Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses rewritten facility‑use policy; supervisors, custodial fees and insurance flagged for refinement
Summary
Trustees reviewed proposed updates to the district’s facilities use policy and fee schedule, focusing on supervision requirements, custodial overtime fees for weekend events, insurance certificates and the definition of seasonal fees for Piper youth groups.
The Piper School District Board of Education discussed proposed revisions to its facility‑use policy and fees Monday, focusing on supervision, custodial overtime, insurance and how seasonal fees will be defined for youth groups.
District administrators presented a redlined policy, accompanying guidelines for administrators, and a fee schedule that distinguishes three categories: Piper youth (teams with 75% or more Piper students), nonprofit youth and nonprofit adults. The proposed changes include a recommendation that a building supervisor (paid at the district extra‑duty rate) be present for rented events and that weekend events or large gatherings that bring food may also require custodial overtime at $38 per hour.
Administrators said the proposed $20‑per‑hour building‑supervisor rate reflects current extra‑duty pay for staff; they cautioned the district could not use that fee to generate district profit. Trustees and community‑affiliated commenters pressed for clearer definitions: what a seasonal fee covers (number and duration of practices), when custodial fees apply, numeric thresholds for "large" events, and standards for "adequate adult supervision." District staff said they will add quantifiers and circulate the proposed policy to frequent facility users for feedback.
Administrators also reiterated that a certificate of insurance will continue to be required for renting groups; staff reported most leagues and organized programs already provide that documentation and that standalone groups can obtain low‑cost policies if needed. Trustees asked the district to survey staff about interest in staffing building‑supervisor shifts and to meet with major community program leaders (youth sports, Optimist, etc.) before bringing a final proposal back to the board.
No formal vote was taken on the policy Monday; the district intends to gather stakeholder feedback, refine threshold language and return the item for further discussion next month. Staff said any changes would be implemented in the 2025–26 school year if approved.
