Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Intergovernmental Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board outlines priorities for joint work session with City of Hillsboro: shared facilities, workforce trends and possible bond discussion
Summary
Board members reviewed a proposed agenda for a joint work session with the City of Hillsboro and recommended prioritizing a short list of topics — Hillsboro 2035 alignment, shared facilities (fields), workforce and student partnerships — and noted April as a potential meeting window.
Hillsboro School District Board members discussed topics they would bring to a planned joint work session with the City of Hillsboro, settling on a recommended short list to keep the meeting focused.
Rose (staff member) said the district has been meeting with neighboring communities and proposed holding the joint meeting at the City Civic Center in early April to align with both bodies’ schedules. She asked board members to prioritize topics so the one‑hour meeting could cover up to four focused items.
Board members and staff suggested several possible topics; the conversation repeatedly returned to these priorities: alignment with the Hillsboro 2035 plan and the district strategic plan, shared facilities and field access (including public concerns about field use), workforce trends and career‑pathway connections for students, and student partnerships such as internships and town‑center collaborations. One board member noted the district is internally discussing a potential replacement bond and suggested placing “ballot measures” on the list so the city could be aware if the district pursues a November ballot timeline.
Participants recommended limiting the joint meeting agenda to two district topics and two city topics or otherwise ensuring both sides agree on top priorities before the session. Staff said they would solicit topics from the city council and return a suggested four‑topic agenda, with April 1 proposed as the joint meeting date and the district’s April 8 work session adjusted as needed to align calendars.
Board members asked staff to discard items that require deeper, committee‑level discussion (for example, long‑range planning details) and reserve those for the district’s long‑range planning committee or future meetings. Rose said she would take notes on the board’s priorities and coordinate with city staff to finalize the joint agenda and logistics.
The board did not make formal motions related to the joint session during the work session but directed staff to proceed with scheduling and to return the final proposed agenda for board approval.
