The November 9th, 2020 Policy Standing Committee
to Order at 506 announces
this meeting as being audio recorded
on I think and I'll just go around the room and introduce ourselves.
I want to welcome our new citizen advisors.
So if we could just say our name and our role for the roll call.
My name is Trisha Steiner and I'm a school director
from Maria.
My school director.
Jason are excited representing the administration.
Michelle Agee, Board Secretary
Beth Olmstead, Citizen Advisor.
Nicole Sarah Foster Citizen Advisor.
Kip Shaw School Board.
Keith Graham Citizen Advisor.
Great.
Thank you. And again, welcome.
And I just want more citizen advisors and ones to know that
the school board members are the ones whose votes
move on, can make a motion or second it and move it to the full board.
But every vote still counts
for four for counting votes and four for opinion speaking.
So please vote.
Oh, and John.
Sorry, I forgot about you, John.
Sorry.
I. Everybody just got out here.
Telephone call.
I am the school director.
Welcome.
Thank you. John.
I almost forgot about you.
Okay, so the summary of
the minutes are attached for your review.
Unless there are any changes needed,
we will just note them and move on to
item number five, which is revised and review policies.
And just another quick note, Mrs.
Mammy's filling in for Mr.
Roux tonight.
Yes, Thank you.
All right.
So the first policy on our agenda is policy
one 13.2 behavior support.
And it looks like this policy,
along with a couple of the two new policies,
have just been updated to correlate
with the state cyclical compliance monitoring price process.
So to just reflect some of the
it seemed to me reading some of the the updates,
it really just increased some of the safeguards to reflect
what's already being done as best practices for positive behavior.
The other thing to note is the district.
This is our cyclical monitoring period.
So our director of Special Ed said, I'm glad you sent this to me
because I was going to come to you and say,
We needed to make some changes in our policies.
So it was actually perfect timing.
That's great.
So does anybody have any questions
or feedback or.
I had a couple of comments.
This is Beth Olmstead, citizen advisor in the
areas of seclusion.
I thought the wording was a little awkward
word said with or without with and
in the first section, and I thought maybe it should be with staff
supervision in the same room at all times or without supervision.
I thought it was just a little awkward sounding.
There.
The way it's worded, it says without staff supervision
in the same room at all times and I just thought it was
unusual sounding.
Well, that's certainly something that doesn't change the content.
So we can just
clean that up if we wanted to.
Where is that exactly?
It's under seclusion occlusion,
and I guess it's on the third page
or second page.
I'm sorry, second page,
just confinement
of a student in a room with or without staff supervision
in the same room at all times in order to provide a safe environment.
I guess it's
six one half a dozen of another
if you want to keep it that way.
I thought it was a little
odd sounding and also under
seclusion and guidelines.
It says presence of staff,
which they're not always involved, presence of staff
within the same room as that's supposed to be present of staff.
I'll check.
Involve the presence of staff, maybe.
Yeah.
Okay.
Those are good grammatical catches.
Thank you.
It's always good just to have language that makes sense.
Well, the clearer it is, the easier it is to interpret.
Should it? Come on? Definitely.
Does anybody else have any questions?
Yes, there is one.
This is Nicole.
So your thoughts as an adviser, I was curious
if there was a specific program that was used
with the behavioral supports, if that's outlined
or if it's just kind of based on best practices
at the current time?
That would be a question for director
of special education to answer,
and I'd be guessing, and I don't want to do that.
Yeah.
All right.
Any other questions? Comments?
Yes. This is John.
Go ahead.
I don't want to speak over someone.
Now, go ahead. I'm getting an echo.
Okay. Hi.
Yes. Under occlusion.
The last sentence.
I think the word should probably be presence as opposed to present. Yes.
Thank you.
Mm hmm.
Okay.
Can I have a motion, then, to go ahead and improve?
Approve.
One 13.2 behavior support for
to move to the full board for a 30 day review.
So, moved capsule second.
