2022-12-01 PPS School Board Policy Committee Meeting

From SunshinePPS Wiki
District Portland Public Schools
Date 2022-12-01
Time 16:00:00
Venue PESC Unspecified
Meeting Type committee
Directors Present missing
Load video
YouTube


Documents / Media

Notices/Agendas

Materials

Minutes

None

Transcripts

Event 1: Board of Education’s Policy Committee - 12/01/2022

00h 00m 00s
hospitals policy committee meeting for December 1st um go ahead and do introductions around the table I'm Haley Lowry and I get to be the chair of policy committee this year hi I'm Michelle to pass a policy Committee Member board member Julie remember and supporting Committee Member Mary Kane senior legal counsel VES and then we have Terry Proctor with us who is our wizard I always feel like you're the you know the Wizard of Oz back there behind the curtain making everything run and then we have Cara Bradshaw who does all the magic of my soundtracks um we're going to begin with the uh compulsory compulsory enrollment age and grade level of entrance policy um we're going to be voting on uh passing this policy out to the full board today um Liz where are we on this policy is Emily going to be here Emily was going to be here um and I think she may still be coming but there haven't been any changes coming out of the last policy committee meeting so the same changes that were discussed are reflected in the red line draft you have she did add a staff report so if yeah any word from her um no is there no questions the committee can act if you'd like to wait if you have questions for her um you know we just um for what it's worth I'm just trying to go through right now we just uh just eight minutes ago got a response from the tag got canceled to the letter yeah um and um and I think you were aware I think she included it in the the report she had there had been a question after or during the last meeting about whether um she had met or was would be meeting with some of the tiger people and she did attend uh meeting I want to say about a month ago and the information that was presented to you in the staff report is what she provided to about the the rationale I think she also if you recall um in her last appearance here she talked about how they pulled it from um tag because it didn't seem an appropriate place for this for this um so it sounds like we do have some questions so let's then wait till Emily's here to maybe fully respond to those there are there are questions I mean Julia do you have I mean um yeah let's let's try to process it right now and I didn't have a chance to go through the 1020 pages thank you the other 120 pages of whatever it was the attachment just a moment let's see why you didn't print out the 120 Pages um that was that I'm pulling up on board books the um was that in four books Julia it was um and then I say we just got the response from Thai guy yeah yeah I'm looking at him I mean I think the basic the basic issue is that what we're hearing from the district is this is not a program that benefits a large number of kids it doesn't um there are Equity issues within the implementation of it and it doesn't seem to be doing what we want it to be doing what we're hearing from the tag folks is um they're they're feeling it that families who do have you know precocious Learners value this program and they'd like to see it continue so we as a board then have to decide policy committee you know are we going to ask staff to look at that or are we going to say we hear that staff has their response around these things so let's wait till Emily gets here okay and then we'll go ahead and I mean I'm I'm fine with it moving out a committee I guess I've also would reserve the right that I want to take time to read through the criminals that were provided I'd say that too I'm really supportive of the staff's recommendation particularly because of the racial inequities that they outlined are the disparities I should say and also have weren't you a great skipper
00h 05m 00s
yeah I remember that I switched kindergarten look where it got me I mean okay so it sounds like we've got some consensus so let's go ahead and take a vote to move this out of committee and to the board and with the copy of that we'll ask have questions for Emily yeah I mean yeah um a I'm supporting the the adoption I'm supporting getting it out into the public comment period yeah the timing too that'll be great okay quickly but we just got an email out today which is why I want time to suffer yeah so we're going to go ahead and vote on uh moving uh policy at first screenshot um 4.10.020-p from the committee to the full board all those in favor please indicate by saying yes yes yes so sorry so we're just we're just recommending our first reading yeah yes okay okay yeah I just want to make sure we're voting to move it out of the committee to the full board for consideration do you have about Julia I said yes okay all right um we'll go ahead and move that then and you all have those notes for Emily great okay next is 5.50.030-p completely policy so this is um the first time we brought these round of changes we are not expecting any action from the committee today this is designed to enhance the evolution of the complaint policy to Endeavor to continue to make it more clear how complaints are filed and which ones go in which path and it's a it's a complex landscape um I think about it in three buckets there's the complaints that have a specifically defined complaint procedure specific to those like Title IX Title II spad you can there are a number of those then you have the division 22 specific topic complaints and then you have other and I want to give Mary and leave some other staff have been working hard to try to make it more uh the structure when you go to the conflict resolution page to try to here's the complaint we'll help you get it in the right place and these uh policy amendments are designed to further clarify and make clear that every every complaint has a home they are they may be different homes depending on the type of complaint and division 22 is its own animal which is again not an intuitive thing to explain it's a very important part of the uh standards compliance through the state of Oregon so I think that's the the TF do you have anything Mary no I think that what we've what we just kind of clarified in the policies that that whatever the complaint is it has there it there is a clear process for it and there's an established timeline by which Community member that whoever will receive a response so that's the it's consistent we wanted to keep it as consistent as possible so it's it's you know within 60 days which is what now are what uh what we have is a timeline for the division 22 complaints so we're I just I had just one comment in reading through the materials and I'm looking for it here but it talked about language access which could be a barrier but I think there's also um I think that might be an instiction where the racial Equity essential Justice lens um absolutely having materials all in English is a barrier but I also thinks that we know that we see white families at disproportionate numbers you know compared to the population that it's not just language it's also understanding and awareness and so I would really hope that and by the way the website looks great the landing page looks great once you get into the click down into the specifics it's a little bit um and there is and there is as you note on the top a translation so you can click on to that you need yes yeah but I think so that's one barrier and there are additional barriers of just people knowing I'm just saying there'll be specific about black families perhaps um other families of color understanding how how to make a complaint how to Advocate future I think you even can that you that you even can make that yeah because everyone knows that that's what I'm saying so it's you know it's great to have a revised policy and it would be really great if everyone knew how to access it
