Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County Public Schools, Student Services Committee Meeting, Thursday, December 18, 2025

Date: Thursday, December 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/1147912834?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 afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the December 18th, 2025, December meeting of the Student Services Committee. I am Anne Donoghue. I am the chair of this committee. With me are Ms. Melinda Mansfield and Ms. Carrie LaBelle, my fellow committee members. For the record, this meeting is being audio recorded.

[00:00:19] It is not being live-streamed, and it is not being video recorded, but it is being audio recorded and will be available to listen to later through the LCPS website. So the first item on our agenda is public comment. Ms. Winslow, do we have any public commenters?

[00:00:37] Seeing none, we will move right along to item number three, which is approval of the draft minutes from our November 6, 2025 meeting, which were posted on board docs, and we have a copy in our packet here in front of us.

[00:00:53] So if my fellow committee members have any edits, corrections, For other questions or concerns, now is the time to raise them. And if there are none, I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes. Ms. Mansfield.

[00:01:12] Chair Donahue. Thank you, Chair. I would like to make a motion to approve the minutes as posted on board docs. Thank you, Ms. Mansfield. Ms. LaBelle. I second the motion. The motion has been proper. Thank you, Ms. LaBelle. That motion has been properly moved and seconded.

[00:01:29] All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye. Aye. That motion passes unanimously. Now we will move on to item number four on our agenda, our sole action item 4.01, new policy 5340, safe and supportive removal of students from an educational setting.

[00:01:50] Ms. Richardson, the floor is yours. Thank you, Chair Donoghue. It's nice to see you all this Thursday evening just before winter break. So as a reminder, brand new policy. This was just presented in committee's information on November 6th.

[00:02:06] Remember, we've been talking about as we've moved through the process in revising policy 5345, restraint and seclusion of students. We did have some instances come up where we've processed and we realized, you know what, there are times when we have to safely and in a supportive manner remove students from the educational setting.

[00:02:27] we know that seclusion is a prohibitive practice here in lcps but we also recognize that at times there are interfering behaviors or students become dysregulated and that requires them to sort of need a different place to go back to to go to to get regulated and then to re-enter okay so this new policy was recommended at the request of this committee and your fellow board members all right so we'll go through this quickly this is the original red line that we had gone through on

[00:03:01] november 6th but we clearly state the purpose we want to be safe supportive and inclusive this does not constitute seclusion as defined by school board policy 5345 then we had our definitions sections so we have the definition of safe and supportive our accommodations we wanted to be clear that some students within the educational setting, their individualized educational planning teams or Section 504 teams may have already considered accommodations

[00:03:36] that support them with some type of removal based on the impact of disability. Then we talk about designated supported areas. We defined isolation, exclusion, and then making sure that we remind everyone of what seclusion is and that it is a prohibited practice in LCPS. Our next sections, we go on to define the conditions for use and the expectations for professional learning across LCPS once this

[00:04:10] policy is fully adopted. Documentation requirements, we know that it is important to document any time that a student is away from the instructional setting. And then the key piece of this is making sure that we are notifying parents and guardians in a timely manner and the policy proposes that we notify them within 24 hours. Nextly we have section G which is supervision and student support.

[00:04:43] There's never a time during the removal of isolation or exclusion that a student is not being supervised by an adult then re review and monitoring making sure that we're debriefing over these situations making sure that we're looking at what were the antecedents in that particular space that led to the isolation or to the exclusion and then making sure that we're following up with the right supports within the classrooms making sure that we're training staff looping in parents and if necessary possibly making a referral for a suspected disability

[00:05:22] under the idea or a the presence of an impairment under section 504 then we have our accountability section and next we go on to proposed revisions from when the committee first reviewed the policy back in november there were recommendations from the committee to further define the time limits right and so it is proposed at line 30 that it's not to exceed 15 minutes and then it's proposed

[00:05:55] at line 34 not to exceed 30 minutes then in the section for professional learning you can see that there was added language to focus on the mental health and wellness of staff so at lines 59 through 62, we added information about the importance of staff, mental health, and wellness, including strategies for managing stress, recognizing signs of compassion fatigue or secondary trauma, and accessing available wellness supports to ensure staff are equipped to respond to

[00:06:33] challenging situations in a regulated and supportive manner. The last recommended revision from the committee in November was in the annual reporting requirement at line 98. And so it has been included in the current red line that any instances of isolation and exclusion would be reported to the school board annually.

