Savannah-Chatham County Public School System Meeting Summary — 2026-05-06
The Savannah-Chatham County Public School System Board met on May 6, 2026. Although the configured meeting title is Executive Session - May 06 2026, the meeting transcript identifies the recorded proceedings as the Board’s regular May meeting and documents policy reviews, student input, financial and procurement actions, and other public business.
Key Actions
- The Board approved an amended agenda that deleted Item 9.01, the proposed Horizons Student Enrichment Program summer pilot.
- The Board approved proclamations recognizing National School Nurse Day and Teacher Appreciation Week.
- The Board approved an adjustment to School Nutrition Program pricing for the 2026–2027 school year, including an increase in the adult breakfast price to $3.50 and proportional adjustments to à la carte prices.
- The Board approved its consent agenda, which included personnel actions, budget transfers, procurement and contract items, policy reviews, audit matters, intergovernmental and capital-project documents, and legal/claims items.
- Among later financial actions, the Board approved an estimated $8,059,680 annual contract for special-education behavior support services using multiple providers.
- The Board approved a $3,654,273 ESPLOST V budget transfer associated with the temporary relocation of administrative personnel while the 208 Bull Street facility is prepared for future use and reconfiguration.
- The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn. Board members were scheduled to reconvene approximately 30 minutes later for the district’s first budget hearing.
Major Discussion Topics
Student Discipline Review Focuses on Consistency and Alternatives to Suspension
The Board reviewed proposed changes associated with Board Policy JD: Discipline and the district’s student discipline regulation and code of conduct. The review followed, in part, a request from the Godley Station School Council and included discussion of how disciplinary expectations are implemented across schools.
Board members emphasized the challenge of making consequences more consistent while still allowing educators and administrators to respond appropriately to individual circumstances. District staff said they plan to audit disciplinary infractions and consequences entered in PowerSchool to determine whether they align with the student code of conduct.
The discussion also addressed out-of-school suspension (OSS). A Board member expressed interest in reducing reliance on OSS while maintaining meaningful consequences, noting that students separated from school can lose instructional time. District leadership described its approach as a balance between support and accountability.
Because the review includes policy-language changes, Policy JD is expected to return to the Board in June for a second reading and adoption.
Grading Changes Emphasize Consistency, Communication and Demonstrated Learning
The Board reviewed Board Policy IHA: Grading Systems, with most proposed changes contained in the administrative regulation rather than the policy itself. District staff said the work was intended to improve consistency in grading practices across the system.
Proposed revisions addressed definitions and shared expectations, minimum numbers of grades, alignment of grades with required learning standards, timelines for entering grades, communication of student progress, and opportunities for students to demonstrate learning over time. Staff said stakeholder feedback — including input from students — helped shape the revisions.
Because the substantive changes are primarily administrative-regulation changes, the grading review was not presented as requiring the same second-reading process as the discipline policy. District staff said the regulation could move forward following Board feedback or return for additional work if revisions are needed.
Student Senate Calls for Student Voice in Policy Implementation
Members of the Superintendent’s Student Senate reported on work involving grading, discipline, cell phones, mental health, communication and student engagement. Students said one of their central conclusions was that consistency in both policy and implementation matters to the student experience.
The Senate described student voice sessions conducted at high schools and a process for identifying practical solutions that could be implemented in schools. One example involved a Woodville Tompkins classroom where instruction was adjusted to accommodate multiple learning styles; students reported that the class performance cited in their presentation increased from approximately 75% to 97% after the material was retaught differently.
Students also asked for continued involvement in district decision-making and strategic-plan implementation. Board members discussed ways the Student Senate could maintain broader representation rather than relying on the perspective of a single student.
Cell Phone Rules Remain an Implementation Concern
Students discussed their experiences with cell-phone restrictions and storage practices, including concerns about access during emergencies and differences in how teachers implement the rules. Their feedback highlighted a broader issue raised throughout the meeting: a written policy can produce different student experiences when implementation varies by classroom or school.
The Student Senate identified technology and its role in education as an area where students want continued discussion.
Board / Council Questions
- Question: How are students selected to participate in the Superintendent’s Student Senate?
Answer: Students apply independently, and a committee selects participants. District staff said the Senate currently includes approximately three students per school.
- Question: How does the Student Senate gather perspectives from students beyond its own members?
Answer: Students said they conducted student voice sessions at individual schools, brought together students with different backgrounds and experiences, summarized their feedback, and returned those findings to the full Student Senate for consideration.
- Question: How will the district determine whether discipline consequences are being applied consistently across schools?
Answer: District staff said they intend to audit PowerSchool records for disciplinary infractions and resulting consequences, comparing those entries with the student code of conduct. School visits will provide an additional opportunity to monitor implementation.
- Question: Why does the district need numerous providers under the special-education behavior support services contract rather than relying on only a few firms?
Answer: Staff explained that student needs and available personnel fluctuate throughout the year. Maintaining multiple approved providers gives the district greater flexibility to obtain specialized personnel and services when a higher-ranked or more frequently used provider does not have appropriate staff available.
Public speakers addressed several policy and student-support issues. During the equal educational opportunities discussion, a speaker emphasized parental participation, access to records, transparency and timely communication when families advocate for students.
During the grading-policy review, a parent raised concerns about whether students could lose classroom credit when outside tutoring was used to help them understand assignments. The speaker argued that grades should reflect student learning and mastery and called for clearer, consistently applied rules concerning outside academic support.
Additional public comments later in the meeting continued to raise concerns about consistency in academic practices and the treatment of students receiving outside tutoring assistance.
What Happens Next
- Board Policy JAA: Equal Educational Opportunities is expected to return in June 2026 for a second reading and final adoption after its first-reading review.
- Board Policy JD: Discipline is also expected to return in June 2026 for a second reading and adoption following the Board’s discussion and additional work on policy language and implementation.
- The district will continue work on implementing and monitoring discipline expectations, including audits comparing recorded infractions and consequences with the student code of conduct.
- The grading-system regulation will move forward following Board feedback unless district staff determine that additional revisions and another Board review are needed.
- The district’s first FY2027 budget hearing was scheduled for 6 p.m. on May 6, with a second public budget hearing scheduled for May 13 at 6 p.m.
