By Javar Juarez | Op-Ed
Columbia, S.C. - In a special meeting held this afternoon at Richland One School District headquarters, members of the press and public were presented with compelling evidence surrounding the Vince Ford Early Learning Center, revealing tactics allegedly used by the South Carolina Department of Education to obstruct progress within the district.
Chief Financial Officer Sherri Matthews-Hazel delivered a detailed presentation, outlining the district’s response to accusations led by State Superintendent of Education Ellen Weaver, along with the involvement of certain rogue Democratic legislators and district board members, including Commissioners Barbara Weston and Robert Lominack.
The presentation addressed the district’s response to the Inspector General’s report, which cited alleged procurement violations and so-called “wasteful spending.” However, the details laid out suggest that these accusations were part of a coordinated effort to derail the Vince Ford Early Learning Center—a vital project aimed at enhancing educational opportunities for underprivileged Black children in the district.
Superintendent Ellen Weaver’s Alleged Interference with the Vince Ford Early Childhood Learning Center
At the heart of this controversy lies the Vince Ford Early Childhood Learning Center—a project intended to serve the predominantly Black, high-poverty Lower Richland community. Despite initial headlines sensationalizing the $31 million cost, today’s meeting uncovered the truth behind the price tag, with district officials confirming that the funding followed standard protocols and budgeting practices used by school districts across the country.
Contrary to public speculation, the Vince Ford Center’s costs are aligned with typical allocations from the district’s general budget, a fact confirmed by the superintendent and district staff. Currently, the district operates early childhood programs at over 26 schools, many of which have waiting lists, and is renting additional space for early childhood staff and parking—costing the district approximately $80,000 per year. Establishing the Vince Ford Center would provide a permanent facility, saving the district significant funds in the long run.
Yet, as district officials revealed today, Superintendent Ellen Weaver’s actions have allegedly obstructed this project, leaving the community’s children without the educational resources they desperately need. Commissioner Tamika Myers voiced her frustration at Weaver’s tactics, saying, “It appears that the superintendent of education is not interested in us building this facility for children in the Lower Richland community…they feel like that community doesn’t need the support or assistance.” Myers added, “I would rather her just say that she doesn’t want us to build in Lower Richland than to take us through all of this.”
A response by the SC Department of Education featured on WIS news today stated: The Department’s October 31, 2024, letter addressing multiple, overlapping fiscal concerns raised in the State inspector General's July report speaks for itself. The public should not be confused by diversionary tactics. The Department looks forward to working closely with the new board to implement necessary fiscal improvements and rebuild the truth that the Richland One community deserves.”
District’s Timeline of Compliance and Alleged Obstruction
The district detailed its timeline of compliance and corrective actions in response to the claims made by the South Carolina Department of Education (SCDE) regarding fiscal caution and procurement issues.
On August 2, 2024, SCDE placed Richland One on fiscal caution, citing unresolved procurement issues despite the district’s efforts to rectify these matters as early as June. The district’s CFO, Sherri Matthews-Hazel, clarified that “the P-card audit findings were resolved in June, per the South Carolina Department of Education audit report.”
Despite complying with SCDE’s requirements, including submitting a Recovery Plan on October 1, the district continued to face delays and obstructions. Matthews-Hazel stated, “We weren’t expecting that because we know we had done a good job. Our staff did an excellent job in that area, but we never heard anything until October 17th.” She expressed frustration that “the state department had escalated” without clarification.
Commissioner Cheryl Harris further pointed out the SCDE’s delay in communication, noting, “So we received notification of this four months later. It took four months for us to get it.” Matthews-Hazel affirmed, “Yes, that’s right. That’s correct.”
Allegations of Bad Faith and Lack of Communication
Today’s meeting revealed a troubling pattern of obstruction and bad faith by the South Carolina Department of Education (SCDE). Members of the public learned that the SCDE provided a technical team to assist Richland One in addressing concerns raised by the Inspector General. Chief Financial Officer Sherri Matthews-Hazel recounted how, after working closely with this team and receiving positive feedback on the district’s recovery plan, she was blindsided when the same team reported to the SCDE that the plan was “deficient”—without offering any further guidance or identifying specific gaps.
