Parents say district mishandled sexual-abuse allegation; board asked to review investigation

Two parents used the public-comment period at the J O Combs Unified School District board meeting to urge the board to scrutinize the district's handling of an alleged sexual assault at Combs High School.

Holly Elena, who said she is the parent of a 15-year-old student with an intellectual cognitive delay and autism, described a report that her daughter told school staff that a 16-year-old student put his hand down her pants and touched her vagina and breast. "That is not accurate," she said of the district’s written determination, adding that an email from the school social worker recorded a more serious account. Elena told the board staff relied on a physical demonstration by her daughter during the investigation and then narrowed the allegation later to a different description, which she said misstates the record. She said family questions to the investigator were excluded and called the process neither neutral nor trauma-informed. "For these reasons, I am asking the board to take a close look at whether this process actually met the standards required to protect students and ensure a fair investigation," she said.

Katie McFersonson, who introduced herself to the board, said district leaders including Mr. Hill, Mr. Middleton, Dr. Fountain and Superintendent Dr. Wyman were aware of the incident on Jan. 6 but "took no immediate steps to remedy it." She said district staff restricted family access to the principal, that no written student statements were taken, and that the male student alleged to have committed the act was interviewed before law enforcement. McFersonson said the Title IX decisionmaker — she identified the decisionmaker as an in-house attorney — concluded there was no violation despite what she said were multiple admissions by the other student and a detective filing charges. She called for in-person retraining on mandatory reporting.

The parents’ comments raise procedural and legal questions the district did not answer during the public-comment segment. Board members did not take immediate substantive action in response to the remarks during the meeting; the record shows public commenters requested the governing board review the processes used and consider retraining and transparency measures. The meeting's published procedures warned that board members may not discuss items not on the agenda but may direct staff to study matters for later consideration.

What happens next: The board has authority to request staff follow-up or place an item on a future agenda for formal review. During the meeting staff noted mandatory reporting and Title IX processes are covered under state statute and district policy; the public commenters asked for the board to ensure those requirements were met and to consider retraining. No board vote or formal direction on this specific investigation appears in the meeting minutes.