Why one, but not the other?

Isn't it the rule in schools that, if kids are fighting, they both (or all) get kicked out of school? Isn't it Zero Tolerance?

Why doesn't that apply in the boardroom?

For example, back on January 25th when Pamela Davis was disruptive and shouting before the board meeting started, why wasn't she escorted out and put on Trespass Notice?

Why wasn't Pamela Davis escorted out and put on Trespass Notice, after she cussed out a 14-year-old student in the boardroom?

A. Because she is Mrs. Baron Davis!

When Baron Davis rushed at Gary Ginn (I believe Gary), why wasn't he escorted out and put on Trespass Notice?

A. Because he is the superintendent and gives the orders to Richland 2 security officers!

Why did Gary Ginn get escorted out and put on Trespass Notice, after he intervened when Pamela Davis cussed out a 14-year-old student who was present?

Why did I get kicked out after introducing myself to Pamela Davis?

A. It was retaliation for writing a blog about Richland 2 for almost three years (at that time), sending many emails to the superintendent and board, criticizing the District's and Board's failure to remove Holmes and McKie for never taking the oath-of-office legally, and speaking out at many board meetings.

Did Richland 2 ever investigate my complaint against Pamela Davis that I filed with the Principal of Blythewood High School, where she is a teacher? I presume he forwarded it up the food chain. On whose desk did it die without action? I'm told it is an "HR Issue" and therefore confidential. But there is a documentated procedure for handling complaints. And one of the steps is NOT "Sweep it under the rug."

And did the S.C. Department of Education ever investigate my complaint against Pamela Davis over her antics in the boardroom on January 25? On whose desk over there did the complaint die?

When I spoke quietly and politely to the black woman I did not know and had never seen before at a board meeting, I had no way of knowing the level of angst that would be immediately created by those four simple, short words, "Hello, I'm Gus Philpott."

I had absolutely no idea who she was. Nor did the two other men or the 14-year-old student. 

Pamela Davis told Judi Gatson, WIS-TV anchor, that she had seen Gary Ginn and me "many times" at meetings. She told Judi she had felt "intimidated", "threatened", "targeted". Is that why she sat down immediately behind where I was standing (and right in front of Gary Ginn, the student and another man?

She must have really gotten some strong coaching before she sat down for WIS-TV.

She said she was "very uncomfortable when they (Gary and I) approached her". She flat-out lied, because Gary and I did not approach it. I stepped around to be in front of her to introduce myself. Why did she lie?

She also lied when she said "one of the men called security over after she refused to answer their question." That isn't how it happened. No one was asking her questions. After I was seated about 20 feet away from her and a security officer was standing between her and me. I told the security officer that I wanted a deputy sheriff as an independent observer. That's when a female deputy came over, and she and I stepped into an adjacent hallway.. 

Pamela Davis was playing the classic victim. Black woman is the victim. White male is the oppressor. Straight out of the CRT playbook.

About two weeks later a black acquaintance told me, "You do know you got set up; right?" Until that day, I had not thought about it in those terms. Once I gave it more thought, I decided he was right.

Why else would Pamela Davis shout, "I KNOW WHO YOU ARE! DON'T TALK TO ME! GET AWAY FROM ME!" as soon as I said, "Hello, I'm Gus Philpott"?

Watch Pamela Davis' performance on WIS-TV right here.

Can Holmes Block Me from her FB page?

Should I be able to access to Teresa Holmes' Facebook page?

She does block me from her "DrTeresa [sic] Holmes" page. Can she do so legally?

Holmes is an elected person. I won't refer to her as an "elected official", because she has never taken the oath-of-office legally. An oath was administered to her on November 13, 2018, but that was three full weeks before she first became eligible to take it. 

However, she considers herself a public official, as does Richland 2.

She was required to take the oath-of-office (legally) before commencing the duties of the office. Yet she was allowed to attend her first executive session (November 13, 2018) and then vote on board motions before her term of office had even begun (November 16, 2018). She filed her SEI on December 4, 2018 and has never taken the oath-of-office since that date.

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.

The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in January 2019 that "the interactive portion of a public official’s Facebook page is a “public forum,” so an official cannot block people from it because of the opinions they hold." [Source: ACLU blog]

The article continues: "As the court rightly held, that includes any time that they’re controlling a Facebook page they maintain in their official roles. Specifically, the court recognized that when a public official uses a Facebook page as a tool of governance — that is, when she uses it to inform the public about her government work, solicits input on policy issues through the page, and swathes it “in the trappings of her office” — she is controlling the page as a government actor.

"And if she opens that page to public comment, the interactive space of the Facebook page constitutes a public forum." ibid.

That decision was in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals; it was a Virginia case. Columbia, S.C. is in the jurisdiction of the same Federal Court of Appeals.

Maybe I'll have a pay to visit to the ACLU office this next week. 

I wonder. Would Teresa ask Richland 2 to pay her legal fees to defend her blocking me from her Facebook page? Would Supt. Davis just put her invoice through Accounting? Or would he say, "No way, José. You're on your own"?

Many thanks to the reader and friend who tipped me off to that article!

Tampons in boys' bathrooms?

Will Richland 2 be installing tampon dispensers in boys' restrooms?

Have you heard of the Menstrual Dignity Act? You haven't? Just ask Oregon Gov. Kate Brown. Thank goodness it's a state law, and not (yet) a Federal law.

From the article, "What’s next? Urinals in the girls’ restrooms?"

