Lisle 202 Board of Education Regular Board Meeting May 20, 2025

001Good evening. It is May 20th, 2025 at 7:36 p.m. and I would like to call to order the meeting of the Lyall Community Unit School District 202 Board of Education. Mrs. Sims, can we please have a roll call? Yes. Um, Miss Novasol, present. Miss Foster, present. Mr. Helderly, present. Mr. Naggler, present. Miss D. Dominico, present. Miss Sims is present. Miss Alman, present. Thank you. If we could please stand for the pledge of allegiance. 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 [Music] all. Item three is our mission statement. The Lyall 202 mission statement is to provide our learning community with the essential education, skills, and experiences for future success. So, keep those thoughts

002in mind as we meet this evening. Next is public comment. There are no members in the audience except for Mrs. Angler. Um, did we have anything uploaded? We have not. Okay. Thank you. Which brings us to our action items. Agenda item five. I did get a request to pull one of our agenda items and that is 5A4C that is the certified employment and um Mr. Dominico um I just wanted to share like first of all my concern is in no way about any particular candidate that's on that for hire list. Um I just I think the administration has absolutely picked the right people that they believe fit the roles that they're looking to fill. But I feel like I need to name a broader concern that I have around the fact that we will no

003longer have a full-time certified librarian at the high school um with this vote. And so I wanted to name that because I believe that librarians play a critical role um in developing high school students um literacy achievement, their civic engagement, their research skills, and the love of reading, which is just something that pays dividends for the rest of their lives. Um and so I just want to request um before making the vote that we include a discussion of full-time librarian at the high school in future board meetings and then after that discussion also review policy 6230 um which covers the libraries as well. Okay. Thank you. I would I think with that also if we could see the position description for the librarian because we have a library media specialist. I couldn't find the specific

004librarian one and and just so that we're aware we talked um I think it was last it was the March meeting I believe um spent considerable time on the in the coach position and we were looking for if we recall the famous line we were looking for Vinnie's cousin um but we we talked about that and that position Vinnie's position is an instructional technology coach so it's a bit different and um Dr. Philippiac said they'd be reviewing the instructional coach and the instructional technology coach positions descriptions and merging the two, I believe, is what uh you were going to have Dr. Catalik do. Yes, it it's at one point seem to be different roles, but they're really when you look at what Vinnie does, it's very much instructional coaching with a technology component. And with

005regards to the point for um Eric Martsoff, the principal said that he anticipated our new hire to assist students and teachers, help students find books for their research projects, recommend books, articles, websites, and other resources relevant to students and teachers needs and teach information literacy skills. Helping students learn how to find, evaluate, and use information effectively. Provide instruction on how to use online databases and resources. and teach students about ethical use of information and the importance of citing resources. And so about 40% of the individual's time will be spent on that. And if we find for some reason 40% of the time is not adequate, that's where we would expand the role. And then there is another individual who uh is an aid there. And so there is an extra set of hands. So this

006individual can do the things I've listed and not have to reshelf books, check out inventory, things of that nature. So at this point we feel like the 40% should be adequate based on the students schedules and we'll evaluate and if not then we can look to expand it. He's also going to be mentored by not only people within our organization or other two librarians but then also um we're hoping to connect him with a few other neighboring school districts who have librarians to make sure whatever model we use is probably hopefully best practice and he would have a group of people he could reach out to. And then in terms of the instructional coach, um Vinnie has already reached out to him and said, you know, let's start to get together. I want to share

007some of the things that I've seen and found success in and learned from each other because he does already have quite a bit of instructional coach experience. Good. Because I think it's that use of digital tools um both in in instruction and in activities that we were that is being su or has found success at the junior high that we'd like to see. So, okay. Any other questions on any of the consent items? Oh, Pam, you know what? I apologize. I didn't send this one in advance. Um, can I request to pull the meeting minutes? Um, I just noticed that I seconded something, but I was out of state. Oh, good, good point. And I am probably the one that And I was thinking of you guys. I was definitely thinking of you guys. Yeah,

008you were. But I noticed that I motioned to return to open session and that was my fault. So, I appreciate you. Yeah, I was thinking of y'all from afar. And then it there was a 70 vote for both of those, but I wasn't here. So I I think I I Yeah, I was the only one not here. So yeah, thank you. Thanks for catching that. Yeah, I'm sorry I missed you guys. Um but you know, as much as I would have liked to second from afar, I was not able to. So So with that, who does anybody want to claim that vote from K? We'll we'll look at the video. It's it's all available. And so what you approve tonight, you can know will be adjusted to have a 6 and we'll find out who

009first and second ated that. Thank you for bringing that to our time. Thanks Kate. Thanks. I caught that earlier. I apologize. I missed that. That's okay. Anything else? All right. With that, I will entertain a motion to approve action item 5A, consent agenda. 5A1, board meeting minutes. 5A2 payroll pay orders. 583 vendor pay orders 54 personnel 584A interim director of student services 5 A4B summer worker employment 54 Certified employment 5 A4D classified employment 5 A4E classified resignation A4F certified leave and 5 A4G extra duty resignation 5 A5 establishment of regular Meeting time, dates, and place. 56 school association for special education in DuPage board in alternate appointment resolution. 5A7 school treasurer appointment 588 shity bond of treasurer and 59 designation of school depositories. Could I have a motion uh to approve the consent agenda as

010a presented? So moved. Second. Okay, that would be okay. Thank you. Mr. Helderly I Miss Foster I Mr. Nagler I Miss Dita Menico I Miss Novascel I um Miss Sims is an I and Miss Alman I thank you. Okay, item six is our financial information. The board acknowledges receipt of the following reports. 6A, financial report, and 6B, treasury report. Did anyone have any questions on those? Okay, item seven is our discussion items. Um, and that is 7A, board policies, press 118, and I will turn that over to Mr. Helderly. The most anticipated part of the evening press. Uh, thank you everybody for getting all your feedback and questions in. Um, I believe the most current version is up on board books that has uh I think Linda had a few additional comments. She added on

011Saturday. So if you had looked at it since then give you all a moment to bring it [Applause] up. Everyone good? Everyone have the spreadsheet up from the side? Great. Um, since there's a number of these, I think our goal tonight is to get through the press packet and then save any guides and the AI stuff for a second a a future meeting, a near future meeting. So, that works for all. Okay, great. Um, so going there for um also to expite thing instead of I usually I just regurgitate regurgitate everything. So, I might just say does everybody read it? Everybody good? And if there's any additional conversation or if there's something you just want to highlight publicly just kind of call it out. So just so we can get through 25 plus policies quickly.

012Does that work for everybody? Great. Okay. So starting with policy 2260 uniform grievance procedure. Um as you see here we had several accept uh changes presented. uh we had um I think a general theme about if the title non-discrimination title n coordinator should be changed and it's up to the board how we want to do that. So for discussion I would we like this non-discrimination/title 9 coordinator or something else I think Linda said that it's up um but the non-discrimination falls under title 19 and um not they're not two separate roles. So it would be an and rather than a slash, right? Is that what how you interpreted her comment? I think I understood that just non-discrimination is inclusive of title n. So you just have the single one. But if I think if we

013want to highlight title N then we probably want to do the and so anybody's else's thoughts on non-discrimination and title n coordinator thoughts I think the shorter the title the easier it is to remember and I'm reading Linda's comment as if we just say non-discrimination coordinator it'll cover the title n that's right that's what you're saying too Okay, I'm fine with the I would agree. Okay, I agree with that. So, we um for this one, if there's uh accept changes presented with the role referenced as just non-discrimination coordinator, I just say I'm reading this the other way around. So, I just want to make sure I say non-discrimination. I'm trying to pull it up. Non-discrimination falls under title N, not the other way around. Let's look at the policy. So, it would be a title

014N coordinator is what you're thinking. And I think I thought that the driving reason for adding all the title N coordinator language was because of the change to title N. So we have to have title N specified. That's was my understanding. Well, and that was why I added on several of these that we don't have a title N coordinator and who is it? Like I was curious about that. That was my thought process in reading it initially. I feel like a big, if not all, of Title 9 is about discrimination. And so, you have a non-discrimination coordinator that's going to investigate if there's any claims of discrimination, which may be under Title 9. It might be under a variety of other things, but I do think the non-discrimination coordinator would be in charge of all

015of those. And so, where we wouldn't add a separate person, I don't really think we need a slash. I would just leave it like this because if we ever do have a case of discrimination we may which may reference title 9, this would be the coordinator. So you're you're I I would propose we just keep as is. Yeah, I just pulled up the US Department of Education and they specifically state your school must designate a title N coordinator. So maybe just making sure those words are in there. I mean I like short and sweet but longer seems comprehensive and safe. Then maybe just the go back to the slash because that would at least list two responsibilities with that person. I think that would cover it. I mean Heather you I I think if we

016have to have title N language a title N coordinator specified but it's not probably to the general public clear what that actually means. We should add the non-discrimination piece as well. That would be my opinion. So I think we're going with the title with the slash. Good. All right. Going once, twice. Oh, that sounds good. All right. Awesome. Moving on to policy 4:15, identity pro uh protection. Any questions here? The administration did reply to the one question. We accept. We go to accept changes as presented. Great. Moving on to policy 4180, accounting and audits. Uh administration has provided some feedback to the questions. Any additional comments or anything to highlight from the the responses? Dan, may I go back? Well, we let's finish this one then. I just I wanted to go back to your

