Not a little wrong - a LOT wrong

Just returned from the circus (err, the school board meeting). I'll write more in detail tomorrow, but about all I can say is, "Holmes wasn't just a little wrong tonight (as board chair), she was a LOT wrong.

She was following the book on meeting order called "Holmes' Rules of Order", when she should have been following Robert's Rules of Order.

She interrupted me several times during my three minutes for Public Participation. Worse, she interrupted Trustees Agostini, Scott and McFadden.

As I sat in the meeting, I looked up Point of Order, in Robert's Rules of Order. Yes, I do have my own copy. Surprised? I didn't think so.

If you want to see chaos, watch tonight's meeting. Go to livestream.com/richland2 and select October 12, 2021. Fast-forward to 1:15:45 to pass the long stretch while the board was in Executive Session.

Amelia McKie gave the shortest Inspiration Moment ever. She ended with "Be kind. Be kind. Be kind." (Did Teresa Holmes miss that?)  It didn't take long for the fireworks and chaos to ensue.

McKie Disturbed by Email

                                                                  

This screen-print is fairly hard to read, but I found it today on Teresa Holmes' Facebook page. Amelia Butler McKie posted about the infamous September 14, 2021 Richland 2 School Board meeting - the "walk-out" meeting.

In her post she misleads the public. She wrote: "Although our board is comprised of 7 members and the majority stayed to conduct the business of the District, our current policy states that 5 board members are required to conduct an official business meeting." The words are true; her meaning is misleading.

It does not matter one whit that the "majority" (of 7) stayed. A legal quorum is required. The District's quorum is five, as decided by a previous board. The chair and every one of the four there should have immediately recognized that there was no longer a quorum. But they sat there, mum on the topic; that is, until the superintendent finally brought up the elephant in the room - that a quorum was no longer present and all they could do was adjourn. 

The most egregious statement is her "because I've received a very disturbing email encouraging the board members who walked out to do it again". 

McKie (alone) did not receive that email. ALL the board members received that email. I know, because I sent it. 

On September 19 I sent the following email to ALL board members. A copy of that email also went to the superintendent, the District's legal counsel, the outside attorney for the school district, the publisher of The Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County, reporters at The State and at the Post and Courier, and the General Manager at WIS-TV. I wonder if they were all "very disturbed", too.

I urge you to cancel the Sept. 22 Special-Called board meeting and place the superintendent's contract  discussion and decision on the agenda of the Regular Meeting for September 28.

Since it is the public that pays the superintendent's compensation, please allow the public's input through Public Participation, not just individual emails and telephone calls that don't get compiled and publicized.

You can avoid the illusion of subterfuge, collusion and conspiracy by conducting the business of the School Board with complete transparency and by answering fully to the public on September 28.

If the Sept. 22 meeting is not canceled, I urge Trustees Agostini, Scott and McFadden not to attend the meeting, resulting in no quorum.

In fact, if the Sept. 22 meeting is held, the legal members of the board (Agostini, Scott, McFadden, Manning, Caution-Parker) will constitute a quorum. Holmes and McKie are not legitimate members of the board and should not be present or voting.

A legal vote by the five legal members of the board might look like this:

Motion to approve the superintendent's revised contract:

Yea: Caution-Parker, Manning

Nay: Agostini, Scott, McFadden

Result: 2-3. Motion fails

I request a trustee at the Sept. 28 meeting to make a motion to allow the board to respond to public comments and questions at that meeting.

What was "very disturbing" about it? Are those words that U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland will use to accuse me of being a domestic terrorist? Is that email part of the Item 2.4 on today's school board meeting agenda. Will I be carried out of tonight's meeting?

Why didn't McKie, as Board Secretary, stand with Agostini, Scott and McFadden? She heard them say they had not received materials in time for adequate consideration before a vote. Did she care? Why didn't she speak up against Holmes, Manning and Davis? 

Why didn't she insist that those more important-items involving "the children" take precedence over the superintendent's pay increase? At least, McKie didn't refer to "our babies" in her message.

R2 Discriminates...

Do you know that Richland 2 has a vaccine financial incentive payable after November 1. Are you fully-vaccinated? Is Richland 2 discriminating between classes of employees, based on vaccination status? 

Will the next financial incentive be for those who support CRT? For those who go to church? on Sunday? on Saturday?

How does this strike you? Is it a proper use for public funds, such as the money of a school district? of taxpayer dollars?

All details haven't been uncovered yet. It will probably take a FOIA Request (or a Richland 2 employee will to leak the information).

Did the School Board approve that incentive? Whose brainchild was it?

If you leak it to me, you'll be safe. There will be NO disclosure of the name of anyone providing me with information. The previous sheriff of McHenry County, Ill. tried to extract names of deputies who were feeding the "dirt" about the sheriff's department to me. It didn't work.

Before you send anything to me, call me. I'll explain how to get information to me so that it cannot be traced to you.

