001Good evening and welcome to the Akan public schools policy committee. I am chair Harrison. I am joined by our vice chair Carmea Kelly, our uh member our committee member Dr. Renee Molnar. Also present is member Nathan J. Roast and our president uh Barbara Sykes, President Barbara Sykes with um Superintendent Outley, Attorney David Sepusk, and we have members of the administrative staff in attendance. Um, I will begin by uh asking for a motion to approve the previous minutes meetings, the May 4th, 2026 meeting minutes. >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I. >> Any oppose? >> Previous minutes May 4th have been approved. Um, we have an additional set of minutes. Special Policy Me Committee meeting May 28th. I will entertain a motion to accept those
002minute meetings. >> So moved. >> Those meeting minutes. We have a motion. >> Second >> and a second. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Um we will have our public comment portion. Is there anyone here today for public comment? Seeing no one here for public comment, we will move into our items of discussion. Our first item of discussion is item 3.01, our artificial intelligence uh policy, policy 7540.09. Um we've had extensive discussions on this policy. I will ask Mr. Ruan if he will approach the podium and um we will engage in some conversations with this policy but I believe we have additional language um for this policy um if Mr. Ru the policy is up and I will uh turn this portion over to Dr. Renee Molnar with Mr. Re Director Rean first. >> Hi.
003Good evening, honorable board members. >> Good evening. >> If you could just give us a brief overview of this policy again and where we stand with the policy. >> Uh, sure. Uh, so this is Niola's draft version of 7540.09. 09 um and we did establish a workg groupoup committee uh that went ahead and went through the policy and has made a series of recommendations. >> Okay. Thank you. Um along with those recommendations um there were some discussions as to this particular um policy. The update is mandated by House Bill 96 the bianual budget. The time frame for House Bill 96 was u July 1st, 2026. We've had numerous discussions on if the policy that we currently have meets the legal threshold. We we know that it has to be updated. The the current policy, does
004it meet the legal threshold? We've had um a series of discussions concerning that particular issue. Um, and I believe that we've come to an understanding that this policy must be updated by July 1st, 2026. Am I correct? >> That is our recommendation. >> Well, well, I I I want to just be clear between the recommendation and what the law is stating. So, the law is stating July 1st, 2026. >> That's correct. if you have anything, >> Dr. Muller. >> Thank you, member Harrison. Yes, I uh since our last meeting spoke with our Neola representative and our Neola representative said that we do have an AI policy on file. The AI policy is not as robust as the one that the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce created because there's two parts of the state law
005that the Ohio Department of Education Workforce shall create a policy and they did a model policy and they did and that districts uh must the district shall adopt a policy which may be the model policy. So we do have a policy it is not as robust as the model policy. It is strongly recommended that we work towards the model policy and that as long as we begin discussions to improve our policy prior to July 1, we should put forth um concerted effort to improve our policies to meet all of the recommendations in the model policy. And uh he also said that we should uh keep this uh up in our minds because we have not that's from the state. We have not received the federal guidelines yet and we should anticipate the federal recommendations coming
006this fall. And so whatever we're passing through now, he said, we should know that this is still fluid because we should look forward to examining this again in the fall um when or whenever we receive the federal recommendations for our AI. So with that I I think we shall continue to work, grow, expand, improve and review because we will keep as as he recommended to us. We will keep improving as AI continues to expand also. >> So we we have some additional language. I'm sorry. Um we have some additional language. Um, I I'm going to really say that we will have a policy an an updated policy by July 1st, 2026. Um, this this policy will be updated by July 2026. you have received some um additional information um that was emailed out um this
007afternoon. Um I would expect that we would be um this policy would be presented to the rules committee on June 15th. Um and I would ask that you will look at the information. Um and again we have not had time to go over the information. And I was been in conversation with um member M member Molnar and I sent the information out and I believe that that information along with the recommendations um will um bring us to where we need to be July 1st with understanding that when the new guidelines come out in the fall that we will have to revisit this policy. But we certainly will meet the minimum requirements with the understanding that we have we still have work to do. We have surveys out with our teachers. We want to get input
