Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County Public Schools, Legislative, Audit and Policy Committee Meeting, Tuesday, November 18, 2025

Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Place: LCPS Administration Building / School Board Room, Ashburn, Virginia
Length: 1h 11m (video)
Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/1138232737?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 2026-10-12. 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 November 18, 2025. We will begin with public comment. We would normally begin with public comment, but seeing as we have no one signed up, we will move right into our first item, 3.01, approval of the October 21, 2025 draft minutes.

[00:00:25] May I please have a motion to approve the October meeting minutes? Motion to approve the October 21st, 2025 LAMP meeting minutes. Thank you, Ms. Chernoff. Oh, I'll second. Right, I remember.

[00:00:42] All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed, say nay. Any abstaining? Aye. Thank you. The motion passes with two votes and one member abstaining.

[00:01:01] Thank you. we will start tonight with our action items first up is item 4.01 policy 3410 office of the auditor general i will be presenting tonight the red line includes language to clarify the school board's relationship with the office of the auditor general the committee has also discussed over several meetings in this in recent months creating a new standing committee that might only be for the auditor general and a new standing committee for the audit program that

[00:01:39] would be an interesting conversation to perhaps have this evening but in hopes of bringing the authority to employ the auditor general under the authority of the school board the office of the auditor general will align more appropriately with what's typical for the industry standard so with that are there any comments or questions from the committee yes miss Chernoff I will make motion if that's all right with you I will move that we send policy 3110 with

[00:02:14] the red line edits to the full school board Office of the Auditor General thank you very much there any need for further discussion I'm sure enough I would just say that I would all I'm good with the policy as is and I think it's in a good place to go the full board but I would entertain a conversation perhaps in the new year as we turn over a new term that we would possibly read I think we're probably gonna be talking about committees in general I have also discussed this with different people about it feels sort of like this is three committees jammed into one we've had to lengthen the time and maybe a

[00:02:53] better cadence to consider could be sort of rotating topics each time and having a policy thread that runs through but I would be open to that dialogue but I think as the policy sits we should continue to move forward. Thank you Ms. Chernoff. Any further discussion Ms. Donahue. Thank you very much Chair Chandler. I would I would like to I'm in support of going ahead and sending this to the full board but I would like to discuss a little bit either today or when this is before the full board a little bit about the the

[00:03:30] scope of what subjects or tasks will be will continue to be appropriate for the auditor general to dig into and what kind of questions or issues are not would not fall within the scope of the auditor generals authority and responsibilities if I may I the language that's added to the policy really only shifts who the auditor general reports to but as the policy is laid out now and I'll ask mr.

[00:04:02] woods to weigh in as well the scope should stay effectively the same as it has been since the editor-general joined us yes the scope remains the same and that scope is that we can audit all our processes or we also have access to all materials within the school division so I think the scope does remain the same thank you so much mr. woods the motion is I'll ask one more time any further discussion it's on here thank you chair Chandler just one follow-up for mr.

[00:04:40] Woods if there are if there were to arise a need for some level of subject matter expertise related to an audit that your office is pursuing how is that handled or how would that be handled all right first we'd have to be allocated the budget resources and secondly we could request outside services as long as it falls within an approved budget and it does happen throughout the industry particularly with IT audits and those who have computer science

[00:05:19] backgrounds who are more knowledgeable about coding we do not have that expertise there could be other areas but they would fall under the same contracting or vending processes as they would with IT thank you mr. woods and thank you miss Donahue the motion has been properly moved and seconded by made by Ms. Chernoff and seconded by Ms. Donohue. All those in favor please raise your hand and say aye.

[00:05:47] Aye. Seeing none opposed the motion passes unanimously with all committee members present. Next we'll move on to item 4.02 policy 2130 oath of office. This policy was last reviewed in September of 2021. The proposed changes align with current practice and provide additional clarity.

[00:06:09] Tonight, Dr. Mark Bergen, our chief of staff, will be presenting. I will just note for the audience, there might be some challenges with audio. Please bear with us. Dr. Bergen, the floor is yours.

[00:06:31] Would you please repeat what you said? The room can hear me. On my behalf, and I will be able to answer any questions that you are not equal to policy.

[00:07:07] My apologies. I really did not hear what Dr. Bergen said, but I will offer the floor to Mr. Allen. Thank you, Chair Chandler. - I think due to the technical difficulties, I'll be presenting out somewhat impromptually, but I will do my best.

[00:07:32] So this policy, as you indicated, the Oath of Office policy 2130, was last reviewed in September of 2021, and legal has reviewed. There have been no updates to the Virginia Code section, which provides for this Oath of Office for all school board members to take, And it's presented to you as it currently was.

[00:07:55] I don't believe there are any proposed red lines for this committee's consideration. Thank you, Mr. Allen. So just to reiterate, there are no substantive changes being proposed at this time. Is there any discussion by the committee? Ms. Donahue.