[00:07:02] Next section is school board advisory and community feedback. So here's our feedback from SEAC, and I did summarize, but you do have their full feedback document with the concern and recommendations attached in your packets.

[00:07:19] So overall, parents have reported to SEAC that students with disabilities are being isolated in ways that may not meet the current criteria definition of seclusion. Okay, so their first recommendation that they would like the board to consider is a spring work session with the school board members, staff, and SEAC to further discuss and refine the proposed policy 5340.

[00:07:46] So, essentially, they would not like for you to take action on it today. Recommendation two at line 26, delete disciplinary isolation and replace it with in school. We, here in LCPS, it's called in-school restriction and not suspension or detention.

[00:08:06] And then recommendation three, at line 25, they want to insert the word also between not and be. So the text reads, and shall not also be for disciplinary isolation. So that is feedback from SEAC.

[00:08:25] Next, we received feedback from MSAC. MSAC's feedback really focused around defining the activity of the student during isolation or exclusion, so maybe possibly building out a regulation to talk about the acceptable things that students should be accessing and doing during this time away from the instructional setting.

[00:08:51] They also wanted the policy or possibly a proposed regulation where in the school setting might the isolation and exclusion take place they were also very concerned about how students re-enter the classroom space to make sure that we have a plan to make sure that students are making have the opportunity to make up any of the work or direct instruction that was missed during the

[00:09:20] safe and supportive removal and then overall community feed feedback they identified themselves as an LCPS staff member, they really felt it was important that re-entry, even though we have proposed some time frames, not to exceed 15 minutes, not to exceed 30, they really felt that the focus should also be on once the child had de-escalated and returned to baseline.

[00:09:56] And then, again, there were concerns over missed instruction and how we would support students. turn it back over to the committee for comments questions ideas thank you very much miss richardson i'm very appreciative for you and your team and with the the thoughtfulness that you put into formulating this policy and also the responsiveness to the community feedback

[00:10:29] i i love it um i do have i i do have a few proposed edits because i'm that kind of person um so i i may i must start with a start with a motion for this or do i just start with amending

[00:11:01] okay so why don't i sense um chair i would i move that the student services committee accepts and approves the new policy 5340 safe and supportive removal of students from the educational setting and sends it to the full board as an information item thank you Ms. Mansfield Ms. LaBelle I second that motion thank you Ms. LaBelle that

[00:11:40] motion has been properly moved and seconded now discussion I have some amendments to propose yes so looking at the red line copy my first proposed my first proposed amendment is two lines lines six to seven I propose where it currently reads actually beginning on line five it reads this policy

[00:12:18] establishes guidelines for the safe and supportive removal of students from the educational setting I propose deleting after educational setting deleting the rest of line six as well as the appropriate use of isolation and exclusion so I proposed deleting that phrase as well as the appropriate use of isolation and exclusion so the sentence would then read this policy establishes guidelines for safe and supportive removal of students from the

[00:12:45] educational setting when necessary is there any discussion as to that proposed change she minds speaking to why you want that absolutely thank you miss field yes so my um when i was rereading the proposed policy uh in conjunction with the

[00:13:23] advisory and community feedback um i started to wonder myself what what the difference was that we were trying to draw between isolation and exclusion and in offline discussions that i had following up with our staff um i i think and i understand that staff would not be opposed to uh instead of having those as two separate categories isolation and exclusion instead

[00:13:57] collapsing them as types of safe and supportive removal and refocusing this policy on safe and supportive removal so I have additional have some additional post amendments but before before getting into the specific language I did want to have a conversation with staff and with my colleagues here specifically because we use in different places in this policy we refer to instructional setting we

[00:14:36] also refer to educational setting and I believe in at least one place we refer to school environment and I I think it's worth clarifying if on staff's part since it was since staff drafted this originally if those phrases are intended to mean different different specific ideas and I raise this question specifically because you know I I'm thinking we are talking here about how our staff can respond when a student is in crisis and that could happen in the classroom but it could also happen in the hallway it could happen in the cafeteria it could

[00:15:14] happen on the playground at recess it could happen on the school bus so because of that concern of mine I wanted to clarify do we anticipate that this policy applies to all parts of LCPS property and if so then going back to my original question those phrases educational setting versus instructional setting versus school environment do those mean different things thank you to your for Donahue for that question in instructional setting specifically means classroom setting