017comment under 415 um just to be sure that was taken care of. But let's finish up 480. I don't want to interrupt that any comment. Good. As okay, then let's go back to 415. You asked if as the send should be expanded to personal ident for PII. Yeah, that was not you know that was for board discussion. So thank you Pam. Um, so as I read this, it it specifically references social security number, but personal identify information can be more than that. It can be your first and last name plus your address or some combination that identifies you specifically. So although this seem to be very focused on social security, I know from job experience dealing with confidential information, it's more than just that. Do we want to expand the language beyond social security number

018or stick with that for now? I mean, the lawyers have reviewed this. I don't know if I would include PII cuz as I'm reading this, it's then it would be like names, right? And like I'm just thinking like in an email as a teacher, I might write a student's name and then I would then be responsible if that email was out somewhere. um even though it would be absolutely appropriate for me to do to use the student's name in in a particular email. So I didn't know if if it was that granular, but that would be a reason to keep it at social security. It looks like it's defined at the end of this and it's social security, passport number, credit card numbers, clearances, bank numbers, biometrics, date and place of birth, mother's maiden name,

019criminal records, medical records, financial records, education transcripts. So, I think you'd be safe with a name. Um, is that defining PII? That's how they're defining PII on here. Not on page eight. Yeah, this it was like later under the press plus like comments above it and I think this is what triggered my question is above it's just missing social security number social security number then down here it defines what PII is actually there's there's PII and then there's protected so PPI so there's two separate ones I this policy is always in the past and now refers to the SSN and rather than PII, I'm wondering if there is a different let's look at the references and see if there's so if I look at like um point number two under on on page seven and

020it reads out protect each social security number collected or maintained by the district from unauthorized disclosure. Should it read protect each PII data item collected and maintained? is name I mean credit cards would be need to be protected password numbers whatever you know is PII should be protected birthdays addresses address broad the policy shall not be interpreted as the guarantee of the confidentiality of the SSN and or other personal information I it it seems like when the lawyers vetted it they would have included there must be a reason this is always just focused I I don't know the answer, but maybe we should get that clarified before second reading. And I almost feel that there's a difference between the P II and the PPI. I mean, there because they have it in here. Do we

021only need to call out the one? The first one's very broad. Like you were saying, it's really broad. Phone numbers. I think I think this should definitely be revisited. Okay. Um I'm questioning the the social security number. Is it specifically called out because of the identity protection act? Is that is that why we're specifically calling out the handling of social security numbers in this case? I believe so. Not up on my legislation. No, but that's and and that's I mean so that's why this calls out social security numbers. So I think in the future it makes sense for us to think through PII and how that applies but I don't know that we could swap them out like for like here and I'm thinking it might be covered in a different section or a different

022policy. So I think we will make a request administration to provide context to why social number is referenced and not PII. Would that be sufficient? I think that's a good idea. Okay. Thank you Pam. I was just glad they capitalize social. So that's It's for years we've been working in very close to your heart. Mhm. All right. So, okay. Any further discussion? Okay. Moving on to policy 510, equal employment opportunity and minority recruiting. Again, we've got the slash in there. Slash and we're going to go with that. uh any highlight from the responses from the administration? I I just that wording it just sat funny the final paragraph. Um I just I and I know the recommendation is just leave it in there, but I just wondered if it was a better way to word

023it. Um hold on, let me bring up the exact which page is that? Um, let me get the exact section here. Uh, it's the final sentence of that policy. Um, is it the the superintendent shall insert into the policy the names? Is that that paragraph? No, it's it's so you go under there anonymous reporting, then go to minority recruitment. That last paragraph, the last sentence there. I just don't know if it's just not. This policy, however, does not require or permit the district to give preferential treatment or special rights based upon protected stated without evidence of past discrimination. I just that last phrase without evidence of past discrimination. My only question was it's the sentence is appropriate or permit the like but should it just be a period? Does does not permit the district to

024give preferential treatment or special rights based off protected says period. at the without evidence of past discrimination, just the context there. Because if someone came forward and had evidence of a past discrimination, does that then change all this? The way it reads, it does change it. That's what I was thinking. It does not require to give preferential without evidence. So in other words, if they had if an individual had been discriminated before, they could be given preferential treatment. I believe I believe that's the intent of it. We've I know with you know in hiring practices in the past if somebody was they could they could be placed into a job if they were discriminated against before. So I don't know that's the way I read it. But is it saying you have to how it's

025written? Could it be interpreted evidence is required in order to do the special treatment or am I misinterpreted? I am reading it at is there is if there is evidence of past discrimination that the individual won then that would allow the district to give preferential treatments to that individual. But that's just the way I'm reading it. I don't know. Well, and I don't understand why you would I I don't want anyone to be discriminated against, but I don't know why then for a future thing we'd maybe discriminate against someone else to allow that person to jump ahead because they were discriminated against before. What if they're not the best person for whatever role or thing that's going on? I It would be the right of settlement on the first. Craig, have you ever had experience

026with that in your past? Not really. No. Um, generally I think they're more straightforward. There's usually more like damages and things like that. We we could also get clarification on that if you want. Yeah, I think that would be a great one to get clarification on. And I agree with Randy with your thought process. That's where I was too thinking I want to make sure we're equitably, you know, employing everyone and having equal opportunity as stated in the title of this policy. And I think that last sentence reads very well. And then without it just it almost contradicts itself on the way it's worded. Um so and you know it doesn't also define that. I mean is that without evidence of past discrimination by uh you know us or by another area? I just does

027that what what is that open to for interpretation? I just think that'd be good feedback from the attorney. Um, we also might look up the legal reference and it might be in there, but maybe we could bring that back for clarification. The question being, should we include without evidence of past discrimination? Yeah. And these are some of these are pretty big. You know, the equitable like the Fair Labor Access, they're pretty big. So, it's just um yeah, maybe the attorney could help guide us in the right direction of what he was thinking there. Okay, so just in summary, we want to keep the the title with the slash and clarification on this sentence ending without evidence of past discrimination. Okay. All right. Moving on to policy 520, workplace harassment prohibited. Um any additional discussion on

028this? Yeah, I had uh placed some followup on this. Um so my question is what if there's a concern that involves one of the named individuals or people on here? What is the alternative then? Is this the right policy that we place that in? Because you know what? If your concern is is your complaint manager or what is the options then? I just feel like there's not a a secondary path listed in this policy. So like a backup for that person in case of that. it is crossreered to 2260 and that's where that's the uh uniform grievance act or or policy on UN and um that does specifically say let's see if I got I believe another uh complaint manager has established even one that's outside the district if a complaint contains allegations involving um

029well it would be administration superintendent or board members a written report shall be filed directly with the board which will make a decision in accordance with the paragraph 4 that's under 2260. So I don't know if you if that you feel Pam just 226 260 Mhm. is the first policy in the packet tonight. Oh that was the first one two. Yep. 2260. Sure is. What what section of that policy? Just real quick. It's right above decision and appeal. It talks about the whole investigation process and where it would go from there. So I um I think that is and it is cross-referred on the bottom here. So it's if a complaint contains allegations involving superintendent or board members, the written report shall be filed with the board which will make decision in accordance with the

030paragraph 4 of the following policy. Is that what you were thinking, Kate? Okay. Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Okay. So, there is an alternate path. And it's it is crossreerred on the bottom. Okay. Anything else? Okay. So, accept the changes presented with the role name as presented with the slash. Yeah, just that slash again. The next one, the policy 5 col 60 expenses so must respond accept changes as presented. So any additional discussion on that? It was pretty straightforward. Go ahead. Record that decision. All right. Moving on to 5 col 100 staff development program. Um, we had I think Kate, you had one comment for I think um I think it's just uh formatting um my next page. That was the one where you said you thought the CPR was in um a weird

031spot. Yeah, I had a couple questions on that one. So, um, well, I know Linda isn't here, but I just wanted to, let's see. Um, yeah, the CPR, like it looks like all of our inservice training is up higher in one section and then it's like a a paragraph all on its own at the bottom. Sorry, what pages it is? Hold on. Too many tabs open. 27 see which page is this? So there's inservice training and then there's additional training below. So if you go to page 27, it's just it's like hanging out at the bottom there. It's It's not numbered. Where is What? It's a just a paragraph on page Oh, I'm sorry. I'm on page 28. 28 is hanging out at the bottom there. The one that starts with an opportunity. Is that

032the one you're talking about? Oh, shall be provided him maneuver card additional. Yep. It's it's under additional but the first paragraph just starts with one line and then all the numbers. So it's actually the second paragraph under additional training requirements. So page 28 right above legal ref. Yeah. Right. Yeah. But it's not like numbered. And then my other question I know I asked this at the last time we reviewed this one too. I mean is this an opportunity where we should have everyone trained? I think we covered that at the meeting before. Yeah. I I I just want to bring it back up. I think it's a I it's a simple training. So, could you argue that both those paragraphs should be bullet pointed like 13 and 14? Why? They probably they probably all should

033be just for from a formatting perspective like just to keep it clean and easy to reference like but are they part of the staff development? um all of those numbered items are under the staff development program shall include. So I guess the question is do these two paragraphs fall under staff development? I don't think I don't it doesn't look to me like they do. It looks like they're separate. So there's in addition to that staff development, there's protocols developed for youth suicide awareness and prevention and then there's also the opportunity for CPR. So, it's almost like cuz but I see what you mean cuz there's like 12 things listed under the first point. Um, almost if it's like a bullet, the 12 things that go under that point. Bullet bullet. Is that what you mean?

