GRPS board approves advisory committee and attorney-reviewed statement aimed at immigrant families

The Grand Rapids Public Schools Board of Education voted Feb. 10 to form an advisory committee to review policies and resources affecting immigrant families and to adopt an updated, attorney-reviewed version of a district statement addressing those families.

The vote came after public comments urging clearer protections and after trustees debated committee scope, whether the committee should draft policy or only recommend changes, and the potential legal and political consequences of an explicit statement. The board president called for consideration of the attorney-reviewed language; trustees then voted to proceed with the updated copy and to convene a community advisory group to examine policies and resources.

The item drew several public speakers who cited a Jan. 27 letter and recommendations from outside groups. Lucinda Suazo, identified in public comment as a community member and longtime Grand Rapids resident, asked the superintendent and board to explain “what they have been doing to implement that list of concrete and specific recommendations” made by the ACLU of Michigan and a local immigrant-rights group, saying the recommendations included staff training and changes to student-directory data shared publicly (addresses, birthplaces, phone numbers).

Trustee Moreno, who led much of the board discussion, praised the committee’s outreach work and the district’s communications effort and said the advisory group should proceed: “Yo adelantar y decir, este, aplaudir a a todos los del comité, hacer el sitio web para involucrar nuestras familias.” Trustee Milton said he was “very passionate” about protecting immigrant and refugee families and described the resolution as a vehicle to organize that work rather than an end in itself: “Estoy muy apasionado... es proteger nuestra comunidad de inmigrantes, los refugiados.” Trustee Williams said she feared that a public declaration could make the district a target but supported clear procedures and outside advice; she urged the board to retain final authority over policy and not to cede rulemaking to an advisory body (“mi preocupación... es si le vamos a dar la autoridad a otras personas que hagan nuestro trabajo”).

Board members described the two drafts under consideration as a clean, edited copy presented for public clarity and an attorney-reviewed (legal) version. The board indicated preference for the attorney-reviewed language and approved a motion to form the advisory committee and to bring forward recommended policy updates and resource guidance for board consideration. The board president called the vote; members were asked to indicate “aye” and the motion passed as announced by the chair.

Meeting materials and speakers referenced outside legal and advocacy input, including a letter and recommendations from the ACLU of Michigan and a local immigrant-advocacy group named in public comment. Trustees said staff would continue training work already underway and that any policy changes would be brought to the full board for a vote.

The advisory committee will review visitor/volunteer policies, data-sharing practices for student directories, and emergency procedures, and will present recommended policy updates and resource lists to the board. Trustees said the committee is intended to coordinate with district legal staff and to consult community organizations; the board did not delegate final policy authority to the committee.

The action closes a phase of public comment on the issue but sets a path for staff and community members to develop specific policy language for a future board vote.