Bring in an Independent Investigator

Richland 2 school district should bring in an independent, impartial investigator to dig into the January 25 incident at the school board meeting.

WIS-TV told me they just reported what Richland 2 told them. So, when you watch the January 28 interview with Pamela Davis and read the WIS-TV stories, statements by the WIS-TV reporter and anchor are based on what Richland 2 told them.

Richland 2 certainly did not interview me. Did Richland 2 interview the other men and the 14-year-old student?

Are Richland 2's statements the reason why so much was wrong with the January 28 late afternoon broadcast on WIS-TV?

Why won't Chair Teresa Holmes call a Special Meeting of the Board? Does her friendship with Baron Davis have anything to do with it?

Holmes was elected by the People of Richland 2 School District. She has an obligation to represent the People of the district above any friendships.

Where would Richland 2 get an independent investigator? Not from any nearby school district. Not from the liberal post-secondary schools around here. 

Should some of us approach a judge about appointing an independent investigator, since Holmes won't call a Special Meeting? Would a judge order the Board to investigate?

Trustees Agostini, Scott and McFadden want a Special-Called Meeting, but they can't get a fourth board member to join them.

Why won't McKie, Caution-Parker or Manning join with them? What are THEY afraid of? Why won't even one of them join in? Why won't ALL of them join in? The request for a Special-Called Board Meeting should be 6-1!!!

What can you do? Contact McKie, Caution-Parker and Manning. Ask them to join in the call for a Special Board Meeting! If they refuse, ask them why.

Pam Davis on WIS-TV. Did you cry?

On January 28 Columbia TV station WIS-TV aired an interview with Pamela Davis that should have made you cry. Were you reaching for the Kleenex®?

That was three days after another man and I were kicked out of the January 25th school board meeting room and put on Trespass Notice. The person who started the whole thing (Pamela Davis, wife of the superintendent and a teacher at Blythewood High School) apparently got a pass from Richland 2 security officers and security chief Marq Claxton.

Of course they gave Pamela Davis and Baron Davis passes. If they had not, they would have been unemployed the next day.

Pamela Davis got a real softball interview with WIS-TV. Watch that interview here.

The interview (notice the nice setting. Where was that?) opened with an off-camera female voice saying, "Pam Davis says she was only at the meeting as support for her husband who had a medical issue* at a recent meeting. She says, when she arrived, the student and the two men involved in the confrontation were already there. She says, when one of the men approached her at her seat, she made it clear she did not want to talk. She said she never directed profanity to any of them." 

Off-camera reporter: "So what did you say?"

Pamela Davis: "I said, when I was engaged by one of the gentlemen that approached me. I was interacting with him. The student made a comment towards me. I can't really say what it was. Umm. But I looked at the student and said, 'You are a child. You don't need to speak to me.' And that's what I said. That's all I said to him. He didn't respond. .He didn't say anything else to me. And that was it."

Off-camera reporter: "Now regarding the confrontation with the two men, Mrs. Davis said she was very uncomfortable when they approached her because one of the men had sent what she viewed as threatening emails to her husband."

Pamela Davis: "I was feeling intimidated. I felt treatened. I felt targeted. Because I was minding my business. I was sitting quietly like I always do. I've seen those men there together many times. I've never said anything to them. They've never said anything to me."

Off-camera reporter: "Mrs. Davis said it was actually one of the men who called security over after she refused to answer their questions and that one of the men had already been escorted out of the meeting when her husband got involved."

Judi Gatson: "Now tonight we are also hearing from one of the men who was kicked out of the meeting. Our Lauren Adams joins us live outside of the school district office. Lauren, I know he told you that he was attempting to introduce himself to Mrs. Davis."

Lauren Adams: "Yeah, that's right, Judi, He said he was only trying to introduce himself to the superintendent's wife, but two board members say it goes much deeper than that."

Off-camera reporter: "Video from the board meeting Tuesday does not show the verbal fight beforehand. It started when Gus Philpott introduced himself to the superintendent's wife, Pamela Davis. 

