Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Business Partnerships topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debate over creating local business advisory committee stalls amid legal and procedural concerns
Summary
A proposal to create a locally controlled Local Business Advisory Committee (LBAC) sparked extensive discussion and disagreement among trustees over statutory authority, existing regional partnerships and process; no motion to form a district‑controlled LBAC advanced.
Trustees on Monday debated a board‑member proposal to establish a locally controlled Local Business Advisory Committee (LBAC) intended to connect district students with internships and employer partners. Discussion grew contentious as members raised statutory, procedural and coordination concerns, and no motion to create a new district LBAC passed.
Board member Zach Fuji introduced an outline proposing a board‑led committee to facilitate local business partnerships, internships and performance tracking. Fuji said the committee would be a “board committee” and volunteered to chair initial meetings.
“It's a board committee. It would be a bridge to local businesses and community leaders for board members to connect,” Fuji said, describing the committee as a locally controlled alternative to a regional service.
Several trustees pushed back. Board member Doug Duffy questioned the process Fuji used to develop the proposal, saying he had not been consulted and that outreach to elected officials had placed a local council member in “a compromising position.” Duffy also raised concerns about legal authority, noting the district currently participates in a regional Business Advisory Council (BAC) through the Educational Service Center (ESC) and referenced board policy and state statute that govern how a BAC is established.
“You can only have one,” a trustee said during the discussion, referencing the statutory structure that delegates BAC responsibilities to the district, an ESC or a third party. Board members and staff agreed the district’s existing policy (adopted 2010) delegates representation to the ESC’s Business Advisory Council.
Superintendent Ryan McClain and Curriculum Administrator Mark Robertson were asked whether the proposed committee duplicated or overlapped with the district’s contract with BridgeEd (the vendor referenced for career programming) or with ESC services. Fuji and other members said the proposal would not replace BridgeEd but would be an organic, locally controlled forum for business leaders; others said existing networks such as the Sunbury‑Big Walnut Area Chamber of Commerce and the ESC already provide pathways to employers and suggested that individual trustees pass business contacts to district staff or BridgeEd for inclusion.
Legal and procedural questions remained unresolved. Trustees asked the treasurer and district counsel to research the board’s 2010 agreement with the ESC and the Ohio statute governing BACs. Several board members suggested the cleaner path might be forming a board committee with clear meeting minutes, agendas and public transparency, or working more closely with the Chamber of Commerce and BridgeEd to route local business contacts to the existing programs.
No vote to create a district‑controlled LBAC passed. A motion made by the proponent to adopt the LBAC outline did not receive a second and therefore failed for lack of a motion. Trustees said they will consider legal counsel’s opinion and explore whether a board committee or better coordination with existing partners will meet the district’s objectives.
Why it matters: School–business partnerships provide internships, career‑exploration and potential hiring pipelines. Trustees differed on how best to structure that work without duplicating existing state‑mandated or contracted services.
