Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Director Tatum urges board resolution on education technology after public AI concerns
Summary
Public commenters raised worries about artificial intelligence and other education technology tools, and Director Tatum proposed a board resolution to prompt action; staff said a May report tied to executive limitation 4.7 will inform next steps.
Get email alerts on the Education Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Bend‑LaPine Administrative SD 1 board heard public concerns about education technology — including the use of artificial intelligence — and discussed a potential formal resolution to guide district action.
Public comment during the meeting included remarks from community members raising worries about AI and broader educational‑technology use. Lisa Burke, the district's deputy superintendent, told the board that several individuals had spoken on the topic and that the board's discussion had been "robust." Director Tatum later proposed drafting a resolution intended to catalyze concrete steps on the issue.
Kinsey Martin, the district's executive director of policy and advocacy, asked the board to consider clearer policy language to support fundraising and stakeholder engagement work the district has carried out over the past two years; Martin's request framed part of the board's broader attention to technology, policy and community input.
Burke also said staff will present a May update tied to executive limitation 4.7 — language in the district's governing documents that relates to technology use — and the board can then decide whether that report is sufficient or whether to move forward with a separate resolution. The board appeared generally supportive of developing a resolution but did not adopt one at the meeting.
The discussion followed several public‑comment speakers who raised technology and AI issues during the meeting's public‑comment period. The board did not vote on any AI‑specific policy during this session; members directed staff to return with information that will inform next steps.
Next steps: staff will provide the executive limitation 4.7 update in May and the board may consider a formal resolution after reviewing that report.

