Coraggio Consulting
Fairfax County School Board Governance Committee Meeting, Tuesday, September 15, 2026

Date: Tuesday, September 15, 2026
Place: Fairfax County School Board, Virginia
Length: 1h 48m (video)
Official meeting video (YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPiDiLhsnrE
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 2026-10-26. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

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

[00:00:02] Okay, this this September 15th Committee meeting of the Governance Committee is called to order at 4:32 p.m.

[00:00:20] The first thing that we're gonna do is talk about the approval of the minutes from last meeting. Do we have an Mr. Frisch? I'll make the motion to approve the minutes. Thank you. Do we have a second? Thank you. Would you like to speak to your motion?

[00:00:39] Are you good? Okay, any questions about the minutes? I didn't see anything that stood out. Dr. Anderson?

[00:01:06] just looking at it right now because it didn't have it so on page four top of five those are the policies that we moved forward yes is that what that is I believe that the that at the bottom of page four that was the list of all of the policies that we considered or all the policies that were listed for the day but then the motions would have discussed each individual policy that was move forward and we did make sure that before anything was posted on new business that it was only the 17 that we had discussed during the last meeting all righty thank you okay okay all in favor of approving the minutes that is

[00:01:42] unanimous for all board members thank you okay moving on we're gonna going to talk about the governance manual revision plan quickly what I did is what I told you guys I was going to do is created just kind of a tentative outline this is the existing outline of the governance manual with all its components right now and I included just a few questions and different parts that I have some questions about the organization of the document it seems to be in my opinion that many of these things were just kind of added in and I

[00:02:19] understand the way the governance manual was originally created kind of created a document that was merging a bunch of different policies because in the organization work that I've been doing with the policies it's pretty clear that a lot of these were existing policies that got merged into one document and I just think that we're in a moment that we could reorganize the information not necessarily this is not a conversation about changing content this is a conversation about how we're going to organize the information and whether or not we still want to have certain information included that is duplicated in other locations throughout the division so dr. Anderson and then mr.

[00:02:54] Frisch yes thank you and I want to go you didn't have something on our internal document for this right no I included the comments right on the side in this document so that everybody can see the different portions yeah so I wasn't sure if I had missed that I want to make sure I just grab my notes on this okay I can't find it so I'm just gonna run through here I'm just gonna run through some of the comments that you have here and I don't know how they

[00:03:31] will be captured starting with what is on page 11 which is a strategic plan the overview the goal reporting the portrait of the graduate I think we should keep that however the communicator collaborator I don't think that needs to be identified in the table of contents per se because it's all under the portion of the graduate and that necessary saying to take the content out just not in the index I would like for to retain each executive limitation on

[00:04:07] its own page because it's cleaner and I'm really hoping we get to that place where we have with the table of contents where we have that link back where we could do that with those pages and having them be single singly provided on a page I think it's cleaner in terms of general organization I think we have an opportunity to take like all of the board stuff and to put together even at the top I think if this is the board's governance manual all of those things can be after you know just the general preamble of the things the board self-governance policies which are now outlined on pages 34 to 47 I think we

[00:04:46] could bring that up and then even in the back some of the appendices some of the other things I deal with board conduct they can all be clustered together I am not sure why pages 40 I think it's 40 to 44 I'm not sure that we need those B labels. You see where it says B6, B5? I don't know what that means. I've never really understood what that means, so I'd like for us to take a look at that. On the back, the legislative committee

[00:05:23] needs to be added as a seventh committee. Dr. Anderson, just so you know, I believe that we approved that in the last iteration, so it just wasn't updated on here. Oh, no, no, no. I realize that because I know it's new, and I'm just saying to add it. Board member conduct, which is 56, 54, 56 just to move that under all of the board's self-governing the appendices I fully agree I don't think they need to stand as appendices I think they should just be a certain section I'd also like to see if we could reorganize the

[00:05:59] appendices a little bit because you're right I think it's just been added over time and not organized in a thoughtful way I can envision a staffing section that speaks to the superintendent things and then all of the ELs the AG things and then whatever goes under that particularly from the work of the administration committee maybe it makes sense to include some of those things under the AG and then subsequently the deputy clerk because since these are our

[00:06:28] main employees okay mr. Frisch thank you I agree with most of what dr. Anderson said and I think it probably makes sense to bring board self governance up in the manual I would like to see the strategic plan goal reporting be the section that is before executive limitations so that we're more closely tying things that we're judging the superintendent on together I

[00:07:08] don't think we need to regurgitate the strategic plan in the governance manual then we are required to update the governance manual every time we have a new strategic plan I think we should reference it and let people know where to find it and why why the board relies on it on a strategic governance or excuse me a strategic plan period I think portrait of a graduate can live on its own before diving into the strategic plan one thing that's not in

[00:07:43] here that I think is in the current governance manual is like a value statement and a mission statement that's in the governance manual they're not in the table of contents but I feel like that could live with the portrait of a graduate so I would ensure that that's in there and then just generally speaking it drives me absolutely nuts that some sections of the governance manual are like three paragraphs of prose and then other sections have

[00:08:20] hierarchical lettering and numbering to make it more easily understood when you're talking about different sections. And as people have said, it's clearly a result of different eras and whatnot. For example, the B1, B2, B3, etc. Those are all just board governance policy number one, board governance policy number two, just like an EL. But that's just a relic of how we used to do it, right? Like, there's no reason to tie it through, especially when you consider that before adding the ELs it was like the only section in the governance manual that

[00:08:55] had like a B whatever numbering system and so I'm not opposed to having the iterated out different sections just like we do under the ELs but if we're going to have that kind of organization to the document I think we should probably have it for all the sections of the document and if we did that I I wouldn't be opposed to B1 B2 because then we'd have shorthand for talking about the different sections, right?

[00:09:27] But then if we do have a staffing section, we'd have to have like an S1 and S2 whatever it is, right? I just want some uniformity in addition to The suggested moving of things possible removals of things and that's before we even talk about like things that could be written To more closely reflect what the board's practices are or what the board's desires are etc That's just to get the status quo to reasonable So I'm going to take a quick turn my advocacy and this would be that I would like our preface to actually have a statement of

[00:10:04] Support for the strategic plan with a link to where you could find the strategic plan on our website Because I do not think that that core place that you can find the information is going to likely change And I think we should have the same thing for a statement of support for our vision and our mission with where you can find that information on the website and so that way to mr.

[00:10:23] Frisch's point we this will not go out of date if any of those items change because that's a large portion of what mr. Frisch spent part of the time in governance last year is kind of updating this document to make sure that we didn't have that outdated information in there and so I don't I would I don't want to remove the references of support to our main core things like the strategic plan or portrait of a graduate or anything like that I would just like it to be a little bit more strategic just because it's such a long document as it stands that I worry that it kind of gets lost in the shuffle of things I agree

[00:11:02] that we don't need all of that for portrait of a graduate I actually understand why they were that all of the communicator of collaborator and all that was in there but I understand how we could really easily reorganize some like my Socratic questioning came out in this so if you see a question it's probably because I believe that we should do it I believe absolutely we should move the board governance policies or board governance standards or how whatever we want to call them because this isn't necessarily a policy I would like to move the board governance before just so that and then

[00:11:38] take anything from the appendices that would make sense to attach up I would like to make sure that that's done and we're probably going to need to strengthen our overarching information in that section as we move forward just so we can have a little bit more information that's partially what we were talking about with the guidelines for the policy development style guide so some of those types of standards I think would be very helpful and then my question is and this is something I didn't have a chance to crosswalk as

[00:12:17] closely as I wanted to but for the superintendent board relationship we're looking at policy 1203 today my question is is some of this should be in policy not necessarily because if the superintendent's being held to a standard it can't just be on the in my opinion it can't just be on the governance manual because this is that this is the practical document that's executing our policy the same way the superintendent has regulation and so the governance manual serves as that for us and so I would advocate let's check within that area of the governance manual and make and see what should

