School board narrows expulsion labeling, defers formal code changes after lengthy public discussion

Marion County School Board members spent a wide-ranging work session on Jan. 9 focused on how the district handles recommendations for student expulsions and what services, if any, expelled students should receive.

At the meeting the superintendent—s student-discipline team outlined the step-by-step process schools follow when they recommend expulsions, and Attorney Blackman and Dr. Hembruck described how families may dispute either the facts of a case or the disciplinary consequences. Dr. Hembruck said the district packages witness statements, an executive summary and any threat-assessment or MDR (manifestation determination review) paperwork and forwards a completed packet to the district—s expulsion review committee for vetting before it goes to the board.

Why it matters: Board members said existing labels such as "with services" and "without services" have caused confusion for families and the public. Several trustees pressed for clearer language that explains whether an expelled student will continue to receive Marion County Public Schools instruction in person, via district-managed virtual programs, or not at all. Attendees also raised concerns about consistency in how individual principals decide which incidents to forward and about the balance between safety and maintaining students— access to instruction.

District staff summarized the legal process for families who contest a recommendation. Attorney Blackman described how parents who challenge the facts of a case may request an administrative hearing before the Division of Administrative Hearings, while challenges of the consequences are heard directly by the board in its quasi‑judicial role. "When the judge makes factual findings, those findings are supposed to be given deference," Blackman said; legal conclusions and recommendations, however, may be returned to the board for a final vote.

Board members discussed a range of scenarios — from middle-school students sharing a vape to more serious violent incidents — and emphasized that the same label can cover very different facts. "Passing a vape to a friend and an organized sale of narcotics are not the same," Board Member Dr. James said, urging the board to separate some drug offenses into distinct codes rather than treating them all identically.

The board also heard from Principal Jones, who described the Marion Technical Institute—s (MTI) alternative-learning program and said MTI prioritizes continuing academics for students while providing wraparound supports and community partnerships.

What the board decided: Trustees agreed not to rewrite the code of student conduct on the spot. Instead they asked staff to change the way expulsion items are captioned on the next school-board meeting agenda so the public can see, in plain language, the likely placement being recommended. Staff said they would replace "expulsion without services" with a clearer description (for example, "expulsion — off‑campus virtual alternative learning") and similarly label expulsions that keep students in an on‑site alternative program as "expulsion — on‑campus alternative learning." Superintendent staff also told the board they have secured an addendum with an online-provider (Imagine Learning/Edgenuity) to allow district-managed, off‑campus virtual instruction with a certified teacher as a placement option.

Next steps: The board asked the district—s student code of conduct review committee to incorporate trustees— concerns and return recommended policy language as part of the 2025–26 code review and rule‑making process. Board members signaled they want clearer, code‑level distinctions that map particular infractions (and aggravating/mitigating factors such as age and disciplinary history) to the range of possible placements and the length of exclusion.

Board members and staff emphasized the need for clearer public communications and for training so that principals and district reviewers apply standards more consistently across schools. Dr. Hembruck said staff would adjust meeting scripts and agenda captions immediately and prepare draft code changes for the formal review cycle.

Ending: The board did not adopt new policy at the work session; it set a near-term administrative change to how expulsion items are described on agendas and directed the school-code review committee to return proposed, specific code edits for the 2025–26 cycle. Families with cases already scheduled for the next board meeting will receive the same case packets and the district will offer the newly arranged online placement option to students who are assigned off‑campus virtual instruction.