I like to call the
Policy Standing Committee meeting to order at 509.
So I could just do a quick roll call.
Tricia Steiner I'm a school board member.
Kathy Seger School Board.
Stephanie Patton Arsenal Member.
Just as a citizen advisor.
Jason Rice Senator representing the administration.
At Homestead Citizen Advisor.
John Abell School Board.
Great.
The summary minutes are attached,
and I just wanted to note that
to close the loop about
the nondiscrimination policies.
One, two, 3123.11042 48
and 348 that we discuss regarding
the reasonable time frame.
QUESTION Mr.
Speaker, that you have the last one right there is discussion about the vague time
frame provided
and the following language sets the sentence that read the complaint,
and the accused shall be informed of the outcome of the investigation
within a reasonable time of the submission of the written report.
So we checked
on that language with our solicitor and he said to keep that as is.
So I just want to close that loop.
Okay.
Thank you.
And if anybody else has any questions or comments
or corrections for the minutes, let me know.
Moving along to item number four,
Unfinished Business Policy 707 Use of school
facilities.
Yes. So this work started,
I think, last year and we weren't making a lot of progress.
So I believe it was our first meeting this past fall
that we decided to form an ad hoc committee with the goal of coming
back to this committee at today's meeting to inform you of our recommended changes.
So the committee was great.
It took a lot of work and a lot of discussion back and forth.
But what we came up with let me back up
and say what we decided to at least recommend.
So one of the comments our solicitor had made
was at one of the meetings or through an email was that
the current policy is very cumbersome, very wordy
and very lengthy and tough for any member
of the community most likely to understand and be able to interpret.
So with that being said, it just so happened
that PSB actually made a recommendation or changes to their recommended
policy.
So what we actually did from a committee standpoint or ad hoc committee
standpoint was to break our policy down and just make it very simple to read,
but then add some administrative regulations
that spell out the the meat or the essence of of that particular policy.
So what you see and what I sent out to the committee
ahead of time was the actual policy.
And then essentially for administrative regulations,
the facility request form could be considered a regulation as well.
But the use of school
facilities, rules for school facilities and then fees and rental schedules.
So I'm not sure where we want to start.
Perhaps we start with the actual policy for the committee to look
at and then we go from there.
And Dr.
Shadows enter the room too.
So thank you, Dr.
Scholl.
So the actual policy
provides some basic overview of the reason that or the purpose
that we're allowing the community to use the facilities, the authority
to grant the use delegation of responsibility
and then some basic application guidelines.
So it's not completely void of what someone needs to do,
but it's clearly not that the nine or ten pages
that that we had before.
And then of course, some
what I would consider fairly obvious violations
and what you can and can't do.
So that's
so our our original policy is now down to four pages
and follows what SBA has for the most part, recommend it.
So if there's ever any changes to their recommended facility use policy
due to some regulations or laws and it will be easy for anyone
to follow what those changes are and and make those changes.
And here we added a little bit of our own language
as far as who approves the administrative regulation.
So if you remember from other conversations, typically admin
regulations or guidelines are not approved or by the board.
In this case they will be approved by the board
similar to our recently passed nondiscrimination
policy. So
so the board will have oversight over over any fee schedule
and over any facility use
recommended changes questions on on this.
So this is
fairly non-controversial at the moment.
The only thing
I never did reply to that email about was
I was thinking we should add a few more lines.
That's that say
refer to the administrative regulation so that people know
that there's more to read,
which I made a note somewhere.
But but it does say that you you mention does say the superintendent
or designee sure.
Implement administrative regulations or procedures.
I just wondered if somebody reads
this want to make sure they know that there's so much more they need to read.
So so so yeah I'm not sure how they can get away from that
because I mean, they'll be attached right to the policy and board docs
when they go to our website to use the facilities.
These admin regulated regs will be there.
Mark and laurel and or buildings and ground department will will
send them to them because they have to if they're actually using the facility.
I think our,
our facility use forms now even refers
that they've read everything.
So we certainly added.
Cathy Yeah, but I don't want to over overdo it at the same time.
Right to the back of the, the new facility use form says I have read
the rules administrative regulations and board policy of the use.
I'm good if you want to leave it that way.
I just never responded back.
Yeah, no. Words.
Tie that up.
So perhaps
we go to the most controversial thing and then we back up
because I don't really think the other parts of it are
so Reynolds fees.
So this is kind of how things start. It's
so if you remember,
the question was brought up
due to excessive use of the fields on on various tournament.
Shall
we be charging groups that are hosting tournaments more than other groups?
And where do we go from here?
We came up at that time, it was all right.
We wanted to limit the use of our school facilities.
