Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Attendance Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews first reading of new out‑of‑zone attendance policy tied to Assembly Bill 533
Summary
Director of school improvement presented a first reading of a proposed policy aligned with Assembly Bill 533; trustees pressed for clarifications on transportation, fees, priority enrollment tied to state 1‑2 star ratings, capacity limits and disciplinary denial language.
Ray Smith, the district's director of school improvement, presented a proposed new attendance policy the board will consider for second reading. Smith said the draft "is really taken directly from that legislation" and is being presented now so the board can offer feedback before the next reading.
Trustees focused on several issues they want clarified before a formal vote. Multiple trustees asked whether the district will provide transportation for students who attend schools outside their assigned attendance zone; Smith said the district's longstanding practice has been not to provide transportation for out‑of‑zone attendance and that "there's still some funds that might be set aside through somewhat of a grant process" to offset costs if the board pursues that option. One trustee asked Smith to be explicit in the policy language that the district does not intend to provide transportation unless a separate process is adopted.
Board members also asked staff to clarify fee and tuition language. The draft states a student attending outside the assigned zone "shall not be assessed any tuition or fees" for attendance purposes, and trustees sought to make clear that fees tied to optional classes (for example, a science lab fee) would still be payable by the student. Smith agreed that the policy should explicitly distinguish attendance costs from class fees.
Several trustees raised concerns about section 0.7 on priority enrollment, which grants preference to students zoned for schools designated in the "one of the two lowest ratings of performance" under the Nevada performance system. Trustees urged clearer language to ensure that students who live in a school's attendance zone are not displaced by out‑of‑zone priority enrollments and that the policy reflect capacity rules and lottery procedures.
Trustee discussion also noted the statute's disciplinary clause: the draft references a provision that "may deny the application of a pupil" who has been suspended for 10 or more days in the prior school year. Trustees asked the board to consider whether delegation or specific review thresholds are needed if the policy names the board or superintendent in disciplinary decisions.
Staff said they will take the board's suggested edits — including clarifying the registration/application distinction, specifying treatment of fees and rewording 0.7 to protect in‑zone students — and return with a revised second reading. This was a first read; no final action was taken.
