001All right, let's do it. Good morning, everyone. We'll call the ASD schoolboard governance committee meeting to order. Today's Thursday, April 24th at 11:01 a.m. Present in the boardroom will go around starting with myself to our to my right, Carl Jacobs. Mr. Chair, Jacob, school board member and and committee America Sullivan, executive assistant, Sen, chief academic officer. Derek Bryant, superintendent. Marty Lang, chief of HR. Andrew V, employee relations specialist. Belchan, senior director of teaching and learning. Eric Bman, senior director of high schools. A welcome all. And then we have online. Uh my door is the other member and she's online. So we have Oh, and President Holland is online as well. and learn lessons. Great. Welcome all. Okay. Uh first thing on our agenda under B1 is our rotating policy review. Um we can start by
002looking at 4119.11. We're going to ask committee members to review this board policy. Determine if there's any requested changes, revisions. As a reminder to the committee, we review every policy on a trial basis and we're a little bit behind. We're trying to be ambitious with the ones we're reviewing today and the rest of the year. any comments, feedback on this policy member against you know what's what I think is lacking here and I guess it could be earlier but is that is a centralized reporting of all sexual harassment type complaints racial all the other types and some sort of overview report to the board so that we know something's being followed through I've gotten a number of complaints from different people in regards to we just had a presentation with me. I think that was
003revealing and it would be very good if we could um have from the administration perspective of how they can maintain ensure that any complaints of this nature that comes in is reported to human resources. So it's ensured that it's properly investigated. People who have raised concerns are told what steps they can take doing the investigation if they're dissatisfied. Some of them have not gotten feedback on regards to the investigation. I know one case with with the child uh because I know the circumstances they didn't get even the details out of it for a special needs child. So somewhere along this line that there'd be some sort of central review point because of the seriousness of sexual harassment complaints and racial and all that that we maintain some sort of tracking system along and overview ensure
004that it's adequately investigated. If it has to be reported in the in the then the pressure to the school to make sure they follow through correctly will increase. You have any thoughts? a couple um further down um in the first full paragraph after the numbered list a little further down um it does say all complaints about behavior that may violate this policy shall be promptly investigated. The personnel department shall be informed of all such complaints. So the way the policy is designed is to have a kind of a a central repository. they may not be the one necessarily conducting the investigation but they should be informed. Um this one is specific to sexual harassment um this policy and we are working towards um a ticketing system um where we can do a better job of
005logging and tracking these. we have a kind of a beta version work with our IT department that we we'll implement for next year that I think will give us um greater capacity to produce some of those reports because we've heard in previous conversations that there is an interest from the board in getting some regular you know quarterly updates on just kind of how many uh complaints came in and how many were investigated but what the resolution was. So I I believe we are working that direction. Um because I I' I've heard some of those um concerns of yours before member Higgins and and U. So I think it's articulated already here that intent and we are working that direction. Yeah. I don't know if we want to know the resolution to it, but I would
006like to know percent what how many will substantiate it and because I don't think we want to get involved in any disciplinary consequences below an executive level. regarding to the bar system principles and the and the uh the municipality requirements as well municipal charter but I do think tracking I think that I don't know push another department do you go about pushing another department down or do we want to change that if you're going to suggest any changes to this um uh board policy it would be uh changing that language which is really housekeeping I believe personnel department is the language that came from ASB we would refer to that as our you know labor and employee relations office or or wherever that function lives um in the district. So I would put down you
007know human resource whatever you want to put shall be promptly informed let's let's put something in there uh just because the emphasis is not after the fact but you know to look at it and that you the review but then like I said a report to the more uh just to gives us an idea how many complaints we're receiving don't need to know the precise we don't want all the details but we want to know that it's fact and then if we get complaints from the public and we go to you and find out it has and what you got hit with issue. Um so from a what did we decide Mr. Lang the term we'd like to update that too? We are having some internal conversation right now um about reoring this function and
