05/05/2025 Policy Committee Meeting

001take a five minute reset. We can I'll make a motion to take five minute reset. Okay, I guess I'll second it since I'm the only other person. Uh yeah, let's uh let's do it. Uh five minutes back at 5:37. Okay, is um pizza of all sorts and there's bread sticks or marinara sauce. If you guys would like some soda, I have a variety. If you wanted any, just let me know. joined the meeting. Yeah, there's water over here. Thank you. I I didn't hear Sherry was not here. Uh yeah, she's out of town. They gave one out of the kindness of her. They give like a free like some sort of new mushroom. No. No. What's this mean? That's the policy review. Okay, I guess I'll sit through it. A lot of information. [Music] You

002seem content over there, Lyn. I seem content. Just getting ready for the next meeting. [Music] Thanks. I am sorry. I think we are. I think we're recording now. Thank you. Is it recording still? Uh what's That's what she [Music] joined the Okay. Go ahead. I'll pick a time. So Tammy, how'd the first day of your new job go? Well, I didn't do much anything. Carl, that's usually how it does go. When is your new job? I'm a fraud investigator for the state for unemployment insurance. What were you doing before? You also the state from before, right? Mhm. I was doing tax collections. Yes, I'm sure it'll be fine. I did it before. I did the job for nine months prior to moving the collection for Yeah. Yeah. during COVID. So there was quite a workload

003in so joined the meeting. They expect me to be on my own in a week. They said I thought okay. Yeah, they mentioned that guy I told you about but he might work in a different fraud department because he could work for Bola and that's like the legal affairs that do really intense fraud investigations. You don't think like tax evidated and stuff like that? That's not anything we deal with in DUI. It's just unemployment benefit claims that we investigate. How was your day? Lots of taxes. No, you took a day off today, Carl. I went to exercise. Oh, nice. What'd you do? clean up my yards. Okay. Get ready for your garden to come in slowly. She's going to come home first. She does. Okay. Well, she needs a little vacay before the gardening starts.

004That's our job in the summer. That ain't Yeah. So, we're at six minutes. Can we call? All right. Yeah, we're at six minutes. So, I'm going to call it back to Larry. Uh yeah. So, policy review committee May 5th, 2025. First item on the agenda is the board vacancy voting process. Uh which we have Oh, my computer's short. Come on, buddy. My computer just stopped for a minute. Okay, never mind. Same thing. So, if you want me to just kick this off. Yeah, sure. Yeah, go ahead. So, letter A uh and uh hopefully um it hopefully our board docs kicks it open, but uh there's a process that we used last time uh that the uh policy committee reviewed took to the board. Uh the board actually voted on the process before we went into

005Okay, there finally came uh before it went into place. I suggest we uh do the same tonight, which is to review the process, explain the process at the board meeting um and uh then go through the same process um as it was explained. I believe um our attorney shared last time we did this is to go through the process, have the process voted on at the board meeting, and then go through the process of appointment. Uh we do have an appointment coming up here at the May uh was it 19th? Is that the right date? Uh meeting uh and um we have uh already I think it's uh five candidates they closed on Wednesday. Um they have their materials in uh for us to take a look at review. Um but this process um is

006one that um was discussed uh and utilized last time. Join the meeting. our our policy gives you a pretty pretty broad um way that you want to do it, but really what our attorney said is to make sure that we have a discussion about what it's going to be and then have it voted on and then implement. Certainly. Um so, uh question right off the bat, this policy kind of revolves around the date of the resignation. Uh, so I think the helpful first point is can you give us the exact date of the resignation? April 2nd. Thank you. April 2nd. Okay. Gotcha. Gotcha. So that would put the 60-day vacancy because we've already put out uh we've already put out the appointment notice. Uh we've already had people apply. Uh but that would put the

00760-day notice at Oh jeez, I can't because 31 and 30. Um it would go to June 1st I think might be the latest you could I think act according to the policy. Right. Well so and here's what I'm reading here and again I might be you know we're going to have a discussion about it certainly because it's a pretty detailed policy. So it says if a vacancy has not been filled by an appointment made within 60 days of the date on which the vacancy first existed, the board will attempt to fill the vacancy using the following procedure. Um uh if a duly elected successor at a spring election will take office, that doesn't apply. We can skip past A because there is no spring election within 60 days. Uh then down in item B it

008says if the vacancy is not filled by that duly elected officer or duly elected successor then at a regular board meeting held no later than 45 days after the end of the initial 60-day period of the vacancy that would put us if I'm not mistaken actually at June's you could go to June is specifically for the uh the hatd draw scenario that we had happen last time. Uh, and I know that I received an enormous amount of feedback from people uh, across the board saying, "We really don't like the fact that you can leave a board appointment up to a random hat draw." Uh, it really felt to a lot of people like it eroded trust in the board. And I think I would like to see us try to avoid having a situation like

009that happen because I don't think that would be great. So, I think that at the very least at that at this upcoming May meeting, I don't think we need to go to a hat pole. Even if we hit a deadlock, I would say that um if we hit a deadlock, we should keep at it for a specific period of time and then maybe reconvene uh at the next board meeting with the intent to rethink our options and then go forward with the kind of procedure at the at that June board meeting. So, I don't know. Uh, Tammy, what are your thoughts? Uh, I don't like the hat draw. Yeah. Um, I do think that maybe if there was a deadlock scenario, allowing some sort of conversation, whether it's board members that need to ask clarifying

010questions to the appointees to figure out how to move in one direction, I would be for that. But I think the last thing we should do is do a hat draw. I mean, I would almost be I would almost move in the direction of saying, "Hey, can we for a first read at today's meeting? I don't know if it works this way. I'm I'm not trying to overstep boundaries. Can we strike and send to the board for a first read this policy concerning the hatd draw and then have the board kick it back to policy?" U this isn't a a drafting of policy. Yeah. That we're talking about. We're talking about how to implement the policy. Sure. And really it's your job as the policy committee to share. This is how we suggest you implement

011it. They hear that and then they vote yes or no. We're implementing it that way. Gotcha. So what I would say is implement it how you want. Okay. Right. As a committee. Just say this is what we discussed at committee. This is how we think we should implement it this time. uh and bring it up at the board level. They have they get to vote on it, right? Okay. And if they vote um no, we don't like that suggestion, then realize you are on a timeline and you may have to um think about what what that timeline looks like as to have another meeting um and or whether or not you're going to wave the timeline because you as a board can wave policy uh if you need to. I don't suggest waving policy because

012that's why you put it there in the first place. Yeah. But um just realize that if you don't come up with something that you think is going to pass muster with the whole board um be mindful that that is going to put you on a different timeline. But usually what you come up with the board says yes, let's try that and let's put it in place and let's go. Okay. So those are those are your options here. Okay. I think. Do you have any alternatives to suggest for a deadlock, Sam? Because I I'm not sure how. Uh, you know, I mean, when I've uh when I've looked at other examples in other areas, I have seen that a deadlock means that there needs to be more discussion. There needs to either be more discussion or

013that people are going to need to work through in their mind. And I think people would like to see a majority of the board agree on an appointment because that's closer to a representation of what the general public wants. the the main concern that I heard from people is that so if a majority of the board wants a certain person as the appointment that does represent a majority of people that were elected by uh a plurality I suppose of of people in the a plurality of people in the in the district when you have the hat poll what ends up happening is you could have someone get pulled out of the hat that only represents what a quarter of or or maybe even less depending on what your your composition is there. A quarter of

014the uh existing board wants to see and you can actually have have someone wind up on the board who's very much not representative of the will of the public and that tends to make people not very happy. Uh so my recommendation would be that if we hit a deadlock and we have that I don't know if we can have discussion if that's the way that it works out to the 45day timeline but the the basically the law says you need to make a decision right within that 45 days. So I mean that's that's the reason it shows up in our policy is because the law says you can't just sit and not have it filled. Yeah. Right. And so at some point in time, if there still remains a deadlock up until the 45th day,

015you have to come up with a method. And you're right, a hat pull, a um coin flip, those are not great. And our our public certainly doesn't want to ever see those things, right? Brought that up last time we had discussion around this, but sometimes it just is a deadlock because you're dealing with eight people, right? And if the board is that split uh on um you know either communication or ideology or whatever else that leads us to a a a uh 5050 then that's a concern. Yeah. I would say let's uh this is my thought. Let's because we're not at the 45day deadline. Let's have the meeting. Let's have the vote. even if it goes to a deadlock, let's keep on going on it until uh we can have a board member motion to

016proceed on to the next item on the agenda. I would say that we go about it that way. Um and then we can either have a special meeting sooner than the June meeting if we decide to as a board. Can I make a suggestion? Go ahead. I I would say have a certain number of rounds. Don't leave it up to a board member to shut down the conversation. have a have a procedure of how many rounds. If you're still deadlocked after six rounds, 12 rounds, 21 rounds, whatever it is, it becomes a procedural reason that you're ending the discussion. And it doesn't put it on any one person's shoulders to end that discussion, right? Because it's always better to have it be a procedural reason than to have people in the community, for or against,

017start getting on one member of the board because they're the ones who made a motion away from that. Okay. And I'm just saying that that's not that's not Jared speaking. That's our attorney saying this is what you should do and that's that's the guidance we got last time. Okay. Can we go into close session for a discussion and then come back and make the final decision? No. Yeah. I mean I guess it it depends on how you arrange the agenda though, right? You could have two separate opportunities for the vote on the agenda. I mean you could do all sorts that that meeting. I mean that that's a topic that's that's not a closed session topic, right? That's an open meeting. Yeah. Well, I mean I think having I think having a discussion if it

018comes to that, not that I know particularly what way it's going to go one way or the other, but if it did come to that, I do think that having that discussion would probably be healthy. But uh yeah, I don't know. I mean, I hear what you're saying about the procedural reason, but again, I think that what I heard from a lot of people was they felt like the hat pole took accountability away from board members and it was people were able to say like, "Oh, well, I mean, I'm not responsible." And people didn't like don't like seeing that sort of behavior. And my concern would be that if a procedural issue, a procedure Yeah. Go ahead, Chris. Uh the reason that you know what Jared is talking about is makes a lot of sense

019is because uh if you can imagine a board member moving to move on to the next agenda topic and another board member seconding it and then it becomes another slip vote a 44 potentially. Um I mean what's going to be the tiebreak in that situation? I suppose yeah that makes sense. You are going to be on a certain timeline that will force a decision. You just want to talk about what does that force decision look like should it get there. Sure. Sure. only because the in this instance the law says you have to make a decision by this time, right? And so you can see an opportunity to work its way to a forced decision, one that maybe nobody's happy with, but it's just a decision that was made. H Yeah, go ahead. Make a

020suggestion. Do we anticipate this is a likely scenario coming out for the next board meeting? I don't know one way or the other. I guess I'd prefer not to make inferences about that just because, you know, I mean, just for for the sake of uh for the sake of fairness and neutrality. Um, it's not that I especially do, it's just that I know this was something that was a very very strong topic of discussion uh after the last appointment. And so I suppose I'd rather see it get addressed and kind of talked out. But yeah, if we have to make uh if we have to make a decision on the appointment, I suppose what I would say is that can come back to policy if need be in June before the June board meeting, which

021would be the 45day cutoff. in in your procedures. Make sure that you say if we come to a deadlock after x amount of times or whatever else that the procedure will then be to have this go to policy to determine a deadlock procedure. Sure. Sure. And then come to XYZ meeting, right? So that there's a final decision made at that time. Just make sure that's part of your procedure. So that because the other thing is is for those people who are sitting out there wondering what's going to happen and their names in the hat. They want to know, right? Yeah, definitely. They want to know all the rules of the game before they enter. That makes sense. That makes sense. Okay. So, uh, if we were to enter a deadlock in the main meeting, 10

022rounds of the deadlock, then it gets kicked back to policy for a discussion about the method by which that tiebreaker will happen. But the same process will occur at the meeting in June so that we have the opportunity if people so wish to, you know, to uh to to ultimately change their vote. I think that would be the best. What do you think, Tammy? Okay. So, I'm un I know it's a little Yeah, it's a little circuitous. Yeah, we're going to take the policy as is if outside of the hat pole and say if it does get to a hat pole in May, the appointees don't get any decision made. It's going back to committee and they get to wait till June to find out. Uh then then there's there's another vote in June. Yeah.

023because June would be what interview for us. No, I don't think they would interview if you're leaving it up to the committee to decide. I don't know what they might decide. Okay. You know, as the next uh round, the suggestion that I would make is that you don't open it up to other participants that haven't been already named yet. You're just causing a large problem there. Um so you know leaving it open to those who are there are there. One of the thoughts that we had or questions that we had last time about identifying who goes in the hat was is it just the top two or is it like uh we make a you know take all of the committee members who are not the committee all of the people who signed up and

024put you know say we have to have a nominating process again or whatever else it was. So there are a lot of things that tonight we should discuss to uh we put together ground rules that are pretty significant for our main meeting, right? That outline all those steps up to an up to but not including what happens if we're at a deadlock, right? Because your suggestion is that a deadlock will then go to a uh June policy meeting which will then be discussed. Yeah. right uh forward with the board. Yeah, I suppose there's a I suppose there's not a whole lot that goes along with that. I just think that, you know, people really dislike seeing what they get the sense of as being people avoiding responsibility. That's the that's the phrase that I heard

025repeated over and over again, avoiding responsibility. And yeah, go ahead, Sam. Has anybody discussed this with our attorney? Yes, we did a great detail. Matter of fact, our attorney last time sat with the committee uh and talked us through some ideas, right? What was his final I don't know analysis? I don't think it was with the committee. It was with you and I and the board president, right? Chair of the committee, the board president and I sat with the attorney. This final analysis that we would have a this this similar discussion at the committee level. Um and then the committee as a whole well the committee made the recommendation to move forward with the process that we utilized you know for the use. So the main takeaways was this from the attorney which is create

026a process prior to the meeting through the committee right things you have to think about are um how nominations are made right the the way you're going to go through the voting process is it going to be by written ballot or uh show of hands or however it is right um and also decide whether or not you want people to put the names on the ballot are not the names on the ballot, you know, those kinds of things. Uh and then uh lastly, have a very defined way for if you become a deadlock, how does the deadlock get resolved? So, those were the main uh points of interest that we got from the attorney because the attorney said your uh the way you wrote your policy is pretty open. You know, there's only certain things

027that you have to abide by and most of them are in the law. Statute does prevail. Statute does prevail. At the end of the day, someone will need to be placed within. If you guys can't come up with a way to break a deadlock, you are held in the meeting until you break the deadlock by law. I don't care if that takes 20 days. I think that's a good idea. I mean, I I mean, well, that's you you like just sticking out the deadlock until we figure it out. You better. I'm I'm with you, actually, Carl. That's how I feel at the end of the day. I'm okay with having a I'm not joking. It takes It takes a couple days. You got to sit here. Somebody will break. I think I think there's I

028think there's more honor in that personally, but you know, 14. Well, I'm just saying that's what the law says you have to do, Carl. And there's nothing wrong with the law. No one. I mean, is there any other um further uh merit to what Tammy was alluding to in that case where um after so many rounds of the deadlock, it triggers a further discussion about the candidates in open session among board members. Mhm. Well, I personally feel that why wouldn't we encourage discussion between between each deadlock? And I'm not saying 20 30 minute conversation, but if there's something that you feel a candidate should add that could sway somebody, why wouldn't we encourage that instead of doing four votes boom boom boom boom boom? Where is there any I mean any more information added to

029the decision for them to move their vote in either direction outside of well we're in a deadlock I better right concede. Does that mean does that also entail uh coming back to the candidates and asking another round of questions or or it's an interview process I would say. Yeah. Okay. Right. We're interviewing them. It should be open. If we can't vote, then we should be able to go back to the candidates and ask whatever clarifying questions we might need to sway in the direction of the two. I'm assuming in this scenario, you two people, right? Yeah. Usually it comes down to two people. Yeah. Yeah. Uh yeah. No, I actually I like that quite a bit. I just uh I think as long as we're before that 45day deadline, I would say, man, have a

030special meeting on the 45day deadline and you do the you do a coin flip or a hat pull then, you know, don't do it any sooner. Um but as long as we're there, you know, have a I I think I think having the deadlock like Carl said and just playing it out makes the most sense to me. Um maybe after 10 rounds of a deadlock, we procedurally move forward with the agenda for the night and we h we set up a special meeting where that is the only item of the special meeting and we have that vote before the 45day deadline and we stay there. That's that's where I would go with that. I just, you know, I heard very very strong feedback and I'd like to I'd like to honor that feedback I was

031getting from people. Although I do understand the statutes and the need to fill by a certain date. So this particular board vacancy is a bylaw. Yeah. So procedurally if we want to suspend the rules of of our existing bylaws at the next board meeting that would be a two Thursday. Okay. Gotcha. If we want to do that, you can just have something else in case that twothirds doesn't happen. Sure. Sure. Makes sense. Well, again, I mean, I don't know exactly what's being suspended though because at our meeting on May 19th, we're still not going to be at that 45day mark. So, we don't nothing in the policy says that we have to do a hat pull at that point. But as far No, our our policy was our our policy direct us um for how

032we handle a deadlock situation. It does explain how you handle a deadlock situation, but that's only at the 105th day after the initial vacancy date. And that was something that we discussed previously that I was a little I I had a few questions on, but you know, previously, but it didn't uh it didn't become entirely clear, but it is on the 105th day. That's what will happen. Okay. So, I guess then I kind of feel like our goal should be to have somebody appointed at the meeting that they're there to interview for. That should be our goal. Yeah. I would just I would say that Our meeting is probably going to be the 23rd of June if I've got that set out correctly. The regular board meeting would be the 23rd of June. And even

033that would only be 20 29 days from the end of the 60-day period. So you really would have So then I So then is it the recommendation of the committee then for to direct the a deadlock situation uh after 10 rounds of Mhm. at the next regular board meeting where the interviews take place to move on procedurally to the next uh agenda topic with the understanding that within the next 40 day 45 days a meeting of the board will occur to handle the deadlock situation within 45 days of June 1st. Okay. Oh, June 1st. Yeah. June 1st is the 60-day cut off because it was April 2nd. Okay. To May 2nd to June 1st. Yeah. Okay. But is that the recommendation of the I heard a lot? We're going back to the initial recommendation, right?