[00:08:12] Thank you very much, Chair Chandler. Mr. Allen, can you just clarify where the policy states that school board members shall subscribe to the oath prescribed for officers of the Commonwealth? can you please clarify what uh what legal authority that is referring to it says prescribed for the officers yes miss donahue that's set forth in virginia code section 49-1 that is a form of general oath required of officers and it's the one that you all were sworn in under would it be

[00:08:48] possible to add that as a cross reference because i don't believe that it is or at least the cross reference that I'm looking at here is code of Virginia as amended sections 22 point 1 - 31 certainly staff can certainly add that in I was curious if my colleagues had looked at the revisions proposed by I believe it was the equity

[00:09:21] committee related to potentially adding some additional language and MSAC there were two proposals one from MSAC suggesting that we consider adding language that would outline what happens if an individual refuses to take their oath and the equity committee also proposed some additional language not changing what's there both proposals are not to change the language that is there but to consider making additions to them and in particular with regard to

[00:09:58] to MSAC's proposal I'm curious for Mr. Allen what were to happen if they if an individual were to decline to take the oath for for some for any reason thank you Miss Donahue given that the code requires and uses the word shall that's certainly implied that they would not be affirmed into office if they failed to

[00:10:28] take the oath sure enough I appreciate it I did see the feedback my question is is it legal to add to the oath that is set forth by state law and the code and the Commonwealth seeing that it is the oath that all school board members take across the state thank you Mr. Chernoff I know I certainly want to advise

[00:11:04] adding additional language I think following the language in the code would be the most advisable approach yeah and my only other thought on that and just reflecting on it is you know we're we're taking an oath to be school board members we have all these policies I mean you could easily it could open up a door for a slippery slope in my mind because we also have policies about upholding research-based literacy practices and upholding public comment and you know how many policies do we have so we have policies in place that support these values and these values for our students in our division and I believe that that is sort of part of what we do with the Commonwealth as what

[00:11:42] is said and upholding the constitution of the united states and the constitution of virginia so i would think that that would not be something that would be advisable either for myself um just thinking about adding things on i think you you could go a lot of different directions with that and sort of the question then for me would be like where does that stop and why so that's sort of my two cents miss donahue thank you chair chandler i i read at least the msac proposal i read not as adding to the oath that members must take so much as just reminding members that when

[00:12:19] you take the oath of office these are parameters of that requirement i i do agree it is it is a little bit less clear to me with the proposed the proposal from the equity committee if the proposal is to add this language to the oath versus this is a requirement when you take the oath of office these are the things you're committing to do for what that's Mr Allen are you able to articulate

[00:12:56] whether or not either of these suggestions are legally enforceable and I would also wonder and I I'm sorry this is just off the top of my head and not a conversation that we've been able to have but are there any pitfalls or challenges that we could get into as a school board or as a division in terms of what standard for election practice or election law thank you chair Chandler I would have to do a deeper dive for the latter question

[00:13:30] but in terms of the proposed recommendations from MSAC as I indicated earlier I think that's necessarily implied what gives me pause there is I think the their proposed wording says within the time allowed to And under current law, 22.1-31, it doesn't indicate a kind of a lapsing of that time frame.

[00:13:55] So that would be a potential problem in terms of defining that where it's not defined elsewhere in law. Thank you for that clarification. With that, is there any further discussion?

[00:14:13] Are there any motions? Ms. Chernoff? Thank you, Chair Chandler. I move that policy 2130 oath of office go to the full board second thank you the motion has been properly moved by Miss Chernoff and seconded by Miss Donahue all those in favor please raise your hand and say aye aye I'm seeing none opposed the motion passes and we'll move forward to the full school board next up is item 4.03 policy 2140 orientation and professional development for the

[00:14:48] board members this policy is also due for its five-year review and was last reviewed in November of 2021 the proposed changes align with current practice and provide additional clarity is there any update on who will be presenting tonight Thank You Chair Chandler I believe due to technical difficulties that'll be me as well thank you and looking at the proposed policy I I don't see any further red lines proposed by members of this committee, but we're happy to, staff is happy to entertain

[00:15:25] any questions coming from the feedback received from the equity committee, MSAC, and otherwise. - Thank you. Question, comments, Ms. Donahue.

[00:15:44] - Thank you, Chair Chandler. I just had one suggestion. I'm looking at the red line on line 23 the of the red line version with the new proposed language reads the chair shall work with the superintendent or designee to schedule in-depth programming for new school board members I realize I'm being very nitpicky but instead of saying new school board members I would suggest newly elected or incoming school board members technically at the time they're doing the orientation there they haven't been sworn into office yet they're not board members at that time sure enough

[00:16:24] to reaffirm that on line 29 it uses that language newly elected so I would support that I would also support that I think it's a good catch would you like to make a motion so that we can thank you thank you chair Chandler yes I I move to to change on line 23 of the red line to read to schedule in-depth programming for newly elected or appointed school board members just as a point of clarification from our parliamentary expert mr. Allen do we need

[00:17:03] to go back to the basement make a base motion before we amend yes okay so would you like to make a base motion I would be delighted I move that policy 2140 orientation and professional development for board members move from this committee to the full board second thank you the motion has been made by Michelle off and seconded by miss Donahue all those in favor please say aye oh no no I'm sorry we're not passing thank you for the clarification now is there any discussion or further motions yes please thank you chair Chandler I

[00:17:42] move to amend the proposal so such that line 23 of the red line will read to schedule in-depth programming for newly elected or appointed school board members second the motion has been made by Miss Donahue and seconded by Miss Chandler it is properly made is there any further discussion seeing no further discussion all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed seeing none

