Bill Lewis Reveals He's the Jonathan Gruber of CCSD

Those stupid Charleston County voters! We shouldn't allow them to elect school board members! That is the basic underpinning of retired CCSD operating officer Bill Lewis's proposal in Sunday's op-ed.

Of all horrors, democratically-elected board members don't always toe the line thrown out by the Chamber of Commerce. They're too stupid. Imagine having "community activists" or "disgruntled former teachers" on the board! It's a nightmare! Only such "highly-qualified" candidates as Chris Fraser, Brian Moody, and Gregg Meyers will fulfill that mission.

Lewis apparently believes that the school district should be run as a private-sector organization. Those private-sector boards he praises for not micromanaging their CEOs really did a good job preventing the excesses that caused the last recession, right?

We wonder why Lewis could not name any of the cities where mayors have made the difference in improving schools, since he seems to believe that mayoral control is the solution to CCSD's problems. His solution would give Charleston three seats, Mt. Pleasant three seats, and North Charleston five seats, since Mayor Summey will control the County Council's choices through Teddie Pryor, a North Charleston employee, and his son Elliott.

Politicians selecting school board members instead of voters? Gee, that sounds great.

There are two major ways in which the school board elections can be improved, neither of which is on Lewis's radar screen, or, should I say, the radar screen of the Chamber of Commerce member who vetted Lewis's op-ed.

It's an open secret that these supposedly non-partisan seats are as partisan as they can be, just flying under the radar. Our local paper chooses to ignore that slates are regularly supported by the county's Democrat and Republican organizations. These seats are non-partisan for the same reason that the mayoralty of Charleston is nonpartisan: so that white Democrats can fool Republicans into voting for them. Mayor Riley not a Democrat? Please.

If races were designated partisan, political parties would vet the candidates and voters would have a better idea for whom to vote in the primary. Voters would rapidly discover that the school board generally has been the hiding place for Democrats to be elected to office in the county. Check for yourself: how many of the present school board members are registered Democrats?

Some will try to make the case that Democrats and Republicans share the same ideas about education. Really? When was that last the case? Probably in the 1950s.

The second aspect that would strongly improve the election is single-member districts. These single members would be voted upon by their own district, not by the county at large. That would make members responsible to their districts. Who can forget Toya Green's (yes, vetted as "highly-qualfied" by Bill Lewis) response to her District 20 constituency: "I don't represent you!"

It's time to stop pretending that the population of the county is so small that voters in Mt. Pleasant know who is the best person to represent North Charleston. The system as it is allows the Chamber of Commerce and its lackeys to control outcomes in many areas. What just happened in North Charleston, where Mt. Pleasant supporters (and the Chamber) put Cindy Bohn Coats over the top North Charleston vote-getter Shante Ellis, is a case in point.

Part of the solution is better communication within the county about what the candidates stand for. Evidently, we can't depend upon our local newspaper or television outlets for full information. Perhaps its lack of interest (or collusion) in local races is part of the reason that the Post and Courier has become a dinosaur.

CCSD Charter Enemy Support from Riley & McGinley

As I write, Mayor Riley (he who has no legal power in the Charleston County School District) and Superintendent McGinley (she who hates Mary Ann Taylor's ideas and probably her guts) are lobbying the Charleston County legislative delegation to appoint former CCSD Board Member Brian Moody to the seat vacated by Mary Ann Taylor.

Moody has a record of serving the district all right--to its detriment. First of all, why should the Chamber of Commerce be given even more power on the school board?  Chris Fraser already gives a blank check to the superintendent. Is that what the voters wanted when they elected Taylor? No.

Second, Moody opposes public charter schools. Yes, opposes. Our legislators should pay attention to what their constituents want: more charter schools, not fewer. Take a poll of voters if you don't believe me. The present charter schools in CCSD are practically beating off students with a stick. While on the Board, Moody voted for the moratorium on new charter schools in the district.

Disgruntled voters in the sending district for Drayton Hall Elementary have just learned that their efforts for a more creative charter school in its place have been squashed by litigation from CCSD. Moody voted in favor of funding that litigation.

