Coraggio Consulting Loudoun County School Board, Special School Board Meeting, Thursday, March 5, 2026 Date: Thursday, March 5, 2026 Place: Loudoun County Public Schools / School Board meeting (see BoardDocs / LCPS-TV) Length: 2h 30m (video) Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/1170500663?rel=0 BoardDocs (School Board): https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/loudoun/Board.nsf/Public 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 2026-10-10. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [00:02:29] - Good afternoon, everyone. I call to order this March 5th, 2026 Loudoun County Special Meeting. I'm gonna start tonight with our procedures for public comment. [00:02:45] Thank you for engaging with the school board through the public comment process. The school board welcomes comments from Loudoun County residents and believes that strong community engagement and outreach are important components of a successful school system. [00:03:01] Speakers must limit comments to the time allotted Based on the number of speakers and the agenda this evening, all speakers have been allotted one minute each for public comment. Please be advised that speakers who miss their time slot will not be called at a later time. [00:03:17] Decorum and civility. All audience members shall maintain civility, decorum, and respect for the functioning and dignity of the school board at all times. Violations of civility, decorum, and respect include shouting, heckling, jeering, applause, or any other noise which disrupts or delays the meeting. [00:03:42] Obstructing speakers from being able to see the school board and vice versa. Interrupting speakers. Attempting to speak when not called to do so by the chair. And approaching a speaker or otherwise attempting to intimidate, disparage, or distract a speaker, staff member, or other meeting attendees. [00:04:01] Speakers should refrain from vulgarity, obscenities, defamation, profanity, and other like breaches of respect, nor may speakers target, criticize, attack individual students and or individual division employees during public comment. [00:04:21] As a reminder, School Board Policy 2520 states speakers may not target, criticize, or attack individual students during public comment. Speakers should communicate those concerns to their school principal or an appropriate school official. [00:04:39] The school board requests that comments on an individual student or employee-related matter not be shared at public meetings where the disclosure could violate applicable confidentiality requirements. I do want to take a moment to clarify a few things. [00:04:56] As has been explained previously, speakers can personally identify a student or employee without stating a student's or an employee's names. That is, personally identifiable information is any information that a reasonable person can link together to pinpoint an individual student or employee and where that individual student or employee is known to others in their school or surrounding community based on the context that is shared. The school board welcomes you to share your concerns, but asks that, to the [00:05:34] extent you have prepared remarks that target, criticize, or attack any individual students or employees, you generalize such remarks to ensure compliance with board policy. For example, Comments that target, criticize, or attack a student or an employee or a student or an employee from a specific named school or a student or an employee with any characteristics where the information would personally identify that student or employee to others in the school or broader LCPS community would violate school board policy. [00:06:12] However, comments that discuss general concerns with students or employees at schools and do not target, criticize, or attack an individual identifiable student or employee are permissible. [00:06:28] Under school board policy, I, as the school board chair, am charged with the responsibility to maintain order during school board meetings. Accordingly, when reasonable, I will warn of breaches of decorum, civility, and respect and ask speakers to redirect their comments prior to possibly discontinuing individual speaking privileges or taking other actions to preserve the civility, decorum, and orderly conduct of the meeting. [00:06:55] Such action includes calling a recess in order to maintain and or restore order. If speakers fail to comply with board policy regarding public participation, you will receive a warning and a request to redirect or generalize your comments. [00:07:11] Should you fail to redirect or generalize your comments after that warning, you may be asked to yield the microphone, at which time you should yield the microphone and as well the floor, and take your seat, and I will then call the next speaker. To the extent necessary, I will also warn of breaches of decorum, civility, and respect from attendees prior to taking other actions to preserve the orderly conduct of the meeting. [00:07:38] Speakers should face the dais and direct their comments to the school board. Per School Board Policy 2520, members of the school board will not answer questions or respond directly to the public during the public comment period. Violations of decorum or civility by any meeting attendee may result in the chair directing staff to remove the attendee from the remainder of the meeting. [00:08:01] Repeated or persistent violations of decorum or civility by the audience may result in, on the decision of the chair, public comment being tabled until a later point in the meeting's agenda, Limiting the number of attendees in the meeting room during public comment for safety reasons or the public comment period ending for the evening. [00:08:23] Distribution of materials to school board members. Copies of materials for school board members should be given to the public information officer in the media box at the back of the boardroom before the start of the meeting. Please provide 12 copies of materials. Under no circumstances may a speaker approach the dais. [00:08:42] The public is reminded that access to school board meetings is available through LCPS on Comcast Channel 18 and 1070 HD and Verizon Fios Channel 43. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on the website. We look forward to hearing your comments. [00:08:59] We will now start with our virtual public comment. Our first speaker is Brian Chain followed by Mayor Patel. We don't have a caller by that name. Thank you, Mayor Patel, followed by Brenda Bankston. [00:09:16] We don't have a caller by that name. Brenda Bankston, followed by Tracy Fry. We do not have a caller by that name. Tracy Fry, followed by Ann Miller. [00:09:33] We do not have a caller by that name. Oh, no. Actually, I'm just going to ask everyone to hold for the meeting for just a second. [00:10:12] I understand there are only three speakers logged on, so we will continue to proceed through the list. We have four of the nine. Thank you very much. So, Ann Miller, followed by Mike DeVille. Well, to just read my very brief statement without rushing through. [00:10:38] In February, the Woodgrove wrestling team won its third straight state championship title. One of their coaches is our longtime SRO at Woodgrove. He's beloved by staff, students, and families. As a parent and former Head Start teacher, I've interacted and partnered on multiple occasions with SROs for well over a decade to navigate some tenuous situations. [00:10:57] In every circumstance, I've witnessed nothing but the utmost professionalism from SROs. Having practiced many times sheltering in place with my students and knowing seconds count and save lives, having an SRO in the building and footsteps away is best practice. The need is established. SROs were called 1,500 times to elementary school. [00:11:17] School-to-prison pipeline hypotheticals are debunked by decades-old successful SRO program in our middle and high schools. Common Sense says fund our SROs. the equitable thing to do is to provide elementary children with the same level of safety middle school and high school students are receiving. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Mike DeVille followed by Laura Grover. We don't have a caller by that name. Laura Grover followed by Jill DeLorenzo. [00:11:51] We do not have a caller by that name. Jill DeLorenzo followed by Carrie Michonne. Good evening. I am commenting on the proposal to add SROs to our elementary schools. As a parent of an LCPS kindergartner, I'm heavily invested in her and her peers' safety throughout their time in elementary school. When considering the SRO proposal, we must ask, why this? Why now? In 2025, Loudoun County Sheriff's Office signed 287G Memorandum of Understanding with ICE, enabling designated [00:12:27] deputies to identify and process individuals in their custody for potential deportation. This partnership allows LCSO to hand over detainees to ICE. Also in 2025, the federal government revoked the Sensitive Locations Memo that previously protected schools from immigration enforcement actions. [00:12:46] As ICE attacks and detentions escalate nationwide, including on U.S. citizens and folks who have never committed a crime, the sudden proposal expanding SROs in elementary schools should give us pause. Will it make all of our students safer or could it lead to devastating actions for my dear daughter's peers and their family? [00:13:02] Thank you. Carrie Michon. We don't have a caller by that name. Thank you. We will now move on to our in-person public comment. The first speaker is Diane Jackson, followed by Sarah Eichelberg. [00:13:22] Having an open meeting. Appreciate that a lot. I have a child at Algonquin Elementary. I myself am an ER trauma RN with 50 years of experience. And I can tell you that a death of a child due to violence is a terrible thing. It's incapacitating to all, and we don't want to see that happen. [00:13:50] In Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the most crucial need of an individual is, number one, food, water, shelter. Number two, safety and security. After that comes all other things such as community, family, self-esteem. The issue before us is not about ICE. It's not about English language speakers or people of color. It is about putting forth the most important need of our [00:14:27] students which is safety and security. Thank you. Sarah Eichelberg followed by Joel Cornell. My name is Sarah Eichelberg. Our family has three kids at Madison Trust Elementary for now with a fourth who will soon be entering LCPS. Middle and high schools have had SROs for years. If trained deputies are appropriate for these levels there is no rational argument for denying that same protection to are most vulnerable. So I'm stunned this board is debating this issue at all. Since when does this [00:15:03] board believe student safety should only begin in sixth grade? And let's not twist this effort as anti-counselor or an attempt to criminalize kids. SROs are an added layer of deterrence providing a faster response so that a bad day doesn't become a tragedy. This board should support putting SROs in all Loudon elementary schools. Our kids are not this board's political pawns to use as negotiating leverage or virtual singling. Parents expect this board to take their safety seriously. [00:15:31] Thank you. Joel Cornell followed by Caroline Fiffick. Caroline Fiffick followed by Jasmine Tyler. [00:15:58] I am a Loudoun County Elementary School parent here to oppose expanding school resource officers. The plan to add officers isn't about care for student safety. It's about control, policing play, and criminalizing childhood. Loudoun is already described as one of the safest counties in America. And national research shows that SROs do not clearly prevent rare events like elementary school shootings, but they do increase suspensions, expulsions, and law enforcement referrals, especially for black students and students with disability. Instead of adding armed [00:16:37] officers to early grades, please require transparent, publicly presented, disaggregated discipline data for all grade levels, and convene an independent panel to review the evidence and recommend better options like more counselors, social workers, and mental health supports. Our youngest students deserve nurturing, developmentally appropriate schools, not early contact with the criminal justice system. Thank you. Thank you. Jasmine Tyler, followed by Barbara Criderden. [00:17:08] Good evening. I'm Jasmine Tyler. I'm a Sterling resident. I have a child in LCPS. I am a professor at Georgetown and the Public Policy School, I am discombobulated this evening. I jokingly tell people when I tell them where I live that I'm still integrating Loudoun County in 2026. This series of conversations has proven that true. I continue to be heckled by the rabid constituency [00:17:46] in support of this policy, and that further goes to show me that people cannot be trusted with black and brown adults or children. I want everyone to know that our children are currently not safe with SROs in their schools. Might not be safe because of potential shooters. I oppose this. [00:18:14] Thank you. Barbara Critterton, followed by Joaquin Zubig-Aga. Good evening. I'm Barbara Crittenden. My serious concerns about the safety of our elementary school children bring me here today. [00:18:34] All our schools are potential targets for the same violence we've witnessed across our country with many lives lost. Yet currently our youngest and most vulnerable charges are not afforded the same layer of security provided to older students. [00:18:55] SROs serve as protection for our most precious treasures, our children. Leaving any children without this protective layer of security is not a reasonable risk. Actually, LCPS makes a commitment to this effect on their website, and I quote, There is nothing more important than the safety and security of our students and staff. [00:19:26] Please, I urge you to fulfill. Thank you. Joaquin Zubiaga, followed by Santos Munoz. Good evening. [00:19:42] My name is Joaquin Zubiaga, a Loudoun County resident and student. I support expanding armed school resource officers into our elementary schools. Elementary students are the most vulnerable children in our system, yet they currently receive less protection than students in middle and high school. [00:20:01] Loudoun County has fortunately avoided tragedy, but safety policy should never wait for disaster before acting. Counselors and administrators are essential, but they cannot stop an armed threat. Only trained law