NHCS Board of Ed. Policy Committee Meeting | September 9, 2025

001I got it. Here comes Miss Justice. Right on time. Uh we do have a quorum and uh everyone here. Uh Miss Miss Pat, would you please call the role? >> Miss Dol >> present. >> Miss Mason >> here. Miss Justice >> here. >> All right. Welcome everyone. Thank you for all being here. Uh today's invitation will be given remotely by Chaplain Georgiana Pinkney. So, uh, then we'll have a moment of silence because we will not be gathered on 911. And then we I guess I'm up for the ple for the pledge of allegiance. Good morning. My name is Geanna Pinkney. I'm a chaplain with Lower Capefir Life Care. I am grateful for the ask to pray for the leaders of our community today. Let us pray. Gracious and loving Lord, we thank you for this

002day, the giver of all things that are good and worthy. We thank you for our many blessings, not just for ourselves, but for our schools and community. We thank you for the abundance of successful outcomes and school events and for the staff of New Hover County. We ask for the blessing of discernment as we continue to seek wisdom, strength, and courage in all of the planning we do today. Guide our thoughts and deliberations and allow us to make conscientious decisions for the good of those who have confidence in our leadership and put their trust in us. We ask Lord God for the insight to lead with integrity to reflect what is good and right for the community we serve without self-interest but with fairness and integrity. Lastly, Lord, help us to have compassion in our

003hearts and may our actions reflect your values of service and justice. We pray that by working together we have a united purpose and create a positive learning environment for all. We ask this in your holy name. Amen. >> Amen. If you would please now join me in just a moment of silence for all those that lost their lives on 911. Amen. You can face the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. >> Hi. Is >> Mr. Perry remember? >> You're here. >> I'm here. >> I am so sorry. >> You're fine, dear. >> You're fine. In fact, I was thinking about you right now. >> And Dr. Barnes

004is still at the law conference. at the law conference. >> Law conference. >> Oh, that's right. >> Yeah. So, okay. All right. But we have the rest of the team here. So, very cool. At least for some of the time. All right. I will entertain a motion to approve the agenda. >> So, moved. >> Is there a second? I'll second that. >> Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. All oppose. Like sign. Passes 30. Next, we have the approval of the minutes. Is there a motion? I move accepted. >> Okay. Is there a second? Okay. Any discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. That passes 300. >> All right. We'll jump in with both feet and I'm going to look to

005my left uh to our assistant superintendent to lead us through policy 4150. Miss Barnum, come on down. >> All right. >> Speak on up. Okay. So, the um well, I'm looking at the packet. >> Um page 20, >> right? I'm taking over. >> Telling us the pages we're going to do. >> Um so then on page 25, I think is the um additional suggested language. Is that the um the one that we want to discuss first? >> Okay. uh because the language on page 20 has been has been discussed a few times and I think this is the new suggestion page 25. >> Um the section around the student assignment plan shall detail the procedures for how the lottery assignment process will work and um I'll just refresh your memory. The um student assignment plan

006is the student assignment and enrollment handbook um that has been shared a couple times in our links. This is what it looks like. Um, let's see. All lotteryies will provide an equal chance for students to be selected. No weighted preferences shall be made. And then the additional language added is however in the case of yearround or magnet schools, students must apply for admission to the nearest yearround or magnet school to their doicile that provides an equivalent school calendar and educational environment. >> Isn't that already in So, so I can explain what what the student assignment plan already does have. >> That's already in there. >> Well, it is for the year round. So, the two year round schools, Eden and Codington, >> there is an attendance zone that splits the county in half and it's

007um Market Street South is um for Cottington applicants and Market Street North is for Eaton applicants. And then that is run um as of the change that to have no weighted lottery. this coming year it will be run without weights and it will be um equal opportunity but based on those two geographic zones. So so that um is the case there. However, the magnet schools for example um Freeman and Snipes they are not split geographically and students can apply to attend Freeman from any place in the county and they can apply to attend Snipes from any place in the county. And so that's how that works right now. Um, and so I wasn't sure about this suggested change and and whether that is something that um would benefit student assignment. >> And just what you

008were saying before uh about the busing, if a child lived to Carolina Beach and wanted to go to Gregory, would we provide a bus for that? >> So Gregory, let me double check on that. Um, if they lived in Carolina Beach and they wanted to go to Freeman, yes. If they lived in Carolina Beach and um got approved for Cottington, then yes. if they wanted to go to Snipes. Yes. Let me double check on um Gregory. Um Yep. I'll come back to that. Okay. >> I'll come back to that. Thank you. Um so I think the question for me is the one about magnet schools in that. >> But what you're saying is anywhere in the county for the magnet schools, >> right? >> That that are what magnet schools we're discussing right now, >>

009right? >> Miss Barnum, how many magnet schools do we have? >> Just for everybody. So we we don't call them magnet schools which is why the language I I need to sort of um pull this out and define. So specialty schools so we have um year rounds we have two and then specialty schools are listed as Rachel Freeman International School at Gregory and then Snipes. Um and then then those those are the ones that are listed as specialty schools. And then of course we have signature programs within our high schools and then otherwise our high school specialty schools which are our cooperative innovative high schools and just because I know we've had this conversation before. I'm sorry. Can I >> Miss Mason? >> Sorry. Um, what there's a different requirement when it comes to delineating

010magnet schools, correct? There's like certain requirements that we have to abide by. Can you just kind of say what those are for the public to hear? >> Um, I don't that's not in my area. Um, the specialty program schools and whether we would um meet the definition for magnet is not in my area and I'm not sure if we're ready to answer that question. The definition of magnet schools There's requirements to participate in a magnet like and and >> to be called a magnet school >> to be labeled as a magnet school. There's certain requirements. Correct. And I'm just curious and I'm so sorry I as we were talking I didn't even think about I didn't even think about that question. But um just to kind of give the because we don't have magnet schools

011and so to put it in policy we shouldn't put magnet in there. But just so the public knows why we don't have them, there's there's something different about them. And just making sure >> it's kind of like magnets a brand name and we're using generic terms because the brand name would have would have additional requirements. >> Okay. So our three, right, our three are um specialty program schools for elementary are Rachel Freeman, Gregory, and Snipes. Transportation is provided for those three. >> There you go. There you go. >> All right. >> Now you know. >> So um I would I would not suggest that we use um the term magnet school, but that we would use year round and specialty schools. Use the same language that is provided in our um student enrollment and assignment

012handbook. And again, the year round is delineated by geographic area, but um our other specialty schools are not. And I think that we would end up limiting our applicants if we did that >> because the wording, you just discovered the wording isn't proper. >> Right. Right. >> Um I'm not even sure why. I guess the big thing I think that he's trying and I don't want to speak for anyone else but I think the big thing he's trying that that the this uh policy is trying to say is that you know trying to get get uh remove the delineation of the innovative high schools that that last part of the rubric >> he's trying to get rid of it. I I think that's what what he's >> that's not we can't operate that way >>

013but I think it's the part that you know talks about you know whether you are college >> whether you are a first time college attendee I guess >> right so that next section I think right so that number three and we've got more information that we can provide on that I think the the statement though um that is written here in red if um if approved by the policy committee and then approved by the board changes is the student assignment plan. >> Mhm. >> Because the um because it it uses the magnet school terminology. Um and then it also says that um they could only apply to the magnet school um closest to their doicile which that limits our applicants. So we really at this point we do not have that in place. Mhm. >>

014So I think it's up to the >> again that would like for instance let's take uh you know um Snipes. So basically that if you didn't live closer to Snipes if you want but right now if somebody from Carolina Beach wanted to go to Snipes they could but this policy as it's written would limit that. So they would not be able to. the additional language would if this additional language was not in there then um if the language in red the sentence the >> the sentence here then we would continue and we would allow more opportunity for parents to choose those specialty schools >> purpose of having >> that's the purpose of having the specialy school so parents across the district could >> and right now just you know so we are aware of that

015number do you know you know our our specialty schools full for the most part and if not we, you know, we want to keep those doors open as much as we possibly can. >> Exactly. So, our year- round schools are at CAP. Um, our specialty schools are not. So, we would like to welcome applicants from any place so that we can continue to um provide seats there. the year- round schools. Um just for um example, we had about combined between Eaton and Codington around 70 children on the wait list. So we were able to accept the vast majority of interested parents to a year round >> and then for specialty school we could still accept more students. So we don't necessarily we don't have a wait list and we're um we could still accept more

016students there. >> Okay. So limiting that geographic area could be problematic in allowing more students in. >> What about going to the the next paragraph which is again I think the one that is the best or or most important to be discussed at this point I would think and that would be the one about the innovative high schools. um taking that one line off the rubric is that how would that negatively affect or you know and I think everybody's kind of going back and forth on that but the one the one that you know talks about the not having college first time >> so I think I have some information for you about that so I did give you a hard copy of the rubric today so you have that at your desk um you'll

017see that the total points >> Got it right here >> from the rubric are 78 points and then plus the five for firsttime college making a total 83. So I do want to point out I give you gave you a copy of the general statute 115c 23850 that says that the purpose of the comprehens uh cooperative innovative high school programs shall target >> either students d at risk of dropping out high school students with parents who did not continue education beyond high school and high school students who would benefit from accelerated academic instruction. to sort of define that students whose parents did not continue education beyond high school. We are looking at parents who have degrees versus attended some college because even for our students who are in the CCP program and take classes through

