The Board of Ethics on July 17 approved its consent agenda and instructed a board member to ask the municipal purchasing director why certain school disclosure forms require notarization.

Board of Ethics members voted to approve the consent agenda as a block after a brief discussion. Paul, a board member, raised questions about the notarization requirement on ASD disclosure forms and said the requirement appeared to create an unnecessary filing burden for front-line school employees.

Paul, board member, said, "A lot of these forms are like teachers and substitute teachers, and, you know, they have no impact in reviewing contracts at all, and there's no role for them to like, potential for a conflict. But their forms require them to get that notarized, which seems to impose some sort of a little bit of a burden. We just wanna make it as easy as possible for them to file. But maybe, they could just change that form or we find out why they do that." The board chair agreed and authorized Paul to contact the purchasing director to seek the reason for the notarization requirement and whether it could be removed or changed.

A board member noted the municipal "Munis" form does not contain a comparable notarization requirement. The board did not take formal regulatory action beyond directing Paul to inquire; the consent items themselves were approved without further amendment.

Next steps: Paul will reach out to the purchasing director and report back to the board; no deadline for that follow-up was set during the meeting.