001good evening and welcome everyone sorry we are starting a little bit late um it is 5:40 on the clock um to my left here on April 15th for our legal and contract policy meeting so welcome everybody um first first item of business is uh the previous meeting summary and we have our packets here from our lovely team thank you for these paper packets it makes it so much easier to navigate through here it's good to have it in board Ducks but it's also nice to have on paper so thank you so um behind our agenda the first thing on here is our previous meeting minutes this is of our March 27th special meeting summary so memb Sykes and I um we're there um and Mr uh deot and miss kupar any thing with the minutes
002no Corrections no additions all right thank you member Sykes and so then moving on to policy readings we have our compensation policy listed here as a first reading we're um as a reminder for the the flow of policy in our committee meetings or through our committee meetings the compensation policy was one of the first policies that was brought through this new agenda process um from um a a non-board member uh this is brought from our legal team um and this was to ensure that board members um or it did not appear that board members could get paid more than um legally allowed by Ohio Revised Code and so so the um we had this in Round Table um in our previous meeting and so now the first reading is available as the next item in
003your packet and um as as we had in our discussion um that it's uh with the language up to the statutory amount under section 33113 of Ohio Revised Code um 0.12a actually of Ohio Revised Code and I think this would be great for a lot of reasons especially since we got such a great score in our last [Laughter] auditing so as we continue to review this go ahead thank you so I'll just go over um the changes that were made um really quickly and um nothing really too crazy in here but just makes the language broader so that we don't have to keep revisiting this should the Ohio Revised Code um change in the future so instead of um at any or I'm sorry instead of at each it now says at any to clarify
004um that special meetings and committee meetings will be included under this policy um up to the statutory amount under the revised code instead of um the 50 meetings per year figure um with the I believe the dollar amount was in here as well um so that's been revised so at this point I think the committee we can uh have the opportunity to um move this forward to the board agenda for a second read or back to Roundtable if we feel it warrants any further discussion so member Sykes I will defer to you for a move Direction okay so uh the compensation to a board member for attendance that approve a training programs not to receive 3,000 per board member in a fiscal year that's just for the in attendance at training program is that in
005addition to not to exceed 5,000 that's yeah that's specific to the training problem um the training portion um so this is the training portion here and then the regular compensation is um the paragraph where the changes are made so they're um taken totally separately okay so the first part is just not to so you took the 50 minutes uh the 50 meetings out and just said per Ohio revised code right um I was incorrect when I stated before that the dollar amount um was in there the dollar amounts not but the dollar amount um times this 50 meetings per year was um contradicting what the Ohio Revised Code says so that's why those changes were made there okay okay so but my question is that so we're saying that the amount would be not to
006exceed for the regular board meetings what per the Ohio Revis code and not to exceeded for board members attendance at training programs not to exceed 3,000 that's right that's correct okay so be so the total amount would be not to exceed 8,000 yeah that's kind of correct but this I think that the the compensation is for a totally different things so it's for for attendance for the board it's education um whereas the other the other amount of payment is just for attendance so if we put those two together I could see where it would create some confusion in the language there um so I think keeping them separately at this point is probably a bit clear as far as drafting goes but we can certainly look into rephrasing that if you think that um if
007the committee would like us to um revisit that and look at changing the numbers around to explain them more yeah I I'm I'm thinking the reason why we're doing this is so we can make it clear and that we're not exceeding the amount that the Ohio Revised Code would indicate as relates to what board members are being paid per meeting because I believe the problem was that because we were having more meetings that board members are being paid more than the 5,000 so actually what was incorrect is the 50 meetings figure yeah so um it should have never been 50 meetings um as far as this version of the revised code goes um I'm sure it was correct at a certain point um when this was last looked at um but currently the 50 meetings
008is what makes this incorrect okay because it's the 50 time um 125 is like 6,000 that's not my strong suit um so that figure was incorrect so for that reason we took this out now there are probably boards that aren't as active as this board um who never reached that statutory amount which is why um this kind of a language is I think preferable um comparison to um having a number like that 3,000 but the reason for the differences I think are because this could vary but the 3,000 one will not if that makes sense it does I just want to make sure that we don't exceed the amount that do Ohio bu rised code say in dollar amounts right so if we were to include the dollar amount then you just run the potential
009issue of having to revisit this again um for this section and I guess the same could be said for the $3,000 amount yeah it could be okay well I have um a clarification question on here also because I thought the $5,000 was also the maximum so as I was reading this I thought it was um 3,000 for training so let's say I only attended you know uh two meetings but attended you know $4,000 worth of training that would still be under the $5,000 but you don't get that extra ,000 of training okay I think I need to look into this to clarify too um I think they're two different things I the way I was looking at the Statue um when we initially were going over this was I was taking them as two different
010things but I will look further into it and make sure that this $3,000 amount is not included in the attendance for meetings it was my understanding that it's they're different um we'll um be sure to go through and verify and happy to provide more information at the next meeting that's exactly why we have these discussions so wonderful so we will have compensation um back in round table at our next meeting which um is presently scheduled for I had this written down I promise May 13th so 5:30 on May 13 so we'll have compensation back in round table and with that this was the only policy we had up for first read so we are now moving to Our Round Table discussion section um with our new agenda as I have been um bragging about I
011don't know a better word for it the new genda format um where we're trying to have U more approachable and transparent um and engageable conversations about our policies and um more pragmatic use of our our policy process um the round table section is is the only section within the agenda where we have our discussions um the other sections are usually information and we can move things in and out of discussion so the first um policy that we have on here is section 301 is discussion of policy 5120 but we also have recently passed our committee policy 0155 um and so before we have this discussion on this policy I will ask if we have community members that would like to address the board on this individual policy 5120 and I will repeat this questioning for
012each of the policies in section three uh Madam chair just for clarification did the public get a copy of our agenda so I don't know if he would know what we're talking about yes sorry I do not know I know Pastor Harrison has signed up but I don't know which policy he signed up to speak for sorry it took me maybe an hour to find a policy so I don't know exactly which policy is what okay I have copies I just don't know exactly which I want to speak on the one about the reassignments and so okay 5120 okay then you can stay up because that is this is exactly the time for that and so we are going to do the same three minutes as we do address the board for our regular meetings
013and I will read um the same thing that we say every time before participants will not be permitted to speak on matters related to vendors business matters formal complaints grievances specific student or Student Records Personnel matters and or pending legal matters participants must speak on matters related to the business of the board please keep your comments to 3 minutes or less the board will not respond but will assign through the superintendent the appropriate person for followup thank you um actually this is a this gives me an OP opportunity to talk about a few things but um directly related to this policy these policies and um are the reason um that some of us in the community are upset um and the fact that we switch these policies when it seems to be convenient it seems
014like the policies become the loow hanging fruit that we can change the policy to accommodate what we want to do but this is why we trust the board and this is where our confer comes in if there are issues where the public does not trust the board it's because of policies like these that have been used historically to marginalize communities communities who didn't have the resources to fight the policies schools have been closed because of policies where there was no opportunity for people to come in and speak resources have been reallocated because of policies like these that did not give people the opportunity to come in and fight for the resources that they needed so when you have a policy and it impacts anything you do impacts the community the policy is in place to
015protect our voice and if you take our voice away to change the policy then that becomes Incorrect and what that means to me is you don't value me what that means to me is I can't trust you what that means to me is okay um here we go again and we have a historical a historical presence how much time I got um we have a historical presence that will say when these things are changed then we get left out of the equation I would love to support a levy but I absolutely can't I refuse to support a levy until policies like these are not only put in place but put into practice and so we need to be able to stand on what you say as a board we need to be able to trust
016in what you say and the policies are the only way that we have thank [Music] you thank you and now we will move into our presentation Madam Madam chair may I just say that because it is a committee uh meeting and you tend to be a little bit less formal um May I just make a comment uh instead of referring this to the superintendent uh may I just say to the speaker Madam chair do I have permission to do so uh that uh I agree with you which is why when this policy was changed in order to move the redistricting process alone that's why I made the amendment to refer this back to this committee and why is on the agenda today why we had this special meeting to make sure that we will be
017able to discuss this on the agenda today so that we could place these items back uh in policy uh because I agree totally with you I understand that when we when we violate our own policies that that is where the distrust comes in and uh so I would hope that you would uh appreciate uh that the chair as well as myself are very much interested in making sure that you feel that you can trust us and given what we were faced with um this was the solution as you were here on the spot that we could come up with in order to try and to reassure the public that we don't want to violate our policies that we appreciate the time that it took to come up with this policy and that we want to
018make sure that we correct the situation that we found ourselves in so I would hope that you would give us a chance to do that and that you could believe us when we say we really do want to make sure that we respect our policies and but more importantly that we respect you as a voter and as a citizen within this District that is concerned just as much as we are about our children because we know it is the policy regardless of who's sitting in these chairs that will make the difference and how effective and efficient we are in caring car carrying out the rules and and policies of this District so I apologize for uh where we found ourselves but I hope that you will give us a chance to to correct ourselves and
019I hope you will trust us eventually by the actions that we're taking not just by the words that we're using but our action thank you madam chair thank you member Sykes thank you okay and now we will move on to our presentation um on 5120 thank you thank you madam chair members uh my name is Mike defabo I'm director of Labor Relations and as we discussed at the previous meeting uh the superintendent the administration put forward a revision to 5120 but I think what I'd like to do this evening uh that will help ensure trust in the public is I would like to run us through a historical it's a bit of a different presentation it's more of a historical presentation of where we were at as a district in in 98 up through 22
