June 9, 2025 Summary

Key Takeaways: There was discussion on the transfer policy, following a new state law that prohibits school districts from charging families transfer tuition. Greiner outlined two options: continuing with TSC-designated transfers without extra funding or adopting an open enrollment model that would likely increase the number of transfer students while providing greater local control. Board members emphasized the importance of public input and voiced concerns about financial impacts, class sizes, and long-term enrollment trends. The board also heard public input on a policy about library material removal, with suggestions to include parents and students in the review process. The district’s five-year strategic plan is set for approval in August.

Agenda with links to board documents

Topic Timestamps: YouTube Recording

10:48 – Honor WLCSC Retirees
20:33 – Community member comments on policy for library materials removal
27:30 – WLCSC Strategic Planning 2025-2030
52:42 – WLJSHS English Department Novel Adoption
58:45 – Discussed Policy A125 – Nepotism, Conflict of Interest, Gifts and Use of Corporation Resources
1:14:54 – Approved Policy C475 – School Sponsored Publications and Productions
1:16:47 – Approved Policy H200 – Relations with Special Interest Groups
1:17:36 – Discussed Policy H250 – School Library Material Removal Request Procedure
1:50:23 – First Reading of Policy A200 – Firearms, Weapons, and Destructive Devices, Policy A225 – Reporting of Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect, Policy A285 – No Distracted Driving, Policy B100 – Board Authority and Philosophy, Policy B125 – Duties of the School Board
1:55:52 – Discussion of transfer policy & new state law restricting charging extra referendum fees to transfer families
2:30:59 – Superintendent Report
2:33:31 – CFO Report
2:34:24 – Board Reports

The following is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions.

10:48 – The regular meeting opened with Yin participating virtually and Purpura absent. Board members read statements recognizing WLCSC retirees; none of the honorees were present.

Jana Leasure – JSHS business teacher; a 1983 graduate of West Lafayette High School, retired after 12 years of service to WLCSC, where she worked as a secretary, completed her MBA, and later returned to teach business. She inspired students through her leadership with Girls Who Code, Future Business Leaders of America, and the 3E Grant, emphasizing real-world skills and career readiness.
Kathy Wolf – WLES 3rd grade teacher; retired after more than 30 years with WLCSC, she was known for her vibrant, student-centered classroom and hands-on, real-world learning projects that empowered students to take ownership of their education. Beyond the classroom, she led impactful service initiatives like Cumberland Cares, teaching students compassion and community-mindedness through projects that supported causes from local families to disaster relief.
Beth Scherrer – JSHS special education teacher; retired after 13 years at WLJSHS and a total of 30 years in special education, where she served as department chair and sponsored student clubs. Known for her dedication and kindness, Beth made a lasting impact on colleagues and students alike, inspiring even the next generation of special educators.

20:33 – Communication from the Audience (those who had signed up before the meeting began)

Karl Janich, community member, proposed some revisions to Policy H250 School Library Material Removal. He recommended adding student and parent representation on review committees, publicly posting the committee’s rationale, clearly defining “extenuating circumstances” for repeat challenges, and setting fair filing limits to manage workload while preserving community access. He emphasized that these measures would increase transparency, promote collaboration, and help ensure a consistent, legally sound process.

24:22 – Consent Agenda:

Austin noted that the August school board meeting was rescheduled to the first Monday of the month to ensure new hires could be approved before the school year begins. Greiner clarified that this month’s accounts payable vote included a request to pre-approve payment for tennis court work completed in June.

Voted 6 out of 6

27:30 – WLCSC Strategic Planning 2025-2030 with details and summary: Consultant Adam Jones, Skybound Education, shared that the strategic plan is nearly complete following extensive input, including nearly 2,000 survey responses and meetings held at every school with staff, families, and community members. The final version will incorporate board feedback before being brought for a vote in August. Jones emphasized that the plan reflects broad community perspectives and is intended to be a living document, adaptable over time. Leadership roles listed for each goal were developed through collaboration with the district team and are meant to guide, not limit, who participates in the work.

Mumford recommended rephrasing the term “expand capacity” to make it clear that this is about expanding services rather than classrooms, adding a progress measure to address Initiative 3.2 on academic rigor, and revising the measures in Goals 4 and 5 to make them more aspirational rather than simply continuing the current practice. Yin suggested changing the slogan “Excellent Education for All” to “Excellent Education for Everyone,” noting it felt more personal and memorable. She also inquired about how building committees would be formed and how stakeholders would be included in each initiative. Jones said he would work with Greiner to revise the strategic plan with recommended suggestions and noted that teacher, parent, and student involvement is assumed across all initiatives, adding that this could be clarified in a letter sent out from Greiner. The process used to create this strategic plan enabled effective collaboration among the board, administration, and community with shared input and transparent communication ahead of the vote. I believe this strategic plan will lead to growth and improvement in our schools.

