December 17th, 2014
Dear Board of Trustees
Thank you for the opportunity to contribute my thoughts. I would like to present a few items for further discussion as I will not be able to attend the December 17th meeting due to a conflict with my work. Please consider the following thoughts regarding the review of the newly adopted Board Policy 1230 - School Connected Organizations.
Before I begin, I would like to point out that the recent review of District Bylaws and Policies have not been done in the interest of conducting the peoples business in a format consistent with open government standards. Most government boards abide by the practice of at least two readings pertaining to action items before a vote is made. District Board Bylaw 9311 states in part:
Before adoption, policies shall normally be given two readings by the Board.
At its second reading, the policy may be adopted by a majority vote of all members of the
Board.
The preferred practice of conducting a first reading of an update to a Policy at a regularly scheduled meeting, followed by a second reading, has only been accomplished when a Policy was sent back by the Board for further review, and only a few times in the past few years. The last time a dissenting vote (not unanimous) was cast during the review of a policy was February 15, 2012. With nearly all Board Policy updates being conducted with only one reading since that time, one has to wonder how five independent people could hold a perfect voting record for all that time, all with only open public forum discussion concerning the topics at hand.
I would also like to respectfully request that the section that encourages public participation in the Policy update process to be fully implemented. Board Bylaw 9311 also states in part:
The Board encourages members of the community to contribute information and opinions
for the Board's consideration and to propose revisions to policy.
The intent of Board Bylaw 9311 is to promote public participation by giving Bylaw and Policy updates at least two readings and allowing contribution from the public before moving forward. I would like to respectfully request that the board follow Board Bylaw 9311.
I would also like to respectfully request that the board follow Board Bylaw 9313 by reviewing Administrative Regulations for conformity to adopted Policy. Board Bylaw 9313 states in part:
The Board shall review proposed administrative regulations for the sole
purpose of ensuring conformity with the intent of Board policy.
The practice of allowing the Superintendent to push Administrative Regulations out by way of the District’s website without review, is not consistent with open government standards and is not consistent with Board Bylaw 9313. I respectfully request that Board Bylaw 9313 be followed.
Where I understand the need to move ahead quickly in revising grossly out of date Bylaws, Policies, and Administrative Regulations, I believe established procedures should be followed. I have taken the liberty to look at board packets from a number of our surrounding Districts and have noted that in many cases, proposed changes to Administrative Regulations are presented in written form at the time of review of the corresponding Bylaw or Policy update. I would also like to see the sample CSBA Policies and Administrative Regulations be included in the Board packets. I think the Board and the public would benefit from the reference material that we pay for. I would like to suggest the Board encourage this practice of including all relevant documents in the promotion of conducting business in an open fashion.
The Board also has not followed the California Education code 35160.5(a)(10) and the Districts own policy 9311 that requires policies that cover extracurricular and cocurricular activities of students, which may include fundraising activity, and is referenced in Board Policy 1230, to be updated ANNUALLY. It is the Administrative Regulation 9313 that puts this responsibility on the Superintendent of the District.
The Superintendent or designee will ensure that those mandated by law by a certain
date are reviewed, amended if necessary and adopted by the Board within the
timeline prescribed by law.
It appears that Board Policy and the corresponding Administrative Regulation 1230 had not seen an update since 2006 and Policy 6145 that specifically covers Extracurricular and Cocurricular activity has not seen an update since 1998. I respectfully request that the Board follow the California Education Code 35160.5(a)(10) concerning policies that require an annual review.
As a final note, I would like to request that the recently adopted Board Policy 1325, Advertising and Promotions, also be reviewed in an open format as there are issues that the public would like to address.
Now on to Board Policy 1230 - School Connected Organizations.
I would like to state to the Board that School Connected Organizations are their own entities and there are very specific laws in the education code that pertain to such organizations. I will not allow the Superintendent to pretend that the law is on his side in reference to control of our Home and School Club. The District may control their own websites, newsletters, email lists and fundraising activities, but they will not control the means of communication of the Home and School Clubs or the fundraising activities, except in strict accordance with law. Organizations such as Campus Kids Connection collect email and phone numbers on school grounds and yield a hefty profit, yet the District knows they have no jurisdiction over CKC’s communications or telling CKC where their proceeds will go. The same goes for our Home and School Club. The District may decide not to accept our abundant giving, but the District will not control our organization, and we will definitely not allow the intent of Policy or Administration Regulation to attempt to do so.
I would also like a distinction made between Student Body Associations and Home and School Clubs. References to laws cited by the Superintendent as the laws that must be considered in the update of the School Connected Organizations Policy, had to do with Education Code section 48932, which strictly deals with Student Body Associations that are comprised entirely of pupils. The role of Home and School Clubs is clearly defined in other sections of the code and the two do not cross over. It is disingenuous of the Superintendent to try to use laws from one section of code that clearly do not relate to Home and School Clubs. The Courts have roundly rejected attempts by School Districts to govern or restrict activities that are not considered school related functions. Where I understand the District’s need to maintain oversight of District related business, how the Home and School Clubs raise money is not the business of the District, except when expressly governed by the Education Code.
In summary, the Superintendent has egregiously overstated the authority and jurisdiction of the District and I respectfully request that the Board allow public review of each and every Bylaw, Policy, and Administrative Regulation for conformity with law, before formal adoption or publication..
Respectfully,
Chris Hadland
Co-Chair of FOMS
