01/13/2025 Policy Committee Meeting

001personal there. He works with all people. You get outside the strip and that's another city. It's really It does. Yeah. kind of like I was checking back and it was the best advice I got. When you're in bar, you don't take a ride unless you get all the way to Vegas. He says, "You don't want to drop any line. No worries. All right. All right. Now 606 uh and I call this meeting of the policy review committee to order. And uh first up for discussion we have uh policy 8132. This would have been an older policy uh our current policy about filling board vacancies. Uh this is particularly important to discuss this um coming up to this next board meeting. I'm assuming that um it pertains to this next board meeting. Okay. So um President

002Trader mentioned that we should we should discuss this uh in in a little bit better further detail because there is some vagaries uh associated with it. So it does give the board some flexibility on how they'd like to handle um part of the process uh specifically when when there is a when when there is a tie and possibly even when when there is uh you know the part of the process where you're trying to whittle down the field of candidates join the meeting for discussion or for consideration. So, uh, I know David Trader had some questions about Sure. about, uh, Lynn, is that, uh, is that the current policy 8132 you have attached? Yes. Can you call it up? And so um I guess I'll I'll read from my screen but u ultimately between item

003four and five. So for Dan, Lori and and U Sam, it says here that uh item number four um voting on the candidates may be roll call, voice vote, or signed written ballot. The method of voting will be determined by the majority vote of the board. So on Monday the 27th, we'll say, "Hey, how are we going to do this?" Okay, we all agree that we're going to do it by written vote. Okay, sounds good. Then board members, this is still part of four, should consider the candidates's interest and devotion to public education and willingness to give time and effort to the work. And then it jumps right from four to number five and it says, "The candidate appointed to the vacancy shall uh pending acceptance and filling the oath of office be seated on

004the board." Well, what happened to the vote? What what happened to a 2224 tie? What happened to a 1113 you you know vote? Um how many votes did we take? What if we were tied in a stalemate? Did we go forever? Further in the policy starting in seven. It addresses some of those things. It addresses that after five rounds you'll go to a picking a name out of a hat. It goes it doesn't go to a one tie all tie. So right now Jared, we have at least three. How many people? Four. Four. Four. Okay. So imagine next Monday we roll we we sign ballot and the vote is a 22 two2 tie or 22 two22 tie. This policy is mute on what to do next. It doesn't say anything. It just jumps from four

005to five and says, "Well, after we've all considered who the people are and we've considered their qualifications and we've all agreed to a written ballot, now we're going to seek the appointee." Well, how did they get there? And so, I wanted this group. I said, you know, I don't want to be inventing this real time on the board meeting. And so I kicked it to Jared and Craig to say, "Hey, is there can we get on the agenda this week on this month and decide how how we're going to do that?" Uh I know Jared and his other board, we're not trying to rewrite policy. This policy is mute on it. We know that it has to be a majority, not a plurality. I.e. a 1, three, four vote if all eight of us are

006there and voting doesn't seat a person. It has to be a majority, not a plurality. That's Robert's rules and that overrides. Uh, and that's also the attorney's advice. So, I'm I'm open for suggestions. I I don't know what we should do. I can come up with a bunch of crazy variations of it. Let's say it was a one three. Do you then say, you know, eliminate the two people who got the one and then you do a runoff with the three? Well, what if it's a, you know, one one three or one 331, whatever it just the game plan, and I don't want there to be anybody who objects to it. So, I'd like us to look like we know what we're doing. And I mean, our attorney shared this uh whatever you do and

007and you're open to do whatever because you interpret your own policy and it's pretty wide open for you. Um they said just make sure the public knows at the meeting what you're intending to do before the even even the first vote is taken. Right? I if if there is a tie, right? What are you going to do in the event of a tie if there's not a majority? What are you going to do with the ones who got fewer votes? Are are they still in the mix or are they no longer in the mix because they didn't get a higher percentage of the first vote that was taken? Those are the kinds of things that you should come up with a game plan of today so that we can in essence share. He also said

008you're not going to be able to, you know, think of every solution to every situation, but the event that they know you go you're going in with a plan. Uh, and that you can, you know, comport any rule to what was already said is going to be better than what you they think is you making it up on the fly because you like this person or that person better or whatever. So, it sounds like there's a few things that we know, right? We know that uh that there has to be a majority. So it's at least a five. The first candidate that gets five votes, five of the eight are if eight are there, eight if eight are there, right? don't abstain for some reason then um then the other part of it would be

009is if there is a four to four split and section D seems to indicate that it would go to the random selection process by which 7D does that yeah right 7D so board president would pull out names from a hat of the board member board member would nominate a candidate until a particular board member until the the candidate receives two nominations from a board member. Is that how I'm reading? I I didn't read it that way, Craig. Not that that not that I'm right. I just um a nominee must be qualified elector who has submitted a sworn declaration, which I assume, Lyn, all these people have submitted a sworn declaration, correct? Or that the people who are up for an appointee to be appointed. What's not a sworn declaration? and they've submitted a resume uh

010cover letter. Okay. Both with adequate validating information that we know that they're actually eligible. Yes. Okay. So, let's assume that they are eligible uh to fill the vacancy. Uh each board member who is present at the meeting may nominate or support the nomination of only one nominee, Craig. So, that's not drawing a board member out of a hat. That is everybody goes around the room and say I support Bob and Sam supports Jim and and Lori supports Sue. We all go around the room and as long as there's if Lori says I support Sue, as long as somebody else says I do as well, then that person gets to have their name put in a hat. Okay? And then you pull from a hat. And then you pull from a hat. Okay? Each board member

011is present at meeting nominate or support the nomination, but only one. Which means that if Lori supports Sue and I say I also do when it comes to my turn I don't get to nominate another person. Okay. But once again this is all in section seven which is odd that there really should be in between four and five. It's just in the wrong spot in the document. So you got the other thing that we know. The other thing that we know is that whatever voting happens um whether it's voice vote or on paper uh those are signed ballots. Everybody out there gets to know who you voted for, right? Uh and that's that's there's not a secret ballot that can happen during this process. Okay. Sure. So, however you guys choose to do it, just

012know that your name goes along with your vote somehow. Whether it's a raised hand or a voice vote or putting it on a piece of paper, you still have to sign your name to it. Interesting. Not that it matters much, but when we appointed Diana, uh Lori and Craig, you would have been there. That was Do you remember having to sign your name on it? No, I don't think so. No, we just wrote a name. I don't think we did. So, okay. The the policy that you have in place, I'm aware of it that you I wasn't bringing the meeting then and actually that's supported by Yeah, I where I'm confused about the seven and you paid that price ever since. Where's Diana? She can't even defend herself. who it starts out if a vacancy

013has not been filled by an appointment made within 60 days of a date which the vacancy perfects blah blah blah blah blah. So are we not supposed to do seven until after 60 you know I'm just this is the point this this is where I'm saying is what I really want to do is I want to take seven B C and D and insert it up into between four and five. Gotcha. Okay. and make it for A, B, and C because the policy doesn't entirely skip it. I mean, it it speaks to it. It just speaks to it as like the second step where we're now 120 days in the future. And I'd much rather take those and and only go around the room five times uh five times once it's down to two people.

