BLYTHEWOOD – Blythewood Middle School faculty routinely
disregarded a former student’s bullying complaints, retaliating against him for
reporting the continued harassment, according to a recently filed lawsuit.
The abuse grew so severe, the student identified in court
papers as “D.G.,” threatened to harm himself, the suit says.
“By selectively punishing D.G. for minor or nonexistent
misconduct, but allowing other students to bully, intimidate and humiliate D.G.
without any disciplinary consequences from the District for the misconduct,
District created a dangerous environment for D.G. and other students who could
be bullied without being able to take meaningful steps to protect themselves,”
the suit states.
Stephen and Tammie Gilchrest, the student’s parents, filed
suit April 30 in Richland County Circuit Court. The litigation names Richland
County School District Two as the defendant.
A Richland Two spokeswoman declined to comment, citing the
pending litigation.
The suit seeks actual, consequential and punitive damages,
as well as reasonable attorney fees and other costs and expenses.
The lawsuit filed last week doesn’t directly blame his son’s
bullying or the district’s response on his participation in public policy
matters, though it noted both parents are “often at odds” politically with the
district and school in matters outside the scope of their son’s education.
According to the suit, the harassment began in the 2022-2023
school year, shortly after D.G. was disallowed from studying saxophone for
failing to score at least 97% on a music theory test.
His teacher offered to waive the requirement if his parents
enrolled him in private music lessons. The Gilchrists objected, citing
affordability and raised concerns to the teacher.
After the Gilchrists spoke up, the school targeted and
retaliated against their son, according to the suit.
Blythewood Middle altered the student’s schedule,
selectively punished their son for minor infractions while tolerating similar
conduct of other students, confined him once in a storage room to “calm down,”
and on another occasion paraded him in front of students, subjecting him to
student ridicule, the suit states.
Bullying quickly followed
In September 2022, the student reported he had been bullied
in math class. Students responded by labeling the student a “snitch” while the
bullying intensified and faculty admonished the student for not reporting the
bullying “more quickly,” according to the suit.
As the time progressed, bullying intensified in terms of
severity and frequency. Meantime, the student was often assigned detention or
given in-school suspension when he was the victim of bullying, according to the
suit.
In December 2022, following continued bullying complaints,
former Richland Two board chair Monica Elkins-Scott issued a board statement
that read as follows: “We will take innovative, effective and proactive
measures to improve school safety immediately.”
However, bullying persisted throughout the school year and
into the following school year, as did indifference by Blythewood Middle
faculty.
In October 2024, video surveillance captured another student punching D.G. in the face, but BMS administration refused to punish the other student, calling the punch “no big deal,” the suit said. The school eventually enacted “limited punishment” of the student after the Gilchrists filed a criminal complaint.
The Gilchrists ultimately unenrolled their son from BMS when
the school failed to adequately address a cyber bullying incident in which a
student photographed their son in the bathroom and posted it to social media,
according to the suit.
School staff told the Gilchrists they wouldn’t act unless
the Gilchrists first filed a Title IX complaint, citing “rules put into place
by President Trump,” the suit continues.
“The absence of any disciplinary response from the District
to incidents such as the October 2023 battery and unauthorized dissemination of
the humiliating bathroom photo involving D.G. was deliberate and intentional
misconduct that shocks the conscience and is intolerable in any public school,”
the suit states.
The Gilchrists are seeking actual, consequential, and
punitive damages, as well as legal costs.
No trial date has been set. A deadline of November 26 has
been set to complete mediation.
WINNSBORO – Less than 24 hours before Dr. Tracie Swilley boarded a plane Wednesday for Washington, D.C. where she will be presented as one of three nominees vying for National Principal of the Year on Friday night, she received another feather in her cap.
Swilley
Under Swilley’s administration, Fairfield Central High School
received a ‘Good’ rating on the S.C. State School Report Card for the first
time in the school’s history.
Besides achieving an overall ‘Good’ rating, the school’s
scores in math (60.8%) bested the state average (47.8%.) FCHS’ career readiness
score (75.9%) also measured up well against the state’s average of 69.6%.
While the school’s English Language Arts (ELA) score of 58%
fell short of the state’s average score of 66.4%, and there was a wide gap in
FCHS’ college readiness score (16.2%) and the state average (32.5%.), the
school’s on-time graduation rate (85.3%) was just shy of the state average
(85.4%.)
“It’s been a long climb,” Swilley said, “and we’re still
climbing.”
Fairfield School Superintendent Tony Hemingway praised
Swilley.
“We’re really proud of the work that Dr. Swilley has done,”
he said. “I’ve had a lot of conversations with her, just listening to the
things she’s done with her instructional leadership, working with her staff,
all of them helping to move the school forward. That hard work has paid off,
and we are super proud of her.”
Swilley, in turn, heaped praise on her students and her
staff for their overall ‘Good’ score as well as other areas where they have
made improvement.
“I attribute this success to our staff, their belief in our
students, and our students believing in what it takes to get it done and
following through,” Swilley said.
“I also want to recognize what our parents, our school
board, and the entire community have done to help make this happen,” she said.
“It really does take a village.”
BLYTHEWOOD – A 14-year-old student was arrested earlier this
week following confirmation that the juvenile was in possession of a loaded
firearm on school grounds at Westwood High School, according to Sheriff Leon
Lott in a press release.
On Aug. 12, at approximately 9 a.m., a Student Resource
Officer at Westwood High School was notified by school administration that the
14-year-old suspect had a firearm in their book bag, according to the release.
The SRO was able to determine that Defender Security stopped the suspect before
entering the school after the metal detector alerted on the suspect’s bag.
Lott said security escorted the suspect to a school
administrator who confirmed the presence of a handgun in the bag. The SRO
secured the firearm and confirmed that it was loaded. SROs confirmed that the
firearm was not stolen and the suspect had obtained the firearm from his own
home.
WINNSBORO – The Fairfield County School Board of Trustees voted unanimously to select five educators as finalists for the next superintendent of the Fairfield County School District: Claudia Avery, Ph.D; Tony Hemingway, Ed.D; Floyd Lyles; Shawn Suber, Ph.D; and Sam Whack, Ed.D
Avery
Claudia Avery, PhD. is currently serving as the Deputy Superintendent of Academics in Fairfield County, a position she has held since 2011. Before assuming this role, she served as Director of Special Projects in Fairfield. She has served as an Assistant Principal in Lexington School District Two, a Curriculum Specialist for the SC Department of Education, and a Classroom Teacher in Richland County School District One. She attained her Doctor of Philosophy degree from Capella University, a Master of Education degree from the University of South Carolina, and a Bachelor of Arts degree from University of South Carolina Upstate. In 2023, she graduated from the Aspiring Superintendents Academy facilitated by The School Superintendents Association (AASA).
