There is a significant error in the Minutes for the June 20, 2020 Board Retreat Minutes. The Minutes are attached to the agenda for today's Regular Board Meeting.
At the top of the Minutes is reported the Attendance. While the starting time of the Retreat is not reported, the notetaker for the June 20 meeting reported that all trustees, by name, were present.
However, the vote to adjourn to Executive Session was approved by only five trustees: Agostini, Manning, McKie, Shadd, Holmes.
Of course, this caused me to wonder why the names of Elkins-Johnson and Caution-Parker were not indicated for the vote.
Down a couple of lines, the notetaker reported that Elkins-Johnson and Caution-Parker joined the meeting during the Executive Session.
Will a Board member at the June 20th meeting ask that the Minutes be corrected?
Correct reporting would have been to note the times when they showed up.
The notetaker reported Holmes as being presented for the vote to enter Executive Session.
The Zoom panel showed only Holmes' name and not a live recording of her presence. The Chair should have told Holmes to start her video, so that the public and the other board members would know she was really present.
Tuesday, June 30, 2020
COVID-19 Update
At the May 26, 2020 school board meeting the superintendent reported that there had been no reported cases of COVID-19 among Richland 2 students or staff.
With the spike in cases in South Carolina, I wondered whether that was still the case.
At 4:28PM a Richland 2 parent called me to tell me that his wife had just received a broadcast email that the Supt. Davis has been diagnosed with COVID-19.
Today's school board Zoom meeting started at 4:32PM and the board, as expected, went directly into Executive Session. There were 110 visitors on the District's site at 4:32PM. The board is expected to reconvene in public session at 5:00PM.
At 6:52PM The State newspaper reported that Supt. Davis had tested positive for COVID-19, receiving the test results today.
There was no mention of his test results during the board meeting.
After the board meeting I read the email from Supt. Davis, which the District emailed at 4:29PM, one minute before the scheduled start of the board meeting:
With the spike in cases in South Carolina, I wondered whether that was still the case.
At 4:28PM a Richland 2 parent called me to tell me that his wife had just received a broadcast email that the Supt. Davis has been diagnosed with COVID-19.
Today's school board Zoom meeting started at 4:32PM and the board, as expected, went directly into Executive Session. There were 110 visitors on the District's site at 4:32PM. The board is expected to reconvene in public session at 5:00PM.
At 6:52PM The State newspaper reported that Supt. Davis had tested positive for COVID-19, receiving the test results today.
There was no mention of his test results during the board meeting.
After the board meeting I read the email from Supt. Davis, which the District emailed at 4:29PM, one minute before the scheduled start of the board meeting:
"Dear Richland Two Community,
I am writing to personally share that I tested positive for COVID-19 today, Tuesday, June 30, 2020. Over the weekend I started experiencing mild symptoms, including a sore throat and fever, and was tested on Sunday, June 28, 2020. Following the recommended guidelines, I will isolate for 10 days from the date of my test and until I am symptom free for 72 hours.
Prior to my diagnosis, I was taking every precaution possible, including wearing a mask, maintaining at least six feet from others and working remotely as much as possible. As a result, no district employees are considered to have been in “close contact” with me. According to S.C. DHEC and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “close contact” is defined as being within six feet of someone for at least 15 minutes.
I feel it is important to share this news with all of you in an effort to be open and transparent as our community, state and country continue to deal with the pandemic. I urge you to take this virus very seriously because it can affect anyone.
My family and I are taking the necessary precautions to ensure our health and safety, and we appreciate your thoughts and concern during this time. Please keep yourself and your loved ones as safe as possible.
Sincerely,
Dr. Baron R. Davis
Superintendent"
Sunday, June 28, 2020
Board: Swear in McKie, Holmes
The Richland 2 School District has once again been asked to swear in Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes.
S.C. Code of Laws §8-13-1110 reads:
SECTION 8-13-1110. Persons required to file statement of economic interests.
(A) No public official, regardless of compensation, and no public member or public employee as designated in subsection (B) may take the oath of office or enter upon his official responsibilities unless he has filed a statement of economic interests in accordance with the provisions of this chapter with the appropriate supervisory office.