[00:12:53] eventually be added into 1203 whether or not there's duplication or anything like that and then we absolutely I do think that this is a smart place for executive limitations to live so aren't mr. Dannen thanks my primary feedback is this similar to yours that if if an item is the if this is not the system of record or source of record for that content then with think it makes more sense to make reference to it and then store that elsewhere so I don't know is that portrait of a graduate I guess we were to update that that would not be

[00:13:30] through the governance manual it would be updated okay I also agree with the comment about executive limitations having them breaking out on each page kind of like how that's done already in other places the other I also agree the comment about the board's governance items coming first and then ELs and so forth maybe afterwards trying to look to the other questions that you have provided that's the large yeah those that's my biggest thing is just to your

[00:14:07] point it's a very long document and I think we need to get to the point sooner as far as what it covers dr. Anderson thank you even while we're doing all of the streamlining and I tend to be less concerned about length I'm more concerned about it being nicely organized and easily easily too easy to find and predictable I also want us to be mindful of I look and we all use the governance manual to look for the processes so we have some things that are expectations we have some things that are process I think there's a space to differentiate that. The public also uses the governance manual. We cannot forget that. They're not going to

[00:14:46] necessarily go and look up all of these policies. So let's not lose sight of the fact that they are looking at this because I've heard at definitely more than one board meeting where somebody says, your governance manual says. So this is an easy place for them to find certain information. I just want us to keep that in the back of our heads to not be too reductive. Is that the word that I'm looking for in terms of how we revise this so that we lose content that people who are beyond us are using the other question that I have for folks is do we

[00:15:24] want so the revision notes are a pretty extensive document or part of the document and I'm not a hundred percent sure how I think that the clerks maintaining a revision history is important but I'm asking whether or not we think that it needs to be part of the document itself other than when we bring the board matter like basically when we bring the item to a vote I think that we should have an outline of what was revised but I'm asking whether or not we still need the revision notes that start on page 114 and go to the end

[00:15:58] of the document do we still need that in the actual document itself mr. fish I would say no you could probably once a reformatting is done you could probably started again and say like it was you know revised extensively and you could also just list the previous dates as opposed to saying what every change was our policies don't list what the changes were just list the dates that it was

[00:16:32] changed so and then from that point it'll be a good practice for the school board office to keep a version of each previous and perhaps it can be numbered at the top so that or the but wherever so that previous iterations can be saved for posterity and that we know that the most recent but is you know version 2.1 point five point whatever so I don't see a problem in removing that or just changing the practice of how we note that it was updated the other thing I

[00:17:11] would add is that on the on the question of how we include things in the document I think we can provide links in a document that maybe we've shied away from because when these things were created back in the day people didn't link to documents in a Word file or whatever so when we talk about the strategic plan we can link to the page for the strategic plan when we talk about portrait of a graduate we can link to that when we talk about the approved form that people do for forum topics. There's so much stuff in the appendix

[00:17:46] that does not need to live in the governance manual nor does it format properly to live within the governance manual. So all of that kind of stuff can be linked out even if just to a page or repository where those documents can be found on board docs or something else with a short URL and then as those things are updated. They're updated there. They're easier to find there. But the fact that I was able to go through our governance manual a few months ago and change things that had been defunct for the better part of, on the strategic

[00:18:26] plan part, three years, and on other parts well more than that, speaks to the fact that we need to make sure that as many aspects of this is evergreen as possible, so that we're not subjecting future boards to the need to revise the document that should have been revised long ago.

[00:18:44] because it's just not going to happen every time. We had plenty of school board members who were conscientious and looking at the governance manual on a weekly monthly basis on previous boards but those things were not touched. So I think we need to do our best to limit the number of things that will have to be updated when external when external things are updated as a result. I would agree with you just for understanding how these this document this size how it's maintained on a normal basis I would definitely agree so my next

[00:19:21] question to everybody is how do we want to move from here so my recommendation would be that I can do one of two things I can bring back another updated table of contents that will outline exactly how things are going to be laid out and dig in just a little bit to the content in each of these sections to make sure that it all makes sense I can start moving pieces of the document around whichever I want to do whatever everybody feels the most comfortable with moving forward so that we have a clear vision of how things have have changed

[00:19:56] so there is no question moving forward and then I know during this process that we are going to uncover things that are going to need to be updated or thing and so what I would suggest that we do is similar to what's going on with the policies right now is that we identify things that we want to go back to and so that way even if we only get to reorganization this year I think it's going to be a very successful endeavor to make this document more usable for everyone but I have a feeling that we're going to be able to do a fairly quick move of content within and then we can identify the areas that we would want to

[00:20:34] consider to align with board practice or anything like that so I I welcome any feedback as to how we want to move forward from here so I saw Tom and dr. Anderson and then mr. Frisch I would just advocate for the latter scenario going in a little bit more detail making a little bit deeper edits versus just coming back with an updated table of contents dr. Anderson I'm on the opposite end I think we should chuck it a little bit let's just reorganize it get people accustomed to the reorganization before we make content edits because the two together it will take it will be a little bit more

[00:21:10] significant because there's you know sections that some are wedded to I think we could give ourselves the gift of let's just make this something that is manageable in terms of navigation before we dive into the content changes I also wanted to speak to the links well I love a link I also find it hard to navigate a document that has many many many links and again this is not just a document for the school board it's a document for the public you know the regular person who's going to be on their phones, sometimes it's easier for them to see the content than having to go to a link that may be in a place that they don't have access to because of how our system is set up.

[00:21:50] So I just want to be mindful that we are not just making it a reference document, that we are super judicious about the things that must be linked to. - Mr. Fresh. - So I would say that I agree that we should reconvene on the subject with like a revised table of contents And then I think we should go section by section in that revised table of contents and make sure that it is all within the same voice, using the same hierarchy of numbers or whatever that we're using in the manual.

[00:22:28] And then that is what should be presented to the full board for approval, which is basically just a cleaned up version of the current governance manual with no changes to the intent of any section. While doing that, I think you're right, we're going to identify things that, oh, I want to talk about that one or I want to talk about this one.

[00:22:45] So let's make a list. And once we finish ensuring that the table of contents is worked out and that everything's in the right voice and the right numbering regime, then we can dive into, OK, Dr. Anderson wants to adjust this part about this.

[00:23:02] Carl wants to adjust this part about this. Tom wants to do this. Marcia wants to do this. And I didn't want to take away the doctor. so we all have our say and you know what might need to be updated but before that everything is just for lack of a better word formatting cosmetic and voice and then after that we can tackle whether or not certain practices fit with what we're doing now or should okay so what what I'm gonna oh I'm sorry Miss St.

