R1 has a new school board. What does it mean for superintendent, defunct learning center?
The election of two newcomers to the Richland District 1 school board on Tuesday raises questions about the future of both Superintendent Craig Witherspoon and the Vince Ford Early Learning Center in Lower Richland.
During the campaign, Richard Moore and Ericka Hursey, two former district principals, expressed a need to better hold Witherspoon and the district administration accountable for perceived shortcomings. The incoming board members also were skeptical of moving forward with the Vince Ford center. Construction on the center was halted in January after state and county officials said the district improperly started building it.
Moore and Hursey will join two incumbents on the seven-member board who a year ago voted against a positive annual review and contract extension for Witherspoon and who have pushed to walk away from the Ford center altogether. The four would have a majority to take action on Witherspoon or the center, if so desired.
“If the administration can meet the goals of transparency and financial responsibility and student achievement, we want to work with that,” Moore told The State on Wednesday. “But we do have reservations about the fact that the superintendent has been there for a number of years and those things don’t seem to have happened.”
When asked to discuss the future of the district under a new school board, Witherspoon sent a statement saying he was focused on implementing Richland 1’s new strategic plan and building on student progress.
Witherspoon, hired in 2015, had often been supported by a staunch majority on the previous board. With Tuesday’s election, that favor may soon fall away.
Under his leadership in the last two years alone, Richland 1 was placed on “fiscal watch” by the state Department of Education after a state-ordered audit revealed faults with the district’s procurement card policy.
A year ago, Witherspoon and district administration came under fire after 11 teachers were abruptly reassigned nine weeks into the school year. Richland 1 officials were adamant that such transfers were “not uncommon,” and were made to maintain ideal student-teacher ratios in each district school. The reassignments were criticized by several Richland County legislators.
In August, state education Superintendent Ellen Weaver placed Richland 1 on “fiscal caution,” the second most severe level of concern by her department. It followed an Inspector General’s investigation, which condemned the district’s work on the Vince Ford center and its procurement practices.
During the fall campaign, The State asked all school board candidates if they believed Witherspoon should remain as the Richland 1 superintendent. Moore and Hursey both said Witherspoon had not been successful and expressed a lack of confidence in the administration’s transparency and accountability.
Moore said he hoped to prioritize student achievement, teacher retention and an atmosphere of collaboration, transparency and efficiency. He said that in his time as superintendent, Witherspoon had failed to accomplish that.
“The majority of the current board members have consistently supported him in his actions and decisions and do not seem amenable to holding him and his administration accountable for these issues,” Moore wrote during the campaign. “In order to release Dr. Witherspoon, the school board has to change.”
Hursey said the superintendent’s evaluation currently lacked ways to measure success.
“Based on the district’s current performance, I would assess that the superintendent is not meeting acceptable standards,” Hursey wrote. “The superintendent’s performance, operational and fiscal management have been substandard which have negatively impacted constituent, community relations and taxpayer trust in the district.”
She also pointed to low student achievement and high employee turnover as concerns, and said the goal for the superintendent lacked measurable outcomes, making it difficult to evaluate progress.
Hursey is currently suing the district for breach of contract and freedom of speech violations after she was removed as principal of Lower Richland High School following a graduation speech.She claimed in the lawsuit that her removal was initiated by board member Cheryl Harris, who lost to Hursey in Tuesday’s election.
Witherspoon received a positive evaluation last year in a 5-2 board vote on the board. Members Robert Lominack and Barbara Weston voted against that assessment, as well as the move to extend Witherspoon’s contract through 2026 and to give him a 3% raise.
“I don’t think we’re headed in a direction that justifies both a raise and an extension,” Lominack said at the time.
The State also asked school board candidates during the campaign what they thought of the district’s action regarding the Vince Ford Early Learning Center.
Construction of the $31 million center was stopped in January after the district failed to obtain the proper permitting. That quickly caught the attention of Weaver, who ordered the investigation by the Office of the Inspector General.
The investigation determined that Richland 1 broke the law and cost taxpayers more than $350,000 when it began construction without proper permissions by state and local authorities. The probe also found illegal or unauthorized procurements.
After Weaver escalated the district’s “fiscal caution” status, she urged the district to abandon the project, claiming Richland 1 had already “wasted” $6 million. Last week, the department rejected a mandatory recovery plan from the district and ordered yet another independent audit.
The early learning center site on Caughman and Rawlinson roads has been untouched for 11 months, and has been the subject of at least three lawsuits against the district.
During the campaign, Moore described the district’s handling of the Vince Ford center as “irresponsible” and “misleading.” He said the Richland 1 administration should’ve taken full responsibility for the project’s missteps.
“I believe the board needs to take whatever steps are needed to put this behind us with the least amount of additional cost. In my opinion, the early learning center is not needed,” Moore wrote in September. “We need to look at how to achieve the goal of supporting families with the facilities we have currently.”
And Hursey said plans for the center lacked planning and oversight, “especially for a project with potential long-term financial and educational implications.”
“These violations prove the superintendent failed in the areas of leadership, accountability and transparency,” Hursey wrote. “There was mismanagement or lack of foresight in decision-making, lack of transparency, stakeholder engagement and strategic planning.”
Now elected, both continue to have reservations about the project.
Since construction on the center was paused in January, Lominack and Weston have proposed to walk away from the project or to reallocate the funds set aside for it. Those proposals have failed up to now.
Moore and Hursey could join Weston and Lominack, all former teachers, in a 4-3 majority on the board.
Weston and Lominack have long been dissenting votes on the board and frequently voice frustration with the Richland 1 administration, citing the superintendent’s proclivity to dodge questions or be unequipped to answer them.
But after the election, both Moore and Hursey expressed hope in fostering a new era for the board, to work together and respect one another, instead of worrying about a majority.
“With two new members and two incumbents coming off the board, I hope we start to build together,” Hursey told the The State on Wednesday.
Moore said he hoped to work closely with each of the other members to come to an agreement about where the district is and how to move forward.
The State has reached out to both Lominack and Weston.
The election results are not yet official, and will be certified by the county on Friday, the South Carolina Election Commission said. Any recounts are likely to be completed that day.
New board members will then be sworn in at the next board meeting on Tuesday.
