A resident raised concerns during public comment about proposed policy revisions requiring annual submission of nonprofit bylaws and alleged board members were exchanging notes during the meeting in violation of board policy and open-meetings rules.
The commenter said the policy committee had proposed changes to two policies that would require bylaws to be submitted yearly and require identification of board members or directors. “I'm just wondering what brought that up,” the resident said, referring to changes labeled 9191 and 9210. The commenter said last month’s agenda showed many PTO/PTA groups had already submitted bylaws but questioned whether the educational foundation had complied.
The speaker emphasized that school parent organizations are separate from the district. “We are separate independent from the district, completely independent from the district. The only reason we communicate with our building level administration is out of respect for our mission and our goals, but we are completely separate entities. They cannot govern us. We cannot govern them,” the resident said.
The resident also cited policy 0170 and open-meetings laws, raising transparency concerns about board members exchanging written notes at the dais. “Policy 0 1 7 0, use of electronic devices by board members needs to be reviewed by the whole board... I do see you guys writing back and forth, so I'm not sure what's going on on the site,” the speaker said, adding that such exchanges could conflict with the Open Public Meetings Act and the Sunshine Law.
Nut graf: The comments called for clarification and enforcement on three areas: whether nonprofit bylaws (including the educational foundation) are in compliance with proposed policy revisions; whether fundraising disclosures to contributors are adequate; and whether board members are complying with the board’s electronic-device policy and open-meetings requirements.
The commenter asked for clarity about fundraising disclosures and filing requirements, noting PTAs and PTOs file 990-EZ forms that include explanations for how funds are used. The resident said the district cannot govern independent nonprofits and urged that policy language and enforcement reflect that separation.
There was no formal board action recorded in the excerpt; the remarks were part of the public-comment portion of the meeting. The transcript shows board members acknowledged the points but did not announce an immediate policy vote or enforcement action in the excerpt.
Ending: The public commenter sought assurance the policy committee and the full board review the proposed policy changes, that nonprofit compliance is demonstrated, and that the board clarify electronic-device rules on the dais; the transcript does not record a formal response beyond acknowledgment.