Board of Education Policy Meeting, 3-23-26

001Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. I would like to call the meeting to order with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Announcements. Administrative team will not be joining us this evening. Okay. Repeat that. I have one announcement. Well, it's not really an announcement, it doesn't really fit in this section. So, and it's not policy related. Um last week after our meeting, I had someone from the Times of Wayne County reach out asking for information about the discussion at the school board meeting about leasing a building for educational purposes. Um so before I even got back, they already published something today. Um so and

002Bridget and I just had a quick conference call with What? Huh? What? No, uh Patty is the one who reached out. And she wanted to know if it was a serious consideration, which building, who would be considered leasing it to, leasing it to, reasons for the sale, enrollment down, question mark, delinquency up, question mark, etc. Um so, they did publish a whopping two sentences in the Times today that said there was a discussion about the fiscal responsibility and the possibility of closing buildings in the district district with all revenues considered. The conversation included the selling of buildings would not positively impact tax structure. However, leasing the space to a partner could be financially beneficial. And that's all it Um so just be aware if you see something or Um and if Patty or anyone else

003reaches out, we just need to remind everyone we know what's in their handbook, but we as individual board members should not be responding. So, you can either direct them to me or to Bridget. Um if they reach out, let me know. But thus far, I haven't responded because they published it already. >> [laughter] [snorts] >> Um so. I guess if you see anything or hear anything, let me know. And that is part of our PR service, so we want to utilize them. So, as soon as she let me know she had the outreach, I reached out to the director and said, "Hey, listen, we just got the same query. Would you be willing to meet with Angela and I so that we can help talk about whether or not it makes sense for her to

004respond or not." Um and then of course, by the time we got the meeting scheduled, they already published it. So, yeah. Okay, new business. Um review updates for policy 1360 code of ethics. So, I guess the question is, do we want to review this though or not? We brought it up to review and then tabled it. Um and there's a whole bunch of different examples that we were given. Also, so I guess the first question is, do we want to keep it the way it is, in which case we're done with item A, or do we want to modify it at all based on the information we were given or any of that? And we have a strong preference one way or the other? >> So everyone just leave it the way it is. What

005do you say to leave it the way it is when I have a No, we have one. But do you want to change it, leave it alone, or Are you saying that it's not adding like that part on it? Well, originally I had proposed that, but we never approved it. We're looking forward to it. >> [laughter] >> I had I had proposed adding the words "and in the community" to item M. And I think Kelly gave us I provided the other two because they have similar wording on them. There was one from New Hanover County. And then there's one that is the Niskayuna policy that says 21- 60. Looks different than the Erie 1 so I thought some of the New Hanover ones were pretty much law and it's pretty simple. And stuff that probably

006I can't so yeah. So what are we going to do with this? Well, this is the this is the the thing, right? Do we we have in the past, the few years that I've been on the board, anything that's in law try to get rid of that out of our handbook. Well, because it's law, but now I feel like we're at a place where we're missing some things that people may not be doing some things because We still have a They don't have taking out a policy even though it's law. So I guess you have to be careful what we have to keep in as a reminder of what we need to do for our students. Does that make sense? I think there's a duality around courtesy to your community by having it in writing.

007And uh you would also, if you had legal in there now, you would also talk about how you can create more problems for yourself as a district if you have too much policy. The reality is when you look at the binder, like this is one section of the policy. And then you look at this update because we looked at it. So really we have four policy recommendations for you. So I think the effort's more recently from the superintendent has been trying to have it not be three different binders that are 3-4 inches thick because who can possibly manage that? So I think that's part of the conversation, but I'll also argue that but I'll also argue that from my lens, sometimes and there are some policies I'm recommending to you where I want it in

008writing so it's much easier for folks to see and hold folks accountable to. Uh you know, a good example is one of the policies that we first reviewed at our last meeting specific to medications. The reality is we had no articulation for our families around what our expectations were around medications. That's problematic. Right? There isn't and shouldn't be an expectation that our families understand what the regulation is and rather than having to write that every year something new, have it in policy. It is regulation. There are certain things you can and can't do specific to medications in a school district and it's a courtesy to our community because there isn't an expectation that they know every ed law that we're bound by. Or New Hanover have to look it up. Right. And given recent questions,

009inquiries that have come up, it makes sense to me that we would want to protect better protect the district and make sure that we're transparent about how we are going to administer that facet of operations in our school district specific to medications. So there are a number of them that I would say to you, I'm going to make recommendation because from my lens it makes sense as a professional courtesy, but also from an accountability standpoint, it makes the job of enforcing some of the regulations vastly easier when I can say here's word policy that also supports the regulation because in the same way I can't expect families to understand and know all the regs by heart, neither do our staff, faculty, and staff. Right? >> Yeah. So [clears throat] so there's this dichotomy of wanting

010to not have a three binder or three-four inch binder as a policy, but also making sure we're doing our due diligence around the professional courtesy to our stakeholders both internally and externally. Is there a way that we could have a policy book and then other guideline book that is state regulated? So just keep in mind policy is rule, regulation, law. I don't want to say regulation, it gets confusing. It's rule, it's law of the school district. Regulation is how do we administer, what's the execution of, and that's something totally separate. I'll share with you openly, I see Kelly and I, actually my entire team, having a lot of work this summer looking at section 8000 saying, "Now we got to update all the regulations that go with section 8000 to make sure that they actually

011reflect what the policy says." They may or may not be aligned at this juncture, which is frankly why I invited the administrative team to be a part of these meetings so that we can be looking at it in practice. It's great to have the the policy, but if it isn't being implemented with fidelity or it's problematic as written, I wanted their lens to bring forward to you so they could challenge and say, "Hey, this is a problem because this is not how it it's been done ever, maybe ever, but the policy says it. So it's a problem because we're in violation of our own policy." I guess part of my role is I want to make sure we're never in violation of our own policy. >> [clears throat] >> Is this one on the docket

012for review coming up or this one is recent? No, it was one that I just asked to review. I wonder if they could just make this this small update now and then when it comes up again look at it again. Yeah, cuz the thousands are in two years. Right? I'm reading this right? So it would be 27-28. I do like about the one that you guys found with the 28-120, I like how they broke it down into all of the board and then specific It's like the ethical requirements and then the specific board commitments. It's kind of nice that it breaks things down for us. Okay, so I think I'm hearing for now leave ours the way it is and add that sentence of the third phrase at the bottom of the first page. Yeah.

013Okay. Yeah. Okay. Okay. I'll add this third phrase. At 48. If I might, 1360 is a great example of the power of the conversation. You have the rule, the the regu- the I don't want to say regulation, the law of the land for Williamson Central School District, and the question here is a concern, does the rule, the language of this reflect what you want the law of the land to be? And so [snorts] when you made the recommendation to say "and in the community", you might say it was an oversight. The reality is when we're doing policy, it shouldn't be an exercise in creative writing or semantics. Really we want it to be what Legal 1 provided and then saying, "Are there changes we need to recommend because it doesn't reflect the spirit of how

014we want to govern Williamson?" So I I'm going to respectfully encourage all of us to think a little bit more about doing less of the semantics piece. Like this isn't intended to be beautifully written. We want them to be legally intact so that the uh law again, team of lawyers makes recommendations from the Erie 1 policy. Any changes we're making to Erie 1, frankly I'm going to push back to Legal to make sure they can support and say, "Yep, as a district we can support and it's defensible." Right? We have to make sure our position is defensible if there was ever a challenge to our policy. So so this is a great example of one where you have the rule, the law, and there was a a missing element that was really important to you

015as a board and yet we should absolutely have that element included. Right? Okay. >> [clears throat] >> Okay, so then I think that's all the non-8000 stuff we have with all of them for now. Yes. >> So now we're going to policy 8207, which is the next one in our list. Which is school safety plans and team. That's right. In 8207 for Williamson policy, my recommendation is to adapt 5681, which is the Erie 1 policy. It is going to require some customization. I believe I included the required requested customization. It's in green in your master grid. So if I think about [laughter] for Kelly's purposes as she's updating policy, I'm going to respectfully ask that we include and make mention of Staff App. That should be part of our district safety plan policy because it's

016something that we utilize for emergency uh annexes. Also required, but I do think uh Erie 1 put it in there, you have to by law have a disclaimer in your policy that allows for us to have the door hangings over our doors in the event of a lockdown. It's against the law to do anything to alter uh the door from a safety standpoint unless the board allows us authorization to put up we now have uh black laminated sheets of paper in the event of a lockdown, we quickly move the black pieces of laminated paper over the window to better safeguard our our faculty, students, and staff who are in classrooms in the event of a critical incident. And so that is >> [clears throat] >> absolutely got to be part of the policy. And that's

017by regulation you have to say, this is our law, we're going to do it. Okay, so you're recommending adding those stuff that's in green and using Erie 5681. Correct. And then the only other customization is at the bottom of one of six. It asks about the board whether or not you want these to be allowed to participate. It's not required. So would the board want to include that a student could participate or would you like to remove that? I can say we currently do not have any student reps on the district safety team. I would agree. I'm good with that. If they want to come, they have a perspective that we don't have. But I guess the question is if it's if it's required. It's not required. I like that it says a student may

018be allowed to participate because it doesn't direct that it has to happen now, but over time honestly I'd love to evolve into and I have a student rep on the committee. Or are allowed to. Right. I'm okay with adding it. What I would not want it to do is their their presence hinders getting the work done. Like if you can't schedule meetings cuz they're never available when you're trying to do it. No, I agree. So I like that Or if there's confidential are allowed. So if they don't show up, they don't show up. If no one wants to do it, that's That's really how I structure SSAC. I have students who can come and sometimes they can. They can come when they can. >> but if there's a schedule, if they don't show up, just

019like any other person. If they don't show up, does the meeting continue? We're not holding up anybody. So at the bottom of one of six it would just be crossing off the yellow and removing the star by at the discretion of the board and we would just leave that language. >> [clears throat] >> The the very last paragraph, can I bring this this one back up? Page I'm on one of six. That works. It said the district wide school safety plan would be developed by the district wide school safety team appointed by the board. Yeah, you approve it every year after it's approved by the board. So is it so appointed by the board? Is that what it says? I bring the names forward and you just approve it. >> Okay. I wasn't sure if

020it was supposed to be recommended to the board so it's appointed by the board. Do we have to that point it lists out a whole bunch of representatives. Do we include bus monitors and drivers? Every everyone on the in the I shouldn't say everyone. All individuals are given the opportunity >> the opportunity. Okay. Yes. If they so choose. That's correct. I can't direct who can do. >> [clears throat] >> And those people >> are able to participate. Correct. So our supervisors are part of the team. Food service, building, transportation. Those dates are by law. I mean our current policy is two pages and this one's Yeah. It's just include more of the state law. It's more of the state law. If I might though, I would challenge to say there's been a lot we've been

021out of compliance around our district safety. So from my lens it's important that this is part of it. Whether it's me here or someone else. Like it is important this is what we should be doing. And we we pay for Erie one service and the argument when it was originally brought to the board by someone who's no longer here that we should remove all the policies that reference the law was that then you don't have to maintain them. But we literally pay Erie one so if something in the law changes that would affect us They'll let us They would say, hey you need to update your policy cuz that's part of the law that's different. But we're we're purchasing that service. And if I might go back to the earlier conversation, just thinking about the

022burdens to understand and know or be um articulate about all Ed law, a lot of this is required in your district safety plan. And wasn't there? And should be there, right? No, I'm I'm glad that we're moving to something that's has some more meat to it. I mean it's It's a lot more for me to It spells out what we're supposed to be doing, right? Yeah. It's more for everyone. Right. If you look under C3, [clears throat] I was wondering about the conversation on what we do and what we don't do. Yeah, Under which which phase of six? C3 and C5. I'm sure they're there but I It says may include and we do not have So we don't have to vote that could But you have to do may we can And if I

023might just come to Because that way you don't get in trouble. We're not outside our We're not violating our own rules if we say we're going to have someone from elementary school, someone from the middle school, someone from the high school, someone from the district office, someone from A B C D all the way through Z and we don't have a volunteer we're getting ourselves in trouble. So if I might, all of this language right comes right from the SED guidance around development of your emergency response plan. So for instance, 5A and B are about our WIT team. Because we have a WIT team, I have to include information about WIT in the emergency response plan. So this is just referencing one stop shop, it's already here. Any other recommended changes to Erie 5681. I'll

024work with Kelly where to insert the TAP at but I We absolutely should add information about TAP at in there just like we have to with the emergency response plan. But this will now be in the 5000 series, no longer in the 8000 series. No, but it's going to be the new 8207. Oh, wait actually. Great question cuz eventually we want to shift everything over. So Erie one and we match up so then something needs to be updated. So then it's easier. We'll update it. Yeah. We can find it easier. Were we making I remember correctly we were making some kind [clears throat] of document updating meeting the handbook, a calendar of things that the board does throughout the year. Are these dates that should go in something like that? I don't know if there

025was something that we were updating. Their handbook. With the handbook we had like what we're doing each quarter or each month. Are these dates that need to be in there? Dates for any meetings? Like the October 1st, 30 days prior. No, that's part of the law and and we're very aware like those and they're on our calendars. And that's operational and that's governance. If and again if you put in here you're required to have a safety meeting in October, you're required to have one in January and you don't because something happened and you delayed it till February. You don't want to say, oh look what I did. >> And I would also argue that's operational. Like you're you task the superintendent to lead a district safety team. I put together my own calendar. >> Yes.

