from the General Counsel was not a dead end, no matter how much she might hope so.

School board president: "F--- you"

This FoxNews article reports that Los Alamos, California school board president Marlys Davidson was caught on an open microphone uttering a profanity toward a female parent who had spoken out at a school board meeting. This happened on Tuesday, October 26.

According to the article, parents were applauding the remarks of the speaker, when Davidson ssid, "F--- you." Her words were picked up by the microphone. Davidson realized her error and apologized.

That's not what happened here in Richland County, S.C. on Tuesday, October 12, outside R2i2. As trustee-elect Holmes and trustee Caution-Parker were leaving the building and crossing the courtyard toward the parking lot, that same expression was heard. One of the observers questioned Caution-Parker about it as she walked away.

Caution-Parker was being escorted by a deputy of the Richland County Sheriff's Department. I emailed Sheriff Lott to ask him to obtain a report from that deputy as to exactly what he heard. I don't know if that was done, and I did not request a copy of the deputy's report.

At that same meeting here, Caution-Parker can be heard disrespecting Trustee Scott, who had a motion on the floor and whose motion was being ignored by the board chair during Board & Superintendent Comments. As Trustee Scott reminded the chair (Holmes) of her motion, which had been seconded, Caution-Parker rudely said toward Trustee Scott, "Tough!"

Cauiton-Parker often touts her "40 years of experience in Richland 2." My question is, Did she really have 40 years of experience, or did she have one year of experience, 40 times? Her true business experience, which is a quality sorely needed on the school board, doesn't get demonstrated. She said that night that they (the board) were there "for the children". That is, of course, wrong. 

The school board directs the business of the school district; i.e., the operations. Not the hands-on education of the students. That concept should be first-in-mind; it's not.

Parental Rights - Secure in R2 Schools?

You'll want to reach this article closely about a Florida case involving a school that provided "guidance" to a minor student , without informing the parents, about accommodating "... her decision to be acknowledged as non-binary and use an alternate name at school."

The school had a "Leon County School District’s Transgender/Gender-Nonconforming Student Support Plan" for the 13-year-old girl.

I'm beginning to hear about "personal pronoun" nonsense in Richland 2 schools for students as young as first grade. 

If you get a sniff of anything like this involving your child, please let me know. I'll write about it in a way that will not identify your child or you.

To what extent, if any, is this happening in Richland 2 schools?

https://www.theepochtimes.com/florida-parents-file-lawsuit-for-violation-of-parental-rights-to-stop-secret-transgender-affirming-guidance_4061814.html

Oct. 26 Board Meeting - Secondary Motion

When is Teresa Holmes going to start paying acttention when Trustee Agostini speaks. It seems to me that she turns off her hearing aid (or Hearing), as soon as Trustee Agostini begins speaking. And, if it involves a secondary motion, the hearing aid switch gets stuck on OFF.

When the draft agenda was being discussed, Trustee Agostini made a (secondary) motion to amend the primary motion (which was to approve the draft agenda). Her secondary motion was to add a discussion of the difference between Critical Race Theory vs. Culturally Relevant Teaching, based on the back-to-school, in-service to staff this fall. Mrs. Agostini's motion begins at (2::56:50) on the Oct. 26th meeting on livestream.com/richland2  

Mrs. Agostini clearly said, "I move ..." Then Holmes asked, "Is that a motion, Ms. Agostini?" OF COURSE, IT IS A MOTION. Will somebody please put a copy of Robert's Rules of Order under Holmes' nose and tell her to inhale deeply?

Trustee Scott seconded the motion. Mrs. Agostini explained why she wanted the item on the agenda, and voting was called. Electronic voting was very slow. The superintendent said something to Holmes that was inaudible to the public. Then Holmes interrupted during the voting pause (2:59:00) and claimed a point of privilege to make a completely unnecessary and possibly incorrect statement. She said, ".. to remind everybody for the public (whatever that means) that Richland 2 school district does not teach critical race theory ..." 

She obviously missed the entire point about Critical Race Theory. The District claims not to teach it, but all the elements seem to be present: equity, inclusion, diversity, 100 Premier Men of Color (the preference of black men to white men in hiring). 

Kind of like "it smells like a pig, looks like a pig, walks like a pig, has pig's ears..., but we don't have any pigs here." Wake up!

Then Trustee Agostini addresses the form of the agenda shown and stated she wanted in on the agenda, not on the draft agenda.

McKie jumped in when she should have spoken correctly or kept her mouth shut. Then Manning further clarified that voting was on the Secondary Motion by Agostini. That had to be voted on before the vote could be taken on the Agenda as amended. Holmes referred to it as a "mouthful".

It is the Chair's responsibility to keep all that straight. Holmes seems completely unable to handle that.

The vote was 6-1 (McKie voting No) to add CRT vs. CRT to the November 16th agenda.

