Coraggio Consulting
Fairfax County School Board Governance Committee Meeting, Thursday, August 20, 2026

Date: Thursday, August 20, 2026
Place: Fairfax County School Board, Virginia
Length: 1h 53m (video)
Official meeting video (YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Oxa5FvN9to
Official School Board page (FCPS): https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/leadership/school-board

Machine transcript (speech-to-text) produced by Coraggio Consulting. Not an official county record. Names and numbers may be misspelled; check the video at the timestamp before quoting.
Speech-to-text: whisper.cpp, model large-v3-turbo. Produced 2026-10-27. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[00:02:18] we're gonna get going this August 20th 2026 meeting of the Fairfax County School Board Governance Committee will now come to order at 4:32 p.m. Mr. Dannon has submitted a request to attend today's meeting remotely due to personal reasons as he is away at a family event and is located in Lake George New York I have performed an initial review of mr. Dan's request and have found it in

[00:02:58] compliance with the school board's remote participation resolution and I have approved the request mr. Dan and we see you can we hear you testing one two three and all right we now ask for all board members who are physically present to vote on the following all those in favor of confirming the chair's approval of mr. Dannon's request missing John Cunning mr. fresh and myself all those opposed dr. Anderson okay the first thing that we're gonna do is agenda item 1.0 1 approval of minutes we will now vote to approve the minutes of the June 16th

[00:03:36] 2026 meeting of the Governance Committee thank you mr. fresh is there a second dr. Anderson all those in favor that is unanimous for all committee members okay so now we're gonna move on to talking about the policies and I would like to thank everyone for taking the time to review them we have 24 policies that we have ready to talk about today this is going to be the first in a in a series just so you guys know we have a hundred and five outstanding policies right now that are out of compliance and or they're out of

[00:04:12] date or due this year and so this is 24 of those in which is I believe a great start for the committee to kick things off my intention is only to use this process where I give you full advance notice just to let me know whether or not you agree that the policy can move forward to the consent agenda only in those circumstances where I don't think that there will be a large amount of discussion you guys did a great job of providing some comments related to me specifically related to different things that you would like to see updated in terms of wording and things like that and we'll be able to go through many of

[00:04:50] those fairly quickly I believe so that's what we're going to start off with and then we're going to talk about the full future planning for the committee for this year so to start I received agreement from all five committee members on seven of the different policies so we're gonna go ahead and talk through those really fast things that did not have any comments that came to me say again yeah I'm gonna tell you those that didn't have any comments that came back to me we're just gonna go ahead and we'll see whether or not we can do they probably don't need a discussion if everybody already agreed however there

[00:05:28] were a few that had minor wording changes just so you know if anything is out of alignment with the the style policy it was not in or the style agreement of the board in the governance manual it was not intentional it was likely that I just forgot or missed something that needed to be updated so we'll go through those very quickly as well okay so here are the seven that are in the full agreement to move to consent so we have 1106 which is the protection against retaliation which engage which when engaged in protected activity policy 1200 which is constitutional authority policy 1301

[00:06:08] which is staffing standards for school administrators teachers and support staff policy 1406 integrated planning and budget policy 5105 which is authority to enter into contractual agreements policy 5501 preparation of

[00:06:25] annual budget and policy 5790 field trips 50501 5105 yes okay I appreciate that I on several of them we do have minor things that have been brought

[00:06:54] forward so I am is there okay so I have 1106 1200 1301 1406 5105 okay and then so I'm gonna I thank you for the motion is there a second to move these to consent perfect do you want to speak to your motion or miss Anderson just really quickly can we do that motion with leave for the clerks to make technical grammatical and formatting yes yes and that's what I'm gonna say is

[00:07:30] Any motion related, I think that one of the things that we should agree to as a committee is that if there are grammatical errors, if there are those types of changes that need to be made just the same way we have in the past, that we would go ahead and ensure that all of our decisions are made with leave to the clerk's office to make those updates.

[00:07:48] okay so policy 1106 had I received no further feedback on policy 1200 the constitutional authority I also received nothing 1301 I received one question about wording in the philosophy section from missing John cunning you just get to that in this case I think that there was just a question about whether or not

[00:08:27] the items in the series matched however the suggestion that you gave I think it changes the work that changes the intent of the wording so right now I believe if I remember it's something about financial services point of clarification I'm so sorry just trying to kind of stick to the process here this was moved and seconded so this is the discussion well section I am giving the feedback about what would need to be changed so maybe we should do the feedback before we do we're not yeah we're not voting on the motion I just was accepting it but now we're gonna have the conversation that needs to be had well wouldn't that

[00:09:04] happen from the movers first if they had any comments I'm just trying to understand the process because I think we're a little bit cart before horse here I agree and I think that just so we can have alignment in the in the process I think in the future if you have any of these types of changes we would just say no it's not ready for consent so but I don't want to stop us us moving forward and so I want to go ahead and just talk about the few minor like these a lot of these are puppy to small dog type changes and I don't think that they're going to be anything that we have major concerns about and I think

[00:09:43] that's my statement I think it would have been better or rather procedural procedurally cleaner if you had had the opportunity to just go through those minor edits and then we could make the motions and so we're gonna just have to figure that out moving forward because I do want to make sure that we give enough time in this case because we're getting started so soon after we came back from recess so in this case the request was for financial services like the end of the philosophy section it there's a statement related to financial services and in using the words supporting student success and there was

[00:10:21] a question as to whether or not we needed to change that wording there one of the things that I'm gonna well it the question right one of the questions was is that whether or not it would read more clearly to say that supporting students success and ensuring fiscal responsibility and transparent governance and I'm not sure that I see all that much of a difference in those so it just takes puts another and within the items in a series so I'm not sure that it's necessary but I wanted to ask missing John Cunning whether or not that

[00:10:52] was a large concern okay so say that one more time mr. Frisch is essential to

[00:11:35] supporting student success gotcha may I be recognized I guess here no but you can Absolutely share the documents that were posted. So if you can share where we're talking about within the documents I think that that would be extremely helpful. Otherwise, I'm tracking the changes that are going to need to be made We are in 1301 currently and my hope is is that we're going to be moving these fairly quickly through very quickly. So

[00:12:16] Okay, Miss St. John Cunning. Is that good? Yeah, that's fine. Okay, so without objection. I have a question. Go ahead why I'm trying to understand it's the last sentence is essential to supporting student success fiscal responsibility and transparency as it is it's a laundry list it is but the question was that the supporting was supporting attributed to fiscal responsibility no the supporting students may look make it look like it's the students responsibility to have fiscal responsibility okay so it's not success financial response or you know what I mean it's not the all those on

[00:12:55] the students so you're you're just separating the two to ensure that it's not attributed to the student response but it has a comma which makes it a list which is it's supporting one student success to fiscal responsibility in three three transparent governance okay I think that we're working smithing so I'm not a hundred percent sure it matters if we want to just create clarity so okay moving on to the next one we had a question about was 1406 and dr. Anderson I believe, if I understand correctly, you just want to make sure that Fairfax County is removed before school board.

[00:13:33] Yes. Sorry, I need to distract these. There's a lot of them. 1406 is the number 11. She did. I think with 1406, the only comment that I had on that is because there were two versions.

