001We've decided to just go for it and run. No more t-shirt com. Yeah. behave. We don't have anyone else online as far the I suspect you are correct. What are you thinking as far as is there a time we have to wait? No, I mean we start at six and there's public comment done. We're going to leave it and I didn't even do board discussion on the topic tonight. Just wanted to be very focused on public feedback. We had the agenda celebrating Carol. Was it is she still here? Yes, she just said she was here. So, so I'm looking. Is that okay? Well, we have Yeah, we'll make it. We're going to be invisible. Yeah. Well, maybe we could No, I don't know. I don't really care. I think it'll live until then. I could
002take it home and water. Clearly not. Iowa farm. You're funny. Should make it. It'll be fine. I'm surprised they still in the back shrunk about five. That's for an asterisk. It doesn't apply to anything on the agenda. Yeah. Right. At 6:00, I'd like to bring the board of trustees of uh Fremont County School District number one public hearing and special board meeting to order. Uh first order of business, the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Great. Thank you. So, tonight's agenda is pretty simple. Uh we're just accepting comments regarding the uh revised policy or I should say, yeah, the revised policy CKA and specifically the proposed CKA
003rule. It's no longer a policy at that point. Uh hence the change in our procedures. Um, so at this point, uh, Mike, do you is I don't think we have anyone online at this point. Um, and folks that are here, are you guys already aware of what's in the the proposed policy or do we need to cover that? I think it might be helpful to cover it just in case I misunderstood something. Okay. Mike, would you want to give just a a brief overview of changes? You bet. Uh, Mr. Chair, members of the board. So, basically, this scales down what we already have on record in terms of our current rule for CKA and would eliminate several support policies underneath the CKA umbrella because certain things like um background checks for for applicants. Well, first,
004the whole application process. There's no approval process anymore under these revised rules based on the new state statute. There is no approval process for those employees who wish to carry uh while on school property. Um so you know our old policy had that approval process starting with the immediate supervisor superintendent then the school board and then uh a psychological test um some initial training a whole series of things that steps before you be approved to carry on property as an employee. With the new statute that is is gone and what's left is basically some general requirements. First of all, the employee still has to possess and maintain the valid concealed carry permit, which comes from the local sheriff's office. Um, and then in terms of training, this section is kind of up to the discretion
005of school districts. There's some minimums that are in place in the statute. What's in the proposed rule for our district is consistent with what's already in place. So, 40 hours of live fire handgun training. Um, and then there are several there's 14 points that are included within the training spec specifically for that live live fire training. And then 16 hours of scenario-based training um done in the school buildings with law enforcement um just learning how to work with partners, learning how to clear rooms, things like that. Um interfacing with the police when they show up on scene and things like that. Um so then after that initial training every six months, uh the folks who are in this program or or are carrying on school property should complete this this retraining the recurrent training. Um,
006and that would entail six hours at least of live fire handgun training and six hours of scenario-based training every six months. And then part of that would be, as is the case currently, successful completion of the Wyoming Law Enforcement Academy closerange pistol proficiency course. And that course is not like a class. It just means a series of shots from different positions and distances. Um, the other part of this that's that's different than our current CK is this little piece about funding. uh it's it's not clear exactly how the funding will will take place from year to year. So with our attorney's guidance, we can craft this paragraph here where the district has some discretion to pay for some none or all of the training depending on the number of um our budget, the financial resources
007we have and number of employees who seek reimbursement and the amounts requested. It could be a significant cost burden. We don't want our employees to shoulder that entirely. Uh but at the same time it's unclear exactly what the amount will be at this point because we have no way to know how many employees may want to seek training and then subsequently suggest or request reversion. Um point four on the general provisions here is firearms kept on the person. So this is just to ensure that the employee or volunteer who carries um has to have the firearm within their control on their person at all times or in a concealed locked biometric container. So not just on the desk, not in the purse, not in the backpack, but person being actively maintained by that individual. Uh
008the next part on instructor and trainer qualifications is also verbatim from the existing rule in our district. Talks about the experience uh of the instructor, safety aspects, the skills that are covered, tactics, and then scenario-based training. The types of things that we expect of the instructor in those scenario-based training environments. Uh the last little points on this use of firearms. Of course, we expect the firearm to only come out if the if the uh employee or the volunteer believes that there's an imminent risk of death or serious bodily injury. It's not to help with crowd control or to make your point or whatever. It's got to stay away unless there's some very serious um urgent need to pull it out. Um compliance. This is just a piece to suggest that if there's to state that