034Uh no, the recommendation would be to go 10 rounds. Yep. And then if 10 rounds passes procedurally, we're going to move on with the rest of the agenda and another meeting, either the regular board meeting or a separate meeting will be set to finalize that vote within 45 days. Okay. So like where we'd be addressing is having the board move from the deadlock situation. Yeah. Okay. Yep. I'm I'm good with that. Yeah. All right. if you need me to clarify. Yep. So, we're going to have to rewrite the the process. Yes. For the um meeting, can we can we go through uh that document that had the voting process prior? So, and I have it here that I can wants to open up that voting process document if you have a computer or it's on

035the uh board up there. Uh just want to make sure uh that as we're talking through this um we we know what we're looking at cuz I I don't think the first part is something you're veering from like the first bullet would be each candidate will be given the opportunity to address the board explaining interest and qualifications giving the number of candidates. This will be limited to three minutes per person. Anybody have a disagreement with that? So that won't be part of the process. Right. The candidate order will be drawn like we did the last time, right? And we'll we'll draw the candidate order like we did last time. Okay. The board will have the opportunity to ask candidates questions after each candidate makes their remarks to the board. Everybody agree with that? Yep. Then

036at the conclusion of candidates remarks and board questions, board members will vote by sign written ballot uh for their third candidate. Is that how we want to proceed? Signed, written, ballot. Yeah, I think that one makes the most sense. I think it's the least confusing. Okay. Um, and then it says, uh, after that, uh, no candidates are eliminated until a one receives a majority vote. Um, if a candidate, and then there's the examples there, a candidate receives support from a majority of the board members present, the board will then vote on a resolution appointing the candidate to the vacancy or B, there is a 44 tie among candidates. Is that clear? Yeah. You want to stay with that? Correct. Yeah. Okay. In the event of a 44 tie is where we start changing, right? So

037Sam, will you will you share like in the event of a 4-4 tie, what you uh what you guys decided? Yeah. In the event of a 4-4 tie, voting w uh uh deadlock voting will begin between only those two candidates, which the deadlock has arrived at. The deadlock vote will last 10 rounds of signed written ballots. At the end of 10 rounds, if no change has been made, the board will move on to the other agenda items and the vote for the appointment will be moved to another meeting of the board no later than July 15. Okay. So, uh, what I see here in, uh, that next bullet, in the event of a 4-4 tie, the only thing that we're changing in that bullet really is 10 rounds. No. No. Well, here's what I see

038logistically. Um, we have to get to a point where there's a deadlock that's declared first, right? The president will, it says in that same bullet set or that same bullet, right? president will declare deadlock. You probably should put that first, right? Not after the fifth round or well actually after the 10th round. It would be after, right? Yeah. We didn't really vote the way that this we didn't really vote last time the way that this is written, right? Um, and I'm thinking more so in terms of the way that we voted last time because I think that as long as you have not reached a point of deadlock, you should not move on to a deadlock. That doesn't seem to make sense. If if you get three for one and two for another and three

039three for another, you don't, you know, if you do that for five rounds, you don't move on to a deadlock. That doesn't make sense to me. Makes sense. Um, yeah. Sorry. After the 10th round, president will declare it. Got it. Yeah. We actually did that uh at the meeting. There was some people who got some votes and then like it moved to more votes and we ended up with two candidates that were 44 and that happened organically, right? That happened organic. Yeah. Um and so that's that's basically what this says. We'll do that and then uh we will go um to a 10 round basically. Do we want to make sure that we incorporate in that 10 round a pause for further discussion on the candidates after each round? Uh I think after every two

040rounds only because you have 10 rounds there. That's a fair amount of rounds. I think after two rounds if there's no change of mind considering what's happening then we can go for another round of questions to the candidates. Is that good everybody or make sense to me? Mhm. Okay. Do you think you're you have it clear enough? Uh, not yet, but okay. We'll get there. So, in the event So, here's what I'm going to kind of read back what I'm understanding. I'm trying to keep up with this. In the event of a 445, deadlock voting will begin with two candidates. The deadlock will last 10 rounds. if after 10 rounds of the deadlock to move on proceed uh we will move on procedurally to the next agenda topic with the understanding that now this isn't

041right um well why don't we do this why don't we word smith it with Sam okay I'm taking notes right now I think we're I think we're all on the same page as what we want and then basically saying that if it doesn't transpire right if we end up in a deadlock, then the committee will decide how to deal with the deadlock, but we will have a confirmation within uh a meeting prior to July 15th. Yeah. Is is how we'll have to see something like that. We will have a full board meeting prior to July 15th where the outcome will be decided. I think I'm pretty clear on what you guys are looking for. I think we can word Smith it and get it ready for be a standing policy. Jeremy, I just It's actually

042not a standing policy because the policy was written in a way that was so kind of vague. It really leaves it up to the board at the time that's seated to determine what they want to do. Yeah. And if this had if the timing had been a little bit different on this, we might have had further discussion about what this looks like. Maybe we could have had a fuller discussion about policy itself. But, um, we're just kind of trying to figure it out. I I thought the first time we read it that it was both complicated and vague and that wasn't really helpful to making those decisions. The Yes. I'm only asking because should we put a numeric date on there and not like numeric number like within 105 days or within 45 days of

043what whatever and not make it a specific calendar because it's only specifically for this. We can say no later than July 15th. Right. Yeah. because just this situation and and if Mr. Yacht would have uh gone two days earlier, it would have been a whole different we wouldn't be having this discussion. It wouldn't be policy would have gone with the the vote or whatever was in there. Mhm. It would have been uh the next person on the ballot, I believe. Right. Yeah. And so, you know, um but I mean so Okay. Yeah, that uh that clears that up for now. Uh any further questions, Dan? Any further questions, Dan? Craig, Carl? Thanks for hanging in. All right, on to the next one. Next item is uh agenda or uh uh policy 2240, controversial issues in

044the classroom. Uh Craig, if I remember correctly, uh you brought this up previously and you and Jared, did you guys ever have meetings to discuss this policy? No, this this one particular item was was postponed. Gotcha. um or a a number of different reasons, but um it's important that I felt that it was important the board had that discussion at some point um because especially before before the next um school year so proper information can be communicated out and uh the feedback I've received from other board members so far has and that this is a particular priority concern me. Yes, definitely. All right. So, these changes are just kind of the standard changes. I know that was Diana sent a few. There were no changes uh in it. Uh there is u you know the

045the controversial issues in the classroom. What you're seeing there is basically Neiola's policy. Uh and then you see the um two model policies there I believe are from uh will uh and what we want to do is we want to talk about what do we think is important starting with uh the neon policy to say how do we want to handle these kinds of issues moving forward uh and then incorporate whatever other thoughts from whatever other resources we want to do um including your own uh yoga brain So yeah, how how do you want to work through this policy is is my question because there is not a um a working copy that came from administration up. Definitely. All right, that sounds good. Uh so initial thoughts are I do uh like the idea of

046the definitions that they have here uh for political or controversial statement referring to any symbol or physical representation that meets one or more of these criteria. Subject of intense public argument, disagreement or disapproval. Includes political messages, displays of partisan affiliation or advocacy for specific political candidates or parties. pertains to contentious ideologies, beliefs, social issues, insights, controversy, debates, or divisiveness within the school community. Um, I do think that uh again, we're talking about personal displays. We're talking about either personal effects that are found within the classroom or we're talking about articles of clothing or is that more of a dress code item? Would that I think it probably does go hand in hand. and you could probably refer to the dress code u as well in this particular policy if if there's a particular u if

047there's some language that you want to put in and I did me I did hear that uh you kind of read off some of the bullets of the model policy Yeah. Uh which is not in the 2240. Yeah. Uh and I I am not particularly um opposed to that language as an policy to be inserted instead of 2240 policy. Yeah, this is because 2240 is more about subjects of discussion within the classroom versus items versus uh model policy 7's um controversial displays, but policy or model policy 28 from will is controversial issues could probably be a little bit more pertinent to that, right? Um, but I do think that the the bullet point list from seven would be a uh would be a good descriptor uh to potentially bring in as a uh in a

048sort of um inclusive definition, I suppose, including but not limited to, of course. Um you think that would be a bad idea? Cammy, I'm not sure what your thoughts are on that. Um I'm okay with adding it. I I I assume reading that this is for like displays controversial issues like what's discussing right like class content and not necessarily a teacher's own private like how they choose to decorate the room or are we trying to spaces and both policies right there are additional policies that talk more about um personal effects in the classroom and things like that But I think the pertinent part of model policy 7 is that list of four items that is kind of a definitional quality and then like a frame of reference for whomever is reading the policy of what

049would be considered controversial topics. Yeah. Okay. And then uh under model policy 28 then the pertinent section would be the board will permit the introduction of controversial issues provided that they're using the instructional program. One is related to the instructional goals of the course of study. Two is age appropriate for students. Three does not indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view. Four encourages analytical thinking and open-mindedness. Five does not create a hostile school environment. Um well, we would need to include the legal analysis there, but uh um I do honestly think that uh the whole of model policy 28 has Oh, you're uh 28. Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, I'm I'm hopping between the two and I'm kind of measuring them up against each other. Um just because there are a couple of

050policies that have some different uh that have some different use. Yeah, sorry about that. Um let's see. Controversial issues related to program may be initiated by the students themselves provided they are presented in the ordinary course of classroom instruction related to the topic of instruction. Do not create host school environment. Uh a certain amount of this is obviously already in 2240. But I do like the specification um and the effective notice to parents that's uh in 20 in model policy 28 second page second paragraph uh I think that would be worthwhile to ensure we have uh very clearly specified in there um that we will provide ample effective notice parents. One one thing that I I think would be beneficial for the administration is to be clear in the policy as to what uh what

051topics this has. Uh for instance, controversial issues usually is around instruction, right? displays is around uh like things like personal content, dress and so on. If we can have different buckets that we're not trying to go to one policy that kills everything, it's easier for us because it's easier for us to have conversation uh and to be pretty uh straightforward with whatever that conversation uh entails. So, you know, where we can to be as specific as possible about what it is we're looking at and what we're looking to do. um is is going to be a lot better. Um and maybe even splitting out what's the difference between uh again what is student driven and not student driven some of this regard u would be also something that we have to think about like there's

052definitely um different levers that we have to think about uh whether it's a student or a staff member uh and making sure we delineate those uh is important as well. Yeah, I think there's a lot that goes into this. Right. Right. one uh address. Two, uh content in the curriculum andor a the discretion that the staff member chooses to utilize for the consideration of controversial issues as legitimate place in the instructional program. I think that's a I mean are we if we're going to spell it out I mean it should be clear as day that this is this is what is acceptable and this is not acceptable and if there isn't and if there is a particular question about this is the expectation you know you are to go and ask these individuals or what

053they gave for clarification on moving forward with that particular level of instruction. Yeah. Um for instance, um in in in this regard, you know, talking about what is uh what is or isn't controversial right now uh is getting more in the eye of the beholder versus is a common norm. And so one of the things that I would like to see in the policy is something whereby the U superintendent would have that conversation with either board leadership or uh the board president to say here's an issue that came up. There's many of them that I'll be able to say, "Yeah, I think that's controversial." Or, "No, that's not controversial." But if it's on that, like where does our community sit on this? I would rather have a check-in with those locally elected officials just to

054say what are your thoughts on this? There's actually a paragraph in model policy 7 that that's why I'm bringing this forward. It defers to the principal and if the principal is unsure then it goes to the board for final determination on if who will allow it to be taught. Yep. Yeah. I was going to say my recommendation would be looking at that first page under policy on model policy 7. Uh adding the language from the third paragraph that starts with four purposes through the B through the numerical list and then the following fourth paragraph ending with and personnel. Uh I think all of that would be good if you could transfer that over to 2240. Uh it would be helpful for clear direction on your part and it would be helpful for definition. I think

055uh to provide you with some guidance, but it still leaves room for that interpretation. Um so it's you know it's kind of there's there's a little bit of pliability there. So as as a building principle, do you think it's clear to them where we want them to go based on this language? Well, I think that's one part of it. Uh, I think that model policy 28 then gets into some more detail about what you're looking at and what allows for controversial issues. But what you're going to see is I think from my time looking at policy, a lot of policy kind of one thing bleeds into another. Policy is definitely an interwoven uh it's interwoven. No piece of policy I think stands just out there on its own or in most cases no policy stands

056out there on its own. It usually has another policy that provides further clarification. Uh and ultimately if there's a lack of clarity it can always become an item that gets discussed by the board. And I think that's good because I think at the end of the day, you know, you can say when in doubt, maybe stay away from something that you think is going to be controversial, but that is again, you know, I think I think it's best going back to people who are at least representative of of what the what the general public is looking for. And you know just in the on this topic in general right this is where really um things can can and and sometimes do get to be a sticky wicket. Um and what I mean by that is

057if you look at even case law for the last 60 years you'll see something that was controversial then became uncontroversial but now is the center of controversy again. uh and you see courts go back and forth on that, right? And we're basically in that same situation here where we're seeing um things keep going uh back and forth on some of these issues throughout time, even within this district. Mhm. What I'm saying is that we have to be open to a pathway of communication when something happens for our our building administration to say, "Hey, uh, you know, issue that I didn't see as controversial. Now I got some people who are saying, "Hey, this is pretty controversial. What what are your thoughts?" you know, and we can pull that up to even as high as me

058uh discussing that with somebody on the board to say where do we stand so that I can give clear direction to our building principles as to how and what we want to do with that piece, right? And that's how we're going to have to um I think navigate through some of these issues. There are other ones that are pretty black and white, right? like, "No, that that should have been." Um, and there are things that I think should have been black and white where I call it black or white and somebody goes, "Well, did you think about this or and I'm like, I'm sorry. I called it black or white and I should have been maybe a little bit more lenient, right?" Uh, and so this is one of those things where more communication is

059better than less communication. And all I'm advocating for is a a communication channel within policy to um clearly define what that is and how we want to look at that. Right. So then Oh, yeah. Go right for it. Question. Yeah. This is something I'm kind of picking up from you, so I'm happy to hear from you on it. Yeah. Uh the uh the 2028 policy, what are how much of that are we considering putting in? all of it or at a glance I think so the thing that would concern me about putting in putting in all of it would be that it's uh there is some repeated language there's some repeated sentiments there some of it is like standard recitation of law um what I would say minimum is from 28 adding on page one

060paragraphs 4 through six which also includes a uh an enumerated list why don't why don't we do this It's easier really for me if you tell me what it is you like of seven and 28 and then I work with uh Sam and Lind and our administrative team to try to pull that into what's existing with Neiola and say here's here's what we have. Right. Yeah. So tell me what you like. we'll find a way to make it uh incorporated into the uh policy and um come back and say here's what we came up with because that's going to be easier than us trying to word smith as a group. So just tell us what you like. Yeah. Um the the list of description on 28. Okay. That is in group five enumerated one through

061five. Um and the paragraph preceding it. And then honestly I do think that uh paragraphs the all of the preceding proceeding paragraphs um all the way through the end. Some of those are definitional but uh effective notice shall be construed to be noticed efficiently in advance of instruction such that parent may have units. Um in this case this is a little bit more nuanced because these are units that are part of core classes. That's another discussion. Opt in and opt out. But yeah, I would say uh from board will permit all the way through the rest. Uh all of that is content that I would like to see in there. So basically, you do not need the first three paragraphs. Everything else you'd like to keep from 28. Yeah. Only because I think that those

062first three paragraphs really are already in 2240. I don't need an explanation. I just need though. Yeah, that's Oh, yeah. I mean, I'm thinking through it out loud, I guess, for Tammy. Say again for the rest of the board members who are here. So, the only other thing I would um um so like the last page of 28 um it's valuable information. However, 2240 states it has it has may not express personal opinion, has to identify as such, all that other u language. uh we have that we have 2240 the one that's brought forth as recommendation as may not express a personal opinion right so I I think that that's probably um good to maintain oh definitely yeah know because um yeah we're going to stay neutral then we'll stay neutral on yeah no I

063I completely agree Yeah, I was uh not necessarily thinking that anything major should be removed from any of the major points should be removed from 2240. I thought that uh model policy 28 was more of a a good compliment to what already exists within 2240. Okay. So, anything else from 28 uh other other than the board will permit through the end? Tammy, you got any thoughts? Nope. I would added what you did. Any other thoughts from uh any other present board members? All right. Thanks, D. What about model policy seven? Are we go are we going to try to mish mash this into the controversial or wait? No, I think just the definition pull this into uh when we get to more of a discussion about displays and those kinds of things. Yeah, that's yeah,

064the rest of this is more relevant to discussions about displays, clothing, and things like that. A little bit of this will have to do with the next item perhaps, but I don't I'm not sure what Jared means pull us into the discussion about displays. Um because I I don't know when that discussion is going to occur, seeing as though I I don't believe that Neil happens to have a policy on controversial displays classroom. So I would almost uh make a motion to adopt model policy 7. I I yeah I mean I think that perhaps maybe the committee might want to consider just adopting model policy 7 and and adding to the water town policies. Is that something you would like to see, Tammy? Yeah. But should we also add the verbiage of what would happen

065with um controversial issues in the classroom? the verbiage that's on there about it being deferred to the principal and then it coming to the board. Should we add that to the topics, the controversial issues in the classroom? I believe that is uh actually from model policy 7. We're taking that from model policy 7 along Yeah. along with a lot of 28 and putting that on 2240. And then in addition, we would also adopt model policy 7 in its entirety into our policy book as well. and and I will double check the displays and so on. I'm sure I because I Let me getting frustrated with the Wi-Fi because yeah, it's a little slow to eating up time here, but um I I think there may be a a something that we can combine that with.

