TAXPAYER HERO COULD BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE
Kim Murphy – a Midlands, S.C. school board member and one of the state of South Carolina’s true taxpayer heroes – is on the verge of being removed from office over a residency dispute.
According to Richland County, S.C. tax records – Murphy is a resident of that county. In fact she’s paid taxes there for years. However one of her political rivals is claiming she’s a resident of Lexington County – which he claims would make her ineligible to serve on the board of Lexington Richland School District Five.
Robert Gantt, a typical pro-status quo educrat (and longtime leader of this corrupt district), is spearheading the effort to have Murphy removed from her post.
Why? Because he wants to return to the good ol’ days of wasting tax dollars on excess bureaucracy and unnecessary projects without anyone being the wiser (a.k.a. before Murphy was elected). Also it’s apparently becoming too time consuming for Gantt and his cronies to continue their elaborate efforts to keep Murphy out of the loop by denying her information she’s entitled to as a member of the board.
Murphy is one of the few local elected officials in South Carolina who has “walked the walk” when it comes to watching out for taxpayers – which is the real reason she’s being attacked (as opposed to Gantt haggling over some line on a map).
“I don’t agree with everything Murphy has done but this seems absurd,” one resident of the district told FITS, referring to Gantt’s efforts as a “witch hunt” by a “corrupt district.”
We concur.
As we noted a year ago in giving Murphy one of our “Taxpayer Hero” awards, “if every local government official in South Carolina was as committed to protecting the taxpayer’s bottom line as Murphy is, this state’s local governments wouldn’t be a combined $10.4 billion in debt.”
Taxpayers in this district benefit from Murphy being on this board … and boards across the state would benefit from having more Kim Murphy’s on them.
That’s why this witch hunt is so bad … not only would it kick a true taxpayer hero out of office, it would have a chilling effect on other fiscal conservatives looking to make a difference at the local level.
***
123 comments
I agree with Mr. Gantt.
It is possible there is an error in the location of respective County Lines as well as School District 5 Attendance Zone Lines.
If the question of legitimacy is applicable to the Goose, Ms. Murphy, then it should be applicable to the Gander, Mr. Gantt.
Not only should both of their respective properties be surveyed but everyone who claims to live in School District 5, claims to live in Richland County. claims to live in Lexington County or claims to live in a specific Attendance Zone should have their properties surveyed at the expense of School District Five.
If we are going to stomp out corruption, by damn let’s do some real kick ass black boot stomping.
While we are at it why not have School District 5 fund full psychological and physical exams for every man/woman/child/other in the District.
I have been up at Bi-Lo on double coupon Wednesday and have run into more than one bat shit crazy person who should be taken off the voter roles.
Is it out of the realm of possibility that some of our current problems can be attributed to the fact that a significant number of crazy people have voted in the past.
Go get ’em District 5, I have your six and you have my vote.
You need only look at the stickers on Murphy’s shirt in this photo! Bat shit crazy. The only one missing is Comptroller Eckstrom.
Coming soon from Sic another update on the Old and the Restless “Keckstrom” District 5…
I know little about her, but judged by the people who hate her she seems OK to me.
I guess that Sic Willy agrees that spending some 12 million dollars to fight a dranage ditch was proper spending of tax payer dollars…. Way to go “Tax Payer Hero”. What could have been built with that 12 million. A Fine Arts building in Chapin??
The reality is that If you really knew the entire story, you would know that District 5 did not go on this so called “witch hunt.” This was brought to the attention of District 5 so see… NO One made Murphy a target. Live by the sword… Die by the sword.
If she really does live in Richland County then no harm.. but if she is in Lexington county.. she should resign or be removed. Either way the meter for the tax payer will be running again.
For once, please get the entire story BEFORE you write something. Well, I guess that falls in to the same as “the check is in the mail” and “it was only driven to church on Sunday”.
Peace out my brother.
I don’t think that $12 million dollar figure is right. I think that is a political statement this District likes to throw around. I don’t think Murphy should have brought the law suit because of the ditch, but there is no way Gantt isn’t going after her on this property line business. And I heard that he was the one who first began looking into it. This Board ran a dity, nasty campaign to “stack” this Board with all like minded candidates and now they are trying to get rid of Murphy. I hope they dont get away with it.
It was and is a stream, not a ditch, and if the district and its consultant hadn’t lied about that they wouldn’t have given Murphy an easy item to grab ahold of.
No, I don’t agree with many of Kim Murphy’s methods; however, lawdog, I can certainly tell from your words that you are nothing more than a District 5 Kool-Aid drinker who loves to slander Murphy along with all the other MILF b!tches of Peyton Place… um, I mean Chapin. So, while you and your Timberlake cohorts are busy gossiping about Murphy while guzzling wine at your Chapin Chickfests, I’ll be laughing my a$$ off while your hubbies are out boinking interesting, exciting, and just generally fun-to-be-around women.
It takes 2 to tango- if you blame Kim Murphy for wasting 12 million, then you equally must blame the other board members who opposed her.
If you believe SD5 actually spent 12mil defending that I have some swamp land I’d like to sell you. That is some inflated number based on “increased building costs due to delays. It has no basis in real numbers. I’d like to know how much was spent filling in the valley at Irmo Elementary so they could build that 17mil addition.
Kim Murphy is crazy as a bat! She is not a tax payer hero. She is a drama queen!
I think Robert Gant is a wicked old man who thinks he is above the law. He is a liar and his daughter is too. She got on that web site of hers during this campaign and lied and lied and encouraged others to lie. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree here.
Wayne, thanks for showing us your true colors.
I dont know Mrs.Murphy but I like the work she’s doing. I’m not a fan whatsoever of the status quo on the school board such as Gantt, Burns and Bumgartner.
I concur. Time for her to move on.
To: Bill: Showing “your true colors.” Well go to Citizens for a Better District Five and read the article on “Signs of our Times” where Loveless and Watson put up their signs on an unauthorized business location. The owner came to town and removed them. They filed a police report and put them back up. When the police came to the site and called Loveless’ husband he told the police that the owner’s sister gave him permission. The owner said he didn’t have a sister. The police gave him an hour to remove the signs. Character Counts.
Gantt’s daughter had an entire web site which she devoted largely to signs. I am sure all sides had signs that were somehow destroyed. But she tried to get people to lie about sign destruction. One lady wrote that the wind destoryed her sign and she replied on and on again, “are you sure it was the wind. I know someone who lives in your neighborhood. And the whole web site was full of lies. I thought there was something in a teacher’s oath or contract about honesty???Character Counts.
You apparently haven’t seen many meetings. Ms. Murphy always politely asks questions and is treated very unprofessionally by both Robert Gantt and Beth Burn Watson. I believe this latest scheme by Gantt will back fire and maybe voters will see the truth. Gantt thinks he can do whatever he wants without consideration of the taxpayers or parents. There is plenty that needs to be addressed in this District, but how does he open his new term: Trying to get rid of a Board Member who has a different opinion on some issues than he does.One of the incumbents who lost in this race wrote that she was so disappointed in the nastiness of this campaign, that “she thought they were friends with a different viewpoint,”, In this District, a different view point makes you an enemy.
And you apparently know nothing of parliamentary rules that govern meetings of public bodies. The rules dictate how and when you can ask questions, provide for rules regarding time allowed, and most importantly dictate that if an issue is not on the agenda it cannot be discussed. Murphy is constantly trying to amend the agenda to add things.
The times I have seen Gantt shut down Murphy in the meetings it is always because she is violating the rules, but I believe that is by design. She always has her fans in the audience that have no concept of the rules and are all aghast at how she is treated. The rules are the same for everyone.
Hey..another story planted on FITS by Kim Murphy. Remember when she planted the story that D5 was trying to remove the pledge of allegiance from the classrooms (turned out to be total BS). BS just like this story.
I was at the board meeting, the district has a letter from the Budget and Control Board (the division that deals with political boundaries) that stated Kim Murphy does NOT live in Richland County. The board told her at the meeting she had one week to respond to the letter.
Given all the crap Sic has spewed over the last several weeks regarding the ineptitude of Richland County officials would it surprise anyone that the county or counties put her house on the wrong side of the line? Guess she should have double checked the plat.
Bottom line, either she lives in Richland County or she doesn’t, if she doesn’t she cannot hold the “Richland County” seat on the D5 board.
