Afternoon. I would like to call to order tonight's meeting of the ISD 191 school board's policy review committee. Uh the date is August 19th, 2025 and the time is 5:00 p.m. I'd like to welcome folks that are joining us in the audience and also at home. Thank you for taking time to learn about our school district. Uh we'll start with policies with changes starting with policy 621 literacy and the read act. Uh Eina Oftall, director of curriculum instruction and assessment is with us. Welcome. Thank you very much. Um the policy 621 uh if you recall was a new policy that was created in alignment with the readact. And so all of the information in that policy relates to read act and literacy instruction. During the last legislative session, there were some changes in definitions um around um some terms that uh many folks had considered vague and so there was some clarity. Um and then there is a large portion of the policy which addresses dual immersion programs, dual language immersion programs, which was some needed changes for school districts that were engaging in those types of instruction. Um uh some of the changes are also legislated in terms of their changes in due dates and some of the permissions that we've been given to uh conduct training internally. >> Great. Thank you very much. Questions or comments committee members? >> Only one very nitpicky kind of comment uh way down in it's in uh section five identification and report. Um in uh paragraph A I think we have too many ands where before the very big wait let's see oh yes um at the very beginning in the first sentence it is um including multilingual learners what I think it should be including multilingual in learners comma students receiving special education services, comma, and students enrolled in. I I think the and between multilingual learners and the students receiving special education services, that and gets cut. >> Otherwise, we got too many ants. >> Yeah. And I think it's because the phrasing from the legislation groups multilingual students and students who are receiving special education services together so much. >> Oh, okay. >> And so I >> So there is a reason for >> I agree that there's too many ants. >> Gotcha. So, it was there for a reason, >> but I believe it's because of the phrasing in the legislation. >> Ah, gotcha. Okay. That they do want to lump those together. Thank you. >> Good catch. >> I just have a quick question also. So, the dual language immersion programs, we're adding that because of the legislative changes even though we do not offer those programs currently. >> That's correct. And so, if we would in the future ever offer that, we would have that that guidance included in our policy. >> All right. Anything else? Oh. All right. We'll have that on first reading, please. Uh, next we will, let me get back to my agenda. Uh, we'll go to policy 418, uh, drug-free workplace, drug-free school with Dr. Belmont. Welcome. >> Thank you. >> Good evening, directors. Um, policy floor 18 is um is kind of one of those policies that interacts with several of our directors. Director Sovine, Director Petrolowski, and Director Oftall. Um, the change proposed by the schoolboard association in response to the 2025 legislative session is around Canada's programming specific for um a member of the tribal medical cannabis program. So, it just reads, "The school district may not refuse to enroll or otherwise penalize a patient or person enrolled in the Minnesota patient registry program or a tribal medical cannabis program as a pupil solely because the patient or person is enrolled in the registry program." And again, the addition of or a tribal medical cannabis program. Then it details um due process obligations that the employer would have if that um person's um oh and also it does it does maintain the language that unless failing to do so would violate federal law or regulations or cause the school to lose a moni monetary or licensing related benefit under federal law or regulations. I did check with director so as well. He said this is um a fairly nonsubstantive change. It just seeks to also include those members. >> Great questions or comments? All right. Uh policy 418 will be on first reading. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh next we move to policy 501, school weapons policy with Dr. Belmont. 501's another one that's been up quite a bit with review committee in recent years. Um this changes that are proposed um from the most recent legislative session involve active shooters. Um we did also just um modernize and make some language more inclusive throughout the policy. Um direct the board's attention to some of the language around active shooters. They've in working with law enforcement, they've broadened the definition of what an active shooter is and then they've um added reporting obligations. So that's detailed in the statute. >> Great questions, comments. >> I mean, again, I think it's kind of half a dozen or sixes. um is why we have the definition of an active shooter incident and an active shooter threat down at the bottom in section 7 instead of up with the rest of the definitions. I mean I I it still gets the information there, but I just found it interesting that you know at the very at the very end those are definitions why they're not up in the definition section. >> Yeah. Was there an intentional reason for >> that? I would have to inquire with the schoolboard association and and did they intend for us to shift that and include it into our definitions. >> I I don't think I think you know it's important that it's there and so I don't think it's necess you know critical as far as one or the other but I just found it interesting that it was down there in section seven instead of