WIS-TV then broadcast the interview of Lauren Adams with me. (2:12)

Then WIS-TV also broadcast interviews in front of R2i2 with Teresa Holmes (2:43), who said, "It is about the election..." and with James Manning (2:55), who, the off-camera reporter said, "Philpott is always questioning the board." 

SEE separate, following blogposts about those interviews.

* Recovery from that "medical issue" was so fast and complete that it didn't keep Supt. Davis from being in Charleston on Friday morning to speak at the South Carolina Alliance of Black School Educators (SCABSE) Winter Conference at 9:10AM. Did she go there with him?

Court action to remove Holmes and McKie? $25.00

I closed my last blogpost with

Only one thing is keeping me from hauling Holmes and McKie into court. Money. An attorney asked for a $10,000 retainer and told me I'd need more very soon after that. Are there 1,000 people willing to contribute $25 to seek removal of Holmes and McKie from the school board before the November election? Email your $25 Pledge to gusphilpott@gmail.com Don't send money yet; just your pledge.

S.C. Code of Laws §15-63-60 explains how to remove a person who is illegitimately in office.

SECTION 15-63-60. Action against usurpers, for forfeiture of office or against persons acting as corporation.

An action may be brought by the Attorney General in the name of the State upon his own information or upon the complaint of any private party or by a private party interested on leave granted by a circuit judge against the parties offending in the following cases:

(1) When any person shall usurp, intrude into, or unlawfully hold or exercise any public office, civil or military, or any franchise within this State or any office in a corporation, created by the authority of this State;

I was unsuccessful in persuading the Office of the S.C. Attorney General to take up my case. I was told they didn't think that they could prove that Holmes and McKie intended to break the law by taking the oath three weeks before they were eligible to take it.

My argument that "intent" is  not stated in the law wasn't good enough.

(Next time you get stopped by a cop for speeding, tell him that he can't write you a ticket because he won't be able to prove that you intended to speed.)

The next option is this one:

SECTION 15-63-60. Action against usurpers, for forfeiture of office or against persons acting as corporation.

An action may be brought by the Attorney General in the name of the State upon his own information or upon the complaint of any private party or by a private party interested on leave granted by a circuit judge against the parties offending in the following cases:

(1) When any person shall usurp, intrude into, or unlawfully hold or exercise any public office, civil or military, or any franchise within this State or any office in a corporation, created by the authority of this State;

If a circuit judge told me to go for it, then, as I understand it, I could file in the S.C. Supreme Court and that Court would hear the case in a matter of days, just as it did Richland 2's Proviso case. Usurping public office is, I believe, a pretty serious matter in the eyes of the S.C. Supreme Court. I wouldn't have to go to the back of the line and wait seven years. 

Will you pledge $25.00? If 1,000 people pledge $25.00 quickly, I'll seek "leave by a circuit judge" next week. Maybe by March 1st, Holmes and McKie will be gone.

If S.188 passes the S.C. Senate.. the House and the Governor, McKie won't be able to run in November. Let's not wait. 

Why "trustees-elect Holmes and McKie"?

"Good afternoon, members of the board and trustees-elect Holmes and McKie"

Why do I use this salutation in my emails to the Board of Trustees? 

In February 2019 I first addressed the Board about Holmes' and McKie's not being legitimate members of the Richland 2 school board.

The Board, the District, the attorney for the District, Richland County Sheriff's Department, SLED and the South Carolina Attorney General's office have all heard me continue to use this term.

Never once have I been challenged about it.

If I were wrong, don't you think they would have come after me?

They know I'm right. Holmes and McKie are not legitimate board members. They have never taken the oath-of-office legally. An oath-of-office was administered to them on November 13, 2018, but that was three weeks before they were first eligible to take the oath.

Why is following the law so hard for them? 

In March 2019 I suggested they take the oath and become legal board members. They had filed their Statements of Economic Interests with the South Carolina Ethics Commission on December 4, 2018. On that December date they first became eligible to take the oath.

At that time the District would have had to correct only four months of votes by the board, removing all votes by Holmes and McKie.

