AMHERST — School Committee members are standing behind a revised Anti-Bullying Policy adopted in late 2024, even though a recent audit found it to be out of compliance with state general laws and Department of Elementary and Secondary Education regulations.
At a joint meeting of the Regional, Amherst and Pelham school committees, the panels heeded the recommendations of the Policy Subcommittee that school administrators should update internal procedures to ensure consistent, effective and legally compliant implementation of the policy across all schools, and that a biennial update of the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan be done by the end of the school year.
But the committees nixed any changes that would overhaul the policy.
William Sherr of Pelham, who chairs the Joint Policy Subcommittee, said the policy, known as JICBF, was adopted legally and reviewed by a school attorney four times, and is compliant with Massachusetts law.
Sherr said he worries that changes to the policy could mean response procedures to bullying are adjusted without any vote by the committees.
“Removing them from policy doesn’t strengthen protections, it weakens them,” Sherr said.
A December memo from Superintendent E. Xiomara Herman explained that as part of an ongoing collaboration with the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s Corrective Action Department, findings of the Bullying Compliance Audit were completed by MacAvoy, Joyce & Kowalski of Marshfield.
That finding states,”The first and most critical finding of the audit states unequivocally that the School Committee’s current Anti-Bullying Policy, JICFB, is not aligned with Massachusetts General Laws or DESE regulations. This is not a minor wording issue; it is a structural misalignment that affects the legal foundation of all district bullying response practices.”
Specifically, the audit states that Massachusetts law is “very explicit” about the role of School Committee policy versus the role of the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan:
“The policy must include the definition and prohibition of bullying and clearly delegate the authority to develop and implement the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan. It may not include procedural details, investigative timelines or operational steps.”
Amherst representative Bridget Hynes said the circumstances of revising the policy came as allegations were brought to light in 2023 about counselors intentionally misgendering students at Amherst Regional Middle School and possible violations under the Title IX gender discrimination law.
“Horrible, extensive bullying was happening and things weren’t being followed through on,” Hynes said.
Hynes said school officials came up with the bullying intervention plan, but it became clear the committees needed a clear and strong policy for the district.
Hynes added she feels like this was one of the core responses to that turmoil and is really important to have in place. To review the policy again, she said, would be expensive and would send a message to the community, and students, that the district is pulling back from those efforts.
Leverett representative Tim Shores said tweaks to the policy don’t need to happen.
“This has gone through a thorough and extensive legal review,” Shores said. “It seems like the policy is something we’re legally able to do.”
While Sherr said he is concerned about the superintendent auditing committee policies, Herman said she didn’t call for an audit of policies, but rather an audit of district practices to determine where there were gaps of implementation.
Amherst representative Deb Leonard said it went through joint committee discussions three times before being adopted. “I don’t see any benefit in sending it back through that process,” Leonard said.
The LGBTQIA+ Caucus of Amherst issued a statement expressing support for the recommendations of the Joint Policy Committee:
“We see no reason to weaken a strong and protective policy that has been well-researched, vetted by the community, and aligns with the Massachusetts Association of School Committees sample JICFB policy, one that conforms to the Education Reform Law of 1993 and other state and federal laws and regulations.”