Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County Public Schools, Legislative Audit and Policy Committee Meeting, Tuesday, April 29, 2025

Date: Tuesday, April 29, 2025
Place: LCPS Administration Building / School Board Room, Ashburn, Virginia
Length: 58m (video)
Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/1080007196?rel=0

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 2026-10-13. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

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

[00:00:00] Good evening. This is April Chandler calling to order the Legislative Audit and Policy Committee meeting for April 29, 2025. We will begin with public comment, although it doesn't look like there is anyone signed up for public comment.

[00:00:15] So, seeing as no one has signed up for public comment, we will move on to our first agenda item, item 3.01, approval of the March 18, 2024 draft minutes. May I please have a motion to approve the March meeting minutes?

[00:00:33] Motion to approve the March 18th, 2025 minutes. Second. Thank you. The motion was made by Ms. Chernoff and seconded by Ms. Donahue. All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye. Aye. Seeing none opposed, the motion passes unanimously with all committee members present.

[00:00:52] With that, we will move on to our discussion items. We will begin tonight with item 4.01, Office of the Auditor General, the Auditor General's Quarterly Report. This update aims to enhance the transparency of the Office of the Auditor General's functions and to provide the committee, along with other vested parties, with periodic updates on audit management.

[00:01:13] Mr. Woods, the floor is yours. Thank you, Madam Chair, and good afternoon, committee members. Today I will go over the office's quarterly updates. The purpose of this is to give LA&P and the community at larger an update into the audit activities of the internal audit here in the Office of Auditor General's.

[00:01:35] We'll cover completed in process and upcoming engagements. We'll briefly go over the audit calendar. We'll go over a brief update on the My Concern hotline since January 1 through April 25th. We'll go over our trainings that we've taken place in conferences that we attended.

[00:01:53] Also for the initiatives that we're trying to perform this year we'll go over what we've done to work towards those goals. So I won't get into a deep discussion over audit of student placement and policies and procedures because we did give a brief at a prior meeting.

[00:02:12] But I just wanted to put it up here because this is one of the completed engagements through January and April. Next slide, please. So we are currently performing four audits. We are performing the IT third-party risk management, the LCPS staff support advocacy and resources, LCPS transportation management, as well as Jefferson contracts.

[00:02:33] I'd like to go over each line item real quick just to give you a brief update of where we are each one of those engagements for the first item the IT third-party risk management we recently had our exit conference last Thursday with the stakeholders who were part of those who are audited and so this Friday we do hope to administer a draft report with our findings to those stakeholders for the staff support and advocacy resources today we had our last field work

[00:03:08] meeting we are currently moving into the drafting of the report we do have a draft report internally but we have not had an exit conference once we schedule an exit conference we will provide those oddities with that draft report so we hope to do that in the next few weeks next up we have LCPS transportation management this one is currently ready to move out of the planning phase we have A SITE VISIT ON FRIDAY TO TRANSPORTATION'S PERCYVILLE LOCATION THAT WILL BE OUR SECOND

[00:03:43] SITE VISIT WE WENT TO THEIR MAIN LOCATION ON SICKLAND AND THEN WE'LL FOLLOW THAT UP WITH A VISIT TO PERCYVILLE THAT WILL PROBABLY CONCLUDE THE SITE VISITS AND THEN WE'LL REVIEW GET INTO THE TESTING SO THAT'S THE NEXT STEPS FOR THAT ONE FOR THE JEFFERSON CONTRACTS WE ARE now entering field work the planning session is over and we are out here ramping up our testing of those contracts in contract management next slide sorry last slide so currently the upcoming engagements include register

[00:04:21] and registrars information management and data integrity the objective of that audit is to evaluate the controls and practices used in registered data collection once we issue a draft report for the IT third party we will begin that audit and so we will provide the IT third party audit on Friday and then we'll move on to start the work of the register information management and data integrity audit.

