Okay.
We're going to call the Policy Standing Committee to order at 5010 actually, 502
on September 10th, 2018.
If we could, I'll just go around the room and introduce ourselves
and state our affiliation with the committee.
I'm Tricia Steiner School board member.
Good afternoon.
I'm Johnny. We're a school board member.
Beth Olmstead, Citizen Adviser.
Jason Raff, Center Administration.
Kip Shore School Board member.
Kathy Seger. School Board. Right.
Thank you.
The summary minutes were attached.
Can I have a motion to approve?
Thank you.
So no discussion.
All right.
All those in favor say I, i any opposed?
All right.
Minutes are moved.
We have a full agenda tonight, so we'll try to roll through.
First policy.
006 meetings.
Yeah.
So one of the things I started to do because I know there was
some confusion in the past and who's making recommendations. So
PSB actually, traditionally
when they send out recommendations for new policies, also include a summary,
and that's relatively somewhat new, I believe.
So I just I'm including the summary on, on the notes.
So see you know exactly when and why and and how they're being recommended.
Hopefully that's useful.
Yeah, I think it's really helpful.
It was very helpful. Very helpful. Yeah.
So did everybody see those notes because they were just popped on there?
Yeah. Okay.
So policy 006 has to reflect the
new executive session provision
to change the voting requirement
and additional options to expand the time
frame for school directors to receive agendas
that include a line item regarding removal of an officer of the board
and other changes regarding terminology.
So did anybody have any
just one question or one question on this policy?
On page two, under regular meetings,
it says Shall meet the second or fourth Monday of every calendar month.
Is that going to include July?
Because we didn't this year.
Just curious.
We need to change it.
We typically just meet once, once in July.
So can we add something in on that like
I don't want to be too formalized
like it is, but
sure.
Can we add the word generally?
Yeah, yeah, sure.
That's good. Generally.
Okay.
Well, you and I have some other.
Are you. Do you have anything else? Yep.
Okay, So I was I emailed Jason
and Tricia that when we go over any policies,
I also want to look at our board operating guidelines, because what I found
is that they don't match and like, there might.
So then something will come up and go.
Someone will say, Well, who sets the agenda?
And I'll say,
Well, the superintendent and the board president with to agenda planning.
But then when you read our policy, it just says the superintendent sets the agenda.
When you look at our board operating policy, it says
that under the president's rule that says meet monthly
with the superintendent, which isn't correct because it's
actually twice a month and invited the two additional board members.
So I'm trying to make sure that we can merge the two
so that it's not so confusing because it's it's neither are correct right now.
So under presiding officer,
it says the president shall provide it all board meetings.
That's all okay, except in the board operating guideline.
It also
says it's just really wanted to add this.
The Vice President what the vice
president does as well.
Maybe I wanted that to go
into special meetings.
Sorry.
I think this is on one
to the third page.
So it says
under special meeting, as the president shall call a special meeting at any time
and shall call a special meeting
upon presentation of written request of three board members.
That is in our board operating guideline.
But it also says that the Vice President
can call a
special meetings when requested in writing by three board members.
So shall we add that in
so that they both say the same thing?
So says the President and the Vice president?
No, that says the president may call a special meeting at any time
and shall call a special meeting upon the presentation of three
written requests of the written request of three board members with the Vice
President and says Call special meetings when request requested
in writing by three board members.
So, Kathy, if I'm hearing you correct after the first sentence,
dealing with the president and three school directors and the line
the vice president may call a special meeting
upon the presentation of written request
of three school directors when requested in writing by three board members.
Same language, correct?
ST Yeah. Repeat.
And then the other thing is I did send you
under regular meetings order of business.
I kind of typed out how we do our order of business.
That's not right right now.
The way it says called order roll call flag salute.
I sent it in email because there's so much.
But did you see like
Linda gives me this this book and I kind of went by that on
how we have it displayed so that we could put it into this
and update it
and the work sessions.
So the work sessions are really our committees, right?
That's on
1 to 3
on page 12.
So committees are
run a little differently,
but they're they look like they're defined under work sessions
So just as public notice of such meetings
shall be made in accordance with board procedures,
I think that looks okay.
I know sometimes these policies are from PSB,
but we've run our things differently.
I had a question about voting
under the voting section on page four.
It says
Actions require the unanimous affirmative
vote of all members of the board remaining in office.
Number one, appoint as board secretary, a former school director who has resigned
before the expiration of the term for which the director was elected.
Which, first of all,
I didn't get that at all, but our board secretary, we use Mike.
