##VIDEO ID:bQ7rGA39hAo## in the interest of time get going um through this meeting so we do have a quarum so I think we can start um I will read the agenda and then we can call the role um please be advised that on October 28th at 5:00 pm there will be a special meeting of the Medford school committee to be held remotely via Zoom this meeting is being recorded the meeting can be viewed live on Medford Public Schools YouTube channel through Medford Community media on your local cable which is Comcast channel 98 or 22 and Verizon channel 43 45 or 47 um the meeting will be recorded since the meeting will be held remotely participants can log in uh by using the following information the meeting um ID is 917 55761 1532 questions or comments can be submitted during the meeting by emailing Medford SCC medford.ma us and those submited questions must also include the following your name first and last name your Medford Street address and your question or comment uh member Roo if you could call the role certainly member branley I believe member Graham here member Anapa member Ola here member reinfeld here member so present mayor Longo K absent as well so four present and three absent um if we can all please stand to salute the flag I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all um okay um our today is long and short um we have one item on the agenda that's the short part the long part is that it is the first reading of policy acgb um Title Nine sexual discrimination grievance procedure resolution um uh some headlines about what this um policy is all about sure it is really hard to Sor just to know we have another member online now yes I recorded member brandley thank you um so this is a very long policy I would never draft a policy of this length um it it's so long that um we might be the only people to ever read it but um this came from our professional association and came down from a set of lawyers that they contract with um regarding title N9 changes um title name has sort of been batted back and forth through each of the administrations that we have had in the white house so this is the the Biden version um hopefully we don't have to go through all of this again in the next couple of years but um so this is one of many policies um that we have been going through related to Title 9 this is the grievance procedure so um anybody who wishes to file a grievance through Title 9 UM would follow this procedure there is a lot of Preamble um and then there are step by steps who has what rights and when um and I will admit that I lack knowledge about prior versions of this so I can't really speak to the what changed um I don't know uh Miss Bowen if you I didn't even ask you but is there any big giant change that you feel or is it just such a wholesale change that you don't um I I think most of it is like the scope of um the sexual discrimination and sex-based harassment so it's very clearly defined in that um and also just bits and pieces here and there about the process how that is different um Witnesses um there was a part in here previously about like being able to question the accuser and so they've changed a lot of those types of language and processes um but it mostly was just about the sex discrimination and sex-based harassment that they really clearly defined I feel great thank you um so not having the knowledge of the previous one it sounds like really fles out the areas where there was always litigation because it's like well what does that really mean that's good news that's good news if we have an update of this size it's good to see that hello member friendley um so I mean I attempted to do um an AI summary and I failed because this is too big for the free AIS to ingest and I wasn't about to pay for a AI subscription just to be able to do on this one giant policy um so I mean we could go through it Page by Page or section by section and just like this is what this section means I personally have a strong uh dislike of the idea of reading it because I did time it if we were to have um a Siri or AI read us the policy it's an our and um 27 minutes just without us stopping or having questions and that was with a pretty fast voice so uh I'm hoping nobody here is Desiring that we do that but um the the other thing I will note in the policy and this is something new I've never put this in a policy before at the very end there's a statement that I think we might want to put into other policies it says updates to contact information of school staff identified within the policy may be made without school committee notification so I think it's bad form to have in your policies like the names and phone numbers of individuals but in this case where it's sort of part of the point of the policy is that that's all there um I thought this was a good workaround so we are not reviewing this policy every single time a staff member retires or we hire somebody new um but that's sort of the outlier for how the policy language is drafted um so that's the 10 Mile ey version is there a motion to wave the reading I'll make that motion so motion to wave the reading by member rouso I'll second seconded by member brandley uh roll call member brandley yes member Graham yes member inapa is presently absent still I think M yes member rinel yes member so yes and may is still not quite with us so five in the affirmative two absent so the reading is waved um so we've just saved an hour and 27 minutes thank you all for for that um so memb so I think it probably makes sense to go through this like chunk by chunk and just ask for folks to let us know if they have questions or comments um about that as we go through and then once we um go through that we can sort of see where we land and decide you know if there's another motion to entertain um whether to pass this or or um pass it on to another meeting or um take care of uh waving reading both readings here tonight so