[00:23:41] John Cunning. So I agree with what both Dr. Anderson and Mr. Frisch said about having the table of contents 10s done first and then going back and also being mindful of how many links we use or don't use because I do agree that sometimes it's hard to navigate it's hard for us to navigate it's also it's even more difficult for the public so as we go through that thinking about what should be linked and what shouldn't be linked okay so what I'm gonna suggest here is because the way our meetings are falling we probably won't actually I

[00:24:21] don't miss Brown we don't have a meeting in December right it's January is the next one after the November meeting okay so I'll have to double check the schedule but it's not going to be the next meeting that we talk about this it's going to be the meeting after using dr. Anderson's kind of plan to to space the workout and so what I'm going to suggest that we bring back in the next one is that I do think that the the interesting part is one of the smaller sections in the document itself is going to be any information that we include about staff and so even with the ELs and everything else that's it's pretty

[00:24:58] straightforward that we're not we wouldn't even in the future change the language related to ELs and unless that was a bigger board conversation and so I would advocate for bringing back a revised table of contents and the revision to the section for executive limitations and the information about the superintendent and so that way we can kind of pull together that information out of the rest of the document and so that could be the first section that we talk about as a way to kind of chunk it just a little bit so that we're not just in in a do loop just talking about the table of contents I

[00:25:34] think we can we can I'm not gonna say what I want to say but I think that we can get there by threading the needle just a little bit so is everybody okay with that approach yes okay so I will make sure that we bring a revised table of contents and start to pull together at least the section related to our staff so like having a section it would probably make sense to have a section called board staff so if we are all without objection excellent thank you miss brown

[00:26:12] perfect okay excellent moving on to the next topic which is to talk a little bit about the the remaining policies from the previous meeting so i want to go through and go ahead and talk about each of the policies so they're listed on board docs in order and there's also the link that will get you to where that all is we've also included the feedback that we

[00:26:51] received from Miss Marin related to two of the policies up on board docs so you'll have that information available to you as well so what we're going to do is go ahead and start by talking about clarification the feedback from Miss Marin it's it's not incorporated in the language it's just a document that is posted right now because it was it was the the only feedback that was incorporated from the previous version were basically like the the small wording changes that you guys brought forward and then mr. Frisch provided some further suggestions weren't incorporated those were not incorporated

[00:27:30] yours were right so miss Marron's were not and mr. Frisch's weren't because they weren't posted no I just need to know if I need to pull it out you had a new version I did not and so what we're gonna do is talk about the version that was posted for 1203 to start so we have some some requested changes mr. fish do you want to walk through what some of your recommendations were and you we can kind of my hope is that we can kind of gain consensus but mine are not yours

[00:28:07] are not because of the they were provided on the internal document so you're gonna walk us through she hers were included because they were sent to

[00:28:17] the entire committee okay so the first question that I have is of the changes

[00:29:20] that were recommended from committee members who provided them before the last meeting do we have any concerns with the changes that were made they were included on yeah they were included on the red line too they were pointed out one of my changes was misunderstood okay can you let me know which one yes it's the one that speaks to section E if you go back to section 4 that speaks to

[00:29:55] responsibilities you have a enforce laws be organized and manage C is maintain all of those are verbs I think when I shared my statement you place it in the wrong place my hope was that instead of having governance which is the only noun and that series we could change that to be consistent with how the other sections are being presented and change that to present progress because all of the others begin with a verb I think you ended up putting that term in the first line when it was a recommendation to change the title

[00:30:34] because you change report progress to present progress and I wasn't so dr. Anderson you just want the governance header to be changed to be what is that present progress only because we have verbs with all of the other areas you're trying to happen to be all parallel I got you I'm not sure that I can answer your question about whether my changes have anything to do with other people's

[00:31:07] changes I you asked if we are okay with other people's changes I don't know because all I did was edit the red line version with my changes so I don't know if I edited over somebody else's changes I could have been prepared for that if I knew that was was gonna be the question so I don't know okay but I will tell you what my changes were and why I did them and people can tell me what they think

[00:31:44] okay for what we're on 1203 right yep all right I don't think that the division superintendent recognizing things belongs in our philosophy this is the board's philosophy I moved that to be a header paragraph beginning in the responsibilities section so I moved that down and then I changed it to the school board further believes so that it continues with the normal way that we talk about secondary considerations involved in policy in philosophies

[00:32:18] rather and then also attend school board meeting it should be it should be a 10 school board meetings which is G attend school board meeting it should be meetings so I do think that my version kind of goes over other edits that were made dr. Anderson was tweaking language that I've moved so that's the that's where the conflict would be between these and I'm perfectly fine with the

[00:32:58] change that mr. Frisch provided which is moving a paragraph that I had embedded to a different location it's still there and it replaces the the current opening sentence of under responsibilities yes absolutely so I guess my only question for you Mr. Frisch is when you provided the feedback you were providing it on the red line that was already the one that was going to be presented here yes yes okay so ever on the one that was the previous version so as long as that is

[00:33:32] true then the then the changes will be reflected in whatever your that so we're gonna so there were always there are almost always two redline versions right a superintendent's red line and then where our red line ended up after the last meeting right with the change I never used the previous version I always use the changes after the last meeting version so that's that's something to just note is that we're talking about the version that I created for this meeting not the version that we created for the last meeting so as long as we then that means that we're talking about the same thing and anytime I made a change based on what the recommendation from from a different committee member

[00:34:11] was I made sure to put note of the change that was being made on the red so you'll see them all and so I appreciate dr. Anderson you letting me know that I misunderstood so are you suggesting that we want to keep will annually report progress or do you want to okay I did not have any commentary regarding the language itself my feedback was regarding the title okay so I'm gonna note to leave that as report progress yeah and G should be meetings I

[00:34:47] got that already yep hold on let me go down any objections to changing the E header to pres to present progress okay any objections to the changes that mr.

[00:35:17] Frisch has suggested excellent do I have a motion to move this okay go ahead two small things one under B for only because I believe I read this someplace so it says the the division superintendent shall maintain an organizational chart but it says may develop procedures and regulations

[00:35:54] necessary I can't remember which other policy that we spoke to where it says she would develop procedures why is that a man not a shall and is there a rush this is B - I think that that was the way it was in the previous version of the document before yeah I think it was the way it was the previous version in the document and I'm happy to I have no problem changing that and I can't believe I can't remember the other policy it's just keeping that language consistent regarding procedures and regulations so that's one and if you don't have any objections to doing that that's great and the other piece that I

[00:36:32] had the purpose change you did not change the purpose the purpose is to prescribe the division superintendent responsibilities and relationship with the board is that a reciprocal relationship should we be speaking from superintendent to board and from board to the superintendent because I think it's a little bit one-sided that was just a general observation can I make a can I make a suggestion that we actually say to prescribe the superintendent's responsibilities within the school division I just this isn't

[00:37:11] really talking about the relationship with the board this is talking about the requirement within the division so with without objection so it would be to prescribe the superintendent's responsibilities within the school division any objection doctorate or within Fairfax County Public Schools do we want to have it be specific we've done that in other places was the previous suggestion within the school division I think we need to say within

[00:37:49] Fairfax County Public Schools the references to FCPS throughout need to be FCPS yes I will make note to change that can I raise some of the comments that miss Marin sent since I think there

[00:38:26] was some of 1203 yeah actually if you can help be in charge of that that would be amazing so that I don't have to have one more document it's a lot of document juggling I was looking at all the different versions because yeah I'm glad there were only seven I believe the first one is section the same section that I just talked about that talked about may develop which we have changed to shall develop procedures and regulations and the suggestion is efficient and safe

[00:39:03] operations of the schools and all FCPS facilities I think there's some merit to that the language I think is a little clunky but I think there's a space for to be inclusive of facilities because we do have regulations that are not necessarily that don't necessarily pertain to schools but our facilities and we have other buildings besides just school buildings would we want to simplify it and just say the efficient operations of all FCPS facilities yes I think that any objection to that so it would be shall develop procedures and regulations necessary to ensure the efficient operation of all FCPS

[00:39:42] facilities hmm you know what on second hand if we just say all facilities does it make it too physical plant related rather than schools which has a whole other body of work which is the educational component can can we just say to ensure the efficient safe operations period or deficient to ensure safe efficient operations period I think that we would have to say at least of the school division and that would include yeah facilities and everything I because for me in this case schools isn't I agree with dr.

[00:40:21] Anderson I don't think schools is actually the physical building I think it's the conduct of our schools and so I think that would also include buses for example things like that right 100% right so safe and efficient to ensure the efficient we could say operations all aspects of our schools of the division. Okay. We want of the school division? Yes, because it's everything they're in. Any objection

[00:40:58] to that? I think it gets to the heart of what we're trying to accomplish there. Shall develop procedures and regulations necessary to ensure the efficient and safe operations. And safe operations of what? I had of the division. Now that I hear it, I think there's something missing.

