Updates on the Fight for Quality Public Education in Brevard County, FL
0:00 Thank you.
36:59 from the suggested language of Neola.
37:02 the NEOLA sent out suggested language to a policy
37:05 we hadn’t adopted yet.
37:07 So we put it in place.
37:09 Everything that was within the policy
37:11 we were already doing.
37:13 So it’s just a matter of encoding
37:15 that this is what the NEOLA suggests.
37:18 - Comments, questions, or concerns on policy 2800?
37:24 Okay.
37:27 Next then, Dr. Thudy will present the executive summary
37:30 for policy 3121 conditions for employment
37:33 and re-employment of staff.
37:35 - This policy is being revised
37:37 for technical and content changes.
37:38 Particular areas of revision include the following,
37:41 the addition of paragraphs three and four,
37:43 which are really C and D,
37:44 with suggested NEOLA language.
37:46 And these proposed revisions encompass
37:48 the suggested language from NEOLA.
37:50 - Any questions or comments
37:52 on policy 3121 conditions for employment?
37:58 Okay, then we will move on to 3121.01, Dr. Thudy.
38:03 - This policy is criminal background
38:06 and employment history checks.
38:08 This policy is being revised for technical changes.
38:11 Particular areas of revision include the following,
38:13 the addition of suggested NEOLA language
38:15 and the inclusion of all staff support and instructional.
38:18 These proposed revisions encompass
38:19 the suggested language from NEOLA.
38:23 Any questions, comments or concerns on 3121.01?
38:26 All right, hearing none,
38:30 we will move on to policy 3215,
38:33 smoking and tobacco-free environment, Ms. Moore.
38:36 - This policy, the proposed revisions
38:40 encompasses the suggested languages of NEOLA.
38:44 As you guys know, we just did 3215.
38:46 We did major revisions.
38:47 Most of the revisions this time
38:48 are based on slight changes to the definition,
38:52 as well as some language about violation of this policy
38:56 for administrators and staff
38:57 and for any persons allowed to accept
39:00 or solicit contributions
39:02 or to promote tobacco products on school property.
39:08 - Any comments, questions or concerns on policy 3215?
39:11 Ms. McDougall, I think you had questions on that, but.
39:14 - I did.
39:15 One of the questions I had is,
39:18 I know that we lease and rent out our building,
39:22 so I just wanna make sure
39:23 that certainly pertains to them too.
39:26 I didn’t see that in here,
39:27 but I don’t know if that’s in another contract
39:29 or someplace else.
39:31 - Yeah, it does pertain to them
39:32 and the way that they would handle
39:33 if they wanted the venue
39:35 to allow their participants to smoke
39:37 because they would have to apply
39:38 for a waiver to the board.
39:40 - So it would come before us then?
39:42 - It would come before you.
39:43 It’s part of the facilities use agreement
39:46 and then they’d have to come to you for a waiver.
39:48 - Thank you.
39:49 There might’ve been something else
39:51 but I can’t remember.
39:53 - There was another question
39:54 about adding matches alongside a lighter as prohibited.
39:59 - I don’t know if that’s a big deal or not,
40:03 but it’s fire, so, okay.
40:04 I mean, I just don’t know
40:07 if that would be, if this may seem silly,
40:11 but our students are very bright
40:13 and people are very bright for loopholes
40:15 and I, do I worry about that or not?
40:18 So it’s a, whatever you think, so.
40:20 - I think it’s a good addition.
40:22 There’s no reason for anybody to have matches
40:23 or a lighter on campus
40:24 unless it’s part of an instructional lesson.
40:26 - Chemistry.
40:27 - Okay.
40:29 - Everybody good with that recommended change?
40:30 - All right, then we are going to move along to policy 3590
40:40 personnel file.
40:43 Dr. Thede.
40:44 - This policy is being revised for technical changes.
40:47 Particular areas of revision include the addition of suggested NEOLA
40:50 language
40:50 and something I need to update on here, the addition of some
40:53 statutory language.