enforcement can respond immediately to that situation. [00:20:19] Our county's safety record is built on strong law enforcement and effective SRO programs. Extending that protection to elementary schools simply ensures every student receives that same standard of safety. Thank you. Thank you. Santos Munoz, followed by Mittal Gandhi. [00:20:40] Good evening. My name is Santos Munoz. I'm a London County resident parent and community leader. I'm here tonight to speak in support of expanding the SROs to our elementary schools. Today, every middle school and high school in London has SROs, trained professionals who help protect our students, build relationships, and serve as mentors in our school's communities. [00:21:04] Yet our youngest students do not currently have the same level of support. I also want to recognize the professionalism of the London County Sheriff's Office and the important work their SROs already do in our schools. This is not about politics or creating a police state. [00:21:20] It's about expanding the prevention, partnership, and peace of mind for elementary school families with a blanket of security that middle school and high schools have and the people that work in this building enjoy. I respectfully urge the board to expand the proven program to our elementary schools, giving the language students have the same commitment to safety. [00:21:44] Thank you for your time, service, to the community. I'm Mittal Gandhi, followed by Carlene Stecke. Good evening. My name is Ram Gandhi, and I currently attend Farmall Station Middle School. [00:22:04] I want to talk about something that honestly shouldn't even be a question. Keeping elementary school kids safe. I went to Discovery Elementary School for six years. I had amazing teachers and great memories there. We even had D.A.R.E. officers come to our school and teach us lessons. And I remember how much the students respected them and how comfortable everyone felt around them. [00:22:23] Honestly, I would have loved it if the officers were there in the building full time because it would have made me feel even safer and more secure in the building. Across the United States, there have been over 1,000 school shooting incidents since 2000, and many of them happening in elementary and middle schools, where the youngest students are the most vulnerable. [00:22:42] Do you know how scary it is when we have lockdown drills in schools? To this day, when we have lockdown drills, I still get worried. Kids can't protect themselves. We rely on adults to protect us at school, and knowing there's a police officer in the school would help kids feel safer. [00:22:58] And because when it comes to protecting kids... Thank you. Carleen Zdecki, followed by Donna Wadowski. Donna Wadowski, followed by Kathy Ellen Davis. [00:23:23] I am a grandmother of elementary school-age children. I am also a former member of the United States Secret Service. It was reported just yesterday an elementary-age student may have brought a loaded handgun to an Alexandria City public school. [00:23:46] Do you want a counselor, as the blue-shirted agitators have suggested, confronting a person entering an elementary school carrying a rifle, a handgun, or a machete in an emergency situation, or would you rather have a sheriff's deputy, a sworn-trained law enforcement officer confront the situation? [00:24:08] Dr. Spence and Chairman Chandler, it would be blood on your hands in explaining to a apparent of a child that has been shot or injured why you did not have the layer of protection of an sro it is plain and simple cut out all the noise and place an sro in the elementary schools thank you thank you kathy ellen davis followed by kerry kidwell everyone here cares about protecting kids [00:24:42] and we know the number one thing virginia schools want to help with that sr wait no according to studies, it's the 12th thing they want. Strange. Okay, but we know that people get unsecured firearms at home and use those in school shootings. To help with that, we need SR. Wait, no, that would be safe storage laws we need. Well, people who are a danger to themselves or others shouldn't have access to guns, so we need SR. No, wait, that's red flag laws. Chapman doesn't support those. Weird. We all know that schools are safer anyway with SR. No, wait, no studies prove that. [00:25:12] They actually show they can do harm. And 15% of gunfire incidents on school grounds are unintentional and only happen because a gun is there. There are many things we can do to keep things safe. LCPS is already doing many of them. And groups in this county advocating for gun sense legislation are working hard to help. Chapman doesn't work with them. So he says he wants to protect kids, but only this one specific way that doesn't actually help? That's a little weird. Thank [00:25:38] you. Thank you. Carrie Kidwell, followed by Meredith Ray. Hi, I'm Carrie, and you know I volunteer with Moms Demand Action, the actual Moms Demand Action that works on gun violence prevention. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery as they say. [00:26:01] I have things to say but basically you know that we don't stand for SROs in schools. They are not helpful, they can be harmful. We do stand for things like reducing youth access to firearms using red flag laws and strengthening mental health and community support. As Kathy Ellen mentioned, all of which are voted against the general assembly and Chapman does not do a lot of support with red flag laws. We don't use that a lot in Loudoun County. It's really crazy that we're asking people to put armed officers in schools as a first line of defense when people are not willing to secure their own firearms at [00:26:37] home and ask people to keep their children safe. 4.6 million children are in homes with unlocked firearms and most of the school shootings happen from students who get firearms that way. You need to lock them up we need to use red flag laws and you need to oppose this in schools thank you thank you meredith ray followed by erin dunbar hello according to a comprehensive study by rand a non-profit non-partisan research organization there is no evidence about whether sros prevent [00:27:15] the types of mass shootings that often lead to the placement of sros in schools from the university at albany's peer-reviewed 2023 study published in the journal of policy analysis and management one of the most rigorous studies ever done using data from 94,918 schools, schools with SROs saw between a 35% and 80% increase in out-of-school suspensions and a 25% to 90% increase in expulsions. [00:27:43] Referrals to police and school-based arrests were up between 10% and 50% compared to schools without SROs. When I asked for a yes or no answer on the demographic data of LCPS students at the Sheriff's Town Hall. They refused to answer it twice. Without this info, I cannot support this, and neither should you. [00:28:02] Thank you. Erin Denbar, followed by Susan Cox. The question before you should not be partisan. [00:28:18] It should simply be, how do we best keep our students safe? For some of our rural schools, response times can be dangerously long when seconds matter. As a preschool teacher in Western Loudoun, many of my students go on to attend our small rural elementary schools, and it sickens me that anyone would vote against giving them every possible layer of protection. [00:28:34] School resource officers are already in our middle and high schools. They build relationships with students and staff and provide immediate coordination with law enforcement during an emergency. They're highly trained and are not involved with student discipline. This is not about planning for the everyday, it's about preparing for worst case scenarios so you don't have to look back and say, "What more could we have done?" [00:28:50] I personally couldn't care less if there's a lot of downtime for SRO as if it means they are there on site. You suggest counselors and safe gun storage and that's great, I fully support it, but they won't help students in a school that becomes a random target of violence. At the end of the day, if this board believes bulletproof glass and security guards are necessary for adults in this building, then our youngest students deserve to at least have one trained officers in theirs. Thank you. Susan Cox followed by Mike Clancy. Everyone's speech can be found as reason for you to support SROs. The many people who speak in favor, their sincere justifications should be obvious, [00:29:26] but just as important, the people who speak against their reasons underscore a need for SROs. Trust in law enforcement needs to be restored. It's vital. SROs will be one such step. The naysayers' fears need to be alleviated. Quality SROs can do this by being part of healthy, happy, and safe communities. This outreach and service is of utmost importance to keeping students safe and informed as SRO are trained in de-escalation techniques, mental health education, bullying prevention, classroom instruction, internet and personal safety, and much more. There will be another set of eyes coming from a highly trained [00:30:04] sourced in addition to LCPS resources. This is advantageous as it will give the school a much-needed diverse viewpoint while helping with accountability and transparency. Thank you. Thank you. Mike Clancy followed by Jennifer Magyari-Hole. [00:30:24] Good evening board members. I'm Mike Clancy from the Leesburg District. 1,649. That's the number of times an elementary school requested SRO assistance last school year, 1,649 times over 180 school days. That's more than nine times a day. [00:30:47] Clearly, there's an urgent need for SROs in the elementary schools to provide for the safety and security of our children and our parents and the teachers. And this should not be a political issue. It's not Republicans against Democrats, and our children shouldn't be pawns in some political game. This is about their safety and their security. SROs in the elementary schools. [00:31:09] That's common sense. That's good sense. That's the right thing to do for our community, for our children, for our teachers. Thank you. Thank you. Jennifer Magyari-Hole, followed by Ashley Abbott. Hi, my name is Jenny Hole, and I'm a parent of a first grader at Kenneth Culbert Elementary and a three-year-old who will soon join him there. Like every parent, their safety is the first thing on my mind when I drop them off each morning. That's why I'm here tonight to respectfully urge you to [00:31:45] support expanding school resource officers to our elementary schools. Elementary-aged children are our most vulnerable students. Many are still learning how to respond during safety drills or don't understand them altogether. They rely entirely on the adults around them to keep them safe. Last year, after we were notified about threats and security incidents, I know families who chose to keep their children home for several days because they did not feel safe sending them to school. For those of us who did drop our children off at school after receiving these emails, we did so with a pit in our stomachs, hoping that that wouldn't be the day that something happened. That feeling stays with you once you're in that situation. Every parent I speak with, [00:32:25] neighbors, classmates, families, and teachers share the same basic concern. We want strong on-site protection for our children. Thank you. Ashley Abbott, followed by Richard Ryan. Good evening. My name is Ashley Abbott, and I am the parent of a second grade student in the Loudoun County Elementary School System. I am here today to express my strong support for including SROs in our elementary schools. As a parent, nothing matters more to me than knowing [00:33:02] my child is safe when I send him off to school each morning. Schools should be places where children can focus on learning, building friendships, and growing, not where parents or teachers have to worry about whether there's adequate protection in places if something goes wrong. I understand that some members of our community have raised concerns that there may other ways to address school safety. I believe those conversations are all important. Safety in schools should never just rely on one approach. Counselors, mental health resources, and strong school communities all play an important role but those supports and preventative efforts are not replacements for trained law enforcement when an emergency occurs. They serve different purposes. [00:33:39] Preparedness is not something we hope to ever, it's not something we, I'm sorry, preparedness is something we hope never to rely on but when seconds matter having trained professionals. Thank you. Richard Ryan followed by Samantha Zaboli. [00:33:55] Good evening, school board members. I'm Richard Ryan, 20-year resident of Ashburn, Virginia and a 29-year retired naval officer. Do you know the vast majority of mass shootings occur at gun-free zones? I'll repeat that. The vast majority of mass shootings occur at gun-free zones. And why would that be? Because those crazy people know there's nobody with a gun there to shoot back. And so that's That's where they go: movie theaters, shopping centers, schools, and other places. [00:34:33] I note with alarm that when I walked into the building tonight, there was a sign out there that said this is a weapons-free zone. However, there's one difference. We have armed guards protecting you all and all the adults that work in this building. [00:34:49] Why is that? And you're not going to afford defense to the most indefensible of our young ones? The most vulnerable? I really think you should consider a strong vote in support of Sheriff Chapman's, SROs, I encourage you do so. Thank you. Samantha Zabouli followed by Beth Hess. I firmly and adamantly oppose SROs in schools and especially in elementary schools. 