If Holmes and McKie take the oath (legally) now, the District will have to go back to November 13, 2018 and remove all the votes by Holmes and McKie. Taking out those votes will change many decisions. The Core Four controlled many decisions 4-3. Throwing out two of those four votes will mean that many decisions will become 3-2 (Agostini, Scott, McFadden vs. Caution-Parker, Manning)

Holmes and McKie have been in office illegally more than three years. McKie continued to serve as chair until June 30, 2019; Holmes served a year as Vice Chair; Holmes now serves as Chair; McKie now serves as Secretary.

Holmes and McKie are not entitled to serve as officers, because they are not legal board members. Yet the majority of the board elected them!

Board Officers are elected at the last board meeting of the School Year. Last June 29th I addressed the board and asked them to nominate and elect only fully-qualified board members as officers. What did Manning do as soon as nominations opened? He nominated Holmes as chair!

It didn't take long for chaos to ensue. 

Only one thing is keeping me from hauling Holmes and McKie into court. Money. An attorney asked for a $10,000 retainer and told me I'd need more very soon after that. Are there 1,000 residents in Richland 2 School District willing to contribute $25 to seeking removal of Holmes and McKie from the school board before the November election? Email your $25 Pledge to gusphilpott@gmail.com 

Holmes - incorrect about speaking board member name

Yesterday I emailed the following to all board members (and some others):

Good afternoon, members of the board and trustees-elect Holmes and McKie,

At each board meeting Teresa Holmes has been explaining Board Policy BEDH incorrectly. She has been admonishing speakers not to mention board members by name.

That is not how policy BEDH reads. Please ask her to explain and apply BEDH correctly.

BEDH reads, in part: "The board will not permit in public session any expression of personal complaints [emphasis added] about individual school personnel or any other person connected with the school system."

BEDH does not say that a speaker cannot mention a board member's name.

If Teresa continues to apply the Policy incorrectly, will you please call a Point-of-Order, stop the clock, rule, re-start the clock and allow the speaker the full amount of time remaining?

Trustee Manning replied about 3½ hours later. He wrote:

"Mr Philpott. Respectfully. You often misinterpret our policies to your benefit. No policy allows for clock resets. We value public input. But we also value respect from the public."

It's nice to know that the board cannot do or say anything that is not in Board Policy.

Is there a Board Policy that allows them to breathe during board meetings? Blow their noses? Of course, they can re-set the clock, if they want to. No Policy is needed for that.

If one board member calls a Point-of-Order and asks for the speaker's clock to be stopped during the discussion, will one of The Core Four call a Point-of-Order to discuss that? Who will hold Holmes' hand and lead her through that procedure?

Did Holmes learn anything during Friday's Winter Retreat? Will she no longer act as a dictator, tyrant, czar? What would happen if Holmes merely introduced Public Participation the way Craig Plank did several years ago, saying only "Speakers will have three minutes each. The Board does not respond to comments and may have a staff member follow up with a speaker."

Speakers don't need to be warned, threatened, told what they can't say. In four years I've never heard a speaker use "gossip, defamatory words, abusive or vulgar language.

When the public is respected, the board is likely to be respected.

Take this RCSD Survey

 One of the tools that the Richland County Sheriff's Department is using is a survey conducted online. This survey is a designed as a periodic check-in with the community to help deliver the services that the community needs and help keep community members safe.

This survey is a research project, and it is completely anonymous. There is no identifying information being collected. So please share your thoughts below about community safety, it will take just a few minutes. Please click the link below and help keep your community safe!

https://rcsdfeedback.net/

$10,000,000 Reserves; Me, first

Richland Two is getting ready to dole out $10,000,000 from the reserves to full-time and part-time employees. 

Sure hope I can get to the front of the line before they start writing checks. 

I really feel for the teachers and workerbees, but they should have gotten control of pens and mouths at the District a little faster. 

I've got my first purchase picked out.

RICHLAND 2 WILL PAY FOR THIS

Then I face a "real" problem. Where will I park it? The street in front of my residence is a public street. It won't block the street, but the HOA will go into orbit.