008so I'm a little reluctant to propose a specific name knowing that we would then have to go back and change it. So so maybe once we get the updated version we can then just do a control F on board policy to do one giant housekeeping update. Yeah. Great. Okay. any other feedback. Yeah, feedback depends upon the person. Somebody raises a sexual harassment complaint and it's they aren't the one being harassed, they just observe it. You're not going to give any feedback because that gets in that's outside that system. But if they're alleging their complaint that they have been harassed, then you have to provide feedback and tell them what you're going to do and and give them a chance to provide additional feedback to whatever you're finding them. But the appeal process also needs to
009be communicated in there feel like this isn't adequate and we and that's one of the biggest concerns that I get. People say I raised a bunch of people about the principal nothing's getting done. I'm frustrated. That's the reason why we did the audit was because we don't have that system out there. People principles and assistant principles I get a different answer as to who they will go to chat with the principal. Well, if the principal doesn't know the answer to that, what do you think staff and parents and students are? They don't know either because if the principal can't tell them that, nobody can. So, I just want to make sure that like I said, it's centralized bit. We get a report and that people understand how they can feel something and it still hasn't
010been addressed. So, are you I just want to make sure I'm tracking the readings. Are you proposing a change to this policy? Um, yeah, I would add I would add language and ask you to because you said you're working on a system a system in there to at least acknowledge that we're going to get reports. Now, maybe it it doesn't need to be here. Maybe there's a bigger broader system that says we're going to get a report on sexual harassment, racial, uh, all you know, uh, things to get a general report like that. The number that have been there instantiated each category might be better than just leave leaving it in sexual harassment. So maybe we maybe maybe I won't push this issue here to the reporting, but we need something in there so that
011we get some type of status report to get verification that this is being done because right now the feedback I'm getting is parents don't know they have the complaint. What we got from the MAC was about a third of them they feel like it's not followed up. They didn't like to respond. They don't know what they can do and some of them are leaving the school system. So somewhere along this line, we got an obligation to acknowledge that kind of information and maybe do something to correct. Yeah. So Mr. I agree that I don't know this policy maybe or at least this venue is the right opportunity to address this now, but I do like the idea that you had yesterday about um maybe getting the board a chance to review the report from ECAC
012that you witnessed by attending the meeting. That's something I was talking with Chris Paul about for our um retreats coming up. um something. Yeah. Anyway, so we we'll um that's on my radar as well and we'll note that we are have an interest in this item. We aren't going to um amend the board policy at this point, but an item for future discussion. With that said, is there any other proposed revisions or changes to this first board policy before we move on? Great. Hearing seeing none, we'll move on to our next item. It's 42 41192. The only other suggestion, the only suggestion I would have would be to consider incorporating um the use of chocolate which we have and is not mentioned here. For example, you know, the paragraph beginning the school board encourages students
013or staff to immediately report incidents incences of harassment to the principal or designate or through the anonymous you know or the use of stop it. And I don't know whether you want to incorporate a specific piece of technology that will not exist in 10 years. Um yeah, I agree that future proofing it and maybe not mention the specific language is good but encourages. Um but I think adding an extra design or well I think if yeah I think even adding a reporting system something that's evergreen in it. Exactly. So adding a through the district's reporting system, but and I think mentioning anonymous for me is very important because that wasn't always um well anyway we didn't always have that that wasn't always seen as a something that we should require and we I want to
014make sure it's required and so I don't know if Mr. L you have a suggestion. You know I've worked in different places and this is the thing I had focused on a lot was employee concerns. That's what I investigated what I set up. will generally do is have an employee person process policy separate from what different things are so that you have everything all filled out in one and it applies to everything. Anybody has any concerns, they can raise it, they can do it anonymously. They don't like it, they go to this level and this level with just one policy rather than trying to look at each individual type of offense and trying to add it there. We're going to add it here. We're going to add it in sexual harassment. We're going to add