008from the parents. policy takes a long time to create and so the robust portion of this policy will have to be um done over a period of time in collaborations. But we will have the minimum requirements um from House Bill 96 and I expect that to be presented at the June 15th meeting, the June 15th rule committee. Do we have any questions? >> Well, I'm really not sure about what what the the issue is. Uh so we have as elected board members, we have a statutory duty of care. So once the state legislators have passed the law, we have that statutory responsibility of care to make sure that we follow the law. So, uh, you know, I'm looking at 754.09 and and it's really the cyber security program for the state of Ohio is what
009we're talking about. And we call, we keep calling it artificial intelligence, but it's really was the cyber security program. So, I just want to make sure that as a body that we have the responsibility to make sure that we passing and recognizing the law. So are you saying that we are going to implement the nei recommendations or are you saying that the rules committee will receive something different on the 15th or do you not know? Are you not sure? Yeah, the the we will have the Nola recommendations >> and with the Niola recommendations there's been additional language um and so that additional language has not been vetted by our legal counsel has not been vetted by Mr. Ruan um and that information with the information we received from Niola with the information that um you
010know I had conversations with the superintendent today I had conversations with uh Mr. Ruan today. So we will have the information that is presented by Niola, the recommended information, the recommended requirements that Niola and the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce Development. We will have that information. Dr. Molner, >> thank you. I think to uh clarify any confusion. So this is the nola policy but there are other items that are being uh recommended to this policy because this policy is a lot of statement of principles but there is not a lot of information to guide governance decisions um or even um the administrative procedures. So there is language that has been that is proposed by the board for administration to review and add to this policy. So it would be this policy and more robust
011added to this policy. Um is a conversation for the 15th that would hopefully come to rules. Is that accurate >> in part? The the conversation needs to happen before the 15th. >> Yes. >> Um so, [clears throat] uh it it needs to be to the rules committee um prior to I'm sorry, I just had my calendar up. Um so the rules committee is the 15th. I would uh imagine that we would have this policy um completed on the 11th. and um so that the rules committee can take a look at it before the rules committee on Monday the 15th. >> Yes, Dr. >> So to clarify as a committee member when should I expect to receive the draft that we will review? Am I receiving the draft on the 11th? So, >> sorry. >> Um,
012we're we're incorporating um your suggested language um with the approval of our legal counsel and Mr. Ruian. So, that was out today. That has come out to the members today. That has went out to the administration today based on the conversations of last Thursday, based on the conversations with Niola. Um so um we we have not had adequate time to review that information. Um so you know again I would think that we would have this issue any we would clear all legal hurdles and make sure that we are meeting the requirements set out by house bill 96 by the 11th of June. >> Yes. to so does that mean the committee will receive an updated draft or >> the committee should be working on it. >> Okay. >> The committee should be as we are
013now the committee should be working on this. We should reconvene to move this to the rules committee on the 11th. And so if we have issues of with this policy, um this policy should be ready to move to rules on the 11th 10 days. We we've received the additional information. It's ours as as a committee, as the administration, we'll work together to accept, reject. If there is no common language, then we will accept Diola's recommendations and move Nola's recommendation to the rules committee. >> One last question, >> Dr. Muller. >> Thank you. One last question to Director Ruian. You did say that the AI workg group has met on this. May I ask who the board representative of the AI work group is? I believe that was yourself, Dr. Molinar. And um I apologize for,
014you know, we had sent several emails encouraging participation. Um but we did have a diverse group of stakeholders. We had instructional coaches, counselors, library media specialists, uh representatives from special education and technology services uh did make up the committee. And so, um, ultimately, we feel like the policy is pretty solid and we're certainly open to feedback and suggestions. We did receive, uh, your recommendations and can get right back to you tomorrow. >> So, so the work group never met as a group together. >> We met multiple times. Multiple times. >> And I was part of that group. >> Well, you were, you were the board member assigned to work with the AI group. That was I'm I don't mean to interrupt you. That was member Kelly. >> Member Kelly was digital content and accessibility. >>
015Well, that may be where the hangup is. So, we we will get this done. We we will get this done. You say you'll get back to us tomorrow or Absolutely. >> you'll get back with us tomorrow. Um and this policy if we cannot um come to an understanding this policy will go forward as recommended by Niola um to meet the minimum requirements with the understanding that we do have to um do some more comprehensive work on the policy um to update it. >> Member Kelly. >> Uh thank you President Sykes and Chair Harrison. I've heard I've heard several dates be thrown out. Could we go over those dates for some clarification as it relates to like a timeline we're wanting to we are wanting to create for this policy so we can meet that 15th