[00:13:58] There's one that's identified as... I apologize. I did not have any edit comments, but there were two versions. were provided one is labeled as a superintendent version that was the one that I was in support of well but what I'm asking is there's no difference between the two documents other than the formatting changes that were made to bring it into the current format so I'm confused the only difference between the two is that the superintendent's version said school board instead of Fairfax County school no the superintendent's version said philosophy the other one says commitment statement and community involvement if you look at the red line

[00:14:37] it was removed not in the plain version that I have the superintendent's version has it removed I gotcha okay but okay so I believe that this is one of the ones that I gave the information about the fact that if we don't have the title be something different then there is no meat of the policy if we only have a philosophy then there is no policy there's no direction to the

[00:15:14] superintendent the philosophy is not a direction to the superintendent so this was well I don't disagree with you but the whole purpose of this document is more more about commitment more than in action I wonder if there's an opportunity to then tease that out because the philosophy is more of the belief which also seems to be the purpose the commitment statement is

[00:15:53] essentially a philosophy which is why I think the superintendent's version went there which is why I said I preferred this one but I did not have any edits I hear what you're saying but I think my position stands okay I guess maybe we

[00:16:05] need to tease this out more gotcha dr. mr. fresh we would insert a new number

[00:17:27] three would say philosophy the Fairfax County School Board recognizes that division-wide planning is essential for long-term success period number four is commitment statement and community involvement with the text as redlined

[00:17:51] okay with those changes are we good with moving this to consent just just as a consensus and we'll vote officially to move them all but okay um 1505 I'm sorry

[00:18:30] 5105 brain yeah okay so dr. Anderson I believe that this is the one where you asked a way to confirm which way the school board is denoted no you're fine yes so you want this so my question to you is do you believe that it's

[00:19:08] interchangeable that we could use Fairfax County school board or fair or school board I think the conversation that we had with the last board on this was that on the initial reference to the school board it would read the Fairfax County school board and then anything subsequently can be an abbreviation whether it be school board but the first one should be the full vernacular and I just want to make sure that we start on that vein okay as we are working through when we're talking later about the governance manual changes those are the

[00:19:46] types of things that we're gonna want to make sure is updated in that in that portion of the document as well so absolutely we can make sure that those are those are updated and then I believe Miss St. John Cunningham you also had a requested change in this section in the philosophy if I remember correctly yeah to to do and that was to delineate the authority to of the school system let me go back to where I believe if I understand your request was to take out

[00:20:26] the school system and add division there instead I know I don't have my paper copies which is confusing but yes yeah I mean to be consistent because we use

[00:20:44] division okay okay any objections to that change excellent okay and then 5501 the preparation for the annual budget dr. Anderson you made a recommendation here related to changing the wording for the periodic reports section and I think I may have come up with a solution that

[00:21:23] would give us the wording that I think is what you're going for in that section I think the that I was going for I did write under the periodic report which is oops sorry yes shall present periodic reviews of the current budget that was what I proposed I wrote that I I don't know if you guys were able to see my link I saw you I saw the information that you provided well what's in blue is what I am proposing right I guess my concern is that I don't want to remove the

[00:22:02] requirement to review so what my proposal would be is that the division superintendent shall periodically review the current budget comma including statements and analysis of all funds and present findings which section are you in yours in the preparation of annual budget so I'm just no the periodic the D section D or philosophy so what I am suggesting that we change is it that it actually includes the requirement to both review the budget and present to us okay because let me backtrack a little bit as it stands it says the school board shall require periodic reviews of the current school board to include

[00:22:41] statements and analysis of all funds that was the original language Deacon Kerr okay what I am proposing is that we say that the superintendent shall present the period our periodic reviews right and what you're adding is my suggestion says that it will that it does change it to shall it just says the division superintendent shall periodically review the current budget comma including statements and analysis of all funds and present the findings to the school board oh that's fine so it's just a minor change that makes sure we

[00:23:19] get all of it into one clear designators when we read that again sure the division superintendent shall periodically review the current budget comma including statements and analysis of all funds and present the findings to the school board I think that's inclusive of the statement that I had perfect okay and then the last one dr. Anderson I believe 5790 you mentioned that you may have had a change in that one but but I didn't see it on the feedback that you provided me

[00:23:58] it's about field trips yes thank you 5790 I think it was more there were two questions there under sections a and B this is under approval section 4 a was very clear in terms of routine field trips being required principle only B

[00:24:35] had unusual field trips and all of the things that needed to happen therein whether they be continental or international the foreign exchange which is C it's the only one that referred to another document to another regulation rather than outlining it so I was just wondering a little bit why that was the case because the others just offered the information right there in my experience we usually do that when we want to have an easy time updating the

[00:25:11] information in the regulation to meet the current requirements.

[00:25:16] I think the foreign exchange, anything in or no, exchange and overseas study and travel also implied, foreign exchange means it may be staying there for a year or a semester, it's a longer term, it's not like travel in and out, it's often credit, I mean they're connected to the curriculum potentially, so I think that's likely why we have that separate regulation connected.

[00:25:51] So for number two, which is international, there's no other requirements outside of what's here? Well, what's here lists the outside requirements. There has to be a review by risk management, outside of the public, financial services, as well as the chief of schools.

[00:26:10] That's not foreign exchange and overseas study where, you know, think foreign exchange student programs where you go live with another family. It's a different purpose that's come to place. Absolutely. If I could finish. So what I think I understand from you is that for number two, well let me not put words in your mouth, is there an additional regulation that outlines further details for number two? I don't think so.

[00:26:41] That was just and that was my question because these two all of it seems to be embedded right in the policy and the other made a reference to a regulation but you're saying the third one it's because it's a little bit more involved it needs to be further outlined elsewhere yes the other two are not outlined anywhere else that's my understanding okay thank you dr. Reed to dr. Anderson's point we don't typically we point to the fact

[00:27:16] that we're requiring that you create a regulation to support the work in a policy but we don't usually identify a policy as the place where all the information like when we don't usually direct to it exactly the same way so is it possible that it it would make sense that it would be the division superintendent shall maintain a policy for foreign exchange and overseas study and travel because that that is in line with what we've done in other instances where we've outlined specifically that we are requiring that you create a

[00:27:51] regulation to support their requirement in the policy so yes you could I believe you could ask that we develop a regulation because you already have it so yes ma'am it would be just your responsibility to maintain that regulation which is really what the policy is meant to point to yes ma'am that's correct and I could just add my time when I was here as deputy there is a a process for each of our these folks that are listed for international study

[00:28:30] to review and approve or express concern or or deny and and it went through all of these people dr. Anderson does that kind of get to the point of what you're trying to say yes and I think there's it there's a lack of consistency I appreciate the point that you've raised that we don't typically point to a regulation except and even this exercise we have in mother in other places where we're seeing a specific regulation I guess I'm just looking for some sort of

[00:29:05] criteria in which it would make sense to have that reference because here again we have three different things and what I'm hearing is number two and number one and number two don't have any other lengthy regulation behind it but you're saying they do I was sharing that we do have a process of review for the international studies before that would be approved right is that process laid out in a regulation I don't believe so okay it was a process that was developed

[00:29:43] internally okay I think that answers the question for here but if we want to kind of pull away from the reference to particular regulations that may be a challenge because it shows up in a lot of places where it was purposefully intended I had the question here because it seems to be we have three different kinds of trips and only one said go see someplace else again I'm fine with the someplace else it's because it's a little bit more involved and complex but just kind of taking the long lens what is our intent do we want to continue to

[00:30:20] have those kinds of references or do we want to have some sort of statement that may not say go here but still outlines the expectation I like I I don't know if you're asking me specifically I'm just asking the room I believe strongly that it makes sense in policy for us to state what our requirement is for the superintendent and then her response to that that policy is regulation and so I fully and completely understand why we would be connecting that because oftentimes we want to show people where the rest of the information so I don't have a problem with the cross-reference information that's at the bottom of the

