Judge voids Richland One votes on early learning center after FOIA lawsuit

COLUMBIA, S.C. – (WIS) A judge ruled Thursday that a pair of votes Richland School District One took in February related to a paused, under-investigation construction project broke the law, and are now null and void.

At its meeting on February 1, the Richland One board voted to approve legal recommendations given behind closed doors about the Vince Ford Early Learning Center.

A lawsuit filed by district parent Clint Wallace claims that “secret government action” violated the law.

Judge Jocelyn Newman agreed, and outlined her legal conclusions Thursday after an initial order in March.

Richland One may not act on the votes taken following the February 1 executive session, but the board may reconvene at a later date and take a public vote authorizing the same action, the decision read.

“Ultimately it is a pattern of this school board to tend to want to hide their actions from the public,” Cody Smith, one of the attorneys representing Wallace, said.

The order from Newman states that the district violated the Freedom of Information Act, which is a law that aims to keep the public informed about its government.

“When I ran, I ran on transparency and sharing information and that kind of things because we need to be forthcoming with our constituents,” Board member Barbara Weston, who was elected in 2022, said.

Newman’s decision reads in part that the board violated FOIA at its meeting when it failed to “properly notice and announce a specific purpose when entering executive session,” and took official action on items that were discussed in executive session without clearly stating what that action was.

“My understanding with these meetings was that the school board was actually taking steps in a positive direction, and really trying to take corrective measures,” Smith said. “It’s a shame that in doing that, they weren’t able to be more transparent. It’s a little bit baffling and concerning.”

Before meeting in private, public bodies are required by law to detail the reasoning for doing so.

The reasoning in this case was not sufficient, according to the order.

“Legal advice related to an unnamed construction project is not a specific purpose,” Newman wrote.

Notably, Newman added that this particular FOIA violation could easily have been fixed had the board simply referenced the Vince Ford Early Learning Center.

“Arguably, because of public news reports leading up to the February 1 meeting, an astute observer of the news might also assume the non-specific reference to a construction project was, in fact, referring to the VFELC; however, FOIA does not rely on such assumptions or require the public to be keen observers to understand government action,” the order said.

The job of elected officials is to keep the public informed, according to Smith.

“We shouldn’t expect every citizen to be fully informed of all the issues that are going on in our school district, in our city, in our county, and that’s why we need and why FOIA requires that our public bodies and our representatives do a good job of keeping us informed of the issues that they’re going to be discussing, and more importantly that’s why it requires that they discuss them in public for the most part,” he said.

Richland One has also been ordered to pay the plaintiff’s attorney’s fees in this case, which total $10,462.

Weston said this money could instead be used for students and repairing aging facilities.

“I think that a part of our job is to try to be good stewards, be forthcoming, and save the district money instead of spending it on frivolous lawsuits,” she said.

Smith, who represented Nancy Miramonti in another recent case where a judge ruled that Richland One unlawfully conducted public business in executive session, said it is “somewhat astounding” that there is a similar violation so soon.

“I hope that the school board will take corrective action to avoid these sort of missteps in the future,” he said.

Smith believes the board is wasting money.

“It’s unfortunate that they have to spend that money that way, but it’s more unfortunate in my opinion that plaintiffs like Clint Wallace have to bring lawsuits to make sure that our government is simply transparent and open and complies with the law,” he said.

In a statement, a Richland One spokesperson said, “The district has received the order from the Court. While we disagree with the ultimate ruling in the order, we respect the Court’s decision and district leaders will consider the next steps in this matter.”

Board Chairman Aaron Bishop, when reached for comment Thursday, said in part, “I am sure that district leadership will discuss the Order with the board after reviewing it.”

The early learning center has faced controversy this year, and is now the subject of a probe by the South Carolina Office of the Inspector General.

The investigation into the district is “active and ongoing,” Inspector General Brian Lamkin said on Thursday.

He did not, however, provide a timeline for its completion.

Construction has been paused on the project since January 19, nearly four months ago, after a stop work order and lack of proper permits.

Since that time, the project has cost the district more than $800,000, according to a Richland One spokesperson.

Those ongoing costs specifically deal with site inspections and security, among other things.

Feel more informed, prepared, and connected with WIS. For more free content like this, subscribe to our email newsletter, and download our apps. Have feedback that can help us improve? Click here.