00h 10m 00s
um I I mean I would love to see more families of color complaints overall but a more representative breakdown doesn't make sense yeah because we're getting stuff right initially yes another superintendent and lots of people here was obviously and I want to say it too is to resolve concerns as quickly as possible at the lowest level possible but there needs to be a mechanism that people are not getting resolution and this escalation piece but but but every time we talk about it we want to remind ourselves in the community that it is really important that we have strong resolution conversations in every level resolution better relationships yes concerns do you think part of that should be a novel like informing people that we have a complaints that's what I'm getting at as we've had parent handbooks and that kind of information in the fall how do we get the information out to people that this is an option I think at the back to school nights or at registration of people who register after school starts or if there there should be a way for us to tell all families we're hoping to do that so this is the the revision and the content resolution Pages it is is it beginning it's getting it looks good keep evolving and one of the things that we're also uh moving towards is a kind of a button that's on every school web page you know it's report that can use so so whatever it is it it will then it will centralize it will come to a person a person and we will try to resolve it and again it's looking at it's sometimes it's a complaint sometimes it's a concern sometimes it's I don't know what to do here and and that's the the idea of well bring it to us and we'll figure out who who we think should be the best person to resolve if we can do it at the school building level I just I don't know how I don't know how to and I want to acknowledge that Jonathan oversees the complaint process and is homesick this week he's actually quite under the weather so um Mary and I support provides legal support to that function but I also want to not speaking I have to say that I also think that this is part of a book sorry yes I am Scottish is so embarrassing is telling me okay um so when I first came to PBS 10 years ago it really felt like there was this cultural fear in a lot of places like any complaint or any concern that there were sort of silos and there was sort of this feeling of like um a fear of getting in trouble and I feel like fat especially under Guadalupe Center has really shifted and that there's less fear of recrimination and it's more about Improvement and I think as we see these these changes with the complaint policy and the new landing page and this emphasis on conflict resolution and some of the ways we've changed things I think that's a continued culture shift and I just want to thank you all for being part of the work to change that where you know we are working at the building level and then if the building level doesn't respond it feels like people are more willing to to go up the chain in a way that's constructive rather than fearful so I really appreciate it Nick Jonathan's team also has the rather than feeling like someone's going to get in trouble I feel like it's much more to like how can we help support families that's just I mean I know it's not perfect across the district but that sort of sense I've seen within my own communities so so just flipping up with um Michelle's comments some like framing um that I think should change because when this was originally framed it was that this is like was the formal complaint process for division 22 like right a broader just accept the rules so whether you were actually other types of complaints listed but like here's generally how we're going to approach the process um so if this is going to be with part of the primary focus on division 22 it seems like on the second page before you get to look at small complaints 22. there should just be a brief like framework of like here are the here are the types of complaints there's the hopefully 80 of
00h 15m 00s
them which go to the the conflict resolution they get resolved at the school there's no formal complaints and then there's the very small hopefully of division 22 which would be handled by this and then the one like a category of other complaints because I feel like if I'm I'm trying to think as like as a parent if I'm looking at this I go to it like hey I don't complain about that teacher I you know my son's algebra teacher I look at this and it's like oh but now it's division 2 I don't know what this is so it seems like it would be good to have sort of this funnel of the talk that's like the types of complaints like if you haven't if your son's algebra teacher go to the you know deciding to be in policy I mean I don't think that needs to be in the policy I think that needs to be on the conflict resolution page well it's called the complaint policy so it seemed I guess I what I find what I found frustrating sometimes as a parent is like you're having to go to a whole bunch of different links to get information versus like hey if you have an issue yeah I don't know why our complaint the complaint policy wouldn't have the same sort of like framing up through the different places and then like our very specific um rules and timelines for division 22 and then the you know other Provisions which yep because I just don't want to apply to every I think it's cumbersome to put because I don't think we can put every single thing someone might complaints about in the policy so I think that makes it conversation I'm not suggesting that it's just I you're talking about a process that has a funneling effector a gathering of all of the complaints and then something like I thought that the website it does list out the types of are you talking about complaints that might not be here well okay so one of the things we're doing here is making the majority of this and the very specific timelines and appeals about division 22. I know that's one type of complaint and then there's discrimination special Edge so time so just just to make sure we're talking about the same so we we made the decision not to put all the other specifics of category one Title IX that have so those were we made the decision to not put try to capture each and every one of those in this policy because they appear in others and there are other policies is that correct yes okay let's just use the most easy one like the dog the dog the dog so so you so I hear I hear that you want some better language to help Define what's in this policy on the front end in some general language and we can we can work on that on page two ahead of you know maybe in around paragraph a when you get this paragraph one is about formal complaints paragraph two is the other then you get to timelines 2A is about all complaints other and Division 22. until you get to but it's not about the dog park yes that's about the job mark the timelines yes we're keeping that consistent we wanted to keep it all consistent so it appears when you get to still be time limited yeah when you get to section four that becomes a separate appeal process for division 22 that isn't there for the dog park so I don't think that's intuitive because it seems like you you have division 22 on page two and then the timelines well then paragraph two that says other types of complaints so there are two types of we can make that more robust but both types of complaints are defined in that section one section two a is timelines for both of those categories division 22 and other and then the appeal rights for division 22 to the board is different that's what we that's what we're attempting to do here so if it's not clear we need to make it clear that's not clear uh so to me sorry I think and if we maybe we added like timelines for all complaints or that would help yeah okay so if you put that well maybe it's doing the timelines first it's just timelines before we just find the different kinds of complaints yeah just say this is the timeline for complaints we haven't we let us let us work on it's it's a I think this is a complicated policy to follow I think division 22 is hard to explain as the category of complaints it's not no one talks about division 22 except people in this building so I I do think there's a level of complexity here that's really hard to
