we'll call the meeting to order thank you everyone for coming tonight and we'll start off with the pledge of allegiance ok so the policy agenda tonight should be reflective of what it should be in the future not twenty or thirty policies only a few the student trip a is connected to policy one to one and we had the a r if you recall we as board members don't approve a r s in the form of  but on certain items that are setting fees and those sorts of things we would have to have a say so and originally we changed policy one twenty one to be very generic and jess relate to student trips and we had discussed the fact that we were going to make the administrators regulation more specific and go through each particular type of trip and assign what the district is responsible for paying and what the district is not so really if you look at this proposed to add in information is that athletics has had a really good procedure they the department knows the procedure because we have an athletic director one person in charge of telling groups what is reimbursable and what is not and it's very consistent and i think what the administration found with respect to non athletic groups is maybe the same consistency wasn't there maybe because different groups historically do different things and there's not one person who's in charge agenda meetings was to come tonight and present the athletic portion because we discussed that and we think it's solid but to hold off on the  non athletic reimbursement a r until we actually decide find more data to go back and see what different academic groups how how many competitions are they going to how we reimburse them how transportation is reimbursed and those sorts of things so tonight that's why you only see a proposed a r that would deal with athletics that sums it up perfectly and it's my understanding that there was a meeting this week or is a meeting morrow he tomorrow to discuss the non athletic and kind of what we were thinking about in in the agenda meetings was that than non athletic groups might be broken down into like a competitive academic group and noncompetitive academic because you know we sort of had the understanding that you know you want to find non at academic competitions very similarly to athletic compas but that's something like a german club or the sad club or that sort of thing that never goes to any competition or there is no trannie where would be in sort of a different group so that's where we it we could move forward with the non athletic funding does anyone have any discussion of what we've come up with the athletic with the understanding that what we did rather than say there's a district responsibility and family responsibility we just said this is the day this is what we're going to pay for so anything else it's either up to the students or the booster group or to to pay for that and then we broke it down into elective meaning and mr garner you can tell me if i'm wrong elective meaning that that may not have been on  schedule it might be a wrestling tournament that wrestling gets to go to and those are limited and the non elective is what the p i a schedules so if if you have tournament's for different things and torn and it's for volleyball and things approximately how many tournament's does each team go to  bus if somebody wants to travel to say harrisburg to go to a tournament well that's that would be elective torment but we can do something here locally where that's not the or we don't have to send them across the state to have a tournament but the answer your question it all depends on the sport basketball volleyball wrestling not too many other sports have torments there some track meets or some cross country meets but for five for those there's anyone else have any common and this reflects this is not a change in funding from previously for athletics we just sat down and really everyone got together and this reflects what historically has happened in the past too but it was put out especially to a system board members so that when we're reviewing athletic expenditures we can see so we should not be paying for student meals or we should only be paying fifty dollars a night for students room and i before the beginning of school year so the people involved will in fact know what's going on we're meeting with a big group tomorrow and then again on thursday with all of the principals just to make sure that it's the same across each school up in a policy news network the district contracts with the pennsylvania school board association with a program so that when there is change in legislation they actually update policies and proposed policy language change and that's what happened with respect to one thirteen point three and just to give you a little background when i reviewed the proposed recommendations of p s p a normally if you see down the left hand side there's authority for the changes that they're making in the body of the policy and i usually look at that to see if the change is actually accurate or reflected in the policy and several of these policies that we're dealing with tonight  related to changes with respect to english language learners for students who come in and their first language is not english and they made several changes in the policy to remove different items or ensure that the district communicates with parents in a particular way so i have consulted with p s p a because sometimes their authority didn't match what the changes were going to be so i do have on page five of one thirteen point three after speaking with the p s p a attorney today they were recommending that we eliminate or keep in the fact that we should be communicating in the native language of the past now when i consulted that authority thirty four c f r section three hundred point five zero two it didn't have any of those changes and so when i called  today the attorney said that that reference should be three hundred point five zero three and in fact when you look at five o three it does say statutorily that we should be communicating in the native language so we can keep the elimination of where feasible and if we could keep the language that was supposed to propose so that it should read down and then instead over the right so can understand comes now and then if you add after the word guardian on last clearly not feasible to do so which is ok so that's the only change i had with respect to the proposed changes i'm on thirteen point three does anybody else have any questions  language you proposed is that another term of art to refer to special education right here should there be in this sentence here the word services or some modifier of special education or is special education the ok yes dr french thought that that was correct terminology from the education  the only the only and i would have to go back and read the c f r and that sort of thing i don't know if this is a legal requirement i know if you say it should be you know a written request but then if there was an oral request what they're saying is you have to tell them you have to make a written requ right and all i'm saying is that if it if it is made orally then the i'm in a straight or is going to have to say it has to be randomly gated yes so there are yes because of  so but on page on page six you're saying that that's the reevaluation i think it i think revaluations ended with those two paragraphs and then independent educational evaluation started so one through four is the independent educational evaluation not the reevaluat you if you look at the sentence underneath one two three and four it says upon request the district shall provide to parents guardians information about where an independent evaluation media  k so why don't i do this and i will put that as a question should there be an additional fact and letter  disclosing the qualifications required for an independent evaluate are right ok ok ok so i will ok ok thank you if you're ok does anybody else have any comments on one thirteen point three ok and are there any any comments from the floor i should ask after each one if anybody