Facts vs. Fiction
The Truth Will Prevail
Introduction
This website attempts to separate facts from fiction. Below you will see various allegations that have been made against Frank Curtis and the Grays during the month of July. We have done nothing but work tirelessly for the committee and the patriot movement, giving exorbitant amounts of time and money, and pouring in our hearts and souls. We have no ill will toward anyone on the committee, and we sincerely apologize to anyone we have unintentionally offended.
It's difficult to defend yourself when the accusations are being made behind your back and you have to piece them together through secondary sources. In early July, Jennifer Lancaster demanded that we all resign. In a meeting on Wednesday, July 10th, Jennifer floated the idea that we all be voted out: https://rumble.com/v59j0oa-jennifer-suggests-removal.html. She also suggested that Frank be convinced to run for District 2 JP so he would resign as chair. https://rumble.com/v59j10c-jennifer-suggests-another-way-to-replace-frank.html. She then suggested that she, Clint, and Stephanie Duke would take over and run the committee. (audio here: https://rumble.com/v59pjhn-lancasters-and-stephanie-will-take-over.html and here: https://rumble.com/v59pl4t-jennifer-suggests-she-become-chair.html). On Saturday, July 13th, she sent Thomas Harper and Randy Sams to meet with Frank Curtis in an attempt to get him to resign. Having broken no rules, he refused and instead offered to work together to find solutions and move forward in a positive manner. On a follow-up Zoom call July 13th among Jennifer Lancaster, Stephanie Duke, Thomas Harper, and Randy Sams, upon learning that no one had resigned, Jennifer threatened to use her position as District 2 Chair to disband the entire committee. (It is important to note that we were blindsided by these allegations. The Grays had just been invited to a party at the Lancasters' house in late May. On June 8th after the state convention ended, Jennifer Lancaster said to the Grays, "We make a great team!" After the great success at the state convention, we felt the committee was more unified than ever.)
While the Lancasters and Stephanie Duke want to burn it all down, Frank Curtis and the Grays have proposed positive solutions so that we can move forward to deal with state RPA issues and focus on the general election this November.
You can listen to the entire 1st “hate” meeting here:
https://8468304.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/8468304/July%2010th%202024%20Meeting.mp4
You can listen to the entire Town Hall meeting here:
https://8468304.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/8468304/town%20hall%2072924.m4a
Allegation 1
Scott took credit for the convention
Response: This is false. After hearing that Jennifer demanded that we resign, Scott said that would be sad for the statewide patriot movement, because he is needed to push the patriot agenda at the state level. Scott was instrumental in carrying out the rules changes at the state convention. In fact, Jennifer was texting Scott motions throughout the convention. As a loyal foot soldier, Scott was pushing the patriot agenda from the floor, but he never took credit for the convention. Scott openly acknowledges that around 20 individuals were involved in the planning and execution of the changes adopted at the state convention. Jennifer did an outstanding job as convention chair, and after the convention, when all but a few had left the room, Jennifer told the Grays, "you know, we make a great team."
Allegation 2
Scott wrote Chairman Frank's "RINO" Speech
Response: This is false. Scott did not write the speech, had no advance notice of the speech, other than there would be one, and did not participate in drafting the speech. The next day, Scott did send a survey regarding the July meeting date. Question 3 on the survey asked a narrative question, "Do you support the vision for SCRC that our Chairman laid out Tuesday night?" The survey was emailed to the entire committee. 85% of respondents supported the Chair. You can view all of the responses here: https://8468304.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/8468304/July%20meeting%20survey.pdf
Allegation 3
The Grays do too much and won't let others participate.
Response: The Grays are experienced marketers. They volunteered to help market SCRC in early 2023 when the committee was first growing. They have given countless hours of time to promote the committee and the patriot agenda. Now that others say they want to participate, the Grays are happy to step back and allow others to do the work. They will, however, continue to exercise their first amendment rights individually.