[00:04:51] Similar the school board and staff communication audit is also coming up that will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the framework design of communication and information sharing practices between the Loudoun County School Board and the Loudoun County Public School Administration once we issue the draft report to the stakeholders for the for the staff support advocacy resources we plan to start that audit and so that one I can see is taking place second week of May is when we

[00:05:28] plan to kick that one off security pass and ID badging audit I foresee this one being carried over into the next fiscal year the purpose or objective of that audit is to evaluate the design adequacy of staff badging and access security systems that one will not start until a later audit is completed which would either be the transportation management audit jefferson or the jefferson contract administration that's also contingent on if the committee approves that audit to be carried over in the next

[00:06:04] year's fiscal year audit plan slide. There's just a calendar look at our audits where they are right now when they started. And so it's just a update for you all to take a look. I'll pause right here if you have any questions regarding the calendar or the. All right. We'll go to the next slide. So between January 1 and April 25th we have received two concerns. We those concerns are both open now and

[00:06:43] so we are looking into both of those current slides. So in first quarter of 2025 or calendar year 2025. The Office of Auditor General continues to strengthen its knowledge of the Institute of Internal Auditors newly updated global internal audit standards. All auditors in the office. The two staff auditors and myself have all taken a 16 hour course titled navigating the global internal audit standards. These are the new audit standards that we will

[00:07:20] adopt beginning July 1 and so all the auditors have taken that audit or that training to help us identify the new standards that we will be implementing. Also the I've also attended the Vision University executive continuous learning cohort this cohort is also another area where we are gaining valuable experience in understanding the new standards specifically related to the quality assurance and improvement program and so that's really been

[00:07:55] helpful coming up in July we will send an auditor to the Association of certified fraud examiners conference which will be held in Nashville Tennessee that will be an additional 20 hours of training and so that will take place in July or June so at the beginning of the year we provided a annual plan our annual report in that report we identified or outlined some areas that were fiscal year 25 initiatives which included quality assurance and improvement plan conforming conformance readiness assessment which will address

[00:08:34] gaps in our current standards and the ones and the new standards will adopt in June in July also the fiscal year annual audit report plan which will be a recurring annual initiative for the QAIP we held our second meeting in March as a team to identify gaps we also this school year we started issuing post audit surveys to gain feedback from those we audit for areas of improvement right now we've gotten lukewarm responses you know we get a lot of surveys in LCPS and I

[00:09:11] think maybe some people are are tired or surveyed a little surveyed out but we'll continue to administer those surveys and hope to gain feedback on how we can improve our process and learn business acumen in the areas they perform lastly we are currently performing our risk assessment we have surveyed school board members we have surveyed principals and we have surveyed senior staff we are currently reviewing those surveys to compile a audit universe that we will

[00:09:47] bring forward to you all for your review and eventually approval of next year's audit plan next slide that concludes our quarterly update any questions thank you thank you mr. woods I do find it so interesting your feedback on the surveys struck me as a good idea and then I was like oh that makes sense but you know I do think it is imperative to try to capture some feedback on the audit experience so I do appreciate the effort that you're making there are

[00:10:25] there any questions or comments from the committee no okay thank you with that we'll move on to item 4.02 legislative update this update aims to inform the community and the committee about updates that have occurred since the end of the legislative session mr. John Sutton coordinator of government relations will be presenting mr. Sutton the floor is yours thank you madam chair and members so so I'll do a I mean there's not much news probably won't

[00:11:00] have any any news until May 2nd but I'll do a sort of a quick refresh and then give you some things that we're kind of looking at if that's okay so the governor complete about a complete action about 916 bills sent to him during the 2025 general assembly session the governor signed about 599 bills amended 159 bills many returned the budget House bill 1600 with 205 amendments bill signed our proposals ranging from keeping school lunches free of artificial

[00:11:36] dyes to filling transportation gaps to tackling absenteeism and and supporting students opportunities to take advanced math classes things of that nature the virginia house delegates eventually signed off on about 41 of the governor's proposed changes to the 188 billion dollar state budget and rejected 164 uh without a floor debate so so basically issues that we're looking at at this point are and this really goes to the heart of of the matter of it is the governor's proposal to take 300 million dollars from

[00:12:14] the budget to sort of shore off anticipated short shore up anticipated shortfalls in what they consider to be waning federal support the major concern in our mind is that a major casualty of those proposed efforts is the funding to a fully lifted a long-standing support cap on support for school staff so a key priority for public schools across the state is that support cap so we'll be we'll be waiting anxiously to see what's what is going on there in terms of another thing where I'm kind of keeping an eye on a school construction although everybody agreed this year that we need to support school construction the

[00:12:54] governor indicated that a proposed 50 million dollars for school construction grants and loans above the current you know budget was the solution which sort of brings the total roughly to about six hundred ten million dollars if it's adopted this caused a little bit of consternation because it's really it's really his his way to avoid a giving into the long-standing debate in the Commonwealth regarding counties and localities pursuing options individual options to invest in school construction or renovation through local referendums the governor vetoed a proposal that would have allowed all localities and its

