Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Filed and Attested by

Court of Common Pleas For Prothonotary Use Only: PROTHONOTARY

05 Aug 2020 04:21 PM
Civil Cover Sheet Docket No: A. Harris
CHESTER County 2020-05102-IR

The information collected on this form is used solely for court administration purposes. This form does not supplement
or replace the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law or rules of court.
Commencement of Action
S ✔ Complaint Writ of Summons Petition
E Transfer from Another Jurisdiction Declaration of Taking
C Lead Plaintiff's Name: Lead Defendant's Name:
T SCOTT D. COUSINS UNIONVILLE-CHADDS FORD SCHOOL
DISTRICT
I Are money damages requested? Yes ✔ No Dollar Amount Requested: Within arbitration limits
O (check one) outside arbitration limits

N Is this a Class Action Suit? Yes ✔ No Is this an MDJ Appeal? Yes ✔ No

Name of Plaintiff/Appellant's Attorney:
A ✔ Check here if you have no attorney(are a Self-Represented [Pro Se] Litigant)
Nature of the Case: Place "X" to the left of the ONE case category that most accurately describes your PRIMARY CASE.
If you are making more than one type of claim, check the one that you consider most important.

TORT(do not include Mass Tort) CONTRACT(do not include Judgments) CIVIL APPEALS
Intentional Buyer Plaintiff Administrative Agencies
Malicious Prosecution Debt Collection: Credit Card Board of Assessment
Motor Vehicle Debt Collection: Other Board of Elections
Nuisance Employment Dispute: Dept. of Transportation
S
Premises Liability Discrimination Statutory Appeal: Other
E Zoning Board
Product Liability(does not include mass Employment Dispute: Other
C tort) Other Other:
T Slander/Libel/Defomation
I Other:

O MASS TORT REAL PROPERTY MISCELLANEOUS

N Asbestos Ejectment Common Law/Statutory Arbitration
Tobacco Eminent Domain/Condemnation Declaratory Judgement
Toxic Tort - DES Ground Rent Mandamus
Toxic Tort - Implant Landlord/Tenant Dispute Non-Domestic Relations
B
Toxic Waste Mortgage Foreclosure: Residential Restraining Order
Other: Mortgage Foreclosure: Commercial Quo Warranto
Partition Replevin
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY Quiet Title Other:
Dental Other:
Legal
Medical

2020-05102-IR
Other Professional

2020-05102-IR
 Chester County
Court of Common Pleas Docket No:

Cover Sheet 2020-05102-IR

Plaintiff(s): (Name, Address) Plaintiff's/Appellant's Attorney(circle one)
SCOTT D. COUSINS (Name, firm, address, telephone and attorney ID#)
102 WYNDHAM HILL DR. KENNETT SQUARE, PA 19348

Defendant(s): (Name, Address) Are there any related cases? Please provide case nos.
UNIONVILLE-CHADDS FORD SCHOOL DISTRICT
740 UNIONVILLE ROAD KENNETT SQUARE KENNETT
SQUARE, PA 19348

Defendants who are proceeding without counsel are strongly urged to file with the Prothonotary a written statement of an
address AND a telephone number at which they can be reached
Commencement of Action (if applicable): Agreement for an Amicable Action Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award
Notice of Appeal
If this is an appeal from a Magisterial District Judgement, was appellant __ Plaintiff or __ Defendant in the original action?
Jury Trial Demanded Yes ✔ No
Nature of case if not on previous cover sheet - Please choose the most applicable
Annulment Writ of Certiorari

Custody - Conciliation Required ✔ Injunctive Relief

Custody - Foreign Order Mechanics Lien Claim

Custody - No Conciliation Required Issuance of Foreign Subpoena

Divorce - Ancillary Relief Request Name Change

Divorce - No Ancillary Relief Requested Petition for Structured Settlement

Foreign Divorce

Foreign Protection from Abuse

Paternity

Protection from Abuse

Standby Guardianship

Arbitration Cases Only Notice of Trial Listing Date

Arbitration Date mm/dd/yyyy Pursuant to C.C.R.C.P. 249.3, if this case is not subject to
compulsory arbitration it will be presumed ready for trial twelve
Arbitration Time hh:mm:ss (12) months from the date of the initiation of the suit and will be
placed on the trial list one (1) year from the date the suit was
Defendants are cautioned that the scheduling of an arbitration filled unless otherwise ordered by the Court.
date does not alter the duty of the defendant to respond to the
complaint and does not prevent summary disposition form
occurring prior to the arbitration date.
This matter will be heard by a Board of Arbitrators at the time To obtain relief from automatic trial listing a party must proceed
and date specified but, if one or more of the parties is not present pursuant to C.C.R.C.P. 249.3(b), request an administrative
at the hearing, the matter may be heard at the same time and date conference and obtain a court order deferring the placement of
before a judge of the court without the absent party or parties. the case on the trial list until a later date.
There is no right to a trial de novo on appeal from a decision
entered by a judge.
File with: Chester County Justice Center, Prothonotary Office, 201 W. Market St., Ste. 1425, PO Box 2746, West Chester, PA 19380-0989
These cover sheets must be served upon all other parties to the action immediately after filing.

2020-05102-IR
Submit enough copies for service.

