8/10/21 Board Meeting - The Start is a Must-see

At first, I wondered why Richland 2 didn't record the start of its board meeting. The meeting was scheduled to start at 5:00PM.

Did something occur during the beginning minutes of the meeting that the District would prefer the public not to know about? You bet! See below.

While normally the Board quickly adjourns to Executive Session, that is not always the case. A board member might have a comment to make, and the public is entitled to hear it.

The first video I viewed was actually the end of the August 10th meeting and the recording started with Holmes calling the meeting to order (re-convening) and asking for a motion 

For the first 17 seconds, background "noise" (unintelligible conversation) can be heard on the recording of the meeting. At 00:17 on the recording Holmes (or someone else) can be heard saying, "OK, ummm". At 00:34 Holmes asks, "Y'all wanna go home?" At 00.39 Holmes says, "My people, y'all wanna go home?" The video comes on, and Holmes giggles. At 00:47 she raps the gavel and asks for a motion to come back [sic] out of executive session.

Can you believe that? Who are "My people"? If I had been sitting on the board last night, I would have stood and walked out. Right after marching up to Holmes and stating, "I am not 'your people'!"

The six seated there are not "her people". They are fellow board members. EQUAL board members. Well, except for McKie and Holmes herself, who have never taken the oath of office legally.

I emailed the District and was directed to https://livestream.com/richland2. Once there, I saw three video panels to the right.

The top one (Length 03:20) is the end of the meeting and begins after the second executive session.

The middle one (Length 2:15:50) starts at 20:35. The video begins with the re-convened meeting after the first executive session.

The third video (Length 17:07) is the beginning of the 8/10/2021 meeting. The video starts at 14:54.

 This is the one you want to see. This is where the first fireworks are. Holmes, acting as chair even though she is not a legitimate member of the board or the legitimate chair, calls the meeting to order. A motion was made and seconded to enter executive session. When discussion was asked for, Holmes was looking around and then recognized Trustee Agostini. 

Agostini requested that the board postpone discussing the superintendent's evaluation, because she just received materials the day before after 5:00pm. Holmes said Agostini's concern was noted and asked for further discussion. Agostini restated that she wishes to make a motion to postpone the evaluation. Agostini's motion failed for lack of a second. (NOTE: Robert's Rules of Order 49:21 Procedure in Small Boards (less than a dozen members): "2) Motions need not be seconded.") Holmes moved on to the vote, while tapping her fingers (I'd say, in annoyance). Watch Holmes' expression. 

There was a hand vote (Agostini did not raise her hand). Holmes announced that the motion passes, without referring to a count of votes. Agostini stated to Holmes that Holmes had not asked for those opposed.

In a very snippy tone of voice, Holmes said, "I don't need to ask. I'm conducting this meeting, Ms. Agostini, and I'll conduct it how I see fit."

SMACK DOWN! Wow! Is this an indication of how future board meerings will be run?

It's Teresa's way or the highway. 

I will watch the rest of the meeting later.

Pitiful Example of Board Meeting

The August 10, 2021 board meeting was to start at 6:30PM. Where were they? The livestream screen says they are still in executive session. Why does the board disrespect the public by managing its Executive Session time so poorly that the Regular Open Session doesn't start on time?

Who's in charge? Oh, that would be the (illegitimate) board chair, Teresa Holmes.

But there are six other board members, and they ought to be calling for the Executive Session to adjourn  and to get into the main room at the R2i2 conference center and hear what the public has to say tonight.

6:43PM Well, here they are! 

No one spoke during the public hearing. Have all the parents given up?

Holmes was lost when attending to the order of business. She should stop fooling around with her tablet and work from a printed agenda. Somebody should tell McKie to lose her mask so that she can be heard and understood; she finally did remove it. What was that garbage that she read? Nobody wants to listen to her act like she is reading to second-graders. Isn't there a copyright on that book she was reading from?

Agostini asked whether her vote would be counted tonight, since it was not counted when entering into Executve Session. Holmes was really snippy in her response.

The Board still has not figured out how to take votes expeditiously.

Holmes didn't even know she had the list of speakers for the Public Participagtion segment.

Holmes didn't know how long public participation was supposed to be. Holmes wouldn't even answer a simple question about masks for young students. The superintendent was sitting right there and could have answered simply and easily. Holmes told the speaker to email the Ombudsman or any one on the board. WRONG!!!

I emailed the District Ombudsman on July 10 and have never received a response. Mask questions get directed to Administration, not to the Board.

