If you are going to an early morning meeting at the Sandhills public library at R2i2 (the Richland 2 Institute of Innovation), do NOT expect to enter the building before 9:00AM (on the dot) to use the restroom after driving an hour to get there.
No matter how far your drove or how little coffee you drank before you set out. No matter if it is raining, snowing, or under a tornado threat or watch. No matter what!
If your meeting is scheduled to start at 9:00AM, you will be late.
The public is not to be admitted before 9:00AM. This is by order of the Richland 2 School District Superintendent, Baron Davis.
The sign on the door reads 9:00AM, and a building security officer will unlock the door AT 9:00AM.
However, if you are an applicant for Richland 2 employment, then you'll be allowed to enter early and sit in the lobby out of the wind and rain and cold, with access to restrooms.
But if you are a member of the tax-paying public and there for a meeting in the public-access building, then you will NOT be admitted. If you do happen to enter, you will be asked to leave.
The security guards are polite, and they are only following (dumb) orders. If they don't do as they are told, they'll be looking for work elsewhere. So don't give them a hard time. They might want to let you in. They don't dare do it.
If you think this policy is wrong, show up at a Richland 2 School Board meeting and tell the Trustees what you think. Ask for an explanation why members of the public are not allowed to enter the building. Assk why they cannot enter and wait just inside the door, out of the weather.
R2i2 is not Fort Knox. It's not a bank. It's not a Post Office (even there you can wait in an enclosed space until the opening minute).
You'd better believe that Richland 2 employees will obey the rules and the orders of the superintendent. If not, look for them at the Unemployment Office.
Why is it that an order comes from the superintendent to keep the public out. Wouldn't you think that the facility manager could be authorized to make such a decision?
It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that I was with a group of 20 waiting to enter on Monday morning and, when we were rebuffed, that I called the superintendent's office to ask admittance?
Don't you have to wonder, if Jesse Jackson or Jim Clyburn or Barack or Michelle Obama or Marlon Kimpson or Mia McLeod showed at 8:30AM, would they be told to wait in the rain or cold? Thoughts, anyone?
Thursday, February 6, 2020
Friday, January 31, 2020
Sugar-coating by Richland 2
In a story date-lined today, January 31, The State newspaper reports on crimes committed at Ridge View High School on Monday and Tuesday. Charges included assault and battery by mob, second-degree assault and battery, and first degree criminal sexual conduct.
OK, this is Friday. Why did this not appear in the local newspaper on Wednesday???
You can read the article here.
The four criminals are male; two are 14 years old, and two are 15 years old.
Laws in South Carolina need to be changed, so that criminal acts by these punks, who are not to be confused with "children", can be described with their names, races, grade levels in school, and previous run-ins with the law.
What's the "sugar-coating"? The State's article read, in part,
"Richland District 2 spokesperson Libby Roof sent to The State a statement the school sent to parents: “We became aware of an incident that occurred earlier this week that was a violation of our district’s Student Code of Conduct. ..."
"Incident"? "violation of Student Code of Conduct"?
The miscreants were arrested on criminal charges! The District has to be careful, of course, or parents will retain a hungry lawyer and sue the District. Then the news will be all about a lawsuit by the miscreants and not about their criminal activity.
You'd better believe that the District's lawyers get a chance to approve statements like these, either in each case or as a general format. All politically correct,, of course.
If anyone would like to send me the names of these criminals, I'll publish them. Parents in the District should want to know who is in this kind of trouble.
Staying alive
An article in this morning's The State describes the grief being experienced in Saluda after a single-vehicle crash that killed two high school students and injured one.
Read the article by Sarah Ellis here.
How do we keep kids alive today?
As a former deputy sheriff and motorcycle patrol officer, I would like to see an article in The State that dissects the crash. But it'll never be there, because newspapers don't print analytical articles about fatal crashes. They should.
Readers could learn from such analyses. Parents could sit their children down and explain how they can stay alive.
Maybe the crash in Saluda was "just" an accident. I tend to think not.
Was the driver speeding? Distracted? Impaired? Were the passengers concerned about his driving before the accident?
Or, if he was speeding or driving recklessly, did they think that was "cool"?
Parents, when you see articles about fatal crashes, discuss them with the children in your home. You might just be saving their lives.
Tell them to get out of the car, if the driver is endangering them. Tell them that you will pick them up - anywhere and at any time, no questions asked - if their safety is at risk. And then do it.
Students, get out of the car, even if you are going to get wet or cold or have to walk home.
YOU are responsible for your life.
Read the article by Sarah Ellis here.
How do we keep kids alive today?