29% of LCPS students are EL or SPED, [00:35:25] not to mention the 60% minority student population who are disproportionately impacted by the criminal justice system stemming from policing, military grade equipment, and profiling. My student is all of the above and when I asked him how he felt about having armed police in the school he said instantly, no, I could get shot for wearing a free Palestine shirt. It's sad. It's a sad reality that our students can name, understand, and verbalize police brutality at the age of eight. The sheriff's office has refused to provide protection for our elected board members, requiring private security. [00:35:57] This security was praised by Chapman himself in his town hall, acknowledging that LCPS already does an excellent job. We do not need armed officers in our schools, nor the overreach of unilateral executive sheriff with a track record of non-collaboration with other elected officials and a commitment to racial-based policing like 287G agreements. Stand your ground. Say no. [00:36:17] Thank you. Beth Hess, followed by Mark McCaffrey. Good evening. I'm Beth Hess with Moms for Liberty. We advocate for parental rights at all levels of government. What more important right is there than the right to send your children to safe schools? Parents send their children to school with a simple expectation that they will be safe and that's exactly what Sheriff Chapman intends with his plan for SROs in elementary schools. To enter this building we all had to go through [00:36:53] security. There are also armed guards. None of us here is being denied a safe and secure space so why would we deny the same to our elementary school children? As a Loudoun County taxpayer I see the finite cost of this investment as protecting something invaluable and that's children. Parents trust schools with the most important people in their lives. When parents advocate for school resource officers, they're advocating for preparedness, safety, and peace of mind. Every child deserves a place to learn where they feel protected and every parent deserves confidence that their [00:37:29] child's school is ready to- Thank you. Mark McCaffrey followed by John Collins. My name is Mark McCaffrey and all I'd like to say about this is I'd like you, the school board, to listen to everybody here, listen to their input. I'd like you to get the facts and figures hopefully the unfiltered raw data that you need I'd like you to go back and make debate vigorously among yourself which I'm very sure you will and you'll come back with an answer and if that answer is yes we need SROs in that school I'll thank you if you come back and you say that answer is no we don't need SROs in that school I'll thank you [00:38:06] because what you did is you conducted business with ethics you'd conducted with dignity and you did what was expected of you you did not get bullied and cowed by obvious political pressure you obviously this is going to be ramping up for political season and this is a terrible subject to use to try to get forward a political message so all I ask for you I hope and praise that you step back and do whatever whatever decision you make you make it for the right reasons not for political reasons thank you thank you John Collins [00:38:38] followed by Abby Platt Abby Platt followed by Heather Gottlieb walk into this building and you pass through multiple layers of security there's There's guards at the door, there's armed protection in this room right now. [00:39:04] Our five-year-olds get none of that. I hear a lot of talk about safe storage and I support it. Everyone in this room supports keeping guns out of the wrong hands. We agree on that. But safe storage doesn't stop at a threat, doesn't stop a threat that comes through the front door, an SRO does. [00:39:19] Sheriff Chapman has put together a plan to put SROs in every elementary school in Loudoun County. And here's the part that needs to be understood. This money has already been budgeted. It's already in the sheriff's funding. This does not cost LCPS a single dollar. So we're not asking you to find money, we're not asking you to make any cuts, we're asking you to say yes to the safety of our children, to a plan that's already funded and ready to go. [00:39:43] Our elementary schools are the most vulnerable buildings in this division. The sheriff has the resources, he has the people. Please provide our kids the same level of protection that you ensure yourselves as you sit up there. Thank you. Heather Gottlieb, followed by Donna Colombo. [00:40:04] you for having the courage to call this special meeting to address Sheriff Chapman's attempt to skirt the established process. This is how you deal with a bully. Sheriff Chapman didn't even attempt to collaborate with the school board under the memorandum of understanding he himself agreed to. That agreement exists so decisions about resource officers are made in partnership with the school system. Instead, he tried to bypass that process entirely. At the same time, his office refuses to provide basic accountability. [00:40:31] He will not provide demographic data on students referred by SROs. In fact, he refuses to provide any meaningful data at all. If this program is supposed to serve students, the community deserves transparency about who is being impacted. So tonight is simple. The sheriff does not run our schools. The board of supervisors does not run our schools. You do. I'm confident that you all will make an evidence-based and data-informed decision to keep our students safe. [00:40:56] And just so you know, Mark McCaffrey used to work for Chapman, and he is a police officer. Thank you. Donna Colombo, followed by Lynn Davis. Good evening, everyone. I am a parent and grandparent of students that have gone through and are still attending Loudoun County Public Schools. I have been at the education leadership and community leadership level for over 30 years here in Loudoun County. I am here to say safety is about more than just locks and alarms. It's about the relationships that we build. [00:41:34] Having an SRO in an elementary school isn't about policing. It's about providing a consistent, friendly presence that makes our youngest learners feel secure. An SRO serves as a mentor and a protector who knows the hallways and the students by name. Their presence allows teachers to focus on teaching and kids to focus on being kids, knowing that there is a trained professional dedicated solely to their well-being. By fostering trust early on, a foundation is created where safety is a shared responsibility, ensuring the school remains a true sanctuary for learning. [00:42:06] I am in favor of an SRO in our elementary schools. They deserve the same security that our middle school, high schools, and so many organizations have now. They are our future. Let's keep them safe. Thank you. Lynn Davis, followed by Suzanne Satterfield. [00:42:31] Do not let the sheriff gaslight you into believing a school shooting would be your fault. Sheriff Chapman is pushing a narrative that says if you vote against elementary school SROs, you will be held responsible for school shootings. [00:42:48] but there's currently no scientific evidence that a police in schools can stop shootings. A review of 179 school shootings from 1999 to 2018 found no evidence that SROs reduced deaths or injuries during school shootings. What does work? Mental health professionals. Another defense is safe storage of guns. [00:43:15] funds. Another one is SRO, is, I was going to say SRO, sorry. Another is. Excuse me. Please stop the clock. Please don't react. We're almost at the end. Thank you. I'm sorry. Please start the clock. [00:43:37] And so Chapman is asking for funding that he says he exhausted all of the grants to him. Thank you. Suzanne Satterfield. Once again, the majority on this board are using children as political pawns. Allegiance is made to PACs like every town's mom demand action who wants to limit law enforcement in our schools. They practically own Anne with their $20,000 campaign donation, [00:44:14] which is almost as much as her school pay. Isn't it ironic that there are not proven threats to this board and Spence? Yet they sit behind a ballistic rated dais, are protected by armed guards, and even escorted in and out of special doors as they come and go in the building. [00:44:32] There are not only outside threats to our schools, but there are also proven threats to students inside our schools. As teachers, and yes, even a counselor at LCPS has been convicted of grooming a student into having sexual relationships with her. When children are in danger, they are taught to call law enforcement. [00:44:51] So it's time to end the political charade and put students' safety at the forefront and fund the sro expansion thank you thank you for coming out today and providing your public comment that ends our public comment period we will now move on to our action item 3.01 safety and security for elementary schools i called this meeting because i think it's important for us to hear from the community and because i think it's important for the school board to have an [00:45:26] opportunity to have a real conversation and make a recommendation regarding SROs in elementary schools. And with that, school board members, I'll open the floor for discussion. Yes, Vice Chair Donohue. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate having the opportunity to address the issue with a little more time than we would if we had, if we were having this conversation during one of [00:46:03] our regular board meetings. I have spent a lot of time thinking about student safety, school safety, and the question of SROs. For people who don't know about my background, I used to be a prosecutor. [00:46:18] I used to prosecute murderers and drug traffickers. I also worked in national security. I am a gun owner, and I'm a parent of a third grader and a sixth grader who have been students at LCPS for their entire school careers and have had only good interactions with their SROs. [00:46:37] I care very deeply about the safety of our students, our staff, and our entire Loudoun community. And I acknowledge that we have some issues that we may need to address. [00:46:53] I am not discounting the information that has recently been provided to us by the Sheriff's Office regarding the number of calls that are made in which SROs stationed at middle schools or high schools are called out to attend to issues at elementary schools. And yes, if we have SROs stationed at our middle schools and high schools, that is for a reason. And if the SRO has to be called out, then that does leave an absence in that school. So that is an issue that perhaps we need to address. The lengthy response times to some of our more remote schools is also an issue [00:47:32] that perhaps we need to address. What I have found troubling about our current situation and the proposal that is before us is that what we have been presented with is only one possible solution. [00:47:50] The conversation that has been brought before this board has not been an open conversation to discuss what do we need to make sure that our students are as safe as we can make them, all of our students. What are the concerns, and what are the possible solutions? [00:48:07] That is the conversation I want to have. Instead, we're being told there is a problem, our schools aren't safe enough, and the only way to fix it is to expand the SRO program to include our elementary schools. And I do not believe that we have the data right now to support that as the only or best available solution. [00:48:29] In addition, I have concerns that I have raised previously and that others have raised previously that there are national studies going back for many years about the impact that SROs have on certain segments of student populations, the negative impact. Now, are these concerns insurmountable? No, I don't believe they are insurmountable. But again, I believe we need to have a conversation about these are the negative impacts that have been observed in other districts, in other places with other groups of SROs and students, how can we avoid that negative impact [00:49:06] in our district if we go forward with this plan? That is not a conversation we have had. And I think it is critical to do that. So I was at the sheriff's town hall, which I did appreciate the sheriff conducting the town hall. I attended and I had my third grader with me. And on the drive home, she asked me about what the conversation was about, said that she missed seeing her sro around because i guess he hadn't stopped by recently and i explained that he's he's actually [00:49:42] the middle school sro but he comes to help out at her elementary school and other elementary schools and i asked her do you want to have sro do you want to have an sro in your school and first she said yes and i said okay and we talked a little bit about why and i reminded her she has the uh she has the allied security in her school and then she asked me what the difference is between the too. And I said, well, the biggest difference is an SRO carries a gun. And she said, oh, no, I don't want that. I do not want anyone having a gun in my school. And I agree with her. [00:50:20] My gut is to agree with that. I don't want more guns in our schools. I want less guns in our schools. And again, we have not talked about other options. We have not talked about metal detectors. We have not talked about clear backpacks. We have not talked about cluster approach to SROs. [00:50:36] We have the only option that is before us right now is expanding the SRO program to station one SRO in every elementary school. And again, I do not believe that the data supports that as the best or only solution to our current concerns. [00:50:54] And for that reason, I can't support this measure at this time. What I would be in support of is scheduling soon genuine opportunities to talk through all of the issues. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. LaBelle. [00:51:17] - Thank you, Madam Chair. The last time we spoke about this at our last meeting, I believe it was, I talked about the fact that there were many miles between the elementary schools in the Catoctin district and the SROs that are located in Percival. [00:51:38] I would like to tell you or ask you if you remember back on January, there was a day when it was like 18 degrees outside And the windshield made it even worse. And that was the day that one of my elementary schools had a gas leak. [00:51:58] And the principal, with no SRO, was trying to organize the school to get them out of there, get them in warm clothing, coats, hats, and get them out of the building before he could attend to calling anybody else for help. [00:52:16] Now, his SRO is shared with Harmony Middle School. He waited, called there, and it took that SRO 25 minutes to get there. [00:52:32] In the meantime, they had the kids lined up outside. He also called administration, and thankfully, buses were sent to pick up the children and keep them inside the warmer buses, but it took 10 minutes. [00:52:48] And then the fire departments, three different fire departments, showed up. This is all before the SRO arrived. And they were all trying to figure out where the gas leak was coming from, setting up gigantic fans to clear the gas out. [00:53:05] And they kept going and trying to go in with their little readers, and it never actually cleared very much. It took two and a half hours before a parent who was a member of the volunteer fire department got the old Lovettsville fire department opened and the buses got the children moved in where they could use the bathroom. [00:53:32] Now at this point, the children hadn't had any lunch. They are sitting there in the fire department and it was three and a half hours before that that building was cleared enough to allow the children to go back and get on their buses. [00:53:49] This is unacceptable. One of the SRO's most important jobs is to coordinate during emergencies, 25 minutes before he got there. Unacceptable. [00:54:04] We have spoken about, oh, they have guns, oh, they're in school, oh, they're friends with kids, oh, they make things safer, oh, they'll face off a gunman from outside. But that is not the only thing that they do. They provide emergency response, immediate emergency response on the ground. We have left that part out of our conversation and we need to consider it and consider it well. Thank you, Madam Chair. [00:54:32] Thank you. Mrs. Griffiths. Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't know how I follow that one, but I did witness, I was at a middle school, and there was a police car out front, and I was asking where he was, and I was told he was at another, at an elementary school, because there was an unruly parent that was not allowed in the school and was showing up at the school. [00:55:08] So, in that regard, I mean, this was several years ago, it really bothered me that he was not there. I later, when I was at the school again, I later saw him leaving with all the students at dismissal. [00:55:24] He was right there in the middle with all the students, talking to the students and watching everything that was going on. But I do want the people of Loudoun County to know, first off, there has been misinformation out there. We as a board promote safe storage, so does the sheriff's office. [00:55:41] In addition to advocating for SROs in schools, they have what is called safe to talk. So they will provide locks, and they will have conversations on how you can protect your guns. They also have, they are following red flag laws as well. [00:55:58] So I'm not sure why that information was brought here when they are participating in those. If anybody has any questions, I can certainly get that information for them or put it on my Facebook. With that being said, as mentioned by constituents, this building has layers of physical security. [00:56:18] And yet, some of my colleagues are prepared to vote against placing trained professional resource officers in elementary schools in this county. Against protecting five-year-olds, against protecting the most vulnerable people in our entire system. [00:56:34] I find it stunning. And let's be clear what we're actually being asked to do here. Say yes to resources that cost the division nothing. The sheriff's office has brought forward a fully funded proposal. The money has been allocated. [00:56:50] We simply have to say yes. When we walk out of here tonight, I want every parent in Loudoun County to know where each of us stood and why. Our children deserve at least the same level of protection as we give ourselves. I will not explain to a parent in this county why we decided that the funding was not there when it is there. [00:57:11] The plan was ready, and we still said no. I will not pretend that protecting this dais while leaving, I'm not going to pretend that we're protected while leaving our five-year-olds unprotected in a defensible position. I have been speaking with PTAs and actually had a meeting scheduled this evening at 7 p.m. to specifically discuss the issue, and I didn't get a chance. [00:57:35] But most of the PTAs I've met with are in favor of having SROs at their schools, and these are elementary schools. This board meeting was announced at the last minute, and unfortunately, not enough information was shared with the public regarding town halls or surveys. [00:57:51] Through emails and PTA conversations, I've heard from many parents who strongly support the SROs in our elementary schools. Many cannot even understand why this is even a question. Protecting our youngest students should be a straightforward decision. It's been suggested that officers could simply patrol multiple schools. [00:58:11] However, I've seen firsthand why this does not, that's not a good level of protection, as I mentioned, the middle school issue. Today, SROs are an important and trusted part of our school community. As a former board member, I do want to quote Beth Bartz, who sent us all an email this past week. [00:58:29] When it comes to adding more SROs, the responsibility lies with us, not the Board of Supervisors, not activist groups, Mom Demand Action, an organization many on this board belong to, not local political parties. This should not be a political issue. This is our children. It's a matter of common sense and student safety. [00:58:52] I ask my colleagues to not listen to the regular cast of outside agitators and think about your youngest, K-5 students. I believe this has turned into a publicly charged issue when it shouldn't have been. Every one of us deserves to feel safe in our workplace. [00:59:10] Our youngest students and their teachers deserve that same security. I will vote yes on this issue, although I'm not sure why it was put on action tonight. It only takes one incident, one incident, to create a catastrophic consequence for most vulnerable students. [00:59:28] While SROs may not prevent every possible event, they absolutely help limit harm and provide an essential additional layer of protection. Last note, if not past tonight, I just learned that the Board of Supervisors might put this money that's been funded for SROs to DEI programs instead. [00:59:53] I hope the people of Loudoun County know this and are okay with this alternative suggestion by the Board of Supervisors. It is DEI programs or protecting young students. Take your pick. Thank you. Thank you. [01:00:08] For the community, I would just kindly please ask that you maintain decorum and allow the meeting to proceed. Thank you. School board members, any further comments? Yes, Mr. Svinson. Thank you, Madam Chair. [01:00:23] I wholeheartedly agree that this should not be a political issue, and our community deserves a better policy development process. We need a process where we are taking into account the expert opinion of folks who work in our schools, principals, teachers, staff, that takes into account the views of our parents, that takes into account the views of outside experts. [01:00:48] And that has not happened to date because we have not had a collaborative dialogue and a process set up between the school board and the sheriff's office. I think that a transparent dialogue along the lines that Vice Chair Donahue is speaking about is the way to address a lot of the questions that have come up during this process around how to develop an SRO program that's developmentally appropriate for our younger students. [01:01:14] How do we ensure that folks are getting the appropriate training to work with younger students, to work with students with disabilities? These are really important conversations, and I think that we have to be taking the time to develop a policy because it is the top priority of the school board, the safety and security of our children, and that deserves real thought and effort, and there has not been space for that to date. [01:01:43] So I also want to say that this piece is not just about process. It's about building trust in the eventual solution that's arrived at, building consensus. And I just want to read a passage from MSAC's letter to us that really resonated with me. [01:02:06] So MSAC said that the decision by LCSO to pursue elementary SROs outside of the standard collaborative channels with LCPS and the school board has raised questions and concerns for many families for communities that already experienced disproportionate contact with law enforcement process matters transparent collaborative decision-making is essential to building and maintaining confidence in any school safety initiative I think that if we have a real interest in building something that's lasting and that has trust of the community we have to go through the steps to engage everyone who's involved in our school communities and make sure that it's a [01:02:40] good solution. That we're not just running at the first model that's thrown out there, that we're able to talk with each other and talk about what's the best way to approach the SRO program. So that's what I wanted to offer, Madam Chair, just that this is a really, the process piece is really important for us to consider in terms of how we arrive at an eventual solution. Thank you. Mr. Pepper? [01:03:07] Thank you, Madam Chair. If you look around the room tonight, a lot of people have said a lot of things. And I don't necessarily think anything that has been said has been entirely untrue, right? There is truth to the fact that there is no evidence, and the sheriff himself will admit this, that SROs prevent school shootings. But it's also true that the presence of SROs can do things, and I've read the research, to reduce some things like non-gun violence and fights or threats and reduce those numbers in schools, particularly right now the research is at the secondary level. [01:03:45] It's also true that the number of calls for our SROs is over a third of the calls in LCPS. But what's also true is the vast, vast, vast majority of them, once again, the sheriff has shared this data with us, don't require an immediate need for law enforcement. [01:04:01] They're kind of right-to-know calls. We're talking single digits for immediate response. It can be true, and I've experienced this as an administrator and a teacher, and students have experienced this, and I've seen this in emails, that a vast majority of our middle and high school students have had extremely positive interactions with their SROs. [01:04:21] Elementary school students have had extremely positive interactions with the SROs in schools. It's also true that there are bad actors, and there are like Deputy Papa Bear who take these interactions to a level that it's not appropriate between an adult and a child. It's true, like Ms. LaBelle said, that there are other purposes to SROs in schools, educational purposes, bike safety, the D.A.R.E. program, although, question about that one. [01:04:45] But I've used SROs in my classroom to teach physics lessons, right? It's also true that at the elementary level, the things an SRO are bringing on education, a lot of which at the middle and high school level, like social media safety, like drug awareness education, isn't as needed. [01:05:03] So the scope of that is limited. It can be true that an SRO will make some in the community feel safer. It's also true that the presence of SROs make individuals in marginalized or minority communities less safe or feel less safe. There are so many things that have been said tonight, and not one of them, on both sides here, and we all sit with our side, it's really interesting, has been necessarily untrue. [01:05:32] I actually really liked what Susan Cox said, I'm going to call you out, because one of the things that our elementary students can learn, particularly those, is that SROs are not, law enforcement is not these evil people that some in other communities see. [01:05:52] Now, we have to get this right. If we are going to do this, we have to get this right. And I know there are people who have said, and my colleague, Ms. Griffiths, has said, this meeting was rushed, right? Well, it was rushed because this issue was thrown into our laps less than a month ago by the sheriff. [01:06:14] So if we are going to take it, I'm actually in agreement with my colleague, Mr. Svensson, that we are going to do this. We have to get this right so that every single person, every single person, student, teacher, administrator, parent who is visiting feels safe. [01:06:34] So that we do not have bad actors like Deputy Papa Bear in our schools or officers who refuse to be trained on the same prevention techniques like MANT training. This needs to be clarified and specified and developed in the right way and not just thrown at the community as an immediate and urgent need that we have now. [01:06:56] If we are going to do it, let us get it right. Let us take the time, as Mr. Recreedy said, to have those robust discussions. Let's bring the sheriff. I haven't seen the sheriff at a school board meeting. Has anyone else? Let's bring him in. Let's ask questions. [01:07:11] Let's get this right. And so right now, I think we need the time to deliberate on that process. Thank you. Dr. Rasheed? Thank you, Chair. When the school board presented our fiscal year 27 budget to the Board of Supervisors, we had the opportunity to ask Sheriff Chapman and Lieutenant Colonel Sawyer questions in that early stage. [01:07:40] They said that their office received hundreds of calls from elementary schools each year, but at the time did not provide information about whether those calls are all appropriately resolved by law enforcement or if any number of them would be better handled by other services or agencies. I asked what local law enforcement is doing to educate schools about options beyond calling the police or situations that arise in our schools. [01:08:03] I had in mind times when perhaps a mental health or medical response would be more appropriate than a police response. However, the only answer I was provided was run, hide, fight in response to a violent threat. To date, I have not been given any information about this. [01:08:18] I am concerned that there is no thought beyond violence and police response when it comes to our youngest LCPS students. Data was presented to the school board last year, clearly showing that students of certain race or ethnicities, students with disabilities, and students who speak English as a second language are being suspended more frequently. [01:08:39] Considering the different vulnerabilities of these student populations, we have to think carefully before raising the stakes to police use of force or criminal arrest. And furthermore, I understand the desire for protection and safety, but unfortunately, examples such as Robb Elementary School show that armed law enforcement did not prevent the tragic deaths of elementary school children and educators there. [01:09:03] As I've seen, and