[00:18:22] opposed the motion passes unanimously and with that we will return to the base motion is there any further discussion on the policy nope seeing none all those in favor please raise your hand and say aye I I'm seeing none opposed that policy motion passes and will move forward for consideration by the full school board okay next up is item 4.04 policy 1035 school board norms protocols and violations this policy is also due for its five-year review

[00:19:00] it was last reviewed in April of 2021 proposed changes align with current practice and provide additional clarity i'm going to assume mr allen that you'll be presenting thank you yes thank you chair chandler the most substantive proposed change comes on page two at the bottom and inserts section b professional development this extrapolates language from the policy 2140 orientation professional development for new school board members and places that here what we did not discussed in the prior policy 2140 is that that was being converted to address

[00:19:40] the orientation for new newly elected or appointed school board members so this just clarifies if board members are current board members and continuing board members are looking for professional development this tracks the language of the Virginia code that sets forth the requirements for that professional development for their school board members thank you mr. Allen any comments or discussion I'm sure enough thank you madam chair as I mentioned last time and with Miss Donahue with us tonight I'd love to

[00:20:18] gauge her thought process on this I'm still still thinking about how we could add a section that outlines the chair and vice chair responsibilities as well as just within the board norms and wondering if that's the best fit here and I do want to propose that we think about maybe tabling this and adding this as a section here or creating and adopting a new policy outlining those roles and responsibilities and as I know this committee appreciates their research I did a little bit of a deep dive and this is really not new or unusual in fact it reflects standard governor

[00:20:55] governance practices across the Commonwealth and for instance Arlington Public Schools has a dedicated policy called board leadership that defines expectations for the chair and vice chair including agenda setting with the superintendent presiding over meetings coordinating board evaluations etc etc you can go look that up in your free time and then also Fairfax County sort of takes it in a different direction they have a hundred and seventy page strategic governance manual so also super fun reading but all of those roles and responsibilities are outlined there and then as policies arise that would include those things it's cross-referenced so I found that to be

[00:21:33] interesting and there are other school boards that have that and in fact VSBA also offers guidance on language around having sections in policy or manuals or separate policies sort of defining that leadership and really the main goal for me is just sort of clarity and continuity in one place as we as I stated last time we have different roles and responsibilities of the chair spread throughout our various policies also I think it offers governance Instability in terms of lack of, there's no lack of confusion.

[00:22:05] You know what you're signing up for if that's what you want to do. Transparency for the community to understand how that role differs and works in tandem with the current school board members. For instance, their vote doesn't count more, right? So I think most people know that, but I think having it in one place could be helpful.

[00:22:21] And then, again, just alignment with our other divisions, especially the divisions around us, as they have that as a best practice. So open to the conversation. do feel like it best fits here I think that we can make a section for it and it could be fairly straightforward but I was hoping to engage some dialogue before we move this to the full board Thank You Mr. Arnoff thank you chair Chandler I have I have I have given some thought to that topic generally in in

[00:22:56] our time on the board I feel that there feel that in my memory I have observed where occasions where there have been some questions among some of my colleagues as to what decisions actions etc are appropriate for the chair to to make unilaterally versus what under what circumstances does the chair should or must involve or solicit the opinion of the rest of the board versus what are the decisions that the board has to approve by a majority or unanimously that then the chair speaks on behalf of the board

[00:23:36] members and from the outside particularly I think from an outside perspective it's not always clear when if a statement is being made is that the statement understanding that the chair is always representing the board I think there could be some benefit to having it laid out a little more clearly you know what what decisions are to the discretion of the chair versus what are the decisions that may need to have input from the entire board on the other hand

[00:24:12] getting into the business of trying to predict all of the sets of circumstances that may arise is also can be hazardous because there's then the risk of leaving out possible outcomes so I don't I'm I don't know where I've have ultimately landed on that discussion.

[00:24:38] But I do think that it's good to have the conversation about do we need to flush this out more in policy, and I don't know if regulation is appropriate if we're talking about the ambit of the school board members, but whether this would be appropriate for policy versus board norms that we agree on that will then be flexible with new board members and future boards.

[00:25:04] I think that's a good conversation for us to be having. - Thank you, Ms. Donahue. I am almost always open for taking a deep dive and doing research and finding best practice.

[00:25:19] You know, that speaks to me, right? I will just note, I mean, it's November. We are coming up against, we will certainly have a meeting in December, but the board will effectively turn over while this policy could be in consideration.

[00:25:42] I don't imagine that there are any proposals to add to the language tonight. Ms. Chernow? - What I was, there, thank you, Madam Chair. That's a good question. There is not.

[00:25:57] I felt like after last meeting, because there was only the two of us and we were sort of at a standstill, I'm sort of asking if there is an appetite work with staff to bring it back which would allow us some time before it got to the full board and there would be some transition so I we didn't have it ever before so I don't see it as something that like we're majorly changing but could be a good place by the time it does get to the full board to see where people stand but I also just didn't want to direct staffs time if that wasn't even the will of the committee because that didn't feel like the proper approach so I'm really asking tonight if there is a you know a sense from this

[00:26:36] committee to move forward to start creating that section in this policy or if we feel like the best next step is to address this in the new year and see if a new policy is needed I think for just because we already have a board norms policy that has all these things in I think a section is sufficient and allows us to kind of go back and revisit it as needed but I will certainly defer to the two of you in terms of next steps and especially you madam chair Thank You Mr. Chernoff I would be open to holding this item and leaving it on the agenda for December as an action item so that we could have further discussion but I