[00:41:16] Of the school division? Yeah. Efficient and safe operation of the school division. That's fine. Okay, then I'm just second-guessing myself for no good reason then. Okay, so this is the way it would read.

[00:41:35] Shall develop procedures and regulations necessary to ensure the efficient and safe operation of the school division. I think that encompasses everything we want it to be. Everything under the sun. Buses, the educational component, as well as the plants. Anything else from Ms. Marin?

[00:41:52] Yes. Number two, suggesting an addition that says, shall enter the school division into fiscally prudent and justified financial commitments and communicate these with the school board per policy in law I don't know if I know where this is supposed to go fully is it number six oh oh be on new number six thank you because the rest says shall maintain an

[00:42:26] organization shall manage shall develop procedures shall I don't know what this one says because I can't see it is empowered to act and then this one just says shall enter and yeah I read it mr. Christian and I also have a comment on this one this one's pretty easy because I think we already have a superintendent who does this but I don't think the end of the sentence is how we typically describe these things in our policies it's usually in accordance with all

[00:43:02] applicable state and federal laws and policies or whatever that's the language it should end with not per school board policy and law we don't make laws so in accordance with all applicable laws and school board policies because we do have policies that spell this out in much more detail the current number five is

[00:43:39] kind of the catch-all I'm actually gonna throw another wrench in this I do not think that it should be under this section I think that it should be its own section about financial because I do not think it makes sense to just put this into organize and manage we have other things broken out so I think it makes sense to have it be its own header so so pretty much enforce laws organize and manage the school system so the new heading would be starting with a verb

[00:44:08] spend wisely fiscal responsibility I mean it's something about fiscal responsibility right could we just fit it in and come up with the title a little bit later once we've kind of pondered it a little bit but I agree

[00:44:42] with you I think it could very well live on its own as a subsection okay so taking dr. Anderson suggestion that will continue to come up with a title here the the section the statement within the section would read the division superintendent shall enter the school division in into fiscally prudent and justified financial commitments and communicate these with the school board in accordance with all applicable laws and school board policies so that's how it would read the division superintendent shall enter

[00:45:19] school division into fiscally prudent and justified financial commitments and communicate these with the school board in accordance with all applicable laws and school board policies I don't know if it's the superintendent shall enter because technically the superintendent cannot enter into contracts the school board enters into contracts so shall make recommendations that are shall make recommend it's all of them whether she's initiating it following up with something else that's come from somebody else ultimately it's a recommendation to the school board so I think it should be shall make a recommendation shall make fiscal recommendations that are yada yada yada

[00:45:57] you could you know put in the rest where do you want to put yada yada I think that my recommendation at this point is actually gonna be to hold here because I think that we're we're kind of wordsmithing and so what I'm going to recommend is that we look at the information in the governance manual that's part of what the superintendent's responsibilities are ensure that those sections are in here I will continue to make to do the same thing where we are I assume that do we have consensus to agree to the things that we've already

[00:46:31] discussed so far today with the understanding that we I've made notes to add all of these in and then the last section would be so can you guys let me know where you think the new section should be let's decide that because I think it's actually but like it would be the new C I think it needs to be pretty high up our financial responsibilities are really paramount so it can't get buried too far behind so enforce the laws organized management

[00:47:04] system you know I would even be fine if it's a well I I don't think that fiscal responsibility is higher than enforcing laws for me but it's pretty it's pretty high up there so that's why I was suggesting C because I think that it's after how we're conducting the school division itself and then fiscal responsibility is the next component because we've just added safety as a component to one of the things within B so I would hate to remove that as lower

[00:47:37] can I offer just is it worth making reference to executive limitations here which can I spell out some of this stuff it's a good question I would rather not miss I don't think it's necessary per se to make the recommendations to executive limitations because these are so broad that I think the external limitations can fit under them or what we had before or what could be in the future potentially I don't know if I see it as a must I I think that it would be

[00:48:15] a wise addition into the philosophy that in alignment with our executive limitations or authorizing I mean from my from my policy perspective from the federal government that's the way documents are done is that law would be first and then the DODI and then whatever management type document is created for the organization this is for the division this is the most essential component in terms of directing the superintendent and then the executive limitations are authorized by this document so it would there be an would

[00:48:51] there be an objection to determining a place to add that in here and again it would come back as a red line the same way as everything else we are on hold but I'm just giving you a heads up that I'm I'm going to offer a suggestion as to where we might be able to authorize the executive limitations within the strategic governance manual the same way we did to authorize different different things that we've been utilizing in other locations and we I would never suggest that we include them as a written version because that's one more thing to update but I think that author like just calling attention to where they

[00:49:29] live I think is not necessarily a bad idea I will bring back those changes and then we and I will also look through the government the governance manual in that section and see if there's anything that we have outlined in that section and make sure that it if it has a place that it needs to be added in here so I think we just we're gonna go ahead as long as there's a consensus that we will bring this back for the next meeting yeah all in favor yeah okay excellent okay let's

[00:50:09] go over to 1310 the only suggestion that mr. Frisch had in this circumstance was to change the word principles in the philosophy section to be the division superintendent dr. Anderson I had a minor recommendation under philosophy I I believe the new version reads parent communications in accordance with the

[00:50:47] appropriate policy and regulations my wondering was should we limited to policy because this is our wheelhouse the regulations can change at the principle at the superintendent's discretion because you know I think it needs to be both because the superintendent's gonna be setting far more granular guidance in regulation than the policy lays out and I think that

[00:51:26] we talk a lot about wanting to make sure that we're abiding by the regulation that's put forward and if this is kind of about making sure that that is being upheld I mean this this is that there's a philosophical aspect to this that I talked about with missing John Cunningham dr. Reed earlier is that this it gets a little bit clunky when we're talking about not explicitly saying that this is something that's the responsibility of the principal and so we can say with appropriate policy because it does seem a little I mean but we want we would want to be explicit with dr. Reed following the regulation that she

[00:52:06] put forward to so I don't necessarily see a concern with keeping it okay anything else with this one because this incorporated the comments that I received from dr. Anderson and missing John cunning so those are all reflected in here and the only change I had was to the was to the philosophy philosophy yep

[00:52:42] okay do we have a motion to move this to consent dr. Anderson and mr. first second all those in favor excellent okay so we are good for 1310 with those changes okay 1375 this is another one where similar things where we have a few

[00:53:18] spots where we had principal identified and mr. Frisch is suggesting that we move change those to be the division superintendent and then there was a portion within the philosophy that he requested for it to be included at the end of that first sentence it would it would read students comma families comma and staff and then the last one was that the division superintendent in in on the second page for B for information material that it would read the division superintendent shall determine and it would remove principals from that line

[00:53:57] so these changes are for two reasons one the superintendent is establishing rules for doing this in the buildings that the principals can avail themselves of so I want to make it clear that this is the superintendent doing these things

[00:54:27] and I thought the language in the philosophy was just nicer so while I don't think that every policy needs to swap out for quote-unquote whatever to division superintendent I think this one it makes sense okay Dr. Andrews generally like where we're heading in terms of cleaning it up so we don't have to have all of the changes when offices and titles change but this one just and I like where you're going with it but it's sounds a little clunky to me that the

[00:55:06] superintendent let's say number two shall have the discretion to permit principals she already has that discretion I'm just wondering what would prevent us from just leaving it as the division superintendent whomever she assigns it to that's whomever she assigns it to well that it would say the division superintendent like if you look at yeah it will be the division superintendent will have the authority to to collect just taking the principles out of it she might delegate it to the principals she might delegate it to the

[00:55:40] DSS's she might delegate it to whomever I'd initially written it that way but I added principles back because I know I want that because it's so building based but at the end of the day it just I don't know if it's worth it to say it also has the authority to assign principles that's already embedded that's already there it also doesn't lose the thrust of the goal so rather than just saying the division superintendent shall have the authority to permit principles to allow it would be the division superintendent shall have the authority to permit students to collect yep she'll have the discretion to permit

