Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Release Time Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debate over 'release time' religious instruction policy after national legal guidance; trustees ask for legal review
Summary
Trustees debated elements of the district’s release‑time religious instruction policy after national commentary questioned whether vendor model language goes beyond Ohio law; the board asked counsel to review background‑check and distribution provisions before any change.
The Stow‑Munroe Falls board on April 28 debated Policy 5223 (release time for religious instruction) after trustees reviewed recent national commentary that said some proposed policy language could exceed statutory authority and raise First Amendment concerns. Board members asked the district’s legal counsel to review the policy language and brought up two specific areas for possible revision: (1) a vendor background‑check requirement that is not explicitly in state law and (2) broad language limiting distribution of items such as trinkets or t‑shirts after release‑time events.
Why trustees raised the issue One trustee asked the board to delete two paragraphs from the policy: a paragraph that required private providers to provide criminal background checks and a paragraph that attempted to control what private providers might distribute (for example, trinkets or t‑shirts). The trustee cited media coverage and legal commentary that warned model policy language from a vendor (Neola) could add requirements not contained in Ohio’s release‑time statute and potentially increase litigation risk.
Board discussion and positions - Some trustees urged caution and said the district should follow legal counsel recommendations rather than act immediately. Trustees pointed out that prior removal and reinstatement of policies had occurred and noted the district must comply with state law.
- Other trustees said background checks for individuals who regularly enter school buildings are standard practice for volunteer and partner groups and argued that it would be risky to excuse providers from background checks if they will take students off campus or be alone with children.
- Trustees also raised concerns about food or items returned from off‑site religious instruction and the need to maintain consistency with existing building rules (ingredient lists for food, allergy protocols, volunteer background checks for on‑site events).
Next steps and legal review Multiple trustees and the superintendent said they have already shared policy language and commentary with legal counsel and will return with a recommended revision. One board member asked that legal counsel evaluate whether the vendor’s proposed additions are lawful or exceed the legislature’s release‑time statute. Another said the board should ensure policy language preserves student safety and consistent building‑level expectations for outside groups.
Ending The board did not adopt changes at the meeting. Staff and district counsel will review the policy language and the legal commentaries cited by trustees and return with recommended changes or an opinion to guide a future board action.
