District legal counsel and staff presented multiple first readings of updated board policies recommended by the North Carolina School Boards Association and modified for local adoption. The most discussed policy was 2302 (remote participation in board meetings), which the superintendent and staff said was revised in light of the Court of Appeals decision in State of North Carolina v. Anson County Board of Commissioners.

What the remote participation change would do: The proposed policy would allow board members to participate remotely for certain reasons (illness, travel, declared state or local emergency) but would limit or preclude remote voting when no state or federal emergency exists, to reduce legal exposure if a split vote later is challenged. Staff described the change as the most conservative approach recommended while the appellate litigation continues.

Court case and statutory context: Dr. James explained the Anson County case: the Court of Appeals held that, outside a state of emergency, commissioners who participated only remotely could not be counted as present for quorum in that specific county-commission statute. School boards do not have the exact same statute, but the association recommended a narrow policy to limit legal risk until higher courts clarify the law.

Other policy items: The board also reviewed first readings of purchasing thresholds (Policy 6430/6450 updates to legal references), federal grant administration (Policy 8305) including updated definitions for minority business participation, and student policies (4320 tobacco products; 4329/7311 bullying/harassment) that align local policy language with state statutes and clarify reporting and investigatory roles for staff and supervisors. Policy 9125 was noted to retain a 10% aspirational, verifiable goal for minority business participation; staff will fix a formatting omission in the draft.

What will happen next: These were first readings; staff and counsel recommended conservative language on remote participation pending appellate clarification. The board did not vote; policies will return as required for adoption on second reading or at a future meeting.

Ending: Board members asked for clarifications about whether local emergency declarations would permit remote voting (staff said state or federal declarations, but not a county-only declaration, control remote voting rights under the narrow policy approach). Staff will provide final clean drafts and legal citations for the next meeting.