Hemingway
Tony Hemingway, EdD is currently serving as the Chief Human Resources and Strategic Planning Officer in Clover School District. He has been in this role since 2017. Prior to this position, he served as the Principal for Larne Elementary School, an Assistant Principal in Crowders Creek Elementary, Larne Elementary, and Kinard Elementary. He has classroom teaching experience in Clover School District, Philadelphia Public Schools, York School District One, and Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools. He received a Doctor of Education degree from South Carolina State, an Education Specialist and Master of Education degree from Cambridge College and a Bachelor of Science from Claflin University. He completed the National Superintendent’s Academy through Atlantic Research Partners.
Lyles
Floyd Lyles is currently serving as the Deputy Superintendent for the SC Department of Juvenile Justice. Before being named Deputy Superintendent, he became the Interim Deputy Superintendent of DJJ in 2018. Prior to this, he served Principal and Assistant Principal for Birchwood School at SCDJJ. Mr. Lyles worked as an Instructional Facilitator at Fairfield Middle School in 2015. He was the Principal at Union County High School, Jonesville Elementary/Middle School, Assistant Principal at Union County High School and a classroom teacher at Excelsior Middle School and Sims Junior High School. Mr. Lyles served as a Summer School Director for Union County Schools. He was also a part of the high school baseball and football coaching staff. Mr. Lyles received an Educational Specialist degree and a Master of Education degree from Converse College in Spartanburg, SC. He received a Bachelor of Science degree from Benedict College in Columbia, SC.
Suber
Shawn Suber, PhD currently serves as the Executive Director of Learning Support Services in Richland School District Two. He has been in this role since 2023. Previously, he served as Director of MTSS/State and Federal Programs, Principal at L.W. Conder Elementary, Assistant Principal at Lake Carolina Elementary and Rice Creek Elementary, and a School Counselor. He received a Doctor of Philosophy degree, an Educational Specialist degree, and a Master of Education degree from the University of South Carolina. He received a Master of Education in School Counseling from Winthrop University and a Bachelor of Arts degree from Newberry College.
Sam Whack, EdD currently serves as the Director of Educator Effectiveness, Recruitment and Retention for Clarendon County School District. During his 26 year career, he has served as Deputy Superintendent of Administration and Instruction, Chief of Human Resources and Instructional Services, and Interim Chief of Human Resources and Secondary Program Specialist in Jasper County School District and District Coordinator of Professional Development and School Improvement in Richland School District One.
Whack
He served as Principal at Palmetto Middle School, Savannah Grove Elementary, Lower Lee Elementary School and Rosenwald Elementary/Middle School. He served as Assistant Principal at Walker-Gamble Elementary School, District Transportation Director in Clarendon School District Three, Administrative Assistant at Fleming Intermediate School, and a classroom teacher in Clarendon School District Two. He received a Doctor of Education degree, Educational Specialist degree, and Master of Education from Cambridge College. He received a Bachelor of Science degree from South Carolina State University.
Finalists will be available to meet with community members
and faculty/staff on Saturday, Feb. 3 at Fairfield Central High School from 10
a.m. – 1 p.m. Finalists will have their final interviews with the Board of
Trustees on Feb 5, 6, and 7.
Henry Miller, chair of the Fairfield board said he is
excited about the next phase in the search process. Community members and
faculty/staff are encouraged to reach out to board members with their feedback
on this important decision.
COLUMBIA – Dr. Baron Davis has stepped down as superintendent of Richland School District Two, the second of two high-ranking departures in the district in a month.
Davis
No official reason was stated for Davis’ departure. He had
held the district’s top post since 2017.
On Tuesday night, after a nearly six-hour executive session,
school board trustees voted unanimously to “mutually agree to separate their
contractual relationship, and that the Board accept Dr. Davis’s resignation.”
The resignation was effective January 17, the date of the
board meeting. The motion also authorized board chair Lindsay Agostini to
execute a separate agreement with Dr. Davis, which was reviewed in Executive
Session.
Details of that agreement were not available at press time.
An agenda for the meeting listed the purpose of the
executive session as for the “receipt of legal advice regarding superintendent
contract.” A vote on executive session items followed, according to the agenda.
Since the Jan. 5 meeting, at which the superintendent’s
contract first appeared on the agenda for discussion during executive session,
rumors have circulated across social media that the board might vote to dismiss
Davis.
One media outlet based a story on a comment that former
board member James Manning posted on his Facebook page.
“Don’t let the board make decisions in a vacuum,” Manning
posted on Jan. 4, the day before the first special meeting at which Davis’
contract was discussed. “Show up to ensure they have to look you in the face
when making decisions. There is a good chance they will fire the superintendent
at this meeting … they want a weak leader who will do their bidding. Not be a
true leader.”
Davis’s resignation comes after the state Inspector General’s
Office released a report critical of the former Richland Two school board for
its political environment, dysfunction, and chaos.
Davis’s departure also comes on the heels of an announcement
by the District’s Chief Financial Officer Shelley Allen, that she is resigning
effective Jan. 27.
One media story appeared to tie Allen’s resignation to the
board’s Jan. 5, 2023 special called board meeting. The story stated, “Last
week, the board called a special meeting to discuss the Inspector General’s
report and Davis’ contract … Allen’s letter was dated Jan. 6, a day after this
meeting.”
But Agostini said in an interview with The Voice following
the Jan. 17 meeting, that on Dec. 19, 2022, Davis told her (Agostini) that
Allen was resigning.
“He asked me to keep it confidential. But just hours after
our conversation, I received a text from a member of the community saying, ‘Hey,
Shelley [Allen], the girl from accounting, is resigning.’
“I texted Dr. Davis that the public already knew. He texted
back, ‘Ok. We won’t share anything from our end.’
“Any implication that Ms. Allen was leaving because we were
having discussions about Dr. Davis’ contract is just inaccurate,” Agostini
said.
