Staff outlines state law changes: child-abuse investigations moved to DHHS; chronic absenteeism rules loosened

District staff told the Policy and Governance Committee that several recent state-level changes will alter how the district handles child-abuse allegations, chronic absenteeism and certain open-meetings requirements.

Staff said investigations of alleged child abuse will now be handled by the Department of Health and Human Services rather than by district-appointed investigators. “Where those investigations are are now going to be handled by, the Department of Health and Human Services, not the school district,” staff told the committee. Under the change, staff said the district must place an accused employee on leave immediately when an allegation is made; if an investigation returns a founded finding, the district must terminate the employee.

Staff added the district is waiting for state rules from the Department of Health and Human Services about how the process will operate, including timelines for investigations and any procedural details. The committee was told the district is sending staff to training and will meet with the county attorney to review last year’s first-year experience under the new compulsory-attendance referral process.

On chronic absenteeism, staff said state changes removed a requirement for certified mail — a practice that had cost the district about $40,000 in postage last year — and gave schools more discretion on when to refer a student to the county attorney. “So it was $40,000, something like that. So $40,000 from the general fund that we were paying for postage. So that's real money,” the presenter said.

The state also expanded the list of excused absences to include items such as funerals, weddings and certain military-related events, and allowed schools to determine whether absenteeism is negatively affecting a student’s academic performance before referring the family to the county attorney. Committee members discussed that the county attorney’s office has shifted to a “charge-first” approach for compulsory-attendance referrals, meaning the office starts with a charging process and then may drop charges if families comply with agreed steps; staff noted the charge is against the parent.

Open meetings and training: committee members raised ambiguity in proposed language about required training timing. One member asked whether the 90-day training requirement should run from the election or from taking the oath of office; staff said the district would likely set the clock from the oath because election certification can be delayed.

Why it matters: these changes affect district operations (investigations, staffing, legal exposure), district costs (removing certified-mail requirement returned about $40,000 to general fund), and how the district interacts with the county attorney on compulsory-attendance cases.

Next steps: staff said they will continue follow-up with the county attorney (Rachel Zimmerman) to clarify referral forms and processes and will incorporate state rule guidance as it becomes available. Committee members asked staff to survey other district policies and negotiated agreements for possible conflicts with the new mandated procedures.

Taper: staff emphasized there are outstanding rule details from state agencies and that some policies and negotiated agreements may need further review to ensure consistency with the new state mandates.