001[Music] Hey. [Music] We're going to call the governing board meeting for Liberty Elementary School District to order today, Wednesday, May 7th at 5:30 p.m. here at the Jerry Roby District facility. Four board members are present. Board members Zimmerman, Vice President Kenyon, board member Stencion and myself, Michael Todd. Our first item on the agenda will be item 1.2, the pledge of allegiance. And see, I think Mr. Strenion, it's your turn to lead. 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. Got a little seat malfunction. Okay, good thing he's tall. He can still see over. Okay, we'll move to item 1.3, approval of the special meeting agenda. Take a motion in a second. Mr.
002President, I rec um I motion that we approve the agenda consistent with board policy BED and temporarily suspend government board policy with which this agenda may be inconsistent. Okay. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. I have a motion, a second to approve item 1.3, the special meeting agenda. If there's no discussion, I'll go for the vote of board member Zimmerman I. Vice President Kenyon I. Board member Shinion I. And he's got a new chair. I'm also an I. We will show that approve. Four yes. Zero no. Thank you, Miss Camarado. Thank you. Next on our agenda is item 2.1 discussion, consideration, and approval of the trust policy chapter 1. This will be the third read to be effective on July 1st, 2025. Dr. Mr. Mahorn, anything you'd like to add? Nope. It technically has
003my name on it, but I'm going to immediately hand it over to Miss Castanos. All right, Miss Castanos. All right. Thank you, Dr. Mahorn. Well, governing board members, it is a pleasure to be here again today. Um, we are here to discuss any review or any edits that were made to chapter 1. Um, and then we will be taking a vote. Um, if you all are ready to vote on that. So, um, looking or reviewing chapter one, I'd like to open that up for any discussions if you have them. Uh, the only thing I would like to discuss is about when we pay performance pay. Can you that's in chapter? Yeah, if you can give us a page number. I'm attempting to get to it. I apologize. So, that will be our next agenda item.
004Oh, I I so apologize. No worries. I just want to it's been a lot of trust policy over the last month. So, okay. Anything else for uh chapter 1? All right. Hearing none, we can take a motion in a second. Mr. President, I motion that we approve the trust policy chapter 1 third read effect of July 1st, 2025. Second. Okay. Have a motion, a second to approve the trust to approve the trust chapter 1 policies to be effective July 1st, 2025. There's no discussion. We'll move to a vote. Uh Miss Zimmerman, I. Vice President Kenyan, I. Board member Cion, I. I'm also I will show that approved four yes, zero no. Also, for the record, um Miss Schmidt is unable to join us. I apologize for not announcing that sooner, but Miss Schmidt was unable
005to join us today, so we'll show her absent from the meeting. I apologize for not doing that housekeeping at the beginning. Okay, we'll now move to our next agenda item which is item uh one I'm sorry 2.2 which is discussion consideration approval of the trust policy chapter 2 third read to be effective July 1st 2025. And Miss Zimmerman I think you've got one queued up. Yeah. So it's page two. Um and you know I don't want to repeat everything I've already said. So I stand by the fact that I uh you know as it's the red line um you know I'm comfortable with it being you know I think it should be June 30th. I don't think there's 31 days in June. Um but I'm I'm comfortable with it uh between June and June 30th
006or if the board would like to open it up until July. I would just personally like to see it after June 1st is what I'm looking for. So the current redline edit right now is June 1st to June. We will change the 31st. So thank you for catching that by June 30th. Okay. So members, if the motion goes uh without any changes, that would be approved to do it as the June 1st to June 30th. Is there anything else in chapter 2? All right. Hearing none, we take a motion and I'll take a second as well. Motion to approve the trust policy chapter 2 third read effective July 1st, 2025 with the change noted. Okay, I have a second. Second. Okay, I have the motion and the second to approve chapter 2 of the trust
007policies to be adopted and into effect on July 1st, 2025. If there's no discussion, we'll take the vote. Board member Zimmerman, I. Vice President Kenyon, I. Board member Spencion, I. I'm also I will show that approve for yes, zero, no. All right, moving right along. We'll go to item number 2.3 discussion consideration of the trust policy chapter 3, second read. This two would be, if adopted, would be effective on July 1st, 2025. Members, I know this one's been a little fresher for you. We did one and two a few times. So, we can take this one uh a little more in depth if need be, but I think the the red lines are in there so we can hopefully move through it relatively quickly and efficiently. Miss Zimmerman, do you have anything you'd like to
008comment on this one? Um, yes. So, do you want me to go through all of mine at this time? Uh, I think everybody's had the chance to review it, but if you want to just go to the changes, that would be great. and maybe just try to move through it as efficiently as possible. So, page 34. Yes. Okay. I was just giving people time to chance to look. Um, so it's talking about um a contractor or a vendor not being able to obtain um a clearance card and it's um you know, only the superintendent can wave it if you know they're certain that they're not going to interact with children. Um, I would just the only thing I'd like to add is if we could notify the principal so that they're just aware even though
009if they we don't believe that they're going to have a reasonable access to children like it's still their principal's responsibility, you know, to keep the children of their campus safe. So, if this waiver is granted, I would just like us to see if we could like notify the principal. Okay. Okay. Anybody object to that? All right, Miss Zimmerman, go with your next one, please. Okay. Um, page 41. Um, again, these are all things that were redlined to be, you know, as part of it. I'm not adding anything. Um my question still is uh as it was when we did the first read is um there doesn't seem to be policy around this is about uh the facilities is like how is there always a district employee on campus who's opening you know do people that
010rent the facilities have the ability to have keys who decides if the rental is approved none of that is in policy that was previously in policy. So, I'm just wondering, can that be added? Um, just so that we're clear and and we know how we're handling especially to me the keys like how are we ensuring that you know our facilities are safe essentially and protecting our assets. Is that previously and these are all starting to run together. Was that in the facility use agreement where we had our fees and and all that information or was it originally in the policy? It was originally in policy KF-A and KFRB of the ASBA policies. So I guess Mr. Dangerfield I'd ask you should we put this include it in policy or should it fall under more operations
011of the uh facility use agreement handbook? Thank you, Mr. Todd. You guys hear me? Yes. Okay. So, um this what M Zimmerman is referring to can easily put into the application form um of the uh policy. They um trust has informed us that they do have a possible application form as a template for the rental of school facilities and we can build into that application for form some of those specific issues and that can be part of the policy manual in under procedure. Okay, Miss Zimmerman, does that suffice for an answer for you? I I just am concerned about the key part. Are we giving keys to people who rent our facilities? And how do we I understand the um the the procedure of how it's approved. I can understand that that would be there.