[00:13:31] residents by choice to explore one percent sales tax for school construction so that's I mean that was that was kind of that was kind of coming but but still nonetheless favored vetoing that as opposed to giving local local jurisdictions the option another note and I always I always we laugh about this so I and other folks laugh about every nugget every once in a while there's a nugget that comes along and you kind of kind of floats in and out during the session and you don't really think about it and it pops up and you're

[00:14:06] like where the heck did that come from so I we got a little surprise that slipped by us during the session thing and these little nuggets are things that don't seemingly affect us but in the in a way can can be kind of oh wait a minute that affects us so that the governor quietly amended House Bill 1601 which delegate Josh Thompson came up with changing how localities handle their improvement process for new HEUFs or data centers high energy use facilities and originally the bill required applicants to submit a site assessment

[00:14:45] before rezoning which or special use permits and that impact that examine impacts environmental factors water resources agricultural stuff parks historic sites forests residential units and school buildings our schools and our facilities so the governor's new language now makes the impact assessment optional for localities I mean we'll all assume that the localities will do the right thing and I and still still require

[00:15:16] those but it allows them to decide whether to even require impact impact work so the provision of the bill will really not go into effect unless it's reenacted next session 2026 but we're going watch that one because that that can that can affect that can affect what's being built or not being built around around our school our schools and our and our school buildings and and the greater community as well so hopefully after May 2nd I can bring something to you of substance something that will

[00:15:51] really make us overjoyed but at this point we're just gonna have to wait till May 2nd Thank You Mr. Sutton are there any questions or comments from the committee okay thank you very much all right with that we'll move on to our action item for tonight 5.01 policy 2310 committees of the school board this policy governs the structure efficiency and effectiveness of committees to support the work of the board and the school division tonight Miss Natalie Allen our chief of communications and community engagement will be presenting

[00:16:30] Miss Allen the floor is yours thank you and I'm going to ask for a little help from my friend Wes Allen over to my left as well on this one but as you all know there have been multiple red lines and we've taken multiple amendments to this policy to create what is here so you'll see many changes and do you want me to go through them line by line or do you want to just kind of what would you prefer why don't we just talk through okay yeah sounds good okay

[00:17:08] um and so like the big changes truly are around the discipline committee and appeals hearings committee so you'll see that in section seven and then we also the joint committee with the board of supervisors there's some language there there's some new language around select committees and then we made sure that there was consistent language for each individual advisory council and

[00:17:44] committee and so those are all listed out for you there and then we also talked about school division administrative advisory committees being specially established and named by the superintendent so those were the big changes and we can just go ahead and talk through them if that works for you all Wes anything that you wanted to add specifically. Thank you Miss Allen I think you've covered the main items but I'm happy to do a little bit deeper dive for context if it would be helpful so this policy you reviewed as a committee on

[00:18:23] March 18th 2025 when this was up for and review as an information item and as Miss Allen reflected there's three main proposed changes for your review the first is the inclusion of a school division administrative advisory committee which is defined in section a and further clarified in section E starting on line 322 of the most recently redlined version.

[00:18:47] The second, as Ms. Allen referenced, was changes to the Student Behavior and Accountability Committee, specifically with respect to their student discipline appeal hearings function. Particularly when this came before the committee in March, staff incorporated proposed language in response to the committee's initial input that such function be pulled out and assigned to a discrete Student Discipline Appeals Hearing Committee and then at the March meeting and after hearing from Dana Scanlon, the Director of the Office of School Administration, and after receiving initial input from the SBAC Committee, staff proposed an alternative approach

[00:19:26] whereby SBAC will retain its purview over Student Discipline Appeal Hearings Committee with the SBAC Chair and another member of the SBAC Committee presiding over such hearings and the SBAC Chair recruiting a school board member who does not serve on the SBAC committee to serve at such hearings on a rotating basis.

[00:19:46] Dana Scanlon and Hearing Officer Bill Daniel are here today to address any questions you have and share out further input from SBAC, who I understand met yesterday. And then the third change that we discussed was the inclusion and incorporation of the School Health Advisory Board as an advisory committee in Section D7.

[00:20:07] You will recall policy 2320 came before this committee. It's a separate and discreet policy 2320 School Health Advisory Board. It came before this committee in March. As we have believed discussed there's no other advisory committee that has a standalone policy.