015it in in racial discrimination. All the policies It's easier to put it in one just would be a lot simpler. Understood. Appreciate that feedback. Mr. Lang, did you have perspective on either a quick way to amend this or something you prefer to amend it with or we can take this back and do an hour and then bring it back to I like that suggestion for member lessons. U one other thing that we noted in this one scroll up America. Um, at the bottom of the second paragraph, uh, it calls out, uh, a number of specific, uh, protected class groups. Um, we have another board policy that specifically, um, includes those groups that are protected classes within the district and it is more comprehensive than this list. And so, one suggestion that we have if if
016if the board wanted to amend this one um, would be to to marry those two lists up. And which court policy it's if you scroll down America to the second set of attributions it's uh 0410 that first link that's there under non-discrimination district programs and activities. So then I'll make a note that we should review and potentially mirror language between those two policies and have that be work of the committee that we can then take up and once we have a draft we'll send it to administration to make sure I didn't miss anything and then we can amend and pass it up. Okay. Does that sound agreeable? Great. Okay. Then seeing and hearing no other objections for this one we'll move on. 4119. That's 21. feedback on this board policy before we consider it reviewed
017for trial purpose. I guess I'm going back to my a background with how we would write things because it defines what code of what a ethical violation I mean code of ethics would apply to because it applies to real or perceived conflicts right is that kind of talk about this code of ethics is a little bit of both it's really not the only kind I mean it's real conflict of interest is included but I don't know if that's not listed is it this is really focused on [Music] educational and I see you know making reference to the teaching practice educational ethics is that what focus that's yeah mr My understanding my area of expertise is that the this commission that's operated by the state and I think they're political appointees has their own uh code
018and of conduct that's enforced at that level and so this is language that probably mirrors what's in Alaska administrative code state policy. I don't think this is something we have a ton of purview over besid just referencing what exists state. I just see all personnel code of ethics and it focuses on teaching instruction. But you got code of ethics whether it's acquisitions where you may real see conflict of interest, you've got hiring, you've got all kind of issues that out there potential for conduct which is a conflict of interest or perceived that may impact the integrity of the process. Mr. L, do you have any thoughts of do we need additional language in this? I think we have other board policies that specifically speak to conflict of interest. Um the professional teaching practice commission um
019and their code of ethics uh is all certificated staff uh are by statute under that. So, we have more broadly applied that to our employees generally because it already speaks to about half of our uh employee population in the district. And then layer on top of that the the municipal uh code of ethics as well. And this is more about individual actions and misconduct. And um and so I I have found those to be broad enough and specific enough to cover um most instances where we've had to call out unethical behavior in place. I was just looking at the heading all personnel code of ethics. It's really dealing with with the certificated well well there's a comma after professional teaching practice commission municipal code of ethics. That's for everybody, right? It's like this list of
020everything there. I think what the one thing that probably gets to where you're you're thinking is the on the third paragraph down the last sense of disagree where any violation of the code of ethics to the profession of teaching practice. You probably wouldn't do that for a for a person or something like that. Correct. Custodial maintenance, right? That that That's probably just teachers. So maybe that sense would come out because then it's there's not there for everybody. So who should they report it to other than the professional teaching practices for teachers? Huh? If it applies to other people, who are they supposed to be report code of ethics violence? and we have applied that code of ethics to all employees. The difference is when there's a violation with a certificated employee, we have an obligation
021to report that to PTPC. Um, we wouldn't report to PTPC somebody who violated the code of ethics who is not certificated, but we still apply that same standard as a governing standard as a as a institution of public education. So an individual from facilities who has a complaint of this this of this nature would be would report it to talent management or HR. Okay. Yeah. So that makes sense then. So who do they report if I'm an employee and I see a potential code of ethics violation out there? Who do I report it to internal within school? We I think I just asked that question so I think the answer is talent management HR their supervisor a manager the superintendent's office the school board. I mean, I think I think there's a wrong answer there.