018the community college through their high school, that counts as some college for them even if they don't do anything beyond high school. So, we're counting degreed parents versus people with college, but that does say shall target that. So, I do want to just point that out. And then, um, so you have this sheet that has all three of our cooperative innovative high schools numbers on there with the number of applicants, the number accepted, and then the number that actually enroll. But, of course, just like in a college, just because you're accepted doesn't mean that people are going to enroll. oftent times they're making other options. And then you have three sheets. Yours is a little bit bigger than this, but the one with um the green at the top, that is actually Isaac Bear. And

019it shows that um let me scroll up. Um that Isaac Bear for this year, this current year, had six students admitted um because those five points tipped them over the cut score. And however, those students were admitted, but um they their admission did not deny the spot of any other non-firstgeneration college attendee at um CEK. Eight students were admitted based on those five points. Um but um none of those took the place of anyone who would have been admitted and ex um admitted anyway. And then um at WEX um they didn't exactly answer that question, but the the short story from Miss Hall is that no one was denied admission so that someone else who did not get those five extra points um could be admitted. Um if that helps. So that's that's the one

020as I call it the right just said is I guess as far as the policy was the one that's most needy the one that is the most apparent that Mr. Perry is concerned about. What are your thoughts just now, Miss Mason? >> Um, so I I'm in and looking at the rubric. Um, how often I know that you and I had a brief conversation. So, Miss Dr. Hamilton, not Miss Dr. of Hamilton um about how often this is used, if it breaks any ties, um and any students that were pulled up because of those extra five points, what kind of data do we have that that was a successful thing for them? Should they have gotten those points, did they utilize them? You know what I mean? To the best of their >> So, Miss

021I asked Miss Hall that question after you asked that. She said very rarely do they return to their home school. she can work on those numbers, but most of the time they stay there and remain there and do just fine. >> And then as far as if are there frequent ties that have to be broken by something like that? >> Um I don't know about ties, but I I can say that according to these reports that we gathered that no one was not admitted because someone else was. So, >> oh, >> so I don't don't know that, >> you know, I don't know that ties um matter. Even if if we both had if you and I both had 60 points, I don't know that that matters because no one was not admitted because of

022someone else, she said. >> And then the other I'm so sorry, Mr. Verable. Am I good? He's not. Um the other thing what was what was it that we Oh the different um the different programs have different levels of acceptance. Correct. They each um create their own cut score. And then once round one has gone through and x number of children do not accept, then to make sure that we are trying to fill those buildings to the capacity that we need for them to be for space purposes and for staffing purposes. They will go back and lower that cut score for around two, sometimes around three to help um fill those spots there. And to clarify, the cut score is established by the number of seats that are available, which is based on the school's

023capacity, not based on an arbitrary cut score that they want for enrollment. >> That's very helpful. I'm like, if they have different cut scores, how are they choosing that? But >> it's going to depend on how many seats they have and how many points their group of applicants have to where the cut score needs to be. And then >> depending upon how many um accept the seat so they can apply and and be um um accepted but then how many of them actually then present for enrollment? >> Can I ask can I ask a quick question? So what is the weight list for the three um schools? Do you know? Yeah. >> Because I did have a you know to be totally honest Dr. Barnes and I talked about a young lady, you and I,

024well, you and I talked about the same young lady that her sister already attends one of these schools and she was not, you know, was not on it, but then later on it was like they have nobody on the wait list. I'm like, but the child wanted to go. So, >> right. So, so um so according >> if a if a student is applies and they meet the qualifications >> um and they're ranked ordered and then the cut score is at a certain place, those remaining that met qualifications will be on a wait list. >> If they don't meet the qualifications, >> the minimum requirements, then they don't go on a wait list because they're not eligible for enrollment in the school. >> Gotcha. what you're talking about young lady was in that situation. Okay.

025So, she wasn't qualified >> because I actually asked cuz with our other schools, the elementary schools, if if a sister's on and another sister applies, they're automatically in. And I said, you know, don't we have that? And but for the high schools, they do not. >> For for regular for traditional high schools, we do. But for um for the specialty high schools or the cooperative innovative um high schools, they have to meet certain requirements to participate in the rigor of the program that includes college courses. >> Success, Miss Mason, >> full of the questions. I never have questions, so you should be excited. Um this one is not for you ladies. It is for the gentleman sitting right next to me and that is looking at um general statute 115 C-238.5 A. It says these

026cooperative the last sentence of that parag that particular first paragraph these cooperative innovative high school programs shall target any of the following groups and then it has three different um types groups of students. Can you um indicate are these mandatory? Are they something that we would like to have? Can we pick and choose? What's your interpretation of that? >> I think there I mean it uses the shall and um Dr. Hamilton I very briefly spoke a minute ago and I think that's the same reading. you you well and Miss Barnham's over there agree and I haven't asked the um the schoolboards association but if you look in the very next um part 10 of uh this same article that talks about regional schools and I'll give you the reason I think it's mandatory is because

027the admissions criteria for regional schools and that's 115 C-238.67 67C it says may give priority to first generation students. So the general assembly is using different language there. It's permissive in that point. It's it's may this is shall. I mean >> look you could read that as shall target students in any of these following you know or any one of these following groups. I think the more realistic view is that they mean any of them. That if you fall if you are a student and you fall into one of those three categories that you got to be targeted by the by the criteria. And the problem with that is that in on page 25 here, this part that says level of >> in the parenthetical >> um >> level of parents education is is problematic

028for that reason. If we strike that out, I think that we're compliant with the rest of it. I mean, you don't have to consider income. Um, and you don't have to consider geographical location, but you do have to consider whether or not their parents continue education beyond high school. My question in that though would be because it says that the cooperative innovative high school programs shall, which I agree, target any of the following groups. We give points for one of the three. We don't give points for the other two. >> And and I I don't know how to I don't know how to work that. >> Yeah. >> I mean, because these are those are a little bit >> How do you demonstrate that you're at risk of dropping out or that you would benefit

029from accelerated academic instruction? I mean, I I I mean, that's that's a more of a staff question um than me, but I I I I certainly think it would be that you do need to target those. I just don't know how. >> And it's not as cut and dry. It's real cut and dry with educational >> so so it is our understanding that the board can choose to pri prioritize any of those three points one 1 A or two and and like um Mr. Blancher just mentioned the rubric or somebody just mentioned the rubric does maybe it was you Mr. Boulevard um include the 1A um parents who do not continue education beyond high school by having the level of parent education included. Um so it the rubric by our view does comply with the

030general statute. um the the language on page 25 um that would that would say not to include so we don't include um family income um do include level of parent education and we don't include geographical location with regard to our cooperative innovative high schools because they're also very different and we don't zone the county by by a geographic boundary for those. So that again would limit our opportunities for parents to apply for the program that they believe is a best fit for their student. >> And can I add that we um the children who would benefit from accelerated academic instruction. So those are going to be the children who have the highest number of points from the rubric because they would be the ones with like all level fives, all A's and so that increases

031their number of points. So that is the way that that is intended to address that section two right there. >> Okay. Is there any way we could address number one? >> Could it maybe counselors? So there are we we do of course do operate dropout prevention programming and we do that in any of our schools whether it's a cooperative innovative high school or a traditional high school and a lot of that is the work of our um school counselors, school social workers, graduation coaching efforts. Um we engage in dropout prevention efforts early on with our attendance campaigns and maintaining um routine timely attendance in school. Um so we often have utilized other alternative programming JC Row sometimes um just unique um specialty high schools that's not specific to cooperative innovative high school like Mosley to

032really support based on the type of need the student has concerns us for risk of dropping out. uh how well how well do they feel connected to their school environment? And if they don't feel connected to their school environment because of the size or because of the different types of activities, then that's where we look at at assisting them and being placed where they feel that they can be most successful. >> Um >> so it's not specific to the cooperative high school. >> Well, this seems pretty cut and dry because that is the state statute which has precedent over anything that we come up with. >> So I don't know how you're going to wiggle around this and just go with it. I have a lot of concern about even bringing this up. You know

033me, I'm an educator first and I've I've done plenty of I've read plenty of studies. I've been involved with schools that this was a huge plus to have the first time college attending students participate. Um I don't see any downside to this. I'm not sure why this is even in here. Uh this is probably a personal perspective. Everybody's got different ones, but as professional, my professional perspective is this is and the state created it for a reason. It's to break the cycle of certain culture in families that don't believe in higher education, >> but it works and that's nothing but a benefit for the students and our community. So, I'm not sure why this would even be an issue, but that the state apparently agrees with me. I think that um when we're looking at

034these these changes, just for clarity sake, the cooperative innovative high schools are not part of a lottery. Correct. >> Right. They are more of a rubric application process. They're not a lottery process. >> So, initially they were included under lottery assignment. Correct. section of the policy, >> right? In the section of the policy originally, um it was clarifying that lottery assignment would not be um this was where the weights got in. Uh the weights were discussed and weights are applied to the rubric which is kind of it they were more connected because of weights not because of lottery. >> Right. Yeah. >> So it it really shouldn't they shouldn't be considered lottery, but it it became they became connected in the discussion about whether weights should be applied. >> So I think that based off