As far as the “taxpayer hero” crap it is laughable on its face. I bet Murphy has wasted more time and money in the district than all other critics combined. Her 3 lawsuits over the Chapin HS renovations were an expensive joke. Wonder why Sic won’t tell us about the millions she wasted and that SHE WON NOT ONE SINGLE LEGAL DECISION IN A TWO YEAR BATTLE ALL THE WAY TO THE SC SUPREME COURT. Does that sound like a reasonable, responsible “taxpayer hero” to you?
No, I don’t agree with many of Kim Murphy’s methods; however, DC, I can certainly tell from your words that you are nothing more than a District 5 Kool-Aid drinker who loves to slander Murphy along with all the other MILF b!tches of Peyton Place… um, I mean Chapin. So, while you and your Timberlake cohorts are busy gossiping about Murphy while guzzling wine at your Chapin Chickfests, I’ll be laughing my a$$ off while your hubbies are out boinking interesting, exciting, and just generally fun-to-be-around women.
Talk about wasting money. Who authorized these new field houses at the high schools. Did we need that with so many kids still in portables. And this new school they are putting up in Chapin. Will only serve two grades. Has anyone considered how much more it will cost to run two schools with two grades each. Crazy economics. Gantt says he expects it to pass. I guess he does as they have stacked the Board with like minded people. And this one lady they put on the Board couldn’t even answer the questions at the forums.
Do you even listen to the board meetings “Wayne” or do you just get your information from Murphy?
The field houses were constructed to capture space in the main buildings occupied by athletics and use the space for academics.
The two grade schools were proposed to deal with overcrowding in the Chapin cluster without having to re-draw attendance lines. Since you and your buddies have been spreading the specter of rezoning for months I would think you would be pleased that the district put forth this plan.
But why let the facts get in the way of a good story?
You don’t know what you are talking about. Gantt initiated the inquiry about the property line. He started the whole thing. More lies.
I am sure that Ms. Murphy has fed information to Will Folks in the past, but this particular nugget ran on and in the other local media outlets days ago. For once, FITS is the last to know it seems.
I disagree with the action that Ms. Murphy took against the district. I am not going to speculate as to her intentions, but there is no doubt that her focus can be misguided and her approach can be downright maddening.
However, if you are able to get past personal feelings and bias and really LISTEN, she does make some good points from time to time. Regardless of what county she resides in, as a taxpayer within Lexington-Richland #5 she is entitled (like the rest of us) to information regarding district spending and operations. This board has a long standing history of withholding information and telling constituents only what they want them to know when they want them to know it.
Ms. Murphy has been on the board the shortest amount of time. Several of the other board members have reigned, or shall I say ruled, for eight, ten, twelve years. We moved to this community in 2004. I am not exactly sure when it all started, but this infighting, this turmoil has been going on for the entire time we have lived here. It just does not end.
Strong leaders lead through adversity. They collaborate, they compromise, they don’t point fingers and they don’t make excuses. Ms. Murphy is one person. Even if she is removed from this board, she is not going away. She challenged and questioned every bit as much as a private citizen as she has as an elected official. If Mr. Gantt is incapable of working with her, of dealing with her (along with the thousands of community members who voted her into office), then perhaps he should be the one to step aside. He has been the chairman of the board for years. The buck stops with him and so he must take his fair share of the blame for this mess we are in.
The GOP…the party that hates frivilous lawsuits unless they are the ones bringing them.
Do you even listen to the board meeting “Wayne” or do you just get you information from Murphy?
The field houses were constructed to capture space in the main buildings occupied by athletics and use the space for academics.
The two grade schools were proposed to deal with overcrowding in the Chapin cluster without having to re-draw attendance lines. Since you and your buddies have been spreading the specter of rezoning for months I would think you would be pleased that the district put forth this plan.
But why let the facts get in the way of a good story?
Two schools a considerable distance from each other serving two grades each is a tremendous waste of tax payer money. It costs more over many years to maintain two schools serving just two grades each. Not to mention the inconvenience of parents having to take their kids out of elementary school after the 4th grade and sending them to a 5th and 6th grade center; then moving them several miles away for the 7th and 8th grades. Wait until the parents really get to experience this.And the field houses were not needed. There is no way you can sell that one. Heard they had tile floors?
The parents in the Chapin cluster were consulted, their #1 concern was no re-zoning. The parents prevailed, sorry we can’t have an elementary school with 1500 kids in it to make you happy.
The Irmo and Dutch Fork clusters all go to Crossroads for just 6th grade and the parents love it.
Don’t waste your breath, Wayne. I’m sure that Bill is merely a Mungo groupie who advocates that this corrupt board push more and more kids into the NW, undeveloped corner of the District. Yeah, you’ll here about all of this proposed change being for the kids; but, in such a funny and overt way, the intelligent amongst us all know that it is about the construction of yet more “vinyl villages” for the financial benefit of the Chamber of Commerce crowd.
The county council are the ones approving all the re-zoning necessary to build. They are going to continue giving Mungo and every other builder whatever they want.
Bill,
With all due respect, I am a parent in the Chapin cluster and I was not consulted. Nor were any of my friends or acquaintances. In fact, a lot of folks knew nothing of this plan until the article ran on one of the back pages of the paper the other day. And no, now that we do know, a lot of us are not happy about our children leaving elementary school after fourth grade and being bumped around to two different middle schools.
I voted for the bond referendum in 2008, but this plan, like the plan for the new high school, and the field houses and the auditorium are so far removed from what we originally voted on. At that time, we were told there would be a fourth cluster. In fact, when we bought our house a couple of years ago, we expected to be attending this new cluster of schools. In light of the fact that enrollment across the district is declining, that some schools are currently well under capacity, and that most all of us now have an even tighter budget with the implementation of more federal taxes (just this month), would it not make sense to go back to the drawing board and consult the community, the entire community as we will ALL foot the bill, prior to approving any more spending?
Yes, but it the major water and sewer lines needed for the schools (of which his develop follows) that Mungo is after. He doesn’t want to install those for his vinyl villages… too costly! Thus, voila, the district (us) financially aids him in the profitability of his sprawl ventures.
DC – I am sure you were generalizing, but that is the problem with generalizations. They are rarely accurate. We don’t all love the 6th grade school. I don’t have a 6th grader yet, but I don’t like the concept. Crossroads has super leadership, some great teachers, yes. However, a lot of folks share my concerns relative to the model. In fact, I often speak with parents who have moved or are considering a move to avoid sending their child to Crossroads.
CoolAireHeights …..
Dude, can’t you even write and original thought? Man, I feel cheated.. The same reply to me and “DC” ?? No, no wine drinking here.. Onlyt facts that Murphy wasted $$$$$ that you have been better spent. SLANDER ??? What slander? Only facts my brother.
I should not have expected better. Make a really STUPID post when I don’t have a clue…
Like mama said ” STUPID is as STUPID does”.
LOL
lawdog, sorry, no need to reinvent this post. After all, once you’ve seen one District 5 Sheepish Chapin B!tch, you’ve seen them all.
To: DC – You are Nuts. People move or send their kids to private schools to avoid Crossroads. Lies.
And most of the parents in the Chapin cluster don’t know about the two schools. Lies.
Just read the craziest thing ever. Parents love Crossroads. That is crazy. It’s a zoo.
I’ve had three kids go through CrossRoads; it was a madhouse. Whoever thought up the idea of sending a huge percentage of the sixth graders of an entire district to one school was a moron.
To Cicero. You are so right. Whoever would say the parents love Crossroads. And that could still be fixed. It is beyond horrible. And whoever thought of putting all those 6th graders together is nuts. Recognize it Board and do something about it. Spend your time on fixing projects like that instead of trying to measure a property line and ousting an elected Board member.
And while you are at it reconsider what you are doing in Chapin. You are going to damage the property values around Lake Murray. Who wants to buy a house in a community where they are told well for the 1st – 4th grade your child will go to the school in the area. But in 5th and 6th they will be bused several miles to a school for the 5th and 6th grades. But wait in the 7th and 8th they come back to the area. But then in the 9th – 12th grade they go back again.
It doesn’t make sense. And the cost will me much greater to maintain. It may fix the immediate over crowding but the long term cost is going to be enormous. Add the cost inefficiency to the curb appeal of selling a house around the Lake Murray School attendance zone and it is a loser.
Ouch CoolAireHeights. That really hurt.
To: Dutch Fork Parent. You are so right about people moving to avoid Cross Roads. We moved to Chapin and now learn that they have to leave Lake Murray after the 4th grade and go to Chapin and then back again. We are so unhappy. I don’t know if it will be much better than Cross Roads. Why couldn’t they have like a K-3rd grade and then 4th, 5th and 6th.