[00:30:59] page I do agree with you though that this is seems a little bit different in terms of the fact that we're saying in ours that this is that basically that you are just going to rely on this particular regulation, but the regulation is written by the superintendent, which is fine. But I would like, if I agree with you that saying that the division superintendent shall maintain a policy related to foreign exchange and overseas, and then the cross-reference can stay where it is. Does that make sense? It does. Mr. Foster, Dr. Reed, do you

[00:31:37] have any concerns with that approach no ma'am okay excellent okay without objection then I'm going to go ahead and make that change in the document that just said that it will say the division superintendent shall maintain a policy or maintain a regulation that outlines or the required adherence for foreign

[00:32:04] exchange and overseas study and travel program field trips okay that is the seven that we had agreement and oh no that's the field trip one that we're talking about yeah these are the seven that we had everybody in agreement on I

[00:32:37] know and just so you know in the in the document I reorganized them so that they're in the buckets so yes the right now the seven we have a motion on the table mr. fresh would you like to speak to your motion missing John Cunningham would you like to speak to your second okay all those in favor of moving these seven policies with the minor changes that we've discussed and agreed upon to consent all those in favor that's unanimous for all board members or I'm

[00:33:16] sorry all committee members I'll get my language right okay now we have 11 different policies that we have an agreement from a majority of the committee members to move them to consent so I want to make sure that we have the opportunity to talk about each of them and determine whether or not many of them are very much the same from what I've seen as what we've already been doing and so my hope is that we can move through these fairly quickly so do

[00:33:49] you want me to list them okay so 1354 flag rules and regulations 1360 visitors to schools 1365 distribution of materials yes six five 1405 accountability for division efficiency and effectiveness 1501 public access to information 5002 free and reduced price meals 5010 procurement of goods and services except

[00:34:27] construction 5017 school procurement system 5028 system of inventory management 5725 responsibilities for students personal property and 5830 school stores so those are the 11 that we have an agreement from a majority of the committee members but we need to go ahead and talk about some of the changes

[00:34:57] that are potential potentially needed okay so 1354 is the first one this is flag rules and regulations so dr. Anderson I believe you had a change in the philosophy section I know so it's just that you wanted to remove that correctly correct I thought I put yes with a minor edit oh I meant because

[00:35:36] some of them I did put yes I know and that was supposed to be that because I think we oh I'm sorry well Mercier has something too but dr. Anderson yeah mine was minor because I think we've really exhausted the use of the word that okay so that was my only edit got that we reviewed that we were that okay because it's mostly unnecessary yeah it's overused and it's highly unnecessary most times because it's more spoken it's not yet as much as should be written

[00:36:11] but that was my edit and I didn't mean to write yes with gotcha perfect and then mine is also really minor yours do you would like students instead of pupils yeah because pupils in all world like pupils and just use students instead of people any objection to changing - in hours and conditions for display yeah 1986 thank you it's in hours and conditions for display when the school

[00:36:45] may be closed to students instead of pupils no people yeah it's pupils so any objection to changing that excellent okay then this one oh well the wind is

[00:37:08] kicking yep we're gonna keep it okay so for 1354 is there a possible motion and you guys have to tell me if Tom raises his hand is there a possible motion to

[00:37:37] move these into the okay but here's my here's my question though I would very much like to make sure because things that all five of us agree as to the path that it's on right now we're gonna try to probably put those as one consent agenda item things that we have either disagreement or we have you know questions about we're gonna probably pull off to have them be individual just in case other board members also share those concerns I would say let's just if

[00:38:11] we could just wrap up each one as we go along let's wrap them up are we good for that objection without objection to Tom are you good moving 1354 to consent excellent so we're adding that yes we're adding that to the previous motion say

[00:38:36] okay okay 1360 I also had a few I I have a concern about the name of this one but 1360 is the visitors to schools and it's it's dignitary visits

[00:39:15] well I was initially confused about this because I feel like it I mean the purpose is very clear but I feel like visitors to schools could should include things related to the new volunteer system and things like that and so I don't think this is I don't think the title captures the work that we're doing like the work that it is dr. Anderson I just wanted to go over my pieces unless you wanted to capture under philosophy again I think I struggled a little bit

[00:39:53] with dignitary visits and the comment that I made there that it'd be changed to visits from dignitaries because I think we could explain who a dignitary is I don't know if we want to get into that as a definition but I think there's a basic understanding there are you time in philosophy okay couldn't can you address the point that you had in purpose first because you had you you mentioned in that that you would like to keep the superintendent's red line which

[00:40:25] meant that you wanted to keep the word patron and I'm just in purpose it's a the superintendent's red line which I believe was just from the original was to authorize page patron dignitary visits to schools and I think that we crossed out patron and included dignitary instead that was the I may have misunderstood no comment okay okay can you bring us down to oh you know what

[00:41:00] happened when I copied it over I failed to highlight I gotcha I failed to include the red line okay that's why it has both but it wasn't an ask it was an oversight so in philosophy it's where I had more changes I gave Miss Brown access to this it would be easier if I think it yeah no I was just hoping we could just show it up there that was all just to ease of conversation Miss Brown then if it's gonna take time Miss Brown I believe that that was an internal

[00:41:40] document that was only these are just my notes yeah I'm happy to talk about it I'll just so the first sentence the first paragraph is fairly easy I just change it from visits from dignitaries I'm sorry from dignitary visits to visits from dignitaries so perfect let's keep it moving the second paragraph that says the part that starts with at the same time I think I made some changes there

[00:42:19] that said the school board believes that the primary function I think I separated a couple of sentences why is my thing green should I just keep on reading okay it says the school board believes that the primary I'm going to read as I would like it to read the school board believes that the primary function of schools is a teaching and learning and that school operations must remain orderly secure and minimally disruptive disrupted I think I crossed

[00:42:56] out my own although although the school board believes that the primary function Well, yeah, then comma, the board seeks to establish a balanced approach, yada, yada, yada. None of it, none of that was changed. Yeah, yeah, the board's, turn your mic on.

[00:43:28] And the school operations must remain orderly, secure, and minimally disrupted. It seeks to, et cetera. Yeah, that's fine. I think that would still reflect what I was trying to propose. dr. Anderson can I confirm that the second part of that doc like the second two paragraphs is how you want it worded in in the information that you sent yes except although should not have been struck no I understand but the clean the two paragraphs underneath that those are the clean ones is that yes yes the two clean ones at the bottom should be that but with leave to make the change that

[00:44:08] call just shared gotcha I had forgotten that I put the two clean ones at the bottom it's very helpful because it was complicated okay without objection we'll go ahead and change those two paragraphs and then you also had a change in the responsibilities section correct yes and I don't think I wrote a clean version of that one underneath but I also had an inquiry I know with the last iteration of the Governance Committee we talked quite a bit about whether or not we should be pointing to other offices I think we had a large discussion on the superintendent is responsible for everything in a couple of places here we

[00:44:47] had a an appointment to a specific office so I just want to make sure like which one are we doing or are we just going to use it on a case-by-case basis I mean I don't think I mind but I would love some consistency or do you have a preference dr. Reed because I thought you did that we just say the superintendent shall and you'll determine who does it because it could be this office this year and you find that next year it's better suited to another office this kind of locks you in or requires a revision I think staying consistent with the superintendent's office is likely the best option so then I would like for

[00:45:26] this paragraph to be reflective of that because it speaks to what is going to happen in the chief engagement officers office with we're changing from OCCR exactly well this one had OCCR which is why it was change a chief experience but it might be something else in a year okay so the request is now I will ask for a clarification at some point because there are moments in some of these policies where we talk about the need to have the regional assistant superintendent be but that is a level of approval in my opinion not a specific

[00:46:06] office necessarily because that because some of this is meant if I understand correctly some of this is meant to have staff understand where the approval needs to happen so we send lots of things directly to the regional assistant superintendents related to school matters and so I just would ask whether or not we ever want to to divert from I think that I think there's a distinction I think for the board policy the board directs the superintendent and to dr.

