The lawsuit against the school board, specifically the conservative majority including Twigg, Phelps, Gillespie, and Abuismail, was heard today by Judge Martin.
The Judge dropped all of the charges brought forward by Makaila Keyes and the Edwards Lawfirm, except for the one concerning the FOIA violations at the January 10th meeting. This means the case will move on, and the next hearing is estimated to take place April 20th.
The January meeting that the lawsuit concerns, was the meeting in which the board held an illegal closed meeting and voted to fire superintendent Scott Baker. This was obviously a controversial action, and the board subsequently caught fire from some in the community for doing so.
The Keyes lawsuit alleges that this illegal closed meeting "violated Keyes' rights" and that Twigg and the rest of the conservative majority should face consequences, amounting to a legal fee, and possibly a recall.
Jeremy Capps is the attorney representing Twigg, Phelps, Gillespie, and Abuismail. He did not deny the FOIA violation, instead arguing that such a violation amounts to a procedural violation, or breaking policy. He also argued that the board is capable of holding a closed meeting so long as “the substance and nature of the closed meeting is stated,” which he asserts, did happen.
His main argument was that Makaila Keyes did not have her rights violated, because a closed meeting that amounts to a procedural violation does not directly affect her, her family, or her property. This is a rebuttal of the Edwards Lawfirms' claim that the board "knowingly" violated Ms. Keyes' rights.
Fred Edwards, who is representing Ms. Keyes, was asked by the judge if Keyes has any standing to bring on this lawsuit. “Yes, sir, any person has rights,” Edwards responded. He then retorted, saying that Keyes has a right to hold her elected officials accountable.
Capps pointed out that the lawsuit isn't about that, rather it's about whether or not Keyes had her personal FOIA rights violated. This is yet to be determined by the judge, but the prosecution will have to prove that Keyes was directly impacted by the board to have a valid case.
Some have pointed out that considering the FOIA violation is procedural, it is odd that the lawsuit would ignore the multitude of other violations by board members Shelley, Cole, and Daniels. This contributes to a growing concern that the lawsuit is politically charged, in retaliation for the legal firing of superintendent Scott Baker.
The case is set to reconvene in April, and some supporters of lawsuit have already declared today's hearing a win for them, even though the maximum penalty for the conservative majority, only amounts to about $500 at this point.
Hardly a win, especially not for the students of Spotsylvania county.