How Long Is a Moment?

 How long is a moment?

The short answer, according to Wikepedia, is: "90 seconds. The length of a solar hour depended on the length of the day, which in turn varied with the season, so the length of a moment in modern seconds was not fixed, but on average, a moment corresponds to 90 seconds."

Now, how long is a moment, say, an Inspirational Moment, when it comes to the Richland 2 School Board.

A couple of meetings ago Board Chair Shadd told the board (and the public) that he had assigned the Inspirational Moments to (trustee-elect) McKie. Of course, he didn't call her "trustee-elect McKie", but that's what she is.

At tonight's meeting McKie launched into a veritable explosion of words and used up more time to introduce tonight's speaker than I thought he would use. But I was wrong.

Remember when Board Chairs would introduce speakers for the Inspiration Moment with, "Tonight's inspirational moment will be given by ________"? And then the speaker spoke for 2-3 minutes and led into the Pledge of Allegiance.

I'm pretty sure McKie set a record tonight with her introduction. 

And then the speaker, Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin, took over. And six minutes later the Pledge was recited.

There was nothing inspirational about either McKie's introduction or Hizzoner's words.

Shadd won't be able to get McKie under control. She thinks she is still the Board Chair, an office that she should have stepped back from in November 2018, when her 2014-2018 term was up and she failed to file her Statement of Economic Interest. That made her ineligible to take the oath of office on November 13, 2018, but she did it, anyway. 

But the Day of Reckoning is coming.

Will somebody please explain to McKie that she doesn't have to recite a speaker's C.V.? Just introduce him and get out of way. Oh, and tell him he has three minutes and to make it inspirational. Please!

Open Letter to R.C. Elections Commission

 The following letter has been sent to the Richland County Elections Commission.

If a candidate for public office is elected and qualified to serve in that office, but never takes the oath of office legally, does that candidate-elect lose the entitlement to serve after some period of time?

We have a situation in Richland School District Two that involves two trustees-elect who have never taken the oath of office legally.

Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes were elected on November 6, 2018. They took an oath of office (illegally) on November 13, 2018 and began to serve (illegally). State law (SECTION 8-13-1110(A)) is clear that one must file a Statement of Economic Interest before taking the oath and beginning to serve.

Neither filed the SEI until December 4, 2018. On that date they became eligible to take the oath. But neither has done so. Yet they have been allowed to serve as if they are legitimate trustees.

Does the Richland County Elections Commission take an interest in candidates-elect who usurp public office?

Are District 2 Employees at risk?

Trustees of the Richland 2 School District receive certain monetary benefits for performing official duties. These benefits include

Monthly compensation (could be $900/month) for attending two Regular Meetings. Trustees also attend Special-Called Meetings.

The District pays membership dues in professional associations, such as the South Carolina School Boards Association.

The District would also reimburse mileage and other expenses for attending meetings, workshops, seminars and other events. Did the District pay for Teresa Holmes to go to a national school boards meeting in Washington, DC in January 2019, two months after she was elected? She wasn't even a legal school board member at the time.

And what about monies paid for Amelia McKie to be a Region 8 Director of the South Carolina School Boards Association? She too is not even a legal school board member.

Now, what about District monies paid to or for a person who is a trustee-elect but not a legitimate Trustee of the School Board?

There are two women in that category: Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes. They have never legally taken the oath of office, which S.C. law requires before they can enter office.

The District was first asked (by me) to swear in McKie and Holmes legally as early as February or March 2019. The Board has never discussed this in open session.

The District confirmed today (8/20/2020)  that the last oath of office administered for board members was on November 13, 2018. That was three weeks before McKie and Holmes filed their required Statements of Economic Interest with the S.C. Ethics Commission.

Who is responsible for distributing taxpayer monies (District funds) to McKie and Holmes? The employee who is pressing "Pay" on a district computer is the one processing the payment. But would it be fair to nail that low-paid employee with a State or Federal crime for just doing her job?

Or should a department manager be charged and suffer the penalties?

Or may the District's Officer in charge of the larger Department?

Or maybe the superintendent?

Or is the Board responsible? They've known about the problem for over a year. Would FBI or SLED agents show up at a Board meeting and just take all of them into custody in one fell swoop?

What Does Richland Two's Lawyer Say?

Since February 2019 I have been complaining to the Richland 2 School Board that it has two women on the board illegally. A few other community members also complained.

Amelia McKie and Teresa Holmes were elected on November 6, 2018. They took the oath of office on November 13, 2018 and began serving.

The problem?