2020-05102-IR
 Filed and Attested by
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PENNSYLVANIA PROTHONOTARY
05 Aug 2020 04:21 PM
CHESTER COUNTY A. Harris

SCOTT D. COUSINS )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No.: _____________________________
)
UNIONVILLE-CHADDS FORD )
SCHOOL DISTRICT )
)
Defendant.
)
)

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Scott D. Cousins (“Plaintiff”) hereby brings this action against defendant the

Unionville-Chadds Ford School District (“Defendant” or “District”), pursuant to Pennsylvania’s

Sunshine Act, 65 Pa. C.S. §§ 701-716 (the “Sunshine Act”), the Declaratory Judgments Act, 42

Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 7531-7541 (the “Declaratory Judgments Act”) and Rules 1091-1099 (Actions

in Mandamus) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Pa. R.C.P. No. 1091-1099 (the “Writ

of Mandamus”). In support of this action (the “Complaint”), Plaintiff alleges, upon knowledge

as to his own conduct and upon information and belief as to other matters, 1 as follows:

NATURE OF THE CASE

1. In order to prevent the District from further violating his rights secured by the

Pennsylvania Constitution, the Sunshine Act and the District’s policies and procedures, Plaintiff,

an interested community resident living in the District, seeks the following relief in his favor

against the District:

1
In support of this Complaint, Plaintiff contemporaneously submits the Declaration of Scott
D. Cousins in Support of Plaintiff’s Expedited Petition for (A) Preliminary Injunction; and (B)
Writ of Mandamus (the “Cousins Declaration”).

2020-05102-IR
a. with respect to Count I, Count II and Count III of this Complaint, a
declaratory judgment that the District violated the Sunshine Act by:

(1) failing to provide Plaintiff a “reasonable opportunity at each

advertised regular meeting . . . to comment on matters of concern,
official action or deliberation which are or may be before the Board.
. . prior to taking official action,” in accordance with Section 710.1
of the Sunshine Act;

(2) preempting, creating, supplanting, expanding or restricting the

rights or liabilities of Plaintiff beyond those established in law, in
accordance with District Board Policy #000 (Board
Policy/Procedure/Administrative Guidelines);

(3) restricting Plaintiff’s public comments on educational issues and

limiting his involvement in public Board meetings in accordance
with the Public Participation in Board Meetings principles of
District Board Policy #903; and

(4) refusing to give substantial weight to the input received from

Plaintiff in accordance with the Community Engagements principles
of District Board Policy #910 (Community Engagement) with
respect to the future of the Unionville High School mascot and name
(together, the “Unionville High School Mascot”); and

b. with respect to Count I, Count II and Count III of this Complaint, a

preliminary injunction and permanent injunction under the Sunshine Act
prohibiting the Defendant from:

i. preempting, creating, supplanting, expanding or restricting the

rights or liabilities of Plaintiff beyond those established in law, in
accordance with District Board Policy #000 (Board
Policy/Procedure/Administrative Guidelines); and

ii. refusing to give substantial weight to the input received from

Plaintiff in accordance with the Community Engagements principles
of District Board Policy #910 (Community Engagement) with
respect to the future of the Unionville High School Mascot; and

c. with respect to Count IV of this Complaint, a Writ of Mandamus directing

the District to comply with Plaintiff’s First Request, Second Request, Third
Request, Fourth Request and Fifth Request of the Board to appoint a Citizen
Advisory Committee pursuant to District Board Policy #905 prior to taking
any official action of “retiring” the Unionville High School Mascot.

-2-
2020-05102-IR
 PARTIES

2. Plaintiff is an adult individual and interested community resident living in the

Unionville-Chadds Ford School District.

3. Defendant is a “School district” organized and operated under the Public School

Code of 1949, as amended, with a principal business address of 740 Unionville Road Kennett

Square, PA 19348. By state law, the District is controlled by the Board of School Directors for

the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District (the “Board”).

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa. C.S. § 931(a) and 42 Pa. C.S. § 7532.

Section 931(a) provides:

Except where exclusive original jurisdiction of an action or proceeding is

by statute or general rule adopted pursuant to Section 503 (relating to
reassignment of matters) vested in another court of this Commonwealth, the
courts of common pleas shall have unlimited original jurisdiction of all
actions and proceedings, including all actions and proceedings heretofore
cognizable by law or usage in the courts of common pleas.

5. Section 7532 of the Declaratory Judgments Act provides that “Courts of record,

within their respective jurisdictions, shall have power to declare rights, statutes, and other legal

relations,” and the declaration “may be either affirmative or negative [and] shall have the force

and effect of a final judgment or decree.”

6. The District is an “agency,” as that term is defined by the Sunshine Act and,

accordingly, is subject to the Sunshine Act. The District is subject to Actions in Mandamus under

Rules 1091-1099 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Pa. R.C.P. No. 1091-1099.

7. Venue is proper in Chester County pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 2103(b) because the

District is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth and is located in Chester County. The

definition of “Political subdivision,” as set forth by Pa. R.C.P. 76, includes school districts.

-3-
2020-05102-IR
 BACKGROUND

A. The UHS Identity Council

8. On December 14, 2017, a student-led group called the UHS Identity Council met

inside Unionville High School (the “UHS Identity Council Meeting”). According to the meeting

minutes, the UHS Identity Council Meeting was attended by District Superintendent Dr. John

Sanville, Unionville High School Principal James Conley and Unionville High School Athletic

Director Patrick Crater, among other students and administrators. A copy of the Minutes from

UHS Identity Council Meeting is attached to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 1. According to

the minutes, Dr. Sanville spoke about “his role in making these decisions as the Superintendent.”

Id.

9. While the minutes of the UHS Identity Council Meeting reflect the desire to

“engage all the unique perspectives on this issue and to engage as many individuals in the

conversation as possible,” id. at p. 2, the individuals identified by the UHS Identity Council to be

engaged in this discussion were limited to “Representatives from various clubs and sports teams,”

“Alumni,” “Students,” and “Teachers.” The individuals identified by the UHS Identity Council

excluded any residents, taxpayers, parents, alumni, or any other “interested community residents”

who were not employees of the District.

B. The First Request for a Citizen Advisory Committee

10. On March 14, 2018, Plaintiff and dozens of other interested community residents

made their first request (the “First Request”) that the Board appoint a Citizen Advisory

Committee pursuant to District Board Policy #905, Citizen Advisory Committees, “to investigate

the merits of changing the Unionville High School mascot and name, which we understand the

Board is currently considering.” A copy of the First Request is attached to the Cousins Declaration

-4-
2020-05102-IR
as Exhibit 2. As set forth therein, Plaintiff proposed that the purpose of the Citizen Advisory

Committee would be “to investigate the merits of changing the Unionville High School mascot

and name, which we understand the Board is currently considering.” Id.

