Spotlight: S.C. Ethics Commission

What's that old saying? "I've got some good news for you and some bad news."

Today's Post and Courtier newspaper takes a hard look at the South Carolina Ethics Commission - again. Read the article here.

If Amelia McKie reads that article, she'll be relieved. The bad news is that this is a long article about a State agency that should be keeping publicofficials on the straight and narrow. The good news is that her name is not in it.

The last article took a big swipe at Amelia McKie, trustee- elect (since November 6, 2018) of the Richland 2 School Board. She owes $57,100 in fines and penalties to the Ethics Commission, which filed a judgment in the Richland County Common Pleas Court in July 2019.

Notable sentences in the article:

"The State Ethics Commission is an understaffed government watchdog enforcing a toothless ethics law."

"The State Ethics Commission should be one of South Carolina’s most powerful anti-corruption tools."

"What’s more, state prosecutors say the agency has traditionally not forwarded criminal cases to them for prosecution."

Why isn't the Ethics Commission pounding on the South Carolina Department of Revenue (SCFOR) to collect that $57,100 for it? 

Rumor has it that the SCDOR doesn't go after people who can't pay.

McKie can't pay? Doesn't she receive almost $10,000/year from the Richland 2 School District?

Well, maybe not, since she didn't report any income for 2020 from Richland 2 on her Statement of Economic Interests (SEI) filed with the Ethics Commission on January 12, 2021. But why wouldn't she have been paid a stipend of $800 monthly, as were all the other trustees?

She also did not report any Family Members' Income. Was she married in any part of 2020?

McKie reports only private personal income in 2020 from NLLC (whatever that is). It is not required that she disclose the amount of any private personal income.

Her SEI is a public record and was examined today.

Degaldo or Delgado?

When you refer to someone in a meeting, how important is it to know who that person is/was and how to pronounce his name?

During Tuesday night's presentation on Critical Race Theory, Mrs. Grant referred to Richard "Degaldo". Only it's Delgado, not Degaldo. He was listed on Slide 11 as a legal scholar.

The second paragraph of Slide 11 read, "The basic tenets of critical race theory, or CRT, emerged out of a framework for legal analysis in the late 1970s and early 1980s created by legal scholars Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado, among others." 

Did Mrs. Grant just lift that paragraph and the preceding one on Slide 11 from Education Week, as cited, without really knowing who the scholars were? Is that why she mispronounced Delgado's name?

I recognized the mispronunciation because I had read through that presentation two-three times before the meeting? When I heard "Degaldo" during the meeting, I knew I hadn't seen that name. How many of the board members studied the presentation before the meeting?

Want to know more about Richard Delgado (1939 - )? Check this out (and get ready for a laugh)   https://www.seattleu.edu/research/law/richard-delgado/

That page is in Seattle University's "Scholarly Excellence" section. His name appears above University Professor as "Richard Delgad0". I wonder how long it has been like that!

Board Policy BID - smoke & mirrors

At the November 16 regular board meeting, trustees and the two trustees-elect heard Richland Two's in-house General Counsel Karla Hawkins present a draft revision to Board Policy BID - Board Member Compensation and Expenses. The proposal is to change the monthly stipend ($800/month) to a per diem for each meeting. The discussion starts at 1:26:15 in the altered version of the board member recording on YouTube at https://youtu.be/56lks0GbCfs

If approved at the December 14, 2021 meeting, she said it would not go into effect until January 1, 2022.

Like that is supposed to be important? Anyone concerned? December 14th is the only board meeting before January 1, 2022. Should board members be permitted to change their compensation during their term-of-office? Many in the public will say a loud and resounding NO.

Mrs. Agostini asked a question about whether a board member could spend more than her equal amount of expense money.

There is a huge problems with the proposed change.

No one asked for a comparison of the stipend costs versus anticipated per diem costs. Remember all those extra meetings in September. The scheduled Regular Meetings in September were September 14 and September 28. Then Teresa called two Special Meetings: September 22 and September 24.

If trustees were paid a per diem of $400/meeting, September's costs would have jumped from $800 to $1600.

If a Special-Called Meeting (workshop) is held, would that mean three (3) meetings paid by per diem in that month? $1200 vs. $800.

Is the board acting like the Federal Government? Just spend money without feasibility studies or  a cost/benefit analysis?

Is this a case of the fox watching the henhouse?

RCSD Press Release

The following press release was received from the Richland County Sheriff's Department.

Sent: Fri, Nov 19, 2021 6:31 pm
Subject: Re: Press Release - Richland 2

Sheriff Leon Lott announces that no charges will be filed against the Richland Two school administrator who was accused of sexual misconduct.

 

After an intense investigation which included interviewing multiple witnesses and the individuals involved, as well as reviewing surveillance video from school cameras, investigators determined that the incident did not occur as described by the child and that the administrator did not do anything improper. 