014So to clarify, Craig, yes. So my in my my hope and I'm we can you can tell me what you want to do. This is not me the president writing this is that if it's a I'm going to say okay now we eliminate the two ones and and now or that'd be a 1133 excuse me 1133 the ones are eliminated now we're going to vote up to five times on these two candidates. So the first two the first vote doesn't count because it wasn't on the final field and it wasn't a tie. So if it goes around once, it's 44. It goes around again, 44. Then we put those two in the hat, assuming they both get a nomination in a second, and then we pick them out of a hat after five rounds. That's

015that's what I would hope to do. So So I I think that makes sense. But I I do think that like that second round is going to be also a feel a lay of the land because if you don't have to declare a deadlock, so to speak, you wouldn't declare a deadlock. Oh, no. If if it's 5-3, then it's 53, right? Yeah. No, then it' be done. I I think it's important to clarify this one P of B. B is not after the the the first meeting. Okay. B is 45 days from the vacancy. No later than 45 days and before 60 days, you have to come together, have a meeting, right? And at that meeting, if in five rounds you don't finalize, then it goes into that procedure, right? Okay. So, it's it's not

016a we're going to meet and if we can't and and then 45 days comes around. That's not what the intent of this is that I understand. My I think the intent uh that um the uh the lawyer and I discussed was the 45 days starts ticking when the vacancy opens. We're within that 45 days. We're going to be great, right? Um, but moving forward is what that looks like. Yes. Sam, I don't understand what J told me. Might I ask for you to clarify because I may I might be in the same boat. I might not be following, but I think I am. So, when I read it, it says 45 days after the end of after the end of the initial 60-day period of vacancy. So, right, what was the what was the start

017date for the period of vacancy? probably I I don't it was we put it on the announcement December 20th December 13th December 13th so you would do two months from December 13th would be February 13th then the 40 day 45day clock ticks that's right yeah because letter E talks about the 105 days following the day then so we can obviously have a vote but we are not obligated to do the random hat call before the 100 or the 105day limit That that's kind of true, Sam. But that's where I was confused. But but the thing is, uh, unless you have a a real rationale or reason for not moving into that right away. Okay, this is the the discussion point I have with the attorney, which is you're not I mean, you you could say,

018well, we're just going to sit on this for 60 days and then let it happen. But the real reality is is if you have a a way to settle it, settle it while you're there. Don't don't just let the statutorial part have to kick in because you are deadlocked. And that's the part that I wanted that's my main I wanted what I my goal was to get out of you guys was tie breakers and when there's more than two and stalemate when there are two. Okay. So, how do we eliminate candidates who didn't get a plurality of the votes to get it down to the final two? And then once we're down to the final two, how many times do you want me to go around the room asking you to write a name on

019a sheet of paper? And if the answer is forever, well, then we'll just keep on writing names forever. And we're never going to leave until 60 days happens until 60 until 60 days happens. We will be there for two weeks writing the names on the piece of paper. In which case I don't we can set it not set it aside but if we say we're going to go around five times then let's go around five times and if it doesn't change then we just go to drawing names. If you want if you want to stick to the stalemate and it goes forever then we're there. Every other item on next Monday's agenda won't get discussed and we'll be in that room until midnight until we have to adjourn and come back the next day and

020do it all over again. I so I would I would propose a couple of things here. One, we have to uh as a committee uh recommend a course of action to the board and then two, we also have to um basically amend this policy to push it forward for first and second reading as well. So that um in future situations between now and when our our Neiola uh book gets adopted if it arises or when um that we we have something in place. Um point of order on that. Does that mean do all policies have to do first and second read? And should we now move this policy to first item on the agenda before we do the appointment? Okay. So, first of all, um you know, I share this with Craig as chair. There's

021not a time uh for us to do a first and or second read and and so on. I'd have to go back to our policies. Some districts allow you to pass policy by full membership of the board on first read, but even that we're not going to have a first read in place for uh a vote to happen. It's on the first if it's first action item. But but here's the thing, and this is what I shared with Craig, okay? The the last people who put this policy together were board members just like you. They left it open to give you the ability to talk about in this situation coming up, how do we want to control this ourselves, right? You can write a policy that controls it for the next board down the line.

022But also, if they have a meeting like this prior to that, they may say, "We don't want to follow this. What what did they do this for? Why did they lock us in?" Okay. So, there there's other things that you need to think about about that. And I think the runway that we have for this vacancy is probably too short. If you want to talk about future vacancies, well, let's get it on the policy committee meeting to talk about not uh for tonight, which was to define how we're going to uh use this policy that's in place. Because if if it was different, if the agenda item was different, if it was to rewrite this policy, I would have had different conversations with our attorney, different conversations with you two. uh about preparing for tonight.

023I'm not prepared to rewrite a policy tonight. Okay. You know, and and I'll say that I agree with you. I don't think we have to rewrite or prove this or first or second. I think that we as censient board members can understand where there's some gaps in and what we want to be able to accomplish. And I like I said, I'd rather do that tonight than do it real time then. But I don't think we have to rewrite the policy. That's my opinion on it. But I'm not a Robert's I'm not you know parliamentarian on that. So, so I guess if I can reiterate your suggestion more or less your your recommendation would be to uh at the first round get a lay of the land for the second round potentially um eliminate the the

024one votes or less. And then the second vote hit a lay of the land. If it happens to be a four four split, declare a deadlock. And then five row after five rounds of voting ensue. Then it turns to a a blind draw. Right. Yeah. And and yes, everything you just said with one clarification. Sure. If the first round is 224, right? Then the four steps on the side and then we vote between the two to bring them up to to get a majority. Two candidates, the two Yeah. One of the lower two. So a 224 split. It's not a one tie all tie. I mean, we could do that if you said one tie all. All right. But so if we did that though then not saying that this but you could be potentially

025being forced to vote that's true for two people that you may not have voted for. That's that's a true that's a true statement. I don't know. Well and great point Lori. How do I how do I know what I'm saying? And you said there was four right now. So let's assume it's 0224 and I have to somehow get it down to just two. Mhm. Either I put them all back in and wait for it to go, you know, 44 or 233 and then I can accept the the the lower one gets eliminated. If we don't want to do a runoff or a primary, if you will, then we keep anybody who got a vote in there until there's somebody who gets five or two a tie at the top. But you could still be going

026around in circles being 224, 224, 224 every time you go around, right? Then What's what happens out of that is the the fourth one who didn't get any votes is up is up. Right. Right. And then you have three to pick from, but it was already 224. But what I'm saying is you would have three to pick from in that discussion of um oh to nominate. Yeah. If you went because you'll have if you left all three candidates in the hat for five rounds and it went around the room five times. 224 then that means that all three of them would have a bite at the apple in the nomination and none would be eliminated unless they got zero votes at one point or less than two or less than two in that situation. Uh

027sorry. So on that point 7 C specifies that a nominee must be a qualified elector who has submitted a sworn declaration of eligibility has submitted paperwork. So any of the four people and has not withdrawn from consideration. Not has not been eliminated. It's not. Yeah. They could get nominated again. They're all open. Yeah. They're still there. If a gets zero zero votes and then when we're doing the hat, people could nominate him and put him back in. He might get in or she might get in anyway. Good point. I'm glad you brought that up because I would have missed I would have missed that. I don't think you really need to worry about that. I think that I like the idea of doing runoffs until you get to if there is a tie. Again, we

028don't know because you don't even know. Maybe someone's like, "Well, actually, you know what? That person's not that bad. I mean, like, I'm vote for him." It, you know, it might not be that intense. I don't know. So, but yeah, at least get to a point where you've got a solid 44 tie and then if that doesn't go anywhere, then let's shake it up. Let's see how it goes with the hat. Maybe it goes to a 50/50. Maybe it goes to 2525. So, in the interest of Craig's agenda and and this topic, uh would I can I can I write this up and send it to everybody? I don't want to do a policy writing on the fly by walking for him in an email, but I'd like policy writing. You're I know and honestly,

029your job is to uh run the meeting run the meeting, right? And so, what you're doing right now is you're getting feedback from the other board as to Well, how do you guys want me to put the rules? My question is, did you get enough feedback? And do you guys think that you're clear? You were clear enough on giving him ideas so that way when he says, "This is how we're going to run tonight's meeting," we don't go, "Wait, wait, wait." And then we're doing this on Monday. Well, not everyone is here. I understand. I don't know what that would look like. I will I will send out the rules of engagement ahead of time, but but the comments would only come back to me individually. do not get into a discussion on but the

030idea that not everybody is here. This is where you say right Craig as chairman says we discussed this at the committee. This is why you know you know our president is saying we're doing this because this is what we agreed to right and so that should squaltch any comments from the public. I mean they may make comment but the idea that they make comment after that is better than everybody just thinking Dave can do whatever he wants and that's what he's doing. We don't want to give anybody the idea that that's what's happening. So, there's a there's an advantage to um having this discussion here tonight to kind of come up with some clarity on how we're going to go about I'm glad you I'm glad you pointed that out, Sam, because I would have