Maria.
Mimi here.
Any further discussion?
All those in favor say I II any opposed?
All right.
Policy moves.
Next one on our list is 122
extra curricular activities.
And this one, along with 123
and one 23.2,
have some of the same
relevance
updates to the to the school code,
which combine sudden cardiac arrest and electrocardiogram
testing to 123
and one 23.2.
It looks like it was just um oh and 1.1 22.
There are just changes in the legal citation at the bottom,
so there weren't actually any changes to the policy for, for that.
Yeah. So, so this one, you're, you're correct, Mr.
Steiner There's no change as far as language goes.
The change is just in the citation.
As and you remember from past meetings, I don't go in and change the citations
until after the meeting's over because it's it's
very challenging to get those to match.
So that's that's really it.
I debated if you even want to put it on the agenda, but
knowing it was a recommendation, I thought it would be best practice
just to share with the committee that there's a change to the citation.
Definitely.
And then regarding 123, there are some
updates that
we had made based on a on board discussion
about the athletic policy to be reviewed
every three years.
So let's
go ahead and move 122 off the plate
and leave 123 open.
But is anybody have any questions?
122 There there were no changes at all.
Just this just in the citation.
Motion to approve 122 for movement.
Do you need a second?
Yes, please. Second. Maria. Me.
Thank you. Any discussion?
All those in favor say I, I.
Any oppose I.
Okay.
122 Ms..
Then now
sitting in on two 123 interscholastic athletics.
There's also have the changes in the citations, but the other just
minor ones were about reviewing the athletic policy every three years.
And I know that
Mr. Singer is here.
I wanted to recognize him and see if he had any comments on this policy.
Okay.
Thank you.
Terry Singer 858 Happens
all drive and Hummelstown P.A..
I just wanted to offer as a footnote
on this policy, we
we adopted and approved the new athletic philosophy.
I don't know, two or three months ago, maybe four months ago.
And at the time the existing athletic philosophy had eight sections in it
and we peeled off five of them
and at the time talked about just rolling those over
to administrative guidelines or administrative regulations.
And we went we just adopted the mission, the vision
and the principles that guide us as far as the athletic philosophy.
So just as a footnote, just in case the administration hasn't
had a chance yet.
I just wanted to make a footnote that
there was a discussion about
turning those
remaining sections of the athletic philosophy
into administrative guidelines or their state regulations.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Singer.
Are there any other comments?
All right.
Can I have a motion to remove 123 interscholastic
athletics to the full board for a 30 day review?
So moved Kip Capshaw.
Scott Murray, Amy Hill.
Any further discussion?
All those in favor say I, i any opposed?
I. 123 months.
Next is one 23.2.
Sudden cardiac arrest.
This again has updates to the citation.
Also includes some language updates.
The only comment
that I had for this policy was
it noted
in the
explanation that
SBA provided notification of the necessary revision
to the Department of Health
about the symptoms and warning signs for on the information sheet.
And I guess if that
when that becomes available,
is that something that we can attach to the policy?
Mr.. SNYDER.
And I'm just reading,
yeah, Yeah.
I mean, we can certainly and that's that's not a problem.
I think all that information
is given out to the athletes at the beginning of the season.
But there's there's nothing wrong with with that in that.
Okay.
Thank you.
Regarding
this has kept shy regarding the return to play paragraph on the second page
some concern regarding the intent and the wording in the first sentence.
It says until the student is evaluating cleared
for return to participation in writing by a licensed physician
certified registered nurse, practitioner, or cardiologist.
If the intent is just to have a license and independent practitioner,
sign off on the return to play, which I don't think is a good idea, then
then that you should just have license independent practitioner.
This is a student that's had a near-death episode,
and the way it's worded now, a family practice nurse practitioner
could sign for return to play, and I don't think that's a good idea.
This, this should be a physician.
A physician should have to sign off on this return to play.
And then that makes the next sentence consistent.