three with the rest of the question. I was just wondering if yeah if there was any specific reason why they were put down there. >> I have not received that type of question before and I'm not sure in this context. Um >> look into it and look at it's up to you chair if you want us to deal >> like just approve a formatting shift if we find that it's more appropriate to be in the definition section. I think we can agree that if it's just shifting the that language into definitions, that's fine. If it's determined to leave it as is. >> Okay. We'll get back to you if we're changing content at all. >> Okay. Great. >> All right. >> So, we'll keep uh and I had one question. Sorry, Scott. Did you have any Okay. Um because we just looked at it um the student handbook last Thursday. I'm wondering if we on page 501.24 ex Oh no. Um, do we need to add airsoft to the list of examples? Uh, and I'm trying to find the list of examples. It's up top. What constitutes a >> I see air guns of dangerous weapons. Um >> I would have to >> I thought we had tightly aligned our handbook language with this but we can double check. I see um do you see where it says air guns then pallet guns? >> Yeah. >> So the question is >> it does say air guns. Yeah. >> And I don't I I don't know what a an airsoft is. So, >> I mean, is that an air gun? >> It's a air gun. >> Gotcha. >> If we don't think it's important or if it's already covered, >> an airsoft gun is a type of air gun according to Google. >> Okay. >> I think the question is fair though that we want to make sure we're using the same terminology in the handbook as the policy. So, I can >> look into that. cut. >> My guess is this policy comes from statute and then so that >> yeah like to director Hume's point I don't know if that word soft makes a difference or not but we can look into it. >> Cool. >> They're in parenthesis you know >> you know such as >> just so it's consistent or there are different words floating around that mean the same thing. It's good to include them all I suppose. Uh and then on page 5012 501.2 under four exceptions um there is one additional his or her that we can change to oh they them. Uh let's see if I can find it. Uh in the second line, uh line A, uh under exceptions A, uh have a weapon in his or her possession. >> Yep. It's like a word find. >> Yep. >> Game. Thank you. >> Yep. No problem. >> Found it. >> Uh so that will be >> funny that it's in the same sentence, but they've already caught a couple other >> uh so this will be on first reading. Okay, we'll make that adjustment. We'll make that changed. >> Thank you. Uh, next we go to policy 503, >> student attendance. >> We'll invite Dr. Petroski up for this. She's our attendance. >> She's been inundated with the attendance pilots. >> I can imagine. Yeah. >> 503. So, student attendance. Um, part of what we wanted to share too with the review committee that the technical changes are pretty minimal here with what we're looking at. Um, there's an um, MSBA came out with new guidance about who receives the application of appeal in a excusal situation where the parents advocating and the um, and the and the the office procedures are not allowing for that absence to be excused. they're just naming that it goes to um a school official designated by the principal rather than um a member of the board or the superintendence. So that's um and then um we did uh through the attendance handbook process that team that's been working all summer, Director Petroski and Morgan McDonald have been working with them did suggest that we add language around family vacations. Currently in policy, there is nothing that speaks to family vacations, but it's a reality for our families. We have families who go overseas for personal things, things like that. So, the idea on the table is that family vacations totaling up to five days within the school year could be excused. I if you want to speak to more of that. You know, there was just a lot of conversation that we do have a lot of families that take extended time of vacations and that um and that so the um this would allow families to take 5 days of vacation and miss 5 days of school and then after that there's a conversation about um miss school for family vacations. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Questions or comments? Scott, you >> I'm not sold on the family vacation, but I don't know that I have a question. So, >> we're interested in the discussion. We some of this is in unchartered waters. The pilot schools are looking at new innovative things to do to help improve some of those intend attendance markers and the partnership between homes and schools. This is one that has come up. >> Sure. Remind me when we had our conversations around attendance >> probably in the spring. We talk about the how the state records and tracks >> yes >> attendance or excused absence is recorded any differently than unexcused >> excused unexcused um out of school suspensions they all move towards chronic absenteeism. >> Okay. >> So that is all part of the chronic absentee. So >> so moving it from one bucket to the next doesn't change anything kind of how the state is monitoring. >> Yep. Yep. That was what I was wondering. I think >> Rachel, did you have questions? >> I guess on in that same vein, I do I do have questions. You answered the first one. Why are we putting this in policy? Because it's a new option that school districts are are considering. Um I have concerns about enforcement and tracking. Um you know, is this a one-time vacation? What happens if it's twice? Um is it backtoback? Like say they take two weeks, right? Is it five days and then we get, you know, or maybe within the same month it's two. Um tracking of this and also enforcement. I I