During Public Participation parents made comments requiring responses. For the first time ever, after public participation the superintendent asked for staff to catch up with those parents before they left the room. I've never seen that happen in 3½ years.

Manning made a motion to extend the superintendent's contract to June 30, 2025. Agostini said she will not support the contract extension because she does not trust the superintendent. On the video that is 2:15:50 in length, Manning's motion is at 41:43, and Agostini's remark is at 42:30.

A long delay occurred while a staffer typed up Manning's motion. His motion was poorly worded and unnecessarily long, stating the superintendent's evaluation and to extend his contract. Motion passed 6-1. Of course. All the followers piled right on. No other board member asked for discussion about Agostini's refusal to follow the herd.

Holmes didn't have her glasses and couldn't read the Board Policy to be considered.

I bailed out at 7:10PM. Pitiful.

R2 Board - Two Vacancies?

Could the Richland 2 School Board really have two undeclared vacancies?

And two vacant officer positions (Chair and Secretary)?

Should the Richland County Council be calling a Special Election to fill two seats of the 2018-2022 term of office?

If the District won't declare the seats vacant, who will do it? The Richland County Board of Elections? The South Carolina Supreme Court?

How much longer with the public and the taxpayers allow two women to usurp public office?

In March 2019 a simple solution was presented to them. Just take the oath of office - legally. But they have not done so. The District hasn't made them do it. The other board members have not made them do it. They have not voluntarily done so. 

A serious problem of the District itself is that, since November 13, 2018, it has been disbursing public monies (taxpayers' dollars) to the two women illegitimately on the board. SLED and the FBI should be investigating that. 

Clarendon 2 just got caught in a wrong-way deal over a townhouse that it provided to its superintendent - free. Of course, the superintendent there knew he wasn't paying for it and should have stepped up and caused the situation to be fixed. Read all about it in the Post and Courier.

R2 Board really cares - or does it?

A last-minute media release about tomorrow night's school board meeting changes the location for the board meeting. It will be in the conference center at R2's Taj Mahal, a/k/a R2i2. Frankly, there have been too many errors in announcements in the past few months, and you can expect an amendment to today's release, correcting an obvious error in the boiler-plate about signing up for public participation.

The board will meet in Executive Session from 5:00-6:30PM. At 6:30PM the board will re-convene in open session.

This morning's announcement includes: 

"Public session will resume at 6:30 p.m. at which time a Public Input Session will be held. During the input session, the public has the opportunity to share comments related to the district's plans for the safe return to in-person instruction and continuity of services and for the spending of federal emergency relief funds (ESSER III funds)."

Now read this and spot what's wrong:

"Public Participation is on the agenda for the August 10 meeting. The Board sets aside a maximum of 30 minutes (15 minutes at the beginning and 15 minutes prior to the end of the public portion of the meeting). As each speaker is allotted three minutes, Public Participation will be limited to the first 10 people who sign up to speak (five during the first Public Participation and five during the second Public Participation). The sign-up to speak will open at 5 p.m. and close at 5:45 p.m. on August 10 in the lobby of R2i2."

The announcement is unclear. It fails to clarify that the Public Input session precedes the Public Participation segment of the meeting. How many parents will be allowed to speak during the "Public Input" period, and for how long?

Why in the world should you have to sign up between 5:00-5:45PM for a meeting that starts at 6:30PM???

And does the Board really care about what "the public" (parents!) will have to say about safe return to school? If it really cared, it would listen to more than ten people. Some school boards are having hundreds of parents show up for board meetings, such as when parents want to sound off about Critical Race Theory. 

Obviously, the boiler-plate should have been altered to close sign-ups at 6:15PM, which is 15 minutes before the scheduled resumption of the open session. But why should sign-up even close then?

The lucky first five get to speak during the first segment of public participation. Why does the board make the 6th-10th signed-up speakers wait until almost the end of the meeting which, based on recent trends, could be 2 hours (or more) later. 

If the board really cared about what parents think, it would listen to 20 or more parents in an hour, non-stop. The board could save time by calling up the next speaker and announcing the names of the next two speakers, and have them stand in waiting. Ex., "The first speaker will be John Smith, followed by Mary Jones, followed by Tim Parent."

Of course, then the board members might complain about being hammered by parents. Would that be so bad?

Why Did Manning Nominate Holmes?

On June 29, 2021 the Richland 2 School Board elected three officers for the 2021-2022 School Year.

Why did James Manning nominate Teresa Holmes for Board Chair?