11. District Board Policy #905 provides, in part: “Citizen advisory committees can be

useful in keeping the Board and administration informed with regard to community opinion and

in representing the community in the study of specific school issues.” A copy of District Board

Policy #905 is attached to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 3.

C. Request for Waivers of District Board Policy #903 at March 19th Board Meeting

12. In connection with the First Request, Plaintiff sent an email to the Board requesting

a waiver of the “three minute rule” for public comment under District Board Policy #903, Public

Participation in Board Meetings (the “Request for Waiver”). A copy of the Request for Waiver

dated March 14, 2018 is attached to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 4.

13. District Board Policy #903, Public Participation in Board Meetings, provides that

“Each statement made by a [public] participant shall be limited to three (3) minutes duration.” A

copy of District Board Policy #903 is attached to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 5.

14. With respect to the Request for Waiver, Plaintiff wrote:

While I always endeavor to be concise when speaking in public, I anticipate

that my presentation will take approximately 15 minutes. Accordingly, I
hereby request a waiver of the provision of District Board Policy #903 that
provides that “Each statement made by a [public] participant shall be limited
to three (3) minutes duration.”

Exhibit 4 at pp. 1-2.

15. In the concluding paragraph of the Request for Waiver, Plaintiff wrote:

Finally, I know that the dialog regarding the merits of changing the
Unionville High School mascot and name has been heated at times,
particularly on various social media platforms. By our very nature,
Americans are typically polite, decent and respectful of opposing

-5-
2020-05102-IR
 viewpoints. Social media, however, has changed the way that we debate
each other. What we have today is one big tribal conflict (pun intended)
with each side wrestling and preening for the moral high ground. Diverse
viewpoints might be uncomfortable for one or both parties to a debate, but
that’s how to prompt further reflection, perhaps leading to the changing of
minds. Please know that, at least from my perspective, I appreciate the
Board’s consideration of all diverse viewpoints.

Exhibit 4 at p. 2.

16. Also in connection with the First Request, Plaintiff provided the Board with his

Presentation to Board of School Directors of Unionville-Chadds Ford School District dated March

19, 2018 (the “March 19 Presentation”). A copy of the March 19 Presentation is attached to the

Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 6.

17. The March 19 Presentation detailed the concerns of Plaintiff, particularly with

respect to the importance of protecting viewpoint discrimination and free speech where the

“government has singled out a subset of messages for disfavor based on the views expressed,” and

the risks to a free and open society of the “heckler’s veto,” designed to shut down free speech or

particular ideas or viewpoints. See generally Exhibit 6.

D. The Board’s Response to Request for Waiver

18. Several hours before the March 19, 2018 Board Meeting, the Vice-President and

presiding officer of the Board at the March 19, 2018 Board Meeting responded to Plaintiff’s

Request for Waiver, writing:

I am writing to inform you that I cannot honor your request for a 15-minute
presentation at tonight’s meeting. We are not engaging in a discussion
regarding the School Mascot tonight. I am further writing to inform you
that since the mascot is not currently a Board agenda item or topic of Board
discussion - there is no need for a committee. To be clear – the Board is not
forming any Citizen’s Advisory Committees in regards to this topic of the
school mascot.

-6-
2020-05102-IR
(the “Response to Request for Waiver”). A copy of Response to Request for Waiver is attached

to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 7.

E. The March 19, 2018 Board Meeting

19. Consistent with the Board’s Response to Request for Waiver, at the meeting of the

Board on March 19, 2018 (the “March 19, 2018 Board Meeting”), the Vice-President and

presiding officer of the Board stated:

I know that some of you are here tonight because you intend to speak
regarding the topic of our school mascot. I want to begin tonight with a
clear and concise statement with regards to this topic as a few vocal
antagonists on this issue have flooded our community with false and
derogatory statements regarding our district, our administration, our faculty
and staff and most importantly our students in misleading social media and
news articles. There is no recommendation by the administration or faculty
and staff that could potentially remove the Indian mascot. There is no vote,
no debate, no discussion, no committee formation, no agenda items current
scheduled by this school board now nor currently any time in the future that
could potentially remove the Indian mascot. Anything to the contrary of
this statement is fake news.

Unionville-Chadds Ford Schol [sic] District Board Meeting – March 19th 2018, 7:30 p.m.,

YouTube (March 19, 2018), https://youtu.be/O9ZAr7CiY28 at 0:51 to 4:27. See also id. at 1:34:41

to 1:35:48 (“There is nothing. This board has no intentions to do anything with this particular

subject.”).

20. At the March 19th Board Meeting, Plaintiff made his Second Request for the Board

appoint a Citizen Advisory Committee pursuant to District Board Policy #905 and made a portion

of the 37-page March 19 Presentation, but was stopped after approximately five minutes. See

YouTube (March 19, 2018), https://youtu.be/O9ZAr7CiY28 at 1:03:15 to 1:08:37. This was

Plaintiff’s second request for the Board appoint a Citizen Advisory Committee pursuant to District

Board Policy #905 (the “Second Request”).

-7-
2020-05102-IR
 21. The Vice-President and presiding officer of the March 19th 2018 Board Meeting,

concluded the meeting with the following statement:

The Identity Council is simply a student group. It’s not a legislative body.
It’s not a decision-making body. It’s not an authoritarian body that is going
to have any say in anything related to our school. They can certainly make
recommendations. But that responsibility lies with the school board based
on the recommendations of the administration and we don’t have any
actions intended with regards to this issue—just as we don’t have any
actions with regards to what the Fellowship of Christian Athletes or the
Math Club or anybody else is going to be doing their program. So, again
I’m puzzled as to why it’s perceived that there is some suspicious activity
planned here. There is nothing. This board has no intentions to do anything
with this particular subject.