“No discussion had been initiated about Dr. Davis’ contract
before Dec. 19 when he informed me that Ms. Allen was resigning. I didn’t even
speak to our attorney about the contract until Dec. 20, when I asked if she
would address the board about the superintendent’s contract.”
In her resignation letter, Allen stated the district
continues to be “filled with chaos and dysfunction.” She blamed local and state
leaders for that chaos and dysfunction.
“It is very disheartening and quite frankly demoralizing to
all district employees when this mentality is so prevalent in our community,”
the letter states.
“I have optimistically hoped that the outcome of the
Inspector General’s report would provide some justification for making some
changes that are needed in this district,” the letter continues. “But the focus
continues to be misdirected.”
Allen made clear in her letter her support for Davis,
praising his leadership.
“I have been fortunate to work with you,” Allen, said,
referring to Davis in her letter, “in a capacity that has allowed me to witness
your passion, your humility, your vision and your deep desire to provide the
best education for every student.”
The Richland Two Black Parents Association responded to
Allen’s letter with the following Facebook post:
“Is Ms. Allen referring to the current board or the old [previous] board? …she worked at the district the last four years and was there
when the Governor launched the investigation by the Inspector General …so did
these revelations become clear to her right after the November elections?”
Voters opted for four newcomers for the board last November,
ousting the former chair who was the only incumbent seeking re-election.
Agostini has marked Davis down on his annual evaluations,
citing concerns over his demeanor and excessive travel to out-of-town
conferences, among other issues.
In 2020, Agostini and
Davis clashed over a board policy the former superintendent proposed – and the
prior board majority approved – that required the full board to approve an
individual trustee’s request for records.
The policy contradicts a S.C. Attorney General’s opinion
that says elected officials have a right to review district records.
The board has called a special meeting Thursday, Jan. 19, at
5:30 p.m. to discuss employment regarding an acting/interim superintendent for
Richland Two.
This story was updated on Jan. 18, 2023 at 5:05 p.m.
WINNSBORO – A parade was held on Hwy 321 in Winnsboro last Wednesday, Sept. 28 to celebrate Fairfield Magnet School for Math and Science being recognized as a 2022 National Blue Ribbon School by US Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona.
Cardona announced on Sept. 16 that 297 schools across the country were receiving the award. It recognizes a school’s academic performance and progress in closing achievement gaps in student subgroups.
Pugh: County Needs to Re-evaluate How We Spend Money
COLUMBIA – Richland County Council passed third and final
reading of its FY 2022-23 budget Tuesday night, excluding Richland School
District Two’s request for an 18.4 millage increase.
It was the second year the council has passed a
no-millage-increase budget.
The vote to pass the budget was 8 to 3 with both of
Blythewood’s representatives, Derrek Pugh (Dist. 2) and Gretchen Barron (Dist.
7), and Bill Malinowisky (Dist. 1) voting against.
“This [the 18.4 millage request] is a very hot topic in the
community,” Pugh said just before the vote. “The budget before us will not
raise taxes, but it’s imperative that not only millage agencies but Richland
County as a whole needs to re-evaluate how we spend money and make the necessary
adjustments. Everybody is experiencing shortfalls. So it’s important for us to
exercise other options before sticking our citizens with higher tax bills.”
Last week, the Richland Two School Board voted 4 to 3 to ask
Richland County for the 18.4 millage increase over the District’s current 7
mills. Board members Lindsay Agostini, Dr. Monca Elkins Scott and LaShonda
McFadden voted against.
Current Millage Rate (331.70) plus the 18.4 mill increase
would have hit the millage cap of 350.10 for FY 2022-23.
County council had already held second reading and the
public hearing on the county budget before the Richland Two Board voted to
request the millage increase. County council would have had to hold a fourth
reading and another public hearing to consider that increase.
Instead, council passed the budget with the District’s last
year’s 7 mills, which did not cause and increase in the county budget.
Richland County Planning Commissioner Steven Gilchrist spoke
against the county raising taxes before the budget vote was taken. Following
the meeting, Gilchrist expressed his approval of council’s vote.
“Richland County council needs to be applauded for not going
along with this foolishness to raise taxes by 18 mills which Richland School
District Two requested. Leadership matters and our county council proved that
to the school district and the citizens today!” Gilchrist said.
The District’s requested millage increase would have raised
property taxes for local businesses and secondary homes ad was estimated to
bring an additional $6.16 million in to the District next year.
Superintendent Dr. Baron Davis stated that, with the 18.4
mill increase, a businesses with a property value of $100,000 would have payed
$9 more a month in property taxes or $108 a year.
COLUMBIA – A cacophony of voices can be heard on the
recording, the participants becoming more and more shrill as they compete for
volume. Bystanders echo and boo.
It sounds like it could be a hallway fight among a group of
middle or high school students, but it isn’t. The participants are all grown
adults – and they are members of the school board at Richland School District
Two.
The recording is from a closed-door board meeting.
The April 28 meeting was called to discuss safety and
security in Richland Two schools – an issue that’s received attention after
several gun incidents and assorted reports of students holding fights at school
and circulating videos online.
The audio recording of the school board members’
confrontation – a four-minute clip provided to media – begins with School Board
Chair Teresa Holmes quietly laughing while board member Lashonda McFadden is
speaking – part of a pattern of bullying that’s been observable for months
during the board’s public meetings.
McFadden is talking calmly about an unknown issue when the
drama begins.
“You can laugh if you want to,” McFadden says.
“I am, but go ahead,” Holmes says, “Go ahead. Finish your
statement. Don’t worry about me.”
“I’m not worried about you,” McFadden says her voice
beginning to shake.
“Finish your statement, honey,” Holmes says, “Do what you
gotta do.”
“Shut the f*** up,” McFadden replies, becoming emotional.
“Come on, that language is not necessary,” says Vice Chair
James Manning, his voice clear and louder than others, as if it might be closer
to the recording device, as others express their disapproval.
“Little girl, little girl, little girl,” Holmes repeatedly
taunts McFadden.
“I’m fed up with you,” McFadden says. “You want to call me a
little girl? I found out what ‘little girl’ means. I found out what it means.”
“It’s ok. It’s ok. Are you upset?” Holmes continues. “Are
you upset, Lashonda?”
“No, I’m not upset. I’m just letting you know right now that
I will f*** you up….”
The other board members erupt in a chorus of disapproval,
and from that point on, it’s hard to hear much of what is said.
“You have threatened me!” Holmes exclaims multiple times.
