Can three board members control the School Board?

Many people will say that the school board is controlled by the majority of board members. In other words, four board members control. 

This is NOT correct.

Three board members can control the board, and they should. Judiciously, of course.

Remember when three trustees walked out because of the short notice they were given to consider the superintendent's proposed contract renewal? That worked!

They should have used that again when they were asked to vote on The Wyche Law Firm on such short notice. The superintendent and the chair apparently withheld information about Wyche from at least three of the trustees until the executive committee met. Did Manning, McKie and Caution-Parker get the information days earlier? Did they even care if they didn't?

Agostini, Scott and McFadden could have walked out, eliminating a quorum and halting the meeting.

And last Tuesday night, when the same three wanted more time to consider the $300,000,000+ budget for 2022-2023?

Walk-out time.

The same when they raised a Point-of-Order. When the Chair failed to recognize the call for a Point-of-Order, the trustee needs to say it again and more loudly. If still not recognized, then stand up and say it loudly. And if that doesn't work, three trustees can walk out.

They could remain in the hall for five minutes, hoping the Chair would decide to comply with Robert's Rules of Order. If not, the meeting is over for that evening.

I wrote to them earlier in the year and suggested they consider that philosophy. I told them it's like training a new puppy. 

When you train a puppy, it only takes a few times of discipline. 

If the chair refused reasonable requests and positions, walk out. 

I figured it might have taken a little longer with the Chair, but it would have worked. The bullying would have stopped.

Pass motion; then make secondary motion???

At Tuesday night's board meeting (July 12, 2022) there was a lengthy discussion of the proposed 2022-2023 Budget. 

Trustees Agostini and McFadden asked for more time to consider it. McKie had made a motion to approve the budget. McFadden made a (secondary) motion to delay the vote and  allow more time for deliberation. 

Manning said there was a  motion standing. He was right, but he knows full well what a secondary motion is and in which order motions are voted. He has been on the board since 2010, and he often had to explain secondary motions to last year's chair.

And then McKie chimed in the wrong information that she has spoken about in the past.

She should know by now that, when a motion passes, such a "secondary motion" is meaningless. The motion would have already passed.

But Manning, as chair and member of the pack of the Core Four, did not correct her.

And without a Parliamentarian the wrong information did not get corrected.

McFadden's secondary motion should have quickly been seconded by Agostini or Scott. Then there should have been discussion and a vote.

Unfortunately, the Core Four stood ready to approve the budget, so they would have voted en bloc 3-4 on McFadden's motion, causing it to fail. But there would have always been hope that Holmes would not have understood McFadden's motion and would have "hit the wrong button", making the vote 4-3 (passing).

That would have killed the primary motion and would have just taken them back to a starting point, and they would have had to wiggle to produce some kind of wording to get what The Four wanted - a passed Budget Tuesday night.

How much money did the District waste on the two "executive coaching and parliamentary procedures" trainings? $10,-15,000? More? Did anyone ever submit a FOIA request?

The three R's

Several years ago, in a different school district, a high school counselor told me that students do not need to know how to write in cursive, don't need to know arithmetic, and don't need to know how to spell. They use keyboards, calculators, and spellcheck.

I remember telling that counselor that, if she were playing baseball, she had just struck out.

Today many high school students cannot read or write in cursive, cannot add numbers in their heads or correctly estimate totals (sums or products), and cannot spell.

Students without those skills are harmed - for life.

If you have a student in grade school, middle school, or high school, now is the time to get them the help they need.

These are basic life skills. If a person is balancing his checkbook, he should be able to estimate the new total, after he makes a deposit or writes a check. Should the new total be greater or less than before the transaction? And by approximately what amount?

There is one way to spell a word - the correct way. (Although I did have a person tell me that "it is a strange and narrow-minded person who can spell a word only one way." And then there is Mark Twain's version: "I don’t give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way."

To me, a person demonstrates his intelligence through his spelling and his oral word choices. When I call someone and ask, "May I speak with Betty, please?" and the response is, "This is her", I am ready to gag. I mean, throw up. I'll probably just hang up.

I visited a third-grade class one day and the teacher said, "Him and I are going to the library." Seriously? And then the teacher made a similar error the next week in the kid's IEP. It was all I could do to refrain from saying, "WHAT?"

How do you handle incorrect grammar from children?

Don't Miss Policy JICA (proposed revision) - WOKE all the way

On the agenda for the July 12, 2022 school board meeting is a first reading of a proposed revision to Board Policy JICA - Student Dress/Articles/Displays

You can read it in the attachment to the agenda. Email me if you don't know how to find the agenda. gusphilpott@gmail.com

The revision drifts far away from Student Dress, to be re-named Attire.

Following a re-statement of the District's Mission to develop global citizens - blah, blah, blah - 

Check out the new first paragraph. Just exactly how is a school responsible for ensuring that attire does not contribute to a hostile or intimidating environment for any student?

