Chatfield School Board Amends Policy to Include Board Members in Library Objection Process

The Chatfield School District Board of Education meeting, held on March 12, 2025, addressed several topics including policy amendments, fiscal planning, and student achievements. The most notable decision involved the proposed amendment to Policy 660, which now includes school board members in the process of challenging library materials, a change driven by the belief that board members should have the authority to object to materials even if they do not have children enrolled in the district.

35:11The discussion on Policy 660 was a part of the meeting, with debate over the amendment’s wording. Previously, only faculty, parents, and guardians were explicitly mentioned as stakeholders eligible to object to library materials. The proposed amendment aimed to rectify what some believed was an oversight in excluding school board members. This sentiment was echoed by others who stressed the necessity of board members having a say in library material decisions to fulfill their oversight responsibilities effectively.

The conversation highlighted the potential for misinterpretation in the policy’s language, which could technically exclude board members from the objection process. A suggestion was made that the board could expedite the amendment by bypassing the typical first and second reading process, although some expressed reservations about this approach. The board ultimately decided to include the amendment for further discussion at the next meeting, recognizing the need for careful consideration and reflection.

17:00Fiscal matters also featured prominently in the meeting, particularly the presentation of the fiscal year 2026 preliminary budget reductions. Superintendent Edward J. Harris outlined a plan to address financial challenges stemming from declining enrollment. The proposed reductions amount to over $200,000, mainly achieved through non-replacements of staff. Harris expressed confidence in the district’s budget management strategy, which involves gradual reductions and cautious assumptions about state revenue and labor contract settlements. The board discussed the timeline for finalizing the budget, with a preliminary version set for approval in June and further adjustments anticipated in December.

Another fiscal topic was the renewal of the fiscal year 2026 food service contract. The board welcomed representatives from the service provider, Tarr, including the new food service director, Ray, whose background in coaching was noted as a positive asset. Management fees for the contract will increase slightly from $0.45 to $0.465 per meal, a change deemed reasonable given past transitions in department leadership. Harris emphasized the importance of quality in food services and expressed optimism about the program’s future.

The meeting also covered the annual Achievement and Integration Fiscal Year ’26 budget application, essential for accessing funds aimed at reducing achievement gaps among learners. The district expects to generate approximately $35,000 annually from these funds, with an additional $9,000 in revenues now available. These funds support salaries and professional development related to trauma-informed instruction. The application was approved unanimously.

0:00Student achievements were recognized, notably Jaylen LaPlante’s receipt of the Athena award for her excellence in track and volleyball. The wrestling team was lauded for their strong performance at the state meet, and the knowledgeable team secured a place in the state competition with their second-place finish at the section meet.

The meeting briefly touched on infrastructure issues, specifically drainage problems caused by severe weather. An application for emergency grant funding through FEMA was noted, with hopes that the grant would cover significant repair costs. The board discussed the importance of collaborating with the city to address these issues effectively.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

Trending meetings
across the country: