1 hour ago, Falcon Pride said:

I am close with administrators and teachers at multiple Private Schools. They will be following this Law. They are already working on the wording of waivers they want signed for students/parents.

Also, the lawyer in the family thinks this will be in the Courts in no time.

I think that is a huge mistake by any private schools (to concede) and I know they are not all on board with thinking the new law applies to private schools.

Also yes, I think the courts are going to have to sort this out, ugh...

From Missy Young-Salyers on Facebook:

Many of our KEA members have had questions pertaining to [Redacted].  On Friday, I emailed the attorney for EPSB and here are her responses:

1.  Can any parent sign a waiver allowing school employees to communicate with their child or can only family members use waivers?

KRS 160.145(4) provides the parents the ability to “submit written consent to authorize a designated school district employee or volunteer who is not a family member to communicate electronically with his or her child outside of the traceable communication system.”

2.  Do all districts have to provide waivers?

The statute provides the right to parents to submit a consent form and does not provide an exception for districts to refuse to allow consent.

3.  I have many teachers who do private tutoring during the summer through zoom. Can they continue to do this?

If a teacher is communicating with a student enrolled in their district through Zoom, they should ensure that they have a consent form on file with the district to communicate with the student.

4.  I have teachers who also are youth pastors/youth counselor, do they have to use the adopted platform from their district or can parents sign a waiver. 

If a teacher leads a youth group at church, it would appear that KRS 160.145 continues to apply to electronic communications between the teacher, and any member of the youth group who happens to be a student enrolled in the school district where the teacher is employed. Parents could file consent forms with the school district to allow the teacher to communicate electronically with the students in the youth group. Otherwise, it would appear the teacher should communicate through parents of the students in the youth group. 

5.  If a school employee posts something on social media and a student comments (but employee doesn't respond to comment) can they still be in trouble? 

In the scenario you describe, the electronic communication is with “the world” through social media, not to a particular student or students. Therefore, [Redacted] would not apply. If the teacher sent direct messages to students or commented on their social media accounts and those students were enrolled in the school district where the teacher is employed, then [Redacted] would apply.

6.  If a school employee communicates with a KY student who is not enrolled in their district, do they have to use the platform their employer adopted? This might be difficult if other KY students aren't using the same platform (many tutor kids from other districts).

The Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) interprets the requirements for traceable communications in KRS 160.145 as applying to electronic communications between school district employees or volunteers and students of the same district. The language of KRS 160.145, when read in its entirety, supports this position. “School district employee or volunteer” is defined throughout the [Redacted] as “a school administrator, classified or certified employee of a school district, school volunteer, nonfaculty coach or assistant coach, student teacher, or sponsor of an extracurricular program or activity.” The statute requires “[e]ach local board of education to designate a traceable communication system to be the exclusive means for a school district employee or volunteer to communicate electronically with students.” The statute goes on to state that “a school district employee or volunteer shall not communicate electronically with a student: (1) outside of the traceable communication system designated by the local board of education; or (2) through an unauthorized electronic communication program or application.” Since the traceable communication system is determined by the district, and each district can have different traceable communication systems, school district employees and volunteers would likely only have knowledge of the systems designated by the local board of education for which they work/volunteer to communicate with students. That is, they will not know which systems are authorized except as notified by their employer school district. Furthermore, their access to approved systems will be for communication with students of the district for which they work, not with students enrolled in a different school district.

KRS 160.145 also provides that “a parent may submit written consent to authorize a designated school district employee or volunteer who is not a family member to communicate electronically with his or her child outside of the traceable communication system.” The consent form shall be “filed in the administrative office of the student’s school prior to any electronic communication being sent from a school district employee or volunteer to a student outside of the traceable communication system.” When read in total, the law anticipates filing these forms in schools for the school district employees/volunteers of that school district communicating with students. Otherwise, the school would be responsible for receiving and filing forms for employees/volunteers of other school districts who they do not know and have no employment/volunteer relationship.

Though the provisions of KRS 160.145 do not apply to electronic communications with students or minors who are not students of the employee or volunteer’s district, it is best practice to communicate electronically with all minors and students in an open, traceable manner with the consent of the minor or student’s parents.

As  far as an employees duty to report other employees, do they have to see this communication between an employee and the student? Do they report if they just hear a rumor this is happening? 
KRS 160.145(6)(a) provides that “A school district employee or volunteer that receives a report alleging that another school district employee participated in unauthorized electronic communication shall immediately notify the supervising principal.” The requirement is that the employee receive a report not that they see the communication.

7.  Do they have a duty to also report this to CPS?

KRS 160.145(6) specifies that the duty to report is to the principal (or the superintendent if the principal is the subject of the report). It does not create a duty to report to CPS. KRS 620.030 outlines the duty to report of child abuse, dependency and neglect.

Heard an email walking back some stuff was sent out today.  

1 hour ago, PurplePride92 said:

Heard an email walking back some stuff was sent out today.  

