An administrative regulation (AR) tied to policy 321 prompted extended debate at the policy committee, where multiple board members said its language risked subjective enforcement and could chill classroom discussion.

Doctor Russell described the AR as guidance intended to help staff and principals enforce policy language. Mr. Moran recommended separating volunteers and visitors from policy 321 because the 300s policies address employees; he and others suggested referencing existing visitor (907) and volunteer (916) policies instead.

Committee members questioned whether the AR would apply to polling locations, to private renters, or to building monitors, and asked how building principals would determine whether a teacher’s classroom presentation constituted undue political influence. “It just seems vague and potentially inflammatory language in the AR,” one member said, while others asked for concrete ground rules such as prohibiting teachers from telling students how to vote.

Administration agreed to take the AR back to principals and other stakeholders, to define key terms and add enforceable ground rules where appropriate, and to return a revised draft in January for further committee review.

Next steps: Administration will consult principals and relevant stakeholders, draft clearer definitions for terms like “indoctrination” and “coercion,” and present a revised AR 3/21 to the policy committee in January.