031missed that. Um, so when we do and if we do uh make a rewrite, I'm going to make the suggestion that we do what other school districts do or some other school districts anyway, which is we um uh mandate hiring a parliamentarian, which is your attorney to come in and run that part of the meeting because then they decide the rules and how to interpret that and it's not on any one of you. Jared asked me that. I just want you are you have something on the table here which is you are an elected official that attorney is just doing the job of the parliamentarian for that piece and they're just making it go. And so it to any extent that everybody gets upset or or whatever, it's it's with the idea that that that

032parliamentarian ran the show, not any one of you got caught in the whisp of that that and and I and I think that's really good idea for you guys to think about in the future because it does protect you in that in that regard. So So I'm going to summarize that. Um, my goal is to get it to two people from whatever slate that we start with and and runoffs and and voting on the lesser to get if one person gets four from the onset, then we're going to try to get a four vote or or a majority or plurality of somebody else to run up against that person. Then those two candidates will go around the table at least five times. And if we we're still at stalemate, then we'll go to nominations and

033anybody there who had their name in consideration can be nominated to for a blind draw. So the way I saw this playing out is somewhat similar to what he was mentioning um Sam was mentioning or regarding um you know the having having other you know say you have two two four um I I remember when was it David Smith and I were um being considered for the same vacancy at one point in time there was there was about five candidates for the one seat. And it it did go around a few times before uh people started switching their votes over to uh more uh so there was no elimination. There was no elimination, but there was there was vote switching all the way up to the point where they where David received five votes. Uh

034okay. So, it wasn't necessarily a a deadlock, but it was until he received five votes. Now, I guess I guess the question I see is what constitutes a deadlock? What What does the committee see constitutes a deadlock? Does it is it a two two four or is it just if if the one candidate is only getting four votes and they're not getting any more than that after a certain amount of rounds. Is that considered a deadlock? I Craig, I I fully support that. We can just keep all the names in the names available and we just keep on going around until we get a tie until you get a four four tie or a five or five or a five or a five whatever. Yeah. A five whatever. either a majority or a tie. Yeah,

035a majority. And if you get to the tie, then it's a deadline. Sure. But then it still be five more votes and everybody's name goes back in the hat anyway. So, if they're nominated, uh, if they're nominated, right? If they're nominated, right? I do I do prefer that. I think that that sounds like a better Okay. I think that sounds like a better method. Is there an issue with the fact that uh seven B isn't really written that way? Is there an issue with three three A, B, and C aren't even written. So, it's Well, I mean, yeah, I think it's just organized. Seven is kind of like like a footnote or an addendum or an appendices or whatever word you want to use. Um the the application of law to the policy. Yeah, it's

036just like, hey, this is how it goes and then here's the contingency for if this happens. So, my only question is, are we violating board policy by following that? Because although I enjoy that, I don't want to violate board policy just because I enjoy it. That's not something I like to do. Um, you're only violating uh th this portion seven of the policy should you get to that number of days out and you have to follow that piece. Right. Yep. Yep. Right. The rest of it is fairly open to interpretation on how you want to get to that number of days and then having this law portion uh kick in. Okay. So clarifying, we'll keep on voting on whoever's in front of us until there's a majority or a 4-4 tie. And if there's a

0374-4 tie, then it will be a runoff with five votes. But then after a runoff of five votes, we'll still take nominations and draw from a hat, even anybody who still wants to be considered. But per this policy, each person can only first and or second. You can't independently nominate somebody other than the person you seconded. So Craig says, "I want to nominate them." And Dan says, "I second." Dan doesn't get a nomination. So that means by definition the most you're going to have in the hat is four because there's eight of us. There won't be eight in the hat. Yeah. Okay. I will try to craft that and repeat it back to you within 24 hours. That's fantastic. If you need to meet more than a week ahead of time and then if we

038need to meet and talk again, we'll meet and talk again. uh just to keep it all the up and up. So I don't When's when's the board meeting? Next week. It's two weeks from two weeks from yesterday. Two weeks from today. Two weeks from today. Two weeks from day. Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Craig. All right. All right. Sounds good. All right. All right. We have uh section B of our the 2000 group group one of our new policies. Right. Now we have uh we have a number of uh policies regarding that pertain to either curriculum development, adoption of courses or educational options, special observance. Did anybody have anything particularly um that stood out to them as something that they wanted to discuss those regarding those policies? The 2000s 2000s. Yep. Section B. Um, we have a

039couple questions. Um, for the first one, curriculum development 2210. I was just curious, do we already have the shaken baby instruction that's in this on letter M? And one in one of grades five to eight and 10 to 12 students with the instruction on shape baby syndrome and impact of babies described. Is that like we're requiring that for all students or what is that? I'm just curious what that looks like because I don't think we do that now especially from 10 to 12 because they're usually do health class in 9. That seems like something we do maybe health class. I don't know. I'm just curious what that Yeah, I would have to dig more specifically on that. I do believe is in our health courses. Um I do know that's part of something actually part

040of the process that we're going through right now is collecting and analyzing each one of those specific pieces. Okay. Um and so I can get back to you. I think my biggest thing is I know when they're like 10th to 12th grade, they may not be in a class that would have that. You know what I'm saying? Because I think 12th is usually in ninth grade. So I just didn't know if we wanted to maybe But ninth grade since that's where it's going to fit. You know, I don't want it to be in here and then we're not doing it right for that. And that one is very specific. Right. Right. Right. Right. You know, it's kind of one of those with the health. Yeah. I tell you that this is my first crack at

041these policies. So, I will be learning right along with you the process of how this goes. Jared and I have talked quite a bit about the fact that we're introducing quite a few new processes. um as we work through uh some of the curricular pieces and Lauren knowing that you were on our um ed services team or committee I always say team but it's committee um knowing that we're going through that curricular review process and introducing some processes and um those are the type of pieces like as I'm working with the social studies department there are very specific laws about very certain things that need to be taught in social and right and That's what I figured. I figured it was along and that's why we have Niola, right? Catch these things, but it it's

042just conflicting on what we're going to what we're actually teaching currently. So, I didn't know how that was going to affect and and I'm not as to curriculum as I used to be when I was a director, right? But I can tell you the the law in itself was intended to try to um gear high school offerings and middle school offerings to determine when that health class was taught, right? That that dealt with uh that and other health topics. um where some schools have gone around that is they they put something like this in the policy and then they said we'll just keep an eye on each student and if a student has health in ninth grade then when they have their mandated PE course we'll do a small unit on it in PE or

043I mean they you know so I don't know exactly where and and part of it uh as we're restructuring everything um and putting curriculum all under one house and that kind of stuff. Jenny's going to have to dig into that. Yeah. Yeah. I just it just grabbed my attention because I think of like unified strength that my son's been in, you know, like I don't see this being in a class. You know what I'm saying? So, I just wanted to point it out. I was sometimes it's in our our you know, um family consumer ed courses like the middle school versus a health class and you know, so yeah, there are a lot of places incorporated from K to, you know, nth grade. I think it was that 10th to 12th grade where you're going

044to be, you know, expect that content to land. Yeah. Because I also was also even curious about like the financial literacy and I know that's required at the high school, but I didn't know is that something that has to be at every grade because it says K to 12. So I'm just and that is something that we're working through with our social studies. uh that one in particular our social studies working um genocide as well. Yeah, there's groups there too. So yeah, those all fall under um legally mandated work. Okay, thank you. Yeah, that that'll my main one for that one. Any other comments on this grouping or um Well, you guys go first. Uh my only other one I'm making sure there's so many. I got to make sure I got my write my

045notes. So I will I'll say I included I had Lynn included the uh model policy 16 in there for Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty. um that particular policy. Uh just kind of a reference uh about um you know how how it might be advantageous to consider a couple of different things when when reviewing the curriculum and considering the curriculum. Uh especially when it comes to uh third party resources. Uh for instance um educational materials used as part of an educational program which may include textbooks, workbooks, teacher guides, digital resources, assessment materials and other print and non-print materials or resources which are purchased from publishers or other thirdparty vendors. So not creating a you know u a blank uh a loophole by which uh you know if a if a particular instructor decides to pull

