Potomac amends Return to School plan

POTOMAC – At their special meeting Sept. 20 Potomac School board tabled the decision to amend their Return to School Policy and 1900 Series. They picked up the discussion and unanimously approved the amendments as well as approved COVID pay for certified and classified staff at their Sept. 27 special meeting.

Board Trustee Wes Mitchell proposed the idea to review the entire Return to School policy and 1900 series following the school’s shift to remote learning Sept. 20.

“Seeing the effect and knowing how this is affecting everyone and how the community is looking at it, I feel it is worth sitting down and reviewing,” Mitchell told the board at the Sept. 20 emergency meeting.

The board tabled the decision to amend the policies until Sept. 27. This allowed time to review the policies, do more research and talk to the teachers and community.

At the Sept. 27 meeting, Board Chair Dr. Courtney Hathaway addressed the public comments made at the Sept. 20 meeting that said parents of children that are at a high risk for medical complications should keep them home so the healthy kids can go to school.

“Every child in this community has a right to a public education and we will continue to fight to that,” Hathaway said. “It is not only ludicrous but it against the law, Montana State Law, constitutional federal law and the American’s with Disabilities Act that all say that this school will continue to provide education for every child in this community. We will continue to do that.”

In response to a letter from a parent with special needs children, Rouse said it is unreasonable to expect that a child can be transported through communal spaces, including the Community Center, without being exposed to the air around them. There may be children that are unmasked in that area. He encouraged parents to approach him to work out the best options.

“We are limited on certain things. As long as we feel like we are doing the best that we can that is what we can do,” Hathaway said. “That is going to look different and feel different to different people. Different people are going to think we should be doing more and other people are going to think we should be doing less but we have to come to some sort of middle ground where we feel like we are doing the best, which is hard.”

Reporting on her research for the following week, Hathaway addressed the school’s authority to ask students and staff to quarantine. The Montana School Board Association told the board that the District does not have the authority to quarantine. That authority is reserved for the executive branch through the state and county health departments. However, the Districts can identify circumstances when a student is required to obtain remote education or when an employee must work from home. This requires that the District makes off-site instruction an option for students identified as a close contact for exposure to COVID-19.

Hathaway said she was advised by the school’s legal counsel to follow the direction of the Missoula City-County Health Department.

When she asked if the new state laws removed the ability for health departments to ask individuals to quarantine, she was told no. What the new laws did was remove the ability for the health departments to change the quarantine requirements based on vaccination status.

Mitchell said the length of quarantine is the issue with him and other parents. Two weeks of quarantine for asymptomatic close contacts children is too long.

Rouse explained the 14 days is specified in the return to school plan and is the window for going into online instruction to avoid transitioning from in-person to online every few days. Only the Health Department has the authority to set the length of time an individual must quarantine.

Hathaway and Rouse agreed that the only authority the board has is to decide if and when the school goes into online instruction and for how long.

The most current version of the Return to School Plan stated if a third of the students are out or more than two certified teachers are gone, they shift to remote instruction and stay there for 14 days.

Hathaway said she reached out to teachers to get their feedback. The general consensus was the triggers to shift to remote learning still made sense. They also felt shifting for a designated period of time was helpful so they can set the curriculum and when students returned hopefully they will be healthy.

The board discussed what happened when the school shifted to remote learning Sept. 20. Because there was a positive case identified in every cohort group, Rouse made the decision that all classes would go remote. Board members said they did not receive a call from the Health Department informing them that their child was a close contact until six days later.

Mitchell pressed the contact tracer for an explanation. He was told that they have six tracers, an average of 100 cases a day with six close contacts each. They are so far behind.

“We have to rely on each other,” Mitchell told the board. “If you have a close contact or a positive case please share that information. We have to share that information because the Health Department cannot get to us quick enough. You may be able to stop possible future infection of people who have not been contacted by the Health Department. We have to help our own community by doing this.”

Rouse added that the Health Department does not share who is positive. Mitchell felt it was important that when a child is absent, parents share symptoms and testing information with the school to facilitate communication.

Trustee Kyle Kelley pointed out that they didn’t close the school Sept. 20, they shifted to remote learning. The school had the ability to get every student the technology and resources they needed to successfully learn from home. They were still learning and the teachers are still teaching.

“I think we all agree that this is the best place for them to be learning and none of us want them to be wearing masks while they are here. None of us want them to be going in and out of online instruction. It is just we as a board are, unfortunately, beholden to state law, county regulations and we have to figure out how to massage that for what is best for our small community,” Hathaway said. “Thank you Kyle, I think that speaks to the fact that we are working at this.”

Mitchell steered the conversation back to the 14 days in remote learning. He, along with parents he spoke with, wants students back to school for socialization and hands-on learning with teachers.

After further discussion, the board agreed to change the Return to School Plan, making it possible for a cohort to return to face-to-face instruction the first Monday after seven days depending on a reassessment of the two trigger points – if more than 33% of the student body is out or more than two certified teachers.

They added two bullet points to the Plan further outlining triggers for the cohort groups:

• Once 50% of an isolated cohort can return to in-person learning, they will return under hybrid model.

• The cohort group will engage in online instruction when 50% of that cohort has been identified as a close contact or positive for COVID.

The also Board also discussed the mix cohort activities. They agreed that mixing cohorts is a known risk when parents allow their children to participate in other activities including sports and the Friday program.

The board made no changes to the temperature checks or the 100.4-degree temperature or higher threshold for a child to be sent home. That is the one objective measure that they can do at the school to determine sickness. However Hathaway said COVID shows itself in a lot of different ways and a fever is not always a symptom. Parents are asked to complete the daily health assessment before sending their child to school.

“I think that is where we are asking the parents again to just take it on themselves, if your kid seems sick or out of sorts, we are putting that on the parents to keep them home even if they don’t have a fever,” Hathaway said.

Trustee Jayme Fairfield pointed out that the Return to School plan stated surfaces need to be sanitized as needed including before and after school. Since science does not support that COVID is transmitted via surfaces, the board agreed to change the Plan requiring surfaces to be sanitized once daily to save on time and cleaning supplies.

No other changes were made to the Return to School plan and only minor text edits were made to the 1900 Series.

In other business, the board unanimously approved the certified and classified staff COVID Leave agreements for the 2021-2022 school year. The only change made to the agreements from 2020-2021 was giving full pay, instead of the two-thirds pay, to those that need to remain home to care for a family member with COVID. The policy still allows the District to request medical documentation if they feel it is being abused.

The next board meeting is scheduled for Oct. 11 at 7 p.m.