Supporters of Moody can point to his experience as a CPA all they want; the record shows that Moody was asleep at the switch in the 2005 train wreck that raised property taxes. Moody admitted a year later that he just took the word of administration. He didn't do the job that he was elected to do. The district raised property taxes that year by nearly 30 percent while telling the voters it was doing just the opposite.

Administration has lulled the toady majority of the Board into the same shell game in 2011. Legislators, do you really believe Moody would have held his ground against the administration this time around? As legislators you should care about rising taxes--unless you wish to be pegged as in favor of them!

The reality of Moody's prior service to the district is that he was a place marker. If the legislative delegation chooses to appoint him over someone like Henry Copeland, who will take his position seriously, it deserves defeat in the next elections.

Call or email your representatives now to give them some backbone to repel Riley's and McGinley's attempts to put a travesty back on the Board of Trustees.

Senate: Larry Grooms 803-212-6400; Michael Rose 803-212-6056; Glenn McConnell 803-212-6610; Robert Ford 803-212-6124; Chip Campsen 212-6016; Paul Campbell 803-212-6016; Clementa Pinckney 803-212-6148

House: David Mack 803-734-3192; Chip Limehouse 803-734-2977; Wendell Gilliard 803-212-6793; Mike Sottile 803-212-6880; Seth Whipper 803-734-3191; Bobby Harrell 803-734-3125; Peter McCoy 803-212-6872; Robert Brown 803-734-3170

Anyone with email addresses for this delegation can append them in a comment. Time is of the essense!

McGinley-Meyers Candidates for CCSD Seat

Pay attention.

The P&C has not only put forward the obvious candidates--Seabrook, Moody, Miller, Copeland--for the recently-vacated seat on the Charleston County School Board. It has leaked the plans of the McGinley-Meyers nexus.

The long arm of former Board member Gregg Meyers has reached into his bag of tricks and pulled out the name of William L. "Sam" Hiott, who the reporter mentions formerly served on the District 23 constituent board.

And now the rest of the story.

Meyers recruited Hiott to run against Sandi Engelman in the 2006 school board elections. After all, Hiott thought Engelman was "too divisive."

We all know those code words.

He had difficulty finding enough signatures for his petition to be valid, so the Taj Mahal found some more for him. Despite Meyers's plans, Ruth Jordan won that election.

No doubt Hiott has the common touch, since he made over $18 million dollars in 2009 in his last year as executive vice president of the Bank of South Carolina. He won't need to worry about this "salary" business. Now that he's semi-retired, he can mingle with the hoi polloi.

At least he's from the Low Country's "front porch."

Such cannot be said for McGinley's choice, Rew A. "Skip" Godow, whose Facebook page sports a 25-year-old picture, reveals no family, and states his interest in women.

The College of Charleston and Trident Technical Center employ this native of Chicago (well, Oak Brook, its tony suburb) in various administrative capacities. Who better to take McGinley's side than another member of the edublob? His Ph.D. in the Psychology of Philosophy (or is it the Philosophy of Psychology?) should come in handy on the Board.

Godow has served and continues to serve on multiple boards of directors--the Chamber of Commerce, the United Way, the Charleston Education Network, the Education Foundation, and even the Community Advisory Committee to CCSD.

You get the picture. Just the type of bureaucrat McGinley wants--can be counted on to show up for meetings and not ask too many questions.

Let's see if the Charleston legislative delegation has any common sense.

CCSD Needs Voice for Taxpayers

As the editors of the P&C have correctly stated, the newly-appointed member to the Board of Trustees (to replace the resigned Mary Ann Taylor) should be a person who reflects Taylor's views.

In fact, it makes no sense to appoint either of her opponents, Miller or Seabrook, to the Board because the voters have already rejected them once in favor of Taylor.  Nor does it make sense to allow the Chamber of Commerce another seat on the Board in the person of Brian Moody. After all, the Chamber already controls the Board in the person of Chris Fraser.

No, the most feared appointee will be one who can read financial statements and ask intelligent questions, one who will guard the interests of students in the district by guarding the wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars. That attitude alone will put that person in the voting minority--at least until the next school board election.

Do we really want another go-along-and-get-along member as the superintendent's salary and those of her close administrative staff reach for one million dollars a year? 

Yes, Henry Copeland, has locked horns with the Taj Mahal over wasteful expenditures, uninforced policies, backroom decisions, and lottery shenigans. He sounds perfect.

