Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County School Board, Legislative and Policy Committee Meeting, Wednesday, May 13, 2026

Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2026
Place: Loudoun County Public Schools / School Board meeting (see BoardDocs / LCPS-TV)
Length: 45m (video)
Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/1190277419?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 2026-10-11. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

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

[00:00:01] I call to order the May 13th 2026 legislative and policy committee meeting it is 5:01 p.m. sign up to make in-person public comments as closed I do not see anyone here for public comment that we'll move on number three on the agenda approval of the March 11th for the approval of the minutes for the April 8th 2026 meeting have the board members had time to look over the

[00:00:41] minutes oh okay and are there any changes to minutes I'll now entertain a motion to approve the minutes from the April 8th 2026 legislative policy committee meeting so moved second we have a motion by dr. Rashid to approve the minutes I seconded been properly moved and seconded to approve the minutes all those in favor of approving the minutes say aye aye all those opposed the motion passes two to zero uh with dr rasheed and myself supporting it uh none opposed

[00:01:16] and ms griffiths abstaining from the vote all right um let's move on to item number four this is policy 2350 appeal of administrative decisions presented by dr bergen um turn it over to you dr bergen thank you chair svensson board members this policy is returning to you from last month by way of reminder this policy is up for its five-year review having last been affirmed by the school board or confirmed by the school board 9 30 2021 since putting it out for public feedback we did receive substantial feedback from

[00:01:55] MSAC and so I want to take the time to go through their recommendations line by line for you and show you where the administration agrees with the recommendations and where we do not agree so up on the screen Marie has tasted for you let's put the one up with the highlight on it please Marie yep so you'll notice there's there's going to be a couple areas towards the bottom of this policy that are on the screen in yellow highlight and those are going to be the recommendations that I am going to be recommending from MSAC but we'll

[00:02:32] get to those one at a time so to begin MSAC made a couple of general comments and then made some specific recommended changes their first general comment was that in-person meetings with the appellant as currently written should we discuss whether or not in-person meetings with the committee should be permitted we agree with that recommendation so as indicated up on the

[00:03:07] screen at line 39 the administration proposes that we add at the section at the end of section a5 at line 39 quote additionally or alternatively as the case may be if the committee believes doing so may provide additional clarity on the information the parties initially provided to the committee may elect to allow the parties to attend a hearing wherein the committee may request additional information from either or both parties and quote this does not require compel people to attend the select committee they're welcome to attend and observe the select committee but this would allow the committee to purposefully ask individuals for additional information if they felt like

[00:03:46] additional information was warranted or needed the second general comment from MSAC was while the appeal process should not continue endlessly are there any scenarios where an appeal would be appropriate for example if new information is received that directly impacts the decision the administration has considered whether or not additional appeals should be permitted if and when new information becomes available however we believe that the decisions of the select committee of the school board need to be final and consequently we do not recommend any additional language to the policy that would extend the appeal

[00:04:22] process beyond the select committee continuing on with the MSAC comments there was a specific comment at lines 1 and 2 that several administrative decisions made by the school division are appealable by parents and legal guardians of students and by adults with a comment that it's not clear which administrative decisions are or are not appealable and a recommendation that the policy be updated to include which administrative decisions are and are not appealable or reference the policy or regulation if one exists which provides the guidance while the administration appreciates this suggestion we do not

[00:04:58] recommend any changes to the policy on this point we believe the language in lines one and two sufficiently captures the overarching notion that there are many administrative decisions that could be appealed however not all administrative decisions are appealable and further not all decisions that are appealable would go to a select committee of the school board which is of course the focus of this policy consequently we're not recommending any additional language based upon this MSAC feedback and lastly there was the specific recommendation of correcting a typo at line 43 which we appreciate them

[00:05:35] catching for us it should read 8 a 5 instead of B 5 and so you'll see that that is highlighted on the screen I will pause there mr. Spence and that takes us through all of the recommendations from MSAC relative to this policy there was one other piece of feedback which is in your folders it was from a community member that offered some feedback on this policy regarding appeal timeline clarity about what is appealable accessibility the process opportunity for direct parent voice transparency of decisions and earlier problem-solving

[00:06:10] options which some of those mirror the same recommendations as MSAC and some of these comments are we're very appreciative of and very pleased that we have an office of the ombuds so when individuals are feeling overwhelmed by a process and have some questions about timelines and are looking for someone to help them navigate the system that's what our ombuds spends a fair amount of her time doing so in response to these comments I would direct this individual or any individual who has concerns about the process to speak with the ombuds.