020Amendment then what Neola is recommending we do and what our proposed uh policy is and before I begin I I in my former life at the city of akan did a lot of procedure and I I may refer to this so I want to be up forward you know upfront with you folks is I've always seen a policy that the anatomy of a policy in my mind is it has to be legal it has to be clear and it has to be functional and functional being that it can whatever is being regulated can be done at an operational level so as I speak I may be looking at those three things is it legal is it clear is it functional and if we meet those three issues I think we're we're on our way to
021a pretty good policy so if we could flip to the first this is the policy that was in effect November 12th of 1998 through October 10th of 2022 and as you can see it's a very short policy and really doesn't contain any language uh that we're going to be confronting tonight but I think it's good for us to all know this was the starting point uh to the 2020 policy can you turn to the next [Music] policy and go on down to thank you so for ease of of the board what we did is we highlighted the provisions we'll be talking about tonight so we're all clear so in 2022 this was put in place and you're all familiar with it this is is what we discussed back in our redistricting reorganization and it added
022quite a bit of subsidence to the 1998 policy and what it did is it added 30 days for a public notice so you'd have public notice and then 30 days you would have to wait before you would have a first read second read and then a third read and what would happen with the first read second read third read is you would have public comment and you'd have comments from the public or the superintendent would be at the schools and you would have folks raising issues and in response revisions to the plan or changes for reorganization were made so then the question became for us for the lawyers is When A change is made to a particular plan to reorganize redistrict do you restart the 30-day notice and that gets into a very interesting legal
023discussion and if the answer is yes you start restart the first read re you know go back to the second read there's another public comment you hear changes does that restart the 30 days so one of the issues that I'm trying to address in my revision later is to hopefully address the public comment component the parental notice also and try to bring those two together to where we don't have the 30-day legal discussion because as you go back to the anatomy of a policy legal clear and and functional and and I think this the difficulty here is Not only was it a legal issue but it it wasn't functional from an operational standpoint because you had to keep having discussions on I want to listen to the public I want to make changes I don't
024want to close this school does that change the purpose and we restart the clock again on a 30 days so can we switch to to the next [Music] one so this is our current policy and what what it states is prior to the board adopting a change of the district's attendance areas the board Andor District shall provide notice of the proposed changes to the parents guardians of current acam public school students of the changes that the board is considering then it provides additional public notice may be provided as determined by the board or District that's our current policy as we sit today if you could go to the [Music] next now this is interesting I I asked to put together this is what niola recommends and if you could Heidi go down to after the
025and could you just real quickly explain Neola for the public for everybody yeah Neola is a subscription based I guess software that we have that recommends the best policies I I guess I would say they recommended changes based on the law that's been passed or what is new and they send out recommendations and then we can select from various options so it's a software-based recommend recommendation on what we can adopt so on Neola wanted to reach out for curiosity and see just where are they at on this whole process and as as we can tell they're they're pretty General as far as the language that they use they give a lot of flexibility and don't put in any you know time periods and first reads and second reads it's very general yeah so I I
026just did that for the board's sake so as you look at the materials as you consider this this is Neola this is the subscription-based company that we use to make sure and ensure that we're using lawful policies okay may I mad chair ask so I I think what we were faced with was that uh we actually had a situation whereby the superintendent along with his administrative staff had already gone out into the community and had several meetings well about 10 meetings already on this topic and and when the change was made was was the qu did the question come about with Robertson is that how we got to this point because um I I can understand why the software would be General because it's in a way that we can um pattern it for our
027particular situation cor for our district as opposed to a district someplace in north dakota that's right yeah thank you member so I was not here when this policy was written um this is a policy that I inherited um before we began the work I asked to see the policy we sent home a letter to All Families in acan public schools in December and then I sent a separate letter to each school who was being impacted I proceeded then to go to each school and meet with those staffs and then I also held um public meetings for parents and the community um which we notified to say that we were having these meetings from the feedback that the families gave us we went back to meet in the the next morning we made appropriate changes based
028on what they were asking sometimes we were able to um do or meet them where they what you know in terms of what they were asking sometimes we were able to do that sometimes we were not able to do that um as the superintendent coming in I inherited redistricting um buildings had already been approved to be closed so we're trying to just get this move it along move the process along the problem was that we had a board member um who questioned whether or not this was the first read or the second read or the third read so I went back to the to the team and I said um to your point Dr um um a member of syes the CH when when when we went to change um stem High School from from
029it going to East to it going to Robinson is where it was questioned well that's a major change so we need to start the process all over again so I went to the attorney and said look this is not a major change but I'm not an attorney so I will follow what your guidance is she then said you know what just to be on the safe side so that because again to your point um Mr deinbo um there were many interpretations there were there were many interpretations around what we were doing and whether or not it was following the policy the policy had never been used this is the first time that the policy was used the policy had been revised but never used so weed used a policy that had never been used in
030its revision many questions as to whether or not we were uh following the policy we did absolutely far more than what the policy even required and what I didn't want was in the revision of the policy for the things that we had done to be put into the policy because I I did what I did because that's the way I'm accustomed to doing it having all of those parent meetings and meeting and I would do it all over again I don't I don't have a problem because I wanted to hear what the parents had to say and what the families had to say that's what dictated some of the moves that we made it was because of the the the team uh going out but also when we were at the east meeting it was
031asked well why can't you guys leave the East where it is and why can't you use um Robinson as a stem school okay that some of our families made that right so the team went out they reviewed they looked at it they came back I said okay I'm I'm okay I'm just simply trying to get this redistricting done something that really and truly could have taken a month maybe a month and a half at the most took us from from December all the way until last month which really I don't think it should have taken us that long but because the attorney was trying to make sure that we were not violating the policy she said I would rather do more than less and leave nothing up to interpretation so that's why you had us
032coming back and forth and back and forth and back and forth because we were simply trying to make sure that we weren't violating the policy but we were also trying to make sure that there was no room left for interpretation to say oh you didn't do this this or that after the board approved we sent home a new notification districtwide letting everyone know what the the redistricting would look like again none none of what we were doing was it required by policy however I feel that our community needed to be aware of all the steps that were being taken and so that's the reason why we did several pieces of communication and that's the reason why when the change was made it was questioned I went to the attorney to make sure that we were
033F because this was a policy that had never been used before so we tried it and we found out that there was some some things that we needed to adjust and so in no way shape form of fashion were we doing anything unethical or were we trying to pull the wool over the community's eyes I don't function that way thank you Mr superintendent Madam chair may I follow up yes so the question that we were faced with and when we found that the item had been pull from the agenda was whether or not we needed to start the process over and do an additional 30 days and if we needed to just notify those families that were affected by their children being moved to Robinson or if we had to do the total Community the
034total District right and remember we had already done the 30day notice in December I do I do remember we just did a second 30-day notice yes so that that was the issue that was the issue and so I think it goes to uh what you're saying was is that 30 days clear if it's functional and if it's legal and and is obvious that the 30 days and how we were to handle the 30 days was not clear correct it it was not clear not clear right and uh Mr superintendent I don't know I think you saying it it wasn't functional it wasn't clear nor was it function nor was it functional so I don't know if it was legal or not but it wasn't functional because it meant starting the 30-day cycle again and and
035in and Advising and informing the total community of acan public schools as opposed to just those individuals that were affected by the move to Robinson we did both but you did end up doing both we did both we notified the whole entire akan public schools and then we notified the schools that were actually impacted so we actually did it twice we did double what we were supposed to do but I wanted to make sure that we had covered all bases but just Madam chairman I follow real quickly but when we passed actually passed the assignment within the district legislation had we done both yes we had done both yes we had sent a letter in December and then we did another one um I'm forgetting my months right before the February February yes so I'm
036not clear then well why did we change the policy if we had done both anyway we didn't change the policy it seems like we did the notification we did we we changed the policy in order to to pass the legislation which is why I referred it back to this committee oh I'm saying I'm I'm sorry yeah I was saying we didn't change any policy but by the by the time so we had already done it in December MH it was February right in order for us to be able to do the bus routing determining determining you know which where kids go to school uh Staffing all these things it would have put us in April uh the end of March would put us so late MH and we just we had already done a letter
037in December we did another one if you were going by the policy um because we again the attorney wanted to make sure that we had lit literally followed the policy to the letter which we did we actually had done more than what the policy required but because of the questions and confusion she wanted to make sure but then when we looked at the timing we wanted to we we then said hey we're actually running out of time we have had multiple Community meetings where parents were able to come and give feedback we had already had two board meetings where they actually were able to provide feedback um it was pulled twice so we really were running out of time just and and for sorry before you go on for clarification because this has brought up
038been brought up a couple times so February 26th was when the second came out and the special board meeting when it was changed was on March 20th so it had been 23 days okay not 30 days that that's correct oh um so so that's why we were asking for I think that's why the recommendation was to see if we could suspend the policy in order to get the work moving because we're working a year in advance so like right now we're working right now for next year yeah and so if we continued to hold it up then it just would have been people would have had to do overtime and stress levels would have been here and so February 26th would have taken us past the March meeting which was on March 25th so 30