40:54 Proposed revisions encompass the suggested language from NEOLA.
40:58 - Anyone have comments or questions on 3590 personnel file?
41:03 Ms. McDougall, I think you submitted a couple of questions on
41:06 there,
41:06 but I don’t recall that there were any changes.
41:08 - I don’t think there were, I don’t think there were changes.
41:11 There was just clarification that Dr. Thede and I talked about,
41:14 about if something happened off, out of Southside school.
41:21 - If an arrest would appear in the personnel file and my
41:24 explanation
41:25 or my answer to the board was the arrest wouldn’t necessarily
41:28 appear
41:28 in a personnel file, but the investigative file would contain
41:32 that information and if the employee, the other piece you asked
41:35 about,
41:36 was if the employee resigned or was terminated during the pendency
41:39 of that investigation, would that be in the file?
41:43 The answer to that is yes, and that’s actually the new statutory
41:45 language.
41:46 And it specifically states the resignation or termination of an
41:49 employee
41:49 before an investigation of alleged misconduct by the employee
41:53 that affects the health, safety, and welfare of a student is
41:56 concluded,
41:57 must be clearly indicated in an employee’s personnel file.
42:01 - Thank you.
42:03 Anything else on 3590 personnel file?
42:09 All right.
42:10 Then we will move along to the revisions to policy 5500 student
42:14 conduct.
42:14 Ms. Moore.
42:16 - This proposed revision does encompass the suggested language
42:18 from Neola.
42:19 This revision specifically includes new language from state
42:22 statute 985.12
42:26 regarding civil citations.
42:27 - Questions, comments, or concerns on policy 5500 student
42:32 conduct?
42:33 - We just changed this, right?
42:35 - Yeah.
42:36 - Mm-hmm .
42:39 - We worked with district security to make sure that we were in
42:43 line
42:43 with how law enforcement officers, how they make decisions
42:48 around civil citations.
42:50 The actual statute says we will encourage our law enforcement
42:53 partners
42:54 to offer civil citations when appropriate.
42:57 So that’s basically how we, with the help from our district
43:00 security
43:00 partners, phrase the language in here.
43:02 - All right.
43:05 Hearing nothing else on 5500, we will move on to policy 5517.03,
43:11 dating violence and abuse.
43:13 Ms. Moore or Ms. Landon?
43:16 - Minor changes are presented to coordinate with the addition
43:19 of new policy 2266, non-discrimination on the basis
43:22 of sex and education programs and activities in light of changes
43:26 to federal law under Title IX.
43:28 The policy has been revised to appropriately cross-reference
43:30 policy 2266 and require that reports of dating violence first be
43:34 evaluated by the Title IX coordinator for applicability
43:37 of the Title IX grievance process.
43:40 After screening, any reports deemed not to fall under the scope
43:42 of the Title IX would be addressed through this policy.
43:45 Any reports falling under the scope of Title IX must instead be
43:48 addressed through the grievance process set out in policy 2266.
43:53 The proposed amendments did not arise from an updated Neola
43:56 template.
43:56 Instead, they were initiated by BPS legal counsel
43:58 in consultation with Neola’s legal counsel.
44:03 - Comments, questions, or concerns on 5517.03.
44:07 Ms. McDougall, I think you had questions, but I don’t think
44:09 there were requested changes if I recall.
44:12 - I think legal and I talked about, wasn’t there a checklist
44:17 that we talked about?
44:19 I just wanted to make sure that there wasn’t a time gap between
44:23 going
44:23 back and forth between Title IX and our people who are going to
44:28 investigate it.
44:28 Like, so there’s not a gap and we’re going back and forth.
44:31 And I think we talked about a checklist you said.
44:34 - Yes, we did talk about that.
44:36 And then I put that in an email to the board on December 8th.
44:39 So you have it for reference there.
44:41 But what we discussed is this will be a new process that we’ll
44:45 develop.
