Committee Meeting WAS recorded

 Surprise, surprise.

The livestream.com/richland2 homepage now shows a recorded meeting of the June 14, 2022 Committee of the Whole on Safety & Security. That meeting, which shows a recorded length of 1:52:44, was announced without a Livestream notice. See the June 14th "livestream" here. The audio seems to begin at 08:14, and the video camera was added at 08:27.

What's the real meaning of this? Viewers could not watch the meeting as it happened and then show up at the board meeting at 6:30PM and ask questions. Sneaky, eh? The Committee Chair, Trustee Monica Scott, had requested that the meeting be livestreamed. It was not. It was recorded, and it is the recording that now makes its way to the livestreeam platform.

Present: Scott, Agostini, Caution-Parker, Holmes, Davis, Manning (late)

Absent: Caution-Parker, McFadden

First up was the recent school survey. (11:22) The staffer said there were four questions. The first two were demographics (What school? What level (grade) was the student at?). The next two questions were, as the speaker said, the "meat of the survey". THEY DO A SURVEY AND ASK ONLY TWO SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS?

Q. 3 was to rate their level of support on a list of safety measures. There were four choices.

Q. 4 was a list of safety concerns. Notably absent from the list was "Student bringing a gun to school". The assumption by the District was that bringing a gun to school is a major safety concern. What if it is not?

Mrs. Agostini asked the staffer if the survey had asked about race or gender. Staffer: No. Well, they missed a HUGE factor!!! Who designed the survey? Did the Committee have input on the questions or form of the survey? The staffer kept referring to "our" list. To me, that meant the staff's list, not the committee's list.

The Committee seems to sit in their "regular" board seating arrangement, with the superintendent holding the corner position, which Robert's Rules of Order designates for the Chair of a committee or board. Move him to the outside or maybe not even at the head table!

At this point Holmes spoke up for the first time. It was not her place to thank the staff for the survey (that's the role of the Chair). As she continued, her phone rang. HOLMES' PHONE RANG? Inexcusable!  She continued to hold her phone and even scrolled and began typing! Then she trashed the survey.The rest of her comments were completely unnecessary. 

This is what happened up to the 27:00 marker for the meeting.

Chaos Again! RONR - out the window!!!

Did you hear that big, ol', black steam engine roar through the boardroom tonight?

There are new Rules of Order for the Richland 2 school board. They aren't available in print yet, but the title will be Holmes' Rules of Order. Basically, they will be, "I'm Holmes, and I rule this joint."

Business fell apart during the portion of meeting devoted to student appeals. 

When Student #5's fate was to be determined, Manning made a Motion to deny the in-person appeal. 

Listen to this portion of the meeting. Go to livestream.com/richland2 and fast-forward to 1:24:15 for the start of the discussion about Student #5.

Trustees Agostini and Scott spoke in favor of hearing from the student in person. While just about every sane person would agree that a person ought to have the right to confront his accusers, that isn't the way the (majority of the) Richland 2 school board works. Trustee Scott stated that the board is the "stewards of the people" and that everyone deserves the oppotunity to be heard.

[I'll bet that includes Gary Ginn and me. We both requested in-person hearings on our No-Trespass Orders and were denied them.]

McKie went on record that the board should not hear an appeal due to the severity of the case. (Was this one of the guns-at-school cases?)

The vote was called. 

I expected the vote to be 4-3. HOWEVER, the vote was 3-4, with Holmes voting with Agostini, Scott and McFadden. Therefore, Motions Fails.. Imagine that! Holmes voted AGAINST her buddies, and against the Motion to deny the appeal. How did that happen?

Then Trustee Scott made a Motion to hear the case of the parent/student (#5), and Agostini seconded. Manning said there are certain cases that are so severe (that there was no point in granting a hearing). In other words, Guilty; no chance to prove innocence. (My words). Scott said everybody should have the chance to be heard. McFadden said the board should hear the "whole, entire story".

Holmes announced she was going to take a "point of privilege", which was unnecessary to state, because it was her turn to speak. She said there is a "legal law" (whatever that is) that has to happen. 

Holmes said, "I am open to hearing cases if we have leeway." RIGHT THERE IS A LIE. The board had leeway with Gary Ginn's grievance and with my grievance. Did we get hearings? NO.

So, Holmes' position seems to be, if a person is charged with Murder, he should be convicted. No need to have a trial.

At this point (1:30:48) Trustee Agostini asked Miss Lewis (Christine Lewis, the board's secretary and the recording secretary for the school board meeting) to read back the vote, saying that Holmes had voted AGAINST denying the in-person hearing; i.e., if not AGAINST it, then she was FOR it (the in-person hearing).

Holmes woke up and realized that she had voted the wrong way. Said she, "I must have hit the wrong button." Yes, indeed she had. And her vote was cast and announced by the recording secretary, by displaying it to the public. Holmes pointed her finger at Christine Lewis and said, "You cann change my vote."

No, the secretary CANNOT change Holmes' vote!!! Robert's Rules of Order is very clear about this at Section 4:42: "... a member has the right to change his vote up to the time the result is announced. After that, he can make the change only by unanimous permission of the assembly."

Well, you can't just do that. Holmes did that a few months ago. Unfortunately, the trustees are not highly educated about the finer points of Robert's Rules of Order, but at least this time they stopped her.

Manning bailed Holmes out with some "clarity" about fixing the problem without changing her vote.

Now what?

Teresa tried to excuse her mistake, but she said a second time that she pushed the wrong button. NO, SHE DID NOT PUSH THE WRONG BUTTON. She cast a "No" vote. CARELESSLY, because - well, you fill in the blank here.

The Motion was to hear the in-person hearing. (Whew! Some wording!!!) The vote was 3-4, as expected. The Core Four stuck together - again. 