If a student wears a "I love Trump" shirt or a shirt with "Jesus is the way" (or a hoodie with BLM on the front) to school, and "another student" gets triggered and trots off to the Principal's office to complain of a "hostile environment",  what happens next?

You can guess, can't you?

In a world of equity at Richland 2, which student will be supported? Which one will be disciplined?

You and I know the answer to that question.

Why is there a re-statement of core values (Learning, Character, Community & Joy) in the Attire policy?

"Students have the right to be treated equitably." No, no, NO..... The right is to be treated EQUALLY. Look closely at "marginalization" and identity in that bullet-point.

Whoever drafted that revision should be required to affix her name to it. My guess it came straight out of the DEI department. 

Contact all the trustees and express your opinion (even though you already know the Core Four will approve it at the second reading on August 9.

Will board meetings return to 90 minutes (max.)?

Remember when school board meetings ran about 90 minutes? What happened over the past three years? (You and I know.) Chaos. Disrespect. Shaming. Out-of-control.

Will James Manning, as the board chair for this school year, restore order and control over meetings?

Suggestions:

Establish a 90-minute time-frame for meetings before entering the planning session with the superintendent on the Thursday before a Tuesday board meeting.

Shorten the Inspiration Moment to three minutes (max.), including the introduction. Select a different board member to introduce the Moment. Amelia McKie must have thought she was at the Academy Awards or Toastmaster Championships. 

Move right into the Pledge. And, no, it's not "Join me in reciting the Pledge." It's "Join me in the Pledge of Allegiance." Let the Chair thank the speaker. It's not necessary to spend another 1-3 minutes thanking the speaker.

Cancel student performances as the Inspiration Moment. If the Board decides to have Student Performance, instead of Inspirational Moment, change the Agenda.

Eliminate the lag between speakers during Public Participation by asking following speakers to queue up.

Crack down on unnecessary board member comments that are redundant and off-topic.

Eliminate the long delays in board voting. What is the world takes so long to tally and announce electronic votes?

Know Robert's Rules of Order and follow them without shaming board members.

When the agenda is created, set a time-limit for the dog-and-pony shows put on by the staff (at the superintendent's direction). Presenters don't need to read slides to board members (and the audience).

Board members should study the packets that are distributed to them before meeting and be prepared to ask succinct questions.

If a board member wants something, make a motion (or a secondary motion). Saying, "I would like ..." is a waste of time. Recall how many times Teresa Holmes just blew on past what a minority member said, instead of asking, "Do you want to make a motion?"

Conduct the board meeting in a fast-paced, concise manner without "rushing". Work against "Time Remaining". Put up a big clock, similar to that used in football and basketball games.

Eliminate individual thanks by board members for staff presentations. That just wastes time. The chair can thank for all. Cut out the "I've been an educator for 35 (or 40) years" remarks.

Let four-hour board meetings be a relic of the past.

Like any of these suggestions? Have some of your own? Put them in the Comments section below.

Dennis & Julie Podcast

I'm a fan of Dennis Prager and PragerU. Dennis is a smart man.

Recently I learned of the Dennis & Julie Podcast, featuring (who else?) Dennis Prager and Julie Hartman.

This is a must-watch. I'd like to give you an image on which you could just click, but this video must be one that YouTube has partially censured. It doesn't show up in the YouTube search window for the Blogger platform.

However, you can watch the video by clicking on this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRcvdxliOiE

Dennis introduced Julie as his first co-host. They discuss the Russian invasion of Ukraine and other topics.

Open Letter to board chair James Manning

To Richland 2 board chair James Manning:

One of your first acts as Board Chair for the School Year 2022-2023 should be to require Teresa Holmes and Amelia McKie to take the oath-of-office and become legitimate members of the Richland 2 school board.

This issue was first raised during public participation at a school board meeting in about February 2019. The board was informed that the oath-of-office administered to Holmes and McKie on November 13, 2018 was done so THREE full weeks before they first became eligible to take it.

That is because neither Holmes nor McKie had filed her Statement of Economic Interests report (SEI) with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. They filed the SEIs on December 4, 2018. Neither has taken the oath-of-office since that date.

Had the board required Holmes and McKie to take the oath-of-office in February 2019, the District would have needed to correct the votes on motions only back for three months. All votes of Holmes and McKie should have been removed. Many results of voting on motions would have changed.

The problem of wrongful voting has continued now for more than 3½ years. The effort required now to correct votes and results is massive.

With respect to honesty, integrity, responsibility, transparency, and South Carolina law, there should be no further delay in correcting this legal nightmare.

The board has functioned with only five legitimate members since November 13, 2018. McKie's term as board chair ended on November 13, 2018, and a new board chair should have been elected for the balance of the 2018-2019 school year.

Holmes and McKie should not have been nominated for, or elected to, officer positions on the board. Holmes and McKie should not have been elected as board officers on June 29, 2021, and they should not have been elected as board officers again on June 28, 2022.

S.C. Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110 reads, in part,

ARTICLE 11

Disclosure of Economic Interests

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.

Will you correct this error now?