hesitate to put it in policy um because while yes, we do have families taking attend taking vacation during the school year. Um we really do want to encourage our students to be in school and and there are other times that families could take vacation. The extended vacations of course will be what they are because then you run the risk depending on how long it is of being dropped. >> So >> yeah, those are all points that I've heard in the discussions even in my limited time with the group. >> A lot of those conversations have come up as well and not um the tracking the vacation tracking is is a little bit easier because it is tracked under vacation and so there's a code. >> Yeah, there's a code for it. So we can track the vacation pretty easily. Um and it just becomes an excused absence. You know, it's just a matter of enforcing is a good question because then does that come down to how do we address that with families? Is that a barrier? Is that a conversation that we just need to bring them to the table and talk about absenteeism or is it that um you know it's it's put in there and anything after 5 days is unexcused, no questions asked. But that's not what the policy says, >> right? Yep. Those but those are the conversations that we've been having. So >> yeah, the Yep. And you asked some questions to uh director Alt about the So this we did try to choose wording that that would be clear that it's up to five days within that school year. So it wouldn't matter if you take them intermittently or >> just five days. and the um and again that to represent the team that's advocating for this right now we don't have clarity or um direction in our schools or consistency around the topic of vacations. So this would be the hope is to add some some language and discussion to it. the they can the parents can always go to that that what I mentioned with the change the the principal or their design to seek additional exceptions. So these are just detailed as some of the exceptions for excusals. It doesn't mean that there's no more recourse for the families and this is a change that we will live with either putting into policy or not. I think it's not going to it's not going to derail everything that we're doing with our attendance works, >> right? >> So, as I'm reading this, so are you >> please? >> So, five days during the school year. So, it's not necessarily consecutive days. It could be three days before MEA and >> two days before spring break or something and that would be the five days that they would have >> during the year. Now, I think what I just heard you say is that after that it's not necessarily unexcused. They could still apply to the principal >> for an exception. >> Is that what you said? >> Yeah. Um application can be made to the truency officer or the school official designated by the principal. >> The principal an extenduating circumstance would be that they need to take two weeks of vacation during the school year, but I'm sure they're I'm sure they happen. Um, yeah. >> I guess I'm not all that thrilled with it, but as a member of the policy committee, um, I don't Rachel, do you have any other comments you'd like to make? >> Yeah. No, I mean, yeah, it's I think it is that pushpull. We really want to be emphasizing attendance and you know and I I think especially you know if if anything I would say you know perhaps enhancing it to be five consecutive days because I mean missing one or two days one semester and two days another semester isn't as as impactful as you know if you miss a whole week and you're then stretching into two weeks in a row. I mean a lot of those concepts and everything if that is something that >> is it gives a little bit more of that flexibility for our families as far as like what was stated you know you have a couple of days before me and a day or two before Christmas and a day or before spring break and all of a sudden you know you're kind of in trouble versus you know two weeks before spring break and you know I mean and you're gone. or something. Um, you know, if it's maybe five consecutive days is something that >> on the other hand, it kind of waters it down. >> Yes. Exactly. >> Yeah. That's >> But that as far as the you know, but does that >> provide some of the um I don't know flexibility or something. I just >> the thing I like about if we're going to have it in there, I like the five days though because otherwise potentially this probably wouldn't happen, but potentially a family could go to town every weekend and say, "Well, it wasn't five consecutive days." >> Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I guess what I struggle with, and I'm fine with it moving forward if the rest of the group is, but is is the policy intended to reflect the reality that we're living in, or is it more aspirational of what do we want our students and families to to be doing? And I think this is kind of getting to the heart of that in my mind is yes, the reality is families are planning vacations during the school year. We know that. Mhm. >> And this policy reflects that reality, which maybe that's fine. >> Um, but also at a time when we spend a lot of time and energy talking about attendance and it continues to be a challenge. Do we want to make it easier for families to miss school? I don't know if this makes it easier, but but now we're codifying it in policy. So that's that's my concern. >> I was that's exactly where my mind was going. And and like you, Scott, I'm I'm not necessarily I'm not interested necessarily in holding this back. I'm not completely sold on the suggestion of making it easier. Um because we as a school district, I mean, our responsibility is to educate the students and to hold people accountable, families and students