“That’s jail!” school board member Cheryl Caution-Parker
says excitedly.
“I’m tired of this bull***it,” McFadden says.
“You threatened me!” Holmes shouts.
“Go file a complaint like you normally do,” McFadden says
amidst the chaos of voices.
“And what you gonna do, boo?” Holmes continues. “So, what you
gonna do? Do it! Do it!”
Then McFadden says, “I want to let you know that if you
think you’re going to continue to disrespect me, then I will catch your
mother-f****** ass outside.”
Holmes says, “Now that’s the second threat. Thank you for
saying that in front of everybody. Thank you.”
“It’s a matter of record now,” Caution-Parker says.
“What I saw was your lack of professionalism, madam chair,”
says board member Lindsay Agostini. “Laughing at one of your board members
starting to speak. That’s what instigated this.”
“You don’t know what I was laughing at,” Holmes says, “Are
you in my head ma’am? I might’ve been thinking of something else.”
Holmes continues to taunt and laugh at McFadden, And then
the recording ends.
This four minutes of audio has elicited a firestorm of
commentary, online and among students and families across the school district.
Asked about the exchange, multiple school board members have
said that this level of conflict is not unusual in their closed-door meetings.
The tension and hostility among board members has, with increasing frequency,
occurred public meetings as well.
The board is generally split on issues with Holmes,
Caution-Parker, Manning and Amelia McKie on one side and Agostini, McFadden and
Monica Scott on the other.
Holmes, the board chair, declined to comment on the
incident.
She did, however, address it in an e-mail to Agostini, who
requested to view the video referenced in Holmes’ police report about the
incident.
“It’s important for the entire board to have access to the
video and to know who breached the confidence of the Executive Session,”
Agostini wrote in an e-mail to Holmes.
“This is now a legal matter,” Holmes wrote in her reply,
declaring the video off-limits, comparing herself to a rape victim, calling
Agostini names and trying to place blame on Agostini.
“It is quite clear… you are negative,[sic] and determined to
remain in high conflict despite truth or morality. In full disclosure, I find
your deceitful and continuing hostility toward me sad,” Holmes wrote.
“Your goal of intentionally working against certain members
of the board, the administration and continuous [sic] conspiring with outside
sources to attempt to create an atmosphere of confusion in order to, [sic] sway
the election in November is appalling.”
Also in the email, Holmes vowed to expose malicious intent
and hypocritical behavior “no matter the cost” – and to “no longer be silent
about exposing antics.”
McFadden, for her part, issued a written apology Monday for
her role in the ruckus, asking for forgiveness as she apologized to Holmes,
district parents and students, her family and church family, and fellow
Christians.
“As an elected leader over your children, it is my deepest
regret that I allowed my emotions to alter my character and behavior to use
such horrific and vulgar language,” said McFadden, who is also a parent.
“For those who have called, texted, dropped by, sent well
wishes, and prayer to me during this most trying time… THANK YOU! I have felt
the encouragement pulling me through the depths of guilt and shame.”
Agostini said she believes both participants in the exchange
and the person who made the recording – a violation of board policy – should
all be removed from the board as consequences for their actions.
Board member Monica Scott said that because of the breach of
trust caused by the recording of executive session meeting, she will no longer
be attending those meetings.
Manning, who insisted to The Voice that there is no video,
only a recording, refused to comment on whether or not he had made the
recording, called for McFadden’s resignation.
“We have students who get expelled for threatening,” Manning
said. “I don’t know how she can continue to properly serve when she’s making
decisions over students who have exhibited similar behavior.”
Manning was among those who defended Superintendent Baron
Davis and his wife, Pamela (a high school teacher), when, several weeks ago,
they reportedly became unruly toward members of the public at the start of a
school board meeting and law enforcement became involved. Pamela Davis
reportedly used vulgur language toward a student in the audience during the
incident.
I never would’ve thought that we would be in this type of position in Richland Two. We have always been seen as a leader in education in the state, and to see where we are now is unfortunate.
– Stephen Gilchrist, Member of the Richland Two Black Parents’ Association
Also, in that incident, two people attending the meeting –
both of whom some witnesses say were not unruly – were banned from school
district property.
Both of those who were banned say they intend to sue – one
(Gary Ginn) for violation of his constitutional rights under the first and
fourteenth amendments, and the other (Gus Philpott) for issues such as
“defamation, libel and due process.”
Ginn, a parent, described the window the recording gives the
public into how the board operates.
“I think that we should just remove the whole school board,”
Ginn says. “I think the governor should just wipe the slate clean and remove
the whole school board and basically release Dr. Davis and Pamela Davis from
their positions at the school district, and that would solve all the problems.
Then we as parents wouldn’t have to deal with it anymore.”
Stephen Gilchrist, a founding member of the Richland Two
Black Parents’ Association and member of the Richland County Planning
Commission, said he applauds the recent approval of a state law that added
school board members to the list of public officials that can be removed by the
governor for misconduct.
“Obviously in Richland School District Two there’s been a
lot of public displaying of a lot of issues that the law has been designed to
address,” Gilchrist says. “So, unfortunately, we have become the poster child
for Senate Bill 203, and we will just see what happens as folks begin to
revisit some of the issues that this board has been having over the last
several months and years.”
He says parents and others have begun calling the governor’s office asking for help, but that’s not enough. Gilchrist says local leaders – from the Richland County Council, which holds purse strings for the school system, to local business and community leaders – should oppose the school board’s continued dysfunction.
“I never would’ve ever thought that we would be in this type
of a position in Richland School District Two,” he says. “We have always been
seen as a leader in education in the state, and to see where we are now is
unfortunate.”
The board routinely expels or otherwise disciplines students
for behavior, he says – but in many ways the board members conduct themselves
even worse than the kids. He says suspension and removal should be options for
them, too.
“I don’t think that we can continue to fund dysfunction at
the level that we’ve been doing that and raising taxes on people to fund
dysfunction,” he says.
“It’s my hope that with so much concern about what’s
happening at our school district, we will come together as a community to try
and bring either some new faces to the leadership of the school district or
have the state really weigh in on what’s been going on here.”
Gilchrist: The Board’s Vote Could Deny Due Process
COLUMBIA – Discussion of a complaint policy took center
stage at Tuesday’s meeting of the Richland Two School District Board of
Trustees.