[00:56:18] charity fundraisers so if there's anything that goes wrong at the schools with the charity that you've allowed it's on you in in dr. Reed's defense it already is okay and then I recognize that the top of page three around the top of page two with number three I missed a division a division in front of superintendent and we will get that changed and remember all of our motions always leave room that the that the clerk's office can clean up those tiny little things yeah yeah and the other thing that just so you know some of our

[00:56:55] policies had had the definitions in the wrong place because apparently in the previous policy we had definitions going before philosophy so I've been fixing those as well before they're published my only other question under philosophy versus the Fairfax County School Board recognizes that charity drives and I was struggling with that a little bit because the drives are charitable rather than charity drives completely wordsmithing here so you want it to say the charitable drives because the drive is the

[00:57:28] noun so charitable is the at is the um adjective to said noun that is modifying it in that case i think it's an adjective it's charity is the adjective for the drive but charity is a noun charity is not well okay like I said completely what's a charity case a charity what what's a charity case slang yeah if we're gonna do that and I'm I'm

[00:58:06] gonna cause myself more trouble here if we're gonna do that we need to also change the name of the document okay I just am putting it out there I do I will say that there are some things in policies that are older versions I'm not 100% sure what the right thing I don't think that this is necessarily a hill that I'm willing to die on but I will say I I do generally understand what it what it means and what the intent was but I will say that it is throughout the entire document and so I'm not a hundred percent sure that's exactly why I didn't

[00:58:41] write it in my comments but it was just a wondering because it just didn't sit well with me I think that this is one of those things that if it comes to you in the middle of the night at some point and you want to make the change that we could probably quickly do that in the future I wouldn't want again this is it's fairly significantly out of date so I would love to be able to have this one move through and I wouldn't want one word to hold us up but if it's something you feel strongly about we can bring it back we don't have to bring it back because the only other place where I see that it's like significantly an issue is

[00:59:18] under the purpose it's also in it's embedded in the document in other areas let's come back to that okay so are you okay moving this to consent then yes and I'll work on an idea that yeah perfect okay so do I have a motion to move 1375 to consent mr. Dannon is there a second missing John Cunning all those in favor dr. Anthony good okay thank you okay I think this is yeah I think this is one

[00:59:55] that we caught another issue on the red line originally so okay 1475 this is where go ahead so sorry I completely forgot to turn the page over would there be any objections under number three to changing relating to children - relating to students because I know that's a language piece we've been changing and

[01:00:27] other documents 3B the only question children or students the only question I have for you there is we're not necessarily only talking about our students and so it could be children in other countries it could be you know lots of different circumstances so I think that relating to children actually works here particularly since we acknowledge in the next sentence that it's local national or international but do we only do charitable

[01:01:00] drives for children we do it for all kinds of things is this even needed like I now I'm questioning So what we want to say is that it would meet our unique need.

[01:01:19] Dr. Reed. Dr. Reed. Thank you. I was just sidebarring with our esteemed CFO, and the charity drives that Section B refers to really, I believe, was initiated around Educate Fairfax.

[01:01:39] And at one point we allowed employee withdrawals, I think, from paychecks and that type of thing. So it was really, I think, in other divisions I've worked in perhaps United Way or you could select other charitable sources to, you know, designate donations from a paycheck.

[01:02:04] So that was more sort of a division-wide thing rather than a, you know, bake sale or something. And I think I understand, but we're in Section 3 at the top of page 2B, where it's just determining whether or not the only fundraising efforts that we can make are connected to...

[01:02:22] Oh, okay, I thought you were on B. No, whether or not it's related to children. Oh, you're on 3B, not BB. No. And so that's the question, is whether or not we can, in this case, delete the portion where it says meet a unique need and then delete the rest of the sentence.

[01:02:38] I think to the degree that you can connect anything we might do to children For example, our current composting initiative, you know, one could argue being greener is good for children, but again, it's a bit more tangential than school supplies, which children might use immediately.

[01:02:57] So, you know, there are different topics, or it might be a piece of equipment for the playground or something that, you know, which would benefit children, but it's also a facility piece. So I think it's a curious statement, though, because it speaks about the benefit to partners, business partners and children, as if those are the only two entities that we could potentially have a charitable drive for.

[01:03:22] I'm trying to sell it. So I guess my question is, from Ms. Burden's perspective, is there any reason that we would only be able to limit our charitable contributions to something that's related to children?

[01:03:39] Because there's often times that I've seen our schools that will raise money for whatever it is, items, need. And that's what I'm suggesting is whether or not we can just remove everything after unique need.

[01:03:59] Is there any objection to that, Dr. Reed? Well, I do rather think that we ought to relate that work to children. I don't know that we would want to spend a lot of time on a charity that did not in some way relate to children it's the business partner part I think that we're having trouble with in that sentence because it says school system-wide charity fundraiser drives deemed necessary to support business partners or meet the unique need relating to children I think it's educate Fairfax is what they're referring to as a business partner is what Lee is saying

[01:04:38] so maybe we just name education partner rather than business partner or an education business partner I think we wrote education business partner that better describes it okay how does everybody feel about that education business partner yeah I was reading this differently when we're thinking about business partners like I was thinking like if you're doing a blood drive it's so we're we're as a system like I know that they have organized with high school kids we're gonna do a blood drive and that's gonna support that business

[01:05:15] that's how I was reading and I wasn't reading it educate Fairfax well the because it's a fundraising drive and not a blood-raising drive this is more specifically to money right or resources and the catch is that it's system-wide and so I think that's the language in here that is significant so school system-wide charity fundraising.

[01:05:40] But then it raises the question. But it also raises the question now, we're in the business of having drives to support business partners that should be supporting us. That's how I read it. Even if they're educational partners. So, for example, like Apple Federal Credit Union, right?

[01:06:04] They collect backpacks. And there are some... Oh, you're talking system-wide. Never mind. We are talking system-wide. Never mind. And so I do understand the connection to our our foundation Can I ask a question is there any reason that we just couldn't say because I I know that Particularly if they're system-wide the school board is going to have visibility of what the those efforts are

[01:06:40] Is there any reason it couldn't say school system-wide charity fundraising drives deemed necessary period the charity maybe local national or international? Go ahead. I think that's fine. You could also just delete to support business partners and just leave to meet the unique needs relating to children because all of the business partner things that we can anticipate doing are also going to relate to the needs of children.

[01:07:07] So that's like the bigger circle outside of the... Okay, so what we're saying is delete support business partners or... Necessary to meet a unique need relating to children. Because our primary goal is never to support the business partners in and of themselves.

[01:07:28] No. It's to help them to get to the children. Okay. Any objection to that? Yes. I still object to the children because we could have a system-wide... No, stop.