[00:20:25] So in order to treat all advisory committees consistently staff proposed including that here. The thought being the full school board could vote to rescind or repeal policy 2320 subsequently. since the meeting in March just two additional changes that staff have proposed reading this with fresh eyes one it was in response to public comment and request from this committee to harmonize and ensure consistency among the level of detail and advisory committee descriptions as Miss Allen reflected and additionally staff noticed a potential lack of clarity with respect

[00:21:04] to select committees in section C specifically with respect to chairship and membership and staffing for select committees so there is some new proposed language there which is reflected on the screen here so at this time staff is happy to entertain questions again we have Ms. Scanlon and Mr. Daniel here to address any questions pertaining to any proposed changes with respect to SBAC and I believe I saw Ms. Chernoff posted some amendments earlier today on board docs for the committee's consideration staff is glad to address those as the committee sees fed

[00:21:39] thanks um thank you to both miss miss allen and mr allen um since we have right no relation no relation um since miss galen and mr daniel are here it seems logical to start with any updated reports from the events that happened last night um so please the floor is yours thank you very much it's nice to be here with you again today last month when I was here Miss Chandler did ask that SBAC have an opportunity to discuss and review the proposed changes as they pertain to the SBAC committee and its functions and to

[00:22:18] have that opportunity to provide feedback to your committee they did discuss the proposed changes in March those changes were summarized in writing previously provided to you I'm happy to answer any questions that you have about that as it happens yesterday SBAC had its regularly scheduled April meeting and use that opportunity to review and discuss the relevant proposed changes to the policy as they were updated on April 24th and I was asked by the SBAC

[00:22:57] members to share their feedback with you tonight. Specifically aspect members continue to strongly believe that a standing committee for student disciplinary appeals hearings best ensures consistency of decision making.

[00:23:14] And also best ensures that such hearings are conducted by school board members who are the most experienced and knowledgeable about student disciplinary matters. SBAC members continue to believe that for the purpose of providing learning opportunities to other school board members, the current practice of inviting a variety of school board members to serve as substitutes is sufficient.

[00:23:43] SBAC members also expressed concern that the recommended changes might overly burden staff that is responsible for scheduling and for training members to participate in such hearings. SBAC members feel very strongly about this issue and indeed opted to formalize their feedback via a motion that passed unanimously and which recommends that SBAC membership remain as it is currently composed for both the monthly SBAC meetings and for student disciplinary appeal hearings.

[00:24:22] I'm happy to answer any questions as best as I can related to their feedback. - Thank you so much for that update. that's very helpful at this time are there any questions or concerns from the committee miss Donahue thank you chair Chandler thank you miss Galen for presenting us with the with the committee's concerns which I do want to I do want to hear and consider my question I guess my main question is

[00:24:57] where I started with this this is different from how we do the special permission appeals and I understand we're talking about student discipline it is a different area but people have raised similar concerns guarding the special permission appeals that the fact that it is a rotating committee or rotating members who determine the special permission appeals could lead to inconsistent potentially unfair outcomes and I am left struggling with why

[00:25:37] Because every member of SBAC has also served on that, the committees that hear the special permission appeals, I believe. And I am struggling with why they feel that these two categories of processes should be handled differently.

[00:26:01] So that's an issue that didn't come up in the discussion. And I can't say at all whether they do feel that it should be handled differently. I don't know if they would propose that a standing committee also be used for special permissions I really can't speak to that because that was not raised as

[00:26:22] an issue thank you for your candor I I'm a little at loose ends I I I it's not the first time that I've raised that question and that thought and so I am a a little disappointed that i still don't have any insight i mean that that was i thought the point

[00:26:56] of why we invited sbac to share their thoughts about this was because we want to have their input and preferably reach a compromise i would find it preferable to if we are going to make changes that it be through an agreement and be able to come to some compromise and um and maybe this is just I might be saying different comments in a week because I've only just had the opportunity

[00:27:28] to to read SBAC's feedback but I'm I'm a little disappointed so I I'll stop there thank you I'm sure enough thank you chair Chandler um I have a couple of thoughts and also a question at the My first thought I tend I think Ms. Donahue and I tend to be pretty aligned in thinking

[00:28:03] of this as a compromise and I will say that I can speak for myself as a school board member the more exposure and experience and knowledge that we have I feel like is better for oversight of the division and I have felt that way consistently across all areas and I feel that way about discipline appeals when I have been able to sit on them it is it illuminates a lot of what goes on in our schools with our processes with our protocols how policy rolls out and how that impacts the lives of our students and our families and our buildings and so I have found it to be

[00:28:39] very beneficial to have that experience and that knowledge I also want to play a little bit of devil's advocate on the consistency side because we're talking about a committee that stayed the same for two years. That may not always be the case. And in fact, both years I asked to be on SBAC, but the chair is the one who decides. So it could have switched. It didn't, but it could have.