There is nothing difficult to understand about the wording of that law. It is clear as day. It is indisputable.
That the law was violated by McKie and Holmes is a fact, because their notarized oath-of-office documents are dated November 13, 2018. They had not filed their Statements of Economic Interests. They didn't file their SEIs until December 4, 2018.
McKie and Holmes were qualified to serve as school board trustees, because they were elected. However, they were not eligible to serve until they filed their SEIs. They became eligible on December 4, 2018. That was the first date they could legally take the oath of office.
The following letter was sent to the board earlier today, with copies to the attorney for the school district, a FOIA/Robert's Rules of Order expert, the S.C. Attorney General, and the Deputy A.G. who examined my complaint last year.
Good afternoon, Mr. Manning,
S.C. Code of Laws §8-13-1110 reads:
SECTION 8-13-1110. Persons required to file statement of economic interests.
(A) No public official, regardless of compensation, and no public member or public employee as designated in subsection (B) may take the oath of office or enter upon his official responsibilities unless he has filed a statement of economic interests in accordance with the provisions of this chapter with the appropriate supervisory office.
There is nothing difficult to understand about the wording of that law. It is clear as day. It is indisputable.
That the law was violated by McKie and Holmes is a fact, because their notarized oath-of-office documents are dated November 13, 2018. They had not filed their Statements of Economic Interests. They didn't file their SEIs until December 4, 2018.
McKie and Holmes were qualified to serve as school board trustees, because they were elected. However, they were not eligible to serve until they filed their SEIs. They became eligible on December 4, 2018. That was the first date they could legally take the oath of office.
The following letter was sent to the board earlier today, with copies to the attorney for the school district, a FOIA/Robert's Rules of Order expert, the S.C. Attorney General, and the Deputy A.G. who examined my complaint last year.
Good afternoon, Mr. Manning,
As your final board meeting as Chair approaches for the 2019-2020 school year, will you please consider administering the oath of office to Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes, so that they will finally become legitimate members of the Richland 2 School Board. It is not too late to amend the agenda for the June 30, 2020 board meeting for this item.
On November 13, 2018, after they were elected, each took the oath of office before she was eligible to do so. Neither had filed her Statement of Economic Interests with the South Carolina Ethics Commission.
McKie and Holmes did not become eligible to take the oath until December 4, 2018, when each filed her SEI.. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the oath of office has not been administered to either on or after December 4, 2018. According to South Carolina law, they are usurping the official office of school board trustee.
There is a simple, quick and free remedy. Administer the oath of office to each.
The District has paid compensation to them for trustee meetings, paid expenses on their behalf and may have reimbursed them for other expenses. These payments and expenses could constitute illegal disbursements of taxpayer and government funds. District employees who handle such disbursements could end up at risk for doing so.
As a school district desiring to be known as "premier", shouldn't this problem be corrected?
Sincerely,
Gus Philpott
cc: Kathryn Mahoney
Helen McFadden
Alan Wilson, S.C. Attorney General
Creighton Waters, S.C. Deputy Attorney General
Saturday, June 27, 2020
Agenda for June 30, 2020 Published
The agenda for the June 30th Board meeting was published this morning. The meeting starts at 4:30PM, with an immediate adjournment into Executive Session. The open meeting will reconvene at 5:00PM. The meeting will be held via Livestream (Zoom). Find the link on the District's homepage, where it is now posted. Or just click here: www.richland2.org/livestream
To examine the agenda, go to the District's website. Then
Click on EXPLORE (top right), then
Click on School Board; then
Click on AGENDA; then
Notice the Guidelines for Public Participation in Board Meetings *; then
Click on Regular Board Meeting; then
Click on View the Agenda
On the agenda for the Executive Session is the superintendent's evaluation. I imagine most of the board members will have their rubber stamps handy, because the agenda allows only 30 minutes for the Executive Session to evaluate the superintendent and conduct other Executive Session business.
