Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Religious Volunteer Programs topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents, Lifewise representative exchange views on religious volunteer program during public comment

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Two speakers during the March 20 public comment period urged opposing actions on the Lifewise RTRI program: one asked the board to tighten rules for outside religious-sponsored programs; a Lifewise representative described background checks, insurance and student-support services the program provides.

During public comment at the March 20 Marysville school board meeting, two speakers offered opposing perspectives on Lifewise, a community-run RTRI (return-to-school / religiously-affiliated) volunteer program that works with district students.

Sherry Ulmer, a resident who identified her address in Marysville, asked the board to modify the district's current RTRI policy to impose tighter limits. Ulmer read a list of desired policy changes, including a requirement that sponsoring entities certify FBI and BCI criminal checks for any person working with district students; a prohibition on RTRI programs distributing promotional items ("no candy, trinkets, snacks, clothing"); a restriction on board members and staff promoting or discouraging RTRI programs; limiting RTRI sessions to one day per school quarter and 30 minutes during lunch; and preventing RTRI participation in before/after/during-school events such as book fairs, parades, open houses, field days and concerts. Ulmer also voiced concern about anticipated legislative changes that might allow organizations to provide Bible study on school grounds.

Christine Wheeler, speaking as a Lifewise representative, told the board Lifewise follows safety measures and operational protocols. Wheeler said the program maintains liability insurance, conducts background checks using Pro Screening (comparing it to the district's volunteer screening), performs reference checks and interviews, and requires training including child-abuse awareness, mandated reporter training, CPR and emergency response. She described daily driver inspections for buses, fire and state bus inspections, attendance records for accountability, a formal curriculum, incident reporting, and a 1:10 adult-to-student ratio. Wheeler reported program statistics for the year: 267 students served, 64 team members (15 of them parents/grandparents), and participation by 20 churches. She also shared an anecdote of a family the program helped connect with a church and report improved family circumstances.

Board members did not take immediate action on policy changes during the meeting; the public comment raised questions the board may address in policy review or future agenda items. Board President and administrators reiterated the public comment rules and said the comments would be considered as part of the district's ongoing volunteer/program policies.

Ending: The exchange made clear competing community views about religiously affiliated volunteer programs operating in or alongside district activities; Lifewise detailed safety practices, while a resident asked the board for tighter limits in policy and on program activities if legislation permits expansion to school property.