The physicians note,
because if you're going to keep that license, independent practitioner,
which would be nurse practitioners, then you would have to change the wording
in the next sentence.
Okay, So I see there's a five citation.
There is that language we can
I'm. Going to look now.
Okay.
I understand what Dr.
Scholl saying with less consistency and of medical
expert advice.
So assuming we can change it
if we're able to, that's not written specifically in the code,
what would you suggest changing it to a Dr.
Scholl.
The that first sentence until the student is evaluating clear
to return to participation in writing by a physician licensed physician.
I guess we'll just leave it at that.
Without a certified nurse.
Or cardiologist. Okay. Yeah.
I mean, optimally, it should be a cardiologist
or a sports medicine physician who knows exactly what
he's doing.
I mean, I've
you know, in my
my career as an emergency physician, I only saw a small handful of these
and in the ER and boy, they are scary.
And even if everything was normal, there was no way I was signing them
to return.
They were seeing a cardiologist before they went back.
So it's just that simple. What?
So believe it or not, when you hit on that citation,
it takes you and it says it's no longer available.
So then you have to go to another House bill.
But I was able to find that so that what the language reads
is in order to help determine whether a student is ready to return to
play the licensed physician or certified registered nurse practitioner may consult
any other licensed or certified medical professional.
So that's how it currently reads.
Once again, just like anything else, that's the minimum standard.
We can always make our standards higher,
you know, than what the minimum is.
So that's it's really up to the group what they want to decide.
I just want to read what's our what what is the the language
that's in the code.
So would it be better
just to strike out certified nurse
practitioner and leave cardiologist
or just strike them all out?
You could leave you could leave licensed physician or cardiologist,
but just being redundant because the cardiologists
are physicians.
I'm comfortable with striking that language out
and just leaving it with licensed physician.
Could I ask one question in the following sentence
where it says to verify return to place status?
Or are
school district staff meaning the athletic trainer,
head coach and athletic director
also,
you know, examining the student and not just taking this
physician's word for it is that come into play or is it
the physician says return to work and they verify.
Okay.
Or return to play that they're saying that's okay.
Is there still another examination by the staff?
That's how I, I verifying the note.
I'm I guess I'm I'm not real clear on that sentence.
Yeah,
that's a good point.
Maybe the maybe the word should be confirmed
as opposed to verify, because I think we're asking
we're asking those three people to exercise some independent judgment.
It sounds like.
I like the word confirm.
Yeah.
What do you think, Dr.
Scholl?
That changed.
That's fine.
Here.
Okay, so if we include those
minor changes,
are there any other comments?
What's the what's the thought process or the difference between saying
confirm or verify?
I'm not following along with
I to me reading this,
it sounds like they're just verifying that there is a physician's note
where I think confirming would say the student is healthy
and it's it's their judgment as well as the.
Position.
That the athlete is healthy enough to return to play.
Right.
The only question I would have like that is, does
that give them any liability because they're on.
Yeah, I think I mean my mind might have changed here was too
you know they're not just checking the box and I just think it's a
for their exercise some independent judgment and not that's
what I tried to suggest by the word confirm
that their assessment as well is that this person can turn.
John, does that open
my concern for the trainer, the head coach and the athletic directors?
Is that opening them up for any liability because they're really not physician.
Do you see what I'm trying to say?
I mean, that kind of puts them into the loop or not.
I don't know if you thought about it that way.
Well, I wouldn't suggest that they would override
a physician's note or, you know, if
I think that it would all work
in the a collaboration working together
and that they're not just verifying. Yes.
You have a note.
Yeah.
And in reality, being a head coach of of a varsity sport,
if we get that physician's note from a physician that says it's
okay for the child to play, provided that they've been practicing
and are able to play well, I shouldn't say practicing,
but that they're able to play according to physician.
We're letting them play.
We would we would not override that.
That note.
So to
Maria's point, my guys as a as a coach,
if a doctor can if a doctor says that they are healthy
enough to return to play, I'm not saying that they can't play.
