Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Handbook topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
McComb board debates student handbook wording on CPS referrals, vaping and restorative discipline
Summary
Board members questioned draft student-handbook language that could prompt Child Protective Services referrals when parents cannot be reached, sought clearer alignment with Mississippi law for vaping/THC consequences, and discussed whether restorative practices will be applied consistently across campuses.
The McComb School District board spent a large portion of its meeting reviewing a draft student handbook and pressing administration for clearer language on discipline, parental contact and substance-related consequences.
Board members raised repeated concerns about a section that says failure to pick up a child may result in a CPS (Child Protective Services) referral. "If a parent can't answer the phone because of work, do we call CPS?" said Speaker 2, arguing the handbook should frame contacting CPS as a last resort and give administrators discretion. Administrators responded that the draft currently uses "may result" language and that they could rephrase the section; they emphasized that, regardless of handbook text, staff already retain discretion to contact CPS in severe cases.
The handbook's vaping and substance section also drew scrutiny. Speaker 2 said the draft's stated consequences for a first vaping offense — "10 days" and a return conference — could conflict with Mississippi state law when a device tests positive for THC. Board members and staff agreed the draft should explicitly reference state law and avoid wording that suggests the district can supersede statutory penalties.
Separately, members pressed for clarity on restorative practices and PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports). Speaker 1 asked whether restorative alternatives to out-of-school suspension would be standardized across campuses; administration replied each campus will have a plan and principals retain discretion within the district's approved consequences list.
The board asked administration to return revised language that (1) frames CPS referral as a last-resort measure, (2) places substance-consequence language in a spot that clearly references state law, and (3) clarifies where restorative practices apply and where principals retain discretion. No final handbook vote was recorded in the provided transcript.
The board also requested follow-up data about discipline categories (including bus incidents) and asked administration to provide clarifying charts and counts so the board can target interventions and driver recruitment efforts.