026Right. That's what I'm getting You can certainly ask for having meetings with But it's not stuck in this way you have to do it on such and such a day. You have Yeah. Or they can just see the one or two sections. On page six of six, I think that's where this is. Your table, like the chart, it says no mention of FAMPP in D. That is five. So top of page six, U and emergency remote instruction plan. We do have an addendum, the board approved it last year. That was new for Williamsville. I'm working on a FAMP which is food allergy management prevention plan and that will also be new for Williamsville. We hope to have that board approved it. That's where you would reference it. Yeah. Food What does it stand for? Food

027allergy allergy management prevention plan. The regulatory language is really more about anaphylaxis and life threatening responses. So you would add that there. >> [clears throat] >> Actually I probably Actually I don't know that I would just Or does that sentence cover it? It covers it. We don't have it. I was just trying to understand what that Okay. And that the last sentence on page six covers part of what your green section says. And it's vetted by a team of attorneys so we're good. Okay. So we really only have to add the TAP. That's right. And that's because that was regulatory as well. We were required but per Alyssa's Law to explore panic alarm systems. We opted to do that. That happened before I got here or ordered from a recommendation. At this juncture so we

028will include this as part of our district safety. Okay. So when when we go through and we add all these we'll put parentheses like the number changes. Okay. Something like that. Just So we're going to make it >> 641. 81. Or 5681. So then you put parentheses previously 8207 or something like that. I don't know that I would at this juncture only because we didn't move the other ones. Like safety programs is still 8200. So I don't know if it'll be out of sequence if we do that. 8202 was [clears throat] suicide and other at risk behaviors. Right now it might make sense until we do a reconfiguration with Erie one. >> To leave them. Can we just do the opposite then and say 8207 and then in reference 8207 5681 so that when you

029go to Yeah. Or when Erie says to us, hey you got to update this one we can quickly figure out what our equivalent is. So we're going to keep our numbers Just for this one. For this one. For 8207. It sounds good. We have to move them as we go along. Or we have to move all of them before we go through all of them, right? What What do you mean? So if we if we if we move them as we go along, then when we get to the 5000s we know we've already done that one. We can just skip it, right? >> Yes. Um but if we if we move them all at once like this summer, if there's some in the 8000 we won't we won't get back to that. It's not going

030to be this summer. I don't think we'll get to it this summer. Honestly I don't know that it will happen until after we go through all policies. But you guys are on a time crunch. 3 years you got to get it. >> [clears throat] >> 4 years. And then I can see doing it before we actually start the next cuz otherwise it'll be like, oh, we already did that one and it's in the section. If there's new policy, we're trying to introduce it into the right section from year one if it's one you didn't have. >> [clears throat] >> The next one so I think we would adopt 8207 the Erie 1 policy, which is 5061 with just a couple changes the bottom of page one of six the inclusion of tap app. And then

0318208 is an existing policy. The question I have for the board is right now our SRO has no access to video surveillance and that absolutely is about board governance. Meaning there would have to be policy for our SRO to have an access to video surveillance. There's positives and negatives, right? If he has unfettered access that means he's privy to all surveillance. >> [clears throat] >> We can have it limited that it's only in matters as directed by the superintendent and or other administration designees. But at this juncture he can't access our video surveillance at all. Which is problematic if we're conducting an investigation. And is that because we say he can't or So let me ask you this. If you were investigating something and it was an internal matter the SRO would not need to

032look at that video because it's an internal matter. He shouldn't be. He should not be accessing that. If it's a criminal matter, let's if there's a missing person or something like that Do we have staff members that would actually be able to get onto that a lot quicker than say the SRO? Right now it's really only building level and some district level administration have access. So yes and no. Um what what would you envision them wanting to look at for for what type of >> So for instance, let's go back and say hypothetically you had a missing student student alleged student got off the bus we were confident got off the bus pulling video pulling that kind of video helping in a matter such as that. Makes makes sense. Beyond that if you're looking at

033a crime I got another one. We had some Oh my gosh, what's the word I want? Mischief? Criminal mischief? Outside right in the parking lot. I think the first summer I was here there was a car moved there was stuff that they were taking from the storage unit from the capital improvement project. So [clears throat] pulling video to see who was responsible for the mischief. So what you're saying is that any crime here you would automatically want to share with the department only to investigate. Well, it would be there. That is yes. >> Outside of school hours or whatever strictly He would look at this with someone who's [clears throat] approved to have access like if you were sitting next to him or something like he could see it just can't access it if it

034was personal. [snorts] So I would I would run this one by our attorneys. Um I did cuz there was a request and they came back to what your policy says. So then we don't have a policy which is interesting to me because So I guess what are you asking to put this language in in the policy? Because it's this would be a question of board governance. Would would it be acceptable to the board that the SRO would have access to video surveillance? To your point most matters any personnel matter student matter unless it was crime. What if there's a crime that happened 2 days ago someone broke into the storage unit. That's something that you could say, hey by the way since we're going to we can review we can provide you that video. I

035don't think that they would need instant access to that. Our facilities person can pull the video. 100%. Um When it comes to search warrants and things nowadays I'm very surprised that our attorneys would say that they would be okay under our policy. I'd be very surprised on that. That's that's pretty specific if you read what's on the green. I don't know any business that automatically allows a police officer to look at surveillance. It's usually the business that reviews and provides it. So that did come from legal that was part of the inquiry. So when I made the inquiry they said, do you have board policy? Went to the policy we have certain video surveillance policy but we didn't have anything about the SRO. That's the recommended language if it was the board to include the

036SRO. I I would certainly be acceptable to whenever there's a crime 100% you review the video we provide it at a quick turnaround to help solve a crime 100%. If there's a missing person and they want to come in and and view it that makes sense. Um beyond that I don't I wouldn't understand why would they would need access to it. I think we have a motion to say leave the policy as is. The Erie 1 policy. Uh this is actually I I don't know if it originally came from Erie 1 but 8208 is a current Williamson policy state 2016. Is this you're recommending use 5684 in place of 8208 and add the language for if there was such a desire for you to do so. So it seems like the language here You're you're

037saying Jeff that that there's no reason for them to have it, right? I I can't I can't see a reason but again active shooter they want quick access to it makes sense. Unless a person is on campus makes sense. >> And actually with active shooter now it's all with the tap app and coordinated. So you don't even need it they actually view it on the cameras at that point. So I guess the question is is there an instance that they would need it? The ones that we just described. Which is no longer a process in progress. So [snorts] that's a simple one. Someone breaks into Someone breaks not in progress. You come into school Monday morning and you realize that someone broke into a school bus someone broke into the business office whatever. It's not

038in progress so then someone from the school district can review the video. Yeah, we see that someone somewhere would come in. You could easily provide that video then to whatever agency it No different So he doesn't have to review it. You can provide it to whatever. Here you go. Here's it but there's no reason for him to have access to it. >> Right. On his own. There there would be no reason for that. It's not in progress. Okay. There's no immediate need. Right. You know and then that's to me that's a slippery slope. I would say this one is split. I mean there's a number of districts where they absolutely have access. But So you're saying only access when we give them Again if it's not in progress if it's not in progress there would

039be no there would be no reason to access. It's no different than Again I I I hate to be that person but there's no different than you don't have any reason to have access if I had a camera system in my own house. There's no reason for that. I can provide you some or at the at the local gas station. If someone had an armed robbery at the gas station they couldn't just view the video they would have to get permission from the owners of the business. You can't you can't just It surprised me that the school district would provide that. Efficiency. It's I mean it's no longer in progress. There's no immediate need. There's no dire need to Distribution of the professional I guess I'm trying to get the counter argument. Distribution of the

040professional responsibility because you're conducting an investigation around a criminal matter criminal mischief. The the reality the reality is any police investigation is going to take weeks months. That's just nature of the beast when you have an individual police officer has 30 to 40 open cases at a time. You're not you're not you're not with all due respect you're going to try the only case and again if it was a break-in where someone stole a a package of pencils. I guess you're going to try to solve it as quickly as you can but From an efficiency standpoint I guess the pushback would be if you had an incident of criminal mischief and they had to review it is a you know cuz you're tedious. And so if you think about the manpower and the resource here

041viewing the video to ultimately turn it over to the police. So I could see from an efficiency standpoint having someone else view the video in this specific case has nothing to do with students well we hope it's not students that might have been engaged in criminal mischief. Happened outside of the school day. So can you put language in there which I'm I've read it a couple times but I may be missing it. Could you put language in there that says that you that the footage can be um accessed by the SRO when that when the superintendent deems that it's necessary. Cuz I would think that that would be a case by case call where where might go it's more efficient for him to sit and watch for the specific detail than a school administrator. I'd

042push back at that point and then [clears throat] I would say, well, if we want our SRO to tediously go look through video for 3 or 4 hours to find something, should they be monitoring the schools? Well, if it was a matter of criminal mischief, then I probably turn it over to police. And then I would be providing and doing my best to partner with local law enforcement to provide them information that actually reach a conclusion of what transpired on school grounds. There isn't a designated Here's the thing, I'm I'm comfortable either actually I can see both sides of this and I can see how untethered it could be very problematic. I can't. >> [clears throat] >> Um but I also could see in the other case where there's no one dedicated here, like we

043don't have a district safety person who would be watching that video. I'd be pulling a resource, whether it's Michaela, our coordinator of technology and/or facilities person, and then they're spending days looking at video. That's really a law enforcement investigation. So, in the absence of language, if you left it out, if you left this You cannot wording out, can he look at it with you? >> Yes. Can you Can you The people you just rattled off Can those people say, hey, we want that SRO >> Absolutely, it is. to have this with us? That's exactly what happens. Oh, then I would say Yeah, that's fine, but not him viewing by himself, on his own, just to to view cameras. So, I think we have a motion, 5684, in lieu of 70 79. I'm not sure what

044the question is. I'm sorry, in lieu of 8208. I have some questions about 5684. But without the inclusion of And it would be in green in the chart. Kelly, under 8208, we would not include that. I I And then I have some questions. I think I have an executive [clears throat] on this issue as well. What do you want What do you want to do? Like you need to go into executive I need to go into executive on this. Okay. Can I ask a couple questions first and then do it? Mhm. Okay. So, on the Erie policy, page Well, it's on my page, right? >> I don't know if I'm missing a page. >> [clears throat] >> No, um in the second paragraph, um do we need to spell out what public or common areas

045are because it says, such as stairwells, hallways, cafeterias, but it does not mention classrooms, the auditorium. You can't have them in classrooms. Right. Okay. Because that's a teacher That's not a common or public area. Okay. Again, doesn't have to be all >> just those. Okay. It's just a such as. Um And then, do we I put a note under the same The section that says signage and notification, and I'm sorry, I'm trying to reread it, but I had a question about do we have to put notice on our buses since there's cameras on the buses? Like I know there's signs when you come into the building that say video monitoring in progress or whatever, but we will Yeah. So, that would be a question of practice and like we should >> like we have a

