Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Policy Concealed Carry topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustee proposes strict concealed‑carry training, liability waiver; board debates timing
Summary
A trustee read a proposed amendment that would require extensive medical, psychological and multi‑hour firearms training for any employee or volunteer who carries a concealed weapon, and would require a waiver indemnifying the district. Trustees debated suitability, liability and the July 1 statutory effective date.
Trustee Bosch read a comprehensive amendment to the district’s concealed‑carry policy at the June 11 meeting proposing new training, screening and liability provisions for employees and volunteers who choose to carry concealed on district property.
The amendment, read into the record by Trustee Bosch, would require a school‑district physical (including vision and hearing testing), a district‑approved psychological screening and background check, and multiple firearms instruction components—ranging from several hours of safety training to 24 hours of shooting‑range training and an annual quarterly firearms proficiency test. The language also included a liability and indemnification clause: "Any employee volunteer who carries a concealed firearm does so at their own risk and assumes all liability and risk associated with their independent decision to carry a concealed firearm," the amendment stated, and it further required a signed waiver and made violations grounds for suspension or termination.
Why it matters: Trustees expressed a range of concerns. Several trustees said the amendment addressed important liability and training gaps; others objected to the premise of having firearms on campus and said they might abstain from a vote for personal or moral reasons. Staff cautioned the board that delaying a policy vote could forfeit a deadline to claim certain implementation costs and that a related statutory change takes effect July 1; staff said the district would miss a submission cutoff (cited as June 25 in the discussion) if the board did not act.
Board action and next steps: The board did not adopt the amendment at the June 11 meeting. Trustees discussed tabling the item, convening a special meeting, or approving the policy as presented with a commitment to reopen the language in July/August. Staff indicated they would provide additional legal and insurance information, and at least one trustee requested that staff clarify whether requiring liability insurance for individuals who carry is feasible.
Public comment later in the meeting raised concern that the concealed‑carry discussion should not affect the district’s concurrent effort to secure funding for a security vestibule.
Next steps: Staff will return with legal and insurance research regarding training requirements, indemnification language and the feasibility of requiring individual liability insurance prior to any final board action.
