Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Directory Information topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee raises privacy and clarity concerns over directory‑information changes and open‑enrollment cap
Summary
Gresham‑Barlow SD 10J policy reviewers flagged proposed edits to JOA (directory information) that would strike "grade level," raising concerns about athletic rosters, press releases and safety; the committee also discussed the 3% open‑enrollment threshold and appeals process and asked staff for clarifications before advancing the policy.
Committee members scrutinized proposed edits to the district’s directory‑information policy (JOA), raising questions about who may receive directory information, whether "grade level" should remain listed, and how the district measures the 3% threshold used in open‑enrollment denials.
The chair and other members said striking "grade level" could affect routine uses such as athletic rosters and press recognition. One member noted that grade level is broadly shared in everyday communications and queried why the draft removed it. The committee asked staff to clarify whether the policy's references to outside organizations (for example, the military or institutions of higher education) and to public records requests are intended to govern external disclosure rather than internal uses.
Members also discussed appeal rights and the district’s practice during COVID. A member reminded the group that parents have the statutory right to appeal to the State Board of Education for certain denials and asked whether the law had changed; staff said it had not. The committee examined the 3% cap for potential students in the attendance area and observed that the figure is difficult to prove because it includes home‑schooled students and charter enrollments in various ways.
Several members emphasized safety concerns tied to public disclosure and noncustodial parents' access to information: as one committee member put it, “I don't want to violate the law either. Or put a child in harm because we release information.” The committee concluded staff should research and clarify the intended scope of directory information, confirm how the 3% calculation is to be applied, and return the policy to the committee and a subsequent work session with that information.
Next steps: staff (Spencer) will provide background and clarifications on who directory information is intended for, how grade level and dates of birth are handled in practice, and how the 3% calculation is derived; the committee will reconvene the item at the work session.
