001We are not. >> Fantastic. Thank you everyone. We're going to call our meeting to order. This is the May 5th, 20126 policy committee. Uh we'll open with public comments if there are any. No public comment. So that will bring us to the approval of the minutes of the April 13th meeting. Emily, they were good by me. Do you have any corrections? I >> do not. Uh so they are therefore approved and we'll get right into our discussion items as well. Uh that is first the agenda item is 4.1 a draft policy for naming of facilities and dedication of spaces. Um unfortunately well fortunately this was just presented to the full board for first reading. Um because board docs was down, some board members had difficulty accessing it. Um and uh still approved the first reading
002dependent upon obviously any changes that may take place. Um I went through uh yesterday or maybe today and took a look and everything looks good to me with the exception of two pieces um that I'd like to ask Emily about since we try to put it forward to the full board. One is in the third paragraph. Uh it talks about to ensure a consistent and efficient process. The district shall maintain a standardized submission procedure. Um I want to make sure that's the way we're going. And then the question is so of course who will maintain that procedure process whatever it may be. um which at one point in time is slightly at odds with the paragraph below which says the board at its discretion may ask for additional information documentation um and not that they're
003completely at odds uh but I think for us to move the policy to the full board we have to come to an agreement if we're going to require a standard submission procedure or if we're going to say the board reserves discretion to request additional information. That's how I see the policy as it currently stands. Emily, I don't know your thoughts on the policy language, things that we should consider, etc. >> Um, I mean, my initial reaction is that standardizing that allows to feel more equitable. um it doesn't set us up for like oneoff decisions that people like it kind of shows that we were that we considered everything. Um is there a reason you're to not do that? >> No, it's just um for me again the paragraph 3 and paragraph 4 were one says
004that the board sort of reserves the right to request additional information. The other one says we'll have an standardized process. Um, let's be real, to ensure a consistent I'm not certain it will be an efficient process, >> but a consistent process. Uh, and so either one works for me. I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page about what we're expecting. And more importantly, I think to this may have been Emily's question, who is going to be responsible for either hosting the site, creating the form, uh, making sure it gets to the board in a timely fashion, all of those things. you have any thoughts? >> Yeah, I mean we can uh a lot like u was it central I slipped it uh they had a standardized form on their website.
005>> Uh we could just take a look at what they have and then come back with we could I mean I don't know if it's appropriate policy but we'd be happy to share a draft of what it would look like. >> Yeah. Yeah, I don't think it has has to be, for lack of a better word, enshrined in policy, especially if the policy states the district will create a standard form and it's public and it's consistent and it's there. That part is easy to do. Um the question becomes who one of the questions become who is responsible for either maintaining it or making sure that it's available, those sorts of things. And um for me, that's an excellent question. I think uh not to put more on Emily's plate and but I'm taking Emily away
006from it. I think if it's coming to the board, then the board clerk seems to be the most >> um appropriate place for it to be for the information to be received. Who builds the form? Who builds the product? That's something different from my perspective. >> Yeah. >> But I know for the folks who are in the room, Emily, you have thoughts about that. Emily Workman, we have different >> um I I agree. I think that makes sense. um I don't know how how specific it need to be. So I guess that means that it's the communications team that is receiving the submission through the website and then their respons but maybe that's just goes without saying. >> So can should we or can we say first of all I'd like to remove the word
007efficient. I'm not going to lie. Um I don't want to promise something that I'm not sure we can deliver right any form becomes cumbersome any process >> becomes cumbersome but to ensure a consistent process and I would like to say the district clerk shall maintain a standard submission request >> okay >> so it's it's the creating of the request not that the clerk is doing anything more than that yeah what do you have for us >> from >> y >> standpoint if the board is retaining the authority then isn't it it's not really a submission form as much as it's an application form. >> Um yeah, I agree. This is where I was saying that some of the language is inconsistent with what we're trying to do. Right. So >> if the board is retaining
008all authority, if the board can ask for additional information, if the board can >> then people have to apply to the board to change a name. So it should be an application process and application form. >> I don't know. It seem I mean this is really semantics but like it seems like we're inviting it's not necessarily to like change like if we had a new whatever building and we invited people to submit an idea for someone for the name of someone to be named after. I don't feel like they're like they're like they're not like applying for that. They're like submitting ideas that could be considered in the process. >> I I tend to agree. I think it is actually an application. I think it is an applying because there can be a denial. >>
009Yeah. >> Right. Like the board can turn back and that's it may be the two it may be beneficial to switch paragraph two and three. >> Yes. >> So to ensure a consistent whatever that may be and I appreciate the semantics of a submission or an application. I appreciate that, but I'm wondering if the board retains the sole authority afterward is more appropriate to begin with what you have to do to try to rename. >> I I also think that if you can there can be a both hand with the board requesting additional information after the sub the application is sent in if there's more. So, you know, I think it that could be a both and with the third paragraph there. uh another one and then we'll get back to the original question. um
010the way in which it reads I think that I would switch paragraph three and four now um which state which states in essence that such actions will only be taken by majority B full board that's the that's the end product right that's the idea of it um but it does get back I'm fine either way with standard submission procedure or application procedure either works for me or we can float it as an idea to the full board see if our full board has recommendations I don't I don't care too much. I still think I mean just looking it up now that apply says to use implement layout surface level or formally request something like a job or applying knowledge to a problem. Submit it refers to yielding to authority surrendering or formally presenting proposals or