44:45 My plan is to borrow from our friends in Orange County who have
44:49 developed
44:49 a very handy one-page checklist so that immediately upon the
44:54 report
44:55 of an incident of dating violence, that would, that the process
45:00 would flow
45:01 directly to the Title IX coordinator at the school, the deputy
45:03 coordinator,
45:04 or the district coordinator, who’s currently myself.
45:06 And very quickly we’d fill out that one-page assessment to just
45:09 kind
45:09 of get it tracked in the right place.
45:11 Does it need to follow 2266 process or does it need
45:15 to follow this 5517.03 process?
45:18 And just as an aside, when I first, the reason I initiated this
45:22 revision
45:23 is I was looking at it and I realized, okay,
45:25 the new Title IX regs cover dating violence.
45:28 And so therefore I felt like this was a, you know, duplicate
45:32 policy
45:32 and I questioned whether it was redundant or confusing
45:35 and could we eliminate it?
45:36 So I had a discussion with our Neola attorney about can we just
45:39 repeal 5517.03
45:42 in light of the new 2266.
45:44 And the answer was no, because there’s a specific Florida
45:47 statute
45:47 that kind of has a different, slightly different definition,
45:50 like a lesser standard definition of dating violence.
45:53 And we have to keep this policy.
45:55 So regrettably, I mean, there’s some confusion there, but I hope
45:58 to very quickly do the training and implementation
46:02 of the identification, that early assessment.
46:06 So we didn’t put a timeframe in the policy, but, and we
46:09 certainly could
46:10 if you feel that’s important.
46:12 I will add it to the administrative procedures
46:14 as we develop that for Title IX in general,
46:17 that those assessments would be turned around.
46:19 I mean, I think within 48 hours or just immediately.
46:23 Great. Thank you.
46:26 So can I follow up?
46:28 Several of these, or at least this one
46:32 and the one that you were referring to,
46:33 doesn’t it have somewhat to do with like where it takes place?
46:37 So this, this could be something that’s completely separate
46:40 from, from what happens on a school campus.
46:43 But it’s, again, one of our staff becoming similar to Ms. Moore.
46:46 We had this conversation about, you know,
46:48 our families making school aware that something’s going on
46:51 outside
46:51 that we need to be aware of because it may affect the students.
46:55 You know, we, you know, we want to know what’s going on in our
46:57 kids’ lives
46:57 when, when they’re struggling.
47:00 But this kind of policy sets in place what we do when we find
47:03 out
47:03 that something’s happening outside of school.
47:04 Whereas with the other policy really has more to do
47:07 with when it’s going on on our campus.
47:09 Is that, am I understanding that correctly?
47:12 Yes and no.
47:15 I think both, the, the main difference in my mind is 55, 1703.
47:20 That’s under state law, 2266 under federal law.
47:23 Both of them are going to have a jurisdictional component.
47:26 So you’d have to look at that as it comes in.
47:28 If you have like a boyfriend, girlfriend type scenario
47:31 and one of them punches the other in a hallway and somebody sees
47:34 it,
47:34 an employee, that actually would fall under Title IX,
47:37 surprisingly,
47:38 even though it wasn’t sexual in nature
47:39 because there was a romantic relationship, it actually is Title
47:43 IX.
47:43 So that’s the importance of the trained Title IX coordinator
47:46 to conduct that assessment.
47:49 But the basic gist of the jurisdictional analysis is if it
47:52 happens on our campus
47:53 or in the scope of our program or activity, even on a weekend
47:56 during a sporting event,
47:57 then it would fall under one or the other of these policies.
48:00 If it happens off campus and it gets reported on campus,
48:04 I still would want to treat it through Title IX with supportive
48:07 measures.
48:08 And the way that the way that you would do a Title IX is even
48:11 if we can’t discipline the activity because it didn’t happen on
48:15 our campus,
48:15 we still would want to reach out and offer counseling and
48:17 supports
48:18 and document all of that.