I am not sure what that means.  Emails can't "walk back" law.  With that said, if anyone has it, send it to me please. 

The Kentucky Department of Education released some guidance on KRS 160.145

The way the guidance is written is not for BGP but I encourage everyone to read all ten pages, ugh. 

Kentucky Department of Education Traceable Communication Systems FAQ July 15, 2025

Here are a few highlights from the guidance.

Question 1.2: Does [Redacted] apply to electronic communication between a school district employee or volunteer and any student in Kentucky? Or does [Redacted] only apply to students enrolled in the school district where the individual is employed/volunteers?

Answer 1.2: KDE interprets the requirements for traceable communications in KRS 160.145 (which was created by [Redacted]) as applying to electronic communications between school district employees or volunteers and students of the same school district. The language of KRS 160.145, when read in its entirety, supports this position. “School district employee or volunteer” is defined throughout the [Redacted] as “a school administrator, classified or certified employee of a school district, school volunteer, nonfaculty coach or assistant coach, student teacher, or sponsor of an extracurricular program or activity.” The statute requires “[e]ach local board of education to designate a traceable communication system to be the exclusive means for a school district employee or volunteer to communicate electronically with students.” The statute goes on to state that “a school district employee or volunteer shall not communicate electronically with a student: (1) outside of the traceable communication system designated by the local board of education; or (2) through an unauthorized electronic communication program or application.” 

AND

Though the provisions of KRS 160.145 do not apply to electronic communications with students or minors who are not students of the school district for which the employee or volunteer works, it is best practice to communicate electronically with all minors and students in an open, traceable manner with the consent of the minor or student’s parents.

Question 1.9: Does [Redacted] apply to private schools and their employees/volunteers?

Answer 1.9: No. [Redacted] requires local public school boards to designate approved traceable communication systems and for employees and volunteers of the local public school board to electronically communicate with students using the approved traceable communication system(s) unless an exception applies. [Redacted] does not impose any requirements on private schools or their teachers, staff and volunteers.

Question 2.1: Does [Redacted] contain any exceptions that allow for electronic communications between school district employees/volunteers and students outside of a traceable communication system authorized by the local board of education?

Answer 2.1: Yes. School employees and volunteers may communicate electronically with students outside of the approved traceable communication system if: (1) the student is a family member of the school employee/volunteer; or (2) written parental consent has been filed with the student’s school.

Question 2.5: Can a school district refuse to accept parental consent forms?

Answer 2.5: [Redacted] provides that “a parent may” submit written consent to authorize electronic communication, and that the parent’s consent, if given, “shall be filed” in the administrative office of the student’s school. This leaves the discretion of whether to file consent with the parent(s) of students, and not with the school or district. If a parent wishes to file a written consent, the school should accept and file the consent document.

Question 5.4: What if school staff are responding to a student who communicates with them electronically, but outside of the approved traceable communication system, about a health or safety emergency?

Answer 5.4: [Redacted] does not contain an exception for health or safety emergencies. Nevertheless, school employees have certain ethical responsibilities to not ignore an imminent threat to health or safety once they become aware of such a threat. School districts should clearly communicate their expectations and protocols for employees responding to imminent threats to health and safety through electronic communication. For example, a school district may establish protocols requiring the employee to immediately notify the school principal of such electronic communication and provide copies of all written messages sent and received as a result of the imminent threat to health or safety. If employees follow the protocols set by the school district in situations of imminent threat to health or safety, they should not be subject to disciplinary action for engaging in unauthorized electronic communications with a student.

==============

There is a lot more information here and again I encourage everyone to read it:

Kentucky Department of Education Traceable Communication Systems FAQ July 15, 2025

The fact that this requires 10 pages of guidance shows how poorly thought out this thing was.

Also, the fact that this applies to teacher's personal lives to such an extent means that it will kill volunteering and activity in their communities to a great degree.

Has anyone else heard of any coaches/assistant coaches that aren't teachers not returning because of this?
 

6 hours ago, No Hiding Here....BC 21 said:

Has anyone else heard of any coaches/assistant coaches that aren't teachers not returning because of this?
 

The sentiment I get from some ....

 

"I am gonna do what I need to do and if they fire me, so be it."

1 hour ago, ChiefSmoke said:

The sentiment I get from some ....

 

"I am gonna do what I need to do and if they fire me, so be it."

That is really sad and if that is how "adults" are going to respond maybe the penalties should be increased.  Additionally, no one with that type of attitude should be around children. 

Wow. Another great reason to enjoy retirement!

On 7/21/2025 at 4:12 PM, theguru said:

That is really sad and if that is how "adults" are going to respond maybe the penalties should be increased.  Additionally, no one with that type of attitude should be around children. 

I couldn't disagree more with this.  Do what's right by the kids.  Period.  If that somehow violates this rule and you get fired, then you can sleep better at night knowing you did everything possible to help kids, which is why almost everyone gets into this profession to begin with.