Of course, they cannot approve the evaluation in the Executive Session. They will do that as part of Item 6.1. There should be a discussion of his performance. This is the place where they will reveal how big of a salary increase they will award to the superintendent this year. Last year's increase was a whopper.
* The "Guidelines for Public Participation in Board Meetings" are out-of-date, plus Board Policy BEDH was rescinded. The public is no longer allowed to participation in board meetings; not even remotely. It could, but the Board has shut out the public. And it gets away with it, because it never publicly announced what it had done.
I'll venture a guess that the public doesn't even know it can no longer address the board at meetings or suggest items to be added to the agenda.
The District has never altered or notated Board Policy BEDH to inform the public that it was suspended; i.e., suspended indefinitely, which might just be the same as permanently.
To examine the agenda, go to the District's website. Then
Click on EXPLORE (top right), then
Click on School Board; then
Click on AGENDA; then
Notice the Guidelines for Public Participation in Board Meetings *; then
Click on Regular Board Meeting; then
Click on View the Agenda
On the agenda for the Executive Session is the superintendent's evaluation. I imagine most of the board members will have their rubber stamps handy, because the agenda allows only 30 minutes for the Executive Session to evaluate the superintendent and conduct other Executive Session business.
Of course, they cannot approve the evaluation in the Executive Session. They will do that as part of Item 6.1. There should be a discussion of his performance. This is the place where they will reveal how big of a salary increase they will award to the superintendent this year. Last year's increase was a whopper.
* The "Guidelines for Public Participation in Board Meetings" are out-of-date, plus Board Policy BEDH was rescinded. The public is no longer allowed to participation in board meetings; not even remotely. It could, but the Board has shut out the public. And it gets away with it, because it never publicly announced what it had done.
I'll venture a guess that the public doesn't even know it can no longer address the board at meetings or suggest items to be added to the agenda.
The District has never altered or notated Board Policy BEDH to inform the public that it was suspended; i.e., suspended indefinitely, which might just be the same as permanently.
Open Letter to School Board
The following letter is being emailed on June 27, 2020 to the Richland 2 School Board, superintendent, and diversity chief.
Has the Board approved development of an anti-racism policy?
To the Board and Trustees-elect McKie and Holmes,
Dr. Helen Grant's June 8, 2020 Open Letter, published on the District's website, refers to an anti-racism policy. She wrote, "We will move forward with drafting an anti-racism policy to make plain our commitment against racist actions, practices and procedures."
If so, please direct me to the Board Meeting where this was on the agenda, was discussed and was voted on. What involvement will the parents and community members in District 2 have in development of this policy?
Dr. Grant also refers to "our Equity Policy." A search on the District website for "Equity Policy" produces no results. Please send me a copy of District Two's Equity Policy.
I wish to receive a reply to this message.
Friday, June 26, 2020
SHOCK!!!! Read Letter on District Homepage
While I was looking on the District's homepage for the starting time for the June 30th board meeting, I came across "An Open Letter" from "Dr." Helen Grant, District 2's Chief Diversity and Multicultural Inclusion Officer. She holds a JD degree.
What does Wikipedia say about the JD degree? "It has not been customary in the United States to address holders of the J.D. as "doctor". It was noted in the 1920s, when the title was widely used by people with doctorates (even those that, at the time, were undergraduate qualifications) and others, that the J.D. stood out from other doctorates in this respect.[208] This continues to be the case in general today.[209]"
But back to the Open Letter. By the time I finished the first sentence, my blood pressure was going through the roof.
The first sentence reads, "In the midst of celebrating the graduation of our Richland School District Two seniors, the Richland Two family is grieving for yet another Black life lost at the hands of police brutality."
It is? Why? What does Richland 2 family have to do with a death in Minneapolis? Absolutely Nothing. Not one single thing! I suspect that not one person in District 2 knew George Floyd. No, the Richland 2 family is not grieving.
George Floyd did not deserve to die the way he did. Those responsible will be held accountable.
And then the second sentence: "Mr. George Floyd is just the last name in a long list of names of Black men and women who are the victims of police brutality and social injustice."