066Yeah, it might be either that or we can do a standalone. Um and and either way, right, we're going to have to put it into the the Neola, excuse me, not the uh well, it would be the Neola number format, right? We would have to put it and and then reformat it to match those. We can't just say this is and pull it forward. So, um, you know, we will we will try to get that work done between now and, uh, the board meeting. I don't know that we will, but, we will try our hardest to get that done. I understand what you guys want. Okay. So, um, if there's a a combination that may be harder to come to the board for first read if we're going to try to combine it with a

067that may have to that controversial issues may have to go to next month. Uh, not not controversial issues, the displays will have to go to next month. Yeah. If there's anything that Yeah. If there was anything we needed to merge model policy 7 with, that would obviously take more time. We're trying something to merge it with, we will just put it into the Yeah. Neiola template and move forward. But if there's something that we need to consider, we'll have to go to next level. And I'll just uh stay in touch with Sam on that. Yeah. Your timeline to get everything out of the teachers in there. We're just going to go um and and we're going to get done as much as we can. I don't want to stop the rest of the process. And

068if we need to implement something, we will implement it, you know. Um, you know, we we make addendum to handbooks all the time. It would be nice to have it all nice and neat. I don't think we're going to have everything nice and neat. We're just going to have to go with what we can, right? Uh, and then we have to make addendums. We make addendums. We let parents know. We let teachers know. Here's the date it's starting on and we just go. Okay. I mean, I don't want you guys to think that um policy can only be adopted once a year because of a handbook. I I I think there's some policies that are pretty critical to make sure they end up in that first edition of of the policy handbook and this would

069be one of them. Yeah, I I do agree. Yeah. If there's anything that we can do to assist with that, I mean, I'm certainly willing to have extra meetings to try to accelerate the process. I'm certainly willing to meet as a policy board in addition to just our standard monthly meeting. I don't know if that necessarily does help you because then that's more time that you're spending here in the evening, but um I can help tighten up the policies for approval. Yeah. And I'm certainly working on that. I have notes that I'm taking right now for that as well. Uh which I'll I'll get to you guys. Um just as a reiteration of what we've been Okay. All right. Yeah. Let's move on to the next item on the agenda. We got curriculum development uh

0702210. Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. Yep. Just getting past 3216 and 4216 staff dress and grooming. Uh that's for certified non-certified or certified and support. And then there's uh dressing grooming for students which is policy 5511. And Craig, uh, I would like to open up with you talking about some of your thoughts on this because I know this was again one of the items that you were bringing up at previous policy meetings. Yeah. Uh, I appreciate that. Um, I felt that our previous u uh dress and grooming uh policy. This has actually been something that uh has been a discussion with building administration one-on-one for a couple of different years and it seemed to be a pretty vague policy if you ask me or maybe more broad I should say and uh left to interpretation. uh

071administration and building administration did seem to uh move to uh address some dress code issues. However, uh as the year progresses, things keep sliding back to the way things used to be. Um I feel like the Neola um this particular model policy is a little bit more um straightforward, black and white and uh I would be more supportive of that kind of language. However, um you know, I'd call your attention on the model policy to the uh number three bottles where there's a um there is a measurement that's given uh in li of that I would say um instead of adhering strictly to a measurement. Um perhaps utilizing some language that would say um on the that like for for instance skirts should not be more than 4 in maybe say uh a skirt should

072not should generally fall in the within the bottom 3/4 of the thigh you know above the knee something of that nature so that people aren't chasing down with with measurement sticks you know something something like that. Uh that that in general this policy is what the board's intention is when it comes to dress code and enforcement of the dress code. Something that's a little bit more specific um but not to the point of um pulling up tape measures. Sure. Like for instance, some of the bigger bigger changes would be like uh no spaghetti straps, you know, having cap sleeve, you know, um low cut shirts, that sort of thing. Um yeah, I agree. I do think that having specific measurements is that gets a little tricky. Um Tammy, what do you think about the language

073in there? You're talking about the language on the model policy? on the model policy. Yes. Um I'm reading the language. I'm okay with it. I think it's clear. Mhm. Um I think girls are going to have a I guess I don't see a problem with the tank top in the summer in all honesty. personally like I understand the spaghetti straps that might be a little provocative for young boys but I mean sorry a tank top you know they are normally at least an inch wide straps on tank tops I I think I think the reason for um for them saying no tank tops and having a cap sleeve because that's you know you You're creating an atmosphere, right? And and and then but that's also that's also straightforward. That's not that's not a situation where

074you're going to get a ruler out or, you know, Yeah, that's a sort of situation. A tank top and a spaghetti strap can be very subjective. I think at times there's more ambiguity to that. Yeah, I definitely understand that. I also see where you're coming from. I you know I don't think tank tops are I don't feel very strongly about that. I mean you could also you like the topless you know like I get that where there's no straps or spaghetti straps I could see but a tank top I mean we live in Wisconsin it gets hot but yeah you could take out must have cap sleeves. Uh you could just have no spaghetti straps or strapless tops are allowed. Tank tops must have uh tank top straps must be the width a width wider

075than a finger. I mean that's really I don't know uh what what do you think about that Tammy? I don't know. It's hard to say. You got to give me a minute. I'm trying to look at perspective administrator trying to Yeah, it gets it gets really tough like Well, yeah. I mean like it's a pretty there's a pretty clear line there though. I do think there's a clearer line there than there are for a lot of other things. But alternatively, you can just do callous leaves and you can just not have the issue whatsoever. Thinking of that, I'm gonna go to something that's a little less controversial, but um is a is a terminology here that I think is vague that we can rule without um and that's if you look at uh D um

076the the language plainly offensive is really a very difficult standard. Um, but when you look at lewd, vulgar, or indecent, um, there's definitions uh, within law that talk about what what those are, right? But plainly offensive to you might not be plainly offensive to me. So, I'd rather just take it out. And we deal with those things that are uh, lewd, vulgar, and indecent. Uh, and we we take care of it from that standpoint. Yeah. and take out the the subjectivity of offensive. Yeah. Offensive is psychic. Yeah. So, is there in this policy I think that one of the discussions that people have had and I know this is about students but I think that a lot of this language um or well this this point of language rather would apply across the uh dress

077code policies. Um, there's nothing in here about uh political or social content as far as articles of clothing being worn during uh the school day, is there, Craig? No, I didn't I didn't see that. Well, actually, wait a minute. No, no. I but I mean if if there's a desire to put something else in there that says uh Yeah. I don't think we can. You don't think so? No. I think students have a much stronger first amendment rights than than staff do. You know, because staff's an employee of the district where students are That makes sense. They could possibly be legally able to wear political messaging, you know, as long as it's not lewd, you know, like they have some first amendment rights that protect them, too. I think there's a balancing test though. There

078is. I think I mean, and you know, the supposed bong hits it for Jesus um discussion point about speech, right? And so there is a balancing test. Yeah. in law called tinker the tinker test, right? That we would have to think about. I I think that if I think that is if you if you put some sort of a a standard in that says no political speech on on a shirt that for for dress code, if that's what your dress code is, then then it has to be strictly enforced that it you know you're not playing favorites. you happen to wear this particular shirt then you can't wear that particular shirt. Sure. Sure. So do you want to go in the direction of no political at all for the students like they can't can't wear

079things political in nature or it's it's hard to say with students. Um I haven't been in the school district in a bit. I haven't been in the buildings in a bit except for well there was one exception. I was at one of the elementary schools recently. Although that isn't the best example. I think this would apply more to middle and high school. Uh but in my time in the district I did not see an overt amount of uh political messaging and things like that with students. Um and I think it's you know obviously there's there can sometimes be intent uh which gets a lot more complicated. I was thinking that this applies more to uh staff. Um, and I'm thinking this specifically because I had a teacher reach out to me or not a teacher,

080I'm sorry, I had a an individual in the community reach out to me about having observed uh that during the school day there were there was at least one teacher, I believe it was multiple teachers at the high school who were wearing uh some pretty strong uh political and social messaging shirts a few Fridays ago during um apparently there was a protest being held at the school. uh some sort of non-obstructive protest on the part of the students. But the teach but there were a number of teachers who were quite into it and they were wearing quite open and uh and um what some people would call maybe even uh aggressive messaging on their shirts. And um I well whatever I won't get into the details about about it any more than that, but I

081think that that sounds grossly inappropriate to me and that probably shouldn't be something that's going on with any of the teachers in the school district. Um, I mean, I remember teachers having political messaging in their rooms when I was there almost 10 years ago. I don't know if that's appropriate, but I certainly think that, um, you know, like we were talking about with controversial issues previously, uh, in that previous discussion point um, you know, uh, pertains to contentious ideologies, belief, social issues, incites, controversy, debate, or divisiveness within the school community. It certainly appeared to me from what I was hearing and what I was seeing uh that those two stand those two criteria were absolutely being fulfilled by that language. So perhaps having something about that's not acceptable for teachers to wear for staff and

082administration to wear um on school grounds I think would be sensible. With students, again, I think it's pretty with you, Sam. Yeah, I I think that's a clear line. With students, it's a little bit more difficult, and I think that should probably be handled on. We had um you know, a student wearing a cape of a political party um and went through the day at the middle school. H interesting. Yeah. I mean, I suppose it kind of depends on what's being communicated there. I don't know where that falls and whether or not that is that does fall under first amendment right. Maybe that's a discussion that we bring up to the full board and we have we have that item of discussion specifically. Are we going to restrict uh political messaging on articles of clothing

083for students? Um that's that's a little bit more ambiguous to me, but I think for staff that's a pretty easy call. My personal opinion is I'd like to get all political messaging out of the district completely, whether it's staff or students. Like, not that they can't be in robust discussions, but nothing worn on them physically, no room decor. I think that no flags except for this the country's flag, the state flag. Yeah. The school flag or the city flag. Um, yeah, absolutely. I don't know the legality behind putting that kind of restriction on students where I know that it it can happen like we have more control over the staff's dress than the students dress when it becomes infringing on their first amendment rights. Sure. Sure. Um yeah, I'm with you. I guess uh what

084we could do is we could make the recommendation. Yeah. Go ahead. Um I just want to make it clear that school board does have a lot of um a lot of control over that situation. Uh the school board can make it so that we can go the way of uh uniforms if we want to. Um, so I mean if you don't want any messaging on a shirt and that you want to make that as a policy, you can even just have them wear plain t-shirts. I mean, everybody in uniform. Yeah. So, I mean, I wouldn't be opposed to such a thing. The improvements in a school district uniforms exponentially. I mean, including staff. Yeah. Well, something something that big might require some more discussion. Sure. Um, so just saying that. Yeah, I do hear what

085you're saying. Possibility is there for you. Yeah, I suppose uh I suppose it's I would say are we able to consult with uh with legal to get some advice about that? The best thing for you to do, right, is to tell me the aims that you're looking for as specifically as you can and then we get guidance from our attorney to say, "Here's how you do it." Sure. Because our attorney will get us there, get us to your aims. Um, and they'll do it in a way that makes it um, you know, take our liability risk down as far as we can, right? We we may incur liability risk depending on what we want. you know, if you uh depending on what kinds of speech you want to try to limit, they they may say

086absolutely not or here's a way, but you may incur some liability. Um, but at least I'll know what to say to our attorney and convey here's the things that they'd like to control for, right, when it comes to dress, you know, and and so if if you want to share that with me, also share with me your thoughts about what you would like to uh convey to staff around displays, you know, what what things you have concerns over um because really it's going to take us uh a little bit of time to say here's what we need to do to make a model policy. But then there's also informing uh people of that policy not only on at a macro level but on an individual level um so that we understand that due process was

087given to everyone right and that we move forward with that. Sure that makes sense. All right. So, I don't see it that easy. Nothing ever is. This we're we're walking a fine line here. A very fine line. I'm for all for keeping politics out of the school system. I'm for educating people, the kids, and that's it. But when it comes to this, we need legal help on this. and a lot of it. Yeah. So, our aim would be we want to remove political messaging, right? We want to have no political messaging. Uh if that is something that we can do, staff and students, obviously that is contingent on where we stand, you know, legally speaking. So, uh when you talk about political messaging, what do you mean? Do you mean just political parties and people

088running for office or do you mean um issues that could be political in nature? Uh abortion um white power, black power. Correct. Yeah. Those kinds of things like I mean like what what do you mean to me when you say uh political messaging? The second thing that you were talking about in including including including uh social social and uh So, contemporary political issues, right? And retro political issues, too. I don't want to see any Richard Nixon shirts in the schools. Okay. Not a fan of that. No. No. Reagan. No Reagan. And also, no. Uh Oh, man. I don't even remember the guy's name that he the other day. Really? Yeah. Yeah. Mondale. That's it. Yeah. There you go. Wow. Yeah. So, if you vote at all, but as vanilla be Well, I mean, you know,

089I think that I think that if her focus is to is to have academic education uh and to get away from the increasing uh the increasing controversy and high tension, I think, you know, let's let's get rid of it all, man. But we we want to keep things like uh lewd, vulgar, obscene. Those are things that are legally definable into uh the context. But we want to stay away from um the idea of well, I don't even remember what it said in there, but you know, generally distasteful is basically what I put it in my mind as. Yeah. Plainly, plainly offensive. Plainly. And I and I think that from earlier model policy 7 what we were talking about about it goes through the process comes up to the board if there's like an an issue

090of an issue of ambiguity there uh I I think that would make sense for the process as well bring it up to the board. Um when in doubt bring it to the board. I think that makes a lot more sense. What about um two through two through nine when it comes to more specific um requests when it comes to address code? I mean, just having more of a defined guideline because I feel like this is this is where the board should as their curfew define what this looks like. Yeah. This is the expectation and this is how it is expected to be enforced, you know. Yeah. I don't have a problem with language as written. Uh although I certainly heron would be glad to adopt the adjustment of the specific lengths to well cuz I

091mean let's put this way to my 10-year-old daughter who is extremely petite a 4 inch skirt is going to look like something's wrong. You know what I mean? Yeah. to somebody that's nearly uh an 18y old in the um in high school that 4 in is completely different. It's not proportional at all. I mean even absolutely. So and what was the the specific language that you proposed I think was uh was pretty good for that. Well, I guess I will leave it to administration to come up with some language that can be enforcable. This is this is easy. Our attorneys deal with this topic all the time. Yeah. Right. And so I I can if you want more specific language uh and and I show them this policy and say, you know, there there's some

092things that we had problems with. We had problems with the idea of what does a strap mean? Are we going to go with spaghetti strap or tank top or uh fully covered shoulder? Right? That has to be a discussion point. Right? the the um attorney may ask you, do you want to put a clause in there for things like prom or other things because you try to find some prom dresses sometimes, right? Um I would say, you know, I wasn't that prom, but um given history of proms, um at least half of the girls have strapless dresses, right? Uh and so there are there are things there that you may want to consider as an exemption. I don't know if that's something you want to do or not, but um some of those things that

093Yeah, they may they may ask me. Yeah. Exceptions or modifications to the dress code on page two, right? There's on page two section for that. Yeah. You want you like I I would say bring over all of the language from model policy 13. um defer between 3216 and model policy 13 deferring to 13 where necessary with advice from legal I can do that is everybody is everybody clear on that that going to students and staff or uh specifically that's the student side specifically for students yeah um the staff dress and grooming oh I'm sorry I said 3216 I said the name wrong policy. Uh 5511 is what I meant for students. I apologize, Len. Um uh I think that 3216 and its counterpart 4216 look fine. I think adding in the language about uh political,

094social, culture, cultural messaging on clothing uh would be the only thing that I would want to see changed there. Okay. Any other thoughts? Anyone? All righty. With you, Sam. All right. If we're all right on that, then we're moving on to the curriculum review process. And once again, Craig, because you've been working this for the last year, I'm uh pass me the baton. Um the curriculum development process. This was one of those another topic that kept uh coming up. Um it happens to be something that's kind of on the forefront of discussion today. because uh I feel like sometimes uh the board should have more involvement in that process uh and more awareness of that particular process. the model policy, one of the model policies as we see here um was the model policy 16

095uh talking about evaluation update uh district curriculum purchased from third parties and it uh it talked about basically a curriculum review committee um that should shall consist of members who shall be selected by the district district district administrator and approved by the board. Uh should include at least one person from each of the following groups, teachers, administrators, curriculum coordinators, parents, and students. Um, you know, that that could also mean that uh if the board wants to include a board member or multiple board members um in that process, I feel like that might not be a bad idea. um you know and you can even specify as many uh parents or students that you or teachers or curriculum coordinators or administrators that are in on that particular committee. Um the idea being that it's a larger

096process, a larger group than just um the administration and teachers in the school district that are bringing forth the recommendation. that it's it's it's a more of a collaborative effort when moving forward as a selection and that the board approves that process and that committee for or that um consideration and that the that that particular um process also involves updating the board and and regularly review the content of the data and whatnot. I also had uh attached or included other other model policies uh that may make sense when it comes to other instructional materials that should be reviewed on a regular basis. uh including um uh library materials and um uh then also here's included um library materials and parental parental rights things of that nature. Um so that if we're going to uh social

097emotional instructional uh social emotional learning and instruction and parental notification stuff like that um that should be part of that review committee's purview so that these things are being reviewed on a regular basis. Uh I I do think it might even make sense that the the board includes more of those reviews and in particular committee like head services uh or that discussion um occurs. We would like to see these materials reviewed on a regular basis because right now um it it awfully seems like we as a board the only involvement we happen to have with circuit curriculum is uh you know you approve the course handbook or the course guide based on three sentences and that never comes before the board for additional review or approval. So in that period of time that particular course

098could have been offered for the last 20 years and never actually come before the board for review. Um that's not appropriate. You know things evolve, things change. Uh who who has adapted that course uh accordingly? I think that's that's um that's the purview of a a school board uh to approve those particular um items on a regular basis. Um, so what does that mean? Yearly, bi-yearly, you know. So, thank you for a review of like those resources and the issues where uh the committee last came to an end on this issue and actually the board um it was uh kicked to a a smaller committee of Miss Borst uh the board uh uh excuse me the ed services chair and the policy chair to uh work through all of those policies because there's like I

099don't know six different policies that are around curriculum, curriculum adoption process, uh material review and selection, how to uh challenge a material uh and a number of other things that really need some coordination together in these in this regard. wondering if we want to stick with that process that was outlined by the board to kick it to a smaller committee by which um a couple board members can work with Miss Boris uh um and and possibly myself to talk about what is what is the what is the way we're going to do this because we know that we have to do uh things differently uh and we want to make sure that we have them all coordinated. Does that still sound like a good process or what? Yeah, that sounds fine to me. That kind

100of leads into that earlier thing I was talking about where I was saying, "Hey, if having additional meetings to work out some of these more complex discussions is the way to go. Let's do that and let's yeah, let's let's let's get it moving." So, the reason that didn't happen is because we also knew that everything was up in the air. Up up up in the air and new board members and then we were waiting for who's the chair. But Jenny, Miss Boris, is really ready and and wants to be done with the process, much less get started with it, right? So, she's really tough at the moving. We just want to make sure that that's what you want. And uh we will have uh the chair of policy and the chair of ed services uh

101meet with Miss Forest and talk about like how are we going to tackle these six or seven policies together in a way that um gets to all those issues and and looks at those resources that you brought forward, Greg, to to say here's here's some of the guidance uh things that we need to think about. That sounds great to me. So perhaps the uh recommendation or the motion would be to set up a separate subcommittee meeting which of course we're just going to follow what was already decided. Yeah, let's uh let's continue on that. Let's let's grab a time and uh let's move forward with it hopefully in the next couple of weeks. Miss Boris will in the uh next couple of days give you guys that email and if you have forward to it

102I've been an air now that we have a little direction I'm happy to do moving forward. Yeah, that sounds great to me. Thanks. All right. Uh on to item E. Uh that's policy 2414, human growth and development. Model policy 30 and 31 are accompanying it. Uh, and once again, Craig, take it away. The human and girl, the development. I don't know if this was out of rotation for Nola. Uh, if have if I just pulled this happened to pull this one forward outside of rotation because I don't know that we've had a discussion on it. No, it's still coming forward. Okay. Right. I feel like this was discussed previously. At least it's something we touched on at one of the previous policy meetings. Yeah. In the same sense of the curriculum pieces, I think we

103were going to loop human growth and development in that as well, right? Because it's it's a unique process within the same type of thing. Yeah. And we don't have a current policy that is as specific as the policy. Um, and I did not get a chance to review the model policy that will put up with it, but I know when I stated the real policy followed in the old policy very closely. Um, and so the board has the decision, are we teaching human growth and development? Yes or no? If so, there's a very specific committee outlined in this law um that we would pull together to review the topics that are being taught um and when they're being taught and how they're being taught. Um, and I'm again one of those areas that I'm very

104anxious to start moving forward on um depending on what the board is determining they would like to do. And I was under the impression that those were going to be locked in with some curriculum review concept as well. And so I'm happy to to work with the two of you to to figure how we want to move forward with that. Um I'm happy to move that and if you need I am one of the instructors for fourth or fifth grade teacher. Sure. So well they have one but you have to have two, right? And so I go and support the teacher. Um so to Oh, sorry. Um so in the interest of uh being direct, uh it sounds like this is going to be another meeting with chairs and um Tammy, before we move on

105from it though, because I don't want to rush through it and you're also on this committee, is there anything you'd like to see as far as the human growth and development policies go? Um are there any thoughts that you have about that in uh in the district? I mean, we're just talking about basic, right? Like, we're not getting in anything. I know that statute requires what parts are. Well, there are certain things that are required by state statute that schools have to cover. So, I'm comfortable with that. As long as we're not going into anything crazy. Yeah. As long as there's no uh as long as there's no comprehensive sexuality education, I think that's what it's called. No. And matter of fact, when those conversations come up, um, you know, at any level, we refer

106them to their parents, uh, or a trusted adult or a doctor. And that's how we say it. Yeah. Yeah. What were you going to say, Chris? Well, um, I think this is where this is where some of the confusion came in. Um, that there there should be an approval process when it comes to human growth and development. Yeah. state statute and uh that that also means taking a look at what's being taught. Um because uh I do believe that one of the staff members actually raised a question to that and said, "Hey, I just don't want to get in trouble for teaching this if it hasn't been board approved." Yeah. So, has it not been board approved in the past? The human growth development that is it it has been a while since it's been

107reviewed and approved. So, that's something that we can bring up way more than we So, I have a question about that as well and maybe my understanding is wrong, but historically I thought that board the board not that I agree with this process, but that the board only initially approved curriculum and then it was never brought to the board. Human growth and development should be on a fiveyear cycle. Okay. But there are some topics where we'll just approve and then never see it again even though changes have maybe been made over seven to 10 years or something. Right. Un unless changes have been made. Okay. Right. I if if there have been substantial changes made um or the standards have been changed or we have adopted different standards that all has to go to you.

