At the May 28th Richland 2 School Board Meeting there was quite a discussion after the agenda for the June 11th Board meeting was proposed.
Trustee Lindsay Agostini made a motion to amend the proposed agenda to include having the bond attorney attend the executive session to explain the POS (whatever that is) and the No-Litigation Certificate which are part of the bond documents she refused to sign. The motion was seconded by Dr. Elkins-Johnson.
Trustee Caution-Parker asked if they'd have to pay the attorney to attend. Well, duhhh... of course. Attorneys don't work for free. (Watch the YouTube recording of the 5/28/2019 meeting, and start at (1:21:20) on the timer.)
Caution-Parker asked, "Is there something so out-of-kilter that we need to have her there?" Then Caution-Parker mentioned a letter that Supt. Davis gave to all the board members that explains the attorney's views.
What could that "something so out-of-kilter" be?
Actually, I can name about three things that will create H-U-G-E problems for those who signed the documents, which I have since learned pertain to the April 11, 2019 sale of the bonds.
And probably not just for those who signed, but possibly for the entire Board, because it has not addressed the problem that arose on November 13, 2018.
Notice how McKie allowed the meeting to run out-of-control after the discussion ended and she called for a vote. The voting opened, and then Caution-Parker had a question. She was too late and should have been cut off, but McKie didn't cut her off.
Then McKie recognized James Shadd, who was also too late for discussion. McKie continues to run meetings by the McKie Rules of Order, rather than by Robert's Rules of Order. Shadd, for some strange reason (and especially strange, since he is an attorney himself) said the bond attorney (Heizer) would not be at an executive session for legal advice.
Well, that's exactly why she would be there.
At that point, Supt. Davis said "the contract has already been signed." What he meant was the contract for the sale of the bonds. And that's why he needed the Board Secretary to hurry up and sign.
Mrs. Agostini was wise to consult with her private attorney and to refuse to sign the Certificate of Incumbency and the Signature and No-Litigation Certification.
After James Shadd was appointed successor Board Secretary, he signed the documents on April 30.
Finally one board member supported Mrs. Agostini. Dr. Elkins-Johnson said it was proper to support a board member's request for clarification. Of course!!!
The vote on the amendment to the motion is shown at (1:32:51). The vote was 3-3 (Failed). Agostini, Elkins-Johnson and Holmes voted in favor. McKie, Caution-Parker and Shadd voted against. Manning was absent. (The vote should have been recorded as 3-3-0-1.)
Tossing out the votes of McKie and Holmes, who are not legal members of the board, then the vote would have been 2-2-0-1. Had Trustee Manning been present, I suspect the vote would have been 3-2 (without the votes of McKie and Holmes recognized), passing instead of failing.
Does anyone remember a Resolution coming before the Board to authorize the Board Chair and the Board Secretary to sign the bond sale documents on behalf of Richland School District Two?
Was that buried in some document or motion months ago, so that the signatures could be affixed without a current Resolution?
Friday, June 7, 2019
2 teens - armed home invasion
As I was driving out of The Summit on Wednesday, June 5, I encountered a long line of traffic backed up on Summit Parkway at Hard Scrabble Road. I turned and drove through Elders Pond subdivision to access Hard Scrabble Road by Walgreens. There were many deputies and at least one K-9 who seemed to be searching around the pond near Kendrick Road.
This article in The State, finally published on June 6, 2019 at 5:08PM, explains what it was all about.
Two students, 14 and 15, are described as having invaded a home on Wild Indigo Court (map), and the younger threatened to kill the teen-age girl who had been asleep when they broke in. Fortunately, she did not hesitate to call the Richland County Sheriff's Department.
Ridge View High School was placed on lockdown. Were the two boys students there? The story says the girl in the home knew them. Was Rice Creek Elementary School also locked down?
Where did they get the gun? Were both armed?
Should the identities of minors who are accused of committing major crimes like this be withheld from the public? I don't think so!
A 14-year-old with a gun who threatens to kill someone does not deserve to have his identity shielded by an archaic law.
If you know who they are, let me know. After I confirm it, I'll publish their names, addresses and the name of any school in which they are enrolled.
Hopefully, they will be charged and tried as adults. They should not be allowed to take advantage of the more lenient treatment that juvenile offenders expect.
Comments?