as so many messages to the school board have pointed out, a 20-year study by the National Institute of Justice shows that where there were armed officers in schools during school shootings, the rate of death was 2.83 times higher. [01:09:20] The comparison has been made between armed security at school board meetings and potential armed security at elementary schools. I find this to be a false equivalency. The general public is invited to these meetings in the interest of public information and engagement. [01:09:36] This is not the case for elementary schools where there should not be a steady flow of community members seeking entrance. Individuals are vetted for purpose of visit and must enter through secure vestibules into the main office only. These situations are not parallel. [01:09:52] All of our students, educators, and staff deserve safe, welcoming, and peaceful school environments created through evidence-based practices by those who are trained and committed to child development and education. This includes counselors, family liaisons, safe storage education, and social emotional learning. [01:10:09] Let schools be education focused so that our students, particularly our youngest students, learn to be kind, compassionate, and productive citizens. Thank you, Chair. - Thank you, Ms. Chernoff. - Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm grateful for the reflections of my colleagues, and I know all of us are taking this very seriously. [01:10:28] We've taken quite a bit of time to examine what a potential next step could be for our elementary schools. I've tried to do the same, listen to my community, done some research, engage with the sheriff's office, talk to my schools. At its core, for me personally, this is about one thing. [01:10:47] It's about strengthening the layers that protect our children and our schools. I think we all agree that if we can have a layer of protection, we would want it. When there's danger, we call law enforcement. Yesterday, I had a chance to review the social studies materials that are up for adoption. [01:11:04] Almost every single one of those primary resources talks about law enforcement as community helpers, as well as the other members of our community that strengthen it. We teach our kids that, that when there's danger, that we have people that we can turn to because they are trained, prepared, and committed to protecting lives. [01:11:22] We, I believe, that our SROs are not outsiders. They're trusted members of our school communities, and they build relationships with students. They mentor, they educate, they serve, and when needed, they respond. They're part of our LCPS community already in our secondary schools for these reasons. [01:11:40] The thing that I keep circling back on as I listen to the public comment and my colleagues tonight is that to me it's starting to feel as if we were arguing about having this program completely or not having it at all. And the thing that I'm struggling with is why it's good for one group and not another group of students, especially our most vulnerable. I've spoken often about my elementary teaching experience. [01:12:07] I mentioned last meeting about coming in and hearing about Sandy Hook as a kindergarten teacher. Those things are deeply impactful when you are in a building and the last thing you want to be thinking about is who is in my building to protect me and how long is it going to take to get here and almost certainly we are calling law enforcement in those situations. This morning in a moment of clarity and sort of brevity actually I was able to visit some of our preschool classrooms head start classrooms across the division some of them sit in our high schools [01:12:42] and some of them sit in our elementary schools and while I know that that's a logistical thing and that there's not a purpose in one having access to an added layer of protection or not it did draw a stark contrast to me. As I watched the children filled with joy and laughter offering hugs and snacks and stickers and all kinds of things in each different setting, whether elementary or in high school, it's the same program. These are our kids in LCPS. They deserve the added layer [01:13:17] of protection. I believe in LCPS we're blessed to know that we have safe schools. We have invested heavily in dedicated educators, counselors, trained mental health professionals, and layered security systems working every day in tandem to support our students and our educators. To me, this decision is not about replacing or prioritizing one support over another. It is about adding a layer of support for all kids. And it feels simple to me that I believe that having trained law enforcement [01:13:57] officers whose profession and expertise is to protect and serve, strengthen all of our schools. I hear my colleagues on the timeline. I'm struggling with it too. It feels fast. It feels heavy. And it feels rushed. And I sense that in the room. Anytime on a public comment sheet where I'm tallying for or against, for or against, my heart is grieved. We've got to do better. We've got to come together on this. And I agree with Chair Chandler that this is an invitation to collaborate. And my other colleagues that have spoken of that as well. But we are against a [01:14:35] timeline of sorts. There is a reality. That's why we're having this meeting. And so I'm wondering if I might offer something else. I would like to ask my colleagues, because we know we already support the SROs in our high schools and our middle schools, if and that through this process it has been brought to light that the middle school SROs in particular get pulled for these calls that we are hearing about. So I'm wondering, in an effort to backfill those calls, if we would maybe consider [01:15:11] directing the Board of Supervisors to give us the money for this phased approach. It's a phased approach. It wasn't all 61 at once. It was 15 each year. So I'm wondering if maybe we would grant that as a possibility for them to be patrols. Maybe not to move to the step of the being stationed in every single school, because I can kind of see the writing on the wall is that there's not support for that. I wish there was, and I support that, but there isn't, and I understand that. But as a middle ground, could we come together and ask for more officers in a more cluster-based approach [01:15:45] where we have remote schools, where we have higher needs, more population density, and think about it as adding that layer. So we're still adding a layer of support, which I've heard over and over again tonight, but thinking about it as if those are the ones that are going to respond to the elementary calls instead of leaving gaps in our secondary schools and their programming this would help reinforce those concerns because I do worry that as part of this dialogue we're leaving [01:16:17] ourselves open a lot of things have been said and brought to light and while I personally and I feel my community behind me support having SROs in every elementary school every middle school and every high school. I am seeking a way forward that we can all agree on because we got to come together. [01:16:38] These are our kids and I want to prioritize student safety above all else as I'm hearing all of you do and I really want to choose solutions over stalemates. So with that I'm asking could that be something that my colleagues are open to as a different avenue to pursue with the sheriff's office and then set aside a separate time and conversation to collaborate and make sense of what this program would look like if we were to move it down the road. Thank you. [01:17:09] Thank you. Ms. Riccardi? Thank you, Madam Chair. I really do appreciate everybody's comments and thoughtful conversation around this topic tonight, and I really do appreciate hearing from everybody in the public around this as well. You know, we have Virginia Code that requires us to be collaborative with the head of law enforcement in Loudoun County for everything related to school safety, doing audits and whatnot for school safety. So we are completely in partnership with the sheriff's office when it comes to this stuff, and I do believe that we really need to focus on [01:17:46] making sure that we continue to build a very strong relationship with the sheriff moving forward, and we find common ground on all this. I think there's some really great suggestions here. You know, it does strike me, though, we've taken an approach around this by holding this special meeting today and we were kind of pigeonholing ourselves into one one way of operating that the sheriff should have come to us for you to talk to us about this first or negotiated this with us first etc but the reality of it is he gets his budget like we do from the board of supervisors [01:18:21] he doesn't have to come to us for this kind of stuff and we're in the middle of negotiating the MOU between Loudoun County Public Schools and the sheriff's office for the out years for the middle in the high school program. I think one of the things that gets missed here is a different way of looking at how we want to move forward and it and it can be an opportunity for us to frame and we should by the way as the school board and the governing body of LCPS we are the ones that should frame the direction that we want to take safety and security in our schools. I'm very familiar with you know the being crunched on time with the budget process as we were back in [01:19:01] January we're all very quite familiar with that process we're in the same kind of situation here with the county's the county's budget and all of the departments that that fold into the county asking for money they're in the process of doing that now I think it makes a lot of sense for us to support and let let the Board of Supervisors do their thing make their decision about this money in SRO project and then what will wind up being able to do is have the lengthy conversations the work sessions that create our own timeline for when we if and when we want to implement this and what that looks like for us but I think we'd be very short-sighted to turn down the opportunity to have this this [01:19:40] money set aside for safety and security of our schools and then we frame how that money is spent and what those investments look like and they have and that can come in a lot of different ways it could be SROs in schools it could be patrols it could be some other kind of approach it could be investment in other things there's lots and lots of different ways to do this so we're not we're not getting shoved into having to make a decision we really aren't we're creating that own sense of urgency ourselves and it doesn't really exist the Board of Supervisors has to make the budget decision that they're going to [01:20:17] make about the sheriff's office they're either going to approve the money or they're not going to approve the money I would hope they would so that we then can at least open the door to have those conversations over the next several months and be able to roll out a plan that everyone can live with and that meets the needs of our entire population in Loudoun County which is very diverse and has lots of different needs and preferences right but we're not in we're not in this body is not in a pressure cooker to make this decision this isn't our decision to make I mean we don't give the sheriff the money what we do is once the money gets gets doled out we then get to make the choice about how [01:20:56] that money is going to be appropriated and what that looks like for us so I don't feel the pressure to make a decision tonight to make a decision you know even next Tuesday on how this happens because it's really a a board of supervisor decision to be had I'm gonna kind of just continue down this though a little bit and just say this I'm glad we had this conversation I'm concerned that it is going down a path that looks and feels political and I think every a lot of us has kind of expressed that concern tonight and that [01:21:32] is where I'm really the most concerned I too I'm not going to be the person on the school board that's gonna you know the people are not gonna be coming to me saying you could have done more to protect our kids I will never be that person that will never happen but what that looks like is is something that the nine of us have to collaborate on gather lots of information and then make a really good informed decision it isn't it doesn't it you know it's not lost on me that we didn't invite the sheriff to come to speak tonight I'm kind of concerned that we didn't do that it's a little disappointing to be perfectly [01:22:07] honest with you and again I also share the concern that we pay for private security and metal detectors which are next to impossible thank goodness to get through and we have really great layers upon layers of security here but we're not willing to invest that same level of effort with our youngest children that's a really big concern to me too I also come from the Sterling district I've lived here for 15 years. I'm extremely aware of the concerns that our population in Sterling have with law enforcement, but I will also tell you that all of my schools have expressed really great relationships with their [01:22:46] security teams. In fact, we were just at Guilford a couple days ago and the SRO was in doing a D.A.R.E. training with the elementary kids. They love their SROs, so I honor and I recognize that we've got a lot of different competing interests here that we need to blend but we are in we are under no pressure to make a decision this evening or even next Tuesday on what happens with this money we're not and so I think that's a blessing to us because we can actually take the time to make the right kind of decision that's best for the long term [01:23:21] for our students and our families and I think what I wanted to leave with is the fact that I just I've had incredibly great experiences with our security team here with the SROs in in our schools they have been amazing individuals and coming from the military with my husband who is in the military and having military background as well I just I really do appreciate all of our SROs and [01:23:58] all of our law enforcement all of our security teams that work tirelessly and And all of those that are working at the schools, they're really great individuals, really great individuals. And I just want to make sure that we're definitely supporting them as we move forward. And with that, I will be done. [01:24:17] Thanks. Thank you. Okay. This is something that has