009there's no um if there is some failure to comply with these provisions, whether it's having the firearm under your control or training or um anything like that, you don't have a concealed carry permit, then that could be a cost for disciplinary action up to including termination. And then the limitations. The last piece here, just some some confirmation of some points that are from the statute. But of course, we expect any employee who carries under this rule to follow all applicable laws, rules, regulations at the state, federal level. Um, and then if they have a if there's a student who happens to be of the age to carry a firearm, so we have some 21-year-old students. Um, that doesn't mean they can carry even if they have a concealed carry permit. you're a student, you're not
010allowed to carry on district property. Um, and having a gun on district property would still be, you know, result in some serious disciplinary action and including expulsion. Um, and then the last piece is no open carry. So, can't walk around with it on a on an outside the outside the waistband type of a holster or if it's printing through your garments, that's not considered concealed carry. Has to be out of you. Um, so that's just to clarify that we don't have open carry on on district property. It's just concealed. And that's the general synopsis other than the definitions which are at the very start of the document. That's pretty much it. Quick overview. Great. Thanks, Mike. All right. This time we'll take a public comment. Doesn't look like there's too many, so I'm not too
011worried about the uh the timing. So, uh, just as per normal, just come on up, state your name, and let us know what your thoughts are. Like, it's probably just me. Um, we have Yeah, thank you. Okay. Hello. um Sarah Riley and um I'm here mostly because this is kind of the reason why I got so involved in um schoolboard issues to begin with. Um I'm really happy to see that the policy is as close to its original as possible. I never thought I would advocate for this policy in any way. Um but I do appreciate that. Um I had a couple of thoughts that I wanted to share though. One of them is related to district training or the the required training for staff who are going to carry. And I'd really like to
012see this apply to all staff um not just staff who choose to carry um but because that's the conversation today. when you've got like basically cart launch for people to come into the school building now with weapons, um it's the risk is a little bit higher um that the staff is going to have to deal with something. And I'd really like to see some detailed training on deescalation tactics and motivational interviewing the way they do at the state penitentiary. It's a several day program um that uh that works really well. Um if you talk to anybody who's worked at the state pen, which is where my husband got his training, um it's fantastic. You learn all kinds of deescalation um tools and tricks that you don't get in a short couple of hour training. Um
013so I would like to see the district consider that um like I said for all staff now because this does affect all staff. Um and then the other one is on the the final page under use of firearms um where it says uh that they can uh fire their firearm uh when they reasonably perceive that his or her life or the lives life or lives of others are in in risk of death or serious bodily injury. We asked this in 2019 and were not able to clarify why the ask was made. Um, I would like to see the word imminent changed to immediate. And the reason for that is it's very similar to the difference between a winter storm watch and winter storm warning. An imminent threat could be that there's just a person in
014the building who is acting suspiciously as a weapon. They may or may not draw on a student or staff. Um, we don't want our staff to fire at that point. We don't want them to make it known that they have a weapon at that point. An immediate threat is when they have now visibly confirmed that somebody is in the building with the intent to shoot, especially because now this concealed carry, anybody can come in. And if I've got a a holster that's under my jacket and I lean over and it shows up, that might be an imminent risk, but it's not immediate. and I would hate for staff to um think that that was an appropriate time to to brandish that weapon or fire it. So, those are the concerns that I have. Um and
015I'd like to maybe see some conversation on on that if you've if you wanted to. Um other than that, I really appreciate the work that's gone into this. Um I know it's a really difficult situation when the legislators take away your right to make rules for our district. Um, so I appreciate u everything you guys are doing with that. Um, does everything that I said makes sense. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks. Anyone else? I don't think we have anyone else online. Travis is double checking for us. Okay. Um I had not intended. You never know on these things whether you're going to have a whole room full of people or if you're going to have Sarah. Um it's always Sarah. So uh it turns out tonight it's just Sarah. So do we want to have uh
016some additional discussion on this evening or do we just want to Well, I think since this is what we put out as an agenda, you'd rather just That's fair. That's fair because people won't expect us to have stick to our Okay, that that's reasonable. That's fine. Well, if that's the case, unless anything unless anyone has anything else, we can adjourn. So, discussion will be at our regular regular and there might be more comments there. I assume there will be more comments there, but hard to tell. Maybe it'll just be Sarah. Well, I've already said what I wanted to say and you all seem to be listening in some way and I appreciate that. Mr. Chair, maybe just for clarification then because that would be a next reading and this has to pass by July. Would
017that be considered because this is a rule? Will you remind me how this procedure works? There's no second on the rule. Okay. just one vote. So we would just vote after discussion at our next meeting and so we could make edits and changes and the one uh the one issue that we have clarified with legal counsel is that if we materially change now you can define material however you want but if we materially change what was put out for the public then we need to go through another 45 day review process. Okay? Now, that doesn't mean we can't and we may, but uh just so everyone's aware that that's the situation. That's helpful. Thank you. You bet. Were you here for public comment? I work with the Atlanta Journal. Okay. Sorry. My bad. All right.
018Well, if that's the case. Okay. Any other questions? We're adjourned. Thanks, guys.