So that
that's been my experience and throughout that I've taken.
No, I was just thinking that the the the school staff
would might have a better
has worked with the athlete more in my Yeah.
See the signs are no no and I understand that I just I'm trying to think through
all the different scenarios that I've had and I can't think of a scenario
where I would tell a child they or an athlete they can't play.
If a doctor is claiming them to play right to that point,
I'm not a physician, so I can't make that call.
I mean, if it's clear they're out there
and they're having difficulties, we would we would pull them from the event.
But barring that,
you know, we we let them play.
We have no reason not to.
And so long as you trust the
the doctor's word, then I guess that's it then.
Yeah.
And, and we have to I mean I,
I don't know how we would challenge our
physicians.
I think there's trust, right, between the doctors, the parents, the coaches.
You know, at some point somebody is going to have to say,
okay, maybe got a no, but I don't think he should be here.
So and I mean, I'm not arguing at all.
I think it's a really good conversation to have.
But I think the way it's written just kind of lets it
unfold the way it's supposed to unfold
between all of the parties involved.
Yeah, understand that.
Yeah.
Typically what happens and I
know from from a coaching standpoint,
we get the note, we give it to the trainer, the trainer reviews the note.
They're the most they're the folks with the most medical knowledge that we have.
If they say the athlete can play, then provide it.
They're practicing and are look like they're able to play and compete.
Then we let them play and compete.
That's okay. That's good.
I just thought. The word verify was a little.
Yeah, verify, confirm. Or something a little bit. More.
I think they're both I think both words are fine.
If we want confirm, we'll go with confirm.
I think.
I think they're okay.
I'll leave it to the.
Yeah.
The powers that be just my $0.02
either way.
So if we but we, we all agreed
to strike out the certified registered nurse practitioner
which I love, my certified nurse practitioner.
So and my, my kids, my children both go to a certified nurse practitioner.
So by striking that out, that would mean I would have
to find a different physician.
So only if you almost drop dead and more student athlete.
That's the only thing this is for.
This is just returned to play after after the kid almost dropped dead.
Yeah.
So that's all that's the only thing that skips point.
Like if that's the situation that occurred, you're going to want someone
like a specialist to a cardiologist to look at your child.
Okay. All right. That's makes sense.
All right.
So if we strike out the certified nurse practitioner
and then went to Caps point
the whole thing after licensed physician because cardiologist is redundant.
Right. Right.
And then verify, confirm, we can flip a coin.
Really?
So I have to make the changes salary
going with confirm or
confirms. Fine.
I mean so Keith Graham I think confirms better than verify.
You're not really verifying what the doctor saying. Right.
You're confirming confirming what they're saying.
Yeah.
Yeah. Okay.
All right. Confirm.
Are there any other comments or questions
seen? None.
Let's go ahead and have a motion, please, then to move
one 23.2 sudden cardiac arrest
to the full board for 30 day review approval.
With with the changes.
So moved Capshaw.
Yes. Second Maria Miami after Shamsi.
All right. Any further discussion?
Are those in favor say I any opposed?
All right.
The motion carries.
So those are it for our
revised policies.
Next, we're going to move on to our new policies.
And if we could skip down to item s policy.
832 educational equity, just because this has been on our agenda
and I don't want to run out of time for it,
this is one of our goals as a policy committee
and it's also one of our comprehensive goals as a school district.
So I just want to make sure that we get our equity policy in place.
So the only caveat to that is making sure that we hit the 113 one
and 113 four because it is a monitoring cycle for our special ed department.
Okay.
So I don't think they'll take longer, have much debate. So.
All right. So
832 educational equity
and this is a this is a policy that
PSB has has worked on for the last couple of years to develop
with an equity task force
with a lot of different stakeholders from across the state.