108Right. But it should be a minimum a fiveyear cycle. Right. But but but lessons can change on the topic, right? And the and the topic based on the standard. If that's still the same and lessons change, it shouldn't have to come back to you. Okay. Well, I mean, I I I feel like there's a there's a valid reason to go through that. If um if VPI changed the standards uh for whatever particular reason, the board should have the purview to say yes, we're going to adopt those standards or no, we don't want to adopt those standards. That's exactly what I said. Yes. If if that's the case, yes, it would come to you, right? But if it's if the standard hasn't changed and those uh topics, you know, um honor those standards, those I'm missing

109the word. So I feel like we're blurring the conversation between growth development and our and they kind of merge. I agree totally agree to your point about um curriculum and bringing different curriculum back and I I won't go deep right now but what I appreciate about the policy it talks about curriculum guides and having those published and public and that is something that I feel um would be a great next step for us to be doing. Okay. Um, and it's something that we have to talk through. The process of bringing them to the board for approval could get a little dicey at the beginning because we would have so many to begin with, but then having a process by which we're bringing them back so that it's not that something was approved 35 years ago

110and then never revisited again. Um, and I think that's all something that um, Dr. Burke and I have been talking about. How do we how do we work through policy and work through a process with our services instances to sort of clean that up if you will? Um, and it's something that I'm very excited about and I appreciate your point, Craig, about teachers wanting to feel like comfortable and confident in the topics in which they're teaching. And I think that, um, frankly, we owe to them to make sure that we are being clear with what. So, um, I I'm I'm excited to embark on that. And I was kind of looping that piece in there as well. Um, and so I'm happy to sit with the two of you to kind of start crafting what

111that might look like and what that could look like. Um, and then talking through human growth and development too because I know that that is a very specific topic and I know we've talked about the fact that that's not something that has been brought back to the board level or the median level um in a while and that seems that we if we are going to be teaching human growth in development in the district that so the language that the state statute uses is age appropriate Mhm. Do we determine what is age appropriate or so? Yeah. Um, so we do um to some extent. Um, but what I'm saying is this is if we have a curriculum guide, right? Um, where it it says here's the standards that we're looking at and then that curriculum

112guide goes deeper into here's the units, right? Um, and and the major discussion points within those. Those come back if those come back on a more regular basis. um that's where you will have a lot of the um say over what's age appropriate right and um to that extent sometimes um like when I was a director of curriculum instruction we brought the uh the standard set the curriculum guide and a couple of sample lessons uh to uh the educational services committee and said why don't you take a look at curriculum guide and standards for this course and you know here's a couple sample lessons any questions? Right? And that is usually enough to spark like if there was any inkling of, hey, I'm a little worried about what we're teaching here, then we pulled that

113one off and have a deep discussion, the rest of them we move forward. Sure. Right. And so that was really good kind of where where your level of is like that really that guidance level. Right. Yeah. I definitely think that any uh human growth and development um I understand how in the past it was sufficient to say here's a sample. I think Oh yeah. Now it's been a while. I think we need to go into it. Yeah, I think it's a full full curriculum uh detailed detailed examination there. Um and again this is this is a discussion that we can have uh in addition to this goes along with curriculum review. Um, the only thing that I would add that I think I would like to see happen and this is going to come into

114play with a number of policies is I would like to see optin being prioritized above opt out. I think that's really important. I've heard from a lot of people that opt in sometimes feels like something that can slip through the cracks and they prefer to see an op or I'm sorry, opt out feels like it slips through the cracks. they feel like they would like to see an optin strategy where they are specifically asked for permission before something happens and it does not happen without their their permission and acceptance of it. Um so I think that would be key with human growth and development. Uh so yeah uh any other questions any other thoughts? All righty, let's move on to item F 7540 districts stack email account. This is something that uh a staff member

115brought up at the last general board meeting. Uh thank you for having these placed on here Craig. I really appreciate that. That was an interesting question that he raised. uh the specific language that he was talking about on here is towards the end I want to say let's see um I don't know where it is off the top of my head then um it was about whether or not staff can send mass emails. Yeah. Where? Oh, yeah. It's actually towards the top. It's the third paragraph from the start. W USD staff shall not send or forward mass emails even if the emails concern WUSD business without prior approval. Site administrator. Um, so Jared, off the top of your head, do you know why we would have a clause in there like that? Can you give

116us a little bit of background on the rationale? So with within an organization uh this size um you can imagine uh any classroom teacher uh or um sport activity other thing. If everybody was doing this on a regular basis, the amount of junk mail that people have to sift through becomes almost contradictory to getting to the things that are important like a communication for a parent or whatever. Sure. And so I don't know how we're going to um parse out between uh what's important uh to send as a mass or not important to send as a mass unless there is a a body to check in with to say hey we think this is important because you will get stuff like has does anybody have any red pipe cleaners? I'm looking for red pipe cleaners

117and then that goes to the whole uh email address book. Yeah. Right. Uh and and and so um that has been uh creeping up more and more and more lately. And it's not always just within a building, but it will go to the whole email book. And you know, sure, somebody in maintenance may have red pipe cleaner box sitting on the back shelf somewhere and that would have filled the I mean, I don't know. But um the reality is we're trying to seek a balance and I don't know how else to seek a balance. And if you guys have ideas, I would be happy to hear what those are. uh and and to to figure out how we can do it. But that's the impetus of the discussion point. Definitely. You got any thoughts initially,

118Tam? No, I was just I was actually going to ask like how many mass emails are you seeing shooting about the district where it it's creeping up. Yeah. And I'm not saying that it's not. That's why I was And I mean, and some of it's not even like our business. It's hey, the Girl Scouts are throwing cookies at whatever tonight, you know, and stuff like that. Sure. Sure. you know, so like some sometimes it's not even it's like school adjacent because it deals with a youth, right? But it's it's not necessarily even our school business. And this isn't we don't have anything like this on the books indicating that mass emails can't be sent. Is that the case? That's why we have to go back and look at our our policy, our older policy on

119it. But I believe that the spirit that this was brought up in was not about emails that go out to the full district. I think it was about the ambiguity of what a mass email is. If I'm uh the wrestling coach or the basketball coach is something that goes out to the whole every single person in the district. Okay. Got it. And and I also don't want people to go, "Well, I didn't include Jared because he was the superintendent. I didn't include him, so that's not a mass email because I didn't include everybody." You know, I mean, like, sure. Sure. It's it's not when it's for your specific group or team activity. It's when it's a general statement to uh the the vast majority of the district. So maybe Oh, go ahead. Sorry. So you

120wouldn't consider the email that the gentleman was sending to like 130 other people involved in the um skills USA. The skills USA. That wouldn't be considered a mass email, right? Because he's not sending out to everybody in the district. He's just sending it out to a large number of people that he communicates with in his day-to-day operations. Is that what we're saying? I think what we were trying to control for was like all of that traffic, especially the in-house traffic um you know, but sometimes it's good. So sometimes we'll have like um um uh some students like at the high school who are like we have a um you know a sale that we're raising some money for, you know. Um, but then if they go to their building principal and say, "Hey, we want

121to send out an advertisement to the whole body, would you approve that?" Then we at least have an avenue for that, right? They're just not running around looking for X, Y, or Z. Does anybody got a good paper cutter that they're not using anymore? We get a lot of that kind of stuff at the end of the year where people are trying to get rid of stuff and or get stuff and you know, um, Right. So, do you think implementing a policy that doesn't allow that kind of communication within the organization is going to hinder or help the organization to be successful and improve communication. I'm trying to seek a balance is what I'm saying. Yeah. And I don't know the best way to do it. So, I'm asking you guys. I I think this

122is a great start. I think the way that I see it, you could either define mass email uh or you could change the phrase mass emails to districtwide emails. that might explain it a little bit more because it's not even if you have 400 people in Skills USA, that's still not districtwide. It's still the the subject or the recipients of the email are part of a subgroup of the district for a specific purpose. Um, you guys got me. I'm not saying I'm not saying you shouldn't have it. and say, "Is it such an issue that it needs to be roped in or are we just projecting like are we assuming it's going to get worse and let's just add this in quick to avoid, you know, Miss Stephanie sending out an email to, you know,

123600 employees that she needs red pipe cleaner." Yeah. And just cereal cereal boxes. Yeah, that's a that's an actual one that you know we've seen. Um but sometimes you encourage it, right? Based on what they're asking for. Well, I'm not saying encourage it. I'm saying sometimes we would allow for it depending on what they're asking. So for a sitewide, it requires administrative. Well, I'm just saying, you know, if there's a filter of some kind, you know, um where a professional is looking to somebody and say, "Hey, you know, I realize that we're trying to limit mass emails, but here's here's some things." If a building administrator says, "Yeah, those are really good. Sit them out." Like, at least then when it does come as a mass email, right, the person on the other end receiving

124it knows that at least they got an approval. then they could take it up with that building principal or whatever else to say really this was important for you to send out to everybody. But there right now there are instances where staff members are just like rude to other staff members and they say, "Well, why are you sending this kind of stuff out? Like it's just just chewing up my inbox and that kind of stuff." I don't want to see that either. um because we're all here to help one another, but there are some instances where some people are asking for some things that's like why is that an email to everybody? So, just any way that you guys have that can help us clarify that. That's all I'm looking for is clarity to give

125to the staff around it so that we can try to solve for the issue. If you guys think, hey, not a big deal, let all the emails go. Then we'll have that go for a while and I'll bring it back to you if there is uh you know if you want us to take some data around it and say how many mass emails do we have? I'd like to hear from a teacher for a former teacher. Yeah. Were you using emails? Oh my Wow. Yes. Actually, no. There you go. That's why I'm honest. It was it was an it was a question made in good faith. But that's right. So I I just don't want to stop communication is my big concern because they like I haven't seen the most recent staff survey, but with

126the one that was last online, communication seems to be something that staff has a problem with. Mhm. And do we really want to further take away their ability to communicate with one another? And so I think that this really what this plays into is the two important parts of that paragraph are mass emails and clarity on what mass emails mean. I think districtwide would be a little bit clearer there. And then approval of the site administrator. I think that's going to play into if you have something that you need to send out to people, it's reasonable to say, hey, uh, to the superior in that situation, hey, uh, I want to send this out. Then the flip side is we have to have some standards in place for timely replies on the administration on the

127side of administration. So that that's kind of a different discussion though those are separate policies that are actually uh I don't know if they're in here today but we do have separate policies that are about that and I think that's where that would play in. So um you know we're not we're not eliminating your ability to send stuff throughout your building and all that stuff. But when it starts crossing over from one building to another. Okay. Right. Those are the things that we're talking about that people are saying, well, why are why are we getting Okay, I understand. Why are you and and so those are the ones that I'm talking about that we're trying to think about and control for because we're our aim is better communication, not hampering communication. But I also don't

128want what we write to feel like it's hampering mis either. Uh and so that's the balance I'm asking and I think um you know our teacher in good faith is asking for as well and and all of his emails even though they were mass were dedicated to hit people you know and so forth. So yeah, you discourage the mass emails for this reason, right? And then teachers would understand. That's why I would say my only thought is really districtwide instead of mass email makes more sense. Mass just sounds like a lot. Districtwide makes it clear. We're talking about going out to multiple schools and um for more general uh discussion or for for general attention uh among the among the entire district. So, what do you think? Districtwide instead of mass. I'm good with that.

129And then we'll talk about like administrative reply times and things like that in in another section, I think. And then that'll take care of that piece, I think, where there might be some con some feelings of constriction. Okay. Any other thoughts, Dan, Greg, Carl? No. Okay. Well, with no further thoughts on that, we can move on to the final section of priority discussions. Uh, item 8, 4162, controlled substance and alcohol policy for employees that transport students. WSD sponsor. Oh jeez. I I don't know what's going on. I must be uh double clicking or something. Uh 2340 WSD sponsor trips. Uh, another thing that was brought up the last general board meeting. Um, here we are. Bring this over here. Uh, professional staff member versus certified staff member. Uh, there were there was a question about

130that language in there. Uh, right off the bat, do you have anything to add, Jared? Yeah. So, um this really becomes more of a liability issue uh where um if there is a liability concern and our insurance providers are in the mix, they're going to want to make sure that we have a paid employee in charge of those uh students. I'm not saying that I as the paid employee can't be in charge of the 80 students but also have help from other people but that there there still needs to be a p aid member who's overseeing you know or assigned to oversee those. You can have help from a nonpaid employees, right? But to say that volunteer is the only one and then um have something happen u we would be leaving that volunteer um

131maybe possibly on their own liability and their own personal liability insurance or homeowners insurance or whatever else should something happen and they get named if they're not a paid employee. Okay. Right. and I'm trying to protect them as well as protect the interest of the school in in how this is worded. So, and that kind of led into the next question he asked and I think that's what he was he was asking for clarification there. So, that makes sense to me. Uh Tammy, what do you think? No, I understand wanting the, you know, professional professional. Yeah. Because it would fall on your cool liability insurance or Right. Once it's a volunteer situation, a little maybe we certainly have siphoned individuals that are coaches. They're paid individuals. They will be covered under our liability insurance, right?

132But a true volunteer who has no uh financial tie to the school district. We don't want to uh for their sake leave them in in charge of of a crew and something happens and there wasn't any assignment or oversight from a paid employee. Sure. That would make it not good situation. Absolutely. And then uh he also asked about uh he asked for clarification about language implying that WIAA trips would be exempted from overnight trip policies. Do you do you remember this when he asked about it? Uh, I know it was it was a little below actually. It was only last week, wasn't it? Um, yeah. So, uh, that I think kind of falls into the same category, but can you give us a little bit of a give us a little bit more information about

133the WIAA trips, how that fits in? Yeah, the the way that that fits in is u sometimes uh the the need and or efficiency for that to happen. Um because especially at tournament season, everything else, we we have to allow for the administrator who's in charge of that, the you know, basically the activities person to help go through that process and and make sure that those arrangements are there. That's the rationale behind it. Most other clubs, activities, sport, they don't have that kind of a a nature to it where they can go through an approval process. Right. And so um just trying to keep those two um differentiated um was the only discussion point or rationale. Sure. Sure. Makes sense. I mean I would I would love to have the everybody be under that process

134but sometimes just not an availability of turnaround to make sure that that happens. Sure. That makes sense to me. Jamie, you got any questions on that? And then the last item that he brought up uh with the district sponsored Oh, no. I'm sorry. This was uh in the this was in another one. So, yeah, that was that. Uh that clears it up for me. I don't have any further questions there. Um any other comments? Okay. So, then on to H4162. Um, and again that was uh from that staff member at the previous meeting and his question was about volunteers and drug testing. Uh, and I think it was about the maybe ambiguity and emission of language more than it was about the actual language of the policy itself. Um, and it appeared to him that

135volunteers would be exempt from drug testing according to this policy. Jared, what do you have? Well, um there is no uh statutory language that supports us mandating a drug test for a volunteer. We can mandate it for all employees. And so that's the difference that you see in the language, you know. Um and honestly, that's why some school districts tend to try not to do volunteers in this kind of a setting. Sure. you know, um we are still pretty open to volunteers in this kind of a setting, but we also realize that um we can't mandate that for them. That's a liability that you open yourselves up to by allowing the help. Right. Sure. Otherwise, you say, "We don't have volunteers and we pay everybody, but I don't know how we're going to do that."

136you know, um, and just let them know if you're being paid, you have to uh submit to a possible, uh, drug test. Um, but you're not going to want to put everybody on a payroll just for one night. Yeah. It just doesn't make sense. And I mean, this is specifically about drivers. Uh, I would think that, you know, um, well, that's what I mean. They can drive for one night like to to that activity and back and that's the only time they ever do it. Right. So, right. And you think if it raises to the level of like they needed to be tested for something, the police would be involved and police would have greater authority than the district to tell the driver, yes, hey, field sobriety, baby. Sure. I mean, hopefully hopefully it would

137reach that point. Um, I guess there's an element of there's an element of making a judgment call on the part of the other uh me members of the district. I suppose if if you're going to have a situation where someone's not in a state where they can drive, I would guess that uh they're not going to be getting into a car without anyone observing it. I mean, even students at that point. Bottom line is we can't mandate volunteers be drug tested. Okay. So, it's a law thing. And yeah, Tammy is right. If there's a issue that pops up or arises, right, and we can't mandate it, we call the police and they can if they think it's a endangering health. Sure. Sure. In that regard. So, okay. Makes sense to me. Makes sense to me.