039days would have been March 26 and so it was just trying to figure out how what did we need to do in order to get the work done basically so seven seven days was the difference so my Madam chair if I may so actually that is I believe what we should have done just suspend the policy and not change the policy because we could have change suspend the policy just for this particular situation and still have the total policy intact but what we actually did was pass legislation that to that changed the policy so now that's why we're here back here today correct well I I would say um Miss Sykes that the policy um as was written um if we had to do this all over again um I I don't think that the
04030 days should be in there I think it is a hindrance to the administration trying to get the work done what I do think is that um we do need to and that's why I allowed I I did far more meetings than we needed to do because I wanted to hear from our community and our parents um even when they didn't come to certain meetings I held them at another school so that we could maybe thinking that we would get more more parents it was a different set of parents but I was just trying to make sure that we engag the community in this process but the 30 days I I the policy as it is written the the only things that that I'm looking at is the 30 days which um I think is
041a hindrance to us being able to to move the work forward in terms of us sending a letter out to all the families at the very beginning I absolutely have no problems with that in terms of sending a letter to the families that are impacted I have no problems with that I would if I had to do it all over again I'm still going to allow for our families and our our parents and our kids to be engaged and to give voice to this um but it needs to be clear here that when we come and bring the presentation to the board that there is a proposal you're going to make changes but every time you make changes if you go back to starting the square one we are never going to finish the process
042so you can't say every time we bring it that oh you made a change you're going to have to go back and start from square one we will never get we will never finish so I think that that's why our recommendations were to help bring about some clarity to the policy so that it would be clear um and it would be functionable um and that's all we were recommending and trying to do I don't make the decision if we should suspend or if we should whatever that's a recommendation that came from the attorney and so I'm just following what she gave us um which honestly as you look back at the situation all that was going on I can clearly understand some of the behaviors of of why she said to do certain things um
043I would just ask that when we're working on policy um the board approves policy but the board does not implement the policy and if the policy being implemented isn't functionable then it's okay it doesn't mean that someone did something wrong it's okay for us to make adjustments so that it's functionable and we can get the work done in the interim of that um and so that's all I would be asking as this process proceeds that we do make it clear so that our families are not confused we also make it functionable so that we're able to actually get the work done and in the future not take up so much time from from the from our families and the board meetings but be able to actually get this done um redistricting is something that as
044a superintendent I'm going to look at every year I should be I shouldn't be waiting every four years because if something happens next year and I need to and I need to look at that then it's my job to bring it to the board to say hey and make you aware of X Y and Z so that would be all that I will be asking um that you know we do understand that you know we have to be the we are the ones that have to actually implement the these policies and we just we just want it to be something that we can actually do and work with um and in the current state that the policy was it was left up to a lot of interpretation which created an unnecessary um issues that we
045could have resolved honestly if it had just been clear from the very beginning um so thank you Mr superintendent um Dr Robinson um in the sake of time because I know we have a lot more of things to discuss and this is just one of the policies it's our first policy and we're still in the middle of the presentation of this um I know you have I think two more pages after this um can we go that very very quickly and then maybe have three or four questions before we decide we're going to continue this in round table again um at the next meeting absolutely for time so what what we have here and taking in consideration what Dr Robinson just spoke to uh we made a couple of recommended changes first we added annually
046instead of periodically the board shall determine annually the School attendance areas of the district and then we get down to the to the meat of the changes and and really what we tried to do is take in consider consideration of what 2022 had and you know bring and put that in harmony with the functional operations of of this so now what we're going to do is we recommending prior to the board adopting a change in the district's attendance areas the board Andor District shall provide notice of the proposed change to the parents guardians of Current acan public school students and there may be additional public notice now this is the major change the proposed change shall be brought to the board a minimum of two meetings to allow for the public to comment on the
047changes so now unlike our previous the current policy we now are bringing in public comment through having this brought to the board twice and then once it's brought to the board twice then the followup will be go ahead and and pass the change so that is our recommended change to try to bring everyone's concerns together have notice to the public notice to the parents and public comment on any changes or recommended changes thank you Mr defa and at this point I would really like to hear from um the rest of the committee my fellow board members um on these proposed changes before um before I go down my list I really don't have any comment um as I read through the board shall determine annually annually yearly I think that's reasonable and then the two
048meetings um because we meet twice a month anyway so that will be within a 30-day cycle if something is brought into because it's within a month we meet it's the second and the last Monday of every month so that would be a 30 days it still will render that as I understand it so excuse me I didn't have anything additional based off these two are there any other comments on the proposed revisions to 5120 Madam chair I know that you had the public make a statement but I just wondered if if you've have you have any thought on that if if it's if that's appropriate Madam chair if I can do that I I mean this is an informal meeting it's not the formal board meeting and that's the purpose of committee meeting so that
049we can have this back and forth conversation but I still want to to appreciate and in respect the chair I I appreciate the opportunity and and I was at the east meeting at the meeting at East um and I absolutely agree that all of those conditions were met um I was I'm not an attorney with a policy but I can read the policy afterwards and I guess my only concern was the way that policy was changed and so I I I can't speak to this particular policy I was looking at the practice of changing the policies because and i' and I heard it um to facilitate the administration's plan and and that's the part that that concern me so any change of the policy with notice to the public is great my only concern was
050the practice of changing policies to facilitate the agenda on hand thank you thank you and can we put um back up just the proposed change just so it's easier for not for because everyone doesn't have our same print out yes so the mo the most recent proposed change yes thank you madam chair um Mr Harris um based off what you just stated um I completely understand what you're saying because a new board different superintendent possible different agenda I heard your earlier statements about the disenfranchise and how policies have been made to hurt those who are the most disenfranchised my question to you um when you get a moment because when we when the the policy was changed it was changed under um the impression another policy of a state of emergency Emer uh I want
051my wording right I'm going to say a state of emergency right so another it was referenced another policy was referenced in order to do that and I'm wondering to member molnar's point point if for clarity what deems an emergency should should be cleared do you think I I'm just curious as far as your opinion is because if something happens and we have to act um in an instance to make sure that school children are housed in schools or school can go on and and I believe that's why we vote the the board in and that we trust a suspension that that's what we trust that we I I I trust the board members and if you suspend the policy I know it's not changed and I can come to you as individual board members and
052speak to you about it and get a better understanding so I trust a suspension I never trust a change in the middle of a process I completely understood thank you for that clarification and I think um that helps me as a board member Madam chair and other board members because the the sense of urgency when when we convened as a board and with seeking the taking the advice of councel was what we seen that happen but I believe I I don't it may have been U member Sykes who said well why was this what if we had other options then why was this the option selected and at the time it was my understanding that this was the option and so we move forward for the sake of business and for kids not to be
053in a um you know an influx but if we had an option of suspension uh yes Chief of Staff oh I was just going to say the reason why webly to look at the policy because St many questions absolutely around the policy and so we do need to make sure that it's clear and that it's function and yes and to that also the next item in our Round Table discussion is the policy that was used to justify the change in policy versus the suspension in policy and so we can move on to that discussion soon um I do have some comments though on the proposed changes to this policy um does anyone else have comments before I start okay um so I did notice the change the top um from periodically to annually it was
054at 4 years before um I was under the impression I also was not here when the original um policy well not the original but the 20 the one that the one we had this time last year wasn't here when that one was made um that four years was made there but if our Administration feels comfortable with annually then I feel comfortable with annually um instead of I some something that um gave more time um then the next thing in here with these changes um in the highlighted section here it says prior to the board adopting a change to the district's attendance areas the board and or District it used to say the board um and now it has been added in and or District I'm curious if this means the district can communicate without notifying
055the board um I'm I'm curious of the language on that if the board can be left out of this um that would make me very uncomfortable um additionally um another change in this sentence was that shall provide notice of the proposed change to the parents guardians of current students um I do know that when the policy we had was enacted that it was a big topic of discussion that just finding the parents and Guardians would be incredibly difficult in a situation in a district like ours we have a lot of students who um are um in transient situations and also we might have parents who haven't enrolled yet um or they're going to enroll and they would be interested they it would matter to them and we have neighbors that it would matter to them
056we have people who come to our meetings that don't necessarily have students enrolled in the districts but they demonstrate how much this matters to them um so I don't I don't like that we would only notify the parents guardians of current students what it used to say was to the public specifically including notice to parents Guardians so it would go to the full public but we would make special notice Maybe have a meeting in a CLC or something like that um and then um finally the 30 days the 30 days yes that um is where the question lied but just because that's where the question lied I disagree with the fact that eliminating it is the solution um clarifying it is the solution we were at 23 out of 30 days we held a special