046lot of buses. >> to? Cuz that's not mentioned in there. I feel like they're out in the front of the bus at the top, like Yeah. I I can't Yeah, I haven't been on the bus in a while, so Just cuz it says And it says space sign at the entrances to the school campus and major entrances into buildings, but do we need to specify that I I I myself am not personally knowledgeable if the law actually said it has to be on the bus. I'd have to research that myself to know if we have to include that. I guess my question would be even if the law doesn't require it, if we are saying we're going to post that common bus, do we want to specify Like a bus is not a building and

047this refers to signs at buildings. Right. I would think that they would have included it. I mean, they just updated this in 2026, so they would have included it, but I mean, If it was required, If it was required, yeah. But do we do we Do we put them on buses? The parking policy talks about when you're doing a publication. We definitely have cameras on buses. >> We have I know we do, but do we have signs that say there's cameras on buses? Yeah, I Like there's signs when you walk through the building that say I know what's the deal with cameras in the classroom because that's a Correct me if I'm wrong, the teacher union issue. It has to be collectively bargained. >> Collectively bargained. But the cameras on the school buses, is that

048because of uh Department of Transportation? Is that a different rules of Just like you're asking, a different rule system? I do not know why that would not be collectively bargained. I guess because it's not a value because of APPR and evaluation of teachers, having the cameras in the classroom would be a question of APPR and how you might be evaluating them in a different way. And we're not evaluating a bus driver for his job performance. >> they're having an annual review. Totally different. [laughter] That's it. I just find it interesting. The only other question I had is in part when I compared ours to Erie's, did you have a paragraph at the bottom of page one that says what happens if there's a request for viewing a recording, that they have to be made in

049writing and all that. Erie one has nothing about that. Because it's required by FERPA, anything that's the student record, I have to produce in my 45 days to give it to a parent. Please. And that would be under FERPA and all student record information. It's a different policy. Okay. But it qualifies. I absolutely would have to produce it. Okay. But the I guess the Does that policy specify that they have to make a request in writing? They can't just call you up and Absolutely. Any verbal requests, so it has to be in writing. Okay. It does talk about Yeah, it does talk about that record being at the bottom. I guess to me, if I'm thinking about, you know, clarity for parents, is there harm in putting that paragraph on this policy? On the Erie

050policy. I mean, it does it does state that Did you Did you read the last paragraph of 5684? I'm glad you put it for I don't know, maybe. That's it. >> Well, it says that they'll comply, but does a parent know what that means? Right. So, recommend A parent's going to have to take this and go, what is FERPA? And let me go Google that and try to figure out what that means I'm supposed to do. Our policy is much clearer and simpler and says, if you as a parent or whoever want to review a video recording, this is what you're supposed to do. Which is blunt. Yeah, it's blunt. >> It's it's very clear. No one's going to have to NO ONE'S GOING TO HAVE TO GO, OKAY, I don't know what this means,

051but maybe I should go Google FERPA and then come back to the policy and try to search our policy And then they don't look at policy, they just make the request and then I have to help support the administrative team on what they legally have to provide or not. So, you want to play name and say FERPA says Yeah. I'm nervous about because we're we're saying, oh, in accordance with court order and/or subpoena, that may or may not now be accurate around what's required for FERPA. So, then I'd have to go and ask legal, like, does this language actually Is it too restrictive? Okay. Because honestly, we are obligated to produce with And we have to do it in 45 days. And video is part of student record. >> Is that something that's in the

052student parent handbook? FERPA. Correct. Yeah, it's it's on the website. We're required to do that. More likely [snorts] though, I don't know if I'll see the vote on that. Okay. The Bill of Parent Rights, that's what it is. Sorry. It's going to drive me crazy. It's the Bill of Parent Rights, which we're required to add on the website to remind families. I believe it's part of the August mail. I hope. Okay. And so, but And it's also included in our policy 7350, so we have it covered. Okay. >> [snorts] >> So, that answers my question, but then you saying you want to have executive session about this policy? So, you have to make a motion. Do you want to do it now or do you Um want to table this policy? It's up to you.

053The motion is that we would not include the language around SRO. So, it'd be 5684 without the inclusion of that language. We would strike the green. So, they would not have access to it unless it was Okay. Correct. That's fine. Yeah. But and I can Have executive session another time, is that what you're saying? >> [laughter] >> I can I know what you're saying. I know exactly what you're saying. We can what? I mean, if you want to do it now, that's fine. Let's take 5 minutes. It's going to take 2 seconds. 5 minutes. Let's take 5 minutes. All right. Do you want me to time it? Just hit the transition button. It'll go back to the other screen. So, somebody has to move Somebody has to second. Okay. I make a motion to go

054into an executive session for the employment history of a particular person. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. I'll step out. Yes. I would I would follow you. >> Mhm. >> A lot of these are good as is, so Okay. Yes, we're back in open session. Uh next is 8209. 8209 recommendation is to keep as is. Sorry, can we So, we're going with Erie 1? Erie 1 5684 as is, correct? Correct. Okay. 8209 is Williamson unique policy. There is no Erie 1. Recommendation is to keep as is. Keep as is. Keep as is. Is there something about parent final consent? So, we do with part of our It would be in the regulation. Okay. So, every time that they change buildings, I know. And then any new registering. Okay, 8210. 8210 recommendation is to adapt Erie

0551 and to remove the local advisory council. The replacement language should be BOCES advisory council. The local advisory council. Would you take out the section that says grievance procedure and references all Erie policies or would you upgrade it to refer to our equivalent? We'd have to watch our policies, policy numbers, to see if there's an alignment. Probably should have the grievance procedure. Cuz this would reference the Erie the Erie set of numbers and not necessarily be ours. So, Kelly would have to just go through and see what the actual numbers are. So, Erie 8220. Do we Yeah. So, for the local advisory council, we're only striking the first sentence? Correct. Okay. And keeping the the SAS. Right, yes. Okay. Do we need equal opportunity and public notification in all of them? Do we need equal

056opportunity and public notification in To me, those are That That's law that's pretty well known that Of course, it's equal opportunity. We have to do everything like that with that way. Again, because it's coming from a team of attorneys and because it's about career and tech education programs, it's education, not a job. We're talking about career and tech education. Right, so isn't that Isn't it understood that we're giving equal opportunity to everyone? One would hope. But isn't that law though? Like that's the law that says that we have to do that. I just Like adding it in just seems like This is better protection for the district. If you had someone who didn't engage with equal opportunity, you have more policy that says you have to do it. Okay. I'm not But even if even

057if we didn't have that in there, I'm saying that somebody could be like, Yeah, your case is always stronger for the district if you have your own policy to lean into. Because again, you can't One can't make the presumption that everyone is well versed on the law book. Yeah. You're right, it should be counted. I feel I just I felt those things are just like Those are the things that everyone knows, right? Equal opportunity is just give it for I think given the It's CTE, right? So, I think given that you could have It's not required for everyone. There could be greater opportunity for there to be some type of discriminatory practice around how you're pushing students through the program. And so, the fact that the lawyers chose to keep it in the policy makes

058me think I don't want it in for the district cuz it's better protection for the district. Okay. I think that historically there has been some. Male, female. Right. >> [clears throat] >> Honestly, special education students being in certain programs. Yes, I do think we should Even the reverse discrimination. More than likely as well. If you look at the first 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 seven policies, state state laws that are listed >> [laughter] >> Which are all centered around equal opportunity. Right. Cuz I mean, it's like And yet for some reason, [laughter] I just felt So, that's all I have to say. That's fine. I'm okay with leaving it there. It's just So again, just one where for courtesy. Right. Let the folks who are responsible for administering the policy have it right

059here. There can be no mistaking what your expectation is. Okay. So, the recommendation would be to update the policies under grievance procedure, change the policy numbers to make sure they align with Williamson's. The local advisory council, we would strike the first sentence and we just sentence two the board with BOCES approval. We do that utilize the BOCES advisory council. And that's what we do. And now I flip the page and I see on our chart Kelly, you got it? I see on our chart 8260, but it's not in my book. So, do I have that someplace else? It is required by regulation and it is not complete. So, we don't have a draft of that somewhere. >> have a draft of it. Okay. That makes me feel better. So, you do not yet. Okay, that

060makes me feel better. And like I said, you do not have a draft of it. So, is that one that we need to add to this for next >> I'm not sure we'll be adding it to next. I feel like it's in a different section. 8260, they align on page three of the Yes. So, 8260 is required. And I do not But we don't have a draft. >> have a draft. Correct. It is required. We have it listed in something else. That's why. I knew there's something to this. It's listed as a different policy number. It's not in our 8000. So, it is required. >> to 8260. Because it's because it's 8260 is Erie's number. Okay, got you. Can I ask a question about a greened out one? Yes. Not super important, but I was

061just wondering. You guys probably have the history on it. It looks like 20 8223 instruction for students who are English language learners is going to be removed. I was wondering if that maybe went somewhere else. I saw that we did not have one. I don't know. I think that's before me as well. I can look to see when we deleted it. I'd have to go back and look at notes from then. So, we have a different policy number for 8260, but do we need to review it? Yeah, how about we table that and I'll bring it next meeting. And or if it's going to go to the next section, I'll let it I'll let you know what the update is. There is something to it. Okay. And it is required. I just didn't want to

062skip over it cuz it's not in the book, but it's on the It is required because you have to have stakeholder involvement in Title 1 2 3 4 money, grant funded monies. Kelly, I asked her if we had it at the time we were putting this together. She found it for me and I can't remember if it was in a different section or why it was something different, but I did not have it here Okay. So, we'll table that till We We deleted the yellow one in 2016. That's what it looks like to me. You were talking about 8223. >> Oh, maybe 2019. Yeah. >> [clears throat] >> It looked more to me. 40. I know once they were deleted, it's still on BoardDocs. No. So, moving to 8271, religious holiday observance in schools. This

063is a 2016 WCS policy. Recommendation is to remove or revise. It looked like Erie 1 had one. 8271. It It like I didn't have an Erie 1. I know when I was on their website, I don't know if I really but they had some mention of it. It's possible I did not make recommendation to want to have it. You want to add the language in green, right? Yes. So, Is Is your recommendation to remove it or to revise it? To remove or to add the green depending on if you wanted to keep the policy about religious holiday observances. >> [snorts] >> Yeah, I'm I'm okay with what you put in green. Are you okay removing it or would you rather green? It's one of those policies again. If someone is looking Right. They might as

064well see it and So, is there any part of the current policy that you want to keep in addition to the green recommendation and green? I don't think so. Me neither. So, it would be replace everything in here with the green. Yes. Okay. There's something about needing some kind of parental notification, some kind of notification that comes with it. Is that somewhere? Does that matter? Does that I mean >> That's more regulation, like how we would handle it. Like what a parent would have to do for us, that would be regulation. This is the board saying You can take religious holidays and we won't take it put it against you. I like it. I like it in there, especially considering that we just came off of a week of of my time where the religious

065students weren't in school week and they had a problem with that. I mean, do we hold absences against students anyway? There's legal There's legal and not legal excuses. That's correct. But that would be a legal reason if it were for religious service. Right. Right. And so yes, to your point, a parent would have to communicate to us that that's the reason why they kept us out. Yeah. But that's part of our attendance procedure. I don't know if that gets you all there. Um we deleted that policy in 2020. Okay, which one? The LL one. 8223 8223 Is it our old school one? 8223 Okay. That's right when I was taking over. Yeah, that was probably one of the ones that actually got deleted. versus the ones that were supposed to be Yes. revised and didn't

066get revised. Yes. Okay. All right. So, the next one This is 8310. 8310 uh we're not I'm not prepared to speak to this evening. I'm working with a committee. I'm looking at library selection selection of library materials and objection of library materials. And so I'm working with all the building level administrators and our new uh library specialist and we're reviewing uh policy from across not only Wayne County but also Monroe County to see uh what makes the most sense for Williamson and we will prepare to bring a recommendation at our next meeting, which is why I asked to table until 4:00 p.m. So, we will have both. We'll have 8310 prepared and then 8330 uh is going to replace 8320, which was removed. I don't know when, but 8330 we absolutely want policies specific to