So the administration was tasked with coming up with a plan to do so.
Well, we certainly did, because we heard from the community that it would
pretty much be and they would be unable to use our facilities, which
then the direction was, no, we want we want the facilities to be used.
Let's set a reasonable amount to use those.
We've always had a waiver.
When we were going through this, there became some issues with the waiver
and the comfortability of of approving some waivers and not other waivers.
So what we've decided to do as a and once again, this is these are recommendation.
This is not what has been decided, but what the committee decided to present,
the ad hoc committee decided to present to this committee
is to leave the the groups as is, which we just approved.
So we would have nonprofits, we would we would have school related groups,
we would have nonprofits and all other categories,
which would be anybody that's not a nonprofit or school related.
We decided to come up with three different fee structures,
one which is for school groups.
So that's group one where they would they pay
no fees to use the facilities, which is what happens now.
The only fees that they would be required to pay would be the actual custodial
or maintenance or any fees associated with personnel.
We then decided in the
group to not to charge any facility
fees unless it's for an athletic tournament.
So I academic tournament would be exempt.
No charge for fees, but an athletic tournament inside or outside of
would be charged.
The facility use fees, otherwise the only fee that they would need to
pay would be fees associated with personnel cost.
Outside of the regularly scheduled work shift.
So if we have a group that is using a classroom
4 to 6:00 at night, they're a nonprofit, they would not be charged the personnel
fee because we already have people in here cleaning and taking care of things.
If they would use the facility on a weekend where there's no personnel around,
then they would be charged that fee
and it would be the actual cost
of of the personnel, not just a standard cost.
So pretty much we go for a group to submitting waivers for every time,
I shouldn't say every time the majority a group to submitting waivers
not to pay facilities, fees to group to
not being able to submit a waiver.
So the waiver is gone for group to what with the ability
to not no longer pay filled usage, classroom usage,
but only pay personnel cost when when warranted.
And then we have group three, which would pay
the facility cost and also the personnel cost.
So it essentially eliminates
the waiver, which was a concern for the board and making sure
that they're not discriminating while they're
authorizing or approving or denying denying waivers.
It does add some extra costs to the district.
In addition, say, extra costs.
We don't
the district won't,
for a better word,
be able to recoup some funds that it may be had in the past.
But if we remember that those costs were arbitrarily decided anyway.
So if we decide to to to rent our classrooms for $20 an hour
and then we upped the classroom weight to $100 an hour,
it's all relative and perspective anyways,
from an administrative standpoint, this is this new the new recommendations
would be fairly easy to implement and observe and
and process, unlike
some of the things that we have going on now.
As far as group two goes, we did clarify
they could be a5a1c3 recognized by the federal government
or they can also be on Pennsylvania non nonprofit or charity less.
And so that would be a qualification as well.
And that's now outlined
in the description of group two
questions on on fees.
I just wanted to know
does would group to include camps like if there's a nonprofit group
coming in every day for a week at a time.
Described.
You know what I mean kind of I mean in the way that a tournament uses
the facilities at a bulk time.
I wonder if the camp would be.
So at this point in time.
So we ran through a lot of scenarios, camps.
We didn't run through that one, but we had a large discussion
of the word tournament and athletic tournament and other usage.
And so to answer your question, no camps would not be charged a fee
that the reason that we landed on the word
tournament was to try to separate the nonprofit group
doing something that was nonprofit versus when they were clearly doing something
that was for profit.
And we thought that tournament was one word.
Everybody understands.
We didn't talk about camps because I don't know that camps
would be for profit if there would be a scenario where a camp would be for profit.
Maybe we should look at that, but otherwise it would fall in that category.
This is a nonprofit
and the events nonprofit, so then they wouldn't have the usage fees.
That's why we landed on tournament.
Yeah.
The nice thing about the administrative regulations is that it doesn't
necessarily need to go through the 30 day review process
every time we we want to make a change.
So if we do change the facility fee structure, that that can go
right to the board to make a change.
So I absolutely see your point.
There are some athletic camps, in fact, many athletic cancer for profit camps.
So if it becomes an issue, it would be easy to add that language.
Is it are you thinking of a nonprofit that runs a camp and they make a profit?
Yes. I can't think of any
I don't want to have to name names, but
because a lot of our youth camps are kind of booster,
but there are some camps, but their profit,
their run, they're not a nonprofit.
It depends.
Okay.
Yeah, because but you could it was a really good question
because we not talk about that and that's another bulk use thing.
Yeah,
but I was just trying to think of what you're referring to
and I can't think of so top of my head at.
This point, I'm not sure I would recommend
adding camps until we see if it's being misused
and not.