McGinley Subscribes to the NSNS Too?

National Sarcasm News Service, or Halloween joke? You decide.

From the Superintendent's Desk, October 31 [italics mine]:

On Monday, we honored the proud legacies of Nancy Cook, Brian Moody, and Hillery Douglas—all three of whom, after longstanding tenures on the School Board of Trustees, stepped down. We will miss them, but as I said on Monday, we know that the enduring impact of their work will be felt for a long, long time. Not only is our recent academic success a tribute to their leadership, but new buildings—such as Sanders-Clyde and Haut Gap, two schools we ceremoniously broke ground on this week—would not have come online if these Board Members had not championed the need for them.

"Come online"? Who's writing this stuff?

CCSD's McGinley: Surfing as Metaphor

That cream puff I had for breakfast today was so sweet that it nearly made me sick. [See Q&A with Charleston County Schools Superintendent Nancy McGinley.] By itself it would have been fairly sweet, but then I just had to have a second helping! [See McGinley Lets Waves Carry Stress Away.] Maybe I should save the P & C for dessert after dinner.

When you think about it, however, perhaps surfing is a fitting metaphor for McGinley's leadership in CCSD during her first (and maybe last) year as superintendent. She's here for the ride. Her "leadership" takes the form of scouting CCSD to see which wave is the strongest (that would be the five-person tag team of Meyers to Douglas to Jordan to Hampton-Green to--usually--Moody), then applying the latest appropriate educational jargon (and sometimes Broad Foundation solutions) to whatever issue is at hand. There's no doubt she means it when she says that she wants to make CCSD an excellent district; that's her career on the line as well.

Under the waves, it seems, a possible rip current is brewing. What happens if, for example, voters replace Douglas with Kandrac and Hampton-Green with Stewart? Of course, that's why she negotiated a three-year contract. Election day will tell, but if McGinley's supporters are elected, prepare yourself for the closure of more than one elementary school in District 20 and continued prevarication over Buist.

CCSD Shenanigans: The Thick of Derthick

For SIX years--SIX years--CCSD school board members voted to distribute "more money than it was supposed to" from the Lawrence Derthick Jr. Memorial Trust Fund. That's SIX years, folks, when no one watched the store, six years that, if my memory serves me correctly, encompass Don Kennedy's entire service as CCSD's chief financial officer.


To quote Friday's P & C, "The committee administering the fund has given out more money than the fund earned for the past six years. In the future, the district's finance department will notify the board chair of the amount available to be awarded."


Umm. In the future? And the Board weren't notified previously how much was available? What kind of crazy system is that?


Needless to say, the taxpayers will foot the bill for this foolishness, which member Brian Moody called "over-funding" of "worthy and legitimate causes." Moody himself is an accountant, but he didn't notice that a fund that contained $150,000 gave out $50,000 in one year, seriously depleting its principal. Fortunately, member David Engelman pointed out the discrepancy, or as he has said, "what $150,000 investment makes $50,000 in one year?"

Truth to tell, board members used the fund as a personal charity for favored groups, some undoubtedly deserving, and some, like the one run by Nancy Cook, an apparent conflict of interest. Two CCSD board members, unnamed in the article (but one is Hillery Douglas) and a third from the District 20 constituent board make the recommendations to the full CCSD board each year.

As the P & C points out, "The fund isn't supposed to fall below its principal amount, but that happened this year after the board doled out too many grants. The fund has earned an average of $500 in monthly interest for the past four years, but at that rate, the fund would take more than seven years to rebuild itself to the principal amount."

Where IS Al Parish when we need him?

CCSD: A MEGO and the Tip of the Iceberg

The appropriateness of William Safire's term--MEGO--struck me as I watched the tape of last Tuesday's meeting of the CCSD Board of Trustees. On the new school budget, MEGO--that's short for "my eyes glaze over"--truly applied as the millions of dollars flew in the air and on the Power Point and the millage fluctuated in Don Kennedy's presentation. Kennedy will not soon be named a reality-TV-show host.

It's hard to take any of it seriously (although I know the participants functioned as required by law) when on the Tuesday prior to the legislature's recess, no "hold harmless" legislation had been passed for a more-than-$10-million shortfall from the state. Yet the district mode was full- steam-ahead, counting on promises alone.

