Petition

 

Statutory Foundations for Removal

 

I am currently synthesizing the legal frameworks governing the removal of school officials in West Virginia, specifically focusing on the intersection of administrative non-compliance and official misconduct. My initial analysis identifies West Virginia Code §6-6-7 as a primary mechanism for removing elected county officers, including board members, for neglect of duty or malfeasance. Simultaneously, I am evaluating §18-4-3, which outlines the specific grounds for removing a county superintendent. I am thinking through how a 'failure to comply with state law'—such as the mandatory staffing ratios for school counselors—elevates from a regulatory violation to a removable offense.

 

Clinical Safety and Statutory Mandates

 

Through a detailed review of recent investigative reports, I have uncovered a significant conflict regarding the 'clinical safety' of students. A major point of contention involves the substitution of certified school counselors with 'Graduation Coaches,' a move that appears to bypass the mandates of W. Va. Code §18-5-18b. I have noted that while physical security measures were prioritized with substantial funding, the removal of mental health professionals has created what is being termed a 'clinical vacuum.' This shift raises complex questions about 'institutional negligence' and whether such a decision constitutes an arbitrary or capricious action by the board, potentially meeting the legal threshold for removal.

 

Investigating Procedural Paths and Case Studies

 

Moving forward, I will investigate the specific procedural hurdles required to initiate a removal petition, including the roles of the circuit court and the State Board of Education's intervention powers under §18-2E-5. I plan to dive deeper into the recent developments in Pocahontas County to understand how the 'Statement of Non-Compliance' filed against the board serves as a catalyst for potential judicial action. My next steps involve clarifying the distinction between state-level administrative takeovers and the individual removal of board members or the superintendent for specific statutory violations

Judicial Pathways to Removal

I am synthesizing the dual-track process for removal in West Virginia, where both judicial and administrative authorities overlap. Under Code §6-6-7, I have identified that a three-judge court must find 'clear and convincing evidence' of official misconduct or neglect of duty to remove a school board member. This standard is exceptionally high, typically requiring proof of willful unlawful behavior or a total failure to perform a mandatory duty. I am analyzing how this judicial path contrasts with the State Superintendent’s authority under §18-3-4, which allows for the initiation of proceedings against any school official for a persistent failure to comply with the rules of the state Board of Education.

Local Governance and Non-Compliance

I have uncovered critical developments in Pocahontas County from early 2026, where the substitution of school counselors with 'graduation coaches' has led to a formal 'Statement of Non-Compliance.' This specific conflict highlights a tension between local fiscal decisions and state mandates like §18-5-18b, which requires counselors to spend 80% of their time on direct service. I am evaluating how the board's decision to cut these positions, despite documented warnings of a 'clinical vacuum,' might be legally classified as 'arbitrary and capricious,' a key threshold for establishing the neglect of duty required for removal.

Escalation and Administrative Intervention

Moving forward, I will focus on the specific escalation steps that follow a state-issued 'Statement of Non-Compliance.' I need to determine if this administrative label serves as the requisite legal trigger for a three-judge court to act, or if it primarily leads to a state takeover of the county system. My next steps include examining West Virginia Supreme Court precedents to clarify what specific actions constitute 'insubordination' by a county superintendent versus 'neglect of duty' by a board member, ensuring I can trace the exact path from a regulatory violation to a change in leadership.

 

To file a formal petition for the removal of a school official in West Virginia, you must adhere to the procedural requirements of West Virginia Code § 6-6-7. Below is a draft template for a citizen-initiated petition based on the legal standards and substantive grounds for removal.

---

---

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA

IN RE: PETITION FOR THE REMOVAL OF,

PETITION FOR REMOVAL FROM OFFICE

Now come the undersigned Petitioners, being registered and qualified voters of [County Name] County, West Virginia, and proffer charges for the removal of [Official's Name] (hereinafter "Respondent") from the office of pursuant to West Virginia Code § 6-6-7.

I. STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION

1. This Petition is filed pursuant to W. Va. Code § 6-6-7, which authorizes the removal of any county or school district officer for official misconduct, neglect of duty, or incompetence.

