When the Richland 2 School Board considered the resolution to oust a Board member from a position as Officer of the Board, did that resolution actually pass? The resolution was not to remove a member (elected official) from the Board - only to remove a Board member from a position as an officer of the Board (Chair, Vice-Chair or Secretary).
At a Board meeting earlier this year, that resolution failed on a 3-4 vote.
Agostini, Manning and Elkins-Johnson voted for it.
McKie, Holmes, Shadd and Caution-Parker voted against it.
However, McKie and Holmes were not legally members of the Board.
Thus, instead of the vote being 3-4, the true vote was 3-2. Only Shadd and Caution-Parker remained as members of the Board voting against it.
The Board must re-visit every vote since November 13, 2018 that was decided by votes of McKie and Holmes.
Saturday, March 16, 2019
McKie, Holmes to be arrested at 3/26/19 meeting?
Should Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes be arrested at the Richland 2 School Board on Tuesday, March 26, 2019?
Each violated South Carolina Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110(A), a misdemeanor.
The five legal members of the Board of Trustees (Agostini, Manning, Shadd (an attorney, himself), Elkins-Johnson, Caution-Parker) should be very concerned about having two people sitting at the Board desks during the semi-monthly meetings who are not legal members of the Board.
The attorney for Richland 2 School District is the attorney for the District, not for individual Board members, and certainly not for people who are not legally-constituted Board members (McKie and Holmes).
The Board is responsible for millions of dollars in School District assets, thousands of students and hundreds of employees. Having a legal leadership of seven Board members is imperative.
If this illegal functioning of the Board is not resolved before the March 26, 2019, meeting, should the two women sitting illegally at the Board desks be arrested and removed from the Board seating area?
Why are McKie and Holmes there illegally? Because South Carolina law 8-13-1110(A) reads that they cannot take the oath of office and commence their duties unless they have filed Statements of Economic Interests. Neither Mrs. McKie nor Ms. Holmes filed their Statements until December 4, 2018, a full three weeks after they took the oath of office on November 13, 2018. A violation of 8-13-1110(A) is a misdemeanor (Section 8-13-1520). A misdemeanor is a crime.
The problem can be easily cured. Now that the Statements of Economic Interests are on file, they can take the oath of office and commence their duties. I have requested Superintendent Davis to inform me of the date, time and place of the swearing-in ceremony.
Mrs. McKie cannot continue as Chair. Her 2014-2018 term-of-office on the Board and then-position as Chair ended on or before November 13, 2018. She has been allowed to act as Chair improperly. The Vice-Chair should assume the duties of Chair until the next regular election of Officers.
Many actions of the Board may have to be reviewed, due to McKie and Holmes sitting at the Board desks and voting on School District business. Items in question will include student suspensions, transfers, expulsions; financial and bond matters; the resolution to create authority to remove a Board Officer, etc. Every vote that was decided by the votes of McKie and Holmes should be reviewed.
The vote on the resolution to remove a Board Officer was 4-3. Removing McKie and Holmes from the vote changes the vote to 3-2 and it would have passed!!!
What is the problem with the Richland 2 School Board that it is resisting this issue? Is it pride? Ego? Is it "We're right, and you parents (not just this writer) are wrong"?
Your comments are invited and welcome below.
 |
| Amelia McKie |
The five legal members of the Board of Trustees (Agostini, Manning, Shadd (an attorney, himself), Elkins-Johnson, Caution-Parker) should be very concerned about having two people sitting at the Board desks during the semi-monthly meetings who are not legal members of the Board.
The attorney for Richland 2 School District is the attorney for the District, not for individual Board members, and certainly not for people who are not legally-constituted Board members (McKie and Holmes).
 |
| Teresa Holmes |
If this illegal functioning of the Board is not resolved before the March 26, 2019, meeting, should the two women sitting illegally at the Board desks be arrested and removed from the Board seating area?
Why are McKie and Holmes there illegally? Because South Carolina law 8-13-1110(A) reads that they cannot take the oath of office and commence their duties unless they have filed Statements of Economic Interests. Neither Mrs. McKie nor Ms. Holmes filed their Statements until December 4, 2018, a full three weeks after they took the oath of office on November 13, 2018. A violation of 8-13-1110(A) is a misdemeanor (Section 8-13-1520). A misdemeanor is a crime.
The problem can be easily cured. Now that the Statements of Economic Interests are on file, they can take the oath of office and commence their duties. I have requested Superintendent Davis to inform me of the date, time and place of the swearing-in ceremony.