And Doctor Heather
Bennett and Heather Massad
put a lot of time into this policy
to to develop it into what it is now, a very comprehensive
it's important to note that it's in the eight hundreds as an operational policy
because equity should really be at the foundation of education
and we should be looking at everything through that equity lens and every aspect
that we do.
So does anybody have any comments or questions on US policy?
This is something that our district has been moving towards
and this just sort of grounds the work that we're.
This is
publicly funded.
I think it's a
very good document.
It's a personal equity audit.
Periodically conduct.
I would just
ask if we would provide periodically periodic
basis or we have very often,
I think, as we say in this article.
John, you were cutting in and out there a little bit.
Are you talking about the
you said something about periodic
how long we should for accountability, how long, how often we should get updates?
Is that what you're talking about?
Yeah, I was talking about the older section.
How often do we need to have the done
and late analysis period.
And I would suggest
at least not North.
Okay, So you're talking about the audit
which says she'll periodic conduct and you think how often you do it.
Yeah we're.
Right now we.
Take all up on the, you know, once every three years what, three or four years?
I think that we always keep on at least so.
So John, I can I can speak to that a little bit.
So when new policies come out, when you see words like periodic annual
I forget the other word that they throw in there.
I chose periodically because it's our first time
and I'm not sure how long it will take to complete this audit
and that.
So I was just being cautious,
knowing that we can always come back and add a specific period of time.
I just didn't want to put in every three years knowing that
it takes over a year to do it, and then we're conducting an audit
before we really had a chance to to make any substantive systemic changes.
So that that's the reason now.
And but by all means, this committee can put in a time frame.
So that was just me thinking out
at the time where I put it on the agenda.
So, yeah, well, that makes sense then.
Jason, I appreciate any better word.
They like.
John.
We missed you there. Can you repeat that?
Yeah. Yes.
Thanks for that, Jason.
I think her word would be disruptive.
We're going to that.
We're going to take that as you.
Thank you, Mr.
Refsnyder, But I can't hear what the last part of that was.
I'm suggesting that we would hope
the word would be regularly.
That works for me, John.
Regularly. Okay.
Because then that would apply more
of a consistency rather than just.
Yeah.
Right. Every now and then.
And for those that don't know, we are currently
in the
stages of an audit, so we are working with Nicole Hahn Sims of the Department
of Department of Health I'm sorry, Hahn of Education
to to conduct that audit.
And like Mr.
R-centre said,
it could be a period of time before we get those results back
and then figure out what type of systematic changes to implement
and then see how that
plays out over a course of time to see what the results
will be after that.
The only other thing
that I wanted to add to was under on the next page
on page three, under administrators, teachers and staff
item number two,
where it says efforts to recruit and select personnel.
I just wanted to add efforts to recruit, comma, select,
comma and support personnel because there's a lot of
a lot of information about,
you know, if you if you recruit,
you know, persons of color
or black administrators or teachers,
that's wonderful.
But then if you don't have a support structure in place to
to have that support for them, then then, you know, there's it's
you're not doing yourself any, any good.
So I just want to make sure we have that support in there.
Are there any other comments, questions?
All right.
CNN Can I have a motion then to move
educational equity 32 to the full board for a 30 day review?
So we would keep your.
Miriam, I mean,
any further discussion,
All those in favor say I, I, me oppose.
All right.
The motion carries.
Next, let's back up to policies
one 13.1 discipline of students with disabilities
and one 13.4 confidentiality of special education student information.
And again, I think these are new policies for us.
PSB Have these policies established
prior to and just because we didn't
have the policy didn't mean that we were weren't doing it.
I think this policies are just reflecting what we're already been doing
and then the, you know, the
the language updates that came up out of the other policy
and from the monitoring, it brought it to our attention
that we just needed to put this on our policy book as well.
Am I is that an accurate representation?
Yeah.
So I was going back and looking just at our policies
and at one point in time we did have this policy.
What what happened to it? I have no idea.
So what I'm thinking is when we made the conversion or PSP
made the conversion to board docs, maybe somehow it got missed, but we did have it.