Then there's the not-so-small question raised by Ravenel regarding the accuracy of Kennedy's millage estimate. The estimate seemed to account for all the difference in other potential shortfalls and cuts. See, I did manage to stay focused for most of the presentation.

Yet the drone was punctuated, however briefly, by interesting questions and responses.

The previously-requested comparison of CCSD administrative costs in regard to other school districts was one such topic. Whether deliberately or not, the CCSD's accounting set-up for "leadership" contains ingredients not comparable to most other districts. Workers' compensation and insurance costs are included, whereas most other districts distribute those costs to individual schools. Moody made some silly remarks about allocating those costs to the schools so that the Board could claim that it had provided another $7 million to schools. I say, someone on the Board needs to request COMPARABLE percentages. Yes, that would require some research, but wasn't that the point of the Board's request in the first place? Obfuscation.

Second, did I hear correctly that the cost of Workers' Compensation had been reduced 83% in the last year???? What the heck was going on in previous years?

Also, the district's being forced to use an incorrect figure posted last Feb. 1st by the State Department of Education is yet another example of incompetence at the state level and belated response by CCSD. Since the correct number is known, and that correction adds money to CCSD, why has the Board not already pursued a legal opinion?

Last, but not least, Ravenel pointedly brought up the auditing process for the district. Frankly, I was at first relieved to hear that there WAS an audit. His point, however, was dead on: Kennedy sits on the committee that selects the auditing firm that audits. . . Kennedy.

Why do the Board members insist on creating conflicts of interest? For example, Nancy Cook makes a big deal of abstaining from voting on CCSD funds distributed to the shelter she directs, but she's still board chairman, isn't she? Surely we have progressed from the "we're-all-ladies-and-gentlemen-here-and-can-trust-our-pure-motives" mindset?

In fact, why have written contracts? Let's do everything on a handshake, like in the good old days.

Would that we could!

Economic Idiocy

At the end of the P&C's article today complimenting State Senator Glenn McConnell on his letter asking the attorney general for an interpretation of the state school funding formula in light of last year's tax reform, the reporters appended an email from newly-elected CCSD school board member Brian Moody. Here is what appeared in the news article:

"School board member Brian Moody wrote in an e-mail to The Post and Courier that he couldn't agree more with McConnell's letter and was thrilled that he wrote the attorney general. The issue has nothing to do with where people stand on the property tax debate. It's an issue of fair play, he wrote.

'If there's more money being funneled into public education in South Carolina, how can you reconcile that the largest tax contributor, Charleston County, would receive less money than the year before,' Moody wrote. 'The answer is, you can't. Frankly, I'm not sure how a reasonable person could see this any other way.'"

The reporters wisely chose not to comment further, or, if they did, their response was cut off.

Moody clearly doesn't understand what the formula is all about--equalizing money spent in districts across the state (in Texas it was known as the "Robin Hood" law).

Let's try some simple economics for Brian, who either doesn't get it or is deliberately being obtuse:

Suppose you have a yearly pie and each district gets a piece of it each year. If all of the pieces are the same size, the district that has baked really large pies in the past will end up with a much larger total than the district that hasn't had the ingredients to bake a big pie. In fact, the latter district has gone hungry. If you want to equalize the results for the two districts, the larger slice that you give to the hungry district will mean that the pie-rich district will get a smaller piece.

Brian, there's no way around this economic fact. It doesn't matter if taxes come from property or from sales: the pie is the same size. Giving CCSD $11.4 million more will mean that the hungry districts will get $11.4 million less.

In the past CCSD would have dealt with a shortfall by raising property taxes and again spending more than the less wealthy districts. Apparently our state legislators did not want that result. They are the ones who have limited the district's ability to raise taxes on owner-occupied homes. It was a really popular idea at the time, Brian. Do you remember?

There is nothing, I repeat, nothing about this result that should be a surprise to anyone except the exact amount of the deficit for CCSD.

That's what a "reasonable" person should conclude.

Update: I stand corrected: Brian Moody is NOT "newly elected." He is serving his second term on CCSD. I guess his remarks just suggest that he's new!