before we before we yes can I ask so this seemed to be when I went through it very much aligned with the notes that came out of Department of Education and this fact sheet the final rule fact sheet that has kind of the key components so I'm wondering how much of this is the language that was already recommended versus specific to Medford because I think I am confident that in having a policy that complies with federal law we shouldn't be debating a lot of those things remember so yes um it it is um so that that language went to the lawyers I forget the law firm that masc uses and they expanded upon and and translated it as much as was actually needed I didn't read the Desi uh I mean not the Desi the uh Department of Ed language so if it's if they simply copied it and stuck their name on it I wouldn't know but um yeah this is I did not make changes other than updating the the contact information replacing the district with Medford and I also there were a few places of you know punctuation and uh frankly there were some typos um but so other than that I did not change the content although of course a legal perspective a com can matter um was very cautious and there you know I use grammarly grammarly has a lot of recommendations to make the thing better I did not take any of them other than where comma was necessary or not necessary um it was clearly just a mistake in the in the drafting of the language I really didn't like the format there's so many levels um but again I felt uncomfortable really making a big change because it did come from lawyers and because Title 9 is such a gigantic complex thing that I don't fully understand that's that's where we're at great so I I I think going through it piece by piece and maybe having member Russo and Miss Bowen jump provide a little bit of the guidance of this is what this is doing here or how it plays out would be helpful so um would you like to share the screen would be great okay that's a good idea um and then let's we can start at the top um there is a preamble that goes on for several pages so up until page halfway down page five is a preamble that um in my reading describes like what the intention of the policy is and why it was um built in the first place so I will um open the floor to any questions about the Preamble just realize you can't see me shaking my head probably because I have this text up I don't have anything on the Preamble hearing and seeing no questions on the Preamble um the next section is definitions um and I know um wait was what we what we were just looking at was the Preamble there's one piece that says sex descript discrimination that right there where your mouse was prohibits sex discrimination should that be sexual discrimination you know everything else is really consistent and then I didn't know if that was just left in as sex discrimination but I promise I'm not this was the only place I got that detailed interesting that I can search I'm searching too okay so there's 20 six instances of the words sex discrimination um now I'm not inclined to go in and mess with and there's 43 of sexual discrimination I will say that uh it is not the only thing in this document that I have the similar concerns about um but I don't actually know technically if there are differences between the two they seem like the same thing to me my sense was that sexual discrimination was the term that was being used to cover all of these things laid out here plus um sexual harassment so um I mean I'm fine with a fine in replace with sex discrimination with sexual discrimination if nobody has any uh reason to disagree with that and this is um I guess my only thought is that we're not changing anything of substance and but we might be if we make this change right we're not tending for it to be substantive but it could be um unbeknownst to us so I would um Advocate that we leave it alone I agree okay all right completely mess up the formatting to add a few characters anyway um okay so about halfway down page five we start with definitions and it looks like they go to page eight halfway down page eight mogram are you looking at the agenda yes I am looking at the agenda I'm sorry that's okay um so I'm on a page three to page um six six thank you yes y so um again definitions I don't think they're particularly consistent but I don't want us to have to engage lawyers questions about the definitions okay okay um the next section is about uh reporting sexual discrimination um and filing a formal complaint so that goes on for several pages so I could just kind of give like quick go through the steps process real quick sure that would be great so um starts out with who may file reports and it's anyone um which I think is inter it doesn't have to be the the victim or whatever the proper term isn't according to the definitions um how to report the Discrimination is um in the uh well these are not steps sorry this again this this this organization of this document was a challenge uh there's internal reporting that's related to employees um there is uh the district next is the District response to the report which of course the district will respond um there are five um things that the district will do promptly and confidential confidentially um contact the complainant um inform the complainant of um supportive measures uh consider the complaintants wishes um don't really know what the point of number four is and then um the complaint will have it it will be explained to the compliant what the um process is for filing the complaint next we have filing itself so um this is the actual process who may file it a much longer version this this document is very good at repeating itself um so um a much longer version of who a file the process again in longer words more words um did it say step one somewhere it did I apologize step one so step two is the um consideration of supportive measures so the complainant and the