022Okay. Is there any other feedback? All right. Hearing see none, we'll move on to our next item 19. Member lessons. I would urge the governance committee consider the last sentence. Um, I think that it's it used it is a not helpful sort of judgmental sentence that doesn't um really acknowledge the physicality of teaching. Um, right the the miles that um I am sure our principles and this is principal log every day going back and forth. The fact that our elementary and middle and high school teachers are on their feet most of the day. Some of them, uh, the teacher in charge may have to be dealing with alopments and be ready to sprint out the door at a moment's notice. So, if I were them, I'd be wearing my tennis shoes. And if somebody was
023going to call that not appropriate for a classroom teacher, I would give them a piece of my mind. That's just me. So, I would urge the committee to write that. I would I don't mind. I think that's reasonable. I would also um guess that this board policy probably isn't the first thing referenced when we're talking about classroom attire, but I appreciate that we we added this in at some point. Um is there any objection to striking that sentence? We should receive the last one. The last I I believe that most teachers that I have run into are addressed appropriately and they're wearing tennis shoes. I think there's other areas right where this would be. it it's it's appropriate for the position and leave it open for people to appropriate to set the standards and they
024communicate it properly to the employees and then you got problem communicate it. So this is a significant enough of a change although it's pretty easy to make that we probably would need to add on a consent agenda at a future meeting. So, if we could flag that, but the edit is simple enough for just Yeah, just one other stylistic recommendation. It probably wasn't important enough if we weren't going to open this one up, but since we are right now, it talks about um that second paragraph, the school board encouraged to staff during school hours. Um that's um pretty narrow and could broaden that language to say the school board encourages staff during school hours and other you know public facing work activities to wear clothing to demonstrate the high regard for education would any district
025sanctioned event be inclusive enough work hours or any district sanctioned event. Okay. So yeah, we can make those edits. I'll add that to my list of things to bring back. Well, we'll just we'll send this one to straight to the president. I think we're good to change this. Member Higgins, is there any issues here from an enforcement standpoint that needs to be shored up because you got people challenging it? I didn't think so. There's no AR. Perfect. Okay. Common sense changes and relative non-issue, which is always great. Seeing hearing nothing else, we'll move on to 4119.23. 23 member lessons. So, um I don't have any cause to disagree with anything here from a normal employee standpoint. From the perspective of somebody who has campaigned, it positions candidates, whether a firsttime candidate or a candidate for
026reelection, which is an inherently a political activity, in a very weird position because it is not clear whether um I am looking at the wrong document. Never mind 25. Sorry, not on my list. All good. is member Higgins I see a question. Um mine was going to be the second sentence where it says any action inadvertently normally you get to the point that replace be subject to progressive discipline because if it happens again over and over again you're going to be sub carelessness is going to be an issue right for enforcement. So normally you don't say every if you do it 10 times in a row just keeps going in your personnel file. Usually you make reference to subject to progressive discipline. It may as future occurrences will be subject to something like that. You
027don't just I guess from a process question, you don't think the first sentence? First sentence has to do with willfully releasing not negligence. The second sentence is negligence. And if every time it occurs with negligence, you just simply put it in the personnel file. You can do it 100 times and your policy says you're only going to put it in the personnel file. That's my only the way I read that. Okay. So, it's an enforcement issue. I mean we could we I mean we could simply do you know copy and paste um and mirror the language from the first half to the second half in an extreme situation. I don't Mr. laying any perspective. um to adding the disciplinary language from the first sentence of the second paragraph to the second sentence of the second
028paragraph in extreme situations where there's multiple violations of an inadvertent or careless problem that I think that's pretty stock language across multiple policies and I mean is it safe to say the district would be engaging in that anyway? I believe so. I I don't think the language the way it sort of precludes us from the aggressive discipline process were appropriate in that second instance as well. But if it provides clarity, I don't think there's any objective. If it's not an issue enforcement, that's all I was thinking of. I was looking at it from an enforcement perspective. You know that better than I do, but if you got somebody that maybe something and it loses it and then continues to lose it, then you want to do something more. Well, it sounds like administration border in
029alignment on this and so um I think we can probably consider this one agreed upon and move on. Yeah. Great. So we'll go to our last item for today. 4119 4219 4319 and member lesson. Yeah. So this is something that um I sort of noodled on for some time and I saw pop up this morning. So, I don't have a an exact suggested edit for it, but I think I'd like to flag it for um future conversation and adjustment because um with specific reference to school board members or to candidates for school board, which is an inherently affordable thing. Right now, schoolboard members do receive, you know, a paycheck, if you will, from the district. We are sort of an employee but we are also very much elected. And so the problem is that our