[00:15:48] um so your core content elective specials classroom okay educational setting could be hallways bathrooms lunch rooms school environment could be recess could be the school bus right because that's still LCPS that's still part of the school environment um so that's why we did we were intentional in drafting it to make sure that we covered all possible settings now if the committee wishes to simplify that I'm sure there's a way that we could but we want it to be clear that

[00:16:26] this can sometimes happen during in instruction and as you said it could be the bathroom it could be the hallway it could be the lunch line or it could be the school bus it could be outside transitioning from the school bus into the school setting so we we did in intentionally use the three different phrases thank you very much miss Richardson that is very helpful so and in light of in light of your response my

[00:16:59] my next proposal is so I'm still kind of on isolation and exclusion are you considering having new terms for that because this is isolation exclusion because we know that this is happening right and that so are you thinking about different terms for that that's what I'm wondering because that's the whole

[00:17:36] point of supportive removal I know we don't want isolation but the fact is is that it does happen and what happens right now is that we have no monitoring or parents understanding of it happening or that kind of thing so that was the whole point of this so what i'm wondering is if you're thinking about other terms for those two areas thank you for that question ms mansfield um i i don't i don't have specific alternative terms but what i am proposing

[00:18:13] is a more expansive rewrite of the definition of safe and supportive removal span so my my proposal and i apologize that i don't have it in writing for my colleagues but my proposal is looking at line 14 on the red line under b1 definitions where it says safe and supportive removal i propose after removal before the colon adding from the school environment colon and then i

[00:18:48] propose to delete the rest of part one so the rest of line 14 and all of 15 and 16 and in place of that insert so we have part one safe and supportive removal from school environment colon refers to a temporary supervised separation of a student from the instructional environment when a student's behavior presents an imminent risk to their own safety or the safety of others

[00:19:23] or significantly disrupts the learning environment this practice is a safety protocol and used only when less restrictive proactive interventions have been unsuccessful or are not feasible supportive removal from instruction supportive removal is characterized by having trained staff supervise the student through the completion of the crisis cycle within a designated safe and supportive space the student's physical and emotional well-being will be monitored continuously When the crisis cycle has completed, the student will receive re-entry support to restore regulation and learning.

[00:20:02] The following conditions and actions are prohibited. Locked rooms or physically preventing a student from exiting, unsupervised separation, use as punishment, discipline, or for staff convenience, denial of access to basic needs, e.g. bathroom, water, medical support.

[00:20:22] Yes, Ms. LaBeau, and I will tease this. Yeah, we're missing some there.

[00:20:39] You used the word regulation. Could we change it to be self-regulation? Because that's a little different than regulation. Ms. Richardson, would staff have any concerns with that?

[00:20:55] No. Self-regulation is appropriate. Oh, amend my own amendment then. I was partly joking. I didn't make a motion.

[00:21:17] I just wondered. Okay. So I. Wherever you had. When he regains regulation, I think you put it that way. self-regulation yes to restore self-regulation okay so yeah I will I will make that change oh and so sorry so the rest of section B to finish my proposed amendment that language would essentially take the place of what is

[00:21:55] currently B1 at lines 14 through 16 I would then propose that we keep in place as is sections 2 and 3 so lines 18 to 26 would remain as they are delete lines 28 to 32 which is isolation and exclusion and then keep lines 34 to 36 for seclusion involuntary confinement of a student alone in a room or area from which the student is physically prevented from leaving seclusion is prohibited in LCPS so that is my complete and total proposed amendment

[00:22:30] for reworking section B okay I'll second it but I still have some issues okay so I have I don't know that it always is an imminent risk to their own safety or the safeties of others when it happens so that is one of my unless I'm

[00:23:06] wrong but miss Richardson I sometimes it is imminent sometimes it is just the observation of dysregulation sometimes it could be non-compliance that's not imminent danger so we could soften that language or we could add some additional descriptions and then maybe leave imminent as sort of the last sort of descriptor and I think any time again we're going to have students that have individualized educational plans in section 504 plans that are going to have

[00:23:42] these breaks written in and then we're going to have students where teachers may write behavior plans or again you have teachers that will notice that a student is dysregulated and often and offer a break or there could have been a classroom disruption maybe there was not imminent danger but definitely disruptive to the point that instruction was interrupted and had to be halted and then we had to take this action. Thank you Ms. Richardson that was that