138All right. Any other comments, questions, discussion on our priority discussions? Nothing else. We're moving on to section three, policies for discussion. More policies. Uh, first on the docket is Neiola policies group 10,00. Where are we at with that? Uh, does anyone have anything on any of these policies that they would like to discuss? Yeah. Um, policy number 162, we need second paragraph. Mhm. We have some title old title lang language in there. Yeah, I noticed that as well. Uh I did have a question about that because uh there's title nine and then there's I can't remember which title it is off the top of my head. I do know that this is about uh employment uh and I think that there might be a different standard there. Wisconsin standard for employment uh in the state

139of Wisconsin has title seven or title seven still has what you see there and that comes from I can't remember which Supreme Court ruling it was it boto I don't remember Boston yeah um yeah so yeah I had the I I had the same note though Craig um I also had on page two I'll bounce off of what we're talking about here um we have I missed what you Oh, I'm sorry. Uh, if we go to page two of that policy of policy 1662, uh, we have a section talks about bullying, then under in the list item I says, uh, uh, sexual, religious, and racial harassment. Um, and this kind of goes along with what we were talking about in priority discussions. I think that adding political harassment uh political to that list, sexual, religious,

140political or racial harassment uh would be pertinent. Okay. And then my second note on there is that we have a paragraph below the list that talks about harassment including hate speech. Um, the only reason that I bring that up is I think that we have sexual, religious, racial harassment, public humiliation, um, intimidation, things like that. Hate speech doesn't really have a legal definition, and it gets really dicey with how we define that. I think you're getting into sticky waters when you bring in hate speech. Um, so you know, my thought was even with the examples that they're bringing up, some of those are already taken care of under item I. Uh, I think that, you know, maybe there's a better way we can go about go about taking care of any situation that would come

141up like that again under sexual, religious, political, or racial harassment. I think that would be sufficient. instead of having that uh paragraph that starts with harassment and then through examples A and B and I would recommend striking those. I don't know if anyone else has any thoughts regards to that, Kenny. I don't see the point for hate hate speech added to it given the bullet points. I guess can can you give me something outside of the bullet points that would be considered hate speech that we'd need to account for? I can I'm still trying to find out where where it says that. Oh, sorry. Page two says bullying and then there's A through K. Okay. And then under K it says harassment also includes hate speech. the use of language, behavior, or images slash symbols

142that express prejudice against a particular group or groups on the basis of any predicted characteristics. Examples are a making statements that promote violence towards a racial or ethnic group and b drawing, displaying or posting images or symbols of prejudice, eg swastikas. Again, I mean, I think that both of those examples are already covered by eye, especially if you include political harassment. And I also think that when you're talking about symbols of prejudice, that gets really abstract. I think that you're really getting into uh personal definition territory. Like when we say plainly offensive like so so it's saying when you make a statement that promotes um as an example um that seems to be a very subjective thing and well it's it's saying promoting violence or a racial or ethnic group. I mean, I'm not I

143would just say that statements that promote violence in general should not be included. If anything, you could add statements promoting violence to A through K. I'm I'm indifferent. I guess it makes I I think it's a redundant section. Yeah. Um it even even then you could say that falls under B threats, right? I mean I what is the legal standard for for uh some sort of speech that somebody feels instigates a a violent reaction? I mean that seems very very big. Yeah, it uh yeah, it seems it seems like not a great piece to have in there. So, do we have any uh do we have any objections then to just striking harassment through the end of example B? I have no objections to that. Right. Uh yep, that would be the recommendation there. Um

144uh on sorry I did have quite a few notes here. Um page three item C. Can I Oh yeah, go ahead. So do you want to add for I since we're adding political, do we want to add ethnic to that? Uh racial harassment is already in there. I mean is racial harassment not the same thing as ethnic harassment? that same give me give me a distinction. Go ahead, sir. Um, I'll give you an example. An ethnicity is Hispanic. They are considered to be white. Their race is white. Okay. How what is the definition of race then? Can you give me a definition for race? Because I'm a little I'm a little foggy on how all of that has been going on for a while. I don't understand how you arrive at a definition of a

145particular race. Okay. Okay, it's it's okay. Those are those are governmental uh governmental distinction. of process you follow would be different depending on the language process is the same but if you leave out ethnicity okay um that is a particular different factor right somebody can say you know it's not yeah it's not based on race I just don't like them because they're Irish right it's true it's happened well I mean then I mean that opens up a whole nation that opens up a whole number of uh questions about racial harassment. I mean, if race is then determined by government standards, then we're looking at a person is being harassed because of what the government has said that they are, that seems a little silly to me. I I understand what you're saying. I understand that

146Irish and white are not the same thing. Um, if racial just means the color of your skin, it's just when I see the check off lists for like race and ethnicity, I guess, on a on a variety of forms because like it a lot of times those forms together and eth ethnicity together. Yeah, sure. Um, yeah, I don't have a problem with uh with clarifying racial, ethnic harassment um and adding political in there. That's fine by me. Uh I mean, you know, it'd be nice if the government stopped assigning labels to people that other people used to abuse them. Sounds like the government's fmenting hate. Uh but uh yeah, so yeah, that's that's fine by me. Um let's see. Any other comments? I got also got page three and page four are two other notes

147that I took. Um on page three there's boundary invasions. Boundary invasions may be inappropriate or inappropriate. Um, uh, specifically, uh, I guess this was more of a general comment, but I remember seeing a lot of, uh, you know, when I was a teenager moving into the high school and the middle school, I remember seeing teachers behave in ways that were definitely on the border here. Um I guess uh that was always very bothersome to me and I would maybe it's a bigger discussion to have at some other point but how do we determine those things and how are we are we take are we taking steps to kind of try to figure out whether or not these things are going on in the district because it seemed to me that a lot of students would

148go along with certain behaviors that are listed here. I don't I never saw item E under boundary invasions per se or anything like that, but I saw a lot of stuff that could be classified here. How are [Music] we we're just we're relying on the observation of other staff, of students, or of parents to confront boundary invasions. Is that correct? Is that clear on your question? uh just uh boundary invasions is a really broad it's it's a broad category seeing things like favoring certain students by inviting them to the come to the classroom at non-class times. I saw a lot of that when I was in high school even 10 years ago. Um sometimes I saw teachers that could have been being too touchy with students. But one of the problems that came up was

149as a student you don't necessarily know where the boundary is there. So what's the kind of [Music] uh I guess what's the methodology by which we determine those things because I would hate to think that these things are going on that we have policy in place that states that it's inappropriate as we should but that these things are kind of continuing onwards because we don't have accountability you know proper accountability measures in place if that makes sense. It's just a when I was reading through it, it made me realize that, you know, a lot of that stuff can really slip by the wayside. Uh because I saw a lot of teachers engaging in behavior like that that was probably not very good when I was in school. So, you know, the the idea behind the

150list is this that um it's not an exhaustive list, but we needed to be um expansive enough to allow um teachers and students, right, staff and students to understand that there's appropriate lines of this. And some of those you can look at and say, well, how is that inappropriate? Well, you you only figure that out by process of investigation, right? and and some of that has to go with, you know, um different patterns of behavior, intent, all of those things that can be uncovered uh within an investigation. But students and staff need to know um you like ideas of these things so that they can if they they feel like they're being infringed upon, right, in one of these manners, they can say something. Got right. And that will prompt an investigation. So we want

151people to understand there are ways by which um you know uh these boundary evasions to happen. Sure. Okay. That makes sense. That makes sense. And you can report it to uh you can report it to the building principal or the superintendent or compliance officer or compliance officer the uh uh officers like from the police department that we have in the building or how do you define? In general compliance officers would be u uh either Mr. or Miss uh Brady, right? And you I think Sarah, right? The fine lines officer, right? Okay. Awesome. All right. Thank you for clarifying my question. I know it was a really bad one, but what's that? Online. She goes online. Um All right. Well, thank you for thank you for answering my question. I know it was it was a

152pretty open-ended one. Then uh under page four uh there's a list of different types of harassment. This goes with my earlier comment. Uh I think adding political harassment as a category would be good. Um I think that the that it would line up most closely with religious parenthesis creed harassment. Um, so if we could uh if we could put political harassment in there. What's that one? It's in page four there's a list of different what which letter? Oh uh no. Uh underneath the letters uh after the struck text end of boundary invasions option it says religious parenthesis creed harassment. That's where the list of different kinds of harassment comes in. So, I'm gonna have to work with our attorney on what a definition of political harassment is. Yeah. What kinds of things are you thinking

153of when you say political harassment so I can work out a definition with them? Uh I think you know this goes along with uh making politically provocative statements uh or around um people in the district around other staff members in the district um or around students. Yeah. Um staff students administration. Yeah. I mean essentially making negative statements on school grounds regarding political views, political campaigns or social issues, social cultural issues. Okay. So, uh let's take a topic like abortion political topic um people harassing one another whether it's for or against. Yes. Right. Mhm. that topic that would be considered um something that um we need to not uh or we would need to have an investigation on it. If if a if somebody came in and said, "Hey, uh they're coming after me because I'm

154uh proabortion, you know, we would have to look into that." Same with uh anti-abortion. Yeah. 100%. And that and that that reminds me of a number of years ago there was a teacher a number of years ago there was a teacher in the district who a student had written a paper from the perspective of a pro-life position and the teacher had uh written on their paper um you're horrible you're a fascist you're a Nazi etc etc etc and it seemed like that was not really taken care of that seems like really really serious to do again like I said this was a number of years ago I'm not talking about at present necessarily but that was that was a very severe instance um So that happens to be in that scenario, but it would be

155equally wrong for a teacher to treat a student that way if the positions were reversed. Um, and so yeah, that would be that would be a very good example of political harassment. Anybody else have anything else they want to add to that as I make sure we got a good definition there? I've got nothing to add to that. Dan, I'm not on the committee. You You can speak at the committee. Okay, fair enough. Fair enough. All right, sounds good. Um, all right. Uh, what do you have a question about your 1662? So, we've already passed first and second read of support staff, the support staff and professional staff anti-correction. So, we're going to have to make those changes. We would have to if we make any changes to this one, we have to go back

156and make changes because this is the human resources policies for administration, right? That cover those already made changes in those. So, make changes in this one. We have to go back and back up remake those, but that's fine. All righty. Uh, moving on to Neola Policies Group. Uh, Neil Policies 2000. If no one else has any rents can go to First Street. Yes. I don't have anything else for the 1000s. Tammy, you got anything? Basically 1662 is the the action item. 1662 is the action item for me. Craig, uh do you have anything else on the 1000s before we move on? Because I know you were you were in here for a while. Um the rest of them seemed uh fairly straightforward to me. All righty. Um, anyone got any particular items out of the

1572000s that they would like to uh address right away? Uh, okay. Craig. Yeah. Right. Go right ahead. 25 22. Yeah. Mhm. Media centers. Uh, I might suggest that the committee maybe pull this one out at some point. Uh because there's nothing in here. I mean it says that the plan shall be reviewed periodically. Um it the board shall adopt a long range plan for media services. Um developed by the teachers and library shall be reviewed periodically. When was the last time we reviewed any type of plan? It's this year. We did. Okay. Just services. Services. Okay. Um but it was just Okay. So, uh, when it comes to reconsideration of the school library materials, um, so it it seems to allow for, you know, complaint or concern uh by a parent or or whatnot to

158make that request. test and then a it gets reviewed and really the board hears about it, right? Who's doing the reviewing, right? It doesn't say in the policy who's reviewing that. Uh it does. This is a re reconsideration committee will be appointed by the district administrator uh upon receipt of formal complaint which shall consist of one for building level administrator to a teacher and five two members of the community library media specialist high school students selected by WHS and one board member. So, is that new or is that just carry over from old policy? I I don't remember exactly how closely it fit our last policy, but I think that was pretty close. What we did was model it after the uh curriculum concern. Also, when I took a look at this, we looked at

15993 10 I believe it is. Is that right? 9130, I'm sorry. On page two of this under reconsideration of school library materials. Yeah. And that first paragraph says govern 9130. And we looked at what the recommendations of 9130 were. attempted to parallel this process of what was outlined in 9130. So they'd be matching. Okay. So then so the board member that's normally included in ED services then is that who we could even make it the ED services chair if you want. Yep. I think uh I think that could be sensible. Uh it seems like a good solution to me. I also thought that number five in that list, two members of the community would perhaps be better suited to being the persons making the uh to be part of that review. The person or persons

160making that request. You don't want the person who's challenging the request to be part of the solution of the request. Well, I think that you're going to have a library media specialist who's approving the books that are in in the library. So, you're going to have someone there who is uh so to speak defending the presence of the book. I think that uh having that library media specialist and a teacher who is may or may not be defending the presence of the book, you end up not necessarily having anyone there who counters the fact that you have people who are hand selecting or approving of books entering into the system in the first place. Determines the community members also uh appointed by the district administrator. So the district administrator is how it's currently written. I

161also thought that it may be better to have that be a board appointment um instead of a district administrator. Not that I don't appreciate you, but I think that it might be better. Or is it any district administrator? So, okay. Okay. Well, usually it means superintendent, but we've been changing it to be superintendent. Um this could say superintendent or their designate. Um, I would generally have the administrator who's in charge of library media specialist run that. Okay? Because here's the thing where we can set up a um process of, you know, like I'm not happy with this decision and I want it reviewed by somebody, then it would come to me. I would have to appeal, right? I would have to see overwhelming evidence to turn to turn it over. But there may be overwhelming

162evidence to turn it over, right? Um where we can have that. In this instance, that would be uh Mr. Bull, right? He's in charge of library media specialists. Uh he he would be that person to set the committee uh and uh pick at random different community members. Um have the chair of the committee. Uh and uh Sam, not not always in in in our district, right? We're big enough that we have multiple library media specialists. So Jason would most likely pick one of the library media specialists in a library that this doesn't affect. Sure. Right. And so if it's a secondary material, he'd probably pick a elementary library media specialist and vice versa um to to sit on uh the council. So it's not the person who brought the material into the building. Sure. That

163makes sense to me. That makes sense to me. Um, I still I still feel that two members of the community seems like uh like an interesting ask. That seems to me uh a little unusual. It doesn't seem directly relevant. How are those two members chosen? Are they chosen out of a hat? Are they chosen uh for any specific purpose? Um, that's why I'm saying it seems to me like it would make more sense to have it be the person or the person's making the request. And why why student? I was going to ask that next. If you know I mean if a book like book that a parent is bringing up, why would a high school student weigh in on like I could see a high school student on high school content but even then

164I mean like so if I'm like oh I find all what is it called? Old Boys Aren't Blue or something like that. If I find if I find a book of that nature and I read it and I'm like, that's not appropriate for my kid, is it really in our best interest to be like, oh, let's pick another high school student and let's have them read this book that their parent may or may not be okay with them reading. And if their parent is okay with them reading it, is that really an unbiased, you know, selection? Kind of putting that child in a predicament. I'm assuming that this would be somebody would know this kid would be involved in potentially saying, "Let's get this book off the shelf." Do we really want to put them

165in that? Yeah, predicament. I'm asking if this is common practice. I'm here to hear your with and help implement. We're we're giving you, you know, ideas. Uh if you have or want to implement them, I'm okay with that. Just let us know what what it is. Yep. What's up, Craig? Um model policies 22 and 23 means the library materials and parental rights. Um my my suggestion was to the committee that maybe pull us out and have a further discussion uh along those particular lines especially on the uh on the front of um library material uh library transparency where where the materials in the library are uh published publicly published and annually. uh uh provided to the the board um and that sort of thing. there. You know, there there's perhaps maybe um a discussion there

166also when it comes to whether or not a parent would like to um allow their kids to read certain materials. Um and then on the flip side of the coin may not want their ch child to read certain materials. uh perhaps maybe there's a a mechanism by which that can interfere so that um it's not a discussion of necessarily removing books but um you know there there I do believe that there's going to probably be some instances where uh there are completely agent appropriate books in a library but then there's um other instances where um you know if a parent feels their child could u read that material that they have the right to allow their child to read that material. Yeah. And I mean is the school district the place where that material is

167made available to a child if the parent wishes that the material is made available to the child? That seems you know I mean perhaps the library like the public library or something like that might be in placement there. I do think that there is a lot going on. I I agree with you that perhaps this would be best pulled out and discussed in greater detail, pulling it alongside model policies 22 and 23. Uh not to throw a wrench and everything, but uh you know to the extent that um we're going to get into a larger discussion on this uh and that you think that there may be a um you know a deeper need to to really get into that. We also have like classroom libraries that are curated by each teacher, right? um those

168don't have the oversight even of a librarian and or a check in and out process like that, you know. Um Well, right. I mean, I I know my son has gone to your wife's classroom over and over and over and I don't necessarily know what's in her library, right? You know, I don't I can't go on to Skyward and see that he checked out something, you know, those kinds of things. So my my question resides with like what you know what are we trying to um think about andor control for um so that we have some of those discussions explicit content charity right that's what we're attempting to and just because and that's in a library as far as I'm concerned that's in a library where I can go and search the book or in

169a teacher curated library they should not be bringing anything that would be considered ed explicit or as soft well I think what extracurriculars yeah I think what I'm hearing uh Jared say is that if we're going to have a discussion about um published materials in the library um then maybe we should also happen to have a discussion around whether or not materials at the uh teacher uh the classroom level are also lump in that particular category. Yeah. And maybe we need a method of ensuring that, you know, that that doesn't uh that it doesn't occur in on the classroom level either. And that is a pretty big discussion, but I do think that we owe it to people to have that happen. I know that when I was in school, when I was in high

170school, and beside the point that it does talk about ages of 16 instead of 18, but when I was in school under the age of 18, there were teachers that were certainly willing to give books to students that their parents would not have approved of them reading. Uh, and I had teachers give me books that uh I don't I think most people's parents would not have been okay with. Again, I'm talking about 10 years ago, but I don't know that that's uh I don't know that it's different these days. Um, so figuring out how we encounter that is or how we how we counter that and you know do our due diligence to parents who want to make sure that they have that they have the say in their child's life is important. Um, yeah.

171I think the best way to handle it would be to prevent certain books from coming in in the first place. Mhm. But if you're the media specialist, librarian has to order books for the next year. This one won a call award, whatever recommended, you know, and and and so obviously she can't read all the books that are coming in. Well, we'll have to talk about where we get our recommendation lists from. Certainly, uh is I mean, this is really something that's almost worth a discussion in and of itself on a separate day at a separate time, you know, because it's so major. Like many of the discussions we've had tonight, there are many elements that weave themselves together. So perhaps we can call a uh perhaps we can call a subcommittee meeting uh with a

172someone who's an overarching media specialist. And I I also want to put one more topic out there. Uh and I'm going to use a word that some people think is political and I'm not sharing it as a political term. I'm just saying whenever you um are talking about an allowed group of texts or not, people will throw the word censor censorship out there, right? Uh and I'm not using it in a political term, but if we are going to uh censor or make uh judgments on materials, right, we have to have a discussion uh and be pretty explicit about it. Um, you may have remembered a a couple of community members when this topic came through, I don't know, about a year and a half ago, um, said, "Well, you know, um, the the Bible

173itself has some explicit language in it in certain sections." Um, would we say that that's something that a student shouldn't check out or we wouldn't want in our Can they check out a Bible in public school? I'm asking. I don't know. Right. Um, can they I have to double check. I I haven't I haven't looked myself, but um I I wouldn't I would say like if they're going to do that, you know, are they going to be able to check out religious material, right? I don't believe our school district material. I don't know. Yeah, but they has a computer or access to it going where Well, I mean, yes, but there's a difference between a child seeking that out and it readily available on the school shelves. There's a difference between that. Just Yeah. Just

174because if I have a kid and my kid can go out and get drugs doesn't mean I should give drugs to my kid, right? Uh but I do I definitely hear what's being said. I completely agree. I think that those things need to be discussed. I think that having that discussion in greater detail on its own, similar to what we're doing with human growth, development, and curriculum review, is probably for the best because this is a bigger, more tangled issue that has quite a number of uh quite a number of aspects to it. Um any other comments on the 2522 library before we move on though? uh to set to set a separate meeting. No, that just making sure that uh we we capture that action item. You have that L to pull a subcommittee

175meeting together regarding the library media centers and we're going to pull that out for more discussion. Yes. Thank you, Sam. What's up, girl? Story. Yeah. My mother wasn't too happy when I brought mine cuff home. Well, you got more context or is that the end of your story? It's the end of the story. I take it that it wasn't a very compelling uh compelling word. see the book. It's Yeah, it's it's enormous. It's a tough book to read. Yeah. Well, he uh the little I know about the philosophical work he was building himself off of, he wasn't exactly building off of people who uh try to make themselves easy to understand. So, if it was that guy writing with that ego, I'd imagine it was darn near impenetrable. As long as you didn't wear a

176t-shirt with, you know, the author's name on it. Well, provocation versus uh trying to understand, you know, I think there's a lot of value in trying to understand where bad people come from. Uh I think there's probably uh you know, if you're talking about libraries and materials, there may be uh context to have a discussion about that book. Yeah. you know, um, and other, you know, like, uh, the Communist Manifesto or or things of that nature when it comes to the context of, um, social studies class or history or or whatnot. But yeah, typically the evaluation is made on whether or not there is merit in the document that provides for its that that that provides uh, value for its explicit content. that's usually what they talk about. But again, we are talking generally about

177explicit content. We're not talking about philosophical content, things of that nature. Um, you know, I think the the better example would probably be uh are you going to carry uh works of philosophy, my Michelle Fuko, who writes some really out there stuff that that I think a lot of parents wouldn't be okay with their kids reading. The problem is that it's a philosophical work and whether or not a philosophical work is protected for that purpose gets a little bit stickier. So that's where a discussion would have to happen. But I mean again we could talk about this for another five hours probably, right? I mean we get into specific works of poetry, right? There are are people who you know have explicit things within poetry. Oh yeah. And and they aren't even using explicit language.