057board meeting at 23 out of 30 days we could have just as easily held a special meeting at 30 out of 30 days um and if if the question was does the 30 days restart every single time then we can just put the word first in there 30 days after the first public notice and now we're adding that specificity but we're still giving adequate notice to our community members um another thing that definitely I um I noticed missing that is gone is here it was brought to the board at two meetings so it I see this as a presentation to the board um but there's no um information here on has that presentation changed what has changed since the last time and it um and that's why the second third and final readings in this
058language of the old policy were relevant and that's where there was conflict it was there was conflict because there were changes the question is were these changes major changes but should our community know and be notified that changes have occurred or should we just eliminate it so legally if we make a change we don't want to identify how big of a change it is so these are things that matter to me I don't know if they matter to the committee um but I don't feel comfortable moving this as it's worded exactly I think it still needs some fine tuning what is the will of the board Madam chair I would agree with you that uh the 30 days can remain if we just say 30 days after the first public notice because that still would
059address the superintendent and his administration concern because that says that we are not starting all over again it's just the first no sooner than 30 days after the first public hearing and that would have been all the way back in December if first had been in there and you would not have had that issue and then the change uh would be whether or not it was a significant change and so I I think that some felt that it was a significant change because it was changing uh East to to to Robertson so that was a question whether or not that was a significant change um but still the primary issue was whether or not that change should have taken place uh starting all over again 30 days but with the recommendation of changing it to
06030 days after the first public notice because it really says now that there only will only be one public notice that's what you one public notice that's and that's so the in terms of the um public notice we're we are still well first of all um any superintendent should be paying attention to the attendance zones and whether or not um attendance is low and c I mean that's something you should be doing anyway mhm um and so I don't have an issue with it being annual because that's something that we're going to do in in in anyway and when it comes to um the the the notice uh no we're not going to notify families that we are redistricting and we have not brought that to the board that that isn't something that we would
061that we would be doing so um and when you go back to your previous policy what we're talking about was in the other policy already so we didn't make any changes there um I mean if the board chooses it is the board's pleasure to choose whether or not they want the 30 days in there um all we can do is Rec is is uh recommend um because again the board makes policy but we Implement policy and if the implementation of the policy is why we're sitting here today because the policy was not clear and the attorney wanted to make sure that we just didn't make any mishaps which honestly we did a whole lot of additional work because it kept being questioned well is this the first re and every time when you do a
062proposal you're going to make changes I've never in 20 something years of being in education I've never seen a proposal presented where there has not been changes made to it and if every time we make a change we're going to go back and start all over again we will never finish anything that we attempt to do so you're going to make changes yeah what we did every time we had a meeting we notified those families and all the presentations were kept so they could see the changes that were made and we notified them of that and then when we did the presentation no we perhaps did not have a slide that said these are the changes from the previous one but every time we got up and said it and went over the presentation we
063said these were changes that were made from the previous time so um m superintendent let me just say Madam sit here and go over semantics over and over and over again which is why it took so long to get something done that could have taken a month and it took forever to do because we got well some people got got caught up in words and semantics when the policy was never written by this Administration or the board that I came in on get Madam chair Madam chair let me just say that that that this is the role of a committee this is what we do in committee we go through the semantics we go through the process we go through we go through the tedious things this this is the role of the committee and
064and let me just say I think that we're agreeing with you we're saying okay if you want to change this to annually that's fine change it to annually as opposed to periodically and but I think that what the chair is saying is that if we could just keep the 30 days but we just say 30 days after the first public notice M can you see just adding that in and see how that would work we my only concern I think we'll have to have a legal opinion because I I don't think that's a policy problem I think that is a legal problem and when when you have an interpretation on whether there's been a significant change and the policy states 30 days for a first read I still think we may have legal problems to
065try to eliminate I mean that was part of the problem when I looked at it and like Dr Robinson I was not here when this policy was written but it includ we'll all we'll all just say none of us was here when it was first written so let's go from there we don't have to say that again in analyzing it the troubling part for me to look at it is you have 30 days then you have a first read a second read and the third read I mean we're not passing a a policy so that the first read second read third read is difficult for me in my mind to put together to have a functional policy and Madam chair may I just say that having been in this for 40 years I am very
066I am very surprised to find that when an item is on the agenda that for some reason this board pulled information off of the agenda instead of keeping it on the agenda whether we are voting on it or not because that would be another read that could be the first second read you can have first second reads without actually discussing the item and but it seems to be the practice of this board whereby items are pulled off the agenda if we're not going to vote on it and so that was one of the issues that I had when I came in and saw that it was totally off the agenda the redistricting policy and I don't know how that came about or why that is but I but a legislative process said does not indicate
067that just because we're not discussing the issue that the issue should be pulled off of the agenda so because there is a practice of pulling items off of the agenda and for some reason we seem to think we have to have a clean agenda starting each board meeting and not nothing old remains on the agenda unless we're going then that that was a problem that would have been another read just the just the day that we pulled it off the agenda and you see you you understand what I'm saying I do yeah I would like to add to that um what I liked about having the requirement of multiple reads because this is a resolution was because as the items were being pulled from the agenda it was because they were being modified but it
068was not clear on the agenda that they had been modified and so the I mean I think a discussion on that I agree member Sykes a discussion that would have been more uh fruitful than simply pulling it from the agenda but um the concept of a change versus a significant change if that's where the question is then that's what needs to be fleshed out in the policy that seems like a problem that's going to continue to linger so here's an opportunity for us to insert what we would like to proactively in the future think what might be a change or significant change would going to a different building be consider considered a an example of a significant change and between reads or between presentations at what level of change does the public need to be
069notified that this is not what you saw the last time it was not on the agenda uh Mr defab please I I just just one comment as we're working through this on the committee um I mean I guess it's what is the goal we have to ask ourselves I mean what is the ultimate goal because in my mind what I think the problem that I saw with the 2022 is we're encouraging public participation and if we're encouraging public participation we should be listening and we better be changing I don't think the 2022 does that I I think it's more difficult it sets up a process of the 30 days go through a first read a second read third read if there may be a change we restart so I think we just need to come
070up with something that allows us to listen to the public make a change without it being punitive on restarting the clock so as of sure U can you come to a microphone though please oh yeah I don't [Music] speaking so I was just going to say um it sounds like we need to address if there's changes made with the proposal within the 30 days and then two if in fact we use the word significant then we're going to need to spell out some examples of what significant means because some people may think well we know we had to close we know we're closing Central Hower or we're not going to be using Central how anymore we know that so stem has to go somewhere so is it significant as relates to the building that's being
071used knowing that they're going to have to move you know I mean so we wouldn't need to Define significant if that's being used or is there a way to say if changes are made after the first read then maybe we need to put something in there about we need to be explicit within what those changes are once it's brought back the second time and then even the third time if in fact so we don't have to start over but we're being explicit as it relates to what those changes are within the proposal after hearing from parents and the community thank you and yes that's this is what I'm hearing also it sounds like what we had wasn't perfect what we're seeing isn't perfect but we can add specific language to this to uh possibly bring
072back to the next round table that will hopefully be an improvement or at least another topic of discussion if that sounds good with the committee that's fine with me Madam chair all right thank you we are now moving on um to policy or section 3.02 discussion of policy 0 and 31 legislative this is the policy that was used as justification to um change policy in an Emergen rather than suspend a policy and so in that thank you so much for putting that on the screen um in the third paragraph um it says these bylaws and policies may be adopted or amended at a single meeting of the board and an emergency an emergency shall be defined for purposes of this role as any situation or set of circumstances of which the board has reason to
073believe will close the schools or jeopardize the safety or welfare of the students or employees of the district um and so when this was brought out I brought up concern that I did not believe that I I did not have reason to believe that we were jeopardizing the safety and Welfare of students to change this policy when we could have just set another meeting and left the policy or suspended the policy um so it is my proposal I'm the one who brought this to Round Table um a sample statement that I wrote um is that any Declaration of an emergency necess necessitating the adoption Amendment repeal or suspension of a bylaw or policy must be sanctioned by an affirmative vote by no less than six members of the board prior to a vote on any
074bylaw or policy and so my the re rational of my recommendation for that is you may or may not agree on changing the Poli policy or you may or may not agree on change on having an emergency those are two separate situations and would require um separate action so I I do not have a copy of that because I but yes Madam chair I would just simply say that I believe that that's what this says this already says as a bylaw shall be adopted amended repealed or suspended by an affirmative vote of six members that includes determining that it's an emergency that is what I said at the special meeting but at the special meeting we did not vote that it was an emergency we voted on the policy and I said I asked for
075two separate votes to vote that it is an emergency and then vote to approve the policy it was it was combined into a single vote and so what could have been done in in my opinion was to declare it was an Mery and then have a vote to suspend the policy but instead it was just a movement to change the policy IAD um I think it would I a recommendation of suspension of the policy as I recall was never made BEC I you because had a recommendation to suspend the policy at the time when we were discussing it we could have had free if that was the recommendation of the time I I don't want to rehash it but I'm saying I'm thankful for the knowledge of we could have suspended the policy now we
