Committee tables proposal to add a non-terroristic threat category for threats against staff

The Discipline Committee discussed whether to add a new infraction category to the discipline matrix to address threats made toward St. Mary Parish employees that do not rise to the level of terroristic threats. After extended discussion about definitions and intent, the committee voted to table the item for further work.

Mr. Holmes, the staff presenter, described the proposal and emphasized the distinction the principals wanted between terroristic threats and less severe threats. He said: “we don't want our students threatening, teachers or faculty members period. But they wanted to differentiate between a terroristic threat and a threat that was less severe.” He used examples from the packet such as students saying "snitches get stitches" or telling a teacher they would "go get my mother or my daddy for you," which, he said, would not meet the terroristic-threat standard.

Discussion focused on the legal definition of assault and the threshold for involving law enforcement. A committee member observing the matrix said the assault definition "mirrors closely this definition" used by police: the threatened person must feel fear and the student must have the means and intent; such incidents are treated as level 4 and involve immediate law enforcement notification. Members raised concerns that the draft language for the proposed level 3 could overlap with level 4 language (for example, words like "intention" or "written statement of intention to inflict pain"), and asked staff to revise the wording and consider separate language or application for K-5 versus grades 6-12.

Tamika West, identified herself as "the Saint Mary Parish alternative teacher for K through 5," and urged the committee to account for developmental differences among younger children who may say hurtful things in the moment and later reconcile: "it's a little bit different with the little ones... 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour later, they're still trying to get in your good graces." Other members noted the need to distinguish perceived intention from expressed words and to avoid unfairly subjecting children to level 4 consequences.

Following discussion, a motion to table the proposal so staff could refine definitions and consider K-5 versus 6-12 distinctions was made and seconded; the chair announced the item would be held for further revision.

Staff said they would return with clarified definitions and proposed language at a later meeting.