Perrysburg board updates tip-line reporting, referrals and public-records limits after staff-safety complaints

Superintendent Tom Hassler presented the Perrysburg Exempted Village School District’s student-safety and staff-accountability update at the June 16 board meeting, summarizing the district’s use of a tip line and steps taken since January to document and handle complaints.

Hassler said the district has logged dozens of reports and taken steps to centralize intake and improve documentation. “We launched this tip line, which gives students and families, community members, another opportunity to report,” he said, and added the district is reviewing each report and checks them at multiple administrative levels.

Hassler and other administrators gave a six-month breakdown: in that period 32 reports were logged and reviewed; 17 staff members were specifically named in submissions (10 of those names appeared in three multi-name emails); 11 reports were referred to the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce’s Office of Professional Conduct and two were referred to law enforcement. He said most tips that do not meet reporting thresholds were handled at the building level and closed after investigation.

A central point of the discussion was whether submissions to the district’s “report at” email and voicemail tip line are public records. Board members and administrators said materials sent directly to the district’s internal tip address can be subject to public-record requests. By contrast, the Ohio Safe School tip line — a state hotline — was described as confidential and exempt from public-record disclosure under state guidance. Hassler said the district’s attorneys are working to clarify what must be released, what may be redacted and how to protect students’ identities while responding to records requests.

Trustees raised concerns that public disclosure of local tip-line submissions could chill reporting. Hassler noted the district receives anonymous reports and sometimes cannot act on them because they lack identifying information; he also said anonymous reports have produced “buckshot” lists of staff names that require follow-up but are harder to substantiate.

Hassler described additional steps taken since the board’s public discussion earlier in the year: monthly internal reviews including law enforcement and school resource officers; a formal tracking document for every report; development of an anti-grooming policy and an ad hoc student-safety committee; targeted staff training and a video with QR codes to help students and families report concerns; and a semester review with local police. He said the district is also consulting counsel on responses to public-records requests involving investigations.

Board members asked whether parents should be encouraged to use the state tip line to protect confidentiality; administrators said the state tip line is a valid option but also explained why the district created a local reporting channel — to gather older reports or concerns that might not meet the state tip line’s immediate thresholds. Hassler said the district will consider clarifying its web messaging to direct people to the preferred confidential avenue when appropriate.

No formal policy change was adopted at the meeting. Trustees said they want clearer website language explaining which reporting channels are confidential, and asked administrators to return with recommended wordings and procedures for summer follow-up.