52:42 – WLJSHS English Department Novel Adoption: Roth presented the English department’s recommendation to adopt and purchase new novels for select junior and senior high school English Language Art classes: In the Time of Butterflies, American Born Chinese, and Be Ready When the Luck Happens: A Memoir. Roth explained that the titles were selected by teachers following input from a family survey and review feedback from randomly selected parent volunteers.

Yin expressed appreciation for the more transparent novel adoption process, particularly the inclusion of parent feedback. She recommended that, in future adoptions, links to book titles be provided to help families more easily access information during limited review periods. Yin also praised the department’s openness to community-recommended titles and encouraged continued inclusion of diverse cultural perspectives in the curriculum to enhance students’ global awareness.

Voted 6 out of 6

55:32 – Policy Revisions: The policy committee presented several proposed policies, either for a vote or for discussion. The drafts (links below) use black text to indicate the first draft from the school district’s attorney, blue for suggestions from individual board members that the policy committee does not recommend, green for suggestions that the policy committee discussed and recommends, and red strikethroughs for suggested deletions. I am happy that the policy committee has started working on these again. The last time they brought a proposed policy to the board for a vote was in November 2024. I am also happy that many of the changes I recommended were subsequently also recommended by the policy committee.

58:45 – Policy A125 – Nepotism, Conflict of Interest, Gifts and Use of Corporation Resources (as proposed by legal counsel), Disclosure Statement, Revisions: Mumford asked why the proposed revision to paragraph 6 requires only school board members to annually disclose potential conflicts of interest, rather than also requiring administrators and employees to follow the same procedure. She noted that this is common in other districts. Cronk responded that in her experience, both approaches exist and she doesn’t see a clear advantage to one over the other. Greiner added that since board members are the ones voting on financial matters, annual disclosures are more relevant to board governance than to employees. I disagree, I think if the prior group of school administrators had submitted annual disclosures of their conflicts of interest it would have been very beneficial for our school district. A conflict of interest policy is required by state law, so it is surprising that disclosing potential conflicts of interest has not been required of our administrators or board members in the past.

Lyle raised concerns about the policy’s internal consistency and wording that could be interpreted to prohibit employees from holding any outside financial interests. Witt said the language came from legal counsel and expressed confidence in their expertise. Austin shared how she interpreted the wording, prompting Lyle to respond that policies shouldn’t rely on personal interpretation but should be clear. Mumford and Lyle requested the policy be sent back to legal counsel for further review. I appreciate Lyle’s careful reading and willingness to raise concerns.

1:14:54 – Policy C475 – School Sponsored Publications and Productions: There were no revisions or discussion.

Voted 6 out of 6

1:16:47 – Policy H200 – Relations with Special Interest Groups: There were no revisions or discussion.

Voted 6 out of 6

1:17:36 – Revised Policy H250 School Library Material Removal: Witt highlighted three revisions to the district’s policy on reviewing school library materials. First, a live hyperlink to the removal request form was added to improve accessibility for families and community members. Second, paragraph six was revised to clarify that any decision to remove material would apply only to the specific school where the concern originated—not the entire district. Witt emphasized that what’s appropriate can vary by age group. Third, paragraphs nine and ten were revised to streamline the appeals process, allowing written appeals to be submitted within 10 school days and considered by the school board during a public meeting. This ensures that the discussion takes place in a public setting and that the committee’s rationale is shared transparently in the board packet ahead of the vote.

Witt explained that the committee will be appointed by the superintendent, who has flexibility in selecting additional members. The policy requires the committee to include a district-level administrator, a school librarian, a teacher, a building-level administrator, and a school employee residing within the Corporation’s geographic boundaries (if not already represented). She noted that the inclusion of parents or students should be at the superintendent’s discretion. She also expressed concerns about involving students, stating that the emotionally sensitive nature of the issue could place them in an uncomfortable position. Regarding “extenuating circumstances,” Witt clarified that this would refer to a meaningful change in what is known to be accurate or a significant shift in community context or school leadership. She expressed opposition to adding any further restrictions beyond what the policy already outlines.

