Good evening. I'd like to call to order tonight's meeting of the ISD 191 school board's policy review committee meeting. Uh the date is October 21st, 2025 and the time is 5:00 pm. I'd like to uh
welcome the folks that are joining us in person as well as anyone that might might be watching from home. Uh we will start with policy 515, protection and privacy of public record. Um public records uh policies with changes uh with
Dr. Chris Belmont, assistant superintendent. Welcome Dr. Belmont. Chair Alison, good evening. Um, this policy 515, uh, direct your attention to section 3D,
directory information, which the content has gone through some changes in the last few years because of some shifts in Minnesota law. So, you might recall we we discussed this at a previous meeting this fall. The the Minnesota definition for what
should appear in directory information is more narrow than the federal um interpretation. And the way we had it organized was more of a narrative naming federal and then the state law and essentially that we follow the state
law. This attempted to kind of blend the information so that it flowed a little better. Um, those are the only changes we're proposing is that. >> Thank you. Any comments or questions? >> No, no, not at the start.
>> Okay. Um, I guess I only had one at the top of page 515-2. Um, is there any reason why it it says um but is not limited to? Is there any
reason why we are not limiting um the definition to what's the verbiage that's limited in policy? >> Director, could you help me locate it? >> Sure. Um
so would not generally be considered harmful or an invasion of of privacy if disclosed. it in it includes and it's in a third line down but is not limited to the students name uh photograph electronic image. So I
guess the question is why would we not limit um directory information to specifically what's named in policy. >> I'll have to run that through model policy and find out if that language is there. It does. I I understand your
point that it's specifically naming pieces. So why it would be it's not limited to >> and if there's good reason for that I'm I'm fine with that. It just given the difference between state and federal law. Um >> okay. Yeah. We kind of tried to fuse the state
law, the federal law, the previous policy and the U model policy. So I'll I'll do that research and find out and just get you something declarative about what makes sense. So >> that would be awesome. Thank you. Um and otherwise >> Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I I definitely, you
know, kind of agree and see your point that uh you know, if we're trying to limit and say the we're >> delineating what is allowed, if it's kind of left open, then Yeah. Yep. I definitely understand and agree with the
point. >> Awesome. >> Yeah, that sounds good. We'll check on that. So maybe have it come back again next month. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. It's really a reorganization. There's no new like content we're trying to introduce. It's just how we're naming it. So yeah.
>> Okay. Great. So I will say that's coming back in November. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> All right.
So next we will go to policy 208 development adoption and implementation of policies with Dr. Latana Daniels superintendent. >> Good evening Dr. Daniels. >> Good evening director all director Mickelson. Yes, we are presenting policy
208, the development, adoption and implementation of policies to um include policy 524 which is our personal electronic devices policy in section 5 letter D to um also include it in the
review of policies on an annual basis. >> Great. Thank you. Questions? >> Okay. Okay, that makes sense. Um we'll have this on first reading. Uh, next
we will go to policy 509, enrollment of non-residents with Stacy Sovine, executive director of administrative services. Welcome Stacy. >> Good evening. Uh, bringing to you tonight 509 enrollment of non- studentents um
non-resident students otherwise often referred to as open enrollment. Really the only change that we're looking for at this time is on 5094 uh removing the established by schoolboard policy um that the the school district lottery process. We do
have this posted on our web page under enrollment. It is also posted uh our enrollment uh process is also posted on the same page in three different languages but we already have that posted elsewhere.
>> Thank you. questions. >> Is this um coming as is this recommendation coming as a result of MSBA review or is a staff recommendation? >> I honestly I think it's a part of MSBA
because usually I don't add too many things. I'm a person of limited but um can verify that. I don't think this one was I think the your thought process was with the regulation in Bible nine >> because we already are posting it
online. >> So staff recommendation. Okay. Yeah. >> Awesome. >> Um so this will be first reading. Thank you. >> Uh next we will go to uh 509R enrollment of non-residents the
regulations. Staying with Stacy Sovine. We have a a few items here under regulations that we're looking to do some housekeeping on. Some regulations kind of have fallen by the wayside and been out there for a number of years. They're either no longer applicable.
They either are in contrast to policy or we're already addressing them per our practice with 509R. Again, we are posting our um open enrollment process as well as the lottery process online and we don't need
a regulation for that. The process does align with our policy. So, I'm requesting that we go ahead and remove this from the books as one of our items. >> Questions or comments?