See YouTube (March 19, 2018), https://youtu.be/O9ZAr7CiY28 at 1:33:50 to 1:35:48.

F. Request that Coalition Discussion be Placed on the Agenda for April 16, 2018 Board
Meeting

22. Following the March 19, 2018 Board Meeting, on March 30, 2010, Plaintiff made

his third request for the Board appoint a Citizen Advisory Committee pursuant to District Board

Policy #905 (the “Third Request”). A copy of the Third Request dated March 30, 2010 is attached

to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 8. The Third Request also asked that Plaintiff have the

opportunity to make a 15-minute presentation to the Board related to Plaintiff’s request for the

appointment of a Citizen Advisory Committee, writing:

Because Section 710.1 of the Sunshine Act addresses matters that “may be”
before the Board, the community’s right to be heard at the April 16, 2018
Board Meeting goes well beyond what the Board decides it wants to hear,
regardless of whether the school mascot is on the agenda. Further, refusing
to place the school mascot on the Board agenda and offering me three
minutes to speak on the appointment of a Citizen Advisory Committee is
inconsistent with the Sunshine Act. Moreover, the Board’s time restrictions
are designed to unconstitutionally limit opposing viewpoints, in violation of
District Board Policy #000 (“That neither the Board nor the administration
intends to violate federal or state Constitutions or any other applicable
law.”).

Exhibit 8 at p. 5.

-8-
2020-05102-IR
 23. As Plaintiff wrote in his Third Request:

I am not proposing to silence students’ voices. Rather, the Citizen Advisory

Committee should consist of “interested community residents,” District
Board Policy #905, including “stakeholders in the school community” such
as “students, parents/guardians, families, residents, businesses, and
community organizations. . . .” See District Board Policy #910 [] (emphasis
added). As such, if the Board forms a Citizen Advisory Committee, what
the students will lose is the exclusive right to determine the fate of the
Unionville mascot.

Id. A copy of District Board Policy #910, Community Engagement, is attached to the Cousins

Declaration as Exhibit 9.

24. In response to Plaintiff’s Third Request, on April 12, 2018, the Board responded

through the solicitor for the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District, John R. Merrick (the “April

12 Response”). A copy of the April 12 Response is attached to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit

10. In the April 12 Response, Mr. Merrick assured Plaintiff that “the Mascot issue is not a current

item of consideration by the Board. However, Dr. Sanville assures me that, should the Board ever

take up the matter, there will be ample opportunity for involvement and input by the District

community and stakeholders.” See April 12 Response at p. 2 (emphasis added).

25. To add to the confusion leading up to the April 16, 2018 Board Meeting, Board

President Hellrung wrote in a community publication that it is the Board’s responsibility (not the

administration’s responsibility) to address changes to the Unionville High School Mascot. See

“Traditions at Longwood Newsletter (Spring 2018),” attached to the Cousins Declaration as

Exhibit 11 (“If the Administration finds merit in making any changes, they will put the matter

before the school board.”). Mr. Hellrung also claimed that “the Indian is not threatened.” See also

id. at p. 8 (“So, we are trying to calm our community and encourage the adults who have so rudely

inserted themselves into this student issue to back off and allow our students to pursue their project

and to learn without interference. Unfortunately, it’s been our students who have modeled civil

-9-
2020-05102-IR
discourse in this instance and not our adults.”). Finally, Mr. Hellrung responded to Plaintiff and

dozens of other interested community residents who signed the First Request with insults, insisting

that opponents of changes to the Unionville High School Mascot had “engaged our students in a

sometimes intimidating and disrespectful manner in their zeal to ‘Save the Indian.’” Id.

26. Finally, on April 16, 2018, Mr. Merrick further responded (the “April 16

Response”), offering his personal opinion that he “perceive[d] no federal or state

Constitutional violation by the Board.” See the April 16 Response, attached to the Cousins

Declaration as Exhibit 12. In the Board’s April 16 Response, Mr. Merrick also assured Plaintiff

that “The First Amendment is alive and well in the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District.”

Id.

G. The April 16, 2018 Board Meeting

27. At the meeting of the Board on April 16, 2018 (the “April 16, 2018 Board

Meeting”), Plaintiff again made a presentation (the “April 16 Presentation”) to the Board, but

was stopped after approximately six minutes. See Regular Board Meeting – Monday, April 16,

2018, 7:30 p.m., YouTube (April 16, 2018), https://youtu.be/450-8cW6Oqk at 1:32:25 to 1:38:15.

See also id. at 1:37:26 to 1:37:30 (statement of Mr. Hellrung, “Mr. Cousins, that’s five minutes if

you could please wrap up.”). This was Plaintiff’s fourth request for the Board appoint a Citizen

Advisory Committee pursuant to District Board Policy #905 (the “Fourth Request”).

H. Meeting with Certain Members of Board

28. On or about May 14, 2018, Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s wife, Board President Jeff Hellrung,

Board member Gregg Lindner and District Superintendent, Dr. John Sanville met to discuss the

Unionville High School Mascot.

- 10 -
2020-05102-IR
 29. Following a regularly-scheduled Board meeting of May 21, 2018, on May 22, 2018,

Mr. Hellrung sent Plaintiff a statement (the “May 22, 2018 Statement”) that he read at the May

21, 2018 Board meeting:

At last month’s school board meeting, I invited spokespersons of the Save

the Indian Coalition to a discussion on the matter of the UHS Indian over
coffee. Scott Cousins and his wife Candice accepted and met with me, John
Sanville, and Gregg Lindner. We had a productive and respectful discussion
and learned that we have much common ground.