So I don't want to go on record saying that the groups
that were organizing tournaments were misusing the fields.
That's no, not at all.
What I'm saying.
I'm just if it becomes an issue and people are trying to use
that as a loophole, then it's easy for the board to close that loop.
Thank you.
Mm hmm.
So I want to make sure I understand.
So in group two, then,
if you're
you have to be a nonprofit and there's no rentals
unless you are hosting an athletic tournament.
Is that right? That's correct. Okay.
And then we prescribed the runoff fees down here.
And did we did we bring those numbers that were from the last time?
That's yes.
So those numbers, except for all other facilities, those numbers
came from our current fee structure, I believe, for nonprofit groups.
All right.
So we are actually remove
in fees for nonprofits.
Unless it's for an athletic tournament, you know, So any other.
Nonprofit that they used to pay or asked for a waiver,
we would get a slew of waivers all the time.
No more waivers.
No more waivers, just no fee.
But still have to pay the labor.
If the labor is not already working here, like if it's a Sunday evening,
we probably don't have a custodian here
in a you're running something and you do have to pay for the custodian.
But if our custodian has already here, you do not have to pay.
So when when
organization fills out the facility request form
and they need the labor, do they get like a quote back from the.
That would be an expectation for Mr.
Anderson and his group to communicate what that estimate of cost would be.
And and the other thing with this is
if it's a large and I'll just use a tournament or even, let's say camp,
so I don't want to pinpoint and narrow it down for one group or another,
but that event requires
multiple personnel to be here outside of the time they they pay
the fees that we believe as a district are necessary to make this particular
event run smoothly and safely.
So if we believe that we need Derry Township police
to be involved for security, then they pay for that cost as well.
Okay.
So quick question.
What if there's two events going on that require labor and they split the cost?
It depends
on the size of the event.
I mean, like if like you're saying a custodian says two people,
three groups have a thing on a Sunday, they just I would have to ask Mr.
Anderson how he currently structures that, but I would imagine
they split it.
Good question.
Any additional questions
on the fee schedule?
Can we back up to the policy for a minute?
Jason? I just had a couple absolutely.
One very minor.
And then just a couple of questions on the policy.
So I know the power policy and number six talks about no tobacco.
So do we interpret that to mean no vaping as well?
So am I.
Am I going to be able to go to a school that and and vape
versus I know you can't use a cigaret, you can't smoke there.
So I wanted to do we think that through.
Where are you John using.
Specific policies as covered
by nicotine delivery nicotine delivery products.
All right.
Thanks.
And then
the other thing I had, which was just a minor, is a typo
under our guidelines application process, second
line up from the bottom.
I think that should be. But
yes, then
the the last thing was number two, I want to make sure.
So number two is I think I mean,
copies of bylaws.
So do we do we.
Require.
Every applicant to have to submit the bylaws?
You know,
Jason, if we historically requested that, I'd have to get back to you.
John. That's correct.
That was in the previous version.
But if we actually practice what our policy says.
That right, I believe it's just upon request.
Yes, upon request. So we can request it.
But I'm not we
I don't think it comes with every application, but it might
I mean, I'm not quite sure where they're collecting. Yeah.
I think we say copies of bylaws upon request.
I think that's what it does. Say that's.
How you read. It. Yes. As may be requested.
Okay, great.
And then number three, I wanted to try to understand
was number three, evidence of organizational liability.
So does that mean that we require a certificate of insurance?
We do. Okay. Yeah, okay.
I think that's detailed in one of the administrative regulations.
Right. The amount. Correct. Oh, that's. Good.
All right.
Yeah.
You had to have 500,000 in bodily injury, 100,000 property damage.
You do have to show proof of that when you.
Yeah. Great. That's.
That's all I had is apologizes.
Okay, then we'll move to I.
Had one one small comment.
I don't know if it's minor or not
but under the same prohibited activities is number one.
Whereas does possession
use or distribution of illegal drugs and or alcoholic beverages.
I would thinking
is to say alcoholic beverages and or illegal drugs.
I just think the illegal adjective can
maybe limit the alcohol in some way.
Someone might misinterpret that
to just think like the alcohol is only illegal
if you're a minor versus
I don't know if someone would try and twist that or not.
Mm hmm.
Where if you just say alcoholic beverages, that covers all alcohol
and or illegal drugs and to which it I just thought it was.
Yeah, I just thought it would be a little bit cleaner.
That's good, right?
To say. Well, I'm. I'm over 21.
Oh, yeah. I'm 21.
It illegal. Okay.
I just thought it would be a little bit cleaner.
Anyone else?
Okay, then if we
take a look at the use of school facilities. Yes.