046in res resources from the outside that that's included in the review process and approval process by which a board um would approve those particular materials. Um the same thing would be true is on this particular model of policy also mentions a curriculum uh review committee that would consist of members that was selected by the district administrator and approved by the board including one person from uh teachers, administrators, curriculum coordinators, parents and students. Um, so those are some of the things that I felt like Niola didn't mention that would probably be advantageous to um implement in the future when it came to uh curriculum review uh that that a committee should be formed and approved by the school board. Um, Craig, I mean, I I read through, well, kind of like Lori said, there was a

047lot of policies. Lori or Lynn, good job. Uh, there was no way I was going to read every single one of them. Uh, to every every WSD to district and superintendent to administrator to superintendent, etc., etc. And I did read through several of the the model policies from Will on face value. I have no specific issue with any of them. It's more of a matter of what should be our direction for the staff. I mean, let's push forward with Nola and then circle back and see how these impact mola policies. Um, or are you advocating that we edit the new policies today versus have these for consideration or for for efficacy? I mean, to get done by June 30th, which I think is still our what do we have to have these all done by?

048What's the calendar? Yeah. Um, well, we want to have everything buttoned up and completed for May. Okay. I guess I'm just thinking in May. This would be any of these will policies is worthy of reviewing against our book. I just wouldn't do it while we're adopting the I just wouldn't want to try to do two things at once because I just don't think we're going to get it done. Sure. So um before we get into section C, we're talking about this particular section and model 16 is pretty much just pertinent to um 22 uh 10 and possibly 2220. Um so I felt that especially when it comes to policies that don't have any particular district match um it is actually uh the NEOA guidelines the NEOA policies bringing brought forth from administration happens happened to

049then become uh an administration administrative recommendation of a new policy more or less and if we're going to consider a new policy then then I do think it's it warrants a further discussion on on what should be included in that particular policy. Okay. So, do we just put them in a parking lot until we get I'm not opposed to that. Get everything else taken care of. Yeah. If that's what it means to um have a you know more of a robust discussion and maybe even refine some of that bandwidth. Yes. refine like what what does this look like? So it's not a clunky policy, you know, that that's kind of the intention behind behind that. Okay. And I I guess I didn't recognize that as being applying to just newas that didn't have a matching

050one currently. Um which not neither here nor there. Sure. So I I just I don't want to be trying to do two things at once. Drive the car while you're building it and and we're trying to Right. I don't think we're That's a plane, right? Try to build the plane while you're building. Yeah. Plane. Yeah. Whatever. I can't. If I can understand this Craig though, I I don't think your intent is to um use uh will only for uh policies that don't you would like to look at those model policies from will and infuse uh some of their content into any policy that might match up whether it's an old one or a new suggested one. Is that right? That's right. Y yeah. So that that's where I'm asking like I I'll ask the same

051question that David asked like um because we could have you know five different stacks of organizations policy work right because there's about at least that many out there that do policy work for schools my the question I have is am I um using Niola or am I using Niola plus will plus WB plus you know AASA plus you know well well I guess I guess in this particular case there this is only applying to that one particular policy I'm you know and in section C you you'll notice a number of different um uh other model policies as it pertains to um parental rights if we're going to jump ahead a little bit and my thought my thought was that will only leaves a a small little paragraph on parental rights. Yet the uh Kettle Marine

052School District happens to have a lot of different um uh definitions of what parental rights are and and what those are and how we can spell those out. And then I also have included in the model policy of Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty to also indicate, you know, here are some of the areas that uh that that Neiola is moot on. we should probably consider putting some of those forward in that particular section of policy and and so yeah my Craig I think we've been pretty consistent on this since we embarked on the whether it was bullying whether it was uh extracurriculars whether it was other sponsored policies I don't want to say every single one of them has taken a back burner but we generally agreed that we wanted to get the book

053in place before we made any edits and so when look at parental rights. Let's just pick out that one, right? That's what I would consider to be a sponsored policy. Okay? And if and if we're consistent with the way that we've done it in the past, anybody can can bring forth a policy that they want to sponsor, edit, or have incorporated with a deep dive, but we've not tried to do that in any situation up to this point in the last 15 months of editing EEL policies on the fly aside from merging them or accepting them. between what we had and what they recommended. So I would be against anything that edits a if it's not a pure mix of WSD and Neiola. Sure. I would say that it should be put to a sponsored

054policy that occurs at a later date or or we get it done today and then we because go through first read go through second read just to get the book done and then sponsor a policy to hammer any one particular topic whether it be will or marine or parental rights or curriculum review. I I just don't think it's it'd be entirely inconsistent with what we've been doing for the last 15 months to pull one out and incorporate well third party piece of information. I'm not opposed to that. What I was trying to um illustrate was that uh the curriculum development piece uh should potentially have um further discussion. Yeah. And uh the same thing no issue. Yeah. Yeah. No issue. And I I agree with that and um I don't have issue um pulling policy

055from different groups. But what where where I'm asking a clarification question is um the board action right that the board took was for uh the administration to work through the committee to uh realign our policies to the policies. That was the that was the task we were getting, right? And I I believe we should finish that task or ask the board if we're abandoning that task for something else because what we're proposing is uh more of a hybrid. Well, yeah. And I guess uh sorry to Lori just to reiterate. I think I think what we have here is too uh the new process if it it doesn't fit the community. If it doesn't if if we're bringing forth policy that happens to be a recommendation of the administration happens to be new policy because we

056don't have a uh district match to it then I think there's a a worthy discussion to be had at that time when we consider that particular policy. Now if uh if it means it has to be parking loted till later I'm open to that idea um and then bring that back. So, um, go ahead, Lori. I I was just going to say I do think it's important that we I I agree with what you're saying, Craig, and I I don't care really the process so much, but I do think that it is important that even though we do want to try to align with Mola, there is going to be s, you know, maybe situations where we need to tweak things. And I think we have tweaked a couple things here and there. Yes. But

057we've tweaked them based on our existing policy, not the world of policy out there. we existed. If we're going to tweak it on our existing, that must mean that we feel strongly that those things should stay the same where even though it's a new or you know or somebody does or we feel like we we wanted to keep it. Um but I I don't know if I would agree that just because it's not one we have that we have to 100% agree with the new, you know what I mean? or we may not be able to I I was under the understanding it was always going to be our policies right like we still had a say right on the policy that's true and I'm not I'm not arguing that what I'm saying is that

058when we embarked upon the process and we had no niola here and and what we agreed to was you have one of three things right you have um either the nola policy that you say yes 100% to Right. Or you have a hybrid between your existing policy and the oldest policy or you have something that will not be in the booklet. Oh, right. And that's that's what you go through. Right. And then once you're done, if you want to open it up to the uh worldwide uh area of policy that you might want to bring in from whatever group, okay? Right. Then then you can do that. Um but again remember that what Niola or anybody who does policy work for you says right the the and and will say this too like I if

059you are doing more and more adopting outside of our policies that we update for you right we're going to tell you that they're going to be less and less effective right and every group will tell you that no matter who does policy work for you uh because they want to be able to have you adopt their policy booklet and keep up to date with their policies. Uh because then that's what they're that's why you're buying their service. Right. Right. And so if we don't if we're finding we don't like the Neola service, right? And we're finding more that we need to hybrid or not have their policies um then we shouldn't buy their service. So, so to that I would say um not true because there's a number of policy the vast majority of policies

060that we we do have in place that we would generally feel comfortable with NEOA when it came to uh the compliance with specifically HR and a number of other particular areas where those uh those laws would change. there's an advantage to actually having Neola in order to have them update those particular changes. Now, in in certain instances where it doesn't fit quite the the um the the direction of the board and or the um desire of the community to be transparent, then I think that it makes absolute sense to make sure that we adopt policy according to to those needs. So um I that's true in in this regard which is as long as that right is the the you know the very few or the one offs what I was what I said before

