Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County School Board, 2nd Tuesday School Board Meeting (Reconvened from August 12, 2025), Tuesday, September 2, 2025

Date: Tuesday, September 2, 2025
Place: Loudoun County Public Schools / School Board meeting (see BoardDocs / LCPS-TV)
Length: 2h 33m (video)
Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/1110982340?rel=0
BoardDocs (School Board): https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/loudoun/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DHTN925EC6E3

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 2026-10-11. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

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

[00:01:53] Good evening. It is September 2nd, 2025, and I'm calling to order the reconvened August 12th, 2025 Loudoun County School Board meeting. A reconvened meeting means that we will start off, we will start where we left off on August 12th.

[00:02:08] Dr. Deans will be participating remotely, but the board does not need to vote her in again because the August 12th meeting was held in recess and not adjourned. And so we will go ahead and start off with, and I'm, Dr. Deans, you are here, correct?

[00:02:34] Yes. Great. Just wanted to make sure. Okay. And we will go ahead and start off with information item 12.05, Legislative Audit and Policy Committee, Revisions of Policy 2310, Committees of the School Board, presented by April Chandler, who's the chair of L.A.N.P.

[00:02:52] Ms. Chandler, would you please introduce this information item? Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. This policy came before the Legislative Audit and Policy Committee in March. Significant changes include adding language to outline the process for creating school division administrative advisory committees.

[00:03:11] This is current division practice that had not yet been encapsulated in policy. An amendment was presented that would change the current structure of the SBAC committee so that each month the committee would consist of two members of the SBAC committee, with the third member being a school board member who is not on the committee and serves on a rotating basis.

[00:03:31] The third change included further documenting precisely how assignments are made on a select committee. And finally, the fourth change outlining how an advisory committee is formed when it is not required by law and seeking to capture in policy a consistent and accurate description for each of the current advisory committees.

[00:03:53] I will just say this policy was brought forward by the LAMP committee, even though the members were at a one-to-one impasse, with one committee member absent for the vote. So we did not continue to further delay action on this item. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Chandler.

[00:04:11] Board members, do you have any other questions? Yes, Mrs. Griffiths. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am concerned about the proposal to create an advisory committee under the superintendent. advisory committees by design should provide accountability and transparency to the school board and the public if this committee reports only to the superintendent it removes that oversight and creates a body that can influence decisions without direct accountability to elected board or to parents for the sake of transparency and trust any advisory committee should remain under the

[00:04:49] clear authority of the school board not the superintendent i also want to point out that we will have a new school board uh in january and i don't i'm not sure why we have to do this now why we couldn't wait for the new school board um so i'm actually asking to send this back to committee thank you is that a motion yes i make a motion to send it back to committee so um before we um so we have a motion to send this back to committee do i have a second second i have a second

[00:05:26] by um vice chair donahue that motion has been moved and seconded um is there any discussion yes miss labelle i too have the same thoughts as mrs griffith uh the concern that the um that i have again is that the same as hers that this needs to be under the purview of the school board

[00:05:58] and not the administration um thank you um mr allen one of my understandings of this is that we could have for information you can go ahead and decide to put it on back to committee or you could decide not to do the board could decide not to take it back to committee and would that not be

[00:06:27] a vote thank you chairman yes pursuant to policy 2430 all agenda items must be approached first as an information item but they could be either sent to an action item or continued as an information item or return to the appropriate committee for further review so this is currently my understanding as an information item not an action item but pursuant to policy 2430 if there's kind of a temperature check to a majority of the board to send it back to a committee that that could be

[00:07:03] appropriate so i can just take a temperature check okay board members is there a temperature check to take it back to committee that does not pass so we'll continue to talk about it as information item to discuss it board members is are there any other questions yes mission off I tend to agree with miss Griffiths in terms of the approval just by the superintendent and I had brought this up at one of the committee meetings although I'd missed the one when we brought it to action here so I

[00:07:39] will likely be making an amendment when it comes to action on line 333 after on the red line version that after the word superintendent add the phrase with approval by the school board we did discuss this in committee and I know that that feels like it might be it might slow the process down of establishing those committees so we might need to work around some of that but I think that if the superintendent feels that there's a need to establish a committee for any reason that the school board shouldn't at least know about it and approve it so maybe that could help us reach a middle ground of changing the policy I also just want to express my support for the rotating

[00:08:15] member on SBAC, and I know we heard a lot of feedback through Ms. Scanlon from SBAC and wanted to ensure that that was something that they felt comfortable with. Thank you, Ms. Chernoff. Superintendent Spence, Dr. Spence, could you tell us a little bit more about the Administrative Advisory Committee? Yes, ma'am. It is not unusual in my experience as a superintendent to have administrative advisory committees. So for example, we have a student advisory committee to the superintendent. We have a principal advisory committee that works with our docile team. We

[00:08:55] have teacher advisory committees, although currently on hold as a result of collective bargaining until we kind of sort that out. So it's completely normal for the administration to have advisory committees, to bring stakeholders in, to have discussions with the administration that are not directly related to the work of the school board and not advising the school board on matters of governance or policy. They're advising the administration on matters of operational import. Very normal has happened in every school division I've been in for 31 years.

[00:09:26] I don't think it would be good policy or good governance to say the only time the administration can seek stakeholder input by committee would be when the school board approves that. That doesn't make sense and it would slow down the operational flow of things and it isn't about transparency.

[00:09:47] And I think the reason that this is in the policy for discussion is simply to codify that from time to time there would be a need or a desire to have school board members join the advisory committee so that we have your input. And that currently exists.

[00:10:02] So we already have, for example, the School Business Partnership Executive Council. That is not a board committee. They do not come here and report to the board. They don't advise on policy. They support our operational work on business partnerships. but we have asked that school board members be present and be a part of those conversations for awareness so that you have awareness and can report back during committee reports and say you know I was at this meeting and this is what they talked about and there's a workforce summit coming up or there's this breakfast that's being planned and board members you should have that on your radar but it isn't a function of the board and it's not a matter of governance or policy it's simply operational issues that we seek advice

[00:10:42] on and so there is a distinction between that and the school board advisory committees which directly impact your work and come here to advise you on matters of policy and concerns of governance and so I think it's just important to distinguish between again kind of operations and scored and recognize that this is not intended to say you know we're creating something new that we would then be hiding from people I mean we again we have stakeholder advisory input all the time and this I think was just intended to

[00:11:20] capture in your policies that from time to time we may reach out and ask school board members to participate thank you dr. Spence I do have is miss Boland here yes yes ma'am I'm here I was wondering about the potential of HR TD and to have that a little bit of that discussion and how that would or would not work with collective bargaining.

