Miss Mazan, board member, raised the item the board had discussed previously: whether students using Empowerment Scholarship Accounts who are home educated should be allowed to participate in district interscholastic activities. The board spent more than 40 minutes weighing academic standards, fees and the district’s exposure under Arizona Interscholastic Association rules before concluding it would not expand participation to high school athletes at this time.

Why it matters: The decision touches eligibility, competitive rules and district finances. Allowing ESA students to participate could require the district to set fee schedules, track participation and clarify whether district facilities and grounds costs are included in any charge to families.

Board discussion and key details
Miss Mazan told the board she initially proposed opening registration for ESA students at both middle‑ and high‑school levels but, after checking, recommended limiting any change to middle schools because high school athletics are governed by the Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA). "I think we're scrapping the idea totally of high schoolers," she said, adding the AIA’s unclear stance made the high‑school option risky.

Staff member Mr. Tannehill presented a cost spreadsheet with two baseline figures — a lower per‑student baseline and a higher figure that, the staffer said, would include field, grounds and water costs. Tannehill described the higher number as including "the fields and landscaping and water bills" and said some districts prorate field costs by time of use.

Board members probed academic requirements and equity concerns. Dr. Dellinger asked whether middle‑school ESA students would be held to the same academic standards as enrolled students; Miss Mazan confirmed the proposed affidavit would require the same grade‑keeping and standards as other athletes. Dellinger also raised a potential "double dipping" concern: charter or private school students might argue for similar access if ESA families can pay to participate. The board discussed limiting eligibility to students who are not enrolled elsewhere so charter or private school students would be ineligible.

Outcome and next steps
No formal policy was adopted. The board expressed reluctance to move forward now and several members said they preferred to wait for legislative direction or clearer AIA guidance. Miss Mazan said the board will "revisit this when we get there" if the Legislature or AIA issues clarifying rules.

Context and constraints
Board members and staff repeatedly emphasized the distinction between discussion, direction and formal action: this item remained at the discussion stage (no first reading or vote to amend policy was made). The board did not accept ESA funds on behalf of any student and staff confirmed any participation fee would be paid by families and not directly drawn from ESA funds by the district.