011documents or consideration review. And then it says like common usages or like project proposals or applications. Um so >> I think we need a footnote that says according to Noah Webster we find this word as the final. >> I don't think it matters. >> I don't think it actually like as I'm reading it because it's because then there's also like the how it's used >> as opposed to the dictionary definition. They essentially both come down to making a request for consideration. And so I don't think that it actually matters significantly. >> Yep. Uh the second paragraph, the last parenthesis could probably be removed if we're in agreement that it should be hosted by the district clerk, >> which I think again makes sense. And then I think the flow of it um I think both
012recommendations work well. At the end of the day, we're going to end up in the same place where there's going to be a form that's created. The board can request additional information and it can only take action of by majority vote. And I don't know if that's the language we use. If we're looking for a consistency, we may want to go back and take a look what other policies state about how board actions are taken by majority vote. Not I'm not sure what language we used over the years. We probably change the language multiple times >> and the way that we have it written and also having the alum that we are inviting essentially inviting people to submit it even when we to submit for us to consider even about something that we've never brought
013up that we have any interest in considering. Right. >> Yeah. Well, that for me that's the only concern and I don't know if there's a way to address that. Um the form at central ISelip is um uh significant. It it requires a a decent amount of information. Um, not that we'd have to follow that same process, but would we want to even step in between where we don't want to waste labor like no, we would never consider that so don't even submit it or the submission is part of the archive and historical record and the board can decide afterwards or it means that you only get, for lack of a better word, requests or submissions that are serious in nature. >> If it requires that amount of work, then it is what it is. So
014big both for the archive, the history and for the seriousness. You got to fill out the form. Um the form we can modify or the board can modify any point in time. And I know we had a conversation about not specifying that in policy for a variety of reasons. >> I don't think that's necessary, but as long as it says there's it's available for everyone to see, um I'm good with that process as one board member. Can the form and process be written in language that is accessible enough that a student group under the direction of a teacher could potentially access it? When I think about who would be most likely to say like we studied the history of the name of our school of the person our school is named after and propose a
015change like students might be the most likely to be involved in that. So just making sure that like the form is not completely adultf facing so much that it's inaccessible to students working under the advisement of a teacher. Uh I think we can take a board can take a look at that. The past requests have actually not been from students. Um I think the past three maybe the past four have been from uh either teachers or community members asking about various faces. Uh but I would hope that any forum we're trying to create is accessible just for accessibility purposes. >> The the example from central is if I have it up right now it's pretty basic. It's I think it's pretty self-explanatory. A lot of check boxes. I mean, you can Google it. >> it's
016it's actually on the policy. It's at the very bottom. >> Okay. >> There's a link to it at the very botto. I guess this is the one piece that I want to make sure that we are being thoughtful about of if it is if it is the board who is first going to um initiate the process by saying we have a um a facility that we are considering naming or renaming and we invite submissions versus you can always submit a submission because when I hear you path Catherine say that I'm thinking, okay, so if a group of students put in the time to work with a teacher and to submit this form and to say like, you know, we're, you know, we find it inappropriate or offensive that this is named after X, Y, and
017Z, >> it puts like a lot of onus onto the board to like take that seriously and to really like even if it's just like one application, like we would have to then take this next step of really make deciding Like I wouldn't then I would have a hard time then saying like actually we we are not considering renaming any schools right now. It then becomes like a much more it becomes something very different. I would love that. But does that need to then does that mean should that be part of this process or is that something like that students could always weigh in on but this process is very much like talking about and initi initiated by the board when it's made a decision or when the district has to work with the district
018to make a decision that is considering naming or renaming something and here is the way that you can submit ideas for that. That's very different than cold calling with like ideas and submissions and I think I understand it and that's part of the role of being on the board making difficult decisions. So if students say I want to rename a school Simeon Dit did some very interesting things maybe we should rename Dit Middle School. That's part of the consideration if whether So, I understand the idea. The question becomes how specific do you want to be? Um, and this does say not just schools, right? Again, we've been asked to rename libraries, been asked rename courts, playgrounds. Um, there's been a number of things that people want to have honored. Uh, what we do not specify
019here, and this may not answer your question, Emily, is like, is there a, for lack of a better word, a statute of limitations, right? But like if something gets renamed like we're not going to revisit it for a number a couple years but even that makes me uncomfortable just giving recent history. >> Yeah. >> Um you know new information is always coming out. So we want to how do you want to proceed? I I um I think this is a policy for me that we should begin when we've had no policy and we've renamed a number of spaces. So as a starting place it seems like a good place to start. the board can always revisit like >> sure >> look we're finding this isn't working or this is way too much work for everybody
020involved we want to do something different but as a starting place without ever having one >> um we can go that route or we can also just make a phone call and see if um you know if anyone else like centraliz you know direct recommendations >> sure >> any unspoken rules that you all are following that we should know about >> but I think a lot of them is pretty clearly stated on And the form can state some of the things that you're saying as well if the board agrees to what the form is. >> Yeah, that makes sense. The only other thing is I think that in our previous some previous iteration or at least we talked about um asking the board clerk to to maintain a like list of previous submissions so that
021when we are thinking about like naming something new or whatever that we we can go back and like consider all of the names that have been provided. You're saying that as for us to to remind ourselves or to put into >> I feel like in the second paragraph maybe we could say the district clerk shall maintain blah blah blah and uh or we could just say after that like a a >> I would say slightly different like my apologies. Um, a list of all requests shall be held in the district's office. >> Yeah, >> I expect you to be here for quite some time, but anyway, >> I also know this might be >> Should that be at the end of that even? >> Sure. And maybe held isn't the right archive kept maintain maintained.