[00:27:14] would love to hear miss Donna Hughes opinion Thank You chair Chandler I was I was thinking through do we think that this if we're going to have a conversation about it do we think that that will be more fruitful within the committee or among the full board our committee is presumably not going to change until at least january but then may change in january and as chair chandler pointed out obviously a third of the board will be turning over uh at that time so um i i'm not i don't think that i have particularly

[00:27:54] strong feelings right now at this juncture about whether or not to hold it in abeyance um i think that it would my gut inclination is that I think it would make sense to have a discussion among the new board members and I don't don't recall right now if we have any board retreats coming up because that might be a good opportunity to have that conversation once the new members are sworn

[00:28:26] in that's also an interesting observation are there any comments or concerns from staff hearing done i do have two additional items one is with the language that has been kind of extrapolated from policy 2140 and converted into 1035 i do see the label reference was not added so we'll want to add that which is virginia code 22.1-253.13 colon 5 so staff will make that

[00:29:03] proposed change before it comes back the other item i did not include the other substantive update to this policy for discussion which is online 167 it pertains to school board members visits to school activities and online 167 you'll see that there is proposed language that's been stricken which is unless invited by the building principal and it indicates now they will notify the chief of staff as as well as the building principal in advance of school visits.

[00:29:42] Ms. Donahue. Thank you Chair Chandler. Thank you Mr. Allen for pointing those changes out which reminded me that I wanted to thank staff for making that change in particular because I it's not having come into this position already knowing a lot of principals in the division this requirement previously that we were not allowed to visit schools unless except by specific invitation from the principal I found to be somewhat

[00:30:15] limiting and I I'm relieved that I'm relieved to see this proposed change I just wanted to express my appreciation for that thank you thank you Miss Donahue so in terms of getting a temperature check on the current policy that we're discussing 1035 would anyone like to make a substantive motion with an action plan or would you like sure not sure thank you madam chair I'm gonna

[00:30:49] move that we keep this as information item in December with direction to staff to come up with a draft section for chair and vice chair responsibilities to review and decide if that's something we want the full board to consider in January it's a point of clarification would you be open to having it as an action item or would you rather so that it could move yes that would be great Yeah, just move it off of info tonight, so action next meeting.

[00:31:18] And I don't. It's on action, so we'll just bring it back as action. Oh, perfect. Is that all we have to do? Yeah, I think I can. We just bring it back as action. And that can be in the purview of the chair of the committee. But I do appreciate your request for clarification and instruction for some additional language.

[00:31:39] I was just a little bit unclear as to whether or not there was any desire to table. but I'm happy with this outcome, if we're in agreement. - Second. - Okay. - I second the motion, I-- - Well, we don't, do you wanna-- - Oh, do we not need to, never mind.

[00:32:00] - If it's not something like a table, but is there any more discussion on this policy before we move on, I'd definitely be open to that. Do you? - I think that's a good idea. I was looking at the schedule in a small amount of concern of looking, trying to think ahead to what are the possibilities that our next meeting could either get snowed out or if it's too close to the break that someone just decides, maybe we're done having meetings for the year, but I see our next meeting is on the 9th.

[00:32:30] So I feel like that kind of lessens those options. I'm hopeful that if we have continued conversation about this policy on the 9th, that we could at that point potentially vote to send it to the full board for board consideration in January. That timing would work out well.

[00:32:49] - All right, thanks everyone. now we will move on to item 4.05 policy 3120 powers and duties of the division superintendent this policy is being revised as a result to revisions to another policy policy 2140 mr allen the floor is yours thank you chair chandler the only substantive change proposed for this policy is the inclusion of a new section entitled professional development at section B which is starts on line 22 and concludes on line 26.

[00:33:28] This language is pulled directly from policy 2140 which the committee reviewed earlier tonight which is titled orientation and professional development for new board members. And it was my recollection and staff's recommendation that this would more appropriately fit within this policy powers and duties of a division superintendent which sets forth professional development or requirements for the division superintendent rather than in a policy as to the professional and development for new school board

[00:34:00] members Thank You mr. Allen committee members any questions or comments I just wanted to bring up the MSAC feedback I don't know if you got a chance to review it but they raise an interesting point about lines 22 and 23 by using the word or is that limiting in any way to say they can only do local state or national would that exclude their ability to do both or more do we need to evaluate that or is it not is that not how it reads it opens the door

[00:34:36] for all three if possible I just wouldn't want it to be limiting if opportunities arise outside of the state as well as locally thank you miss Chernoff I believe I recall your question precisely of the same nature last meeting and and as I recall my and I don't view it as being mutually exclusive I think it allows for the opportunities for all three okay great thank you oh pardon me miss Donahue thank you chair Chandler I since mr.

[00:35:14] Knopf brought up the msac comments and I and I my inclination or my interpretation of reading was the with the or is not that it's limiting but that it it permits the superintendent to engage in any in training at any of those levels MSAC had also proposed potentially deleting high quality on the basis that it should be assumed that the professional development would be high quality and while I I agree with MSAC that we should presume that our superintendent would always intend and plan to engage in high quality professional development

[00:35:53] I also have generally felt like when we're making policy, we need to assume worst-case scenario, and for that reason, I do not support deletion of that language. I think that we should leave it as high quality. Thank you, Ms. Donahue.