034Yeah. I just Well, one I mean from a formatting perspective like it just policy like everything should have like you know a that structure where it's organized there. Um, but two, I just, you know, I know they said that they think only certain positions, but I mean, the fact of the matter is an event could happen at any time, any place. And it's a simple training and we have AEDs available in the school. I think having staff certified to use it. And I think also for our teachers, it's a position if they were in, I don't think any of them would want to not be able to react. I think they'd want to do the best they could in that moment. I think we'd have to So we we open it up to everybody. I

035mean, every year we send out an email if this is something you're interested in. It's mandatory for all coaches, physical education teachers, people like the nurses, but we open it up every year, but we do not require a general ed teacher or a parapro or a custodian to go to the training. So we have a section inservice training requirements one through eight. And then to highlight what you're saying, okay, is that in additional training requirements 1 through 12 and then two paragraphs just hanging there. So, do we want to take those two paragraphs and make them 13 and 14 or keep them separate how they are? Well, I just don't think they're applicable to the list. I I I agree with the formatting. It's weird. It almost feels like you can make a suggestion to

036move those paragraphs up. We're afraid to put another section heading in there, but they're not they're not number 13 and 14 because neither of them are part of the staff development program. How about optional training requirements with a heading over those two paragraphs? Yeah, I would think a section heading would is that is that would that work? Yeah, maybe a a section heading or something. I just it's hard to identify when you're doing follow-up on policy if things aren't like structured like you know letters, numbers, Roman numerals. So you can easily say like you know Roman numeral 2 section A number one. So you can just clarify those sections of the policy. I we probably have an opportunity on a lot of our policies for for that. But just this one stood out cuz this

037one is a little bit more has more rigor to it. Um, I don't think I'd change the heading to optional because I'm not sure that it is optional for the protocols um that the superintendent needs to develop. Maybe additional training opportunities. Would that is that what you were thinking? Right. Well, that's what it it Well, it require opportunity versus requirement. Is that what because they used opportunity in the second paragraph there. So it seems like it seems like it's not a requirement. How about additional development opportunities or or do we just put A and then 1 through 12 B C like keep the heading but just add the A, B, C, and D. The superordinate bullets. Is that what you would call those? I don't know. I think something like that might be better because

038then we're not like calling we're not putting those two paragraphs into one item because they're kind of two different things. And so I think at least having like an ABC to separate them cuz I agree like down at the bottom it kind of looks like a random little paragraph that you don't look at. Um, so I think lettering it might be better cuz they're two different kinds of things. Are they requirements? That's I guess that's what I'm looking at now that we've brought it up cuz that heading is specific to I guess that would be my question is the development of the protocol the requirement but then there's different like I I'll have to I'm going to go look at 7290 um in reference but I think or is that cuz that's referred to again

039up higher. Is that a sub bullet point to that? Right. So you you could instead of additional training requirements take out the word training additional requirements and then you've got number one staff development program shall include number two superintendent develops program number three option must be we must we're requiring that the option for everybody to do CP shall be provided all three of these are requirements they're not training requirements that be a additional requirements. Additional requirements. And then we've got we've got the requirement for the program. We've got the requirement that the superintendent shall develop protocols. And we've got the requirement that we provide an opportunity to staff for CPR and him and all that works for me. Additional requirements and label the paragraphs one and two and enumerate them. Only question I would bring

040up about this is when we get new press items on this like area, will it make it harder to update it because they aren't like the same kind of headers as what um they have in the things that they send out? I don't know. I'm just like wondering that. Also, is the intent still the same? Do we still read the paragraphs the same? Is it worth the the change, I guess, is what you're you're referencing. Yeah. Well, I'm not saying is it worth it. I I agree that there it's hard to read. I just don't know the right way to do it to where we can still um be able to reference those policies if there's changes that are required if we reorder them. Like I don't know if I'd reorder them. Um, I would

041keep them in the same order that they are, but like just have a way to call them out separately like so that you don't think it's like some random paragraph at the bottom. And 7290 is required. So removing required wouldn't be I don't think we should appropriate. Yeah. Okay. But I mean my my bigger concern was this just revisiting that. I know you say there's an opportunity. Um, how easy is that? Is that at an inservice? Is that or is that a class they have to go to on their own time? Usually it's coordinated with uh through Tom Markham and he'll say we're offering this CPR class. Anyone who would like to register, please just click on this form and then it would be after school and put on either by a company or maybe

042the fire department. I don't recall. So it would be on their own time. I think the confusion is that it really doesn't have a heading for those two last paragraphs. And do we need a do we need a heading for those last two because they aren't under? So, it's actually separate from the the topic above, which is training requirements. So, these are like two two additional paragraphs that go in there. Um, I like the idea of a separate heading with each paragraph is labeled one and two because then it follows the pattern above. But I do think that the youth suicide awareness and prevention is required training because that goes in 7290 the it describes in further detail the training program that's required. So that that what I think would has to stay. It's just

043separated from the 1 through 12. It's like a separate like I think the easiest way I can think of it is like AB A 1 through 12 BC because they're required but it's the CPR is not required for everyone but people in the roles that necessitate that training it is required. So Paul I believe you're correct that that's required for everyone. So is that in the wrong section then if it's required for everybody because there's inservice training requirements. I'm guessing, I'm not confident in this, but I'm guessing because the way that the superintendent develops it is not named here, but it is named in 7290, that's why it's listed is not like number 13 because then you're to reference 7290 to see the way that that's organized um for the required training is is what

044I'm guessing. If we're going to keep the heading, why don't we go with the ABC if that because that's not changing too much. We do make changes to other policies that when press updates it um it falls in like 2260 or not. Yeah, I think it was 226 that we just Anyway, we do make it let's just do ABC and Okay, for what it's worth, I've looked at some of our neighboring school district to see how they handle this and that last paragraph is unique to us. I think that must be something the board put in place really on their own and so maybe that's why it seems random and doesn't allow and then the superintendent shall develop protocols that's just its own paragraph in most other school districts right but above legal references we

045might have added that based on the discussion on defiills Let's I I think we need to, you know, make a decision and move on. If we do ABC, that might Does that satisfy? Yeah, I do too. Okay, that works. Okay. Yeah, that works. So, the the A would be under and under additional training requirements, A would be in front of in addition. That's and then the par beginning with superintendent shall develop is B and an opportunity shall be provided C. Yes, I just just want to make sure I have it right. So it says inservice training requirements on page 26 where it starts to say the staff development program shall provide that's an A. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And I just want to before we wrap up on this policy just revisiting that CPR piece.

046I know I've brought I I brought it up last time like I mentioned just I think in light of our experiences as a district this year. It is something worth revisiting. it bringing this in uh basic life support training is short. It's important. It could make a huge difference. The outcomes of anybody who has um first responder CPR significantly better. And um I mean I know this is something that we all hope never happens in the workday of anybody who works here, but if we have inservice days, it's it to me feels like an easy ad. Um and people only have to go through it every two years. I I don't recall exactly and maybe Dr. Catalik could mention it next month to I believe it had something to do with contractual. There's there's so

047much training that staff has to legally have. There's an entire list that people aren't too excited to have to do that on their free time. I think if we pushed one that's not legally required, that would be something we need to negotiate. I I think that's that's the conversation I remember. Um, and maybe we couldn't revisit it when I mean talk about it when we approve it for second reading, but I think we need that additional background information again or if that's enough cuz that's the way I remember the conversation. Does anybody else remember? I I agree. I mean, do we could we get information on how many people go through that training the optional the way it's already structured? Sure. All right. So, we'll add A, B, and C. Excellent. So, all right. Moving

048on to policy 6 col 150, home and hospital instruction. Uh, nothing for board discussion. Uh, and the administration has replied to the questions. any additional conversation on this except okay we'll accept changes as presented moving on to policy 6 col 235 access to electronic networks uh there are some uh board discussions and some replies from the administration so to start with who wants to kick us off for discussion on this I I think uh Greg, Heather, and Paul, you had some comments or discussion. Who like to go first? Okay. So, I just wanted to know if we could, you know, instead of waiting two years or, you know, four, two, two years or five years, whatever the next interval is, can we look over our ai policy specifically at this time next year or when

049is next best? because this is going to be a uh rolling topic and I I think annually it's probably our our position may need to change very rapidly. I think number five on page 35 that was my comment. I believe it requires it an annual review. So my suggestion was we put it on the board planning calendar for as we do other policies for review yearly. Okay, that that would be fine. Thank you. Um, my only question comment on number five, it specifically says we'll review the district's AI plan. We'll review the AI responsible use guidelines um on an annual basis and update them as needed. My thought was whether during that review we could also review what is in use to be sure that any investment that we're making in AI tools and any