And then the second one is appoint our solicitor,
a former school director who has resigned
before the expiration of the term for which the director was elected.
So that language is really confusing to me.
And I don't
I don't follow follow that.
And we don't have a solicitor that's a school director
or we don't use a school director as our board secretary also.
So I don't know if we can just
what should we do with that language?
Can we remove it?
Does anybody know the history of that?
Because sometimes things like that come up because of a past occurrence
that somebody wants to make sure it doesn't happen again.
So that would obviously be before our time.
Right.
But that kind of language is sort of a hint
that that might be how it how it evolved or how it came into being.
It is
bizarre
just for like a general special, though, if someone's not present in
in the absence of the solicitor, the school board member
takes up
place just for a particular instance or.
Correct. That's the way that I read that.
I read it the same way. It's a special voting requirement.
If there's no board secretary present that that you would be voting on
behalf of the
the school director
would be voting on their behalf
in just that particular instance.
I mean, that's how I see it. But
I just don't.
Father, who has resigned
before the expiration of the term for which the director was elected,
I guess it just means that there's still a current member.
I understand it does sound a little backwards.
Okay, Maybe who is still in good
standing on the board Might be a better
reflection.
Has anyone sat through a procedure like that now?
Mm hmm.
So do you, Jason.
Do you think we have to leave that because it came from school code?
Is that why you put it there? Right.
I put it there because that's the recommendation from PSB.
So all these changes that you'll see are not changes that I necessarily agree with.
There changes that PSB is recommending and since that's your governing body,
I, I, I wouldn't be doing my job that said and show you what they're recommending.
Having said that, my understanding is it has codes behind it.
You should probably leave it there because it's there for a reason.
Right.
And these do have codes.
So if it's school code, we probably should leave it.
If it's just a proper
recommendation, we may want to further consider the school code.
Yeah, those both have to code to following them.
Well, do you think.
I don't think we need the If the agenda indicates
an item of business related to the removal of an officer of the board, the agenda
shall be provided to each auditor or at least seven days before the meeting.
Why? Why would we?
That's. You said that was optional.
That's on page two in green.
I think you said
an additional option.
So it's a
Yeah, that's, that's what the ranking member resigns.
That's, that's not a code or any statute that's just Yeah.
I don't think that's fair that we take that out
because we've actually had a resignation happen at 4:00 and we voted on it at 7:00.
I don't see why we would need to wait because that just delays the process
of filling the seat for somebody.
I mean, I don't know why you would
wait seven days,
do you?
Did anyone object to removing that?
No. Well, I guess
you're looking at the change under regular meetings, right?
Yeah.
So but this is removal as opposed to resignation.
Well, we can't remove anybody, can we?
We can. We can vote to remove people.
I thought you couldn't get fired and we could either. So.
So to the extent of these resignation, I agree.
I was I didn't think we can remove
we don't have any
removal of an officer of the board.
Does that mean secretary, treasurer, president or vice president?
The officer
would say within
seven days, it's not a so it's not a resignation.
I read it as a resignation,
removal of an officer.
That must mean
that the board's removing the president from the position of presidency
to do that.
And then there should be seven days, seven days notice for that, right?
I would say right to remove me, you have to give me seven days.
That's what that means.
Okay, well, that makes sense.
I did not reason that up. Yeah.
So you can't remove a board member, but you can remove an officer.
Theoretically. Right. Okay.
And then under agenda right above that.
Cathy, did you want to add
It should be the responsibility to Superintendent and the board President.
So it matches with the operating? Yes.
So the under agenda, it says it shall be
the responsibility of superintendent to prepare the agenda.
I would add the sentence from the board operating guidance.
It says the President shall meet before each board meeting and invite
up to two board members to finalize the agenda.
And I
added before each board meeting because our board operating guideline
says monthly, that needs changed because that's our typical protocol.
We have agenda planning Wednesday or Thursday prior to a monday board meeting
and the superintendent, the president and the two board members meet.
So could we add that a sentence and then we'll need to eventually change
that board operating guideline from monthly to before
each board meeting
that does everybody okay with that?
Yes, that's all I had for this one.
And can I clarify,
So these these this, this first batch here under the number five.
So what are we voting on news tonight
then, to go to the full board?
Yes. For a 30 day review.
For 30, Yes. Okay. Yes. All right. All right.
Yes. To we a vote to move it.
Anybody like to make a motion to vote to move it to a 30 day review?
One point clarification.
I'm sorry to be so dense on this, but going back to work sessions,
the way I read that is that's not the standing committee's.
That's if the board decides that the board is going
to operate as a committee of the whole to address a specific issue.