[00:36:10] I do appreciate having the ability to reflect on that very much. Are there any additional comments or considerations? Chair Chandler, if I may, I just, as a technicality, this too should add as a legal reference.

[00:36:28] Virginia Code 22.1-253.13:5 as it tracks the language that was pulled from policy 2140 thank you for that clarification that's a great catch and the high quality language is part of the Virginia Code oh perfect even better miss Donahue not that I want to thank you madam chair not that I want to rush my colleagues but I was going to say I would be happy to make a motion to send this prop policy with its proposed revisions to the full board for its

[00:37:07] consideration second thank you the motion has been properly moved and seconded all those in favor please say aye I seeing none opposed the motion passes unanimously with that we will now move on to our information items our first information item is the legislative update item 5.01 our government relations coordinator mr. John Sutton will present mr. Sutton the floor is yours thank you madam chair thank you members of the committee I'm going to talk just very briefly about several of the outcomes of the legislative

[00:37:45] breakfast that we had last Friday's legislative breakfast served I think as a significant opportunity to highlight the divisions proposed legislative priorities share the impact of statewide policy decisions on our division and strengthen relationships with our key policymakers and thought partners the event was highly successful we had 98 attendees that those included students principals community partners school board members county state legislators and representatives from all of our federal partners as well and I think that the their presence demonstrated a shared commitment to advancing our

[00:38:25] educational quality and supporting the needs of our school communities I think one of the strengths this year I'd like to highlight was the participation of I think a diverse group of part of participants particularly our LCPS student board members who really got an opportunity to sit and share firsthand experiences that they're with their table mates providing them with meaningful insight and conversation into some of the realities of today's classroom. I think that the comments from Dr. Spence and Mrs. Chandler articulated a consistent

[00:39:02] message supporting the proposed legislative agenda, emphasizing both immediate needs and long-term structural challenges facing the state this year. Our county and state legislators followed suit and I think spoke of these needs as well, and I think they did that very effectively.

[00:39:22] I'll just touch on, I'm not going to, because we did this previously, and I know you heard a lot at the legislative breakfast I'll touch briefly on our key legislative priorities that we discussed whether it's the joint subcommittee doing their work to modernize the K through 12 funding formula and implementing implementing JLARC recommendations re-benchmarking student and staff mental health support standards of learning SOL reform block grants and hold harmless provisions I I think that the legislative breakfast this year and the work that we've done thus far successfully

[00:40:02] amplified the division's proposed priorities, strengthened partnerships with our thought partners and policy makers. The presence and engagement, again, of students, educators, number of community partners, again, our elected officials and board members, underscored, I think, a very important commitment to supporting high-quality public education.

[00:40:25] The dialogue from this event will play a crucial role in advancing legislation that promotes equitable funding, student well-being, instructional quality, and operational stability. The strong sense of alignment between all of those who participated position us well this session to move forward with a unified and effective advocacy strategy for, again, this upcoming legislative session.

[00:40:52] So thank you for all those individuals that participated. Thank you for the 98 citizens, community leaders, kids, educators who showed up to have discussions. One of the amazing things was just how long the students stayed after the breakfast was over to talk to all kinds of different people about all kinds of different things that they're experiencing in our great school division.

[00:41:24] thought that was a real testament to not only the kinds of things that were teaching them but also the kinds of advocacy that they are doing every day on behalf of the school division I was very very very excited about that and I hope those of you that were there had a chance to see that as well and of course in the future I look forward or now I look forward to discussing anything related to the breakfast or of the proposed legislative agenda thank you mr. Sutton I would like to go ahead and make a motion to suspend the rules to take this item up as an action item and perhaps voted out of committee tonight

[00:42:01] so I move to suspend the rules to take this item up as an action item second thank you Miss Donahue the motion was made by Miss Chandler and seconded by Miss Donahue all those in favor please raise your hand and say aye I seeing none opposed the motion passes unanimously with that I'd like to move on to discussion are there any questions or comments from the committee Ms. Chernoff I just wanted to thank you Mr. Sutton for a lovely breakfast and to your point I did hang around with some of my Leesburg schools and their student

[00:42:40] representatives and one of the things that they said was you mean is it is it true that teachers can't work and live here because they can't afford it and and they were shocked absolutely shocked by that so I and they were you know they wanted action on that they were like well what do we do well our teachers need to have affordable housing so anyway just to that point I think you stirred up a lot of different things through the conversations and they're definitely listening and so it was exciting to me to see students engaging with the governance process at that level so thank you for a great morning it was great to be in attendance - Thank you, Ms. Chernoff.

[00:43:16] Ms. Donohue. - Thank you, Chair Chandler. I also wanted to express my gratitude and congratulations to you, Chair Chandler, to Mr. Sutton, to everyone who put the event together because it was, I thought, a really lovely, wonderful event and also especially because I was not able to attend last year's event, this was my first time being there with the students and I also thought that that made just a huge difference in the quality of the event from my perspective.

[00:43:45] then I wanted to request chair Chandler if you could address why we're suspending the rules as far as the timing goes of this why we're pushing this now well I'd be happy to address that just in terms of some challenges that were met along the way we want to make sure that we're able to present this to the full school board and and actually get it completed before we go on winter break Mr. Sutton Is there anything you'd like to add?