[00:46:37] Anderson's point my apologies that we edited this way because this is up from our staff side having said that I think if we stay consistent in the policy with the superintendent the regulation then can stipulate because regulations can be more nimbly adjusted the regulation could stipulate the chief experience and engagement or regional assistant superintendents or fill in the blank right so I think to stay consistent with the board direction to the superintendent is probably our best path and then in the regulation I need to be really on top of making sure that we've got our team is keeping those up to date

[00:47:13] and so my second point now that I have had that articulation I think we need to change that and in the paragraph that says that each person entering the school shall immediately go to the principal's office to obtain a pass they're not going to the principal's office to obtain a pass please they're just going to the main office so I also made that adjustment but I don't have ready language to switch around this to the superintendent happy to but I just don't have it right now I don't I think that this is an easy fix so dignitaries

[00:47:51] wanting to arrange visits to schools or central FCPS offices should contact the office of the division superintendent perfect there you go and then was there another and this is one that I should have rewritten okay miss st. John cunning this is one where you had a question about alignment with regulation

[00:48:17] 1361 I think that the note if I understand it correctly it was more about needing to update the regulation to ensure that it it mentions VIP or dignitary visits so if if dr. Ead you might want to make a note of that for your staff to go ahead and update that particular regulation so that it is in

[00:48:54] alignment with this yes ma'am thank you any objections to renaming this particular can we rename it dignitary visits or visits from dignitaries may I ask one more question visits from dignitaries will they have to engage in the management system that we have for other visitors are we going to assume because they're dignitary they're a little bit better known that we are

[00:49:31] going to allow them to not have to stick their ID into the system or are we going to require the ID into the system that's a great question dr. Anderson I think many of our dignitaries are international and may not have documents that would be we simple scannable for any purpose because they're not in maybe legal systems here in this country having said that they're also never going to be unaccompanied in our site so it's likely no that we would not ask

[00:50:07] them to go through our visitor management system okay so this isn't really a question about like this but but I and I understand exactly what you're saying dr. Reed but part of the reason that also we have people log in is safety if there's a fire then we account for how many people are in the building do you know I'm saying it's not just like to check their backgrounds I don't know I did this just occurred to me because we're discussing that do we

[00:50:45] have a backup mechanism for those dignitaries that come in that don't have the valid ID but you know we will I know it's a school situation and we'll know it's just a wondering as my colleague often says miss st. John Cunning we always sign in even when I'm visiting schools either I or somebody I with will sign me in for that purpose I misunderstood the question if it included that purpose I thought we were talking about like the background check where we ask people to swipe their identification so we certainly would want people to sign in so we know who is in the building and that's a great

[00:51:24] reminder thank you thank you do we have agreement or a motion to move this to consent thank you mr. Frisch second I don't think I had agreement on the principals and main office piece were okay yeah okay so dr. Anderson is the second do you guys want to speak to your motions fabulous all those in favor of

[00:51:53] moving 1360 to consent excellent moving right along okay 1365 I believe miss st. John Cunning and dr. Anderson had questions about this one missing John Cunning I believe that you had a question about the last sentence of the

[00:52:22] philosophy right and on that just a little bit of rewording on that to limiting distribution the last sentence might need to be slightly reworded as political advocacy is not necessarily synonymous with limiting distribution of political materials and so I gotta go to the policy of these in a philosophy yeah

[00:52:51] um let me go to the let me go to yeah okay mind for more questions rather than

[00:53:30] edits we have this conversation here regarding written communication it seems to lend itself more to the things that will be going home in the backpacks it doesn't seem to give any nod to electronic communications particularly communications that PTAs are sending out because if you recall a couple of years ago dr. Reed I think it was when you've probably first started we had a message that went out from a school I can't remember but it was a message that was not in keeping with what we had wanted and it ended up being that that message

[00:54:08] was not reviewed by the schools and I think you said at that point you would have had an expectation that the schools would review the access that PTAs have to the gov delivery messaging so I think there's space for us to be inclusive of that here and I didn't see any reference to electronic communication and to the review of such I don't know if that's covered in a regulation but is this only for written material that is backpackable which is essentially what I

[00:54:47] I think this speaks to Wednesday folders yeah right but we're doing more and more electronic distribution we should be inclusive of that as well there was a question is the question is do we get specific that it's any like digital or snail mail email I um it says because the topic says distribution of materials right you don't make any reference to electronic distribution that's right and I don't think we have another policy that speaks to that what

[00:55:27] does say carried home when such materials so on and so forth I don't know that we've given access to any other group to send anything electronically to be honest with you what PTA we have this speaks to this speaks to parent groups and raise the groups I promise you they all have access well interest I will say that the purpose of the policy does say to establish procedures for distribution of written materials correct and so what we may need to do is change that to be print materials and then change the distribution of print materials in the name and that would at least align it and then I agree that I'm not sure I've seen a policy that talks about

[00:56:07] electronic communication requirements and we could merge those two but and this goes to what I was hoping that we could talk about when we're talking about future planning I don't want to stop the progress of getting the current regular the current policies up to date but I do want to absolutely capture the things that we identify that we want to make sure that we change for future use and so it could be that what we do is approve this existing with the changes to be print materials and then because what this really is talking about if I

[00:56:42] understand correctly is is materials that are distributed by this seems to be other people physical yeah so I want yes data so is this an easy fix though to change this from just physical to physical and digital so if it's not I would love to hear what the you know we could go with this as is but what's the plan to address the digital distribution of materials I feel like to be honest

[00:57:21] with you it's been a while since we reviewed this and moved it forward so I feel like this is one I'd want to go back and have a conversation with our principals and chief of schools to find out what our current practices in terms of the boosters or the PTA like who is working with them currently on any kind of digital information before I answered that I think dr. Reed can I can I clarify because I think that the changes that we have in here related to the philosophy and thing like that are still important for the print materials and so

[00:57:56] is it possible that we could do change this and get it updated in addition to have you go back and look at how electronic can can or digital you know communication or whether or not that's more suited to a different policy and so I guess that's my question is this is one of the things that is this a yes and or is this I have to have right now yes ma'am that makes sense I think it could be a yes and I think updating the written materials makes sense and then we'll make a note to go back and have a conversation and see if maybe this maybe the digital is actually addressed in a different policy that sitting here this

[00:58:35] afternoon I'm not aware of so I think it's a yes and okay and in that case we absolutely can update the cross references at the back what I will say is that we do have some regulations that are already updated in there and so it would be interesting to see whether or not the regulation refers to that because in that case it could just be that our policy needs to be updated to match the information that's already presented in the regulation and so does is there any objection to changing the name of the of it of this particular policy to distribution of print materials no objection okay is there any objection to

[00:59:14] changing the purpose to be to establish procedures for the distribution of print materials no objection okay so when I ask one more thing for Dr. Reed's consideration as you go back to determine do we have something else with digital do we need to redo this at some point down the line to include digital communication can you also have some conversation regarding the process and I'm sure that would live in your regulation the process of approval for boosters and PTAs because things have gone out and there were no eyes on them

[00:59:48] and they were not again consistent with FCPS expectations which is how we landed in this conversation many moons ago yes ma'am we'll take care of that okay just want to clarify I'm sorry if I don't have the printed stuff so what I want when what I was trying to say is what it says in the philosophy is by limiting political advocacy which is different than saying limiting the distribution of political materials and that's clearer because advocacy and we're talking about the distribution of the materials and that's it was just a

