Governance committee advances reading-policy compliance, approves public‑comment and board‑norm changes; discusses student protest and safe‑schools measures
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The committee voted to send a state‑model reading policy to the full board, approved updated public comment language and recommended updated board norms; it also discussed a student protest policy, how to make a safe‑schools resolution more publicly accessible and a formal transparency commitment.
At its Feb. 5 meeting, the St. Louis Public Schools governance committee advanced several policy items and approved two to be moved forward for full board consideration.
Dr. Daniel presented Policy IGAB, an MSBA model policy on instructional interventions and reading success plans that the legislature requires districts to adopt. "This is the MSBA model policy that meets all of the letter of the law," he told the committee, adding that SLPS has been implementing reading success plans in practice but had not adopted a formal policy. The committee voted to recommend IGAB to the full board for final approval.
The committee also approved updates to the district’s public comment policy (4.2) by voice vote and moved forward updated board norms, which added language about safety, ethical conduct and online behavior.
Members discussed a student protest or student‑voice policy (referred to as policy 4.3). Kim Dutch, general counsel, reminded members that legal considerations around the First Amendment and related exceptions must guide any policy drafting; the administration plans to survey other districts, vet stakeholder input and return with draft options.
The chair read aloud a "Safe Schools" resolution affirming that SLPS will not deny admission or participation in district programs based on immigration status and directing that any immigration‑enforcement requests be processed through the superintendent’s office. Committee members asked administration to ensure the procedures that implement the resolution are readily accessible on the district website and to report back with an update at the next governance meeting.
Several members also asked administration to outline a clearer definition of "transparency" and recommended the district consider a media‑relations or public‑relations policy or a scheduled policy‑review cadence; staff agreed to return with options for the committee to consider.