Public engagement: BCSC approves policy updates

Bartholomew Consolidated School Corp. board will institute an official process for communicating with the public about proposed policy changes.

The school board voted Monday to approve a number of policy updates, including two that were drafted by a public engagement subcommittee made up of board members Rich Stenner (chair), Dale Nowlin and Logan Schulz.

The group’s recommendations included an updated version of the board’s bylaw on the adoption, amendment and repeal of bylaws and policies.

“When transparency breeds more questions, it makes the process a little bit more difficult, but at the end, you get a better result,” Schulz said.

The revised bylaw states that the adoption, amendment or repeal of bylaws and policies must adhere to the following process:

• Being posted publicly on the school corporation’s website at least 14 days prior a first reading. The posting will include a way for members of the public to comment virtually.
• A first reading at a public board meeting with a public engagement opportunity
• Feedback collected from community members will be provided to all board members five days before a working session
• Review in a public working session of the board, where board members can provide edits and feedback, and the public is able to attend
• A second reading at a public board meeting — which must be a different meeting from both the first reading and public working session — with a public engagement opportunity

However, bylaws or policies may be adopted or amended by resolution at a single meeting of the board in the event of an emergency. Any resolution adopted under emergency conditions will expire at the first public board meeting after the emergency ends, unless the board adopts the resolution as a bylaw or policy.

Additionally, the updated bylaw states that, “The board welcomes and encourages proposals to enhance the bylaws and policies of the corporation. Any person with a policy proposal should provide their proposal to a board member for consideration. Board members can motion to include these proposals within the first reading of the next policies being considered at a subsequent board meeting with a majority vote of the board quorum. These bylaws and policies may be amended by board members within the first or second readings without restarting the process.”

Bylaws and policies will be adopted, amended, repealed or suspended by a majority vote of the full school board.

The public engagement subcommittee also drafted an updated version of the policy on public comment at school board meetings.

The update features changes that are consistent with the recommendations of the school board agenda subcommittee, which were approved by the board in July. These include:

• Striking the requirement that comments must pertain to items on the meeting agenda
• If there are more than 15 participants, priority will be given to individuals speaking on agenda items that the board will take action on in that meeting
• Each statement is limited to three minutes, with extensions granted by the presiding officer
• The time for public comments will be limited to 45 minutes, unless extended by the presiding officer

The policy also states that speakers will be requested to preface their remarks by providing their name and affirming their relationship to the BCSC as a resident and/or parent of a student.

According to a copy of the procedures for participation — which was available at Monday’s meeting — individuals who speak during the time for public comment must be residents of the school corporation or parents of students in the school corporation. This is not specified in the previous version of the policy currently posted in BCSC’s online manual.

Additionally, members of the public can provide “brief, written testimony” prior to the board meeting to be included as part of the written record in lieu of public participation at the meeting, the updated policy states. The testimony should include the individual’s name and relationship to the school corporation.

The update also strikes a section stating that public participation may be prohibited at any meeting that must be conducted remotely due to an emergency declared by federal, state or local officials unless the board elects to allow public comment at these meetings.

According to Nowlin, another recommendation from the subcommittee is to hold special meetings to receive public input in more conversational format.

This particular recommendation has not yet been approved, said Superintendent Jim Roberts.

“One of the things we heard from the representatives from the public that came was that it was very helpful for them to talk in an informal setting,” Nowlin said. “… In our brainstorm list, one of the complaints we heard regularly was that when you get up at a board meeting, it seems like you’re just talking and nobody’s listening or actually hearing what you’re saying.”

As stated in the subcommittee’s report, “We recommend the full board or a subset of the board meet on specific topics of public interest for the purpose of public input. These might be topics like major initiatives, referendums, curriculum, or policy proposals. The board president could make a decision based on the topic and the levels of engagement. Focusing on a specific topic would inform which administration representative(s) would attend the meeting. These would be informal meetings, not bound by Roberts Rules of Order and more conversational in format.”

Nowlin said that as part of their work, the group used a metric Stenner got from the Environmental Protection Agency. According to the EPA’s website, this model is the International Association of Public Participation’s “Public Participation Spectrum,” which outlines five levels of engagement: inform, consult, involve, collaborate and empower.

The group rated different board actions on what level of engagement seemed appropriate and then focused on actions with higher levels of engagement, Nowlin said.

“We were actually successful at tackling three of those,” he said. “We created a revised policy for board comments at board meetings. We created a revised policy for adopting board policy. … And we created a recommendation around having special board meetings for the purpose of receiving input in an informal, conversational way.”