067how you object to instructional materials and controversial issues. And again, we'll come I will come prepared to the next meeting after committee has to meet another time. You said 8330? So, 8330 >> 8310 and 8330 Yeah. So, you have >> it with 8320. Which would be the Erie one. Correct. So, we don't have 8330 already? Yeah. 8330 is our policy. 8310 and 8330 are our policies. 8320 Is the Erie policy that we find in Erie. And we also have language from the frame and I don't I don't have it in writing. I don't I just don't I don't have 8330 either. So I think it was in an email and I stuck it in my folder. I might have printed it. I I printed it and stuck it in It's after 5:00. It's probably in

068one of the handouts. It's in your packet. I don't know where it is. It's after 5:00 in numerical order. So, I'm still on 8310 or something. So, 8310 the recommendation is going to be to adapt 8320, which is Erie one. However, our side group committee is going to have a recommendation for change of Erie one policy based on our conversation, so I can bring that to you next time. 8330 is going to be new Erie one policy uh that replaces uh 8320 was originally removed. So, here's the the the tricky part is 8320 was a Williamson policy, but it's been removed. I don't know when. Erie one policy is going to be 8320. So, when you look at this list, it does get confusing because 8320 with yellow is the Erie one policy. I'm going

069to be making recommendation with slight revision. 8330 I'm going to make recommendation um to obstruct objection of instructional materials and controversial issues. And in the past, that was 8320, which was objection to instructional materials, which we don't have now. Okay. I was just curious um the the selection for library materials is that going to be very much different than when we had policy on how classroom teachers select materials? Are they looking at >> It's very different. It's very different. Yeah. Can I make a suggestion when we go through this in the future on the table if it's a Erie policy, not a Williamson policy, can we put like an E or something? What do you mean before it? E and W E and W Just cuz it gets confusing when you're talking about >> That's

070a good idea. Especially if it's a we don't have the policy in Williamson. >> these are all Williamson. I did my darnest, Angel, to try and make sense of what we have and put in anything that was going to be Erie one here, but until it's actually our policy, all I could do was make a notation that I was going to be recommending Erie. Like these on the left, these are all our policies. >> Those are all ours. Yes. Except that This one column shows the Erie policy. number So, column three is does Erie one have a policy? In most cases, that's why I say yes, 8320, yes, 8250. The numbers are different. Many of them don't align. So, hopefully after this year, it will again be all Williamson numbers and we're not going to

071be able to update until we get through all policy and then we'll try to align with hopefully Erie in 3 years. It'll be a fun summer break. I guess where it gets confusing is like the yellow line for 8260, that's not really a Williamson policy number. That's a Erie policy number. But we're saying we're required, so we don't have a I'm sorry, I don't even have it in front of me. I have I don't know. It could be our number. I don't know. Right now cuz I don't have any in my Erie number. I'm sorry. I didn't >> I just know there was some that And now I can't Most of the ones Most of the ones that she wanted to add that were new, she put add instead of the number that we have.

072>> Yes. Okay. So, this might be a legit one. And I don't even see Can you go on the website and just see what it says? We do have a policy. You found it. I was like, oh, this is a required one and we don't have it. And you found it. I'll probably find it quicker than you. Okay. Okay, so we're tabling 8310 and 8325, right? Yes, 8310 becomes 8320 and 8330. And I'll have the updated copies with the recommended changes next meeting. 8325, dissection of animals, recommendation is to replace with Erie 8250. Do we still do that? Yes. We do. Right. I don't know cuz the clicker was changed over to Williamson. Um I haven't seen any news since the 7101 That's why. So, it's not included here because it's in our 7000 series.

073So, it's required per regulation. So, 8260 was Erie's. It's not our number, that's Erie's number. What is it again? 7101, parental involvement. 7101, yeah. Okay. So, 8325 the recommendation is replace with Erie one Replace with 50 8250. Just had a question of practice, want to make sure cuz we're required by regulation to do the instruction on humane treatment of animals, want to make sure that we're actually doing it. So, that would be a question for parents. So, it wouldn't be a policy question, it'd be a question of practice. I don't think Erie does it. Any discussion on 8325 becoming 8250? >> [snorts] >> 8330 the recommendation Okay, so adapt this one. Does I'm working to see what We have language that says give people notice of their opt-out rights. Does Erie have that? It has

074alternative activities. under [snorts] the first paragraph of the dissection of the An alternate activity clearly related to An alternate activity uh paragraph 1 2 3 4 under dissection of animals. An alternate activity clearly related to and comparable where you're probably dissecting in lieu. We don't have computer simulations. Probably don't. But it says some examples of So, adopt we're saying we want to adopt 8250. Yes. Okay. I'm okay with that. I'm okay with that. Yes. That gets into the operational side. The answer is no. Those things are well pickled. They last a long time. >> [laughter] >> I just wanted to save a couple bucks. Not all. You know what? The only time I ever got in trouble in school cuz I did not want to do a pig dissection. >> Yeah. It was the only

075time I ever had to go talk to somebody cuz I was not going to do the dissection. Yeah, I was a strong student. Not a I remember I was thinking you opted out in school. >> No, I couldn't. It was a pig and a frog. >> It was the pig frog. I did the frog and I was the only one. I draw the line at the pig. Yeah. I did the pig virtual. Oh, did they? Really when I was in school. I could see I probably only did the frog. You can still smell it. I can. I can't help but think about it but I won't. Okay, [laughter] so 80 or 8330 Our 8330 will be embedded into 80 Yeah, that's the other discussion. Yeah. When we So, it'd be the recommendation to remove and

076have it be part of 8320. Okay, so 8320. Because the actual one we can just say we're removing cuz we're putting Cuz 8320 is actually titled textbooks, library materials, and other instructional materials. But to your question, Sarah, the process for selection in the library is vastly different. I'm learning a lot. Yeah. Vastly different. I was trying to find room to Yes. merge it with concise but it doesn't sound like that. Okay. All right, 8350. Let's go. 8350 you're saying recommendation to remove 8350. Correct. Yes. I think it's great. Look, and the numbers align. 8320. Yeah. Very hard. Um is there anything about training in here? I know it's written in the old file, but I know it's operational but at the same time, you know, teachers were were volunteers and so Are you talking about

077the copyright stuff? >> Yes. Yeah. Do we have to have anything in there about that? >> That's the team lawyer who gives policy. >> Okay. If somebody raises a complaint, then we investigate. And we have policy which is suggestive of what they can do it. 8410 independent study, recommendation is to replace with 8430 Erie 1 policy. They're both the same policy number. Yes. No, they're not. 8410 and 8430. Right? 8410 8430. Oops, I had a typo. It is 8430. And I only have 8430 is much shorter than our 8410, right? Okay. Yes. So, it should be 8430. So, 8430 Erie good? So, when the quarter of a grading period ends, does that affect us at all? We have yet to find out. >> [laughter] >> We do not know how it will affect us. Good

078question. Erie 1 will let us know? Cuz we're waiting for the update. 8440 is field trips, recommendation is to remove 8460. Actually, I did not. On mine I actually said keep 8440. It was more comprehensive and included overnight travel. So, actually in this one my recommendation was to keep the existing 8440. Oh, yeah. Here. Keep 8440. Okay. So, not to adopt 8460 Erie 1. So, I had a whole note but but in minutes I read this. So, for uh volunteer expectations in 1 2 Where are you? The third paragraph down on Um example Second page or the first page? >> Oh, the first page. I'm sorry. First page 8440 third paragraph. Um it talks about volunteer expectations. Just out of curiosity, do we have volunteers that are on staff going on overnights and driving students?

079Driving students? Driving no, but spending overnights. Could be. Yeah. I'm thinking of But typically staff. I mean, so we have volunteer flooded the middle school. And then we have senior trip and those are typically employees. >> Thinking of the eighth grade trip that goes to DC, you have volunteer parents? But I think all of those were parents who were chaperoning. They're staff, yep. They're all staff. They might be a parent, too, but they're all staff. What travel club? No? Yeah, travel club that was all parents. It was employees but they were also parents. Yeah. So, this is the second page. Fourth paragraph Non-district transportation is used for any school approved trip. The transportation supervisor David Me must approve the number of vehicles. Like if a bus breaks down, is that So, this would be if

080we had a coach bus. If a non-district transportation is used, the transportation supervisor must approve. That is tricky. >> you contract with a different We just looked at coach potentially for state the trip to state. Ultimately, it cost so much more than us sending a bus. We ultimately didn't plan on that pathway even though it would have been easier for our facility or our transportation department for the drivers. But it was absolutely Vicki counting my end of the conversation. Well, and I know that like a week before the trip they have to send the credentials of the driver to Vicki and she verifies them. Like I know that for a fact cuz I was an advisor and I know we had to go through all that stuff. Like verifies that they do have valid like

081Yeah. And then and then our mechanics inspect the bus before the bus leaves. Is that right to charter a bus? Yeah. I didn't know that. Yep. That's crazy. Absolutely. They come do a whole safety check. So, 8440 we're going to keep and abandon 8460. Another thing on that state page 1 2 3 I'm sorry. First page? Uh second page under refreshment it says uh What if the bus comes from >> If it becomes necessary for the board to cancel a trip because of safety concerns, every effort will be made to obtain reimbursement of monies. Does it Is it safety concerns the only reason why we would cancel it? Should we get rid of that? Cuz there might be other reasons to cancel a trip. Yes, mitigating circumstances. Yes. That way we cancel for other reasons

082people aren't upset. Mitigating circumstances instead of safety concerns. Do we need to specify um that just because reimbursement may be obtained that doesn't mean it goes back to the individual. And I'm thinking of COVID when people thought that they could get their senior trip money back and they really couldn't. Here's the thing. I It's tough because each trip is going to be different. Like the one we just had the international trip, we had absolutely zero control over and there was absolutely no refund. So, at least this covers all possible scenarios. It says we're going to try to get your money back. Like going into the international trip you had Well, to me that's vague. So, I read that and go How many kids are safe? Um to obtain reimbursement of money paid. It does not

083mean reimbursement to you, Bridget. It could mean reimbursement to the district. And then I think we would refer to that fundraising policy. >> Cuz that's in a different policy. Okay. I thought it was in policy, that's where I wanted to go. My hope would be that it would go back to the family. If you read the policy Only what they paid. Right. That's what it should be. But if there is like funds But if there's but if there's >> fundraising monies that were attributed to this Right. No, it goes back to the Then make extra class. I guess I just we'd have to refer them to that other policy cuz people could read that how they want. But it says monies paid. If you fundraise, you didn't pay it. I agree. So, maybe that's what

084it >> [laughter] >> Historically has been a Yeah. If Yeah. Yeah. This gives me sufficient language to have that conversation. I don't question having that conversation cuz it says you're paying for it. Yeah. Doesn't say if you fundraise. I have one more thing and I will not say anything else about this. But on the first page on 1 2 3, the fourth and fifth paragraph, I have a note. Um this is opportunity to combine kids holidays. It seems like there are some Combine those two paragraphs? >> Or like make it smaller cuz I think they both say basically the same thing. I think the fifth paragraph adds on a little bit, but the essence is that things are going to be approved. So this would just be all of a sudden you have people pull

085out and it ends up being five or fewer students going. Yeah. Like it was an an emergency provision in the event that we didn't have a board meeting scheduled. The first one is absolutely and there should be board approval on any overnight event. So that covers that clause. Yeah. The second one I read as being oh, we have the international trip and I think there actually were nine kids. If four ex- four suddenly backed out, I could authorize that they're going to continue without calling an emergency meeting of the board. Okay. Oh, you know what? I actually I'm just I actually I'm going to dispute my own. In an unplanned or unexpected case. So that would be somebody coming to me saying I'd like to take an overnight and I have to tell you why

086I wouldn't do that. I wouldn't do it. It would have to go to the board meeting. Like we would need sufficient notice. You're not coming to me within two weeks to say hey, we're going to do an unexpected. >> [snorts] >> Even with states, like there's sufficient time to bring that forward. >> Well, you know the schedule before the season even starts. >> Correct. So I can't >> Before the season starts. I can't think of a circumstance we would be actually encouraging people >> But we don't uh we don't approve trips to states like we approve Right. senior trips. I was just trying to think of an example. But you know the schedule Yes. >> four or five months >> But I'm saying we don't approve those in a board meeting like we approve Right.