The coalition is concerned about gradual changes that have been made over
the years in our Indian iconography. They know that a student group at UHS
has taken an interest in the Indian and is questioning whether or not it is an
appropriate and respectful symbol. They know that our Administration is
supporting this inquiry to teach our students how to research their topic in a
thorough and balanced manner and how to conduct a civil, collegial, and
respectful dialogue. They are concerned, however, that UHS may be on a
path to eliminate the Indian and they do not want that to happen without full
community engagement and preferably through the school board initiating
a Citizen Advisory Committee on the topic of the Indian mascot.

We were able to explain the history of our rebranding activities that have
taken place over the past several years, which have involved all six of our
schools starting with PMS and ending with UHS. The School Board has
been kept informed on this work that has sharpened and modernized our
symbols and iconography. In my view, all of the changes have resulted in
more focused, modern, colorful, and appealing symbolism than the more
dated images from our past. None of this activity was or is meant to put us
on a path to eliminate the UHS Indian.

If there is a student recommendation to eliminate the Indian, I expect that

our board will refer the matter to our Administration for a recommendation.
If the Administration endorses such a change, I expect the school board to
consider it. Before taking any action to eliminate the UHS Indian, the school
board would thoroughly engage all of our stakeholders, including students,
alumni, staff, parents, and community residents.

In light of the many compelling educational issues before us in UCF,

including in particular student safety and wellness, and also academic,
athletic, and artistic programs, I personally believe it is very doubtful that
our board will be interested in an extended discussion on eliminating the
UHS Indian. But I am keeping an open mind.

- 11 -
2020-05102-IR
 For now, I implore individuals on all sides of this issue to dial down the
rhetoric and to let our students finish their project without adult interference.
Let’s all relax and allow the issue to play out as we would with any other
similar student issue.

(Emphasis added). A copy of Board President Hellrung’s May 22, 2018 Statement is attached to

the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 13.

I. Renewed Demand for the Formation of the Citizen Advisory Committee

30. Over two years following the May 22, 2018 Statement, on June 19, 2020, the

District sent an email captioned “Discrimination and the UHS Mascot” (the “Discrimination and

UHS Mascot Email”). A copy of the Discrimination and UHS Mascot Email is attached to the

Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 14. The Discrimination and UHS Mascot Email stated, part:

Since at least 2011 the mascot has been a topic of discussion internally and
in the community. We have had conversations with tribal elders of the Lenni
Lenape Tribe – who reside in Oklahoma. These talks resulted in UCF
eliminating the offensive stereotypical iconography and the tomahawk chop
cheer. The UHS logo was changed to a U with a single feather. Symbols
that carry negative connotations about a particular group are unwelcome in
UCF.

Id. The Discrimination and UHS Mascot Email was signed by District Superintendent Dr. John

Sanville.

J. The Change.org Online Petition

31. In the Discrimination and UHS Mascot Email, Dr. Sanville stated, in part: “Just

yesterday we were made aware of an online petition created by UHS alumni requesting that UCF

take steps to address racial and ethnic issues in our school community. The Indian mascot is at

the center of the situation.” Upon information and belief, attached to the Cousins Declaration as

Exhibit 15 is a true and correct copy of the “Change Unionville High School’s mascot” petition

referenced in Dr. Sanville’s Discrimination and UHS Mascot Email (the “Online Petition”).

- 12 -
2020-05102-IR
 32. The Online Petition reads as follows:

For years, Unionville High School has been using the Indian as a mascot
with little to no outrage from community members. In a mostly white and
affluent district, the mascot is irrefutably offensive, and tradition alone is
not a valid reason to keep a celebration of the stolen land and culture that
Unionville rests on. During pep rallies, students are encouraged to “let out
an animalistic, guttural scream like an Indian on a warpath” and are
admonished for resisting. Students unaware of Indigenous culture or
significance wear headdresses and warpaint to signify school spirit.
Historically, they have been known to paint the representative red and/or
white. Each of these examples relays the deep racism against the Indigenous
population of the United States and in our area. While the idea of changing
the mascot was explored in the past, there have been minimal changes to
the representation of Indigenous peoples in the school. This is the time to
change the mascot and rectify the 90+ years of inherent, obvious racism at
the heart of Unionville High School.

Exhibit 15 (emphasis added).

33. In response to the Online Petition, which proclaims the Unionville High School

Mascot to be “irrefutably offensive,” based on a “celebration of the stolen land and culture that

Unionville rests on,” with the goal of those signing the Online Petition to “rectify the 90+ years of

inherent, obvious racism at the heart of Unionville High School,” District Superintendent Dr. John

Sanville expressed his thanks to “the alumni for their passion and energy around this topic” and

ascribed to the group altruistic motives. Exhibit 14 (“It is worth noting that the UCFSD graduates

initiating this process have done so to change the path forward not for themselves, but for those

still in school.”).

K. Plaintiff’s Fifth Request for the Board Appoint a Citizen Advisory Committee

34. In reply to the Discrimination and UHS Mascot Email, on June 25, 2020, Plaintiff

wrote to District Superintendent Dr. John Sanville:

I would ask that before the Administration and Board takes any action with respect
to the UHS Indian, that you consider [Board President Hellrung’s] guidance that
the Board “thoroughly engage all of our stakeholders, including students, alumni,
staff, parents, and community residents.” As you also know, I think that is best

- 13 -
2020-05102-IR
 accomplished the formation Citizen Advisory Committee (see my March 14, 2018
in this regard). I’m happy to chat with you if you think that’s helpful.

This was Plaintiff’s fifth request for the Board appoint a Citizen Advisory Committee pursuant to

District Board Policy #905 (the “Fifth Request”). A copy of the Fifth Request is attached to the

Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 16.

L. The July 13, 2020 Board Meeting

35. During the meeting of the Board on July 13, 2020 (the “July 13, 2020 Board

Meeting”), Unionville High School Athletic Director Patrick Cater made a presentation on the

future of the Unionville High School Mascot (the “July 13, 2020 Board Presentation”). A copy

of the July 13, 2020 Board Presentation is attached to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 17.