[00:29:03] And it likely will. Definitely will because. Yeah, it definitely will because Dr. Dean's is not running again. So it definitely will switch. So someone new is going to be in there in January anyway so my thought is if we rotate on a monthly basis and everybody has that exposure and we all get trained which I realize would be a burden on staff but I think it's important that we have that training regardless of whether or not we ever saw a discipline appeal because we do get emails we get concerns I think that that would actually solidify the consistency argument because

[00:29:40] then you would always have hopefully you're going to have someone who's done it before And so for me, thinking holistically about how the board works across a larger span of time, not just in the here and now with how the committee is now, I actually think that this option of one person rotating makes for more consistency.

[00:30:02] Maybe others don't see it that way, but that's how I see it. And so I still support that. I also am processing through the feedback as it was made aware to me this afternoon so I've had a little bit of time to think about what was said last night and I will go back and listen and I do hope that when this gets to the full board obviously we'll have one-on-one chance to be able to talk to each of them and sort of get a feel for for really where they are because it feels that they're very passionate about how they feel and that is important to me to hear out so that's kind of where I am on this. I really haven't moved much. I originally thought rotating two members

[00:30:39] was going to be a good option. I have come to the conclusion that that wasn't due to the feedback, and I do feel that this is a good middle ground option. My question, is it going to be a massive burden on staff, or would it be more predictable in a sense to know who's assigned to what month, as would be mentioned in my amendment later? So from a scheduling standpoint, I think it depends on how the board conceives it as being organized.

[00:31:10] One thing that's very helpful, not just to staff, but just in order to get these hearings scheduled in accordance with our policy and legal requirements is to have a date and time at least once every month that is fixed where we have the room.

[00:31:31] We know who is on board to serve in the event that there is a hearing often well maybe not often but with some regularity those standing times those appointments so to so to speak are cancelled because we don't have an appeal that month but we know that if we get one we have a time that we've all agreed we have a room etc if that practice were to continue regardless of who was serving on each committee then it would not be burdensome

[00:32:08] so long as people kept that commitment and I don't mean to imply that anybody would not wish to keep the commitment but you know when you know the last Monday of every month is that whole afternoon is SBAC afternoon you just know when it's once every three or four months and then it gets canceled and now you haven't even thought about it for six months sometimes those things fall by the wayside from a training perspective it is what it is I mean it's our job to train it's our job to schedule

[00:32:46] so that would not in my view be a determining factor in the decision that you have to make I appreciate that and I know with special permission not to harp on the point Ms. Donahue brought up but we have our months assigned in advance and so we expect to see those things to be scheduled in those months and that is helpful as a board member to be able to say I know I've made this commitment because of this month so I'm going to stick where I am on this and see where it goes with the full board after further discussion but in committee I'm supportive of the changes and when we get to the amendments I'll discuss it.

[00:33:25] that part. Thank you. Thank you. In reflecting on the totality of this process I can say I my perspective has shifted somewhat. When I started out I felt a little hesitant about making a change in our committee to the way another committee does business even though it's clearly outlined in policy that we can do that it's just kind of where I started right with a hesitancy about it

[00:33:58] and I will say I am a little bit surprised to have gotten word of this occurrence this afternoon because I also felt that we had gotten to a place of compromise based on the conversations that I had had um leading up to this time um I would propose that as a committee our committee has two options right we send it forward the way we would like to send it forward um to the full board for a big debate um which sounds like it could be fulsome um or we continue to work on it

[00:34:35] here and collect more feedback um you know I I'm not sure um just in terms of thinking about it um does anybody want to talk through that piece further thank you chair chandler i was struggling with that also because at whatever point we move on from talking about s back i wanted to address the proposed changes to select committees part of me has part of me has the feeling that this

[00:35:14] this doesn't feel like we're done enough with it to send it to the full board like i normally would want to feel more like yes this is this is a product that is done and ready to be you know looked at and voted on but to your point these are also i think both of those both of those categories of changes with regard to sbac and the select committee are also areas that i think would benefit from you know hearing the input from our fellow board members and that is much harder to

[00:35:53] obtain if we continue to work on this within committee not impossible but as you say it's hard to have one-on-one conversations to that point Mr. Allen would it be okay if I asked you to to give us some information about what my choice as the chair of the LAMP committee could potentially be in terms of collecting more feedback thank you chair Chandler there's a couple

[00:36:28] of ways you could do that. You could talk individually amongst your colleagues. You could, each of you, you wouldn't be able to do it in pairs at this point until it moves out of committee at the very earliest. In terms of SBAC providing feedback, I think you're free to reach out again one-on-one with your colleagues, or yes, one-on-one with those colleagues. I feel like you have received two rounds of feedback from the individuals on the SBAC committee at this point.