[00:24:17] was going to be my thought as well that to Ms. Mansfield's point that not all instances may present an imminent danger of harm to to the individuals present but we also have I've also included in there the phrase or significantly disrupts the learning environment there's your concerns not broad enough because when you talk about disrupting the learning environment for me

[00:24:49] i mean significantly disrupts like miss richardson said child can be dysregulated and not necessarily disrupting the learning environment you just notice that they're dysregulated and could be potentially needing needing something like i mean i know that sounds terrible but but it does happen if someone's not on their medic if someone's changing medication sometimes things just happen and they need some space and time so if i could ask for a clarification yes miss

[00:25:24] Mansfield are you advocating then that we should make it clear in this policy that it is permissible for staff to safely and supportively remove a student if the student is having a regulation issue even if that issue does not rise to the level of imminent risk of harm or significant disruption of the learning

[00:25:57] environment so bluntly however i know what happens and can happen um this is what that's the point that i'm trying to clarify is i yeah i'm not i'm not disputing whether these instances happen but i'm i'm trying to get at or there's a difference between acknowledging maybe these things happen but they shouldn't be happening versus these things happen and we need to acknowledge them and make sure that they are covered as permissible because if you're saying like that happens and

[00:26:33] it's not permissible we shouldn't write it into this policy. That's kind of what I'm feeling that it's not permissible. That what well okay you state because I know I think imminent risk to their own safety or safety to others and significantly disrupts of course and I also think that there are things that happen like I said that we need to understand happens and those

[00:27:08] children or students need to be given the opportunity or maybe requested that maybe they might want some time and that they can decide that they need some time and that's still kind of a removal so could be from there could we address that by saying when a student's behavior presents or may present an imminent risk or significantly disrupts or may significantly disrupt so because your

[00:27:41] motion is the way it is unless we take it unless we because now we're at two amendments right we have an amendment and we have an amendment to the amendment so we're gonna have to take this and and vote it down in order to change the wording because it's been seconded Mike and I will tell you that part of this discussion and I know it's not completely germane but a little germane to this is I feel like we don't have enough time in the next 20 minutes

[00:28:17] to do all of this I get where you're coming from I appreciate where you're coming from believe me I do and I think you're in the right ballpark I wish that we had more time but in order to fix this I think we're gonna need some more thoughts I respect your concerns in that regard miss Mansfield I will I will say and missabelle you've been waiting very patiently and I will I will turn to you

[00:28:54] shortly I my preference would be to forward this on to the full board for its consideration with the understanding that there may be additional changes but I I am reluctant to keep it in committee for a lot of reasons

[00:29:27] Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to have it clarified. We seem to be talking mostly about special ed children, but doesn't this cover all students? We're talking about all children.

[00:29:43] That's what I thought. All students in LCPS. And I think as we were going through the discussion, or Ms. Mansfield was going through her comments, I started thinking about preventative. If we see a student beginning to escalate? Could they be removed to prevent further? Is that in there

[00:30:13] anywhere? Because we've read so much and said so much so far. Ms. LaBelle, I think that speaks to the discussion that Chair Donahue brought up with maybe adding the word may be of imminent risk or may lead to disruption. That speaks to that preventative sort of, you know, what I see this starting to happen and so I'm gonna give you an opportunity right okay thank you it's we have said so much in the last 10 minutes I wasn't sure where things

[00:30:51] landed thank you miss LaBelle and miss Richardson my going back to our parliamentary procedure my memory is I proposed the amendment to line six to seven and I believe we have not voted on if you want to amend wording in here you're gonna have to we're gonna have to vote this down and you're gonna have to read rewrite or whatever and then you can do another amendment to the amendment

[00:31:29] or we can vote this down vote on the other one and then okay is there other discussion as to the proposed amendment revising the language in Part B definitions seeing none let's take the vote on that yes I had a question why are we eliminating section for isolation that actually clarifies the amount of

[00:32:06] time that a student may be removed to a supervised setting for de-escalation why is that being removed thank you for the question Ms. LaBelle so my my proposal was twofold one because again in in my review and in my conversations with staff trying to get at what what are we saying is the depth is the difference between isolation and exclusion is it removing a student from a classroom is it removing other students who are with a student in crisis in a classroom it felt the more i thought about it