[00:06:44] Those are all the comments that we receive from the public on this policy. Again, there are two recommendations from the administration at Lines 39 and Lines 43. If the committee is in agreement, we would entertain the chair, ask the entertainer to entertain any motions to make those changes and then see if there are any other changes at the will of the committee.

[00:07:08] Dr. Bergen, do the committee members have any questions? Ms. Griffiths. Thank you, Chair Svensson. For the suggestions from the community member, opportunity for the direct parent voice, I understand where they're going with that.

[00:07:34] For example, if they are trying to get permission for a school, a specific school, and they're just rejected and that's it, they might be told, okay, enrollment, it's an enrollment issue. And then they are able to come to a, and when you say select committees, you're talking about just the permissions committees or are there other examples?

[00:08:00] Because automatically I think appeals are made when they're rejected from going to the school they prefer. So if you can expand on that, because I understand where they are, where they would like direct dialogue to discuss why they were rejected.

[00:08:21] It could be enrollment, and that's, that could be final but there could be other reasons but can you elaborate so committees that you would have participated in the select committee rotates each board member has an assigned month and the chair of that committee rotates as assigned by the chair of the school board in my limited experience yes most of those select committees are parents who are appealing a decision that where they had asked for their child to have permission to go to a school outside of their zoned area and they wanted to appeal that decision and that would go before the select committee similarly there have been a

[00:08:57] number of appeals to the select committee where we have rezoned schools and students were permitted to stay for their final year like their senior year or their fifth grade year they're here but they missed the window and they forgot to ask and the window had closed so they're allowed to appeal to the select committee to have special consideration to stay even though they missed the timeline those are two examples of when a select committee would be formed MSAC made a similar comment that as in highlight if the committee feels that they need to hear from the parent the committee can ask the person

[00:09:35] who's making the appeal if the committee feels they need additional information so with that you had mentioned that you can't add any of these concerns into the into the policy no I would say that there's some of the with this this additional individual who has submitted some of this information like many of these recommendations track what MSAC had already said and we've reviewed those suggestions and if I understand this correctly for the select committees automatically like you explained I was thinking when we do have redistricting

[00:10:11] or rezoning people come and they they want permission for the schools are there other select committees where an appeal would be made that you can think of off the top of your head i'm just curious thank you mrs griffiths uh in terms of other policies that refer to policy 2350 which is uh currently for review by this committee uh policy 6620 arts regulation uh it speaks to no trespass letters so no trespass letters going up could then be appealed to the select committee appeals of regional assignment of all kindergarten students

[00:10:47] relocating to another school due to over capacity pursuant to policy 8155 and its regulation could come before a special committee and appeals of walk zone or transportation decisions as referenced in policy 6210 could also come before a select committee of the school board we would create a select committee for those types of things or they would just come to the regular committees that we established the latter so each month it's my understanding there's select school board members who are the three i haven't had some of those issues that's why i'm curious okay well thank you

[00:11:22] thank you for uh explaining um picking up on this so on cross-references at the end of the policy it looks like we have cross-references to mr allen you mentioned 6210 and 8155 i also see cross-references to 8070 and 8350 are those policies that also reference this appeal process or is there another reason that they're cross-referenced?

[00:11:55] Thank you, Mr. Swenson. I believe 80-70, I'm reviewing it now, is the written comments and complaints. My understanding or

[00:12:29] at least this observation would be that that's cross-referenced to provide families guidance on if there is a determination that they cannot appeal or just a mechanism, another mechanism for families or resource to lodge comments and complaints that that's my understanding i don't see there's direct in the text of written comments and complaints um however this policy 2350 is cross-referenced as well and running comments and complaints but i my i assume that that's just to

[00:13:06] allow again serve as a resource for families to know how to navigate um exploring uh resolutions for certain comments and complaints they may have or concerns they may have and then i believe you

[00:13:21] mentioned another policy 350.

[00:14:14] thank you for the opportunity to review 8350 the only reference i see to an appeal is under section c2 extracurricular activities where in it the policy provides a principal's decision regarding a student's removal from participation in an interscholastic co-curricular extracurricular activity and/or attendance at school sponsored events is final and not appealable so my presumption is that that speaks to kind of the first item of or the first sentence that MSAC referenced in its

[00:14:53] comments that there there are administrative decisions that are appealable and there's some that are not that particular cross-reference and and its inclusion predates my tenure here, but that's my presumption. And so it would be cross-referencing in the sense like this is not – so that's not actually a type of decision that would be appealable under this process laid out in 2350.