[01:00:28] clarification okay so if what what you're requesting is that it would now read by limiting the distribution of political materials and ensuring non-discriminatory access do we have any objection to to making that of that change I apologize I was speaking to the maker of the change and I missed the change that the maker of the change was proposing this is in the philosophy section yes and can you read again where the last sentence the last sentence and I know go ahead it would now read by limiting the distribution of political

[01:01:06] materials and ensuring non-discriminatory access for eligible nonprofit organizations so the change is removing political advocacy which is right because we're not yeah and ensuring non-discriminatory access all the rest of it's the same although it's the same I concur any objection excellent okay consent thank you mr. Frisch is there a second in the motion to thank you

[01:01:40] dr. Anderson okay so without object yeah everybody in favor excellent we are all

[01:01:50] in agreement 1365 we'll get moved to the consent agenda okay 1405 yeah so did

[01:02:21] okay so Miss St. John Cunning your request was at the end of the philosophy section to say the efficient use of the public trust and reason and public resources any objection to adding and public resources I I have a concern with the efficient use of public trust because I don't think that makes sense

[01:03:01] okay so do we so the suggestion is to change the word trust to resources any any objections to that I'm so sorry can you please repeat where I located end of the philosophy in section three it says the school board understands that accountability is not merely a compliance obligation but a core commitment to transparency continuous improvement in the effective and efficient use of the public trust so do we like is it okay to say public

[01:03:36] resources there yeah any objections excellent I think it's publicly I think use of public resources know the okay excellent okay and dr. Anderson did you have concerns yes I did and I apologize because I wrote here that I was going to restate it but I did not my question was in the purpose particularly the second paragraph to provide for the establishment of procedures that seems to be a handful I think we could just say to establish procedures this was small

[01:04:15] this was supposed to be a no I mean a yes with edits okay so what you're saying is to establish procedures well you know what we are establishing procedures to determine yes it just seems to be too many words I would argue that the whole sentence should be stricken yes well the only reason I say that is we don't establish the procedures that's why it says to provide for the established but that's what we do with every I think inherently there's something that I struggle with and how these are written all of these are directives to the superintendent and sometimes we say we want to give that directive to the

[01:04:55] superintendent it's already embedded so all of these are to establish procedures via someone else so I think I would lean into getting rid of it all together as I'm Sandy just recommend miss miss Anderson just recommended that's fine any objection because all of these are supposed it is self-referential I mean

[01:05:24] it is stating the obvious okay anything else excellent okay 14:05 mr. Frisch we have a motion put it on the consent agenda missing John cunning seconds all those in favor excellent that is unanimous okay 1501 public access to

[01:06:01] information mr. Dan and you're up he's now I'm the one that's got to go find my notes here okay if you know one yep 1501 your request was to delete the the last definition because eating yes yeah a lot of these are is it a small dog or a puppy kind of things so yeah that was all so his Rick yeah his request was to

[01:06:39] remove the last definition because it's not used and it's it's redundant we don't need it it it's kind of I object to small dog or puppy becoming a phrase that we use multiple times a meeting I where did it come from I think we should have a 30-minute conversation about that's a normal yeah it's a normal it's it's an editing thing but any objections to removing the definition that we don't use okay perfect okay and then Miss St. John Cunning you have a

[01:07:16] couple of things that in here while she looks may I say something that I did not said but I did write it for myself under purpose again I'm big on the laundry list of you know the Queen's English where we have to establish the school board's commitment to developing and maintaining positive relationships and Between the school divisions, the residents of Fairfax County, and between the local schools and their respective communities, there seems to be an extra and at the beginning.

[01:07:54] I think that it's the school division and writ large, the county, and then individual schools and their respective communities. Then I think we're missing a comma. Except for the fact that it's a clause. Well, we're missing something that makes this less than ideal first paragraph purpose.

[01:08:14] what we could say is between both the school division and the residents of Fairfax County and between so we could just say between both do you see what I'm saying a suggestion we can fix this easily okay relationships between the school division and Fairfax County residents and local schools and their respective communities so just take out the between yeah that's what you want instead of saying and the residents of Fairfax County it becomes Fairfax

[01:08:52] County residents it would say to establish the school board's commitment to developing and maintaining positive relationships between the school division and Fairfax County residents it's not a comma comma and local schools in their respective communities okay guys that's not a comma oh is it a semicolon no because I'm not so no I yes but I think that to dr. Anderson's point I think that it makes a whole lot of sense if you get three communications people in the same room it's always gonna be like this between both the

[01:09:31] school division and the residents I like the Fairfax County residents and between so you're letting them know that it's two sets by saying both great excellent okay I believe that there is there a question in the public session to take out this

[01:10:08] section the second ensuring the community has visibility on the decision-making process no no so the the concern is the concern that I've see that I think that she explained was that and I think mr. Foster may need to speak up to this one right now the pup the definition for public session is a meeting of the school board that is open to the public for observation ensuring that the community has visibility into the decision-making making process the question is whether or not it makes sense to include because

[01:10:46] it's kind of a it's a moral qualifier at the end of that definition rather than just having the stated definition be a meeting of the school board that is open to the public for observation so is there any question about taking that second clause out or any concern in fact it would preclude somebody for having a different reason from attending the session if it exactly that was exactly And then missing John cunning was there another concern or did we get all of them? I

[01:11:32] I'm not a hundred percent sure I would agree that it's a concern because we identify news media, so we don't need to actually

[01:12:14] Define media Specifically so because we have the qualifier of news media. Are you okay with leaving that one? Okay. Okay. No worries Okay, so yes, I'd like to make a motion. I love that. Okay, so 15 dr Anderson's do you have another concern with this one and I can make a motion that he not make a motion oh go for it I'm just trying to keep the train moving okay so 1501 I assume that your motion is to move this to consent yes excellent any do I have a second dr. Anderson okay so all those in favor that is unanimous

[01:12:48] maybe for all committee members excellent okay dr. Anderson just a quick comment because as these continue to be prepared by the superintendent and her team to come forward there are a couple of things in kind of the non soup though I guess the right what we're calling the red line versions that I really liked and I think these were I don't know if these were yours or part of the guidelines but the summary of changes not being alphabetized I think is a smarter move because one it also takes up less space just bulleting those out if we could just continue those as a practice if they're not articulated anywhere I think that was very helpful because again the summary of changes

[01:13:27] don't need to be numbered and the definitions just being listed alphabetically rather than again lettered I think it's a helpful step yeah this is something that was actually in the style guide so yeah we're yep we're we've got all of it so yeah it's all taken care of okay so 5002 which is free introduced meals I didn't receive any actual feedback for me see it I missed

[01:14:00] it so it is in the document it is and it is not both are correct both are there okay and it is listed and this is one why I did write a clean version as well as inserted oh gotcha the edits okay so do you want to go talk through your changes uh yes it's just clunky language do you see there that I'd like for the first part of the purpose to be changed to to provide free or reduced price

[01:14:34] meals to eligible students as determined by public law etc rather than to be served it's just a little cleaner okay and the second part is under responsibilities just having it be read that the superintendent shall maintain regulations as outlined to outline the procedures for each of the items listed below again a very small thing but it just is a cleaner and crisper yeah without objection are those changes okay with everybody excellent dr.

[01:15:07] Anderson would you like to make a motion oh would you like to stay I'm making the motion to move 5002 to consent excellent oh do I have a second Ms. St. John Cunning. All those in favor? That is unanimous. Excellent. Okay. So, 50-10.

