Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Policies Meeting Structure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dallastown Area SD board tables proposed 2024–25 meeting restructure after debate
Summary
The board voted to table a proposed revision to board meeting structure and related policies after members raised concerns about committee chairs, meeting frequency and required policy revisions; roll call showed five votes to table and three opposed.
The Dallastown Area School District board on Jan. 9 tabled a proposal to revise its 2024–25 board meeting structure, related board policies and a revised school director handbook, sending the package back to the policy committee for further work.
The proposal would have reintroduced a board-of-the-whole finance/BCPC committee, revised meeting dates for 2024–25 to align with the restructuring, and updated policies in the OO series and the board handbook. Doctor Dahl, presenting the packet on behalf of administration, said the package reflected the board's direction from the Dec. 12 meeting and clarified that proposed HR committee work must comply with state open-meetings law.
The matter came to a motion to approve followed by an alternative motion to table. Board member (name not stated in the approval motion) initially moved to approve; later a motion was made to table the item and send it to the policy committee for further revision.
Board members who spoke against the proposed structure said the packet conflicted with the board's earlier direction and that removing committee chairs would reduce opportunities for broader member involvement. Mrs. Hosler said she would vote no, adding, “I think the purpose of behind this proposal was to get more board involvement. And without the addition of committee chairs, I don't see that happening.” Another member questioned the efficiency of reducing business-meeting action opportunities to one meeting per month.
Attorney Berman, the board’s legal counsel, advised the board that its policies require multiple readings before adoption but that the package met the 24‑hour notice requirement under Act 65; as a result, the board could have moved to suspend multiple readings and vote that night if it chose to do so.
A motion to table and refer the package to the policy committee passed on roll call: Mister Wingard — yes; Mister Pierce — yes; Mister Capellick — yes; Mrs. Hosler — yes; Mister Granholm — no; Mister Bentsil — yes; Missus Alba — no; Mister Pantano — no. (One member’s response was not recorded in the roll call audio.) The board secretary announced that action item 7A was tabled and that the previous motion to approve was eliminated.
The board will reconsider the policy revisions after the policy committee reports back, per the motion to table.