With respect to the billboards, every single billboard that used the SCRC name was approved by the Chairman at that time. This should no longer be a problem, though, as the Grays will leave it up to the committee to pay for any future billboards.
Allegation 4
Frank, Angela, and Alison did not allow others to run for the positions.
Response: This is false. (1) After begging Jennifer to stay on as chair, and after considerable time when no one else came forward to run, Frank first notified Jennifer that he would be willing to serve. No one else came forward, but they had every opportunity to do so. (2) The Grays then asked Jennifer to stay on as First Vice. She insisted that she needed more time with her family and needed to shed positions. Again, when no one else came forward after some time, Angela reluctantly announced her candidacy. She publicly stated this at Italy in Town. Kandi elaborated and asked if anyone else wanted to run. None did. No one was prevented from running, and Angela would have happily not run had another come forward. She has no intention of running for re-election in January to this or any other office. (3) When Alison announced her candidacy for state committeewoman, no one else had come forward. Anyone else could have run but no one chose to do so. No one was ever excluded from running. The Grays simply do not have the power to prevent or disallow anyone from exercising their right to run for party office.
Allegation 5
3 Grays vote on the Executive Committee
Response: This is false. (1) Scott held an appointed position under David Gibson. He was not reappointed when the new committee began on March 30th. While he attends the meetings, as do other non-members, he does not have or exercise a vote. (2) Angela and Alison were duly elected. They serve and vote on the Executive Committee. Angela will no longer be on the executive committee after the January election. She is simply filling the remainder of the term as first vice after Jennifer's resignation. The Executive Committee meetings are open to all to attend. Going forward, a better effort will be made to notify the entire committee of EC meetings. Executive Committee composition is spelled out in RPA rules. See Article 2 Section 3 C..
Members have been intentionally left off of text / email lists.
Allegation 6
Response: (1) When Rena Allmond became Secretary, it was discovered that a number of members were not getting emails due to bad and mistyped email addresses. A great effort was made to correct the list. Anyone who has notified of an email problem has been corrected. There was no malice, and no one was intentionally left off the list. In fact, when members recently alleged they were not receiving emails, we were able to verify they were, in fact, being delivered and in many cases, read. The EC cannot force someone to open an email or check their spam folder (where most bulk emails end up.) Rena encourages anyone who is not receiving emails to let her know, so the problem can be traced. (2) As to texts, different members maintain different text lists to notify others of meetings or advocate a particular position. Not everyone is on every list. These lists are 100% funded individually and are not related to SCRC. Anyone can request to be added to a text list or create their own. (3) No official SCRC chat or messenger group exists. Like text lists, different members maintain different groups. No one is obligated to be added to these private groups, but members can always request.
Allegation 7
Passive Aggressive Facebook posts
Response: Scott typically only posts meeting announcements to the SCRC facebook page. Frank has posted memes in the past to gain exposure, but will not moving forward. This broad allegation came with no specific information, so it is difficult to investigate. To the extent the allegation involves individual, personal facebook posts, policing those would constitute censorship, which is outside the bounds of the committee. As to the website, Scott stands behind everything posted to the website as purely factual. If a member has a concern about a specific post, please bring that forward.
Mean texts
Allegation 8
Response: (1) Scott has no knowledge of sending any mean or otherwise inappropriate texts. If you have a specific allegation, please present it, so he can improve. (2) Frank did have a strained text conversation with Jennifer Lancaster where they were both rude to one another. Frank sincerely apologizes and is happy to show the entire thread, not just selected texts, to anyone who would like to see them.
Allegation 9
Resolution on Hill / Cotton / Boozman was wrong.
Response: The motion was properly made and approved. Codie Crumpton made the motion because she was frustrated with the constant votes to send billions of our tax dollars to Ukraine. No one spoke against the motion, and it passed without a single objection. You can watch the short video here:
Stephanie Duke & Jennifer Lancaster have unsuccessfully met with Frank and the Grays to resolve concerns.
