Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Policies topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves policy bundle; term‑limits proposal and certain suspension language to return for further review
Summary
After months of review, the Cedar Springs board approved a bundle of policy updates at its Oct. 13 meeting and deferred two items — a term‑limits proposal and revised suspension/expulsion language — for further consideration.
The Cedar Springs Public Schools board on Oct. 13 approved a bundle of policy revisions after several months of review but deferred two items for further consideration.
District administrators told the board the packet combined several updates: (1) model policy language supplied by NEOLA, (2) revisions to align with federal grant administration guidance (the Education Department General Administrative Regulations, EDGAR) and (3) suggested local adjustments. Administrators said NEOLA materials show proposed deletions (red with strikethrough), new language (green) and optional language boxes the district can accept or leave out.
During discussion, the board and administrators focused on suspension and expulsion language and a proposed term‑limits change. The administration said it modified suspension language to reflect recent school‑code structure by creating tiers of suspension length: a building principal may suspend a student up to 5 days without additional approval; with the superintendent’s approval a principal may suspend up to 10 days; the superintendent may suspend more than 10 days (up to 45) in consultation with the board president and two other officers; the full board would hear appeals of superintendent actions; and the superintendent may recommend suspensions beyond 45 days or expulsion to the board. That suspension/expulsion language and a separate proposal limiting board members to three consecutive four‑year terms were discussed but not acted on at the Oct. 13 meeting; the administration said those two items would return for a future board meeting for additional review.
Board members asked procedural questions about grant proposals (policy 6110) and whether the superintendent must present grant proposals only when required by law; administration said the board approves expenditures and certain contracts but many grant proposals are delegated to the superintendent unless the grant carries requirements or matching obligations that should be reviewed by the board.
After discussion the board voted to adopt the policy packet presented for action that evening (board packet items numbered in the policy bundle), with the exception of the two items the board had asked to hold for more review. Roll call recorded all present trustees voting yes: Vice President Schaffner; Secretary Slager; Trustee Lund; Trustee Patton; Trustee Bowser; and President Reid. Treasurer Gilmore had been excused earlier in the meeting.
The approved packet will be posted in the district’s policy repository; the two deferred items will return for additional board review and action at a future meeting.