They are going to ruin the Chapin cluster by setting up two middle schools miles apart. Where is the logic in this? People are moving out of the Dutch Fork cluster to avoid Crossroads. And now after investing in property in Chapin we find they are thinking of building a separate school for just 7th and 8th grade. They are going to hurt property values in the Chapin area if they do this. Why don’t they go back to the original plan and have a cluster to serve the Lake Murray cluster and another one to serve the Chapin cluster. People will avoid moving into an area with this set up.Not to mention the enormous waste to tax payers to maintain these two separate schools, not to mention transporting kids miles apart. Go back to the table on this.
Kim Murphy is the most polite member on that School Board. She is polite no matter the abuse she takes from Gantt and Beth Burn Watson. She certainly isn’t a drama queen but truly shows true character and poise in the way she conducts herself. It is admirable in terms of the abuse she suffers. And it never seems to be personal with her.
Polite + Correct
Wasted 12 milluion tax dollars = ABSOLUTEKLY Correct
Emily – You lie!
Emily – You lie!
I believe that $12 million dollar figure is propaganda. And this District can’t say anything about wasting money on law suits. They are constantly setting the District up to be sued. Ask Cromer how many lawsuits he has and has had against this District. Also ask him how many times he has won. Their mishandling of this teacher over the flag issue has gotten them nationa attention and set us up for yet another law suit. One which most think he will win. How much will tax payers spend on this. They have no regard for tax payers money in regard to law suits. This Board thinks they are ABOVE THE LAW and BULLY their way into law suit after law suit.
Well there is something to be said for being polite. Beth Burn Watson’s role on this Board is to be nasty to Kim Murphy. While Murphy is refused the right to ask a question, Watson is allowed to rant and rave about Murphy. And Gantt is obsessed with Kim Murphy. At the forums, when she wasn’t even running, he kept going back to her. He blames her for every thing. It is nothing but an obsession.
And speaking of Watson’s role as a tyrant, it is interesting to note that her ex-husband had not one but THREE of her opponents’ signs going across the entire front of his dental practice on Broad River Road in Lexington County. Interesting indeed.
Perhaps it’s just me but Murphy has a big green sticker that says ” School Choice Now “.
Should a Board Member on a Public School Board promote PUBLIC SCHOOLS ??
How much Howard Rich Money did she take ??
Hey! I think school choice would be great for public education! District 5 would spend our resources on trying to do a better job of educating kids so their parents wouldn’t want to take them out of our schools to a private school. The focus would actually be out back on education! Teachers would get the respect they deserved and, in turn, would be even more excited about teaching!
District 5 is afraid of the competition. They are hand selecting Board members and running as a team. These members are no more than “mechanical dummies.” Mrs. Loveless, with all due respect, has no credentials to be on a school board. She couldn’t answer the questions at the forum. All they want her for is to vote their way. Jan Hammond and Jim Turner usually voted with them, but sometimes they would raise a question. Sorry with Gantt and White (the two running the Board) you can’t occasionally ask a question or have a different opinion. It is scary what they are doing to this Board.
Let’s look at some facts about Lexington 5:
Second lowest millage rate among the 7 Midlands School Districts (www.Sccommerce.com)
10th best rated School District in SC with the second highest number of students in that ranking (www.schooldigger.com)
SAT Average 1528 which is 92 points higher than SC average and 28 points higher than the National average. (www.ed.sc.gov)
So here we have a school district that has been called corrupt, wasteful and incompetent by opponents and yet they consistently put up results. The opponents resort to namecalling and even accusing wives of drinking while their husbands sleep around. Opponents use terms like “Kool-aid drinkers” for anyone who supports the district. And who should we listen to?
The tenth best rated school district in South Carolina? Wow that is low. We used to be at the top? Also where is the bragging rights when we are 10th best in a State that is 49th in the nation. We can, should and could be better. Maybe we need to spend more money investing in good teachers and less on building facilities in a school district that isn’t growing.
And no matter to any of this, it is WRONG to try and oust a Board member based on a property line (just discovered by Gantt)who paid taxes in the District she serves and was voted in by that District. The best I remember she got over 5,000 votes. Are you going to let Gantt disenfranchise those voters. Oh don’t tell me he and White have a plan to suggest Alberse (White’s running mate) who got a scattering of votes. It seems to me that no matter what side you are on, this looks FISHY.
You are right, we use to be first. However, if you look at demographics (free and reduced lunch, poverty level, mean income) then I would say that we have held our own. Sure we can hire more teachers, but where will we place them? Also, this board has hired a visionary leader in Dr. Hefner who is putting together a plan for magnet schools that would allow parents and students to choose schools and to cross zoning lines. I thought that is what Fits and others wanted…school choice.
Kind of right, kind of wrong, Tnelson. Are you talking about the magnet school at Spring Hill that is based on the lottery system that will merely move the mundane from Irmo and Dutch Fork, to the Spring Hill Community? If so, please tell me how a magnet school not built around the “best and brightest” approach is going to be any better than what we have now?
10th best? We used to be THE BEST. And BS!!! The millage rate in District 5 brings in more $’s per student than Lex 1. When you say District 5 has the lowest millage rate in the Midlands, that does not mean they are taxing us less. It means we have a greater assessed value and therefore it doesn’t take same amount of mils to bring in the same amount of money as the other Midlands school districts. For District 5 to use this as a reason to “increase millage”, it’s a slap in the face of the average person that trusts district officials and thinks they are looking out for the best interests of there kids and pocketbook. Robber barons. Go get ‘um Kim Murphy
To: Treston: I totally disagree with your comment about Dr. Hefner’s visionary qualities. This magnet school concept he, and Dr. Andersen before him, put together to get studnets into the Irmo cluster is a huge FLOP. This school at Harbison West that houses both a gifted and talented program and a regular school is two schools in one.
We need a more creative approach to the Irmo cluster.People in my neighborhood, near Harbison West, cannot sell their homes. They stay on the market for months. No one is going to move here and send their child to Harbison West. And some of these magnet programs have absurd emphais. Dr. Hefner doesn’t understand the concept ov a fully functional magnet program. These type approaches is why people aren’t moving into our area.
We in the Irmo cluster have to organize and admit that this Board and Dr. Hefner have failed us and elect Board members who will come up with more creative solutions for our cluster. I don’t want to die in my house for lack of a buyer and I don’t want to move to Chapin.
Uh, does she live there or not?
Our eventual AI robot overlords sure are going to save us a lot of time, as evidenced by the above commentary.
To say that Hefner is a visionary is far out. He is a retired Superintendent who is here, just like Berg before him, to pick up a few extra dollars. His vision of magnet schools escapes the whole concept of a true magnet school. Isn’t the Spring Hill new school a magnet school based on jobs. And isn’t it right next to the Cate Center which has the same emphasis. Has anyone ever heard of a magnet school that isn’t so narrowly focused? And aren’t both of these schools a considerable distance from Irmo?
OK – SHOW ME THE MONEY – AND YOU MAY SEE WHY THIS DISTRICT IS CALLED CORRUPT. Go to the SC.Gov-SC State Ethics Commission Public Disclosure and Accountability System web site and you will note contributions from both construction companies and builders on both Beth Burn Watson’s list as well as Gantt’s. Maybe that is why they keep building these schools and then these builders come forwad building houses around them. All of this in a District that isn’t growing. You will note that Ed White received contributions from these same companies.
One such company Contract Construction, who gave money to both Gantt and White, happened to get the contract on one of the field houses?
And on Gant’s list is a $1,000 donation from a well known Democratic supporter. Talking about the Democratic Party – didn’t Beth Watson resign from the school board to run for an office in the Democratic party and when she didn’t win, come bak to her old post on the Board.
Kim don’t give up. We need you to continue raising questions.
So Watson and Gantt are both Democrats. That explains why the Dutch Fork teacher was placed on leave for posting a sign that said, “the road to hell is paved by Democrats.” We certainly know how favoritism works in this District. Just look at Bea and Ed White and the demands they have made to make sure they and their children are given “favored” treatment.
And Gantt himself changed the rules that said Board members family members couldn’t work in the District. Result: Both of his daughters now work in the District. Have heard there are problems at Irmo High. But what can administrators do?
Too bad some of the excellent teachers, one of whom won teacher of the year in her district after being turned down for a position with Lexington 5 are not related to Gantt. Maybe it would help us go from number 10 back to number 1. Just a thought.
Arlene you are way off course with your statements. Mr. Gantt’s daughter has taught 2 of my 3 children over the past three years. She is by far one of the best math teachers they have ever had. She is well qualified to teach. She was hired to teach AP Calculus to help raise the Irmo scores. They have risen significantly since she has been there.