Right.
Because it says the board may meet as a committee of the whole in an open meeting.
So that's not the same as our standing committee.
Okay.
So I just want to make sure I had that.
I was clear on what we're we're going to vote on the moving
the green language forward.
Right, right, right.
Okay. Yeah. And that that's correct.
In the work session, language above is actually exactly the same.
So I just have to remove
or remove one of those.
But but you're correct.
Okay.
Motion to move this on to the full board.
30 day review.
Second, any further discussion?
All those in favor say I, I oppose.
All right.
To move 006 to the full board for a 30 day review.
Next is
policy 108 adoption of textbooks.
Again, this was from
PSB recommended language
based on school code.
The biggest change here is that it used to have a timeline.
I believe it was April
that textbooks could be approved or adoption in textbooks now.
Now can be any time of year.
I don't have any concerns about this one.
No, no, I don't have a motion to move
Policy 108 to the full board for a 30 day review.
So moved second discussion.
All those in favor say I oppose.
All right. Motion moved
next policy
to 10.1 possession, administration of asthma inhalers,
epinephrine, auto injectors.
Let's again was more recommendations
from EPA
as required by school code.
I have a lot of questions about this
policy as you to
just because
I have a daughter that carries an EpiPen
and the additional language of requiring
a written acknowledgment from the school nurse of the student has demonstrated
that she's capable of self-administration of the asthma inhaler,
which on the form currently
there's a section for the doctor
to check off whether or not they're able to self-administer or not.
And then also for item number five,
written acknowledgment from the student that they've
received instruction from the student's licensed physician,
certified registered nurse practitioner or physician assistant on proper
safety precautions for the handling and disposal of the asthma inhaler.
And unless this is a new requirement
for the doctors to do, I just don't see that
as a realistic expectation because that doesn't happen,
at least not at my doctor appointments.
But the EpiPen is something that we do.
We practice at home with the with the trainer that they give you, but
the doctor never talks to any of the talks.
We use this language like this that was being proposed here.
I feel the same way.
I think that four and five are overkill in this policy
because I have a son who self administers and asthma inhaler as well.
So you go to the doctor, the doctor fills out the form, tests
the kid if they know how to do it.
And I remember our pediatrician saying that they thought
Hershey was such a progressive school district
that they actually allowed the student to carry the inhaler
because he had in his gym locker and he had his backpack.
In case you had anything on the bus, which was such a such a comfort to me.
And I feel like adding four and five makes you jump through so many more hoops
when to me, the doctors above the nurse
and the child like to me, those things are already done.
When the doctor reviews it with the child and signs the form at the visit,
why do you then have the child to go to the school nurse to sign it
and then sign another acknowledgment?
It just seems like it's overkill to me and it causes
more forms and more delays
for the student to be carrying their lifesaving medication.
They go and also, like for the student, she'll notify the school nurse immediately
following each use of an asthma inhaler that was already there.
I thought that when you were suppose if you administered it on school
property, I thought you were always supposed to tell the nurse.
Whether that happens or not, I don't know.
But I thought because.
Because I think the school nurse should know if it gym class.
You needed your inhaler.
Yeah, but
I don't know.
How does our resident doctor feel about all this?
Yeah, you're asking the wrong specialist.
I'm mean, I'm an emergency physician.
This is a whole lot. This is a whole lot of words.
And I think some of it is
redundant and superfluous.
Four and five are pretty good examples.
And if they needed to change this policy because of students
who have an IEP, I understand that that language needs to be in there.
But for the students who don't have an IEP,
do we have to add four and five?
And I did want to ask you, Jason, did our school nurses review this?
No, they have no, they didn't have a chance to.
Yeah.
So they I wondered how they would feel about this.
Yeah, that's a lot of extra responsibility for them
and the other question I had was under guidelines
on the previous page, it's under a student self-administration
of asthma inhalers and epinephrine auto injectors Under one.
It says a written request from the parent guardian
that the school complies with the order of a of the physicians.
And then number two is a written statement from the parent
or guardian acknowledging that the school
is not responsible for ensuring the medication.
So those seem to counteract each other at all.
And so that was already in there, though, right?
One, two and three
a screen.
I mean, what I thought what was currently happening was only three,
which was a written statement from the licensed
physician, certified registered nurse
that states, you know,
the name of the drug, the prescribed dosage,
which is all the information that is on the school medication order.
Oh, no.
But I mean, if you look at the read that's crossed out
and before the green one, two and three are already there.
So I thought that they were that was already our procedure
because, Jason, when you crossed out
the red, is that doesn't that mean that's the policy that we have now.