061which was true is to the extent that you hybrid more or move away from the policy more than you're using it why would you pay for the service you know am I that's that I don't know how many were doing that with. But um but it still begs the question as to if there's only a very few, right? Then let's get through the book and let's tackle the very few that might not quite fit in or that we'd have to hybrid away from what we're doing. Okay? because that that's a smaller amount and uh we want to get through the service that we're paying for and we want to get on their schedule of you know a review and we can work on those few that are at the end. So I guess a question

062maybe Lynn would know the Excel spreadsheet. Um how how many Neola policies have we I'll say reviewed and declined to add to our book. I mean is it 1% 5% 10%? It's not even 1% like there aren't very many that we are not recommending. Okay. And and so if we did put let's say five we just handp pick five out of maybe this all five of these. I don't even know, just randomly five. We We don't want these. We have a way to indicate to Niola that we didn't adopt their policy and that we're still on our policy. Yes. Okay. Yes. And so or a lot of them are ones that um did not have a WUSD match and it did not I think the majority of them are and so we just left we

063we left those out there because we didn't have time to review them or we didn't think we needed them. Right. like an uh what was it? A nuclear disaster. Yeah. Yeah. Like there's one on there's one on nuclear disaster. Iodine pills. Yes. Okay. Okay. So, we don't have an iodine pill one. Okay. Good. You know, there are things like that. I really thought perhaps you would throw that in here just to see what the response would be. But I think would have that not because might have something like that, but we're not in the area right now. Um, I guess if not that that's a motion, Craig, but I I firmly believe we should move forward with the Neola adoption process or conversion process. And we can leave ones on the side that were uncomfortable

064with Niola, but that just means that we're sticking with the one that we have that's the most closest to it or nothing or or nothing at all in the event that we don't choose to put it in our book. Don't do harm because you're waiting to do good. Well, and I just leave it just from a standpoint of like I said, we're not going to build the plane until we come back. We're not going to build the plane while we're flying it. I I just don't see that there's any impetus to adopt or change today when we're under the gun and behind schedule on getting the in place. I would propose this as a um when it comes to group well grouping B and C here. Um that policy 2220 along with 5780 in group

065C get set aside. Okay. for further discussion. for further discussion. Yeah. And leave it with whatever we have now. If we don't have anything, then we don't have anything, right? Okay. No, I'm I'm good with that. Like I said, I read through the will and I read through part of the kettle mering. No issue. It' just be unprecedented that we insert at this point in this 15-month process. Okay. I do have one more question on one other policy bill. Sure. just on the um special observance days. I noticed that November 11th they have our mist day I know as veterans day and I don't know if our miss is even proper anymore. So I'm just wondering to me veterans is the appropriate but because I miss this is just World War is it Columbus or

066Indigenous People Day? Is it Columbus or Indigenous people day in there? It's I didn't catch that. Now you're opening the can of worms. Yeah, that is not trying to actually veterans veterans day. Immediately when she brought it up, I was like Columbus Day Christopher Columbus birthday thing. I think it's just Well, Veterans Day Veterans Day should be We recognize all veterans. Not How did you catch that? Because my dad was a veteran. comfortable with whatever recommendation you have. I would recommend veterans day. Yeah, state statute like Jenny said is state statute does say I was pretty sure that's why I was like you don't see that very often and it's been changed. I know there was some controversy years ago when it was changed but technically your mist is just World War I. I believe

067it was listed as Okay, good. makes me happy. I I'll Yeah, I'm with you. Let's let's edit that to Veterans Day. Thank you. I got to remember to take Lee Ericson Day off. So, so among the uh it's a 2000 series. Uh was there any other any other um concerns and and you're it was 2210 and 2220 that you were going to leave on the we're going to push those to the parking lot. Yeah. Right. and then 5780 in the next group as um only question on that. Um just for clarification and and for Lynn's recordkeeping, do 2210 and 2220 or 5780 have an existing uh approximate policy that we're going to by de facto keep until an edit is made. 2210 is matched with WSD 6210 curriculum development and then adoption of course of

068the study for our 2220 is aligned with 6210 as well. Okay. And then 5780 5870 5780 does not have a w. Thank you. Okay. And I I strongly believe that we need to get one of those in place. Just not Well, I mean, we're going to adopt a book anyway. Yeah. Yeah. Well, but we're going to do it without 5780 and then we're going to quickly edit it or create one if we don't have one right now. Right. Go ahead, Sam. Clarifying question just as a as a newer board member when it comes to the adoption of courses of study. This was at the last board meeting. Yeah. the December board meeting. I think we went over the curriculum course book and while I was looking at it, I was like, "Boy, there's a lot

069of classes in here that I didn't know about." And that was I didn't want to belabor the point of the thing, but that was part of the reason I was like, "Well, I'm going to decline to vote for this." What would the process be then if we're Is that the correct place to do something like that in that location or is there a different place where we go over the course? So, tomorrow morning, it's a great leadin to tomorrow morning at 7:30. Tomorrow morning. tomorrow morning um we're gonna have that discussion because as you guys recognize um there hasn't been that process uh and the interpretation of where the approval process for a course handbook was uh was um different than I have interpreted in the past and made a suggestion to the board to

070you know hold that approval at your level not um at the whim of what the administration brings to you or not to you. And Sam, I'm gonna do a quick tomorrow morning. Item C is a discussion on course book approval procedure. And then item D is actually course book approval uh of the RMS course book. And so we wanted to go over the timeline on that because we can't be asking for a review the day before school starts. We can't even be asking for a review eight months before school starts. So we have to set up a timeline. So that's what item C is on the discussion for tomorrow. And then item D is then actually to review the course book as it stands right now and then potentially pull out anything that we want

071to see changed not for 2526 but for 2627 and and that's what those items D and D are on. Henry, it was nice to see Craig's policy on it from Will because either we'll uh independently come up with the same idea or we'll let that document inform the discussion tomorrow morning. So, come prepared to talk about that tomorrow morning because that's when I really wanted to get into the heart of it. Uh because you're right, it was a gap at the last ED service meeting. We didn't or the last board meeting. We're like, where does this go? Well, and honestly, that's that's why, you know, a good part of why will put that model policy together because they've been realizing that that power of the board has been slowly moving towards administrative work instead of

072uh the board and they take the stance that that should remain with the board. You know, there should be a process of that review. Does that does that answer the Sam or Yes, perfectly. The fact that we're going to talk about it tomorrow is enough for me. As a matter of fact, I think I'm only good. I think that's everything. That's all you wanted. I had the same sentiment. I will say I had the same sentiments as Craig about the about the parental rights uh with the will things. I thought it was fantastic that you included those. I thought that was great. Um but talking about that, we said we wanted this done by May, the course book, the whole book done by May. Yeah. Talking about it in a couple of months is not

073going to be uh the end of the world. So I think that's reasonable. What's up? Okay. Have a good time. Thanks, man. See you tomorrow morning. All right. So, let's move on to uh hearing no other concerns about the 2,00 group. We're going to move on to the 5,000 group. Um any other concerns there that anybody else could see? Again, I I read through half of these and found nothing uh of concern. Um that on my end, Laura, yeah, that's my two cents. I And I know so for I do have a question 5515 for student use of motor vehicles. I noticed that [Music] um the last sentence that um the district admin shall established standards for the granting of permits which shall contain the warning that infraction of the rules may result in the

074revocation of the permit. Do we not re revoke permits? Is that not Are we talking about parking permits? Yes, I'm assuming I don't know that we've revoked any revoked any parking permits. Okay. or that there has been any sort of procedure to revoke a parking permit. Yeah. Because I'm not opposed to that. If you know, I mean, if there's a student that's been caught using drugs, they have a parking permit. I don't think they should have a parking permit. And I'm not trying to get down a rabbit hole. I was just curious. We've never talked about it. So, I was just curious where you guys stood on that and what you saw or if somebody happens to have some really terrible parking habits, right? I mean, I' I've been quite verbally abused. I've I've seen

