Community and counsel press board for clearer Safe Schools policy language on ICE and enforcement

Several public commenters and a practicing immigration attorney addressed the board on the district’s draft Safe Schools for All policy and how it should treat federal civil immigration enforcement.

Tyler Kreider and Theresa Hill raised community concerns about ICE activity near schools, citing incidents in other states and urging explicit prohibitions or safeguards. Sarah Dady, who said she has practiced immigration law for more than 20 years, urged the board to include clearer definitions in the policy and to distinguish between criminal law enforcement and federal civil immigration enforcement. "The policy should clearly differentiate between federal civil law enforcement, which the state law was passed to do, and criminal law enforcement," she told the board and recommended defining judicial versus non‑judicial warrants, requiring staff training in de‑escalation, and communicating protocols to families.

During board discussion, counsel and staff noted that the Safe Schools for All Act (cited in public comment) defines "law enforcement agent" to include federal civil immigration enforcement and excludes school resource officers; the board confirmed the district drafted the policy to align with that statutory definition. No change to the policy was decided on the spot; the board voted later under item 7e to approve the board policy revision (7.15) that aligns definitions with the statute.

Commenters asked the board to clarify operational protocols and training to reduce family fear and minimize attendance impacts if enforcement actions occur near campuses. Board members and staff acknowledged the limits of district authority over federal enforcement but emphasized the district's role in communication, staff preparation and family reassurance.