This is the document that provides
more detail into the different classifications.
So school related activity, organization activities,
which now specifically we address includes district recognized booster clubs.
So that language wasn't
singled out, but that's one of the things the ad hoc committee we discussed
and booster clubs definitely would fit into to that category nonprofits.
So we did add language.
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Department of State
is required
in order to be identified as a nonprofit.
And we also singled out
that any nonprofit using it for an athletic tournament
sanction shall be subject to the nonprofit fee schedule.
Otherwise, the classifications have remained the same
of what we currently have.
The general application guidelines
are pretty much taken from a combination of what PSB had and what we previously
had in our policy and the recommendations from this committee.
Last time.
So any
questions, comments, concerns with
Air Zero?
I like it.
And then the last one is
just kind of general use of school facilities.
So it's letting organizations know specifically what they can and cannot do.
I did add broke it down into use of in addition to general rules,
use of kitchen use of auditorium
and then use of synthetic turf and track.
The one thing we forgot to mention is the turf manager
fee is now is now gone.
So that's no longer fee that the committee felt was necessary.
So sorry for not mentioning that earlier, but that's one of the things
that was eliminated.
So we don't even have that on the list at all.
Correct.
Okay.
I, I mean, I think with that
we have the rules, regulations, cameras to if we find damage.
So I see. I think the turf manager was a good idea.
We first put the turf in ten years ago.
But I think it's it's it were done. Correct.
And another comment the committee or someone in the committee made
which makes a lot of sense if we're opening up our track for use from
dawn to dusk
without anyone supervising it.
You know what?
Essentially, we're relying on a video to monitor.
And if there's damage or it's misuse, then the board has the right
to revoke the use from that particular organization moving forward.
And also, I felt like there was a double dip.
There are some times
when we would waive the fee, but then we would pay someone to be there.
So we were costing ourselves money and it was already opened.
I'd never like that.
Correct
Questions Concerns with the rules.
Just I just want to add a comma
under number two, under general rules on the first page,
unless weather related comma,
right?
Yeah.
Oh right.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Sure.
Okay.
What?
I would like to thank the ad hoc committee for their time and feedback.
Lots of colorful discussion, but it was.
I mean, it was needed in order to get to a place where we are now.
The amount of conversation
that we had was absolutely what was needed.
You know, I've been in so many, I, I share this story a lot.
This is the fourth district I've worked in,
and this is the only district that has modified that policy so often.
Many of them get not many of them are not revised
because you have so many people with their own particular interests
that you can never make any headway. So
the only thing that we still need to work
out is the our limitation
in our our protected groups say that any group that's using the facility for
or that is not using the facility because of same sex or
a particular religion, that they can't use that
because we have a nondiscrimination clause.
So we do need to make sure that we're communicating with their groups.
That and I'll just give an example of the girls field hockey team is
not girls field hockey, but if field hockey is offering
something that they need to open it up to two boys as well.
I, I talked to Tricia about this, okay.
Because I was worried about girls on the run hockey softball.
And we Tricia had a really good point that we think they're fine.
If you look at it's I'm on air zero use of facilities
number two inclusiveness under a as as a youth group
that primarily serves young people under age 21
including but not limited to youth groups defined by the Boy Scouts of America.
Bob above may restrict its membership in leadership
and or include an oath of allegiance to God and country.
So it says a youth group
serving to under 21 can restrict their membership in leadership.
Yeah, I think just to be safe, we should probably check with our solicitor.
But if nothing else, it's just getting word out to our groups
to make sure they're they're open for for all individuals to participate.
So we definitely double check.
Like so I think Girls on the Run is safe
because I think the controversy comes
when you try to go
neutral, is that
that was created as a safe space to build girls self-esteem.
It was it's a there's a particular purpose in mind.
So what we'll do is we'll. Do this double check.
Yeah.
That they don't need to be open. Correct.
So how about we leave it at this will move this forward.
We'll check with our solicitor on that language.
And from what I'm hearing from this committee is we don't though
those particular types of groups.
We want them to be able to operate as as they are.
So if our solicitor needs to modify the language to
to go with the intent
of this committee, then we have the authorization to do so.
Is that what I'm hearing? Yeah.
And as far as field hockey is concerned, you boys can play
field hockey up until eighth grade, but they cannot play in high school.
And there's a reason because they're stronger and faster.
And I don't want to play against the boy either. When they hit that ball.
So I think youth feel like it would be fine.
Letting boys play is just that.
We've always said it's open to girls. Yeah.
But so that's one of the things the ad Hoc committee kind of
addressed and tried to handle.
When we said we'd wait until we were done checking with everything else
before we would go to our solicitor.
