Advocates urge New Hanover County Schools to limit suspensions of 5–7‑year‑olds after district discipline review

At the New Hanover County Board of Education’s October meeting, parents, advocates and some board members urged the district to change its short‑term suspension practices for the youngest students, especially 5‑, 6‑ and 7‑year‑olds, and asked staff for additional discipline data and policy options.

The appeals followed a presentation of the district’s 2024–25 discipline data by district staff. Julie Barnum, the staff presenter, told the board the district recorded 20,733 incident entries in PowerSchool for the year, of which 2,603 were attributed to kindergarten through second grade. Barnum said the district logged 4,530 in‑school suspension assignments (61 for K–2), 2,428 short‑term suspension assignments (93 for K–2) and 152 reportable offenses (five for K–2). She also said disciplinary reassignments to JC Rowe Academy rose to 126 and long‑term suspensions were four.

Why it matters: speakers framed the issue as one of both student safety and long‑term equity. Commenters and advocates argued that young children—particularly those whose behavior stems from stress or developmental factors—should receive supports and mental‑health consultation before being removed from class.

"Why do we continue to press month after month for better exclusionary discipline policies for our youngest learners?" asked Stephen Axum, a public commenter who opened the discussion during the public‑comment period.

Several speakers asked the board to amend policy 43‑51 (short‑term suspension) or the student code of conduct to require a mental‑health or behavioral consultation before administrators remove K–2 students from school. Amanda Riesmeyer told the board: "I'm asking that policy 43 51, our short term suspension policy, include language ensuring that before a 5, 6 or 7 year old is suspended, a school administrator consults with a mental health professional to determine whether there is imminent threat of harm, and what supports that child needs to succeed." Loretta Stackhouse added: "What are kids learning when a principal kicked them out of school for 1 day or possibly 10 days? The message is, you are bad. We don't like you. We don't want you here."

Other commenters focused on seclusion and data transparency. Peter Rawitsch cited U.S. Department of Justice guidance and asked, "So, where are the New Hanover County students secluded?" He urged the board to publish non‑identifiable data about seclusions and locations. Love Our Children and other speakers pointed to Maryland’s statute and implementation as an example of limiting exclusions and establishing required in‑school supports.

District staff and board responses

Barnum said the data reported to the state came from PowerSchool and that the district is transitioning data collection to Infinite Campus. She gave a three‑year comparison showing incident entries rose from about 21,744 in 2022–23 to roughly 24,002 in 2023–24, then fell to about 21,000 in 2024–25. She reported short‑term suspension assignments declined about 22 percent into 2024–25 and that reportable offenses fell roughly 6 percent year‑over‑year.

Superintendent Dr. Barnes said staff had pulled additional, up‑to‑date figures and reported that K–2 short‑term suspension incidents so far in the current school year numbered six. "We are 3 weeks away from the 9‑week break. So our K–2 suspension numbers at this point are at 6," Dr. Barnes said.

Board members pressed staff for further breakdowns. Board member David Perry asked for public‑facing, non‑identifiable reporting tools and automation so community members can run discipline queries online. Barnum said she could pull bus‑referral detail and three‑year trends and agreed to supply more disaggregated reports. She also said staff would provide information on the disciplinary reassignments to JC Rowe Academy and measures of credit recovery and re‑entry success for reassigned students.

What the board did

No policy changes or formal votes on discipline policy were taken at the meeting. Instead, the board directed staff to return with additional, disaggregated discipline data (including bus‑referral counts, K–2 trends and information on JC Rowe reassignment outcomes) and to explore options for public reporting and other supports that could reduce exclusions for young learners.

Ending

Advocates left the meeting urging the board to adopt a policy approach that prioritizes in‑school supports and mental‑health consultation for very young students before using exclusionary discipline. Barnum and the superintendent told the board they would provide the additional data and that staff will work with principals and school teams to consider alternatives to out‑of‑school suspension for K–2 students.