from the audience has any comments ok so then we'll move on to one twenty seven assessments and again these changes were proposed for changes in chapter four and then there was some additional language  education programs and this was these changes were required because there was a big statutory change on watch schools and what schools have to control with respect to home educated students so that those are reflected here are there any comments or proposed ok and any comments are ok i just have a question on this i'm mean it sounds in here like we have some duty to somehow supervise over see that they're actually attaining the information that they need to how do we do that we last week i spent some time screening mcmurry students just to make sure they were appropriate placed so we take a look at those when we get the new are always ok thank you are there any other questions  last test grades in power school my question new we get to see this a our and what will it say way that was shows through on this particular version it seems like we just added that that actually was a provision that we changed and voted on in june ok so that really what happened is is that once we approved all of those two hundred plus policies in june we send them off to p s b a and they have to go through in re format monic sure all the everything's ok and then they're supposed to send them back to us will then we had to change it before we even got it back so in actuality that's not just been recently added it was added any other comment on to twelve ok we'll move on to nine sixteen which since i've been policy chair i think this is the third saabs attentive change to this policy and to those who may be watching at home or sitting in the audience we all apologize that it seems like every six months we change the requirements for who has to get prince's how much they cost how long they last but it is in direct change in statutory so you will see again that there are new definitions and i'll just go through real quickly about the changes the major change so now the clearance requirement is that clearances are required for all on paid a dollar volunteers who are responsible for the welfare of a child or have direct volunteer contact which so just like we did before if you are in control and supervising a child taking them you know you have control of them the state says if you're acting in loco parentis if you're in that role you need to clearances then they have that second prong or if you have direct volunteer conduct contact and that's defined in the definition far on page one as the care supervision guidance or control of children and routine interaction known as the and so it will be up to the administrators in each building to determine what that means i mean colloquially we've had like little discussions like i think from a legal perspective when you have big events like a mcmurry day or something where a parent is merely working again under the prior language you might think that a clearance is needed but under this language because it's not a routine interaction and they have no control over the child you know i think it allows the administration to say ok you won't need a errands for that so there's going to be a little more talking with the principal as to when the clearance is required the big exception that this gives which is wonderful because we talked about the fact that we have a lot of students in high school who reach the age of eighteen and who volunteer they volunteer in tutor at pleasant valley and technically under the prior law they should have had their clearances and the sad part was is you know there was a significant cost to them to get the clearance but now there is an exception for adult students to who they are a dog because they reach eighteen but they're still unrolled in peter's township and they are really not responsible for the child's welfare they're just you know helping out and they're volunteering for an event that occurs on school grounds then those kids do not have to have their clearance another great thing is they extended the time period in the last set of the statutes  clearances were only good for three years now they're good for five years and the best part of it for anyone who hasn't received their clearances yet is that the state has waived the cost for all of the state clearance so you can get your tuesday clearances for nothing as long as you know they can only be used for volunteer purposes in the last statue they allowed a waiver so that if you lived in for the f b i fingerprint if you lived in pennsylvania for ten years the last ten years you can get a waiver of the f b i clearance check and now there's a certain waiver if you haven't lived here for ten years and those are in so those are the major changes does anybody have any questions with respect to them no i just wanted to comment that shelly belcher actually put this out in a blast today that i thought was board with the possibility and i mean i knew we don't have to vote but the sticky point is is that there's a change in statute so we it doesn't necessarily change automatically our polic what we'd like to do is go into the school year with a policy that we could put accurately the aca this proposed policy that we would vote on we would like it to be accurately reflected in the handbooks and on the website which we will not be able to do if we go to a first read in august and a sakit read in september so what i was going to kind of ask the board if they would have any changes and go directly to a second read and i do know that it's possible to do that because when i had contacted p s b a when we were talking about not having a version of the suicide policy and saying listen we need to go to first and second read by august and they said you always have the opportunity to waive a second read so for those of you who are here would you have any objection to that because we would really like to be able to inform our parents about the changes but then we don't want to jump the gun and i'm now it's a change that the board has not voted on yet so if we go to a second read at the august regular voting meeting that would give us the opportunity to then you know vote on a handbook that actually has the same i don't have an objection to you just thinking attempt to get you know i have had this reviewed by the solicitor already and and this reflects any chiz that she has so are there any other questions and is there  how in it strikes that entire paragraph we meant only to strike the words to the extent practicable so the policy that language should be there and we were j well why it means they're different if you look at some of the language sometimes like that one c f r which is a regular federal regulations typically says we have to speak in the native language and i thought that was onerous if it was a very obscure native language by i recommended that we go back to that language because that is what the regulations said when i spoke with the attorney for p s p a today she did say that there is a case out of the eastern district of pennsylvania where there was a parent to understood english b i said i want to make sure that we are following following the law as it requires by not anything more because there i said there could be a situation where you cannot  regulation it doesn't allow you to have it out where it's visa yes i understand i understand because in one sentence it had in the language that is preferred and i thought see the problem is is that sometimes their authority when i go to it you know like i did today and they gave me a different  s and i think it's just where again the case law and they are going but you know we're not bound by case law and the whole take that hill of practicable and the general on the field said it's not practical but you know so he blamed that one word single word for the loss of gettysburg and you know what and you know what actually it is it does it does it is actually in there and we could leave that one in there because it does have to the extent practicable in this is under the parent involvement