[00:15:23] That's correct. I think it's a fair point. I would also, as we said here, recommend that administration include as a cross-reference regulation 6620, because that is a regulation that section f if i recall correctly references how to an appeal a no trespass letter and does specifically call out policy 2350 so i would recommend including

[00:15:52] that as well as i believe it already addresses 8155 and 6210 yes and in terms of procedure is that when we get to the end of our discussion here and someone were to make a motion to approve as changed here, as edited on the screen.

[00:16:15] Could we add language to that effect, adding the cross-reference? Yes, that's correct, Chair Svensson. If you want to make the motion as amended to include amending the cross-references to include Regulation 6620, that would be appropriate.

[00:16:35] So 8350, and would we recommend striking 8350 as a cross-reference, Or would it be your recommendation to keep it for any reason?

[00:16:53] Based on the plain language of the policy that's referenced, I don't think it's clear the nexus between the two. So if that's the committee's will, I think that would be appropriate. I personally think that would be clear for folks who are referencing the policy.

[00:17:17] And I think this is helpful in terms of responding to MSAC's feedback in terms of spelling out what types of administrative decisions are appealable that we can point to the cross-references. One question I had is that when a family, a student, and their parents receive a decision that is appealable, do they receive information about this policy and how to appeal the decision?

[00:17:47] For instance, a school assignment decision, do they receive information about? Okay, Chair Spence, and my understanding is that correspondence would include the process to provide them with the due process and lay out this policy or at least reference it for families' decisions.

[00:18:18] I know that families do often engage, at least for some of the opportunities, this process. I think that could be an appropriate question when this is presented as an information item to just confirm with administrators, relevant administrators.

[00:18:34] I will say that the no trespass letters that are issued do lay out specifically the appellate process and includes that first if it's to the principal who issued, then to the principal's direct supervisor, and then to the chief of schools, and then it cites its policy 2350.

[00:18:56] So it's pretty prescriptive. Thank you. That's helpful. And I think that some of the comments were along the lines of seeking more guidance. And I think, you know, directing folks to the ombudsman is a really helpful resource. But I think, you know, and this may not be something that we actually spell out in this policy, and it's better saved for a guidance that's provided to the parents upon receiving a decision.

[00:19:22] But I think it's worth us kind of following up with Cabinet just to make sure that for these types of decisions that the appeal process is kind of spelled out for parents and that they're made aware of 2350 and their options. I know Mrs. Tate did because she and I were dialoguing quite a bit after the last round of the rezoning, and there were a number of families that, you know, when they realized, oh, we missed that, she alerted them to the procedures for the select committee.

[00:19:52] I'm certain Mr. Dolson's letters also reference it because there is a steady stream of parents who come to the select committee. But I'll confirm that, so if you ask that in the adoption or in the presentation of the full board, we'll be prepared to say that with better clarity. Thank you. I appreciate that.

[00:20:08] I think that I had to – Dr. Rashid, do you have any questions? I will look to see what – I may add an additional question. No, I do not. Thank you, Chair. I appreciate you all taking the time to consider the feedback and make changes in response.

[00:20:29] I appreciate the work of MSAC, as always, in helping us improve our policies and also the feedback from the community member who sent in their responses. With that, I'll entertain a motion.

[00:20:50] Move this forward. I have a motion. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I move that the Legislative and Policy Committee consider proposed changes to policy 2350 and forward it to the full school board as an information item. Seconded. And I think in terms of, and I guess we can discuss it now, in terms of making the changes that have been proposed on the screen, I can put forward an amendment.

[00:21:18] So I would move that we amend the base motion to reflect the revisions proposed at Lines 39 and at Line 43. Do we have an and to amend the cross-references to include a reference to Regulation 6620 and to strike the reference to Policy 8350.

[00:21:49] Do we have a second for that motion? Second. I didn't know we need an amendment I thought that the proposed changes were just automatic because there's a lot of like stuff at the top that we had mentioned but if that covers it then that's that's fine the other red line you're just referring to the all of the changes that are in red line of which we didn't get any feedback on that that was as originally proposed to the committee all right so yeah so let's vote on the amendment so all in favor of including

[00:22:29] these changes that amendment passes three to zero all school board members present all right we'll return to discussion of the base motion any further discussion on the moving the policy 2350 to the full school board information item all right so I dr. she'd made the the original motion and I seconded I recall correctly so now we'll take a vote on that as amended