36. The July 13, 2020 Board Presentation claimed that the Unionville High School

Mascot “has served as Unionville High School’s mascot since 1954.” Exhibit 17 at p. 6. Mr.

Crater noted that many in the community “feel strongly about changing the mascot” viewing it as

“Offensive imagery.” Mr. Crater also noted complaints about “Symbols that carry negative

connotations about a particular group.” Id.

37. An illustration of the current iconography of the Unionville High School Mascot—

as described in the July 13, 2020 Board Presentation as a “U” logo with a feather—is attached to

the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 18.

38. The UHS iconography does not include a likeness a person, however. Rather, as

explained in the Discrimination and the UHS Mascot Email, it is a “U” with a feather. See Exhibit

14 (“The UHS logo was changed to a U with a single feather.”); Exhibit 17 at p. 4 (the watermark

on page 4 of the July 13, 2020 Board Presentation).

39. During his presentation, Mr. Crater stated: “At this point, no decisions have been

made and ultimately we will work together, lean on our values and standards, and our District’s

- 14 -
2020-05102-IR
mission to make a decision.” See UCFSD Board Meeting - 7/13/2020 - 7PM – Virtual, YouTube

(July 13, 2020), https:// youtu.be/1Rue-KsaZK0 at 5:55:37-5:55:46.

40. The July 13, 2020 Board Presentation, however, demonstrates otherwise. Rather,

it is clear that the Board intends to “retire” the Unionville High School Mascot at its August 24,

2020 Board meeting, followed by a “subsequent committee” that would be “charged with selecting

a new mascot” and with the District taking steps to “Collaborate and implement new ways of

honoring the Lenape Indians.” See Exhibit 17 at p. 6.

41. Before voting on the proposal for the administration to conduct a formal review of

the Unionville High School Mascot, Board President Hellrung, made the following statement:

I am going to use my executive authority here to cancel the Item 7.1 “Comments
from Residents” in light of the late hour and in light of the need of our
administrators in particular to be able to end their day and get to work tomorrow
including on new items that we have assigned them tonight. I do want to ask
residents who want to talk to us, please email us. We’ll still read your comments
and include those in the minutes of the meeting. And we’re always interested in
your emails, phone calls and personal conversations and advice to your school
board members.

Id. at 5:57:39-5:58:23.

42. Immediately thereafter, the Board approved the administration’s proposal to

conduct a formal review of the Unionville High School mascot.

43. At the end of an almost six-hour Board meeting, the July 13, 2020 Board meeting

concluded at approximately 1:00 a.m. on the morning of July 14, 2020.

M. The July 16, 2020 UHS Mascot Community Conversations Email

44. On July 16, 2020, the District sent an email captioned “Unionville HS Mascot

Community Conversations” (the “UHS Mascot Community Conversations Email”). A copy of

the UHS Mascot Community Conversations Email is attached to the Cousins Declaration as

Exhibit 19.

- 15 -
2020-05102-IR
 45. In its effort to “gain valuable feedback and maintain an open and transparent

process,” the District announced that it would be hosting community conversations on July 30,

2020, to discuss the future of the Unionville High School Mascot. Initially, there was a period one

hour set aside as follows:

July 30, 2020 • 12:00 PM – Conversation for Students

July 30, 2020 • 1:00 PM – Conversation for Staff

July 30, 2020 • 2:30 PM – Conversation for Community Members 2

July 30, 2020 • 3:30 PM – Conversation for Alumni

See Exhibit 19.

46. Upon information and belief, at the August 24, 2020 Regular Board meeting the

administration intends to recommend to the Board that the Unionville High School Mascot be

immediately “retired” and that a committee be formed to develop a new mascot and name. If the

Board takes official action at the August 24, 2020 Board meeting by cancelling the Unionville

High School Mascot without first according substantial weight to any meaningful input received

from the members of a Citizen Advisory Committee, the Board’s actions will cause irreparable

and immeasurable harm which cannot be compensated through money damages as the Unionville

High School Mascot, a unique asset that has been a part of the District for over 65 years, will be

lost forever.

THE LEGAL STANDARDS FOR THE RELIEF REQUESTED

47. Section 7532 of the Declaratory Judgment Act provides:

Courts of record, within their respective jurisdictions, shall have power to declare
rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be
claimed. No action or proceeding shall be open to objection on the ground that a
2
Approximately one hour prior to this “community conversation,” the District extended this
session to “90 minutes.” See Exhibit 20 (Mascot Community Conversation for Community
Members - 2:30pm).

- 16 -
2020-05102-IR
 declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either
affirmative or negative in form and effect, and such declarations shall have the force
and effect of a final judgment or decree.

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 7532.

48. The Sunshine Act is a good-governance law. It requires that governmental entities

conduct their business in the open. The Sunshine Act aims to prevent corrupt backroom dealings

and hold government officials accountable to the public.

49. Section 710.1 of the Sunshine Act required the Board to provide Plaintiff (an

interested community resident living in the District) a “reasonable opportunity at each advertised

regular meeting . . . to comment on matters of concern, official action or deliberation which are or

may be before the Board. . . prior to taking official action.”

50. The Pennsylvania Office of Open Records provides guidance as to what a

reasonable opportunity for residents to comment on an issue before the Board, noting: “The OOR

encourages agencies to take care when imposing time limits on public comment. Three minutes

is a common limit, and may be more than enough at most public meetings. However, it may not

be adequate at certain meetings, such as when a complex draft budget is being discussed. It can

be good practice to allow for flexibility in any policy imposing time limits on public comment,

taking care to ensure that the agency does not show partiality to some commenters over others.”

(Emphasis added). A copy the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records guidance is attached to the

Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 21.