Correct.
So one, two and three are already our policy.
We must already have those forms.
I don't know.
I never filled out any of those forms.
I don't remember.
I do know we filled out the one with the doctor,
the self administration, and he went over how to use it.
You do that every year,
but I don't know about the other ones.
Do we want to table this
till the next meeting or what do we want?
Yeah, I'm going to suggest because I just.
I just did a quick research here and maybe a solicitor.
I think this requirement under four and five is coming from the law.
I think it is now there's there's the law,
if I'm correct here, there's the law says,
look, you know, we have to
require a child that desires to possess
to demonstrate that they can use it.
But then the law goes on to say the policy under section
may include the following the requirement of the written statement.
So I want to get our solicitors input as to whether or not
we're stuck with four and five, so to speak, under the law,
or if it's a way we can make four or five less onerous,
but nonetheless be compliant with the act with what the statute is envisioning.
So I think that's a very good idea
because we obviously we have we have to do with what the statute says.
Well, if you look under five, it doesn't have a number after it, but four does.
Does that mean that four is probably the law and five is optional?
No, I think four and five are both within both within it.
And I quickly looked at it. So I think we probably want to
and I think I think
both Kathy and Tricia make very good points.
But that's my suggestion.
And John, isn't there an age limit to this?
I mean, are they going to make a child who's seven?
What is the age limit for self administration?
Because it
yes, it's really just maturity level when you think
your child's confident enough to.
So the doctor makes the decision, right.
I mean, that's my personal experience anyway.
But even still, like even though like my daughter is able to self-administer,
I still want an adult to be able to, you know, administer it,
even if she's not, you know, like, you know, she's has that capability.
But that's such a scary time.
She's never had been faced with that moment of having to actually do it right.
So I still want adults there if she were to need it.
So do we want to
Can we send this to a solicitor, Jason, and have them review four and five?
Okay. Absolutely.
I mean, we can have them review the entire policy
if you want, if that makes it.
I think maybe I also want to do to make sure that like, you know,
because there's there's information about here
about making sure that the school nurse school nurse and other does
school employees, students, classroom teachers also substitutes.
You know, I want to make sure that our substitutes know where all the stuff is to
so. Okay.
So do we need to take a vote to table that or have those?
We should do it.
Okay. All right.
Can I have a motion then, to table policy to 10.2
pending review of our solicitor and school nurses
to 10.12, actually.
So PSP actually has it to 10.1, but
we have use of medications on field trips, which is R2 10.1.
So that's why we had to name it to 10.2, which is kind of confusing.
So ours is two 10.2. Yeah. Okay.
So moved
to the second.
Second.
All right. Any further discussion?
Well do you is there any benefit on having our school nurses review this?
Jason.
No, not before the solicitors do Solicitor first and then just to make like
I feel like, you know, I guess if it's a love of the law, right, Correct.
Yeah.
So I'd hate to have
our nurses or any school employee get their hands on it, make changes.
Right.
And then those changes aren't valid anyway, so they have to comply with
what the law is. That makes sense. Okay.
All right.
All those in favor say aye.
I any opposed?
All right, well, table to 10.2
pending Solicitor review.
Next item is policy
239 foreign exchange students
is not one again
was more recommended language from the SBA
and I just had a little typo just under authority
says the board shall accept foreign exchange students who meet the
guidelines establish,
I think, as was supposed to say,
yeah, I'll take a look at that and I think you're probably correct.
Okay.
And anybody have any other.
No, those. Fine.
All right.
Can I have a motion to move policy to 39
to the school board for 30 day review and approval.
So move second.
Any further discussion? Oh,
all those in favor say I, i any oppose.
All right.
Policy to 39 will be moved to the full board.
Next item is
policy to 46 school wellness.
Yeah.
So you'll see a couple policies that were done change or recommend
recommended be changed because of safe drinking water act there.
I think that's what it is.
So it'll change it to safe drinking.
I think our food services policy
does the same thing to optimize conditions for learning
and minimize potential for health health risks.
So that's
that's really it.
Okay.
So is our drinking water tested regularly?
Yeah.
I mean, not every single water fountain, every single time that they do
spot checks throughout the year.
Yeah.
And then I just had a question
about the reference to the
on the last page to the school Environmental Health program.
But then you included it in your background information.
So I was wondering if we should
link that somehow so people
understand what that is.
It says
School
Environmental health guidelines per the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
and then you list the EPA website.
So is that is that what that is?
Referencing the School Environmental Health Program,
I would imagine?
Tricia, We can certainly at the bottom of the policy
include links and other policies have links as well.
