Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gilmer County Board of Education revokes open-enrollment status for two students
Summary
At its meeting the Gilmer County Board of Education voted to revoke open-enrollment status for two students for the 2025–26 school year following an executive session, citing state and local education policies. The superintendent made the recommendation and the board carried both motions with no opposition recorded in open session.
The Gilmer County Board of Education voted to revoke the open-enrollment status of two students for the 2025–26 school year after an executive session and a superintendent recommendation.
Dr. Manning, the district superintendent (speaker S2), told the board that a committee had reviewed the cases and recommended revocation under West Virginia Department of Education policy 7 2 1 2 and Gilmer County Schools policy 51 1 5 1 1 3. The superintendent said the committee’s findings supported removing the students’ out-of-county placement and asked the board to move on that recommendation.
Before the executive session, a board member moved to authorize the executive session under West Virginia Code 6-9-43 so the board could discuss disciplining, suspending or expelling a student; the motion was seconded and carried. The board returned to open session, and the superintendent’s recommendation to revoke the first student’s open-enrollment status was moved, seconded and approved. The board then moved, seconded and approved the recommendation for the second student. In open session no member voiced opposition or recorded an abstention.
The revocation motions were handled as formal board business: the superintendent presented the policy basis and the board voted to accept the committee recommendations. The meeting record shows the actions were taken under the cited state and district policies; the board did not provide further public detail in open session about specific incidents, disciplinary measures beyond revocation, or appeal procedures for the students.
During public delegation earlier in the meeting, parent Kim Stumpf (speaker S3) urged the board to hold students accountable for a pattern of bullying, saying parents had contacted her and asking, “Why not punish the 5 kids? It doesn't matter who their parents are.” That public comment preceded the board’s closed hearing and the subsequent votes but the record in open session does not tie her remarks to the specific cases voted on.
The board did not announce additional details about next steps for the affected students during open session. The board minutes and the superintendent’s written recommendations are expected to be entered into the official record following the meeting.