With all the other equity issues in Richland 2, it probably won't be long before "menstrual equity" hits here.

Committee of the Whole - Mon., 5/16/2022, 5:30PM, R2i2

Another meeting of the Committee of the Whole (on Safety & Security) will be held on Monday, May 16, 2022m 5:30PM, at R2i2.

No executive session is on the agenda.

No public participation is on the agenda.

The District issued this announcement today:

SPECIAL COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE WHOLE ON SAFETY AND SECURITY ON MAY 16 AT 5:30 P.M.

 

COLUMBIA, S.C. — The Richland School District Two Board of Trustees will hold a Special Committee Meeting of the Whole on Safety and Security on Monday, May 16, at 5:30 p.m.

 

Click the link below to view the agenda for the meeting:    http://go.boarddocs.com/sc/rsd2/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=CECTJ4678FD0

 

The meeting, which is open to the public, will be held in the Boardroom at R2i2 located at 763 Fashion Drive, Columbia, 29229. Please note this meeting will not be streamed live or recorded.

 

At the Special Committee Meeting, visitors will need to adhere to social distancing guidelines.

The official notice is attached. [not attached here]

After reading the announcement, I sent this email to the Board members, superintendent, in-house legal counsel, outside legal counsel, and the consultant who tried to work with the board on parliamentary procedure (and executive coaching)

If you feel the meetings should be live-streamed, leave a comment below and inform the board members.

Members of the Board,

I suggest that the wording of the announcement of Committee of the Whole be changed.

Current wording is "The Richland School District Two Board of Trustees will hold a Special Committee Meeting of the Whole on Safety and Security on Monday, May 16, at 5:30 p.m."

This wording makes it a Board meeting, not just a Committee meeting. All State laws apply, including Notice, Agenda, etc. The Agenda for the Committee meeting is published on the Board's webpages. If fewer than five board members show up, the meeting cannot be held.

The meeting should be announced by the Committee, not by the Board.

The Board should carefully consider what happens when five or more board members attend. It then becomes an official board meeting, subject to all the rules for public bodies.

Detailed Minutes of the Committee meeting should be quickly available, so that the public will be informed. I suggested a dedicated webpage on the District's website.

Committee meetings should be live-streamed, so that the public will know what's going on. It is difficult for the public to attend frequent 5:30PM meetings. More specific information should be revealed on the Agenda. 

And another GSA article

Earlier today I wrote about the Gender and Sexuality Alliance (GSA) in Fort Collins, Colo. Today is the first day that I've heard of GSAs. And then I came across a second article about them.

This second article on FoxNews is titled, "Elementary school teachers say 'no' to parents' wishes they refer to students by pronouns given at birth".

I understand there are a lot of kooky things in California, but they spread.

Read that article.

If you, the parent, tell your kid's teacher to refer to your kid by his gender at birth, should the teacher have to follow your wishes?

If you, the parent, tell your kid's teacher to call your kid by his name, should the teacher have to do it? And, if your kid is a boy, to use "him" and "his" when referring to your boy? Must the teacher comply with your direction?

Or must the teacher call your kiddo Roberta, not Robert, if that's what the kid wants in school? And should you be told about it?

Teachers likely find themselves in a Catch-22 situation. Caught between a rock and a hard place. Caught between parents and administration. How does it work in Richland 2?

School board members just spent a lot of District money in San Diego, attending a conference of the National Association of School Boards. To what were they exposed?

Gender Nonsense in R2 schools?

I lived in Fort Collins, Colo. for the entire year of 1989, so I was interested in this May 12, 2022 FoxNews article about a middle school there that had an LGBTQIA+ club, portrayed as an "art club", but it was really a Gender and Sexuality Alliance (GSA) "safe space" at the school.

One mother learned that her 12-year-old daughter had thought she would be attending an art club, but an outside speaker was there to present about transgenderism.

Wellington Middle School is one of 53 schools in the Poudre School District, and it had sponsored the GSA event. 

Is there any chance this nonsense is going on in Richland 2 schools?

Board Expenses through 4/30/2022

Thanks to FOIA, here's the information that the superintendent didn't want you to know. If fact, he didn't even want one trustee to know what the others were spending.

In the School Year 2021-2022 each trustee is allocated $7,000 for travel, training and some other listed expenses.

How much has each spent?

Agostini                   $2,516.43 (San Diego conference to be added)

Caution-Parker        $2,117.97

Holmes                   $9,726.37   OVER $2,726.37

Manning                 $7,172.60    OVER $172.60

McFadden              $6,606.76

McKie                    $7,444.83   OVER $444.83

Scott                       $9,938.15   OVER $2,938.15

TOTAL                 $45,523.11

Who recalls hearing Supt. Davis say that the trustees, as a whole, had exceeded the total amount allocated for training and travel? Wouldn't that be $49,000? $7000 x 7? Not true, was it?

In fact, $49,000 is listed as Total Annual Board Travel Allocated to Board Members

$49,000 - $45,523.11 = $3,476.89 Remaining as of 4/30/2022

Trustee McFadden has $393.24 remaining, as of April 30. She certainly could have transferred to $150.00 to Trustee Scott. Why wouldn't the superintendent allow that? 

The worksheet is very clear about showing the total spent and the remaining amount. The question is, why didn't District controls kick in to prevent over-reimbursement?

The Board has never approved an increase to the total allocated for travel, training, etc. And it should not. The District should recover monies overpaid to trustees.