030it's a question of the use of facilities for political campaign purposes. I think that the intent of this policy really is saying don't have political events in schools when kids are around. But I think it has been used to prevent um photos of or videos of um school buildings which are also inherently public uh in campaign sort of activities and I think that's weird and I don't have an exact solution but I would like to see us um clarify what is what is the ability and maybe like a legal question right what's the ability ility of the district to tell a candidate for office you cannot use a photo or a video, you know, whether you're driving by a high school or taking a picture of an elementary school. I mean, is that a use
031of facility that um the district can somehow regulate? So, I just wanted to say at this point, maybe if we could pull it for revisiting in a month, I think it's a conversation that for future candidates for this office, it would be helpful um to just clarify. I also think that there's a municipal um code citation that speaks about using municipal resources for political purposes that maybe we could tie to this, but the fact that it isn't listed makes me wonder if this is intended for something different maybe outside of the um because I I don't think from a legal perspective the board policy would be binding. Dr. Right. Right. I was just going to uh say that I think member lesson is on to something that we should talk about this more because the
032I'm it's less about the schoolboard member versus an opponent. I think the issues are more about if you have two people running for an office and one happens to be an ASD employee and the other is not and one is doing things on an ASD campus. Theoretically, we could discipline the employee but we'd never be able to discipline the non-emp employee. So it does create an awkward situation because it seems like in historical practice we've been using this policy to justify telling candidates they can't be in that that's exact policy has come up right and I don't think this is the right policy for that if anything it should be something from municipality or whoever regulates elections but I don't think that the administration should have any role in telling candidates they should or shouldn't
033be doing something other than maybe like don't choose I mean student protection yeah so I I guess maybe this is a good initial conversation. I'm happy to work another potential retreat item. Yeah. Or retreat it maybe for the biggest concern after is trying to take pictures in school. You're capturing kids and putting them in a like thing and that that's a violation of their rights. You know, you're not taking pictures within schools and using them for purposes. So they don't want to do that. But even having a picture in a I mean as a background has been I haven't heard any complaint taking a picture from the school from a distance but I have they go into a school and they try to take pictures they try to take pictures where they get kids gathered
034around them. Those were the restrictions that I heard that the big issue was there is protecting the kids from being subject to that type of of you know abuse with abuse but they're being used uh for political purposes without consent and in a school environment that is that parents may disagree with or anybody else. So that's always what I always heard the restrictions were. I didn't but I've seen them out there with pictures running for a legislature where they're gathered around a football team. Yeah. So Mr. I think we're you're speaking this all on the same page that there fura complications we definitely want to be cognizant of but that may be a separate conversation of how the district wants to limit um our interaction with political candidates especially when you have employees and external
035candidates too. Um and so something to further discuss. Agreed. Um, if there's no other conversation now, recommend everyone take into this separately, we will mark this as reviewed and then nobody will follow up on it. Um, and with that said, we've completed item B1, our standard rotating policy review. Again, we're going to have to do some work to catch up at some point. We suspended this portion of our meeting during some especially challenging pathways of budget right sizing, but we'll return. Um we'll move on to BP 5123 promotion acceleration retention. This an item from Madn correct you want us to talk about it? Yeah, please do. Yeah, whoever's ready to speak. Um so we really just made uh one change. We added um work policy 6146.5 for differential requirements for individuals with exceptional needs just
036as a um as a reference. But the change we made was the retention part. Um we wanted to utilize AASB's garbage that the school board recognizes that research indicates that their children benefit from being retained during the elementary and middle grades. the superintendent for designation promote alternatives to retention among certificated staff. And we added in um Alaska statute under the Alaska Reads Act because of the requirement to inform third grade parents that all K through parents can be retained. Member Higgins, I'm curious. Does anybody know the results or the benefits associated with like Floyd or did they third grade we're going to repaint them if they aren't there type issues and they cause but I'm just wondering what the outcome was there got to be studies out there showing what different locations I know that