alike. Reality. Yes. And so um these are this is you could be a part of our attendance too. >> I was just thinking he's had these conversations. >> The current reality though just to put a fine point on it. The current reality is endless excusals of vacations. So this is >> so so currently parents >> because families are are excusing their children when they go on vacation and there's nothing to put a >> a stop on it. >> A level of automaticity with it. So, uh, >> I would say that that's probably one of the main questions that we get asked through this. It's like, well, what because when you think about the different scenarios when we're putting our committees together, we're bringing up experiences that our social workers and our administrators have had in their buildings and this is probably one of the top three things is like what do we do with the families that are on vacation for this that or the other thing you know I but we have left there's a lot of things in policy that if it is a family emergency, if it is anything like that that's excused. Sure. >> You know, but a family vacation is a planned vacation most often. It usually isn't a spur of the moment. And if we're planning correctly, like through the, you know, long um weekends that we have for whatever, if we are able to plan that, then we can be a little bit more sporadic. But I think that m the multiple times that we have students that miss multiple days in a row, they actually do fall further behind with just like one or two days. If we have five days in a row, okay, yep, we met that. Then second quarter we have another five days and then in the spring we have another five days. That's a lot of time and and our students that are you know trying to get their credits and things like that made that's not anything that we can hold them back from because we have nothing here. And so um but I will say in some of our buildings with some of our families that is our reality is that there is multiple. >> So that was really helpful I think. um when this comes before the full board including that information in terms of this is the reality you know we have no way of of you know they're just endless excused absences I think that kind of is a good reminder for for everybody that that that's where we are >> I guess maybe why was it why was the five why five why not three why not seven I mean is there anything you know it it seems like a good a full week >> kind of number. >> Yeah. I I guess I don't know. I think that that was just we talked about five, we talked about 10, but then once you get to 10, now you're beyond that 90% or whatever. So the five was within that 90. And it also if you got a couple sick days, you got a couple things like that, things that come up that also go excused, unexcused, and suspensions go towards that. It doesn't as much. It doesn't go into that chronic absenteeism quite as much. So it gives you a little bit of leeway. And most family vacations are going to be about a week. So, five five school days >> a week. And most families, I would say, probably take that when they've already got some time or one or two days off with President's Day or anything like that or, you know, a professional development day. Students aren't in. That's a great time to plan your vacation. >> And if it's longer than 5 days, the conversation will happen. >> Right. >> Good conversation. Any anything else? >> I have nothing else. Okay, >> thank you. >> Thank you. >> Really appreciate it. >> Uh so this will be first reading please. Uh next we're going to policy 515 uh protection and privacy of pupil records. Staying with Dr. Belmont. >> Okay. Thank you. The board has seen 515 quite a bit too over the last several years with the legislative changes around directory information. Um also added tried to find some more of those um inclusive modernized uh noven clature. Um this change reads a parent's personal contact information must be treated as private data on individuals regardless of whether that contact information was previously designated as a as or treated as design directory information under Minnesota statutes. So that is an additional layer that was put into the last um legislative session um including parents con parents personal contact information. Um I know we've already had a lengthy discussion around student attendance but I would just be curious what the the board the board and uh superintendent Daniels thinks about how we are I am wrestling a little bit with how best to word directory information. Currently we we use the MSBA guidance that just walks us through this is what the federal um law says around directory information. Um here I can direct I can direct you to the exact language. Um sorry one second. [Music] Sorry y'all. I had it. >> It's okay at one point. >> Thank you. I know it was at the beginning. This is a lengthy policy. 5152. So in addition to that change from the MSBA guidance, I was um wondering if the board could ex engage in a little bit of a discussion on how best we could approach. So, I find it a little bit problematic and confusing the way we lay out the federal law of directory information, detail it, and then label state law and how that differs and then kind of at the end just say we follow state law. I'm comfortable with it if you all are comfortable with it. I've also just like combed through a lot of other uh district policies and they essentially like create their own messaging around what's allowed and what's not. leaning heavily on what's in state law. So, >> good question. Thank you. >> Thoughts on including federal versus >> Yes. I thought in in, you know, today's environment, this is good to get some additions in here. >> What was that? >> Just based on today's environment and everything, getting some additional statements and clarification and clarity on on things in here, I thought was good. So yeah, it's that section 3D. How best to share that story through policy if and maybe it's just how we >> ah I see what you're >> shared in student in our student handbook. We just put in what's in the state law. So what our public generally sees is more clear >> thoughts. Scott, >> I I guess I I would think we would in terms of our own directory >> go with whichever one is probably more restrictive. If there's one that has it, it must include this, it shouldn't include that. If we can, you don't want to like So, the two laws basically seem to contradict each other a little bit. A >> little bit. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> What do we do in other cases like that? I guess when state and federal law, like is there a [Music] >> conflict? I mean, council has typically shared with me that state law precedes or takes precedent over federal law. That's my >> that's my thought as well. >> That's what um the attorney shared with um the district attorney shared with me when I asked her about certain aspects, certain concerns um as a result of what was happening at a federal level and she said that typically state law um prevails and overrules what happens at a federal level. That's my answer then. >> So, so I can I can prepare something for our next committee meeting um where it's really just focused in on that >> Yeah. >> state. Would you be >> Yeah, I think that would be great. And I I agree with Rachel. I think um that additional clarification, the additional level makes complete sense and >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. So anything else? >> No. >> All right. Uh so this will be first reading. >> Okay. >> Uh next we move to uh policy 206 um the policy and regulations uh on listening session and this is with Dr. Daniels. >> Good evening directors. I am bringing before you formally um changes to policy 206 especially around our listening session protocols. um making sure that we are the purpose and and goal of these changes are to make sure that we are um acting with efficiency, acting more planfully, actually providing more access by removing impediments or barriers for signing up for public comment or listening sessions and also just creating a positive culture and environment around listening sessions. we just had a robust conversation about changes that would make this um change in protocols or these changes in protocols um palatable and acceptable for the board. And so I'm bringing forth to you all um for further discussion and consideration to move forward with as a first read. >> Great. Thank you very much questions or comment. >> I think this accurately reflects what we talked about last week. So thank you for that. >> Um under point number listening session protocol agenda items section A number two >> individuals should note if their public comment will address something directly related to an agenda item on an upcoming board meeting or a non-aggenda related item. Is that something that we would have as like a checkbox on the online form? or would they when like when would they note >> that that is something on that's on the board agenda >> if the board packet goes live on Monday at noon right >> and they have until that um that Wednesday y at noon to sign up for um a listening session they would could be referring to the board packet to want to speak towards a a particular agenda item that's represented in the board packet. >> And so that would be an opportunity or if they wanted to just discuss, you know, something um that was of deep concern to them just overall occurring in the district, they would have that opportunity as well. So if that is a a request or an ask, that's something that we can um add to the sign up form. >> I just think the way it's worded to me that implies that it would be part of the sign up form. Mhm. >> So, >> well, and I'm although I'm wondering they're going to be putting down what the topic is. >> Mhm. >> We know what the agenda is. We'll know if it's on the agenda. Is this necessary? >> Mhm. I mean, and how many people I I don't know if everybody's actually going and looking at the board agenda to know whether or not, you know, something that they're interested in speaking on is I mean, if we're going to have it, you know, maybe putting, you know, have an option, you know, yes on the agenda, no or unknown, you know, or don't know. >> Um, if we do have it listed, but I mean, if we've got the >> topic, we'll know if it's on the agenda. >> That's fair. Yeah. And I guess does it really matter if they know or not or if it's just a >> coincidence agenda item or not? >> Because it's still going to have the same impact >> if it's an agenda item that night. I mean again I'm I'm cool with having it on there just like say you know having the option of you know like don't know if we if we do have it on the sign up >> for people >> maybe we add that and you know see what happens and >> yes and we can can come back and make revisions if necessary changes >> anything else >> um that a couple of things um you know because I don't have lots of years of history with the listening sessions um but you know with ones that I've been in um >> you know as far as submitting a written copy of a prepared statement in advance of the meeting um that's in number three >> um I'm just wondering if it's just that it would be appreciated to provide you you know, if you're if it's going to be a written prepared statement, you know, having a copy available to give us after making the statement or something. I guess >> I was going to ask >> having before the meeting just seems like if I was someone in the public, I'd be looking at