[00:37:05] I'm at a loss readily for other types of discussion, how you could get feedback. I was just going to say we have had policies come for information more than once, too.

[00:37:22] So it's not to say that, you know, you couldn't have it on information and not find a resolution and the need to put it back again. So that's not completely unheard of either. And, of course, we've had where folks, you know, bring it for information, and then it gets sent back to committee. And so, you know, it might be that we just kind of expect that ahead of bringing it to the full board.

[00:37:45] But I understand the need to have a fruitful conversation as an entire school board. And truly, that may be the easiest path forward. But I'm trying to think through, I mean, with the outside of a closed session, is there any way that we could have a working committee that could include both members, the members of both committees?

[00:38:08] I guess so. Thank you. Yeah, nothing would preclude as, once it moves out of the committee, to have a work session. We'd have to notice it, to the extent there's more of you, which there would be, as a work session. You could potentially, I don't know how the board meeting agendas look for the balance of the year, but that you could always make the request to have a work session to kind of do a deeper dive and discuss this and have relevant admin and staff present to answer questions as

[00:38:44] well. But there's not a mechanism for us to invite the entire committee to come here to LAMP to discuss the policy? Not that I'm aware of. That would make it, you know, somewhat of a full board meeting at that time, yeah. Okay, thank you for working through that with me. I just wanted to see if we could come up with any creative solutions. Is there any more conversation at this point, or just limited to this piece of the conversation since Ms. Scanlon and Mr. Daniel?

[00:39:17] No? Okay, thank you so much for providing that very helpful feedback. With that, we can move on discussing the entirety of the policy are there any motions sorry thank you chair Chandler sorry I wanted to madam chair Chandler invited discussion

[00:39:48] regarding the proposed amendments I wanted to solicit the thoughts from my colleagues regarding the proposed edits to the select committee portion as everyone here knows this has recently become relevant the notion of how a select committee might be formed and who selects membership and chairship of such a select committee was was there was not a lot of detail in this policy

[00:40:26] previously so I do appreciate the the effort to kind of flesh that out a a little bit I wonder if well I wonder what my colleagues thoughts are regarding these proposed amendments if there is an opinion that this is sufficient to address any concerns about any there's anything else that we would want to see and I I've been trying to think about this from the lens of having

[00:41:03] chaired the Joint Committee on collective bargaining which was I felt at time could have benefited from a little bit additional guidance on mission the responsibilities the extent of authority that that group had going into that process and reflecting you know reflecting on that now looking back I

[00:41:36] guess my thought is that I would advocate there needs to be something in writing that even if we're going to say the chair of the school board has the discretion to appoint a select committee and appoint the membership and determine the scope of the responsibilities and mission of that select committee it needs I think it needs to be in writing for the for the sake of transparency for the

[00:42:06] sake of of having clear guidance for those individuals when you say it needs to be in writing what specifically that the scope and the purpose would be outlined by the chair as well as who's appointed that's my inclination yeah my question too and i would need to go back and listen although i've listened to a lot of those meetings from the select committees but there was some discrepancy about should are we voting are we not there were

[00:42:41] like those moments and so it's i do agree with you that maybe that those specific maybe a little bit of language around that now that you say it would be helpful I'm fine with the proposed changes here from staff I think a simple word about the scope and purpose could probably be added in terms of outlining that outlining expectations before the committee begins and intended outcomes possibly but I don't remember with the select committee if that was set forth

[00:43:20] beforehand or it kind of evolved as part of the process it felt like it evolved but maybe it was set forth well I would say as I contemplate what's written in policy here now the part that I'm challenged by is that we put the policy contemplates that the purpose can be fulfilled and the committee can be discharged but it doesn't seem to me as if we've set up a way to define the purpose according to how it is currently written and I don't see how you can decide when something

