Board set to hold hearing on anti-bullying policy; committee to rework instructional materials appeals language

Board and staff spent an extended portion of the work session reviewing proposed policy changes across the 3000 and 5000 series. Staff said the district will ask the board at its next meeting to pass a resolution to schedule a hearing on policy 5207 (the anti-bullying policy), after which the district will take public comment and return the matter to a work session and then to the June board meeting for action.

A substantive discussion centered on policy 5407 (instructional program/curriculum development and the process for appeals related to library and instructional materials). Staff described three different approaches used by neighboring districts: (1) final decision by the superintendent or designee (Jenison model), (2) appeals reviewed by a board curriculum committee (Forest Hills model), or (3) appeals filed to the board with a written response (Grandville model). Board members debated whether the superintendent should have final authority, whether a smaller board committee should review appeals to avoid convening the full board for every appeal, or whether the full board should retain final authority.

Board member Don and others expressed concern that returning decisions to the full board could create recurring, high-profile appeals and that the district’s updated process — which includes parent subcommittees and multi-step review involving principals and curriculum committees — was designed specifically to reduce appeals reaching the board. Some board members said they favored retaining a meaningful board role for rare cases. Several members requested staff draft a clear revised policy on 5407 that preserves the district’s internal review process while specifying who would have final review if an appeal proceeds beyond the superintendent.

Staff said they will rework 5407 to bring a cleaner draft to the next work session and asked for board input on whether final authority should rest with the superintendent, a board committee, or the full board; the board asked staff to return the revised policy and to include related procedures (for example, the district’s book-review guidelines) in the draft so the board can consider the full process together.

Separately, board members raised clarifying edits to other policies under review (for example, 3105 on visitor sign-in and escorting), asked about background check language and intellectual property/logo usage in district policy, and confirmed that individual policy edits will be returned for formal action in June.