that going, they want to be prepared to counter me or it's it's they're there that not, you know, having it ahead of time. It's it it I don't know I >> which is not anything that we would do would be able to do in a listening session. >> Right. Right. Exactly. But it gives the impression of they're wanting to be um I I don't know. It just doesn't seem it would feel intimidating >> to me or that there is an effort to keep me from maybe or or stop me from speaking if they don't like what I had in my prepared statement, >> right? >> You know, for somebody that hasn't been to a listening session or doesn't really know the protocol, I I would see that as intimidating. And I would say >> what does frequently happen and it happened as recently as Thursday, >> right? >> Where people bring a written statement and then they turn it in, >> right? And that I love like and maybe that's maybe we can rephrase the word statement that speakers may be asked to submit a written copy of their prepared statement >> at the meeting at the conclusion of the meeting or at the yeah something like that. Mhm. >> We get it cuz I do think it's helpful if somebody's taking the time to write a three-page summary of what they want to say. It's helpful for us to have that have a copy of that if there is followup that the superintendent of the board >> needs to do. >> Right. And to kind of have, you know, have something along with that. it, you know, that we may ask because it is helpful, you know, >> to submit, you know, have a copy of a prepared written statement to be able to submit after presenting >> your information um >> at the meeting. >> And I think in terms of policy reflecting practice, um that's kind of what we're talking about, right? That um >> it it's it's two it's a two-way street. They may be asked and they may choose >> to share like we may ask. I think it might be more welcoming to say speakers may choose. >> I was just going to suggest something like that. Yeah. >> Yes. If you would like to submit >> speakers may submit a written copy of their prepared statement ahead after we appreciate being able to have a copy at the meeting after the conclusion or something. Yeah. So then uh speakers may >> submit >> submit a written copy of their prepared statement following their state following their the speakings after the listening session. >> We can work submit it. >> I captured speakers may submit a written copy of their prepared statement at the conclusion of the meeting. >> Mhm. And that's exactly what happened this past Thursday. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> About this very topic. Mhm. >> Exactly. Because they had looked at the agenda online. >> Exactly. And it was one of two. >> Both did not submit their written statement, but the one who had written a statement, >> right, >> and read it cuz not everybody has something that's preparing. I want to just make sure that you can still talk. You don't have to prepare something and draw something and >> have it submitted. And you know, we still want to hear from you. >> And phones. Some people are reading their phones. >> Yeah. Right. Yeah. Mhm. Um and I guess the the other thing was asking as far as selecting one person to speak the sometimes it's coordinated um and people are there you know and know each other talking about the same topic but other times I mean they may not it may not this whole thing of one person may be asked to you that you may be asked to select a representative >> right I I It >> it typically doesn't come up unless there are a lot like >> right >> once every couple of years when we have like 500 teachers here when during contract negotiations and obviously we don't have time for all 500 of them to speak. >> Yes. >> So a select number that they've kind of identified would be the ones that would speak until time runs out essentially. >> Right. And and that's where I wonder if we should be putting if there's enough, you know, due to time constraints, you know, in a situation time. does say that in the guidelines that we read at the beginning, but I'm not sure >> because it >> it doesn't happen all that often. But having this in policy as clearly as it is >> and I don't I can't remember the last time that we've actually done that. But it's nice to have that to to fall back on when we have >> it. Definitely. I mean, I think there needed to be something there. >> We don't need to explain ourselves. I know there was a meeting last year last spring like spring of 24 when I had the listening session and we had we did have the hundreds of teachers here and I had to have my stop my watch buzzing like I think they got 60 seconds or something each speaker maybe 90 seconds so >> and there was another one I definitely know of yeah I mean there'll be times when there'll be enough people but just that I don't know and and maybe it's not necessary as far as but this is not >> typical where it's necessary, >> right? Like last week, we had two people who wanted to talk about the listening session. We had only two speakers, so it was fine. So sometimes it's fine, >> right? But you know, it's okay if you've got four people speaking on the same subject, >> you know, >> right? As long >> all four will still be able to talk, >> right? As long as they've as long as they've signed up, >> right? >> To you know, the process is expecting people to sign up in advance. And so as long as they've signed up in advance, >> yeah, >> we wouldn't stop them from speaking. is just just trying to create efficiencies and be more purposeful and planful and who is coming to speak also in respect and being courteous in in consideration of your time just in case someone does not show up and you all are here. So it's all around you. It was just is there