[00:44:15] I think you spoke to it very well. I mean, the timing was a challenge this year because of a number of things. One, just so everybody's clear. One, because we were moving with different legislative partners.

[00:44:34] Two, the difference in the schedule for members meetings. I wrote down in my notes just to make sure the caucuses, all those things sort of culminated around before the election cycle, which kind of messed everything up a little bit.

[00:44:52] So we wanted to go earlier, but we had to kind of push it back. And quite frankly, I think that when you're waiting for those thought partners to come up with their own ideas of what they think are important in order to really, really get authentic and actionable legislative priorities, you have to wait and listen to the people that are going to be voting on them and the people that are going to be working in Richmond to to and discussing those every every day at least for at least for 60 days so I appreciate the I appreciate the committee sort of allowing me to work through that and being a part of that process so I apologize for any

[00:45:29] convenience thank you mr. Sutton I will say I want to acknowledge the fact that this is the first time that we've had someone in a comparable position and it has been very nice to welcome you to the team mr. Sutton and one of the things that I anticipated throughout the process this year was that we would see lots of changes and I will say I've been pleased and I would anticipate that we'll continue to see changes as we move forward into the next year. There's also a little back and forth with the fact that every two years the entire House of Deliants is up for re-election and last year when we had the legislative breakfast

[00:46:07] we were able to do it a little bit earlier than we did this year. We were able to do it in October because it wasn't unclear who would be able to participate and so it just presented a series of challenges which I am sure we will experience every other year so with that I really do want to thank you again for the legislative breakfast I enjoyed it so much and of course being able to engage with the students is always my favorite and one of the student delegates in my district is someone that I've known since she was a tiny person and being able to see this student and

[00:46:47] reflect on her experience and and sort of chat was very impactful and and I think many in being able to talk with all of the students that were in attendance from our district it was clear that the students learned quite a lot about how the government works and were very intrigued by the process. So thank you for giving us that opportunity to in a more direct way than government class introduce some interesting concepts and who knows maybe someday we'll see these students in

[00:47:22] government themselves. So when you're in a room full of young people and then all the legislative aides even the federal folks are all young it gives you both it gives you both hope but at the same time you feel very old so I appreciate the fact that all those folks all those young folks were so thrilled to be there and so engaged and maybe made us feel just a little bit younger for even just a brief the brief time so I appreciate it thank you thank you I just it's so invigorating and I think it's really good for us to have the opportunity to reflect on exactly why

[00:48:01] we're here to do this work and it is for the students that we serve so with that there any other questions or comments from the committee sure enough with that I move that we push forward our 2025-2026 legislative agenda to be considered by the full board thank you mr. enough so good thank you the motion has been properly moved and seconded all those in favor please raise your hand and say aye aye the motion passes unanimously with all members present with

[00:48:38] that we will move on to our next information item item 5.02 policy 2230 legal counsel this policy has been brought forward as part of our ongoing effort to update the policies around staff who report to the school board mr. Allen will you be presenting I know that that might put you in a tough position no okay sure they're happy to so policy 2230 in terms of staffs

[00:49:16] recommendation as you'll see in the title just clarifying this is legal counsel again for clarity and then on line 5 and 6 adding for again additional clarity not only just attending meetings of the school board its committees but also other entities that are created by the school board or the superintendent to provide legal advisement as the case may arise.

[00:49:46] The second substantive change is on line eight, just clarifying superintendent in a way to make that these policies are consistent. As we're going through, staff is recommending striking division that's kind of from the model policies of VSBA and we're one division and so it's a little redundant or unnecessary and then just a cosmetic change here to clarify it's a superintendent or designee who may

[00:50:21] employ other legal counsel for specific matters I am aware and see in board docs that there is an amendment that's proposed by you chair Chandler so I'll let you speak to that thank you mr. Allen I again enjoyed taking a deep dive on many policies that are used in our neighboring jurisdictions and made an effort in this amendment to loud an eyes it so that it's appropriate for the process that already exists there are some new ideas that I would like to

[00:50:57] bring forward for the committee's consideration including potentially having a review of the the not just that we would give an annual review to our division council but also as part of that process take a look at the issues and the cost that have arisen throughout the year which I think would give us a more substantive way to sort of identify issues that could potentially be occurring and have just a better mechanism to have a discussion

[00:51:36] around that so I don't guess I could make a do I need to make a motion to include it or because it's an information item it's already included I'd be happy to discuss and we'd love to hear the committee's thoughts thank you chair Chandler I appreciate your work on this I do I find sometimes when our our policies are so vague and sort of one-liners if you will it feels like there's more to be said and since this is something that reports to the school board a regulation doesn't really make sense so I really appreciate that I will

[00:52:14] be honest I feel like I kind of need to really dig into what this is actually saying at a deeper level but at first glance I'm very appreciative of some guidelines and guardrails that you're putting in place here I am especially appreciative of the conversation around finances because I think that that is something that needs could use some more oversight and reflection especially as it guides decisions in the future and we weigh whether or not that that is appropriate my biggest question so I will do that work for next time and I'll get those questions out but my biggest question is normally with policy I go to our division council to ask whether or not it's appropriate and I feel in this