taken up a lot of time and space in my life, and I've spent many, many years thinking about it. [01:24:33] I can remember very clearly what it was like in 1999 to have just been a college graduate and to watch in horror as the incident at Columbine High School in Colorado played out on television. [01:24:49] It was unthinkable. Since that time, there have been over 420 similar instances. The SRO program has been in schools since the 1950s. [01:25:10] When I have, over the course of the last two years, spoken about data and studies, it's because I really take my obligation to the community seriously to be a good steward. [01:25:27] And I never want to assume that I know what's best, and I really try to rely on research and evidence-based best practice in every instance, which is why I go and read a lot of studies. Like I said last week, I don't ever want any of our partners to think that raising questions are anything other than an invitation to work together and to collaborate. [01:25:59] Now, I hear from my colleagues, and I'm going to say one of the reasons why I personally asked Sheriff Chapman to have a town hall and why I personally called this special meeting is because it really, really matters to me to hear from the community. [01:26:17] I think that parents should have a right to have a say in this decision, and it's not something that we should rush to do. And it feels, you know, respectfully, my opinion, it feels rushed. We didn't have any conversations over the last year when we were in negotiation, as far as I know. [01:26:38] Didn't have any conversations with me as a school board member, as far as I know. I certainly wasn't aware that this was coming. And I think it's important that we give the community the same opportunities. [01:26:55] I feel very deeply the idea of obligation to our students. And it's very hard for me to hear just that we could be causing harm in one way. [01:27:18] Because one of the things that the studies point out is that harm is caused or could potentially be caused if the program isn't managed appropriately in another way. And so when it comes down to it, it's very, I don't think that we can just partner and plan for the worst case scenario. [01:27:41] We really have, I know, even for me, when I think about this program, it does come back to the worst case scenario. It does come back to the unthinkable. But we should also be thinking about the real and the potential consequences and concerns with every aspect of this program and have an honest discussion and look at data. And to that end, you know, I hope that instead of fighting with each [01:28:19] other, we really do look at the fact that we are a community, we are one LCPS, and we have an obligation to make sure that we look out for all of our students. So with that, I will ask, does anyone have a motion that they would like to make tonight? Mr. Svensson? Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have a motion. I move that while the Loudoun County School Board supports further discussion regarding expansion of the school resource officer program, does not support [01:28:55] funding the expansion of the SRO program unless and until the school board and the parties to the Memorandum of Understanding can discuss and make a determination through a transparent MOU process. Second. Madam Chair, point of order. [01:29:14] The special meeting notice and the noticed agenda item authorized this board to deliberate on making a recommendation regarding SROs in elementary schools. The motion before us goes beyond the scope of what was noticed and under Virginia Code section 2.2-3707 a special meeting is limited to the purposes stated in the notice. [01:29:38] Furthermore, under policy 2430, all items subject to a vote must be placed on the agenda at the following regularly scheduled business meeting of the school board. Tonight is a special meeting, not a regularly scheduled school board meeting. And our next regularly scheduled meeting is Tuesday. [01:29:55] This board's own policy does not permit an action vote tonight. And before I note any formal objection, I'd like to request that the board council provide an opinion on whether this motion can be properly brought. given the lack of notice cited. [01:30:16] - Thank you, Mr. Carty. I'm gonna need a couple of minutes to look at that. And if you wanna take a recess or otherwise have discussion, I can report back, thank you. - Thank you. To accommodate that request, the board is now in recess. [01:30:32] We will come back at 6:55. [01:42:25] The board is back in session, right? The board is back in session, thank you. All right, Mr. Allen. [01:42:41] - Thank you, Madam Chair, bear with me. So as I understand Ms. Riccardi's question, just the applicable law, looking under Virginia law code section 22.1-72, it does state that a school board may hold special meetings when necessary, and each school board fixes its own procedures for that. [01:43:02] And so the Virginia Freedom of Information Act tracks that in section 2.2-3707E, which provides that notice reasonable under the circumstance of special emergency or continued meetings shall be given contemporaneously with the notice provided to the members of the public body conducting the meeting. [01:43:26] School Board Policy 2210C tracks that language in section C, which states special meetings to conduct business may be called by the chair, division superintendent, or in writing by a majority of the school board, provided that all members are notified and public notice of the time, place, and purpose of the meeting it's given. [01:43:47] Public notice reasonable under the circumstances shall be given contemporaneously with the notice provided to school board members or otherwise in accordance with applicable Virginia Freedom of Information Act provisions. And so as I understand it and as reflected on board docs, this was noticed on Monday afternoon contemporaneously with the time, place, and purpose of the meeting. [01:44:11] the recommendation reflects on board docs that the Loudoun County School Board deliberate on making a recommendation regarding SROs in elementary schools. This was noticed as an action item as reflected in board docs. [01:44:27] And per policy 2430 school board agenda, the school board can vote on action items. Irrespective of that, policy 2430, which is again school board agenda section F discussion, discusses the suspension of the rules, which indicates, you know, if there is a concern with following procedure, the board may vote to suspend the rules and move an information item or an item of new business to a vote of the school board immediately, if at least two thirds of the voting eligible board members present at the meeting, vote to approve, [01:45:06] or present, sorry, at the meeting, vote to approve of such suspension of the rules, excluding blanks or abstentions. And then at that time, the board could vote as the action item. So in my estimation and understanding of the applicable law and policy and Robert's rules, the board could take up the motion that's on the floor as this has been reflected and noticed as an action item. [01:45:37] It's within the board's discretion if they feel that they need to suspend the rules to take this up, but it has been noticed as an action item. Suspension of the rules would be more applicable if this was noticed as, say, an information item or was an item of new business. [01:45:56] So in short, the board would be cutting square corners by taking up this matter as an action item as it was presented with the vote, any motion on the floor. Okay. I'm going to continue my point. [01:46:12] Yes, go ahead. Thank you. Thank you for that clarification. So, Mr. Allen, the recommended action in the notice is that the board is going to deliberate and on making a recommendation. It does not say anything about taking action. And in other action items, it's always a very clear statement to action one side or the other that we're going to be taking. The action here tonight is deliberation. [01:46:41] It says nothing about actually taking a vote. on the issue. - Thank you, Mr. Carty, that's helpful and clarifies. I think it was overly explanatory. Based on that concise statement, this was noticed as an action item and the board is deliberating and so it follows logically that there would be, based on the deliberation and potential action item, well, this being reflected as an action item, there would be a vote on this matter because it has been noticed as an action item. [01:47:17] - Okay, well then I'm just gonna note my objection for the record and ask that it be reflected in the minutes. I believe this action exceeds the scope of the special meeting. I was not under the impression we're actually taking a vote based on the reading of this. I was under the impression that we were going to be deliberating on it. [01:47:32] And as such, I believe this exceeds the scope of the special meeting notice and it may be subject to a legal challenge. Thank you. - Thank you. so we'll go back to the motion was made by mr. Svensson mr. Svensson could you please read it again yes madam chair while the Loudoun County School Board supports further discussion regarding expansion of the school resource officer program it does not support funding the expansion of this our program unless and until the school board and the parties to the memorandum of understanding can discuss and make a determination through a transparent MOU [01:48:09] process thank you and just for clarification Dr. Rashid you seconded the motion? Yes, I second it. Thank you. School board members, is there any further discussion? Mrs. Griffiths. Just to clarify, is this to vote on the SROs tonight? So Mr. Svensson has made a motion and the motion reads, while the Loudoun County School Board supports further discussion regarding the expansion of the SRO program, it does not support funding the expansion of the SRO program unless and until the school board and the parties to the MOU can [01:48:47] discuss and make a determination through a transparent MOU process. That is the motion that we are voting under consideration. May I speak to the motion? Oh yes please I would love it if you would speak to the motion. Thank you madam chair. So this motion comes from our conversation that we've been having here on the dais about the need for a transparent process that brings in all members of our community, so that's folks who are working in our schools, principals, teachers, parents, and making sure that they have a voice through working with the school board in a collaborative dialogue with the [01:49:24] sheriff's office and that we're able to talk about the exact model for an SRO program, you know, whether whether it should be expanded, if so, how it should be expanded, what trainings involved in in terms of that expansion, how how this would be tailored for different school contexts you know a lot of the issues that folks have have brought up today and I think that this is an appropriate forum for it because we have this memorandum of understanding already that governs our relationship with the sheriff's office for our secondary schools this would be the place for us to have this conversation and be true [01:50:01] truly in a dialogue with the sheriff's office on this and and not playing telephone via via the Board of Supervisors and other outside forum for this we should be in a true a true dialogue and conversation and I think that this is a way that we can build trust with the community about whatever comes out of those conversations is something that is thought through and careful and considering the various aspects of student safety and well-being being that that many of the folks who spoke at public comment discussed tonight so that that is why I think that it's appropriate to go through the [01:50:40] MOU process and to the point about if yeah I think that it makes sense to not fund a program that we have not agreed upon with the sheriff's office and that then if once we have agreed upon what a program would look like for us to go to to the Board of Supervisors jointly to present the model that we're going forward with and what the amount of funding would be appropriate for that model. I don't think it makes sense to put the cart before the horse and give money for something that has not been put through its paces with the school board. So that's a little bit of background on the motion and happy to [01:51:20] address any questions. Mrs. Griffiths. I'm trying to understand. I thought the program was already funded and ready to go we're not funding it the school board is not funding it we're just saying yes or no if we want them in the schools please clarify that for me thank you well I'm certainly not an expert but as we present our budget so also does the sheriff and ultimately the deciding body that determines what the budget that proves the budget is the Board of Supervisors and I'd be happy if miss Willoughby or anyone else on cabinet [01:51:57] would like to clarify if I've gotten that accurate. I'm happy to just briefly respond. The Board of Supervisors has not yet taken a vote on their budget, therefore no departments are funded. So they'll finalize their budget just like you all do. [01:52:16] Our budget request has been included in the county administrator's budget request, so until they fund that, our budget request for next year is also not funded. Yes, Mrs. Griffith. This meeting today was premature because we don't know how the board of supervisors is going to vote um on this so i feel like it's premature and we're just um we're continuing when we don't even know if they're going to fund completely you could fund uh the sheriff's office completely so that's where it gets confusing um we were waiting we were [01:52:51] supposed to i thought wait for them to make their decision and then proceed from there so that's why confusing, and I think this meeting was a little premature. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Chernoff. Thank you, Madam Chair. As I mentioned before, I would actually like to make a substitute motion, so I'm going to move that the motion now read, "While the Loudoun County School Board supports further discussion regarding expansion of the school resource program, SRO, we only support the funding [01:53:28] allocated for phase one at this time and encourage the Board of Supervisors to fund the sheriff's proposed budget for SORs this year and use those funds to hire more SORs for patrolling purposes. Further expansion should not occur until the school board and other and other part sorry until the school board and the parties to the Memorandum of Understanding MOU can discuss and make a determination through a transparent MOU process. Ms. Chernoff has made a substitute motion and it has been properly seconded by Ms. LaBelle. Ms. [01:54:07] Chernoff would you like to speak to your substitute? Yes I like I said I can see the writing on the wall here in terms of support for getting them every in every elementary school and so this is what I explained earlier I believe this is a middle ground solution it holds the funding to be solution oriented for proximity purposes for responding to the data that we have seen in terms of the calls. They we already call our SROs from middle school so that that backfill would be addressed here with this patrolling purpose. It still offers us that time to do the things outlined. I mean I pulled the language exactly from [01:54:47] Mr. Svensson's amendment as well to have those conversations about the MOU if we were going to expand. I do have concerns about future budgets with where what we're seeing in terms of some of the things happening in Richmond as well as what we've discussed in our budget process with the data center money so we have an opportunity here to say yes to some funds to add a layer of protection to our elementary schools right now and I would really be grieved to see that pass us by thank you any further discussion mr. pepper so I thank you [01:55:25] madam chair I appreciate my colleagues motion the substitute motion on the floor, and I understand the kind of financial implications of doing this now, but as I said previously, we really need to get this right. We are inviting the sheriff into our house, and I know that we already have an MOU at the secondary level, but elementary students are extraordinarily different than secondary students. They are different psychologically. They are different in growth. Everything about an elementary school student is significantly different than those at [01:56:03] the middle and high school level. It just is. I am a secondary educator. I would not even feel comfortable going into a third or fourth grade classroom to try to teach a lesson. I might get along with the kids. I judged out of sea of the mind this weekend. It was wild. Wouldn't know the first thing about doing Ms. Chernow's job as a kindergarten teacher, the original motion allows us to dictate the terms of what SROs are going to do in our elementary schools. And if we go with [01:56:36] this substitute motion, it takes a lot of the authority that we are going to give out of our hands and I don't want to give it away because as we've heard across the dais here this this is something that we have a chance to be really a not just a local but a statewide or even national model of doing this and we're gonna do it to do it right let us work with the parties involved let us hear from our principals before we do this let us hear from our teachers before we do this let us hear from more in the community before we do this the original motion [01:57:12] was not a hard no. The secondary motion is a yes and a we'll see. I would rather wait to get this right before we move forward. And I know that, and I talked to Mr. Knopf, I know I share the same concerns about our budget moving forward, right? This money is available now, and I get it. [01:57:33] But if this is something we truly believe in, we have a good relationship right now with our Board of Supervisors. We have a good relationship. We're working on building a relationship with our sheriff office, hopefully through this MOU process, let us work together to get a solution that is going to positively impact 100% of the students in LCPS. Not 80%, not 20%, 100%. Let us take the time to get this right. Thank you. Ms. LaBelle. Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, [01:58:12] Well, the sheriff is already in our door in middle schools and in high schools. I don't see that having him in elementary schools changes anything. But I'm not going to be talking about that right now. What I'm going to be talking about is Ms. Chernoff's motion. [01:58:29] A patrol that drives around in the areas where our most vulnerable schools are, ones that are 15 to 20 miles away from a high school. children are needing help. If there had been, at the event that I described earlier, if it hadn't been a gas leak, if it had been a fire, if it had been a shooter, that principal was on his own. That person who is supposed to be coordinating emergency services, who has quick and ready access to all of our [01:59:09] emergency services wasn't there 25 minutes it took him to get to the site so he could begin his coordination duties the principal's duties his first duty and I know that you'll agree with me mr. pepper was to get the students and staff out of that building safely he didn't have time to call or organize once they were out and safely away he could contact administration then they could start to get the buses out to keep the students warm then it took again two and a half hours before they found them a place to go because their unification [01:59:47] position was supposed to be Woodgrove but they couldn't get them there so if it hadn't been for that parent those children would have been out there in 18 degree weather with howling winds for three and a half hours that parent was the one who got them the place of safety. Now, asking to have a patrol, a sheriff's patrol, to be able to circle, especially our schools out in western Loudoun, and I'm also including those in the western part of Little River because they're not close to any high school except [02:00:26] maybe independents, to have that kind of help available to them in a much quicker scenario than what we have right now would be extremely helpful if we could just get a patrol out to those students not necessarily have it for the whole if you don't want it in your community yet if you want to talk about it more but I am terribly concerned by what has happened in that school and not so very long ago [02:01:00] thank you thank you I have a point of information a point of information yeah Ms. Chernoff, we read her amendment again, or her motion again. Yeah, and I can tease it to you also. I move to amend this motion to read. [02:01:17] While the Loudoun County School Board supports further discussion regarding expansion of the school resource program, we only support the funding allocated for Phase 1 at this time and encourage the Board of Supervisors to fund the Sheriff's proposed budget for SROs this year and use those funds to hire more SROs for patrolling purposes only. [02:01:38] Further expansion should not occur until the school board and the parties to the Memorandum of Understanding can discuss and maintain a determination through a transparent MOU process. Thank you, Ms. Chernoff. Vice Chair Donohue. Thank you, Madam Chair. [02:01:54] The idea of a cluster or patrol, again, seems like a worthy idea for us to discuss in a time and space when we have more time to talk about all of the options before us. That is not the proposal that the sheriff has made to the Board of Supervisors. [02:02:13] We don't have any authority to tell the Board of Supervisors what they should or shouldn't be doing, and we also don't have any authority to tell LCSO what they should be using their funding for. What the sheriff presented to the Board of Supervisors or requested from the Board of Supervisors, to the best of my understanding, was funding to expand the SRO program to elementary schools. [02:02:35] If the sheriff wants to propose instead a patrol or cluster model and request some amount of funding for that, then I think it's incumbent on the sheriff to prepare that proposal and pitch it to Board of Supervisors and potentially to us if it impacts our schools. But that is not the option that has been presented. [02:02:55] And I will not be supporting the amendment. Mr. Carty. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm just going to say this. There are plenty of things that we fund here in LCPS and the county government funds and then figures out how they're going to allocate and work through that plan. [02:03:15] That happens all the time, here and elsewhere, in every government agency you can possibly imagine. So they're asking for the funding, and then we as the governing body get to choose how that gets allocated and what we're doing it for. He could recommend all kinds of things, but if we don't agree to it in MOU, it won't happen. [02:03:36] So the reality of it is, we control how this plays out moving forward. That's the whole crux of this. I think you guys have got yourselves into this mindset that it's his way and his plan or the highway. [02:03:53] That isn't how this works. He's asking for the money for the SRO program. He can, again, suggest all kinds of things that he may want, but we're the ones that govern and negotiate with him on that MOU. And again, we do that here quite a bit. We fund programs and then we figure out how we're going to allocate them. [02:04:11] Those plans aren't always baked before we ask for the funding. That happens all the time in government. So I just want to help kind of reframe the conversation because it's not a his way or the highway kind of a thing. It's a we could use the money and then let's go to the table like you've suggested and let's figure out how we want to allocate those funds and what that's going to look like and do that in conjunction with the sheriff's office. [02:04:35] That's how this works. Thanks. Thank you. Yes, Vice Chair Donahue. Thank you, Madam Chair. I take Mrs. Riccardi's point, but again, this is not our budget request and it's not our decision. I genuinely don't understand why we're taking the position or why there's a recommendation to take a position here that the sheriff should request, you know, more money or less money to do partial program or other part of a program. The sheriff's proposal, this was his proposal. That's what's been presented [02:05:10] does. It's not our job to tell him what he should or shouldn't be asking for. It is our job to say whether or not we're going to agree to have elementary school SROs or make other changes to our arrangement with our law enforcement partners and changes to our school security, which yes, again, I think is an important conversation for us to have, which we do not have the time to do before the Board of Supervisors votes on their budget on Monday. Thank you. [02:05:40] can I respond to that thank you yes yes thank you I mean you actually just made my original point which is we shouldn't be voting on this tonight this isn't this isn't for us to vote on they need to sort out their business and then we can decide what happens with that money if and if if the Board of Supervisors even approves it which is exactly going back to the whole reason why I made the motion to begin with is I didn't think we were even discussing this tonight because we shouldn't be in my opinion this is not a decision for us to make This is a decision for the Board of Supervisors to be making with the Sheriff's Office. [02:06:13] And then we, I mean, they could allocate the whole entire amount of money. And then in two weeks or four weeks or whatever, we could come back and say, yeah, no, we're not doing this at all. That is an option, right? I'm not suggesting that should be the option, but it's an option that's out there. And so this is not really the time for us to be making these decisions. [02:06:31] And it's, again, why I suggested that I thought we were here for discussion. I didn't realize we were here to vote it. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Chair Donohue. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just this point has been made a couple of times, so I just wanted to respond briefly to it. Yes It is the Board of Supervisors decision, so I take your argument that we shouldn't be Providing input arguably right now, but my counter to that would be when we went through our budget adoption process We went through a process of saying we want to cut some of these funds and reallocate them to other places The Board of Supervisors does the same thing [02:07:05] I can envision that it could be valuable to them for us to provide some input onto whether or not we would support the expansion of elementary school SROs right now. Because if we don't, they may want to take those funds and reallocate them to a different purpose. I have a question, actually. [02:07:23] I haven't spoken on this motion yet. And I'm open to staff providing the answer. So I can't think of any other situation in which another government entity or duly elected government official intersects with the authority of the school board other than, I mean, when it comes down to it, my underlying concern with this issue is that we as a body, the school board, all nine of us duly elected officials are tasked with deciding what happens in our school. [02:08:02] And I don't want to purposefully or inadvertently accidentally give leeway to give another government official undue influence to make a decision about what happens in our schools. Okay. [02:08:27] Okay. Any further discussion? Mrs. Griffiths. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to reiterate, my understanding was the money was there. The money's funded. If we do not, this is something that just took place this week, a couple days ago, I guess, or yesterday. [02:08:47] If we do not use that money that is funded for the SROs, it will be going or it's been suggested to go to DEI programs. So I just want to make sure, again, that the people of Loudoun County know that and understand that. [02:09:04] And it should go to our students. Thank you. I believe that the budget has been requested or allocated, but has not yet been approved, and that ultimately the decision to approve the budget will be made by the Board of Supervisors. [02:09:21] Is there any further discussion on Ms. Chernoff's substitute motion? Mr. Pepper. So, and this will be a question for all of us. If we vote no on this motion and we vote no on Mr. Svensson's motion, it really is us doing nothing what happens if we do nothing does it just kick the can down the road do we have a do we have an answer for that ultimately i think we have to decide if we [02:10:00] want to maintain the authority to decide what happens in the schools miss recording thank you madam chair so if we do nothing tonight absolutely nothing vote no and no and we say no the board of supervisors then on monday has to make it just whatever all their budget choices that they're making about all their different things that they're voting on including the sheriff's budget and let's say it hypothetically they vote yes okay so there's a pot of money in an account and now we have to then engage in the MOU choose to expand it [02:10:34] not expand it whatever we're gonna do and we co-craft that arrangement with the sheriff's office at whatever point in time we choose to do that or don't choose to do that whatever we you know it really has it's really up to us to make that choice that's that's if they say yes if they say no then there's no money and we just go just move on and keep doing what we're doing right so this isn't a there's nothing lost by us to not taking action we don't even have a say in this all this I'm gonna be honest with you this is nothing right now but frankly a political move to influence the Board of Supervisors decision on Monday and we don't need to do that they can go make we they know [02:11:13] where we stand hopefully we've all had conversations with our own boards Board of Supervisors members on this they can go make their own decision about what they want to do with this budget we don't have to influence that decision right now we don't we can choose not to and then they'll have to make a choice on the budget and then we'll have to decide what we want to do with the sheriff's office moving forward or not it really is that simple thank you I'm [02:11:41] vice chair Donahue thank you madam chair I call the question thank you was there a second second thank you miss Chernoff with that the substitute motion has been properly made by Ms. Chernoff and seconded by Ms. LaBelle. There's no we need to vote on call the question and the call the question requires two-thirds of a vote. Okay so [02:12:21] clerk please open the vote. School board members please record your vote. This is the vote for call the question. Okay Ms. [02:12:56] Griffiths could you please state your vote? No. Thank you. Clerk please close and display the vote. Okay, the motion passes with seven voting yes, including Ms. Riccardi, Mr. Svensson, Ms. Chernoff, myself, Vice-Chair Donahue, Mr. Pepper, and Dr. Rasheed, with Ms. LaBelle voting no, and, oh, I'm sorry, Mrs. Griffiths also voting no, but the motion passes seven to two. [02:13:32] - Okay, Madam Chair, I move to suspend the rules. - Yes, Ms. LaBelle. We called the question, so we have to vote on the motion that stands. Right, Mr., could we please have a ruling from our parliamentarian? [02:13:51] Yes, so as I understand it, there was a question that was called as to Ms. Chernoff's substitute motion on the floor. So you need to clear that out before another motion can be entertained. So we called the question, which means that the next proper movement would be to vote on Ms. Chernoff's substitute motion. [02:14:12] Necessarily, to close that out, yes. to close that out and then we would return to the base motion correct thank you okay um with that board members our clerk please open the vote board members please record your vote this this is on ms shirnoff substitute motion which i'd be happy to read again i move to amend this motion to read while the loudon county school board supports further discussion regarding expansion of the school board or the school resource program we only support the funding allocated for phase one [02:14:46] at this time and encourage the board of supervisors to fund the sheriff's proposed budget for SROs this year and use those funds to hire more SROs for patrolling purposes. Further expansion should not occur until the school board and the parties to the memorandum of understanding can discuss and make a determination through a transparent MOU process. Clerk please close and display the vote. [02:15:13] Okay. The motion fails with five school board members voting no, including Mr. Svensson, Ms. Chandler, or myself, Vice Chair Donahue, Mr. Pepper, and Dr. Rasheed, and three school board members voting yes, including Ms. Chernoff, Mrs. Griffiths, and Ms. LaBelle, and Ms. Riccardi abstaining. [02:15:41] Okay, at this time, I believe that would be proper. Ms. LaBelle, could you please explain what would you like to suspend the rules to do? Thank you. [02:15:59] I would like to suspend the rules to include Mr. Svensson's motion. I would like to vote on it without any further discussion under suspend the rules. Okay, so we have a motion to call the question on Mr. Svensson's motion. [02:16:20] without any further discussion is that accurate yes okay um i'll just ask our parliamentarian is there anything else um oh okay so actually miss labelle could i please ask you to rephrase your motion to make it a motion for suspending the rules i'm sorry i moved to suspend the rules i don't know that that was exact so could you make it a motion for calling the question i said that incorrectly and I apologize. I move to suspend the rules and call the question. I hear a motion [02:16:55] to call the question. Second. Thank you. The motion was made by Ms. LaBelle. No to suspend the rules. I believe it would be proper to call the question and I will ask Mr. Allen. I think I understand what Ms. LaBelle is intending but I just want to clarify. Ms. LaBelle and in terms of suspending the rules is your and is your thought to take this action item this item that's reflected as an action item up as an action item which would then require two [02:17:34] thirds vote because without suspending that that is correct exactly what I'm saying okay so madam chair I think this item it goes back to mr. Cardi's inquiry earlier uh i think miss labelle's motion and miss labelle please correct me uh if i'm incorrect here is to kind of walk this back to for clarity of the record to take this item which is reflected [02:18:08] as an action item and be crystal clear that it is an action item um in which case if the rules are suspended with the two-thirds vote, this would then be taken up as an action item to take up Mr. Svensson's motion thereafter without further discussion. Is that correct, Ms. LaBelle? [02:18:32] I would like to have Mr. Svensson's motion voted on with a need for a two-thirds majority. That is why I am suspending the rules. Thank you for that clarification, Ms. LaBelle. That isn't needed. [02:18:57] For this action item, of course, the board can consider that as an approach, but the suspension of the rules isn't necessary, as this has been reflected as an action item, and there's a recommended approach to deliberate on a recommendation, which the board has done. [02:19:19] and so it logically necessarily follows that there would be a recommendation that the board would vote on. And my understanding is that Mr. Svensson's motion is on the floor as a recommendation that the board's voting on. So it wouldn't be necessary to suspend the rules to further consider Mr. Svensson's vote or motion. [02:19:44] Okay, is there any further discussion on Mr. Svensson's motion? Dr. Rasheed, I just have a question. [02:20:01] Ms. Chandler, if I might. Yes, please. Ms. LaBelle's motion still stands. Okay, so then we have a motion to suspend the rules, which would require two-thirds to pass. So we will vote without any further discussion. Oh, yes, Vice Chair Donahue. [02:20:18] Point of information? Sure, go ahead. What are we suspending the rules for? Please, Mr. Allen. Yes, while not necessary, the board would be voting to suspend the rules. [02:20:38] Ms. LaBelle's motion is the board on the floor would be to suspend the rules to take up Mr. Swenson's motion without further discussion. It's a nullity, but if the board still wants to pursue that route, it should, but it is a motion on the floor. [02:20:58] So if I could ask Ms. LaBelle if Mr. Allen has correctly stated the intent of your motion is that after we take this vote on suspending the rules, if it passes, we would then move to a vote on Mr. Svensson's motion without any further discussion. [02:21:18] But could I also ask a point of information? In the event that the suspension of the rules passed, when we vote on Mr. Svensson's motion, how is that vote impacted? What percentage of the vote is required to pass or fail Mr. Svensson's motion? [02:21:41] That would be a majority vote. Okay. The motion to suspend would be a two-thirds vote. So even if we passed it with the motion to suspend the rules with a two-thirds vote, with the statement that I made about needing a two-thirds vote to pass Mr. Svensson's vote, does that how that works? [02:22:07] Thank you for that clarification, Ms. Lambelle. That wouldn't be, it's kind of a tiered approach. So you would first move to suspend the rules, and that would require a two-thirds vote. And if that passes, then you would proceed with Mr. Svensson's, to vote on Mr. Svensson's motion without further discussion. [02:22:30] So the first approach would be to suspend the rules, which would require a two-thirds vote. And if that fails, then it would go back to the motion on the floor for further discussion, potentially on Mr. Svensson's motion. Thank you. [02:22:47] There is a motion on the floor. There won't be any further discussion. We will now vote on Ms. LaBelle's suspension of the rules. Was there, actually, that's a great question. Did someone second it? [02:23:03] Madam Chair, I did, but I thought it was a motion to call the question. Oh, okay. I'm not rescinding. I'm just not clarifying. Okay, so we have a motion to suspend the rules made by Ms. LaBelle and seconded by Vice Chair Donohue. [02:23:20] At this time, clerk, please open the vote. Board members, please record your vote. [02:23:35] Thank you. Clerk, please close and display the vote. Okay, the motion to suspend the rules fails with seven school board members voting no, including Mr. Svensson, Ms. Chernoff, myself, Vice Chair Donohue, Mrs. Griffiths, Mr. Pepper, Dr. Rasheed, and Ms. LaBelle voting yes. [02:24:03] so now we are back to the base motion are there any other any other discussion um just to clarify the base motion again because you lost me thank you i'm happy to do that okay so um mr spenson made a motion that and it was properly seconded by dr rasheed that reads while the loudon county school board supports further discussion regarding expansion of the school resource officer program [02:24:36] it does not support funding the expansion of the sro program unless and until the school board and the parties to the mou can discuss and make a determination through a transparent mou process okay see yes miss riccardi i know everybody wants to go i hear you i got you um i don't what what are we talking we don't we're not directly involved in the mou negotiations as far as i understand this is really that's really a discussion that happens between [02:25:09] Dr. Spence's staff and the Sheriff's Office. So I need clarification, I guess, on what you guys mean by that, number one. And then secondly, I would say this, I'm really disappointed that clearly this is a motion that has been crafted and available to at least some of you before this meeting, or at least at the time of this meeting, and it wasn't provided to the rest of us to consider as the actual action item that you all wanted to have tonight. [02:25:38] And I'm just really disappointed that clearly this was something that has been planned by at least some portion of this board without the rest of us being privy to that. And it's just, I'm going to say this, I'm enormously disappointed in that. [02:25:58] I mean, it's just very obvious to me what's happening here. And, you know, it would have been really nice that there would have been some respect shown to all nine of us and this motion had been shared with all of us. So that we could have come here number one prepared to actually vote and that that statement could have been part of the action of The motion itself that was posted so we would have known what we were actually Discussing because there's a lot more conversation that needs to be had with this. So again, you know I ran on this this whole issue of politicizing this stuff is really disappointing to me I was really hoping we weren't going to do that this time, but clearly we have thank you [02:26:37] Seeing no further discussion, let's move forward with an electronic vote. Clerk, please open the vote. Board members, please record your vote. Clerk, please close and display the vote. [02:26:56] Right, the motion passes with five school board members voting yes, including Mr. Svensson, myself, Vice Chair Donahue, Mr. Pepper, and Dr. Rasheed, and three school board members voting no, including Ms. Chernoff, Mrs. Griffiths, and Ms. LaBelle, and Ms. Riccardi abstaining. [02:27:15] Now, I have another motion. I would like to move to create a select committee of the school board to oversee the MOU negotiations and to continue to engage on the issue of safety and security within our schools and ensure a timely and transparent MOU process. [02:27:38] Second. Thank you. And with that, I will speak to the motion. I hope, again, I brought the MOU process to the Board of Supervisors Joint Committee in November because I was... [02:27:58] Point of order. Madam Chair? Yes, Mr. Cardin. This is not on the agenda. This is another item outside of the scope of the agenda. So I'm going to go back and say again to Mr. Allen, I mean, again, not on the agenda. [02:28:15] Not a stated action item. I'd like a ruling, please. - Okay, thank you, Mr. Allen. - Thank you, Chair Chandler and Mr. Riccardi. [02:28:32] I think this, in terms, I understand Mr. Riccardi's perspective with respect to policy and how there typically is a recommendation or a proposed vote that specifically says that the board will do X or Y or Z as a base motion. [02:28:54] So I understand that perspective. So it's, and again, it's within the board's purview if they view this broadly. And again, the recommendation as reflected on board docs for this agenda item, this action item is that the Loudoun County School Board deliberate on making a recommendation regarding SROs in elementary schools. [02:29:21] So in its broadest term, the school board could view this falling within this. If the school board deems to take a more cautious approach, it could always has opportunity to suspend the rules for further consideration of this particular motion. [02:29:42] So that's my advisement to the board. - Thank you, Mr. Allen. I will rescind my motion and take it to the agenda to go through regular business. At this point in the evening, We have completed our work, and with that, this special meeting is adjourned. [02:30:03] Thank you for coming out, and please drive home safely. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Coraggio Consulting ยท aguyonx.com