012To be honest, there's a lot of procedure in the trust policies that were not in ASBA. So, I feel like we're picking and choosing what procedures we're putting in these policies. But I am concerned about the the you know do we have a district employee on campus to ensure that we're protecting our assets when a facility is being used. President Todd, can I speak please? You may. I was going to ask you. I know you handle these and board members. Yes. Um, in the uh facility use paperwork there is um where the fees are located on the bottom of that it does it does say keys access and who's going to open and who's going to close and who's going to stay on site. Um, we can definitely add to that, but that is there
013already. And usually facility use is is kept at the school site with them, you know, figuring out who's staying, who's opening, who's giving keys. Um, so, so my question is, do we give keys to people that are not employees at this time? I could only speak to when I was at Australia Mountain, and the answer would be no. Okay. But it's not a general policy at this time. It's up to the school administrator whether to give keys or the office manager as I was one. Okay. So each school site like I said you know it I I think that leaves a lot of room for interpretation here. Um and I personally find it concerning. So that's my personal opinion. If I can Yeah, if I can interrupt. I think this may No, that's okay. I
014think this may be one that we need to ask Bob to make sure um cuz I would as well be uncomfortable giving someone that's not an employee a key. Um I don't think we do, but I can't say 100%. So I wouldn't be comfortable saying 100% for sure that we don't. and then President Todd and fellow board members. Along with that though, um then what about the vendors that come on campus? They are supplied keys if they're going to remain after hours. Give me an example. Employees, give me an example of who you're talking like just so I can wrap my head. Like the security system, but they're contracted. They are contracted, but they're giving keys if they stay after hours. They're not employees, right? And and I think it could put a burden on
015our employees, right, if we are renting facilities and we're asking them to always come. I guess I just want clarification so that we're, you know, being fair to every, you know what I mean? I just think that the fact that we're not sure how schools are doing it, we're not doing it consistently. Can I ask a few questions? Yeah. Okay. So is what you're asking for is to have a policy so that it is uniform and that we know across the district what happens with keys because this is only talking about the reasonable fees for charged for school facilities, right? So we're not talking about vendors right now. We're just talking about space rental. Yes. So, if I was to take the um sections out of KFA and KFRB um that specifically related to keys
016and safety concerns and put them in here, would that help uh or is that what you're looking for? Is that what you're asking? Yes. Okay. So, I will go ahead and take this back and add those sections in um and then bring it back for review for this specific policy. Okay. And I think if we're going to take those as a whole and we get to the point where we can adopt this tonight, we can adopt it with adding that language in and then you don't have to bring it back for a third read. I don't know where we'll end up, but I would be comfortable saying we'll just basically you're going to cut and paste. I cannot cut and paste anything from ASBA. You'll finish the language. You'll you'll fix the language as such
017that it matches this, right? Yeah. Sure. Okay. Okay. On page 43, um this is talking about um political signs um on school property at any time, including election day at school sites that are used as polling places. And my question is um you know there this was obviously a big concern at the last election. And so my question to Clyde at this read was on election day when we are a polling site signs can be outside of the 70 I don't think that this is legal right here saying you can't put signs outside of the 75 ft line because the police report says otherwise. So I'd like some legal clarification here. Yes. Um, if I could respond to this, um, Miss Zimmerman, the, uh, the language that's in here is actually from the statute and
018the attorney general's guidelines. Uh, so normal polling places, the 75 ft limit applies, but on school property, the school is not supposed to have political activity on school property like that. Um, so it it would be appropriate though it would be hard to administer uh it would be appropriate to have it off of the school property and outside the boundaries out to the side of the sidewalk or whatever. Okay. But the sidewalk is not school property. Correct. Generally, it's right after the sidewalk. The the buffer zone between the sidewalk and street is usually the edge. You know, it could depend on that particular what particular site has the actual um boundaries, but um the general rule we follow the sidewalk to the to the street is the public space. Okay. And so you're saying that
019not having not allowing political signs on election day when a site is a polling place is in statute. That's in the attorney general guidelines interpreting ARS 15511. Are you able to send me those? Sure. Okay. Mr. Dangerfield, that's in the agency handbook, correct? Pardon? Is that is that in the agency handbook that talks about? No, there's a there's a in the statute it directs the attorney general to develop guidelines for this for this statute about the use of political material on use of school resources for influencing the outcome of election and they're directed to create these guidelines and that's what I'm referring to and I can send all the board members a copy of these guidelines. Okay, that' be great. Thank you, Mr. President, if I may. You may uh Mr. Dangerfield, are you referring
020to the 2004 attorney general's um yeah, their their opinion on this? Yeah, that is correct. Okay, cuz I do have that in front of me. Um and part of where it starts, they give guidelines, but they specifically lay out individual schoolboard policies may be stricter than these guidelines and school board policies are not supplement uh supplanted by these guidelines. So, just throwing that out there because I know we're going to have more conversation on this here in a little bit um as we progress in this policy. Yes, that's what I'm referring to is those guidelines. So, Mr. Dangerfield, can I ask a question really quick? Uh board vice president Kenyon has this pulled up on his computer. Would it be okay for him to email that to the board members so we can all read
021it as we're doing this or can we send it to you and then have you send it out so we're in the meeting we can we can review this and discuss it. Uh Mr. President, I apologize. I do not have it on my screen. I printed it out. Oh, you printed it. Sorry. Yeah. Okay. Can I ask a question to Mr. Dangerfield? You may. Okay. So, in regards to Mr. Kenyon um that the attorney general's language says that the schoolboard policy can be stricter but law enforcement isn't enforcing schoolboard policy. Correct. That is correct. Thank you. So maybe I can suggest something for the board to consider and that is not using school property for elections. I don't know how many school sites you use. Are all of them being used as election polling places?