178They're using figurative language to get to the same meaning. And you know the question is just like that's why we have to have a review process, right? Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. 100%. Okay. Uh that being said, uh let's move on as long as no one has any objections. Um and let's talk about uh 2623. Everyone's all right with that. Um this is about uh student assessments um assessing student needs in the curriculum. Is this according is this just about state requirement tests or is this about tests kind of across the board? both state required and uh just decided on by the district. We really approached this state required PCB with some uh consideration for an intrum assessment assessments such as STAR but we had a conversation about it when we really wouldn't think about like formative

179assessment that make sense. An example would be teachers do an exit slip in their classroom to get some formative assessment that we wouldn't expect that to show up in in Skyward for example. Sure. So it's anything that's a more of like a district level assessment either a building or district benchmark type assessment. Okay, that makes sense. This would not apply to like surveys about political opinions and things like this. This is about reading aptitude, mathematics aptitude and we make the content of those assessments available to the parents. Is that correct? Yes. Um all right. I don't have any further questions on that. Uh although I would say that again as I was talking about earlier anything that isn't uh statemandated or required by the state I think that we should move in the direction of

180an optin model instead of an opt out model uh for parents. I think that uh I understand the difficulties. I've I've talked to a number of the staff and other people in the district about the difficulties of having people opt in, but I think that especially since we are moving to, as we discussed at one of the pre recent meetings, since we're moving to a uh more of a centralized communication platform, uh what what is it called again? Rooms, uh I think that it's going to be a lot easier for us to make sure that that happens. And I do think that it's uh in the best interest of the the families in the district that we move to opt in. I'm willing to try that. Um if it gets to the point where um

181we're seeing a huge number of students whose communication did not get back to us. Realize that that will change um dramatically our ability to help them um and or to track data as cohorts and other things. Yeah. And so I I'll just be coming back to you at that point in time and saying, "Here's some data. Uh we can continue on this path or not, but continue on this path. Um then maybe we need to think about doing something different with our cohort data or not even track it at all if we have good data." Sure. Sure. Yeah, that sounds like a plan to me. Yeah, if you can bring that back to us. Um and I think that no reply versus specifically opting out is is quite a different thing. Um, just not assuming

182that someone opts in. Is that make sense? No, it didn't make sense. So, you're saying they opt in? They have to tell us yes, we want our child to take the test. Outside of that, that means they don't. Are we able to have a two section two option selection? Yes, I do. I do want my child to take the test. No, I don't want my child to take the test. Are we able to have it formatted like that where it doesn't automatically get assumed that they approve of their child taking the test unless Is it a non-response? Are you going to assume yes or you going to assume no? I would assume no in that case, but I would still mark it as a non-response. Okay. So, when in doubt, don't administer a test that

183a parent doesn't approve of. But you can still mark that for your internal record. Then then then truly you don't need a no. I mean, no, because I think it still clarifies whether a person is saying no, I do not versus a par a parent just not responding. parent doesn't respond, you can reach out and say like, "Hey, did you receive this notice?" And and so the problem is that so again, it was a different kind of survey, but I think that the same principle applies. I'll be with you in just a moment. Sure. Because you're probably thinking similar to me, but with the political survey, what happened is parents got an email, it got buried in their email inbox, which happens to a lot of us, like we were talking about earlier, and then

184their child was going to be administered the survey. And if it hadn't been talked about in an early enough date, that probably would have happened to quite a number of parents. And so I would rather have and I think, you know, based on what the community says, we would rather have it where we don't administer something without the consent of the parents, without the express consent of the parents. So sorry, Greg, go ahead. Um, I think I think we're chunking two different things. Policy 2623 is uh dealing with student achievement curriculum. That's essential essential uh work product of what we do in our district to uh determine whether or not a child is um you know on par with their course. So that I think if we're going to have a general discussion about opt

185in versus opt out, I would suggest that that's that's a larger board discussion because I don't know if everybody's on the same page about about that idea, but that that's just that's just what I've I've heard. So um but but as far as surveys are concerned in general I'm I'm with you when it comes to student assessment I think it's kind of essential an essential function of what we do school district. So uh opting an opt in for taking a test I think that would be kind of a counterintuitive. I think there are some tests that the state gives that our parents can choose to well what would be one would be the forward if parents don't have to take the you don't have to take the forward exam that's an opt out not dead

186well and these are yeah and what it currently is set up is as as a as an opt out you can opt out of any of these tests I I believe according to what what this policy says sorry go ahead then you're only talking about students though you're not talking about parent surveys or are you Well, I'm just talking about the policy at all. We're talking about We're talking about assessments policy. I get that. But I mean, previously you were talking about opt in versus opt out. Um we don't have to do opt in with parents, do we? Uh with parents in what context? Well, uh, at the end of the year, we're surveying parents to see what they feel about the way this year went for their child. Okay. There's really no threat to

187that parent. Well, they them opting out is just not answering a survey. It's a little bit different when the survey is being administered with the child in class. For sure. I mean, I guess what I see is I see a growing number of parents who unless it is mandated by law, would prefer that their child is not utilized as a date. That's what I've heard more or less in various words. I understand it. I understand that this is academic. Believe me, Craig, I totally get it. I'm not saying that epidemic tests have uh have uh the the social and cultural things going on that certain other surveys might have. But I do think that there is a general sentiment even among the academic tests where parents are uncomfortable with these. Where we have to be

188careful though, Sam, is if you if you say, "Hey, you op you have to um voice whether or not you opt in for the forward exam." Nobody's going to take it. And then and then we're in a situation where that drastically skews the data by which our whole entire district is evaluated. So, you have to kind of we have to kind of look at it on a case-byase basis, if you will. I think that not I do agree with you that not all parents are going to want to have their child take that particular assessment and they have every right to opt their child out of those assessments. Um but in this particular case uh you know if we think that you know I think that there's a there's valid reason to have we keep

189assessments as opt out. I I completely hear you where you're coming from. But what it comes down to in my mind is when you say they have every right to opt their child out, if they would wish to opt their child out and the only reason that they don't is because they aren't worthy to that information because the information is not adequately presented to them, that is functionally taking away their agency and taking away that right to opt their child out inadvertently because now because the only thing that's keeping them is the lack of information, the information that they've that they've lost, which is the comparison to the political survey from a month or so ago. No, I'm not following you. I'm sorry. I don't because uh uh a survey is very much different from

190an assessment, a test, you know. Um, and I I think that you could feasibly say that a parent can opt their child out of any particular assessment and that may affect that child's grade. Um, and the state to say that the the forward exam isn't mandatory is not accurate. It is a mandatory test that we administer. Um when we if we opt out of that, you know, I think that sends the if we if we opt in, I should say that sends the wrong message. uh that when when our when all of our teachers are trying to make sure that the students are going to take that particular assessment seriously and and uh every effort is made to try to make sure that they're all set up for success before taking that and then all

191of a sudden you say well you know take um I think that sends the wrong Yeah, I I just don't know how to reconcile those those two points. It seems to me to be It seems to me to be a gray area and a little bit of a uh a little bit of a tough spot. I don't know, Tammy. What What are your thoughts on that? I understand we're talking about tests here. I understand that we're not talking about surveys. It just seems to be part of the same overall discussion. And if parent has a right to opt their ch to to not have their child undertake something, at what point does a lack of information take away that does a lack of information infringe on that right? So the state law addresses um the

192forward in this way and I'm not talking all assessments but that um parents have the right to opt their child out um but it's a mandated test. They don't opt in. for if that's clear clarity or not for you guys. I don't know. Like the state law writes it as default. Everybody takes it unless the parent asks about unless the parent specifically asks. So I mean at the end of the day maybe this is a discussion that needs to be had about communication and about ensuring that that communication comes across more clearly to parents. Um because I don't think that this is the last time we're going to talk about the difficulty of ensuring that we're not accidentally infringing on parents rights due to communication. And like I said, accidentally infringing. I'm not talking about

193anything purposeful. And of course, as we've talked about, this is academic testing. Um it's just it's still an important subject and I've heard so much about it over the last year from so many people and I just want to make sure we're not letting that slip through the cracks. Um, yeah, I I don't have any particular changes outside of that. That's one thing that I would like to see, but that's probably going to require greater board discussion and maybe discussion with planning and and some other committees as well. Okay. Uh, yes. And I think um in in my my opinion uh assessments are different than surveys, permission slip forms, um research uh that happens in the in the school classroom, those kinds of things. What I mean by research is like UW comes in and

194does research or whatever. I mean, they're they're obviously not going to do an opt out. They're going to do an IRB process where you have to opt in, right? and parents have to be fully aware of what um the study's aims are and all that stuff, right? Um those things happen uh in education all the time. Uh and so, you know, looking at what it is uh that you guys want us to aim more towards opt in versus opt out on is important, but I do think there's a distinction between that and our academic programming and assessment of students. Sure. I I definitely understand where you're coming from. I just Yeah. I think there's Yeah, you don't have to agree. No, no. I mean, and it's not even It's not even a super strong disagreement.

195I just think that there's I think there's some nuance there. And I think that we're going to have to find I think we're going to have to find a unique solution for that. Um where we make sure we're that we're not mistreating the responsibility that we're given as a district and as a board. Um yeah. Any other comments? I have one more on school counseling, academic career planning, and uh then I'm out of uh the 2000s. Does anyone else have anything to say about the student assessment or that though? Oh, thanks. uh 2411. Uh the only thing is on page one, paragraph three, so that's below the below list AB or A through F. It starts with academic and career planning services. Uh this is similar to a previous discussion um point that we had

196uh maybe a month or so ago. Um, just the change of language in that last sentence of that paragraph starts with the WUSD shall involve parents in each school year regarding which academic and career planning services their child will receive. Um I was just thinking that each school year parents shall decide which academic and career planning services their child will receive might uh you know carry the message of uh parents being in the driver's seat a little bit better. Does anyone have any um the distinction between that? Um so again this is this is similar to a previous discussion that was had about policy uh in in a separate policy in the WUSD shall involve parents. If I'm going on a vacation and I involve you in that vacation it sounds like I'm making the

197plan and you're coming along with me. That's what it sounds like if I involve you in my vacation. Okay. But if we say each school year parents shall decide which academic and career planning services their child will receive, I think the language is clearer. What's that correct? The uh the trouble with that is um if a particular course has been bu build up or not no no longer available for whatever particular reason um then a lot of times a student may be placed in a particular uh different course offering and therefore by saying they will decide that kind of sure believe me as a I'd love you to give me the rights to the checkbook and decide whatever I want for my kid. I'd love that. But the reality is we we can't do that.

198Fiscally responsible is not that. Generally speaking, my children since being in this district have worked with student services to like pick their schedule for the next year. Sure. And I think that's good giving children some accountability as as far as it goes to because one would assume that the course content is not going to be of you know um anything very to cause any conflict right but I mean since sixth grade my children pick their own you know if they wanted to go to band or if they wanted to learn an instrument or if they wanted to take you college level courses to you know test for college and I don't for one one particular reason believe that if there's a particular uh course selection that a child paid like if if they signed up

199for like three classes one particular year parent and they they needed to be a little bit more challenged parents probably going get full you know so yeah I suppose I maybe I'm reading it wrong, but it seems like this is about a lot more than just course selection. This sounds like it's about uh this is not really about course selection. This sounds like it's about um I mean the phrase career planning is in there. That's very different. Academic and career planning. So this is more about the services that are provided through the school counselor and is not school counseling and why don't go ahead. So freshman through senior year, there is an actual plan um for every freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior in which I'll give you an example, senior year, they're learning how to

200write resumes. This is done in um regular classrooms. Every senior is going through those pieces. It is well written, it's well documented, every single freshman has particular pieces that they go through. Um same thing with sophomores, juniors and seniors to prepare them for life outside of us. Whether it is, you know, college career life or military ready. And so it is the students choice. A lot of the times they're looking at a different pathway or career and those particular pieces ready them for that. Sure. But it is an absolute plan. We have a website. We have everything. And we um we did change from inform to involve. Uh and uh I'm as strong of a parent advocate as anybody in this room. And I I do believe that parents should be more involved in that

201process and not just along on vacation, right? Um and so active invol actively involved um parents but but I also know that we we cannot just turn over all decision making educational decision- making to individual parents. We we do not have the resources to do that. I mean we can't have them have uh any choice to everything and anything that they want available to them. And you have to have some faith that high school level students Sam, you know. Yeah, I I think that uh I understand what you're saying, but I think that uh when you leave room for parents to not be involved, things quickly get difficult, not just for parents, but also for the district. So, and I do hear where you're coming from, the difference between inform and involve completely. I'm not

202a Yes. Yes, I'm not a and I also wanted to I don't want to stop a child's education just because the parents can't get themselves to a place where they can be involved and is so again I'm just uh I'm a little unclear about this because this isn't this is their academic and career planning services. These are classes that they're taking. These are classes that they're taking. They're not I mean not no it's integrated within the classes. But but here's the thing. There are some parents who just can't or don't show up. I'm just being honest. There are students here that go through and they don't have parents Mhm. who can or will show up. What I mean by can is that may maybe um they they themselves have either a medical disability or a

203mental health disability or something. They just can't help show up for their kid. Right? I don't want us to stop because they can't help make decisions or won't help make decisions because sometimes they they just they won't show up. So, I I need us to be as flexible as we can, ensuring that we want I I know what we all want. We all want every parent to show up, right? Uh and and be there and help be supportive for their children, make those decisions, but the reality is sometimes they're not. You write a policy that says they have to. I'm all stop until somebody some parent by law shows up, parent or guardian. Yeah, I I understand where you're coming from. I suppose what I'm trying to find is a solution to the dual-sided issue

204that I've heard about from both teachers and from parents, which is parents saying, "I feel like I'm not involved in my child's education." And teachers saying, "I feel like the parents aren't involved in their child's education." And both sides seem to want more of that. And how we how we bridge that gap. I don't know. Maybe we work on maybe we work on a mixture of communication and and uh you know incentivizing parents to be involved. Uh in the in the case of parents who may not show up uh maybe alternative modes of communication, alternative opportunities for them to be involved. We can talk about those things. I do hear what you're saying though. So okay, fair enough. Um yeah, may I make a suggestion then? Yeah. Um the the district shall involve parents in

205each school year in academic and career planning services their child receives uh when when at all practical or something to that effect as as much as practical. Well, I think we do. We we we involve them and we communicate information out to all of our families, right? Um and I I think it's important to do so, right? So, I don't want to put, you know, impracticality in there because I want them to continue to do that at all times. Yeah. Um which I I know that they do. And the students really are at that secondary level. They're in the driver's seat of what they're doing with their parents involvement and then with the support of the school. Right? this is what you want mom is this what you want for your child and they're like

206yeah I'm fully supportive and this is how we're going to get you there so I think keeping that as we are doing this right we are going to continue doing it not in all practicality just we're going to do it um is important yeah uh yeah absolutely the term involve is trying to bring that into play without creating a wooden and unachievable standard that you guys are then held to and it gets difficult. Um, and I will say our parents are for the most part um very supportive of their children's decisions and and what they want to do and um listen to their kids and are very supportive of those supports that their children are receiving because it's life skills at this point. It's how are we going to get a job? How do we

207do an interview? What do you say? How do you prepare yourself? what are the next steps for military? How do you get all of that information together? Um, you know, they're making decisions that when they leave us will impact um their lives, but our society, too. And so, we need to make sure we're doing our our best to get them there. Yeah. And to understand, we we've had counselors go do door knocks. Yeah. I mean, it's it's not like we're just sending an email and say, "Oh, you didn't show up." You know, I just want everybody to be aware of our standards are high to try to involve parents. Well, maybe we can uh maybe we can find a way to cut a little bit off on each side, so to speak, of the of

208the frustration that goes on and we can figure out we can figure out a solution that uh kind of clears a lot of this up for you guys. Okay, that was my last note on that. Anyone else uh got anything on the 2000s? Nope. Okay, on to item C. WSD policies with no Neil match. Uh Jared, you got any comments on that? Well, so, um, Lynn and I, uh, sat through, um, a list, uh, and, uh, you can see in our notes section, um, some of the, um, work that we're looking to either recommend to keep, uh, recommend not to keep, and, I think there's only, uh, one maybe uh, that was not keep, right, Lynn? Correct. Uh and then um some that are recommended to uh just be administrative guidelines, not necessarily policy. And

209as you um uh know uh starting July one through December, we're going to try to finish an administrative guidelines uh all of those templates that come through. um for the ones that we didn't already have. If it was really really important to have the administrative guideline, we finished that along with the policy adoption um in the last year, a year and a half. So um this is a list of those uh that we're recommending to keep um and one that's we're not recommending to keep and then the rest that are administrative guidelines. The one we're not recommending to keep is that uh news media relations 11:30. And is there anything else that's taking its place or does it just have no relevance to the district? I I didn't say no relevance. I just, you know,

210uh I I think um you know, I don't I don't know that we're big enough that we absolutely need a polic I mean, it's us and one news media all here in town, you know, like um I don't know that uh we have to have a policy that governs that. Gotcha. Okay. Um, let me uh let me show you. If we did have a policy that governs it, I don't even know what you guys would want. Um, either way, I'm not recommending we keep this one. If you want one, you know, I think we should start from scratch and say, what do we want to have as a news media policy, but this is an old policy that's been on the Sure. Sure. I hear what you're saying. Okay. Yeah, fair enough. Fair enough. Makes

211sense to me. What do you think, Tammy? Yeah, I'm good with that. Okay, cool. Alrighty. Uh if there are no other notes on that item, we can move on to the next. D Neola policies 5,000. Any comments to start on the 5000s? Tammy Grace. Dan. Uh oh. Um policy first one uh 5111 eligibility of non resident non-resident students I think this uh yeah go I think that this may also have to mention something about ecamas um because does it um because they're going to be either resident or non-resident open enroll but then there is a section um that we have that deals with our international students uh which are are there and um where do we have that piece at the bottom of page one foreign students participating in foreign students participated in bonafide foreign

212exchange no not that um there was a um non-resident other than open enrolled. Okay, there's that piece in here. Uh Pete, non-resident students may be accepted into the program under the part-time or full-time open enrollment programs. Is that what you're looking for? No, there is a they are not students other than open enrolled students uh may enroll in grades kindergarten through 11 only with board approval. So here that's that's a different uh I guess that's probably a different um aspect that I was uh going after. Uh I was I was looking at it from the lens of the resident student that happens to be attending campus and uh decides to transfer schools from one uh entity to another entity. What does that mean? So, one of the things that we might want to be aware

213of is if we're transferring students from uh building, so to speak, to building uh then we run into a slew of issues when it comes to uh where they are being officially classified. Um and and the reason I say that, what do I mean? Well, okay. If you don't have a student that's participating in eCampus in any particular meaningful way as long as and then has to transfer back into uh you know the high school, let's just say now they might not be an 11th grader. So because of their lack of participation for whatever the case and now we end up assessing them under the forward before we weren't. So let me walk through that kind of scenario with you. Sure. Let's say there is a student who attends ecampus right and becomes uh truent