48:19 And we would address the so-called downstream effects
48:21 if it’s affecting the student’s ability to concentrate in school,
48:24 for example.
48:25 Right.
48:26 Okay. Thank you.
48:30 All right.
48:31 Anything else on 5517.03?
48:35 Then we will move along to 5610.05.
48:41 Ms. Moore?
48:42 This is a new policy for us, participation in extracurricular
48:45 activities.
48:46 This policy is being adopted to clarify the procedures regarding
48:49 participation
48:50 in extracurricular activities and other changes in compliance
48:53 with applicable Florida law.
48:55 This makes consistent how our student-athletes participate in
49:02 events
49:03 when being disciplined or when having other instances.
49:08 It’s no longer school by school.
49:10 This is board policy.
49:11 Comments, questions, or concerns on this one?
49:14 So is the athletic code of conduct is something that some
49:19 schools had
49:20 and some schools didn’t?
49:22 Is that right?
49:22 That’s correct.
49:22 Okay.
49:23 We didn’t have a district-wide.
49:26 We do not.
49:26 Okay, thank you.
49:27 5710.05, extracurricular.
49:28 I’m good to go.
49:32 I’m done.
49:33 So one of the issues that this is a great opportunity and
49:37 everything else,
49:37 there’s two things that happen here.
49:39 In section two of section, subsection two of section B says to
49:46 refer to 2431.01 participation
49:49 by transfer students policy for if the person’s allowed to
49:55 participate, right?
49:57 That gives the – that solely – that policy talks specifically
50:04 to giving the superintendent
50:05 the opportunity to draw those things.
50:07 It doesn’t say what those criteria are.
50:10 It just says that the superintendent can make those things.
50:14 So what I would like to do is, is whatever those are, be able to
50:18 publish for our families
50:19 so that they understand.
50:20 Because one of the issues that we have is that homeschool
50:23 families and families that are outside
50:25 of the scope like to participate in our sports, right?
50:27 When they do that, one of the issues they have is they’re not
50:30 sure what those rules and regulations
50:32 are.
50:32 It’s a barrier that’s existed that’s gotten better, but in
50:35 recent years, it might come
50:36 up again.
50:37 So the one thing there that I would mention is, is Dr. Mullins,
50:39 if there’s a way for us
50:41 to publish part of that so that they understand it or a way –
50:45 because when they’re looking
50:46 inside the policy, they’re not going to see it, right?
50:48 Is that something we can work on in the future?
50:49 It’s not something we need to do now.
50:51 Yes.
50:52 Yeah, we’ll take care of that.
50:53 Okay.
50:54 And then the other thing is, is that where I really was like, “Hey,
50:57 wait a minute, we
50:58 might be doing something here.”
51:01 Students prohibited from participating in all or part of extracurricular
51:05 activities are not
51:06 entitled to further notice, hearing, or appeal rights.
51:10 So if you have a student that’s like, “Hey, why am I not able to?”
51:13 Is there a trigger or some sort of an email as to why they would
51:17 be?
51:18 Because I know that the ultimate – so if a student is
51:21 prohibited from participating,
51:23 there’s no way, according to this policy, that they can then
51:27 approach somebody with it,
51:29 right?
51:30 I understand that, but is there a way that – is there a trigger
51:34 for us to find out and
51:35 to say, “Hey, maybe that’s not fair?”
51:38 Because sometimes I’ve been out in the sporting world, coaches,
51:41 somebody else may skew something
51:42 because they don’t want the kid out there and it’s not fair,
51:44 quite frankly.
51:45 Well, I think what I’m reading this, Mr. Sisson, is that this is
51:48 because of a discipline issue,
51:50 but they broke the discipline code of conduct, and I think there
51:54 is an appeal if there’s – well,
51:57 there is because we see them all the time.
52:00 We see requests for it all the time.
52:03 I’m not asking for change in it.
52:06 I’m just asking to work with you, Dr. Mullins, on how that works
52:10 for the family so that they would know.