some clarity around when we may ask for one representative to speak on behalf of >> you know as far as I mean what how many is multiple >> you know I guess and maybe that's not necessary >> I think if we if we make it more fine-tuned you want to keep policy broad >> right >> and sometimes even if >> that's fine >> I mean this wasn't exactly well a little bit the two people that wanted to talk about the listening session last we had different things they wanted to talk about. So even if they have the same big topic, >> they might have different specific things that they want to to talk about. So it's not even that's why I would be, you know, as someone going, well, how do I know that this other person that wants to talk on the same topic is going to be saying the things that I want? And so I look at that like, is it, you know, am I? Most of the time people will self- select out if that's like I've had other listening sessions where somebody says well they said what I was going to say so I don't need to speak now. So people don't want to waste their time anymore than they want to waste ours >> and and when it is the you know when we do have a listening session where we have a large group like the teachers >> they do a really nice job of um in the last couple times that I can recall in terms of covering different topics. Granted the the broad umbrella topic is the same but there are different aspects of it that are shared and and >> well absolutely I mean I think some place like you know the the the tutorial community the teachers you know they're organized they know what the listening session rules are they they know to you know they're they're going to they probably will have nominated people to speak because you know they know what the time constraints are and everything. It's it's the people who don't come to these frequently or don't know that that was my concern is not not the really organized groups. >> It's um >> Yeah. And so fine. Yeah. No problem. >> I had one other thing that's not related to a proposed change to the policy, but I wanted to bring up maybe it's something that officers could talk about with Dr. Daniels or we could talk about in our next workshop work session. Um and that's the report that comes after the listening session. >> Um and the policy is a report summarizes the listening session report summarizing the listening session will be given and distributed to board members via the consent agenda at a future meeting. >> Yes, that happens, but it's typically Jane Smith spoke about the listening session policy. Um and there's not really the kind of the any depth or meat to it. And we don't have anybody there who's I mean the superintendent and the board members who are there can take notes. Um so like creating a more robust report might be something that was difficult but I think it's a conversation worth at least considering. >> Dr. Dr. Daniels, I think we discussed this recently and you shared, maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but I I seem to remember that there's, you know, legal counselss um legal counsel gave us guidance >> in terms of >> um and I can't remember the details, but >> Right. Right. But >> Right. And and I think that that was one of the requests and the concerns that came out in that particular listen listening session um this past Thursday. um community members wanting to know exactly what was said during the listening sessions versus, you know, Jane Doe spoke about XYZ. Um and in speaking with our um legal counsel, I was advised to be very careful about descriptive summaries because anything that is put in writing can be discoverable and it can, you know, work against us instead of um for us. And so I just think that whatever we choose to do, however we structure it, we need to be wise in how we um do that in order to um protect the the the best interest of the school district. >> That's fair. And a lot of the times I and I suspect others have you go to those listening sessions and they are intended >> to listen >> and to learn and then those things those topics may come up in a future work session or board meeting. It may not come up that night. M >> um but it's certainly something that I always keep in the back of my mind that oh I remember that person spoke about this at topic at a listening session. So that's sometimes I think how those impacts can happen even if it's not on a formal report right >> in detail it it still can continue on >> right >> and have an impact even 6 months or a year later as as things come up >> right and and last Thursday I intentionally I did take notes on the back of the note cards that people um had signed up on and very intentionally during our work session I was able to integrate requests that um those um community members had shared with us around the listening sessions to make sure that we were acknowledging their voices and some of their concerns that were brought forth. Of course, did we were we able to, you know, um accommodate all of the requests within um that they made within the listening session? No. But we did accommodate 90 80% of the requests made. >> Having been at that listening session, I would agree with you. >> Yes. Mhm. >> Well, and I think also there's the opportunity if you know when I see what's on the report, >> if I have a question about >> or I'm curious about what was discussed, >> we as individual board members can can discuss that with Dr. Daniels or Dr. Belmont, you know, when as a >> I've done that also. Yeah, definitely. >> And we also made it very clear that my door is open and so if people want to discuss things further with me, they have that opportunity as well. And sometimes things that come up at the listening session are not necessarily things