Board members discussed a proposal to name the football field in honor of a longtime district employee after trustees raised questions about the district’s naming policy and criteria.

Discussion only: board members said the idea originated informally and that staff and some boosters had voiced support for recognizing the employee’s long service. Several trustees said the district’s current naming policy requires honorees to be deceased and retired and that they wanted to confirm the policy language and consider whether exceptions are appropriate. One trustee noted the policy as written is open to different interpretations and recommended forming a small committee to evaluate options and ensure consistent future decisions.

Options and concerns: suggested alternatives included a plaque, multiple plaques at several campus locations, a fitness center or entryway dedication, or a hall‑of‑fame recognition rather than renaming a facility. Trustees also discussed costs, the precedent set by naming physical assets, and whether booster clubs had proposed the idea (several trustees said the Football Boosters Club did not originate the suggestion).

Next steps: the board agreed to review the district naming policy and return with a formal action item and recommended committee recommendations at a future meeting; no vote to rename any facility occurred at the July 14 meeting.

Transparency note: discussion occurred during a standing agenda item; staff said they had not put a naming motion on the agenda and sought board guidance before presenting a formal resolution.