As a former deputy sheriff and motorcycle patrol officer, I would like to see an article in The State that dissects the crash. But it'll never be there, because newspapers don't print analytical articles about fatal crashes. They should.
Readers could learn from such analyses. Parents could sit their children down and explain how they can stay alive.
Maybe the crash in Saluda was "just" an accident. I tend to think not.
Was the driver speeding? Distracted? Impaired? Were the passengers concerned about his driving before the accident?
Or, if he was speeding or driving recklessly, did they think that was "cool"?
Parents, when you see articles about fatal crashes, discuss them with the children in your home. You might just be saving their lives.
Tell them to get out of the car, if the driver is endangering them. Tell them that you will pick them up - anywhere and at any time, no questions asked - if their safety is at risk. And then do it.
Students, get out of the car, even if you are going to get wet or cold or have to walk home.
YOU are responsible for your life.
Thursday, January 30, 2020
Girl punches teacher at Westwood HS
WIS-TV reported last night that a female student at Westwood High School punched a teacher in the face at school yesterday.
What kind of little punks are attending Richland 2 schools?
The girl is reported to be 17 years old. Isn't that an adult in South Carolina for this type of crime? What's her name? Where is her booking photo? Height? Weight? Race? Previous disciplinary problems?
I suppose it would be politically (and legally) correct to say the student "allegedly" battered the teacher. And perhaps that the teacher "allegedly" suffered redness and swelling to the eye and jaw. And that the student was "allegedly" arrested before being released to her parents.
At least WIS-TV didn't dodge the gender issue, when it reported that the student was released to her parents. I guess the station could have written "to its parents", but this was a female student punching a teacher.
The District's Board Policies would label this a Level 3 offense, subject to expulsion. Is there any doubt that that kid should be expelled? And prosecuted and jailed after conviction, too?
Make a clear and convincing example out of her that this type of behavior will be dealt with in the harshest manner. Allow no "deals" by prosecution. No "diversion". No opportunity to clear her record. She just destroyed her future.
Tough cookies!
What kind of little punks are attending Richland 2 schools?
The girl is reported to be 17 years old. Isn't that an adult in South Carolina for this type of crime? What's her name? Where is her booking photo? Height? Weight? Race? Previous disciplinary problems?
I suppose it would be politically (and legally) correct to say the student "allegedly" battered the teacher. And perhaps that the teacher "allegedly" suffered redness and swelling to the eye and jaw. And that the student was "allegedly" arrested before being released to her parents.
At least WIS-TV didn't dodge the gender issue, when it reported that the student was released to her parents. I guess the station could have written "to its parents", but this was a female student punching a teacher.
The District's Board Policies would label this a Level 3 offense, subject to expulsion. Is there any doubt that that kid should be expelled? And prosecuted and jailed after conviction, too?
Make a clear and convincing example out of her that this type of behavior will be dealt with in the harshest manner. Allow no "deals" by prosecution. No "diversion". No opportunity to clear her record. She just destroyed her future.
Tough cookies!
Tuesday, January 28, 2020
Richland 2 alters agendas
Recently I wrote about the practice of the Richland 2 School District to change a published agenda after a School Board meeting.
It is my very strong belief that the original agenda should be preserved on the District's website.
Rather than reporting action taken only in the Minutes, it is apparently the practice of Richland 2 to alter the published agenda and to add the actions taken at a meeting and the votes by the board. By adding these changes, the original agenda no longer exists.
When I first discovered this, I assumed that the changes were being made after the meeting had ended.
This evening I did not attend the Regular Meeting. At about 7:40PM I logged onto the District's website to examine whether there might have been any changes to the agenda after it was published last week.
To my great surprise, I found that the actions being taken at tonight's meeting are being entered on the Agenda during the meeting!
As it happens, I am reading George Orwell's 1984 this week. If you haven't read it, you can read it on your computer from the www.HooplaDigital.com service of the Richland Public Library system.
It is my very strong belief that the original agenda should be preserved on the District's website.
Rather than reporting action taken only in the Minutes, it is apparently the practice of Richland 2 to alter the published agenda and to add the actions taken at a meeting and the votes by the board. By adding these changes, the original agenda no longer exists.
When I first discovered this, I assumed that the changes were being made after the meeting had ended.
This evening I did not attend the Regular Meeting. At about 7:40PM I logged onto the District's website to examine whether there might have been any changes to the agenda after it was published last week.
To my great surprise, I found that the actions being taken at tonight's meeting are being entered on the Agenda during the meeting!
As it happens, I am reading George Orwell's 1984 this week. If you haven't read it, you can read it on your computer from the www.HooplaDigital.com service of the Richland Public Library system.