52:11 That’s all.
52:12 I think, interestingly, what we haven’t put out there is Dr. Ramjit
52:17 has been working on a
52:19 athletic director handbook.
52:21 Beautiful.
52:22 And within the handbook, it’s enshrining all of these things.
52:24 That’s it, yeah.
52:25 What I’m hearing you say is you’d like some procedures around
52:27 this.
52:28 Hey, guess what?
52:29 This is the rule you broke, and now this is one of the other
52:32 consequences to it.
52:33 We can add that within the handbook or as an administrative
52:36 procedure, but that is what he has been working on.
52:39 Yeah, and that’s perfect, and having that out, kind of like the
52:42 FHSAA rule book, something like that,
52:44 and then having that available for families to be able to also
52:47 follow keeps the accountability level
52:49 and transparency at a good level, that’s all.
52:51 Yeah.
52:52 That’s just something I saw.
52:53 So thank you.
52:54 Perfect.
52:55 Oh, wait, hang on.
53:03 I was just trying to look up this policy that Mr. Susan was
53:08 talking about in B-2, and I’m not finding a 2431.01.
53:13 I found it.
53:15 Go to.
53:16 No, that’s 3.0.01.
53:21 I’m wondering if it needs to be under just 2431 interscholastic.
53:27 I wonder if that was a Neola.
53:29 Let’s make sure we got the right policy there.
53:37 I will double check that, yeah.
53:38 I’ll review that.
53:39 I hesitated to say I know what we do is follow the FHSAA
53:42 language on transfer student participation
53:44 without having it all right there in front of me, but we’ll
53:46 double check it.
53:47 We’ll tighten it up, and we’ll get it right, yeah.
53:49 I mean, it may be in 2431, but we just want to make sure that we’ve
53:51 got that right policy.
53:52 If we need a 2431.01, then there’s the next step.
53:55 And the other thing is that the reason for it is not all schools
53:59 follow or play in the FHSAA rules, so, you know.
54:02 All right.
54:03 Thank you.
54:03 Okay.
54:03 Yep.
54:04 All right.
54:04 Hearing nothing else on that one, we’re ready for the Executive
54:11 Summary of Board Policy 5780, Student Rights and Parents Rights.
54:14 Russ Bruhn, Chief Strategic Communication Officer, will be
54:19 presenting.
54:21 This policy is being revised to bring it up to date with NEOLA
54:24 version and to be in compliance with Florida law.
54:27 These proposed revisions do encompass the suggested language
54:32 from NEOLA.
54:33 How did this fall on your plate, Mr. Bruhn?
54:36 I was wondering if that was going to be asked.
54:39 I’ve asked that also.
54:44 I think there’s a lot of, inside the policy, there are student
54:47 records, which falls under GCR.
54:50 And there’s also different divisions at the district that are
54:54 impacted.
54:55 And so, they played their role in getting this policy kind of
54:59 written.
55:00 And so, I’m just kind of wrangling it.
55:03 All righty.
55:04 Well, thank you for wrangling.
55:06 All right, comments, questions, or concerns on policy 5780,
55:11 Student Rights and Parents Rights.
55:13 Yes, ma’am.
55:14 Ms. Campbell.
55:15 And actually, this might be a Chris Moore question, so I’ll let
55:19 you punt if you need to.
55:20 I had brought up E1 and E2 when it talks about health issues.
55:28 The way that’s worded, I’m just reading it plain.
55:31 It sounds like the parents are exempt from health exams and the
55:35 parents are exempt from immunizations, not the students.
55:39 And I don’t know that we are.
55:45 Yeah, I don’t have it in front of me.
55:46 I’m sorry.
55:46 It’s – yeah.
55:47 E1 says, “The parent of any student shall be exempt from the
55:52 requirement of a health examination.”
55:55 And then blah, blah, blah.
55:56 And then number two for immunization says, “The parent of any
55:59 student shall be exempt from the school immunization
56:01 requirements.”