[01:15:39] Okay. This one, Dr. Anderson, I believe you had some suggestions. I did. And I apologize. I did not write language for this one. That could have been due to fatigue or something.

[01:16:00] But there was a lot of conversation in here. No, I actually have language that I put in my notes. There was a lot of language in here regarding how we are valuing our stewardship of public funds by being committed to a procurement process that is transparent, fairness, et cetera, and getting the best dollar, all good things.

[01:16:24] What this did not speak to in any way is the fact that we do have some sole source, which does not necessarily speak to the spirit of competition that we have here. and there are times there's a huge you know there's significant rationale for that because only one person makes WIDA that's not going to be something that is competitive but there are times where there are multiple vendors but we are going on a writer for example through consulting we use a writer but that doesn't mean there's no other company that does that so I think there's some opportunity for us to talk about how sole source contracts while it's not

[01:17:01] preferred especially when there's multiple vendors when it's available because competition produces you know all the good things that are outlined here but also speaking to how sometimes sole source is inevitable I just think that needs to be part of it because it doesn't recognize that that exists in any way here okay do you have a suggestion as to where you would want that included initially I was thinking and the philosophy but then something that I believe you said earlier is that the philosophy speaks to the general

[01:17:41] beliefs and value it's not the direction and we have done this in a couple of places where we've given direction in the philosophy and I think I did highlight that in another place so perhaps the philosophy gets well the philosophy already speaks broadly to it I think well go ahead it could be under ethics in contracting as a standalone numbered item it would just be worded a little bit differently than like there's a value in blah blah blah right so it'd

[01:18:15] be enter into sole source contracting when blankety blank blank blank right so policy saying yes we can do social contracting here's generally right why but I also want to make sure we're highlighting it's never I will go to it's not the preferred method because it doesn't support all of the things that we've said previously in the philosophy but while it and it doesn't have to be a very extensive thing not preferred but often is a necessity but it's not the

[01:18:48] preferred or the go-to method in favor of having language written for the next meeting what I would recommend I can write language what I would recommend is let's go ahead and give this one to dr. Anderson and that way if you can bring back just the recommended recommended language say one more time I think without objection we'll go ahead and have dr. Anderson look at her

[01:19:24] suggestions for language and then bring it back at the next meeting okay so 5,017 which is the school procurement system this is one of those I believe dr. Anderson that you reckon that you considered whether or not this could be merged with the previous and this is one of those times that I would very much like us if we are okay with them being separated right now in both policies like once we get the language back at the next meeting if we're okay with them I think that it's aspirational to have them merged if it's appropriate and I think that we need a conversation with dr. Reed about whether or not that is a

[01:20:03] preferred method because contracting and procurement or two I mean they can be different in terms of the system and so we can determine whether or not that's that's successful or would be a good use because I do understand that the point here is oftentimes that we're trying to merge policies to reduce just the sheer volume of policies that we have out in the world to have them make more sense but may I ask a question sure since with 5,000 5,010 5,010 I will be

[01:20:43] working on for new language 5,017 whether or not we pass it or don't pass it I think this could be one of those yes and perhaps have dr. Reed and her team look at does it make sense or is there any rationale to keeping them separate or putting them together 5,010 and 5,017 in the meanwhile and background yes ma'am we could do that I get a yes and no you could we can meet with the procurement staff thank you okay and then the other question that I saw is that again we're gonna make sure it says Fairfax County School Board

[01:21:21] there so any objections to making that change in the philosophy section is just to make sure that the first time I believe it is though so can you talk a little bit about your comment on that because unless I'm looking at the wrong policy I think you look at the wrong policy hold on because I just need to on the right one yeah it just is the school board yep I will add it right now

[01:21:47] okay so without objection we will go ahead and make that updated change mr.

[01:22:03] Frisch I'd like to make a motion to send this to the consent agenda I love that idea do I have a second thank you dr. Anderson all those in favor of moving this to the consent agenda with that change that is unanimous excellent okay 5028 let me close my mini open policies yes ma'am 5028 in 5028 dr. Anderson I believe you have one word that you would like to add to the philosophy and I want

[01:22:41] to change how she uses it okay again super minor edit hopefully I wrote yes with minor edit did I put okay it's okay I had a lot of screens open to make that happen we have no idea because my notes and that what I would like for there to be reflected under philosophy the school board recognizes that inventory management shall be regularly conducted because I think we speak to cadence someplace else if I recall properly I just think it needs to be part of the

[01:23:20] philosophy so that it doesn't intimate that this is a one-time activity gotcha mr. fish okay without objection we will add the word regularly conducted um okay and that speaks to a cadence that's more active no it's just oh oh sorry I

[01:23:52] misunderstood okay do I have a motion to move 5028 missing Jen cunning would she would like to move this to the consent agenda? Excellent. Do I have a second? Mr. Dannon, do I have a second? Excellent. Okay, all those in favor of moving this to the consent agenda. Excellent. Okay, 5725. We're doing great here, guys. Keep going.

[01:24:19] 5725. Yes, okay. Yes, this is 5725. Mr. Dannon, I believe this was your concern about adding the additional section about the FCPS responsibilities in here yeah and not a again not a big one but it just seemed like a in a interest of trying to keep things as consistent

[01:24:53] as we can um seem a little bit vague but again I don't have a strong thing about it um this was a recommendation from the superintendent so Dr. Reed can you speak to why um for policy 5725 why we might need the FCPS responsibilities added I assumed that it was in case we ever took control of a student's property that we would take responsibility

[01:25:24] for the property when it was in our control is that an accurate understanding yes ma'am I think so I believe so I'm just reading it real quick the students are responsible for the personal property I believe that's correct yes ma'am okay do we need that's right yet so mr. Foster do we need to identify that

[01:26:01] the item has been confiscated or is this just when we take control of anything I mean is this I'm I'm just I I understand but we don't usually take responsibility for items that we haven't removed from a student's possession I'm sorry you said when an item has been compensated confiscated confiscated so I I mean right now I'm really thinking cell phones is that we're about to take a whole lot of cell phones away from kids and so I don't know that the mr. Frisch

[01:26:36] I think it needs to be broader because for example if the school division is transporting student luggage for a an overnight trip or if they are gathering people's bags for moving them or what I'd like there's any number of one-off musical instruments you know clothing for concerts like all of these things where if something were to happen that the school division is holding on to it not because the student has been penalized but obviously I think the big ticket dollar item is going to be cell phones and perhaps other devices in the

[01:27:14] year ahead I think that includes everything here it does and I guess what my question is are we assuming liability for those items if we've taken control of it it's already here so I guess are you questioned after are we taking liability like are we assuming liability for items that are in our position the short answer is yes so and so that is the intention of this policy is that we

[01:27:48] want that language in here I just am that's what the language says and so yes I mean I think as currently worded well this is the only reason I ask is this is a change to the policy that we're actually voting on and so this is not existing policy so so I just I want to clarify that I think there's a nuance to this language and maybe ask mr. Foster to respond it does say FCPS shall assume responsibility for student property solely when so we're not assuming responsibility at any other time other than when such property is under the

[01:28:24] direct supervision and control of FCPS and in accordance with other established procedures. So I think what the attempt is, is to narrow when we actually have responsibility for student property rather than have it just broadly be at any time. So I agree, but the new law requires that we take possession of cell phones if they're being used inappropriately in our schools. And that's a pretty significant liability for the division to take on. Indeed it is. So question.

[01:28:56] Go ahead, Mr. Dan. So just to kind of make sure I understand that, so in the case of a cell phone, then, if a teacher, a principal confiscates a cell phone and there's subsequent damage to it or there's disagreement about how and when it got damaged, you know, we'd be liable for that?