016deadline. So I' I've heard the 11th which is th June Thursday June 11th rules is Monday June 15th. This policy has to have time to be reviewed by the rules committee. There's additional language that was brought to the committee today. Um, Dr. Molnar has had conversations with a representative from Neiola. Superintendent Outley has had conversations with a representative from Niola. Out of those conversations, neither uh Mr. Ruan nor attorney Sapusk has had the opportunity to review the the additional language. Um we know that we have a minimum threshold. The minimum threshold um is required to be uh voted on and approved by July 1st 2026. the additional information um has not been reviewed. We need additional time for the rules committee to make sure that before it goes to the full board that we meet
017the minimum on the 11th of June. This policy should be completed with a um draft copy to the chair of the rules committee and the members of the rules committee. So we have 10 days to work on this policy. Mr. Ruan, you said you can get back to us in a couple days. I think that will allow Mr. Sepusk to um Attorney Sepusk to do a legal review. Um and we should be voting this policy to the rules committee and have it in the rules committee by the 11th of June. That will be the timeline and I think we have thoroughly discussed this policy and the timeline. Thank you Chair Harrison. >> Yes ma'am. >> Let me just May I just make this statement? U so I understand you indicated that uh member Mullen and
018I had a conversation with Niola. So let me as the president just be very clear that the president is represent this board and so to go out and to have a conversation with Nola was inappropriate. I don't understand the need for an individual member to do that. Uh so what was the I don't understand the need for that other than confusion because if you have one member calling Neiola, another member calling Neiola, the administration calling Neiola, then what is Niola to think? So I I would just simply say I would hope that the members would respect the role that we all play. And so that was the role of the president. If you felt members felt there was a need to speak to Niola so that the president could come back and give the members
019the information from Niola. I would never think of disrespecting any member by doing what you just indicated a member has done. So is that true? Member Molinar, >> did you do that? >> Yes, I did. >> Well, that is very unfortunate. Okay, thank you. We have the timeline for that um for the artificial intelligence policy 754.09. 09. Um we will move to item 3.02 U policy 9130 public complaints and I will let superintendent outly give us who will lead this discussion. And I know we there's a few of us on this particular committee or this particular policy and it's pretty extensive. >> Well, our lead was um member um Kelly, but if you would like Oh, would I believe um Dr. Chapman was willing to represent both of us if if that's okay with you
020or if you would like to begin and she can tag team with you. >> Uh thank you Superintendent Otley. Um Chair Harrison, may I? >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. um this policy. I I I do want first let me start off by thanking um the other my other teammates with drafting revising revising revising this policy before um today. Uh and that included um a dynamic group of individuals that that were working with Dr. Chapman, Attorney Sepusk, and also our sup uh the superintendent, Superintendent Utley. After today's instructional policy committee, [clears throat] where we heard that there was some uh understanding that some of the language in policy 9130, which is the public complaint policy, did have some areas that we felt like could be separated uh from this policy. and add it to another pol
021another policy that aligns um more with in an appropriate policy which falls under our curriculum. Excuse me. Uh additionally, additionally, excuse me. Um, there were some questions that were brought forth to me regarding some of the items that I have added and I hope that we could um if not now at a later time um kind of discuss the state level assistance for unresolved complaints. Besides that, I think this policy is ready. I am um interested in hearing what Dr. Chapman uh will add to this conversation. But besides that, it is a relief to know that uh there were also some recommendations to pull some of the language from policy 9130 to add to another policy that's much more appropriate than our policy 9130, which is the public complaints policy. Thank you. Dr. Chapman. Good
022evening, Chair Harrison, members of the board, President Sykes, Superintendent, and our general counsel. So, um, we're almost there, uh, with this policy. It is indeed still in draft mode. Uh there were even today some things caught that we wanted to bring to your attention. The first one is the bullet under definitions that says general concern minus the language from attorney subuskig. We wanted to begin this section with the A B C D that follows general concerns, B formal complaints, C appeals to executive directors, and D appeals to the board of education. So that little blurb at the front minus the language in green legal or compliance concerns added by attorney sepus we wanted to remove so that this section would begin with a general concerns attorney sepus matt Mr. chair. >> Yes. >> Could we