[00:11:51] So it would be my recommendation that we propose potentially striking the need for that committee. I've expressed this sentiment before, but since the certification of the Latin Education Association, LEA. As the exclusive representative for the certified and non-certified bargaining units, we continue to face questions about how to move forward with established practices, processes,

[00:12:27] and procedures in a collective bargaining environment. This includes policy. With 12,000 employees, 91% of our workforce now in the union, one such question that we face is the utility of maintaining a standing committee on human resources in a union environment. The policy states in 7G, the HRTD committee provides oversight and policy recommendations in personnel-related

[00:13:02] matters, including condition of employment, employee recruitment and retention, evaluation standards, employee compensation, and retirement. While policy development was never the sole role of the Human Resources Committee, a look back at years of meeting agendas demonstrates that most frequent business handled by this committee is policy related work. The passage of the school board's collective bargaining resolution has significantly changed the framework under which these activities can now

[00:13:41] occur. Several provisions in the resolution directly impact how employment matters currently are captured in policies and should be implemented. LEA's role as the exclusive representative now holds the legal right to bargain over matters related to wages, benefits, and potentially other working conditions as defined in the scope of the resolution, essentially causing conflicts of interest and keeping us from being able to bring many of the items

[00:14:19] we used to bring to committee without first having negotiations with LEA as the exclusive bargaining unit. We would therefore be limited in the topics we could discuss on the agenda. And as the HRTD committee members will recall, we had a difficult time finding items to place on the agenda that didn't conflict with collective bargaining.

[00:14:49] Any other discussion? Yes, Ms. Chernoff. That also reminds me, I know Dr. Dean's brought up for new business before the recess about the equity committee. Where do we stand with that conversation, and is that need to be part of this policy at all, or should we wait?

[00:15:09] Was there a further conversation about that, Dr. Spence? In general, I would defer to Dr. Deans, but I think the last time we spoke, there was a desire to have further conversation about what to recommend to the board in the equity committee.

[00:15:30] So I'm not sure we're there yet. Dr. Deans, do you want to weigh in? Dr. Spence is correct in that I had asked to have further conversation before sending the equity committee away or changing its status.

[00:15:51] Its status has to change because it is no longer an ad hoc committee. So I think we would move that down the road to have discussion after this policy is put in place. Yes, Ms. LaBelle.

[00:16:13] I have a question for Ms. Bolin. A few minutes ago when we were talking or you were talking about HRTD, you mentioned retirement. The retirees that are already out there, understand are not covered by the bargaining committee without HRTD where would they go if they had questions or concerns the retirees could still come to HRTD I don't recall them regularly coming to the HRTD committee I believe

[00:16:51] they most frequently came to F&O when the RFPs went through the F&O process we would still have items that would need to come before a committee but similar to the way that we handle technology we would take those items through another committee before the board. So the retirees if they had any concerns about health related issues and health related policies then go to F&O?

[00:17:21] They would go to whichever committee those policies were going through so if that would be FNO then yes ma'am it would be FNO thank you yes mrs. Griffiths thank you madam chair thank you miss Boland for clearing that up as far as HRTD that we're not going to continue as of right now and I did want to mention again per this committee through the superintendent that I think that the superintendent can meet with stakeholders meet with staff at any time I

[00:17:55] I don't think we need to create another committee, you know, and throw a school board member in there. I don't think that's efficient. And, again, I want to mention that we shouldn't be doing this now. We should be waiting until we have the new board in January.

[00:18:14] Thank you. Dr. Rashid and then Ms. Chandler. Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to point out my thoughts very briefly. And I just wanted to say administration and operations continue their work.

[00:18:30] think aside or regardless of the school board and I think that they should also not concern themselves with elections because I think the work is more ongoing the process is ongoing and I feel like it should be independent of the election cycles thank you miss Chandler thank you madam chair first and foremost I would just like to reiterate that this is a very typical this is a procedural what we were trying to do in this policy is capture the process that already exists. And as Dr. Spence

[00:19:10] mentioned, there are lots of examples of committees that fit within this category. To my mind, it's more transparent to set it aside in committee explicitly how we do it and why we do it. And there's no reason to be concerned. It's a standard practice. Now in terms of the election, I would find that to be a devastating precedence to set because ultimately, because of the staggered terms, we will be in this position every 18 months. And the work of the school board will

[00:19:45] basically grind to a halt. So essentially, you have the school board that you have. We have to find a way to work together. And yes, it could change. That's just part of it. But to say, oh, you know what? It's September. We're not going to do any work until after the election or after the new board comes in January is not a responsible approach to governance thank you miss um miss Boland did you have a uh at some point I'd like to share madam yes ma'am can I have Ms. Boland

[00:20:23] speak for one second about HRTD I think and then I'll have you Dr. Dean yes thank you chair I just wanted to clarify Mrs. Griffiths I I don't actually have the authority to halt or stop the hrtd committee so while it's my recommendation it's ultimately up to the school board and any action they would take through this policy so i just wanted to clarify that i'm not halting or saying it should stop or or is stopping that's just my recommendation thank you miss boland dr

[00:20:57] deans and then mr streffi i would just like to share that for those of us who are still serving or trying to serve, it would almost put us into a lame duck situation, and that is disrespectful on the part of the individuals who have chosen to serve the board and the community and the school division. So I agree with Dr. Rasheed that we should not go into a holding pattern because an

[00:21:35] election is coming up in January. Thank you, Dr. Dings. Mr. Struffy. Thank you, Chairman Mansfield. Ms. Chandler mentioned kind of the point that I was going to make as well. So first and foremost, although the conversation around HRTD and the equity committee are important, they are adjacent conversations. And I don't want to muddy the waters too much. I think this policy would kind of dictate those future conversations but this policy itself I agree with Ms.