087senior trip or the eighth grade trip or So I think this gives you that Otherwise would we have to approve those? This is a field trip, right? Yeah. This is field trip or this is for sports. Yeah, so this is It's not a field trip. This is maybe like this is surely field trip we're going to see a play or see this play or something like that like and it's happening tomorrow. We got free tickets or something like that. There's only a few. >> It's almost like emergency approval like I do for Yeah. an appointment an appointment or such. But to your point, this is field trip. This isn't Right. Right. This would be sports and it's not overseas trips either. So are we good with paragraph four? That was my whole motivation wanting to

088keep 8450. I didn't think that the Erie one included stuff I guess I was thinking more of the word going through the superintendent's office for approval. So could we just say everything's going through the superintendent's office for approval including No, because some of them don't go through the superintendent's office for approval. Like the senior trip comes to the board. Right. Paragraph five is that extra like last minute. And even that to me when I read it, the superintendent could authorize it after notifying and obtaining agreement from the board president or designee. Right. The notification must happen as soon as the superintendent becomes aware so that the board president has time to call a special meeting if he or she deems that necessary. Okay. So it doesn't say that she can just approve it. She still

089has to notify the board. Yeah. And I would argue in the other one it really should be a superintendent recommendation. Anything going to you is being recommended by the superintendent. Which is why it says it's going through the office of the superintendent. The second one is really about the emergency approval. I can't think of an example of an emergency approval. No, but I think it happened at some point which is why It was it back in the day when they went to worlds or something like that. Remember that? And they go to Chicago and it was a very tight timeline. So maybe that's So I I mean that covers that kind of stuff like Okay. So are we good with keeping And the only change you're making is that maybe in circumstances instead of safety

090concerns? On page two? Yeah. Uh Oh, what is boom? Here is another policy recommendation. On 316. Okay. I'm having a hard time That's one page. I didn't stick it in there obviously. Oh wait, that's the one that you just gave us. Yep. Okay. The one that you and I stuck in the binder. There we are. Now we know where it goes. She gave it to us the other day. Okay, so this is Erie 8450. What? So 8450 I'm bringing I'm bringing back in the recommended language from Erie one because there is no regulatory language around home homebound instruction previous to July 1 of this year, there had not been regulatory language around the district's responsibility to provide homebound instruction for any student who misses 10 or more days and it doesn't have to be consecutive.

091So we do need an articulation on what homebound instruction is for Williamson. This would not be permanent. I think the original 8450 which was abolished said permanent instruction. That's not what this is about at all. This is about around the hook for it. So we should have policy and regulation around it. So our chart says adopt Erie one with included revisions. What's the revision? It's included in there already. I don't know. It's already out here. Like is this I updated it. This is Erie Because I put I'm sorry. I can't find my own copy of that and I'm so organized in my binder and I don't have it. 8450 I took homebound instruction. The reason you didn't get this I'm sorry, it's not coming back to me. On March 18th, the reason you didn't get

092this at the board meeting is because it was an 8000. So I kept it in the 8000 cuz we're doing 8000. But I worked with our medical director and nurse coordinator Nancy um to make them customized to Williamson. So that reflects actually what our practice is and embeds the regulation. So that is with the necessary revisions to Erie Okay. So the recommendation would be as is. As is. Okay. I didn't see it on there. I feel like I I can hear your language in the car. Did you happen to add to the home hospital or institutional structural requirements with a case by case basis? >> [laughter] >> Yes, why yes I did. And I made sure [snorts] it went through legal cuz it was my end. It was not the Erie one. This will be

093case by case basis. What the district, Sarah? So we are we good with 8450 language? Jeff, you can't find it. I know. No, we're good. I'm I'm happy with you guys. I stole it. I'm just making sure. Okay, 8460 multi-tiered systems of support process. That one is to replace with Erie 7312. Yep. I didn't This is the longest Erie ever. This one? And I have notes for myself. We may have to table this one until the eighth one Harris here cuz I made notes. I asked her to provide just because she's been responsible for MTSS. Okay. So I would like to table that one until the eighth so that she can provide the updates to that. So table to 48. I'm going to make you happy with that. It was so long. I read it.

094I just Oh, so that one we're skipping. Uh recommendation for 8461 is to abolish. Is that because it falls under the MTSS Mhm. Yeah. Okay. Care teams are basically tier three. Mhm. So I'm going to call care teams. Okay, so we're removing 8461. It depends how long it's been on the list. It's probably three years that we've had that one. Let's see. You know what? Today's the day. Are we able to can't if we know we need to remove one, can't we remove it Yeah, I think it just got like jumbled and you know, like I mean if we know if we know it's been like superseded by something else, can't we Totally agree. I think Yeah. To your point, do we have an agreement that who cares if it's out or whatever? Let's just

095deal with it. Well, if we know that If we need to remove it cuz it's replaced or obsolete. So that you don't have to wait for three years. Yeah, I agree with that statement. >> [laughter] >> I'm just sticking it Oh, yeah, you probably have a take down, right? This is going >> to send you a picture. >> [laughter] >> Yeah, bring forward your sticky notes. Oh, really? What Anything that's supposed to be removed whenever we have another board >> Well, if we come across something that Just as you guys said anything Even if it's just like an agenda setting say hey, I have a one that I know is obsolete. Okay. Write it in that way you can get on top of it. What must we have to do when we go through this?

096And that makes it easier for you though, right? Okay. Uh 8470 replace with 3220. Right? And the only customizable The only customizable part is paragraph two which we do have therapy dogs. So, we would want to remove the star and get rid of the yellow at the bottom of page one and three. Do we allow the use of miniature horses, though? I would. I was like, what I would. Why not? So, are we going to keep at 8470? No, 3220. [snorts] We're going to put it in the 3000s. No, We're going to keep it as Because the 3000s for us are community relations. So, right now we're keeping it as 8470 until we go through the 3000s, no? I thought those were all I'd have to make up a new number. You currently have 3220

097student participation. So, can we just keep it as 8470 since it's where it is? >> Yes. So, replace with 3220 with the So, you get rid of the asterisks in the first paragraph, but then where it has the asterisk for therapy dogs, we keep that section. And all of our therapy dogs have one through seven already. Do you have a follow-up question first? the process Yes. I don't want to set a policy up and then suddenly no more therapy dogs enter. Meet the criteria? >> Right. And it's like, well, that wasn't a good idea. Well, they shouldn't be allowed in the building. You see? It sounds like a whole form process. Yeah, I So, are Would that form coincide with this? Yeah. Yeah. Yep. I just assumed that the word therapy dog ID and or

098bandana following certified Where do you see bandana? Uh under four, under F. That would be the only thing I would question. Under under following certified olive or top certified company certified whatever. Yeah. So, it's not one you just buy online. Do they wear I don't think they do, which is where I think we would need to get some clarification. I don't think they do currently. Do we want to table this one? >> So, do we want to Yeah, do we want to verify that ours meet this criteria before we adopt this policy and then find out we have to get rid of the ones we have. Is it a problem if we ask them to wear the ID? No. No. >> No, but I think I'm not saying I'm not asking that they wear the

099ID. Like if that's considered best practice. Again, it's the team of lawyers thinking of every possible thing in relation to the district budget. I just want to add this to I don't think it's a problem. Does it say it has to be certification from the handler? That just means they have to The handler has to say the dog will wear a therapy ID and or bandana. It doesn't say it has to be from a certified organization. Right. Right, which shouldn't it? No, it doesn't actually say that. You have to do it to Well, that's my question. Shouldn't it? That That was my question. Because I could just purchase one online from Amazon for five bucks. Here Here we go. Right, but but they're also providing the copy of the cert certification from AKC recognized therapy

100dog organization. Up at the desktop. Okay. And Yeah, and then the middle of the page. Remain under the handler's control through the use of a leash or other tether. >> That's Yeah, F F2 is where I wonder because I when you're in a classroom with students and it's I see them walking around without a leash. Yeah. So, do we That's what Yes, that one. Yep. Just [clears throat] remain under the handler's control. Yep. And get rid of the rest. Yeah. Is that under the handler's control, is that a defensible thing law law-wise? Like >> If something came up, yeah. So, if you go to worst case, probably not if there was an incident. Right. Yeah. Even even with someone on a leash, I mean a dog could could go off. It just seems indefensible law-wise.

101I I'd rather not have it in there at all. >> [laughter] >> Oh, you're saying >> saying we remove But isn't that a law that you have to have a dog on a leash or we're not including the law? I don't think so if you're outside. Yeah, but if you're in the school building So, there's there's regulation and then there's risk mitigation. And what's tough is without actually looking at the law, it's hard to know is this part regulation or is it actually risk mitigation? My hunch is that positions the district in the best possible place from the lens of risk mitigation cuz clearly if it's on a leash, you have a better chance of not no incident than if the dog is not on a leash. Yeah. So, that's more risk mitigation. And I

102feel bad for the handler that that No, it would be a complete shift in practice to what we currently have. Leaving it in there. Are Are the dogs >> No, saying that if we had they had to have a leash, like that would be a total change in practice. >> Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Leaving Leaving number two in there would be a change in practice. >> But the dogs are absolutely under the control of the handler. I mean, that's No, I mean that hands down. That is absolutely happening. The handler has to be in the same room with the dog. The next one says be supervised and accompanied by the handler. >> [laughter] >> The next one says be supervised and accompanied by the handler. So, like that's what they're doing. That be supervised

103and accompanied. So, knowing that and that we don't use a leash, could you take two out and number three covers it? I would just I actually I like two better. Remain under the handler's control because if I'm letting a dog go into a classroom and I might not be in the direct supervision of the dog because the dog has a relationship with the teacher in the class. So, you just get rid of some of the words in that sentence. So, you would You would leave number two to just say remain under the handler's control and get rid of the rest. And then period. Yeah. I would keep three, though, because three is more specific and says they have to >> That's where I see problematic with practice. Like I you can't say with confidence that

104we don't have the dog sometimes being in other places without like Mary Wells' dog. Mhm. Like I think sometimes that dog is in other classes. Yes, it just wanders. Oh, but how can it be under the handler's control if the handler Because it's under her control. She's taking the dog to her office. So, how is that different from me having the dog in my office? It says under the Americans with Disabilities Act, service dogs must be leashed, harnessed, or tethered in schools unless But this isn't a service [laughter] But this isn't a service dog. These are therapy dogs. No, but therapy dogs are not covered in No. Is it what you really require as leashes? Are you saying that there's times when Usually. I can't say The dog is different. The dog is not covered.

105So, like I can think of examples where I go to a counseling office and she's not there and the dog is there. That's not under her supervision, but it's absolutely under control. That's different. How can you be controlling the dog? How can you be [laughter] controlling the dog if you're not physically there? Because she's left it in the care of someone else who's responsible. She's absolutely in the care of the dog. Like I've left whoever's going to be responsible for the dog and I'm going to my meeting. Then it should say be supervised by and accompanied by the handler or designate. Or designate. Like if I like that. Which could be a split. So, number three and add or designate. Yeah. Handler or designate. So, do we want to keep four and require it? Is

106that what I heard you say? I feel like just that I feel like if the dogs are in the school and they're certified to be there, they're there because of that, right? If you walk in the building and you didn't have a kid in the building and you were coming to register your kid or visit, or would you know that? No. No. But if they had Just like if I To Jess' point, I can bring a dog someplace and say it's my service dog. If it's a legit service dog, it's going to have legit credentials on it while it's working. My brother has a service dog. They literally wear it and the only time it is off is when they are not working and when they're at home. But we all We all know what

107a certified We all know what a certified service dog is compared to a I bought I bought my certification online for a family therapy dog or whatever. I'm going to print out a certificate so I can bring my grandpa Penry to work and he's going to be my therapy dog. >> There you go. Yep, right. We require teachers to wear their badges, right? This should be a similar thing. Could it be like a collar that states that or something? Yeah, just says wear a therapy dog ID. I think that would encompass a collar. Like I heard you would get like a photo you would shave anyway, so you could just Put it right in? >> Right in. >> [laughter] >> So, we have two remain under handler's control, three be supervised and accompanied by handler

108and or designate. Two and three are the same. We just talked about that. I really think two is just indefensible. But it's there. Can you take off the part that we took off? >> right, maybe the recommendation is just get rid of it cuz we actually have these supervise and accompany by the handler >> Yeah, that's really what I'm asking for. Okay, so get rid of two. Get rid of two. Two dogs. So three becomes two and then so and so on. Yeah, cuz I see control supervision, right? Like you're Yeah. I see control as tethered. Right? Like the dog can't do anything that they're not supposed to do. But if you won't lose all these are real good training control with a dog. >> There is always a risk. With an animal. That's right.