The two opposing factions on the board appeared to talk past
each other about the intent of a change in wording to a rule known as “Policy
KE,” which governs complaints made to the school district. It became the center
of discussion during the meeting.
Those in favor of the new language argued that it would
better direct complaints through the proper channels before they reach the
board, while those in favor of the old language argued that it better protected
the rights of parents and members of the community.
The board never discussed the content of the policy’s few
paragraphs or sought compromise wording; instead, the revision passed with the
characteristic 4-3 vote that often occurs when the board considers
controversial issues.
The old wording, most recently adopted in 2019, briefly
described a process of referring complaints to administration for resolution,
making it clear that the complaining person, if not satisfied by the outcome,
has a right to appeal the issue to the school board.
The new wording, based on a model policy of the South
Carolina School Boards Association, is more verbose and details the order of
authorities to contact by those seeking resolution of complaints.
But it then goes on to add the two additional items with
which the speakers and board members – and others in the community – took
issue:
The first: “Anyone who defames a district staff member and
damages a person’s professional reputation, whether before students or any
third party, may be subject to legal action brought by the staff member.”
The second: “The board is not obligated to address a
complaint. If the board decides to hear the issue, the board’s decision is
final. Otherwise, the superintendent’s decision on the issue is final.”
During the meeting’s public comment period, two men spoke
against the new wording, requesting that any changes to the policy be rewritten
with clearer, more precise wording and eliminate parts that stifle the voice of
the public.
“It seems to me what we are doing here is like they are
changing the rules of the game. When you change the rules of the game, you
stifle collaboration and trust, hence the problem never gets resolved,” said
Larry Smalls, a parent who spoke at the meeting.
“This is not a popularity contest sitting in these [school
board] seats; you’re dealing with the public. You’re dealing with taxpayers,
people’s livelihoods, their kids, and I’d hope you would take it seriously and
not just change the rules so you can get commendation from the people you
select coming up here.”
Stephen Gilchrist, who is a founding member of the Richland
Two Black Parents’ Association and past chairman and current member of the
Richland County Planning Commission, as well as chairman of the South Carolina
African American Chamber of Commerce and a member of the U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights, e-mailed concerns about the policy to the board members before
the meeting, noting the risks of vague terminology, lack of accountability, and
a potential chilling effect on free speech.
“We have a history that has not been too far in our past
that prevented folk from being able to have a voice in the political process
and the public policy arena, so my hope is that… a district that classifies
itself as premier does not in some ways revert back to those days of old,”
Gilchirst says.
“I don’t see this any different than the times where black
people were asked to count how many jellybeans were in a jar to vote.”
After the vote, he expressed disappointment in approval of a
policy that he says will deprive parents and students with grievances of due
process.
He says it would be better – and possible – for school board
policy to strike a balance that both protects educators from wrongful
accusations and protects the right for people to weigh in on issues impacting
schools and education in the district.
The policy change was considered in the context of two
incidents that occurred at recent school board meetings.
In one case, a parent publicly accused a school
administrator of sexually abusing a child, an allegation that the parent later
apologized for and declared to be false.
In another case, two men who sometimes express criticism of
board actions and policies and board behavior were removed from a school board
meeting on Jan. 25 after witnesses say the two men and others were aggressively
confronted by Superintendent Baron Davis and his wife, schoolteacher Pamela
Davis – an incident that has resulted in multiple complaints against the
district.
One of the men, local blogger Gus Philpott, says it was a
lengthy struggle to get the details of his ban from district property in
writing – and maintains that he did no wrong and violated no policy on the
evening in question, a claim that’s backed up by eyewitness accounts.
The other individual who was banned, parent Gary Ginn, has a
similar story. Eyewitnesses say he spoke up when a 14-year-old student was
verbally attacked by Mrs. Davis. Ginn has expressed criticism of board policies
in recent months, but was orderly in expressing that criticism.
Philpott, 83, contends that the real reason for his ban is
to silence his online journalism and protect corrupt officials from the
public’s right to information about the actions of elected leaders. His blog,
which frequently draws attention to school board issues, is often critical of
current school system leadership.
Philpott has sought to appeal the decision to the school
board under the old wording of the complaint policy, he says – a right that he
believes prompted the new wording and a right that was taken away by the new
wording approved Tuesday night.
Board Chair Theresa Holmes provided a copy of the document
stating that administrative authorities and the school board had decided to
uphold Philpott’s ban from school property for the remainder of the school
year.
“After reviewing and considering the record in this matter,
which included statements from you regarding the January 25 incident, the Board
voted to uphold the administration’s decision in this matter, which means that
your trespass notice will continue through the end of the 2021-2022 school
year,” according to the letter, which is signed by Holmes.
Holmes, who supported the policy change, during the meeting
accused board and community members of insincere grandstanding on the issue.
“There [were] two weeks to make changes to this, and the day
before there’s all this, because people want to come to a public meeting and
make all these statements and these lectures and all that because it’s in
public,” Holmes said. “Let’s not play the game up in here tonight because
that’s what we’re doing.”
Davis, the superintendent, said the new policy on public
complaints is similar to that governing personnel matters. He said that, hypothetically,
under the old policy, the board could get stuck spending large amounts of time
hearing complaints that have not gone through the proper channels.
“The policy has nothing to do with public participation.
There’s a different and separate public participation policy,” Davis said in
the meeting.
Board member Lashonda McFadden said the new policy can
prevent complaints that do go through proper channels from being appealed to
the board and tie up time-sensitive issues in months of bureaucracy, to the detriment
of students and parents who need help.
Board member Monica Scott implied that the policy change was
a form of hypocrisy.
“We are elected officials. The public and the parents are
actually the reason why we are sitting here, and… when many of us were
campaigning, we were campaigning because we want to be a voice for the
community, we want to be a voice for parents, we want to be a voice for equity.
We want to be a voice for integrity… but once we get here, we’re not who we say
we want to be,” Scott said.
“I’m going to respond to every e-mail that comes to me,
whether it’s a complaint, whether it’s a compliment, whether it’s something
that they’re not happy with – it doesn’t matter to me because we’re here
because of the public, and I just think that when we’re trying to take away the
right of the people who have placed us here, I have an issue with that.”
The new policy passed with the support of Holmes, James
Manning, Amelia McKie, and Cheryl Caution-Parker. McFadden, Scott, and Lindsay
Agostini voted against it.
Philpott, meanwhile, says he’s looking for a lawyer to help
him take his complaint against the district to the next level: the courts.