This article in The State, finally published on June 6, 2019 at 5:08PM, explains what it was all about.
Two students, 14 and 15, are described as having invaded a home on Wild Indigo Court (map), and the younger threatened to kill the teen-age girl who had been asleep when they broke in. Fortunately, she did not hesitate to call the Richland County Sheriff's Department.
Ridge View High School was placed on lockdown. Were the two boys students there? The story says the girl in the home knew them. Was Rice Creek Elementary School also locked down?
Where did they get the gun? Were both armed?
Should the identities of minors who are accused of committing major crimes like this be withheld from the public? I don't think so!
A 14-year-old with a gun who threatens to kill someone does not deserve to have his identity shielded by an archaic law.
If you know who they are, let me know. After I confirm it, I'll publish their names, addresses and the name of any school in which they are enrolled.
Hopefully, they will be charged and tried as adults. They should not be allowed to take advantage of the more lenient treatment that juvenile offenders expect.
Comments?
Wednesday, June 5, 2019
Investigations continue
Update to readers....
The change in frequency for postings here has nothing to do with any reduced interest in the shortcomings of the Richland 2 School Board or its willingness to address critical issues that it has been burying since January.
Continued digging is occurring. Sometimes it's just better to dig and not talk about the digging.
When the wheels come off, they will be coming off in a big way.
Certain members of the School Board have failed the public in terms of
Ethics
Character
Integrity
Honesty
They may think they've got a free ride until 2022.
One of these days the S.C. Ethics Commission will get around to turning uncollected debts over the the S.C. Dept. of Revenue. As of May 20, 2019 Amelia McKie owed $51,750 in fines and penalties. According to the Ethics Commission, the period for bargaining and negotiating has expired. That's what she owes. That's what the DOR will be collecting. How does the DOR collect it? By every available means.
Could Gov. Henry McMaster remove McKie from office? He could apply the same standard to McKie that former Gov. Nikki Haley applied when she removed Kelvin Washington from the Richland County Council in March 2016 after his conviction for failing to pay S.C. income tax for three years. Gov. Haley considered that an act of moral turpitude; it wasn't Washington's DUI guilty plea that cooked his goose. It was his failing to pay income taxes.
How similar is a public official's failing to file Statements of Economic Interests Reports and Campaign Disclosure Reports for four years? Pretty close, I'd say.
The change in frequency for postings here has nothing to do with any reduced interest in the shortcomings of the Richland 2 School Board or its willingness to address critical issues that it has been burying since January.
Continued digging is occurring. Sometimes it's just better to dig and not talk about the digging.
When the wheels come off, they will be coming off in a big way.
Certain members of the School Board have failed the public in terms of
Ethics
Character
Integrity
Honesty
They may think they've got a free ride until 2022.
One of these days the S.C. Ethics Commission will get around to turning uncollected debts over the the S.C. Dept. of Revenue. As of May 20, 2019 Amelia McKie owed $51,750 in fines and penalties. According to the Ethics Commission, the period for bargaining and negotiating has expired. That's what she owes. That's what the DOR will be collecting. How does the DOR collect it? By every available means.
Could Gov. Henry McMaster remove McKie from office? He could apply the same standard to McKie that former Gov. Nikki Haley applied when she removed Kelvin Washington from the Richland County Council in March 2016 after his conviction for failing to pay S.C. income tax for three years. Gov. Haley considered that an act of moral turpitude; it wasn't Washington's DUI guilty plea that cooked his goose. It was his failing to pay income taxes.
How similar is a public official's failing to file Statements of Economic Interests Reports and Campaign Disclosure Reports for four years? Pretty close, I'd say.
Friday, May 31, 2019
Ridge View HS teacher quits
Local news is reporting that the Ridge View High School teacher who was involved in a classroom fight on May 28 has quit.
At least one media outlet reported that a deputy told the kid's mother that she could file charges. Well, what do you think she said?
Her sweet, little boy would never cause a problem at school, would he?
Maybe, instead of metal detectors at entrances, there should be video-cameras in every classroom!!!
The deputy should have investigated the full incident and then charged the one who started it. Media is reporting that the kid shoved the teacher. OK, if that is what started it, then ONE person gets charged - the kid!!!
What do you think happens in a classroom and a school, when a kid shoves a teacher and gets away with it? He'll be strolling around with his pants down to his knees, acting like King of the Jungle.