[00:32:42] and discussed it with staff the more artificial it felt to be trying to say these are two wholly separate categories of safety protocols as to the time limits i my personal feeling is i think time limits would be more appropriately addressed in regulation if if it is the will of the majority of the committee members to have specific time limits in the policy then we're we're already discussing the possibility of amending my proposed amended language for the definition section but the that we are

[00:33:22] putting in here that the definition of safe and supportive removal is a temporary removal with that description yes it is all a temporary removal but I'm looking at number four that says the separation of the student from their peers in a supervised setting whereas we're looking at exclusion the removal of a student from the school environment and as we spoke about earlier a school

[00:34:01] environment is much broader than just removing him or her from their peers so I think you need to know if it's both or not I I understand your point and I don't disagree my again this goes back to my feeling is that this would better be addressed in regulation specifically because we're not going to write into policy all of the different permutations of circumstances where these safety protocols might be necessary to be enacted and if we say you can only do this thing for 15 minutes or you can only do that thing for 30 that

[00:34:38] may not be feasible depending on is this happening on a bus is this happening in the middle of a playground is this happening on a field trip I I am not comfortable having it in policy okay understood thank you any further discussion on that proposed amendment okay so that motion has been moved and seconded um we will vote on that proposed amendment to section b definitions all those in favor please

[00:35:10] raise your hand and say aye aye aye all those opposed nay that motion passes uh with ms mansfield in opposition and ms donahue and ms labelle in support we will now vote on the first amendment which is to lines six and seven removing as well as the appropriate use of isolation and exclusion there any discussion as to that proposed amendment will not be supporting this because i really do

[00:35:46] feel like you need that in here definitions of that and i do feel you also need time limits because we do have time limits for seclusion and everything else well seclusion is prohibited um seeing no additional discussion um we will vote on that proposed amendment to line six and seven all those in favor please raise your hand and say aye aye aye on those opposed that motion passes

[00:36:21] 2 to 1 with Ms. Mansfield in opposition full of other minor proposals on line 26 of the red line line 26 of the red line is part of the definition of designated supportive areas and this is actually a SEAC proposal lines 25 to 26 say currently read shall not be used for disciplinary isolation I propose to

[00:36:56] change disciplinary isolation to read student discipline so the it would then read in the definition of designated supportive areas these areas remain unlocked are free from hazards provide a safe and calm environment and shall not be used for student discipline to amend that I second is there any thank you is

[00:37:27] there any discussion why I'm just asking can you speak to your motion real quick certainly so it was one of the phrases that SIAC had concerns with calling it disciplinary isolation and I thought that calling it isolate referring to disciplinary isolation when I don't believe isolation is a term that we use

[00:38:05] in our discipline policies and procedures but it is a term that we have been using in this area I thought leads to confusion miss Richardson do we not use isolation or exclusion in any of our s bars or anything else nothing that may be a question for the other miss Richardson because I am not that intimately familiar with the s bar I can speak to the conversation and discussion that SIAC had at their meeting ms LaBelle was also present they

[00:38:38] did approach it from the perspective of our other policies don't reference anything called disciplinary isolation. They reference student discipline, so that's why SEAC was asking for this policy to have consistent language. Now, the other Ms. Richardson, I don't know if there's anything in the SBAR about isolation. Fortunately, I don't have to do discipline, so I'm not that familiar with the SFR Ms. Richardson is looking at that up and we'll get back to

[00:39:12] you shortly discussion is to that no I do like the term student discipline because that that is absolutely clear it doesn't it could be any kind of discipline the student is receiving as opposed to oh just for isolation and there are spaces that are used just for discipline and then there are spaces that you would use if you wanted to isolate a student so they do not want

[00:39:47] those students in the disciplinary spaces well said thank you care Donahue mr. sorry to interrupt yes the other miss Richardson has verified that there is no reference to isolation in the SBAR thank you miss thank you both miss

[00:40:10] Richardson is that motion isn't properly moved and seconded we will now vote on the proposal to amend line 26 all those in favor please raise your hand and say

[00:40:37] aye that motion passes unanimously on line 67 of the red line line 67 to 68 of the red line currently reads documentation must also include a record of communication with the students parents slash

[00:41:09] guardians regarding the incident i move to amend that sentence to read documentation must also include a log of communication with the student's parents slash guardians regarding the incident and copies of such communications and or notes made by LCPS staff related to such communications.