214in ecampus doesn't show up doesn't do work and uh therefore or is a failing grade. Right. Right. Um, we still have our promotion policy that dictates that student no matter what building they're in. If they're in if they go from there to Endeavor to the high school, right? Uh, unless there uh is a rationale to have them held back through our promotion policy, right? those grades carry with them from one building to another within our enrollment and and you can't change enrollment of a student that is a resident student because they have a right to attend Sure. public school unless they're expelled. Right. Right. And so I I am trying to figure out and have a solution for what you're concerned. So, is that do we So, your your your take on it is because

215they're enrolled in the district that doesn't really it doesn't apply to this particular policy. What what I'm saying is as a resident of the school district, yeah, we can't bar them from enrolling, right? And we can't change their their uh grade level assignment. Uh first let's let's talk about barring them from enrolling. The way we can do that is through um two means which is expulsion uh uh that happens or a the what go ahead say we make determinations based on IEPs as well right and the services and supports that are available either through eCampus or not through eCampus and so sometimes that's not the best placement for a student right but I'm I'm speak strictly speaking regular ed student but you're right AP's everybody knows that that's that's a whole entity on itself but

216if if we have a um an agreement uh that they're not going to attend right uh a deferral agreement um that's the only way we can not enroll them right when we enroll them they have to be enrolled at the uh grade and age level that they're supposed to be unless there is something in their file that says that they were withheld uh from a grade level, right? And that has to go through the the process outlined in our promotion and retention policy. If they were retained, uh that's where we would enroll them in the appropriate grade level. Without that dis that distinction, they will be enrolled in the grade level that they are supposed to be attending by age uh and um how they've gone through the system. So I'm I guess I'm I'm

217trying to understand what the if this policy is just void of a particular uh mechanism by which uh a student uh is prevented potentially from deciding to enroll in a a regular classroom. room and then switch back to eCampus and then switch back to the regular program. I can do that. Maybe we shouldn't do that. Why why would we allow that to happen? Well, um we we do have a lot of meetings around when when those transition happen, right? We don't just let any student go. I want to be at Shers today, Douglas tomorrow, and Webster the next day, and then oh, I made a mistake. I want to go back to Shars. Those those happen with a lot of conversations with the administration, the parents, and so on. Okay. Right. So, so it's not

218just like you're explaining willy-nilly. I can just decide whichever school I can go. Right. We have placement decision. Yeah. Okay. Right. And so we would have those placement decision discussions with the family, the teaching staff, um administration, uh to talk about what's the best placement for the child. Is that not what this policy does? No, this policy talks specifically about where kids can enroll or not enroll and who's allowed to enroll and who's not allowed to enroll. So why wouldn't into the district into the district, not where they're placed. Okay. Okay. Placement decisions are other decisions that we talk about with parents. For instance, when I first came to the school the school district, they wanted to know, they knew where Ryan was going because he was a middle schooler. Sure. But my other son,

219they were saying, "Well, which uh elementary school is he going to?" And I said, "Well, I want to know, do you have like a specific attendance policy?" Because here's my address. And they said, "Well, your address, they would technically go to this school." Sure. Right. But we have different programs and we allow some of our parents at least to tell us they're top one or two or whatever. Sure. And so we listened to that. We went and had some conversations as family and we said here's the ones we wanted to look at and uh there was some internal discussion that I wasn't aware of because it was internal discussion, right? Uh and they placed my child at um one of the one of the elementary buildings just like they do every so that's that's how

220that happens. But um this is about enrollment to the district placement right. So but yeah enrollment um okay so um resident students were specifically talking about uh children that are coming in from uh other parochial schools um from private from homebased schools tribal schools schools, um those types of things, but not from charter school within our own district. No, because they would already be enrolled in our district. Okay. They may be placed at that school, but they're already enrolled in our district. Gotcha. Okay. Now, if there was a charter school in town that was a non-instrumentality charter, there's a difference between instrumentality and noninstrumental. Sure. Instrumentality are means they're set up by the district. Okay. Right. A non-instrumentality charter means it was set up by some private organization. Right. Right. Uh that uh A to

221Z schooling, right? A Toz schooling has a school. They want to go from A to Z schooling to our school and they are a resident. It's it's covered under resident student. Okay. Okay. if they are a toz uh and they're not in our uh discussion point. It's charter school uh open enrollment through charter. Okay. Right. Thank you. Yes. Thank you for providing the explanation on that. It is it gets confusing. Yeah. No, for sure. I mean it's the it's the nitty-gritty of what we're going through and what we're what we're looking into. So, it's always going to be there. Um, uh, really quick, I just have a clarifying question on 5136 and 5136.01, uh, personal communication devices and technology resources. uh between the two of those, am I correct to understand that students are allowed

222to record either audio or video within their classrooms for the purposes of documenting the lecture or the class um for their own personal use like as like academically speaking. I mean like they're allowed to record the lecture, you know, like turn on the voice recorder and you know, listen back to it later and things like that. So, I'm in calculus. that might be a IEP driven. I would say most of the time that's an accommodation driven discussion and or a specific um you know a teacher uh driven discussion. Yeah, I only I only ask because on page two I think it's the only not struck paragraph. It says students may use the following technology resources and other electronic equipment adi slash devices during instructional time for an educational or instructional purpose with teachers permission and

223supervision and may use these technology resources and other electronic equipment during non-instructional time provided such use is consistent with policy 7540. So it's as long as they get permission from the teacher and that's why it's either a a academic plan or an individualized discussion. Sure. Gotcha. Gotcha. All right. That makes sense. And teachers are at the discretion to say, "No, you're not allowed to record the content of my class as they wish." Is that is that correct? Yes. Unless they have an academic plan. Gotcha. Um, I would personally say that while I understand that teachers may not want students using their uh using technology for inappropriate purposes during the class, I don't know that it even without an IEP or a specialized education plan. I don't know that a teacher should be able to tell

224students that they're not allowed to record the audio of the class and things like that. It seems to me like something that they should be allowed to do for their own purposes. Even if I don't have an IEP, maybe I'm someone who benefits from going back and listening. Maybe I'm more of an auditory learner. Uh but I'm still a regular ad student like you said earlier. Um do you guys have any thoughts on that? If one party from state, that's how I feel about Yeah. I mean legally speaking, yeah, I think that's like for admission into like court of law or is it just like actually it's just you don't need like you can't record a conversation that the other person doesn't know about. It's not admissible in court, you know. Okay. But you can

225have it for your purposes. Yeah. Essentially. Gotcha. Gotcha. Does I mean that's so that's state law but I mean does but school policy does override that if the school says we don't allow recording on on campus unless we give you express permission I mean that would override it wouldn't it? Yeah, if we have our policy that says that we, you know, we don't have to just because it's a one person consent state doesn't mean we we have to say that that's the providing rule. You have the ability to create your own uh policies that govern students and their interactions within as long as it doesn't infringe on the rule. But it's not disruptive. I don't see why they can't like if it's disruptive, you know, don't get me wrong, I would not be for a

226kid walking into the class putting on a tripod, you know, like recording. Yeah. But that's why if it's not disruptive, 1800 flash photography. Yeah. I don't see it. But but I was going to say that's why we have that communication with the teacher, right? Uh so the student and the teacher can have the discussion. The reason I would rather have the student and the teacher have the discussion is who knows the the teacher may be able to help resolve with a little bit of quick tutoring or whatever else. And um at least it puts a highlight on where the issue is, you know, u with that student and um finding a way to work with students is what teachers do. I'd rather be done best than in the open with a conversation than, you know,

227student just trying to resolve it on their own and continue to struggle maybe and the teacher doesn't even know that they were recording and do all this other stuff and trying to work it out. Um when they could have easily just gone to the teacher first and said, "Let's problem solve this together." Uh personally, it's a it's kind of a touchy subject. I think there's probably more that goes into this than you might think. Um last last board meeting we listened to uh somebody who presented uh this book Mhm. The anxious generation. I think that uh I think that there are trends that are going towards uh uh the school systems that don't have personal communication devices uh accessible also. So, if we're we're um possibly heading down that road as a school district, uh

228when we talk about um having uh making an exception for more and more students to to do that, are we also creating a loophole then by which they say, "Oh, I use my cell phone for recording in The other piece to this is Google Classroom and the different tools that we already utilize and staff uses to not only um amplify instruction, but then to assist students when they're not in the classroom and they're looking for that extra review. And so taking a look at our tools and how that can be utilized as well. Yeah. To promote um continuous learning and the continuum of of that practice for retention is also something you could take a look at. And I do think those are great tools, but unfortunately I think things like Google Classroom uh are

229not necessarily solid. I think that there are cases where a student might want to go back and look at a previous class and that class content may have been deleted from Google Classroom. That does happen. Um, I've certainly heard about that. Uh, I hear what you're saying about the presence of uh, smartphones and the negative effects that that can have, but currently I don't see that we are uh, entirely removing uh, the these sorts of technological devices from the district. If we have a discussion about that, I think um, we can have that discussion when it comes. But I feel that it's fairly important that students be allowed to record classes as they deem necessary. And I think that it could even be a larger issue if a teacher desires to prevent their class from

230being recorded. Uh I guess maybe you know the question is if a student say you know say I'm a student and I'm like okay boop boop. I'm going to turn on my voice recorder. Phone's down here or it's even in my back. I've just got it like that. If that student then talks to another student, says, "Yeah, I recorded the class. Here are the notes here. Here you go. You can you can replay it. For some reason, it's not on Google Cla Google classrooms." What What are the repercussions for a student doing that at that point? What are the repercussions for a student recording a class without getting permission from the teacher? I think uh you know there there isn't necessarily going to be a repercussion other than uh having some more discussion around which

231is why I I I think I'd like to know why you want to remove the teacher from the discussion you know uh I I I don't understand that. Um, you know, I think that, you know, having a a a good discussion between the student and the teacher about, you know, ways that we can, uh, help them. I'm sure recording of the material would be a good one. Um, seeking out notes from your neighbor might be another good one. There are plenty of problem solving things that can happen between that conversation. I just don't understand why you would want to remove that from the policy. Why? I mean, why would you want to remove the teacher and having that discussion from the policy? Because I think that the teacher may not want their class recorded even

232though it is beneficial to the child that the class is recorded. And I think that instances like that have come up and I from what I've heard that is uh that's a general desire that people in the community have had. I understand what you're saying about having the discussion, but for a variety of reasons, the student may not want to have that discussion with the teacher. Um, I think uh think that, you know, students are sometimes shy. I think that students sometimes feel uncomfortable asking for that permission and would rather just, you know, unobtrusively without causing uh disruption in the classroom record for their own purposes. And I suppose if you know them doing that is in itself in and of itself not a violation of any particular standard for the student then that's one

233thing. But if there's some sort of response where a student can be suspended for you know uh unobtrusively uh recording contents of class lectures for their own purposes. I don't exactly see what the issue would be with saying that a student can do that again unobtrusively, non-disruptively without the teacher's permission. I I I don't see why we'd have it. I just think that, you know, that that could become an issue in the idea that, you know, we bar them from cell phone use uh within the classroom, right? And so if they are doing that you're um you know they would be using the cell phone without permission in the classroom. That would that would be a violation that we would have to have some discussion about. Um but again that's why I'm saying it's best

234to make sure that we're involving the teacher and the student what's best. And you're right, if if the teacher is like saying, "Hey, no, absolutely not." I want to know what the reason is for that. Right. That's that's what we have administrators there for. We have counselors to help through that discussion piece. And I certainly would be a little suspicious as to what what is the reason for um us not allowing some accommodations for a student. Just I mean, but I understand where you're coming from. I just don't Yeah. Well, I mean, again, way of removing the teacher. Yeah. I suppose. I'm only speaking specifically about the use of technology resources for educational or instructional purposes. I'm not talking about any other use. Uh I'm not talking about using it to plugins, check social media,

235anything like that. Uh this is specifically on that topic. What's up? What's up, Greg? I I I just I just feel like it there's a couple of issues that I'm concerned about. One, uh the enforcement issue of the cell phone policy. Uh that that one I have particularly concerns about bigger concerns about because like a we've been trying to be extremely um vocal about being a 101 district in the past and how uh having having Chromebooks and the technology that students need to to uh properly document you know their their studies in the classroom and whatnot. They have mostly at their fingertips. In fact, they might even have a recording uh app that they could be used on their uh uh on their Chromebooks. If if that's a possibility, I'd be I'd be open to

236that. Um but I don't like the use of personal communication devices like cell phones to be used in a in a classroom. And to Jared's point, uh I do think that there are instances where uh if there is particular greater need for the recording of a class, I think that that having a a teacher looped into that discussion may get a child additional IEP help that they uh that they might desperately need that has been overlooked. I think that that's u an important aspect. Just a couple of things. It does list laptops in the in A through H in this section. So the students school laptop would be included in an item that is not allowed to be used without express permission from the teacher. Correct. I I would say that if we're going to

237have supports um in a classroom, right, I think uh the the teacher should be aware of what those supports look like, Sam. If if if you're recording, right, and you're going to all these other lengths and I don't even know it, right? Um and you're struggling, we should have a conversation. Well, you know, I mean, like I I don't understand why it's still I still don't understand the benefit of removing the teacher from the discussion. Yeah. I mean, I I don't I don't understand why recording a lecture is considered something that's like IEP worthy to me. Yeah. I mean, it's just someone might be might feel like, "Oh, well, I want to record this because it's something that is convenient for me to record the class so that I can check my notes against it

238later so that I can go over and listen to it again if it's a class that has a particular topic that I really want to sink my teeth into or it's a particularly dense subject. Uh, it just seems to me that it would be best left as an unobtrusive activity in the hands of the student who's not disrupting the class by doing it. I hear what you're saying, Craig. I don't think it would be appropriate for the student to pull out their phone and start recording in the middle of class because now you're blurring the boundaries between appropriate use and inappropriate use. Can I share Can I share why um the teacher should and needs to be in that discussion? Yeah. First of all, it's not about just you who wants to be unobtrusive and

239capture data from the classroom. You've got a classroom of other students in there who have data privacy rights, right? And they make they may ask questions, they may talk about topics, they may decide things. Uh and now you get to walk away from that with all of their data for free and it's protected student data, privacy data. That's really important and and that's an issue that we all have to be aware of. the adult included in that classroom when that recording happens. So we understand what happens with that recording. We understand what happens with that data as it leaves the classroom and that student that captures that data understands how long they can capture that data for, how long they can keep it for and what uses they can have it for because it's other

240student protected data. Okay. So this Yeah. Go ahead. Um some teachers are very protective of the material they've created and so forth. Mhm. Like if I have these handouts that I worked hard on and teacher next to me comes in and takes those handouts and gives them that their students something and you know I'm essentially teaching their class. The same thing with lectures. A lot of that comes out of the college classrooms where professors say, you know, I'm going to write a book based on this stuff and you'd be stealing my material. So that you know they some teachers are willing to share anything others are not. Sure. So do you have any further thoughts on the topic Tammy? Say I'm in agreement with you. I don't understand why it's a um like and you

241know we're going to be frank here. I understand Sam's being very diplomatic about you know maybe this student's struggling. Maybe the students struggling specifically with that teacher and the parents would like verifiable evidence of that inappropriate treatment of that child by that teacher and before even discussing it with administration they want some sort of evidence to bring to you and not just hear situation that's a different topic in general that's not but it but we're talking about recording like recording with you want teachers express permission now I can't speak of I do not know the ins and outs of the laws to student privacy. But in the scenario like if I was the student, I'm the only student in that entire room that needs to be aware that there's a recording going on per state

242statute. No other student needs to be aware of that perate statute. Not the teacher, not the principal, nobody needs to know but me. Very true. Very true. That does become increasingly difficult because now you know if a student is recording uh in a situation like that, say the example that I gave you earlier of the let's say that instead of writing it on his test, the teacher had said it verbally to the student in the class. If the student was being was going to be reprimanded for recording the class, he'd be less inclined to record that sort of behavior. But I think it would be probably in the best interest of the district if that behavior was recorded. In that instance, it was recorded because it was written down by the teacher. Uh in other

243cases, it's not. And yeah, in that example, in the scenarios that Tammy is talking about, that does become a really significant situation. And I would just like to add now this is just a question J here because you had said that there wouldn't be like disciplinary action really for the student which is fine that there but most likely there wouldn't be because at at the at the end of the bottom line right yes you broke you or you violated a policy you you know if you were in in the case that was discussed using your personal device right um but in the end having the discussion and figuring out the why behind it I I doubt that there would be a consequence, right? So, I I mean, I feel like I'm all for boundaries, like

244creating them for students and staff. But part of children understanding that boundaries are real, is that if we create a policy and they violate it, there's some repercussion for it outside of just a casual conversation. Please don't do that again repeatedly. You know what I'm saying? Like if we are setting oursel up for success and teaching our children that there's consequences for your actions and if we're going to implement a policy saying that children cannot use their personal devices in the classroom, there should be serious consequences connected to that if they do not. If we're slapping them on the wrist, I as far as I'm concerned, we're wasting that student's time and we're wasting the administrator's time that is spending the time explaining to the student, you violated the policy. Please don't do it again.