[00:22:10] Chandler that it is we are not changing anything the attempt is to document the way the process currently exists and to kind of formalize the fact that we would have liaisons for for these advisor you know administrative advisory committees that are operational so it it's meeting the goal of transparency in making sure that the way we operate, how we make decisions about these committees today is formalized in our policy. So I don't know that we would be changing anything. And I do agree with what Dr. Spence is

[00:22:46] saying. It sounds like, you know, to have committees to get stakeholder input and run the school division according to those principles is going to be an important thing to maintain. So yes, thank you madam chair um i just want to point out that um i don't feel that it's very trans that it'll be transparent plus i'm thinking how did we survive before without it um the superintendent can meet like i said with stakeholders and staff whenever he wants to

[00:23:22] i don't think we need to create another advisory committee thank you any other discussion okay um There is no more discussion.

[00:23:43] I'm assuming that this item will go to action. We're not going to be putting this on consent. And so then we can move on to the next item. Item 12.06, Specialized Programs and Centers Committee, Review of Policy 5095, Participation in the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, presented by Dr. Sumer Rashid, Chair of Specialized Programs and Centers Committee.

[00:24:09] - Dr. Rasheed, would you please introduce this item? - Sure, yes, thank you, Chair. The Loudoun County School Board, we review the specialized program.

[00:24:25] SPCC's approved revisions to policy 1595, which is a participation in TJ, Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology. This went across the SPCC committee, and now it is being brought forward for our approval.

[00:24:41] The policy was reviewed by staff, council, and cabinet. It was posted for community feedback in early June and it's approved to be forwarded to us, well, to be forwarded to the full school board on August 5th and hence here we are. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Dr. Rasheed.

[00:24:58] Board members, are there any other questions? Yes, Mrs. Griffiths, same. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to point out that TJ is one of the top schools in the country, one of the top schools in the country.

[00:25:16] And I think this policy revision, I don't think we need it to revise this policy because it just, it makes it harder for families and it discourages families with regards to their kids going to TJ.

[00:25:33] So I'm actually not for revising this policy. I don't know if Mr. Slevin wants to talk further about it as to why we're revising the policy. But I think the previous policy was just fine on its own.

[00:25:49] Thank you. Dr. Rasheed. Thank you, Chair. There's not much of a change to this, as far as I know. I think it's more of one of the lines. I can't remember. Line, I forgot, Mr. Seven. I think it's line 16 or line 7.

[00:26:06] I forgot. One of the lines was just that we wanted to put a closer eye on transportation and have that looked at every year. But nothing was, as far as I'm concerned, was taken away. And that was brought forth to SPCC. that was made clear also in that amendment thank you yes um vice chair Donohue thank you madam chair I have I guess a question for clarification because there are two different red line versions posted on board docs version one and version two and the language related to section c about

[00:26:44] transportation is different in those two in those two versions so which if I could ask I guess which one is being proposed for consideration of amendment? Thank you for that question. This policy was shared with the Special Programs and Senators Committee as an information item, and prior to it going out for public comment, the committee made a motion to amend the policy that updated the language-related transportation. Prior to that, it was similar to what the language was in the past in terms of providing transportation. After the public feedback was

[00:27:22] received at the meeting where it was an action item another amendment was made so version two was approved by the special programs committee on August 5th and that is one you would be considering thank you mr. Sullivan and that is so if I'm reading it correctly both versions change the change in both versions was section C formally stated Loudoun County Public Schools will provide transportation to LCPS students attending TJ and had and the proposal is is to change that to say to the extent transportation is provided by LCPS, the terms of transportation will be reviewed each year in line with the annual contract renewal with Fairfax County Public Schools.

[00:28:02] And then the second version has an additional sentence addressing logistics and number of buses. Correct. Thank you for the clarification.

[00:28:17] I have previously supported us reviewing whether we think it makes financial sense for division to continue to provide transportation to all LCPS students who attend TJ.

[00:28:36] So I am generally in support of making these changes, but I do want to flag, I assume that if LCPS gets to the point of deciding we are not going to provide transportation to some or any LCPS students attending TJ, I personally would only be comfortable supporting that if we say it would apply to the students who have not yet applied and been accepted.

[00:29:11] I would not be comfortable saying the students who are attending TJ now on the assumption that we are providing transportation, changing that commitment in the middle of their high school education does not feel comfortable to me.

[00:29:30] So one of the items that the committee discussed, and we talk about frequently with TJ, is we do want families to feel confident in the choices they're making. There are pretty consequential choices they make between 8th and 9th grade.

[00:29:48] And there may be language that could be added to this policy if there was an interest in making an amendment. And I'm happy to work with you with that, Ms. Danyu. Any other discussion? Yes, Mr. Streffi. Oh, I got you. Dr. Deans, can we let Mr. Streffi go and then you?

[00:30:07] Sure, sure. Thank you. That was my point of clarification as well. I'm trying to recall all the discussion that we had in committee. And I've been a vocal proponent of maintaining our transportation. We've been looking at transportation numbers and number of bus drivers and the routes for months.

[00:30:27] And just maintaining those opportunities for Loudoun County public school students is important. But I thought that this was a fair compromise to be able to Have this in the policy to leave it up for review And I think for me, I don't know if it's contemplated in here based on your response But would also be important to me that families that have already Been accepted to TJ know whether they're going to have transportation. So that's just want to add that the it does say

[00:31:05] say LCPS will provide families with as much notice as possible to any changes in transportation logistics. But any other? Oh, Dr. Deans. I just think that if we got to the point of changing the policy, maybe we could have a phased-in approach. I mean, there would have to be some adaptation. In the year 2028, there would be no more transportation. So I don't think that it has

[00:31:42] to be all or none at one time. I think that you can look at the numbers and see where it is that you would like to cut off. I think that this also tells people that there may be some logistical changes as well not necessarily just taking buses away but there could be like different hubs different models of some sort um that i think it's better to have it in the policy and more

[00:32:17] transparent that way than otherwise um i agree miss labelle as i recall when we were reviewing this policy our was our concern was mostly do we have enough buses do we need less buses because are less students going it wasn't getting rid of the buses it was looking annually to see how many buses were needed how many drivers were needed what would be a better route things like that that was part of our conversation not

[00:32:51] eliminating buses which is what I think a lot of people are looking at thank you any other discussion yes mr. Shandler thank you madam chair and thank you miss LaBelle I really find that context to be very helpful I also would not be in favor just in general of making any changes to our agreement with Thomas Jefferson I think this is one of the opportunities that our families expect for us to make available I don't think it's competitive with the academies of Loudoun at all there it's two very separate types of program in my view and

[00:33:30] At the very least, I am grateful to see that the actual taking a fiscally responsible approach and looking at the busing and what needs to reasonably be done to make sure that we're managing that resource adequately.

