Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment And Education Concerns topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters press Washoe trustees on public‑comment rules, curriculum and student outcomes
Summary
During closing public comment at the Jan. 7 special meeting, speakers urged changes to when public comment occurs, raised data‑privacy and Infinite Campus concerns, and pressed trustees to prioritize literacy, the constitution and drug prevention.
Several members of the public used the Jan. 7 Washoe County School District special meeting to press trustees on meeting rules, curriculum and student outcomes.
Todd Bailey, speaking for the Committee to Fix Washoe Schools, urged the board to restore public comment to the start of meetings, extend the per‑speaker time window and involve nonselected applicants in advisory committees. Bailey also recommended five finalists for the District C vacancy and encouraged trustees to take stronger action on the board’s land‑acknowledgment commitments.
Roger Edwards and other speakers emphasized academic rankings and literacy. Edwards noted Nevada’s state ranking and told trustees the district should prioritize raising academic standards and “quality of education.” Several commenters urged a return to core skills: reading, arithmetic and civics instruction. Monica Lehman, an applicant earlier in the meeting, asserted Nevada “is ranking 50 out of 50 states in term of education,” language echoed by public speakers calling for renewed focus on basic skills.
Concerns about student safety, drugs and discipline also surfaced. Bruce Parks (also an applicant) told trustees he had heard from students about high rates of substance use and said chronic absenteeism and discipline incidents are harming schools. Commenters asked the district to report regularly on academic achievement and to adopt stronger interventions for attendance and safety.
Privacy and transparency were raised as well. John Eppolito, representing ProtectNevadaChildren/Protecting Added Children, criticized the timing of public comment (moving it late in the agenda) and raised concerns about data retention and sharing through Infinite Campus. Drew Rebar referenced a Nevada Supreme Court case, Mack v. Williams (2022), to argue that state officials are subject to litigation and that community members must be allowed to petition government without intimidation.
Multiple commenters requested specific procedural changes: put public comment at the beginning and end of meetings, set a consistent evening meeting time to improve access for working parents, and ensure public comment applies to consent‑agenda items. Trustees responded during deliberations earlier in the meeting that they would take public input into consideration when deciding finalists and acknowledged the community’s engagement.
No formal board action on public‑comment rules or curriculum was taken at the Jan. 7 meeting. Speakers and trustees indicated those topics would remain part of ongoing public discussion.