Friday, January 24, 2020
Millenials and Communism
Watch this important fireside chat with Dennis Prager.
If you are a student, watch it.
If you are a parent, sit down with your children and watch it. Tell them to put their phones down. Then discuss it.
I am worried about communism and why so many people don't think it's bad. I grew up in the 1940s and the 1950s. My thoughts and beliefs formed them. Why do I fear socialism and the uninformed young people of today?
After you watch it, please comment below.
If you are a student, watch it.
If you are a parent, sit down with your children and watch it. Tell them to put their phones down. Then discuss it.
I am worried about communism and why so many people don't think it's bad. I grew up in the 1940s and the 1950s. My thoughts and beliefs formed them. Why do I fear socialism and the uninformed young people of today?
After you watch it, please comment below.
Saturday, January 18, 2020
R2 Ethics Poster
At last Tuesday's school board Regular Meeting, the inspiration moment was devoted to explaining the Ethical Principles poster that had been signed by all the board members and the taking of a group photo.
\You can view that segment near the beginning of the video-recording on YouTube. It's at 0:02:20 on the timer bar.
At the meeting I was immediately reminded of Amelia McKie's unpaid fines and fees balance of $51,750, owed to the South Carolina Ethics Commission. The fines are related a years' of unfiled required financial statements. In July 2018 the Commission issued a Decision & Order, and McKie basically thumbed her nose at the Commission and failed to make any payments toward her balance.
She could have avoided a substantial increase in the fees by making agreed-upon payments, but she did not. As a result, the Commission tacked on a $10,000 penalty at the end of 2018. Then, in July 2019 the Commission filed a Judgment in the Richland County Common Pleas Court.
What should be happening now is a collection effort by the South Carolina Department of Revenue. Collection action could include garnishing her income from the Richland 2 School District, other income or contract-work receipts, filing a lien on real estate, and taking of assets.
The DOR may be a failing collection agency, though, once you look at the $2.7 Million in outstanding debt owed to the Ethics Commission.
And then The State announced ethics problems of a second Richland County School Board member. James Shadd III owes $1,400 for unfiled financial documents related to his run for office in 2010.
Is this his first encounter with the Ethics Commission? Or did Shadd have a previous negotiated settlement with the Ethics Commission over different violations of ethics laws?
Ethics principles are like integrity and honesty and truth. You're either in or you're out. You reach the mark or you don't. There is no such thing as "very" or "almost" or "a little".
There is no reason for the Ethics Commission to negotiate on the $1,400 fine owed by Shadd. The State's reporter, Lucas DaPrile, wrote that Shadd told him on Friday (January 17, 2020) that he "was working to fix it." What Shadd should have dropped off at the Ethics Commission this week was a check for $1,400, as well as his campaign bank statements.
\You can view that segment near the beginning of the video-recording on YouTube. It's at 0:02:20 on the timer bar.
At the meeting I was immediately reminded of Amelia McKie's unpaid fines and fees balance of $51,750, owed to the South Carolina Ethics Commission. The fines are related a years' of unfiled required financial statements. In July 2018 the Commission issued a Decision & Order, and McKie basically thumbed her nose at the Commission and failed to make any payments toward her balance.
She could have avoided a substantial increase in the fees by making agreed-upon payments, but she did not. As a result, the Commission tacked on a $10,000 penalty at the end of 2018. Then, in July 2019 the Commission filed a Judgment in the Richland County Common Pleas Court.
What should be happening now is a collection effort by the South Carolina Department of Revenue. Collection action could include garnishing her income from the Richland 2 School District, other income or contract-work receipts, filing a lien on real estate, and taking of assets.
The DOR may be a failing collection agency, though, once you look at the $2.7 Million in outstanding debt owed to the Ethics Commission.
And then The State announced ethics problems of a second Richland County School Board member. James Shadd III owes $1,400 for unfiled financial documents related to his run for office in 2010.
Is this his first encounter with the Ethics Commission? Or did Shadd have a previous negotiated settlement with the Ethics Commission over different violations of ethics laws?
Ethics principles are like integrity and honesty and truth. You're either in or you're out. You reach the mark or you don't. There is no such thing as "very" or "almost" or "a little".
There is no reason for the Ethics Commission to negotiate on the $1,400 fine owed by Shadd. The State's reporter, Lucas DaPrile, wrote that Shadd told him on Friday (January 17, 2020) that he "was working to fix it." What Shadd should have dropped off at the Ethics Commission this week was a check for $1,400, as well as his campaign bank statements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)