[01:29:20] Under your reading, I guess maybe it's a question for Mr. Foster. Where does the liability lie? There's a potential. I mean, there would need to be proven in each case that the phone was damaged while in the possession and sole custody and control of the school system, which is going to be very case-specific.

[01:29:38] I mean, I think, yes. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Mr. Dannen, does that alleviate your concern related to this section? Yeah, it does. Thank you. Okay. Dr. Anderson.

[01:29:55] Thank you. A couple of questions. I want to start with this piece. So my understanding for FCPS responsibilities, a school confiscates a cell phone and puts it in the office and it becomes lost then we are liable to replace that cell phone potentially yes potentially what would make it not a yes well for example I mean the the standard is a reasonableness standard so for example if the phone was secured in the main office and despite that securing in the main office someone breaks in and steals

[01:30:32] it despite the best efforts of the administration in the school I think we would have an argument that we would not be responsible in that case sure thank you but we would be responsible if the person who took the cell phone confiscated the cell phone left it somewhere and forgot where and God knows what happened to it then we would have that liability I think in that scenario yes how do we use how do we address the examples that mr. Frisch raised like we've collected backpacks because we're going on a field trip we put them all on one section of the bus we come and we told the kids leave them there on the

[01:31:10] bus go out and enjoy the field trip we come back calls backpack is gone who's responsible for the thousand dollars he had in my mom would say I am but I'm too wondering doctor and mr. Foster I think that if I understand correctly to missing on Cunning's point there is an exception for field like for things like that and that could be what's already in established procedures and guidelines so we may have other procedures and guidelines that are mitigating some of the the impact of this is that right there that's correct I also wanted to

[01:31:48] note that under a long-established Virginia case law the school board is absolutely immune from liability it's the individual employees of the school system that can be held liable so I wanted to make sure that was clear well I don't think that that necessarily is going to make any of our staff feel better okay all right well I'm gonna move on to some of my comments just studying on top responsibilities for students personal response purpose of

[01:32:26] personal property I wonder if we could find a way to remove the apostrophe it's just like for student personal property because we don't necessarily need to make it plural it could just be just kind of the topic so that's one can we just say student responsibility sure okay well I'm talking about the the heading under risk management so if we just said student responsibility then it takes away the that I'm fine with that perfect the other piece that I wanted to better

[01:33:02] understand under philosophy it says the school board recognizes and I know we'll fix it the principle of personal accountability what do we mean by the principle of personal accountability I'm not asking us because we didn't write it I'm asking you all and then while you look for that I did in my notes have a revision of that segment that I'd like for consideration which is just reading

[01:33:41] the school board the Fairfax County School Board recognizes the personal accountability students have regarding their personal property affirming that students and families are responsible for property they bring to the school and the rest didn't change I'm fine with that that's good yeah but I just still want to know what do we mean by the principal like do we just believe in the general idea of it is that what I do believe in that general idea is that a legal term in Virginia mr. Foster I don't know I don't think so but it is a

[01:34:17] curious it is a very curious statement and I hope that my revision still captures that I think somebody probably meant personal responsibility but personal it's still there right I don't know it doesn't matter but I offered a fix so hopefully that is reasonable so without objection are we good with that change in language and the other piece under responsibilities students responsibility perhaps student responsibility or the you know responsibility of students just to remove the apostrophe yeah we already

[01:34:54] said that we were gonna change that it wasn't just two places yeah but we'll change the summary of changes because it's gonna be addressed right oh I meant under under section 4 letter A right right right so I'm asking that it be changed in the title and in letter A gotcha yeah I think that was it so the title would now be responsibilities for student personal property yes yes I got you and then we'll change letter A and I guess what I offered perfect okay any

[01:35:32] other concerns would somebody like to make a motion mr. Frisch to do but not just kidding to the consent agenda thank you is there a second excellent dr. Anderson all those in favor that is unanimous okay so what we're gonna do is we have about 25 minutes left and we are doing an amazing job I'm very proud of us we're gonna talk about the last one that we have the the majority of committee members that are in agreement and then we're gonna hold the last six

[01:36:12] to the next meeting so that way we do have a little bit of time to talk about just the future planning for the committee for this year but guys this is an amazing start to be able to get through all of these these will all be prepared and put on new business for next week so our colleagues will have a chance to kind of look over them and then after that they will be moved to consent okay so I just wanted to give you the lay of the land and as to how this works and we will start off the next time with the the interesting part is what we might be able to do is if there are any again puppy to small dog

[01:36:47] changes then we should go ahead and we could go ahead and make those changes if they're just mistakes or anything like that and then we could have another chance for you guys to let us know whether or not we got it right okay so because we have some feedback from each of you about those issues then we can go ahead and see what we might be able to take care of okay so the last one is 5830 which is school stores and with that one dr. Anderson I believe you had

[01:37:25] some wording adjustments to purpose and philosophy yes under purpose I love it when our policies write to establish policy so that was tiny just to change it to guidelines just something else because that's the purpose of the document itself rather than reiterating and under the philosophy just a small change to rather than it just school stores shall and I think that's in my notes oh I have one other more substantive question because that was

[01:38:02] not said here I understood because this is something that I had in my life as principal and I also believe that that was the case here that school stores should not be cannot be opened during lunch periods as to not offer direct competition is that still accurate especially I believe some food stuff I believe so that's been a long-standing rule is that articulated in a

[01:38:34] subsequent regulation was that something we need to capture here I would have to check I am suggesting such because we have certain restrictions that are already articulated so it's easy just to just add a sentence that articulates exactly that that school store shall not be in competition with cafeteria during

[01:39:13] their open hours I don't believe that rule has changed so you're asking where else do we did we know I did I was kind of articulating some language because so he confirmed that the rule has changed so school stores shall not be in competition with the cafeteria during their during hours during their open hours um can I ask a clarifying question that could mean that this that the leadership team or leadership class can't sell donuts before school because

[01:39:52] the school cafeteria is open is that what our intention is well I just know that the rules are you can't sell foodstuff when the cafeteria is open because that shouldn't be a competition however that we can capture that let's do so if that's the rule if the cafeteria is open for breakfast that means they cannot sell doughnuts because that would be the conflict right so so I'm just asking if that was what our intent was intent because I think that's been a long-standing rule forever don't compete with the cafeteria because they're a self-sustaining entity you could argue that a leadership bake sale is not necessarily a school store so that well I think all of those things

[01:40:31] also should not be happening because again going back to my days I was as a practitioner like I couldn't have the PTA sell stuff while the cafeteria was open gotcha so students should should not also sell things food things they could sell the pencils and things but the food items that would potentially compete with the cafeteria we're told to take another time I think that's probably better suited for a different policy in that case because this is specific to school stores and I don't know how many of our schools still have I remember firmly buying pencils but yes yeah since this is specific to schools was we could just use that statement okay that sounds good any objection to

[01:41:11] adding that sentence and at the end of restrictions okay okay then Miss St. John Cunning I believe in the second sentence of the philosophy you wanted it to but I but I believe dr. Anderson I don't know that's where she put where she wanted to put shall operate and I had just put they operate I had just be it was what we both had an issue with so shall operate is fine yeah perfect it's the same okay that sounds great is okay so do I have a motion to move this

[01:41:49] to consent dr. Anderson do a second missing John Cunning all those in favor of moving this to consent that is unanimous for all committee members okay guys we did great okay so for the next set we have 1203 1310 1375 1475 5029 and 5030 so those are the seven or the six policies that we still have less left out of this first just quick question because it took me forever to to do the

