Cabell County board declines to send school start-time survey, urges local stakeholder review

The Cabell County Board of Education voted Tuesday, May 6, 2025, not to send a districtwide survey asking whether middle- and high-school start times should change, after public commenters urged a slower, stakeholder-driven process.

Board President Polley moved to halt a district survey on start times and the motion carried with no opposition. The board instead encouraged Local School Improvement Committees (LSICs) and community stakeholders to examine the issue and provide input at publicly noticed meetings.

Supporters of later start times framed the question as a student-health issue. David Pittinger, a research psychologist at Marshall University, told the board “an incredible amount of research has demonstrated that starting later greatly improves academic performance by all measures” and offered to volunteer on a planning committee. Monte Fowler, a resident, urged a broad working group including transportation, facilities, parents and employers to study impacts and trade-offs. Carolyn Miller, another resident, urged the board to “slow down” and form a task force that would study districts that have changed start times and then, if appropriate, develop an implementation plan and timetable.

Board President Polley said she had reviewed guidance from medical and advocacy groups and recommended a process that begins with stakeholder meetings. Polley read excerpts from the American Medical Association policy on adolescent sleep and cited materials from the Start School Later organization as resources for planning. Polley told the board that successful district changes typically set clear district goals (for example, aiming for no school start before 8:30 a.m. for middle/high schools) and allow time for community adjustment.

Superintendent Tim Hardesty and other board members discussed the LSICs — locally run, publicly noticed committees required by state code — as an initial venue for discussion. The board directed staff to share LSIC meeting schedules and to make it possible for community members who support a time-change study to address those committees.

The board’s decision at the May 6 meeting was procedural: it rejected a districtwide survey at this time and asked for stakeholder conversations instead. No change to school bell times was approved, and no formal implementation plan was adopted.

Board members and several public speakers said further research and carefully structured public engagement would be necessary before any referendum or board action on start times. Several speakers recommended an implementation lead time of at least a year if the district eventually decided to change schedules.