022No. No. Which one? Which ones? Usually the district office, but um this Westar has been one in the past. Estraa has been one in the past. When I was at Gilbert schools, we stopped doing it at the schools because it was disruptive to the uh educational environment. Um and it was a safety concern too about people having access to the campus so easily during that polling day. The school board um the school again, excuse me, the school office, the district office is not wouldn't have that particular infringement or that problem, but it's still school property. So my only concern is how do you enforce this? someone's going to have to really monitor it carefully uh to to because all the uh people the people that are involved in elections they're familiar with the 75 ft
023rule. They aren't necessarily going to be familiar with the off the school property rule. Well, and I think we also need to consider the state statute that says it's illegal to remove political signs. So, if district staff is doing that, then they're breaking the law. It's illegal to move political remove political signs if they're placed legally. Correct. And so they if they're not placed legally, then the um governmental entity, the city usually quite often has a sign code group that will take care of that issue. But when it's your own property, school district property, it wouldn't be a violation of the law to remove it to the outside of the school property. Right. I know in the city of Goodyear they have no sign zones and if you're in one of those the city does
024remove them and disposes of them after a short time if you don't claim it. So they do also move political signs. But again that's this ultimately although public property is our property and if the law allows it to not be on the property then the school district removing it would be within the guidance of the law because they're not allowed on the property is what I'm hearing you say. Correct. That is correct. That's what I'm saying. Okay. All right, Miss Zimmerman, any other questions on um page 45? I This policy um is about visitors. Um and I I just if you could help me recall, Miss Casanos, is there a policy about volunteers and how that is handled different than visitors? I'm putting you on the spot. I apologize. I do not remember seeing something
025that was separate for volunteers. However, that's not saying it doesn't exist. I would have I need to look through all of the policies to see. Okay. I I think that this is okay for visitors, but I think there probably needs to be a policy about volunteers and and and I don't know if that's a procedure um in terms of how the district, you know, handles that. The only other thing I have um here is um the first line, the superintendent may establish controls and procedures. I just think the word should be shall like he he or she should do that. Okay. So, are you asking for any changes to page 45? Just the may to shell. Okay. And then so this class classroom visits by parents legal guardians is fine. Mhm. Okay. Can I jump
026in? Yes, please. We do have a procedure. I mean, we could have a policy as well, but we do have a volunteer procedure where they have to come to district office. There's paperwork they have to fill out. So, we don't have a policy, but we do have a procedure. And I think there might be a volunteer policy in chapter 5, but I'm not positive. Like, I can't picture it. I've looked at that so many times. There was a lot of talk about volunteers in chapter 5. I'm just not sure exactly what it was. Yeah. So, I will look for the volunteer policy, but we do have a procedure um that's set. Um I'm on page 71 now. Um, this is talking about FOYA's Freedom of Information Act. And in the middle of the page, the
027district shall respond to all requests within a reasonable amount of time. I think it would be great if we could define this. What is reasonable? So, um, I will comment on this a little bit by having worked in news organizations, filing a lot of public records requests. The courts themselves have never been able to define this, what a reasonable period is. in the handbook of open meeting or I'm sorry in public records requests. It gives lots of caveats about what time can be. If you're short staffed, if you're uh at crunch time at the end of a quarter, uh grading time, graduation time, those are all factors that that they have deemed reasonable to uh take a process. Also, you have a a case load of your employees even if you're fully staffed. So if
028we have to have legal review on this um which they should be to ensure that nothing is uh released that should not be such as a attorney client privileged information uh the redaction process depending on the the request it can take a long time but I know the courts have never really been able to define what a reasonable period is. I've seen some take many many months um and some come back rather quickly and it it doesn't seem to matter if it's a big agency or a small agency. It just seems to be the way the review process is. But I I'm cautious to try to define this because I think it's it's an unknown and that's exactly why the law has has been written vaguely. Mr. Dangerfield, do you have any thoughts? Yes, I
029do. Thank you, President Todd. Um the you are absolutely right that it isn't defined on purpose because um it's so hard to determine all the factors that are involved in it. But just a general rule, I would say a general rule is just like a 30-day period, but it can be changed significantly based on the facts involved. So the courts are the ones that would define it and would decide if you're outside that there is an action that can be brought by someone that is waiting for their uh public records. Action could be brought in superior court and the um governmental entity uh can be forced to produce it and also be fined for having violated a reasonable time. But they decide whether it's reasonable or not based on the facts. I understand. I mean,
030I know that what the law says as well. Um and so you know if we I understand that we probably can't totally define it but if we had you know the district uh uh not shall but you know we'll attempt to fulfill it within 30 days you know something but that's up to the rest of the board. Mr. President Mayor I'm okay with it how it's written. I think it uh it makes sense. Okay. Thank you, Miss Zimmerman. Next, uh item uh page 72. [Music] Um it's talking about uh public records requests on personal devices. Uh my question is, you know, for the district and uh potentially legal, is there a procedure now on how this would be done or Is is someone waiting for me to respond to that? Yes. I'm not aware of
031anything that's out there right now. Um I Stephanie, are you familiar with anything? I am not as well. No, this is another one that's really really hard to define. Um, and when it's personal devices, you're also talking about personal civil rights issues. So, um, though you can re it can be requested and in a legal situation, in fact, it can be, um, court ordered that someone produce their text messages. Um, just for your information, I have been involved in one of these cases before that was very public a number of years ago. And um, it was in newspaper articles here locally. And uh, the thing that we learned is the text messages are saved by the the phone company and you can actually get a record of the written text messages. And I reviewed months
032of a government uh elected official that had kept and claimed that they hadn't used that their cell phone for any government information that it was all personal. And I was asked and given the task to review probably a year's worth of text messages of this individual. And he was right. He hadn't used it for any government service, but in fact he he had to divulge the information and we were able to get it through his cell phone company. Okay. Um move on to 73. It's uh it's new trust language about technology and it at the bottom of 73 at halfway through that last paragraph it says anyone who misuses, abuses or chooses not to follow the technology guidelines and procedures may be denied access to the district technology. My concern is if we put something
033in policy then we need to be able to follow through. But can we truly deny students access to technology or the district's technology when they are reliant on it dayto-day to access curriculum and be able to do their schoolwork? So on well Mr. Dangerfield I'm sorry would you tell what are we looking at 3-43? It's 3-43 under appropriate use of technology on page 73. It would be the second to last line. The second to last line. Anyone who misuses, is that what you're talking about? Anyone who misuses, abuses, or chooses not to follow the technology guidelines or procedures may be denied access to district's technology and may be subject to disciplinary and or legal action. This is um and this is it with students regarding students and staff. I think it's both. Uhhuh. Yeah. So,
034this is for discipline. This is to allow the district to take discipline either with an employee or with a student. No, I understand. I I see that. But, and I'm fine with that part. It's the part that we're denying access to district technology. And I'm just giving the example of our of our sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students who are onetoone on a Chromebook who use it every single day to access curriculum that is online. How are if we remove this, if we keep this policy, we need to be able to enforce it. And so, how are they going to access education if they're not able to use district technology? That's a good question, m Miss Zimmerman. Um, and I have had a personal experience with this from uh in my role um as an
035attorney dealing with uh student discipline, serious student discipline and a student that had gotten involved with inappropriate use of technology was only allowed to use the district's access at the school site with some supervision. So uh that's how they did implement this type of a rule is they were not allowed to use the material at home and there was always supervision. So that's the way they did it, that district did. And I have I have experience with this as well. And anything they need to do at home, the teachers would print out anything they needed to do at home for them and give them paper copies so they could still have access to what they needed. Okay. Uh page 77, the line after number three is when student shall be permitted to use wireless communications.