[00:41:49] Second. Thank you Ms. Mansfield. Is there any discussion? Ms. Mansfield. That include emails from staff and anything else? That is my intent is, yes, to have copies of written communications between LCPS staff and parents or guardians of the student who was impacted by the exercise of one of these safety protocols.

[00:42:22] And if such communications happened over the phone, copies of notes that were made related to the oral communications. Richardson yes thank you in drafting the policy staff are really thinking that we're going to create an incident reporting process around this policy should it be approved by board so that we really wouldn't be taking notes so

[00:42:57] certainly if it is a phone call it would then be part of the procedure that you must follow up in writing and we would have templates that administrators would be able to follow so an incident report then the follow-up communication with parents if a phone call is the quickest way to get in contact but we will always follow up in writing and our procedure is that the parents would receive a copy of the incident report that is the thinking of staff in talking about the training aspects and what we will expect as procedures across LCPS

[00:43:36] - Thank you, Ms. Richardson. Any other discussion as to that proposed amendment? Ms. LeBell?

[00:43:52] - It's a question for Ms. Richardson. Ms. T. Richardson. And, oh, is this going to be covered in regulation?

[00:44:08] - That is the thinking of staff, is that we would build out a regulation, again, with the supporting forms that we're thinking about, the student incident reporting form. We currently have a form in our Phoenix system, but we were thinking about building out a separate one from that for this process and for training purposes and then that form would be sent home to parents thank you thank you miss richardson and understanding that regulations are not the lane of board members um i i i would anticipate that there will be board members who would love

[00:44:47] to see the regulations when it comes to voting on it at the full board whenever that may certainly come to pass. Any further discussion as to that proposed amendment? Ms. LaBeau. So we're taking out the part that you said of copies of such communications and notes that remain in there

[00:45:25] since it's going to be in regulation. I can certainly share that as a staff member every time I'm on the phone with anyone whether it's a parent whether it's a principal I'm taking notes in my phone log you wouldn't want copies of my notes from my phone log but what you would want me to do is then write a summary of what we discussed and then send it to you so

[00:45:52] that you have it preserved in writing this amendment has been made in seconded so I my my understanding is that we have to vote on it as is and then we can either make additional changes today or additional changes in another day this is not amendment to the amendment I don't think is it correct that's correct

[00:46:28] okay so you can still make one more amendment to this okay wording if you want all right then I move to amend the amendment that is on the table to read copies of such communications just copies of such communications so the sentence would read documentation must also

[00:47:02] include a log of communication with the students parents slash guardians regarding the incident and copies of such communications all those in favor please raise your hand

[00:47:23] and say aye aye I voted for it it made it all the way down to me that motion passes unanimously go back up to your other one is that do I guess we have to

[00:48:01] okay so that motion was just to amend the proposal to take out the reference to notes so now we have to vote on actually adding the amended proposed language to the policy any further discussion as to that okay so we will take a vote all those in favor please raise your hand and say aye aye that motion passes unanimously last one for me I promise on line 75 of the red

[00:48:36] line or excuse me line 76 of the red line currently reads 76 to 77 a meeting with the parent slash guardian should be scheduled as appropriate to discuss the incident and any additional supports or interventions needed. I move to amend that sentence on line 76 to read a meeting with the parent slash guardian will be scheduled if requested by either the parent slash guardian

[00:49:08] or LCPS staff and that language would replace on line 76 from a meeting through as appropriate. So the sentence would then read a meeting with the parent slash guardian will be scheduled if requested by either the parent slash guardian or LCPS staff to discuss the incident and any additional supports or interventions needed.

[00:49:36] I'll second it, but I'd also like to amend it to say as opposed to if requested, I'd strike those that.

[00:49:56] So the motion has been moved and seconded. Is there additional discussion? would be my discussion would be to amend that if requested slash is that a motion to amend a motion to amend the amendment is there a second second that has been properly moved and seconded Ms. Mansfield would you like to speak further to your motion I don't think we need to do it as

[00:50:27] request as if requested I think you just need to do it Ms. LaBelle I agree with Ms. Mansfield if it is strong enough to require removal from the classroom it probably needs to be discussed so i do agree with her so let's vote on ms mansfield's amendment to the amendment all those

[00:51:00] in favor please raise your hand and say aye aye going to abstain that motion passes with ms mansfield and ms labelle in support and ms donahue abstaining and then and that substitutes then for so now the proposal proposed language to amend into the policy would read a meeting with the parent slash guardian will be scheduled to discuss the incident and any additional supports or interventions needed. Okay. All right.