that are for board action. Sometimes they're things that the superintendent would follow up on. We've I've definitely been at listening sessions where that's been the case. So in those cases, maybe I'd ask you about it on our next one-on-one or something, but it's not something that I would expect would necessarily >> come to the board, right, just because it was brought up at a listening session, >> right? >> Yeah. And kind of the the comment about just care around what how in-depth the these go. I mean the listening sessions are public. Anybody can come to them but they're not recorded. They're not I mean that you know as a member of the public I would say you know that's a conversation for me to give to the superintendent and the board versus to be public. And you know would I really want I I want to feel comfortable having that be the listening session versus broadcast it the whole point. Right. and and yeah that even though you know the listening session is public but it's a little different kind of forum. So as far as not going into too much detail. Yeah, makes sense. >> Well, I've said my piece. >> You just reminded me um and I didn't read for this. Is there anywhere in the policy that addresses the media? Not to my knowledge. >> I don't remember reading it. I don't know that there's anything that we can that that would be done to manage media presence. My concern kind of dovetailing Rachel on your comment is, you know, let's say we have a mixed group arrive >> at the listening session. Um, some are aware that the media is going to be there, some are not. >> Right >> now, we do have in policy that recordings would be stopped if there's a concern about, you know, the comfort of this >> barrier to participation. >> Barrier to participation. And maybe that's maybe that's where >> I don't know that we can explicitly say that about the media, though. >> Yeah. >> Well, and I don't know that we I mean, we're not mind readers. We couldn't know if a person, >> you know, stepped down because of, >> you know, they had to leave or, you know, was it the presence of the media? I mean, >> right, >> we're kind of used to it. >> The community might not >> and you know, maybe that's just because it's the media, >> but I don't think we can restrict the media attending. So I think if we maybe if at most maybe we would say something along the lines of members of local speakers should be aware that these are open and it's possible that meet local media >> could attend. That's >> although they can take notes. I mean you don't have to record the conversation. I mean I know I've seen our local reporter Oh yeah, you know scribbling actively >> notes, >> right? >> You still have analog. I don't know. I hadn't thought about it, but you got me thinking about that, Rachel. >> Maybe that's something to look into, Dr. Daniels. I mean, I don't know. Under >> next round, >> I would say under listening sessions a number nine, it says the school board reserves the right to conclude listening session, conclude the listening session in the event that audio or video recordings are being made >> and when such recordings may present a barrier to participation. So that's there. >> That's right. >> Yeah. >> Which isn't necessarily media. It can be, right? But it's not necessarily cuz it could also be that >> Jane Doe brought her cell phone, wants to record, wants to Facebook live the listening session. >> And if it's a parent, I know we talked about this in the past. If it's a parent who's proud that their student is speaking at a listening session, >> they're going to record and that's and that's different. >> That's not a barrier to participation, >> although the kid may wish it was. >> All right. So, I think we're are we good? >> I think we're good. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, so that will be first reading, please. Uh, next, let me get back to my agenda. We're at policies with no changes. Uh, policy 506, student discipline with Dr. Belmont. Thanks for having me back. Um, 506 is, um, on our annual review schedule. It it has been one that's had a lot of um changes in the past, but not recently. Um um my understanding is this the state did have some robust discussions this past session around student discipline, but didn't pass any changes and therefore our schoolboard association were not advocating for any at this time. >> Comments or questions? Um I do have one uh page 506.8 number 22. I think we need to update the policy reference >> internet acceptable use and safety policy and also the cell phone policy >> in light of policy 524. >> Y thanks for noticing that. Um >> I think also adding policy 524 to the reference section. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Um >> Sarah, thank you. >> And then minutia um 506.14 uh C number one uh under disciplinary dismissals prohibited. There's an extra comma. >> Mhm. Between readiness and voluntary. Mhm. >> Interesting word that was once Sarah. I don't >> uh I think this can go on consent even with the change the update of the of the policy. >> Don't think we need to have a discussion about a comma. >> I don't think we need to have a conversation about a comma. No. >> So add the reference uh 524. >> Yes, please. >> Delete that gap. Uh, next policy 602, organization of the school calendar and school day with Dr. Belmont. >> Also, um, policy 602 presenting with no changes at this time. um schoolboard association suggested um just bringing your attention to the fact that the legislature in the 2025 session gave the authority for the 2627 and 2728 school year to the school board to start before Labor Day. Questions or comments? All right. Uh we will put that on consent. And with that uh we can adjourn. Thank you everybody. >> Thank you.