[00:43:56] can be discharged if you have not first defined its purpose and so the the more I sit with this the more I feel that I would like extra time to work with it and to make sure that we're getting it right the first time so and unless there's any other discussion I mean I certainly think it's it's 545 we can continue to work on it now but um to be honest it might be more productive for us to take this out side of committee continue to work for it work on it and come forward at

[00:44:33] the next meeting with additional plans i'm sure enough thank you chair chandler i tend to agree now having this conversation about purpose of select committees and definitely thinking about the upcoming select committee that we're about to embark on i think that that would be purposeful unintended I would like to talk through some of the amendments today so that staff has a chance to hear them although I have discussed them with most of staff today and you all as well since it was such a last-minute I apologize is that a dance competition all weekend and so I didn't get a great chance but if it would

[00:45:12] be permissible in the next five to ten minutes here to just walk you through those so you have time to marinate on it and think about it and understand my thinking is that absolutely okay I will say as the chair of the LAMP committee I am going to decide to keep this policy in committee so that we can continue to work on it but I'm very much open to the idea of being able to consider the perspective of the amendments over the course of the next few weeks before we move forward perfect I actually think that makes it better I went through this kind of with a fine-tooth comb and there were just a couple things that I felt

[00:45:50] needed tightening up. I don't think any of it's earth shattering. One was online. So I am on the red line version from April 22nd that was updated on April 24th. Is that correct or is it is that right? Yes. So that's the version I'm working off of for everyone's information. And the first one was just in the talking about the conversation and looking at the feedback. One of the pieces of feedback said I think this came from SBAC was if it's going to rotate how often was a question and so for me I was just kind of going off the special

[00:46:28] permission process and thinking like we each get assigned certain months so that's where that word would be added on line 97 and so it would read the SBAC chair will convene two of its members to preside over such student discipline appeal hearings and the SBAC chair will recruit a school board member who does not serve on the SBAC to serve at such hearings on a rotated rotating monthly basis so it's just adding the word monthly so it's something for us to consider and you know maybe Ms. Scanlon we can talk about logistically if it would be better two months not every month yeah quarterly

[00:47:04] we could leave that open but it was more just to try and find an answer to the question and eliminate that from being vague so were there any questions I do actually have a question in terms of that monthly qualifier, are there instances in which there's a trigger and it has to occur in a more timely manner?

[00:47:25] So yes, when we receive an appeal, a decision has to be issued within 30 days. So the hearing needs to be conducted within at least, say, 25 or 26 days in order to ensure that the decision is issued within the 30 days which is why we have now we have one a month scheduled there could one a month has worked for us there could be an occasion where we would

[00:47:58] actually have to schedule one because the appeal comes in right before say three days before the day that we would typically have the appeal and we can't squeeze it in in three days that just doesn't give us enough time to get the information out to the committee and to the families and whatnot. But if we wait until the next month, we've gone beyond the 30 days. But so far, that hasn't occurred. It could absolutely occur, though. I could foresee that happening.

[00:48:28] Also, appeals tend to be feast or famine. So we might have a month when there's three or four or five appeals. We might have a month or two or three when there's no appeals. So that is the other thing that we have to anticipate will happen, that if you have these rotating committees and everybody picks or is assigned certain months, you could have certain committees that go a year without getting a hearing just because we don't have any schedule during that month.

[00:49:07] You're also going to have situations where we have to, with very little warning, schedule hearings that aren't on the calendar.

[00:49:27] Do you want to move on to the next one? Sure. The next one is more just sort of for clarity as we looked to align advisory committees with consistency.

[00:49:43] As I read through them, so now I'm on line 302. And as you look at SEAC and GEAC and MSAC and LEAF, every single one of those talks about giving input to the school board except for MSAC.

[00:49:59] So it was more just adding in that language that they would give that input. One of the sentences reads, MSAC is also dedicated to building a school system that is culturally and socially competent and positioned to provide fair and equitable learning experiences for all students. um I understand that that's their recommendation but they don't actually build the school system so it's more of a technicality of language um to just say that they would provide input to the school board that advocates for dedicate you know to building a school system that is currently socially competent and positioned to provide fair and equitable learning experiences it's more like I said it's more of just

[00:50:37] aligning it with the other language where each other committee is giving an input any questions and then my last one it was on line 329 this has to do with the school division administrative advisory committees and I realized that we already have some of these committees such as the business partnership and there's been teacher cabinet and teacher advisory committees that have happened that the superintendent would appoint because this policy is committees of the school board it felt natural to me that the school board would approve them I