036And it lists specific reasons. And then I just think the reason right after three should just be number four district protocol um you know regarding the use of wireless communication to allow for student and parental legal guardian communication. So we're the first three are saying, you know, here's how they why they can use their cell phone essentially. And I think just moving that. So that's one of the reasons to communicate with their parents. Mr. President, mayor, you may. I'm a little confused what you're saying. You're saying they should be able to use their phones and to communicate with their parents? Yeah, it it says that we will allow that. So we're but the numbers one, two, and three are reasons why they are allowed, you know, reasons they should be permitted to use their devices.
037I just think instead of having it separate, it should just be number four. That's all I'm saying. Students shall be permitted to use wireless communication device district protocol regarding what I got. I don't I don't understand this. Okay. So right under number um three district protocol regarding the use of wireless communication devices shall allow for student and parent/legal guardian communication. So my question is when does a student need to use their cell phone to talk to their parents when they couldn't talk to the teacher and use a landline? How did all of us who grew up without cell phones talk to our parents without cell phones? We have a state law that's come into effect that is trying to restrict this. I think one of the number one complaints we hear from teachers is students
038on their phones. So, if they need to speak, the only time I can see that they need to speak to their parents on a cell phone would be during an emergency. Aside from that, I don't see a time where they couldn't ask the teacher and do like we all did. Go up to the front office and call our parents and say, "Mom, I forgot my cleats for the baseball game. I forgot lunch. Forgot to tell you my homework is sitting in the washer." Whatever the case might be. But I don't know why they would ever need to use their phone to call their to call home when we have the access to use landlines to do that. And this just becomes a slippery slope as a whole. that now students are always going to be
039calling their parents. We actually had this happen here in this district a couple of years ago where one particular parent at the Liberty District was just showing up at the front office. I'm I'm here to pick up my student and what are you talking about? Oh, she called me and said, "Come pick her up. She didn't feel well and she was using it from her Apple Watch." Um, and the parent even argued that your policy says you can't use cell phones, but it says nothing about a watch. we quickly change that policy um wording there. But again, we shouldn't just have students deciding they don't feel well or want to go home or whatever and just randomly picking up a phone to call that when they can do it the way most of us, at
040least those of us with gray hair, uh did it um and go to the front office, make the phone call. I I don't think that's a problem if somebody's sick, somebody forgot their homework, forgot their cleats. Um, when my daughter was at school here for many years till she was old enough, she didn't have a cell phone and if she forgot something, she called right from the teacher's desk phone with the teacher there to make sure the phone call was appropriate and was taken care of. Uh, the other thing that I think this helps a lot is if we have any custodial situations or that nature, students don't always understand and they may be getting text messages from a parent that the courts have deemed shouldn't be taking place. Um, it's hard for a for
041a school district to always monitor that if they're just on their cell phone. So, I would actually just like to see it stricken and say that if they need to contact anybody via phone, unless it's during a true emergency, a school declared emergency, I might tighten that up because if you just forgot your medicine, just tell your parent you forgot or tell your teacher you forgot your medicine and call home and get it from a landline. Um, and we just strike that from the from the from the record and messages can come to the front office just like they did for hundreds of years. Mr. President, if I may, you may. Um, I agree 100%. Um, this is something that's been brought up to me time and time again. Um, and I think that it
042really needs to be reeled in. Uh along with what you're stating, I would I would also state just during an emergency um because this is one of the things that we've been dealing with and it's becoming more and more prevalent in our generation in this in this time period where there's so much electronic communication and and it's a distraction for the kids. We're hearing that from the teachers that they can't teach because the kids are distracted by the devices. um and limiting that. Going back to exactly what you said, not to reiterate everything, but I mean I have a daughter who's currently enrolled in our in our district and she doesn't have a cell phone and whenever she needs to, she goes either to the front office or her teacher's desk with the permission of
043staff and calls her dad and lets me know what's going on, what she forgot, what's going on. Um so that I would be in agreement with this. Um I think in our ABA um ASBA policy it said something about uh they're not permitted in the classroom unless um approved by the the teacher or something. But even that I I I really just would like to keep this wireless communication devices only used during an emergencies. I we will need to check on the legality of that because this was in direct response to House Bill 2484 that was just passed. Okay. Um, so I just need to check the legality of it. I'm sure it's fine. Um, but I want to make sure that we'll check with legal. Can I add something? Yes. Um, you know, first
044I think that we need to keep uh if they need the wireless device for their own medical condition for kids that um have type one and they're, you know, checking their blood sugar. often time it's I believe can be on their cell phone or something like that. But I also think that we kids are going to have cell phones. I don't think that we can get around that. And so causing them to go up to the front office all the time. I think a simple text to your kid like hey pick up your little brother like I'm not going to make it home. I don't to have to call the school then the school has to call the class to interrupt the teacher. I think we already have in the student code of conduct or
045handbook that you know the cell phones seem to be kept off and and you know in their backpacks and things like that. But I think saying that parents and their child can't communicate. I'm not comfortable doing that. I don't think we're saying they can't communicate. I think they're saying they need to communicate through the office. The trick is is you might know at noon that you're not going to be there to pick up your child and and somebody needs to pick up their little brother and walk him home. If they get that message at noon or they get that message 10 minutes before school's out, that's less disruption if it goes to the main campet to the main phone at the district office who can then send an email or a message to the classroom
046at the end of the day versus having the class getting text messages from their parents all day because then it's going to lead to another question. Well, mom, I wanted to go to my friend's house. Why do I have to pick up little Johnny instead? And now we have a back and forth. It's much easier just as we all did for many, many years. Goes right through the front office. And I'm I'm going to stand pretty firm on that idea. We're not we're not stopping any commun important communication to the student. Um we definitely are not stopping anything if a child is diabetic or or something and has a medical, you know, they have devices for diabetes that report to the phone. We're not stopping any of that. We're stopping all the disruptions that happen.