[00:52:54] case that might be a conflict of interest although I do defer to you mr. Allen but is is there someone else that we should ask or can I don't I don't mean to put you on the spot but is it is there an ability to be impartial I mean we can compare these things to the code and to the the different things that we know that other divisions do but in terms of loud denizing it that would be a little bit more personal I feel since you are the division counsel so I would appreciate any guidance that you might have about where those questions might be appropriate thank you mr. enough I think that's a very appropriate and

[00:53:30] thoughtful question and practical question yeah to the extent there are questions that are not precisely within you know squarely addressed by the law or other policies those I can answer unbiased right as I tend to do but I'm happy to set up an opportunity for discussion with outside counsel should the board or this committee see that as necessary but i will say the there are i've looked at other school divisions from around virginia they range in how fulsome these policies are but i do think

[00:54:08] some of our neighboring counties do have robust language and guidance similar and comparable to what miss chandler has proposed would you be willing to send those to me so that i can review them in comparison as well and again thank you for your work on this chair Chandler I do appreciate the additions here and always clarity and transparency are important so thank you Ms. Chernoff thank you for your pragmatic question I really enjoyed it not to someone taught me not to take risks

[00:54:42] too many so I won't mention him thank you Ms. Donahue thank you chair Chandler I also commend you for it's clear that you put a lot of time and effort into into these into this proposed language and i also agree this policy needed a more substantial overhaul um so i'm i'm i will also be digging into the specifics but i'm i'm very glad that that we're going to beef up the guidance around around the importance that

[00:55:21] division council plays in our lives and especially that we're switching from may retain to shall. It was very surprising what I read that may retain. Thank you for your legally minded perspective. I do appreciate that. Are there any other any other questions or discussion on this item? No. All right. Seeing that it will come back next month as an action item. And now we are

[00:55:54] moving on to our next item, 5.03, the policy manual. Mr. Allen will be presenting. Mr. Allen, the floor is yours. Thank you, Ms. Chandler. The first recommended change you will see is to clarify on line three that there are some policies that are set forth in law that require review earlier than five years one that comes to mind is the technology or AUP policy and we

[00:56:28] have that set forth and the appropriate policies 8566 and 7560 I believe and I believe the next change is on lines 39 through 41 which just clarifies the full title of the SRNR for clarity and accuracy.

[00:56:57] Happy to entertain any questions. Thank you so much Mr. Allen. Any questions or comments from the committee. Ms. Donahue. Thank you. Thank you Chair Chandler.

[00:57:13] I just just to make sure that I'm not missing anything. Mr. Allen in the printout there are some lines here that are highlighted which is separate from red lines that are reflected. Is is there a reason for the highlight.

[00:57:32] Thank you Ms. Donahue. notice that which is why I paused earlier when I was scrolling through I believe this was an in full transparency and upon my review and you'll see the wa1 there on line 13 which was a comment I had inquired whether this impacted if collective bargaining would have impacted either of these items and upon further discussion that was confirmed that that would not be the case as these are set forth by Virginia code that they should be included in the school board's policy manual

[00:58:10] and school divisions policy manual but I did flag that just because it struck me that in this new landscape of collective bargaining there may be some implications there thank you so if I if I can clarify or what I'm what I'm hearing is on lines 8 through 13 of the red line version not withstanding that they appear to be highlighted there are no proposed changes there and to the extent that line 13 on the red line currently has a WA-1 in brackets at the end that is not a proposed edit that that will end that line will end with evaluated as it as it does in its previous version current version.

[00:58:49] Precisely. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Chernoff. Thank you Chair Chandler. I just have a question about the first section where it says the school board shall maintain and follow an up-to-date policy manual.

[00:59:08] all policies shall be reviewed at least every five years or sooner if otherwise required by law and revised as needed or desired. So recently we voted as a board, the majority voted to hold a policy out from its five-year review with a motion that was made and sort of freeze it until certain parameters were met or criteria were met so how would that how does that fit here because that to

[00:59:47] me does not fit here and how do we address that I mean I wasn't super thrilled about that I like the five-year cadence I think that it's an important one but that was an exception that has happened in our time here so I just wanted to address how that fits into our own policies Thank you, Ms. Chernoff. I believe by board action, and as this committee knows, there are times where through board action they can suspend the rules or deviate from policies through a majority of the board or through a two-thirds vote.

[01:00:24] And so my understanding is that is how you reconcile kind of a departure or deviation from this policy provision in response to your question. so it's really just that simple that if the full board wants to deviate from policy we can that's if it doesn't violate the law I'm assuming that that's right that's a caveat okay I don't love that but okay thank you thank you Ms.

[01:00:53] Chernoff Ms. Donahue Thank You Chair Chandler I I was just going to add my memory from that meeting at that time because I also asked that question was that Mr. Allen's opinion was that to the extent that the board had well for for for the reasons that you cited at that meeting my memory is that Mr. Allen specifically opined that that that the board's action at that time counted as the five-year review so it under that interpretation it would

[01:01:30] not be a violation of the Virginia code that requires the five the review every five years but I invite strongly encourage mr. Allen to correct if I'm misstating anything no that's that's other consideration as well I do recall providing that consideration thank you mr. Allen and miss Donohue any other questions or comments on this policy before we move on to our next item thank you this item will come back as an action item next month and we will come

[01:02:07] to our last item on the agenda tonight item 5.04 this is policy 8-65 solicitation distribution and posting this policy was adopted in March of 2015 and comes to LAMP for consideration after being revised and discussed but not acted on in another committee I don't know with our technical difficulties if we'll be able to have a fulsome conversation about the work that done in the other committee um mr allen thank you chair chandler chandler i will try my best

[01:02:47] so the proposed changes uh here before this committee come from a number of changes that were proposed through fno and where it was last reviewed i believe last fall and after discussion at internal discussion it was proposed that this policy would be appropriately raised with this committee the L.A. and P. committee and so the proposed changes include a new policy number alignment with current practice and additional clarity.