[00:51:15] know that in speaking with Dr. Spence this afternoon that that gives a little bit of heartburn in terms of a logjam in terms of efficiency and creating responsive committees to an issue should an issue arise so I would also consider the school board being notified and that seemed to be a happy medium between him and I this afternoon but I'm curious what what you all think as school board members since these are committees that are established with a purpose clearly to address something do we feel that as a school board we should approve that or do we feel like that that's unnecessary and maybe just be

[00:51:54] notified or leave it completely as is I do recognize that they would be listed in a regulation but again keeping up with all the different changes that are constantly going on in the division it for me it would be appropriate I think for us to at least at the minimum be notified if not have approval so curious your thoughts on that more was definitely looking for discussion on that which can occur later I just wanted to put it on your radar thank you Ms. Chernoff sorry

[00:52:32] to be asking a stupid question so is your amendment to say advisory committees will be established and named as such by the superintendent with approval by the school board that's the proposal so he's the the authority still rests with the superintendent to establish such advisory committees there's no they're right you said this amendment is approval but you're saying like you would be open to having it say notice to rather than approval by yes and speaking

[00:53:10] with Dr. Spence it felt like if it has to go for through the full school board approval process which maybe we want it to I don't know it would if there's an issue that occurs that he needs a committee for and he's creating that to address it and hear feedback directly quickly kind of like we do with town halls right we're addressing that in the moment although this would be called a committee that could be cumbersome in terms of executing that committee in a timely manner that since schools are evolving and living buildings and I hear that I also still

[00:53:47] feel like because it's committees of the school board we should at the bare minimum be notified if especially if there is an issue that is timely that he needs a committee for he or she in the future who knows this is also for all superintendents forever but yeah so I do think that that's something again I'm one to want to be in the loop I think that transparency and notification are important for a school board and you know we did get into a discussion about a committee that he had once formed around nutritional services because there was an issue with staffing concerns in the nutrition department and it was rapidly

[00:54:25] happening and evolving and so that was created and I would want to know that as a school board member that would potentially have implications to decisions that we make so that's kind of where I'm coming from with this I think that makes I think that makes a lot of sense and I will say I am glad I don't I don't know if it needs to be included in here, but I am the board liaison for the Loudon Education Foundation, which is not mentioned anywhere in here.

[00:54:51] It is not an advisory committee, but I am its board liaison. I don't know if we feel that there is a need to address it here in some way. They're a separate 501c3, so that's why it's separate. Right. Similarly, right?

[00:55:08] But similarly. Mr. Estreffi is the liaison to the School Business Partnership Advisory Council, right? And I think it is important and useful for the functions both of those groups and the board that there are liaisons.

[00:55:25] And that provision is in the policy, correct? It doesn't have to be, but it can be, is the way I read it. Yes. Well, in sort of thinking through how each of these amendments could impact the rest of the policy, I do find myself looking at the definition, since we've never outlined this in policy before.

[00:55:50] I'm wondering if that would require any changes to be made, or if there's some way that we can make it stronger. And I was curious if anyone from staff had any thoughts about that? So related to the School Division Administrative Advisory Committee piece?

[00:56:06] If we're looking at, like, if there were to be an amendment, as Ms. Chernoff is suggesting at line 329, then do we need to strengthen the policy under the definitions specific to number four? Yeah, so I might change the language to a committee created by or appointed by administration to which the school board appoints a school board member liaison versus just a committee of LCPS administration.

[00:56:36] We actually talked about this in cabinet because, obviously, to give the same example, the School Business Partnership Advisory Council, there are business partners who sit on that advisory council. It's not just administration who sits on it, and of could be interpreted both ways.

[00:56:54] Wes, anything else? I know. Right. I think so. Just keep on working through it. Right. Right. Yeah. Are there any more comments related to InsureOff's proposed amendments?

[00:57:09] Do you have anything else you want to share? I also in speaking with Ms. Crotty regarding the SEAC recommendations would either like to seek further feedback from the committee on how they would like to be defined or add a word so having more time also makes me feel a little bit more comfortable in terms of making sure that we we get this right I know their recommendation is to add the word community at the end of their of the section that relates to them to their

[00:57:47] their work so I'll just flag that for an actor to do for next time are there any more items for discussion related to the policy all right seeing no further discussion is there any new business seeing no new business this meeting of of the Legislative Audit and Policy Committee is adjourned.

[00:58:20] Thank you and have a nice evening and a safe ride home.

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