Mumford voiced support for having parent representation on every review committee and including a student representative for high school-level reviews. She highlighted the valuable perspectives that students bring and underscored the need for parent involvement. She also advocated for publicly sharing the committee’s rationale for each decision.

Lyle expressed concern about adding a student and parent to the committee, noting the challenge of selecting representatives and the pressure such a role might place on a student. Wang said he supports having parents serve on the committee rather than limiting it to school personnel and recommended including a junior or senior student for high school-level reviews. Yin agreed that a parent should be part of the committee and asked how a split vote would be handled. She also suggested that, beyond approving or removing a book, an alternative option could be requiring parent permission for student access. I appreciated the input shared by the community member at the beginning of the meeting and submitted my recommended revisions to the policy committee.

Witt made a motion to approve the green text version of paragraph 6 in place of the blue text. She also moved to approve paragraphs 9 and 10 as presented.

Voted 6 out of 6

Witt confirmed that the policy would not move forward for a vote and would be sent to legal counsel for guidance on including parents and students on the committee.

1:50:23 – Policy A200 – Firearms, Weapons, and Destructive Devices, Policy A225 – Reporting of Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect, Policy A285 – No Distracted Driving, Policy B100 – Board Authority and Philosophy, Policy B125 – Duties of the School Board: Witt said that these policies were each being presented for a first reading. Witt noted that the volume of policy revisions requires significant work. Mumford recommended using school board work sessions for any policies needing discussion. The school district’s law firm sent dozens of updated policies for the policy committee to review in early 2024, and the majority have still not been looked at. All but one of these proposed policies already had a first reading back in February or March of 2024. The policy committee stopped working and they were never brought to the board for a vote. In fact, it had been 7 months since the board was last asked to vote on a proposed policy.

1:55:52 – Transfer Policy Discussion (Policy wording for open district or Policy wording for closed district): Austin explained that a recent change in Indiana law affects WLCSC’s current transfer arrangement with Tippecanoe School Corporation (TSC). Note that our existing transfer student practice is based on a verbal agreement between the two superintendents rather than a formal written policy. Last year, we had about 160 transfer students from TSC. The state provided education funding to TSC for those students. Our per-student cost of education (which includes some operational costs and education spending from the Referendum fund) is higher than in TSC, so TSC sent a transfer tuition bill to each transfer student family and then paid our district our per-student cost of education for each transfer student. This new law now prohibits school districts from charging families transfer tuition. Note that children of our teachers who live out of district can attend our schools and are not considered transfer students and have never been charged transfer tuition.

Greiner said that he recommends the district select one of two options: continue the current arrangement by accepting transfer students who are designated by TSC, though without the additional funding previously collected from families to cover referendum costs, or adopt a formal open enrollment policy that would allow students from any district to apply, with West Lafayette managing its own admissions, potentially through a lottery system. He emphasized that both options would require close management of enrollment to maintain class size targets, but only the open enrollment model would give our school district direct control over admission decisions. The school board has never passed a transfer student policy which means that in our district the superintendent has had complete control over the transfer student process. I previously wrote about misuse of transfer student tuition in our district.

Lyle asked whether ADM funds would still follow students under the new rules, and Greiner confirmed that if West Lafayette adopted open enrollment, the state funding would come directly to the district rather than through the district where the student lives. Witt asked if the change would create more administrative burden, and Greiner said it would actually simplify operations, since WLCSC would no longer need to rely on TSC’s decisions.

Mumford recommended holding a town hall to present the enrollment and financial implications of each policy option and to gather public feedback before making a decision. She cautioned against admitting additional transfer students before a clear policy is in place, as this could affect class sizes. Yin expressed concern about declining enrollment within the district, citing an increase in homes for sale and uncertainty related to the SK hynix development. She warned that if families begin moving out but keep students enrolled through open enrollment, it could weaken the tax base and negatively impact the next referendum.

Witt talked about a third option, closing the district to transfer students, and asked if this would result in staff reductions. Greiner confirmed that having no transfer students would lead to cuts not only in teaching staff but also among support personnel and administrators. He emphasized that enrollment numbers directly affect the district’s ability to maintain a wide range of programming, particularly at the high school level, including Advanced Placement courses, arts, and leveled math. Greiner clarified that he is not recommending having no transfer students. He explained that having transfer students contributes financially to the district, and that he either wants to either keep the agreement with TSC which leaves decisions largely to that district, or open our district to students from other districts as well.