[01:07:44] I know because we could... You just can't say it that way. Huh? No, I don't object to the word children because we could have a system-wide fundraiser to support making sure that every classroom has a certain thing even though it will impact the children but it's not like am I am I making myself clear no I think you are but it's the it because it says unique need related to children relating to children I think that we're covered okay okay are we all good with just a

[01:08:21] leading support business partners or any questions are we good okay so I think we already voted on this so without objection we will add that in as well okay so now we are definitely moving forward to 1475 there are a few recommendations that mr. fish provided so the first one is in the purpose where it says external parties toward a commitment and what mr. fish said instead

[01:09:00] was to regulate data collection by internal and external parties and the release of protected data to external parties in alignment with the school divisions commitment to accuracy utility and the ethical legal rights of staff and illegal rights of staff any objections to making that change so it's in the I thought that that language more succinctly said that we have that commitment already instead of that we're moving towards that commitment so it'd be an alignment with that commitment yeah any objections to that change no

[01:09:37] okay he he caught me I missed a Fairfax County in front of school board I will definitely make sure that that gets fixed yes we are I'm not going to catch all of them so then he also made some suggestions that actually create a stronger list in the end of the philosophy so he removed some words but I'm gonna read that second sentence so the school board affirms that participation in well-designed and ethically conducted research second sentence of the philosophy ethically conducted research may provide

[01:10:15] meaningful benefits to students staff and the community when such activities clearly align with the division strategic priorities comma demonstrably I hate that word support student learning school improvement or operational effectiveness and are conducted with appropriate safeguards we actually need some semicolons in there but no he's just removed two words yes so

[01:10:52] it's just it's creating one longer list rather than having it and we'll put some semicolons in there to make sure that it's set off correctly yes definitions will be moved up over philosophy I did catch that under the responsibilities section he removed the school board expects and just as the division superintendent I think that that's a stronger yeah and it also says shall establish rather than to establish so I think that makes a lot of sense the the

[01:11:27] draft says under the definition it says new data collection I don't think that that's accurate I think it's just data collection section you know if you look under on my notes under questions let me just pull up the actual I know but where in the policy is that I guess it's my question yeah the first definition data collection the gathering of new information should be the gathering of information dr. Reed can I just confirm if I'm understanding this correctly this

[01:12:03] is related to like I the equivalent of IRB approval for data within the division so it would always be the new poll of information because it would it you would have access to old information because it would have already been published and we are not requiring anyone in the division to access you know to get permission to access information that we've already made available so these are new requests for it's the equivalent of IRB approval within the division for information related to students and is that an accurate representation I believe it is yes ma'am I'm gonna ask miss Neal to confirm

[01:12:39] that yeah I think the intent we were trying to say is we may have existing data that researchers are asking to access some of that data is not publicly available so they still have to go through a research approval process we may have requests to collect new data such as surveying students or staff that's generation of new data again that has to go through an approval process okay and then there was one other spot where there was in section four on page

[01:13:11] three I believe that this was dr. Anderson's request to remove the what constitutes a it's in section 4 on page 3 and so yes thank you because the criteria itself is the Constitution of what needs to be happen it's just a little bit redundant yeah that's fine and then it would add an S at the end of

[01:13:43] topics so any objections to adding that information in okay mr. Frisch okay excellent is there a second Miss St. John Cunning all those in favor of sending this to consent excellent okay moving right along 1510 and I want to give I'm yes thank you 5010 I would like to give an update also that I've

[01:14:20] heard from procurement that they're planning on offering up a combined policy between 5011 and 5010 and I've also mentioned that you were interested in and having 5017 added in to I do believe that this is an opportunity similar to the way we've taken it in the past is to make some changes to this based on the feedback we've received but also to go ahead and approve it so that it is an active policy and then we can work towards merging those policies whether or not it makes sense to do so is are we still on

[01:14:59] an agreement that that's the best way to move forward on this okay so let's go ahead and talk about five zero one zero mr. Frisch also has some some comments here as well so aside from like some typographical things that will be caught anyways about FCPS usage and stuff like that there's a sentence this is the school board supports the use of procurement practices that encourage competition I'm I would like to add to the greatest extent practicable because

[01:15:35] don't want the implication to be that other mechanisms for contracting that don't have the same type of competition as you know traditional contracting are not allowed and so there's two changes where I've suggested that language to be to use to be used and then under organization I thought this was a space where we are identifying very specific people and these are all things that our

[01:16:14] regulations have defined and we should just let the regulations speak to it yes so in organization it would now read the division superintendent shall establish regulations governing the procurement of goods and services in alignment with delegated procurement authority from the Fairfax County School Board from the Fairfax County purchasing I'm sorry Fairfax County purchasing agent any objections to that change dr. Anderson there were two changes which one are you asking if we have an objection to well the first one the first one that mr.

[01:16:51] Frisch mentioned was adding to the greatest extent practical I do object that one I can't object the second one you do not object to the second one I do not object the second change but I object to the language to add the greatest extent practical because we do know practicable rather we do know that there are some things that are sole source and there's language in here that speaks to that which gives us the opportunity to have other ways of contracting it doesn't say that everything has to be competed and I'm trying to find where the sole source information is provided because this is

[01:17:27] the one I brought back that I worked on and now of course I can't find it but it isn't here I promise you it isn't here you can probably see it on the red line version. Yeah, I'm looking at his redline version. I guess I should be looking at our, the other

[01:17:46] redline version. Go into the next thing and I'll find it. I don't want to hold up the whole shebang. I think that you added it into the last sentence on the philosophy is where cooperative

[01:18:19] procurement or similar contractual arrangements are utilized. And then sole source contracts are not preferred when multiple vendors are available as competition. So that does speak to the fact I believe that does speak to the fact that there is opportunities where it is not going to be competed I think to the greatest extent practicable kind of dilutes the language a little bit of the competitive nature to which is the general expectation of the contracts if one is pursuing a sole source contract

[01:18:55] that would imply that they're not putting it out for bid to determine whether there are multiple available vendors for it so how would one determine whether the item that they'd like to put out for sole source has multiple vendors that can provide the service and if there are multiple vendors that can provide the service are they are we disallowing the use of sole source contracts I don't think we're preferring it when there's multiple vendors available can you name anything that doesn't have multiple vendors College Board we just talked about that just they're a monopoly but that's few

[01:19:30] and far between though I think we've had some other examples second oh thank you but that's a good or a service. What's that? There's a lot of places where there's just no one else who's doing it let's oh there's one WIDA is one that comes up every year nobody else is doing that we go with WIDA every year because that's the only game in town. And it's true of the driver's ed information as well I guess my question is is that is it possible that it doesn't necessarily work as clearly in the first statement in the second paragraph but it actually does

[01:20:08] make sense in this in this in the last paragraph so it says where cooperative procurement or similar contractual arrangements are utilized the school board expects solicitation of offers for multiple vendors to the greatest extent practical - I'm sorry I don't know which one you're looking at so I'm looking at the last statement if you look at the last paragraph of the philosophy then what it does is it adds to the greatest extent extent practical after multiple vendors can you read that again I was looking at this one where cooperative

[01:20:45] procurement or similar contractual arrangements are utilized the school board expects the solicitation of offers from multiple vendors to the greatest extent practical to achieve maximum return on investment so I think there it actually makes sense and up at the top one I understand why it could be perceived as diluting but I think that that kind of still adds to the point into the philosophy because remember we're just in philosophy here so I think that if that works is that amenable to everybody yes okay so I'm going to

[01:21:21] remove the request from the first okay and then leave it in the second part perfect okay in the organization go ahead no no okay I just remembered in organization there is that we just agreed that the that changing the language in that section makes sense to ensure that it's aligned with the

[01:21:55] division superintendent and then for authority mr. Frisch also had some suggestions about the way that that could be kind of listing all kinds of very granular staff people here when it's the superintendent has regulations that dictate that these people are the people who are responsible for this work so it should be the division superintendent shall establish regulations governing the general supervision of all procurement activity within the school division additionally the division superintendent shall

[01:22:31] establish regulations to carry out the principles etc any objections perfect and then on a continuing basis is has been changed to an ongoing basis and that was the only other major change the rest of them are just a few like smaller grammatical errors and then I would I receive I did look over miss Marin's concern here I think that the concern that she's outlining in what she brought forward is going to be related to how the policies are merged together

[01:23:11] and I think that making sure that the folks working on merging those policies have access to this to make sure that the distinction between the different types of procurement are clear in the policy will be something that we can address as we move forward is that amenable at this point the other thing that was under authority it was about the school board retains final authority to approve contracts I think that needs to be clear because that's the case it's

[01:23:50] status quo so it's just stating current practice so are we suggesting that we would go at the end of that section which is the new end of that section because isn't that a section that mr. fish because we because her suggestion suggested that we should have a third paragraph and we already have a third paragraph so I would like to make sure that nothing about this sentence conflicts with current school board policy about which contracts we are approving as a board there are certain contracts that we have stipulated