050training we're doing is still appropriate and it's adopted. The reason why I'm making this comment is because we know that AI is really cool and people are like trying to use it in the best way they can and but adoption is a problem, right? Just widespread, not like at the district or anything, but it's just a problem in general of people actually using the AI tools that they have today. and making sure that when we embed AI or we implement a tool that we're paying for that people are actually using it and it's serving its intended p purpose. That was the intent behind my comment actually. I think that's also with the pace that AI is changing which is you I've done for work fair amount of research on this and it's fast I mean

051and and they say in the next two years it's going to even change faster than we've already experienced uh with simply prompts moving on to agents talking to each other that are semiautonomous. So um so yeah so I think along with the annual review is also part of that review what AI tools are in use in the district right so Vinnie will be here next month to walk you through our current use uh he and Kelly Nelson have been selected to give a national presentation I think next fall and so um he'll give you an overview of what we're doing currently what our plans are moving forward in the future and then included in your materials for tonight. This is the what I'll call the first draft. We had about 20 staff members meet on

052three occasions to try and come up with some guidelines. I think as a group we agreed it's all so new. If you look at 100% like 10% of it was clear this is appropriate. 10% of it is clear that this is inappropriate and now it's, you know, schools across the nation trying to figure out what we're going to do and how we're going to communicate when it's appropriate and inappropriate in the middle because we're just still as I think across the planet trying to figure out what AI can do and when it's okay. But definitely needing students to know upfront with a project when it's appropriate and when it's not appropriate. So later when we determine it's inappropriate and they say, "Well, I didn't know that, so I don't want an F. I think I

053should get an A." that you know there's some clear expectations. So we'll go over a little bit of that in the June board meeting showing what AI is currently being used and what we see moving forward and it's going to be as you pointed out a work in process but I added it to the planning color calendar every June to review use of AI guidelines annually policy 6235. So it's now on the planning calendar so we don't forget. Okay. And we can do the tools at at at the same time. I mean, I was I was glad I was going to ask that for a future agenda item to see if we could have um Kelly and Vinnie come to present cuz that's that's really an to agree on his day off. But I I

054we'll start there. We'll see if Kelly wants to come too. Okay. But maybe once they get their slide together for November, maybe they'll want to do it next school year to be able to showcase who attended and what they shared. Yeah. Well, that's that's um that's an achievement. That's great. We congratulate both of them. So I know there was some references also about integrating this draft into handbooks. We're not there yet. So I think there was a link within this document to our current handbooks, but we hadn't even got gotten to the process yet of integrating it. So we'll make sure it gets included, communicated, and if there's differences and ramifications at an elementary versus a high school level that it's clearly delineated. Okay. As we look at the handbooks, it's help it might be

055helpful whatever language is designated for the district to be used in at each of the schools with modifications. Obviously, LE is going to have some different, but I think that helped with the safety plan or the emergency occupation plan. They have language that's and so the way the handbooks are set up now. There was a point where the board was very involved in the student handbooks. I think at this point it's more of an FYI, but we have a district level handbook and then we have addendum or separate sections for each of the different schools because it may have different nuances to either what's in that or things that are just not appropriate at each of the other two schools. And so we'll continue the format. The assistant principles work with Linda in the month

056of June to be able to get those handbooks ready. And they're now they have been for a while digital. So as we need to make modifications, we can make them digitally and then communicate to both teacher not well teachers, parents and students if they need to know that there was a change. Okay. So with that, do we want to accept changes? I just have one semantic suggestion. Um uh in the line on page 34, um it reads that the board recognizes AI enabled tools are important to enhance student learning. And I just would like to change the R to May. um being that we haven't named the AI enabled tools and so I they may or may not be helpful. They could be a hindrance to student learning. Page 34. That's a big page where

057oh sorry uh all the way at the bottom in the it's in the green if it's green for you. me. It's the very last paragraph where it's the press plus one use of artificial intelligence AI enabled tools and it's this line that reads the board recognizes a enabled tools are um important and I just I'm suggesting that we change R to May. They may be important. I will pass that along. Thank you. So, we will accept changes presented. Uh, but would like to revisit AI policy annually, including what AI tools are in use in the district, plus changing the verb in the sentence. The board recognizes the that AI enabled tools may be important. Great. You want to go with that? Yes. Yeah. Excellent. Excellent. Uh moving on to 7 10 equal education opportunities. Um

058I think we have the title 9 or the non-discrimination title 9 coordinator change. Any other comment discussion? sub changes as presented plus the role name. Okay, moving on to 7 col 20 harassment of students prohibited. We had some items for discussion. I think we might have addressed these who handles the complaints. So with this, this would be also like a last one accept changes presented with the role referenced as non-discrimination title N coordinator. Any other discussion? Right, knocking these out. Okay, moving on to 7 col 60 residents. I think we had uh some board discussion here. Um then Greg and Randy and um Heather, you had questions for discussion. I don't think it's a question. just indicated that I approved all changes other than the section that looks like we're supposed to discuss it. And

059I I had the same question, but I put it over for admin because I wondered why it was struck. Yeah, I mentioned to you and I might have put that in the wrong place. So, what would you like? Should we strike it or what's the So, it's the language on 42 or 40. It's on 43 or 44. Yeah. Yeah. Where they strike it out like everywhere you get there. So my comment was I presume the only reason we do we have non-resident students attend district schools today is because of state federal law or court order. That was my presumption that I was trying to clarify. I believe McKenna Vinto is covered in another part of the policy. Yeah. I I believe so there's that. I do recall the conversation and Dr. Philippia you may recall

060about with going to other schools here. That's that's what this um having a agreement with an adjacent school to go there and we chose not to have non-resident schools attend. I believe that I I do recall the discussion from the last time. So, we can look up um that discussion would have been when did we approve this? That was a couple months ago when um we the update isn't on here when we had oh adopted so December of 23 they you know the years go quickly but um about a year and a half ago and that was part of it and that would otherwise might open it up to staff children um coming to the school. Well, I think those are Do you recall the conversation? That's why we decided to take that part of

061it out. So, do we also need to eliminate the header? Yep. Header and Yeah, I think so. Non-resident students shall attend district schools pursuing to col that has to be restricted as well. So that whole section of admission of non-resident uh what I don't recall did we uh request uh or did we get any uh legal guidance as to whether we could eliminate it or is it required that we have this as an option legally. I I don't recall if we got that. You know, I don't believe that we did, Greg. And I wonder if we get that before we decide to to remove the whole section, but this was per the comments. It was press that recommended strike. Yeah, this is as I'm looking at it that that was a different conversation within the

062context of non-resident, but it wasn't these that we struck. So, it's press that's making. Yeah. Yeah. I agree, Pam. It was a separate conversation. Yeah. But I think we all agreed it was probably not something we were looking to pursue. As far as striking that header, I don't think we should actually looking at it because it's saying non-resident students may attend desert schools pursuant to and if you go down, it would be homeless children and it says any homeless child shall be immediately admitted and then challenging a student's resident status um or delayed residency. And it gives you those options. So striking the header might mess that up. I'm just not sure why why we're striking it at all. I So I think and I think someone referenced it's green on your copy. I I

063don't know. I think the green was supposed to be included without the strike through. I think the old version said non-resident students may attend the district persuant to pursuant to and then 1 2 3 4. I think what they're wanting to do at IASB is eliminate one, two, three, four and replace it with whenever any state or federal law or a court order mandates the acceptance of a non-resident student. So I I think the striketh through is the inappropriate part and that the green is adding it because there's not currently anything there when you look at our policy, their current policy. Okay. Or school district's policies. I keep comparing ours to see if anyone else has done something different. What is the pink in there? I mean, I I printed in gray, so I don't

064know what's pink. The pink is whenever any state or federal law or court order mandates the acceptance of non-resident student. So, are we looking at completely striking the pink excluding the green? We're supposed to I don't know what's green and I don't know what the green is the I just think it should read now admission of non-resident students and then there should just be one sentence which is currently a color and has a strike through in it. So I think that it not it should not have been struck. Okay, the one that starts with or that has whenever and state are okay. I think that should be there. I think that was a change this time and eliminated one through four. But either way we're we're making an educated guess. So maybe we get clarification

065on which one should have been struck through and which one should have been added. Yes. Yeah, we'll do that. And so you're the sentence. It would just be that first sentence whenever any state or federal law or a courtmandated court order mandate the acceptance period the acceptance of non-resident students mandates the the acceptance. Okay. So that would be the sentence that stays and we're saying the rest of it would go well in our current policy that's um on there it what is highlighted in our copy in pink is currently there and the 1 2 3 4 in the green is not not. So I think we're supposed to decide but I'm with you Kate I just rather find out. Um I think we're supposed to decide whether or not we want 1 2 3 4.