[00:51:38] So that is the proposal. Um, all the, any further discussion, seeing none, all those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye. Aye. Aye. That motion passes unanimously. Uh, chair, I have a motion amendment. Okay. Um, I move that the next, uh, student services committee, um, have two work sessions with SEAC members to SEAC members to further discuss and refine this proposed policy 5340 and not go to the school board until after such work sessions.

[00:52:12] Can I make that Ms. Richardson C. Richardson is that an appropriate motion. To have a work session is that it certainly is it's so it's right okay I guess twofold question is it appropriate to make a motion for work to schedule work sessions And also, and I, that I, I'm not sure what I think the answer might be, but then also appropriate to make a motion not to advance to the full board.

[00:52:47] Okay, so if you do one, you do all? Okay, then I'm fine with that, two from each, LEAF, MSAC, and SEAC. Since I haven't, it hasn't been seconded yet, I changed my motion to amend.

[00:53:07] move that the this policy have that the next Student Services Committee have two work sessions with two CAC to leave to MSAC members to further discuss and refine proposed policy fifty three four miss miss C Rick miss C Richardson is a motion to schedule work sessions is that an appropriate topic for for a motion I

[00:53:41] i just haven't seen us do that before so curious i am unclear about that ms labelle in the past if we wanted to do more refining of a policy we have decided not to send it forward to hold it back schedule work sessions we could also add in who else we'd like to invite to these work sessions and i think that this would be an easier way to deal with this than than to put it through a motion

[00:54:21] but to actually go ahead and schedule additional work sessions to decline to send it forward so my my feeling about those comments and proposals um seac did request work sessions but they yes i don't remember if it's clear i thought cx request was that it be sent to the full board and have work sessions before the full board and in any event when we when we have scheduled work

[00:54:55] sessions in the past it has it has been in this committee it's been at the chair's discretion and I I believe the work sessions at the full board are also scheduled at the chair's discretion my only hesitation with the proposal at this time is as everyone sitting here knows we have three new board members coming in as of January which will necessitate a reconstitution of this committee and many others I don't know if I will continue to be the chair of this committee I don't even know if Ms. LaBelle and I will still be on this committee but we do know that Ms. Mansfield will not and I have some

[00:55:32] reluctance to even if it is an appropriate motion I will say I have some reluctance to obligate the next Student Services Committee to do this process when that might not be the preference of the next chair especially when we could forward this to the full board and have work sessions there but I And looking at CX recommendations and their recommendations say this recommendation one that the school board request a work session in the spring that includes school board members, staff and CAC to further discuss and refine.

[00:56:11] But it is it is not explicit as to whether that work session is proposed to be within this committee or at the full board. Ms. C. Richardson. So I have consulted with division counsel to get an answer to your question. So what he has said is you don't need to make a motion.

[00:56:30] it's not inappropriate though to make a motion but he said you could also just direct to keep the matter as an information item and schedule it as a future work session and just have that instruction listed in the minute thank you for that clarification ms c richardson um okay so ms mansfield has made a motion that's that's what i was trying to recall um so i can amend my motion to what did you just say from division council so i have a question for you yes ma'am so are you wanting to send it to the full board for a work session or to do that within the committee

[00:57:10] i think it should stay in the committee and i think this committee needs to um get um up to speed on this um and and take ownership of it um i realize that miss chair donahue and miss labelle might not be on this committee that doesn't mean that and and if we direct it through a motion then it's not I don't think the chair can just get rid of it is that correct the chair of this committee can they just get rid of it even if we have a motion well it would be it would be

[00:57:48] reflected in the minutes so that would be direction to the future committee so I I had conversations with division council on a similar issue related to a matter that the full board voted on earlier this year and my understanding from that conversation was that if if the full board voted comparatively i believe my understanding based on the parallels between the situation i discussed with division council and what we're discussing right here right now would be if there is a vote to keep this matter in committee and schedule work sessions that if the new committee

[00:58:27] chair did not want to do that they would have to take another vote to revisit that decision As opposed to if it's not a vote, the new chair can just, it may be a direction, but could not be.

[00:58:43] I just really think that this needs, I'm a little afraid that at the full board, this is going to pass, and I think it's not ready yet. So, and that next chair of this, they don't want me coming up here for public comment all the time. So your motion is still?