respondent that three is written notice of be allegations is there a definition of the word consider because it's not offer it's not like I suspect that is one of those words that is legally it means one thing in legal terms and another to the rest of us yeah not in the policy that I can see yeah no versus offering those supportive measures like I feel like that's implied here but isn't explicit yeah there was a section up here about um what was it was it appear so in if you go up to the uh Part D of the reporting section provided yeah bullet for which I agree with maruso that doesn't make what is how do you determine that says if you're not providing supportive measures you have to say why like we went straight to disciplinary action for these reasons there was an imminent danger we this was not yeah a safe safe environment in which to offer this support measure I understand that to be yeah the this it's the non-punitive shall I continue y you can I think the heart the heart thing is of thank you I think the hard part is of course without specific examples it gets really this is not easy stuff to to draft um okay so those are the written notice uh what will be included in the notice there will be a statement foring retaliation of course um submitting false information all the things you'd expect um see okay step four is the um consideration of whether to dismiss the formal complaint um so there are some mandatory yes on section three number seven just need a capital on that thank you so much thank you even grammarly didn't notice that it also doesn't want to read 18 propes um thank you uh so yeah so step four is about whether or not um the complaint is subject to mandatory discretionary dismissal um so uh if the district cannot identify the respondent which is often known as the accused in regular language uh then of course there's no way to further the U deal with the complaint um there is a May dismiss these are the May dismiss so if the person is not involved with our educational programs and is not involved with the district we may dismiss not to say we have to um if the complaintant does a voluntarily withdraws so then there's more stuff about dismissal um so it's really hard to summarize without just reading it but I'm not reading it um see if the dismissal is a field the district will do a set of things notifying all the right people um when the district when the complaint is dismissed the district will at a minimum offer supportive measures um respondent will be notified of the allegations and supportive um measures will be offered there as well why is this under scored okay um and then um yeah yeah so let's see and there's more just dismissal lot really important there okay so let me read that one since I can't remember it dismissal of a formal complaint for purposes of title noun include the district from addressing allegations under any other relevant District policies or procedures including about not limited to the Civil Rights grievance procedure The Bullying prevention and prevention plan that thing the student code of conduct and or collective bargaining contract nor will it preclude the district from adusting the allegations pursuant to the grievance process s in section two of this procedure the title line coordinator shall have the discretion to make any such referrals and proceed as appropriate in regard to the allegations so just because uh dismissal within this title is happen doesn't mean it's the end necessarily this may not qualify for this type of measure but it could still be a violation of other thank you uh next step five is the initial invation um this is the the details on what the district will do um standard appr proof the burden is on the district collection of evidence let's see presentation of witnesses um we will have no there'll be no gag orders um each party will have one advisor notice let's see privacy medical treatment so um the district cannot access medical information in any situation here unless of course they can unless they consent to it um the investigator timelines so speed matters it always matters to everybody involved in these things I think that's one of the changes that did happen that um there used to be a 10day waiting period imagine if you're involved in this as the victim or accused or but whatever the proper terms here are and once all the investigations are done then everybody has just sit on their hands for 10 business days um everybody's going to school everybody's you know it's it it didn't make a lot of sense so um I think that was one big change that they made is that that 10day mandatory waiting period is gone um see and we don't have any definitions of what a reasonable time frame is no I don't no we don't I mean I think that for minor things I think everybody would think reasonable is you know same day a day or two but for major major things I can certainly see it taking many days or longer once there's lawyers and you know all kinds of other things involved um but there's separate language for acknowledgement of the receipt of the complaint right y uh then there's this is the uh opportunity for parties to access and respond to the evidence um the evidence uh there's limitation in here okay so we have to redact confidential information not directly related to the allegations uh furpa is very much still in effect here um this is an override furpa and for anybody in the public that wants to know that's the family educational rights and Privacy Act which is uh you'll hear school committee members use it when we respond to you about why we can't actually do things you ask us to do sometimes um and everybody is prohibited from disseminating any of the evidence for any purpose not directly related to the Grievous procedures so don't take it and go to Facebook um or anything it is um evidence that you have the right to see but you do not have the right to disseminate remember ryel wants to say so I do so this is the section where I yeah thank you this is the section where I had a lot of questions and it I think it comes up in the bullying policy as well if there are more than two parties right if we're talking about a group like a team of people or multiple staff I think there's a lot of confusion on what gets investigated on a person byerson basis versus people as a group talking amongst themselves if you have a group of students who is either filing a complaint or is being or is the respondent or respondents whether they're getting individual whether all of these where it's multiple things happening simultaneously versus a an investigation into a group situation and that's not really addressed and I don't know if there's guidance there obviously I can try to talk to lawyers about that but I don't know how how that works in some of our other policies because I know there has been a lot of concerns where I was told one thing and I was told another and then parents start sharing ACR with each other around the same situation and there's just lots of conflicting information FR can you give us an example like I'm not tracking like a group okay if a group does something it's because individuals in the group did something right right yeah so I have examples that aren't title N9 specific is that sure okay so for example a group of middle schoolers is caught with vaping supplies and each student is being the inves ation as is happening individually with those students but the outcomes of those end up being different and so the parents you know suspension might happen one student is suspended another one isn't parents are comparing notes and they're saying this is this is what the administration told me oh well this is what they told me and I can't release information about this other student but the parent has given me this information and I want to bring that as part of my complaint because my kids were together our kids were together is that helpful I think it's a little helpful um I don't know Miss Bowen if you have any thoughts on that I mean I think in the end like the district can't like they they can't broadly meet out consequences like they have to do that specifically in individually right so I could see why a parents would do that or want to know like what else there's a video the reviewing of evidence like there's a there's a video of something that happens and one complaintant complaintant can't review a video because it contains footage of another complaintant for example must be what so I mean I think it's not so the the consequence necess wouldn't necessarily be one size fits all I think when we start doing these investigations we find out more information and and then apply what the discipline would be or what sort of restorative circles or supportive measures would be but I think it's um like finding out what each student specific role was you know like in regards to vaping maybe the the student that brought all the Vapes in might have a heavier consequence than a student that just took one so I think it's really doing a deep dive into all the information and then looking at what is going to um be the best line of you know how do we handle this with each student um and we can have conversations with parents like your child's role was a little bit different and this is this is why the consequence was a little more severe or was not as severe um if that makes sense so member reinfeld as it relates to a title 9 investigation right if some if there is collective bullying for a group of lgbtq students or or um it's School the school say I I don't think this is going to happen but school is not providing adequate pumping space for new parents and we as a group want to file a complaint can we as a group file a complaint or does it have to be a series of individual complaints I I think it could be a group complaint and then it may it may um you know separate into more individual investigations but if if there are say four women who don't feel like the uh accommodations are appropriate and they file together then we would look at it and and as a as a group look at a solution for them so it that would be a little bit different I think than say a bullying or a sexual harassment um like a grp group response to that I I think it's looking at each individual's actions and part of say a sexual harassment um complaint and then going from there they they vary so widely when things happen so it's it's really hard to give a if then sort of answer because we it's it's really really you never know like once this um complaint comes in and you st to do the investigation it takes a life on its own and it does involve more people um so it's like really doing that due diligence and and looking into it and then going from there and then you know what are the the ramifications for the students do we do we discipline them do we not do we say like we work with the parents about maybe they need some social skills groups or Counseling in school or whatever it may be so I think it's it's really hard to say we're going to do this if this happens because when we're in the midst of the invest a we we're seeing a lot more things come to light either for the positive or for the negative and I just want to jump In Here Also that this is um the scenario given um there there has to be a a victim so a bunch of students getting in trouble for Vaping is not Title Nine even if we decided we were going to say just the girls are going to get in trouble and not the boys um because the victim where who's the victim the district foring a policy or taking action Is We I suppose we could be the perpetrator um as a district but I don't think this policy considers that the district is actually a perpetrator um in violation I mean obviously plenty of Title Nine things are about the district refusing to you know deal with sports and all the other types of things