035of just the separation of if if if they're not under the lottery assignment, I don't think we should put them. But I do I do think it's important that we have a section about that in policy. Um >> can I offer a suggestion? >> I mean >> Would that be helpful? why you're here. >> So the um under lottery assignment um the the last section added where it talks about how in the case of yearround or magnet um students must have apply um for year-round or magnet to their doicile that provides an equivalent school calendar and educational environment. Um yeah, nearest their doicile unless you want to limit access for applicants that should not be included because the student assignment plan is already presented to the board for approval. So how that how that is

036completed in that process is already approved by the board. >> So you're saying strike the word save the students geographic. >> No, I'm on page 25. Oh, you're on 25. >> Yep. I'm sorry. I was looking at the new language. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Well, I mean, would it not be better to go back to 20 and use what we have here and just make tweaks to that versus starting a whole just because Mr. Perry has brought this forward doesn't mean we have to. I don't think that 25's ever been approved. >> Page page 20. That makes good sense. So, the student assignment >> while throw it off. >> No, I like that. Student assignment plan shall detail the procedures for how the lottery assignment will work. All lotterys will provide an equal chance

037for all students to be selected. No weighted preferences shall be made save the students geographical proximity to the school. And then that last sentence can be removed. This does not include the cooperative innovative high schools. Right. >> But al should should we also get rid of the words save the students geographic proximity to school or no? >> Um you >> well the student assignment plan is going to clarify that there is a geographic proximity for year round schools. So you could take that part out um because the student assignment plan is going to cover it. So you could so if you removed save students geographical proximity that's covered elsewhere. >> Well also because as you said like with snipes you don't want to do that anyway, >> right? So it's only for for where it

038does apply. Okay. And then if you if you go back to page 25 and you look at that section three >> Mhm. >> a suggestion for admission to cooperative innovative high schools. Um leave the first two sentences. NHCS administration will develop an admissions rubric for entry into these programs. This rubric and any alterations to it must be approved by the board. >> But we already have that. But I do not believe the the rubric itself was previously approved by the board. But Dr. Barnes and I discussed that this rubric can be um added to the student enrollment and assignment plan that I do bring to the board for approval and it can be added as an um an appendix to that. >> That's a good idea. So people can see what's going on. >> So

039then you're right. So then your first two sentences and remove the rest as that um would become um unnecessary when the board approves the rubric. >> So just leave the first two. >> I got it. >> I can I can make the motion if you want. >> Well, if you would and that way there and I would just say instead of adding it on the bottom as was just said, why don't we have a separate a new sections three because that's we we it's a different thing. So, why don't we call it a different thing and make the three from page 25, >> but I'm gonna let Miss Mason do that. Go ahead. >> All right. So, I will make a motion that we >> Why did I sign up for that? >> You raised

040your hand. I saw it. >> I know I did. Okay. So, I make a motion that we remove from under lottery assignment, we remove save the students geographical proximity to the school. This does not include the cooperative innovative high school programs and we add a section three thus altering the remaining numbers with the sentence um new Hanover County administration will develop an admissions rubric for entry into these programs. This rubric and any alterations to it must be approved by the board. >> I'll second that. >> Okay, now discussion. So, all we're doing is we're getting rid of all everything in the red except section three and that first sent first two sentences. >> Correct. >> Is that correct? Uh >> 20 page 25. Section >> on page 25. >> Yeah. >> 25. Um. All right.

041And I'm a little confused. Um, here's the the red and the deleted over here on two. So, we're not approving that. We're just approving number three in the first two sentences >> on page 25. >> On 25. Okay. And then on 20. >> Go back to 20. Yes. >> Eliminating save everything from save until programs. >> Yes. >> Is that Are we >> okay? We have a motion. Second. Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor, please signify of uh amending uh policy 20 uh uh with Miss Mason's um motion. Just signify by saying I >> I. >> All opposed. Passes 30. >> All right. >> Do we have to send that to the board, too? That was just the amendment. Or was that to >> talk to the board? Yeah. >> Perfect. >>

042And I don't know where my little sheet is, but you got it. So, we got it. So, all right. I don't where my usual little sheet >> and I can talk to Miss Kadesky too after >> got it over here. >> All right. So 4150 is going amended to the board discussion 4150. >> All right. Carrying on uh our other uh probably lengthy discussion will be party uh policy 2230 um which is on page >> yeah fin >> 30 30 30 30 Okay, um updates here uh change in name on the first section delete safety In section four, so finances changed from finance to finance, bond and capital joint committee. Uh deleting the whole safety section uh four uh updating section four under curriculum to four to three board members. And I believe Miss Mason

043uh just to let everybody know >> um that we did that's what was approved by the board was three board members. >> So if I could tell you exactly when and exactly what the vote was. Um so back in April, end of April on the 29th, it was an agenda review. Um we had a lot of discussion about this and the changes um that I had sat down with our uh subject matter expert. Um I brought forth those and the motion was made initially to make it into a board standing committee with two additional members. Two additional members. So there's already one >> confusion was I additional two. You said additional which meant you already had one member total. That's what the confus I didn't realize that >> and then that was that was a

04470 vote. So and that was back in back in April. So I went back and watched all of that fun discussion. Well, yeah, I understand what happened. I I think there was confusion. That's probably the reason it ended up the way it did with the 700. >> And then u continuing with 2230 section 10, which is the turnaround task force, which is still uh carrying on as uh the elev elevation group uh but it's not one of our committees anymore. >> It's on their own. So that is deleted. and a new section G which goes through committee assignment process. Um and that I don't know where that actually came from but that's there now too. So anyway, >> if I might I think that was an addition by I think that was an addition by

045um >> Mr. Perry as well. >> Okay. All right. Well uh so it's up for discussion. We can make the motion to to bring it on to the full board. We can discuss parts of it. Um, >> I'll make a motion that we send it to the board. >> All right. I'll second that >> as as amended as it has been. >> Okay. And then we can discuss. Okay. Let's have a discussion. >> Okay. Um, >> discuss way >> discuss away. >> All right. These are Are these all of our committees? >> They are. >> All right. What happened to the legislative committee? Is it in here? >> It's here. >> Where's it at? I'm sorry. >> It should be number two, I believe. >> Yep. It it starts at the bottom of 30 and

046then the summary of it is on the top of 31. So if the number the number for legislative committee is right there on the bottom of 30 and then anything talking about it other than the next page. >> Okay. My confusion about this is that when we were talking about the bond finance bond capital joint, we had also we talked about this and I have I did not look at go back over look at our meeting to see exactly what we said but we were going to put them all three together into that committee right but now in this it's standing separately >> there they're all together >> it says all three together under on page >> finance bond and capital joint meeting committee >> and then the legislative committee which was going to be

047with it. >> No, legislative was never put under that. It was we combined finance, bond and capital because of the related >> nature. That's my confusion because we had at the time we made that distinction with the bond and the capital all put them together. We also said legislative. I we can go back and look at but I know that was part of the discussion. So I was under the impression that was one of the groups that were folded from you know three different committees into one. >> So um >> and I think the legislative the discussion at that point was because if you remember legislative met every month and now it meets bianually. Yeah. Yeah. Well, that I I well I said I remember that it was going to be going folding into this

048committee to make all three of these together into one. Yes. >> Um as far as the twice. Okay. There's I've got there's some confusion in my brain about what's going on here. I I think a separate legislative committee would be appropriate. Uh but during the discussion at the time and I can't remember exactly what it was. doesn't seem very, you know, rational to put them all together. >> We never put legislative with finance. >> I need to go back and look at that. >> We never we what we combined um was finance, bond, and capital simply because of the nature of all three of those committees has has a joint like is a joint purpose. They have a joint purpose. And so we only combined finance, bond, and capital that we have listed here. legislative

049is has always been and hopefully I would assume will always be its own separate entity because it doesn't have that same focus. >> Well, the focus at the time was the legislative were talking about finance and they are like this and that's why I believe that we had put it together. Now I'm I'm going to go back and watch it. I mean we can move this to the board but I would like to go I'll find it. There's ways to find things you know that where we had that discussion. Um, and and if I might direct you, probably either March, one of the March meetings, it would be the March agenda review, the April agenda review because I believe it took us a couple months to get through all the committees, at least a couple

050months. And I think there was a work session that we had that was there was part of that as well. So, it would be in that time frame for you. >> And the other thing too, if you think about it with capital, because that was on capital, capital meets once a year and bond had to that point had never met. So, >> well, that's why this is all like new. We're putting something together. So, that's why at the time, it seems to me we had talked about putting legislature in there, too, because it all had to do with doing it down, funding our schools. >> Okay. >> You look at all that. >> Let's take a moment to look at section G, though. Is there any discussion on that specific section? >> Section G, which

