Should R2 nix Board Policy KE?

On the Agenda for March 8th Regular Board Meeting is a revision to Board Policy KE - Public Concerns and Complaints. This is THE ONE protection that the Public has to correct ills in-between elections. Now look what the superintendent and the board chair have dreamed up.

First, read Board Policy KE:

Policy KE Public Concerns and Complaints

Issued 4/19

"Complaints to one or more board members against any action or any employee of the district or against any administrative rule or board policy will be referred to the superintendent.

"If the matter cannot be resolved satisfactorily by the superintendent, the complainant may register the complaint in writing with the board chair, setting forth the facts on which the complaint is based.

"The board, at its next regular meeting or at a special meeting, will then consider the grievance of the complainant and dispose of the matter according to its best judgment."

Adopted 2/03; Revised 7/1/03, 4/30/19

Now read Board Policy KE, as the revision is proposed:

Policy KE Public Concerns and Complaints

Issued 4/19

Adopted 2/03; Revised 7/1/03, 4/30/19

Notice anything missing? Right!!! The entire Policy is missing. What the superintendent and the board chair want to do is to eliminate the public's right to have grievances addressed.

Here is how it looks in the attachment to the Agenda:

Right now it is a right. It's in Board Policy, and the Board must follow it.

Why would the superintendent and the board chair want to get rid of Board Policy KE?

Maybe they don't want the Board to have to hear a complaint and grievance about the superintendent's wife and how she disrupted a board meeting and swore at a 14-year-old student.

Maybe they don't want the boare to have to hear a complaint and grievance about the superintendent's wife about her pity-party on WIS-TV and her lies about what happened on January 25th in the boardroom.

Maybe the board does not want to have to hear a complaint and grievance about the unfair Trespass Policy and how it was weaponized against two white men on January 25th to protect one black woman in the board room who is married to the superintendent.

Maybe the board does not want to have to hear a complaint and grievance against the Richland 2 Media Relations Department for issuing an untrue press release to the public and to the employees and parents.

WHAT CAN YOU DO? 

Communicate by email and phone right now with the seven board members and tell them you do NOT want them to eliminate Board Policy KE.

Board Workshop 3/4/2002 - Terrible

One member of the public showed up fo today's board workshop. Look at the "barrier" that was set up to keep him in his cage. That set-up reminded me of Caution-Parker's utterance in the courtyard after a board meeting last fall. Creating a fence to keep the public in its place is exactly that sentiment!

I could not believe what was going on in today's "workshop", which was described as Executive Coaching and Parliamentary Procedures.

Holmes was not there. The one person who NEEDED to be there was not. Manning explained that there had been a death in the family, but he didn't say what Holmes' relationship was to that person. Was the deceased an immediate family member? Or was it the dog's groomer's third cousin, twice removed. Holmes' missed another meeting within the past year of so for a family death, as I recall.

When Liz Guthridge asked questions, too many times board members just sat there without responding. And she let them get away with it.

Why didn't she say, "If you aren't going to be part of this workshop, just get up and leave. And don't collect your pay on the way out the door!"

Ms. Guthridge is a nice person. This board does not need a "nice" person. It needs someone who will dig in and whip them into shape as a Board.

A recent written interchange from Manning to Scott was sent to Guthridge before this workshop, so that she would know exactly what's going on between board members. It was nasty! Maybe the workshop should have started with her reading that aloud and starting from that point.

I gave up at 1:40PM. Had I been there in person, I would have walked out about 1:15PM.

Manning said, "Nobody knows what to trust or whom to trust." Not true! Some Board members aren't finding anything or anybody to trust! That's the problem.

Most of the board members there today sat there like bumps on logs. 

Lindsay Agostini brought up some good points, and the trainer put them on Hold for "later". Sure hope she returns to them.

Not to be sexist about it, but a male trainer was needed. A hard-headed business man. Or a hard-headed business woman, if she met the board head-on.

Richland Two has wasted its money on these two workshops. Wasted the money both on the fee for the trainer and for the pay for the board members!

If you want to know how bad it really was, check it out on livestream.com/richland2 for March 4, 2022.

Thursday (3/3/22) - Joe Trapp Meet-and-Greet

 

Come on out at 6:00PM on Thursday, March 3, and meet Joe Trapp, first to announce for the Richland 2 School 'Board.

I know Joe to be a man of integrity and honesty.

He was sitting in the second row of the board room on January 25, when Pamela Davis melted down when I introduced myself. Keep in mind, I did not know who she was. Joe didn't know who she was; nor did Gary Ginn or Ethan L.

But Joe witnessed what happened. And, as he told the school board during Public Participation on February 22, the District never asked him for a statement. Not the night of January 25th. Not since. No one was closer.

Come and meet Joe Thursday night (March 3rd).

Special-Called Board Meeting - March 4

More "be nice" and RONR.

Richland Two trustees (and the two trustees-elect) get a chance to earn some extra pay this month. A Special-Called Board Meeting is scheduled for Friday, March 4, 2022, at 1:00PM. This meeting is at R2i2 and will be open to the public.

The agenda reads "Executive Coaching & Parliamentary Coaching".