but there are victims there um yes the sports scenarios are coming to mind and I'm trying yeah to not I mean we are in a public meeting and so yeah so um let me find what page we're on since I've already yeah we were on page nine step seven you keep going down further oh thank you glad somebody's paying attention to that um okay so um yeah all right so uh let's see oh and I see yeah for any purpose not directly related to this grievance procedure so if there is a interconnected investigation that remains within the single grievance or okay thank you you're welcome um so next up is Step seven completion of the investigative report um then eight is the party's opportunity to respond to the report step nine is uh directed written questions from the parties so after the investigative report has been sent to the parties but prior to reaching a determination regarding responsibility the decision maker shall afford both the complainant and the respondant the opportunity to submit to the decision maker relevant questions of the other party or any witness provide the party with other the other party and our Witnesses written responses to said questions and allow for additional limited followup questions from each party in writing uh questions that seek disclosure of information protected under legally recognized privileges such as furpa will shall not be permitted uh unless the person holding the privilege waves their right so um this is seems pretty standard um not as awful as an actual deposition but um so um so there is this 10 days to submit U directed relevant questions so again this this is this is still 10 days there was that other 10 days on top of that 10 days um it would be hard to feel like things are being taken seriously if we just keep adding two week increments so um let's see so 10 days to craft your questions five days to get before your answers are due um another three days um and then another three days it's really it's no wonder things take forever but they have to I mean everybody has to do the work and have their rights protected so um let's see and then step 10 is determination of responsibility findings the fact by the decision maker um who's on this call Joan is oh to Joan we just lose Jan I think we oh no there you are sorry here you moved to the top um for some reason on my screen um standard appr proof decision makers findings um the determination will be written of course and um sent simultaneously to both parties um there's some more very long time frames here section c remedies um so this is um what can be done so there's um the remedies the elimination of the harassing environment um next is um section D page ofon 15 um persons who discipline so this is um about discipline as you would imagine um however there is a reference to the uh to massachus general laws related to special uh to behaviors that are attributable to uh disabilities uh but I won't go into those because those are those Stand Alone um so then there's the imposition of sanctions compliance with the gy uh the imposition of the sanctions and uh okay so this is sort of important so um you know if there was a determination that it had not happened or that it was not sorry not that had not happened that it was not um considered um am I misreading this so what does the sentence me this one mean do you know I I would say it means that if they make a false statement um hold on let me read this again yeah if I may it seems like it's reading as if the 109 coordinator will not discipline a party witness or other participating uh entity um if they make a false statement um about sex discrimination or if they felt as though it was but it was not actually based off of the determining criteria after a review process had occurred so there's there'll be no repercussions towards the original respondent or yeah I think is how it reads okay does that sound right to you John yes yeah thank you okay thank you lawyers J know how to make it hard um this might have been the previous section but so there's this timeline talks about the elimination of conditions once the determination has been made it doesn't this policy doesn't seem to say a lot about while the investigation is going on making sure things are safe so those would be the supportive measures that you offer okay in advance yes okay great thank you and um Miss if correct me if I'm wrong but if I mean supportive measures could be quite substantial like if we felt the student couldn't be in the building we would be offering them another option for how to get an education outside of the building it's not that they just get to come to school and we're like be nice that that's not what we mean it could be something as significant as that correct correct and if it was a a staff member who was um made a complaint that they were being sexually harassed you know walking them to the car at night um offering them counseling that sort of thing so it's a wide range um but yes it it could be um a a big um supportive measure that we offer depending on the situation does that supportive measure potentially include removal of the respondent or the alleged perpetrator I I I would have to go back and see I don't think you can remove until you do the investigation but you can separate sort of you know really close supervision put in a safety plan um but I would have to go back and I haven't experienced that yet um I hope I don't but um I think you have to make sure that you do the investigation first before you can remove because one of the real challenges of these situations is that a lot of the burden to remain safe is on the victim or alleged victim or complainant and that can be really hard and further exacerbating of a situation correct and I think it's really important that when we have a conversation about the supportive measures we also can have like counseling staff there with us um you know the parents can be involved and