Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
U-46 adopts 2026–27 student code of conduct after public complaint about SRO conduct
Summary
The U-46 Board approved the district’s 2026–27 student code of conduct on a unanimous roll call. A public commenter said recent wording changes undermine accountability and alleged inappropriate School Resource Officer conduct during a Feb. 6 incident.
Get email alerts on the Student Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The School District U-46 Board of Education voted May 18 to adopt the district’s Student Code of Conduct for the 2026–27 school year.
Administration presented the proposed code and answered questions before a roll-call vote. The motion to approve the code was moved and seconded; the clerk recorded a unanimous “yes” from each board member and the chair declared the motion carried.
Before the board acted, public commenter Jonathan Medina urged greater transparency and accountability, saying wording changes to the code “basically takes away value of the student code of conduct” and describing a February 6 incident in which he alleged a school resource officer intimidated him and that agreements between U-46 and Bartlett about SRO roles had been violated. “I’m just want some transparency, you know, accountability,” Medina said.
Administration noted Mark Cannella, coordinator of culture and climate, and Tricia Olsen, chief legal officer, were available to answer questions about the proposed changes. The board did not debate or amend the code on the floor; trustees approved the administration’s proposed document.
The board’s action formalizes the code for the coming school year; board members and administration indicated the district will continue to respond to community concerns through established processes, including public comment and legal/ personnel procedures where appropriate. Medina’s public comments were heard under the board’s public-comment rules, and administration did not provide an on-the-spot response during the meeting per those rules.