022>> Yeah. Yeah. >> And should we say like maintained and like reference for consideration in future um maintained in perpetuity. What's the records retention on this list? >> I think it's more just ensuring that we're like we would be returning back to them. So it it no I guess >> I'm with you. >> I'm thinking about like aside well just if you think that there's a name that is like so important that it would be really wonderful to have some facility named after I kind of feel like unless it's like I would only want this person's name associated with the with a gym because they were you know athletic person or whatever. Otherwise, it's like if you brought forward this other meaningful flow name, I would I would like to think that as the person
023that submitted that that that name would be considered for any time because I would really just be saying this person has done so much for this community and for ICSD. I would love to see them honored in this way so that they don't have to like re apply or submit that name for consideration every time if that makes sense. >> I think I'd argue just the opposite. >> Okay. If it didn't pass the first time, then it should go through the full process another a second time. >> Yeah, I guess it depends. If there were three amazing submission, like I see what you're saying. I'm thinking about it if I'm like there are three amazing submissions, we obviously can't do all three of them. Whereas, yes, if we were like, no, this doesn't this was
024a weaker, you know. So, I I hear you. And I'm also thinking about the flip um which is uh a a renaming request that would never be considered >> for sure >> but still has gone through the entire process. Right. So how do you protect from both those like >> well I guess you're saying we're maintaining it is fine then we can do whatever we want. >> All right. The only question I have is that last sentence if um I don't know how to take a look about how we capture that um and other policies or if there's a recommended um sentence to clearly specify what that is that obviously um that it's only by I I just think the policy needs to be clear that whatever process has gone through the renaming would only
025happen by a vote of the And that may not be the right language, but that's just what I put. >> Ch require consideration of the it's the word full is the problem here. Why does it >> I I'm just thinking like because but I understand what you're trying to say that the committee policy that there's no committee can make this unil >> or subgroup of board members. So >> I just say by majority vote the board like maybe full is assumed but that's why I also want to take a look see how >> it's at a at a voting meeting >> right >> because the structure is those votes happen at voting meetings so you could use that as the >> I've seen it multiple ways and I definitely have seen policy to say by
026majority approval of the full board >> to to specify what we're actually needing to discuss, but I'm fine for here for the time being. I'll take a look as well and we'll we'll go from there. >> Does that work? >> Fantastic. Thank you all very much. Uh I'm okay with this going back up for a second reading at a next board meeting. >> Okay, great. >> Where further consideration of board members have a chance to take a look at it. Um agenda item 4.2, which is school visits by board members. Um, also a somewhat new policy. The board has not had this prior. Uh, that was recommended to us by a couple of folks done some research from school districts across the state. Um, a good number of whom do have a policy. And to
027be clear, we talked about this briefly at the last board meeting. This is not about board members going to a school for a production or an athletic event or a parent teacher conference. This is about excuse me schoolboard members visiting schools under their official capacity as a school board member and trying to provide some direction uh to how that should happen. Uh we've gotten various legal opinions about whether it should happen, it shouldn't happen. Again, some of the other school districts are far more restrictive in how board members enter schools. Uh some school districts require background checks. Uh some school districts require it to be a motion or a resolution on a voting agenda for a majority vote of the full board to give approval for an individual board member. We didn't think that that
028at this time was necessary. We want to encourage board members to visit schools, but also wanted to set out a process by which that happened and have it be sort of centralized and information given to fellow board members as well. So, from the last time that we took a look at this policy, I re I think it's still there. Yes, I moved two paragraphs. I didn't change any language. Um the paragraph that's probably the most obvious is right above where it says procedures for official visits. Um that says board members visiting schools in their capacity. That paragraph had been moved and I think I add the word additional in the paragraph four. Um oh and then I did take a look at u procedures number one request for a visit uh shall go to the
029superintendent. I would recommend that we delete um number 1B because it is actually in the next section of scheduling planning and uh just include uh 1 A and 1 C which become 1B. The idea being an individual board member writes the superintendent, communicates the superintendent, superintendent is coordinating the visit and an individual board member gives um notice to the full board that they are going to be visiting the school. The rationale for this, as I've heard it from a couple of folks, is to do a couple of things. I'm thinking about writing policy far beyond where we find ourselves. Uh I know for some building leaders it can be and teachers and teaching staff it can be anxiety causing to have board members in a building if the feeling is that it's there for judgment
030or an evaluation. Um a new principal who may not be tenured would not probably tell a board member no. So it's not fair to ask that district leader to make the decision. That should be the decision of the superintendent. um and uh finding that maybe other board members may want to join into that um even while we're doing more instructional rounds right we did more of this again precoid got away from it postcoid but going back there so beyond that that's the changes that I saw from our first reading to the full board but open to suggestions questions uh obviously um additions, uh, revisions, etc. >> So, when you were first talking about this last was just last week, um, there was some pretty strong reaction from my group chat over there being no provision
