New Challenge Policy Logic

I wrote the following to explain my proposal to my colleagues, I thought I'd share it with the rest of you:

I did not attempt to recreate the policy from the ground up. I worked very hard to propose simple changes that address only the problems that are now identified using procedures already in place in other districts. I did this for several reasons. I did it to preserve the committee's time in future meetings for attention to other matters. I did it out of respect for precedent, minimizing the effort to rewrite the existing regulation and the possibility of unforseen consequences. I did it to minimize the need for counsel's guidance, and ultimately I did it to reduce the likelihood of future controversies.

Specifically, the changes I propose intend the following:

• Board review prior to removal of material ensures that all sides are heard. Members of the community are more likely to respect a decision after being given a chance for meaningful input, even if the decision goes against that input.
• Board review prior to removal of material ensures that all policies have been followed.
• Board review prior to removal of material provides the Board the opportunity to expand the impact of a challenge District-wide.
• Prohibiting the inherently controversial decision of a principal or Superintendent to override the conclusions of a committee that s/he personally appointed.
• Clarifying the status of a material after removal, as current policy allows for neither enforcement of a successful challenge in future years nor any appeal for reinstatement. (This is the one proposal that is not implemented in other Districts).