[00:33:51] Also, I just really appreciate the fact that the language is included that says we will give families adequate notice because I really do believe that it would need to be as early as possible. before any changes were made so um thank you for that mrs griffiths thank you madam chair um again i don't think um even with the transportation i don't think we should be uh adjusting the policy i think we should just leave it as is and not change any of the verbiage um and that's just

[00:34:25] my thought because i think uh later on we may take that the wrong way as let's eliminate um Somebody's going to turn that into, let's eliminate, we don't need to do this anymore. And that is not good for this county.

[00:34:42] Thank you. I think that it says with logistics and number of buses, I think that that also says that that's not elimination. Dr. Rasheed. Thank you, Chair.

[00:34:59] If you can recall with public comment, as people came out, they were saying, especially from places like Purcellville, places like Middleburg, places like far out in Aldi, there came a point where a lot of constituents were concerned with the lack of buses or lack of transportation thereof or waiting in the winters, their kids waiting and waiting because there was just some sort of lack of buses of transportation. They had some hard times with transportation.

[00:35:31] And looking at that, I'm not saying that transportation should be removed from Thomas Jefferson, but it's important to just kind of keep our eyes peeled so that the policy is reviewed on at least a yearly basis. However, I didn't feel, and I still don't feel, that transportation should be taken away, but it should be under a tighter lens. Thank you. All right, any other discussion?

[00:35:56] Seeing none, I get a feeling there's probably an amendment in there somewhere, maybe. So that will go to action for the next meeting, which is next week, September 9th. Thank you, Mr. Slevin.

[00:36:15] We'll move on to the next item, 12.07, Specialized Programs and Centers Committee, Charter School Annual Technology and Support Services Agreement, presented by, I'm assuming, Dr. Rasheed again, as well as perhaps Ms. Elaine Lehman, perhaps. Dr. Rasheed.

[00:36:36] Thank you, Chair. One of the recommendations is that the Loudoun County School Board review and approve the Technology and Support Services Agreements for Hillsborough Charter Academy and Middleburg Community Charter School.

[00:36:56] The Technology and Support Services Annual Agreements for HCA and MCCS are renewed each year by June 30th. This came about or came across SPCC, and now it is coming forward to us as a full board. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Rashid. Any other questions from the board members? Yes, Ms. Donoghue. Vice-Chair Donoghue.

[00:37:16] Thank you, Madam Chair. I had one question that is applicable to all of the contracts that we are considering, and that is with regard to the non-discrimination language in each one. We amended our anti-discrimination policies last year to include actual or perceived immigration status.

[00:37:39] And we also changed the language around our disability, individuals with disabilities, to read actual or perceived disability. And that language is not included in the non-discrimination clauses in these contracts. So it does address disability, but does not state actual or perceived, and it does not address actual or perceived immigration status.

[00:38:02] So I wanted to ask if there has been consideration of whether we would want to see that language in these contracts, if that's already been discussed, and if there are opinions on the part of Dr. Spence and or cabinet, I guess, either way.

[00:38:25] Mr. Allen, do you want to take that one? Thank you, Madam Chair. The language tracks that which is required by the Virginia Human Rights Act. That's Virginia Code 2.2-3900 and also mirrors that which is required by the Virginia Public Procurement Act.

[00:38:46] So that's the standard language that LCPS and other public bodies include in their contracts. So, Mr. Allen, if you're saying that, then what I'm hearing outside is that charter schools can make up their own policy kinds of things.

[00:39:05] They're not subject to LCPS policies, per se. That's subject to the terms of the actual charter agreement sets forth what policies they're kind of beholden to in terms of Laudan County School Board policies and what policies they are exempt from or create on their own.

[00:39:27] That's set forth in the charter. Vice Chair Donohue. Thank you, Madam Chair. I was going to ask as a follow-up if there is a prohibition that would prohibit us from adding such language into these contracts.

[00:39:45] I don't want to necessarily derail this meeting. If that's a topic that's of interest solely to me, I'm happy to follow up offline. Any other discussion, board members?

[00:40:05] Well, perhaps that this is not going to go to consent either until Vice Chair Donahue might get her questions answered more appropriately. Okay, we'll move on to the next item, Student Behavior and Accountability 12.8.

[00:40:29] Student Behavior and Accountability Committee, Revisions of Policy 8225, Admission, Exclusion, or Reassignment of Student Previously Expelled, Long-Term Suspended, or Reassigned to an Alternative Education Program, presented by Ms. Carrie LaBelle, our Chair of SBAC.

[00:40:51] Ms. LaBelle, would you mind introducing 12.08? No problem. Thank you, Madam Chair. This policy talks about reassignment of students who have been previously expelled, long-term suspended, or reassigned to an alternative education that are trying to enter Loudoun County public schools.

[00:41:14] We have in this policy clarified some of the verbiage to make it consistent with the state code in this case, and a lot of it was taken out to help it be more succinct.

[00:41:32] and to make people understand or allow the student and the family to understand what constitutes being admitted to Loudoun County Public Schools. And it does say that their due process rights are protected.

[00:41:51] They're entitled to hearings. But it doesn't, if you look at the very end of the policy, students with disabilities, nothing herein prescribes the rights of students with disabilities to receive educational services from LCPS under applicable federal and state regulations pertaining to the education of students with disabilities so we are very very clear on that that they are still going to be receiving the services they need even though they're not in Loudoun County Public Schools thank you miss

[00:42:31] LaBelle. Board members, are there any questions? Yes, Ms. Griffiths. Not really a question, but thank you, Madam Chair. I think that reassigning dangerous students doesn't make our school safer. It just moves the problem to a new campus. Loudoun has seen this before. We had an attack on two girls in 2021. We had a gang member who came to school with a gun and was reassigned, putting other students at risk. We cannot continue shuffling dangerous students around while pretending it protects anyone. Student safety must come first. And that's just my thoughts

[00:43:09] on the matter. Thank you. Yes, Mr. Straffi. My understanding that much of this policy is driven by Virginia code. So maybe another way of kind of approaching this is to really ask what types of protocols or what types of protocols or decision-making criteria do we use to ascertain whether a student is a danger and how do we outside of the the the code piece of this how do we use our discretion is there some additional clarity that we can add outside of this just

[00:43:48] policy just for the community to understand I'm sorry could you say that one more time so I just based on the policy, much of this policy is driven by code, so at the points where the hearings take place, is there additional context that we could provide to Ms. Griffith's point around some of the concerns, how we make a decision whether a student is a danger to be brought back into the school environment? Thank you, Mr. Struffy. I think that we probably need

[00:44:21] to address what Ms. Griffiths just said, Dr. Spence, about the potential gang member coming back into our schools which was completely out of order well to the point if we're referencing a specific student I guess it's difficult because I don't want to get into details but that didn't

[00:44:54] occur so I'll just stay there and then also there are as Mr. Estreffi is talking about very specific rules under the code about when we can exclude students from public schools and they're very stringent and miss scanlon who works in the office of school administration works very carefully to make sure that we are adhering to code when we make the decision to exclude students from public schools or assign them to alternative settings and always does so in accordance with code which again

[00:45:30] this policy is just intended to to catch up to code and make those changes that are necessary you know i i understand the concerns and i appreciate mr astraffy's questions and it's probably something procedurally we could talk about at a hearing for example how we might help the board members understand what the code is saying with regards to that but you know there are there are reasons you can long term suspend there are reasons you can expel students and even when you expel students those students have the opportunity to return and so there are there are

[00:46:08] just procedures that the board has to follow and can't just say i don't like this kid this kid seems dangerous therefore they shouldn't be in our schools the virginia code does not contemplate that school boards can make those decisions you you as a board have to adhere to the law in this matter and so i think it's really important when we're discussing students that we understand that and that we make sure we know what that looks like so if it would be helpful for the board for you know perhaps a work session for miss scanlon to come in and provide an overview of this code and what kind of different examples of what might happen if something were to occur just so you have

[00:46:47] a sense of that i mean we can do that i don't know if you need to do that before you vote on this policy but we're happy to provide whatever information we can not specific to any individual case but like just give examples of what might happen in a situation where x occurs i mean we get this kind of thing all the time right so we have students who are excluded from our schools or provided different options alternative settings because of for example court proceedings and then when those court proceedings conclude and if the child is adjudicated to be not guilty that child's coming back to the school regardless of our perceptions about whether or not they're dangerous

[00:47:26] now we may put support plans in place but that's what the law says you don't get to just exclude students because you think they're dangerous. So we can talk about that, but we cannot talk about specific student cases. All we can do is tell you kind of by example how and when we might be able to exclude a student or provide alternative settings. I don't know if I'm going to keep going if that's providing any clarity. I mean, I have to say that now we have tape, we have virtual out like there are other placements that we have now that we did not have in place maybe five years

[00:48:05] ago or something um miss labelle um i'm looking through the policy and i found on line 75 that is the virginia code number if you want to look it up and it gives you the procedures set forth in our regulation and if you had looked at the very beginning of this it starts out with students that applying to Latin County Public Schools because they were expelled or excluded from another school system or private school so that's in there as well then down a little further what do we do about our students that need to be excluded or expelled and as chair Mansfield explained we do have other

[00:48:45] options for them such as tape virtual distance loud and places like that if they are in oh I don't know what the proper term is for it now but at JDC the juvenile detention center we have teachers that will go out and give them their work the people that run the facility will actually see that the work is done and then give the work back so there's a lot of different opportunities for these children to continue education but they are being excluded from our

[00:49:22] regular public system and so this is something that we need to think about because under law we have to provide education for all students between the ages or between the years of kindergarten in 12th grade it is a law a federal law at that so we have to make these these distinctions and we have to look at how we're going to provide the education and on what basis we can exclude them so this clarifies a lot of that. But if you want to look at line 75, that'll take you directly to the

[00:49:58] Virginia code. Thank you, Ms. LaBelle. Ms. Chandler. Well, thank you. I will just say all of my points have been made at this point. I really just wanted to reiterate that the law does allow for and contemplate that there are appropriate situations in which a student may be excluded. So I'm good.

[00:50:19] Thank you. Any other discussion? Okay, seeing none, I'm assuming that's probably going to go, We can take a temperature check for consent. Okay, that'll go to action for the September 9th School board meeting. We'll move on to item 12.09 from Miss Chernoff policy 8040 discussion Miss Chernoff would you like to introduce the item that you requested to be placed on the agenda along with Miss Griffiths and Miss LaBelle?

[00:50:52] Thank you, madam chair Tonight I'm bringing forward policy 8040 rights of transgender and gender expansive students along with a request from Miss Griffiths and Miss LaBelle Policy 80/40 has been discussed on multiple occasions in the Student Services Committee, but has yet to be advanced to this full board for discussion.

[00:51:11] Considering recent public input as well as the findings from the US Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, I feel that this conversation is necessary. Knowing that this policy impacts our students directly, I want to approach this topic with compassion and grace, acknowledging both the tension and engagement that it has garnered since its inception.

[00:51:30] Although we have already moved forward with our response to OCR and have clarity there, that in and of itself doesn't give us clarity on this specific policy. I believe we have an opportunity to examine some options for the policy, even in light of our decision. I had hoped that this work of the policy would happen in committee, with public input, considerations for each component, and revisions recommended.

[00:51:53] Then it could advance to the full board. However, we have been on this board for 20 months, and the complexities, implications, and nuances of the policy have yet to be addressed. At our last meeting, a common thread I heard from public comment from everyone was that we must protect all students.

[00:52:10] I want to be very clear. I absolutely support protecting all students, especially as outlined in our existing policies, which name students groups by race, color, religion, ethnic and national origin, citizenship or immigration status, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, socioeconomic level, military status, and disability, both policy 80-30, student

[00:52:47] discrimination and harassment, and policy 10-40, equal opportunity for equitable, safe, and inclusive environments, outline provisions for those protective groups. And yet policy 40 is the only stand-alone policy for those student groups. I believe in order to maintain a commitment to all students, we should return any necessary protections to our existing policies which already outline them for all groups. With that in mind, I'd like to open up a dialogue to see what the desire of this board is for the next steps. In my mind, I see three options, although I acknowledge

[00:53:22] that you may have more. Option one is leave 8040 as is. No changes, no evaluation until its five year review cycle next year. Option two, address the components in 8040 through committee and examine whether or not to bring them into compliance with federal guidance. Or the third option and my preference which is to rescind policy 8040 and direct staff to ensure that existing school board policies address the privacy dignity and respect of all students then evaluate protections in policy 8040 and to the extent necessary make any policy changes

[00:53:59] through those appropriate committees i am anxious to hear your thoughts and ideas thank you any other discussion yes dr rasheed thank you chair when it comes to the fair and equitable treatment of LCPS students, I stand by the spirit of Policy 8040, including the stance that all students shall be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, transgender status, or gender identity expression.

[00:54:28] LCPS is committed to supporting student privacy and providing equal educational opportunities, including access to LCPS programs, activities, and facilities. We should not call on discussion, revision, or repeal of this policy outside of its routine review cycle just for political strategy. It is not appropriate to weaponize this policy for the sake of election campaigns. Current federal law guides the policy and there is no court-ordered or other legislative reason to change this policy at the moment. Being transgender is not a mental illness nor biological confusion. In fact, gender is social construct that is not based in simple

[00:55:07] biology and the science backs up the fact that biological sex itself is not binary. Both gender and sex are expansive. We must reject fear-based misinformation and embrace education. I refuse to target students based on fear and political talking points. LCPS schools need to be safe and supportive.

[00:55:28] As chair Mansfield has pointed out, belonging is key and LCPS students should know that they are loved. Thank you chair. Any other discussion? Yes, Mrs. griffiths um i do agree that we should protect all students um so i will say that um this policy was adopted four years ago in august 2021 this policy is fairly new and causes nothing but divisiveness if you want to vote on it uh if you if you can vote on it you can get rid of it

[00:56:04] um in keeping this policy active it only leads to entanglements with students community and higher courts of law. So again, this is a new policy the past four years. I'm curious to know what we did before. For background on policy 8040 for our constituents, the policy allows for students that may be a different biological sex to access student activities and facilities such as restrooms and locker rooms. It also allows students to use gender pronouns. This policy is trying to make our students, boys and girls, accustomed to losing their spaces in middle school

[00:56:40] in high school. For female students, it is a way of grooming them to be more accepting of losing spaces we fought so hard for in 1972. What the public was told on a June 24th meeting is that we would have certain Title IX issues if we didn't. What they weren't told is that we wouldn't have certain Title IX issues if we didn't have 8040. We have entanglements due to 8040 that brought up on cases for Title IX investigations.

[00:57:10] The Title IX is clear. The Department of Education has confirmed that Policy 8040 is in violation. We should comply with federal law and get rid of it. Instead of clinging to a broken policy, let's protect all students, follow the law, and move forward.

[00:57:26] It's hypocritical to condemn tragedies like a shooting in Minnesota while continuing to push policies that exploit gender dysphoria and fuel a destructive frenzy and divide our community 8040 tramples on the privacy rights of students and families just to satisfy an agenda it's time to stop chasing a gender agenda that ignores reality and get back to the core goal of rigorous teaching and learning and i must say that our schools were built for the majority of students not for the one percent we accommodate

[00:58:03] the 1%. We did go in and we did renovate bathrooms to accommodate. So I'm not sure why we can't do this here, why in locker rooms we can't accommodate further. We do want all students to be safe, and I think it's very clear that this policy has to go away. Thank you. So at the heart of what we do, at the center of every policy and every conversation, there should be one fundamental

[00:58:37] principle, and that is recognizing and honoring each other's humanity. And that principle is being tested now across our country, our state, our communities, and right here in our schools. We are witnessing an unprecedented wave of attacks on transgender people, particularly trans youth, at nearly every level of government, in state houses, in school boards, and on national and international stages. And we're seeing efforts not to just erase identities, but to vilify them.

[00:59:16] This is not accidental. It's strategic. It is harmful, and it is deeply wrong. And I feel the need to say this out loud for y'all to hear and to use this platform for good and to provide clarity about what I believe. Trans people are people. Trans youth are children. They deserve of safety, respect, and the freedom to exist fully as themselves. We know from data and we know from our own experiences in schools and communities that when trans kids are supported, when they're

[00:59:54] affirmed at home and in the classroom, they thrive. According to the Trevor Project's 2024 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ plus Young People, trans and non-binary youth who report feeling supported in their gender identity by their families are less likely to attempt suicide. Similarly, trans youth who have access to gender-affirming schools are significantly less likely to experience depression and self-harm. And these numbers are just not statistics.

[01:00:32] They are lives saved. Yet in this moment, instead of wrapping these children into our support, We are seeing media narratives and political campaigns designed to stir fear and spread lies.

[01:00:49] Misinformation about gender identity is being weaponized to score political points, often at the expense of the most vulnerable. I know and I understand that there are deeply held beliefs at play here, and that there's a lot of misunderstanding about so much, and it's purposeful.

[01:01:11] As a public official, I will continue to follow the law. This issue has been litigated and Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board established a binding precedent in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that says we may not prohibit a student from using facilities that align with their consistently and persistently held gender identity because it constitutes sex discrimination and violates Title IX.

[01:01:41] The Supreme Court declined to hear this case, leaving the lower court's ruling in Grimm's favor in place. We are following controlling law. Today, we find ourselves in the middle of a legal and political whiplash caught between shifting federal interpretations of LGBTQ plus rights and protections under different administrations and the existing legal precedent here in Virginia.

[01:02:12] Ultimately, the courts must provide clarity. However, the current federal administration is using this topic as a distraction, a deliberate attempt to divide us and shift tension away from real issues like overall education funding, public health, economic uncertainty, and the erosion of our democracy.

[01:02:35] And the more we allow ourselves to be pulled into the manufactured panic and outrage, the more we risk becoming complicit in the harm. So what can we do? We must listen to trans people, especially our youth, and believe them when they tell us who they are.

[01:02:56] We must educate ourselves and others with facts and not fear. And that means checking our sources, challenging misinformation, and refusing to let hateful rhetoric go unchecked, whether it's on our social feeds, our workplaces, around our dinner tables, or in our school buildings.

[01:03:14] We must create spaces of belonging, not just tolerance, but belonging, environments where every child knows you are safe here, you are seen here, you matter here, and you are loved.

[01:03:36] and finally we must choose courage over comfort because history is watching and one day our children and grandchildren will ask us what we did in this moment when people's rights were under attack and protections were being taken away and when kids were being targeted simply for being who they are let us be able to say we showed up we stood up and we did the right thing let us be remembered not for our silence but for our solidarity because kids deserve nothing less

[01:04:11] I don't think it's a good idea to change anything until all investigations are over and the courts figure this out. So it is because of this that I move that the Loudoun County School Board suspend the rules to put item 12.01 to action. Do I have a second?