037all the arguments against retention period you you third grade you go through third grade all over again and it wasn't handled well the first time it's not handled well the second time all kind of issue and you got some kids that start right when they're barely five years old in school, if you wait a year, they they you say it hasn't worked, you hold them back and they do much better. I've seen those examples, too. But I'm wondering what the latest studies are showing in regards to the retention issue, given you've got some states that did it outright, all of them. And I'm sure they've got some pretty comprehensive studies showing benefits and the positives and negative aspects of that. I'm wondering as we look at this, what do those studies show? Has anybody done
038any research or review of that in the recent past or not? When we went over the regression uh retention issue, especially for K3 students with regards to the Alaska Reads Act, I know the students department did a comprehensive review of the latest literature and they didn't find that there had been any substantial changes. I'm thinking about all students, not just special ed, because we've got in the case of Florida, I know they went through such a big deal that they they expanded the parking lot into the schools that they thought kids would be old enough to be driving. So, they had to be prepared for that. That's pretty significant. But I'm wondering and then then the number of retentions went down over time. I know that much that it really resulted in less retentions in
039the future. That may be because schools were pressure. Maybe they found some way around the system. But whatever it was, I'm kind of curious because it I agree with the idea of it not withholding kids back. But I also want to the review is on all retentions. So it was the school sites looking at K3 retention for students that did not meet adequate progress for reading. So special ed or non-special ed. and the least latest case reviews that they had read determined that there hadn't been any big changes in overall data review for long term, but there hadn't been a lot of there hasn't been 12 years of study. So there's only been about seven years since safe Florida started their retain any third grader who is not proficient in reading. So those kids are
040just now getting to the their graduation so that they can start to get the data of graduation overall graduation rate if they had been retained. So, it's gonna still be another couple years to see that overall data and my understand I just I was just kind of curious because with all that information gathering it gives us an opportunity to review this whole issue. And I wanted to add that the research that I've tracked is that if the the students that are retained when they get into high school and they're 18 as a junior or the beginning of their senior year, they're less likely to finish and complete their graduation requirements. I like same programs like other alternatives. I'm not advocating holding them back anything else. I just I know of a few cases where they've
041done it. it was beneficial, but most cases it's just repeat same as. So, and I think at the same time, what we're trying to do with the Alaska Reads Act is also really concentrate on those tier one um uh instruction and really hone up on what we teach during the day. But in this case, what we're what it's helping us to do, especially with the reads act, is monitor the interventions and progress monitoring, but at the same time honing in on those tier one uh instruction so that we're raising the rigor of our daily instruction and not just concentrating on how we're reading. I saw some reports from National Association, but they just got focused on what they can do to improve the situation without holding it back and they did some other alterations. I'm
042not proposing holding anybody back and I'm curious how it makes a difference. Thank you, member Higgins, member. Yeah, I had a question and it's about the second edition uh under the Alaska Reads Act. Currently, it reads a student retained due to reading deficiency must be provided the process. Isn't it does it isn't a student who's recommended to be retained gets process? So all students get uh all student I mean you're not you're not retained until the process has already unfolded right if you're recommended to be retained that the process kicks in. I would need to read what that AS 1430 because there's a couple different processes referred to in the because you have to the part of the process to my memory and pulling up the statute is good is that it has to it
043ultimately is the parents decision right I think that the teacher or school makes the recommendation well it should be a team always a team the parents involved the parent has the ultimate decision unless the parent is not decides not to be part of the project there There's one piece of the statute that I'm not sure if that's referring to that basically says a parent can change their mind at any point. So, we could be halfway through the next school year. The child had been retained as a third grader. Go back up. A parent can say, "I changed my mind. I want that child to be in fourth grade now." And there's a part within the law, within the statute that says the school has to have a plan for if and when a parent changes
044their mind. And so now the child has missed been uh not doing well in third grade now missed half of their fourth grade instruction and is now being bumped into a fourth grade class or vice versa that the parent has now said I want that child to be retained after spending half the year in the next grade up and that can happen in kindergarten first, second or third grade according to the law. the conversation is supposed to happen at any of those grades. Um, however, the retention can only happen once. So, it does specify within the statute that a child can only be retained one time in their um K3 years. So, this is in a way then um referring to a student truly who has already been retained. That's why I need to pull