“My complaint was that I myself was not guilty of their
charge and that I did not get a chance to defend myself,” he says, contending
that school board policy was applied improperly in his case – and that rules
barring speakers from mentioning individuals or job titles are also improper.
“The board says there’s no appeal. No, no, no. There’s
always an appeal,” says Philpott, who promises to resume attending school board
meetings in July, as soon as his ban expires. “A person can always go to
court.”
Gilchrist, meanwhile, says he and the Black Parents’
Association are looking forward to this year’s school board election. He says
there are a lot of potential candidates preparing for the start of campaign
season – and November’s election promises to be an interesting one.
“I guess that the biggest concern for me is protecting the
rights of the citizens of the community who have children in the district, who
are taxpayers in the district, and who sometimes do offer constructive
criticism,” he says, calling the Jan. 25 incident “unfortunate” and the actions
of current leadership “exhausting.”
“I am presently encouraged that… we’re seeing a large
segment of our community – black and white, rich and poor, Democrat and
Republican – who say enough of this, and that’s encouraging,” he says. “It’s
time to get to get some adults in the room who will run the school district on behalf
of the children.”
Board members up for re-election are Holmes, McKie,
Caution-Parker and Manning.
Looking forward, he says, he’s hopeful that the upcoming
elections will result in more civility in school district leadership at
Richland Two.
“It’s my hope that as we move toward these elections in
November, that parents are paying attention, parents are beginning to get more
engaged, and they see this for whatever it is,” Gilchrist said.
“We look to bring on some energy on the school board that
cares about governing, that cares about parents, that cares about learning,
that cares about the things the parents care about, and not about using
taxpayer money, using the district apparatus, and using the power of governing
to silence the community.”
J.R. Green, superintendent of Fairfield schools, for years has sidestepped questions about his salary and his spending of public money. When he thought the local newspaper was too critical of his district, he started the taxpayer-funded Fairfield Post. | Michael Smith
Costly travel, hefty compensation, lack of accountability uncovered
WINNSBORO — J.R. Green seethed with anger as he read an
article in his local newspaper. The school district he leads was on winter
break, but Green couldn’t stop fuming over the words on the page before him.
The Voice of Fairfield County reported that Green’s district had failed to meet certain state academic benchmarks. The article cited statistics to prove it.
Bristling at the critique, the superintendent fired off an
email to his principals and school board. The missive, titled “False, Biased,
and Misleading Reporting,” blasted the paper and accused its reporter of
“marginalizing our students, staff, and system.”
“I want you to share this reporting with your staff so they
understand the hostile media environment we face,” Green wrote that night in
December 2018.
The fiery dispatch is emblematic of Green’s approach to
uncomfortable questions and criticism during his nine years leading this
high-poverty Midlands district of roughly 2,000 students.
In public forums, he has sidestepped questions about his
taxpayer-funded salary and other points of contention. For years, he has
rebuffed attempts to reveal how he spends thousands of dollars in public money.
It’s one striking example of how easily government officials
in South Carolina can shield information from the public. In its investigative
series Uncovered, The Post and Courier is partnering with local newspapers to
help shine a light on questionable conduct, and hold the powerful to account in
areas with few watchdogs.
Across South Carolina, particularly in rural communities
that have become news deserts, officials are less likely to be pressed on their
decisions, and more prone to set the public agenda themselves.
Largely thanks to tax revenue from a local nuclear power
plant, Fairfield schools collect more money per student than any other district
in the state.
Year after year, top school district officials use a hefty
chunk of the money for travel to pricey conferences at tourist resorts across
South Carolina and the country, the newspapers found.
Between 2017 and 2020, Green’s office and Fairfield’s seven
board members charged taxpayers for trips just about every month during the
school calendar. That included dozens of trips to conferences at waterfront
resorts in Charleston, Myrtle Beach and Hilton Head.
The annual bill for those and other trips? Nearly $50,000 —
enough money to cover the salary of an additional classroom instructor.
At the same time, the board has extended Green fat bonuses,
contingent upon Green receiving passing grades in thin annual evaluations that
lack measurable goals.
The one-page forms are filled out anonymously by board
members and leave little room for comments or discussion — less rigorous than
some first grade report cards.
That’s contributed to a vacuum of accountability in
Fairfield, a community that does not have a daily newspaper.
The Voice publishes weekly, holding the district to account
when student performance dips, or when top officials attempt to obscure their
public spending. Green views that reporting – on scores, his evaluation and
spending and his failure to disclose an out-of-state, overnight
school-sponsored trip to the board – as an attack on the district.
In response, Green has warned district employees against
speaking to The Voice, directing them, for the last two years, to send any
information for The Voice (student achievements, honors, etc.) to the school’s
human resources department for approval to be forwarded to The Voice. That
information never gets forwarded. Then, Green took the matter a step further:
He started the district’s own publication.
The Fairfield Post is distributed weekly around the county,
often filled with campaign advertisements or columns penned by politicians.
“The Post is an opportunity to really lift up the good
things that are happening,” Green said.
Taxpayers underwrite the costs, to the tune of $27,000 a year.
Fairfield schools Superintendent J.R. Green (right) celebrates after being named Superintendent of the Year by the S.C. Association of School Administrators. | Photo: Joe Seibles
Green, whom the S.C. Association of School Administrators named the 2021 S.C. Superintendent of the Year, did agree to speak with The Post and Courier. He then conducted a lengthy discussion of the newspaper’s collaboration with The Voice at a May 11 school board meeting.
When reporters arrived, he asked them to leave, citing the
district’s social distancing rules in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Still, a livestream broadcast Green’s remarks to the board — a defiant rant that stretched nearly 40 minutes. He fiercely defended the district’s spending of taxpayer money. He roundly criticized the state’s education statistics, which he described as an incomplete picture of the district’s progress with students.
Green also accused a reporter of questioning him because he
is Black, describing this and other reporting by The Post and Courier as a
suspicious effort to target people of color.
In other conversations with a reporter, Green stressed one
point above all: He despises and distrusts The Voice. When asked to cite
examples of the newspaper’s reporting, Green pointed to what he insists was a
demeaning tweet sent by a Voice freelancer in 2019, months after he had cut
ties with the newspaper. Otherwise, he only spoke generally about coverage he
described as negative.
“I have confessed in (church) that there is animosity in my heart,” he said about the newspaper and its publisher. “I have to pray that the Lord removes it.”