Later in the meeting why did Cheryl Caution-Parker nominate Amelia McKie for Board Secretary? 

All on the board knew that the question of legitimacy of Holmes and McKie on the board has been an issue since at least February 2019.

There were several community members who began speaking about the legitimacy of Holmes and Amelia McKie on the board at the beginning of 2019. The others have tired of blowing in the wind and have given up that this serious error will ever be corrected.

And, during the Public Participation segment of the June 29th board meeting, I addressed the board in person and asked them to nominate and elect only fully-qualified board members.

The reason that Holmes and McKie are not legitimate board members is found in S.C. Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110 (A), which reads

"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. If a public official, public member, or public employee referred to in this section has no economic interests to disclose, he shall nevertheless file a statement of inactivity to that effect with the appropriate supervisory office. All disclosure statements are matters of public record open to inspection upon request." [Emphasis added]

The facts are:

1. The oath of office was administered to both on November 13, 2018. Each then attended the November 13, 2018 school board meeting, including the confidential Executive Session, and voted on board Motions. The District submitted the notarized Oath of Office documents to the S.C. Secretary of State.

2. Both Holmes and McKie filed their Statements of Economic Interests with the S.C. Ethics Commission on December 4, 2018.

I think even a second-grader could figure out that Holmes and McKie took the oath of office and "entered upon official responsibilities" before filing their Statements of Economic Interests.

And neither has ever taken the oath of office legally; i.e., on or after December 4, 2018. They could have. They have been asked to. They have not.

Holmes continues to claim she hasn't done anything wrong. Isn't usurping public office "wrong"?

So, to ask again, why did James Manning nominate Teresa Holmes? 

Why did Cheryl Caution-Parker nominate Amelia McKie?

03:00 !!! and Not One Second More

                                                                      03:00

Have you ever noticed that, at Richland 2 school board meetings, members of the public get Exactly 03:00 minutes to speak during Public Participation?

Somebody (a staffer?) starts the timer, and then the speaker's time erodes as he (or she) makes his comments. For several months the timer was displayed on a screen seen by board members but behind the speaker. The District may now have figured out how to show the remaining time to the speaker, who does not have eyes in the back of his head.

But you definitely know when time is up, because the Chair will say so. And don't you dare try to exceed that time.

What happened in Pennsylvania recently when a resident of the West Chester (Pennsylvania) School District was addressing the school board on the topic of Critical Race Theory? Board president (Mr.) Chris McCune must have had his stop-watch in one hand and the gavel in the other, and he called time. Apparently, Ms. Anita Edgarian wasn't quite finished with her remarks.

McCune announced that her time was up. Then he quickly stood, left his chair, walked off the stage and over to Ms. Edgarian and ripped the microphone away from her. Then he pointed her at the exit.

It actually looked like assault and battery to me. I wonder whether she'll see it that way. Or harassment? Intimidation? Or infringing on her right to speak, even if she was past her three minutes?

You can see it all right here. Watch the video in the article. Obviously, he never should have stood or left his seat or left the stage or approached the speaker. He lost his temper. Maybe his ego was bruised.

Can you see this happening right here in Richland 2?

Why is the Richland 2 school board so attentive to the time used by a parent or community member, but allows the entire board's time to be wasted by 3-5 minute introductions of the Inspirational Moment? 

Does the board even listen to parents or community members? Or do some board members just look past the speaker and watch the countdown timer?

I think it was about two years ago that I tried to include two issues in my three-minute speaking time at Richland 2. I was cut off. When I objected, I was told my time was up. It was a good thing that I yielded and left the microphone when I did. I learned later that a deputy sheriff (extra hired security) was approaching from behind to remove me. 

Since nothing had been said to security during the meeting, he must have been cued up ahead of time. Which board member or senior staff person had set that up? As I look back on that night, I've decided it was a really good thing that I wasn't surprised by a hand on my shoulder. Might I have defended myself from physical assault?

Of course, there is nothing in Board Policy about addressing the board on more than one issue. I guess their feelings were hurt. Oh, my; the poor sensitive board members ...  Some of them should consider therapy. I can think of at least three who would benefit from it.

Do you know this name - Thomas Sowell?

If you don't, you should. Watch this 5-minute video from PragerU about Thomas Sowell. He was born in Gastonia, N.C. in 1930. Quickly now ... How old is he?

www.prageru.com/video/the-great-thomas-sowell/

As you watch it, think about where you stand. Right? Left? Far Left? What are your beliefs?

After you watch it, post your thoughts below.