2. Petitioners represent the required number of qualified voters as dictated by W. Va. Code § 6-6-7(b)(1)(C), based on the population of [County Name] County.

II. GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL

The Petitioners proffer that the Respondent has engaged in the following:

Charge 1: Neglect of Duty (W. Va. Code § 18-5-18b) The Respondent has committed a "knowing refusal or willful failure to perform an essential act or duty required by law". Specifically:

• Failure to Implement Mandated Services: The Respondent voted to abolish certified school counselor positions at, replacing them with "Graduation Coaches" who lack the clinical certification required to perform suicide risk assessments and mental health interventions.

• Violation of the 80% Rule: By replacing counselors with administrative staff, the Respondent willfully failed to ensure that students have access to a comprehensive counseling program where the professional spends 80% of their time in direct counseling relationships, as mandated by W. Va. Code § 18-5-18b.

• Creation of a "Clinical Vacuum": This failure has created a "clinical vacuum" and a "dangerous gap" in student safety, constituting a disregard for the statutory safety net designed to prevent violence and manage mental health crises.

Charge 2: Neglect of Duty (W. Va. Code § 18-5-1A)

The Respondent has failed to complete mandatory training requirements for school board members:

• The Respondent failed to attend and complete the required orientation and annual training on governance and fiscal management without good cause.

• Per W. Va. Code § 18-5-1A(2), this failure constitutes per se "neglect of duty" under § 6-6-7.

Charge 3: Incompetence The Respondent has demonstrated incompetence through the "waste or misappropriation of public funds".

• Specifically, the Respondent authorized the expenditure of over $540,000 on physical security measures (e.g., gates and alarms) while simultaneously removing the clinically trained personnel required by law to provide preventative behavioral intervention, thereby rendering the security investments ineffective and the school environment clinically unsafe.

III. INFORMED ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Each Petitioner, by signing below, acknowledges that they have read the charges herein and agree that the allegations, if proven by clear and convincing evidence, warrant the removal of the Respondent from office.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Petitioners respectfully request that this Court:

1. Enter this Petition of record;

2. Issue a summons for the Respondent to appear;

3. Evaluate these charges as sufficient under the strict construction required by law; and

4. Forward this matter to the Supreme Court of Appeals for the appointment of a Three-Judge Court to hear the charges and order the removal of the Respondent from office.

---

VERIFICATION

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

COUNTY OF, to-wit:

I, [Name of Lead Petitioner], being first duly sworn, say that the facts and allegations contained in the foregoing Petition are true, except so far as they are therein stated to be on information and belief, and that so far as they are therein stated to be on information and belief, I believe them to be true.

---

Taken, subscribed, and sworn to before me this ____ day of [Month], 2026.

---

Notary Public

My commission expires: _______________

---

PETITIONER SIGNATURES (Note: Every page containing signatures must include the official's name, office, and the charges or grounds for removal).

Printed Name	Residence Address	Date Signed	Signature
1.
2.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF POCAHONTAS COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA

IN RE: PETITION FOR THE REMOVAL OF: DR. LEATHA WILLIAMS, SUPERINTENDENT, AND THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION WHO VOTED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

RESPONDENTS.

---

STATEMENT OF FACTS

COMES NOW the Petitioners, citizens and registered voters of Pocahontas County, West Virginia, who respectfully submit the following Statement of Facts in support of the Petition to Remove the above-named Respondents from office pursuant to West Virginia Code § 6-6-7. The Petitioners assert that the Respondents have committed "Neglect of Duty" through the knowing refusal and willful failure to perform essential acts required by law, specifically the abolition of state-mandated mental health safety nets at Pocahontas County High School.

I. THE MANDATORY STATUTORY DUTY

1. Mandate for Counseling Services: Under West Virginia Code § 18-5-18b, county boards of education are explicitly required to "provide counseling services for each pupil." The statute defines a school counselor as a "professional educator who holds a valid school counselor's certificate".
2. The "80% Rule": Both W. Va. Code § 18-5-18b and West Virginia Board of Education (WVBE) Policy 2315 mandate that certified school counselors spend at least 80% of their time in a "direct counseling relationship" with students. This legislative safeguard is designed to ensure students have access to clinical support, crisis intervention, and holistic development.
3. Comprehensive School Counseling Program (CSCP): State law requires the implementation of a CSCP, which serves as a "statutory safety net" to detect and prevent student mental health crises, suicidal ideation, and behavioral escalation.