Fairfield County School District Superintendent J.R. Green. The Voice/Provided
‘Change the culture’
Green didn’t always quarrel with the local newspaper.
Green carries three degrees, as well as a doctorate in education
leadership from the University of South Carolina. As a principal and assistant
superintendent in Chesterfield County, he helped a high school bring up its
grades on its state report card, and hit its year-over-year targets for
improving student performance.
Meanwhile, Fairfield schools were rocked by extreme turnover
in the district’s top position. Before Green arrived, Fairfield cycled through
12 superintendents in 20 years amid a period of dysfunction among the board.
Local residents called the district South Carolina’s “graveyard for
superintendents.”
The surrounding community also faced disruptions.
Once-bustling Winnsboro, the county seat, hosted the headquarters of Uniroyal
Tire Company. But the town lost businesses, jobs and eventually its hospital
after the construction of Interstate 77 bypassed the community in the 1970s.
The surrounding countryside remains largely rural, dotted with rolling pastures
and horse and cattle farms.
Fairfield’s teachers and administrators educate a student
body where school officials say nearly 90 percent of the children qualify for
free or reduced lunch.
Green vowed to “change the culture” in an area that needed
help. He stressed teamwork and an open relationship with the community. He has
maintained a visible presence, regularly making appearances in front of
television cameras for local news programs.
But eventually, some of those promises were tested as
Green’s decision-making came under tighter scrutiny.
First, board members questioned why more than two dozen
out-of-state and overnight trips were planned for student groups in 2015,
including travel to New York City, Puerto Rico and the Bahamas. Board members
questioned how much those trips would cost taxpayers. Green said he didn’t
know. The board authorized the trips anyway.
Some board members also pressed Green on his use of the
superintendent’s fund, roughly $42,000 in taxpayer money. Green has broad
discretion to spend the money each year as he chooses.
Green said he’d only share the information if the board
voted to ask for it. Another board member at the time, Paula Hartman, pressed
further.
Paula Hartman said she was one of only a few Fairfield County School District board members who ever questioned the superintendent’s spending and performance. | Photo: Michael Smith
“Does that mean that you won’t give us that information?” Hartman asked.
“That means if the board directs me to provide it, I will,”
Green said.
Beth Reid, then the board’s chair, suggested Hartman submit
an inquiry under the S.C. Freedom of Information Act.
“If a person from the audience asked for that information,
could they get it?” Hartman asked.
“Yes,” Reid answered.
“Then why can’t I?” Hartman asked.
A lack of access
The state’s open records law is supposed to allow for the
free flow of public information, so any media outlet or citizen can easily see
how their government is operating and spending the public’s money.
But the FOIA law is riddled with loopholes that officials
can exploit to shield unsavory information from public view.
After a 2017 amendment to the
law, government agencies — for the first time — were allowed
to charge residents and news outlets for costs that officials associate with
retrieving or redacting documents.
But with vague guidelines, the amounts calculated by the
government can far surpass what the average citizen can afford — hundreds, even
thousands, of dollars.
At the same time, officials may freely ignore direct
questions from citizens. Instead, they can insist that information only be
released if requested under FOIA. That way, they keep public information in the
dark for weeks, or even months.
The flaws in the system present major roadblocks for
cash-strapped local newspapers around the state, including The Voice of
Fairfield County.
After lashing out at the newspaper’s coverage of the
district’s student performance in 2018, Green has not agreed to an interview
with the newspaper in more than two years, and has blocked other attempts by
the newspaper to gain information for stories that highlight the schools.
The end result is dwindling accountability, and an
environment that limits the local newspaper’s ability to carry out its First
Amendment duties, said Lynn Teague, vice president of the South Carolina League
of Women Voters.
“It sounds totally unacceptable,” Teague said. “If I were a
taxpayer in Fairfield, I would find it unacceptable.”
Green said The Voice is at fault for its poor relationship
with him. He pointed to a 2019, incident that occurred long after he broke off
communication with The Voice over reports on the school’s test scores.
Green took the remark as a slight that suggested the
Fairfield teacher did not earn her recognition. “Simply despicable!!” he
tweeted at the time.
The Voice’s publisher responded, “FCSD is rightfully proud
of her accomplishment, as is all of Fairfield County.”
But Green told his employees that he does not trust The Voice — and that they should not either.
Fairfield schools superintendent J.R. Green. | Michael Smith
A steep fee
In 2019, The Voice requested access to records documenting
two years of Green’s discretionary spending — an issue that had continued to
divide members of the board.
After waiting 10 business days to respond, the maximum allowed under state law, Green insisted the information would cost $338. The Voice couldn’t afford to pay.
State law allows governments to waive fees and release
public information for free, so The Voice asked Green to reconsider.
He waited another two weeks, then refused. He also rejected
the newspaper’s requests to inspect the records in person, something reporters
often do to avoid the costs of copying documents.
Asked about the matter by The Post and Courier, Green said
he’s merely doing what the law allows him to do.
The Voice has a team of freelancers and one full-time editor
and the publisher, who declines a salary. The publisher also supplements a
roughly $150,000 annual budget by occasionally paying for rent and other
expenses out of her own pocket.
Ultimately, The Voice dropped its request.
The newspaper agreed to partner with The Post and Courier on
this article, in part, in an effort to obtain Green’s spending records —
originally sought nearly two years ago.
When The Post and Courier sent its own request, for travel
expenses from 2017-20, Green agreed to turn them over without a charge.
No discussion
The records show a steady drip of travel expenses for Green
and his assistant. There’s also a bulk of purchases related to a Bow Tie Club
trip (for the district’s teenage boys), led by Green, to Louisville, Ky., in
2019. While board approval is required for trips costing over $600, overnight
trips and out-of-state trips, Green did not ask the board to approve the
Louisville trip in advance, as is required for all three travel criteria. When
later asked about the trip’s expenses at a board meeting, Green said he
couldn’t recall details.
The actual cost to taxpayers? More than $10,100. That
included lodging at the downtown Marriott; a $3,850 tour bus for students; and
more than $700 in charges at the Louisville Slugger Museum, the Muhammad Ali
Center and the world-famous Churchill Downs horse racing track, home of the
Kentucky Derby. Green told The Post and Courier those expenses only covered
costs of admission.