075some crazy stuff. So, I I'm not saying that we have to make like get into deep discussion. I was just curious why that isn't that should be a privilege to me. A very very I don't know. We we just haven't. Okay. So, we were we were just thinking with what we haven't Yeah. I mean, if if you want to change that up or I think I was just surprised. I think I was more surprised that what that's not a privilege that we would necessarily take away and maybe not. Okay. Right. Okay. But if you guys want that change, we change it and then we move forward with uh writing up stuff and communicating it out to um students as to how you might lose your parking privileges. Um, and then do we do we validate

076that students have motorcycle license for them to ride a motorcycle to have a motorcycle? If you're Well, it says in here that no student who does not possess a valid motorcycle safety education certificate will be allowed to ride or park. I know that there are students that have motorcycles that do not have motorcycle license. So, I was just curious if we have a we may want to look into that, make sure we have a process for that. Well, I I I believe the process is we have an SRO. Okay. And if the SRO believes that they don't That's fine. Right. That's fine. I was just curious. That becomes a a referral to the SRO. Sorry. Little PDSD of driving many years that high school dropping students off. So, it just drew my attention. But that

077that I mean that's that's how we currently do things. Okay. But you can drive your snowmobile to school. I know. I saw that. And tractor and tractor and tractor tractor. All right. And tractor. I will tell you we we talked about this one a lot and had a lot of fun of what other vehicles could you could you bring to school? It was a good time solar car. Your your solar car that came up. Dirt bike. We had a lot of Well, didn't they try to pass the side by sides too at one point? Can you imagine? Oh. Oh, man. Um, sorry. So, store that side by side's in town here. They're pretty big town. Not not in the in the city limits really last summer. Okay. Well, that's interesting. It's a pretty big city

078for that. That's what I thought, too. But anyway, whatever. Like, I'd like it. So So, do we have any any other um Lauria? I do have one more. So, we're not going to make that change. Is that I I just was bringing it to the attention. I'm not saying I I'm just one I just wanted to bring it to attention that I thought it was give you guys another tool by which to like enforce some behaviors at the high school. I don't to be really honest, I don't know that we would ever and we have never talked about enforcing students not being able to park at school because then it's a barrier for transportation for them to pick a school for some of our friends. And so we'd like them to attend um and then

079we find other means to make um learning more beneficial so that we learn those soft skills. I I think I think I was more looking at like the drugs and alcohol situation. I think that that is a pretty um I know other districts do drug tests. We don't do that. That is a privilege that if they do not pass their drug test, they lose their parking permit. So, it's just something that I'm not saying one way or another what the the one that I wanted to mention and we'll bring forward um for question was uh 5870. Are we moving away from this policy then? I'm fine with moving away. Okay. Oh, sorry. I just wanted to kind of get clarification. Go ahead, Craig. Sorry. Sorry. 58 5870 uh student production and goods and services. I

080noticed had come up something similar earlier in the year and uh it it looks to me like the the edits andor this policy happens to be consistent with what we had discussed earlier. Um is everybody on the same page with that? No, sounds good. Um, give me one second. Bear with me for maybe you can just maybe it's more of a clarification for 5531 student assistant programs. Um I didn't write down usually I try to write one paragraph um blah blah blah students maintain difficulties the superintendent is authorized to establish one or more assistance programs for the students which provide for more effective interventions in areas such as blah blah that last paragraph I guess what I'm curious is that does that mean that that's on the cost of the district or is that we're

081just giving them resources oures for them to it's kind of you know I just didn't want it to look like we are offering substance abuse treatment or because I I know that usually it's in the cost for the family or if they have like hobby worker or something like that. So I was just kind of unclear if we need to be more clear on that. Does that is authorized to establish one or more assistance programs for the students which impact the students emotional, mental or social wellbeing effect their ability to benefit from program. To me that looks like we are offering the intervention and sometimes we are when it comes to AODDA we absolutely do provide interventions for some of our students who require that of course we are not medical providers right um families

082are aware parents are aware but we also have other processes so um you were talking about referral right and we have a referral system that they can use and parents can absolutely go forth and and do what they need to do that I uh we pay a very small fee for the referral service and then it's in their parents hands and it's in it's in you know um grandparents hands or whatever it might use it however they want but that's part of a student assistance program as well. Okay. And we we don't pay for the services they get, but but we are paying somebody to help align the the family with the service. Okay. Does that make sense? Yeah. [Music] And you do have like with C that staff members are properly trained. So they're

083only giving whatever it is they're trained on. Okay, I'm good with it. I think it was when you're reading all these sometimes you write the note and you're like just needed to read it through with somebody. Yes. Just make sure it makes sense. Believe me, that's why that's why I talk with Craig about it. I talk, you know, whoever. That's all I have for Okay, so I have one more. Uh 5880. Um letter C. Uh I I just kind of curious why parental permission for each minor is sought and receive it received prior to the performance are discussing about public performances by students. So when you think about the care alerts or you think about different organizations that are going on out we we do not currently seek the permission of families. They do have

084a schedule ahead of time. They do know where their children are. At least they should if if they're paying attention to those pieces. Um, so we we currently do not do this. It is well communicated out, but we are not seeking permission for children to or students to attend the Pepsi plant at 7:00 for their Christmas concert so that they sing as as a caroler. We didn't seek out permission for them to come to the board meeting and sign permission for them to attend the board meeting to sing in front of us every December. That makes sense. or like the Christmas concert at Webster. Ask for parent permission on February 6. We talk about this. We kind of went round and round about this. When it's during the school day um and they have to

085leave campuses, of course, there is field trip permission. Parents know that they're leaving and they're going somewhere else such as Webster or other places um during the day. But we're talking about public performances by students usually thought of that this is occurring outside the school day. Yeah. So parents would have to bring them there regardless if they run out of age. Like my uh like Ryan has a skills thing up in Pestigo, right? Where he's performing through the skills course with his urban robotic, right? They they didn't ask permission for him to go do that. If you're in skills, this is one of the performances that you do, right? In skills. Well, I mean I I'm just curious, does that open us up to liability then, too? I mean, if you're not seeking I mean

086seeking parental per permission for your minor child to go and do a performance outside of the district. No, because again those things are communicated to parents that if you are going to have a child in carolers or skills or whatever um it's there uh if your child is in the the band class or music class, right? Those things are communicated. These are our performance dates, right? And some parents say, "That's fine that those are a performance date and that's fine that you're even grading the performance, but I'd like to talk to you about an alternate assignment because I don't want my child performing blah blah blah, right?" And then that becomes a very specific thing between the parent, okay, and the teacher. So, so it' be safe to say that there's some sort of implied

087consent there. I don't know if you call it implied consent. Um because implied consent is you know making sure that um you know the the an implied consent form is one of the forms that says we're doing this unless you want to opt out. Well, right well and we're not saying that. We're saying this is what we're doing. Right. the parent if they decide that well I'm not okay with that and they want to opt out and they want to seek something else right then they take that on we don't say you know sign this if you want to opt out we're not giving an implied consent we're just saying this is what we're doing all okay if you're if you're comfort if you're com comfortable with it I'm I'm fine I'm just asking the

088question with just inserting the note that parents may opt So sufficient I mean so I think that that opens us up for some issues and I'll tell you why. Let's say that it's WSMA. I don't know what that is. So so Wisconsin State Music Association when the kids are going to Soul Ensemble. Yes. So it's not on a school day. It's on a Saturday. Could be here. Could be at a neighboring school. And you put in here that parents can opt out. Students grades are sometimes based on WSMA participation. Well, the parents just opted out or or or they opted out. You can let them know if you opt out, you're not going to get a grade for this. Yeah. You're you're the the fifth player in the court. Oh, good point. Yeah. Then everybody's

089grade is going to be Yeah, good point. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, there's just uh Except for in that situation, they can opt out except for that. I know. I know what I know. I I understand what you're trying to get at, Craig, which is like where we can, we always want, you know, parents to be part of and and consenting to whatever it is your child's going to be participating in and learning, right? Um I don't know how we would do that for every um every possible item that could come up of them performing. you know, I would say like you would just have a a parental form that you sign at the beginning of the season. These are the these are the activities we're going to participate in, then you know there there you