So I was surprised when I went through and I'm like, Well, where is this policy at?
I know we had it.
So anyways, this has all the updates
that that SBS recommend recommending.
And so anybody have any questions
or comments?
I have just one question on one 13.1
for discipline.
Are students with disabilities
under
the administration administrative removal of interim alternative
education setting for certain infractions Under number one,
it talks about weapons.
I was happy to see
that it excludes pocket knives.
So because, you know, there's a lot of kids
that go camping over the weekend or whatever and then accidentally ends up
with a Swiss Army knife in their bag.
And the question I had about the listing of weapon
is defined as a weapon device and strap material or substance.
It's come up before from
some other
board that I've been a part of that
that that has been interpreted as as mace or pepper spray,
which some girls have carried, you know, as a self-protection
and so I just wonder how that would be interpreted,
because I
wouldn't want to see one of our students get in trouble for that.
Yeah.
So we would go back to our weapons policy on that one for sure.
And and if you look there, when I first joined the district,
that was a big topic of discussion
because of some incident or one particular incident that occurred.
So, Kip, if you remember, we changed that language to a reasonable person.
And so
so a reasonable person, if someone's
using it in self-defense, it would be self self-defense.
Yeah.
And I also think here in this particular policy, it reads
that is used for or is readily capable
of causing death or serious bodily injury.
And I don't think that reasonable people would think that that pepper Correct.
Is it falls into that category.
Okay. All right.
Thank you. I just want to clarify that point.
Right.
And if there are no further questions or comments, can I have a motion?
And to move both of these policies, one 13.1 and one 13.4
to the full board for 30 day review.
So move, capture.
Second. Maria. Mommy.
All right.
Any further discussion?
All those in favor say I II and the Opposed.
All right. The motion carries.
Next is policy one 46.1 Trauma
informed approach.
This again,
is another optional policy that also is sort of,
you know, goes hand in hand with our equity initiatives.
This is also reflective of
programs and initiatives that our school district has already been doing.
Dr. Lisa, our this is Lisa miller has already been doing
a lot of these initiatives of trauma informed care
and just recently it was,
you know, put into the code for the School Safety and Security Committee.
Are even school directors are required to get training now
on an annual basis for trauma informed care.
And we could also say, well, check with our solicitor on this one
where our solicitor helped, as you can see from the notes, helped write the policy.
So yes, yes, Mr.
Z was a big part of this and he participated in many of the trainings
across the state.
So he's at the forefront of this issue.
All right.
If there are no questions or comments, can I have a motion then to move 146
point to the full board?
So move capture the second.
Maria. Mimi, thank you.
Any further discussion?
All those in favor say I, I any opposed? I
the motion carries next policy is policy
252 dating violence
and this is a policy that I think came up
because of the title nine sexual harassment updates.
And this is something that we didn't have.
This is something that Mr. Reisner and I had talked about previously.
And so I'm happy to see this policy come up.
I think this is something that we should have
for for our students
just as an extra layer of protection.
And so
I'm glad to
do to prevent
I I'm actually here tonight because of this policy.
That's why I just wanted more information on it,
because I was unclear as to
and it could they could just be completely
the example I'm going to use just might be totally irrelevant
to what this intention is for this policy.
So that's why I came for clarification.
I think if a student leaves
the campus and let's say somebody sends them
a really mean Snapchat or something on social media happens
outside a school district, hours outside of the campus.
And I know as a parent in the past, like the school district
is not responsible for things that don't happen during the school day.
So I was just wondering what the how does that
I mean, it's not the right word, but how did that mentality
or how does that relate to this policy?
Yeah.
So anything that happens outside of school that has an impact on on
that impacts a student's ability to learn while they're at school,
that definitely then becomes
an issue that the school needs or a concern
that the school needs to address.
So even though it's happened outside of it's similar to bullying
or cyber bullying, if it happens outside and has an impact
on either students learning during the school day, we do.