51. With respect to Actions in Mandamus, the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure,

Pa. R.C.P. No. 1091-1099, Pennsylvania courts must enter a writ of mandamus when necessary to

compel a public, tax-payer funded school district to perform a ministerial act or mandatory duty

- 17 -
2020-05102-IR
where there is clear legal right in the plaintiff, a corresponding duty in the defendant, and a want

of any other appropriate and adequate remedy.

52. District Board Policy #000, Board Policy/Procedure/Administrative Guidelines,

provides in part: “Board policies and procedures and administrative guidelines shall not preempt,

create, supplant, expand or restrict the rights or liabilities of students, employees, residents or

others within the school community beyond those established in law.” A copy of District Board

Policy #000 is attached to the Cousins Declaration as Exhibit 22.

53. District Board Policy #903, Public Participation in Board Meetings, provides, in

part: “The Board recognizes the value to school governance of public comment on educational

issues and the importance of involving members of the public in Board meetings.” See Exhibit 3.

54. District Board Policy #910, Community Engagement, provides, in part:

The purpose of community engagement is to create a collaborative

environment in which students, parents/guardians, families, residents,
businesses, and community organizations are encouraged and invited to be
involved stakeholders in the school community. . . . The Board directs the
administration to develop and implement a planned program of community
engagement that regularly provides opportunities for students,
parents/guardians, families, residents, businesses and community
organizations to participate in dialogue and decision-making related to
district-wide and school-based issues. . . . The Board and administration
shall give substantial weight to the input received from the community.”
(Emphasis added).

See Exhibit 9.

COUNT I

Action for Declaratory Judgment and Injunction with Respect to

Violation of Section 710.1(a) of the Sunshine Act

55. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in the preceding

paragraphs as more fully set forth herein.

- 18 -
2020-05102-IR
 56. Section 710.1(a) of the Sunshine Act required the Board to provide Plaintiff (an

interested community resident living in the District) a “reasonable opportunity at each advertised

regular meeting . . . to comment on matters of concern, official action or deliberation which are or

may be before the Board. . . prior to taking official action.”

57. The Board violated Section 710.1(a) of the Sunshine Act when it limited Plaintiff’s

March 19 Presentation at the March 19, 2018 Board Meeting to approximately five minutes and

Plaintiff’s April 16 Presentation at the April 16, 2018 Board Meeting to approximately six minutes.

58. The Board further violated Section 710.1(a) when the Board President Hellrung

used his “executive authority” at the July 13, 2020 Board Meeting to “cancel the Item 7.1

‘Comments from Residents’” with no opportunity for public comment.

59. Any and all official action the Board has taken in violation of the Sunshine Act is

invalid.

60. The Board’s Sunshine Act violations will continue unless enjoined by the Court.

61. If the Board accepts the proposal from the administration to “retire” the Unionville

High School Mascot at the August 24, 2020 Regular Board meeting, the Board’s actions in

cancelling the Unionville High School Mascot will cause irreparable and immeasurable harm

which cannot be compensated through money damages as the Unionville High School Mascot is

a unique asset that has been a part of the District for over 65 years.

62. Section 713 of the Sunshine Act empowers the Court “to enjoin any challenged

action until a judicial determination of the legality of the meeting at which the action was adopted

is reached.” If the Court determines that the meeting violated the Sunshine Act, the Court is also

empowered to invalidate “all official action taken at the meeting.” Id.

- 19 -
2020-05102-IR
 63. Section 715 of the Sunshine Act specifically empowers this Court to enforce the

Sunshine Act “by injunction or other remedy deemed appropriate by the court.”

64. Plaintiff lacks an adequate remedy at law.

COUNT II

Action for Declaratory Judgment and Injunction with Respect to

Violation of District Board Policy #000
(Board Policy/Procedure/Administrative Guidelines)

65. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in the preceding

paragraphs as more fully set forth herein.

66. District Board Policy #000 ensures that the Board’s policies, procedures and

administrative guidelines do not “preempt, create, supplant, expand or restrict the rights or

liabilities of students, employees, residents or others within the school community beyond those

established in law.”

67. The Board violated District Board Policy #000 when it limited Plaintiff’s

presentations to (a) approximately five minutes with respect to Plaintiff’s March 19 Presentation;

and (b) approximately six minutes with respect to Plaintiff’s April 16 Presentation.

68. The Board violated District Board Policy #000 when cancelled any opportunity for

public comment under agenda Item 7.1 “Comments from Residents.”

69. The Board’s actions were designed to unconstitutionally limit opposing viewpoints,

in violation of District Board Policy #000, federal or state Constitutions or any other applicable

law.

70. Any and all official action the Board has taken in violation of District Board Policy

#000 is invalid.

- 20 -
2020-05102-IR
 71. The Board’s violations of District Board Policy #000 will continue unless enjoined

by the Court.

72. If the Board accepts the proposal from the administration to “retire” the Unionville

High School Mascot at the August 24, 2020 Regular Board meeting, the Board’s actions in

cancelling the Unionville High School Mascot will cause irreparable and immeasurable harm

which cannot be compensated through money damages as the Unionville High School Mascot is

a unique asset that has served as Unionville High School’s mascot since 1954.

73. Plaintiff lacks an adequate remedy at law.

COUNT III

Action for Declaratory Judgment and Injunction with Respect to

Violation of District Board Policy #910
(Community Engagement)

74. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in the preceding

paragraphs as more fully set forth herein.

75. District Board Policy #910 offers the Board the opportunity to create a collaborative

environment in which students, parents/guardians, families, residents, businesses, and community

organizations are encouraged and invited to be involved stakeholders in the school community.

76. District Board Policy #910 requires the Board and administration to give substantial

weight to the input received from the community.

77. District Board Policy #910 offers members of the community the opportunity for

the community to participate in dialogue and decision-making related to district-wide and school-

based issues.

78. The Board violated District Board Policy #910 when it refused Plaintiff’s repeated

requests for “interested community residents” to participate in dialogue and decision-making

- 21 -
2020-05102-IR
related to district-wide and school-based issues through the appointment of a Citizen Advisory

Committee with the assignment of investigating the merits of changing the Unionville High School

mascot and name and making its recommendations to the Board.

