Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UCPS policy committee forwards several policy revisions to May meeting
Summary
At its April 15, 2025 meeting the Union County Public Schools policy committee voted to forward two policies for approval and six policies for first review at the May meeting, including changes to attendance, discrimination complaint procedures and extracurricular eligibility.
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union County Public Schools' policy committee on April 15, 2025 reviewed multiple proposed changes to the district policy manual and voted to forward two policies for final approval at the board's May meeting and to send six additional policies to May as first-review items.
The actions affect internal governance and student-facing rules: revisions included a clarification that responsibility for certain standards will move from the Department of Public Instruction to the Center for Safer Schools; updates to employee and student complaint procedures that add a Title IX coordinator and clarify reporting and notice steps; removal of an attendance-recovery provision after a change in state board policy; proposed rules addressing name-image-and-likeness agreements and eligibility when families misstate residency; and adjustments to how credit recovery grades are calculated to align with state policy changes.
Attorney Morris, speaking for staff, presented the items and described their intent and origin. He said of the second-review items, “The first policy for second review is policy 1-10, Board meetings,” and explained that staff recommended those items go for approval at the May meeting. On attendance policy changes, Morris said, “You'd have to be failing by performance, not just attendance,” summarizing the effect of a recent state board policy change that removed the option to fail students solely for attendance and made attendance recovery provisions unnecessary.
The committee discussed two policies that were on second review: policy 1-10 (Board meetings) and policy 5-10 (School improvement plan). Staff requested both be placed on the full board agenda in May for approval; the committee moved and approved that referral by voice vote.
Committee members then reviewed six companion items for first review and asked that they be placed on the May agenda for first review: policy 1-27 (responsibility/standards language, shifting a referenced standard-setting body to the Center for Safer Schools), policy 3-07b (racism/harassment/bullying complaint procedure for employees) and policy 4-07b (racism/discrimination/harassment/bullying complaint procedure for students) — which add a Title IX coordinator and clarify reporting/notice steps — policy 4-01 (attendance), policy 5-04 (extracurricular activities and interscholastic athletics, revised for name‑image‑likeness agreements and to address eligibility when residency is falsified), and policy 5-12 (student promotion and accountability, revised to reflect state changes to credit-recovery grade calculation). Morris told the committee that cabinet staff and relevant directors had reviewed and supported the proposed changes.
Formal procedural votes recorded in the transcript were routine voice votes. The committee approved the agenda and the open-session minutes by voice vote at the start of the meeting. Later, after discussion, the motions to refer the second-review policies to the May board meeting for approval and to refer the listed first-review policies to the May meeting for first review were each moved, seconded and approved by voice vote; the transcript does not record individual mover/second names or a roll-call tally. The committee adjourned after confirming the next meeting would be in May 2025 at 8 a.m.
The committee's review centers on procedural and compliance updates rather than new district-wide programs or budget changes. Staff framed several edits as technical or compliance-driven — to align with changed state board policy or to name responsible units such as the Center for Safer Schools — while the updates to complaint procedures add clarity on coordinators and reporting steps.