[00:23:03] I think let's just for clarity of the record dr. She can you can you repeat your motion yes chair Spenson I move that the legislative and policy committee consider proposed changes to policy 3040 I'm sorry I'm ahead of myself. I move that the legislative and policy committee consider proposed changes to policy 2350 and forwarded to the full school board as an information item as amended we have a second second all right all in favor say I motion passes three to zero with all school board members

[00:23:41] present all right we'll now move on to item 4.02 policy 3040 school building administration presented by dr. Bergen I'll turn it over to you dr. Burton chair Spenson again just to help ease the review of the policy Marie's projecting up onto the screen the red line as presented to the committee last month with in yellow highlight additional changes that the administration would bring forward forward tonight based upon the feedback

[00:24:18] from MSAC and I will go through the MSAC recommendations one line at a time and they will track with what is in highlight on the screen so MSAC made three general comments the first general comment was clarifying license requirements at lines two through four with a suggestion that we update as needed to address whether or not individuals need to hold an active license and also MSAC suggested that we reference administration and

[00:24:53] supervision pre-k-12 in the code so our administrative response is that we do not believe it's necessary to add the word active as it is implied that licenses must be active in order to serve an administrative role that further the language in our policy closely tracks the language in the code of Virginia twenty two point one dash two nine three however to the point of

[00:25:21] additional reference to Virginia code 8 vac 20 - 23 - 6 2 0 the administration recommends adding at line 3 and endorsements after the word who hold licenses so that the sentence now reads the Loudoun County School Board upon recommendation of the superintendent employees principals and assistant principals who hold licenses and endorsements as prescribed by the Virginia Board of Education and that is in response to the first general comment

[00:25:59] from MSAC the second general comment from MSAC was in regards to spelling out the responsibilities of principals the comment from MSAC was that the policy provides a very high-level overview of responsibilities and recommended quite a bit of additional language I did consult closely with Division Council on this recommendation as well as with our Department of School leadership and in consultation with those entities the administration does not recommend adding this additional language given that it is not

[00:26:37] set forth in the Virginia code 22.1-293 the third general comment from MSAC was in regards to principal performance there was a comment that the policy mentions that the principal evaluates the performance of other employees but it is not listed in this policy that the principal themselves is evaluated so while this notion may not fall squarely within the scope of this policy the administration appreciates the thought and does recommend adding at line 22 as highlighted on the screen some new language that would say principals

[00:27:14] assistant principals and other school-based administrators shall be evaluated in accordance with the LCPS evaluation procedures for administrative employees as required by policy 7312 then MSAC had some outside of general comments they had some specific recommendations at line 9 MSAC was questioning the use of the word rules and regulations of the school board as opposed to policies and procedures of the school board the administration does not recommend changing the language because the current language in the

[00:27:52] policy tracks Virginia code 22.1 - 293 section B another specific recommendation from MSAC at lines 14 through 16 which we greatly appreciate there was a gendered reference to the principal being under teachers under his supervision so that is highlighted at line 15 and the administration would recommend that we change that sentence to say a principal may submit recommendations to the superintendent for the appointment assignment promotion

[00:28:30] transfer and dismissal of all personnel assigned to the principal's supervision the last comment from MSAC was relative to line 16 with the statement principals must receive training the comment was it's assumed but the current wording does not address if the principal should have completed or passed the training with a recommendation to update to clarify that the training should be completed and not only received the administration does not recommend making this change as the current language tracks the language in

[00:29:06] Virginia code 22.1 - 293 section C we would have an expectation that you know if we require training that that's an internal process to make sure the training was completed but we don't recommend changing the language and the policy that would take us in a different direction than the language in code so those were all of the recommendations from MSAC in summary again on the screen we would ask the committee to consider adding at lines three and endorsements to file licenses we'd ask the committee to consider changing his supervision to the principal's supervision at lines 15 and

[00:29:45] 16 and adding the additional language at lines 22 relative to administrators being evaluated in compliance with Policy 7312. In addition to the MSAC feedback, the committee also received from a community member, could be the same community as the other one or a different community member, but had some feedback relative to principals, having developmentally appropriate responses when interacting with children, the importance of early support to prevent escalation, making accommodations for regulation and impulse challenges,

[00:30:25] utilizing correction over punishment, and having a clear transparency and shared understanding and communicating with families. And these are all excellent comments and have all been shared with the Department of School leadership for their consideration when we are hiring, supervising, and evaluating our administrators.

