Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Of Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews updated member code of conduct language, removes ambiguous "inefficiency" wording
Summary
The board reviewed draft revisions to the member code of conduct using Neola model language, agreed to remove an unclear reference to "inefficiency" and to bring the revised policy forward on consent at a future meeting.
Board staff presented a redraft of the board member code of conduct that incorporates model language from Neola. The board reviewed multiple sections (referenced in meeting materials as G C 7, G C 8 and G C 9) and discussed specific edits and next steps.
Lori said she had incorporated Neola language into the introductory paragraph and the violations section and added provisions addressing district confidentiality and references to FERPA. She told members the draft had been sent to a colleague that afternoon and that the changes were intended to clarify and expand the board's options when addressing conduct concerns.
Board members questioned whether the policy could remove an elected member from office. One member asked, "Is there any mechanism to remove board members?" and staff clarified that the board cannot remove an elected member; it can remove a member from committee assignments or board offices but not from elected office.
The board focused on one specific edit: language in section 6 that used the word "inefficiency." Several members said the term was unclear in a disciplinary context. The board agreed to strike the single word "inefficiency" from item 6 and to bring the cleaned draft forward for consent at the next regular meeting. One member asked staff to keep a note in the running policy file about the question of "inefficiency" and to return with possible definitions if the board wishes to revisit the concept later.
Timing and related items: the board noted the next scheduled policy work session is the first meeting in December, when a redraft of the equity statement is expected. For the code-of-conduct edits, staff said they would return the item on consent at the next meeting unless members requested separate action.
Ending: The board accepted the staff-proposed edits for further consideration, asked for the single-word deletion in section 6, and directed staff to return the revised policy as a consent item.