031for teachers to invite a board member. That doesn't have to go through the superintendent. And there may be situ and like at that point it was a superintendent and the building leader but there may be times where staff and not just teachers but all staff you know especially staff who are paying attention to things feel that there is information that the board needs to make a decision that they can only get by being in the space that they are not getting from the superintendent. And there's no safe way for staff in this in this procedure as it is for for staff to leverage in inviting board members in for a purpose. >> Um I am not in support of that. Um and it's not that I don't want that to take place. Uh our legal
032council has requested that schoolboard members actually not visit buildings. That is not part of the board governance. Our board governance is to we have a single employee. We have two employees, my apologies, the superintendent and the board clerk. And so part of the idea is that it should always go through the superintendent. So other board members may feel differently. Part of your idea of having a policy to take place is that it still goes through the superintendent. Um it it we find ourselves in an interesting position where from my perspective and a number of years of experience that board members have an opportunity unfortunately to overstep their board governance role and get involved in the day-to-day operations of a district which is not what we're supposed to do. So I don't know how you square
033those things. And so the idea may be a staff member invites a board member and the board says bet yeah I'll reach out to the superintendent and I'll come to that school. So, it's still going through a process. So, I understand the concern of teachers and I'm I'm putting my teacher hat on, right? Like I would want a board member to come in and challenge what may have been heard or what may have been said. I understand that and it's a very interesting process if we're talking about board governance. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean the only other way that like without that avenue the only other way to communicate that is in this context which then you know it's like like I like I I could just I could see a worstc case scenario where
034the only way that people feel that their concern can be addressed is like through a three minute public comment at the start of a board meeting on something That would have been so much easier and more collaborative to be able to handle >> or they would vote through you as union leadership. >> Yes. But then but I'm not in here either. >> Right. Because the goal is between the board members and the superintendent. Let's not act as if this isn't already taking place where we're not having folks write to board members saying, "Please come visit my school." And that's already happening, >> right? I don't know that these be codified in a policy if we already have avenues for that to take place. >> I'm just passing along that that the feedback was to have
035to go through the superintendent felt like it was cutting an opportunity for that felt safe to workers to offensively voice essentially concerns that need to be seen in person. >> I I do not disagree with the request. I don't think our legal counsel would support that. And I would ask folks to make a phone call, see what our legal counsel would say. >> I'm wondering if um first of all, I want to I want to think about it in not totally a deficit person. >> You know, there's been lots of times when teachers have been like, I would love for you to come see like I know you were talking to Mary about EL implementation. I would like love for you to come see that or or whatever. Um, and I'm wondering about like the
036role of the um, building leader in all of it. Um, and if that isn't I know that there like I I have heard the concern expressed about a untenured building leader feeling who may feel like there is like they can't say no. Um, and you know, building leaders are responsible for running their entire buildings and taking in account all of these things about, you know, making sure that it's not disrupting learning and other things. And I I've had both before being on the board and on the board have multiple times where principles have invited me into school to be able to, you know, enjoy witnessing whatever was happening in learning environments. And so to some extent I what I was thinking about was just like we're just adding like it feels a little bit like
037we're adding an additional step if we've already had somebody who's like leading that entire building say I'd really you know you're welcome to come in or I'd really love for you to come see what's happening in this class and then to say like well I can't just say yes to your invitation to come to your own building. might need to go up and you know talk to the superintendent who then basically all I'm doing is saying the building leader has already I don't know it's just making sure that you know and I and Dr. Brown is here. Would love to like hear your thoughts like if you know if his part of his staff is are building principles. Is there like a level of like trust in them making a decision about who in the
038same way that any other person visiting the schools would be doesn't need to be like approved by anyone other than >> I would like to take it away from Dr. Brown. This isn't about the current position in the role. This is about a structure of board governance. Our legal counsel has repeatedly said that board members unless there is a official approval majority vote with the board should not be visiting schools. That's a way that we can go. I was trying not to go that route and saying rather than work with the superintendent. If we want to go that route, then let's follow legal counsel's advice, which is if a schoolboard member wants to visit a school as a school board member, then let's make it a resolution and have a board vote on whether or
039not we think that's a good idea and remove the superintendent all together. or we're not listening to legal council's direct recommendation anyway. This is one way of doing it alternatively, >> which is >> the way that it's written now. Um I'm just saying there's not like it's not either or necessarily like >> if we're already deciding that we don't feel like >> it needs to go to the entire board for a vote. This is one option if we trust that superintendent are putting whomever the superintendent is are putting building leaders in place that are responsible for maintaining you know safety and healthy learning environments and all the things. >> Is there a reason to feel like except for that um that that you know one principle that may be untenured and might feel really nervous
040about that. necessarily bring some >> before before you speak I want to say I appreciate you not saying let's not always focus on the negative but let's act let's not act as we can't find a situation where some employee says look I want you to come like my colleague is really bad I need you to come take a look it's not like that hasn't happened as well right and so trying to put some safeguards some guard rails is sort of the idea behind it you took a seat up Dr. Brown which usually means >> how moving married told me to move. >> I do as a student of the gang for 20 years in the state. There have been some situations where board members have gone into schools without board approval and resolution and there
