A Green High School parent told the Board of Education that his son was removed from class and questioned by law enforcement without a parent or advocate present, and urged the district to adopt a designated student advocate policy.

Todd Daniels, of 5014 Meadow Bluff Drive, described an incident he said occurred May 8, when his then‑freshman son was pulled from class, had his phone and backpack taken and was questioned in a room for “well over an hour” with three law‑enforcement officers and a school administrator present. Daniels said the student was not told why he was being questioned, was not allowed to call a parent, and felt “targeted” because of his small stature. “Policy 5540 exists for a reason,” Daniels said, referencing the district’s policy on law‑enforcement interviews; he told the board that parents were not contacted prior to the questioning and that an advocate was not provided.

District administrators acknowledged the concern and described immediate steps taken after the parent filed a complaint. The vice superintendent — who later provided a written report to the parent — told the board the district considered Daniels’ complaint valid, apologized for the procedural misstep and said changes were implemented the following day. The superintendent said the district will hold a “full debrief” with Summit County Sheriff’s Office to clarify how the two entities work together during high‑risk safety investigations.

Daniels urged the board to go further and “consider implementing a designated student advocate, someone who is present at the time the student is questioned by law enforcement or outside parties” until a parent arrives. District leaders said that idea would be discussed during the debrief and in future policy and training reviews.

The board did not vote on a policy change during the meeting. Administrators said they will pursue training and a policy review with law enforcement and will report back to the board and the family. The vice superintendent’s written report and the district’s planned next steps were described publicly during the meeting; details of that report — including any personnel actions or changes to written procedures — were not announced at the meeting and remain subject to follow up.