56:02 Got it.
56:04 We will make sure the language reads, “The parent of any student
56:08 shall be able to exempt their child from the requirement.”
56:11 We’ll fix that language.
56:13 There we go.
56:13 Okay, thank you.
56:14 E1 and 2.
56:15 Just – yeah, those are the only two that I saw, because
56:17 everything else was pretty clear.
56:19 It was about the student.
56:20 It was just E1 and 2.
56:21 Thank you.
56:23 And then – in J – I’ve got to get there.
56:34 This is a long one.
56:37 In J, under the non-discrimination, I noticed that NEOLA had
56:41 suggested in several of these other policies to take out –
56:45 to change it from transgender status to just gender status.
56:48 I’m not sure why, but I thought if we’re going to make all those
56:51 changes to the other policies that we talked about at the
56:52 beginning,
56:53 maybe we’ll just be consistent and do it the same here.
56:58 That was – I know it was in a 5517, but I think I saw it in a
57:03 couple of different places.
57:04 And again, I didn’t – it was an explanation, but it might as
57:08 well make them look all the same.
57:11 We’ll look at that.
57:12 Okay.
57:13 And then S5, we actually don’t have it officially adopted
57:23 tonight, because I think we’re voting on it tonight.
57:26 But this one has to do with parent access to instructional
57:29 materials.
57:30 And in the parentheses, it says C Policy 2520, Selection and Adoption
57:34 of Instructional Materials.
57:35 But if I remember our policies correctly, the one that we’ll be
57:37 voting on tonight, the revision of 2521 – or was that a new one?
57:41 It actually – they moved all the – or some of the appeal
57:47 processes to that one.
57:50 So I think we might want to consider, especially after we vote
57:54 on it, either just adding 2521 so people will know where to look.
57:59 Because one of them had to do with how we go through when we do
58:02 official textbook adoption.
58:04 And then the other one has that in there and also has the
58:09 process for not official textbooks, but, you know, other
58:14 instructional materials.
58:15 So once we get it voted on and it’s officially one of our
58:19 policies, assuming everything passes tonight, then we want to
58:23 include 2521 in that item.
58:24 All right.
58:25 I’ll update it after tonight.
58:26 Thank you.
58:27 Okay.
58:28 Thank you.
58:29 That’s all I have.
58:30 Thank you, Ms. Campbell.
58:30 Anything else on Policy 5780?
58:39 All right.
58:41 Then that is going to take us to Policy 8330, Student Records.
58:46 Ms. Moore.
58:47 This policy is being revised for technical changes only.
58:50 The proposed revisions encompass suggested language from NEOLA.
58:54 The one thing that this policy reinforces is that even if a
59:00 child is being investigated by law enforcement or is being
59:06 reviewed for DCF, they don’t lose their student record privacy
59:11 rights.
59:11 And that is stated very, very specifically in the new language.
59:16 Comments or questions on this one?
59:20 Okay.
59:25 Ms. Campbell, we had conversation previously about modifying our
59:33 language around what is available and –
59:35 Directorate information.
59:36 – and directory information.
59:37 Did that –
59:38 We actually just revised this policy in May.
59:41 Yeah.
59:42 And the one –
59:43 There’s several that I was like, we just did that one.
59:45 Yeah, yeah.
59:46 Like something like we really literally just voted on it at the
59:48 last board meeting.
59:48 Yep.
59:49 That, if you look down in the director information section,
59:52 which I’m looking at the red line copy.
59:54 It’s – or it’s in – from the packets in page 47.
59:57 We did remove – I believe it was place of birth.
1:00:01 Mm-hmm.
1:00:02 And an email – there was another one.
1:00:05 I think it was email address.
1:00:06 Yeah.
1:00:08 So, what is left are really things that we need to put out in
1:00:12 one way or another, whether it’s because of –
1:00:14 Your book.
1:00:15 Whatever.
