Portland Public Schools held a first reading of two proposed policy revisions on Oct. 28: a comprehensive rewrite of the field‑trip and off‑campus activities policy and a modernization of the liability of employees policy. The board did not vote on either policy at the work session; staff indicated the board will take final action on Dec. 2.

Nut graf: The draft field‑trip policy removes the routine requirement for board approval of out‑of‑state trips (those more than 150 miles from the district) and international travel, clarifies oversight responsibilities and reiterates expectations such as a substance‑free environment for adults on trips. Staff said risk management and senior directors will continue to review all trips before approval. Supporters said the change will reduce procedural delays that can raise family costs; critics asked for built‑in reporting and stronger language to protect continuity of instruction for students who remain on campus.

What staff proposed and what it would change
- Streamlining: Staff proposed eliminating the routine board approval step for many out‑of‑state and international trips, citing timeliness concerns for events such as athletic qualifiers and early‑ticket pricing.
- Non‑PPS sponsored trips: The draft clarifies distinctions between district‑sponsored trips and outside, non‑school‑sponsored travel; it tightens language about avoiding district branding on trips that are not sanctioned by the district.
- Safeguards: Risk management and senior directors will still review trip safety and logistics. The draft reiterates schools must provide curriculum‑based continuity for students remaining on campus during multi‑day trips.

Board debate and next steps
Board members discussed multiple concerns: requiring greater transparency (some asked for a quarterly or semiannual report listing trips, costs, equity of participation and school days missed), tightening prescriptive language (several directors proposed changing some "should" language to "shall"), and ensuring immersion capstone or language‑program trips are not inadvertently restricted.

District staff and multiple board members gave specific examples of delay costs; one board member said a recent capstone trip incurred higher ticket costs because approvals were delayed, raising per‑student costs by roughly several hundred dollars. Board members asked staff to clarify whether nonprofit fundraising that covers the cost of a PPS trip should be treated as district‑sponsored or non‑sponsored for purposes of policy language; staff replied that many immersion capstone trips are PPS trips funded in part by fundraising and would not be treated as non‑sponsored trips.

Process: Board members may submit amendments at the policy committee meeting (Nov. 17) or propose them at a full‑board meeting. Staff advised that directors can submit amendments ahead of the Dec. 2 vote; staff will prepare written feedback and legal language to support proposed changes.

Ending: The board scheduled a second reading and final vote for Dec. 2. Staff said they will provide academic leadership feedback on the policy's potential classroom impacts and will prepare text for any board amendments.