Allegation 10
Response: This is false. Not only has no meeting been proactively offered by them, but both Jennifer Lancaster and Stephanie Duke were asked to attend the July Executive Committee meeting in an attempt to discuss and resolve any disputes. Neither of them attended. At that meeting, which Robert Scott did attend, the Grays and Frank extended yet another olive branch to the Lancasters and Stephanie Duke to meet and work out these differences. We were told by Robert Scott that the committee was damaged and could not recover. At no point have the Lancasters or Stephanie Duke asked for a meeting or discussed these allegations directly with the Grays. In fact, the Grays were blindsided when they heard about the allegations, because they thought everything was on track and the committee was unified after the successful state convention at which Jennifer remarked, "We make a great team!"
Allegation 11
Response: Carson is well-versed in the rules. Frank specifically requested Carson's parliamentary assistance. At the July meeting, Carson correctly pointed out that Mrs. Mills's motion was out of order because it created a special rule of order by adding additional duties to the position of secretary. In an attempt to lower the temperature of the meeting, Scott moved to table the motion. Going forward, Frank has committed to attempt to hire parliamentarians; however, the committee will need to fund this.
Carson needs to sit in the corner and read a book.
Allegation 12
The Grays control the committee.
Response: While the Grays are active participants and often make motions and present resolutions, the body controls the committee. Anyone is welcome to speak against any motion or resolution or to vote no. All members are always welcome to make their own motions.
Allegation 13
Spending is reckless.
Response: The committee has spent very little money outside of two marketing expenses. One was the Get Out the Vote mailers, motioned by Angela Ross. The other was Decline to Sign mailers, motioned by Stephanie Duke. Both expenses were overwhelmingly approved by the committee. Gray Media provided both mailers for hard costs only, which was mostly postage. This saved the committee around 50% vs consultant rates. All other expenses have been trivial, but receipts have been provided for each and every expense. All small expenses have been approved by the Executive Committee, which has authority to approve up to $250 for individual expenses.
5 people need to be on the marketing committee.
Allegation 14
Response: The notion that 5 people need to be on the marketing committee is an opinion. Frank prefers to work with The Grays. With that said, the Grays are more than willing to step back and give others an opportunity to do the work.
Allegation 15
Amanda Barnard is not receiving committee emails.
Response: This is false. She has received and actively opened recent emails. See link below for proof:
Alison determined the convention delegates.
Allegation 16
Response: In an attempt to save time and speed up the process of selecting delegates without having multiple planning meetings, Alison pre-contacted members who expressed an interest. She worked hard to find enough delegates but was unable to find a healthy number of alternates. Everyone was able to nominate themselves at the county convention. (One who nominated himself but didn't attend the planning meeting decided to go on vacation, so the position was given to an alternate. At the last minute, he called wanting the position back.) No one was ever excluded from the process. Going forward, the Grays will not coordinate delegate slates.
Allegation 17
According to a Stephanie Duke text on 7/31, Scott attempted to meet with members to "show them things" and has been targeting Jennifer on the state level to turn people against her.
Response: This is false. Scott did not ask to meet with anyone to show them anything. There is no proof of this because it didn't happen. Scott has not targeted Jennifer statewide. After Jennifer would not meet with any of us, Scott made less than a handful of phone calls in an attempt to arrange a meeting. Jennifer has not been disparaged and has generally only been praised by the Grays.
Allegation 18
We do not follow the rules.
Response: This is false. In the July 10th meeting, Jennifer claimed that we do not follow the rules by allowing Scott to be on the Executive Committee. Again, Scott is NOT a voting member of the Executive Committee. He has no desire to be on the Executive Committee. Jennifer is no longer on the Executive Committee and hasn't attended an Executive Committee meeting since the last one she chaired, so she does not know who is voting. Below is a discussion about the executive committee, including an allegation that we are not texting out enough information. Contrary to the statement made, we have never been asked to relay Jennifer's texts with personal conversations. It is also interesting that, while she complains that Angela and Alison are both on the executive committee (though duly elected), that is exactly what she is proposing by putting herself and Clint in "leadership roles."