“We were assured that everything looked good,” Matthews-Hazel stated, “only to find out later that this team went back to the SCDE with a negative report. It felt like a setup.” This unexpected turn set off alarms, as district officials realized the very team assigned to provide support had ultimately undermined the district’s progress by submitting damaging feedback to Superintendent Ellen Weaver.
District officials also expressed frustration over the SCDE’s repeated refusal to engage in direct communication. Superintendent Dr. Craig Witherspoon confirmed that the district had made multiple attempts to arrange a meeting with Weaver, all of which went unanswered. “We have tried to set up a meeting, but we are not sure why that hasn’t happened,” Witherspoon explained. “We need to understand any gaps in our recovery plan, and the SCDE’s own team could have provided insight.”
Board Chair Dr. Aaron Bishop emphasized the importance of open dialogue, pointing out the SCDE’s contradictory approach. “It’s very concerning that we can't have a conversation between two superintendents,” Bishop said, “and yet the SCDE is escalating this situation, bringing in outside auditors but refusing a direct conversation. We’ve been ‘leveled up’ without any discussion, any understanding of the supposed deficiencies, and without conversation—just correspondence.”
Commissioner Angela Clyburn highlighted additional red flags, noting a significant delay in communication. She pointed out the four-month gap between the SCDE’s letter on June 10, which acknowledged the district’s corrective actions, and the October communication from Weaver’s office. “Why did it take so long for us to be notified that these issues were supposedly still outstanding?” Clyburn questioned. “This kind of delay speaks to something deeper than mere oversight.”
The timeline of events paints a troubling picture. On September 30, the SCDE granted an extension for the district’s recovery plan submission, ostensibly to provide additional clarification on “non-procurement issues.” Yet, after the district submitted its plan on October 1, the SCDE continued to add new requirements, including a demand for the district to confirm it could guarantee future insurance costs—an unusual and arguably unreasonable request for any district.
Further complicating matters, on August 2, Superintendent Ellen Weaver raised concerns about the district’s liability regarding pending lawsuits over stormwater runoff at the Vince Ford Early Learning Center construction site. The district’s response clarified, “The District is required to maintain liability insurance. The South Carolina School Boards Trust (SCSBIT) provides coverage for the district. The District has no financial implications related to the lawsuits outside of the deductible and premiums paid annually for liability coverage.”
The district’s response underscored the SCDE’s apparent misunderstanding—or disregard—for standard procedures. One attendee remarked, “It’s clear that Ellen Weaver, with no prior governance or real experience working in the classroom or as an education administrator, has no understanding of how insurance or districts work.”
The sequence of events and lack of transparent communication from the SCDE leave little doubt in the minds of district officials and community members: this appears to be a concerted effort to obstruct the district’s progress and the development of the Vince Ford Early Learning Center.
Barbara Weston and Robert Lominack Resist Progress for District Initiatives
Despite the comprehensive report presented by the District's Chief Financial Officer, which thoroughly addressed concerns from the SIG report, Barbara Weston and some of her supporters remained dissatisfied. Weston consistently questioned the information presented, at times seeming to intentionally misinterpret details. In one instance, she continued pressing on a point even after realizing her question had already been answered, seemingly to save face. Much of her frustration, along with Commissioner Robert Lominack’s, was directed toward Superintendent Dr. Craig Witherspoon. Mr. Lominack claimed he hadn’t received a breakdown of costs for the Vince Ford Early Learning Center, though several people, including commissioners, executives, and the CFO, had openly discussed the project's finances. The financial aspects were transparently outlined within the general budget, just as with all other district projects and programs. Superintendent Witherspoon reiterated that the Vince Ford Early Learning Center is an integrated part of the district's overall mission, with no separate or hidden agenda.