090go. Yeah. But I it if they're I would say if they're extracurricular type things, yes. But if they're part of your grade, right? For instance, um my son has to be at band uh oh, it's tomorrow night. Uh middle school plays at the basketball game. Uh, he's fine. I have to leave my account. He's coming up, right? Um, he can not go, but he'll lose part of his grade if if we say, "No, you're not going to that." And that's an extra thing that happens outside. We've got things on, you know, church on Tuesday night or whatever it is and you're not going, you know, that's that's really hard for some of that that to navigate. And I'd rather us navigate that when a parent says, "Hey, I've got a concern than us forcing every

091teacher and every parent to go through a paperwork process." That 99% of them are like, "No, we understand that." Uh, if your kid's going to be a banned, they're going to have to do a PEP ban on so on. So 5850 the next one on social events you crossed off no student will otherwise be eligible for participation in a school social event will be denied such participation as a punitive device student there would be a situation where they wouldn't be um eligible to attend a social gathering because of so it's the next piece Craig. So we crossed that one out so that we could take the second option which is participation in school events is not a right and may be denied. Okay. And student who has demonstrated disregard for the school rules. So we

092chose that option. I see how that's set up. Sure. We didn't have about that one. We didn't have much. All right. We're good. Any other questions on the 5,000 group? I do want to bring your attention to 5855, but I do feel like that is a change in practice. Okay. We did have some discussion about this one with the high school. We we up to the high school. They chose option one, which I do believe is a change in practice in my opinion compared to option two. So, I want to bring it to your attention if no one brought it to ours. This one is saying that we're requiring pre high school students. Yes, I'm glad you mentioned that because I did notice that. I'm like, okay, in a middle school um there has been

093instances that um there aren't parental supervision and behavior issues as resolved. So, this would would give you a little bit of extra like ability to control those situations. Okay, I'm all school districts do this as well and that was a change for them as well. Um, and participation increased in their events because then parents had to come. Um, but it was very similar. Okay. And the same would go for like a high school football game. The middle school student would not be dropped off or it would have to be accompanied by Correct. Do they have to be with can it be like four students with one of the the way I say parent or adult? Okay. So if moms six kids Yeah. I'm bringing 27 eighth graders with me but we're coming. Okay. Um and

094do you think we can enforce this? I mean obviously if it's a change that's going to require enforcement because when you walk into some of these events um there is a check-in process, right? You're paying, you're getting your hands stamped, you're doing all sorts of things. Yeah. What if a what if a kid wants to come with their older sibling? And I mean, no parent is present. I mean, are you going to say no to that now? I mean, yeah, that's why it's written. That's why we wanted to make sure that you know this. any any unaccompanied student will not be allowed to attend the event and the board will not be responsible if they attend a trap room. So as a student for some reason and we did talk through like what would that

095experience look like and Josh would yeah this would be a perfect one for you maybe at the board meeting to say listen u we would like the board to fully weigh in on this okay topic because uh it is a change in policy like a change in how we do things okay you know and just get a tenor for what the eight of you or nine if it's after the person is seated. Do you do you want a separate agenda item for that or do you want me to just mention it in the minute in the minutes? Okay. And and then anybody who votes on the policies, we can always separate out whatever 5585 you said. What do you have? 5585 5850 5850. Yeah. Yeah. So when they get to the the part where they're

096on the consent agenda to pass all the policies, right, I would expect somebody to say, "I'd like to uh motion this one be pulled from the consent agenda." Right. If necess if somebody Yeah. After Craig explains it in the minutes, somebody can motion to pull it if they if they wanted discussion. So continue discussion then. Okay. Yeah. Did you what was that? I just was wondering if if this is based on behav like where it's seen issues or there's issues. Yeah, there's I mean you have a whole you have a whole middle school section at the football game. Right. Right. Right. Where there most of them don't have an adult or even older siblings. Oh, right. Right. Right. You know you got high school kids kind of I imagine. Right. Yeah. Okay. I figured that

097was it, but I didn't know. All right. Any other questions on 5,000 group? All right, moving along. We have seven 7,000 group. Uh, group one. I actually thought most of these were just they were straightforward things that we were just either missing or or what not. Great. 7530 lending of district only equipment. Can I get an example of equipment we've lent out? Yeah, I mean we anything from folding tables and chairs to um you know other things. We get requests sometimes from staff members who say, "Hey, you know, I'm wondering if I could, you know, borrow this or do that." And, you know, a lot of times we we go through the paces like, you know, uh, you know, there's a rental center down there where, you know, but but also we you know, we

098know that like it's a it's a small benefit that we can give to our staff members, right? Right. that that we do. Um sometimes uh you know um a another place in town, let's say the Rotary, like uh you know, they're going to have a concert, you know, hey, can we get some folding chairs from you or whatever, you know, we just trying to be neighborly or whatever. I mean, it's it's stuff like that that happens every once in a while. Probably not a vehicle. No. Uh we don't let people just show up and say, "Hey, I'm I need a van for the day." I'm talking about just I mean I was gonna ask for the back hole sign me up. You know what I mean? I mean there there's there's discretion in it. Uh

099and and we try to you know um meet people's needs. But then also if there's you know stuff like that you know there is rental center in town that you can go get a lot of stuff from. I guess I was thinking of uh you know the gym equipment that's left out at night and and Rex shows up and that sort of thing. Do we have a problem with that ever? I think we have a really good relationship with Park and Rack, you know. Um we respect each other's spaces and you know uh we're on their field as much as they're on our port, right? And so um we we really have a pretty good relationship. I don't think we have to worry about that. Um but you know uh do we um sometimes share

100equipment and other things? Sure. That's why we have this policy and so we can we can do that and you know basically you know it basically comes down to you know one of our administrators myself or a designate right is going to have to answer for why they lent it out right so I guarantee you they're going to go through the same paces to to check on that you know uh and make sure that it's taken well care of and it's checked out in an orderly fashion and checked back in in an orderly fashion but we don't have that many requests. We don't do it that often. A church will ask for something or whatever. We just want to make sure that we have the ability to be neighborly if we can. Any other questions

101on that? Just um with snow removal equipment, is there a possibility that we would have shared equipment with the city? you know, something like that where um we haven't done that. The closest we came to a discussion point that I'm aware of uh since I've been here and it's not a real long track record is we talked a little bit about um help with snow removal at the library once because the library has its own uh snow removal for portions of what they have. um the city takes care of some of it. Um but there was some discussion there about hey would would the school want to help out with that regard or something. So whether it was with lending tools and or staffing or um but that kind of went away and we didn't

102do anything but All right, next one. Uh this also might be uh a meeting minutes notification just give you a heads up but it would be policy uh 7530 that was a cell phone allowance we have 7530.1 one this is the uh yeah I read the cell phone allowance I was wondering this is kind of a new a newer thing this would be new um not new that we don't have uh people with cell phones knew that um if we're asking people to use their cell phones or uh we have them have a cell phone that districts pay for um we have policy that governs that most I wouldn't say most all other entities I think have some way to um counter for this liability If it's for work purposes, I don't know if you

103have your employees. I can tell you that liabilities over those things. The the the policy I inherited, the company that I purchased was paying the foreman a stipen every single month for their personal cell phone because when foreman started getting them their cell phones in 1995, they were being forced upon them. Mhm. 25 years later, there's not a single person on this planet who doesn't have one, who doesn't pay for their cell phone. And so I abolish that policy because then they get to own whatever they want and make calls on it. I like the 3CX system of putting the application on their cell phone and calling that good because they're going to own their phone anyway. And if they're using the 3CX for calling, it's not going to affect their phone plan. In which

104case, the 3CX eliminates the need to pay for the monthly service or for the maintenance or the ownership. U I consider it an extra expense to pay people who'd have one anyway. Now, to force them to get a second one, that's different because I know a lot of people who carry two because one is a work cell phone and one is a a personal cell phone. So, if you're forcing somebody to have one that I mean that's specifically owned by the district, then that'd be different, but then you're probably paying for it entirely anyway. But a stipen I would be against. Yeah. So, um I think there's uh the one big difference between um I would say most policies that a um a business may have and in our business, right, is that um if

105I'm saying to you, hey, this is this is my cell phone, right? I'm paying for the bill, right? Um I can choose to answer it or not answer it whenever I want to answer it or not answer it, right? So, um but also if I do work on it and you you're required to have that work, every one of my employees enters their time tickets on their personal phone. Um they haven't pushed back on me yet. And you don't have the proper policies in place to get my work product off of my phone? No. Well, what's the work product? Any text I send, any uh you know, anything like that? That's not it's not what you consider to be a area of exposure. It it is for schools. Yeah, I know. I understand that. Right.