All of these post are fine. Debate all you want on the merits of District 5 however answer the elementary question of Does Murphy live in Lexington or Richland County. If she lives in Lexington, then resign. If she lives in Richland, then keep the seat the voters put you in.
Given the history of Murphy, the taxpayer will once again foot a legal bill.
lawdog, I actually agree with you on this. Not sure how it could happen – and if it were true, it would obviously be a case of mischief (from her) and incompetence (from the Election Commission) – but if her primary residence isn’t in Richland County, than she should resign. End of story.
RICHLAND COUNTY SEEMS TO THINK SHE LIVES IN RICHLAND COUNTY
THEY HAVE BEEN COLLECTING PROPERTY TAXES FROM HER SINCE 1997.
It is crazy to say there was “mischief” from her. She has lived there 12 years and paid taxes there 12 years. And she ran for school board several years ago in Richland. And the two counties told her she lived in Richland. Gantt initiated this so he and White wouldn’t have any opposing views on the school board. It is crooked. Call a snake a snake.Even if you don’t like Murphy, this looks FISHY.
Trust me Ed, I’m not assessing guilt on her part (remember, I agree with most of what she says). It’s just that I don’t know whether this story is true or not, and, I’ve not done the due diligence to know. That said: (1) she apparently IS a resident of Richland (per Will’s reporting), (2) it is ridiculously easy to corroborate this residency, and, (3) if she was/is, I’d politically slap the originator of this witch hunt 18 ways past Sunday.
School Board Members do not represent taxpayers
School Board Members do not represent children
School Board Members do not represent employees
School Board Members are self serving political animals.
They represent those who contribute funds to their war chests and are beholding to those contributors to keep their political status.
If you want to neutralize the politics and the corruption that it fosters, then remove the selection of School Board Members from the political arena.
The fact that School Board Members are not identified with a “party” label fails the smell test that the current process is not a cauldron of rotten political fatback
Change the Process, Change the Results.
When a vacancy occurs on a School Board all candidates can apply to the district much like one applies for employment.
Once verified as a legitimate candidate(residency, age, citizen, etc.) then their name goes on the ballot.
Candidates will provide prescribed amount of “why vote for me” literature to the District. The District will distribute the literature to every child in the candidates voting area on a regular schedule.
Given the fact there are voters without school age children all registered voters will receive at least two mailings through the District presenting candidates resumes.
Each candidate’s resume will be posted on any and all District websites.
Open forums at selected schools will be held on regular basis if anyone desires to meet candidates one on one and ask questions.
Any candidate who places litter signs on the highway, create or participate on independent websites, mails direct literature or engages in any activity to circumvent the prescribed process will be declared ineligible.
Upon election a candidate will serve a defined term
Any School Board Member can be elected Chairman of the Board
NO School Board Member can serve more than one year as Chairman during any one four year period.
Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely
There shall be a recall mechanism if a Board Member is considered by a predetermined percentage of voters to be not performing their duties in the best interest of the students, the staff or the taxpayers.
School Boards hire Superintendents all the time. Candidates apply. Their credentials are verified. They are interviewed by the School Board Members. They attend meet and greet sessions with students, parents, voters, taxpayers. Their credentials are placed on the Districts websites. The School Board issues press releases to the media providing details of each candidates qualifications. The School Board Members meet and select a new Superintendent.
If a nonpolitical process can be used to “hire” someone with a compensation package close to $250,000 to supervise/manage a School District then surely a similar process can be used to “select” 7 people to serve as School Board Members.
If the District is involved I wouldn’t trust the results. I heard Gantt was going into classrooms and asking teachers to put up signs in their yards. You think they are going to turn down the Chairman of the School Board. He should have been cited for this. I suppose they will put in Kevin Alberse, who ran with White, and who got hardly any votes. Watch this play out. Another mechanical yes vote.
Yep, that is a sticky point.
Outside of bringing in a contingent of Trappists Monks from Mepkin Abby to run the show the District’s capabilities are about the only economical resource available.
I think there are still some strong moral, ethical employees within the District Operations. If the process could be stripped of the politics, clear with rules/regulations and subject to review, the District employees should be capable of running the show.
I think that Robert Gantt has finally achieved his goal of getting the almost perfect board in his mind and now he is feeling the power. The only obstacle in his way is Kim Muphy.Talk about a convenient way to abuse the power. This seems typical of a
man who had the long standing rule changed regarding relatives of board members working in the district from where they could not and now they can. Once again, convienent timing.My understanding is that shortly after this rule was changed both of his daughters landed teaching jobs in the district. I know of others who are really good teachers with far more experience that did not. Sounds like nepotism to me!
Two other sitting board members had children that were also teachers. Jim Turner’s daughter and Jan Hammond’s daughter. Why isn’t that ever stated. Maybe it is a witch hunt for Gantt.
My understanding is that Ms. Hammond’s daughter was already teaching before she was elected to the board. Am I not correct?
I voted for Kim Murphy because I liked what she stood for. Please don,t take her off the board and disenfranchise my vote. Let her serve out the rest of her term.
“Wayne, Lucy, Arlene, Ed, Alton, Lauren, Anna, Ryan” are all the same poster. Someone has too much time on her hands (and not very creative, either).
I hope you are right because this is the kind of dedication we need to turn this District around. We need committed people who will work long and hard and not just someone who makes a comment and goes away. We need a grass roots movement with a few hard working people. People who work like Kim does.
To: Concerned citizen. I concur.
At least the voices in your head agree with each other.
I have just read your posts and disagree with you about all these people being the same poster. Why do you think this. I just do not see it.
To: CoolAreHeights: How could she live in a District and pay taxes to that District and now be in another District?
OK, she clearly lives in the District. That’s not the point. However, please remember that the District is comprised of both Lexington and Richland counties. And where you live in the District depends on whether Lexington or Richland county voters can vote for you. For instance, if you live in Lexington, you run in the Lexington District race, if you live in Richland, you of course run in the Richland District race. Given this controversy, I can only assume that the county line runs through her property and that where her house is placed on her lot will depend on who should have voted for her. This is speculation on my part, but this is my best guess of what is happening.
I just ran in the Irmo News that Robert Gantt announced at the beginning of Monday’s board meeting about Kim Murphy’s residency issue. Also that he had known about this or questioned it since October. So he went “behind the scenes” to look into this and didn’t give Murphy a “heads up” about this. Instead hit her with it cold. Murphy describes it as a “bonbshell.” At best it shows Robert Gantt’s inability to compromise, work together for the common good and lead this community. At worst it was “mean spirited”.
BLA BLA Bla Gantt is EVIL , The Board is Evil, Only Murphy cares about US !!!!
Dude, FOCUS !!!!!! The bottom line, the end result, the pay off pitch is this……
Where doe she reside… Lexington county part of District 5 or Richland county part of District 5??
Using your logic, I guess you should notify anyone during an investigation ….
The issue goes back to where she is paying her taxes. Obviously Richland feels like she is in Richland County and has been receiving her taxes since her home was put in that location. Have we heard lexington saying that she resides in lexington? If so, she would be years delinquet in her taxes and her home put up for auction. This has not happened. Therefore the county governments of Richland and Lexington must also agree about her residence. The next question I have is why is all of this coming to light now? When Kim Murphy filed to run for the school board I would hope her application was checked by the ethics commission. These folks have to pay a filing fee that covers a check of the validity of the application. Kim Murphy has always been a thorn in the side of several members of the school board. Why? Because she is asking questions that maybe they do not want to answer? I do not have the complete answer. However, something is not right for Gantt and any other board member to all of a sudden want to challenge her residency.I wonder what must be coming up on the agenda for the school board meetings,that just maybe they do not want Murphy around for or to be a part of?
1) School board candidates DO NOT pay a filing fee.
2) Ethics Commission does not determine the county where a candidate lives.
3) Per the statement read at the meeting, this was brought to light by a SC Official NOT District 5 Administration or the Board.
4) The “thorn in the side” as you call it is Murphy who filed 8, yes 8 law suits, and lost all 8 of them. The results … 12 million dollars cost to District 5 Tax Payers. And Fits wants to say “Corrupt District Trying to Boot Watchdog”
If District 5 is so corrupt that answer this… Why has and financial audits uncovered any corruption? Has not happened. As a meter of record, District 5 has received superior audits over the years so this just does not hold water.
District 5 continues to be one of the best school districts in SC despite the best efforts of Duncan, Murphy, Hammond, Cole and the other anti District 5 crowd.