023ask uh attorney about that? >> Yes. For the purpose of this conversation, um if you need to reference the the attorney or the superintendent, please reference them and please consider yourself um acknowledged. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Dr. Chapman, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, um if you recall at the last uh time that we were discussing this policy, uh we had put in some language uh more robust language regarding specific ID IDA section 504 title 9. It was very specific and the request was this should be more less technical I think was the phrase. So in in attempting to, you know, uh approach that request, um took out out out that laundry list of specific statutes and civil rights uh areas to simplify that language. So that's just recommended uh adjustment based on some
024of the suggestions. On page two, there's additional language at the top, right above the letter C, appeals to executive directors. You'll see the language, the policy. This policy works alongside and does not replace any grievance procedures in those agreements. Also coming from attorney, >> so I have a question on this. >> Okay. So, are we saying um that this policy applies to staff as well? Is is that the purpose of this the additional language? >> Yeah, that language kind of reaffirms the sent the first sentence in that paragraph uh where it ends and in compliance with provisions of a collective bargaining agreement. Uh, and so we just want to be clear that it works alongside but does not um replace okay >> any of the contract language. >> All right. Thank you. >> Moving down
025to the middle of the page, you'll see that we have added uh based on feedback and recommendations from the board, the complainant shall receive notice of the conference date within three business days. I believe it was previously 10. >> Thank you for that. Going into the next section highlighted here uh under the complainant shall be advised in writing of the board's decision no more than it is blank um because this is related to the board's decision and I did not want to fill in those number of business days following the meeting with our board council. >> Can you give us a reference where you are in in that particular section? >> On page two, third paragraph from the bottom, the complainant shall be advised in writing of the board's decision no more than 15 has
026been stried out >> Mhm. business days following the meeting. We want to defer to board's council on the number of business days that the board shall advise a complainant in writing. So, so my question would be um what and this is a question this is not to get to that day today but the question would be what is reasonable um and we may not agree on it but what from an administration point what is reasonable as you see it. >> Superintendent, do you want to offer? >> Chair Harrison, may I let him answer that question first? >> I'm sorry. >> This is >> member Kelly. >> Go ahead. >> Are you Thank you, chair. At this time, as it pertains to the 15 days that we marked out, is that the question at hand is
027what would we recommend? >> Yes. as I'm sorry. I'm trying to think back to our conversation. [clears throat] >> Well, we don't we don't have to get it today. We I was just looking at >> Let me think. I don't want to make up something. We discussed this and we did not. But Dr. Chapman, I don't think you were there. It was member Kelly and attorney Sepusk and we debated and we left it Blake and I'm trying to even remember in my mind what were we debating about how much time but I know I thought the 15 days um >> yeah I would have to I don't want to speak to that right now Kelly >> thank you chair Harrison and Superintendent you are absolutely correct um the convers conversation was what was an appropriate
028time frame that we felt like this board uh thought was reasonable. Point one was our schedule where we work together or we meet together as a board. We didn't want that to uh fall in the in between that that time frame where we we were not meeting. And also that was part of the reason why we wanted to include or the decision was made to include the community in this this policy. What did they think was appropriate as far as their input on this policy? This was something that we encouraged our community members to be a part of. I recommended and proposed dates that I did share with Chair Harrison. But if it's the dates that is holding this up or that allotted time frame, I if we can get together as soon as possible
029because I don't want us to continue to sit on this policy. >> Thank you, Chair Harrison. >> Thank you. And I'm not I mean this policy we we went from a I'm sorry. Go ahead. Um, super >> I just want to run some thinking by you because and I want to make sure this is um in alignment with our uh policy and and the law and that is it the point that I think we got tied up on is it the board had to make a decision >> and [clears throat] if you have to be a body to do that then I was thinking do we say by the next board meeting and not put days on it, but instead say by a certain time, like when the next time you meet following an executive
030session or that was where my mind was going. I didn't know if we wanted to put days because I wasn't sure on a calendar where the days would fit and if you would have had time to meet to discuss it. >> Thank you, uh, Madam Superintendent. And, and that would be my concern. I I think when we're looking at 15 business days, um I think there has to be some understanding that the board meets um twice a month, you know, so every two weeks the board will meet. Um I'm not exactly sure what goes what's the process of um resolving a complaint. We certainly need time to review whatever we are hearing. then we discuss it um and with the thought that we have other things on the agenda as well. So, um I think
031that this is a u probably a broader discussion for board members and I know we have um President Sykes here today, but I don't think we've had the benefit of um having the president weigh in on a reasonable time because the president and the the president of the board and the superintendent sets the agenda. So, um I think this particular area is probably an uh a more robust conversation. Um and not because we're not getting back to the public in a timely manner, but because of the dynamics of the time of the meetings and the um the time it takes to review the information. Um and the nature of the complaint will dictate um how we're handling it. Um and we know everything we do. we have to have a legal eye on it and
032um the legal eyes are are are cautious not to make a quick decision. So I think that particular one takes some time to coordinate with the leadership of the board with the leadership of administration. So I think we Dr. Chapman. >> Thank you. Um, chair, we also talked about by the time it has gone through a general concern with five days listed there to a formal complaint with another three days uh appealing to executive directors. and that if a complaint actually required an appeal to the board of education that they would have probably and likely attempted to resolve it at times prior to an appeal to the board, not always, but possibly. So that 15 days would seem like an extremely long period of time if I've been working through a process to resolve an
033issue by appealing to the principal, the teacher, the executive director, and now going from the superintendent to the board. So that was part of the consideration as well. >> Okay. And then the only other item uh that member Kelly has already mentioned is that on page three matters regarding instructional materials. We have discussed with Dr. Lash and others that there is policy 2240 controversial issues and that this section regarding public complaints related to curriculum instructional materials could possibly be considered for policy 2240 and that was part of the discussion in the last committee meeting as well. Chair Harrison. >> Okay. Okay. And and and I want to clarify that policy 2240. Um and the name of that policy was um can you give me the name of that policy? >> Controversial issues. So we are
034not moving language to either one policy or the other. We are making sure that the language in policy 9130 is consistent with the language in 2240. >> Why? >> You have a question. Remember Kelly, >> it's it's to my understanding it's it's addressing two different things. >> Dr. Chapman, >> I believe the language is consistent with the process in controversial issues 2240 with the process. >> So, we want to make sure that they align with each other and they're not in conflict with each other. >> Thank you. >> Any questions? Um, Dr. Molar. Thank you, Chair Harrison. Um, I appreciate all the work that has been done on this policy is several pages long. Um I wonder is there I was trying to read through is there somewhere in this policy um about where or
035how uh someone from the community a family member a parent would submit their complaint. >> Dr. Chapman I think it was a section. >> It is listed under D appeals to the board. It is also uh listed under C appeals to executive directors. So, um, a person may submit a, um, complaint via email, telephone, or in person, or at the district office. Are you asking if that needs to be brought forward and included in other places? I I I guess my question is if there was a a form that they would fill out or if they are submitting a narrative. It sounds like maybe a narrative or if if we had a complaint portal. I don't I don't want to open that can, but I was just curious. We do have the email that is
036school's concerns that we're all that we're on. Um the all of the executive directors are on it. I'm on it. Dr. Chapman, are you you are on it as well. So that way it's like a list serve. So whenever someone fills out a concern, that group of people get it. So if it's an elementary, then Mrs. Carter will respond. But if it's a high school, then Mrs. Marcus Karns will respond. If it's a middle school, Mr. Johnson will respond. If it's something that doesn't seem like it would take a, you know, I could address it very quickly, I will respond. So, it is we do have that and we could make we could I thought we said we weren't going to do links because of and maybe um Mr. Ruran Ruion would like to address
037why we said we shouldn't do links. I believe it had something to do with fishing and we did not want for um somebody to copy the link and then it becomes an issue in the district with um a virus, but it doesn't have to be a live link. Maybe we could just put what the address is, the email address, so that they can use it. So, we can add that if that's what the request is. >> So, so I'm hearing a couple things and I know we we've had this conversation. Um we had the common language. So, we we want to make sure that um the forms are not a barrier, but we we may need forms. Um I brought it up before about something in the policy that lets our um parents know that
038if an interpreter is um needed that, you know, the an interpreter can be requested to help fill out the form. So we want to make sure that um we are accessible to all of our families. Um there uh there's a couple of items that um you know we we have discussed the process I I think is um as [clears throat] doc as attorney alluded to um some of it seemed so technical and it it it seems like we've cleaned a lot of that up to make it more user friendly. Um but my quick observation is uh to think of a broader our student base our our parent population um if there is an issue that we need to address or that they need to address um to making sure it's streamlined to make sure that