041have been major issues that have actually led to board members being removed. So policies are some often times unfortunately written for the one off and the out >> worst case scenario. Correct. So if this is a conversation for this board, let's be careful because without and in some recent situations and I'll share some of those news articles with you. Um we have to put some shape on otherwise it will be it can be abused and with no policy in place to protect against that this could go real bad and it would ruin the next 10 to 15 years because I know that district was not there now. there's nobody visiting whatsoever like it's gotten it went to the extreme because of some situations that were unfortunate but board resolution I heard that because our legal
042counsel has recommended I've seen that work well because everyone is aware you know the intended purpose that's above board according to policy but outside of having everyone know and clear parameters it can be abused and it has been shown to do so and the recourse is not one that I would want to be reading about as a community >> and that was the idea about a policy that says you coordinate with the superintendent. The superintendent is then responsible for coordinating with the building leader and any staff that may be involved and that there must be notification to the full board. Not a vote of the full board though that's what most districts do but but advanced notice to the full board so everyone is made aware. I've also been around where folks have been visiting
043schools and no one has known and it that has created tension not just not here but in other districts as well. So trying to find that balance. Katherine, I hear what you're saying about teachers wanting to be able to invite folks in. Um it's strange because I get invited into schools on a regular basis oftentimes to give a presentation. So I wonder if that how that falls here. Like I'm going to talk to 8th grade Whit Middle School students for a day or I'm going in to read books at Bel Sherman Annex, right? like that is for me is a little bit different than going in and saying I want to walk around and get an idea of what's going on around the school. >> So you said something very at going to the school
044as a board member throughout my opinion most times board members who are sitting at the board table or going into schools more less as a visitor or a parent. So maybe we define what it means to be going into a school. Have you had that idea? >> Very clear. But yeah, if you're asking to go in your board capacity, right? So we've had that happen a couple times. People say, "I want to go visit the school." Why? Because I'm a board member and I should be okay. In that circumstance, we should have a policy that helps outline what that's what those steps are. So what would be the capacities in which it would be appropriate for board members to be coming in from in their board capacity, not in a visitor capacity would be the
045thing that would need to be defined. >> Yeah, I I've heard about LACS. I have no clue how it operates. I want to spend an afternoon understanding and seeing how the school moves and flows. The policy is clear, barring from some other language. You're not there for an evaluation purpose, for judgment purpose, right? Like it that's that's not the purpose. The purpose is to gather knowledge and hopefully help inform better decision making. That's sort of the the idea behind it. And I'm not like there are far more policies that are far more important to me than this one, right? I want to be clear about that. I just know that it looking at other districts, it is a common policy amongst other districts. We have had a couple of situations over 18 years where there's
046been some discussion debate about an actual stepby-step polic like how do we do it both for new board members and for returning board members and um I understand some of the questions but I do think the board as a board governance role should be in direct conversation with the superintendent and that does not preclude an invit ation that anyone writes to them like hey you should come see my school we have a process outline this is how we make it happen >> sure for clarity are are you proposing that every every time someone goes to a school that the board would vote on it is that >> if you are going to the school at in as a school board member >> yes no I'm not recommending that we vote on it >> okay >>
047I'm saying that the board should know if another board member is going as a in the board capacity that that visit is orchestrated through the superintendent's office and all the board members know. >> Yeah. >> If you're going as a community member see a basketball game like that, that's so vastly different. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. >> I'm going to see my kids third grade reading recital, whatever it may be. That's that's not we're talking about here. >> Let's be clear. My comments were to protect board members because in situations that have gone south is when a board member went and didn't have to explain why they were there later to the entire community and everyone else and the superintendent nor the other woman couldn't even speak to even any knowledge. So had people
048known they could help support like it just somebody you need some support and some uh comfort from my perspective but it can be twisted I um I think it's just it's a it's a challenging issue. I think that it's I totally hear what you're saying and I and I agree in many ways and and certainly appreciate the idea of like protecting board members and there is this piece of like a recognition of how completely bizarre the role of a board member is and how a board member is supposed to be, you know, making such significant decisions about and for a school district where their information about any is like so severely limited. And so it's not about like witnessing if something good or bad or whatever is going on, but just about like, you know,
049being on a governance team for a place in which like you you get so very very little if any exposure to is just such and I'm and and that's kind of a little separate, but that's why I struggle with this a little bit, not even with what's written or what's not, but just what a big like how do we how do we get there where we have a governance team who actually feels like they understand, you know, the the organization with which they are overseeing without, you know, even to put the onus on a superintendent and their coupled with, you know, senior staff to be able to give us or give a board the kind of information and exposure to so many things for them to feel like they can make, you know, thoughtful decisions