and and what sort of protections do we need to put into place if there's any legal um protections that may have to happen as well like we you know involving the the school resource officer and that sort of thing as well but like administrative leave can't happen during an when does administrative leave if that's the it could possibly it could possibly and that's where we really um engage with our with our attorney too to say like this is what has been reported to us we're in the process of an investigation does somebody go out on paid leave until the full investigation is happening um and that's where we would seek how a greens spans um advice on that privacy challenges on both sides are significant all right thank you all right next up we have did I finish this section I believe so um informal process um so that there's an option to have an informal process if the um so use the right words to describe the different people here oh one second Google is okay that was crashing on me um so there is an option to have a informal process um all right um next is uh section F emergency removal under Title 9 UM the district May remove a respondent on an emergency basis at any time that the district one undertakes and individualize safety and under okay and risk analysis to determines that an immediate threat to the physical health or safety of any student or other individual arising from the allegations of sexual discrimination justifies removal and that there is no alternative to the respondent's Emer emergency removal to mitigate the threat presented and three provides the respondent with notice and the opportunity to challenge the decision immediately following removal so um that's there hopefully we never have to use that Anonymous reporting um so this is that we may take Anonymous reports um let's see we can do supportive measures um cannot provide oh I'm sorry obviously we can't do support of measures if we don't know who is supporting who is reporting um let's see that that seems I mean if we don't know who the reporter is that's different than confidentially reporting but um there's really not much there's a there's pretty significant limitations on what could actually be done um anybody want to talk about that one at all I mean is is an anonymous report is not a formal complaint and I think that's where that's certainly where we've seen in higher education these things come out is people saying well I can't do anything until a formal complaint is filed and people don't feel safe submitting a formal complaint or whatever it is but it's this horrible Catch 22 maybe not even a catch 22 but a paradox of yep of people just people need to people need to be good people but all right so next up is appeals um so there's an entire appeals process of course um says who to send the appeal to five days um after the determination um the decision maker may not take uh uh sorry the decision maker for the appeal cannot take part in the event could not have taken part in the investigation um so um we do have it the original policy as I received it had um frankly a lot more decision makers than we have decided to go with um we have some freedom and leeway to do that um and I can see both sides of that but I'll explain that when I get to that section later um okay because I did have a question question is we have one appeal officer and what happens if this is purely hypothetical not based on the individual named but what happens if the appeal officer is involved in this there needs to be an alternative Miss phone can you answer that so that that could be so the roles can be interchangeable like one person could fill all these roles but if say like John Bruno who is the appeal officer is involved in the case then I might be the appeals officer or we might look at um other people like the informal resolution facilitators if they were not involved that they could make the decision at that point about the appeal and I don't know since you said part of this it's about communicating what the Avenues are that was my question here is do we need to communicate that in the event of the designated person not being being able to be that unbiased decision maker these are the alternate paths it was only because that particular role had one person y so is your suggestion that there be more than one person listed as an appeals facilitator appeals for what they what the well I think what I what I'm hearing as Bowen saying is that frankly all these people are interchangeable so I mean if if John Bruno was involved then obviously he's not going to be the investigator or the I mean you know if that these these are all roles that can just be swapped around to ensure that there's not a conflict I mean we'd have to list every person under every section and then the point is sort of that people know who call um I think if you know if you were concerned about John Bruno as like you're writing a complaint against him then obviously you're not going to um want him to be the appeals officer he also wouldn't be a very good investigator um and so these are just sort of like defaults is how I take them that is how I take them as well I've just was wondering about how explicit we need to be about that and just since we're in public I like John Bruno very much and I to principal at my child just not picking on him yeah um where was I on this :15 so let's see sorry okay so we had finished that section there um record keeping so obviously just keep uh Records related to this procedure maintained for a period of seven years thought I said days I was confused okay years um that's pretty much standard stuff um employment agencies this is um boiler plate stuff where to go okay is identification Key Personnel so that's this section down here um and you know in some the boiler plate code that I originally had had a investigator at each school um I can sort of see the value in that on the other hand um