We do have
an obligation that to act.
So I'm not sure that's exactly what you're asking,
wanting an answer for
Maria.
But the days of saying it happened outside of school
and we have no responsibility, those those days are kind of kind of over.
So if it doesn't impact
either student's ability to learn substantially
and we do have limited powers, but if it
if it's having a major impact and I'll just give you an example.
Let's say there were some violence in both students are in the same classroom
and the one student cannot learn because of what happened then.
We do have a responsibility as a school district to take corrective actions.
So yeah, I think that's a great policy.
It's just kind of wondering.
It seemed like there were some blurred lines there, but.
That's yeah, there still are blurred lines.
It really comes back to and I think our bullying policy does a better job
and actually her harassment policies do a better job of defining
when it's appropriate to take action, when it's not appropriate to take action.
I'm not sure that we could
make revisions to the policy to accommodate this scenario.
What would the administration have a guess or an inkling what they would do
if the alleged perpetrator
were of a different school district
and therefore hypothetically wouldn't
get our student handbook, wouldn't get our student code of conduct,
wouldn't be obliged to look our district website.
And like I said, I don't know that we can make reservation
provisions to cover that.
But you know, any sense how that would go?
Yeah, I don't at this time.
That's something I think.
So one of the things we learn in school, all classes
when we're not sure do the right thing, when we're not sure
what the right thing is, contact your solicitor.
So this would certainly be a case where
I know what the right thing to do is, but I'd still contact our solicitor.
And I will say this is an existing policy.
So it's likely that some other surrounding school districts already
have this policy in place.
We can hope.
But but I can find out that answer.
And earlier you had asked a question about best practices,
and I'll find that answer out and get back to you as well.
I a comment about the complaint procedure
because it outlines that it would be reported to the building principal.
Are there other identified teachers or staff
or mental health professionals that are also
identified as people to report to
if they feel unsafe with the principal
or uncomfortable I should say?
Yeah.
So if memory serves me correctly, this came out before
the Title nine policy came
out and revisions because we just didn't get to it.
So I, I have
a strong suspicion that this policy is going to be updated in the near future.
And the reason I'm saying that is because everyone had to get trained,
our entire administrative staff on how to conduct a complaint,
you know, and then of course, as the compliance officer
said, who's conducting the investigation?
So to answer your question, other people,
it may be reported to them, but at this point
in time, I would not want anyone else conducting an investigation
unless they were trained in how to conduct an investigation.
And I think I was focusing more on the student making the complaint.
Yeah. So they can they can make a complaint to anybody.
And that that happens quite quickly.
I shouldn't say quite frequently, because we don't have
traditionally had incidents like this.
But usually students will go and share information with a staff member
that they're most comfortable with and then they get referred to
the appropriate person.
And part of the policy to says that the dating violence training
will be provided to guidance counselors, nurses and mental health staff. So.
All right.
Any further discussion questions?
Can I have a motion then to move
policy 252 dating violence to the full board for 30 day review approval.
So moved kept your.
Second summary of many
any further discussion.
All those in favor say I.
I oppose.
All right.
The motion carries
and then the last one on our list is policy three 17.1
Educator misconduct.
Again, I feel like
this is another one that PSB had a policy for,
but just came up with the title nine Sexual harassment
updates.
And again, you know not a policy that we had
but are still practices that we have in place.
So is everybody comfortable with this policy?
Any questions, comments?
Scene
nine Can I have a motion then to move policy three 17.1
Educator misconduct to the full board for 30 day review approval.
So moved kept showing.
You got a second.
Oh second.
Maria Mimi thank you very
any further discussion
all those in favor
say I, i, i any opposed All right.
The motion carries and that's everything, right? Yes.
And I see no public available for comments.
So our next meeting is scheduled
for February 8th, 2021 at 5 p.m.
and I want to thank you all for coming here tonight.
Meeting adjourned at 553.