Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Counseling Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Boone County board to address counselor cuts and bring back in-school suspension
Summary
Public speakers told the Boone County Board of Education that reductions in counseling staff at RA Jones have left a single counselor for hundreds of students and urged reinstatement of in‑school suspension at a middle school.
Speakers at the Boone County Board of Education meeting raised concerns about staffing and discipline policies, telling board members that counselor reductions at R.A. Jones Elementary (referred to in testimony as "Jones") have left the school with one counselor for more than 700 students.
"How do you take a high trauma school and reduce it to 1 counselor?" asked Leslie Chambers, a community member who signed up to speak. Chambers said two counselors were removed from the school's staffing and described frequent student crises and a heavy demand for counseling services.
Chambers raised concerns about support for students with special education or English-learner plans, saying the counselor was the usual advocate for those students and that replacing trained counselors with staff without counselor credentials could undermine compliance with Individualized Education Program (IEP) requirements. She said her son, who she described as having an IEP, was given more than 10 out-of-school suspensions and expressed concern about equity and student safety with reduced counseling capacity.
Another speaker, Naomi Lipson, urged the board to bring back in-school suspension at her children's middle school, saying the measure keeps students in supervised settings rather than sending them home. "Keeping me in school allowed [my mother] to have this job," Lipson said, describing how supervised in-school discipline can help families who cannot provide daytime supervision.
Board staff read a reminder that, by statute, the board cannot discuss confidential personnel matters during a public meeting and indicated that individual employment concerns must be handled outside the public session.
The board did not take formal action on personnel changes or discipline policy at the meeting; these were public comments submitted during the audience-of-citizens portion of the agenda. Members acknowledged the remarks and confirmed they would follow board policy about confidentiality and personnel matters.
Speakers called on the board to use its budget authority and superintendent-hiring authority to address school-level staffing decisions that affect student mental health and discipline outcomes.