066Yeah. Okay. So the question is going to be what we want clarification. should be kept and struck. Yeah. Perfect. All right. Do we do we want to at first reading decide whether we want to keep one through four if I I believe I feel like it would be a good use of our time because it seems like we all feel like the red is our current policy. Mhm. And it's moved to four. So it seems like we're going to keep four. That's probably legally required, I'm guessing. Right. That's most likely what's going to come out of clarification. So the conversation probably should be do we if we don't have two do we want to keep one two three or not um I don't and they are optional if one two three are optional then previously

067we had not wanted to do that so and press one two three I think confirm that those three are optional and that's the discussion so but we would have to keep four I think that's the confusing part. I just want to make sure we're all saying the same thing. Our current policy includes 1 2 3 and four. If you go to our website and you click on 760 for L 202 request for non-residential student admission. Oh, it's a different section. It's a different sorry bulleted list. Yeah, further down. Further down. It's not there, but what is there is in the red, but as Heather pointed out, that red is now green truck number four, right? It's the same language in number four. Yeah, we'll just we'll reach out to ISB and see what the colors

068mean and what they're asking for. So, let's assume the green is meant to be kept or struck. Uh to Heather's point, what would we like to keep and we like to have struck? Do we want to have one through three struck based on prior discussions and keep the fourth one which is actually what they is in red. The second one is um foreign exchange students which I don't know if we've had one but that would be that's where you're part of a program right and you have a student from another country come over here. I don't know that we do that, but I know it's something I would be opposed to if that was something they were pursuing in the future. It does. It does call for tuition free [Applause] and number two it Oh,

069it does. Yeah. Sorry. The strikethrough is and also does number one number one also provides for tuition free. Oh, I we've had some point shootings in the past. I don't think recently did have did have we charge tuition for them in the past. Uh I do not believe we've ever charged tuition because I gather they would be based on the residency of their host residents. So it would be considered so yeah I know a student last year but they were living with a family member in the district or something like so I don't know if that's a host family. Yeah that would be like a host family. Okay. I I think reading these I my suggestion is they stay. Does number three apply to us inter interd district transfer? I mean when we don't have

070it's for multiple schools. Yeah, it's uh for expectant parents or victims of domestic or sexual violence the way number three is reading but not limited to an agreement for who are parents but it's like an interd district transfer would be if like in my school district they have 23 elementaryaries and you're like well I know I should go to this school but for these reasons I'd like to go to that school and so you can go to a different school even though that isn't your school that you've been assigned But for these reasons only. Yeah. And that wouldn't apply to us cuz No, because their choices are one school or one school. An intergovernmental agreement including but not limited to the interd district transfer. So it could be with a different school board. Intergovernmental though.

071Yeah. And how would we transfer someone? We wouldn't be able to cuz we have a elementary, junior high, and a high school. So that wouldn't really work. I I just I'm reading it as it's it's not the interd district transfer is not the only option. I'm a little concerned that there's uh this 105 ILCS listed there and if that may be required by law referencing another regulation it's optional per press. I'm not passionate about this. I just don't think it would apply cuz we don't we couldn't do an intergovernmental agreement with oursel for another high school. I just don't think it would apply in our case, but we can leave it in in the event that it ever does apply. I mean, I'm not opposed to it. Well, that's an in wouldn't that be an

072intraggovernmental? Well, look at the definition under press plus three. An example of an agreement is one to accept non-resident students entering to such agreement is optional. non-resident. So if we don't have the agreement, then we can remove the whole thing. So Downer's Grove 58 I called up, they just have according to an intergovernmental agreement. They don't have the rest of it. But um I'm not Does it say it has to be free? Because like we have students going to neighboring school districts. So like we have an agreement with Downtowners 99 for some of our special ed students who are in the 18 to 21. And so we have an intergovernmental agreement with them. So yeah, number three does not say it's free. And so maybe you can have a non-resident student if we have an

073intergovernmental agreement with one of our partnering school districts, but it doesn't mean it's free, right? It it does not say it. Just just number one and number two say free. And so I just picked up Downer's Grove 58 as an example. They changed number three to say according to an intergovernmental agreement. Period. Well, I just want to say I was reading his intra and it's inter. So, y'all are right and I think we should keep it. It's a lot of words with a line through it. So, yeah, that's hard to read. in place. So with what we're saying with th those students, just that as an example, we would need to keep number three then. Correct. Well, we're saying this reads whether or not we want non-resident students to attend our district, not necessarily if

074our students attend another, but I would think that we would want to afford the same opportunity to our our partner districts as they are to us if if they have this policy. Yeah, if if they have we we only do this for other districts that recip have a reciprocal agreement. But but it but you have to have the intergovernmental agreement. So So it's not like any of this is actually binding without further discussion other it just allows us to have that discussion, right? Like cuz you have to have the intergovernmental agreement for number three. For number four, you have to have a written agreement and and same for number one. So, it's just it allows for the possibility of naming those cases, not saying that we necessarily would. And if there's an agreement, that means

075there's a contract, right? And the contract may or may not stipulate tuition reimbursement. it it from our discussion if I don't again I don't know why we moved number three or four up there but let's say that the pink um stays I I think I would suggest that we keep one two and three then because the pink is the same as number four or do we eliminate if if indeed whichever one we're supposed to eliminate one of them needs to stay in so I like making it four just based on my formatting Yeah. Okay. And I'm guessing that's what they wanted us to do is take out pink and leave. So, and I say with with confusion. And it seems like you must have looked at this before because it sounds like number one is

076optional and maybe you said we don't want that. Number two is optional. You said I don't want this. Number three, I don't see maybe it is optional. And so that's why you just picked number four and collapsed it into the sentence. So I have no idea why press is saying here's a line that goes through your option number four that you collapsed into the first sentence. But we can look into it. Okay. But other school districts did not collapse number four into the non-residential student may attend districts and they have a 1 2 3 and four as written here. They must have selected the options. So we'd like the clarification what is kept and struck but are we who would prefer to adopt all four points to adopt all four points. Correct. Excellent. Okay. Anything

077else? Moving on to policy 7 colon 70 attendance and truency. Uh we just note that this is on our planning calendar already um for review every two years in February. Um district has responded to questions. Any further discussion or additional? No, I didn't. I'm good. We're good. Accept changes as presented. Moving on to policy 71 180, prevention of and response to bullying, intimidation, harassment. We had some items for board discussion including the the nation of title 9 coordinator. Um note that this is reviewed every two years and accept changes. So I think that's what's on the line. Um any further discussion to accept we'll accept changes as presented with the role referenced as non-discrimination title 9 coordinator. Excellent. Seems like we review this policy about every three months as opposed to it feels it's it

078it seems to come up. It's been one a few times this year it seems like. Yeah. Yes. Um, moving on to policy 7 col 185. Teen dating violence prohibited. Um, we had a question about the age range. The administration has um during health class age range, but Kate, did you have addition anything additional? Um, yeah, I was just reading this um about this for the policy. The term teen dating violence occurs whenever Susan is 13 to 19 years of age, which I guess is technically a teenager. And it talks about, you know, the harassment, the prevention of bullying. I think this is all good. Um I think um well, 13 still feels very young to me. I think the reality of the world now is there are people in intimate relationships younger than that sometimes

079at ages 11 and 12. And should we have an age range in there that precludes students who may also end up in situations where we want to make sure this policy applies and they get the help and support they need. the fact that it's a term I it feels like it's legal a legal definition to me, but yeah, I think I I'm just saying we could say whenever a student and then remove who is age 13 to 19 years of age and just we're saying whenever a student remove that section uses or threatens um in a dating relationship. I mean unfortunately there there are 11 and 12 year olds where this is applicable. If there's no legal limitation I would agree. That's fine. Okay. I'm fine. So except changes with removal of the who is

08013 to 19 years of age. Good. All right. Yes. Moving on to policy 7 clone 190 student behavior. I think we've had some for discussion here. Do we agree with the definition mentioned in press plus two 67? Um also KU asked why is there no action taken if there's a psych psychiatric medication not taken? So what would Yeah. And let me go back to the how that was exactly what line in the pal with my nose. Okay. I just felt like it was a very vague um let me just find exactly where that line is here. Um, no disciplinary action shall be taken against any student that is based totally or in part off the refusal of the student's parent or guardian to administer or consent to the administration of psychotropic or psycho stimulant medication

081to the student. So my clarifying question is so a a student assaults another student and we find out parents did administer medication there's no consequences. it. That's how this reads to me. And what page exactly are you? 63. Right above disciplinary 23 down. Right above disciplinary measures. Yes. Thanks, Dan. I'm wondering if that's getting into telling the parents what their child needs to medically ingest. Um, and I I don't know legally if you want to get into that. I don't I don't know. I also think it sounds like no disciplinary action should be taken against the student who's as a minor wouldn't have access to that medic medication without consent of their parents whose parents refuse to. So they would be like innocent by default um because they I they couldn't go get that prescription

082filled. And does that mean they're not taking it regularly? Does that mean they missed a dose? I mean we also look at children as they grow. These are weight- based medications. Have they grown? And are we saying now they were underdosed? That's not within the jurisdiction. Yeah. It just But are they not getting their appropriate medication? So I just if there's an event, could a parent come back with that and say, "Well, all these things, they didn't have their medicine." I think it's it has to be based on the refusal of the parent to administer or consent to the administration. So not because a dose was wrong but because or they were maybe misdiagnosed or mismedicated but because the parent is saying you cannot have this medication. And again I think it's just a protection

083to a kid who like maybe would choose to take that medication but is not legally able to without parent consent. So how do we handle those situations? I imagine I mean do we just say they didn't take their medication parents responsible? What I mean what if there's consequences to other students like violence? I I think it would all depend on the case case by case. It's probably the same as if a parent let allows a child to have a gun. I mean, you know, those cases, it depends on the situation. I would think based totally or in part um violence is like another issue so to speak. um if we're we're if we focus on the uh uh event itself as opposed to one factor of it, we can still discipline based upon uh you