You feel that would be beneficial?
It's easy to do
so. Do you want it
in your little synopsis on Agenda Manager you have
a few listed as as resources related to the school
Environmental Health Program can be found here.
Do you want to add all of those?
Certainly Ken doesn't hurt.
That would be good.
I think there's 1 to 3 links there.
Yeah, and I, I think I'd add
a paragraph or a couple of sentences above that
so they know, okay, what's happening and I think that'll be helpful.
Okay, I can do that.
They're all links to the EPA dot gov stuff, so
right.
All right.
Any other issues?
Can I have a motion to move
this to the full board for 30 day review approval?
So moved.
Second, any further discussion?
Are those in favor say I.
I any oppose okay
policy 246 school bonus will be moved
to the school board for 30 day review.
Next item is policy 309
assignment and transfer
in this.
So so this came about
during the transfers that we had back in May.
And what's the authority of the board and what's an administrative prerogative.
So there is I shouldn't say some confusion,
but I mean, I take ownership of of that.
My understanding at the time was that the administration
has the right of transfer while our policy says otherwise or
currently says otherwise. So
once again, I take ownership of that.
I wish I knew all of our policies inside and out.
But but I didn't.
I was basing it on what I what I didn't know at the time. So
Section 510 of
the school code, you know, does go into what the
the rules and regulations or what boards have authority of and
what what they don't necessarily have authority
over is transfers or approval of transfers.
They have the ability to hire the ability to levy taxes
and the ability to come up with rules or governing rules.
This is standard language in
in most policies.
However, in order to avoid any confusion moving forward,
the administration would just recommend
taking out the language that that's stricken their.
So you're saying
it's standard language to include it?
Yeah. Yeah.
Believe it or not,
that's what when I went back and did a search of other school
district policies, that's the language that SBA has.
I'm not exactly sure why,
but that's the language that's there.
I think that's what we identified, that SBA
was not strictly
saying exactly what school code says.
Correct.
And we should be following the school code and then hanging other stuff on
that as we see fit, but not stuff that which which might
cause concerns.
So school code. School code
were originally we thought that perhaps that sentence was added
by a previous board at Derry Township because of an issue
of wanting to approve transfers.
But you're saying that you found that as language is common?
I found that language fairly common in other school districts,
that I looked at their policy because I was like, Wow,
how could I have made such an error when I said that?
So I went back and believe it or not, it was wasn't just on ours.
John Did you and they say something about.
Well, no, I think so.
Then if I understand correctly, then the implication of this change
is that the board has to approve the initial assignment,
but the board board authority is not needed
for transfers or
or certifications of credentials. Right.
So then that would be correct
that the administrative administration could transfer anyone from building
to building or any assignment for which they're certified.
Right. Right. And I'm fine with that.
I think that's just, you know,
so the board knows and the record reflects with their eyes wide open
that that's that's I think that's what we're doing here today.
And and I am fine with that.
I'm on the view that the board does not need
to approve transfers from building to one building to another.
That's my opinion now on future board agendas.
How will we memorialize that?
So I think the language that we did recommend was sound language,
where it would say the administration recommends the approval
and the recognition of okay
or the approval of the following appointments
and recognition of the following transfer.
We've already added that. Correct.
All right.
We did.
But then I think we went back because our policy didn't meet what we were saying.
Okay, so once this is approval, make sure we all will be cleaned out.
And when we speak it at the board meetings.
Correct.
Once again, I haven't had a chance to publicly own own that mistake,
so I don't own it right, right now and let everyone know that that was
that was my mistake.
Thank you. Thank you.
We all wish we could remember everything that comes across.
But when you get an agenda with 24 policies on it, you kind of have a panic attack.
Okay.
All right.
So may I have a motion to move this
policy to the full board?
Someone second?
Any further discussion?
All those in favor say I, I any oppose.
All right.
309 will be moved to the full board for 30 day review and approval.
Next item is policy
311 reduction of staff in this policy.
I'm not sure if you followed it much in the past,
but they re dead the way that you were. The
the state legislator reading the way that you can furlough
or layoff staff to include by by performance.
So this language is kind of
memorializes that in our policy.
Hopefully we'll never have to do that because it's a very complicated and
what will become a very litigious
method. So
may I have a motion to move
policy 311 to the full board for 30 day review
approval.
So move
right.
Second, was there any discussion?
All those in favor say I, i any opposed
policy 311 will be moved to the full board
for 30 day review and approval
next is policy seven zero for maintenance.
Yeah.