1:00:16 – awards programs or recognitions and things like that,
1:00:21 athletics.
1:00:21 So, that was the one big one that we did.
1:00:24 We did remove that.
1:00:25 And we did have that conversation.
1:00:26 So, yes.
1:00:27 Thank you for remembering.
1:00:28 Okay.
1:00:29 Just wanted to make sure we – we’re still covered with your
1:00:32 concerns.
1:00:32 Okay.
1:00:33 I think one of the important things for us to recognize about
1:00:35 this policy is when DCF
1:00:36 comes to do an investigation, we want to support them.
1:00:38 I mean, they’re doing critical, important safety work.
1:00:41 But we still are – we still have to follow FERPA.
1:00:44 And one of the things that we have trained our staff to do is
1:00:49 they can’t respond to a give
1:00:50 me – here, fill out this piece of paper for me or give me these
1:00:54 records.
1:00:54 But we can respond with information that’s personally known to
1:00:58 us.
1:00:58 So, if a DCF worker has questions of a counselor, a social
1:01:02 worker, an assistant principal, a principal,
1:01:04 and are asking questions about what they personally know about
1:01:08 the student and the student’s life
1:01:08 situation, we can answer.
1:01:10 We just can’t respond by either giving records or looking
1:01:14 information up on the records to respond.
1:01:16 And so, we have a great relationship with DCF.
1:01:20 They understand what our limitations are.
1:01:22 And our folks have been trained to understand what they’re
1:01:25 allowed to give and how they’re allowed
1:01:26 to aid and support an investigation.
1:01:30 So, Ms. Moore, just for clarification on that.
1:01:32 Does that mean that if they come to the – say, somehow DCF gets
1:01:37 involved with the minor,
1:01:38 and they come to the school and they need a home address?
1:01:40 Yes.
1:01:41 We cannot give it to them?
1:01:42 We can. That’s directory information.
1:01:44 Okay. So, as long as it’s included in that directory information,
1:01:47 we can share any of that.
1:01:48 We just couldn’t go into things outside of that scope.
1:01:51 Correct.
1:01:52 Okay.
1:01:53 Oftentimes, they want to know whether they have an IEP or a 504
1:01:57 and their progress in classes.
1:01:58 And that’s information we cannot give.
1:02:00 And so, I feel like we’ve gotten better.
1:02:06 It used to be that DCF workers would send us a notification with
1:02:11 a bunch of questions, and they would ship it off to us.
1:02:13 And our people would call us and say, I don’t know what to do.
1:02:16 And our answer is, do nothing.
1:02:18 Mm-hmm.
1:02:19 Reach out and say, I’ll be happy to talk to you with information
1:02:22 that’s personally known to me, or supply them only with the
1:02:24 directory information that you’re allowed to supply them with.
1:02:26 And then we always send them the list of what directory
1:02:29 information is.
1:02:30 Right.
1:02:31 So, how does that interact with our threat assessment teams?
1:02:36 Because some of that information does need to be shared within
1:02:39 that venue, correct?
1:02:40 That is correct.
1:02:41 The threat assessment legal language is very specific.
1:02:45 If there’s a serious substantive threat, that means all agencies
1:02:49 can communicate with one another about what that threat is.
1:02:52 So, when we meet as a team, and we are talking to DCF and law
1:02:56 enforcement, we have the legal standing.
1:02:58 The threat assessment process has already taken place.
1:03:01 We have the legal standing to share that information because it’s
1:03:05 of safety and health concerns.
1:03:06 Okay.
1:03:07 Thank you for that clarification.
1:03:09 All right.
1:03:11 That is going to move us to Mr. Novelli, Policy 8405, School
1:03:19 Safety and Security Threat Assessment Team.
1:03:21 Mr. Novelli, Policy 8405.
1:09:16 Mr. Novelli, Policy 9405.
1:09:17 Mr. Novelli, Policy 8405.
1:09:20 Mr. Novelli, Policy 9405.