Parent urges board to reinstate student stay‑away that school declined to continue

At the public‑comment period, a parent asked the board to require that a school reinstate a stay‑away agreement protecting her son from another student, saying the school previously told the family the agreement had been effective.

The speaker, who identified herself as Ally Spieth and gave a Trophy Club address, told the trustees that her son had experienced repeated physical and verbal assaults in kindergarten and that a stay‑away had prevented further incidents. She said school officials had used the stay‑away's effectiveness as a reason to deny the family's earlier request to remove the other child from the campus, but that the school later declined to reinstate the agreement for the 2025–26 year. She asked the board to require the stay‑away be signed by the other student and family to protect her son.

What she said: The parent described verbal threats and physical contact toward her child, including an incident on the boy's sixth birthday. She said the boy continues to be worried about encounters if protections are removed and asked the district to resume the agreement that she said had previously worked.

Board response: The public‑comment item was for information only; the board did not deliberate or take action during the meeting. The superintendent and staff were present; the parent said she would pursue the district grievance process and indicated she may seek legal counsel if the stay‑away is not reinstated.

Clarification: The transcript records the parent's statements during public comment and her stated intent to pursue administrative grievances; the board did not announce a separate formal decision on the matter during the meeting.