The Concord School Board communication and policy committee voted to move the district's revised harassment reporting and grievance policy (Policy 4.15) to the full board for first reading after members resolved several substantive edits.
Committee Chair Karen Baker said the document contains targeted changes and that the committee reviewed “the areas where we actually need to review” before forwarding the policy. The committee passed the motion by voice vote; the meeting record shows the motion carried with no opposition.
The committee’s review focused on several substantive points. Baker read new language under the policy’s consent definition, including an added example: “Due to the inherent power differential, a student, regardless of age, cannot consent to a relationship with an employee, contractor or volunteer at a primary or secondary school.” The draft also retains a separate sentence stating that “any person under the age of 16 cannot legally consent to a [sexual] relationship,” language the committee discussed but did not remove.
Members also agreed to remove an earlier, detailed impact test — phrased in prior drafts as conduct that is “severe, pervasive, objectively offensive” — saying the committee believed that standard is addressed elsewhere in the policy and was unnecessary in the Title IX–related section.
The committee revised the policy’s retaliation language to clarify when charging someone with making a materially false statement is appropriate. As read and refined in committee discussion, the policy now states that “a finding that a complaint is not substantiated is insufficient to find that a person made a materially false statement in bad faith.” Committee members debated sentence structure and agreed on the simplified wording during the meeting.
Committee members reviewed additions to the appeals section and the document’s terminology: the committee confirmed use of the two-word term “appeals decision maker” in places where the role is described and noted the definition of “decision maker” includes initial decision-maker and appeals roles.
The draft also includes an added sentence clarifying that complaints by former students or employees that fall outside Title IX jurisdiction “may be handled under other Board policies and/or reported to outside authorities,” language committee members specifically requested so the district can pursue non-Title IX avenues when appropriate.
The committee asked staff to clean up formatting, complete internal citations and verify contact information listed under outside resources (for example, the New Hampshire human-rights body referenced in the draft and federal Office for Civil Rights contacts) before the policy proceeds to first reading.
Baker said she would work with policy staff on a final technical pass before first reading; the committee did not request another substantive meeting on the item prior to that board-level step.