Teachers, staff and community members urge clearer communication and review of restraint policy at Greeley District 6 meeting

At the May 12 Board of Education meeting, several teachers and community members used the public comment period to press the district on communication with staff and the application of policy JKA (use of physical intervention and restraint).

Why it matters: Teachers said breakdowns in communication have eroded trust between staff and administration and asked for transparency about disciplinary processes and survey results. The concerns included both policy implementation and personnel records.

Josh Wainscott, speaking during the public comment period, referenced district policy JKA on use of physical intervention and restraint and summarized the policy language the district makes available: that staff may use physical intervention and restraint within the scope of employment, that restraint lasting over one minute must be documented, and that actions taken in good faith consistent with policy are not to be considered child abuse. Based on his reading, Wainscott asked the board to remove letters of reprimand from any current or former employees' files if the district's review found disciplinary action to be unwarranted.

First-grade teacher Molly Davis told the board she and other teachers feel a "growing lack of trust in our school administration" driven by "poor communication." Davis asked the district to notify staff when outcomes change; she said staff were informed when an employee was arrested but were not told when the employee was later found not guilty. She urged the district to interview all staff who interact with a student involved in an allegation so the whole picture is considered.

April Kramer, a reading interventionist and member of the Greeley Education Association, said staff had been asked to provide detailed feedback about district communication and discipline decision-making through a district survey. Kramer said many staff spent personal time responding and asked that the district share the survey results with all employees, calling publication of the results a step toward transparency.

Board members listened during the public comment period; no board action was taken on the requests during the meeting. Several speakers asked specifically that formal reprimands be rescinded when later findings warrant that step, and asked for clearer and earlier communication to staff when investigative outcomes change.

The board did not respond with policy changes at the meeting. District staff said they would continue to work on communication and training plans referenced earlier in the agenda, but no specific board directive or vote on the public requests was recorded.