I've written before about the Culturally Relevant Pedagogy brainchild of CSU's Prof. Gloria Boutte.
Is a teacher supposed to just understand that some "children" grow up pushing others around or, as Board Trustee James Shadd, "speak loudly"? And that makes it okay in a classroom?
NO, it does not! While no teacher (white or black) should ever have to defend himself from a student, he also should not be required to stand down if attacked.
The teacher will get a good lawyer and sue the District.
The student's family will get a lawyer and sue the District.
For the District, it's lose-lose.
At least one media outlet reported that a deputy told the kid's mother that she could file charges. Well, what do you think she said?
Her sweet, little boy would never cause a problem at school, would he?
Maybe, instead of metal detectors at entrances, there should be video-cameras in every classroom!!!
The deputy should have investigated the full incident and then charged the one who started it. Media is reporting that the kid shoved the teacher. OK, if that is what started it, then ONE person gets charged - the kid!!!
What do you think happens in a classroom and a school, when a kid shoves a teacher and gets away with it? He'll be strolling around with his pants down to his knees, acting like King of the Jungle.
I've written before about the Culturally Relevant Pedagogy brainchild of CSU's Prof. Gloria Boutte.
Is a teacher supposed to just understand that some "children" grow up pushing others around or, as Board Trustee James Shadd, "speak loudly"? And that makes it okay in a classroom?
NO, it does not! While no teacher (white or black) should ever have to defend himself from a student, he also should not be required to stand down if attacked.
The teacher will get a good lawyer and sue the District.
The student's family will get a lawyer and sue the District.
For the District, it's lose-lose.
Wednesday, May 29, 2019
Fight at RVHS
Will the student(s) who video-recorded the classroom fight at Ridge View High School yesterday be disciplined?
The School Board spent a lot of time gnashing their teeth and word-smithing a revision to a Board Policy that pertains to use of cell phones in schools. That Policy may have been directed at employees, rather than at students.
Obviously, at least one student had a cell phone handy yesterday, when a fight broke out between a student and a teacher (teacher, not employee, per WIS-TV).
Policy JICJ Use of Electronic Communication Devices in School
The School Board spent a lot of time gnashing their teeth and word-smithing a revision to a Board Policy that pertains to use of cell phones in schools. That Policy may have been directed at employees, rather than at students.
Obviously, at least one student had a cell phone handy yesterday, when a fight broke out between a student and a teacher (teacher, not employee, per WIS-TV).
Policy JICJ Use of Electronic Communication Devices in School
Policy JICJ reads, in part: "Students are prohibited from using ECDs to capture, record or transmit the words (i.e. audio) and/or images (i.e. pictures, video) of any student, staff member or other person in the school or while attending a school-related activity without express prior notice and explicit consent for the capture, recording or transmission of such words or images. Using an ECD to take or transmit audio and/or pictures/video of an individual without his/her consent is considered an invasion of privacy and is not permitted, unless authorized by the building principal." (Last revision 8/11/2015)
A better question is why didn't the students in the room intercede and stop the fight? Surely, there were some decent-sized boys in the room who could have separated them. WIS-TV inaccurately reported the fight and failed to comment on the engagement by the student. Notice how he doesn't step back when the two are temporarily apart.
Nary a word was spoken
Guess it's a good thing I didn't wear my favorite tie to last night's Richland 2 School Board meeting. I came >>>/this/<<< close to wearing it.
You'd have thought all was quiet on the Western Front. Nary a word was spoken about an fight earlier in the day involving an employee (teacher?) and a student at Ridge View High School, one of Richland 2's five high schools.
WIS-TV's first story was at 5:47PM, and it was updated today at 10:20AM. The incident must have occurred shortly before 1:00PM on Tuesday, May 28, 2019, as WIS-TV reported that the SRO responded at 1:00PM.
Wouldn't you think there would have been some mention at the school board meeting? Okay, so no details. But why treat people showing up at a school board meeting like mushrooms? There was a valuable "teaching moment" about transparency, and the Board missed it.
The principal of Ridge View HS was at the school board meeting. Was the principal, Brenda Mack-Foxworth, Ed.D. told, in no uncertain terms, that she was not to mention one word about the fight?
