Battle Ground School District interviews three students for student representative roles; board moves to executive session

The Battle Ground School District held a special meeting at 4:30 p.m. Thursday to interview three candidates for student representative positions. After hearing from each applicant, the board adjourned to an executive session to deliberate and said it would reconvene at 6:00 p.m.; the transcript records no public appointment.

Addison Junkie, a Prairie High School sophomore, was the first candidate. She described leadership experience in ASB and HOSA and work reviving a school spirit and outreach group, ‘‘Crimson Crew.’’ She said the student representative should ‘‘represent their community and be able to communicate well with the students around them’’ and urged the board to consider ways to make public comments more solution-oriented and respectful. She also raised resource concerns relayed by a teacher, saying recent budget cuts had affected access to computers for some middle and elementary students and that ‘‘some students don’t have access to Wi‑Fi’’ at home.

Haley Natiola, also a Prairie High School student and a varsity volleyball captain, told the board she favors in-person outreach and short, frequent surveys to collect input from students who do not belong to clubs or teams. ‘‘Creating a more comfortable environment’’ at meetings, she said, encourages candid feedback. Haley told the board she may face scheduling conflicts with evening 6 p.m. meetings because of sports but said she could attend work sessions and some district events with accommodation.

The third applicant, identified in the record only as Josh, said he has attended multiple district schools and is active in band, choir and theater. He described the role of student representative as ‘‘to be the voice of the student body,’’ and said he would make a point of spending time outside his usual activities to gather a wider variety of student perspectives. Josh told the board he could attend regular evening meetings and most work sessions.

Board members asked each candidate how they would handle criticism, broaden outreach beyond ASB and clubs, and balance sports or other obligations with meeting schedules. Several board members emphasized that student representatives should be willing to advocate for peers while recognizing legal or policy constraints; one member noted that the district must follow OSPI requirements.

After the interviews the board recessed to an executive session to consider the candidates; the chair announced a return time and the public meeting was scheduled to resume at 6:00 p.m. The transcript does not record a decision or appointment during the public portion of the record.