Kent School District pauses Title IX policy update, discusses recess, nutrition and wellness rules

The Kent School District Board spent a special public work session beginning at 5 p.m. reviewing proposed policy changes on student nondiscrimination, school safety, nutrition, recess and wellness and directed staff to obtain legal review before advancing several items to a formal board vote.

The discussion mattered because it touches student civil‑rights processes, daily student routines, and federal and state program compliance that shape school operations across the district.

Holly, a district staff member who led the presentation, told the board the district is holding proposed revisions to Policy 3205 — titled discrimination and harassment of students prohibited — ‘‘per our legal counsel’’ after a federal court ruling. Holly said the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky vacated the 2024 Title IX regulations on Jan. 9 and ‘‘vacated entirely, meaning they totally threw out the 2024 Title IX new regulations. They said that the regulations were invalid and must be set aside, and this ruling applies nationwide.’’ Holly said the 2020 Title IX regulations are now back in effect and that the district’s existing policies (3205 for student discrimination, 3207 for harassment and bullying, and 5010 for staff nondiscrimination and affirmative action) remain in place to protect students.

Board members discussed a set of other policy drafts the district received from WASDA/WASA model language: a revised emergency policy tied to RCW 28A.321.125 that clarifies how substitutes receive safe‑school information and the three basic functional drill responses (shelter in place, lockdown and evacuation); a separate, standalone nutrition policy (67100) that was previously combined with physical education and recess; a new recess and physical activity policy (6701) that supports compliance with Senate Bill 5257; and a new federal‑requirements wellness policy (6702) that establishes a wellness committee and addresses family engagement, staff wellness and before/after school physical activity.

On nutrition, district nutrition staff explained how school meal programs are tracked and budgeted. ‘‘It is a requirement that we spend within the amount of money that we bring under 9800,’’ a nutrition services staff member said, describing the district’s internal program tracking (program code referenced in the work session as 98100 and tracked under fund/program 9800). Board members asked whether fundraising or general‑fund use for snack items could conflict with meal‑nutrition rules; staff noted additional USDA and OSPI rules limit sales of foods of minimal nutritional value.

Recess and active transportation drew sustained questions. Board members reviewed proposed language that echoes SB 5257 and the model procedure prohibiting withholding recess as punishment except when a student’s participation poses an immediate safety threat. One board member asked whether the policy’s references to ‘‘opportunities for active transportation to school’’ required equipment or infrastructure; staff clarified that the policy text uses the phrase ‘‘opportunities’’ and that many district schools already have bike racks, though the number of spaces varies. The board asked staff to prepare a legal review on liability and coverage related to encouraging or facilitating active transportation (helmets, storage, supervision), and asked staff to consider a clearer scheduling guarantee so schools ‘‘will be scheduled a minimum of 30 minutes per day’’ for elementary recess, language a board member suggested adding to the policy procedures.

The board did not adopt these policies during the work session. Members agreed to hold Policy 3205 pending counsel guidance on Title IX implementation and to obtain the requested legal review of the recess/active‑transportation language before a second reading; staff indicated that if the legal review is completed and edits are made, the item could come back for approval at the next board meeting.

Separately, during the regular meeting that followed, the board approved routine business items. The board voted to approve the meeting agenda (motion passed 4–0), accepted gifts and donations (motion passed 4–0) and approved consent agenda items 8.01–8.11 with the exception of vouchers (motion passed 4–0). The voucher item (8.10) was considered separately and passed 3–1, with Vice President Cook voting against the vouchers and citing payments to the law firm Foster Garvey; the board did not identify line‑item charges during the meeting.

What happens next: staff will provide the requested legal reviews — for the Title IX policy and for liability questions tied to active transportation and recess procedures — and the board indicated it expects revised language to accompany a second reading. If legal review clears the draft changes, staff said they would bring the policies back for formal approval at a future regular meeting.