Way to go Mrs. “Tax Payer Hero” .. 12 Million plus and the meter is still running…
lawdog –
I am bewildered by your claim that Jan Hammond and Melissa Cole are anti-District 5. I get how you feel that way about Murphy and some of her supporters. They have had nothing but complaints and criticisms for years. They have offered very little in the way of meaningful dialogue.
But Hammond and Cole are both educators who have firsthand experience working in the trenches. Hammond certainly has not always sided with Murphy. She vehemently opposed her legal action against the district. And she was a strong advocate for teachers while in office.
Ms. Cole publicly stated that she did not agree with the action that Mrs. Murphy took against the district and she offered many solutions…more than any other candidate during the campaign(s)…to issues facing our district. I did not work directly with her, but I have several friends and colleagues who did. All of them praise her for her vision and leadership.
So is anyone who ever dares to question or challenge the status quo or the powers that be considered anti-District 5?
Nope !! Question all you like. I never once said public schools and public school boards should not be accountable to the PUBLIC.
Nor did I say “anti-Education”… I said ” Anti- District 5″ which Hammond was a part.
She:
1) Voted against the opening of the District 5 CATE Center and tried to delay the project for one year.
2) She abstained on a vote to not support school vouchers. How does that help teachers?
3) She often sided with Murphy on actions which delayed or added cost to District 5 projects.
I watched the movie “Lincoln “not long ago. There is a scene when one person voted Yea, then voted no and then said “Mr. Chairman, I abstain” Classic Hammond….
Check her record.
Cole:
You have got to be kidding…. Murphy ran that race for her. Murphy was out asking businesses to put the 4×8 signs up on their property.
Very polished and if Murphy is booted off because she does not live in Richland County… I expect Cole will run and possibly win..
Now let’s talk morals… I think Richland Family Court records answer that question.
So to conclude… Question District 5 all you wish. Yep, they make mistakes and do some things that I question but the fact remains District 5 is still one of the best Districts in SC and we should thank the parents and teachers. However you need quality facilities to attract qualified teachers and Murphy stands in the way.
The major problem with this school board and others around the area is the length of time these board members stay in office. Two four year terms should be mandatory. It is absurd that Gantt will be on this board for 16 years when he finishes this current term. Surely this is it for him. We need a rule that says only two terms.
agreed but it needs to be House of Rep, Senate , ect from national offices to local races
You are right, lawdog. We should thank the parents, teachers and students for keeping us in relatively good standing within the state of SC. They succeed in spite of leadership that is failing them. So many of us were hopeful that after the campaign season ended this board, and its individual members, could and would bury the hatchet and find a way to work together. However, it appears they have picked right back up where they have never left off and the Gantt-Murphy show continues. We are all so past sick of it. They both should go.
Yep… Right as rain… Teachers and parents are the key to success.
But answer this for me..
Why will Murphy go out of her way to debate every small point?? Many issues are just a routine vote. Murphy attacks the CFO of District 5 every chance she gets. These attacks on District 5 administrators are out of control.
I’m all about questioning something you don’t understand but brow beating someone is well “Just Murphy”.
Perhaps Gantt needs to put forth more effort but from the meeting which I have attended, it seems that he give lots of effort.
None of us knows what goes on behind closed doors but I have to believe there is much more to the story that we know.
Now we return to the central issue of “does she live in Lexington or Richland”. If Lexington, then she cannot serve on this Board. I hope (but don’t expect) she will do the right thing and just resign. Can we say “another lawsuit”?????
That is my point. I am sure there is SO MUCH MORE to the story. But it is a story that we have all grown weary of. I really don’t care to know any more of this story. What do I care about? That my child is receiving the best educational opportunities possible in and through a system focused on growing, developing and supporting top-notch teachers.
I work in the private sector. In our world, trying is awful nice, but results are what counts. If Mr. Gantt is unable to deal with Mrs. Murphy and other critics either on or off the board, then perhaps he is not the man for the job. He has had more than enough time to TRY.
I am wondering how long this drama regarding her residency and eligibility to serve is going to play out. How long this back and forth fight will tie up our time and attention. Quite frankly, I don’t care if she stays on the board or not. I disagree with a lot of what she does, but even when she gets it right, her vote does not count. No one on the board will ever side with her on any issue for fear of being labeled “anti-district 5.” If she says up, they say down and the rest of us have no say at all. We just have to sit and watch them squander our time, our resources and so much potential.
Isn’t it up to Richland county to determine where property lies? Why didn’t Gantt contact them? I pay taxes in Lexington and don’t question it. Seems to me until Richland county changes Murphy’s county it should stand. Gantt must have some crooked deal he doesn’t want questioned to be doing this. I checked county records Apparently Murphy’s own home and 12acres. So if any part of a12acre contiguous plot is in Richland county wouldn’t she be legally able to run in richland county. This is a witch hunt.
Your home must be in the county you file in and represent. The county line does in fact go straight through the 12 acres she owns. But her house sits in Lexington County. END OF STORY
District 5 parent
I would say that your children are receiving a Quality Education. My point is that it takes Quality Teachers AND QUALITY FACILITIES … something that Murphy does not support.
Trying is all that Gantt can do. These two just don’t like one another and both need to set aside their differences for the better of the students. I think fault can be found with everyone but no matter what, it seems that Murphy ALWAYS votes against anything positive with District 5.
You said: “I disagree with a lot of what she does, but even when she gets it right, her vote does not count”
Actually her vote DOES count; she is in the majority most times. Murphy would be better to “use honey and not vinegar to catch flies” Something she apparently will never understand.
sctaxpayer2012:
You would be incorrect. Many people have property which a county line will split. It’s not as simple as you think. Unfortunately, it appears that the courts will make this decision…. Translated… AT TAXPAYER COST… 12 Million $$$$ and still running.
Well you can’t blame Murphy for a law suit the District brings to oust her off the Board. This District gets into plenty of law suits by the way they handle things. Isn’t the District currently suing Murphy? That’s taxpayer cost.
lawdog –
We will agree to disagree on a few of your assertions. Yes, my children are receiving a relatively good education, but it could be better. I am always going to stay away from absolute statements and generalizations. What is considered “positive” is in the eyes of the beholder. And I simply don’t understand your comment regarding Mrs. Murphy being in the “majority” most times. That is contrary to everything I have seen.
However, we agree on a couple of key points. Mrs. Murphy would absolutely do better to use the occasional dose of honey versus the steady diet of vinegar she doles out. These two obviously don’t like each other, and it sure would be nice if they could and would see past themselves, let go of the feud and work together for the betterment of all stakeholders.
And sadly, I think you are right about where this thing is headed. She will contest his claim, show where she is registered to vote in Richland County, show where she has paid and continues to pay taxes in Richland County (it is public record – look it up) and he will then lead the district into pursuing legal action on the taxpayers’ dime.
Meanwhile, our enrollment continues to decline, staff morale sinks even lower and our district stays in the headlines for all the wrong reasons.
Also to law dog: Why do we need to keep building facilities when enrollment is not going up. I think this is what most don’t understand. Also I thought there was going to be a 4th cluster in the Ballentine area? What happened. So now we have a jobs magnet school and two middle schols miles apart.
Actually it’s quite simple. If Murphy does not live in Richland County as the SC Official asserts then she needs to resign. Plain and simple. All of that is yet to be seen. Perhaps she does just that but if history is any indicator, will I see another law suit. ( 8 challenges in court and she did not win ANY of them)
As far as “majority” well I got that one wrong… I meant minority.
Anna , Anna, Anna… Really? If Murphy fights this through the courts, don’t you think the District has an obligation to have her removed? You know … Following the law ?? She cannot legally serve as a Richland County Board member if it is determined she lives in Lexington County.
To address quality facilities… From your comments, it clear that you live in the Chapin area. Many of the older schools have not had renovations or upgrades in years. I really think the students who attend Irmo High School should have the same opportunity to attend quality schools, as do the students in Chapin, who will basically have a new school after renovations are complete. The quality of schools affects the tax base of a community. Just look around at Columbia High School and Lower Richland H.S. Upgrades and renovations were not done there for years. As a result, student numbers declined. Thankfully, it appears that these schools are being turned around. Here is a tip… visit some schools, talk to teachers and administrators and I’ll just bet they will tell you how badly renovations were needed.
