Mill A School Board adopts narrower boundary policy language and rescinds personnel warning after student testimony

The Mill A School District board on May 20 approved edits to Policy 5253, the district—s ‘‘boundary invasions’’ policy, and later voted to remove a letter of direction and a written warning tied to a personnel complaint after extended public comment and student testimony.

The board—approved the updated policy text by voice vote after adding clarifying language intended to preserve ‘‘collegial relationships and the formative teacher–mentor environment’’ in the PCIA program and tightening the wording in the paragraph on use of technology. The board left the implementing procedures for further revision and public review before they return at a later meeting.

The policy debate opened with legal guidance from the district—s retained counsel, who described the model policy as an encouraged WASA‑style template that districts commonly adapt. Curtis, the attorney at the meeting, told the board: "I think that you do need to have a boundary procedure and policy in place... but adapt the procedure to fit your needs," and warned that procedures should not change the policy——s core protective purpose.

Public comment and student testimony formed the bulk of the meeting. Several students read letters and spoke in person about a Google document they had created that listed grievances and concerns about school culture and access to teachers. One student letter read aloud by the board said, in part, that the student community felt "unfairly manipulated" during an administrator meeting and that the students were left uneasy communicating with administration. Other students said they had not experienced favoritism and asked that staff and students be given tools to resolve classroom issues directly.

Concerns about the complaint process and the district—s choice of investigator also dominated discussion. Community members and union representatives questioned whether outside investigators recommended in earlier advice had been retained, and whether using the same attorney for collective bargaining and for aspects of the personnel response created at least an appearance of conflict. The PSE chapter president and other union speakers raised related claims about reductions to classified employees' hours and alleged retaliatory treatment; the board heard those claims and asked for follow‑up.

After hearing testimony and discussion, a board member moved to overturn the complaint and to rescind the letter of direction and the written warning, with instructions that the material be removed from personnel files. The motion was seconded and passed on a voice vote. (The meeting transcript does not record a numeric roll‑call tally.)

Board Chair Diane Green said the next step will be to work with legal counsel and with staff to rewrite the procedures so they reflect the district—s small, community‑based school model and to provide clear rules for communications and parental permissions where appropriate. Superintendent Bob Rogers and board members agreed to present a revised procedures draft at the next meeting for public review.

Votes at a glance: the board approved Policy 5253 (policy text only) and later approved a motion to overturn the complaint and remove the letter of direction/written warning from the personnel file. The transcript records voice votes; specific yes/no tallies were not given at the meeting.

The board said procedures will return to a future meeting; the superintendent will post the approved policy and circulate the draft procedures to the public and staff before final adoption.