if somebody's particularly well trained in that then maybe they're a better choice um and um but the other the other part of that that I was a little bit like so mcglenn is kind of far away from the Miss took um but that means that Mr O'Brien is going to be doing Title Nine investigations over at the Muk but on the other side I also was kind of like it seems better to have somebody not at your school doing the investigation so um you know if we were to do it where we had really it would have to be an entire uh table of like if you're here this is who you contact and I think it gets really messy um so I think um you know Jan's at the top so Jan's gonna get the calls so and and and this does not preclude an investigator at another school doing it right John correct yep I mean previously we had two people two administrators um that did any sexual harassment complaints um so this has expanded it to a few more roles throughout the district um but yeah if it if it's at the mcglen elementary school then then we might have Jen SK or Shila do it and it's it's interchangeable so we you know depending on the specific situation we would look at who would be the the best person to do the investigation it might be myself it might be you know um Human Resources might get involved as well so um I do like the how we have more people involved right um so this this prominently displayed on the district website I don't know if there's anybody who has idea what the word prominently displayed means in uh in legal e but I um I will ask um I'll send an email afterwards to ask that that um if it's not already there that you know Joan is listed as the title line coordinator maybe in the about or section or somewhere very prominently um I don't think on the actual main page just like right there makes a lot of sense because that get very much we want to have the non-discrimination statement we want to have the um the uh the district um educational statement it just gets very long but that's just my opinion so we are at an hour and we have sort of been through it it's a lot to digest um and we will have another chance at a regular meeting when we do the second reading which we will not read also hopefully are there any other questions or changes s suggested I have been trying to figure out a way to rephrase vict the the phrase victim without their consent because it implies that a victim can give consent up in the definition section but I haven't settled on anything so I think another difficulty is is trying to if there are components of things that we want to change without changing like state or fed guidelines and the the the terminology that they're using so I don't want to do anything that's going outside of what their expectation or recommendations are so we're not kind of following um their requirements so that's another difficulty I think yeah I mean um you know whenever I tell people what it's like to be on the school committee I do talk about that the federal the state and of course the local everybody's got their hands in the pie and nobody talks to each other or cares frankly what the other one thinks um so we do end up with definitions that can not only be not consistent but can even be contradictory and we're just left to sit in that uh stew and um yeah it's tough especially when you're writing you know we write one policy like the bullying one which comes from the stay house and we are very specific definitions of you know aggressor is the word they use and then here there's there's the respondent which is like the most uh mild bannered version of that probably anybody could ever come up with so I I think we just have to live with the fact that in some policies we are calling those folks the respondent and other ones they're the aggressor and I think the state one actually has two two different words um perpetrator until it's been proven they can't put that in right and then you know victim isn't even listed in this one as the act in the definition section so um they do say that alleged victim is a yeah that person but that's not yeah it's it's hard and hopefully nobody has to go through any of this especially if they have to go through it in multiple policies because that would be terrible there a motion to approve the first reading yeah I'll make a motion motion to approve the first reading by member L I'll second second it by member brandley um roll call um member brandley yes member Graham yes member and top is absent member alap member reinfield yes member so yes mayor Loker is absent so does this automatically go to a regular meeting or do we wave so five in the affirmative two absent motion passes is um and I think the question that you have is does this go are we waving a second reading or is this going to another meeting is that your question that is my question so um I know we accidentally did way of second readings two meetings ago and then several of you asked we already did the second reading why is it on the agenda um the second reading has to actually be on the agenda because that's the opportunity for the public to it's like the second chance it's not for us it's for the public to be like oh yeah you saw you know if you're watching the meeting and you see something discussed and you want to discuss it um you may not be prepared so the second reading I think should happen at the next meeting and I I'll I will be submitting a clarifying up rule update to make that clear because it's not clear okay so the second reading will be on our next school committee agenda which is a week from today um are there any other uh motions on the floor motion to adjourn motion to adjourn by member reinfeld I'm on a second roll let's do it by member brandley roll call member brandley yes member Graham yes me in top is absent member Ola yes member reinfeld yes member say yes Maro Kern is also absent I've been the affirmative to absent the meeting is adjourned I