That's a laugh. "Executive" Coaching. Maybe it's a fancy name for spending a few thousand dollars to bring in a consultant for a day. There won't be any "executives" in the room.

I hope Ms.Guthridge (if it is she who returns) will know of the intense sniping that has been going on between certain board members, at least two of whom are very likely consulting private attorneys about what is happening on the board.

The dirt is likely not to be fully aired, since it is a public meeting. But you should see the e--mails that are flying back and forth.

Will the consultant hammer board members for acting like children? Like bullies? For finger-pointing and claiming harassment during meetings? For not acting independently, but rather voting almost always en bloc?

What about those board members who work for a living? Must they take an unpaid day off work?

Does Holmes have a job?

Does Caution-Parker work?

Does McKie work?

What if three board members refuse to show up, because it is irresponsible for them to abandon their livelihoods for a day?

Result? No quorum. No meeting. And the consultant will still get paid.

SRO press event - what a waste!

 

This morning's "press event" was totally unnecessary. It was a "splash" just because it could be put on.

Everthing said or done could have been accomplished with a two-paragraph press release. The superintendent wanted some face-time, screen-time, something to put in his scrapbook. 

Sheriff Lott was brief.

Teresa Holmes was all gushy and will claim some "bytes" for her next political campaign. Whatever her day job is, she should not give it up to become an emcee. Her egocentric demand for recognition and attention came across as just that. A demand for attention and obedience and acclaim. And False. Where did she think she was? Training at Walmart? I almost expected her to call for a cheer: "Give me an S. Give me a R. Give me an O. S-R-O!"

Board members (four) in attendance, in addition to Holmes, made it a quorum. When a quorum is present, there it is a Meeting. And Notice should have been given, with an agenda. There wasn't. So this morning's meeting constituted a violation of the South Carolina FOIA law.

Two Council Council members attended. Big deal. And one representative of the South Carolina Department of Public Safety.

One question was asked by a man (a reporter?) in the audience. His question was not audible during the meeting, because no microphone was handed to him. (Why not? No advance planning?) And the question was not repeated by the moderator of the Q&A.

No question was asked about the cost of the ten new SROs, who began working on March 1 (yesterday). No mention was made of the schools to which they were assigned.

The budget shows almost $4,500,000 spent on SROs before the ten new ones. If RCSD charges $150,000/year for each SRO, then ten new ones will cost $1,500,000. And Richland Two will account for $6,000,000 for SROs.

Opinions, anyone?

Refused Access - Again

Yesterday, in accordance with the Trespass Notice issued to me by Richland School District Two on January 26, 2022, I wrote to Director of Safety and Security Marq Claxton to request Access Authorization so that I could attend tomorrow's press conference about the ten new SROs for the school district.

The Trespass Notice directs that I must request access authorization at least 24 hours before an event.

Yesterday Claxton emailed me a one-liner, denying my request and providing no reason or explanation.

This morning I mailed an appeal to his superior, Will Anderson, COO of the school district, citing the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and asserting that the District is abridging my right as a member of the media to attend that press conference. 

I have been publishing this blog since March 2019. For those who are interested in numbers, in 2019 there were 284 postngs.

2020: 321

2021: 382

2022 (to date): 126

Blogposts have been read more than 42,000 times.

This access request is the second refused by Claxton. The first was my request to attend my grievance on February 22, 2022. 

Do you think he is refusing requests without getting a nod from persons above? Was he told to deny ALL requests? 

How did Claxton even decide to issue the Trespass Notice to me on January 25, 2022? Was he told to do so? Was he merely following orders? Is there some reason that he didn't even write a report about the incident in the board room that night? Was there something that he really didn't want to put in writing? Why was he allowed not to write a report?

SRO Program - adding ten in Richland 2

RICHLAND TWO AND RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT JOINT NEWS CONFERENCE

COLUMBIA, S.C. — 

WHAT: Officials with Richland School District Two and the Richland County Sheriff’s Department will hold a news conference to provide an update on the progress to add 10 School Resource Officers at Richland Two schools after receiving a grant from the
S.C. Department of Public Safety.

WHEN:  Wednesday, March 2, 2022, at 9 a.m. 

WHERE:  Richland Two Institute of Innovation (R2i2) Conference Center

How much manpower will be wasted on Wednesday morning, when a celebration is planned for something that is just a matter of pushing paper and money around?

Why not make a video and publish it on Livestream? 

An announcement like that would be perfectly adequate to inform the public that money has been found for ten more SROs. Why should there be pomp and circumstance surrounding this announcement?

Unless a few people are just wanting to plant more feathers in their caps and say, "Look at me. Look at me."

Richland 2 currently spends $4.5 Million on SROs. I was shocked a couple of years ago when the $150,000/year cost was mentioned at a board meeting. If I recall correctly, the cost of a deputy was about $80,000 and the sheriff charged $70,000/year for the deputy's equipment (uniform, firearm, leather, all the 40 lbs. of equipment, AND a patrol car).

A SRO's patrol car is a commuter vehicle. Why not tell him to drive his own car to work and back?

If there is a need to transport a miscreant to jail, call a road deputy for that.