>> No. No. Okay. I had none either. So, uh this would go on first reading. Um, moving along, we'll go to 7:15 our purchasing and bid
requirements. Staying with Stacy. >> Again, this is another one of the regulations that is uh outdated. It was revised in 2016, the last time it was addressed, which was nine years ago. Uh all of the
information that is included here is a part of our fiscal compliance and procedures manual which is updated annually within the finance department. It is over 15 pages long and is very detailed and then also gets looked at with our uh auditors as they look at our
process to make sure we're in compliance. So this is addressed just addressed elsewhere. >> Questions? Nope. Nope. That was kind of my question is okay where you know which other policy or where else is this yep >> uh then handled. Yep. So and answer that
>> and I guess my question is if it's 15 pages long um my concern is that we have heard of late that our community appreciates knowing how we manage our our purchasing and bid requirements. how readily accessible, how transparent are
we with this particular part of our um district um business? >> I I will check to see if that's something that we can post. It it goes into a number of pages because it calls out specific. It's like if this we do
this, if this then we do this, if this then we do I mean it it goes into great detail for the department to make sure the different circumstances. We're following that process and that practice. So I don't think there's any reason why we couldn't post something
like that under our finance page, but I'll check. My concern is I would like for sure for transparency purposes I actually have an affinity for this regulation based on what we've heard recently. Um if there are adjustments
that need to be made to this regulation to make it accurate and you know it's it's easily digestible for our community. Um I think maybe a conversation could be had about it. Um, I want to make sure that we're transparent with our community about this particular part of our our school
district's business. So maybe it goes back and we have a conversation about whether we need to maintain the regulation or how else can we make sure that this information is made publicly available. I don't know um, director MS if you
>> Sure. Yeah. um you know what you're talking about with on the finance website or if within this big document and nice summary kind of page some way to make it easily digestible since it is something that really deals with how they're using how we're using the money.
>> Yeah. and and the rate like you know particularly you know contracts over 100,000 contracts between 25 and 100 those details I know I've had conversations with community members recently um within the last year and
they they do care um about understanding how we manage those >> I'd be more inclined to try to figure out a way to post our manual than to continue with the procedure because the procedure glosses is over the fact that
some of the things within these parameters, state statute actually has different means to addressing it, which is like I said, sometimes in contradiction >> to what the procedures component would look like. >> And whatever it needs to look like as long as it's easily understandable for
our community, that's really what I'm trying to get at. >> Okay, we'll try sometimes. >> And I know stat statute is what statute is. I get it. I understand what you're saying. And and we don't want to put to where it's like, well, you said you would do it this way versus what the
statute says we should be following. I I just want to be very care. That's why we have like 15 pages that says, well, certain circumstances it may look like this. >> Yes. Yep. No, >> in general, >> you know, you know, something like that
that helps to >> say that there could sometimes be exceptions and Yeah. you need to see this longer policy for those or >> here's the link to the statute because we know that the statute will change, right? >> Yeah. Which is included in policy.
Absolutely. Yeah. >> Yep. It's just one of those things even though you say something, not everybody always recognized that you just got done saying it >> completely and you have to say things three times some. >> I think we're on the same page.
>> Yes. So maybe we agree to sunset the regulation and continue to have a conversation about what we can do >> and and I can update uh uh board members um hopefully tomorrow even I can find out what that answer might be for that.
>> That would be awesome. Thank you Stacy. So this will be on first reading then. Um, all right. So, let me close that. Next, we're at uh 401R, equal opport
equal employment opportunity again with Stacy. >> Yeah. Um, again, this one, the last time it was looked at, looks like it was back in 2014. Just even reviewing this in I have some real issues. It isn't something
that we have been posting on our website, but it is one of the things that is listed on the uh on the books under 401. It needs to go away. We need to stay with our policy to to protect the district in the long run with this.
>> Any questions or comments? >> I'll defer to you. >> I believe this only went forward in that last review when we converted MSBA policies to the model the new model policies. So yeah, I had no problems
with that. Absolutely. >> Um so frustrating. >> Thank you for catching that. Um policies with no changes. Uh policy 722 uh public data requests. Stacy, >> as it is listed in the category, I have
no changes for 722. >> Okay. >> Okay. So that will be on consent policy 101.1 name of the school district with Dr. Daniels. >> Yes. Um there are no changes regarding this policy. We compared it to MSBA
model policy. They recommend no changes. It's part of the regular review cycle and again we're recommending no changes to this policy. >> Okay. >> No no no questions or issues. >> Okay. No questions here. So consent.
Uh policy 101, legal status of the school board with Dr. Daniels. >> Yes. Again, this is um a policy that's a part of our regular review cycle um that we review annually. There are no changes that we're recommending and thus we would like to move it forward with no changes.
>> Okay. No questions. >> Okay. No questions here. Uh so that will be on consent. Um Sarah, do you have what you need from us? So everything first reading um except for those last three on consent for November 6th and
then one coming back to committee on November. >> 5:15 coming back in November. Yep. That's that's we're good. All right. We're adjourned. Thank you everybody. >> Thank you.