Before the regular meeting, trustees and student board members reviewed several vignettes from a governance book covering ‘terrible habits’ of board members. The group focused on three scenarios: signing a petition and then posing as a neutral decisionmaker, bringing political party priorities into a nonpartisan board role, and intervening directly in staff decisions instead of following the decision‑making matrix.

Trustees emphasized that board members may have private opinions but should not present themselves as having made final decisions before public deliberation; they reiterated a standard response to constituent demands: listen, refer to the chain of command (teacher → principal → superintendent) and offer to be kept informed. Multiple trustees and student members described the exercise as useful in reinforcing expectations about ethics and public perception. Discussion included examples and anecdotes but no formal policy changes were proposed or adopted.

The book‑study portion ended with trustees thanking participants and moving the meeting into regular session.