������Ƶ

The Hawaii Department of Education has released a new visitor code of conduct aimed at preventing violent and threatening behavior from parents after a school employee safety bill failed to pass last year.

The code outlines acceptable behaviors for visitors to school campuses, as well as potential consequences for those who don’t follow the rules. But some teachers and former employees say the code leaves out key protections against teacher harassment they pursued through legislation last session.

House Bill 1651, which failed to pass in the Legislature, included specific guidelines around teacher safety, such as requiring DOE to formally investigate all reports of teacher harassment and call the police after employees receive threats of physical harm. 

Rep. Justin Woodson, who serves as the House Education Committee Chair and introduced last year, said he’s hopeful the new code of conduct will help families effectively communicate with teachers without resorting to violence or threats.

When failed to pass in March, DOE said it would work with the Attorney General’s Office to develop a code of conduct establishing clear expectations for the behavior of parents and guardians in schools. The department has struggled to find a balance between protecting its teachers from unreasonable parent behavior and respecting families’ rights to remain involved in their children’s education.

In one case, nearly a dozen teachers and public school employees filed restraining orders against a single Hawaii parent over 13 years. Nationally, educators have reported against them since the Covid-19 pandemic.

DOE already had a outlining appropriate behavior for employees and school volunteers but had not published a comprehensive set of guidelines for families until last month. The department declined an interview request but said in a written statement that the will be shared online, posted in school offices and sent home to families.

“Ensuring that our schools remain places where respect, safety and support are at the forefront is a shared responsibility,” DOE spokesperson Nanea Ching said in an email. 

Former supporters of HB 1651 said the visitor code of conduct is a good start, but school leaders and lawmakers need to do more to define the role DOE plays in protecting teachers and responding to threats or violence from the public. 

Few Clear Consequences

The one-page document defines prohibited behavior as physical attacks, intimidating behavior, abusive language and more. According to the code, visitors are required to follow school rules like signing in when they arrive on campus and communicating respectfully with teachers during in-person meetings and through emails, texts and social media.

But teacher Inger Stonehill said there is not enough clarity on the consequences for prohibited behaviors. The code says repercussions could range from limiting a parents’ communication with school workers to “legal action where appropriate.”

In Hawaii, harassing an individual is considered a petty misdemeanor, although it can be difficult for school workers to prove that threatening or aggressive parent behavior meets the .

“There’s really only one line that says if you break these rules, there will be consequences,” said Stonehill, who helped to author HB 1651 last session. “That’s it.”

DOE Deputy Superintendent Heidi Armstrong said in an interview in January that schools can ban parents from campus for a year or call the police in extreme cases of aggressive or violent behavior. The department requires teachers to report cases of harassment to their administrators, but the response from schools can vary, leaving staff unsure of what protections they should receive.

Lindsay Chambers, who previously served as DOE’s communications director and co-authored HB 1651, said unclear policies on employee protections made it difficult for her to request a safety plan or receive extra security when a parent repeatedly left her threatening phone calls and voicemails at work. Chambers, along with Stonehill, filed a temporary restraining order against the parent and sought criminal harassment charges against him.

Chambers said she would like HB 1651 to be reintroduced next session to put more pressure on DOE to develop stronger procedures for responding to harassment claims. For example, she would like the department to track all harassment cases from teachers and staff to identify and address patterns of concerning parent behavior across school campuses.

But lawmakers say it’s too early to determine if additional legislation is needed or if DOE can resolve the debate about employee safety on its own.

Rep. David Tarnas, who chairs the House Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee, said publishing the code of conduct is a good first step, but he would like to learn more about its implementation in schools in the coming weeks. When it comes to tracking and responding to harassment cases, DOE should be able to make its own internal policies to protect its workers, he added.

“They’re the employer,” Tarnas said. “This should not be a burden on the employee’s shoulders alone.” 

DOE also needs to make sure that regulations or proposed laws aren’t stifling parents’ rights to have a say in their children’s education, Woodson said. He added that teachers’ concerns from the last session seemed to mainly be addressed through the code of conduct, although he’s open to hearing their feedback.

Woodson added that DOE is developing a manual providing more information to employees who want to file temporary restraining orders against parents, although he didn’t know when the document would be published.

“If there’s any other gaps, I should know,” Woodson said. “My understanding is that everything’s being addressed.”

Civil Beat’s education reporting is supported by a grant from Chamberlin Family Philanthropy.

Read the visitor code of conduct here: