Jordan School District · Public Participation

How to Speak at a Jordan School District Board Meeting

Speaking at a board meeting is one of the most direct and effective ways to influence district policy. Board members are elected representatives — they pay attention to constituents who show up. This guide walks you through everything you need to know to participate with confidence.

When and where meetings happen

Location

AddressJATC South Campus
12723 S Park Avenue
Riverton, Utah

Typical schedule

Study Session~4:00 PM — working discussion; public comment not always available
Regular Meeting~6:30 PM — formal public meeting; includes Patron Comment
Patron CommentThe designated period when the public can address the board directly — this is your window

Check the district website to confirm times before attending — schedules can vary.

Agendas and livestream

Note: The board can only take action on items on the agenda. Patron Comment is your opportunity to raise issues not yet on the agenda and signal that a topic deserves future attention.

How to sign up and what to expect

Signing in

Sign-up happens in person before the meeting begins. Arrive at least 15–20 minutes early to add your name to the public comment list. Ask a staff member at the entrance where to sign in for Patron Comment.

Sign-in procedures can vary. Check the posted agenda before attending so you know what to expect.

Speaker priority

Per district policy, priority for public comment is given in this order:

  1. Students enrolled in the district
  2. Parents of enrolled students
  3. District residents
  4. District employees
  5. Others (if time remains)

Per speaker

3 minutes

Practice your comment out loud before attending — three minutes is shorter than it sounds.

Total comment period

~45 minutes

If many people sign up, individual time may be shortened to accommodate everyone.

Conduct

  • Stay on topic
  • Be respectful and professional
  • No personal attacks
  • Yield the floor when your time is up

What makes an effective speaker

A structure that works

The most effective public comments follow a simple, clear structure. Board members hear many speakers — a comment that is easy to follow lands harder than one that is passionate but hard to track.

  1. Who you are — State your connection to the district (parent, student, community member, educator). This establishes your standing and gives the board context.
  2. What you are asking for — State your specific request clearly in the first 30 seconds. Do not make the board wait to find out what you want.
  3. Why it matters — One or two concrete reasons. Focus on students, staff, or the district — not abstract principles.
  4. A clear closing ask — End by restating exactly what you want the board to do. Make it specific and actionable.

Example comment

"I am a parent of two students at [School Name] in the district. I am asking the board to adopt a written policy requiring a judicial warrant before immigration enforcement officers can enter school buildings or remove a student. This matters because without a clear policy, staff at different schools respond differently — and families have no reliable information about what to expect. Staff deserve a documented procedure. Families deserve a clear answer. I urge the board to put this on a future agenda and move toward adoption."

Keep it simple

  • One main point per speaker — not a list of concerns
  • Ask for a concrete action — "adopt a written policy requiring a judicial warrant" — not a general outcome like "do more to protect students"
  • Talk about student safety, staff consistency, and district operations — not immigration politics. The board's job is to run the district well; speak to that
  • Be calm and professional — boards respond to clarity and credibility, not intensity
  • Speak from notes, not a fully scripted read-aloud if possible
  • Make eye contact with board members, not just the podium
  • Thank the board for their time at the close

Choose a focus — and what to say

The most effective speakers focus on one clear angle. If multiple people are speaking, choosing different angles helps the board hear a fuller picture without repetition. Supporting data is included under each focus — you do not need to quote statistics, but they are there if you want to feel prepared or answer questions. Full citations are on the sources page.

Core policy — most important
  • Require a judge-signed judicial warrant before immigration enforcement officers enter non-public school areas or remove a student
  • Provide written training for front office staff so every school responds the same way — including how to tell the difference between a judicial warrant and an administrative ICE form
  • Communicate clearly with families about what the district will and will not do
Student outcomes — strongest board argument
  • Fear of enforcement leads to increased absenteeism and disengagement — direct educational outcomes the board is responsible for
  • This happens even when enforcement does not occur at the school itself — community-level fear is enough to keep students home

Supporting data:

  • A 2025 Stanford-led study found a 22% increase in student absences in districts experiencing increased immigration enforcement activity (Stanford / PMC)
  • A national UCLA survey found 63.8% of principals reported students missing school due to immigration-related concerns, and 70.4% reported student well-being concerns tied to enforcement (UCLA Education)
  • Research shows fear of enforcement alone — even without direct action at a school — can reduce attendance (Education Week)
School operations
  • Without a written policy, different schools respond differently to the same situation — that is inconsistent and unfair
  • Front office staff should not have to improvise a legal decision under pressure — they deserve a documented procedure
  • When students feel unsafe or uncertain, it can lead to disruptions to the school environment, including missed class time
  • A clear policy protects the district from legal exposure and inconsistency

Supporting data:

  • Research shows enforcement affects multiple aspects of school functioning, including instructional pacing and staff response challenges (PMC)
  • Districts that adopted clear enforcement response policies saw protective effects on academic outcomes and school climate (CGO)
Family trust & communication
  • Families need accurate, reliable information about what will happen — not general reassurances
  • Uncertainty reduces parent engagement, which harms the school community
  • Schools function best when families trust them — a clear policy builds that trust

Supporting data:

  • Research shows fear and uncertainty reduce parent engagement and student participation, even among families not directly targeted (PMC)
  • Enforcement impacts extend beyond directly affected students, influencing entire school communities (The Journalist's Resource)
  • Approximately 5 million children in the U.S. live with at least one undocumented family member — illustrating the scale of communities that benefit from clear district policy (Urban Institute)
Changing conditions — optional context
  • Increased coordination between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities
  • Growing concern in affected communities
  • Schools can provide stability even when outside conditions change
Legal grounding — if asked
  • Schools are not required to allow access based on administrative ICE warrants — only judicial warrants signed by a judge compel entry (learn the difference)
  • Student records are protected under FERPA — schools already have a legal obligation to restrict access without proper legal authority
  • Plyler v. Doe (1982) established that all children have a right to education regardless of immigration status — districts have a duty to protect that access
  • This policy would not obstruct lawful enforcement — it simply requires the same legal standard that applies to any private space

Full citations and additional research: No ICE in Schools — Sources

What to expect after you speak

The board will usually not respond directly

This is normal — and it is not a sign that you were ignored. Board members in most districts are advised not to engage in extended back-and-forth with public commenters during the meeting. Your comment is on the record.

After Patron Comment, issues raised may be:

  • Acknowledged briefly by the board chair
  • Referred to district staff for follow-up
  • Discussed informally in future study sessions
  • Added to a future meeting agenda — especially if the issue comes up repeatedly

Change takes time — and consistency

A single well-delivered comment rarely produces immediate action. What produces action is a pattern: the same concern, raised by multiple credible voices, across multiple meetings, accompanied by a clear, specific ask and organized community backing.

Change often takes multiple meetings and continued participation. Showing up consistently is itself a message to the board: this issue is not going away.

Coordinating with others

Before the meeting

  • Identify who is speaking and what angle each person will cover
  • Agree on the specific ask so all speakers are aligned
  • Practice individual comments out loud, timed
  • Arrive together and sign in early

During the meeting

  • Sit together as a visible group — presence matters even for those not speaking
  • Listen to other speakers so you can build on, not repeat, what has been said
  • Stay professional and calm regardless of how the board responds

After the meeting

  • Debrief as a group — what landed, what to adjust next time
  • Follow up with board members by email to reinforce your message
  • Plan your next appearance before leaving
Ready to go deeper? See the full organizer strategy page for policy design, coalition tools, and political strategy.
View Strategy Page →