051is the assignment process, >> new writing, you know, the chairperson signing. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> Can I speak to that? >> Yes, you may. Go ahead space. >> So when I got on as chair in December, um I was very new to the whole process. It's like jumping into very deep water and somebody throwing some bricks at you to try and figure out what you're doing. And so I definitely admit that there were some missteps on my part um when it came to this particular section. And so just so that for future chairs there is that this is this is the expectation. It's more to me if I had had this guidance I feel as though there would have been less bumps in that arena. And so I think that this is a good

052protective thing for future boards for this board and for future boards. Um I and so I I support I support it. I think that um I made mistakes and I think that this could have possibly prevented some of them, but again to protect this board and future boards, I think that this is an excellent addition to it. >> And can I Yes. Uh don't beat yourself up because this has never happened. Uh it's up to whoever became chair to do it the way they wanted to. And there was a lot of bizarre behavior behind it. Let's be real here. We've seen some strange things. Uh, I think you did the best you could with the kind of information you were given and the expectations and your newness as a position. I'm sure that Pete has

053felt the same way when he first got it. I don't think you were following this exactly, but >> Oh, I This is It's a good idea though to have steps and, you know, limitation. You know where everything's coming from. >> Okay. >> So, this Yeah, it's a good idea. >> I'd entertain a motion then to carry uh policy 2230 onto the full board. >> I did. >> Oh, you made that motion. I will look for a second then. We already had that. >> Who said? >> I think you did. >> I did. Okay, there we go. All in favor of moving 2230. >> Hold up. There's one one thing um that I received a message about the adjustment of the order of finance would be finance capital bond, not finance bond capital. I guess that

054was that was a concern that was sent to me. So, >> okay. So, then you would like to uh >> so change your motion? What? >> I make a motion that we send this on to the full board with the adjustment of finance, capital, bond, um, and the additions. >> Okay. And I I'll second that again. Yes, ma'am. >> I just want to point out one nuance if you don't mind, please. On page 31 at the bottom under board advisory committees, the last sentence says the board chairperson will appoint one board member to each advisory committee. And that was changed for the curriculum committee in the um revised updates. So perhaps just say the board chairperson will appoint report board member or maybe put like a little parentheses s on the end of that. Um

055>> member members >> I I'm going to kind of jump in. Don't do anything yet because that is for board st board. >> Oh no, never mind. >> Advisory. >> Sorry. Just kidding. I think that uh >> so would you like to amend your motion? >> Yes, you do. Yes, you do. >> What am I amending at this time? >> Well, I'll make a substitute motion then to um to change section uh B under uh to the board chairperson will appoint board uh board member with S in the there to each uh of those and keep the rest of what Miss Mason said. Is there a second to my amended >> with the yes? I'll second yes. >> Okay. All right. Now we have a amended motion. Did you get that? Okay. Got that. All

056right. All in favor of passing 40 uh 2230 onto full board as amended. Please signify by saying I. >> I. All oppose. >> Carries. 30. All right. We'll go home now. No. No. No. Almost. >> Not done. >> All right. Advanced delivery. Advanced delivery. Oh, this is interesting. >> Um, this is our next one. >> Let's see what page we're on over here. You know, that Barnes guy is kind of helpful with this kind of stuff. Keeping up with that. >> Yeah. >> 39. Thank you. >> If you would be technical, it starts at 38. [Music] >> All right. Now, this is one we really need to discuss. Um it actually came from one of our uh press uh folks in the uh area that uh talks about the fact that we really need to

057follow our own um policy and that we may not be doing so. Uh so we want to make sure we are right on top of it. Um, so 2235. All right. So, who would like to carry us through this one? Um, you know, right now, are we able to uh at least 5 days, including holidays, prior to each regular or interim board meeting, agenda review meeting, the superintendent shall provide the following materials to each board member. um you know the agenda um but also I think now the discussion is uh what you know what are we providing to the press etc >> public has to do with open meeting law >> so related to that I think it's primarily related to the last section the proposed agenda and supporting materials will be made available for

058public inspection 48 hours prior to the start of the meeting um and I think that's the part of the policy that the media has indicated that we're not >> necessarily following. Um, I know um that in speaking with staff that would definitely push up the workload um for them to have everything everything >> um even documents that may be changed or if there's a special speaker that all of that would be readily available to the public. How I don't know how that is a possibility other than making it not how maybe Miss Brinson can can speak to h there's a there's a certain like privacy setting I'm assuming that we can that we can access but the public cannot when it comes to the proposed agenda. um what would that look like from your standpoint

059if we were to make it available to the public even before that? Is that a lot of work? Is that >> I will try and answer that. This is actually software that um Miss Buoie manages. So I'm I'm not in there. But if you're if I understand you correctly, basically what I'm hearing is that this the time in which we open it up to the general public with all the attachments and stuff, you're looking to move it sooner. Is that what you're saying? to asking if it's to like if it's a massive burden because I know our staff has multiple responsibilities and so we have to consider what our staff is able to do, how much they already have on their plate and if if this is not a feasible option, how can we adjust

060policy to make it more feasible? Well, the majority of our stuff we have ready for the agenda review and we have to have it by so many days before the agenda review. >> However, there have been times when stuff had to be tweaked or updated between the agenda review and actually the board meeting. Maybe sometimes based on conversation at the regenda review or sometimes it's, you know, not getting information from, you know, an outside person that we're having to update, but the majority of the time everything we have is up and ready at the agenda review time. So unless there's changes, that's not necessarily an issue to meet that 48 hours before the board meeting. The part that I have concern with actually is the contracts andus 30 days prior till, you know, before the

061contract ends because that's just not always doable, you know, and dealing with vendors and getting quotes because now we have vendors that tell us because of the tariffs, their quotes are only good for 30 days. So trying to get that that far ahead is sometimes very difficult. My other question, my my question too though is as you're saying you you're referencing the board meetings, but it's also the agenda review. So, is is it available I mean I mean one very easy fix could be to, you know, take that last line and make it um available for public inspection 24 hours. that would give you guys an extra day to be able to upload things >> because right now we upload our stuff the Friday before the agenda review meeting which is on that Tuesday. So

062that's that's when we have to have our stuff up. We don't always meet the midday deadline that Crystal likes us to have. Sometimes it's the end of day before we get there. But that Friday before that >> um before the agenda review is when we have to have our stuff up. Would it be I guess my question would be would it be helpful to say instead of that Friday to do it that Monday or is that not that big of a deal? >> I think that's a state law that it has to be and I don't know that or off the top of my head but I think that 48 hours is a state requirement. I don't think it's a US requirement. >> Okay. >> You mean a 48 hours prior to the meeting should

063be available to the public? >> Yeah, I I think so. I'm not 100% sure. >> Okay. And I hate to say this, but where is that on his policy? >> It's on the last last sentence. Post agenda and supporting materials will be made. >> Thank you. I was just trying because I knew it was there, but I was looking all over the place. >> But, you know, I think that the gentleman that brought this forth said that we were not following your own policy. So, >> and if I might, I think it's because when we do our agenda review on that particular agenda, it says review of agenda items. And what what they are asking for access to is all the documents under that specific >> Yeah, that's what they said. >> I don't >>

064Yeah, that's what they say. >> And I think that's that's where we're trying to what we're trying to sort through. >> Yeah, because the the actual main when it comes time for the agenda review, you know, there's the two documents. There's the actual agenda review agenda and then there's the actual board meeting agenda and because during the agenda review you're actually going over what's happening at the board meeting. So that's where the two agendas and there really aren't very many attachment usually for the agenda review because that is the um it's only if there's a presentation done. >> Um everything else is really an attachment for the actual board meeting. They they want to have 48 hours be able to inspect those presentations and everything else that we were talking about during the agenda review.

065I believe that's what the big issue is is that they haven't had access to some things that pop up during the agenda review until that very moment. >> Thoughts we could change the policy or we can you know hard >> Yeah. I know from having been on the board for as long as I have since and watched a lot of different things come down things appear at the last minute suddenly you weren't aware not within the 48 hours you still want to put them on the agenda for the agenda review to be able to cover it >> and that's just the reality of what we're dealing with when you're dealing with so many issues publicly schools and just so much >> I mean I'd love to be able to do it 48 hours if you

066guys got a miracle that we could do You should still do it right. >> Mhm. >> Lawyer, Mr. >> I was looking I'm sorry. I'm trying to look on my phone right now to give you an idea of how the statute reads 132-6. It says that you shall permit in any record to be inspected and examined at reasonable times and under reasonable supervision. >> Okay? and shall as promptly as possible furnish copies and and I think that's their their gripe is that they feel the the press obviously always feels like that you should the first thing you should do when you work with a draft is send to them for their review. Um but that's not feasible administration >> what that says. >> That's right. I was going to say I um and if you

067put things on the internet then you've complied. So, I mean, if you told people if you had a regular schedule, you can't have it, you know, available to them 6 weeks after the meeting or something like this, but I don't know that you immediately have to put it down. And I don't know that necessarily 48 hours prior to the start of the meeting >> is reasonable. You could change that to say >> um uh will ordinarily be made available for public inspection or you could change it to say if feasible, >> you know, which is what is possible. Yeah. I mean, anything like that, but I'd go with the stat. I get that the staff it's it's difficult and I think Dr. Barnes had expressed the concern that a lot of things are being edited

068almost right up until the meeting. You know, they're getting input and are changing it all along. >> And there might be 10 different versions of something um between a week ahead of time and and the the time for the agenda meeting. >> So perhaps we should move we should u amend this change it to reflect the statute. Take the 48 hours out. >> Yeah. I I mean it's look the idea is that you you need to try to make it um available as reasonably you know reasonably as as quick as you can but but there's a little bit of wiggle room in there and you have to think about what's administratively feasible when you do that and I don't know how to reduce that to words without having a long >> um paragraph there. Well,

069could you read that one more time if you had just read about the expectation the statute for providing these documents >> and it's 132-6, right? If you have a question and it's a um >> 6 >> at reasonable times and under reasonable supervision and shall as promptly as possible furnish copies. So, you know, it goes on A1 says that you can satisfy the requirements by making them available online in a format that allows a person to view the public record. >> That is not that's this is 132-6. And I'm I'm again I'm scrambling on my phone here to find this stuff. >> So this is a different legal reference that he has than what you just brought up. >> I thought he said 115 C-36A. >> That's what I thought he said. Okay. And Dr.

070Hamilton pointed out to me that in the notice of meetings part, it's 143-318. This is in the open meetings. Those are those are three different >> you um three different >> the the 48 hours is talking about the 48 hour notice for for meetings um rather than >> right that's the 48 hour notice rather than the the agenda. You do have to turn out your agenda 48 hours ahead of time if you're having a special meeting. Um but the the the records themselves, you know, you're you're >> What were you reading one more time? It wasn't the one we thought. Uh that was >> I was reading 143-318 is the is the open meetings law and the talk about the notice for meetings. >> That's the one you just read a few minutes ago before

071we >> but the one before the public records act is 132-6 >> and that's the 48 hour notice but that's >> 48 hour notice deals with giving notice of a meeting. It's it's it's a little bit slightly different of than than the than the records themselves. $40. >> Yeah. I mean, it's look >> there's there's ambiguity in the statute and and that has ambiguity in that. But the for the 48 hours I mean there are going to be times when they're simply not prepared at all 48 hours ahead of the agenda meeting for example or this meeting. So, I'm looking at 115C-36, which is what the legal reference that's cited, and I don't know why it's on there because it says designation of board. And I can read, it's a very short. It says, "All

072powers and duties conferred and imposed by law respecting public schools, which are not expressly conferred and imposed upon some other official are conferred and imposed upon local boards of education." said boards of education shall have general control and supervision of all matters pertaining to the public schools in their respective administrative units and they shall enforce the school law in their respective units. >> That's just the statute forming school boards to be the head of the administration for >> I'm really puzzled as to why that's the legal reference if that isn't related to the actual policy. So, I would >> think we should have the the pertinent general statute, >> the one he just read 132-6 >> as the legal reference. I think we need to change that legal reference because that's not it doesn't appear

073incorrect. >> 48 hours >> 143. >> Oh. Uh, okay. Now, this and that, and that is the one you just read, 132. >> 132-6 is the public records. The public records. >> And you read that one out loud. The reasonable, >> right? Right. >> Right. And that's that's uh a part a. >> You said feasible. It said feasible. >> As soon as feasible. >> How about reasonable? Feasible. Both of those words are used in that, isn't it? I think potato potato. >> I think it says reasonably. >> Yeah, I I remember reasonable. I wrote that >> reasonably probably or something. >> Well, this will be good though because now we're along with the state statute and they can't say no. >> Soon as we get out of here, >> this is a working district. >>

074The policy manual is is kind of a living document of sorts and so there has to be >> some changes. >> 132-6 is at reasonable times and under reasonable supervision as promptly as possible. That's actually the operative language is as promptly as possible. So now >> that is certainly complying. >> Okay. >> Yes, >> I I seconded. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Uh I wrote down exactly what he said. Reasonable times and under supervisors >> under reasonable supervision. And you know the idea behind >> So can we can we use that whole term you know the reasonable times and under supervisor. >> Yeah. >> Can you turn your mic on? And A1 of the same statute points out that you can meet your obligation by putting big. >> Well, that's what the discussion is. They

075want it on the internet. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> Okay. So, you want to leave it as promptly as possible. You don't want to add these other >> caveats that >> I don't think we do because then how are we going to We can't supervise them. So, >> we're not going to be able to supervise. >> No, that's not us. >> How about reasonable times impromptly is possible? >> That's fine with me. That's good. >> Okay. Okay. But I really do think reasonable times but time to be in there. >> If I might, I think the difficulty is that reasonable is >> kind of a subjective term. >> Okay. >> Like what one person might consider reasonable, another person might not. >> I would be hesitant to put that in. >> Get more letters. >> All

076right. So, we have a motion. We have a second. All in favor of moving 2335 on the full board as amended, please signify by saying I. I. >> I. All opposed. S is 300. All right. >> And that, you know, that's that's fitting with state statute. That's good. >> That's right. Mhm. >> Always go that way. >> All right. Next, we are on to 30 2310. And I'm going to ask Mr. Blanchard to start the discussion. >> What page is that? Do you have >> That is 41. >> 41. Miss Mason, you're in charge of that from now on. >> Barnes, you're out. Mason's in. >> I always have mine. >> Oh, nice. Mr. Blanchard >> here. >> Okay. I I think the reason this is before us is because the call to the audience

077uh um issues um that people have been having and in particular issues with um courtesy and civility and decorum um on this. And I um at the last meeting we talked briefly about I mentioned a case called Davidson versus Rose and it was the and handed out this uh blog um from Professor Bluestein about criticizing public employees and in public. And I think the concern that the board has is dealing with um people who they feel like are targeting individual board members um and in a you know aggressive or harassing way. Uh the Davidson case uh mentions the policy at issue there was the Lowden County School Board's policy and I'm I'm reading from the case. um their policy does not allow comments quote that are harassing or amount to a personal attack against any

078indiv identifiable individual including schoolboard members. So that was their policy that and their rationale for it was that personal attacks should be prohibited because they have the potential for causing unnecessary delay or disruption and the fourth circuit upheld that. Um I will tell you um Dr. Morgan here helped me out just a minute ago. Lowden County has since changed their policy. It doesn't have that language in it anymore. Um but it was upheld in 2021. Um, so it it that's the the job for us here is to allow people to uh you know to comply with their rights, their first amendment rights um but at the same time to to maintain some order um in the meeting and and I think obviously there's a lot of subjectivity involved with that you know um people who

079are >> um uh being railed at um themselves feel like what's harassing um oftentimes is a uh that line's crossed a lot more quickly than other people might feel like >> the line is crossed and I don't know how to have a policy that doesn't involve some subjective judgment calls >> and first amendments don't >> but right you can now what we do know is that you can have reasonable as as Professor Bluestein says reasonable time manner and place restrictions you can tell people three minutes. You can tell people no shouting. You can tell people no amplified noise. And and you can also based on Davidson tell people, you know, that you can't go up there and make personal attacks um against people. The rationale for that is like they said that it that it

080causes the meeting to break down into a shouting match. And we've seen that at some of our meetings. It's a real it's not an idle concern. It's a real concern. But at the same time, >> the activity >> Yeah. And and I >> just to toss an idea out here, aside from the language that we've got here, I had discussed with uh with the chair um and briefly with Miss Mason and others the option of the board allowing um individual board members to excuse themselves. um that uh respects their first amendment rights because you do you have the right I mean think about it under the first amendment you have the right to tell people no you're an idiot now it's impolite and and it it you know is certainly something that the chair could

081discipline someone for because you know it is a breach of decorum um but you can't be prosecuted for it or anything like that so yeah the first amendment does protect it but This is so subjective. >> Yeah, it it is there. And that's the problem. I I don't know how to come up with a policy that doesn't involve subjectivity. >> Well, and you think about, you know, the fact that as board members, we are asked to model this ourselves. So, it's not I think that Miss Mason actually brought up some language here that um you know, does reflect some of that that even things that we're we're asked to do, you know, >> uh we we don't we're not supposed to call out Mrs. So ando or Mr. So and So, or Dr. So and

082so uh you know we're supposed to say the member to my left or the member to my right >> colleague. Yeah. >> Uh that kind of thing. So we're asking some of the folks but this this um thing I did actually uh reach out to a couple other board members um and one thing just to um think about as we we look at the the stuff in the red here on page 42. um is that you know one board member said we really should uh make sure that like what it says where it says Robert's rules of order we should say Robert's rules of order newly revised 12th edition uh and then the question was raised by uh a board member said you know in the first section maintain civility and respect shouting personal attacks

083and other disruptive behavior will not be permitted and then what do we do you know what what you you know what is what is it I mean cuz as Miss Mason knows as chair as I knew as you know during my time as chair you know that you know that if we ever do have to ask the um you know our law enforcement partners to inter intervene that they're not going to do it after you you know if you say well I give you one chance and you're out that they're not going to do that. So you know we do need to at least have it modeled something that can be enforced. We can't just say, well, I'm saying this in our policy says this, if the, you know, if the law enforcement uh folks,

084you know, they will remove folks and thank goodness we haven't had to do that in years. But >> thank God. >> I mean, that's not what we want to do for sure. But it is, you know, there is, you know, otherwise you have somebody up there just, you know, attacking somebody. So, your thoughts, it's justice. >> Well, that's why we're here. People going to disagree with us. I've once again I've seen a lot seen a lot of different shares. It is extremely subjective and I can't help but agree with some people in the public who have been complaining and complaining to me and I'm sure to you too that a lot of these disagreements are excuse me chair's rulings or encouraging the chair to get the chair to uh stop our public comment section have

085to do with stifling free speech speech and I I happen to agree with that because I've seen it. Um it depends upon whose chair, what the environment is, but it definitely does restrict free speech sometimes. Now, personal attack, I totally agree with that. Um yeah, directed to the ch that kind of thing. But there are certain and I've seen it happen recently where people are saying things that some of us in the das don't like and instead of listening to them just sitting there because that's why we're here, they start trying to shut them down. That's not our job to shut down the public. we're supposed to allow them to speak to us. So that's subjective and that's what my concern is. Uh and I've seen it done. You've seen it done depending on who's

086chairing at what time and what was going. I'm not You're doing a good job and you did a good job and thank God I can say that compared to some other things I've seen up there. But there's, you know, we've got to be very aware of people's first amendment rights and just control ourselves. I've had during co >> Mhm. >> I had certain members on the board now who were screaming at me and saying horrible things and you know what I sit there and took it. Now maybe I'm sitting up there and seeing them not taking it so well. Our job is to listen. They shouldn't be doing some hor you know saying horrible things about us. I agree with that part. But we do need to listen to the public. Well, and and my

087question in the whole thing is, you know, what decisions that are made are made by the board, you know, might be a 4-3 vote, might be a 70 vote, whatever it may be, you know, and and like some of this thing here is is, you know, going through the board, going through the chair, you know, if I mean, it's this this article, I think, is really great. I mean it was really I read it over twice but it talks about the fact that you could say the same thing and you know if if you go to say well I don't agree with your decisions board that's a lot different than saying I don't agree people will board you're crazy you're an idiot. >> No I said that part we don't need to be doing >>

088Yeah. Right. Right. That's what I'm saying. So if they come up and they chastise the board or or whatever else, that's a lot different than I think what we're talking about here where it's one board member that you know or any one of us. So just what do you think? So when I was um going through this and trying to determine, you know, what what our next steps are, um I listened to board members and in my own personal view, I I got on this board and I knew that the moment that I sat on that dis that I was going to get criticized, yelled at, insulted. Um and that is to me that's part of the job. And I believe personally that individuals have the right to say what they want to say. So

089I'm trying to balance this now between they have this right, they have their first amendment rights, and I absolutely believe they have their first amendment rights. If we already have standards that we're supposed to be abiding by, if Robert's rules does dictate a certain expectation, not just from the board, but also from the public, then we need to rectify that. If it hasn't been done in the past, then we need to adjust and and and fix that. Um, like I said, personally, I think that the public has the right to say what they want to say. Um, so I went in and I looked through Robert's rules and um, what I found in in some of like the commentary and the um, the different explanations. Um, one of the things that was in in this

090was during public comment. So, and I can I can send this this is just something I just found, but it was one of the many documents that I had found. Um it says require all speakers to address the remarks to the chair. That's the first thing it says under during public comment. So in that light I wanted to reflect what Robert's rules is saying if we're supposed to be abiding by Robert's rules. And I know that we're supposed to be getting that training at at some point and I'm trying to collect all of the the numbers for that before we I present it to the board um to kind of determine who's going to do the training. But in in our best ability, we should be following Robert's rules as much as possible. It doesn't

091not everything in there applies to us, but when we're looking at just basic expectations, maintaining decorum, um I think that this verbiage kind of reflects what Robert's rules is saying. >> Um >> yeah, there is when people sign up for call to the audience, there has been some confusion too because it's not the call to the audience is not in line with necessarily what you're just now reading. So if we're going to do that, we need to alo a obviously modify public facing rules for call to the audience because that's what I heard the last time that >> and that's why I actually asked for that section. If you look on the right here, it says on your computer. >> No, I'm just Yeah, I'm just bringing that >> but it's actually Yeah, call audience

092signup sheets because we do need to update that or change that to to reflect >> that would change that would cause less >> criticism, >> right? Well, I mean if if we want to use that like this this verbiage here, say for instance, >> then we should have that printed on the call audience so that it is, you know, the expectations are made clear, >> right? Because when they go online and sign up, they read that they need to have that right in front of them >> because it was that was a confusion and that did cause some people to be upset. >> Right. Right. Well, I mean that's the thing is, you know, you can't you can't blame somebody for not following rules that they don't know the rules are there. >> There's two

093or three different rules. Nobody's clear. Right. >> I agree with you. that they have it. >> So, um >> Miss Nason, >> sorry. So, if we want to I know that um our attorney mentioned the possibility of adding some verbiage as far as if a board member needs to excuse themselves allowing for that. Do we need to add that verbiage or is that an expectation that we we have? Do we need to codify it or not? And then secondly, um if we want to make edits, I I'm not married to this. So if we want to make edits to what what I had, I have no problem with that. Um I would suggest uh direct comments about direct comments to the board chair and eliminate about specific board members. That way it removes the >>

094turns it into a content neutral time, place, and manner restriction. It is it to use the legal verbiage for it. Um, and that copies what Cornell University had suggested. >> And let me just go ahead. >> My biggest problem, people can insult me up and down all they want. I have been a middle school principal in the city. I can handle anything. What upsets me and what's sad is when they attack our staff and our students. >> Is any of that in here? How do we protect them? I don't I haven't even thought of that until now, but you know, this is all about us and how we can handle it. >> There's some things that I might I might bring something to policy. I'm going to think about this. >> I mean, think about

095it because I mean >> because we're okay. We got elected to this and we knew about it. Mhm. Mhm. >> Starts attacking our staff as students who have no choice but to do what they're doing professionally. >> I wonder if we could maybe change that section direct comments uh about specific board members to about the board to the chair because really it should be uh you know the as I said before the board makes a decision not any individual board member. Now every individual board member has a vote but the board makes a decision. So I think maybe we can you know ask you know maybe that second direct uh comments is about specific board members to the board chair. I mean we leave that please remember that that decisions are made by the board

096not by individual board members. >> You mean to add that to that second board? >> Mhm. Because really it's, you know, I can do whatever I want, but that doesn't mean that the rest of the board's going to follow that or you can do any >> the majority. It's always the majority of the board that makes decision. >> Yeah. And the so it really should be directed to the board as a whole and the chair is the person that's in charge of the board as a whole. >> The representative of the entire board, >> right? You are you are a spokesperson. So >> here we go. here we have where people are feeling that they're being attacked personally and that's why >> speak to you the chair >> but you can still I guess it's

097just a matter of the audience knowing or the speaker knowing new parameters of >> well I mean I definitely if if we were to adopt this you know of course we don't adopt it here if the board were to adopt it then it would need to go on to the um you know the call to audience when they sign up they see here the rule you know the rules and >> that's what you know it needs to have I would say >> if if I might >> as it referred as um my colleague across the way um was talking there is a section C of that that says reports of complaints and it says complaints about the performance of school personnel implementation of board policy the quality of the educational program or school facilities FAC

098should be submitted initially for response to the school system official responsible for the program or the facility or to the superintendent. >> So it is talking about school personnel is addressed in that policy um as far as complaints about performance of the school personnel >> and it's probably a good thing then that we're looking at this now. So when these kinds of behaviors start, we see this isn't the proper place for this kind of complaint. >> Mhm. >> Nice. >> And I and I'm looking at the the signup sheet and it really doesn't have the rules posted at all. >> It's online. >> Yeah. >> Speaker selection CVN open. Do you need a translator? Please provide recommendation to board. >> I know I've heard it. I maybe somewhere else. I don't see it here. >>

099It says it says when you sign up you need to read the rules. >> I used to sign up a lot. >> Okay. Yes, sir. If the concern is about attacks on school or even individual folks out there, you could lift the language straight from the case that we will not allow comments that are harassing or amount to personal attack against any identifiable individual school board, >> right? >> That was comp now. So if that's the concern, you can't directly address that. Um they had the Cornell hand out that um Jim Mason talked about addressed their suggestion direct all comments to the >> So you're not just restricting it. You want because otherwise what you're trying to avoid is back and forth with individual board members, right? >> And if you do that, you know,

100you're picking up, like you said, any any any uh complaints um about policy decisions are being directed to the to the chair, right? >> Okay. just thought. >> So, if I might, um, >> I would make a motion to, um, send this forward to the board with the following changes. Um, after Robert's rules of order, having newly revised 12th edition. >> Um, and then after the word shouting, add the word harassment. and eliminate the verbiage about specific board members. And then again, Robert's rules of order, newly revised 12th edition. >> Okay, I'll second that. >> Any further discussion? >> All right. Could you Okay. Could you go over that one more time? This is the part right here. >> I have. So I have added the newly revised 12th edition for Robert's rules. >> Added