00h 20m 00s
is it still down so let us try again to make that even clearer so the question do you consider number two are the types of the links to be everything else is not division point two so the dog works yeah sexual harassment yeah well there's reference to it says but this this paragraph would be like the whole universe of everything else yes so maybe a way to think about it is to start with the what would be the majority and then this specific category of yeah and I do think it would be helpful here to have the links to the IEP like if we have other timelines and other policy language about complaints to say you know Title IX policy number those kinds of things to help people then find the information if that's what they're looking for well I I I I our approach Haley and you guys are the boss and you're the development makers our approach has been to link to the website so it's all in one place there's a single form and we are constantly getting the legislature well-intentioned is adding acting specific complaint procedures every session and so we are constantly at if it's this it's a violation of this it now has its separate process okay and so we're trying to it's I worry we in the context of updating over time that something doesn't get added there and it's not to make it harder we actually want to make it easier so I don't know those are my I think maybe in the policy that like if you're looking for these specifics the best place to go I know it's on there but to really clarify like that this conflict resolution has the most up-to-date information because laws are constantly changing yes yes and then also I'm wondering about um presenting the information on a table about the timelines because that's also confusing um I mean there's different timelines for different so well we tried to be consistent with that so we're doing um it is a single timeline for step one okay he did but it's also 60 days you'll get a final decision within 60 days forever you have to complain within two years and then you'll get a response within 60 days of your complaints I like the idea of tables and bullet points whenever possible yeah it's a really text Heavy fantastic so let us let us take another cut at making it approachable because I do think that is the goal okay I again in the context of um in the staff report where it talks about the racial equity and social impacts and that we hear mostly from white families and thinking about um just presenting information for someone that's that's going to be really easy for a parent to find I do understand I do agree with Julia that how do we make it really clear that division 20 I mean I see what you're saying Julia about the policy not being clear on we've got division 22 got a couple of other buckets of complaints and then we've got sort of these General complaints that we also want to help resolve within a like clear transparent time so if we could clean up some of that language to make that up a little more clear yeah so the other thing um is in here we talk about um going to the conflict resolution web page and then just looking at the web page is I think it's not clear that that's the complaints page so I think the ORS over the materials require us to have like the complaint landing page on the home page and it just says conflict resolution and to me conflict resolution is not the same as a complaint okay and so having it be consistent so on number two there's other types of complaints then it says but it says conflict resolution slash complete resolution process so maybe that that's closer but not exactly if that's on the the lady I'm just thinking of people like I want to file a complaint like you would naturally look for the look at the conflict I agree I'm Not In conflict I want to complain we just switched yeah complaints yeah if you look at Beaverton then you type in Beaverton School District you can see like it comes right up yeah we can do that no not to you know it's good to look around and see what other people are doing so the the other thing in terms of division 22 just since we're really drilling down on this is gonna be that there's going to be really specific on division three two I think it would be helpful to explain what division 22 is we sort of use it as just a like you can see some you sent a
00h 25m 00s
description of which I thought was useful to have so I'd like to have that in the policy here's here's what it is because division 22 doesn't mean anything to most those parents um and then you know I originally was thinking well you could list all the division of my twos but it's pretty long list again I'm trying to um I also don't think if you go to division 22 is it is it an administrative rule yes okay so if you go to the administrative rule you actually get caught in this big long thing um and if you were just looking for the list like is this division 22 I don't know if there's some way for us without listing in the policy but to link to just the list without send him to the administrative rule which then is like oh my God they sent me to an administrative rule that is like impossible to but maybe the ode web page on complaints which is not quite the Oar because I do think I worry about us having a list that ode changes and that it doesn't flow through but I do think I do think part of the opportunity here and what should be helpful to families is they don't have to know that it's division 22 like part of this intake is you it's one of these categories that you alleged the district isn't complying with and it's our job to make sure it gets in the right lane I mean I think I think expecting families to be able to correctly categorize is not fair to Fan lights I think the district's obligation is to say this is what you're complaining about is this and our best understanding is this and this is where it should go and that's why in the Complaint Form if you go through it there are some drop downs right so again you don't need to know what the division whether it's within or out of division 22 it it will it'll it has some prompts in it to describe what happened and you said this is who we are for you please drop down suggestion like is it this this and you get to check which one and and that I think it helps the family but it also helps us to understand okay this is that this is what is at issue because you know there's oftentimes as you know multiple things happen Etc I think you're right and I also think we should identify what's division 22 because we're changing a practice where people are like hey I get an appeal to the elected the people I elected you know told me that they would listen to the community about you know issues that we have it's like hey how come mine you know my complaints didn't go to like the board and so I think being able to be really clear about here here's the thing that here's the items that go to the load of the board and here's the items that won't and I think for a lot of people it will be helpful if like hey I just put in I have this problem with like like curriculum materials and staff figures out whether it's division 22 or something else but other people may be like I want to file a division 22 company because I wanted to go to the board I potentially want to go yeah and I did yeah yeah I mean if I if you're filing to the plate about curriculum and