Clymer Central School’s Board of Education spent time during the November meeting reviewing the updated policy manual. P-J photo by Sara Holthouse

CLYMER — Ever since the discovery that Clymer Central School’s Policy Manual has not been updated since 2000, it has been on the list to be reviewed and updated.

“When I came into the district in 2020 I first looked at our policy manual, and when you see that our policy manual dated as 2000, I was like ‘oh boy, I need to dive into this right away’,” Superintendent Beth Olson said during Clymer’s November Board of Education meeting. “However, we were in the middle of COVID and I took off way too big of a chunk than I probably should have at that time, and I’ve learned my lesson. However, our policy manual has been, I want to say, in a limbo or flux in the sense that we’ve been reviewing it.”

Olson said the policy manual has been being worked on to get it caught up to more current policies, and that they are finally at the point of having a second draft that has been gone over several times and is now ready to be looked at by the board. A policy subcommittee was formed to help with the catch ups, starting last year with April to June and then July to September, looking at suggested updates from Policy Services with existing policies and suggested languages, which schools then apply to their district as needed. Olson was joined by Board Members Carole Siverling and Justin White, spending two and a half hours on updates on the policies from April to June then July to September, which were then discussed for approval at the board meeting.

Specific policies that have been updated are Title IX, emergency drills, leaves of absence, student government, advanced coursework, virtual instruction, graduation requirements, equal education opportunities, safety plans, and a non residential policy. The non residential policy is something that has come up recently, following a request from a neighboring district to take in a student. The old policy talks about having non resident students that have come in because of having some relation in the district, and the new one asks for a request in writing.

“Currently I received a request from a neighboring district, asking if we would accept a student of theirs into our district,” Olson said. “There have been some bullying issues, and the kid is just not having a quality experience, so they’re looking for a fresh start. We currently accept students from Sherman, our special ed students because of our special ed program and we do that with an agreement. This student is general ed and doesn’t fall under that agreement.”

Although the policy has not yet been officially approved by the board, Olson asked if this was something they wanted to accept because of the circumstance, adding that there would be no additional teachers or space needed and nothing would be pushed out. The board discussed allowing the student in, adding that other students are also disrupted by the student being bullied, and that this would be a special circumstance to allow the student under these conditions to have a fresh start. Discussion also included being sure that through conversation that has come up it is not the school passing a bad apple along and that the issue would not move to Clymer with the student. The board agreed that it should be a case by case situation and that it is something that should be allowed for this case.

“I agree, when you said we could give them an opportunity to change the course of the rest of their time in school, we can be a neighbor and do that,” White said.

There is also a paper trail showing that the student is being bullied, and that it is a problem. Olson said there would be no action at the November meeting as she did not want to rush it through, and would bring it back to the board in December, also giving time to see if any problems may come up.

“We can’t simply say, ‘we like you, we don’t like you’,” Olson said. “‘You’re an athlete, you’re not an athlete’. Whatever is the deciding factor we’ve just got to make sure we don’t open ourselves up to discrimination.”