Parents urge district action on bullying, special‑education procedures at school board meeting

At the public comment portion of the April 7 Berkeley County Board of Education meeting, multiple speakers described ongoing problems with bullying and the district’s handling of students with individualized education plans (IEPs). Speakers asked the board to acknowledge failures, explain enforcement practices and propose improvements.

“More specifically, how we've seen repeatedly ... enforcement of these policies,” said Jason Brockett, who identified himself as a recurring public commenter. “My own son's story has been intentionally pushed under the rug for almost a year now.” Brockett said he has cataloged his appearances and interactions publicly and urged families and staff to speak up so the district can “present a plan for doing it better.”

Another parent who identified herself as Sarah raised multiple questions about services and safety for students with special needs: “What is your training for crisis prevention institutions for kids with IEPs and BIDs? What happened to the music teacher and the other teachers that are leaving? Why is a fourth grade teacher not returning? Why is a teacher who struck my son still working inside the school?” She also asked whether seclusion and restraints are being used and whether there are cameras in special‑education classrooms. Sarah said she had filed police reports and described her child coming home injured.

Both commenters said fear of retaliation keeps many families from speaking in public. Brockett said some families “are reluctant to come up here … for fear of repercussions” and urged the board to acknowledge problems and explain how it will enforce its policies. Sarah told the board she had repeatedly tried to resolve issues with school staff and said a principal had called the Department of Social Services on her, which she described as “a bogus call.”

The board did not take immediate action on public comments during the meeting; the district’s public comment rules read aloud at the start of the session note that the board will not take immediate action and that complaints about employees other than district‑level executives will not be heard in public session.

The superintendent and other administrators were present later in the meeting and made routine reports on district programs and events; no publicly announced immediate remedies or investigative steps were presented on record in response to the commenters’ allegations during the open meeting.