if you call it division 22 or you don't it's still a division 22. so the the subs I'm not saying I disagree with you but I want to get us back to the substance it's the thing that should Define the path not whether the complainant says I wanted division 22 or even I want the board that's defined by the topic of the complaint so we can we can figure out how to get a link to the list in there I I don't want it to be I don't recommend you guys get to decide I don't recommend that it's a PPS created list that's linked because again that if ode changes division 22 then we haven't updated that in real time but look I bet we can find something that works yeah to like hey read through these 50 pages to find the list yeah and it's a terrible the Oar website's terrible in terms of trying to get to the list but that's why I'm raising it yes because I went but your list that I sent the list that I sent the committee members today I got from the thing I got a promoted website so we can we'll figure out how to and I think it's helpful for families who want to understand well what is the instructional requirement I mean it's good for families to have access to information if they want to learn more about it and I I think this isn't right in the curriculum but and I'm it doesn't feel right but I want to see what the standard is I mean I we get we need to help families across that Spectrum whether they want us to chase it or they want to go understand what the rules are and we need to make that accessible in all those so I think we can solve it um without with a with the list that gets updated by ODE automatically like a smart text it's too bad you couldn't um use you
00h 30m 00s
know like a smart text to pick up on people's plain language um as a writing a complaint that would sort it into the frame okay yeah the technology is probably there yeah it's there are other uh questions we have about this policy or um things to raise uh before we send it back to Sam yeah I mean so I'm sort of reading it like in the old way and I guess I'm trying to follow so the filing of a formal complaint step one one two there's new language that um compliance final decision within native in 60 days is that a written decision because that's what you get yeah yeah okay um do you want to add written decisions um so um so mine has page numbers it says like five of nine at the bottom I don't know maybe I get a separate upload of the workbook or maybe maybe this was it didn't print when you printed it I don't know sorry anyway it tells anybody um so I'll just try and describe it um under four B unfortunately should find a decision so I don't know that the language needs to be um updated but our resolutions are often written that the says the board agrees with the findings and this doesn't say anything about the findings it's just whether the decision this if we're going to talk about the findings in our resolution should this be changed or do we want to leave a decision and then have our resolution be about the board affirming the decision of the findings I think that's probably a resolution issued on a policy issue but I'm I'm also in favor of the board having some latitude on the decision because these things come to the board in a number of different formats so I'm not I think you want to be sure that it's clear what the board is deciding I don't I'm not sure it's helpful to put a lot what really Divine boxes around that in the abstract before it gets done we're like agreeing with the findings and it's like but that's different from the just handy decision yes um so it seems like we if we're gonna include that not included otherwise we're not following the policy when we just are moving resolution saying that eight Ruth findings I don't recommend adding findings to the policy but it's up to you because you want to okay well then we need to make sure that our when we vote on things that we're upholding them to say affirming the decision not the findings okay said good because that's not just certain well we have different two different paths right after we hear a point um there's there's affirmed and it's and it's it's considered final and therefore appeal to Ode appealable and appeals appealable to Ode or it's um reversed which it still could be you know it's still a final decision that can be appealed but often it comes with the direction from the board to the district to take certain actions and do certain things okay I guess the issue I have like is with the word decision I'm hearing your issues with the word findings well I'm not looking for the the we often approve resolutions that talk about the findings but don't talk about the decision like we affirm the findings oh here we go well I think if that if I think that um issue can be addressed in resolutions but I'm here if I'm understanding the concern um right because otherwise I don't think we're following the policy if we're just like hey we read the findings so we are affirming the district's decision instead of we'll have to change the resolution which to say the word resolve those are affirming yes great so the other um thing I would say is instead of reversed is there
00h 35m 00s
so that doesn't seem the opposite um Affirmed it's actually really that's what a court of appeals would use which doesn't mean that's what a school board should do but that is it's affirmative reverse this but a court does it's a we but I don't you are not a Judicial body except for this very good thing yeah I mean maybe you can get some robes out of it but um I so I it is that is the judicial language of affirmed or reverse when something's unappealed but I don't know that that's required which is required what's required as a clear final decision that a complain it could take to Ode so we're I think trying to discount make sure that the board's decision is final and clear this was added I think in the last round of revisions so I don't I was trying to solve a problem yeah I mean I don't know if not affirmative is better than a big verse because reverse seems like they reverse the decision and then usually it's uh radiation I could so you want to change reverse to not affirmed in whole learn part so I mean one I think this is not going to be what you want to do but one thing you could do is we were suggesting here is you could just say the board Celestial final decision after the hearing period and your final decision can be framed that gives that that gives you more latitude for decision versus findings versus but it just needs to be a final decision that's clear and that then you don't have to fight with that concert there's one or two that may not be what you want because those will just put in here fairly recently can we does that comply with the division 22 yeah so we come up with the final decision and essentially people kind of peel it it whatever it is whatever it is yeah I mean you want it to be clear so the family understands the decision and ode can understand the decision I think I don't think this has been a problem but that's your I think your your what do you think Julia I'm okay with changing it to not affirmed but I'm also okay with just saying the boards will issue a final decision what are what are you thinking I actually think it's better to have affirmed and not affirm because that seems like a little bit clearer to to people because if you're if the decision is affirmed it's like the board didn't the more degrees the superintendent and that's it um whereas the final decision it just seems like that brings it open to so if we could change that to not affirmed in a polar and part and may direct so just change reverse to not affirmed I mean most the time we're doing it for one which thing although we sometimes not a firm in charge right right I don't think we've ever enrolled turned something over but we've often said but I think that gives more clarity like hey the four degrees is