084know other breaches of policy and court content. Okay. Well, actually, so Greg, you're reading it differently than me, which may be its intended purpose. Just going back to the formatting piece, I read this as part of like the all the other things above 1 through 22, right? Um, teen dating violence, uh, you know, entering school property, causing damage, stealing, attempting to steal. I read it as in line with all those based off where it is. Is that not the intention of this section? I think it's tied to the school administration is authorized to discipline students for gross disobedience or misconduct including but not limited to and then it does the numbers but I think that that part pertains to that top sentence if that makes sense and so that's like just for a civil disobedience

085or not necessarily violence or I don't know. I I just I'm just going through and looking for because we're in a a I feel a sticky situation. If we have an incident, let's say I'll go with something. We'll take violence out of it. Damage to property, right? Significant damage to property. School administration follows up with the parents. they pull the policy and they say, "Oh, look, they missed a dose of medication, they can't be in trouble for this." I feel like we're we're writing it in a way where it states if if there's total or in part the refusal like, "Oh, we didn't give them their medication, is there no consequences?" That's how I read it when I read this policy. Are there consequences to parents outside of school for a refusal to medicate? I'm

086I'm talking about I I'm just saying like it's just depends on what the nature of it is. It's not that I don't think that there could be disciplinary action taken by law enforcement. It's just as a district we wouldn't take disciplinary action against the student because the parent refused medication and and that's the way it reads. It's the parent refuses to administer Yes. or consent to the administration. So the child is is not responsible. So this is a situation where if they're underdosed because they're older, they're different weight, that's not in this. It's literally the refusal parents and guardians refusing to have this and the child has an incident and it's attributed to their lack of medication. You have no disciplinary Does that mean there's no disciplinary, but is there other actions the administration can

087do to say they need to be separated from the general population? And that might be that's not disciplinary. I know we get out place in the SAS where they have the ability to deal with and that's not this policy. That second step isn't the policy. It's just they can't be disciplined. Other actions I'm I'm sure there are and that's what I'm getting to. It's not disciplinary uh actions. It is protecting the other students. It's other actions. And so I think this is fine then knowing that there's other avenues to make sure that student does not repeat or other students are not don't feel threatened. I I I agree that the way it it's written it's for the disciplinary action. other actions it's not talking about here but um it should we have additional followup in

088that section because I as I it reads now when I read this it means I read it as there's no consequences and and maybe saying oh you know you're Saturday school or suspended whichever the choice is maybe that's not the right first step but are there other first steps right Are there mandated family counseling? I don't I don't know what the options are. We add it to the end of the if we add to the end of the sentence something to the effect and this is going to be poorly worded but administration may determine measures to protect other students. I think it might be in the cross references but without checking each of those because we don't we don't expound on what the next step would be in any other policy. We just um I

089mean we we can go through all of the um the cross references, you know, with those and is there like I just is there a definition there? Is there a didn't you didn't get a dose in the morning and then it falls into that category or you're just not on a prescription at all? To me, it doesn't clarify. I think it's refusal of the parent to administer and that means it doesn't have anything to do with the dosage. They just refuse to administer the that's the way it's written. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Like woke up morning, had a stomach ache, said, "I'm not going to give you the pill cuz your stomach hurt this morning. An event happens and they say, "Well, mom wouldn't give me the pill cuz my stomach hurt." Or, "My

090mom disagrees with this medicine. I'm not on it completely." I just feel like those are different circumstances. Should we go back before our next meeting and read the cross cross references and come back to that at our next read? Cuz I see what you're saying. Like I'm reading it as a parent, I'm going to fill that prescription. Like it's not an option. You're not taking it versus like I didn't give it to you on Tuesday, but I'm I gave it to you Monday and Wednesday, right? like that. So, I'm not reading it that way, but we could look to see if that's clarified or defined and then come back. Yeah. And I I wonder if it's defined in one of the cross references. Do we just have the same verbiage there? Yeah. Can we Can

091we do that? Look at it and come back at our ne cuz I think it would take us too long to look at all of them tonight. But I'd be very willing to like look and try to and I would get concerned if this suddenly encompasses things like the drug is no longer available or the parent can't afford it. Mhm. So we need to be very careful what we're doing here. So I think I put in here is a sort of decision for tonight is that I think we also ask guidance from administration if we should indicate if administration can apply other actions to the end of the paragraph beginning no disciplinary action shall be taken and the board members shall or will research cross references. Sound good? And we'll bring this back for discussion.

092And there's a lot in cross reference here. Just if anyone finds one that has the answer, so maybe that could be sent back out through the press. That would be I think some of the legal references too are are going to be the answer. I I I think we're dealing in an area that it's specific with the wording for a specific reason. So, um you know, I think we need to kind of divide and conquer on all those references rather than having Paula look up everything. Yeah. Okay. Okay. All right. So, we'll get guidance from the administration. We'll do some research. Anybody who finds the answer, send it to me. I will do a do not reply all FYI. Okay. I think um I'm trying to think of how to word this. Um over the

093in between now and next meeting, look up the public act. I think it's actually a law and that's why it has to be in here. I agree. But I need more time to research it. just in the small time that I was looking here. Um I found that in Illinois state law and it was enacted at like the end of 2023 as far as I can tell. But um which one is that? I'm so sorry. It's called the public act. Um what about the first legal reference? Is that is that is that in our legal reference? [Music] Well, these legal references probably you know why don't we that's what I'm saying. But this does reference schools have to have that in their policy. Um, but I'll look at it more and I'm sure Linda can

094probably clarify better than I can, but All right, sounds good. Thank you. Thanks. Okay. Anything else? With that, we will move on to semicolon 200 suspension procedures. All except changes presented. Any further discussion on this? No. Can we back up to the last one? Oh, yes, we can. Sorry, you can. Okay, go ahead. For sexing. Oh, yes. The there's actually no policy applied to sexing. It's just a definition pllopped in E. Oh, yeah. It doesn't actually say you can't. It just says here's what it is. Um, so if you go back up to uh five, it says you can't use have interaction with electronic devices. Then A goes in to define what an electronic device is. B says what an interaction includes. D lists all the things you can't do with those electronic devices ever.

095And then E is just a definition of sexing. So I think it three D3 if you guys are still with me was the definition of sexing. That definition has been expanded and moved to E. But now there's no policy on it. It doesn't say that you can't do it. It just says, "Here's what sexing is." So, I thought this was in another policy, too. You go up above this, not like to where you get to the top where it starts numbering 1 2 3 4. I think it's actually supposed to be one of the numbers and not a letter under that electronic thing. So I think it's the school administration is authorized to discipline students for gross disobedience or misconduct including but not limited to and then I think sexing was supposed to be that

096it was supposed to be number six I think. Okay. But it got put as E for some reason. Yeah. I I I don't have a preference on format. I just wanted to call out that we're not actually saying what you can or cannot do. We're just Yeah. No, I agree with you. I think it's like cuz E shows up all the Yeah, I agree. I think it should have been six and the number should have gone down further, but So, are you saying change E to six and then adjust the numbers? Yeah, I think so. Yeah, that makes more sense. Mhm. [Music] think together. Okay. So, we will move E to S6 and adjust the remaining points. All right. [Music] All good now. Cool. All right. Policy 720 suspension suspension procedures. We've all accepted changes

097as presented. Um, good there. Okay. Moving on to 7210 expulsion procedures. Uh, there was a question of this is if the 2-year maximum for consecutive expulsion or is it sum of multiple? In K you had asked that question. Dr. Philip, do you know if this is the when it comes to expulsions is a two-year maximum consecutively or a sum of multiple it would be an admin question over there. Linda would have which uh which paragraph and page was that? page 71. [Music] Um, which paragraph [Music] is it 1G and you're just wondering if it's a max of two years? Is that what you're asking? Is it one block or over the course of their schooling maximum? Like could they be expelled for one year and then another year and that's two years or or if

098you get expelled for, you know, one year and then you're back and then you get expelled again and then you're back and then so you can go beyond you can do two years for each incident. So if somebody brought a gun, we said we're expelling you 2 years. It wouldn't be be here for a year, come back for a year, then you're gone and be gone for another year, would be consecutive. But if then they did it a second time, they can't say, "Well, you already put me out for two years. I you can't put me out again." So it's two years per incident and they're typically consecutive. So I think as written is fine. Okay. Okay, I'm just adding the note that it's per incident. Okay, so we went to accept changes as presented

099with the addition of a period at the end of point H. Okay, right. We're down to seven, I think, for those who are counting down. Okay. Policy 7 col 250 student support services. Uh we had for student or for board discussion um suggestion adding a cross reference to five col and Randy you want to accept pres uh changes presented after uh question response but I don't see my question. So Oh I'll look at it and see. I'll look and see what it did. I not merge it in possibly. Let me look back and see. Hold on. I need some feedback. Yeah, somebody. Yeah, mic is on too. Oh, did you have who is a designated resource person for each building? Yes. It's the same as it's the same as in policy 510. And that's why