050and just be aware of things. >> So, it's ownorous to be like, "Hey, I want to go visit the school. Can you help me make that happen?" And, "Hey, by the way, board members, I'm going to visit the school." >> No, I'm not. I'm I'm talking about like why it feels like such a because then what started what started making me think about it was the second the the those of us who have children in schools right now have already have like those inequitable access to schools. And no matter what anyone says, you walk into a school building as a schoolboard member talking about your own kid and nine times out of ten you're probably going to be able to get access to an information. So it already feels very muddy. And so a person
051with no kids, you know, and I and I actually just had like an educator talking to me about this like, hey, you guys need to get into schools more. Well, you know, you're so lucky all of your kids are in schools. You can go into them. And I'm like, right, but that like limits the school. So it just I guess I'm just using this to voice like that it's a much more kind of complicated big thing and even those that aren't going through this policy are getting access to such different bits of information especially when you have a board that's like not working collaboratively. It certainly isn't sharing information that it's learning and getting. So I I I don't know. I I guess I just feel like there's a big weight to whether there is
052a teacher who really wants someone or what is the what is a building leader's role of being able to be the one that's like making a decision about who does and doesn't come in. Is it their responsibility to approve it and then let the superintendent know so that the superintendent is aware or >> but the policies written it's not approval it's coordinating. >> Yeah. >> Right. The superintendent is not approving whether a board member goes into a building. the coordinating the visit and we're talk about operating from a deficit model. We're operating as if there's that these requests can be combative as opposed to supportive like um I think the policy as I read it was trying to move away from the punitive form that I've seen which is we need a resolution to approve
053a board member to go into a building in their board capacity. That seems a lot to me, right? But that's what the majority of districts do or a number of I won't say the majority but that's what a a number of districts do. The policy is honored the way in which is written is that a board member will coordinate with the superintendent to visit a school and will let their colleagues know. I wonder if the word coordinate could be changed to notify because it's not reading to like that's the first time I've heard that articulated and having read it and then knowing the reaction of the people who reacted to it and shared their feedback with me coordinate the visit with the superintendent felt as if there were at least some taciff approval built into
054coordination that there was a like so it it's really like kind a question of >> but it's notified because that mean then they're working right. So but building principles are not us. >> No no no I know but I'm I'm I'm trying to I'm trying to square a circle here right >> um because I also see the way that it can cut both ways for staff. I can see the way how staff can think that they want the board coming into their school and then I can see all of the ways that they could quickly realize that that was not what they actually wanted and board protecting themselves. But also there is an element of how do you make solid especially I'm thinking of policy decisions and I'm thinking specifically about like to hear students
055and teachers talk about how the cell phone policy is working at a certain school is one thing. To take a walk through that school and see it in person is another thing. And this the first draft read of this felt that to staff to teaching staff that there's no clear way especially when the the word that's being presented by managerial staff is things are going so well. there's no safe way for staff to say, "Wait, no, you really have to see this because what you're being told is not my experience. Please come." And that there's no way to do that without essentially saying like if you have to go through the superintendent, then there is an element of what they're saying is not what's happening that feels that feels vulnerable to staff and like obviously
056it's your policy, >> Katherine. I disagree with that. uh you all have a fairly strong union with significant protections. Folks can go through you. The idea of coordinating with the superintendent is that board members again have an employee. They are a board governance. I could not imagine a board of trustee member walking into my classroom without the president of the institution knowing that that was taking place. I could not imagine what that would look like. And you can say, well, I walk I worked with the chair, right? But as an educator there, I don't necessarily like the structure. I don't like the hierarchy. I think folks who have known me for quite some time as I've tried to disrupt it as much as possible. I understand the concerns that are being expressed. But I think
057clear lines of demarcation are necessary and that's where I would ask then the union leadership. If a particular staff member feels like something is not happening, then the union makes a request to board members to make that happen and works with the superintendent in a collaborative way to make that happen. I I I don't see that this is I don't see that this prevents board members from going in and seeing what's taking place in a school in any way, shape, or form. Does it add a step? Yes. Does it prevent that? I don't see that. >> I think it adds a barrier for staff to feel like they can voice concerns even to me to go to go through me. I would dare say as a staff person who was a former IT member, I
058don't know how we ever get away from that feeling ever. no matter what policies in place. And so even if it was like you have to let all the board members know people may feel some way about that like right so the way in which I'm reading the policy and maybe we're reading it in different ways um I'm reading it as uh someone who's been on the board thinking about board governance and how we make this this thing happen. Uh so I don't want to be as rigid as other districts. I don't think the current policy is as to other districts and if it's something that we table to for another meeting then let's table it. I'm not again this is not a policy for me that uh I'm intrigued by the conversation that it's
059raising and I think that sometimes that we have conversations that feel to me to be personality dependent and not policy and that is that's a tough place to be at when you feel that that's the case. Have you pulled I know that Sean's spoken about other districts. Do we have any um examples of other just yet? >> We have a whole >> I think there's a whole fold shared with nine or 10 different examples. >> There's also a couple at the end. >> Are we looking up these now? Are we going to table this? Are we going to try to resolve this? What's the best way for >> um >> is it a whole board discussion? >> Yeah, that's what I was. So that would be the idea be to send it to the whole