the superintendent Like You can disagree with it but like that versus a final decision which may be people in person yeah is that okay with you Michelle yes I'm sorry I'm distracted I guess it is anything else Julia or Michelle or Gary on this again we're sending this back to staff we'll have another Draft before the next meeting so this is the work in progress we're not voting it out today or anything yeah I mean I'm still I know that uh the staff goes to heroic efforts to um get things schedules and I know sometimes we're part of it issue um wondering if the 90 days so it is we have some complainants that will not agree to a meeting and they so we have years where complaints are sitting and I think that's not helpful so we're trying to find a mechanism that's fair and generous that also lets us conclude the process with lots of attempts to accommodate but they just simply won't agree to schedule it just sits there and we get this weird smells the Donut of compliance problem where you're they're going to run out of time to appeal if we don't have a final decision until they cross to the next so it can get there a different way but it it's it's complicated for everybody and again I think it's not we work really hard to schedule and accommodate with the complainants schedule is within reason of what the board can do so that's what we're trying to solve it doesn't mean that this is the right way
00h 40m 00s
to do it but because without it they their appeal their appeal right is also time limited and so if they don't get that final decision from us they yeah and then you cross over I think I think probably be revived but there's this double time limit problem do we understand why people are running the clock out um is it that they don't know at the other end that they're running up against we've told that so when we have said that when we said you're getting to the two-year Mark and we want to make sure you have all your rights preserved that has been helpful but it's also been two years where the district acted a year and a half ago and we've been waiting that long to get to the board sometimes it's a family that has a crisis or we're like great we have medical issues we'll stand down um but other times it's I want to go get more information I want to do things that actually which we say how much time do you need but it's already been through you know at that point this example was from one of the three-step process it's already been through two layers this is now it's a two-step process but there's it just gives us a mechanism to get finality to a decision with lots of notice and lots of opportunities and again we're trying to find the most generous accessible way but also we need to we need a mechanism to get to make a decision so yeah yeah don't allow them enough time too right right so again this may not be the right construct but that's the problem it'd be one of those things where I I because of I know of the history the professor I've owned the books for a couple years I'll be okay with adding this in I guess I would if we started having a bunch of them that you know when we get into the busy season or you know summertime you know what whatever it is that the board you know we're like here are the two days now well those don't work for us and then it's like oh the 90 days um I guess I would want to just I mean is it intended to be the burden is on the district to make all reasonable attempts and I think we can ask for that right at the hearing to say what all happened to try to yeah coordinate with this complainant and then just to be clear the board may consider an appeal on the written materials so the board would have a meeting yeah and it says may consider not that we have to so we could also say we even though it's been the 90 days we want to give this family more time or we want the staff to try to reach out again so I'll be okay that I would add in there that like be specific that we're actually going to have a meeting okay because otherwise it could be just like Hey we're going to circulate the written materials and okay yeah and you know who knows that may be um inspired people too yeah is a public meeting or a um that makes sense hopefully you can make it yeah and it is it is not designed to it's not designed to squeeze we just need to and I think it also I mean if there is an issue and the district needs to care for it it's helpful to do that in a transparent way foreign [Music] so this came up percent an individual who has a spot of complaints raised this issue of number 13. not knowing that they can communicate with board members it was in public comment that the last meeting of the meeting before do you think after they filed a complaint um and so I don't know maybe that's part of what gets communicated to individuals I think the the other the other thing is a tightening a process on the other side that we still
00h 45m 00s
get community we still get Communications from staff about something and if we're again being the same quasi-judicial which we're not for um like we are still getting information from one side but not that nothing so we do I mean there is there is except for confidential materials attorney client or FERPA protective materials anything that goes to the board from staff goes to the complainant before they appeal they have the opportunity to submit more information as part of that um I mean number 13 has been through a lot of iterations and is not I'm not I'm not advocating for defending the practice I think it has you and I know conduct I think it has complexity to administer that's very consistent with the rules you will play as elected officials and I think it's a hard rule to put a for events around but I understand the the intent behind it so we can try to I mean we try to make sure there's um free flow of information I think this is about less about communication to the full board and more was more about when it was drafted about individual Communications between complaint complainants and individual board members right I think that was the okay but that still happens I mean yeah so people you know know somebody on the board or you're like I'm in your Zone and I don't like what happens um the way that I mean that so that this is the inconsistency with 99.5 of your job is to have those kinds of conversations this is a very different exception to that in terms of more elective work behavior and it puts the onus on the board member to say I'm sorry I can't have that conversation with you outside of the formal appeal process I would be happy to so I think the issue was around people independently investigating things or trying to resolve stuff on their own about the full board um so I think if we wanted to modify this to say board members should not knowingly initiate contact or complainants about the topic of a complaint or independently investigate allegations I mean I think if well it could be on us it's on us a complainant right so if we're not initiating contact and we are not independently investigating something I think that's the concern not that we don't speak to compliance it's it's this that's actually not the issue I'm raising at all I mean I don't I don't have any issue issue with that piece I was talking about I think it's just confusing because people are like what do you mean I can't talk to you about it it would be the first person they'd want to talk to probably but we would if we took out continue contact with then that would save that because if we're not initiating and we're not investigating if someone contacts us and says hey you're my person in this Zone I have this issue and it's in complaint process then we can say okay like we can talk to them but it's different than us initiating or us investigating what I'm saying is that um things to make this workable like we have to be really clear to people like once they're in the complaint process