100I suggested cross referencing it. So, do we know who those are? Linda, I think um yeah, it's uh AP for student service, assistant principal for student services. Um Alinda answered it over on the she did answer. Okay, just all blurred together. Okay, do you see Randy? Um she did say my I asked, do we need to list them in this policy? Um, Linda, the response was listing the position and not the person's name may be best in case of staff changes. So, if we want to list the resources, we would list them in the other um the resource person, we could list the positions if the board would agree. And then there was a couple other policies we would also list the resource person as. So that's up to whether we want to list the

101positions. Well, Ry's checking hers. I think listing the positions is a good idea for clarity. Maybe one more place for people to know where to go. Yeah. Mhm. Okay. I agree with that. Okay. So, we'll add the cross references and listing of positions. Anything else? I know my question, I do see the answer on here, but it was answered only for the high school. I know Linda's not with us tonight, so maybe at the next meeting, just clarification. I just want to make sure um we have a way at each building to create awareness around the availability of counseling services for all age levels because it's not limited to high school age students. Okay. and um Dan when when we when we list the resource person I believe it's in 5 col 100 and also

1027255 as well as 7250 was a 5100 7250 and what was there was a third one the 725 55. All right. Anything else for this? Okay. Moving on to policy 7 colon 270 administering medicines to students. We had some itis report discussion. Um indicated the policy only mentions asthma, diabetes and e epilepsy. Should the language be generalized to cover other medical conditions? And is the district legally limited to these three conditions? Which page, Greg? Oh, 76. Starting at 76. And I believe there's a couple of places these these conditions are mentioned of, you know, like uh breast cancer dealers. I I'm I'm thinking again that it must be a legal reason. There's probably there might be a legal reason. Let's go down and look. Um but I I don't know. I recall that uh that

103there were other meds that you know can be stored by the school nurse and so on so forth and administered but um I'm not I just wasn't certain if there were other exceptions. I don't know. This might need to be a Linda question. I just put it in the wrong place. Are they I'm just going. Is this the ones they can carry on their own? Oh, let me see. Yeah. So, um which actually allergy should be allergy is there because they can bring an EpiPen, asthma. Asthma action plan. Allergy action plan. Greg, you're thinking like what nurses what medicines the nurse could have because I I'm thinking they could have anything if they're controlling administration. Administration. I didn't take that in account cuz I was looking at administering medicines to students, but in my mind

104is us to them, not just, you know, but I mean it's it's not a big deal. I was just wondering if we were just limited to these uh uh terms and the terms appear in other parts. I I wasn't just looking at the highlighted green section. Other parts of the uh policy mentioned these conditions and I was just wondering if it just be any condition that you know uh they might have medications for on site and is the nurse able to give and maybe we need that state there is there a limit on what they're able to give at the school or they able to take care of anything find out if you'd like something um No, I'm just I'm just asking as followup for Greg's question. In paragraph one um on page page number

10576, it says that the if a parent believes that the medication needs to be taken during the school hours for their health and well-being um along with the licensed healthcare provider, then they can they have to set that up um as a request with the nurse. But then I believe the other stuff you were mentioning is the things that the students can carry on their own. Yeah. But they have to have a plan it sounds like. Yeah. You have to have an asthma action plan or an allergy action plan. Um but that answers my question. And my question was just whether on paragraph 3 um it's only one sentence but it says including administering medication and I'm wondering because paragraph one refers to unless it is necessary whether necessary is should be included there. Is

106it necessary is defined by the medication administering form. Yeah. I And and if it's fine, it's fine. I'm just wondering if because it said including administering medication could be anything and this is all about um but I you know it's not a should it be not necessarily but maybe what's indicated in the SMA form. You know, I I don't know. I don't know what the intent is because if it's emergency assistance, including administering probably is any medication, nothing in prohibits. So, if they felt an aspirin would help, I you know, I don't know, but I I I wanted to see if anybody else read it. I think because when I read the first sentence in the paragraph above it is that no school district employee shall administer to any student or supervise a student selfadministration

107of their medication. The caveat then would be if unless there's an emergency and then they can okay but I'm not like I'm not going to check that you're doing your inhaler at 9:00 a.m. when that's part of your plan or whatever that is. I don't know if others read it that way too. Yeah, I think it's taking away the legal responsibility for uh all of the staff to be monitoring whether or not a student is taking their self-administered medicine, but it's saying that if there's an emergency, that doesn't mean they can't help them. It's just saying that they're not responsible to remind a student to take some. That's how I'm reading it. It just doesn't say, you know, well, you know, if that's the way you read it, that's that's good. I I was just

108worried that it was it limits it does not limit the type of medication that can be given with. But if so, who we're not concerned about it, I I'd say we move on. I would say who has the description of what necessary is? Yeah, necessary is used in the first paragraph. That's the only I think that's in the action plan. Like that would be like if you have an asthma action plan, it outlines like at what point. So, so it would include any and that comes from a doctor's office. Like when you said I only know because I have two kids with asthma. So I had to go to the doctor. They had to declare they had asthma. They recommend what their plan should be and then we take that to the nurse and it's

109on file at whatever school that student's at. Okay. Okay. So, we're going to accept changes of pres I just had one other question and I don't know if this is part of policy and maybe this is something Linda could answer in the future. Just um we there was a lot uh in here about the undesated medications. Um and I'm glad we had them. Um and then um I just was wondering one how we obtain those undesated prescriptions for those medications cuz those are like uh well Narcan isn't but like an EpiPen if we have an extra one. I think it's good to have but I just want to make sure like we have a process in place for obtaining that. I think we asked this. I remember asking this last time we reviewed this and

110they said that the that they have a prescription on um the school district has a prescription themselves and they take it in and get it refilled when the like they have to monitor how long like if it's expiring or anything like that or if they're short but they have a prescription for those medicines. Okay, I remember that discussion too. And then my other question was if there is a call that a nurse is needed, is there like some sort of graband-go bag that goes with the nurse? Because if one of those meds is needed, by the time the nurse makes it across, we have some, you know, decent sized buildings in our district. You get to the student, you realize one of those is needed, the response time on having someone go back and bring

111it back is that that could have be pretty Yeah. They have an entire med kit that they run down with. Oh, they run down with. Mhm. Perfect. Thank you. I don't think that has the students uh I don't think that has the students particular meds but yeah I've seen them in action and they have a big crash bag. Oh they do? Okay. Yeah. I uh I am fortunate to see I haven't witnessed that but um yeah. Oh just as long as I've got the EP and the Narcan with them. Okay. So any additional discussion on this? So accept changes as presented with the addition of the word necessary. It's good. And did we decide on necessary or did we not or were we going to leave it as is? I I thought we decided not

112to, but I will I thought we decided not to as well. Okay, great. My note was wrong. All right, moving on to the next policy. 7310 restrictions on publications elementary schools. I think we had most of the board here accepting presented. We just had one question and I think Pam, do we need to go on your comment for the uh shoot on school buses or other school vehicles included in policy 780? Do we need to go modify the language of 7 col [Applause] 180? I'm looking for where that is. Damn. [Music] Um, are you talking about inbullying and cyber bullying? That paragraph towards the bottom cuz it references 7 180 and it talks about um bullying and cy cyber bullying. I don't know if that's where you So, we're asking if So, I'm asking if

113on page 80 we should also include that. Um, should unschools after or other vehicles be included? the last paragraph on 180 or on 80 or at school related activities or school property or on the bus is what I'm saying and she's saying yes. Should on school buses or other school vehicles also be included here in that last paragraph? includes accessing or distributing on school property, on school buses or other school vehicles or at school related activities. So what page on page 80? That's 80 on the very last paragraph. I think it's only first sentence, last paragraph. Accessing or distributing on campus includes accessing distributed on school property or at school related activities. Oh, so you're saying my question was should on be included as done in because we included in policy 7180 number two and

114the answer was yes. Okay. So if we add to that paragraph [Music] after distributed on school property, or school buses, comma, or at school related activities. Yeah, except there was a different wording on school buses or other school vehicles. That's the way it's worded in 7180. So, we were repeating it here. On school property, on school buses or other school vehicles, and then or and then it's the rest of it flows. Lots of ors. Okay. Mhm. Okay. Right. Any other further discussion? So, we'll accept those changes. Accept changes presented plus the language to add buses and vehicles. Okay. Yeah. Excellent. Moving on to policy 7 col 340 student records. I'm sorry did I miss one? Yeah, I think we've Yeah, policy 7 315 restrictions on publications high schools. There was one uh question to the

115board on AI. Yeah. And I think the one before that too, Dan 730, is that also or not? Did we cover that one? Yeah, you that was the one where we just added 310. Yeah, we just did 310. So it's page 82 then. Yeah, just 32. Yeah. So now we're on to high schools restriction on publications for high schools. Page 8 315 the junior high in that list. There's just elementary schools and high school. There is, you know, and I don't know if I it doesn't look like I wrote that, but we don't The junior high is not on there. I caught that when I was reviewing one. I mean, should it be lumped in with the high school? I mean, it doesn't say senior high school. Is it both of them? I did catch

116that. I think I forgot. Yeah, cuz the one before That's what I was trying to say before that the one before talks about elementary, the 7310. Uh, and then we just jumped to high school. Well, it says high schools plural. So, it's a junior high school and a senior high school. So technically we are covered but so it's not uncommon for it to be elementary or high school and people don't distinguish that there might be a junior high or middle school. They just call it elementary. We just call it middle school junior high. But we can change it to say elementary and junior high schools if that's what you would like to do. If that's your question. That's probably a good idea just so that they're included. So it's on 310. Yeah. Especially because I

117read that as oh they'd be in the other one because you have like elementary districts, you have high school districts, but including the elementary districts is typically a junior high or middle school. Okay. Policy title to include reference to junior high. Okay. All right. Moving back to policy 7315. Um any dis further discussion on that administration got back to you Pam. Uh yeah I mean unless as they're looking at guidelines for if if this should not be reflected AI guidelines should not be um no I'm I'm comfortable with that. We'll work through it. It isn't a board policy. We just want to make you aware of what's going into the handbookish. Okay. Okay. Great. So, any further discussion on 7 colon 315? Accept changes as presented. Accept. Excellent. Moving on to policy 37 gold 340.

