The Bedford School Board spent substantial time on June 9 discussing a proposed communica­ble‑and‑infectious‑disease policy (draft EBCG) that would replace several older policies, including discrete HIV/AIDS language, and that lists specific diseases and exclusion procedures.

Board members said they support protecting students and staff from serious infectious threats but disagreed about how prescriptive the policy should be and whether some language belongs in a procedure rather than a policy.

The draft EBCG consolidates earlier policies and, according to the materials, cross‑references RSA authority that permits exclusion of students who exhibit symptoms of contagion. The draft lists example conditions that “include but are not necessarily limited to” chickenpox, shingles and infectious mononucleosis.

Several board members expressed concern that the list and some operational language could lead to inconsistent application at the school level. One member said the draft “is a monster” and worried it could prompt excessive exclusion or require principals and nurses to implement complicated precedents during an outbreak. The superintendent described how, in practice, most day‑to‑day attendance decisions are handled by the school nurse in consultation with parents; principals or the superintendent become involved only infrequently.

Members asked for these clarifications and next steps before adopting the consolidated policy:
- Practitioner review: circulate the draft to school nurses, administrators and a physician advisor and ask them to flag items that are impractical to implement or better handled through procedure.
- Statutory check: verify the RSA citations and NHDHHS guidance referenced in the draft to ensure the board does not remove language required by state law.
- Narrow or reframe lists of conditions: several members suggested avoiding exhaustive disease lists that could be misapplied to conditions that are difficult to diagnose quickly (for example, mononucleosis) or unique non‑contagious medical presentations.

Board members also discussed related operational issues: the district’s truancy letters and the way chronic or repeated absences related to recurring medical issues are handled; the board asked nurses to confirm existing local practices for pulling or not pulling truancy letters in those cases.

No vote was taken on the EBCG draft on June 9. The superintendent said she would circulate the draft to nurses, administrators and two physician contacts and return recommended edits to the board.