Maybe the rule is, "If it ain't on the Agenda, we ain't talkin' 'bout it." Do you think that, if the R2i2 building caught on fire, there would be no announcement because it wasn't on the Agenda?
Let's see if Richland 2 throws the teacher under the bus. The smart move will be to make a thorough, independent investigation of what happened, who started it, who prolonged it and what previous trouble, if any, there had been with that student.
Richland 2 might do that, but what the public will hear is, "The District does not comment on personnel matters."
Will the kid be arrested for disturbing schools or assaulting a teacher?
You'd have thought all was quiet on the Western Front. Nary a word was spoken about an fight earlier in the day involving an employee (teacher?) and a student at Ridge View High School, one of Richland 2's five high schools.
WIS-TV's first story was at 5:47PM, and it was updated today at 10:20AM. The incident must have occurred shortly before 1:00PM on Tuesday, May 28, 2019, as WIS-TV reported that the SRO responded at 1:00PM.
Wouldn't you think there would have been some mention at the school board meeting? Okay, so no details. But why treat people showing up at a school board meeting like mushrooms? There was a valuable "teaching moment" about transparency, and the Board missed it.
The principal of Ridge View HS was at the school board meeting. Was the principal, Brenda Mack-Foxworth, Ed.D. told, in no uncertain terms, that she was not to mention one word about the fight?
Maybe the rule is, "If it ain't on the Agenda, we ain't talkin' 'bout it." Do you think that, if the R2i2 building caught on fire, there would be no announcement because it wasn't on the Agenda?
Let's see if Richland 2 throws the teacher under the bus. The smart move will be to make a thorough, independent investigation of what happened, who started it, who prolonged it and what previous trouble, if any, there had been with that student.
Richland 2 might do that, but what the public will hear is, "The District does not comment on personnel matters."
Will the kid be arrested for disturbing schools or assaulting a teacher?
Trustee Manning - MIA 5/28/19
At last night's Richland 2 School Board meeting Trustee James Manning was absent. His name plate was there, but he wasn't. Not only that, his name was never mentioned during the meeting.
You may remember my comments about the lengthy message read by Supt. Davis, when Amelia McKie missed a meeting. It went on and on. So where was a mention last night about Mr. Manning's absence?
When it came time for votes last night, any record of his vote (or lack thereof) was ignored. The four choices for a vote on a Motion are:
Yes
No
Abstain
Not Present at Vote
Why were votes recorded, for example, as 6-0, instead of 6-0-0-1?
Was this a subtle snub at Mr. Manning by the person in charge of the meeting? Was it intentional or just done in ignorance?
One of these days the School Board is going to have to review ALL votes taken on and since November 13, 2018. Votes that came out as 3-4 (Failing), such as on the Resolution to allow the Board to remove an Officer, actually would have Passed, when the votes of McKie and Holmes are tossed out. Other votes, for example, on student matters would have had different outcomes.
At last night's meeting the vote by the Board to pass the proposed Agenda for the June 11, 2019 meeting actually failed. The vote was 4-2. But, when you toss the votes of McKie and Holmes, who are not legal members of the School Board, then the vote was 2-2. A tie-vote is considered failing. So there is no approved agenda for June 11, 2019.
You may remember my comments about the lengthy message read by Supt. Davis, when Amelia McKie missed a meeting. It went on and on. So where was a mention last night about Mr. Manning's absence?
When it came time for votes last night, any record of his vote (or lack thereof) was ignored. The four choices for a vote on a Motion are:
Yes
No
Abstain
Not Present at Vote
Why were votes recorded, for example, as 6-0, instead of 6-0-0-1?
Was this a subtle snub at Mr. Manning by the person in charge of the meeting? Was it intentional or just done in ignorance?
One of these days the School Board is going to have to review ALL votes taken on and since November 13, 2018. Votes that came out as 3-4 (Failing), such as on the Resolution to allow the Board to remove an Officer, actually would have Passed, when the votes of McKie and Holmes are tossed out. Other votes, for example, on student matters would have had different outcomes.
At last night's meeting the vote by the Board to pass the proposed Agenda for the June 11, 2019 meeting actually failed. The vote was 4-2. But, when you toss the votes of McKie and Holmes, who are not legal members of the School Board, then the vote was 2-2. A tie-vote is considered failing. So there is no approved agenda for June 11, 2019.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)