The secrete of a great debate is to keep emotions out of your argument. If you examine the facts that this action was not brought by District 5 or the Board, but by an official from the State of South Carolina well then the myth of “District 5 is evil” will just “go away”. What say you?
lawdog –
I may have missed something, but I don’t believe Anna expressed any opposition to renovating existing facilities. I won’t speak for her, but it appears to me she is merely questioning whether new facilities are needed considering district enrollment continues to decline. I have actually heard this question posed from teachers, parents and taxpayers throughout the community. Many, me included, feel it would be a good idea to seek input from stakeholders before moving forward with the construction of more new buildings. However, if history is any indication, this board will act in a vacuum regardless (and disregarding) of community sentiment.
We all know Mrs. Murphy brought legal action against the district over the renovations to be made at Chapin High School. 8 times, 10 times, honestly, I have lost count. I disagreed with her doing so. I believe the renovations were needed. I am glad to see them being done. But all of that is water under the bridge. Can we please move on?
Again, I will stay away from absolute statements, but I can only assume that you are not an educator because I don’t believe an educator would assign the decline of schools like Columbia High primarily to the state of the facilities. I actually know someone who teaches at Columbia High School. She has discussed numerous issues with me regarding her job, her students, the school’s leadership and community. Never once, in good times or bad, has the physical facility even been mentioned as a cause or catalyst for…well, anything.
I will find some more common ground with you. (Too bad you and I are not on the board, huh? Just think of all we could accomplish!) A great debater is reasonable and rationale and may be passionate, but checks emotion at the door. A great debater also makes sure that their “facts” are indisputable. With all due respect, very few people in this community who are aware of this latest battle royale believe that some random state official made it his business to look into the residency of only one of our elected school board members with no prompting or urging from another board member and/or district official. Come on.
Regardless of who initiated the action, if there was a question regarding Mrs. Murphy’s residency, it should have been raised. My issue is with HOW it was raised. Daylight is often the best antiseptic and sources are rarely “credible” when they are anonymous. There is a perception out there that this district administration, this school board, makes decisions and actions outside of the public view and that they attempt to hide and obscure. The board chair keeping this information from Mrs. Murphy and from the public for months, and then dropping it on her and us in dramatic fashion at the first meeting of and in the New Year, feeds that perception. Yes, he has a right and responsibility to ensure her eligibility and the eligibility of all board members, but he could have and should have handled it in a way that was direct, open and transparent. And because he did not, the perception of “corruption” is fueled and fed.
The really sad thing is, other than you and me and a few others hashing this thing out via sporadic online posts, no one really cares. Our community is becoming quite apathetic to the carryings on of our local school board. If you tune in at all, you quickly realize it is like watching Days of Our Lives. No matter how many grains of sand pass through the hour glass, you will see the same characters acting out the same tired story lines.
I ran into a friend of mine recently. She is a teacher within the district. Somehow the school board came up in our conversation. But not for long. Because she told me that the school board is irrelevant to her. She pays no attention to what goes on “up there.” In her opinion, it is the same old stuff that has been going on for years. They have no bearing on what she does in the classroom. A sad validation of my earlier claim – she, and others like her, succeed in spite of impotent leadership.
You are correct in stating that poor facilities are not the only reason in the declines in Columbia High School and Lower Richland; however they are part of the issue. Changes in demographics, the median cost of homes in an area, the ability of a district to attract and retain quality teachers and parent involvement towards the success of their children also contribute to the success or failure of a school or District.
With that being said, I have seen some of the same declines in the Irmo Cluster. The facilities were in poor condition. The Board sought the input from committees composed of business leaders, parents and teachers. A list of projects was comprised and work started on each of those schools. Tour Leaphart Elementary and look at the walls that were constructed. Examine the smart boards and technology upgrades. These improvements will continue the excellence of education in District 5. More importantly, this gives the teachers the opportunity to explore each child’s educational needs.
Did enrolment decline in District 5? Yep. With District 2 building the mega high school (River Bluff) as well as other new facilities, families chose to move to those areas and send their children to new schools. Does that mean we don’t need to continue to upgrade our facilities? I hope not, as quality schools are the engine that drive the real estate economy. Ask any realtor.
No I am no longer in the classroom but not so long ago, I was part of the educational environment. I saw firsthand the condition of District 5 Schools. I believe that there have been mistakes but I also recognize the success of the Board.
Why do I continue to highlight the Murphy lawsuit? Simple. I have 12 million plus reasons. I heard parents question the reason a fine arts facility was being built at Irmo High School. Would it not have been wonderful to have the funds to have built a fine arts facility as Chapin and Dutch Fork? We’ll never know because District 5 taxpayers paid that tab. So, as the old saying goes” I might forgive but I won’t forget”.
As for the board members, I have observed them in the meetings. I believe that each member has the best interest in mind for Teachers, Students and Staff. One member continues to “fight” for emotional and physically disabled students. One member has single handed lead the “fight” to bring Career and Technical Education back to District 5. The newly elected Board Member has been seen at various events at the schools and has been speaking with teachers to inquire what THEY need to be more successful. And yes, I believe that Gantt and Murphy need to find common ground but that will take the effort from both individuals and frankly and in my opinion, Murphy will only extend the olive branch to reach out and “hit the Board up side their head”. I think she may have some great ideas; however her “war like” attitude just turns most people off.
I hope the Richland and Lexington Election delegation settles the issue of “Where doe she live” as soon as possible. Deep down, I feel if things don’t go Murphy’s way…. It’s back to the courts.
I am not sure why we continue to discuss the renovations to existing schools. We agree that these renovations were needed. I have toured Leaphart Elementary School. There is no doubt that the updates and upgrades have rendered that school safer and more conducive to teaching and learning. However, these updates and upgrades alone will not “continue the excellence” in School District Five. In order to “continue” the excellence, you have to be excellent to begin with, and that school has not been excellent by any measure in quite some time. Enrollment has been steadily declining and academic performance has been stagnant at best, with fairly significant discrepancies noted between the performance of white and non-white students.
You know where else significant discrepancies are noted between the performance of white and non-white students? Harbison West Elementary, also in the Irmo cluster. In fact, this past year that school was recognized as being “one of the schools with the highest average performance gap between subgroups.” Makes sense actually. Because that school is really two schools operating in one building. Several years ago homeowners were insisting that the district do something to address the decline of their neighborhood school. However, our district officials were too busy selling new schools – come to think of it, they still are – so rather than taking the reform minded approach needed to meet the educational needs of disadvantaged and disenfranchised students, it was decided HWES would become a magnet school for the gifted and talented, giving the perception of improved performance. Sad for the homeowners who continue to see their property values decline, but even sadder for those kids who are left behind within their own school in a relatively good school district.
This is just one of so many conversations we need to be having. So many issues we need to be facing. So many challenges we need to be meeting. That is why I take issue with the continued focus on Kim Murphy’s lawsuit. For every minute we spend talking about all that we can’t control, all that we can’t change, we lose a minute talking about all that we can. And that is why I also take issue with this collective board’s inability to put aside their personal feelings and personal agendas and work together on behalf of our children, and their teachers and us all.
I am not going to speculate as to the intent of any individual board member. I will give them all the benefit of the doubt and agree that surely they want to do what is best for our students, our schools, our district and our community. However, right now, collectively, they are failing us miserably. And if the board chairman can’t focus them, redirect them, encourage and inspire them to do what must be done, I sure hope someone steps up to the plate who can.
“Failing us miserably?” Really? Gee, maybe I should have researched the district and surrounding alternatives before buying a house in District 5. Oh wait, I did! “Failing us miserably.” Exaggerate much?
Judging by your rambling “we need to be having conversations” essay, you must be very close to the scorned Mrs. Cole. She just loves to discourse, dialogue, and converse. Those are some of her favorite buzz words. Just guessing, but maybe she was “discoursing, dialoguing, and conversing” with Andersen extensively during school hours during her tenure as RSES principal? Could explain her school’s drop in performance ratin while she was in charge.
District 5 voters are much smarter than Murphy and Cole want to believe.
Your comments are a glaring reflection of the toxic culture that is perpetuated by a few (on both sides of the aisle) within our district. It is unfortunate that anyone who questions, challenges or in any way says we can be better than we are is labeled “scorned.” It is even more unfortunate that the desire to engage in meaningful dialogue to improve our schools and our community would be scoffed at.
I learned some time ago – you cannot reason with an unreasonable person.
lawdog – although we don’t agree on everything, I have enjoyed and do appreciate the civil discourse and debate.
And now, I guess we will all start the clocks and meters. We have no choice but to sit back and see how much time and money these two can waste on their latest feud.
I’m sorry. I guess I didn’t make myself clear. I don’t consider Cole “scorned” because she questions. It’s because she had an alduterous affair with her boss and continues to lie about it. Thankfully the voters saw through that narcissistic game of hers.
