ESPAÑOL ES ABAJO
***Correction, October 6, 2026
***An earlier version of this post did not separate two different sentences. The phrase "merely a request for information" is not new. It has been in Bylaw 9322 since May 17, 2022, and that version says only that the board president and superintendent "respond accordingly." What is new is the clause Trustee Ching read aloud from CSBA's updated sample bylaw on September 29, which says the request "shall not be placed on the agenda," and which she described as "a new clause that didn't exist before." The post below now draws that line. An earlier correction notice overstated the error and said the whole provision was existing policy. That was my overcorrection and this replaces it.
The school board is rewriting its own rules. One change under discussion would let two people decide that a question from a parent or a resident never gets discussed at a board meeting. Nothing has been voted on yet. The board meets again on Thursday, October 8.
How it works now
Anyone can ask the school board to discuss something at a meeting. You write to the superintendent at least ten working days ahead and ask for your item to be added to the agenda. The agenda is the list of what the board will talk about that night. If your item is not on the list, the board does not take it up.
Our current rule also lets the board president and the superintendent decide whether a request is "merely a request for information." If they decide it is, the rule says only that they "respond accordingly."
What could change
On September 29 the board met with an outside adviser to go through its rules. He called the ten-day deadline unusual and recommended a 30-day review instead. Trustee Anne Ching then read from the updated sample rule published by the California School Boards Association, which many districts copy. Under that wording, the board president and the superintendent would have 30 days to answer you and say whether your item is something the board handles, and when it might be heard.
That part may be better for you. There is no deadline left to miss.
But the same sample wording includes a sentence that Trustee Ching read aloud and called "a new clause that didn't exist before"
: If the board president and superintendent determine that the request is merely a request for information, then the request shall not be placed on the agenda.
Today's rule says those two people "respond accordingly." The new sentence goes further. In plain words: if they decide you were only asking for information, your item does not go on the list. They send you an answer instead. The board never votes on it. The sentence does not say they have to explain why, put it in writing, or make the decision in public.
There may be a way to push back
The adviser also recommended that an item kept off the agenda could come back at the next meeting, where three of the five trustees could vote to put it on. He described this for requests from trustees, and it is not yet clear whether it would apply to requests from the public.
If it does, it still puts the work on you. You would have to find out your item was set aside, wait for the next meeting, and convince three trustees. The decision to set it aside takes none of that.
Trustees are being told to send you to the superintendent
Another part of the draft governance handbook tells trustees what to do when you bring them a problem. Listen, then send the person to the superintendent.
That part is accurate. Under state law a school board only acts as a group. One trustee has no power to order anything alone, so a trustee cannot fix your problem by themselves even if they want to.
The adviser said this applies at trustee office hours too. Trustee Jason Lehman described what people expect when they show up: "the public is looking for us to solve their problems in office hours. And this is saying that is actually not the case." The adviser answered, "That's correct because you are not the board at your office hours."
Now put the two next to each other. A trustee hears your problem and sends you to the superintendent. And the superintendent, together with the board president, would decide whether your written request ever reaches a board meeting. Neither decision about your request would need a vote of the board.
What you can do
None of this is final. The board's policy committee has flagged this rule, and a trustee said it will come back to the board "in the near future." It is not on the October 8 agenda. If you want to speak about it Thursday, use the public comment period at the end of the meeting for items not on the agenda. Open session starts at 6:00 p.m. at the Sonoma City Council Chambers, 177 First Street West, and you can also join by Zoom. People speak before a vote, not after. Once the board adopts a rule, changing it back takes the whole process over again.
The most useful thing to ask for is a small fix rather than a fight. If the board keeps the new sentence, ask them to add three things. The decision has to be made in public. The reason has to be given to you in writing. And you have to be told that you can ask the board to put your item on a future agenda. None of that costs the district anything.
Where this comes from
The rule discussed here, Bylaw 9322, was reviewed at the September 29, 2026 study session. The proposed wording is not in the meeting packet. The only attachment is a draft governance handbook that repeats the current rule, last revised May 17, 2022. The recording is on the SonomaTV YouTube channel. The meeting runs from 0:01 to 3:50 and from 1:42:09 to 2:35:13. The stream was left on during closed session, which is why the video is so much longer. The adviser's recommendations begin at 1:42:11. Trustee Ching describes the new sample wording at 1:50:33 and reads the new sentence at 1:53:52. Trustee Lehman's office hours comment is at 1:58:31. Nothing described here has been voted on.
ESPAÑOL
***Corrección, 6 de octubre de 2026
***Corrección, 6 de octubre de 2026. Una versión anterior de esta publicación no distinguía entre dos frases diferentes. La frase "únicamente una solicitud de información" ("merely a request for information") no es nueva. Está en el Reglamento 9322 desde el 17 de mayo de 2022, y esa versión dice solamente que el presidente de la Mesa y el superintendente "responderán de manera correspondiente" ("respond accordingly"). Lo que sí es nuevo es la cláusula que la fideicomisaria Anne Ching leyó en voz alta el 29 de septiembre, tomada del modelo actualizado de reglamento publicado por CSBA, que dice que la solicitud "no se incluirá en la agenda" ("shall not be placed on the agenda"), y que ella describió como "una cláusula nueva que no existía antes" ("a new clause that didn't exist before"). La publicación de abajo ahora hace esa distinción. Un aviso de corrección anterior exageró el error y dijo que toda la disposición era política ya vigente. Esa exageración fue mía y este aviso la reemplaza.
Nota: Esta traducción fue realizada con una herramienta de traducción en línea. Pedimos disculpas por cualquier error.