[01:42:26] notes that I did and I know sometimes I if it was a small change I just had it as red line but if it was a lot of change I redlined it and I tried to write the clean copy is a clean copy more helpful I think actually both are helpful to show where the change was and also the over I think for the conversation purposes that was extremely helpful to have both if it's a one word that you're adding it's fine to just leave it but if it's a rewrite of the Section I was very helpful to have both in my opinion. Okay So that means that today we got through

[01:43:03] 18 policies, so that is a huge huge deal In terms of our work moving forward I do want to talk about future planning and just give you guys a kind of the lay of the land of the things that I'm hoping That we're going to be able to accomplish this year. Like I said at the beginning we have 105 policies that are due for review we looked at 24 of them today and we approved 18 to go to new business and then go to the consent agenda so we have already talked a little bit about the nice to have and the have to have so I do hope that we can continue that it's the yes and that we can pass this now

[01:43:43] and we will be doing a lot of work to make sure that we keep track of the policies in five years from now we do not want to have the future board have to go through 105 policies so it would make perfect sense that there's some work that can be done in an iterative way even if it can't be done this year because if we are able to get through the backlog of things that we already have due for this year we absolutely can start tackling some of those things that were smaller changes or you know we would like to add this additional information that kind of thing we'll make sure that we get those added in we

[01:44:20] I would like us also to make an agreement that if we have a the time in our schedule that we are going to be able to move things through quickly and that's this first couple of meetings I'm hoping we can get like the low-hanging fruit the easy ones that I think are pretty fast to approve I'm not sending anything in this format to you guys that I think is going to be a longer discussion but if any of these just the same way as we did today if any of them are turning into longer discussions then I hope that we will be able to do what we did today which is assign it to a particular committee member have them bring back the suggested change and then we will be able

[01:44:58] to move through a little bit faster in that way so that's my hope so that's all related to the policies that are due for review the governance manual revisions there are some revisions that need to be made at this point the clerk has taken the work that mr. Frisch did last year and she updated the initial document the document is in desperate need of formatting and I'm going to I have already offered to make it match the formatting that I did for the committee or the Community Advisory Committee guidebook that we created what I however I do not want to make any of those changes until the committee has approved

[01:45:37] the new outline so that is what I will be bringing to the committee at the next meeting is an outline that shows what is in the document now in the way that it's being recommended to change so we will not be doing anything with the with the actual format of the document until we have that discussion but right now I think because of the way things are kind of a little bit haphazard in the document itself we've been adding appendices instead of actually reformatting the document to make things make sense and the problem is is that's not an effective way to have a governance manual so I want like four

[01:46:15] different numerical it really does and that kind of thing is going to drive us all nuts the other problem is is because so many times it's just been converted from a PDF file the table of contents is a disaster anytime you try to make any changes it's a it's just a mess so what I'm hoping is is that we can kind of create a document that's going to live for a little bit longer in terms of the actual format and then the second iteration of what I hope we can accomplished with the governance manual is changes that we want to make or changes that we want to recommend to the rest of the board and it could be that we might not get to all of that this year or we pick a particular section and

[01:46:55] go forward with it but my intention in formatting the document is I have a significant amount of experience of not changing a thing related to the content but actually getting a document formatted to be in a usable format so that's what I would recommend is that I would like to move carefully through this to make sure everybody is comfortable with anything that we're doing so dr. Anderson did you have a yeah just speaking to the cadence of work I understand we have the backlog of 105 documents and we're trying to get through it and I won't speak for anybody else but I spent a significant amount of

[01:47:33] time to be thorough and these 24 documents that I looked at and these were the easy ones and and also navigating my notes so that it could be visible to you all and could be organized and clear and balancing that other internal document that I'm checking off and making sure I'm doing the right things which clearly I did not because some were supposed to be yeses with and some ended up no's so it's a fair amount of preparation I'd like us to consider as we are dealing with the doc the backlog of policies new policies that take up a significant

[01:48:13] amount of time such as technology governance work that maybe we alternate so that it doesn't have to be 25 policy 25 25 policies that we maybe do 25 we might know what the 20 the next 25 will be and we have a little bit more lee leeway to work through that because the next month we will deal with the governance manual and then the following month it will be maybe back to the next 25 and then the next month it could be the tech policy whatever the policies of the day that tends to sometimes overrun our calendar I just want to break it up a little bit to give a little bit more time for prepping

[01:48:49] because I don't think I think we're at the low-hanging fruit of easy policies I just like more time to be more thorough yeah about a hundred of the hundred and five there are about 60 that I would count as like those low-hanging fruits So I I think it's a great idea. It takes a ton of time to get all the red lines I know it takes a ton of time for the superintendent's office to get them done, too The only reason that I redid the super the red lines is just to do all those tiny little formatting changes to the documents themselves So they'll that formatting can live on in the word versions in the future But I agree with you is that giving you guys enough time to be successful and have a chance

[01:49:28] so what it could be is that by the next meeting I'll be able to give you the next 25 and so that it'll be a full month before we look at the next iteration but anything that's already been done we could probably clear pretty fast because we've already done the first heavy lift so that I think that's a great idea I'd suggest that we always have at least 10 or a dozen ready to go so that if we're doing tech policy and we reach a breaking like an end point and we still have 45 minutes left in the meeting we can pick up a handful of the policies and just move them on and make sure that they're always on the agenda we may not get to

[01:50:08] them on the agenda but they're always there so we can pick them up okay I think I think both of those are great suggestions and I think that next time it would be very easy to go ahead and talk about that the other thing that I'm the last thing that's on the list and it's not a small item is that the ed tech policies absolutely need to get passed as quickly as possible so that way we have full runway for our staff to have as much time to make any changes that are outlined in the policy before the next school year and so I don't want us to get into a situation as we have this year where there's a very short

[01:50:44] amount of time for staff to be able to make those changes so my recommendation would be is that I'm going to go ahead and meet with the superintendent to determine and we're going to reverse engineer a timeline I have already let her know that I'm hoping that we can have these policies done by the end of this calendar year and I've already let the board chair know that I'm hoping that we can schedule a work session that would allow us that once we do the the next iteration of the work based on the superintendent's policies that she's going to bring back that we will have a chance to take it to the full board at the at the moment that is appropriate is that does that sound about right to

[01:51:21] everybody? Okay. Okay. Then you guys are awesome. Mr. Dannon has his hand up. Oh, I'm sorry. Go for it, Mr. Dannon. I'm so sorry. Just wanted to emphasize that last point. I really like the idea of reverse engineering some of the bigger policies and developing a timeline. I would just point out, I know that tech and emerging tech policy is one of those that is high profile. It's going to take a lot of community input. Last year was calendar policy and a couple others. I don't if we need to at some point identify what those could be so they could build out the kind of timeline to make sure we're getting enough input and feedback

[01:51:57] and so forth but I really like that suggestion and the other thing I'll say too is just good go ahead no you're good no nothing I'll say is I think with these two it'll really help us I think it looks like we're doing that starting very broadly and then Gary getting narrower and there we're getting a lot of feedback that way so appreciate it look I have no delusions of grandeur that we're gonna be able to get through all 105 but it's an aspirational goal and so I really think that we could absolutely do this if we kind of set our our minds to it this year and I think that if this committee is able to take

[01:52:34] on the ed tech policies we're able to clear as many off the 105 there are date in addition to getting some formatting changes and updates to the governance manual it would be a very successful year for all of us so I am excited about the possibility and I think today was a great example of how we can really move quickly once we just decide to do so so it thank you so much for all of the advanced work that you guys did so at 6:22 we are adjourned

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coraggio Consulting · aguyonx.com