I have lost track of the number of times that Teresa Holmes has threatened to sic her lawyer on me. I think she never went to a lawyer. If she had done so, she would have been told that she didn't have a leg to stand on.
Now read this message from the soon-to-be former person who was allowed to sit on the Richland 2 school board during the 2018-2022 term-of-office. At 7:42PM on November 9th Teresa dispatched this missile (err, missive) to me:
"Slander may cost you now Mr. Philpot. I suggest you watch what you say."
Does that sound like a threat to you? I do know that I'll keep at least four feet between us, if she is wearing all those heavy metal rings on her fingers.
Should I hot-foot it to the sheriff's department and have her arrested? What prompted this?
On Wednesday I emailed a number of people at Richland 2 who are in the food chain for FOIA, Open Records laws, preservation of official communications, etc. I wrote:
With the imminent departure of Manning, Holmes, McKie and Caution-Parker from the Richland 2 School Board, will you please make absolutely certain that no official emails are deleted from District-server accounts before or after their departure? When the new school board term starts on November 18, their accounts should be password-locked.
Teresa Holmes used a personal GMail account (email@example.com) for official business since her election in 2018. She used that account as if she had been a legitimate Trustee, although she never took the oath-of-office legally. That GMail account should be preserved and under the control of Richland School District Two, to secure your ability to respond to any future FOIA requests made to the District.
Please acknowledge this message and let me know what steps the District will take to preserve its control over these email accounts.
Perhaps there is a lawyer, somewhere on the planet, who can point out to Teresa that nowhere in my message was she "slandered".
My guess? Richland 2 will not demand control over all the official Richland 2 communications in her GMail account. Will that cause a problem in the future for Richland 2?
James Manning replied to my email that Teresa has had a Richland2.org email address "from day one". Oh, really? Why didn't the District publish it, instead of her personal GMail address and require her to use it? Because she is "special"? Privileged? Why? It was available to staff, but not to the general public.
Why did the District wait until the IG's Report was released to take down her personal email address and publish her District email address?