Nurses, parents and community members urge Beloit board to retain director of school health; critics cite open-meeting concerns

At the School District of Beloit board meeting Oct. 7, school nurses, the district’s director of school health and dozens of emailed commenters urged the board not to eliminate the director of school health position, saying the role is essential to student safety, Medicaid reimbursement and staff training.

Speakers at the meeting told the board that the director performs clinical functions that cannot be delegated to nonmedical administrators. “This role directly supports student safety, compliance, and the daily well‑being of students and staff,” Michelle Bevelleas, who identified herself as the incumbent director, told the board, adding that she oversees Medicaid billing, runs customized health reports and coordinates districtwide emergency drills.

The comment was echoed by current and former school nurses. “Eliminating the director of school health position would not just be a budget decision. It would create disorganization, risk and potential harm to students,” Emily (a former district school nurse) said, describing clinical duties such as interpreting medical orders, creating individualized health plans and training staff in medical procedures. Alyssa Rohrer, a current district nurse, said the director’s work is needed year‑round to prepare emergency care plans and to support nurses who often work alone in buildings.

Why it matters: Public commenters and several board members framed the position as both a clinical and revenue function. A speaker identified as a community member said the director’s office had secured about $9,000,000 in Medicaid reimbursements over six years; the commenter argued that the position effectively “pays for itself” and that eliminating it would jeopardize reimbursement revenue.

Transparency, notice and committee process were also central to public remarks. Tom Johnson, a citizen speaker, criticized the policy and human resources committee’s Oct. 6 meeting, saying the agenda item listed only “compensation” while the committee discussed and voted on a recommendation to eliminate the director position. Johnson said that vagueness violated Wisconsin’s open meetings law and left staff and the public without fair notice.

Board response and procedure: At the start of the meeting the board approved an amended agenda that removed “item 7c consideration of personnel compensation.” Later in the meeting a district official said the item to eliminate the position was not being moved forward that evening. The board did not take a final vote to eliminate the position during the Oct. 7 meeting.

Context and details: Multiple emailed comments submitted to the board described day‑to‑day functions the director performs, including running immunization clinics, organizing CPR trainings, preparing monthly illness reports and coordinating with outside providers and programs such as “Seal a Smile.” Commenters warned that losing the role would increase staff turnover and reduce compliance with federal programs and IDEA/Section 504 health‑related responsibilities.

What’s next: Board members and speakers asked for greater transparency about the committee process and asked that any future personnel changes be clearly described in committee and board agendas in advance. Several commenters urged the board to shadow the director to see the scope of the work before making a decision.