Hartman, one of the board members, unsuccessfully sought
details about that trip. Green also rebuffed her attempts to learn how much he
earns each year.
“We never got any information we wanted,” Hartman said.
But when Hartman asked him how much money he made, Green
said he didn’t know.
Now, Green’s salary has ballooned to more than $192,000. No
superintendent of such a small district in South Carolina makes more, according
to the most recent data from the state. Including his retirement benefits, his
overall taxpayer-funded compensation is above $225,000.
Green told The Post and Courier he has agreed to freeze his
benefits package at its current level.
“That’s what my spirit led me to do,” he said.
Pricey trips
Other records obtained by The Post and Courier show even
more expenses — these charged by Fairfield’s seven board members for their
travel.
In just over three years, board members charged taxpayers
more than $123,000 in expenses for travel to conferences, including $52,900 in
out-of-state travel.
It also included nearly 70 trips to waterfront resorts in
Charleston, Myrtle Beach and Hilton Head. During school years, one or more
school board members attended a conference just about every month, the records
show.
The board’s travel between 2017-19 averaged $41,200 a year.
By comparison, in the last full fiscal year before the pandemic, the board of
Greenville schools spent less than $37,000 on travel. That board oversees the
largest district in South Carolina. And it has 12 members, five more than
Fairfield.
Fairfield board members disclosed their trips in reports
provided during regular meetings. But they had little to add to inquiries from
The Post and Courier. Most did not respond to phone messages and emailed
questions about their travel.
Fairfield County School Board Chairman Henry Miller defended the district’s contract with J.R. Green, saying the superintendent has been worth every penny given the instability that preceded him. | Michael Smith
The board’s chair, Henry Miller, has charged the most in recent years — more than $31,500, records show. He did not return voicemails, but defended the travel in a written response.
“Investing in training and professional development is a
vital component to becoming a more effective school board member,” he said.
Another sitting board member, Sylvia Harrison, spent more
than $27,000, records show. She also briefly defended her travel. But after
learning the newspaper was partnering with The Voice, Harrison said she wasn’t
interested in a reporter’s questions.
“This is what you all do,” Harrison said. “It didn’t work
for (The Voice) and it’s not going to work for you.”
Few comments
Green is supposed to receive more scrutiny during his annual
evaluations from the board. But year after year he glides through the process,
often without being pressed publicly on any aspect of his performance.
The board conducts its year-end discussions with Green
behind closed doors. Then, board members submit one-page rubrics with
benchmarks as vague as “community engagement.” The evaluations do not point to
any measurable goals.
Board members do not have to sign their names, nor are they
required to offer specific comments on how well the superintendent stacked up.
Some leave no comments at all.
By comparison, Fairfield’s neighbor in Richland County
School District Two, board members there evaluate their superintendent with
six-page forms using far more detailed metrics.
State Representative Annie McDaniel, who sat on the school
board from 2000-18, said Fairfield used to use a similar process. But some time
during Green’s tenure the board pushed for a change.
“We went to a one-pager,” McDaniel said. “I wasn’t a fan of it, even though I thought that Dr. Green was doing some good things in the district,” she added.
Meanwhile, though the state has adjusted its metrics,
Fairfield schools have about the same overall ‘average’ rating as when Green
took the helm eight years ago.
In an interview, Green defended the district’s work with
students and stressed that top officials continue to make changes. Most
recently, after poor ratings in 2019, Green replaced the middle school
principal.
“I’m never satisfied,” he said. “We recognize that we still
have progress to be made.”
‘Negative’ coverage
Ultimately, it was the low ratings for Fairfield Middle
School, and other middling district metrics, that were the subject of The Voice
article in 2018 that set Green off.
He blasted the publication in his email to principals and
other staff. Two months later, he took the matter a step further: He started
Fairfield school district’s own newspaper, The Fairfield Post.
The newspaper features bylines from students. But with
articles on community events and local elections, its coverage stretches well
beyond the walls of Fairfield schools.
As Green puts it, “Anyone can submit a story.”
Local politicians regularly oblige. An early issue included
a half-page editorial on education policy, written by state Sen. Mike Fanning.
Another edition contained an unsigned feature on Green, after he received a special
recognition from USC.
Throughout 2020, inside pages were filled with campaign
advertisements and other content submitted by McDaniel, Winnsboro Mayor John
McMeekin and Fairfield school board candidates.
Sen. Greg Hembree, the state senate education chair, told
The Post and Courier that Green has waded into murky ethical territory, where
the public underwrites a news publication with little ability to keep it from
becoming a “propaganda arm” of the district.
Green told The Post and Courier he has no editorial control
over the newspaper. He only reads and encourages the publication. Politicians
pay for their advertising space, Green said.
Not everyone is convinced The Fairfield Post is a good idea.
Teague, with the League of Women Voters, said she’s not sure
the arrangement is legal.
“The paper is a public resource, and it is being used for
campaign purposes,” she said.
Green insists he did not start The Post to compete with The
Voice.
“I’m not stopping them from writing anything,” he said, but
neither is any information allowed to be released from the district to The
Voice.
Harrison, the board member, also defended The Post while
railing against coverage in The Voice.
She told The Post and Courier, “If it’s not positive, I
don’t read it.”
After hanging up on a reporter, Harrison took to Facebook
that evening to alert her followers about what she described as the latest
example of biased news reporting. She insisted she had no intention of reading
this article.
Besides, she added, “We have our own newspaper.”
Until Green shut off all communications with The Voice in 2018, it regularly printed feel-good features about the district’s students, teachers and school activities. This photo illustrated a front-page feature story about the school’s second cohort of STEM graduates flying to Spain for a weeklong trip as part of the STEM program. | Contributed
Joseph Cranney
Joseph Cranney is an investigative reporter in Columbia, with a focus on government corruption and injustices in the criminal legal system. He can be reached securely by Proton mail at jcranney@prontonmail.com or on Signal at 215-285-9083.
Avery Wilks
Avery G. Wilks is an investigative reporter based in Columbia. The USC Honors College graduate was named the 2018 S.C. Journalist of the Year for his reporting on South Carolina’s nuclear fiasco and abuses within the state’s electric cooperatives.
Barbara Ball
Barbara Ball is the publisher of The Voice of Fairfield
County and The Voice of Blythewood. Ball received the South Carolina Press
Association’s Jay Bender Award for Assertive Journalism in 2018 and 2019. She
can be reached at barbara@blythewoodonline.com.