Mrs. McKie cannot continue as Chair. Her 2014-2018 term-of-office on the Board and then-position as Chair ended on or before November 13, 2018. She has been allowed to act as Chair improperly. The Vice-Chair should assume the duties of Chair until the next regular election of Officers.
Many actions of the Board may have to be reviewed, due to McKie and Holmes sitting at the Board desks and voting on School District business. Items in question will include student suspensions, transfers, expulsions; financial and bond matters; the resolution to create authority to remove a Board Officer, etc. Every vote that was decided by the votes of McKie and Holmes should be reviewed.
The vote on the resolution to remove a Board Officer was 4-3. Removing McKie and Holmes from the vote changes the vote to 3-2 and it would have passed!!!
What is the problem with the Richland 2 School Board that it is resisting this issue? Is it pride? Ego? Is it "We're right, and you parents (not just this writer) are wrong"?
Your comments are invited and welcome below.
Friday, March 15, 2019
Electronic Voting - what's wrong?
Are electronics supposed to simplify life and meetings?
If you have attended Richland 2 Board meetings in-person or viewed them on YouTube, you have seen the pauses and delays, when the Board votes on adoption of agendas, student matters, or adoption of policies.
The Chair calls for the question (Let's vote!) and then it's time for a nap. Somebody has to type up the question, and then the Board members must touch a button on their tablet screens.
Instead of a quick show of hands, there is a long silence. And then it's even longer, when the question is worded incorrectly. Or the wrong Board-member name is entered for the person making or seconding the motion. Or the vote is incorrect and must be corrected.
This needs to be fixed between meetings, so that the flow is smooth and fast.
Aren't electronics supposed to save time, not waste it?
If you have attended Richland 2 Board meetings in-person or viewed them on YouTube, you have seen the pauses and delays, when the Board votes on adoption of agendas, student matters, or adoption of policies.
The Chair calls for the question (Let's vote!) and then it's time for a nap. Somebody has to type up the question, and then the Board members must touch a button on their tablet screens.
Instead of a quick show of hands, there is a long silence. And then it's even longer, when the question is worded incorrectly. Or the wrong Board-member name is entered for the person making or seconding the motion. Or the vote is incorrect and must be corrected.
This needs to be fixed between meetings, so that the flow is smooth and fast.
Aren't electronics supposed to save time, not waste it?
The Ides of March
Do most students today have any idea what is meant by "the Ides of March"? Or who Julius Caesar was? Or when he died?
Or what "Et tu, Brute" means? Or where those words come from?
Would they have any idea even how to pronounce them?
Is Latin taught in any public school in South Carolina? Are there Latin classes in the Gifted & Talented program at any Richland 2 school?
When did I learn those words? 1951. Why would I still remember them? I myself am thankful for the education I received in University City, Missouri.
Will the kids today be thankful for their secondary education? Will it be a genuine foundation of lifelong learning?
Or what "Et tu, Brute" means? Or where those words come from?
Would they have any idea even how to pronounce them?
Is Latin taught in any public school in South Carolina? Are there Latin classes in the Gifted & Talented program at any Richland 2 school?
When did I learn those words? 1951. Why would I still remember them? I myself am thankful for the education I received in University City, Missouri.
Will the kids today be thankful for their secondary education? Will it be a genuine foundation of lifelong learning?
Consent Agenda - what is it?
At each meeting of the Richland 2 School Board, a motion is made to approve the Consent Agenda. When the Board members are asked if there is discussion, there is none. When the vote is taken, it is unanimous.
What is the Consent Agenda?.
It could be approval of accounts payable. It could be forgiveness of debt owed to the District. It could be school remodels. It could be expense accounts. It could be Board or employee travel, meetings, conferences. It could be promotions and raises.
In many "public bodies" (city, county, village, town governments, school boards) approval is needed for business to happen. One way to approve all the administrative detail is to bury it in the Consent Agenda. The Administration (Superintendent, Staff) will seek approval of the Board on many matters.
The Board members will know what is on the Consent Agenda. They should receive lengthy reports, posted to their Board-issued tablets. In olden days (not all that long ago), thick packets of reports were distributed to Board members (city councils, etc.), so that they could read, understand, highlight, question the contents. Now it's electronic. This saves money. It also makes it hard for the public to get the information in advance of a decision.
Sometimes the full Board packet for a public body (legal term for a taxpayer-supported entity) is available by a visit to official offices or a public library. Has anyone ever asked to see the "packet"?