So from what I'm hearing is we're at the point
now that it's probably time to get our solicitor involved,
just to make sure that we're not adding something that we didn't intend to have.
Right. Right.
We have a sense of how many
for profit camps are are run.
I'm not sure.
Would it be would it be just prudent to add that in there now and be done with it?
Well, I don't know, just because I would imagine
we have more academic camps than we have athletic camps or pretty close like.
So we have kids camp.
I know that's a nonprofit.
I don't know.
Well, that's one of the things why I like this new setup
of having the administrative regulations, because it is easier.
It's more flexible to change as our needs arise.
So I appreciate the committee's work on this, too.
This is this is really great.
So the committee was thinking this would be a July one start date.
We didn't think there'd be
too many organizations that would complain about not having to pay the facility fee
moving forward.
Yeah, I don't think it's
going to change much other than actually benefit some people.
So I don't think we're going to be causing any problems.
And most most organizations
have already gone through the nonprofit status.
They last because of this new Yeah, they know about it.
Okay, sounds good to me.
Um, can I have a motion to
approve the use of school facilities?
707 With revisions to the full board
for a 30 day review approval
so moved second.
All right.
Any further discussion?
All those in favor say I, I any oppose.
All right.
Use of school facilities has been moved to the full board.
Next center list is policy
317 conduct disciplinary procedures.
Yeah. So.
So I'm the person that actually is bringing this
for so at our statewide h.r.
Conference
in harrisburg,
i think this was the end of february, beginning of march,
one of the solicitors from starke.
The leader was just going over updates, and there seems to be a conflict
between that doesn't seem to be.
There is a conflict between school code and also the educator disciplinary act.
So the Education educator discipline act says that any
misdemeanor or felony arrest or conviction,
an employee has to report that to the superintendent
so the superintendent can then report it to PD.
And that's that's a requirement under the Educator Disciplinary Act.
How however, the school code says that
the only thing that things that need to be reported
are misdemeanors and felonies that pertain to section.
I think it is
111 of the school code, which pretty much means crimes against kids.
And any school employee that that gets employed
has to sign off on PD six Sara Sara for saying they haven't done this.
So their recommendation at the conference was just to have any
wrestler conviction, any an employees arrested
or convicted that they report that to the school district.
However, after going back and reading that again,
I think I want to modify my own language that to change it
to any misdemeanor or felony arrest or conviction needs to be reported.
Summary offenses do not need to be reported.
So you're going to add any misdemeanor arrest or.
Felony arrest or conviction.
Misdemeanor or felony arrest.
And it so I'll give you an example.
Someone gets and is arrested for a DUI,
unless it's the second offense
under section or a PD six or zero four.
They don't have they do not necessarily need to report that to
the school district under school school code.
But the Educator Disciplinary Act
says you have to because it was a misdemeanor DUI.
Okay.
So this would just clarify that and make it simple for employees.
If you get arrested for a misdemeanor,
a felony, you report that to school district.
So Mr. McFarland can
append his obligations of reporting it
to where he needs to report it.
That's that's.
It sounds commonsensical.
Yeah.
All right.
Is there any further comments on it?
Can I have a motion to move
317, conduct disciplinary procedures to the school board for a 30 day review?
So moved.
Second.
Cathy and Kip.
All right. Any further discussions?
All those in favor say I, I, any post.
All right.
Policy 317 has been moved to the full board,
and the
last item on our list is to talk about focus areas and goals.
It's hard to believe this is our last policy meeting of the school year.
So at the end of the school year, we need to focus on our talk
about what we want to focus on for the next school year for 2019, 2020.
So I know that
I had a conversation with Mr.
McFarland and one of the things that he was interested in suggesting
was trying to develop a policy for the use of therapy animals,
therapy and service animals.
So that's something we can explore.
And I have just done my brief Google searches.
There are other policies out there,
so I think that's something we could easily manage.
Another idea that I had was
to address some LGBT
issues with students, but not necessarily employees.
So I don't know if that's something that we want to think about.
And then also just going through
our sorry, I'm trying to raise my rating or imagine
matching up our policies with our our board operating guidelines,
which I think was on our original intention this year.
We were so maxed out with our other policies.
I don't think we ever actually got to investigating that.
And then just to continue to focus on policies related
to social emotional learning in school, climate related to school safety.
So those are some of the thoughts that I jotted down.
I don't know if anybody else has any other thoughts or.
I don't think that we ever established
a cycle for policy review or not.
We may have and I might have slipped my mind.
We talked about a three or four year cycle just for review to make sure
that there's
no policies been lingering out there since 2004 that nobody's looked at.
So I can I can address that.
