While there may be variations in visitor policies and procedures from district to district, it is generally accepted that a “visitor” is anyone who is not a student or staff member in a school facility. Under this definition, the following are considered visitors and required to follow district sign-in and admittance procedures:

• Parents;
• Volunteers, including PTO members;
• School Board Members, except when they are attending an official meeting, and
• Members of the public.

District visitor policies typically designate a place where visitors must present themselves to a designated staff member (often at the principal’s office), provide identification, state the reason for their visit, sign in, and receive permission to enter the school facility. It is imperative that this policy be extended to all visitors, including frequent ones, to ensure the district maintains a comprehensive record of facility entry, thereby safeguarding student safety and averting potential disruptions.

To enact consistent and effective policy management, it is necessary to train all staff members to direct visitors to the designated office and ensure that office personnel responsible for admitting visitors are trained to adhere consistently to the policy and apply it uniformly to all visitors. That means staff must also be trained in how to deal with belligerent and disruptive visitors who do not want to follow the policy, or who feel the policy does not apply to them. Dependable and persistent application of the policies would help enhance the safety of students and staff by assuring that the district controls who is permitted to enter a building, and that visitors follow district rules while they are present.

Consistent enforcement of this policy provides a dual benefit by also preventing disruption from and micromanagement by school board members. In fact, the New Jersey School Ethics Commission (Commission) has recognized that unless board members are at school for official meetings, they have no right to enter district facilities at will.

One example is In the Matter of Julia Hankerson, Woodbine Board of Education.[2] In that case, Board Member Hankerson began going into the Business Office and asking the confidential secretary to the business administrator to perform certain tasks. For example, in April 2002, Hankerson went into that office, directed the secretary to immediately stop the work she was doing (working on the district’s payroll), and immediately copy and fax documents that Hankerson handed to her. Further, evidence showed that Hankerson was frequently in the office, hallway, and cafeteria talking to students and teachers, while never signing in as required by the district policy. As a result, the Commission found that these actions by Hankerson violated two sections of the School Ethics Act (Act) – N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(c) (confining her action to policy making, planning and appraisal) and -24.1(d) (responsibility is not to administer schools but work with board members to see they are well run). Because of these and other violations of the Code of Ethics for School Board members, Hankerson was ultimately removed from her position as a board member.

Another example can be found in In the matter of Raymond A. Delbury, Sussex Wantage Board of Education.[3] In that case, Delbury was a board member who went into the district and took pictures of open windows in a school building, and menstrual products in the board office bathroom. Delbury subsequently spoke to reporters complaining about these issues, and these pictures were published in the local newspaper. Further, on multiple occasions, he entered the board office without signing in or notifying anyone he was there, or he would stay and wander around the building after his official business ended. Moreover, he frequently stopped at the office of the district’s Supervisor of Curriculum and Instruction and would ask her questions that she could not answer, and then get angry with her for not providing him with the information he was seeking.  His requests included wanting to observe teachers while they were teaching and wanting to review evaluations for every teacher. Evidence was presented that he would behave in a loud and intimidating manner which included putting his hand in her face.

For these and other actions, the Commission ultimately ordered that Delbury be reprimanded for the violation of multiple sections of the Code of Ethics for School Board Members including N.J.S.A.18A:12-24.1(i) (failure to protect and support personnel) and -24.1(j) (failure to bring concerns to the Superintendent). The above cases are only two examples of multiple cases involving board members who failed to follow visitor policies in school districts.

These cases help illustrate the disruption that occurs when anyone, including board members, are permitted to have unfettered access to school district facilities. This disruption, at minimum, prevents district staff from properly performing their duties and prevents students from learning. It can certainly be intimidating for staff members, and even administrators, to tell board members that they cannot enter school facilities without following the visitor policy. However, these concerns can be alleviated by training staff to consistently apply these policies without exception, and communicating with board members and the community about expectations that the visitor policy will be stringently followed and enforced. Moreover, staff should be required to report immediately any unannounced visits by board members, or disruptive visitors, to the Chief School Administrator.

Members are urged to review their visitor policies together with their boards to ensure they are up to date. Further, members should review their professional development plans for staff members to ensure that all staff are sufficiently trained so that they understand and follow the application of the visitor policy. Any member with a question or concern about updated policies should consult with their board attorney or their NJASA attorney.