039um what is required for their complaints. Do we have a proc do it would help to know how are we handling complaints now? >> That that would be helpful. >> So currently principles every day are dealing with concerns raised by their students and their families. When those concerns are felt to be unresolved or there are things that are shared that are not in agreement with a parents choice, interest, feelings about a particular subject. They may call into Penny Pedica pitches the ombbudsman's office. Those concerns are tracked. They are uh recorded by typing in the concerns and they are forwarded to the appropriate person. We track all concerns, the type of concerns, the buildings that they come from. There have been 337 calls made to our district office this year. And so, um, some concerns go
040directly to our elementary, our middle, our secondary director. Some go directly to the superintendent. Some may go to our curriculum support persons or to Dr. Lash. Some may go to our director of security and safety. Some may go to our special education director. It does definitely depend on the nature of the complaint. Those are tracked. They are put into a very rudimentary system. We are exploring with Mr. Ruan's team an option that would allow our families to submit something online that would be forwarded, but we're not there yet. And there is a cost associated with that, of course. So, um, there are multiple ways that a person can lodge a complaint with our district. And I think what the policy could offer is the way our staff should handle them as they are received by
041them both individually at the school level, at the director level. and so that there is a consistent way across our district for handling and receiving calls and concerns from our public. >> Thank you. So, how do we respond once a complaint is received? Are we um acknowledging is there an official acknowledgement that the complaint has been received? Yes, there is an official acknowledgement and that is either a phone call or a visit from Penny because people will come back to lodge another complaint if there isn't a resolution. And so as complaints or concerns are forwarded to the appropriate persons a little time is given about 5 days is given to address and resolve it. The loop then is closed when the ombbudsman calls the parent or public to ensure that they have received a resolution
042and that there are no more concerns. >> Okay. And I don't want to speak to the resolution. I just want to speak to today's Monday. A parent has filed a complaint on a Monday. Is there a reach back to the parent to acknowledge that the complaint has been received? >> Yes, Penny. Does that work? And sometimes those calls are made directly to her. So there's an acknowledgement happening right there. >> Okay. If it's an email, there's an acknowledgement happening right there with that email. If there's a message, there's a call back immediately or as soon as possible. >> Okay. >> Yes. So, so I want to take a little personal privilege here as the chair and say the board receives complaints and if the board I if a parent we are concerned about anything that's
043disruptive to the learning environment. If the board receives a complaint, then we forward the complaint to the superintendent and then the superintendent follows that process. And I just want to make it known that if you go directly to the board, it may add time to a resolution. So the the the the goal of the policy is to give a clear pathway and if you skip a step it may take longer because you have to go back whether it's research whether it's the superintendent has to give it to her staff who has to go back to the originator. Um, and so, uh, I don't want to dissuade anyone, but if you're looking for a resolution, it may once we have the policy in place, it may be a quicker um, avenue towards a resolution with the
044policy in place. Just wanted to um, you skipped us in that complaint process. subtitle code straight to us and um the board will submit the the complaint to the superintendent. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Any questions? >> Uh member Kelly. >> Uh thank you, Chair Harrison, and and thank you, Dr. Chapman. Um again, there was there's been lots of conversation and a lot of work to build this policy. Um in one of the last our last meeting uh with Superintendent Oddley and attorney Sepusk um what we wanted to what we were trying to establish was creating this through the lens of the for the person who would seek out direction when or while filing the complaint. So we want this policy to work for the district, but we also our goal is for this
045policy to serve its community, which was again why there was decision made to make this policy draft live to receive those um ideas or scenarios where community members could come forward and say, "What about this?" or this happened to me and I thought this might have worked best as I was bringing my complaint forward. But there also was conversation um about considering our administrators in the time frame that worked best with them also. So, I did want to acknowledge that because this this this policy should work for all people that will have to come in contact with addressing an a complaint. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions or comments? So, we'll continue to work on this policy. Um I think we have some areas that um we can focus on with the policy timelines.