[00:59:03] Yes, yes, so somebody can second it or not. I wanted to do a little more discussion, if I might. Is there a second? Okay, go ahead, Ms. LaBelle. Normally you have to second something to discuss it.

[00:59:22] I know, that's why I'm tossing around in my mind. Okay, I second the motion. Is there a discussion, Ms. LaBelle? Yes. I know that we have new board members coming, but there are only three. There are nine or more committees in places.

[00:59:40] And I know that whether anybody coming in to be the next chair is very aware of continuity which is what we have spoken about many times, both in several committees and also at the board level.

[00:59:59] I think that, I can't swear to, obviously not, but I think that at least one of us may be on this board next year to preserve the continuity or continuity of what we've been doing.

[01:00:17] So I would be hopeful that that would happen, and that is the only reason that I'm going to second this, because I too believe it is not ready to go forward thank you for your thoughts and input Ms. LaBelle I also anticipate at least one of us will be remaining on this committee but it is I don't even know who will be making that decision so I mean Chair Donahue I hear your I hear what you're saying I really really do and it is a risk it is a risk I think SEAC would put the pressure on as well as other people to keep it and to do it

[01:00:55] the right way i just it doesn't feel good to make it a part of the board right now when there there needs to be more work done i appreciate your amendments i i really do i just think there needs to be a little bit more i don't want to rush this just like we didn't rush restraint and seclusion we didn't rush and we really didn't rush special permission or even special cool assignment thank you thank you Ms. Lavelle and Ms. Mansfield for the conversation I will I will say candidly that I think part of my desire to push

[01:01:31] this forward is because I don't know if I will be sitting as chair of this committee next time and it would feel for me like a great accomplishment to get this out of committee but that you know those are my personal feelings and don't have anything to do with those are not considerations that should be guiding policymaking so just think of me because this is something else that I would like to do and I'm not even gonna be on the board anymore to do this so I hear you all right is there any further discussion regarding is man seals motion

[01:02:06] to have this item come back to the Student Services Committee in the new year for work sessions and additional discussion and finding none all those in favor please raise your hand and say aye aye I'm going to abstain so that motion passes Ms. Mansfield and Ms. LaBelle in support and Ms. Donahue abstaining okay so

[01:02:45] that that is that and okay is there any new business the answer better be no since this is the last meeting of the year and after tomorrow the entire division is going on winter break um i do have something to say though well i just want to thank you for your leadership chair down here you've taken on a lot these were big big policies and i appreciate everything that you've done and carrie it's been a pleasure to serve with you and staff

[01:03:18] y'all are the best and i ain't crying so i do appreciate you guys you work hard and um we got some big stuff done because i remember sitting with with miss richardson and and i was i think we're going to take on special permission she goes um and I said and there we are so I do appreciate you and that was because of your leadership chair Donahue thank you I don't like more people talking

[01:03:53] about me um thank you chair Mansfield madam chair I will take a point of privilege um I didn't prepare anything because I don't like to unless I really feel like I have to um but I also wanted to I wanted to take a brief moment to thank Madam Chair Mansfield and Ms. LaBelle for your collaboration these last two years on this committee we have done a lot of exciting things I think some some that were close to my heart and I know some that were close to both of

[01:04:29] yours and I I really believe that we have made a solid and positive impact on the students and staff of our division and I am I am really proud of the work that we've done and I also want to thank Ms. Richardson and Mr. Dolson and all of the staff that has supported us throughout our processes over the last two years it's been fantastic working with all of you and I hope I will be able to continue to do so but since I don't know if I will be or not so I wanted to take just a moment to say how incredibly grateful I have been for your support and your leadership

[01:05:08] and your dedication to our division thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you to our aides and everyone have wonderful holidays we are going to move on to item number six our adjournment I don't know when the next student services committee sorry I'm sorry miss LaBelle thank you madam chair I too would like to say thank you I think that we have been a very strong committee and work together well and I will cut this short because I know miss Donahue is

[01:05:47] anxious to get out but I really appreciated working with all of you both the committee and the administration on all of these issues thank you so much have a wonderful break thank you again everyone for being here with that we will move on to item 6 which is our adjournment I do not know when the next student services committee meeting will be likely sometime in January but interested individuals will have to check the LCPS website and the posts from various board members thank you very much everyone for coming please get

[01:06:24] home safely and everyone have safe and happy holidays and winter break

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