[01:24:29] through our policy will be handled by the superintendent and executed by the chair without coming to the board so I just want to make sure that it reads the school board retains the authority to approve contracts in alignment with the purchasing authority and board policy applicable laws whatever it actually does have because I looked that up before this meeting to address the same point that you just raised because we have those that are just notification but even in that purchasing agreement there is still opportunity for the board to

[01:25:04] usurp even the delegated authority that's been provided so I don't think it would be misaligned I I do think that it would might be worth it though to ask as these are mere these are merged that this item be considered for inclusion just to ensure that because I wouldn't want it to be misconstrued to be that we have to approve I don't think any of us have time to approve every single contract and we have to mr. Frisch's point we have delegated the authority on that so I take the point of what's being included here I just want to make sure that it's in alignment and I think that once those policies are

[01:25:44] pulled into one potentially it's going to be very clear as to which ones are delegated and which ones are not the only thing I'd say is the last time we did this policy change we increased the number of contracts that the board directly approves by like 75% so while still leaving hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of contracts that the board doesn't have to approve I think there's another point in Miss Marin's comments here that I would not want to get lost while we are ensuring consistency of language it's the second piece regarding

[01:26:21] notice the public notice of forthcoming contract approval whether or not the superintendent is acting upon contracts as delegated or the board is reviewing and approving reviewing or approving contracts there's a public notice component how do we address that and I guess that's more of a question for the folks over there I think that again as we've discussed there are different types of contracts and different levels of public notice depending on the

[01:27:00] competitive nature of some contracts because we can't the you know there some contracts have to be less public until they're finalized because of the competitive nature of the contract so I think I would defer to miss burden to share I don't think all contracts are equal in the public notice realm miss burden but dr. Reed that does not mean that there are any contracts that we are conducting that the public wouldn't have notice of at the time of the vote.

[01:27:33] At the time of the vote, yes. I wasn't sure when you're saying notice. Sometimes we're referring to notice as a week ahead or two weeks ahead. And I just want to be clear that because of the nature of some contracts, the public notice timeline can look different. Of course all contracts at some point become public, yes. And I don't think I'm speaking about the former. It's actually the latter that speaks to the transparency of the public knowing that this contract had been executed rather than our typical use of notice you know two weeks before I don't think at least it's not how I'm reading this piece well dr. Anderson because of the fact that this is something that would be related

[01:28:13] to all of our contracts and not just those identified in in 5010 is there a possibility that again this could be potentially this whole area could be considered for as we're merging the policies together that it will we will have an explicit section that outlines when public notice of contracts will be because some of the some of the wording here I'm concerned about because public notice of forthcoming contract approval isn't always possible if again to the superintendent's point if there's been a competitive process then we can't

[01:28:48] necessarily some of those we have to approve and I mean for hiring as well so So we have lots of contracts that we are approving that are related to hiring, that we approve the contract and then are able to make the notice, because we don't know-- it's a chicken and egg conversation.

[01:29:03] We don't know whether or not the person's going to accept our offer. And so I just want to make sure-- I think that we absolutely can make sure that as these policies are considered on how they're merged, that we absolutely can request a very clear statement as to when public notice can be expected for any these contracts and how in re in reiterates our our goal of having transparency with the community but I'm not necessarily sure that I'm ready to go ahead and add this now without a better conversation as to what the wording should be and I don't I'm not sure that I agree with the wording

[01:29:39] that's been provided by Miss Marin III think the only question that I have that's outstanding is do we have a date certain by which this wouldn't be happening because the concern is if the policies in front of us we have to do all of the things now I know we're trying to pivot into a different way it doesn't we're just trying to get them to be updated and we could come back if that day of coming back it's not if there's no date certain it just puts us right back to we didn't have the larger and more comprehensive conversation so I think for me if we can have some sort of date certain by which we're expecting

[01:30:16] this merger and review it will solve the issue I don't have a specific date but I know that we've been contacted by Miss Pratt as that I believe this is something that she's actively working on so I think that we could probably make a motion as to when we wanted it available to us but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's gonna meet with our calendar yeah I would be hesitant to have a date certain because it has to go through legal review and that is an extended process especially when we're asking for additional things I mean obviously when I defer to John but I would just be hesitant of asking a date certain knowing that that would bump a bunch of other things and I think

[01:30:53] that's kind of inherently the concern because it's just so open-ended it may never happen and board members would feel I miss the opportunity to have impact onto the policies because of all of the things dr. Reed could you bring us by the next meeting a date certain that we might be able to in that way you have a chance to talk with the team about when would be appropriate and that way you can check back in with us at the beginning of the next meeting related to when we might be able to expect that yes ma'am you're referring to a merged emerged for yes ma'am similar to what Miss Pratt is already working on yes so okay I appreciate it is okay so with that understanding and we will ensure

[01:31:30] that everybody has a copy of Miss Marin's comments they are available on board docs and so with that is there any what or is there any further concern about moving this to consent or would someone like to make a motion mr. Frisch is there a second mr. Dannon all those in favor of moving this to consent okay thank you excellent okay guys we're gonna do a time check we're at 603 and so we're gonna look at these last two fairly quickly I do not think that there were many things that needed updating but I do want to make sure that we have a chance to look at the timeline and have a brief conversation about ETRC so

[01:32:09] I believe in the next one which is 5029 there were only two changes that were requested and in addition to the things that were already included in the red line in public so at the end of page one in the responsibilities section the division principal or program manager was changed the division superintendent and then that further in that sentence where it says his or her it was changed to their those were mr. Frisch's recommendations any any concerns with bringing that forward dr. Anderson would it be possible to change there to under

[01:32:44] FCPS jurisdiction because we're really talking about the jurisdiction of the school division okay so the division superintendent superintendent shall assume responsibility for all public property under the jurisdiction just something so we could just remove the pronoun altogether so you want within hold on responsibly for all public property within Fairfax County public schools well I think the reason that's within the jurisdiction is because not

[01:33:22] everything within our division we're responsible for if somebody's car gets broken into all that kind of stuff right if somebody brings a laptop to school and they break it it's in our division but that's not public process yeah that's how it says public property under so what we're saying is that the the division superintendent shall assume responsibility for all public property within the school division that's fine okay is that work and then

[01:33:59] the rest of the sentence would continue. Any other concerns related to this? Do we need to define public property in this to that point? There is something else that I need to bring back about another policy. My other comment too is just around if we need to have A under section 4 given that there's no B. So the other question was just do we need to have is it worth defining

[01:34:29] public property in this given that we use that term under section 4? Well it's anything that is purchased with appropriated funds or local school activity funds or donated to the school system which is listed there as long as you've got enough to work with I don't want to leave you all with a ambiguities okay okay and then in this case because all subsequent I agree with you that I

[01:35:05] don't love that we have an a with no B however in this circumstance because we're having all of the meat of the policy come under responsibilities it was kind of just a function of making the document better organized so I think that it hurts my heart too but I think that we can just let it let it ride the way that it is so any other concerns related to the content here do we have a motion to move this to consent mr. Frisch is there a second miss st. John Cunning all those in favor that is unanimous for all board members present

[01:35:45] okay moving to five zero three zero this is a little bit more in depth in terms of the changes recommended and so I'm gonna actually pause us here for just a second because there was something else that I forgot to bring back and so I will bring this this one back as well for the next time and I will include the changes that were requested by mr. Frisch into the red line the same way in addition I won't change the existing things that are in the red line so you'll be able to see where everybody's comments came in but I did want to

[01:36:20] mention something really fast and and ask mr. Foster to to speak to it very quickly we have a new state law that's coming for related to how combined classrooms can only incur basically they can only include four grades at a time and so mr. Foster do you believe that there are changes that we need to make to this policy that wouldn't that would include that or is this something that we need to include a legal reference to the new or is it something that should be done in July after the after the legal after the law is put in place I

[01:36:59] don't think you need to wait until after the law is put in place I mean I think you could put a phrase that, you know, in compliance with, you know, applicable state and federal law would be enough, and it would capture this provision that goes into effect in 2027 and any other relevant provisions.