060board as is for the dialogue the changes and brother grandpa if I may suggestion because I'm interested to learn more from our legal counsel about some of the um reasons why I've heard multiple law firms make this recommendation and their reasons for doing so. Um, and as a person who had woman was coming in and out through about my time leaving them like I I'm learning some things tonight and I'm about what people were perceiving based on superintendent like as a person who never even thought I was even in this situation to make a decision and I'm I've been in some significantly complex personnel matters in my time. >> Yeah. And I'm thinking about a board member, a governance member who is voting on policy and personnel recommendations going into a space to see someone
061in action making a decision at some point about that action without the entire board knowing about it or have someone approval. I can see the notice of claim coming and the challenges to that vote. So someone who's just following the game and again my role is to protect board member which is weird because I care nothing about what happens to the superintendent but if I'm a board member making a vote on a tenure or disciplinary issue with a person I want some cover from the rest of the board that I'm even supposed to be in that space because as you said every time I walk into a building someone approaches me as a board member and shares some information and I know there are various contracts including mine yet hearing that there are some things
062you must do immediately, not wait until the vote, >> right? >> And if not doing that immediately, then we're already in violation. >> So then if the question is that the way in which it's written, folks may feel like the superintendent has to give approval, >> then the solution is right, then the solution is to have a resolution that is by the majority of the board that would then direct the superintendent to coordinate the visit. >> That's only ever coordinated visits. Um, so I saw it there too. It raised my eyebrow bit when I deny I don't want to ever be in a situation I'm denying access. >> I didn't think that's the way in which that policy was written that you actually could deny access and it was a quick read from this far
063away with no readers on but I did see the word deny so it hit me. >> You were you were saw the word deny. >> Yeah I saw deny up here >> limit. I thought I saw superintendent and or Devon could limit or deny >> may limit reschedule or deny visits >> if necessary to protect student safety or maintain order or address emergency conditions. It is not a flatout you can deny. So I understand we can change that language as well. But I want to be clear that there are caveats. It wasn't just like the superintendent can deny if there's something going on. Yeah. The superintendent can say today's not a good day. >> Right. we got a call or whatever it may be or the you know a water line broke like that's how
064I was envisioning if we need to clarify the language you want to take that out that's perfectly fine you want to make it where it's a board vote that's perfectly fine for me right coordination of the visit through the board clerk's office >> in collaboration with the superintendent's office something like that could be a way um I've never heard people thinking that I'm in the way of keeping board me from hearing different teachers if that is perception then we need to address that >> to make it clear it's not that people are saying it is people are saying that's the fear that's the concern that it could be used in that way and not Dr. Brown but a defendant in >> yeah I think we need to be because counter to what I mean I
065see I see your face looking at Dr. Brown but like Dr. Brown. >> Contrer to what you just said, I think that it's the opposite. It's actually not about you at all. It's about any superintendent that would be in this role and that this that >> or if there is a fear amongst whomever that a superintendent would be like, I don't want board members to see what's going on in this building because of XYZ. That's not a personal thing. The other is thinking about this. >> It is a perpetuation of a hierarchy and us versus them that we're codifying into language and that can be aggressive. clean. So it there has to be a way to talk about this and write this where it's a we're getting the access there's appropriate coordination and board members
066um are they have some cover so that they can be in that space and learn and not be held inappropriately accountable for a decision that's made later. >> I don't know that this addresses what people are talking about. You can let me know. All right, I understand. And we can just say in coordination with the board clerk's office as well, um I still have a concern having watched it happen before of a board member bullying a new principal. >> So I feel like the superintendent has to be involved at some point in time and not a not a decision maker, just a participant in the process. And so that's partly what I'm thinking about as well. And so I don't know this new language addresses that makes it a little bit right that the school
067board member will be uh coordinated their visit with the board's clerk office in consultation with the superintendent. If that language solves it, I still believe that all board members need to be in informed. >> We can go as far as a vote, but if that if that serves the purpose, then I'm that works for me as well. Like I'm not I'm not trying to put it to the super, right? That's not the goal. Uh the goal is to try to find a process by which the board operates upon its order. >> That feels better cuz the board clerk is not a manager of the people. >> And this other one, I'm more than happy. This part right here, if you move up, Emily. the highlight >> that highlight part I am more than happy to
068delete >> like I think there'll be some if something were to come up we would know that it wouldn't be a good idea we would just cancel the visit right like I don't know that we need to say that someone could deny a visit if a board member wants to go into a building the board member goes to a building but there should be a coordinated way in which that happens and all board members should be that's the only thing that I'm trying to accomplish So, should we strike through this for the time being? >> And this part down here, can we delete because this gets back to what I think the conversation we were just having that the board or the superintendent is going to be coordinating the visit. So we just walk through