[01:04:27] Second. I have a second by Ms. Chandler. The motion to suspend the rules has been properly moved and seconded, and there's no discussion to suspend the rules, and it passes with the two-thirds vote, which requires six board members to pass this motion.

[01:04:43] Yes, what is your point of view? This is not the time for discussion.

[01:04:59] There will be another motion, and you can... Discussion, I'm correcting something. Someone, I believe it was Ms. Chernoff. Ms. LaBelle, you are out of order right now. You can have your discussion during the next discussion.

[01:05:16] Clerk, please open the vote. We are voting to suspend the rules to take this to action. Clerk, please open the vote. Board members, please record your vote. Clerk, please...

[01:05:33] Ms. Dr. Deans can you please state your vote? Yes. Clerk please close and display the vote and that motion passes 7 to 2. So we have now suspended the rules and I'd like to make a motion. I move that the Loudoun County School Board postpone any further review or action concerning policy 8040 until after all related federal and or state investigations are concluded and until either the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reconsiders the holding of Grimm v. Gloucester

[01:06:12] County School Board, which remains controlling in the Fourth Circuit, or the U.S. Supreme Court determines whether it would be a violation of Title IX not to provide students with access to intimate facilities that align with their consistent and persistent gender identity.

[01:06:29] per this action unless otherwise required by law policy 8040 will not be eligible for school board review under any of its policies until the foregoing conditions for future board review or action are met do i have a second second i have a second by miss chandler it's been properly moved and seconded now there is discussion miss labelle would you like to discuss yes thank you Ms. Chernoff said that many times the Student Services Committee had talked about 80-40, but it had never advanced to the full board.

[01:07:05] I'd like to point out that every time I tried to bring this subject up, I was overruled. I said we needed to talk about it to fix it, because there is a way to fix it so that it is equitable for all students.

[01:07:21] And every time I was voted down, I pointed out many, many court rulings that said that it is fixable, we need to fix it, but nobody would let me talk about it. And I still say that it is fixable, that we can find a way to meet all students' needs in this area.

[01:07:45] Thank you very much. Please correct the record. Thank you, Ms. Lambelle. Any other discussion? Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to say that 80-40 is not mainstream thinking. It's an 80-20 issue, and that if we continue down this path, I think it's the wrong direction.

[01:08:05] What we have been doing for the past four years, because it's a fairly new policy, is throwing students that do not have gender dysphoria into disarray. Many Loudoun County constituents thought we solved the problem by changing staff bathrooms to gender-neutral bathrooms and making other changes.

[01:08:23] With that being said, every student should feel comfortable and safe in school, including students that do not have gender dysphoria. I believe the word is cisgender, which is the majority of our students. We are throwing the majority of our students in disarray.

[01:08:41] Thank you. Any other discussion? Yes. Vice Chair Donahue. Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a question for clarification. As was previously noted policy 80/40 is due for its five-year cyclical review in the spring is that is your does Your the chairs motion the gate that cyclical review. Mr. Allen. Thank you, Chair Mansfield So policy 2540 that's policy manual requires the board to review

[01:09:19] Policies for potential revisions every five years that tracks Virginia code section 22.1 253 - Point 13:7B, and so pursuant to the plain language, in my estimation, what you are as a board doing tonight is reviewing and considering potential revisions such that that would be compliant with your policy 2540 and the Virginia code that it's based on.

[01:09:54] - May I respond, Madam Chair? - Yes. - Thank you. I have to say I can't, I disagree with Mr. Allen, particularly because if the proposal is we are considering changes to the policy at this time, staff did prepare proposed revisions to policy 8040 at the direction of the chair of the student services committee, my predecessor, prior to the swearing in of this current board.

[01:10:31] Those proposed revisions have never been discussed in committee or at this full board. And I feel that I need to respond to something that Ms. LaBelle stated.

[01:10:54] I, in fact, as the chair of the Student Services Committee, I put those revisions for 8040 on the agenda of our first committee meeting in January of 2024. It was the will of the majority of that committee to pursue consideration of focus groups.

[01:11:10] And that was the reason why it was not discussed in committee for a year. That being said, staff did prepare proposed revisions. They have never been discussed or addressed.

[01:11:30] Yes, Ms. Chandler. Thank you, Madam Chair. From the beginning of my journey on the school board, one of my guiding principles has been the belief that our public schools are inherently for everyone and that all students deserve to be safe, seen, and respected in our schools and in our community.

[01:11:50] And I will continue to support policies that affirm the rights of each student and person that we serve in Loudoun County Public Schools. That is just where I am with this. Now, that said, I also try to be very pragmatic in my approach to governance.

[01:12:10] And I find that I'm very much in favor of Chairman's Field's amendment because we are treading on very dangerous ground. We know there's an inherent conflict between the federal administrative guidance and the federal case law that applies to LCPS.

[01:12:31] I personally do not see the wisdom in engaging in any current speculative interpretations when we know this is going to be decided in court. And engaging in these divisive conversations in this uncertain moment is, I believe, potentially detrimental to the school board and the division.

[01:12:51] So I'm in support of the motion. Thank you, Ms. Chandler. Yes, Vice Chair Donohue. Thank you, Madam Chair. My concern is I think we're putting, I think the Chair's proposed motion makes a presumption that we should not be counting on, which is that we will get a clear and definitive guidance from the U.S. Supreme Court in the near future.

[01:13:31] And while that is possible, it is not a guaranteed outcome. If we don't get clear guidance from the US Supreme Court in the near future, the chair's proposal will put us in the position that we can't look at this policy, we can't take any action on it, we can't discuss it.

[01:13:54] And while I absolutely support the division's commitment to ensuring the safety, dignity, and equality of all students, I also feel that in the conversation about 80/40, we have gotten to a place now where we have been either unwilling or unable to engage in a discussion of whether the policy is doing whether this policy the way that it is currently drafted is the best way to do that we have policy reviews for a reason because when we draft a policy

[01:14:31] we don't know necessarily how it's going to play out so we conduct review regular reviews so that we can fix things if they need fixing. But with 80-40, because it has become such a lightning rod, we haven't had that conversation.

[01:14:50] And I am reluctant to commit to saying we will not make any changes to 80-40 until there is clear precedent from the Supreme Court. I think it's too limiting on our ability to review policy.