[01:03:20] So policy 6330 or the proposed policy 6330 titled distribution of information materials and posting within schools on school grounds or during school sponsored events addresses what information and materials can be distributed and posted on school campuses staff recommends that the lamp committee consider eliminating policy 865 and replacing it with the restructured policy 6330 and approved to send it out for community feedback miss donahue thank you chair chandler

[01:04:00] mr allen if i could ask you to clarify when you say send out for community feedback do you mean the proposed deletion of 8-65 because 6330 has already been is already in place right we are not considering or proposing any revisions to this so the solicitation for feedback would only apply to the deletion of 8-65 do i have that right thank you for that question miss donahue so 6330 is not

[01:04:33] in place this was in the process of restructuring uh former policy our current policy 865 and And so through the committee work, policy 6330, which is a proposed policy, it's not been approved or adopted by the board at this juncture.

[01:04:50] It went through the F&O committee in 2023 is when it started, and then early 2024. It did go out for feedback and received feedback in early 2024. And for whatever reason it was determined I guess in the fall of 2024 that it was better it was more appropriate to be addressed by L&P committee.

[01:05:20] Ms. Donahue. Thank you Chair Chandler. If I could ask for staff's indulgence if you could remind me if this appeared before has this proposal been before the full board?

[01:05:37] I feel like I remember us having discussions about the content of 6-2-3-30, and I'm trying to remember if that was specifically in a meeting or on my own. No, I'm guessing, so there was some informal conversation, not specifically about, you know, building this policy or anything,

[01:06:00] But if I recall correctly, last year when we had folks coming out to back to school nights and those kinds of things, you all had some emails from parents who were upset that there were people breaking the rules and were inside their schools handing out pamphlets and those kinds of things.

[01:06:20] And I think as a board it might have even been at your retreat but it was either at your retreat or during a meeting there was discussion about what to do as it related to that because of emails and things that you had gotten from some parents about you know receiving flyers and such that didn't actually meet the policy standard that might be what.

[01:06:46] Thank you for that Ms. Allen. Also welcome back. Thank you. Happy to be back. Ms. Chernoff. Thank you Madam Chair. I guess just a clarifying question. So really we're talking about policy 6330. I mean, we're talking about it, we're going to delete it, and then we're going to, we would be not making changes to 6330.

[01:07:07] Is that correct? Is that kind of what the conversation is about for feedback? You're going to send out both? So as I understand it, after there's discussion and any proposed changes, that would go out to the community for feedback tandem with the proposed recommended to as you all have before deleted prior versions of policies when there's a proposed restructured policy that's replacing it that deals with the

[01:07:41] same subject matter I believe you policy first and then delete so that you're there's no gap correct so you can do it in the same meeting essentially okay I guess for me I remember too this was kind of being discussed by the former board if I remember correctly right before we took office and there was also some concerns which may have been resolved now through collective bargaining but there were all in the resolution but there were also concerns from LEA that we were getting about 63 30 right when we got on the board about them being in schools and

[01:08:18] distributing different items so I think what I would like to do is I thought we were just talking about the deletion today so I apologize and then we were gonna visit but I think we're probably looking at the reverse so I would like some more time I think there's some conversations to be had around 63:30 and the feedback that we've heard from schools the parameters as well as LEA and I would like to do a little bit more research in terms of where that left off so we can pick it back up appropriately since two years have passed and then

[01:08:53] maybe talk about it again so I would ask maybe if the chair would consider that as an information item again miss Chernoff you know I want to do some research so I am very amenable to your suggestion miss Donahue do you have any comments or feedback to share thank you very much chair Chandler I am curious I I also did not entirely realize that we are considering implementing this policy.

[01:09:24] That was obviously on me for insufficient preparation and would like more time to dig into this. As to Ms. Chernoff's suggestion of putting it on for information again, I'm not opposed to doing that, although as Chair Chandler already noted with regard to one of our previous conversations, if it's on for action, we don't have to vote on it, but if it's on for information and we want to vote on it, we'd have to suspend the rules to vote on it.

[01:09:52] And then I wanted to ask staff, if this got to the point in F&O where it was, when 6330 was in F&O, if it got to the point of being sent out for public feedback, and if so, if there was feedback, because there's not any reference on board docs on our agenda for today.

[01:10:13] And I would, if there was feedback previously, would be interested in what that feedback was at the time notwithstanding I would imagine we will probably be soliciting feedback again although obviously deferring to chair Chandler I would be happy to see the previous feedback but also would like to receive new feedback so that the feedback is timely so with that I would I'll just say I'm happy to have this be an action item next month because we can continue to work and amend and adjust and if we

[01:10:51] decide that we need more time that's a consideration that we can address that in December so are there any other comments or questions oh well excitedly with 10 minutes to spare we have reached the end of our agenda right are there is there any new business seeing no new business we are adjourned thank you and have a safe ride home

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