[01:37:21] Okay. So I guess my other question is, is there any reason that we couldn't just include a legal reference and then ask the superintendent to update this in regulation to ensure that the law is met within regulation? because that's really what's going to be followed in terms of how it's conducted.

[01:37:38] And that way, it would likely be a little bit more prescriptive in terms of how many grades were included anyways. And so if we included a legal reference to the new law and then asked that the superintendent look at her policy to make sure that it was updated, would that be applicable?

[01:37:59] Yeah. Okay. Is there any objection to going ahead and adding that new legal reference? I'm sorry, I went back to 1310, and it's just about how many multi-age classes can be merged into one. And again, this is one of those things that I wouldn't want the law to change and us not to name something specific.

[01:38:19] So I would rather point to the specific law that we're referring to. This is something that was brought to my attention from ACSD. And so I just want to make sure that we capture the legal reference and then ask that the superintendent look at her regulation and ensure that it's in line with the new law that's been put in place that's due to set.

[01:38:44] I believe that that is July of 2027. Is that correct? Okay. Is there any objection to adding that legal reference? Okay. Thank you. Okay. Now we're going to flip over. We've got about 20 minutes left.

[01:38:59] We're going to flip over to talk about the timeline for the educational technology policies We do not have the draft for the policies today The first ETRC meeting is actually on October 21st, which is before our Policy or before our next governance meeting on the 27th. So I did want to go ahead and let you guys know and Miss Brown if you have a chance could you put the Timeline yeah, is it okay with everybody that we bring 50/30 back to the next one and I'll add those red lines? Yeah Okay

[01:39:39] So the idea here is this is something that I've worked on with the chair with both the vice chair and chair and the superintendent To ensure that this is possible. So this is kind of the general Timeline that we're going to be using understanding that there are adjustments that may have to be made if delays occur at any point during this But I wanted to give you guys and then I will send this out to the full board to make sure that everybody knows This is kind of just the general timeline that we'll be using to work on these policies With the understanding that the goal is going to be a February vote Because that will give us enough time to make sure everything that we have in our policies can be operationalized for the next year

[01:40:18] So nothing about this is specific to the policies themselves other than just the general timeline But just to walk through it. We will have an ETRC meeting that's coming up on October 21st they will have a chance to have the initial review of the draft policies I'm hoping that after we go over this quickly that we will have an opportunity to talk about what we might want them to focus on or what specific questions we want them to be looking at then governance will have a chance to come back and look at the draft of the policies on the 27th so that will be the first time that we have the actual draft of the policies we will give feedback to

[01:40:53] ETRC related to all of this from there we will and this is where it gets a little a little funky is that we will likely receive back recommendations from the superintendent related to what ETRC has has brought to her and we will not necessarily have another work session or we will not have another governance meeting before the work session on the 12th so what's being presented at the work session on the 12th is going to be the superintendent's recommendation related to these policies and then we will be able to take our colleagues

[01:41:29] feedback on the 12th and come back on the 19th and in in the governance committee meeting on the 19th we will review the final policies after the work session and then we will move the policies potentially to new business if we were able to reach consensus that evening they will be placed on new business January 28th and February 11th would be the board vote dr. Anderson thank you just want to clarify because I know in previous conversations it has been

[01:42:03] until the policies are completed that activities around tech would be on hold so what will continue to happen and what will continue to be on hold my understanding is specifically the pre-k and K moratorium on handing out devices is on hold until we bring back the motion for any kind of planning for pre-k and K and the board reviews that and makes a decision so no devices other

[01:42:39] than for students who require those as part of an IEP or 504 will be released to pre-k and k students okay and then expansion and other areas of tech and AI are those continuing to be on hold or are those proceeding to my knowledge everything's on hold until the board develops the policy but mr. Sethi dr.

[01:43:06] Presidio anything different from your we're joined by mr. Sethi and dr. Presidio who are co-chairing the ETRC yeah all student AI uses at the same state so it remains blocked for students okay and that's outside of what teachers are able to allow students to do on their personal devices at home yeah that's correct and we've published on our website the current AI use policy for teachers and for students and it's linked to our ETRC committee website as

[01:43:43] well thank you mr. fish okay so seeing no others I assume are we all good with this timeline yes mr. Dan my microphone's making a weird sound today just really briefly I really want to say I appreciate having this kind of timeline right I'm committed to doing the work between these sessions and so forth to get that I also want to call out that I appreciate that we're in doing this we're allocating sufficient time for the ETRC to do its work and consider what both

[01:44:21] what staff put out and what we will eventually put out as well so I do recognize this this area keeps evolving and I see your foresight about wanting to have a innovative technology policies and making sure we're being broader in our thinking so I just want to call out to I think the from speaking with the folks who have attended and participated in some of the recent meetings it seems like the most recent ones where it's been a little bit more of an open format where members have been able to provide a little more direction and so forth has been very well received and so I extend my appreciation to Mr. Sethi

[01:44:54] and Dr. Presidio behind me for doing that and so forth so but no I appreciate this I do want to ask though is the presumption from this timeline that the policies would take effect immediately or in the 27 28 school year or would that depend I think that that's going to depend on what the board direction is at the time that the policies are enacted and so it's also going to depend where the policies land so I don't think that we can make a determination one way or the other at this point the other question that we did have at this moment is is there anything specific I understand that we haven't seen the

[01:45:31] drafts yet but is there anything specific that we're hoping as feedback from the ATRC that would help inform our conversation on the 27th all of the above I mean it is as much as a committee could mark up what we provide them recognizing that we wouldn't you know necessarily accept every single comment but I would love to see the committee be able to review in full and perhaps as subcommittees and so forth I do want to ask just about the timeline or just I guess state for the record so to speak that I would strongly support one we you know these policies should have been on a year ago but recognizing that we're doing the work now I really which I really appreciate I

[01:46:09] would strongly advocate that we'd be mindful of when these policies would take effect and as we write them my assumption in a lot of ways is that they wouldn't take effect until the 27 28 school year which gives you all on your team time to develop regulations to get feedback on those draft regulations and so forth you know if there are policies that could be done or certain aspects that be done sooner you know obviously would support that but also recognize that change is difficult and the more lead time we can give staff especially teachers the better so okay excellent then it looks like that we are all in

[01:46:45] agreement related to this timeline it's 6:18 now I would love to go back and be able to do that last policy if we could I know we I know but hold on the and then the other thing that I want to let you know is that in alignment with dr.

[01:47:02] Anderson's request that you guys have plenty of lead time I understand that the we're gonna plan plenty of time on the governance meeting on the 27th to take as much time as we need to to talk about those policies because that's the main time that the governance will see them and so I want to make sure that we have an opportunity to have a fulsome conversation but with that to that end I want to let you know that we have 21 policies that are ready for you guys that will be posted tomorrow for the 27th meeting and so you will have a month to look at them and I will give you the same type of consensus document that we've been working on just to give feedback and you know give a heads up as

[01:47:40] to how things are landing and then what will be potentially helpful about that is that to mr. Frisch's point if we do end up with some extra time that we're going to be able to move through some of those policies again to mr. Dannon's point I understand that a lot of these are very short but that was done with on purpose like I picked all of the short ones that were easy to kind of go through quickly because many of the times they're short because they are very pointed in terms of what we need to accomplish so to that end so okay saying all that if we can actually I do think I'm gonna give you guys the rest

[01:48:16] of the time the only reason I say that is because there are a fair number of red lines in the in 50/30 that I want to make sure that we have the full opportunity to have everybody be able to see them and so rather than try to kind of push through right now I'm gonna go ahead and end us here so at 6:20 we are adjourned for today

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