076know this uh monard at the time that was not recommended and so the board went with what the information that we had which we were given by our legal counil and which we felt was necessary to get the work done had it been a recommendation I don't I mean but it's hindsight now but I don't believe this word would have been unreasonable to just say yeah let's suspend the policy because that would have been so much more easy it would have been easier it would have been more feasible and we could have moved on so that recommendation was not made so I'm confused because it it sounds like it's saying that it was made and I just want to be clear because I'm certain I didn't hear that at the time I remember member Sykes
077specifically saying if there was another option why were we not why was that option not presented to us and that might have been when we came for this second meeting it was not so originally with your no Vote or whatever you're describing now you never mention a suspension because we could have done a suspension of the of the policy that would have made more sense to and um so I just want to be clear on what we're saying because I think as we all want to be clear on these policies and what we're doing moving forward as to our rationale and why we are doing it from this point what we need to do not because this was not mentioned before about a suspension because then we wouldn't be in this state I don't believe
078what well Madam chair I would agree that was the case but you can't vote on something that's not before us so the emergency Clause I think uh what you're saying was not a part of the agenda was not a part of the legislation so if the emergency language was not in there then you can't vote on it as what the emergency language in there so I right I asked if we could vote on this being an emergency okay and so they said that we don't need to and so if we have the policy that we have to not I mean declare a legislative emergency before we move on okay so what would have had to have happened was that an amendment would have needed to have been made uh by um member mol and I
079to add the emergency clause and so yeah the emergency an amendment was not made to add the emergency clause and therefore we could not vote on an emergency Clause if it was not a part of the legislation that was the that that and I I and I remember you we was talking cross and you said something and I think you asked the chair and I think the chair just didn't really quite understand what you was asking for I I made a motion but then no one seconded my motion so then it went nowhere and so what because of everything that's happening so what I what I am saying is I think here um if if we had it where we declared the emergency before we acted on the emergency is what I am proposing here
080and what was the interpretation before was that the action was the Declaration no no we actually had to have would have had to have had the emergency clause in the legislation for it to be declared an emergency cuz CU you because you're not you know you can't vote on something that's not in the legislation and if the emergency clause wasn't in there it wasn't in there so it was not declared an [Music] emergency sure so um I have just a point of clarification um that I wanted to make so when we're talking about this one two three fourth paragraph here where it says bylaw shall be adopted amended repealed Etc I'm not reading that and this might be everyone might understand this already but um for clarity sake I'm not reading that as that being
081just for like the purposes of emergency um measures they're taken separately so to Dr molnar's point it would make sense to add a vote if you wanted to have votes on emergency measures before that third paragraph right you have to you have to actually have the language in the legislation and was not in the legislation so if she said she offered that as an amendment she didn't receive a second so that means it was not passed as an emergency so and so in this round table that's what I'm offering now if the committee thinks it is something we should do if you know if in future situations should the board vote to declare an emergency before the board changes policy in a single meeting based upon an emergency I think a vote to declare an
082emergency beforehand is the best way to deal with this language instead of you know trying to imagine what an emergency might actually constitute that's that's way more difficult you have to declare an emergency right language yeah so I think that that Avenue makes sense any comment Mr no I think it does as well I I mean rather than rewriting what is an emergency putting in to make it clear that you need to vote I think that I think that's a proper reading but if that's going to be the case then we would need to Legal we would need you all to make sure that that language is in there that would be the responsibility of the legal department the legal division to make sure that emergency language is in there if we are asked if
083we are being asked to vote for on something the very first time that it's being read and so I don't know why you why wasn't it included in the language that we voted on that's my would be my question I'm not sure that it wasn't so I don't have it no emergency language was not in the that's that's what m mod and I was trying to do the emergency language was not in that so my proposal and obviously legal team can Spruce it right on up but my proposal is that any Declaration of an emergency necessitating um adoption Amendment repeal or suspension of a baa or policy within a um single meeting uh must be sanctioned by an affirmative vote of no less than six members of the board uh six members of the board
084so to to to declare the emergency so after in that section where it talks about uh maybe adopted or amended in a single meeting of the board in an emergency so for that for that emergency um six members of the board vote I think is what um I don't know if the committee has any other opinions um or we can bring this back to round table at the next meeting or if we think legal can just put their best foot forward on a first read for the next meeting committee how do you feel uh Madam chair I I really don't have any strong objections to that but I would like to hear the opinion from the superintendent if you have any thoughts thank you member Sykes so the reason first first of all I think
085Miss Jackson sort of hit the nail on the head that the board's legal council provided the board with specificity around what should be the proceeding at the board meeting um which was confidential client privilege um there again it was confusion as to what is the emergency um it isn't the superintendent's designation of whether we should suspend policies that's not that's out of my purview to to do that we were just simply following what we were issued but the question and just to be clear what your instructions were to pull the legislation off of the agenda right yes it was recommended that we pull it off um to avoid any confrontation around litigation but at the same time it was preventing that those 30 days from taking place because if it's not on the agenda then
086you cannot count that as part of the 30 days yeah but I mean we we're not we're not the ones that I I understand what you're saying and I can remember that evening we had that conversation I had the conversation with you in the hall because I asked let me see the language and why can't we just suspend the rules why do we have to pull this off of and not deal with it so okay but they the um around this was around in terms of why it was being considered um was because of the welfare of the students so we're not talking about um when we're talking about welfare we're talking about the overarching fact that kids and families have no idea what school they're going to go to we're not able to even
087do what we needed to do which um the work had to be done around the Cropper which was to determine who gets Transportation who does not um we weren't able to determine which schools kids would go to we weren't able to even let our teachers the process to start for transfers we would have run into that so um uh Madam chair Mr superintendent my question was just simply if you had any thought about whether or not we should actually include in the language that uh when we vote on an item the first time time that come before the board when we say that is an emergency that the language should all should actually be there the language that member mullar stated are you referring to the agenda or in the policy the actual legislative policy
0880131 what we're discussing now okay if you had any thoughts on you may not have any thoughts it may not matter to you one way or the other I just want to have your opinion okay that's what I would like to hear your opinion yeah I I I think that when you look at paragraph three the way this current policy was written which it was adopted in 1997 and last revised in 2019 I think that the third paragraph an emergency shall be defined I think that that warrants further discussion in terms of a more explicit way to define what an emergency would be I don't think that we should have to get into this in a policy of examples of what an emergency should be but I think that it should be clear of of
089why because it's the only reason that you give is because you will close schools or jeopardize the safety or welfare so I would think that we probably need to um Define that a little bit more uh so that it's clear and take out all of the um it's not as ambiguous when when it comes to the interpretation of the of the policy but that would be my recommendation so I don't need I didn't know if um any input from me would help to clarify your point um but I think Dr Robinson um it would be helpful to have your input on whether or not you think that a vote to declare something an emergency would be prudent um with regard to this policy [Music] yes all right so um of of the committee is this
090something that we would like to see a revision of in round table or would we like our attorneys to present us a first read Madam chair I think it would be great to have the attorneys present us a first read but I also think it would be good to for the other board members to have an opportunity to read this language also so would you like us to keep it in M CH yes yes all right so we have two for Round Table and it is 7:02 I am sorry but I am also encouraged that we have had such great conversation um next item on our agenda is 303 discussion of um 2260 the racial Equity policy and the comparison um of similar districts okay thank you Heidi so um in preparation for this round
091table we went ahead and looked at um our legal team went ahead and looked at several different school districts in the state um that are similarly situated to um APS those um those schools include um Cleveland Municipal School District Toledo Public School District Youngstown City School District Canton Public School District Columbus City School District Cincinnati public school district and Dayton Public School District of those um there are only three that have um Equity policies that are in place at this time um that we brought forward for you to look at um it's this packet here and actually the um racial Equity policies that you have in front of you there's there's the 22607 um and that one is different a little bit from the um 2 260.05 that you'll see on the board um and
092in the larger packet um but both um policies are important I'm not sure um I think that maybe the changes or recommendation recommended changes um will be to um 22 60.7 the separate policy um just a point of clarification there so the one in the larger packet has a um a number of working definitions um including diversity and education excellence in education inclusing in inclusion in education and equity in education um it's a pretty robust policy that you'll find um in comparison to other school districts especially considering that um many don't have any um and then I will just Briefly summarize the um the other policies that you have in front of you so if you could just scroll down to Columbus Heidi thank you you can keep going down there a little bit that's
093good thank you um so Columbus City School District um has a division of diversity equity and inclusion um and through that division they adopted this non-discrimination um and access to equal education opportunity policy which focuses on diversifying curriculum content staff bias training student access access to learning opportunities um and also District support of uh facility maintenance and unbiased student evaluations and then Heidi if you could scroll down please to um Cincinnati public schools that'll be our last one this policy was implemented in 2016 um the goal of the policy is to create a barrier-free learning environment that can counteract historical impacted impact of bias and discrimination um so you have a copy of that in front of you as well and then um attached is the resolution from Cincinnati public schools as well um to
094um adopt that program um so I wasn't sure um Dr mullar I know that you um I can't remember how this came about specifically but if you wanted to speak to that a little bit that would be great yes I think this came up actually out of our um well several conversations but one of them was in our um board retreat um and it was talking about the supplier Supplier Diversity and minority um business owners and um like our tier 2 um expanding our tier 2 um and how like Amazon is one of our tier 2 andb um and so there was also discussion on like request for proposal I know that there is a situation about like the masonry work at bookle and things like that and so I think that's where the the