245I've discussed this with you 16 times this semester. Do you that's that's a whole different discussion point on on behavior and how behavior is dealt with, right? But I I do I do understand that every type of behavior that happens uh can be nuanced with a lot of different discussion which is why we have different levels of intervention with them. We don't have a black and white. This means this and that's it. Three strikes you're out to expulsion. Yeah, I understand that. You know, so I just want to make sure that we understand that and we also understand that in relation to uh different um students with IEPs and other things. So outside of discipline, right, there are many factors that I'm disagreeing with you guys on. Uh most of them have have to do

246with making sure that communication still stays between teachers and students. Well, thank you. Sorry. Um no, I appreciate that. uh outside of that, right, are our student privacy issues that we can have a discussion with our attorney uh and to the extent that those may or may not be violated. But even if they're not um violated, let me lean into the argument that says, "Oh, it's not a violation." If I'm a student in that classroom and I know you're taping everything, right, and I'm a little bit worried about my knowledge and growth in my knowledge and opening up my mouth to say something and knowing you're taping it, now I feel uncomfortable. How's that going to affect me and my growth, right? Uh and and so I understand what you're talking about about the individual,

247but I and we as a board have to talk about all of the individuals in that classroom and what we can do to make sure that we have as safe and protective environment for not only the individual but all individuals. Yeah. And so I I I disagree with you guys on multiple instances with this. Doesn't mean you can't override it. You're the board and if the board wants to have this conversation and and override me, then that's fine. we move forward with that. I need to at least make sure that that voice is heard. Okay. What it comes down to is uh I is a recommendation moving forward from the board uh to either leave it alone or not. I would recommend that we amend the two policies in this uh 5136 and 5136.01. um

248when it discusses the use of materials for educational purposes as in not for recreational purposes and we remove with the teachers permission and supervision. Um and we can vote on it at the board level. Do you think that maybe it should go to a strategic discussion at the board level instead of voting on it? Just because it seemed that Dan and Craig also had some reservations about it. So, it might be better to have a more strategic discussion about that. You would like more of a trust factor, you know, between the students and parents and teachers. And that kind of removes it. It's almost like a a gotcha thing. And um if I had a kid taking my class, you know, over the course of a year, I know I said some things, you know

249what I mean? And if those were held against me, it would have been my job. And I guess I have a problem with not trusting that triangle of uh you know, relationships. And so that's Yeah, I I understand. And that's going to be the only way because if they do hear these things regularly in the classroom and they go down the principal principal says well you know did anybody else observe this to hear and you're the only one coming in. So they said well I'll take tape recorder there tomorrow. Um, yeah. It's u it's such a fine line that you're walking there that I don't know. I think I'd abstain if I had to vote now because I see both sides. I mean, people have to be held accountable, but um when we're taping everything,

250we just lose that trust factor. Does that make sense? Yeah. Yeah. That's why I'm saying I'd rather have it go to for strategic discussion instead of it going, "Yeah, Carl, sounds like a sneak attack to me." [Music] Uh, I I'll share this. Um, I I have I had an IEP in college. I was allowed to record. Um there was always an expectation that I would would reach out to the professor and um have uh have a discussion about that, you know, whether I what kind of accommodations I need or that sort of thing. Um I never once felt the need to record a a lecture. Um, I always had a notetaker. Um, I don't think that I I don't know that there's a lot of particular reason to to um try to record um a

251lesson in the classroom um outside of a nice screen. However, um I I think that there we have to put a level of trust there between uh the students and teachers. And um if you're a parent that happens to have a a child that is bringing forth a concern that they have for for a teacher, you're going to take that particular issue pretty seriously. I also feel that as a board member um if those issues come before you a particular concern that's when you address those particular concerns and alert administration to that um so so I'm just sharing some of my perspective on that but um I do believe that if you're going to move it forward that it should it should definitely be a strategic discussion the board. Sure. I'll motion to make it

252a strategic discussion. It fair enough to me. All right. Any other discussion? Anyone got anything else about the 5000s? Greg, you got any other items on the 5,000s you wanted to discuss? I had one other if we don't have anyone else's requests. Um Diana had a request to have the grading one421 removed uh and and taken off. She was actually somebody who had brought up some issues within the grading policy itself a long time ago has been waiting to sponsor that as a discussion point and I was looking for you guys to help her with that so that she can continue on in her sponsorship of that one and uh bring forth some of the concerns that she outlined in your email to you today. Sure. Sure. Yeah. Uh unfortunately, yeah, when she she sent

253that at at like 1:30, I just didn't have the chance to look at it. Yeah, it was a little a little too late in the day for for a for a Monday a work day. Um but yeah, I did copy them onto my notes here actually uh to take a look at. So yeah, if that's something that Diana has been working on and she'd like more discussion on, yeah, let's uh let's move that to the side for now. Um and uh we can bring Diana in on that in the future. Um she also I guess 5421 and 5430 direct her to like have some discussion. Was that particularly or greeting? She had a lot of connections around that and and honestly um before we even started the Nola process in depth. Uh our old grading

254policy she had questions about. Yeah. and uh she still remain those questions still remain for her and I think just having her work with Jenny and then uh bringing forth those concerns. Um, we can, you know, forward the email on to the rest. I don't know if that went to every board member or just you and I, Sam. I think it was just you and I. And if you want, we can just forward those on that email about it. Um, because it's just questions she was going to ask tonight, right? So, I wasn't there. But but for for us to form a subcommittee for you know for for one particular board member to raise questions about um changing the policy and reforming the policy profering a change on that particular policy. I I don't know

255if that's a committee decision to move forward with that at this point. I'm just following what we used to do in the past. So, for instance, like uh when um Lori Holland wanted to sponsor a bullying policy, right? I worked directly with her on that. Um I worked directly with Tina Johnson on an extracurricular policy um that had some discussion that kind of just died, right? Um but I I I just want us to, you know, I was only following what we've done. If you want to change it, I'm okay with it. But yeah, I mean if she if she wants to if she wants to have further discussion about that, you know, put some put some of those ideas together and then bring it to uh and then bring it to the policy committee

256uh you know um if she would like you know we can we can pop this on June and we can talk about this in June potentially um or at another meeting. We don't you know we can uh we can we can schedule a meeting for what would work best if she'd like to talk about that. But I do agree, Craig. It should probably stay with the policy committee. Yep. Um and come back policy like all the other ones did. Yeah. I mean, general when you form a subcommittee, the committee forms the subcommittee and then that subcommittee reports back to the committee before it moves on to Yeah, I'd be I'd be happy to I'll I'll do a subcommittee with Jenny and with Diana if they want to talk about that and then we can bring

257it back if you guys would like to do that. I'd be more than happy to. Um, as long as you're okay with that, Jenny. I know it's a lot of subcommittees, but uh we're getting down to the line. So, I would imagine that especially since we've been like, "Ah, put them on. We'll we'll we'll we'll take care of some of those stickier ones until later." It results in, uh, results in a little bit more of being here this late. Yeah. Uh, but it is what it is, you know, we'll get through it. Um, so, uh, she also had a question about class rank and honor role, uh, 5430. Uh, should there be a paragraph in here about how validictorian is determined? If not, where specifically is that located? I think there's a Go ahead. I

258think it's separate. It's the LA policy of what determines and so the class specific to some changes in state law as it relates to um class rank in particular as it relates to directed Wisconsin. Um and so we took our current L policy and laid it actually what it is if I remember correctly and then that class was specific changes in state law in Wisconsin and then what was the other guarantee right on the validator yeah that makes sense okay very good Okay, thank you for that clarification. Um, and as always, if Diana has any further questions, of course, they're uh we're we're available. Um, and she can bring them up at the board meeting. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, 100%. All right. Um, the last one that I had notes on uh for this section and

259for actually the rest of the meeting was 5350, suicide prevention, intervention, and postvention. Uh on page one, paragraph three, uh it talks about the WUSD's comprehensive health education program. Um I just was looking for clarification on the WUSD's health comprehensive health education program. Uh what that phrase means? Is that just talking about is that talking about the health classes or is there a larger structure that we have? Okay, gotcha. Gotcha. All righty. Um, and I ask because the word comprehensive is I guess a little ambiguous. Sometimes there's sometimes the words word comprehensive is used in conjunction with uh human growth and development classes and it means something quite different. I just wanted to clarify this is just talking about all of the health classes in the district. Okay. Gotcha. Gotcha. Um then paragraph five 1

2602 3 4 under prevention and instruction um it states that the superintendent or their design will use the department of public instruction notice to inform the professional staff of the resources available from the department. Is that state statute that we have to do that or Okay. Gotcha. Gotcha. Um, paragraph six, uh, suicide prevention strategies may include but not be limited to efforts to promote a positive school climate that enhances students feelings of connected connectedness with the school is characterized by caring staff and harmonious inter relationships among students. Uh, I was curious is this this is not in state statute. This is something that comfort had and they they take that from so uh not just our state department but state departments in general have those kinds of verbiage that they put out to schools. Gotcha.

261Uh would the committee uh Tammy would you be opposed to striking that paragraph? I would strike. Yeah. It's uh it feels pretty loaded. I mean if I'm being honest Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Cool. Cool. Cool. Um, gotcha. Um, I would, you know, the the previous paragraph about the state DPI and using that to inform people, by the way, in that in that uh third paragraph from the top um or I'm sorry, fourth paragraph from the top. Uh, oh, wait a minute. What am I looking at? Where are you? Where? I'm wondering where where did I get in this? I must have uh uh No, I just wanted to mention state TPI does promote some very very partisan resources that encourage uh uh students to hide information from their parents. Uh specifically the Trevor Project. And if

262that's state statute that we must inform people of all of those uh of all of those resources, I suppose we can go ahead and do it. We should go ahead and do it. But it makes me uncomfortable to promote the Trevor Project in any way because of what statute that we have things available, but it's not state law that we have to use the Trevor Project, which we should not use. Oh, I'm sorry. It was the It was the fifth paragraph that I was looking at using the Department of Public Instruction notice. So, we don't have to use the Department of Public Instruction notice. Okay. Sam, take us back. What page are you at? Sorry. Page one, paragraph five. Under prevention and instruction. Yeah. Okay. It's the notice. Yep. Use of the public department of

263public instruction notice. Uh, inform the professional staff of the resources available from the department and other resources regarding suicide. So, what element of that is required by statute? So truly what we are doing is we are providing information on the resources that are available locally, county resources, resources that we have, Rogers, there are other other resources that we utilize. Got um I will say that we also do um talk a little bit about what are some of those factors when you're looking at a student for those risk factors and then how are we navigating that because one of the first things is we're contacting the family immediately. Sure. if anything is is peing an interest or if a student comes to us and says this is what they're feeling or they're idle, you know, they're

264having suicidal ideiation. Um that's an immediate call to the family. Um and then we help them through well what do you need? What do you want your student to be able to accomplish at this point? Are you looking for treatment? Are you look what what do you need right as a family? How are we going to support you through that? So a lot of that is just local resources um based on the need. Um but there are certain I would say there are certain and as it says in here there are certain I would students where that might trigger a little bit easier. So, for example, if you have a student in your school community that has completed suicide, um one of the first things that we do is we watch those close friends. Um

265because typically there is a um copycat that may come from that. And so we immediately um contact those families and we make sure that those families and those students are receiving services and supports if they needed them or they understand what resources are available to them. Yeah. Um, and that was actually I had I did have a follow-up question on the second page that I think is regarding that discussion point. But this question that I'm asking is more specifically do we have to are are we required to use the state DPI notice which discusses the which discusses resources that are available to the district for suicide prevention purposes. The reason I ask is because on Wisconsin state DPI'sformational releases, they repeatedly referenced the Trevor Project crisis access for LGBTQ youth via chat, phone, or text,

266which has come under a lot of scrutiny for providing many opportunities for students to have discussions about these topics and to hide them from their parents. It's been very controversial. So my question is, do we have to do that or are we satisfi or is it satisfactory to the law that we provide a list of resources? A list of resources. Well, you that to my knowledge, we have not provided any information on the Trevor Project. Yeah. And and that's and and that's completely fine. I'm not I'm more just looking at the language of the policy. So then what I'm looking at is on page one I would want to strike using the department of public instruction notice. So I would start that sentence with the the superintendent or their designate and then I would say

267uh shall annually inform the professional staff of the re of resources regarding suicide prevention. Yeah. Of the resources available. Yeah. Just take out from the department. Yeah. Of the resources available and those regarding suicide drastic care. Yeah, absolutely. Um I just I know that that wasn't yet. No, they still have it on their website last I checked. But yeah, so that's that's all I'm getting at is the specific use of the Department of Public Instruction. Um it's I'm happy to provide as many resources as possible uh in that regard. I just don't want to provide resources that might be uh might be promoting other things as well uh that might be promoting other causes. And then the last question I have and this is the last question I have for uh oh actually sorry it's

268the second to last question. Um uh on page two it talks about staff development. Yeah. Under item C it talks about those warning signs and at risk groups. So I understand youth berieved by suicide. However, if we're looking at warning signs in youth, I don't know that we should be specifying specific groups one over another. who should receive particular attention. I think that anyone who shows warning signs of suicide should be given attention and we should not prioritize attention to one group over another. In the case of youth ber by suicide, that gets a little complicated because we're talking about those directly affected in that case. But even then, I would say if we're seeing signs of suicide, we should not be going, "Oh, well, this student is less likely to be experiencing that." If

269we see any signs of suicide, we should be approaching it. And we do. Yeah. And so please know that know that statistically these are the groups that are far more likely to complete suicide than any other. And so having people aware that um there are certain factors that are risk factors that increase the likelihood is important to know. However, if any student, regardless of who they are, where they come from, where their background is, is having any sort of ideation or any sort of issues that is dealt with very quickly and very in a very supportive manner. Um, but I do believe though Sam that it's important that we understand that there are certain populations where that risk factor is so much higher than others to keep that in the back of our mind because

270um some students will innately um struggle far more than others just like students with disabilities is on that list. Um they struggle greatly with their self-worth and that's one of the factors. Yeah. And perhaps if this was just a list of students that are at that that have a higher rate of these incidents than other than other groups do, I would say I agree. But because this so the language that I'm looking at on item C there, the second sentence in the middle line, warning signs of this nature should receive particular attention when displayed by an individual in one or more of the following groups. So again, I'm ju I'm to be clear, I'm talking about the Neola uh the Neola model policy here. I'm not talking about where you guys stand. I'm not talking

271about uh information being out there. I think that it would be inappropriate to have that kind of language in our policies because it's a form of equity. It's an Do you understand what I'm saying? So, why don't we change the sentence being something um to the to the fact of students within um or students who identify as or whatever you want to say students students in the following group. risk, correct? May show may be at a higher risk for completion of suicide or ideation of Yeah. Yep. Students. Yeah. Students in the following groups uh have higher rates of uh ideiation or incidents, however, however you'd like to put it there. Um not you, however, should be aware of that or staff um whatever. We'll word sniff it a little bit. Uh actually because is they're

272trying to get to hey be aware of this. Yes. And I mean especially because it's staff development. It says um it must include information on how these warning signs should receive particular attention in these groups. That's where it starts to go sideways. I would just say because it says must include information on the following groups the following groups having an increased risk of ideiation or incident. Yep. That's the that's where I would have that. Um Tammy, any thoughts on that? Awesome. Okay, that's the end of my notes. I want to make sure I don't skip over uh anything major from what we got from uh Diana, but that I think we actually covered most of what she was asking about in her in her questions. So, um that leads us if no one else has

273any further comments to ei000 uh 75402 web content apps and services and student technology adaptable use and safety. Does anyone have any comments on these? Right. No. Okay. Uh then we can move on to the next one. I don't have any comments on that either. Yeah. Neiola policy development process. It's just our um our timeline that uh we have been putting out there. It was adjusted last month uh to kind of talk about and go through the last little pieces here. um in May and June uh with a a uh July finish or a June finish if possible. Um and then uh July through December work on the AGS um which are considerably uh fewer AGs. Um and one of those things is just because Neiola has an AG doesn't mean we necessarily have to

274go through it. We're just going to identify AGs that we think are important um and then move forward with those. Um, so I think those are are going to be uh good for us to think about. Um, just want for awareness. I'm really uh hoping that uh before um July we can get the the bulk of the book passed and any other scragglers just keep moving on. So I really do appreciate us. I know it's a late night, but uh going through all of this and trying to get things that are really really important in in um the the book. That would be good. Yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely. All right. That takes us to uh new major revisions. We have none. Takes us to future agenda planning, future planning discussion. Um this is going to kind

275of lead into action items because a number of those action items are Yeah. special meetings we're gonna have. Um, so because that's where we're at, let's uh let's hop over to action items. Um, let's see. So, from past action items, we had 2131 31 educational outcome goals and expectations. Uh, Craig, these are things that um we were talking about at previous policy meetings. Can you uh where where do we stand on that first bullet point in past action items? That's a good question. Yeah, it's it's a lot. Just talked about some of them, didn't I? We we talked about um well, the second bullet point is gone. The uh third bullet point we talked about a little bit tonight. That'll that discussion will continue with um head service chair and policy chair. Bullet point number

276four, same thing. Um I think uh 22 2210 2220 2230. Um, that must have been an old one that was looked up there. Uh, I think those are I think those are related to the curriculum. Yeah, probably. Yeah, I think that's what those are. I The only one that I don't recognize it looks like all of these are uh are rolling. The only one that I don't have off the top of my head is that first bullet point 2131, 2132, and 1110. We have been here for a while, so we might have talked about them and I might have forgot. Um, uh, yeah. I think it was I don't know if that was related to there's the work needed to be complete work needs to be completed in those uh policies um as they do

277relate to 1110 assessment of district goals. So, we need to make sure that we align them. And that was something that planning was going to be taking up, uh, is to make sure those are aligned to 110. Gotcha. 1110. I guess that's going to be your job. Yay. There you go. Jason's writing it down. Those are part of planning. All right. Sure. Yeah. And then um I have two or three uh meetings with Jenny laid out here from the priority discussions. Uh as far as it could be one meeting. You just happen to have a small little agenda for whatever. Yeah. Yeah. I mean if if we can uh if we can work through them, it might be it might be a longer one. I suppose we can we'll start with one meeting. If we

278need another one, we can uh we can pop another one on the books. Heck. Um so yeah uh we'll set up a meeting uh with uh Jenny, myself, Dan, and we'll discuss specifically human growth and development in the curriculum review. But we also have the 2240 controversial issues and uh staff dress and grooming which So that one I thought wasn't Jenny, that one was me. Yeah, that was going to take your information that you gave me with the attorney. Yeah. on on the the staff grooming, staff and student grooming as well as controversial issues. Those are three that I cover with my notes that I took here. Yes, that's what I was that's what I was thinking. There's kind of a separate meeting that needs to be had to do a little bit more work

279on that with you and the attorney. Um if possible, let me know when you guys are if I can come, I would love to. Absolutely. We'll we'll meet with Renee and have her we did a good job meeting with her last time. All right. That would be great. Um, okay. Uh, besides that, then we have a whole slew of action. Would you like to read them? Yes. If you've got them, thank you for keeping track of it. Okay. So, Jared and Lynn will fine-tune the board vacancy voting process verbiage. Okay. Um, we're going to add verbiage for model policy 28 to the controver controversial issues in the classroom. Um, we're going to adopt model policy seven as its own policy possibly. Possibly. Yeah, we we're going to double check to make sure it doesn't align

280with a Neola one. If it does align with a Neola one, we'll have to do some work on that. If it doesn't then uh you and I will work to when I say you and I usually do work to put it into the format that is the mola format and then work with together give it another. Okay. So we'll double check to see if it aligns with with the new policy. Okay. And then Jared will look for uh policy regarding controversial displays. Well, that was the mouth policy. Okay. [Music] Um Jared's going to reach out to legal counsel regarding removal of political messaging from schools as it relates to staff dress and grooming and student dress as well as articles of clothing. Um we're going to bring over language from model policy 13 to the

281student dress code. Ed services and policy chairs will come together with Jenny to set up a meeting to create a subcommittee to discuss curriculum development. Um human growth uh and development will be lumped in with that curriculum subcommittee. Uh policy for the policy um district issued staff email. We're going to remove the word in banks and replace it with districtwide in the fourth paragraph. um the employee anti-harassment page two. I need to add the word political and remove the verbiage from the word uh harassment through example B. I have to remove some stuff there. Um Jared is going to talk to the legal council regarding the definition of political harassments. We also talked about adding ethnic in addition to racial uh as well in that in item I ethnicity. Mhm. Add ethnicity as opposed to

282racial in addition to racial in addition to racial. Okay. Jared is going to talk to Le. Okay. The remainder of 1000s can go to first read. Um in under we have um set aside uh the library center library media center policy um and possibly pull a subcommittee uh meeting for that. The 2000s or the remainder of the 2000s can go to first read. Um we're moving 5136 and 5136.01 to strategic discussion. Diana Johnson would like to sponsor 5421 grading. that policy is being set aside. Uh I am going to remove the sixth paragraph on the first page of the suicide prevention policy. There's verbiage change in the first paragraph under prevention and instruction and verbiage change under letter C under staff development. The remainder of the 5000s can go to first read and both 7,000s

283can go to first read. You got it. I think that's everything. And Sarah with that suicide prevention one you got all the changes so that you can help her with that one too. All right. If there are no further questions at 9:50 p.m. we are adjourned. All right. Thanks for coming and thanks for sticking in there. I mean we did because it kind of went into the action. It was I had some purple and