118Student records. Um, accept changes. Any any discussion? No. Okay. Home stretch here. All right. U policy 725. students who are parents, expectant parent or victim of domestic or sexual violence. We had some questions for board discussions here. Pam, you want to kick us? I I'll take off the easy one, the page 90. Um, it talks about reviewing this and I checked our board planning calendar and it's not on there. So, I would suggest that we add it for a 2-year review on the board planning calendar 7255. And the other questions are over were answered in by admin. Um, Linda is saying if you looking through those page 89, will the names and contact information be inserted in second reading? And again, she's referencing the positions, which makes sense so that we're not changing the names.

119Yeah, that's that same sentence. I would do the same thing in this one. And then um she's consulting with the attorney under press plus 8. That's page 91 and 93. I think it runs all the way in 93. Press plus 8 and oh, I'm sorry. Uh and page 88, number seven. Does admin recommend the district use a live hearing in its complaint resolution procedure? And she is checking with the attorney. And then um again the next one she's also checking with the attorney. Uh what language does our attorney suggest for disclosure to any district employee with a current de uh demonstrable educational or administrative interest? Um that's interesting that those words are picked uh and the rest of them were answered. Okay. So, I think here we want to add the two-year review to the

120calendar inclusion of the list of positions, but looks like we're waiting for some attorney review and we'll review it at a later meeting. Okay. But I just want to make sure I included 7255 every two years. Next time will be 2020 7. Yes, that's what you asked. Okay. Policy 2, colon 265, title 9, grievance procedure. It looks like she's consulting with attorneys on a couple of these questions, too. So, we will review it at a future meeting um after attorney review. Yeah, it's the same thing about the live hearing and also standing or proof. page 94 under number three. Um, I think we could probably make should sexing be included. It's it's in 7190. I think that's what I was referencing, Heather. I knew it was someplace else. So, it would be on page 94.

121So, you're saying to add it to the number three here, the sexual assault one? Yeah. As defined. Mhm. Okay. it it because it's the only reason is it's listed under 7190 two number three. Mhm. If everybody's in agreement. Yeah, I think that's a a good place to put that actually. What? What am I supposed to add under the um page number? 94. 94. And item number three. Okay. What do you want me to add? Add sexing to to number four. Number three. No, to number three. And it referenced that policy number, right? The seven. So currently, right now it says sexual assault is defined by You want me to also add something to that? Right. cuz it's sexual assault as defined by this and then dating violence as defined by this and domestic violence as

122defined by this or stalking as defined by that one. I don't know. It's reference to which policy. Uh it's it's referenced or it's written that way in policy 7190. What do you need me to write down? Keith, I've got these also I've also got these all in the shared document with Linda. We just need you to match seven col. [Laughter] All right. Any further discussion? All right. I think we'll conclude pause here and go on a future meeting to the um various guides and codes. All right. Thank you all. We had um Dan and I had talked about we anticipating the length of this that this would have been one probably to pull for a separate meeting, but um with Linda's last meeting being next month, we wanted to bring that for a second rating

123and changes and get it done this month. So, she owes me a second Mexican pizza for this. Okay, so she missed the longest one of the year. All right, with that I think we conclude policy for tonight. Terrific. Okay, thank you very much. Um that brings us to um item 7B, our freedom of information requests which are um in the board packet responsive public or 7 C is our public comment followup and we had none. 7D is the superintendence report. because we're all recovering from the policy. I'll just pick a couple items to highlight, but feel free to read the actual report. Uh we're excited for the kindergarten kickoff. We had a lot of parents attend. Currently, we have about 104 students registered. So, um we're probably still just going to have five section. It's

124usually about 110 where we add a sixth section. So, our numbers are still relatively low now that I've said it out loud. We'll probably add a six section. The IESA gave the sportsman award for second year row for junior high. There's 959 school districts that participate and only 18 get this recognition. And so we're really proud that we stood out and the performance of our students and our coaches in terms of um acting in a positive way. I think most of you were at the academic excellence banquet. We had 14 seniors participate in that. And then um I think many of you also attended the honors night both for juniors and seniors and then the breakfast. I think this is the second year that we've done for freshman and sophomore. Number of students got the

125seal of com commenations of by literacy. That's a mouthful. Um we're proud of the 29 students who participated and got that accreditation as uh many of you or all of you were at graduation. I think the speeches were incredible this year. I think that um really an exciting day and so uh we wish our seniors well. And then uh as always, spring concerts are uh very popular this time of year. We had three national French contest French contest perfect scores and those students are listed. Uh we continue to expand our bilingual family nights. And so we had uh 20 families take advantage of having us work with them to help register their students for next school year. And then a very emotional day for many of our 2025 seniors uh to be able to go

126back to the elementary and see their teachers again. and then also do the same thing at the junior high. And finally, uh this seems like a pretty big year to me. We have nine retirees and so uh listed there are a number of staff. Hopefully you've had a chance to connect with a few of them, but always amazed how many of them actually were here more than 20 plus years. So we appreciate all what they do and wish them well at the next stage in their life. I just want to add our thank yous too on behalf of of the board for uh the retirees and wish them well for and thank them for their many contributions to district 202 throughout their years and also the impact that they've made um on so many students

127and a positive difference. So um as the saying goes they will their influence will last a lifetime. So we wish them well. I'm guessing they're not watching um at this point and probably won't be watching next month. So that's why I want to say it now. So thank you. Okay, our committee reports are is next item A 8A facility master planning did not meet. 8B finance um finance did meet at 6:30 in this very room. We discussed the uh uh financial projections as well as the tiff and I apologize that we uh went into board time forcing a delay. That's it was only a minute. Well, I mean it was actually it was a six minute delay. You're right. You're right. Well, thank you Greg. Um policy or I'm sorry 8 C is our policy.

128It seems like we did cover some policy. We had a robust, lengthy, exciting discussion on approximately 23 to 25 policies tonight, but we would have finished 6 minutes earlier had it not been for finance. Once again, my apologies. Okay. 9 is our board representative reports. 9A, home and school organization report is in file. Um, I attended that meeting. 9B is the ISB delegate to board uh did not meet. Anything you want to add on? You can check your inboxes. I think they're starting to do the November um emails with the November uh conference. Okay. I will just kind of relate it to ISB, but we've um going through different phases with Heather for her new board orientation. Um and we've lined up to meet with Mr. Wilkinson in the near future. Also, uh we had

129a meeting on um last night actually with our ISB representative and um she was very timely getting a report to us and we'll be discussing our next steps and follow-up ideas at our next board meeting. And real quick for the it's a joint annual conference. It's usually the weekend before Thanksgiving. and they recommended to go if it works for and all. Okay. Intergovernmental did not meet. Um I I will ask at because intergovernmental somewhat relates but the Memorial Day parade I haven't heard Randy I don't know and Heather if you'll um if you could let me know whether you're interested. Right now it's just two of us and we probably won't be there. I can be there. That's fine. If we get a quorum, we'll we'll go, but we can we can talk. I just

130if you could just um you know, send me a message about that. Uh lend did not meet. Ly Education Foundation did not meet. Sassa did not meet. Uh which brings us to our agenda items for future board meetings. Does anybody have I was going to ask um and recognize the the nice letter that we got about um Kelly and and uh Mrs. Nelson and Dr. So yak being at the um being doing a national presentation. So I was going to ask and you said they're going to be coming next month to do a presentation for us. Uh I had indicated Vinnie will be here. I'm not sure Kelly's available, but I'm sure at some point after they put together the presentation, they will share with us what they shared at the national conference in November.

131Great. Their session is entitled a new era of learning. Students, teachers, and leaders embracing AI in the secondary classroom. So, um, we're very, very proud of that accomplishment. So, okay. If there's no other Sorry, I just wanted to add for future board meetings the review of the um certified librarian at the high school and then after that review, a review of policy 6230. Thanks for bringing that up again. Okay. I just want to make sure I include that. What were the two items? So, um, when you are, we had, um, you had mentioned you're going to review the instructional coach position and just adding the review of the certified librarian position at the same time. And then after that review, a review of policy 6230. Thank you. Okay. Check the time here. Which what time

132is it here? Is it? Oh, it's 9:40. Oh, goodness. Gets away from you, doesn't it? Okay, with that, I will entertain a motion to adjourn at 9:40 p.m. So moved. Second. All in favor? I. And those opposed. Okay. Thank you. Meeting is adjourned at 9:40. whispers.