095question came I don't know where the answer lies I don't know if an answer lies but I think the question came um in that do we have a policy or you know big p policy or Little P policy either one um what is our policy what is our practice um just to easily communicate to our constituents what we're doing to um grow these and and where that lies in our in our um policies and bylaws and how that compares to what other districts are doing in this space well it appears that we do have a policy and it looks fine to me yes but the for I guess and help me here because I the yes we do have the Supplier Diversity in here and then um the I think the request for proposals was
096the other process we have the policy but you know how do they how how would local community members engage in this and be part of this and um and how does that relate to this policy that might not be a question that we necessarily solve here or is solvable here but I think that's where the question was and so that's where the policy came don't we have a committee that deals with this don't we have a equity committee already yeah um that's all just I don't know if member SE is saying this can defer to the equity committee these specific questions um I do have what since we're on this a legal component I received it and I forward it to the rest to you did you is there way to pull that um is
097there legal implications with Dei now I received the email um about some federal legislation that I was going to run through and feel this is the perfect form because I can talk openly with other board members here Federal legislations regarding Dei um programming um being deemed as uncut can you pull up your the email CU I tried to look it up on my phone but I couldn't but I felt it was very and I just want to address it because I'm sure that those saying that this is being viewed and so for conf conversations had it's almost similar to like remember SE when you said a bullet point for the levy with certain issues like this are you aware of some legislation um regarding um uh de Dei departments and programs within schools uh no
098I'm I'm not aware that there was new legislation um regarding that um that's something that we can um take a look at I am not sure without looking at it how much it will pertain to this wasn't able to send through my phone so I'll send it and we can talk about it later and then it may can be Revisited again even that in the equity committee um meeting however the legal ramifications part because they they have made some legal references as far as our operations with still having that that's why I thought I would bring it up in legal so I'll forward it to you and then we'll go from there thank you thank you and then from what I'm hearing from the committee is that learning about the implementation of the Supplier Diversity
099policy we would like to hear about that process from the equity committee uh no actually my question was why isn't this in the equity committee I don't know why we are looking at this in this committee because it was an implementation of a policy and this is a policy committee and there was a question but so is the equity committee isn't it isn't that a policy committee it's a committee so it's a policy committee yes I'm just wondering I mean this may be the appropriate place for it to be I'm just asking the question since we have a well no I it's appropriate committee shouldn't be there as opposed to here that's that's just because uh the chair um diversity uh Chapman has been working and talking about uh Supplier Diversity so it would be
100best house to get the best uh explanation and the discussion of it through um Equity because all of our policies infused what they say Equity is threaded throughout everything and so being that's they're already doing the work I think that's I mean that's just how I'm understanding what mkes is saying I'm not speaking for her but I don't that's how I'm understanding what she's saying right yeah and I appreciate that but I think I I I'm pretty clear that that I think this should probably be in not be in this committee yeah so and I didn't know with that overlap if this is something that we would bring or or not we who someone a board member might bring to an equity committee or since it's here would this committee request that they bring the
101presentation to the legal committee no I think the presentation should be in equity committee yeah yeah okay so next on the agenda would be so what are we doing with this are we leaving it in this committee are we referring it to another committee what what are we doing sorry referring to the equity committee okay so to clarify then there's no um I mean um Miss Jackson we're happy to um yeah I'll s okay and we'll deal with that separately okay thank you because that can also be in the equity committee then yeah okay um 304 presentation on uh social media policy thank you madam chair and board members um for the sake of time I will try to move through this quickly since we spent so much time on on 5120 rightfully so and
102rightfully so so what I've done here is I I've put together a social media policy one of the things I've looked at is we have a policy on email policy on web sites and viewing websites and uh Mr H Shaw has presented various different types of policies regarding uses of computer and proper use one of the areas we we learned is there's not a social media policy um and I think it's best practice I've looked at Cleveland looked at Columbus I mean they all have a social media policy to some extent so I think it's imperative that that this District uh go ahead and and review and and implement or pass and then have a superintendent Implement you know a social media policy what this does here is really two broad categories one it sets
103up the the administration of APs accounts so there are accounts throughout the entire District District run by various people and what this would do is put our communications director in charge of overseeing all the various social media U networks that are out there and the important part of this is if you could go to the last page is by bringing some sort of you know semblance of of order where our real issue is legally and we're subjected to that is when you have a social media account it's operated by the government we a public entity is you really run into an issue with either going and deleting a comment deleting a person taking somebody off when you're in response so if you are operating bookto High School APS and somebody says something nasty the inclination
104is to go ahead and delete so there's a lot of litigation on that so what I put together if you can go down one more Heidi okay so it didn't include the I put together an exhibit um a as part of this it's called moderation of third-party content on social media and it gives the rules of of the road so to speak in law on when you can delete an account for example contains Prof profane language sensitive personal information encourages legal activ ity promotes Fosters perpetuates discrimination on the basis of age race color creed threatens harasses or is an a personal attack insites or promotes violence defames an individual um contains information that could comprise you know an individual or Public Safety so it really puts the rules of the game down formally through a
105policy for all of those who operate District social media sites the second part and you can go up Heidi police is it also provides what conduct is prohibited you can go down a little bit prohibited conduct when you're operating a district social media site so when you're on it these are the things you cannot do also um as we keep in mind you know legally there are certain things us folks who are public employees cannot do even on our own personal social media when you hold yourself out as a district employee so it really takes those areas one regulates and and brings some sanity to all of the social media networks and prescribes rules for that and then lists rules for operation of District uh social media sites and also certain limited times where we
106as public employees operating our own social media media have to be careful because we could be violating uh certain conduct and ethical considerations so that's what this policy really does in a nutshell uh for your consideration thank you and to the committee do we have any initial questions or comments no it it sounds fine to me I have no questions nor comments all right with this I do have a few questions uh the first question to confirm this would be brand new to APS th this would be brand new Neola has a recommended version um I I just happen to have this version that I also worked on at the city of akan that I think would be helpful here so there is a Neola version that has not been adopted um which was my
107first indication of uh-oh we need to get up to speed on social media so we don't have a social media policy period um and that that would be my first question is how does this social media policy compared to both niola recommendations and once again as we we go back to our our neighbors what what are our neighbors doing in their districts um I would be very curious to see how this would compare to theirs I I we can do that I I would say as far as comparison um they all vary with their own twist they're all most are pretty certain on as far as the addendum that I will make sure that you have they're they're all pretty much following that because that is law that is when you can delete a comment
108or when you shouldn't delete a comment and face liability for First Amendment so they all pretty much are consistent there Columbus you know Cleveland that I looked at um some of them vary as far as what you can and cannot do but I can certainly you know put together some other policies for you if you need it I mean I'm only one but I'm fine with how I read I think it covered a lot of the things that were're that we see ha happening and what what we would excuse me be concerned about additionally though the addendum I would like to see just because that's the litigious part because clearly you would want to get rid of things that are Unbecoming that would be on the school website so we just want to make sure
109that our administrators throughout the buildings that are handling the sites are aware of that correct so they they don't go into the infringement of people's First Amendment rights and things like that right so yeah I'm fine with Ires though yeah I'm I'm curious especially um looking at the difference between like the personal versus the professional accounts I know that a lot of our teachers will share out I'm thinking of um I go to a lot of uh Firestone Theater events and so they did a whole bid to for Harry Potter and they made a whole commercial and they posted the commercial and they shared it out they made it in school they shared it out and then they um they got awarded and that's why they're going to be we're going to be one of
110the first districts in the country to do Harry Potter next year and so I I see the need for things but I'm just curious to see um how this Compares in other District so if it is um okay with the committee I'd love to see this again in round table at our next meeting yes that's fine Madam chair and just for a point of real quick Clarity um that what you just referred would not be part of this policy it's about sharing things that are sexual obscene illegal um you know your big ones discrimination on a raid AG race threatening intimidating harassing inciting violence defamation um so a lot of the areas that aren't protected by the First Amendment so it wouldn't bring take into consideration the issue you raised okay yeah I thought because
111it you know they might be doing it during the school day but it's also part of their job but it isn't explicitly part of their job so it could be it could be um as we learned in 5120 interpreted yeah and and this doesn't cover directly I mean it is referen but it references Mr Hen all brought to the board you know authorized use that's already been passed that deals more with the use of things when you can use it when you can't at school teaching permission so it's not directly this does reference Mr Hall's use procedure obviously so we're not conflicting but it's not directly regulating that all right thank you um and the last um item in Round Table discussion um section 305 policy 10651 regular meetings this was brought about um for
112clarification and so we actually did receive some information recently so I kind of just wanted to run down this and hopefully um it is it is helpful um but the notice of the regular um board meetings um as we mentioned in our um board retreat we at a uh what January 27 board retreat um the we are noticing 48 hours in advance um Regular and committee meetings are posted on the district websites calendar however the district calendar as it has been brought by the community may or may not be um the we we are posting it but I think the Community is asking what is the most efficient way what is the most effective way to receive these because for instance if you go to the calendar now um the our meeting in two days
