Board tables proposal for monthly long-term suspension reports; asks staff for draft student code of conduct by March 2025

The Redford Union Schools Board of Education on Sept. 9 debated a motion to require the board be notified of all long-term student suspensions (10 days or more) with specified fields and frequency; after extended discussion the board voted to table the motion pending workshop-level review and also voted to request a draft of a revised student code of conduct by March 2025.

The proposal, made by Mrs. Martin, would have required monthly reporting (or a monthly "nothing to report" statement) listing for each long-term suspension the student’s gender, school, grade, offense, whether the student has an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or 504 plan, and the number of days suspended. "I make a motion that the Board of Education must be notified of all long term suspensions, which is 10 days or more," Martin said when introducing the item. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bailey and opened for board discussion.

Board members debated the request’s scope and the balance between transparency and student confidentiality. Mr. Osowski said he worried the request could be "micromanaging" and questioned why every board member would need detailed case-level information. Several board members, including the chair and Mr. Witt, said the superintendent already receives notification of long-term suspensions and that administrators handle the student-discipline process. Mr. Witt noted the suspension-review process is ongoing and that a draft code of conduct likely would be ready for initial review at an upcoming workshop; he said staff are working toward a fall workshop presentation and that a fuller draft could be presented by November for review.

Board members expressed different preferences about the frequency and level of detail. One option supported during discussion was quarterly reporting of counts by building with indicators for whether students subject to long-term suspension had an IEP or 504 plan and the number of suspension days; proponents said aggregated data could highlight building-level trends that inform restorative-practice or social-emotional learning work without exposing confidential student-level details. Opponents cautioned that a routine monthly production of detailed records could be burdensome and risk confidentiality missteps in a public setting.

The board voted unanimously to table the motion to require monthly case-level reporting and asked to address the matter in a September workshop for further learning and discussion. Separately the board approved a motion, carried 6-0, requesting that staff provide a draft copy of the revised student code of conduct to the board by March 2025 (staff said a draft for workshop review could be available by November).