Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nondiscrimination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Policy committee to restore USDA nondiscrimination wording, clarifies reporting duties
Summary
A school board policy committee agreed to restore a line of nondiscrimination text tied to USDA guidance and to clarify that employees — not students — are mandated reporters, while leaving certain parenthetical protections to mirror ACF guidance. Members asked staff to reconcile federal wording requirements with local policy.
The district policy committee reviewed spring updates to its nondiscrimination and harassment policies and agreed to restore a provision about providing materials in other languages while removing a separate copied USDA paragraph from the local policy text.
Staff member (S3) told the committee that employees are mandated reporters and that "students who see something could say something to an adult, but really incumbent upon the adults to do the reporting." Committee members debated whether the draft's harassment definition — which includes the word "annoyed" alongside stronger terms such as "threatened" and "demeaned" — sets too low a threshold for formal complaints; staff said the language mirrors guidance tied to the district's bullying policy and helps administrators determine when behavior crosses into bullying.
Committee members discussed a parenthetical that references gender identity and sexual orientation. One member (S4) asked whether references to those protected classes had been removed because of an executive order; staff (S3) said the current draft mirrors the ACF/USDA wording and that keeping the parenthetical would align the district's language with the ACF template used by the New Hampshire School Board Association.
The group agreed to restore the line labeled 240 in the draft — language noting that materials may be provided in other languages — and to strike line 233 (a paragraph copied from USDA ACF) from the local policy text. Staff cautioned that when materials relate to USDA-supported food-service programs the district must use the USDA nondiscrimination statement verbatim to continue receiving program benefits. The committee asked staff to clarify where verbatim USDA wording is required versus where a local version may be used.
The committee did not take a formal vote during the meeting; members directed staff to update the draft, note the redline changes, and bring the revised policy back for further consideration.
