Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Discipline Violent Behavior topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee sends narrow violent-behavior policy back to staff to check overlap with SR&R and special-education protections
Summary
Members returned Policy 26-20, focused on students with physically aggressive or violent behavior, to staff for review to determine whether its content is already embedded in the larger Student Rights and Responsibilities policy and to ensure special-education safeguards are addressed.
The governance committee directed staff to review Policy 26-20, which concerns students who display physically aggressive or violent behavior, and determine whether the policy should remain standalone or be embedded within the larger Student Rights and Responsibilities (SR&R) framework.
Doctor Reed presented the draft and said titles and sections were changed and a philosophy statement added. Several members questioned the utility of a stand‑alone policy. Ms. Sizemore Heizer said the draft omitted references that are important when addressing violent behavior, such as protections and procedures for students with disabilities (IDEA protections, manifestation determinations and other special-education processes). “I have actually just a lot of concerns about having this as a standalone policy,” she said, asking staff to identify where the concepts already appear in other policies or regulations.
Legal staff (Mr. Foster) told the committee that the board is required to adopt discipline rules if it elects to do so, but the requirement does not force a stand‑alone policy: similar language can be provided in SR&R. Committee members voted to send the draft back to staff to identify whether the content is duplicative, where items should be embedded, and which cross references or statutory citations should be added. The motion passed with the committee majority; Ms. Sizemore Heizer’s motion to send it back to staff carried with recorded opposition and one abstention noted in the transcript.
Members asked staff to return with recommendations that account for special-education procedures and existing disciplinary documents and to propose either embedding the content into SR&R or justifying a separate policy if necessary.