046Um making sure that we have the language that if um you know if there's a language barrier that we we have something in place to um allow for um our parents, our families to um adequately have representation as far as their native tongue. We want to um continue um to refine the policy and find out um if we're missing anything. Um my my last question is are we represented in this policy? Um is there anything that we have missed or any segment that there seems to be um we need input from? >> Yes. Uh Mr. Mr. Chair, section D. >> Yes. >> Appeals to the board of education >> is an area that I feel we would greatly benefit from board feedback and guidance. Uh that is the section that did not have the number
047of days listed. It had a striketh through for the 15 >> and there may be some other things that board members would like to see in that section on page two. >> Dr. Molner. >> Thank you, Chair Harrison. Yes. Um, and I'm sure this might bring out more conversation, but I do think this is the section that I was asking um, where they're going to submit. And I do think this does outline how they're going to request in writing, but perhaps we can come together as a board and determine where, right? I uh, there have been meetings where I've received a pony envelope at my seat. Is that the Is that the how we want? it was in writing or is there something um that we want for a formal complaint that might be different
048than that? Um so that might uh require more board conversation of the how and where. >> I'm just taking a moment to look at that section. Chair Harrison, while you're reviewing that, uh, the email address that we are encouraging any individual that has a complaint was on a draft of this >> uh, policy. It's no longer on this one. It's not reflected, but that does not mean that it it it can't be added. I believe the reason why we're not seeing it on uh policy 9130 is because there was question if we could provide a live hyperlink to this policy. We received feedback. We were told no that we couldn't uh provide a live hyperlink for uh security purposes. Uh but that we that did not mean that we could not still at least list
049the email address that is um that we're encouraging individuals to forward all of their complaints to. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes. >> May I? Yes. Uh member uh Kelly, the email did exist on a draft, which is uh in part uh one of the downfalls of having so many people editing in the document, but it was it was listed. So, Mr. Chair, I would like to add the school concerns atapslearns.org back to the policy draft. >> All right, Dr. Chapman, we're still in draft form and a and and my suggestion is um that we have a um a lead on this policy. Um member Kelly um Dr. Chapman is um portion um the the the heavy load carrier from the administration. So my my suggestion would be that we would submit any um language to
050one of those two and we all not be in a document editing the document. I think that would make it easier. Um but we should still track what we are saying. Um I'm not sure how many people are editing this document. I try not to get in and edit it. um just make comments on it. But if we cannot have um uh member Kelly and Dr. Chapman or whoever um superintendent outly um designate um that we should limit the number of edits people editing the actual document. Any other questions? Thank you Dr. Chapman. >> Thank you. >> We have um covered um we have other policies, two other policies um or three other policies and we have um talked about the other two. We have timelines for the other two and we have the digital
051accessibility on the hopper. Um on the hopper means that we are currently working in that. So those are the policies that we had for this particular meeting to cover. And if we do not have any other questions or comments, I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion to adjurnn. Um and a second. All in favor? I >> I >> uh we are adjourned at 6:32.