and then I guess this is divisions 22 only this doesn't say we can't talk to someone who like I could talk to a complainant about a complaint they have if they brought it to me this doesn't say that we can't talk to them it says we can't initiate or investigate okay I'm confused can this we're looking at number 13 right using like other provisions I assumed that the supplies didn't everything but yourself because the other ones don't come to the board so it's only those that come to the board okay this is a structure thing again outside out because yeah if it seems like we should have like hear all the complaints and we'll work on the structure I want to hear what she's considering well because I was thinking wait that said was actually the timelines and everything else fly to the that's why it said that the in the attempt of the red line Edition on 13 is to division concerning compliance with division 22. once they have filed a formal complaint concerning complex information so it was designed to make sure that it's clear that this provision applies only to those because those are the only ones that are appealable that's what that red light changes it obviously didn't do it well enough but that's what it was designed to do is to narrow its application to only notes yeah maybe that this is actually just a piece that goes with the division 22 section
00h 50m 00s
it's confusing and I'd be okay if we just change it to board members should not knowingly initiate or independently investigate allegations they're not complaint once they've been notified that a formal complaint has been put division 22 has been filed that it's not good that's not the point that I no two different points so I'm praying that I'm trying to help resolve what your point is understanding I'm sorry yeah but just to be specific because I mean my sense is the vast majority of complaints so somebody's gonna call and say I have a complaint about you know X or like I submitted this thing and I haven't heard from the district it's just knowing where that funnel is and then this the second piece is I guess I also um I'm interested in that as information flows to the to the board informally but that seems like Hey we're getting more information from one side um yeah you are not a court of law I mean like I I just like I so I know I know we agree on that and so telling staff you can't have information we get requests from board members about background information related to complaints so we'll look like staff initiating just um engagement with board members about about a complaint it seems like it makes it unfair then to the parent like hey you can't talk to board members about it because they have this Advantage you didn't have to talk about it so I think we can say the complainants they can send us information on complainants can send us additional information complainants can reach out to us it's that we cannot initiate and we cannot invest that's what your change the change you've proposed I think right language here does not content I can see the new context May provide digital information well and we have a complainant right now who will email the entire board to say where are we on this next step or and so that's different because it's the whole board I mean one thing you could do is delete paragraph 13. I really don't I don't want to delete paragraph 13 I would like us to amend it so that we can um and I do think how do we encourage families to submit an additional information or complainants to continue sharing information with the whole board I mean I think that's the other thing is if certain people are talking to certain people and then that it becomes this whole who has information and who's saying what to whom how can we share that information in a way that's transparent uh yeah I think the the goal of the rule was to prevent individual board members from having side conversations with complainants middle of a formal complaint process or that other were invested that other board members didn't have access to which is different than how does the board have the information it needs to decide from either from either the complaints and because this isn't so I think we should distinguish we could do harm to information received by conflating that with um what this paragraph was designed to do so it's about this is actually about making sure everyone has the same information not individual board members having additional additional information based on certain conversations as I recall this came this did not come through staff this came from a board recommendation so as I recall the discussion at the time which is imperfect um that's the problem I was trying to solve and I I would I think we'd want to think through other steps we put into place that would limit information to the board who's just trying to make the right decision I think that's 100 correct list we want information from the complainant we want them to be able to respond to what the district is saying and we want to make sure that individual board members aren't acting in a way that undermines the work of the board as a whole and our ability to sort of transparently communicate with our complainants I also want to complicate things by take and I mean there is also a danger and step one we've assigned uh someone to investigate to look at all the materials so if information is going to the board and not going to that person then they maybe providing a not complete response
00h 55m 00s
because information that may be coming to the board is not going to the person who's conducting the investing so I mean that's just another thing to think about the the what that has has that happened I mean generally when it seems like information gets sent to the board he gets forwarded to staff I don't know I don't know in terms of the emails I I don't know the answer to that I'm just saying that's one of the risks I don't know if it's going directly to the person who's investigating that this additional conversation came out from there and other things where we typically see it isn't the appeal is this didn't respond to baby or C or whatever that's what comes up so Julia what would you like to have the complaint policy say around sort of that flow of information and the ability to um get information a support well I think the first thing is like structuring it so it's clear that that's just division 22 because there are so many things that I think board members because of their Community relationships like get keep out of the complaint process because you're like hey if you just called so-and-so or you know 100 so this is after this this is only I think you're right there's only um pertains to things that are in division 22 formal complaints it's 13 but like I say we're changing the policy so that there's like two clear yeah paths right now and I think we want to be clear that that's the division 22 pathway because for example so we get the notice that here the complaints that have been filed so if any of these four people call you and want to talk to you about the complaint you have to say now that's in the form of complaint process you can't talk but if they one of those individual calls you about a topic that's not on the list that gets sent out to the board meeting and it's something like hey you know what if you just called so-and-so or if you raise this with the principal you know here's like Apostle solution yeah that is I think what you you I think board members that might because of their relationships can be helpful right totally agree with you and so because we're changing the policy now we'll limit a little bit yeah just to be so that'll satisfy or concern then yeah well and I guess I also I'll have just continuous um concern about um the board getting more information from staff that maybe that the parent has access to so wait the policy requires us to share it with them