The Clinton County School Board voted “nay” last week on Senate Bill 128, allowing students a chance for a “do-over” due to COVID-19.

The motion was made by board member Kevin Marcum, seconded by Bobbie Stone and passed by unanimous vote.

Since then, a public outcry has surfaced, mainly from the parents of the 17 students who planned on using the “do-over” year for both academic and athletic reasons, but the outcry has not been limited to just those parents directly affected by the board turning down SB 128.

The bill was drafted and sponsored by Kentucky Senator Max Wise (R-Campbellsville), who represents Clinton County as a part of his 16th Senate District.

The program would offer high school students who feel they were “shortchanged” on some level due to the COVID-19 experiences of the past 18 months, the chance for a “do-over” of their last year of high school.

While the program offers a repeat of the student’s academic experiences they feel were missed or shortchanged, it also would offer some the chance to be involved in another year of athletic eligibility.

During the school board meeting held last Monday, three of the five board members, along with Superintendent Dr. Tim Parson weighed in on their thoughts against the bill.

“I do have reservations about SB 128,” Parson said during the monthly meeting.

Parson sent out a facility wide email on Friday, May 21, with an update about the school board and what they had decided about SB 128.

The update said: “SB 128 was unanimously denied. It’s complicated, and there’s a host of things that make it difficult, but when it came right down to it, although it would’ve given an extra athletic opportunity to a few who applied for it, it would’ve taken away that same opportunity for all those teammates who have been waiting for their own opportunity. It was a no win situation all the way around,” Parson wrote.

Board Chairperson Leslie Stockton said during the monthly meeting, “On the surface, it seemed like a good thing,” but she added, after studying the bill, one question led to many more. “We have to put academics first,” she said.

Two parents of students who had requested that the school board grant a “do-over” year for their children, came to the office of the Clinton County News this week to relay some of the reasons “why” they were hoping to be granted the opportunities set forth in SB128, and why they felt the board decision was unfair, and even biased against their children

Jamie Ferguson, parent of Sterlin Ferguson, and Beth Bertram, parent of Chase Stines and Hunter Bertram, were both shocked at the board’s decision.

“They said they had to choose academics over athletics,” Ferguson added. “How did they know they were all athletes? They could have been 17 students who wanted to better their grade.”

Both Bertram and Ferguson said they had to put names and a reason down for wanting to apply for the “do-over” year.

“I didn’t put anything about sports on Chase’s or Hunter’s applications,” Bertram said.

“It was totally selecting one set of student athletes over another set of student athletes,” Bertram said. “You’re choosing one set of student athletes over another set of student athletes instead of choosing what the Kentucky Department of Education is supporting and what your legislators are supporting.”

Bertram said the school board made a statement saying they didn’t look at the names on the applications, but did see gender and age of each applicant.

“I hate it even more for a lot of them because it would have benefited them more than Chase in some aspects,” Bertram said. “They get that extra year for recruits. What irritates me about this whole situation is they said they didn’t know who applied for this … they didn’t know names. All they said they knew was gender and age, which is a lie because I know they have specifically pointed out Chase. They didn’t want seniors to take up playing time for somebody else waiting their turn. I know for a fact a school board member has said that. I mean there is only one senior.”

After the board voted to deny SB 128, Bertram said she sent “professional emails” to every board member, including Parson.

“I didn’t send one to our board attorney because she doesn’t vote,” Bertram said. “I also attached to those emails, I copied it to our Kentucky State Board representatives for Clinton County, who are over our board. The first emails I sent went through.”

Bertram said the second round of emails she sent came back as blocked from the board representatives for Clinton County.

Parson did respond to Bertram and agreed to meet with her about the issue, but Bertram said that’s not what she asked for.

“I asked for a meeting with him and any or all board members who would be willing to meet,” Bertram said. “Parson sent me back a message that said in order to have a meeting with all board members more than two would constitute an official meeting.”

Bertram said she agreed to meet with Parson, but an official meeting is what she was wanting.

“He said my request shave basically been told to the board and if I would like to contact them as well I can,” Bertram said. “So I did. I started with Dr. Parson and he did reply, but he wanted just me.”

Ferguson said Parson agreed to meet with her on Monday at 2 p.m., but canceled the meeting earlier in the day.

“Someone lawyered up,” Ferguson said. “They are shunning all of us. Is that fair? I think they should have to hear us and hear what we have to say. Whether they reverse it or not, they should still have to listen to us and look all 17 of those kids in the eye and say you don’t deserve to stay back.”

The deadline to pass the bill was outlined as June 1 in SB 128.

“Basically we can’t talk to anybody. June 1 is next week … it’s not going to get turned around. We probably aren’t going to get it reversed or get another meeting.” Bertram said.

When COVID-19 hit last year, the entire spring sports season was canceled. In Clinton County, that meant no baseball, softball or tennis.

“What about the kids who didn’t even get to play last year,” Ferguson said. “I’m sure those kids wanted to stay back and get their year back. It would have been nice to have the county on our side for our kids and not for selfish reasons. They should want them all to succeed, they should want them all to improve themselves and get back some good out of this crappy world. Let something positive come out of this COVID nonsense. What does that tell the kids? When we first heard about that (SB 128) all the kids were excited about it. Then they jerked that out from under them. What kind of message does that send them? What kind of message does that send to the community who voted them in and gave them that job? That they won’t hear us when we want to be heard? I know it’s not their fault someone lawyered up, but it sure ain’t mine.”

Both Bertram and Ferguson believe the school board is postponing discussing the issue with the parents until after June 1.

“I emailed Senator Max Wise and he actually called me and he couldn’t believe they didn’t pass it,” Ferguson said.

“It’s not just us. I know of several who have asked for meetings and that kind of thing, but we just aren’t getting anywhere,” Bertram added. “We just feel like they are pushing it past June 1. At this point it’s probably useless for any of it. A year is a long time. What’s another year to see what your options are … another year to grow up.”

Parson was contacted by the NEWS requesting an interview on SB 128, but no interview was granted. Parson said in a text message the school district would be issuing a statement and that it would be “clear and complete.”

As of press deadline, no statement was issued by the Clinton County School District or the office of the superintendent.