School board changes policy with no official public input
Board president Young says changes were needed so student athletes are treated the same as other students
New members of the Frederick County Board of Education believe they did a good thing last week when they addressed an ongoing concern for some parents and amended the drug and alcohol policy for student athletes.
The school board limited the student-athlete alcohol policy to cover only what happens on school grounds and during school time.
The board on Dec. 8 voted 4-2 to adopt the change, with Kathryn Groth and Jean Smith voting against. Board member Angie Fish was absent.
Some parents are raising concerns about the changes and are pushing for further discussion. They fear the new policy has weakened the message that the school system sends to students when it comes to the use of drugs and alcohol.
"Sometimes our kids need more defined boundaries in their teens," said M.C. Keegan-Ayre, a parent of a Frederick High School student.
Until last week the school system's policy mandated that student athletes be held accountable for drinking or using drugs, whether that was on or off school grounds, throughout the sports season and beyond.
While the former policy may have sounded too strict, it also served as a deterrent for students, and was a reason many athletes stay away from weekend parties, where alcohol may be served, Keegan-Ayre said.
"This policy was (created) to address instances where student athletes had gotten into trouble off school property and off school hours," she said. "This is a policy that parents used as a tool. And they've just removed that tool from the parents' toolbox."
Created to hold student athletes up to a higher standard than other students, the policy in the past stated that student athletes cannot be mentally or physically prepared "to give their best effort" if they are using drugs or alcohol at any time. It also outlined serious consequences for violations, including exclusion from scheduled competitions and completion of a substance abuse program.
School board President Brad Young initiated the change, saying that the policy was not serving its purpose and keeping students from drinking or using drugs. Instead it was being used maliciously and vindictively, only with the purpose of hurting student athletes.
The board's vote gave school staff a direction to alter the policy and staff will go back to the school board with specific changes later in the year.
Keegan-Ayre said she is worried not only about the changes to the policy, but also about the manner in which the board decided to make these changes.
Changing the policy was not on the school board's agenda last week. Backed by sitting board member Donna Crook, newcomers April Fleming Miller, James C. Reeder Jr. and Young amended the agenda after the meeting started and agreed to put the student alcohol policy up for discussion.
But that meant that parents had no chance to review the policy, or come in to comment on the proposed changes, said Keegan-Ayre. The change of the alcohol policy was just as surprising for school board members Groth and Crook and also was done without any data review or input from staff to back up the changes.
"This is a policy change that directly impacts and affects students, and parents didn't even have a chance to comment on it," she said. "It would have been nice to hear from various schools if this was a problem. But there was no supporting data, no staff reports, no information."
While Young has openly criticized the school system alcohol and drug policy pertaining to school employees, which affected him directly last year, this was not the policy that the board changed last week, Keegan-Ayre added.
And she is not the only parent who is upset with the change. The Frederick County Council of Parent Teacher Associations also opposes the change because it was made in a way that discourages public input and involvement, said Daphne Gabb, president of the council.
In the past week Gabb said she has run into a number of parents across the county who were upset that the new board didn't give them a chance to weigh in on their decision.
"They were appalled," said Gabb. "They felt they were cut out from the process."