045up the complete statute and I have it on my computer. Yeah, let me pull it up so I can figure out exactly what AS14. Do you have the link? I mean, does it if you go down does there is there a link to as.14? Yeah, this 765. Yeah, these are not Oh, they're not they're not so that language comes from AES and maybe we should have not utilized that because we chosen to use Alaska statute language. versus AASB's language because um ASB's language is um it applies to all of the state and the way we put in our MTSS were different than the state as a whole. So maybe we need to pull that part out and just um reference a um Alaska statute because that's what we're following. Yeah, I think we should probably
046pull that part out. You guys want to not the governor's chair? Well, I so I I'm okay that I'm also just a we can pull it if it's a simple removal and what are we can we clarify for our record what specifically are we looking to remove that sentence because that was added in ASB but we would still reference Alaska statute which is AS4 just to be crystal clear when we say that sentence what paragraph what sentence under the Alaska reads act gotcha in the red okay so we're removing under the Alaska Reads Act and then any of citations below it. No, I believe are probably good to have, right? Okay. So, just the the last sentence on that page under the Alaska Reads Act. Yes. Okay. Okay. All right. And then um yeah, I
047mean if if there's no objection from admin from removing it and if there is no objection from the board from removing it and then moving this forward, we certainly can. Um I had a question which isn't related I guess to the edit regarding the acceleration portion this review and revision. I am I correct in assuming that this that acceleration portion wasn't looked at or looked to modify the focus was really on the retention piece. Yes. Okay. Is that something that is on our to-do list or we flagging that as something that needs revision at some point? You have any thoughts on that? I'm thinking of like tightly this happens like once every 10 years. It's not a big we don't a lot get accelerated. Okay. All right. Um I'll Yeah. So I'm interested in learning
048if from I don't know any any other stakeholders if while we're while we have or while we're discussing it there's anything else we need to do but I don't want to hold up this revision and so um I think move this forward and then I can separately look at is there any additional language that we need to tweak with the acceleration is there any other feedback on this item all right hearing seeing none thank you so much we'll consider that one good to go and refer well I guess sorry I'll refer procedurally is there any objection to move forward reporting this policy to President Hall and for placement on the future agenda from the committee. That would be member Higgins, member Wilson. Okay. Hearing seeing none, we will consider that done. We'll move on to
049BB92 50.1 community events and invitations. This one, thank you guys. Mr. Because um there were situations where people were and not being at the events. That's right. Okay. Um, yeah. So, this is a board-driven conversation. So, over the last year, we've had couple uh multiple I would say multiple times where um board members have RSV RSVP to events that have tickets that have a purchase price attached to them and then canceled with little to no notice. It's not something that happens frequently, but it happens periodically. And our current board policy has more stringent language than we've enforced in the past. And so, that's why it's in front of us here. So, I was hoping we could take a second to review and discuss if we want to choose to reinforce proper adult behavior or if
050we need to tweak this policy. We're distinguishing events from like registrations for example. Not that we're traveling available right now, but think of as an event. So like the ROC like high thing and it was a fundraiser the $25 fine um but that's different but like if we go to the AASB November conference which is in travel there is an associated but it's a registration fee not an event but my question is that has always automat autoatically been paid for rather than step one pay the fees themselves or submit a request. Right. Well, I think the request is is often pretty informal and usually I would like to go to this and get it's done. Right. This would be a scenario where yes, if you agreed to go to a ASB and um you didn't
051show up and there wasn't some sort of arrangement or um you know emergency situation where it was just you know something that could have been avoided. Do we want to have that accountability measure given that you know we in our financial situation we want to make sure all dollars are spent wisely and the ASB from what I in my experience when you notify them ahead of time they will give us a credit to you later. So even if we have a snow apocalypse and I can't get out of my credit they can reimburse them. They what I think what I think is the process for that organization specifically is they will keep the money but allow us to use it for another event as long as we notify them at time via the chamber. I'm
052not sure how that works. I know that we attend those events, but if we no show for those after we've requested tickets, I imagine we're out those funds. And so, um, it's a I a conversation of are there board members who object to holding ourselves accountable in this way for no show events for us to pay that cost because that's what's currently in board bylaw. We should be doing okay. What's the purpose of it? Yeah. Oh, well I So I This isn't This is a This is not a new board by Okay. This just continue. This right. So we're bringing it up because we've had over the last year I think a few different cancellations last minute where we haven't been able to recoup those dollars. And in this fiscal environment, additional accountability for us