101the word harassment after shouting. So it would be shouting, harassment, personal attacks or other disruptive behavior will not be permitted. >> Okay. >> And then eliminated about specific board members. So it would be direct comments to the board chair, not to individual members directly. >> Yes. Yeah. >> And then um added newly revised 12th edition. >> Okay. I was just trying to figure out >> sometimes visual is better. >> Yeah, I'm very definitely a visual person. >> Do you think we should add a line in after that that a board member may excuse himself or is that just a known thing? A board member can may excuse themselves. >> I never see have has anybody ever done that? >> Only thing we all did at one time unfortunately. >> Oh yeah. >> Yeah. >> That

102was a very unusual situation. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Yeah. So, do we need to codify that or is that a general understanding? >> I don't think it would hurt to codify it. Yes. So, >> adding all those changes and >> maybe another bullet just saying board member may excuse themselves. >> They excuse themselves. Just >> I'm trying to do I'm struggling a little later. >> If they feel >> necessary >> if they feel it's necessary. I mean that that way there it leaves it way over. Yeah. I like that. If they feel it's necessary. >> Yeah. That way you're not saying if they feel threatened or if they feel whatever else. >> Do you have all that, Miss Kadetski? >> I can share it with you. It's fine. >> All right. All right. So,

103that's my motion >> and I'll and I already second it. So, all in favor, please sending this on to the board as uh amended. Please signify by saying I >> and the necessary parts of it, right? Say I >> I >> 2310. Boy, you know, let's just be a quick I guess I'm not going to make the half hour bet. I guess I guess I guess Okay, we're carrying on to these all came from uh NS NCSBA on >> We have some of those. Yeah, we have uh whole bunch. So, we're going to start right at the top. Parent involvement 30 and we're on the changes are on page of this not page 10 obviously but page 10 and 11. So, it's a long policy pages 10 56 and 57 I heard. See, my wife

104says I don't listen. Come on now. I say that about a lot of people. >> All right. So, this is really talking a lot about students sharing sleeping quarters with members of the other biological sex during any activity uh or event authorized by the school unless the member of the other biological sex is student's immediate family member. I mean, to me, it's pretty straightforward. I don't >> Yeah, >> I mean, >> obviously, yeah, it makes a lot of sense to me. But anyway, any discussion on it? >> Where are we at now? I make a motion we send it on to the board. >> Okay, I'll second that. 1310. >> 1310. And um >> and it is as amended. So >> Mr. Can >> Miss Mason, >> thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Um so

105under the special policy because NCSBA sent us up uh summer >> policy updates. So it says that this is actually required based on um a new state law. So, >> yep. And on top of that, it just makes sense to be honest. >> All right. So, uh all I think we said, but all in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> All oppose. 1310 goes on to full board. Next, we have 3210, >> which is page and page 62. Thank you. And I'm just going back to my computer here. Um, and this is a whole bunch of new uh stuff. >> Yes. >> Wow. She she's she's there. She's Oh, Miss Brennen, you're over here. Would you like to speak to this, Miss Brennon? >> Yes. Um, so there's a couple ways we

106could handle this. This original policy talks about parental inspection and objection of instructional materials. And the part that we one of the parts that we need to add talks about the restriction to library books that is about students independent reading not necessarily instructional materials. So either one that can be a policy in itself but it would be a real small one or we could change the title of this policy like parent inspection and objection of materials maybe and then delineate instructional materials then versus um independent reading or library library books. So that way we're separating the two pieces of it. >> Okay. So, I will make a motion that we uh take 3210 as written here with the exception we we uh remove the word instructional materials and just leave materials as M. Princeton said

107>> and then I think we said something about >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> So, there's another piece. Yes. >> The other part. So under section four when it talks about the parent um having we have to have a process so parents can object to specific um books it says the request must be made in writing to the principal to and identify the title of the library books that the student may not borrow. Our system that we have in Destiny allows the parent or or will allow the parent this fall to be able to go in there and identify like they will be able to log in and actually click next to the books they don't want their kid to read. So the parent won't necessarily have to put it in writing to the principal. They'll

108be able to do it online and then in the library a kid tries to check out one of those books, it'll come up and say student can't check out this book. So don't necessarily need that in place for the library books. >> So we can remove the section that says request made by uh made in writing to the principal. Right. >> Um well, >> or go ahead. >> Justice. Miss Justin Mason. >> That is Justice. >> Well, honestly, I didn't see these yesterday. >> What did I miss? I went online. >> Yeah, they were there. They were there. >> I Boy, did I miss a lot. >> And I think this is due to public law, correct? >> Yeah. >> Is this 805? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, all of this is 805. >> Yes.

109Not all the parts that they're adding. Yeah. So, the first part they're adding to section A has to do with parents bill of rights and that timeline in which they can, you know, a request has to be responded to in those different areas. And then part four has to do with House Bill 805. >> Okay. >> All right. I'm just This is This is actually something we're all familiar with seeing it written down. Thank you. >> My >> Miss Mason >> hesitation um to getting rid of the request must be made in writing. Um, could we just remove must and replace it with may be made in writing or is that not an option? >> No. I mean, they could still make it in writing, but we're still going to ask them to go in

110and identify it because at that point, the parent will be the only one to be able to mark the book as far as I know, unless they they've not come out with that feature yet. So, until we see it, we're not sure if we would be able to identify. It may have to be the parent actually goes in. We could help them go in and do it, but >> So, I would want to change I wouldn't want to get rid of that completely. I would just change must to may. >> Okay, >> that would be my recommendation. >> Okay. And I will amend my motion to make it may instead of must >> because I think it is, you know, you also may have someone that's not very good with computer and I can write

111it down. >> So that initial step. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, uh we have a motion and I believe a sec. Did you second that? >> I think so. >> Okay. Well, you just did now. >> Yeah. >> Uh all right. uh to uh accept policy 3210 as written here with the change of removing the word instructional from the title and then changing the word must to may. >> All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. All opposed. >> I'm going to say I. >> You're going to say I. Okay, that pass. >> I'm just looking at 3210. >> That passes 30. >> All right. I'm just noticing our time. We have about uh 25 more minutes. So, we got a lot to go through. >> We can do it. We can do

112it. >> We can do it. Still very disappointed in myself that we didn't get the half hour in. >> But anyway, it happens. All right. Our next policy is 3320. Uh we are on the my little book 33 >> Page 65. School trip. We're again talking about school trips. Here we are on uh page one of four. School trips uh students prohibited from basically we've already passed. >> Mhm. >> Here um so I'll make a motion we pass on to the full board as amended. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor, please signify. Oh, any discussion? >> Um >> it's the same basically the same thing >> as before. >> Yeah. Didn't we already do a similar one? different different policy, but it's the same >> idea basically that we're prohibiting students

113from sharing sleeping quarters with anyone from >> you already brought Yeah, we already >> Yeah. >> Okay. All in favor of passing 3320 on to the full board, please signify by saying I. >> I. All opposed. >> Can I I just have a lot of problems with this. Well, the problem is that we live in strange times. >> You meant to that. >> Yep. >> I just need to know how you vote. >> I know you do. >> I'll vote no. >> Okay. >> Only only because I'm not quite sure what the definitions are involving biological sex. So, we go again with that one. >> Okay. All right. So, that passes two to one. Carrying on the full board. Next we have 3510 3510 religiousbased exemptions. Uh quite a lot of changes uh right there

114in the first page. Um student student parents can object to specific classroom discussion activity or assigned reading policy is designed to provide students, parents and guardians with process for seeking a religious-based exemption for a student from a specific classroom discussion. Any discussion? I I'll make so we can carry on. I'll make a motion we carry 3510 on to the full board. Is there a second? >> Second. Now we can have a discussion. Yep. >> Discussion. >> Wow, this is pretty darn broad. >> What religion? I'm sorry. Um I was history teacher and I'm not sure how some of this stuff would come across with some parents possibly. I think kids need an education, a broad one, and understand reality and history. And this might interfere with the child's knowledge, but then that is their parents

115right. >> How about that? So I agree with it. Parents want to keep their kids unaware of history. >> Okay. So we have a first >> first and second. All in favor of passing 3510 onto the full board as amended, please signify by saying I. >> I. All opposed. >> You got that right. >> Is that a yay or a nay? Sorry, >> Miss Justice. >> Oh, did I said yes. >> You said yes. >> I agree with you. No, I said the parents have that right. >> Okay. >> That's passes three to zero then. Yep. >> Extra extracurricular activities is 3620 >> 74 is that >> uh page four section 4 >> 71 >> page 71 >> well the section that was changed to 74 >> and we have a third uh discussion of

116the overnight trips. >> How many of these discussions are in here? A lot of a lot of them are, you know, >> changing, but basically, >> you know, this is this is more about, you know, if you have say the boys track team and the girls track team going somewhere overnight together. >> Well, I know I've chered enough track enough field trips that that's that was always our main goal is to keep them separate. >> Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. >> I just I hate the fact that they're even I mean, come on now. It just seems unnecessary to a certain extent if we can't figure this out. >> And then we have the situation with biological sex. So we've beat that one to death, too. So >> I don't want during I don't want kids. I

