Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews multiple personnel and finance policy updates; GBK change draws attention, all policies tabled
Summary
Dr. Ratner presented revisions to several board policies (GAK, GARH, GBKA, new GBK, DIB). The new GBK would replace the Fair Dismissal Act with local procedures that limit certain procedural protections to tenured/contract employees; the board moved to table the policies for further review after receiving feedback from GSBA.
Dr. Ratner reviewed proposed revisions to multiple board policies and highlighted key changes for each.
GAK (criminal background checks): language was revised to clarify that fingerprinting is part of the criminal record check prior to employment. GARH (employees leave and absences) clarifies leave exhaustion before docking pay and refines language on jury/witness leave related to work. GBKA (professional personnel layoff/RIF) was updated and cross-referenced to the new GBK policy. DIB (financial reports) was amended to add guidance on capitalizing bulk purchases that exceed $1,500,000 in aggregate.
Most substantively, Dr. Ratner presented the new GBK policy (Professional Personnel—Suspension, Termination, Nonrenewal) as a local replacement for the Fair Dismissal Act. He said GBK “retains many due process elements that we still would have similar to the Fair Dismissal Act, like hearings, notices, and appeals, but it limits them to tenured contracted employees” and removes procedural protections for non-tenured teachers, administrators and at-will probationary employees. The policy also adds local provisions for administrative leave with pay, short- and long-term suspensions, hearing officer procedures and an appeal pathway that the board is still finalizing with GSBA guidance on whether appeals will go to superior court or the state board.
Dr. Ratner also noted new language clarifying that allegations such as criminal charges or conviction may be grounds for dismissal where conduct compromises professionalism or the effectiveness of the employee—language he said was drawn from the Professional Standards Commission.
After discussion, the board voted (voice) to table each of the presented policies for further review and to allow the policies to sit for the required review period. The transcript records the motions and seconds and a voice vote with "none opposed" answers; it does not contain roll-call tallies or names of movers/seconders in each instance.