79. Any and all official action the Board has taken in violation of District Board Policy

#000 is invalid.

80. The Board’s violations of District Board Policy #910 will continue unless enjoined

by the Court.

81. If the Board accepts the proposal from the administration to “retire” the Unionville

High School Mascot at the August 24, 2020 Regular Board meeting, the Board’s actions in

cancelling the Unionville High School Mascot will cause irreparable and immeasurable harm

which cannot be compensated through money damages as the Unionville High School Mascot is

a unique asset that has served as Unionville High School’s mascot since 1954.

82. Plaintiff lacks an adequate remedy at law.

COUNT IV

Writ of Mandamus
(Citizen Advisory Committee)

83. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in the preceding

paragraphs as more fully set forth herein.

84. The District has a clear duty to enforce the District Board policies, including

District Board Policy #000, District Board Policy #903, District Board Policy #905 and District

Board Policy #910.

85. The District’s clear duty to enforce its the District Board policies is mandatory, not

discretionary.

- 22 -
2020-05102-IR
 86. District Board Policy #905, Citizen Advisory Committees, offers the Board the

opportunity to create Citizen Advisory Committees to provide the Board and the administration

useful information with regard to community opinion.

87. District Board Policy #905 offers members of the community to serve on Citizen

Advisory Committees in order to provide views as to the study of specific school issues to the

Board and the administration.

88. Plaintiff has a clear legal right to the appointment of a Citizen Advisory Committee

to investigate the future of the Unionville High School Mascot.

89. The District has a corresponding clear duty to enforce District Board Policy #000,

District Board Policy #903, District Board Policy #905 and District Board Policy #910.

90. The Board violated District Board Policy #000 when it denied Plaintiff’s First

Request, Second Request, Third Request, Fourth Request and Fifth Request for the appointment

of a Citizen Advisory Committee consisting of “at least one (1) Board member,” as well as

“interested community residents” with the assignment of investigating the merits of changing the

Unionville High School mascot and name and making its recommendations to the Board.

91. The Board has a mandatory, non-discretionary statutory duty to appoint a Citizen

Advisory Committee pursuant to District Board Policy #905, Citizen Advisory Committees.

92. If the Board accepts the proposal from the administration to “retire” the Unionville

High School Mascot at the August 24, 2020 Regular Board meeting, the Board’s actions in

cancelling the Unionville High School Mascot will cause irreparable and immeasurable harm

which cannot be compensated through money damages as the Unionville High School Mascot is

a unique asset that has served as Unionville High School’s mascot since 1954.

- 23 -
2020-05102-IR
 93. Here there is no adequate, alternative statutory remedy that would deprive this

Court of jurisdiction to grant the Writ of Mandamus.

94. Plaintiff no other appropriate or adequate remedy at law.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court award equitable relief in his

favor and against District as follows:

(1) with respect to Count I, Count II and Count III of this Complaint, a declaratory
judgment that the District violated the Sunshine Act by:

(a) failing to provide Plaintiff a “reasonable opportunity at each

advertised regular meeting . . . to comment on matters of concern, official action or
deliberation which are or may be before the Board. . . prior to taking official action,”
in accordance with Section 710.1 of the Sunshine Act;

(b) preempting, creating, supplanting, expanding or restricting the

rights or liabilities of Plaintiff beyond those established in law, in accordance with
District Board Policy #000 (Board Policy/Procedure/Administrative Guidelines);

(c) restricting Plaintiff’s public comments on educational issues and

limiting his involvement in public Board meetings in accordance with the Public
Participation in Board Meetings principles of District Board Policy #903; and

(d) refusing to give substantial weight to the input received from

Plaintiff in accordance with the Community Engagements principles of District
Board Policy #910 (Community Engagement) with respect to the future of the
Unionville High School Mascot; and

(2) with respect to Count I, Count II and Count III of this Complaint, a preliminary
and permanent injunction under the Sunshine Act prohibiting the Defendant from:

(a) preempting, creating, supplanting, expanding or restricting the rights or

liabilities of Plaintiff beyond those established in law, in accordance with District
Board Policy #000 (Board Policy/Procedure/Administrative Guidelines); and

(b) refusing to give substantial weight to the input received from Plaintiff
in accordance with the Community Engagements principles of District Board
Policy #910 (Community Engagement) with respect to the future of the Unionville
High School Mascot; and

(3) with respect to Count IV of this Complaint, a Writ of Mandamus directing the
District to comply with Plaintiff’s First Request, Second Request, Third Request, Fourth
Request and Fifth Request of the Board to appoint a Citizen Advisory Committee pursuant

- 24 -
2020-05102-IR
 to District Board Policy #905 prior to taking any official action of “retiring” the Unionville
High School Mascot; and

(4) such other and further relief as the Court deems just, equitable and appropriate.

Dated: August 5, 2020

/s/ Scott D. Cousins

Scott D. Cousins
Pro se
102 Wyndham Hill Drive
Kennett Square, PA 19348
Phone: (302) 650-9748
[email protected]

- 25 -
2020-05102-IR
 VERIFICATION

I, Scott D. Cousins, do hereby verify and affirm that the allegations set forth in the

foregoing Verified Complaint (a) are true and correct insofar as they concern (i) the acts and deeds

of me, (ii) my review of relevant documents, or (iii) my opinion based on experience, knowledge

and information; and (b) are believed to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge,

information, and belief insofar as they relate to the acts or deeds of any other person including my

communications and discussions with the District through its officers, agents, servants, employees,

attorneys, other representatives and those persons in active concert or participation with such

persons.

This Verification is made subject to 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 for unsworn falsification to

authorities.

Dated: August 5, 2020

/s/ Scott D. Cousins

Scott D. Cousins

2020-05102-IR