[00:30:44] But we do not recommend adding additional language to the policy as it sits before you. And that would conclude my review of this and would turn to you, Chair Fenton, to see if there's any more discussion or questions from the committee. Thank you, Dr. Bergen. I appreciate that. I appreciate you walking through the comments, which, again, very helpful comments from MSAC and the community member who submitted feedback.

[00:31:06] Do I have a motion? Yes, Dr. Ritchie, question before? Yeah, can we just say something? Yeah, yeah, sure. Yes, go ahead. Just one question. I forgot to ask this last time for the charter principles. Is there any clause here? Because I know that charter principles, it's a little bit different.

[00:31:25] They fall under LCPS, but they're not part of LCPS, something like that. And is that covered here when it comes to their training? Or do they still get the same training as all the other principles? They're hired by their board and supervised by their board.

[00:31:47] Frankly, I don't know if code has requirements for charter principles. I'm going to defer to legal counsel on that question. Okay. I was just curious to just – thank you.

[00:32:02] Thank you, Dr. Rashid. I don't see that anything is called out in 22.1-293, which this policy predominantly memorializes and school board policy that calls out charter school principal.

[00:32:30] But we will take the question under advisement and seek to provide a – response when this comes back before the board as an information item? What implications this has and nexus this has to charter school principals?

[00:32:47] Just a follow-up question on that. For line 22 is mostly what I was pertaining to. Do charter school principals still have to follow the same evaluation process as all the other principals? I guess that's a better way of rephrasing. Thank you, Dr. Shee. Yeah, that addition does give me pause from an operational standpoint, So I don't think from my lens I'd recommend that be accepted.

[00:33:09] Just not only for that, but school-based administrators is somewhat amorphous beyond principals and assistant principals. I don't know if it includes deans or whatnot and what implications collective bargaining might have on that. So I'd recommend that it's cleaner to not incorporate that and just rely on policy 7312 as it currently exists.

[00:33:35] Yes, Ms. Griffiths. Thanks, Chair Spenson. I just had a minor question. When you say on line three, principals and assistant principals who hold licenses and endorsements, what does that mean, endorsements, if you could just be more specific?

[00:33:57] Sure. You could be endorsed to have teaching responsibilities at pre-K, K1 through 3, 4, 5, 6, 8. Those are different endorsements. You could have an endorsement to teach English or social studies or science.

[00:34:15] In addition to having a license for administration, you could have other teaching responsibility endorsements. Thank you. That was helpful. Thank you. Further questions?

[00:34:32] All right. I'll entertain a motion now. Dr. Sheehy. Thank you, Chair Spenson. I move that the Legislative and Policy Committee consider proposed changes to Policy 3040 and forward it to the full school board as an information item. Second.

[00:34:48] Second. All right. I have a motion by Dr. Sheehy, a second by Ms. Griffiths. I think that I will now introduce an amendment, so I move that we amend the proposed changes to policy 3040 to include the revisions at lines 3 and 15 through 16 as displayed and as recommended by staff.

[00:35:20] a second for that motion motion by by me by me seconded by miss griffis um any discussion on that amendment all in favor of the amendment say aye aye motion passes three to zero with all school board members present uh we will now return to the base motion any further um church spenson if i

[00:35:58] might um the committee might also want to consider amending the cross references to include that policy 7312 if it would so choose and then the other cross-reference I'd recommend is the 8 BAC 20 - 23 - 620 which is the administration and supervision pre-k through 12 endorsement that that then supports the addition of the end and endorsements on line one I believe it is thank you mr. Allen can you

[00:36:30] repeat so policy 7312 is you're recommending yes and 8 vac which stands for the virginia administrative code 20-23-620 all right thank you mr allen i appreciate it um all right so i will make a motion to amend the the base motion to include a new cross-reference to policy 7312

[00:37:03] And a cross-reference to Virginia code, which is 8VAC 20-23-62-0. Do we have a second for that motion? Second. Thank you, Ms. Griffiths. I've made the motion, seconded by Ms. Griffiths. Any discussion?

