Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Safety And Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and advocates press school board for transparency after alleged student-safety incidents
Summary
Multiple parents and advocates urged the Clarksburg County and Scribe Board to be transparent about alleged student-safety incidents and to state a public position on related legislation; board members said legal limits on commenting during active investigations constrain responses.
Get email alerts on the Student Safety And Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several parents and local education advocates used the public-comment period to press the Clarksburg County and Scribe Board for clearer public positions and faster family notification after allegations of student harm.
Megan Wise, a parent, educator and district advocate, told the board that ‘‘silence in this case is compliance’’ and said a board member had introduced legislation she described as dismantling collaborative conferencing for educators. Wise said the board’s silence while related bills advanced and while parents report incidents has eroded trust and undermines teachers’ ability to flag problems early.
Adam Roger Ellethorpe said his daughter’s situation has been known since March 9 and criticized what he called a pattern of silence and slow communication. Ellethorpe asked the board to make it clear that parents will be notified when serious incidents occur and to ensure investigations include parents from the start.
Amanda Frost, who described herself as a local resident and caregiver professional, urged the board and the community to avoid reactive blame. Frost said standard investigative steps — such as removal from the classroom environment and consistent application of procedures — must be applied uniformly and that statements can condemn wrongdoing without compromising an active investigation.
Board member Miss Berry responded that she would ‘‘not be silent’’ and said the board must follow the law during active investigations to avoid jeopardizing due process. Board member Aaron Mayberry explained that the board serves as an appellate body for employee and student investigations under state law; he said publicly commenting about active investigations could require recusal and limit the board’s ability to hear appeals.
Why it matters: Speakers framed the dispute as both a safety and governance issue: parents want clearer, earlier communication and public positions from trustees when alleged misconduct affects students; board members warned that legal constraints limit what they can say publicly while investigations continue. The exchange left the central questions unresolved: parents called for immediate transparency and procedural consistency, while the board emphasized legal obligations that, according to members, constrain public statements.
Next steps: The board did not take formal action on these concerns during the meeting. The director of schools later previewed the budget presentation for next month and the meeting adjourned.