109It's There's always a risk with humans, too. I got to ask that it could go off. Or a human. Can't say. Can't control everything, right? I I think having it on a leash gets rid of the part of what it's for. And we get supposed to do. That's right. Right. This isn't working so well. Right. So 8470 becomes 3220. On page one of three we're getting rid of the stars and the yellow print that says district option cuz we do have therapy dogs. On page two of three under F we're eliminating number two. Three becomes two and so on. And two becomes be supervised and accompanied by the handler and or designate. The only question we have is are we comfortable with new three where the therapy dog ID and or bandana. If that's something

110that's in the policy, I have no problem asking the question to make sure that they have their an ID. I don't think there's any harm in having them wear something that identifies that they're therapy dogs. Okay. But to your point, I mean when you come in, if you see a dog just wandering as a new person, you don't You wouldn't know. You wouldn't know. But if there's an ID, you're like, "Okay." And where are they letting people bring their dogs to work? Right. In the schools. Right. I mean, we do >> wearing ID that says they're a therapy dog, that removes that question. Is there anything in here that talks about we should be putting something out every so often to say that we have these? Like I know when they first came, we had

111a publication that they were there. In the newsletter that says they're here. Maybe every year there should be something just to say just to let you know we have so this these therapy dogs in the district. Oh, for the broader community for the whole school community. Well, the last sentence on three of three says superintendent or designee, once your parents are notified prior to any therapy dog being brought on school grounds. I think what I hear you saying is and annually thereafter. Okay. I mean, that really that like have to do it and not forget or whatever. I mean, it's just notifying. I feel like that I feel like that we can say we're going to do it every year, but it the policy just says prior, right? Right. And that could mean I guess

112it how necessary it is to Yeah, you're doing it every year and then you forget to do it and then Then I'm in violation of policy. Correct. That's what I said. We really want to catch practice. No, catch practice. We don't want to catch practice. Someone might. Place your one foot in. Oh, I see. Yeah, you're you're you have to you have to You have to approve them every year. >> Approve them every year. Right. Cuz that's what this says at the top. On the first There must be one request for each dog. In no case will a request for the use of the therapy dog be valid for more than one school year. So do they have to re-request every year? We don't currently do that. No. So do you want them to do

113that? So Cuz if not, we should just >> get their dog re-approved every year, yes, they can. It's no different than they breach the policy. >> should be ensuring that they are still certified. They get dog old timer, they get Yeah, they violate. Or be eating. They get to my whatever. Yeah. Yep, they get to my whatever. They're not [clears throat] physically able to do it. Like in the case of a service dog, they get old and they can't do it anymore. 100% they get they get retired. Yep. Does your wallet get bigger? And if it is annually, then you also will have to notify parents annually. Well, they've already been notified. It's the same dog. So you I you were looking for a notification they've been re-certified for another year. Maybe. I'm trying to

114think which office this is coming out of. So Cuz it feels like a very bizarre communication from Could it just be like in the first newsletter or whatever it is? Like if there's a therapy dog >> does it mean? Welcome to that. Well, that's right that parents are notified Welcome to the high school. We have dogs permitted on school grounds. Okay. Okay, are we done with that one? Yeah. It's all with the changes. 8500 shift recommendation to Erie 1 policy 7611. I really don't want to mess with much on anything having to do with all the regular policy language that's specific to special education because this is where you can get yourself jammed up. >> This was Nancy will provide custom language. So do we need Nancy to do that? >> [laughter] >> There really

115isn't going to be customized language. So if you go to the bottom of D on 104 Yeah. It says district must customize. Yeah. There really isn't anything to customize. We would leave it the way it is. Leave it the way it is. Okay. That's exactly what we should be doing. Okay. What about E and F on page two? I don't know why that's customized. It says 2019. It says 7611 page two of four. It says that E and F We practice that. Yeah, E and F. >> [laughter] >> It says E and F are customizable. I mean Um I like it. So that you're saying why is it customizable? Well, I don't see you absolutely need to ensure that necessary accommodations are specified in IEP and you got to make sure you review the need

116for accommodations at the Committee on Special Education. So I don't see that being customizable unless the unless the intent or spirit on this was that they wanted more. But that's exactly what they're doing. So ask The only one I would push back on is number two having library media specialist or curriculum coordinator keep CSE Committee on apprised of available products. I can't say with confidence that that happens with validity. So number two I would strike. It's very specific. Yes. But everything else is exactly what should be happening. Okay. Um So I would say remove the star by E, remove the star by F, strike two would be the recommendation. But the rest is And remove the star by D on page one. Yep. Are we going to use 8500 or are we going to use

1177611? >> Yeah, let's use 8500. Cuz there's a whole slew of them coming right after this one. Right. So no stars and then removal of two F2. 502 is the last And we're saying Okay, replace with 7610. What does position in front of 8500 mean? On the table. My own personal preference is that policy should be the first one that you read about special education because 85 The Erie 1 7610 says special education district plan, which is required by regulation. And so it should be the first policy special education therapy. Stylistically, rhythm-wise, you got to do that. It makes more sense. So could we renumber this 8500? 8500. Or we can do 49. 8549. 4985 Oh, 85 80 8499. >> 8499. Sorry. >> 99 is really hard. So I did the same thing. So Be

118against Erie's numbers? Yes. Yes, but eventually we're going to switch to Erie anyway. Okay. So I want to make sure I'm writing this down right. We would replace 8502 with Erie 7610. Correct. But we would change it to 84 I'm probably making this too challenging. Maybe we shouldn't change the number. 99. If we're If we're going to eventually change it anyway, why change it three times? Yeah. And it's it's stylistically makes more sense that you would do the district plan first before you start talking about IEPs. But once we transition to the Erie number, it will be first. Correct? Cuz it is 7610. Okay. Yes, and actually So don't change it now. >> 7611 Erie is the one we just did. So it will be in the right order. It'll be in the right order

119once we transition. So keep it 8502 cuz eventually it's going to become 7610. Okay. And no need for any uh edits on that one unless you guys saw something. I just I had a question. I don't know if it's like policy, but is this a thing where um on 205 or 76-40 Wait, 76-40? You're ahead of us. Oh, wait. Oh, yeah. We're on 76-11. I overdid it. I apologize. I got I got flipping. Okay. They're way ahead of us. The tricky part is the tricky part is is Erie want So, 76-10 is the first one in Erie 1. We just did 76-11 in front of it. The rest of them from here on out are required by regulation. Like, we have to have policy and we didn't have policy for 76-12, 15, 16, 20, 21,

120and that's what that was. So, 76-11 So, to keep them together, can't we just make them like 85-03 whatever between 85-02 and 85-06. And then when we transition switch to the Erie number. Well, actually, to your point, Angela, it might work cuz it My recommendations for 85-06 and 85-07 is going to be good. And the recommendation is to remove because they're covered within 76-12 or 76-40. Yeah, so we're what We have one extra. Can't we just call it like 85-07A or something to until we transition? So, grouping by need would be 85-03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 07A. Where does the temporary placement of students with disabilities fall in there for the new ones? Which one are you talking about? So, 85-07, the one that we're talking about removing so we can use the increments of

121one, right? So, instead of So, 85-02, 85-03, and so on. I think it's in least restrictive environment. And the reason I know I can pull it is because I know you have all the required by regulation and you have Yes, we all have that one. Okay, so 76-12 will now be 85-03. 03. Any recommendations for revision on 76-12, which is going to be 85-03? This is all regulatory. Yes, we do. It's after 76-10 in our book. It is? See, I'm on 76-40. These were Did you want These are ones to use. Yeah, but I didn't see These were the inserts. This was insert version 2.0. I'm going to pause and listen now. I don't remember when we got this. I don't remember ourselves. I can see if we can get that. [clears throat] >> [laughter]

122>> Okay, so 76-12 which is going to be 85-03. Any recommendations? All good? This is all regulatory. Yeah, that's the way it works. 76-14 Okay. Oh, wait. What's 76-15, you mean? 76-15. Yeah, 76-14 comes later. But I stuck mine in the right order. So, we're Oh, sorry. Well, I put them in the order that they're on the sheet. 76-14 comes down a little bit later on in the party. 76-15 is going to be 85-04, least restrictive environment, and that's required by regulation. You have to have a policy. And that's right from part 200 regs. So, any updates? I don't know. 76-16, again required policy. You have to have a policy per regulation and it comes right from part 200 regs. So, this one's going to be 76-16 or 85-05. Important to note the requirements that

123we do have to have an IEE. Just saying. We do have to have an IEE. Yes. Have we number 5? I'm not going to go there. I can't go there. That's why I asked about number Okay, Erie 76-20 is going to become 85-06. And that again comes right from part 200 regs. So, there'll be no customization there. And then Erie 76-21 is going to be 85-07. Yep. I don't know if I have 76-21, but I must have it somewhere. I don't know. I did I would. I put it down there, but I don't think I got it. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. You don't have that one? Yeah, I don't have that one either. But hang on cuz I might have it in front of me. I just don't know where to put it.

124I'm ready for the next section. Yeah, me too. Well, this one I don't have because my aide brought my stuff to me. We had everything we needed when we did and then I had to give it all to him. 76-21. I don't think I have that one either. 76-21 is section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, required by regulation. You have to have this policy. This is the one from Erie 1. This is all about 504s. We have to have that one. I don't know if any of Cuz Fran doesn't have it. And I don't have it either. I will fact check to make sure it was in my original email. Just give me a It's my fault. I don't know. I don't know. I have the emails, but I'm not going to keep

125flipping. I have 75 from email, but not 76. I don't know why it wasn't sent it out. >> I have 20. I don't have 21. Do you want me to make a copy of that? I was going to say, would you do that and that way they have it? Yeah, they'll have it and then it's done today. I'm going. All right, 76-40 is going to become 85-07A. 76-40, we all have You said 7A? It's going to be 85-07A. Okay. And that's the one that you started to talk about earlier, right? >> Because I didn't have any of that. What? I'm like, how am I so far Hang on. The next one is 76-40. Oh, but I thought you had a question. I did. Um what did you say that was about? And again, this comes

126right from part 200 regs. Oh, it wasn't like a policy. I was just um Unless a referral is withdrawn Where are you? Um I'm on 86-40, page two of five. You mean 76-40? What did I say? Yes. Let me start over. I'm on 76-40, page two of five. >> Yes. Second paragraph. Just curious uh a parental refusal to consent is overridden. So, that's saying the parent refuses to go forward and staff can override that refusal and put forward to the best interest of the child. I'm on 76-20. I have 76-20 and then all these 70s at the end and I feel like that was a weekend. I I was And I only asked you because I thought that I had a parent refuse services and literally put up a fight. Further. So, does it say

127you can? No. But again, this comes right from part 200 regs. Like, this language is not It's right in the regs. Wait a minute. No, no. We're reading this wrong. Sorry. >> Okay. We're reading it wrong. Unless a referral is withdrawn, an individual evaluation is at no cost to the parent, completed within 60 days after consent or parental refusal to consent is overridden. So, we have to get it done within 60 days unless they've overridden their consent. And then you can go beyond 60 days? Yes, or not do it. Or not do it. Yeah, okay. So, we recently had You know what? Yes. We have had circumstances where we've had a verbal change your part but not in writing. But really, we're still bound by 60 days because again, if it's in verbal form, conversation

128and we have it. Okay. Got it. All right, where are we? 85-07A, which is 76-40. 85-07A. Okay. What about the very last paragraph of the same page, two of five? The very last sentence is "The district is not required to conduct the assessment unless requested to do so by a student's parent." What What is that if there's a referral through MTSS? Well, the district So, if someone refers that, then staff can or the district can say no, even if it's So, all of this is about an individual evaluation. So, the district was going to do it. So, you're saying exactly I have to I have to get greater context cuz this is all about individual evaluations. So, initial. Oh, if you go up to paragraph before that where it talks about additional data. On the