106Yeah. And that's why um having these kinds of policies, especially in school settings. So, how what's this going to run the district if you implement that? Well, the uh the idea in the policy is that uh first of all, we would have to have a policy. Secondly, the policy gives the business office the right to set the reimbursement rate, right? So, that'll be a discussion for fiscal to have as to what uh what they're going to set as a rate, what the the business official is going to set as a rate. Then I would be able to give you a budget number on that. Um, I would have to uh make sure that I understand your intent in the policy. If you did this policy the way it's written, um, I could go through our

107employee list and say who's a 247 employee, for instance, because it has these H throughFs. Then I can give you an accounting. Um, I haven't done that because I this is first read. I don't even know. Uh, is this what you want to do, not want to do? Neiola has this policy. we haven't had this policy. Uh when I talked to uh Margaret about it, she's like, "Oh my god, I've been wanting to have a policy like this for years. We need a policy like this from an HR standpoint." Uh and so I brought it up to Craig and I said, "This is a very new thing. This is something that we should probably talk about at committee." Jared, if you want it, you got it. So I don't have an opinion. I mean, I

108just I would shy away from it. It just doesn't it I I don't see a need for it personally, but then again, I don't do your job. Well, and many of us uh one two the four employees in this room all carry our own cell phones and all have used it for our own personal you know needs as well as our work needs. Right. And did did did you own that cell phone before you started working here? Yeah, absolutely. Did you buy it because you wanted it? Absolutely. Did you buy the one that you wanted because you wanted But here but here's the thing. I didn't buy a second work one. Nor were you required to own a second work one. Right. But then the the idea is is that nine o'clock yet? No. Yeah.

109Raise your hand, Dad. The idea is though that as a school district, you you want to make sure that you have some policy in place that allows you to um work product that I've done on that phone. I already told you I agreed with you. You don't have to convince me. I'm just saying that that's why it's different. Well, you you just haven't stopped arguing. I I stopped. You didn't agree with me. You said I wouldn't do it, but it's up to you, Jared. That's exactly what I said. Which means you meant to argue. No, it means I was done arguing. It's your call. All right. Any other concerns about this particular policy moving forward as a recommendation? No. Hearing none. Great. What about any of the other uh policies in the 7000 group one?

110Anybody have any other objections? Yeah. Uh 7440 7440 facility security the uh fourth paragraph. The board authorizes superintendent to conduct searches of non- studentent visitors or vehicles on school property when there is a reasonable suspicion of violation. Are these uh school district employees who are going to check these vehicles? Possibly. Possibly. Yeah, I won't be checking the vehicle. I'm just I'm just imagining some out there time out just a second. This is this is a thing where um it's not a city street, right? Right. It's a parking lot owned by the school district. The police, right, can do anything on a city street. Right. The police can enter your vehicle if I give them permission if it's on our property. Even though it's it's a public school and it's public property, it's still not a

111city street, right? Um it's like a private parking lot like Walmart has. Um technically they can't go into your vehicle at Walmart either unless there was some other violation that you had, right? I guess I'm just as imagining somebody supervising the middle schoolers at the football game and they think there's something in the trunk of that car. Does this give them permission to make them open their trunk? Yes. Uh matter of fact, um in in a prior school district, uh we had uh a substitute came in um and uh was definitely wreaking of alcohol and there was a small marijuana on them, right? Uh we wanted to ascertain whether or not they were embibing on school time because they were they were being employed and they certainly didn't seem right. Right. If I didn't have

112that policy, it would be very hard for me to ask. I I could ask, but it would be very hard for the police department to be able to say, "Yeah, we can go in there." Because our threshold of suspicion is different than their threshold of suspicion. Right? And just because I say, "Hey, I've got this employee who seems out of sorts and our policy says, you know, um this um they would say that's great. You have an adult here who's out of sorts. Like I can't do anything unless they get in their vehicle and drive home. And when they drive home, I have to have good enough suspicion that they may be under influence, pull them over, and then check their vehicle." Right. But you're saying in that case, you'd call the police and handle

113it on your property. Correct. Yes. Yeah. And we would for the high school student like you mentioned. I mean, we would call over an SRO or uh I mean we we don't even uh generally go into backpacks without an SRO available. Right. So I mean we we make sure that when we do a search, right, we we bring the police along in that search of locker or bag or in this case vehicle. Right. Right. Right. So, principal can't just go into somebody's locker. It can. We just usually don't without an SRO present. Okay. We I mean, can I say we we always don't know because there's not always an SRO present, but uh or available. U but most of the time if we're going to go in, we're bringing the SRO along. All right. This

114is one where I I feel like if if you said this is in compliance with law and local ordinances and I I wouldn't stand in the way of that. I wouldn't oppose that. I'm assuming it's written somewhere for students vehicles also already. This just says non- studentents. Yeah, it's in other other uh student code of conduct and [Music] Okay. Okay. Any other questions on that? Hearing none. Any other questions on the 7,000 policy grouping? It also means that you're giving them permission to go through my vehicle. Just say no. And or your vehicles that are sitting out in our parking lot. My vehicle has to be reasonable suspicion. A car reasonable suspicion. You can't just say, "Oh, hey Jared, your time's up. Your time's up in your car. We're going in your car." Reasonable suspicion.

115Correct. Reasonable sus. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify. Okay. Hearing no other concerns about the 7,000 group of mule policies. We move on to um the uh timeline and it looks like uh we had I don't know if we updated this initially, but um we are through some of the two. Did we get through all the 2000s already? No, we're not through all of them. Not through. That's what I said. We're uh we are uh finishing up the the uh 7000s. Um and uh we are getting into the 2000s and 5000s. Okay. Yeah, we knocked off a chunk of 5000s. Yeah. So, So, thank you for the team diligence on getting through all loans. All right. Any other we are really trying to get back on track for February. That's why I said some

116of the 5,000s are ahead, but on the the 2,000s are behind. We're getting there. Okay. We're at the point where we're dividing and conquering as you can tell by the total number that was given to you tonight. Excellent. Almost 50 of them. Appreciate that. Appreciate that. Is this a regular month or odd month? This is our odd month. So, next month is a regular schedule. I'm committee meeting. So, yeah. Um, between now and then, you know, we'll have a full month. I think so. With a lot of things scheduled in. Yes. Yeah. Look at like Mhm. Do you do you anticipate us having a meet in March? Probably. Is that something we should start working on now? Just scheduling. Yeah. I just I uh I'm just throwing it out there because I know how it

117can get and then all a sudden we're scrambling trying to figure it out. Maybe just we'll send out dates. I think Okay. one of the particular committee members that had the most conflict is no longer on the committee any longer. Um so we'll we'll get we'll get through it. Um there's nothing during spring break. Everything's on that. Any other items for future planning? Then we're just So your action items our action items to reiterate. Uh we're going to basically parking lot of 2210 2220 and 5780. We are we had we're going to mention make specific mention to uh 5855 and 7530 and minutes for uh the board for particular discussion there was a particular change to uh I don't remember what policy it was but changing armistice to veterans day Um and I think that's

118and the uh first action item was David will send a note to Jared and Craig. Oh yes. Regarding his minute or his notes on the rules of engagement for Yes. next Monday. All right. Did you get Yeah, which I just did. Which you did. All right. Sounds good. Any other? Yeah, you just did. All right, perfect. All right, the meeting. All right, uh time is 7:48. We were able to keep this to less than two hours. Thank goodness.