At that point Holmes should have asked the trustees if there were further motions. Instead, she attempted to jump straight to a vote on the primary motion to approve the draft agenda.

(3:02:35) Then Trustee McFadden stated she wished to make a motion to add a discussion of Board Policy BEDB - Board Agenda on the draft agenda for Dec. 14. You MUST listen to this exchange. Ask yourself why the board chair cannot listen and understand the first time what is clear to everyone else in the room. Mrs. McFadden made a motion. Holmes asks, "Are you making a motion?" Seconded by Mrs. Agostini. 

Manning tried to shoot down McFadden's request. It was premature and biased to make such a statement. He wants to keep the status quo, because the chair and the superintendent set the agenda. He certainly could have voted in favor of putting it on the agenda and then, if he wanted to argue against any changes, he could have done so when it was being discussed. It is hard to get something added to the agenda.

Mrs. McFadden wanted the agenda item established now for the draft agenda to be prepared on November 16. She has already learned how difficult it is to get past Holmes and the superintendent. 

Teresa blew some smoke at Mrs. McFadden with her suggestion for Mrs. McFadden to put it in writing "and we can address it that way", which is another way of saying it will go straight into the round file.

And then the superintendent stepped in with his usual long-winded oration. And after all that, Mrs. McFadden's motion was never voted on and, if it had been approved, it never got onto the draft agenda for the Dec. 14th meeting. Watch carefully at the November 16th meeting to see if the superintendent includes her request.

Coming up soon: Board & Superintendent Comments (3:10:50)

Oct. 26 Board Meeting - 1

There appeared to be more security and law-enforcement officers present at last night's board meeting than the 20 members of the public who were admitted to the board room.

 

Attendance had been severely limited to 20 by the superintendent's edict last Friday, October 22. COVID was mentioned in the media release, but no one outside Administration believed that for two seconds. 

The District seemed to be feeding off the National School Boards Association's (NSBA) assessment of protesting parents as domestic terrorists. The NSBA apologized for its letter to the White House. The knee-jerk reaction at the DOJ and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland's super-fast kick-off of inquiries by his Federal law-enforcement agencies ignited a public furor.

You'll want to hear the comments made by ten of the 20 people in the room. Go to livestream.com/richland2 and select the October 26th meeting. Fast-forward (drag) to (1:32:00) for the introduction of last night's Public Participation segment.

Teresa Holmes introduced the public participation segment with a reading and then a condescending comment about her intention to squash anyone who violated her rules. Notice her smug expression during her informal comments and her use of "we", meaning you. She added, "... when we get a little past things, we can open things back and have more people participate."

In other words, "when you people learn how to behave and control yourselves and stop picking on us, we'll let more of you people in." That's what her words meant to me. Notice she does not mention COVID.

And then public participation began (1:34:05).

Draconian "security procedures"

Be sure to read the new draconian so-called "security procedures" on the District's website accompanying the announcement of the October 26th board meeting.

These were never publicly discussed at a board meeting or approved by the board. They were instituted by the superintendent on claim of authority as the Superintendent, although his name does not appear as the person responsible for them.

They obviously were not approved by the District's General Counsel. Surely she would have recognized and advised against infringing on the Constitutional rights of the public.

You can read them here: https://www.richland2.org/News/RICHLAND-TWO-BOARD-OF-TRUSTEES-TO-MEET-TUESDAY,-OC

They lead off with "Members of the community may notice several new safety procedures at the meeting."

"... may notice ..."  Gee, ya' think?

I urge those three trustees who actually think the "community" is important to consider this step when the meeting first opens at 5:30PM. Before entering public session, make a motion to suspend immediately the "new safety procedures" until there is board review and approval.

I am not opposed to the entire new procedures; for example, this part is okay with me: "In order to allow for ... a safe distance between the public and the board ..."

The public needs adequate distancing from the board chair. She refuses to wear a mask and often removes her face shield during the meeting, and not just for speaking. Her breath may contaminate the air near the legal trustees near whom she sits and the public who sit in front of her. She may accidentally spit while speaking. When she exhales, which she occasionally seems to do, her breath may carry germs and viruses into the room.

The public needs and deserves this protection from her. Also, she might lose her death grip on the gavel and send it flying into the audience, where it could cause severe injury to an eye or teeth. Perhaps I really shouldn't sit in the front row.

As it stands now, only 20 members of the public will be admitted tomorrow night. Will the superintendent or "The Four" invite their "friends" (any "paid actors" among them?) to attend (for the first time) and claim the 20 available seats?

The superintendent and anyone who conspired with him to cough up these dumb procedures should be publicly identified and accept responsibility for drafting and implementing them. Tell us how much you really care for the public.

How many of the board members knew what was coming before last Friday at 4:35PM, when the press release went out? Did Teresa Holmes know about the announcement? Manning? McKie? Caution-Parker?

Why did the District pick 4:35PM on a Friday to send it out?