Reasonable, well-intentioned vetting of important issues before the board should be expected. Murphy has shown herself to be neither reasonable or well-intentioned. I will be happy to hold the door for her on her way out!
I have lived in the Irmo area for years. We saw with interest Andersen’s concept of I guess a “magnet” school approach by putting in a gifted and talented program at Harbison and another program at Seven Oaks. Apparently Hefner is trying to expand on Andersen’s idea by suggesting other such programs at additional schools. The program at Harbison West is a FLOP. People still won’t move here and send their children to Harbison West. Harbison West is now two schools in one. One school for the “gifted and talented” and one for the other kids. A more creative approach should be tried.
As far as Board members Irmo was in much better hands with Jan Hammond. She was an educator and was vocal about her desire to look after the Irmo cluster. Loveless, no disrespect, has no qualifications to be a Board member. She is simply a “yes” vote for Gantt, White and their team. She was piggy backed in on a dirty campaign run by Gantt, Bea White, Elizabeth Perla, Scott Murray and others. The campaign used scare tactics by trying to combine Murphy with all the other opponents. It was one of the dirtiest campaigns I have ever seen.Jan Hammond didn’t always side with Murphy. She voted independently as how it should be.
The Irmo cluster has got to unite and get better representation on this Board. All these new schools going up in Chapin doesn’t help our cluster. Actualy it may hurt it. Look at the Cate Center. Good idea. Long way from Irmo.
Would love to hear your source for the HWES Magnet program being a “FLOP.”
The fact is, that program has grown from 1 second grade class in 2007 to 8 classes in grades 2-5. Last year, they had to turn away applicants. That doesn’t sound like a flop to me.
The reason homes in that area aren’t selling are because they are older, not kept up well, and are too close to the Harbison Blvd mess.
As for Jan Hammond, it is very apparent that she’s dumber than a box of rocks. You only had to listen to her briefly at a board meeting to be able to see that. She is a voucher supporter who likes to hear herself talk.
As for the “dirty campaign,” I believe that was brought on by a candidate who lied about her immoral past choices and expected the voters to just forget about it. The voters are much smarter than that!
Back to the topic at hand: if independent state agencies agree (as it appears they have) that Murphy doesn’t reside in Richland county, then she should resign. Very simple. However, I agree with lawdog. Murphy will sue. It’s her answer to everything.
Just some friendly advice…..you might want to steer clear of naming private citizens on these here interwebs. You wouldn’t want a process server knocking on your door! Gantt, as a public figure, is fair game. Not the others.
Now, time to take your sour grapes and move on.
To Me Thinks: Andersen met with the Home Owners Association prior to the beginning of the gifted program and it was meant to help with the situation at Harbison West and the community. That is the reason I said it was a flop. I never intended you to think that it was not used by those participating. It does nothing for the Irmo cluster or community. Neither will these other magnet programs.
You show your total ignorance to say “Jan Hammond is dumber than dirt.”
Went to board meeting tonight. I found it kind of interesting that while every member of the board including Mr. White, who arrived late, had something to say Ms. Loveless did not.They were asking questions and inquiring about what was going on as the meeting progressed .Ms. Loveless just sat there and said and did nothing. Also, from what I have heard, she does this at most board meetings. What kind of public servant does this? The more I hear and see the more I come to the conclusion that she was voted on as a rubber stamp yes vote for this board.
Do all of you realize that Gantt, as the board chair, has to be the one that announces these findings. A person from Budget and Control Board brought this information to the school district, Gantt didn’t solicit it, and they have to research it. They looked into it, saw the maps, and presented it. Get over yourselves and find something to do. Serve on a committee. Visit these schools you are talking about. They are wonderful, vibrant, places to learn.
I don’t believe that some independent individual who knew nothing of the hostility between Murphy and Gantt just happened to bring this information to Gantt. Just how stupid do you think the public is. Anyway, if she pays taxes in Richland County, is registered to vote in Richland Couny, she should continue her term. And if there is a law suit it is Gantt’s doing not Murphy’s.
To Sandra Dee: I am not at all worried about the people I named because they set up web sites and put their names to things that would verify what I have said.The proof is there. They put it out there.
Whether they knew of any hostility or not it is the job of the person at the BCB to bring forward the information. It is then District 5’s job to research it. Do you think that when they received this information they should have just ignored it?
Another ” Flack up” story: No wonder “THE STATE” news paper publishes AN 8 PAGE PAPER EACH DAY. Fair and balanced ??
Lexington 5 school board member fighting ouster effort
By TIM FLACH – tflach@thestate.com
Lexington-Richland 5 school board member Kim Murphy is ready to fight possible ouster for alleged nonresidency.
“Other members do not like having a taxpayer watchdog on the board,” she said Friday. “Moving the county line to get me off the board is rather drastic.”
Asked if that meant she will resist ouster, Murphy replied, “I’m just holding my ground.”
She disagrees with a study by state geologists that a long-time boundary error means she doesn’t live in Richland County, as required.
The study — undertaken at the request of some of the other six board members — says an updated analysis of county borders discovered Murphy’s home should be shifted to neighboring Lexington County. Residency questions have not been raised about other board members, all of whom do not live so near a county border.
Long-accepted county borders in the Chapin area are erroneous and should be moved a few blocks northeast, the study said.
The change would mean Murphy is ineligible to remain in one of three board seats assigned Richland County.
“There is no evidence that I have ever been considered a resident of Lexington County,” Murphy said. “The only way my residency changes is if they attempt to move the county lines in order to remove me.”
Board chairman Robert Gantt wants to refer the dispute to an arbiter for a recommendation on whether to proceed with an attempt to oust Murphy from the post she was elected to in November 2010.
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/01/26/2605468/lexington-5-school-board-member.html#storylink=cpy
Issue #26.06 :: 02/06/2013 – 02/12/2013
What County Does School Board Member Kim Murphy Live In?
BY AL DOZIER
On Feb. 15 retired Circuit Judge Thomas Cooper will hold a hearing to decide if Lexington/Richland District 5 School Board member Kim Murphy is a legal resident of Richland County — and a legal holder of the Richland County seat she was elected to serve.
The situation appears a bit strange.
Her driver’s license says she lives in Richland County. She’s been paying taxes to Richland County for the past 12 years. She is a registered voter in Richland County.
Her garbage collector is Richland County.
Could her enemies have gotten so fed up with what they call her “political grandstanding” that they conspired with other government officials to cook the books and change her residency so she could be kicked off the board?
Nope. That didn’t happen, says Bobby Bowers, director of the Office of Research and Statistics for the state Budget and Control Board.
“We didn’t change any county lines,” says Bowers. “They have been there since 1913.”
Board chairman Robert Gantt asked Bowers to check out Murphy’s residency in December, writing, “it has come to my attention, from sources which I deem reliable” that she might not live in Richland County.
Bowers has carefully documented his findings. He cites three different sources: the U. S. Census Bureau, precinct maps and research conducted by the S.C. Geodetic Survey.
Bowers says the entire street of Old Laurel Lane where Murphy lives is located in Lexington County.
In fact, Bowers said there is another residence on Old Laurel Lane that is also misidentified as a Richland County residence.
Murphy, one of the district’s three school board members elected by Richland County voters (the other four are elected by Lexington County voters), insists she is a resident of Richland County, as indicated by her personal records.
Murphy accuses the board of wasting time and money engaging in “back and forth bickering” while “pursuing personal agendas.”
The ongoing rift between the outspoken Chapin resident and the rest of the school board has never been wider.
Several board members often dismiss her comments during board meetings as “political statements” and accuse her of wasting time on irrelevant issues. They also blame her for what they say is the loss of taxpayer funds totaling $12 million resulting from an unsuccessful lawsuit she filed trying to protect a creek bed at a Chapin High School construction site.
The incident involving Murphy is no anomaly, Bowers says. Close scrutiny of county lines often presents challenges to the legal status of a person’s residence near a county line. It’s not just Richland and Lexington, but every county in the state.
Dean Crepes, director of the voter registration and elections for Lexington County, agrees with Bowers that the aged mapping of county lines presents a problem, especially in areas once sparse that are now heavily populated.
“We need to come up with more accurate property lines,” he says.
Crepes says there are often problems settling residency questions when a property is close to two different county lines.
Residents are now living on properties that were not clearly identified in the maps of the past.
“Back in the day, it may have been a field. It wasn’t populated,” Crepes says.
It’s not just a problem with county borders, but also state borders, as indicated by the boundary disputes between North and South Carolina.