113our meeting on Thursday is not on there so community members are saying I think I'm going to the wrong place so we are noticing it we are sending out notice but I think individuals want to know where would be the best place for them to receive these notices where where are those notices coming um because the calendar might not be the most um effective place um but these agendas are in board Ducks board Ducks is uh continuously updated um and uh the public does have access to board Ducks another thing on here was in 1B um when it comes to the agenda it says this meeting is a meeting of the Board of Education and public for the purpose of conducting the school district's business and is not to be considered a public Community me
114meeting that is on all agendas uh for the regular meetings and the special meetings that has been on all of the meetings and um the regular and special meetings um we had the seven days on there this is 165c 7 days but that did not have committee meetings so when this policy was first brought to this committee it was brought with the committee's policy we brought them together we discussed them together then we separated them out and we actually voted on committees we passed committees um in the March 25th meeting but to have the agenda out seven days is um here but it might not apply to the committee meetings if that is making sense or does it apply to the committee meetings that's for the for the committee to discuss um and if do
115we want it to apply to committee meetings and do we want to do anything and what should we do to make this easier for the public to access or if we could show I guess how to click on the website and show people where it is I don't know thank you madam chair um I think seven days even for the committee agendas are reasonable because it gives individuals times to look over the agenda so if they need to research or if they come um and they have questions about things additionally if we could pull it up because um it was my understanding that I know I used to go just to the Aram Aram public school board and then it would on this to the right well to on the left side panel it would
116say meetings and it would show you would just click and it would show upcoming meetings and everything would be there just strictly from going to the Aran Public School website is that no longer can someone look that it's not I mean that's that's certainly true on the board docs website um I mean just Acro where shows all our pictures we've got you can I can go up here in a moment but you can see here this is the calendar um that Dr mullinar was referencing um yeah I'm not referencing that though that's what I'm not referencing because she's as I understand Madam chair said that is what the public is saying is not regularly updated and so what I'm referencing if you put in aan public schools used to be a blue background I haven't
117haven't done it so okay and so when you go there then it has board it has is no longer there doesn't have anything this is a I mean I think that you guys just went through a website change um so this might look different I don't know if that's already happened or not where it says Board of Education in the bottom it would be my right the last one yeah so when you click on the board of education here we go okay now to that left side does it not say meetings or okay uh board um board agenda meeting meetings minutes uh policies bylaws so then it will take you I'm assuming yes to board docs so it's easier to just type in acur Public Schools board docs because it'll take you directly to where
118you need to go the agenda is there um the uh meetings are noticed there as well um policies are all on that website too so we'd love board dos um so then that will be because that's in real that's updated more regularly than the calendar yes so the calendar so that that was my question are we recommending the public would that would be the easiest way is to go directly to board dos yeah board docs is probably um the easiest and um the fastest updated um website we also want to address the calendar issue though because if we're going to publicize the calendar then we need to make sure that it's at update and that is accurate so that's something we want to address so I don't want to I want to be clear on
119that CU that's a problem you have a calendar for a reason if I look at a calendar I want it to be accurate and up to date so that's something that we will address um and I'll make sure I'll follow up with that at at the end of this meeting how are you going to address it I'm I'm going to sense I'm going to go straight to the superintendent okay and say just what we said [Laughter] here um and so then with the 7 days notice so technically this is for for regular meetings technically I believe as this reads and I'm going to defer to our attorneys the 7-Day notice is just for an agenda for a regular board meeting and the 7-Day notice is not for a committee meeting and so if we would
120like and if we think it would be valuable um and practical to have a 7-Day notice or anything like that should it be done here or revisit the committee policy that we just uh Revisited I think it would make most sense to probably um accomplish that here um as this reads you know you could go either way over whether or not it includes committee meetings but um you know if you want it included it's always better to have the words there than to just say that well it's broad enough um so adding committee meetings would be fine I do think that um the generally phrase there is really helpful to us especially when we're um unfortunately find ourselves scrambling to add policies last minute um to make sure that they get discussed um so that
121would be my only recommendation is to leave that word generally in there to leave us with a little bit of wiggle room um of course the goal is always to um strive for that s days um but unfortunately sometimes it just doesn't work out that way Madam chair so uh I think this session section is just dealing with regular meetings it's not dealing with committee meetings at all so is there not a section that committee meetings would better fit this is just for our regular board meetings clearly this section yeah you're right um member syes um so I think with that in mind we would have to pull up this and the committee meetings and hold them side by side and see what um because I I do not recall even though we just went
122over committee meetings recently um what that says as to agenda um and notice being posted so do we want to bring 0155 back in to compare this to um at the next meeting to look at uh looking at the agenda for committee meetings Madam chair yes if you want to amend committee meetings then yes we would need to do it on that section as opposed to this section because you're looking just to ad me the seven days right okay all right is there anything else that anyone would like to discuss on this policy yes Madam chair so I brought in the proposed amendment to the bogs of this section for regular meetings I offered an amendment at our last meeting the withdrawals or additions of agenda item shall be made no later than two days
123prior to the regular board meeting I don't see that any place on the agenda my Amendment yeah I apologize it didn't uh make it into um this version of this um that's uh a Miss site from from our end um but we can definitely Redline and put that language in um for the next meeting and then um if the board is comfortable from that I'm and Dr Molar defer to you um we can at that time determine since we've discussed this a couple of times if whether or not that constitute a first reading or not okay and Madam chair I just just just to remind everyone you know I brought this in because of the discussion that we had earlier with the superintendent in that an item was pulled off of the agenda uh the
124same day of the board meeting so my amendment was simply says that that agenda item shall be made uh withdrawals or additions shall be made no later than two days prior to the regular board meeting that's and that would I think could go in fine under section c of regular meetings I have one maybe question if you would consider an exception no that we could maybe craft because here's why sometimes and I won't refer to anybody in particular but sometimes we have a termination and they will to their better judgment flip over to a resignation and that that could be you know in time there there's some operational if there's a way we could maybe have something that's I don't know pinpoint to to an operational need Madame chair committee I would say that yes
125we could it would be suspension of the rules so we would suspend the rules and add that item on but as a as a routine and as a regular practice of the board than withdrawals or additions of agenda items shall be made no later than two days prior to the regular board meeting so that's how you could handle that situation just ask for a suspension of the rules yeah because there's a couple of issues I just didn't know if we could do something that would be particular um because an employment maybe it would be a suspense um because it would still be so for matters of dealing with personal matters or matters of employment a suspension of the rules to remove certain thing employment issues from the agenda would that not be how it would
126it seemed like would fit that it would be a suspension of the rules for matters of employment you looking confused why I do somewhat yeah I'm just trying to I've heard all these different things and I'm trying to put them all into place you know there are certain times by May 1st there not everything lines up really well with our meetings and in the employment sector um and contractually in the CBA so I'm trying to think of a way that gives us the ability to add something you know particular or change something that may be within that window again so a suspension of the rule would not cover that I'm I'm going to get clarification when I leave agenda trust me I'm going to look into this susp this whole term about suspending for so
127how was being explained because just like if we would have done this with the previous uh situation with the changing of policy had we just suspended it it would have saved a lot of headache a lot of time so now we're here member syis gave a recommendation as far as two days you have trepidation and you said because we run into you know can we just do some type of caveat that covers that I'm asking and while legal's here why would a suspension of the rules for that time not cover that like why is this something we're we're thinking long about I'm I'm not a parliamentarian by any stretch of the imagination but I mean as far as an agenda if if I have a a discharge and we need to put things on seven
128days in advance then the individual determines that they're going to resign and L of termination and if I'm inside that 7day or that 20 48 hour window I I would like to change that that to a resignation and not a termination on the agenda so I don't know how a suspension of the rules would would work to allow me to do that oh as I was okay so maybe I'm misunderstanding okay because I was understanding that the suspension of the rule since it says within two days the suspending of that polic of that policy that rule for that moment was suspended and give you allow you the opportunity to do just what you asked sure that's what I'm unless I'm I don't know I'm missing something I just want some flexibility to be able to
129change to change that yeah that's what I it seems to me that ability though or is it not well it would require a vote from the board in advance of taking it off of the agenda in order for it to be taken off the agenda so there would have to be yeah you would have to call a special meeting just to suspend that which if that's the way the committee wants to proceed then that's the way they want to proceed but I can see I disagree with that you would not have to call a special meeting but let me just let me just say I used the two days because in our policy It also says that's when we can add an an uh item that's an emergency we have two days uh to add
130items to the agenda in case of an emergency so that's where the two days came from I just just pull it out of the out of the air yeah so if we're going to if the policy says we can add an item within two days that we declare an emergency then surely if we're going to withdraw or add something that two days should be should be adequate but we can we can continue disc I was just maybe begging for some some mercy from the board on some flexibility well this is the thing Madam chairman this is the thing is that we we are and we are trying to make the public feel that they can trust what we're doing and if we continue to bring items we continue to say one meeting that we're going
131to discuss an item and then when we come to the meeting that item is not even on the agenda so we can't discuss it because it's not even there on the agenda to discuss that's what caus distrust so what happened to that and so we need a pattern a routine that the public can be familiar with to expect us to conduct our business in such a way that they know what to expect as few surprises as possible sure and so that's why I you know my very first meeting it was a surprise and that an item was off the agenda that I had received and that was the varsity tutoring it had been been pulled off the agenda even though as far as I was concerned it was still on the agenda because I didn't
