District administrators presented proposed handbook language and implementation plans for a revised dress code, prompting board members to discuss specifics including a possible explicit ‘‘no midriff’’ rule, enforcement practices, and consistency across elementary, middle and high school levels. The board asked administrators to refine language and return with recommendations before school starts.

Staff told the board the redlined language sent in the packet was focused primarily on high school issues raised by staff during spring and summer input. Proposed changes include clearer allowable/unallowable items, a documented progressive-response approach (first offense, second offense, multiple offenses) and a plan to track dress-code referrals in a spreadsheet so repeat violations can be identified and addressed without unnecessarily pulling students out of instruction. Staff emphasized they would provide wording teachers could use when speaking with students, because many staff find it uncomfortable to approach students about dress.

Board members discussed operational details and different enforcement philosophies. Several members advocated for a clear ‘‘no midriff’’ rule — described by supporters as a simple standard that staff can apply consistently — while others favored allowing a small amount of exposed midriff to reduce the number of in-class interruptions. Members asked staff to clarify how rules that reference the belly button would be applied in practice and to avoid unintentionally incentivizing students to change how they wear pants (for example raising pants) to meet a technical standard. Members also raised concerns about trends in clothing (very sheer or transparent fabrics) and asked staff to work with legal counsel on wording to ensure enforceability and to avoid overly broad terms such as “hate speech” without legal grounding; one board member recommended language tied to disruption, discriminatory harassment, threats, or encouragement of harm.

Board members also asked administrators to reconcile district-wide consistency with building-level requirements: the draft policy says dress codes should be “consistent at elementary, middle and high-school levels,” yet the proposed handbook language gives building administrators some discretion. Staff said middle- and high-school administrators will meet in August to align handbook language and then return to the board with recommended final wording (board staff identified an August 19 follow-up for additional review).

Staff said the intent is to avoid excessive instructional loss (for example, students being repeatedly pulled from class to change clothes) while maintaining standards appropriate for a learning and, in some cases, workplace-like environment. The board did not vote on the handbook language at the workshop; instead it directed administrators to review staff wording, consult legal counsel on potentially vulnerable phrasing, ensure consistent application across school levels, and report back with clearer handbook language before school starts.