129basis of the referral from the parents, the group will identify what additional data, if any, are needed to determine a variety of factors including blah, blah, blah. So, the district must notify the parents if additional data is not needed and the reason why. We're not required to conduct additional assessment unless requested to do so by the students. Okay. So, it's So, we can deem that we don't need any additional data, but if the parent requests it in writing Got it. then then you can you would have to do the additional >> They'll get the additional data. Okay. So, back to 7621, which is really now 8507. Yep. Any discussion on that one? No. Okay. So, these are all ones that we have to have. They're required required. Yes. How long have they been required to

130have? I do not have an answer for that. I do not know. I just know they're on the master list right now of what we have to have for a policy. Some of this could have been Some of this could have been in the older policy. Yeah, I wonder if they got We got rid of some of them. Well, it is if you go down a little further like 8521 IEP Our 8521 we got rid of. Yeah. Kind of like 8510 disabilities participating in board public sessions. So, I'm going to bite my tongue. Well, it's the role of the board in the board. But, it also says the role of the board though, too. Like, so maybe that was specific to the board's role and not You know you know what I mean? It is

131It could be the If we were to go back into executive session, I can explain why those are there. Well, I think that's really the one that's about the IEP. So, the good news is we have all the ones in yellow we're going to adopt as is starting with 8503 going through 8507A, and we're going to do the Erie one. When you get to 8506, our current policy which the recommendation is to remove. The reason the recommendation to remove is it just speaks to accommodations. The reality is you put together your accommodations within the policy above, which talks about the student IEP. So, the only compelling reason to keep 8506 would be if you want to talk specific to as part of an IEP when you're doing accommodations, a child should be afforded testing accommodations,

132which by the way again is is law is law and it is part of IEP development, which is covered in 8507A or Erie 7640. So, why would you need to keep it? We don't need to. So, we can remove Which one are we talking about? 8506 Okay. Let's get rid of it. Dumb question. For the ones that we are adopting as is, those 6000 whatever that are becoming 8500s in ours, can we just put those on for a first read since we're adopting them as is or do we need to do it as part of the 8000 series? So These are policies that we're supposed to have that we don't. Right. We should remove the ones that the numbers are going to conflict first. Can we do that all in the same meeting? We could.

133Do you have You would need time, but not the next meeting, but What I could do is probably just I we could remove remove on the 8th and then I might be able to get some like written up. But, if not, we could remove and then our second April meeting we could add Just cuz like these ones are ones that We're not changing anything and we need them. Right. Actually, I I don't think I feel comfortable removing these ones that have to do with IEP things and not approving in the same meeting approving the new ones. Yeah, good point because So, that you have something you have that overlap as opposed to nothing. Yeah, so So, ideally we should remove and adopt >> Yes. So, let me try. Can we like we did for another

134new policy recently, can we waive first and second and adopt all in one meeting for those our regular six or seven? Probably. Sorry. [laughter] I mean, they gave us the authority to do that for that last policy. So, 8507 Yeah. The way it's worded right now is actually not what happens. So, if a student enrolls, it says that we would put them in the educational program consistent with the current IEP. If we don't have programming, we can't do that. So, what has to happen is that our PPS person would assemble the committee on special education and develop a plan so that the IEP reflects what we're actually going to do. So, I don't know the need for it's not it's inaccurate and I don't know whether we need this. The reality is for all registrations

135we have to have a kid registered within 48 hours. Period. That's law. Like, every kid that comes in is registered in special education or general ed, we have to do that. Yeah, remove it. So, there's not an Erie one replacement for that one. It just It just says in the the least restrictive environment that we just place students based on their IEP. Which we have up in 7615. 8504 Yep. Yes. So, there's not a one-for-one replacement, but what we need is in that other policy. Okay. So, it's covered from a couple of angles. By regulation we have to register every kid and we have to get them programming, but this the way it's written would make me anxious cuz we can't we don't do that cuz we don't always have the programming. They often have

136to do a modification to the IEP because we don't have an out-of-district placement potentially that would support a kid. If we have it, we do it. But, if there's a more restrictive environment it's a program we don't have here, they don't go into that program. I'm sorry. I might have missed it, but cuz there was multiple conversations, but did we say yes we can remove these and waive first and second and adopt the new ones all at once? I mean, they let us do it with that one policy that we needed for I would say yes. And the goal would be to do it May 8th, but if we can't make that happen the next meeting after. Okay. So, trying to keep me at 10 minutes. I was I was also thinking that is there

137a way that we can put in the bottom of the policies what number they used to be if they were a different number we could change the number so that when we go through and search our minutes we might be able to find what they used to be or when we changed it. You're trying to preserve the conversations. So I mean, preserve these committee meeting agenda. I mean, minutes. >> [laughter] >> Well, it would be in the minutes of our meetings, too. Like, when did we change this? If we're looking up 7621 So, we don't need to adopt when we change the numbers. We're just strictly changing the number you don't need board action. I do know that. Because it's still The the context is the same. We're not changing any words. We're just changing

138the number. For clerical reasons we're just I feel like I understand what Francis' question is for the historical or institutional memory of the change. I think you're trying to protect the institutional memory to make sure there's a record of this is why it is what it is. Like, we change all the numbers. We change all the numbers to the Erie one, but then we have to list somewhere at the bottom that it was formerly 8507. Yeah, but if we're doing that all at once in 3 years when we're done going through the whole cycle you won't have the old set of numbers anymore. Cuz you're changing everything. But, when you're searching through board docs to find out when we adopted them or what conversation we might have had about it or something like that you

139can't search the new numbers. You'd have to search the old numbers, but if you don't know what the old numbers were, you'll never find it unless you're You'd have to search the subject. Yeah. Which is on like on board docs when we when she lists them it says policy book Well, that's true. I guess so. If the subject's there, I guess it's I think it's a really good idea. Most most applications now have like you create a tag for everything and you can search by by exactly that. But, if yeah, if the subject is there, we can search the subject as long as it's Could you put the new like 3 years from now when all the new policies are whatever number they are, can you put in parentheses formerly policy number 1234? I mean,

140you could, but she's going to have to go in and touch every policy. I got it, which would be a pain. Which is tedious. Yeah. It's such a GenXer thing. And if you're >> [laughter] >> Well, if but if if for your reference, right? If the name is We're doing that all at once. I mean I mean, I just think about like in 3 years like I mean, I have most of these policies like the numbers or it's like the context like it's going to have to rework my brain, which is fine, you know, like I know like this policy was 3840, you know, like oh, but now it's 5510, you know. Okay. All right, let's leave 8 minutes. 7641 Uh I'm sorry. 31 Transition services was actually 8508. Recommendation is to take 7641 transition

141services again all part of part 200 regs. And this is required by regulation. Any recommended changes or adopt as is? So the recommendation is to adopt as is. Yes, that's correct. Yep. Uh then going down a little bit further in yellow the preschool special education program. We are required by regulation to have that we didn't have that or I'm sorry actually So I don't have this one. I do. We did have something 8520. Mhm. Yep. So 8520 I have 8520. You don't have 76 >> says 7630. Yep. No, that's a typo. I have 7641. No, this is right. No, no, that's right. Yeah, I don't have 7614. No, 14. This one? The one in yellow on page five in the middle of the page. Oh, so I'll make a copy of this. So Where did

142my stuff go? Oh, I know. 7614 I put it back in the right order. 7614 is preschool special education program. So there's this and 7630 which is committee on special education on preschool special education. So you need both. Okay, so 7614 that we have to adopt cuz we don't have it. And it's required by regulation. And then we already have um We don't want it to be 76 cuz ours are 8000s codes. So can we >> it 8519. We had 8520 is going to become Erie 1 7630. Well, 7630 is going to become our 85 >> Yes. So 7614 can that be 8519? It can be 76 4 Oh, I see what you're saying. You want to keep it together. Yeah. I want to keep the 7000 that we're going to have with our 8000.

143Perfect. So do you need a copy of this one? Yes, please. Do those have to roll up with the other ones that are in yellow since they're all 85 Well, in Erie 1 they are all together. Yeah. So can we just continue with Oh, we can't. We can't cuz we have 8508. No, we're getting [snorts] rid of that one though. We're out of order. We're getting rid of 8508 so can we make No, we're not. We're adopting 7641. And we're keeping it 8508. Yeah. Oh, okay. Got you. Adopt as is. So we're >> So we're going to adopt it as eight We're going to adopt 7614 as as 8519. as 8519. Yep. With And then 8509 8520 is going to be 7630. And we're going to adopt Erie 1 to become 85 >> Eventually they'll

144all be there. We're just Well, we don't have 8509 and 10 though so we can keep it right in line. Yeah, but we already have 8520 so why would we change the number on 8520? Let's just keep it together. Let's just keep it the one. Yeah, so all we change is 8519. Okay. I just thought you wanted those two They're all going to end up in the 7000s eventually. Eventually, yeah. >> [laughter] >> We're done for the night. Cuz eventually they're going to be different anyway. Yeah. If we if they're not going to be next to each other they'll be 7614 and 7630. Which are nowhere near each other. Okay, so what are we doing? So the Erie 1 7614 Yes. is going to be adopted as is as and that's required so we're going

145to add it to the group above when you bring it to the board Okay. 22nd. The one underneath that 8520 we're going to leave the number as is and we're going to adopt 7630 as 8520. Okay. Okay, any questions on those two policies? which is not required by regulation and I got a note that it's covered in 7640 IEP development policy so we can remove it. We do 7630 we just did that one? 476 Yeah, yes. That's the question. Do we do we do all the people are there? Where are we? It's on the first page of 7630. On the first page? Yeah, the high school kids participate in their own meetings. But it's I just say it's a it's will include but not limited to. I just worded it like so every meeting has

146to include each Mhm. all of those people. Mhm. So that's those lists that you you approve after annually and then it just says um like general ed teacher, special ed teacher. Yeah, that is exactly what the committee is. Yeah. Okay. Although I might I guess I'd have to look to see if we actually have a school psychologist at every meeting or and sometimes they have a social worker and a school psychologist. The way that it's listed is school psych. I think the psychs are always there and then I got to look at the list. Cuz the others could be district representative. This says it's school psychologist so I wouldn't want to be in violation of our own policy if it says if we have a social worker [snorts] and a school psychologist. Even though for

147testing purposes it really should be school psych. So it'll be a question of practice now. Policy wise. All right. All right, hold on one second. I have it right here. Okay, so we're ready. So it lists school psychologist and it does there's it says actual name. Okay. Okay, 8553 We want to replace with 7211. We're doing 8532 or 85 8532 is in 7630 and it's more of being replaced with all the instructions on how to access the stuff. Okay. I'll give you a paper copy We have one minute. Oh my gosh, we have to go. We got to keep going. We're so close. We're replacing with 7211. Yes, please. Okay. There is a customized piece. >> which Uh paragraph two parents will be notified of availability of interpreter services. I think it's the 14 days.