047Just imagine 26, 27, 28 kids in a classroom and the phone's going off all day. Mom and dad both think there's an emergency. So they both send messages. Neither one may be an emergency. If it goes to the front office, they can feel that call and at an appropriate time let the teacher know. Maybe it's just an email, but that email comes into the teacher every day before classes out. Teacher can make sure they've cleared their inbox. They have all those messages. They've passed those on to the students. If it's urgent, then certainly somebody from the front staff can need that emergent. They can walk down to the classroom and and deliver a message to the student right away. I'm guessing if it's that emergent, they're probably going to be checking them out of school
048anyway. But it's not an isolated event of just one student once in a while. It's somewhere between 25 and and 30 students that could all be getting text messages throughout the day. And it just is always a response back. I know anytime I would text my teenage daughter, there was two options. You either got a whole bunch of questions back or it was radio silence depending on the mood of the day. But um and I love her to death, but she will agree if she's watching this that that's kind of how that is. Um to this day, you'll message some people. Some answer right back, some don't. But how do we even know if it's something critical that the student got their message if it's a text? If it's to pick up your little brother
049and walk them home and let's face it, students are forgetful and that phone is at home. Now the message just delivered. Don't know if they got it. But if it's a direct verbal humanto human contact message conversation, then you know that that message has been delivered and we don't leave a smaller sibling behind because we thought the text message was delivered and it wasn't. So, I did find in our parent student handbook, it does say the cell phone must remain in the students backpack and switched off at all times during the school day, including lunch, recess, special classes, and while being transported by bus. That's what it say. Sorry. So, that further solidifies if you send your student a message during the day, they they're not going to get it until the school's off and
050they're on their way home. So then they've left their in this example, they've left their little brother or sister behind because they didn't get the text message because the phone was off and in their bag. That's what it's supposed to be. That's what it says in our handbook. But it's that's what it says in our handbook. We all know what teenagers are actually like and what happens in the classroom. Which is exactly why I think we need to have this policy because it will eliminate that and we can take action to not disrupt the rest of the classroom because we know the older kids probably are not following it. In this case before with the watch, it was a first or second grader that was on their phone constantly and there was a time where
051the teacher reached out and said, "Mom's been to the school four times today because four separate messages have been sent home saying the student forgot something or needed something." Um, that's a lot of disruption. Mr. President, if I may, you may. This also the whole phone issue comes into play with um our children's education. I mean that's I think what you're getting at is Mr. President is um the disruption in the class where now the not just one kid who's answering a text isn't paying attention but it's a distraction to the class when it's multiple. We're seeing, you know, Arizona is one of those states that, you know, we're not very proud that our proficiency scores, our test scores aren't the best in the nation. We're some of the lowest in the nation. We want
052that. We want to get that up. Um, and we're being told by staff, by teachers that this is a big problem of communication devices in the classroom. It's a distraction. Um, and so to help our children, we need to I think we need to basically say they cannot use this. And I know like Dr. Mohorn, you said it's in the handbook. They shouldn't be using it even on the buses. It says, but we know they are. So, you know, having it in the policy and then as board member Zimmerman said, we need to be able to follow through and hold these kids and families to these policies. Um, and so I think it's critical for the learning environment that we're giving these kids because I mean, you think about the kids that don't have these
053electronic devices, it's a distraction for them when their friends are all getting messages. Uh, when the teacher's distracted because of everything that's going on and, you know, maybe Johnny has a nice cool new brand new iPhone and, you know, not show supposed to be showing it off, but it's a distraction. It's all a distraction. and it takes away from the learning environment. Um, and so that's that's what I want to focus on is is helping these kids become more proficient, learn better, be better at um, and and I want to say something about AI. I know we're not quite there yet. It's the next next paragraphs. Um, but I'll I'll reserve that till we get there. But it's one of those things. We're just helping our kids succeed rather than just allowing the distractions to
054continue. And and we know that this plays over into discipline. This plays over into uh respect for the teachers and to the other kids that are in the classroom. And the problem isn't a one-time issue. It's that this is this has been abused for so long. Um not just in our district, obviously. It's mostly abused in the high schools for sure. I got two high schoolers myself and uh dealing with that. But in elementary and middle school, this is something we shouldn't allow to be in a distraction in our classrooms. So that's where I'm at. President, may I Hey, just real quick, I don't want to keep being this dead horse, but I don't think we should ever make a policy um one way or another just because we think the kids are going to
055do it anyway. I think that's a bad uh bad thing for us to habit to get us into. Yeah, they might use their phone and we know they're teenagers, but I don't think we should make our policy around knowing a kid's going to break a rule or not. We still should make it enforce it how we think they should be doing, not what they're going to be doing. Okay, Miss Zimmerman, your next uh note uh it's on page 78. It's talking about AI number four. Um these are instances in which um the teachers have the discretion to authorize students to use AI tools basically. So number four says writing assistance. Uh AI/NLP tools can provide grammar and spelling corrections as well as suggest alternative word choices and sentence structure to help students improve their writing.
056I think when you allow them to help with sentence structure, you're you're you're going into a very fine line of plagiarism. And so I'd like to see us remove um sentence structure. [Music] Um and I think I know what they're saying to help students improve their writing skills, but to me if you don't read that correctly, it's suggest in my mind suggesting that AI is helping them improve their writing. And I feel like the teacher should be doing that and not AI. So, um I'm almost at at the very least I'd like to see us cross out sentence structure um and improve their writing skills, but I'd also be okay removing number four as well. Mr. President, you may I know AI is a slippery slope. I get that. Um I'm okay with this only
057because it says the teachers have the discretion authorized. So, the student can't just go do it. It still puts it back on the teacher to let the students know what program they can and how far they can use that program to affect what they're doing. Vice President, can you have any thoughts? Yeah, thank you. Um, you know, first of all, I'm I'm glad that the whole majority of this whole AI section is basically saying that students can't use AI for work. The we're talking about the exceptions. Um, and so I wanted to point out to the community because this is something that's been brought up to me about how computers are doing the thinking for our kids and our kids aren't learning. They're not gaining the skills that they need. Um, pretty much going to
058Miss Zimmerman's point is a, you know, these kids, they need to learn these skills without the assistance. I understand AI is a a great thing as a secondary thing to help you with, right? Um and for adults it's a gamecher in a lot of things but for kids that are in the elementary schools who are developing they're learning uh their skills we I don't think AI really should be allowed hardly at all um but for very specific few exceptions which which are laid out here the five exceptions um and so in regards to this. I am okay with it just because as board member Sereni said the teachers have the discretion to authorize the students to use the following. Now I want to make it very clear if the teacher doesn't authorize it, it is
059not allowed and this should be very unique situations where it is okay. Um because again I think we're stealing those those possible skills these kids could be learning by just substituting with AI with with the computer program. So um as I read through this I think these five are okay as they are members I might uh also provide an alternate idea. I understand both sides and I certainly do agree with with Miss Zimmerman that we let's face it our our people today are having a hard time writing. We once upon a time had cursive in the classroom that went away for years. Now we've gone to technology. Printing is starting to go away. I look at the way some children write and that reminds me of how kindergarters used to write. So, I'm concerned that
060we're losing some skills. And I I definitely understand um what Miss Zimmerman is saying. I I think maybe we word this a little differently uh and maybe even restrict this um to lower grades where they need to form sentence structure. So, maybe we only allow AI to assist with sentence structure in seventh and eighth grade. And until then, you you kind of need to understand the sentence, how to structure a sentence before you rely on AI to do it for you. Um, because I I feel like these days students are very smart and they take the path of least resistance. So, I'll slam down a really poor sentence, not really care about it, and then I'm going to use this policy of AI to say, "Clean this up for me." So, I do I understand
061what both of you are say, what both sides are kind of saying here. Um, I'm wondering if we can limit that to seventh and eighth grade or something upper level where they first have a clear understanding of sentence structure and then perhaps we build some instruction because again AI is the way of the future. Students need to understand it. But I would like to see them understand how first of all how to structure a sentence on their own and then down the road start learning how AI can help them refine refine it. And I think maybe if we if we limit it I don't know Miss if you think that would be somewhat of a compromise or help out or if I'm if I'm being clear on what I'm trying to explain with this. I
062do understand, but I'm not sure that younger grades are going to be using AI and personally I think the junior high kids are the ones that I worry about. Um, so but again, it's the will of the board. Can I offer some considerations here? You may. The Department of Education for the state of Arizona is currently using AI as tutoring programs for students who are deficient in reading and in sentence structure writing ELA skills. So they offer these free programs to students across the state. Um, so I'm not sure if that if actually removing this writing assistance would remove the ability of our students to be able to be tutored by these AI programs and the NLP models. Mr. President, may I you may uh the term AI is like very broad also. So if
063I'm not mistaken, when you're using Microsoft Word for instance and you're writing it and it tells you use different punctuation, technically that's AI. So if we go out and say no AI, then we're really limiting what they're doing. For sit in structure, if it says if you get that blue line under Microsoft Word, I'm pretty sure that's AI telling you to move that somewhere else. So I'm just saying we just got to be careful cuz if we just say no AI for sentence structure now, we got to make sure like they format their word usage to make sure they're not using automatic spell check, all kinds of stuff like that. members, what if we just consider um AI is so fresh still and we're learning. I mean, everybody's learning it. It's changing leaps and bounds.