Witt asked whether the loss of transfer tuition dollars would take effect in the 2025–2026 school year. Greiner confirmed that starting this year, the district will no longer be able to collect transfer tuition, resulting in a projected revenue loss of over $500,000. Witt noted that transfer students for the upcoming school year are already enrolled and that a new transfer policy would apply to future years.

Austin asked whether a lottery would be required every year for transfer students. Greiner explained that once a student is accepted, they do not need to re-enter a lottery annually. He added that continued enrollment for transfer students is currently based only on attendance and disciplinary criteria. He also stated his intent to grandfather in currently accepted students if the policy changes. I agree that all our current transfer students should be grandfathered in. This suggests a fourth option: not accepting any new transfer student requests for a few years to see if this results in a decline in enrollment and/or an increase in families with school-aged children moving into our district.

Yin suggested reviving the district’s international student program where we are allowed to charge tuition for short-term placements. Greiner said that while it could enrich the school culture, scaling such a program to replace transfer enrollment would not be feasible due to staffing and regulatory hurdles. Yin proposed exploring a partnership with Purdue University to share administrative expertise for managing the paperwork burden. Wang clarified that federal law only allows international students to attend U.S. public schools for one year, limiting the potential impact of such a program. He supported the idea of holding a town hall to provide information and gather community input.

Mumford asked whether there is currently a cap on the number of TSC transfer students into our district, noting that transfer tuition will not be charged for this school year. Greiner said there is no formal limit, but building principals review class sizes before admitting students. Mumford expressed concern that removing tuition as a barrier could lead to a surge in applications and approvals before a formal policy is in place, potentially straining class sizes and the overall student experience. Greiner said principals remain cautious and are monitoring capacity closely.

TSC recently announced that it will no longer approve transfers students to WLCSC for the 2025–2026 school year. Our district is not an open district, so this shuts down our district’s ability to admit additional transfer students for this year, which alleviates most of my short-term concerns about an influx of students. I have been asking the board to adopt a formal transfer student policy for years because transfer students impact class sizes, the housing market, and long-term education plans for many families. The administration is expected to present data on various transfer policy options at the upcoming work session on August 4th from 5–6 pm. While the timing is not ideal—just two days before school starts—the session will be livestreamed and available for later viewing. Additional school board meetings on this topic are expected to follow. Community members are encouraged to share their input in work sessions or regular board meetings by signing up to speak before the meeting begins, with a typical time limit of three minutes. I also encourage you to email the superintendent and board members at schoolboardmembers@wl.k12.in.us to share your perspective on this topic.

2:30:59 – Superintendent Report: Greiner congratulated the Class of 2025 and thanked counselors, staff, administrators, parents, and board members for their roles in supporting students from early childhood through graduation. He provided updates on capital projects: the tennis court renovation remains on schedule for August 31 completion and the track project began June 12 with a target end date of July 31. Both projects are monitored through bi-weekly meetings. He congratulated SRO Marcus Slifer, who was selected to receive the Region 4 Exceptional Service Award from the Indiana School Resource Officer Association and will be honored at the June 19 School Safety Conference.

2:33:31 – CFO Report April Financial Report – Funds, May Financial Report – Funds, Cash Flow, Credit Card Statement, Claims Docket Object Breakdown: Cronk reported that claims from May 3 to June 4 totaled $4,525,915, with $2,663,268 allocated to wages, salaries, and benefits, including expenses for the Wabash Valley Education Center.

2:34:24 – Board Reports

Redevelopment Commission: Austin shared that the Purdue Research Foundation is donating land near the wellness center for a 10,000-square-foot early childhood education center, with potential capacity for up to 300 children. This donation is tied to the SK hynix development.
Legislative: Lyle reported that the legislative session has concluded, and the city council approved the SK hynix rezoning, potentially bringing additional businesses.
West Lafayette Schools Education Foundation: Witt reported on WLSEF class reunions, the July school supply drive (with donation boxes at the junior-senior high and public library), and the summer backpack food program serving 14 families.
Yin expressed concerns about firearm safety education and encouraged exploring ways to integrate safety reminders during school registration or through the policy. She suggested considering a pledge or acknowledgement from parents to raise awareness.

2:45:11 – The meeting was adjourned

Upcoming Public Meetings in the Central Office Board Room, located at 3061 Benton Street:

Work Session: Monday, August 4, 2025 at 5pm
Regular Board Meeting: Monday, August 4, 2025 at 6pm

This document is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions. Previous agendas, minutes, and audio recordings can be found at the WLCSC website.

Share this:

Related

Leave a comment Cancel reply