[00:37:21] All in favor, say aye. Aye. That motion passes 3-0. With all school board members present, we'll now return to the base motion. Any further discussion of the base motion? that I think that dr. Rashid made the original motion and it was seconded by miss Griffiths and we will now if folks remember it we'll just go ahead and and vote on that so all in favor say aye aye that motion passes three to zero with

[00:37:55] all school board members present and let's I'll clarify this is the base motion as amended has been approved three to zero and we'll be going to the full school board as an information item with that I'll move on to our information item 5.01 policy 2420 meeting procedures presented by dr. Bergen I will turn over to dr. Bergen thank you chair this policy is before you as it's

[00:38:33] my understanding from legal counsel from a VSB up VSBA update that this requires annual review or affirmation by the school board because of the provisions allowing for electronic participation and meetings so while we were looking at it looks like a sea of red like lots and lots of changes but it's it's actually the same language that's been reorganized into different paragraphs just for clarity to match the template that was provided by the

[00:39:10] Virginia School Board Association and to ensure that we're consistent with the Virginia Freedom of Information Act so I would like to because it's a first time the committee seeing this information I like to go through it slowly with you so that you'll feel confident you'll know that what is this policy saying and it's rewritten format so first of all to my earlier point you'll notice that lines 1:15 through 2:08 you can scroll down please Marie 1:15 to 2:08 have been completely struck and the totality of that language has now been reorganized into lines 15 through 111 and I'll go through those with you slowly but before

[00:39:48] we get to line 15 and the first 14 lines in those opening paragraphs you'll notice some minor edits to remain consistent with what we've done with other policies we're inserting the word Loudoun County before school board we're We're inserting the word school before board, and we're inserting the word Virginia before Freedom of Information Act.

[00:40:09] And starting at line 15, paragraph C, is an overview of when electronic participation in board meetings and committee meetings is permitted for individual board members when there is a quorum of board members physically present. The general conditions start at line 24, section 1, and requires that the board or the committee make arrangements for the remote participation of a member or members, and that those participating remotely must identify any other individuals who may be present with them at their remote location.

[00:40:42] The qualifying reasons for individual remote participation numbered Section 2, beginning at line 39, include subsection A, when the individual seeking remote participation has a temporary or permanent disability or medical condition.

[00:41:00] Similarly, at Section B, when a family member for whom the board member is a caregiver has a medical condition. And subsection C allows for individual electronic participation for a personal matter. You'll note that there are no annual limits on remote participation for medical conditions.

[00:41:19] However, there is a limit of two meetings or 25% of the meetings of the body in a calendar year when it is for personal reasons. Section 3, starting at line 71, summarizes the need for the approval or disapproval of the requesting board member requesting remote participation.

[00:41:39] Section 4, starting at line 77, clarifies that remote participation is not permitted for a student disciplinary appeal hearing or an administrative appeal proceeding. Paragraph D, starting at line 81, provides an overview of when all virtual public meetings may occur.

[00:42:02] In other words, when there is not a quorum of the board physically present and the board is in its entire body is participating virtually. Section 1 clarifies that all virtual meetings are permitted when the governor or the locality has declared a state of emergency, such that the catastrophic nature of the emergency makes it impracticable or unsafe to meet, and the purpose of the meeting is to provide for the continuity of operations.

[00:42:29] Section 2, beginning at line 94, lists the requirements for those all virtual meetings and includes subsection A, that notice has been provided, B, that public access is available through an electronic means, C, that there's an opportunity for public comment, and D, that compliance with Virginia FOIA has been met.

[00:42:53] Section C, beginning at line 106, summarizes the requirements for the minutes of the meeting and that it must include stating the nature of the emergency. Then skipping down to lines 222, you'll notice that because of the reorganization of the policy, we've just reorganized or renumbered the paragraphs as F, G, H, and I, and otherwise that information remains unchanged.

[00:43:19] And lastly, at the bottom of the policy at lines 252 are some additional legal references. so in summary again it looks like a lot it looks it's it's just a rewrite and it's a reorganization of the same information in a clearer format to match the VSBA template to be in compliance with Virginia FOIA I'll defer to legal if there's anything else that I've I'll turn it over to you chair thank you dr.

[00:43:47] Bergen board members any questions thank you chair Spence and so basically we've been following this policy with any electronic I mean anybody virtual or it's not really major changes it's the same correct okay there are no changes it's the same information yeah it looked confusing because it went you know a lot of stuff was pushed down and that sort of thing I just want to verify that nothing's really you know changed from what we had before okay all right thank

[00:44:25] And then just as a reminder, because the code requires it in Section 2.2, 3708.3, this policy requires annual review, so the LMP committee will just see it each year.

[00:44:48] We'll have no further discussion on the information item. We'll move on to item number. Do we have a discussion item?

[00:45:08] No, do we have any new business? Okay. Our next meeting is scheduled for June 10, 2026, so please mark your calendars. Seeing no new business, I will adjourn this meeting and see you all soon.

[00:45:25] Thank you. Bye-bye.

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