Board hears first reading of staff–student relations policy; staff asked to refine language

Los Alamos Public Schools trustees held a first reading of proposed policy 4159 on staff–student relations during their May 13 meeting, and asked administrators to revise several sections to clarify reporting, exceptions and volunteer training before the policy returns for approval.

Board member Margaret Spector and Assistant Superintendent Carter Payne co-presented the draft policy, which the presenters said is intended "to prevent ... ethical misconduct between staff and students" and to create clear professional boundaries for all adults working in schools. Payne told the board that the policy covers teachers, administrators, counselors, coaches, volunteers and independent contractors and that it should be referenced in handbooks and annual training.

Why it matters: presenters said the policy balances two district priorities — encouraging at least one trusted adult relationship for students while drawing clear lines to avoid inappropriate or misunderstood interactions. Payne referenced state law requirements for reporting and investigation under the School Personnel Act, which board members cited during questions.

Substantive changes requested: board members asked staff to clarify how the policy treats interactions that occur outside the school setting (for example, after‑school help or informal rides), to strengthen volunteer training expectations, and to reword the policy’s “exceptions” section so that emergency deviations are reported rather than treated as carve-outs. Several trustees asked that electronic communication (social media, group chats) be explicitly addressed in regulation language so staff and coaches use district-approved platforms for student contact.

Direction to staff: Assistant Superintendent Payne said he would have the policy revised to reflect the board’s feedback and return it to the policy committee and then to the consent agenda for possible adoption. "There need to be some clear guidelines about where things ... those edges of your relationship are so that you can maintain that professional relationship," Payne told the board.

Ending: Board members praised the draft as an improvement over prior guidance and urged clear, implementable regulations that include volunteer orientation, reporting steps for concerns (including informal concerns), and electronic‑communication expectations. The board did not vote on the policy at the meeting; members directed staff to revise the draft and bring it back for formal approval.