When the Motion is made to approve the Consent Agenda, any Board member can ask for an item to be pulled. This means the item will be temporarily set aside for discussion for a vote. The public body then votes on all the other items. Then the public body returns to the "pulled" item, discusses it (or them) and votes.
The public is entitled to know what the Board is approving.
Is the Consent Agenda available for inspection before a Board meeting? How far ahead is it available? Where? During what hours?
Do Board members read all the information in the semi-monthly meeting packets? At the February 26 Board meeting, Theresa Holmes asked a question of a staffer about which teachers were in the Gifted & Talented Program. The speaker hesitated and then said the information was in the report (in the packet). Obviously, Ms. Holmes hadn't read the report. In a future article, I shall address the propriety of a Board member's visiting a G&T classroom.
Several years ago I identified the danger in electronic packaging of reports into Board-distributed tablets. This was back in Woodstock, Ill., when the city council opted to move away from paper packets to electronic tablets. "To save money", don't you know? Who has time to read all that information?
What is the Consent Agenda?.
It could be approval of accounts payable. It could be forgiveness of debt owed to the District. It could be school remodels. It could be expense accounts. It could be Board or employee travel, meetings, conferences. It could be promotions and raises.
In many "public bodies" (city, county, village, town governments, school boards) approval is needed for business to happen. One way to approve all the administrative detail is to bury it in the Consent Agenda. The Administration (Superintendent, Staff) will seek approval of the Board on many matters.
The Board members will know what is on the Consent Agenda. They should receive lengthy reports, posted to their Board-issued tablets. In olden days (not all that long ago), thick packets of reports were distributed to Board members (city councils, etc.), so that they could read, understand, highlight, question the contents. Now it's electronic. This saves money. It also makes it hard for the public to get the information in advance of a decision.
Sometimes the full Board packet for a public body (legal term for a taxpayer-supported entity) is available by a visit to official offices or a public library. Has anyone ever asked to see the "packet"?
When the Motion is made to approve the Consent Agenda, any Board member can ask for an item to be pulled. This means the item will be temporarily set aside for discussion for a vote. The public body then votes on all the other items. Then the public body returns to the "pulled" item, discusses it (or them) and votes.
The public is entitled to know what the Board is approving.
Is the Consent Agenda available for inspection before a Board meeting? How far ahead is it available? Where? During what hours?
Do Board members read all the information in the semi-monthly meeting packets? At the February 26 Board meeting, Theresa Holmes asked a question of a staffer about which teachers were in the Gifted & Talented Program. The speaker hesitated and then said the information was in the report (in the packet). Obviously, Ms. Holmes hadn't read the report. In a future article, I shall address the propriety of a Board member's visiting a G&T classroom.
Several years ago I identified the danger in electronic packaging of reports into Board-distributed tablets. This was back in Woodstock, Ill., when the city council opted to move away from paper packets to electronic tablets. "To save money", don't you know? Who has time to read all that information?
Thursday, March 14, 2019
Ms. Holmes' Defense (attempt)
It seems I got under the skin of Teresa Holmes at the March 12, 2019 Richland 2 School Board meeting.
A general rule, as usually explained by the Chair prior to the Public Participation segment of Board meetings, is that the Board will not respond to or address comments from members of the public. On other evenings it has been explained that "someone" (staff) may get back to a member of the public who addresses the Board.
On March 12, 2019 I asserted that two people on the Board are not legally members of the Board. I base this on State law, Section 8-13-1110(A).
At the close of the March 12th meeting there was an Item (16) for Board and Superintendent Comments.
Ms. Holmes used her time to state that she did not know of any requirement to file a Statement of Economic Interests (SEI) with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. She learned of it after being contacted by The Voice of Blythewood and Fairfield County. She did file her SEI on December 4, 2018.
She defended herself against "things that are done for personal reasons or when things are done to be sensationalized." Now, whom could she possibly mean? What "personal reasons" could there be? Who could benefit from "sensationalism"?
She says she is in good standing with the State Department (meaning the Ethics Commission). She is, but this is a deflection.
She is not a legally-constituted member of the Board.
But she refused to acknowledge, in a short conversation after the March 12, 2019 meeting that there is importance to the wording in the state law. The law says she cannot take the oath of office or begin duties (on the school board) unless she has filed a SEI.
She took the oath of office before she filed the SEI.
She began her duties before she filed the SEI.