though unless it's confidential generally for privilege and then and I think can we put something in there I mean that the information that the the you know the board should have all the information that the parent shares with the district as well a video that hasn't been shared with the board that was referenced in the complaint materials and those kinds of things so that yeah I I want to make sure I understand what you what you want because of from an appeal standpoint there could have been I mean I think Jonathan and Alex aren't here so I want to make sure we are using the same language we'll go I'll go ask Alex and Jonathan and make sure I understand there's the basis for the decision but I think they get all the materials anyway I think they get all I think you guys get all the step one materials that they submitted so I think that's actually in the last year we had something where the parent was like did you see the video and that's why I remember that no I didn't see the video yeah and when I looked at it afterwards it really it like it wouldn't have changed my opinion but it seemed like that I think that was a mess oh and it does feel like when we don't have that stuff it it feels like I it feels like the district's having something I don't think we are but I think that's what it comes across that was the expulsion yeah good good process gives confidence I think I think we should be very clear that the board gets all of them like if a parent has submitted a video if a parent has submitted a letter or whatever that that should be part of our packet I think that's already it will confirmed I think that was it just happened I think that was a Miss on the video because it was I don't know why there's been twice in my time on the board where a video has been referenced in the materials and we never received it and it it has a whole those were disciplined one was the discipline one was not okay the one that I know the the most recent one yeah I think we in looking at it we uh
01h 00m 00s
yeah we relied on the photographs yes it did make a difference but the board doesn't have as to all the materials that the parent has submitted or that are under consideration okay we will incorporate this really helpful feedback into the next draft so thank you that's not so scary to me you're concerned about getting information from families okay okay thank you for taking us back again um looking at it and we're having it even more I think everybody's well on this committee and I think on the school board is to resolve things well so family is considered about their current community all right next up is our anti-racist and anti-person learning communities this is a compliance based on some legislative changes [Music] um the the legislature uh passed a statute requiring us to have a policy that says non-discrimination policies and practices apply to volunteer organizations that support high schools I don't think this is entirely an OSAA rule but I think it you can think about that it extends beyond that and that they have to have a complaint procedure Siege so we have it was a very granular Standalone policy we thought it fit well in this policy is the place to comply with that and then they'll be language so that's that's what the background and that's what the red lines reflect there any questions about this policy nope it's very delayed um so I'm just curious because it looked like from the staff report like I don't have the statutory language but they did they specifically say high school because I mean just conceptually it seems like we wouldn't want organizations working with our students that have oh districts high school activities I actually can't remember what the statute says no no no it's it's okay it should not say okay so yeah good catch some of the staff report but also another languages yeah high schools so that I'm sorry the statute says K-12 yeah so it should read with the dis administrators coaches advisors student participants and others associated with the district's activities programs and events should I conduct themselves in a manner that is consistent with the letter in the spirit of the district's policies rules and regulations and of any volunteer organization including voluntary organizations that administer interspective activities or that facilitate the scheduling and programming of Interstate and for what it's worth taking care of his reference chair was involved in helping me in the court case and helping PBS drafts of its policies so with that changes everyone okay with sending this to the full board uh yes very yes Julia and I'm a yes as well okay so we'll move the anti-racist and anti-oppression to the full board for compliance okay our next is the CUV policy um which we have a degree uh amazing Redline grass here that um we apologize yeah I really appreciate the change in tone um it what what we had is a collection of policies at very different levels and I think the overarching goal what originally came through at the request of the real estate group was some changes to the policy the dot 3-0 version that had some very granular rules in it and it occurred to us as we were thinking about amending you know skateboards I mean like that that level of rulemaking isn't where the board usually sits and those things change and need to be addressed so we thought those were better addressed in an ad but the overarching policy language should appear in the 1.0 .010 policy and give the authority to set those maps with the goal of like here's we welcome consider the use of facilities districts students and the district uses have priority over that and users can't conflict with that and try to find that that balance in the policy language which again is already there in large part but the the decision to and the reason we gave you this draft ID it's not done was that you had a sense of what was moving over to the ad what rescinding it doesn't eliminate it it's
01h 05m 00s
shifting to a place where it can be better managed right so it the the now what our proposed ID he is currently his policy 3.3020 are they two current policies that we have put together as a single administrative directive so I'm looking at the redline version of 3.30.010 and I'm on the the cut between page one and page two um and it reads the superintendent shell Implement administrative directives that implement this policy create a custodial speed waiver process for organization so there needs to be and or yeah I just I read that like four times trying to understand what I mean and then realized it was maybe not me so it's but it's not having that custodial three-way waiver in the administrative directive no it stays in the policy right so one thing that I'm concerned about that's being eliminated here and it may seem like it's an efficiency because the district is the same thing as school um it's somewhere I don't want the number of places actually worth it across half school yeah so here's what happened when the district was short on money it's like okay one way that we get money is we you know rent out our buildings and there is a shortage of um gym space in the district and so like when my kids read a title one Middle School like they couldn't use their gym because PBS rented it out like in advance at the beginning of the school year to um like non-school Community groups and so the reason why school is in here is like School Community should have like priority on their own on their own building and so that like this was a case in the district like Hey we're going to generate more revenue and we decided we could put it back I think this try this separation of the district is different than the school and we are all one combined group was was the intent behind that deletion so it was a very affirming um but we can put it back yeah I have a problem with putting it back because I do think the separation between my school