053is I think should be as welcome as any other level of the district. And so the question is, is there any member who objects to enforcing this going forward? This is not new board bylaws. It's just been uninforced. Okay. Not hearing any. The expectation then is that if um member Jacobs bylaws is violated, we would Oh, member Wilson. Sorry. No worries. I thought I'd jump in. So, the the only um thing I would add to that, and I don't know that it needs to be in policy, is that I think a board member should be notified that there is a cost involved. Sometimes there's the invitation to attend, and there may not be the clarification that there is a cost involved. So, I don't I don't know how to incorporate that in there. I I
054don't want there to be the case where a board member is invited to attend or sit at a table um does not attend and doesn't realize that there was a cost involved. Yeah, I Okay, currently I think it's reasonable, Dora. I I don't know. Maybe it's just my my own research or maybe just my assumption that you know if it's not a community gathering. Um I think the emails that we typically get are worded in a way that we use the word register or ad. Um but I guess a question for administration andor Miss Sullivan. Is it feasible to include like flagging that this is something that requires a paid ticket? Is that information that's typically readily available or it wouldn't be a huge extra workload for staff? No, you can definitely um you know,
055if we're sending out an email to invite, we can just place that information in there. Okay. So that board members are aware that if they RSP the event, there's a cost associated. Great. Okay, that's a great suggestion, Member Wilson. So we can incorporate that into our current practice. Yeah, I would hope that I missed one because it wasn't on my window and that probably um it wasn't there. It was I went to it. Maybe I went to the wrong It was because I I went through it that morning, but that's okay. Um uh but I I if I miss one, I want to know it if I because I may miss it, not know it. And so that's important to me as well. I mean, I try to get every one of my things. I
056go out Eagle River for each one of those four community health council meetings. So I'm not running away stuff, but if I miss something, I need to know. Yeah, I agree. And I my understanding is we're typically looped in. Um I think Miss Granton or Miss Sullivan have let me know very timely when I'm either should be somewhere or I that I'm not or that something's coming up or I really need to be there. And so I think that's already in place and I appreciate that too. That that invite was sent out by the office of superintendent. wasn't sent out by the um ASD schoolboard office, right? So Katie find it. Okay. Well, it sounds like we've got Thank you, Mr. Because it sounds like we've got consensus that we're going to agree to that
057accountability measure, which I appreciate. And we don't again don't have to amend board bylaws. It's already in our existing board bylaw handbook. And then if there's no other feedback or discussion on this, we'll move on to our last item, which is a proposed sportsmanship board policy. Um, this is member Donley's item. And he's not present. Okay. Um, I would suggest we table this until our next meeting then when member Donley is present to present his. Any objection to that? Okay. Hearing seeing none, uh, that's all in front of the governance committee at this point. Our next meetings are 58 and 529. We've scheduled two next month in part to catch up. Um and yeah, I think really just to catch up is the entire reason actually. Um and so um please note that for your
058calendars that we do have an extra meeting that will be here in the boardroom. I think we scheduled that. All right. Hearing nothing else before the committee, we are going to adjourn at Higgins. But I um I want to make sure that we do follow up on things that we've done. We had a a purchasing audit that recommended a working committee that hasn't been set up this point to my understanding and I don't see that just falling apart and not following up. The question is I would like to have a discussion on who will be on that working committee since we didn't get an audit done by the council of great city schools of issues that we raised to them in that meeting and I want to make sure that those are addressed with the
059working committee recommended by the by the audience to meet with the auditors if that's possible that they may have additional information other than the report and a conversation with them would be very beneficial but we kind of dropped the ball with presentation with the council great city schools at high level and that's okay but I'm curious one additional findings I understand there's some differences maybe between the report and what procurement may feel is more accurate that's okay that's something for the working committee to resolve but I would like to see that we're following through we're not just dropping it we had a report in this meeting that said you can save a half million dollars a year you can save here save here whether that's true or not I don't want to be vulnerable that
060we've got recommend commendations to save money and we're not doing a followup. Yeah, Mr. I can I can tell you that one of the reasons we're scheduling the extra meeting in May is to ensure the ball is so it's on our agenda I think for May. Okay. Just I wanted to lay it out there so understand. I appreciate you doing all right. If there's anything else before the committee, we will now journ at 11:52 a.m. Thank everyone.