132know to check back an hour or two hours before the meeting started to see what was on the agenda and what had been pulled so I am just trying to bring a routine for what happens with withdrawals or additions to the agenda a regular routine now there are always exceptions and so that's why I'm thinking that with the exception it would be to suspend the rules and that you don't need two days you can still add it on the agenda in less than two days if you find that there is an employment issue that you need to put on the agenda you come and you explain it then I think we would be reasonable to understand that but the rout there should be a routine that the public should expect that we shall not and
133will not withdraw or add items to the agenda within two days of the board meeting that's all this says and and maybe a clarification doesn't implicate maybe it doesn't I mean if it's someone who's terminated and then they say oh no Mike I I want to resign maybe it is just a casual change that doesn't disrupt the rule I was going to say this conversation makes me as as a as a board member and as as a citizen just curious how often would we need or how often would we feel the need to suspend the rules we don't even know how often that might be because we've never um looked at it that closely and if that ends up being something that becomes a problem then that could be signal to revisit yes additionally I
134think it's too and I mentioned this that this is the board it's the board's agenda and since it's the board's agenda the board we have obligation all seven board members to look over this set agenda in advance of the seven days to approve to set before it be I'm sorry before it's publicized we we have an obligation to look over it so that we don't find ourselves pulling things as if I just I don't I have an issue with the pulling of things to because it it it just seems very unprofessional to me nothing I know this has nothing do with you but so I'm really in full support of me what member syes is saying because I too do not like you pop up things are pulled over because a call was made pulled
135off whatever reason um and we're and you can be blindsided cuz I I've learned to check every hour but sometimes my life doesn't allow me to do that and so yeah so with that being said said I just think it needs to be we need to be consistent we need to have standard operating procedures we need to have rules in place and um monar I think you're right when you're saying like how often we're going to have to do this it shouldn't be very often because we should do our due diligence to look over the agenda well in advance before it's publicized we should look over a draft of the agend it's the board's agenda so that's like someone presenting a paper on your behalf or presenting an announcement on your half on your behalf
136and you don't review it collectively and then we can deal with this is not I have an issue with this this sh before the public sees it and it's like well what happened the so if we do that that can manage some of this too I believe vice president Jackson I just want to say thank you so much for that statement because in this meeting just today alone I heard a superintendent clarify and remind us that it's not his agenda and he isn't the one who has pulled things off the agenda he isn't he isn't the one who did that but we have three board members here saying I didn't know it was pulled off so if we don't know and they who does know and I think it is exactly this recommendation member Sykes
137for us to find out who does know because thank you uh vice president it is the board's agenda and we need to um get this done well Madam chair just for clarification the policy does say that the the agenda should be established by the president of the board and the superintendent so it does give the superintendent the authority to work in conjunction with the uh president to settle upon an agenda but that does not mean as as vice president said that uh the board members should not have an opportunity to actually see that agenda and and comment now that is not us getting together because then that will be in violation of Sunshine Law I'm not saying that I'm certainly not saying that but I am saying that we should have an opportunity or look
138at getting everyone together as a work group and to determine what will and what will not go on the agenda so our policy right now says to the superintendent and the and the board president but there is nothing that that would prevent us as a as more members to actually look at the agenda we just have to do proper notification that means let the public not that's what we're doing and let the media know that's what we're doing which I have no objection to whatsoever uh because it does put us in a very award situation when we see things on the agenda for the first thing for the first time or we see things are not on the agenda that we thought was going to be on the agenda for the first time when we
139uh call into order for our former board meeting so uh this is this is my my uh Amendment and uh it's fine if we want to continue to discuss it but uh I I do think it's appropriate I think 2 days is more than enough time for the administration and for this board to determine what should or should not be on the agenda thank you member syon because this is the second time that you have brought up that Amendment um and you already have the language drafted for us um if the legal team would be able to have that in I I'm recommending at our next committee meeting in as a first read if that is the will of the committee that would be my wish all right wonderful okay moving right along um section
140four policy status review so section 401 policies heading to the board for a third and final reading we do not have any policies currently um scheduled for a third and final reading section 402 policies heading the board for a second reading um in our last meeting in our March 18th meeting we were putting um this policy uh 10691 public participation uh uh up to the board for a second meeting um however it did not make it to the agenda March 25th April 11th and it's also not on the agenda for our upcoming meeting um so what do I guess we kind of take some processes uh take advantage of process sometimes uh what do we do to get this policy that the committee has decided is ready for a second meeting into the agenda for
141a second reading so I can um speak to this one um a bit so um as you are all aware I'm on the newer end Heidi is a little bit newer to the organization as well um and I was personally unaware of how that process works like when we're ready to have some something um move forward so I think that there was some lack of communication on our end and that's why it never um made it to the board meeting um and that's totally fine for that to be on us um that being said we will um the next board meeting is this Wednesday is that correct what forain this isn't sorry I don't remember reading that anywhere we need that excep two days after the last we need that exception yeah and and I
142I apologize Dr mullar brought this to my attention read that anyway earlier today so hence the you know bit of like reactionary um behavior on our part so we're doing our best to get it done as soon as possible um it can be added I have no problem in suspending the roof too shady I don't know that's a policy May understanding people operate in understandings but I I don't um that that's accurate because that hasn't been practiced so we not going to go we're not going to go by we're going to read something we're going to read what the policy says and not go by what because people say a lot of stuff right because people operate in the way that they're used to operate and how they do things that's sufficient so we're going
143to read and then we're going to refer to what policy instructs us to how that goes but I'm I feel very confident in saying it's not two days I feel confident in that response so we'll make sure we get you get an accurate answer that's written okay thank you I appreciate it and if it's silent then that means you'll be able to add it as well okay so I I am thankful to this committee I'm thankful to everyone who um spent all of this time with us here today um these are these are important think there's one more section of the agenda that hopefully will be very quick um but um I am hopeful to see that um this policy that the committee moved on March 18th will make it to the April 11th um
144board meeting um policies we have huh May May 11 oh my goodness it that's where we are right now I don't even know what day it is is that our our next meeting is May 11 today is the 15th so it could not be April that is right is April 22nd 1122 it's been a long night April 22nd we're hopeful thank you for the April 22nd um board meeting so it'll be just over um for that um [Music] is that right 26 or 2 22nd I just note that the board meetings are not on the [Music] calendar it's not it's not the board meetings are not on the it say next Monday is the 22nd the 22nd is the next board meeting okay and then because we canel the meeting because of the eclipse so
145they seem closer together because of that yeah we it on that uh that's what it is yeah um and so then policies heading to uh legal committee for a first reading we will only have one policy in for a first reading um at our next legal policy meeting um and that is the one that we just had 106 f one regular meetings uh policies expected for discussion in the next committee meeting will be um compensation assignment within district and legislative if and social media if my notes have me correct that sounds like where we are that's why I like to have this section our little summary here and then new business it's 7:51 I'm so sorry I want to very quickly I have in new business here Levy prep I did attend Levy University on
146March 22nd it was a professional development sponsored by osba and one of the recommendations they gave to all districts is anyone considering a levy look at the policies you have that might be affected for a levy so if we could bring um to the next round table just a list of policies that might be relevant to us and if we do go for a levy and we do um form Levy committees maybe something we can give them by the way these are things that you're going to need to know I um especially considering our clc's and usage of clc's and what can be free and not free I think that would be very useful member SES I would just also recommend Madam chair that we take a look at the state Auditors dues and don'ts
147as it relates to levies and there's a a series of great questions about 22 pages that we could read which I absolutely had aerd thank you thank you uh for that um but definitely if we need to make any amending amending to our policies we need to look at those and review those um immediately um or at least no um if we don't so the next thing on the agenda new business 2340 field and other District sponsored trips thank you um so this is a large priority for uh the superintendent and um his administration because currently there is not um verbage about background checks uh for chaperon for school sponsored events so um it's you know it's obvious how critical of importance that it is to add um some background check language into here to
148make sure that those chaperon go through the same background checks that um other APS employees go through um so that's what we are hoping the change will be um we are planning on WE being the legal team are planning on bringing a redlined version of this to the next committee meeting with the hope that it will with this committee's discretion and approval be able to be something that we can move along relatively quickly to make sure that those chapons have background checks next year yes so uh I I recommend moving this into round table at our next meeting yes Madam chair I would agree thank you um and then um other policies to discuss in new business did anyone have any other new business they would like to bring forward okay so I just have
149two things one um officially 0155 committees bringing committees back into Round Table um at our next meeting um as discussed and then also um as we are starting our public um addressing the board as part of our committee meetings um if we could possibly consider a new statement I think um as I as I read the statement we always read memb SES picked up immediately this statement does not seem to fit this situation for us so I would like to bring that um to our next meeting also ask one little question um it was mentioned for the 0131 legislative that if the emergency language and about voting was worked out it was mentioned that going for a first read was that going to first read or staying in Round Table I uh I think Roundtable
150because I think we thought we wanted the other board members to take a look at that language also so round table yes I think and Ju Just in case we're wondering who's doing um if if you guys could draft that for us also the uh redlines for was 13 131 okay thank you all right with that thank you all very much we're only an hour late on one of the most beautiful days we've had all year it is 7:50 6 and unless there are any objections I will say this meeting is adjourned thank you [Music]