[01:15:13] Madam Chair, I'd like to call the question. Okay, I have a motion to call the question. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second by Dr. Rasheed. It has to pass by two-thirds.

[01:15:30] It's to call the question. It's to call the question to end the discussion vote. And it has to, six board members have to be a form voting to call the question.

[01:15:47] Clerk, please open the vote. Board members, please record your vote. Dr. Deans, would you please state your vote? Yes. Clerk, would you please close and display the vote?

[01:16:07] And that motion does not pass. So we will go ahead and have any more discussion. Yes, Ms. Chernoff. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm grateful for the dialogue and to hear from my colleagues. I echo a lot of what Ms. Donahue has said tonight. I hope in my statement I made it clear that I really do believe that we can protect all students.

[01:16:33] And I think when we set up the narrative as it's one or the other if you support this policy or not, that's just not what the conversation is. the conversation is there are many components to this policy that are even outside of the grim case in my opinion and so that's why I brought it up I think that there are different you know angles to look at and different components and revisions that had been proposed in the past as well as you know as answering the question that Miss Donahue asked which is is this policy accomplishing what we want it to accomplish when we have policies that are really really well-written to protect all student groups. I am fearful that this motion will

[01:17:12] set a very dangerous precedent for policies to come, that anything that goes under lawsuit or investigation would get punted until there's clarity. We know how the courts work, we know how bureaucracy works, it's not fast, and I think that putting a pause on something indefinitely without clarity for the public silences those voices as things continue to evolve, and I will definitely not support this, which I don't think is a surprise, but, you know, I think it brings more questions and answers. How many lawsuits? Is it only the current federal investigations that you're talking about? What if more arise? Are we waiting for those? You know, how far does this motion take

[01:17:50] us? I feel like there's too much ambiguity, and I will not support it. Any other discussion? Yes, Mrs. Griffiths. I just want to say I agree with Ms. Chernoff that we're just opening it up to more lawsuits um continuous lawsuits i don't think you could put this on hold thank you thank you any other discussion seeing none uh we'll go ahead and vote the voting on my motion on the

[01:18:26] original i move that the loudon county school board postpone any further review or action concerning 8040 until after all related federal and or state investigations are concluded and until either the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reconsiders the holding of Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which remains controlling in the Fourth Circuit, or the U.S. Supreme Court determines whether it would be a violation of Title IX not to provide students with access to intimate facilities that align with their consistent and persistent gender identity. Per this action, unless otherwise acquired by law, Policy 8040 will not be eligible for school

[01:19:06] board review under any of its policies until the foregoing conditions for future board review or action are met clerk please open the vote board members please record your vote dr deans would you please state your vote yes clerk would you please close and display the vote and that motion passes five to four um okay we will consider we will move on to the next item and we will continue with item 14 closed session vice chair donahue do you have

[01:19:45] a motion yes thank you madam chair i move that the loudon county school board recess this public meeting and enter into a closed meeting pursuant to section 2.2-3712 of the code of Virginia for the following consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members or consultants pertaining to actual or probable litigation where such consultation or briefing an open meeting would adversely affect the negotiating or litigating posture of the public body as authorized by section 2.2-3711 sub a sub 7 of the code of Virginia and consultation with legal counsel employed or retained by a public body regarding a specific legal matter requiring the

[01:20:21] provision of legal advice by such counsel as authorized by section 2.2-3711 sub a sub eight of the code of Virginia. Vice Chair Donohue has made a motion. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second by Ms. Chernoff. It's been properly moved and seconded that the Loudoun County School Board go into closed session. Is there any discussion? Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd just like to point out again that I always ask for public meetings, not closed session. So I'd like to make a motion

[01:20:52] to do public i'll try it again if we could go ahead and do that thank you that would be a substitute motion a substitute motion then okay do i have a second there is no second so that does not go um clerk please open the vote on our initial motion to go into closed session clerk

[01:21:25] please open the vote board members please record your vote dr deans would you please state your vote yes clerk please close and display the vote and that motion passes eight to one with mrs griffis

[01:21:44] in opposition of the vote the board is now enclosed is dr. deans back we'll wait for dr. deans dr.

[02:27:05] deans are you here yes thanks all right the uh board is coming out of closed session vice chair donahue do you have a motion yes thank you madam chair i move that the closed meeting be adjourned that the loudon county school board reconvene its public meeting and that the minutes of the public meeting reflect that no formal action was taken in the closed meeting. Vice Chair Donahue made a motion to adjourn the closed meeting. Do I have a second? Second. I'll second by Ms. Chandler.

[02:27:43] It's been properly moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and take a vote. Clerk, please open the vote. Board members, please record your vote. Dr. Deans, would you please state your vote? Yes. Clerk, please close and display the vote and that motion passes unanimously. Vice Chair Donahue, do you have a second motion? Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.

[02:28:17] I move that the following resolution certifying the closed meeting be adopted and reflected in the minutes of this public meeting. Resolution number 05-25-26, whereas the Loudoun County School Board has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, and whereas section 2.2-3712 sub D of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the school board that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law, now therefore be it resolved that the Loudoun County School Board hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge, one, only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements

[02:28:54] by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification applies, and two, only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed, or considered by the Loudoun County School Board. I have a motion on the floor. Do I have a second?

[02:29:11] I have a second by Mr. Streffi. The motion has been properly, it's been properly moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Seeing no discussion, we'll take an electronic vote. Clerk, please open the vote. Board members, please record your vote. Dr. Deans, would you please state your vote?

[02:29:34] Yes. Oppose and display the vote. That motion passes unanimously. Mr. Streffi, do you have a motion? Yes, Madam Chair. I move that the school board authorize counsel for the school board to proceed in the manner outlined in closed session.

[02:29:54] I have a motion on the floor by Mr. Streffi. Do you have a second? Second. i have a second by ms chandler um is there any discussion seeing no discussion we'll take an electronic vote clerk please open the vote board members please record your vote dr deans would you please state your vote yes clerk would you please close and display the vote that motion passes 5-3 with mrs griffiths mrs chernoff and ms labelle in opposition to the vote and

[02:30:32] Vice Chair Donahue abstaining from the vote we'll now move to item 15 board member comment and committee reports do you guys want to thumbs up do your committee reports okay that's a no so we'll move on to new business board members do you have any new business no new business seeing as there's no new business the Loudoun County School Board's reconvened a meeting from August 12th is now adjourned please drive safely home

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