So when I first got here,
they were in the middle of it and we completed it.
Having said that, I think one of the reasons they were in
that cycle was I'm not sure they were members of the Policy
News network that PSB releases.
We are.
We are now and we've been diligently updating our policies as they come around.
I'm aware of two policies that haven't been updated since that cycle.
One, I believe is
the drugs and alcohol for students,
which we tried to address a couple of times and like the facility
use policy, just have never been able to get an agreement on.
And I think the other one might be student discipline,
but I think there's only two policies that haven't been updated since 2000.
I want to see the end of 2012, 2013.
We certainly can care, but I'm not sure that's the best
use of everyone's time knowing that we update ours
every time PSB gives us an update, but we certainly can.
I've done it before.
I hope we can do it.
This committee needs to be ready for the work.
It was like about 20 to 25 policy at every meeting that we that we handled.
A lot of them are just review.
So we certainly can.
Well and even just.
Oh, sorry, go ahead.
I was just going to say and even
just to pull out some of the policies that dictate within the policy review,
like some of them say, you know, review every three years,
even if just to get maybe some of those on the cycle.
We had that as a goal last year revisit policies
that dictate regular review and track for systematic revision.
Yeah and I did pull those out.
Okay.
You know won't it would
maybe not just just to look at the dates of the last review
and if it's been more than four years then review it.
So that would be probably less the majority of them.
Really. Yeah.
I like the idea though.
I mean I don't want to do 20 or 25 ever meeting,
but I do want to start a systematic review because I never got to do all that.
Yeah.
So we started in 2000, so that started the year before I got here.
Think they might have started in the fall of 13 and I don't think
we finished until 16 or 17.
So we get at least at a few.
When I was a citizen advisor on this committee, there were a bunch
bunches of that that rolled through and that was also part of that.
Yeah,
that wasn't that long ago, was it really?
It was, believe it or not.
Yeah.
I was assigned How many policies we have.
I want to say that I actually.
Wait a minute. I have this somewhere
in a little spreadsheet.
And how many times we meet?
Six or four for
quarterly, four times, four times a year.
Where?
So this was this was done a couple of years ago
before we added some policies.
So at that time we had 250 policies
and we've we've added some and we've taken a couple away.
But for the most part we've just added.
So I'm happy to do it.
I just wonder if they're so it.
Just I'm not sure it's the most important or the most productive.
I just think we could figure out a way to pick
five or so a meeting and prioritize it.
Yeah. So what happens?
Yeah.
So I'm willing to do whatever you want.
I just. I know, like, the only way to get through it.
So if we only do five or so, that's only like 28 year.
So if we have 215, we're looking at
ten years before the revise and then we're back revising it again.
So and what we refining, at least what I was finding last time is
we'd go through, we'd do the work, we'd revise it, and then PSB almost
every single time would do a revision like after we were finished.
And it happened with nondiscrimination this time that we did
all this work on our own.
And then another revision came out.
So I'm not opposed to it.
I mean, most of them at this point, my recommendation would just be say,
we looked at it and we move on because there hasn't been a revision from the SBA.
Well, we at least need to do the goal that we didn't do.
Well, you said we did.
Does it all those out.
Anything that had a regular review baked into the policy.
We did pull them out.
I don't think we ever actually got to them, though, this year.
But I mean that's that's easy for me to do because I went back last year
because that was a recommendation and pulled the policies out
that need to be reviewed or acted on every so many years.
So you have a list of those? Yeah, I do.
We can at least start there.
Right. Okay.
You know instead of the 250, right? Yeah.
I think we should. I think we should.
We must draw the board operating guidelines. Right.
That would be a good place to start. Yeah.
That was also a goal from last year.
You know, I don't know if like, I don't know how many of those are, but.
But let's chose not that many.
And, you know, let's get through one through X and then.
The board operating guidelines don't need to go through policy.
Right.
That they can.
So that has changed over time as well.
There was a time where they did come through policy re recently.
They have not come through policy.
So there's there's no rule and just like policy,
there's no rule that says you absolutely have to get a 30 day review.
And that's just been kind of a standard practice that this board has adopted.
What's what's the standard protocol for looking at old policy?
There really isn't.
So SBA usually when new board members go to a policy update, they'll say that
you should probably review them every 2 to 4 years. And
that's what we that's what we did.
And I think there was a group
that just went not that long ago, I think it was last year, wasn't it,
And and said that they should be updated,
revised or looked at every 3 to 4 years.
But to actually do that, it's it's tough.
I mean, if someone looked at a policy, would they be able to bring it and say,
please look at this one,
you know, is that that's so that's kind of I think that was one of our goals
last year is to revise based on PSB or community or citizen input.