So believe it or not the only change on this policy
you're probably wondering what happened was a notation.
Yeah.
Which was at it so there was no language that was added,
but there was a notation.
So I have not gone back and updated any of the references just because it's
so arduous.
I wanted to make sure that we have it correct.
So that's all that we did was I think it was at a number three
under 30.
I'm sorry, I just had a comment about under
delegation of responsibility where it says the superintendent
or his or her designee report monthly to the board
regarding the current maintenance and improvement program.
Is that is that realistic?
I have no I have no idea.
So we'd like to remove it.
I mean, it has no
reference behind it.
I mean, I think you can remove it
if you think it's okay because we do have the finance updates
and which could be equipment replacement and long term building modifications
and or we could say re shall report as necessary.
So at least there's some obligation of the superintendent to let us know
if we need new air conditioners. Right.
Yeah. Time from time to time
report as needed.
Yeah. Okay.
So with that proposed amendment,
I would move that we submitted to the board for full review.
That would be
policy number 704 on maintenance.
Second, any further discussions.
All those in favor say I my any opposed.
All right great policy 704 maintenance it's moved.
Next is policy 806 child abuse
and again these are more minor revisions
based on recent changes in state and federal laws
says it's a mandated policy
so it doesn't look like we have any leeway on this one or what mandate.
It just is saying you have to have one.
Have one.
Okay.
And my only comment was just a typo
under number ten for the green language,
engage in severe.
You see that they're the end of severe.
I think it I think is
is the child is a server in
trafficking or sex trafficking.
I was supposed to be serving I that's how I read the child
is well in a server or server capacity
so the child is the servant in the trafficking.
I mean, that's how I read it and still thought that the server form may be
servant or server capacity.
I don't know that I don't know the okay.
The the legal language for these statutes.
Mm hmm.
That's a good point. Yeah. I didn't even read it that way.
That's we'd had to click on 13 and see what that says.
Right.
The footnotes,
it, it actually it should be severe and I just checked the
what they gave us, so it's just a typo.
Okay.
Yes, it can work.
So it could work.
But now to me it doesn't it doesn't make sense.
I mean, any form of sex trafficking is severe.
Oh, it's just this is just wild sex trafficking. What?
I mean,
that's why I read it in the server, because it's
just right
on page five
of the green language, for lack of a better term, and easy to find
where it says the superintendent or designee shall ensure that the poster
developed by the Department of Education, displayed the statewide toll-free
telephone numbers for reporting suspected child abuse, neglect and school
safety issues be posted in a high traffic public area of each school.
Would that include, like the bullying Hotline poster
would?
Are you just to clarify, if you're asking if this is the same
well, not
the same poster, but it says school safety issues.
So I'm just wondering, does this encompass all school
safety posters
or is there a specific
poster for child abuse?
Child abuse.
So if there isn't, there will be some specific
and I'm pretty sure there already is. But
but yeah, it would be a standalone poster.
Okay,
So we're going to do that.
We have to do do you have the posters?
That's why I don't know.
Oh well, because it just mentions and school safety issues separately.
So and we've you know, I've heard some feedback from people
that they'd like to see Pennsylvania bullying hotline number posted.
So I don't know if that was
included in this.
That's not okay.
So I guess
if we wanted to see that bullying hotline poster specifically, we'd
have to put that somewhere else like and the bullying policy right?
If we want to make sure that it definitely happens, right?
Yeah. Okay.
Okay.
Isn't that one of the policies that's coming up? Yes.
Right.
Yeah.
All right.
Are there any other questions?
I'm just make a suggestion about that and see what
the members of the committee feel
with this poster.
Would there be a downside to having that?
Also have that hotline within our website?
I was I was I would like to think that the members of the public could access
that because this is going to be folks have to go in to the school to see it.
So I,
I would I would suggest
that we adapt we add language to this paragraph
that says
and the public area to school.
Well, as on the district's website.
Yeah, I like it. Yes.
Do you have a certain spot on the
I mean we're getting in in the weeds for a certain spot on them.
Well I'm one I guess I'm the one that that paragraph
the superintendent or designee shall ensure.
And then we have, we have that complete sentence
and then just add language at the very end of that sentence
shall be posted in a high traffic public area of each school
as well as on the district website.
Yeah, I'm sorry, John.
I was maybe I didn't clarify on our district website.
Oh, I probably on the district website.
I mean, I'd like to thank people.
I don't think it has to be the first thing you see.
But I would like to think
that you'd,
you know, be able to see with an easy scroll down that that's my thought
because I think the public has to be aware of the child abuse hotline.
