The Kent School District Board on Jan. 20 voted to approve several personnel and procedural policies, including a newly published student‑discipline procedure and matrix intended to make disciplinary definitions and consequences clearer for families and administrators.

During discussion of policy 32‑41 (student discipline), Mr. Jim Shield explained the district substantially revised a WASDA matrix, expanded plain‑language definitions of behavioral violations and chose to publish the matrix as a separate, public document linked from the procedure so families can see expected responses and appeal paths. Shield said the matrix was developed with about 15–20 building administrators and staff and is intended as a user‑friendly reference while preserving administrator discretion and students’ due‑process rights: "The purpose of the matrix is to have some much more clear, easily understood definitions of each of the different behavioral violations," he said.

The board recorded unanimous approvals (5–0) for several items on the agenda: gifts and donations (8.01), policy 20‑20 (course design and instructional materials, 8.02), policy 3,143 (notification and dissemination about student offenses, 8.03), policy 32‑10 (nondiscrimination, 8.04), policy 32‑41 (student discipline, 8.05) and policy 5,006 (certification revocation, 8.06). The student‑discipline approval was accompanied by discussion of the matrix and next procedural steps for community engagement and appeals.

A separate proposal, policy 5,012 (parental/family or marital status and pregnancy or related conditions of staff), failed on the board floor after members requested clearer language to distinguish pregnancy loss vs. elective termination and to ensure protections would be interpreted sensitively. Directors asked staff to seek legal review and bring back revised language rather than proceed with the current text.

On the consent agenda, the board approved routine items and separately approved vouchers (item 9.12) by a vote of 4–1 after Director Cook pulled the item and explained he had outstanding questions that related to privileged executive‑session topics.

Board members who spoke in favor of the discipline procedure emphasized transparency and plain‑language accessibility; Director Cook and others thanked staff for publishing the matrix and for the work to align policy and procedure with state law.