064Every time you check in chat GPT, it does something more. Um maybe we need to study accept this as it is now and then study AI a little bit more and and come back. we can approve this perhaps um and then come back with a a tighter AI policy that I can see AI becoming a policy of its own um sooner than later. I know the other thing that's happening with AI now. They talked about this at a schoolboard conference a year or two ago is now bumpers because AI is actually creating its own facts that aren't facts and it's referencing things that are now false. So that's the next wave of AI already is AI will create its own I don't know what you call them false facts. uh I I don't know what
065that would be, but it's it's sourcing itself. So, I think we're going to have to learn as a whole uh and maybe even engage our IT department to to make some suggestions on on this, but I think everybody has good points and it's probably all on the same page really. It's just a matter of how we word it appropriately. Well, as a reminder, the trust will update again in August or September of every year. So, they will send updated policies. So that may be a time to review this policy as well and give you a couple of months. Sure. Okay. Miss, what's your next uh on page 80? Um this I think it was sorry I think it was removed because of you know the new language from the trust. But this uh D section
066is what I'm concerned about removing. Um I think it's one of those things um a responsibility of the superintendent. Um, I had mentioned before in chapter 1 about it didn't define all of those responsibilities, but I found them more as I went through different policies and I think this is one um, and just the protection of our data and security. I feel like we need this in policy. So, I'm just referring to section D on page 80. Miss Castianos, do you know why it was Did the trust remove it? Yeah. So, it the entire policy was removed um and replaced with the policy above. So this is that whole section was removed and replaced with the policy that was above, but it doesn't cover any of this now. Mr. President, if I may. So, I
067think I think it's the uh it's page 75 starts this terms and conditions and then as you go down there's the bullet points and I think those are the the new language that replaces the previous stuff. um you know accessing or downloading VPNs or other uh proxy avoiding extensions you know that this is I believe what um the trust has replaced it with is that accurate yes starts it's 3-403 this is the this is more about students though um the new policy page 70 or I I assume it's mainly page 76 right Mr. Kenyon. Okay. With the bullet points. Um, and this is about students, but this is about like the protection of our data and um how we protect our data as a district. So, I just I don't think they're similar enough in
068my opinion. I do have to agree with you. Um, and I don't mean that in in any bad way. I I see what you're saying and I do think it's important that we're providing this to me looks like it's more providing staff with training on protecting data um more so than the students. I'm not sure if it would be the superintendent or I guess we could say the director of IT shall implement maintain data management. They're probably going to be more versed in that than the superintendent, but I can see that uh I can see that here. So, are we agreeing to add in section D23-403? I moment please. President Todd, you may. And that that's a very important section that um Miss Zimmer Zimmerman is pointing out and I think it's got to be
069replaced in one of the other chapters. I think there the trust must have moved that to another spot because it is important information that should be in policy. Um do you know Amy if there it is has it gone some other place in the in the manual? I think maybe we need to do some research on that because that that there that is important language. Yeah, we'll need to do some more research on that because like I said the um updates or were just added in on Monday. So, we'll need to do some more research and um I can bring it back to you. Okay, Miss Zimmerman, you're next. Uh page 88 um number four uh it's talking about pro or con statements for a bond um and it says the governing board may not
070submit a pro statement and the governing board has always submitted a pro statement. So is this new statute Mr. Dangerfield? Oh, sorry. Um, I'm not familiar with the new statute on that. This is the governing board makes a um statement in the handbook in the man, excuse me, the pamphlet, the voter pamphlet for a bond that is already a prostatement. So, what they're saying is that the governing board doesn't do a different one. It's that there is a statement that the governing board has to a resolution or devel a statement promoting what they're asking the voters to approve. Um that's separate from a pro statement that goes in that there's a 500word limit I believe it is that the community is asked to either do a pro or con. They allow up to 10 statements
071to be submitted something like that. But that's different than the governing board statement to the public to the voting public that is authorized and approved in actually do it in a governing board meeting. Okay. The bond usually from my memory is unlimited pro and con and it's the override that only allows 10 each way. [Music] Um, is it statute that the government the governing board may not submit a pro statement? I do not know the answer to that right now. I'll have to look at it. Okay. I do think we are essentially submitting a prostatement and so I would suggest that we just remove that sentence because I think it is confusing to the public because I essentially we you know I haven't been involved in it since 2019 the actual bond part of it
072and but [Music] um that would be my comment. Mr. Dr. Dangerfield, is this basically saying that we can't submit two? The district is going to submit a pro statement, but then the board can't come back and submit a second one. The district can't the district cannot submit a pro statement. I don't think so either. Yeah, I'm a little confused by this language. That's the Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. I I do agree. We're going to have to look at this. Okay. Okay. on page 91 uh number two um I just want to remove the word governing board members from the statement because in the situations in which we're not allowed or anybody the district acting on behalf of the district are not allowed to you know display apparel or influence the outcome of an
073election in a classroom an instructional setting or at a school sponsored extracurricular we are extracurricular event where they are supervising or assisting with supervision. The governing board is not doing any of those things. So, I just don't think it should be listed because we are not participating. We are not in an in a classroom in an instructional setting um at and we're not um supervising a school sponsored event. Mr. President, may I um but we would be in a classroom. We could be possibly in the classroom like if we go on tours. Um if I could interrupt for just a moment please. Um you may miss um Mr. Todd. Um that is language right out of the attorney general's guidelines. Again I'm looking at it. It's on page 11 of the attorney guidelines. It says
074board members, personnel, and others acting on behalf of the school district shall not wear political buttons, t-shirts, hats, or other items displayed on their persons or apparel that are designed to influence the outcome of an election in a classroom, in other instructional setting, or at a school sponsored extracurricular event. Okay. at which they vising or assisting with supervision organization of extracurricular event. I think the question the reason the governing board is in there is when you're there as an in your official capacity as the governing board like for example a governing board meeting. When you are there as the governing board member um you're restricted from doing that political activity. Okay. And again, I would just ask that you send us all, you know, that um so we just I can reference it for other