And the more we can put that in front of the public, I think the easier
you know, the more the more was serving the public.
So so I think that's my view.
So do you have any thoughts on that? Jason?
Yeah, I'm thinking and that's why I was asking
like how prominent do you want it to be?
So if we have a student services link and on that link list, all of the hotlines
for suicide prevention, bullying prevention,
there's child abuse prevention.
I mean, I'm just trying to think we're right.
It would make sense for people. I don't think it's going to go.
And I know that's a good question.
I'm on the website and under the toolbar there's services slash support
and that goes into grounds food services, health services, psychological services,
safe schools and student services.
Maybe add it there.
The Safe schools and student services or Yeah.
Or in that dropdown of services and supports or either in health, either
health services too, because it's all been on the left hand side of that.
I mean there's all kinds of medication information, policy information.
I don't know where it would go.
One of those
okay, we can do that.
All right.
So I moved on, man, without additions and due
to consideration by the school board with that amendment.
So instead,
second,
any further discussion, all those in favor
say I, I and you oppose.
All right, policy 806 List Mr.
Abel's district website Amendment removed.
Next is Policy 808 Food Services
and this is another amendment
per the school code.
Yeah.
So we're talking about food shaming or lunch shaming again and balances
and who can talk to the child and and say
what?
I had a comment on page five
of the added language
where it says it shall not constitute public identification are stigmas
stigmatization of a student for a school to restrict
privileges and activities of students who owe money for school meals.
If those same restrictions apply to students who owe money
for other school related purposes.
And I didn't think that was applicable.
So Jerry Township I mean, what other school related purposes would that imply?
Well, for instance, I'll just give you an example
and I'm not saying it happens now, but in my previous district,
if students damaged textbooks and owed money for textbooks
and didn't pay for textbooks, one of the ways that they could get
I shouldn't say guarantee, but almost guarantee that they would recoup
their money is to restrict them from homecoming or restrict them from from
then from coming to athletic events or any other event that
my students would like to go to.
So that's that's what it's saying.
But but that's saying you can do
you can restrict those privileges if they owe money for school meals.
Correct. Okay.
You can
they're saying they can't go to homecoming if they owe money for meals.
Only if you say the same things to students who owe money for textbooks.
So you can't say if you owe money for school meals, you can't go.
I'm just playing this an example.
You can't go to the prom if you owe money for school meals.
You can't do that unless you're saying to the other student,
But you owe textbook money so you can't go either.
So it's all or nothing. Hmm.
I don't know if I like to.
Why did that come in there?
Does that PSB that I would imagine,
you know, as far as discrimination,
I just think that
they're not equivalent owing money for a textbook or money for a meal. Like
if you just read a textbook, that's one thing.
But if you can't afford a meal there, they're not saying you can't eat.
They're saying you have to if you have a balance, that you need
to pay that balance back before you're offered other privileges.
Yeah, I know, but
yeah, I, i, I, I see what you're saying.
This is so kind of one shaming, like.
No, no, I mean, no.
I mean, they're getting their lunch. No.
And saying they can't have lunch,
but they can't go to homecoming.
Yeah, correct.
But either can the student who didn't pay for other fees.
I'm not saying we do this. I'm just saying that.
Yeah, yeah, I would prefer to remove it, but
yeah, I don't.
I don't feel comfortable with that either.
I mean, there's no code behind that.
That's just PSB recommended language, right?
Correct.
I think it's important we remove it.
Right.
I, I understand the reasoning, but it just
we've been, there has been kind of out front of this issue.
The school has been sort of leading leading the way.
And I, I, I'd move to strike
that paragraph.
I agree.
I think it's punishing the kid
because of the parents.
And I mean, what if it's just a library, fine.
Or even something like I mean, it just
it just seems a little petty.
Do you see anything?
I agree with removing the language, so you move to strike it.
So I'll second that
second and then I'll up with that with that
amendment by way of a striking, I would move that we
forward this
policy onto the board for its full consideration.
Policy number eight oh under food services
it okay and you second in that already right
right okay okay All right others
are those in favor I guess.
All right, great.
Well, move that
to the full board for a 30 day review
with our time.
You don't have much time left.
So eight, ten transportation and eight.
10.1 and eight. 10.3.
I feel all kind of go together
when it's actually 818 and 818 as well.
Okay.
So that's
it said for those
based on legal recommendations.
Yeah.
So they pretty much completely redid all of these policies and actually
actually added an additional policy.
So it seems like there's a limit
for, you know, they they define vehicles
as, you know, 11 or more as a school bus.
More than 16 is a motor vehicle.
