Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety Policies topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Shoreline board reviews first readings of policies limiting immigration‑enforcement access and consolidating law‑enforcement guidance
Summary
Superintendent Reyes presented first readings of revisions to policy 3226 and a new consolidated policy 4310 strengthening language that limits immigration‑enforcement access to school facilities and folding relations with law enforcement into a single policy; the items were presented for first reading and will return for adoption.
Superintendent Dr. Reyes presented two related policy items for first reading: a narrow revision to Policy 3226 (Interviews and Interrogations of Students on School Premises) that adds a sentence limiting immigration agents’ access to school facilities, and a new Policy 4310 (District Relationships with Law Enforcement and Other Government Agencies) that consolidates the district’s prior contacts and law‑enforcement policies.
Reyes read the added sentence aloud during the presentation: “Further, the district does not consent to immigration agents accessing school facilities such that immigration agencies may only access school facilities as required by law.” Reyes said the extra sentence strengthens the district’s commitment to safeguarding schools as sensitive locations and that the district had reviewed the change with legal counsel.
Board members asked about the policy’s source material. Staff said the policy began with a WASDA (Washington Association of School Directors) model and that the additional sentence was a district recommendation reviewed by legal. The new Policy 4310 also incorporates language reflecting guidance from immigration enforcement agencies that enforcement should avoid sensitive locations such as schools.
Board members noted a cross‑reference that will be corrected (the policy page showed a typographical reference to “43100” that staff said would be fixed to read “immigration enforcement in schools” as a cross reference). Reyes said both items will return for adoption at the board’s next meeting.
Because both items were first readings, no board adoption occurred. Staff asked trustees to submit any follow‑up questions prior to the adoption vote.