069about how to not do that. So can we just do that? Uh if it's good by folks right now, understanding that there's a longer conversation coming to the full board, let's put it forward for discussion and debate. In the meantime, if there are some additional language changes, you can send our way. Uh, of course, that means that we're not going to get to the other two policies. Uh, with the three minutes that are left, can I move on from that policy? Uh, agenda item 4.3, student exeicial November. Um, I think we need to communicate to our principles what's going to take place. Dan, you had a Can I ask you to speak briefly on it knowing that we have two minutes left? Well, they were they were just both supportive, both Karen and Keith. The
070only question that came up uh was Keith was wondering if the possibility of one more um member for me has to go to three instead of two. >> I only question. >> Yep. I appreciate that. I I would say keep it at two. That's where the policy was originally written. LACS high school what? 200. That's right. >> Trying to think. I think a high school total it maybe less than that. Total high school 125. >> I don't know. School is roughly about 300. Just under 300, right? >> It is under >> anyway. Okay. Let's say they say it's 300, >> right? The numbers compared to Ithaca High School just proportionally speaking, a 43 does not seem it may be equitable, it's not equal. So maybe we can reconsider it. Sure, >> I understand the idea,
071but the policy as stated says four from Itha High School, two from LACS. We added a third under special circumstances a couple years ago. >> And so that's how we got the three and never put on there. The way in which the policy is written currently does not specify those numbers. I think as a policy committee, we should put it forward to specify those numbers. Um, and I do think it's uh I think it's an appropriate mix as one board member. I don't know how you feel. >> Yeah, I agree. I don't know if he like provided some reasoning behind it, but >> um I mean I could talk to him a little bit more. Um I think just because they've had three. >> They haven't always had three though. >> Right. That's correct. >>
072Yeah. >> And I think it's only been postco that there's been three. That's right. >> So it's a very short time relatively speaking. There's a ratio you can expand and contract as necessary like one rep for every number of students >> or is already more than the board wants to entertain. Uh especially being at a table with speaking rights right of the floor. Uh depending on who's running a meeting that can become difficult quick if you have six six additional voice voices uh at a table. Um but I appreciate that. I added two different things in this policy. Um, one, should we specify the language about the number of people, and I think I see my comment here. In keeping with ICSD board's long-standing practice of student representation, there'll be four students appointed from ETHA
073High School and two students appointed from LACS. That's language that I would recommend and the schools, as we said, could choose that. Though I do have a recommendation if the high school can keep their process of voting in two board members and then having two board members appointed somehow some way for us to address issues of representation. Uh is it someone from the superintendent student council? Is it a member of another club or organization? Um, if there are going to be four board reps from Ithaca High School, I wonder if there isn't a way to res reserve one spot for a student to be appointed by somebody, the high school administration, the board. Uh, I'm I'm worried as we've all said about if it's all done by majority vote of the student body, then we
074may not have the representation. We're not going to rep complete representation no matter what, but that may also continue to limit representation. >> I don't um I think that the way that we talked about it last time was that it because we know that there's we're never going to get close to full representation of of a student body that it was about putting the onus on the on the school. >> Um I I just that like I I I like the idea in general of um of that and then I worry about like who is that one person and what group is it from what groups feel like they were not they're not identified although with that said I think that if we were talking about the student the superintendent's advisory council I think that
075that is different because I think instead of like identifying them based on I don't know something that could get that somebody would have to like defend. I guess I think that I think that the unique work that they are doing and the work that they're doing to like connect with student bodies both at the middle school and the high school and I know that people from the advisory council like really were advocating for us to include um representation from middle school which I think we acknowledge would would have expanded it significantly in ways that we didn't feel like we were ready to be able to do. It might bring like a really unique >> Yeah. but not in keeping with the legislation. It it doesn't provide, >> right? But it just like I don't know.
076They bring in a unique perspective as a student group because of the really meaningful work that they're doing and try to reach everyone. So I guess I would be more in support of like having someone from that group to be able to represent and talk about the work that they're doing versus >> I think my recommendation would be to take a look at it if there's any language changes to make it. But let's um put it front of the full board at least for a discussion and some of this we can hash out and if you really want a board rep I'll volunteer an 11year-old see how what she would want to say as well. Um I realize we're over time. Two other quick things. The policy on the 4.5 on the board organizational meeting
077is a legal change. Um, it's a single sentence just in keeping up with the change in the law. So, I recommend that we would put that up front of the board. There's really not much discussed other than the change of the way in which New York State requires the reorganization meeting to happen every year. It used to be the first week in July and now it's before July 20th. Right. >> So, it's a simple language change. I would recommend we put that forward. >> Great. Um lastly, my again and my apologies for the HR committee. Uh to my policy committee colleagues, uh item agenda item 4.4, New York State mandated policy updates. Uh Emily went through and kindly took a look to see what is required in our policy book and what is missing. Um
078there is no way that will happen between now and June. Uh but I would recommend uh what whoever are members of the policy committee next academic year um address the missing policies andor mandated updates that need to take place. And so that is there for folks to take a look at to see. But you can put it on the June policy committee just as reference just to make sure it stays fresh. But that would need to be there's some work there needs to be done. and the other policies we will hold off to given that we are out of time. >> Good job. >> Appreciate you all. All right. Fantastic. We'll bring the policy committee meeting to