And then less than or equal to ten is a school vehicle.
Is a school vehicle. Yeah.
And that's that's standard.
That's it's been like that for a while.
It just seems like it'd be a lot easier for like it just now.
And the reason they're doing that is if passenger vans
so people who had the 15
person passenger van
you know now now they're saying that's a
pretty much
classified as I think a bus
but they don't have any limits for maximum capacity.
No, but no.
Yeah.
My only question on 810,
I think it's point one on page three, was
it says that the board shall implement a drug use
and alcohol misuse prevention program for employees who are required.
Do we have that in place?
Drug Use and Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program
that would, I would imagine
could be defined as employee assistance program.
Oh, and all the employees are aware part time of full time of our employee
assistance program like the has employees they have access to have access to them.
And then Jason
were they change in any of the do we always check their
background background checks once a year.
What it said is I don't hear that you'll get a copy of things annually.
So with bus drivers, they have to pass a physical exam
every year and we do get an update what we call yellow card
annually
said on page five prior to employment by the district as a covered driver
or transfer to a covered driver position, or at least once each school year,
the superintendent admitted obtain a copy of the valid driver's license.
Obtain a copy of. This is physical
copy of the current school board endorsement card.
Yeah.
Review each covered driver's driving record.
Correct.
So it's an MVR motor vehicle record check.
Okay.
So we're not going through all of the certifications?
No, we don't.
Yeah, that's five years.
But we I mean, so entire metrics are are the instrument we use to track everything.
We have their driver's license and when that's do we have their school
bus endorsement or school bus certification that's every four years.
And then like I said, their physical form is once every year
And then the MVR,
we check at least once, if not twice a year.
And for the contracted services, 18
for contract employees,
do they all receive like a Derry Township school district I.D.
badge?
So just how do we ensure
safety?
Yeah,
Yeah.
So service personnel, we actually have a separate database
that we keep all their certifications in as well.
Trisha And if they're providing a service on a regular basis, yes,
they get a photo I.D.. Okay.
So that the procedure as far as that is concerned,
anyone who comes in our buildings, of course, has to show photo ID
if they say they're here to work with a student,
the administrative assistant
should should know to go and check that particular database.
Okay.
It's very similar to our volunteer database.
The only difference is we ask for Act 168 and then also an Act 24,
which is a PD 666004, which is this arrest and conviction report. So.
All right, Thank you.
All right.
So anybody else have any comments on these for.
Actually, yeah, for policies.
810 transportation eight 10.1 school bus
drivers, 818 contract services personnel
and eight 10.3 school vehicle drivers.
Can we have a motion to move
those all to the full board?
So I'm out.
Second, any input, are all those in favor.
See I, I any oppose.
Okay.
Motion carries.
I know it's already passed to our time, but
we have so many more policies to discuss.
Would it be of interest to
have another meeting before November
and October?
I think our next meeting is and this is in October.
No, I think you're right in November.
That's what I'm saying are.
Yeah, you're saying October, so.
Oh, yes, yes, yes.
I definitely would like to meet before
November because some of the other issues are like more pressing
and all this stuff always comes out of the SBA.
But then we never actually get to the
the meat of some of the more contentious policies.
So there's no more slots open on the Mondays.
We have actual board meetings.
So it would have to be a day that it's not an actual board meeting.
And that's the only issue.
By that time we'll have new citizen advisors
in the next.
The next meeting is November 12th.
So can we communicate
through email and come up with a date and time that works for everybody?
I mean, is everybody willing to come in on an
on a non school board Monday as long as it's a monday on a monday.
Okay.
Good idea.
Yeah. The 5:00 a good time.
I was wondering if we could start maybe it at four
in that way if we need to go longer, we.
Oh, that would be fabulous.
Okay. Yeah, that would be great. Okay.
All right, let's work on that then.
And then
with that, we're going to get to that.
Okay? With you?
Yeah.
Yes, that's fine.
I was going to say, if you just want to pick October
22nd or 29th and.
Oh, we can't do the 22nd.
Okay.
The eighth is Columbus Day.
I don't know.
I'm thinking that's probably out
when we already have a school board meeting with our.
Okay, what about the 15th?
The fifth.
18th.
That's okay.
I can do that for 4:00, October 15th.
Yeah, there's a, there's a game, but that's okay.
Oh, you.
It's okay.
It's okay. Oh,
all right.
Thank you. So.
Well, it was was scheduled for October 15th, 4:00.
If anybody has any issues with that, then let me know or let Mr.
Center know.
Just so I'm clear, we're not adding if PSB comes out with recommendations for new.