Palm Beach superintendent proposes emergency edits to district policies to comply with Title VI guidance

Superintendent Michael Burke presented the Palm Beach County School Board with proposed emergency revisions to roughly 10 board policies, saying the changes are needed to align the district with the federal interpretation of Title VI and the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.

Burke said the Florida Department of Education sent a directive on April 10 requiring the district to certify compliance with Title VI by April 18. "I am recommending emergency board action due to the imminent danger due to the health, safety, and welfare posed to the public and the significant fiscal implications," Burke said, adding the district faces the potential loss of "approximately $300,000,000 in federal funding." The superintendent said the district has reviewed policies and identified language that "directly or indirectly confers an advantage or imposes a disadvantage ... based on race, ethnicity, or national origin."

The proposed changes would strike or repeal specific lines in several policies and adopt a new small-business enterprise policy. The administration repeated that, if adopted as emergency measures, the changes would take immediate effect and remain in place for 90 days while staff completes the formal policy-review process.

The items cited for revision or repeal included: - Policy 1.04, Unitary School District: proposed removal of lines that dictate student transfer based on race and ethnicity. - Policy 1.091, Audit Committee: proposed removal of lines encouraging appointment nominees based on race and ethnicity. - Policy 3.05, Equal Employment Opportunity: proposed deletions for provisions addressing employment efforts tied to race, ethnicity, or national origin. - Policy 5.015, Student Reassignment, and Policy 5.016, Choice Procedures Manual: proposed removals of language prioritizing student transfers or placements based on ethnicity. - Policy 5.60, Eligibility for Participation in K-12 Extracurricular Activities: proposed removal of language directing principals to select advisors or staff based on racial/ethnic composition. - Policies 6.142 and 6.143 concerning diversity in business practice and equitable utilization in business: recommended repeal; the administration proposed replacing them with new Policy 6.134, Small Business Enterprise Program, that would codify outreach and certification-based participation for small businesses in district procurement. - Policy 7.081, Nondiscrimination statement: proposed striking lines related to employment efforts based on race and ethnicity.

Jamie Wyatt, chief of staff, summarized the intent: the revisions focus on "eliminating language that provides an advantage or a disadvantage ... based upon race, ethnicity, or national origin." When asked how the proposed Small Business Enterprise (SBE) program would treat firms, Wyatt said certification would determine eligibility: certified firms that meet the small-business criteria would be eligible, and she affirmed firms would be treated equally regardless of owner background.

District 2 member Virginia Savieto asked for clarification about what qualifies a business for the proposed SBE program and whether certification would treat all businesses equally; Wyatt said certification is the basis for participation. No further substantive questions were raised during the workshop presentation.

The board did not vote on the emergency policy adoptions during the workshop. The meeting record shows the workshop concluded with a procedural motion to adjourn: the motion was made by District 4 member Erica Whitfield and seconded by District 5 member Gloria Branch; the motion "carries unanimously" in the workshop record. The superintendent and staff said they would continue policy review and return proposed revisions for board action through the regular rulemaking process if emergency measures are not adopted at a later meeting.

The presentation cited the Florida Department of Education directive of April 10 and the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard as the driving legal context; the administration presented an estimate of possible federal funding impact and specific policy line edits to be considered during subsequent review.