and the district is problematic so is there a way that to put a different term that's not District or school but but maybe it's stating that school communities should have the first use of their facilities before it goes into the cut process so we have did another administrative directive that's that's like the city center it was a real thing yeah there is an administrative directive now that says the use of District facilities and it says District facilities are available for short-term use when such use does not conflict with District programs operations or activities in accordance with the priority use list I don't know if that helps and what's the priority useless absolutely you know and I was just curious and she's ill today and she could tell us but that is here's where what the sort of breakdown is like good intentions like hey we gave this to the skill community that the principal wasn't responsible the principal didn't like block the time so it got put into the pool use and because in this case you guys didn't have you know a huge parent community that was off like reserving the time when you want to go use the gym at you know trying to use the gym at best you know during basketball season I was like oh we already rented that out you needed to reserve it in the fall so I think we need Kristen and Dana and our Dana here because we are now in a level of complexity of how these things get booked the agreements with Parks all the things that I I think it's more than just editing the language and trying to find Clarity so and again Kirsten's really sick also so there's so much bad stuff going on I hope we all are healthy options but I think having her having a conversation with the committee about that would be helpful to understand how to define the problem and draft for it is that okay Julia and there is there is a list of the priorities and it starts with districts in school so that's the number one priority to move down to ptas yeah I say just like it's more like how it got implemented so I was in another non-title like very privileged community that had a lot of like infrastructure like Hey we're going to just Reserve basically the gym from three o'clock to nine o'clock at night because we've got you know three levels of sixth grade boys basketball three thousand I mean like we're gonna need it all right and they just you know like don't even bother using it and other school communities aren't they don't have that same level of infrastructure wouldn't know to like hey you've got to block it off otherwise the
01h 10m 00s
district's gonna rent it out foreign Julia that we want to be really clear that that local school building and the community and program there should be the priority so how do we do both of those things so Mary and I will work on the language part of that and then Kirsten can talk about the implementation part of that and make sure the language is inconsistent and I I understand the point that those the students at that school should have the priority I also know it sits in this Cub process and again Parks rents tips so I I worry about what I don't know in terms of collateral impacts or conflicts yeah we will work on the language that tries to draw out that the school use has priority within the district family I couldn't tell you the times I've rented um school buildings which has been a lot I've always been told like if there's a volleyball game where there's a basketball game happening today you get bumped yeah yeah anything else on that um it will come back so we're not going to vote this out for first reading because we have quite a bit so some changes okay are we ready to move on to first editions or is there anything else about the CNB policy for the time and it'll come back in our January so just to clarify um we'd be rescinding the this one two online for you I thought because this has been become an administrative director sorry my email to you is not complete because I did not include 2o in the recession so I'm sorry about that yeah so the the administrative directive the proposed Administration is a mashup of too low and three hours so both of them would need the board action would be to get rid of to resend 2-0 and 3-0 and then to to modify yeah I'm sorry and we're not doing any of that today we're we're holding all of that for the January meeting so we can hear from Kirsten and get some I should have looked at that before [Laughter] anything else on the CUV I really I or anyone else okay then we'll move on to number five decisions 1.70 point zero one two presentations by citizens and employees um these to the extent there are rules that are consistent with are in the same category of these they exist in other places um and it's it's not I don't think it adds to the protocols and contact the board meetings that the board is trying to set it's certainly it's got some outdated language and feel and you have this in other places it's a it's a so it's a decision about whether you want something if you want this to be a policy that I would recommend it be amended and it be and some other things get probably there's a sole source of there's a sole source of information about this I think it's done very well in the board the the four materials and other I'm struggling for what we call the things that we have that we post that we tell people here's what we expected here's the contact the guy that made presentations by citizens we generally have public comment or someone asks for a particular topic or ability to speak to the board that goes to leadership or agenda setting I mean it just doesn't really fit with the practices of the court today it's not that some of these things don't exist in other forms it's just it's an it's kind of an awkward policy that's correct form I think it's addressed elsewhere whatever you suppose he said policy say it's um the beginning of it presentation by citizens and employees when members of the general clinic who plan to make presentations at work we should register their intentions with the office of the word Services prior to the beginning of the meeting so we have public View and we don't really have a sign up at the beginning of a meeting for citizen presentation right it's not a right and we also don't use the word citizen anymore either side so that's racist and also is there not a
01h 15m 00s
office of board Services anymore I mean everything since 1971 has changed yeah 66 years yes yeah so that's why we have like the community budget Review Committee as a citizens so it matters to presented to the board at a board meeting by representatives of employee organizations Union shall first be submitted in writing that's not what the contract says no so I think it just it just is uh and we don't set time limits on yeah um I I'm great I'm trying to rescind it because I do think it's it's carried in other places we'll find a reset it too because the alternative is going to leadership like with the national profit yeah Community just asking if they could do a presentation or temporary well yeah you're fine Julia it's fine okay we'll go ahead and move that to be refunded it at the um January 26th okay I did a formal vote on the first one that I haven't done a horrible vote on any of these other ones do we need to do that we on the very first one that the eecoe to move that we moved it to move this reading did you also you ask and you got a verbal confirmation all right from everybody on all of the other ones yeah okay anything else before we move to the public comment all right okay well then we will consider this meeting adjourned thank you everyone for your


Sources

Retrieved from "https://wiki.sunshinepps.org/index.php?title=2022-12-01_PPS_School_Board_Policy_Committee_Meeting&oldid=10363"
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Center for Transparent Analysis and Policy
Powered by MediaWiki
Powered by Semantic MediaWiki