Then Manning made a Motion to deny the in-person hearing for Student #5.

BUT WAIT. They have already voted on that. See above. The vote was 3-4 - Motion Fails. So they have already voted on this Motion.

I believe there is something in RONR that you can't vote a second time on the same motion.

Earlier Holmes had made a comment about certain trustees' "playing", and Agostini expressed that she was troubled by such a comment.

Holmes again mentioned "the law", and Trustee Scott explained the correct wording that applies here. 

What they are calling "the law" is Board Policy, and Trustee Scott said the superintendent or the Board can make a different decision and over-ride the wording in Policy. Board Policy is not "law".

Listen to Holmes' rudely cut off Trustee Scott and allow Caution-Parker to speak. 

Watch Caution-Parker. She began speaking and pointing her finger at Trustee Scott, but she had failed to turn on her microphone and her words cannot be heard. Caution-Parker must have asked Trustee Scott a question while her microphone was off. When Trustee Scott said she was not going to answer that question, listen to Caution-Parker's nasty, condescending remark to Trustee Scott, "Of course you are not going to answer, because you know you are wrong."

Caution-Parker deserved a time-out or to be removed from the board for violating rules of decorum and civility.

McKie said she wasn't sure "what four people" were being referred to. Of course, she is sure. "The Four" are Holmes, McKie, Caution-Parker and Manning. She apparently has no clue as to how foolish she sounds, when she says "I'm not sure..."

Trustee McFadden was trying to be heard. Trustee Agostini called for the vote. At this point the person who made the Motion should have been asked to re-state it. The motion by Manning was to deny the in person hearing for student five. The vote was 4-3; Pass. Holmes found the right button (for her) this time.

That took unti 1:38:55.

6/14/22 Board Meeting 5:30PM/ Sound off?

Where was the sound when the Richland 2 school board meeting was called to order?

It looked to me like Teresa forgot to turn on her microphone. Did anyone else see the red light on her microphone that indicates it is on?

There was no chaos when the meeting was called to order but the public, as well as all board members, are entitled to hear everything said during the meeting.

This Is a GREAT Message

This is a great talk by Carol Swain.

EVERY black student needs to sit down and watch this - and study it. 

She was spared from "life-sapping, negative messages about America that are crippling a generation of young people."

She describes as "poison" such messages as "white supremacy, whiteness as a form of property, unconscious racism, reparations, micro-aggressions, police have it out for blacks, that the United States was created to create and protect slavery".

Sound familiar?

Maybe ALL kids need to watch this video, but many of Richland County's blacks definitely need to.

Open Letter to Governor and Attorney General

The following email has been sent to Gov. Henry McMaster and S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson. If you agree, will you please send your own letter to them this week?

Gov. Henry McMaster: governormcmaster@governor.sc.gov

AG Alan Wilson: agwilson@scag.gov

Gov. McMaster and Attorney General Wilson,

On June 28, 2022 the Richand 2 School Board will elect its officers for the 2022-2023 School Year.

I ask writing to ask you to intervene and to urge or demand that the Board members nominate and elect only fully-qualified, legitimate board members as officers for the coming year.

Two women on the board are not legitimate board members, and each serves as an officer in the 2021-2022 School Year. I have addressed the school board numerous times about this issue since February 2019; it has never taken corrective action.

Teresa Holmes and Amelia McKie were elected on November 6, 2018.

The election was certified on November 9, 2018.

They took office on November 13, 2018 (three days before the start of their terms). An oath-of-office was administered to each, and they were seated. They attended executive session that night and voted on board Motions.

The problem is that neither had filed her Statement of Economic Interests (SEI) with the S.C. Ethics Commission. Neither was eligible to take the oath on November 13, 2018.

On December 4, 2018 each filed her SEI and first became eligible to take the oath of office.

Neither has taken the oath of office on or since December 4, 2018. Therefore, each is an illegitimate member of the Richland 2 school board. This is Fact.

I approached Sheriff Lott and Attorney General Wilson's office in 2019 about Holmes' and McKie's usurping public office.

On June 29, 2021 I implored the Board during Public Participation to nominate and elect only fully-qualified board members as officers. Later in the meeting when it was time for board elections, Trustee James Manning immediately nominated Teresa Holmes as Chair. Trustee Caution-Parker nominated Amelia McKie as Secretary.

Amelia McKie owes $57,100 in debt to the S.C. Ethics Commission and is subject of a Judgment in Richland County Common Pleas Court. That should eliminate her from consideration as an officer of the Board. 

Will you please take such action as you can to prevent their holding Board office in 2022-2023?

Thank you in advance for any action you will take.

Sincerely,

Gus Philpott

www.Richland2.info

847.971.7083

What if no Holmes and no McKie?

What would the Richland 2 school board look like if

Holmes could not vote, be on the board or chair it?

McKie could not vore, be on the board of be Secretary?

The Core Four who rule the roost are Holmes, McKie, Manning, and Caution-Parker..

The Three who get out-voted on every significant issue are Agostini, Scott and McFadden.

What if Holmes and McKie were finally determined to be ineligible board members? What would the teams look like.

Legal board members: Manning, Caution-Parker (2)

Legal board members: Agostini, Scott and McFadden (3)

The board would have voted to investigate what happened on January 25, 2022.

The board would have voted to investigate what happened on April 28, 2022.

The board would have sanctioned Supt. Davis for approving excess spending by trustees on travel and training.

And many other actions of the board and district would have become transparent.

How would their replacements be selected? Would there be a Special Election? Would the seats remain empty, if their eviction occurred within a certain number of days of the November 9, 2022 election?

Do Not Remain Silent

Take six minutes right now and watch this 5/3/2022 senior speech by Harvard University student Julie Hartman.

Watch it as a family.