She has been paid as a Board member, even though she is not legally a member.
By the way, this is also true for Mrs. McKie. A huge problem for the Board is that it has allowed Mrs. McKie to chair Board meetings, even though she is not legally a Board member.
I have emailed Supt. Davis and the school board that I wish to be informed of the date, time and location when Ms. Holmes and Mrs. McKie will be legally sworn in.
Ms. Holmes proudly stated that she has already filed her 2019 SEI. The problem with this? How will she account for any conflicts of interest or reporting of required disclosures between now and December 31, 2019? She gets no points (from me) for filing prior ot the March 30, 2020 deadline. Her statement was a waste of breath and contained no value.
A general rule, as usually explained by the Chair prior to the Public Participation segment of Board meetings, is that the Board will not respond to or address comments from members of the public. On other evenings it has been explained that "someone" (staff) may get back to a member of the public who addresses the Board.
On March 12, 2019 I asserted that two people on the Board are not legally members of the Board. I base this on State law, Section 8-13-1110(A).
At the close of the March 12th meeting there was an Item (16) for Board and Superintendent Comments.
Ms. Holmes used her time to state that she did not know of any requirement to file a Statement of Economic Interests (SEI) with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. She learned of it after being contacted by The Voice of Blythewood and Fairfield County. She did file her SEI on December 4, 2018.
She defended herself against "things that are done for personal reasons or when things are done to be sensationalized." Now, whom could she possibly mean? What "personal reasons" could there be? Who could benefit from "sensationalism"?
She says she is in good standing with the State Department (meaning the Ethics Commission). She is, but this is a deflection.
She is not a legally-constituted member of the Board.
But she refused to acknowledge, in a short conversation after the March 12, 2019 meeting that there is importance to the wording in the state law. The law says she cannot take the oath of office or begin duties (on the school board) unless she has filed a SEI.
She took the oath of office before she filed the SEI.
She began her duties before she filed the SEI.
She has been paid as a Board member, even though she is not legally a member.
By the way, this is also true for Mrs. McKie. A huge problem for the Board is that it has allowed Mrs. McKie to chair Board meetings, even though she is not legally a Board member.
I have emailed Supt. Davis and the school board that I wish to be informed of the date, time and location when Ms. Holmes and Mrs. McKie will be legally sworn in.
Ms. Holmes proudly stated that she has already filed her 2019 SEI. The problem with this? How will she account for any conflicts of interest or reporting of required disclosures between now and December 31, 2019? She gets no points (from me) for filing prior ot the March 30, 2020 deadline. Her statement was a waste of breath and contained no value.
Longleaf Middle School praised
At the March 12, 2019 Richland 2 School Board meeting Principal Robert Jackson and Longleaf Middle School (Columbia, S.C.) made a presentation, and students were recognized for their achievements. Two students addressed the Board.
In his closing remarks, Principal Jackson referred to the late Coach John Wooden and quoted these words, "Don't let what you can't do, keep you from doing what you can do."
These are words to live by!
By coincidence, on Wednesday, March 13, I received an email from a high school classmate with a recorded presentation on TED by Coach Wooden. It was only after I watched the video-recording of the Board meeting that Coach Wooden's name jumped out at me. Not having participated in sports in high school or followed sports afterwards, I was not familiar with Coach Wooden (1910-2010 (Age 99)).
Take 15 minutes and watch this presentation, titled "The Difference Between Winning and Succeeding.". It's one that every teacher and many students should hear. This TED presentation was published on YouTube on March 26, 2009, about 14 months before his death at age 99. Be sure to reach some of the comments, too.
In his closing remarks, Principal Jackson referred to the late Coach John Wooden and quoted these words, "Don't let what you can't do, keep you from doing what you can do."
These are words to live by!
By coincidence, on Wednesday, March 13, I received an email from a high school classmate with a recorded presentation on TED by Coach Wooden. It was only after I watched the video-recording of the Board meeting that Coach Wooden's name jumped out at me. Not having participated in sports in high school or followed sports afterwards, I was not familiar with Coach Wooden (1910-2010 (Age 99)).
Take 15 minutes and watch this presentation, titled "The Difference Between Winning and Succeeding.". It's one that every teacher and many students should hear. This TED presentation was published on YouTube on March 26, 2009, about 14 months before his death at age 99. Be sure to reach some of the comments, too.
To share this with educational professionals you know (or anyone else), just click on the "Share" button above. No record is seen or kept of your email address or that of anyone to whom you forward this article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)