Yeah I think.
Yeah continue to review and then policies based on PSB being recommended
changes.
I am not
I am not interested in creating unnecessary work for anybody.
There was there within this last year.
There was one that came up that had a date of 2004 on it
and, and I would just be I would just want
to make sure that in the last recycled there's nothing that we missed.
That's like ten years old.
You know that that's the one thing that Yeah that's that you know
so according to my notes, the only one that we have is drugs and alcohol.
So the last five last time that were actually looked at were 115,
which is the VA Vocational Technical Education Student Accident insurance
Student Wellness, which has been updated a couple of times
since then, and records management, which I know is updated.
So the only one that has not been changed
is drugs and alcohol and or you you were on
I think you were on it as well and we went from everyone gets tested
and you know so this all had to do with that
and nobody gets tested till we test sometimes and not all the times.
And we just didn't we never finished
try again.
We certainly can. Yeah.
Well is that the change that you would potentially make is drug testing.
No, no.
I saw
I think at least at that time it was decided that we're
we're not going to go down that route. Right.
But then it was.
All right.
Well, let's take a look at a drug
and alcohol policy and pretty much the consequences behind it.
And there was just no agreement on what those consequences should be.
So I went for a much too easy to know.
You can't do that because you're now hurting kids, too.
And no, there's no right or wrong.
Yeah, it's just that there is no agreement.
Which sounds like it's time to revisit that because we just looked at the data
that and we know what our kids are doing.
Yeah. And we know what
leniency and parenting and in in
allowing it or giving it to your kids
higher rates of usage and so ties into all that.
So if you want my recommendation based on what we went through last time
maybe forming an ad hoc committee to take a look at that.
And the reason I'm
saying that is this committee is made up of a limited number of people.
And if you can have a committee, take a look at it
and give a recommendation to this group, you might be better off because
we spent a lot of time on that last time
just to come to committee and it couldn't
even get out of this committee.
And so that's one
that I'm not sure will be as controversial as it was last time.
But more information now. Yeah,
well,
we didn't have before, but
I think it's probably something
that would take a lot of discussion and
that this one could provide.
So that's something we can start now and get a head start.
On looking at the drug and alcohol policy.
Yeah, like form an ad hoc committee
so they can get started on that before we meet again in September.
Or do we just wait to tackle it in September?
I say we wait.
Okay, but.
Yeah, and whatever comes of that
and I would wait until the following school year to implement that
because other so the issue I shouldn't say the issue, but one of the issues or
stumbling blocks is always athletics and teams and,
and when players are allowed to come back from the suspension,
if they're suspended for it to do it midyear, then you could get issues
with, well, I had a child who was involved in a fall sport
and this was their punishment.
And now that you updated the policy, now my child who's involved in the spring
sport is being penalized harsher or lighter than than the other child.
So this is one that I would definitely have ready to go at the beginning of
a year. So
this will be exciting and.
All right.
Well, that sounds like a good list.
Anybody else have any
ideas?
Last year
we had a safe and supportive schools goal,
but we did look at bullying and cyber bullying.
Yeah, I did want to.
I mentioned
I do want to have a continued focus on policies related to social emotional
learning in school climate, in regards to in the context of school safety.
Okay.
I still think that should be a focus, especially since I think PSB is working on
new suicide
policy.
At least I read something like that in the last PSB magazine edition.
And you know, and you know, suicides like the number of suicide
ideation is the number one
call that's coming in from the safe to schools
reporting, because I went to that PSB a couple of weeks ago,
and that's what they're there saying and that's what they're reporting.
So I think so I don't want to lose sight of that.
I want to keep that on the forefront of whatever we need to do from a policy level
to maintain the focus on social, emotional learning and school climate,
school safety.
So we don't have another policy meeting this year.
No, this is it.
Okay.
We don't meet again until September, so I guess we'll put these goals
on the first meeting in September, then to vote on them.
Well, I think we vote on them
kind of now, because then they can then they go on.
Yeah.
The have to the website for next year as our goals.
Okay.
Isn't that right.
They want to read down the list of goal.
Terry, did you have a comment.
When you ran.
Oh Okay.
Opening up to public comment.
Do you have a comment about goals then?
I think you should comment now.
So we have 3 minutes.
Terry Siegfried five eight opens l drive Hummelstown.
I don't know if this is appropriate for the policy committee or not,
but at some point we were talking about looking
at administrative guidelines and I didn't know
if we're going to do that holistically across the district,
whether that was something
the policy committee was going to do or is that something that each
we talked about it.
I just don't know what ever became of that conversation.
That's one thing.
