What obligation does a school district or the school board member have to disclose pending legal issues involving the current school administrators or the school board? Well, I would say they might have some moral or ethical obligation, but humans often avoid making wise choices if it might risk accomplishing their goals.

Board and the community of parents are reluctant to speak about any unresolved legal issues. It totally makes sense. Previous School Board President, Brian Fox, continues to public provide legal interpretations to the public, asserting that a private lawsuit can be paid using taxpayer dollars. No need in debating the law with Mr. Fox, he has been sufficiently informed and the courts will provide their response soon enough. It is my expectation that some other external auditing entities will be digging into this financial error in greater detail. But, no rush, the students don’t need the money as much as the board actors do.

So back to this search for a new superintendent. Does anyone know what might have been the cause related to the mid-year teacher flight and subsequent flight of Dr. Michelle Orner? I know that for me personally, I will enjoy listening to her testimony as the charging party for my defiant trespass arrest. For those that are unfamiliar with the details pertaining that, here is the short version.

I formalized all of my documents for a Federal Complaint, Case #22-3329. With assistance, a stack of folders of the official summons were created, sealed and prepared for official service at a public school board meeting. When attempting service, I submitted to an unlawful arrest by Pennsylvania State Police. They were acting under the color of their authority, to enforce this interesting little document I got via certified mail. One might be confused as to what this is, but here is a better way to look at it.

This is PARODY, Babylon Bee Style.

What was that paper I was holding? It was a response to an Open Records Records request to confirm I did NOT have a criminal trespass warning issued against me. A reasonable person would request to receive an actual production of a document which specifies the crime to be removed from “public property”. Yes, I used public property in quotations. Every citizen has an implied license to access the services and resources of a public entity. What are public entities? You know like the Post Office, the Clerk of Courts, the Department of Motor Vehicles. These entities cannot discriminate by sending a letter via certified mail and permanently ban you from getting public services. However, it is not reasonable that law enforcement, public servants, or even judges for that matter to know the difference for trespassing from private property, private property open for public accommodation and public property. That is why citizens need to be informed when those representing authority misrepresent the law.

It’s is not possible to provide an overview of my attempts to reason with public servants before ever stepping foot at the school to advocate on behalf of parents. It never was my desire to make this a “Federal Complaint”. However, the school board actors, the superintendent and the solicitor held their line and pretty much dishonored their oath. Yes, that is my allegation that the actors may disagree. But, neither one of our opinions matter, as it will be resolved inside of the Federal Court. I am willing to hear from the judge that the constitution is dead. I might not like it, but assuming it is alive is not reasonable when others trample all over my rights. So, I am willing to have the argument in the court. I wonder if the school board actors are willing to accept that they might be wrong. So far, they continue to act in defiance of the law. NOTICE: I did NOT sue the School District nor the School Board, I sued private individuals.

If you saw the beginning of my meeting with Trooper Crnkovik and wondered what document I was showing him? Well, here is the document that was in my folder, prepared to present to the magistrate. I attempted to present this document at the preliminary hearing, but the magistrate was denying me due process presenting exculpatory evidence. Here is a little bonus surprise. The alleged offense of trespass occured in the jurisdiction of the Parkesburg Magistrate. My objections to the preliminary hearing being in Honeybrook, which did not have jurisdiction, were ignoroed.

I am simply sharing this privately for those who have a moral or ethical tug to shine a light on a relatively small issue for the incoming Octorara School Superintendent. People shouldn’t be expected to know, what they don’t know and be afforded the ability to know.

Oh hi there 👋 It’s nice to meet you.

Sign up to receive our FREE newsletter, in your inbox, every month.

We don’t spam! Read our [link]privacy policy[/link] for more info.