075things. I'm gonna send it I actually I'm going to send it to Minnie and let her distribute to the board. Okay. Okay. Mr. President, if I may, you may. Um Mr. Dangerfield, I have uh emailed you, Miss Camarada, and President Todd the link to that. Um, you guys are more than welcome to share that if if you want. Um, I was didn't want to email it to everybody just because I wanted to be careful with open meeting law. Right. Right. Um, with that being said, it looks like most of this trust policy is derives directly from that opinion. And so, uh, even the following up further down questions that the board would have, I would reference the board to this opinion, uh, by the AG. Mr. Dangerfield, if there's any reason that Miss Camarada can't
076just put this into a Google Drive, it's good reference at any point for the board. Um, would that be acceptable for her to do? Absolutely. Okay. Can you do that? Thank you. All right, your next one, Miss Zimmerman. Okay. Um, so in 92 and 93, um, you know, I know that we're all going to have a discussion about this, which is fine. Um, you know, and I think, you know, the situation that we got into is that we, you know, my concern here is that it put the district in a difficult position. I said this back in I think December is that if the way that it's written allowing signatures to be collected on school property at an extracurricular event seemed concerning and it wasn't the way our original policy was written. So I think
077we just need to be clear in the expectation because now there's been two different legal opinions that have been given to different people and so I think we just need the clarity of which legal opinion If I could just insert this is still that same language I from the guidelines from general's office. Mr. President, you may um I would agree with board member Zimmerman in in regards to this becoming an issue where it does put um some liability I would say on the district, some hardship in trying to figure out certain things. There's a number of things in this opinion that make me want to refer back to the beginning of it where I started where it states individual schoolboard policies may be stricter than these guidelines. Schoolboard policies are not supplanted uh by these
078guidelines. Um this is one of those areas where I know we have to make sure legally we're okay doing it, but I'm okay saying no. No, I I think Miss Zimmerman's uh talking about number six right there, petition circulation. Yes. Um I I really don't think it should be done on school grounds at all, district property at all. Um I know in the AG's opinion, it does say um right there we have it up on the screen. Uh number six, I'm going to go right to the bullet points just above the bullet points. does not prohibit individual employees from voluntarily exercising the rights to circulate petitions in their personal capacities on non-duty time. So that's outside the classroom, outside any instructional setting, or at a school sponsored extracurricular event as long as they are not
079supervising or assisting with supervision or organization of the extracurricular event. So um that in itself is basically kind of giving permission. The problem I have is if we go back um and this is going to be sorry I'm gonna find it real quick on page seven of this that we're looking at the terminology is can we pull this up so that we can see it what you're looking at. Oh I'm sorry. No it's okay. Or can you email it to us real fast? I apologize. sent it. Oh, Minnie was going to make it um available. Can you put that in a shared drive really quick for all the board members to see the document? Actually, Mr. Dangerfield, can I just email it to everybody really quick? Will that be okay? Yes, that's fine. Okay. Okay.
080Yeah, go ahead. You got it. You can just send it to every every board member. I'll kind of wait till we're ready. Mr. Dr. Dangerfield, I I know we uh spoke about this previously as well and you had recommended that Miss Seagull is the expert on this and she gave us very clear advice and and actually was part of writing the the AG's opinion on this. So I think uh it would be wise for us to follow her lead on uh on this. Not not questioning you, but she did have a very active role in this and I believe your recommendation was to follow her follow her as well. has great experience in this area. She is uh she was on the committee that drafted drafted these guidelines. Right. So are you suggesting to remove
081uh the third bullet? I am suggesting Well, I guess let me let me continue with my my conversation or what I was talking about. Um, I don't know if we're ready to if you guys have received that email yet. I'll make sure that everybody follows along or else we'll all get off on site track. Vice President, Kenny, can you just tell us the page that you're on to? Yeah, page seven on um It's going to be on the AG's opinion though. It's not in the trust policy. Yeah, it's in the document that's being emailed. Okay. What I might suggest we do is just yield to Miss Seagull on this and ask her to provide you some language that's within She is truly the expert on this section of the law. um having been on the
082committee that wrote it, she understands the dialogue that took place amongst the committee. So maybe we just follow up with her and get get definition on that because ultimately I think we need to follow her follow her advice. I would be okay with that. I just want to make a a point though. um with this on on page seven if we've gotten that um at the bottom of the page under terminology uses or used. So the terminology for person acting on behalf of or aids a person acting on behalf of and it says a school district or charter school may um means that the person is acting with the express or implied consent or um a son of the school district or charter school or is an aiding and such person. the problem the the
083the gray area I guess is the implied consent. So when you have uh staff, let's say at a baseball game walking around with a petition and she says I'm a teacher or somebody runs up to her and says you know hey you know miss whatever um or teacher teacher that you know could be implied consent. I mean, when you're looking at they're acting on behalf of the district, uh because we know staff carry some weight um behind what what they are trying to get across. And so, in my eyes, that could be a very gray area. And so to be safe, I do think it's best if we can limit um or restrict any kind of um anything that has to do with elections on district property, any any way it goes. Um and so
084it's one of those things where it's just it's a I agree with board member Zimmerman. It can it can get us in a lot of messes if it's not very cut and dry and spelled out. Um, and that's my concern. And honestly, I, you know, when I first read this back in December, I was very surprised to see it in here like this because it's not what we currently have. So, I just want us to be consistent. So I will defer to Miss Seagull um and then bring you all back additional language. Thank you Miss Zimmerman. Next I think page 93 uh it's all related so I'm good. Thank you. All right. All right. Members, anybody else uh um have anything really quick through there? I do real quick. Um and this is going back
085to that page 93 where we talk about private vehicles. One thing I would like to add that wasn't in the trust policy, but it is actually in the opinion. [Applause] Um, oops. What I do with it? I got it somewhere, but um I have it written down here. I would like to add so when it's talking about uh vehicles Mhm. and it talks about um you know people allowing putting putting signs and and bumper stickers and things on their vehicles. How that is permitted on somebody's vehicle even if they're staff as long as they're coming to um a district event or they work there, they park there. But there was a section that talks about uh let's see here. The school may not permit um the school parking lot to be used as a permanent
