Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garfield County School District No. 16 board approves updated personnel and nondiscrimination policies
Summary
The board adopted a package of updated policies on May 13, 2025, and separately approved an amended AC Nondiscrimination/Equal Opportunity policy, directing the superintendent to draft a regulation for local implementation. The approvals passed on roll-call votes with one dissent on the final AC vote.
The Garfield County School District No. 16 Board of Directors approved a package of updated policies at its May 13, 2025, regular meeting and took a separate final vote on the district’s AC Nondiscrimination/Equal Opportunity policy.
Superintendent Dr. Jennifer A. Baugh presented a set of policies, regulations and exhibits for second reading and final approval, including items covering nondiscrimination and harassment (AC; AC-R-1; AC-R-3[3]; AC-E-1; AC-E-2), professional-staff and support-staff hiring (GCE/GCF; GDE/GDF), student admissions and conduct (JB; JF; JICA; JII), technology use (GBEE; JS), and several other student- and staff-related policies. The board voted to approve the overall special policy update package as amended; the motion carried on a roll-call vote with members Baker, Gronewoller, Tomasulo and Whelan voting aye and Director Stewart absent.
On a subsequent motion the board approved AC Nondiscrimination/Equal Opportunity for second reading/final vote as amended. Superintendent Baugh was directed to develop a regulation to outline how Garfield 16 will handle specific instances to meet local circumstances. The roll-call vote on the AC policy passed with Baker, Gronewoller and Tomasulo voting aye and Whelan voting no; Stewart was absent.
Board President Vincent T. Tomasulo said the administration will collaborate with the district attorney to finalize the implementing regulation and align the superintendent evaluation process to the budget process as needed. No public comment was offered on the policies during the meeting.
The approvals were procedural actions taken by roll-call votes; the district’s administrative office holds supporting documents for the adopted policies.