While they were duly elected and "qualified" to serve, they were not "eligible" to take the oath of office on November 13, 2018 or to begin serving.

Why not?

Neither had filed her Statement of Economic Interest (SEI) with the S.C. Ethics Commission.

What does the law say?

"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."  [emphasis added]

Crystal clear; right? First you file the SEI. Then you take the oath of office. Then you begin serviing.

Surely, by now the Board has gotten an opinion from the attorney for the School District. What did she say?

There is only one thing she could say. "Read the law. That is what the law says."

An attorney will not tell you whether you can break a law. An attorney will only tell you what the consequences are of breaking a law. 

Is there anything unclear about the law?

What part of the law do trustees-elect McKie and Holmes not understand? Next time you see them, ask them.

Richland 2 Candidates

According to the State election website, the following have filed as candidates for the Richland School District Two election on November 3, 2020. Three seats are open.

If anyone is listed who is not a candidate in Richland 2, please let me know. It was difficult to navigate the State Election Commission website to find these names. There was no intention to omit anyone and no intention to list anyone erroneously. Names are listed alphabetically by last name.

Lindsay Agostini

Monica Elkins

Deon Jacobs

LaShonda McFadden

Rhonda Meisner

James Mobley

James Jamie Shadd

Lawrence Superstar Terry

Dee Bell Williams

Maryann Wright

A prominent attorney in Columbia, with whom I had discussed the Ethics Commission problems and the illegal usurping of office by two current school board trustees-elect (not named here), suggested that I ought to run for the school board. He said it would give me a broader platform for calling attention to the serious problems of the Richland 2 Board. He also said, 'But you don't want to win."

I knew that. There is no way I'd ever be able to put up with the present composition of the Board.

Mail, email go unanswered

 Why does Richland School District Two's board chair, James Shadd, fail to respond to mail and email?

On July 4 I emailed James Shadd. In addition to congratulating him on his election as Board Chair, I expressed disappointment in the June 30 Facebook posting by his long-time friend, Pastor Chris Leevy Johnson. Johnson had posted a racial slur on Facebook, referring to Board colleague Lindsay Agostini as "KAREN". I also expressed disappointment that Tameika Isaac Devine forwarded Johnson's slur to Shadd.

I reminded him that McKie and Holmes have never taken the oath of office legally and requested a meeting with him to discuss that.

No reply.

On July 27 I sent Shadd a letter by Certified Mail-Return Receipt Requested. It was delivered to District 2 on July 31, and I received the green card on August 1. The letter was delivered to Agent, who signed for it as "Covid-19".

On August 2 I emailed Shadd, asking for the identity of "Covid-19"  No response.

Shadd has not responded to the July 27 letter, in which I suggested that he, as a lawyer, would understand S.C. Code of Laws 8-13-1110(A) and that McKie and Holmes still had not taken the oath of office legally.

I also suggested that he, as a lawyer and officer of the court, might have an obligation to correct the problem being caused by McKie and Holmes usurping public office. Usurping occurs when any person " intrude(s) into, or unlawfully hold(s) or exercise(s) any public office" (S.C. Code of Laws 15-63-60). Does Shadd have a legal obligation, as a lawyer holding the position as Board Chair, to cause McKie and Holmes to take the oath of office or cease sitting at the board?

On August 10 I emailed Shadd to ask if he had received my July 27 letter. No response.

In the absence of a reply from Shadd or the District, I filed a FOIA request on August 11 for the identity of "Covid-19" and for the name of the District's employee who delivered my July 27 Certified Mail letter to Shadd. The FOIA Response from the District is expected by August 25.

I remember telling the board, in person, in February or March, 2019, that this issue (about McKie and Holmes being on the board illegally) is not going away. When will it go away? It will go away when they take the oath of office legally or cease sitting at the board.

Who else is concerned about the full legality of the seven-member Board?

Taxes not paid? Can't run for office

We need a law here in South Carolina like the law in Louisiana.

According to The Advocate newspaper in Baton Rouge, "To qualify to run for public office, candidates must certify [emphasis in the original] that they have filed state income tax returns for each of the five previous years."

A candidate for mayor-president in East Baton Rouge has an unclear record regarding payment of her state income taxes. 

There were questions about more than one year's return, and an appeals court ruled against her. She can't run for office. The fight is probably not over.

The point is, pay your income taxes by the due date. Then you don't end up in hot water. You avoid fines, late fees, court action and liens. And a bad reputation.

But owing state income in South Carolina? Big deal, when it comes to running for office.

Source:  https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_ebc31d76-dd7f-11ea-8f73-5bbc6bd03114.html