U.S. Senators Seek Answers From Merrick Garland

Read this letter from 11 Senators on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee to AG Merrick Garland about his directive to the DOJ to keep an eye on y-o-u.

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sens-cruz-lee-blackburn-raise-concerns-over-conflict-of-interest-with-ag-garlands-son-in-law-running-organization-promoting-critical-race-theory

In some Richland 2 schools there is a survey going on right now titled "Whole Child Survey". Is the company behind that survey Panorama Education? Panorama Education was co-founded by Alexander Turner. Merrick Garland's daughter married Turner in 2018. 

Starting to see a connection yet? Aren't you glad Merrick Garland didn't make it to the U.S. Supreme Court?

What is Panorama Education? From the Senators' letter to Garland, it is "...a ‘social learning’ provider that provides consultancy services that reportedly aids schools in teaching critical race theory under the guise of ‘equity and inclusion’ to America’s children.”

The Senators' letter goes on. "Panorama holds contracts with at least 22 school districts across the country, which have paid Panorama a combined $12 million in recent years."

How much has Richland 2 paid to Panorama Education, and since what date?

RCSD Deputies are not personal security guards

Recently a school board trustee was escorted to her car after a school board meeting by a deputy of the Richland County Sheriff's Department.

That was an improper use of a taxpayer-supported law enforcement officer unless, of course, she had been the victim of a credible threat. There was no appearance that that had been the case.

Richland Two employs unarmed security officers. If an escort to a car after a meeting is needed, then a Richland Two security officer can provide it.

Since about January 2019, Richland Two School District has wasted a considerable amount of money to have two-three sheriff's deputies at school board meetings. 

The additional security seems to have started after a school board member was accosted in the R2i2 lobby. From the lobby video that was made public, it appeared a man jammed his cell phone right up in front of the face of a school board member. He appeared to antagonize her to the point that she reacted verbally.

I don't know whether it was political pull or what, but the school board member ended up being arrested. Who really should have been arrested? The man with the cell phone. And maybe the two women with him. 

Before or after that? No need for deputies. Who ordered them? More importantly, who did not tell that person to cancel the order for two-three deputies at every school board meeting.

Mitch McConnell hits back at Merrick Garland

Earlier today I finished preparing my statement for Tuesday night's school board meeting.

Just now I read this article that explains U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's reaction to Merrick Garland's October 4th announcement that likens some parents to domestic terrorists. Mitch must have sneaked a peek at the draft of my statement!

Read that article carefully.

McConnell claims that Garland's Memo could be a clamp down on parents' Constitutional rights. Exactly! Listen to my statement on Tuesday night - assuming I don't get cut off before I get to that part.

McConnell calls Garland's words "ominous rhetoric". 

Republicans on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee said on October 7, "...the FBI should not be involved in quashing and criminalizing discourse that is well beneath violent acts.”

Read the article slowly, carefully and thoughtfully. You might even want to print it.

Did Trustees Violate Quorum Law?

On or about October 5, 2021, there was a reception at the home of Fort Jackson's Commanding General and his wife, Gen. and Mrs. Patrick R. Michaelis. A number of Richland Two's trustees attended that reception.

Who was there? Holmes, Yes. Manning? McKie? Agostini? Scott? McFadden? Caution-Parker?

In their excitement to get to the party, did they violate South Carolina law regarding quorum?

If four were there at that same time, under South Carolina law (S.C. Code of Laws Title 30, Chapter 4) that probably constituted a quorum, requiring notice in advance to the public.

No matter that it was a social occasion. No matter that official business may not have been planned. Richland Two is proud of its relationship with Fort Jackson and the programs and services that are provided to students who are members of the military family.

Section 30-4-20(d) "Meeting" means the convening of a quorum of the constituent membership of a public body, whether corporal or by means of electronic equipment, to discuss or act upon a matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power.

Quorum is definied in South Carolina law as "unless otherwise defined by applicable law means a simple majority of the constituent membership of a public body." (Code of Laws 30-4-20(e))

S.C. Code of Laws, Title 30 - Public Records, Chapter 4, Freedom of Information Act may apply. Did the Board get advice before the reception from the General Counsel (employee) of the school district or from Attorney Helen McFadden, a FOIA and Robert's Rules of Order expert?

Public bodies often find themselves in hot water when too many members show up in the same place at the same time. In this case, the magic number, under State law, is four (4). Board members must be scrupulous about not violating the quorum law.

Richland 2 Board Policy states that a quorum for doing business is five (5). That may be fine as a "policy", but it is State law that sets a quorum as a simple majority of seven. That's four.

Law trumps* Policy.

"Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (1841-1935)

Why do I question this? When I lived in Illinois, public bodies (city councils; town councils, village councils) were often in trouble, after members showed up at parties, gatherings, etc. and too many members from any one public body were present at the same time. The wise public body was alert to that and its members came and went at different times, specifically to avoid a quorum's being present.

* NOTE to all you folks with TDS. "trumps" is a verb, not a last name.