II. THE ACT OF ABOLITION AND SUBSTITUTION

4. Abolition of Position: Respondent Superintendent Dr. Leatha Williams, with the affirmative vote of the Respondent Board Members, formally "abolished" the certified school counselor position at Pocahontas County High School (PCHS).
5. Unlawful Substitution: In lieu of a certified professional, the Respondents created and filled the position of "Graduation Coach" or "Academic Coach." The sources confirm that a Graduation Coach acts merely as an administrative interventionist focused on data and graduation metrics, lacking the master’s-level clinical training required by law.
6. Legal Bar to Practice: The "Graduation Coach" is legally barred from performing the essential duties of a school counselor, including mental health crisis intervention, suicide risk assessment, and specific therapeutic tasks. Consequently, the Respondents have knowingly left the 833 students of PCHS in a "clinical vacuum" without a resident expert to handle immediate psychological emergencies.

III. NEGLECT OF DUTY AND INSTITUTIONAL NEGLIGENCE

7. Knowing Refusal to Comply: Neglect of duty is defined as the "knowing refusal or willful failure of a public officer to perform an essential act or duty of the office required by law". By abolishing the counseling position, the Respondents effectively removed the clinical service provider mandated by the legislature, placing the district in "technical violation" of state code.
8. Prioritization of "Hardening" over "Healing": The Respondents demonstrated Institutional Negligence by approving expenditures exceeding $540,000 for physical security measures (gates, alarms) while simultaneously abolishing the counselor position. This prioritization of "hardening" over "healing" ignores the statutory requirement for clinical safety and fails to address the internal, behavioral causes of school violence.
9. Creation of Systemic Inequity: The Respondents’ actions have created a "professional desert" and a two-tiered system where rural students at PCHS are denied the professional mental health care afforded to students in other districts, receiving only administrative tracking in its place.
10. Ripple Effect of Non-Compliance: To mitigate the damage of their decision, Respondents assigned a middle school counselor to visit the high school part-time. This act further constitutes neglect of duty by diluting services at the middle school level, thereby violating CSCP requirements for those students as well.

IV. HARM AND DAMAGES

11. Risk to Student Safety: The Special Circumstance Review triggered by the state revealed that the absence of a certified counselor resulted in a "clinical vacuum," leaving the school vulnerable to preventable tragedies and liability for institutional negligence.
12. Compromised Academic Integrity: The investigation found evidence of "inaccurate credit transcription" and potentially "intentional" acts regarding student records. These errors are a direct result of removing the certified counselor, who acts as the ethical "registrar of the student's academic soul," further demonstrating the Respondents' incompetence in maintaining the integrity of student data.
13. State of Emergency: The magnitude of these failures was sufficient for the West Virginia Board of Education to declare a "State of Emergency" for Pocahontas County Schools in February 2025. The specific findings cited the lack of a certified counselor and the failure to implement Personal Education Plans (PEPs) as key deficiencies.

---

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Petitioners respectfully pray that this Honorable Court:

1. Accept this Petition and find that the allegations set forth herein, if proven, constitute "Neglect of Duty" and "Incompetence" under West Virginia Code § 6-6-7;
2. Forward this Petition to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia for the appointment of a Three-Judge Court to hear these charges pursuant to W. Va. Code § 6-6-7;
3. Conduct a formal hearing wherein the Petitioners may present clear and convincing evidence that the Respondents knowingly refused to comply with the mandates of W. Va. Code § 18-5-18b, thereby endangering the welfare of the student body; and
4. Issue an Order removing the Respondents from their respective offices as Superintendent and Members of the Board of Education of Pocahontas County, restoring the rule of law and the statutory safety nets owed to the students of this County.

Respectfully Submitted,

---

(Signature of Petitioners) Citizens of Pocahontas County