The boundary between the two states, drawn up in the 1700s, was revisited last year and found to be 150 feet too far to the north after GPS systems and computer calculations determined a new location.
That computation resulted in 93 property owners discovering that their residences were in a different state.
The bitter battle between Murphy and the board is likely to go on for some time.
Even if she loses her seat, supporters say she would likely try to run again.
I guess I have to ask whether Bobby Bowers has checked all county lines everywhere in sc,and also NC SC boundaries. It seems to me if this issue is So important then by George it is important that every single line be checked and corrected. They only seem concerned about one little county line in
Lexington county. How about the problem with NC SC boundaries? 20 years and the problem still is not corrected? And they can correct this problem in an hour? I don’t think so. I smell a rat.
I guess I have to ask whether Bobby Bowers has checked all county lines everywhere in sc,and also NC SC boundaries. It seems to me if this issue is So important then by George it is important that every single line be checked and corrected. They only seem concerned about one little county line in
Lexington county. How about the problem with NC SC boundaries? 20 years and the problem still is not corrected? And they can correct this problem in an hour? I don’t think so. I smell a rat.
Kevin Fisher with the Free Times tells it like it is:
Kim Murphy and Voters vs. School Board Bullies
by : Kevin Fisher
March 6, 2013
First things first: I don’t live in Lexington-Richland School District 5, don’t know the
history of the bad blood between board member Kim Murphy and her colleagues and
don’t care about it.
What I do care about is the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box, which
bullies on the Lexington-Richland 5 School Board are now attempting to overturn
through an outrageous attempt to remove Murphy from office based on a residency
challenge that would change the voting map after the fact.
That’s right: Murphy’s fellow board members are trying to void her election by
retroactively redrawing the district to exclude her. For good measure, they’re also
spitting in the collective face of the voters who chose her.
The good people of Lexington-Richland School District 5 — including those who despise
Kim Murphy and her performance as a board member — should demand that the district
drop its kangaroo court proceedings against a woman duly elected by voters to represent them on that board.
Murphy did nothing wrong and did not attempt to mislead anyone. She paid property
taxes in Richland County as assessed and billed by Richland County officials; filed for
office where she was told to file by Richland County officials; and voted in the precinct
where she was registered and instructed to vote by Richland County officials.
The idea that her legitimacy to hold the seat she was elected to under those
circumstances is being questioned boggles the mind.
The simple fact is that Murphy followed all the rules as presented and applied by
government officials running the election. If a mistake was made, she is not responsible
for it. Nor are her supporters, who carried the day at the polls — whether anyone else in
Richland-Lexington 5 likes it or not.
That is not to say that Murphy’s residence doesn’t matter. Of course it does — for 2014.
If the courts ultimately rule that Richland County election officials were wrong in telling
Murphy she lives in the district and certifying her to run there, so be it. She will be
ineligible to run for the seat again.
But the move to revoke Murphy’s eligibility for the current term is nothing more than a
petty and vindictive attempt to punish her and the people who voted for her because the
Lexington-Richland 5 establishment doesn’t like the political positions she has taken. And
everyone knows it.
You may not like her positions, either. Indeed, I might not if I looked into the particulars.
But none of that matters; that’s not what this is about. Instead, it is about silencing an
elected official through a backdoor, backwoods, backstabbing effort to overrule the will of
the people who chose her.
Worse yet, it is also a fool’s errand. That is to say, by the time this is over, in all
likelihood so will be Murphy’s term. The Lexington-Richland 5 board hasn’t even gone to
court yet, instead asking a retired circuit judge to advise them on whether they have a
case. Let’s hope he tells them no, and the charade can come to an end before more time
and taxpayer money are wasted.
But should the board pursue the fight, it will be long and drawn out. First, the other
board members would have to vote to remove Murphy — and do so based on the
mistakes of others and/or their personal preferences.
Then would come the court battle, for which Murphy is well-represented. Prominent
elections attorney Todd Kincannon has already argued for her at a hearing called by the
board, at which he told officials the meeting itself was improper and that any procedure
affecting elections must be approved beforehand by federal officials.
If the case still stands after those preliminary issues are finally addressed, a trial would
be set, most likely in 2014. Which is of course when Murphy’s term is up anyway, and by
which time district boundaries will be clearly established. That said, it’s time for
Lexington-Richland 5 to suck it up — and grow up.
Fisher is president of Fisher Communications, a Columbia advertising and public relations firm. He is active in local issues involving the arts, conservation, business and politics.
Kevin Fisher with the Free Times tells it like it is:
Kim Murphy and Voters vs. School Board Bullies
by : Kevin Fisher
March 6, 2013
First things first: I don’t live in Lexington-Richland School District 5, don’t know the
history of the bad blood between board member Kim Murphy and her colleagues and
don’t care about it.
What I do care about is the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box, which
bullies on the Lexington-Richland 5 School Board are now attempting to overturn
through an outrageous attempt to remove Murphy from office based on a residency
challenge that would change the voting map after the fact.
That’s right: Murphy’s fellow board members are trying to void her election by
retroactively redrawing the district to exclude her. For good measure, they’re also
spitting in the collective face of the voters who chose her.
The good people of Lexington-Richland School District 5 — including those who despise
Kim Murphy and her performance as a board member — should demand that the district
drop its kangaroo court proceedings against a woman duly elected by voters to represent them on that board.
Murphy did nothing wrong and did not attempt to mislead anyone. She paid property
taxes in Richland County as assessed and billed by Richland County officials; filed for
office where she was told to file by Richland County officials; and voted in the precinct
where she was registered and instructed to vote by Richland County officials.
The idea that her legitimacy to hold the seat she was elected to under those
circumstances is being questioned boggles the mind.
The simple fact is that Murphy followed all the rules as presented and applied by
government officials running the election. If a mistake was made, she is not responsible
for it. Nor are her supporters, who carried the day at the polls — whether anyone else in
Richland-Lexington 5 likes it or not.
That is not to say that Murphy’s residence doesn’t matter. Of course it does — for 2014.
If the courts ultimately rule that Richland County election officials were wrong in telling
Murphy she lives in the district and certifying her to run there, so be it. She will be
ineligible to run for the seat again.
But the move to revoke Murphy’s eligibility for the current term is nothing more than a
petty and vindictive attempt to punish her and the people who voted for her because the
Lexington-Richland 5 establishment doesn’t like the political positions she has taken. And
everyone knows it.
You may not like her positions, either. Indeed, I might not if I looked into the particulars.
But none of that matters; that’s not what this is about. Instead, it is about silencing an
elected official through a backdoor, backwoods, backstabbing effort to overrule the will of
the people who chose her.
Worse yet, it is also a fool’s errand. That is to say, by the time this is over, in all
likelihood so will be Murphy’s term. The Lexington-Richland 5 board hasn’t even gone to
court yet, instead asking a retired circuit judge to advise them on whether they have a
case. Let’s hope he tells them no, and the charade can come to an end before more time
and taxpayer money are wasted.
But should the board pursue the fight, it will be long and drawn out. First, the other
board members would have to vote to remove Murphy — and do so based on the
mistakes of others and/or their personal preferences.
Then would come the court battle, for which Murphy is well-represented. Prominent
elections attorney Todd Kincannon has already argued for her at a hearing called by the
board, at which he told officials the meeting itself was improper and that any procedure
affecting elections must be approved beforehand by federal officials.
If the case still stands after those preliminary issues are finally addressed, a trial would
be set, most likely in 2014. Which is of course when Murphy’s term is up anyway, and by
which time district boundaries will be clearly established. That said, it’s time for
Lexington-Richland 5 to suck it up — and grow up.
Fisher is president of Fisher Communications, a Columbia advertising and public relations firm. He is active in local issues involving the arts, conservation, business and politics.
Local governments $10.4 billion in debt? I thought cities and counties had to have a balanced budget. What do you mean by debt? Do you mean outstanding bond obligations or an inability to meet their fiscal responsibilities? Please tell us the whole truth and not just rhetoric. You may be right but please just calmly explain. I have become disillusioned by many of our conservative groups’, and yes, I’m conservative, uses of partial information to unnecessarily alarm local taxpayers.
Local governments $10.4 billion in debt? I thought cities and counties had to have a balanced budget. What do you mean by debt? Do you mean outstanding bond obligations or an inability to meet their fiscal responsibilities? Please tell us the whole truth and not just rhetoric. You may be right but please just calmly explain. I have become disillusioned by many of our conservative groups’, and yes, I’m conservative, uses of partial information to unnecessarily alarm local taxpayers.