And then the other thing is the Athletic Committee,
Athletic and Activities Committee is currently working on a couple of policies
that might come out by the end of the year that would be referred to policy.
So I guess they would come to you in September.
I guess just those two things.
Okay, Thank you.
Yeah, I remember we had a conversation
about the administrative guidelines and somehow
linking those up so that they were viewable,
but I think that was a big project related to poor docs.
Right.
Which my understanding is.
Well, there's been some new development about that because at the National School
Board Association they found out more information and it's less expensive.
Right now.
We use agenda manager and board docs to house our policies,
but we could go to an all in one inclusive board docs,
but it's cheaper.
I don't think the conversation has died.
Yeah, I'm happy to use whatever it.
It's just a management system to me.
Okay.
So that's not actively being discussed, but that's related
to administrative regulations and branding them viewable, correct?
Right. It's really aren't they housed in board docs as well?
Are they can be. They can be, yeah.
Yes. That's really more of like a logistical
situation.
And when we get to that point where it's logistically feasible for us to review it,
then that would be great.
But I don't think for for so working through that
well, is our administrative regulation something that you are working on
this summer possibly, or
or the administration is or always or.
Continuously working on guidelines
and regulations as far as putting a
an absolute focus or a goal area?
We certainly can do so.
But it's more like when things come up.
So right now we're working on field trip guidelines, so and
so that would be part of,
you know, our field trip policy, but it would be a guideline.
So it doesn't look like what PSB has.
It's actual
different version of a document.
So yes, so we do work on them.
But if we want to kind of go back to what we did with the policies in 20 1216
and try to make sure we touch everything we certainly can do. So.
So what growth do you have for us?
All right.
So developing.
Okay. Oh, sorry. Yes, Yes, please. Hi.
My name is Paula Soni, and I have a first grader at the elementary school.
There's just one thing that I wanted
to bring up as far as
what we have been going through as parents in the district
and it doesn't seem like,
you know, special education doesn't really get
done.
I don't know, the same amount of attention or something.
They just feel like
that is something that is not addressed during some of these meetings.
And I just want there to be a little bit more talk about that.
Does that kind of make sense?
Maybe.
I know that the sub and another school district
that I had recently been to,
they did like a survey to see like how parents in special education
feel about the special education program at their school district.
And I feel like that's something that really needs to be done here.
Maybe. So
just something that I
wanted to bring up. Okay. Okay.
Thank you.
Um, okay. So,
um, and in the context of special education,
one of the policies that I have on my list is, is the to develop policy
for the use of therapy and service animals. Um,
which came out of a direct request
for the special Education Department.
I feel I can tell you more specifically about, you know, how decisions
are being made as far as curriculum
and who is the one making those decisions.
Um, I feel like, you know,
in other districts
that I've seen, it's like kind of like a collaborative approach with
people from military people, you know,
like administrators.
That special education team parents and their needs are being listened to.
And so that, you know, it is like more of a team effort
first and more of a team like collaboration.
Yeah, And I understand that there's a line cleaning is supposed to be like
everybody's like, save Mississippi.
You know, I've heard that sometimes it just feels like it's not. And
I think that it's, you know, like, I think that, you know,
you scratch the surface a little bit, you will see that it's more of an issue
than what comes to light, because, you know, dealing with a child
with special needs, um, it is difficult, you know, because we're just doing the day
to day stuff himself to come to a meeting and like, you know, like a proposal.
It's just a little bit more difficult.
But I think that if you do kind of like dig a little deeper,
it is something that there is need
that, you know, it needs to be addressed.
So that's just something that I think
that would really be beneficial for me.
Thank you. Thank you.
How about how about if we refer this this issue to the Communications
and Community Engagement Committee and then they could construct the survey
and would be able to provide us with some useful information,
like you would have a committee in place to be able to engage the community
and address these concerns, or at least to sort of filter the concerns
to bring us what we would need for for policy implementation.
Now, it's a good idea. It's idea.
Okay, So the list of policies,
focus areas are the table,
the policy for therapy Animals
match our policies with our board operating guidelines
continuing, continuing to focus on policies related to social
emotional learning and school climate. Um,
reviewing our policies so that they're not more than ten years old
and developing an ad hoc committee,
an ad hoc committee to look at drugs and alcohol.
And then I also had the LGBT
related issues for our employees.
So does that sound like a good us?
And then I'll write up that and, and then that'll go up on the website
for next year. So we can all focus on that
all right.
So again, I have a motion to approve those focus areas.
So moved second.
Right.
John and Kip, is there any further discussion?
All those in favor say I, i any opposed?
All right.
Um, thank you very much.
It is 605 and without any further comments, we will adjourn.