148Is where you would customize? Yeah. We do provide interpreter services. We do have a stipend provision by which those folks do provide the interpreter services. So it's 14 days that are realistic reasonable I guess I was wondering the same question myself. Could we get an interpreter for that? I think they even give more I think that we'd have to check. You think they do give more time than that? So we should make it more than 14. I I think This is within 14 days. This is on the parent side. The parent has to make the request. They have to give the district 14 days. Yeah. I mean that protects us. 14 days to respond. But the reality is we're going to try and be responsive when a parent let us know within you know five

149days. >> Faster. Perfect. Right. But we have up to 14 days to respond. No, it's really saying the parent has to give us two weeks notice. 14 days. I I can't hold the parent accountable if they let me know with five days and we're going to try to accommodate. That's right. So you're okay with leaving Yes. >> [snorts] >> Uh 8560 replace with 7670 due process. And again all of this comes right from the part 200 regulations specific to special education. So we don't have a lot we can modify there. Okay. Adopt as is. Oh, I just had one question on that. Sorry. 5412 is the one we're on, yep. That's the one we're going to. Um Okay, where's 5412? We're on 50 8571 8571 8571 replacing with 5412. Um I noticed um I'm getting

150better at saying things. There's only one page for 5412. Yep. Yep. At the very top when it says preference in the purchase of instructional materials be given to vendors who agree to provide materials in a usable format. Just wondering and it talks about braille, large print, all that. Um what about like other one language? Um So content versus format would be means maybe at equal quality for for Spanish speakers. So is there anything on here for for language like that? No, and I guess the reason probably is this whole series is specific to special education and really isn't getting it, you know. >> Oh, okay. So, I guess I I mean, we certainly could add that in, but it looking at alternative formats include but are not limited to certainly we would give preference. Like

151if they're only going to give us one modality, that's where we're going to go with another modality. So, the reason why I say that is maybe is when I had a poor experience with writing curriculum. With the criteria that was put forth was we're going to prioritize and give preference towards curriculum that had more than one language and because we couldn't find curriculum that had more than one language but it also had everything else we wanted we couldn't go with it because it didn't meet that one criteria. So, that's what I was thinking of when I saw it here. It was like preference anything that you say you have preference towards and then you go and find a curriculum and it doesn't meet that criteria then it's like oh, um so Does that make [snorts]

152sense? Or so you say that's a priority but that you choose something that's not the priority. But this is this is specific to alternative formats not regular curriculum, correct? >> And this is more specific to special education These would all be accommodations which we would be on the hook for for compliance on an IEP. Like if it says we have to have braille, we have to have braille. So, it's like currently we have braille and large print. So, I guess in this situation I was thinking of more broadly is um do you want to make a mention that we're going to still prioritize content over maybe some of the other formats and what if the format the the vendor has great formats but it's crappy I look at again alternative formats for instructional because this

153is and maybe we have to specify because this is really more in alignment with special education. >> Yeah. So, it's not about content at all, it's just about accessibility. Right. Okay. That's all I got. I see your point though. I just didn't really care for that. >> So, if I think about the new math program and they had said well, they're not going to provide us the large print, I would have said this is still the program that our team that we've piloted and we know we want and we're going to buy the we're going to buy this program and then we're going to take care of the accommodation. But I don't think that violates policy because this is saying this is saying that's you're going to give that preference for alternative formats. I don't

154think it says that though. I think she's right in the first sentence. Preference of the purchase of instructional materials will be given to vendors who agree to provide materials in usable alternative format. So, outside of the fact that we have different policy around selection of materials and textbooks, this we potentially should would be in violation of our own policy if we didn't. Like if if math expressions did not provide that but say Bridges math did which was another one we were looking at, we would be in violation of our policy as far as selection. I think you're right about that. Consideration instead of preference? Yeah. So, just consideration? Like we should be focusing on that cuz we certainly don't want to buy another program but it it it doesn't let us off the hook to

155providing the alternate format. Okay, yeah. Or maybe just um preference as long as there's history where it's as long as it doesn't mean making some hard choices in content being learning standards. I don't Yeah, but your your I think your example is perfect. I'm thinking about it from the math program. We wouldn't have made our decision based on just saying they don't have large print. So, consideration will be given. Yeah, consideration. And and again if it's on an IEP we still have to provide the alternative format regardless. Yeah, correct. So, maybe just one quick change to consideration Yeah, evaluation. in the purchase instead of preference. Okay. Good call. 8580 You know, I left my Lexington song. I'm so excited. You know why? We're going to listen to it. I don't understand why. I don't want

156to say anything before 8580 we're replacing with 8580 we're replacing with 7617. Correct. It is. >> [snorts] >> So that's everything in the list and so we are tableing 8260 for next time which was not in previous list but I'm going to add it. We're tableing 8310 and 8315. >> Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Are we actually doing 8260? If it's in our 7000s, we're doing it next year anyway. So, we really don't have to do 8260. So, we're doing policy >> if we have a different policy you said >> a policy. We found it. 7101. We have it. In theory one it would be in the 8000s and Williamson's in the 7000s. So, we're not going to do that one. And you said you you were looking into it. But

157do we need to? If it's in the 7000s we're looking at it next year. So Well, it's a required one so do we need to look at it to make sure that it meets the requirement? We have a policy. Does it meet the requirement? I haven't looked at all the 7000s. There could be other 7000s. I don't know that we can do all that. But I guess we probably should do all the required. So, 8260 is Erie's number, correct? Yes. Ours is 7101. So, I guess we should make sure that it meets because it says it's a required policy. I guess I just want to make sure that what our 7101 is meets whatever the requirement is that's in Erie 8260. Well, I guess I would propose [clears throat] that maybe we need to look

158at it more largely at our process larger with more largely than that because we haven't done anything with 3000, 5000, 7000, 1000, 2000, 4000 since I've been here. So, I don't know if there's others that are required by regulation that I don't know about. The only reason I'm saying that is probably we don't have If they're part of Erie 8000 they would have been on this list. Yes, but that policy for us is in the 7000s. There could be five other ones in 7000 that I don't know about because I haven't even looked at the 7000 yet. I understand but those five other ones when we look at 7000 we'll know they're required cuz they'll be on Erie's list. Yes, cuz I'll do similar chart. The 7101 won't be on Erie's list cuz it's in

159260 for Erie. But we're looking at our policy which is all 7000s. So, it's going to pop out and I'm like oh, what's this and I do a crosswalk to figure it out which one it is for Erie one. So, it's going to come up in the 7000s. I just Okay. We can abandon it. I guess that's a great question. We can abandon 3000 for this year which I don't know how many policies are there for 3000s. One. No. 3000s. Wait, abandon 3000? Well, in this plan we're trying to get through two sections in a year. Got you. Got you. Yes. Which we don't even have that. Yeah. Right. That's a lot. Which one could we sub in? 6 1000 or 2000? 2000s we only got one. All right. So, why don't we sub in

1602000? But that makes us go through two series of or some other training. Well, if we don't do two a year we're not going to get through it. I mean, it could take us eight years to get through all policies if we only do one section a year. Okay. So, we're swapping 2000 with 3000. 1000 is 15. So, let's 1000 is how many? 15. We just did those in the 2024. All right. So, 3000 is going to go to year four. And I'm going to get you the section 2000 policy and we're reading that next time on our agenda. 4000 it only has five policies. We could crank out both cuz we got a real rhythm here now. Not tonight. We cannot. Not today. And we already did one of them. So, do we want

161to move we want to move 2000 and 4000 to this year? Yes. We can do them at our next policy meeting on the 8th. Well, that's what I need to think about. That's what I just said. Or you said that I we had agreed cuz I was Yeah. So, [snorts] 2000, 4000. So, you do not have any of that cuz I didn't know if we needed to get through this. But we didn't have 3000 to get through. And Well, listen. To be fair, there's two policies that have been tabled over and over and we're still not through yet. And I don't think we'll get to anything other than that on April 8th. I'm talking about the ones that we did. The AI one and the library materials. >> I'm perfectly happy to withdraw the AI

162one until the 5000 section now that I understand how this is going to go. >> [clears throat] [laughter] >> Do it next year. There's not don't we have to have a policy in place? I think we should just do the AI one believe. And put something in place. Instead of kicking the can. Make a decision. I do want to. I do want to bring it forward. I brought it forward last year. >> but you just said you'd be happy to withdraw it. Cuz I'm anxious about it. Did we already >> angst about it. Did we send you all of our stuff ahead of time? Yes. We You mean you're saying yes? You're saying no AI for kids? All I don't know. That's what we said. I That's what I said. Yeah. You didn't even say

163that. We need to have the conversation. So There there's They have to You can there's different variances there. It's not all or none. >> backwards we're not going to look at Erie's 8260 next year. Is that what you're You're saying we're going to look at all of the other I can't hear you. I just want to know what we're supposed to be prepared for for next time before we all leave. Unless we're going to say we want to go through all of the other required policies, that's one and we're going to get to it next year. Like that 7,000 is next year. So I would not do it. And the reason I listed on this is because it was a required policy, it was in the 8,000 series one, which is what drew my attention

164to it. And then Kelly found it in the 7,000s. So we're going to review that one next one of the 7,000s. The 8000 one, too. The AI would just uh not help. So then we are tabling till next week or till next meeting 8310 and 8330. Yep. Yep. And 8450 which was the one that was highlighted in blue. >> Home instruction. Because we need Karen here, right? And she'll be here next time anyway because of Cuz that wasn't on That wasn't on this sheet for next time. 8450 I had we I had we were going to take it as is. I didn't have we were having Karen come back with that. I got all I needed from the homebound instruction. I worked with Karen, the nurse coordinator. That's right. Okay. Which one did you say

165it was? That's why I'm asking cuz I take notes and we change our change our mind as we're talking. So I'm trying to make sure we're all on the same page. >> Because we were going to have one with Karen to clarify. Hold it down. Did you do that now? This is going to be so much >> There was one that you said you wanted Karen here for. Yeah, I'm looking to see which one. And I think that's That's the one that she has asked. So let's do that one next on the eight. >> So let's do 8460 on the eight. Have Karen here. 8310, 8330, 8460 >> It's Erie 1 8460. Yes. 8310, 8330, 8460 and then our And then AI. If we get that out of time, we are super focused. Just saying.

166And are we adding section 2000 and 4000? So 8460, 8310, 8330 on the eight. Yeah. I don't I think we only have an hour, right? What? We're not going to get through those. So we only have an hour? I We're not going to get through those. Then maybe we just do the 2000 policy. We could definitely do the 2000 policy, right? Maybe. What about the 4000? Um administration, so organizational chart, evaluation, superintendent evaluation of administrative staff superintendent BOE relations and compensation and related benefits. This is all for next time or just That's just the 4000. I guess the answer to could you get through them is going to depend on whether the recommendation is to replace them with something as is or keep them as is or Let's focus on the 8000s that we have

167to do and then You can have your three. No, there's only three left. Right. Do you think that might take an hour? Plus the library policies that are coming. That's the ones. That's what I'm saying. Those are the two Sorry. Those ones might take the full hour. Yeah, we have four plus the library AI. What right? Yeah. So 8310, 8330, 8460 and the other AI which is RTI/MTSS and then 5840 which is artificial intelligence. >> Yeah, let's do just those two. And that's at the bottom of your agenda. The only one I didn't have was 8460 Erie 1, but it's right here as far as what we're doing next meeting. And I did ask Karen and Nicholas Smolenksy to come in and talk with us a little bit about AI and how we might best

168support our students with AI if it should be that it is not prohibited. Is that our last scheduled policy meeting of the So do we want to put one of the 2000 on there? Well, that's why I was going to do. If we if we get to it. Well, if we only get through one section, we're not going to we're going to not be in compliance. We have to get through two sections to get through eight in three years. Do we have any more policies to discuss after It's board member training. We just did it in 2024. The 2000 one. Yeah. Which is I would think that it's probably leave that as but we can pull what Miss Erie 1 has. I I mean for one policy cross that and let's just do it and

169cross that off. Can you please ask for Erie 1 policy for the 4000s, too? And then depending upon cuz I'll do a cross off between the two. If it looks like it's pretty straightforward, then we could then I can just send you the Erie 1 policy and hopefully we can just get that done. If it looks like it's going to take a lot of wordsmithing or changing then maybe we don't do it. Or we add another. And 4230 4230 we did. That's the organizational chart. Because we also have a meeting on the 22nd. [clears throat] Not a policy meeting, no. Right, but I'm saying if we needed to, we could add one more. I don't want us to only get through the 8000s this year and then we're out of we're never going to get

170You can't do one a year. through them all. And 5000 and 7000 are long three years. Right, so which is why But you put them together We could separate. Actually, 7000 should go to year four. I thought you put them together cuz they Cuz I want to get through them. But I have to be practical and and like It wasn't a big push. stuff that And business operations and how he's going to have to be at the table and really Right. practical implications of That one That's the one you moved up. Yeah. >> [snorts] >> I I would say do the 2000s and like get the 4000s and if we have to add one more policy meeting before the end of the year, we do. Okay. Cuz then you know five and seven are big.

171And then your five becomes year three, year seven or I'm sorry, section seven becomes year four. Yeah. And then we've gotten through all of them in the first four years of the And then we find years after we do years after that. And we we could talk about it in a normal meeting. Like if we're just doing the 2000 one policy. Do you really want to No, I don't. >> subject the community to that? Well, they can watch it now. How many people are on the line watching? Zero? It doesn't say right now. All right. We'll move. I need a motion to adjourn. So moved. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Did you Did you get the Did you get the time you needed? Yeah. What about the grant discussion there? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yes,

172I got it covered. Are we off the line? Hold on. I don't No. >> Mhm.