 

The Richland County Sheriff’s Department began investigating on Monday, after the parent of a Richland Two elementary student raised concerns about an incident involving an administrator.

 

On Tuesday night, that parent spoke about the allegations during the public participation portion of the school board meeting.

 

“As parents, we want to believe that our kids are always truthful with us, but sometimes it turns out that’s not the case,” Sheriff Lott said. “However, we have a duty to make sure that any allegations are fully and completely investigated so that appropriate action can be taken when warranted.”

 

Richland Two and the elementary school involved cooperated fully throughout the investigation and have been notified of the findings.

Manning slams community members

During the Board & Superintendent Comments at the end of the November 16th board meeting, at 3:12:45 Trustee Manning slammed and disrespected community members and parents.

He said that they (the board) learned a lot and accomplished a lot. Seriously? What did they really learn from the long presentation by Mrs. Helen Grant that was supposed to rnlighten them about the difference between Critical Race Theory and Culturally Relevant Teaching? Nothing. 

They did learn that Mrs. Grant couldn't even tell them the difference. Certainly, there is no excuse for not being able to explain the difference. That's her department. That's her specialty. That was the requested topic. Grant reports to the superintendent, and she probably will get praised, not reprimanded for her admission that she could not explain the difference.

Then Manning said, "It's interesting - sometimes we get requested to put things on the agenda. We have community outpour and then, when we get to the actual topic, the ones that asked for the information aren't present. Umm. I think it is a two-way street that, you know, when you want information or you request information, you ensure that you are also present so that you make sure you get both sides of the story so that you completely understand what's going on. For those of you who stayed with us, thank you for being here with us so that you are fully informed on what's going on in the District and how that all comes to play..."

"both sides" of CRT weren't presented! 

The problem with what Manning said is that "those who weren't there" have no obligation to be there. They may have already read the CRT presentation. Nothing was added that was helpful. Who wants to sit through other business just to hear someone read a presentation. Plus, anyone can view the replay, so why stay there so late. 

I emailed the board members before November 16 to ask them not to let Mrs. Grant read her 28-page presentation to them. I suggested that, if she started to, tell her you had read the presentation, and then begin asking questions. Which board members, if any, had read the presentation? If I were to guess, I'd say that Trustees Agostini, McFadden and Scott had read all 28 pages. Anyone else?

Manning has managed to raise the ire of a segment of parents who are insulted by his remarks. No public official should make such remarks. 

Holmes - out of order AGAIN

Toward the end of the Nov. 16th board meeting, during the agenda item pertaining to the Draft Agenda for the December 14, 2021 board meeting, Trustee Agostini moved (made a motion) at 3:01:20 in the YouTube sanitized version of the recording to have an Human Resources update included in the agenda.

Teresa Holmes just does NOT understand parliamentary procedure.

The ONLY thing Holmes should have said at that time was, "Is there a second?"

Instead Holmes jumped into Stalling Mode with a question about doing that update as a Board Brief, and then the superintendent piled on with another typical long-winded response. Davis offered a written response to Agostini's question, if he receives the question.

I think there was a reason that Mrs. Agostini wanted it to be part of a public board meeting. She was sticking up for teachers who are losing their planning time to substitute-teaching duties, and that situation has existed for many months. TEACHERS, SUPPORT MRS. AGOSTINI.

Mrs. Agostini already knows that submitting a written request hasn't worked in the past. She did a good job of not asserting once again that that process doesn't work, when it involves a question she has brought up.

Trustee Agostini is always very nice when she gets run over by Holmes and Davis. In the future, I hope she will stand up to them. Another trustee should have called out "Point of Order" and demanded that there be no discussion until Mrs. Agostini's Motion was seconded. The only one who might have spoken up was Trustee McFadden, as Trustee Scott apparently had silently excused herself from the meeting.

There should have been NO discussion until Mrs. Agostini's motion was seconded.

This is exactly why this board needs a Parliamentarian AND why there isn't one. Without a Parliamentarian, Holmes and the superintendent can run roughshod over others.

Manning knew there was a secondary motion pending. Why didn't HE speak up, when Holmes called for the vote to approve the draft agenda??? It is true that it hadn't been seconded, because Holmes violated parliamentary procedure and had never called for a second.

RCSD: No crime at (BHE)

The Richland County Sheriff's Department (RCSD) reports that it has completed its investigation of the incident reported by the father of an elementary school student, when he addressed the school board on November 16. Sheriff Lott announced that no crime had been committed.

See the short article on The State newspaper's website here.

Expect an announcement on Richland 2's website soon. www.Richland2.org

[Edited] 11/19/21 1:16PM The Richland 2 website has been updated. I'm still waiting for the full press release from RCSD.