117I want to keep them safe. >> There's a motion and a second to carry 3620 on to the full board. Uh all in favor please signify by saying I. >> I. >> That passes 30. 3620. >> All right. Next we have 4120 [Applause] doicile or residence requirements. >> What is it? >> Page four 79. Page 79 related to military. military >> promote uh enrollment of children of military families >> and the addition is believe a guardian can be on active duty and add or being separating from active military duty within 12-month period. So >> then a whole new section for where the parent or legal guardian submits the school system proof for residency and documentation related to uh disciplinary actions on the students commencing attendance. So I'll make a motion we carry 4120 onto full

118board as amended. >> I'll second and second. Any discussion? All in favor carrying 4120 on to full board please signify by saying I. >> I. All opposed. Passes three 0. Miss Mason, we're gonna need a long time before you ask me next time. Just say keep it, you know, open. Long time. All right. And oh, and she's back. Miss Brinsson, I'll turn over the uh control to you. 4318, please walk us through it. >> Okay. So, if I would have known this schoolboard association would have come out with this this quickly, I wouldn't have spent the time making the changes myself. But you guys did adopt um and approved 4318 at your September meeting um with with changes that I recommended. So this schoolboard association came up with two different options. One, they edited the

119document that you've already had in place and then they had an optional B policy that they kind of just rewrote. I particularly am not crazy about this one because it defines the school day as beginning of the class period to the end of the day which would be the whole day and we had our high school students they are using their phone at lunchtime and between class periods so that they would be in violation and I just don't think you could monitor that at a high school. >> Um >> middle schools they're they're up they don't allow it there. They have their own procedures that they put in place. So, I'm putting that one aside. The changes that they made to policy 4318. Everything's good. Just kind of want to just warn you or have

120you look at one thing at under B where it said authorized use during instructional time. that very last sentence where it says teachers may authorize individual students to use the devices for instructional purposes provided that they supervise the students during such use or in the event of the emergency now or an event during emergency that's part of the law it also says the teacher can allow them to use it for instructional time during instructional time I don't think the law says that the teacher has to be supervising the student during such time I guess my concern is I'm in a classroom with 30 kids and I'm telling the kids they could bring out their phone and use it for something. There is no way a teacher is going to be able to monitor them on

121that phone during that time. I just don't think that's a realistic expectation. Our students in middle school and high school have laptops. They shouldn't need their lap their phone to do their tasks because they do have laptops. >> But I also know that some teachers may ask them to pull them out for some reason or another reason. Um, so that's the only sentence I'd have you would ask you to kind of think about to see whether you want to leave that in there or remove that. >> That's interesting question. Like Cahoot, I remember Cahoot was huge. >> Um, but they can they can do that on a laptop, right? So they don't they there's really zero reason for a middle school or high school to have to use them for education. >> The only reason

122would be a kid left her computer at home. >> They might have just be some kind of consequences if you leave your stuff at home. You know, you can still do your stuff. there might be another computer in the classroom they could use it >> or but if it's broken we provide um spares in the library so they have spares so >> that would be the only piece that you know I don't unless it's like taking pictures of they're maybe they're in small groups going out and doing little experiments and stuff and taking pictures and might be easier to do then but again monitoring that is just very difficult so I hate to put something in here that I know that teachers aren't going to be able to to kind of actually comply with >>

123um Can I Mr. Justice? >> Yeah. So, what you're saying here is this is the one from the schoolboard association and then we have ours and they're not necessarily driving. >> They they do drive the one that we you guys approved does meet the requirements. They spelled it out kind of like the same format that the House Bill 805 did. I mean how the law did wrong one. >> Yeah, I can see similar >> as far as the definitions and stuff. They added, you know, the top that, you know, which I agree that the use of excessive use of a wireless device, you know, does give significant health and social risk for students. I like that. I mean, that is that is a true statement. Um, we may need to add in here. Um, no,

124that's in the devices. They just they just went a little bit step further than what I did. There's nothing wrong with what they've got in here. It says principal may establish additional limitations to the use and possession of display of the devices consistent with the policy. There's nothing wrong with that. It says the administrator may require students parents to to recover the confiscated device if the student repeat. There's nothing wrong with that. Our policy allowed that also. It just didn't spell that out. >> So this is a little more detailed as far as I guess you could say expectations. >> Yes, Mason. >> There it is. Um I did notice that in here I don't and I'm I'm just double checking um we when Miss Brinson had brought forward the policy initially she had included

125the Apple Watches and that's not in here. So, I think that's important, too, because our a lot of our students do have those. >> But also, um, >> I'm trying to see I can't remember because I've read these this policy in so many different formats. Um, I don't see in here medical. And which one >> is that in the the new not the >> Yes, it's in under section the one with the they did section B the second paragraph that's in purple. >> It talks about >> It's hard to read it. Okay, there it is. It's hard to read it on the paper copy that I had. So, >> yeah, it looks very weird. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Where would you recommend we put the Apple Watch on? >> Yeah. Well, that would

126that would be under the definitions. >> That would be under the >> A2, right? A wireless communication device. And I'm call it smartwatches, not necessarily Apple Watch. >> Yeah, because I'm sure Android has something >> or Android. >> They use a pager anymore. >> All right. Um >> Okay. >> So, but I mean I'm I've read over this three several times and and I'm hearing what you're saying, but don't we isn't it our expectation that we monitor the students anyway? So it doesn't say that we have to see I mean that that one section that you had a concern with you know providing that they supervise the students during that use we expect them to supervise the students anyway >> it's to the extent of that you're saying supervise you know when I when I

127hear supervise because I know we provide them that light speed they actually see the students computers and all that so when I hear supervise I'm thinking more close watching what the kids are doing necessarily if you ever want to talk about supervise is just the kids are in a room you're making sure that they're not doing things they're supposed to as far as behavior and stuff. As long as we're not assuming that that word supervised means that they're seeing the kids screen all the time, then we're good. >> Okay. All right. Well, with that um in mind, I think uh I'm going to make a motion that we uh pass 4318 onto the full board with the addition of smart watches under section A2. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Any further

128discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. I all oppose like sign passes 300 18. All right. Next we have 5024. And Julie's not here. I said Julie and Julie's not here, but I think we're still pretty it's pretty square, pretty easy. Uh just talking about how to deliver epinephrine. >> I make a motion we pass this on to the board. I'll second it. >> Okay. >> Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by saying, and again, this will be under amended. Uh, please signify by saying I. >> I. Passes 30. All right. 5070. How much other public records? Uh, section two. Uh, page two, section G. current uh total compensation from all funding sources including at least salary, including pay, benefits, supplements, etc. >> I make a

129motion we pass 5070 on to the full board as amended. >> Second. >> All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. All right. We might make it. We might make it. >> I told you. >> All right. Administering medicines 6125. We have two sections here, page four and page six that have changed. Page four is talking about delivery uh system we talked about in the other policy and page six also talks about delivery systems. >> Make a motion we pass this on to the board. >> I'll second it. All in favor of discussion? No. All in favor of moving 6125 to the full board, please. As amended, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> They're going to love us. >> All right. >> We can do it. All right. 6320. Uh before

130acting as a driver pursuant to contract under general statute 115 C 253, an individual must submit a criminal history check as described in policy 7100, recruitment and selection of personnel. That's the change. I'll make a motion we move 6340 as amended out to the full board. >> Second. >> Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. Pass this three. >> See, and who said we needed Dr. Barnes here? Come on, we got it. We got it. >> We always need Dr. Barnes here. I know he's listening. So, >> that's true. He probably is. >> Probably throwing things at me now. >> All right. 7100, page two. We talked about uh section three criminal history of sex offender registry checks for contractors. Each contract executed by the board with an

131independent contractor or for services of independent contractors must require the contractor to check six offender registries. Is there a motion? >> I so move >> I move that we send this on to the board. >> Okay. >> She did. >> Did you Did you do so move that? I'll second it then. >> All right. First and second. All in favor of 7100 going on to the board, please signify by saying I. >> I. All opposed. And our final policy of the day. >> You know, I'm really surprised. >> Good job, Mr. Will. >> Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. I mean, that some of these >> I knew you could do it, too. >> Pretty pretty straightforward. >> I can talk really slow. >> No, no, no, no, no. >> Well, so what about those Yankees? All right.

132>> They're fantastic, those Yankees. But my Steelers did win this weekend, so that was good, >> sir. >> All right. All right. So, we have again talking about in section G, uh, F under G, current total compensation from all funing funding sources including at least salary, etc., etc. Um and then we have a whole new section here uh website publication information uh talking about um the policy is central office employee the superintendent assistant superintendent associate superintendent director etc etc etc I'll make a motion we carry it on to the full board for discussion >> second boy I tell you you Okay, >> I figured it out. It's called ragweed. Somebody told me what's going on. >> All right, no discussion. So, everyone uh wanting to send 7820 on to the full board, please signify by

133saying I. >> I. >> All opposed. >> That passes 30. Final action of the day. >> Make a motion. I will accept the motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. First and second. All in favor of adjourning, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> All oppose. No. That passes two to one. >> What? Do it at your own meeting. >> You want to stay here? >> I love being with you guys. Come on now. >> You can stay all you want. Oh my gracious. >> Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Good job. We made it by six minutes.