Dr. Aaron Bishop urged both Mr. Lominack and Ms. Weston to conduct more thorough research. Mr. Lominack’s responses appeared detached, at times defensive, suggesting a lack of engagement with the discussion as a whole.
Barbara Weston and Robert Lominack have become perceived as resistant to student-focused progress, even aligning with groups known for spreading misinformation to undermine district initiatives. This coalition has recently helped secure board seats for individuals like Ericka Hursey and Richard Moore, who, along with former Commissioner Beatrice King, have previously opposed programs addressing disparities among Black male students. They have also shown a critical stance toward Superintendent Witherspoon, who once again today countered misinformation surrounding the Vince Ford Early Learning Center.
In a telling moment, Barbara Weston left the meeting early, avoiding questions from the press regarding her line of inquiry. Her supporters in attendance seemed similarly unpersuaded by the facts presented by the CFO, underscoring a persistent faction within the community resistant to changes that would benefit students and future generations in Lower Richland.
The incoming board’s alignment with entrenched interests continues to show hostility toward Black leadership, paradoxically working against the long-term interests of their own community.
Call for Investigation and Legal Accountability
On Tuesday, November 5, 2024, I testified before Superintendent Ellen Weaver at a specially called meeting in response to the recent school board decision to ban books. I warned that, should Weaver continue to infringe upon the First Amendment rights of South Carolinians, I would be compelled to file a claim against her surety bond. This bond, required under South Carolina Title 59, Chapter 3, is necessary for her role as a constitutional officer and obligates her to perform her duties faithfully and impartially. As outlined in state law, the Superintendent of Education must provide a $5,000 bond to the state, approved by the Governor, conditioned upon the faithful and impartial performance of her duties.
It has become apparent that Superintendent Weaver is not acting with impartiality; rather, she appears to be targeting school districts across South Carolina in a drive to advance her agenda for educational privatization. Weaver’s position, arguably lacking qualifications, seems rooted in alignment with certain MAGA and partisan interests that are out of step with the needs of South Carolina’s diverse communities. Her actions align with efforts by the Republican supermajority to obscure elements of history and limit opportunities for Black South Carolinians.
The potential for a legal challenge is mounting, as many in the community have formally warned Weaver that her continued disregard for the needs of Richland County’s Black community will not go unchallenged. Her delay in engaging with the current board raises concerns about a strategy to stall progress until newly elected commissioners, aligned with her interests, take office. This approach appears aimed at advancing an agenda influenced by special interests, White nationalist sympathies, and a pursuit of political power.
Conclusion
One thing is certain: the Lower Richland community does not tolerate dishonesty. Those within the community who allied with misguided individuals to unseat Commissioner Cheryl Harris may soon face the consequences of their actions. Today’s meeting brought forth troubling facts impacting the district’s large population of Black students, many of whom live in poverty. In effect, the community’s own representatives have misled them; even some local Democrats betrayed their constituents, using discontented voices within the community to derail progress.
When the full scope of these events reaches households across Lower Richland, it’s unlikely that families will be pleased.
The ongoing conflict between Richland County School District One and the South Carolina Department of Education highlights deeper systemic issues within South Carolina’s educational landscape. As accusations of obstruction and bad faith persist, the future of the Vince Ford Early Childhood Learning Center—and the children it would serve—hangs in the balance. Community leaders and district officials are now mobilizing to hold power players accountable, standing resolute in their conviction that Lower Richland’s children deserve the opportunities they have been promised.
#LowerRichland #RichlandCounty #VinceFordEarlyLearningCenter #VFELC #BlackNews #BlackVoices #Education #SouthCarolina #EllenWeaver #MAGA #ErickaHursey #RobertLominack #BarbaraWeston #BeatriceKing #GrowSC #AaronBishop #CherylHarris #JamieDevine #TamikaMyers #AngelaClyburn #CraigWitherspoon
section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. All rights and credit go directly to their rightful owner and no copyright infringement is intended.
コメント