Here we go again. Police brutality. Social injustice. Right out of the Black Lives Matter playbook.
Did the Board of Trustees approve that letter? Why didn't it come from the Board? Who did approve publication of that letter on the District's website? And why?
Now is a good time to present this video, which I just watched an hour ago. CNN's Don Lemon's guest was Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. When Lemon didn't like what Sheriff Clarke was saying, he cut him off and went to a break. That's CNN for you.
What does Wikipedia say about the JD degree? "It has not been customary in the United States to address holders of the J.D. as "doctor". It was noted in the 1920s, when the title was widely used by people with doctorates (even those that, at the time, were undergraduate qualifications) and others, that the J.D. stood out from other doctorates in this respect.[208] This continues to be the case in general today.[209]"
The first sentence reads, "In the midst of celebrating the graduation of our Richland School District Two seniors, the Richland Two family is grieving for yet another Black life lost at the hands of police brutality."
It is? Why? What does Richland 2 family have to do with a death in Minneapolis? Absolutely Nothing. Not one single thing! I suspect that not one person in District 2 knew George Floyd. No, the Richland 2 family is not grieving.
George Floyd did not deserve to die the way he did. Those responsible will be held accountable.
And then the second sentence: "Mr. George Floyd is just the last name in a long list of names of Black men and women who are the victims of police brutality and social injustice."
Here we go again. Police brutality. Social injustice. Right out of the Black Lives Matter playbook.
Did the Board of Trustees approve that letter? Why didn't it come from the Board? Who did approve publication of that letter on the District's website? And why?
Now is a good time to present this video, which I just watched an hour ago. CNN's Don Lemon's guest was Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. When Lemon didn't like what Sheriff Clarke was saying, he cut him off and went to a break. That's CNN for you.
What Surprises Await Richland 2 Constituents?
Once again the Richland 2 School District failed to publish the agenda on Friday for the upcoming school board meeting on Tuesday.
The District used to publish the agenda on Thursdays, then on Fridays, for the upcoming meeting.
By law the agenda has to be published at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. If the June 30 meeting is to start at 4:30PM, then the agenda must be published by 4:30PM on June 29. That's Monday.
That also means that the public and even the school board trustees will have only 24 hours to prepare for the meeting.
For the public, there is nothing to prepare for. The public can no longer attend school board meetings. The board discontinued public meetings (in-person) and has failed to make arrangements for the public to speak at its virtual (Zoom) meetings. It would be simple to arrange that, but the board chose to suspend Board Policy BEDH, and that eliminated 1) public participation and 2) the public's privilege of requesting items to be added to the agenda.
Two board members have requested the superintendent to provide meeting materials, documents and background further in advance of a meeting than 24 hours. Has he done so? In many cases he has not.
The June 30 meeting is likely to start at 4:30PM. The link for the Livestream (Zoom) meeting can be found on the District's homepage. The first item will be an executive session. Then the public session will reconvene. Find the agenda on the District' website for the correct starting time.
The District used to publish the agenda on Thursdays, then on Fridays, for the upcoming meeting.
By law the agenda has to be published at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. If the June 30 meeting is to start at 4:30PM, then the agenda must be published by 4:30PM on June 29. That's Monday.
That also means that the public and even the school board trustees will have only 24 hours to prepare for the meeting.
For the public, there is nothing to prepare for. The public can no longer attend school board meetings. The board discontinued public meetings (in-person) and has failed to make arrangements for the public to speak at its virtual (Zoom) meetings. It would be simple to arrange that, but the board chose to suspend Board Policy BEDH, and that eliminated 1) public participation and 2) the public's privilege of requesting items to be added to the agenda.
Two board members have requested the superintendent to provide meeting materials, documents and background further in advance of a meeting than 24 hours. Has he done so? In many cases he has not.
The June 30 meeting is likely to start at 4:30PM. The link for the Livestream (Zoom) meeting can be found on the District's homepage. The first item will be an executive session. Then the public session will reconvene. Find the agenda on the District' website for the correct starting time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)