086parking for a vehicle displaying a candidates's campaign sign in the lot when the owner of the vehicle is not visiting the school for for school business or other permitted activities at the school. Um, I think that's really important that we have that language in there because we Where are you finding that language? I'm sorry. Um, I will have to find exactly where that was because that I that that's in the attorney general's No, I see where it is here where where it can be inserted. But is that in the attorney general's report? Yes, it is actually on page 10 number three. And so I took that language directly out of that. So Okay. Um, yeah, if we can add that because I'm just I can see where that can be abused. Somebody could just park
087their car there for a week and just have political signs on their car. So, thank you. Any other questions or um considerations for chapter 3? speak now or forever hold your peace. They say well forever is appropriate but at least for the moment. All right. Hey, I think that'll end our chapter 3 discussion. I will go ahead and get these revisions done um and then sent back to you um for approval at a later date. Thank you. All right, members. We'll move on to item 3.1, board comments on agenda topics and items for future consideration. Excuse me, President Todd. Yes, ma'am. It is an action item. Uh, yeah, I think we're not taking action because they got to come back for a third read. Okay. So, would you like for the motion to be coming
088back for a third read or No, I think it'll I think it'll just come back because we're not taking anything at this time. We're not really tableabling it. We're just not taking action, which is Okay. I'll note that in the meeting minutes. Yeah. Okay. Mr. Mr. Dangerfield, do you agree with that? Yes. Okay. All right. Now, we'll move. Thank you, Miss Camado, though, for keeping us honest. Uh, item 3.1, board comments on agenda topics and items for future consideration. Miss Zimmerman. I don't have any at this time. Vice President Kenyon? None at this time. Board member Stencion? No. Okay. Um, I just have two I'd like to uh bring forward. I'd like to for us along the lines in the attorney general's uh or in this the policies that we we spoke about here on
089vehicles. Um I do think we have some people who are parking their commercial vehicles in our lots on the weekends. Uh in speaking with the legal it's very important that we devise a no trespassing policy with some signs and also uh restrict the parking of vehicles when the school district is closed or when the school campuses are closed. So, I'd like to uh ask staff to put something together and bring that forward to us in a future future meeting. All right. Item 4.1 is upcoming board meetings. Members, we uh actually have an update as of today. We're going to have a meeting, an executive session on uh Monday, May 12th. Correct. Cameron, that's correct. Yeah. Monday, May 12th. That's going to be at 11 o'clock. It is strictly an executive session. We will do a
090we to do that. We'll open up a general meeting. We'll go directly into executive session. We'll come out of the executive session and there may or may not be one action item after that. Um and that's going to be at 11:00 with council. Uh yeah, it'll be the action item there. Um then we'll have the Tuesday, May 13th, uh there's a retire reception and a regular board meeting. Tuesday, May 19th will be a work study. Um, we have two on here for Saturday, May 24th and June 7th as work studies. Uh, that's been set aside for policy if we need to get into it. We have those. Is that that was the plan for those, right, Dr. Mahorn? The May 24th and June 7th are work study sessions if we need them for policy revision
091and adoption. Correct. Okay. Um, but we look like we're moving through here, so maybe we'll get done. Um, and then Tuesday, June 10th is a regular governing board meeting. Mr. Todd, can I ask a question? You may. Okay. So, are we just so for planning purposes, are we committing are we all committing to these Saturdays just so that we can plan or policy? I think that's the plan is those are the open dates that uh Miss Castianos has and the dates that are available. So, we need to plan for those if we have them. Correct. Yeah. Okay. and we're not adding um just because in the email we got there were some other weeks. I think we can accomplish them in these three, but I'm just wondering is is the plan to accomplish them in
092these three or do you think that we will be adding more? I hope we can get them done in these three. I think if we spend enough time on those Saturdays um after spending one, we may be even more encouraged to get through this. And uh obviously we want a thorough but uh um a thorough review, but I think I don't foresee that we'll need any more time than this. I'd like to have these adopted so there's plenty of time for staff to read them, become familiar with them before they technically go well, it won't be a technical be real. They'll go live on July 1st. I'd like to give everybody as much time as possible to review them, understand them, and pose any questions if there's any conflicts with what they're currently doing. I
093I can see that we will have some probably come back for review a little bit, but uh if we can get it done um and have them adopted by June 10th at the very latest, it ideal if we could do it sooner, then that gives staff some adequate time to review all the policies. Okay. Thank you, Mr. President. Mayor, you may uh what time are we talking about on Saturdays? I bounce I'm opposed to doing these on Saturdays. Well, we can break these Saturdays up into about eight weekdays if you would like to because instead of a 2-hour session, we're going to have to instead of a long day, we're going to have to break them up. So, if you have other days you'd like to propose, um, we can do that, but unfortunately, it's
094when you're doing this kind of work, it's pretty difficult. And we're also working with Miss Castiano schedule. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we've actually taken considerably longer than what was originally planned to get these uh adopted and done. So, her time is limited and this is basically the time she has available. Mr. President, if me, you may. Yeah. I think um I think what we did before, Miss Castiano, is if if that works for you um with uh the policy revisions that come out, if we're able to look at those and see um sorry, the trust uh cuz we have still have three. We've approved one and two tonight. We have three, four, and five. Mh. Uh to go through the reads. Um, and if we're able to get those, we can review those
095on our own time, email you with questions or or that way when we come to hopefully Monday, May 19th, we have a good idea. Um, and we can just quick hit these, we might not need the Saturdays, but I think it's it's good for us to just set those aside just in case. Um, I'm hoping that May 19th and possibly May 24th will be the two that we have to have. And then with that, June 7th being the the day that if we can get it all done before then, we we won't need that. So, yeah, with all hopes we would have May 19th, we would be approving chapter 3. We'll dive into chapter 4. Chapter 5, we're going to need a Saturday to get through it, and that's just the honesty of it. But
096my intent is I will have all legal opinions and questions answered from chapter 4 within the document that you have or that you get. So you will not be waiting for legal opinions. You won't be waiting for like questions that you had previously to be answered at all. Instead, you'll have all of those right into the document itself. And we shouldn't need to go over those questions again. Hopefully, your questions would have been answered sufficiently in that manner. um and you'll have everything up front, but the chapter 5 is a hefty chapter. Um and we are going to need some pretty consolidated time to go through it. So, um and to have those discussions. So, we'll need at least one Saturday. That's just or we'll need a 4hour block somewhere else. Okay, members, that doesn't
097sound like we have any more to talk about on 4.1. So, we'll move to 5.1. on the adjournment of the special meeting. We'll show it adjourned at 6:55. [Music]